Official RJ Barrett Thread

[YogurtProducer]

RJ's TS% is up to 54.6, not too far off from league average for guards and wings now who range from 55.5-57% at those positions.

Volume scoring below league average isn't going to help us develop a high-end offense.

Did it with Demar for years tbh

[YogurtProducer]

I will never know what to make of this dude longterm. If he could just play some **** Defence he would be such an asset but idk how you win longterm with a Gradey/RJ wing duo defensively.

They don't both have to start or play together for significant minutes.

Longterm our team will look so different come compete time it is hardly worth worrying.

2014 ---> 2019 we went from

Lowry ---> Lowry
Ross ---> Green
Demar ---> Kawhi
Amir ---> Siakam
JV ---> Gasol
Vasquez ---> FVV
Salmons ---> Powell
Patterson ---> Anunoby
Hansbrough ---> Ibaka

Really no point worrying how it will work in 5 years when realistically Barnes is the only who "probably" is still here when it really matters

[YogurtProducer]

RJ since Barnes return...

24.7/6.2/5.7 on .538/.400/.686 (62.0TS%)

Just an infinitely better player when he can play off better guys.

[tsherkin]

Did it with Demar for years tbh

In only two of those seasons was Demar scoring even 20 ppg, topping out at 22.7 ppg. Not quite the volume I was talking about. Also, He was below average efficiency from 2011-2015, and again, in only two seasons was he scoring more than the teens.

During that stretch, we were 20th, 29th, 13th, 10th and 4th on offense.

And in 2015, when we were 4th, we did it primarily with low turnover rate and high draw rate, and being 2nd in the league in FT%. They we got the crap kicked out of us by the Wizards because DDR, Lou Will and Lowry all sucked ass at scoring efficiently against them and Washington's offense ran roughshod all over us.

In 2016 as the 5th-ranked O, Lowry scored over 21 ppg for us at 107 TS+. Demar was above average that year. We again smashed it in draw rate and ball protection, but we were also 5th in 3P%, which helped offset that DDR and Lowry were both several percent below league average inside the arc. A year later, down to 6th, then up to 2nd in 2018 as we really began to leverage the 3, and had Ibaka and Jonas, Siakam, OG, etc.

Demar's scoring wasn't really awesome for us. His main contribution is that he typically ended possessions by going to the line or taking a jumper, so there wasn't a lot of lost possessions from him in the sense of actual turnovers. Just DRBS turning into opponent offense, mostly. He floated mid volume for us, outside of 2017. So it was tolerable, a component of our strategy. ANd he was also typically at or above league average, rather than below.

That's not really what I would call "[v]olume scoring below league average," which was my actual remark.

When he was below league-average efficiency, we weren't a high-end offense. And he wasn't scoring in large volume anyway. And then we started to add tons of peripheral pieces without pushing him to scoring 25+, so we could deal with it. Other guys who were a lot more efficient about scoring helped raise our team efficiency, and Demar contributed by not turning it over and floating some volume, while drawing fouls well.

[tsherkin]

RJ since Barnes return...

24.7/6.2/5.7 on .538/.400/.686 (62.0TS%)

Just an infinitely better player when he can play off better guys.

Very much so.

[ItsDanger]

If he's a better player playing off better guys, maybe Raps should acquire at least 1 more of these better guys?

[Shwaguy]

The players aren't going to lose on purpose though.

[YogurtProducer]

Did it with Demar for years tbh

In only two of those seasons was Demar scoring even 20 ppg, topping out at 22.7 ppg. Not quite the volume I was talking about. Also, He was below average efficiency from 2011-2015, and again, in only two seasons was he scoring more than the teens.

During that stretch, we were 20th, 29th, 13th, 10th and 4th on offense.

And in 2015, when we were 4th, we did it primarily with low turnover rate and high draw rate, and being 2nd in the league in FT%. They we got the crap kicked out of us by the Wizards because DDR, Lou Will and Lowry all sucked ass at scoring efficiently against them and Washington's offense ran roughshod all over us.

In 2016 as the 5th-ranked O, Lowry scored over 21 ppg for us at 107 TS+. Demar was above average that year. We again smashed it in draw rate and ball protection, but we were also 5th in 3P%, which helped offset that DDR and Lowry were both several percent below league average inside the arc. A year later, down to 6th, then up to 2nd in 2018 as we really began to leverage the 3, and had Ibaka and Jonas, Siakam, OG, etc.

Demar's scoring wasn't really awesome for us. His main contribution is that he typically ended possessions by going to the line or taking a jumper, so there wasn't a lot of lost possessions from him in the sense of actual turnovers. Just DRBS turning into opponent offense, mostly. He floated mid volume for us, outside of 2017. So it was tolerable, a component of our strategy. ANd he was also typically at or above league average, rather than below.

That's not really what I would call "[v]olume scoring below league average," which was my actual remark.

When he was below league-average efficiency, we weren't a high-end offense. And he wasn't scoring in large volume anyway. And then we started to add tons of peripheral pieces without pushing him to scoring 25+, so we could deal with it. Other guys who were a lot more efficient about scoring helped raise our team efficiency, and Demar contributed by not turning it over and floating some volume, while drawing fouls well.

I never said Demars scoring was awesome for us, but we did have a good offence in spite of Demar providing below average efficiency is what I was trying to say.

Demars TS+ was 98, 95, 102, 100, 100 during our 5 years of making the playoffs with. That is average at best, and below average in 2 other years.

RJ so far was 106 last year (SSS alert), and is 95 this year which I expect will climb as long as he does not have to play significant minutes with Shead/Mogbo/Fernando type lineups again as we regain our health. Little to early to conclude he is even going to be a "below league average" guy for us yet when a lot of the evidence suggests he is going to be above (102 TS+ as a Raptor in his career 50 games, and I would guess at least half of those were without Scottie).

[YogurtProducer]

If he's a better player playing off better guys, maybe Raps should acquire at least 1 more of these better guys?

Holy **** Danger, did you just crack the code of team building?

All along we were all sitting here saying we should stop acquiring better players, but thankfully you can see the correct path. Wow. Thanks for that.

[tsherkin]

I never said Demars scoring was awesome for us, but we did have a good offence in spite of Demar providing below average efficiency is what I was trying to say.

Sure, but like I said, he wasn't really scoring in huge volume for us, so the impact of his inefficiency was only so much, particularly coupled to his low turnover rate. And we weren't actually very good on offense (aka not "high end") until 2015, when far more than Demar had changed on the roster. And again, that worked in the main because we had significant depth with contributions in several areas, and because Demar WASN'T volume scoring much of that time.

RJ so far was 106 last year (SSS alert), and is 95 this year which I expect will climb as long as he does not have to play significant minutes with Shead/Mogbo/Fernando type lineups again as we regain our health. Little to early to conclude he is even going to be a "below league average" guy for us yet when a lot of the evidence suggests he is going to be above (102 TS+ as a Raptor in his career 50 games, and I would guess at least half of those were without Scottie).

That all makes sense, yes.

I've been saying for a while that I'm going to be patient with RJ until we see what he's like when we're actually replicating the environment which produced his success with us last year. Scottie being back has helped a ton. Scottie's been back since the 21st, and in that time, RJ has had two horribly craptastic games and 4 very good ones. He's posting almost 25/6/6 over that span, on 62% TS. And he's down to 17.3 FGA/g, compared to 19.8 FGA/g prior. He's 8/15 from 3 over the past 3, so that's a contributing factor, but things are different with Scottie on the floor.

I don't think we're going to see quite 25/6/6 on 62% from RJ on the remainder of the year, but it's a stark difference from what he looks like without Scottie and it's a reasonable indicator that with Barnes on the floor, he's going to look different than his traditional New York self, or how he's been performing year to date.

My initial remarks were entirely focused on the Demar side of things, not to do with RJ.

[brownbobcat]

I never said Demars scoring was awesome for us, but we did have a good offence in spite of Demar providing below average efficiency is what I was trying to say.

Demars TS+ was 98, 95, 102, 100, 100 during our 5 years of making the playoffs with. That is average at best, and below average in 2 other years.

RJ so far was 106 last year (SSS alert), and is 95 this year which I expect will climb as long as he does not have to play significant minutes with Shead/Mogbo/Fernando type lineups again as we regain our health. Little to early to conclude he is even going to be a "below league average" guy for us yet when a lot of the evidence suggests he is going to be above (102 TS+ as a Raptor in his career 50 games, and I would guess at least half of those were without Scottie).

TS+ can be a little misleading sometimes. Obviously DeRozan was not hugely efficient being a mid-range specialist, but he drove a lot of possessions for other guys to find space for efficient shots. The 2015 Raptors were 4th in ORTG while DeRozan and Lowry had below average TS+ numbers. I think concluding that it was a good offensive team in spite of Lowry/DeRozan would be the wrong takeaway.

If you take away RJ's slashing & drives (easier said than done), his lack of shooting gets exposed badly. Barnes has a similar limitation so this is something the team has to figure out if there's any hope of them being a successful 1-2 punch. Somebody has to excel at taking those difficult shots off the dribble and being the release valve.

[YogurtProducer]

I never said Demars scoring was awesome for us, but we did have a good offence in spite of Demar providing below average efficiency is what I was trying to say.

Sure, but like I said, he wasn't really scoring in huge volume for us, so the impact of his inefficiency was only so much, particularly coupled to his low turnover rate. And we weren't actually very good on offense (aka not "high end") until 2015, when far more than Demar had changed on the roster. And again, that worked in the main because we had significant depth with contributions in several areas, and because Demar WASN'T volume scoring much of that time.

My initial remarks were entirely focused on the Demar side of things, not to do with RJ.

All i gotta say to the bolded is... what?

He led our team in shots taken every year he was here.

2014 - 6th in entire NBA in FGA (per game)
2015 - 13th
2016 - 12th
2017 - 2nd
2018 - 13th

Unless I am blatantly missing something, IDK how you can say wasn't volume scoring for us. He was in the top 13 in the ENTIRE NBA every year we were making playoff runs in terms of shots taken per game.

[Vampirate]

I never said Demars scoring was awesome for us, but we did have a good offence in spite of Demar providing below average efficiency is what I was trying to say.

Demars TS+ was 98, 95, 102, 100, 100 during our 5 years of making the playoffs with. That is average at best, and below average in 2 other years.

RJ so far was 106 last year (SSS alert), and is 95 this year which I expect will climb as long as he does not have to play significant minutes with Shead/Mogbo/Fernando type lineups again as we regain our health. Little to early to conclude he is even going to be a "below league average" guy for us yet when a lot of the evidence suggests he is going to be above (102 TS+ as a Raptor in his career 50 games, and I would guess at least half of those were without Scottie).

TS+ can be a little misleading sometimes. Obviously DeRozan was not hugely efficient being a mid-range specialist, but he drove a lot of possessions for other guys to find space for efficient shots. The 2015 Raptors were 4th in ORTG while DeRozan and Lowry had below average TS+ numbers. I think concluding that it was a good offensive team in spite of Lowry/DeRozan would be the wrong takeaway.

If you take away RJ's slashing & drives (easier said than done), his lack of shooting gets exposed badly. Barnes has a similar limitation so this is something the team has to figure out if there's any hope of them being a successful 1-2 punch. Somebody has to excel at taking those difficult shots off the dribble and being the release valve.

15-16 is the year Derozan started to break through as an All Star. That was the year where he started to have at least a 55 TS and his PPG was 5 points higher than his FG on high enough volume.

The years prior, Derozan's TS hovered around 52.

Essentially if you're taking 20 FG a night, you should be getting at least 25 PPG from it to be in All Star territory.

[tsherkin]

TS+ can be a little misleading sometimes. Obviously DeRozan was not hugely efficient being a mid-range specialist, but he drove a lot of possessions for other guys to find space for efficient shots. The 2015 Raptors were 4th in ORTG while DeRozan and Lowry had below average TS+ numbers. I think concluding that it was a good offensive team in spite of Lowry/DeRozan would be the wrong takeaway.

The better phrase would be "in spite of those two scoring inefficiently."

But remember what I said earlier: our team ORTG was driven heavily by possession control and draw rate, things at which Demardid well, and Lowry drew fouls quite well, too. It left the team vulnerable to their inability to actually make shots, of course (particularly since Lowry was an extreme rim-or-3 guy), but on the balance of a season, it produced a well-ranked per-possession rating due to the possession control and extra points.

Then later, we started adding peripheral players who scored efficiently inside the arc, and as a team began to shoot more 3s at a higher percentage, which helped. Obviously, especially when things were clicking in the RS, Demar and Lowry were at the core of our success, driving the action which permitted those peripheral guys to get it done. Lowry even more than Demar in that sense, but even DDR started to improve as a playmaker in his later years with us.

It worked, but it was also a bit of a mirage, because you can't JUST operate with possession control. That will eventually catch up to you, as it routinely did for us.

If you take away RJ's slashing & drives (easier said than done), his lack of shooting gets exposed badly. Barnes has a similar limitation so this is something the team has to figure out if there's any hope of them being a successful 1-2 punch. Somebody has to excel at taking those difficult shots off the dribble and being the release valve.

Yes, but the deciding factor on a lot of teams is how good is the guy doing that? It's a big limitation if that guy can't score efficiently, and it's a demarcation between an AS and an upper-bound star bordering into superstar territory, right?

Demar and Lowry were great for us, stepping back. The Raptors were quite successful in the pre-Kawhi times. Lots of wins, lots of playoff appearances, series victories and stuff. We ran into some pretty high-end competition, too, and some wicked defenses. Clearly, the strategy we employed was workable within certain goal parameters, right?

That was the most successful stretch in franchise history, and we capped it off with the Kawhi trade and a title, which was wild stuff.

[tsherkin]

All i gotta say to the bolded is... what?

He led our team in shots taken every year he was here.

Sure, but he didn't take even 18 FGA/g until 2017. That's a bit picky because he was at 17.8 in 2014, of course.

But that's not a volume that I really look at as pushing the boundary too much.

Unless I am blatantly missing something, IDK how you can say wasn't volume scoring for us. He was in the top 13 in the ENTIRE NBA every year we were making playoff runs in terms of shots taken per game.

I don't consider < 20 FGA/g to be volume scoring. He was certainly our lead shot taker, but he wasn't pumping huge volume and he wasn't shooting an absurd percentage of our shots. It wasn't until 2016 and later that his usage got up to crazy rates. He was a 25.7% USG guy for us.

His FGA36 from 11-18:

11: 14.6
12: 14.7
13: 14.7
14: 16.8
15: 17.0
16: 17.7
17: 21.2
18: 18.8

The bulk of that isn't any sort of consequential volume, IMHO. It's regular stuff. There is one year there where he was going bananas and then the year after still supporting significant usage. Perhaps this is a semantic difference for us, but I don't consider 16 or 17 FGA/g noteworthy.

[YogurtProducer]

All i gotta say to the bolded is... what?

He led our team in shots taken every year he was here.

Sure, but he didn't take even 18 FGA/g until 2017. That's a bit picky because he was at 17.8 in 2014, of course.

But that's not a volume that I really look at as pushing the boundary too much.

Unless I am blatantly missing something, IDK how you can say wasn't volume scoring for us. He was in the top 13 in the ENTIRE NBA every year we were making playoff runs in terms of shots taken per game.

I don't consider < 20 FGA/g to be volume scoring. He was certainly our lead shot taker, but he wasn't pumping huge volume and he wasn't shooting an absurd percentage of our shots. It wasn't until 2016 and later that his usage got up to crazy rates. He was a 25.7% USG guy for us.

His FGA36 from 11-18:

11: 14.6
12: 14.7
13: 14.7
14: 16.8
15: 17.0
16: 17.7
17: 21.2
18: 18.8

The bulk of that isn't any sort of consequential volume, IMHO. It's regular stuff. There is one year there where he was going bananas and then the year after still supporting significant usage. Perhaps this is a semantic difference for us, but I don't consider 16 or 17 FGA/g noteworthy.

20FGA is the threshold? That is like a threshold 1 or 2 players a year crosses (well, during Demars time here at least. Nowadays is a bit more inflated).

But IDK man - Demar was 100% a volume scorer from 2014 to 2018 and I find it crazy to even debate that. I think you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who would say the top 15 guys in the league in attempts AREN'T volume scorers. Demar was even worse because IIRC, he was constantly near the bottom of the list of guys who were 1st options in terms of playmaking and efficiency. He was the definition of a "volume scorer" AKA he did nothing else but score, and even then he only scored on volume and not with any sort of efficiency.

TLDR - those Raptors offenses were good IN SPITE of Demar. If we had even an average 1st option (rather than one of the leagues worst) that team might have been a true contender pre-Kawhi. Unfortunately, Demar was just a horrible 1st option.

[PushDaRock]

RJ's TS% is up to 54.6, not too far off from league average for guards and wings now who range from 55.5-57% at those positions.

Volume scoring below league average isn't going to help us develop a high-end offense.

The assisted 2's are now up to 37.8% from 29% at one point while his efficiency has also gone up since. It's looking like he probably can be an efficient player when he has another creator out there to share the burden like Scottie. IQ coming back should only help him out.

When he is supported by others and not creating everything, that's our best look for him, yes. That's a big part of why he was so dramatically different last year versus previously in New York or to date this season. So it's something we should continue to support. More of RJ in the corner will be good, too. He's WELL below his average there in terms of proportion of his shots, and that isn't helping him at all.

Nobody is saying we should settle for below average efficiency, only that he is trending right again now after getting down to 49% TS at one point.

I think "supported by others" is too broad as far as assisted FG's go. If he attacks a close out off a pass and scores a lay-up, that's still assisted. If he makes a catch and shoot jumper, same thing. But, one obviously isn't like the other. I think the key is more that we want to get RJ in motion with a running start for his drives rather than having him initiate from a stand still. Technically those are still assisted when he's coming off a curl screen or ball cut and gets to the rim but he's so much more effective off those as it allows him to get downhill easier.

[TheRealDeal]

Read on Twitter

?s=46&t=8Evds9QVC4TEL0DTgBuPLg

[canada_dry]

RJ's TS% is up to 54.6, not too far off from league average for guards and wings now who range from 55.5-57% at those positions.

The assisted 2's are now up to 37.8% from 29% at one point while his efficiency has also gone up since. It's looking like he probably can be an efficient player when he has another creator out there to share the burden like Scottie. IQ coming back should only help him out.

What a shock.

Who could have predicted that.



Sent from my SM-G960W using RealGM Forums mobile app

[tsherkin]

20FGA is the threshold? That is like a threshold 1 or 2 players a year crosses (well, during Demars time here at least. Nowadays is a bit more inflated).

But IDK man - Demar was 100% a volume scorer from 2014 to 2018 and I find it crazy to even debate that. I think you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who would say the top 15 guys in the league in attempts AREN'T volume scorers. Demar was even worse because IIRC, he was constantly near the bottom of the list of guys who were 1st options in terms of playmaking and efficiency. He was the definition of a "volume scorer" AKA he did nothing else but score, and even then he only scored on volume and not with any sort of efficiency.

I hear you, I can appreciate your argument, I just don't agree with the semantics. We used Demar as a first option scorer. He wasn't a stunner at it. Everyone knows that, agrees about it, for sure. I was vocally not a fan of Demar at the time and I haven't changed my mind on that characterization.

I just don't think that as a first option, he was shooting too much most seasons. I thought he was a limited piece we used in a broader offensive attack because we needed someone to float the volume and no one else had the tools to step up. And I don't generally consider like 20 ppg volume of note.

TLDR - those Raptors offenses were good IN SPITE of Demar. If we had even an average 1st option (rather than one of the leagues worst) that team might have been a true contender pre-Kawhi. Unfortunately, Demar was just a horrible 1st option.

Can't say I disagree here, sure.

Understand, our argument right now is more about the semantics than the broader concept. I didn't enjoy having Demar as our focal option. I don't think he was a good one. I think that it's also easy to forget how long it took him to develop certain parts of his game. PAssing was not his forte for years at the start, for example. And he was hugely jumper-reliant with no 3 and a declining proportion of shots at the rim with a massive emphasis on long twos. Never really developed a 3 with us, always fell back on bad habits in the playoffs, etc.

Like, I am most certainly not arguing with you that he was not an ideal first option. Literally our only contention right now is over specific phrasing. In my head, his volume held us back, but wasn't huge enough to stop us from being a decent to good offense most seasons, the rest of the roster pending. We were pretty good on O with him for a couple seasons because we had a well-distributed offense. We could have been MUCH better if he'd been replaced, of course.

Nobody is saying we should settle for below average efficiency, only that he is trending right again now after getting down to 49% TS at one point.

Yes. And? I agree that he's trending well. I said as much, I've been waiting for Scottie to be back and hoping for IQ and Gradey to come back swiftly so we can see what RJ might look like if we were using him as we did last season.

I think "supported by others" is too broad as far as assisted FG's go. If he attacks a close out off a pass and scores a lay-up, that's still assisted. If he makes a catch and shoot jumper, same thing. But, one obviously isn't like the other. I think the key is more that we want to get RJ in motion with a running start for his drives rather than having him initiate from a stand still. Technically those are still assisted when he's coming off a curl screen or ball cut and gets to the rim but he's so much more effective off those as it allows him to get downhill easier.

Yes, using him to attack off-ball instead of having him attack with a live dribble is a feature component of what I want. That and more corner 3s.