Fox gone, Tatum or Isaac at 5?

With Fox gone, Tatum or Isaac at 5?

  • Tatum

    Votes: 39 69.6%
  • Isaac

    Votes: 17 30.4%

  • Total voters
    56
#31
The funny thing about the Tatum and Issac comparison is that a lot of people are saying how much more potential Issac has compared to Tatum.

As though Tatum has already reached his peak and is not going to improve. But, the funny thing is, Tatum is actually younger than Issac. They are both still young at 19 years old. So, to put a cap on the potential of Tatum, as compared to Issac, I think is ridiculous.

I think both players will be very good players and both improve with age and experience. But Tatum is clearly the more polished and the safer pick of the two currently.

So, at #5, I would definitely take Tatum, if Fox is off the board. I would be very happy with the pick too. :)
 
#32
Yeah but you can't just assume who you trade up for is a star. There is plenty of playing time to be earned....and Joerger makes them earn it. Competition is a good thing.
But the goal in a rebuild is to draft and develop a star.

Richardson might turn out to be a nice SG, but does anyone see him becoming a star?

I'm not saying Isaac will be a star. But if you think he is, giving up a nice SG prospect, a second rounder and taking on an ugly contract for one year is not a big price to move up 3 slots to go get him.

Especially when you already have a very young roster with two other nice shooting guards (assuming Bogdan plays well) and no top tier talent.
 
#33
Listening to scouts opinions it just really seems like Fox is multiple notches ahead of whoever the fifth ranked prospect is. If the sixers take Jackson I think the Suns almost have to take Fox. Our best hope of landing Fox is probably the sixers taking Monk... Either that or a trade with Philly for the third pick. They'd still be able to get Monk at five.
Not necessarily. The Suns have Eric Bledsoe under contract for the next two seasons and Brandon Knight for the next three seasons.

It would be fair to say that Bledsoe has had his injury woes, but in 66 games last season he averaged 21 points and 6 assists per game, his free throw shooting was up, his field goal and 3 point percentage was around his career average. When he's healthy, him and Booker are a fairly potent back court.

Knight moved into a bench role last season, but it was only the season before when he was averaging 19.6 points per game and 5.1 assists. He's never been a big time assist guy, he's always tended to be more of a scoring point guard. Is he a star point guard? No, but he's useful enough to be a starter when needed and adds a punch off the bench.

So there is no dire need for the Suns to go for a point guard. They are currently in a position where they can draft the best player and/or fit for their roster because they have a fairly young starting line up: Bledsoe (27), Booker (20), Warren (23), Chriss (19), Len (23). I suppose an argument can be made for them to draft a point guard and to trade Bledsoe and/or Knight for assets, another first round pick could grad them an upgrade at center. But at the same time when he's healthy Bledsoe is a borderline all star, so they might feel they are better off taking one of the small forwards and upgrading that position, or drafting Isaac and having him compete with Chriss. I don't see the Suns and Fox as inevitable.

Normally in a rebuild I'd agree but the Kings had four rookies last year (plus WCS the year before) and are poised to add 4 more counting Bogdanovic. There's just not enough PT to develop that many kids. And the Kings don't yet have a star. Better to consolidate for better talent.
I wouldn't be against seeing us use our two first round picks to trade up to three to draft Ball if the Lakers select Fox and the Celtics select Fultz, or even moving up to secure our guy. I know having two top ten picks is appealing, and the first of those picks should land us a piece to the puzzle, but second of those picks might only land us a talent that might not get much playing time and could be considered as fairly lacklustre (e.g. Zach Collins, Jarrett Allen). So if the opportunity presented itself to move up to get Ball at three, or whichever player we rate as the next best available, then I would be in favor of that if we believed that player is going to be a star. Otherwise stay put and grab two young talents and hope we get lucky.

In regards to having four rookies and struggling to find minutes for them, well, I wouldn't be too concerned about that. The second round pick will most likely end up in the D-League, and Bogdanovic might not even come over, and if he does he will be fighting to stay relevant without any additions in the draft because we have Buddy, Malachi, Afflalo, Temple, and McLemore vying for minutes at the position(s) he plays. So I guess if the opportunity to consolidate to get a better player presents itself then we should go for it, but at the same time I wouldn't be too concerned about Bogdanovic and a second round pick because both are likely trade fodder unless we manage to hit lucky in the second round like the Nuggets did with Jokic.
 
#34
Not necessarily. The Suns have Eric Bledsoe under contract for the next two seasons and Brandon Knight for the next three seasons.

It would be fair to say that Bledsoe has had his injury woes, but in 66 games last season he averaged 21 points and 6 assists per game, his free throw shooting was up, his field goal and 3 point percentage was around his career average. When he's healthy, him and Booker are a fairly potent back court.

Knight moved into a bench role last season, but it was only the season before when he was averaging 19.6 points per game and 5.1 assists. He's never been a big time assist guy, he's always tended to be more of a scoring point guard. Is he a star point guard? No, but he's useful enough to be a starter when needed and adds a punch off the bench.

So there is no dire need for the Suns to go for a point guard. They are currently in a position where they can draft the best player and/or fit for their roster because they have a fairly young starting line up: Bledsoe (27), Booker (20), Warren (23), Chriss (19), Len (23). I suppose an argument can be made for them to draft a point guard and to trade Bledsoe and/or Knight for assets, another first round pick could grad them an upgrade at center. But at the same time when he's healthy Bledsoe is a borderline all star, so they might feel they are better off taking one of the small forwards and upgrading that position, or drafting Isaac and having him compete with Chriss. I don't see the Suns and Fox as inevitable.



I wouldn't be against seeing us use our two first round picks to trade up to three to draft Ball if the Lakers select Fox and the Celtics select Fultz, or even moving up to secure our guy. I know having two top ten picks is appealing, and the first of those picks should land us a piece to the puzzle, but second of those picks might only land us a talent that might not get much playing time and could be considered as fairly lacklustre (e.g. Zach Collins, Jarrett Allen). So if the opportunity presented itself to move up to get Ball at three, or whichever player we rate as the next best available, then I would be in favor of that if we believed that player is going to be a star. Otherwise stay put and grab two young talents and hope we get lucky.

In regards to having four rookies and struggling to find minutes for them, well, I wouldn't be too concerned about that. The second round pick will most likely end up in the D-League, and Bogdanovic might not even come over, and if he does he will be fighting to stay relevant without any additions in the draft because we have Buddy, Malachi, Afflalo, Temple, and McLemore vying for minutes at the position(s) he plays. So I guess if the opportunity to consolidate to get a better player presents itself then we should go for it, but at the same time I wouldn't be too concerned about Bogdanovic and a second round pick because both are likely trade fodder unless we manage to hit lucky in the second round like the Nuggets did with Jokic.
I would trade both picks to get Lonzo Ball. I think he's a transformative talent. I love Fox but I don't feel he would change the team's fortune to the same degree.
 
#35
The second round pick will most likely end up in the D-League, and Bogdanovic might not even come over, and if he does he will be fighting to stay relevant without any additions in the draft because we have Buddy, Malachi, Afflalo, Temple, and McLemore vying for minutes at the position(s) he plays.
You expect the team to retain Afflalo and McLemore?
 
#36
The funny thing about the Tatum and Issac comparison is that a lot of people are saying how much more potential Issac has compared to Tatum.

As though Tatum has already reached his peak and is not going to improve. But, the funny thing is, Tatum is actually younger than Issac. They are both still young at 19 years old. So, to put a cap on the potential of Tatum, as compared to Issac, I think is ridiculous.

I think both players will be very good players and both improve with age and experience. But Tatum is clearly the more polished and the safer pick of the two currently.

So, at #5, I would definitely take Tatum, if Fox is off the board. I would be very happy with the pick too. :)
Tatum is more polished, but he is one of those players that can do everything well but isn't special in one category. He is also a tweener at the forward position and that can present issues when he doesn't translate perfectly to either forward position. That's not to say he can't be successful in the NBA because we have seen players that are tweeners or hybrid forwards have successful careers, but having that tag can limit a player's perceived upside.

When you look at Isaac he is nearly 7 foot tall. He has guard skills, can shoot, and defend. Granted he needs to add weight to his frame, especially if he is going to play at PF (most likely position in the NBA), but that can easily be sorted when a player gets into the NBA. The kid has the skill set to play offense and defense at either forward position and not miss a beat. As long as he fills out his frame, works hard on his game, and gets the opportunity on the right team, then there is no real limit to Isaac's upside because of his size and skill set. Unlike Tatum, he does have some elite attributes and is good enough in all other areas to offer a decent floor with a higher ceiling.
 
#37
I have a very strong suspicion we will we do a deal for Fox at 3 with Philly. Im not in the biz, its just a hunch.
I can't see Vlade trading with Philly for #3, when that was the pick we lost in the pick swap, and then giving up more assets. Also, I don't think there is much difference between the talent at #3, 4 or 5 in this draft.

If Vlade makes a trade up, it would probably to get Lonzo Ball at #2. It would take at minimum our #5 and #10 and maybe more, to move up to #2 to draft Ball, if the Lakers are not sold on him.

Otherwise, I think Vlade stays put at#5. But, the #10 is in play for trade up or down.
 
#38
You expect the team to retain Afflalo and McLemore?
At this stage we don't know what our front office will decide to do with them. It is possible they move them on, but what is their current trade value? I'd say we would struggle to get more than a second round pick for them. At that price point we might as well keep a veteran like Afflalo around because he can help mentor players and slot into the SG/SF role when needed, and despite being a draft bust, McLemore did have some good games towards the end of last season and perhaps he can continue to carve out a role for himself off the bench - which is something a lot of us have suggested in the past that he could become a sixth man like player. Now I could understand moving both players if we need to clear cap space, but we don't need to do that this year since we are beginning another multi-year rebuild. So unless either player can fetch a late first round pick, or are packaged in any trade deals, then it is possible both players are on our roster at the start of the season.
 
#39
Tatum is more polished, but he is one of those players that can do everything well but isn't special in one category. He is also a tweener at the forward position and that can present issues when he doesn't translate perfectly to either forward position. That's not to say he can't be successful in the NBA because we have seen players that are tweeners or hybrid forwards have successful careers, but having that tag can limit a player's perceived upside.

When you look at Isaac he is nearly 7 foot tall. He has guard skills, can shoot, and defend. Granted he needs to add weight to his frame, especially if he is going to play at PF (most likely position in the NBA), but that can easily be sorted when a player gets into the NBA. The kid has the skill set to play offense and defense at either forward position and not miss a beat. As long as he fills out his frame, works hard on his game, and gets the opportunity on the right team, then there is no real limit to Isaac's upside because of his size and skill set. Unlike Tatum, he does have some elite attributes and is good enough in all other areas to offer a decent floor with a higher ceiling.
You just said his likely position is PF, and we need a SF. Does Isaac have the perimeter skillset to be a 3 full time?
 
#40
At this stage we don't know what our front office will decide to do with them. It is possible they move them on, but what is their current trade value? I'd say we would struggle to get more than a second round pick for them. At that price point we might as well keep a veteran like Afflalo around because he can help mentor players and slot into the SG/SF role when needed, and despite being a draft bust, McLemore did have some good games towards the end of last season and perhaps he can continue to carve out a role for himself off the bench - which is something a lot of us have suggested in the past that he could become a sixth man like player. Now I could understand moving both players if we need to clear cap space, but we don't need to do that this year since we are beginning another multi-year rebuild. So unless either player can fetch a late first round pick, or are packaged in any trade deals, then it is possible both players are on our roster at the start of the season.
McLemore is set to become a free agent. The Kings can tender him to make him a restricted free agent, but either way, they'd have to sign him to a new contract for him to be on the Kings next year. They could sign-and-trade him but with practically every team having a bunch of caproom there's no reason to do a sign-and-trade.

Afflalo is signed for one more season at $12 million but only $1.5 million of that is guaranteed. This actually makes him a decent trade chip for a team looking to cut salary and/or get out from under a bad contract. They can trade for Afflalo at $12 million (sending $12 million +/- 10% I believe) to the Kings for Arron and then waiving him to save the money.
 
#41
You just said his likely position is PF, and we need a SF. Does Isaac have the perimeter skillset to be a 3 full time?
A lot of people see Isaac as a stretch 4 long term but I see a big SF.

He has the lateral quickness to defend wings and he has said himself that he prefers playing SF. He's got kind of a faceup PF type game, but with decent ballhandling and a promising jumper. I would rather have him at the 3 with the option to swing to the 4 in a smallball lineup.

For reference, Isaac is about the same size as Kevin Durant. He's slightly taller but with a shorter wingspan. Similar to Brandon Ingram as well, though both Durant and Isaac weighed in 15 lbs or more heavier than Ingram.
 

dude12

Hall of Famer
#42
But the goal in a rebuild is to draft and develop a star.

Richardson might turn out to be a nice SG, but does anyone see him becoming a star?

I'm not saying Isaac will be a star. But if you think he is, giving up a nice SG prospect, a second rounder and taking on an ugly contract for one year is not a big price to move up 3 slots to go get him.

Especially when you already have a very young roster with two other nice shooting guards (assuming Bogdan plays well) and no top tier talent.
Agreed your trying to get a star but your trying to get talent acquisition. At this point, I'm not sure Isaac will be better than Malachi to be honest. If Isaac can't play SF, I think his value diminishes. I think it's to early to start making judgements on a guy like Malachi. He looked like he could get his shot and score. I'm not ready to deal that for a flyer on a guy. I like Isaac....but to say he's going to be a star? Vlade would have to be convinced. Isaac is too. Much of a wild card right now.
 
#43
I see Isaac as an SF. He has the foot speed and perimeter game on both ends to play SF and has elite length for the position. There is a lot to like about Isaac and he has crazy potential, he just didn't do it all consistently and he seemed to defer much of the time. The big question is was his inconsistency who he is as a player or a result of that wacky coaching style at Florida State. Additionally does he have the personality to be a star.
 

bajaden

Hall of Famer
#44
Tatum is more polished, but he is one of those players that can do everything well but isn't special in one category. He is also a tweener at the forward position and that can present issues when he doesn't translate perfectly to either forward position. That's not to say he can't be successful in the NBA because we have seen players that are tweeners or hybrid forwards have successful careers, but having that tag can limit a player's perceived upside.

When you look at Isaac he is nearly 7 foot tall. He has guard skills, can shoot, and defend. Granted he needs to add weight to his frame, especially if he is going to play at PF (most likely position in the NBA), but that can easily be sorted when a player gets into the NBA. The kid has the skill set to play offense and defense at either forward position and not miss a beat. As long as he fills out his frame, works hard on his game, and gets the opportunity on the right team, then there is no real limit to Isaac's upside because of his size and skill set. Unlike Tatum, he does have some elite attributes and is good enough in all other areas to offer a decent floor with a higher ceiling.
Funny, because Duke played Tatum at PF instead of SF, which is his best position, now he's suddenly a tweener. The dude is a SF that can play some PF. Tatum may not be an elite athlete, but he certainly a good athlete. If I have any questions about Tatum its on the defensive side of the ball. He wasn't terrible defensively, but he certainly needs improvement. But most young college players do.
 

bajaden

Hall of Famer
#45
I see Isaac as an SF. He has the foot speed and perimeter game on both ends to play SF and has elite length for the position. There is a lot to like about Isaac and he has crazy potential, he just didn't do it all consistently and he seemed to defer much of the time. The big question is was his inconsistency who he is as a player or a result of that wacky coaching style at Florida State. Additionally does he have the personality to be a star.
I agree with you. Isaac was a victim of system at Florida St. I think a lot of people are going to be surprised at how skilled he is once he gets a chance to show what he can do. Offensively he's probably a little behind the curve, but defensively, he'll be a difference maker from the get go. I agree that he's a SF, but I think with added strength, he'll eventually be able to play some PF. Tough kid as well. He was an amazing rebounder despite not being as strong as his opponents. He wasn't afraid to get in there and bang.
 
#46
I agree with you. Isaac was a victim of system at Florida St. I think a lot of people are going to be surprised at how skilled he is once he gets a chance to show what he can do. Offensively he's probably a little behind the curve, but defensively, he'll be a difference maker from the get go. I agree that he's a SF, but I think with added strength, he'll eventually be able to play some PF. Tough kid as well. He was an amazing rebounder despite not being as strong as his opponents. He wasn't afraid to get in there and bang.
Isaac reminds me a bit of Andrei Kirilenko without the high level passing ability but with maybe even better shotblocking.

He needs to learn to not settle for jumpers and slow down when given the chance to isolate on his man. I'm leaning towards Dennis Smith at #5 but I wouldn't mind Isaac.
 
#47
I agree with you. Isaac was a victim of system at Florida St. I think a lot of people are going to be surprised at how skilled he is once he gets a chance to show what he can do. Offensively he's probably a little behind the curve, but defensively, he'll be a difference maker from the get go. I agree that he's a SF, but I think with added strength, he'll eventually be able to play some PF. Tough kid as well. He was an amazing rebounder despite not being as strong as his opponents. He wasn't afraid to get in there and bang.
I agree that he offers that versatility, especially if he gains some strength, but I'm not sure he needs to. He made some moves this year that were SG material on the perimeter. Don't get me wrong the ability to play PF will only add to his value, but from the Kings perspective I don't think its a deal-breaker one way or the other.
 
#48
Funny, because Duke played Tatum at PF instead of SF, which is his best position, now he's suddenly a tweener. The dude is a SF that can play some PF. Tatum may not be an elite athlete, but he certainly a good athlete. If I have any questions about Tatum its on the defensive side of the ball. He wasn't terrible defensively, but he certainly needs improvement. But most young college players do.
Which he got away with in college. Is he a natural PF in the NBA? Not really. He might also struggle guarding some of the bigger, more physical PFs.

Could he slide over to SF? Sure, but again it's not ideal since his skill set is more PF. I suspect he can and possibly will play some SF, but he could get found out by some of the more agile small forwards.

In college he might have been a PF, but in the NBA he's a tweener at this stage. If he is lucky draft wise and lands on the right team and he develops, there's no reason he can't have a successful career. However, he will need to nail down his position if he doesn't want to get stuck between the two and end up as a rotational player, or a talented but flawed player. That's what limits his upside compared to Isaac, but as I've said before, I wouldn't be against drafting him at five, though the more I see of him, the more I'm leaning towards Isaac if we go for a forward.
 
#49
Lots of natural SFs play PF in college due to an NCAA team's lack of size or the desire to get another guard or wing into the starting lineup to have the most talented 5on the floor to begin games.

Tatum isn't a tweener. He's got a nice outside shot, moves very fluidly, can handle the ball a bit, and will be better suited guarding wings than bigs on the NBA level.

Now, I have concerns about Tatum's effort on defense, how well his style fits in today's NBA, and whether he can be as good a scorer on the NBA level (for him to be a good player on the next level he pretty much has to be) but I don't have any concerns about what position he'll play. He's a small forward.
 

kingsboi

Hall of Famer
#50
Isaac reminds me a bit of Andrei Kirilenko without the high level passing ability but with maybe even better shotblocking.

He needs to learn to not settle for jumpers and slow down when given the chance to isolate on his man. I'm leaning towards Dennis Smith at #5 but I wouldn't mind Isaac.
I'm getting Al Farouq Aminu vibes when I think of Isaac.
 
#51
It's quite possible Vlade stays put at 5, but if that's the case, I don't think it would be because he is worried what people think. He has already given himself a timeline. He has already stated he is going to do it his way, win or lose.

Plenty of good players will be at 5. However I wouldn't just dismiss the notion of moving up even at 3. We are in great cap position in no small part to that trade with Philly, but people seem to gloss over that. Also, you cant go through life worrying what people think. Not unless your just a follow the leader type.

Maybe more good fortune shines and the player we want is there at 5. My preference is always to get our target without losing assests.
 
#53
It's quite possible Vlade stays put at 5, but if that's the case, I don't think it would be because he is worried what people think. He has already given himself a timeline. He has already stated he is going to do it his way, win or lose.

Plenty of good players will be at 5. However I wouldn't just dismiss the notion of moving up even at 3. We are in great cap position in no small part to that trade with Philly, but people seem to gloss over that. Also, you cant go through life worrying what people think. Not unless your just a follow the leader type.

Maybe more good fortune shines and the player we want is there at 5. My preference is always to get our target without losing assests.
Here is the thing about trading up to #3. The player you presume he wants is Fox, he may be there at #5 and there would be no need to give up more assets (i.e. #5 and #10 for #3, to move up 2 spots).

As much as I like Fox, he is not worth the #5 and #10 to guarantee we get him. I would much rather sit there at #5 and take who is left of Fox, Tatum and Jackson.

My point being, I think there are 2 players that are considered "can't miss" prospects, Fultz (there is no way to get him) and possibly Lonzo Ball at #2. If I am Vlade and taking a risk to sell the farm to move up, I'm doing it to get to #1 (not likely) or #2, to draft one of those two point guards.

While Fox is a great prospect (and my favorite to take at 5), he still has major question marks with his shooting and his slight frame, that I am not willing to trade 2 top 10 lottery picks to insure I get him. I would stay put at 5 and see who falls to me and take him with a big smile. :)
 
#54
@ockingsfan
I agree with you on many points. However I never stated using pick #10. My thought was Richardson and 5. I hate losing assets to early but Philly needs what Richardson likely brings. Scoring from the wing.We meanwhile have too many SG's that we are sliding them to SF when that's not their natural position.

Also, Vlade might jump up to 3 for Ball if he drops, or Jackson. Who can say. Fox certainly seems like the popular consensus.

Also most of us know Grant has been used as the mouth of Sauron er I mean the front office many times before. Dropping subtle hints about forthcoming moves and "softening" the fanbase. He and Doug( I was told) have been saying don't be surprised if we trade an asset to move up to get who we want. They then gave their "blessing" for such a move.I for one won't be shocked if they move up, or try at least. Heck it may be the second pick in the end that we are more interested in improving. I just think it unlikely we pull a GP and simply pick 5 and 10.
 
#56
Fox is the goods btw, he's a no-brainer at #5 in my book. He'd be worth his weight in gold on this roster. Great kid too, they don't make em like that every year.

There's no PG's on the horizon, on a several year outlook, who project to be fast/quick/acceleration like him. He brings an extremely rare commodity to the table, and he's got tons of upside/room for improvement. He's left handed and 6'4" too, it's a joke. He'll be the fastest PG in the western conference if he lands here. Wall and actually Dennis Schroder, to me, are the only ones with comparable speed/acceleration. Coach Cal helped polish his speed too. He's a one man press.

 
#57
For what it's worth, I was not a Aminu fan when he came out of college, and I love Isaac. They are absolutely nothing alike.
I was a big time Aminu fan coming out of college. I root for Wake Forest in the ACC. I'll always remember a HS game where he obliterated ESPN's #1 ranked player Greg Monroe.

There's some considerable differences with him and Isaac, who I've followed since he was ranked 4-stars and was in the 70's(and listed at 6'6" or 6'7").

The biggest is that Aminu was an early bloomer and Isaac is quite the opposite. There's also a very big difference with the way they can shoot, Isaac's stroke is much cleaner. Aminu's longer, for sure.

Both have a great nose for the ball getting rebounds. Both have the ability to go coast-to-coast. Isaac surely has more upside. Aminu to me has more of the role-player demeanor, which he's great at, when he couldn't get paid years ago that was absurd, he was the only player on the Mavs who showed up in that playoff series, and he's worth every penny the Blazers pay him. Isaac on the other hand seems like he's destined for big $$$, he's got lots of room for improvement..
 
#58
McLemore is set to become a free agent. The Kings can tender him to make him a restricted free agent, but either way, they'd have to sign him to a new contract for him to be on the Kings next year. They could sign-and-trade him but with practically every team having a bunch of caproom there's no reason to do a sign-and-trade.
I think you should always tender an offer and see what happens.

There are some teams over the salary cap, and I can see a team like Cleveland possibly being interested in Ben, seeing that LeBron was a huge Ben supporter coming out of college.

A team may offer a second round pick to assure we won't match. Therefore, they can offer a more market rate contract, instead of overpaying for BMac, to make sure we don't match. That way they save on spending on Ben's contract and re-assuring they get him with a 2nd round pick.
 
#60
I think you should always tender an offer and see what happens.

There are some teams over the salary cap, and I can see a team like Cleveland possibly being interested in Ben, seeing that LeBron was a huge Ben supporter coming out of college.

A team may offer a second round pick to assure we won't match. Therefore, they can offer a more market rate contract, instead of overpaying for BMac, to make sure we don't match. That way they save on spending on Ben's contract and re-assuring they get him with a 2nd round pick.
Agreed. Gotta tender the offer. I never liked that pick. I always was hesitant about McLemore being a top pick because of how Marcus Smart completely shut him down on his homecourt (Smart finished the game with a backflip, it was a glorious performance from Marcus). I'll always remember Jay Bilas on TV at that draft saying he was the best player in the field. He's got value and still untapped potential for sure. All depends on the price/market.