Official RJ Barrett Thread Part 2

[Vampirate]

I don't disagree with the latter statement, but isn't that exactly what point forward would be? Cause calling him a PG makes no sense, but point forward certainly does.

I don't see the difference, tbh.

Not to mention, the Magic example is also a poor one, he was a big who not only played the PG role, but played like a PG. Scottie doesn't play like that, he doesn't have the skill set outside passing to match a PG. He has no dribble drive game, he doesn't have particularly good handles, he's not very agile or fast. He's pretty much a PF who has a very good passing game.

Yes, all of his rebounding and postplay made him look a lot like a guard... Magic was much better, for sure, but Scottie handles it on the break, advances the ball about the court in slower settings, initiates PnR, etc. These are all the same basic functions.

Any player can initiate a PnR, I've seen precious take the ball up in slow settings, and so on. The lines are definitely more blurred than ever, but very few people would look at Scottie and confuse him for a PG. He's certainly cosplaying as one though, none of this is a criticism of him, but it just doesn't stick for me. He can't guard or break down an opposing PG, he can't handle like one, his offensive game does not resemble a PG.

You can argue that any player can be any position, but it's efficacy that matters, taking a bunch of 3's and not playing in the post doesn't make you a PG if you aren't very good at it. Taking a bunch 3's doesn't make you a 3 point specialist, making them does.

Jokic is a better playmaker than 99% of the NBAs PGs, he facilitates the offence pretty much every second he's on the court, yet no one would ever call him a PG.

You don't need many dribble moves when you can just pass over players since you are 7 feet tall lol.

[YogurtProducer]

I don't disagree with the latter statement, but isn't that exactly what point forward would be? Cause calling him a PG makes no sense, but point forward certainly does.

I don't see the difference, tbh.

Not to mention, the Magic example is also a poor one, he was a big who not only played the PG role, but played like a PG. Scottie doesn't play like that, he doesn't have the skill set outside passing to match a PG. He has no dribble drive game, he doesn't have particularly good handles, he's not very agile or fast. He's pretty much a PF who has a very good passing game.

Yes, all of his rebounding and postplay made him look a lot like a guard... Magic was much better, for sure, but Scottie handles it on the break, advances the ball about the court in slower settings, initiates PnR, etc. These are all the same basic functions.

Any player can initiate a PnR, I've seen precious take the ball up in slow settings, and so on. The lines are definitely more blurred than ever, but very few people would look at Scottie and confuse him for a PG. He's certainly cosplaying as one though, none of this is a criticism of him, but it just doesn't stick for me. He can't guard or break down an opposing PG, he can't handle like one, his offensive game does not resemble a PG.

You can argue that any player can be any position, but it's efficacy that matters, taking a bunch of 3's and not playing in the post doesn't make you a PG if you aren't very good at it. Taking a bunch 3's doesn't make you a 3 point specialist, making them does.

Jokic is a better playmaker than 99% of the NBAs PGs, he facilitates the offence pretty much every second he's on the court, yet no one would ever call him a PG.

None of this matters.

Calling RJ and Scottie anything else other than similar FT shooters by using some obscure definition of what position each player plays is the definition of a bad faith argument.

As of now, RJ is at 71.3% and Barnes 71.6%. Trying to skew it by saying one has lower expectations is just foolish.

And FWIW - Barnes is obv. the super FT shooter, but the different is insignificant and trying to frame one as a problem and one as fine is just bias.

[tsherkin]

Any player can initiate a PnR, I've seen precious take the ball up in slow settings, and so on. The lines are definitely more blurred than ever, but very few people would look at Scottie and confuse him for a PG. He's certainly cosplaying as one though, none of this is a criticism of him, but it just doesn't stick for me. He can't guard or break down an opposing PG, he can't handle like one, his offensive game does not resemble a PG.

You can argue that any player can be any position, but it's efficacy that matters, taking a bunch of 3's and not playing in the post doesn't make you a PG if you aren't very good at it. Taking a bunch 3's doesn't make you a 3 point specialist, making them does.

Jokic is a better playmaker than 99% of the NBAs PGs, he facilitates the offence pretty much every second he's on the court, yet no one would ever call him a PG.

So again, though, this is mostly ephemeral. Barnes advances it over the timeline. He handles in transition. He initiates PnR. He does everything that PGs do. Some of it, he doesn't do too well, but that's true of many PGs. So what's the deciding line? That's my point. It's a stupid label at this point in the development of the sport.

[nikster]

In 10 games with Scottie RJ averages 23/6.5/5 on 59TS%, 35% from 3. Going back to last year they've played 33 games and it's 61TS%

I think RJ plays well off Scottie and consistently playing with more talent should make him look better this season.

[Scase]

Any player can initiate a PnR, I've seen precious take the ball up in slow settings, and so on. The lines are definitely more blurred than ever, but very few people would look at Scottie and confuse him for a PG. He's certainly cosplaying as one though, none of this is a criticism of him, but it just doesn't stick for me. He can't guard or break down an opposing PG, he can't handle like one, his offensive game does not resemble a PG.

You can argue that any player can be any position, but it's efficacy that matters, taking a bunch of 3's and not playing in the post doesn't make you a PG if you aren't very good at it. Taking a bunch 3's doesn't make you a 3 point specialist, making them does.

Jokic is a better playmaker than 99% of the NBAs PGs, he facilitates the offence pretty much every second he's on the court, yet no one would ever call him a PG.

So again, though, this is mostly ephemeral. Barnes advances it over the timeline. He handles in transition. He initiates PnR. He does everything that PGs do. Some of it, he doesn't do too well, but that's true of many PGs. So what's the deciding line? That's my point. It's a stupid label at this point in the development of the sport.

I'm saying that tons of players do those things that no one would confuse as a PG, you're focusing on stuff that doesn't require much outside of average ball handling, the stuff I mentioned earlier that is pretty integral to a PG that he doesn't do, you've completely glossed over.

I'm not saying these positions are carved in stone, but very few people would look at Scottie and say he's a PG. You're the one that was saying that the traditional position labels are not really relevant anymore, so why are you arguing he should be classified under one of them?

[tsherkin]

I'm saying that tons of players do those things that no one would confuse as a PG, you're focusing on stuff that doesn't require much outside of average ball handling, the stuff I mentioned earlier that is pretty integral to a PG that he doesn't do, you've completely glossed over.

He does PG things. But you're making a proficiency-based argument, not a label. That's my first point. And my second point, again, is that the label itself is quite outdated.

I'm not saying these positions are carved in stone, but very few people would look at Scottie and say he's a PG. You're the one that was saying that the traditional position labels are not really relevant anymore, so why are you arguing he should be classified under one of them?

I'm not arguing that he should, only that it wouldnt be inappropriate by the most common labeling systems.

[Scase]

I'm saying that tons of players do those things that no one would confuse as a PG, you're focusing on stuff that doesn't require much outside of average ball handling, the stuff I mentioned earlier that is pretty integral to a PG that he doesn't do, you've completely glossed over.

He does PG things. But you're making a proficiency-based argument, not a label. That's my first point. And my second point, again, is that the label itself is quite outdated.

I'm not saying these positions are carved in stone, but very few people would look at Scottie and say he's a PG. You're the one that was saying that the traditional position labels are not really relevant anymore, so why are you arguing he should be classified under one of them?

I'm not arguing that he should, only that it wouldnt be inappropriate by the most common labeling systems.

Well yeah, because I think proficiency matters. Just because a 7'3 centre can bring the ball up the floor or run the PnR as the ball handler, doesn't make them a PG. Proficiency kinda determines who should be doing what.

If Scottie was the teams PG, we wouldn't have jumped on IQ, he fulfills some PG duties, doesn't mean he is the teams PG.

[ItsDanger]

His defense is below average in almost every respect. If you have another bad defender on the court at same time, you need to have more rim protection.

[Tripod]

I'm saying that tons of players do those things that no one would confuse as a PG, you're focusing on stuff that doesn't require much outside of average ball handling, the stuff I mentioned earlier that is pretty integral to a PG that he doesn't do, you've completely glossed over.

He does PG things. But you're making a proficiency-based argument, not a label. That's my first point. And my second point, again, is that the label itself is quite outdated.

I'm not saying these positions are carved in stone, but very few people would look at Scottie and say he's a PG. You're the one that was saying that the traditional position labels are not really relevant anymore, so why are you arguing he should be classified under one of them?

I'm not arguing that he should, only that it wouldnt be inappropriate by the most common labeling systems.

Well yeah, because I think proficiency matters. Just because a 7'3 centre can bring the ball up the floor or run the PnR as the ball handler, doesn't make them a PG. Proficiency kinda determines who should be doing what.

If Scottie was the teams PG, we wouldn't have jumped on IQ, he fulfills some PG duties, doesn't mean he is the teams PG.

With IQ they were definitely trying to expand his PG thought process last year instead.of just thinking score. And that's great. RJ was doing it similar when Barnes and IQ were out.

Having the 3 of them being better passers next year vs where they were last year is a great thing. It gives us options when certain matchup don't fall in our favor.

Personally I think we are going to see Barnes with the ball.in his hands more than IQ when everyone is playing. Would much rather Barnes find IQ open for a shot than IQ find Barnes open...if we are talking long distance of course.

But having the 3 of them also will allow a wider variety of plays to be run. But deep down RJ and IQ think score first and Barnes thinks pass. Time will tell how well they do.

[YogurtProducer]

Insane to see the same poster who **** on FVV for months saying that Scottie should be the PG, is now changing his tune that Scottie is not a PG because it helps him in this argument.

Literally cant make this stuff up. SHAMELESS.

[Vampirate]

Insane to see the same poster who **** on FVV for months saying that Scottie should be the PG, is now changing his tune that Scottie is not a PG because it helps him in this argument.

Literally cant make this stuff up. SHAMELESS.

Barnes basically is the PG though.

He's pretty much the guy that sets up his teammates.

[Scase]

Insane to see the same poster who **** on FVV for months saying that Scottie should be the PG, is now changing his tune that Scottie is not a PG because it helps him in this argument.

Literally cant make this stuff up. SHAMELESS.

Barnes basically is the PG though.

He's pretty much the guy that sets up his teammates.

So does Jokic, doesn't make him a PG though.

[YogurtProducer]

Insane to see the same poster who **** on FVV for months saying that Scottie should be the PG, is now changing his tune that Scottie is not a PG because it helps him in this argument.

Literally cant make this stuff up. SHAMELESS.

Barnes basically is the PG though.

He's pretty much the guy that sets up his teammates.

So does Jokic, doesn't make him a PG though.

Sure, but I would compare Scotties impact and how he impacts our offense to Jokic before I would to some random PF you are trying to compare him to. Go through NBA players that have a similar role to Scottie in terms of creation, shot attempts, etc. and you will see Scottie is just as below average at his FT% as RJ is in his role. Enough of this randomly comparing Scottie to PFs because of... reasons... and just compare him to guys who play the same role as him.

I mean, Scottie has started at PG in every single game he has played for us this year. Sure, sometimes Davion was there, but Davion was NOT playing the PG role and was more of a secondary ball handler regardless of what the score sheet says.

Scottie (offensively) is our offensive hub. Jokic on Denver is their offensive hub. Tatum is Bostons. Curry is Golden States. Defensively all of them are vastly different but it doesn't mean you don't compare them.

This conversation has gotten so off track - but to get back on track - RJ and Scottie both are similar in terms of their FT shooting. I initially called you out for complaining about RJs woes at the line and brushing off Scotties. The fact remains they are similar there, and it frankly only your bias and bending of the facts that is making you try to make it different.

[ConSarnit]

Seems like RJ is slowly working his way back into his role from last season. Since Barnes has been back his FGA are down and his fg% is up. His 3pt% is slowly climbing. Barrett shooting splits with/without Barnes on the floor:

with: 51/41
without: 43/31

Pullup 3 stats:

pre-Barnes return: 1.6 attempts per game
post-Barnes return: 0.1 attempts per game

Midrange:

pre-Barnes return: 1.1 attempts per game
post-Barnes return: 0.8 attempts per game

Add IQ (another on-ball creator) back into the mix and RJ is probably playing a similar style to the way he played last year. As many said it seems like early season RJ was being forced to create too much for himself.

[Johnny Bball]

Insane to see the same poster who **** on FVV for months saying that Scottie should be the PG, is now changing his tune that Scottie is not a PG because it helps him in this argument.

Literally cant make this stuff up. SHAMELESS.

Barnes basically is the PG though.

He's pretty much the guy that sets up his teammates.

So does Jokic, doesn't make him a PG though.

He's a point forward. And so is Barnes. Splitting hairs pretending they don't run the point because they aren't guards is weak.

A guy with the 4th most assists in the history of the NBA is a point forward.

[mademan]

RJ is who he is and thats a bench player in this league. He doesnt play smart basketball and he doesnt defend. There are times where he's unstoppable going downhill, and thats valuable, but he doesnt do enough complementary things to be a 30+ min starter on a team hoping to win in the playoffs. It's far from clear to me he even helps teams win in the RS

Thankfully, this draft is full of young wings and i imagine we'll get one of them. RJ isnt a long term Raptor, imo

[Johnny Bball]

RJ is who he is and thats a bench player in this league. He doesnt play smart basketball and he doesnt defend. There are times where he's unstoppable going downhill, and thats valuable, but he doesnt do enough complementary things to be a 30+ min starter on a team hoping to win in the playoffs. It's far from clear to me he even helps teams win in the RS

Thankfully, this draft is full of young wings and i imagine we'll get one of them. RJ isnt a long term Raptor, imo

Doesn't do enough complementary? How many NBA players are above 20/6/6... good lord.

Some of you fans get real stuck in weird takes.

[ash_k]

RJ is who he is and thats a bench player in this league. He doesnt play smart basketball and he doesnt defend. There are times where he's unstoppable going downhill, and thats valuable, but he doesnt do enough complementary things to be a 30+ min starter on a team hoping to win in the playoffs. It's far from clear to me he even helps teams win in the RS

Thankfully, this draft is full of young wings and i imagine we'll get one of them. RJ isnt a long term Raptor, imo

Doesn't do enough complementary? How many NBA players are above 20/6/6... good lord.

Some of you fans get real stuck in weird takes.

Let me answer that question for you
Giannis
Jokic
Luka
LeBron
Sabonis (3x All-Star)
Scottie Barnes
Cade Cunningham
At some point, those kind of posters will have to at least pretend to understand the game a little bit more.(beyond analytics)
Those numbers show the multiple dimensions of RJ's game! Only a (future)All-Star can have all those dimensions . Cade C will clearly be an All-Star soon.

[HiJiNX]

RJ is definitely an NBA starter. Not sure why so many arguments have him as a bench player. His defence wavers from average to bad, and his shot selection isn’t always great, but he’s a damn good player.

[ash_k]

RJ is definitely an NBA starter. Not sure why so many arguments have him as a bench player. His defence wavers from average to bad, and his shot selection isn’t always great, but he’s a damn good player.

Entering his 7th in the league : 350 games played..349 games started

At Legendary Blue Devil Duke/Cameron: 38 games played..38 games started (including still holding the freshman scoring record )
But somehow you got some Rapsfan talking about the bench

It will take them time to go from "he was a Throw-in" to now "6th man" to eventually "All-Star"...they are still in the middle