Official RJ Barrett Thread

[YogurtProducer]

I think I have seen enough of RJ to see the Pascal like qualities. The guys can get All-Star type numbers on sometimes iffy shooting splits, but ultimately at the end of the game they are the last guy I want to have the ball. He has been in at least four game-winning/tying situations and he has either missed a shot or missed freethrows in the clutch.

Not having Scottie or IQ around has really forced RJ into a lead handler role which I think distorts his value. He looked better to me as a guy playing off the catch or cut rather than creating his own shot.

Here’s another take that’s gonna piss people off that can’t be objective - rj has more potential as a playmaker than Scottie does, simply because he’s more crafty with the ball and can actually get deep into the paint.

Scottie struggles when forced to create in iso situations and is not a scoring threat off the dribble

I think this is not true at all.

Scottie has more potential as a playmaker because Scottie is a better playmaker in general, and has way more potential as a creator and 3-level scorer.

[Dalek]

I think I have seen enough of RJ to see the Pascal like qualities. The guys can get All-Star type numbers on sometimes iffy shooting splits, but ultimately at the end of the game they are the last guy I want to have the ball. He has been in at least four game-winning/tying situations and he has either missed a shot or missed freethrows in the clutch.

Not having Scottie or IQ around has really forced RJ into a lead handler role which I think distorts his value. He looked better to me as a guy playing off the catch or cut rather than creating his own shot.

Here’s another take that’s gonna piss people off that can’t be objective - rj has more potential as a playmaker than Scottie does, simply because he’s more crafty with the ball and can actually get deep into the paint.

Scottie struggles when forced to create in iso situations and is not a scoring threat off the dribble

I do give RJ credit on playmaking, especially with Poeltl on pick and roll. With so many guys out he has exceed expectations.

I just think RJ is a flawed player in many more ways than Scottie. Key being clutch shooting and defense and that's where RJ has not made any strides. The freethrow misses and inconsistent three ball are also alarming but as I said, he has been forced into too big a role. Scottie should be our clutch guy in time.

[tsherkin]

Here’s another take that’s gonna piss people off that can’t be objective - rj has more potential as a playmaker than Scottie does, simply because he’s more crafty with the ball and can actually get deep into the paint.

That makes sense. He'll struggle if he can't develop a pull-up J or gain consistency on his 3, but that downhill pressure he creates and his ability to attack a defense with his physical tools opens a lot of doors if he can get himself wired right.

[Johnny Bball]

I think I have seen enough of RJ to see the Pascal like qualities. The guys can get All-Star type numbers on sometimes iffy shooting splits, but ultimately at the end of the game they are the last guy I want to have the ball. He has been in at least four game-winning/tying situations and he has either missed a shot or missed freethrows in the clutch.

Not having Scottie or IQ around has really forced RJ into a lead handler role which I think distorts his value. He looked better to me as a guy playing off the catch or cut rather than creating his own shot.

Here’s another take that’s gonna piss people off that can’t be objective - rj has more potential as a playmaker than Scottie does, simply because he’s more crafty with the ball and can actually get deep into the paint.

Scottie struggles when forced to create in iso situations and is not a scoring threat off the dribble

I think this is not true at all.

Scottie has more potential as a playmaker because Scottie is a better playmaker in general, and has way more potential as a creator and 3-level scorer.

It is the rare day I agree with Boogie. I think it's a distinct possibility is all. To be determined.

[canada_dry]

If the sport is hitting the target and you can move closer to the target to hit it more accurately and you start doing that more often, did you not improve your end result or not?

Except he isn't playing exactly like he did in NYC. His career best in APG is 3.0, he's at 6.5 APG this year. He's in a different role now than he ever has been in his career, he's never had this much responsibility to both handle scoring and creating for others before so I don't think it makes too much sense to be overly critical over the 12 game sample size because of some regression in efficiency which I think is to be expected in the first place.

Yeah, and his USG% is also at a career high as well. No one is arguing he isn't putting up more counting stats, his AST% has shot up and his TOV% is only slightly elevated, which is awesome. But for the millionth time, I have no issues with that, what I have issues with is him being one of the least efficient players in the NBA, stop trying to move the goalposts.

One could argue that the NY coaching staff didn't put him in a position to be successful. They didn't identify his strengths & utilize them properly. It's every leaders responsibility to find their employees stengths & put them in a position to succeed.

Basically what the arguement comes down to is "NY sucked at role management for RJ. The Raptors have been very successful at it".

Is RJ a more useful player here than he was in NY because ot proper role management & utilization? Seems like it.

Whether or not the player "improved" is not as important as "is the player more successful"..

This is a very reasonable point, and I agree wholeheartedly. It's what I've been saying, the player themselves has not been the improvement, the situation has. And if that is a better end result, I'm happy. But there is a very big difference from a better fitting system, and a better player. If RJ continued to be even remotely efficient despite the issues we've been seeing, I'd not have said a thing, but he's not even close to league average, and that's the issue. A player is valuable based on their contributions, but if you have to have a perfect environment for that player to perform well, and anything less results in bottom of the league performance, then you should be extremely careful how important that player is in the grand scheme of the team.

Why do you take into consideration the role change when it comes to his improvement, but you don't consider the role change when trashing his efficiency this year?

You seem to only consider things when it suits you and ignore the exact same context in your next paragraph at times.

Yes. His role changed and he played more efficiently as a result last year. This year he has the ball way more than he normally would, with a much higher usage rate, and as a result his efficiency has suffered, which happens. If it doesn't then you're something of a superstar. His playmaking has taken a big step, that wasn't something he was nearly as good at in the past even on the knicks when he had the ball a lot too. Thats called improvement and development, yes even in his 6th season

Why's it crazy to think once hes playing In a secondary or even tertiary role , and we once again simplify his role and shot diet, he wouldn't play similarly to last year and his efficiency wouldn't be something similar? Rather than whining about his efficiency so far as if this is the player he is and this is his role going forward? In fact if he can go back to something similar to those 30 games and on top of that add his improving pick n roll game especially with jak...again, thats an improved basketball player.

Why is the 30 games not so relevant even though it provided us a window into how he should be used, but the 12 or so games so far this year ARE relavant even though its a role he won't be playing under normal circumstances?

Doesnt seem right to me. Something is off. Your bias might he showing.

Sent from my SM-G960W using RealGM Forums mobile app

It was literally the second to last line of the post you quoted.

The system has changed due to a bunch of injuries, and his efficiency has plummeted.

I think I have seen enough of RJ to see the Pascal like qualities. The guys can get All-Star type numbers on sometimes iffy shooting splits, but ultimately at the end of the game they are the last guy I want to have the ball. He has been in at least four game-winning/tying situations and he has either missed a shot or missed freethrows in the clutch.

Not having Scottie or IQ around has really forced RJ into a lead handler role which I think distorts his value. He looked better to me as a guy playing off the catch or cut rather than creating his own shot.

This is it to me. If people want to be happy with he's produced so far, then so be it. But it is absurd considering we've all seen this song and dance before, to just ignore all the neon signs pointing to the same limiting issues we've seen with multiple other players here baffles me.


If you want to scream from the rooftops at how great he was last year due to the system changing, then you get to hear the inverse when he tanks due to the system changing. Sorry I don't get hyped over a player that is limited and only produces at a high level when they are in a perfect situation, we've seen plenty of those over the years, and they never lead to anything.

I didn't say you calling his scoring inefficient was your bias. No. In fact i would agree with that as i think most would...Your ignoring certain things due to sample size but ignore sample size to speak about his struggles scoring efficiently the past 12 games, is what i referred to as your bias showing.This is what me and multiple others now have called you out on but you're making up your own arguments in your head.

You're ignoring the fact that the role he's playing on this team right now is not one hes ever had before and will probably never have again. That includes his 300+ with the knicks, hes NEVER had this load as a #1 option while he was on the knicks. Thats nonsense and blatantly untrue , and on top of that yogurt calling you out for misrepresenting his hot streaks on the knicks... this is your bias showing. You're equating the 12 games so far this year to his 300+ as a knick when his role is still not all that similar.

I don't think anyone has argued his scoring has been particularly efficient. I haven't seen it.

They're simply trying to give you context about role and how that effects efficiency that you're continuing to ignore over and over again by trying to say its the same as on the knicks, but its just not.

We can easily come to a common ground and say he isnt being efficient and this isn't his most ideal role...But we should also be able to agree that his role currently is due to necessity and he'll be better on a healthier Raptor team and probably be closer to what we need from him and he'll be considerably more efficient in that secondary or tertiary role than the one he's in right now, and that his playmaking has been clearly better than its ever been in his career as you pointed out much higher assist rates with the turnover rate not increasing too much. Thats an improved and improving player in their 6th season.

Sent from my SM-G960W using RealGM Forums mobile app

[Boogie!]

I think I have seen enough of RJ to see the Pascal like qualities. The guys can get All-Star type numbers on sometimes iffy shooting splits, but ultimately at the end of the game they are the last guy I want to have the ball. He has been in at least four game-winning/tying situations and he has either missed a shot or missed freethrows in the clutch.

Not having Scottie or IQ around has really forced RJ into a lead handler role which I think distorts his value. He looked better to me as a guy playing off the catch or cut rather than creating his own shot.

Here’s another take that’s gonna piss people off that can’t be objective - rj has more potential as a playmaker than Scottie does, simply because he’s more crafty with the ball and can actually get deep into the paint.

Scottie struggles when forced to create in iso situations and is not a scoring threat off the dribble

I think this is not true at all.

Scottie has more potential as a playmaker because Scottie is a better playmaker in general, and has way more potential as a creator and 3-level scorer.

scottie cannot break down a defense off the dribble and get to the paint at will. it limits his ability as a playmaker. I'm not saying he doesn't have the natural court vision and talent. He is more gifted than Rj in that regard for sure. However, again, this is what I talk about in terms of being objective in regards to skillset... if Barnes had Rj's ability to get into the paint off the dribble, I would agree he could be elite. But he is limited because he just can't. Seriously, nothing Barnes has showed in his skillset suggests he could be better as a scorer than Rj even, so IDK where that statement comes from. He has no go to moves, often just heaves up shots and is awkward maneuvering in the paint. There was a play against the pacers where Rj split defenders in traffic with his crafty footwork and timing, that Barnes could never do... He often runs into people and just tries to bully his way in. He is a step above OG in that regard where OG is just bumbling all the time, but at least Barnes has coordination. But still very linear and not agile enough. This is stuff that is just obvious if you watch him objectively that's why some of these opinions and ideas about players I'll never understand.

Again, goes back to my RJ evaluation, but this is why I value RJ so much. Because his problem is largely inefficiency, and he's shown over the course of a season (last year, even though people want to somehow deny his overall numbers and act like it was just a hot stretch) that he can actually be an efficient player, he's worth investing and developing because he already has the base level skills. He often just bricks layups he should probably make, and has mental problems shooting free throws. But his ability to generate these looks and get to his spots far exceeds anyone else on the team. Basically, he has the ability to be elite once he improves his efficiency, and this is something that CAN be done. There's a basis for actually investing that just goes beyond "be patient because he's young." I criticized Jamal shead the other day about his lack of overall skills to be an nba player and the arguments were all patience, youth blah blah blah blah and literally people getting offended. OVER JAMAL **** SHEAD. And yet with RJ he's always already a finished product, he's always gonna be inefficient, without even taking into account breaking down his ability and skill level. And yet one is 24 and the other is 22, but we talk about RJ like is 28 and has no room to improve.

[tsherkin]

Again, goes back to my RJ evaluation, but this is why I value RJ so much. Because his problem is largely inefficiency, and he's shown over the course of a season (last year, even though people want to somehow deny his overall numbers and act like it was just a hot stretch)

I think it's more that people want to be cautious with a sample size less than half a season which is violently at odds with the rest of his career performance. It was interesting, though, to see what he looked like with more of his shot attempts supporting by passing, particularly from 3. It will be interesting to see how much of that he can reclaim when he has more playmakers around him as everyone gets healthy.

Basically, he has the ability to be elite once he improves his efficiency, and this is something that CAN be done.

"Elite" is probably getting ahead of ourselves for a guy with no game beyond 10 feet and inside the arc. But he's definitely shown us that there is some potential for elevated ceiling if we arrange his possessions and the guys around him with a little more care. And that, as you say, plays into there being a reason more than just his age for being a little patient with him.

[johanliebert]

Mans literally has to go in the record books just to keep haters off his ass for a few days.

He will be a good 3rd or 4th option, let the kid live.

He wouldn't have to if he wasn't horrifically inefficient otherwise. Consistency is, and always has been the knock on RJ, and nothing has changed that to date. I would rather him be an efficient 15/5/5 than the massive swings of impact and efficiency he is now.

This isn't new criticism, it's been around since his Knicks days. You guys just come out of the wood works when he finally has a really good game.

Why was everyone always on fvvs jock despite his inefficiency? You’re talking about rj since his knicks days like he wasn’t just coming off a rookie contract. The guy is 24 years old not **** 28. When Demar derozan first became an all star with us at 24 he was putting up worse numbers than rj. And I remember every **** year the discussion was he’s still getting better he’s still young he’s still getting better. It’s maddening hearing how people can’t even be consistent with this logic.

it's cause they have they're favourites. Siakam could shoot 10-26 and they'd put a positive spin on it but RJ is a 6th man on this trash roster.

[RoteSchroder]

Don’t move goal posts. Yes, proportion of assisted to unassisted baskets went up. Total volume of assisted 3’s also went down. If he’s getting less assisted baskets per game, how does that equate to extra “passing support”?

I moved no goalposts. The proportion of assisted made 3s is up. That's why it was nearly 98%. The total volume was down, so the total makes per game were also down.

Explain to me how a lower volume of assisted opportunities means he’s getting additional “passing support” on 3’s?

Or did he just lower unassisted shot attempts?

That's a fair question, though it accesses other things I"ve been saying in this thread very consistently. You're making a semantic argument which is functionally the same as what I"ve been saying this entire time: he needs to focus his 3PA toward assisted looks. And that's what he was doing. A higher-proportion of assisted buckets. You digging deep to discern the difference between him getting more raw volume of assisted makes is immaterial to my point. No, he wasn't getting a higher raw volume of assisted shots, he was getting a higher PROPORTION of assisted shots, which is what I said. He was not taking nearly as many unassisted looks, because those are not his forte.

Well, that was my only point, which you kept refuting. Now you're agreeing with me.

1. His catch and shoot (i.e. assisted 3's) are fine

2. Pull-ups (i.e. mostly non-assisted 3's) are terrible

3. He took almost no pull-up threes on the Raps last season. He's taking a ton now due to his role as a lead man and was taking them a bit with the Knicks.

4. Keep in mind that 98% is for shots made. He was 100% with the Knicks last year. Being higher isn't necessarily better. The stat we should be looking for is % of assisted/unassisted shot attempts, which nba.com doesn't have.

5. Higher passing support was not a reason for his increased 3 point %. Unless I just don't know what you mean by passing support.

he was getting a higher PROPORTION of assisted shots, which is what I said.

I went over this already. The passing support difference in his 32 games with us was significant compared to any other period in his career. Have a look.

These two things seem very different..I don't know about semantics, but I would think significantly better passing support means either 1) he's getting a high volume of potentially assisted shots or 2) the looks his teammates are creating for him are much better quality. I would have never have guessed that it means that his shot diet changed to reduce unassisted shots (i.e. pull-ups), which is what I was arguing.

Going back to one of my previous comments:

Catch and Shoot 3's
2023 Knicks: 1.5/4.4, 35.1%
2023 Raps: 1.5/3.7, 40.3%
2024 Raps: 1.7/4.3, 38.5%

Pull Up Shots
Knicks: 0.1/0.4, 20% on 3's (0.4/1.7, 24.4% overall - 2's and 3's)
2023 Raps: 0/0.1, 33.3% on 3's (0.3/0.6, 47.4% overall)
2024 Raps: 0.3/1.8, 19% on 3's (1.0/3.6, 27.9% overall)

If you take away RJ's pull up shots, his percentages go to 45.1 FG% and 40.1% from 3.

Look at the red. I think it's a better representation than %3FGM assisted.

[Scase]

If the sport is hitting the target and you can move closer to the target to hit it more accurately and you start doing that more often, did you not improve your end result or not?

Except he isn't playing exactly like he did in NYC. His career best in APG is 3.0, he's at 6.5 APG this year. He's in a different role now than he ever has been in his career, he's never had this much responsibility to both handle scoring and creating for others before so I don't think it makes too much sense to be overly critical over the 12 game sample size because of some regression in efficiency which I think is to be expected in the first place.

Yeah, and his USG% is also at a career high as well. No one is arguing he isn't putting up more counting stats, his AST% has shot up and his TOV% is only slightly elevated, which is awesome. But for the millionth time, I have no issues with that, what I have issues with is him being one of the least efficient players in the NBA, stop trying to move the goalposts.

One could argue that the NY coaching staff didn't put him in a position to be successful. They didn't identify his strengths & utilize them properly. It's every leaders responsibility to find their employees stengths & put them in a position to succeed.

Basically what the arguement comes down to is "NY sucked at role management for RJ. The Raptors have been very successful at it".

Is RJ a more useful player here than he was in NY because ot proper role management & utilization? Seems like it.

Whether or not the player "improved" is not as important as "is the player more successful"..

This is a very reasonable point, and I agree wholeheartedly. It's what I've been saying, the player themselves has not been the improvement, the situation has. And if that is a better end result, I'm happy. But there is a very big difference from a better fitting system, and a better player. If RJ continued to be even remotely efficient despite the issues we've been seeing, I'd not have said a thing, but he's not even close to league average, and that's the issue. A player is valuable based on their contributions, but if you have to have a perfect environment for that player to perform well, and anything less results in bottom of the league performance, then you should be extremely careful how important that player is in the grand scheme of the team.

Why do you take into consideration the role change when it comes to his improvement, but you don't consider the role change when trashing his efficiency this year?

You seem to only consider things when it suits you and ignore the exact same context in your next paragraph at times.

Yes. His role changed and he played more efficiently as a result last year. This year he has the ball way more than he normally would, with a much higher usage rate, and as a result his efficiency has suffered, which happens. If it doesn't then you're something of a superstar. His playmaking has taken a big step, that wasn't something he was nearly as good at in the past even on the knicks when he had the ball a lot too. Thats called improvement and development, yes even in his 6th season

Why's it crazy to think once hes playing In a secondary or even tertiary role , and we once again simplify his role and shot diet, he wouldn't play similarly to last year and his efficiency wouldn't be something similar? Rather than whining about his efficiency so far as if this is the player he is and this is his role going forward? In fact if he can go back to something similar to those 30 games and on top of that add his improving pick n roll game especially with jak...again, thats an improved basketball player.

Why is the 30 games not so relevant even though it provided us a window into how he should be used, but the 12 or so games so far this year ARE relavant even though its a role he won't be playing under normal circumstances?

Doesnt seem right to me. Something is off. Your bias might he showing.

Sent from my SM-G960W using RealGM Forums mobile app

It was literally the second to last line of the post you quoted.

The system has changed due to a bunch of injuries, and his efficiency has plummeted.

I think I have seen enough of RJ to see the Pascal like qualities. The guys can get All-Star type numbers on sometimes iffy shooting splits, but ultimately at the end of the game they are the last guy I want to have the ball. He has been in at least four game-winning/tying situations and he has either missed a shot or missed freethrows in the clutch.

Not having Scottie or IQ around has really forced RJ into a lead handler role which I think distorts his value. He looked better to me as a guy playing off the catch or cut rather than creating his own shot.

This is it to me. If people want to be happy with he's produced so far, then so be it. But it is absurd considering we've all seen this song and dance before, to just ignore all the neon signs pointing to the same limiting issues we've seen with multiple other players here baffles me.


If you want to scream from the rooftops at how great he was last year due to the system changing, then you get to hear the inverse when he tanks due to the system changing. Sorry I don't get hyped over a player that is limited and only produces at a high level when they are in a perfect situation, we've seen plenty of those over the years, and they never lead to anything.

I didn't say you calling his scoring inefficient was your bias. No. In fact i would agree with that as i think most would...Your ignoring certain things due to sample size but ignore sample size to speak about his struggles scoring efficiently the past 12 games, is what i referred to as your bias showing.This is what me and multiple others now have called you out on but you're making up your own arguments in your head.

You're ignoring the fact that the role he's playing on this team right now is not one hes ever had before and will probably never have again. That includes his 300+ with the knicks, hes NEVER had this load as a #1 option while he was on the knicks. Thats nonsense and blatantly untrue , and on top of that yogurt calling you out for misrepresenting his hot streaks on the knicks... this is your bias showing. You're equating the 12 games so far this year to his 300+ as a knick when his role is still not all that similar.

I don't think anyone has argued his scoring has been particularly efficient. I haven't seen it.

They're simply trying to give you context about role and how that effects efficiency that you're continuing to ignore over and over again by trying to say its the same as on the knicks, but its just not.

We can easily come to a common ground and say he isnt being efficient and this isn't his most ideal role...But we should also be able to agree that his role currently is due to necessity and he'll be better on a healthier Raptor team and probably be closer to what we need from him and he'll be considerably more efficient in that secondary or tertiary role than the one he's in right now, and that his playmaking has been clearly better than its ever been in his career as you pointed out much higher assist rates with the turnover rate not increasing too much. Thats an improved and improving player in their 6th season.

Sent from my SM-G960W using RealGM Forums mobile app

I never suggested he was played as first option on the knicks. I commented on the scoring game, the types of shots, and the efficiency of those shots being the same. Stop reading into things that aren't there.

As for whatever yogurt said, I can't comment, I have him blocked so I don't see his posts.

I don't dispute he's in a bad position right now, what I was saying in regard to his NYC performances, is that his shot diet is largely the same. And everything he did in the 30 games that seem to be what is considered more important than the other 300, he is no longer doing this season. Hence the small sample size. His 12 games are too small a sample size, his 312+ games are not.

It takes like 2 minutes to see this.
68.7% of all his FGA with the Knicks were 2p FGs
68.8% of all his FGA with us this year were 2p FGs
75.6% of all his FGA with us last year were 2p FGs

32.5% of all his FGA with the Knicks were 0-3ft
27.8% of all his FGA with us this year were 0-3ft
43.1% of all his FGA with us last year were 0-3ft

24.4% of all his FGA with the Knicks were 3-10ft
33.8% of all his FGA with us this year were 3-10ft
29.3% of all his FGA with us last year were 3-10ft

7% of all his FGA with the Knicks were 10-16ft
4.6% of all his FGA with us this year were 10-16ft
2.8% of all his FGA with us last year were 10-16ft

4.9% of all his FGA with the Knicks were 16ft-3p
2.5% of all his FGA with us this year were 16ft-3p
0.4% of all his FGA with us last year were 16ft-3p

31.3% of all his FGA with the Knicks were 3p
31.2% of all his FGA with us this year were 3p
24.4% of all his FGA with us last year were 3p

If you can't see something this obvious staring you right in the face, there isn't much to discuss here. Shots he should be taking went down, shots he shouldn't be taking, went up.

[Vampirate]

Seriously, nothing Barnes has showed in his skillset suggests he could be better as a scorer than Rj even, so IDK where that statement comes from.

Results.

There are stats that easily back up that Barnes is not only the better scorer, but the better on ball scorer.

Throughout their career, RJ has shot

.622/ .351/ .308/ .333/ .345/ .423 assist rate on 2s

Last year he mainly played off ball.

Barnes thus far has shot

.711/ .464/ .337/ .386/ .309/ .456 assist rate on 2s

RJ has definitely shot better from 3, however Barnes has RJ beat, handily everywhere else.

[youngRAPZ]

I find it funny scase argument is that if you move a target closer it becomes easier and thus you haven’t gotten better as if the raptors lowered the net and shrunk the 3point line lol you can’t make this up

[Tripod]

So weird that for some it has to be Barnes vs RJ. Who cares if one edges out the other in certain stats....we have them both.

I said a few times looking to pass RJ is better than head down only wanting to score RJ. Hopefully both guys are 6+assist guys in the coming years and both keep getting better.

[tsherkin]

Well, that was my only point, which you kept refuting. Now you're agreeing with me.

At literally no point was I arguing anything different. It's very much possible we have been speaking past one another, but I have been very consistent about my stance.

1. His catch and shoot (i.e. assisted 3's) are fine

2. Pull-ups (i.e. mostly non-assisted 3's) are terrible

Yup.

5. Higher passing support was not a reason for his increased 3 point %. Unless I just don't know what you mean by passing support.

That is the case. You were focusing on raw volume, I was focusing on proportion. I was looking at how many of his shots were assisted relative to his attempts per game, not the raw number.

These two things seem very different..

They are not. You inferred and you didn't clarify, and now here we are.

Apparently, however, we agree. Having RJ take fewer unassisted 3s is good. Eliminating pull-ups, or at least heavily limiting them, is a good strategy. He isn't an elite shooter, but he has a skill which we can leverage with a little structure.

[Scizzup]

Seriously, nothing Barnes has showed in his skillset suggests he could be better as a scorer than Rj even, so IDK where that statement comes from.

Results.

There are stats that easily back up that Barnes is not only the better scorer, but the better on ball scorer.

Throughout their career, RJ has shot

.622/ .351/ .308/ .333/ .345/ .423 assist rate on 2s

Last year he mainly played off ball.

Barnes thus far has shot

.711/ .464/ .337/ .386/ .309/ .456 assist rate on 2s

RJ has definitely shot better from 3, however Barnes has RJ beat, handily everywhere else.

I think you can say RJ is a more "skilled" shot creator but he is not good enough at it to warrant such a role. RJ is better at getting to the rim with his dribble and he is assisted less at the rim. He can obviously create space better than Barnes for a shot with stepback/dribble etc.


33% of Barrett shots are taken at the rim vs 27% of Barnes shot and he is assisted less on them. The issue is that RJ is a bad jump shooter so far in his career especially at the short midrange/floater range that he takes in volume. If he can get better at making those or if he trades them for 3's (at 34%) it could do him well.

But, RJ is not a player that I foresee being better than league average TS over 82 games unless is role is severely diminished. Can Barnes do that either? maybe not, but he is more resilient scorer.

[canada_dry]

Yeah, and his USG% is also at a career high as well. No one is arguing he isn't putting up more counting stats, his AST% has shot up and his TOV% is only slightly elevated, which is awesome. But for the millionth time, I have no issues with that, what I have issues with is him being one of the least efficient players in the NBA, stop trying to move the goalposts.



This is a very reasonable point, and I agree wholeheartedly. It's what I've been saying, the player themselves has not been the improvement, the situation has. And if that is a better end result, I'm happy. But there is a very big difference from a better fitting system, and a better player. If RJ continued to be even remotely efficient despite the issues we've been seeing, I'd not have said a thing, but he's not even close to league average, and that's the issue. A player is valuable based on their contributions, but if you have to have a perfect environment for that player to perform well, and anything less results in bottom of the league performance, then you should be extremely careful how important that player is in the grand scheme of the team.



It was literally the second to last line of the post you quoted.



This is it to me. If people want to be happy with he's produced so far, then so be it. But it is absurd considering we've all seen this song and dance before, to just ignore all the neon signs pointing to the same limiting issues we've seen with multiple other players here baffles me.


If you want to scream from the rooftops at how great he was last year due to the system changing, then you get to hear the inverse when he tanks due to the system changing. Sorry I don't get hyped over a player that is limited and only produces at a high level when they are in a perfect situation, we've seen plenty of those over the years, and they never lead to anything.

I didn't say you calling his scoring inefficient was your bias. No. In fact i would agree with that as i think most would...Your ignoring certain things due to sample size but ignore sample size to speak about his struggles scoring efficiently the past 12 games, is what i referred to as your bias showing.This is what me and multiple others now have called you out on but you're making up your own arguments in your head.

You're ignoring the fact that the role he's playing on this team right now is not one hes ever had before and will probably never have again. That includes his 300+ with the knicks, hes NEVER had this load as a #1 option while he was on the knicks. Thats nonsense and blatantly untrue , and on top of that yogurt calling you out for misrepresenting his hot streaks on the knicks... this is your bias showing. You're equating the 12 games so far this year to his 300+ as a knick when his role is still not all that similar.

I don't think anyone has argued his scoring has been particularly efficient. I haven't seen it.

They're simply trying to give you context about role and how that effects efficiency that you're continuing to ignore over and over again by trying to say its the same as on the knicks, but its just not.

We can easily come to a common ground and say he isnt being efficient and this isn't his most ideal role...But we should also be able to agree that his role currently is due to necessity and he'll be better on a healthier Raptor team and probably be closer to what we need from him and he'll be considerably more efficient in that secondary or tertiary role than the one he's in right now, and that his playmaking has been clearly better than its ever been in his career as you pointed out much higher assist rates with the turnover rate not increasing too much. Thats an improved and improving player in their 6th season.

Sent from my SM-G960W using RealGM Forums mobile app

I never suggested he was played as first option on the knicks. I commented on the scoring game, the types of shots, and the efficiency of those shots being the same. Stop reading into things that aren't there.

As for whatever yogurt said, I can't comment, I have him blocked so I don't see his posts.

I don't dispute he's in a bad position right now, what I was saying in regard to his NYC performances, is that his shot diet is largely the same. And everything he did in the 30 games that seem to be what is considered more important than the other 300, he is no longer doing this season. Hence the small sample size. His 12 games are too small a sample size, his 312+ games are not.

It takes like 2 minutes to see this.
68.7% of all his FGA with the Knicks were 2p FGs
68.8% of all his FGA with us this year were 2p FGs
75.6% of all his FGA with us last year were 2p FGs

32.5% of all his FGA with the Knicks were 0-3ft
27.8% of all his FGA with us this year were 0-3ft
43.1% of all his FGA with us last year were 0-3ft

24.4% of all his FGA with the Knicks were 3-10ft
33.8% of all his FGA with us this year were 3-10ft
29.3% of all his FGA with us last year were 3-10ft

7% of all his FGA with the Knicks were 10-16ft
4.6% of all his FGA with us this year were 10-16ft
2.8% of all his FGA with us last year were 10-16ft

4.9% of all his FGA with the Knicks were 16ft-3p
2.5% of all his FGA with us this year were 16ft-3p
0.4% of all his FGA with us last year were 16ft-3p

31.3% of all his FGA with the Knicks were 3p
31.2% of all his FGA with us this year were 3p
24.4% of all his FGA with us last year were 3p

If you can't see something this obvious staring you right in the face, there isn't much to discuss here. Shots he should be taking went down, shots he shouldn't be taking, went up.

But WHY has the shots he shouldn't be taken gone up and the shots he should be taking gone down? You're continuously ignoring the context in which he's been forced to play this season is totally different than the 30 games he played with us last year.

Noone is disputing those stats but a little nuance here, man please, ffs. Thats all we're asking for. I don't think he's had much choice but to go back to that shot diet. Let's just wait and see how he looks playing off scottie and quick.

Game 1 of playing off scottie in the 1st half is already looking pretty good. I know, i know, sample size But proof of concept is already there!



Sent from my SM-G960W using RealGM Forums mobile app

[PushDaRock]

This was RJ's 5th 30 point game of the season already and we are just 13 games in. Probably the most polarizing player on the roster because if anyone else did this, there would be a lot more buzz and excitement about it.

[JJWong17]

This was RJ's 5th 30 point game of the season already and we are just 13 games in. Probably the most polarizing player on the roster because if anyone else did this, there would be a lot more buzz and excitement about it.

I dunno about everybody else but I'm excited as hell about his development. I can understand the hesitation bc it's not like he's a sophomore or third year guy who's suddenly finding his legs. This is his fifth year and many had already given up on him and assumed he'd reached his peak but I'm always going to be rooting for our players so I'm going to hope that this is a sign of real improvement. If nothing else, it's more fun than waiting for the other shoe drop

[mdenny]

This was RJ's 5th 30 point game of the season already and we are just 13 games in. Probably the most polarizing player on the roster because if anyone else did this, there would be a lot more buzz and excitement about it.

Meanwhile we have a knick fan posting on this board bragging that OG has had 5 games with +20 points for the knicks for twice the cap hit lol.

[tsherkin]

A very nice game for RJ tonight.