Official RJ Barrett Thread

[Nebuchadnezzar]

As a Knicks fan and an avid RJ supporter - I see the consensus that you guys do not value RJ Barrett at all and that you all think he has improved very little in his career. Is this true? I just don't see or understand the hate that RJ garners. Probably the most polarizing and scrutinized 20/5/5 player of all time. Kid is capable of averaging 10 assists, 10 rebounds, and 20 points, has stayed on the court more than Ja and Zion. His game is not flashy at all but he can get to the paint at will and he is still only 24 years old. I really do not understand the RJ hate one bit.

Oh your not wrong at all. It's just half this board has wanted to tank for the past decade, so they need to undervalue our players in order to justify their opinion.

You'll see above that someone says that RJ is a "fourth option". This of course is a ludicrous statement, and one that would not be held outside of the tanking portion of this fanbase.

However, If they admit the RJ is anything more than a fourth option, then it would be admitting that the team has valuable assets worth keeping. Making the argument that RJ is a less than desirable asset allows those with the tanking perspective to advocate for a fire sale of our assets in an effort to lose games.

Thank you for actually supporting our players.

[tsherkin]

You'll see above that someone says that RJ is a "fourth option". This of course is a ludicrous statement, and one that would not be held outside of the tanking portion of this fanbase.

4th option seems a little aggressive, especially when he responds so positively with passing support helping him. Like, sure, he isn't an ATG offensive player. Great, that means he isn't a title-level offensive focus. Those dudes don't grow on trees, though, and we're just trying to be solid and entertaining, and he seems like he has a chance to be able to help us with that.

He's also fun to watch. A little frustrating at times, but who isn't? One of the best subplots of this season will be seeing what he can do over a whole season with us, I think.

[mtcan]

As a Knicks fan and an avid RJ supporter - I see the consensus that you guys do not value RJ Barrett at all and that you all think he has improved very little in his career. Is this true? I just don't see or understand the hate that RJ garners. Probably the most polarizing and scrutinized 20/5/5 player of all time. Kid is capable of averaging 10 assists, 10 rebounds, and 20 points, has stayed on the court more than Ja and Zion. His game is not flashy at all but he can get to the paint at will and he is still only 24 years old. I really do not understand the RJ hate one bit.

I hear you man. The RJ hate around here is ridiculous. People keep wanting a high lottery pick to grow with the core.

You already have a former #3 pick only 5 years ago who is going you 24 pts, 6 rebounds and 6 assists...and is still only 24 years old. But he is only a 4th option by some people's standards? That is just stupid.

I love this kid and hated that I had to watch the Knicks these past few years to get my fix. I'm glad he is a Raptor and it goes without saying that he is absolutely loving being able to play in his home town with his mom at all the home games. He is a really good kid. And best of all...dude just wanted to win so badly. You can question his shot and maybe his tunnel vision at times but dude just wants to win and has the motor. Did you see how proud he was wearing that Vince Carter tribute jersey during his media availability last night?

I am a huge RJ fan. Hopefully he is a Raptor for a long time.

[raincityraptors]

As a Knicks fan and an avid RJ supporter - I see the consensus that you guys do not value RJ Barrett at all and that you all think he has improved very little in his career. Is this true? I just don't see or understand the hate that RJ garners. Probably the most polarizing and scrutinized 20/5/5 player of all time. Kid is capable of averaging 10 assists, 10 rebounds, and 20 points, has stayed on the court more than Ja and Zion. His game is not flashy at all but he can get to the paint at will and he is still only 24 years old. I really do not understand the RJ hate one bit.

Depends who you ask, some people like myself are extremely skeptical due to his rampant inefficiency and rather limited game. And some others think he's a star in the making. It's the whole Siakam thing all over again IMO.

Very limited player, and people heaping unrealistic expectations on them. Except Siakam showed way more growth after he joined the league, arguably due to how late he picked up a ball though.

IMO, he ends up being like a 4th option on a high ceiling team, or like a 1st/2nd option on low ceiling team. No hate on the kid, he is what he is, hopefully he proves me wrong.

I understand this. But think about the fact that he has had a very small sample size of being the #1 option on a team. He has played with Julius Randle throughout his career who literally commands the ball, and on top of that when Randle was out and he played, he had a very small leash and a small room for error for any mistakes, as the Raptors were for a temporary time allowing him to be the focal point of the offense since Scottie and Quick were out.

I think since his game is not flashy there has been very little done to allow his development as a player, but I think since he got the taste of what its like to run a team, with an actual playmaker like Scottie back, his game will continue to flourish.

I actually like this Raptors team and respect the fanbase so I just want to see one of my favorite players be treated good, hoping for yall success! Except when it comes to facing my Knicks lol

RJ is my favorite player and I show him love on this board if he is playing well or slumping.

The RJ hate is a mystery for me too because the effort is there. He doesn't always get it right (especially if he isn't on ball on D, or stubbornly driving when he should pass) but he's always making an impact.

He gives it his all whenever he's on our homecourt. Feel free to come advocate for RJ anytime. He's still developing and we haven't seen his ceiling yet.

There are some folks here though that do see his value and the way he is developing this season, more will see what we see.

[tsherkin]

[
You already have a former #3 pick only 5 years ago who is going you 24 pts, 6 rebounds and 6 assists...and is still only 24 years old. But he is only a 4th option by some people's standards? That is just stupid.

I think there's middle space there.

For one, those raw numbers don't matter too much. Inside them, there are positives to discuss, but quoting his box score averages doesn't really go very far. On the other, it's also clear that "fourth option" doesn't make a ton of sense based on the potential he's shown us, and the limited chances he's had to have consistency of roster around him. So we don't really know which RJ is gonna be our real deal, and that means some patient waiting.

He has pros and cons, and he's young and deserves a shot at showing us what he can do. We certainly gave it to DeRozan, so why not the hometown guy? On the other hand, we also need not to get too far ahead of ourselves over tiny samples while ignoring who he's been to this point and how that meshes with player development over league history. Be a little conservative in expectation, but be patient and let him show what he can do with a little passing support and some spacing, right?

I'm a big fan of not going nuts over a player in either direction early on, most of the time. Bargs notwithstanding xD

[deck]

I hate admitting with that drunk Scottie hater, but RJ is only 13 months older than Barnes. And yet the sky is the limit for Barnes and RJ is absolutely a finished product. It's irrational.

There is an unfounded argument that gets brought up on the board sometimes that tenure is more important than age. I would concede to some extent that given we have seen 5 years of RJ as a player, we know more about his game. But I think it is a mistake to assume that because he is in the league for 5 years, that he is done improving. In most other professions, being both young and having experience would be a virtue. People conflate the unknown of a less tenured player with them having more potential, which doesn't seem right to me.

I think it is easy to loose perspective on how young these players are. Confidence is huge in sports, and RJ may just be hitting the point now where he is comfortable with who he is.

[tsherkin]

I think it is easy to loose perspective on how young these players are. Confidence is huge in sports, and RJ may just be hitting the point now where he is comfortable with who he is.

I think being "comfortable with who he is" most likely isn't super important. What folks are looking for is actual skill development, or at least signs of how we can provide structure around him to support his strengths and mask his weaknesses. And there are some positive findings there. Beyond that, tenure matters. Age matters too, but a half decade with no real markers for improvement in certain skills is usually pretty telling. Certain skills, certain instincts, they don't develop very often in a player's mid-20s or later, not without extremely refined and specific circumstances.

Confidence isn't what's keeping him from success at the line or having a mid-range game. It isn't what has him blindly bulling his way to the rim a half-decade into his career instead of attacking with a more nuanced approach. Time and opportunity may yet help him evolve in those areas, but he makes assertive decisions. He isn't struggling with confidence to any visible extent. He's doing a lot of what he's always done.

He has shown us some things, though. He appears to be passing better. He seems to be working better when he's not the sole creator or initiator. He seems pretty coachable and adaptable. All of those are good things, promising for development. But there is a point where you've been playing so many games per year that we've seen roughly what you are, and it's nuance which starts changing, or what helps keep you afloat as your athleticism ebbs. Decision-making as you see more and more defenses, understand more coverage, get the reps in running sets... there's a value to that.

What we DO know about age is that there is a point where fast-twitch athleticism starts settling down regardless of who you are. We can say the same thing about mileage, we know that it adds up, wherefore all the minute-watching and such. But 5 years in the league is quite a bit different than 3 years in the NCAA and 2 years in the league in terms of your learning curve, particularly when you've been doing more than riding pine.

More than anything with RJ, I think we need to do our damndest to replicate the situation in which he was thriving last year. ANd now, with Scottie back, we're getting closer to that. So we'll see how RJ responds over the next stretch. Because while it's clear he isn't a #1, we also don't have a clear #1 on the squad. So divvying it up a little and moving the ball well may work out rather nicely for us, particularly with a guy who ca go north-south as hard as he can.

[deck]

I think it is easy to loose perspective on how young these players are. Confidence is huge in sports, and RJ may just be hitting the point now where he is comfortable with who he is.

I think being "comfortable with who he is" most likely isn't super important. What folks are looking for is actual skill development, or at least signs of how we can provide structure around him to support his strengths and mask his weaknesses. And there are some positive findings there. Beyond that, tenure matters. Age matters too, but a half decade with no real markers for improvement in certain skills is usually pretty telling. Certain skills, certain instincts, they don't develop very often in a player's mid-20s or later, not without extremely refined and specific circumstances.

Confidence isn't what's keeping him from success at the line or having a mid-range game. It isn't what has him blindly bulling his way to the rim a half-decade into his career instead of attacking with a more nuanced approach. Time and opportunity may yet help him evolve in those areas, but he makes assertive decisions. He isn't struggling with confidence to any visible extent. He's doing a lot of what he's always done.

He has shown us some things, though. He appears to be passing better. He seems to be working better when he's not the sole creator or initiator. He seems pretty coachable and adaptable. All of those are good things, promising for development. But there is a point where you've been playing so many games per year that we've seen roughly what you are, and it's nuance which starts changing, or what helps keep you afloat as your athleticism ebbs. Decision-making as you see more and more defenses, understand more coverage, get the reps in running sets... there's a value to that.

What we DO know about age is that there is a point where fast-twitch athleticism starts settling down regardless of who you are. We can say the same thing about mileage, we know that it adds up, wherefore all the minute-watching and such. But 5 years in the league is quite a bit different than 3 years in the NCAA and 2 years in the league in terms of your learning curve, particularly when you've been doing more than riding pine.

More than anything with RJ, I think we need to do our damndest to replicate the situation in which he was thriving last year. ANd now, with Scottie back, we're getting closer to that. So we'll see how RJ responds over the next stretch. Because while it's clear he isn't a #1, we also don't have a clear #1 on the squad. So divvying it up a little and moving the ball well may work out rather nicely for us, particularly with a guy who ca go north-south as hard as he can.

Sure? But the point being made is that I would far rather have a 24 year with 5 years of NBA experience than a 4th year senior entering the league at the same age. The assumption that all other things equal, the 4th year senior entering the league as more potential due to not being tenured is silly.

Regarding confidence, disagree with what you have said here. RJ just bullying into the lane as he has always done would be a sign of lack of confidence to me. But that isn't what we see from him this year and last year. He is passing out of those situations at a much higher rate. This to me is a sign of a player that is becoming more comfortable with his own game, and being more aware of situations where he should pass rather than force a bad shot. Being confident and comfortable is what allows a player to make better reads, and I think we have seen clear progression from RJ in this regard vs. his NYK days. Agree he has no mid-range game, but I don't think that has anything to do with what I posted.

[bonjovi0308]

If you listen to Masai last year, he always mentioned Scott first, followed by IQ. He put RJ as the 3rd or even not mentioning him.

I like Dick as I think he is a winning player, and he should be in the starting lineup for years to come.

As overall, I like RJ better than IQ, in addition to his loyalty to Toronto as well as his willingness to play defense starting this year. But in today's games IQ's 3 pt shooting would always come with a premium

[tsherkin]

[
Sure? But the point being made is that I would far rather have a 24 year with 5 years of NBA experience than a 4th year senior entering the league at the same age. The assumption that all other things equal, the 4th year senior entering the league as more potential due to not being tenured is silly.

Yeah, I agree. Time in league is a lot more important than anything else for the sake of development.

Regarding confidence, disagree with what you have said here. RJ just bullying into the lane as he has always done would be a sign of lack of confidence to me. But that isn't what we see from him this year and last year. He is passing out of those situations at a much higher rate. This to me is a sign of a player that is becoming more comfortable with his own game, and being more aware of situations where he should pass rather than force a bad shot.

I don't think that's an issue of confidence. That's an issue of learning and adaptation. He was always confident, which is why he was making assertive moves to get himself places. Experiencing the situations, trusting his teammates and so forth, those are not issues of confidence so much as comprehension and recall.

Agree he has no mid-range game, but I don't think that has anything to do with what I posted.

In context of what I wrote, it makes plenty of sense. His development isn't related to issues of confidence. It's related to mental approach and skillset.

RJ was never a timid guy. What he needed was seasoning. In your initial post, you phrased it as development of confidence helping him improve. Now, you're reusing the word, but saying things which aren't related to confidence at all, but which make much more sense as far as why he is looking better.

[mdenny]

The whole difference in perception is primarily driven by 'mystery box' psychology and people who are fully enrapt in draft hype year after year.

We should ask ourselves "Is RJ a good top 5 pick historically in the nba draft" and the anwswer is YES HE IS.

I went back and revisited the top 5 picks between 2005 and 2015 (so that careers can be evaluated in full).

Out of all 50 players chosen top 5 during those years....I got 11 players who had better careers than what is tracking for Barrett (some of whom were derailed by injury like D Rose and J Wall but I tried to be objective about that and put them above RJ).

There were a handful that I think were roughly equal (so far). They were Wiggins, Aaron Gordon, Deron Williams, Al Horford, etc.

But that means RJ is in the 80th percentile in terms of expected outcome for top 5 picks in the NBA draft. He is a VERY GOOD top 5 pick in the draft. But many here would laugh at that because they are essentially scratch-n-win ticket lovers who have the allure in always expecting the best possible outcome.

The draft hype people never remember all the busts and all the mediocre outcomes. They just remember the KDs and the Lebrons.

We're hearing the same thing about the current draft class that we heard about Scotty's draft class. "the top 4 picks would all be number ones overall in any other year yada yada yada". It simply didn't come to fruition and it is extremely unlikely it comes to fruition this summer too.

[SFour]

The whole difference in perception is primarily driven by 'mystery box' psychology and people who are fully enrapt in draft hype year after year.

We should ask ourselves "Is RJ a good top 5 pick historically in the nba draft" and the anwswer is YES HE IS.

I went back and revisited the top 5 picks between 2005 and 2015 (so that careers can be evaluated in full).

Out of all 50 players chosen top 5 during those years....I got 11 players who had better careers than what is tracking for Barrett (some of whom were derailed by injury like D Rose and J Wall but I tried to be objective about that and put them above RJ).

There were a handful that I think were roughly equal (so far). They were Wiggins, Aaron Gordon, Deron Williams, Al Horford, etc.

But that means RJ is in the 80th percentile in terms of expected outcome for top 5 picks in the NBA draft. He is a VERY GOOD top 5 pick in the draft. But many here would laugh at that because they are essentially scratch-n-win ticket lovers who have the allure in always expecting the best possible outcome.

The draft hype people never remember all the busts and all the mediocre outcomes. They just remember the KDs and the Lebrons.

We're hearing the same thing about the current draft class that we heard about Scotty's draft class. "the top 4 picks would all be number ones overall in any other year yada yada yada". It simply didn't come to fruition and it is extremely unlikely it comes to fruition this summer too.

RJ is the type of draft prospect that many would've tanked an entire season for...but now that he's actually on the Raptors there's non-stop criticism with him despite him putting up allstar numbers and still being young at 24 years old.

He's putting up better numbers than Demar did when he made his 1st allstar appearance at 24 y/o.

[mdenny]

The whole difference in perception is primarily driven by 'mystery box' psychology and people who are fully enrapt in draft hype year after year.

We should ask ourselves "Is RJ a good top 5 pick historically in the nba draft" and the anwswer is YES HE IS.

I went back and revisited the top 5 picks between 2005 and 2015 (so that careers can be evaluated in full).

Out of all 50 players chosen top 5 during those years....I got 11 players who had better careers than what is tracking for Barrett (some of whom were derailed by injury like D Rose and J Wall but I tried to be objective about that and put them above RJ).

There were a handful that I think were roughly equal (so far). They were Wiggins, Aaron Gordon, Deron Williams, Al Horford, etc.

But that means RJ is in the 80th percentile in terms of expected outcome for top 5 picks in the NBA draft. He is a VERY GOOD top 5 pick in the draft. But many here would laugh at that because they are essentially scratch-n-win ticket lovers who have the allure in always expecting the best possible outcome.

The draft hype people never remember all the busts and all the mediocre outcomes. They just remember the KDs and the Lebrons.

We're hearing the same thing about the current draft class that we heard about Scotty's draft class. "the top 4 picks would all be number ones overall in any other year yada yada yada". It simply didn't come to fruition and it is extremely unlikely it comes to fruition this summer too.

RJ is the type of draft prospect that many would've tanked an entire season for...but now that he's actually on the Raptors there's non-stop criticism with him despite him putting up allstar numbers and still being young at 24 years old.

He's putting up better numbers than Demar did when he made his 1st allstar appearance at 24 y/o.

the other problem is the singular focus on efficiency stats which is also problematic. It trends toward a specific TYPE of player with a specific TYPE of role. To some degree....high effiency correlates with the inability to dribble the basketball and the inability to create. That's why if you pull up the top 20 nba players in efficiency....it doesn't resemble the list of overall top 20 players.

The problem we see in the playoffs over and over again....is that teams don't have enough ball-handlers. Over a 7 game series....teams spam the ball-handlers and force the ball into the hands of the 'high efficiency' guys. This is why we consistently see 2nd and 3rd string point guards all of a sudden play bigger roles in the playoffs than they did during the regular season.

But ppl who solely focus on efficiency tend to hate point guards.

[mdenny]

I generally agree that Barnes has a clearer path to being a top 20 player (although I don't think it's as clear as many here).

But that's not a sure thing. They are roughly the same age and player development is a function of MANY variables. It seems like many think player development is more predictable than it actually is. To write off RJ at this moment in time as a limited player is crazy. He's way to young to do that. He's showing development. Plus he possesses alot of the aforementioned variables (ie work ethic, attitude, demeanor, leadership, MATURITY lol)

[tsherkin]

The whole difference in perception is primarily driven by 'mystery box' psychology and people who are fully enrapt in draft hype year after year.

We should ask ourselves "Is RJ a good top 5 pick historically in the nba draft" and the anwswer is YES HE IS.

I went back and revisited the top 5 picks between 2005 and 2015 (so that careers can be evaluated in full).

Out of all 50 players chosen top 5 during those years....I got 11 players who had better careers than what is tracking for Barrett (some of whom were derailed by injury like D Rose and J Wall but I tried to be objective about that and put them above RJ).

You see the fault with this method, right? You're looking at a decade. That isn't a representative sample of the draft, which ebbs and flows. And draft picks are, by nature, volatile to begin with. There aren't a lot of sure things.

But that means RJ is in the 80th percentile in terms of expected outcome for top 5 picks in the NBA draft. He is a VERY GOOD top 5 pick in the draft. But many here would laugh at that because they are essentially scratch-n-win ticket lovers who have the allure in always expecting the best possible outcome.

And the flaw in this thinking, right? "Good relative to the other guys who aren't that good" isn't really a measure of value which has much meaning.

the other problem is the singular focus on efficiency stats which is also problematic. It trends toward a specific TYPE of player with a specific TYPE of role. To some degree....high effiency correlates with the inability to dribble the basketball and the inability to create.

This is problematically inaccurate. Not really sure why you thought this was a thing.

That's why if you pull up the top 20 nba players in efficiency....it doesn't resemble the list of overall top 20 players.

This doesn't approach usage at all, so of course it doesn't resemble the top 20 players in the league. Nor does it access any other component of offense EXCEPT efficiency.

But ppl who solely focus on efficiency tend to hate point guards.

Most people who bag on point guards are largely taking issue with point guards who are used in high-volume scoring roles and returning inefficient results, because of the issues that causes. Volume-scoring points are rarely at the forefront of title teams. The ones who have been have typically been some flavor of outlier like Magic, or Steph. And Magic wasn't a 27 ppg scorer, he could just light you up in a game when needed.

[mdenny]

The whole difference in perception is primarily driven by 'mystery box' psychology and people who are fully enrapt in draft hype year after year.

We should ask ourselves "Is RJ a good top 5 pick historically in the nba draft" and the anwswer is YES HE IS.

I went back and revisited the top 5 picks between 2005 and 2015 (so that careers can be evaluated in full).

Out of all 50 players chosen top 5 during those years....I got 11 players who had better careers than what is tracking for Barrett (some of whom were derailed by injury like D Rose and J Wall but I tried to be objective about that and put them above RJ).

You see the fault with this method, right? You're looking at a decade. That isn't a representative sample of the draft, which ebbs and flows. And draft picks are, by nature, volatile to begin with. There aren't a lot of sure things.

But that means RJ is in the 80th percentile in terms of expected outcome for top 5 picks in the NBA draft. He is a VERY GOOD top 5 pick in the draft. But many here would laugh at that because they are essentially scratch-n-win ticket lovers who have the allure in always expecting the best possible outcome.

And the flaw in this thinking, right? "Good relative to the other guys who aren't that good" isn't really a measure of value which has much meaning.

the other problem is the singular focus on efficiency stats which is also problematic. It trends toward a specific TYPE of player with a specific TYPE of role. To some degree....high effiency correlates with the inability to dribble the basketball and the inability to create.

This is problematically inaccurate. Not really sure why you thought this was a thing.

That's why if you pull up the top 20 nba players in efficiency....it doesn't resemble the list of overall top 20 players.

This doesn't approach usage at all, so of course it doesn't resemble the top 20 players in the league. Nor does it access any other component of offense EXCEPT efficiency.

But ppl who solely focus on efficiency tend to hate point guards.

Most people who bag on point guards are largely taking issue with point guards who are used in high-volume scoring roles and returning inefficient results, because of the issues that causes. Volume-scoring points are rarely at the forefront of title teams. The ones who have been have typically been some flavor of outlier like Magic, or Steph. And Magic wasn't a 27 ppg scorer, he could just light you up in a game when needed.

"A decade is a small sample size" lol.

Should I have gone back 20 years? Because I bet the results would be the same.

And yes..."a good player" is ALWAYS relative to other players. How else do you determine a player's worth other than comparing him to other players? Should we evaluate RJ in a vacuum? In that case....he is both the best and worst ball player in the history of civilization.

[Scase]

[
You already have a former #3 pick only 5 years ago who is going you 24 pts, 6 rebounds and 6 assists...and is still only 24 years old. But he is only a 4th option by some people's standards? That is just stupid.

I think there's middle space there.

For one, those raw numbers don't matter too much. Inside them, there are positives to discuss, but quoting his box score averages doesn't really go very far. On the other, it's also clear that "fourth option" doesn't make a ton of sense based on the potential he's shown us, and the limited chances he's had to have consistency of roster around him. So we don't really know which RJ is gonna be our real deal, and that means some patient waiting.

He has pros and cons, and he's young and deserves a shot at showing us what he can do. We certainly gave it to DeRozan, so why not the hometown guy? On the other hand, we also need not to get too far ahead of ourselves over tiny samples while ignoring who he's been to this point and how that meshes with player development over league history. Be a little conservative in expectation, but be patient and let him show what he can do with a little passing support and some spacing, right?

I'm a big fan of not going nuts over a player in either direction early on, most of the time. Bargs notwithstanding xD

The fact that everyone is harping on "fourth option" and completely ignoring the context of "on a high ceiling team" is kinda ridiculous.

He's Aaron Gordon level in the pecking order of the offence. Some nights he moves up a peg, others down. But he is never the first or second intentional option.

No successful team is going to have him as a first or second option, no team in the league would get anywhere with an offensive player that is only good when their shots are all assisted on. I don't think this is a particularly hot take.

[mtcan]

[
You already have a former #3 pick only 5 years ago who is going you 24 pts, 6 rebounds and 6 assists...and is still only 24 years old. But he is only a 4th option by some people's standards? That is just stupid.

I think there's middle space there.

For one, those raw numbers don't matter too much. Inside them, there are positives to discuss, but quoting his box score averages doesn't really go very far. On the other, it's also clear that "fourth option" doesn't make a ton of sense based on the potential he's shown us, and the limited chances he's had to have consistency of roster around him. So we don't really know which RJ is gonna be our real deal, and that means some patient waiting.

He has pros and cons, and he's young and deserves a shot at showing us what he can do. We certainly gave it to DeRozan, so why not the hometown guy? On the other hand, we also need not to get too far ahead of ourselves over tiny samples while ignoring who he's been to this point and how that meshes with player development over league history. Be a little conservative in expectation, but be patient and let him show what he can do with a little passing support and some spacing, right?

I'm a big fan of not going nuts over a player in either direction early on, most of the time. Bargs notwithstanding xD

I personally am enjoying the RJ experience so far. I also feel that we should turn the page on the NY experience because his style of play as a Knick is so vastly different than how he is being used in Toronto. While there are moments when we do see some of the inefficiency and tunnel vision that he was guilty of in NY...I feel like it was out of necessity. The stretch of NY RJ that we witnessed during this most recent stretch...he was asked to shoulder a much larger load being without so many guys. But take that away...he's been probably the one big reason why these losses have been so close instead of outright blowouts. That deserves merit, IMO.

What we are seeing though...is that, what we are seeing with these 30+ point games with 5+ assists and good efficiency...it's reproducible and hopefully we see this sort of consistency build as he continues on in Toronto.

[tsherkin]

I personally am enjoying the RJ experience so far. I also feel that we should turn the page on the NY experience because his style of play as a Knick is so vastly different than how he is being used in Toronto.

I agree. There was a contextual difference in how he was used with us last year than how he was in New York, so we can't JUST look at New York, for sure. And this year until basically this last game, he hasn't had the same sort of roster context, so we can't look at the results relative to last year because it's just not the same, for sure.

What we are seeing though...is that, what we are seeing with these 30+ point games with 5+ assists and good efficiency...it's reproducible and hopefully we see this sort of consistency build as he continues on in Toronto.

How do you define "reproducible?" He's shot 55% or higher in 4 of his 5 30+-point games... and 60%+ in 3 of them (71.4% in the peak one). And in the other, he shot 38.5%. And he had to draw 11+ FTA in 4 of them. Something to consider.

"A decade is a small sample size" lol.

Should I have gone back 20 years? Because I bet the results would be the same.

That would have been a much more meaningful sample, but even then. Things ebb and flow, because that's how talent works.

And yes..."a good player" is ALWAYS relative to other players. How else do you determine a player's worth other than comparing him to other players?

By not handing out participation trophies, for starters...

[Tripod]

Aaron Gordon? The guy who's career high in points in 17.6?

17.6 ranks as RJ's worst PPG season excluding his rookie season. He has 5 seasons of 17.6 PPG or more out of 6 years.

Aaron Gordon is underselling him.