Smith or Tatum

With Fox gone, draft Smith Jr. Or Tatum

  • Smith

    Votes: 16 39.0%
  • Tatum

    Votes: 25 61.0%

  • Total voters
    41
#1
Fox has emerged as the concenaus pick at 5 for Kings if he is there.

What is not clear is the concensus pick should Fox be gone when #5 comes up.

In my mind, if we pass on Smith Jr., he will certainly be gone by 10 and likely Frank N. also meaning if we go Tatum that mean no PG.

However, Smith's on court effort and past ACL have been a big concern on this board.

Tatum's midrange game and ISO tendency and concerns about athletiic ability have others concerned about how effective he will be at the next level.

Which do you choose?

For me, it comes down to the thought that Kings must get a PG and Smith is an elite pg talent.
 
#2
You can collect my thoughts on the KingsFans Mock Draft thread. :)

If Tatum slides to #5 you pick BPA and move to find PG solutions elsewhere.

In my opinion, Kings cannot afford taking the risk that comes with Smith Jr. with this year's #5.
This is not a knock on Smith. It is simply that the Kings must get this draft right, or else they are stuck in limbo for a few more years.

If he is available at #10 though...

And for whatever it's worth: I think Fox will be available at #5. And if he is - I hope Divac takes him.
But I have been wrong before!
 
#3
If the Kings "must" get a PG then they need to trade up to get one of the top 3 PG prospects. If none of them slide, then Tatum is the pick. I would go Monk and Isaac over Smith, as well. Smith is not a good fit for the Vlade/Joerger philosophy.
 
#4
I would probably take Isaac.

Yes, I really want the Kings to get their PG of the future but I don't want to force that.

Between Tatum an Isaac I lean towards the versatile defender with some offensive upside over the advanced ISO scorer who has looked uninterested on defense.
 
#5
Smith is same size as Darren Collison, worse defensively, worse playmaker, worse shot. Smith is more explosive and has more power to his game. But Collison is just as fast. But that's about all. Why would we want Smith again?

The better question at #5 if Fox is gone is likely going to be Tatum OR Isaac? I really like both these guys with slight edge currently to Tatum.
 
#7
Anyone who has concerns about Tatum's "athletic abilities" has absolutely no business judging young players. Tatum will be well above average in terms of athleticism for an NBA SF. I'm willing to make any wager with any board member about that. The guy is a very good athlete.

Regarding his "ISO play", unfortunately somebody mentioned Gay as a comparison in terms of style of play and apparently now 80% of the board thinks he is an absolute exact clone. That's not how it works. I really wish people would watch actual games before coming to conclusions. Tatum is a huge talent with legit size, very good athleticism, and every skill you can think of. He has all-star talent and the confidence/personality to go along with it. Gay is not a bad comparison but they are not clones and Tatum is head and shoulders above where Gay was at the same stage, and shows much more willingness as a passer and defender.

As for DSJ, I have no idea who I would take first out of him and Tatum, because Smith has elite talent and athleticism for a PG too. I also happen to think his attitude/effort issues have been blown out of proportion on this forum. They are both elite talents and would both go top 2 in many drafts. Count me as a happy camper if we get either of these two at 5 if Fox is gone. Smith could end up the best player out of this draft and I wouldn't be shocked. Hopefully injuries don't plague him.
 
#8
I like Smith's upside far and away more than the other guys that might be there. But I have no idea about possible character concerns. So if attitude is an issue I'd take Monk I think.
 
#9
Smith is same size as Darren Collison, worse defensively, worse playmaker, worse shot. Smith is more explosive and has more power to his game. But Collison is just as fast. But that's about all. Why would we want Smith again?

The better question at #5 if Fox is gone is likely going to be Tatum OR Isaac? I really like both these guys with slight edge currently to Tatum.
Smith is a better play maker, 10x more athletic and can get into the paint. How often do we see Collison use his speed? I hear Jerry talk about it all the time but he never uses it because he has no moves to get around his defender. Smith can break down defenses. Collison can't at all. His one saving grace is the fact that he's one of the best shooters in the NBA. He just doesn't shoot a bunch because his release is so slow.

Isaac has a slim chance of becoming "the guy" while Smith has a much bigger chance. His defense is going to suck but we need talent here. Not guys that are more likely going to become role players. The two together would be a great pair but if I had to pick one, it would be Smith every day of the week.
 
#10
Anyone who has concerns about Tatum's "athletic abilities" has absolutely no business judging young players. Tatum will be well above average in terms of athleticism for an NBA SF. I'm willing to make any wager with any board member about that. The guy is a very good athlete.

Regarding his "ISO play", unfortunately somebody mentioned Gay as a comparison in terms of style of play and apparently now 80% of the board thinks he is an absolute exact clone. That's not how it works. I really wish people would watch actual games before coming to conclusions. Tatum is a huge talent with legit size, very good athleticism, and every skill you can think of. He has all-star talent and the confidence/personality to go along with it. Gay is not a bad comparison but they are not clones and Tatum is head and shoulders above where Gay was at the same stage, and shows much more willingness as a passer and defender.

As for DSJ, I have no idea who I would take first out of him and Tatum, because Smith has elite talent and athleticism for a PG too. I also happen to think his attitude/effort issues have been blown out of proportion on this forum. They are both elite talents and would both go top 2 in many drafts. Count me as a happy camper if we get either of these two at 5 if Fox is gone. Smith could end up the best player out of this draft and I wouldn't be shocked. Hopefully injuries don't plague him.
I have a hard time believing that anyone who watched Tatum this year thought he showed "willingness as a defender". He has the tools to be a good defender but he rarely used them. He was too easily screened out of plays, rarely showed quick feet or good technique on closeouts and struggled against both quicker opponents on the perimeter and stronger opponents down low.

And of course Tatum's ISO play gets mentioned. In the halfcourt it was his primary mode of attack. He'd catch the ball 15-18 feet out and allowed to go to work.

I think he's closer in game to Paul Pierce than Rudy Gay (or maybe a smaller, not as strong but more skilled Jabari Parker), but he's still a player who plays an old school game in the new analytics driven NBA.

Can he adapt to be more perimeter oriented and convinced to move the ball more? I don't see why not, he's extremely skilled for his age. But at the moment he is a midrange scorer and a bit of a ball stopper who didn't show a ton on the defensive end.
 
Last edited:
#13
Vlade is in a better place to figure out the character/motivation issues with Smith. It's ridiculous to be an armchair psychologist when we don't really know what was going on with him or that program or his knee.

On talent, Smith looks like he should be in the top tier of this draft to me. That kid has fire. He looks more like Bledsoe or Westbrook playing - not really the same style as Collison.
 
#14
I have a hard time believing that anyone who watched Tatum this year thought he showed "willingness as a defender". He has the tools to be a good defender but he rarely used them. He was too easily screened out of plays, rarely showed quick feet or good technique on closeouts and struggled against both quicker opponents on the perimeter and stronger opponents down low.

And of course Tatum's ISO play gets mentioned. In the halfcourt it was his primary mode of attack. He'd catch the ball 15-18 feet out and allowed to go to work.

I think he's closer in game to Paul Pierce than Rudy Gay (or maybe a smaller, not as strong but more skilled Jabari Parker), but he's still a player who plays an old school game in the new analytics driven NBA.

Can he adapt to be more perimeter oriented and convinced to move the ball more? I don't see why not, he's extremely skilled for his age. But at the moment he is a midrange scorer and a bit of a ball stopper who didn't show a ton on the defensive end.
Towards the end of the year I definitely thought he got better defensively. He was on an upwards trend and with his tools, that to me shows "willingness" as a defender. He was packing it in or giving up, he was making strides.

I also never once said that his ISO play shouldn't be mentioned. Read my post again please. I said someone mentioned Gay in regards to his ISO play and now everyone thinks he's an exact clone. He's not. I also don't see why the ability to go ISO is interpreted as a negative when it's absolute essential to success at the next level. If you can't ISO then you're a role player and nothing more.
 
#15
Smith is a better play maker, 10x more athletic and can get into the paint. How often do we see Collison use his speed? I hear Jerry talk about it all the time but he never uses it because he has no moves to get around his defender. Smith can break down defenses. Collison can't at all. His one saving grace is the fact that he's one of the best shooters in the NBA. He just doesn't shoot a bunch because his release is so slow.

Isaac has a slim chance of becoming "the guy" while Smith has a much bigger chance. His defense is going to suck but we need talent here. Not guys that are more likely going to become role players. The two together would be a great pair but if I had to pick one, it would be Smith every day of the week.
Darren has plenty of moves. He's just not flashy about it. He is very fundamentally sound. You don't score 13 PPG on 57% TS by having no moves or not using your speed. By the way Dennis Smith Jr scored at 56.3% TS. So Darren was more efficient scorer in off an off year for him against NBA defenders than Smith against ACC defenders. There are SO many red flags with this guy from attitude to length to injury to isolation tendencies, I am starting to sour on him at #10 if he slides there.

When you say his "defense is going to suck" you make my argument for me. The Kings cannot afford to put someone at PG who consistently allows dribble penetration and unable or close out on shooters or rotate to help. How many years have we have been BOTTOM 5 defensively?!?? I said in previous thread that drafting Smith at #5 would be front office gross negligence given his projected defensive ability. Fortunately I think the Kings have seen enough wide open threes and matador defense to make more prudent judgements.

I would actually be surprised if Smith Jr. even comes to Sacramento for a workout. We'll see.
 
#16
Tatum for sure. People sour when they hear Rudy Gay but he is more team oriented than Gay imo. Go to scoring is the hardest skill to find and the most important in playoff basketball.
 
#17
Fox has emerged as the concenaus pick at 5 for Kings if he is there.

What is not clear is the concensus pick should Fox be gone when #5 comes up.

In my mind, if we pass on Smith Jr., he will certainly be gone by 10 and likely Frank N. also meaning if we go Tatum that mean no PG.

However, Smith's on court effort and past ACL have been a big concern on this board.

Tatum's midrange game and ISO tendency and concerns about athletiic ability have others concerned about how effective he will be at the next level.

Which do you choose?

For me, it comes down to the thought that Kings must get a PG and Smith is an elite pg talent.

Not necessarily they could go after Juwan Evans as a trade down option....he may not be elite, but he looks like a good player. I would rather they go with Smith than Tatum. Fox or Jackson would be first, then Smith, then maybe Tatum and Evans as an idea. Getting Tatum would not be horrible anyway.
They could resign Lawson and Collison perhaps if they didn't want to go after a PG in the draft or the guy they want is not there.
 
#18
Darren has plenty of moves. He's just not flashy about it. He is very fundamentally sound. You don't score 13 PPG on 57% TS by having no moves or not using your speed. By the way Dennis Smith Jr scored at 56.3% TS. So Darren was more efficient scorer in off an off year for him against NBA defenders than Smith against ACC defenders. There are SO many red flags with this guy from attitude to length to injury to isolation tendencies, I am starting to sour on him at #10 if he slides there.

When you say his "defense is going to suck" you make my argument for me. The Kings cannot afford to put someone at PG who consistently allows dribble penetration and unable or close out on shooters or rotate to help. How many years have we have been BOTTOM 5 defensively?!?? I said in previous thread that drafting Smith at #5 would be front office gross negligence given his projected defensive ability. Fortunately I think the Kings have seen enough wide open threes and matador defense to make more prudent judgements.

I would actually be surprised if Smith Jr. even comes to Sacramento for a workout. We'll see.
Darren has about the most standard set of moves you'll see from any PG. It's mainly why he's not a good assist man because he doesn't cause the defense to come help on him enough. Ever notice what happens when we can't get a shot and we have to give it to Collison with 5 seconds on the shot clock? I've seen it plenty of times before and it's not pretty. Put Smith in the same situation and he's going to make something happen rather than just take a contested shot from the outside.

You can't compare the stats of the two guys. Collison has what, 10 years of experience on Smith right now? Of course he's going to be the better player right here and now. We aren't drafting him to get the exact same production he had from his rookie college season. You draft guys and are dependent on them getting better. Smith is a much more highly touted prospect than Collison was out of college.

Trust me, I know that we need to up our defense. Which is exactly why I'd take Fox, Jackson or most likely Tatum (I go back and forth) before Smith but I wouldn't reach for a more than likely 3&D guy like Isaac before I take Smith. Smith just has too much talent and if he becomes what a lot of people think he can become, then you build the team around his defensive deficiencies. It would be like drafting Jae Crowder over IT. I'd much rather get a 2 way player that doesn't require that but the Kings need to swing for the fences here because they aren't going to become a force in the West with a bunch of solid role players.
 
#19
Darren has about the most standard set of moves you'll see from any PG. It's mainly why he's not a good assist man because he doesn't cause the defense to come help on him enough. Ever notice what happens when we can't get a shot and we have to give it to Collison with 5 seconds on the shot clock? I've seen it plenty of times before and it's not pretty. Put Smith in the same situation and he's going to make something happen rather than just take a contested shot from the outside.

You can't compare the stats of the two guys. Collison has what, 10 years of experience on Smith right now? Of course he's going to be the better player right here and now. We aren't drafting him to get the exact same production he had from his rookie college season. You draft guys and are dependent on them getting better. Smith is a much more highly touted prospect than Collison was out of college.

Trust me, I know that we need to up our defense. Which is exactly why I'd take Fox, Jackson or most likely Tatum (I go back and forth) before Smith but I wouldn't reach for a more than likely 3&D guy like Isaac before I take Smith. Smith just has too much talent and if he becomes what a lot of people think he can become, then you build the team around his defensive deficiencies. It would be like drafting Jae Crowder over IT. I'd much rather get a 2 way player that doesn't require that but the Kings need to swing for the fences here because they aren't going to become a force in the West with a bunch of solid role players.
Assigning a label to Isaac of "3&D" does not make the label valid. Isaac has a good jab step. He will be able to get defenders to back off or use his jab to freeze the defender and blow by. There was also a beautiful play in which Isaac took ball full court and split a trap kept balance and dribble and finished around a third defender for lay-up. This indicates he may be capable of more than 3&D. I look for (1) length (2) balance (3) ability to create separation when I scout. Isaac checks out well in all three categories. When you see Isaac and conclude "3&D" you are selling him short.

The point of comparing efficiency between Smith and DC was rebuttal to "Collison has NO moves". Collison is playing against NBA defenders. Smith Jr is playing against future accountants. You can correctly say Collison has more experience but he's playing against the best players in the world. Smith needs to be extraordinary offensive player to compensate for projected issues on defense. I don't think guy with a busted ACL (which hinders lateral mobility), average shot, subpar length projects as an unstoppable scoring force. And guess what? His athleticism is not going to stand out so much against NBA players. I will bet he gets locked down often. With his tunnel vision, I think he will force shots, then struggle on the other end.

Of course he can be successful player if all turns his way, but the probabilities are not great given the variables I have detailed. In fact I would not be surprised in Smith Jr falls out of the Top 10.
 
#20
Fair enough. We will just agree to disagree but I respect your opinion. My opinion of Isaac isn't that he's going to turn out to be a 3&D guy. I just think he has a much higher likely of being that than he does being a go to guy on offense. I don't try to nail down a prediction on any of these guys because obviously I don't know, but like any GM or scout, you want to kind of put a percentage there of what you think they will wind up being. Smith, to me, has a higher likelihood of being a bust than Isaac but I think he has a much higher likelihood of being a go to guy than Isaac does as well. I think the Kings need to be in a swing for the fences mode since we have no star at this point and we certainly aren't going to land any in free agency. It's all just a guessing game at this point but it is fun to see how wildly everyone's opinions differ on these guys.
 
#21
I would go Tatum at 5. He can be the go to scorer that we need.

At 10, I would hope that frank n. Slides to us at 10.

If not, I trade back in the 1st round and look at jawan evans and frank Jackson.
 
#22
Fair enough. We will just agree to disagree but I respect your opinion. My opinion of Isaac isn't that he's going to turn out to be a 3&D guy. I just think he has a much higher likely of being that than he does being a go to guy on offense. I don't try to nail down a prediction on any of these guys because obviously I don't know, but like any GM or scout, you want to kind of put a percentage there of what you think they will wind up being. Smith, to me, has a higher likelihood of being a bust than Isaac but I think he has a much higher likelihood of being a go to guy than Isaac does as well. I think the Kings need to be in a swing for the fences mode since we have no star at this point and we certainly aren't going to land any in free agency. It's all just a guessing game at this point but it is fun to see how wildly everyone's opinions differ on these guys.
Not trying to pick on you ESP47 but I think "swinging for the fences" is the wrong term. This implies undue risk. The Kings traded away the most talented player in franchise history for $0.50 on the dollar. They were fortunate to parlay the panicked Boogie trade into 5th and 10th pick in a LOADED draft. Now they need to cash in those assets. That is NOT going to happen by "swinging for fences" when likely to strike out as much (or more) as hit home run. The Kings have to do reward vs risk analysis on each prospect, and choose player that checks the most boxes in the positive column relative to the negative column. This is "educated guessing game" more than a "guessing game" especially with the abundance of data and resources available to the casual fan.

I remember last year when "draft gurus" were projecting Buddy as a back-up in NBA. They were questioning his length and hops and discounting his production because of his age. I scoffed at this because I saw a superior shot maker who set records for efficiency (65% TS), who changed ends well, had polished footwork to create space. Then when I heard interviews it was obvious he was a good kid with superior attitude and work ethic which portends continued improvement. This reduces risk. The reason I mention this is I get opposite sense in regards to Smith Jr. when I hear his interview. That doesn't mean it won't pan out or he is a bad kid. But it does mean you are incurring another degree of risk in reward to risk equation. One more thing with these players is positional versatility. Isaac projects as combo forward who can switch to SGs and even check 5s when he gets stronger. This would be extraordinary! He looks like a guy who can guard anywhere on the floor. By contrast Smith has NO positional versatility. He plays one position. So this affects risk to reward ratio favorably for one player and unfavorably for other.

Again this does not mean Smith won't or can't be a star in the league but probabilities get dimmer. Isaiah Thomas's don't enter the league everyday. This is another reason the call is easy in my mind to take Isaac before Smith. The real question is would you take Isaac over Tatum??? If Fox is gone, this may be the biggest draft day decision the Kings face.
 
#23
One of the arguments for drafting Smith is the need for the Kings to get their point guard. What if they have high confidence they can get Milos Teodosic to come over? I understand he's 30 or about to be 30 but would that alone change how the Kings may look at the draft?
 
#25
The Kings are not in a position to pick for need. They need to pick BPA. The Kings need talent.
I'm all for that. I think I got my threads mixed up or at least my recollection of them. I seemed to recall posters stating that we needed to get our PG this draft but looking back I'm not seeing that in this thread.
 
#26
I hope Smith, Tatum, Issac and of course Fox all work out for the the Kings. A lot should be determined by that effort alone and it will give Vlade and company a good opportunity to evaluate strengths and weaknesses.
I hope Fox is there for the picking but if not one of the other three should dispel current concerns. Monk should come as well and display his play making potential. We all know coach Calipari did not give Monk that opportunity, but just think if its there a backcourt of Monk, Buddy, and Bogdan could be special.
And also if Milos is in the cards for the Kings he could be the mentor stopgap while Monk polishes those skills.
 

bajaden

Hall of Famer
#27
I would take either Tatum or Isaac. Tatum is the more polished right now, so I'm leaning toward him, but I really love Isaac. If I was making the decision at 8, then I would consider Smith. But at 5, the Kings can't afford to miss, and there is a risk with Smith that I'm not willing to take that high in the draft. Three are those that are saying that they'll live with his poor defense now, but I can guarantee you, that in a few years, some of those same people will be screaming about it.

When you throw in the knee injury, and lack of length, you have to pass on Smith at 5. Well, you don't have to. :rolleyes:
 
#28
The Kings are not in a position to pick for need. They need to pick BPA. The Kings need talent.
Well, the good news is that BPA at #5 will be one of PG Fox or SF Jackson or SF Tatum and all of the possible BPAs at #5 will fill a position of great need.

So no matter what, if we pick whoever is left of Fox, Jackson and Tatum, we will be good. :)

So, between Tatum and Smith, I would take Tatum and not look back.
 
#29
Smith or Isaac if Fox isn't there. I'm fine with either but I give a slight edge to Smith.
The guy is relentless on O and breaks down the D with ease.. Imagine the drives and dishes to Buddy/Bog/Skal.. I'm sure Joeger can help bring that same fierceness out of DSJ on the defensive end.


Tatum bores me as a player and seems like a black hole. Every time he gets the ball the other four guys stand around..
Plus we have Richardson and Bog whom might be able to hold down the SF position in today's league.
Also, There's like 6 SF's in the top 15 for next years draft and we'll probably get a chance to draft one.

With all this being said, I feel like Vlade should do whatever he can to guarantee getting Fox. Trade into the top 3 maybe?
 
Last edited: