Tyreke Evans Contingency Plan

[Sac.1989]

i dont know what the hoo haa is with Harden and i dont want him here. He's a great role player but i question his ability to be anything more. With Westbrook and Durant out in preseason he had the chance to showcase himself as a #1 option against the bulls. Struggled massively. Someone like Thornton or Reke would revel in that challenge. Not Harden.

 

[andjel]

you put so much effort that I simply have to respond though I am little bit short on time these days.

Statistics:
Sample is either reliable or not. One cannot argue that we cannot trust average, and then not only use that average of 7 points, but also variance for statistical analysis.
It gets little bit more weird when average for games as a backup in last two years happened to be 46.6, not 44.6.
Last comment, if one event has small chances of happening, two unrelated events happening is much smaller, you know the formula. There is 3 team deal term, and this is not it. Deal with OKC does not affect Atl point of view for the trade, and vice versa, and they both have to say "yes" to Kings offer.

Small man - big man:
Average big man gets payed as above average guard, if not more. Please do not make me dig through all those Omer Asik/DeAndre Jordan types of deals. That has been the case regardless of quantity of folks on the market (nice touch, exclusively SG on one list, and everybody over 6'9'' on the other).

Cheers

 

[beb0p]

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.

Yes, and it's pretty impossible to be at Kobe/Wade's level without the shooting isn't it? That's like saying Sarah Palin would have been a great Vice President, all that's missing is the brain.

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.

Budinger? Wright? SJax? Seriously? I thought the point is to get better for the Hawks, not mediocre? No thanks. Two are career backups and one has one foot in retirement.

It's just easier and makes more sense for the Hawks to keep their existing inside-out game plan than to follow the one you orchestrate for them. Keep Smith at 3/4, Horford at 4/5; has two 3-pt threat at the guards and add in either a SF or C depending on match up. Viola! Simple. And they already has the personnel for it.

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.

Yes, it's only guesswork and it makes no difference. The Thunder don't need TRob or Thornton. End of story. They are keeping the same offense that took them to the Finals, thank you very much, not the one you devised for them that stripped them of a much needed second playmaker.

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.

Let's talk about logic, shall we? Let's put yourself in the Thunder's shoes - are you really going to trade away one of your most important championship pieces, just like that? Without looking first to see if you can move somebody on your roster and maybe you can fit him on your team afterall?

If they lose Harden somehow (they won't), if I'm the GM the player I want to replace Harden is Manu (a 2013 FA). If I am to trade Harden, it'd be for a good post player, not another guard (definitely not someone like Thornton). I'd bring Maynor off the bench in the Harden role, the reduction in offense will be more than made up by the new post player that I get in the trade.

In fact, if I'm the Thunder GM, there's no way I'd make a decision until after post-season. There are just so many options (re-sign Harden, sign a big name FA renounce Harden, trade Harden for a star, etc, etc). All those options will be gone if a trade is to be made prematurely for the underwhelming Thornton and TRob.

 

[twslam07]

Yes, and it's pretty impossible to be at Kobe/Wade's level without the shooting isn't it? That's like saying Sarah Palin would have been a great Vice President, all that's missing is the brain.

Yes shooting is an important piece to the puzzle, but it is something that can be taught and learned. Many of the abilities Evans has cannot be taught or learned which gives him the opportunity to be with that tier of players.

Budinger? Wright? SJax? Seriously? I thought the point is to get better for the Hawks, not mediocre? No thanks. Two are career backups and one has one foot in retirement.

Wright has started every game he has played in the last 2 seasons. How does that make him a career backup? Budinger has been a backup for his first 3 seasons, but he has had 3 very solid seasons. For his career, he is averaging 21 mpg 9.4 ppg (.435, .363, .810) 3.4 rpg 1.4 apg 0.5 spg 0.2 bpg 0.8 topg. His per 36 career averages are 15.8 ppg 5.7 rpg 2.3 apg 0.8 spg 0.3 bpg 1.4 topg. He is certainly no pushover in my book. And yes Jackson is old, but he can still hoop. He still does a lot of things well in this league.

Besides, their SF is supposed to be a roleplayer. He would be their sixth option behind Teague, L. Williams, Evans, J. Smith, and Jefferson. All they need him to do is spread the floor for the rest of their players.

It's just easier and makes more sense for the Hawks to keep their existing inside-out game plan than to follow the one you orchestrate for them. Keep Smith at 3/4, Horford at 4/5; has two 3-pt threat at the guards and add in either a SF or C depending on match up. Viola! Simple. And they already has the personnel for it.

Sure it is a simple, quick fix, but it is not going to get them very far. You seem to think it is okay for teams to be stuck in that #6-8 seed for years. My thinking is if the personnel you have isn't going to ever win you a champioship, you change it. I think this is the main reason why we have such different opinions on this subject matter. The Hawks could keep Horford and maybe sign Kevin Martin and Jefferson and resign L. Williams and J. Smith. Their frontcourt would be great with Smith, Horford, and Jefferson, but most championship teams have elite guard play. Evans can become that type of player for them.

Yes, it's only guesswork and it makes no difference. The Thunder don't need TRob or Thornton. End of story. They are keeping the same offense that took them to the Finals, thank you very much, not the one you devised for them that stripped them of a much needed second playmaker.

How does guesswork not make a difference? We don't know what the Thunder's front office think about Robinson. They could have very well held him in high regards which makes this trade doable. Just the fact that we are going back and forth in this trade discussion tells me that there is some discrepancy and that this deal could be possible.

Let's talk about logic, shall we? Let's put yourself in the Thunder's shoes - are you really going to trade away one of your most important championship pieces, just like that? Without looking first to see if you can move somebody on your roster and maybe you can fit him on your team afterall?

If they lose Harden somehow (they won't), if I'm the GM the player I want to replace Harden is Manu (a 2013 FA). If I am to trade Harden, it'd be for a good post player, not another guard (definitely not someone like Thornton). I'd bring Maynor off the bench in the Harden role, the reduction in offense will be more than made up by the new post player that I get in the trade.

In fact, if I'm the Thunder GM, there's no way I'd make a decision until after post-season. There are just so many options (re-sign Harden, sign a big name FA renounce Harden, trade Harden for a star, etc, etc). All those options will be gone if a trade is to be made prematurely for the underwhelming Thornton and TRob.

In a perfect world, the Thunder would keep Harden. Who would blame them? He IS perfect for what they want to do. It's unfortunate that their payroll won't permit it.

They are not trading Harden "just like that." Who are they going to move? Durant, Westbrook, or Ibaka? Not happening. Perkins would be the the most likely, but just because he is the most likely out of the 4 doesn't make it likely. Perkins brings a lot of value to his team that doesn't show up on the stat sheet. Just ask the Celtics. Remember SG is the easiest position to fill. Which makes it more and more likely that Harden is the odd man out.

Ginobli would be a good fit for them, but unfortunately the Thunder are so far over the salary cap they can't sign him. Shucks.

They can resign Harden, but they can't sign a "big name FA" as you so specifically stated. However, they can do a sign and trade, but they are still in the same position where they won't get as much value for Harden considering everyone in the league knows they wont be able to keep him. Sign and trades where the team could still keep that player net them fair value, but when your payroll permits you from keeping that player you are not going to get this "star" player in return.

 

[bajaden]

I believe I stated why I wouldn't trade both Evans and Thornton at the same time. All you have to do is read what I posted. I said I wouldn't gamble that Harden would resign with us. Yes, I realize that Evans is in the exact same situation as Harden and might not resign with us, but we still have Thornton locked up for four years as insurance. We trade them both, and we chance ending up with nothing. Plus, its all a moot point because the trade doesn't work financially.

I would love to have Horford, and I do think the Hawks want to build around him. If we had him, he would automaticly be the second best player on our team, and some might argue that in the short term, he might be the best. He's been forced to play out of position his whole career. Plug him in at PF, and he's an entirely different player. There's not a lot he can't do. Now I've given my reasons, and their not arguable. You can believe what you want, but it won't change my opinion. You want to pry Horford away from the Hawks, then your going to have to give them someone that can play center on that team. Were not trading Cousins, so the only other player would be JT, and he's not enough to get Horford, and once again, the money wouldn't work.

So it would probably have to be Evans and JT, and they'd probably try and pry Robinson or a future 1st rounder out of us as well. Horford is valued a lot higher around the league than you think, and he's under contract for the next four years. So a team trading for him knows that they're going to have him for a while. Not so with Evans, who could take the qualifying offer and then become an unrestricted freeagent the following season. Which means he could walk.

 

[beb0p]

Yes shooting is an important piece to the puzzle, but it is something that can be taught and learned. Many of the abilities Evans has cannot be taught or learned which gives him the opportunity to be with that tier of players.

It took Jason Kidd ten years to learn how to shoot, and Kidd is one of the greatest and he could shoot, he just wasn't consistent. How many years will it take for Tyreke to learn how to shoot? All the great ones have abilities that can't be taught and they also mastered the things that can be caught. Having abilities that can't be taught without mastering the shooting, means he's not great. It's that simple. Tyreke is a good player, don't get me wrong, but he's never going to be at Kobe/Wade's level.

Wright has started every game he has played in the last 2 seasons. How does that make him a career backup? Budinger has been a backup for his first 3 seasons, but he has had 3 very solid seasons. For his career, he is averaging 21 mpg 9.4 ppg (.435, .363, .810) 3.4 rpg 1.4 apg 0.5 spg 0.2 bpg 0.8 topg. His per 36 career averages are 15.8 ppg 5.7 rpg 2.3 apg 0.8 spg 0.3 bpg 1.4 topg. He is certainly no pushover in my book. And yes Jackson is old, but he can still hoop. He still does a lot of things well in this league.

Besides, their SF is supposed to be a roleplayer. He would be their sixth option behind Teague, L. Williams, Evans, J. Smith, and Jefferson. All they need him to do is spread the floor for the rest of their players.

Wright started one and half season and then was shipped out of town faster than you can say his name. That just proves my point doesn't it? He. Is. Not. A. Starter. It's not unusual for a career backup to fill in as a stop-gap starter for a couple seasons (remember Jim Les?) but those guys never perform up to par and are quickly relegated back to the bench where they belong.

It's not as simple as, "Hey we just need a guy to spread the floor." There are still standards you know. If a team starts Wright/Budinger/SJax that team will suck unless it has four All-Stars to make up for it. I mean, if Petrie unveils one of those guys as our starting SF, you'd be mad wouldn't you?

Sure it is a simple, quick fix, but it is not going to get them very far. You seem to think it is okay for teams to be stuck in that #6-8 seed for years. My thinking is if the personnel you have isn't going to ever win you a champioship, you change it. I think this is the main reason why we have such different opinions on this subject matter. The Hawks could keep Horford and maybe sign Kevin Martin and Jefferson and resign L. Williams and J. Smith. Their frontcourt would be great with Smith, Horford, and Jefferson, but most championship teams have elite guard play. Evans can become that type of player for them.

Stuck in #6-#8 seed? Hell, I wish my team is that stuck! LOL. If they do what you propose, the Hawks could maybe be a higher seed but most likely they'll end up where the Kings is at now.

But yes, you're right that I think the Hawks are much better off holding onto Horford and hunting for that elusive All-Star who'll take them to the next level than to gamble on a guard who hasn't proven he can be an All-Star.

How does guesswork not make a difference? We don't know what the Thunder's front office think about Robinson. They could have very well held him in high regards which makes this trade doable. Just the fact that we are going back and forth in this trade discussion tells me that there is some discrepancy and that this deal could be possible.

I doubt they held TRob in that high of a regard. Especially after seeing his play in the summer league and in pre-season, I doubt even TRob's sister would trade Horford for him and a sixth man at this point.

In a perfect world, the Thunder would keep Harden. Who would blame them? He IS perfect for what they want to do. It's unfortunate that their payroll won't permit it.

You don't know that. The latest has it that the Thunder and Harden will likely reach a deal, with Harden softening his salary demand.

They are not trading Harden "just like that." Who are they going to move? Durant, Westbrook, or Ibaka? Not happening. Perkins would be the the most likely, but just because he is the most likely out of the 4 doesn't make it likely. Perkins brings a lot of value to his team that doesn't show up on the stat sheet. Just ask the Celtics. Remember SG is the easiest position to fill. Which makes it more and more likely that Harden is the odd man out.

Ginobli would be a good fit for them, but unfortunately the Thunder are so far over the salary cap they can't sign him. Shucks.

Geez, I'm glad you aren't a GM! All I have to say is just sit back and watch how the Thunder handle the situation and re-sign Harden.

Btw, Manu is a 35 yr-old guard, Thunder can sign him for less than what They'd have to pay Thornton.

They can resign Harden, but they can't sign a "big name FA" as you so specifically stated. However, they can do a sign and trade, but they are still in the same position where they won't get as much value for Harden considering everyone in the league knows they wont be able to keep him. Sign and trades where the team could still keep that player net them fair value, but when your payroll permits you from keeping that player you are not going to get this "star" player in return.

The bottom line is that baring something extraordinary (like Dwight deciding to join the Thunder or a Harden injury, etc, etc) Harden is going back to the Thunder. All this posturing from both sides is just a negotiation tactic. Harden is staying a Thunder for a long time.

 

[twslam07]

I believe I stated why I wouldn't trade both Evans and Thornton at the same time. All you have to do is read what I posted. I said I wouldn't gamble that Harden would resign with us. Yes, I realize that Evans is in the exact same situation as Harden and might not resign with us, but we still have Thornton locked up for four years as insurance. We trade them both, and we chance ending up with nothing. Plus, its all a moot point because the trade doesn't work financially.

So in your mind, the only SG you would want to trade is Evans because he could accept the qualifying offer and leave versus Thornton who is locked up?

Please read my entire post. I told you how we would make it work financially. It would be as simple as adding Cook or Aldrich into the deal.

I would love to have Horford, and I do think the Hawks want to build around him. If we had him, he would automaticly be the second best player on our team, and some might argue that in the short term, he might be the best. He's been forced to play out of position his whole career. Plug him in at PF, and he's an entirely different player. There's not a lot he can't do. Now I've given my reasons, and their not arguable. You can believe what you want, but it won't change my opinion. You want to pry Horford away from the Hawks, then your going to have to give them someone that can play center on that team. Were not trading Cousins, so the only other player would be JT, and he's not enough to get Horford, and once again, the money wouldn't work.

I don't buy the "they would need a center back" argument. They can acquire one in free agency or, if they wanted to, in a trade including Smith. I think the discrepancy here lies with how we value Horford. In all the times I have seen him play (mostly during the playoffs), he has never struck me as THE go-to guy. He isn't the type of guy who can take over a game, but I do agree there isn't much he can do. He is a rich man's J. Thompson in that he doesn't have any weaknesses. Don't get me wrong. He is a great big man who would be a great 3rd option. I just don't see him in the same light that he is the type of guy you build your entire team around.

So it would probably have to be Evans and JT, and they'd probably try and pry Robinson or a future 1st rounder out of us as well. Horford is valued a lot higher around the league than you think, and he's under contract for the next four years. So a team trading for him knows that they're going to have him for a while. Not so with Evans, who could take the qualifying offer and then become an unrestricted freeagent the following season. Which means he could walk.

Let me try and alter the offer a little bit for you:

Kings Gets:
James Harden
Al Horford

Thunder Gets:
Marcus Thornton
Thomas Robinson

Atlanta Gets:
Tyreke Evans
Perry Jones III
Cole Aldrich

You might be right about Horford being valued around the league higher than I think, but sometimes it's not about the value of the player, it is also about the situation of the team. There are many good bigs in this free agent class. They can easily acquire one with their 40 mil cap space and replace Horford, but the SG free agent class is not on the same level.

 

[bajaden]

First you propose a trade. Its pointed out that the trade doesn't work financially. So you starting adding or subtracting players to make it work. When I comment on a trade, I'm commenting on the trade proposed. I don't care about how you can fix it. You can't just make up a trade as you go along. If the original trade isn't going to work, then don't post it in the first place. Its not my job to rework a trade for you, its my job to comment on the original trade. I did, and it doesn't work. Period!

You don't buy the fact that they would need a center in return because they can alway just go out and find one in freeagency? Well I can just make up anything I want too. Now I realize that its convenient for your trade to have the Hawks do that. But why should they? They already have a player that can play center and his name is Horford. The Hawks don't need Evans. Would they like to have him? Probably, but not at the expense of trading Horford. Golden rule with only a few exceptions. You never trade a good big man for a good little man! Because good big men are much harder to find, and to be honest, shooting guards are a dime a dozen. If you watch a lot of college basketball, you'l see that around 60 to 70 percent of all the players in college are between 6'3" and 6'7". So you have a much larger pool of talent to gleen through.

Exceptions? Michael Jordan, Dwayne Wade, Kobe Bryant, etc. But those are the rare exceptions, and no one knew for sure they would be that good when they came into the league. Tyreke Evans doesn't fit in that group. You might hold him in high value, but that doesn't mean the rest of the league see's him the same way you do. A trade has to make sense for all parties, and this, as stated, doesn't make sense for the Hawks. And you wanting it to doesn't change that.

As an aside, your trying way to hard! I've proposed many trades on this fourm, as have others, and seldom has anyone argued as hard as you are. People are either going to agree with you, or not. Learn to accept it! If your lucky enough to get half the people that comment to agree with you, you've had a success. If most don't like it, then move on. After a while it goes from an interesting conversation to just plain irritating. Your choice of course!

 

[beb0p]

Wow, the Thunder surprised everyone (including Harden) and traded Harden. But it should be noted that:

1. Thunder did offered a $53 million contract to the SG. They were willing to go way over the cap to keep him.

2. From the sound of things, it was possible that Harden would have taken the deal. He requested three days to think it over but the Thunder demanded one hour (!!). I wonder if Presti jumped the gun on this one.

3. The Thunder is going for a salary dump (Martin is an ender) plus get a promising replacement in return (Jeremy Lamb). Martin seems to be a stop-gap unless they re-sign him (doubt it at this point). I don't know if Lamb will be as good as Harden (my gut says no) but Lamb is a decent ball handler and maybe not a good passer yet but a willing one. So it seems the Thunder is still looking for a second playmaker big guard in their lineup.

4. I think this trade downgrades the Thunder. They now have three gunners on the team and only Maynor as a true facilitator. Westbrook is not a real PG; I mean he's an All-Star and he's awesome but he's a shoot-first guy who does take horrible shots outside of the offensive sets. Someone needs to become the clue guy for that team and Maynor is the most likely person but I don't know if he'll get enough floor time with Martin/Stefolosa also needing mins. Not to mention Martin's D is... ack!!!

5. With that said, if the Thunder manages to get that elusive post player somehow; they could be back in business.