Congrats, Jayson Tatum, for Making 1st Team All-NBA!

[stepbackj34]

Even one of my top favorite Celtic players, Paul Pierce, never made 1st team.

It takes a great team to make an all nba 1st team, Pierce never had that until he was 30 years old and sharing the ball with two other hall of famers.

All nba teams are about politics and team performance. Pierce’s highest all nba award came in a season when he only averaged 20ppg but the celtics had 62 wins.

~
KG made three 1st Team All NBA while playing for the Wolves.

Each time Garnett made 1st team all
Nba he was on a playoff team that won at least 50 games.

[BK_2020]

It takes a great team to make an all nba 1st team, Pierce never had that until he was 30 years old and sharing the ball with two other hall of famers.

All nba teams are about politics and team performance. Pierce’s highest all nba award came in a season when he only averaged 20ppg but the celtics had 62 wins.

~
KG made three 1st Team All NBA while playing for the Wolves.

Each time Garnett made 1st team all
Nba he was on a playoff team that won at least 50 games.

Are you seriously going to argue that Garnett was on great teams? So if Pierce had the good fortune of playing with Wally Szczerbiak and Troy Hudson, he'd have won 50 games in the stacked West and made 1st team All NBA also?
Nostalgia is one hell of a cognitive dissonance.

[stepbackj34]

~
KG made three 1st Team All NBA while playing for the Wolves.

Each time Garnett made 1st team all
Nba he was on a playoff team that won at least 50 games.

Are you seriously going to argue that Garnett was on great teams? So if Pierce had the good fortune of playing with Wally Szczerbiak and Troy Hudson, he'd have won 50 games in the stacked West and made 1st team All NBA also?
Nostalgia is one hell of a cognitive dissonance.

50 win teams aren’t great teams? Garnett solely carried those teams? Wally Sczerbiak was an all star on the Wolves. Garnett also played with Cassell and Sprewell when he made 1st. My point, it takes a great team and teammates for a player to get 1st team all nba. Rarely does it go to a guy on a bad team. This is why Tatum won over Durant and Bron.

[BK_2020]

If you take Garnett off those Wolves teams, they may not win a single game. I don't think you understand just how bad Garnett's supporting casts were.
I never got this muh Cassell and Spreewell argument either. Garnett was given the luxury of a 33 year old Cassell who had never made an All-Star team before and a cancerous literal choker in Spreewell, then promptly took that team to 58 wins and the WCF. That speaks to how good Garnett was, not how amazing Cassell and Spreewell were.

[Fierce1]

Pierce had one of the quickest first step in the league, was a 6’7”SF.. how much height and length do you need? Again, Tatum is battling weaker competition for these awards. Thats not up for debate. Look at the players I named. Arguably the greatest player ever and 3 of the top 5 PFs ever battling for 2 Forward spots on 1st team all nba.

Winning an mvp today doesnt mean you were necessarily better than players than 5-20 years ago.

You're entitled to your own opinion.

But when it's all said and done, I'm sure Jayson Tatum will have multiple championships, multiple 1st team All-NBA, multiple All-Star appearances, etc.

Like I said, if you think Paul Pierce is better then that's your opinion.

I like how you have no counter for the different eras in which Tatum and Pierce played in. Yes, Tatum will have many 1st team nods cause he only has to battle against a Lebron in season 20, durant and Leonard who will both be 5 seasons removed since they last played at least 60 games, Paskal Siakim, and Demar Derozan.

At this point, after Giannas there’s really no comp for Tatum for that other spot.

That's because comparing eras is pure fantasy.

There are rule changes made from time to time.

So the only way you can make a case about how a player in this era is better than a player in the previous era is by looking what both players has done, what awards they got, and what stats they produced.

The height of the players also matters because the taller the player, the longer the wingspan.

Right now, at age 24, Jayson Tatum is already a legit 2-way player.

I've been a Celtic fan since the Larry Bird era and I'm a big fan of Paul Pierce, but right now, it's very clear Jayson Tatum is already better than Paul Pierce.

What's next for Tatum is to reach Larry Bird's level.

[stepbackj34]

If you take Garnett off those Wolves teams, they may not win a single game. I don't think you understand just how bad Garnett's supporting casts were.
I never got this muh Cassell and Spreewell argument either. Garnett was given the luxury of a 33 year old Cassell who had never made an All-Star team before and a cancerous literal choker in Spreewell, then promptly took that team to 58 wins and the WCF. That speaks to how good Garnett was, not how amazing Cassell and Spreewell were.

The Celtics lost like 18/19 straight games without Paul Pierce in the lineup in the mid 00s.

I dont know why you felt the need to bring Garnett into this debate. But surely you know that the celtics had historically bad rosters in the mid 00s as well? You’re a celtics fans right?

[stepbackj34]

You're entitled to your own opinion.

But when it's all said and done, I'm sure Jayson Tatum will have multiple championships, multiple 1st team All-NBA, multiple All-Star appearances, etc.

Like I said, if you think Paul Pierce is better then that's your opinion.

I like how you have no counter for the different eras in which Tatum and Pierce played in. Yes, Tatum will have many 1st team nods cause he only has to battle against a Lebron in season 20, durant and Leonard who will both be 5 seasons removed since they last played at least 60 games, Paskal Siakim, and Demar Derozan.

At this point, after Giannas there’s really no comp for Tatum for that other spot.

That's because comparing eras is pure fantasy.

There are rule changes made from time to time.

So the only way you can make a case about how a player in this era is better than a player in the previous era is by looking what both players has done, what awards they got, and what stats they produced.

The height of the players also matters because the taller the player, the longer the wingspan.

Right now, at age 24, Jayson Tatum is already a legit 2-way player.

I've been a Celtic fan since the Larry Bird era and I'm a big fan of Paul Pierce, but right now, it's very clear Jayson Tatum is already better than Paul Pierce.

What's next for Tatum is to reach Larry Bird's level.

[Parliament10]

If you take Garnett off those Wolves teams, they may not win a single game. I don't think you understand just how bad Garnett's supporting casts were.
I never got this muh Cassell and Spreewell argument either. Garnett was given the luxury of a 33 year old Cassell who had never made an All-Star team before and a cancerous literal choker in Spreewell, then promptly took that team to 58 wins and the WCF. That speaks to how good Garnett was, not how amazing Cassell and Spreewell were.

The Celtics lost like 18/19 straight games without Paul Pierce in the lineup in the mid 00s.

I dont know why you felt the need to bring Garnett into this debate. But surely you know that the celtics had historically bad rosters in the mid 00s as well? You’re a celtics fans right?

Y'all Both make good points.
But, when we really get down to it:

It's all up to Tatum, and the Current Celtics.
For one simple fact. -- They're still playing.

[stepbackj34]

You're entitled to your own opinion.

But when it's all said and done, I'm sure Jayson Tatum will have multiple championships, multiple 1st team All-NBA, multiple All-Star appearances, etc.

Like I said, if you think Paul Pierce is better then that's your opinion.

I like how you have no counter for the different eras in which Tatum and Pierce played in. Yes, Tatum will have many 1st team nods cause he only has to battle against a Lebron in season 20, durant and Leonard who will both be 5 seasons removed since they last played at least 60 games, Paskal Siakim, and Demar Derozan.

At this point, after Giannas there’s really no comp for Tatum for that other spot.

That's because comparing eras is pure fantasy.

There are rule changes made from time to time.

So the only way you can make a case about how a player in this era is better than a player in the previous era is by looking what both players has done, what awards they got, and what stats they produced.

The height of the players also matters because the taller the player, the longer the wingspan.

Right now, at age 24, Jayson Tatum is already a legit 2-way player.

I've been a Celtic fan since the Larry Bird era and I'm a big fan of Paul Pierce, but right now, it's very clear Jayson Tatum is already better than Paul Pierce.

What's next for Tatum is to reach Larry Bird's level.

Please stop telling me about height. Shawn Bradley was tall and had wingspan, what point are you trying to make with that?

As I said before, terrible assessment.

NBA talk And comparison is never based off what a player did in their era. If that was the case we’d consider guys who played in the 60s the goat. We generally dont do that tho. We don’t consider Cousey or Russell the goat or the GOAT of their position despite all their accolades in their “era”

And it’s not fantasy to say Pierce’s competition in the 00s was significantly better than what Tatum has to compete with today. The 00s were stacked with historically great players. You could argue that the 2nd best SG, GOAT SF, GOAT PF and GOAT C all played in the 00s in their prime.

You keep saying whats next to Tatum is to reach Bird’s level like he’s already widely considered better than Pierce ever was lol. Definitely not.

Tatum would never make 1st team playing in the 00s

[BK_2020]

If you take Garnett off those Wolves teams, they may not win a single game. I don't think you understand just how bad Garnett's supporting casts were.
I never got this muh Cassell and Spreewell argument either. Garnett was given the luxury of a 33 year old Cassell who had never made an All-Star team before and a cancerous literal choker in Spreewell, then promptly took that team to 58 wins and the WCF. That speaks to how good Garnett was, not how amazing Cassell and Spreewell were.

The Celtics lost like 18/19 straight games without Paul Pierce in the lineup in the mid 00s.

I dont know why you felt the need to bring Garnett into this debate. But surely you know that the celtics had historically bad rosters in the mid 00s as well? You’re a celtics fans right?

It's really very simple. Let me break it down in a way even you can understand.
1. You claimed that the reason Pierce didn't make 1st Team All NBA is because he was on bad teams.
2. As a corollary, you made the claim that 1st Team All NBA honors go to players on great teams.
3. However, I pointed out that Garnett was on three 1st Team All NBA despite being on far worse teams (minus Garnett himself)
4. ??????
Let me know if this works. I don't know if I can make this any easier but I will try.

[Fierce1]

I like how you have no counter for the different eras in which Tatum and Pierce played in. Yes, Tatum will have many 1st team nods cause he only has to battle against a Lebron in season 20, durant and Leonard who will both be 5 seasons removed since they last played at least 60 games, Paskal Siakim, and Demar Derozan.

At this point, after Giannas there’s really no comp for Tatum for that other spot.

That's because comparing eras is pure fantasy.

There are rule changes made from time to time.

So the only way you can make a case about how a player in this era is better than a player in the previous era is by looking what both players has done, what awards they got, and what stats they produced.

The height of the players also matters because the taller the player, the longer the wingspan.

Right now, at age 24, Jayson Tatum is already a legit 2-way player.

I've been a Celtic fan since the Larry Bird era and I'm a big fan of Paul Pierce, but right now, it's very clear Jayson Tatum is already better than Paul Pierce.

What's next for Tatum is to reach Larry Bird's level.

Please stop telling me about height. Shawn Bradley was tall and had wingspan, what point are you trying to make with that?

As I said before, terrible assessment.

NBA talk And comparison is never based off what a player did in their era. If that was the case we’d consider guys who played in the 60s the goat. We generally dont do that tho. We don’t consider Cousey or Russell the goat or the GOAT of their position despite all their accolades in their “era”

And it’s not fantasy to say Pierce’s competition in the 00s was significantly better than what Tatum has to compete with today. The 00s were stacked with historically great players. You’d could argue that the 2nd best SG, GOAT SF, GOAT PF and GOAT C all played in the 00s in their prime.

You keep saying whats next to Tatum is to reach Bird’s level like he’s already widely considered better than Pierce ever was lol. Definitely not.

Tatum would never make 1st team playing in the 00s

Paul Pierce would play a different way, on offense and defense, if he was 6-9 or 6-10.

Jayson Tatum wouldn't be able to shoot over defenders with ease if he's just 6-6 or 6-7.

The point you're missing is Paul Pierce is not as gifted as Jayson Tatum when it comes to physical attributes.

Why do you think Pierce ended up the #10 pick and Tatum was a #3 pick?

It's also a fact that right now Tatum has accomplished more at age 24 than what Paul Pierce did at age 24.

And Jayson Tatum is not done getting better.


Even right now Tatum is shattering playoff records.

The icing on the cake will be an MVP trophy.

If Tatum gets an MVP trophy, 99% of Celtic fans will concede that Jayson Tatum is way better than Paul Pierce.

[stepbackj34]

If you take Garnett off those Wolves teams, they may not win a single game. I don't think you understand just how bad Garnett's supporting casts were.
I never got this muh Cassell and Spreewell argument either. Garnett was given the luxury of a 33 year old Cassell who had never made an All-Star team before and a cancerous literal choker in Spreewell, then promptly took that team to 58 wins and the WCF. That speaks to how good Garnett was, not how amazing Cassell and Spreewell were.

The Celtics lost like 18/19 straight games without Paul Pierce in the lineup in the mid 00s.

I dont know why you felt the need to bring Garnett into this debate. But surely you know that the celtics had historically bad rosters in the mid 00s as well? You’re a celtics fans right?

It's really very simple. Let me break it down in a way even you can understand.
1. You claimed that the reason Pierce didn't make 1st Team All NBA is because he was on bad teams.
2. As a corollary, you made the claim that 1st Team All NBA honors go to players on great teams.
3. However, I pointed out that Garnett was on three 1st Team All NBA despite being on far worse teams (minus Garnett himself)
4. ??????
Let me know if this works. I don't know if I can make this any easier but I will try.

Are you a Celtics fans or a migrant from the big 3 era? Surely you are aware of the rosters the Celtics had minus Paul Pierce in the 00s, right? What point are you trying to make?

[stepbackj34]

That's because comparing eras is pure fantasy.

There are rule changes made from time to time.

So the only way you can make a case about how a player in this era is better than a player in the previous era is by looking what both players has done, what awards they got, and what stats they produced.

The height of the players also matters because the taller the player, the longer the wingspan.

Right now, at age 24, Jayson Tatum is already a legit 2-way player.

I've been a Celtic fan since the Larry Bird era and I'm a big fan of Paul Pierce, but right now, it's very clear Jayson Tatum is already better than Paul Pierce.

What's next for Tatum is to reach Larry Bird's level.

Please stop telling me about height. Shawn Bradley was tall and had wingspan, what point are you trying to make with that?

As I said before, terrible assessment.

NBA talk And comparison is never based off what a player did in their era. If that was the case we’d consider guys who played in the 60s the goat. We generally dont do that tho. We don’t consider Cousey or Russell the goat or the GOAT of their position despite all their accolades in their “era”

And it’s not fantasy to say Pierce’s competition in the 00s was significantly better than what Tatum has to compete with today. The 00s were stacked with historically great players. You’d could argue that the 2nd best SG, GOAT SF, GOAT PF and GOAT C all played in the 00s in their prime.

You keep saying whats next to Tatum is to reach Bird’s level like he’s already widely considered better than Pierce ever was lol. Definitely not.

Tatum would never make 1st team playing in the 00s

Paul Pierce would play a different way, on offense and defense, if he was 6-9 or 6-10.

Jayson Tatum wouldn't be able to shoot over defenders with ease if he's just 6-6 or 6-7.

The point you're missing is Paul Pierce is not as gifted as Jayson Tatum when it comes to physical attributes.

Why do you think Pierce ended up the #10 pick and Tatum was a #3 pick?

It's also a fact that right now Tatum has accomplished more at age 24 than what Paul Pierce did at age 24.

And Jayson Tatum is not done getting better.


Even right now Tatum is shattering playoff records.

The icing on the cake will be an MVP trophy.

If Tatum gets an MVP trophy, 99% of Celtic fans will concede that Jayson Tatum is way better than Paul Pierce.

This is nonsense. And again, you have no argument for one player playing in a significantly tougher era than the other. What would Tatum accomplish woth Ricky Davis and Mark Blount instead of Al Hortford and Jaylen Brown. You realize Tatum doesnt play on these Celtics team alone, right?

Kyrie- all star
JB -all star
Hortford- all star
Smart DOPY
Rw all defensive second team

^^Are you saying Pierce played with this kind of talent pre big 3? Im lost.

[stepbackj34]

And again, the height and length stuff is pure nonsense. JT is 6”10 or whatever and still would never make 1st team in the 00s. Thats my whole point.

[Fierce1]

This is nonsense. And again, you have no argument for one player playing in a significantly tougher era than the other. What would Tatum accomplish woth Ricky Davis and Mark Blount instead of Al Hortford and Jaylen Brown. You realize Tatum doesnt play on these Celtics team alone, right?

Kyrie- all star
JB -all star
Hortford- all star
Smart DOPY
Rw all defensive second team

^^Are you saying Pierce played with this kind of talent pre big 3? Im lost.

Kyrie is not with the Celts right now.

It was when Kyrie left the Cs that Tatum became the #1 guy of the Cs.

Right now Tatum is the #1 guy and he has led the Cs into the NBA Finals at the age of 24.

What happened when Paul Pierce was the #1 guy?

Pierce needed an MVP in KG and one of the best shooters in the league, in Ray Allen, to get to the Finals.

There was no clear #1 guy when it was KG, Ray, and Pierce.

It's really not that difficult.

With KG, Pierce, and Ray, they were equals.

Right now Tatum is the clear #1 guy on this 2022 Celtics championship team.

What's nonsense is you talk as if Tatum is about to retire.

Jayson Tatum is only getting started!

[Fierce1]

And again, the height and length stuff is pure nonsense. JT is 6”10 or whatever and still would never make 1st team in the 00s. Thats my whole point.

If height and length is pure nonsense then why are big men always going #1 in the draft?

Here's the thing, Paul Pierce was a 2nd tier superstar back in 00s.

In this era, Jayson Tatum is a 1st tier superstar.

That means Jayson Tatum is the Kobe/Lebron of this era.

[stepbackj34]

This is nonsense. And again, you have no argument for one player playing in a significantly tougher era than the other. What would Tatum accomplish woth Ricky Davis and Mark Blount instead of Al Hortford and Jaylen Brown. You realize Tatum doesnt play on these Celtics team alone, right?

Kyrie- all star
JB -all star
Hortford- all star
Smart DOPY
Rw all defensive second team

^^Are you saying Pierce played with this kind of talent pre big 3? Im lost.

Kyrie is not with the Celts right now.

It was when Kyrie left the Cs that Tatum became the #1 guy of the Cs.

Right now Tatum is the #1 guy and he has led the Cs into the NBA Finals.

What happened when Paul Pierce was the #1 guy?

Pierce needed an MVP in KG and one of the best shooters in the league, in Ray Allen, to get to the Finals.

There was no clear #1 guy when it was KG, Ray, and Pierce.

It's really not that difficult.

With KG, Pierce, and Ray, they were equals.

Right now Tatum is the clear #1 guy on this 2022 Celtics championship team.

What's nonsense is you talk as if Tatum is about to retire.

Jayson Tatum is only getting started!

More nonsense. You make it sound like Tatum is the only notable player on the Celtics roster. Thats not how the nba works yet again you fail to comprehend this. If i take away Smart, Brown, Hortford and Williams and replace them we lesser role players, or players comparable to the rosters of some of the Celtics team pre big 3, would they still make the finals? Tatum would carry a team of role players to the finals?

And im only pointing out the talent Tatum has played with in comparison to Pierce.

Neither Garnett or Allen won anything before joining the Celtics.

[stepbackj34]

And again, the height and length stuff is pure nonsense. JT is 6”10 or whatever and still would never make 1st team in the 00s. Thats my whole point.

If height and length is pure nonsense then why are big men always going #1 in the draft?

Here's the thing, Paul Pierce was a 2nd tier superstar back in 00s.

In this era, Jayson Tatum is a 1st tier superstar.

That means Jayson Tatum is the Kobe/Lebron of this era.

Please stop with the height stuff. Would Tatum make 1st playing on the celtics from 02-07 instead of Pierce? Just answer that.

Againx100, this era is weaker. JT is not as good as Lebron or kobe.

[Fierce1]

More nonsense. You make it sound like Tatum is the only notable player on the Celtics roster. Thats not how the nba works yet again you fail to comprehend this. If i take away Smart, Brown, Hortford and Williams and replace them we lesser role players, or players comparable to the rosters of some of the Celtics team pre big 3, would they still make the finals? Tatum would carry a team of role players to the finals?

And im only pointing out the talent Tatum has played with in comparison to Pierce.

Neither Garnett or Allen won anything before joining the Celtics.

The nonsense here is you're trying to use teammates as an excuse for Pierce not being a 1st tier superstar back in 00s.

Tatum already made 3rd team All-NBA at the age of 22.

Pierce made 3rd team All-NBA at age 24.

Tatum was already an All-Star at 22.

Pierce became an All-Star at 24.

You can already see the trajectory of Tatum's career and he's already way ahead of Paul Pierce at age 24.

What makes Jayson Tatum special is he's 6-9 or 6-10 player who can handle the ball, shoot from anywhere, already a very good passer, and also a very good defender.

Not man 6-9 or 6-10 players can do what Tatum is doing.

That's why he's special.

[sam_I_am]

This is nonsense. And again, you have no argument for one player playing in a significantly tougher era than the other. What would Tatum accomplish woth Ricky Davis and Mark Blount instead of Al Hortford and Jaylen Brown. You realize Tatum doesnt play on these Celtics team alone, right?

Kyrie- all star
JB -all star
Hortford- all star
Smart DOPY
Rw all defensive second team

^^Are you saying Pierce played with this kind of talent pre big 3? Im lost.

Kyrie is not with the Celts right now.

It was when Kyrie left the Cs that Tatum became the #1 guy of the Cs.

Right now Tatum is the #1 guy and he has led the Cs into the NBA Finals at the age of 24.

What happened when Paul Pierce was the #1 guy?

Pierce needed an MVP in KG and one of the best shooters in the league, in Ray Allen, to get to the Finals.

There was no clear #1 guy when it was KG, Ray, and Pierce.

It's really not that difficult.

With KG, Pierce, and Ray, they were equals.

Right now Tatum is the clear #1 guy on this 2022 Celtics championship team.

What's nonsense is you talk as if Tatum is about to retire.

Jayson Tatum is only getting started!

I would say Pierce did pretty well from 2009 without Garnett or with the shadow of a once great KG after his injury from 2010-2012.