Masai: "Scottie isn't a shot maker right now but that will grow. You build around him for his winning mentality"

[TheGeneral99]

The year we won the title, Kyle Lowry averaged 14.2 points per game, and was one of our best 2 or three players. Scottie Barnes is tracking to be a Lowry type, where he does a lot of things that help you win games, without being a high volume scorer.

I love Scottie, but we knew that Lowry had already proven himself to be capable of being a high level scorer before 2019

In 2016 and 2017 he averaged 21, 7 and 5 and then 22, 7 and 5 on solid efficiency. He reduced his offensive role because we got Kawhi and Siakam was ascending into a star. The year after Kawhi left he averaged nearly 20ppg again.

[Raps in 4]

You add a Durant to this team with Poeltl, Ingram and Barnes with depth and it suddenly becomes extremely interesting. We have the pieces to acquire that guy, soon, imo.

Durant is a Robin. Booker is miles better than anyone on this team, and Durant still can't do anything alongside him. Not to mention he'll be 37 next season.

Durant is an elite scorer and took over main option role with the Warriors when he went there lol. He’s not a Robin and on this roster his main focus is scoring.

My main point here is that Masai is building a team where a top scoring guy who’s not a sieve everywhere else would fit in like a glove the same way Kawhi did with us. Masai is building a Boston like team that is stacked everywhere, plays defense and trying to have enough depth to add a superstar who will not have to do everything. Kawhi survived the season he played for us because he basically didn’t have to play defense until the Bucks series.

KD was the second option in GSW. Defences focused on Steph, leaving him to deal with single coverage.

Boston has a top-10 player and a top-20 player in their primes, that they drafted. We don't even have a single top-20 player on this roster. We have the depth, but not the top-end talent. Getting that top-end talent is the hard part. Teams don't exactly trade their Tatums every year. Which current (not about to retire) superstar could be unhappy in their present situation and demand out soon? I can't think of anyone.

[Walid]

What an idiot. Guys don't develop past 23. If Scottie isn't a shot maker by now it means that he will never be a shot maker. You would think that a guy who played professionally, that has been a scout for over 20 years and an NBA executive for 15 years would have figured that out by now.

I for one, will not be drinking the Kool Aid. Most of us who are smart know that the Scottie of today is the same Scottie we will see at 25 and 27, if anything he might be worse. We drafted a bigger and stronger Patrick McCaw.

It’s just PR. If we get more talent, Scottie will fill the role player/glue guy spot. Otherwise, I expect he’d be moved for the right package in the next couple of years. The only thing is will we sell when his value is high.

[Raps in 4]

The year we won the title, Kyle Lowry averaged 14.2 points per game, and was one of our best 2 or three players. Scottie Barnes is tracking to be a Lowry type, where he does a lot of things that help you win games, without being a high volume scorer.

I love Scottie, but we knew that Lowry had already proven himself to be capable of being a high level scorer before 2019

In 2016 and 2017 he averaged 21, 7 and 5 and then 22, 7 and 5 on solid efficiency. He reduced his role because we got Kawhi and Siakam was ascending into a star. The year after Kawhi left he averaged nearly 20ppg again.

Kyle was consistently a top-10 player in impact metrics, scoring efficiently and playing elite defence. Scottie is nowhere near his level.

[PushDaRock]

I think the posters who don't even believe Scottie can be the 2nd best player on a contender anymore, need to start also calling out Masai on his continued disagreement with that assessment.

Exhitbit A:


Exhibit B:


Can't have your cake and eat it too, because I'm seeing too much doubt in Masai's assessment of Scottie, but not enough criticism of Masai's assessment from these same posters.

I'm not sure what exactly you want him called out on. If he says "we hope that will develop" instead of "that will develop", does that make you happier? Even those of us doubtful are hopeful that he develops his offensive game. Masai just gave him a 5 year max contract, he's not going to go picking at all his flaws in the media like we do on here.

Basically I want these posters (the ones who specifically don't even believe Scottie can be the 2nd best player on a contender anymore, unlike Masai) to start also calling out Masai for his flawed player evaluation. Because if that is what these posters believe (and disagree with Masai), then they basically must also believe that Masai isn't building this team the right way.

New CBA environment makes effective team building with more than 2 players on max contracts basically impossible. The time of Big 3s is passed. If Scottie won't be a top 2 player on a contender, then he shouldn't be one of this team's 2 max contract players.

Also to specifically address the bolded part of your reply, Masai isn't hoping he develops into a top 2 player on a contender:

As soon as we get those two phenomenal, incredible players, and we already have one in Scottie Barnes

He already believes he is one, without the development of his offensive game that he was specifically referring to (which would further elevate him from Masai's POV, probably to a #1).

The develop part was referring to his shot making.

Again, what do you expect him to say? He just signed him to a 5 year max that has yet to even start. You don't pay a guy max money if you don't think he's a franchise cornerstone, that goes for any team. But, if we are reading actions rather than words, we can already see acquiring Ingram is an admission that Scottie likely won't ever develop into a #1 option because if you believed he could, you wouldn't be bringing in the guy that will take over that role now. They're also obviously hoping he can still improve his offense and they really have no choice but to be patient and hope for the best.

Obviously if Scottie ends up as a 4th option making max money, that likely makes it very difficult to build out a contender unless he becomes an elite defender in the top 5 range.

[ConSarnit]

If we look at the fact that he said he’s a core piece, and then if you read more of what he said outside of that quote, what he’s telling us is that he’s one of the main guys, but he alone isn’t enough. We need more and they’re trying to accumulate talent to acquire that piece.

Yeah, I hear that. Like I said earlier, though, it doesn't really salve my concerns. I acknowledge I might be reading too deeply into the pessimist stance, but that's where I'm at.

I think even the biggest detractors will agree that Barnes has shown enough to be a very important core piece to a very good team.

Assuming we can pivot his scoring role, yes, he has valuable tools to offer on D and as a playmaker.

I hear you. The bet on Barnes has been the big question mark for me through this era.

With that said, I found this quote interesting:

As soon as we get those two phenomenal, incredible players, and we already have one in Scottie Barnes, or two and a half of them, or three of them

This is the first time that he's moved that number up. Its always been "we have Scottie and we need another player to emerge." This remark, along with the acquisition of BI, tells me they're cooling a bit on their Barnes dreams.

Yeah, that actually worries me, because he is framing Scottie as that kind of player. I hear you as far as acknowledging the need for more, but discussing Barnes as one of those two is so far off-base for me as to remain concerning.

Have to disagree here. What really good team uses a guy of his ilk in an important role? What really good team would use him in a playmaking role? On a better team with better on ball options he’d see his playmaking usage drop and that would reduce his value. If he doesn’t have the ball he’s not overly useful on offense. We’ve seen teams give him the Tony Allen treatment and it’s hurt our offense.

Who is Barnes contemporary on a really good team? What high level team is giving playmaking reps to an inefficient, mid-volume scorer? Has Barnes even proven he can drive “good” offense? Prior to the trades last year we were 17th in offense. Under Nurse we were terrible in the half court and only succeeded by winning the possession game. Is there any evidence it would be worth giving Barnes the ball on a really good team? And if he doesn’t have the ball on offense how is he contributing?

[tsherkin]

Have to disagree here. What really good team uses a guy of his ilk in an important role? What really good team would use him in a playmaking role? On a better team with better on ball options he’d see his playmaking usage drop and that would reduce his value. If he doesn’t have the ball he’s not overly useful on offense. We’ve seen teams give him the Tony Allen treatment and it’s hurt our offense.

Golden State comes to mind with some immediacy. OKC as well. More conventionally, I have to agree that we would likely see his usage drop. I have discussed that earlier ITT, in fact, and of course that creates problems with his contract, no doubt.

Who is Barnes contemporary on a really good team? What high level team is giving playmaking reps to an inefficient, mid-volume scorer? Has Barnes even proven he can drive “good” offense? Prior to the trades last year we were 17th in offense.

His impact on RJ is clear. Referencing last year's team is a little complex, given the general lack of talent depth we had.

I don't want to expend a lot of energy defending Scottie because he's not my guy, but there are ways to take advantage of guys who do what he can do. It just requires better players in front of him.

[Tha Cynic]

Durant is a Robin. Booker is miles better than anyone on this team, and Durant still can't do anything alongside him. Not to mention he'll be 37 next season.

Durant is an elite scorer and took over main option role with the Warriors when he went there lol. He’s not a Robin and on this roster his main focus is scoring.

My main point here is that Masai is building a team where a top scoring guy who’s not a sieve everywhere else would fit in like a glove the same way Kawhi did with us. Masai is building a Boston like team that is stacked everywhere, plays defense and trying to have enough depth to add a superstar who will not have to do everything. Kawhi survived the season he played for us because he basically didn’t have to play defense until the Bucks series.

KD was the second option in GSW. Defences focused on Steph, leaving him to deal with single coverage.

Boston has a top-10 player and a top-20 player in their primes, that they drafted. We don't even have a single top-20 player on this roster. We have the depth, but not the top-end talent. Getting that top-end talent is the hard part. Team's don't exactly trade their Tatums every year. Which current (not about to retire) superstar could be unhappy in their present situation and demand out soon? I can't think of anyone.

We can go back and forth on this underrating of what Durant did with the Warriors, so I’ll stop. It’s not based on fact but media driven drivel.

But Booker hasn’t been a better player than Durant. Durant is older now so there is a concern, but main thing is that the Raptors are trying to build a team that is good across the board. This is year 1 of that. They have the pieces to acquire a superstar in the future imo, one that wouldn’t have to carry the team in his back. My point is someone like a Durant, not Durant specifically.

Ingram is a Brown level player at the least. Barnes last season actually had better than Brown’s peak season from an impact point. I don’t think we’re as far off. If we progress like we have this season with depth, we are getting to a point where we can trade multiple firsts for a superstar type.

Ignore the names and look at it more from an ideology perspective

[PushDaRock]

If we look at the fact that he said he’s a core piece, and then if you read more of what he said outside of that quote, what he’s telling us is that he’s one of the main guys, but he alone isn’t enough. We need more and they’re trying to accumulate talent to acquire that piece.

Yeah, I hear that. Like I said earlier, though, it doesn't really salve my concerns. I acknowledge I might be reading too deeply into the pessimist stance, but that's where I'm at.

I think even the biggest detractors will agree that Barnes has shown enough to be a very important core piece to a very good team.

Assuming we can pivot his scoring role, yes, he has valuable tools to offer on D and as a playmaker.

I hear you. The bet on Barnes has been the big question mark for me through this era.

With that said, I found this quote interesting:


This is the first time that he's moved that number up. Its always been "we have Scottie and we need another player to emerge." This remark, along with the acquisition of BI, tells me they're cooling a bit on their Barnes dreams.

Yeah, that actually worries me, because he is framing Scottie as that kind of player. I hear you as far as acknowledging the need for more, but discussing Barnes as one of those two is so far off-base for me as to remain concerning.

Have to disagree here. What really good team uses a guy of his ilk in an important role? What really good team would use him in a playmaking role? On a better team with better on ball options he’d see his playmaking usage drop and that would reduce his value. If he doesn’t have the ball he’s not overly useful on offense. We’ve seen teams give him the Tony Allen treatment and it’s hurt our offense.

Who is Barnes contemporary on a really good team? What high level team is giving playmaking reps to an inefficient, mid-volume scorer? Has Barnes even proven he can drive “good” offense? Prior to the trades last year we were 17th in offense. Under Nurse we were terrible in the half court and only succeeded by winning the possession game. Is there any evidence it would be worth giving Barnes the ball on a really good team? And if he doesn’t have the ball on offense how is he contributing?

At the very least, you would like those things show up in the advanced stats which it really hasn't. The team is worse with him on the court offensively than off it.

I am not all that optimistic but I'm also realistic that they just gave him a 5 year max, they are going to keep giving him every opportunity to fail for the time being and hope it eventually clicks for him. They will reduce some usage with Ingram here and hope that helps take some of the pressure off while he can hopefully get to a respectable level offensively.

[Spida888]

He said some interesting, and positive things.

But he also said this:

“Scottie is the main core of this team. I think you build around him because of the winning mentality, because of the winning instincts he has. Yeah, he’s not completely a shot maker now, that will develop, but I think he’s a championship-contending competitor now. He understands the game well enough where this is the rebound to get, this is the steal to get, sometimes the right pass to make, when he’s not over-ambitious, or maybe playing with younger players, or people with not the calibre of where his mind is going at the time. And he does make mistakes now.

And most of that is not what I wanted from a GM I hope to trust.

I'm not too worried about it.

First of all, I can't take most of things the FO says at face value, a lot of it is PR talk. He went and got BI, so that tells me they acknowledge this team needs a go to scorer.

It also doesn't hurt for this season for Scottie to experiment and hone his self creation skills because in theory it will help his development and the tank.

[ConSarnit]

The year we won the title, Kyle Lowry averaged 14.2 points per game, and was one of our best 2 or three players. Scottie Barnes is tracking to be a Lowry type, where he does a lot of things that help you win games, without being a high volume scorer.

I love Scottie, but we knew that Lowry had already proven himself to be capable of being a high level scorer before 2019

In 2016 and 2017 he averaged 21, 7 and 5 and then 22, 7 and 5 on solid efficiency. He reduced his role because we got Kawhi and Siakam was ascending into a star. The year after Kawhi left he averaged nearly 20ppg again.

Kyle was consistently a top-10 player in impact metrics, scoring efficiently and playing elite defence. Scottie is nowhere near his level.

Lowry was also a high volume, high fg% 3pt shooter. That has tremendous value as an off-ball player.

If you take the ball out of Barnes hands what’s his role on offense? He barely screens and is low volume as a cutter. We’ve seen teams completely ignore him as a 3pt threat. Lowry was multiple levels above Barnes in his capability to be an off-ball threat.

I don’t want to keep attacking Barnes (I hope he develops) but at his current pace he might find himself as a man without a home. Teams aren’t going to give playmaking reps to a mid volume, low efficiency scorer unless maybe you’re an elite playmaker (Barnes is good but not elite imo). You can’t be an effective off-ball player at the 1-4 if you can’t shoot at all unless you have ideal roster construction. Barnes role on a high level team is definitely questionable at the moment.

[tsherkin]

They have the pieces to acquire a superstar in the future imo,

I have a very hard time believing this, unless we run into another once-in-a-generation nonsense deal as we did with Kawhi.

Ingram is a Brown level player at the least. Barnes last season actually had better than Brown’s peak season from an impact point.

On the same level has any kind of compelling argument.

Last year, Barnes was a +2.9 OBPM player. .098 WS/48. +3.0 VORP. +0.8 O-EPM, +1.1 EPM.

Brown's 2021 season was +3.2 OBPM, .124 WS/48, +2.2 VORP. +1.4 O-EPM, +1.6 EPM.

That said, Brown has been a 58%+ TS player since 2020, this season notwithstanding, and he's an actual spacing threat. Scottie seems to be a better playmaker, and a better rebounder/defender.

An interesting discussion, in any case.

[ConSarnit]

Yeah, I hear that. Like I said earlier, though, it doesn't really salve my concerns. I acknowledge I might be reading too deeply into the pessimist stance, but that's where I'm at.



Assuming we can pivot his scoring role, yes, he has valuable tools to offer on D and as a playmaker.



Yeah, that actually worries me, because he is framing Scottie as that kind of player. I hear you as far as acknowledging the need for more, but discussing Barnes as one of those two is so far off-base for me as to remain concerning.

Have to disagree here. What really good team uses a guy of his ilk in an important role? What really good team would use him in a playmaking role? On a better team with better on ball options he’d see his playmaking usage drop and that would reduce his value. If he doesn’t have the ball he’s not overly useful on offense. We’ve seen teams give him the Tony Allen treatment and it’s hurt our offense.

Who is Barnes contemporary on a really good team? What high level team is giving playmaking reps to an inefficient, mid-volume scorer? Has Barnes even proven he can drive “good” offense? Prior to the trades last year we were 17th in offense. Under Nurse we were terrible in the half court and only succeeded by winning the possession game. Is there any evidence it would be worth giving Barnes the ball on a really good team? And if he doesn’t have the ball on offense how is he contributing?

At the very least, you would like those things show up in the advanced stats which it really hasn't. The team is worse with him on the court offensively than off it.

I am not all that optimistic but I'm also realistic that they just gave him a 5 year max, they are going to keep giving him every opportunity to fail for the time being and hope it eventually clicks for him. They will reduce some usage with Ingram here and hope that helps take some of the pressure off while he can hopefully get to a respectable level offensively.

I hope so too. He has shown flashes where if he can find consistency we’ll be fine with him at the max. He’s had months of good 3pt and midrange shooting so there is some evidence he can do it. If he can put that together we’re in a good spot.

[tsherkin]

I hope so too. He has shown flashes where if he can find consistency we’ll be fine with him at the max. He’s had months of good 3pt and midrange shooting so there is some evidence he can do it. If he can put that together we’re in a good spot.

The mid-range shooting, sure. He hasn't really had more than the usual month or two of good shooting from 3, though. He had an abbreviated season last year which overrepresented that, essentially. And he hasn't even had that this season, which is fairly concerning. You couple that to his weak shooting from the corners, and we have some issues with him going forward.

[mademan]

He could probably solid effeciency from 3 if he cut out the bad shots and sticks to C&S. But that would also mean he couldnt be a primary on ball scorer. With Ingram, he may not need to be

[ConSarnit]

Durant is an elite scorer and took over main option role with the Warriors when he went there lol. He’s not a Robin and on this roster his main focus is scoring.

My main point here is that Masai is building a team where a top scoring guy who’s not a sieve everywhere else would fit in like a glove the same way Kawhi did with us. Masai is building a Boston like team that is stacked everywhere, plays defense and trying to have enough depth to add a superstar who will not have to do everything. Kawhi survived the season he played for us because he basically didn’t have to play defense until the Bucks series.

KD was the second option in GSW. Defences focused on Steph, leaving him to deal with single coverage.

Boston has a top-10 player and a top-20 player in their primes, that they drafted. We don't even have a single top-20 player on this roster. We have the depth, but not the top-end talent. Getting that top-end talent is the hard part. Team's don't exactly trade their Tatums every year. Which current (not about to retire) superstar could be unhappy in their present situation and demand out soon? I can't think of anyone.

We can go back and forth on this underrating of what Durant did with the Warriors, so I’ll stop. It’s not based on fact but media driven drivel.

But Booker hasn’t been a better player than Durant. Durant is older now so there is a concern, but main thing is that the Raptors are trying to build a team that is good across the board. This is year 1 of that. They have the pieces to acquire a superstar in the future imo, one that wouldn’t have to carry the team in his back. My point is someone like a Durant, not Durant specifically.

Ingram is a Brown level player at the least. Barnes last season actually had better than Brown’s peak season from an impact point. I don’t think we’re as far off. If we progress like we have this season with depth, we are getting to a point where we can trade multiple firsts for a superstar type.

Ignore the names and look at it more from an ideology perspective

In the near term? How? There are multiple teams laying in wait for a superstar. Those teams all have larger asset bases than us and some are in more desirable markets than ours. The price of stars has skyrocketed in the last 5 years and we don’t have the ammo to compete in a bidding war. How are we competing with the likes of OKC, HOU, SAS, BKN or UTA if a star trade materializes?

[brownbobcat]

Iggy on roids is a pretty damn good winning player. If that's what he tops out to being, you take it and keep adding more. Just like how Kyle was so crucial to winning on the floor. The do it all mentality is what Masai is alluding to and Scottie has those same traits.

Agreed. Like I have said in other threads.......if Iggy & KG had a baby, that is Scottie Barnes. He is somewhere in between those two.

You can't tell.me that player isn't a winning player.

It's a big assumption to characterize Barnes as a better player than Iguodala.

Also, you can't build around Iguodala for exactly the same reason you can't build around OG even though they're both winning players.

[goinrogue]

I think the title of this thread was mostly so posters could come in and slam Masai, but I actually agree with his overall point. Some players are talented but don’t have a winning mentality. Embiid is a good example. He’s been called out as being lazy, and not driven to win. Driven by money. Ben Simmons had a natural gift for basketball that he destroyed cause he only wanted to get paid, didn’t give a damn about winning.

[ConSarnit]

He could probably solid effeciency from 3 if he cut out the bad shots and sticks to C&S. But that would also mean he couldnt be a primary on ball scorer. With Ingram, he may not need to be

Barnes C&S 3pt stats for the past 4 years:

29%
30%
39%
28%

It’s not looking great.

[Scase]

The year we won the title, Kyle Lowry averaged 14.2 points per game, and was one of our best 2 or three players. Scottie Barnes is tracking to be a Lowry type, where he does a lot of things that help you win games, without being a high volume scorer.

I love Scottie, but we knew that Lowry had already proven himself to be capable of being a high level scorer before 2019

In 2016 and 2017 he averaged 21, 7 and 5 and then 22, 7 and 5 on solid efficiency. He reduced his role because we got Kawhi and Siakam was ascending into a star. The year after Kawhi left he averaged nearly 20ppg again.

Kyle was consistently a top-10 player in impact metrics, scoring efficiently and playing elite defence. Scottie is nowhere near his level.

This just in, a 30 year old player is better than a 23 year old lol

Like damn guys, I by no means think Scottie is going to be a primary scorer or superstar, but comparing him to someone in their 13th or 14th year is I dunno, kinda stupid?