Tyreke Evans ROTY & 20/5/5 Watch
- Thread starter xrzn
- Start date
Asaf, I agree with you that no one on the team, including Tyreke, should be excluded from constructive criticism. But there is a lot of history behind all this bickering on the board that you might not know about. The problem people have with Section101 and other "Tyreke Haters" is that they've been hating on Tyreke since the day he was drafted. That is why Section101 in particularly gets the responses he does from forum members here. Why do they hate Tyreke so much, you might ask? Did Tyreke do a bad thing? Did Tyreke beat up little kids? Is Tyreke a bad teammate? No, The reason is that Tyreke was drafted over their boy toy Ricky Rubio. Ricky was supposed to be our Golden Boy, the one Holy Grail who was supposed to turn the franchise around, and in doing so bring excitement and international fame to the Kings. The Spanish Boy King was supposed to bring brilliant, sensational flashy passes that bring grown men to tears. And at the same time, his boyish good looks and long hair was going to make the ladies' hearts flutter uncontrollably (yeah I'm talking about you Ailene Voison!) as they yearn helplessly for the young prodigal heartthrob. He was the most hyped international basketball player ever.
But then came draft day. and what happened on draft day? The Kings somehow someway drafted Tyreke Freakin Evans. How dare they draft Evans over the Spanish Boy King!? How dare them?! How dare they draft Evans over the international Spanish sensation who was going to be the next superstar Pg? The one boy with vision and passing like no one has ever seen. How dare the Kings ignore the expertise of so many Kings fans who predicted greatness for the Spanish boy King after watching youtube video highlights? This is blasphemy! Some Kings fans here tried to justify the drafting of Evans over Rubio, but to no avail. The Rubio fans would not hear it. They cannot be wrong, they are NEVER wrong. So the Kings draft Evans much to the disappointment of the Rubio fans, but that's ok. because Tyreke Evans is 2 guard and will fail miserably at point guard. Evans will be a complete bust and prove the Rubio fans right! They shall be vindicated!
But then what happens during the season? Tyreke didn't become a bust. Tyreke leads the Kings to an impressive start that had many fans dreaming of playoffs. Not willing to admit that they were wrong, Rubio fans start nitpicking Tyreke's game. "He's not a true point guard." "He makes mistakes that cost the team the game in the end." So now here we are to the present day, with Tyreke having a historic rookie season, and Rubio quietly playing in Europe for 2 years. Rubio fans still holding on, still too proud to admit fault. How could they be wrong?! It just can't be. They are NEVER wrong! Never, ever ever ever!
ps. all joking aside, I think Section101 and others are really Kings fan by heart and do want the team to succeed. But they forget this because they are blinded by their pride and desire to protect their ego.
But that's exactly the point. Of course you can't win a championship in the NBA without having REALLY good players. Who ever said team ball should only be played by mediocre players?
Everyone looks at the teams who have won championships and say "oh, they have superstars, of course". But it should be a given that you need superstars to win, especially in the NBA when the competition is very tough. In fact, almost every team in the NBA has an Allstar level player. Even Minnesota has Big Al.
But look how many superstars have NOT won a championship. Iverson, Barkley, Nowitzky, Stockton, Malone (well..) to name just a few. You need to have really good players (superstars and role players) that will play in a system in which they can all thrive. Giving the keys to one guy, especially a 20 year old guy, and telling him to do as he pleases with the team is taking the Iverson road. Do we really want that?
Just for comparison, only a few centuries ago everyone would've laughed at the idea of democracy. "How would society function without a king? And how are the people qualified to vote for their leader? That makes no sense". But lo and behold, the relatively functional part of the world today is the democratic part. Things change in life, including basketball. It's important to learn from the past, but it's equally important to realize that whatever happened in the past has so many factors built into it that reaching such definitive conclusions based on the only factors we are aware of is doomed to fail.
Everyone looks at the teams who have won championships and say "oh, they have superstars, of course". But it should be a given that you need superstars to win, especially in the NBA when the competition is very tough. In fact, almost every team in the NBA has an Allstar level player. Even Minnesota has Big Al.
But look how many superstars have NOT won a championship. Iverson, Barkley, Nowitzky, Stockton, Malone (well..) to name just a few. You need to have really good players (superstars and role players) that will play in a system in which they can all thrive. Giving the keys to one guy, especially a 20 year old guy, and telling him to do as he pleases with the team is taking the Iverson road. Do we really want that?
Just for comparison, only a few centuries ago everyone would've laughed at the idea of democracy. "How would society function without a king? And how are the people qualified to vote for their leader? That makes no sense". But lo and behold, the relatively functional part of the world today is the democratic part. Things change in life, including basketball. It's important to learn from the past, but it's equally important to realize that whatever happened in the past has so many factors built into it that reaching such definitive conclusions based on the only factors we are aware of is doomed to fail.
The only reason the star driven teams win most of the rings is because it's Stern's league. The Kings team that everyone knows was amazing to watch, but ultimately it did not fit Stern's plan. I hope for the day that either Stern retires and a new way of thinking gets in charge of the NBA or the day Stern gets exposed and is forced to step down.
I think it is interesting to be a Phoenix fan right now, knowing your team isn't built in a way that will get the love from outside forces that is needed to win rings but that you get to go to a ball game and see good basketball. Compare that to being a Cavs fan, and having an excellent all around freak in Lebron James, who can make great passes and finishes, but who exists in one of the ugliest offenses in the league just because it suits the sort of game which allows Superstars to get calls/control outcomes. The Cavs, outside of James, are an ugly *** product and their style even nullifies some of what made James more compared to Magic than MJ at the start.
At a certain point, the league had its stars and its good ball. Jordan and Stern changed all that, and it can be argued that Stern changed that because ratings and interest and revenue were declining at the moment. The same thing is happening now, but I don't think Stern will be willing to change his Superstar model yet.
For the Kings success vis a vis the Superstar model, there are a few hurdles. Namely, that you don't see superstars on smaller markets getting rings often. Second, Tyreke isn't a showtime dunker and highlight guy, and that image is part of what Stern wants to sell. Third, the history of the Webber and Divac era ended in what has become a big black eye for the league's credibility. To bring Sacramento back into the spotlight is to invite comparisons and talk of that team, essentially drudging up a past that Stern would rather be forgotten.
Can the Kings and Tyreke overcome the business side of the NBA to win rings? I'm not sure. Can they bring in extra stars to a small market? If Tyreke ends up a Gilbert Arenas more than a DWade then I doubt it. Even though players understand Phoenix isn't aiming for rings, they still come just to enjoy playing. It was hard for the Lakers to lure Free Agents with Kobe. just due to Kobe's playstyle alienating others. Hell, not everybody wanted to play with MJ either.
An interesting experiment is sure to come.
I think it is interesting to be a Phoenix fan right now, knowing your team isn't built in a way that will get the love from outside forces that is needed to win rings but that you get to go to a ball game and see good basketball. Compare that to being a Cavs fan, and having an excellent all around freak in Lebron James, who can make great passes and finishes, but who exists in one of the ugliest offenses in the league just because it suits the sort of game which allows Superstars to get calls/control outcomes. The Cavs, outside of James, are an ugly *** product and their style even nullifies some of what made James more compared to Magic than MJ at the start.
At a certain point, the league had its stars and its good ball. Jordan and Stern changed all that, and it can be argued that Stern changed that because ratings and interest and revenue were declining at the moment. The same thing is happening now, but I don't think Stern will be willing to change his Superstar model yet.
For the Kings success vis a vis the Superstar model, there are a few hurdles. Namely, that you don't see superstars on smaller markets getting rings often. Second, Tyreke isn't a showtime dunker and highlight guy, and that image is part of what Stern wants to sell. Third, the history of the Webber and Divac era ended in what has become a big black eye for the league's credibility. To bring Sacramento back into the spotlight is to invite comparisons and talk of that team, essentially drudging up a past that Stern would rather be forgotten.
Can the Kings and Tyreke overcome the business side of the NBA to win rings? I'm not sure. Can they bring in extra stars to a small market? If Tyreke ends up a Gilbert Arenas more than a DWade then I doubt it. Even though players understand Phoenix isn't aiming for rings, they still come just to enjoy playing. It was hard for the Lakers to lure Free Agents with Kobe. just due to Kobe's playstyle alienating others. Hell, not everybody wanted to play with MJ either.
An interesting experiment is sure to come.
No, that wasn't my point (or question, since I could be wrong). He specifically said the triangle was designed to be run by non-stars, if that were the case everybody would be running it and you could point to its success elsewhere. As far as I know everybody else who attempted to adopt it failed.
Look, you won't see me arguing against team ball here. I hated the 90s NBA and relish the pre-expansion NBA when there were 7 or 8 legitimate title contenders every season loaded with star talent. My post history will bear that out.
That said, I'm in Brick's camp of just wanting my team to win. I struggled to enjoy the game the past few years until this season. Even when the other team I follow won their first championship in 20 years I struggled to enjoy it because of how far the Kings had fallen. But I also think a lot of the critiques of Tyreke are unfounded. This is a guy that appears to be one of the most humble stars to come into the league in generations. He's working out his limitations in a way that isn't detrimental to our team as the only thing we are seriously contending for is a top pick in the draft. The same has happened for all the great ones.
Look, you won't see me arguing against team ball here. I hated the 90s NBA and relish the pre-expansion NBA when there were 7 or 8 legitimate title contenders every season loaded with star talent. My post history will bear that out.
That said, I'm in Brick's camp of just wanting my team to win. I struggled to enjoy the game the past few years until this season. Even when the other team I follow won their first championship in 20 years I struggled to enjoy it because of how far the Kings had fallen. But I also think a lot of the critiques of Tyreke are unfounded. This is a guy that appears to be one of the most humble stars to come into the league in generations. He's working out his limitations in a way that isn't detrimental to our team as the only thing we are seriously contending for is a top pick in the draft. The same has happened for all the great ones.
K
Oh, and as for you Asaf. A lot of Kings fans are moping around that we lost Gerald Wallace who, after 8 years, is finally living up to his immense potential. A player drafted from Alabama after his one and only season there. This guy is a STUD, doing everything and anything to help his team win.
There is a similar guy the Kings have, whom they drafted out of college after his one and only season, who is performing at a clip that only an elite few have ever done, whose rookie season is still 'in-progress', who has displayed an amazing work ethic and talent level, and you want this individual to perform at the level of an 11-12 year veteran? Please, ask yourself what your true intentions are. Evans has (health permitting) another 13+ years left in the nba. Don't ya think you might give him, hmm, at least until year THREE before throwing him under the bus for making legitimate rookie-future-superstar mistakes?
There is a similar guy the Kings have, whom they drafted out of college after his one and only season, who is performing at a clip that only an elite few have ever done, whose rookie season is still 'in-progress', who has displayed an amazing work ethic and talent level, and you want this individual to perform at the level of an 11-12 year veteran? Please, ask yourself what your true intentions are. Evans has (health permitting) another 13+ years left in the nba. Don't ya think you might give him, hmm, at least until year THREE before throwing him under the bus for making legitimate rookie-future-superstar mistakes?
Ugh, I said I would bow out of this discussion, because I REALLY have more important things to do right now, but I must respond to this one, and this is DEFINITELY going to be my last post, at least for tonight...
This is EXACTLY what I was talking about when this discussion started. I challenge you to find ONE post in which I so much as implied that I want Tyreke "thrown under the bus". I think Tyreke is one hell of a player (although it is becoming quite annoying to have to repeat this every time in order to avoid being branded a Tyreke hater) and I am happy he is a King. Pointing out a player's flaws and expressing hope that he will fit a style of play that in my view is more beneficial to the team does NOT equal wanting him to be traded. I pointed out Casspi's flaws in the rookie wall thread, pretty harshly I might add. Does that mean I want him traded? Do you think I want PW fired because I thought he overreacted in the case of the incident with Spencer? Are we really becoming like Kobe fans where everything that comes out of anyone's mouth that is not along the lines of "he is greater than Michael" is considered hating on the guy?
This is EXACTLY what I was talking about when this discussion started. I challenge you to find ONE post in which I so much as implied that I want Tyreke "thrown under the bus". I think Tyreke is one hell of a player (although it is becoming quite annoying to have to repeat this every time in order to avoid being branded a Tyreke hater) and I am happy he is a King. Pointing out a player's flaws and expressing hope that he will fit a style of play that in my view is more beneficial to the team does NOT equal wanting him to be traded. I pointed out Casspi's flaws in the rookie wall thread, pretty harshly I might add. Does that mean I want him traded? Do you think I want PW fired because I thought he overreacted in the case of the incident with Spencer? Are we really becoming like Kobe fans where everything that comes out of anyone's mouth that is not along the lines of "he is greater than Michael" is considered hating on the guy?
That's all semi-well thought out, and also unfortunately mostly baloney.
Here is why the superstar model works, and its got nothing to do with Stern or favorites or anythng other than basketball dynamics.
1) first, obviously there are two sides of the ball, offense and defense, as there is in virtually every sport. The critical difference between the sides of the ball is this:
2a) on offense, you are limited becasue there is only a single ball. Only one offensive player can play with the ball at a time. This is however also a big advantage -- it means that if you have 1 or 2 dominant offensive players you can keep forcing the ball to them, and the other players do not need to be as skilled. You are in control.
2b) defense is the opposite -- the opposing team controls where it attacks, so you need as many good defensive players over there as you can get, since any one of them may be attacked on any possession. If you have a weak defender out there, the opposing team can focus its attack on them.
here is how that comes together:
3) the problem is that many, or even most, defensive specialist type players lack offensive skill, just as many, if not most, offensive players lack defensive skill. Obviously players that have both are actually star level guys.
4) so, you need as many defensive guys you can get on the floor in order to play top defense, because of the 2b siutation (i.e. because opposing offenses can attack any one of them). But if you put defensive specialists all over the floor, you can't score anymore. Your option is to put in offensive players all over the floor, but then of course your defense suffers.
5) enter the superstar. Because of 2a, that is because there is only one ball on offense and you control who it goes to, one highly skilled offensive player can in fact dominate a basketball game by himself. You keep sending the ball to him, and if he is a superstar level guy, either his man can't guard him, or they double him or trap him or otherwise run extra people at him, which leaves others open, and allows less talented teammates open looks to score.
6) so what does that do? Well because you have this one dominant offensive player, all of a sudden you can afford to put defensive specialists on the floor (typically armed with a limited aresenal, often a standstill three point shot), because the one dominant offensive player takes care of the offense for you. In essense he "buys" you roleplayers/defensive specialists.
7) so now your superstar takes care of the offense, the defensive roleplayers take care of the defense (aided by the superstar -- one of their key traits is they are strong on both ends), and you are set to be a top team.
8) meanwhile teams without superstars are caught in a zero sum situation where they can't have both offense and defense at the same time. They have to choose. To get enough offense they have to put offensive players at every position, but then their defense sucks. Or they can play it the other way, throw all defensive personnel out there, but without a superstar to pick up the scoring burden, they can't score. Either way they are between a rock and a hard place.
9) Cleveland's offense is ugly. But what you are missing is that the offense is not the point. What they have "bought" with LeBron is defense, defense, and more defense. And LeBron's job is just to try to keep them scoring enoguh that the defense will carry them. And as their 52-15 record shows, oh boy does it.
San Antonio. I know Duncan has never had a superstar persona, but it would be hard to argue he isn't one. He's the player San Antonio built itself around. Webber waas Sacramento's superstar. Just an unlucky in body star.
Also, don't forget that the Kings knew they needed to upgrade their defense, if they ever wanted to win a championship. So in 02/03 they were arguably the best defensive team in the league. People seem to like to forget that.
Also, don't forget that the Kings knew they needed to upgrade their defense, if they ever wanted to win a championship. So in 02/03 they were arguably the best defensive team in the league. People seem to like to forget that.
We do have an agenda...it's getting the Kings to be a competitive team and hopefully win a championship by all means necessary. (Beside cheating of course 
) Any other agenda shall be sneer and make fun of.
And that is one of the agenda that Brick listed. You should realized that while it would be fun to watch team style bball, it's not that important to most of us, we just want our Kings to succeed. Whether it's team type or superstar type, both have proven to succeed. One more so than the other but of course that is a debate that you can debate with others. I really don't care much about it.
At least you know your viewpoint has bias in it. Most of us, while we love what Evans doing and giving us hope, if he for any reason can't get the job done, we will be shipping him off like everyone else. Kings first, player second.
Rubio is or isn't are both assumptions. We really don't care about that because it is not real. But we're happy with what we got and very pleased. To have a MVP in the rookie game, 20/5/5 rookie player, and possible ROY (definitely high end candidate) and anyone questioning that would most likely be on Brick's list of agenda. They're too blind with their ambition to see it.
Everyone is entitle to their opinion, but they shouldn't ignore facts. If they can't understand why fans are happy with Tyreke then they're ignoring all the facts. They trying to justified their opinion with speculations and all the little specs of error that still exist. Opinion like that should be ridicule.
The Mods have been doing pretty well with this site, so I wouldn't worry too much about it.
Just my weird self:
Intelligent or not, if they're agenda is not to make the Kings better it shall be sneer, mock and make fun of. That should be the law around here.
PS I like ElRey's post too.
GO KINGS!!
) Any other agenda shall be sneer and make fun of. And that is one of the agenda that Brick listed. You should realized that while it would be fun to watch team style bball, it's not that important to most of us, we just want our Kings to succeed. Whether it's team type or superstar type, both have proven to succeed. One more so than the other but of course that is a debate that you can debate with others. I really don't care much about it.
At least you know your viewpoint has bias in it. Most of us, while we love what Evans doing and giving us hope, if he for any reason can't get the job done, we will be shipping him off like everyone else. Kings first, player second.
Rubio is or isn't are both assumptions. We really don't care about that because it is not real. But we're happy with what we got and very pleased. To have a MVP in the rookie game, 20/5/5 rookie player, and possible ROY (definitely high end candidate) and anyone questioning that would most likely be on Brick's list of agenda. They're too blind with their ambition to see it.
Everyone is entitle to their opinion, but they shouldn't ignore facts. If they can't understand why fans are happy with Tyreke then they're ignoring all the facts. They trying to justified their opinion with speculations and all the little specs of error that still exist. Opinion like that should be ridicule.
The Mods have been doing pretty well with this site, so I wouldn't worry too much about it.
Just my weird self:
Intelligent or not, if they're agenda is not to make the Kings better it shall be sneer, mock and make fun of. That should be the law around here.
PS I like ElRey's post too.
GO KINGS!!
Last edited:
K
This. You admit that it took MJ 7 years before he hit paydirt, yet whining about Tyreke in his FIRST year in the league. I'm telling you to be patient and let him evolve as a basketball player too. All you can do however is defend yourself and keep saying you are not calling for Tyreke to be traded. You just want him to pass the ball to your favorite player more, right?
You think that's bad? I'm listening to the pregame warmup show before the game yesterday on my way home from work, and they are interviewing the Warriors play-by-play guy, and he says: "If Steph Curry doesn't win Rookie of the Year, then there's something screwy going on with the voters." Seriously, I almost crashed into the center divider. I don't know what planet this guy is on, but if Tyreke Evans doesn't win Rookie of the Year, then there's something screwy going on with the voters. It's not even close.
Seriously, I almost crashed into the center divider. I don't know what planet this guy is on, but if Tyreke Evans doesn't win Rookie of the Year, then there's something screwy going on with the voters. It's not even close.
You think that's bad? I'm listening to the pregame warmup show before the game yesterday on my way home from work, and they are interviewing the Warriors play-by-play guy, and he says: "If Steph Curry doesn't win Rookie of the Year, then there's something screwy going on with the voters." Seriously, I almost crashed into the center divider. I don't know what planet this guy is on, but if Tyreke Evans doesn't win Rookie of the Year, then there's something screwy going on with the voters. It's not even close.
Seriously, I almost crashed into the center divider. I don't know what planet this guy is on, but if Tyreke Evans doesn't win Rookie of the Year, then there's something screwy going on with the voters. It's not even close.
Wow seriously....that's some funny stuff.
Not the almost crashing stuff.
You think that's bad? I'm listening to the pregame warmup show before the game yesterday on my way home from work, and they are interviewing the Warriors play-by-play guy, and he says: "If Steph Curry doesn't win Rookie of the Year, then there's something screwy going on with the voters." Seriously, I almost crashed into the center divider. I don't know what planet this guy is on, but if Tyreke Evans doesn't win Rookie of the Year, then there's something screwy going on with the voters. It's not even close.
Seriously, I almost crashed into the center divider. I don't know what planet this guy is on, but if Tyreke Evans doesn't win Rookie of the Year, then there's something screwy going on with the voters. It's not even close.
Well, that was the Warriors play by play guy.
Sounds pretty much exactly like something Grant or Jerry would say.
From an expert's standpoint Mark Stein said it best in his weekly power rankings:
22 (24)Kings 23-44
Tyreke is still averaging 20, 5 and 5, something only Oscar Robertson, Michael Jordan and LeBron James did as rooks. Which is why Tyreke is still the ROY favorite ahead of his fast-charging Golden State neighbor.
25 (27)Warriors 18-47
I suspect it isn't branching out onto the most dangerous limb to suggest that Steph Curry trying to chase down Tyreke Evans in the ROY race holds Oaktown's interest more than Don Nelson versus Lenny Wilkens.
Tyreke is still averaging 20, 5 and 5, something only Oscar Robertson, Michael Jordan and LeBron James did as rooks. Which is why Tyreke is still the ROY favorite ahead of his fast-charging Golden State neighbor.
I suspect it isn't branching out onto the most dangerous limb to suggest that Steph Curry trying to chase down Tyreke Evans in the ROY race holds Oaktown's interest more than Don Nelson versus Lenny Wilkens.
Well, that was the Warriors play by play guy.
Sounds pretty much exactly like something Grant or Jerry would say.
Sounds pretty much exactly like something Grant or Jerry would say.
This is ridiculous. If after nearly 300 posts of what I thought was me contributing to an intelligent discussion, my motives are still in question and my opinions are marked with an asterisk, I really see no point in continuing to post on this board. Feel free to enjoy your consensus. Good thing you are nothing like those Kobe fans...