With the 9th Pick, the Raptors select Collin Murray-Boyles!

[ConSarnit]

The Barnes draft thread:

viewtopic.php?f=32&t=2109602&hilit=Barnes+%234+Scottie

So many similarities between that thread and this thread.

[djsunyc]

With a MUCH bigger need at the 5 than the 3/4, passing on the 18 year old 7 footer seems very odd to me. CMB is another guy people can slack off of on defense unless he has the ball in the paint. So instead if drafting a potential upgrade at the starting 5, they took someone who will never crack the starting 5 unless they change Cs . As you cant have 2+ guys on the floor who cant shoot anymore. And really the only guy that doesn’t cause a problem is your primary ball handler. Just Poeltl alone already hurts them offensively against good teams.

Imo the 5 is where they really need an upgrade to get back go being a 50+ win team again. And another quality 3rd string pg incase of injury.

the team is extending yak so any center we draft will be backing up for a few years. they chose bpa with someone who can really do alot of things instead of a backup center. that's an understandable choice.

[Dalek]

I'm still waiting to hear who the clear higher upside pick was in this situation?

Khaman Maluach obviously at age 18, 7'2 and mobile is the highest upside pick.

Cases can be made for Carter Bryant and Cedric Coward who both project as better shooters and have defensive upside.

CMB has really limited two-way upside mainly because he isn't a crazy athlete and is undersize for his position. He's about a Grant Williams sized PF.

Hes a much more skilled Grant Williams. Size or not, skill matters a ton.

And very debatable on all 3.

Malauch has his warts despite his size
Cedric Coward is already 22.
Carter Bryant had limited playing time and zero self creation tools

I don't see any of the 3 of them having clear higher upside that CMB.

Coward is 21 until September, but like Jaylen Wells his potential was buried because of his weird path to the NBA. He has a several years shooting history, athleticism and size to be a steal. It is not hard to project him in a similar way as Wells who became a starter and basically made it easier to move Bane.

I mean its a 3P shooting league and most of those players have that while Maluach has true NBA size for his position. He basically can do similar things as he did in Duke and be a back-up C in short time.

CMB played a high usage role that he won't get in Toronto. It is hard to see the upside of a hustle player. People may say the playmaking is his swing skill but he was very turnover prone. He is very left hand dominant and is like RJ always going left. It will be interesting to see how quickly he adapts.

Personally, if we were going the undersized big route, I would have saw more upside with Asa Newell.

[tsherkin]

I have the same concerns but Bobby made it pretty clear we are still in the talent acquisition phase and that takes priority over fit. I just assume they were a lot higher on CMB than they were everyone else still available that might have fit the current roster better.

Yeah, talent acquisition is a good thing. But what we do with said talent is also important, right? Redundancy reduces value.

[ConSarnit]

I completely disagree that the fit with Siakam and Barnes was much of an issue. They didn't have an ideal roster around them with both a non shooting big and PG, yet that was Barnes best season and he made all star team (and fell off after Siakam left) while Siakams last 30 games was one of the best stretches of his career.

Siakam was getting better at 3 towards the end of his Raptors tenure too, but I can’t imagine any team doing well with a poo poo platter rotation of Precious, Malachi, Dennis Schroder, GTJr and a revolving rotation of low-end NBA journeymen. Pretty much none of the guys we played are doing anything now..Svi, Yuta, Birch, Dowtin, etc.

Ideally our old core would have all been moved down a peg but we did them no favours surrounding them with the trash we did.

Down a peg how? Barnes can’t play the 3. He’s never been suited to guard wings or faster players. He doesn’t provide the spacing most teams need from the 3. I just don’t get how Barnes at the 3 would have been a long term solution.

Yeah our bench sucked but that was the entire issue. Our starting lineups weren’t that good. The Siakam at C lineups fell apart as they couldn’t maintain the aggressive play style. The Poeltl lineup did fine but the competition level at the end of that season was joke. They also just played Nurse-ball to an even more extreme degree and didn’t fix any high level issues (like half court scoring). The majority of our success was Nurse-ball smoke and mirrors as seen by our collapse once Darko took over.

[YogurtProducer]

you never know with players. ryan dunn made a shooting leap in his first year.

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Not to **** on Ryan Dunn.. but he ended up shooting 31% for the year and only 29% after thees tweets were made lol

[Double Helix]

I’m going to list some pros:

* In future we can now more easily consider the possibilities of Scottie Barnes trades for superstars where we otherwise wouldn’t because of having CMB. If we didn’t have a prospect of that caliber as his understudy there the idea of moving Scottie becomes harder because you’re thinking to yourself, “Sure, I get the better offensive talent coming in but losing the intangibles of Scottie and the defence could still set us back as a group.” If CMB is pushing for more and more minutes it becomes a little like when we felt more comfortable moving on from Pascal due to the emergence of Scottie.

* Similarly, if the right deal comes along for CMB we can cash in the pick as we were reportedly considering doing anyway because he’s a BPA asset with fans around the league.

* We’ve added someone with like the defence of Flagg. As much as Scottie was hyped for D and is a great defender the consensus is CMB has even more upside on that end.

* We didn’t add to the wing logjam we are still looking to resolve.

* He can play some small ball 5 and we do need more 5 depth.

* If we can improve the shot, or if he’s already doing so, then that lifts his ceiling massively. Engleman claims such a swing skill add on for him could turn him into a top 25 NBA player in terms of O/D impact.

* We have additional depth now at multiple positions for a playoff run. Including foul and injury risks.

* Even though some want to paint the Siakam and Scottie pairing as a failure it mostly worked despite the fact it feels like it shouldn’t on paper. Maybe the same synergy will be found in lineups where both are together here.

* By being 1 year older than some of these kids he’s more likely to provide more value than some will over his rookie deal.

* The Raptors scouted him last year and loved him then and he only got better. He fits the profile of a type that this org has maximized before. They know this player type better than anyone.

* Darko’s time with both Scottie and Mogbo should help the transition for CMB a little. If only because he knows these undersized utility knife forwards better than some coaches do.

* He doesn’t seem to be a huge Kendrick fan.

* He says he is willing to play any role and that he’s played roles before.

[lolekszmolek]

What I find intriguing about the draft is that since both Maluach and Essengue were left on the board we don't have to speculate that either of them were preferred by Masai but were lost to another team that selected them before the Raptors.

[YogurtProducer]

Outside of the very top picks, isn't every draft selection at least somewhat a 'we can fix him' pick? They're still kids with a lot to learn and room to grow. None of them are finished products that don't have holes.

i get it really, i think they looked at guys in the range(noa, bryant, maluach) and decided they have a better chance fixing his shot than fixing the the weaknesses of the other guys in his range, which are just as glaring. and i think they liked what he actually already does (extremely)well already, more.

I get what you are both saying, and the logic is sound, but it's the multiple cases of drafting, signing, trading for athletic guys who can't shoot worth a damn and thinking we can fix that. I'm fine with drafting a guy at 9th that has obvious shortcomings, but can we get more of the guys who can actually shoot and work on the other stuff? Gradey was a good start, lets keep that up.

And Gradey has been a net-negative since joining the the team. I liked going after an offense focused player - but both sides can bite you.

And honestly trying to teach bad defenders defence works way less of the time.

We never were gonna get a guaranteed 2-way guy at 9. You gotta take someone good at one or the other and develop.

[JB7]

This post from a Raptors fan who predicted we'd draft CMB got me hyped. Masai has done it again.

https://www.reddit.com/r/torontoraptors/s/XI7BROSr8F

Excellent post, and also got me super excited about CMB.

[ontnut]

I watched the CBS draft analysis with Avery Johnson and found this bit funny:

Spurs: Have a ROY PG, trade for an all-star PG, draft another PG with the #2 pick. Avery: "I give it an A, you don't worry about fit, you just draft BPA. You can never have enough quality depth. You need a deep roster like IND and OKC with 6-7-8-9th guys". The Spurs have 3 starting PGs that need minutes - not a problem.

Raptors: Have a ROY F, trade for an all-star F, draft another F with the #9 pick. Avery: "I give it a C-, I don't like the fit, they should've drafted for fit." Doesn't care about quality depth apparently now, depending on the pick and the team lol. Raptors have 3 quality F's to play 2 F positions. That's apparently a problem.

These guys are just talking out of their asses.

[YogurtProducer]

I'm still waiting to hear who the clear higher upside pick was in this situation?

They will let you know in 24 months.

[disoblige]

CMB will be a better scorer than Scottie, even without the jumpshot.

Nbadraft.net has a different opinion. btw, Scottie Barnes has a max vertical leap of 39.5 inches with 9'0.0'' standing reach.

Weaknesses: At 6’6.5″ barefoot, Murray-Boyles is undersized for a traditional post player, and while his 7’0” wingspan helps mitigate some of that, he lacks the vertical explosiveness and lateral quickness typically needed to overcome size limitations at the NBA level … He’s not particularly quick or bouncy, which could hinder his ability to finish over length or defend quicker forwards in space … His offensive game is heavily reliant on physicality, and he may face a steep adjustment against stronger, more athletic defenders at the next level … Lacks consistent perimeter shooting touch, hitting just 26.5% from three and 70.7% from the free throw line as a sophomore … While he did show growth by attempting more threes (9-of-34), his overall efficiency remains a concern, his mechanics look okay, but results are inconsistent, limiting his projection as a stretch-four or pick-and-pop threat … According to Hoop-Math.com, 75% of his shot attempts came at the rim, where he converted just 66.7%, a concern given the step up in rim protection at the pro level … Struggles to create in space and is still developing offensive polish beyond bully-ball tactics in the post … Can be turnover-prone (2.4 TO per game) when asked to initiate offense or operate as a creator against athletic defenders … Though a willing and creative passer, he doesn’t project as a true playmaking forward, lacking the vision and ball-handling to function as a secondary initiator … Much of his long-term offensive potential hinges on developing a reliable jumper, but there’s currently little statistical evidence to suggest that’s imminent … Without a more refined offensive skill set or improved athleticism, his scoring efficiency and overall impact may be limited against NBA-caliber competition.

Outlook: Murray-Boyles projects as a rotational big with starter potential, though realizing that upside will likely depend on continued development of his offensive skill set … Some evaluators are extremely high on him, with projections ranging from a lottery pick to a potential future All-Star due to his age, toughness, and versatility … However, we’re on the lower side of his NBA projection … While he has been one of the most productive and assertive young players in college basketball over the past two seasons, his skill set doesn’t necessarily translate as well to today’s NBA… He stands out in analytics models thanks to his ability to impact the game across multiple categories, rebounding, steals, assists, and defensive activity, especially as a long, switchable forward … But the negatives must be weighed carefully: he’s essentially a small-ball big who lacks ideal lift, explosiveness, and shooting range … Without significant improvement as a shooter and more refinement in his offensive game, there’s a real risk that his effectiveness doesn’t carry over against NBA length and speed … He could still carve out a role as a high-motor utility forward, but projecting him as more than that, without tangible skill growth — could be overly optimistic …

[nikster]

I don’t have a problem taking BPA. If that’s CMB that’s fine. Here’s the thing with the Barnes draft comp: Barnes had a lot of fit questions and we were told to take a “wait and see” approach. What happened? His fit with our best player (Siakam) didn’t work out, the team slogged along and eventually the team had to be remodeled.

Drafting a non-shooting PF whose game doesn’t fit with our current max salary, face of the franchise PF. We’ve seen this story before. All current signs point to this team not working and that’s not exactly encouraging considering we just put together this version of the roster.

We went BPA. BPA also happens to probably be the worst possible fit with the “face of franchise”. That kills some of the excitement.

I completely disagree that the fit with Siakam and Barnes was much of an issue. They didn't have an ideal roster around them with both a non shooting big and PG, yet that was Barnes best season and he made all star team (and fell off after Siakam left) while Siakams last 30 games was one of the best stretches of his career.

How did it work? It only worked when Siakam played C and that wasn’t sustainable. Barnes couldn’t play the 3 because he doesn’t have the foot speed to guard the wing full-time nor the shooting needed. Did you watch the games where the other teams guarded Barnes with their C and left him wide open at the 3pt line?

Our half-court offense in the “Barnes-Siakam” heyday was terrible and we only won because we played a crazy aggressive defense that forced TO’s and we controlled the possession game. The defense then fell apart because it was unsustainable and the offense doesn’t work at high level. The vast majority of any Barnes-Siakam success was scheme related and everything fell apart once the scheme was no longer tenable. When Poeltl was added we just ramped up the TO and Oreb game to even more extremes. When we switched schemes under Darko the entire thing fell apart.

I also firmly believe Barnes all-star birth was almost solely based on unsustainable shooting and the premature belief he had made the “leap”. He got hot from 3 for 2 months (100 total 3pa) and then fell back to earth (shot 32% on 200+ 3pa in the second half of the season). By the end of the season his shooting at cratered and we saw that carry over to this season.

The entire thing fell apart under Darko because of the fit of Schroder into a lineup that needed shooting and the massive talent gap between him and Fred. They didn't have team success because of a horribly flawed roster construction, but they were both individually playing great basketball. It's not hard to envision them succeeding with a better supporting cast. They had a non shooting big, a non shooting back up level PG starting beside them, and virtually no depth.

And while just plain hot shooting was part of it, Scottie had way more open shots, way less shots of the dribble, way more 3s assisted when siakam was here.

[SFour]

Ok, so I've had some time, done some additional research, and had a night of sleep to think on this pick, and...

Nope. Still prefer Maluach.

the fact that Masai passed on Maluach says alot.....we know Raptors FO doesn't like taking the consensus pick, and it usually works out for them.

[YogurtProducer]

-I thought Chomche was beginning to come around when he got hurt, and his injury seemed like just enough to sideline him but not serious enough to affect his career. By March, the 905 were clearly a better team when he was on the court. We even saw a three pointer. I'm not done with him. He's still just 19 until December, and if the management group likes how he progressed, it may we have influenced their view of Maluach, who would have been a long-term project as well but at a much, much higher risk and financial exposure.

0% chance Chomche was even considered when making this pick.

Y'all gotta chill on a 59th pick. You guys think we passed on Malauch cause of Chomche but didn't consider Barnes with CMB?

[ConSarnit]

I have the same concerns but Bobby made it pretty clear we are still in the talent acquisition phase and that takes priority over fit. I just assume they were a lot higher on CMB than they were everyone else still available that might have fit the current roster better.

Yeah, talent acquisition is a good thing. But what we do with said talent is also important, right? Redundancy reduces value.

This thread is basically Groundhog Day from the Barnes draft thread.

“Excited to see Barnes and OG terrorize teams defensively”

“Just have to hope Barnes learns to shoot”

Smash cut 3 years later: welp, looks like this team isn’t working.

[Duffman100]

Khaman Maluach obviously at age 18, 7'2 and mobile is the highest upside pick.

Cases can be made for Carter Bryant and Cedric Coward who both project as better shooters and have defensive upside.

CMB has really limited two-way upside mainly because he isn't a crazy athlete and is undersize for his position. He's about a Grant Williams sized PF.

Hes a much more skilled Grant Williams. Size or not, skill matters a ton.

And very debatable on all 3.

Malauch has his warts despite his size
Cedric Coward is already 22.
Carter Bryant had limited playing time and zero self creation tools

I don't see any of the 3 of them having clear higher upside that CMB.

Coward is 21 until September, but like Jaylen Wells his potential was buried because of his weird path to the NBA. He has a several years shooting history, athleticism and size to be a steal. It is not hard to project him in a similar way as Wells who became a starter and basically made it easier to move Bane.

I mean its a 3P shooting league and most of those players have that while Maluach has true NBA size for his position. He basically can do similar things as he did in Duke and be a back-up C in short time.

CMB played a high usage role that he won't get in Toronto. It is hard to see the upside of a hustle player. People may say the playmaking is his swing skill but he was very turnover prone. He is very left hand dominant and is like RJ always going left. It will be interesting to see how quickly he adapts.

Personally, if we were going the undersized big route, I would have saw more upside with Asa Newell.

Asa Newell was flagged as one of the higher floor, lower upside players in this draft.

There's a reason CMB was mock and taken as a lottery pick and Newell was routinely mocked and drafted in the late teens to early 20s. I'm not convince you followed this draft closely if you're flagging Newell as a higher upside player.

[djsunyc]

y'all think about this stuff way too much. and y'all give yourselves way too much credit. lol.

[OakleyDokely]

I have the same concerns but Bobby made it pretty clear we are still in the talent acquisition phase and that takes priority over fit. I just assume they were a lot higher on CMB than they were everyone else still available that might have fit the current roster better.

Yeah, talent acquisition is a good thing. But what we do with said talent is also important, right? Redundancy reduces value.

This thread is basically Groundhog Day from the Barnes draft thread.

“Excited to see Barnes and OG terrorize teams defensively”

“Just have to hope Barnes learns to shoot”

Smash cut 3 years later: welp, looks like this team isn’t working.

We'd be worse off from an asset standpoint if we took Suggs instead though. What's the alternative, take the worse player whose a better fit? If the team thinks CMB is the best on the board, you take the best on the board.