We Are Too Low on Jayson Tatum

[PhoSita]

Lots of talk and focus right now regarding Kyrie Irving and Anthony Davis.  That makes sense.

I don't blame people for being disappointed by the idea of a Celtics future that doesn't involve Kyrie or Anthony Davis. 


With that said, in these discussions I see a lot of people dismissing Jayson Tatum.  He's talked about now as a guy who had one good playoff performance, a guy whose second season was a disappointment, a player who may not ever be an All-Star.


Can we take a step back and give ourselves some context to what Jayson Tatum has done his first two seasons in the league?


Let's first recall that he didn't turn 21 years old until he was most of the way through his second season.

Let's recall as well that he has been a starter getting 30+ minutes a game, for a team that fancied itself a potential contender, since the beginning of his rookie season.

If he had been drafted by the sort of team that typically gets to draft a player of Jayson's caliber, he likely would have averaged closer to 35 minutes per game, and he would have had many more offensive opportunities.


Through two seasons, these are his per-36 stats:

17.3 points, 6.5 rebounds, 2.2 assists, 1.2 steals, 0.8 blocks.

He's shot 48.7% from two, 40.0% from three, and 84% from the line, with 9.7 two point attempts, 4.1 three point attempts, and 3.6 free throw attempts per game.

For his career he has a 105 defensive rating, which is remarkable mostly because that's a pretty decent rating despite the fact that he's a young player often tasked with defending the wing, which is a tough task in today's league.

Unlike many young guys, he has had the chance to play in a lot of playoff games, including some big ones (e.g. Game 7 of the ECF).  Unlike most of the young players who have that opportunity, he has if anything raised his game instead of struggling.

His first two seasons, Tatum has played in 28 playoff games.  This is his statline:

17.4 points, 5.1 rebounds, 2.5 assists, 1.2 steals, 50.5% EFG, 4.9 FTA.


In total, through two season Tatum has 12.0 regular season Win Shares and 2.1 Playoff Win Shares.

The list of guys with that type of Win Share production through age 21 who aren't centers is basically LeBron, Michael Jordan, Chris Paul, Andrei Kirilenko, and Tatum.


If you go ahead and try to find, as I did, some historical comparisons to Tatum's first couple seasons in the league, you will find that it is very difficult.


Some names that come up -- Danilo Gallinari.   A guy who has been a talented scorer his whole career and likely would've been an All-Star by now if he hadn't been derailed by injuries.  Danilo isn't nearly the defender Tatum is already, let alone what he could be.

Another name -- Paul Pierce.  I don't think I really need to explain this one.  Tatum's numbers are remarkably similar to Paul's, except that he's a better shooter so far, and he's got a smaller offensive role on a much better team than the one Pierce was on.


Kyle Kuzma and Jaylen Brown are a couple other names that come up.  Hard to know where either of those guys are headed in their careers, since they're basically at the same stage as Jayson.  Except he's younger than both of them.  Kuzma isn't nearly the defender or shooter that Tatum is, and Jaylen isn't nearly the shooter or overall scorer that Tatum is.


This is not to say Tatum is a perfect player, or that he profiles like a future MVP.  His shot selection leaves something to be desired.  He doesn't get to the line enough.  He doesn't really create shots for others.  He doesn't make very many disruptive defensive plays.


Even so, I think it's easy to lose sight, in all of the rumors and grousing about Kyrie and disappointment from this past season, that Tatum had a very impressive and promising first two seasons in the league.



If the best hope we have for the future of the Celtics heading into next season is Jayson Tatum, that's not such a terrible place to be.

[Spicoli]

I just took a look at his regular season numbers and as far as i can tell, his regular season numbers were pretty much up from the year prior. It was the playoffs where his numbers took a hit this year. Outside of numbers, i think his play this year was pretty selfish. If he's going to iso and take a bunch of mid range shots, then he better make them at a high percentage. Nobody has a problem with Kawhi taking midrange shots because he makes more than he misses. So Jayson did a really poor job converting these looks but he kept taking them which to me came off as a bit selfish on his part. He also has a slow release on his 3 point shot which prevents him from getting a larger volume of them up. To me, i think he's a more talented version of Otto Porter which would put him at all star level but not superstar level. I'm fine with that, seeing as though there's only like 5 or 6 true superstars in the entire NBA.

[gift]

I think people are too low on him. I guess his season was disappointing relative to expectations. But whose wasn't on this team? And to what effect did the team problems alter individual performance?

He is still a top prospect in the league.

[Fafnir]

I agree people are too low on Tatum. Just the funk from the whole season souring everyone on the team.

[furball]

What's this "WE" crap??     I couldn't be higher on Tatum and have been saying we need to forget about Kyrie and AD and build around him and Jalen.  Tatum has had a better first 2 seasons than Kawhi, Gainnis, Kobe, Harden, Paul George, and Butler.  Just to name a few.  Yet everyone says he had a step back and wants to trade him.  I never got it.  Patience is just not a thing anymore.   People see what the aforementioned players are now and think they came into the league like that.   It's takes time for people not named LeBron. 

[Vermont Green]

The only thing I have seen opined regarding Tatum is that people are willing to include him in a trade for Davis.  I have not seen any other "sell low" type ideas related to him.

For me, I am both high on Tatum and also more than happy to trade him in a package for Davis.  There is risk because of length of contracts/team control but I don't think this implies people are "low" on Tatum.

He is a top young prospect who has the potential to be but has not yet shown he is a special player.  Davis has been a special player for a while.  Don't take this as negativity towards Tatum.  He is barely 21.  He has lots of opportunity to get even better.  Davis already is better.

My dream line up is:

Irving
Brown
Hayward
Horford
Davis

Not sure who we would have left for the bench after the trade for Davis and other FA adds and subtracts but this is a really good core team.  The biggest soft spot or uncertainty would be Hayward but if he improves or maybe it is better to say reestablishes more consistency, this team would be lethal and I don't think we would miss Tatum.

[Monkhouse]

We are too low on Jayson Tatum, because AD for all intents and purposes quite literally blows JT out of the water by a landslide..

There is no way NOP is taking on any Celtics offer without JT even being the centerpiece, and that is why you presume we are 'low,' on JT. That just isn't true..

He is one year removed from having one of the best effiecent seasons for any rookie, and perhaps probably one of the best playoff numbers in playoff history by a rookie since Adams, Baylor, Mitchell, and Kareem. Some pretty company to be included in, don't you think?

[Chris22]

I am amazed that Tatum spent time learning useless moves from Kobe, but has never learned to shoot a hook shot with either hand. That is a much more valuable skill.

[droopdog7]

It's difficult to judge too low or too high without an understanding what the judgement is on tatum in the first place.

Before last year, seems lots of fans considered him a future MVP caliber player.  There was a thread on whether fans would take tatum or giannis for goodness sake.  After year two, I'd say those expectations were unrealistic. 

As for the OP's comment that some people think tatum won't be an all-star, I'd like to know who actually is saying that?  I sure have not seen those statement in any kind of abundance.  Even with his stock lowered, I would guess that the majority of fans still think tatum could be at least a sometimes all star.

As for my projection, I would say tatum's reasonably ceiling is as a top 15 player.  Best (reasonable) case would be a Paul George type (which isn't bad at all).  Worst case scenario is someone like Rudy Gay.  The middle ground would be a Carmelo Anthony.  Someone that can get numbers, and is an all star, but does not make anyone better (and in fact may make them worse).

[PhoSita]

It's difficult to judge too low or too high without an understanding what the judgement is on tatum in the first place.

Before last year, seems lots of fans considered him a future MVP caliber player.  There was a thread on whether fans would take tatum or giannis for goodness sake.  After year two, I'd say those expectations were unrealistic. 

As for the OP's comment that some people think tatum won't be an all-star, I'd like to know who actually is saying that?  I sure have not seen those statement in any kind of abundance.  Even with his stock lowered, I would guess that the majority of fans still think tatum could be at least a sometimes all star.

As for my projection, I would say tatum's reasonably ceiling is as a top 15 player.  Best (reasonable) case would be a Paul George type (which isn't bad at all).  Worst case scenario is someone like Rudy Gay.  The middle ground would be a Carmelo Anthony.  Someone that can get numbers, and is an all star, but does not make anyone better (and in fact may make them worse).

I'm not here to name names or call people out or whatever.  I can think of at least one example in one of the Kyrie / AD threads where somebody was bemoaning the fact that the Celts could end up with nothing to build around other than a couple of young wings who may never make an All-Star team and one older player (i.e. Horford or perhaps Hayward) who may never make another All-Star team.


I also know that many folks in the media, particularly national media, are acting like the Celts will be "starting over again" or "back to square one" if Kyrie leaves and the Celts don't get AD.

I can't recall one person, even supposedly Boston-centric people like Russillo or Simmons, mention that even if the Celts strike out this summer, they will still have Tatum and Brown to build around and that's not such a bad thing.

[Monkhouse]

It's difficult to judge too low or too high without an understanding what the judgement is on tatum in the first place.

Before last year, seems lots of fans considered him a future MVP caliber player.  There was a thread on whether fans would take tatum or giannis for goodness sake.  After year two, I'd say those expectations were unrealistic. 

As for the OP's comment that some people think tatum won't be an all-star, I'd like to know who actually is saying that?  I sure have not seen those statement in any kind of abundance.  Even with his stock lowered, I would guess that the majority of fans still think tatum could be at least a sometimes all star.

As for my projection, I would say tatum's reasonably ceiling is as a top 15 player.  Best (reasonable) case would be a Paul George type (which isn't bad at all).  Worst case scenario is someone like Rudy Gay.  The middle ground would be a Carmelo Anthony.  Someone that can get numbers, and is an all star, but does not make anyone better (and in fact may make them worse).

I think when it is all said and done, Tatum can either become the next Paul Pierce/PG13/Danny Granger, (before he got injured,) or a less dominant Carmelo/Rudy Gay.

I take AD over those players any day easily.

[PhoSita]

I think when it is all said and done, Tatum can either become the next Paul Pierce/PG13/Danny Granger, (before he got injured,) or a less dominant Carmelo/Rudy Gay.

I take AD over those players any day easily.

That's a no brainer, but of course it's not that simple.  The Celts will have Tatum on a rookie deal for two more years and then have him on a four or five year deal after that.

If the Celts trade for Davis they're only guaranteed to have him for one year and even if he re-signs he may only commit to one or two years guaranteed at a time beyond that (a la Durant or LeBron).

[nickagneta]

It's difficult to judge too low or too high without an understanding what the judgement is on tatum in the first place.

Before last year, seems lots of fans considered him a future MVP caliber player.  There was a thread on whether fans would take tatum or giannis for goodness sake.  After year two, I'd say those expectations were unrealistic. 

As for the OP's comment that some people think tatum won't be an all-star, I'd like to know who actually is saying that?  I sure have not seen those statement in any kind of abundance.  Even with his stock lowered, I would guess that the majority of fans still think tatum could be at least a sometimes all star.

As for my projection, I would say tatum's reasonably ceiling is as a top 15 player.  Best (reasonable) case would be a Paul George type (which isn't bad at all).  Worst case scenario is someone like Rudy Gay.  The middle ground would be a Carmelo Anthony.  Someone that can get numbers, and is an all star, but does not make anyone better (and in fact may make them worse).

I'm not here to name names or call people out or whatever.  I can think of at least one example in one of the Kyrie / AD threads where somebody was bemoaning the fact that the Celts could end up with nothing to build around other than a couple of young wings who may never make an All-Star team and one older player (i.e. Horford or perhaps Hayward) who may never make another All-Star team.


I also know that many folks in the media, particularly national media, are acting like the Celts will be "starting over again" or "back to square one" if Kyrie leaves and the Celts don't get AD.

I can't recall one person, even supposedly Boston-centric people like Russillo or Simmons, mention that even if the Celts strike out this summer, they will still have Tatum and Brown to build around and that's not such a bad thing.

Yeah, I saw that post and didn't agree with it either but there are very few that think that way. I think stating that Tatum would be the centerpiece in any trade that brings Davis here is a massive compliment to Tatum, his game and his future.

I was disappointed in him this year but still think he has a floor as a one time All-Star and a ceiling of a top 10-15 player in the game.

[jambr380]

I'm not here to name names or call people out or whatever.  I can think of at least one example in one of the Kyrie / AD threads where somebody was bemoaning the fact that the Celts could end up with nothing to build around other than a couple of young wings who may never make an All-Star team and one older player (i.e. Horford or perhaps Hayward) who may never make another All-Star team.

It's cool - I know that it was me, but you are taking what I said completely out of context. I was referring to fans who were ready to send Kyrie packing and had no interest in trading for AD. This was the quote I responded to:

We have 3 All Star level players coming into their primes (J, J and Hayward) plus a strong supporting cast. Move on and keep building.

Many fans - including you - would prefer to lose a 27 y/o perennial All-Star for nothing. We will be lucky if any player on our team ever reaches Kyrie's level, including Tatum or Brown. And I would love for Hayward to make many more All-Star teams, but that certainly isn't a given at this point.

Even if Tatum and Brown become stars, it doesn't change the fact that losing Irving without receiving any compensation is a net negative. My comment had nothing to do with how I perceive their futures, it had to do with losing out on our current young star. I really do expect better from you, Pho...

[PhoSita]

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.