Why are Tatum and Mitchell rookie prices still so high?

[RyanMW]

They both had pretty lackluster second seasons. I'm seeing PSA 10 select silver rookies at $200 for each of them. If anything, their prices seem to be going up -- especially Tatum, who I would argue has had the lesser impact of the two.

[Dnic]

Originally Posted by RyanMW

They both had pretty lackluster second seasons. I'm seeing PSA 10 select silver rookies at $200 for each of them. If anything, their prices seem to be going up -- especially Tatum, who I would argue has had the lesser impact of the two.

Tatum has not been involved much these last two games but I bet he balls this next game they need him to get in a rhythm early kid is a stud and with Kyrie probably leaving Tatum will be the face of the franchise next year I beileve

[drobfan8]

Originally Posted by RyanMW

They both had pretty lackluster second seasons. I'm seeing PSA 10 select silver rookies at $200 for each of them. If anything, their prices seem to be going up -- especially Tatum, who I would argue has had the lesser impact of the two.

Probably the people holding their stuff are bidding up their prices still.

I don't even think Tatum has All star potential.

[Dnic]

Originally Posted by drobfan8

Probably the people holding their stuff are bidding up their prices still.

I don't even think Tatum has All star potential.

Lol you lost me there not sure maybe you guys have low definition TV in Aus or you need glasses it's only the kids second year in the league

[ninjacookies]

Originally Posted by drobfan8

Probably the people holding their stuff are bidding up their prices still.

I think that's part of the equation. So many people bought in super high and unwilling to take a major L. And they're still both fairly young.


I'll add that the rest of the draft class hasn't had any other emerging true superstars yet either. So that probably helps keep the prices of both these guys high.

[mwash1983]

Fox will probably end up being the best guy of the draft class.

[ND3]

Both were rookies having a major impact into the playoffs last year. PRices were baked in prior to this season starting and both def were underwhelming.

Mitchell started out quiet but picked it up in the 2nd half. Tatum hasn't been super consistent. If Kyrie does split Tatum could really showcase his stuff and Boston fans pay.

If you believe in either of them and think prices can get back to preseason levels then buy buy buy.

[babyfaceposey]

I have continued to pick up Mitchell. He has that drive that most young players are lacking.

[PKIPP]

Mitchell went from 20.5 to 23.8 ppg, improved his 3 point percentage and carried his team to the playoffs. I may be biased as he's my PC guy but I'd hardly call that lackluster.

[dasiegel]

Mitchell was still great, started slow. Tatum has regressed.

[Giantrobot]

Mitchell has star quality, and is close to All-Star level already.

Tatum has been inconsistent, but I think he’ll eventually be a great scorer.

[drobfan8]

Originally Posted by Dnic

Lol you lost me there not sure maybe you guys have low definition TV in Aus or you need glasses it's only the kids second year in the league

Sorry you invested in Tatum man. I don't see the All star potential there.

[drobfan8]

I also don't think D Mitch had a lackluster season. His floor is Derozan with a 3 point shot. His ceiling is Dame. Can't ask for much more.

[Mahomie]

As others have mentioned, Donovan Mitchell had a stellar year all things considered.

[cam21215]

I feel like we have superstar/player A.D.D. Don't get me wrong, I've gotten caught up in it as well, but look at the rookie vs. 2nd year numbers for each player:

Mitchell 17-18: 20.5 pts, 3.7 rebs, 3.7 ast, 1.5 stl, 43.7% FG, 34.0% 3pt; 33.4 mins/game
Mitchell 18-19: 23.8 pts, 4.1 rebs, 4.2 ast, 1.4 stl. 43.2% FG, 36.2% 3pt; 33.7 mins/game

Tatum 17-18: 13.9 pts, 5.0 rebs, 1.6 ast, 1.0 stl, 47.5% FG, 43.4% 3pt; 30.5 mins/game
Tatum 18-19: 15.3 pts, 6.0 rebs, 2.1 ast, 1.1 stl, 45.0% FG, 37.3% 3pt; 31.1 mins/game

Both players improved in nearly every counting category without significant increases in MPG. Tatum dropped a bit in his efficiency, but Mitchell even improved over 2% in 3pt%. I feel we just are in search of the 'next big thing' and/or want to collect someone under the radar so we overlook the fact that both players are extremely young and have improved, even though we haven't heard as many headlines as we did last year during their rookie campaigns.

[RogerGodahell]

Mitchell had a good year Tatum improved a little. He didn't jump up to 25 Pts a game but he didn't decline either. He plays on a good team with lots of other good player so he isn't the showcase piece. Put him on a garbage team and he probably would be close to 25 pts per game. Not much he can really do about it at the moment i don't see Kyrie taking a back seat. I think he has the ability to be an all-star player. The Celtics have to get rid of a few guys imo there's too many of them that want to shoot and not enough ball to go around. They need guys that are willing to play their rolls whether it's a defensive play maker, rebounder, 3 point shooter, or whatever. Right now they don't know their identity they're just young and all hungry to make a name for themselves. It's basically a free for all, they don't have any structure.

[the27guy]

There are way too many rational posts in this thread. I’m actually kinda disappointed.

[Donkaylove]

Originally Posted by cam21215

I feel like we have superstar/player A.D.D. Don't get me wrong, I've gotten caught up in it as well, but look at the rookie vs. 2nd year numbers for each player:

Mitchell 17-18: 20.5 pts, 3.7 rebs, 3.7 ast, 1.5 stl, 43.7% FG, 34.0% 3pt; 33.4 mins/game
Mitchell 18-19: 23.8 pts, 4.1 rebs, 4.2 ast, 1.4 stl. 43.2% FG, 36.2% 3pt; 33.7 mins/game

Tatum 17-18: 13.9 pts, 5.0 rebs, 1.6 ast, 1.0 stl, 47.5% FG, 43.4% 3pt; 30.5 mins/game
Tatum 18-19: 15.3 pts, 6.0 rebs, 2.1 ast, 1.1 stl, 45.0% FG, 37.3% 3pt; 31.1 mins/game

Both players improved in nearly every counting category without significant increases in MPG. Tatum dropped a bit in his efficiency, but Mitchell even improved over 2% in 3pt%. I feel we just are in search of the 'next big thing' and/or want to collect someone under the radar so we overlook the fact that both players are extremely young and have improved, even though we haven't heard as many headlines as we did last year during their rookie campaigns.

basically,valuewise same cuz of Beantown bump, both young (Tatum path will be much truer/improved next season when team or trade is squared). Tatum is an Alpha, obvious. Mitchell is developing into such a leader becuz Korver saaid something smart? Jokic is the focal point for everything, I just dont think he will get the recognition as much as tatum, i believe in short term. He will be highly regarded ---kinda like Klay.

[SHowley2003]

Originally Posted by Donkaylove

basically,valuewise same cuz of Beantown bump, both young (Tatum path will be much truer/improved next season when team or trade is squared). Tatum is an Alpha, obvious. Mitchell is developing into such a leader becuz Korver saaid something smart? Jokic is the focal point for everything, I just dont think he will get the recognition as much as tatum, i believe in short term. He will be highly regarded ---kinda like Klay.

?????? This response is all over the place and I’m not sure what you are saying, but you really lost me with the Jokic comment. What does a player on the Denver Nuggets who was drafted well before either of these players have anything to do with this thread?

[MyckKabongo]

Any young bucket-getting wings are gonna attract investors at least until they aren't so young anymore. Neither tops my list as the best young player to invest in, but their prices are way down compared to last year and are very reasonable compared to some other young guys.

[Pathora]

If/when Tatum is traded to NO for Anthony Davis his prices are going to tank hard unless he does a James Harden and starts scoring 30 ppg being the man.

[drobfan8]

Originally Posted by cam21215

I feel like we have superstar/player A.D.D. Don't get me wrong, I've gotten caught up in it as well, but look at the rookie vs. 2nd year numbers for each player:

Mitchell 17-18: 20.5 pts, 3.7 rebs, 3.7 ast, 1.5 stl, 43.7% FG, 34.0% 3pt; 33.4 mins/game
Mitchell 18-19: 23.8 pts, 4.1 rebs, 4.2 ast, 1.4 stl. 43.2% FG, 36.2% 3pt; 33.7 mins/game

Tatum 17-18: 13.9 pts, 5.0 rebs, 1.6 ast, 1.0 stl, 47.5% FG, 43.4% 3pt; 30.5 mins/game
Tatum 18-19: 15.3 pts, 6.0 rebs, 2.1 ast, 1.1 stl, 45.0% FG, 37.3% 3pt; 31.1 mins/game

Both players improved in nearly every counting category without significant increases in MPG. Tatum dropped a bit in his efficiency, but Mitchell even improved over 2% in 3pt%. I feel we just are in search of the 'next big thing' and/or want to collect someone under the radar so we overlook the fact that both players are extremely young and have improved, even though we haven't heard as many headlines as we did last year during their rookie campaigns.

2nd year guys also get scouted harder in the off season. With Mitchell I have no doubts that opposing teams want to make him a 3 point shooter.

Tatum to me is a really nice piece that has a bit of work to do to be an All Star.

[Bronconation24]

Both are extremely overrated, as well as that draft class as a whole.

[drobfan8]

Originally Posted by Bronconation24

Both are extremely overrated, as well as that draft class as a whole.

There you go Adam.

[the27guy]

Originally Posted by drobfan8

There you go Adam.

I would laugh out loud but then I’d wake up my wife.