What to do with Tyreke and Cousins?
- Thread starter funkykingston
- Start date
Did you..just say that....JJ REDICK...is better...than Tyreke? There's..I mean that's just....No...And Manu? He's regressed, no. Monta? Chucker, ballhog, no. Smith? Arguably. Klay? Good shooter, and defender, and young, but no. Tony Allen? Maybe. Crawford? GOD NO. I would never argue that he's better than Kobe, Harden, Wade, and Iguodala, and it wouldn't be a huge stretch to say that Derozan, Henderson, Gordon and Mayo are better, but JJ ****ing Redick? You must have a very high opinion of him if you think he's top ten.
I think he's talking about Joe Johnson. At least, I hope he is. Either way, the bottom half of his list is questionable, unless you're talking about their full careers vs. right now. I, personally, question the presence of J.R. Smith on the list, altogether; I think that you could make a much more compelling argument about Gordon being better than Evans than you could about Smith.
At any rate, Smith is an unrestricted free agent (a point made in Bricklayer's post, which it appears that rhythmless chose to deliberately ignore in order to fixate on the "Top 10" part of the post), so it couldn't really be said that New York has a better SG, even if he were better. And, call me a homer, if you like, but I'd be willing to bet a week's pay that there aren't two GM's in the league who would sign Smith over Evans, if they could get them both at the same price, or even within a $1M of each other.
At any rate, Smith is an unrestricted free agent (a point made in Bricklayer's post, which it appears that rhythmless chose to deliberately ignore in order to fixate on the "Top 10" part of the post), so it couldn't really be said that New York has a better SG, even if he were better. And, call me a homer, if you like, but I'd be willing to bet a week's pay that there aren't two GM's in the league who would sign Smith over Evans, if they could get them both at the same price, or even within a $1M of each other.
I don't disagree with your take on the rankings. Yes, I am talking about Joe Johnson. As for JR Smith, I don't like him. I don't like Monta either, but both are better scorers and both are more of a threat on the floor overall, right now. If you had to have someone make a basket, JR and Monta both go above Evans. If you were making a team from a draft pool of everyone for one season, JR and Monta go first. If you were doing franchise drafting, that's a different story. But Brick said Evans is top 10 right now, which is what these pseudo rankings address.
I wouldn't say I was ignoring it. I chose nto to address it because the rest of that post are facts. If you want a take, he's saying that there are 18 teams that could be interested in Evans, but there's more than just Evans in the FA world. Which means although there are 18 teams that want a SG, there are a number of SGs that are worthy of a starting gig. When you have a number of comparable products, the cost goes down. Evans has a leg up on some of the guys in the second list due to higher ceiling, but he is also only really useful as a high usage player. When we get into that, we have to talk about team dynamics and how you choose to build a team. In some cases, a Henderson fits better than Tyreke.
Rankings are difficult due to all of these aspects. JR has baggage. Evans may have stunted growth, etc. Which is why I am addressing the "top 10." I don't think top 10 (right now) is a given for Evans. I think everyone (not just Kings homers) can agree on top 15. But for a top 10, I think there would be some divide. And when you're 10-15 out of 30 starting guards, you're really just above average.
I wouldn't say I was ignoring it. I chose nto to address it because the rest of that post are facts. If you want a take, he's saying that there are 18 teams that could be interested in Evans, but there's more than just Evans in the FA world. Which means although there are 18 teams that want a SG, there are a number of SGs that are worthy of a starting gig. When you have a number of comparable products, the cost goes down. Evans has a leg up on some of the guys in the second list due to higher ceiling, but he is also only really useful as a high usage player. When we get into that, we have to talk about team dynamics and how you choose to build a team. In some cases, a Henderson fits better than Tyreke.
Rankings are difficult due to all of these aspects. JR has baggage. Evans may have stunted growth, etc. Which is why I am addressing the "top 10." I don't think top 10 (right now) is a given for Evans. I think everyone (not just Kings homers) can agree on top 15. But for a top 10, I think there would be some divide. And when you're 10-15 out of 30 starting guards, you're really just above average.
First of all, I'm not a "clone." I don't do "takes."
Second of all, based on what is J.R. Smith a better scorer than Tyreke Evans? Smith has been in the league for nine years, and he's had exactly one season where heis numbers were at least as good as the worst season of Evans' career. And he's done it on a lower FG percentage. Even this past season, which was the best of his career, by a million miles, he shot .422, and has a career FG% of .426. Sure, he shoots better from 3, but I don't personally consider that to be the sole defining characteristic of what makes a great SG; I'm not sure I even consider it one of the five most important traits.
I have no idea what you're referencing on clone and takes.
And you make good points, I am fine with moving JR Smith into the second tier. Again, I'm not attached to JR whatsoever and I'd rather have Tyreke. The point I'm making is that Tyreke is not widely regarded as a top 10 SG. I think that still holds, regardless of your feelings on JR.
And you make good points, I am fine with moving JR Smith into the second tier. Again, I'm not attached to JR whatsoever and I'd rather have Tyreke. The point I'm making is that Tyreke is not widely regarded as a top 10 SG. I think that still holds, regardless of your feelings on JR.
You said right now.
Joe Johnson is not worthless. He's better than Tyreke right now.
Afflalo's stats are comparable to Tyreke's last season. If Afflalo is a role player, then Tyreke is as well (right now). As for the rest, they're more one dimensional, but they've also shown to be about as productive in their one dimension as tyreke in his multi dimensions (right now).
We hope Reke is an impact player, but in the last couple years his production has been that of a roleplayer. Will he go back to an impact player? That's what GMs don't know and that's what will hurt his FA status.
Joe Johnson is not worthless. He's better than Tyreke right now.
Afflalo's stats are comparable to Tyreke's last season. If Afflalo is a role player, then Tyreke is as well (right now). As for the rest, they're more one dimensional, but they've also shown to be about as productive in their one dimension as tyreke in his multi dimensions (right now).
We hope Reke is an impact player, but in the last couple years his production has been that of a roleplayer. Will he go back to an impact player? That's what GMs don't know and that's what will hurt his FA status.
"Take" is the term used in place of "opinion" which was made widely popular by Jim Rome. "Clones" are what he calls his fans. I tend to think of Rome as a preening gasbag, and every time I hear "take" being used instead of "opinion," it sets my teeth on edge, because of him.
I agree that Evans is not "widely" regarded as a Top 10 shooting guard; it's arguable, at any rate. It's not "cut and dry," but the notion is hardly ridiculous.
And I'll beg to differ with Bricklayer's assesment of Tony Allen. I think that Thabo Sefolosha is a good example of a one-dimensional SG who's not in Evans' class (so, for that matter, is his primary backup). Tony Allen, not so much. I think that when you are as good defensively as he is, it can overcome a lot of holes in your game, otherwise. The same way that Ben Wallace, in his prime, was a Top 5 center, despite being utterly inept offensively. As to the question of which one I'd rather have, it'd depend on what the rest of my team looks like.
I agree that Evans is not "widely" regarded as a Top 10 shooting guard; it's arguable, at any rate. It's not "cut and dry," but the notion is hardly ridiculous.
And I'll beg to differ with Bricklayer's assesment of Tony Allen. I think that Thabo Sefolosha is a good example of a one-dimensional SG who's not in Evans' class (so, for that matter, is his primary backup). Tony Allen, not so much. I think that when you are as good defensively as he is, it can overcome a lot of holes in your game, otherwise. The same way that Ben Wallace, in his prime, was a Top 5 center, despite being utterly inept offensively. As to the question of which one I'd rather have, it'd depend on what the rest of my team looks like.
Last edited:
Hold on a sec, so for those who said Reke only worth 8m because he is a 3/4 options, he can't shoot, not a PG and empty stat guy his present do not translate to to win.
Why in the world Reke worth 8m while Cousins worth max? With Reke doing his thing we net 25wins, with Cousins + "heart" we gain a total of 2 win. Some thing don't add up here.
Why in the world Reke worth 8m while Cousins worth max? With Reke doing his thing we net 25wins, with Cousins + "heart" we gain a total of 2 win. Some thing don't add up here.
You give Tyreke and Cousins to a legitimate coach with a winning pedigree and he will gush and do wonders with them.
It's funny how some denigrate either Reke, Cousins, or both, but then turn around and crap all over the coaching staff that we have had for the past...ever since we fired Adelman.
There has been NO system, NO discipline, NO leadership, NO stability, NO winning culture from any of our coaches for our two most important players.
You throw in the fact that they were 19 and 20 yr olds coming into the NBA and it was a recipe for disaster.
We now have a new ownership group that will spend money on a LEGITIMATE coaching staff that will utilize our two young guns to the fullest of their abilities and THEN you will see what Reke and Cousins are REALLY worth.
It's funny how some denigrate either Reke, Cousins, or both, but then turn around and crap all over the coaching staff that we have had for the past...ever since we fired Adelman.
There has been NO system, NO discipline, NO leadership, NO stability, NO winning culture from any of our coaches for our two most important players.
You throw in the fact that they were 19 and 20 yr olds coming into the NBA and it was a recipe for disaster.
We now have a new ownership group that will spend money on a LEGITIMATE coaching staff that will utilize our two young guns to the fullest of their abilities and THEN you will see what Reke and Cousins are REALLY worth.
Another question would be how is Reke worth 8M when a considerably all around worse player and his backup in MT is worth 8M?
Anyone thinking Reke would get or would consider 8M per after MT got 8M per is off their rocker. And if our new GM/Ownership were stupid enough to only offer Reke 4/32 or something in that neighborhood, I'd immediately look to negotiate with other teams and if nothing comes out of it, just sign the one year QO and move on.
Funny thing is the one year QO would pay him almost 7M. So is he really not worth more than 1M more when considering his improvement yet total misuse of him and that that can quickly change? I remember when Stephs extension was attacked. Many just looked at what he did under Smart and his injuries. Failed to understand the impact an idiot coach can have and that negative use of a player doesn't equate to not improving, nor does it equate to not being a better player than it appears.
If I were you, I'd ignore the Reke is only worth 4/32 crowd as they have yet to analyze the situation as a whole and instead take any analysis as "excuses". Although, those excuses quickly become analysis and carry weight when referring to IT, or guys like Rubio or George Hill.
One other thing is people act like if Reke got say, 4/40 or 4/44 that he'd be unmovable, yet somehow moving MT who produces far less at 8M is regularly thrown out there, as if it's a foregone conclusion he'd get good value in return. Even if Reke did sign a larger contract and put up 17/5/4 instead of say 21/5/5 or more, he'd still have suitors, he'd still have value and we'd get value in return if we looked to move him. He wouldn't all the sudden turn into a Salmons type contract.
Anyone thinking Reke would get or would consider 8M per after MT got 8M per is off their rocker. And if our new GM/Ownership were stupid enough to only offer Reke 4/32 or something in that neighborhood, I'd immediately look to negotiate with other teams and if nothing comes out of it, just sign the one year QO and move on.
Funny thing is the one year QO would pay him almost 7M. So is he really not worth more than 1M more when considering his improvement yet total misuse of him and that that can quickly change? I remember when Stephs extension was attacked. Many just looked at what he did under Smart and his injuries. Failed to understand the impact an idiot coach can have and that negative use of a player doesn't equate to not improving, nor does it equate to not being a better player than it appears.
If I were you, I'd ignore the Reke is only worth 4/32 crowd as they have yet to analyze the situation as a whole and instead take any analysis as "excuses". Although, those excuses quickly become analysis and carry weight when referring to IT, or guys like Rubio or George Hill.
One other thing is people act like if Reke got say, 4/40 or 4/44 that he'd be unmovable, yet somehow moving MT who produces far less at 8M is regularly thrown out there, as if it's a foregone conclusion he'd get good value in return. Even if Reke did sign a larger contract and put up 17/5/4 instead of say 21/5/5 or more, he'd still have suitors, he'd still have value and we'd get value in return if we looked to move him. He wouldn't all the sudden turn into a Salmons type contract.
Last edited:
I guess this is a fun excercise, but its really meaningless. To simplify, a player is worth what he can get. You, I, or anyone can sit and speculate how much we think a player is worth. Each of us with our personal bias. But its what the rest of the league, and the new Kings brain trust thinks that matters. What you don't do is get into a bidding war with another team, and sadly, because we've allowed Tyreke to become a restricted freeagent, thats where we might find ourselves.
I think new ownership has to evaluate Tyreke's worth in dollars and then draw a line in the sand at what ever figure that is. Otherwise your letting the other team dictate the worth you have to pay. You have to see past Tyreke and into the future financially. That could end up being a painful process, and end with us losing Tyreke for nothing. Something that could have been avoided a year ago, but was ignored by the Maloofs. Hopefully the worse case scenario would be us involved in a sign and trade, where we at least get some return on our investment. The best we can hope for is that Ranadive is a good salesman, and Tyreke decides to stay in lieu of possibly a better offer. Remember, it wouldn't be the worse thing in the world if Tyreke picked up his option. We'd have him for another year, under a new head coach, and at the end of that year, we could still offer him more than anyone else under the Bird rule. Maybe another year of evaluation is what the doctor ordered for both sides.
I think new ownership has to evaluate Tyreke's worth in dollars and then draw a line in the sand at what ever figure that is. Otherwise your letting the other team dictate the worth you have to pay. You have to see past Tyreke and into the future financially. That could end up being a painful process, and end with us losing Tyreke for nothing. Something that could have been avoided a year ago, but was ignored by the Maloofs. Hopefully the worse case scenario would be us involved in a sign and trade, where we at least get some return on our investment. The best we can hope for is that Ranadive is a good salesman, and Tyreke decides to stay in lieu of possibly a better offer. Remember, it wouldn't be the worse thing in the world if Tyreke picked up his option. We'd have him for another year, under a new head coach, and at the end of that year, we could still offer him more than anyone else under the Bird rule. Maybe another year of evaluation is what the doctor ordered for both sides.
I just finished watching the LLTK Rally and I noticed something that I totally missed the first time. Vivek wore an Evans jersey and all the local investors who were there wore Evans jerseys. If this doesn't send a message about what the new ownership group thinks of Tyreke Evans, I don't know what does...
So, bottom line? Those thinking that he'll be moved are probably wrong.
So, bottom line? Those thinking that he'll be moved are probably wrong.
I can't help but notice all the comparisons to Tony Allen, Thabo Selfalosha, et al. All those guys have things in common for the most part that differ from Tyreke.
They are all older, play on better teams, have better coaches and their respective teams have been better managed. And until just the last few days they played for better owners who would actually pay more for a better product instead of just the minimum.
I would love to see Tyreke and DMC on this team in 3 years with a better team, better coaching, better front office and better owners.
KB
They are all older, play on better teams, have better coaches and their respective teams have been better managed. And until just the last few days they played for better owners who would actually pay more for a better product instead of just the minimum.
I would love to see Tyreke and DMC on this team in 3 years with a better team, better coaching, better front office and better owners.
KB