RealGM

dhsilv2 wrote:

tsherkin wrote:

dhsilv2 wrote:So you need an MVP as the absolute starting point?

I didn't say that, no. But likely to win one, unless it's a really rich period for generational talent, to be fair. To me, though, it's more about performance. You can be a superstar and on a fairly bleh team, and that will impact your MVP chances. Jordan didn't win his first until Chicago was over .500, for example, winning 50 games in 88, you know? But he was clearly a superstar prior to that.

Then I don't see why Zo or Pippen weren't superstars. Paul George in 2019 certainly was pretty superstar to me as well.

Zo was like the 5th best center of his era.

Zo, Pippen, and PG13 were never likely to win a MVP.

Jerry West never won an MVP, but in that era with no 3 point shot centers dominated. The logo is a superstar. Dwayne Wade never won a MVP, but he was the best player in the 2006 playoffs and won finals MVP.

Elgin Baylor never won MVP or finals MVP, but he holds the record for most point scored in a finals game and was the first player to have hangtime while dunking.

CodeBreaker wrote:

Jailblazers7 wrote:He has a signature shoe so yes I’d call him a superstar.

Didn't know Gordon Hayward is a superstar

lol fair, I need to add some fine print. The signature shoe has to be available for sale at a Foot Locker located in the USA.

Scarletfire81 wrote:Yes he is but he settles a lot of the time for a step back three. So that’s what people see & he’s judged on that decision because he’s better than that. He shouldn’t settle like that but he’s gotten better this year.

Blame Brad Stevens. When Tatum was a rookie, he had all the mid range tricks in his bag and went to them often. Then Brad, who was big on playing the Dubs 3-point barrage style offense, made Jt stop taking longer twos and had him just take threes instead. It changed JT's game a bit, but if you see him not overthink mid range shots, where he just goes into his footwork, he's nearly unstoppable. His view that he has to take so many threes (which is Mazzulla's game style, too) I believe prohibits him from putting up higher numbers, as his three point percentage is not very good.

And Brad did not specifically target JT and made him shoot threes due to JT having bad long two percentage numbers, he shifted the entire team and offense to take threes rather than lower percentage threes. He should have essentially left JT's game alone.

Green89 wrote:

Scarletfire81 wrote:Yes he is but he settles a lot of the time for a step back three. So that’s what people see & he’s judged on that decision because he’s better than that. He shouldn’t settle like that but he’s gotten better this year.

Blame Brad Stevens. When Tatum was a rookie, he had all the mid range tricks in his bag and went to them often. Then Brad, who was big on playing the Dubs 3-point barrage style offense, made Jt stop taking longer twos and had him just take threes instead. It changed JT's game a bit, but if you see him not overthink mid range shots, where he just goes into his footwork, he's nearly unstoppable. His view that he has to take so many threes (which is Mazzulla's game style, too) I believe prohibits him from putting up higher numbers, as his three point percentage is not very good.

And Brad did not specifically target JT and made him shoot threes due to JT having bad long two percentage numbers, he shifted the entire team and offense to take threes rather than lower percentage threes. He should have essentially left JT's game alone.

He actually shot less (by proportion and raw volume) from mid-range as a rookie than any of the three following seasons, more like the past couple of years. And it wasn't until his third season that his 3pt volume really started to crank up. The four years prior to this one, he was playing a lot more of the short game away from the rim.

And that comes through a lot in the big-scoring games he has. It'll be a mix of him ruining the team at the rim, clicking from three, and sometimes getting into the key in the bottom half of the circle or otherwise just outside the RA. He doesn't really use the baseline, he doesn't use the elbow a ton anymore and he is far weaker on the right side than the left. But yeah, as a rookie he was smashing the left elbow and the nail a lot more than he has been since.

tsherkin wrote:

dhsilv2 wrote:You keep going back to offense...I'm not debating that side of the floor. But the better player? I think it's very much up for debate on who's better.

I believe it's the difference maker. Maybe you disagree, that's fine, we can agree to disagree on that. But for a focal player, I'd rather have what SGA brings, I think it's more important than what Tatum brings on D.

And I'd say guys like Hondo got elevated to superstar levels through team success. So that's nothing new. Today there's just more of a line in the sand perhaps. But it's not new.

I think Hondo proved what he needed to as the focal point of post-Russell title teams, to be perfectly honest.

But you're repeating yourself and not my point. I agreed with you that people being elevated due to team success isn't a new thing, remember? That wasn't my point of contention.

Hondo wasn't nearly the focal point that a Tatum is offensively. But clearly you are more confident in SGA's ability to maintain his offense in the playoffs than I am given our small sample size so far.

dhsilv2 wrote:Hondo wasn't nearly the focal point that a Tatum is offensively.

Hondo couldn't jack 3s, so there's that to consider.

But clearly you are more confident in SGA's ability to maintain his offense in the playoffs than I am given our small sample size so far.

I am, yes. And by the structure of his game allowing him to be more consistent than a high-variance dude like Tatum. And because he's a far more dynamic playmaker.

NZB2323 wrote:

dhsilv2 wrote:

tsherkin wrote:
I didn't say that, no. But likely to win one, unless it's a really rich period for generational talent, to be fair. To me, though, it's more about performance. You can be a superstar and on a fairly bleh team, and that will impact your MVP chances. Jordan didn't win his first until Chicago was over .500, for example, winning 50 games in 88, you know? But he was clearly a superstar prior to that.

Then I don't see why Zo or Pippen weren't superstars. Paul George in 2019 certainly was pretty superstar to me as well.

Zo was like the 5th best center of his era.

Zo, Pippen, and PG13 were never likely to win a MVP.

Jerry West never won an MVP, but in that era with no 3 point shot centers dominated. The logo is a superstar. Dwayne Wade never won a MVP, but he was the best player in the 2006 playoffs and won finals MVP.

Elgin Baylor never won MVP or finals MVP, but he holds the record for most point scored in a finals game and was the first player to have hangtime while dunking.

Zo peaked in 99 and 2000 as by all measures likely the second best center in the NBA and finishing 2nd and 3rd in MVP voting in back to back years. It was Zo and Shaq. Era is a weird construct but really the only other center really from his true era was Shaq unless you want to argue for Robinson. Or you want to elevate deke. Otherwise Ewing and Dream were far before him. And Duncan came a good bit after. Sadly Zo at his apex and still not even 30 had that kidney issue and we never got to see the end of his prime. But he very well might not have even reached his peak and he was clearly an MVP contender, not to mention 2x DPOY.

Paul George peaked 3rd in MVP voting and had a good case to be higher. He was absolutely dominate defensively in 2019. Perhaps the best point of attack defender who also could dominate off ball since Leonard.

And Pippen I 100% think would have won an MVP or two if he'd not played with MJ. We'll never get to see that. But he too finished 3rd in MVP voting in 94. I wish we had RAPM data from that year as it was possibly the greatest defensive wing season in NBA history. And he still managed 3rd in BPM that year.

I get that Zo had health issues, George had injuries, and Pippen was stuck keeping the peace in chicago for 6 titles before leaving after back surgery and not being the same player. But at these guy's best they were MVP contenders and legit superstars. I'd add 6 rings should get you superstar status if you're often the second best player in the game in your own right as he was.

tsherkin wrote:

dhsilv2 wrote:Hondo wasn't nearly the focal point that a Tatum is offensively.

Hondo couldn't jack 3s, so there's that to consider.

But clearly you are more confident in SGA's ability to maintain his offense in the playoffs than I am given our small sample size so far.

I am, yes. And by the structure of his game allowing him to be more consistent than a high-variance dude like Tatum. And because he's a far more dynamic playmaker.

I need to see the refs swallow their whistle when he's playing before I can go further. Especially given I think Tatum's defense is getting underrated here. But I want to see SGA deal with physicality like Harden has faced or Curry against the Celtics. If he can maintain it through that, ok...I'm with you. But he's not tested yet.

dhsilv2 wrote:Zo peaked in 99 and 2000 as by all measures likely the second best center in the NBA and finishing 2nd and 3rd in MVP voting in back to back years. It was Zo and Shaq. Era is a weird construct but really the only other center really from his true era was Shaq unless you want to argue for Robinson. Or you want to elevate deke. Otherwise Ewing and Dream were far before him. And Duncan came a good bit after.

Duncan won his first title in 99, was 3rd in that MVP vote in his second season, had won the ROY the year before... He was not "a good bit after."

And Pippen I 100% think would have won an MVP or two if he'd not played with MJ.

I can't really envision that, tbh. He'd have been competing with Jordan and Malone, and likely not from a place of a well-built, deep and well-coached Chicago team. Never mind Barkley and Olajuwon and D-Rob. Scottie was very good, but I think there was some degree of mislead with the 94 season.

dhsilv2 wrote:I need to see the refs swallow their whistle when he's playing before I can go further.

Sure, but his dribble attack and mid-range game are considerably better, as is his playmaking... and he was only getting .362 FTr in this postseason, which is lower than the majority of Tatum's postseasons, so I don't know that friendly whistle is the comparison angle you want to approach for these two.

I hear you with wanting to see a little more, but we'll get there. And I'm comfortable that he will continue to be better by virtue of his specific skill set and proficiency therein. I value what he brings more than what Tatum brings in that regard, although I don't meant to diminish Tatum by saying that. I respect Tatum as a very good player, but it's always so frustrating to equivocate for effect when you're trying to speak positively about one player whilst attempting not to crap on another guy.

DowJones wrote:He isn't on the same level as Jokic, Luka, and Giannis. I don't have him on the same level as Curry, Durant and Embiid. I put him on that third level with guys like SGA, Edwards and Booker which is just a bit ahead of guys like Mitchell, Brunson, Halliburton, etc.

Durant can't hold Tatum's jock at this point. SGA is terrific but not quite Tatum level. Edwards is a 1 year wonder who's flaming out right now. Booker isn't in Tatum's class, come on.

tsherkin wrote:

dhsilv2 wrote:Zo peaked in 99 and 2000 as by all measures likely the second best center in the NBA and finishing 2nd and 3rd in MVP voting in back to back years. It was Zo and Shaq. Era is a weird construct but really the only other center really from his true era was Shaq unless you want to argue for Robinson. Or you want to elevate deke. Otherwise Ewing and Dream were far before him. And Duncan came a good bit after.

Duncan won his first title in 99, was 3rd in that MVP vote in his second season, had won the ROY the year before... He was not "a good bit after."

And Pippen I 100% think would have won an MVP or two if he'd not played with MJ.

I can't really envision that, tbh. He'd have been competing with Jordan and Malone, and likely not from a place of a well-built, deep and well-coached Chicago team. Never mind Barkley and Olajuwon and D-Rob. Scottie was very good, but I think there was some degree of mislead with the 94 season.

dhsilv2 wrote:I need to see the refs swallow their whistle when he's playing before I can go further.

Sure, but his dribble attack and mid-range game are considerably better, as is his playmaking... and he was only getting .362 FTr in this postseason, which is lower than the majority of Tatum's postseasons, so I don't know that friendly whistle is the comparison angle you want to approach for these two.

I hear you with wanting to see a little more, but we'll get there. And I'm comfortable that he will continue to be better by virtue of his specific skill set and proficiency therein. I value what he brings more than what Tatum brings in that regard, although I don't meant to diminish Tatum by saying that. I respect Tatum as a very good player, but it's always so frustrating to equivocate for effect when you're trying to speak positively about one player whilst attempting not to crap on another guy.

Would you consider Bird and Magic to be of the same generation of Jordan? Generally that's not seen. Guys tend to get their best years 26-32 with 28-30 being really the 3 year apex. Exceptions exist but if guys aren't cross over that age range for a couple years. I'd tend to argue they aren't of the same generation. That said your top tier guys...perhaps who others see as superstars...I see as more the generational players. Those guys often are so good for so long they can lay claim to two generations.

Mournings generation were guys like Shaq, Deke, Payton, Grant Hill, Jason Kidd and guys like that. Yeah, he crossed a bit with Robinson and Duncan. Ewing was still an allstar on the down side while he was coming into his prime.

50yrceltsfan wrote:Durant can't hold Tatum's jock at this point. SGA is terrific but not quite Tatum level. Edwards is a 1 year wonder who's flaming out right now. Booker isn't in Tatum's class, come on.

SGA is better than Tatum already.

Durant... remains a considerably better scorer, but obviously isn't Tatum's level as a defender. So that's an interesting conversation to have, IMHO. Tatum's younger, and that defense isn't nothing, particularly since there isn't a huge difference in creation for others.

dhsilv2 wrote:Would you consider Bird and Magic to be of the same generation of Jordan? Generally that's not seen. Guys tend to get their best years 26-32 with 28-30 being really the 3 year apex. Exceptions exist but if guys aren't cross over that age range for a couple years. I'd tend to argue they aren't of the same generation. That said your top tier guys...perhaps who others see as superstars...I see as more the generational players. Those guys often are so good for so long they can lay claim to two generations.

Sure. I don't really factor that into this conversation, though. I don't really care what generation a player was here. If they were playing at the same time, then they competed with one another. Duncan hit the league in nearly final form, for example. Yeah, Ewing and D-Rob and Olajuwon had aged out by the time Mourning hit his peak before his illness took him down, but there were a bunch of other guys in the league ahead of him overall, and obviously Shaq and Tim were better at position (depending on how you choose to align with what position a floater like Tim is categorized as, of course).

Mournings generation were guys like Shaq, Deke, Payton, Grant Hill, Jason Kidd and guys like that. Yeah, he crossed a bit with Robinson and Duncan. Ewing was still an allstar on the down side while he was coming into his prime.

Sure, but in context of my comment, when Duncan was in the league, he was a lot better than Mourning, who had few actual peers from his own generation at position. And the one who stands out was considerably better than he was.

Mourning was a lot like Ewing in the sense that he wasn't a dominant rebounder and he was lesser on O than most of his star peers at the 5, but a fantastic defender.

tsherkin wrote:

dhsilv2 wrote:Would you consider Bird and Magic to be of the same generation of Jordan? Generally that's not seen. Guys tend to get their best years 26-32 with 28-30 being really the 3 year apex. Exceptions exist but if guys aren't cross over that age range for a couple years. I'd tend to argue they aren't of the same generation. That said your top tier guys...perhaps who others see as superstars...I see as more the generational players. Those guys often are so good for so long they can lay claim to two generations.

Sure. I don't really factor that into this conversation, though. I don't really care what generation a player was here. If they were playing at the same time, then they competed with one another. Duncan hit the league in nearly final form, for example. Yeah, Ewing and D-Rob and Olajuwon had aged out by the time Mourning hit his peak before his illness took him down, but there were a bunch of other guys in the league ahead of him overall, and obviously Shaq and Tim were better at position (depending on how you choose to align with what position a floater like Tim is categorized as, of course).

Mournings generation were guys like Shaq, Deke, Payton, Grant Hill, Jason Kidd and guys like that. Yeah, he crossed a bit with Robinson and Duncan. Ewing was still an allstar on the down side while he was coming into his prime.

Sure, but in context of my comment, when Duncan was in the league, he was a lot better than Mourning, who had few actual peers from his own generation at position. And the one who stands out was considerably better than he was.

Mourning was a lot like Ewing in the sense that he wasn't a dominant rebounder and he was lesser on O than most of his star peers at the 5, but a fantastic defender.

Duncan came into the league as a pretty poor passer and by 2002 had become an elite one. Zo again would finish 2nd and 3rd in MVP voting (ahead of Duncan) while getting PDOY in 99 and 00. Sadly we truthfully never got to see what an apex duncan could look like due to that knee injury, but duncan's best years came after Zo's peak with Duncans best two years generally being seen as 02 and 03..with all due respect to his crazy playoff run in 07. Zo never came back to from after missing most of the 01 season.

Fencer reregistered wrote:

Read on Twitter

CaRrIeD bY a SuPeRtEaM

KamikazeK wrote:

Fencer reregistered wrote:

Read on Twitter

CaRrIeD bY a SuPeRtEaM

Not carried but he’s had the benefit of being on great teams with a lot of talent since his rookie year which is something most superstars aren’t afforded. So he’s had a lot of deep playoff runs already. Granted he has played a big part in that but if he had been surrounded with wembys supporting cast or lebron early cavs his playoff numbers would look a lot different

tsherkin wrote:

50yrceltsfan wrote:Durant can't hold Tatum's jock at this point. SGA is terrific but not quite Tatum level. Edwards is a 1 year wonder who's flaming out right now. Booker isn't in Tatum's class, come on.

SGA is better than Tatum already.

Durant... remains a considerably better scorer, but obviously isn't Tatum's level as a defender. So that's an interesting conversation to have, IMHO. Tatum's younger, and that defense isn't nothing, particularly since there isn't a huge difference in creation for others.

How is Durant a considerably better scorer? In his prime yes, but that was years ago. Now for him to break 30 is an event, for Tatum it's another day. He's gone 36-10-8 and 36-12-7 in this 3-game series so far. When they faced each other head to head in a series 2 years ago, Tatum embarrassed him.

You can argue either way with SGA-Tatum probably, but they play different positions.

Best analogy I have is eye test vs analytics.

On paper and from a numbers standpoint, he checks the boxes. From that perspective, plus from a marketing point of view, yes.

But he holds back when you watch him.

It's his mental game that gives pause. But he can overcome it. It's up to him though.

50yrceltsfan wrote:How is Durant a considerably better scorer? In his prime yes, but that was years ago. Now for him to break 30 is an event,

...

1) Durant just finished a season where he scored 27.1 ppg. He recorded 30+ in 27 of his 75 games. He posted 40+ 5 times.

2) He was a 62.6% TS scorer this year, which is also considerably superior to Tatum.

3) What are you talking about?


Tatum is a better defender and rebounder than Durant. At no point ever has he been a superior scorer. Yes, he's playing well right now. Indiana has no prayer of guarding Boston, and certainly isn't the same caliber defense that we saw from the 2022 Celtics against an incomplete Brooklyn team.

Tatum is very good; he doesn't require hyperbole for appreciation. It achieves the opposite effect.

for Tatum it's another day. He's gone 36-10-8 and 36-12-7 in this 3-game series so far. When they faced each other head to head in a series 2 years ago, Tatum embarrassed him.

Try again. You meant, "Boston's team D embarrassed him because they were able to key specifically on him with Harden not playing."

You can argue either way with SGA-Tatum probably, but they play different positions.

Position isn't relevant here.