Kings talking Tyreke trade???

[Kingster]

The spacing and positioning on the floor depends on your role in the offense. A PG will have different spacings and positions than a SG, although there will be some similarities. There are NO similarities between the roles and responsibilities of a PG and a SF. None.
So now you have a kid who hasn't ever been a SF, much less a SF in the NBA, and you blame him for having to think about where he needs to be? If you're thinking, you're not reacting. It makes you that much slower.

Come on, Spike. You know, absolutely know that Tyreke can't hit open outside shots. He can play pg, sg, sf or center for that matter and he still can't hit open outside shot. No doubt, he's adjusting to being a 3. But his adjustment has absolutely nothing to do with him not hitting an outside shot. After he's played the three for the rest of the season and he's adjusted to being a three he's not going to be a better outside shooter because of it. He may move without the ball better, and be comfortable receiving passes close-in to the basket, thereby increasing his shooting percentage. That should improve. But when he's standing out there at 20 feet from the basket with nobody on him and he can't bury the shot, being a 3 is not going to affect his shot.

 

[Spike]

I'm not saying he can hit an outside shot. I'm saying that having to think too much definitely affects it. I think he should be a lot better than he is, and I don't think he necessarily needs an outside shot (3 pt range).

Casually speaking, shooting percentages are down all over the NBA this year as well, not just with the Kings. That doesn't change the fact that Evans seems to fade away on his shots, but sometimes it's more than just one thing.

 

[Glenn]

I suspect Tyreke will never have a consistent outside jump shot. I also think he is one of the best people taking the ball to the rim in the NBA. Last night he made 8 layups and no jump shots. He was the second leading scorer on the team. If the focus is on jump shots, he sucks. If the focus is on scoring, he is very good and add to this latter skill the number of rebounds and assists he gets, you have a darn good ball player.

This fascination with his jump shot is distracting. I found myself ooohing! and aaahing! last night at some of the amazingly athletic moves he made at the rim. Create an offense that makes use of his attaking skill and relax a bit on the hysteria about his jump shot.

 

[uolj]

There are several potential excuses for Evans lack of obvious improvement that are absolutely legitimate. The injuries last year, the coach(es?) and the lockout/shortened schedule are all perfectly plausible explanations. Other plausible explanations include a poor work ethic, a lack of understanding of what needs to be done to get better, and a lack of talent to be able to improve on certain things.

Chances are good that reality is a mixture of some or all of those. But where is the firm evidence that clearly points to one side or the other? I don't see it.

Personally, what I've seen makes me think that there is a little bit of the latter group at play. There is a little bit of something innate in Evans that means he probably won't be a super star even if all of the outside influences broke just right for him.

But more than that, I think there's a lot of the former group of reasons affecting what we've seen. The injuries and to a lesser extent the coaching last year are logical reasons for the slight drop in production. The turmoil of this year makes sense as a reason that production hasn't jumped back up. I don't have concrete evidence for it, but it just makes sense.

And two and a half seasons is just not enough time to be sure of the opposite conclusion, especially for someone so young. If you trade Evans now for anybody who lacks his potential, you're acting based on a guess that he won't improve. That seems like such a waste. Even if he doesn't improve he's a valuable piece to the puzzle, but if he just takes a few more steps like most players his age do, then the idea of trading him for a pick will seem silly.

 

[Arkitect]

I suspect Tyreke will never have a consistent outside jump shot. I also think he is one of the best people taking the ball to the rim in the NBA. Last night he made 8 layups and no jump shots. He was the second leading scorer on the team. If the focus is on jump shots, he sucks. If the focus is on scoring, he is very good and add to this latter skill the number of rebounds and assists he gets, you have a darn good ball player.

This fascination with his jump shot is distracting. I found myself ooohing! and aaahing! last night at some of the amazingly athletic moves he made at the rim. Create an offense that makes use of his attaking skill and relax a bit on the hysteria about his jump shot.

That is an important point. It is not about Tyreke needing to add this or that skill by itself. The front office and coaching staff need to put him in a position to succeed. Even if he could shoot .400 from 3 right now I don't think we would be in the playoff race this year. Him and Cousins need better teammates. We are the worst defensive team in the league. That is on every one. We don't have a starting SF. Basketball is not played in a vacuum. It is not fair to evaluate any player without also looking at the rest of the team around him.

 

[mr. moustache]

So by that logic then Jimmer is also terrible at shooting the basketball.

Jimmer isn't even shooting 40% from the field. So far, he *has* been terrible shooting the basketball, excepting for 3pt shots.

 

[Tetsujin]

Jimmer isn't even shooting 40% from the field. So far, he *has* been terrible shooting the basketball, excepting for 3pt shots.

Touche

 

[kingjatt]

I suspect Tyreke will never have a consistent outside jump shot. I also think he is one of the best people taking the ball to the rim in the NBA. Last night he made 8 layups and no jump shots. He was the second leading scorer on the team. If the focus is on jump shots, he sucks. If the focus is on scoring, he is very good and add to this latter skill the number of rebounds and assists he gets, you have a darn good ball player.

This fascination with his jump shot is distracting. I found myself ooohing! and aaahing! last night at some of the amazingly athletic moves he made at the rim. Create an offense that makes use of his attaking skill and relax a bit on the hysteria about his jump shot.

But he has to have defenders stay honest and play him up close for him to be able to blow by them, sure his sheer athletic ability gets him a few layups a game but when teams pack the paint on him knowing full well he is one dimensional basically daring him to shoot yet he continues to attack into a swarm of defenders causing turnovers/missed poor shots etc, is what makes most fans mad because we see the potential of how deadly he could be with a jumpshot. now if he had some sort of a jumpshot he would be a more consistent scoring machine as he would force defenders to respect him outside of the paint.

 

[Glenn]

Somehow he blew by 8 defenders yesterday and scored 8 baskets. That's more than a few layups. It was enough to get him 17 pts as he was fouled and made a free throw. Of course I already said that so I don't know why you ignored that.

He scored more on layups than our jump shooters scored.

 

[Yocrunch]

My first post on these boards, long time lurker...
I would also like to remind some people that the Kings are playing the running game, and who do you want charging down the lane? Reke
I think he can develop a better jump shot, maybe not a great one, this being based on an actual off season practice and all of that stuff we missed out on this year.

 

[jpsls]

Somehow he blew by 8 defenders yesterday and scored 8 baskets. That's more than a few layups. It was enough to get him 17 pts as he was fouled and made a free throw. Of course I already said that so I don't know why you ignored that.

He scored more on layups than our jump shooters scored.

Well, that's because we have horrible jump shooters. Phoenix is in the bottom 5 in opponent field goal % at the rim also, so obviously they are almost as bad as the Kings.

 

[Bricklayer]

Well, that's because we have horrible jump shooters. Phoenix is in the bottom 5 in opponent field goal % at the rim also, so obviously they are almost as bad as the Kings.

Please don't start this silliness again. Reke remians one of the most potent off the bounce players in the league, even wihtout a jumper. Some Kings fans have simply developed a resistance to seeing all the ones that go in, and only see the ones that don't.

 

[IfAt1st]

It is nobody's fault but Tyreke's that he lacks a consistent jumpshot.

Not coaching, not his brothers, not his trainers, not his mom's, and not his teammates, or what position he happens to be penciled in at. He's a grown man, and people looking to spread the blame about that particular aspect of Tyreke's game are rationalizing.

We all know the line about Tyreke : "He's not a point guard, or a shooting guard, he's just a good player who scores, period."
When he tries to back an opponent down for the last 2 1/2 seasons (much less in college or in high school), it doesn't matter if he happens to be playing PG that night, or SG, or SF recently - the play on the court is almost identical regardless of position -

Tyreke has the ball, dribbling around the 3 pt line - looking for an entry with his defender in front of him.
Sometimes he stabs his foot forward, then settles back into his shooting form and invariably bricks it.
That has NOTHING to do with what position he officially is in that play - it all looks the same, and ends up being the same.
Hopefully he can figure out what countless other NBA professionals have figured out this summer, or his career is going to take a HUGE hit, and he's going to lose tens of millions of dollars. You'd think that would be motivation enough to actually make progress this offseason, and if it isn't, the whole world will conclude he will not likely get better.

His life, his jumpshot, his responsibility.

 

[JoMama]

Tyreke's court smarts are right there with Curly of the Three Stooges. Guy hasn't learned a lick in three seasons about moving the ball, not driving into the lane in traffic (turnover King) and making an outside shot. Kings would be monumentally ignorant to give Tyreke a lucrative, long-term contract unless he shows amazing improvement in key areas. Tough decision ahead for Petrie and the Maloofs, although the rumors are that the Kings might just move Tyreke.

 

[Kingster]

It's interesting to me how the discussion has changed with respect to Tyreke's jump shot. First, there was discussion about whether he would ever get a jump shot, whether he should have it by now, whether he trained appropriately to acquire the jump shot. Now the discussion is that Tyreke doesn't even need a jump shot, that his driving skills are so good you should organize your whole team around him, even without the J. I wonder about the wisdom of building a team around a 6'6" guy without a jump shot.

 

[Spike]

It's interesting to me how the discussion has changed with respect to Tyreke's jump shot. First, there was discussion about whether he would ever get a jump shot, whether he should have it by now, whether he trained appropriately to acquire the jump shot. Now the discussion is that Tyreke doesn't even need a jump shot, that his driving skills are so good you should organize your whole team around him, even without the J. I wonder about the wisdom of building a team around a 6'6" guy without a jump shot.

I think the 6'6" guy without a jump shot is a perfect complement to the 6'11" center who can score from the high post and the low post. Find another guard to be the consistent outside threat and you're in business.

 

[Kingster]

I think the 6'6" guy without a jump shot is a perfect complement to the 6'11" center who can score from the high post and the low post. Find another guard to be the consistent outside threat and you're in business.

I'd say a 6'6" guard with a jumpshot is a complement to a center who can play outside or inside. I'd say a guard without that jump shot isn't going to be able to do a pick and roll, and isn't going to be able to get the ball on a kickout and convert the open J.

 

[Glenn]

It's interesting to me how the discussion has changed with respect to Tyreke's jump shot. First, there was discussion about whether he would ever get a jump shot, whether he should have it by now, whether he trained appropriately to acquire the jump shot. Now the discussion is that Tyreke doesn't even need a jump shot, that his driving skills are so good you should organize your whole team around him, even without the J. I wonder about the wisdom of building a team around a 6'6" guy without a jump shot.

This isn't what I said. I certainly didn't say you build a team around him. That would be ridiculous. I DO think we need to live with reality. Tyreke has no reliable jump shot. Let us say he never develops one. What do we do?

I know you can say to trade him but he has no more use to another team as he does to us. I don't think he would be of any more use to another team as he would be to us. I think he should NEVER be standing outside the three point arc ready to receive a kick out. I also thought it was ridiculous that he was handed the ball last night over and over to try to get the winning shot. Everybody in the world knew what he was going to do so, as you have said at least 20 times, they packed the paint and denied him the rim. They forced him to shoot. I think the ball should have been in Isaiah's hands or Cousins' hands.

Deal with what you have and not with fantasy. If you don't like what you have, get rid of him. I happen to like what we have as he still scores, rebounds, and dishes assists. He's a tremendous athlete and plays the most minutes for our team.

 

[gunks]

People complaining about Reke's lack of progress in the BBIQ department need to look at the "coaching" he has recieved in his first three seasons here.

2 years of Westphail, who actively encouraged all of Reke's bad habits with his "freelance offense". Now Smart playing him at the 3.

There was actually a bit of improvement in Reke's PGyness under Smart, so I have no idea why he (Smart) decided to do a U-turn and stick Reke at the 3. IT/Reke should be our starting backcourt.

Reke is 22, hasnt had any coaching, only played 1 year of college. Lets wait a little bit before we decide he's a bust.

 

[Kingster]

This isn't what I said. I certainly didn't say you build a team around him. That would be ridiculous. I DO think we need to live with reality. Tyreke has no reliable jump shot. Let us say he never develops one. What do we do?

I know you can say to trade him but he has no more use to another team as he does to us. I don't think he would be of any more use to another team as he would be to us. I think he should NEVER be standing outside the three point arc ready to receive a kick out. I also thought it was ridiculous that he was handed the ball last night over and over to try to get the winning shot. Everybody in the world knew what he was going to do so, as you have said at least 20 times, they packed the paint and denied him the rim. They forced him to shoot. I think the ball should have been in Isaiah's hands or Cousins' hands.

Deal with what you have and not with fantasy. If you don't like what you have, get rid of him. I happen to like what we have as he still scores, rebounds, and dishes assists. He's a tremendous athlete and plays the most minutes for our team.

Glenn, you seem very reasonable to me. What I keep rattling around in my brain is this:

You have a very athletic guard with no jump shot, but excellent driving skills. Like you said, you aren't comfortable about building around him. But then aren't you forced to build around his weakness - a lack of jump shot - if you make personnel moves with this team? In every move you make isn't one key question: How does this new guy complement our non-outside shooting driving guard? And then what do you do about Cousins? How does this non-outside shooting guard complement Cousins inside game? Or do you relegate Cousins to the outside? And if you do relegate Cousins to the outside, then aren't you de facto "building your team around Tyreke"? I just don't see how this jigsaw puzzle is going to fit.

 

[Bricklayer]

Glenn, you seem very reasonable to me. What I keep rattling around in my brain is this:

You have a very athletic guard with no jump shot, but excellent driving skills. Like you said, you aren't comfortable about building around him. But then aren't you forced to build around his weakness - a lack of jump shot - if you make personnel moves with this team? In every move you make isn't one key question: How does this new guy complement our non-outside shooting driving guard? And then what do you do about Cousins? How does this non-outside shooting guard complement Cousins inside game? Or do you relegate Cousins to the outside? And if you do relegate Cousins to the outside, then aren't you de facto "building your team around Tyreke"? I just don't see how this jigsaw puzzle is going to fit.

Indeed, it is such a mystery. One does wonder how Kareem and a young Magic ever got along. Or how Shaq and a young Kobe could coexist. Or Duncan/Admiral could win titles with the likes of Avery Johnson and a young Tony Parker at the PG. Friggin miracles all. How oh how did those great Knicks teams survive with Ewing and the guards who couldn't shoot straight. How did Mark Jackson ever work with great bigs at all? Just mysteries. Profound ones even. Probably just luck. Could never be repeated obviously.

 

[Glenn]

Glenn, you seem very reasonable to me. What I keep rattling around in my brain is this:

You have a very athletic guard with no jump shot, but excellent driving skills. Like you said, you aren't comfortable about building around him. But then aren't you forced to build around his weakness - a lack of jump shot - if you make personnel moves with this team? In every move you make isn't one key question: How does this new guy complement our non-outside shooting driving guard? And then what do you do about Cousins? How does this non-outside shooting guard complement Cousins inside game? Or do you relegate Cousins to the outside? And if you do relegate Cousins to the outside, then aren't you de facto "building your team around Tyreke"? I just don't see how this jigsaw puzzle is going to fit.

You lost me. Sorry. I think you are working too hard to discredit me. I very much agree with your last sentence as your mindset is dependent on Tyreke having a jump shot.

Last night Tyreke had 27 points. He even scored 6 points in the OT doing what you hate. I didn't like it either but he DID, somehow, with his weaknesses fully exposed and easily defended as you would like to say, score 6 points. He is our second leading scorer on the season. Somehow our team is using him and frankly when I watch a game, I don't have my eyes glued to Tyreke. I watch the game because I love to watch the Kings. If you want to go into details that I frankly didn't follow, go ahead. It doesn't take away from the fact that Tyreke is a very important part of this team despite being kicked around from position to position. I think he deserves credit for what he CAN do and not discredited for what he can't do. Why ignore his strengths? I don't understand you as a Kings fan and I'm not going to play your game.

Something has gone wrong and I can't post notes without using html and even when I do it, it doesn't work.

 

[uolj]

Glenn, you seem very reasonable to me. What I keep rattling around in my brain is this:

You have a very athletic guard with no jump shot, but excellent driving skills. Like you said, you aren't comfortable about building around him. But then aren't you forced to build around his weakness - a lack of jump shot - if you make personnel moves with this team? In every move you make isn't one key question: How does this new guy complement our non-outside shooting driving guard? And then what do you do about Cousins? How does this non-outside shooting guard complement Cousins inside game? Or do you relegate Cousins to the outside? And if you do relegate Cousins to the outside, then aren't you de facto "building your team around Tyreke"? I just don't see how this jigsaw puzzle is going to fit.

Really, though? You don't see how you can have Cousins play inside (and out), and have Tyreke focus on his driving game, then surround them with an athletic power forward who can block shots and defend the faster PFs, a defensive small forward who can hit three pointers, and a second guard who doesn't need the ball much but can hit the three and defend?

I mean, you can make the same argument with virtually any second fiddle (if Cousins is your first). What if you have a pass first point guard who doesn't score much. That forces you to find third and possibly fourth guys who can light it up. Or what if your second fiddle is a Marcus Thornton type who can shoot and score, but doesn't rebound or defend quite as well. Then you'd need to make up for those deficiencies with your other three.

Evans needs better shooting to improve his overall game, but it doesn't have to be great (and we'll be pretty lucky if that ever happened). You can fill the other spots with people who can do that. But if you replace him with somebody who can shoot, then you're just creating different holes that need to be filled and you better hope that the replacement brings as much to the table as you take off of it by removing Evans.

 

[Anthony1]

The more I look at the draft this summer, the more I'm thinking about Charlotte's 1st rounder and Bismack Biyambo. I'd much rather have Charlottes No.1 in 2012 and No.1 in 2013, and have them keep Biyambo, but, I think that's pushing it. We will probably have to throw in Hickson or something as well, but I'm cool with that. I think it's time to move on from the Tyreke era. His ROY year was fools gold. He's an amazing player, but it's just so hard to fit him into a team concept. If we stick with him, we have to concern ourselves with his "issues" with every single move we make. The team has to be constructed in a way in which we hide his deficiencies. Not worth the drama, imo. Cut bait, and walk away with some young talent with amazing upside (hopefully Davis or Gilchrist)

 

[KingsCitizen]

First off, people easily forget that Reke is still leading this team in assist average. And still easily the best perimeter defender on this team. He made good strides at PG under Smart for that short successive games where Smart first implored the running game. But our rookie who's supposed to shoot lights out took months to gain some swagger and our SF spot sucks so bad and that's why Reke is now moved to that spot.

Reke is not the problem of this team. He's the most versatile player on this team that plays 3 positions on both sides of the court.

Even if IT is emerging as a legit NBA PG. I'd still chose Reke over him at PG if we could have a legit SF that could shoot the lights out from the perimeter. Even if Thornton can score 20-30 points every night, I'd still choose Reke over him at SG if we get a savvy PG and SF because Reke is definitely bigger and better defender than MT.

In summary, this team doesn't need to trade Evans. They have a lot of other problems to address on this team than throwing Evans.

Can't people blame Donte instead for not developing a brain to get enough playing time under Smart?
Can't people Garcia instead for not immediately stepping up until the last few games?
Or blame Honeycutt for being unable to challenge those lazy veteran SFs?
Or blame Jimmer for losing the swag and confidence he used to have in college?

There's a gorilla in the room and people keep looking at that ball.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

There's a gorilla in the room and people keep looking at that ball.

 

[Big Cuz 15]

what gorilla? LOL

 

[mac]

Holy Gorilla in the Room Batman!

 

[Kingster]

Indeed, it is such a mystery. One does wonder how Kareem and a young Magic ever got along. Or how Shaq and a young Kobe could coexist. Or Duncan/Admiral could win titles with the likes of Avery Johnson and a young Tony Parker at the PG. Friggin miracles all. How oh how did those great Knicks teams survive with Ewing and the guards who couldn't shoot straight. How did Mark Jackson ever work with great bigs at all? Just mysteries. Profound ones even. Probably just luck. Could never be repeated obviously.

Magic had a jump shot. And yes, it wasn't all that good when he came into the league. But you know what? IT IMPROVED. And you know what else? Every_Single_Year he got better. He added to his game. And you know what else? He had pg skills. Kobe? Kobe? Please. It's too early in the morning for that absurdity.

How does this roll off the tongue: Magic Johnson, Tony Parker, Avery Johnson, Mark Jackson, and,, daa,daa.................Tyreke Evans. That's a very good laugh.

 

[Bricklayer]

Magic had a jump shot. And yes, it wasn't all that good when he came into the league. But you know what? IT IMPROVED. And you know what else? Every_Single_Year he got better. He added to his game. And you know what else? He had pg skills. Kobe? Kobe? Please. It's too early in the morning for that absurdity.

How does this roll off the tongue: Magic Johnson, Tony Parker, Avery Johnson, Mark Jackson, and,, daa,daa.................Tyreke Evans. That's a very good laugh.

Only because you're not a very good judge of basketball talent. He's the second most formidable talent on that list.

And regardless of whether the jumpers of some of those players improved, the clear point was that WHILE THEIR JUMPERS STILL SUCKED, their teams won champsionships. And they won more after they got them. But poor jumpers didn't hold back their early title runs precisely because having a good jumper is NOT an insurmoutable problem for your team. Especially not when you can do other things at an elite level. There is an entire universe out there of poor jumpshooting roleplayers, PGs, and even All Stars (hey let's get Rondo right) who have been on extremely successful teams.

If Tyreke never develops a jumper it just means he will never be a 25ppg scorer, never be a superstar. It does not in any way mean he can't a very good player on a very good team.