Six and seven games in, respectively, this is currently looking like the rare trade that made both teams worse. I still think, if Evans lives up to his potential, that New Orleans absolutely fleeced us in that trade but, given his injury risk, you can definitely smell a lot of "if" in that statement. Evans has the potential to be an A/A- level player, but if he can't get on the court, it's Grant Hill and Brandon Roy all over again.
Much as I prefer Evans, and players who play like Evans, to anyone we currently have on this team (aside from Cousins), it's probably better, in the long run, to have a C+/B- player, whom you know is good for 75 games, than an A- player who's only good for half that many. The highs aren't as high (I'd bet you lunch at your favorite dining establishment that MacLemore won't have two stretches in his rookie contract as good as the 36 games Evans had from 11/7/09 - 1/29/10, and I'd bet a month's pay that Vasquez won't have one in his entire career), but the lows aren't as low, and there's none of the "what if" heartache.
Glenn
Hall of Famer
I just sprayed my drink across my keyboard. It's true!!!!! I like the rest of the post also.
Padrino
All-Star
ordinarily, you're the fount of eternal patience around here, which is why i'm surprised that you'd even bother entertaining an argument so invested in the shortest of short terms. it's a pretty vacant gesture since "at this moment" means next to nothing to either the kings or the pelicans right now, particularly when we're not even certain that greivis vasquez will be here next season. and the fact that "vasquez is playing" is of very little consolation to me, given how atrocious he's been on the defensive side of the ball. that said, if we want to get pedantic about the shortest of short terms, it doesn't mean anything to say "we got the best deal" when the kings are actually a game back in the standings from where they stood at this point last season, and it won't mean anything until draft day 2014, when any additional losses will have significant value to this team...
to me, early declarations about this particular subject are just the empty courtesy of a pat on the head for those that spent the better part of four years trashing tyreke evans at every turn, impatiently waiting for the kings to trade him. but the jury is definitely still out on what that trade will mean for the kings in the future, which is where our gaze should be calibrated. if evans' ankles represent the kind of chronic injury problem that keeps him from playing more than 50 games in each of the next few seasons, the kings will have dodged a bullet. there's no doubt about that. if tyreke evans becomes an important cog of a pelicans squad that is likely playoff-bound in the next few seasons behind the monstrosity that is anthony davis, then good for him, and bummer for the kings if they aren't yet playoff bound themselves. but then again, if the kings lose enough games this season to draft parker or wiggins or smart, then good for them, and evans' sign-and-trade served its purpose. so many "ifs"; far too many to make any immediate judgment about whether or not "we got the best deal" for tyreke evans...
Whoa, dude. You're reading way too much into my comment. Quit trying to read hidden meaning where none was intended.
Basically, on any given day a player who is physically able to play is more valuable than one who isn't. That's all I meant.
Kingsfan23
All-Star
This trade can be analyzed several different ways.. Certainly we got a former #2 who is just 22 for a role player, and certainly we now clearly going with youth (despite the Landry signing) as of right now. To me, though, IMHO it is a clear signal that the FO is down with the tank. To hell with trying to make incremental improvements from last year, Luc was plain and simple causing us to be competitive at a time when the FO understands we shouldn't be (without looking I think we were ~.500 with him starting, including battling the Clips to the buzzer). We're sitting with the 4th worst record in the league, and we aren't looking to the playoffs, do we need anyone slowing down Chris Paul and Marc Gasol? With that said, Utah and Milwaukee are both going to be thorn in the side record-wise with this objective. Milwaukee is terrible, at a time when they need an arena push, the only saving grace for us is that they are in a much less competitive Eastern Conference. Utah at 2-14 actually has pieces, they IMO have just played a tough schedule so far.
C
Cold
Guest
Landry even if healthy is not going to rush back. They're gonna tell him to take his sweet ass time. Vivek is a business man with vision. I find it extremely hard to believe a guy like Vivek isn't going to do whatever it takes to land one of Wiggins, Parker, Randle.
Kingsfan23
All-Star
Trey Burke is balling, and this might help push us square into the Wiggins running. We are only competing with Utah in the West, and Utah has enough young talent to possibly edge us.. In the East, it doesn't matter if we are slightly better than the Bucks or whoever, they play a much easier schedule
What? Would you parse this statement, please? Because there's no way in hell that a team that plays four games each against the Bobcats, Celtics, Pistons and Raptors has a tougher schedule than we do.
Kingsfan23
All-Star
Lol, yeah I think I corrected that as you were replying. My mind was thinking that it was going to be 'tougher' for those East Conference scrub teams to not win more games than us over the long haul due to the weak Eastern Conference schedule. So I meant the Bucks etc. have a much easier schedule
Similar threads
- Locked
- Poll
