Scottie isn't going to be a #1 option superstar in this league

[junot111]

If your expectations was for Barnes to be a scorer to begin with then you're evaluating the game wrong, he didn't win ROY for being a scorer, nor did this franchise draft him with those expectations, like none of this is new to anyone or at least it shouldn't be. Mgmt has put scorers around. The issue is you're lower on him because of it which shouldn't be the case. You called me a strawman in another post & referred to him as a more of a Daymond + more scoring, which is a top out I don't think anyone would/should complain about, to me that is franchise player no? I mean Daymond himself is a franchise player for his franchise... who was surrounded by scorers or shooters to be more specific.

Lol man you keep jumping to conclusions, maybe slow down and read what I'm saying. I never expected Scottie to be a great scorer, my response to tsherkin was to give grace to the fans who did have such expectations after a promising rookie year, even if that wasn't a likely outcome.

Draymond is a key piece but is not a franchise player for any team, and saying he was "surrounded by scorers or shooters" as if Steph Curry, Klay Thompson and KD are some role players that you use to build around Draymond is hilarious

Problem is, it is easy to focus on the impact Steph has because it is on the offensive end, which is much easier to measure. But Draymond had the same kind of impact on the game as Steph, just from the defensive end mostly, but also in his ability to help create space for Steph on O.

I would consider them 1A (Steph) and 1B (Dray) in terms of superstars on that GSW team. That's why they are the two still there. The team recognized it.

This is why people think Scottie can have an outsized impact on the game. Like Dray, it will be in many facets of the game that are harder to measure, and are not picked up by the casual fan. Dray is an incredibly high standard. But the hope is Scottie could max out somewhere close.

Lol this type of take is why there's a fatigue with "advanced stat nerds" in basketball. You can make a case that Draymond is underrated, he's not only an elite defensive anchor but provides more value on offense than his single digit scoring suggests. But calling Steph and Draymond 1A and 1B is ridiculous, they are nowhere near the same tier. He's not even GSW's number 2 guy, Jimmy Butler is.

The whole premise of this thread was to push back on the notion that Scottie can be a #1 option. Referencing Draymond who played alongside GOAT shooters and scorers as an argument is just proving the OP's point. Scottie is not our Steph or KD, if he's our Draymond then we still need a real superstar

[Prestige]

Without an MVP, top 10 caliber player who can take the offensive load, this team is going nowhere.

[tsherkin]

Without an MVP, top 10 caliber player who can take the offensive load, this team is going nowhere.

"Nowhere" is probably aggressive. We certainly aren't winning a title without such a player, but even in our history, we have a nice run of hitting the second round and an ECF appearance without anyone really near that level of player.

[DreamTeam09]

Lol man you keep jumping to conclusions, maybe slow down and read what I'm saying. I never expected Scottie to be a great scorer, my response to tsherkin was to give grace to the fans who did have such expectations after a promising rookie year, even if that wasn't a likely outcome.

Draymond is a key piece but is not a franchise player for any team, and saying he was "surrounded by scorers or shooters" as if Steph Curry, Klay Thompson and KD are some role players that you use to build around Draymond is hilarious

Problem is, it is easy to focus on the impact Steph has because it is on the offensive end, which is much easier to measure. But Draymond had the same kind of impact on the game as Steph, just from the defensive end mostly, but also in his ability to help create space for Steph on O.

I would consider them 1A (Steph) and 1B (Dray) in terms of superstars on that GSW team. That's why they are the two still there. The team recognized it.

This is why people think Scottie can have an outsized impact on the game. Like Dray, it will be in many facets of the game that are harder to measure, and are not picked up by the casual fan. Dray is an incredibly high standard. But the hope is Scottie could max out somewhere close.

Lol this type of take is why there's a fatigue with "advanced stat nerds" in basketball. You can make a case that Draymond is underrated, he's not only an elite defensive anchor but provides more value on offense than his single digit scoring suggests. But calling Steph and Draymond 1A and 1B is ridiculous, they are nowhere near the same tier. He's not even GSW's number 2 guy, Jimmy Butler is.

The whole premise of this thread was to push back on the notion that Scottie can be a #1 option. Referencing Draymond who played alongside GOAT shooters and scorers as an argument is just proving the OP's point. Scottie is not our Steph or KD, if he's our Draymond then we still need a real superstar

You're selling Daymond Short, it's not just us who look at Draymond as having impactful career that has aided steph Curry, media pundits/ GSW organization & Steph Curry himself will echo the same thing, & the whole premise of this argument is if Scottie isn't a 1A doesn't mean he can't be a franchise cornerstone ala Draymond green, nor was Scottie drafted as a 1A superstar & that it doesn't mean our coaching staff n GM don't have a right to call him a franchise player

[DreamTeam09]

Without an MVP, top 10 caliber player who can take the offensive load, this team is going nowhere.

This type of fallacy argument is so bleh, if you think that is the case what is the point of watching the other 20 teams who don't have a top 10 caliber player
Are you advocating for league consolidation

[WaltFrazier]

Scottie for De'aaron Fox trade proposed here

https://www.sportingnews.com/us/nba/san-antonio-spurs/news/spurs-could-acquire-224-million-superstar-cut-ties-wembyamas-new-star-guard/e82881c7642743834d1ea447

Now with a clog at the guard position, they could look to trade one of them away, and Fox is likely the odd man out between him, Harper, and Stephon Castle.

One scenario could be Fox being moved to the Toronto Raptors in exchange for Scottie Barnes.

Financially, this one-for-one move works, but other picks or players would likely be involved.

Barnes is only 23 years old, but has thrived in Toronto, averaging a career 17.2 points per game, 5.8 assists per game, and 7.7 rebounds per game with great efficiency, all while being a positive defender.

Follow The Sporting News on WhatsApp

He embraced the point forward role for the Raptors until they traded for Immanuel Quickley, but Fox would certainly be an upgrade.

On top of that, their most recent first-round pick is Collin Murray-Boyles, a 6’7 (same height as Barnes) 20-year-old whose minutes would suffer playing behind Barnes.

Toronto has young pieces like Gradey Dick and RJ Barrett, but also players they can compete with, like Brandon Ingram and Jakob Poeltl.

Their direction is unclear, nonetheless, bringing in Fox to be the commander of this young offense would be an excellent idea.

[TakeYourHeart]

Scottie for De'aaron Fox trade proposed here

https://www.sportingnews.com/us/nba/san-antonio-spurs/news/spurs-could-acquire-224-million-superstar-cut-ties-wembyamas-new-star-guard/e82881c7642743834d1ea447

Now with a clog at the guard position, they could look to trade one of them away, and Fox is likely the odd man out between him, Harper, and Stephon Castle.

One scenario could be Fox being moved to the Toronto Raptors in exchange for Scottie Barnes.

Financially, this one-for-one move works, but other picks or players would likely be involved.

Barnes is only 23 years old, but has thrived in Toronto, averaging a career 17.2 points per game, 5.8 assists per game, and 7.7 rebounds per game with great efficiency, all while being a positive defender.

Follow The Sporting News on WhatsApp

He embraced the point forward role for the Raptors until they traded for Immanuel Quickley, but Fox would certainly be an upgrade.

On top of that, their most recent first-round pick is Collin Murray-Boyles, a 6’7 (same height as Barnes) 20-year-old whose minutes would suffer playing behind Barnes.

Toronto has young pieces like Gradey Dick and RJ Barrett, but also players they can compete with, like Brandon Ingram and Jakob Poeltl.

Their direction is unclear, nonetheless, bringing in Fox to be the commander of this young offense would be an excellent idea.

Let's not hand the Spurs a dynasty. Castle Harper Bryant Scottie Wemby, good lord

[tsherkin]

Let's not hand the Spurs a dynasty. Castle Harper Bryant Scottie Wemby, good lord

Someone still has to make shots for them to win...

[Badonkadonk]

Without an MVP, top 10 caliber player who can take the offensive load, this team is going nowhere.

This type of fallacy argument is so bleh, if you think that is the case what is the point of watching the other 20 teams who don't have a top 10 caliber player
Are you advocating for league consolidation

It's such boring and lazy narrative. There are several ways to build a contender, people stuck on the NBA's marketing dream of bonafide "superstars" while having too narrow a focus on how to even define that.

[Psubs]

Scottie for De'aaron Fox trade proposed here

https://www.sportingnews.com/us/nba/san-antonio-spurs/news/spurs-could-acquire-224-million-superstar-cut-ties-wembyamas-new-star-guard/e82881c7642743834d1ea447

Now with a clog at the guard position, they could look to trade one of them away, and Fox is likely the odd man out between him, Harper, and Stephon Castle.

One scenario could be Fox being moved to the Toronto Raptors in exchange for Scottie Barnes.

Financially, this one-for-one move works, but other picks or players would likely be involved.

Barnes is only 23 years old, but has thrived in Toronto, averaging a career 17.2 points per game, 5.8 assists per game, and 7.7 rebounds per game with great efficiency, all while being a positive defender.

Follow The Sporting News on WhatsApp

He embraced the point forward role for the Raptors until they traded for Immanuel Quickley, but Fox would certainly be an upgrade.

On top of that, their most recent first-round pick is Collin Murray-Boyles, a 6’7 (same height as Barnes) 20-year-old whose minutes would suffer playing behind Barnes.

Toronto has young pieces like Gradey Dick and RJ Barrett, but also players they can compete with, like Brandon Ingram and Jakob Poeltl.

Their direction is unclear, nonetheless, bringing in Fox to be the commander of this young offense would be an excellent idea.

Fox can't shoot the 3. I would trade RJ for him.

[tsherkin]

It's such boring and lazy narrative. There are several ways to build a contender, people stuck on the NBA's marketing dream of bonafide "superstars" while having too narrow a focus on how to even define that.

NBA history doesn't really lie, there are a vanishingly small number of teams who ever win a title without such a player. In the past, like 46 years, you can point to basically Isiah's Pistons, the 04 Pistons... and that's about it. And of course, those teams still had a fair amount of talent anyway.

Generally, though, it's important to step away from title fixation and appreciate good teams who aren't really going to win a title. You can have good seasons watching such teams. And like a third of the league still has never won a title anyway, right?

Gotta enjoy the quality of the ball more than the end result. And just be happy with as far as you get.

[tsherkin]

Fox can't shoot the 3. I would trade RJ for him.

I'd rather have RJ. Fox isn't an efficient volume scorer and RJ at least draws fouls and gets to the rim, seems to be improving as a playmaker, etc.

[Indeed]

It's such boring and lazy narrative. There are several ways to build a contender, people stuck on the NBA's marketing dream of bonafide "superstars" while having too narrow a focus on how to even define that.

NBA history doesn't really lie, there are a vanishingly small number of teams who ever win a title without such a player. In the past, like 46 years, you can point to basically Isiah's Pistons, the 04 Pistons... and that's about it. And of course, those teams still had a fair amount of talent anyway.

Generally, though, it's important to step away from title fixation and appreciate good teams who aren't really going to win a title. You can have good seasons watching such teams. And like a third of the league still has never won a title anyway, right?

Gotta enjoy the quality of the ball more than the end result. And just be happy with as far as you get.

It also has to do with salary. The calculation is basically the max (or supermax) player capable of providing two starting level players, so that you can cheap out on another position against your competition.

Since there is a salary cap and a max on salary, there would be definition of superstar based on the talent ratio to salary to calculate.

[tsherkin]

It also has to do with salary. The calculation is basically the max (or supermax) player capable of providing two starting level players, so that you can cheap out on another position against your competition.

Since there is a salary cap and a max on salary, there would be definition of superstar based on the talent ratio to salary to calculate.

That's an interesting angle to take, for sure. I think they're ultimately the same thing in the sense of both describing tier of performance. And if you get that level of play earlier on in the guy's career before his salary goes totally bonkers, or they take a discount...

[Indeed]

It also has to do with salary. The calculation is basically the max (or supermax) player capable of providing two starting level players, so that you can cheap out on another position against your competition.

Since there is a salary cap and a max on salary, there would be definition of superstar based on the talent ratio to salary to calculate.

That's an interesting angle to take, for sure. I think they're ultimately the same thing in the sense of both describing tier of performance. And if you get that level of play earlier on in the guy's career before his salary goes totally bonkers, or they take a discount...

Indeed, it is the same thing.
There are exception in chemistry/style or other factors, so using numbers to calculate will be difficult, but the more talent you have, which the result is obvious.

[tsherkin]

It also has to do with salary. The calculation is basically the max (or supermax) player capable of providing two starting level players, so that you can cheap out on another position against your competition.

Since there is a salary cap and a max on salary, there would be definition of superstar based on the talent ratio to salary to calculate.

That's an interesting angle to take, for sure. I think they're ultimately the same thing in the sense of both describing tier of performance. And if you get that level of play earlier on in the guy's career before his salary goes totally bonkers, or they take a discount...

Indeed, it is the same thing.
There are exception in chemistry/style or other factors, so using numbers to calculate will be difficult, but the more talent you have, which the result is obvious.

That tracks, for sure.

[YogurtProducer]

He kind of broke out in 2024 after a disappointing 2nd year, so he's done it before so it's possible and I hope so. But don't bet on it.

He didn't, though. He had two hot months of 3pt shooting, which isn't unusual for him, and was otherwise largely the same. He was still below league-average efficiency on the season (despite it's shortened nature).

Well not entirely. He also had his highest percentage of assisted 3's in his career (91%, compared to 84% as a rook/soph, and 74% last year) which likely contributed to his higher %'s. But there was a change once Siakam was traded and the dynamic of the team changed.

To Jan 15th (Siakams last game), Scottie was averaging 20.2/8.5/5.6 and 2.8 stocks on .479/.378/.744 (57.5TS%)
After Jan 15th, Scottie averaged 19.3/7.7/7.0 and 2.7 stocks on .465/.230./.842 (54.7TS%)

His efficiency dropped drastically, and assists rose as he went more on-ball than he was prior. Some of that PROBABLY is 3 point variance, but it also was that he no longer had good players like Siakam around him to set up everything and releive some pressure. There is SOME reason to believe with Ingram on the team, and Scottie back in a better fitting role in which Ingram/IQ can set him up that we could see a rise.

Arguably Ingram should require more defensive attention then Siakam did, so hopefully that translates.

[YogurtProducer]

Fox can't shoot the 3. I would trade RJ for him.

I'd rather have RJ. Fox isn't an efficient volume scorer and RJ at least draws fouls and gets to the rim, seems to be improving as a playmaker, etc.

WILD.

Fox is a much better player. Would be a bad fit here salary wise and the fact that he is another mid range guy who doesnt fit next to IQ, but he gets to the rate at a better rate than RJ, shoots the 3 better than RJ, better playmaker than RJ, etc.

[djsunyc]

a #1 option requires alot of improvisation. outside of having a few "go-to" moves and/or being a good shooter, they must be able to get their shot off in many ways and they must have counters. there is nothing about scottie's offensive game that says any of that.

4 years later and we are only starting to see a possible "sweet spot" for him on that elbow MR jumper. we used him more in the post earlier in his career where i thought he showed some potential but then moved him to the perimeter once siakam was gone. maybe we go back to him there with ingram because i think that's a place where he can use his strength to score.

anyway, back to the topic - no, he's not a #1 option. for him to become one will require some major strides in his game - and that's going to be a multi-year process, if it ever happens.

[GLF]

He kind of broke out in 2024 after a disappointing 2nd year, so he's done it before so it's possible and I hope so. But don't bet on it.

He didn't, though. He had two hot months of 3pt shooting, which isn't unusual for him, and was otherwise largely the same. He was still below league-average efficiency on the season (despite it's shortened nature).

Well not entirely. He also had his highest percentage of assisted 3's in his career (91%, compared to 84% as a rook/soph, and 74% last year) which likely contributed to his higher %'s. But there was a change once Siakam was traded and the dynamic of the team changed.

To Jan 15th (Siakams last game), Scottie was averaging 20.2/8.5/5.6 and 2.8 stocks on .479/.378/.744 (57.5TS%)
After Jan 15th, Scottie averaged 19.3/7.7/7.0 and 2.7 stocks on .465/.230./.842 (54.7TS%)

His efficiency dropped drastically, and assists rose as he went more on-ball than he was prior. Some of that PROBABLY is 3 point variance, but it also was that he no longer had good players like Siakam around him to set up everything and releive some pressure. There is SOME reason to believe with Ingram on the team, and Scottie back in a better fitting role in which Ingram/IQ can set him up that we could see a rise.

Arguably Ingram should require more defensive attention then Siakam did, so hopefully that translates.

Thank you for this breakdown. I remember noticing that as I was watching the games too. When Pascal left he had to be the number 1 option and you could see things just were so much harder for him. 3 point variance definitely was apart of it but it doesn’t tell the full story. I don’t know, I just think acting like a 23 year old is a finished product on offence just bc history so far has been one way doesn’t make sense to me. No I do not think Scottie is a number 1 option and it’s a low percentage chance he becomes that, there are very few in this league, but I don’t care. Being a number 1 option isn’t the end all be all to being a good offensive player and being a player who impacts the game positively on that end. I also do not think he is someone who should barely get touches and should just get out of the way on offence. That’s crazy talk to me. But to each their own. I’m someone who has a lot of patience for young players and I believe in Scottie. I hope if he comes back improved and the praise is just as loud as the pessimism was.