Development is the key word. He's got a ton of weaknesses now. But as far as his driving ability goes, that's what gives him such a high upside. I think he is top 5, because when he gets past his man, which comes fairly natural to him because that's pretty much his only ability and also because he has great handles and can go left and right, but as i was saying when he gets past his man he's very hard to stop. Strong, long, has finesse, and can finish at the rim with those long arms.
What kind of player do you see Tyreke Evans as, 5+ years from now?
- Thread starter Lockehead
- Start date
How many players can successfully penetrate a set defense and score? Tyreke has tried and failed a bunch of times. But he's also been successful as well. A very tough feat. Who else can we say that about? Lebron? Dwade? Derrick Rose? Key word being set. That doesn't include running plays, screens, or in transition or anything, but a set defense who's standing there ready for the guy with the ball.
You need some http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sJ8mlC3mWW4
You're always making those absolute, if you don't think x, then you don't know basketball, don't know what you're talking about, etc. statements. Really, they prove nothing and just come off as kind of arrogant. If he is so elite, why was he so easy to stop after his rookie year? Shouldn't he begetting better, not worse? Oh wait, I already know the answer...Westphal's fault.
No, both of you need some common sense. You don't have to be biased to recognise that Tyreke has an elite ability to handle the ball and get to the rim. In fact, you'd have to have an amazingly low basketball IQ not to see it when it's so blatantly obvious. Brick has already pointed out how nonsensical the idea is, but if you want to continue to pretend it's biased then go ahead. There's a reason pretty much every announcer of opposition teams marvel at his strength and ability to get to the rim. Tyreke's game has holes, but his ability to get to the rim is absolutely not one of them, whether you like it or not.
LOL
Translation: You’re dumb because you don’t agree with me.
Here’s the thing. First off, I don’t even know if you’re aware you did it, but you moved the goalpost.
Brick said, “elite penetrating guard”. Which is what I scoffed at becaus it make sit sounds like he’s an elite guard rather than just a guard who’s possibly elite at one thing.
Now you’ve conveniently changed it to ”has an elite ability to handle the ball and get to the rim.”
Two pretty different things.
The real question is, who gives a rat’s patoot that he’s elite at penetrating when he’s NOT elite at FINISHING?!
Translation: You’re dumb because you don’t agree with me.
Here’s the thing. First off, I don’t even know if you’re aware you did it, but you moved the goalpost.
Brick said, “elite penetrating guard”. Which is what I scoffed at becaus it make sit sounds like he’s an elite guard rather than just a guard who’s possibly elite at one thing.
Now you’ve conveniently changed it to ”has an elite ability to handle the ball and get to the rim.”
Two pretty different things.
The real question is, who gives a rat’s patoot that he’s elite at penetrating when he’s NOT elite at FINISHING?!
I didn't call you dumb, but you have to question the basketball knowledge of someone who claims Tyreke isn't elite at getting to the rim. It really is that simple. It's not up for debate.
"Elite penetrating guard" does not make it sound like he's being referred to as an elite guard. Seriously, the key word there is quite obviously "penetrating." That's what Bricks argument was built upon. You're being intentionally obtuse, methinks. Secondly, I assume Bricklayer was not talking solely about guards when he included Howard and LeBron, and I'm pretty sure you know this too, unless you happen to be under the impression that they're guards? He was simply prefacing his top 20 stat with the fact that he's an elite penetrating guard, not restricting himself to just guards.
Furthermore, they're really not different things. Being able to handle the ball and get to the rim is precisely what defines a great penetrating guard. It's that simple.
As for your last point, that's a seperate argument and not one that is currently being discussed. You were arguing that he's not elite at penetrating, which is factually incorrect.
I’m never purposefully obtuse in a serous debate. The only time I would do that is if I was just trying to be a smart a$$.
I did misunderstand Brick a bit. The way I read it was that he’s an elite guard, not a guard who happens to be elite at penetrating. My bad.
OK, but if you can’t finish, who cares?
Sigh. That statement right there reflects the attitude that is responsible for most of the tension, bickering, etc. on this forum.
You cannot be factually incorrect (or correct) about whether something is “elite” or not. It’s simply not possible. The very idea of something being “elite” is a subjective value judgement.
I did misunderstand Brick a bit. The way I read it was that he’s an elite guard, not a guard who happens to be elite at penetrating. My bad.
OK, but if you can’t finish, who cares?
Sigh. That statement right there reflects the attitude that is responsible for most of the tension, bickering, etc. on this forum.
You cannot be factually incorrect (or correct) about whether something is “elite” or not. It’s simply not possible. The very idea of something being “elite” is a subjective value judgement.
Fair enough, misunderstandings are common.
I think he can finish, but he needs to work on doing it with his left hand. Playing in the league for a few years will help immensely for knowing how to use various shots in different situations.
It most certainly is not. What's causing divide are the agenda-ridden statements from people crawling out of the woodwork, and then using something as petty as post-count to hide behind their ridiculous claims. New members are always welcomed here, but I can't help but wonder if most of these guys aren't Jimmer fans looking for any excuse to big him up. There's no need for it and as a result, some of the stuff that is being said is laughable.
It's only subjective to a certain degree. Saying Ray Allen is a good shooter is subjective, but everyone knows you'd be an idiot to argue that he's not. This is a similar case, just not as extreme. That does not mean it's not clear as day that Tyreke can get to the basket as good as anyone in the NBA. You can say it's only opinion, and yeah, you'd be right, but some opinions are just stupid. And no, it's not because it's not the same as mine. I have respect for plenty of views that do not correspond to mine, but this is not one of them, simply because it's idiotic.
I think he can finish, but he needs to work on doing it with his left hand. Playing in the league for a few years will help immensely for knowing how to use various shots in different situations.
It most certainly is not. What's causing divide are the agenda-ridden statements from people crawling out of the woodwork, and then using something as petty as post-count to hide behind their ridiculous claims. New members are always welcomed here, but I can't help but wonder if most of these guys aren't Jimmer fans looking for any excuse to big him up. There's no need for it and as a result, some of the stuff that is being said is laughable.
It's only subjective to a certain degree. Saying Ray Allen is a good shooter is subjective, but everyone knows you'd be an idiot to argue that he's not. This is a similar case, just not as extreme. That does not mean it's not clear as day that Tyreke can get to the basket as good as anyone in the NBA. You can say it's only opinion, and yeah, you'd be right, but some opinions are just stupid. And no, it's not because it's not the same as mine. I have respect for plenty of views that do not correspond to mine, but this is not one of them, simply because it's idiotic.
I should expand a little on what I was getting at. The source of tension may be "Ray Allen isn't a great shooter" type of statements. But what I'm trying to say is that you don't have to be a slave to reacting to them with annoyance, belittlement, anger, etc. Instead of getting all flummoxed and saying..."You must be blind if you think Ray Allen isn't at great shooter, only an idiot who knows nothing bout basketball would say that." why not find out what the person's reasons for saying that are before dismissing them as a troll or idiot? It's perfectly OK to think that Ray Allen isn't a great shooter and I just hate the groupthink mentality where anyone who holds an opinion/belief that's too far outside of what the group thinks is ridiculed, scorned, etc. for it.
This is NOT a relative positon. This is saying 2+2=5 and demanding validation for its being a valid point of view. Saying it equals 4 is not groupthink, its FACT. Arguing Tyreke is not one of the best penetrators in the league is not valid anymore than coming on here arguing DeMarcus isn't a good rebounder (or your Ray Allen isn't a good shooter). Its flat out dumb. And every single opposing coach, player, and announcer in the league knows better. The ONLY way you could come up with such a ridiculous positon is if you don't know basketball at all, or if you have an agenda. And there are plenty of agendas around here when it comes to Tyreke.
S
he is most definitely a elite penetrating guard... i completely agree and if you don't see that like brick said you can't actually be watching... but i agree with the argument that its everything else he can't do at times even an avg NBA level that is what brings him back to earth as a so so player... and a total disaster as a top option, leader or PG.
What is that supposed to prove?
Yes, 2+2 = 4 is an objective, mind independent fact.
“Ray Allen is a great Shooter” or “Tyreke Evans is an elite penetrating guard” is not. They’re subjective assessments. They occur only in minds, i.e. can’t be objective.
It’s that closed mined, curmudgeonly attitude that’s the problem.
Of course someone could make an argument for those things. That doesn’t mean that I’d agree with them, but to act like those things are inarguable facts is nothing but stubbornness.
The only thing objective about a player’s rebounding are the numbers themselves.
The moment you start attaching values like good, bad, best, worst, etc. it becomes subjective.
This is Philosophy 101 stuff.
Yes, 2+2 = 4 is an objective, mind independent fact.
“Ray Allen is a great Shooter” or “Tyreke Evans is an elite penetrating guard” is not. They’re subjective assessments. They occur only in minds, i.e. can’t be objective.
It’s that closed mined, curmudgeonly attitude that’s the problem.
Of course someone could make an argument for those things. That doesn’t mean that I’d agree with them, but to act like those things are inarguable facts is nothing but stubbornness.
The only thing objective about a player’s rebounding are the numbers themselves.
The moment you start attaching values like good, bad, best, worst, etc. it becomes subjective.
This is Philosophy 101 stuff.
I am not trying to get into this debate here, but Ray Allen being a good shooter can be made to be objective instantly. The NBA is the highest level of basketball in the world, with the most elite athletes. You can take one look at Ray Allen's percentages and attempts and makes (in which is number 1... of all time) and immediately come to the conclusion that he is indeed a good shooter at the best level there is of basketball. With guards like Evans, a stat like driving to the hoop doesn't exist, which means you cannot compare objectively. All we can go on with Evans are his percentages and what we judge with our own eyes. Yes, he has not played great lately, and yes he is struggling, but one would have to really dislike him to not notice that he is making a very well noted effort to run the offense. It is not his fault we have no offense to speak of, and a system that is still missing as of now. It is mass chaos right now in the Kings organization, he is only trying to find his place and his role. He needs a system, and he will be fine. It is frustrating to watch I will admit, but since the season seems lost, lets see what happens, or if any trades occur.
Last edited:
I think Ray Allen is a great shooter. I think most do. What I don't understand is the need most folks seem to have to pretend that assessments like that are factual and objective. There's no sense in going over it anymore, as obviously most here clearly have a different philosophy regarding these things than I do.
Apparently you failed that class.
You are like my 8 year old right now - arguing just to argue. Tyreke is DEFINITELY one of the best at getting to the rim. No debate. It is a fact. If you are going to argue that point you are bordering on either being trollish or obscenely out of touch with reality. Keep it up at your peril. You've been cut a lot of slack recently on your petty arguing of every single point somebody makes. I wouldn't advise you to keep taking advantage of it.
You are like my 8 year old right now - arguing just to argue. Tyreke is DEFINITELY one of the best at getting to the rim. No debate. It is a fact. If you are going to argue that point you are bordering on either being trollish or obscenely out of touch with reality. Keep it up at your peril. You've been cut a lot of slack recently on your petty arguing of every single point somebody makes. I wouldn't advise you to keep taking advantage of it.
I failed because you also don't understand the difference between objective facts and subjective opinion? Whatever. My peril? LOL! As if this a matter of life and death. Look, if you're petty enough to ban me for arguing, do what you gotta do. I'm not going to walk on eggshells or kiss the butts of power drunk mods just for the "privilege" to post here. There's other forums. You're being ridiculous though because this forum is filled with arguments. If you ban me and want to have any consistency, then you gotta ban a lot of others as well.
Oh, and did I mention that it takes two to argue?
Think about that for awhile...
Oh, and did I mention that it takes two to argue?
Think about that for awhile...
Actually if you read the comments you would know the answer....they problem is not getting there...that has NEVER been an issue. He gets there at a high rate but what is letting him down is the finishing. Big difference. Just because he is finding it harder to finish off his work it does not make him poor at penetrating. He can get to the hoop with ease but when the defence collapses on him he is finding it more difficult to finish.
He is elite at penetrating but he is not elite at finishing.....yet! That is why a lot of people would like to see him add a floater, little pull up jumper in the lane and use the glass a bit more. If he can do that, his FG% goes from .400 to .500.
He is elite at penetrating but he is not elite at finishing.....yet! That is why a lot of people would like to see him add a floater, little pull up jumper in the lane and use the glass a bit more. If he can do that, his FG% goes from .400 to .500.
No, you fail because you cannot even acknowledge simple facts and it makes you look like an idiot.
I haven't even thrown you an infraction recently that I can remember, so quit playing the martyr.
But the No. 1 rule here is "don't be a jerk" - you can "argue" all you like but you are starting to trample all over that rule. And yes, there are other forums. If this one is so darned difficult to deal with the "overbearing" moderators, you are free to post there instead. We run this place the way we want because it encourages civil discussion. If you don't like the rules or the way they are enforced, see ya!
If you want to act grown up and not spam the board with petty, argumentative posts, no problem. Your choice.
And I don't "gotta" to do anything. My choice. Not yours to make.
You want to have any further discussion in this vein, take it to PM's.
I haven't even thrown you an infraction recently that I can remember, so quit playing the martyr.
But the No. 1 rule here is "don't be a jerk" - you can "argue" all you like but you are starting to trample all over that rule. And yes, there are other forums. If this one is so darned difficult to deal with the "overbearing" moderators, you are free to post there instead. We run this place the way we want because it encourages civil discussion. If you don't like the rules or the way they are enforced, see ya!
If you want to act grown up and not spam the board with petty, argumentative posts, no problem. Your choice.
And I don't "gotta" to do anything. My choice. Not yours to make.
You want to have any further discussion in this vein, take it to PM's.
Cut him some slack. You can't expect a 22 year old to be consistent every night. I think the problem is that you're confusing Tyreke's potential with players like Lebron, Wade, and Durant. Without a decent mid-range game, Tyreke is not that type of superstar where you can expect him to be good every night.