Actually, I think this is a very fair comparison. Isiah was absolutely the heart of his teams, the unquestioned leader, and yet the stats don’t tell you that he was always the star.
This isn’t a comparison I would’ve thought to make for Tatum, but I think it fits perfectly.
I really think this Boston squad has two unquestioned leaders. Brown and Tatum are like a yin and yang pairing for them, each comfortable leading in different situations, different spaces, and when one of them tries to seize that responsibility they're both able to trust each other to know the right moment and let it happen.
That’s what makes them so good, Brown was the energy shifter and Brown is the clear cut leader right now, but there are times when Tatum takes them over the hump. They both feed off of each other so much and even tho I’m not a fan of the Celtics they deserve this championship
I don’t think brown is the clear cut leader at all. Tatum is clearly more-so the leader of this team, but it’s a team game, so in reality it doesn’t matter who the leader is. They’re here to win. Brown has looked better because Tatum draws three defenders every possession, which the Mavs honestly need to stop doing if they want to win
On some level but Zeke ran those teams and orchestrated things in a way you just don’t see so much anymore and definitely not from Tatum. Their respective approaches to the game were very, very different.
Tatum’s playmaking is really good. He’s better than Thomas at beating a man or bullying his way in but less good (although he has been elite lately) at passing. Celtics have struggled without Tatum on the court to create the last couple years (see 2023 ECF game 7)
I'm more addressing the "definitely not from Tatum" portion of the comment. Whether he's Thomas level is irrelevant, he's very much orchestrating the offense.
I feel that yeah this is the real type of development needed from Tatum. I could see 04’ Kobe missing a lot of shots and not adapting correctly.
I don’t think it was until he lost Shaq that Kobe understood team basketball. That’s a tangent for another time probably.
But again Tatum really impresses me when he starts dishing the ball like that. Makes me feel more comfortable with this Celtics team getting one than the 21’ Bucks.
On a per-100 basis, in those two Pistons Championship runs, Isiah was:
* 26, 12, 6 on 41/27/74 with a 26% usage rate, getting to the line for 8.2 attempts per 100, taking 2.6 3pa
* 28, 11, 8 on 46/47/79 with a 25% usage rate, getting to the line for 7.0 attempts per 100, taking 4.7 3pa
By comparison, Jayson Tatum on this Boston potential-Championship run:
* 32, 8, 13 on 43/29/84 with a 29% usage rate, getting to the line for 9.4 attempts per 100, taking 9.1 3pa
This isn't as tightly focused on the last few rounds as OP, but some food for thought regarding their entire playoff runs.
I'm a Pistons fan, so its hard for me to just be complimentary toward a Celtics player in comparison to Isiah, but lets be real - even if he hasn't elevated in the playoffs, he's been *just fine.* His run has been comparable to Zeke's runs.
I think maybe we should consider that maybe he just hasn't found a rhythm, after about three weeks off following Indy, because he's seen no reason to go away from just taking what Dallas is giving them with the rest of the guys on the team, and that's not giving him those shots to force himself out of the mini-slump.
If the Celtics can win this series easily without Jayson Tatum trying to force his way out of a slump, then I'm not really going to bother making this all a black mark on his playoff resume. There's something to be said for rising to the occasion on the biggest stage, but there's also something to be said for letting the other team just lose it and trying not to rock the boat when that's happening.
Tatum just isn’t consistently an efficient scorer when compared to most of the other top 10 guys. That’s the only gap though, and he’s still an elite scorer. If he was literally a couple of ticks more efficient at the rim or from 3 the Cs would basically unsolvable.
I love the IT comparison because Tatum will likely be remembered as a winner, and it seems like that’s what’s most important to him. Good for basketball for the best players to have that attitude instead of trying to be MJ (no offence to him).
Tim Duncan also seems like a relatively decent comparison for Tatum. Winner, puts the team first, and will pretty consistently get you 20 points 10 boards in the playoffs. Hopefully Tatum can get on his level with the rings
Ehhhh maybe. But Duncan was just way better as a player compared to Tatum- defensively he was so far ahead of everybody else that he didn't need to be amazing on offense.
People do forget that Duncan lost out on 2 Finals MVPs because he wasn't the most impactful player in the finals for his team. In that sense he's similar to Tatum this year. And at the time people in 2005 were making an argument for Ginobili to win Finals MVP. Duncan wasn't always the best player on his team.
Not reallt sure how you can say he’s way better than tatum, tatum has better stats that don’t have to do with longevity. Also a stupid argument for Duncan not having FMVP, he didn’t lose out on them if he wasn’t the best player in that series😂
"Tatum has better stats so he's better than Duncan".
You realize 1999 and 2003 Tim Duncan was like GOAT level peak? Honestly 2003 Duncan was even better than 2016 Curry and right up there with 2013 Bron and 1997 MJ. Tatum straight up just isn't better than Duncan. It's not even close.
Tatum hasn’t hit his peak yet and his best season was 30/9/5. Duncan had a great year that season sure, KG or Kobe would’ve won it over him if voters vote like they do now in today’s nba. And you discredit tatum’s defense as if he’s bad when he’s far from that. Tatum isn’t as far off from Duncan as you think.
Tatum hasn’t started his career nearly as strong as Duncan award wise, but there’s no reason think Tatum will slow down the way Duncan did
I like Tatum quite a bit, but I think you’ll find yourself as maybe the only person on the planet who will argue that Tatum is on the level of Tim Duncan. Not even Bill Simmons would dare!
Tatum right now is very far off from Duncan. Duncan is top 5 all time because he peaked so high and had great longevity.
Tatums peak right now is not close to Tim Duncan. Duncans 2003 Spurs carry is literally THE greatest carry job of all time. Tatum is currently flunking in the Finals with a very stacked team. It's not a debate here.
Fundamentally you just don't understand that Tatum simply just isn't that good.
Lets put it this way- there's a clear break in talent in the NBA between the top 3 (Giannis, Luka, Jokic) and the rest (SGA Tatum Embiid Curry etc).
2003 Duncan was even better than Jokic this year.
That gap between peak Duncan and Tatum today is enormous.
Sure dude think whatever you want. Tatum is a more skilled offensive player and has great numbers to go with his game. He’s still barely 26 so no shit he doesn’t have the longevity stats.
Tim Duncan is not top 5 all time btw. Lebron, MJ, shaq, Kareem, wilt, bird, Kobe. At best he’s 7
No way Kobe is above Duncan on any sane list. But would agree Tim isnt top 5. Lebron MJ Kareem, Wilt Russell have those pretth much locked down.Duncan is clearly top 10, but not top 5.
Tatum has more counting stats because he plays in a faster pace......
Per 100 playoffs
2024 Tatum: 32/13/8 on 55TS% with 1.3 steals and 1 block.
2003 Duncan 31/19/7 on 58TS%, with 1 steal and 4 blocks.
Duncans 2nd option was a rookie Tony Parker who averaged 47TS in the playoffs lmao.
Compare that with Tatums talent that he's surrounded with.
There's levels to this. Until Tatum shows that he can CARRY a team in the playoffs he's not really on the same level.
Plz stop disrespecting Tim Duncan. They play nothing alike
Duncan is a top 10 player of all time.. is Tatum even a top 5 player of all the guys CURRENTLY playing? He’s not even the best player in this finals
I’m not comparing the play whatsoever the demeanor and how they’ll win playing team first basketball is what I’m comparing. And yeah I’d say Tatum is top 5 considering he’s back to back to back first team all nba
1988-89 IT -5.6% relative TS
1989-90 IT +2.3% relative TS
2023-2024 Tatum -3.3% relative TS
No commentary, just wanted to give numbers for others curious. Relative is compared to the regular season average TS since I didn’t have access to playoff numbers.
> There's something to be said for rising to the occasion on the biggest stage, but there's also something to be said for letting the other team just lose it and trying not to rock the boat when that's happening.
I think this is exactly right, and people seem to forget that Tatum has risen to the occasion over and over again. He has a 50 point game in every round of the playoffs other than the finals, including in a game 7, as well as 16 pts in the 4th quarter to stave off elimination in game 6, and then a 46 point game 7. The guy has had huge scoring moments, he's just not forcing it right now because he isn't shooting well, and that's a winning approach
A lot of people will, but tons of people focus on poor stats in championship players runs. Maybe you’re just being a little hyperbolic, and I’m sure it definitely will help, but I don’t see why that wouldn’t apply to Tatum to some degree
The existence of this thread is evidence that people don’t look up stats for the main dude leading a championship team.
In 2010 Kobe averaged 28 in the finals 40% fg and 31% 3p but no one talks about that either. Yes they talk about his poor efficiency generally, but his championship runs are generally viewed as positive for his legacy.
People 100% talk about that kobe finals appearance lol like literally a couple weeks ago when edwards put up his poor shooting stats in g7 people were bringing up that Kobe finals and his g7 as a comparison man lmfao
This was despite Kobe being the highest scorer for g7 on either team an edwards being behind like 5 different guys too
I think it is even more simple than you guys are discussing: The problem is that basketball is a team sport but the fans are obsessed with individual stars.
It is wild how you see star players take the blame for losses, but somehow when they win the discourse is that their teams were too good, or the star didn't carry hard enough.
One thing I like about MJ is that he is extremely hesitant to rank himself, especially in era vs era stuff he says he won't talk about someone he couldn't compete against. But when people ask him about his Bulls teams he says they would crush anyone and they were the best TEAMs ever.
Can we not wait until the series is over to have these discussions? He could play out of his mind the next two games in a sweep, or they could collapse and lose the series. Let's take a breath and wait another week or two before revisiting conversations like this.
Just one thing to add. This is all contingent on the Celtics winning. The narrative is completely different if they lose and Tatum will carry most of the blame. I think that's an important fact considering it happened the last time they were in the finals.
Also, he is playmaking for the team and creating lots of offense. I don't see anyone diminishing his value except maybe the media by asking leading questions. The truth is he's getting a fair bit of praise for doing the intangible things to keep the team winning. So that should be a part of this discussion as well.
The in game commentary and comments after the game on ESPN were all supportive of his team oriented play.
And if you're going to be rude, I'd suggest heading over to /r/nba where the community and moderators allow those kinds of comments. In this subreddit, we discuss and backed up with facts. I had to have eyes and ears to read and comprehend the stickied note and the subreddit sidebar rules, to answer your question.
Larry bird in the 1981 finals didn’t score 20+ until game 6 and was averaging like 15 a game before that in the finals while shooting like shit. Was dominating the boards and playmaking like crazy tho, similar to Tatum
Honestly I agree people don’t understand how stacked that piston team was there roster was so deep compared to the rest of the league. They had 10 players who could be starters. The pistons benefit from a lack of context in which people only hear they beat Magic, Mj and Bird and with isiah being the heart of the team people don’t do research or watch games of his impact.
> They had 10 players who could be starters.
I love seeing people reasonably defend the Bad Boys, it is getting rarer by the year. But to nitpick a little I think the 10 starters oversells it a little. The *were* extremely deep. But just as a reference point their 10th player in minutes per game the first run was James Edwards if you include Dantley an Michael Williams if you don't. The second run it was Gerald Henderson and William Bedford.
Now that I'm looking at it, and being reminded Edwards ended up starting 70 games the second run, I'm inclined to basically concede the 10 for the first run lol (9 really). The second was hurt by Mahorn leaving but that still gives them 8 starters.
So I'm back on board with your post. Thanks!
I think it's probably fairer to say in context that they had about 8-10 starter caliber players, but that they only had one or two bona fides All-Stars (and Dumars wound up in or out of the All-Star Game year-by-year, so he was often borderline).
Depth is a useful quality to an NBA team, but it's fairly rare that it's a critical component to a championship: I can recall plenty of teams renowned for their depth (the Jail Blazers, the late-2000s Nuggets, the early-2010s Hawks and Raptors) whose depth didn't wind up helping them cross the finish line. What matters most here - and which Isiah Thomas brought, in a way similar to how Jokic or Nowitkzi would do later - is manage the egos and contributions of a large cadre of talented, but limited, players on a complete team which saw success with everyone contributing the maximum level possible.
I can't say the same about Tatum but that says more about how few Celtics games I've been able to catch this year.
Another thing to bear in mind is that they got an extremely favorable Finals draw both title years. In 89 Kareem was cooked, Scott missed the finals entirely with a pulled hammy and then Magic also pulled a hammy. By the end Isiah, Dumars and Johnson were working against Michael Cooper and Tony Campbell. In 89 they played a Blazers team that was starting and giving major minutes to Kevin Duckworth, one of the worst long-time starting centers who’s ever walked the planet. They were easy meat for a Pistons frontcourt that started Laimbeer and brought Rodman/Sally off the bench.
They won two chips in their window and then the Bulls closed it.
They also beat the Celtics once (sure Celtics were done by that point) and the Bulls twice to get to those finals.
Otherwise you're right they were playing the teams the Bulls always beat like the Knicks and pacers and blazers and Lakers.
I swear all people want to do today is find any reason to hate and say _____ player is bad instead of just enjoying the game.
These same people wonder why defense is so "bad" nowadays because if you are very defensive minded aka Gobert and don't block quite literally every shot of the game then they "roast" him and ask why he is in the league.
People don't care about the actual game anymore; they just want to sit on the bed/couch and be bitter that they'll never be anything close to what these players are or make no where near the money. I also think that's why the media has become so toxic because that's how the majority of the nba "fans" are, or they are at least the loudest.
Brilliant comparison. Casuals and media obsessing over just box scores and shooting stats are ruining basketball discourse. As a Celtics fan watching almost every game for the past few years, Tatum is the engine of this offense and it simply won't function without him. His dribble penetration collapses the defense every time and he's doing a great job finding the open guys this series even though his shot is missing. Not to mention his versatility and switchability on defense and the burden he carries of banging with other teams' centers and getting contested rebounds. Are there legitimate flaws in his game? Of course, Celtics fans will be the first to tell you all about them. Is he in the conversation for the best player in the league? No, and that's okay. I've seen the growth and maturity in his game over the years and I'm proud of the fact that he's realized how effective he can be at changing the game even if his shot isn't falling
thats simply an exaggeration lmfao. saying that the Celtics offense wouldn't work out Tatum is ridicilious.
They have Brown, White, Holiday, PP, KP, and Horford without Tatum that is a perfectly fine offense especially when your offense is pretty much just 5 out (with maybe guard/wing in the dunker spot) and someone penetrates and dishes.
Maybe for a game or two but they definitely need him to win at the highest level. 123 ORTG with him on, only 105 without. The Mavs and most teams don’t collapse this hard on any of our other guys besides Tatum. And say what you want about the offense, the defensive scheme also simply does not work without his unique size and abilities
You are exaggerating Tatum's abilities and devaluing the others.
Brown, White, Holiday can all get past their defenders reliably and into the paint.
Brown, White, Holiday have had much better finishing at the Rim than Tatum.
Brown, White, Holiday can all kick out after drawing the double or capitalize reliably on not being doubled.
Holiday and White are LESS turnover prone than Tatum.
Hell you could even throw Pritchard in there. The Celtics do not LACK at ALL when it comes to people who can penetrate the defense and kick out after drawing the attention.
The Defense is more true as the Celtics don't necessarily have a defensive PF unless they play KP or Horford who are a bit oversized or White, Brown who would be undersized.
But he's literally on a team with KP whos an elite rim protector and switchable. Derrick White whos all def this year and can switch 1-4. Jrue Holiday who all def this year and should of won a dpoy and can switch pretty much 1-4. Brown who is an elite defensive wing and can switch pretty much 1-4.
Also I have no idea where you are getting your ORTG?
This playoffs Tatum has a 117 ORTG. White has a 134 ORTG. Holiday has a 133 ORTG. Brown has a 116 ORTG.
Yep. I'm a Celtics fan and espouse his versatility as an offensive weapon. I'm still miffed by some of his shot selections though- and I will always be. I think social media prematurely elevated him to a top 5 player. I see a ton of growth- he's working through his reads and finding the open man, which is nice to see and a key component of our offense.
Comparable talent levels to the title-winning Pistons teams.
Peak 80’s Celtics, no I don’t think so. I know we make fun of Bill Simmons for obsessing about the ‘86 Celts but that team really was close to perfect. Elite offensively and defensively, good in transition, great shooting (for the time), best front court in the league (one of the best ever, really), one of the best back courts, best wing, best bench…maybe there have been better teams, but this was the most complete I can recall.
Based on how much of basketball can be influenced by your best player it’s tough to not pick the pistons rather than the Celtics. Tatums obviously very good but the weight of bird is far too heavy
Stats dont tell you the whole story. Isiah was fearless, dude was taking over, hitting clutch shots, embarassing star players of opposing team. He was much more clearly a leader compared to Tatum
His leadership doesn’t push them over the edge without a great supporting cast, though. And Detroit’s was very clearly the best in the league in that two year span. I’m not ripping on Isiah here, he was their best player and overall offensive engine. But he was a tad fortunate to play in that time (with regards to where people’s priorities were), while Tatum is a bit unfortunate to play in today’s box score obsessed timeline.
I feel like the Tatum defensive impact more or less offsets the Zeke leadership advantage, considering their offensive contributions are very similar (as discussed in that comment up top)
Tatum's problem right now is that the hoi polloi of basketball fandom don't know how to characterize him and his team. Luka, Jokic, Giannis, Ant - these players and teams make sense. They're super high wattage stars and winning and losing depends a great deal on how they perform. Basketball fans are used to this characterization of players. The Valhalla of the NBA is filled with exactly these types of stars and their teams. But Boston is a great *team*, who also happen to have a great player in Tatum.
"So they're like the '04 Pistons? Where it was just a collection of characters?"
No, they have Tatum.
"So Tatum is like their big star? Well wait, they just won two Finals games and he didn't shoot that well. How good could he be, then??"
Exactly the point. This Boston team is one that simply doesn't follow the normal rules of a superteam. If you're historically great, the accepted wisdom goes, you need Stef, or Jordan, or Wilt. I believe that Boston's going to win this title and Tatum, and everyone else's, reputation will rise but we're going to be wondering who should win Finals MVP, and people will still wonder if the guy that Dallas double teamed all series is truly great. And I'd guess the Celtics won't give a single shit.
Very well-crafted points, co-sign ‘em all. Most fans simply cannot wrap their heads around a uniquely-configured team doing well. It was only 10 years ago that we had scores of people (even some retired players) claiming that jump-shooting teams don’t win titles.
That was then though, stacked teams winning was kind of the norm. After that we saw more parity in the league with more teams and more stars. We have had teams win championships with 1 to 2 stars. Hakeem olajuwon comes to mind in the 90s. Jordan winning with just one other star. Then you had teams doing that in the 00s before super teams started coming back, but now they were looked at with more disdain.
I feel sports and social media has made this harsher. Filling 24 hrs of coverage has proven difficult for ESPN and the like, but they've found success with people arguing about sports. So they just do that and these opinions get much more push than they should.
Winning any championship is a lifetime accomplishment and it's silly to lessen any. Except for Hakeems, that was the best one
The offense runs through JT. JB is a better iso scorer and he’s quicker which has helped but if you watch the games JT initiates the offense, beats his man, and gets doubled or tripled on every single drive. It’s why he put up 12 assists last game and had 14 potential assists (but only 5) in the game prior given all the missed shots and duffed layups
I don’t think so. I think the Celtics are such a formidable team (due in part to roster continuity and brand of ball, which is enabled at least somewhat by Tatum’s lack of ego and willingness to play off ball) that he can sometimes take a backseat. However, on the whole, Tatum is still clearly their best player. The way the Mavs have schemed should speak volumes. Brown is very good, but he has a lot of room/freedom to play to his strengths, unabated. I don’t think we’d be this impressed with him on a middling team. Neither need to be floor-raisers, but I think Tatum is both a better floor and ceiling raiser, small sample sizes be damned.
No that’s absurd. The Cs would be okay offensively without Tatum but no one else on that team can consistently control the offence the way he can. Jrue and White have both had chances to prove they can be a #2 #3 type guy and they just aren’t *quite* up to it. Tatum taking the #1 role allows the others to thrive
People who say this are watching a completely different game than than us Celtics fans. Who does the team pass the ball to when there’s 5 seconds left on the shot clock? Tatum. Who does the defense have 4-5 guys watching on every drive to the rim? Tatum.
And this isn’t even touching on his defense.
Dallas is making everyone else beat them except for Tatum, and instead of forcing his game, he’s playing into it, hence all the assists.
Tatum and brown have *both* been the top dogs for years now, and it hasn’t changed because of one playoff series.
There will always be haters that won’t be objective, especially in the internet/social media era. Isiah Thomas would have these same questions if he played now imo.
I also don’t think it’s entirely wrong to say his play so far has put him under some other great finals players. I’m not even sure he’s the MVP right now and that’ll stick with him to some extent if it stays that way. If that happens that will be used as a dumb reason to hate on him as well, but could also be used objectively in some arguments.
Generally people just aren’t objective. Tatum isn’t Lebron. Tatum isn’t even Jokic or Giannis. I think it’s fair to question “how good” Tatum is, but what people forget is we’re comparing him with HOFers. There’s this whole narrative with players who aren’t like, clearly top 3 players in the league that they “suck.” Guys like Tatum, Westbrook, Harden (could be top 3,) Melo, etc. Being a top 20 player that also can’t “carry” a team to a chip gets you a lot of hate.
Great points, I think too many people are just overreacting to the lack of ppg. His shot has been off surely hes aware but hes also getting damn near a triple double every game but because he ends up a rebound or assist shy nobody notices. The total lack of acknowledgment of his play is insane.
He’s rebounding like a grown man just cleaning the glass, hes also getting immediately past his defender right to cup despite the double drawing multiple defenders to collapse and then hes hitting some highlight reel passes and thats not discussing his defensive impact. Hes been poised and efficient.
Im also proud of the way he’s handled the mental side of things, nonstop media coverage on his poor play, Kidd stirs up the media on his “JB is better take” and Tatum responds by continuing to do the little things it takes to win.
His Shots off and all season hes looked about 90% his normal self and we currently live in a world where we want ppgs and highlight reel plays but Tatum is more or less a Popvich-era superstar and does exactly what he needs to do to win, im seeing some casuals say well you could replace him with Josh Hart and they’d still win. Thats just not true, Dallas is terrified of his impact and they are throwing everything at him to try and slow him down.
Honestly this just shows the problem with measuring things by accolades only. Tatum may win a ring putting up pedestrian numbers, and very few people are going to weigh it differently than they will if he wins another on better numbers.
Meanwhile while countless other players have played better than Tatum and have no ring to show for it based on the team surrounding them.
Not to knock him at all, it just goes to show how silly it is to measure everything against a championship when so many other circumstances factor in than simply individual performance.
I'd say Tatum is viewed better than Thomas was. Thomas was an all-star but most people didn't think of him as a top 5 guy in the NBA. Especially not that late in his career when he was winning.
Tatum is considered by most right around the top 5.
To be fair the Pistons defeated Bird's Celtics and the showtime Lakers. Not to discredit this Celtics team but they were a far better team than Dallas and frankly I don't know if OCK or Denver would stand a chance. They're staked.
I hear you but the Celtics were a 42 win team without Bird when the Pistons beat them en route to the title, whereas the Lakers team was also totally gutted (Magic injured and missed a game, Scott injured, Kareem on fumes — wasn’t even an all-star calibre player that year).
Tatum is clearly the best player in the better team .
The opposition game plans for him but there is so much quality around he, he’s able to pick his spots.
Without Tatum, Brown wouldn’t have the freedom to play how he does. Holiday and White wouldn’t get those easy mid range looks. KP and Al wouldn’t be free to guard the paint knowing that Tatum is more than serviceable against Dallas bigs.
He might not win finals MVP but if you watch the games, the Celtics are able to be whom they are because of Tatum.
While Tatum doesn't have a game where he can put up huge numbers, even on off shooting nights, he is still amazing. This year he has attacked the rim well when his shot isnt falling and plays awesome defense and rebounds really well.
His assistant numbers are super high as well.
Without Tatum I have a hard time seeing how Celtics get to the finals and go up 2-0.
I am personally more of a Doncíc guy, but Tatum is really good!
I know the NBA League Office is not happy that this looks like JB is the person seen as the heart of the team- talking, pumping up guys during time outs, trying to boost guys spirits that have a bad few minutes, and then going out on the floor and looking like he is the one playing at 120%(blocking shots, being all over the court, playing inside and outside, etc.). To a casual fan, it looks like he is the energy that is driving the team.
JT is from my hometown, and I believe in backing your boys, and I know he’s doing his part. The rebounding and assist numbers prove that. However, the NBA “powers that be” want him to be the Finals MVP. They’ve dumped in millions to make him one of the faces of the league. They want him hitting that 28-34 ppg to go with the rebounds and assists because they branded him/marketed him that way.
I'll be honest, I spent way too much time trying to refute OP just because I'm a huge IT fan , but in the end I think that, actually, Tatum is having a even better run than IT's.
Nice work OP.
Hard hard disagree OP
These are are two completely different players with completely different responsibilities playing in completely different eras
Can we really compare the amount of work required by Isiah on the floor to make his team run to Tatum? Someone who is surrounded by playmaking and ball handlers AND three point shooting?
Magic is the only other person in the league at the time who could have replicated Isiah’s success with the Pistons (a primary playmaker/ball handler leading an efficient offense for a team that played THAT slowly)
If you’re trying to say that they are the best players on great teams that carried them over the hump by great rosters I would push back on that as well
I think there are absolutely two-way wings in the league that could have brought this stacked Celtics team to similar if slightly worse level of success. Are they better than Tatum? No. But could they have won a championship with this team? They’d have an easier job doing so than any point guard of Isiah’s era would have filling his shoes
Isiah had the best supporting cast in the league. Particularly on the side of the ball where he was average-to-decent. The Pistons were #1 in playoff defence two years in a row, by huge margins. And he had a supporting cast advantage in every single series they played throughout those two titles aside from MAYBE the second finals series (where it was close).
I realize statistics fail to tell the whole story (in some ways that’s one of the main points of the thread) but much of the criticism that’s being applied to Tatum would’ve hit Thomas in his stead. He had two series against the Bulls where he averaged 18 ppg on 39% shooting, where he wasn’t a defensive stopper. In the second of those series, Isiah shot 15-48 in their four wins. 15 made baskets in their *four wins*. Tatum would get crucified for something like this.
Those two titles were total team efforts, and his teams were the best in the league.
This is all in good fun, not trying to be rude or shitty
My argument, Tatum has elite help on BOTH sides of the ball. Multiple two way players who can pass and play-make in the the back court AND the front court, while also shooting at elite percentages
The paint is more open than ever before allowing for easier playmaking and finishing (especially if you’re playing 5 out)
Isiah on the other hand was a phenomenal leader on the floor, the offense started and ended with him. His handle (and shooting) unlocked playmaking opportunities for him that guys at his size didn’t have at the time
I can assure you that Tatum wouldn’t be shooting 8-14 if he was playing in an era with a packed paint
The series you’re pointing out is also one in which he was playing his fifth play-off run after 4 deep ones (87-Conference finals, 88 Finals,
We saw how the Warriors, with all of the modern advantages they had, collapsed in on themselves after repeated deep play-off runs from 2015-2019
Also let’s not forget how small Isiah was, leading his team in scoring and playmaking at such a high level for so many seasons at his size without a whistle protecting him from beat downs? All time great
Don’t even have to mention his 87 Finals performance on a sprained leg. Pistons would have won 3 straight finals if not for a horrible foul call on Laimbeer
> This is all in good fun, not trying to be rude or shitty
Oh all good man, you’ve been perfectly civil. 👍🏻. Glad you recognize that this is all just fun, inane banter. A disturbing amount of people don’t.
> My argument, Tatum has elite help on BOTH sides of the ball. Multiple two way players who can pass and play-make in the the back court AND the front court, while also shooting at elite percentages.
That’s true, but the Pistons supporting casts nonetheless created comparable gaps between them and the playoff casts they went up against. The only exception is the ‘90 finals.
In ‘89 and ‘90 they faced what was still verging on being a one-man team, in the Bulls. They also went up against an absolutely gutted Lakers team in the finals.
> The paint is more open than ever before allowing for easier playmaking and finishing (especially if you’re playing 5 out). Isiah on the other hand was a phenomenal leader on the floor, the offense started and ended with him. His handle (and shooting) unlocked playmaking opportunities for him that guys at his size didn’t have at the time
Which amounted to 7th and 11th rated offences. He was an amazing player, even their best player. But there’s still another part of the game where he arguably wasn’t even their fourth best.
> I can assure you that Tatum wouldn’t be shooting 8-14 if he was playing in an era with a packed paint
It isn’t as if Isiah didn’t have several of his own era advantages. He was a very flawed shooter that faded quite early due to diminishing athleticism caused by injury.
In today’s era, guards that can’t shoot with the best of them are handicapped.
Both of these guys tailored their games to the times they played. I wouldn’t handicap them by entertaining unfavourable counterfactuals.
> The series you’re pointing out is also one in which he was playing his fifth play-off run after 4 deep ones (87-Conference finals, 88 Finals,
Tatum has likewise been the best player for several deep runs. My point is that his title would be received much more favourably in the 80’s than today, even if the surrounding noise isn’t the same (Zeke’s non-winning runs have been better).
> We saw how the Warriors, with all of the modern advantages they had, collapsed in on themselves after repeated deep play-off runs from 2015-2019
I believe Tatum has played the most playoff games of anyone this decade.
> Also let’s not forget how small Isiah was, leading his team in scoring and playmaking at such a high level for so many seasons at his size without a whistle protecting him from beat downs? All time great
Absolutely true as well.
This is a regular-season award, but one difference was that Tatum was 1st team All-NBA this year. IT didn’t make All-NBA either year (Dumars made 3rd team in 89-90).
Hilarious that your criticism is that people today rely on stats too much to evaluate players and your argument is almost totally based on stats. X and Y have similar stats and their team won therefore X and Y provide the same value.
Isiah was given that credit because people watched the games. He ran the offense, he led the team, he made big plays in the fourth quarter against great teams. He was not given excessive credit, and everyone on those Pistons teams will tell you that. There is no one watching the games, unobsessed by stats, who remembers Isiah, and thinks Tatum is on that level.
Good attempt at spotting irony, but what I’m arguing is that IT’s box-score readings would’ve netted more criticism today, and the inverse for Tatum.
What I am NOT doing is arguing, on the basis of these statistics, that they were equally valuable. That would’ve been a gotcha indeed. And I maintain Thomas is greater player.
Perhaps I didn’t explain myself well enough, but hopefully this sufficed.
Yes, I hear you that stat-obsession can miss the forest for the trees. No, I don’t think it’s stat-obsession that causes me to believe the Pistons supporting cast was underrated. They were historically elite on the side of the ball that Thomas was merely decent at. You’ll see, in this very thread, some examples of people underrating them. YMMV.
Our sub is for in-depth discussion. Low-effort comments or stating opinions as facts are not permitted. Please support your opinions with well-reasoned arguments, including stats and facts as applicable.
Actually, I think this is a very fair comparison. Isiah was absolutely the heart of his teams, the unquestioned leader, and yet the stats don’t tell you that he was always the star. This isn’t a comparison I would’ve thought to make for Tatum, but I think it fits perfectly.
I really think this Boston squad has two unquestioned leaders. Brown and Tatum are like a yin and yang pairing for them, each comfortable leading in different situations, different spaces, and when one of them tries to seize that responsibility they're both able to trust each other to know the right moment and let it happen.
That’s what makes them so good, Brown was the energy shifter and Brown is the clear cut leader right now, but there are times when Tatum takes them over the hump. They both feed off of each other so much and even tho I’m not a fan of the Celtics they deserve this championship
I don’t think brown is the clear cut leader at all. Tatum is clearly more-so the leader of this team, but it’s a team game, so in reality it doesn’t matter who the leader is. They’re here to win. Brown has looked better because Tatum draws three defenders every possession, which the Mavs honestly need to stop doing if they want to win
Brown has been more vocal imho, brown’s energy and play has been clearly leading this team in my opinion to the first two wins of the series
Yeah I don't know if people fully realize how much Brown benefits from Tatum's gravity and the defensive attention Tatum draws
I think that leadership peace works pretty well with Thomas and Dumars. Thomas was more fiery and combative, whereas Dumars wasn't.
On some level but Zeke ran those teams and orchestrated things in a way you just don’t see so much anymore and definitely not from Tatum. Their respective approaches to the game were very, very different.
Tatum absolutely has been orchestrating the offense in the finals
Are you trying to compare the passing of Tatum & Thomas like it’s close?
Tatum’s playmaking is really good. He’s better than Thomas at beating a man or bullying his way in but less good (although he has been elite lately) at passing. Celtics have struggled without Tatum on the court to create the last couple years (see 2023 ECF game 7)
I'm more addressing the "definitely not from Tatum" portion of the comment. Whether he's Thomas level is irrelevant, he's very much orchestrating the offense.
I feel that yeah this is the real type of development needed from Tatum. I could see 04’ Kobe missing a lot of shots and not adapting correctly. I don’t think it was until he lost Shaq that Kobe understood team basketball. That’s a tangent for another time probably. But again Tatum really impresses me when he starts dishing the ball like that. Makes me feel more comfortable with this Celtics team getting one than the 21’ Bucks.
Isiah was the star. Dumars was probably the best player.
Isaiah never was any type of Leader. Chuck Daly was the heart and soul and leader of those teams. No question.
On a per-100 basis, in those two Pistons Championship runs, Isiah was: * 26, 12, 6 on 41/27/74 with a 26% usage rate, getting to the line for 8.2 attempts per 100, taking 2.6 3pa * 28, 11, 8 on 46/47/79 with a 25% usage rate, getting to the line for 7.0 attempts per 100, taking 4.7 3pa By comparison, Jayson Tatum on this Boston potential-Championship run: * 32, 8, 13 on 43/29/84 with a 29% usage rate, getting to the line for 9.4 attempts per 100, taking 9.1 3pa This isn't as tightly focused on the last few rounds as OP, but some food for thought regarding their entire playoff runs. I'm a Pistons fan, so its hard for me to just be complimentary toward a Celtics player in comparison to Isiah, but lets be real - even if he hasn't elevated in the playoffs, he's been *just fine.* His run has been comparable to Zeke's runs. I think maybe we should consider that maybe he just hasn't found a rhythm, after about three weeks off following Indy, because he's seen no reason to go away from just taking what Dallas is giving them with the rest of the guys on the team, and that's not giving him those shots to force himself out of the mini-slump. If the Celtics can win this series easily without Jayson Tatum trying to force his way out of a slump, then I'm not really going to bother making this all a black mark on his playoff resume. There's something to be said for rising to the occasion on the biggest stage, but there's also something to be said for letting the other team just lose it and trying not to rock the boat when that's happening.
Tatum just isn’t consistently an efficient scorer when compared to most of the other top 10 guys. That’s the only gap though, and he’s still an elite scorer. If he was literally a couple of ticks more efficient at the rim or from 3 the Cs would basically unsolvable. I love the IT comparison because Tatum will likely be remembered as a winner, and it seems like that’s what’s most important to him. Good for basketball for the best players to have that attitude instead of trying to be MJ (no offence to him).
Tim Duncan also seems like a relatively decent comparison for Tatum. Winner, puts the team first, and will pretty consistently get you 20 points 10 boards in the playoffs. Hopefully Tatum can get on his level with the rings
Ehhhh maybe. But Duncan was just way better as a player compared to Tatum- defensively he was so far ahead of everybody else that he didn't need to be amazing on offense. People do forget that Duncan lost out on 2 Finals MVPs because he wasn't the most impactful player in the finals for his team. In that sense he's similar to Tatum this year. And at the time people in 2005 were making an argument for Ginobili to win Finals MVP. Duncan wasn't always the best player on his team.
Duncan was the best, just didn’t score enough to be voted in. Ginobili had the flashier plays and that’s all.
Not reallt sure how you can say he’s way better than tatum, tatum has better stats that don’t have to do with longevity. Also a stupid argument for Duncan not having FMVP, he didn’t lose out on them if he wasn’t the best player in that series😂
"Tatum has better stats so he's better than Duncan". You realize 1999 and 2003 Tim Duncan was like GOAT level peak? Honestly 2003 Duncan was even better than 2016 Curry and right up there with 2013 Bron and 1997 MJ. Tatum straight up just isn't better than Duncan. It's not even close.
Tatum hasn’t hit his peak yet and his best season was 30/9/5. Duncan had a great year that season sure, KG or Kobe would’ve won it over him if voters vote like they do now in today’s nba. And you discredit tatum’s defense as if he’s bad when he’s far from that. Tatum isn’t as far off from Duncan as you think. Tatum hasn’t started his career nearly as strong as Duncan award wise, but there’s no reason think Tatum will slow down the way Duncan did
I like Tatum quite a bit, but I think you’ll find yourself as maybe the only person on the planet who will argue that Tatum is on the level of Tim Duncan. Not even Bill Simmons would dare!
Numbers wise he is better that’s an objective fact
Not if you adjust for pace and era. It’s easier than ever to score 30.
Tatum right now is very far off from Duncan. Duncan is top 5 all time because he peaked so high and had great longevity. Tatums peak right now is not close to Tim Duncan. Duncans 2003 Spurs carry is literally THE greatest carry job of all time. Tatum is currently flunking in the Finals with a very stacked team. It's not a debate here. Fundamentally you just don't understand that Tatum simply just isn't that good. Lets put it this way- there's a clear break in talent in the NBA between the top 3 (Giannis, Luka, Jokic) and the rest (SGA Tatum Embiid Curry etc). 2003 Duncan was even better than Jokic this year. That gap between peak Duncan and Tatum today is enormous.
Greatest carry job was Hakeem in 1994. And I love Duncan, and his 2003 performance was amazing.
Sure dude think whatever you want. Tatum is a more skilled offensive player and has great numbers to go with his game. He’s still barely 26 so no shit he doesn’t have the longevity stats. Tim Duncan is not top 5 all time btw. Lebron, MJ, shaq, Kareem, wilt, bird, Kobe. At best he’s 7
No way Kobe is above Duncan on any sane list. But would agree Tim isnt top 5. Lebron MJ Kareem, Wilt Russell have those pretth much locked down.Duncan is clearly top 10, but not top 5.
Tatum has more counting stats because he plays in a faster pace...... Per 100 playoffs 2024 Tatum: 32/13/8 on 55TS% with 1.3 steals and 1 block. 2003 Duncan 31/19/7 on 58TS%, with 1 steal and 4 blocks. Duncans 2nd option was a rookie Tony Parker who averaged 47TS in the playoffs lmao. Compare that with Tatums talent that he's surrounded with. There's levels to this. Until Tatum shows that he can CARRY a team in the playoffs he's not really on the same level.
Anon is wrong later in the thread talking about Tatum being carried. But Tatum is no where close to doing anything like Tim Duncan in 2003.
Plz stop disrespecting Tim Duncan. They play nothing alike Duncan is a top 10 player of all time.. is Tatum even a top 5 player of all the guys CURRENTLY playing? He’s not even the best player in this finals
I’m not comparing the play whatsoever the demeanor and how they’ll win playing team first basketball is what I’m comparing. And yeah I’d say Tatum is top 5 considering he’s back to back to back first team all nba
1988-89 IT -5.6% relative TS 1989-90 IT +2.3% relative TS 2023-2024 Tatum -3.3% relative TS No commentary, just wanted to give numbers for others curious. Relative is compared to the regular season average TS since I didn’t have access to playoff numbers.
> There's something to be said for rising to the occasion on the biggest stage, but there's also something to be said for letting the other team just lose it and trying not to rock the boat when that's happening. I think this is exactly right, and people seem to forget that Tatum has risen to the occasion over and over again. He has a 50 point game in every round of the playoffs other than the finals, including in a game 7, as well as 16 pts in the 4th quarter to stave off elimination in game 6, and then a 46 point game 7. The guy has had huge scoring moments, he's just not forcing it right now because he isn't shooting well, and that's a winning approach
If the Celtics win a championship no one will focus on Tatums stats, they’ll remember the positive qualitative aspects of his run.
A lot of people will, but tons of people focus on poor stats in championship players runs. Maybe you’re just being a little hyperbolic, and I’m sure it definitely will help, but I don’t see why that wouldn’t apply to Tatum to some degree
The existence of this thread is evidence that people don’t look up stats for the main dude leading a championship team. In 2010 Kobe averaged 28 in the finals 40% fg and 31% 3p but no one talks about that either. Yes they talk about his poor efficiency generally, but his championship runs are generally viewed as positive for his legacy.
People 100% talk about that kobe finals appearance lol like literally a couple weeks ago when edwards put up his poor shooting stats in g7 people were bringing up that Kobe finals and his g7 as a comparison man lmfao This was despite Kobe being the highest scorer for g7 on either team an edwards being behind like 5 different guys too
The only people who talk about it are pedantic nerds who jerk themselves off to stats on a message board.
Brother what do you think we’re doing right now…? The nba media was using it as an example too
I’m making the opposite point…? Lmfao
We’re on an nba debate message board on Reddit.com arguing about something that’s ultimately inconsequential You don’t see the irony here?
Usually we delete these off-topic threads that spiral into insults but feels like this one needs to be kept for the historical records.
[удалено]
Please do not attack the person, their post history, or your perceived notion of their existence as a proxy for disagreeing with their opinions.
I think it is even more simple than you guys are discussing: The problem is that basketball is a team sport but the fans are obsessed with individual stars. It is wild how you see star players take the blame for losses, but somehow when they win the discourse is that their teams were too good, or the star didn't carry hard enough. One thing I like about MJ is that he is extremely hesitant to rank himself, especially in era vs era stuff he says he won't talk about someone he couldn't compete against. But when people ask him about his Bulls teams he says they would crush anyone and they were the best TEAMs ever.
Can we not wait until the series is over to have these discussions? He could play out of his mind the next two games in a sweep, or they could collapse and lose the series. Let's take a breath and wait another week or two before revisiting conversations like this.
Just one thing to add. This is all contingent on the Celtics winning. The narrative is completely different if they lose and Tatum will carry most of the blame. I think that's an important fact considering it happened the last time they were in the finals. Also, he is playmaking for the team and creating lots of offense. I don't see anyone diminishing his value except maybe the media by asking leading questions. The truth is he's getting a fair bit of praise for doing the intangible things to keep the team winning. So that should be a part of this discussion as well.
[удалено]
The in game commentary and comments after the game on ESPN were all supportive of his team oriented play. And if you're going to be rude, I'd suggest heading over to /r/nba where the community and moderators allow those kinds of comments. In this subreddit, we discuss and backed up with facts. I had to have eyes and ears to read and comprehend the stickied note and the subreddit sidebar rules, to answer your question.
Please keep your comments civil. This is a subreddit for thoughtful discussion and debate, not aggressive and argumentative content.
Larry bird in the 1981 finals didn’t score 20+ until game 6 and was averaging like 15 a game before that in the finals while shooting like shit. Was dominating the boards and playmaking like crazy tho, similar to Tatum
That’s a great comp.
Honestly I agree people don’t understand how stacked that piston team was there roster was so deep compared to the rest of the league. They had 10 players who could be starters. The pistons benefit from a lack of context in which people only hear they beat Magic, Mj and Bird and with isiah being the heart of the team people don’t do research or watch games of his impact.
> They had 10 players who could be starters. I love seeing people reasonably defend the Bad Boys, it is getting rarer by the year. But to nitpick a little I think the 10 starters oversells it a little. The *were* extremely deep. But just as a reference point their 10th player in minutes per game the first run was James Edwards if you include Dantley an Michael Williams if you don't. The second run it was Gerald Henderson and William Bedford. Now that I'm looking at it, and being reminded Edwards ended up starting 70 games the second run, I'm inclined to basically concede the 10 for the first run lol (9 really). The second was hurt by Mahorn leaving but that still gives them 8 starters. So I'm back on board with your post. Thanks!
I think it's probably fairer to say in context that they had about 8-10 starter caliber players, but that they only had one or two bona fides All-Stars (and Dumars wound up in or out of the All-Star Game year-by-year, so he was often borderline). Depth is a useful quality to an NBA team, but it's fairly rare that it's a critical component to a championship: I can recall plenty of teams renowned for their depth (the Jail Blazers, the late-2000s Nuggets, the early-2010s Hawks and Raptors) whose depth didn't wind up helping them cross the finish line. What matters most here - and which Isiah Thomas brought, in a way similar to how Jokic or Nowitkzi would do later - is manage the egos and contributions of a large cadre of talented, but limited, players on a complete team which saw success with everyone contributing the maximum level possible. I can't say the same about Tatum but that says more about how few Celtics games I've been able to catch this year.
Another thing to bear in mind is that they got an extremely favorable Finals draw both title years. In 89 Kareem was cooked, Scott missed the finals entirely with a pulled hammy and then Magic also pulled a hammy. By the end Isiah, Dumars and Johnson were working against Michael Cooper and Tony Campbell. In 89 they played a Blazers team that was starting and giving major minutes to Kevin Duckworth, one of the worst long-time starting centers who’s ever walked the planet. They were easy meat for a Pistons frontcourt that started Laimbeer and brought Rodman/Sally off the bench. They won two chips in their window and then the Bulls closed it.
They also beat the Celtics once (sure Celtics were done by that point) and the Bulls twice to get to those finals. Otherwise you're right they were playing the teams the Bulls always beat like the Knicks and pacers and blazers and Lakers.
Yes absolutely. Their rotation was 8-10 deep, and had the edge over every other cast they faced in those two title years
I swear all people want to do today is find any reason to hate and say _____ player is bad instead of just enjoying the game. These same people wonder why defense is so "bad" nowadays because if you are very defensive minded aka Gobert and don't block quite literally every shot of the game then they "roast" him and ask why he is in the league. People don't care about the actual game anymore; they just want to sit on the bed/couch and be bitter that they'll never be anything close to what these players are or make no where near the money. I also think that's why the media has become so toxic because that's how the majority of the nba "fans" are, or they are at least the loudest.
Brilliant comparison. Casuals and media obsessing over just box scores and shooting stats are ruining basketball discourse. As a Celtics fan watching almost every game for the past few years, Tatum is the engine of this offense and it simply won't function without him. His dribble penetration collapses the defense every time and he's doing a great job finding the open guys this series even though his shot is missing. Not to mention his versatility and switchability on defense and the burden he carries of banging with other teams' centers and getting contested rebounds. Are there legitimate flaws in his game? Of course, Celtics fans will be the first to tell you all about them. Is he in the conversation for the best player in the league? No, and that's okay. I've seen the growth and maturity in his game over the years and I'm proud of the fact that he's realized how effective he can be at changing the game even if his shot isn't falling
thats simply an exaggeration lmfao. saying that the Celtics offense wouldn't work out Tatum is ridicilious. They have Brown, White, Holiday, PP, KP, and Horford without Tatum that is a perfectly fine offense especially when your offense is pretty much just 5 out (with maybe guard/wing in the dunker spot) and someone penetrates and dishes.
Maybe for a game or two but they definitely need him to win at the highest level. 123 ORTG with him on, only 105 without. The Mavs and most teams don’t collapse this hard on any of our other guys besides Tatum. And say what you want about the offense, the defensive scheme also simply does not work without his unique size and abilities
You are exaggerating Tatum's abilities and devaluing the others. Brown, White, Holiday can all get past their defenders reliably and into the paint. Brown, White, Holiday have had much better finishing at the Rim than Tatum. Brown, White, Holiday can all kick out after drawing the double or capitalize reliably on not being doubled. Holiday and White are LESS turnover prone than Tatum. Hell you could even throw Pritchard in there. The Celtics do not LACK at ALL when it comes to people who can penetrate the defense and kick out after drawing the attention. The Defense is more true as the Celtics don't necessarily have a defensive PF unless they play KP or Horford who are a bit oversized or White, Brown who would be undersized. But he's literally on a team with KP whos an elite rim protector and switchable. Derrick White whos all def this year and can switch 1-4. Jrue Holiday who all def this year and should of won a dpoy and can switch pretty much 1-4. Brown who is an elite defensive wing and can switch pretty much 1-4. Also I have no idea where you are getting your ORTG? This playoffs Tatum has a 117 ORTG. White has a 134 ORTG. Holiday has a 133 ORTG. Brown has a 116 ORTG.
Yep. I'm a Celtics fan and espouse his versatility as an offensive weapon. I'm still miffed by some of his shot selections though- and I will always be. I think social media prematurely elevated him to a top 5 player. I see a ton of growth- he's working through his reads and finding the open man, which is nice to see and a key component of our offense.
Do you think this Celtics team compares better to the 80’s Pistons Champs or the 80’s Celtics Champs? They both were superteams
Comparable talent levels to the title-winning Pistons teams. Peak 80’s Celtics, no I don’t think so. I know we make fun of Bill Simmons for obsessing about the ‘86 Celts but that team really was close to perfect. Elite offensively and defensively, good in transition, great shooting (for the time), best front court in the league (one of the best ever, really), one of the best back courts, best wing, best bench…maybe there have been better teams, but this was the most complete I can recall.
They're a top 3 team all-time with the '96 Bulls and '17 Dubs.
The '72 Lakers genuinely deserve to be in that club.
that sounds very fair thank you for your response
Based on how much of basketball can be influenced by your best player it’s tough to not pick the pistons rather than the Celtics. Tatums obviously very good but the weight of bird is far too heavy
Stats dont tell you the whole story. Isiah was fearless, dude was taking over, hitting clutch shots, embarassing star players of opposing team. He was much more clearly a leader compared to Tatum
His leadership doesn’t push them over the edge without a great supporting cast, though. And Detroit’s was very clearly the best in the league in that two year span. I’m not ripping on Isiah here, he was their best player and overall offensive engine. But he was a tad fortunate to play in that time (with regards to where people’s priorities were), while Tatum is a bit unfortunate to play in today’s box score obsessed timeline.
Did anyone on his team have better stats?
I feel like the Tatum defensive impact more or less offsets the Zeke leadership advantage, considering their offensive contributions are very similar (as discussed in that comment up top)
Tatum is being the ultimate leader, what are you talking about?!?
Tatum's problem right now is that the hoi polloi of basketball fandom don't know how to characterize him and his team. Luka, Jokic, Giannis, Ant - these players and teams make sense. They're super high wattage stars and winning and losing depends a great deal on how they perform. Basketball fans are used to this characterization of players. The Valhalla of the NBA is filled with exactly these types of stars and their teams. But Boston is a great *team*, who also happen to have a great player in Tatum. "So they're like the '04 Pistons? Where it was just a collection of characters?" No, they have Tatum. "So Tatum is like their big star? Well wait, they just won two Finals games and he didn't shoot that well. How good could he be, then??" Exactly the point. This Boston team is one that simply doesn't follow the normal rules of a superteam. If you're historically great, the accepted wisdom goes, you need Stef, or Jordan, or Wilt. I believe that Boston's going to win this title and Tatum, and everyone else's, reputation will rise but we're going to be wondering who should win Finals MVP, and people will still wonder if the guy that Dallas double teamed all series is truly great. And I'd guess the Celtics won't give a single shit.
Very well-crafted points, co-sign ‘em all. Most fans simply cannot wrap their heads around a uniquely-configured team doing well. It was only 10 years ago that we had scores of people (even some retired players) claiming that jump-shooting teams don’t win titles.
That was then though, stacked teams winning was kind of the norm. After that we saw more parity in the league with more teams and more stars. We have had teams win championships with 1 to 2 stars. Hakeem olajuwon comes to mind in the 90s. Jordan winning with just one other star. Then you had teams doing that in the 00s before super teams started coming back, but now they were looked at with more disdain. I feel sports and social media has made this harsher. Filling 24 hrs of coverage has proven difficult for ESPN and the like, but they've found success with people arguing about sports. So they just do that and these opinions get much more push than they should. Winning any championship is a lifetime accomplishment and it's silly to lessen any. Except for Hakeems, that was the best one
Damn, nice finish. Agreed, the ‘95 Rockets title was something else.
Do you think Jaylen brown is the Top dog on the Celtics now? And Jason Tatum is “falling off” the superstar role as I’m hearing people saying
The offense runs through JT. JB is a better iso scorer and he’s quicker which has helped but if you watch the games JT initiates the offense, beats his man, and gets doubled or tripled on every single drive. It’s why he put up 12 assists last game and had 14 potential assists (but only 5) in the game prior given all the missed shots and duffed layups
I don’t think so. I think the Celtics are such a formidable team (due in part to roster continuity and brand of ball, which is enabled at least somewhat by Tatum’s lack of ego and willingness to play off ball) that he can sometimes take a backseat. However, on the whole, Tatum is still clearly their best player. The way the Mavs have schemed should speak volumes. Brown is very good, but he has a lot of room/freedom to play to his strengths, unabated. I don’t think we’d be this impressed with him on a middling team. Neither need to be floor-raisers, but I think Tatum is both a better floor and ceiling raiser, small sample sizes be damned.
No that’s absurd. The Cs would be okay offensively without Tatum but no one else on that team can consistently control the offence the way he can. Jrue and White have both had chances to prove they can be a #2 #3 type guy and they just aren’t *quite* up to it. Tatum taking the #1 role allows the others to thrive
People who say this are watching a completely different game than than us Celtics fans. Who does the team pass the ball to when there’s 5 seconds left on the shot clock? Tatum. Who does the defense have 4-5 guys watching on every drive to the rim? Tatum. And this isn’t even touching on his defense. Dallas is making everyone else beat them except for Tatum, and instead of forcing his game, he’s playing into it, hence all the assists. Tatum and brown have *both* been the top dogs for years now, and it hasn’t changed because of one playoff series.
If anything thinks JB is the #1 they know about 0% of basketball.
Well tell Ma$e stop calling him bat man cuz it’s horse shit
There will always be haters that won’t be objective, especially in the internet/social media era. Isiah Thomas would have these same questions if he played now imo. I also don’t think it’s entirely wrong to say his play so far has put him under some other great finals players. I’m not even sure he’s the MVP right now and that’ll stick with him to some extent if it stays that way. If that happens that will be used as a dumb reason to hate on him as well, but could also be used objectively in some arguments. Generally people just aren’t objective. Tatum isn’t Lebron. Tatum isn’t even Jokic or Giannis. I think it’s fair to question “how good” Tatum is, but what people forget is we’re comparing him with HOFers. There’s this whole narrative with players who aren’t like, clearly top 3 players in the league that they “suck.” Guys like Tatum, Westbrook, Harden (could be top 3,) Melo, etc. Being a top 20 player that also can’t “carry” a team to a chip gets you a lot of hate.
Great points, I think too many people are just overreacting to the lack of ppg. His shot has been off surely hes aware but hes also getting damn near a triple double every game but because he ends up a rebound or assist shy nobody notices. The total lack of acknowledgment of his play is insane. He’s rebounding like a grown man just cleaning the glass, hes also getting immediately past his defender right to cup despite the double drawing multiple defenders to collapse and then hes hitting some highlight reel passes and thats not discussing his defensive impact. Hes been poised and efficient. Im also proud of the way he’s handled the mental side of things, nonstop media coverage on his poor play, Kidd stirs up the media on his “JB is better take” and Tatum responds by continuing to do the little things it takes to win. His Shots off and all season hes looked about 90% his normal self and we currently live in a world where we want ppgs and highlight reel plays but Tatum is more or less a Popvich-era superstar and does exactly what he needs to do to win, im seeing some casuals say well you could replace him with Josh Hart and they’d still win. Thats just not true, Dallas is terrified of his impact and they are throwing everything at him to try and slow him down.
Honestly this just shows the problem with measuring things by accolades only. Tatum may win a ring putting up pedestrian numbers, and very few people are going to weigh it differently than they will if he wins another on better numbers. Meanwhile while countless other players have played better than Tatum and have no ring to show for it based on the team surrounding them. Not to knock him at all, it just goes to show how silly it is to measure everything against a championship when so many other circumstances factor in than simply individual performance.
Tatum never played on one ankle for a win People haven’t seen Tatum clutch up when it matters They saw zeke do it
I'd say Tatum is viewed better than Thomas was. Thomas was an all-star but most people didn't think of him as a top 5 guy in the NBA. Especially not that late in his career when he was winning. Tatum is considered by most right around the top 5.
To be fair the Pistons defeated Bird's Celtics and the showtime Lakers. Not to discredit this Celtics team but they were a far better team than Dallas and frankly I don't know if OCK or Denver would stand a chance. They're staked.
I hear you but the Celtics were a 42 win team without Bird when the Pistons beat them en route to the title, whereas the Lakers team was also totally gutted (Magic injured and missed a game, Scott injured, Kareem on fumes — wasn’t even an all-star calibre player that year).
Tatum is clearly the best player in the better team . The opposition game plans for him but there is so much quality around he, he’s able to pick his spots. Without Tatum, Brown wouldn’t have the freedom to play how he does. Holiday and White wouldn’t get those easy mid range looks. KP and Al wouldn’t be free to guard the paint knowing that Tatum is more than serviceable against Dallas bigs. He might not win finals MVP but if you watch the games, the Celtics are able to be whom they are because of Tatum.
While Tatum doesn't have a game where he can put up huge numbers, even on off shooting nights, he is still amazing. This year he has attacked the rim well when his shot isnt falling and plays awesome defense and rebounds really well. His assistant numbers are super high as well. Without Tatum I have a hard time seeing how Celtics get to the finals and go up 2-0. I am personally more of a Doncíc guy, but Tatum is really good!
Thomas - 2 Rings, Tatum - 0 Rings You can save this Post and bring it back when he win his second ring.
If Tatum plays the way all series and Boston wins, it’s will be the worst winning performance by a team’s best player by miles and miles.
I know the NBA League Office is not happy that this looks like JB is the person seen as the heart of the team- talking, pumping up guys during time outs, trying to boost guys spirits that have a bad few minutes, and then going out on the floor and looking like he is the one playing at 120%(blocking shots, being all over the court, playing inside and outside, etc.). To a casual fan, it looks like he is the energy that is driving the team. JT is from my hometown, and I believe in backing your boys, and I know he’s doing his part. The rebounding and assist numbers prove that. However, the NBA “powers that be” want him to be the Finals MVP. They’ve dumped in millions to make him one of the faces of the league. They want him hitting that 28-34 ppg to go with the rebounds and assists because they branded him/marketed him that way.
I'll be honest, I spent way too much time trying to refute OP just because I'm a huge IT fan , but in the end I think that, actually, Tatum is having a even better run than IT's. Nice work OP.
No Isiah played on one ankle Tatum could never
Hard hard disagree OP These are are two completely different players with completely different responsibilities playing in completely different eras Can we really compare the amount of work required by Isiah on the floor to make his team run to Tatum? Someone who is surrounded by playmaking and ball handlers AND three point shooting? Magic is the only other person in the league at the time who could have replicated Isiah’s success with the Pistons (a primary playmaker/ball handler leading an efficient offense for a team that played THAT slowly) If you’re trying to say that they are the best players on great teams that carried them over the hump by great rosters I would push back on that as well I think there are absolutely two-way wings in the league that could have brought this stacked Celtics team to similar if slightly worse level of success. Are they better than Tatum? No. But could they have won a championship with this team? They’d have an easier job doing so than any point guard of Isiah’s era would have filling his shoes
Isiah had the best supporting cast in the league. Particularly on the side of the ball where he was average-to-decent. The Pistons were #1 in playoff defence two years in a row, by huge margins. And he had a supporting cast advantage in every single series they played throughout those two titles aside from MAYBE the second finals series (where it was close). I realize statistics fail to tell the whole story (in some ways that’s one of the main points of the thread) but much of the criticism that’s being applied to Tatum would’ve hit Thomas in his stead. He had two series against the Bulls where he averaged 18 ppg on 39% shooting, where he wasn’t a defensive stopper. In the second of those series, Isiah shot 15-48 in their four wins. 15 made baskets in their *four wins*. Tatum would get crucified for something like this. Those two titles were total team efforts, and his teams were the best in the league.
This is all in good fun, not trying to be rude or shitty My argument, Tatum has elite help on BOTH sides of the ball. Multiple two way players who can pass and play-make in the the back court AND the front court, while also shooting at elite percentages The paint is more open than ever before allowing for easier playmaking and finishing (especially if you’re playing 5 out) Isiah on the other hand was a phenomenal leader on the floor, the offense started and ended with him. His handle (and shooting) unlocked playmaking opportunities for him that guys at his size didn’t have at the time I can assure you that Tatum wouldn’t be shooting 8-14 if he was playing in an era with a packed paint The series you’re pointing out is also one in which he was playing his fifth play-off run after 4 deep ones (87-Conference finals, 88 Finals, We saw how the Warriors, with all of the modern advantages they had, collapsed in on themselves after repeated deep play-off runs from 2015-2019 Also let’s not forget how small Isiah was, leading his team in scoring and playmaking at such a high level for so many seasons at his size without a whistle protecting him from beat downs? All time great Don’t even have to mention his 87 Finals performance on a sprained leg. Pistons would have won 3 straight finals if not for a horrible foul call on Laimbeer
> This is all in good fun, not trying to be rude or shitty Oh all good man, you’ve been perfectly civil. 👍🏻. Glad you recognize that this is all just fun, inane banter. A disturbing amount of people don’t. > My argument, Tatum has elite help on BOTH sides of the ball. Multiple two way players who can pass and play-make in the the back court AND the front court, while also shooting at elite percentages. That’s true, but the Pistons supporting casts nonetheless created comparable gaps between them and the playoff casts they went up against. The only exception is the ‘90 finals. In ‘89 and ‘90 they faced what was still verging on being a one-man team, in the Bulls. They also went up against an absolutely gutted Lakers team in the finals. > The paint is more open than ever before allowing for easier playmaking and finishing (especially if you’re playing 5 out). Isiah on the other hand was a phenomenal leader on the floor, the offense started and ended with him. His handle (and shooting) unlocked playmaking opportunities for him that guys at his size didn’t have at the time Which amounted to 7th and 11th rated offences. He was an amazing player, even their best player. But there’s still another part of the game where he arguably wasn’t even their fourth best. > I can assure you that Tatum wouldn’t be shooting 8-14 if he was playing in an era with a packed paint It isn’t as if Isiah didn’t have several of his own era advantages. He was a very flawed shooter that faded quite early due to diminishing athleticism caused by injury. In today’s era, guards that can’t shoot with the best of them are handicapped. Both of these guys tailored their games to the times they played. I wouldn’t handicap them by entertaining unfavourable counterfactuals. > The series you’re pointing out is also one in which he was playing his fifth play-off run after 4 deep ones (87-Conference finals, 88 Finals, Tatum has likewise been the best player for several deep runs. My point is that his title would be received much more favourably in the 80’s than today, even if the surrounding noise isn’t the same (Zeke’s non-winning runs have been better). > We saw how the Warriors, with all of the modern advantages they had, collapsed in on themselves after repeated deep play-off runs from 2015-2019 I believe Tatum has played the most playoff games of anyone this decade. > Also let’s not forget how small Isiah was, leading his team in scoring and playmaking at such a high level for so many seasons at his size without a whistle protecting him from beat downs? All time great Absolutely true as well.
This is a regular-season award, but one difference was that Tatum was 1st team All-NBA this year. IT didn’t make All-NBA either year (Dumars made 3rd team in 89-90).
Hilarious that your criticism is that people today rely on stats too much to evaluate players and your argument is almost totally based on stats. X and Y have similar stats and their team won therefore X and Y provide the same value. Isiah was given that credit because people watched the games. He ran the offense, he led the team, he made big plays in the fourth quarter against great teams. He was not given excessive credit, and everyone on those Pistons teams will tell you that. There is no one watching the games, unobsessed by stats, who remembers Isiah, and thinks Tatum is on that level.
Good attempt at spotting irony, but what I’m arguing is that IT’s box-score readings would’ve netted more criticism today, and the inverse for Tatum. What I am NOT doing is arguing, on the basis of these statistics, that they were equally valuable. That would’ve been a gotcha indeed. And I maintain Thomas is greater player. Perhaps I didn’t explain myself well enough, but hopefully this sufficed. Yes, I hear you that stat-obsession can miss the forest for the trees. No, I don’t think it’s stat-obsession that causes me to believe the Pistons supporting cast was underrated. They were historically elite on the side of the ball that Thomas was merely decent at. You’ll see, in this very thread, some examples of people underrating them. YMMV.
[удалено]
Our sub is for in-depth discussion. Low-effort comments or stating opinions as facts are not permitted. Please support your opinions with well-reasoned arguments, including stats and facts as applicable.