Moderators: HiJiNX, 7 Footer, Morris_Shatford, niQ, Duffman100, tsherkin, Reeko, lebron stopper, DG88
Duffman100 wrote:grumpiest 26-19 fanbase ever?
Indeed wrote:Duffman100 wrote:All this IQ/Shead talk...
The bigger issue if CMB is missing significant time and Poeltl isn't back, we're **** ed for our frontcourt. We need to make a deal soon for center depth.
I am unsure fixing the center problem by creating a guard problem would make us any better.
We can say the same with Barrett out and Shead got injured, we basically have no rim pressure and lack of shooting (maybe we already lacked shooting in half court).
The Bulls have been a lot better whenever Smith is in the game – no matter the position he is playing. Cleaning the Glass has Smith's efficiency differential sitting at +12.5, which rests inside the 95th percentile. The Bulls' offense is +8.7 points per 100 possessions better, while their defense is -3.8.
WWSRD wrote:nikster wrote:evenflow wrote:
This is just not accurate. IQ is being criticized because of the role he is being asked to play not because he lacks talent.
Most of the critique, from what I've seen, comes from people looking at how IQ performs as a starting PG and coming to the realization that he is going to be a liability during the post-season as a PG.
It is about a simple question. Can we win a championship with IQ as our starting PG? I think that those who are critical of him as a PG realize that we can't, so we might as well move on from the experiment and find another solution that will allow us to achieve our ultimate goal.
There was good example last night of why people hold this view. It was the fastbreak where IQ had Grady on his right and Mamu on his left. He passed the ball to Mamu instead of Grady, which would have been the correct play. He didn't recognize the correct play quick enough and by the time he was able to process it, the only play he felt comfortable making was the pass to Mamu.
Also I have doubts that he has the skill to make that pass to Gradey. He really isn't a good passer and can't really recall a time when he has made a one handed pass, almost all his passes are with two hands which is severely limiting to making the correct reads on offense.
Thing is though, I think he could help us win a championship with him as a 6th man/SG. He is very talented, he's just in the wrong role.
That's not a simple question and I thinkt eh discussion around "can x player be a championship starter" are always so simplistic.
Contenders make it or win titles all the time with players as good or worse than IQ. Is Aaron Nesmith a championship SG? Derrick Jones JR a championship wing? 38 year old Al Horford a championship C?
IQ is a good 3 point shooter, good secondary playmaker and is at least solid defensively. There is no reason he can't be a stater on a championship team
Yes there is. He's eating 25% of your Cap and giving you 17/6 on 36 p% with average defence.
Madvillainy2004 wrote:Tor_Raps wrote:YogurtProducer wrote:I mean it is true. Analytically our team is IQ --> Barnes --> RJ --> Ingram
I think Barnes is kind of unarguable as our best player this year, but Ingram really hasn't been "that" much better than IQ and RJ that there is no discussion on who the 2nd best has been.
Does Ingram take the hardest shots? Yep. Does Ingram make shots IQ + RJ cant? Also yep.
But there are two sides of the floor, and a lot more to basketball than just PPG. Ingram has the most PPG on the team, but he also has been the least efficient of the 4, the worst playmaker (maybe that is RJ), the worst defender, and also the most turnover prone.
But I would say our first course of business if we are ever in a "trade for a star" phase is to move Ingram, not IQ or RJ. Ingram is not good enough offensively to offset his defense, and that gets to be even more of a problem if he goes down the pecking order.
Theres a reason why analytics for the most part havent taken off in basketball like baseball, its just too hard to quantify in a team sport.
I can easily say Barnes is 1 and Ingram is 2 on our team with no one else even in the discussion either to due performance or injuries. This isnt even debatable to me lol.
How is it not debatable? Were acting like Ingram is KD or something. I dont think hes been "bad" but theres 2 ends of the court and Ingrams defense has always been a drag on his overall value. IQ guards ball handlers so its easy to nitpick his defense instead seeing Ingram watch guys go for backdoor cuts or is too lost to rotate. Ingram occasionally can make plays cause of his length but his motor and IQ on that end has always been bad. And i don't think hes enough of an offensive engine for people to hand wave away his bad defense (like we can do for guys like Brunson/Luka/Mitchell).
Offensively he kinda sucks as a playmaker lol hes at 163 assists to 119 turnovers (for comparison IQ is at 261 assists to 71 turnovers). Scoring wise he has a useful skillset in that he can take a lot of midrange jumpshots and hit them at a reasonable clip. But his lack of rim pressure puts a cap on his overall efficiency which is worse than IQs and pretty mediocre as far as 1st option scorers go.
Even in his on/off stuff is just meh +0.9 per 100 with him on and were actually +1.8 per 100 with him on the bench. Some of that is garbage time noise but hes not exactly driving a ton of winning ball. This probably came off as overally negative but i think you gotta look past just PPG to see what Ingram really brings to the table and it paints a pretty meh picture overall.
Tor_Raps wrote:Madvillainy2004 wrote:
All I read there was Ingram slander, some of which is true, and yet still beats IQ EASILY as the better player for the Raptors this season.
Ah yes - the old "I have nothing to bring to the argument, so I am just gonna call you stupid" defense.I cant even believe I have to debate with people whos been better here. Its like some people dont watch or understand what theyre watching. Ingram would win in a landslide if you created a poll about this lol.
LoveMyRaps wrote:Duffman100 wrote:grumpiest 26-19 fanbase ever?
I'm enjoying this season a ton.
Despite all the injuries, we're still 26-19 and firmly in a top 4 position.
Also helps the Cavs and 76ers continue to drop games.
Second half of the season is gonna be slugfest. We'll need everyone to be healthy.
DreamTeam09 wrote:WWSRD wrote:earthtone wrote:We’ve won 2 playoff games in the past 5 seasons, you think we should be holding players to championship-or-bust standards?
If you pay a guy $35million to start at PG, then you should feel he can start on a championship team. More importantly, he can't be PREVENTING you from building a championship team by clogging up your cap.
I'm pretty sure Bobby thinks he can get 80% of IQ production for 15% of the money. Shead is kind of proving that this season.
this is absolute madness. Again everyone has to stop using these blanketed phrases, theory, or mandates or talking points.
He's the 19th highest paid PG, no you're not getting 80% of IQ for 15% of the money, saying that isn't even a serious take. & whatever player you're going to use as an example is not the standard or that player should be paid more.
By that same token the max players being paid max and not performing at the max, or injury prone max players, iQ is being paid like 15-30% compared to those guys, & we are currently top 4 in the east. The earth is not falling
YogurtProducer wrote:WWSRD wrote:nikster wrote:That's not a simple question and I thinkt eh discussion around "can x player be a championship starter" are always so simplistic.
Contenders make it or win titles all the time with players as good or worse than IQ. Is Aaron Nesmith a championship SG? Derrick Jones JR a championship wing? 38 year old Al Horford a championship C?
IQ is a good 3 point shooter, good secondary playmaker and is at least solid defensively. There is no reason he can't be a stater on a championship team
Yes there is. He's eating 25% of your Cap and giving you 17/6 on 36 p% with average defence.
25%?
Try 21%, and it will be as low as 18% by the last year.
He also is a career 38% 3 point guy, and is certainly better than average defensively. Per EPM, he is actually 11th among starting PGs.
YogurtProducer wrote:Tor_Raps wrote:Madvillainy2004 wrote:
All I read there was Ingram slander, some of which is true, and yet still beats IQ EASILY as the better player for the Raptors this season.
Where is the slander?
And sure, but that is up for debate. IQs shooting and spacing, and RJs rim pressure, are arguably just as important as Ingrams tough shot making.Ah yes - the old "I have nothing to bring to the argument, so I am just gonna call you stupid" defense.I cant even believe I have to debate with people whos been better here. Its like some people dont watch or understand what theyre watching. Ingram would win in a landslide if you created a poll about this lol.
I am 100% fine with someone thinking Ingram is better, but it certainly is way closer than you are making it out to be. Two sides to the floor. More to offense than just hitting middies.
The fact of the matter is that what Ingram is good at, is not overly valuable at an NBA level. He has below average efficiency and that is the BEST part of his game. His playmaking has been a disaster. His defense is poor.
nikster wrote:YogurtProducer wrote:WWSRD wrote:
Yes there is. He's eating 25% of your Cap and giving you 17/6 on 36 p% with average defence.
25%?
Try 21%, and it will be as low as 18% by the last year.
He also is a career 38% 3 point guy, and is certainly better than average defensively. Per EPM, he is actually 11th among starting PGs.
And again, championship teams survive bad contracts like that all the time. Tim hardway Jr at 13% of the cap was racking up DNPs in the finals and only averaged 13 minutes on the games he did play.
IQ around 20% is totally plausible for a championship team
WWSRD wrote:DreamTeam09 wrote:WWSRD wrote:
If you pay a guy $35million to start at PG, then you should feel he can start on a championship team. More importantly, he can't be PREVENTING you from building a championship team by clogging up your cap.
I'm pretty sure Bobby thinks he can get 80% of IQ production for 15% of the money. Shead is kind of proving that this season.
this is absolute madness. Again everyone has to stop using these blanketed phrases, theory, or mandates or talking points.
He's the 19th highest paid PG, no you're not getting 80% of IQ for 15% of the money, saying that isn't even a serious take. & whatever player you're going to use as an example is not the standard or that player should be paid more.
By that same token the max players being paid max and not performing at the max, or injury prone max players, iQ is being paid like 15-30% compared to those guys, & we are currently top 4 in the east. The earth is not falling
'Everyone stop using these phrases'........like you're some sort of authority on basketball reasoning. Give me a break.
Fine, 15% is hyperbole. You can get 80% of the production for 25% of the cost. That person exists and it's Tre Jones.
You can spin it however you like, IQ's contract was a bet on him taking a step into being a 32.5M/year guy. He has not taken that step. He hasn't taken a step at all.
He was a 18-24M/guy. He still is. He's overpaid by 8-14M/year. He can change that by playing better.
He's not a bad player. It won't be easy to find a better player. It will be easy to get a better deal value wise though.
Madvillainy2004 wrote:YogurtProducer wrote:Tor_Raps wrote:
All I read there was Ingram slander, some of which is true, and yet still beats IQ EASILY as the better player for the Raptors this season.
Where is the slander?
And sure, but that is up for debate. IQs shooting and spacing, and RJs rim pressure, are arguably just as important as Ingrams tough shot making.Ah yes - the old "I have nothing to bring to the argument, so I am just gonna call you stupid" defense.I cant even believe I have to debate with people whos been better here. Its like some people dont watch or understand what theyre watching. Ingram would win in a landslide if you created a poll about this lol.
I am 100% fine with someone thinking Ingram is better, but it certainly is way closer than you are making it out to be. Two sides to the floor. More to offense than just hitting middies.
The fact of the matter is that what Ingram is good at, is not overly valuable at an NBA level. He has below average efficiency and that is the BEST part of his game. His playmaking has been a disaster. His defense is poor.
Like theres definitely some nuance and I do take into account Ingrams role when looking at his efficiency (which is why id say hes better than Mamu for example despite the gap in efficiency). But even with the context that Ingram has a lot of offensive attetion and takes the toughest shots i still dont think hes been "good" in that role.
His turnovers are just really killer to me cause most of them arent high-risk/high-reward passes. Theres lots of live ball turnovers from his low iq and lack of a solid handle. He just doesnt punish teams for giving him attention like most other 1st options. But we still need what he brings and I think theres a path to him being better tho.
WWSRD wrote:DreamTeam09 wrote:WWSRD wrote:
If you pay a guy $35million to start at PG, then you should feel he can start on a championship team. More importantly, he can't be PREVENTING you from building a championship team by clogging up your cap.
I'm pretty sure Bobby thinks he can get 80% of IQ production for 15% of the money. Shead is kind of proving that this season.
this is absolute madness. Again everyone has to stop using these blanketed phrases, theory, or mandates or talking points.
He's the 19th highest paid PG, no you're not getting 80% of IQ for 15% of the money, saying that isn't even a serious take. & whatever player you're going to use as an example is not the standard or that player should be paid more.
By that same token the max players being paid max and not performing at the max, or injury prone max players, iQ is being paid like 15-30% compared to those guys, & we are currently top 4 in the east. The earth is not falling
'Everyone stop using these phrases'........like you're some sort of authority on basketball reasoning. Give me a break.
Fine, 15% is hyperbole. You can get 80% of the production for 25% of the cost. That person exists and it's Tre Jones.
You can spin it however you like, IQ's contract was a bet on him taking a step into being a 32.5M/year guy. He has not taken that step. He hasn't taken a step at all.
He was a 18-24M/guy. He still is. He's overpaid by 8-14M/year. He can change that by playing better.
He's not a bad player. It won't be easy to find a better player. It will be easy to get a better deal value wise though.
WWSRD wrote:nikster wrote:
He's overpaid by like 10million. Not the end of the world but not great. His backup being extra cheap and surprisingly good/young exacerbates the issue.
He gets to 23pts/7ast or 20pts/9ast with same efficiency.....he's a 32million dollar guy.
Right now, he's a 21milion dollar guy. Still a very good player.
They are not.I feel the statements above are fairly factual. Can we agree on that?
Come on bruh. You find the one outlier guy who got traded away for peanuts and extended at a low rate because he had no value.WWSRD wrote:Fine, 15% is hyperbole. You can get 80% of the production for 25% of the cost. That person exists and it's Tre Jones.
I'd 100% argue he is a $32M guy. He is paid like the 56th highest paid guy in the league, and by all metrics is performing at about that rate.You can spin it however you like, IQ's contract was a bet on him taking a step into being a 32.5M/year guy. He has not taken that step. He hasn't taken a step at all.
DreamTeam09 wrote:WWSRD wrote:DreamTeam09 wrote:
this is absolute madness. Again everyone has to stop using these blanketed phrases, theory, or mandates or talking points.
He's the 19th highest paid PG, no you're not getting 80% of IQ for 15% of the money, saying that isn't even a serious take. & whatever player you're going to use as an example is not the standard or that player should be paid more.
By that same token the max players being paid max and not performing at the max, or injury prone max players, iQ is being paid like 15-30% compared to those guys, & we are currently top 4 in the east. The earth is not falling
'Everyone stop using these phrases'........like you're some sort of authority on basketball reasoning. Give me a break.
Fine, 15% is hyperbole. You can get 80% of the production for 25% of the cost. That person exists and it's Tre Jones.
You can spin it however you like, IQ's contract was a bet on him taking a step into being a 32.5M/year guy. He has not taken that step. He hasn't taken a step at all.
He was a 18-24M/guy. He still is. He's overpaid by 8-14M/year. He can change that by playing better.
He's not a bad player. It won't be easy to find a better player. It will be easy to get a better deal value wise though.
it's not that I am some sort of authority, I just don't confine myself to preconceived notions that trap myself into these one way or the highway mindsets.
Nor is Tre Jones anywhere close to the player of quickly caliber, even if Tre Jones is having an up year and quickly is having a down year.
YogurtProducer wrote:WWSRD wrote:nikster wrote:
He's overpaid by like 10million. Not the end of the world but not great. His backup being extra cheap and surprisingly good/young exacerbates the issue.
He gets to 23pts/7ast or 20pts/9ast with same efficiency.....he's a 32million dollar guy.
Do you wanna know the PGs who averages 23/7?
- Keyonte George on a dreadful Utah team
- Cade Cunningham (max player)
- Tyrese Maxey (max player)
- Luka Doncic (MVP candidate)
- SGA (MVP)
- Jamal Murray (max player)
- James Harder (Top 75 of all time)
Wanna know which PGs average 20/9?
- Cade Cunningham
Wanna know the cheapest player here (outside George on the rookie deal, who also is likely going to get $40+M)? Maxey who is slated to earned $38M this year and $46M by the end of his deal.
IQ makes $32M. Similar to Jrue Holiday, Jalen Green, Jordan Poole, Tyler Herro, Dejounte Murray. Good players. Guys who maybe even make an all star game. Not freaking all-nba 1st team candidates
What a freaking ridiculous threshold to expect Quickley to get to.Right now, he's a 21milion dollar guy. Still a very good player.
Point guards who make around $21M
- Marcus Smart ($21M)
- Sexton ($19M)
- Monk ($19M)
- Nembhard ($18M)
Quickley clears all these guys.They are not.I feel the statements above are fairly factual. Can we agree on that?
Exactly - and you are ignoring that IQ is better than those guys.WWSRD wrote: Jrue Holiday, Jalen Green, Jordan Poole, Tyler Herro, Dejounte Murray.........All those guys were traded to dump those contracts to another team after buyer's remorse. except Herro, currently being shopped. Your point did not land well. Those are bad contracts. Your saying IQ is a bad contract like these guys.
Okay? But IQ is better than Smart, so who cares what people thought of Smart at $20?- Marcus Smart ($21M)
- Sexton ($19M)
- Monk ($19M)
- Nembhard ($18M)
Marcus Smart is is on a 5million contract. The 15million is from a buyout, because, once again, no team wanted him at 20million.
No. Two sides to the floor my guy.Sexton, Monk at 20million are more valuable than IQ at 32. If they were all paid the same, IQ would be the most valuable.
Nembhard got overpaid after his playoff run. He's overpaid and worse than IQ. So we can agree on that.
"Wanna know which PGs average 20/9?
- Cade Cunningham"
No....Cade is averaging 26/10.
WWSRD wrote:nikster wrote:YogurtProducer wrote:25%?
Try 21%, and it will be as low as 18% by the last year.
He also is a career 38% 3 point guy, and is certainly better than average defensively. Per EPM, he is actually 11th among starting PGs.
And again, championship teams survive bad contracts like that all the time. Tim hardway Jr at 13% of the cap was racking up DNPs in the finals and only averaged 13 minutes on the games he did play.
IQ around 20% is totally plausible for a championship team
He's overpaid by like 10million. Not the end of the world but not great. His backup being extra cheap and surprisingly good/young exacerbates the issue.
He gets to 23pts/7ast or 20pts/9ast with same efficiency.....he's a 32million dollar guy. Right now, he's a 21milion dollar guy. Still a very good player.
I feel the statements above are fairly factual. Can we agree on that?
WWSRD wrote:Raptors expected IQ to take a step and he hasn't. By your own admission, he may have regressed.
Your position ignores his contract in comparison to the rest of the league.Again, my position is moderate and reasonable: Decent player. Overpaid by 10million dollars/year. Makes roster construction more difficult. Contract value based on expected production which hasn't occurred as of yet.