Kingsfan23
All-Star
I can understand the arguments for all three of Jackson/Tatum/Isaac. Different flavors
Jayson Tatum
- Thread starter John Galt
- Start date
allrightythen
Starter
This is not the vibe I get from Tatum at all. Everything I see and read says he works really hard on his game and wants to be great....at basketball. His game and the improvement he showed throughout the season suggests the same. Seems unfair to judge him on anything other than his own body of work and his own personality.
lwc
Starter
This is what I consistently go back to if Tatum falls to 5. Every great playoff team has an offense designed to share the ball with sharp ball movement. Yet, come playoff time when everyone ratchets down on defense, every truly great team has that one player that when you really need a bucket can take the ball say, "get out of my way" and get you a score. I truly believe for someone Tatum could be that guy.
ISO basketball as a consistent offensive set doesn't seem to work in today's NBA but it is absolutely necessary for deep playoff runs and we have to think about that if we want to be truly great. The problems the Kings have had over the last decade is the Kings have too many ISO players at once (i.e. Cuz, IT, Darren, & Rudy). Having one of those guys like Tatum could be a great blessing as long as he can play in the flow until he is called upon to create in ISO.
Last edited:
bajaden
Hall of Famer
Your absolutely correct. Personally, I hate Iso basketball. I love ball and player movement. However, you have to have players on your team that can get you a basket when you need it. Having the ability to create and make shots, doesn't necessarily make you a ball stopper. The Warriors are loaded with players that can create and make their own shot, and yet they still have terrific ball movement. The reason is, they don't care who scores the basket as long as someone does.
If you can fill your team with highly skilled and unselfish players, you'll have yourself a contender. When you have a player like Tatum, who is only 19 years old, I don't think it's fair to lock him into a box. He's young enough to mold into the player you want him to be. He has never struck me as a selfish player. We have to remember, that to a large extent, he was Duke's go to guy. It's not fair to criticize him for doing what was asked of him
ParniValjak
All-Star
Precisely my thinking. Another thing I do like about Tatum is he actually stepped up in the tournament and played well when the pressure was on. That shows character and willingness to take on the responsibility.
I like the kid and I think someone like coach Joerger could do wonders with developing this kid into a very efficient and dangerous player. I still hope to see a trade with Phoenix that gets the Kings top 4 pick so that King can pick hopefully both Fox and Tatum. Not sure how interested Phoenix would be but if you take Knight off their hands and offer them Afflalo (send cash if needed for the buyout) pick 10 and someone/something else you might be in the ball park. It would be a terrific start to a rebuild with a young kid with talent at every position on the court.
This really is a fun draft class.
I went back and re-watched Duke's games from the ACC tourney. At least the ones I had recorded. Tatum looked better than I remembered. He does lack explosion but he knows it and is able to create space very creatively. His passing vision needs to improve - most of his assists are shovel passes to bigs when he's driving and he needs to continue to work on his outside shot but man is he smooth.
I had Isaac firmly in front of him but going back to the tape I'm rethinking that. Isaac settles for jumpers far too often and bobbles the ball a LOT both while dribbling and catching passes. I worry about his hands.
I think I'm also realizing that the Kings desperately need a star and Tatum is a guy who could be one.
Fultz? Sure.
Ball? Of a sort. I don't think he'll ever be a guy who you can throw the ball to at the end of a game and ask him to get you a bucket. But he can potentially transform a team with his style.
Jackson? I don't know. He reminds me a lot of Iguodala or Pippen with less wingspan and a notch less ballhandling. Was young Iggy a star? Tough call. I think Jackson needs to be able to consistently shoot the ball well to be more than a high level role player.
Fox? Even more so than Jackson it depends on his jumper coming around. Without that he's a quicker, more explosive Elfrid Payton or a bigger Dennis Schroeder. Not bad, but not a star. But if teams can't sag off him? Then he's a major weapon.
Isaac? I don't see it and I love Isaac. I think he can be an elite role player as a 3&D wing/stretch four who provides shotblocking. Awesome. But not a star.
Dennis Smith Jr? Yeah, he could be a star, at least on offense. And passable on defense if engaged. But he could also get hurt again or fail to give max effort. I also wonder if his playing style is conducive to winning.
Monk? I don't see it. Maybe if he can be a true lead guard. Otherwise he's maybe A bouncier Lou Williams off the bench for a good team or at best a McCollum/Beal type. Good second option. Not a star.
Ntilikina? I struggle to see it. Right now he has a ways to go just to show that he's really a PG. Great potential as a 3&D PG but I don't view him as a guy who will possibly torment teams that passed on him down the line.
Markkanen? Nope. Just entirely too one dimensional.
Collins? I don't see it. What does he do that's elite? What can he hang his hat on as a skill that will transfer? I think he carves out a long NBA career but I don't see star potential?
Anunoby? Don't see it. Could be an elite defender if he stays healthy but his offensive game is SO rudimentary.
Mitchell? Maybe but I doubt it. It would likely have to be as a PG and he's need to tighten up his handle, stop settling for so many bad jumpers and improve greatly at finishing at the rim. I think he's a fairly safe pick as an Avery Bradley/Marcus Smart type but then I liked Baldwin more last year than Mitchell and he really surprised me with how badly he struggled.
So who are the guys the Kings will likely have a chance to draft at #5 who I think could be stars?
Fox, Tatum, and Smith.
Hmm
I went back and re-watched Duke's games from the ACC tourney. At least the ones I had recorded. Tatum looked better than I remembered. He does lack explosion but he knows it and is able to create space very creatively. His passing vision needs to improve - most of his assists are shovel passes to bigs when he's driving and he needs to continue to work on his outside shot but man is he smooth.
I had Isaac firmly in front of him but going back to the tape I'm rethinking that. Isaac settles for jumpers far too often and bobbles the ball a LOT both while dribbling and catching passes. I worry about his hands.
I think I'm also realizing that the Kings desperately need a star and Tatum is a guy who could be one.
Fultz? Sure.
Ball? Of a sort. I don't think he'll ever be a guy who you can throw the ball to at the end of a game and ask him to get you a bucket. But he can potentially transform a team with his style.
Jackson? I don't know. He reminds me a lot of Iguodala or Pippen with less wingspan and a notch less ballhandling. Was young Iggy a star? Tough call. I think Jackson needs to be able to consistently shoot the ball well to be more than a high level role player.
Fox? Even more so than Jackson it depends on his jumper coming around. Without that he's a quicker, more explosive Elfrid Payton or a bigger Dennis Schroeder. Not bad, but not a star. But if teams can't sag off him? Then he's a major weapon.
Isaac? I don't see it and I love Isaac. I think he can be an elite role player as a 3&D wing/stretch four who provides shotblocking. Awesome. But not a star.
Dennis Smith Jr? Yeah, he could be a star, at least on offense. And passable on defense if engaged. But he could also get hurt again or fail to give max effort. I also wonder if his playing style is conducive to winning.
Monk? I don't see it. Maybe if he can be a true lead guard. Otherwise he's maybe A bouncier Lou Williams off the bench for a good team or at best a McCollum/Beal type. Good second option. Not a star.
Ntilikina? I struggle to see it. Right now he has a ways to go just to show that he's really a PG. Great potential as a 3&D PG but I don't view him as a guy who will possibly torment teams that passed on him down the line.
Markkanen? Nope. Just entirely too one dimensional.
Collins? I don't see it. What does he do that's elite? What can he hang his hat on as a skill that will transfer? I think he carves out a long NBA career but I don't see star potential?
Anunoby? Don't see it. Could be an elite defender if he stays healthy but his offensive game is SO rudimentary.
Mitchell? Maybe but I doubt it. It would likely have to be as a PG and he's need to tighten up his handle, stop settling for so many bad jumpers and improve greatly at finishing at the rim. I think he's a fairly safe pick as an Avery Bradley/Marcus Smart type but then I liked Baldwin more last year than Mitchell and he really surprised me with how badly he struggled.
So who are the guys the Kings will likely have a chance to draft at #5 who I think could be stars?
Fox, Tatum, and Smith.
Hmm
ParniValjak
All-Star
This pretty much sums up how I see it.
At 5, for me its either Fox, Tatum or Smith and probably in that order (I am constantly changing my opinion on the order of Tatum and Smith).
It will be really interesting to see what Philly and Phoenix will do. If Philadelphia goes with Jackson then we will get either Fox or Tatum. Phoenix is interesting. Do they pick the PG, SF or trade down to get a big. I think there might be interest there to trade down for a big. I think someone like Collins would be a nice fit there if that is the direction they want to go in.
When Kings traded Boogie, my hope was for Kings to get Fox and Tatum. It might be possible if Phoenix decides to trade down. That would be a home run for the Kings IMHO. Tatum and Smith would be a nice combo too but I suspect that Magic just might be calling out Smith's name at 6 and I can't see them being interested in trading down given the type of players that would be in that 10 range and the money they have invested in their big men.
There is always a risk of Philly trading down to pick Monk. If they reach for Monk at 3 that I think creates a flow on effect that could still leave someone like Isaac there at 10.....maybe!
Suicide King
Starter
I think if our FO knows exactly who they want sans Fultz and Ball, and Philly really wanted monk, a deal is likely. Who Philly wants is the big mystery to me. If Philly doesnt want Jackson I cant see him slipping past PHX.
My worry is a team behind us jumping into 3rd somehow and snagging a player we are targetting heavily. Orlando for example, if they want Fox or Tatum/Isaac.
If we can get a BPA with our 5th that fills a positional need and they meet or exceed expectations, then it should be a good draft for us regardless.
My worry is a team behind us jumping into 3rd somehow and snagging a player we are targetting heavily. Orlando for example, if they want Fox or Tatum/Isaac.
If we can get a BPA with our 5th that fills a positional need and they meet or exceed expectations, then it should be a good draft for us regardless.
ParniValjak
All-Star
Yeah Philly is the unknown here. Monk fits them the best out of all the players in the pool but when you are top 3 you need to take best available IMHO. They also need a PG but Fox might not be a great fit because of his current inability to space the floor. Fox is the best talent there but he is an awkward fit. Then Tatum and Jackson aren't exactly the best fits either especially with Simmons and Sarić spending a lot of time at those positions. I think they will trade down and I think it's pretty likely that it is with Orlando who might be eyeing off Tatum or Fox.
I'm not really interested in seeing the Kings trade up from five if it isn't for Fultz. I'd consider it for Ball but I don't want to see a trade with the Lakers. Fox is my favorite prospect for the Kings but unless the price is low, I wouldn't want them to move from 5 to 3 just to guarantee that they get him.
I'd much rather see them try to trade up from 10.
I'd love to see the Kings come out of this draft with either Tatum or Isaac and either Fox or Smith.
I'd much rather see them try to trade up from 10.
I'd love to see the Kings come out of this draft with either Tatum or Isaac and either Fox or Smith.
Kingsfan23
All-Star
That may be the way it would have to work if Isaac was indeed the rumored target of the Wolves. But who knows if he really is
I don't think Isaac is a project. He's already a very good defender with a reliable outside shot. His floor is pretty high. Whether he takes the next leap and becomes special offensively is the question, but I think he contributes very early on. That said, I think Tatum has the potential to be a first option on offense. That's a valuable thing to have if he can translate his skills to the next level.
My ideal draft haul would be Fox and Tatum followed by Fox and Isaac, followed by Smith and Tatum followed by Smith and Isaac. Are any of those realistic possibilities? I don't know. But I think it's very unlikely that it happens without the Kings trading up.
With the pick at 5, I don't think Isaac should be in play since we hope he takes the leap offensively. Fox, Smith and Tatum and Jackson are all more sure things. I'd rather take Fox or Smith over Tatum but if they take Tatum, it's a good pick as well.
lawlman91
Starter
That, or his training program was just really good. You can work hard but only work on your jumper the whole day, and if you practice the same skillset too much you get diminishing returns. By spreading out what he practices (pull-ups, post-ups, layups, etc.) he gets a diverse skillset. The question is this: if his repertoire was made possible only because of a good training program, will he continue to develop within the same or similar program during his time on the Kings? Or will we force him to adopt a stand-in-the-corner McLemore role?
Smith Jr will likely be there, and I agree - Fox then Smith Jr. But Vlade gets paid the big-bucks to look at all the angles, and they may have analyzed it differently.
Kingster
Hall of Famer
I've been coming around to this position as well. The knock on Tatum is his "iso" play. Yet, by all accounts, he's a great kid who is coachable and is willing to work on his game; he's also shown the ability to pass the ball. Unlike Fox, he's demonstrated he can shoot the ball. Unlike Smith, he has no issues whatsoever concerning his commitment to the game or attitude. So who do I want to take a chance on - the point guard who hasn't shown a consistent ability to shoot the outside shot in Fox, the kid with the questionable attitude in Smith, or the coachable work-ethic kid who has the "iso" reputation in Tatum? I'll take Tatum.
My preference is still for Fox, but I've come around to Tatum as the best option at 5 if Fox is off the board.
Watching videos of recent workouts it looks like Tatum has cleaned up his shooting mechanics a bit which was a slight concern of mine. But I figured he'd be a good shooter in the NBA. After all there is no prospect likely to be drafted in the first round who shot a better percentage from the free throw line than Tatum other than his Duke teammate Kennard. Not Ball or Monk or even Markkanen.
My biggest concern with Tatum was whether he could be a go-to scorer on the NBA level but going back and watching him I really think he can. I think he can be coached into working well in a motion offense and then getting an isolation or running a two man game when the team needs a bucket. That would be huge for a young Kings team without an offensive focal point.
ockingsfan
Starter
Fox is my favorite at 5, but I would be just as happy with Tatum at 5. I actually like Tatum more than Jackson, especially considering the off the court issues with Jackson.
Watching the videos on Tatum, I think he can definitely be a go to scorer in the league.
We would have a nice 1-2 scoring punch with Tatum and Buddy to build around.
We just have to hope there is a point guard at 10 or try to move up from 10. I am hoping Frank N. somehow falls to us at 10, if we take Tatum at 5.
Yup we still need a go to scorer in half court that can crest for himself. The Gay comparisons are nonsense he's young and still plays team ball.
I wouldn't be upset if we picked him over Smith if Fox and Jackson are off the table. He seems very coachable and has potential on defense as well. The best players in the league are almost all good ISO players so I wouldn't hold it against him. Most players don't have that kind of skill. What remains to be seen is if he can get easy buckets in the flow of the offense. Kind of the same way Durant did in game 1 by getting all those easy dunks by reading the defense and cutting. What you don't want is a guy who just stands there and waits for the ball to swing around to him. You also don't want a guy like McLemore who probably runs a marathon every game because he's always cutting and running around the floor, but he has no instincts for the game so he's always just running around while covered instead of getting open for easy buckets.
lawlman91
Starter
Tatum is my #1 but let's not call him a go-to scorer yet, let's be real about who he is. What is clear is that he can surgically pick apart mismatches with his repertoire, but against similarly athletic and lengthy competition who knows what will happen.
But the reason he is #1 on my list is because it looks like he cares about the art of the game. I know it's subjective, but look at how polished he is. Polish requires attention to detail such as pull-up footwork, layup variety (overhand/underhand, inside hand/outside hand, two-step/one-step, etc), and post-up footwork.
Most impressive is his decision making off of the post-up. His first option is to face up, second option to drive/spin... rather than have a back-down as the first post-up option. In my experience, players who look to "score" instead of "do the post-up" tend to fare better.
allrightythen
Starter
Even if he had the best training program ever, he still has to have the drive to do it. He has to go to the gym and execute that program. Your last question is a coaching question and I'm confident in Coach Joerger and his staff to get everything they could out of Tatum and even push him to add more.
Kingster
Hall of Famer
If the Kings got Tatum, and were able to wangle a deal for Knight, and then pick up at #10 a good player, how would you feel about the off-season?
I'm not a huge Knight fan, but depending on who they got at #10 I'd likely rate that as a very successful draft
kingsboi
Hall of Famer
Kings can have a perfectly fine off-season without Knight being on the team. What's the use for him? I'd rather bring back Collison or Lawson if that's the best that's out there. Knight has had numerous opportunities in different cities to showcase himself and this is his third team where it's just not working.
Kingster
Hall of Famer
I like his talent. From what I saw of him at Kentucky he wasn't afraid to take the big shot and make it. In the year he was drafted I had Kemba Waler as #1a and Knight was #1b on my draft board (That was the fateful Jimmer draft). Sometimes it take point guards a while to find their way, especially combo-guards.
Ozymandias
All-Star
Would be a huge step forward. I'd give it an A. There'd be more moves too.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Poll
