I agree with everything you say man believe it or not. I think it's all based on whether either of us thinks he can do it or not. I am on the side of "easing his way into it" by maybe putting another guy out there with him like he had when he was a rookie (Beno is a free agent btw but we do have McLemore). I don't think tossing him out there as the only ball handling option with the first team will help him ease into the role. But then again some like trial by fire so it could work? Who knows. I just wish we would know if he's staying or not.
Kings want Evans (latest news, tweets, etc.)
- Thread starter VF21
- Start date
Speaking for my portion of the "other side," of course I would agree that I was wrong yet all I have said is that I think he deserves a shot at PG. I have never said he is a great facilitator and I don't believe anyone else has either. I think this argument is manufactured to a certain degree and to think there is a battle between different sides is silly. I am a Kings fan and I want what is best for the Kings. If Tyreke works out, great. If he doesn't, we do something different. I am unhappy that we wasted the four years without adequately answering the question as to Tyreke's PG skills. We shouldn't be entering year 5 and not know for sure.
and here's the real kicker for me. If the plan was to move forward with Reke at SG, then I'm on board. We've seen tangible improvement in his spot-shooting/off-ball play at the 2 guard slot. It's still a steep price for him, but I think he'd end up earning that price-tag in the long run.
PG is a different story. I have no clue how he'd run the team. The little footage we have of him the last few seasons has not been good. The offense always stalled. To me, $12mil is a hell of a gamble on someone we're not sure can play the position.
In the end, we all want the Kings to win. There's just differing opinions on getting there.
PG is a different story. I have no clue how he'd run the team. The little footage we have of him the last few seasons has not been good. The offense always stalled. To me, $12mil is a hell of a gamble on someone we're not sure can play the position.
In the end, we all want the Kings to win. There's just differing opinions on getting there.
No no, not you in particular. It was in general that those type of arguments end in name calling. I thought it was going down that path because your posts made it look like you were upset so I wanted to tone it down a little before it got there. Then Spud said it seemed like I was trolling. I did take a look at some of my posts, and I can see his side, so I will tone it down a bit on the negativity so I don't pee people off. We're all Kings fans here.
Unless I am in a bad mood which rarely occurs that anyone could notice, I will ALWAYS try to be civil and I think a few people may have even noticed that when I see a guy kind of losing credibility because of temper problems, I will try to calm things down and rehabilitate (is that a good word) that person's reputation. I thought it odd that you used a brief comment to me and mentioned name calling and put downs. I won't do that and don't try to predict my future posts. 
You can assume that if I put someone down, and I don't remember putting any person down, just their opinions, it's a temporary brain fart.
There is a real negative expectation among a lot of people here.
Edit: let me give an example. I might say "Gary, your ideas are full of beetle dung" or I might say "Gary, YOU are full of beetle dung" and to me, there is a big difference. One is a comment on your ideas and the other is a comment about you. I don't think there is anyone here that I dislike although I have tired of one person's attitude and have him on ignore. It's not that he is full of beetle dung but he is getting alarmingly close.
As to spudfan, I think I clarified my confusion and sincerely thought your question meant something different than you meant. I AM in a more aggressive mood today but that's because I am tired of the "I know it all" attitude of some people and although I used to just let those comments pass, I am not going to let them pass at least until this evening when I might revert to normal.
Might!!!
You can assume that if I put someone down, and I don't remember putting any person down, just their opinions, it's a temporary brain fart.There is a real negative expectation among a lot of people here.
Edit: let me give an example. I might say "Gary, your ideas are full of beetle dung" or I might say "Gary, YOU are full of beetle dung" and to me, there is a big difference. One is a comment on your ideas and the other is a comment about you. I don't think there is anyone here that I dislike although I have tired of one person's attitude and have him on ignore. It's not that he is full of beetle dung but he is getting alarmingly close.
As to spudfan, I think I clarified my confusion and sincerely thought your question meant something different than you meant. I AM in a more aggressive mood today but that's because I am tired of the "I know it all" attitude of some people and although I used to just let those comments pass, I am not going to let them pass at least until this evening when I might revert to normal.
Might!!!
Last edited:
I just want to touch upon the point about the offense...especially when you're talking about the 'Smart' era.
Does anyone have any sort of idea of what type of offense they were trying to run....because it was a hot mess out there.
It seemed as if the offense consisted of two things
1.) Get the rebound and push it up the floor and try to get an early hoop.
2.) If in the half-court...get the ball to a guy (Cousins/Tyreke/IT/Thornton/Jimmer/Jt) in an iso situation and hope that he can either get a bucket...or recognize the defense and kick the ball out to someone with an open shot.
In all honesty...I had ZERO confidence that if the Kings had 24 seconds to execute a single play in the half court with a game on the line...that they would be successful.
I'm not sure why anyone would single out Tyreke as not doing a good job running the offense when it was clear he wasn't asked to run it...and there really wasn't much of an offense to run in the first place.
Hopefully Malone changes all of that for next season.
Does anyone have any sort of idea of what type of offense they were trying to run....because it was a hot mess out there.
It seemed as if the offense consisted of two things
1.) Get the rebound and push it up the floor and try to get an early hoop.
2.) If in the half-court...get the ball to a guy (Cousins/Tyreke/IT/Thornton/Jimmer/Jt) in an iso situation and hope that he can either get a bucket...or recognize the defense and kick the ball out to someone with an open shot.
In all honesty...I had ZERO confidence that if the Kings had 24 seconds to execute a single play in the half court with a game on the line...that they would be successful.
I'm not sure why anyone would single out Tyreke as not doing a good job running the offense when it was clear he wasn't asked to run it...and there really wasn't much of an offense to run in the first place.
Hopefully Malone changes all of that for next season.
Last edited:
Mike bibby was our Pg in the glory years. I averaged over 6 assist exactly one time. ppl argue the christie did most of the handling (althought I don't remember that) he averaged 4. I think Evans is just as good of a facilitator as Mike bibby or Doug christie. Bmac did average 2 a game being the #1 option on the team.
I have stated it before but I think it is worth considering that no player was offered a chance to play at their best or even to improve. It was left to them. I think it is premature to judge anyone who has been with the Kings until they are under adequate coaching. We may have some surprises. For instance there is Tyreke, PPat, Jimmer, JT, MT, Cuz, and even Outlaw. I may be the only one to think that Salmons was trying to do the best he could in a non-system. I may have come close to listing the whole team but that's by design. I think we all have somewhat of an idea how some will play under Malone but I don't know how Cuz, Tyreke, or PPat will be affected. Those three could improve substantially and be part of a big change in the Kings. Outlaw might be a reasonably big contributor nut who knows?
This is just kind of an editorial, I suppose, but I absolutely believe it.
This is just kind of an editorial, I suppose, but I absolutely believe it.
Evans Offensive IQ is FINE.. Hes proven time and again he can drive and kick too the open shooter and set DMC up (he could get a little better at that). If Westbrook can do it and have success. Evans can. Especially if we get a passing Small Forward like Evan Turner. We would be golden for running our offense. Plus we havent even tapped into DMC's passing skills. Our team would be fine with Reke at PG. I Think replacing IT with someone like Calderon would just be icing on the cake.
For a guy with C&S game plan McLemore actually passed pretty well. He's no 'Bazz.
For a guy with C&S game plan McLemore actually passed pretty well. He's no 'Bazz.
For people wondering why McLemore is potentially a better fit next to Tyreke if Evans is moved to PG, the simple answer is that McLemore is a shooter whereas Thornton is a scorer. And what I mean by that is that Thornton is not a catch and shoot player. He's a guy that wants to get the ball in his hands and create on offense. I agree this team needs some ballhandling and or playmaking from the SF to make that backcourt function well, but I don't think Iguodala is the only guy capable of filling that role.
Regarding #1, that's what most good teams want to do. (By the way, that's what Malone wants to do also). It's exaggerated about how the Kings were run & gun, like a Westhead offense or something. For example, I don't recall during the entire season that the Kings ran off of an opponent's made basket. That certainly wasn't part of their plan. Yes, there definitely was a lot of iso. Most of the offense was through Cousins. And as far as Tyreke running the offense, sometimes he ran the offense, sometimes he didn't. Sometimes the ball went through IT, sometimes through Salmons, sometimes it was thrown in the post to JT or thrown to Cousins (mostly at the high post). It was a "take your turn" offense, depending on ? Maybe it was dependent on the matchups of the team they were playing, maybe internal politics, maybe chance, maybe who got hot during the game. It rarely gave one the impression that there was any coherent plan or that movement was terribly important to the offense.
We're both in agreement that the best option for any team is to get the ball in the hoop before the defense has a chance to get set.
I think Malone said "We want to run...but with purpose"
The issue as I think you'll agree is that if the Kings didn't get an easy scoring opportunity early in the clock...there didn't really seem to be any sort of coherant offensive plan to score against a set defense in the half-court...and more than anything that is on the coach.
I think Malone said "We want to run...but with purpose"
The issue as I think you'll agree is that if the Kings didn't get an easy scoring opportunity early in the clock...there didn't really seem to be any sort of coherant offensive plan to score against a set defense in the half-court...and more than anything that is on the coach.
I'm not really in the habit of defending Keith Smart but I can all but guarantee that what actually happened on the court bore little to no resemblance to what he tried to implement in practice or draw up during games.
Part of that blame has to fall on the players but if what you are preaching isn't getting executed that falls primarily on the coach.
For players to buy into any system they have to (1) have faith in their coach (2) experience a consistent message and and (3) be given appropriate roles (4) see positive results from the system
Smart failed on all accounts. The team was losing, players were jerked in and out of the lineup with everyone given the green light to shoot early last season and Smart said one thing and then did another constantly. Not surprisingly he lost the locker room and destroyed any goodwill he'd established the previous season.
Yes, the actual schemes on offense and defense (as well as matchups, adjustments, substitutions etc) are hugely important but there is so much more that goes into being a successful coach, much of it how you relate and deal with people. Keith Smart showed he's simply not NBA head coach material. So did Musselman, Natt and to a lesser extent Theus. I have more faith in the Malone hiring than I've had in any Kings head coach since Adelman, but we still have to wait and see what with him as well.
Part of that blame has to fall on the players but if what you are preaching isn't getting executed that falls primarily on the coach.
For players to buy into any system they have to (1) have faith in their coach (2) experience a consistent message and and (3) be given appropriate roles (4) see positive results from the system
Smart failed on all accounts. The team was losing, players were jerked in and out of the lineup with everyone given the green light to shoot early last season and Smart said one thing and then did another constantly. Not surprisingly he lost the locker room and destroyed any goodwill he'd established the previous season.
Yes, the actual schemes on offense and defense (as well as matchups, adjustments, substitutions etc) are hugely important but there is so much more that goes into being a successful coach, much of it how you relate and deal with people. Keith Smart showed he's simply not NBA head coach material. So did Musselman, Natt and to a lesser extent Theus. I have more faith in the Malone hiring than I've had in any Kings head coach since Adelman, but we still have to wait and see what with him as well.
How do we know that coach Malone's offense is going to be hinged on the point guard facilitating everything? What if half of the game the intent is for Evans to bring the ball up and then player B facilitates the offense? The problem with the argument of the naysayers is that it's predicated on a narrow view that the point guard is the sole facilitator of the offense and the teams performance is 100% reliant on a traditional pass first point guard. I don't think the coaching staff or FO will be as close minded.
Given the lack of movement from the Kings' side I am beginning to think Ranadive & D'Alessandro are willing to give it to him.
Losing Evans for nothing would be a talent bleed regardless of how you feel about him as a player or whether you think he could pair in the backcourt with McLemore or not.
And if the Kings aren't signing Iguodala (which I would have only wanted IF they kept Evans too) and are prepared to let Tyreke walk then it makes you wonder what the plan for this offseason really is, assuming there is one.
Losing Evans for nothing would be a talent bleed regardless of how you feel about him as a player or whether you think he could pair in the backcourt with McLemore or not.
And if the Kings aren't signing Iguodala (which I would have only wanted IF they kept Evans too) and are prepared to let Tyreke walk then it makes you wonder what the plan for this offseason really is, assuming there is one.
