Why I’m out on R.J. Barrett as an elite NBA prospect

R.J. Barrett is one of the most gifted players in the 2019 draft. So why is it so hard to see him succeeding in the NBA?

IT’S A THREE PLAYER DRAFT. You’ll read that opinion everywhere leading up to the 2019 NBA Draft. Everyone seems to agree on Zion Williamson at #1, followed by Ja Morant at #2, with R.J. Barrett coming in at #3. Those are the three players everyone is referring to when they call this a three-player draft and, almost without exception, it’s the order they are ranking them in.

Does that strike you as odd? Zion is the top prospect — that’s just objectively true. He would be the best player in almost any draft, to the point that we can exclude him from this draft class from a judgment standpoint and pretend the second pick is the start of the real draft. Think of Ja Morant as the consensus #1 pick among normal human beings not created in a lab to take over the basketball world. Not everyone agrees Morant should be the top non-Zion pick but he’s close to what a “consensus #1 pick” would look like, akin to Ben Simmons in 2016 or Karl-Anthony Towns in 2015. When every talent evaluator settles on one player at or near the top the heap, the wisdom of crowds is typically a pretty good indicator of success. It’s normal for an alien basketball savant to go first. It’s normal for a collection of evaluators to settle on a consensus player atop the draft. It’s not normal to decide there’s a consensus #3 pick in the draft.

The closer we get to the draft, the more I’m starting to see some evaluators quietly move R.J. Barrett a spot or two down their board. Maybe he drops to #4 because they talk themselves into Jarrett Culver’s upside or De’Andre Hunter’s safety or Brandon Clarke’s defense. Maybe they just don’t quite believe in Barrett at #3 but figure he’s too talented to drop out of the top 5. If they rank by tiers, he stays in the second tier, just toward the bottom. That was me for awhile. I never felt good about Barrett in the top 3 but kept him just outside, close enough that I couldn’t look too foolish but low enough that I could look back and say “See! I didn’t have him third!”

No more. I don’t have Barrett third. I don’t have him fourth or fifth. I don’t have him in my top non-Zion tier. I don’t have him on my wish list at all.

I am out on R.J. Barrett as an elite NBA prospect and as an NBA building block. And I’m going to tell you why.

A brief R.J. Barrett profile

R.J. Barrett is clearly a top-5 talent in a weak draft, and you can make an easy case for him being the most talented player in the draft not named Zion. From a traditional standpoint, Barrett has the whole package.

He’s big, 6'7" with a 6'10" wingspan, weighing in around 210 pounds. That’s a big frame for a player that will spend most of his time at the two or three. It gives Barrett a long stride, plenty of strength, and lots of defensive potential.

He’s athletic. Barrett didn’t attend the Combine but would’ve tested well. He’s quick with a deadly first step, good burst, and a great leap, and he throws down some nasty highlight dunks.

He’s also young. Barrett turned 19 yesterday, which means he accomplished all he did at Duke as an 18-year-old freshman. Youth equals upside, and Barrett already improved a ton as the year went on.

And he’s just plain talented. Barrett has the Euro step. He can drive the ball. He’s a heat-seeking missile in transition. He can find his shot and score in a hurry when he gets hot. He can pass and create for his teammates. He can do it all.

This is a guy that just averaged 23 points, 8 rebounds, and 4 assists as an 18-year-old lead handler on the best team in the nation with the world watching. All season he was on national television in marquee games against North Carolina, Kentucky, Gonzaga, Virginia, Texas Tech, and North Dakota State, and all season long he produced. The talent is undeniable.

Let’s take a look at the skill set. First we’ll look at Barrett’s greatest strength, his ability to drive the ball and attack the basket. Then we’ll consider his shot-making and ancillary skills, things like passing and handle, before studying the decision making and intangibles and wrapping up with defense.

Barrett’s #1 strength: Attacking the rim

If you had to close your eyes and imagine one vintage R.J. Barrett play, it looks a little something like this. Barrett uses his size to grab a defensive rebound and takes off in a flash. With three huge steps, he winds through the defense to half court and suddenly it’s just one forlorn defender between him and the rim. Barrett charges ahead like a bat out of hell, gathering steam as he reaches the free throw line, then Euro steps back to his left and finishes with a lefty layup as the whistle blows for a three-point play. He scowls and flexes as the Cameron Crazies go wild. Welcome to the R.J. Barrett show.

R.J. Barrett is at his best when he’s attacking the defense and getting to the rim. And whew, does he have a full arsenal of skills that allow him to do so. Barrett can drive left or right. He can attack with a full head of steam or from standstill. He can dribble around guys or go through them, and he’s strong enough enough to absorb contact, draw the foul, and finish at the rim. Barrett draws a lot of shooting fouls on his drives, a major strength.

He’s especially lethal in transition. That’s one skill I’m really confident in translating directly to the NBA. If Barrett gets a head of steam and has only one guy in front of him, it’s lights out. I noticed myself just assuming Barrett would score if he got the ball in space on transition, and I was usually right. He just gets downhill so fast and is elite at drawing contact and contorting his body to finish. His finishing ability is fine, but not as good as you’d hope. Barrett made 65% at the rim and 43% from short range, per The Stepien. Those numbers are good, but remember, a lot of those shots are coming in transition. In the half court offense, Barrett makes only 51% of his shots at the rim. That ranks in the 21st percentile among all players — and barely ahead of his much-maligned teammate, Reddish. If Barrett can’t finish at the rim, is it really that valuable to get there?

One thing that will help is the added space of a modern NBA offense. Duke famously lacked three-point shooting (in part due to Barrett) so teams constantly collapsed at the rim and left R.J. less room to operate in. That was even more of a problem when Zion Williamson was out injured. Barrett stepped up his play in those games, impressive considering he was often playing 1-on-5 with no spacing. Against Virginia Tech, he basically lived at the rim as they had no answer. Duke lost anyway without Zion, but it felt like they’d have lost by 20 without R.J. In their first game against Virginia, Barrett repeatedly got into the paint against an elite defense and finished through contact time and again, an especially outstanding performance considering the absence of point guard Tre Jones left him initiating the offense.

The driving isn’t perfect. Barrett repeatedly drives into double teams. He’ll have space one direction and it almost feels like he changes direction to go into the double team, perhaps trying to draw the foul or because he’s over reliant on his left hand. He also piles up offensive fouls. In Sam Vecenie’s Athletic profile, one coach said Barrett fouls with his off hand on every drive to create room. In one game he was called for three push-offs. Good defensive teams learned how to wall off Barrett’s drives as the season went along, so he’s going to have to keep expanding this skill to succeed in the NBA.

Barrett’s shot is a problem

As a shooter, R.J. Barrett is incredibly streaky. He has the ball in his hands a lot and takes a ton of shots, with a 32% usage and over 18 field goal attempts a game. And remember, Barrett shared the floor with at least two other future lottery picks, one of them an alien, but he kept on shooting anyways.

Sometimes the shots went in. In the second game against Virginia, Barrett couldn’t miss. He wasn’t getting to the rim as easily as the first game so he started taking contested threes and kept hitting them, a career-high six from downtown to lead Duke to a win. Barrett took over six threes a game but hit under two of them, shooting 31% on the season. He’s a streaky shooter but not a particularly good one. He is better on a catch-and-shoot, which gives hope for a lower-usage role, but he barely moves off-ball and usually has the ball anyway, so that’s not a key weapon. The jumper is much worse off the bounce and doesn’t have consistent form or mechanics.

The worst part about Barrett’s shot is his own supreme confidence in it. Barrett has the Mamba mentality. He believes he’s the best player on the court at all times, and that’s a serious problem when he very clearly wasn’t with Zion around. Barrett takes heat checks and forces too many shots, even looking off open teammates at times. When the game gets close, he shoots even more. In six Duke losses, Barrett took almost 23 field goal attempts a game and saw his field-goal percentage plummet to 39%. Barrett is a poor three-point shooter and an inefficient scorer on screens, cuts, and isolation, especially if he’s going right.

Again per The Stepien, Barrett made 33% of his 72 long twos, a paltry 0.66 points per possession. He hit 31% of his college threes and only 27% of his NBA range, 36 of 134. We know that college free-throw percentage is a better future indicator of NBA shooting prowess, in part because it’s a bigger sample. Barrett took 224 free throws and made 149 of them, just under two-thirds. He’s not a good shooter. He’s not a horrible shooter, but the shot isn’t good, and he goes to it way too often, especially when he’s so much better at driving, and when he’s taking those shots away from Zion and Cam Reddish.

Barrett has nice enough touch, so his shooting should improve. But it has a long way to go. Even improving means something like 33 to 35% from three and 70 to 75% at the line. Even then, he’s a below average shooter.

A look at Barrett’s ancillary skills

With ancillary skills, we’re talking about Barrett’s dribbling, his passing, and his rebounding.

The dribble is okay but not great. Barrett is heavily over reliant on his left hand and tries to get back to his left far too often. Smarter teams adjusted to that as the season went on and made his life more difficult, and his propensity to switch left often had him driving into double teams and finishing against more contact than necessary. Sometimes Barrett got bailed out, but he’s going to get that call less in the NBA. Barrett’s dribble feels a bit loose, like the ball is slippery and easily turned over. He has a handle, obviously with his driving skill, but it needs to improve if he’s going to have the ball so much.

Barrett’s passing and creation skills came a long way as a freshman. That’s the skill he improved the most over this season. Early in the year, I didn’t feel like I saw R.J. create much for others. He got assists, but it felt like they came when he drove into a wall and dumped the ball off to a star teammate who did the work for him. That changed as the season went along. Barrett uses his size to create some really nice passing angles and shows some real distribution skill. When he plays under control and keeps his options open, he can really create. Against North Carolina State with Zion in foul trouble, Barrett filled up the box score with a triple-double, taking over the game in a win.

His playmaking improved a lot over the season and provides the biggest reason for optimism going forward. As an 18-year-old sharing a ball with three other highly-recruited handlers, Barrett recorded 7+ assists eight different times. There’s real potential there. He’s going to have to cut way down on the turnovers. The turnovers were a constant problem. He had two or fewer turnovers in only 39% of his games, and he had as many or more turnovers as assists 17 different times. The turnovers got worse in March. Every previous month, Barrett averaged around three turnovers per game. In March when the competition heated up, his turnovers leapt almost 50% to 4.4 per game in a 10-game sample. That’s pretty worrisome.

Barrett is a good rebounder. That’s one reason the Andrew Wiggins comparison is lazy. Wiggins loves to put up 20 points and 3 rebounds. Barrett had double-digit rebounds nine times, averaging 7.6 per game. That includes a 4.8% offensive rebounding percentage, impressive for a guard. Barrett’s rebounding is an obvious value add, especially with his transition ability.

The problem with R.J. Barrett: his decision making

And now we come to the crux of the problem with R.J. Barrett: the mental side of the game.

Barrett clearly has a good feel for the game. He’s a baller and knows how to make plays. Think back on that transition sequence. When Barrett gets downhill, he doesn’t have to think. His body just knows what to do and goes into attack mode, usually with good results.

But when Barrett does have to slow down and make good decisions with the ball, the results have not been great. You know that Mamba mentality? It’s going to create a legion of R.J. Barrett stans but drive some poor coach absolutely insane. Barrett thinks he’s the best player on the court. That wasn’t true at Duke, and it’s probably not going to be true in the NBA. Irrational confidence can be helpful at times, but it makes Barrett trigger happy and was constantly frustrating to watch. He hoists so many bad shots and makes so many short-sighted decisions.

There’s been talk of the New Orleans Pelicans making a trade that would give them a top-4 pick and a chance to reunite Barrett with Zion Williamson in the NBA. I would be genuinely curious to know Zion’s opinion of playing with Barrett. If I were a superstar like Zion, Barrett’s decision-making and hero-ball antics would have driven me insane.

Now, let’s be fair. Barrett was 18 and sharing a team with two other stars, and that’s not the easiest transition. And his decision making clearly improved as the season progressed. In his first game against Syracuse, Barrett hung back and took 17 threes, even when they weren’t falling, shooting 8-of-30 in a loss. In the rematch, Barrett scored 30 and shot 70%, slicing into the 2–3 zone and hitting floaters and short-range shots to take over the game. That’s how you beat a zone, not taking contested threes from a 30% shooter.

The decision making was especially questionable in the few moments of the season when Duke faced pressure. In an early loss against Tennessee, Barrett went full ball hog late, taking every shot in the final three minutes while Zion stood by watching. In the epic comeback against Louisville, Barrett was mostly silent and not even on the court for part of it as Cam Reddish and Zion led the way. Against Central Florida in the NCAA tournament, Barrett made the winning tip-in but didn’t defend or box out in the final seconds, literally celebrating before the time ran out as UCF missed a tip-in. In the final two games against Virginia Tech and Michigan State, I remember feeling certain Duke would lose because I knew the ball would be in R.J.’s hands in the clutch and I knew he would default to hero ball. Against Michigan State, his key missed free throw essentially cost Duke their season, and his mindlessly losing Cassius Winston on the inbounds sealed the deal.

You see, it’s not just the decision making. It’s the effort and motor that sometimes disappear at the worst time. Even that fiery competitiveness seems to fade sometimes if Barrett doesn’t have the ball with the chance to be the hero, but sometimes heroes play defense or box out, too. I don’t see the energy or hustle to close ground after a mistake or get to a loose ball. I don’t see the effort on defense. Some of these things can be coached, but some feel like habits. If you can’t stay mentally focused even in the biggest moments of the season, why should I believe you’re going to develop that ability later?

Barrett is going to have the ball a lot, and that means he’s constantly going to be making decisions. And, to be fair, Barrett is actually quite decisive — just not always in a good way. His decision making improved during the season but still has a long way to go. When Barrett thinks and makes the right play, the one he’s talented enough to make, he can be a lethal wing creator and scorer. When he plays on instinct, you get the season we got — one where 45% of his shots were long twos or threes while only 38% of his attempts came at the rim. That’s what led to Barrett’s mediocre 53% true shooting and poor efficiency metrics in college, and it’s simply not going to cut it in the NBA.

The defensive upside: skills without results

A lot of evaluators give Barrett credit for being an average defender. I don’t see it. I think he’s a poor defender. Again, it comes down to the mental side; there’s just not enough effort or anticipation. Many of my game notes ended with a cursory mention of Barrett’s defense: didn’t see him do anything good on D, not impressed with his defense, doesn’t pay attention, lazy. Barrett has the size and athleticism to be a good defender, but that doesn’t make him one.

Barrett doesn’t anticipate well on defense, so he’s always reacting instead, and his transition D is awful. He gave up multiple easy transition buckets in one game against Carolina, then went MIA in another Carolina game late and probably should’ve cost the team the game. This is Duke-UNC! If you’re not going to show up defensively in college basketball’s biggest rivalry game, why am I to believe you’ll play defense on a cold rainy Tuesday night in January?

Some of the defensive numbers are damning. Barrett averaged under 1 steal per game and under half a block. He had only five games all season with three “stocks.” It feels inexcusable for an athlete with this size to not be able to create defensive events. Barrett had two fouls or fewer in 29 of his 38 games. If you almost never foul, it tells me you’re not trying on defense.

I didn’t see enough defensive effort or awareness to believe Barrett will be anything other than a negative on defense in the NBA. It’s certainly not going to be a value add, and I’m not sure it will even be neutral.

Overall profile and NBA expectations

So where does that leave us with R.J. Barrett?

It leaves us confused mostly, which is why I think so many evaluators are keeping Barrett safely in their top 5 even though almost everyone has some real reservations about him. There’s so much obvious talent. If you were going to build an attacking NBA wing in the lab, you’d want a guy with size that can attack the teeth of the defense, a guy that plays fearlessly at all times. At least you think you want that.

But what sort of value is there in that player? He’ll demand the ball despite a clear lack of shooting and turnover problems, with a mentality that forces him to take over the game to his own detriment at times. He’s not giving you value as a shooter and not as a defender. His passing and decision making are improving but questionable — and remember, this guy has the ball most of the game. What is that player?

I scoured the Basketball Reference database looking for NBA players this century that fit that sort of profile. I looked for wings with a usage rate over 25% that scored 15ppg and attempted at least 12 twos a game with limited efficiency (under 55% true shooting) and a lack of defense (DBPM under 1). The names I found are a murderer’s row of NBA scoring wings: Vince Carter, Jerry Stackhouse, late career Kobe, Carmelo Anthony, DeMar DeRozan, Antawn Jamison, Joe Johnson, Andrew Wiggins. These are all players that played a distinctive style of basketball, one we might call 90s ball now. They played in Michael Jordan mode, taking a flurry of pull-ups and attacking the rim, scoring a bundle of points. But it’s not the 90s anymore, and we know now about all of those players that their scoring wasn’t efficient or particularly helpful. We know their shots were often among the least valuable shots on the team, that their inefficiencies hurt the team. We’ve learned that not everyone can make shots like Michael Jordan. Only Michael Jordan can.

If you look at that list of NBA players, what do you see? If you see a huge list of All Stars and are thinking to yourself, “See! This guy is a nut! R.J. Barrett is good, and this idiot just proved it with that list!” then I’m afraid we just don’t see basketball the same way. If you look at that list and instead see guys who played some variation of hero ball before we realized 3>2, who racked up All-Star appearances because we glorified 20ppg scoring wings, whose teams had a knack for going down in flames in round one of the playoffs, then you might be concerned about R.J. Barrett now too.

Here’s the real problem. It’s not that R.J. Barrett is bad. He’s not bad. The real problem is that R.J. Barrett looks so good. Our eyes see Barrett piling up stats and think he must be good. They see 23/8/4 as an 18-year-old at Duke and figure he must be a top-3 pick. In a few years, they’re going to see a young 20ppg scorer and think he must be a max contract. Barrett’s talented enough that he’s going to be in the NBA a long time, and he’s going to get paid a ton of money. Joe Johnson was once the highest paid player in the NBA. Andrew Wiggins is one of the league’s most dreadful contracts. Late career Kobe and Melo hamstrung their teams for years. I know you think all those guys were NBA greats, but let me ask you this — how would you build a successful team in 2019 with someone like Stackhouse or DeRozan as your best player? You’d surround them with shooting and defense and unselfish, high-IQ guys to make up for their weakness in those areas, right? And you know why? BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT MAKES YOU GOOD AT BASKETBALL.

(takes a deep breath)

Okay.

What if Barrett is the good version of those guys above? What’s the list look like if you add in a 38% three? Well, it looks like a totally different list, you dope, because we aren’t playing make believe. Drafting Barrett in hopes that he suddenly becomes a great shooter is ridiculous. Fine, what if you add in a 33 to 35% three instead? Same list. Almost identical. What if you drop the poor defense and add in playmaking with a 20% assist rate? Now we’ve added peak Tracy McGrady as a potential outcome. TMac wouldn’t be the most modern player in today’s game, but he was an MVP-caliber guy at his peak even without a great shot. All we need to do now is get Barrett to start playing great defense and continue to take huge strides in his playmaking and creation. That’s… possible. It’s certainly not likely, but I’m intrigued.

The problem with R.J. Barrett is with this entire archetype of scoring wing that we’ve been led to believe for so long is what basketball is all about. Mamba mentality and high-usage scoring wings are what make the game go round. Only they’re not. They’re not at all, and a look at the title-winning teams from the past decade tells you everything. Is R.J. Barrett the next DeMar DeRozan? Is he modern day Jerry Stackhouse or Larry Hughes? Is he Tyreke Evans or Will Barton? And if he is those things, do you want him leading your team?

Think of it another way. What is the path toward a player in this mold being a star, one worthy of the #3 pick New York will likely spend on him?

We talked about the McGrady route — take a huge step forward as a passer and defender. There’s also the Dwyane Wade route — double down on a crazy free-throw rate and increase efficiency dramatically (plus defense). I suppose there’s the Carmelo Anthony route — just keep jacking shots and getting them checks. And then there’s the Kobe Bryant route — win rings when you’re next to a Hall of Fame big man and hope the media keeps your reputation alive in between.

Parting thoughts and final analysis

R.J. Barrett is what Bill Simmons used to call a table guy. You love 80% of what he brings to the table, but he takes 20% back off of it. And the more we learn about modern basketball, the more we realize how much it hurts to take away that 20%. Every forced shot, every bad turnover, every defensive lapse is one just more losing play that hurts your team. It’s one less better shot, one less possession, one less bucket allowed. The good teams are too good in 2019 to give away possessions and points.

How does R.J. Barrett contribute positively when the shot isn’t falling or when he can’t score? I see some people dream about him adjusting mentally to a role player, where he attacks only when there’s space and takes only open jumpers. They’re watching a different R.J. Barrett than me. I don’t see Barrett adjusting to an off-ball role, and frankly, I don’t see a team pushing him toward one. Unless Barrett miraculously becomes a good shooter or makes huge strides in his decision making so he essentially turns into a big point guard with his playmaking, I have a very hard time seeing a positive outcome.

The path to success just feels so narrow. Barrett isn’t going to be a good defender. He’s not a good shooter. He’s not going to provide spacing. The only real way he provides value is if the ball in his hands, and if the ball is in his hands, he’s making too many decisions and taking too many shots. That’s my biggest fear with R.J. Barrett: that he’ll be inefficient on the ball and not particularly useful off it.

I worry that R.J. is just another volume guy. I’m not worried that he’ll be a bust — I’m worried that he won’t be. I’m worried that he’ll be a top-5 pick and that he’ll average 20 points a game and that an entire generation of fans will think he’s an All-Star and that his team will pay him $200 million to keep playing inefficient basketball. It’s not that I think R.J. Barrett is bad. It’s that I worry he is just good enough to cripple an NBA team’s salary cap and team-building process. It’s not that I don’t think R.J. Barrett is a good asset; it’s that I worry he might be a negative one.

So I’m out on R.J. Barrett. And I’m prepared to look stupid because, like with Deandre Ayton a year ago, I fully expect Barrett to put up numbers. I expect him to make a couple All-Star teams, and I figure he’ll score 18 or 20 points a game. He’s going to be productive.

But I don’t have him third on my board, nor top five. I don’t have him ahead of Zion, Morant, Culver, Clarke, Hunter, or Grant Williams. And after that? I dunno. Would I rather have Barrett on my team than P.J. Washington or Nickeil Alexander-Wallker? If I’m being honest, probably not. But at some point, you have to swing on upside in a star-driven league, and role players can only get you so far. Barrett has clear paths to stardom, real stardom, not just the volume scoring type. I just don’t believe in him getting there.

So maybe he ends up #7 on my board. Maybe he’s #10 or #13. It’s all pretty irrelevant at that point, because he’ll never last that long in the draft anyway.

I’m out on R.J. Barrett as an elite NBA prospect.

Sorry Canada. At least you’ve got the Raptors now. ■

Thanks for reading! Be sure to follow for plenty more NBA Draft content to come. If you’ve missed anything, here are my profiles of the four best players in the 2019 draft…

Follow Brandon on Medium or @wheatonbrando for more sports, television, humor, and culture. Visit the rest of Brandon’s writing archives here.