Interesting info on Barrett

[NSDukeFan]

There's no doubt. RJ's ceiling is Jimmy Butler. (No shame in that obviously). Zion can be an MVP candidate like Giannis.



RJ's three-ball is almost certainly more efficient than his 15-footer. We might vaguely remember him hitting some midrange or long 2s recently, but almost nobody shoots those shots more efficiently. For the season, RJ is only hitting 2-pt jumpers at 34.7% according to hoop-math: https://hoop-math.com/Duke2019.php



There's no doubt. Any time the competition level increases, the separation between talents becomes greater.

For example, if Zion and I both played against 5-year-olds, I would be just as good a player as him. I might be better actually because he seems like a good guy that would take it easy on them and buy them ice cream or something. But once you get to just a middle school level, it probably becomes obvious that he's better than me.

I hope R.J.’s ceiling is higher than Butler, who has made two 3rd team all-NBA teams, but that would certainly be a very solid NBA career if he could achieve that. He is a bit taller, I believe and a stronger player at this point in their respective careers.

[Steven43]

Now, with all that said, I think the point was to have a pro-RJ thread unencumbered by his detractors or comparisons to Zion.

RJ probably doesn't get enough praise around here for his status as the 2nd-best freshman in the country.

Point taken. But I don’t think it makes one an RJ “detractor” to offer the opinion that Zion is simply better at basketball. RJ is really good, no doubt.

[luvdahops]

Point taken. But I don’t think it makes one an RJ “detractor” to offer the opinion that Zion is simply better at basketball. RJ is really good, no doubt.

RJ is also the alpha dog of this group (upperclassmen included), and sets the tone for the rest of the team with his relentlessness at both ends. His shot selection has been discussed ad nauseum, but I do think it is improving. And he is a strong defender and excellent rebounder for a wing player, and a very good passer both on the run and in half court settings. Does his game still have weaknesses? Of course. Will he continue to work his butt off to improve? It sure seems that way. But we're very, very fortunate to have RJ, too.

[Phredd3]

Having both RJ and Zion on the same team is very nearly magical. They complement (and compliment) each other in all the right ways.

[uh_no]

RJ's three-ball is almost certainly more efficient than his 15-footer. We might vaguely remember him hitting some midrange or long 2s recently, but almost nobody shoots those shots more efficiently. For the season, RJ is only hitting 2-pt jumpers at 34.7% according to hoop-math: https://hoop-math.com/Duke2019.php

It's reaaalllllyyy hard to say precisely without shot location data...BUT

RJ shoots 32% from 3 (19/59 in ACC play), so needs to shoot 48% on his mid-range to be as efficient. In ACC play, RJ has shot 48/97 from 2 good for 49%. So even IF we only look at his 2 point shots in totality, he is slightly more efficient from 2 than from 3. HOWEVER, one can anecdotally say most of his misses come from poor shots close to the basket, which might explain why he appears to be such a hot shot from mid-range. Fortunately, I did some leg-work so we don't have to be anecdotal. Using ESPN play by play "layup" as a proxy for shots in close, RJ is 21/43. This means he is 27/54 = 50% on mid-range shots.

So not only is RJ more efficient from mid-range than he is from 3 in league play, he is more efficient from mid-range than he is close to the basket. It should be noted that all these effective percentages are super close...but it serves as an effective counter to your point that there is no way he could be as efficient on those long 2's.

ACC play was used because I was too lazy to go through all the game data. per-game stats on layups in reverse chronological order:

1-4
3-6
3-5
5-7
2-6
1-5
5-8
1-2

EDIT: don't know why the stats differ so much on hoops-math, as they're almost assuredly using the same data stream. Only guess is the difference lies in league play vs whole season. Either way, in league play, RJ has been incredibly efficient from mid-range.

[CDu]

It's reaaalllllyyy hard to say precisely without shot location data...BUT

RJ shoots 32% from 3 (19/59 in ACC play), so needs to shoot 48% on his mid-range to be as efficient. In ACC play, RJ has shot 48/97 from 2 good for 49%. So even IF we only look at his 2 point shots in totality, he is slightly more efficient from 2 than from 3. HOWEVER, one can anecdotally say most of his misses come from poor shots close to the basket, which might explain why he appears to be such a hot shot from mid-range. Fortunately, I did some leg-work so we don't have to be anecdotal. Using ESPN play by play "layup" as a proxy for shots in close, RJ is 21/43. This means he is 27/54 = 50% on mid-range shots.

So not only is RJ more efficient from mid-range than he is from 3 in league play, he is more efficient from mid-range than he is close to the basket. It should be noted that all these effective percentages are super close...but it serves as an effective counter to your point that there is no way he could be as efficient on those long 2's.

ACC play was used because I was too lazy to go through all the game data. per-game stats on layups in reverse chronological order:

1-4
3-6
3-5
5-7
2-6
1-5
5-8
1-2

EDIT: don't know why the stats differ so much on hoops-math, as they're almost assuredly using the same data stream. Only guess is the difference lies in league play vs whole season. Either way, in league play, RJ has been incredibly efficient from mid-range.

Yeah, Hoop Math says Barrett is shooting 34.7% on 2pt jumpers, which is decidedly inefficient and also much less efficient than his somewhat inefficient 3pt shooting.

[uh_no]

Yeah, Hoop Math says Barrett is shooting 34.7% on 2pt jumpers, which is decidedly inefficient and also much less efficient than his somewhat inefficient 3pt shooting.

see my edit. seems he's been phenomenally more efficient in league play. (unless hoops math has a way to split on league play and that's what you're looking at)

[CDu]

see my edit. seems he's been phenomenally more efficient in league play. (unless hoops math has a way to split on league play and that's what you're looking at)

Hoop Math has him at 34/98 on the season on “2pt jumpers.” That would suggest he went 13/55 in the preconference schedule. If both sub samples are accurate, I would suggest that this is random variation over a small sample size. I don’t see a reason to think he magically got less inefficient instantaneously at the start of ACC play. I am more inclined to believe that he is a 35% shooter on 2pt jumpers than that he is a 49% shooter or a 24% shooter.

Note: While 49% (21/43) on “2pt jumpers” is better than his pre-conference numbers, it is still inefficient overall. Also, I think “2pt jumpers includes everything that isn’t a layup/dunk or 3pt shot, which seems a bit broad to be defined as mid-range in my opinion. It would appear that some 5-6 footers are getting lumped into jumpers based on a look at ESPN’s shot charts, and I wouldn’t call those midrange.

[CDu]

Hoop Math has him at 34/98 on the season on “2pt jumpers.” That would suggest he went 13/55 in the preconference schedule. If both sub samples are accurate, I would suggest that this is random variation over a small sample size. I don’t see a reason to think he magically got less inefficient instantaneously at the start of ACC play. I am more inclined to believe that he is a 35% shooter on 2pt jumpers than that he is a 49% shooter or a 24% shooter.

Note: While 49% (21/43) on “2pt jumpers” is better than his pre-conference numbers, it is still inefficient overall. Also, I think “2pt jumpers includes everything that isn’t a layup/dunk or 3pt shot, which seems a bit broad to be defined as mid-range in my opinion. It would appear that some 5-6 footers are getting lumped into jumpers based on a look at ESPN’s shot charts, and I wouldn’t call those midrange.

Also, I did a quick perusal of the play-by-plays and find Barrett to be 17-44 (38.6%) on 2pt jumpers in ACC play. That is roughly consistent with his 34.7% on the season. Was your 21-43 actually layups and not 2pt jumpers? That would sound about right: 10-10 on dunks, 21-43 on layups, 17-44 on 2pt jumpers.

Regardless, it definitely doesn’t look like Barrett is more efficient on midrange shots than on 3s.

[uh_no]

Hoop Math has him at 34/98 on the season on “2pt jumpers.” That would suggest he went 13/55 in the preconference schedule. If both sub samples are accurate, I would suggest that this is random variation over a small sample size. I don’t see a reason to think he magically got less inefficient instantaneously at the start of ACC play. I am more inclined to believe that he is a 35% shooter on 2pt jumpers than that he is a 49% shooter or a 24% shooter.

Note: While 49% (21/43) on “2pt jumpers” is better than his pre-conference numbers, it is still inefficient overall. Also, I think “2pt jumpers includes everything that isn’t a layup/dunk or 3pt shot, which seems a bit broad to be defined as mid-range in my opinion. It would appear that some 5-6 footers are getting lumped into jumpers based on a look at ESPN’s shot charts, and I wouldn’t call those midrange.

I don't mean to pretend that the sample size isn't small. I would hop on and say that IF he is hitting 50% and IS actually a 50% shooter from there of his mid-range shots, then his 32% on 3 pointers is awful relative to where it ought be. So why might that be the case? We often anecdotally (without as much evidence as I would like ) say that the quality of the three point shot matters...and were he shooting 32%, one might argue that he isn't taking enough good three pointers relative to his bad ones (dribble->shoot, moving sideways, closely guarded, etc.).

So if I had to draw an ultimatle conclusion based ONLY on league play, it would be that his 3 point % is not as high as it ought be relative to his 2 point %. There is no reason a player like RJ shouldn't have, as was suggested, a higher efficiency from 3 than 2. So one of a few things has to happen:

- we get more samples and one or both numbers regress to the mean
- RJ takes some better 3 point shots and hits them at a mark more in line with the rate in which he's hitting 2's
- his max range is simply around 15'...but i find this unlikely
- he becomes far more efficient close to the bucket, artificially propping his 2pt numbers

A player like RJ ought to be better at 3s or worse at 2s than he has been in league play.


NOW...as I think is an underappreciated point, the highest efficiency option is not ALWAYS the best option. If you took the highest efficiency play every time, the defense would just defend that. If the defense over commits to the high-efficiency option, then the low efficiency option may become more effective. So the defense knowing they have to commit some effort to also defending slightly lower efficiency options ensures that the high efficiency plays STAY highly efficient (wow that was an awful sentence).

[CDu]

I don't mean to pretend that the sample size isn't small. I would hop on and say that IF he is hitting 50% and IS actually a 50% shooter from there of his mid-range shots, then his 32% on 3 pointers is awful relative to where it ought be. So why might that be the case? We often anecdotally (without as much evidence as I would like ) say that the quality of the three point shot matters...and were he shooting 32%, one might argue that he isn't taking enough good three pointers relative to his bad ones (dribble->shoot, moving sideways, closely guarded, etc.).

So if I had to draw an ultimatle conclusion based ONLY on league play, it would be that his 3 point % is not as high as it ought be relative to his 2 point %. There is no reason a player like RJ shouldn't have, as was suggested, a higher efficiency from 3 than 2. So one of a few things has to happen:

- we get more samples and one or both numbers regress to the mean
- RJ takes some better 3 point shots and hits them at a mark more in line with the rate in which he's hitting 2's
- his max range is simply around 15'...but i find this unlikely
- he becomes far more efficient close to the bucket, artificially propping his 2pt numbers

A player like RJ ought to be better at 3s or worse at 2s than he has been in league play.


NOW...as I think is an underappreciated point, the highest efficiency option is not ALWAYS the best option. If you took the highest efficiency play every time, the defense would just defend that. If the defense over commits to the high-efficiency option, then the low efficiency option may become more effective. So the defense knowing they have to commit some effort to also defending slightly lower efficiency options ensures that the high efficiency plays STAY highly efficient (wow that was an awful sentence).

Two things:
1. Why would we assume that the smaller sample is “correct” but the larger one is not?
2 See my other comment above. I think you may have totaled Barrett’s layups and not his 2pt jumpers. I calculated he was 17-44 (38.6%) on 2pt jumpers in ACC play. Which is (a) fairly close to his season average and (b) way less efficient than his 3s.

[uh_no]

Two things:
1. Why would we assume that the smaller sample is “correct” but the larger one is not?

I don't, which is why i said "if" in big capital letters. That said, I would imagine there is a class of freshman who improves as the year goes on. It's impossible to make such a determination on RJ at this time. MORE DATA!!! yes please.

2 See my other comment above. I think you may have totaled Barrett’s layups and not his 2pt jumpers. I calculated he was 17-44 (38.6%) on 2pt jumpers in ACC play. Which is (a) fairly close to his season average and (b) way less efficient than his 3s.

I totaled his layups and subtracted them from his total 2 point shots.

[weezie]

...I do go crazy over him. he's a fantastic player, and we're lucky...

Me, too. I've been gaga since that trip up to Canada in August. Best decision I've made this year. RJ has the eye of an assassin.

He's the engine.

[CDu]

I don't, which is why i said "if" in big capital letters. That said, I would imagine there is a class of freshman who improves as the year goes on. It's impossible to make such a determination on RJ at this time. MORE DATA!!! yes please.



I totaled his layups and subtracted them from his total 2 point shots.

That ignores dunks and tip shots. If you count his jumpers (the approach I took), it comes to 17-44 on 2pt jumpers. So, again, I am pretty sure that the 49% estimate isn’t correct.

[uh_no]

That ignores dunks and tip shots. If you count his jumpers (the approach I took), it comes to 17-44 on 2pt jumpers. So, again, I am pretty sure that the 49% estimate isn’t correct.

fair enough. I thought ESPN counted pretty much everything in the key (dunk, tip, etc) as "layup" but didn't do much auditing, so I wouldn't be surprised if it is wrong.

That being the case, I'm still less upset with the pull up 15 footer than I am with the dribble-driibble-dribble-jack a 3 play that we saw a couple times. since I highly doubt he's hitting THAT shot at 32%, and as a result, the defense has to do very little to effectively guard it, as opposed to the pull up mid-range

[CDu]

fair enough. I thought ESPN counted pretty much everything in the key (dunk, tip, etc) as "layup" but didn't do much auditing, so I wouldn't be surprised if it is wrong.

That being the case, I'm still less upset with the pull up 15 footer than I am with the dribble-driibble-dribble-jack a 3 play that we saw a couple times. since I highly doubt he's hitting THAT shot at 32%, and as a result, the defense has to do very little to effectively guard it, as opposed to the pull up mid-range

Yeah, ESPN differentiates layups from dunks and tip shots. Barrett had 10 of those in ACC play.

As for the pull-up midrange jumper vs a 3 off the dribble, I don’t think either is very worthwhile. A 35% or 39% shooting percentage means that is a REALLY inefficient look. I would rather Barrett either go all the way to the rim or pass it instead of shooting a woefully inefficient shots.

[niveklaen]

Yeah, ESPN differentiates layups from dunks and tip shots. Barrett had 10 of those in ACC play.

As for the pull-up midrange jumper vs a 3 off the dribble, I don’t think either is very worthwhile. A 35% or 39% shooting percentage means that is a REALLY inefficient look. I would rather Barrett either go all the way to the rim or pass it instead of shooting a woefully inefficient shots.

Two benefits of the pull-up mid range shot that wont show up in the shooting percentages are avoiding charge calls and decreasing defensive certainty/drawing the defense away from the rim which makes attacking the rim easier.

(I only remember 1 game where we racked up a ton of charge calls so this problem may be rare or already solved...)

[BandAlum83]

Two benefits of the pull-up mid range shot that wont show up in the shooting percentages are avoiding charge calls and decreasing defensive certainty/drawing the defense away from the rim which makes attacking the rim easier.

(I only remember 1 game where we racked up a ton of charge calls so this problem may be rare or already solved...)

I don't know if it's solved, or if that was just an officiating anomaly. I just don't see charges called very often any more. I mean, if Battier were in college now, I don't think he would even be getting charge calls.

It wasn't just Battier, Duke made a living collecting charging calls (since they did get all the calls). The changes made with the arc and having to be set before the offensive player leaves the floor has really changed the game.

I know Duke tracks this stat, but are there official stats on this? Has the volume of charges per game really gone down as much as I think, or do my eyes and memory deceive me?

[kako]

Hey mods, thanks for the Feather! I feel honored, but at the same time I wonder if it was just a slow posting day

That being said, yes, my post was intended to simply call out Barrett for his success via an interesting stat. I kind of wish now I hadn't mentioned Zion at all, as my intention was not to compare them in any way. Zion is spectacular. Cam has such potential. How lucky are we to have 3 potential lottery picks this year, and even to discuss which of them should be taken #1 in the draft!

9F

[JetpackJesus]

I don't get this. RJ is not quicker nor does he jump higher than Zion. His handle isn't appreciably better, and he gets stripped on his drives as frequently or moreso than Zion. If you remove Zion's 1-11 start from 3FGs, he is shooting 10-27 since then, which is better than RJ's season average. Then again, if you remove RJ's worst stretch he'd probably be shooting better than his current average.
As for size, there is nobody except one enormous leadfooted C in the NBA bigger than Zion, and nobody anywhere near his size has the speed, quickness, agility or leaping ability he has. If anything, i would say Zion's game translates to the NBA as well or better than RJ.
One thing that RJ does appreciably better than Zion is deliver assists, but Zion's game of attacking is unparalleled. Why would you ask a guy who shoots 10-12 from the field to pass more?
I certainly think RJ has the potential to have a fine, maybe even excellent pro career. Zion's ceiling (which is certainly well beyond the roof) seems higher than RJ's though.