Scottie isn't going to be a #1 option superstar in this league

[TravisScott55]

This year will answer that question. If he doesn't take a massive leap offensively Raptors need to tank.

[wegotthabeet]

is Tatum a 1st option on a championship team? apparently.

then Scottie has the potential to be on that level. not a top 5, but rather good enough with another player at a similar level and great supporting cast.

[HangTime]

Year 1 - he was the best player, but playing third fiddle to Fred and Pascal.

Year 2 - Fred was "playing nice", very early on. Scottie got hurt, then Fred took over the offense (his contract on the line), which is what caused Scottie to stagnate.

Year 3 - Probably the weirdest season in team history.
We had 5 versions of the team
Game 1 - Game 31 - With OG on the roster
Games 32 - Game 40 - Post OG, With Pascal, Dennis, RJ, and IQ
Game 41 - Game 51 - Post Pascal to the trade deadline
Game 52 - Game 60 - Post trade deadline to Scotties Injury
Game 61 - Game 82 - Fill the gaps, just get to the end of the season.


Give him some time.
The local media hates on him, because he doesn't leak info like Fred did.

[tecumseh18]

I do actually think he can be something like Kawhi - i do see flashes of that midrange game.
I do think he has a high motor and won't stop wanting to be better.

I am not sure there are more than 3 people in the league, given his age, I would trade him for

And one of them isn't Ant. At the time Darko referred to Scottie as a future "face of the league", and Stephen A. sputtered "No, no, it's Anthony Edwards", Scottie had better overall stats - as reflected in his PER - than Ant. People here poo-poo the relevance of PER, but at least it's easy to find and reflects the aggregated box score stats of players quite well. The top PER guys each year are the top players, period.

Scottie dropped off in his PER before he was finally pulled for the season, and Ant surpassed him by a bit. But ... Ant was in his fourth year, and is 6 inches shorter than Scottie. Who would you rather have, a guy with decent stats, or a guy with essentially the same stats but half a foot taller? As long as the net is 10 feet high, I know my preference.

During the Rising Stars competition a few years ago, one of the commentators compared Scottie to Kawhi. I didn't really see it. But maybe.

I totally agree that we have to take advantage of the strong 2025 draft, And I think management does, too. The Raptors' off-season moves so far don't reflect an attempt to maximize wins next year. But I've lived through the Raptors rebuilding, and we never had players like Scottie, RJ and even IQ on the team. We didn't have a C as good as Jak or a shooter as good as Gradey. I hope we trade Jak, get some more 2025 picks, and lose a LOT of competitive games next season.

[kalel123]

An idiotic discussion.

Not only would we be making premature assumptions on what the player will become but it's suggesting that it's all doom and gloom if he isn't one and that's just f'ing puke worthy.

Sometimes you just need to STFU and watch a young player grow. Where he lands doesn't really matter at the end of the day as long as he continues to make meaningful improvements towards multiple All-Star selections and eventually somewhere in All-NBA, both of which is absolutely doable for him. The more important thing is surrounding him with multiple players at or around or even above his level and that requirement doesn't change whether he becomes #1 option superstar or somewhere inbetween. (Just look at Celtics)

Whether that means we have to outright tank is a tricky question but that's just whole other discussion and much more important one than what Barnes will become. Personally, I don't believe in artificially outright tanking if you don't have the roster for it because it just creates too much unnecessary and unhealthy negativity. That's why they call it the no man's land, which is kind of where we are IMO due to many mistakes of FO. The more important thing is to be opportunitistic tankers when situation presents itself (we all know you don't need to be the worst team to land in top 4), absolutely hit on the picks they do make and develop the hell out of them and consolidate/upgrade where they can. I'm not that optimistic on this front but they still need to go through the motions before hitting that reset button.

[HangTime]

It's also hard to compare him to anyone, people see so many different things for him. I am glad Darko sees the "face of the league."

[YogurtProducer]

I mean probably not, but very few guys can be.

[kalel123]

What an absolutely stupid and backwards way to view a team sport.

What year is it that we're still thinking in terms of #1 options as anything worth worrying about? Any contending team in this current era will have multiple stars and a great supporting cast. Putting this all on Scottie is stupid. Even a Jokic isn't doing anything without a Murray/MPJ/Gordon. A Tatum/Brown had Holiday/White/KP. Giannis had Middleton/Holiday/Lopez.

Kawhi had Lowry/Siakam/etc.

We'll only really get anywhere when we pair Scottie with other great players on his level and that's true for most any championship team in NBA history. Jordan only won with Pip, LeBron with Wade/Bosh and then Kyrie/KLove. Magic had Kareem/Worthy/Cooper/etc. Bird had McHale/Parish/Johnson

Who's the best guard that Scottie has ever played with? Fred? IQ? Best player overall is probably Pascal and they play the same position. Like what are we even talking about here?

And all this would be true EVEN IF HE WAS A NUMBER ONE SCORING OPTION.

That being said, the unique traits that Scottie does possess in terms of playmaking and two-way versatility do matter and do help elevate a team, even if he isn't a Luka level scorer.

It's not stupid.

My point is we still need that player in the Jokic/Tatum/Kawhi bracket that you mentioned. I don't think Scottie is capable of reaching that tier, so the point is we need to operate as if we don't have a superstar instead of "building around" Barnes who isn't one. If not we'll be making the exact same mistake we did in the Bosh era where we "built around" a guy who turned out to be a #3 guy on a championship tier team.

Tatum isn't that guy and Celtics still won. Your argument is absolutely stupid because to "build around" Barnes or anybody still requires top tier talents because no one person can do it alone. Even if he is that guy doesn't suddenly make it less important to get best players you can especially in this day and age. The mistake with Bosh era was more building around Bosh with subpar talents.

[Prestige]

Luka, despite being the prototypical #1 option, still can’t lead a team to a ring despite having Kyrie and good role players. Even if Barnes was this type of player we still wouldn’t be a contender with the current roster. We need a complete team, as shown by the Celtics or our 2019 team.

We need to draft at least another A- tier player like Barnes, preferably 2 of them in the next 2 years. After that, sneaky drafting and one good trade will vault this team to title contention.

[WaltFrazier]

He doesn't need to. The Celtics best player Jaylen Brown had by far the best help in the nba and they won it all. Scottie will be in the same situation soon once we find our Tatum

Will Scottie ever be as good as Brown or Tatum?

[REJECTEDBYCLARK]

An idiotic discussion.

Not only would we be making premature assumptions on what the player will become but it's suggesting that it's all doom and gloom if he isn't one and that's just f'ing puke worthy.

Sometimes you just need to STFU and watch a young player grow. Where he lands doesn't really matter at the end of the day as long as he continues to make meaningful improvements towards multiple All-Star selections and eventually somewhere in All-NBA, both of which is absolutely doable for him. The more important thing is surrounding him with multiple players at or around or even above his level and that requirement doesn't change whether he becomes #1 option superstar or somewhere inbetween. (Just look at Celtics)

Whether that means we have to outright tank is a tricky question but that's just whole other discussion and much more important one than what Barnes will become. Personally, I don't believe in artificially outright tanking if you don't have the roster for it because it just creates too much unnecessary and unhealthy negativity. That's why they call it the no man's land, which is kind of where we are IMO due to many mistakes of FO. The more important thing is to be opportunitistic tankers when situation presents itself (we all know you don't need to be the worst team to land in top 4), absolutely hit on the picks they do make and develop the hell out of them and consolidate/upgrade where they can. I'm not that optimistic on this front but they still need to go through the motions before hitting that reset button.

Find something better to do with your day than telling strangers on the internet to STFU because you disagree with their ideas.

[torsport]

No. barnes has not shown anything that makes me believe he can be a #1 option. But to be fair, this will be his first year as the clear #1 for the Raptors, so my opinion can change during the year.

This.

I'm a little more optimistic, but this is the year to show and prove.

[Mr Funk]

player X won't ever be a top 5-10 player.

player X won't ever lead a team to a championship.

team X won't ever win a title.

all these stances are the lowest of the lowest hanging fruit possible.

"I know everything and have all the answers" - the know-it-all arrogance is insufferable.

[kalel123]

An idiotic discussion.

Not only would we be making premature assumptions on what the player will become but it's suggesting that it's all doom and gloom if he isn't one and that's just f'ing puke worthy.

Sometimes you just need to STFU and watch a young player grow. Where he lands doesn't really matter at the end of the day as long as he continues to make meaningful improvements towards multiple All-Star selections and eventually somewhere in All-NBA, both of which is absolutely doable for him. The more important thing is surrounding him with multiple players at or around or even above his level and that requirement doesn't change whether he becomes #1 option superstar or somewhere inbetween. (Just look at Celtics)

Whether that means we have to outright tank is a tricky question but that's just whole other discussion and much more important one than what Barnes will become. Personally, I don't believe in artificially outright tanking if you don't have the roster for it because it just creates too much unnecessary and unhealthy negativity. That's why they call it the no man's land, which is kind of where we are IMO due to many mistakes of FO. The more important thing is to be opportunitistic tankers when situation presents itself (we all know you don't need to be the worst team to land in top 4), absolutely hit on the picks they do make and develop the hell out of them and consolidate/upgrade where they can. I'm not that optimistic on this front but they still need to go through the motions before hitting that reset button.

Find something better to do with your day than telling strangers on the internet to STFU because you disagree with their ideas.

You are the one needs something better to do, like learn reading comprehension if that's what you got out of it. Learn to comprehend what's actually being said in entirety than taking one thing out of context and making it about that.

Regardless, at the end of the day, we are all trying to dictate our own opinions to each other and it's ironic you are kinda trying to do the same you criticize me of. Quite the hypocrite.

[Chuck Everett]

Can he be a Chris Webber like performer with more ballhandling responsibility? If so, then all you really need is a guy around him that's comfortable taking and making big [perimeter] shots late in ball games.

[mdenny]

Ridiculous statement. People love to call this guy that and that guy this. When tre young was going into his 4th year everyone was saying he was on his way to being a top 10 player. Now they can't trade him.

This coming year is a big one for Scotty. But nothing is set in stone either way. Also....he is a particular unique player without many clear player comparisons typical of projecting a career arc.

I say that as someone who has been much less optimistic than the scotty brigade on this board who I think represent the opposite extreme of a statement like this.

We just don't know yet. Fact is....it's alot more important to our franchise for scotty to be a "winning player" rather than an offensive superstar anyways. I'd take a Jimmy butler type impact over Carmelo Anthony any and every day.

[PhilBlackson]

I’m not excusing this season, I still expect a big one (period).

You can’t be getting those kinda dollars to barely scrap 20ppg. There must be another jump.

BUT I don’t think you can expect to see #1 option on championship contender by next year. We’re in such a rush to see him match that MVP level tools/physical abilities with his consistent level of play but there’s a lot of learning and dedication between that and the achievement of that goal.

He’s still only 22 years old. Yes of course there are other superstars that you see explode almost from the time they touch a NBA court but a lot of them just start elevating in this 22-25 year old period…for example Shai was at 19ppg at 21 then started scoring 24ppg at 22-23 years old. Then really took off at 24 years old up to 30ppg. He’s a more natural scorer

But the point is NOW is where we’re supposed to the real incline. The next 2-3 years will tell us exactly who he’s gonna be but I don’t think you can say definitively he’s the number one guy or not based off this next season. BUT he MUST continue to incline and it be more exponential instead of incremental in the next 2-3 years (*ahem kinda coincides with this rebuild plan).

[ontnut]

Kawhi, Curry, Lebron, Jokic, Tatum, Giannis...they're all different types of #1 options.

There are guys like Curry, who aren't #1 options on a championship team (Trae), or guys like Lebron/Jokic (Luka/Embiid) who haven't won it either. PG13 was as close as you can get to Kawhi, and he isn't considered a #1 option superstar either. And Giannis basically has no comp.

It's hard enough to define what a #1 option on a championship roster should look like.

The question should be: Can Scottie improve his offensive arsenal to become a consistent 3 level scorer? And the answer to that question, shown in glimpses last year, is yes. Whether he can sustain that over a full season and playoffs, only time will tell.

Can he go out and single handedly carry us to a chip in the way Lebron did in CLE? Probably not. He's not likely to be 2019 Kawhi either. But can he be one of 2024 Tatum/Brown? I don't see why not.

[Tom_Foolery]

Last time I checked, this was a team sport.

I'd even argue this era of basketball demands more balanced team play than a #1 dominate peice.

[will]

Didn't know one singular player single handily wins games.