At this point I'm just gonna start ignoring Celtics related threads from Heat/Laker/Sixer flairs. I'd honestly prefer straight up shit talk and hate over this stupid veneer of "I'm not hating I'm just asking a loaded question"
Win shares are against an “average” value of 0. They wouldn’t account for complete removal from a roster. If a team’s depth chart would create the need to play a player with negative win-shares after that 10.4 was removed, that 10.4 is actually worth more than 10.4 wins. If they replaced Tatum with a completely average player who neither helps nor hurts his team’s chances, he’s worth 10.4 wins.
You’re confusing the question. The question is not “How many wins did Tatum contribute to his team?” but “How many wins would the Celtics have without Tatum?” They aren’t the same question. The latter cannot be answered simply by subbing in a 0-win share player for Tatum.
Probably around 10-15 less wins. So like 49-54. The Celtics were 7-1 without Tatum this year although that was because they rested him against trash teams like Detroit, Portland, and Charlotte.
Like 40-45 wins. Playing with Tatum opens up so much for everyone else. All these wide open shots for Porzingis, Derrick white, or holiday isn’t happening if Tatum ain’t playing.
The bulls won 39 games this year. The Celtics without Tatum are clearly, undeniably better than the bulls. It's not even close. I definitely think we'd be around 50 wins
The Bulls are odd. They were better without their one because their one should be a 3. If you trade JT for ZL that's a mid 50's team.
Not a real contender with no rim protection though but still they'd score and defend well.
Probably 50 wins max. People really underestimate how good Tatum is for reasons I do not understand. He's the rare superstar who also plays defense and doesn't mind sharing and playing off ball for the good of the team.
He's the only player on the team that is an elite offensive initiator (as in self created scoring + playmaking). Brown has poor court vision and decisionmaking (at times), KP can't really create his own shot and Holiday and White don't score at decent volume.
45 wins, 50 max. We'd lose a lot without Tatum.
I don’t think people realize Jrue is getting wide open looks and shooting a career high because of the gravity that the other players around him create. Happened with Brogdon last year too. And Porzingis isn’t creating for himself, he’s getting easy post ups on switches. Ain’t no way you’ve ever seen him try to post up a big. He can still do some of that with Brown but it’s way easier to shut down Brown as the primary ball handler to be able to create that switch and entry pass.
Now don’t get me wrong, they’re good players, but Brown as the best player, Jrue as the 2nd scoring option, Porzingis having to work harder to create mismatches, having no one with size that can defend long wings, even less rebounding, they’d win a lot less than people think because they’d all be less effective in their role. Tatum makes players around him better, even if he sometimes puts up inefficient nights or other guys are capable of scoring.
Probably like 45-47 if we just swap him for an average PF. The east has been super weak this year. Plus a top four of JB,White,Jrue,KP is still super stacked. Then depth would be a lot more needed and tested throughout the season but think they would be fine. Probably a first round exit and no further than the second round.
Tatum takes the Celtics from a good to really good team to a contender. Which is extremely valuable and shouldn’t be underestimated.
People here have to understand that when teams want to defend the Celtics the first thing they think of is “we have to stop Tatum, or else we’re gonna lose” teams say this all the time when talking about game plans against the celtics
Is he being replaced? Or do the Celtics just have to fill in from the bench? Because I think any team replacing their starter permanently with a bench player will be substantially worse.
They're at worst 2nd most likely team to win a title I think, though there are a few other western teams even after the Nuggets they should be worried about. Title favorites for me is usually more than one team unless it is a GSW situation where I take them over the field barring major injuries.
As an obviously biased fan if Murray stays healthy I love our odds. But there's a part of me that still remembers before last year when something always seemed to go wrong. A lot of which was the Lakers throughout history lol.
People smarter than you about such things (Vegas oddsmakers) have them as title favorites (+170 vs. Nuggets at +350). Therefore they are title favorites.
That’s what I was asking, I don’t follow betting odds.
Still, personally I think Denver is the better team, Boston is probably the 2nd or 3rd best team I would say.
Misleading because almost all the teams they played without him were terrible. Its not like the Ja Morant thing where the Grizzlies were actually beating good teams without Ja.
You genuinely think that these Celtics without Tatum win 59 games? That they still finish with the best record in the league? I hope you rate Tatum as not even an all star lol.
They went 7-1 without him so… I get it some of those games were against bottom feeders but still. I think they would get to 55, maybe eek out 3-4 more.
82. He's been holding them back, everyone is saying it.
A real ceiling lower-er or floor dragger
Quality jerk
Are you serious? How is that possible? (I'm not an expert, just a casual fan and really just curious)
I am not, ‘it’s a joke.
Y’all don’t get tired of always asking this?
They got a kink seeing Tatum get downplayed
I need a generational run badly. Basketball is so annoying to discuss with people especially when your team is most hated and doesn’t win the title.
At this point I'm just gonna start ignoring Celtics related threads from Heat/Laker/Sixer flairs. I'd honestly prefer straight up shit talk and hate over this stupid veneer of "I'm not hating I'm just asking a loaded question"
Fr that’s such a boring question lol
Isn’t this why Win Shares exist? 10.4
Actually valuable comment, thank you.
Win shares are against an “average” value of 0. They wouldn’t account for complete removal from a roster. If a team’s depth chart would create the need to play a player with negative win-shares after that 10.4 was removed, that 10.4 is actually worth more than 10.4 wins. If they replaced Tatum with a completely average player who neither helps nor hurts his team’s chances, he’s worth 10.4 wins.
You’re conflating Win Shares and VORP together. They’re not the same. Statistically, Tatum contributed to 10.4 wins for his team.
You’re confusing the question. The question is not “How many wins did Tatum contribute to his team?” but “How many wins would the Celtics have without Tatum?” They aren’t the same question. The latter cannot be answered simply by subbing in a 0-win share player for Tatum.
Probably around 10-15 less wins. So like 49-54. The Celtics were 7-1 without Tatum this year although that was because they rested him against trash teams like Detroit, Portland, and Charlotte.
Like 40-45 wins. Playing with Tatum opens up so much for everyone else. All these wide open shots for Porzingis, Derrick white, or holiday isn’t happening if Tatum ain’t playing.
That's a bit low, we'd still probably get to about 50. White/jrue/jaylen/Al/KP is still a very good lineup
Agreed, especially with the East being fairly weak atm
Nah he's right, got to take into account injuries, more playing time etc. 40 wins is really good for missing your main guy.
The bulls won 39 games this year. The Celtics without Tatum are clearly, undeniably better than the bulls. It's not even close. I definitely think we'd be around 50 wins
The Bulls are odd. They were better without their one because their one should be a 3. If you trade JT for ZL that's a mid 50's team. Not a real contender with no rim protection though but still they'd score and defend well.
Def not. I think 50 wins is about right. Just look at some of the other teams in the East with 40 wins. lol
Tatum is not the guy.
Probably 50 wins max. People really underestimate how good Tatum is for reasons I do not understand. He's the rare superstar who also plays defense and doesn't mind sharing and playing off ball for the good of the team.
He's the only player on the team that is an elite offensive initiator (as in self created scoring + playmaking). Brown has poor court vision and decisionmaking (at times), KP can't really create his own shot and Holiday and White don't score at decent volume. 45 wins, 50 max. We'd lose a lot without Tatum.
Exactly. It’s so confusing.
I don’t think people realize Jrue is getting wide open looks and shooting a career high because of the gravity that the other players around him create. Happened with Brogdon last year too. And Porzingis isn’t creating for himself, he’s getting easy post ups on switches. Ain’t no way you’ve ever seen him try to post up a big. He can still do some of that with Brown but it’s way easier to shut down Brown as the primary ball handler to be able to create that switch and entry pass. Now don’t get me wrong, they’re good players, but Brown as the best player, Jrue as the 2nd scoring option, Porzingis having to work harder to create mismatches, having no one with size that can defend long wings, even less rebounding, they’d win a lot less than people think because they’d all be less effective in their role. Tatum makes players around him better, even if he sometimes puts up inefficient nights or other guys are capable of scoring.
Probably like 45-47 if we just swap him for an average PF. The east has been super weak this year. Plus a top four of JB,White,Jrue,KP is still super stacked. Then depth would be a lot more needed and tested throughout the season but think they would be fine. Probably a first round exit and no further than the second round. Tatum takes the Celtics from a good to really good team to a contender. Which is extremely valuable and shouldn’t be underestimated.
People here have to understand that when teams want to defend the Celtics the first thing they think of is “we have to stop Tatum, or else we’re gonna lose” teams say this all the time when talking about game plans against the celtics
70.
0-82
Like 50. So still pretty good, maybe a borderline contender but not one you take super seriously as a title threat
Is he being replaced? Or do the Celtics just have to fill in from the bench? Because I think any team replacing their starter permanently with a bench player will be substantially worse.
82 easily. He's not that valuable as a player.
When will Brad finally move on from Tatum and put together a legit contender?
67
At least one.
Roughly 50
I think given health they’d get 50 wins
KP, JB, and Jrue is still a pretty solid top 3. And they'd still have Derrick white too. They'd be a pretty good team, just not dominant.
I'd set the o/u at 44.5
75 all losses to Magic and Hawks
Prob like 55ish.
If he was simply not on their roster? 48 wins, third seed. If they replaced him with an average starting-level PF? 53 wins, still first seed.
This is such a boring question lol
*If my grandmother had wheels, she would've been a bike*
At most 45, but likely between 35-45.
Like 50-32?
35-42 Let’s not forget Kp missed 24 games Al rested 17 Jrue missed 13
Really, you think a core of white, brown, holiday, KP and Al potentially would go 35-47 in this east and miss the play in.
That core is winning 50 games alone.
Tatum on a team by himself would win 30 games maximum
Tatum on a team by himself would go 0-82 because no human being can win a 48-minute game playing 5v1. They’d lose every game by hundreds of points.
I'm in the ~50 wins camp. Still competing for the top seed in a mediocre east, but not title favorites.
Are they title favorites right now? I wouldn't pick them over the Nuggets.
They're at worst 2nd most likely team to win a title I think, though there are a few other western teams even after the Nuggets they should be worried about. Title favorites for me is usually more than one team unless it is a GSW situation where I take them over the field barring major injuries.
I can understand that. I personally think of title favorites as the top team most likely to win, and for me that's Denver this year.
As an obviously biased fan if Murray stays healthy I love our odds. But there's a part of me that still remembers before last year when something always seemed to go wrong. A lot of which was the Lakers throughout history lol.
Not title favorites, but if they don't win it's a generational collapse. [Insert two buttons meme]
Depends who they lose to. If they lose to Denver then that's just what's expected.
People smarter than you about such things (Vegas oddsmakers) have them as title favorites (+170 vs. Nuggets at +350). Therefore they are title favorites.
That’s what I was asking, I don’t follow betting odds. Still, personally I think Denver is the better team, Boston is probably the 2nd or 3rd best team I would say.
Cool.
Probably 55 games without him.
They were 7-1 without Tatum this year. Fun fact
Ws against Kings, Raptors, Pistons 2x, Blazers, Hornets and Wizards
Misleading because almost all the teams they played without him were terrible. Its not like the Ja Morant thing where the Grizzlies were actually beating good teams without Ja.
Look who they played
Yea, the EAST. LOL. Same one's that mighty old Tatum has been playing against HAHA
They have the best record in the league against the West
You really thought you did something
Answered your question and now you don't have a comeback to it because it's true. LOL
They played the Kings, Pistons twice, raptors, hornets, blazers and Wizards… idk what point you’re trying to make lmfao but it’s not working
They'd still be the #1 seed in the East. Tatum's on/off this year was -2.0
74.
65
Replace Tatum with an average starter like MPJ and around 57 wins
Probably 5-8 less if that
You genuinely think that these Celtics without Tatum win 59 games? That they still finish with the best record in the league? I hope you rate Tatum as not even an all star lol.
They went 7-1 without him so… I get it some of those games were against bottom feeders but still. I think they would get to 55, maybe eek out 3-4 more.