Author Topic: Is this a 50 team with JB as #1?  (Read 3920 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Is this a 50 team with JB as #1?
« Reply #15 on: November 28, 2022, 05:25:18 PM »

Offline GetLucky

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1760
  • Tommy Points: 349
I'd say 50 wins would be the upper range of variance with JB as the #1 (ie if everything went right -- It think average wins over multiple years with him would be in the 45-48 range). What makes this team special is pretty much entirely Tatum's unique gravity, both on and off the ball. JB rarely gets the same game-plan-changing respect, even when he's the alpha on the floor.

Re: Is this a 50 team with JB as #1?
« Reply #16 on: November 28, 2022, 11:13:46 PM »

Offline Moranis

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 33461
  • Tommy Points: 1533
Brown has never shown the ability to lead the Celtics as the #1.  That doesn't mean he couldn't do it, but in the few games when Tatum has been out, Boston has not been good.

Data point:  last night.
beat me to it. 

this constant bashing of Brown is aging like week old fish in the sun
How is stating facts bashing Brown?  Last year, Boston was 2-4 without Tatum and 2-3 in those games when Brown played.  The year before 2-7 without Tatum, Brown missed just 1, so 2-6 with Brown and without Tatum.  So Tatum doesn't miss many games, but the last 2 full seasons in games Tatum has missed and Brown has played, Boston is 4-9, or you know, not very good.  And that includes losses to teams like the tanking Thunder.  And it wasn't any better the 19-20 season either, 2-4 without Tatum, 1-3 in the games with Brown.  1-2 the year before that and Tatum's rookie year, Tatum missed just 2 games, Boston won them both, but Brown only played in 1. 

That just isn't the case when the inverse happens, i.e. Brown misses games but Tatum plays.  Boston isn't quite as good as they are with both of them, but they are still a good team without Brown.

Facts are what they are, and the facts show that Brown just doesn't move the needle for Boston where winning is concerned.  Now maybe if the team truly missed Tatum for an extended time, Brown could overcome some of that, but I just don't think it is his game.  He just isn't that sort of player.  He is best suited as a #2 type player, and I just don't think he is a great fit next to Tatum overall.  Great player, but not as great next to Tatum as he would be next to a different great player.
2023 Historical Draft - Brooklyn Nets - 9th pick

Bigs - Pau, Amar'e, Issel, McGinnis, Roundfield
Wings - Dantley, Bowen, J. Jackson
Guards - Cheeks, Petrovic, Buse, Rip

Re: Is this a 50 team with JB as #1?
« Reply #17 on: November 29, 2022, 01:28:51 AM »

Offline GreenlyGreeny

  • NCE
  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2116
  • Tommy Points: 94
If everyone is healthy, this is a 55-60 win team without JB. Without JT, we’re flirting with .500 and missing the playoffs. We are that good. Still think we should move JB while he’s as high as he’s ever been. Diet Kyrie is just too risky to commit to…

Re: Is this a 50 team with JB as #1?
« Reply #18 on: November 29, 2022, 07:25:44 AM »

Online Kernewek

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3797
  • Tommy Points: 262
  • International Superstar
Brown has never shown the ability to lead the Celtics as the #1.  That doesn't mean he couldn't do it, but in the few games when Tatum has been out, Boston has not been good.

Data point:  last night.
beat me to it. 

this constant bashing of Brown is aging like week old fish in the sun
How is stating facts bashing Brown?  Last year, Boston was 2-4 without Tatum and 2-3 in those games when Brown played.  The year before 2-7 without Tatum, Brown missed just 1, so 2-6 with Brown and without Tatum.  So Tatum doesn't miss many games, but the last 2 full seasons in games Tatum has missed and Brown has played, Boston is 4-9, or you know, not very good.  And that includes losses to teams like the tanking Thunder.  And it wasn't any better the 19-20 season either, 2-4 without Tatum, 1-3 in the games with Brown.  1-2 the year before that and Tatum's rookie year, Tatum missed just 2 games, Boston won them both, but Brown only played in 1. 

That just isn't the case when the inverse happens, i.e. Brown misses games but Tatum plays.  Boston isn't quite as good as they are with both of them, but they are still a good team without Brown.

Facts are what they are, and the facts show that Brown just doesn't move the needle for Boston where winning is concerned.  Now maybe if the team truly missed Tatum for an extended time, Brown could overcome some of that, but I just don't think it is his game.  He just isn't that sort of player.  He is best suited as a #2 type player, and I just don't think he is a great fit next to Tatum overall.  Great player, but not as great next to Tatum as he would be next to a different great player.

Out of curiosity, who do you see as a better fit for Brown?
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.

Re: Is this a 50 team with JB as #1?
« Reply #19 on: November 29, 2022, 07:47:41 AM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 58542
  • Tommy Points: -25636
  • Bo Knows: Joe Don't Know Diddley
Quote
Facts are what they are, and the facts show that Brown just doesn't move the needle for Boston where winning is concerned.

I just think this is a wild conclusion to make.  Going into the playoffs, if JB went down do critics think that our odds of winning a title would be about the same?  The Bucks are 14-5 without Middleton this year.  Does he move the needle on winning this season?



I'M THE SILVERBACK GORILLA IN THIS MOTHER——— AND DON'T NONE OF YA'LL EVER FORGET IT!@ 34 minutes

Re: Is this a 50 team with JB as #1?
« Reply #20 on: November 29, 2022, 08:06:31 AM »

Offline Moranis

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 33461
  • Tommy Points: 1533
Quote
Facts are what they are, and the facts show that Brown just doesn't move the needle for Boston where winning is concerned.

I just think this is a wild conclusion to make.  Going into the playoffs, if JB went down do critics think that our odds of winning a title would be about the same?  The Bucks are 14-5 without Middleton this year.  Does he move the needle on winning this season?
Boston is better without Brown, but just not that much.  Now that small amount, might be the difference between beating a team like the Bucks or losing to them.  Last year, for example, I believe the Bucks beat Boston if they had Middleton, but it was a close 7 game series without him.  Middleton, though, is an excellent fit next to Giannis.  They make each other better.  Brown doesn't do that for Tatum.  In fact, historically Tatum ups both his totals and his efficiency when Brown doesn't play.  So Tatum is better when Brown isn't in the game.  We saw that even yesterday when Tatum was 11 of 14 from 2 point range in a total blowout of the Hornets. 
2023 Historical Draft - Brooklyn Nets - 9th pick

Bigs - Pau, Amar'e, Issel, McGinnis, Roundfield
Wings - Dantley, Bowen, J. Jackson
Guards - Cheeks, Petrovic, Buse, Rip

Re: Is this a 50 team with JB as #1?
« Reply #21 on: November 29, 2022, 08:58:28 AM »

Offline td450

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2330
  • Tommy Points: 254
Part of this is pretty simple. The C's have far more talent at the 2/3 spot than the 3/4. We are super thin at power forward and we have been this way for some time. We've always had more guys who could contribute in Jaylen's slot.

The other major factor is that the Celtics are offensively designed around Tatum. The offense runs through him. That has been true for 3 years now.

Brown has always been asked to figure out his opportunities around that. And he does.

So when Tatum is out, there is a lot of offensive decision making that needs to get replaced. He's almost never out, so when he is, it is a harsh adjustment. When Brown is out, it is often for a quality player and is more about just distributing the shots.

If Tatum were out for a couple of months or more, the team would figure it out and the impact wouldn't be so severe.

_______

After watching the last few games, I'm starting to think this team could be pretty solid without either guy. This team looks like it is getting better every week.

Re: Is this a 50 team with JB as #1?
« Reply #22 on: November 29, 2022, 09:20:11 AM »

Offline slamtheking

  • NCE
  • Red Auerbach
  • *******************************
  • Posts: 31869
  • Tommy Points: 10047
Part of this is pretty simple. The C's have far more talent at the 2/3 spot than the 3/4. We are super thin at power forward and we have been this way for some time. We've always had more guys who could contribute in Jaylen's slot.

The other major factor is that the Celtics are offensively designed around Tatum. The offense runs through him. That has been true for 3 years now.

Brown has always been asked to figure out his opportunities around that. And he does.

So when Tatum is out, there is a lot of offensive decision making that needs to get replaced. He's almost never out, so when he is, it is a harsh adjustment. When Brown is out, it is often for a quality player and is more about just distributing the shots.

If Tatum were out for a couple of months or more, the team would figure it out and the impact wouldn't be so severe.

_______

After watching the last few games, I'm starting to think this team could be pretty solid without either guy. This team looks like it is getting better every week.
bingo - solid analysis

Re: Is this a 50 team with JB as #1?
« Reply #23 on: November 29, 2022, 10:12:28 AM »

Offline Moranis

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 33461
  • Tommy Points: 1533
Brown has never shown the ability to lead the Celtics as the #1.  That doesn't mean he couldn't do it, but in the few games when Tatum has been out, Boston has not been good.

Data point:  last night.
beat me to it. 

this constant bashing of Brown is aging like week old fish in the sun
How is stating facts bashing Brown?  Last year, Boston was 2-4 without Tatum and 2-3 in those games when Brown played.  The year before 2-7 without Tatum, Brown missed just 1, so 2-6 with Brown and without Tatum.  So Tatum doesn't miss many games, but the last 2 full seasons in games Tatum has missed and Brown has played, Boston is 4-9, or you know, not very good.  And that includes losses to teams like the tanking Thunder.  And it wasn't any better the 19-20 season either, 2-4 without Tatum, 1-3 in the games with Brown.  1-2 the year before that and Tatum's rookie year, Tatum missed just 2 games, Boston won them both, but Brown only played in 1. 

That just isn't the case when the inverse happens, i.e. Brown misses games but Tatum plays.  Boston isn't quite as good as they are with both of them, but they are still a good team without Brown.

Facts are what they are, and the facts show that Brown just doesn't move the needle for Boston where winning is concerned.  Now maybe if the team truly missed Tatum for an extended time, Brown could overcome some of that, but I just don't think it is his game.  He just isn't that sort of player.  He is best suited as a #2 type player, and I just don't think he is a great fit next to Tatum overall.  Great player, but not as great next to Tatum as he would be next to a different great player.

Out of curiosity, who do you see as a better fit for Brown?
I've never been shy that I think finding a long term PF would be most optimal.  Someone that can play outside and not clog up the lane offensively (Rob and Brown do that enough for Tatum as is).  Then replace Brown with a shooter (preferably a solid defending one).  I know these guys are on different teams and I do think Brown has more value then they do collectively, but if for example we acquired John Collins and Buddy Hield for Brown, I think Boston would be better even though those 2 guys aren't as good as Brown. 

I think Tatum functions at his best with a non dominant ball handling PG, a shooter at SG, him at SF, a shooter at PF, and a C that can score at the rim.  So for the current team, I think Smart, Brogdon, Tatum, Horford, and Rob may actually be the most optimal lineup the team has.  That to me maximizes Tatum the best.  Obviously Rob isn't out there so I'd probably do Horford and Grant along with Tatum, Smart, and Brogdon.  If White continues to shoot as well as he has, I could see him swapping in for Smart.  Clearly, Brown is Boston's 2nd best player, I just don't think he is a good fit with Tatum, and I believe their numbers reflect that.  They are both at their best at SF.  They both operate better with the ball and in the same places on the floor.  That is why I don't see them meshing very well, and why Tatum has historically played better when Brown doesn't play at all.  Brown isn't a good enough passer, ball handler, or creator to do what Tatum does, which is why the team collapses without Tatum, and because his game is so similar to Tatum, the team doesn't fully maximize his skill set or get the most out of his talent.  It reminds of an old Clyde Drexler quote, where he asked about Jordan something like "what can he do that I can't" and the response was something along the lines of "Nothing.  Jordan just does everything better."  Brown is Drexler, Tatum is Jordan, and just like I don't think Clyde and MJ would have worked as well as their talent would yield, I feel the same about Tatum and Brown.
2023 Historical Draft - Brooklyn Nets - 9th pick

Bigs - Pau, Amar'e, Issel, McGinnis, Roundfield
Wings - Dantley, Bowen, J. Jackson
Guards - Cheeks, Petrovic, Buse, Rip

Re: Is this a 50 team with JB as #1?
« Reply #24 on: November 29, 2022, 10:22:46 AM »

Offline MarcusSmartFanClub

  • NCE
  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1096
  • Tommy Points: 59
I literally don’t know what you’re talking about. I watched the NBA playoffs and Jaylen was a big factor in getting to the Finals. You prefer John Collins AND Hield to Jaylen Brown? Two guys that are perpetually on the trade block?

I guess we don’t deserve good things if we can’t even appreciate what we have.

Re: Is this a 50 team with JB as #1?
« Reply #25 on: November 29, 2022, 10:34:59 AM »

Offline td450

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2330
  • Tommy Points: 254
Brown has never shown the ability to lead the Celtics as the #1.  That doesn't mean he couldn't do it, but in the few games when Tatum has been out, Boston has not been good.

Data point:  last night.
beat me to it. 

this constant bashing of Brown is aging like week old fish in the sun
How is stating facts bashing Brown?  Last year, Boston was 2-4 without Tatum and 2-3 in those games when Brown played.  The year before 2-7 without Tatum, Brown missed just 1, so 2-6 with Brown and without Tatum.  So Tatum doesn't miss many games, but the last 2 full seasons in games Tatum has missed and Brown has played, Boston is 4-9, or you know, not very good.  And that includes losses to teams like the tanking Thunder.  And it wasn't any better the 19-20 season either, 2-4 without Tatum, 1-3 in the games with Brown.  1-2 the year before that and Tatum's rookie year, Tatum missed just 2 games, Boston won them both, but Brown only played in 1. 

That just isn't the case when the inverse happens, i.e. Brown misses games but Tatum plays.  Boston isn't quite as good as they are with both of them, but they are still a good team without Brown.

Facts are what they are, and the facts show that Brown just doesn't move the needle for Boston where winning is concerned.  Now maybe if the team truly missed Tatum for an extended time, Brown could overcome some of that, but I just don't think it is his game.  He just isn't that sort of player.  He is best suited as a #2 type player, and I just don't think he is a great fit next to Tatum overall.  Great player, but not as great next to Tatum as he would be next to a different great player.

Out of curiosity, who do you see as a better fit for Brown?
I've never been shy that I think finding a long term PF would be most optimal.  Someone that can play outside and not clog up the lane offensively (Rob and Brown do that enough for Tatum as is).  Then replace Brown with a shooter (preferably a solid defending one).  I know these guys are on different teams and I do think Brown has more value then they do collectively, but if for example we acquired John Collins and Buddy Hield for Brown, I think Boston would be better even though those 2 guys aren't as good as Brown. 

I think Tatum functions at his best with a non dominant ball handling PG, a shooter at SG, him at SF, a shooter at PF, and a C that can score at the rim.  So for the current team, I think Smart, Brogdon, Tatum, Horford, and Rob may actually be the most optimal lineup the team has.  That to me maximizes Tatum the best.  Obviously Rob isn't out there so I'd probably do Horford and Grant along with Tatum, Smart, and Brogdon.  If White continues to shoot as well as he has, I could see him swapping in for Smart.  Clearly, Brown is Boston's 2nd best player, I just don't think he is a good fit with Tatum, and I believe their numbers reflect that.  They are both at their best at SF.  They both operate better with the ball and in the same places on the floor.  That is why I don't see them meshing very well, and why Tatum has historically played better when Brown doesn't play at all.  Brown isn't a good enough passer, ball handler, or creator to do what Tatum does, which is why the team collapses without Tatum, and because his game is so similar to Tatum, the team doesn't fully maximize his skill set or get the most out of his talent.  It reminds of an old Clyde Drexler quote, where he asked about Jordan something like "what can he do that I can't" and the response was something along the lines of "Nothing.  Jordan just does everything better."  Brown is Drexler, Tatum is Jordan, and just like I don't think Clyde and MJ would have worked as well as their talent would yield, I feel the same about Tatum and Brown.
It seems hard to argue with these two as a pair, because they have had significant success so far and the team is showing signs this year that they are becoming dominant, as they reach 24 and 26. That sounds successful to me.

Jaylen is a beast, and could successfully play as the team's power forward if that was such a priority. Tatum plays there a lot now and Jaylen is definitely the more physical guy of the two.  The team just doesn't see things that way.

Re: Is this a 50 team with JB as #1?
« Reply #26 on: November 29, 2022, 10:39:49 AM »

Online Kernewek

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3797
  • Tommy Points: 262
  • International Superstar
Brown has never shown the ability to lead the Celtics as the #1.  That doesn't mean he couldn't do it, but in the few games when Tatum has been out, Boston has not been good.

Data point:  last night.
beat me to it. 

this constant bashing of Brown is aging like week old fish in the sun
How is stating facts bashing Brown?  Last year, Boston was 2-4 without Tatum and 2-3 in those games when Brown played.  The year before 2-7 without Tatum, Brown missed just 1, so 2-6 with Brown and without Tatum.  So Tatum doesn't miss many games, but the last 2 full seasons in games Tatum has missed and Brown has played, Boston is 4-9, or you know, not very good.  And that includes losses to teams like the tanking Thunder.  And it wasn't any better the 19-20 season either, 2-4 without Tatum, 1-3 in the games with Brown.  1-2 the year before that and Tatum's rookie year, Tatum missed just 2 games, Boston won them both, but Brown only played in 1. 

That just isn't the case when the inverse happens, i.e. Brown misses games but Tatum plays.  Boston isn't quite as good as they are with both of them, but they are still a good team without Brown.

Facts are what they are, and the facts show that Brown just doesn't move the needle for Boston where winning is concerned.  Now maybe if the team truly missed Tatum for an extended time, Brown could overcome some of that, but I just don't think it is his game.  He just isn't that sort of player.  He is best suited as a #2 type player, and I just don't think he is a great fit next to Tatum overall.  Great player, but not as great next to Tatum as he would be next to a different great player.

Out of curiosity, who do you see as a better fit for Brown?
I've never been shy that I think finding a long term PF would be most optimal.  Someone that can play outside and not clog up the lane offensively (Rob and Brown do that enough for Tatum as is).  Then replace Brown with a shooter (preferably a solid defending one).  I know these guys are on different teams and I do think Brown has more value then they do collectively, but if for example we acquired John Collins and Buddy Hield for Brown, I think Boston would be better even though those 2 guys aren't as good as Brown. 

I think Tatum functions at his best with a non dominant ball handling PG, a shooter at SG, him at SF, a shooter at PF, and a C that can score at the rim.  So for the current team, I think Smart, Brogdon, Tatum, Horford, and Rob may actually be the most optimal lineup the team has.  That to me maximizes Tatum the best.  Obviously Rob isn't out there so I'd probably do Horford and Grant along with Tatum, Smart, and Brogdon.  If White continues to shoot as well as he has, I could see him swapping in for Smart.  Clearly, Brown is Boston's 2nd best player, I just don't think he is a good fit with Tatum, and I believe their numbers reflect that.  They are both at their best at SF.  They both operate better with the ball and in the same places on the floor.  That is why I don't see them meshing very well, and why Tatum has historically played better when Brown doesn't play at all.  Brown isn't a good enough passer, ball handler, or creator to do what Tatum does, which is why the team collapses without Tatum, and because his game is so similar to Tatum, the team doesn't fully maximize his skill set or get the most out of his talent.  It reminds of an old Clyde Drexler quote, where he asked about Jordan something like "what can he do that I can't" and the response was something along the lines of "Nothing.  Jordan just does everything better."  Brown is Drexler, Tatum is Jordan, and just like I don't think Clyde and MJ would have worked as well as their talent would yield, I feel the same about Tatum and Brown.

Ok, but this is not what I'm asking - I'm asking you who is a better fit for Brown. Unless your answer is 'the same sorts of players who I feel would be more complimentary for Tatum'?
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.

Re: Is this a 50 team with JB as #1?
« Reply #27 on: November 29, 2022, 10:48:46 AM »

Offline Moranis

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 33461
  • Tommy Points: 1533
Brown has never shown the ability to lead the Celtics as the #1.  That doesn't mean he couldn't do it, but in the few games when Tatum has been out, Boston has not been good.

Data point:  last night.
beat me to it. 

this constant bashing of Brown is aging like week old fish in the sun
How is stating facts bashing Brown?  Last year, Boston was 2-4 without Tatum and 2-3 in those games when Brown played.  The year before 2-7 without Tatum, Brown missed just 1, so 2-6 with Brown and without Tatum.  So Tatum doesn't miss many games, but the last 2 full seasons in games Tatum has missed and Brown has played, Boston is 4-9, or you know, not very good.  And that includes losses to teams like the tanking Thunder.  And it wasn't any better the 19-20 season either, 2-4 without Tatum, 1-3 in the games with Brown.  1-2 the year before that and Tatum's rookie year, Tatum missed just 2 games, Boston won them both, but Brown only played in 1. 

That just isn't the case when the inverse happens, i.e. Brown misses games but Tatum plays.  Boston isn't quite as good as they are with both of them, but they are still a good team without Brown.

Facts are what they are, and the facts show that Brown just doesn't move the needle for Boston where winning is concerned.  Now maybe if the team truly missed Tatum for an extended time, Brown could overcome some of that, but I just don't think it is his game.  He just isn't that sort of player.  He is best suited as a #2 type player, and I just don't think he is a great fit next to Tatum overall.  Great player, but not as great next to Tatum as he would be next to a different great player.

Out of curiosity, who do you see as a better fit for Brown?
I've never been shy that I think finding a long term PF would be most optimal.  Someone that can play outside and not clog up the lane offensively (Rob and Brown do that enough for Tatum as is).  Then replace Brown with a shooter (preferably a solid defending one).  I know these guys are on different teams and I do think Brown has more value then they do collectively, but if for example we acquired John Collins and Buddy Hield for Brown, I think Boston would be better even though those 2 guys aren't as good as Brown. 

I think Tatum functions at his best with a non dominant ball handling PG, a shooter at SG, him at SF, a shooter at PF, and a C that can score at the rim.  So for the current team, I think Smart, Brogdon, Tatum, Horford, and Rob may actually be the most optimal lineup the team has.  That to me maximizes Tatum the best.  Obviously Rob isn't out there so I'd probably do Horford and Grant along with Tatum, Smart, and Brogdon.  If White continues to shoot as well as he has, I could see him swapping in for Smart.  Clearly, Brown is Boston's 2nd best player, I just don't think he is a good fit with Tatum, and I believe their numbers reflect that.  They are both at their best at SF.  They both operate better with the ball and in the same places on the floor.  That is why I don't see them meshing very well, and why Tatum has historically played better when Brown doesn't play at all.  Brown isn't a good enough passer, ball handler, or creator to do what Tatum does, which is why the team collapses without Tatum, and because his game is so similar to Tatum, the team doesn't fully maximize his skill set or get the most out of his talent.  It reminds of an old Clyde Drexler quote, where he asked about Jordan something like "what can he do that I can't" and the response was something along the lines of "Nothing.  Jordan just does everything better."  Brown is Drexler, Tatum is Jordan, and just like I don't think Clyde and MJ would have worked as well as their talent would yield, I feel the same about Tatum and Brown.

Ok, but this is not what I'm asking - I'm asking you who is a better fit for Brown. Unless your answer is 'the same sorts of players who I feel would be more complimentary for Tatum'?
Edit: Sorry I misread your post as Tatum, when you asked about Brown.

For Brown, I think he'd be fine in the Middleton role in Milwaukee.  He'd be great next to Embiid or Jokic.  I think he'd be ok next to guys like Morant or Edwards (and certainly Curry).  I think he might have similar problems with Durant that he does with Tatum.  He needs to be next to a guy that can create, but that doesn't operate at basically the same position on the floor.  Brown and Tatum are similar types of players, but Brown just is worse at about everything and they operate at their best in the same spots.  That is why they don't work all that well.
« Last Edit: November 29, 2022, 11:30:40 AM by Moranis »
2023 Historical Draft - Brooklyn Nets - 9th pick

Bigs - Pau, Amar'e, Issel, McGinnis, Roundfield
Wings - Dantley, Bowen, J. Jackson
Guards - Cheeks, Petrovic, Buse, Rip

Re: Is this a 50 team with JB as #1?
« Reply #28 on: November 29, 2022, 10:53:40 AM »

Offline bogg

  • Jayson Tatum
  • Posts: 817
  • Tommy Points: 51
I provided a hypothetical i.e. Collins and Hield.  Lesser players but better fits.

I don't think they are. Neither defends very well and Collins isn't a particularly good shooter. Both probably come off the bench for this team when fully healthy. Jaylen's on his way to an All-NBA spot and I don't think you get better splitting him into a pair of never-time-all-stars who combine to make significantly more.

Re: Is this a 50 team with JB as #1?
« Reply #29 on: November 29, 2022, 03:09:30 PM »

Offline ETNCeltics

  • NCE
  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2720
  • Tommy Points: 306
Brown has never shown the ability to lead the Celtics as the #1.  That doesn't mean he couldn't do it, but in the few games when Tatum has been out, Boston has not been good.

Data point:  last night.
beat me to it. 

this constant bashing of Brown is aging like week old fish in the sun
How is stating facts bashing Brown?  Last year, Boston was 2-4 without Tatum and 2-3 in those games when Brown played.  The year before 2-7 without Tatum, Brown missed just 1, so 2-6 with Brown and without Tatum.  So Tatum doesn't miss many games, but the last 2 full seasons in games Tatum has missed and Brown has played, Boston is 4-9, or you know, not very good.  And that includes losses to teams like the tanking Thunder.  And it wasn't any better the 19-20 season either, 2-4 without Tatum, 1-3 in the games with Brown.  1-2 the year before that and Tatum's rookie year, Tatum missed just 2 games, Boston won them both, but Brown only played in 1. 

That just isn't the case when the inverse happens, i.e. Brown misses games but Tatum plays.  Boston isn't quite as good as they are with both of them, but they are still a good team without Brown.

Facts are what they are, and the facts show that Brown just doesn't move the needle for Boston where winning is concerned.  Now maybe if the team truly missed Tatum for an extended time, Brown could overcome some of that, but I just don't think it is his game.  He just isn't that sort of player.  He is best suited as a #2 type player, and I just don't think he is a great fit next to Tatum overall.  Great player, but not as great next to Tatum as he would be next to a different great player.

Out of curiosity, who do you see as a better fit for Brown?
I've never been shy that I think finding a long term PF would be most optimal.  Someone that can play outside and not clog up the lane offensively (Rob and Brown do that enough for Tatum as is).  Then replace Brown with a shooter (preferably a solid defending one).  I know these guys are on different teams and I do think Brown has more value then they do collectively, but if for example we acquired John Collins and Buddy Hield for Brown, I think Boston would be better even though those 2 guys aren't as good as Brown. 

I think Tatum functions at his best with a non dominant ball handling PG, a shooter at SG, him at SF, a shooter at PF, and a C that can score at the rim.  So for the current team, I think Smart, Brogdon, Tatum, Horford, and Rob may actually be the most optimal lineup the team has.  That to me maximizes Tatum the best.  Obviously Rob isn't out there so I'd probably do Horford and Grant along with Tatum, Smart, and Brogdon.  If White continues to shoot as well as he has, I could see him swapping in for Smart.  Clearly, Brown is Boston's 2nd best player, I just don't think he is a good fit with Tatum, and I believe their numbers reflect that.  They are both at their best at SF.  They both operate better with the ball and in the same places on the floor.  That is why I don't see them meshing very well, and why Tatum has historically played better when Brown doesn't play at all.  Brown isn't a good enough passer, ball handler, or creator to do what Tatum does, which is why the team collapses without Tatum, and because his game is so similar to Tatum, the team doesn't fully maximize his skill set or get the most out of his talent.  It reminds of an old Clyde Drexler quote, where he asked about Jordan something like "what can he do that I can't" and the response was something along the lines of "Nothing.  Jordan just does everything better."  Brown is Drexler, Tatum is Jordan, and just like I don't think Clyde and MJ would have worked as well as their talent would yield, I feel the same about Tatum and Brown.

Ok, but this is not what I'm asking - I'm asking you who is a better fit for Brown. Unless your answer is 'the same sorts of players who I feel would be more complimentary for Tatum'?
Edit: Sorry I misread your post as Tatum, when you asked about Brown.

For Brown, I think he'd be fine in the Middleton role in Milwaukee.  He'd be great next to Embiid or Jokic.  I think he'd be ok next to guys like Morant or Edwards (and certainly Curry).  I think he might have similar problems with Durant that he does with Tatum.  He needs to be next to a guy that can create, but that doesn't operate at basically the same position on the floor.  Brown and Tatum are similar types of players, but Brown just is worse at about everything and they operate at their best in the same spots.  That is why they don't work all that well.

Brown is averaging 26/6/3 on the best team in the league a quarter of the way through the season, one of the league's better wing defenders, almost certainly an all star, and is possibly an all-nba selection.

To say that he needs something or that he and Tatum don't fit together is absurd.