We Are Too Low on Jayson Tatum

[Roy H.]

Many talk about Tatum as a future perennial all-star / superstar.  I don’t necessarily see that, particularly in terms of his passing and defensive instincts.  There’s a lot of criticism for Kyrie, but Tatum seems like an extreme example of Kyrie’s bad habits, with less offensive explosiveness.

[jambr380]

Honestly this thread isn't a specific response to your post, but to a general trend I've observed.  That's why I did not quote you directly and I'm not interested in parsing exactly what you posted now.

I don't want this to devolve into another thread about Kyrie, but I think paraphrasing other people by saying they would "prefer to lose a 27 y/o perennial All-Star for nothing" is, to say the least, misleading and disingenous.  I think you know it's a more complex case than that.

Nope, from an asset accumulation standpoint, it really isn't. And you are the one that took a post about a different topic and applied it to this one. Other than stating that other teams also have nice young players, I have never said anything negative about Tatum or Brown. Honestly, nick of all people should know how much I support Jaylen. And I have stated on numerous occasions that Tatum is easily our best asset and that I hope he can continue his growth to stardom.

I don't think it's ridiculous to say that Jayson or Jaylen might never reach perennial All-Star starter status or that Hayward might not make another All-Star team (I have been defending him greatly, as of late, with all the blame about he ruined chemistry).

I just find it strange you chose to lazily cherry-pick an out of context post and paraphrase it in a way that pushed your agenda. That's just weak.

[nickagneta]

Honestly this thread isn't a specific response to your post, but to a general trend I've observed.  That's why I did not quote you directly and I'm not interested in parsing exactly what you posted now.

I don't want this to devolve into another thread about Kyrie, but I think paraphrasing other people by saying they would "prefer to lose a 27 y/o perennial All-Star for nothing" is, to say the least, misleading and disingenous.  I think you know it's a more complex case than that.

Nope, from an asset accumulation standpoint, it really isn't. And you are the one that took a post about a different topic and applied it to this one. Other than stating that other teams also have nice young players, I have never said anything negative about Tatum or Brown. Honestly, nick of all people should know how much I support Jaylen. And I have stated on numerous occasions that Tatum is easily our best asset and that I hope he can continue his growth to stardom.

I don't think it's ridiculous to say that Jayson or Jaylen might never reach perennial All-Star starter status or that Hayward might not make another All-Star team (I have been defending him greatly, as of late, with all the blame about he ruined chemistry).

I just find it strange you chose to lazily cherry-pick an out of context post and paraphrase it in a way that pushed your agenda. That's just weak.

Let's halt this line of dialogue right now. It leads nowhere positive.

[Kuberski33]

Many talk about Tatum as a future perennial all-star / superstar.  I don’t necessarily see that, particularly in terms of his passing and defensive instincts.  There’s a lot of criticism for Kyrie, but Tatum seems like an extreme example of Kyrie’s bad habits, with less offensive explosiveness.

I'm with you Roy. I think many here overrate him. To me his athleticism is still questionable at least as it translates to his ability to be anything beyond a 3 pt shooter. I also think he's a little soft at both ends of the court.  Of course he's still very young and he should improve, but in my mind, no way is he untouchable.  I don't think there are any guarantees that he ever gets to All Star level. 

[CF033]

I can't pretend to be able to judge where his ceiling is at this point, especially because he is so young. But IMO he's at least going to be an all-star, he def has the tools to get there.

It'll be interesting to see the young guys (most likely) playing a step up the chain next season when Kyrie bolts.

[CF033]

dup

[keevsnick]

I do agree that people are probably too low on home right now, but I think people were also way too high on his last offseason when there were fans and media who thought he was more likely than not to be a top 10 or 5 player. What we are seeing is market correction.

I think Tatum has a lot of the skills he needs to be a 20ppg player already, where I have a lit of trouble getting is how he gets to 25ppg. His handle might be worse than Jaylens, he doesn't have a great first step, he isnt the pure shooter many thought he was. He can get blinders at times. He needs to get a lot better to be a top 10 like guy, maybe he does. But I'm confident he will be an all star at least.

[RazzelnoDazzel]

I’ve been low on Tatum for a long time. He’s moved are predictable and he haven’t shown any counters with them. He still doesn’t finish off at the rim the way I had hoped. I really didn’t see the leap forward from year one to year two like I had hoped. I do see him as a high volume shooter, but I honestly don’t see him becoming an all star like everyone else does.

[PhoSita]

Many talk about Tatum as a future perennial all-star / superstar.  I don’t necessarily see that, particularly in terms of his passing and defensive instincts.  There’s a lot of criticism for Kyrie, but Tatum seems like an extreme example of Kyrie’s bad habits, with less offensive explosiveness.

Does he need to improve that much as a defender or passer in order to be a perennial All-Star?


Seems to me if he played more minutes and had higher usage, he would just need to maintain similar efficiency while getting to the line a bit more and then he'd be pretty close to that level.


Paul George attempted 21 field goals per game this year.

If Tatum attempted 21 field goals per game and his efficiency and 2P/3P/FT ratio remained the same, Tatum would average 25.18 points per game.

Now, I'm not suggesting he would necessarily maintain his full efficiency if he attempted 8 more shots a game.  I don't think it's crazy to think he might.  But even if he wasn't quite at that level, as long as he was still fairly efficient, 25+ ppg with solid defense, 5-6+ rebounds a game, on a winning team --- that's going to get you an All-Star berth in an ordinary season.

[Roy H.]

Many talk about Tatum as a future perennial all-star / superstar.  I don’t necessarily see that, particularly in terms of his passing and defensive instincts.  There’s a lot of criticism for Kyrie, but Tatum seems like an extreme example of Kyrie’s bad habits, with less offensive explosiveness.

Does he need to improve that much as a defender or passer in order to be a perennial All-Star?


Seems to me if he played more minutes and had higher usage, he would just need to maintain similar efficiency while getting to the line a bit more and then he'd be pretty close to that level.


Paul George attempted 21 field goals per game this year.

If Tatum attempted 21 field goals per game and his efficiency and 2P/3P/FT ratio remained the same, Tatum would average 25.18 points per game.

Now, I'm not suggesting he would necessarily maintain his full efficiency if he attempted 8 more shots a game.  I don't think it's crazy to think he might.  But even if he wasn't quite at that level, as long as he was still fairly efficient, 25+ ppg with solid defense, 5-6+ rebounds a game, on a winning team --- that's going to get you an All-Star berth in an ordinary season.

I think Tatum is a long way away from 25+ ppg with solid defense on a winning team.  He’s going to have to actually work to improve his game, rather than trying to emulate Kobe.

[RazzelnoDazzel]

Many talk about Tatum as a future perennial all-star / superstar.  I don’t necessarily see that, particularly in terms of his passing and defensive instincts.  There’s a lot of criticism for Kyrie, but Tatum seems like an extreme example of Kyrie’s bad habits, with less offensive explosiveness.

Does he need to improve that much as a defender or passer in order to be a perennial All-Star?


Seems to me if he played more minutes and had higher usage, he would just need to maintain similar efficiency while getting to the line a bit more and then he'd be pretty close to that level.


Paul George attempted 21 field goals per game this year.

If Tatum attempted 21 field goals per game and his efficiency and 2P/3P/FT ratio remained the same, Tatum would average 25.18 points per game.

Now, I'm not suggesting he would necessarily maintain his full efficiency if he attempted 8 more shots a game.  I don't think it's crazy to think he might.  But even if he wasn't quite at that level, as long as he was still fairly efficient, 25+ ppg with solid defense, 5-6+ rebounds a game, on a winning team --- that's going to get you an All-Star berth in an ordinary season.

I think Tatum is a long way away from 25+ ppg with solid defense on a winning team.  He’s going to have to actually work to improve his game, rather than trying to emulate Kobe.

Loooooong way, but Brown though 🤔

[Celtics4ever]

For me the key here is getting Davis to committ long term, if he does it is a no brainer to trade Tatum and Smart and #14 and filler for him.

[Walker Wiggle]

I do feel that people on this board (and others) underrate him, but it’s part of a broader theme of how we assume players are finished products at such a young age. I’m baffled by all the people here lamenting things like poor shot selection. Do you really feel like Tatum won’t work on his game over the next four years, and otherwise mature, after which he’ll only be entering his prime at age 25? For goodness sake, we are talking about a 21 year old.

Trading Tatum even STRAIGHT UP for Davis is far from a no brainer. Why? Because you are not trading a player for a player. You would be bringing in one year of AD at max money, after which (if he agrees to stay here) you’d pay him 30% of the salary cap with steep salary raises. You’d be sending out Tatum with three more years on his rookie salary, plus because he’d only be a restricted free agent at the end of his rookie deal, the worst case scenario after that is that you’ve got him for another four years or five at 25% of the cap.

The point is, you could be sending out 7 guaranteed years of Tatum at relatively low money, in exchange for between 1 and 6 years of AD at much more money.

[PhoSita]

Many talk about Tatum as a future perennial all-star / superstar.  I don’t necessarily see that, particularly in terms of his passing and defensive instincts.  There’s a lot of criticism for Kyrie, but Tatum seems like an extreme example of Kyrie’s bad habits, with less offensive explosiveness.

Does he need to improve that much as a defender or passer in order to be a perennial All-Star?


Seems to me if he played more minutes and had higher usage, he would just need to maintain similar efficiency while getting to the line a bit more and then he'd be pretty close to that level.


Paul George attempted 21 field goals per game this year.

If Tatum attempted 21 field goals per game and his efficiency and 2P/3P/FT ratio remained the same, Tatum would average 25.18 points per game.

Now, I'm not suggesting he would necessarily maintain his full efficiency if he attempted 8 more shots a game.  I don't think it's crazy to think he might.  But even if he wasn't quite at that level, as long as he was still fairly efficient, 25+ ppg with solid defense, 5-6+ rebounds a game, on a winning team --- that's going to get you an All-Star berth in an ordinary season.

I think Tatum is a long way away from 25+ ppg with solid defense on a winning team.  He’s going to have to actually work to improve his game, rather than trying to emulate Kobe.

I'm not sure why you think he's so far off.  He was used as a 2nd or 3rd option, if not lower, most of his first two years in the league.  I think it's fair to wonder if he would struggle to get good shots if the defense was focusing on him more. 

I tend to think that he's already capable of handling a greater load offensively.  He already has a pretty good variety of moves, and if he had more touches I think his shot selection would be more varied.  Maybe I'm being too optimistic as far as that goes, but I don't think so.

[Spicoli]

Tatum would flourish in just about any system other than this one, as a primary scorer. Stevens' offensive system is outdated, stale, and predictable. Doesn't create easy shots or looks for anyone. It would be better for Tatum's career if he were traded elsewhere, since Ainge will never fire Stevens and we are stuck with him as coach.