2022-2023 General Celtics thread

Auger34

used to be tbb
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
9,273
I'm in the flexibility camp, signing Jaylen to a super MAX (contract certainty) is good for Boston, if he stays for the full 5 is another question. HRB has raised an interesting point and believes there is a chance he could be moved (or demand somewhere else)

Teams aren't going to trip over themselves to sign Grant to multiple years at $20MM+/yr, so at the right number 100% agree they should sign/match.
After this most recent stretch, if Grant gets to $20M a year I will have to question the sanity and competence of whatever team is giving him that contract. For most of the past few months he has been abysmal. Like this guy doesn’t belong on an NBA court bad
 

Euclis20

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 3, 2004
8,014
Imaginationland
I think it's a few months too early to see whether Brad or Grant was the smart one by not extending last summer. It was his performance against Milwaukee (and to a lesser degree, Miami) that made a lot of people (including national media) think that Grant was about to get PAID. He played passable defense against Giannis and then hit a million 3s in game 7, even if no one looks at him and sees a future all-star, a good postseason puts him right back in the money. As noted above, he'll definitely get the opportunity given who our likely opponents will be deeper in the playoffs. If he plays like he did against Milwaukee for the entire postseason (and avoids a stinker at the end like against GS), I don't know what the offers will look like. Even if no further growth is possible, PJ Tucker signed a year ago for 3/33. The cap will be bigger and Grant is 13 years younger - $20M AAV isn't hard to see.
 

InstaFace

The Ultimate One
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
21,754
Pittsburgh, PA
The reason we want JB all-nba is not because we want to pay him more money. If he makes all-nba we have the ability to sign him to a super max contract this offseason when nobody else can negotiate with him instead of waiting until next year when he's a free agent. If we think he'll sign an extension this offseason even without the supermax option that's obviously even better. The most important thing is not to let him get to free agency next year.
My read of the extension rules is that having signed a 4-year extension in Oct 2019 covering the 20-21 through 23-24 seasons, he was eligible to sign a Veteran Extension as of the third anniversary of signing (so, last October), although since the season is in-flight he now has to wait until June 30th to sign an extension. So, we have an exclusive ability to negotiate an extension with him starting this 6/30/2023 and ending when his contract ends on 6/30/2024, which can be for up to 4 years. He will have 8 years of service when he completes the current contract, so the first year of an extension would be his 9th service year, meaning he's eligible for the 30% max right now in an extension.

If JB doesn't make all-NBA this year, he's eligible for a 35%-Max deal starting in his 10th year regardless of performance, meaning in theory he could go to free agency, sign a 1-year deal for 30% during his 9th season (24-25), and then the next year would be able to sign a 35% deal with any team in the league for up to 5 years (starting the 25-26 season). However that would carry a bunch of injury and performance risk for him during that 1-year deal. So I assume he would probably prefer to lock in the 30% extension than wait a year for a 35% max.

But if he makes all-NBA, then he's eligible for the 35% Max in the extension we're able to offer him, without waiting out a 1-year contract. Meaning we have to either show him the money, or he's going to go to the market. But if he doesn't, then we have this coming summer to negotiate an extension with him for the 30% Max, during which time nobody else can woo him. That's the scenario I'd like to see.
 

DGreenwood

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 2, 2003
2,444
Seattle
My read of the extension rules is that having signed a 4-year extension in Oct 2019 covering the 20-21 through 23-24 seasons, he was eligible to sign a Veteran Extension as of the third anniversary of signing (so, last October), although since the season is in-flight he now has to wait until June 30th to sign an extension. So, we have an exclusive ability to negotiate an extension with him starting this 6/30/2023 and ending when his contract ends on 6/30/2024, which can be for up to 4 years. He will have 8 years of service when he completes the current contract, so the first year of an extension would be his 9th service year, meaning he's eligible for the 30% max right now in an extension.

If JB doesn't make all-NBA this year, he's eligible for a 35%-Max deal starting in his 10th year regardless of performance, meaning in theory he could go to free agency, sign a 1-year deal for 30% during his 9th season (24-25), and then the next year would be able to sign a 35% deal with any team in the league for up to 5 years (starting the 25-26 season). However that would carry a bunch of injury and performance risk for him during that 1-year deal. So I assume he would probably prefer to lock in the 30% extension than wait a year for a 35% max.

But if he makes all-NBA, then he's eligible for the 35% Max in the extension we're able to offer him, without waiting out a 1-year contract. Meaning we have to either show him the money, or he's going to go to the market. But if he doesn't, then we have this coming summer to negotiate an extension with him for the 30% Max, during which time nobody else can woo him. That's the scenario I'd like to see.
Without all-nba, his extension was limited to 120% of his salary which was not enough to max him this offseason (under the old system). The new CBA allows for 140% increase which will get him in the ballpark of the max.

If he makes all-nba this year, he has no incentive to wait until free agency since he'll immediately be eligible for the supermax. If he misses all-nba this year he could wait to sign until free agency to see if he's all-nba next year. The max contract will be on the table next year either way, unless he Gordon Haywards himself.
 
Last edited:

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
30,491
My read of the extension rules is that having signed a 4-year extension in Oct 2019 covering the 20-21 through 23-24 seasons, he was eligible to sign a Veteran Extension as of the third anniversary of signing (so, last October), although since the season is in-flight he now has to wait until June 30th to sign an extension. So, we have an exclusive ability to negotiate an extension with him starting this 6/30/2023 and ending when his contract ends on 6/30/2024, which can be for up to 4 years. He will have 8 years of service when he completes the current contract, so the first year of an extension would be his 9th service year, meaning he's eligible for the 30% max right now in an extension.

If JB doesn't make all-NBA this year, he's eligible for a 35%-Max deal starting in his 10th year regardless of performance, meaning in theory he could go to free agency, sign a 1-year deal for 30% during his 9th season (24-25), and then the next year would be able to sign a 35% deal with any team in the league for up to 5 years (starting the 25-26 season). However that would carry a bunch of injury and performance risk for him during that 1-year deal. So I assume he would probably prefer to lock in the 30% extension than wait a year for a 35% max.

But if he makes all-NBA, then he's eligible for the 35% Max in the extension we're able to offer him, without waiting out a 1-year contract. Meaning we have to either show him the money, or he's going to go to the market. But if he doesn't, then we have this coming summer to negotiate an extension with him for the 30% Max, during which time nobody else can woo him. That's the scenario I'd like to see.
According to Forsberg (https://www.nbcsports.com/boston/celtics/what-does-nbas-new-cba-mean-jaylen-brown-celtics), because JB's salary for final year is $30.7M, under new CBA (140% raise), Cs could only offer 4/$190M (approximately) extension. That's compared to the super-max deal of 5/$290M.

I don't know if 4/$190M would be 30% of cap but it would be close.

Under current CBA, I think BOS's max extension would have been 4/$165M (approximately)
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
“Shoot the ball” or just “Shoot!” are more common but less directive.
Score The Ball has always been such a powerful and direct instruction. First time I heard it I was 8-years old and it resonated. Shooting is to shoot the ball, Scoring is a specific purpose.
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
4,546
Miami will play a bunch of zone and generally try to send plenty of help to JT and JB. Hauser’s shooting should help loosen things up and I trust his shooting more than Grant’s. I also expect most of Hauser’s minutes to come with JT on the floor.
I trust Hauser's shooting more than anyone on the team.

I also trust his defense way less than any of the 8 guys above him in the rotation.

Can't imagine playing him over any of those guys.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
Celtics have lost 8 of the last 9 playoff games held in Atlanta since the Pierce years. Not an easy place to play in the spring for some reason. Splitting 3&4 is key to not have to return there. I don’t want another G7 to begin this shit.
 

128

Member
SoSH Member
May 4, 2019
10,016
Celtics have lost 8 of the last 9 playoff games held in Atlanta since the Pierce years. Not an easy place to play in the spring for some reason. Splitting 3&4 is key to not have to return there. I don’t want another G7 to begin this shit.
The start to that postseason run in 2018 was heart attack-inducing. The Hawks would not go away.
 

DGreenwood

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 2, 2003
2,444
Seattle
Hollinger picks the Celtics to beat the Nuggets in the finals. I'm not sure if that's a good thing or a bad thing. I tend to disagree with his takes a lot.

Boston is a tricky title pick because Tatum isn’t quite on the level of the league’s superduperstars, but the Celtics have a nine-deep rotation for the playoffs with positional versatility and few weaknesses. They match up really well against the one team they definitely need to beat (Milwaukee), and they would have home-court advantage against every other opponent. I would take the field over any individual team, especially given how tight the top three in the East are, but if forced to pick, I’ll take Boston to win it all. Pick: Celtics in six.
 

Smokey Joe

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 9, 2001
1,155
Lmao, you took the words right out of my mouth. This is my same Finals pick….I am really starting to question it now
Just tell yourself that he is wrong about the Nuggets coming out of the West. The rest of it is fine.
 

TripleOT

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 4, 2007
7,758
Hollinger picks the Celtics to beat the Nuggets in the finals. I'm not sure if that's a good thing or a bad thing. I tend to disagree with his takes a lot.
What does Tatum have to do to be placed with the league’s superduperstars, where KD never won anything without three HoFers around him, and Embiid and Jokic haven’t ascended the playoff heights that JT has.

How many more 50 and 60 point games? How many more “Walk into the other team’s arena facing elimination and putting up monster games for the win” moments?

If Boston’s bench didn’t get destroyed in the last five games of the Finals, would the narrative on JT be different? I guess it’s Championship of Second Tier for a lot of these pundits.
 

DGreenwood

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 2, 2003
2,444
Seattle
What does Tatum have to do to be placed with the league’s superduperstars, where KD never won anything without three HoFers around him, and Embiid and Jokic haven’t ascended the playoff heights that JT has.

How many more 50 and 60 point games? How many more “Walk into the other team’s arena facing elimination and putting up monster games for the win” moments?

If Boston’s bench didn’t get destroyed in the last five games of the Finals, would the narrative on JT be different? I guess it’s Championship of Second Tier for a lot of these pundits.
Hollinger linked to Seth Partnow's latest "Pre-Post Season Player Tiers" when he made that "superduperstar" comment. And in that article, Seth explains his reasoning, so I'll paste it below.

My guess is two of the players about whom I’m going to get the most pushback in terms of what slot they’re in are Jayson Tatum (Tier 2A, or seventh to ninth top player in the league) and Joel Embiid (1B, fifth or sixth), especially given both having seasons that will place them in the top five, and in Embiid’s case, possibly at the top of the MVP voting.

And I’m here to tell you there is literally (well, almost literally, but nobody is going ’61 Wilt or anything) nothing they could have done this regular season to move any higher. Because the questions they have to answer, and the tests they have to pass, happen in May and June, not January and February.
I’m not even saying either player has shirked or shrunk in playoffs past. But they haven’t quite overcome either.

Somehow, a narrative has developed that last season’s NBA Finals weren’t actually that close, but with a chance to go up 3-1 at home, Boston had a five-point lead with 6:30 left in Game 4. And the Celtics couldn’t close it out and didn’t win another game from there. A big reason was the degree to which the Warriors had seemingly (and finally) figured out Tatum, turning him into much more of an isolation scorer than the playmaking offensive engine who helps the Celtics purr. Over the final two games, he made only 16 of 38 shots, with nine turnovers against only 11 assists.

To put a point on it, the title was there to be won, but Boston’s offense bogged down. With Tatum the primary driver of that offense, he takes a good chunk of the blame. Maybe if the late-game offensive foibles hadn’t plagued the Celtics earlier in the postseason — they made harder work of the series against the Bucks and Heat as a result of similar breakdowns — or across the regular season wherein the Celtics were one of the worst-performing teams in the clutch of the last few decades, the disappointment would stick to him less.
 
Last edited:

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
37,055
Hingham, MA
Hollinger linked to Seth Partnow's latest tiers when he made that "superduperstar" comment. And in that article, Seth explains his reasoning, so I'll paste it below.
Conveniently says that a narrative has developed that the Finals weren't close, but also ignores the fact that Tatum was playing with an injured shoulder. He's not wrong that Tatum didn't play well with a title on the line. But there was more to it.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
20,112
Santa Monica
Hollinger picks the Celtics to beat the Nuggets in the finals. I'm not sure if that's a good thing or a bad thing. I tend to disagree with his takes a lot.
pretty cogent summation of Cs vs Bucks

Since this series is likely the de facto NBA Finals, it’s a huge one. And I think it comes down to Williams’ health. The Celtics are probably a big man short against this team if Williams isn’t available, but he looked good in the final weeks of the season. The Celtics, despite their depth of talent, can get too slow on offense late in games and too dependent on Tatum hero ball, and they’re probably too small against a huge Bucks team without Williams.

But again, they beat Milwaukee last year with Williams only playing three games. I think Milwaukee might be a better team, in a global sense, but head-to-head, this matchup seems to favor Boston.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
11,997
Conveniently says that a narrative has developed that the Finals weren't close, but also ignores the fact that Tatum was playing with an injured shoulder. He's not wrong that Tatum didn't play well with a title on the line. But there was more to it.
Steph went through a similar thing. People acted like he choked in the 2016 Finals, when in reality he was playing hurt.

Took him 6 years to get to prove himself again, given how easy the Durant titles were, but no one questions him now.

Giannis, in contrast, got one of the easier title paths in recent memory, and now gets to officially be a Winner in all discussions.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
20,112
Santa Monica
Steph went through a similar thing. People acted like he choked in the 2016 Finals, when in reality he was playing hurt.

Took him 6 years to get to prove himself again, given how easy the Durant titles were, but no one questions him now.

Giannis, in contrast, got one of the easier title paths in recent memory, and now gets to officially be a Winner in all discussions.
24, fractured left wrist/shoulder, massive playoff minutes, & intense 2nd half of the season push gets lost in the National NBA media Tatum narrative
 

Euclis20

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 3, 2004
8,014
Imaginationland
Steph went through a similar thing. People acted like he choked in the 2016 Finals, when in reality he was playing hurt.

Took him 6 years to get to prove himself again, given how easy the Durant titles were, but no one questions him now.

Giannis, in contrast, got one of the easier title paths in recent memory, and now gets to officially be a Winner in all discussions.
Steph's path to the finals last year was as easy as could ever be hoped for - Ja missed half the Memphis series, and Denver and Dallas were one man teams with on one else close to all-star level other than Luka/Jokic. He earned every inch of it in the finals, but Boston's path to the finals was just as hard as GS' was easy, and it showed as that series went on. Like just about every champion (especially first time), Tatum and Boston will need some luck along the way.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
31,189
Conveniently says that a narrative has developed that the Finals weren't close, but also ignores the fact that Tatum was playing with an injured shoulder. He's not wrong that Tatum didn't play well with a title on the line. But there was more to it.
He also got to the finals, which is more than we can say about Embiid, ever. I think it's absolutely insane that anyone would take Embiid over Tatum----Embiid plays a lot less, he plays worse when it matters, and he has a vastly more worrisome physical history and aging profile. Tatum didn't deliver in the finals last year---but has in many playoff series and games. Embiid has a vastly inferior track record.

If the question being asked is the super-narrow "who will produce more in 35 minutes of play in a single game" I do think that is Embiid. But that is never the right question to ask----games played matter, minutes matter, etc.

Anyway, I guess we'll see how this year's playoffs turn out. Embiid is a great and a fun player---whether he's a winning player is very much TBD. Tatum has proven himself there.
 

Auger34

used to be tbb
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
9,273
Steph's path to the finals last year was as easy as could ever be hoped for - Ja missed half the Memphis series, and Denver and Dallas were one man teams with on one else close to all-star level other than Luka/Jokic. He earned every inch of it in the finals, but Boston's path to the finals was just as hard as GS' was easy, and it showed as that series went on. Like just about every champion (especially first time), Tatum and Boston will need some luck along the way.
This.

I think people here tend to over-blow the Tatum shoulder angle. IMO, Tatum (and all of the Celtics) were just exhausted by the end. They went to war in two straight series playing against two incredibly physical (some may call it dirty) teams and didn’t have enough gas in the tank by the end.

This year I think that’s going to be flipped. It wouldn’t surprise me in the least of Boston gets to the ECF relatively drama free. I think the West is so bunched up that whoever wins will have gone through the ringer to get there
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
37,055
Hingham, MA
Anyway, I guess we'll see how this year's playoffs turn out. Embiid is a great and a fun player---whether he's a winning player is very much TBD. Tatum has proven himself there.
I think he's proven he is a winning player. Unsure if he has proven he's a championship player. That may have been what you meant.
 

Auger34

used to be tbb
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
9,273
He also got to the finals, which is more than we can say about Embiid, ever. I think it's absolutely insane that anyone would take Embiid over Tatum----Embiid plays a lot less, he plays worse when it matters, and he has a vastly more worrisome physical history and aging profile. Tatum didn't deliver in the finals last year---but has in many playoff series and games. Embiid has a vastly inferior track record.

If the question being asked is the super-narrow "who will produce more in 35 minutes of play in a single game" I do think that is Embiid. But that is never the right question to ask----games played matter, minutes matter, etc.

Anyway, I guess we'll see how this year's playoffs turn out. Embiid is a great and a fun player---whether he's a winning player is very much TBD. Tatum has proven himself there.
I may have to end up eating my words on this but Embiid really doesn’t scare me much at all. I think he’s a fantastic player but, IMO, he tends to make incredibly stupid plays and decisions late in games. Part of it is because he’s always trying to grift the refs and exaggerate contact; part of it is he’s not great at reading and reacting to double teams.

I am much, much more afraid of Giannis than Joel. It’s not even close to me (as a Celtic fan)
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
31,189
I think he's proven he is a winning player. Unsure if he has proven he's a championship player. That may have been what you meant.
Yes---I mean, he's not an empty-calories scorer or anything like that. But every playoff series of his I've watched he is a) unable to compete for 40 minutes for 5-6-7 straight games conditioning-wise and b) loses focus multiple times in a visible way. He can be, for bursts, the most dominant player in the game...but he hasn't shown he can do that when it matters in the NBA, which is (and I agree with Partnow on this) about May-June not about regular season.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
11,997
I think he's proven he is a winning player. Unsure if he has proven he's a championship player. That may have been what you meant.
I guess I think of "winning player" as "good in the playoffs too, even if not winning a title."

Embiid has famously never made it past the 2nd round, and some of the losses are really bad. The 2018 and 2021 losses were awful, and the 2019 Sixers were loaded. Last year there was the injury thing...but they were still 2-2 against Miami with everyone back.

I don't want to get into semantic debates about "winning", but it's bizarre the pass that Embiid gets, relative to Tatum. I think it's because he *feels* dominant and imposing, and the numbers are gaudy.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
37,055
Hingham, MA
I guess I think of "winning player" as "good in the playoffs too, even if not winning a title."

Embiid has famously never made it past the 2nd round, and some of the losses are really bad. The 2018 and 2021 losses were awful, and the 2019 Sixers were loaded. Last year there was the injury thing...but they were still 2-2 against Miami with everyone back.

I don't want to get into semantic debates about "winning", but it's bizarre the pass that Embiid gets, relative to Tatum. I think it's because he *feels* dominant and imposing, and the numbers are gaudy.
Agreed I don't want to go there.

eFG regular season: .533
eFG playoffs: .500

Tatum:
eFG regular season: .529
eFG playoffs: .504

Fairly similar. Embiid certainly doesn't deserve a pass.

Edit: I would expect pretty much every player's playoff numbers to show a similar decline. Defense just at a much different level.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
11,403
around the way
We spend a lot of time talking about guys' stats in the one sport when being a super dominant player should make your team really good. That is, if what you do is really super dominant.

Everyone gets why Mike Trout might be the best player in the world on a shit baseball team. It's baseball. And even in hoop, it shouldn't just be a ring counting exercise. But if you're THAT GUY in hoop, and your team doesn't ever do anything, then you're not that guy.
 

TripleOT

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 4, 2007
7,758
Golden State blasted Boston’s bench by 37 points in games 5 and 6, 10 and 13 points Warrior wins. Not going to win a title when your bench scores 5 points in a home game facing elimination.
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
44,475
Melrose, MA
What does Tatum have to do to be placed with the league’s superduperstars, where KD never won anything without three HoFers around him, and Embiid and Jokic haven’t ascended the playoff heights that JT has.

How many more 50 and 60 point games? How many more “Walk into the other team’s arena facing elimination and putting up monster games for the win” moments?

If Boston’s bench didn’t get destroyed in the last five games of the Finals, would the narrative on JT be different? I guess it’s Championship of Second Tier for a lot of these pundits.
Tatum needs to lead his team to a finals win, or, at least, if the problem is with the rest of the team, he needs to play well in a finals series.

Against the Warriors, Tatum shot 3-17, 8-19, 9-23, 8-23, 10-20, 6-18. That's not "superduperstar." Other than turnovers the secondary stats aren't terrible but aren't anything to write home about either, other than the turnovers. With his team facing elimination he played his worst game of the entire playoffs and one of the worst of his career. 6-18, 1-4 from three, did not get to the line, had just 3 rebounds, 7 assists was OK but he offset that with 5 turnovers.

Of course there are all sorts of excuses that could be made. But the point of superduperstardom, at least to me, is that the player rises above all that.
He also got to the finals, which is more than we can say about Embiid, ever.
Rating Embiid above Tatum, at this point, is ludicrous. Yes, he's a better generator of stats. Wake me up when when his team advances beyond round 2.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
11,403
around the way
Tatum needs to lead his team to a finals win, or, at least, if the problem is with the rest of the team, he needs to play well in a finals series.

Against the Warriors, Tatum shot 3-17, 8-19, 9-23, 8-23, 10-20, 6-18. That's not "superduperstar." Other than turnovers the secondary stats aren't terrible but aren't anything to write home about either, other than the turnovers. With his team facing elimination he played his worst game of the entire playoffs and one of the worst of his career. 6-18, 1-4 from three, did not get to the line, had just 3 rebounds, 7 assists was OK but he offset that with 5 turnovers.

Of course there are all sorts of excuses that could be made. But the point of superduperstardom, at least to me, is that the player rises above all that.
I honestly feel bad for Tatum that he didn't do a better job at sprinkling his shitty games across the schedule a little better.

Does anyone honestly think that the guy who carried the team offensively most of the year and has played a buttload of winning game 7s in such a short career just cannot handle the finals?
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
I honestly feel bad for Tatum that he didn't do a better job at sprinkling his shitty games across the schedule a little better.

Does anyone honestly think that the guy who carried the team offensively most of the year and has played a buttload of winning game 7s in such a short career just cannot handle the finals?
Tatum has always struggled with the Warriors quickness and speed but yeah if it’s not “choking” it was he was “gassed.” I don’t place much weight on either lazy argument based on what we know occurred in those playoffs.
 

Bunt4aTriple

Member (member)
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
4,347
North Yarmouth, ME
This.

I think people here tend to over-blow the Tatum shoulder angle. IMO, Tatum (and all of the Celtics) were just exhausted by the end. They went to war in two straight series playing against two incredibly physical (some may call it dirty) teams and didn’t have enough gas in the tank by the end.

This year I think that’s going to be flipped. It wouldn’t surprise me in the least of Boston gets to the ECF relatively drama free. I think the West is so bunched up that whoever wins will have gone through the ringer to get there
I went to most of the home playoff games last year and noticed after his first drive to the basket/contact of each game, he would grimace painfully and hold his arm/shoulder. Really dumb analogy, but I am sure an mri would reveal my shoulder is made of Swiss cheese. Whenever I play disc golf, my first big huck is torture. Subsequent throws get easier but it never feels good. I think he felt off and at least subconsciously was hesitant to initiate contact.

At some point, these guys need to learn to play through and adapt. We'll see if he's there this postseason.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,096
Tatum's injury was both untimely and more serious than the doubters will have you believe. It certainly impacted him. So did Golden State's defense and the inability of anyone else on the Celtics to play the initiator on offense. And the fact that the Celtics bench was far worse than the Warriors bench (and far worse is understating the chasm).

This year's team has Brogdon, a healthy Rob, and a far more confident Derrick White. Should be night and day in the event there is a repeat of last year's matchup
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
11,403
around the way
Tatum has always struggled with the Warriors quickness and speed but yeah if it’s not “choking” it was he was “gassed.” I don’t place much weight on either lazy argument based on what we know occurred in those playoffs.
Much the same way that it doesn't make Giannis a choker when we have a good system to limit his production. Sometimes teams are just good matchups for a guy (or bad matchups, if you're the guy). I do think that crazy minutes add up too, but I get why some folks aren't bought in on that.
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
44,475
Melrose, MA
I honestly feel bad for Tatum that he didn't do a better job at sprinkling his shitty games across the schedule a little better.

Does anyone honestly think that the guy who carried the team offensively most of the year and has played a buttload of winning game 7s in such a short career just cannot handle the finals?
Well, in his one chance so far, he did not handle the finals.

Let’s remember the context here: this wasn’t about whether Tatum was a good player or even a perennial All Star one of the best in the league. It seemed to be a question of whether he gets up into that same stratosphere that KD and LeBron inhabit. And for me I need to see more than last season’s finals failure.

There are lots of other top players in the NBA right now who have accomplished less than Tatum in the post season, beginning with Joel Embiid but there are plenty of others. For me Tatum is above basically all of them, until they reach or surpass his playoff contributions.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
11,997
Well, in his one chance so far, he did not handle the finals.

Let’s remember the context here: this wasn’t about whether Tatum was a good player or even a perennial All Star one of the best in the league. It seemed to be a question of whether he gets up into that same stratosphere that KD and LeBron inhabit. And for me I need to see more than last season’s finals failure.

There are lots of other top players in the NBA right now who have accomplished less than Tatum in the post season, beginning with Joel Embiid but there are plenty of others. For me Tatum is above basically all of them, until they reach or surpass his playoff contributions.
Your opinion is reasonable and basically correct imo.

I think the issue people have is the national media elevating guys like Embiid, Jokic, Luka to superduperstardom, when Tatum has been the best player on multiple better performing teams.

At the end of the day, this whole debate is mostly about Giannis and KD and Embiid and Jokic *feeling* like more dominant players, and conveniently forgetting things like the Celtics completely punking KD in the 1st round last year. The dude was mentally and physically broken after that series.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
Much the same way that it doesn't make Giannis a choker when we have a good system to limit his production. Sometimes teams are just good matchups for a guy (or bad matchups, if you're the guy). I do think that crazy minutes add up too, but I get why some folks aren't bought in on that.
Speaking of matchups….Sam Hauser OWNS the Atlanta Hawks. Comfort zones for shooters matter tremendously so I expect Joe to give him early minutes today to see if that continues in a playoff setting. I’m
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
44,475
Melrose, MA
I think the issue people have is the national media elevating guys like Embiid, Jokic, Luka to superduperstardom, when Tatum has been the best player on multiple better performing teams.
So, all of them "might be" better than Tatum but none have the track record to prove they are. Until this year I thought for sure Luka would surpass Tatum but now I am having my doubts. It's certainly true that none of them should automatically be regarded as better.