What exactly makes Tatum more talked about/ranked higher than Pascal Siakim?

[cl2117]

So let me get this straight... Because Tatum has a more advanced skillset at a younger age... He has less room to improve and develop further?

Doesn't that seem... Backwards?

It's basically trying to argue that if Tatum wasn't as polished / didn't have as many skills as he currently has he'd have more "upside"... Crazy.

I don’t think anyone was saying that. It’s more that Siakam didn’t get the coaching at a young age or the 10,000 hours theory at a young age so he has more that he can add (and has).

There are two totally different age arguments that get conflated.

1) Tatum is younger than Siakam

2) Siakam started playing organized basketball much later than Tatum

They are two totally separate arguments, each favoring one over the other, but shouldn't be argued in the same breath. Otherwise it gets convoluted like Karate Diop pointed out.

Tatum, by virture of being 4 years younger, is more likely to develop physically over the next couple years as he matures. Siakam has less room to physically develop. This is more about actual physical gains than polish.

Siakam, by virture of picking up the game much much later than Tatum, has the potential to continue on a much more positively skewed developmental curve as far as his basketball skillset/knowledge goes. Tatum has less room to develop in that respect as he's already benefited greatly from all the muscle memory/repetition gained from a lifetime of playing ball. This is more about polish than physical gains.

That isn't to say that each can't develop more than the other in each area, just that they both have more potential to develop in those areas based on the "age" differences.

[Shock Defeat]

The Boston Celtics hype machine was in overdrive since last year. They were media darlings. Remember they were supposed to win 67 games. Had the most loaded depth in the NBA with Hayward returning, with Brad Stephens the GOAT coach and Danny Ainge who had a war chest of assets. According to Jaylen Brown they were a lock to make the Finals and Tatum was crowned as a superstar player already.

[The_Hater]

Let's say Tatum has a decade of building up basketball skills over Siakam. What makes people think Siakam can make up for that gap, let alone what Tatum may improve in the future, in 6 years? Tatum had the freedom as a kid to hone his step backs, pull ups, turnarounds, fadeaways, and dribble moves. Yes Siakam has the benefit of professional training, but limited time due to games, team practices, travel, personal time, events associated with being an NBA player.

You can't expect a player to continuously have astronomical improvements Siakam has every offseason. Progression isn't linear and a diminishing returns effect happens.

Now this isn't to say Tatum is guaranteed to figure it out himself. He has gone on both sides of the Jeff Green-Andrew Wiggins shot selection spectrum.

I think most fans expect improvement to be linear, so when it doesn’t happen every season as expected that player is immediately deemed a disappointment.

That pretty much sums up Tatum’s season. He was much better as a rookie than anyone reasonably expected and now that he hasn’t shown a marked improvement in season #2 many consider him a disappotment. Mitchell and Simmons are both suffering a similar perception with overachieving rookie seasons and flatlined sophomore campaigns. D Fox has taken a completely different path, he was one of the worst players in the league as a rookie and has improved leaps and bounds as a sophomore.

But if you go back to the summer of 2017 for all 4 of these players and then point to where each of them are at today, none of them are disappointing. They’re 4 of the best young players in the league and all of them are ahead of schedule on their development curve. Disappointing would be Ball, Josh Jackson, Ntilikina.

[Froob]

It’d be cool if Rozier and Smart routinely didn’t shoot as much as Tatum.

[TDotJon]

I think part of it is looks that helps Tatum to be honest. Male fans don’t want to admit it but when their prospects look like guys they can imagine in commercials physically due to their looks they tend to boost their support of the player more. The prospects in the league that are more traditionally good-looking always tend to be more popular in comparison to the more average looking dudes. For a long time I’ve heard stuff like “He just has the looks of a Star.” I remember when people used to say the same thing of Rudy Gay when he was young.

Most male fans won’t admit they’re influenced by it but all sports fans want to imagine their prospects becoming the next big thing and Tatum has a look to him that’s easier to advertise than someone like Siakam.

If Kris Middleton’s game somehow transferred to Chandler Parsons he’d be way more popular than Middleton is. It’s just how people are.

Siakim is way more jacked...so I'm not following the looks thing. Siakim would be way better in a male forward action flick. Tatum would be the guy Siakim was shooting.

Also, don’t forget the prejudicial element that Shaq dropped on national TV at the all star game about about Stephen Curry. There’s truly some resentment in black America over a perception that lighter-skinned black Americans seem to perceived separately and more favorably in many ways including popularity in movies, music and on TV.

Tatum looks like someone Disney would cast. Pascal does not. And this can influence bias in people perceive Star power without even realizing it.

All of this stuff adds up. It’s not the main reason obviously. It may only be a small tiny reason but it contributes on a subconscious level toward how fans view players and star potential. Tatum was seen by some as a future face of the league in part, but obviously not limited to, the fact that he “looks the part” to a lot of people.

If Aminu had Giannis game would he be seen as the face of the sport the way Giannis is?

neither of them are particularly good looking. one is just lighter.

[Double Helix]

So let me get this straight... Because Tatum has a more advanced skillset at a younger age... He has less room to improve and develop further?

Doesn't that seem... Backwards?

It's basically trying to argue that if Tatum wasn't as polished / didn't have as many skills as he currently has he'd have more "upside"... Crazy.

I don’t think anyone was saying that. It’s more that Siakam didn’t get the coaching at a young age or the 10,000 hours theory at a young age so he has more that he can add (and has).

There are two totally different age arguments that get conflated.

1) Tatum is younger than Siakam

2) Siakam started playing organized basketball much later than Tatum

They are two totally separate arguments, each favoring one over the other, but shouldn't be argued in the same breath. Otherwise it gets convoluted like Karate Diop pointed out.

Tatum, by virture of being 4 years younger, is more likely to develop physically over the next couple years as he matures. Siakam has less room to physically develop. This is more about actual physical gains than polish.

Siakam, by virture of picking up the game much much later than Tatum, has the potential to continue on a much more positively skewed developmental curve as far as his basketball skillset/knowledge goes. Tatum has less room to develop in that respect as he's already benefited greatly from all the muscle memory/repetition gained from a lifetime of playing ball. This is more about polish than physical gains.

That isn't to say that each can't develop more than the other in each area, just that they both have more potential to develop in those areas based on the "age" differences.

Agreed.

[The_Hater]

It’d be cool if Rozier and Smart routinely didn’t shoot as much as Tatum.

Is there any reason why Tatum settles for so many long 2’s? He steps in instead of sideways when chased off the 3 point line and rarely seems to attack the rim in those instances. Is this coaching? Personality? Inexperience?

[UcanUwill]

Tatum is 20 and Siakam is 24.

Siakam started playing basketball at 17.

Tatum's been playing since he was a little kid.

Well, too bad for Siakam, he is still 4 years older.

[pagal]

It’d be cool if Rozier and Smart routinely didn’t shoot as much as Tatum.

Is there any reason why Tatum settles for so many long 2’s? He steps in instead of sideways when chased off the 3 point line and rarely seems to attack the rim in those instances. Is this coaching? Personality? Inexperience?

No, it is simply low basketball IQ at this stage of his career- may be he'll get better, may be not. Also, after seeing him in person, he is a below NBA-average athlete. He was getting outrun by almost every RAPS guard/wing and had poor body-language throughout the game. It was almost pathetic to see him try to catch Siakam.

[cl2117]

It’d be cool if Rozier and Smart routinely didn’t shoot as much as Tatum.

Is there any reason why Tatum settles for so many long 2’s? He steps in instead of sideways when chased off the 3 point line and rarely seems to attack the rim in those instances. Is this coaching? Personality? Inexperience?

Probably all of the above, but it's less of an issue than it may appear to the casual observer. He does sidestep on closeouts to still shoot the 3 after the defender has flown by, but he's more comfortable stepping up for the long 2. He does attack the rim in those same instances, and surprisingly well I might add with his long-armed layups, but again not frequently enough.

It's not that he can't do those things, it's that he doesn't do them enough. Results in the same net effect, but at least it suggest that with coaching and seasoning he will reduce the long jumpers and take the higher value/percentage shots.

I think he's much more comfortable shooting his jumper so he's just got to get it into his muscle memory to take the 3 instead of the long 2 and to attack the rim with the intent of getting to the line rather than settling for the jumper.

[The_Hater]

It’d be cool if Rozier and Smart routinely didn’t shoot as much as Tatum.

Is there any reason why Tatum settles for so many long 2’s? He steps in instead of sideways when chased off the 3 point line and rarely seems to attack the rim in those instances. Is this coaching? Personality? Inexperience?

No, it is simply low basketball IQ at this stage of his career- may be he'll get better, may be not. Also, after seeing him in person, he is a below NBA-average athlete. He was getting outrun by almost every RAPS guard/wing and had poor body-language throughout the game. It was almost pathetic to see him try to catch Siakam.

He’s not elected but I think he’s a solid athlete. I wouldn’t use getting outrun by Siakam as the gauge, Siakam might be the fastest baseline to baseline player in the league. He wins a footrace with everyone.

[Double Helix]

Tatum is 20 and Siakam is 24.

Siakam started playing basketball at 17.

Tatum's been playing since he was a little kid.

Well, too bad for Siakam, he is still 4 years older.

Once you get past puberty and height growth potential and are talking about two twenty year olds... basketball experience today is more important than physical age and Siakam is younger in basketball years so his ability to grow further remains high.

[Froob]

It’d be cool if Rozier and Smart routinely didn’t shoot as much as Tatum.

Is there any reason why Tatum settles for so many long 2’s? He steps in instead of sideways when chased off the 3 point line and rarely seems to attack the rim in those instances. Is this coaching? Personality? Inexperience?

No idea, seems like it’s worse this season. He spent time with Kobe during the off season so he may have received poor advice lol.

Especially don’t remember him taking so many inefficient shots in the playoffs last year he was killing Philly in the paint.

[cl2117]

Siakam started playing basketball at 17.

Tatum's been playing since he was a little kid.

Well, too bad for Siakam, he is still 4 years older.

Once you get past puberty and height growth potential and are talking about two twenty year olds... basketball experience today is more important than physical age and Siakam is younger in basketball years.

That's an incredibly subjective opinion said surprisingly categorically.

[Dave_From_NB]

Tatum has been on the radar for years, as a high end high college recruit and playing for the U.S. internationally, so it's natural that he is much better known than a guy who was pretty much irrelevant until his breakout this season. Heck, if we pretended that Siakim was a rookie last season, his ppg would have ranked him 30'th among rookies. He came into the season pretty much invisible. Kudos to him for making such a dramatic improvement.

Ratings tend to consider how long you've been operating at a level and potential. The latter has been discussed at length here, but consider that if the list came out in April instead of February that Siakim would have been too old to have even been considered, whereas Tatum will likely be on the list for another 4 years.

(These comments assuming that the principal motivator for the thread was the ESPN top 25 under 25 ranking)

[BodieB]

Next season will be able to determine this a whole lot better. Both will essentially be tasked with carrying their respective franchises.

[Tacoma]

There was talk within the Raptors circles about his potential but no one expected Siakam to be this good so fast. Conversely, Tatum was hyped to be a superstar in waiting after last season but that level of growth has not (yet) materialized. If you look at their respective careers so far as a graph, Siakam is currently on a steeper growth curve.

Tatum has more room to grow due to age. Siakam has more room to grow because he started playing bball later. Being younger doesn't automatically follow that he'll have a higher peak. Both players can peak at the same level but the older one peaks earlier.

You can argue that duration of peak performance may be greater for Tatum because he's younger. That may be the case all else being equal. But all else is not equal. There are many variables such as usage, health, genetics and the fact that Siakam has less mileage in his basketball odometer because he didn't seriously play bball until 17.

Overall, we have too few data points and it's a wait and see. Both will be crucial to their team's success in 2019 playoffs. In this world of what have you done for me lately, the one that performs better in the 2019 playoffs will be the one more talked about... until next year.

[ATLTimekeeper]

Siakam breaks many conventional ideas about basketball players.

He was the prototypical big man who was coerced into the game because he was tall and not because he loved the sport. The story about him only attending the Mbah Moute camp because it was a chance to visit his sister is kind of how it is with him. Yet the kind of things you'd expect him to struggle with (feel for the game, creativity, motor, work ethic) he excels at. His development will likely include building his shooting touch out further in his post game, because that's what he's had since college, as well as a couple of spots where he can pull up for two a la Giannis.

[King Ken]

Siakam seems to have a higher ceiling to me. He is good as heck

[PushDaRock]

So let me get this straight... Because Tatum has a more advanced skillset at a younger age... He has less room to improve and develop further?

Doesn't that seem... Backwards?

It's basically trying to argue that if Tatum wasn't as polished / didn't have as many skills as he currently has he'd have more "upside"... Crazy.

If Tatum wasn't as polished, he also wouldn't be as good right now and we wouldn't rate him as high either. He's not an elite athlete with developing skills like you typically think of when projecting high upside. What makes him good is he has a very advanced offensive package for a young player. How much better is that really going to get is the question.