Zatzman: Raps Need Elite Iso Scorer

[ConSarnit]

Okay I’m getting tired of this now.

I said potential closers. OBVIOUSLY they are not there yet. And yes, Korver doesn’t create his shot, but he was instrumental to the Hawks success because his presence on the floor made it easier for others to get their shots off as well.

We are talking about maximizing this team right now in a DEVELOPMENTAL YEAR. We are wanting a role player who gets his shot off and those are the types who have been discussed. I’m suggesting outside options and internal options.

How about this: make some suggestions as to how the raptors could acquire an iso scorer. Beyond tanking the entire season, please and thanks.

Stop cherry picking parts of my posts. I said we need talent. I don’t care how we get it or where we get it from. Ps. Jakobe can create his own shot.

If you meant those guys as potential closers/iso guys (which is perfectly fine if you think that, maybe they get there) why did you say “Barnes can facilitate that”? Closers/iso guys don’t need someone facilitating for them. The whole point is they can get their own shot off without the need for someone setting them up.

And to touch on the Wiggins idea from another post: Wiggins has played 10 full seasons and has been effective as an iso player for extremely brief periods of time but has never been able to sustain it. Why are you taking the smallest sample size and extrapolating it when we have a decade of data to show he cannot do it consistently? Here’s an example: Demar shot 45% from 3 in Feb of 2016. No one thinks Demar has untapped 3pt shooting potential because he got hot for month because we have a decade plus of him not being able to shoot 3’s efficiently. Let’s give Wiggins the benefit of the doubt and say he was the best iso player for 2 months: do you know how many iso fga he would have taken during that time? 48. You’re basing your argument around a sample size of under 50 fga. Thats 5% of Wiggins fga in a single season. Do you realize how small of a sample size you are going of off? Wiggins has taken 800+ iso fga in his career yet somehow you think the 48 fga he took at the start of the 20/21 season are more representative of what he is as an iso player. You must see how unrealistic it is to think that Wiggins will ever become a high level iso player. His brief stint as “best in the league” was obviously never sustainable given the entirety of his career.

As for getting an elite iso scorer: it is nearly impossible to acquire one because they are the most sought after players in the league. It is basically asking “how do we get a perennial MVP on the team” because that’s who elite iso guys are. You’re asking me to find one while removing the option of drafting one. Newsflash: that’s the entire reason people are pushing to tank. We believe we need a true #1 and the only way to get those guys is to draft them or trade literally everything that isn’t nailed down. Drafting one is a long shot. Trading for one is an extreme long shot because if we give up everything (what do you think Luka would return in a trade?) we are not the Lakers so we are left trading everything (both present and future) and have no way of building a team around that player because good free agents don’t come here. The best way for us to get a true #1 is to draft that player or hope Barnes jumpshot reaches a high level. There is no easy way to do any of this because it’s the hardest position to fill in the league. Thats why the original article is so dumb: he’s suggesting we just need an elite iso scorer to complete the team. Yeah, no sh*t. That’s what every team wants and at any given time only about 5 teams have those types of guy. Zatzman might as well be asking “if you’re poor all you need is a truck full of gold bars and then you’ll be good”. He’s talking about acquiring one of the rarest things in sports.

Right. So you have no suggestions, only reasons why it won’t work.

I recognize it’s a small sample size. I have literally said I’m trying to fit a square peg into a round hole and I have furthermore said that Wiggins does other things beyond being a tertiary scorer, including defend better than the other options I suggested in Zach Lavine, Cam Thomas and Keldon Johnson. I think he can also create a shot in a pinch. Let me say it differently. Adding Wiggins does not take away from our team’s ability to create a shot. It adds to the options the team has for an ISO. Furthermore, I think Masai can improve Wiggins’ consistency. I may be wrong, but that’s what I feel for now.

As for Scottie facilitating that, he would be doing it the same way Korver facilitates other players by creating spacing. Only in Scottie’s case it’s more about a threat to score and pass. Basketball is a team game. Even if you’re Jordan, the GOAT iso player - you still need the team around you. Scottie’s leadership and encouragement also factors in here.

So now we’re going to solve our iso issues… through Scottie’s encouragement?

No offense but do you even know what iso play is? This thread is about elite iso scoring. This isn’t about passing or leadership. This is giving a guy the ball and saying “go score”. ISO play is literally a guy going one on one and trying to score. That’s what we’re talking about here, that’s the issue we are addressing. Who can get a bucket without needing to pass or run a play. Thats what iso scoring is.

[ConSarnit]

While I do think it's tricky when you give that 2nd Max contract to any non superstar, all of these guys other than Harris (never a max player in the first place) ended up being bad contracts mostly due to injuries which led to the huge regression in their play. That's not really something that can be controlled, but when we think of bad contracts, that's basically the determining factor in most instances.

I sort of think that’s part of the equation with these guys. It’s highly questionable if they’re ever worth 30% when fully healthy. So now you’ve got a guy who needs to play at his absolute peak for him to maybe be worth the deal but is probably approaching 30 (or will be 30+ during the contract). To get full value from these guys you can’t have any age related slippage in play or any injury related slippage at a point in their careers where injury is more common. The odds are so slim to get full value out of these guys because the upside isn’t even really upside, it’s just maintaining their previous level of play. Full health during the entire contract and you did ok. Any major injury and it becomes a disaster. Is there a single 30% max 3rd contract guy who has provided surplus value on his contract? I’m sure there has been but I can’t really think of any.

The margin for error is of course much smaller for these guys versus an actual superstar. The point is though that if Lavine were still averaging 25-27 ppg like he's done the previous 4 seasons, he would probably still be tradeable right now. He's not tradeable right now largely due to only playing 25 games and the regression in his numbers when he did play and that's largely due to injuries.

I mean to have surplus value on a 3rd max contract, that player would need to go from a star to superstar, not really likely to happen for someone in their mid to late 20's to take that kind of jump. For guys worth the money, I'm not sure if Devin Booker would count because he's pretty close to superstar level but maybe him? Paul George when he's healthy would also fit as well I think.

I might be wrong but I think Booker is on a 35% max. I think his accolades are also a clear level above the Beal or Siakam types. He’s finished top 5 in MVP voting and made 1st team all-NBA. George made multiple all-NBA and all-defense teams so I think that also puts him a level above Siakam. Both Booker and George led their teams to the conference finals before the age of 25 so they had proven some semblance of being the best player on a contender, which I think adds to your point about them being considered superstars.

I guess there is no set criteria for who might be a bad 30% max but if you don’t have multiple all-NBA selections and weren’t the best player on a serious playoff team you’re probably high risk of not being worth the 30%.

[bballsparkin]

I was being facetious about trading Barnes.

The elite players everyone is buzzing about in this thread are incredibly rare. Whether you're trying to acquire one through the draft, free agency, or trade, the odds are slim, no matter what strategy you use. That’s why it’s a fool's game to base a rebuild strategy on the hope of landing one or to get frustrated when you don't.

The upcoming draft certainly looks good but a lot of drafts have been hyped prematurely. In 2014, Tank Nation on this forum was born. Andrew Wiggins and Jabari Parker were to be sure fire superstars. Marcus Smart was possibly the next Dwayne Wade and Julius Randle the next Karl Malone. More recently, the 2021 draft was suppose to feature multiple MVP types...."tank4Suggs!". Now people are saying the best players from that stacked draft arent good enough and will need Luka Doncic or Steph Curry types next to them in order to win?

The Raps right now have some decent young pieces on the roster but overall experience is lacking and the team depth looks suspect. They'll be mid to high lotto team regardless of whether or not Poeltl is traded. I will not lose sleep over where exactly the pick lands nor should anybody else. Just pick the best player you can and push forward the following year. If we land a young SIakam level player, I'll be happy......I'd also add that quite often MVP types come out of nowhere and arent even top picks (Kawhi, Giannis, Jokic, Shai) so who knows, anything can happen.

Do the Raps need to add an ISO scorer? Sure, but I dont think that player necessarily has to be elite....overall talent and roster balance should be the goal and thats something thats realistically attainable.

For sure, I figured as much. It was more a thought experiment than something I think would happen. Curios to wonder which teams would want Barnes and being willing to pay the exuberant prices that the Raptors would demand. It's a Hinkie like maneuver and I believe would be frowned upon league wide. Fun to consider though.

I think they have a shot at battling for Play-in if the East remains as bad as last year. I won't be losing sleep for something that's out of my control either. Nonetheless, I'll be hoping for a top 9ish pick.

[PushDaRock]

I sort of think that’s part of the equation with these guys. It’s highly questionable if they’re ever worth 30% when fully healthy. So now you’ve got a guy who needs to play at his absolute peak for him to maybe be worth the deal but is probably approaching 30 (or will be 30+ during the contract). To get full value from these guys you can’t have any age related slippage in play or any injury related slippage at a point in their careers where injury is more common. The odds are so slim to get full value out of these guys because the upside isn’t even really upside, it’s just maintaining their previous level of play. Full health during the entire contract and you did ok. Any major injury and it becomes a disaster. Is there a single 30% max 3rd contract guy who has provided surplus value on his contract? I’m sure there has been but I can’t really think of any.

The margin for error is of course much smaller for these guys versus an actual superstar. The point is though that if Lavine were still averaging 25-27 ppg like he's done the previous 4 seasons, he would probably still be tradeable right now. He's not tradeable right now largely due to only playing 25 games and the regression in his numbers when he did play and that's largely due to injuries.

I mean to have surplus value on a 3rd max contract, that player would need to go from a star to superstar, not really likely to happen for someone in their mid to late 20's to take that kind of jump. For guys worth the money, I'm not sure if Devin Booker would count because he's pretty close to superstar level but maybe him? Paul George when he's healthy would also fit as well I think.

I might be wrong but I think Booker is on a 35% max. I think his accolades are also a clear level above the Beal or Siakam types. He’s finished top 5 in MVP voting and made 1st team all-NBA. George made multiple all-NBA and all-defense teams so I think that also puts him a level above Siakam. Both Booker and George led their teams to the conference finals before the age of 25 so they had proven some semblance of being the best player on a contender, which I think adds to your point about them being considered superstars.

I guess there is no set criteria for who might be a bad 30% max but if you don’t have multiple all-NBA selections and weren’t the best player on a serious playoff team you’re probably high risk of not being worth the 30%.

George had that 1 MVP level season and never broken 25 ppg ever again. I think that puts him more in the elite #2 option category rather than superstar. He's maintained that level of play very well when he's been healthy despite getting up there in age.

Booker is close to a superstar but I think it would be very difficult for any team to win with him as their best player. Still, he's been worth the money.

Someone like Beal was arguably at a superstar level when he was averaging over 30 ppg for those 2 seasons, they squeaked into the playoffs one of those years too. He's still a pretty good player but he just can't stay healthy and all that mileage has added up too. He's also in a much different role on that Phoenix team, his usg rate down from 34% in those 30 ppg years to under 23% last season.

I think I finally came up with a player that is probably close to your criteria. Jrue Holiday

[ConSarnit]

The margin for error is of course much smaller for these guys versus an actual superstar. The point is though that if Lavine were still averaging 25-27 ppg like he's done the previous 4 seasons, he would probably still be tradeable right now. He's not tradeable right now largely due to only playing 25 games and the regression in his numbers when he did play and that's largely due to injuries.

I mean to have surplus value on a 3rd max contract, that player would need to go from a star to superstar, not really likely to happen for someone in their mid to late 20's to take that kind of jump. For guys worth the money, I'm not sure if Devin Booker would count because he's pretty close to superstar level but maybe him? Paul George when he's healthy would also fit as well I think.

I might be wrong but I think Booker is on a 35% max. I think his accolades are also a clear level above the Beal or Siakam types. He’s finished top 5 in MVP voting and made 1st team all-NBA. George made multiple all-NBA and all-defense teams so I think that also puts him a level above Siakam. Both Booker and George led their teams to the conference finals before the age of 25 so they had proven some semblance of being the best player on a contender, which I think adds to your point about them being considered superstars.

I guess there is no set criteria for who might be a bad 30% max but if you don’t have multiple all-NBA selections and weren’t the best player on a serious playoff team you’re probably high risk of not being worth the 30%.

George had that 1 MVP level season and never broken 25 ppg ever again. I think that puts him more in the elite #2 option category rather than superstar. He's maintained that level of play very well when he's been healthy despite getting up there in age.

Booker is close to a superstar but I think it would be very difficult for any team to win with him as their best player. Still, he's been worth the money.

Someone like Beal was arguably at a superstar level when he was averaging over 30 ppg for those 2 seasons, they squeaked into the playoffs one of those years too. He's still a pretty good player but he just can't stay healthy and all that mileage has added up too. He's also in a much different role on that Phoenix team, his usg rate down from 34% in those 30 ppg years to under 23% last season.

I think I finally came up with a player that is probably close to your criteria. Jrue Holiday

I think elite #2’s are definitely worth the 30% max. That’s where I would rank George (and probably Booker). I wouldn’t trust Siakam, Beal or Lavine to be an elite #2, even in their best seasons. They would probably need to be 2a or 2b, meaning they would need another player of similar stature next to them along with a true #1.

Jrue might be close but I don’t think he ever broke 27% of the cap and his deals usually averaged around 26% of the cap. Sometimes the wiggle room can be enough to help teams get over the hump but I might just be splitting hairs.

[Vampirate]

Even if I were to pretend that Poeltl was not even on the roster the Raptors still would land in the play-in. There are so many bad teams in the East. The Pistons. Nets, Wizards, Hawks, Bulls. Hornets all stink. I feel as though the Magic while a very good defensive team may have had a bit of a fluke season. It is more likely that the Raptors sneak into the top 6 then not at least be in the play-in.

I've been saying it all off-season. I think people are grossly underestimating how mediocre this team already is. I don't think we can tank even if we wanted to. But we'll see. Hopefully I'm wrong.

There is zero chance that a SL of IQ/RJ/GD/SB/KO makes the play in. This team has zero bench, and that would be one of the worst defensive starting lineups in the league, you're looking at 30 wins at the absolute best. Jak isn't some magical player by any means, but the drop off from him to KO defensively is the grand canyon.

Not to mention that is assuming everyone stays healthy. You throw in some real, or fake injuries to any of BBQ, and you're looking at 20-25 wins.

I think you are overestimating the level of production that could be realistically expected from this team.

You remove Jak, and hopefully BB as well. And you have at most 6 NBA level players on the entire roster.
Ochai isn't an NBA level player.
Boucher and Temple are cooked.
Battle/Shead/Walter/Carlson/Mogbo are all rookies/g leaguers that will barely contribute.

So your NBA level players are RJ/IQ/Scottie/Gradey/Mitchell, and maybe Olynyk. So unless the other 8-9 guys play absolutely out of their mind, that group aint winning squat.

Honestly, I think you're underestimating just how weak the 8-11 seeds are in the East.

The Bulls just got worse RS wise going from Derozan to Giddey. Atlanta is a question mark, the Nets just got worse than us.

Sadly the East is so bad that we were 2 spots away from the play in with a .305 win record. Only really Charlotte probably can leap frog us and they have just as many question marks as we do.

It's not about us getting that much better, it's about the mid-bottom of the East getting that much worse.

It's possible were in the playin sheerly by default just because of how bad the bottom of the East actually is.

[Scase]

I've been saying it all off-season. I think people are grossly underestimating how mediocre this team already is. I don't think we can tank even if we wanted to. But we'll see. Hopefully I'm wrong.

There is zero chance that a SL of IQ/RJ/GD/SB/KO makes the play in. This team has zero bench, and that would be one of the worst defensive starting lineups in the league, you're looking at 30 wins at the absolute best. Jak isn't some magical player by any means, but the drop off from him to KO defensively is the grand canyon.

Not to mention that is assuming everyone stays healthy. You throw in some real, or fake injuries to any of BBQ, and you're looking at 20-25 wins.

I think you are overestimating the level of production that could be realistically expected from this team.

You remove Jak, and hopefully BB as well. And you have at most 6 NBA level players on the entire roster.
Ochai isn't an NBA level player.
Boucher and Temple are cooked.
Battle/Shead/Walter/Carlson/Mogbo are all rookies/g leaguers that will barely contribute.

So your NBA level players are RJ/IQ/Scottie/Gradey/Mitchell, and maybe Olynyk. So unless the other 8-9 guys play absolutely out of their mind, that group aint winning squat.

Honestly, I think you're underestimating just how weak the 8-11 seeds are in the East.

The Bulls just got worse RS wise going from Derozan to Giddey. Atlanta is a question mark, the Nets just got worse than us.

Sadly the East is so bad that we were 2 spots away from the play in with a .305 win record. Only really Charlotte probably can leap frog us and they have just as many question marks as we do.

It's not about us getting that much better, it's about the mid-bottom of the East getting that much worse.

It's possible were in the playin sheerly by default just because of how bad the bottom of the East actually is.

The lineup I mentioned could easily manage bottom 5 in the NBA. It is horrendous, and the team has zero depth. It's why I'm so gung ho about getting rid of Jak. He's a floor raiser on this team, and it serves no purpose but to all but guarantee we end up with a mid pick.

We might have better starters than a few bad teams, but the falloff from our starters to bench is a cliff face. This team is barely 5 deep.

Trade Jak, and even 1 injury to a SL player, and we're in the absolute dumps. I think you're overestimating this team lol.

.305 had us 2 spots from the play in, but it also had us 2 spots from 14th in the east. 11 games back of the play in, but only 10 games ahead of 14th. I'm not saying you're 100% wrong, but we won 25 games missing 2 starters for like 20 games, that's really not a lot.

[PushDaRock]

I might be wrong but I think Booker is on a 35% max. I think his accolades are also a clear level above the Beal or Siakam types. He’s finished top 5 in MVP voting and made 1st team all-NBA. George made multiple all-NBA and all-defense teams so I think that also puts him a level above Siakam. Both Booker and George led their teams to the conference finals before the age of 25 so they had proven some semblance of being the best player on a contender, which I think adds to your point about them being considered superstars.

I guess there is no set criteria for who might be a bad 30% max but if you don’t have multiple all-NBA selections and weren’t the best player on a serious playoff team you’re probably high risk of not being worth the 30%.

George had that 1 MVP level season and never broken 25 ppg ever again. I think that puts him more in the elite #2 option category rather than superstar. He's maintained that level of play very well when he's been healthy despite getting up there in age.

Booker is close to a superstar but I think it would be very difficult for any team to win with him as their best player. Still, he's been worth the money.

Someone like Beal was arguably at a superstar level when he was averaging over 30 ppg for those 2 seasons, they squeaked into the playoffs one of those years too. He's still a pretty good player but he just can't stay healthy and all that mileage has added up too. He's also in a much different role on that Phoenix team, his usg rate down from 34% in those 30 ppg years to under 23% last season.

I think I finally came up with a player that is probably close to your criteria. Jrue Holiday

I think elite #2’s are definitely worth the 30% max. That’s where I would rank George (and probably Booker). I wouldn’t trust Siakam, Beal or Lavine to be an elite #2, even in their best seasons. They would probably need to be 2a or 2b, meaning they would need another player of similar stature next to them along with a true #1.

Jrue might be close but I don’t think he ever broke 27% of the cap and his deals usually averaged around 26% of the cap. Sometimes the wiggle room can be enough to help teams get over the hump but I might just be splitting hairs.

Yeah, I think you're probably splitting hairs really if Jrue doesn't count.

The thing is it's probably going to take a Hall of Fame level player to be worth a max contract for their 3rd deal. By their 3rd contract, they are either in year 9 or 10, add on another 4-5 years from there and that takes them through years 12-14. If they are still worth the max in years 12-14, they probably are a Hall of Famer.

[Vampirate]

There is zero chance that a SL of IQ/RJ/GD/SB/KO makes the play in. This team has zero bench, and that would be one of the worst defensive starting lineups in the league, you're looking at 30 wins at the absolute best. Jak isn't some magical player by any means, but the drop off from him to KO defensively is the grand canyon.

Not to mention that is assuming everyone stays healthy. You throw in some real, or fake injuries to any of BBQ, and you're looking at 20-25 wins.

I think you are overestimating the level of production that could be realistically expected from this team.

You remove Jak, and hopefully BB as well. And you have at most 6 NBA level players on the entire roster.
Ochai isn't an NBA level player.
Boucher and Temple are cooked.
Battle/Shead/Walter/Carlson/Mogbo are all rookies/g leaguers that will barely contribute.

So your NBA level players are RJ/IQ/Scottie/Gradey/Mitchell, and maybe Olynyk. So unless the other 8-9 guys play absolutely out of their mind, that group aint winning squat.

Honestly, I think you're underestimating just how weak the 8-11 seeds are in the East.

The Bulls just got worse RS wise going from Derozan to Giddey. Atlanta is a question mark, the Nets just got worse than us.

Sadly the East is so bad that we were 2 spots away from the play in with a .305 win record. Only really Charlotte probably can leap frog us and they have just as many question marks as we do.

It's not about us getting that much better, it's about the mid-bottom of the East getting that much worse.

It's possible were in the playin sheerly by default just because of how bad the bottom of the East actually is.

The lineup I mentioned could easily manage bottom 5 in the NBA. It is horrendous, and the team has zero depth. It's why I'm so gung ho about getting rid of Jak. He's a floor raiser on this team, and it serves no purpose but to all but guarantee we end up with a mid pick.

We might have better starters than a few bad teams, but the falloff from our starters to bench is a cliff face. This team is barely 5 deep.

Trade Jak, and even 1 injury to a SL player, and we're in the absolute dumps. I think you're overestimating this team lol.

.305 had us 2 spots from the play in, but it also had us 2 spots from 14th in the east. 11 games back of the play in, but only 10 games ahead of 14th. I'm not saying you're 100% wrong, but we won 25 games missing 2 starters for like 20 games, that's really not a lot.

One of those starters was Barnes though and then pretty much every player sans Gradey was out for a 10 game stretch (kind of hilarious how it happened all at once)

It was in this time period we went on a epic losing streak.

Agreed on Yak though.

Of course the other thing is the better Barnes gets, the more of a floor raiser he himself is.

Maybe regression from RJ (from last years efficiency, not to the extent of his NY numbers) might balance it out.

There's also the question of 'if' IQ takes a step and if he does it means more wins.

Ideally everyone gets better and we pull a Atlanta Hawks (idealistic dream scenario lol)

[bonjovi0308]

Even Bobby last year (or the year before?) Acknowledged that the team needs shot creator. However, I don't think a shot creating, microwave scoring guard is Masai's preference, he likes long athletic bigs. There were a few shot creating guards in the 2024 draft, but Raps probably won't pick them even if they were still available

[Merit]

If you meant those guys as potential closers/iso guys (which is perfectly fine if you think that, maybe they get there) why did you say “Barnes can facilitate that”? Closers/iso guys don’t need someone facilitating for them. The whole point is they can get their own shot off without the need for someone setting them up.

And to touch on the Wiggins idea from another post: Wiggins has played 10 full seasons and has been effective as an iso player for extremely brief periods of time but has never been able to sustain it. Why are you taking the smallest sample size and extrapolating it when we have a decade of data to show he cannot do it consistently? Here’s an example: Demar shot 45% from 3 in Feb of 2016. No one thinks Demar has untapped 3pt shooting potential because he got hot for month because we have a decade plus of him not being able to shoot 3’s efficiently. Let’s give Wiggins the benefit of the doubt and say he was the best iso player for 2 months: do you know how many iso fga he would have taken during that time? 48. You’re basing your argument around a sample size of under 50 fga. Thats 5% of Wiggins fga in a single season. Do you realize how small of a sample size you are going of off? Wiggins has taken 800+ iso fga in his career yet somehow you think the 48 fga he took at the start of the 20/21 season are more representative of what he is as an iso player. You must see how unrealistic it is to think that Wiggins will ever become a high level iso player. His brief stint as “best in the league” was obviously never sustainable given the entirety of his career.

As for getting an elite iso scorer: it is nearly impossible to acquire one because they are the most sought after players in the league. It is basically asking “how do we get a perennial MVP on the team” because that’s who elite iso guys are. You’re asking me to find one while removing the option of drafting one. Newsflash: that’s the entire reason people are pushing to tank. We believe we need a true #1 and the only way to get those guys is to draft them or trade literally everything that isn’t nailed down. Drafting one is a long shot. Trading for one is an extreme long shot because if we give up everything (what do you think Luka would return in a trade?) we are not the Lakers so we are left trading everything (both present and future) and have no way of building a team around that player because good free agents don’t come here. The best way for us to get a true #1 is to draft that player or hope Barnes jumpshot reaches a high level. There is no easy way to do any of this because it’s the hardest position to fill in the league. Thats why the original article is so dumb: he’s suggesting we just need an elite iso scorer to complete the team. Yeah, no sh*t. That’s what every team wants and at any given time only about 5 teams have those types of guy. Zatzman might as well be asking “if you’re poor all you need is a truck full of gold bars and then you’ll be good”. He’s talking about acquiring one of the rarest things in sports.

Right. So you have no suggestions, only reasons why it won’t work.

I recognize it’s a small sample size. I have literally said I’m trying to fit a square peg into a round hole and I have furthermore said that Wiggins does other things beyond being a tertiary scorer, including defend better than the other options I suggested in Zach Lavine, Cam Thomas and Keldon Johnson. I think he can also create a shot in a pinch. Let me say it differently. Adding Wiggins does not take away from our team’s ability to create a shot. It adds to the options the team has for an ISO. Furthermore, I think Masai can improve Wiggins’ consistency. I may be wrong, but that’s what I feel for now.

As for Scottie facilitating that, he would be doing it the same way Korver facilitates other players by creating spacing. Only in Scottie’s case it’s more about a threat to score and pass. Basketball is a team game. Even if you’re Jordan, the GOAT iso player - you still need the team around you. Scottie’s leadership and encouragement also factors in here.

So now we’re going to solve our iso issues… through Scottie’s encouragement?

No offense but do you even know what iso play is? This thread is about elite iso scoring. This isn’t about passing or leadership. This is giving a guy the ball and saying “go score”. ISO play is literally a guy going one on one and trying to score. That’s what we’re talking about here, that’s the issue we are addressing. Who can get a bucket without needing to pass or run a play. Thats what iso scoring is.

So now we're going to respond to threads asking for actual suggestions... through deflecting arguments?

No offense, but do you even know what responding directly to suggestions for gettable iso scorers is? This thread is about elite iso scoring. This isn't about deflecting and failing to respond to suggestions for gettable iso scorers. This is giving the guy a request for suggestions for iso scorers and saying, "show me". Asking for a suggestion other than what I have brought forward is literally asking for a suggestion other than the players I have brought forward. That's what we're talking about here; that's the issue we're addressing. Who do you suggest we trade for that is an iso scorer other than the names I have brought forward? That's what we are asking for. We are not asking why these names don't work or to define ISO scoring. We are asking for suggestions for players the Raptors can acquire—ideally without gutting their team—who can help in the near to medium term while the rest of the players develop.

In case you've forgotten those names are: Zach Lavine, Cam Thomas, Bennedict Mathurin, Andrew Wiggins, Keldon Johnson. Some of these players are less elite than others at iso scoring but could be good scorers on our team given a different shot diet (Keldon Johnson) or can improve their iso percentages in a new system with a new coach (Andrew Wiggins). The first 3 are above-average to elite iso scorers with varying ability levels, availability and usefulness to our team. As previously stated, I wanted Mathurin in the Pascal trade. I am open to trading for Zach Lavine but am wary of moving RJ to the 3. I am less interested in Cam because we have other options on our team who are similar (IQ), and I am most interested in Wiggins because he does a little bit of ISO as a tertiary scorer but also helps our biggest weakness (wing depth) while being available for our spare parts (Bruce Brown, Boucher, Ochai etc.).

[Merit]

Even Bobby last year (or the year before?) Acknowledged that the team needs shot creator. However, I don't think a shot creating, microwave scoring guard is Masai's preference, he likes long athletic bigs. There were a few shot creating guards in the 2024 draft, but Raps probably won't pick them even if they were still available

The thing is, those guards require development and aren't better at shot creation than IQ and RJ, so why would we consider them? We also have Shead and Jakobe to develop, never mind Gradey.

This is why I suggested Zach Lavine—since he's a plug-and-play fit. The challenge (aside from his contract and poor defense) is that he would start at the 2, moving RJ to the 3, where he's less effective offensively and defensively.