AussieCeltic wrote:nate33 wrote:ForeverTFC wrote:I just can't see Boston not having an all-star and Tatum is a better player than Brown.
Agree that Beal has been much better as of late. If FVV doesn't make it, my bet is that it's the Beal scenario.
Why should Boston categorically have an All-Star? They currently have a sub-.500 record and are ranked 10th in the conference, a half-game ahead of New York at 11th. If Toronto and Washington are ranked 7th and 8th with a 26-24 record when the selections are made, while Boston is sitting at 11th place with a 23-27 record, why should Tatum make it over Beal and Van Vleet?
Statistically, Van Vleet looks better than Tatum, and Beal is about the same.
We shouldn’t categorically have an all star but you’re being disingenuous with the records. Yes we are in 10th, but only half game back of Toronto and only 2.5 games back of 5th place.
You then throw up weird hypothetical records to try make your point. Raptors schedule is harder in the next month than Boston so every chance Boston is ranked higher than both the Wizards and Raptors.
Celtics have played the 6th hardest schedule so far this season and have an easier remaining schedule than every team in the East aside from the Cavs.
You misunderstood.
I'm not saying Jason Tatum absolutely should not be an All-Star. I'm merely saying there's a very plausible scenario with Washington and Toronto playing 1 game above .500 for a month and the Celtics playing 2 games below .500 for a month that yields the records I posted. And in that hypothetical but plausible scenario, why is it that Tatum should be an automatic All-Star bid?
If the vote was today, I'd probably have Tatum on the list ahead of Beal. As you said, the difference in record between Boston and Washington is minimal, and Tatum currently has slightly better numbers. All I'm saying is that team record could have a big impact on that by the time selections are made.