Jayson Tatum 2021-22: Leap Year

Buck Showalter

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 26, 2002
6,339
Citifield - Queens, NY
There was a pretty long string of possessions until the game was iced when Tatum just ran to the corner and played decoy. And honestly, it was the right call. The Schroeder, Smart, Horford plays were working much better, attacking the rim much more aggressively. Even Marcus’ step back seemed like a better choice than a lot of Tatum’s attempts tonight.
you know - I actually agree with you.

It worked....but I "still" don't like it.

Down the stretch, I should want the ball to be in the hands of my best player. The fact that "not" doing that was the better option --- given JT's propensity to attempt bad shots --- makes me uneasy.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
18,809
you know - I actually agree with you.

It worked....but I "still" don't like it.

Down the stretch, I should want the ball to be in the hands of my best player. The fact that "not" doing that was the better option --- given JT's propensity to attempt bad shots --- makes me uneasy.
Yeah, but if it continues to work, teams will adjust to it and it should lead to better shots for Tatum.
 

Euclis20

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 3, 2004
4,668
Imaginationland
I like the idea of putting the ball hander, be it Schroder or Tatum (or Brown) in a pick and roll with Horford. The latter moves well enough, is a good and willing passer, and can score at all three levels with a bit of space. The most reliable bucket this team has had in the 3-4 years were the Kyrie/Horford pick and rolls, and I don't see why that couldn't continue to be a reliable scoring option down the stretch.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
23,057
I like the idea of putting the ball hander, be it Schroder or Tatum (or Brown) in a pick and roll with Horford. The latter moves well enough, is a good and willing passer, and can score at all three levels with a bit of space. The most reliable bucket this team has had in the 3-4 years were the Kyrie/Horford pick and rolls, and I don't see why that couldn't continue to be a reliable scoring option down the stretch.
Defenses attack differently down the stretch than during normal course of a game so there is more urgency and intensity. I would be more comfortable doing this with Tatum who can more easily back out of a trap, force the trapper to retreat and get right into iso as a second option. I don’t like this at all with Schroder, or anyone else on our roster, who would be more susceptible to a trap or being forced to move the ball against aware defenses in these spots.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
8,576
Kiev, Ukraine
you know - I actually agree with you.

It worked....but I "still" don't like it.

Down the stretch, I should want the ball to be in the hands of my best player. The fact that "not" doing that was the better option --- given JT's propensity to attempt bad shots --- makes me uneasy.
It's not because of his propensity to attempt bad shots; it's because his shot hasn't been falling this year, even on good looks. Using him as a decoy/spacer to win games is important. Sometimes you're in a slump and the team has to figure things out.

I don't think anyone is particularly worried that Jayson Tatum will be suddenly unable to hit 3s or finish at the rim for the rest of his career.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
23,057
Took almost 24 hours for someone to land this plane. On behalf of a grateful board, thank you.
Surely others considered but it was nighthob who had the courage to comment. Some could say he’s the only one who had the balls to do so.
 

RorschachsMask

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2011
2,267
Lynn
They ran a ton of PnR with him last night, i would guess the Charlotte game is the only other game where he ran it more. And I don’t think that it’s a coincidence that he looked way more comfortable, and it led to a ton of wide open looks.

Even after last night though, he’s still only running PnR 17.7% of the time, down over 10% from last year. Need that up around 30% IMO, right in the Paul George range.
 

pjheff

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2003
915
Feast your eyes.
Did Udoka bench him in the first quarter? He was playing sluggishly from the opening and disappeared around the six minute mark, never to return to until the second quarter if I recall correctly. I don’t ever remember that kind of rest pattern before, and I don’t think that he was in foul trouble at the time. Whatever happened seemed to work, as Tatum was much more effective in the second quarter and actually played aggressively with good body language in the second half. There was an interesting article circulating recently about how Nick Saban had Mac Jones filmed so that the young quarterback could see how his emotional outbursts impacted his teammates. I wonder if Brad Stevens ever considered doing the same with Tatum.
 

Eddie Jurak

Go Leafs Go
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
34,333
Melrose, MA
Did Udoka bench him in the first quarter? He was playing sluggishly from the opening and disappeared around the six minute mark, never to return to until the second quarter if I recall correctly. I don’t ever remember that kind of rest pattern before, and I don’t think that he was in foul trouble at the time. Whatever happened seemed to work, as Tatum was much more effective in the second quarter and actually played aggressively with good body language in the second half. There was an interesting article circulating recently about how Nick Saban had Mac Jones filmed so that the young quarterback could see how his emotional outbursts impacted his teammates. I wonder if Brad Stevens ever considered doing the same with Tatum.
I didn't initially think Tatum was benched - Ime took him out right after he picked up his second foul. One notable difference between Brad and Ime is that Brad rarely adjusted his rotations because of foul trouble, whereas Ime seems to do so much more readily.

At the same time, Tatum began the game bombing away ineffectively from three. When Ime lifted him he was 1 for 5, including 1 for 4 from three, for 3 points in 6 minutes. Over his next 28 minutes, he was 12 for 21, including 3 of 5 from 3 (and 7 of 7 from the line), for 34 points.

So it could have been the fouls, could have been sending a message, could have been both. The Celtics had 12 points when Tatum came out and Richardson and Smart combined for all 18 Celtic points over the rest of the quarter, so it could also have been that Ime liked what they were doing offensively.

Tatum was in to start the second quarter.
 

Eddie Jurak

Go Leafs Go
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
34,333
Melrose, MA
I couldn’t recall whether Tatum had one or two fouls at the time. Perhaps it’s as simple as that.
If it was, at all, a benching, it strikes me as a very clever way to bench a star. Benching a star is guaranteed to create a media shitstorm. But here Ime can just say "I was protecting him after the second foul."
 

RorschachsMask

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2011
2,267
Lynn
Arbitrary cutoff and all that, I know. But over the last 7 games he is averaging 28/9/4 on 44/40 splits, and has a +9.3 net rating.

Obviously the last two games he’s starting to look like himself offensively, but his defense has been pretty excellent since that ugly first few games.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
18,809
Did Udoka bench him in the first quarter? He was playing sluggishly from the opening and disappeared around the six minute mark, never to return to until the second quarter if I recall correctly. I don’t ever remember that kind of rest pattern before, and I don’t think that he was in foul trouble at the time. Whatever happened seemed to work, as Tatum was much more effective in the second quarter and actually played aggressively with good body language in the second half. There was an interesting article circulating recently about how Nick Saban had Mac Jones filmed so that the young quarterback could see how his emotional outbursts impacted his teammates. I wonder if Brad Stevens ever considered doing the same with Tatum.
He had 2 fouls.

edit: Late to the party.
 

Euclis20

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 3, 2004
4,668
Imaginationland
Arbitrary cutoff and all that, I know. But over the last 7 games he is averaging 28/9/4 on 44/40 splits, and has a +9.3 net rating.

Obviously the last two games he’s starting to look like himself offensively, but his defense has been pretty excellent since that ugly first few games.
It's actually not an arbitrary cutoff at all - that was the first game Jaylen missed. I think we're all hoping it's coincidence that Tatum finally started looking like himself when Brown went to the bench.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
6,519
around the way
It's actually not an arbitrary cutoff at all - that was the first game Jaylen missed. I think we're all hoping it's coincidence that Tatum finally started looking like himself when Brown went to the bench.
Well he had some garbage games with Brown out too.

The defense finally has clicked in general, which is the biggest part of the better Celtics play lately. The offense is still a work in progress, Lakers' defensive indifference notwithstanding.

Tatum seemed to accept last night that he wasn't going to get the calls that he deserves and to remember that he's wearing a muscle suit now. If he keeps attacking the rim like Lebron or Giannis, we won't care much if he's shooting 33% from 3 for stretches.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
13,455
Santa Monica
For those asking about Tatum's foul-drawing: here's a really good video breaking down how officiating has changed this year to disincentivize offensive players seeking out contact on drives. Tatum mentioned a bit, but the examples of what is and isn't allowed are good.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-tojc0cl680
Like most, I like the rule changes. But I do think this will eventually lead to more 3pt shooting
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
8,576
Kiev, Ukraine
Like most, I like the rule changes. But I do think this will eventually lead to more 3pt shooting
I don't love overly 3-happy NBA ball, but I strongly prefer more 3s to whatever the hell Trae and Harden do on their drives. It's bad product, and the league (to its credit) seems to have recognized that.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
37,268
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fk5ZsuGu4vE&ab_channel=ThePlayers%27Tribune


Tatum in his own words rather than some media mouthpiece. Not a lot of meat here but he says all the right things about Jaylen and Ime as well as Kemba (Tatum said he didnt want Kemba to go). We all know he is having a down year and that there may be questions about how far he can take the Cs but I continue to be impressed with the maturity level of someone Tatum's age.

I found his "start, bench, trade" response to be illuminating. Tatum clearly identifies with a certain type of personality which I take as a bullish sign for his competitive future.
 

RorschachsMask

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2011
2,267
Lynn
Only some advanced stats are available so far, but with the exception of defensive BPM, looking good. Obviously he needs to shoot better, but I’ve been pretty happy with his defense this season. EPM has him as a plus defender so far, as well.

CE4A29D3-E34F-493F-9FB3-1DADD9059E28.png
 

Euclis20

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 3, 2004
4,668
Imaginationland
Good stuff. Tatum is not and never has been the problem here. Trade the other 16.
And this is with Tatum still not shooting that well from 3 - he's hit .361 from behind the arc during these 14 games, well under his career average entering this year (.396) and worse than his worst full season (.373 back in 2019). He starts hitting close to 40%, he'll again look like a top 10 player.
 
Last edited:

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
18,809
If, for some reason, Tatum is out for an extended period of time this year, the C's are probably lottery bound and should definitely be trading away a few pieces.

Extended period of time being longer than 10-14 days or whatever.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
18,809
Probably Omicron. Tatum has been vaxxed as well. Almost 99% certain this will be far milder than his pre-vaxx infection last year.
I am too, but there's always that 1% and it's the Celtics.

I guess it's also possible he doesn't miss that many games but is at less than 100% for an extended period of time. I suppose it doesn't matter much as this team isn't going anywhere but it would be nice to see Tatum get back to around career norms this year.

Here's hoping it's nothing.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
23,057
If, for some reason, Tatum is out for an extended period of time this year, the C's are probably lottery bound and should definitely be trading away a few pieces.

Extended period of time being longer than 10-14 days or whatever.
The new protocol for vaccinated players should only result in Tatum missing 3-4 games and other teams will be missing players too. Tonight, for example, we play the Wolves without Towns, Edwards, and Russell.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
18,809
The new protocol for vaccinated players should only result in Tatum missing 3-4 games and other teams will be missing players too. Tonight, for example, we play the Wolves without Towns, Edwards, and Russell.
Yeah, he's not going to miss close to the time with Covid. I just meant if he had another injury or whatever. With no Tatum, this team is ugly.

That's basically the difference between Tatum and Brown. With Tatum as your best player, you are probably play in game bound at worst. With Brown as your best player, you are in the running for a top 5 pick.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
23,057
Yeah, he's not going to miss close to the time with Covid. I just meant if he had another injury or whatever. With no Tatum, this team is ugly.

That's basically the difference between Tatum and Brown. With Tatum as your best player, you are probably play in game bound at worst. With Brown as your best player, you are in the running for a top 5 pick.
It’s all relative though. Even without Tatum for the next five games we’ll be favored in four of them due to other teams also missing their star players.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
18,809
I was curious. Tatum was a .458/.396/.840 career shooter going into the year. If he was shooting at his career rates, he would currently have 25 more FGS, 19 of those being 3 pointers, and 3 more FTs. That's 72 more points over 33 games. Instead of averaging 25.6 PPG, he'd be at 27.8. The C's point differential would climb from 1.1 to 3.3. That would probably put their record at closer to 20-13 than the 16-17 it is now.

The C's struggles this year are mostly due to Tatum's performance. That's a simplistic take though. It assumes Tatum's shooting struggles are all on him and that the other 4 players aren't having an impact on the types of shots Tatum is getting/taking.

Fix Tatum's shooting woes and you fix the team. Of course, fixing the team could also possibly cure Tatum's shooting woes.
 

Deathofthebambino

Drive Carefully
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2005
35,984
Probably Omicron. Tatum has been vaxxed as well. Almost 99% certain this will be far milder than his pre-vaxx infection last year.
I've got about 15 friends that had COVID early, got vaxxed, and now have it again (or just got over it in the past week). Some were hospitalized for weeks the first time around, and ended up getting really fucked up. Even they (along with everyone else) said this time around, it was nothing but a 2 day head cold/flu with a sore throat. And then they felt fine. I would hope it's the same for Tatum.

Although when he comes back next week and proceeds to shoot as bad as he has been, I'm sure we'll blame COVID for a couple of months...
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
23,057
I've got about 15 friends that had COVID early, got vaxxed, and now have it again (or just got over it in the past week). Some were hospitalized for weeks the first time around, and ended up getting really fucked up. Even they (along with everyone else) said this time around, it was nothing but a 2 day head cold/flu with a sore throat. And then they felt fine. I would hope it's the same for Tatum.

Although when he comes back next week and proceeds to shoot as bad as he has been, I'm sure we'll blame COVID for a couple of months...
Same here. I came up for the holidays and haven’t been able to see family bc all but two of our 6-7 close family households have cases with symptoms less than the flu. No doctor here but all signs seem to be that this will pass soon…….unlike Tatum/Jaylen, who may not pass in the foreseeable future. ;)
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
8,576
Kiev, Ukraine
I was curious. Tatum was a .458/.396/.840 career shooter going into the year. If he was shooting at his career rates, he would currently have 25 more FGS, 19 of those being 3 pointers, and 3 more FTs. That's 72 more points over 33 games. Instead of averaging 25.6 PPG, he'd be at 27.8. The C's point differential would climb from 1.1 to 3.3. That would probably put their record at closer to 20-13 than the 16-17 it is now.

The C's struggles this year are mostly due to Tatum's performance. That's a simplistic take though. It assumes Tatum's shooting struggles are all on him and that the other 4 players aren't having an impact on the types of shots Tatum is getting/taking.

Fix Tatum's shooting woes and you fix the team. Of course, fixing the team could also possibly cure Tatum's shooting woes.
I don't think that's a simplistic take at all. Eye test and numbers have Tatum getting pretty good shots from 3 in particular, and just missing a ton that he's made his whole career.

Another way of saying it: the complementary players, when healthy, have actually been pretty decent. Smart, Grant, JRich, RL, TL, Horford, sorta DS.....it's actually a fairly deep team. The problem has been that Jayson Tatum's shooting fell off a cliff.

Decent complementary guys + 2019-2021 Jayson Tatum is a good (not great, but good) team.
 

Kliq

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 31, 2013
17,268
I don't think that's a simplistic take at all. Eye test and numbers have Tatum getting pretty good shots from 3 in particular, and just missing a ton that he's made his whole career.

Another way of saying it: the complementary players, when healthy, have actually been pretty decent. Smart, Grant, JRich, RL, TL, Horford, sorta DS.....it's actually a fairly deep team. The problem has been that Jayson Tatum's shooting fell off a cliff.

Decent complementary guys + 2019-2021 Jayson Tatum is a good (not great, but good) team.
Is it really fair to compare Tatum's shooting percentages to previous years? For almost his entire career, he has often shared the floor with a third creator in Kyrie, Hayward or Walker. Obviously the effectiveness of those players has varied, but I think we can all agree they were guys that drew attention from opposing defenses and given Tatum better looks. This season he doesn't have either of those guys, and Jaylen has missed significant time as well. He just doesn't have the kind of supporting casts that is going to create more advantageous situations to score than he has throughout his career.

For star offensive players that lack support, I think we need to recalibrate our expectations for efficiency. Some players like Curry are freaks that can maintain their efficiency, but for a lot of players, being the only real star-level player on the court is going to lead to worse efficiency. There are naturally just going to be a lot of possessions where the offense is stagnant, Tatum gets the ball with five seconds left on the shot clock, and he just has to put up a tough shot because nobody else can do anything.

Tatum definitely should be shooting the ball better...but I think some regression in his efficiency can be expected. It can be a frustrating pill to swallow given that our expectations for Tatum are that he should be getting better and better year-over-year given his age and the history of his progression, but there is a big learning curve for him this year I think in playing mostly with more limited role players and not having a Kemba-like player to draw some attention.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
6,519
around the way
The new protocol for vaccinated players should only result in Tatum missing 3-4 games and other teams will be missing players too. Tonight, for example, we play the Wolves without Towns, Edwards, and Russell.
I know that this isn't the gambling thread, but I like the Tatum for Towns-Edwards-Russell tradeoff. Wonder how much the line moves after the Tatum announcement.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
6,519
around the way
I was curious. Tatum was a .458/.396/.840 career shooter going into the year. If he was shooting at his career rates, he would currently have 25 more FGS, 19 of those being 3 pointers, and 3 more FTs. That's 72 more points over 33 games. Instead of averaging 25.6 PPG, he'd be at 27.8. The C's point differential would climb from 1.1 to 3.3. That would probably put their record at closer to 20-13 than the 16-17 it is now.

The C's struggles this year are mostly due to Tatum's performance. That's a simplistic take though. It assumes Tatum's shooting struggles are all on him and that the other 4 players aren't having an impact on the types of shots Tatum is getting/taking.

Fix Tatum's shooting woes and you fix the team. Of course, fixing the team could also possibly cure Tatum's shooting woes.
This.

And I'm starting to wonder (probably not the only person) whether bulked up, "I'm gonna get to the line this year" Tatum has replaced "I shoot unblockable 3s at almost 40% Tatum" permanently.

He has dropped 45 points on his true shooting and is only getting .7 FTA more than last year.