I like the new team

[mdenny]

You are encapsulating the deterministic flaw in tanking theory though lol.

I mean...we've all been over this a million times but I'll take another kick at the can.

Point:

"If tanking worked than we'd see regular power shifts in nba standings and teams like Detroit, Houston, Minnesota, Knicks wouldn't spend 10 or more years at the bottom of the league"

Counter-point:

"When a team spends more than 10 years at the bottom of the league it means they didn't know how to tank effectively. Tanking is only effective when combined with good management"

The counter-point is a fallacy. It could be called "no true scotsman". Or it could be called "circular reasoning". In regards to the latter....suppose someone said "the best strategy is to achieve treadmill status and then execute a trade for a top 5 player". (Ie raptors and kawhi)

The response might be "if that was the best strategy....then we'd see more treadmill teams succeed by doing it". Which leads to the counter-point: "those treadmill teams just didn't execute the strategy effectively. Look at the 2019 raptors. The treadmill plus trade strategy has to be combined with good management".

Any proposed strategy "combined with good management" can potentially be successful. It's the "good management" part that determined the success....not the specific strategy.

Exactly.

As I've been saying for a year, there are MANY ways and strategies to build a team.

I didn't say there was a right or wrong way, I said this current method is a bad way to do it. You can steer a car using your knees instead of your hands, still technically steering it, but it's a bad way, or rather not ideal way to do it.

If you guys want to try and say that there is no positive benefit trading players when they have more years on their contract, or closer to when they play a better season, rather than expiring UFAs. Then there is no point to having this conversation.

Tanking has it's benefits and draw backs, as does literally everything. Same as players. But much like building a team, and how you must mask, or compensate for player shortcomings, you need to do the same with tanking.

Part of that, and it's a doozy, is not trading away your own picks, and tanking in that year. You literally end up with nothing to show for it. So again, if you are going to try and suggest that, that, isn't a bad form of tanking. Then there is no point to having this conversation.

There were better ways to pull off the tank job, and there are worse ways to do it, but that doesn't mean you should defend bad moves or mediocrity just cause "well it could've been worse" or "it's in the past". Bad is bad, and it should be discussed and labelled as such.

I have already stated that I think this core has the ceiling to match the 2016-2018 raptors, in so far as, they can probably swap a couple of the high performers to swing for the fences and grab that coveted superstar. The thing is, getting those trades and still having a competitive team, those are very far and few between.

So no, we are not the Pistons, but that doesn't mean this has been executed well either.

I would bet that almost EVERY team that starts tanking owes at least one draft pick from their pre-tank moves.

The raptors are missing one solitary FRP and it's likely conveyed this summer.

[mdenny]

You are encapsulating the deterministic flaw in tanking theory though lol.

I mean...we've all been over this a million times but I'll take another kick at the can.

Point:

"If tanking worked than we'd see regular power shifts in nba standings and teams like Detroit, Houston, Minnesota, Knicks wouldn't spend 10 or more years at the bottom of the league"

Counter-point:

"When a team spends more than 10 years at the bottom of the league it means they didn't know how to tank effectively. Tanking is only effective when combined with good management"

The counter-point is a fallacy. It could be called "no true scotsman". Or it could be called "circular reasoning". In regards to the latter....suppose someone said "the best strategy is to achieve treadmill status and then execute a trade for a top 5 player". (Ie raptors and kawhi)

The response might be "if that was the best strategy....then we'd see more treadmill teams succeed by doing it". Which leads to the counter-point: "those treadmill teams just didn't execute the strategy effectively. Look at the 2019 raptors. The treadmill plus trade strategy has to be combined with good management".

Any proposed strategy "combined with good management" can potentially be successful. It's the "good management" part that determined the success....not the specific strategy.

Exactly.

As I've been saying for a year, there are MANY ways and strategies to build a team.

I didn't say there was a right or wrong way, I said this current method is a bad way to do it. You can steer a car using your knees instead of your hands, still technically steering it, but it's a bad way, or rather not ideal way to do it.

If you guys want to try and say that there is no positive benefit trading players when they have more years on their contract, or closer to when they play a better season, rather than expiring UFAs. Then there is no point to having this conversation.

Tanking has it's benefits and draw backs, as does literally everything. Same as players. But much like building a team, and how you must mask, or compensate for player shortcomings, you need to do the same with tanking.

Part of that, and it's a doozy, is not trading away your own picks, and tanking in that year. You literally end up with nothing to show for it. So again, if you are going to try and suggest that, that, isn't a bad form of tanking. Then there is no point to having this conversation.

There were better ways to pull off the tank job, and there are worse ways to do it, but that doesn't mean you should defend bad moves or mediocrity just cause "well it could've been worse" or "it's in the past". Bad is bad, and it should be discussed and labelled as such.

I have already stated that I think this core has the ceiling to match the 2016-2018 raptors, in so far as, they can probably swap a couple of the high performers to swing for the fences and grab that coveted superstar. The thing is, getting those trades and still having a competitive team, those are very far and few between.

So no, we are not the Pistons, but that doesn't mean this has been executed well either.

I would bet that almost EVERY team that starts tanking owes at least one draft pick from their pre-tank moves.

The raptors are missing one solitary FRP and it's likely conveyed this summer.

I believe that if Phoenix pivots to a tank in 4 years they will owe or not control their own picks for 3 more years after that.

I'm no expert on this....but I'm pretty sure that it's highly typical for just about EVERY team that pivots to a tank to owe some form of draft capital. The raptors owe one pick. My guess is that our initial tank position is comparatively ideal in that regard.

We essentially have 5 FRPS over the next 3 years and we have 7 (?) Legit players under the age of 25.

[ArthurVandelay]

Exactly.

As I've been saying for a year, there are MANY ways and strategies to build a team.

I didn't say there was a right or wrong way, I said this current method is a bad way to do it. You can steer a car using your knees instead of your hands, still technically steering it, but it's a bad way, or rather not ideal way to do it.

If you guys want to try and say that there is no positive benefit trading players when they have more years on their contract, or closer to when they play a better season, rather than expiring UFAs. Then there is no point to having this conversation.

Tanking has it's benefits and draw backs, as does literally everything. Same as players. But much like building a team, and how you must mask, or compensate for player shortcomings, you need to do the same with tanking.

Part of that, and it's a doozy, is not trading away your own picks, and tanking in that year. You literally end up with nothing to show for it. So again, if you are going to try and suggest that, that, isn't a bad form of tanking. Then there is no point to having this conversation.

There were better ways to pull off the tank job, and there are worse ways to do it, but that doesn't mean you should defend bad moves or mediocrity just cause "well it could've been worse" or "it's in the past". Bad is bad, and it should be discussed and labelled as such.

I have already stated that I think this core has the ceiling to match the 2016-2018 raptors, in so far as, they can probably swap a couple of the high performers to swing for the fences and grab that coveted superstar. The thing is, getting those trades and still having a competitive team, those are very far and few between.

So no, we are not the Pistons, but that doesn't mean this has been executed well either.

I would bet that almost EVERY team that starts tanking owes at least one draft pick from their pre-tank moves.

The raptors are missing one solitary FRP and it's likely conveyed this summer.

They might owe a pick but it's so heavily protected (i.e. top 14 or top 12 or even top 10) that it is irrelevant.

Given how everything has turned out, the Poeltl trade was a bad move. I personally don't mind it because it helped close the chapter on Siakam/OG/Fred and we don't know what a possible Poeltl trade could return, but overall, it was not a good move for how things have played out. I'd feel a bit different about things with total control over their pick, or at least lotto control.

[mdenny]

I didn't say there was a right or wrong way, I said this current method is a bad way to do it. You can steer a car using your knees instead of your hands, still technically steering it, but it's a bad way, or rather not ideal way to do it.

If you guys want to try and say that there is no positive benefit trading players when they have more years on their contract, or closer to when they play a better season, rather than expiring UFAs. Then there is no point to having this conversation.

Tanking has it's benefits and draw backs, as does literally everything. Same as players. But much like building a team, and how you must mask, or compensate for player shortcomings, you need to do the same with tanking.

Part of that, and it's a doozy, is not trading away your own picks, and tanking in that year. You literally end up with nothing to show for it. So again, if you are going to try and suggest that, that, isn't a bad form of tanking. Then there is no point to having this conversation.

There were better ways to pull off the tank job, and there are worse ways to do it, but that doesn't mean you should defend bad moves or mediocrity just cause "well it could've been worse" or "it's in the past". Bad is bad, and it should be discussed and labelled as such.

I have already stated that I think this core has the ceiling to match the 2016-2018 raptors, in so far as, they can probably swap a couple of the high performers to swing for the fences and grab that coveted superstar. The thing is, getting those trades and still having a competitive team, those are very far and few between.

So no, we are not the Pistons, but that doesn't mean this has been executed well either.

I would bet that almost EVERY team that starts tanking owes at least one draft pick from their pre-tank moves.

The raptors are missing one solitary FRP and it's likely conveyed this summer.

They might owe a pick but it's so heavily protected (i.e. top 14 or top 12 or even top 10) that it is irrelevant.

Given how everything has turned out, the Poeltl trade was a bad move. I personally don't mind it because it helped close the chapter on Siakam/OG/Fred and we don't know what a possible Poeltl trade could return, but overall, it was not a good move for how things have played out. I'd feel a bit different about things with total control over their pick, or at least lotto control.

Yes the poetl trade was a mistake in retrospect (however overstated).

But what I'm saying.....is that every team who pivots to a tank has some move from it's previous incarnation that owes draft capital.

How many teams enter into a tank with a completely clean slate? With all these "3 picks/3 swaps" trades in recent history? Those take 6 years to get off the books. 6 years is longer than most team runs for contention do.

We owe ONE solitary pick and no swaps. We also have 5 picks over the next 3 years. (I'm counting the Detroit pick)

[Dalek]

I came up with who I think is a good comparative to this team, thanks to Dean on Draft who mentioned this throwback team. The LA Clippers from the 2002-2008 era:

RJ Barrett = Corey Maggette (high scoring Duke guard with sort of terrible defense but a contact magnet)
Scottie Barnes = Lamar Odom (do everything point-forward who teases potential but has weird body language at times)
Jakob Poeltl = Chris Kaman = (a bit of a goofy looking C who is a middle tier but more effective than he looks)
Gary Trent Jr. = Cuttino Mobley (combo guard who can get hot from the perimeter - a bit soft in traffic and on defense)

Immanuel Quickley = No good comp because the Clips mainly ran with a 35 year-old Sam Cassell who was so good later career.

Personally, I think Maggette and RJ are clones. If you remember Corey, he was such a beast getting to the rim.

[Scase]

I came up with who I think is a good comparative to this team, thanks to Dean on Draft who mentioned this throwback team. The LA Clippers from the 2002-2008 era:

RJ Barrett = Corey Maggette (high scoring Duke guard with sort of terrible defense but a contact magnet)
Scottie Barnes = Lamar Odom (do everything point-forward who teases potential but has weird body language at times)
Jakob Poeltl = Chris Kaman = (a bit of a goofy looking C who is a middle tier but more effective than he looks)
Gary Trent Jr. = Cuttino Mobley (combo guard who can get hot from the perimeter - a bit soft in traffic and on defense)

Immanuel Quickley = No good comp because the Clips mainly ran with a 35 year-old Sam Cassell who was so good later career.

Personally, I think Maggette and RJ are clones. If you remember Corey, he was such a beast getting to the rim.

Kill me now.

[DelAbbot]

I came up with who I think is a good comparative to this team, thanks to Dean on Draft who mentioned this throwback team. The LA Clippers from the 2002-2008 era:

RJ Barrett = Corey Maggette (high scoring Duke guard with sort of terrible defense but a contact magnet)
Scottie Barnes = Lamar Odom (do everything point-forward who teases potential but has weird body language at times)
Jakob Poeltl = Chris Kaman = (a bit of a goofy looking C who is a middle tier but more effective than he looks)
Gary Trent Jr. = Cuttino Mobley (combo guard who can get hot from the perimeter - a bit soft in traffic and on defense)

Immanuel Quickley = No good comp because the Clips mainly ran with a 35 year-old Sam Cassell who was so good later career.

Personally, I think Maggette and RJ are clones. If you remember Corey, he was such a beast getting to the rim.

Kill me now.

Bad p0rn Barrett

https://www.reddit.com/r/nbadiscussion/comments/ug99c0/rj_barrett_is_currently_the_new_corey_bad_porn/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=mweb3x&utm_name=mweb3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button

IQ is actually closer to Cuttino Mobley. GTJ is Lamond Murray

Poeltl is more like Kandi man - Kaman actually has a post game

[Scase]

I came up with who I think is a good comparative to this team, thanks to Dean on Draft who mentioned this throwback team. The LA Clippers from the 2002-2008 era:

RJ Barrett = Corey Maggette (high scoring Duke guard with sort of terrible defense but a contact magnet)
Scottie Barnes = Lamar Odom (do everything point-forward who teases potential but has weird body language at times)
Jakob Poeltl = Chris Kaman = (a bit of a goofy looking C who is a middle tier but more effective than he looks)
Gary Trent Jr. = Cuttino Mobley (combo guard who can get hot from the perimeter - a bit soft in traffic and on defense)

Immanuel Quickley = No good comp because the Clips mainly ran with a 35 year-old Sam Cassell who was so good later career.

Personally, I think Maggette and RJ are clones. If you remember Corey, he was such a beast getting to the rim.

Kill me now.

Bad p0rn Barrett

https://www.reddit.com/r/nbadiscussion/comments/ug99c0/rj_barrett_is_currently_the_new_corey_bad_porn/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=mweb3x&utm_name=mweb3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button

IQ is actually closer to Cuttino Mobley. GTJ is Lamond Murray

Poeltl is more like Kandi man - Kaman actually has a post game

The one bright side for RJ is that compared to last year, and since coming to the Raps, he's improved on his FG% from 0-3ft by 4%, 3-10ft by 5%, 10-16ft by 7%, and 16ft-3p by 10%. I'm not touching his 3p% since it's such low volume at 71 attempts.

All in all, still a small sample size, but a promising one. If he ends the season around the same spot, I think him shooting 71% at the rim is fantastic and definitely better than Maggette.

For comparison sake, at those same ranges Maggette vs RJ since joining the Raps :

64% - 71%
33% - 46%
36% - 37%
39% - 50%

RJ's 2ps that have been assisted is up to a career high here at 66%, whereas on the knicks it was about 42%. Maggette averaged 60% over his career. Hopefully with more of his shots being assisted, in general he is being put into higher % situations and this can continue.

As negative as I was about him coming over at first, I can't argue with the production, I just hope this isn't a Bargniani situation and it holds up.

[ItsDanger]

Maggette was a higher volume FT guy who shot 82% at the line. RJ's shot diet has improved but his game needs mid range options. Otherwise usage should be capped and is only 3rd option at most.

[mdenny]

I think ppl are mistaken when they assume Barrett is who he is already. I agree that his current game is a third option (and not even an ideal one on a comtender) but there's 2 factors behind why I think he could still make a jump: firstly, he has a REALLY good handle. He's just generally very skilled with the ball in his hands. Second, by all accounts, he is praised for his work ethic. Alot of veterans talk about it when his name comes up and players generally know who does and who doesn't put in the time to improve. He might end up being like Demar where he never stops making incremental improvements through his mid to late 20s.

His ball IQ and court vision/awareness seems to be lacking at times. But he won't be stuck as the player he currently is through lack of effort and training. He's not past the age where a player stops developing but he is sometimes talked about in that way.

I also get the sense that he REALLY wants to play and stay in toronto.

[StozeLeGroz]

Good convo, I may be eating that bird on the Play in call. Thought they might gel faster, still like where we are going, I have more faith in the growth of these players together but that obv is a position of faith not fact. Still seeing a whole bunch of takes that look more like self projection than anything. Who'd the thief accuse when he lost his shoes kind of stuff but thats the territory. I like our team

[LoveMyRaps]

I think ppl are mistaken when they assume Barrett is who he is already. I agree that his current game is a third option (and not even an ideal one on a comtender) but there's 2 factors behind why I think he could still make a jump: firstly, he has a REALLY good handle. He's just generally very skilled with the ball in his hands. Second, by all accounts, he is praised for his work ethic. Alot of veterans talk about it when his name comes up and players generally know who does and who doesn't put in the time to improve. He might end up being like Demar where he never stops making incremental improvements through his mid to late 20s.

His ball IQ and court vision/awareness seems to be lacking at times. But he won't be stuck as the player he currently is through lack of effort and training. He's not past the age where a player stops developing but he is sometimes talked about in that way.

I also get the sense that he REALLY wants to play and stay in toronto.

You hit the nail right on the head.
Since joining the Raps, he's been playing like one of the best young players the league has to offer.
How many guys can you find that are putting up his numbers at the age of 23?

Yet people continue to talk about him as if he's done improving and is a finished product. That is far from the truth, he's already made significant strides since joining this Raptors team and will continue to do so for years to come.
I think he can be close to a 40% 3PT shooter.
Look at Norm for example, he was a 30% shooter (on 2 attempts per game) when he was 23/24 - now he's a 45% shooter (on 5 attempts per game).

RJ has also shown flashes of being an elite passer and has improved a ton as a decision maker/playmaker since joining us.
He's been terrific at finishing at the rim, drawing fouls, etc.
There's a lot to like about his game.
And the best part is that he's ONLY 23.

Masai truly struck gold with RJ.

[Vampirate]

As for the OP - I like this team too, but we’re not making the play-ins. We’re still a really bad team - too young, too immature, too raw. Simply not ready to win games on a consistent basis.

Only 2 things are ultimately going to matter in terms of this team's ceiling.

1. How good Barnes gets
2. Drafting/Trading for a player that's better than him (and ultimately one that's under 30 years old if we trade for one)

[Chandan]

As for the OP - I like this team too, but we’re not making the play-ins. We’re still a really bad team - too young, too immature, too raw. Simply not ready to win games on a consistent basis.

Only 2 things are ultimately going to matter in terms of this team's ceiling.

1. How good Barnes gets
2. Drafting/Trading for a player that's better than him (and ultimately one that's under 30 years old if we trade for one)

i think the road to play off really depends on IQ's growth. As shown in the Cavs game, the gap between their 2 borderline all stars guard and ours is rather huge. To the point that even if one of theirs plays to their average capabilities it's an automatic game over for the raptors. IQ really have to add more dynamism to his ball handling if we hope to even compete with the good teams in the league.

[LoveMyRaps]

As for the OP - I like this team too, but we’re not making the play-ins. We’re still a really bad team - too young, too immature, too raw. Simply not ready to win games on a consistent basis.

Only 2 things are ultimately going to matter in terms of this team's ceiling.

1. How good Barnes gets
2. Drafting/Trading for a player that's better than him (and ultimately one that's under 30 years old if we trade for one)

i think the road to play off really depends on IQ's growth. As shown in the Cavs game, the gap between their 2 borderline all stars guard and ours is rather huge. To the point that even if one of theirs plays to their average capabilities it's an automatic game over for the raptors. IQ really have to add more dynamism to his ball handling if we hope to even compete with the good teams in the league.

I'm very high on IQ. I think he's got All-Star potential and I can't wait to see the strides he takes this off-season.

[Tacoma]

I think ppl are mistaken when they assume Barrett is who he is already. I agree that his current game is a third option (and not even an ideal one on a comtender) but there's 2 factors behind why I think he could still make a jump: firstly, he has a REALLY good handle. He's just generally very skilled with the ball in his hands. Second, by all accounts, he is praised for his work ethic. Alot of veterans talk about it when his name comes up and players generally know who does and who doesn't put in the time to improve. He might end up being like Demar where he never stops making incremental improvements through his mid to late 20s.

His ball IQ and court vision/awareness seems to be lacking at times. But he won't be stuck as the player he currently is through lack of effort and training. He's not past the age where a player stops developing but he is sometimes talked about in that way.

I also get the sense that he REALLY wants to play and stay in toronto.

You hit the nail right on the head.
Since joining the Raps, he's been playing like one of the best young players the league has to offer.
How many guys can you find that are putting up his numbers at the age of 23?

Yet people continue to talk about him as if he's done improving and is a finished product. That is far from the truth, he's already made significant strides since joining this Raptors team and will continue to do so for years to come.
I think he can be close to a 40% 3PT shooter.
Look at Norm for example, he was a 30% shooter (on 2 attempts per game) when he was 23/24 - now he's a 45% shooter (on 5 attempts per game).

RJ has also shown flashes of being an elite passer and has improved a ton as a decision maker/playmaker since joining us.
He's been terrific at finishing at the rim, drawing fouls, etc.
There's a lot to like about his game.
And the best part is that he's ONLY 23.

Masai truly struck gold with RJ.

Norm is not a comparable example to RJ. At 23, Norm was a raw sophomore playing only 18 mpg. At 23, RJ is a 5-season vet.

It's not like RJ has been improving every year. He peaked ~3rd season, mostly flatline since then. And in each of 5 seasons he was always 2nd fiddle to a mundane player in Randle, and then he dropped to 3rd fiddle when Brunson came along last season.

We can be hopeful that Darko may pull some magic that he may breakout next season, his 6th, but I wouldn't bet money on it. Players who peak later into their careers are generally higher IQ guys like Nash, Billups or Payton. I don't see RJ as that, but I'm ready to be pleasantly surprised.

[Scase]

I think ppl are mistaken when they assume Barrett is who he is already. I agree that his current game is a third option (and not even an ideal one on a comtender) but there's 2 factors behind why I think he could still make a jump: firstly, he has a REALLY good handle. He's just generally very skilled with the ball in his hands. Second, by all accounts, he is praised for his work ethic. Alot of veterans talk about it when his name comes up and players generally know who does and who doesn't put in the time to improve. He might end up being like Demar where he never stops making incremental improvements through his mid to late 20s.

His ball IQ and court vision/awareness seems to be lacking at times. But he won't be stuck as the player he currently is through lack of effort and training. He's not past the age where a player stops developing but he is sometimes talked about in that way.

I also get the sense that he REALLY wants to play and stay in toronto.

You hit the nail right on the head.
Since joining the Raps, he's been playing like one of the best young players the league has to offer.
How many guys can you find that are putting up his numbers at the age of 23?

Yet people continue to talk about him as if he's done improving and is a finished product. That is far from the truth, he's already made significant strides since joining this Raptors team and will continue to do so for years to come.
I think he can be close to a 40% 3PT shooter.
Look at Norm for example, he was a 30% shooter (on 2 attempts per game) when he was 23/24 - now he's a 45% shooter (on 5 attempts per game).

RJ has also shown flashes of being an elite passer and has improved a ton as a decision maker/playmaker since joining us.
He's been terrific at finishing at the rim, drawing fouls, etc.
There's a lot to like about his game.
And the best part is that he's ONLY 23.

Masai truly struck gold with RJ.

You need to pump the brakes IMO. RJ has never shown "flashes of being an elite passer", stop throwing around words like elite, as if they are pedestrian. He's made some nice passes, that's it.

Maybe Masai made a real good trade getting him, it's entirely possible. but claiming that he "struck gold" after 19 games is lunacy lol. It's his 5th year in the league, he can probably get better, but he isn't going to magically transform into an all nba player. His game still has the same shortcomings as when he was on the Knicks, he's just playing his natural position now, and in a scheme where he is getting lots of solid passes. His game has not fundamentally changed.