Purely Hypothetical: Would You Trade Tatum In Package For Greek Freak?

[Phantom255x]

Some Bucks fans believe Giannis is just overrated. Could not lift the Bucks to a Game 7 win and that he gave up.

I thought his body language last night confirmed to me that he gave up. Khris Middleton was the one trying to lead the Bucks to the promise land lol.

Therefore, nah. I want to keep my boy Tatum. He is the future and could become the next KD35.

That he gave up is pure nonsense.

I saw him more as "give me the ball" than giving up.  If Giannis had a good long range game -- he'd be the best player in the league right now.  At 23 I'll bet on him developing the range.  Much more of a sure thing "top 5" than Tatum since Giannis is probably already top 5!!

Giannis is Top-10 right now, not Top-5.

[wdleehi]

In a vacuum yes.



Really depends on what has to be added to the package.  (which is a lot less than when this thread started based on Tatum)

[Vermont Green]

Some Bucks fans believe Giannis is just overrated. Could not lift the Bucks to a Game 7 win and that he gave up.

I thought his body language last night confirmed to me that he gave up. Khris Middleton was the one trying to lead the Bucks to the promise land lol.

Therefore, nah. I want to keep my boy Tatum. He is the future and could become the next KD35.

That he gave up is pure nonsense.

Giannis is a great player but also overrated to some degree (both can be true).  At this point, he is not a player that can carry a team in game 7 (neither is Tatum).  Both have plenty of upside to become that type of player.  If I was allowed to pick one of them today for the Celtics, I would pick Giannis.  I like the length which is more of a need for this roster (Hayward and Tatum can both be the primary wing-SF).  Tatum may end up better "IF" he gets stronger, IF he improves ball handling, IF....  .  Giannis still has potential that may or may not get realized but there is less uncertainty with Giannis.  It seems to me that Giannis would thrive as the second best player on a team (which he could be on Boston with Kyrie).

[Green-18]

Some Bucks fans believe Giannis is just overrated. Could not lift the Bucks to a Game 7 win and that he gave up.

I thought his body language last night confirmed to me that he gave up. Khris Middleton was the one trying to lead the Bucks to the promise land lol.

Therefore, nah. I want to keep my boy Tatum. He is the future and could become the next KD35.

That he gave up is pure nonsense.

Giannis is a great player but also overrated to some degree (both can be true).  At this point, he is not a player that can carry a team in game 7 (neither is Tatum).  Both have plenty of upside to become that type of player.  If I was allowed to pick one of them today for the Celtics, I would pick Giannis.  I like the length which is more of a need for this roster (Hayward and Tatum can both be the primary wing-SF).  Tatum may end up better "IF" he gets stronger, IF he improves ball handling, IF....  .  Giannis still has potential that may or may not get realized but there is less uncertainty with Giannis.  It seems to me that Giannis would thrive as the second best player on a team (which he could be on Boston with Kyrie).

Sums up my thoughts perfectly.  Those who lean heavily towards Tatum are ignoring the positive impact Brad Stevens would have on Giannis.  In these debates I tend to assume that we would see the best version of any player who comes to Boston.  Are Giannis' shooting woes really a problem on this roster?

Let's pretend we live in a world where Tatum is swapped directly for Giannis.  Imagine the sheer versatility of an Irving, Brown, Hayward, Giannis, and Horford lineup.  The defense and transition scoring would break the will of most teams.

[Phantom255x]

In a vacuum yes.



Really depends on what has to be added to the package.  (which is a lot less than when this thread started based on Tatum)

Well even if he was available like years from now, he's making like 24M+ by then, so matching salaries would be extremely difficult in that trade (like it would have for an Anthony Davis one).

[Vermont Green]

Are Giannis' shooting woes really a problem on this roster?

I think I am agreeing with Green-18 but does Giannis really have shooting "woes"?  I think he shoots pretty well for someone his size.  Per NBA stats, 46.2% 8-16 ft and 38.5% 16-24 ft.  (For reference, Anthony Davis is 43% 8-16 ft and 34% 16-24 ft, I guess he has woes too).  The Celtics would play him as a big (where he should play).  He would get 10+ rebounds, block shots, run the floor and can shoot a high percentage within a reasonable range if playing with good shot selection.  If he is open and has a totally squared up look, fine, take the outside shot but that should not be the objective.  I have no concerns whatsoever with Giannis' shooting.

[Chris22]

Giannis was 7-17 in a game seven his team had to win.
And Horford made him his B.
F no.

[Moranis]

Giannis was 7-17 in a game seven his team had to win.
And Horford made him his B.
F no.

Do you know who else was 7-17 in that game 7?

[Green-18]

Are Giannis' shooting woes really a problem on this roster?

I think I am agreeing with Green-18 but does Giannis really have shooting "woes"?  I think he shoots pretty well for someone his size.  Per NBA stats, 46.2% 8-16 ft and 38.5% 16-24 ft.  (For reference, Anthony Davis is 43% 8-16 ft and 34% 16-24 ft, I guess he has woes too).  The Celtics would play him as a big (where he should play).  He would get 10+ rebounds, block shots, run the floor and can shoot a high percentage within a reasonable range if playing with good shot selection.  If he is open and has a totally squared up look, fine, take the outside shot but that should not be the objective.  I have no concerns whatsoever with Giannis' shooting.

Are Giannis' shooting woes really a problem on this roster?

I think I am agreeing with Green-18 but does Giannis really have shooting "woes"?  I think he shoots pretty well for someone his size.  Per NBA stats, 46.2% 8-16 ft and 38.5% 16-24 ft.  (For reference, Anthony Davis is 43% 8-16 ft and 34% 16-24 ft, I guess he has woes too).  The Celtics would play him as a big (where he should play).  He would get 10+ rebounds, block shots, run the floor and can shoot a high percentage within a reasonable range if playing with good shot selection.  If he is open and has a totally squared up look, fine, take the outside shot but that should not be the objective.  I have no concerns whatsoever with Giannis' shooting.

Yeah we are in complete agreement.  I mentioned shooting "woes" in regard to his lack of confidence in creating shooting opportunities from the perimeter as a #1 option.  He still looks awkward at times if he is forced to catch the ball from beyond the arc against good NBA defenders.   

The perception of this being a fatal flaw is largely overstated by most.   As you mentioned he would be treated as big man in our offense.  Milwaukee realistically needs to build around him as a 4/5 in their half court offense.  The goal should be to get him the ball from inside 15 feet every time.  His perimeter ball handling is fine when Milwaukee forces a switch onto slower or weaker defenders.     

[incoherent]

No I wouldn't do the trade.  In 4 years when Tatum is Giannis' age Tatum will be vastly superior to what Giannis is now. 

[Roy H.]

Giannis was 7-17 in a game seven his team had to win.

Kobe was 8-for-24 in Game 7 of the NBA Finals once. 

[Chris22]

Giannis was 7-17 in a game seven his team had to win.

Kobe was 8-for-24 in Game 7 of the NBA Finals once.

Was he guarded by Ojelly?

Giannis is overrated. If he was not mollycoddled by the refs who allow him to take four steps, his game would be much different.

[footey]

I'd trade any player in the NBA for Giannis, including Lebron and Durant.  Age factors into that thought.

[Who]

No I wouldn't do the trade.  In 4 years when Tatum is Giannis' age Tatum will be vastly superior to what Giannis is now.

Yeah. I said "yes" before when this thread first appeared ... but after seeing Giannis against the Celtics in the playoffs, I am switching to the "no" camp.

I was not impressed by Giannis in that series. He is nowhere near the MVP candidate the media portrays him as. He is a very good player. An All-Star. But not an MVP and I am not even sure he is a top 10 player in the league either.

I'd rather take my chances with Tatum. At least with Tatum you do not need to build around him to compensate for his flaws like you do with Giannis.

[Moranis]

Giannis was 7-17 in a game seven his team had to win.

Kobe was 8-for-24 in Game 7 of the NBA Finals once.

These are Michael Jordan's 1st four playoff appearance shooting stats in the closeout game of the series that the Bulls lost.

6 for 16
8 for 18
9 for 30
10 for 22

Let's not pretend that all great players don't lay some eggs when their team needs them the most.