Link to article (post as URL wasn't working): [Joe Wolfond] The Raptors are testing the limits of an offensive philosophy shift

I thought this was a good article. I'm curious what others who've been watching the start of the season are thinking so far and expecting the rest of the way.

Some article snippets:

Toronto is testing the limits of a philosophical shift. Because practically speaking, this is a very similar roster with similar (in some cases starker) limitations to the one that finished bottom six in true shooting and half-court efficiency each of the last two years.

The Raptors are off to a 1-3 start, with the worst offensive rating in the league. While they've offered plenty to feel encouraged about - they continue to thrive in transition, their more conservative base defense has been tremendous, and Barnes appears to have taken a sizable leap on both ends - their half-court offense has been inept enough to undercut most of the positives.

The Raptors can cut, hand off, and reverse the ball to their hearts' content, but what does that amount to if their actions aren't treated as genuine threats by opposing defenses?

How much of that is really about execution, though, and how much of it is about personnel? There are things the Raptors can do better, but at the end of the day bending a set defense is hard to do without high-end ball-handling and movement shooting, both of which are in short supply in guard-poor Toronto. Schroder brings more rim pressure than VanVleet, and his playmaking has been a pleasant surprise, but he's a similarly poor finisher with a lot less off-ball gravity.

"It's hard. That's the art of this job," he says. "We want to create new habits, we want to play to a different identity, but then we have certain players that are really good at doing certain (other) things. So, yes, occasionally it makes sense to look for a mismatch and take advantage of it.