The Gradey Dick Thread Part 3

[Mikistan]

did we ever get the story of the tattoo's meaning?

Try googling, I found this on reddit as a collection of diff people trying to explain the imagery


it’s called the Keeper Of The Plains, it’s a statue/monument downtown Wichita, KS where Gradey is from. 316 being the area code.

Dream catcher at the ankle because he's nipping at the heels of the giants. I dunno not my thing tbh


50 is his mother's number when she played

"God bless the child that can hold his own" so:

Seems like a variation on the famous Billie Holiday song lyric "But God bless the child that's got his own". I can't speak for Gradey's variation, but the lyric is basically a restating of the line "God helps those who help themselves". Meaning don't expect to be handed anything, you have to go out and earn it.
I think it’s probably the j Cole lyric from “In The Morning”

Yeah the guys below you are right with the Wichita warrior /316 / and his moms bball number was 50. The mask is actually for Jason, he love horror movies. The hockey mask is a slight nod to Canada his nba home too! Just kidding it’s the Jason thing. Tat about his past.

[Scase]

What RJ did for 300 career games is not important guys, only what he did for 30 games here. THAT is the true predictor of future success, short unsustainable bursts with no sample size. Nothing to see here.

Some of the **** you read around here

[HumbleRen]

What RJ did for 300 career games is not important guys, only what he did for 30 games here. THAT is the true predictor of future success, short unsustainable bursts with no sample size. Nothing to see here.

Some of the **** you read around here

Hopium is a powerful tool. Plus it’s just more fun to be optimistic rather than take the realistic POV.

[Scase]

What RJ did for 300 career games is not important guys, only what he did for 30 games here. THAT is the true predictor of future success, short unsustainable bursts with no sample size. Nothing to see here.

Some of the **** you read around here

Hopium is a powerful tool. Plus it’s just more fun to be optimistic rather than take the realistic POV.

I get the whole ignorance is bliss thing, but I can't shut my brain off enough to reach these levels of absurdity.

[djsunyc]

What RJ did for 300 career games is not important guys, only what he did for 30 games here. THAT is the true predictor of future success, short unsustainable bursts with no sample size. Nothing to see here.

Some of the **** you read around here

it is my opinion. your post is bully behavior. be better.

[Scase]

What RJ did for 300 career games is not important guys, only what he did for 30 games here. THAT is the true predictor of future success, short unsustainable bursts with no sample size. Nothing to see here.

Some of the **** you read around here

it is my opinion. your post is bully behavior. be better.

[DreamTeam09]

What RJ did for 300 career games is not important guys, only what he did for 30 games here. THAT is the true predictor of future success, short unsustainable bursts with no sample size. Nothing to see here.

Some of the **** you read around here

Hopium is a powerful tool. Plus it’s just more fun to be optimistic rather than take the realistic POV.

I get the whole ignorance is bliss thing, but I can't shut my brain off enough to reach these levels of absurdity.

Do you give any credence to the fact that maybe a different situation can maximize a players strengths, make up for some of his deficiencies. Or with more responsibility & leadership comes with better play?
Or he had Randle operating in his spots as a lefty big posing as a wing.

I don't think anyone is disregarding what RJ was in new York. But writing off a 23 yr old because he has nearly 400 games under his belt isn't meeting in the middle either.
It won't kill you to operate from an optimistic outlook that's all.

[Scase]

Hopium is a powerful tool. Plus it’s just more fun to be optimistic rather than take the realistic POV.

I get the whole ignorance is bliss thing, but I can't shut my brain off enough to reach these levels of absurdity.

Do you give any credence to the fact that maybe a different situation can maximize a players strengths, make up for some of his deficiencies. Or with more responsibility & leadership comes with better play?
Or he had Randle operating in his spots as a lefty big posing as a wing.

I don't think anyone is disregarding what RJ was in new York. But writing off a 23 yr old because he has nearly 400 games under his belt isn't meeting in the middle either.
It won't kill you to operate from an optimistic outlook that's all.

My guy, I was referring to someone literally disregarding what RJ was in NYC lol

as for rj, imho, what he did with the knicks is no longer relevant.

all that matters is what he does for us.

I'm not saying he isn't doing better in a different situation, I think he's definitely doing better having a lot more of his points assisted on, but that doesn't change who or what he is as a player. He's not going to magically improve his lateral quicks, he's not going to suddenly become a very good 3pt shooter etc. I fully expect him to improve on some aspects of his game, but to completely disregard 300 games of evidence, to assume 30 is what you should trust, is just silly lol.

[WhatsaTDot]

I'm just here to check on how many of the obligatory 15lbs of off season muscle Dick has gained to date.

[S.W.A.N]

I'm just here to check on how many of the obligatory 15lbs of off season muscle Dick has gained to date.

Don't be silly. Summer muscle all happens in a 6 week window before training camp.

And it will be 10 pounds of pure aggression and rebounding.

[Appostis]

I'm just here to check on how many of the obligatory 15lbs of off season muscle Dick has gained to date.

Seriously...add 15-20 lbs of muscle on the guy and alot of the teams problems go away.

IQ/RB/GD/SB/Yak

[Scase]

I'm just here to check on how many of the obligatory 15lbs of off season muscle Dick has gained to date.

Don't be silly. Summer muscle all happens in a 6 week window before training camp.

And it will be 10 pounds of pure aggression and rebounding.

The best time to add Dick muscle was yesterday, the second best time is today.

[Psubs]

I get the whole ignorance is bliss thing, but I can't shut my brain off enough to reach these levels of absurdity.

Do you give any credence to the fact that maybe a different situation can maximize a players strengths, make up for some of his deficiencies. Or with more responsibility & leadership comes with better play?
Or he had Randle operating in his spots as a lefty big posing as a wing.

I don't think anyone is disregarding what RJ was in new York. But writing off a 23 yr old because he has nearly 400 games under his belt isn't meeting in the middle either.
It won't kill you to operate from an optimistic outlook that's all.

My guy, I was referring to someone literally disregarding what RJ was in NYC lol

as for rj, imho, what he did with the knicks is no longer relevant.

all that matters is what he does for us.

I'm not saying he isn't doing better in a different situation, I think he's definitely doing better having a lot more of his points assisted on, but that doesn't change who or what he is as a player. He's not going to magically improve his lateral quicks, he's not going to suddenly become a very good 3pt shooter etc. I fully expect him to improve on some aspects of his game, but to completely disregard 300 games of evidence, to assume 30 is what you should trust, is just silly lol.

Players develop and he's not even started his prime years yet. He did shoot 40% from 3 his 2nd year starting 72 games. So he regressed and now maybe his head space is back. I'd guess he's more of 36-38% shooter from 3 instead of 39-41%.

He's better being physical as a SF slasher. Hopefully Dick is able to handle SG's.

[Scase]

Do you give any credence to the fact that maybe a different situation can maximize a players strengths, make up for some of his deficiencies. Or with more responsibility & leadership comes with better play?
Or he had Randle operating in his spots as a lefty big posing as a wing.

I don't think anyone is disregarding what RJ was in new York. But writing off a 23 yr old because he has nearly 400 games under his belt isn't meeting in the middle either.
It won't kill you to operate from an optimistic outlook that's all.

My guy, I was referring to someone literally disregarding what RJ was in NYC lol

as for rj, imho, what he did with the knicks is no longer relevant.

all that matters is what he does for us.

I'm not saying he isn't doing better in a different situation, I think he's definitely doing better having a lot more of his points assisted on, but that doesn't change who or what he is as a player. He's not going to magically improve his lateral quicks, he's not going to suddenly become a very good 3pt shooter etc. I fully expect him to improve on some aspects of his game, but to completely disregard 300 games of evidence, to assume 30 is what you should trust, is just silly lol.

Players develop and he's not even started his prime years yet. He did shoot 40% from 3 his 2nd year starting 72 games. So he regressed and now maybe his head space is back. I'd guess he's more of 36-38% shooter from 3 instead of 39-41%.

He's better being physical as a SF slasher. Hopefully Dick is able to handle SG's.

I will over the moon if RJ can manage to sustain a 36% rate, I just don't think it's realistic. Players do develop, but most of them don't take any massive leaps in their 6th year. He shot 40% 1 year out of 5, that's an outlier, not the baseline. I suggest you take a look at the players that shot 36-38% this year and see if he reasonably fits in that group as a shooter.

[JB7]

My guy, I was referring to someone literally disregarding what RJ was in NYC lol




I'm not saying he isn't doing better in a different situation, I think he's definitely doing better having a lot more of his points assisted on, but that doesn't change who or what he is as a player. He's not going to magically improve his lateral quicks, he's not going to suddenly become a very good 3pt shooter etc. I fully expect him to improve on some aspects of his game, but to completely disregard 300 games of evidence, to assume 30 is what you should trust, is just silly lol.

Players develop and he's not even started his prime years yet. He did shoot 40% from 3 his 2nd year starting 72 games. So he regressed and now maybe his head space is back. I'd guess he's more of 36-38% shooter from 3 instead of 39-41%.

He's better being physical as a SF slasher. Hopefully Dick is able to handle SG's.

I will over the moon if RJ can manage to sustain a 36% rate, I just don't think it's realistic. Players do develop, but most of them don't take any massive leaps in their 6th year. He shot 40% 1 year out of 5, that's an outlier, not the baseline. I suggest you take a look at the players that shot 36-38% this year and see if he reasonably fits in that group as a shooter.

RJ's production in Toronto is probably also due to the type of offense the team was running, and how they narrowed his shot selection. In NY, it was a lot more iso heavy, so RJ was forced to generate his own scoring opportunities (a lot of mid range shots), whereas in Toronto, with all the ball movement, it looks like they tried to narrow RJ's focus on O (3 options - be ready for an open 3, if it disappears and a driving lane opens take it, and if that does not materialize, move the ball). They probably tried to keep him out of the iso situations, and that of course would work better with more options on the floor. So who knows, maybe his Toronto numbers might be more sustainable.

There is also a maturity factor as well. As he ages, and has been in the league for a few seasons now, he develops a better understanding where he can maximize his scoring opportunities and efficiency. Toronto may benefit more from that than NY did.

I'm not going to hold a player to the first few years of his career as that is all we can expect, especially with someone like RJ who appears very mature, and seems very open to learning.

[Scase]

Players develop and he's not even started his prime years yet. He did shoot 40% from 3 his 2nd year starting 72 games. So he regressed and now maybe his head space is back. I'd guess he's more of 36-38% shooter from 3 instead of 39-41%.

He's better being physical as a SF slasher. Hopefully Dick is able to handle SG's.

I will over the moon if RJ can manage to sustain a 36% rate, I just don't think it's realistic. Players do develop, but most of them don't take any massive leaps in their 6th year. He shot 40% 1 year out of 5, that's an outlier, not the baseline. I suggest you take a look at the players that shot 36-38% this year and see if he reasonably fits in that group as a shooter.

RJ's production in Toronto is probably also due to the type of offense the team was running, and how they narrowed his shot selection. In NY, it was a lot more iso heavy, so RJ was forced to generate his own scoring opportunities (a lot of mid range shots), whereas in Toronto, with all the ball movement, it looks like they tried to narrow RJ's focus on O (3 options - be ready for an open 3, if it disappears and a driving lane opens take it, and if that does not materialize, move the ball). They probably tried to keep him out of the iso situations, and that of course would work better with more options on the floor. So who knows, maybe his Toronto numbers might be more sustainable.

There is also a maturity factor as well. As he ages, and has been in the league for a few seasons now, he is better understanding where he can maximize his scoring opportunities and efficiency. Toronto may benefit more from that than NY did.

I'm not going to hold a player to the first few years of his career as that is all we can expect, especially with someone like RJ who appears very mature, and seems very open to learning.

Percentage of his 3's that were open + very open
23-24 Raptors - 23.6%
23-24 Knicks - 32.3%
22-23 - 30.1%
21-22 - 30.2%
20-21 - 27.4%
19-20 - 25.7%

If anything our offence has done a substantially worse job than the Knicks his entire career. It was a 32 game sample size vs 300 games. I get it, he's mature, he's getting older, he's a hard worker and so on, he's also gonna be a 6 year vet. We can't just want hand wave 4.5 years of sample size because of how we feel. He's had worse shot quality with us, and shot it well above his career averages, in a 32 game sample size.

Can we try and be a little objective here?

[Fairview4Life]

I will over the moon if RJ can manage to sustain a 36% rate, I just don't think it's realistic. Players do develop, but most of them don't take any massive leaps in their 6th year. He shot 40% 1 year out of 5, that's an outlier, not the baseline. I suggest you take a look at the players that shot 36-38% this year and see if he reasonably fits in that group as a shooter.

RJ's production in Toronto is probably also due to the type of offense the team was running, and how they narrowed his shot selection. In NY, it was a lot more iso heavy, so RJ was forced to generate his own scoring opportunities (a lot of mid range shots), whereas in Toronto, with all the ball movement, it looks like they tried to narrow RJ's focus on O (3 options - be ready for an open 3, if it disappears and a driving lane opens take it, and if that does not materialize, move the ball). They probably tried to keep him out of the iso situations, and that of course would work better with more options on the floor. So who knows, maybe his Toronto numbers might be more sustainable.

There is also a maturity factor as well. As he ages, and has been in the league for a few seasons now, he is better understanding where he can maximize his scoring opportunities and efficiency. Toronto may benefit more from that than NY did.

I'm not going to hold a player to the first few years of his career as that is all we can expect, especially with someone like RJ who appears very mature, and seems very open to learning.

Percentage of his 3's that were open + very open
23-24 Raptors - 23.6%
23-24 Knicks - 32.3%
22-23 - 30.1%
21-22 - 30.2%
20-21 - 27.4%
19-20 - 25.7%

If anything our offence has done a substantially worse job than the Knicks his entire career. It was a 32 game sample size vs 300 games. I get it, he's mature, he's getting older, he's a hard worker and so on, he's also gonna be a 6 year vet. We can't just want hand wave 4.5 years of sample size because of how we feel. He's had worse shot quality with us, and shot it well above his career averages, in a 32 game sample size.

Can we try and be a little objective here?

I think you're misreading the numbers a bit. His open and wide open 3 point frequency numbers from NBA.com for the Raps ( https://www.nba.com/stats/player/1629628/shots-dash?SeasonType=Regular+Season&DateFrom=12%2F31%2F2023&DateTo=04%2F30%2F2024 ) are not the % of his threes that were open or wide open. It's 23.6% of all of his shots that were were open or wide open threes. This is just showing that the Raps had him shooting far fewer 3's (as a % of his total number of FGA's) than he did in NY.

[JB7]

I will over the moon if RJ can manage to sustain a 36% rate, I just don't think it's realistic. Players do develop, but most of them don't take any massive leaps in their 6th year. He shot 40% 1 year out of 5, that's an outlier, not the baseline. I suggest you take a look at the players that shot 36-38% this year and see if he reasonably fits in that group as a shooter.

RJ's production in Toronto is probably also due to the type of offense the team was running, and how they narrowed his shot selection. In NY, it was a lot more iso heavy, so RJ was forced to generate his own scoring opportunities (a lot of mid range shots), whereas in Toronto, with all the ball movement, it looks like they tried to narrow RJ's focus on O (3 options - be ready for an open 3, if it disappears and a driving lane opens take it, and if that does not materialize, move the ball). They probably tried to keep him out of the iso situations, and that of course would work better with more options on the floor. So who knows, maybe his Toronto numbers might be more sustainable.

There is also a maturity factor as well. As he ages, and has been in the league for a few seasons now, he is better understanding where he can maximize his scoring opportunities and efficiency. Toronto may benefit more from that than NY did.

I'm not going to hold a player to the first few years of his career as that is all we can expect, especially with someone like RJ who appears very mature, and seems very open to learning.

Percentage of his 3's that were open + very open
23-24 Raptors - 23.6%
23-24 Knicks - 32.3%
22-23 - 30.1%
21-22 - 30.2%
20-21 - 27.4%
19-20 - 25.7%

If anything our offence has done a substantially worse job than the Knicks his entire career. It was a 32 game sample size vs 300 games. I get it, he's mature, he's getting older, he's a hard worker and so on, he's also gonna be a 6 year vet. We can't just want hand wave 4.5 years of sample size because of how we feel. He's had worse shot quality with us, and shot it well above his career averages, in a 32 game sample size.

Can we try and be a little objective here?

Objective? You are complaining about a small sample size of 32 games vs 300 in his career, but are generally ignoring that the 300 were the first few years of his career in the NBA (age 19 - 22), when a players numbers are generally at their worst. These are not 300 games from the middle of his career (age 23 - 26) that might be more indicative of what he is as a player.

Players do get better throughout their careers, and the fact that RJ started his career in the NBA at age 19, makes me think those numbers in the first few years are probably not going to be an accurate reflection of his total career.

[Scase]

RJ's production in Toronto is probably also due to the type of offense the team was running, and how they narrowed his shot selection. In NY, it was a lot more iso heavy, so RJ was forced to generate his own scoring opportunities (a lot of mid range shots), whereas in Toronto, with all the ball movement, it looks like they tried to narrow RJ's focus on O (3 options - be ready for an open 3, if it disappears and a driving lane opens take it, and if that does not materialize, move the ball). They probably tried to keep him out of the iso situations, and that of course would work better with more options on the floor. So who knows, maybe his Toronto numbers might be more sustainable.

There is also a maturity factor as well. As he ages, and has been in the league for a few seasons now, he is better understanding where he can maximize his scoring opportunities and efficiency. Toronto may benefit more from that than NY did.

I'm not going to hold a player to the first few years of his career as that is all we can expect, especially with someone like RJ who appears very mature, and seems very open to learning.

Percentage of his 3's that were open + very open
23-24 Raptors - 23.6%
23-24 Knicks - 32.3%
22-23 - 30.1%
21-22 - 30.2%
20-21 - 27.4%
19-20 - 25.7%

If anything our offence has done a substantially worse job than the Knicks his entire career. It was a 32 game sample size vs 300 games. I get it, he's mature, he's getting older, he's a hard worker and so on, he's also gonna be a 6 year vet. We can't just want hand wave 4.5 years of sample size because of how we feel. He's had worse shot quality with us, and shot it well above his career averages, in a 32 game sample size.

Can we try and be a little objective here?

I think you're misreading the numbers a bit. His open and wide open 3 point frequency numbers from NBA.com for the Raps ( https://www.nba.com/stats/player/1629628/shots-dash?SeasonType=Regular+Season&DateFrom=12%2F31%2F2023&DateTo=04%2F30%2F2024 ) are not the % of his threes that were open or wide open. It's 23.6% of all of his shots that were were open or wide open threes. This is just showing that the Raps had him shooting far fewer 3's (as a % of his total number of FGA's) than he did in NY.

Ah looks like you're right, thanks for pointing that out. Do they not they have a way to filter out the percentage of a specific shot type based on it's "openness"?

RJ's production in Toronto is probably also due to the type of offense the team was running, and how they narrowed his shot selection. In NY, it was a lot more iso heavy, so RJ was forced to generate his own scoring opportunities (a lot of mid range shots), whereas in Toronto, with all the ball movement, it looks like they tried to narrow RJ's focus on O (3 options - be ready for an open 3, if it disappears and a driving lane opens take it, and if that does not materialize, move the ball). They probably tried to keep him out of the iso situations, and that of course would work better with more options on the floor. So who knows, maybe his Toronto numbers might be more sustainable.

There is also a maturity factor as well. As he ages, and has been in the league for a few seasons now, he is better understanding where he can maximize his scoring opportunities and efficiency. Toronto may benefit more from that than NY did.

I'm not going to hold a player to the first few years of his career as that is all we can expect, especially with someone like RJ who appears very mature, and seems very open to learning.

Percentage of his 3's that were open + very open
23-24 Raptors - 23.6%
23-24 Knicks - 32.3%
22-23 - 30.1%
21-22 - 30.2%
20-21 - 27.4%
19-20 - 25.7%

If anything our offence has done a substantially worse job than the Knicks his entire career. It was a 32 game sample size vs 300 games. I get it, he's mature, he's getting older, he's a hard worker and so on, he's also gonna be a 6 year vet. We can't just want hand wave 4.5 years of sample size because of how we feel. He's had worse shot quality with us, and shot it well above his career averages, in a 32 game sample size.

Can we try and be a little objective here?

Objective? You are complaining about a small sample size of 32 games vs 300 in his career, but are generally ignoring that the 300 were the first few years of his career in the NBA (age 19 - 22), when a players numbers are generally at their worst. These are not 300 games from the middle of his career (age 23 - 26) that might be more indicative of what he is as a player.

Players do get better throughout their careers, and the fact that RJ started his career in the NBA at age 19, makes me think those numbers in the first few years are probably not going to be an accurate reflection of his total career.

Complaining lol? I'm saying it's absurd to base a players performance off of 32 games vs 300. Meanwhile you're suggesting we throw out 300 games because "it was at the beginning of his career". And I'm the one who can't be objective? You're selectively picking and choosing what stats you want to believe based on a clear and apparent bias.

With a conveniently placed cut off of 19-22 being thrown out, but would you look at that, we need to count 23-26, cause he's...let me check my notes here, ah yes, 23 now. Yes he's young, yes, he will very likely get better, no that doesn't discount FIVE YEARS OF DATA. Unreal.

[Fairview4Life]

Ah looks like you're right, thanks for pointing that out. Do they not they have a way to filter out the percentage of a specific shot type based on it's "openness"?

Not sure exactly what you're looking for but there's the FG column which shows all of his shots. 36.4% of them were open or wide open with us. 44.9% with the Knicks. But about ~10 of that difference being more 3's. There was some very well done analysis this year of Barrett's new shot diet with the Raps leading to significantly better efficiency. Essentially taking a lot less threes, and a lot more downhill driving to the hoop and less midrange shots leading to a lot higher efficiency numbers. It's obviously a little different if there's a defender on his hip at the rim vs. in midrange or at the 3pt line. He scored a LOT more often from 2 with defenders close with us. Like 15% more makes with defenders within 2-4 feet, for example.