As the NBA heads into the offseason after the Knicks’ Finals win, Celtics coach Joe Mazzulla is urged to have a direct, difficult conversation with Jayson Tatum—specifically about changing how he attacks offensively. The argument centers on Tatum’s playoff dom
In the early days of June. Joe Mazzulla has been making his rounds the way a head coach does when he wants to be present—not just in video rooms. but on the ground. He traveled to Omaha and worked out Baylor Scheierman at Creighton University, the school where Scheierman played. A few days later. he was spotted in Lisbon. Portugal with Neemias Queta. watching the opening game of the Portuguese Basketball Championship Finals.
The trips sound like the kind of detail fans don’t see, but Mazzulla isn’t doing it for the optics. The bigger work comes next, and it’s pointed at the one conversation that can’t be delayed: a frank offseason talk with Celtics star forward Jayson Tatum about attacking differently next season.
Notably, the idea circulating among some Celtics fans—that Tatum should be traded—doesn’t fit the agenda. The position here is blunt: any chat about trading Tatum would be “absurd. ” and it’s not stopping people from floating the suggestion anyway. Even in a fanbase conversation full of nostalgia and debate. the thrust is that what matters is the Celtics’ offense. and Tatum is the lever.
Tatum’s case starts with what he does when it counts most. When healthy, he has been “an absolute force” in the NBA Playoffs. In the NBA Finals, he averaged 22.2 points, 7.8 rebounds, and 7.2 assists per game—numbers presented as better than Jaylen Brown’s 20.8/5.4/5.0. But the critique that hangs over those performances is about the shots that come before the highlights: the reminder that Tatum’s Finals shooting included 38.8% overall and 26.3% from 3.
And yet the argument insists those postseason moments can’t be dismissed. There’s a 46-point performance on the road against the defending champion Bucks in Game 6 of the 2022 conference semifinals. a series the Celtics won in seven games. There’s also a 51-point showing in Game 7 against the Sixers. another conference semi in which Boston had trailed 3-2 before winning.
The statistical memory here is meant to anchor the emotion. Tatum has five playoff games with at least 40 points, and 13 with at least 35. He has 18 playoff games with at least 13 rebounds and nine with at least 10 assists. The piece also points to a 50-point game against Kevin Durant and the Nets. and to the claim that he dunked on LeBron James’s forehead as a rookie—moments offered as proof that the ceiling isn’t in question.
But the offseason isn’t about relitigating whether Tatum can dominate. It’s about whether he can change.
The argument widens to what the Knicks showed after winning the NBA Finals—and why the Celtics offense has to look different. The Knicks. it says. rely on a high-usage. ball-dominant fulcrum in Jalen Brunson. but still move the ball consistently and with purpose. Against that model. the Celtics are framed as inconsistent. especially after the point when the offense stopped resembling an initiator-style attack.
The turning point described is tied to Tatum’s recovery. It recalls that he struggled to put things together at times after missing most of last season recovering from his torn Achilles injury. And then it lands on the conclusion the writer wants Mazzulla to force into clarity: when Tatum returned from that injury. he played an initiator role—but by the end of the season. he abandoned it.
From there, the offense is described as having “devolved” into an iso-heavy, one-on-one approach. The picture is familiar: Tatum or Brown creating possessions while Derrick White. Payton Pritchard. and whoever else was on the floor stood in a corner or set a screen. It’s portrayed as unimaginative and inefficient—especially because it often starts with a decision that kills momentum: multiple possessions per game in which the player who brings the ball past midcourt ends up taking the shot. including “eh-might-as-well” three-pointers with 14 seconds on the shot clock.
The demand is direct. Tatum, the piece argues, needs to commit to taking better shots and stop with what it describes as passive—or conscious—resistance to playing faster. It says the change would benefit him, too.
This is also where the tension with the fanbase debate matters. Tatum and Brown have combined for enormous success here. Their talent and determination have made the uninspired offense work. The writer even calls them wonderful players and notes they’re on track for having their numbers retired to the rafters.
But success isn’t the end of the argument. The piece ties its view of improvement to one specific path the writer still believes in: Brown-for-Giannis. It frames that as the best way to get the Celtics “legitimately better” this offseason. and it contrasts that with the absence of a specific plan to “add around the edges” that could make them immediate contenders again.
The piece also repeats what it doesn’t want to hear as a solution—mentioning Robert Williams III as someone “we love,” but not as the answer that fixes the offensive problem.
If Tatum and Brown stay as a tandem for a ninth season, the writer says the alternative fix is different but equally pointed: share the ball, make the defense work, look for the best shot instead of your best shot, and learn from the champion Knicks.
That brings the story back to where it began, to Mazzulla’s offseason work. The call isn’t for another round of workouts in far-off places like Omaha or Lisbon. It’s for Mazzulla to make the message land—on Tatum. and if Brown remains too. on him as well; and on anyone else who wants minutes next season.
The underlying frustration is that it may already be clear enough to everyone—except the coach is the one tasked with ensuring it changes anyway.
Celtics Jayson Tatum Joe Mazzulla Knicks Jaylen Brown offseason offense NBA playoffs torn Achilles Brunson Scheierman Queta