Official Scottie All Star Barnes Thread 8

[Shwaguy]

Due to his .446 shooting last year and .388 in that area in his career I think he has promise. This one is up to the reader if you believe he could have fixed his shooting form making his mid range better.

3 seasons, average influences by that 44.6%. Low volume. Not particularly good percentages. Can't say I agree, but we can agree to disagree on that front, for sure. I don't think the long two will feature too prominently in his game. Him shooting under 30% from 10-16 feet in each of the past two seasons, though, is much more of an issue. As is his 3pt shooting, though there at least we have seem some intriguing signs of potential development. So that's something.

I also need to see a larger sample size, but thus far he's taking more short mid range shots (10-16 feet is the same as at the rim).
Also looking at the statistics he's taking more unassisted 3s (.750 assisted) so we'll see how that shakes out.

Yes, he's technically shooting 40% from 10-16 feet this season over his 5 games. But that tracks to being 4/10, so I don't really care yet.

His 2P assisted percentage is at .333, so it looks like he's trying to create more of his own offense (in this regard, I trust him as hois career 2P assisted rate is at .455)

Yeah, we'll see what happens. He has played nothing near enough games for any of his stats to be relevant yet this season. 5 games is about as meaningless as one game. I hope we have the opportunity to see close to a full season from him.

Speaking of his short game he's taking a whopping 41.9% of his shots from 3-10 feet at a 51.6% clip.

That's pretty close to par for him. It's good stuff. He needs other things to support his overall efficiency, but that has consistently been a strength for him.

If he ever averages 24 PPG (58TS%) 10 Rbs/ 8 Asts/ 1.5 Blk/ 1.3 Stl where do you put him? It's this type of theoretical production all over you have to consider.

League average mid-volume scoring with a nice all around game? Top 15-20, maybe? A really strong second-star type of player.

Barnes is in the Kawhi mold in terms of tools.

No he isn't. He's both athletically inferior and DRAMATICALLY less proficient as a shooter. They both have power to their game. That's... about the only similarity. And Scottie's taller. As I mentioned earlier, we might have more success looking at him as a 4 than as a perimeter guy.

Honestly, we have nothing to lose this season to see what he can do as the main option. Moving him to another role is a bad idea imo. Even if he struggles.

Moving him to another role isn't a bad idea, but neither is giving one more go at seeing where he's at in his development arc, I agree.

I mean how far off is he right now from a 22PPG (57%TS)/ 9 RBD/ 7 AST/ 1 STL/ 1 BLK player?

Not that far. And that pushes him well into "quality second star" kind of territory, for sure. As ever, I find myself repeating myself, but I think well of Barnes overall and I'm happy he's on our roster. I just don't want him shouldering our primary volume load because he's so far behind the curve for the kind of player who can do that effectively for contention. That's basically my only criticism of Scottie.

Otherwise, he's a highly-versatile player who has a clear and positive impact on our team and plays at both ends. That's a win of a resource, for sure.

Again, Barnes is very unique as a player. His value in not only scoring but passing, rebounding, blks, stls is what's intriguing.

And as support to a real focal player, he's already well-positioned to be hugely positive, for sure.

Ultimately, my "criticism" of Barnes is that he isn't an ATG offensive player. Because that's what it takes to headline a title team. And he will never be that, which is both obvious and also just fine. You can't strike that sort of gold often, and we shouldn't overlook what Scottie does bring just because he isn't that guy. We have some pieces right now, and we need to take the season at least to see how they fit together. His impact on RJ, for example, even setting aside Barnes' own individual production. That could be a big deal.

If we can get RJ at 18-20 ppg at +1 - +2% rTS (trying to be conservative here), and Scottie's scoring maybe 22 ppg at league average efficiency (or even at -1% rTS), then we start to look a lot different on O, right? ANd with Scottie bringing back some defense, well, then we have something to talk about. We have a recent title; we can think in different terms than "title or bust," because we already have what like half the league doesn't: a ring. And recently, too. So if we could put together "just" a really good team which consistently exits the first round, that'd be awesome.

And it looks like we aren't too distant from doing that.

Fundamentally disagree with the notion that you need an All time great level scorer to win a championship. Motion style team heavy offences get more and more dominant every season and is taking over the league, and the notion that these offences fade in the playoffs will disappear. Boston won the championship last season and had no all time great level scorer, and their player who was closest to that was not good/did not even win finals MVP. Now of course, Boston was just stacked all around, but still is conceptually proof of that.

Do I think Barnes ultimately will need to be paired with a flamethrower who has gravity and can score 25 a night efficiently, capitalizing off of Barnes' ability to be a versatile keystone to an offence? Absolutely I do think that. I don't necessarily believe that that dude scoring 25 a night next to Barnes' 20 will need to be a better player than Barnes though.

Say you got a guy who's dropping 25 on like, high 40s FG and high 30s/low 40s from 3. Then you have Barnes at his peak, probably scoring around the same 20-22 a night he dropped last year, but on increased efficiency, and increased Assist numbers, and hopefully elevated to All NBA Defence level on that end. I think that is a fair hope for Barnes' prime. And I think that player is more impactful.

I also do think we'd need a special big man for this type of set up to really be a championship level team. But not necessarily better than Barnes, and not an all time great level scorer. But someone who can anchor a great defence, be switchable, get you 18 a night on high efficiency, command some level of respect behind the arc, be a lob threat/and great at getting easy buckets.

It'll likely never happen as cleanly as I described it, I think that's the type of vision I can see this team heading towards on a successful path led by Barnes (I would LOVE if we could get another player even better than Barnes....But that seems, not very likely, even with some lottery luck) If we do we are really cooking with gas, but still think we can cook something great up even if that doesn't happen.

[Shwaguy]

Let's say Scottie ends up in his prime as as 22/10/8, like 3-4 stocks guy on good efficiency, like, 36% from 3, all NBA caliber defense or close to it.

And say Gradey pans out like we all hope and can be an All star scorer giving you 25 a night on 60 or so TS% Like a Tyler Herro level of production I guess? I think that's what he's putting up this year (White Boy Winter btw)

IQ
Gradey
????
Scottie
????

And buy in that we are able to have a strong bench due to our development track record.

What needs to go in those ?????? spots.

Do you need 30/game superstar in one of those spots to get to title contender? Or does a great 3 and D guy at the 3, and a Myles Turner level Center, get you there? What level of player do we need at the 3 and 5 and Scottie and Gradey turn out as we've hoped? Maybe you need a better PG than IQ? Does it necessarily have to be a Bailey/Flagg level prospect at the forward spot? Or maybe a Maluach at the 5 then roleplayer at the 3?

[Vampirate]

3 seasons, average influences by that 44.6%. Low volume. Not particularly good percentages. Can't say I agree, but we can agree to disagree on that front, for sure. I don't think the long two will feature too prominently in his game. Him shooting under 30% from 10-16 feet in each of the past two seasons, though, is much more of an issue. As is his 3pt shooting, though there at least we have seem some intriguing signs of potential development. So that's something.

I wouldn't say he's excelling here, but he's also not a liability either. I'd say he's competent from deep long mid range.

Yes, he's technically shooting 40% from 10-16 feet this season over his 5 games. But that tracks to being 4/10, so I don't really care yet.

40% is better than under 30%, he shot nearly 40% his rookie year so i'd wager he'd can do it again, I honestly just want to see some improvement in this area and i'd consider that a win and build upon that.

His 2P assisted percentage is at .333, so it looks like he's trying to create more of his own offense (in this regard, I trust him as hois career 2P assisted rate is at .455)

Yeah, we'll see what happens. He has played nothing near enough games for any of his stats to be relevant yet this season. 5 games is about as meaningless as one game. I hope we have the opportunity to see close to a full season from him.

Being honest, the best players generally have a more even split in their assisted rate, a player like Cade who gets most of his 2s at an assisted rate of 20% isn't really a good thing. Tatum has an assisted rate of .445 on his 2s. Most of the best ISO players stop at around 35% assisted rate. This is one of the knocks I have on Cade for example. (career assisted rate on his 2s of .241)

Barnes is in the Kawhi mold in terms of tools.

No he isn't. He's both athletically inferior and DRAMATICALLY less proficient as a shooter. They both have power to their game. That's... about the only similarity. And Scottie's taller. As I mentioned earlier, we might have more success looking at him as a 4 than as a perimeter guy.

When I think of tools, i'm mostly thinking of physical tools like height, strength, wingspan, hand size etc (though burst would be there too) hence the Kawhi comparison.

When I think of shooting it's not tools, but more in the skill/talent area.

Funnily enough Kawhi actually didn't come in as a shooter, he was basically remade.

Moving him to another role isn't a bad idea, but neither is giving one more go at seeing where he's at in his development arc, I agree.

Not that far. And that pushes him well into "quality second star" kind of territory, for sure. As ever, I find myself repeating myself, but I think well of Barnes overall and I'm happy he's on our roster. I just don't want him shouldering our primary volume load because he's so far behind the curve for the kind of player who can do that effectively for contention. That's basically my only criticism of Scottie.

Otherwise, he's a highly-versatile player who has a clear and positive impact on our team and plays at both ends. That's a win of a resource, for sure.

I think my main point here is having Barnes as the main guy this season is a win/win. He either proves you wrong in showing he truly has at least 1B potential (Tatum) in which then we are playoff bound above the playin, or he flounders as the main guy in which we reap the possible rewards in the draft and possibly just draft the guy to actually be that player (possible top 5 pick in a weak draft).

Ultimately, my "criticism" of Barnes is that he isn't an ATG offensive player. Because that's what it usually takes to headline a title team. And he will never be that, which is both obvious and also just fine. You can't strike that sort of gold often, and we shouldn't overlook what Scottie does bring just because he isn't that guy. We have some pieces right now, and we need to take the season at least to see how they fit together. His impact on RJ, for example, even setting aside Barnes' own individual production. That could be a big deal.

The vast majority of the time I agree, but there are exceptions, Tatum isn't an ATG offensive player imo, and neither is Garnet. But your point still stands, those cases are rare.

If we can get RJ at 18-20 ppg at +1 - +2% rTS (trying to be conservative here), and Scottie's scoring maybe 22 ppg at league average efficiency (or even at -1% rTS), then we start to look a lot different on O, right? ANd with Scottie bringing back some defense, well, then we have something to talk about. We have a recent title; we can think in different terms than "title or bust," because we already have what like half the league doesn't: a ring. And recently, too. So if we could put together "just" a really good team which consistently exits the first round, that'd be awesome.

Ultimately though you still want to see that there is going to be some type of opportunity to get a title somehow.

Also if we're 'just' a really good team, chances are we're getting past the first round as our record gets us a better seed.

I also think we have better top end talent right now than the Lowry/Derozan Raptors.

I think Barnes easily has the higher ceiling than either DDR or Lowry, and RJ I trust over Derozan playoff wise (which isn't saying too much).

I also think Barnes has the physical tools to excel in a playoff setting more than those 2. Time will tell of course.

Gradey and IQ I see are better starters than what we had back then.

And it looks like we aren't too distant from doing that.

[/quote][/quote]

I'd rather not be the Hawks, Bulls who can consistently make the playoffs but no one cares. I hope our playoff ceiling is higher than that, even if it currently isn't heading into championship territory.

If our core performs well in the playoffs statistically when they get there (doesn't have to be this year) then maybe we can build to something greater.

I believe our first goal should be to aim to be in the Magic/Cavs tier somehow.

Regardless this season is pivotal with the upcoming draft and also seeing how much is real/false on our current roster.

[RoteSchroder]

Fundamentally disagree with the notion that you need an All time great level scorer to win a championship. Motion style team heavy offences get more and more dominant every season and is taking over the league, and the notion that these offences fade in the playoffs will disappear. Boston won the championship last season and had no all time great level scorer, and their player who was closest to that was not good/did not even win finals MVP. Now of course, Boston was just stacked all around, but still is conceptually proof of that.

Do I think Barnes ultimately will need to be paired with a flamethrower who has gravity and can score 25 a night efficiently, capitalizing off of Barnes' ability to be a versatile keystone to an offence? Absolutely I do think that. I don't necessarily believe that that dude scoring 25 a night next to Barnes' 20 will need to be a better player than Barnes though.

Say you got a guy who's dropping 25 on like, high 40s FG and high 30s/low 40s from 3. Then you have Barnes at his peak, probably scoring around the same 20-22 a night he dropped last year, but on increased efficiency, and increased Assist numbers, and hopefully elevated to All NBA Defence level on that end. I think that is a fair hope for Barnes' prime. And I think that player is more impactful.

Two examples I would use are the Pistons (all-time great defense) and 2014 Spurs - a well-balanced two-way team with some of the best team passing and ball-movement I've ever seen. I like teams with great ball-movement over teams where the ball sticks to the all-stars, and this style makes a lot more sense on a team without an all-time great on-ball player, which is why I don't mind Darko and his vision.

Boston might be a little harder to emulate. Their entire starting 5 consists of 2-way players, all capable passers/playmakers, 1-4 are capable ball-handlers, all above average IQ, and all who can hit the 3 ball at a great or elite clip (worst being Jaylen Brown).

Hypothetically, if Scottie gets much better at shot creation (i.e. creating a play for an easy look when the team can't get anything going), tightens up his handles and improves his perimeter shooting, combine that with a strong defensive impact, then of course he can be the best player on a championship team. But given his current improvement rate, it may be tough for him to get there.

[tsherkin]

I wouldn't say he's excelling here, but he's also not a liability either. I'd say he's competent from deep long mid range.

I would not. And certainly not on the basis of a 60-game season. He flashed the J in small volume last year on the long 2 and the 3. It's at odds with his other performances. He was about 5% below league average in 2023 and about 2% below as a rookie, and he hasn't looked any kind of competent from there this year. 60 games doesn't, at least to me, make effective commentary on his overall ability with those 157 games wrapped around that streak.

40% is better than under 30%, he shot nearly 40% his rookie year so i'd wager he'd can do it again, I honestly just want to see some improvement in this area and i'd consider that a win and build upon that.

We'll see. It's possible. 74 games versus 143 games of him not hitting that shot effectively leans away from it, but there, he does at least have the tools.

Being honest, the best players generally have a more even split in their assisted rate, a player like Cade who gets most of his 2s at an assisted rate of 20% isn't really a good thing. Tatum has an assisted rate of .445 on his 2s. Most of the best ISO players stop at around 35% assisted rate. This is one of the knocks I have on Cade for example. (career assisted rate on his 2s of .241)

Cade has a variety of issues, so I'm not sure why he's really in this discussion. Barnes' passing support could use some work. It's a theme for him and Barrett. HIs inability to score efficiently with lesser passing support is yet another reason that he has a lower ceiling IMHO than what many would like to believe. That's what the best in the league do, and he can't, so it's another tier he isn't in danger of reaching at the moment.

When I think of tools, i'm mostly thinking of physical tools like height, strength, wingspan, hand size etc (though burst would be there too) hence the Kawhi comparison.

When I think of shooting it's not tools, but more in the skill/talent area.

Funnily enough Kawhi actually didn't come in as a shooter, he was basically remade.

What? Kawhi hit the league above 77% FT and shooting 37.6% from 3. Then by his second season, he was shooting 51% from 10-16, 42.4% from 16-23 and had another season over 37% from 3. He shot better pretty much from the word go. He certainly worked on his mid-range game, but he also showed dramatic and rapid improvement there.

Meantime, shooting is inescapably a tool. Your ability as a shooter opens or closes many doors in your game. And there is a degree to which natural ability elevates a player beyond what mere work ethic can accomplish in development. Physical dimensions are not the only tools.

Either way, Kawhi's mobility was also a noted difference, but yes, they are in the neighborhood in build.

I think my main point here is having Barnes as the main guy this season is a win/win. He either proves you wrong in showing he truly has at least 1B potential (Tatum) in which then we are playoff bound above the playin, or he flounders as the main guy in which we reap the possible rewards in the draft and possibly just draft the guy to actually be that player (possible top 5 pick in a weak draft).

The chances that he proves himself anything Tatum-like are basically nil. Player development pretty much never works that way, and in Tatum's specific case, he's a dramatically superior shooter to an extent which Barnes will find basically impossible to catch. Lest you forget, Tatum was a 40%+ 3pt shooter at 19 and has been maintaining acceptable percentages on very large volume from primarily above the break. Scottie's got nothing on escalating to that level of play. Tatum is the wrong example.

As I said though, this is specifically a reasonable year for experimentation. With him and with Barrett, we may as well see what we have. But we should be thinking about what's next.

The vast majority of the time I agree, but there are exceptions, Tatum isn't an ATG offensive player imo, and neither is Garnet. But your point still stands, those cases are rare.

There are some arguments that Garnett actually IS an ATG offensive player on the basis of his playmaking and his RAPM and all that, but that's an aside. Garnett was also a DPOY who scaled down his volume and fit alongside some other guys to win a title quite handily. He had other tools and other uses and abilities which outstripped Scottie's.

Tatum in the RS has been a 27.6 ppg, 8.1 rpg, 4.6 apg guy on 59.2% TS, on about 103 TS+, and escalating. He was at +0.4% rTS in 2021, and subsequently +1.2, +2.6, +2.4 and is rocking +3.5.

Kobe's prime was +3% rTS, for some point of comparison. Tatum is heavily dependent upon 3pt shooting, so he withers up his own behind in the playoffs at times (like all of last postseason), but he's still quite a good player. And Boston has a degree of talent depth which is exceptionally rare to match and takes years of asset acquisition and luck.

Ultimately though you still want to see that there is going to be some type of opportunity to get a title somehow.

If it's an option.

But again, the number of times you win a title without a top-5 player is very small. In the past 4.5 decades or so, it's really only happened like 4 times. The 89 and 90 Pistons, the 04 Pistons and the 2024 Celtics.

I also think we have better top end talent right now than the Lowry/Derozan Raptors.

Doesn't look like it so far to me.

I think Barnes easily has the higher ceiling than either DDR or Lowry, and RJ I trust over Derozan playoff wise (which isn't saying too much).

I think Barnes' theoretical ceiling is higher than DDR, for sure. Lowry, depends heavily on his offensive development. And RJ, well, we have to SEE him in the playoffs first. He hasn't even proven it in the RS yet, though there's time still for that to happen.

I'd rather not be the Hawks, Bulls who can consistently make the playoffs but no one cares. I hope our playoff ceiling is higher than that, even if it currently isn't heading into championship territory.

I'd rather be a consistent playoff team winning rounds than a team that is out of the playoffs more often than not, personally. I'd love for Tank Nation to STFU and I'd love to have us on the right side of .500 with a chance at a series victory every season. Losing sucks.

I believe our first goal should be to aim to be in the Magic/Cavs tier somehow.

Gotta have players comparable to their focal guys first.

Regardless this season is pivotal with the upcoming draft and also seeing how much is real/false on our current roster.

This, I"m with. We aren't gonna get Flagg; we get screwed in the draft basically every time, so I refuse to be optimistic about that at all. But this season will reveal a lot more about what we do and do not have, and that's relevant and important. And maybe we'll get someone useful in the draft too.

[tsherkin]

Fundamentally disagree with the notion that you need an All time great level scorer to win a championship.

Don't misquote me. I said "offensive player" for a reason. He doesn't need to go chasing scoring titles.

Motion style team heavy offences get more and more dominant every season and is taking over the league, and the notion that these offences fade in the playoffs will disappear. Boston won the championship last season and had no all time great level scorer, and their player who was closest to that was not good/did not even win finals MVP. Now of course, Boston was just stacked all around, but still is conceptually proof of that.

Boston didn't win because of their offense so much. They won on the back of their defense, and very good distribution on offense. So even with their focal volume scorer stinking like a corpse rotting in the heat, they had enough. They were good enough that even with that from Tatum, they were the 3rd-best offense in the playoffs. But they were also the 3rd-best defense. And it's worth mentioning that the East was a cakewalk, although they are hardly unique in NBA history for enjoying an easy route to the Finals. They did enjoy watching Dallas dry up from 3, though.

Do I think Barnes ultimately will need to be paired with a flamethrower who has gravity and can score 25 a night efficiently, capitalizing off of Barnes' ability to be a versatile keystone to an offence? Absolutely I do think that. I don't necessarily believe that that dude scoring 25 a night next to Barnes' 20 will need to be a better player than Barnes though.

Will he necessarily be as versatile? No. If he's halfway competent on D, though, then he probably will have more juice as an offensive player overall. Will that make him better than Barnes? Kind of depends on his defensive value and the efficacy of that scoring, and how much of it he can do on his own versus whilst being set up, right? That said, 25+ ppg scorers who can score efficiently do not grow on trees. They are a premium player type in the league for a reason.

Say you got a guy who's dropping 25 on like, high 40s FG and high 30s/low 40s from 3. Then you have Barnes at his peak, probably scoring around the same 20-22 a night he dropped last year, but on increased efficiency, and increased Assist numbers, and hopefully elevated to All NBA Defence level on that end. I think that is a fair hope for Barnes' prime. And I think that player is more impactful.

Again, though, that assumes a Barnes which does not yet exist. I do agree that Barnes at even league average efficiency starts to look a lot better than he is now. But it's an inescapable truth that you need to be a competent scorer, and if you're struggling this badly on lower volume, it does put a cap on your utility to a contending team in a more featured role. Keep in mind that Barnes isn't the guy who is routinely breaking down the defense to create shots, right? If he were a more mobile guy, attacking effectively to shuffle the D and create looks for his teammates, this might be a little different a conversation.

I also do think we'd need a special big man for this type of set up to really be a championship level team. But not necessarily better than Barnes, and not an all time great level scorer. But someone who can anchor a great defence, be switchable, get you 18 a night on high efficiency, command some level of respect behind the arc, be a lob threat/and great at getting easy buckets.

Sure. Another high-value guy, though. And another uncommon-at-best player type. You're essentially talking about Gobert with a 3, and now what you're doing is showcasing the rapidly-rising level of talent one requires around Barnes in order to fashion a potential contender. The lower the bar on your focal guy, the more talent you need around him, the less likely it is with the present cap situation, etc.

[XTC]

This thread has too much doom and gloom, let's try to cheer this place up. Yes Scottie has struggled to start the year off, but he's coming off a hand injury, and now an eye injury. After time off it takes time to get into a groove. To reiterate I'm not defending his play, but at the end of the day while struggling he's still averaging 18.7/6.8/6.2/2.0/0.5 (PER36 that's 20.6/7.5/6.8/2.2/0.6) with a PER of 18.1 and a BPM of 3.1... If you take out the very first Cavs game he's averaging 20.6/7.0/6.4/2.4/0.6 (PER36 that's 21.8/7.4/6.8/0.7) and I bet his PER would be better than 20, and his BPM would be higher than 5.

We've seen what Scottie can do in the past... I mean just last season he started off the year in his first 31 games averaging 21/9/6 on 39% shooting from 3 on 6 attempts per game. If this is the worst Scottie's going to be, I can't wait until he breaks out this year. I'm standing by my predictions he's going to end up averaging 22/8/6 with 3 stocks by years end.

[XTC]

This thread has too much doom and gloom, let's try to cheer this place up. Yes Scottie has struggled to start the year off, but he's coming off a hand injury, and now an eye injury. After time off it takes time to get into a groove. To reiterate I'm not defending his play, but at the end of the day while struggling he's still averaging 18.7/6.8/6.2/2.0/0.5 (PER36 that's 20.6/7.5/6.8/2.2/0.6) with a PER of 18.1 and a BPM of 3.1... If you take out the very first Cavs game he's averaging 20.6/7.0/6.4/2.4/0.6 (PER36 that's 21.8/7.4/6.8/0.7) and I bet his PER would be better than 20, and his BPM would be higher than 5.

We've seen what Scottie can do in the past... I mean just last season he started off the year in his first 31 games averaging 21/9/6 on 39% shooting from 3 on 6 attempts per game. If this is the worst Scottie's going to be, I can't wait until he breaks out this year. I'm standing by my predictions he's going to end up averaging 22/8/6 with 3 stocks by years end.

I'm also going to say this until the end... when you have a player like Scottie Barnes your center cannot be a guy like Poeltl. It takes away his space, and neutralizes his best attribute which is passing.

In the 23/24 season here are Scottie's splits with Poeltl on and off the floor.

PER36 Barnes with Poeltl
19.4/8.3/6.4

PER36 Barnes without Poeltl
21.3/8.6/6.2

So far in this young season the same trend is continuing.

PER36 Barnes with Poeltl
17.8/8.9/8.5

PER36 Barnes without Poeltl
23.2/8.3/5.2

Heres the kicker... last season Barnes attempted 18% of his shots within 3 feet of the basket when Poeltl was on the floor... When Poeltl was off the floor 24% of his shots where within 3 feet of the basket. I know it's early, but this is a trend I noticed last year. Barnes cannot get to the rim with Poeltl on the floor, and he becomes passive.

***Edit***

23/24 Scottie w/Olynyk on the court and no Poeltl
22.7/11.4/11.0

Small sample size, but you can see what happens when Scottie actually has room to operate.

[Appostis]

The Scotty haters are out in full force in the PGT

[Scase]

Overall I'm not concerned about Scotties start this year, recovering from hand surgery, and a broken orbital bone is going to impact his play. That said, I want to see him focusing less on the 3, and more on getting in the paint, but realistically I don't know how shy he will be about that due to his eye. Last night was a great example as to how that can go wrong from a basic rebound.

To which again I ask, why tf isn't he wearing a mask.

That said, the same asterisks for RJ should be placed on Scottie, without an actual (reasonably) healthy team around him/them, there are going to be limits to their efficiency. That said, we are pretty much healthy aside from IQ, BB/KO don't count as they have little to no real impact (comparatively) and over the coming month, barring any new major injuries, I expect to see both of them slowly improving.

Scottie may be inefficient as a scorer, but at least his defence is still on point, so he'll always have that to coast on as a back up when the other side of the game isn't going well. Being able to pull down 7 boards putting up 6+ assists and a decent amount of stocks still gives him a lot of value on the court. But man, does this team ever need a real scoring threat.

If we can some how manage to get Bailey, I am fine with Masai starting to make moves to win now, but without that level of scorer we need to continue to eat ****, cause none of BBQ are going to give us what we need. Unless GD takes a huge continued leap.

[tsherkin]

This thread has too much doom and gloom, let's try to cheer this place up. Yes Scottie has struggled to start the year off, but he's coming off a hand injury, and now an eye injury. After time off it takes time to get into a groove. To reiterate I'm not defending his play, but at the end of the day while struggling he's still averaging 18.7/6.8/6.2/2.0/0.5 (PER36 that's 20.6/7.5/6.8/2.2/0.6) with a PER of 18.1 and a BPM of 3.1... If you take out the very first Cavs game he's averaging 20.6/7.0/6.4/2.4/0.6 (PER36 that's 21.8/7.4/6.8/0.7) and I bet his PER would be better than 20, and his BPM would be higher than 5.

I think, setting aside other remarks, he clearly has a lot to give us. He moves the ball well, he rebounds well, he defends well. Scoring is his primary issue, that and putting good pressure on the defense with movement. But even independent of those things, he's already a good, useful player. He's also young, and has room to grow in those areas.

Scottie's good stuff. As far as "doom and gloom," it's usually to offset exaggerated optimism, but I think we can all agree that Scottie was a good get who is productive and valuable for our team with his versatility. And that his specific performance early this season is way too early to judge after extended time away due to injuries.

[ForeverTFC]

This thread has too much doom and gloom, let's try to cheer this place up. Yes Scottie has struggled to start the year off, but he's coming off a hand injury, and now an eye injury. After time off it takes time to get into a groove. To reiterate I'm not defending his play, but at the end of the day while struggling he's still averaging 18.7/6.8/6.2/2.0/0.5 (PER36 that's 20.6/7.5/6.8/2.2/0.6) with a PER of 18.1 and a BPM of 3.1... If you take out the very first Cavs game he's averaging 20.6/7.0/6.4/2.4/0.6 (PER36 that's 21.8/7.4/6.8/0.7) and I bet his PER would be better than 20, and his BPM would be higher than 5.

We've seen what Scottie can do in the past... I mean just last season he started off the year in his first 31 games averaging 21/9/6 on 39% shooting from 3 on 6 attempts per game. If this is the worst Scottie's going to be, I can't wait until he breaks out this year. I'm standing by my predictions he's going to end up averaging 22/8/6 with 3 stocks by years end.

I really don't think it's doom and gloom. This is a re-building year and I think we're all trying to figure out what the future of the team looks like. Scottie is a stat-sheet stuffer for sure, no one doubts that. But we now have 3+ years of sample that tells us a step change in shooting and handles is unlikely. That closes a few paths for him and us as a team moving forward.

It's worth talking about how difficult it will be to build a team around Scottie given his limitations. There are only so many ways you can take this if he is THE focal point. He should be a big part moving forward for sure, but if I'm in the FO, I'm advocating for a more agnostic approach to team building than what they've signaled to us this year.

[AbC?]

Barnes strikes me as one of those guys who will have a lot of success on his second team where his role will match his skillset. It's hard for guys dubbed the face of the franchise to accept a lesser role on their original team. The change of scenery would allow him to accept a tertiary role.

Similar to Bosh/Aaron Gordon/Holiday/Love etc. A couple of those guys were way better than he is now too and accepted lesser roles behind better players.

[Naysorn]

Barnes strikes me as one of those guys who will have a lot of success on his second team where his role will match his skillset. It's hard for guys dubbed the face of the franchise to accept a lesser role on their original team. The change of scenery would allow him to accept a tertiary role.

Similar to Bosh/Aaron Gordon/Holiday/Love etc. A couple of those guys were way better than he is now too and accepted lesser roles behind better players.

what if our FO also seems him as a #2 on a title team?

[tdotrep2]

A lot of sobering in this thread, I reckon it's because a lot of people thought he could be a number one scoring option. He is not that guy, never has been. He could still easily become an elite player, a guy who can give you 20+ that does everything else extremely well & hopefully run some sort of offense through.

[Scase]

I think you'd be hard pressed to find anyone suggesting Scottie could be a number one scoring option, but rather a number one offensive option.

[tsherkin]

I think you'd be hard pressed to find anyone suggesting Scottie could be a number one scoring option, but rather a number one offensive option.

I think that if you aren't an efficient scorer, it becomes very much more difficult to be a quality primary offensive focal point. Particularly since he isn't a speedster or an elite burst athlete. What he does on O takes time. He has vision and technical passing ability, but he isn't Magic Johnson (even setting aside Magic's ludicrously-efficient scoring).

He's missing too much to be a focal option right now and I don't think he projects that way either, to be honest. He's slow, he's a non-elite shooter (actually not very good as a shooter in general at range at the moment still). He is patient, though, and he's strong, so he absorbs contact well. He has good vision for cutters and guys diving in when he gets past his initial defender, which is good. He uses and sets screens well. If he could get any kind of good at that elbow jumper, it's there for him around every high screen he ever takes, but he's not Kawhi or Shai. An area for potential improvement, though. His handle is looking a little better, which is somewhat encouraging. His pocket passing has been good and I like watching him handle in transition.

But ultimately we aren't looking at the picture of a guy who puts huge pressure on a defense, particularly because his own scoring is still so limp. It's sort of the Jason Kidd effect, only with less handles and playmaking, obviously (not that "not being Jason Kidd" is a criticism, mind).

It's hard to look at someone who isn't a serious scoring threat even if they traditionally don't smash it in volume and consider them a truly elite number one. Even Kidd suffered for his own weaknesses as a scorer in that arena. He made it up in New Jersey in a weak East on a team with more depth and structure than most anyone else in the conference, of course, and he was an excellent rebounder and defender (kind of like Scottie). And he was able to get where he wanted to go on the floor, he just had finishing issues, so his ability to attack and apply that pressure was more significant, coupled to his vision and passing of course.

Scottie still projects as a quality #2 in my mind. I struggle to envision a good offense with him at the helm taking a lot of shots without some significant changes in his ability (though again, 6 games or whatever into the season, we'll see what this year brings).

[Scase]

I think you'd be hard pressed to find anyone suggesting Scottie could be a number one scoring option, but rather a number one offensive option.

I think that if you aren't an efficient scorer, it becomes very much more difficult to be a quality primary offensive focal point. Particularly since he isn't a speedster or an elite burst athlete. What he does on O takes time. He has vision and technical passing ability, but he isn't Magic Johnson (even setting aside Magic's ludicrously-efficient scoring).

He's missing too much to be a focal option right now and I don't think he projects that way either, to be honest. He's slow, he's a non-elite shooter (actually not very good as a shooter in general at range at the moment still). He is patient, though, and he's strong, so he absorbs contact well. He has good vision for cutters and guys diving in when he gets past his initial defender, which is good. He uses and sets screens well. If he could get any kind of good at that elbow jumper, it's there for him around every high screen he ever takes, but he's not Kawhi or Shai. An area for potential improvement, though. His handle is looking a little better, which is somewhat encouraging. His pocket passing has been good and I like watching him handle in transition.

But ultimately we aren't looking at the picture of a guy who puts huge pressure on a defense, particularly because his own scoring is still so limp. It's sort of the Jason Kidd effect, only with less handles and playmaking, obviously (not that "not being Jason Kidd" is a criticism, mind).

It's hard to look at someone who isn't a serious scoring threat even if they traditionally don't smash it in volume and consider them a truly elite number one. Even Kidd suffered for his own weaknesses as a scorer in that arena. He made it up in New Jersey in a weak East on a team with more depth and structure than most anyone else in the conference, of course, and he was an excellent rebounder and defender (kind of like Scottie). And he was able to get where he wanted to go on the floor, he just had finishing issues, so his ability to attack and apply that pressure was more significant, coupled to his vision and passing of course.

Scottie still projects as a quality #2 in my mind. I struggle to envision a good offense with him at the helm taking a lot of shots without some significant changes in his ability (though again, 6 games or whatever into the season, we'll see what this year brings).

I suspect he will be an average efficiency scorer, which will be enough pressure on defences to allow him more freedom to run the offence at a high level. But I think a mid range game is what he needs above anything else, he's shown flashes of the proper technique, but he's gotta focus on that, and realizing he's really quite strong. If he can hone in on being a paint bully he will have to be doubled, which leaves the rest of the team to run free, cause you know he will find the best option 9/10 times.

But until he's able to get one of those 2 at a solid level, it's all potential. Call him a #2 or a #1, doesn't matter much to me as he's not a #1 scorer, and we will need one if we want to make any sort of noise. I just think with everything else he does in his game, he's going to draw a lot of opposing defences and he's smart and talented enough to make them pay when they do. He just needs to give them a reason to double him lol.

[tsherkin]

I suspect he will be an average efficiency scorer, which will be enough pressure on defences to allow him more freedom to run the offence at a high level. But I think a mid range game is what he needs above anything else, he's shown flashes of the proper technique, but he's gotta focus on that, and realizing he's really quite strong. If he can hone in on being a paint bully he will have to be doubled, which leaves the rest of the team to run free, cause you know he will find the best option 9/10 times.

But until he's able to get one of those 2 at a solid level, it's all potential. Call him a #2 or a #1, doesn't matter much to me as he's not a #1 scorer, and we will need one if we want to make any sort of noise. I just think with everything else he does in his game, he's going to draw a lot of opposing defences and he's smart and talented enough to make them pay when they do. He just needs to give them a reason to double him lol.

There are several pathways to him improving his efficiency, yes. I'm just waiting to see if it will happen.

I would love to see him develop a mid-range game, yes. It's there for him and he has the physical tools to excel there. In general, I just want to be happy as he develops and grows. It's frustrating to get someone with the physical tools who takes a year and a day to show meaningful signs of improvement on O, but is flashing improvement in enough other areas that you know he's putting in the work.

He's clearly much more effective when the 3 and that elbow jumper are falling. So we'll see what this season brings. This Pistons game is a fun watch because his J IS falling.

[GreatWhiteStiff]

This thread has too much doom and gloom, let's try to cheer this place up. Yes Scottie has struggled to start the year off, but he's coming off a hand injury, and now an eye injury. After time off it takes time to get into a groove. To reiterate I'm not defending his play, but at the end of the day while struggling he's still averaging 18.7/6.8/6.2/2.0/0.5 (PER36 that's 20.6/7.5/6.8/2.2/0.6) with a PER of 18.1 and a BPM of 3.1... If you take out the very first Cavs game he's averaging 20.6/7.0/6.4/2.4/0.6 (PER36 that's 21.8/7.4/6.8/0.7) and I bet his PER would be better than 20, and his BPM would be higher than 5.

We've seen what Scottie can do in the past... I mean just last season he started off the year in his first 31 games averaging 21/9/6 on 39% shooting from 3 on 6 attempts per game. If this is the worst Scottie's going to be, I can't wait until he breaks out this year. I'm standing by my predictions he's going to end up averaging 22/8/6 with 3 stocks by years end.

BTW all of this is better than we could've expected when we took Barnes vs Suggs and thought Barnes would be a pretty limited offensive player with physical tools and good passing and defensive potential. I think he's already hit or exceeded what a lot of people would've predicted (and vastly outproduced what his cynics might've imagines) what was his likely peak level of predicted performance if you're pickin'up what I'm laying down.