PDA

View Full Version : Jayson Tatum: What's this guy's ceiling?



JasonJohnHorn
12-11-2017, 01:01 AM
He's not getting a lot of assists, but it seems like you couldn't possibly ask this guy to do any more than he is already doing.

He's leading the league in 3pt% as a rookie (.518 from beyond the arc), getting about a steal and a block a game, posting over 5 boards a game, hustles on D, and is barely over a single turnover a game.

I can't remember seeing a 19-year-old ever play this efficiently.

What is this guy's ceiling? Where is he on your ROY ballot so far?

tredigs
12-11-2017, 01:29 AM
He's not hitting many 3's, but the efficiency is clearly incredible for the young rook (won't last obviously, but >40% is a lock). He was expected to be the most complete/game-ready scorer entering the draft, but he's exceeding expectations. He just seems veteran.

ROY he is probably #2 ahead of Mitchell. Simmons is the ROY obviously.

Raps18-19 Champ
12-11-2017, 01:30 AM
Pretty good.

corky831
12-11-2017, 06:39 AM
Tough to put a ceiling on him, a lot of melo/pierce comparisons coming in, but he looks like he will be a much more complete player than melo ever was. If he was on a crap team, he'd be averaging 18-20 ppg as a 19 yr old. With Jaylen Brown and Tatum, I like to compare them to a young VC and TMac when they were on Toronto. Really like the future in Boston, especially with Kyrie only being 25, and next yr Hayward only being 28.

BoSox47
12-11-2017, 08:51 AM
In his prime he could be a top 20 player in the league. His offense has come as advertised and then some, but what has been surprising is his ability to defend at such a young age. He is no where near an elite defender and may never be, but he can definitely project to be an above average defender and an elite scorer. Celtics have a bright future with him and jaylen brown. Scary to think they also have one of the (LAL 2018 or SAC 2019 picks), memphis pick, clippers pick and their own picks coming up.

Celtics also dont have roster spots for these draft picks, so look for them to package a couple of them together to move up a few spots in the draft one of these years.

warfelg
12-11-2017, 09:06 AM
I see a lot of top 20 projections, not just here, but elsewhere on the internet. I wouldn't jump there yet. Yes, he is playing very efficiently and putting up nice numbers.

BUT

Right now he is on a great team and is the 4th option on offense behind Kyrie, Horford, and Brown. If you don't know how much that really helps him out with those things I dunno what to say. And I don't want to make it out like he's only seeing wide open shots, but it makes things easier on him.

SO

It's really hard to project him at the moment. What would happen if he's forced into a bigger role? Would he still be this efficient? I dunno.

I think he's a very nice player that went to a great situation, and other than his defense, this is what I expected from him.

I think he's going to be what we thought a healthy Jabari Parker would be.

homie564
12-11-2017, 09:14 AM
His efficiency really is insane. He’s the go to shooter after Kyrie... his 3pt shooting was never really “supposed” to be this good


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ahriman
12-11-2017, 09:20 AM
I never watch NCAA basketball (it's already hard for me to watch much NBA besides highlights) but perhaps he's adjusting well to the NBA because Boston has a well-oiled system he can fit into, just like Duke is on the NCAA level?

He looks like a smart player and will probably be a very efficient 2nd / 3rd fiddle on a championship team, but I personally do not see him lead a team. I'd be glad to be wrong tho as I like the guy.

BoSox47
12-11-2017, 10:06 AM
I see a lot of top 20 projections, not just here, but elsewhere on the internet. I wouldn't jump there yet. Yes, he is playing very efficiently and putting up nice numbers.

BUT

Right now he is on a great team and is the 4th option on offense behind Kyrie, Horford, and Brown. If you don't know how much that really helps him out with those things I dunno what to say. And I don't want to make it out like he's only seeing wide open shots, but it makes things easier on him.

SO

It's really hard to project him at the moment. What would happen if he's forced into a bigger role? Would he still be this efficient? I dunno.

I think he's a very nice player that went to a great situation, and other than his defense, this is what I expected from him.

I think he's going to be what we thought a healthy Jabari Parker would be.

He somewhat already is being forced in to a bigger role. Him and Kyrie have been the 4th quarter guys for the Celtics and the league is taking notice. Tatum is just outside the top 10 in clutch points with 39 points. I think he is a little more more athletic than jabari parker as well and will be a better defender.

The "bigger role" arguement could be made, but at the same time he is already 2nd best on the team to Kyrie at being able to create his own space to open his shot. He has a really good 3p shot, mid range game and a really good ability to get to the basket.

JasonJohnHorn
12-11-2017, 10:12 AM
He's not hitting many 3's, but the efficiency is clearly incredible for the young rook (won't last obviously, but >40% is a lock). He was expected to be the most complete/game-ready scorer entering the draft, but he's exceeding expectations. He just seems veteran.

ROY he is probably #2 ahead of Mitchell. Simmons is the ROY obviously.

Not hitting many 3's? He's taking over 3 a game, which is nearly as many as Ray Allen took as a rookie, and Allen hit less than .400 percent of them.

His 3-pt shots make up one third of his shot selection.

I realize in the era of Steph Curry taking 10 3pters a game that might seem like 'not many', but in context of the general NBA, this is a relatively high number of 3's for a player, particularly a rookies.

As for whether he'll keep it up all season, we'll see. He starting shooting over .400 and has brought it up since. So.. and we're over 20 games in. This is a solid sample size. It is a real possibility that he could keep this up (or something close to it) for the entire season.

corky831
12-11-2017, 10:36 AM
I see a lot of top 20 projections, not just here, but elsewhere on the internet. I wouldn't jump there yet. Yes, he is playing very efficiently and putting up nice numbers.

BUT

Right now he is on a great team and is the 4th option on offense behind Kyrie, Horford, and Brown. If you don't know how much that really helps him out with those things I dunno what to say. And I don't want to make it out like he's only seeing wide open shots, but it makes things easier on him.

SO

It's really hard to project him at the moment. What would happen if he's forced into a bigger role? Would he still be this efficient? I dunno.

I think he's a very nice player that went to a great situation, and other than his defense, this is what I expected from him.

I think he's going to be what we thought a healthy Jabari Parker would be.

Would have fit perfectly in Philly with Simmons at the point.....I believe he will be better than Jabari Parker. If on a crappy team, his efficiency probably would not be where it is at now, but he prob would be averaging 18-22 ppg as a 19 yr old.

warfelg
12-11-2017, 10:39 AM
He somewhat already is being forced in to a bigger role. Him and Kyrie have been the 4th quarter guys for the Celtics and the league is taking notice. Tatum is just outside the top 10 in clutch points with 39 points. I think he is a little more more athletic than jabari parker as well and will be a better defender.

But again, I question how much of an effect does it have on him to not be the main go to #1 guy on that team? It's something that can't be answered right now.


The "bigger role" arguement could be made, but at the same time he is already 2nd best on the team to Kyrie at being able to create his own space to open his shot. He has a really good 3p shot, mid range game and a really good ability to get to the basket.

We knew he could create his own shot, hit the midrange, and get to the basket. If you really watched him at Duke you would know the ability to hit the 3 was there. So again, like I said, offensively we shouldn't be too shocked with what he is doing. We knew he was a polished offensive player.

warfelg
12-11-2017, 10:45 AM
Would have fit perfectly in Philly with Simmons at the point.....I believe he will be better than Jabari Parker. If on a crappy team, his efficiency probably would not be where it is at now, but he prob would be averaging 18-22 ppg as a 19 yr old.

Right. I didn't say it like it's a bad thing. More it's hard to judge what he ultimately is.

Let's just say a for instance here:
He stays in the role he's in this year. Next year his role gets a little smaller because Hayward is back and playing well. He continues to be an efficient scorer with some solid defense.

Does that guarantee him to do the same with another team?

Because this is the area where we get into contract discussions. If Boston extends Kyrie in 2 years to the max, Brown in 3 years to the max, and let's just say they replace Horford with another max when his deal is up.

Some team is going to offer Tatum a max RFA deal because they are going to look at a player who can score and is very efficient. If there's a middling team with 1 star player can cap space they will do it.

Does he continue to do these same things at the same rate when he's on his own? Let's say the efficiency drops off and he's putting up prime Melo offensive numbers, do we hold him in the same regard?

I think a lot of his "how good can he be" this soon into his career has a lot to do with the situation and the players around him.

JasonJohnHorn
12-11-2017, 10:48 AM
I see a lot of top 20 projections, not just here, but elsewhere on the internet. I wouldn't jump there yet. Yes, he is playing very efficiently and putting up nice numbers.

BUT

Right now he is on a great team and is the 4th option on offense behind Kyrie, Horford, and Brown. If you don't know how much that really helps him out with those things I dunno what to say. And I don't want to make it out like he's only seeing wide open shots, but it makes things easier on him.

SO

It's really hard to project him at the moment. What would happen if he's forced into a bigger role? Would he still be this efficient? I dunno.

I think he's a very nice player that went to a great situation, and other than his defense, this is what I expected from him.

I think he's going to be what we thought a healthy Jabari Parker would be.

I don't think '4th option' is a fair assessment it is technically accurate. He's getting 9.1 shots a game; Al is getting 10 and Jaylen is getting 11.

It's a pretty even distribution that requires all three to share the ball evenly. Kyrie is the first first option, but these guys are all getting shots based on how defenses shape around them, and in the 4th quarter, Tatum is getting the ball more than anybody besides Kyrie.


And yes... he is on a very good team, but he is one of the reasons the team is very good. Keep in mind, they are first in the league after losing their All-Star shooting guard and being lead by a PG who has never made the playoffs without LBJ by his side. This roster lost several key players in their system (Jae and Avery) to make room for Kyrie and Hayward who is now lost to injury. They were only a 50-win team last year. They are on pace for over 60.

It wasn't like he just hoped into the GSW who already were a 60-win team. He's helping to improve the team, not simply riding on its coat tails.

But a fair point here nonetheless.

warfelg
12-11-2017, 11:00 AM
I don't think '4th option' is a fair assessment it is technically accurate. He's getting 9.1 shots a game; Al is getting 10 and Jaylen is getting 11.

It's a pretty even distribution that requires all three to share the ball evenly. Kyrie is the first first option, but these guys are all getting shots based on how defenses shape around them, and in the 4th quarter, Tatum is getting the ball more than anybody besides Kyrie.


And yes... he is on a very good team, but he is one of the reasons the team is very good. Keep in mind, they are first in the league after losing their All-Star shooting guard and being lead by a PG who has never made the playoffs without LBJ by his side. This roster lost several key players in their system (Jae and Avery) to make room for Kyrie and Hayward who is now lost to injury. They were only a 50-win team last year. They are on pace for over 60.

It wasn't like he just hoped into the GSW who already were a 60-win team. He's helping to improve the team, not simply riding on its coat tails.

But a fair point here nonetheless.

Right. I didn't imply to mean that he was riding coattails. More wondering if the quality of the team he's on and the team around him is helping his ceiling look huge, when it might not be as high as some think.

Like I said I've seen a ton of top 20 NBA player (on twitter even some top 10 mentions). But if he ends up a top 30-40 player is that so bad?

tredigs
12-11-2017, 11:49 AM
Not hitting many 3's? He's taking over 3 a game, which is nearly as many as Ray Allen took as a rookie, and Allen hit less than .400 percent of them.

His 3-pt shots make up one third of his shot selection.

I realize in the era of Steph Curry taking 10 3pters a game that might seem like 'not many', but in context of the general NBA, this is a relatively high number of 3's for a player, particularly a rookies.

As for whether he'll keep it up all season, we'll see. He starting shooting over .400 and has brought it up since. So.. and we're over 20 games in. This is a solid sample size. It is a real possibility that he could keep this up (or something close to it) for the entire season.

It doesn't make any sense to compare his numbers to those of players decades ago. In this era 3 three point attempts is minimal for a wing seeing 30+ mpg. Hell it's average for a center, and ranks 7th on his own team in 3pt attempts. Basically he's not a 3pt creator, but simply takes the open looks that are given to him (which is fine, it's clearly effective). But no, I definitely see a regression to the mean of a rookie leading the NBA in hitting >50% from 3. If for no other reason than Stevens imploring him to take more of them. But also because it's just not a sustainable percentage.

IndyRealist
12-11-2017, 12:35 PM
10ft. Maybe 12ft if they're vaulted.

homie564
12-11-2017, 12:53 PM
Right. I didn't imply to mean that he was riding coattails. More wondering if the quality of the team he's on and the team around him is helping his ceiling look huge, when it might not be as high as some think.

Like I said I've seen a ton of top 20 NBA player (on twitter even some top 10 mentions). But if he ends up a top 30-40 player is that so bad?

I think there’s a significant difference between the top 30 and top 20 though... so the difference doesn’t sound like much, but you could be talking the difference from elite to great


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

FlashBolt
12-11-2017, 01:08 PM
I'm not sure he would have excelled on a bad team. Brad Stevens, hate to say it, just knows what he is doing. He's brought up Jayson in a pace where he is now comfortable. I remember Jayson looking a bit awkward out there in his first few games and now he's a key player for them. Brad Stevens has seriously made it work for everyone on this team. Everyone understands their role and it's amazing that without Gordon, they have found their go-to's. Doesn't hurt that defense allows everyone to make mistakes offensively and that is where Boston has helped some of their players.

Chronz
12-11-2017, 01:14 PM
I'm not sure he would have excelled on a bad team. Brad Stevens, hate to say it, just knows what he is doing. He's brought up Jayson in a pace where he is now comfortable. I remember Jayson looking a bit awkward out there in his first few games and now he's a key player for them. Brad Stevens has seriously made it work for everyone on this team. Everyone understands their role and it's amazing that without Gordon, they have found their go-to's. Doesn't hurt that defense allows everyone to make mistakes offensively and that is where Boston has helped some of their players.

He looked awkward for like 1 day and on a bad team he would be featured more so let's just drop any pretenses of brad doing this and give the kid some credit

FlashBolt
12-11-2017, 01:21 PM
He looked awkward for like 1 day and on a bad team he would be featured more so let's just drop any pretenses of brad doing this and give the kid some credit

I will give him credit but I think coaching has expedited his progress. Not anything negative to say about him but Brad Stevens has legitimately solidified himself as the Pop of the modern era. Is it a coincidence this team is somehow dominating without GH? That doesn't happen out of the ordinary.

Chronz
12-11-2017, 01:28 PM
Maybe, I'll give him like 2%credit but I think you overrated the impact coaching has had here. I could easily see him song more under a lesser coach, he's that refined imo.

FlashBolt
12-11-2017, 01:30 PM
Maybe, I'll give him like 2%credit but I think you overrated the impact coaching has had here. I could easily see him song more under a lesser coach, he's that refined imo.

Well, at the end of the day, winning changes everything. Tatum has looked great in part because the team is winning and he's seen as a valuable contributor. But who do you honestly give the most credit to for leading his team to their record? Kyrie? Horford? I mean, these guys are fairly great players but I'm pretty sure when GH was injured, no one expected them to be this good. And I watched a few of Brad Stevens's videos on how he coaches. The guy just has sound fundamentals that go a long way in developing a player.

Chronz
12-11-2017, 01:48 PM
Always loved horford and thought kyrie had more in him, especially now that he gives a consistent **** defensively. Could credit brad But i wager Lots of coaches could've motivated kyrie considering this wad his exodus. Brads great but I don't think anyone in the NBA believes a coach is worth as many wins as you may think. Idk bout that but to answer your question, yeah I give the players the credit because it tends to pass over throughout their careers whereas coaches have less consistency. Boston is just well managed from top to bottom but players come first.

I don't get the fascination with bringing up what we thought, people are wrong all the time, exceeding expectations doesn't have to fall on a single person

FlashBolt
12-11-2017, 01:50 PM
Always loved horford and thought kyrie had more in him, especially now that he gives a consistent **** defensively. Could credit brad But i wager Lots of coaches could've motivated kyrie considering this wad his exodus. Brads great but I don't think anyone in the NBA believes a coach is worth as many wins as you may think. Idk bout that but to answer your question, yeah I give the players the credit because it tends to pass over throughout their careers whereas coaches have less consistency. Boston is just well managed from top to bottom but players come first.

I don't get the fascination with bringing up what we thought, people are wrong all the time, exceeding expectations doesn't have to fall on a single person

Yeah, I probably gave Tatum less credit but this might be a Pop case where he was able to get the most value out of his players and still win regardless of lineups. Literally no one would have expected them to be at this record without GH. It's quite amazing.

Chronz
12-11-2017, 02:03 PM
I've seen lots of teams overachieve, even with negligent coaches so maybe that's why I give more credit to the players, I've seen pop lose in r1 due to injuries so I don't buy your narrative

And again it's more surprising than amazing to me, people get **** wrong all the time brother

tredigs
12-11-2017, 02:32 PM
I've seen lots of teams overachieve, even with negligent coaches so maybe that's why I give more credit to the players, I've seen pop lose in r1 due to injuries so I don't buy your narrative

And again it's more surprising than amazing to me, people get **** wrong all the time brother

In the NBA marquee talent is King, but I've seen plenty of would-be-elite players (especially role players) left under-developed, miscast or simply underutilized by poorly run organizations and poor coaching. A lot of this is as simple as having a full time/elite shooting coach on your roster, which amazingly not every organization does. You give Pop's current cast to the Kings and they're a lotto team right now. Pop has them 3rd in the West and on pace for nearly 60 wins. I can only imagine if the Spurs drafted Demarcus Cousins how much better he would be at knowing how to win in team basketball.

FlashBolt
12-11-2017, 02:41 PM
I've seen lots of teams overachieve, even with negligent coaches so maybe that's why I give more credit to the players, I've seen pop lose in r1 due to injuries so I don't buy your narrative

And again it's more surprising than amazing to me, people get **** wrong all the time brother

And we've seen many players end up collapsing because of a poor basketball system around them. It works both ways. I credit the coach more in this instance because I honestly didn't expect them to be this good. I mean, the case with Tatum was that he was very refined for a player his age but it certainly helps that they are winning and Tatum is benefitting from the Celtics culture. And his shooting over 50% isn't something that will last for a season, IMO. You're right, though. I should give Tatum more credit. But don't we all agree Stevens deserves more credit as well? Check the game thread when GH was injured. No one expected this. And if they are saying they did now, they are lying.

Chronz
12-11-2017, 03:01 PM
And we've seen many players end up collapsing because of a poor basketball system around them. It works both ways. I credit the coach more in this instance because I honestly didn't expect them to be this good. I mean, the case with Tatum was that he was very refined for a player his age but it certainly helps that they are winning and Tatum is benefitting from the Celtics culture. And his shooting over 50% isn't something that will last for a season, IMO. You're right, though. I should give Tatum more credit. But don't we all agree Stevens deserves more credit as well? Check the game thread when GH was injured. No one expected this. And if they are saying they did now, they are lying.

Nah, they're far from equal that's where we disagree. And you can bring up how wrong you were about how good they would be all you want, I really don't think it helps your argument as much as you wish it did. Again, i give him 2% credit if that, definitely falls more on Tatum.

Chronz
12-11-2017, 03:06 PM
In the NBA marquee talent is King, but I've seen plenty of would-be-elite players (especially role players) left under-developed, miscast or simply underutilized by poorly run organizations and poor coaching. A lot of this is as simple as having a full time/elite shooting coach on your roster, which amazingly not every organization does. You give Pop's current cast to the Kings and they're a lotto team right now. Pop has them 3rd in the West and on pace for nearly 60 wins. I can only imagine if the Spurs drafted Demarcus Cousins how much better he would be at knowing how to win in team basketball.

Exceptions exists, still falls on the player as plenty of greats have neglected buying in. I disagree with your opinion of their talent base too . I've seen guys leave pops system and do better for similarly successful teams before, even the best of coaches aren't as influential as you think. Pop is rare yes, that doesn't mean the rest can't develop without him, by and large talent will remain king

FlashBolt
12-11-2017, 03:08 PM
Nah, they're far from equal that's where we disagree. And you can bring up how wrong you were about how good they would be all you want, I really don't think it helps your argument as much as you wish it did. Again, i give him 2% credit if that, definitely falls more on Tatum.

Lol, okay. I'll give 2% to Tatum as well. But the fact Kyrie is probably #3 in MVP voting is a testament of Brad leading this team just like he is grooming Tatum. There's a reason they gave up Fultz for him.

Chronz
12-11-2017, 03:31 PM
Lol, okay. I'll give 2% to Tatum as well. But the fact Kyrie is probably #3 in MVP voting is a testament of Brad leading this team just like he is grooming Tatum. There's a reason they gave up Fultz for him.
Oh? What's that reason?

And subjective mvp narratives is suppose to be a testament to what, exactly?

JasonJohnHorn
12-11-2017, 05:11 PM
It doesn't make any sense to compare his numbers to those of players decades ago. In this era 3 three point attempts is minimal for a wing seeing 30+ mpg. Hell it's average for a center, and ranks 7th on his own team in 3pt attempts. Basically he's not a 3pt creator, but simply takes the open looks that are given to him (which is fine, it's clearly effective). But no, I definitely see a regression to the mean of a rookie leading the NBA in hitting >50% from 3. If for no other reason than Stevens imploring him to take more of them. But also because it's just not a sustainable percentage.

Firstly, my argument isn't solely predicated on a comparison to past players. I'm looking at the percentage of his shots: in third are form the arc. That's a high volume.

Secondly, I'm not only comparing him to players from 'decades' ago. Ray Allen won a NBA championship as a three-point specialist THIS decade taking only 4 a game.

And we have guys on the all-time list, who have played entire careers where they don't take much more than 3 or 4 of those a game, and are considered elite all-time shooters.

So saying he doesn't 'take many 3's' is not an accurate representation unless you are comparing him to Steph Curry. And even if he is 'seventh' on his team, that doesn't mean he isn't taking a lot: it means he isn't taking as many.

And it's not like there is a huge gulf between him and 5 of those 6 players ahead of him in volume: he's within about a shot of each of them. What's more, while he may be 7th on his team in 3's taken, he's third in 3's made, and is only out of second by 0.1.

So yeah... when you take a step back and look at what he's doing: consistently take 3 or more a game, and having played over a quarter of the season, and essentially being second on his team in 3's made, yeah, he's shooting a fair amount of 3s.

I would say a fair amount. Not a lot. But 'not too many'? That's not a fair representation.

Don't grasp at straws because you painted yourself in a corner.

JasonJohnHorn
12-11-2017, 05:15 PM
Right. I didn't imply to mean that he was riding coattails. More wondering if the quality of the team he's on and the team around him is helping his ceiling look huge, when it might not be as high as some think.

Like I said I've seen a ton of top 20 NBA player (on twitter even some top 10 mentions). But if he ends up a top 30-40 player is that so bad?

Seems fair to me. I just see him play... I know other guys on weaker teams are putting him better personal numbers, but I feel like if this kid even improves a little bit, it's going to be hard not to put him in franchise-player category.

tredigs
12-11-2017, 05:16 PM
Firstly, my argument isn't solely predicated on a comparison to past players. I'm looking at the percentage of his shots: in third are form the arc. That's a high volume.

Secondly, I'm not only comparing him to players from 'decades' ago. Ray Allen won a NBA championship as a three-point specialist THIS decade taking only 4 a game.

And we have guys on the all-time list, who have played entire careers where they don't take much more than 3 or 4 of those a game, and are considered elite all-time shooters.

So saying he doesn't 'take many 3's' is not an accurate representation unless you are comparing him to Steph Curry. And even if he is 'seventh' on his team, that doesn't mean he isn't taking a lot: it means he isn't taking as many.

And it's not like there is a huge gulf between him and 5 of those 6 players ahead of him in volume: he's within about a shot of each of them. What's more, while he may be 7th on his team in 3's taken, he's third in 3's made, and is only out of second by 0.1.

So yeah... when you take a step back and look at what he's doing: consistently take 3 or more a game, and having played over a quarter of the season, and essentially being second on his team in 3's made, yeah, he's shooting a fair amount of 3s.

I would say a fair amount. Not a lot. But 'not too many'? That's not a fair representation.

Don't grasp at straws because you painted yourself in a corner.

I read a couple sentences of this because frankly I don't care and you're exhausting. He's a kid making ~4 points worth of threes a game as the #7 in attempts on his own team, behind his bigs. It's not like he's a gunner and some new 3pt shooting savant. It's also not sustainable.

JasonJohnHorn
12-12-2017, 03:56 PM
I read a couple sentences of this because frankly I don't care and you're exhausting. He's a kid making ~4 points worth of threes a game as the #7 in attempts on his own team, behind his bigs. It's not like he's a gunner and some new 3pt shooting savant. It's also not sustainable.

You simply don't have an argument. You made an off-handed comment, still holding onto the '7th in attempts' on his own team (failing to acknowledge the fact that he's virtually tied for second on his team in 3's made) and then made an judgment with no basis that it can't be sustained when he's actually been improving his shooting throughout the season. Other players have shot over .500. I'm not suggesting Tatum will hold the .500+ percentage, but he's clearly a good shooting. You don't shoot over .500 from down town in the NBA for over a quarter of the season, taking 3+ shots a game by getting lucky.

About a third of KD's shots are 3's, which is the same ratio as Tatum. Is that 'not a lot' then? Sure, he takes more shots over all, so the shots per game is higher, but when you consider the ratio, it's essentially the same as Tatum. So... if a guy is scoring in the high teens, and a third of his points come from down town, you seem to think that that's 'not many'? And you can't gauge a guy's shooting ability on that.

If you prefer a per-game comparison, Casspi only takes 2 a game? Is he not taking enough to gauge whether he's a good 3-pt shooter?

The claim that he's not taking many 3's just just a knee-jerk comment you made without thinking and now you've painted yourself in a corner.

Ishkabibble
12-12-2017, 06:43 PM
Tiresome.
Caspi? What the hell are you talking about?
Paragraph after paragraph and I guess you're (feebly) trying to tear Tatum down.
A guy that averages 9 shots a game while shooting 50% from the field and 3.
One thing's for sure, there are plenty of people on record that know a helluva lot more about the NBA than you and I that think he's gonna be a star. And soon.

Tatum turns 20 in March.
20.
One year from today, with a full season, playoffs and his 2nd season underway, imagine how good this kid may be? Look at the 2nd season of Brandon Ingram and Jaylen Brown in comparison to their rookie years?

tredigs
12-12-2017, 07:29 PM
You simply don't have an argument. You made an off-handed comment, still holding onto the '7th in attempts' on his own team (failing to acknowledge the fact that he's virtually tied for second on his team in 3's made) and then made an judgment with no basis that it can't be sustained when he's actually been improving his shooting throughout the season. Other players have shot over .500. I'm not suggesting Tatum will hold the .500+ percentage, but he's clearly a good shooting. You don't shoot over .500 from down town in the NBA for over a quarter of the season, taking 3+ shots a game by getting lucky.

About a third of KD's shots are 3's, which is the same ratio as Tatum. Is that 'not a lot' then? Sure, he takes more shots over all, so the shots per game is higher, but when you consider the ratio, it's essentially the same as Tatum. So... if a guy is scoring in the high teens, and a third of his points come from down town, you seem to think that that's 'not many'? And you can't gauge a guy's shooting ability on that.

If you prefer a per-game comparison, Casspi only takes 2 a game? Is he not taking enough to gauge whether he's a good 3-pt shooter?

The claim that he's not taking many 3's just just a knee-jerk comment you made without thinking and now you've painted yourself in a corner.

Tatum 0-4 from 3 last night, dropping him to an even 50%. The obvious regression to the mean begins.

It's not just the ratio of your shots if you're only taking a few attempts a night from 3. It's about the type of shots you're taking.

You're being way too protective over a kid on a subject that is not a debate. He's not a 3pt savant who is going to be changing the gravity of an opposing defense. He's getting open looks from 3 and has been doing his job above his means to this point. It's not a knock to say that will come down to earth. Anybody with any knowledge of the game + stats realizes that. You trying to put words in my mouth indicating I'm saying he's a bad shooter or not being absolutely fantastic in his role is just you making up your own arguments. Kick rocks with that nonsense. All I'm saying is that he's still getting very, very easy looks.

Some stats to back up what I'm saying: 85% of his 3pt shots are taken off of 0 dribbles. And 94% of them are classified as either "open" (35% of them having the closest defender within 4-6ft), or "wide open" (58% of them having them having the closest defender >6 feet away). He's crushing all these open looks so far, but as he becomes seen as a guy who they can no longer sag off of as much, this % of open looks will decrease. When a defender is 2-4ft away he shoots an understandable 37.5%, and he literally has no 3's taken this year with a defender closer than 2 feet away, so who knows what he'll shoot in that scenario. To compare that to your example in KD, Durant is taking 35% of his 3's with a player "tight or very tight" (0-4 feet), and just 29% of his 3's would be classified as "wide open" in comparison to Tatum's 58% of 3's being classified as "wide open". That's why the ratio means nothing. Comprende?

Now, I'm done with the Tatum/shooting lesson. We can see how this plays out in 5 months after the dust has settled.

PropheticGeius
12-12-2017, 11:36 PM
Tatum will be ROY

I called this many weeks ago

His ceiling is Jordan. Tatum will win at least 1 MVP

PropheticGeius
12-12-2017, 11:39 PM
He's the most talented scorer I've ever seen as a rookie

ewing
12-13-2017, 01:42 AM
Tatum 0-4 from 3 last night, dropping him to an even 50%. The obvious regression to the mean begins.

It's not just the ratio of your shots if you're only taking a few attempts a night from 3. It's about the type of shots you're taking.

You're being way too protective over a kid on a subject that is not a debate. He's not a 3pt savant who is going to be changing the gravity of an opposing defense. He's getting open looks from 3 and has been doing his job above his means to this point. It's not a knock to say that will come down to earth. Anybody with any knowledge of the game + stats realizes that. You trying to put words in my mouth indicating I'm saying he's a bad shooter or not being absolutely fantastic in his role is just you making up your own arguments. Kick rocks with that nonsense. All I'm saying is that he's still getting very, very easy looks.

Some stats to back up what I'm saying: 85% of his 3pt shots are taken off of 0 dribbles. And 94% of them are classified as either "open" (35% of them having the closest defender within 4-6ft), or "wide open" (58% of them having them having the closest defender >6 feet away). He's crushing all these open looks so far, but as he becomes seen as a guy who they can no longer sag off of as much, this % of open looks will decrease. When a defender is 2-4ft away he shoots an understandable 37.5%, and he literally has no 3's taken this year with a defender closer than 2 feet away, so who knows what he'll shoot in that scenario. To compare that to your example in KD, Durant is taking 35% of his 3's with a player "tight or very tight" (0-4 feet), and just 29% of his 3's would be classified as "wide open" in comparison to Tatum's 58% of 3's being classified as "wide open". That's why the ratio means nothing. Comprende?

Now, I'm done with the Tatum/shooting lesson. We can see how this plays out in 5 months after the dust has settled.

I'd be shocked if anyone continued reading after this

ewing
12-13-2017, 01:43 AM
I've seen lots of teams overachieve, even with negligent coaches so maybe that's why I give more credit to the players, I've seen pop lose in r1 due to injuries so I don't buy your narrative

And again it's more surprising than amazing to me, people get **** wrong all the time brother

Kyrie, Tatum, and Isaiah Thomas all suck.

Tg11
12-13-2017, 07:31 PM
Tough to put a ceiling on him, a lot of melo/pierce comparisons coming in, but he looks like he will be a much more complete player than melo ever was. If he was on a crap team, he'd be averaging 18-20 ppg as a 19 yr old. With Jaylen Brown and Tatum, I like to compare them to a young VC and TMac when they were on Toronto. Really like the future in Boston, especially with Kyrie only being 25, and next yr Hayward only being 28.

Me too I love the comparisons and being a die hard Celtics fan not only is our future bright but at the same time Tatum he is at least in the conversation when it comes to Rookie of the Year

tredigs
12-13-2017, 08:39 PM
I'd be shocked if anyone continued reading after this

It was tongue-in-cheek obviously, but there's also the fact that 4 missed shots had such a big effect on his 3pt percentage. That's how small of a sample we're dealing with (for the rook who is only taking what's given).

JasonJohnHorn
12-14-2017, 10:34 AM
Tatum 0-4 from 3 last night, dropping him to an even 50%. The obvious regression to the mean begins.



Me: Stats from over twenty games throughout the season are a strong basis for a statistical trend.

You: NO!! THEY ARE NOT!!! One night of shooting, however, is. So there!

Me: Ok. I see where this has devolved to.

warfelg
12-14-2017, 11:00 AM
Me: Stats from over twenty games throughout the season are a strong basis for a statistical trend.

You: NO!! THEY ARE NOT!!! One night of shooting, however, is. So there!

Me: Ok. I see where this has devolved to.

He wasn't really using the 4 shots and 1 night as a sample size.

He's showing how much a single bad night had an effect on his overall numbers.

cheetos185
12-14-2017, 11:34 AM
Is there really that big difference between tatum and kuzma?

ewing
12-14-2017, 11:35 AM
Is there really that big difference between tatum and kuzma?

Yeah


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

JasonJohnHorn
12-14-2017, 05:55 PM
He wasn't really using the 4 shots and 1 night as a sample size.

He's showing how much a single bad night had an effect on his overall numbers.

"Tatum 0-4 from 3 last night, dropping him to an even 50%. The obvious regression to the mean begins."

That sounds a lot like "The obvious regression begins" and not like "one bad game can negatively impact the numbers so much that the guy is still leading the league with an astronomical .500" But hey... who I am to interpretat that?

I'm sure you're right. I mean... after he got owner twice for that, he came back with "I was saying it tongue in cheek."

Seems legit.

tredigs
01-08-2018, 10:15 AM
He's shot 33% from 3 in the month of games since you scoffed at the notion that I said >50% from 3 was not sustainable for him (and even bore out the #'s for you to explain why). And this with him being even MORE selective in his very easy/minimal 3pt attempts. Expect him to land closer to 40% on the year after more regression to the mean.

I also said he's been great, and still is (he's a 2 way All Star in the making).

"Seems legit".

Giannis94
01-08-2018, 10:23 AM
He's shot 33% from 3 in the month of games since you scoffed at the notion that I said >50% from 3 was not sustainable for him (and even bore out the #'s for you to explain why). And this with him being even MORE selective in his very easy/minimal 3pt attempts. Expect him to land closer to 40% on the year after more regression to the mean.

I also said he's been great, and still is (he's a 2 way All Star in the making).

"Seems legit".
Seems legit to anyone except for Philly fans. I mentioned him in the past. And they can't admit that he's more than average

Ishkabibble
01-09-2018, 02:20 PM
I think he's going to be what we thought a healthy Jabari Parker would be.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Interesting side note to this comment; this past off season they did a poll of 6 veteran Duke basketball reporters & broadcasters, guys that'd been covering the team for years if not decades, asking after Kyrie Irving which Duke basketball player was the most NBA-ready prospect they'd seen and which one would have the most successful NBA career.
Tatum finished first on all 6 ballots, easily outdistancing Jabari Parker, Brandon Ingram, Jahlil Okafor, Rodney Hood and everyone else.
Tatum is going to be a flat-out star in this league and (I think easily) the best player out of this draft. And He doesn't turn 20 until March.

Ishkabibble
01-09-2018, 02:34 PM
Yeah


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The real question may be how comparable will they be in another couple years when Tatum is Kuzma's age.