I would love to add Markannen, but it would be difficult if not nearly impossible to pry him from the Bulls. He is probably the center piece of their rebuild.
I would love to add Markannen, but it would be difficult if not nearly impossible to pry him from the Bulls. He is probably the center piece of their rebuild.
''not dirt young'' was my point. What I mean by that is that a player at 22 isn't a complete unknown. If a player is 19, or 18, then there's huge huge question marks about who they will be. Then, 3 or 4 years later, they're 22 or 23 and you can look at them and get a decent idea of what they're going to look like as a complete player. That's not always a guarantee, I'm happy to admit that, but it's usually a pretty good litmus test. If a player is going to be a superstar, or a star, they've generally shown those signs already by 22. Lebron, Curry, AD, KD, Simmons, Giannis, for example, had all shown their signs of greatness by 22.
There are exceptions, again, I'm happy to admit that: Kawhi Leonard, for example, didn't really blow up at all: instead he gradually improved every year. So I'm not claiming that this is a definite rule, but it's a trend that tends to be there.
Jaylen Brown is also 22. It's hard to judge him off this years entire stats because obviously he had a big injury to his shooting hand that he played through, but if you just take how he's played since he got the bandages off his hand in December, he's averaged basically 14 points per game, which is obviously less than Markkanen, but he also averages about 5 less FGAs per game. His actual FG% is better, and he's shooting about the same from 3. He's also a better defender.
I'm not massively hot on Marcus Smart either. I like him, but I'm not huge on him, and I'm happy to admit there's big holes in his game, for sure.
The one and only thing we should absolutely be focused on in getting back for AD should be another franchise centerpiece, which for the sake of argument, is someone who has a good chance to be a top 10 player in the NBA for a sustained period of time. The only realistic way to compete for a championship in the NBA is to have a player like that on the team. Rebuilds are completely pointless if you're not building around a superstar. That centerpiece gives the rebuild direction and provides the entire organization structure.
Obviously getting that piece is the difficult part. Whether we think that could be Tatum (I'm open to the idea but skeptical), Zion (who I'm insanely high on but the team would have to be Saville-Row-level tailored to him), Ja Morant (who I don't know enough about, but the more I hear, the more I like) or some other top level prospect that I'm not thinking of (Hint: it's not Lauri Markkanen, although I think he'll develop into a great secondary option), it's all about getting that piece back in whatever trade we make.
We already have Jrue who is a good #2 and a literally perfect third option on a great team. We will ostensibly be getting back other pieces in the trade and it will be up to the new management team to make sure those pieces fit both the timeline and the playing style of our centerpiece. That superstar has to be given room to grow and surrounded by coaches, players, and executives who will nurture that growth. That should be the singular focus whenever we finally end the hell that is the AD saga.
While I agree, our chances of getting a future top 10 player are long. Tatum may be that person or may not. He has a high ceiling and floor. Zion is certainly a possibility with a tremendous ceiling, but I think his floor could be lower. Outside of those 2, I am not sure who could be that player. I do not see any on the Lakers or Clippers or Knicks (outside of Zion if they get #1). Any other players you can think of that may be obtainable?
Yea, that's kind of the problem because those types of players are so rare. But I want as many shots at that player as possible. I think SGA on the Clips has a small chance to be that guy, but I'm not putting any money on it. But I think Zion and Tatum are the two most obvious targets for a potential superstar type prospect.
Locked on Pelicans is live! Is the Hollywood Tower the best ride at Disney World?; Which player is the key to free agency?; Danny Ferry as a candidate to run the Pelicans https://t.co/pfc7u8LWoZ pic.twitter.com/XBceEsdmlt
— Jake Madison (@NOLAJake) February 21, 2019
...talks about Kyrie dictating what trade options may be available to the Pelicans. :idoh:
Mitchell Robinson increasing his trade value :hihi:
Two straight games of at least 15 points, 14 rebounds, and 5 blocks.
On a recent Lowe Post pod, they were saying he could be the next Rudy Gobert if he can get his fouling under control.
Meanwhile... Jayson Tatum is having what Boston folks consider a disappointing year on the offensive end (his defense is underrated).
The Pels decision will be interesting this summer.
Yeah Tatum is having a bad offensive season because he's increased his 3pt attempts per game and is now "only" shooting 38.2% from 3. Yet he's increased his scoring, rebounds, and assists per game from his rookie season.
I think Boston fans are simply trying to turn on Tatum so it doesn't hurt as bad when he's traded for AD.
He's not having a bad season. He's having a disappointing season. He's not as consistent as he needs to be and hasn't really improved on his rookie year. He has not met the lofty expectations of Celtics fans, but also folks who follow the entire league. Pelicans fans are still really high on him.
I agree in Robinson. He's maybe a touch less defensively smart, but he's considerably more athletic, so while his game won't last as long (in its current form) as Gobert probably will, he does have a higher ceiling with it. And of course, there's always a possibility that he'll improve on the mental aspect of the game: he is a 20 year old rookie, after all.
I don't see too much issue with Tatum. I understand some people are disappointed, but as Mythrol said, he's still performing at a solid level, and while that may be disappointing to some who estimated him breaking out into stardom, there's a risk of forgetting that a lot of his potential was released when the Celtics didn't have Hayward, or Kyrie, and he was their first option. Now he's not, and therefore he isn't having as huge a role. That's natural.
Improves on nearly everything except 3pt % but hasn't really improved on his rookie year? People who are cooling on Taytum are simply allowing Boston's team struggles to affect their judgment of him. Boston as an entire team isn't consistent.
But it doesn't shock me that you'd be the one pushing this narrative.
You see what you wanna see.
His FG% and 3pt% are both down. His VORP, WS, ORtg, and DRtg are also not as good as last year. His usage rate is up. And those are just advance stats. When you watch him play, which I recognize is subjective, he doesn't look like he's improved any between year 1 and year 2, and at times he looks like he's regressed. That certainly wasn't anyone's expectation.
Tatum could end up being an all star. But he's also overhyped. People are expecting him to show up in New Orleans next year and turn into a player I'm not sure he is.
I'm not pushing a narrative, just stating what I see. No different from anyone else here.
Not trying to get involved in any argument, here, just want to clarify a few things.
His percentages are down, that is true, but he's also taking several more shots a game, including a higher volume from 3 point range. Unless someone is a deadeye shooter, you generally see drops in percentages when they take more shots. Not a guarantee, and not saying you're wrong, but there is an explanation there that goes beyond just 'regression' as a concept.
You're also comparing regular season to regular season, which isn't quite fair. A lot of the hype people have for Tatum comes from seeing what he was able to do during the playoffs, once Kyrie was totally out of the picture, and he was the head of the team. During that time, he averaged 18.5/4.4/2.7 on 47% from the floor and 32% from three. So for many people, they're comparing him with THAT image of him, and in fact he's shooting better now than he was during that period of time, at least from deep, and is also rebounding better this season. He's averaging less points, sure, but he's also playing significantly less minutes.
Win shares are cumulative across a season, so you can't really compare them right now, since the season isn't over. What you CAN compare is their WS/48, and while there has indeed been a decline in that statistic, it's a fairly small decline: the sort of thing you'd generally chalk up to statistical variation, and whne you consider that WS/48 also rely on your team winning, and the Celtics have been worse overall this year, there is some explanation for that. Similar for ORTG and DRTG, actually.
Now, I'm not making the argument that Tatum has improved in every area: he hasn't, really. He's improved in some areas, and not in others. But it's not quite representative of the full picture to just post up his percentages.
His fg% is down BECAUSE his 3pt% is down. His 2pt % is basically the exact same as last year. All his shooting % will be skewered because of his lower 3pt%. If he hit 10 more TOTAL 3s from the entire year his 3pt % would basically be the exact same as last year.
He has increased his FT%, rebounds, assists, lowered his TOV% while INCREASING his usage. His PER being higher this year than last shows he is improving this year.
So people are basing his weakened numbers off of him basically missing *2* extra 3s a MONTH. It's nonsense. The Celtics have struggled all year trying to add Kyrie and Hayward back into the lineup, Tatum has had to deal with all the same rumors as Ingram, Ball, etc and yet his is IMPROVING from nearly everywhere but his 3pt.
Just to add some numbers to this:
Tatum 2017-18: 63% from 0-3 feet, 25.8% from 3-10 feet, 43% from 10-16 feet, 42% from 16-3pt line.
Tatum 2018-19: 70% from 0-3 feet, 34.8% from 3-10 feet, 42% from 10-16 feet, 36% from 16-3pt line.
So he's actually shooting considerably BETTER this year from inside of 10 feet, but his mid-range has suffered by a fair margin.
Also wanna add, in support of my love for Mitchell Robinson, that in the month of February, he's averaged 11.2pts, 9rbds, and 3.6 blocks per game on 69% shooting in only 23 minutes per game.
Tatum is a bit of a victim of his own success. He still probably has the highest ceiling of he, Ingram and Kuzma.
I do like Ingram though, he's coming along nicely. Scoring inside and outside, and playmaking too
Is it really spinning a narrative when all I did was state the facts? It's not like I'm saying the dude is a bum. I said he has Danny Granger potential a couple of weeks ago, and people acted like that was an insult! Middleton and Porter are solid small forwards. IF Tatum is the crown jewel of an AD trade and the sales pitch is he's 21 and LEAGUE AVERAGE... is that really the prince we've been promised?!
I get the possibility of this high ceiling based on his age, but he has a lot of peers (22 and younger) in his basketball cohort that have just as much potential (or more).
D'Angelo Russell
Trae Young
John Collins
Lauri Markkanen
Jamal Murray
Marvin Bagley
Jaren Jackson
Donavan Mitchell
Devin Booker
Ben Simmons
De'Aaron Fox
Luka Doncic
DeAndre Ayton
Would any of their teams trade the above players for Tatum? Maybe the Bulls would trade Lauri. But I think that's it.
I'm not crapping on the guy. If he comes here, he will be the best small forward we've had in a long time. Maybe I have James Posey PTSD when it comes to potentially overvaluing Celtics players! But I just don't see All NBA or even multi time All Star as very likely for Jayson Posey ... I mean Tatum ;-)
The point is I can see through the act. You've made tons of excuses for the lack of improvement or even REGRESSION of Ball, Ingram, etc...
But Tatum isnt "improving enough" even though he's improved in most major categories except 3pt% and you're taken this stance with him.
It's laughable the effort of spin you are trying to use here.
Tatum has just as much trade value as he did before. If anything I HOPE the Pelicans try and spin the same nonsense as you are here so they can pull some more assets from Boston.
This whole thing reminds me of the guy on Twitter trying to say the Pelicans are playing AD to "keep his trade value up". Lol
The question really is, would any of those teams trade those players for AD? That is what is relevant. While there are some on that list that I do not think have as much or more potential than Tatum, of those that do, I do not see that team parting with that player for AD. To compare him to Posey is silly though.
You're confusing me with someone else. I'm not Laker Guy. The only point I've made consistently is that Tatum is not so great that he's worth waiting for. I'm the "100 things can go wrong" and the "Kyrie is leaving Boston" guy.
I think the Lakers Players have potential, but they haven't shown enough of it consistently. Notice on my list of peers for Tatum, I didn't put any of the Lakers players. I know Tatum is more valuable than any of them individually, based on what each has shown to this point. But Ingram/Ball would still be, very much like Tatum, asset plays based on ceiling. Tatum isn't the center piece of a potential AD trade based on being the league average PER player he's been. It's based on his ceiling and potential at a still young age. All I've argued is that you can make the case for a ceiling play on Ball and Ingram as well. Tatum, Ball, Ingram, and Kuzma have all had stretches where they've demonstrated how good they can be. The Lakers players have also demonstrated how bad they can be. But again, no one has suggested we cap the potential of any of these guys who are under 22.
Does Jayson Tatum have the highest ceiling of young players we could trade AD for? And will he actually hit it? I'm not convinced on either and I think there are reasons to be concerned. It's clear, I'm outright skeptical! I'm equally skeptical of Lakers players, but Ball/Ingram/Kuzma give you three swings at the homerun, as opposed to one potential swing in Tatum (if Kyrie doesn't leave). You prove every post that you are planning Fyre Festivals on Tatum Island and going all the way in on it. That's cool. Your flag is planted and you're convinced. I'm not trying to spin anyone, nor do I have an act. I'm just not sold on Tatum. ***shoulder.shrug.emoji***
You thought I was comparing Tatum to Posey? lol
Read it again.
I was acknowledging only that I might be unreasonably biased against Celtics Small Forwards based on the traumatic James Posey experience! NBA fans should share a collective trauma of seeing players do well for the Celtics, leave or get traded, and then not live up to being the player they were with the Celtics. This has literally happened over and over again going back to 2007. I recognize it should have nothing to do with how I evaluate Tatum, but I want to be transparent in my biases!!
A lot of influential NBA media voices happen to be Celtics fans. Their fan base is large and their franchise is history. Their players, like Lakers players, get overhyped.
Based on this read, I am still not sure why you say Tatum is not worth waiting for. Did Tatum's performance in the playoffs last year not impress you? Have any of the Lakers players even approached that level? Are any of the Lakers players (or all 3) so much clearly better than Tatum now as well as their potential to jump at that offer immediately rather than waiting for Tatum or other offers? Is there any reason to expect that the Lakers players will not be available in the summer (along with maybe even a better 2019 pick)?
As I've stated at least a 100x, I think Kyrie is leaving Boston. So that's part of why I don't think Tatum is worth waiting for. I think it's a coin flip at best that he's offered in the deal.
I also don't think any of the Lakers players are better than Tatum right now. I thought I was clear on that point. But they've all had stretches that demonstrate they can be. For instance, Ingram is currently, IMO, playing at a higher level than Tatum. In an AD trade, I want swings at success. So I want multiple draft picks and multiple young players. I like trades with a lot of teams that can offer that: Knicks, Clippers, Hawks, Magic, Lakers, Celtics...
I never saw the Celtics as clearly preferable.
Kyrie FREAKING Irving being the first domino to fall that will impact the future of the Pelicans franchise is a ridiculous position to be in. But that's the position we're in. The offer from Lakers can get worse if the prospect of a huge Knicks offers or a huge Celtics offers doesn't materialize based on draft order or need (dictated by free agent movement).
The Lakers also will not rush the trade if they have the ability to sign a free agent this summer, and if they think the Celtics and Knicks offers have become weaker or diminished. Too many prideful guys over there and if they think they can squeeze the Pelicans at any point in this they will. If there are odds that AD opens the season on the Pels roster, it would be worth a small bet on the upside potential of that payoff.
This summer will be fun if you like the transaction side of NBA. But the risk is real for the Pelicans, that they end up with a deal we'll be debating the merits of and comparing to the Lakers offer for a decade.
Wise words NM
My dude, you typed a whole lot of nonsense. You were the one literally arguing with people that we should take the Lakers trade over Tatum. You were the one trying to use what little you could to hype up the "potential" of Ingram and Ball even after they showed regression.
And now you're the one trying to tear down Tatum evne though he's actually improved on basically everything except 3s where he's missed a whopping 2 extra 3s a month this season. You keep trying to lump Tatum on the same level as Ingram and Ball. It's so obvious what you're doing dude. Give it up.
Now you still throwing shade on Tatum saying "League Average PER". First league average PER means nothing unless you look at it by position since bigs typically have a higher PER. For his position his PER is the 10th highest in the entire league. For reference Ingram ranks 26th. You trash Tatum and his 16 PER and try to build up Ingram and Ball who have never even had league Average PER and are year over year LOWER.
You assume because I don't fall for your nonsense that I'm all in on Boston. I'm. Not. I'm all in getting the best package possible. You think if Dallas offers Luka for AD I'd still want Tatum? Heck no! But naming all these players that we can't get with AD and saying "See Tatum couldn't get them" is pointless. It's all about what we can get for AD. Atlanta offers Young and a good package? Cool, let's go.
But cut the nonsense of trying to tear down Tatum after you spent so long trying to hype up Ingram and Ball who have never shown the promise of Tatum. His trade value is exactly as it was before. The reason people prefer Tatum is he has shown more already than either of the Lakers players. Plus if you get picks also you still get your shots at players.
Lay ou the packages for AD and let's discuss that. Stop wasting your time trying to devalue Tatum.
Seriously, try to keep up...
1. Pelicandae is the one who initially referenced Tatum's league average PER.
2. Jayson Tatum's PER at his position is .62 ahead of freaking Bojan!
3. IF you're dealing an asset like AD for any of these young players it should be based on potential, not production (because, Bojan)
4. I've always preferred a Knicks deal, not a Lakers trade.
5. If not believing Tatum is the next GOAT is the equivalent of tearing him down, I'm guilty. But I think I've said he's better than the Lakers guys at least half a dozen times today alone!
6. The point of naming 15 or so players all under 22 that are in Tatum's basketball cohort, wasn't to say that we should/could get them instead. It was to point out that the concept of Tatum as some Unicorn or future All NBA prospect over the next 10 years is flawed. His peers are already as good or better in some cases.
7. And again, I've never been the poster consistently hyping up Ball or Ingram. All I've ever said is like Tatum, they have potential. You literally have me confused with someone else.
You love Tatum. Cool. But you're bordering on being completely irrational anytime he comes up! I don't love him, but think he has potential. What is so objectively wrong with that take?!? Do you think he's currently a top 50 player? What about top 30? He's only the 3rd best player on the 5 seed in the East. A team with a coach everyone has salivated over. What am I missing here?! Why is Tatum viewed as such a great asset?
I've laid out plenty of packages I'd hope are on the table for AD. Lakers trades, Knicks trades, Hawks trades, three way trades, a John Wall and Beal trade! ... I've probably tossed out more scenarios than anyone!
But anytime I see Jayson "the GOAT" Tatum's name 6 times in this forum... I'm going to appear out of nowhere!
Yet again You don't understand my point at all. You think I view Tatum as some all star unicorn special player. I don't. I think he is realistically the best player we can get in an AD trade unless a team gets Zion and is willing to deal.
My point is simply I see you for what you are trying to do. You are hating more on Tatum than you did at any point when you were arguing we should trade for Ingram and Ball. This isn't me confusing you with someone else. You we literally pushing for the Laker trade (and a Knicks trade) and trying to justify it by "potential" even those Ingram and Ball have shown far more regression than anything else. Now you are trying to devalue Tatum because he "hasn't improved enough". Where were these same takes on Ingram and Ball when you wanted us to do the Laker deal at the deadline?
No one is saying you didn't prefer the Knicks trade, but you 100% argued we should take the Lakers package over waiting on Tatum. Heck you've said the same thing in this thread. Now all of a sudden you start trying to hate on Tatum and say he "hasn't improved enough" and his trade value has went down. Yet you're the same person who wanted us to take Ingram and Ball and excused their poor play. Tatum is improving in nearly every aspect but it's not fast enough for you so you're throwing shade on him. It's hilarious how obvious you're being.
Personally, give me the best package possible. More players doesn't mean you have better odds of hitting an All Star. Better players and higher picks gives you better odds. Name off the better players than Tatum that we can realistically get then we can have a conversation otherwise hating on Tatum is pointless.
Again, nothing in this gives me a valid reason as to why the Pelicans should have jumped at the deadline for a less than stellar offer as opposed to waiting. There is no way the Lakers are going to pass on AD for another FA (outside of KD maybe) if they think they can get him. All teams can now present offers. Additionally, the offseason is much easier for all teams if for no other reason, the expanded rosters. I would rather get the best player possible than fill our roster with 3-4 lesser players with the hope that one eventually becomes better. That leads to justifying overpaying them to keep them around as centerpieces to the AD trade (ala Gordon).
I think what I've posted speaks for itself, so I won't even attempt to debate you on whatever it is you think you're seeing.
Tatum is better than any of Ingram, Ball or Kuzma. We agree. I think it's just a matter of you thinking the gap in potential is the Grand Canyon, and I think it's a bike lane.
And I believe that Kyrie and KD to the Knicks is a done deal. Which means we're not getting Tatum anyway...
I can't make my position any clearer than that. Hope I'm wrong.