Since Barrett’s injury Raptors offensive rating has plummeted to last in the league

[YogurtProducer]

Man, that’s just a **** horrible take.

Hate Quickley all you want, but he’s a positive rotation player in the nba. 30/30 nba teams take IQ and don’t even think twice for a second.

We can definitely pay a positive rotation player double.
Same thing we traded DeRozan for Leonard, and argued people who against the trade.

What does “pay a positive rotation player double” even mean?

I don’t know what Demar or Kawhi have to do with IQ either.

I am quoting this again because I really need to know what “pay a positive rotation player double” in this context even means

[Thaddy]

We can definitely pay a positive rotation player double.
Same thing we traded DeRozan for Leonard, and argued people who against the trade.

What does “pay a positive rotation player double” even mean?

I don’t know what Demar or Kawhi have to do with IQ either.

I am quoting this again because I really need to know what “pay a positive rotation player double” in this context even means

He's saying IQ is a rotation player we paid twice as much for? That makes sense. IQ probably is one of the poorest production to pay ratio players in the league right now.

Shooting variance is a thing though, he should eventually bounce back. He's shooting the lowest percentage of his career and he's getting a lot of open looks. This might be correlated with not playing with a big C. I'd be interested in seeing his stats with / without Poeltl.

[Indeed]

Man, that’s just a **** horrible take.

Hate Quickley all you want, but he’s a positive rotation player in the nba. 30/30 nba teams take IQ and don’t even think twice for a second.

We can definitely pay a positive rotation player double.
Same thing we traded DeRozan for Leonard, and argued people who against the trade.

What does “pay a positive rotation player double” even mean?

I don’t know what Demar or Kawhi have to do with IQ either.

It means you overpay someone in double.

The DeRozan example was the same mindset that people thought he was contributing a lot, and have no cheaper replacement.

[Indeed]

What does “pay a positive rotation player double” even mean?

I don’t know what Demar or Kawhi have to do with IQ either.

I am quoting this again because I really need to know what “pay a positive rotation player double” in this context even means

He's saying IQ is a rotation player we paid twice as much for? That makes sense. IQ probably is one of the poorest production to pay ratio players in the league right now.

Shooting variance is a thing though, he should eventually bounce back. He's shooting the lowest percentage of his career and he's getting a lot of open looks. This might be correlated with not playing with a big C. I'd be interested in seeing his stats with / without Poeltl.

Correlated to both Poeltl and Barrett (hint, topic of this thread).

If we are to pay Barrett, I would expect him to do the duty of Quickley (PG and add a floater / mid range), and Quickley is expandable. More importantly, the fit for Ingram and Barrett is more a lockdown defender with spotup 3 (unsure CMB and Walter can take this role). If we need better scoring, we are better off adding a scoring (another rim pressure PnR) 6th man for this role. That would get us below the tax and with depth.

[DreamTeam09]

I am quoting this again because I really need to know what “pay a positive rotation player double” in this context even means

He's saying IQ is a rotation player we paid twice as much for? That makes sense. IQ probably is one of the poorest production to pay ratio players in the league right now.

Shooting variance is a thing though, he should eventually bounce back. He's shooting the lowest percentage of his career and he's getting a lot of open looks. This might be correlated with not playing with a big C. I'd be interested in seeing his stats with / without Poeltl.

Correlated to both Poeltl and Barrett (hint, topic of this thread).

If we are to pay Barrett, I would expect him to do the duty of Quickley (PG and add a floater / mid range), and Quickley is expandable. More importantly, the fit for Ingram and Barrett is more a lockdown defender with spotup 3 (unsure CMB and Walter can take this role). If we need better scoring, we are better off adding a scoring (another rim pressure PnR) 6th man for this role. That would get us below the tax and with depth.

why would that be the ideal fit when we are currently a top 5 defensive team? You are lockset in one way if building a team & when you are in that mindset, it's never a good thing...Why would you want RJ to PG things instead of doing RJ things like slashing, getting out in transition, and getting to the rim? You wanna spam pnr with RJ, and have him take more pull up jumpers which is what's gonna happen

[YogurtProducer]

If we are to pay Barrett, I would expect him to do the duty of Quickley (PG and add a floater / mid range), and Quickley is expandable. More importantly, the fit for Ingram and Barrett is more a lockdown defender with spotup 3 (unsure CMB and Walter can take this role). If we need better scoring, we are better off adding a scoring (another rim pressure PnR) 6th man for this role. That would get us below the tax and with depth.

... what?

Expecting Barrett to do what Quickley does is just pure insanity... you think RJ is just going to be able to develop into a PG with a floater and mid range game somehow?

And then since RJ is playing Quickley's role, you want to get a rim pressure player (which is what RJ is right now?)

I am sorry man, but this just incoherent to me.

[YogurtProducer]

[
It means you overpay someone in double.

The DeRozan example was the same mindset that people thought he was contributing a lot, and have no cheaper replacement.

What does it mean to overpay someone in double?

He's saying IQ is a rotation player we paid twice as much for? That makes sense. IQ probably is one of the poorest production to pay ratio players in the league right now.

This is not even close to the truth. IQ makes $32.5M. Wanna know who else makes $30-35ish million? Guys like McCollum, Porzingis, Murray, Randle, Herro, Poole, Grant, Holiday, Middleton, Green, Sengun, Brunson, Gobert, Suggs, JJJ,. He is on the bottom end on that list, but not some crazy outlier.

You could argue he is overpaid a little bit, but it really is not significant. Lets say he is overpaid by $5M and "should be" making $27.5M. Guys who make $25.0 - 28.5M? White, Wiggins, RJ, Simons, Vassell, Rozier, Tobias, Collins, Claxton, FVV, Bridges, Giddey, Draymond, etc.

Like he is right in that tier there with those guys and better than most tbh.

The idea he is paid twice as much as he should be is insanity.

Shooting variance is a thing though, he should eventually bounce back. He's shooting the lowest percentage of his career and he's getting a lot of open looks. This might be correlated with not playing with a big C. I'd be interested in seeing his stats with / without Poeltl.

Yeah his shooting is very weird right now. He is getting the most wide open 3's of his career and shooting them at the worst % of his career.

On the other hand, he was one of the leagues best pull up 3 point shooters over the last few years, and he has been pretty bad at it this year to.

I for one don't expect a guy who has been a borderline elite shooter in his career to continue to be average at it. Odds are he will go on a crazy 10 game run at some point this season and his #'s will all come back to his career averages.

[Indeed]

If we are to pay Barrett, I would expect him to do the duty of Quickley (PG and add a floater / mid range), and Quickley is expandable. More importantly, the fit for Ingram and Barrett is more a lockdown defender with spotup 3 (unsure CMB and Walter can take this role). If we need better scoring, we are better off adding a scoring (another rim pressure PnR) 6th man for this role. That would get us below the tax and with depth.

... what?

Expecting Barrett to do what Quickley does is just pure insanity... you think RJ is just going to be able to develop into a PG with a floater and mid range game somehow?

And then since RJ is playing Quickley's role, you want to get a rim pressure player (which is what RJ is right now?)

I am sorry man, but this just incoherent to me.

So if Barrett is injured, we would accept that our offense being in the bottom of the league? If not, where are you getting another rim pressure without going to the tax?

[Indeed]

He's saying IQ is a rotation player we paid twice as much for? That makes sense. IQ probably is one of the poorest production to pay ratio players in the league right now.

Shooting variance is a thing though, he should eventually bounce back. He's shooting the lowest percentage of his career and he's getting a lot of open looks. This might be correlated with not playing with a big C. I'd be interested in seeing his stats with / without Poeltl.

Correlated to both Poeltl and Barrett (hint, topic of this thread).

If we are to pay Barrett, I would expect him to do the duty of Quickley (PG and add a floater / mid range), and Quickley is expandable. More importantly, the fit for Ingram and Barrett is more a lockdown defender with spotup 3 (unsure CMB and Walter can take this role). If we need better scoring, we are better off adding a scoring (another rim pressure PnR) 6th man for this role. That would get us below the tax and with depth.

why would that be the ideal fit when we are currently a top 5 defensive team? You are lockset in one way if building a team & when you are in that mindset, it's never a good thing...Why would you want RJ to PG things instead of doing RJ things like slashing, getting out in transition, and getting to the rim? You wanna spam pnr with RJ, and have him take more pull up jumpers which is what's gonna happen

I never said it is an ideal fit, but we clealy need another rim pressure behind Barrett, and which position would not get us above the tax?

If people agree to this thread about how important Barrett with his rim pressure, is there a reason we are not adding a backup for not being the bottom of the league in offense? And which position if not the PG/SG spot without breaking the bank?

[Indeed]

[
It means you overpay someone in double.

The DeRozan example was the same mindset that people thought he was contributing a lot, and have no cheaper replacement.

What does it mean to overpay someone in double?

He's saying IQ is a rotation player we paid twice as much for? That makes sense. IQ probably is one of the poorest production to pay ratio players in the league right now.

This is not even close to the truth. IQ makes $32.5M. Wanna know who else makes $30-35ish million? Guys like McCollum, Porzingis, Murray, Randle, Herro, Poole, Grant, Holiday, Middleton, Green, Sengun, Brunson, Gobert, Suggs, JJJ,. He is on the bottom end on that list, but not some crazy outlier.

You could argue he is overpaid a little bit, but it really is not significant. Lets say he is overpaid by $5M and "should be" making $27.5M. Guys who make $25.0 - 28.5M? White, Wiggins, RJ, Simons, Vassell, Rozier, Tobias, Collins, Claxton, FVV, Bridges, Giddey, Draymond, etc.

Like he is right in that tier there with those guys and better than most tbh.

The idea he is paid twice as much as he should be is insanity.

Shooting variance is a thing though, he should eventually bounce back. He's shooting the lowest percentage of his career and he's getting a lot of open looks. This might be correlated with not playing with a big C. I'd be interested in seeing his stats with / without Poeltl.

Yeah his shooting is very weird right now. He is getting the most wide open 3's of his career and shooting them at the worst % of his career.

On the other hand, he was one of the leagues best pull up 3 point shooters over the last few years, and he has been pretty bad at it this year to.

I for one don't expect a guy who has been a borderline elite shooter in his career to continue to be average at it. Odds are he will go on a crazy 10 game run at some point this season and his #'s will all come back to his career averages.

His low release does not suggest he is one of the better pullup shooter in the league. We certainly can wait.

As for being overpaid, it was widely reported from Bobby Mark, where his contract is being the benchmark for negotiation, which is bad.

[YogurtProducer]

His low release does not suggest he is one of the better pullup shooter in the league. We certainly can wait.

I mean... there are stats that show that he was

Among players taking at least 2 pull up 3's per game, he was 7th in pull up 3pt% last year and 12th the year before. This year he is 43rd among 55 guys who meet that criteria.

https://www.nba.com/stats/players/pullup?CF=PULL_UP_FG3A*G*1.9&PerMode=PerGame&Season=2024-25&dir=D&sort=PULL_UP_FG3_PCT

https://www.nba.com/stats/players/pullup?CF=PULL_UP_FG3A*G*1.9&PerMode=PerGame&Season=2023-24&dir=D&sort=PULL_UP_FG3_PCT

I love the confidence on something we can so easily fact check tho

[YogurtProducer]

If people agree to this thread about how important Barrett with his rim pressure, is there a reason we are not adding a backup for not being the bottom of the league in offense? And which position if not the PG/SG spot without breaking the bank?

I mean, just because IQ has been healthy and you haven't seen what we look like without him, doesn't mean he is also not important to the offence.

Reality check - we have been missing Jak and RJ for about a month. That is 40% of your starting lineup. We also had a really bad shooting month from pretty much everyone outside of BI and Mamu. Everyone else, IQ included, was missing a TON of open shots.

We shot 33% as a team on 22.4 wide open looks from Dec 1 to today. Before that we shot 37.2% on 20.6 attempts per game.

That alone is about 3 points per game just on wide open looks. (doesnt account for "open" looks that also saw a drop off).

But even adding 3ppg to our stats takes us from 28th to 18th in ORTG.

Sometimes, the answer are not that complicated.

[PushDaRock]

[
It means you overpay someone in double.

The DeRozan example was the same mindset that people thought he was contributing a lot, and have no cheaper replacement.

What does it mean to overpay someone in double?

He's saying IQ is a rotation player we paid twice as much for? That makes sense. IQ probably is one of the poorest production to pay ratio players in the league right now.

This is not even close to the truth. IQ makes $32.5M. Wanna know who else makes $30-35ish million? Guys like McCollum, Porzingis, Murray, Randle, Herro, Poole, Grant, Holiday, Middleton, Green, Sengun, Brunson, Gobert, Suggs, JJJ,. He is on the bottom end on that list, but not some crazy outlier.

You could argue he is overpaid a little bit, but it really is not significant. Lets say he is overpaid by $5M and "should be" making $27.5M. Guys who make $25.0 - 28.5M? White, Wiggins, RJ, Simons, Vassell, Rozier, Tobias, Collins, Claxton, FVV, Bridges, Giddey, Draymond, etc.

Like he is right in that tier there with those guys and better than most tbh.

The idea he is paid twice as much as he should be is insanity.

Shooting variance is a thing though, he should eventually bounce back. He's shooting the lowest percentage of his career and he's getting a lot of open looks. This might be correlated with not playing with a big C. I'd be interested in seeing his stats with / without Poeltl.

Yeah his shooting is very weird right now. He is getting the most wide open 3's of his career and shooting them at the worst % of his career.

On the other hand, he was one of the leagues best pull up 3 point shooters over the last few years, and he has been pretty bad at it this year to.

I for one don't expect a guy who has been a borderline elite shooter in his career to continue to be average at it. Odds are he will go on a crazy 10 game run at some point this season and his #'s will all come back to his career averages.

I'm thinking this as well, he's too good of a shooter to be missing so many open ones. The percentages on the year aren't terrible but he should be over 40% with the quality of looks he's getting.

[MEDIC]

Plus, NY and Boston cap hits are 9 and 12 million more than ours and have future 1sts traded away.

Would we be better trading 1sts and adding 9-12 million to our cap hit? Yes. But as you said, it's not the time to be doing those things.

The Celtics without Tatum isn't a tax team.
Meanwhile, it is unfair to compare to Lowry, who is actually performing (much) better than his contract. As for DeRozan, we didn't pay him the max for reason, and once we traded him away, we are not worse. Quickley is performing less than his contract, keeping him instead of developing our players or exploring better value is just not optimizing our lineup and being over the tax.

Who are we not developing at the expense of IQ?

Davion Mitchell & Jamal Shead

[Indeed]

If people agree to this thread about how important Barrett with his rim pressure, is there a reason we are not adding a backup for not being the bottom of the league in offense? And which position if not the PG/SG spot without breaking the bank?

I mean, just because IQ has been healthy and you haven't seen what we look like without him, doesn't mean he is also not important to the offence.

Reality check - we have been missing Jak and RJ for about a month. That is 40% of your starting lineup. We also had a really bad shooting month from pretty much everyone outside of BI and Mamu. Everyone else, IQ included, was missing a TON of open shots.

We shot 33% as a team on 22.4 wide open looks from Dec 1 to today. Before that we shot 37.2% on 20.6 attempts per game.

That alone is about 3 points per game just on wide open looks. (doesnt account for "open" looks that also saw a drop off).

But even adding 3ppg to our stats takes us from 28th to 18th in ORTG.

Sometimes, the answer are not that complicated.

The answer is not that complicated, but you are complicating or conflicting yourself.

If you believe the drop off is not due to 3 point shooting, then we dont need more 3 point shooting. You just proofed my point.

[YogurtProducer]

If people agree to this thread about how important Barrett with his rim pressure, is there a reason we are not adding a backup for not being the bottom of the league in offense? And which position if not the PG/SG spot without breaking the bank?

I mean, just because IQ has been healthy and you haven't seen what we look like without him, doesn't mean he is also not important to the offence.

Reality check - we have been missing Jak and RJ for about a month. That is 40% of your starting lineup. We also had a really bad shooting month from pretty much everyone outside of BI and Mamu. Everyone else, IQ included, was missing a TON of open shots.

We shot 33% as a team on 22.4 wide open looks from Dec 1 to today. Before that we shot 37.2% on 20.6 attempts per game.

That alone is about 3 points per game just on wide open looks. (doesnt account for "open" looks that also saw a drop off).

But even adding 3ppg to our stats takes us from 28th to 18th in ORTG.

Sometimes, the answer are not that complicated.

The answer is not that complicated, but you are complicating or conflicting yourself.

If you believe the drop off is not due to 3 point shooting, then we dont need more 3 point shooting. You just proofed my point.

Do you even read..? Like actually I am questioning this, because you seem to interpret posts the complete opposite of what they actually say.

I said a big reason of the drop of WAS 3 point shooting, and that a significant reason why our offence came to a halt was because no one could hit a 3. How the hell did you get to the conclusion I said the opposite?

[Los_29]

The Celtics without Tatum isn't a tax team.
Meanwhile, it is unfair to compare to Lowry, who is actually performing (much) better than his contract. As for DeRozan, we didn't pay him the max for reason, and once we traded him away, we are not worse. Quickley is performing less than his contract, keeping him instead of developing our players or exploring better value is just not optimizing our lineup and being over the tax.

Who are we not developing at the expense of IQ?

Davion Mitchell & Jamal Shead

They both have played a lot and did play a lot. Davion started quite a few games for us and averaged close to 25mpg. Shead is our back-up point guard and gets steady minutes. Over 20mpg this year.

They actually were and are in ideal environments for development.

[YogurtProducer]

Who are we not developing at the expense of IQ?

Davion Mitchell & Jamal Shead

They both have played a lot and did play a lot. Davion started quite a few games for us and averaged close to 25mpg. Shead is our back-up point guard and gets steady minutes. Over 20mpg this year.

They actually were and are in ideal environments for development.

I assume anyone saying we needed to develop Davion is just being sarcastic lol

I am glad Davion has a spot though. IT was laughable when we acquired him and people were trying to push the narrative he was not an NBA player. He just got squeezed out here in TO due to money.

[Tripod]

I the end, for IQ, he needs to be our best shooter because that's the end of the court where he can excel. He can't keep shooting worse than RJ and Barnes from 3. We expect way more than that.

[Indeed]

I mean, just because IQ has been healthy and you haven't seen what we look like without him, doesn't mean he is also not important to the offence.

Reality check - we have been missing Jak and RJ for about a month. That is 40% of your starting lineup. We also had a really bad shooting month from pretty much everyone outside of BI and Mamu. Everyone else, IQ included, was missing a TON of open shots.

We shot 33% as a team on 22.4 wide open looks from Dec 1 to today. Before that we shot 37.2% on 20.6 attempts per game.

That alone is about 3 points per game just on wide open looks. (doesnt account for "open" looks that also saw a drop off).

But even adding 3ppg to our stats takes us from 28th to 18th in ORTG.

Sometimes, the answer are not that complicated.

The answer is not that complicated, but you are complicating or conflicting yourself.

If you believe the drop off is not due to 3 point shooting, then we dont need more 3 point shooting. You just proofed my point.

Do you even read..? Like actually I am questioning this, because you seem to interpret posts the complete opposite of what they actually say.

I said a big reason of the drop of WAS 3 point shooting, and that a significant reason why our offence came to a halt was because no one could hit a 3. How the hell did you get to the conclusion I said the opposite?

Because it was Barrett making others shooting well from 3s, and before the injury, we were top 6 in 3 point shooting. That suggested our need is not an elite shooter.

If Barrett was irrelevant in making the extra 3 point per game, and we need an elite shooter, then you are disagreeing the drop of our efficiency was due to Barrett (disagree to this thread).

If you still dont understand, I will tell you straight. It was not because no one can shoot the 3 as you said, but Barrett took the attention off and allow 3s to be shot at their spot, and you dont need an elite shooter when others can shoot at their comfortable spot, and I rather we double down on the rim pressure, instead of elite 3 point shooting.