Hayward is the obvious choice for the second best playmaker / creator on the team, which should result in a good number of plays and touches. However, I dont' think he will be or should be one of the top two guys in terms of scoring attempts, since he's naturally more of a facilitator.
Well, except that Hayward has, historically been a much more efficient, volume scorer than anyone else on this team. Even including his poor start to last year, he posted a 57.5% TS% -- higher than any of Kemba, Jaylen or Jayson. And it was higher and higher as the season progressed as he got healthier and his USG creeped up. By the end of last season almost all of his effectiveness numbers were at or above what they were in his last season at Utah. What was still trailing (slightly) were his aggressiveness stats: shots per touch. Even that was trending up, though and not far off from where he was in Utah.
I love Tatum's potential, but he's not (yet) anywhere near the versatile and efficient scorer that Hayward is. Tatum, at this point, is a shot maker and creates a little for himself off the dribble. But Hayward is a point creator who can score efficiently from all levels in multiple ways, from shot making, dribble/drive and of course, getting to the FT line.
Assuming Hayward is pretty much fully recovered -- and while that's a question, there is a lot of reason to believe the answer is closer to 'yes' than 'no' -- he could very easily be the best player on this team.
Thank you. People are cAlling me crazy saying Hayward is easily the superior talent.
Talent is not the same thing as having the disposition and skillset to score 20+ points per game reliably and efficiently. Meaning that the question of whether Hayward or Tatum is more talented is not the same thing as the question of which of them should be attempting more shots or scoring a larger share of the Celtics' points each game.
Hayward to me seems like a guy who is ideally going to end up scoring in the high teens with 5+ assists and 5+ rebounds per game. He's your versatile playmaking wing. On a team with a variety of scoring options I dont' think he's going to be your go-to scorer.
Of course I must acknowledge that Hayward has scored over 20 PPG once in his career, and come very close (19.7) in another season, whereas Tatum has not broken 16 ppg. So from that perspective, Hayward is the much more obvious candidate to be one of the lead scorers for the team.
At that point in time, though, Hayward was on a team with considerably fewer quality offensive options than this Celtics team has (the second best scoring option was either George Hill or Rudy Gobert).
On the Celtics, I view the best version of Hayward as something like a more athletic / quicker Joe Ingles. Anybody who has watched Joe Ingles the last couple of years should recognize that as a sincere compliment.
With that said, I see Tatum as more of a natural scorer and less of a guy who does all of the other things, compared to Hayward.
To get max value out of Hayward you need him to maximize all of the things he does well apart from scoring, though he is indeed an efficient shooter & scorer.
To get max value out of Tatum you need him to scale up his scoring from the somewhat low usage rates from his first couple of years in the league.
I think it's fair to say, as well, that Celtics becoming a really good team anytime soon depends a great deal more on Tatum turning into an elite level scorer than it does on Hayward regaining his All-Star form.
Hayward is only under contract for 1-2 more years and is in the midst of his prime. There's a good chance he's already had his best season as a pro.
Tatum is the best hope the Celts have on their roster of a guy who could become a top 10, foundational player. Sorting out whether he can become that guy is the #1 project of the franchise for the next year or two.
Topic: FGAs per game Who should get what (Read 5705 times)