What kind of player do you see Tyreke Evans as, 5+ years from now?
- Thread starter Lockehead
- Start date
I was referring to converting 3-4 layups a game, not attempts. Not sure why I get the sense you're arguing with me about Reke getting to the rim. I've always agreed he's elite at doing just that.
I'm simply talking about what I'd like to see him improve on when he can't get those layups. I never said he needs a floater to be effective. He's already damn effective at getting to the rack.
I'm just pointing out what I'd like to see him add to his game. He gets to the rack just like Rose and Westbrook do. But, both have them have also developed floaters/runners. I'm not talking about adding a floater when he gets to the rim. That makes no sense, because at that point he's at the rim. You use a floater when you can't get to the rim. What Reke needs to improve on is what to do when that lane to the rim is cut off by the defense.
You're talking layups. I'm not. I'm not talking attempts at the rim, where yes he's elite. What about those situations where he beats his man, yet the defense rotates and cuts off the layup? That's when he flips up something ugly, or barrels into the defender sometimes getting a charge.
I'm simply talking about what I'd like to see him improve on when he can't get those layups. I never said he needs a floater to be effective. He's already damn effective at getting to the rack.
I'm just pointing out what I'd like to see him add to his game. He gets to the rack just like Rose and Westbrook do. But, both have them have also developed floaters/runners. I'm not talking about adding a floater when he gets to the rim. That makes no sense, because at that point he's at the rim. You use a floater when you can't get to the rim. What Reke needs to improve on is what to do when that lane to the rim is cut off by the defense.
You're talking layups. I'm not. I'm not talking attempts at the rim, where yes he's elite. What about those situations where he beats his man, yet the defense rotates and cuts off the layup? That's when he flips up something ugly, or barrels into the defender sometimes getting a charge.
Man I didn't even get a stupid emoticon, your posts are going downhill brah. I bet if I wrote a sweet anti Evans post I could get some of your signature cheerleading. "hey guys don't we got it figured out, guess were smarter then they say we are 
", good stuff.
", good stuff.
Last edited:
You just don't know basketball. Tyreke is one of the most complete players in the league...
Play the victim or cheerlead, that's mostly what you have been doing in this thread. I can find more examples for you if you want, it's pretty easy.
The bolded portion I can't really agree on. Tyreke's game doesn't lend itself terribly well to pick and rolls. Tyreke is a threat on the drive, not the pull-up.
Pick and pop is a good play for Tyreke with his current skillset. Tyreke penetrates and attempts a shot at the rim or kicks to the open big off the screen if the d collapses on his drive.
And I've seen him run pick and pops fairly often recently.
Pick and pop is a good play for Tyreke with his current skillset. Tyreke penetrates and attempts a shot at the rim or kicks to the open big off the screen if the d collapses on his drive.
And I've seen him run pick and pops fairly often recently.
Ok, so that sounds pretty much like what I described. The next step is to try to understand the other person's viewpoint. Do you? What's your counter to the claim that almost all players, including stars, have weaknesses like the ones you described. Do you disagree with that? Or do you think Evans' weaknesses are worse?
what is it that you people who constantly ride tyreke want?
that's a serious question. every player, no matter the talent level, has good and bad games. we've seen both from tyreke so far this season, and that's to be expected from a third year player. are you legitimately hoping that 'reke becomes a superstar overnight, or are you so blinded by your particular bias that you'd be satisfied if the kings traded him, no matter what strides he makes? you very sarcastically wave off the fact that he nearly had a triple double last night. and its quite obviously not an aberration, because he has proven to be a triple double threat on any given night in the nba...
now, in regard to his weaknesses, he's shown VISIBLE improvement in just the handful of games that keith smart has coached. with so little practice time, that's rather impressive. he's becoming a smarter passer, and a better decision maker. he's a third year player on the youngest team in the nba, so there's going to be plenty of speed bumps along the way. i guess i'm just never going to understand kings fans. lakers fans, sure. they've witnessed greatness so often that they act entitled and ungrateful, as if the next big superstar should just land in their lap via trade because LA isn't playing at a championship level so far this season. many of them consider dwight howard to be a foregone conclusion in a laker uniform. but kings fans? really?! with only the short burst of life in the early 2000's as a backdrop, what does this franchise have for comparison in the sacramento era that has caused such entitlement amongst the fans? the lack of perspective i witness at kingsfans.com is occasionally alarming...
petrie has drafted well in the last five years. he brought in two potentially cornerstone players to build a new team around. does that mean tyreke evans and demarcus cousins should be shielded from criticism? absolutely not. but criticism is a matter of recognizing need. what do the kings need from tyreke? they need him to score, they need him to be something that resembles a playmaker, they need him to keep the turnovers down, and they need him to play solid wing defense. the fact that he rebounds well is just mustard on top of all that. but, as for the kings' needs via tyreke evans, he can improve his shooting percentage, including his jump shooting percentage. his assist numbers are already up under keith smart. i hope it continues. he needs to continue to become a better decision maker in order to cut down on the turnovers, and he needs to ratchet up the defensive intensity. but none of that represents some kind of great deficiency in tyreke. i expect those improvements to come with time, as one expects those improvements to come with any talented young player...
so, once again, what is it you want from tyreke? do you want something reasonable, as above? or do you want something impossible, so that you'll be guaranteed ammunition for such highly stylized rants as i've seen in this thread? if you want tyreke to magically morph into lebron james, just say it, and we'll move on. but not boxing his man out on a consistent basis? THAT is what you're comin' at him with?! the guy is among league leaders in rebounds at his position. why should it matter if he boxes his man out or not? he's a GUARD. its not his job. and, if he is correctly out on the floor with demarcus cousins for most of his minutes, it should never have to be his job. more to the point: he had one year of college experience. same as demarcus ('cept demarcus is a basketball savant. i've never seen a player pick things up so quickly. he's not a basketball lifer like a lot of these guys. he started playing in high school). jimmer had a full four years of college experience, and he's still lost out there. these players have a lot to learn before they can implement everything their taught...
but you 'reke bashers read like a goddamn vendetta, as if he repeatedly stole your lunch money when you were a kid, and this is the best you've got to get back at him for it. here's the truth, if you want it: WE ALL BOUGHT THE HYPE. and i'm not talking about tyreke evans. i'm talking about the sacramento kings. with a media frenzy comparing the 2011-2012 lockout shortened season to the kings-era defining 1998-1999 lockout shortened season, we all bought it. we all thought this team was ready to make the jump. they probably wouldn't make the playoffs, but they wouldn't be far out of the conversation. .500 basketball was within their capability. .400-.450 would be a satisfying improvement. and now that we've all recognized that its probably not in reach, that we were wrong (and sports fans HATE that), that this is the youngest team in the nba, and one in need of much more practice then they're getting, we're scrambling for places to point the finger...
tyreke bashers have been a constant since he was drafted, but you've all become so obvious that its embarrassing. you claim straw man and expect people to take you seriously, but its increasingly difficult to take you seriously because of your hyperbolic, hand-me-down arguments. its the same schtick over and over, it leads nowhere, and more importantly, its not rooted in nba reality. i have no problem claiming tyreke evans, with all of his flaws, as one of my favorite kings, behind demarcus cousins (again, the kid's a goddamn savant. its impossible NOT to be excited about him, in my opinion). but then again, i've been a kings fan all my life. i can remember some of the REALLY bad years, when the kings were perennial losers and there wasn't even the hope of improvement on the horizon. last night, i saw the youngest team in the nba, led by exciting talents tyreke evans and demarcus cousins, playing well on the road (golden state notwithstanding), and losing in the clutch, as young teams tend to do. it hurts to say it, because we've waited so long, but its going to take a couple more years for this to come together. but evans and cousins are showing some true promise as the franchise's cornerstones, and both displayed that last night...
i don't post at kingsfans.com very often anymore. i'm a grad student with a hefty academic load, so when i do post, i kinda hit-and-run my way across a lotta the major issues being discussed on the board, and lump them into whichever thread seems most relevant, because that's what i have time for. so i'll close by saying that rebuilding from scratch in a small market, without the benefit of major free agent acquisitions, is not easy. the kings arrival into playoff contention won't be as soon as we had hoped, but i still think the kings are a true, starting [veteran] small forward and an additional playmaker away from making some noise. they may also need a more permanent solution at head coach, though i've liked the way smart has handled himself so far, particularly with respect to tyreke evans. i'm not a fan of his occasional smallball lineups, and i worry sometimes that he picked up a few bad habits from westphal with regard to holding starters out too long after they're placed on the bench, but for the most part, i think he's doing well as a teacher for a team that desperately needs the basketball education...
that's a serious question. every player, no matter the talent level, has good and bad games. we've seen both from tyreke so far this season, and that's to be expected from a third year player. are you legitimately hoping that 'reke becomes a superstar overnight, or are you so blinded by your particular bias that you'd be satisfied if the kings traded him, no matter what strides he makes? you very sarcastically wave off the fact that he nearly had a triple double last night. and its quite obviously not an aberration, because he has proven to be a triple double threat on any given night in the nba...
now, in regard to his weaknesses, he's shown VISIBLE improvement in just the handful of games that keith smart has coached. with so little practice time, that's rather impressive. he's becoming a smarter passer, and a better decision maker. he's a third year player on the youngest team in the nba, so there's going to be plenty of speed bumps along the way. i guess i'm just never going to understand kings fans. lakers fans, sure. they've witnessed greatness so often that they act entitled and ungrateful, as if the next big superstar should just land in their lap via trade because LA isn't playing at a championship level so far this season. many of them consider dwight howard to be a foregone conclusion in a laker uniform. but kings fans? really?! with only the short burst of life in the early 2000's as a backdrop, what does this franchise have for comparison in the sacramento era that has caused such entitlement amongst the fans? the lack of perspective i witness at kingsfans.com is occasionally alarming...
petrie has drafted well in the last five years. he brought in two potentially cornerstone players to build a new team around. does that mean tyreke evans and demarcus cousins should be shielded from criticism? absolutely not. but criticism is a matter of recognizing need. what do the kings need from tyreke? they need him to score, they need him to be something that resembles a playmaker, they need him to keep the turnovers down, and they need him to play solid wing defense. the fact that he rebounds well is just mustard on top of all that. but, as for the kings' needs via tyreke evans, he can improve his shooting percentage, including his jump shooting percentage. his assist numbers are already up under keith smart. i hope it continues. he needs to continue to become a better decision maker in order to cut down on the turnovers, and he needs to ratchet up the defensive intensity. but none of that represents some kind of great deficiency in tyreke. i expect those improvements to come with time, as one expects those improvements to come with any talented young player...
so, once again, what is it you want from tyreke? do you want something reasonable, as above? or do you want something impossible, so that you'll be guaranteed ammunition for such highly stylized rants as i've seen in this thread? if you want tyreke to magically morph into lebron james, just say it, and we'll move on. but not boxing his man out on a consistent basis? THAT is what you're comin' at him with?! the guy is among league leaders in rebounds at his position. why should it matter if he boxes his man out or not? he's a GUARD. its not his job. and, if he is correctly out on the floor with demarcus cousins for most of his minutes, it should never have to be his job. more to the point: he had one year of college experience. same as demarcus ('cept demarcus is a basketball savant. i've never seen a player pick things up so quickly. he's not a basketball lifer like a lot of these guys. he started playing in high school). jimmer had a full four years of college experience, and he's still lost out there. these players have a lot to learn before they can implement everything their taught...
but you 'reke bashers read like a goddamn vendetta, as if he repeatedly stole your lunch money when you were a kid, and this is the best you've got to get back at him for it. here's the truth, if you want it: WE ALL BOUGHT THE HYPE. and i'm not talking about tyreke evans. i'm talking about the sacramento kings. with a media frenzy comparing the 2011-2012 lockout shortened season to the kings-era defining 1998-1999 lockout shortened season, we all bought it. we all thought this team was ready to make the jump. they probably wouldn't make the playoffs, but they wouldn't be far out of the conversation. .500 basketball was within their capability. .400-.450 would be a satisfying improvement. and now that we've all recognized that its probably not in reach, that we were wrong (and sports fans HATE that), that this is the youngest team in the nba, and one in need of much more practice then they're getting, we're scrambling for places to point the finger...
tyreke bashers have been a constant since he was drafted, but you've all become so obvious that its embarrassing. you claim straw man and expect people to take you seriously, but its increasingly difficult to take you seriously because of your hyperbolic, hand-me-down arguments. its the same schtick over and over, it leads nowhere, and more importantly, its not rooted in nba reality. i have no problem claiming tyreke evans, with all of his flaws, as one of my favorite kings, behind demarcus cousins (again, the kid's a goddamn savant. its impossible NOT to be excited about him, in my opinion). but then again, i've been a kings fan all my life. i can remember some of the REALLY bad years, when the kings were perennial losers and there wasn't even the hope of improvement on the horizon. last night, i saw the youngest team in the nba, led by exciting talents tyreke evans and demarcus cousins, playing well on the road (golden state notwithstanding), and losing in the clutch, as young teams tend to do. it hurts to say it, because we've waited so long, but its going to take a couple more years for this to come together. but evans and cousins are showing some true promise as the franchise's cornerstones, and both displayed that last night...
i don't post at kingsfans.com very often anymore. i'm a grad student with a hefty academic load, so when i do post, i kinda hit-and-run my way across a lotta the major issues being discussed on the board, and lump them into whichever thread seems most relevant, because that's what i have time for. so i'll close by saying that rebuilding from scratch in a small market, without the benefit of major free agent acquisitions, is not easy. the kings arrival into playoff contention won't be as soon as we had hoped, but i still think the kings are a true, starting [veteran] small forward and an additional playmaker away from making some noise. they may also need a more permanent solution at head coach, though i've liked the way smart has handled himself so far, particularly with respect to tyreke evans. i'm not a fan of his occasional smallball lineups, and i worry sometimes that he picked up a few bad habits from westphal with regard to holding starters out too long after they're placed on the bench, but for the most part, i think he's doing well as a teacher for a team that desperately needs the basketball education...
I hope they come in time but have doubts that they will. I know the team is young and all that, we all do. But that doesn't account for the problems Tyreke has yet to fix in his game like fading away on jumpshots, trying to do too much in crunch time, and lacking consistency. By a player's 3rd season i think it's reasonable for them to begin correcting those things or at the very least to show that they're on the path to correcting them. I feel like time is running low here. If we go into his 4th season still waiting for him to fix these things, that's not good. At some point, if tangible, long term improvement isn't being made, you have to begin questioning whether it ever will be.
then this is where we disagree. in the brief age of the high school draft pick leading up to the current era of the one-and-done collegiate draft pick, there are very few players who correct every hitch and glitch in their game by the third year, particularly those players who are asked to do a lot of heavy lifting for their teams. lebron james obviously sticks out, as does kevin durant. but those guys are rarities in the nba. they've got relatively complete games after a few seasons, often due to freak athletic ability, which tyreke does not have. its even taken derrick rose a few years to get that jump shot down...
however, i do see improvements in tyreke's game so far this season. i see that he's "on the path to correcting" issues in his game. he's getting better at seeing the floor and understanding his options when he drives the lane. he still makes mistakes, but in the brief span of time that keith smart has been head coach, tyreke has shown a much-improved sense of floor spacing on offense, and his passing is becoming less forced and more intuitive. his nine assists last night were not happy accidents. most of them came off of intentional play sets. off the dribble, he still fades away on his jumpshot. but when he takes a set jump shot, his form is much better, and his percentage is more consistent. off the dribble habits are always harder to break, so we'll see if that improves with time...
in last night's game, we saw 'reke make a few cuts and do a few things without the ball in his hands that resulted in kings baskets. that's refreshing, if you ask me. his clutch play will also improve with time and experience. this season, people are already talking about lebron's failings in the clutch, and he's the most talented all-around player in the game. tyreke was asked to do a ton in the clutch during his rookie season, and he was largely successful in those endeavors, but now that teams have adjusted to his play style, its going to take some time for him to work out those late game kinks. ask kobe bryant. you've gotta blow it at the end of the game enough to understand how to win it at the end of the game. all-around consistency also just comes with time, but its asinine to claim that there has been no improvement in tyreke's game. its there. you don't even have to look that hard for it. but you can't tie the team's lack of improvement in the win column to tyreke evans and ascribe the same lack of improvement to him as an individual player, which seems to be the temptation for a lotta skeptics...
my problem with the constant criticism of tyreke is that so little of it is rooted in nba reality. in an age of internet access and i-want-it-now culture, people forget how long and arduous the developmental project can be in the nba. the kings haven't had to do it before. you could hardly call the bad old days "rebuilding" years. they just sucked, year in and year out, no matter how many veterans were on the squad. but in the early-2000's, sacramento fans were handed a stellar team of talented, experienced players. webber was an established veteran just entering his prime when he was traded to the kings. vlade was on the backside of his prime when he signed with the kings, but his crafty style of play aged very well in sacramento. peja was a seasoned euro vet by the time he came over. doug christie had seen plenty of court time. so did jon barry, bobby jackson, and other players among the bench mob. jason williams was an electric, but frustrating rookie who was eventually traded for the more steady mike bibby. that team was ready to go from day one, and they improved with time together. this kings team is nothing like that, except to say that they will hopefully improve with time together...
in my estimation, tyreke evans will be fine. players of his talent level almost always find success in the nba. his degree of success will be up to him, and how much work he wants to put into his game. he's got all star potential, and none of the issues you bring up are in any way game-breaking. none of them are insurmountable, and most of them just iron themselves out with practice and experience. he's not a player who relies solely on his athleticism, but has no basketball iq to speak of. he's got a particular skill set that's highly-valued in the nba, and as he and demarcus cousins continue to make strides in the weaker areas of their respective games, i expect the team's overall quality of play to improve...
however, i do see improvements in tyreke's game so far this season. i see that he's "on the path to correcting" issues in his game. he's getting better at seeing the floor and understanding his options when he drives the lane. he still makes mistakes, but in the brief span of time that keith smart has been head coach, tyreke has shown a much-improved sense of floor spacing on offense, and his passing is becoming less forced and more intuitive. his nine assists last night were not happy accidents. most of them came off of intentional play sets. off the dribble, he still fades away on his jumpshot. but when he takes a set jump shot, his form is much better, and his percentage is more consistent. off the dribble habits are always harder to break, so we'll see if that improves with time...
in last night's game, we saw 'reke make a few cuts and do a few things without the ball in his hands that resulted in kings baskets. that's refreshing, if you ask me. his clutch play will also improve with time and experience. this season, people are already talking about lebron's failings in the clutch, and he's the most talented all-around player in the game. tyreke was asked to do a ton in the clutch during his rookie season, and he was largely successful in those endeavors, but now that teams have adjusted to his play style, its going to take some time for him to work out those late game kinks. ask kobe bryant. you've gotta blow it at the end of the game enough to understand how to win it at the end of the game. all-around consistency also just comes with time, but its asinine to claim that there has been no improvement in tyreke's game. its there. you don't even have to look that hard for it. but you can't tie the team's lack of improvement in the win column to tyreke evans and ascribe the same lack of improvement to him as an individual player, which seems to be the temptation for a lotta skeptics...
my problem with the constant criticism of tyreke is that so little of it is rooted in nba reality. in an age of internet access and i-want-it-now culture, people forget how long and arduous the developmental project can be in the nba. the kings haven't had to do it before. you could hardly call the bad old days "rebuilding" years. they just sucked, year in and year out, no matter how many veterans were on the squad. but in the early-2000's, sacramento fans were handed a stellar team of talented, experienced players. webber was an established veteran just entering his prime when he was traded to the kings. vlade was on the backside of his prime when he signed with the kings, but his crafty style of play aged very well in sacramento. peja was a seasoned euro vet by the time he came over. doug christie had seen plenty of court time. so did jon barry, bobby jackson, and other players among the bench mob. jason williams was an electric, but frustrating rookie who was eventually traded for the more steady mike bibby. that team was ready to go from day one, and they improved with time together. this kings team is nothing like that, except to say that they will hopefully improve with time together...
in my estimation, tyreke evans will be fine. players of his talent level almost always find success in the nba. his degree of success will be up to him, and how much work he wants to put into his game. he's got all star potential, and none of the issues you bring up are in any way game-breaking. none of them are insurmountable, and most of them just iron themselves out with practice and experience. he's not a player who relies solely on his athleticism, but has no basketball iq to speak of. he's got a particular skill set that's highly-valued in the nba, and as he and demarcus cousins continue to make strides in the weaker areas of their respective games, i expect the team's overall quality of play to improve...
I didn't say correct every hitch. I said begin correcting those things or at the very least to show that they're on the path to correcting them. Pretty big difference. I don't expect him to fix all this stuff overnight. I just expect him to demonstrate that he's on an upward trajectory. He hasn't really been doing that though. He's kind of stagnated since his rookie season. He teases us with great games about 40% of the time but the rest of the time he ranges from unremarkable to downright awful. i really can't think of any third year players with his talent level that were this inconsistent at the same point in their careers. If anyone knows any, please mention them because I'd actually like to know.
I think the bolded portion is where the disconnect between Reke's critics and defenders comes from. Most of the folks frustrated with Tyreke want to see improvement over what he did his rookie year in just a couple of areas. There are a lot of areas to pick from, but we'd be pretty happy with just a running floater or a post-up game.
His jump shot is slightly improved, but he slips back into the old fadeaway form pretty easily. Consistent form leads to consistent shooting. At the risk of committing heresy, Kobe's jumper is nearly identical from one shot to the next. His fadeaway looks the same every time. His sideways fade looks the same every time. With Tyreke's jumper, you never know which form you're going to get, and, I don't think he knows either. The result: inconsistent shot leads to inconsistent results. Last night, he rolled the dice on his jumper and sunk a couple in a row. His confidence was up so he decided to shoot the game away.
FTR, this has also been Jimmer's problem. His catch and shoot jumper's form has been remarkably consistent, which has almost magically led to a much higher percentage of those falling. His form on his little driving stop and fadeaway has also been pretty consistent leading to good results when he doesn't get blocked. Everything else has been haphazard and changes from shot to shot. Strangely, the results on those have also been inconsistent.
His jump shot is slightly improved, but he slips back into the old fadeaway form pretty easily. Consistent form leads to consistent shooting. At the risk of committing heresy, Kobe's jumper is nearly identical from one shot to the next. His fadeaway looks the same every time. His sideways fade looks the same every time. With Tyreke's jumper, you never know which form you're going to get, and, I don't think he knows either. The result: inconsistent shot leads to inconsistent results. Last night, he rolled the dice on his jumper and sunk a couple in a row. His confidence was up so he decided to shoot the game away.
FTR, this has also been Jimmer's problem. His catch and shoot jumper's form has been remarkably consistent, which has almost magically led to a much higher percentage of those falling. His form on his little driving stop and fadeaway has also been pretty consistent leading to good results when he doesn't get blocked. Everything else has been haphazard and changes from shot to shot. Strangely, the results on those have also been inconsistent.
"inconsistent" is a misleading word. most young players are inconsistent on the basis that some days they play well, and other days they don't. few players are so consistent that you can set your watch to them. in his prime, tim duncan was one of them. but even a player as excellent as dirk nowitzki didn't get off to a good start this season. he's been "inconsistent." of course, few would actually use that that word to describe dirk nowitzki as a player...
obviously, there's no worthwhile comparison to be made between tyreke evans and dirk nowitzki. my point is to illustrate that "inconsistency" is a perceived thing. every player has bad nights, and on an individual basis, you can't measure consistency except in the statline, so i'll give you a buncha statistical comparisons. here's a baseline:
Tyreke Evans 2011-2012 stats: 36 MPG, 16.9 PPG, .418 FG%, .234 3pt%, 0.763 FT%, 5.1 RPG, 5.0 APG, 1.5 SPG, 2.95 TOPG
and comparable third year stats from a range of combo guard type players who averaged roughly the same minutes per game:
Kobe Bryant: 37.9 MPG, 19.9 PPG, .465 FG%, .267 3pt%, .839 FT%, 5.3 RPG, 3.8 APG, 1.4 SPG, 3.14 TOPG
Baron Davis: 30.9 MPG, 13.0 PPG, .390 FG%, .250 3pt%, .739 FT%, 4.0 RPG, 6.8 APG, 2.2 SPG, 2.75 TOPG
Andre Iguodala: 40.3 MPG, 18.2 PPG, .447 FG%, .310 3pt%, .820 FT%, 5.7 RPG, 5.7 APG, 2.0 SPG, 3.43 TOPG
Tracy McGrady: 31.2 MPG, 15.4 PPG, .451 FG%, .277 3pt%, .707 FT%, 6.3 RPG, 3.3 APG, 1.1 SPG, 2.03 TOPG
Tony Parker: 34.4 MPG, 14.7 PPG, .447 FG%, .312 3pt%, .702 FT%, 3.2 RPG, 5.5 APG, 0.8 SPG, 2.39 TOPG
none of these players were good jump shooters in their third year. they were all very poor jump shooters, as a matter of fact. but they all filled the stat sheet to varying degrees of success in their third year, and they became all stars, save for iguodala, who is still a fine player and excellent defender...
i'm not saying that tyreke evans is going to have the career trajectory of any of the above, but if you look at those stats, and think about the individual level of excellence that those players eventually achieved in their careers, their third years were relatively unremarkable by comparison. these five were still developing in that third year, as is tyreke...
his shooting percentage is the one glaring statistical issue this season, but somebody who makes a living attacking the rim isn't going to have much of a problem correcting that issue, i imagine. again, i see the complaints about tyreke as much ado about nothing. sometimes i feel like many of the kings fans on this website have never watched a young, developing player before. its fair to criticize, certainly. in my previous two posts i pointed out several weaknesses in his game that either need polishing or overhauling, but i'm also not blinding myself to the strides he's making...
a players' third year is not make or break. its just one more step in the process. tyreke is also in an unusual position, having come off of an injury-riddled sophomore season just to enter a lockout-shortened season with no training camp or practice time, and a new head coach. i make no excuses for him, but i'm also not ready to do anything even close to resembling giving up on him. questioning whether or not he can even make long term improvement is asinine to me. he's 22 years old!!
obviously, there's no worthwhile comparison to be made between tyreke evans and dirk nowitzki. my point is to illustrate that "inconsistency" is a perceived thing. every player has bad nights, and on an individual basis, you can't measure consistency except in the statline, so i'll give you a buncha statistical comparisons. here's a baseline:
Tyreke Evans 2011-2012 stats: 36 MPG, 16.9 PPG, .418 FG%, .234 3pt%, 0.763 FT%, 5.1 RPG, 5.0 APG, 1.5 SPG, 2.95 TOPG
and comparable third year stats from a range of combo guard type players who averaged roughly the same minutes per game:
Kobe Bryant: 37.9 MPG, 19.9 PPG, .465 FG%, .267 3pt%, .839 FT%, 5.3 RPG, 3.8 APG, 1.4 SPG, 3.14 TOPG
Baron Davis: 30.9 MPG, 13.0 PPG, .390 FG%, .250 3pt%, .739 FT%, 4.0 RPG, 6.8 APG, 2.2 SPG, 2.75 TOPG
Andre Iguodala: 40.3 MPG, 18.2 PPG, .447 FG%, .310 3pt%, .820 FT%, 5.7 RPG, 5.7 APG, 2.0 SPG, 3.43 TOPG
Tracy McGrady: 31.2 MPG, 15.4 PPG, .451 FG%, .277 3pt%, .707 FT%, 6.3 RPG, 3.3 APG, 1.1 SPG, 2.03 TOPG
Tony Parker: 34.4 MPG, 14.7 PPG, .447 FG%, .312 3pt%, .702 FT%, 3.2 RPG, 5.5 APG, 0.8 SPG, 2.39 TOPG
none of these players were good jump shooters in their third year. they were all very poor jump shooters, as a matter of fact. but they all filled the stat sheet to varying degrees of success in their third year, and they became all stars, save for iguodala, who is still a fine player and excellent defender...
i'm not saying that tyreke evans is going to have the career trajectory of any of the above, but if you look at those stats, and think about the individual level of excellence that those players eventually achieved in their careers, their third years were relatively unremarkable by comparison. these five were still developing in that third year, as is tyreke...
his shooting percentage is the one glaring statistical issue this season, but somebody who makes a living attacking the rim isn't going to have much of a problem correcting that issue, i imagine. again, i see the complaints about tyreke as much ado about nothing. sometimes i feel like many of the kings fans on this website have never watched a young, developing player before. its fair to criticize, certainly. in my previous two posts i pointed out several weaknesses in his game that either need polishing or overhauling, but i'm also not blinding myself to the strides he's making...
a players' third year is not make or break. its just one more step in the process. tyreke is also in an unusual position, having come off of an injury-riddled sophomore season just to enter a lockout-shortened season with no training camp or practice time, and a new head coach. i make no excuses for him, but i'm also not ready to do anything even close to resembling giving up on him. questioning whether or not he can even make long term improvement is asinine to me. he's 22 years old!!
Last edited:
Again, I said nothing like he has to be so consistent that we can set our watches to him. Obviously no player play well 100% of the time. It's all relative. The best players probably play well about 90% of the time, though. Tyreke is nowhere near that. he's 50/50 at best. I honestly don't even see how anyone could deny or question that Tyreke has a problem with consistency. The number you posted aren't helpful because they don't tell us what the degree of separation between their good and bad games were. You have to look at how averages are attained and realize that averages alone don't tell the full story. Tyreke is averaging 15 PPG by scoring 12 or less in about half of his games and 20 or more in the other half. A more consistent player would average 15 PPG with a smaller degree of separation between the good and bad games. it most certainly is not just about "perception", it's about data.
i'm not saying tyreke evans doesn't have a problem with consistency. i fully recognize that he has a problem with consistency. what i am asserting is that you're living in a world of unrealistic expectations. so here's data for you, in the form of season splits from the junior season of both tyreke evans and tony parker:
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/e/evansty01/gamelog/2012/
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/p/parketo01/gamelog/2004/
that's two wildly inconsistent players in their third years. their stats read like an EKG. its all ups and downs. but, with coaching, parker became a more consistent player, and eventual all star. perhaps tyreke will do the same. perhaps he needs further discipline via his head coach. it sounds like keith smart recognizes this, and he's taken on the challenge of truly coaching tyreke evans, something westphal never seemed wont to do...
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/e/evansty01/gamelog/2012/
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/p/parketo01/gamelog/2004/
that's two wildly inconsistent players in their third years. their stats read like an EKG. its all ups and downs. but, with coaching, parker became a more consistent player, and eventual all star. perhaps tyreke will do the same. perhaps he needs further discipline via his head coach. it sounds like keith smart recognizes this, and he's taken on the challenge of truly coaching tyreke evans, something westphal never seemed wont to do...
Using only 21 games played for both players, I find that Evans first standard deviation is 8.93 vs Parker 3.75. It's a method used to measure variability from the mean. I think it's a fair statistical method on evaluating consistency.
In this case Evans average 16.9 but can vary by 8.9 points, but Parkers, who average 14 can vary by 3.75 points.
We're about 1/3 of the season and Smart is just starting to implement his system. It's still too early to say Evans will not be consistent but at this time, he is not.
In this case Evans average 16.9 but can vary by 8.9 points, but Parkers, who average 14 can vary by 3.75 points.
We're about 1/3 of the season and Smart is just starting to implement his system. It's still too early to say Evans will not be consistent but at this time, he is not.
I don't have the exact stats at my fingertips, but Grant was mentioning last night just how badly the lockout has affected the early performance of a lot of players. He was talking about Rudy Gay at one point, so it wasn't just about the Kings.
I think we'll see a leveling out of players after the all-star break.
I think we'll see a leveling out of players after the all-star break.
I think at the start of the year, someone mentioned that younger/newer teams would be hit harder earlier in the year, but that they would make up for it later in the year when the schedule impacted the older teams...can't remember who said it, but it made sense at the time. We are both young and new (and our fans, restless.)
I recently heard an interview on ESPN with Scotty Brooks, coach of the Thunder. The questioner asked him about what he had said to Perkins, who had underperformed the previous year. Brooks said that in a meeting with Perkins that Perkins promised that he would get back to playing like he used to. You know what Brooks said? "THAT'S NOT GOOD ENOUGH." He told Perkins that he was still young and that he should have a lot more improvement in his game and he should be much better next season than he has ever been. Perkins thought about it, and said he would do just that. Now that's what I'm talking about. Raising expectations, not lowering them. That's how you get progress. Because if you don't meet those expectations, everybody should be dissapointed - the owners, the management, the coaches, the fans, and certainly the players. Let's not play the lower expectations game. The Kings org is absolutely outstanding in lowering expectations and making excuses. And that's certainly not a complement.