Everything Scottie Barnes

[inthepaint]

If players are heads up, watching the positioning of the defense as well as their own teammates, then cutting provides layups and dunks along with associated foul shots, corner threes and mid-range shots. I don't see any place in my post where I said "let's put five players on the floor who can't shoot." To think that the raptors players and staff are content to go through the next ten months without without working on and improving 3 point shooting seems silly. It is easier to improve a random player's 3 pt shot than it is to improve a random players 3 point shot defense. With the type of players the Raptors are accumulating, and their obvious effort to hone a switchable, positionless style of play, an improvement in their 3 pt shooting and an improvement in their 3 pt defense seems to be their goal. That combined with a Ward style philosophy of team building might ameliorate the lack of free agent star power they face. Improved play for the team combined will elevate the perceived value of each member. Increased asset value allows for additional trades down the road.

My preference is to imagine they have a master plan to improve the team as opposed to being oblivious to their lack of distance shooting and no alternative to mediocrity.

We'll see how it goes.

I also feel this is the best alternative for them, at lest for now. Get the best guys that are "gettable" at this point: athletic, switchy, posiotionless wingy players that are fast and sound defenders with a feel for the game, then slowly add value internally by developing their individual offence.

Yes, you need individual brilliance (aka star power) to win, but start power alone doesn't win it either. You need a solid foundation, and post-championship our team was picked apart. So now they gotta rebuild the foundation the proper way, then make the jump once they're in contention again (through trades and future picks)

I will only add this: This novel uber-positionless approach requires patience and tolerance for errors (on both ends of the floor). Quick hooks with players under the gun to prove something and also "playing favourites" won't work with this approach. So if that's what they want Nurse may have to re-think his rotation philosophies. We're starting from scratch now, we need an equal baseline where these guys can feel they there's a fair internal competition so they'll all grow together

[Puffer]

...Quick hooks with players under the gun to prove something and also "playing favourites" won't work with this approach. So if that's what they want Nurse may have to re-think his rotation philosophies. We're starting from scratch now, we need an equal baseline where these guys can feel they there's a fair internal competition so they'll all grow together

If this is the way they are trying to build their team, then Nurse needs to use the hook judiciously and on guys who aren't helping the flow of the game, as opposed to guys who are taking good shots and missing. I'm listening to SL coach talk about Ish and praising his basketball IQ. Seems to be a theme. We'll all know more halfway through the season. If they are sold on this method, they will stick it out at least that long, hoping to see signs of growth.

[slaw]

I mean they aren't planning on an either/or (either high IQ 'flow' guys or guys with basketball skills), they're drafting & picking up guys with the IQ & feel and they're planning to develop the skills within the organization. They feel they can do that and end up with better players in 2-4 years than guys who currently have the skills. E.g. evidently this was the whole thing with Barnes vs Suggs.

LOL, what? What the fuck does that even mean? Who is saying this? That 'consultant' from that RR podcast?

[DanH]

LOL, what? What the fuck does that even mean? Who is saying this? That 'consultant' from that RR podcast?

I think SR was just responding to golden's points in the discussion above.

[slaw]

I think SR was just responding to golden's points in the discussion above.

I know. I am wondering where this construct of somehow feel for the game is exclusive of actually, you know, being able to play the game. It's so fucking absurd that it has to come from some sort of consultant and I'm curious as to whether it's this guy from the podcast that seems to keep coming up.

[golden]

I think SR was just responding to golden's points in the discussion above.

lol. I never said that. Lost in translation, like Dragic.

[Puffer]

I know. I am wondering where this construct of somehow feel for the game is exclusive of actually, you know, being able to play the game. It's so fucking absurd that it has to come from some sort of consultant and I'm curious as to whether it's this guy from the podcast that seems to keep coming up.

The consultant (Henry Ward) never said "Pick guys with feel, even if they can't play." He referenced past teams where the ball moved, players cut and good shots were given up for great shots. Then he advises looking for guys with a strong feel for the game. I took that to mean high BBIQ and a great sense of where people are on the court and where opportunities are going to appear. He suggests finding guys who are good at making the pass that allows the next or subsequent pass to become an assist. There are guys like that in any draft and they often get skipped over for players with better raw stats. But the guys who are great at reading the play elevate everyone's game because they make it easier to get baskets. There is no suggestion that you avoid guys that can shoot of play D.

[golden]

LOL, what? What the fuck does that even mean? Who is saying this? That 'consultant' from that RR podcast?

lol. Classic "slaw" skimming a single post and going nuclear on a fraction of a sentence, taken completely out of context. Let alone absorbing the back & forth discussion in its entirety. Stay on brand.

[S.R.]

The consultant (Henry Ward) never said "Pick guys with feel, even if they can't play." He referenced past teams where the ball moved, players cut and good shots were given up for great shots. Then he advises looking for guys with a strong feel for the game. I took that to mean high BBIQ and a great sense of where people are on the court and where opportunities are going to appear. He suggests finding guys who are good at making the pass that allows the next or subsequent pass to become an assist. There are guys like that in any draft and they often get skipped over for players with better raw stats. But the guys who are great at reading the play elevate everyone's game because they make it easier to get baskets. There is no suggestion that you avoid guys that can shoot of play D.

Yeah they aren't mutually exclusive at all, but the Raptors are pretty starkly giving weight to this IQ/'flow'/hustle/defense/ideal-physical-build philosophy over more polished basketball skills (e.g. shooting) because they think they can develop the latter and once they put those two pieces together, they have a higher ceiling player. So now we've got Barnes, Banton, Precious etc. on the roster and it's an interesting trend here that management is reloading the roster with guys who fit this bill so similarly.

Of course they'd love to get a guy who was 6'7" with a 7+' wingspan, had IQ/hustle/defence/character, AND polished basketball skills - but you get that like once every three or four years at the number one pick. In the meantime, they're weighing these factors more and weighing some traditionally valued ones a bit less and it does create a contrast, i.e. they almost look like they're adding 6 different versions of the same guy here with Barnes/Precious/Gillespie/Banton etc. The team is full of wings and forwards built like Siakam and/or OG who have a ton of development ahead of them. With the picks and resources they have they're loading up guys who fit this profile but need skill development but they're planning on the skill development coming along - but some of the conversation already (after 2 SL games) is talking about this like these things are exclusive, like they're adding players without the offensive skills. Important to note they're viewing this as a process and it's going to take years to know whether they were 'right' or not with some of these guys. Not two SL games.

[planetmars]

The NBA made some rule changes to help defenders get away with stuff that offensive players were abusing.. specifically guys like Harden and Young. So moving towards a defensive first type of roster over an offensive first type of roster will hopefully make things easier because of those pending rule changes.

Although you still need to score the ball. And optimizing possessions still matter. The ball still moves faster than players despite how tall or fast they might be. So if we are playing a strong 3pt shooting team, and they aren't great defensively. I still think that team might come out on top.

Really need Pascal, Fred and OG to pick up their games next season. And hopefully Boucher continues to play like he did last season. He's in a contract year now so that helps.

[Puffer]

Yeah they aren't mutually exclusive at all, but the Raptors are pretty starkly giving weight to this IQ/'flow'/hustle/defense/ideal-physical-build philosophy over more polished basketball skills (e.g. shooting) because they think they can develop the latter and once they put those two pieces together, they have a higher ceiling player. So now we've got Barnes, Banton, Precious etc. on the roster and it's an interesting trend here that management is reloading the roster with guys who fit this bill so similarly.

Of course they'd love to get a guy who was 6'7" with a 7+' wingspan, had IQ/hustle/defence/character, AND polished basketball skills - but you get that like once every three or four years at the number one pick. In the meantime, they're weighing these factors more and weighing some traditionally valued ones a bit less and it does create a contrast, i.e. they almost look like they're adding 6 different versions of the same guy here with Barnes/Precious/Gillespie/Banton etc. The team is full of wings and forwards built like Siakam and/or OG who have a ton of development ahead of them. With the picks and resources they have they're loading up guys who fit this profile but need skill development but they're planning on the skill development coming along - but some of the conversation already (after 2 SL games) is talking about this like these things are exclusive, like they're adding players without the offensive skills. Important to note they're viewing this as a process and it's going to take years to know whether they were 'right' or not with some of these guys. Not two SL games.

Wish I could like this twice. You summed it up nicely.

[inthepaint]

Wish I could like this twice. You summed it up nicely.

Yeah that's the vein to tap into. We don't have a top 10 player able to get a high convert rate from looks that are traditionally low %. It will be a while till we get one.

Next best thing is take away the low % looks out of your team offence as much as you can, through ball movement, off-ball screens/movemets, cuts and reads. There are certain players archetypes that are better at that, but they're often somewhat hidden in the draft (eg Tony Parker (28th), Ginobili (57th), Draymond (35th), Marc Gasol (48th), John Stockton (16th) )

The earlier peak Spurs model and circa 2014/15 Warriors (Which yes, had two of the best shooters on the planet but beyond that they were also getting incredible open/easy looks all the time through their overall offence) is what they seem to be angling for here in very baby steps.

It's a slow process to get there, team usually needs to have been playing together for a while, but it looks like we're assembling the pieces needed

[Axel]

Want to feel old?

Barnes was born August 1, 2001. I had just finished high school! I know I'm not the only one in that age bracket here.

[WJF]

Want to feel old?

Barnes was born August 1, 2001. I had just finished high school! I know I'm not the only one in that age bracket here.

Add another 10 years for me, now maybe you don't feel as old

[slaw]

Add another 10 years for me, now maybe you don't feel as old

Yeah, the 30s were the sweet spot. Don't blow them Axel! It's all downhill from there!