Old ESPN article on Evans..
- Thread starter bajaden
- Start date
It's more of an anti Petrie and Maloof move.. I have not been real thrilled with how they decimated the team over the last few years. At least it's purple! 
Remember the movie "Major League"? I am those fans sitting in the bleachers.. I'm a pissed off die hard that wants a good team.
Remember the movie "Major League"? I am those fans sitting in the bleachers.. I'm a pissed off die hard that wants a good team.
Please don't keep pointing out every damm thing you can think of why Evans is going to fail, and then at the end of it say you hope your wrong. Thats disingenuious and trying to have it both ways. Let me ask you a question. Who, in your opinion was the best player on the Memphis team last year? And, who, other than perhaps Dozier, has anyone else even heard of on that team? And, who, other than maybe Dozier, will ever play in the NBA? A team is usually as good as the sum of its parts. When I looked at Memphis at the beginning of the year, I certainly didn't have them as one of my favorites. Did you? I knew that Evans had been very good at every level he had played at, but despite that, I didn't think he could make up for the players they had lost. I was wrong.
On the defensive side, I thought Evans was very good. Did he get beat on occasion by some 5'7" little speedster? Yes! Will he be able to stop Chris Paul every time down the floor. No! But please, lets get real here. You name the player in the NBA thats going to stop any of the top point guards all the time. I don't care who you are, your going to get beat by someone, sometime. But, do I think he has the ability to effect the games of some of the best point guards in the NBA? Yes! And, he will get better at it as he matures and learns their games. So please don't paint him as a defensive liability because he's not. He'll be an improvement. Not that it'll be that hard to be an improvement.
One final thing. We don't need you or anyone else to try and temper our enthusiasim. This is the time of the year when every team is in first place. When hope springs eternal. So we don't need to proceed with caution and look for red flags. That will be taken care of once the season starts, and reality rears its ugly head. Until then, personally, I would just like to bask in the sunlight of optimism about the upcoming season. It'll start raining soon enough..
We need a hell of a lot more than a PG. We were the worst team in the league. We need a superstar....so front office drafted who they felt had the best chance of being a star. Yes, it just so happens that they believe he can successfully play PG; however, I would be shocked if they didn't consider the possibility of him NOT working at PG when they made the choice. That suggests either way they thought he was the best player available.
i'm confused. so is he or is he not allowed to say what he wants?
and THIS is exactly why some people around here are pessimistic. you think they're happy that our team is so sh*tty at times that ANY small improvement is cause for eternal celebration? none of this makes either side correct, because it's always, always, ALWAYS just points of views and opinions. and yet we all still persist in putting others down if they disagree with our own point of view. ugh.
looks like we're going to have to go back to separate threads for the happy harry's and the gloomy gus's.
and THIS is exactly why some people around here are pessimistic. you think they're happy that our team is so sh*tty at times that ANY small improvement is cause for eternal celebration? none of this makes either side correct, because it's always, always, ALWAYS just points of views and opinions. and yet we all still persist in putting others down if they disagree with our own point of view. ugh.
looks like we're going to have to go back to separate threads for the happy harry's and the gloomy gus's.
quote=AriesMar27;659595]granted this wasnt directed at me but whatever.... it isnt about rubio. it never was. it never will be. we needed a pg and we passed on not only the best pg available, but every pg available. had we drafted flynn or jennings you more than likely wouldnt here a single complaint about it. some would be upset that we passed on rubio but would be okay with it due to his contract issues. i personally wouldve been happy if we drafted flynn or jennings and all i would do is create beno trade threads all summer.[/quote]
I think you know where I stand on the point guard and Evans issue. I don't care if he's ever a great point guard, as long as he's a great player. In my opinon we drafted the best player available. I've already stated that if I wanted to draft the best point guard on my list available, I would have drafted Flynn. And, I would have been alright with that if they had decided to go in that direction. A little disappointed, but OK.
Way back when, the Kings needed a center. The best center available when they picked was Joe Kleine. They had a need at center and drafted the best available at that spot. They also passed on Karl Malone, because they didn't have a need at that time for a PF. You tell me who you would have rather had.
If your the GM. And you think that Evans is the best player available, then thats who you pick regardless of position. If you think that with time he might be able to play that position at the NBA level, then thats a bonus. I have no doubt that Flynn will turn into a good NBA point guard. I had serious doubts about Rubio, but not being able to really see him play much, I couldn't make a fair judgement.
Teams get into trouble whenever they draft just for need. Unless they get lucky and the best player available happens to fill a need. I believe the Kings drafted the best player available. What position he eventually fills is for the future to determine. Remember something. Its easy to look back at other teams and say, well, their good because they've got Kobe, or Wade, or Stockton, or Malone etc. But except in rare examples, no one knew that Kobe was going to be as good as he turned out to be. Ditto Wade and Malone. Sure, the teams that drafted them may have had their suspicions, but there wern't any guarantee's. So there's always an element of luck involved. The more knowledge you have, the less luck involved, but there's always the element of luck. I believe we accidently got lucky. I know you disagree. But if you don't mind, I hope I'm right and not you.
I think you know where I stand on the point guard and Evans issue. I don't care if he's ever a great point guard, as long as he's a great player. In my opinon we drafted the best player available. I've already stated that if I wanted to draft the best point guard on my list available, I would have drafted Flynn. And, I would have been alright with that if they had decided to go in that direction. A little disappointed, but OK.
Way back when, the Kings needed a center. The best center available when they picked was Joe Kleine. They had a need at center and drafted the best available at that spot. They also passed on Karl Malone, because they didn't have a need at that time for a PF. You tell me who you would have rather had.
If your the GM. And you think that Evans is the best player available, then thats who you pick regardless of position. If you think that with time he might be able to play that position at the NBA level, then thats a bonus. I have no doubt that Flynn will turn into a good NBA point guard. I had serious doubts about Rubio, but not being able to really see him play much, I couldn't make a fair judgement.
Teams get into trouble whenever they draft just for need. Unless they get lucky and the best player available happens to fill a need. I believe the Kings drafted the best player available. What position he eventually fills is for the future to determine. Remember something. Its easy to look back at other teams and say, well, their good because they've got Kobe, or Wade, or Stockton, or Malone etc. But except in rare examples, no one knew that Kobe was going to be as good as he turned out to be. Ditto Wade and Malone. Sure, the teams that drafted them may have had their suspicions, but there wern't any guarantee's. So there's always an element of luck involved. The more knowledge you have, the less luck involved, but there's always the element of luck. I believe we accidently got lucky. I know you disagree. But if you don't mind, I hope I'm right and not you.
First off, he, you, or anyone can say whatever they want withing the rules of the fourm. I did use the word PLEASE! Secondly, I happen to like Gary. He's a very knowledgable guy who spends a lot of time watching the same games that I do. So I guess I'm just surprised at him because he usually very objective when it comes to players. As a matter of fact I agree with him more than I disagree with him. Thirdly, I'm not a happy Harry. I'am a glass half full person, but I do try to be objective and fair. I'm not anointing Evans as the next coming of anything. But based on watching him play last year, and his achievements in highschool I believe he can be something special. Now if you think that makes me a happy Harry, then so be it. I just call it being optimistic. I'm sorry if my optimism offends you. I'll try and be more negative in the future.
First off, he, you, or anyone can say whatever they want withing the rules of the fourm. I did use the word PLEASE! Secondly, I happen to like Gary. He's a very knowledgable guy who spends a lot of time watching the same games that I do. So I guess I'm just surprised at him because he usually very objective when it comes to players. As a matter of fact I agree with him more than I disagree with him. Thirdly, I'm not a happy Harry. I'am a glass half full person, but I do try to be objective and fair. I'm not anointing Evans as the next coming of anything. But based on watching him play last year, and his achievements in highschool I believe he can be something special. Now if you think that makes me a happy Harry, then so be it. I just call it being optimistic. I'm sorry if my optimism offends you. I'll try and be more negative in the future.
i have no problem with your optimism, but i do take issue with you having a problem with pessimists; it seems hypocritical.
Just admit it man. This is about Rubio for you. You can check a lot of your post and you will find out that your pains are about NOT DRAFTING RUBIO.
You were saying we needed a point guard, but didn't that need get addressed too by trading for the seemingly pass-first point guard Sergio, who some say serves as an insurance in case Evans fails at 1?
Of the many good qualities and accomplishments of the kid from the past worth mentioning you come up with that 6' 11" wingspan as seemingly the most important reason for someone to have a man crush on Evans. That clearly shows your unreasonable bias on Evans.
Is that the "same amount of info" that you were referring on your post?
You were saying we needed a point guard, but didn't that need get addressed too by trading for the seemingly pass-first point guard Sergio, who some say serves as an insurance in case Evans fails at 1?
Of the many good qualities and accomplishments of the kid from the past worth mentioning you come up with that 6' 11" wingspan as seemingly the most important reason for someone to have a man crush on Evans. That clearly shows your unreasonable bias on Evans.
Is that the "same amount of info" that you were referring on your post?
Last edited:
About Tyreke's jumpshooting, I sort of expect Reke to get to the basket anyway--it's sort of like Rondo, where his strength, instincts, first step, ballhandling and athleticism just carry him through and allow him to carve up defenses. It's a skill that few players of his size actually have--the ability to get to the line despite not having what I currently believe is a NBA-caliber jumpshot--and potentially, as his jumper gets respected and as he hones his passing ability off the dribble--it can be that much better. It's a great skill to build off of provided he puts the work in it. This is where I think he might get most of his turnovers from initially as well.
I know many scouts and draftniks have been talking up Reke being a scorer with passing skills, and I'm actually tending to believe towards that as well. You don't see any real 6'5"+ natural PGs nowadays (well Detroit's trying to convert Stuckey into one but that's failing) and I think in the long run he should just use the passing to enhance the scoring skills. I know he had to score in college and in summer league because his teammates frankly weren't that good, but his scoring ability is probably more valuable than his passing ability.
There's many ways Reke can really go with this--he can become a full-fledged scorer (he certainly seems to have that dynamic aspect to him, and his game really caters to the more up-tempo NBA), he can be an all-around stat stuffer (in college he flashed that, with his versatility and his ability to rebound, pass, steal, block shots and play defense) or he can attempt to be a full time PG. The last one to me is getting more unlikely seeing his game more and more, and frankly I'd prefer to see him develop in the middle as a stat stuffer. But knowing that we need to alleviate KMart with another perimeter scorer/slasher, I definitely wouldn't be surprised if he takes the full-fledged scorer route at first. Whether he continues on that path will definitely depend on our coaching staff.
I know many scouts and draftniks have been talking up Reke being a scorer with passing skills, and I'm actually tending to believe towards that as well. You don't see any real 6'5"+ natural PGs nowadays (well Detroit's trying to convert Stuckey into one but that's failing) and I think in the long run he should just use the passing to enhance the scoring skills. I know he had to score in college and in summer league because his teammates frankly weren't that good, but his scoring ability is probably more valuable than his passing ability.
There's many ways Reke can really go with this--he can become a full-fledged scorer (he certainly seems to have that dynamic aspect to him, and his game really caters to the more up-tempo NBA), he can be an all-around stat stuffer (in college he flashed that, with his versatility and his ability to rebound, pass, steal, block shots and play defense) or he can attempt to be a full time PG. The last one to me is getting more unlikely seeing his game more and more, and frankly I'd prefer to see him develop in the middle as a stat stuffer. But knowing that we need to alleviate KMart with another perimeter scorer/slasher, I definitely wouldn't be surprised if he takes the full-fledged scorer route at first. Whether he continues on that path will definitely depend on our coaching staff.
Everyone...EVERYONE knows that when you have a top draft pick like the Kings had you draft talent, not to address positional needs. There are many examples of when drafting for positional needs goes wrong. The most infamous example is Portland drafting Sam Bowie because they already had Clyde Drexler and didnt need Michael Jordan at shooting guard. Imagine Clyde Drexler and Michael Jordan in the backcourt. Forget that neither of them are point guards. Think their team would have been better off adding talent (Jordan) than adding positional need (Bowie)? This should atleast give you an idea as to why the Kings drafted a guy that might not be as much of a point guard as some of the other players in the draft. Will Tyreke be Michael Jordan? NOPE. Will Tyreke end up being a better player than all the other ppoint guards in the draft? The Kings think so, I think so. With the exception of maybe Flynn, who could end up being a bad dude, I dont think any of the other point guards in this draft will be worth mentioning in 5 years. Somebody let me know when Tyreke Evans jerseys are being sold
It probably seems like youre being condemned because there are more people that actually think Evans will show to be a smart pick, even if he plays point guard, than there are people who dont think it was the right choice. Youre not being condemned, theres just way more people that disagree with you than there are that agree with you.
It probably seems like youre being condemned because there are more people that actually think Evans will show to be a smart pick, even if he plays point guard, than there are people who dont think it was the right choice. Youre not being condemned, theres just way more people that disagree with you than there are that agree with you.
Last edited:
A
Just admit it man. This is about Rubio for you. You can check a lot of your post and you will find out that your pains are about NOT DRAFTING RUBIO.
You were saying we needed a point guard, but didn't that need get addressed too by trading for the seemingly pass-first point guard Sergio, who some say serves as an insurance in case Evans fails at 1?
Of the many good qualities and accomplishments of the kid from the past worth mentioning you come up with that 6' 11" wingspan as seemingly the most important reason for someone to have a man crush on Evans. That clearly shows your unreasonable bias on Evans.
Why, if you're not anti-Evans?
You were saying we needed a point guard, but didn't that need get addressed too by trading for the seemingly pass-first point guard Sergio, who some say serves as an insurance in case Evans fails at 1?
Of the many good qualities and accomplishments of the kid from the past worth mentioning you come up with that 6' 11" wingspan as seemingly the most important reason for someone to have a man crush on Evans. That clearly shows your unreasonable bias on Evans.
Why, if you're not anti-Evans?
petrie laid an egg and drafted another combo guard. i was mad when he drafted douby and passed on sergio, farmar rondo and marcua williams. i knew he wouldnt be a pg and i was right. people argued with me about giving him time and guess what? he wasnt a damn pg.
you can all argue that we got sergio who is a pg but we shouldve already had sergio and that doesnt change the fact that evans isnt a pg. he himself said that he didnt know what position he would be playing for the kings. you ask jennings, flynn or rubio and they will all say pg... you ask griffin and he'll say pf, thabeet will say center and so on...
this isnt about rubio, this is about evans not being a pg.
A
Way back when, the Kings needed a center. The best center available when they picked was Joe Kleine. They had a need at center and drafted the best available at that spot. They also passed on Karl Malone, because they didn't have a need at that time for a PF. You tell me who you would have rather had.
If your the GM. And you think that Evans is the best player available, then thats who you pick regardless of position. If you think that with time he might be able to play that position at the NBA level, then thats a bonus. I have no doubt that Flynn will turn into a good NBA point guard. I had serious doubts about Rubio, but not being able to really see him play much, I couldn't make a fair judgement.
Teams get into trouble whenever they draft just for need. Unless they get lucky and the best player available happens to fill a need. I believe the Kings drafted the best player available. What position he eventually fills is for the future to determine. Remember something. Its easy to look back at other teams and say, well, their good because they've got Kobe, or Wade, or Stockton, or Malone etc. But except in rare examples, no one knew that Kobe was going to be as good as he turned out to be. Ditto Wade and Malone. Sure, the teams that drafted them may have had their suspicions, but there wern't any guarantee's. So there's always an element of luck involved. The more knowledge you have, the less luck involved, but there's always the element of luck. I believe we accidently got lucky. I know you disagree. But if you don't mind, I hope I'm right and not you.
If your the GM. And you think that Evans is the best player available, then thats who you pick regardless of position. If you think that with time he might be able to play that position at the NBA level, then thats a bonus. I have no doubt that Flynn will turn into a good NBA point guard. I had serious doubts about Rubio, but not being able to really see him play much, I couldn't make a fair judgement.
Teams get into trouble whenever they draft just for need. Unless they get lucky and the best player available happens to fill a need. I believe the Kings drafted the best player available. What position he eventually fills is for the future to determine. Remember something. Its easy to look back at other teams and say, well, their good because they've got Kobe, or Wade, or Stockton, or Malone etc. But except in rare examples, no one knew that Kobe was going to be as good as he turned out to be. Ditto Wade and Malone. Sure, the teams that drafted them may have had their suspicions, but there wern't any guarantee's. So there's always an element of luck involved. The more knowledge you have, the less luck involved, but there's always the element of luck. I believe we accidently got lucky. I know you disagree. But if you don't mind, I hope I'm right and not you.
i wasnt old enough to care but who was the kings starting pf when they picked joe klein?
A
Everyone...EVERYONE knows that when you have a top draft pick like the Kings had you draft talent, not to address positional needs. There are many examples of when drafting for positional needs goes wrong. The most infamous example is Portland drafting Sam Bowie because they already had Clyde Drexler and didnt need Michael Jordan at shooting guard. Imagine Clyde Drexler and Michael Jordan in the backcourt. Forget that neither of them are point guards. Think their team would have been better off adding talent (Jordan) than adding positional need (Bowie)? This should atleast give you an idea as to why the Kings drafted a guy that might not be as much of a point guard as some of the other players in the draft. Will Tyreke be Michael Jordan? NOPE. Will Tyreke end up being a better player than all the other ppoint guards in the draft? The Kings think so, I think so. With the exception of maybe Flynn, who could end up being a bad dude, I dont think any of the other point guards in this draft will be worth mentioning in 5 years. Somebody let me know when Tyreke Evans jerseys are being sold
It probably seems like youre being condemned because there are more people that actually think Evans will show to be a smart pick, even if he plays point guard, than there are people who dont think it was the right choice. Youre not being condemned, theres just way more people that disagree with you than there are that agree with you.
It probably seems like youre being condemned because there are more people that actually think Evans will show to be a smart pick, even if he plays point guard, than there are people who dont think it was the right choice. Youre not being condemned, theres just way more people that disagree with you than there are that agree with you.
After three years in college, Douby clearly showed that he wasn't a PG; plus he had a bum sophomore year that definitely should have served as a red flag about where his true shooting ability really lies, and combined with poor 2-point shooting percentages and just an okay free throw rate the writing was almost on the wall that he was doomed to fail in the NBA considering his height and his complete reliance on mostly outside shooting. One-dimensionality.
Rubio showed two really great NBA-caliber traits--his passing ability and his ability to intercept passing lanes/play off the ball. Those are two of the markers I like to see most in PGs, but you definitely have to be concerned about his scoring ability as well as his ability to play D. I remember at the time of the draft, we had real concerns that had we drafted Rubio, teams would just send their guards to "go at him", much in the same way guys shoot with confidence over Matt Bonner. I also have to wonder whether his latent smarts and smoothness will help unleash his passing ability especially when defenses back off him daring to shoot the jumper. The jumper is the easiest thing to correct in the league, and he has two potentially elite NBA PG traits, so I think he'll succeed in some capacity, but at the same time I think there's an adjustment period with him, and that's why we avoided drafting him. That being said, I don't think he'll ever be a good scorer or a good shooter.
In just a year of college Evans didn't show great PG ability, but showed that he did have some court vision which could be developed further due to his age, and not only will his various athletic gifts translate well to the up-tempo NBA, he also imposed that athleticism in college (rebounding, getting to the free throw line, stealing/blocking shots), things that should all translate fairly decently to the NBA. His weaknesses in his jumpshot and turnovers might become habits, but they're also some of the more easily correctable traits as well. That will definitely depend on the coaching staff. As I said above, Evans really has a great platform to build off of, and his career has the option of branching three different ways, which can't really be said of most players. Again, I don't think he's a point guard at all, but I do expect him to be at least one of the first two options in some degree.
Rubio showed two really great NBA-caliber traits--his passing ability and his ability to intercept passing lanes/play off the ball. Those are two of the markers I like to see most in PGs, but you definitely have to be concerned about his scoring ability as well as his ability to play D. I remember at the time of the draft, we had real concerns that had we drafted Rubio, teams would just send their guards to "go at him", much in the same way guys shoot with confidence over Matt Bonner. I also have to wonder whether his latent smarts and smoothness will help unleash his passing ability especially when defenses back off him daring to shoot the jumper. The jumper is the easiest thing to correct in the league, and he has two potentially elite NBA PG traits, so I think he'll succeed in some capacity, but at the same time I think there's an adjustment period with him, and that's why we avoided drafting him. That being said, I don't think he'll ever be a good scorer or a good shooter.
In just a year of college Evans didn't show great PG ability, but showed that he did have some court vision which could be developed further due to his age, and not only will his various athletic gifts translate well to the up-tempo NBA, he also imposed that athleticism in college (rebounding, getting to the free throw line, stealing/blocking shots), things that should all translate fairly decently to the NBA. His weaknesses in his jumpshot and turnovers might become habits, but they're also some of the more easily correctable traits as well. That will definitely depend on the coaching staff. As I said above, Evans really has a great platform to build off of, and his career has the option of branching three different ways, which can't really be said of most players. Again, I don't think he's a point guard at all, but I do expect him to be at least one of the first two options in some degree.
Last edited:
A
i agree with most of that, my only beef... my only problem with evans is that he isnt a pg. i never said that he will be a bad player or a bust. in fact after we drafted him i started a thread to trade martin for tmac and play evans at sg because i knew that he would need another ball handler and passer to play with him to make him as effective as possible. i dont dislike evans... i have no problems with him as a player just the position that he is being asked play for us. pg.... thats it. im not anti-evans, i couldnt care less about the dude personally because i dont know him and i dont live in sacramento so i wont be going to arco for any games. when he comes to los angeles i'll go and see him in person but besides that its whatever....
i dont expect rubio to be a great scorer nor do i need him to be one to be a great pg. kidd isnt much of a scorer neither was stockton.
i dont expect rubio to be a great scorer nor do i need him to be one to be a great pg. kidd isnt much of a scorer neither was stockton.
Last edited by a moderator:
A
Sorry. As you were typing your response, I was editing the last sentence on my last post. Oh well, I guess it doesn't matter, since I meant the same banana and you did not answer my last question.
You missed the entire point of my post. Olajuwon was the consensus #1 pick. The point of my post was that rather than draft talent, the Blazers elected to draft for positional need. The comparsion for the Kings is that instead of taking the best talent you thought they should have drafted a point guard because thats what you thought they needed. History has shown that that stance is often a mistake.
Last edited:
Come on, get serious. First off, I'm not talking about the Knicks, I'm talking about the Kings. If the Kings had the choice between Ewing and Malone and they needed a center, I would have picked Ewing, because at the time I actually thought that Ewing was a better talent than Malone. More was known about him and he came in with more fanfare. But that wasn't the choice. It was between Kleine and Malone. Entirely different choice.
The fact that you didn't care about our choice then because you were too young is immaterial. The rule is still the same today. You always take the best player available. That doesn't mean you can't make mistakes. But the mistakes are likely less if you go with the best player period, than go with the best player at a position of need.
What I find most interesting is that the two players you would have picked first and second, are the two players that most people know the least about. And by most people, I don't mean GM's or scouts. I mean fans. Unless your addicted to international baskeball, and know how to watch those games, of which there are some on this fourm, you really don't personally know much about either Rubio or Jennings. And by personally, I mean having watched them play yourself. I saw Rubio play three times. I tried for a fourth, but for some reason he didn't play in that game. Maybe he was nursing an injury or something. Two of the games were in the Olympics. He had some good moments and he had some very average moments. But it wasn't enough for me to draw any conclusions one way or another. I tried to watch one game with Jennings and I think he played all of 5 minutes in the game. He did nothing in that five minutes to make me stand up and take notice. But in that limited time it wouldn't be fair to him to say he wasn't any good.
In the short time I watched Rubio, I saw him do things that would certainly make the highlight reel on a regular basis. But I saw Jason Williams do similar things when he came into the league. Jason was quicker than Rubio and had an erratic, but better looking jumpshot with a quicker release. Jason won't be going into the HOF anytime soon. But that said I liked Jason. He helped put the Kings on the map. My thought with Rubio was maybe he could do the same thing if we drafted him. But we didn't.
Anyway dude. I'm really tired of this conservation, so knowing that I'll never change your mind, I'll leave you with your optimism and maybe I'll see you at the Clipper game.
The fact that you didn't care about our choice then because you were too young is immaterial. The rule is still the same today. You always take the best player available. That doesn't mean you can't make mistakes. But the mistakes are likely less if you go with the best player period, than go with the best player at a position of need.
What I find most interesting is that the two players you would have picked first and second, are the two players that most people know the least about. And by most people, I don't mean GM's or scouts. I mean fans. Unless your addicted to international baskeball, and know how to watch those games, of which there are some on this fourm, you really don't personally know much about either Rubio or Jennings. And by personally, I mean having watched them play yourself. I saw Rubio play three times. I tried for a fourth, but for some reason he didn't play in that game. Maybe he was nursing an injury or something. Two of the games were in the Olympics. He had some good moments and he had some very average moments. But it wasn't enough for me to draw any conclusions one way or another. I tried to watch one game with Jennings and I think he played all of 5 minutes in the game. He did nothing in that five minutes to make me stand up and take notice. But in that limited time it wouldn't be fair to him to say he wasn't any good.
In the short time I watched Rubio, I saw him do things that would certainly make the highlight reel on a regular basis. But I saw Jason Williams do similar things when he came into the league. Jason was quicker than Rubio and had an erratic, but better looking jumpshot with a quicker release. Jason won't be going into the HOF anytime soon. But that said I liked Jason. He helped put the Kings on the map. My thought with Rubio was maybe he could do the same thing if we drafted him. But we didn't.
Anyway dude. I'm really tired of this conservation, so knowing that I'll never change your mind, I'll leave you with your optimism and maybe I'll see you at the Clipper game.
It won't look like anti-Petrie or anti-Maloof if you wear that T-shirt. It will obviously look like an active anti-Evans and people will surely sympathize with the 19 year old kid for seeing a few fans like you destroying the kid this early on his NBA career. I really hope somebody throws a rotten egg on you if you do this kind of discouragement on the poor kid.
How can anyone think that drafting the 19-year old kid Evans ( who is NOW more than ever obviously look like the BEST PLAYER AVAILABLE at #4 ) meant a continuing decimation of the team?
We probably have identified all the pros and cons of experimenting on playing Evans at 1. If you could really be very objective and set aside your biases ( or your crush on Rubio ) and be a little bit reasonable, you probably will be able to give Evans the benefit of the doubt before you write him off.
Why is it so hard to just let go and just wait and see first what will happen with playing this talented Kid at the point guard position?
I am just curious, do you have a crush on Rubio?
How can anyone think that drafting the 19-year old kid Evans ( who is NOW more than ever obviously look like the BEST PLAYER AVAILABLE at #4 ) meant a continuing decimation of the team?
We probably have identified all the pros and cons of experimenting on playing Evans at 1. If you could really be very objective and set aside your biases ( or your crush on Rubio ) and be a little bit reasonable, you probably will be able to give Evans the benefit of the doubt before you write him off.
Why is it so hard to just let go and just wait and see first what will happen with playing this talented Kid at the point guard position?
I am just curious, do you have a crush on Rubio?
Do you have a crush on Evans or something? Seems like a lot of people are intoxicated when describing him. I went to meet him and oh my..
Looked good from far but far from good.
Call it what you want. Its basicly soothing your damaged ego for the Kings not drafting who you thought they should draft. Your still delivering rotten eggs, but now your putting a little icing on them. If I didn't know you, and saw you sitting next to me at a game, I would take it as you wanting Evans to fail, and by extension, the Kings to fail. Just so you can be right.
Please don't keep pointing out every damm thing you can think of why Evans is going to fail, and then at the end of it say you hope your wrong. Thats disingenuious and trying to have it both ways. Let me ask you a question. Who, in your opinion was the best player on the Memphis team last year? And, who, other than perhaps Dozier, has anyone else even heard of on that team? And, who, other than maybe Dozier, will ever play in the NBA? A team is usually as good as the sum of its parts. When I looked at Memphis at the beginning of the year, I certainly didn't have them as one of my favorites. Did you? I knew that Evans had been very good at every level he had played at, but despite that, I didn't think he could make up for the players they had lost. I was wrong.
On the defensive side, I thought Evans was very good. Did he get beat on occasion by some 5'7" little speedster? Yes! Will he be able to stop Chris Paul every time down the floor. No! But please, lets get real here. You name the player in the NBA thats going to stop any of the top point guards all the time. I don't care who you are, your going to get beat by someone, sometime. But, do I think he has the ability to effect the games of some of the best point guards in the NBA? Yes! And, he will get better at it as he matures and learns their games. So please don't paint him as a defensive liability because he's not. He'll be an improvement. Not that it'll be that hard to be an improvement.
One final thing. We don't need you or anyone else to try and temper our enthusiasim. This is the time of the year when every team is in first place. When hope springs eternal. So we don't need to proceed with caution and look for red flags. That will be taken care of once the season starts, and reality rears its ugly head. Until then, personally, I would just like to bask in the sunlight of optimism about the upcoming season. It'll start raining soon enough..
Please don't keep pointing out every damm thing you can think of why Evans is going to fail, and then at the end of it say you hope your wrong. Thats disingenuious and trying to have it both ways. Let me ask you a question. Who, in your opinion was the best player on the Memphis team last year? And, who, other than perhaps Dozier, has anyone else even heard of on that team? And, who, other than maybe Dozier, will ever play in the NBA? A team is usually as good as the sum of its parts. When I looked at Memphis at the beginning of the year, I certainly didn't have them as one of my favorites. Did you? I knew that Evans had been very good at every level he had played at, but despite that, I didn't think he could make up for the players they had lost. I was wrong.
On the defensive side, I thought Evans was very good. Did he get beat on occasion by some 5'7" little speedster? Yes! Will he be able to stop Chris Paul every time down the floor. No! But please, lets get real here. You name the player in the NBA thats going to stop any of the top point guards all the time. I don't care who you are, your going to get beat by someone, sometime. But, do I think he has the ability to effect the games of some of the best point guards in the NBA? Yes! And, he will get better at it as he matures and learns their games. So please don't paint him as a defensive liability because he's not. He'll be an improvement. Not that it'll be that hard to be an improvement.
One final thing. We don't need you or anyone else to try and temper our enthusiasim. This is the time of the year when every team is in first place. When hope springs eternal. So we don't need to proceed with caution and look for red flags. That will be taken care of once the season starts, and reality rears its ugly head. Until then, personally, I would just like to bask in the sunlight of optimism about the upcoming season. It'll start raining soon enough..
Sometimes I feel like I am the only person that actually has dissected Evans game enough to realize that we will be starting the season with a SG (Martin) and a combo guard whose weakness is anything to do with actual PG skills, but hey.. I get a laugh when everyone keeps talking about how he is going to do this and that and the other when he doesn't even know how to do it yet. Might as well put Garcia at PG because the PG skills are pretty similar although I would give the edge to Garcia.
Last edited:
I guess if we drafted Griffin you be pissed too?
When it hit's the #4 pick, and you have Beno starting at PG (which is the teams weakest position) and Flynn, Jennings, and the Spanish dude are all available you take one of them. Evans was never really an option on my draft board because we have an allstar caliber SG in Martin.