ESPN Still Ranks Simmons and Mitchell Ahead of Tatum for Future Star Potential

[Fafnir]

Tatum gets plenty of respect in the article. 3 rookies can be awesome at the same time. All three are so different too, really special class shaping up and there are several other players who I could still see being stars who are just having more typical rookie season.

droopdog7 makes a great point, Tatum's age bode's very well for his future development. To be this good at his age 19 season raises his potential in my view. As does how he has responded so well to his increased usage late this season due to Kyrie's injury.

[Donoghus]

In the grand scheme, does it really matter?

Of course not. 

All 3 are legit talents and going to be talked about that way for the next decade or so.  To have one of them is special.

[SHAQATTACK]

watching whats going on past three games for each .

Tatum is clearly ahead ....overall play for his team

Mitchell is close .

Simmons is basd more on future potential, what he could be , and that is Not what he is at the moment .    I agree with a previous poster , Simmons development is gonna be can he get himself together and grow up,mentally .  Tatum is years ahead of Simmons in maturity, listening to them is night and day.   

Simmons did nothing at LSU that made his team stand out .  This might be his cross to bare , unless,he can get over himself ....being the newest NBA diva .

[Fafnir]

It is ironic that both of those guys have emerged by the absence of one player, Gordon Hayward. Mitchell would probably have been brought along more slowly if Hayward stayed in Utah and the same for Tatum if Hayward didn't break his leg in Boston.

Hayward was so good in Utah without dominating the ball I think Mitchell would be having a season similar to Tatum's. More efficient offense with flashes of greatness and less usage, a ton more off the ball dunks via cuts too.

The only player most teams care about when Mitchell has the ball is Ingles. I am undecided which would be better for his development.

[Fafnir]

In the grand scheme, does it really matter?

Of course not. 

All 3 are legit talents and going to be talked about that way for the next decade or so.  To have one of them is special.

Exciting basketball is a finite resource. Hence why everyone should realize Simmons is a taller MCW and Mitchell spin moves are in fact travels and not fun at all. There is nothing fun about breaking the rules and being unable to shoot the ball.

[gift]

It is ironic that both of those guys have emerged by the absence of one player, Gordon Hayward. Mitchell would probably have been brought along more slowly if Hayward stayed in Utah and the same for Tatum if Hayward didn't break his leg in Boston.

Hayward was so good in Utah without dominating the ball I think Mitchell would be having a season similar to Tatum's. More efficient offense with flashes of greatness and less usage, a ton more off the ball dunks via cuts too.

The only player most teams care about when Mitchell has the ball is Ingles. I am undecided which would be better for his development.

I don't mean either Mitchell or Tatum's development would be stunted by Hayward, necessarily. I'm more speaking to the perception. I think the conversation about this years top rookies would be very different had Hayward either stayed in Utah or been healthy in Boston.

[Granath]

In the grand scheme, does it really matter?

Of course not. 

All 3 are legit talents and going to be talked about that way for the next decade or so.  To have one of them is special.

TP for this.

It boils down to "who cares"? I don't care if ESPN has Tatum ranked 3rd or 30th. All I know is that kid looks like a stud and so long as he is that's all we need.

Tatum's real competition will forever be Fultz. If Fultz ends up being better then Philly can be seen as winners in that trade. If not, then the Cs got a major steal by dropping down and still getting their man. So far I like our chances.... 

[johnnygreen]

Let's not forget that Tatum also had a child during his rookie campaign as a 19/20 year old. Personally, I wouldn't want Danny to trade Tatum for either Simmons or Mitchell. His poise in big moments, especially in these playoffs, has been remarkable.

[bdm860]

For those who have their pitchforks out and need another reason to question the writers:

But Boston has, for the moment, cracked the code to the 21-year-old rookie, who has averaged just 12 points, 6.1 rebounds, 5.2 assists and 4.2 turnovers with sub-50 percent true shooting in nine games.

Those stats, for 9 games, means they're including the 2 pre-season games.  Not that it changes much (12.1/6.6/5.7 in 7 regular season + playoff games), but who does that?  The evidence has been tainted (even though it was against Simmons), his whole argument needs to be thrown out!  Mistrial!  Tatum could still end up #1 with some competent analysts!

[Erik]

For those who have their pitchforks out and need another reason to question the writers:

But Boston has, for the moment, cracked the code to the 21-year-old rookie, who has averaged just 12 points, 6.1 rebounds, 5.2 assists and 4.2 turnovers with sub-50 percent true shooting in nine games.

Those stats, for 9 games, means they're including the 2 pre-season games.  Not that it changes much (12.1/6.6/5.7 in 7 regular season + playoff games), but who does that?  The evidence has been tainted, his whole argument needs to be thrown out!  Mistrial!  Tatum could still end up #1 with some competent analysts!

Yeah, that's dumb if true.

[smokeablount]

Hate Simmons, but I really like Mitchell. Think he might already have the best spin move in the NBA.

[pearljammer10]

Hate Simmons, but I really like Mitchell. Think he might already have the best spin move in the NBA.

100% agree.

[Erik]

Hate Simmons, but I really like Mitchell. Think he might already have the best spin move in the NBA.

You know who else has a great spin move? This guy... He was also the 2009-10 Rookie of the year (he also scored 20 ppg that year):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C0tN81YY_EU

Sorry, I don't see anything here but a volume scorer, boys.

[Sophomore]

http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/23430368/ranking-ben-simmons-lonzo-ball-nba-rookies-star-potential

Funny, I'm a homer, but can't help but think that there would have been a little more debate of whether or not Tatum projects to be a better pro than either of them.  Are they not watching the **** play-offs?

What is it in particular about Donovan Mitchell in the playoff has made you think he'd be a worse pro than Tatum?

So when a player scores 22 with 33% fg efficiency, he's gonna be a better player than Tatum who scores 25 pts with 65% fg efficiency.
Not to mention, Tatum is younger and had more time to develop...

I've go no idea what you're talking about, because none of the numbers you're citing have any basis in reality. Tatum is averaging 18 ppg in these playoffs. He's not shooting 65%, and Mitchell is not shooting 33%.

Based it off of their previous game, but if you want the stats I'll give me to you.

Tatum is scoring about 18 pts per game with a .496 ef fg%

Mitchell is scoring about 24.4 pts with a .462 ef fg%

the league average is .521 efg%

Mitchell takes more shots, of course he's gonna have a higher ppg then Tatum, but what about efficiency, not to mention, Mitchell takes about 6 more FGs than Tatum. Other stuff around the board like TOV % and stuff, but it's not far fetched with Tatum having a brighter future then Mitchell.

Tatum's edge is a little greater in TS%, which also takes into account a player's ability to get to the line.

Tatum: .559
Mitchell: .503

Still, Mitchell is pretty much *the* guy for the Jazz, especially at the end of games. They are game planning to stop him, the way teams did to IT last year. On the other end of the court, Mitchell is defending James Harden. He has more rebounds(!) and assists per game than Tatum.

Not to take anything away from Tatum - I would say his career potential is greater than Mitchell because he's so skilled, a year and a half younger than Mitchell, and taller. But this year I can't argue against Mitchell.

[celts55]

I'm going with "silly argument". Who knows who will have the best career? Who even knows who the best player is? So much depends on how a player fits a particular team.

Get back to me in a few years.