« Reply #45 on: December 13, 2023, 08:05:36 AM »
This discussion should not be had until Tatum has led his team to at least one championship. Legends start in Boston usually with multiple championships.
Tatum has the highest scoring season in team history, and he's made it to the Finals once. If he continues at that pace with multiple 30 ppg seasons, 1sr Team All-NBA, repeated deep playoff runs that don't lead to a title, etc., is there no discussion to be had?
He'll never surpass Larry or Russell, but can people argue "Tatum was better than Pierce or Hondo" if he doesn't get a ring?
Is it a better player versus better legacy debate?
One caveat: He's playing in a 3pt-heavy era, which definitely boosts his scoring (and that of most players).
This is true, but at the end of the day, players have to compete against their contemporaries, so it feels good to note but difficult to tell how that should guide our assessment (maybe we can adjust pace & league-wide offense to adjust for weighted importance of each point?).
Logged
Man had always assumed that he was more intelligent than dolphins because he had achieved so much—the wheel, New York, wars and so on—whilst all the dolphins had ever done was muck about in the water having a good time.
But conversely, the dolphins had always believed that they were far more intelligent than man—for precisely the same reasons.
Topic: How do you rank Tatum against other Celtics legends? (Read 3914 times)