Interesting in that the 90%/ 10% comment could be easily made about Embiid and Luka as well. Even about Giannis although he has actually won a championship.
Seconded. If Philly called and offered Embiid straight-up for Tatum, I'd hang up the phone.
Especially given the age gap. I do understand why the media doesn't kill Embiid for his repeated playoff failures - the team and organization around him is clearly a mess, and he's not directly responsible for any of it. The Celtics on the other hand are extremely well run, and while this obviously benefits Tatum's game and success, I get why someone gives him less credit than they might if he was surrounded by idiots.
Tatum 7th isn't bad, but Anthony Davis at 6 is absurd. I get the logic behind it (Timpf values ceiling over consistency because he feels the higher ceiling is more likely to win deep in the playoffs when everybody knows what everybody is going to do, and AD at his absolute best is arguably better than Tatum at his absolute best) and I like Jason Timpf generally, but this is too cute by half. This isn't an Embiid/Tatum comparison where outside of this board and Boston fandom most people would choose Embiid, I'm positive that all 30 NBA teams would, if things were equal, take Jayson Tatum over Anthony Davis right now. Ceiling doesn't matter if you aren't available, and while Tatum is just entering his prime, AD is entering the stage of his career where most players start to break down. I don't know where that leaves a guy who averaged just 50 games per season over the last 5 years and has just 2 healthy playoff runs over that stretch.
The finals? If that prayer of a shot falls of the rim, they've got probably a 40% chance of getting to the conference finals (or whatever the odds are of a team winning overtime in game 7 on the road), where they'd be up against the 60 win Bucks and MVP Giannis.
Agre 25-29 Tatum vs Age 35-39 Steph?
Especially if Tatum takes another step forward in his game this year, which is certainly possible.
Steph is too old. Factoring in future years, the list is simply Giannis and Jokic for me. And Tatum might be like <2 years away from me taking those 2 off as well given they’re 3 years older.
I completely agree with you, and we could easily argue that Giannis and Jokic already are off the list… so let’s say it becomes apparent that the 7-10 range is his absolute peak so he *could* be your centerpiece to a title if everything lines up just right for him, but he ultimately lacks that ability to stomp in and take it like a top 3 could… do you reset and take a shot at Cooper Flagg or go all-in on the annual roulette spin hitting?
This is bullshit.
No, you do not do this, but I do congratulate you on making the most New England post ever.
Yeah, the 2017-18 Sixers were thought to be way more talented than the Celtics that year, and I think they would have had a chance at the 3-0 comeback if a few things had gone differently.
Philly does seem to get the least out of the players around Embiid. Besides the Butler, Simmons, and now Harden kerfluffles, they basically ran a perfectly serviceable Al Horford out of town after one season.
Yeah, it's funny that any mention of the best Tatum teams will prominently feature Horford, and yet Philly had Horford in his prime and we count it as "meh"
I hadn’t really thought of this until you so clearly laid it out that both his teams and his star teammates tend to underperform playing with him, but maybe Embiid is a ceiling limiter. He requires his teams to play a certain way offensively and defensively. As great as he is, having to throw the ball to the low and mid-post on offense, and then play drop coverage on defense are both styles that today’s analytics heavy NBA frowns upon.
would like to hear more about this (no snark intended) as the Cs are going to drop coverage this year plus DEN just won playing what I at least would consider drop coverage.
What is the very specific skill set Embiid requires around him? I think his strengths allow for a lot of flexibility.
Thanks for posting. 25yr old JT is a few seasons from apex-Tatum. He continues to get bigger/stronger every summer, which helps with at-the-rim scoring efficiency, rebounding, and defense.
He has been considered a top five player over the last two years (6th and 4th in MVP voting and two First Team All NBAs). He is the fourth best player over that time. Do you mean MVP level player or some arbitrary "Top Five" that doesn't actually mean an actual five people?
Its not. My sense is that Embiid, excepting the Butler season, has never had the kind of supporting cast that Tatum has had. I didn't think this was an out there take but I guess it is.
Right, Butler was the best guy on a Finals team twice (Tatum has never had anyone on his team with that credential)
There's a difference between "considered a top 5 player" and "considered one of the 5 best players of the season." Easy and extreme example: If Jokic tore his ACL tomorrow, he's not making any all-NBA or MVP lists for the 23/24 season, but he's still gonna be at (or at least very close to) the top of any preseason player ranking 11 months from now. Tatum's durability means he's always going to be a bit better than the general perception, I'm saying he'll actually be considered a top 5 player, not where he is now (which is somewhere between 5 and 8).
I gave you Butler. I don't agree that Harris or Simmons or Reddick etc were as talented as the C's rotation pieces over their time in the league. We can probably put numbers around this but what's the point?
The point is someone mentioned Embiid gets a weird pass for not getting anywhere in this sport in terms of winning and you said it makes sense to give him a pass because he has had a bad supporting cast which he hasn’t.
I am pretty sure that the first year Tatum’s Celtics eliminated Embiid’s Sixers (2018)
I stand by my giving him a pass - I simply think he hasn't had the right type or enough talent around him for his career. If you look what Denver did building around Jokic and the C's did building around Tatum, you can see that Philly fell short - or just look at their relative playoff successes over that timeframe. There were other factors, of course, but I just don't think Embiid has had the same support that other stars get in this league.
This is our main difference I guess. I think it is laughable to think Jokic wouldn’t have been able to make the finals with Embiid’s supporting cast.
That Sixers team entered the series against the Celtics having won 20 of their previous 21 games (16 straight wins to end the regular season, then a 4-1 win over Miami). I had completely forgotten how hot they were to close the year.
The team building wasn't ideal, but they've had Butler, Simmons and Harden (3 legit all-star level players) come and go. The fact that they all wanted to leave says something about Embiid, who seems more than happy to pass the blame to other guys. And the fact that his performance drops tremendously from the regular season to the playoffs (despite not ever going deep into the playoffs) says something about him, too. There's always an excuse, but he'll be 30 in March. He is who he is.
I didn't say that - Jokic is a different type of player than Embiid. I am pointing out that teams like Denver and Boston have done a much better job of executing roster building around their stars.
Its funny that people are citing Ben Simmons as an NBA talent now. He is what he has always been, a skilled player athletically whose flaws were exposed by the NBA. If anything it makes my point because Embiid's original star running mate turned out to be an enigma. That's not on Joel - that's on the 76ers pupu platter of decision makers and their evaluation process.
Morey is incredibly overrated. Booth, Stevens, and Elisburg are much better GMs.
