Official RJ Barrett Thread Part 2

[PushDaRock]

When you say 2% under league average is "very very bad", I don't think that leaves much room for bad. So, does that make league
average also bad since you need to be above league average to be decent?

League average is mediocre, most especially when you're doing it in volume. And the lower your volume, the less tolerance there is for bleh efficiency, because you're cherry-picking shots.

So, factoring in our team quality, you're not giving RJ some tolerance being 2% under league average and he's still "very very bad" this season?

Are you trying to irritate me? You know that isn't what I'm trying to do. I have like a dozen posts ITT speaking to that exact point and directly remarking on how contextual factors are helping RJ this season. I have commented many times on how we should be patient with RJ, orbiting the idea of us overextending him as a volume.

Pay attention, or don't engage.

Ok, so you're making my point for me that it's harder to score efficiently at higher volume.

Then, why are you making pointless posts asking me if I'm aware that 2% under league average is "very very bad" when you also know there is context there?

[PushDaRock]

It isn't some radical claim that if you're scoring under league average, it's bad. This isn't news.



Above league average is decent. +2% and better is generally a pretty good marker for "good."

Naturally, there are contextual factors, right? There's some tolerance for team quality depressing individual efficiency.



His efficiency was excellent with us last year. It has not been this year, which is more in line with his career averages. But that discussion has been hashed out many times already and also involves roster context and all that.

League-average scoring in volume isn't especially good, no. Slightly-above league-average scoring isn't terribly remarkable either, but in Barrett's case, the raw average escapes the very large distance between the two performances, right? We have been using him quite differently this year and it hasn't really gone well (as expected) when he hasn't had Scottie on the floor. Which is fine, we just need to have Scottie on the floor and not push his volume too much, sure. But it's not like they're comparable samples which move fluidly into one another.

When you say 2% under league average is "very very bad", I don't think that leaves much room for bad. So, does that make league average also bad since you need to be above league average to be decent?

So, factoring in our team quality, you're not giving RJ some tolerance being 2% under league average and he's still "very very bad" this season?

League average at volume is bad.

How many players do you think in the league can score around 25 a game at league average efficiency?

[pingpongrac]

Again, RJ’s 55.2 TS% this season is below league average, but you need to apply some context. He’s not a 7-footer who is getting spoon-fed easy dunks/layups and he’s not a three-point specialist while he has been initiating a lot of offence for us. If you filter by rotation players that have been healthy, he’s in the ~40th percentile when it comes to TS% which is no where near “very, very bad” — especially when you consider that a large chunk of players within ~1 TS% of Barrett are all-star-level talents (LaMelo, Bridges, Ingram, Haliburton, Brown, Harden, Scottie, Cade, etc.) — and he’s doing a lot more than just scoring for our offence like those other guys.

The guy is putting up 24/7/6 on 55 TS% with a very respectable 1.8 AST/TO ratio all the while being the only offensive creator on the floor for about half of his minutes this season. It is wild to me that his “very, very bad efficiency” is such a big talking point on this board. We know he shouldn’t be the #1 option — especially if our #2 option is Gradey and #3 option is Poeltl — so it seems rather silly to be harping on his TS% so much when he has been in a rather unfavourable position for the majority of the season yet still producing at a pretty high level overall.

[tsherkin]

Ok, so you're making my point for me that it's harder to score efficiently at higher volume.

Then, why are you making pointless posts asking me if I'm aware that 2% under league average is "very very bad" when you also know there is context there?

Because I'm tired of hearing people talk about volume as an end in and of itself. Most players, given enough possessions, can post high PPG on crap efficiency. It isn't remarkable. So when ATL remarked about Barrett being 23rd in PPG (22nd, now), it's meaningless. It's empty. It's a function of possessions used.

And the reason I made that remark is because you replied to me. You said "It shows something to be able to score on high volume at a semi respectable efficiency level which isn't something most NBA players can do. RJ is at 55% TS this year which is just 1-2% lower than league average at his position." As I said, that remark is more independent of RJ than anything else, it's a remark on the approach.

Barrett has responded well when we've had our roster pieces letting him fill a role which matches his skill set. That's fine, that's actually been encouraging. You're the one trying to make this about RJ, and not about the comment about volume itself.

[tsherkin]

so it seems rather silly to be harping on his TS% so much when he has been in a rather unfavourable position for the majority of the season yet still producing at a pretty high level overall.

That's only because you weren't actually paying attention to what I said. Which is frustrating, as it has been with Push. So many here are in such a hurry to white knight for RJ that they're not really paying attention to specific comments and responses, which gets very irritating.

Circling back to your first point, no one cares that he isn't a seven-footer. Scorers who are worth it manage to score above league average. Even the smaller ones. That's what makes them worthwhile as volume scorers. The ones who don't end up holding back the offense, most especially in the current environment. There's truth to the notion that roster context (and position) limit final efficiency and that's fine. Not everyone needs to be a +5% rTS guy, but consistently, year after year, the good scorers of the league manage to exceed league average. And those that don't have considerably lower impact. With RJ, as I have laboriously repeated ITT, we have a different role we can use him in which helps him operate better, because he has more specific usage parameters than the higher-end guys. But that's fine, because he isn't a superstar, and we don't have one. We aren't contending for a title, we're trying to be not-crap. And he can play a role in that. But there are very specific diminishing returns on volume scorers who don't surpass league average. That isn't a subtle element of the league.

As you say, he's doing a little more than just scoring. So his total value on offense is a little greater than just his efficiency. That is not, however, super relevant to an evaluation of his scoring. Again, though, that's a tangent from those not paying attention to what I've said, or even BEEN saying for a long time.

[PushDaRock]

Ok, so you're making my point for me that it's harder to score efficiently at higher volume.

Then, why are you making pointless posts asking me if I'm aware that 2% under league average is "very very bad" when you also know there is context there?

Because I'm tired of hearing people talk about volume as an end in and of itself. Most players, given enough possessions, can post high PPG on crap efficiency. It isn't remarkable. So when ATL remarked about Barrett being 23rd in PPG (22nd, now), it's meaningless. It's empty. It's a function of possessions used.

And the reason I made that remark is because you replied to me. You said "It shows something to be able to score on high volume at a semi respectable efficiency level which isn't something most NBA players can do. RJ is at 55% TS this year which is just 1-2% lower than league average at his position." As I said, that remark is more independent of RJ than anything else, it's a remark on the approach.

Barrett has responded well when we've had our roster pieces letting him fill a role which matches his skill set. That's fine, that's actually been encouraging. You're the one trying to make this about RJ, and not about the comment about volume itself.

Yes and my original comment still holds true. It's not meaningless because scoring at volume without the efficiency being horrid isn't something most NBA players can do. 55% TS is absolutely respectable in that role and not "very very bad" when you compare to many other All-Star level players who are right around the same. It's also a decent gauge for what that player could do in a lesser and more optimized role that plays more to their strengths.

[mademan]

When you say 2% under league average is "very very bad", I don't think that leaves much room for bad. So, does that make league average also bad since you need to be above league average to be decent?

So, factoring in our team quality, you're not giving RJ some tolerance being 2% under league average and he's still "very very bad" this season?

League average at volume is bad.

How many players do you think in the league can score around 25 a game at league average efficiency?

I saw Cam Thomas do it last year and he's a bench player on any good team in this league. I think any reasonably talented guard given a green light and decent spacing can do this

Inefficient volume scoring is one of the least important attributes you can have as an NBA player.

[PushDaRock]

League average at volume is bad.

How many players do you think in the league can score around 25 a game at league average efficiency?

I saw Cam Thomas do it last year and he's a bench player on any good team in this league. I think any reasonably talented guard given a green light and decent spacing can do this

lol do we have decent spacing on this team?

[mademan]

How many players do you think in the league can score around 25 a game at league average efficiency?

I saw Cam Thomas do it last year and he's a bench player on any good team in this league. I think any reasonably talented guard given a green light and decent spacing can do this

lol do we have decent spacing on this team?

Yes? The entire league has decent spacing. There isnt an NBA team without it. This is the new game

If youre putting up more than 30 3's per game, you have decent spacing.

[PushDaRock]

I saw Cam Thomas do it last year and he's a bench player on any good team in this league. I think any reasonably talented guard given a green light and decent spacing can do this

lol do we have decent spacing on this team?

Yes? The entire league has decent spacing. There isnt an NBA team without it. This is the new game

If youre putting up more than 30 3's per game, you have decent spacing.

Seemed like you were adding "decent spacing" as a caveat, otherwise why bother mentioning it if every team by default has it?

[mademan]

lol do we have decent spacing on this team?

Yes? The entire league has decent spacing. There isnt an NBA team without it. This is the new game

If youre putting up more than 30 3's per game, you have decent spacing.

Seemed like you were adding "decent spacing" as a caveat, otherwise why bother mentioning it if every team by default has it?

Because im talking about this in a historical sense as well.

Go look at Raptor legend 06 Mike James...a guy who never cracked 13ppg being given an absolute green light at the age of 30 putting up 20ppg on a team near the tops in the league in 3pa and 3p%.

NBA players - and especially guards- are extremely talented. Give them the green light, and they'll average over 20. RJ is more talented and has better physical gifts than a lot of them..with a green light, he'll always put up points. It's not terribly impressive. You give a bench player like Tre Mann on the Hornets the green light and he'll put up an inefficient 20 as well. These guys are all disgustingly talented

[pingpongrac]

How many players do you think in the league can score around 25 a game at league average efficiency?

I saw Cam Thomas do it last year and he's a bench player on any good team in this league. I think any reasonably talented guard given a green light and decent spacing can do this

lol do we have decent spacing on this team?

29th in 3FGA/per game and 23rd in 3FG%…yep! We have decent spacing on this team even with two of our arguably top 4 shooters (IQ and Olynyk) missing almost the entire season so far!

Not to mention Cam Thomas was a pure volume scorer and nothing else while being an even worse defender than Barrett. Barrett literally has twice as many rebounds and assists per game than Thomas did last season when he put up 22 PPG on 55 TS%.

[PushDaRock]

Yes? The entire league has decent spacing. There isnt an NBA team without it. This is the new game

If youre putting up more than 30 3's per game, you have decent spacing.

Seemed like you were adding "decent spacing" as a caveat, otherwise why bother mentioning it if every team by default has it?

Because im talking about this in a historical sense as well.

Go look at Raptor legend 06 Mike James...a guy who never cracked 13ppg being given an absolute green light at the age of 30 putting up 20ppg on a team near the tops in the league in 3pa and 3p%.

NBA players - and especially guards- are extremely talented. Give them the green light, and they'll average over 20. RJ is more talented and has better physical gifts than a lot of them..with a green light, he'll always put up points. It's not terribly impressive. You give a bench player like Tre Mann on the Hornets the green light and he'll put up an inefficient 20 as well. These guys are all disgustingly talented

When I ask how many players can average 25 on league average efficiency, I am talking about year in and year out or at least multiple years, not for a career year. That Mike James Season you have to consider a fluke considering he doubled his scoring average and had a 58% TS that year and never broke 53% TS any other year in his career.

How inefficient would Tre Mann be putting up 23-24 ppg? Right now, he's at 53.7% TS on 14 ppg. If he's closer to 50% TS on that kind of volume, that's really not at all comparable to RJ's 55% TS

[KrazyP]

Again, RJ’s 55.2 TS% this season is below league average, but you need to apply some context. He’s not a 7-footer who is getting spoon-fed easy dunks/layups and he’s not a three-point specialist while he has been initiating a lot of offence for us. If you filter by rotation players that have been healthy, he’s in the ~40th percentile when it comes to TS% which is no where near “very, very bad” — especially when you consider that a large chunk of players within ~1 TS% of Barrett are all-star-level talents (LaMelo, Bridges, Ingram, Haliburton, Brown, Harden, Scottie, Cade, etc.) — and he’s doing a lot more than just scoring for our offence like those other guys.

The guy is putting up 24/7/6 on 55 TS% with a very respectable 1.8 AST/TO ratio all the while being the only offensive creator on the floor for about half of his minutes this season. It is wild to me that his “very, very bad efficiency” is such a big talking point on this board. We know he shouldn’t be the #1 option — especially if our #2 option is Gradey and #3 option is Poeltl — so it seems rather silly to be harping on his TS% so much when he has been in a rather unfavourable position for the majority of the season yet still producing at a pretty high level overall.

And1. Many fans seem to have a hard time taking TS% into context. Role, system, coaching, teammates can have a massive impact on efficiency.

Look at a guy like Siakam.
---> As a 2nd/3rd option on the Raps championship team - he put up .628 TS%.
---> When he came a defacto 1st option without a legit 2nd option the following years - his efficency dropped to ~55%
---> On the Pacers as a 2nd option - his efficiency is back up to over .618 TS%.

Since joining the Raps, in 54 games, Barrett is averaging 22.5 PPG on .587 TS%. This is solid.

His efficiency has certainly dipped so far this season but this is no big deal....there are very few players in the league that could be efficient while carrying high usage on an injury plagued semi-tanking team where half the rotation consists of rookies and sophomores.

As a frame of reference - Scottie Barnes career TS% is .547 (.553 this season) on much lower usage but he doesnt seem to get nearly the same amount of criticism on this forum as Barrett. Quickley hasnt even been efficient so far as a Raptor but nobody seems to care. So strange that only Barrett seems to be analyzed under a microscope.

[mademan]

Seemed like you were adding "decent spacing" as a caveat, otherwise why bother mentioning it if every team by default has it?

Because im talking about this in a historical sense as well.

Go look at Raptor legend 06 Mike James...a guy who never cracked 13ppg being given an absolute green light at the age of 30 putting up 20ppg on a team near the tops in the league in 3pa and 3p%.

NBA players - and especially guards- are extremely talented. Give them the green light, and they'll average over 20. RJ is more talented and has better physical gifts than a lot of them..with a green light, he'll always put up points. It's not terribly impressive. You give a bench player like Tre Mann on the Hornets the green light and he'll put up an inefficient 20 as well. These guys are all disgustingly talented

When I ask how many players can average 25 on league average efficiency, I am talking about year in and year out or at least multiple years, not for a career year. That Mike James Season you have to consider a fluke considering he doubled his scoring average and had a 58% TS that year and never broke 53% TS any other year in his career.

How inefficient would Tre Mann be putting up 23-24 ppg? Right now, he's at 53.7% TS on 14 ppg. If he's closer to 50% TS on that kind of volume, that's really not at all comparable to RJ's 55% TS

It would be worse efficiency but he's also a much worse talent than RJ. My overall point is that inefficient scoring is the least important aspect of basketball and that's RJ greatest attribute.

And yes, RJ has, for every year of his career, been inefficient. He has played with stars and has been a 3rd option as early as last year and was still inefficient. If he changes, he changes, but there is no reason to re-write history. This is who he has been for every year of his career and as long as that continues, he'll be a negative overpaid player.

[PushDaRock]

Because im talking about this in a historical sense as well.

Go look at Raptor legend 06 Mike James...a guy who never cracked 13ppg being given an absolute green light at the age of 30 putting up 20ppg on a team near the tops in the league in 3pa and 3p%.

NBA players - and especially guards- are extremely talented. Give them the green light, and they'll average over 20. RJ is more talented and has better physical gifts than a lot of them..with a green light, he'll always put up points. It's not terribly impressive. You give a bench player like Tre Mann on the Hornets the green light and he'll put up an inefficient 20 as well. These guys are all disgustingly talented

When I ask how many players can average 25 on league average efficiency, I am talking about year in and year out or at least multiple years, not for a career year. That Mike James Season you have to consider a fluke considering he doubled his scoring average and had a 58% TS that year and never broke 53% TS any other year in his career.

How inefficient would Tre Mann be putting up 23-24 ppg? Right now, he's at 53.7% TS on 14 ppg. If he's closer to 50% TS on that kind of volume, that's really not at all comparable to RJ's 55% TS

It would be worse efficiency but he's also a much worse talent than RJ. My overall point is that inefficient scoring is the least important aspect of basketball and that's RJ greatest attribute.

As a Raptor, he is a 22.5 ppg scorer on 58.7% TS. There is reason to be optimistic that he's not just going to be a below average efficiency scorer in his optimal role here.

[ash_k]

Those numbers are undeniable then he was at 20+pts|6+pts|6+pts with Scottie and NBA greats only(Jokic, Giannis, LeBron, Luka). Just undeniable.
Some guys on here have to stop overthinking it. We have an unbelievable player next to Scottie, literally just scratching the surface like Jaylen Brown at the same age.

"Unbelievable" is pushing it too much. We have a young guy with good potential, but again, comparing him to Jaylen isn't particularly wise because Brown has a bunch of different skills which RJ does not. This is the sort of comment which ends up having me discuss RJ's flaws more than his positive potential in these threads, you know?

Had anybody told you that RJ would do numbers that only the Greats can and are doing as in Jokic, Luka, Giannis, Lebron..you would have indeed not BELIEVED IT!

[MEDIC]

Again, RJ’s 55.2 TS% this season is below league average, but you need to apply some context. He’s not a 7-footer who is getting spoon-fed easy dunks/layups and he’s not a three-point specialist while he has been initiating a lot of offence for us. If you filter by rotation players that have been healthy, he’s in the ~40th percentile when it comes to TS% which is no where near “very, very bad” — especially when you consider that a large chunk of players within ~1 TS% of Barrett are all-star-level talents (LaMelo, Bridges, Ingram, Haliburton, Brown, Harden, Scottie, Cade, etc.) — and he’s doing a lot more than just scoring for our offence like those other guys.

The guy is putting up 24/7/6 on 55 TS% with a very respectable 1.8 AST/TO ratio all the while being the only offensive creator on the floor for about half of his minutes this season. It is wild to me that his “very, very bad efficiency” is such a big talking point on this board. We know he shouldn’t be the #1 option — especially if our #2 option is Gradey and #3 option is Poeltl — so it seems rather silly to be harping on his TS% so much when he has been in a rather unfavourable position for the majority of the season yet still producing at a pretty high level overall.

And1. Many fans seem to have a hard time taking TS% into context. Role, system, coaching, teammates can have a massive impact on efficiency.

Look at a guy like Siakam.
---> As a 2nd/3rd option on the Raps championship team - he put up .628 TS%.
---> When he came a defacto 1st option without a legit 2nd option the following years - his efficency dropped to ~55%
---> On the Pacers as a 2nd option - his efficiency is back up to over .618 TS%.

Since joining the Raps, in 54 games, Barrett is averaging 22.5 PPG on .587 TS%. This is solid.

His efficiency has certainly dipped so far this season but this is no big deal....there are very few players in the league that could be efficient while carrying high usage on an injury plagued semi-tanking team where half the rotation consists of rookies and sophomores.

As a frame of reference - Scottie Barnes career TS% is .547 (.553 this season) on much lower usage but he doesnt seem to get nearly the same amount of criticism on this forum as Barrett. Quickley hasnt even been efficient so far as a Raptor but nobody seems to care. So strange that only Barrett seems to be analyzed under a microscope.

Great posts. Spot on. Context matters.

[tsherkin]

Had anybody told you that RJ would do numbers that only the Greats can and are doing as in Jokic, Luka, Giannis, Lebron..you would have indeed not BELIEVED IT!

He's been 2/3s of the way there for three years, averaging around 20 ppg and 5 or 6 rpg. Him playing 34+ mpg in a feature role doesn't make the production surprising, particularly with the attendant increase in his turnover rate.

I don't particularly care about his box score averages. Those are the product of minutes and opportunity. It IS nice to see the development, but like, Ricky Davis once averaged 20.6 ppg, 4.9 rpg and 5.5 apg, so I don't get too invested in raw averages. Again, because no one here likes seeing anything that isn't clear praise of RJ, I'm generally happy with what we're seeing this season. But comments about ATG players and raw averages don't help the subject at all.

[tsherkin]

As a Raptor, he is a 22.5 ppg scorer on 58.7% TS. There is reason to be optimistic that he's not just going to be a below average efficiency scorer in his optimal role here.

See, THIS is something I can get behind, yes. As long as we don't make him a primary on-ball guy and he's got Scottie along with him, I'm quite optimistic about him being a value-add player to our team, for sure.