Brown's numbers are also down across the board this year, so it isn't just a Fox thing. I don't really like Hield at all. I'd much rather have Barnes or Bagley. I probably wouldn't do it, but I'd at least consider Fox and Bagley for Brown and Hernangomez. Schroder has shown what a real PG can do for the C's, but Tatum in particular, I just don't think he is here long term, and the team could do a lot worse than a guy like Fox going forward. I'd certainly be worried about his numbers this year, but as I mentioned, it isn't like Brown is tearing it up either. I've always liked Bagley. He hasn't been able to stay healthy and Luke Walton was so bad as a coach that those things set him back some, but Bagley has immense talent. If he could somehow be unlocked, it would be a huge get for the C's.
Brown's numbers down partly due to injury m8. Pre injury he scored about 15pts/game more than post.
This why we saying; give him some time.
except he is always hurt and Boston is AGAIN better in the games he hasn't played as Boston is just 6-7 with Brown, but is 7-4 without him. This continues the trend for the team that has existed since Tatum entered the league. Boston wins at the same or a better pace when Brown isn't on the floor because imo Brown is just not a good fit with Tatum and when he isn't in the game, Tatum and everyone else just play better.
Last year we went 7/13 without Brown.
Not sure how you're calculating this. Do you use the moon's orbit?
Since Tatum entered the league the Celtics and entering this year Boston has been better without Brown twice, the exact same once, and slightly worse once. Thus far this year, they are better without Brown. Since that has happened twice before, using the word again is accurate.
Statistics works better as sample sizes increase. Brown has been the second best player on the team for 2+ years. He doesn't steer the team by himself. You are looking at a very small sample size, with lots of statistical noise.
Look at this year's scenario. The team started the year with Tatum and Smart, among others playing horribly bad, and Brown playing very efficiently. I guess you could claim that Brown caused the other players to play badly, but that's a tough argument to swallow, especially given that Tatum and Smart have roles that don't depend on Brown much at all. The argument would be strictly one where Brown takes up touches and shots and ruins their chi. Really? Cause those guys still get their shots and touches anyway.
So Brown gets hurt, and Tatum and Smart start to play better. Was that because Brown went away, or was it mostly due to regression to the mean? Given who controls the ball the most, who is more responsible for making the team dynamic work, anyway?
You can see causation in this or you can see the correlation. Which makes more sense?
Tatum absolutely plays better without Brown on the floor. He always has, which is why the team performs at a similar level without Brown. Take the 8 games that Brown missed consecutively. Tatum averaged 28.6 p, 9.1 r, 3.6 a shooting 41.6% from 3. In the 5 games after that when Brown was back, Tatum averaged 20.6 p, 9.8 r, 4.0 a shooting 21.1% from 3. And the 6 games before the 8 game stretch, 22.5 p, 7.8 r, 3.5 a on 27.5% from 3. The last 3 games without Brown, Tatum back up to 34.0 p, 8.0 r, 4.0 a on 45.8% from 3.
You can do this every single season and find similar results. Yes it is a smaller sample size, but it holds true pretty consistently that Tatum plays significantly better when he doesn't share the court with Brown. So contrary to your assertion, Brown does hamper Tatum. They do not fit well together. Tatum is just better without Brown, and Tatum is quite simply a better and more impactful player than Brown.
I'm gonna look at efficiency, since I think its fairly obvious each guys will score a little less together than apart. Last year, both guys are all-stars:
Tatum On / Brown off - Tatum 57.0% TS
Tatum On /Brown On - Tatum 58.3% TS
Brown on /Tatum Off - Brown 57.7% TS
Brown on / Tatum On - Brown 59.2% TS
So in both guys best year, both guys were more efficient with the other on the floor than off.
The year before that was to your point somewhat different, Brown was still more efficient with Tatum on court, but Tatum was more efficient with Brown off court in 19-20. But I think you can argue also argue both guys took the kind of moderate but important playmaking leap last year that likely makes 20-21 more representative of the rest of their careers than 19-20.
I care about 0% what the numbers say so far this year. Brown has played only 13 games and five of those since he's been back has been less than 70%. Tatum started out ice cold this year, which he often does and has nothing to do with brown. Brown was just "unlucky" that his healthy games happened to be when Tatum was ice cold which is what is driving these numbers. Then Tatum ate in that 8 game stretch Brown was out against some pretty awful competition. The samples are nowhere near representative enough to draw the conclusions you are trying to draw.
In any event the case clearly isn't as open and shut as you portrayed, given that last year both guys were clearly more efficient with each other on the floor than off on a much larger sample size.
Topic: Idea: Jaylen for Hield and Fox (Read 12852 times)