I didn’t think the opposite because I thought KOC made good points but I thought the other side did too.
A central part of Tjarks philosophy seems to be seeing how guys do against guys who will also be NBA players. It’s reductionist to say that just means watching clips. It’s just what he emphasizes.
I think they could both be right. Taytum might have a potential skill that would give him the biggest upside in the draft. He also has a potential skill that is only really useful if it is elite. In other words, if your skill is the ability to score at the end of shot clocks and in 4th quarters when it slows down.. that’s only useful if you are good enough to get the ball. That makes it risky.
KOC seems comfortable with that risk and Tjarks isn’t.. seemingly based somewhat on their evaluation of the player but ALSO their overarching philosophy on the draft (just look at their big boards).
Also, keep in mind that Taytum could be Rudy Gay and KOC could still have been right in his process.