ESPN's 25 Under 25: Tatum ranked 14, Brown ranked 22 (no kidding)

[GreenEnvy]

ESPN sucks, what else is new?

[Moranis]

I think some of the experts are a little stuck on the "stat hanging" some players can do on teams that are lotto teams that lack other talents.  Both Tatum and Brown likely would be higher if they were on a team that used them more offensively.

Tatum and Brown can't handle more offensively at this point.  Brown, after all, has the 2nd most shots per game on the Celtics by almost a full shot more than Morris.  Tatum has plenty of chances to shoot more and doesn't.  They just aren't those type of players.

Of course they could if they could be volume shooters like some of the other players mentioned.

Tatum is at 9.9 shots a game.   Brown at 11.4

who are these volume shooters you speak of on that list ahead of Brown and Tatum?

There are definitely players on that list that shoot 2-7 more shots per game than Tatum and Brown who's TS% is about equal to less than Tatum and Brown. If Tatum was on a poor team shooting the amount of shots Mitchell and Booker are, he would definitely be much higher on the list.

Utah is well above .500, they aren't a poor team at all. 

Booker is obviously on a bad team, but he has a TS% of 56.6 which is better than Brown and worse than Tatum (though Tatum has been dropping consistently the second half of the year).  He isn't just putting up stats because he is shooting a lot, he is putting up stats because he is an incredible scorer and quite efficient.  He isn't some inefficient chucker who is only scoring because he is on a crap team and someone has to shoot. 

The thing is, there are plenty of shots available for both Brown and Tatum and they just don't take them.  It isn't a question of them needing more looks, it is a question of them not being able to handle more shots because they aren't that type of player right now.  They might develop into a #1 scoring option, but they might not (for the record I think Tatum will develop into an excellent scorer, but I don't think that is Brown's game at all).

Your whole assumption here is Tatum and Brown don't take more shots because they aren't ready. The truth is probably closer to they have been taught to play within the system and look for the type of shots Coach Stevens wants.

If they were given the type of freedom that others on this list have, taken the amount of shots others on the list have and made them at their current rates, my guess is they are both much higher rated.

Your assumption that they aren't ready or wouldn't hit shots at the same efficiency is just a negative guess, the same way I think if Brown and Tatum were put on another team and given #1 scoring opportunities they would score a whole bunch more is a positive guess.

But, if put into that stuation one thing is for sure, they would put up more stats and score more. The only question is the efficiency. Either way, more stats, in my opinion would mean higher rankings because these voters are basically going by stats and little else.

Also, I think it disengenuous to call Booker a great scorer and highly efficient when he takes 5-7 mores shots per game and he has a worse TS% than Tatum and his TS% is just 1% higher than Brown's. Give Brown and Tatum the same offensive opportunity where they are allowed to play absolutely zero defense and I can see them being great scorers too.

or as is often the case increased shots as a #1 option yields a worse percentage not more efficiency. Or like Bradley, Crowder, Olynyk, etc. When guys leave Boston they lose all their efficiency even if they shoot less.  Booker was an incredible shooter in college, it shouldn't surprise anyone that he is an incredible shooter in the pros.  Tatum was also a very good college shooter so he might turn it on, but right now he absolutely is not ready or he would be shooting more as the shots are there for him to take.  It isn't because he is in Boston he isn't shooting, it is because he isn't ready and there is no guarantee he will be.

Yeah...I just think you're completely wrongt and there's very little data to support your point so we will have to agree to disagree since I don't want to bring up points to someone who will just ignore them. You look at things negatively for Brown and Tatum vetsus others, I look at things positively. My guess, Brown and Tatum will win a title long before most on that list and it will be because they grew up in the right environment. An environment where as along as you ate winning, its okay not to be the leading scorer on your team.

Let's see how people evaluate them after that happens.

Bradley took 14 shots a game last year all with IT having over a shot more per game than Irving and Horford shooting 1.4 more per game.  In other words, the shots are there, but they aren't taking them. 

[mr. dee]

Capela on the top 10 alone is laughable. His ceiling is just as solid role player and that's it.

[Celtics4ever]

I think Ball is too high on the list.  We all know the ESPN guys love LA and this might have skewed their list.  I really don't take them as a sports authority at all, they have been a joke for years.

[RodyTur10]

Capela on the top 10 alone is laughable. His ceiling is just as solid role player and that's it.

He might be in the top 10 as a player right now, but definitely not as a prospect. His fit in Houston is so great that it makes him look better than he really is. Very valuable for the Rockets, but for most other teams nothing more than a solid center.

[SHAQATTACK]

Can’t believe Beal is only 24

i agree.....i think thought he was Avery s age , seems like he s been around a long time .  I had him pegged for 3-5 years older than listed.

[Moranis]

Capela on the top 10 alone is laughable. His ceiling is just as solid role player and that's it.

Capela is 13th in the list.

[gift]

I guess it's weird to me that this list filters for age and then compares 24 year olds to 19 year olds. Seems too broad a range.

[KGs Knee]

I guess it's weird to me that this list filters for age and then compares 24 year olds to 19 year olds. Seems too broad a range.

It's definitely not easy to compare a player who has been in the league for 4 or 5 seasons to a rookie or 2nd year player.

Most of these players in their 4th or 5th seasons have already seen the vast majority of growth in their games and are what they are save for some refinement. The younger players mostly still have yet to have see the major improvements in their games we hope for.

In other words, you're judging some players based on a theoretical ceiling, while other players you're mostly judging them on what is pretty close to a finished product.

For example, Otto Porter is clearly a currently better player than Jaylen Brown. But Brown clearly has a higher ceiling right now. The question then becomes how likely is it Brown reaches his ceiling, and if he doesn't reach it, where does that leave him. If. Brown reaches 80% of his potential, is that better or worse than where Porter currently is, or may end up with a limit more refinement to his game that comes as a player reaches his prime years.