Tyreke Evans Contingency Plan

[twslam07]

First off, I want to say that I am a huge fan of Evans. I think he has all the tools to be a star in this league. I think he has been a victim of our system and thus has not been able to improve at the rate we would have liked him to. I definitely think that the first half of this season is make or break for him. If he hasn't shown enough improvement to deserve a max contract, I think it would be in the best interest of the team to trade him before the trade deadline to get something in return.

With that being said, this is my proposed trade:

Kings Give:
Tyreke Evans
Marcus Thornton
Thomas Robinson

Kings Get:
James Harden
Al Horford
Perry Jones III

Thunder Give:
James Harden
Perry Jones III

Thunder Get:
Marcus Thornton
Thomas Robinson

Hawks Give:
Al Horford

Hawks Get:
Tyreke Evans

Why the Thunder do this trade
It has been known for awhile that the Thunder were going to have trouble keeping both Harden and Ibaka next offseason. It seems that the Thunder have made their decision by extending Ibaka which makes Harden the odd man out. Thornton will have a much more affordable contract than Harden which will allow them to focus more dollars towards their other contracts. Thornton can come off the bench just like Harden did and add that scoring punch. They also give up Jones who is a very good prospect but he plays the same position as Durant. He won't get very much playing time so he wont be as valuable as he could be on another team. They also get Robinson to sweeten the deal. A big man rotation of Ibaka, Perkins, Robinson, and Collison will be very physical, energetic, and defensive. Robinson will fit in nicely and give them a talented 3rd big off the bench. After this trade, their rotation would look like this:

Westbrook/Maynor/Jackson
Sefolosha/Thornton/Cook
Durant/Hayward/Liggins
Ibaka/Robinson/Collison
Perkins/Aldrich/Orton/Thabeet

Why the Hawks do this trade
After the failed Joe Johnson era, the Hawks are looking to rebuild and find that star player that will carry them to the promise land. Horford is a good big man but he is no star player. Evans can be that player. Like I said earlier, I believe Evans has all the tools to be a star in this league, but sometimes a change of scenery is what is needed to reach your potential. The Hawks might be willing to invest in Evans. Their team has some decent players already so it is likely that they wont be drafting early in the lottery to get that star player so they have to rely on trades and free agency. If they do this trade, their total salaries next offseason will be 1 million. That's right. 1 million. They will have plenty of salary to work with. This salary cap flexibility can also help Evans reach his potential. They literally can tailor the team around him and bring in players that compliment him perfectly considering they have nobody on their books. After this trade, their rotation would look like this:

Teague/Harris/Williams
Evans/Jenkins/Stevenson
Morrow/Korver/James
Smith/Scott/Tolliver
Pachulia/Johnson/Petro

It's possible that after the offseason the Hawks could have a starting lineup of:

Teague
Evans
D. Wright
Smith
Jefferson

Why the Kings do this trade
Again this is a contingency plan if Evans doesn't work out. I personally believe that Evans could be better than Harden. It's just a question of if he can reach that level. I also like Thornton, but he is not a player you build your team around. He is a good offensive player, but he is not that star player that can beat his man more often than not. He is born to play a sixth man role. His style of play fits it perfectly. What we need though is another star to pair with our superstar, Cousins. That's where Harden comes in. He is already proven that he is a great player in this league. He does everything really well and is a very good team player. He is the type of player that can find his place on any team. Horford would be a great compliment next to Cousins. He is an athletic big man who is good at defending and blocking shots. He is also a good passer which would give us two dynamic big men passers, and when Cousins is on the bench, Horford gives us another viable big man that we can go to in the post. Jones has been playing well so far this preseason. Through 3 games, he is averaging 26.1 mpg, 13.0 ppg (.643, .400, .143), 3.7 rpg, 2.0 apg, 0.7 spg, 0.3 bpg, 0.0 tpg. Small forward has been a problem area to say the least. With the addition of Johnson, it looks like we have solved that problem, but it can't hurt to have Jones as our backup SF. With him and Johnson manning the SF minutes, I don't think SF will be a liability for us. After this trade, our rotation would be:

Thomas (28 min)/Brooks (20 min)/Fredette
Harden (37 min)/Salmons (11 min)/Garcia
Johnson (32 min)/Jones III (12 min)/Outlaw (4 min)/Honeycutt
Horford (30 min)/Thompson (26 min)
Cousins (35 min)/Hayes (5 min)

 

[andjel]

Well thought off the trade. Do not see it happening of course, but still very nice effort

Atlanta will be practically team from last year, awfully thin at the center, with max contract from Reke instead of Johnson (smaller but still large).

Regarding Kings, too many uncertainties about all 3 players they are getting.
How is Horford after injury, how good is rookie PJ (there might be some reason why he surprisingly fell so low).
Not to mention Harden and his value as a starter. It has been discussed in details in other threads, but his shocking drop in efficiency (FG%) in his rare games as a starter is a big red flag for me.

 

[HereWeBoogie]

i doubt that the Kings would EVER give up 3 young talents in a trade like that

 

[DesertFox]

I think it actually makes a lot of sense. Harden can handle more than the 3rd guy status he has now, and Horford isn't quite the #1 option that he has to be in Atlanta. In Sac, they can be a very good 2a/2b to Cuz's #1. Reke and Trob's slight upside advantage is swapped for Harden and Horford's much higher floors, at a cost of Thornton. And to sweeten the pot add a high upside SF.

I would do it only because the team as it is now doesn't quite fit, and although the team loses a little upside, a lot of it was going to be wasted with how the team is currently built.

 

[twslam07]

Well thought off the trade. Do not see it happening of course, but still very nice effort

Atlanta will be practically team from last year, awfully thin at the center, with max contract from Reke instead of Johnson (smaller but still large).

Regarding Kings, too many uncertainties about all 3 players they are getting.
How is Horford after injury, how good is rookie PJ (there might be some reason why he surprisingly fell so low).
Not to mention Harden and his value as a starter. It has been discussed in details in other threads, but his shocking drop in efficiency (FG%) in his rare games as a starter is a big red flag for me.

You said, "I do not see it happening of course." Would you care to explain why you think that? You kind of just threw it out there with no evidence to backup your statement.

I don't see how the Hawks would be practically the same team. They lost Johnson and they would have Evans instead of Horford. Not sure how that justifies as practically the same team. If Evans gets a max contract, it will be almost half the total of Johnson's contract so I don't see your point there.

Horford returned towards the end of the season and put up good numbers. I'm sure with a full offseason to get back into shape he will be good as new.

Jones isn't a huge part of this trade. He would be a backup SF for us. Regardless, he has tons of potential. His athleticism is elite to say the least. It's just up to him to put it together.

I think it is a justified reason to question if Harden will be able to carry over his production to a starter role, but the evidence you use is not close to sufficient. Over the last two seasons Harden has played 144 games total. Seven of those were as a starter. That is not even close to a big enough sample size to consider. Besides his averages aren't even that bad as a starter:

35 mpg .386 fg% .419 3pt% .824 ft% 12.1 ppg 4.6 rpg 4.0 apg 1.0 spg 0.3 bpg 2.0 topg

Compared to his stats as a backup:

26 mpg .446 fg% .369 3pt% .836 ft% 12.7 ppg 3.4 rpg 2.4 apg 1.1 spg 0.3 bpg 1.6 topg

 

[twslam07]

i doubt that the Kings would EVER give up 3 young talents in a trade like that

They give up 3 young talents to get 3 young talents. I don't see your point...

 

[twslam07]

I think it actually makes a lot of sense. Harden can handle more than the 3rd guy status he has now, and Horford isn't quite the #1 option that he has to be in Atlanta. In Sac, they can be a very good 2a/2b to Cuz's #1. Reke and Trob's slight upside advantage is swapped for Harden and Horford's much higher floors, at a cost of Thornton. And to sweeten the pot add a high upside SF.

I would do it only because the team as it is now doesn't quite fit, and although the team loses a little upside, a lot of it was going to be wasted with how the team is currently built.

I agree. We have talent but the type of talent we have doesn't mesh. We really need to make some sort of trade in the near future to get this team headed in the right direction.

 

[baller13]

I would do that trade in a heartbeat. Too bad atlanta never would. Horford has already been an all-star and he is still very young. No way they give up an all star caliber big man for a guard with maybe all star potential.

Might try Evans for harden straight up though if evans doesn't work out this year

 

[twslam07]

I would do that trade in a heartbeat. Too bad atlanta never would. Horford has already been an all-star and he is still very young. No way they give up an all star caliber big man for a guard with maybe all star potential.

Might try Evans for harden straight up though if evans doesn't work out this year

Just because someone makes an all star team doesn't make them more valuable than another player. It's not about all star appearances. I think most would agree that if Evans reaches his potential, he could carry a team. I can't say the same for Horford. Don't get me wrong, Horford can be a great 3rd option and compliment a winning team, but he doesn't have the ability to alter and take over a game like Evans could do. This is the idea behind this trade. Atlanta tried to make a run at the title with players who would be 2nd and 3rd options on championship teams (Johnson, Horford, Smith) and it didn't work. They are in rebuild mode and are searching for that game changing player. Obviously it is risky because Evans hasn't shown much improvement over the years, but it comes down to if Atlanta thinks Evans can reach his potential on their team.

Evans for Harden wouldn't work since they both might be getting max contracts which doesn't solve the Thunder's problem. Also, the Thunder would probably think that is a downgrade anyway.

 

[beb0p]

You said, "I do not see it happening of course." Would you care to explain why you think that? You kind of just threw it out there with no evidence to backup your statement.

There is no way in hell the Hawks trade Horford without getting at least a starter quality big man in return. Their frontline is already small, this trade leaves them with Zaza as their full time center and virtually no adequate backup, yikes!!! The Hawks won't do this trade, but if they do, they will require either JT or TRob in return, for sure. Second, they want guards who can space the floor; just look their guards on that roster.

There is no reason at all for the Thunder to trade Harden and jeopardize their chance at winning a championship. I'm sorry but Thornton doesn't strike me as an adequate replacement for Harden and I doubt the Thunder have much use for a rookie big man, especially with Ibaka and Collison already firmly slotted in the rotation. If they are to trade Harden, it is for a All-Star calibre guy. Thornton and TRob (and even the current Tyreke) isn't on that level.

 

[bajaden]

There are quite a few things wrong with this trade. One is that I can't think of one good reason for the Hawks to make this deal. They have at present, one good big man on their team thats under a long term contract, and thats Horford. I doubt they would like to be left with Petro as their starting center. Secondly, Horford makes 12 mil a year, and Tyreke makes 5 mil a year, and last time I checked, salaries have to match. The Kings aren't far enough under the cap to absorb 7 million dollars. The player the Hawks would be likely to move is Josh Smith, but he's an unrestricted freeagent at years end.

I don't like Perry Jones at all. He spent most of his two years in college doing an imitation of a potted plant. I love Harden, but he's in the same situation as Tyreke with both being restricted freeagents at years end. I'm not about to give up both my SG's on such a risky trade. You want to trade Tyreke and not Thornton, and I'll consider it, but not both. The bottom line though, is that if you go to ESPN trade checker, you'll find that the trade doesn't work salary wise.

 

[Kings Faithful]

What about trying to work a deal for Josh Smith... he said he's going to explore free agency anyways but we could pull a Lakers and get him to commit it might be a good payoff. Huge risk though, I wouldn't do it if he is unwilling to sign with us obviously.

 

[andjel]

You said, "I do not see it happening of course." Would you care to explain why you think that? You kind of just threw it out there with no evidence to backup your statement.

If I put no evidence, what were you discussing after this ;-) Just because they are not good for you does not mean they are not good for me.

There are actually 2 trades you proposed here not one. Getting one to happen is miracle, getting 2 is practically impossible.
That aside...

Atlanta: Last year JJ+JSmith+no center, after this trade TE+JSmith+no center. If counting on improving their team, they better keep good big man and shop for SG. Much cheaper.

I agree that 5% of games is a small sample, but FG% discrepancy is huge. We are not talking about percent or two. It has risk written all over it.
MT has shown he can be starter, Harden did not.
Combine risk with TRobb>Jones and the fact that this trade is not related with Reke's (which is title of this thread), I do not see why would we do it.

 

[twslam07]

There is no way in hell the Hawks trade Horford without getting at least a starter quality big man in return. Their frontline is already small, this trade leaves them with Zaza as their full time center and virtually no adequate backup, yikes!!! The Hawks won't do this trade, but if they do, they will require either JT or TRob in return, for sure. Second, they want guards who can space the floor; just look their guards on that roster.

It's not about the Hawks competing this year. They couldn't win a championship with Johnson, Smith, and Horford as their "big 3" so what makes you think they have a chance with just Smith and Horford? They are in rebuild mode. They will have 1 million in guaranteed salaries next offseason if they do this trade. They basically get to start from scratch and with that much cap room, they can make a speedy recovery. If they can't field a very competitive team this year so be it. They will get an earlier lottery pick to help build towards the future. If the Hawks are able to extend Teague and Evans, resign L. Williams, J. Smith, and Pachulia, sign A. Jefferson,D. Wright, C. Brewer, and draft a solid lottery player, they could have a very formidable lineup:

Teague/Williams
Evans/Jenkins
Wright/Brewer
Smith/Lottery Player
Jefferson/Pachulia

Obviously, the probability is that the Hawks wont go after every player I just mentioned, but it's just an example of what they can do.

In reference to your second point that the Hawks want guards who can space the floor. I don't see your point. They have Teague, Harris, Williams, Jenkins, and Morrow who are all very good 3pt shooters. They don't need more outside shooting. What they need is someone who can break down the defense and get those 3pt shooters open looks.

There is no reason at all for the Thunder to trade Harden and jeopardize their chance at winning a championship. I'm sorry but Thornton doesn't strike me as an adequate replacement for Harden and I doubt the Thunder have much use for a rookie big man, especially with Ibaka and Collison already firmly slotted in the rotation. If they are to trade Harden, it is for a All-Star calibre guy. Thornton and TRob (and even the current Tyreke) isn't on that level.

Completely disagree here. They can try and go after a championship one more year with the same group, but after the year it doesn't look like they will be able to resign Harden which means they would get nothing in return for him. Thornton allows them to keep that valuable sixth man at a price they can afford. Many on this forum agree that Thornton was made to play sixth man. He definitely can be a sixth man of the year candidate.

The Thunder don't have much use for a rookie big man drafted in the top 5? I'm pretty sure any team would be more than happy to have that level of talent on their team. I don't see how having Robinson and Collison to go to off the bench is a bad thing. If anything it helps them right now with different matchups, and it's possible that Robinson can outperform Collison this year and take over as the 3rd big. If it turns out Robinson isn't ready, then they further solidify their big man rotation in the future in a very cost efficient way.

 

[twslam07]

There are quite a few things wrong with this trade. One is that I can't think of one good reason for the Hawks to make this deal. They have at present, one good big man on their team thats under a long term contract, and thats Horford. I doubt they would like to be left with Petro as their starting center. Secondly, Horford makes 12 mil a year, and Tyreke makes 5 mil a year, and last time I checked, salaries have to match. The Kings aren't far enough under the cap to absorb 7 million dollars. The player the Hawks would be likely to move is Josh Smith, but he's an unrestricted freeagent at years end.

I don't like Perry Jones at all. He spent most of his two years in college doing an imitation of a potted plant. I love Harden, but he's in the same situation as Tyreke with both being restricted freeagents at years end. I'm not about to give up both my SG's on such a risky trade. You want to trade Tyreke and not Thornton, and I'll consider it, but not both. The bottom line though, is that if you go to ESPN trade checker, you'll find that the trade doesn't work salary wise.

As I mentioned in my reply to beb0p, this trade is not about making them a contender this season. They are not going to be nearly as successful as they have been in past years, considering their best scoring option is in Brooklyn. This trade is about the future.

Last time I checked, this was a 3 team trade. The kings would have 18.8 mil in salaries coming in and 16.25 mi in salaries going out. You are correct that the trade does not work on nba trade checker, but you are incorrect in thinking the problem is with the Hawk's and King's side. The problem with the trade is the Thunder bringing in 11 mil and only shipping out 6.8 mil. This can easily be solved by including a fill in player (Cook or Aldrich would work). This player could be sent to the Hawks or Kings and the trade would still work.

When I think of Harden, I think of a safe, smart, and consistent player. I don't see how investing in a SG like that would be very risky. The only risk that comes with Harden is do you think he can be just as good as a starter. I personally think he will be especially since he will be the 2nd option to Cousins. Trades are risky. I don't see how this trade is any more risky than the next. It is the classic trade of production (Harden) for potential (Evans) and guard (Thornton) for big man (Horford).

 

[twslam07]

What about trying to work a deal for Josh Smith... he said he's going to explore free agency anyways but we could pull a Lakers and get him to commit it might be a good payoff. Huge risk though, I wouldn't do it if he is unwilling to sign with us obviously.

If we could get him to resign with us, I think he could be a great fit. Super athletic, great rebounder, great defender, great rim protector. The only negative would be that both our 4 (Smith) and 5 (Cousins) would be taking 3pts when they can easily score in the paint.

You're right though. It would be a huge risk, especially since we aren't the most attractive city to play for.....yet

 

[beb0p]

They are in rebuild mode. They will have 1 million in guaranteed salaries next offseason if they do this trade. They basically get to start from scratch and with that much cap room, they can make a speedy recovery.

You're just making trades for the sake of making trades. The Hawks already have over $40 millions in cap room next summer. What's the point of trading Horford for even more cap room? Plus, you don't trade big for small, and you don't trade a talented big man that you've locked up for a guard with an ending contract. What if Tyreke packs up and leave Atlanta leaving the Hawks with nothing? Have you thought about that?

In reference to your second point that the Hawks want guards who can space the floor. I don't see your point. They have Teague, Harris, Williams, Jenkins, and Morrow who are all very good 3pt shooters. They don't need more outside shooting. What they need is someone who can break down the defense and get those 3pt shooters open looks.

The Hawks are going to play insider-out. They want Smith and Horford to score inside and they want guards who can spread the floor. That's their offense. Tyreke just doesn't fit, he's not an inside-out player. The Hawks will have to revamp their offense to fit him in. Do they want to do that?

Completely disagree here. They can try and go after a championship one more year with the same group, but after the year it doesn't look like they will be able to resign Harden which means they would get nothing in return for him after he returns. Thornton allows them to keep that valuable sixth man at a price they can afford. Many on this forum agree that Thornton was made to play sixth man. He definitely can be a sixth man of the year candidate.

Thornton doesn't fit the Thunder. They use Harden to run pick and rolls, as a secondary PG next to Westbrook, and as a guy comfortable as the 3rd option. Thornton can't do any of that. You're asking a born gunner to come in and be a playmaker who only takes shots within an offense; that's not going to happen. At worse, Thornton will fight for shots with Durrant and Westbrook; at best he is one-dimensional guy who can spread the floor. The Thunder would use Maynor over Thornton, cuz Maynor is much closer to Harden than Thornton is.

The Thunder don't have much use for a rookie big man drafted in the top 5? I'm pretty sure any team would be more than happy to have that level of talent on their team. I don't see how having Robinson and Collison to go to off the bench is a bad thing. If anything it helps them right now with different matchups, and it's possible that Robinson can outperform Collison this year and take over as the 3rd big. If it turns out Robinson isn't ready, then they further solidify their big man rotation in the future in a very cost efficient way.

You don't remember the Gerald Wallace era do you? Or the fact that the Thunder has their own lottery pick big man (Aldrich) who's also languishing on the bench. No, championship contender teams generally don't have the patience to live thru rookie mistakes (with a few exception). And even if TRob beat out Collison, that makes him what?.... the backup PF?.... for as long as Ibaka is in Oaklahoma? So basically the Thunder gave up a star in the making for a sixth man and a backup PF. Yeah.

 

[bajaden]

As I mentioned in my reply to beb0p, this trade is not about making them a contender this season. They are not going to be nearly as successful as they have been in past years, considering their best scoring option is in Brooklyn. This trade is about the future.

Last time I checked, this was a 3 team trade. The kings would have 18.8 mil in salaries coming in and 16.25 mi in salaries going out. You are correct that the trade does not work on nba trade checker, but you are incorrect in thinking the problem is with the Hawk's and King's side. The problem with the trade is the Thunder bringing in 11 mil and only shipping out 6.8 mil. This can easily be solved by including a fill in player (Cook or Aldrich would work). This player could be sent to the Hawks or Kings and the trade would still work.

When I think of Harden, I think of a safe, smart, and consistent player. I don't see how investing in a SG like that would be very risky. The only risk that comes with Thornton is do you think he can be just as good as a starter. I personally think he will be especially since he will be the 2nd option to Cousins. Trades are risky. I don't see how this trade is any more risky than the next. It is the classic trade of production (Harden) for potential (Evans) and guard (Thornton) for big man (Horford).

Pretense is not intelligence. I have no further desire to waste my time on someone preaching nonsense. Adios!

 

[twslam07]

If I put no evidence, what were you discussing after this ;-) Just because they are not good for you does not mean they are not good for me.

There are actually 2 trades you proposed here not one. Getting one to happen is miracle, getting 2 is practically impossible.
That aside...

Atlanta: Last year JJ+JSmith+no center, after this trade TE+JSmith+no center. If counting on improving their team, they better keep good big man and shop for SG. Much cheaper.

I agree that 5% of games is a small sample, but FG% discrepancy is huge. We are not talking about percent or two. It has risk written all over it.
MT has shown he can be starter, Harden did not.
Combine risk with TRobb>Jones and the fact that this trade is not related with Reke's (which is title of this thread), I do not see why would we do it.

These two trades rely on each other. I wouldn't bring Harden here if Evans was still around. Why would we want to continue our successful philosophy (sarcasm) of having two of our 3 best players share the same position? I wouldn't trade Evans for Horford because it lead to Thornton starting for us. He is made to be a sixth man. His tools fit it perfectly. He can be a starting SG, but I don't think he can be a starting SG on a contender.

As I have mentioned multiple times in my most recent posts, this trade is not about improving their team this season it is about improving their team next season. I'm not sure keeping a good big man who gets paid 12 mil a year versus extending a good SG is cheaper. Besides the SG unrestricted free agents are not as attractive as the big man unrestricted free agents for this coming offseason.

SG
Ginobli
K. Martin
Foye
T. Allen
Reddick
B. Rush

PF/C
Howard
Bynum
A. Jefferson
J. Smith
Milsap
West
Brand
Kaman
Dalembert
Odom
Jamison
Hickson

I think with the cap space the Hawks are going to have, it would be wise to get a great SG talent and go after some bigs in free agency.

You say the FG% discrepancy is huge, but it is not even close to being big enough to make it statistically significant given the sample sizes. For the hell of it, I ran a two sample proportion test to see if it was remotely significant. The results were laughable. For those of you who have any statistics knowledge, the p-value was 0.75. It needs to be 0.05 or below to prove there is a statistical difference between the two samples (the sample of his games as a starter and the sample of his games as a sub). Bottom line, you can't justify your argument off this seven game stretch.

This trade is not related to Evans? He is in the 3 team deal and as I explained earlier, both trades rely on each other (in my way of thinking) so they have to be done simultaneously.

Again, this is only if Evans doesn't work out for us. If he does great! I would be ecstatic, but this is my idea of a backup plan.

 

[twslam07]

You're just making trades for the sake of making trades. The Hawks already have over $40 millions in cap room next summer. What's the point of trading Horford for even more cap room? Plus, you don't trade big for small, and you don't trade a talented big man that you've locked up for a guard with an ending contract. What if Tyreke packs up and leave Atlanta leaving the Hawks with nothing? Have you thought about that?

How is this making trades for the sake of trades? We finally clear up our log jam at SG, we get a SG who has shown he can be a great player in this league, and we get an athletic big man who is a good defender, shotblocker, rebounder, passer, and post player.

The point is not trading Horford for more cap room. It is trading Horford for a SG who can be an elite player in this league. The unrestricted free agents at SG are not nearly as good as the unrestricted free agents at PF/C next year. They could go with Evans, Smith, Jefferson or they could go with K. Martin, Smith, Horford. Personally, I would like to build around the first three.

The Hawks are going to play insider-out. They want Smith and Horford to score inside and they want guards who can spread the floor. That's their offense. Tyreke just doesn't fit, he's not an inside-out player. The Hawks will have to revamp their offense to fit him in. Do they want to do that?

They have more than enough shooting already. This season it would be Teague, Morrow, and J. Smith around Evans. Teague and Morrow are both good 3pt shooters and Smith is a very good outside shooter for a PF. Next offseason, they can surround Evans with even more 3pt shooters to continue to open up the floor. Most elite teams have a perimeter player who can take people off the dribble and penetrate into the lane. I think the Hawks would welcome a weapon like that.

Thornton doesn't fit the Thunder. They use Harden to run pick and rolls, as a secondary PG next to Westbrook, and as a guy comfortable as the 3rd option. Thornton can't do any of that. You're asking a born gunner to come in and be a playmaker who only takes shots within an offense; that's not going to happen. At worse, Thornton will fight for shots with Durrant and Westbrook; at best he is one-dimensional guy who can spread the floor. The Thunder would use Maynor over Thornton, cuz Maynor is much closer to Harden than Thornton is.

I'm not saying that they should use him in the same way they did Thornton. They are different players with different styles. You're not going to be able to replace a Harden with another Harden. If they could do that, they would just keep the one they have. Thornton is not as good as Harden thus he will be making less after Harden's extension. He is a downgrade to Thornton, but he patches up that wound pretty well for the Thunder. With Harden gone, it prompts you to ask the question who will handle the ball when Westbrook is out. My guess is Maynor. He was hurt all last year, but he is a solid player who can run an offense and look to get Thornton and Durant their shots.

You don't remember the Gerald Wallace era do you? Or the fact that the Thunder has their own lottery pick big man (Aldrich) who's also languishing on the bench. No, championship contender teams generally don't have the patience to live thru rookie mistakes (with a few exception). And even if TRob beat out Collison, that makes him what?.... the backup PF?.... for as long as Ibaka is in Oaklahoma? So basically the Thunder gave up a star in the making for a sixth man and a backup PF. Yeah.

A star in the making that they can't afford. That is the point. I think the general census is that teams would like to remain good for as long as they can. Why not gather top 5 picks when you can? It's pretty rare that a team that went to the NBA finals gets a top 5 talent the next year. Those sort of moves help solidify franchises for a long time. Now I'm not saying that Robinson is going to be a franchise player, but I think we can all agree that he has the potential to be a very good player in this league. Now I know draft position isn't everything, but think about it this way. The Thunder turned their top 5 pick (Harden) into a very good player (Thornton) and another top 5 pick (Robinson). If they keep this up, they are going to be good for a very long time.

 

[twslam07]

Pretense is not intelligence. I have no further desire to waste my time on someone preaching nonsense. Adios!

You are one of the most respected voices on this forum, bajaden, and I always enjoy when you comment on my posts as I truly respect your opinion. You are one of the most talented and knowledgable minds here. It disappoints me to see you quit on your posts so quickly. You of all people should know hard work beats talent, when talent doesn't work hard. Later amigo

 

[Section 101]

You are one of the most respected voices on this forum, bajaden, and I always enjoy when you comment on my posts as I truly respect your opinion. You are one of the most talented and knowledgable minds here. It disappoints me to see you quit on your posts so quickly. You of all people should know hard work beats talent, when talent doesn't work hard. Later amigo

This trade is a non starter.

 

[beb0p]

How is this making trades for the sake of trades? We finally clear up our log jam at SG, we get a SG who has shown he can be a great player in this league, and we get an athletic big man who is a good defender, shotblocker, rebounder, passer, and post player.

The point is not trading Horford for more cap room. It is trading Horford for a SG who can be an elite player in this league. The unrestricted free agents at SG are not nearly as good as the unrestricted free agents at PF/C next year. They could go with Evans, Smith, Jefferson or they could go with K. Martin, Smith, Horford. Personally, I would like to build around the first three.

I'm writing from the perspective of the Hawks and Thunder. From the Kings point of view, it's a pretty good trade. They come away with the two best players in the deal. Not bad. Hawks and Thunders, not so much.

They have more than enough shooting already. This season it would be Teague, Morrow, and J. Smith around Evans. Teague and Morrow are both good 3pt shooters and Smith is a very good outside shooter for a PF. Next offseason, they can surround Evans with even more 3pt shooters to continue to open up the floor. Most elite teams have a perimeter player who can take people off the dribble and penetrate into the lane. I think the Hawks would welcome a weapon like that.

I don't doubt that the Hawks will welcome a perimeter player who can do what Tyreke does... but not at the expense of Al Horford. By welcome I mean they'll experiment with Reke rotation and see how/where he fits on their team and then proceed from there; Not to go gung-ho and bet all their chips on Reke by trading away Horford. You seem to imply that Reke will play SF for the Hawks, a position that no one knows Reke can actually play at this point. Plus, I don't know that the Hawks are ready to proclaim Smith a true PF; it seems they still prefer to slide him between the 3 and 4 - meaning Reke will have to slide between 2 and 3; and when Reke is at the 2 and Smith is at the 3; there is not enough players to spread the floor. Smith may be a decent jump shooter for a PF, but as a 3 his range is dismal.

I'm not saying that they should use him in the same way they did Thornton. They are different players with different styles. You're not going to be able to replace a Harden with another Harden. If they could do that, they would just keep the one they have. Thornton is not as good as Harden thus he will be making less after Harden's extension. He is a downgrade to Thornton, but he patches up that wound pretty well for the Thunder. With Harden gone, it prompts you to ask the question who will handle the ball when Westbrook is out. My guess is Maynor. He was hurt all last year, but he is a solid player who can run an offense and look to get Thornton and Durant their shots.

The issue isn't who handles the ball when Westbrook is out, it's who handles the ball when Westbrook is in. Harden is that secondary playmaker. Thornton can't do that. Now, if you put Maynor next to Westbrook, that's ok but where's Thornton going to get his mins?

A star in the making that they can't afford. That is the point. I think the general census is that teams would like to remain good for as long as they can. Why not gather top 5 picks when you can? It's pretty rare that a team that went to the NBA finals gets a top 5 talent the next year. Those sort of moves help solidify franchises for a long time. Now I'm not saying that Robinson is going to be a franchise player, but I think we can all agree that he has the potential to be a very good player in this league. Now I know draft position isn't everything, but think about it this way. The Thunder turned their top 5 pick (Harden) into a very good player (Thornton) and another top 5 pick (Robinson). If they keep this up, they are going to be good for a very long time.

It's not about draft position, it's about fit. Look at it from the Thunder's angle will ya? What the Thunder need is a post scorer, and TRob is not that. Why do they turn a stud player into two guys they don't need? Now, if the Kings are to offer up Cousins (omg!!!!), I'm sure the Thunders will be interested.

 

[twslam07]

I'm writing from the perspective of the Hawks and Thunder. From the Kings point of view, it's a pretty good trade. They come away with the two best players in the deal. Not bad. Hawks and Thunders, not so much.

I have made multiple points why this trade benefits them and why it would make sense for them to make this trade. You are right, if the world was to end today, we would come away with the two best players. Obviously the world doesn't work like that. In my opinion, Evans has the potential to be better than both Harden and Horford. We also don't know how good Robinson can be. He is only a rookie. For all we know, he could develop a very good post game and be a 20 ppg player.

Besides, you're looking at this the wrong way. Harden > Thornton > Robinson > Jones III. It's not about who gets the best player in the trade. It's about who gets the most value. Same with the Evans and Horford trade. As of now I would say Horford > Evans, but considering Evans has the potential to surpass Horford and the fact that the big man free agency crop is much more attractive than the SG free agency crop, it makes this trade worth while for them.

I don't doubt that the Hawks will welcome a perimeter player who can do what Tyreke does... but not at the expense of Al Horford. By welcome I mean they'll experiment with Reke rotation and see how/where he fits on their team and then proceed from there; Not to go gung-ho and bet all their chips on Reke by trading away Horford. You seem to imply that Reke will play SF for the Hawks, a position that no one knows Reke can actually play at this point. Plus, I don't know that the Hawks are ready to proclaim Smith a true PF; it seems they still prefer to slide him between the 3 and 4 - meaning Reke will have to slide between 2 and 3; and when Reke is at the 2 and Smith is at the 3; there is not enough players to spread the floor. Smith may be a decent jump shooter for a PF, but as a 3 his range is dismal.

They are betting all their chips by trading Horford? It is a risky move, yes. But every elite team needs a game changer on their team. I don't consider Horford in that light. He is a good big man who does everything well, but he isn't the type of player who can carry a team. Evans has the tools to be that type of player. Whether he realizes it, is another question.

No where do I refer to the Hawks using Evans as a SF nor was it my intent to come off as thinking that's where the Hawks would and should play Evans. I don't see why they would have to slide Evans between the 2 and 3. He would only play the 2 on the Hawks which most think is his best position. Their next SG would be Josh Jenkins who was drafted late in the first round. I'm pretty sure Evans will be able to register 35-37 min at SG easily.

When it comes to Smith, I always have seen him as a PF. He can play SF, but his skills become more advantageous when he plays PF. His shooting becomes above average, his passing becomes above average, his athleticism is more diffiuclt to match, and he is placed in a better position to block shots. His rebounding woud still be very good for his position as well.

The issue isn't who handles the ball when Westbrook is out, it's who handles the ball when Westbrook is in. Harden is that secondary playmaker. Thornton can't do that. Now, if you put Maynor next to Westbrook, that's ok but where's Thornton going to get his mins?

When Westbrook is in, Westbrook will handle the ball. He is like Evans in that he needs the ball to be effective. He will be their main pick and roll option. Durant is showing he can take people off the ball and end up creating for others. He averaged 3.5 assists last year. He draws so much attention from his talent it is almost a given there will be players open. I don't know why you think who will handle the ball when Westbrook is in is more important than who will handle the ball when Westrbook is out. The major difference they will see is not having Harden in there to handle the ball for them, but like I mentioned before, I think Maynor can come in and be the guy to run the offense.

It's not about draft position, it's about fit. Look at it from the Thunder's angle will ya? What the Thunder need is a post scorer, and TRob is not that. Why do they turn a stud player into two guys they don't need? Now, if the Kings are to offer up Cousins (omg!!!!), I'm sure the Thunders will be interested.

I am looking at it from the Thunder's angle. Why do they need a post scorer? They made it to the NBA finals without one. Even if they did need a post scorer why not invest in a top 5 rookie big man? I'm sure with Robinson's work ethic and athleticism, good coaching, and time, Robinson can have a very nice post game.

The bottom line is the Thunder, who are a small market team, are looking like they will not be able to extend Harden. This drives his value down since other teams know the Thunder have to get rid of him. I don't know why you act like Thornton and Robinson aren't players they could use when they could definitely help their team now and in the future.

 

[beb0p]

I have made multiple points why this trade benefits them and why it would make sense for them to make this trade. You are right, if the world was to end today, we would come away with the two best players. Obviously the world doesn't work like that. In my opinion, Evans has the potential to be better than both Harden and Horford. We also don't know how good Robinson can be. He is only a rookie. For all we know, he could develop a very good post game and be a 20 ppg player.

Besides, you're looking at this the wrong way. Harden > Thornton > Robinson > Jones III. It's not about who gets the best player in the trade. It's about who gets the most value. Same with the Evans and Horford trade. As of now I would say Horford > Evans, but considering Evans has the potential to surpass Horford and the fact that the big man free agency crop is much more attractive than the SG free agency crop, it makes this trade worth while for them.

Potential is another word for gamble. Sure Evans could turn out to be the next Wade or he may not. Who knows. Sames with TRob. Basically you want the Hawks to roll the dice and gamble. Evans and Trob are. Not. Sure. Things.

They are betting all their chips by trading Horford? It is a risky move, yes. But every elite team needs a game changer on their team. I don't consider Horford in that light. He is a good big man who does everything well, but he isn't the type of player who can carry a team. Evans has the tools to be that type of player. Whether he realizes it, is another question.

First of all, it's debatable if Reke is still a game changer or will ever be. Second, a quality big man is just as hard to find as a game changer. They got one and you want the Hawks to throw it away in a gamble that Reke turns out to be something he hasn't been for two years. It's a risky move. You said it. You don't need to make risky moves when you have a young team, $40 millions in cap space, and rebuilding. Risky moves are for teams desperate to take that next step. Hawks isnt' there yet.

No where do I refer to the Hawks using Evans as a SF nor was it my intent to come off as thinking that's where the Hawks would and should play Evans. I don't see why they would have to slide Evans between the 2 and 3. He would only play the 2 on the Hawks which most think is his best position. Their next SG would be Josh Jenkins who was drafted late in the first round. I'm pretty sure Evans will be able to register 35-37 min at SG easily.

When it comes to Smith, I always have seen him as a PF. He can play SF, but his skills become more advantageous when he plays PF. His shooting becomes above average, his passing becomes above average, his athleticism is more diffiuclt to match, and he is placed in a better position to block shots. His rebounding woud still be very good for his position as well.

Because somebody has to play the 3 for the Hawks. If it's not Smith and not Reke, who? Tolliver? Korver? This trade leaves them with no size, no shooting, and a drop in defense in the name of gambling.

When Westbrook is in, Westbrook will handle the ball. He is like Evans in that he needs the ball to be effective. He will be their main pick and roll option. Durant is showing he can take people off the ball and end up creating for others. He averaged 3.5 assists last year. He draws so much attention from his talent it is almost a given there will be players open. I don't know why you think who will handle the ball when Westbrook is in is more important than who will handle the ball when Westrbook is out. The major difference they will see is not having Harden in there to handle the ball for them, but like I mentioned before, I think Maynor can come in and be the guy to run the offense.

But that's NOT how the Thunder plays!! They use two playmakers, two, not one. Why are you trying to change their system? They have Harden and Westbrook on opposite side of the floor and when a play breaks down with Westbrook on the strong side the ball is swing to the weak side for Harden to run the plays. Even Sefolosha has to do a little playmaking here and there. It'd be comical watching Thornton try to run the pick and roll if it isn't also sad.

I am looking at it from the Thunder's angle. Why do they need a post scorer? They made it to the NBA finals without one. Even if they did need a post scorer why not invest in a top 5 rookie big man? I'm sure with Robinson's work ethic and athleticism, good coaching, and time, Robinson can have a very nice post game.

The bottom line is the Thunder, who are a small market team, are looking like they will not be able to extend Harden. This drives his value down since other teams know the Thunder have to get rid of him. I don't know why you act like Thornton and Robinson aren't players they could use when they could definitely help their team now and in the future.

Why do the Thunder need a post scorer? Did you watched the NBA final?

I'm beginning to suspect that you're too high on Robinson and Thornton; especially Robinson.

I'm aware of the rumor that the Thunder can't afford to keep Harden, but it's just a rumor. The most likely scenario is a wait and see how far Oaklahoma goes in the post season. If they win it all or make it back to the final, and if Harden plays up to his standard during that run, then they probably just bite the bullet and keep him. The point is, I doubt the Thunder has made up their mind to trade Harden at this point in the season. And even if they are to trade Harden, remember the Bobcats already offered the #2 pick in a deep draft and got turned down. This is not going to be a fire sale. We are not the Lakers, the Kings don't get breaks like that.

 

[bajaden]

You are one of the most respected voices on this forum, bajaden, and I always enjoy when you comment on my posts as I truly respect your opinion. You are one of the most talented and knowledgable minds here. It disappoints me to see you quit on your posts so quickly. You of all people should know hard work beats talent, when talent doesn't work hard. Later amigo

There are times when its not worth the effort. There's nothing wrong with posting a trade idea. But at some point, you have to realize that just maybe, this once, what you've posted isn't feasable. And along with that, I would never consider trading away both Evans and Thornton at the same time, and bet that Harden would resign with us.

And I can guarantee you that there is no way that the Hawks would trade Horford for Evans. It would leave them with absolutely no one to play the center position. If anything, they want to rebuild around Horford, and rightly so. As much as I like Tyreke. If I had to choose between Tyreke and Horford, I wouldn't even have to think about it. Hell, if you can get them to agree to that trade, then forget the rest of the stuff. Put Horford next to Cousins and Thronton at SG. The problem is, they won't do it. And I can't blame them.

 

[twslam07]

Potential is another word for gamble. Sure Evans could turn out to be the next Wade or he may not. Who knows. Sames with TRob. Basically you want the Hawks to roll the dice and gamble. Evans and Trob are. Not. Sure. Things.

What do you mean by sure things? Because many would say that Evans is better than Thornton. If you mean it in the sense that Evans has still not reached his potential (unlike Thornton who has), then I agree with you, but just because he hasn't reached his full potential yet, does not mean he isn't a very good player right now.

First of all, it's debatable if Reke is still a game changer or will ever be. Second, a quality big man is just as hard to find as a game changer. They got one and you want the Hawks to throw it away in a gamble that Reke turns out to be something he hasn't been for two years. It's a risky move. You said it. You don't need to make risky moves when you have a young team, $40 millions in cap space, and rebuilding. Risky moves are for teams desperate to take that next step. Hawks isnt' there yet.

I agree that it is debatable if Evans will ever be a game changer. That is why I said Evans has the tools to be that type of player. However it isn't debatable if Horford is a game changer.

Is it as hard to find a quality big man versus a game changer? The game changing guards that come to mind are Rose, Westbrook, Paul, D. Williams, Wade, and Bryant. The quality big men that come to mind are D. Lee, Griffin, Bargnani, J. Smith, Millsap, R. Anderson, Ibaka, Duncan, Boozer, Nene, Z. Randolph, Favors, Gortat, Monroe, M. Gasol, Hibbert, Bogut, Chandler, Perkins, Noah, Kaman, and Horford. I'm sure there are a few more I missed.

Teams that are rebuilding at some point need to go after a player who can carry the franchise. Preferably, early on in the rebuilding process so they can begin to tailor their team around them. It's much more inefficient and expensive to go after a player who has proven he can be a franchise player after you have already constructed most of your team.

Because somebody has to play the 3 for the Hawks. If it's not Smith and not Reke, who? Tolliver? Korver? This trade leaves them with no size, no shooting, and a drop in defense in the name of gambling.

This trade is not about making them more successful this season. I don't know how many times I have told you this, but I'll play your little game. I would assume it would be mainly Korver and Tolliver at SF. If the Hawks are not satisfied with that, then have them take one of our SFs. I'm sure we won't mind. Again, the Hawks have no chance to win this season so why is it such a big deal that they have a good SF or a good C for the season? These issues will be addressed in the offseason where they can come back a very strong team (add D. Wright and Jefferson/Bynum).

But that's NOT how the Thunder plays!! They use two playmakers, two, not one. Why are you trying to change their system? They have Harden and Westbrook on opposite side of the floor and when a play breaks down with Westbrook on the strong side the ball is swing to the weak side for Harden to run the plays. Even Sefolosha has to do a little playmaking here and there. It'd be comical watching Thornton try to run the pick and roll if it isn't also sad.

Why do the Thunder need a post scorer? Did you watched the NBA final?

I'm beginning to suspect that you're too high on Robinson and Thornton; especially Robinson.

I'm aware of the rumor that the Thunder can't afford to keep Harden, but it's just a rumor. The most likely scenario is a wait and see how far Oaklahoma goes in the post season. If they win it all or make it back to the final, and if Harden plays up to his standard during that run, then they probably just bite the bullet and keep him. The point is, I doubt the Thunder has made up their mind to trade Harden at this point in the season. And even if they are to trade Harden, remember the Bobcats already offered the #2 pick in a deep draft and got turned down. This is not going to be a fire sale. We are not the Lakers, the Kings don't get breaks like that.

I do recall the offer the Bobcats maade for Harden, but many people had Robinson 2nd on their draft boards so it is possible that this deal could be seen as a better deal to them.

Their system and ballhandling duties are going to have to change because a salary cap and luxury tax level exists. This is not a big market team. They can't afford the luxuries like LA, Miami, and Boston can. If they extend Harden. Their salaries for their top 5 players (Durant, Westbrook, Harden, Ibaka, and Perkins) will total to 67.8 mil. That is around 10 mil over the cap and around 2 mil
shy of the luxury tax (just for 5 players!). Now if you add in all of their other long term contracts and rookie team options they would be at around 86 mil total. Yikes! That is 16 mil over the luxury tax which means they would have to fork up another 16 mil that goes to the league. So they would be paying a total of 102 mil for player salaries alone. I don't know of many small market teams that can afford that. They are going to need to change their system to accomodate the salary cap and luxury tax or the owners are going to feel the pain.

 

[twslam07]

There are times when its not worth the effort. There's nothing wrong with posting a trade idea. But at some point, you have to realize that just maybe, this once, what you've posted isn't feasable. And along with that, I would never consider trading away both Evans and Thornton at the same time, and bet that Harden would resign with us.

And I can guarantee you that there is no way that the Hawks would trade Horford for Evans. It would leave them with absolutely no one to play the center position. If anything, they want to rebuild around Horford, and rightly so. As much as I like Tyreke. If I had to choose between Tyreke and Horford, I wouldn't even have to think about it. Hell, if you can get them to agree to that trade, then forget the rest of the stuff. Put Horford next to Cousins and Thronton at SG. The problem is, they won't do it. And I can't blame them.

I still don't understand your premise of not trading both Evans and Thornton at the same time when you are getting back a very good SG. I would understand where you are coming from if we weren't getting a SG back to fill that position, but we are.

I see Horford as a 3rd option on a good team. I don't tend to believe that you build around 3rd options, but I agree that he would be a very nice piece to have. No doubt.

Again, this trade isn't about improving them this year, and they weren't going to be contenders anyway so why is it such a big deal? Let Pachulia and Petro handle the center spot this year and go after one of the big name centers in free agency.

This trade is not only about the players being swapped. It is about the situation that the Hawks move themself into. Would you rather have Evans, Smith, and Jefferson or Kevin Martin, Smith, and Horford to build your team around? Not saying that is exactly the players they would sign, but it is a possibility.

 

[beb0p]

What do you mean by sure things? Because many would say that Evans is better than Thornton. If you mean it in the sense that Evans has still not reached his potential (unlike Thornton who has), then I agree with you, but just because he hasn't reached his full potential yet, does not mean he isn't a very good player right now.

I agree that it is debatable if Evans will ever be a game changer. That is why I said Evans has the tools to be that type of player. However it isn't debatable if Horford is a game changer.

Is it as hard to find a quality big man versus a game changer? The game changing guards that come to mind are Rose, Westbrook, Paul, D. Williams, Wade, and Bryant. The quality big men that come to mind are D. Lee, Griffin, Bargnani, J. Smith, Millsap, R. Anderson, Ibaka, Duncan, Boozer, Nene, Z. Randolph, Favors, Gortat, Monroe, M. Gasol, Hibbert, Bogut, Chandler, Perkins, Noah, Kaman, and Horford. I'm sure there are a few more I missed.

Teams that are rebuilding at some point need to go after a player who can carry the franchise. Preferably, early on in the rebuilding process so they can begin to tailor their team around them. It's much more inefficient and expensive to go after a player who has proven he can be a franchise player after you have already constructed most of your team.

If you honestly think that Reke is going to approach (or even have a chance to approach) your definition of a "game changer" at the same level as guys like Kobe and Wade, I'm beginning to see why you think the way you do. I mean, it's ridiculous and it's simply not going to happen. I suppose that in your mind the Hawks is trading Horford a very good big man, a very hard to find big man, for a future HOFer. If you honestly believe that, hey it's a free country.

This trade is not about making them more successful this season. I don't know how many times I have told you this, but I'll play your little game. I would assume it would be mainly Korver and Tolliver at SF. If the Hawks are not satisfied with that, then have them take one of our SFs. I'm sure we won't mind. Again, the Hawks have no chance to win this season so why is it such a big deal that they have a good SF or a good C for the season? These issues will be addressed in the offseason where they can come back a very strong team (add D. Wright and Jefferson/Bynum).

I don't care which season you're talking about, the Hawks still need someone to play SF, don't they? Who is going to come to Atlanta and fill that void at SF? It took the Kings forever to find a SF who can play next to Reke, what makes you think the Hawks can do what the Kings cannot? Especially since you're the one who said that good FA wing players are scarce right now.

I do recall the offer the Bobcats maade for Harden, but many people had Robinson 2nd on their draft boards so it is possible that this deal could be seen as a better deal to them.

Their system and ballhandling duties are going to have to change because a salary cap and luxury tax level exists. This is not a big market team. They can't afford the luxuries like LA, Miami, and Boston can. If they extend Harden. Their salaries for their top 5 players (Durant, Westbrook, Harden, Ibaka, and Perkins) will total to 67.8 mil. That is around 10 mil over the cap and around 2 mil
shy of the luxury tax (just for 5 players!). Now if you add in all of their other long term contracts and rookie team options they would be at around 86 mil total. Yikes! That is 16 mil over the luxury tax which means they would have to fork up another 16 mil that goes to the league. So they would be paying a total of 102 mil for player salaries alone. I don't know of many small market teams that can afford that. They are going to need to change their system to accomodate the salary cap and luxury tax or the owners are going to feel the pain.

There are rumors, and then there are facts. You have a habit of mixing up the two. I don't know anyone besides draft sites and casual fans who rank TRob #2 on the draft board. I don't know any team besides the Kings who would pick TRob as high as #5. Personally, I ranked him #9-#15 and think that's about right.

As for the Thunder, only their boss knows how much they're willing to spend. There are rumors out there but they're just rumors. It's not about whether the team is in a small market, it's about how much the owners are willing to spend. The Trailblazers and Mavs are small market teams, but their owners consistently opened his wallet. We simply don't know what kind of spender Clay Bennett is.

 

[twslam07]

If you honestly think that Reke is going to approach (or even have a chance to approach) your definition of a "game changer" at the same level as guys like Kobe and Wade, I'm beginning to see why you think the way you do. I mean, it's ridiculous and it's simply not going to happen. I suppose that in your mind the Hawks is trading Horford a very good big man, a very hard to find big man, for a future HOFer. If you honestly believe that, hey it's a free country.

That is the type of company Evans could be with if he reaches his potential. I truly believe that. As I said earlier, he has all the tools to be that type of player it's just a matter of him putting it together. He has above average size, length, strength, and athleticism for his position. He has great rebounding, playmaking, vision, and defensive skillls. Lastly, he has some of the dirtiest handles and moves I have seen in a long time which allows him to get to the rim at ease, and if getting to the rim wasn't easy enough, he finishes around the rim at a great rate. The only thing really missing from his resume is shooting.

I don't care which season you're talking about, the Hawks still need someone to play SF, don't they? Who is going to come to Atlanta and fill that void at SF? It took the Kings forever to find a SF who can play next to Reke, what makes you think the Hawks can do what the Kings cannot? Especially since you're the one who said that good FA wing players are scarce right now.

First of all, I talked about how there are not nearly as many good free agent SGs as there are PF/Cs this offseason. I didn't reference SFs. Second of all, it took us forever to find a suitable SF because of our front office not because it was difficult to do.

If you don't care about which season it is, then lets consider next season. Dorell Wright, Stephen Jackson, and Chase Budinger are all unrestricted free agents this offseason. Sign one of them and voila your SF spot is filled. I don't see how that is so hard to grasp.

There are rumors, and then there are facts. You have a habit of mixing up the two. I don't know anyone besides draft sites and casual fans who rank TRob #2 on the draft board. I don't know any team besides the Kings who would pick TRob as high as #5. Personally, I ranked him #9-#15 and think that's about right.

As for the Thunder, only their boss knows how much they're willing to spend. There are rumors out there but they're just rumors. It's not about whether the team is in a small market, it's about how much the owners are willing to spend. The Trailblazers and Mavs are small market teams, but their owners consistently opened his wallet. We simply don't know what kind of spender Clay Bennett is.

All I was doing was making a point that the Thunder could have had Robinson #2 on their draft boards. I'm not saying I know for sure. If that was the case though, then that trade looks much better now, doesn't it? Adding Thornton to who they would have selected with the 2nd pick seems a lot more feasible. It's not really about where you or I have him ranked, it's about where they have him ranked, but we'll never know for sure. It's only guess work on our part.

There are rumors, there are facts, and then there is logic. I am aware of the rumors, but all you have to do is look at their payroll and it's obvious. Small markets do matter whether you think so or not. There is a reason they are called "small" and "big" markets. A small one does not have as many people living in that area which usually leads to the demand for tickets, memorabilia, TV viewers, etc. to be lower compared to big markets. If you don't have as high of a demand, less people will come resulting in profits not being as high as they could and if less people come to the games then you might lose sponsors or sponsors might reduce the amount they are giving you. These are all important factors which make it more difficult to make a profit in these smaller markets. Now when you are payroll is almost double the salary cap, it makes it even more difficult.