Which core would you choose?

[td450]

Yeah, the idea that Tatum is any better than Pierce is hard to swallow. I'd be very happy if he ends up that good. So far he matches up with early Pierce, but Pierce continued to evolve. Tatum will have some work to do to keep up.

With Jaylen, it's a matter of health. If he doesn't break down, he's going to be considerably better than Antoine or Joe Johnson. Antoine was better right away. Jaylen's early arc is closer to Johnson's so far, but Johnson couldn't sustain that level he reached at 25. Jaylen's the best athlete of the bunch by a fair margin, and I expect he hasn't plateau'd yet.

[Moranis]

Tatum is a more efficient offensive player and a better and more versatile defender than Pierce ever was.  Pierce was a very good player for a long time, but Celtics fans have a way of over emphasizing the peaks of Celtic players.  I'd take Tatum thus far over any individual Pierce season.  In addition, Tatum has had far greater post season success as his team's #1 option/player than Pierce ever had as a #1. 

[Kiorrik]

For the record

I think Tatum might actually be better, on all levels, than pierce.

Like, legit, if we'd put them up against each-other, 1on1 or with the same other players, I think Jayson might win.

That doesn't however mean I'd pick Tatum.

Because I think, over a season, and with playoffs in mind, I think Pierce's squad would win.

This is an "at the moment" thing anyway. Tatum has showed significant development in team play this season.

If next year, Tatum performs as a top 10 star in the league, I'd put him over Pierce.

[td450]

Tatum is a more efficient offensive player and a better and more versatile defender than Pierce ever was.  Pierce was a very good player for a long time, but Celtics fans have a way of over emphasizing the peaks of Celtic players.  I'd take Tatum thus far over any individual Pierce season.  In addition, Tatum has had far greater post season success as his team's #1 option/player than Pierce ever had as a #1.

I don't see that. Pierce had two really inefficient years at 25 and 26. Tatum seems to be flirting with something similar right now. Looks to me like they had remarkably similar efficiency levels if you compare stats.

My personal recollection is that Pierce was better overall. His game was physical and more reliable. Tatum is playing more frontcourt and has better rebounding numbers, but if I had my life on the line and had to win a game, I'd take Pierce every time, at least so far.

[Vermont Green]

When you look at Paul Pierce vs. Tatum or Brown vs. Johnson, they match up pretty well.  Paul Pierce evolved into a very clutch player, had that uber competitiveness that Tatum may or may not develop.  I think Brown can have a Johnson-like career.  But overall, I call this a wash for the pairs of wings.

The thing with Walker vs. Smart is that Walker was a big (even if he didn't always play like one) and for that reason alone I feel is more complimentary to the two wings.  Smart as a PG/Combo guard, no matter how the talent matches up, just can't offer what a good big can.  So if you assume that the other 2 players that would be added to each core are average or below, then the team with the two all star wings plus a top big is better than the two wing + combo guard team.

[jambr380]

People freak out over Antoine's inefficiency, but don't bat an eye at Iverson's. I understand that it wasn't the case for all players, but it was also a sign of the times. PP even had a couple of inefficient seasons, as mentioned above. The fact that Pierce and Antoine could take an incredibly underwhelming team to the ECF and then the ECSF is a testament to their will; it wasn't just about stats.

I'll stand by my Antoine vs Brown comparison for now. To this point in their careers, Antoine was at least equal to Brown in terms of talent, but a much better leader on the court. Antoine's career peak did not last long, even though he had an incredible 2006 playoffs. Obviously I take Jaylen if I am comparing the two from what they have to offer from like year 8 on.

If you wanna do a Joe Johnson vs Brown comparison, leaving Antoine vs Smart - no problem. Again, I love Smart, but he'll never touch Antoine in terms of talent (although he does have the fire).

[cons]

pierce stands out
the others are good players
pierce is a hall of famer / champion/ proven clutch performer

and yeah, i dont see the competitiveness the same in tatum as pierce
pierce alwas had a chip on his shoulder and loved being to go-to guy


so pierce puts that group far ahead to me.

[showtime]

 Smart hurts Tatum and Browns chances of being picked!

[Moranis]

People freak out over Antoine's inefficiency, but don't bat an eye at Iverson's. I understand that it wasn't the case for all players, but it was also a sign of the times. PP even had a couple of inefficient seasons, as mentioned above. The fact that Pierce and Antoine could take an incredibly underwhelming team to the ECF and then the ECSF is a testament to their will; it wasn't just about stats.

I'll stand by my Antoine vs Brown comparison for now. To this point in their careers, Antoine was at least equal to Brown in terms of talent, but a much better leader on the court. Antoine's career peak did not last long, even though he had an incredible 2006 playoffs. Obviously I take Jaylen if I am comparing the two from what they have to offer from like year 8 on.

If you wanna do a Joe Johnson vs Brown comparison, leaving Antoine vs Smart - no problem. Again, I love Smart, but he'll never touch Antoine in terms of talent (although he does have the fire).

Except Iverson was a significantly better and more impactful player on both sides of the floor.  I love Antoine, but his decision making was awful, which led to his lack of efficiency.  Iverson was a small guard that was the focal point of opposing defenses.  He averaged nearly 9 FTA's a game peaking at 11.5.  That is absolutely incredible for a man his size.  Walker made himself a jump shooter when he was actually a very good interior player.  He was frustrating because his skill set was such that he could have been one of the five best players in the game, but he settled for outside jump shots, inefficient play, and just poor decision making.  That is why Walker gets criticized for inefficiency far more than Iverson i.e. you understood why a tiny guard like Iverson was inefficient, but you never could understand why Walker was, nor could you comprehend Walker taking 8 3's a game (AI peaked at 4.5 and per 36 he was never above 3.8 because he played so many mpg).   Walker is very much like Smart in that regard.  You just know they could be so much better if they just played more to their strengths.  You never felt that with Iverson.  He got every ounce of ability out of his small frame. 

Toine was definitely a better leader than Brown, but Brown is quite simply a better player on both sides of the court and I don't think it is all that close. 

[Who]

Love Antoine. The ball-handling and passing of that first group as star players is far above this current group. They can get in another guard alongside them as well. That team would be so much fun to watch. Easily them.

[slamtheking]

Love Antoine. The ball-handling and passing of that first group as star players is far above this current group. They can get in another guard alongside them as well. That team would be so much fun to watch. Easily them.

well if we're going off which group is more fun to watch, it's older group by far. 

[Celtics2021]

Definitely the current core.  Walker was pretty much exiting the phase of his career where he could be considered a core player by the time Johnson was entering it.  If Johnson were two years older and had arrived to the C's in 1999, maybe it would be a closer call for me, but by the time Johnson really started to emerge in his third season Walker was just a couple years from being out of the league.

Trading Joe Johnson was a mistake, and he should have been part of a core with Pierce, but 'Toine wasn't going to be a part of that core.

[Celtics2021]

Love Antoine. The ball-handling and passing of that first group as star players is far above this current group. They can get in another guard alongside them as well. That team would be so much fun to watch. Easily them.

well if we're going off which group is more fun to watch, it's older group by far.

I personally think that is either due to nostalgia or expectations, or both.  When Pierce and Walker had their best couple of seasons, the Celtics had been a mediocre or bad team for more than a decade.  The current Celtics have made the playoffs 13 times in 14 years, at least the second round 10 times, 6 conference finals, two NBA finals, and one title.  The expectations have been raised so much.  We're disappointed when we lose in the conference finals, and apoplectic when we don't get that far.  I was at Game 6 vs. the Nets in 2002, and everyone in the Garden was just happy to be there.

[sgrogan]

Tatum is a more efficient offensive player and a better and more versatile defender than Pierce ever was.  Pierce was a very good player for a long time, but Celtics fans have a way of over emphasizing the peaks of Celtic players.  I'd take Tatum thus far over any individual Pierce season.  In addition, Tatum has had far greater post season success as his team's #1 option/player than Pierce ever had as a #1.

I don't think it is so clear. For their first 5 (4 1/2 for Tatum) years

Tatum is a more efficient offensive player:
 TS% .553-Pierce .564-Tatum
If Tatum finishes the season at his current rate the gap will close. If you look at adjusted shooting Pierce was better vs the league average.
Pierce had more assists, but a worse AST/TO ratio.
Pierce got to the line more by every metric, raw per36 per100, rate, vs league.

and a better and more versatile defender than Pierce ever was:
I think Tatum is a better defender than Pierce because he is more versatile. Box metrics favor Pierce for blocks and steals, and Tatum for DRB. But they're all reasonably close.

Tatum has had far greater post season success as his team's #1 option/player than Pierce ever had as a #1:
I would say that Tatum has only been the #1 the last 2 seasons - Lost E-Conf 1st round - Lost E-Conf Finals
Pierce only made the playoffs 2 seasons of his first five. Lost E-conf Semis - Lost E-Conf Finals.

I think its much closer than you indicate. Pierce had a much worse supporting cast than Tatum over the first five years.
I think it comes down to if you think Pierce was carrying a bad team, or he was putting up stats for a bad team.

[Celtics2021]

Probably the former. Tatum and Pierce are pretty comparable. Jaylen probably has a higher ceiling than Antoine, but Antoine made his 3rd All-Star team in year 7 (Jaylen is in year 6). But the reason I choose the former is Smart vs Johnson. I love Smart, but that's not even a contest.

Also, for all of the people who think Antoine sucked, I think he really would have excelled as a Point Forward with two undisputed All-Stars alongside him.

The problem with making a player-by-player comparison is that you're using the prime of Toine's career which ended before Johnson's career really started taking off.  If you want to use Toine's prime against Brown, you need to compare Smart against year 1-2 Johnson, and that's not a contest, but it's not a contest the other way.  Alternatively, if you want to use prime Johnson against Jaylen or Smart, then the current core gets a third player while the old core is just Pierce and Johnson.