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

[tsherkin]

We need to get one no matter what (need 2).

Yes, I agree with that.

Other than that, agree to disagree. I do believe in Scottie particularly because he's got a major leap in maturity coming to him. And I have seen the most dominant stretches practically EVER on some Scotties games. Where he literally becomes unstoppable.

I can't think of a moment where he did anything sustainable and it looked like he was unstoppable, to be honest. He's got a reasonably sound mind, but maturity doesn't hit jumpers for you and it doesn't improve your fast-twitch athleticism, so I remain less than optimistic about his ability to grow far beyond where he is now as a scorer.

Toronto's Bosh? I'm sorry, that man was a playoff b***tch that would only take contested elbow jumpers. Let alone play no defense. This is a hard disagree for me.

He slashed and he drew fouls and what-not. He had his issues in the playoffs, for sure, but his RS performance dramatically outstripped Scottie. Bosh wasn't an ideal #1 either, of course, but he was a lot better than Scottie.

Westbrook have never taking anyone anywhere not even as #3. I'll take prime Scottie over prime Westbrook anytime. That's another no defense stat padding guy. Scottie for me.

2011-2019, Westbrook was better than Scottie has ever been. 2015-2017, Westbrook was better than Scottie will ever be. There really isn't wiggle room on that one. On shot creation alone, Westbrook was way, way, way better than Scottie for an offense. Russ had his issues, and not a small number of them, but yeah, he was far, far better than Scottie.

[ATLTimekeeper]

But there is not even a need for that, we will need another max to compete, let's get a #1 and be happy that scottie will be happy. He will give you 20-8-8 in his sleep because I think he is elite at opportunistic scoring/assits.

Sure. He asked a specific question, though, so this isnt really salient to that, right?

If Scottie can put up 20 on league average efficiency while giving us 7 boards, 5 assists and quality D, that's a useful player, no doubt. But the question asked which I answered was about if he maximized his potential.

Yeah, I didn't follow the whole thread... so, 20-7-5 2+ stocks is "useful" now? Used to be "superstar", or maybe that is only on other teams, lol. Like I said, can't have nice things.

It is no longer superstar ppg, sorry. Times have changed and bball reference can point you in the right direction.

20/10/4/2 is Bam Adebayo.
20/14/8/1.5 didn't even get 2nd team all-nba last year.

His ppg has to vault, or his efficiency has to vault.

[Buff]

We need to get one no matter what (need 2).

Yes, I agree with that.

Other than that, agree to disagree. I do believe in Scottie particularly because he's got a major leap in maturity coming to him. And I have seen the most dominant stretches practically EVER on some Scotties games. Where he literally becomes unstoppable.

I can't think of a moment where he did anything sustainable and it looked like he was unstoppable, to be honest. He's got a reasonably sound mind, but maturity doesn't hit jumpers for you and it doesn't improve your fast-twitch athleticism, so I remain less than optimistic about his ability to grow far beyond where he is now as a scorer.

Toronto's Bosh? I'm sorry, that man was a playoff b***tch that would only take contested elbow jumpers. Let alone play no defense. This is a hard disagree for me.

He slashed and he drew fouls and what-not. He had his issues in the playoffs, for sure, but his RS performance dramatically outstripped Scottie. Bosh wasn't an ideal #1 either, of course, but he was a lot better than Scottie.

Westbrook have never taking anyone anywhere not even as #3. I'll take prime Scottie over prime Westbrook anytime. That's another no defense stat padding guy. Scottie for me.

2011-2019, Westbrook was better than Scottie has ever been. 2015-2017, Westbrook was better than Scottie will ever be. There really isn't wiggle room on that one. On shot creation alone, Westbrook was way, way, way better than Scottie for an offense. Russ had his issues, and not a small number of them, but yeah, he was far, far better than Scottie.

Only thing left here is to bookmark the post and come back in a couple years when Scottie hits his prime.

[tsherkin]

Only thing left here is to bookmark the post and come back in a couple years when Scottie hits his prime.

Yeah. His development is still possible. He needs a better handle and a jumper really badly. If he develops those, then lots of things will change positively for him, no doubt! Would be nice. Unlikely, but hey, I'd love to be wrong on that one, unquestionably. As long as he's still with us, hah!

[tecumseh18]

I've never understood why Hollinger's PER stat isn't taken seriously as an objective measure of a player's counting stats. The top PER guys - e.g. >30 - are invariably superstars. >25 is all NBA. >20 is all-star-ish. Scottie's PER was ~20 last year, almost the same as Ant's. After four games, his PER is 17,6. Probably it's all the turnovers depressing his stats.

Of course it's too early this season to make a judgment based on such stats. But I see that SGA and AD are currently each sporting PER's of 31, while Jokic has an astronomical PER of 39.0. Now THAT'S a superstar. Chet is nearly 30, as is Tatum. Interesting that both Suggs and Franz Wagner are both in 23-24 range. [edited to add] Holy crap, Maple Jordan is over 30!

Long story short, Scottie has a long way to go to achieve superstar status. Cut the TOs, work on the shooting. Ant has become an outside shooter to be feared, after shooting ~30% from 3 in college (7.7 attempts per game). Time for Scottie to do the same.

[tsherkin]

I've never understood why Hollinger's PER stat isn't taken seriously as an objective measure of a player's counting stats.

Because it means only so much and is often used inappropriately. As a rude, basic measure of stratification, it isn't bad, but it isn't a hot tool for direct player-to-player comparison.

[Buff]

Only thing left here is to bookmark the post and come back in a couple years when Scottie hits his prime.

Yeah. His development is still possible. He needs a better handle and a jumper really badly. If he develops those, then lots of things will change positively for him, no doubt! Would be nice. Unlikely, but hey, I'd love to be wrong on that one, unquestionably. As long as he's still with us, hah!

Btw, just for reference... do you consider Bosh and Westbrook way way better than Lowry?

[tecumseh18]

I've never understood why Hollinger's PER stat isn't taken seriously as an objective measure of a player's counting stats.

Because it means only so much and is often used inappropriately. As a rude, basic measure of stratification, it isn't bad, but it isn't a hot tool for direct player-to-player comparison.

The traditional complaint was that it overrated rebounds, which certainly helps Jokic's PER. But so can Poeltl, and his PER is a little over a third of the Joker's, at 14.5.

Yes, all I'm suggesting is that it's a rough and ready measure of stratification, along the lines I suggested. 30 or over = legit superstar. But again, it's WAY too early in the season to even care about that.

[tsherkin]

The traditional complaint was that it overrated rebounds,

That is also true, yes.

Yes, all I'm suggesting is that it's a rough and ready measure of stratification, along the lines I suggested. 30 or over = legit superstar. But again, it's WAY too early in the season to even care about that.

I guess because it doesn't really offer useful information. You can look at a slashline and generally understand anything PER might say about said player, only you can find more context from the box score. Also, it does overrate scoring, even inefficient scoring, so that's another weakness. There are 30 player-seasons of 30+ PER in league history (with minimum 60 GP and 30+ mpg). I robbed Shaq of his 99 season, I guess, but you get the picture. PER isn't really revealing in that regard because no one needed a single, TENDEX-style number to tell us that about those guys.

It does, however, wither in utility pretty quickly once you get beneath that threshold. Like, Clint Capela has a 24 PER season. Do you consider him on a level with Bam Adebayo, Rudy Gobert and... Luka Doncic?

[CPT]

Seems pretty simple to me. Lowry was a 6 foot guy who was not overly athletic, who still is a borderline HOFe. He probably would be a better player if he had the body and athletic ability of one of the most athletic players of all time ASSUMING he still had the same IQ, skills, and traits of his 6 foot self. Its a stupid conversation to have, but the post I am replying to said "LOWRY was barely above average NBA player and only benefitted from having superstar Kawhi carry the team". How you took more issue from my reply than that travesty of a post is confusing

But also, what was the ceiling for team success as Lowry as your best player? At the peak we won 2 games in the ECF. That is not really something that should be used against Lowry. That is an accomplishment that what? Like a dozen guys in the last decade can claim?

Since 2015 (last 10 years) - #1 options to win at least 2 ECF/WCF games
Tatum, Luka, Butler, Jokic, Curry, Booker, Kawhi, Trae, Giannis, LBJ, Harden, Durant, Lowry.

Arguably, Lowry had the worst #2 of any of those teams outside of the Butler Heat and Trae Hawks.

Was not trying to "both sides" it, even if that's how it came across, lol.

The argument that Lowry was barely above average is dumb and doesn't really deserve any attention. It's kind of just a run of the mill dumb point though.

I can't stand the arguments that give one player some physical gift or skill, give everyone else nothing, and act like it should have any bearing on anything. I kind of respect the ordinary dumb argument more.

As for the second part, it's an interesting metric, but I think it actually speaks to the theme of this thread. It's very difficult to get to that "best player on a contender" level. It's an exclusive club, and the members do their best to keep others out. In that regard, it's a great accomplishment that Lowry even made it in. You could say that the East was weak, and it was, but there still weren't random dudes racking up Conference Finals wins. At the same time, if you look at total wins as the best player (Conference Finals and beyond) in that time, I think it would make Lowry look like the odd man out (or one of them). I tried doing a back of the envelope calculation and got a bit lightheaded (even before getting to stuff like Curry/KD), but guys like Lebron and Curry have 30-40 of these wins in the same period to give some perspective.

Kyle also got put in the rare situation where he ended up getting the first option to get over the top. If we don't think Scottie can get to this level on his own, we have to hope he can get to the Lowry level and then somehow land a better player.

[canada_dry]

Re Lowry comp - As a Lowry at Villanova fan, I can assure you he was always high motor. Scottie has a hot/cold motor. Lowry's trust issues with coaches, off court pain-in-the-assery, etc never bled onto the court in Memphis, Houston or early Toronto.

Re KG comp - again, the motor was always on. My comp for Scottie is Rasheed Wallace. You think you can get more out of him, but there's some physical and emotional limitations that render him a hair less than the elite.

Re play with Booker! The Middleton to Giannis comp! Booker can't even win with KD. He had one year being carried by Chris Paul. For Scottie to get to Giannis' level he has to get closer to high 20s ppg on elite efficiency.

Superstars are rare. There just isn't an inefficient superstar in this day and age where scoring is a little easier. We need to see more time with Scottie and his best teammates to see if what he's worked on in the summer is enough to build efficiency.

Yeah ive explained the same about lowry. Motor was always there. Would be much less complaining about scottie if he had a lowry motor.

Sent from my SM-G960W using RealGM mobile app

[MoMan24]

Re Lowry comp - As a Lowry at Villanova fan, I can assure you he was always high motor. Scottie has a hot/cold motor. Lowry's trust issues with coaches, off court pain-in-the-assery, etc never bled onto the court in Memphis, Houston or early Toronto.

Re KG comp - again, the motor was always on. My comp for Scottie is Rasheed Wallace. You think you can get more out of him, but there's some physical and emotional limitations that render him a hair less than the elite.

Re play with Booker! The Middleton to Giannis comp! Booker can't even win with KD. He had one year being carried by Chris Paul. For Scottie to get to Giannis' level he has to get closer to high 20s ppg on elite efficiency.

Superstars are rare. There just isn't an inefficient superstar in this day and age where scoring is a little easier. We need to see more time with Scottie and his best teammates to see if what he's worked on in the summer is enough to build efficiency.

Yeah ive explained the same about lowry. Motor was always there. Would be much less complaining about scottie if he had a lowry motor.

Sent from my SM-G960W using RealGM mobile app

A motor like Lowry and is not sustainable for a man of Scotties size and all he does for the team on both ends. He will wear himself out. If you want high motor from Scottie either reduce his minutes or reduce his role but this motor narrative is garbage.

[tsherkin]

A motor like Lowry and is not sustainable for a man of Scotties size and all he does for the team on both ends.

There isn't much to suggest the truth of that statement, no.

[ATLTimekeeper]

A motor like Lowry and is not sustainable for a man of Scotties size and all he does for the team on both ends.

There isn't much to suggest the truth of that statement, no.

He's quoting my post where I gave examples of two guys much bigger than Scottie, KG and Giannis, that had that motor.

[tsherkin]

A motor like Lowry and is not sustainable for a man of Scotties size and all he does for the team on both ends.

There isn't much to suggest the truth of that statement, no.

He's quoting my post where I gave examples of two guys much bigger than Scottie, KG and Giannis, that had that motor.

Yeah, there are big dudes with great motors, no doubt.

[MoMan24]

There isn't much to suggest the truth of that statement, no.

He's quoting my post where I gave examples of two guys much bigger than Scottie, KG and Giannis, that had that motor.

Yeah, there are big dudes with great motors, no doubt.

CraftedNBA has Scottie as a 99% for his defensive versatility ratings, meaning he defends all 5 positions evenly when on the court. Scottie was also 8th last year in distance traveled per game according to NBA.com The only 2 players of significance above Scottie with respect to defensive versatility are Dillion Brooks and Jrue Holiday since their match difficulty is higher. However last year distance traveled for Holiday was 58th in the league and Brooks was 97th. They have lesser and much simpler roles on offense which is where they can rest at times. Since Giannis was brought up he was 150th in defensive versatility at 66% and was 36th last year in distance traveled per game. My point is asking Scottie to play all 5 positions on defense and then run the offense and be the 1st option is not sustainable. Not to mention he is not the most graceful athlete. They have to simplify his defensive role. The 7 players above Scottie in distance traveled last year have either simpler roles on defense or offense. This isn't a motor issue. He has to play smarter not harder.

[tsherkin]

My point is asking Scottie to play all 5 positions on defense and then run the offense and be the 1st option is not sustainable.

Yeah. I'm all for reducing his scoring load, because he isn't good at it right now. And when Quickley is back, his playmaking load WILL be reduced, because IQ is pretty decent at that. Right now, of course, that isn't an option. We know there's an inverse correlation between offensive load and defensive impact, that isn't really news.

[MoMan24]

My point is asking Scottie to play all 5 positions on defense and then run the offense and be the 1st option is not sustainable.

Yeah. I'm all for reducing his scoring load, because he isn't good at it right now. And when Quickley is back, his playmaking load WILL be reduced, because IQ is pretty decent at that. Right now, of course, that isn't an option. We know there's an inverse correlation between offensive load and defensive impact, that isn't really news.

My pushback is saying he has a motor issue when he might be the hardest working player. Scottie without a doubt has to be the highest usage player on this team. The gap in advantage generation between Scottie and IQ is still massive. IQ just being on the court helps Scottie be a better scorer since Mitchell and Shead don't provided much spacing. It's his defensive role that needs to be simplified. He can't fight through screens or keep guards in front of him well enough to exert that much energy to be mediocre at it. For the record I think he is a better scorer than he has shown its just playing with very little NBA talent around him will hurt any player. Gradey has been the best offensive player Scottie has played with this year so far. Maxey right now is shooting 38% from the field and 23% from 3 without Embiid and Geroge. The Sixers are 1-3. You need talent in this league unless your prime LeBron or Jokic.

[tsherkin]

My pushback is saying he has a motor issue when he might be the hardest working player. Scottie without a doubt has to be the highest usage player on this team.

Depends on what version of that term you use. If you mean statistically, then Quickley and Barrett are both ahead of him, and by very large margins at that.

If you mean in terms of total scope of effort expended, that becomes a different conversation of course.

For the record I think he is a better scorer than he has shown its just playing with very little NBA talent around him will hurt any player.

Within a given threshold of tolerance. We've seen many, many good scorers on bad teams over decades and decades of NBA ball. While they don't show their peak efficiency on those teams, good scorers will typically still show through with at LEAST league-average efficiency. But as we've discussed, Scottie doesn't really have a good set of scoring tools, so he isn't able to do much with what he gets on the court. He doesn't have elite burst, he doesn't have much range to speak of, he's mediocre when he gets to the line, etc, etc, etc. He's been drawing fouls well early this season, but he's still a bag of smashed butt holes more than 10 feet from the rim and that really hurts him. And unless something changes, he's going to see FURTHER regression, because there's basically no way he keeps shooting ~88% in the RA all season long.

So, I don't really think he's better than he's looked as a scorer. That isn't typically how this works. I think he's a good player and I think he has potential to improve, but scoring reeeeeally isn't his forte and trying to force that probably won't go well for us.

[timdunkit]

My pushback is saying he has a motor issue when he might be the hardest working player. Scottie without a doubt has to be the highest usage player on this team.

Depends on what version of that term you use. If you mean statistically, then Quickley and Barrett are both ahead of him, and by very large margins at that.

If you mean in terms of total scope of effort expended, that becomes a different conversation of course.

For the record I think he is a better scorer than he has shown its just playing with very little NBA talent around him will hurt any player.

Within a given threshold of tolerance. We've seen many, many good scorers on bad teams over decades and decades of NBA ball. While they don't show their peak efficiency on those teams, good scorers will typically still show through with at LEAST league-average efficiency. But as we've discussed, Scottie doesn't really have a good set of scoring tools, so he isn't able to do much with what he gets on the court. He doesn't have elite burst, he doesn't have much range to speak of, he's mediocre when he gets to the line, etc, etc, etc. He's been drawing fouls well early this season, but he's still a bag of smashed butt holes more than 10 feet from the rim and that really hurts him. And unless something changes, he's going to see FURTHER regression, because there's basically no way he keeps shooting ~88% in the RA all season long.

So, I don't really think he's better than he's looked as a scorer. That isn't typically how this works. I think he's a good player and I think he has potential to improve, but scoring reeeeeally isn't his forte and trying to force that probably won't go well for us.

To add, Scottie hasn't shown that he can be a dynamic scorer with high efficiency. He's historically been a guy who has a high percentage of his scoring assisted. There are advantages to having a player like Scottie, dynamic overall game and doesn't need to dominate the ball to have an impact.

People underestimate how much improvement it takes to move up the echelons in the NBA (the gap from 75 to 50 is not the same as 50 to 25). Given the talent in the league, I don't see Scottie bridging that gap to being a number one option.