Jayson Tatum

[Parasite]

If Jayson Tatums prime is 26/5/3 shooting over 40 percent from 3 while also playing good defense I think the Celtics will be thrilled. In other words, if he was prime Danny Granger.

[cloverleaf]

Do you have ANY clue what the word prime means?
Where do these people come from?

This thread was started with PP and DG equated. I very rightly shot that down. You came back "just sayin'" Granger had some kind of one great year in his prime. Pierce, of course, with 4 years of a higher PER than that one Granger year. That one "prime" year Granger had a VORP of 3.0--while Pierce had 12 years with a higher VORP than that "prime" Granger year!

Please, stop clowning yourself.

Clowning myself? You can’t even grasp that when people speculate on what a prospect can become and compare them to a player they look at their primes! Who had the better CAREER? Pierce and it isn’t close. Who had the better prime? A LOT closer. It doesn’t matter if someone’s prime lasts 1 or 2 years or 8 or 9. It isn’t that hard of a concept to grasp but you clearly lack the mental faculties to do it.

Again, Pierce and Granger's primes are not close--let alone their careers. Which, yes, is what reasonable people consider when projecting comparisons onto rooks. And spare me on the further attempted insult on my "lack of mental faculties"!

Jeesh!

[Ed Pinkney]

The big question I have is where is his best position long term? At the moment I would say it is at the 4, as having the size of Brown and Hayward at the 2 and 3 allows you to play a full time Horford/Tatum front court which I would otherwise have some minor concerns about. I am a big believer in the saying your position is who you can defend, at the moment he struggles a bit with bigger fours. But I guess having this much size and length on the wings allows so much switching that it probably doesn’t really matter what position he plays.

Another interesting thought process is what happens if the Lakers pick conveys and they draft one of these bigs, or if they traded for Davis without losing Tatum? Would he better suited shifting down a spot to the 3?

[Parasite]

This thread was started with PP and DG equated. I very rightly shot that down. You came back "just sayin'" Granger had some kind of one great year in his prime. Pierce, of course, with 4 years of a higher PER than that one Granger year. That one "prime" year Granger had a VORP of 3.0--while Pierce had 12 years with a higher VORP than that "prime" Granger year!

Please, stop clowning yourself.

Clowning myself? You can’t even grasp that when people speculate on what a prospect can become and compare them to a player they look at their primes! Who had the better CAREER? Pierce and it isn’t close. Who had the better prime? A LOT closer. It doesn’t matter if someone’s prime lasts 1 or 2 years or 8 or 9. It isn’t that hard of a concept to grasp but you clearly lack the mental faculties to do it.

Again, Pierce and Granger's primes are not close--let alone their careers. Which, yes, is what reasonable people consider when projecting comparisons onto rooks. And spare me on the further attempted insult on my "lack of mental faculties"!

Jeesh!

I never said their careers were close. Their primes certainly are though. It doesn’t matter how you try to spin it.

[thelarrybirdx]

The big question I have is where is his best position long term? At the moment I would say it is at the 4, as having the size of Brown and Hayward at the 2 and 3 allows you to play a full time Horford/Tatum front court which I would otherwise have some minor concerns about. I am a big believer in the saying your position is who you can defend, at the moment he struggles a bit with bigger fours. But I guess having this much size and length on the wings allows so much switching that it probably doesn’t really matter what position he plays.

Another interesting thought process is what happens if the Lakers pick conveys and they draft one of these bigs, or if they traded for Davis without losing Tatum? Would he better suited shifting down a spot to the 3?

Stevens doesn't care about positions, man. It literally does not matter.

[jmr07019]

Clowning myself? You can’t even grasp that when people speculate on what a prospect can become and compare them to a player they look at their primes! Who had the better CAREER? Pierce and it isn’t close. Who had the better prime? A LOT closer. It doesn’t matter if someone’s prime lasts 1 or 2 years or 8 or 9. It isn’t that hard of a concept to grasp but you clearly lack the mental faculties to do it.

Again, Pierce and Granger's primes are not close--let alone their careers. Which, yes, is what reasonable people consider when projecting comparisons onto rooks. And spare me on the further attempted insult on my "lack of mental faculties"!

Jeesh!

I never said their careers were close. Their primes certainly are though. It doesn’t matter how you try to spin it.

Their primes weren't close. Go back and watch the title run. Pierce went head to head against LeBron and Kobe and was their equal.

[cloverleaf]

Clowning myself? You can’t even grasp that when people speculate on what a prospect can become and compare them to a player they look at their primes! Who had the better CAREER? Pierce and it isn’t close. Who had the better prime? A LOT closer. It doesn’t matter if someone’s prime lasts 1 or 2 years or 8 or 9. It isn’t that hard of a concept to grasp but you clearly lack the mental faculties to do it.

Again, Pierce and Granger's primes are not close--let alone their careers. Which, yes, is what reasonable people consider when projecting comparisons onto rooks. And spare me on the further attempted insult on my "lack of mental faculties"!

Jeesh!

I never said their careers were close. Their primes certainly are though. It doesn’t matter how you try to spin it.

Just stop with the ridiculousness.

Granger's top two VORP years were 3.0 and 2.7. Pierce with 12 years higher than Granger's 3.0, a peak of 5.7, and six years of 4.7 or higher.

Granger's peak WS/48 were .158 and .155. Pierce with .207 and .201--and a 19yr career average of .157.

Granger's top two years for TS% were .584 and .573. Pierce with .620 and .613.

Granger's top two RBs/game were 6.1 and 5.5. Pierce with eight years having more than that, topping out at 7.3.

Granger's top two years in assts/game were 2.8 and 2.7. Pierce had a 19yr average of 3.5, topping out at 5.1 and 4.8.

[Parasite]

Again, Pierce and Granger's primes are not close--let alone their careers. Which, yes, is what reasonable people consider when projecting comparisons onto rooks. And spare me on the further attempted insult on my "lack of mental faculties"!

Jeesh!

I never said their careers were close. Their primes certainly are though. It doesn’t matter how you try to spin it.

Their primes weren't close. Go back and watch the title run. Pierce went head to head against LeBron and Kobe and was their equal.

That’s not what prime means. My goodness. Who’s to say that Granger couldn’t do similar given the same circumstances in his prime years? So we must go by the numbers and Grangers prime was very very good.

[jmr07019]

I never said their careers were close. Their primes certainly are though. It doesn’t matter how you try to spin it.

Their primes weren't close. Go back and watch the title run. Pierce went head to head against LeBron and Kobe and was their equal.

That’s not what prime means. My goodness. Who’s to say that Granger couldn’t do similar given the same circumstances in his prime years? So we must go by the numbers and Grangers prime was very very good.

I'm saying Granger couldn't play LeBron and Kobe even. No chance. His best year his team won 36 games and missed the playoffs. He wasn't that good. Pierce dragged a crap team to the ECF. What big moments did Granger elevate his game in? He never outdueled LeBron in a game 7. Never scored 19 in the 4th of a comeback playoff win or 46 in the 2nd half and OT of a playoff win. Pierce could elevate his game to a level Granger can't touch.

[brackdan70]

Their primes weren't close. Go back and watch the title run. Pierce went head to head against LeBron and Kobe and was their equal.

That’s not what prime means. My goodness. Who’s to say that Granger couldn’t do similar given the same circumstances in his prime years? So we must go by the numbers and Grangers prime was very very good.

I'm saying Granger couldn't play LeBron and Kobe even. No chance. His best year his team won 36 games and missed the playoffs. He wasn't that good. Pierce dragged a crap team to the ECF. What big moments did Granger elevate his game in? He never outdueled LeBron in a game 7. Never scored 19 in the 4th of a comeback playoff win or 46 in the 2nd half and OT of a playoff win. Pierce could elevate his game to a level Granger can't touch.

Granger had a 3.5 year Prime and Pierce a 12 year Prime. Pierces off prime years were mostly as good as Grangers Prime years.

[ConstableGeneva]

When's the last time a teenager was the 3rd/4th best player on a 60-win team?

I'll be sad when April hits and we can no longer refer to him as a 19-yo.

[Fencer reregistered]

This thread was started with PP and DG equated. I very rightly shot that down. You came back "just sayin'" Granger had some kind of one great year in his prime. Pierce, of course, with 4 years of a higher PER than that one Granger year. That one "prime" year Granger had a VORP of 3.0--while Pierce had 12 years with a higher VORP than that "prime" Granger year!

Please, stop clowning yourself.

Clowning myself? You can’t even grasp that when people speculate on what a prospect can become and compare them to a player they look at their primes! Who had the better CAREER? Pierce and it isn’t close. Who had the better prime? A LOT closer. It doesn’t matter if someone’s prime lasts 1 or 2 years or 8 or 9. It isn’t that hard of a concept to grasp but you clearly lack the mental faculties to do it.

Again, Pierce and Granger's primes are not close--let alone their careers. Which, yes, is what reasonable people consider when projecting comparisons onto rooks. And spare me on the further attempted insult on my "lack of mental faculties"!

Jeesh!

The one knock against Pierce is that he didn't have THAT spectacular of a peak. E.g., he never was a serious contender for MVP or even 1st-team All-NBA, and it's not because he was robbed.

That said, Granger's peak was never close to Pierce's. He wasn't close on accolades. He wasn't close on advanced stats. Peak Pierce was a very good defender. So the comparison indeed was a misfire.

[Ed Pinkney]

The big question I have is where is his best position long term? At the moment I would say it is at the 4, as having the size of Brown and Hayward at the 2 and 3 allows you to play a full time Horford/Tatum front court which I would otherwise have some minor concerns about. I am a big believer in the saying your position is who you can defend, at the moment he struggles a bit with bigger fours. But I guess having this much size and length on the wings allows so much switching that it probably doesn’t really matter what position he plays.

Another interesting thought process is what happens if the Lakers pick conveys and they draft one of these bigs, or if they traded for Davis without losing Tatum? Would he better suited shifting down a spot to the 3?

Stevens doesn't care about positions, man. It literally does not matter.

I know Stevens doesn’t care about positions in the traditional sense, but he still talks about three positions (bigs, wings and ball handlers). And if Tatum, Hayward and Brown are all wings then that might be relevant to Tatums future. Especially with Horford and Irving being in the starting five.

As I said though, I think it really boils down to who he is going to be defending long term - is it mainly threes/wings or is it mainly fours/bigs.

[steefP2]

Can we stop with the Pierce-Granger debate. Take it to the pm’s.

[Green89]

Read on Twitter

It's just bizarre.

This has got to be the yips. It's just practice and he looks like he's hesitant to release the shot.

[ermocrate]

My biased opinion on Tatum:

He can shoot, can dribble, finish at the rim, has pretty sweet offensive moves and he his defense is above average with the plus of his size. He is also an assassin with a baby face, he flips the switch when is time to win the game... He obviously needs to get stronger but he needs to remain lean, he is more of an AD/KD type than a LBJ/Howard one, size, quickness and skills are his strengths, maybe he hasn’t the best court vision but to be a scorer would be his primary focus so it’s not easy to tell right now. Sincerely I would not trade him for any player in the NBA right now.

[cloverleaf]

Can we stop with the Pierce-Granger debate. Take it to the pm’s.

And you couldn't have practiced what you preach and delivered this message via DM--bwahaha!!!

[Almeida]

Looks like Tatum is now a father.

[711takeover]

Looks like Tatum is now a father.

Baby was born about a month ago actually. He had it with his ex from HS and currently dates a Duke volleyball player. Interestingly enough his current gf knows he got his ex pregnant while they were dating but she's fine with it and they're still dating. She just wants to be an nba wife so badly lol.

[cloverleaf]

Looks like Tatum is now a father.

Baby was born about a month ago actually. He had it with his ex from HS and currently dates a Duke volleyball player. Interestingly enough his current gf knows he got his ex pregnant while they were dating but she's fine with it and they're still dating. She just wants to be an nba wife so badly lol.

Look at the length on that little kiddo!

(And I guess Tatum really does have a little TB12 in him!)