Official RJ Barrett Thread

[ATLTimekeeper]

But this is exactly what everyone who is "complaining" is saying. People aren't complaining RJ just to complain, they are complaining about specific aspects of his game that indicate the same thing as those players traded, they don't have championship calibre skill sets.

Both IQ and Scottie do. RJ currently is DD with a considerably worse mid range game. I think most everyone who watched the DD years here can unequivocally say he does not possess any championship calibre skills outside his mid range game, and the value of that in the modern NBA is debatable.

The people "complaining" are simply saying the same thing that was said about the traded players, and they were right back then. Time will tell if that is the same case here, but it's not like there isn't precedent, people used to complain about DD's limitations all the time, and they were valid complaints cause they limited the ceiling of the team. So he was traded.

They have championship calibre skillsets, but they were upgraded for better players. A lot of players can play on championship teams. Kyle Lowry was almost traded, too. Creating hate campaigns about good players that last a long time in the NBA is stupid. On one team Porzingis or Pau Gasol are soft losers, that draw the ire of their fanbases until they're traded for peanuts, on another they're talented champs. There's fans that understand this and then there's fans that have nothing better to do but campaign endlessly against these players.

Right now, the Raptors have zero players that fit into a 1, 2, 3 championship core. It's all based on potential. Scottie is not a #1, not even close. IQ is not a #2, not even close. RJ is not a #3, not even close.

Can we chill on calling basic criticism a "hate campaign", like jesus dude.

DD is a good player, he also has a skill set that you won't find utilized as a primary part of a championship team in the last 10-15 years. There are no primary or secondary scoring options on championship teams that can only play in the mid range, nor are there any that can only drive to the rim. Because 1 dimensional players are easy to shut down, how is this even a discussion?

You seem to be getting confused. No one is saying the players on our roster currently would be part of a championship core, not a single person. What people ARE saying is that the SKILL SETS of the players fit a championship team.

Scottie has great vision, is an excellent help defender, a very good man defender, and despite having no go to move, can still put up solid numbers on decent efficiency.

IQ has top of the league above the break 3pt shooting, which is pretty much an absolute requirement in the modern NBA, and he's not a complete negative on defence.

RJ has top tier rim driving ability, bottom of the NBA as in FOURTH percentile FT rate, and bottom half of the NBA And1 rates, which kinda kills the benefit of his ability to draw fouls. His defence is bottom 3rd of the NBA and that's being generous.

A player with 1 offensive weapon and terrible defence is not found on any championship team as a number 1, 2 or 3 scorer. Stop parading around like people are calling him the worst player in NBA history, these are all very measured takes backed up by historical stats and actually watching the games.

RJ's FTr is career .321. There's no way that's 4th percentile. It doesn't really matter if he gets his FTs off drives, or just by being fouled in a scoring position. That's what FTr is good for. It tells you who has to be fouled or it's a bucket (or, in some small cases, who should be fouled because they shoot 50% from the line).

Your breakdowns just indicate what I pointed out, that none are close and need significant improvement.

But, aside from that, let's dismiss using the term "modern" NBA as a qualifier. This isn't a stable identity. Until Steph, a jump shooting guard could not win a title. Until Jokic, traditional slow footed big men could not play in the modern NBA. The NBA morphs to what works and what is difficult to stop, and this goes not just for the very best players but down the line.

[bluerap23]

Without reading much of the thread, this was the comparison I was thinking of making. It's not perfect, but I think in terms of strengths, weaknesses, style, overall impact, etc, it's pretty close. I wonder what other people think of it.

From there, two things can be true, even if they contradict each other a bit.

1. I would be absolutely delighted if RJ becomes DeRozan. That's an amazing outcome for any player, let alone one we picked up as filler (arguably a cost) in a trade where we didn't have much leverage.

2. You do not want to lock yourself into a core building around DeMar DeRozan. When it's actually time to win, you know you will have to move off him.

Even if the on-court comparison isn't perfect, it's a pretty good representation of how I feel about RJ, and why I probably lean more negative at times in discussions about his future, role, upside, etc.

There is a major difference. DD was who the team was built around. He was our offence. RJ is being put in a number 3 role. My only issue with RJ when we acquired him was his 3pt shooting. If that is really corrected we have a really nice player.

What do you mean by 3 pt shooting really corrected? He did shoot close to 40% since with the Raps and 40% with team Canada.

I mean he has turned into a great 3pt shooter since the trade, but was below average prior. Hoping that is not just a small sample size (ie luck) and that something happened with the shot. It is really strange that his 3 has improved so drastically and, at the same time, the FT has gotten worse. I know that the Raps have a very specific shooting system aided by tech and Dillon Brooks has credited that with improving his 3 last summer when he was training at our facitily for Basketball Canada. So my fingers are crossed.

[ATLTimekeeper]

- Barnes is a #2, not a playoff #1
- RJ looks like he might be a better playoff player than Demar. Exceeding my expectations since we acquired him. Considering his lower defensive figures, maybe a #4 all things considered.
- IQ I’m still struggling to figure him out, I can hope for a playoff #3 eventually

- Conclusion: We need to find an actual #1 in the 2025 draft, to do anything in the playoffs

I see Scottie as a true #1,

I think most people say #1, they think top scorer, but I don't see it that way.

A #1, in my eyes, is your best decision maker.

He's the best talent on this team. But to be a true #1 he has to be at least a top 10 NBA player. In order to accomplish that, imo, he either has to improve his scoring (efficiently) about 5ppg (manageable) or become a consistent all-NBA calibre defender (manageable).

Either way, the crux of the argument with these players is that they're all pretty good. The Raptors have to be better as a team in order for them to raise their trade value. At that point, you can decide whether to trade or to keep winning and see where it goes. If you're good for long enough then you might get some breaks, a la Siakam, Norm, OG and Fred.

[GreatWhiteStiff]

I for one, really enjoy the StarJ offense. It's good. Translates to FIBA too. We need a scorer, he can put the ball in the basket when other players cannot. By the way he did it for Knicks in the playoffs too, when IQ couldn't.

He has a positive attitude, and loves to play for the Raptors.

All good for me, I'd rather focus on how can we get him to improve his defense.

In my assessment, he is the type of player that can rise to the occasion and play better than he is.

His FG% in the playoffs is 42%. Quickley did suck in the playoffs.

[bluerap23]

There is a major difference. DD was who the team was built around. He was our offence. RJ is being put in a number 3 role. My only issue with RJ when we acquired him was his 3pt shooting. If that is really corrected we have a really nice player.

Exactly. RJ will be at best 3rd option or even a great 6th man if he's still here when we are really competing. That's a fantastic get as a throw in for a player we had no interest in paying long term. He has been averaging 22pts on 15.5fga as a Raptor which is crazy- even if he regresses that's still elite for a non-All Star.

We really have absolutely nothing to complain about in this scenario. It's not like we started declaring him the franchise like the Knicks did.

That's the thing though... is he a 3rd option? If so, is he a good 3rd option?

He seems to need the ball a lot for a 3rd option. He's had a higher usage rate than Scottie and Quickley so far. Granted, I don't know if that holds up in the limited time they played together, but I also don't know that his much celebrated 22 ppg on good percentages holds up when they play together. Someone more into the stats can probably clear that up, but we'll be dealing with small samples regardless. I'd best describe him as an iso slasher, and while "black hole" might not be fair, he's not really a playmaker. IMO he has a 1st/2nd option style game. 3rd options are usually closer to 3&D/glue guys who are capable of dropping 20 but don't necessarily try to every game. If RJ isn't giving you 20, what is he giving you? If his 3pt shooting holds up and he can improve on D we might be on to something, but so far, it wouldn't be much.

This gets back to DeRozan and similar players. Just because a player is a bad 1st option doesn't mean he can be a good 3rd option. It's why guys like Beal, DeRozan, Ingram, Lavine, etc are not really hot commodities (it's also that they are paid like 1st options in most cases). They are not bad players, but their points don't really win you games.

RJ still has time to show he can do other things, but it's kind of looking like his best case scenario is getting into that group (which would still be good value).

Obviously a very small sample, but on Team Canada he is really playing within the flow of the offence. Not taking bad shots, etc. In Toronto the offence flows through Scottie with RJ and Quickley playing off ball for the most part. When Scottie is not initiating it will be IQ as the primary ball handler. RJ may take the most shots on the team, but he will be 3rd in the creation pecking order.

[Scase]

Who said that?

I actually don't see RJ as the guy that needs to get better or even the guy that might get shipped out.

Out of Barnes, IQ & Gradey, RJ is the only one with a definitive elite skills.

Suggesting he isn't the one to be shipped out infers the others would be more likely to be shipped out than him.

In no world if you lined up IQ/RJ/Scottie, would he be the least likely to be moved. But you also think a historically horribly inefficient player with bottom of the NBA defence doesn't need to get better.

Yeah. That's not what I was suggesting. Later in the post I was suggesting that Gradey would ultimately be the guy that would be developed and shipped out (with other assets) in order to upgrade the roster..

What I was trying to say is right now RJ has a definitive skillset as an off the ball scorer & transition scorer. He doesn't need the ball in his hands to be effective.

Scottie & IQ will have the bulk of the ball handling duties & will need to learn how to be high level scorers and faciltators within Darko's system. Like another poster said, RJ is closer to mastering his role on offense than IQ & Barnes.

RJ has the more simple offensive role between the 3, but I think this is where he will excel.

Fair enough, it read that way, my bad.

As for him having the most simple offensive role, that's kinda the whole reason why so many think he is likely to be shipped out. 1 dimensional players are not hard to replace, while I don't think it's this extreme, just look at GTJ, he can shoot open 3s and thats about it, and he struggled to find a home.

Gradey has shown the potential to be a much more impactful and varied offensive player than RJ has in 5 years. The question is how he develops over the next couple years, but my gut tells me he is more likely to outlast RJ. In his short time as a pro he has shown a 3 ball, the ability to slash, quite impressive vision, and hilariously enough, a better midrange game than RJ even with his boosted Raps stats.

I'm still high on Gradey and think he's gonna be around for a while, and is a better fit for the modern NBA.

[Scase]

They have championship calibre skillsets, but they were upgraded for better players. A lot of players can play on championship teams. Kyle Lowry was almost traded, too. Creating hate campaigns about good players that last a long time in the NBA is stupid. On one team Porzingis or Pau Gasol are soft losers, that draw the ire of their fanbases until they're traded for peanuts, on another they're talented champs. There's fans that understand this and then there's fans that have nothing better to do but campaign endlessly against these players.

Right now, the Raptors have zero players that fit into a 1, 2, 3 championship core. It's all based on potential. Scottie is not a #1, not even close. IQ is not a #2, not even close. RJ is not a #3, not even close.

Can we chill on calling basic criticism a "hate campaign", like jesus dude.

DD is a good player, he also has a skill set that you won't find utilized as a primary part of a championship team in the last 10-15 years. There are no primary or secondary scoring options on championship teams that can only play in the mid range, nor are there any that can only drive to the rim. Because 1 dimensional players are easy to shut down, how is this even a discussion?

You seem to be getting confused. No one is saying the players on our roster currently would be part of a championship core, not a single person. What people ARE saying is that the SKILL SETS of the players fit a championship team.

Scottie has great vision, is an excellent help defender, a very good man defender, and despite having no go to move, can still put up solid numbers on decent efficiency.

IQ has top of the league above the break 3pt shooting, which is pretty much an absolute requirement in the modern NBA, and he's not a complete negative on defence.

RJ has top tier rim driving ability, bottom of the NBA as in FOURTH percentile FT rate, and bottom half of the NBA And1 rates, which kinda kills the benefit of his ability to draw fouls. His defence is bottom 3rd of the NBA and that's being generous.

A player with 1 offensive weapon and terrible defence is not found on any championship team as a number 1, 2 or 3 scorer. Stop parading around like people are calling him the worst player in NBA history, these are all very measured takes backed up by historical stats and actually watching the games.

RJ's FTr is career .321. There's no way that's 4th percentile. It doesn't really matter if he gets his FTs off drives, or just by being fouled in a scoring position. That's what FTr is good for. It tells you who has to be fouled or it's a bucket (or, in some small cases, who should be fouled because they shoot 50% from the line).

Your breakdowns just indicate what I pointed out, that none are close and need significant improvement.

But, aside from that, let's dismiss using the term "modern" NBA as a qualifier. This isn't a stable identity. Until Steph, a jump shooting guard could not win a title. Until Jokic, traditional slow footed big men could not play in the modern NBA. The NBA morphs to what works and what is difficult to stop, and this goes not just for the very best players but down the line.

My bad, not FTr, his FT%. The issue isn't that he doesn't draw fouls, it's that he's been bottom of the NBA at actually doing anything with them. The only benefit it provides is some pressure on the defence, but it doesn't produce much in the points column.

As for the modern NBA comment, yeah until a generation great comes along nothing changes, but they did and it has. Every single NBA team aside from ours and a couple others are peppered with 3p shooters, it is the most important aspect of an NBA offence and has been for 10+ years. And calling Jokic slow footed is definitely a take.

3's are worth more than 2's when shot at a reasonable clip, and until that changes it will continue to be the most important trait of an offensive player. So if your best argument is that once the entire NBA landscape changes to fit exactly the limited skill set that RJ posses, he will be great, yeah, that's not a great sales pitch. Short of rule changes, that's not going anywhere any time soon.

[MEDIC]

Fair enough, it read that way, my bad.

As for him having the most simple offensive role, that's kinda the whole reason why so many think he is likely to be shipped out. 1 dimensional players are not hard to replace, while I don't think it's this extreme, just look at GTJ, he can shoot open 3s and thats about it, and he struggled to find a home.

Gradey has shown the potential to be a much more impactful and varied offensive player than RJ has in 5 years. The question is how he develops over the next couple years, but my gut tells me he is more likely to outlast RJ. In his short time as a pro he has shown a 3 ball, the ability to slash, quite impressive vision, and hilariously enough, a better midrange game than RJ even with his boosted Raps stats.

I'm still high on Gradey and think he's gonna be around for a while, and is a better fit for the modern NBA.

I don't really see Gary & RJ as the same tier at all.

Gary was a shooter. That's all he could do. He also tended to be a black hole while trying to get his shot off. He couldn't get to the rim. Couldn't get to the line consistently. Wasn't good in transition. Didn't ever look to pass. Wasn't good at cutting and moving off the ball. I think RJ is a much more dynamic scorer than Gary.

I can't even think of any other players with RJ's skillset. Norman Powell?
There aren't a lot. Most guys who attack the rim as well as RJ does are ball dominant players.

I hope you are right about Gradey. I think we will know a lot about him by the end of the season.

[raptorforlife88]

My bad, not FTr, his FT%. The issue isn't that he doesn't draw fouls, it's that he's been bottom of the NBA at actually doing anything with them. The only benefit it provides is some pressure on the defence, but it doesn't produce much in the points column.

As for the modern NBA comment, yeah until a generation great comes along nothing changes, but they did and it has. Every single NBA team aside from ours and a couple others are peppered with 3p shooters, it is the most important aspect of an NBA offence and has been for 10+ years. And calling Jokic slow footed is definitely a take.

3's are worth more than 2's when shot at a reasonable clip, and until that changes it will continue to be the most important trait of an offensive player. So if your best argument is that once the entire NBA landscape changes to fit exactly the limited skill set that RJ posses, he will be great, yeah, that's not a great sales pitch. Short of rule changes, that's not going anywhere any time soon.

His career FT percentage is 71%. He's also shot FT's fine with team Canada so far. What is the minimum FT% that makes for an efficient offensive possession?

Wouldn't 71% make for like 1.42 points per possession? (I don't know if that's how it works and I may be wrong about it)

But that certainly seems like it does produce points for the team. A 50FT% shooter would damage an offense yeah, but I think you're really significantly exaggerating that he doesn't do anything with them. That seems very wrong.

[Drakeem]

My guy, it's been 32 games, how is that enough to prove anything one way or the other? Precious had a stretch of 25 games where he played great and shot 41% from 3, was that proving anyone wrong? No, and neither does this.

Let the dude have a solid season before taking victory laps, no one here is gonna be mad if he finds a way to do this for a whole season.

My point is that this constant, ongoing discussion about how RJ is actually, secretly still trash isn't productive. It's like people want him to revert to being a bum so they can feel vindicated. He was trash before the trade. He was no longer trash (on offense) after the trade, thanks to very real changes to his game.

Will he revert to being a bum? Maybe. But it's also entirely possible that he turned a corner. Just enjoy the ride. There are plenty of things to complain about with this team, but at the moment, RJ isn't one of them.

No one is complaining about him and wishing for him to be bad again, they are just saying pump the brakes it's been 30 games.

I mean, I think people know that, but sometimes it also feels good to be optimistic and dare I say excited? Fandom is inherently a little silly. Why do we care so much about a basketball team that we have no personal/financial stake in? It's pretty fun to imagine a homecoming story where we get a guy who rebuilds himself to be a really good player. I think most of us know the likelihood is middling at best, but at some point you gotta have something to believe in and hope for IMO.

[Scase]

Fair enough, it read that way, my bad.

As for him having the most simple offensive role, that's kinda the whole reason why so many think he is likely to be shipped out. 1 dimensional players are not hard to replace, while I don't think it's this extreme, just look at GTJ, he can shoot open 3s and thats about it, and he struggled to find a home.

Gradey has shown the potential to be a much more impactful and varied offensive player than RJ has in 5 years. The question is how he develops over the next couple years, but my gut tells me he is more likely to outlast RJ. In his short time as a pro he has shown a 3 ball, the ability to slash, quite impressive vision, and hilariously enough, a better midrange game than RJ even with his boosted Raps stats.

I'm still high on Gradey and think he's gonna be around for a while, and is a better fit for the modern NBA.

I don't really see Gary & RJ as the same tier at all.

Gary was a shooter. That's all he could do. He also tended to be a black hole while trying to get his shot off. He couldn't get to the rim. Couldn't get to the line consistently. Wasn't good in transition. Didn't ever look to pass. Wasn't good at cutting and moving off the ball. I think RJ is a much more dynamic scorer than Gary.

I can't even think of any other players with RJ's skillset. Norman Powell?
There aren't a lot. Most guys who attack the rim as well as RJ does are ball dominant players.

I hope you are right about Gradey. I think we will know a lot about him by the end of the season.

Yeah that's what I meant by not as extreme. GTJ is a much more limited player than RJ, but I was just pointing out the 1 dimensional aspects of their respective games. RJ is objectively a better player than GTJ.

Norm is basically a much much better version of RJ. He has an equal to better % of his shots/on floor fouls drawn relative to his position, RJ has a higher overall FTr though, he converts them at a higher rate, is a MUCH better FT shooter, has a better mid range game, and is a WAYYYY better 3pt shooter. Not to mention overall he's a better defender, the only advantage I would give RJ in comparison is his AST% and his FG% at the rim.

I would say prime Norm is actually RJs absolute ceiling, which isn't bad, but also not a "need to have" player in the SL, not unless he can match the near 40% 3p shooting Norm did.

As for Gradey, my hopes are that he gets a LOT of burn with Scottie. I see them as our discount Jokic/Murray combo.

[PoundTown]

Fair enough, it read that way, my bad.

As for him having the most simple offensive role, that's kinda the whole reason why so many think he is likely to be shipped out. 1 dimensional players are not hard to replace, while I don't think it's this extreme, just look at GTJ, he can shoot open 3s and thats about it, and he struggled to find a home.

Gradey has shown the potential to be a much more impactful and varied offensive player than RJ has in 5 years. The question is how he develops over the next couple years, but my gut tells me he is more likely to outlast RJ. In his short time as a pro he has shown a 3 ball, the ability to slash, quite impressive vision, and hilariously enough, a better midrange game than RJ even with his boosted Raps stats.

I'm still high on Gradey and think he's gonna be around for a while, and is a better fit for the modern NBA.

I don't really see Gary & RJ as the same tier at all.

Gary was a shooter. That's all he could do. He also tended to be a black hole while trying to get his shot off. He couldn't get to the rim. Couldn't get to the line consistently. Wasn't good in transition. Didn't ever look to pass. Wasn't good at cutting and moving off the ball. I think RJ is a much more dynamic scorer than Gary.

I can't even think of any other players with RJ's skillset. Norman Powell?
There aren't a lot. Most guys who attack the rim as well as RJ does are ball dominant players.

I hope you are right about Gradey. I think we will know a lot about him by the end of the season.

Yeah that's what I meant by not as extreme. GTJ is a much more limited player than RJ, but I was just pointing out the 1 dimensional aspects of their respective games. RJ is objectively a better player than GTJ.

Norm is basically a much much better version of RJ. He has an equal to better % of his shots/on floor fouls drawn relative to his position, RJ has a higher overall FTr though, he converts them at a higher rate, is a MUCH better FT shooter, has a better mid range game, and is a WAYYYY better 3pt shooter. Not to mention overall he's a better defender, the only advantage I would give RJ in comparison is his AST% and his FG% at the rim.

I would say prime Norm is actually RJs absolute ceiling, which isn't bad, but also not a "need to have" player in the SL, not unless he can match the near 40% 3p shooting Norm did.

As for Gradey, my hopes are that he gets a LOT of burn with Scottie. I see them as our discount Jokic/Murray combo.

This is a wild take. RJ's got like 3 inches on Norm, and Norm at 23/24 could not finish at the basket at all. RJ is much further along at the same age and it's not even close. Also, Norm isn't really that good of a defender. He tries, and so does RJ and their both averagish, but I think RJ will be the superior defender and more versatile defender with his size and strength. RJ is also already a superior passer than Norm ever was. Norm is the superior shooter.

Just because RJ doesn't project to be a franchise player or number 1 option, doesn't mean he can't be a really good number 3. I think many of us without an anti-RJ agenda could agree that RJ turning into a number 3 option on a contender isn't out of the question. Hell, he already was with NYK on a playoff roster at 23 years old. In contrast, Norm has never been a number 3 option or a good number 3. Maybe in Portland for half a season behind two other guards? When did Norm average 4 assists? This take is just so off lol.

[Scase]

My bad, not FTr, his FT%. The issue isn't that he doesn't draw fouls, it's that he's been bottom of the NBA at actually doing anything with them. The only benefit it provides is some pressure on the defence, but it doesn't produce much in the points column.

As for the modern NBA comment, yeah until a generation great comes along nothing changes, but they did and it has. Every single NBA team aside from ours and a couple others are peppered with 3p shooters, it is the most important aspect of an NBA offence and has been for 10+ years. And calling Jokic slow footed is definitely a take.

3's are worth more than 2's when shot at a reasonable clip, and until that changes it will continue to be the most important trait of an offensive player. So if your best argument is that once the entire NBA landscape changes to fit exactly the limited skill set that RJ posses, he will be great, yeah, that's not a great sales pitch. Short of rule changes, that's not going anywhere any time soon.

His career FT percentage is 71%. He's also shot FT's fine with team Canada so far. What is the minimum FT% that makes for an efficient offensive possession?

Wouldn't 71% make for like 1.42 points per possession? (I don't know if that's how it works and I may be wrong about it)

But that certainly seems like it does produce points for the team. A 50FT% shooter would damage an offense yeah, but I think you're really significantly exaggerating that he doesn't do anything with them. That seems very wrong.

A 71% FT shooter is basically 20-25th percentile for a forward, and my comment about not doing anything with them was more in reference to his And 1 stats, he sinks about 18% of those, and considering he draws a foul on about 15% of all his FG attempts, that's a lot of points left on the floor.

And while yeah he's shot well in the olympics, that's literally only 12 FTA. I expect him to float around the 70% mark as he always has, but that is quite a bad FT% at his position.

As for the PPP, you can't just isolate one type of shot, a PPP calculation has to factor in total points, FGA, FTA, and TOs. It only makes sense if all you do is shoot FTs.

[Scase]

I don't really see Gary & RJ as the same tier at all.

Gary was a shooter. That's all he could do. He also tended to be a black hole while trying to get his shot off. He couldn't get to the rim. Couldn't get to the line consistently. Wasn't good in transition. Didn't ever look to pass. Wasn't good at cutting and moving off the ball. I think RJ is a much more dynamic scorer than Gary.

I can't even think of any other players with RJ's skillset. Norman Powell?
There aren't a lot. Most guys who attack the rim as well as RJ does are ball dominant players.

I hope you are right about Gradey. I think we will know a lot about him by the end of the season.

Yeah that's what I meant by not as extreme. GTJ is a much more limited player than RJ, but I was just pointing out the 1 dimensional aspects of their respective games. RJ is objectively a better player than GTJ.

Norm is basically a much much better version of RJ. He has an equal to better % of his shots/on floor fouls drawn relative to his position, RJ has a higher overall FTr though, he converts them at a higher rate, is a MUCH better FT shooter, has a better mid range game, and is a WAYYYY better 3pt shooter. Not to mention overall he's a better defender, the only advantage I would give RJ in comparison is his AST% and his FG% at the rim.

I would say prime Norm is actually RJs absolute ceiling, which isn't bad, but also not a "need to have" player in the SL, not unless he can match the near 40% 3p shooting Norm did.

As for Gradey, my hopes are that he gets a LOT of burn with Scottie. I see them as our discount Jokic/Murray combo.

This is a wild take. RJ's got like 3 inches on Norm, and Norm at 23/24 could not finish at the basket at all. RJ is much further along at the same age and it's not even close. Also, Norm isn't really that good of a defender. He tries, and so does RJ and their both averagish, but I think RJ will be the superior defender and more versatile defender with his size and strength. RJ is also already a superior passer than Norm ever was. Norm is the superior shooter.

Just because RJ doesn't project to be a franchise player or number 1 option, doesn't mean he can't be a really good number 3. I think many of us without an anti-RJ agenda could agree that RJ turning into a number 3 option on a contender isn't out of the question. Hell, he already was with NYK on a playoff roster at 23 years old. In contrast, Norm has never been a number 3 option or a good number 3. Maybe in Portland for half a season behind two other guards? When did Norm average 4 assists? This take is just so off lol.

Where did this imaginary idea of RJ just being average come from? He by virtually all metrics is one of the worst defenders at his position in the NBA. Like he's bottom 20% at defending the 3, his 2 best places to defend are at the rim, where he is very good, and in short mid range where he is below average, his half court defensive stats are below average, and his transition D has him in the bottom 20-30% year by year.

Norm is by no stretch a good defender, he's just better that's all. And being realistic and fact based about a player doesn't make anyone anti anything. Players have strengths and weaknesses, defence is one of his weaknesses. You don't need to make up a narrative when it's pretty cut and dry. Every single year of his career, opposing teams have an increased pts/poss when he is on the floor, that's a total of 11000 minutes across 5 seasons, it's not anti anything, it's what the stats say.

It's not to say that's how he will always be and he can't get better, but I'm not going to throw out 5 years of evidence based on blind faith. And none of this even takes into account his physical limitations, can he improve? Yeah probably, will it be enough? Remains to be seen, but I'm doubtful.

Anywho, I think I'm done with the whole convo for a bit as it's just going in circles with what people hope and pray a player will turn into vs empirical evidence of what the player has been for a not insignificant portion of time. We all hope he gets way better, I'm just being realistic about it.

[MEDIC]

I think if RJ's ceiling ends up being a bigger/ stonger, better rebounding, better passing version of Norman Powell, that's a huge win..i do think that he will be better than that in his prime though.

If you compare each of them at 23 years old, RJ is light years ahead of where Norm was at. It's not even close. At 23, RJ's offensive game is already better than Norm's was in his prime years.

[Psubs]

I think if RJ's ceiling ends up being a bigger/ stonger, better rebounding, better passing version of Norman Powell, that's a huge win..i do think that he will be better than that in his prime though.

If you compare each of them at 23 years old, RJ is light years ahead of where Norm was at. It's not even close. At 23, RJ's offensive game is already better than Norm's was in his prime years.

I would say his prime could be more like a bigger, more physical, better rebounding Derozan with above average 3pt shooting.

[ATLTimekeeper]

I think if RJ's ceiling ends up being a bigger/ stonger, better rebounding, better passing version of Norman Powell, that's a huge win..i do think that he will be better than that in his prime though.

If you compare each of them at 23 years old, RJ is light years ahead of where Norm was at. It's not even close. At 23, RJ's offensive game is already better than Norm's was in his prime years.

RJ is just a better player, and was at the age Norm was when he entered the league. This guy is just making mistakes left, right and centre for the sake of scrapping online.

[HumbleRen]

I think if RJ's ceiling ends up being a bigger/ stonger, better rebounding, better passing version of Norman Powell, that's a huge win..i do think that he will be better than that in his prime though.

If you compare each of them at 23 years old, RJ is light years ahead of where Norm was at. It's not even close. At 23, RJ's offensive game is already better than Norm's was in his prime years.

I would say his prime could be more like a bigger, more physical, better rebounding Derozan with above average 3pt shooting.

I don’t think RJ will ever have the scoring prowess of DD. It’s why I don’t think that comp makes total sense.

RJ is a play finisher, not necessarily a go to scorer. That’s the fundamental difference between DD and RJ.

RJ’s play style with the Raps is more playing within the system, playing off others and attacking gaps in defences. Demar is more so the go to scorer that soaks up offensive usage for a team.

The floor is higher with DD because he can do the traditional #1 option impersonation really well but the issue is that it comes with a low ceiling due to the offence being so dependent on him creating. RJ is the opposite, he’s a play finisher, not creator. He’s better with less time on the ball than he is with the ball in his hands for a longer period of time. Makes him a much more malleable offensive player than Raptors Demar.

[brownbobcat]

I don’t think RJ will ever have the scoring prowess of DD. It’s why I don’t think that comp makes total sense.

RJ is a play finisher, not necessarily a go to scorer. That’s the fundamental difference between DD and RJ.

RJ’s play style with the Raps is more playing within the system, playing off others and attacking gaps in defences. Demar is more so the go to scorer that soaks up offensive usage for a team.

The floor is higher with DD because he can do the traditional #1 option impersonation really well but the issue is that it comes with a low ceiling due to the offence being so dependent on him creating. RJ is the opposite, he’s a play finisher, not creator. He’s better with less time on the ball than he is with the ball in his hands for a longer period of time. Makes him a much more malleable offensive player than Raptors Demar.

DD at 24 did not have the scoring prowess of prime DD, either. His handle was very suspect, his footwork was not elite yet, don't recall much of a post game and he was very reliant on strength, transition buckets and pull-up midrange. In his time as a Raptor, RJ has been at least as good a creator as DD in those early years. Let's see how far work ethic takes him. RJ is the same age now as DD was entering his first AS season.

[HumbleRen]

I don’t think RJ will ever have the scoring prowess of DD. It’s why I don’t think that comp makes total sense.

RJ is a play finisher, not necessarily a go to scorer. That’s the fundamental difference between DD and RJ.

RJ’s play style with the Raps is more playing within the system, playing off others and attacking gaps in defences. Demar is more so the go to scorer that soaks up offensive usage for a team.

The floor is higher with DD because he can do the traditional #1 option impersonation really well but the issue is that it comes with a low ceiling due to the offence being so dependent on him creating. RJ is the opposite, he’s a play finisher, not creator. He’s better with less time on the ball than he is with the ball in his hands for a longer period of time. Makes him a much more malleable offensive player than Raptors Demar.

DD at 24 did not have the scoring prowess of prime DD, either. His handle was very suspect, his footwork was not elite yet, don't recall much of a post game and he was very reliant on strength, transition buckets and pull-up midrange. In his time as a Raptor, RJ has been at least as good a creator as DD in those early years. Let's see how far work ethic takes him. RJ is the same age now as DD was entering his first AS season.

Ah I disagree to an extent. 24 YO Demar wasn’t as polished as the Chicago Bulls Demar but he was still more polished than current RJ. He just wasn’t efficient.

The potential growth from RJ won’t necessarily be his mid range game or in between stuff, it’ll be from his 3 point shooting and defence. It’s why I just think him and DD are just very different from one another.