Jayson tatum slander all over media

[SparzWizard]

Season MVP: SGA

Finals MVP: Jayson Tatum

 

[tenn_smoothie]

Bottom line is that until Tatum plays great (not every single game, but most) throughout a playoff run that ends with a title, his status among the best players will be questioned and rightfully so. It doesn't mean he is not very good, just that he is not an elite player, which he claims to be. Gotta prove it.

Amen, brother.

Taking this to its logical conclusion makes the argument that guys like Barkley, Balyor, Gervin, Malone, Stockton, Maravich &c. were not elite players, which is a pretty bold stance.

I do not put those players you listed in the same category as their contemporaries who won titles, Bird, Magic, Jabbar, Havlicek, Cowens, Jordan, Isiah, Olajuwon, Moses. Only player I would call absolutely elite who had multiple failures until finally breaking through late is Jerry West.

[cman88]

but if the standard is playoff performance then why do we put Luka and Embiid there? both haven't even gotten as far as tatum has.

[Neurotic Guy]

Bottom line is that until Tatum plays great (not every single game, but most) throughout a playoff run that ends with a title, his status among the best players will be questioned and rightfully so. It doesn't mean he is not very good, just that he is not an elite player, which he claims to be. Gotta prove it.

Amen, brother.

Taking this to its logical conclusion makes the argument that guys like Barkley, Balyor, Gervin, Malone, Stockton, Maravich &c. were not elite players, which is a pretty bold stance.

I do not put those players you listed in the same category as their contemporaries who won titles, Bird, Magic, Jabbar, Havlicek, Cowens, Jordan, Isiah, Olajuwon, Moses. Only player I would call absolutely elite who had multiple failures until finally breaking through late is Jerry West.

Oscar Robertson was 32 (and with Kareem) when he won his only championship.

[Kernewek]

Bottom line is that until Tatum plays great (not every single game, but most) throughout a playoff run that ends with a title, his status among the best players will be questioned and rightfully so. It doesn't mean he is not very good, just that he is not an elite player, which he claims to be. Gotta prove it.

Amen, brother.

Taking this to its logical conclusion makes the argument that guys like Barkley, Balyor, Gervin, Malone, Stockton, Maravich &c. were not elite players, which is a pretty bold stance.

I do not put those players you listed in the same category as their contemporaries who won titles, Bird, Magic, Jabbar, Havlicek, Cowens, Jordan, Isiah, Olajuwon, Moses. Only player I would call absolutely elite who had multiple failures until finally breaking through late is Jerry West.

Oscar Robertson was 32 (and with Kareem) when he won his only championship.

The ‘problematic list of necessary exclusions’ gets significantly longer if we include guys like this in the conversation - most notably for the forum, perhaps, is that KG fits this to a T.

But, in general, I think Tenn is more correct (even though I disagree) when it comes to retired players or players who are soon to be retired: guys we can can assess in total. I don’t think we should apply the same criteria for younger, active players..

[keevsnick]

The thing about Tatum is he's pretty much right on that line between "player who's an MVP and good enough to be a #1 on a finals team" and a step below that. And the issue is THAT LINE IS VITAL. So people who think he's above that line will think he's being slandered, and people who think he's right below that line will think he's overrated. The truth is probably that we just don't know yet what side of the lien he will peak at, teh fact thats its a vital question is what leads to so much Tatum talk.

All you can really say is....we'll find out.

[Vermont Green]

The thing about Tatum is he's pretty much right on that line between "player who's an MVP and good enough to be a #1 on a finals team" and a step below that. And the issue is THAT LINE IS VITAL. So people who think he's above that line will think he's being slandered, and people who think he's right below that line will think he's overrated. The truth is probably that we just don't know yet what side of the lien he will peak at, teh fact thats its a vital question is what leads to so much Tatum talk.

All you can really say is....we'll find out.

Right now, what I think you can say for sure about Tatum is that he is destined to be a multi-season 1st team all NBA.  This season's first team is likely:

SGA
Doncic
Tatum
Giannis
Jokic

I think it is fair to say that Tatum is not the least valuable of these 5 and not the most valuable (at least this season).  So he is somewhere between 2-4 in terms of best player or MVP.  That is really good.  He has had a lot more team and playoff success than Doncic or SGA, but Giannis and Jokic have titles (and also a lot of team success).

That is just based on this season though.  If you start talking about comparing him to all time greats, he just isn't there yet.  Michael Jordan won his first MVP at age 24 but his first title at 28.  It will be years before you can start to assess where Tatum is on all time lists, but I think he will climb his way up over time.

[tenn_smoothie]

Bottom line is that until Tatum plays great (not every single game, but most) throughout a playoff run that ends with a title, his status among the best players will be questioned and rightfully so. It doesn't mean he is not very good, just that he is not an elite player, which he claims to be. Gotta prove it.

Amen, brother.

Taking this to its logical conclusion makes the argument that guys like Barkley, Balyor, Gervin, Malone, Stockton, Maravich &c. were not elite players, which is a pretty bold stance.

I do not put those players you listed in the same category as their contemporaries who won titles, Bird, Magic, Jabbar, Havlicek, Cowens, Jordan, Isiah, Olajuwon, Moses. Only player I would call absolutely elite who had multiple failures until finally breaking through late is Jerry West.

Oscar Robertson was 32 (and with Kareem) when he won his only championship.

I stand corrected regarding Oscar Robertson and Kevin Garnett.

[keevsnick]

The thing about Tatum is he's pretty much right on that line between "player who's an MVP and good enough to be a #1 on a finals team" and a step below that. And the issue is THAT LINE IS VITAL. So people who think he's above that line will think he's being slandered, and people who think he's right below that line will think he's overrated. The truth is probably that we just don't know yet what side of the lien he will peak at, teh fact thats its a vital question is what leads to so much Tatum talk.

All you can really say is....we'll find out.

Right now, what I think you can say for sure about Tatum is that he is destined to be a multi-season 1st team all NBA.  This season's first team is likely:

SGA
Doncic
Tatum
Giannis
Jokic

I think it is fair to say that Tatum is not the least valuable of these 5 and not the most valuable (at least this season).  So he is somewhere between 2-4 in terms of best player or MVP.  That is really good.  He has had a lot more team and playoff success than Doncic or SGA, but Giannis and Jokic have titles (and also a lot of team success).

That is just based on this season though.  If you start talking about comparing him to all time greats, he just isn't there yet.  Michael Jordan won his first MVP at age 24 but his first title at 28.  It will be years before you can start to assess where Tatum is on all time lists, but I think he will climb his way up over time.

I think he probably is the least valuable of those 5, based on performance this regular season. I also don't think first team all-nba is a lock for him this year. He'll probably make it due to tam successes, but you could ague for KD or even Kawhi ahead of him.

[green_bballers13]

What is the slander?

I think I've heard pretty reasonable takes, such as "Tatum is very good, but he needs to step his game up to be great" and "he has to win a championship like Giannis and Jokic to be included with them".

[Vermont Green]

The thing about Tatum is he's pretty much right on that line between "player who's an MVP and good enough to be a #1 on a finals team" and a step below that. And the issue is THAT LINE IS VITAL. So people who think he's above that line will think he's being slandered, and people who think he's right below that line will think he's overrated. The truth is probably that we just don't know yet what side of the lien he will peak at, teh fact thats its a vital question is what leads to so much Tatum talk.

All you can really say is....we'll find out.

Right now, what I think you can say for sure about Tatum is that he is destined to be a multi-season 1st team all NBA.  This season's first team is likely:

SGA
Doncic
Tatum
Giannis
Jokic

I think it is fair to say that Tatum is not the least valuable of these 5 and not the most valuable (at least this season).  So he is somewhere between 2-4 in terms of best player or MVP.  That is really good.  He has had a lot more team and playoff success than Doncic or SGA, but Giannis and Jokic have titles (and also a lot of team success).

That is just based on this season though.  If you start talking about comparing him to all time greats, he just isn't there yet.  Michael Jordan won his first MVP at age 24 but his first title at 28.  It will be years before you can start to assess where Tatum is on all time lists, but I think he will climb his way up over time.

I think he probably is the least valuable of those 5, based on performance this regular season. I also don't think first team all-nba is a lock for him this year. He'll probably make it due to tam successes, but you could ague for KD or even Kawhi ahead of him.

That would be a fair enough debate, in particular Durant.  I think Tatum does end up on the 1st team and that he ends up in the 2-4 range of MVP voting.  I would be surprised if Durant got 1st team and/or finished higher in the MVP voting, and really surprised if Kawhi did, but they are both really good players too.

Hard to believe that Jokic wasn't first team last season, even though he was second in the MVP voting, but shows that it can happen even if you are a great player.  Embiid isn't in it so Jokic will get all the center votes this season.  Last season, Giannis got all 100 first place votes for 1 of the forward spots, so he is probably a lock.  Maybe the votes for the other forward spot start to divide up, I don't know.  But Tatum is slightly better this season over last in FG%, 3P%, and Assts.  He has fewer PPG but he is also taking fewer shots.  I find it hard to see him not getting 1st team.

[tenn_smoothie]

What is the slander?

I think I've heard pretty reasonable takes, such as "Tatum is very good, but he needs to step his game up to be great" and "he has to win a championship like Giannis and Jokic to be included with them".

Good point. Tatum does bring some of this on himself by proclaiming he is the best player in the NBA, by holding up fingers to show off his points total and generally, making comments that come off as defensive and insecure. Shut up and play and your reputation will take care of itself.

[keevsnick]

The thing about Tatum is he's pretty much right on that line between "player who's an MVP and good enough to be a #1 on a finals team" and a step below that. And the issue is THAT LINE IS VITAL. So people who think he's above that line will think he's being slandered, and people who think he's right below that line will think he's overrated. The truth is probably that we just don't know yet what side of the lien he will peak at, teh fact thats its a vital question is what leads to so much Tatum talk.

All you can really say is....we'll find out.

Right now, what I think you can say for sure about Tatum is that he is destined to be a multi-season 1st team all NBA.  This season's first team is likely:

SGA
Doncic
Tatum
Giannis
Jokic

I think it is fair to say that Tatum is not the least valuable of these 5 and not the most valuable (at least this season).  So he is somewhere between 2-4 in terms of best player or MVP.  That is really good.  He has had a lot more team and playoff success than Doncic or SGA, but Giannis and Jokic have titles (and also a lot of team success).

That is just based on this season though.  If you start talking about comparing him to all time greats, he just isn't there yet.  Michael Jordan won his first MVP at age 24 but his first title at 28.  It will be years before you can start to assess where Tatum is on all time lists, but I think he will climb his way up over time.

I think he probably is the least valuable of those 5, based on performance this regular season. I also don't think first team all-nba is a lock for him this year. He'll probably make it due to tam successes, but you could ague for KD or even Kawhi ahead of him.

That would be a fair enough debate, in particular Durant.  I think Tatum does end up on the 1st team and that he ends up in the 2-4 range of MVP voting.  I would be surprised if Durant got 1st team and/or finished higher in the MVP voting, and really surprised if Kawhi did, but they are both really good players too.

Hard to believe that Jokic wasn't first team last season, even though he was second in the MVP voting, but shows that it can happen even if you are a great player.  Embiid isn't in it so Jokic will get all the center votes this season.  Last season, Giannis got all 100 first place votes for 1 of the forward spots, so he is probably a lock.  Maybe the votes for the other forward spot start to divide up, I don't know.  But Tatum is slightly better this season over last in FG%, 3P%, and Assts.  He has fewer PPG but he is also taking fewer shots.  I find it hard to see him not getting 1st team.

To be clear, I also think he makes first team. The Celtics are going to finish like 8+ games ahead of everyone else and Tatum will play in like 77/82 games and put up great numbers and that will get him 1st team. He'll likely finish 5th (maybe 4th) in MVP voting behind Shai, Giannis, Jokic and maybe Luka becasue fair or not the team is awesome when he's out there, and almost as awesome when he's not. 

Some parts of Tatum are overrated: He's never been as good a scorer as people think, just not as efficient as the bets guys.
Some parts are underrated: The guy ABSOLUTELY shows up in big games. Ask Milwaukee or Phili.

Overall i think he's properly rated as the 6th to 8th best player in the NBA who finishes higher than that in MVP because he never misses games.

One last thing: There are no positions for all-nba this year.

[Big333223]

but if the standard is playoff performance then why do we put Luka and Embiid there? both haven't even gotten as far as tatum has.

I think this is the real question.

Weirdly, it hurts Tatum in the national discourse to have been on more accomplished teams.

[Vermont Green]

To be clear, I also think he makes first team. The Celtics are going to finish like 8+ games ahead of everyone else and Tatum will play in like 77/82 games and put up great numbers and that will get him 1st team. He'll likely finish 5th (maybe 4th) in MVP voting behind Shai, Giannis, Jokic and maybe Luka becasue fair or not the team is awesome when he's out there, and almost as awesome when he's not. 

Some parts of Tatum are overrated: He's never been as good a scorer as people think, just not as efficient as the bets guys.
Some parts are underrated: The guy ABSOLUTELY shows up in big games. Ask Milwaukee or Phili.

Overall i think he's properly rated as the 6th to 8th best player in the NBA who finishes higher than that in MVP because he never misses games.

One last thing: There are no positions for all-nba this year.

I have been thinking about this and assessing my opinion based on all the responses.  In particular, the On-Off aspect of Tatum's production.  Tatum happens to play on a really good team.  When he is on the court, they are the best team by a fair margin, when he is not on the court, they are still a very good team.  Other teams like DAL, MIL, OKC drop off more when Luka, Giannis, or Shai are not on the court.  Is that because of the individual players or the rest of the team?  The answer is both of course.   I don't think it is something that is easily quantified.  Should Tatum be "punished" or viewed as less valuable because the rest of his team is much better than the rest of the team of these other stars? 

I concede is it a factor, but I don't think it is a deciding factor.  If Tatum was on a worse team, like last season and other seasons, than his On-Off would be more in line.  The On Off is more about who replaces Tatum when he is not on the court relative to who replaces Shai (for example) than it is about Tatum relative to Shai.  Or at least it is about both.

As to Tatum's scoring, I think he would score more points if he wanted to or needed to.  His scoring efficiency is quantifiable so I can't dispute that he is a less efficient score than Shai (for example) and that is a factor that should be considered in the overall MVP or All NBA consideration.  But there are a lot of factors that need to be considered and everyone considers them differently (part of the problem with the whole concept of MVP).