Jayson tatum slander all over media

[scaryjerry]

SGA is never going to be able to rebound like Tatum or defend with the position versatility that Tatum can. 

Is there much difference in the defensive versatility?

SGA can defend both guard positions at a high level and the SF position at an adequate level. Tatum can defend both forward positions at a high level and the SG position at an adequate level.

I would say that in general, having the versatility to defend bigger wings and big forwards at a high level has more value than being able to defend guards and smaller wings.  So yes, that is part of why I value Tatum a little higher than SGA.  With his size, SGA has more defensive versatility than say Donovan Mitchell, but I still value what Tatum can do more.  Especially on this current Celtics team.  Tatum's versatility is a huge factor in the Celtics ability to play the rotation they play, while still being the team's top scorer/playmaker.

Celtics make the playoffs without Tatum, maybe even the second round. He’s a good player on a great team.
Thunder are a lottery team without SGA. He’s a transcendent talent on an otherwise below average team.

I am not saying that Shai is not a star, but if he is so transcendent, why wasn't he able to transcend any of his previous teams?  Is he really transcending this team that is otherwise below average?  Or is he finally on a good team and able to be the best player on that team.  He has been a starter in the league for 6 seasons.  This is the first season where his team has shown any real team success.  I think it is a stretch to say that OKC is a lottery team without him.  They have been a lottery team with him in the past though.

Tatum clearly came into the league more NBA ready and has had more team success thus far in his career, goes without saying. Shai came into the league as more of an unknown/project with upside. Welp he’s reaching and surpassing that potential and growing as a player by leaps and bounds to the point he’s slightly surpassed Tatum as a player, certainly in the mvp race this season.

[Vermont Green]

SGA = Wade
Tatum = Pierce

These two remind me of this comparison. SGA the unstoppable one-on-one force who can get wherever he wants to on the court. Tatum like Pierce more well rounded with his perimeter jump-shot but not the unreal athlete or driver that SGA (Wade) is.

This is pretty fair. But even Paul Pierce never played power forward. Nor did he rebound at the rate that Tatum is rebounding. Nor did he ever cover power forwards on a regular basis. But I think the idea that SGA is a better singular offensive player, but Tatum, a better all-around player is fair.

[Moranis]

SGA = Wade
Tatum = Pierce

These two remind me of this comparison. SGA the unstoppable one-on-one force who can get wherever he wants to on the court. Tatum like Pierce more well rounded with his perimeter jump-shot but not the unreal athlete or driver that SGA (Wade) is.

This is pretty fair. But even Paul Pierce never played power forward. Nor did he rebound at the rate that Tatum is rebounding. Nor did he ever cover power forwards on a regular basis. But I think the idea that SGA is a better singular offensive player, but Tatum, a better all-around player is fair.

I don't think who was comparing the players, only using that as a reference as Wade had a better peak than either and both are much better than Pierce was at his best. 

The last 2 years, SGA has been the better all around player.  Basically every metric you can use leads to that same result.  SGA has simply been better than Tatum and unlike last year, I can't see Tatum finishing ahead of SGA in MVP voting (they were 4th and 5th last year).  SGA is going to finish in the top 3.  He should finish 2nd, but I think enough voters may go with Giannis at 2 so I went safer and said top 3. 

[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.

[Indocelts]

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.

[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.

[Roy H.]

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.

At the same time, aren't all of those players generally knocked down a bit in all-time rankings because they didn't win?

I guess it then becomes "elite for their time" versus "elite all-time".  The title is important in the all-time discussion.  But, for the current era, the consensus is that Doncic and Embiid are elite.  If somebody accepts that argument, then Tatum belongs in that conversation.

[No Nickname]

Tatum and this team's problem is that in important moments they spread the floor, set a pick on Tatum's man so he can get a "favorable" matchup, and then 80% of the time he shoots a fade-away jumper.

That kind of offense plays right into the defense's hands.  The C's have so many weapons in all five spots that ball movement, cutting, touching the paint and kicking out, is a much better play.

Against Phoenix they ran the same ISO in the 4th for four straight possessions with middling results, several Tatum turnovers, and no points.

Then Jrue slipped the screen, Tatum threaded a pass to him, and Jrue drove-and-kicked to Horford in the corner for a three.

Let's see more of that.  More of Tatum sharing the ball and hopefully receiving it back again with his defender not completely set.

[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.

At the same time, aren't all of those players generally knocked down a bit in all-time rankings because they didn't win?

I guess it then becomes "elite for their time" versus "elite all-time".  The title is important in the all-time discussion.  But, for the current era, the consensus is that Doncic and Embiid are elite.  If somebody accepts that argument, then Tatum belongs in that conversation.

I think it's reasonable to say that in order to be in the conversation for the greatest of all time, championships are a necessity.

I also think most people would agree that there's a pretty clear delineation between that and an elite player - the criteria or cut-off for 'elite' will almost always be more relaxed than for 'GOAT' - especially when you take someone's entire career into consideration.

Given that Tatum is 25, it seems silly to consider his career in total, especially since championship seasons almost always have an element of luck to them. Otherwise, you'd have to account for situations like 'Gary Payton, not elite until 2006', which simply isn't serious.

[Moranis]

Tatum is a great player but he hasn't yet reached elite status and may never get there. 

There are 5 no brainer all time elite players in the league right now. Lebron, Durant, and Curry are past their prime and then Jokic and Giannis. 

Injuries harmed Kawhi's elite starts but he is arguable as is Embiid.

Paul is right on the cusp where I could see arguments for or against. Same with Davis, Harden, Westbrook, and Lillard.

Then there are a handful of guys that have shown the talent to get there if they keep progressing.  That is where Tatum is along with Doncic, SGA, and Booker.

Edwards, Banchero, Zion, and Wemby all appear talented enough to get there as well, but need to stay healthy and continue to improve.

[Surferdad]

Tatum is a great player but he hasn't yet reached elite status and may never get there. 

There are 5 no brainer all time elite players in the league right now. Lebron, Durant, and Curry are past their prime and then Jokic and Giannis. 

Injuries harmed Kawhi's elite starts but he is arguable as is Embiid.

Paul is right on the cusp where I could see arguments for or against. Same with Davis, Harden, Westbrook, and Lillard.

Then there are a handful of guys that have shown the talent to get there if they keep progressing.  That is where Tatum is along with Doncic, SGA, and Booker.

Edwards, Banchero, Zion, and Wemby all appear talented enough to get there as well, but need to stay healthy and continue to improve.

TP. I largely agree with your groupings of the top players in the league.

[Vermont Green]

I thought this thread was about whether Tatum would win MVP or not. I will check back in 10 seasons to debate whether Tatum should be considered an all-time great.  He has a chance but still a ways to go Before he is in that conversation.

[Vermont Green]

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.

I am not sure I follow this in the context of a debate about Tatum versus SGA. You are saying that Tatum has a ceiling on how good he should be perceived to be because of his playoff performances or successes. But SGA has done a fraction of that in the playoffs so far. SGA has played most of his career on lottery teams.

Great players follow an arc. First, they compile big stats. Then they start to make other players better. Then they start having success in the playoffs. Then they win titles. Tatum is much further on this arc than SGA.

This all started with me predicting Tatum would finish third in the MVP and SGA fourth. I am surprised at how much debate this has stirred up.

[Who]

Donovan Mitchell is a scratch. He has been ruled out for missing too many games.

The list is now

Cleveland Cavaliers guard Donovan Mitchell and Boston Celtics big man Kristaps Porzingis are now ineligible for NBA awards this season. Mitchell missed his 18th game for Cleveland on Monday night vs the Phoenix Suns. Porzingis missed his 18th game for Boston on Monday night at the Portland Trail Blazers.

Joel Embiid is the highest profile player who is also ineligible, but the list continues to grow. Jimmy Butler, Kyrie Irving, Kristaps Porzingis, Julius Randle and Bradley Beal are some notable players who are also ineligible. Karl-Anthony Towns and Trae Young will likely join this list soon, as well.

Haliburton is at 52 games played out of 65. So he needs to play 13 of his remaining 17 to remain eligible.

[Who]

My MVP ballot would be

#1 Jokic
#2 SGA

#3 Tatum
#4 Luka
#5 Giannis

Honourable mentions: Haliburton, Jalen Brunson