The Case for Evans at #4

[Kingster]

There isn't a more athletic player in the draft. Speed, jumping, quickness, fluidity, and the length of a 7 footer.

Evans is the perfect complement for this team - athletic on a relatively unathletic team, good defender on a lousy defensive team, great finisher on a team that can't finish. Evans would prosper immediately because he will be playing with four other players that can spread the floor. That gives him space for driving the ball. Good luck stopping him.

The knock on Evan, of course, is his shooting. To me, it all comes down to work ethic with Evans. Reynolds is right - you have to need to be great, not want to be great. If Evans has the passion, I'd pick him and then break down his shooting stroke on DAY 1, a la Tony Parker. If he has the passion to develop a good outside shot, he could be not just very good, but great.

 

[nbrans]

Well, first of all, there are more athletic players in the draft, including DeRozan, Griffin, Teague, Terrence Williams, etc.

But the thing about Evans is that he's the type of player you can get away wtih playing the point in college because the opposing defenders aren't great. He's not an NBA point gurad. Everyone trots out a 6'5"+ guy who has a decent handle and tries to pass him off as a point guard and it never works, whether that's John Salmons, Mardy Collins, Jamal Crawford, or whoever else.

He's a SG who can't shoot. He's got potential and in a scrappy game he might be able to get his points, but I think he's way more Jamal Crawford to ever work as a PG. And taking a SG with the #4 pick is pointless. We already have a PG who's going to get 37+ minutes a night, and Evans can't slide to SF. 11 minutes or less for the backup SG. That's a wasted lotto pick.

 

[vikinginferno]

I think Evans would be a good fit for our team. The great shooting of KMart plus others on the team at a few different positions lessens the need for a great shooting point guard. He may be able to develop that shot also. Even if he doesn't his defense and slashing ability would be great for our team.

 

[ElRey]

Well, first of all, there are more athletic players in the draft, including DeRozan, Griffin, Teague, Terrence Williams, etc.

But the thing about Evans is that he's the type of player you can get away wtih playing the point in college because the opposing defenders aren't great. He's not an NBA point gurad. Everyone trots out a 6'5"+ guy who has a decent handle and tries to pass him off as a point guard and it never works, whether that's John Salmons, Mardy Collins, Jamal Crawford, or whoever else.

He's a SG who can't shoot. He's got potential and in a scrappy game he might be able to get his points, but I think he's way more Jamal Crawford to ever work as a PG. And taking a SG with the #4 pick is pointless. We already have a PG who's going to get 37+ minutes a night, and Evans can't slide to SF. 11 minutes or less for the backup SG. That's a wasted lotto pick.

Evans does have some good point guard skills...He used to play PG in high school and then also for Memphis in the latter part of the season. in particular he has got excellent handles and can break down people. He's the type of player that can slide to 1, 2, and 3 position. He's like 6'6 you know. In regards to his passing, I can't make an assessment because I haven't seen him play in enough games. I would say that would be what could hold him back from being an awesome pg. Check out his battle with Derrick Rose in High School game here (Juking Derrick Rose is not easy you know)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SrF0oE94yIg


btw how do you insert a video in a post like some you guys do here?????

 

[ElRey]

I think Evans would be a good fit for our team. The great shooting of KMart plus others on the team at a few different positions lessens the need for a great shooting point guard. He may be able to develop that shot also. Even if he doesn't his defense and slashing ability would be great for our team.

I think where Evans goes in this draft will depend on his workouts. He can go anywhere from #4 to late lottery. I think Petrie makes his picks largely on individual workouts and also group workouts where he makes the prospect go against each other. That's how he ended up picking up Jason Williams, who wasn't really anyone until he went through the workout circuit and was killing anyone they matched up against him.

 

[bigbadred00]

There isn't a more athletic player in the draft. Speed, jumping, quickness, fluidity, and the length of a 7 footer.

Evans is the perfect complement for this team - athletic on a relatively unathletic team, good defender on a lousy defensive team, great finisher on a team that can't finish. Evans would prosper immediately because he will be playing with four other players that can spread the floor. That gives him space for driving the ball. Good luck stopping him.

The knock on Evan, of course, is his shooting. To me, it all comes down to work ethic with Evans. Reynolds is right - you have to need to be great, not want to be great. If Evans has the passion, I'd pick him and then break down his shooting stroke on DAY 1, a la Tony Parker. If he has the passion to develop a good outside shot, he could be not just very good, but great.

You don't draft a guy at #4 in the draft to be a perfect compliment, you draft 1 to be a near star level not a complimentary piece. That's what our 2nd pick is for and our 3rd pick. His D really isn't that great considering his length. His handle is also overrated, he averaged about as many assists as he did TOs.

 

[Kingster]

Well, first of all, there are more athletic players in the draft, including DeRozan, Griffin, Teague, Terrence Williams, etc.

But the thing about Evans is that he's the type of player you can get away wtih playing the point in college because the opposing defenders aren't great. He's not an NBA point gurad. Everyone trots out a 6'5"+ guy who has a decent handle and tries to pass him off as a point guard and it never works, whether that's John Salmons, Mardy Collins, Jamal Crawford, or whoever else.

He's a SG who can't shoot. He's got potential and in a scrappy game he might be able to get his points, but I think he's way more Jamal Crawford to ever work as a PG. And taking a SG with the #4 pick is pointless. We already have a PG who's going to get 37+ minutes a night, and Evans can't slide to SF. 11 minutes or less for the backup SG. That's a wasted lotto pick.

With respect to those players that you mentioned - absolutely not. The only players that can come close athletically to Evans are Teague and Griffin. Coordination and fluidity are key athletic characteristics in basketball and Evans has got those in buckets. When you factor that in, along with his length, he's got the best length/atheticism coefficient than any of those you mentioned, again maybe with the exception of Teague, and maybe Griffin, who falls waay short in the fluidity category. (Evans is going to be longer than Griffin) We can debate the pg/shooting guard thing till the cows home, but I think he's got pg skills, and morever, I absolutely do not think we need the classic creator type pg on this team that many want. We have a center and power forward that are excellent passers, and that allows for us to have less of a true creator than we would otherwise. The old Kings team was a perfect example - Bibby certainly wasn't exactly Chris Paul when it came to being a creator.

If it makes you feel any better, I'd be happy with Teague, that is if he passes the passion test and the coachability test, but I think his stock has fallen for reasons beyond his athletic ability (just a hunch). And of course, you have the same debate about Teague - he's not a "true" pg. If Rubio isn't there, and he probably won't be, then you're basically left with Evans and Hardin, maybe DeRozan. They all have deficiences and risks, but in terms of complementing the team we have, Evans is the best pick imo.

 

[Arby's Roast Beef]

He's interesting, but I don't think he's worth #4--he's a fairly athletic stat stuffer who aggressively asserts himself into the game (he's very, very ball dominant), but it comes at the expense of turnovers, terrible shot selection and what I think is a lack of shooting range. The last aspect should improve, but the other two are probably firmly entrenched into his ball-dominant game. He's NBA-ready in that he can rely on his scoring early to make an impact and has some passing ability and defensive chops, but he's also the type who can infuriate coaches and his teammates with his horrible decision making, general ball dominance and very questionable shot selection. He's clearly very talented, but suffers from too many bad habits I doubt he'll get out of; I do like the potential that comes with his athleticism, scoring and defense combination, so I'm not ruling him completely out as the 4th pick, but there's just too many red flags here.

 

[Hallama]

he's very, very ball dominant

This is a very important point with Evans - he needs the ball and he needs to pound it for him to be effective - which in turn is the least effective way to run an offense.

 

[beb0p]

Drafting Evans is kind of like bringing back John Salmons to play PG. I guess it does ensure we get another crack at #1 next year.

 

[nbrans]

With respect to those players that you mentioned - absolutely not. The only players that can come close athletically to Evans are Teague and Griffin. Coordination and fluidity are key athletic characteristics in basketball and Evans has got those in buckets. When you factor that in, along with his length, he's got the best length/atheticism coefficient than any of those you mentioned, again maybe with the exception of Teague, and maybe Griffin, who falls waay short in the fluidity category. (Evans is going to be longer than Griffin) We can debate the pg/shooting guard thing till the cows home, but I think he's got pg skills, and morever, I absolutely do not think we need the classic creator type pg on this team that many want. We have a center and power forward that are excellent passers, and that allows for us to have less of a true creator than we would otherwise. The old Kings team was a perfect example - Bibby certainly wasn't exactly Chris Paul when it came to being a creator.

If it makes you feel any better, I'd be happy with Teague, that is if he passes the passion test and the coachability test, but I think his stock has fallen for reasons beyond his athletic ability (just a hunch). And of course, you have the same debate about Teague - he's not a "true" pg. If Rubio isn't there, and he probably won't be, then you're basically left with Evans and Hardin, maybe DeRozan. They all have deficiences and risks, but in terms of complementing the team we have, Evans is the best pick imo.

I just think there's a difference between having some PG skills, in the way that Salmons, Cisco, Crawford, Collins, Artest, etc., have some PG skills, and being an actually capable 6'5"+ point guard. And I don't just mean the distinction between being a "true" point guard vs. a scoring point guard, I mean simply having the quickness and dribbling ability to bring the ball up against Chris Paul and guarding PGs on the other end.

Sure, all of those guys I named can bring the ball up the floor against guys their own size. But against a quick PG? No way.

Evans is athletic, but he's not a freak of an athlete. He's way more crafty than he is explosive. His game is actually a whole lot like John Salmons', even if he has more potential. He can put his head down and use crafty moves to get to the rim, but he's weak from outside and his passing is iffy. He needs to pound the ball, and he really only thrived in scrappy, disjointed situations.

Long term I can't see Evans as anything more than a SG. He would be the perfect SG to pair alongside a scoring point like Gilbert Arenas because he can bring the ball up against other SGs and distribute, but I have an extremely hard time seeing how an Evans/Martin backcourt could ever work.

 

[Kingster]

I just think there's a difference between having some PG skills, in the way that Salmons, Cisco, Crawford, Collins, Artest, etc., have some PG skills, and being an actually capable 6'5"+ point guard. And I don't just mean the distinction between being a "true" point guard vs. a scoring point guard, I mean simply having the quickness and dribbling ability to bring the ball up against Chris Paul and guarding PGs on the other end.

Sure, all of those guys I named can bring the ball up the floor against guys their own size. But against a quick PG? No way.

Evans is athletic, but he's not a freak of an athlete. He's way more crafty than he is explosive. His game is actually a whole lot like John Salmons', even if he has more potential. He can put his head down and use crafty moves to get to the rim, but he's weak from outside and his passing is iffy. He needs to pound the ball, and he really only thrived in scrappy, disjointed situations.

Long term I can't see Evans as anything more than a SG. He would be the perfect SG to pair alongside a scoring point like Gilbert Arenas because he can bring the ball up against other SGs and distribute, but I have an extremely hard time seeing how an Evans/Martin backcourt could ever work.

I'm not going to say you're wrong, because I will be the first to say that he has risks. The lowest risk (but not necessarily highest potential) guy is gone in Griffin. As for the Evans/Martin backcourt, defensively it would be fantastic because you wouldn't have to switch. That means Martin wouldn't repeatedly get "stuck" on picks. I just see Evans differently when it comes to bringing the ball up the floor. He's an excellent ball handler; I just don't see that as a problem. And offensively, with Martin behind the three point line, Noc behind the 3 point line, Hawes and Thompson about 18 ft out, that gives Evans considerable space to operate driving to the basket. If Evans isn't the guy, then I guess Hardin would be, because they don't like Jennings or DeRozan and it's highly probable that Rubio is gone.

 

[FakeInjury]

Evans gets the nod, from me. But, Petrie is going to pick the player who cares the least about endorsements, and Evans is probably going to end up in a major market.

 

[Dime Dropper]

Evans gets the nod, from me. But, Petrie is going to pick the player who cares the least about endorsements, and Evans is probably going to end up in a major market.

Oh yeah, Petrie really hates those endorsements.


I like Evans, but his IQ seems low, and he dribbles too much and takes too many bad shots. On the flip side, he has great physical tools, good handles, good passer, and scorer.

It's just about whether he can start moving the offense, not stagnate it. It seems to be just dribble, dribble, dribble with him.

 

[Kingster]

You don't draft a guy at #4 in the draft to be a perfect compliment, you draft 1 to be a near star level not a complimentary piece. That's what our 2nd pick is for and our 3rd pick. His D really isn't that great considering his length. His handle is also overrated, he averaged about as many assists as he did TOs.

Look, there are several guys that will be available that are relatively equal in their value. If you don't believe that, just read this board and you will see the disagreement among the posters on these guys - Harden, Jennings, Evans, etc. So, in a situation like that you do weigh whether the guy is complementary to your team. It's only if you have someone that is head and shoulders above the bunch that you don't.

 

[hammystyle]

I agree mostly with Nbrans. I saw him numerous times during the season and his athleticism did not stand out to me at all. It seems like has quick feet for defense and driving, but not necessarily big ups or blinding foot speed. Kind of like Artest.

He is also in NO WAY a PG. Memphis just didn't have anyone else who could handle the ball as well.

He's a really interesting prospect just because he has such clear strengths and weaknesses and if you watch him a couple times they are plain to see. Strengths: One of a kind wing span, great feet, big strong frame, great ball handler and driver. Weaknesses: Bad decision maker, bad shot.

 

[bigbadred00]

Look, there are several guys that will be available that are relatively equal in their value. If you don't believe that, just read this board and you will see the disagreement among the posters on these guys - Harden, Jennings, Evans, etc. So, in a situation like that you do weigh whether the guy is complementary to your team. It's only if you have someone that is head and shoulders above the bunch that you don't.

I guess maybe I don't understand your definition of complimentary. I understand the value after the top 2 and maybe Thabeet is pretty equal. What do you think Evans will become? Do you have a comparison for him? Personally no matter who we are drafting, we should be looking for a guy with a chance to become a great player especially when you are drafting this high. If all Evans is going to become is a good complimentary role player, no thanks. I still feel that Evans has the most chance to be a bust of any player in the lottery. He has a very low basketball IQ and low IQ in general. And I understand that Martin can shoot but in the NBA it is a huge liability when a 2/3 can't shoot.

And as others have mentioned, in Memphis the only reason he ran point is everyone else did such a terrible job at it and he was by far their best athlete. It doesn't mean the pros he should even consider running point.

 

[Kingster]

I guess maybe I don't understand your definition of complimentary. I understand the value after the top 2 and maybe Thabeet is pretty equal. What do you think Evans will become? Do you have a comparison for him? Personally no matter who we are drafting, we should be looking for a guy with a chance to become a great player especially when you are drafting this high. If all Evans is going to become is a good complimentary role player, no thanks. I still feel that Evans has the most chance to be a bust of any player in the lottery. He has a very low basketball IQ and low IQ in general. And I understand that Martin can shoot but in the NBA it is a huge liability when a 2/3 can't shoot.

And as others have mentioned, in Memphis the only reason he ran point is everyone else did such a terrible job at it and he was by far their best athlete. It doesn't mean the pros he should even consider running point.

Regarding complementary, read the first post. We need physicallity, athleticism, defense and finishers on this team. Evans provides those qualities. What we have in abundance are outside shooters. So, the fact that Evans doesn't have an outside shot to speak of yet, doesn't bother me nearly as much as if we had team of athletes who couldn't shoot.

Thanks for substantiating that he is a great athlete. If you're the best athlete on Memphis, you're pretty darned athletic.

 

[bigbadred00]

Regarding complementary, read the first post. We need physicallity, athleticism, defense and finishers on this team. Evans provides those qualities. What we have in abundance are outside shooters. So, the fact that Evans doesn't have an outside shot to speak of yet, doesn't bother me nearly as much as if we had team of athletes who couldn't shoot.

Thanks for substantiating that he is a great athlete. If you're the best athlete on Memphis, you're pretty darned athletic.

Memphis wasn't really that stacked this year. Last year it might be saying something with CDR and Rose on the team. This year with Dozier and Taggart it really doesn't say much. They were an overrated team the 2nd half of the season.

 

[Kingster]

Yep. I guess he is pretty athletic. And with a jump shot could be great.

 

[VF21]

So basically this is an "I told you so"?

Since Evans is the topic of about a gabillion other threads, I'm just gonna close this one.