Official RJ Barrett Thread Part 2

[nikster]

His TS% over his entire career genius. You know you can look at other years too, right? Just toggle down

Ineffeicent literally every year of his career but the problem is IQ/Barnes being out for a bit. LMFAO

How about focusing on what he is as a RAPTOR? How about focusing on what you see today and not 2 years ago?

I did. He's been inefficient this season too. Ive watched almost every game this year and RJ is the same player he's always been. He has more space and more usage, but he's still the guy who's not a star on ball to justify having the ball all the time and not capable of impacting the game without the ball. Maybe he improves, but the league isnt full of guys who became who completely different players 6 years in

His last 10 games (which is when Scottie returned from injury), he averages 24/7/5 on 60.4 TS%, and he did with an average time of possession of 3.9 seconds. That's very low for someone with that kind of production, he is not dominating the ball.

Everything points to him being able to play well of Scottie, Our next best offensive creator is Davion Mitchell, a zero offense back up PG, so I have no idea how you come to the conclusion he can't play off ball. Unless your entire idea of an off ball player is nothing more than 3 point shooting

[tsherkin]

Factually inaccurate? You literally just said its within 2.5% of average and that isn't respectable?

It isn't. Volume scoring that far below league average is quite bad.

Again, we agree that if we look at his usage when he's with Scottie, he looks like a very different player. But that's still not even a full season's worth of games against several years of his other play, plus this year without Scottie. It's fairly clear that he can't support too much individual on-ball creation, and has a volume threshold. Which is fine, I mean, with any player you need to figure out their best deployment and we appear to have sorted that with RJ, more sample pending. And that's fantastic. But you were arguing something which wasn't really true, and isn't true even on the balance of the current season.

Anyway, setting that aside, the key underlying point on which we both seem to agree is that at least when he's got the luxury of attacking more off-ball and getting set up by Scottie, he seems to be finding himself. And in that specific subset, he has not been inefficient. We need to see if that'll bear out over a longer time frame, but it should be very interesting to watch.

[brownbobcat]

Factually inaccurate? You literally just said its within 2.5% of average and that isn't respectable?

It isn't. Volume scoring that far below league average is quite bad.

Again, we agree that if we look at his usage when he's with Scottie, he looks like a very different player. But that's still not even a full season's worth of games against several years of his other play, plus this year without Scottie. It's fairly clear that he can't support too much individual on-ball creation, and has a volume threshold. Which is fine, I mean, with any player you need to figure out their best deployment and we appear to have sorted that with RJ, more sample pending. And that's fantastic. But you were arguing something which wasn't really true, and isn't true even on the balance of the current season.

Anyway, setting that aside, the key underlying point on which we both seem to agree is that at least when he's got the luxury of attacking more off-ball and getting set up by Scottie, he seems to be finding himself. And in that specific subset, he has not been inefficient. We need to see if that'll bear out over a longer time frame, but it should be very interesting to watch.

Was Allen Iverson "quite bad" or is TS% contextual? Based on his skillset and efficiency, I think RJ is still figuring out his role and I don't think that's being the lead scorer on a good team. Just because you're not a lead scorer on a good team doesn't mean you're a terrible player. Cade Cunningham's TS% has never been better than average, same with LaMelo. Ant didn't do it before this year - it's not the only stat that matters.

RJ isn't on a good team right now, so I don't see the harm in letting him figure out stuff on the court. Who else is supposed to have shot the ball with Barnes, Gradey and IQ out for large stretches this year?

[Johnny Bball]

Factually inaccurate? You literally just said its within 2.5% of average and that isn't respectable?

It isn't. Volume scoring that far below league average is quite bad.

Again, we agree that if we look at his usage when he's with Scottie, he looks like a very different player. But that's still not even a full season's worth of games against several years of his other play, plus this year without Scottie. It's fairly clear that he can't support too much individual on-ball creation, and has a volume threshold. Which is fine, I mean, with any player you need to figure out their best deployment and we appear to have sorted that with RJ, more sample pending. And that's fantastic. But you were arguing something which wasn't really true, and isn't true even on the balance of the current season.

Anyway, setting that aside, the key underlying point on which we both seem to agree is that at least when he's got the luxury of attacking more off-ball and getting set up by Scottie, he seems to be finding himself. And in that specific subset, he has not been inefficient. We need to see if that'll bear out over a longer time frame, but it should be very interesting to watch.

Its not "far" below league average, its slightly below average on the year and the volume is the EXACT reason why. Its not the preferred volume for him or the team, it was just necessary.

You are ignoring all of last year's efficiency when you call him inefficient.

Despite stating that him playing as a first option without Barnes was an issue, you now pretend it's not what impacted the efficiency calling it quite bad, even while paying lip service to it.

Seems to be finding himself? Its what some of us have said the entire time was the issue and what was impacting his game negatively, while some of you were nothing but insufferable about it moaning on inefficiency without any real context or understanding about how it changes where on the court he plays and how he plays. Some of us even said weeks back with Barnes returning Barrett's efficiency would get back to normal, while you and other people ignored it and now pretend he's just starting to come around and still need more time.

If you remove the games Barnes and IQ were injured and Barrett had to lead the team, he's not inefficient. That is the entire point.

RJ attacking from the wing, playing from the wing, attacking and in transition and shooting from the corners is RJ's game. When he has to be the ballhandler above the break all the time, that is not his game.

This shouldn't be difficult.

[Basketball_Jones]

I think we’re in for some rough games from RJ now without Scottie. Great game yesterday though. Unfortunately he continues to just push left into big set defenders in crunch time as he has a poor iso game. And that’s ultimately what so many people choose to remember.

[tsherkin]

Was Allen Iverson "quite bad" or is TS% contextual?

Iverson had a lot of limitations, exacerbated heavily by volume. The specifics of how he struggled in Philly were related to being tiny, shooting too much and having no help around him, yes. But he also wasn't doing that at 17 FGA/g. He isn't an especially good example.

Based on his skillset and efficiency, I think RJ is still figuring out his role and I don't think that's being the lead scorer on a good team. Just because you're not a lead scorer on a good team doesn't mean you're a terrible player

Sure. But I didn't say RJ was terrible and I specifically noting things about him which are encouraging in his development, so that's not really a relevant remark.

. Cade Cunningham's TS% has never been better than average, same with LaMelo. Ant didn't do it before this year - it's not the only stat that matters.

True, but it does describe their level as scorers. Good scorers manage league-average efficiency on bad teams.

RJ isn't on a good team right now, so I don't see the harm in letting him figure out stuff on the court. Who else is supposed to have shot the ball with Barnes, Gradey and IQ out for large stretches this year?

Not sure why this is a remark to me at all. I never said anything at all about him not continuing to shoot

[tsherkin]

Its not "far" below league average,

Yes, it is.

You are ignoring all of last year's efficiency when you call him inefficient.

No, I'm not. That is factored into his career average, and I also explicitly mentioned it.

Despite stating that him playing as a first option without Barnes was an issue, you now pretend it's not what impacted the efficiency calling it quite bad, even while paying lip service to it.

No, I made a clear divide between his function without being taken off-ball and when he's being tasked as a focal scorer.

Seems to be finding himself? Its what some of us have said the entire time was the issue and what was impacting his game negatively, while some of you were nothing but insufferable about it moaning on inefficiency without any real context or understanding about how it changes where on the court he plays and how he plays.

This is not a particularly relevant remark, because I have been speaking about the context around Barnes' play the entire time.

[qote]
Some of us even said weeks back with Barnes returning Barrett's efficiency would get back to normal, while you and other people ignored it and now pretend he's just starting to come around and still need more time.[/quote]

No, that's a flat-out lie. I have been discussing this since the beginning of the season. You not liking that I address his inefficiency while also discussing what helps him improve is your problem, not mine.

[Johnny Bball]

Its not "far" below league average,

Yes, it is.

You are ignoring all of last year's efficiency when you call him inefficient.

No, I'm not. That is factored into his career average, and I also explicitly mentioned it.

Despite stating that him playing as a first option without Barnes was an issue, you now pretend it's not what impacted the efficiency calling it quite bad, even while paying lip service to it.

No, I made a clear divide between his function without being taken off-ball and when he's being tasked as a focal scorer.

Seems to be finding himself? Its what some of us have said the entire time was the issue and what was impacting his game negatively, while some of you were nothing but insufferable about it moaning on inefficiency without any real context or understanding about how it changes where on the court he plays and how he plays.

This is not a particularly relevant remark, because I have been speaking about the context around Barnes' play the entire time.

Some of us even said weeks back with Barnes returning Barrett's efficiency would get back to normal, while you and other people ignored it and now pretend he's just starting to come around and still need more time.

No, that's a flat-out lie. I have been discussing this since the beginning of the season. You not liking that I address his inefficiency while also discussing what helps him improve is your problem, not mine.

The only thing more insufferable than your posts in this forum when you were a mod, are you posts like this on basketball when you aren't.

Yeah you keep talking about his career average instead of as a raptor and move whatever goalposts you want.

[MEDIC]

Yeah you keep talking about his career average instead of as a raptor and move whatever goalposts you want.

Yeah. I am not sure why these guys keep bringing up his Knick stats. Who cares. Different time, age, teammates, coaches, environment. He doesn't play for the Knicks anymore. It's not like he is 28 years old either.

Should we also be evaluating Kyle Lowry on what he did before he became a Raptor? Who gives a sh*t. People change......they mature. Also circumstances change.

[Airmiess]

If you're still complaining about RJ itt you have lost the plot completely.

[Syd-TK3]

Well without Scottie around he's gonna struggle again so congrats to his haters

[nikster]

Well without Scottie around he's gonna struggle again so congrats to his haters

Hopefully Quickley is back again soon. Small sample of 7 games playing with Quickley and no Scottie here, but he had 24/7/5 on 62TS% in those games

[Airmiess]

Well without Scottie around he's gonna struggle again so congrats to his haters

Hopefully Quickley is back again soon. Small sample of 7 games playing with Quickley and no Scottie here, but he had 24/7/5 on 62TS% in those games

I think IQ is actually a better release valve for RJ than Scottie. Barnes and RJ are the same player, one just has better physical tools.

IQ can score more from the perimeter which will balance out the spacing alongside Dick. However, RJ needs to make the right reads once he gets into the paint and not go up over 2 defenders.

[brownbobcat]

Iverson had a lot of limitations, exacerbated heavily by volume. The specifics of how he struggled in Philly were related to being tiny, shooting too much and having no help around him, yes. But he also wasn't doing that at 17 FGA/g. He isn't an especially good example.

Sure. But I didn't say RJ was terrible and I specifically noting things about him which are encouraging in his development, so that's not really a relevant remark.

Obviously Iverson is much more talented than RJ, but it's the same point that you can't look at TS% in isolation. Iverson didn't have an amazing TS% when put up fewer shots either. The average player doesn't shoot the kind of shots that better players do, and it's not always just because the latter get more latitude to chuck shots.

RJ is not "quite bad" just because he's not among the handful of guys that score at volume and high efficiency. I'm well aware of how his shooting limits how well he can slot into different situations and lineups, but people are acting like he's a below-average NBA player simply based on TS%. Yes, he needs to become a better shooter for the Raptors to have more upside - no doubt.

True, but it does describe their level as scorers. Good scorers manage league-average efficiency on bad teams.

It seems like your bar for good = superstar. You're going to tell me LaMelo Ball isn't a "good scorer"? Look at all the guys below average TS% this year - Luka, Trae, Maxey, Sengun, Jaylen Brown - should they all stop shooting?

[ConSarnit]

Iverson had a lot of limitations, exacerbated heavily by volume. The specifics of how he struggled in Philly were related to being tiny, shooting too much and having no help around him, yes. But he also wasn't doing that at 17 FGA/g. He isn't an especially good example.

Sure. But I didn't say RJ was terrible and I specifically noting things about him which are encouraging in his development, so that's not really a relevant remark.

Obviously Iverson is much more talented than RJ, but it's the same point that you can't look at TS% in isolation. Iverson didn't have an amazing TS% when put up fewer shots either. The average player doesn't shoot the kind of shots that better players do, and it's not always just because the latter get more latitude to chuck shots.

RJ is not "quite bad" just because he's not among the handful of guys that score at volume and high efficiency. I'm well aware of how his shooting limits how well he can slot into different situations and lineups, but people are acting like he's a below-average NBA player simply based on TS%. Yes, he needs to become a better shooter for the Raptors to have more upside - no doubt.

True, but it does describe their level as scorers. Good scorers manage league-average efficiency on bad teams.

It seems like your bar for good = superstar. You're going to tell me LaMelo Ball isn't a "good scorer"? Look at all the guys below average TS% this year - Luka, Trae, Maxey, Sengun, Jaylen Brown - should they all stop shooting?

In theory shouldn't RJ be more efficient than average just based on the type of shots he takes and shouldn't that be weighted? Most of those guys you've listed have a higher 3pt attempt rate (only Sengun is lower and his issues this year is finishing). League leaders in TS% are always roll-man centers because they take almost all of their attempts at the basket. The fact that RJ takes more shots closer to the rim and still has below league average TS% is not a good thing. His expected TS% is probably even higher than the league average given where he takes his attempts. He's currently below league average efficiency in 2p%, 3p% and FT%.

(obviously I think some of this is a result of RJ having to be the #1 option this year and he's not cut out for it)

[tsherkin]

Yeah you keep talking about his career average instead of as a raptor and move whatever goalposts you want.

I separated both of these points as well. Passing support and Scottie's presence (and Quick to some extent, and Gradey) has been a feature component of my comments about Barrett for ages now. What are you even talking about?

Yeah you keep talking about his career average instead of as a raptor and move whatever goalposts you want.

Yeah. I am not sure why these guys keep bringing up his Knick stats. Who cares. Different time, age, teammates, coaches, environment. He doesn't play for the Knicks anymore. It's not like he is 28 years old either.

Should we also be evaluating Kyle Lowry on what he did before he became a Raptor? Who gives a sh*t. People change......they mature. Also circumstances change.

It is relevant. It isn't the only picture, which is why we are ALSO discussing the contextual changes during his successful period. What Johnny refuses to accept is that both of these things have been mentioned, that's all. He wants to die on the hill that I'm attacking RJ, when I'm really not. But he needs some weird cause to vent his anger, and I'm not really here for it.

Obviously Iverson is much more talented than RJ, but it's the same point that you can't look at TS% in isolation. Iverson didn't have an amazing TS% when put up fewer shots either. The average player doesn't shoot the kind of shots that better players do, and it's not always just because the latter get more latitude to chuck shots.

Yeah, he had a tough TS because he wasn't an elite shooter, had no size, and shot a ton with fairly poor shot selection. He was an impact player, but he also showed that he was only so good even after he left the Sixers. He had a pile of things getting in his way, and did a lot with what he had. He also had a fairly crap attitude along the way which hurt.

RJ is not "quite bad" just because he's not among the handful of guys that score at volume and high efficiency.

I agree. What I actually said, though, was that 2.5% below league average efficiency is quite bad. That's not the same thing. And the rest of my comments are relevant to my opinion of RJ, which seems to be flying over people's heads.

I'm well aware of how his shooting limits how well he can slot into different situations and lineups, but people are acting like he's a below-average NBA player simply based on TS%.

Well, argue with them, then, not me. I think, as I have said multiple times ITT, that RJ has shown some promise as we've taken him more off-ball and let him work more around what others are doing in terms of initiation

It seems like your bar for good = superstar. You're going to tell me LaMelo Ball isn't a "good scorer"? Look at all the guys below average TS% this year - Luka, Trae, Maxey, Sengun, Jaylen Brown - should they all stop shooting?

Luka will likely normalize. Trae is being extended well beyond what he should as a volume scorer, absolutely. I don't know enough about Sengun or Maxey to comment. And yes, Jaylen Brown isn't an especially remarkable scorer. He has utility in his role inside Boston's system, but that actually highlights that he isn't especially stunning in that regard. All that help, all that spacing, non-ridiculous volume and he's still an average scorer? Yes, it reflects deficiency. They use him as such, and it works, but that's in large part because Boston is spoiled with a wealth of talent at either end of the floor.

Look, you're attacking a strawman. I have said MANY times that I'm willing to see what RJ can do with us over the season. I have often remarked about his value to us as an off-ball slasher, and at slightly less volume than he was handling amid all of our injuries. So let's try to argue about what I actually said, not what you THINK I said, please.

I said 2.5% below league average TS% was very bad. I said that RJ is an inefficient player. He is, to date. I have also acknowledged the role change we saw for less than half a season last year and what we've seen for 6 or 7 games lately and remarked that it's promising for his future performance with us. All in this very thread, and often elsewhere. Try to remember this.

[brownbobcat]

In theory shouldn't RJ be more efficient than average just based on the type of shots he takes and shouldn't that be weighted? Most of those guys you've listed have a higher 3pt attempt rate (only Sengun is lower and his issues this year is finishing). League leaders in TS% are always roll-man centers because they take almost all of their attempts at the basket. The fact that RJ takes more shots closer to the rim and still has below league average TS% is not a good thing. His expected TS% is probably even higher than the league average given where he takes his attempts. He's currently below league average efficiency in 2p%, 3p% and FT%.

(obviously I think some of this is a result of RJ having to be the #1 option this year and he's not cut out for it)

"At the rim" is relative. His conversion numbers are fine within 3 ft, but he struggles mightily when he can't get all the way there. His TS% takes a big hit from his FG% between 3-10ft. This is why it's not really sustainable for him to cut out midrange jumpers completely in the long run, he needs to hit jumpers reliably at elbow range or get a floater, push shot, something.

[Johnny Bball]

Yeah you keep talking about his career average instead of as a raptor and move whatever goalposts you want.

I separated both of these points as well. Passing support and Scottie's presence (and Quick to some extent, and Gradey) has been a feature component of my comments about Barrett for ages now. What are you even talking about?

Yeah you keep talking about his career average instead of as a raptor and move whatever goalposts you want.

Yeah. I am not sure why these guys keep bringing up his Knick stats. Who cares. Different time, age, teammates, coaches, environment. He doesn't play for the Knicks anymore. It's not like he is 28 years old either.

Should we also be evaluating Kyle Lowry on what he did before he became a Raptor? Who gives a sh*t. People change......they mature. Also circumstances change.

It is relevant. It isn't the only picture, which is why we are ALSO discussing the contextual changes during his successful period. What Johnny refuses to accept is that both of these things have been mentioned, that's all. He wants to die on the hill that I'm attacking RJ, when I'm really not. But he needs some weird cause to vent his anger, and I'm not really here for it.

Obviously Iverson is much more talented than RJ, but it's the same point that you can't look at TS% in isolation. Iverson didn't have an amazing TS% when put up fewer shots either. The average player doesn't shoot the kind of shots that better players do, and it's not always just because the latter get more latitude to chuck shots.

Yeah, he had a tough TS because he wasn't an elite shooter, had no size, and shot a ton with fairly poor shot selection. He was an impact player, but he also showed that he was only so good even after he left the Sixers. He had a pile of things getting in his way, and did a lot with what he had. He also had a fairly crap attitude along the way which hurt.

RJ is not "quite bad" just because he's not among the handful of guys that score at volume and high efficiency.

I agree. What I actually said, though, was that 2.5% below league average efficiency is quite bad. That's not the same thing. And the rest of my comments are relevant to my opinion of RJ, which seems to be flying over people's heads.

I'm well aware of how his shooting limits how well he can slot into different situations and lineups, but people are acting like he's a below-average NBA player simply based on TS%.

Well, argue with them, then, not me. I think, as I have said multiple times ITT, that RJ has shown some promise as we've taken him more off-ball and let him work more around what others are doing in terms of initiation

It seems like your bar for good = superstar. You're going to tell me LaMelo Ball isn't a "good scorer"? Look at all the guys below average TS% this year - Luka, Trae, Maxey, Sengun, Jaylen Brown - should they all stop shooting?

Luka will likely normalize. Trae is being extended well beyond what he should as a volume scorer, absolutely. I don't know enough about Sengun or Maxey to comment. And yes, Jaylen Brown isn't an especially remarkable scorer. He has utility in his role inside Boston's system, but that actually highlights that he isn't especially stunning in that regard. All that help, all that spacing, non-ridiculous volume and he's still an average scorer? Yes, it reflects deficiency. They use him as such, and it works, but that's in large part because Boston is spoiled with a wealth of talent at either end of the floor.

Look, you're attacking a strawman. I have said MANY times that I'm willing to see what RJ can do with us over the season. I have often remarked about his value to us as an off-ball slasher, and at slightly less volume than he was handling amid all of our injuries. So let's try to argue about what I actually said, not what you THINK I said, please.

I said 2.5% below league average TS% was very bad. I said that RJ is an inefficient player. He is, to date. I have also acknowledged the role change we saw for less than half a season last year and what we've seen for 6 or 7 games lately and remarked that it's promising for his future performance with us. All in this very thread, and often elsewhere. Try to remember this.

**** sakes. Learn how to read a room and be less annoying. Nobody wants to even bother responding to you when you have an insufferable habit of doing this to posts. And you responded to MY post. One that is about how he's playing for the raptors. That was the subject. Then you moved the goalposts to make it whatever you wanted, refuse to accept you did, and cannot shut up about it.

Treading the line on personal attack. Dial it back.

[LastNameEver]

In theory shouldn't RJ be more efficient than average just based on the type of shots he takes and shouldn't that be weighted? Most of those guys you've listed have a higher 3pt attempt rate (only Sengun is lower and his issues this year is finishing). League leaders in TS% are always roll-man centers because they take almost all of their attempts at the basket. The fact that RJ takes more shots closer to the rim and still has below league average TS% is not a good thing. His expected TS% is probably even higher than the league average given where he takes his attempts. He's currently below league average efficiency in 2p%, 3p% and FT%.

(obviously I think some of this is a result of RJ having to be the #1 option this year and he's not cut out for it)

"At the rim" is relative. His conversion numbers are fine within 3 ft, but he struggles mightily when he can't get all the way there. His TS% takes a big hit from his FG% between 3-10ft. This is why it's not really sustainable for him to cut out midrange jumpers completely in the long run, he needs to hit jumpers reliably at elbow range or get a floater, push shot, something.

Not sure why he cut out midrange and floaters, this is something he came packaged with pre-draft.

[MikeM]

Worse version of Demar