That's what Chad Ford(?) said I think -- and I'll save someone the effort and say Chad Ford is an idiot, unlike me for being a fan of a 17-win team. And when I heard Evans being interviewed at the draft by ESPN radio he saw himself more as a two-guard but would play the point if that's what the team wanted from him. He saw himself as a LeBron-type player. I guess there are some combo-guards who are really good in the league but I believe most good players have an established position.
How do you feel about picking Evans?
- Thread starter VF21
- Start date
I don't know how to feel about Rubio not playing in Minnesota... A part of me feels bad because I know that he REALLY wanted to play in Sac and he's probably regretting entering the draft now. Another part of me says he just needs to man up and play for the Wolves. Then again... thats what the Wolves get for not trading him to us for Kenny Thomas.
Either way I don't see how Evans was necessarily the safe pick. Rubio has pro experience, even if it is in Europe, and was rated higher by plenty of NBA writers/experts.
I think they just chose who they thought would be the best player, and in the minds of many of the Kings talent evaluators it seems as the decision wasn't too difficult.
I think they just chose who they thought would be the best player, and in the minds of many of the Kings talent evaluators it seems as the decision wasn't too difficult.
I think Evans is the safe pick as far as immediate returns go. He has more NBA ready qualities in his strength, his defense, and his penetrating ability which will probably get him a lot of trips to the free throw line. Rubio's greatest strength is his ability to create for others, but before he can do that at a level that will significantly impact the team, he has to learn the nuances of the NBA and his teammates. Evans is a 1-on-1 scorer first and foremost, and that is far more easier to transfer to the NBA right off the bat than it is for Rubio. If you want to compare strictly playmaking/facilitating ability between the two, I say Rubio is the far safer pick and you'll get results sooner and at a higher degree than Evans, but Evans has more ready scoring ability than Rubio, so he'll at least be able to provide some scoring punch in his rookie season.
I agree Evans should have more of an immediate impact, and could challenge for ROY, but I also think he has a higher ceiling, especially if he can develop into a good PG.
I still don't think immediate impact = safer pick. The safer pick would be the guy who energizes the fan base more, regardless of numbers he puts up, and Rubio was clearly that guy. Plus if a guy is seen as less "NBA-ready" fans and ownership might be willing to give that player more time to develop, which I think makes that the safer pick for the GM and the new coach.
I still don't think immediate impact = safer pick. The safer pick would be the guy who energizes the fan base more, regardless of numbers he puts up, and Rubio was clearly that guy. Plus if a guy is seen as less "NBA-ready" fans and ownership might be willing to give that player more time to develop, which I think makes that the safer pick for the GM and the new coach.
And Thompson almost had 3apg his senior year.. People look at the stats and swear they are the same player that ran the same offense. They are not.
Evans to Rose is worse than people making the JWill or Pistol Pete comparison to Rubio. Rose and Evans are entirely two different players who just happened to play for the same school.
And MAC, stfu about the puppy already. You must have a 1996 Dell computer with a 12" crt running in 640/480 with half the screen chopped and 16 colors if you can't tell that's a dog. Go to the other thread and look at the full sized pic.. It's a puppy that's running towards the camera.
Evans to Rose is worse than people making the JWill or Pistol Pete comparison to Rubio. Rose and Evans are entirely two different players who just happened to play for the same school.
And MAC, stfu about the puppy already. You must have a 1996 Dell computer with a 12" crt running in 640/480 with half the screen chopped and 16 colors if you can't tell that's a dog. Go to the other thread and look at the full sized pic.. It's a puppy that's running towards the camera.
Yeah, but we've already seen how that system doesn't work and how it really doesn't work with 1 on 1 guys, so Evans still doesn't make sense. You have to have shooting guards, and Evans isn't known for his shooting touch. It also moves your big men away from the basket, which creates less foul pressure on the other team and weakens your offensive rebounding. It also requires passing big men of which Hawes is our best option and he's nowhere near Webber/Vlade at this point. It also tends to use the types of big men who offer little defensive presence and leave you constatly compensating on that end.
Why can't the FO learn from their mistakes?
THANK YOU!!!
Kings fans need to get over the past. First, that system didn't bring a championship and that was with a remarkably well crafted team perfectly suited to that style of play. We don't have those players, we don't seem to really be trying to acquire those players yet we keep trotting out the same system. Move on! Determine an identity (which isn't that tough if you look at some of the other successful teams) and start building a team to support it.
The lack of strategic thinking in the FO is shameful. If this truly was a business as they like to use as a reason for a lot of the decisions over the past 3-5 years, the management would have been fired a long time ago.
What player available would have appeased you? I've read through a lot of this thread and the board in general, and it seems like fans are upset that we didn't take Rubio. (By the way, using your logic above, he wouldn't have been a good fit either.) Is that your angle also?
The reason I'm asking is because I happen to think Tyreke Evans is a really good player. I don't really care who we already have on the team, or what needs we had. Griffin and Thabeet were the only real "hands down, if they're available, take them" players in the draft, and they went 1 and 2. James Harden was probably just a notch below those two, and he went third. I believe if Harden was available, he'd have been our guy, regardless of the fact that we don't have a need at shooting guard.
I don't think NBA teams really approach the draft from a position of need, especially when you're picking 4th. You take the best guy left, regardless of position. I don't know if Evans is going to wind up being the best guy left, but he's definitely not a stretch. I'm not as enthralled with Rubio as everyone else is, but he would be in the discussion as well. It was kind of a toss-up, and I am more satisfied with Evans than I would be with Rubio, from a basketball perspective. I don't think Rubio necessarily fits with our team anymore than Evans does, and I think Evans is a more well-rounded player.
It's a long offseason. There's a lot of opportunity to make moves to improve your roster, and while I think we can look at the team right now and have a good idea of what we're gonna have next season, it's likely that we'll wind up with rotation that does play to the strengths of the team. A good coaching staff doesn't force a system on a team that's not capable of running it. I firmly believe that Paul Westphal is going to adapt his approach to what makes sense for the roster, regardless of whether Yoda is on the bench or not. The Evans pick probably won't wind up being Samaki Walker over Kobe Bryant. It's probably going to be a good pick for us.
The reason I'm asking is because I happen to think Tyreke Evans is a really good player. I don't really care who we already have on the team, or what needs we had. Griffin and Thabeet were the only real "hands down, if they're available, take them" players in the draft, and they went 1 and 2. James Harden was probably just a notch below those two, and he went third. I believe if Harden was available, he'd have been our guy, regardless of the fact that we don't have a need at shooting guard.
I don't think NBA teams really approach the draft from a position of need, especially when you're picking 4th. You take the best guy left, regardless of position. I don't know if Evans is going to wind up being the best guy left, but he's definitely not a stretch. I'm not as enthralled with Rubio as everyone else is, but he would be in the discussion as well. It was kind of a toss-up, and I am more satisfied with Evans than I would be with Rubio, from a basketball perspective. I don't think Rubio necessarily fits with our team anymore than Evans does, and I think Evans is a more well-rounded player.
It's a long offseason. There's a lot of opportunity to make moves to improve your roster, and while I think we can look at the team right now and have a good idea of what we're gonna have next season, it's likely that we'll wind up with rotation that does play to the strengths of the team. A good coaching staff doesn't force a system on a team that's not capable of running it. I firmly believe that Paul Westphal is going to adapt his approach to what makes sense for the roster, regardless of whether Yoda is on the bench or not. The Evans pick probably won't wind up being Samaki Walker over Kobe Bryant. It's probably going to be a good pick for us.
I am thinking or hoping that as well, but the offenses I see fitting this team as it is, is mostly just ISOs and curl movements. I suppose you can run pick and rolls with Beno, but that is pretty much the sum of last years offense. And the thing is, the Kings scored okay last year. It just wasn't an offense that looked reliable at the end of games.
I don't care what the system is, our offense isn't going to be reliable at the end of games because we're young and have a brand new coach. But like you said, I think this concern over our offense is premature, if not completely out of place.
I like that Evans can play defense, and can drop down to the two and defend without giving up a bunch of size.
I like that Evans can play defense, and can drop down to the two and defend without giving up a bunch of size.
If you like Turnovers get ready for this year with all these youngsters we have.. I am just throwing this out so anyone can answer but is there a team recently in the NBA that averaged more TOs than Assists for the entire year? I think the Kings have a chance at becoming the first if no other team has done it.
WHAT IN THE WORLD??? did anyone see this
http://www.sacbee.com/static/weblogs/sports/kings/archives/2009/06/evans-red-flag.html
http://www.sacbee.com/static/weblogs/sports/kings/archives/2009/06/evans-red-flag.html
Im very happy Tyreke was the pick. His height combined with Kevin Martin's is going to allow our backcourt to get shots off whenever they please. It also gives us a good defensive presense on the perimeter. Most PG's in the league have problems scoring against taller, longer players. Kill all the talk of Evans not being a 1. Evans played almost his entire year at Memphis as a 1 and will play almost all of his minutes as a 1 with SAC. The last high draft pick taken as a 1 that "wasnt a true 1" was Deron Williams I believe. Weve all seen how that turned out.
Ive been saying/thinking it ever since the Ricky Rubio hype machine hit full blast, " Rubio is going to be a bum." The last thing the Kings need is a soft euro player to lead the team. What player in the league was Rubio supposed to be able to guard? Lets not forget that hes only played in europe/spain which is a 2nd tier league. Ricky Rubio is going to be the Luke Walton of pg's, Cant score or defend but passes the ball well.
Ive been saying/thinking it ever since the Ricky Rubio hype machine hit full blast, " Rubio is going to be a bum." The last thing the Kings need is a soft euro player to lead the team. What player in the league was Rubio supposed to be able to guard? Lets not forget that hes only played in europe/spain which is a 2nd tier league. Ricky Rubio is going to be the Luke Walton of pg's, Cant score or defend but passes the ball well.
I said this about Evans before we drafted him, acknowledging that while he's a superb talent I just wasn't sure if several maturity issues/habits allowed him to be receptive to change:
FYI, I also said that he had a loser's game (meaning that his team wouldn't win much) and thought that he wouldn't be able to reach his full potential. But because I truly believe he was huge upside (the only thing that might currently be missing is a good jumper, easily correctable) I'm okay with the pick, and if he grows properly he could be a very special player.
FYI, I also said that he had a loser's game (meaning that his team wouldn't win much) and thought that he wouldn't be able to reach his full potential. But because I truly believe he was huge upside (the only thing that might currently be missing is a good jumper, easily correctable) I'm okay with the pick, and if he grows properly he could be a very special player.
Back to Evans..
How do you all feel about Evans against a good stable zone defense? That was one of his most glaring weaknesses is handling the PG duties against a zone defense and being able to drive and kick.
One other thing that really worries me is his poor shot mechanics. I wouldn't care how his shot looked if he made his shots, but he doesn't really have any range or a decent set shot. How will that plus a zone defense hurt him? Will he be able to get the ball to an open man?
How do you all feel about Evans against a good stable zone defense? That was one of his most glaring weaknesses is handling the PG duties against a zone defense and being able to drive and kick.
One other thing that really worries me is his poor shot mechanics. I wouldn't care how his shot looked if he made his shots, but he doesn't really have any range or a decent set shot. How will that plus a zone defense hurt him? Will he be able to get the ball to an open man?
Last edited:
In this case its a coinsidence. I was never sold on Rubio. He was the most hyped player in the draft and yet he wasnt the best player in the draft nor was he the best at his position. I think there are 4-5 point guards that should be taken ahead of Rubio. I honestly dont see what the big deal is about him. He's tall and can pass, after that I dont see what qualities he has that will allow him to excell in the NBA.
Gary, i wouldnt worry too much about Evans shot mechanics. If the ball goes in thats what matters most. The Kings best player (Martin) has some of the worst shot mechanics ive seen of any player in the league, but it doesnt seem to hinder his ability.
Gary, i wouldnt worry too much about Evans shot mechanics. If the ball goes in thats what matters most. The Kings best player (Martin) has some of the worst shot mechanics ive seen of any player in the league, but it doesnt seem to hinder his ability.
Well, that wasn't all the offense. I mean the Cavs, Heat and Lakers all run that or ISOs at the end of games, but they have Lebron, Wade and Kobe attaching the D. We had KMart (who can't really create), Beno and Salmons doing it. Of course, that's going to lead to a lot more losses than wins. The nice thing about Evans is that in theory he can become someone who can get us those crunch time baskets.
Understand where you are coming from, but I wouldn't get too concerned about him having a loser's game. Hughes and Salmons (who you compared him to in your previous post) did not have problems per say with their talent or skill set, their problems were more about their attitudes. They were both me first players and Hughes just wasn't a hard worker. Yes, Evans could go down that same path, but he also could become like Wade who had similar criticisms coming out of college. This isn't to say he'll be as good or to compare them athletically, but with Evans work ethic and seeming desire to win it's perfectly realistic. You could even argue he showed signs as the college season went on. The last third of the season his AST went up and FGA went down. Over the final 8, he actually averaged nearly 5 ast per game.