Case for/against the Toronto Raptors inserting Patrick McCaw into the rotation
The Toronto Raptors recently acquired free-agent swingman, Patrick McCaw. Should he be inserted into the rotation immediately? We argued both sides.
The Toronto Raptors have officially signed Patrick McCaw to a one-year veteran’s minimum contract. The 6’7″ athletic wing has major defensive upside but is somewhat of a liability on the other end. His fit with Toronto is complicated, and although he was recently added, there’s no guarantee McCaw will immediately be given a spot in the rotation.
Free-agent signings have more stipulations than what is released to the public. We weren’t present during the negotiations, and it’s possible Masai Ujiri promised McCaw at least a temporary role with the team. I’m skeptical that promise would be made to an unproven free-agent, so for the time being, we will be operating under the idea nothing was promised.
Here’s the case arguing for and against adding McCaw to the rotation right away:
Case for:
The Toronto Raptors just added a 6’7″ rangy wing with boatloads of upside. They didn’t add him for no reason. Of course, he’s going to play right away.
Case against:
Upside? Upside isn’t what the Toronto Raptors are looking for right now. They’re looking for a consistent two-way player, something Patrick McCaw hasn’t been so far in his career. Why take minutes away from a valuable member of your rotation for a poor offensive player?
Case for:
Upside doesn’t have to develop six years down the road. There’s a good possibility McCaw has already made a significant jump, particularly in three-point shooting. We saw the leap Pascal made from his second to third year as a shooter. McCaw is a far more natural shooter than Pascal, what if he made a similar leap?
Case against:
So if one player makes a giant leap as a three-point shooter, another one is bound too? That’s a huge fallacy. Chances are McCaw is a very similar shooter to what he was the previous two seasons. That guy wasn’t good enough to receive consistent minutes for Golden State who is thinner — thinner, not worse — than Toronto on the wing. If he’s not good enough for the Warriors rotation, he’s good enough for the Raptors.
Case for:
Chances are he is a similar shooter to what he was the past two seasons. But you won’t know until he spends real minutes on an NBA court this season. He needs to play in order to do that. Also, yes, he didn’t play consistent minutes for Golden State last season. He still was offered a $5.2 million extension this summer. Considering their tax concerns, that’s a sizeable commitment. He was going to receive some time this year.
Case against:
Golden State didn’t sign him for his present value, they wanted to develop McCaw. He had the possibility of a long-term role within the organization, a possibility that doesn’t exist with Toronto.
As it presently stands, McCaw is a good but not great defender and a non-threat from the perimeter. Why not give those minutes to Delon Wright or Norman Powell? Defensively, they’ll make a similar impact and can actually contribute on the offensive end.
Case for:
Yes, because Delon and Powell have been so great offensively. McCaw could never replicate less than seven points per game on below-average efficiency.
Case against:
At least they can shoot. Their ability to space the floor is extremely valuable in comparison to McCaw. McCaw hasn’t shown the ability to shoot as well as either player and that significantly impacts his value.
Next. The full Patrick McCaw scouting report. dark
Case for:
If McCaw can shoot similarly in practice, would you be willing to provide consistent minutes until a proper valuation can be made?
Case against:
Deal.