So why is Jayson Tatum held to such a high standard on this forum?

[CeltsfanSinceBirth]

We sure do get a lot of threads for a team that won't even get into the Finals. The Boston Celtics are definitely Real GM's team of choice. Forever in your minds and hearts. Never change GB

[NinjaBro]

Tatum had an awesome rookie season. I think he broke the record for shooting corner 3s percentage as a rookie. Still young with lots of upside.

[ajones9219]

It's not elite for a 3. And his handles look flat out bad sometimes.

not sure what you consider elite size for a three then. But nothing about any of your previous posts suggest an unbiased take anyway when it relates to the Celtics so it's not worth arguing

Pretty sure my posts have proven to be the most unbiased.

But his size is pretty average for a 3. In the range of guys like middleton or george or harris, etc etc.

Plenty of 3s have wingspan over 7 feet - kawhi, lebron, gallinari, OG, etc etc

This may be the hotest take you've ever had. That was a Donald Trump type statement

[will]

Probably Celtic fans overrating him.

[ITYSL]

Yawn, another strawman. This board calls him overrated way, way, way more than it calls him a future superstar.

Well, you cannot be overrated if no one calls you a superstar

Yah, tell this board that lol. Even though nearly no one calls him a future superstar, a lot of people call him overrated based on that strawman.

[pingpongrac]

Almost every time I watch Boston games, I'm baffled by Tatum's shot selection. He's a career 40% three-point shooter (and 10/22 so far this season), but he only shoots 48% on 2FGA despite having all of the tools to be much more efficient inside the arc. If he tones back on the midrange attempts and sometimes wild drives, he can easily be a 20+ PPG scorer on good efficiency as soon as this season. He's been trending in the wrong direction shot selection-wise since the 17/18 playoffs, though, and it seems even worse in the few games I've seen this year.

Sent from my LG-H831 using RealGM mobile app

[everdiso]

not sure what you consider elite size for a three then. But nothing about any of your previous posts suggest an unbiased take anyway when it relates to the Celtics so it's not worth arguing

Pretty sure my posts have proven to be the most unbiased.

But his size is pretty average for a 3. In the range of guys like middleton or george or harris, etc etc.

Plenty of 3s have wingspan over 7 feet - kawhi, lebron, gallinari, OG, etc etc

This may be the hotest take you've ever had. That was a Donald Trump type statement

SFs Height/Wingspan

K.Durant 6'10" / 7'4"
J.Isaac 6'10" / 7'1"
K.Leonard 6'7" / 7'3"
O.Porter 6'8" / 7'2"
R.Hachimura 6'8" / 7'2"
O.Anunoby 6'7" / 7'2"
K.Oubre 6'6" / 7'2"
D.Hunter 6'7" / 7'1"
L.James 6'8" / 7'0"
A.Wiggins 6'8" / 7'0"
D.F-Smith 6'7" / 7'0"
T.Snell 6'7" / 7'0"
J.Tatum 6'8" / 6'11"
C.Osman 6'8" / 6'11"
S.G-Alexander 6'6" / 6'11"
B.Bogdanovic 6'7" / 6'11"
T.Harris: 6'7" / 6'11"
K.Middleton: 6'7" / 6'11"
H.Barnes 6'7" / 6'11"
T.J.Warren 6'7" / 6'10"
M.Morris 6'7" / 6'10"
G.Robinson 6'6" / 6'10"
J.Winslow: 6'6" / 6'10"
M.Bridges: 6'6" / 6'10"
R.Hood 6'7" / 6'9"
W.Barton 6'5" / 6'10"
D.House 6'7" / 6'8"
D.Derozan 6'6" / 6'9"
J.Crowder 6'5" / 6'9"
L.Ball 6'5" / 6'9"

[BostonCouchGM]

There's definitely some truth to the claims of Boston bias. Simmons and others massive voices in the NBA media and they're very active on social media hyping him up. Brad Stevens can't develop young talent which is why you aren't seeing Tatum live up to his promise. A good coach would never allow long 2s to continue after the first week let alone into Year 3. He's got too much natural talent and drive not to be Melo lite which is still a good player. If he had a better coach he could actually be Melo (the good young version not the ball hog older version).

[NPZ]

Good, a new day and a new “trash the Celtics” thread.

Miserable souls.

Well, personally, I love the Celtics.

[NCHeels2008]

Man the real estate the Celtics, Danny ainge and Tatum own in some posters heads here....why? everyday a new post and we aren’t even contenders.

Well Boston gets a disproportionate amount of attention from the media because a disproportionate amount of the main writers have ties to the Boston area. Out of maybe 10? voices that drive the NBA discussion 3 are from Boston (KOC, Zach Lowe and Bill Simmons). There has been a Boston bias for the last 10-15 years, the KG years for some reason are held in higher reverence than the Lakers team that won more titles in the same time period and the Pistons of the mid 00s who have a nearly identical track record to the KG Celts. You can't be that surprised people are going to feast on the corpse when your team is down.

Like I said, real estate in your heads if you believe any of that is true.

you seriously don't think the Celts get more national attention than they deserve over the last decade and a half? Let's take the last 5 years, Boston has had a similar track record to the Trail Blazers, yet I don't think any reasonable person on this board would dispute Boston has gotten at LEAST 2x the coverage.

[CeltsfanSinceBirth]

Well Boston gets a disproportionate amount of attention from the media because a disproportionate amount of the main writers have ties to the Boston area. Out of maybe 10? voices that drive the NBA discussion 3 are from Boston (KOC, Zach Lowe and Bill Simmons). There has been a Boston bias for the last 10-15 years, the KG years for some reason are held in higher reverence than the Lakers team that won more titles in the same time period and the Pistons of the mid 00s who have a nearly identical track record to the KG Celts. You can't be that surprised people are going to feast on the corpse when your team is down.

Like I said, real estate in your heads if you believe any of that is true.

you seriously don't think the Celts get more national attention than they deserve over the last decade and a half? Let's take the last 5 years, Boston has had a similar track record to the Trail Blazers, yet I don't think any reasonable person on this board would dispute Boston has gotten at LEAST 2x the coverage.

Lol. Blame market size.

[NCHeels2008]

Like I said, real estate in your heads if you believe any of that is true.

you seriously don't think the Celts get more national attention than they deserve over the last decade and a half? Let's take the last 5 years, Boston has had a similar track record to the Trail Blazers, yet I don't think any reasonable person on this board would dispute Boston has gotten at LEAST 2x the coverage.

Lol. Blame market size.

Boston is 10th, it's a mid-sized market and FWIW I think the calculation is generous as to what counts as part of the Boston metro area.

[MagicBagley18]

Well Boston gets a disproportionate amount of attention from the media because a disproportionate amount of the main writers have ties to the Boston area. Out of maybe 10? voices that drive the NBA discussion 3 are from Boston (KOC, Zach Lowe and Bill Simmons). There has been a Boston bias for the last 10-15 years, the KG years for some reason are held in higher reverence than the Lakers team that won more titles in the same time period and the Pistons of the mid 00s who have a nearly identical track record to the KG Celts. You can't be that surprised people are going to feast on the corpse when your team is down.

Like I said, real estate in your heads if you believe any of that is true.

you seriously don't think the Celts get more national attention than they deserve over the last decade and a half? Let's take the last 5 years, Boston has had a similar track record to the Trail Blazers, yet I don't think any reasonable person on this board would dispute Boston has gotten at LEAST 2x the coverage.

The Celtics have gone to the conference finals 2 out of the last 3 seasons, hows that like the blazers who finally busted through and Made a conference finals last season. they had one of the most polarizing and popular players in the league in kyrie who is a magnet for attention no matter what he does and had a cache of draft picks and trade assets that put them in the news for any available star the last 4 years- of course they are going to be talked about in any rumor etc.



They have been to the conference finals 5 times in the past 11 years including 2 finals trips and a championship of course they should be talked about. Not to mention they are one of the premier teams in the nba in a pretty decent sized market (top 10).

Before kg and ray they were the worst team in the league and deservedly got killed in the press and their ownership before wyd got killed.

[Curmudgeon]

Thee are so many Celtics haters out there that the team doesn't need fans to stay in the headlines.

[Edug27]

Because he’s a future star. Next question...

[NY 567]

Because he’s a future star. Next question...

Star? In Europe? Possibly. In China? For sure. In the NBA? Highly unlikely.

[AussieCeltic]

It's all young players in general these days. They're getting drafted so much earlier than in the past (I'm talking 80's/90's prior to HS players) and people expect them to have a huge impact straight away.

Look at majority of the stars in the league right now. It took most of them 3-5 years (or at least when they were 23-25) before they get their groove going and start contributing properly (minus Lebron because he was a freak).

[snoopdogg88]

people loved that Sixers essentially traded him for #1 overall pick in Fultz so they hyped the hell out of him with an underdog angle.
it was fun to hype him up while clowning on the Sixers. and then it turned into this mini-rivalry with Simmons too.

he got super overhyped. fans love any decent young prospect who can shoot. If you can shoot, you have a 95% better chance of being a fan favorite.

now it's ironically flipping around with Fultz all of a sudden being this lovable scrappy underdog who the masses love, and Tatum being the overhyped prospect with a declining team. it's starting to hit people that he's not that good.

basically people just like to flip quickly with their narratives.

[therealbig3]

Well Boston gets a disproportionate amount of attention from the media because a disproportionate amount of the main writers have ties to the Boston area. Out of maybe 10? voices that drive the NBA discussion 3 are from Boston (KOC, Zach Lowe and Bill Simmons). There has been a Boston bias for the last 10-15 years, the KG years for some reason are held in higher reverence than the Lakers team that won more titles in the same time period and the Pistons of the mid 00s who have a nearly identical track record to the KG Celts. You can't be that surprised people are going to feast on the corpse when your team is down.

Like I said, real estate in your heads if you believe any of that is true.

you seriously don't think the Celts get more national attention than they deserve over the last decade and a half? Let's take the last 5 years, Boston has had a similar track record to the Trail Blazers, yet I don't think any reasonable person on this board would dispute Boston has gotten at LEAST 2x the coverage.

The Celtics have been pretty good for the most part over the last 15 years, including a couple of Finals and a title, and a bunch of conference finals, including back to back years prior to last year.

They've been a relevant and pretty successful playoff team for a while now. Based on team success alone, not even considering the market they play in, they deserve a decent amount of national attention.

You want to talk about a team that doesn't deserve anywhere near the national attention they get based on their team success? The Knicks. They've made the playoffs less than a handful of times over the same time span, and promptly got demolished every time. Have consistently been one of the worst teams in the league outside of what, the 3 times in the last 15 years they made the playoffs?

[CeltsfanSinceBirth]

you seriously don't think the Celts get more national attention than they deserve over the last decade and a half? Let's take the last 5 years, Boston has had a similar track record to the Trail Blazers, yet I don't think any reasonable person on this board would dispute Boston has gotten at LEAST 2x the coverage.

Lol. Blame market size.

Boston is 10th, it's a mid-sized market and FWIW I think the calculation is generous as to what counts as part of the Boston metro area.

And what about Portland?