RealGM

With the offer we reportedly gave IT, wouldn't we be better-served giving that to Turner instead? Could he be had with that offer?

1) Turner is > Singler MORE than Thomas is > Jennings

2) It balances our roster more


Jennings / Bynum / Dinwiddie / Siva
KCP / Meeks / Martin
TURNER / Singler
Monroe / Smith / Jerebko / Mitchell
Drummond / Monroe / Harrellson

Turner isn't worth anything near $8 million per season.

He doesn't do anything particularly well nor is particularly athletic. Turner is another second pick bust, in my opinion.

I want nothing to do with turner, he is horrible.

He can't shoot.

So no.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... ting/2011/
http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... ting/2012/
http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... ting/2013/
http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... ting/2014/

Turner is a decent mid-range shooter but $8 million would be a lot to stomach for him. I don't believe the difference between him and Singler is more significant than the difference between Thomas and Jennings either.

coordinator0 wrote:http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/t/turneev01/shooting/2011/
http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... ting/2012/
http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... ting/2013/
http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... ting/2014/

Turner is a decent mid-range shooter but $8 million would be a lot to stomach for him. I don't believe the difference between him and Singler is more significant than the difference between Thomas and Jennings either.

Where does it imply he's decent? He's 58% at the rim and >40% everywhere else on the floor.

For shooting numbers that's alright. Nothing above average but decent. Not good for threes or at the rim.

Turner is not the best 3 point shooter while Singler is still developing, has more length on defense and is better beter from the 3.

Pass on ET, he may be a talented wing with a nice all around game, but his 3 pointer is spotty, defense isn't good, and he's a ball dominant player that isn't good enough to dominate the ball.

I'd give the starting SF job to Singler 9/10 times before ET the bust gets it.

I'd be very surprised if he gets anything more than 8 mil per year. I remember some people in here (ya'll know who you are too) that wanted to do a S&T Monroe for Turner. I'm not even going to ask what mental gymnastics it took to reach that conclusion.

Piston Pete wrote:With the offer we reportedly gave IT, wouldn't we be better-served giving that to Turner instead? Could he be had with that offer?

1) Turner is > Singler MORE than Thomas is > Jennings

2) It balances our roster more


Jennings / Bynum / Dinwiddie / Siva
KCP / Meeks / Martin
TURNER / Singler
Monroe / Smith / Jerebko / Mitchell
Drummond / Monroe / Harrellson

Sure, Evan Turner would be a nice pick-up. The kid has a nice mid-range jumper and he can dribble. We could probably get him for cheap too! No way does he start over Smith though.

If we can sign Turner for cheap, he'd be ok off the bench, but Singler is a better player and a better fit in our starting lineup.
If we could sign him for 3-4 mil, then I can live with it.

I'd rather have an injured Dinwiddie than Turner. The only time I'd take ET is if he had an OSU jersey on. Man was he fun to watch.

Sent from my SPH-L720 using RealGM Forums mobile app

coordinator0 wrote:For shooting numbers that's alright. Nothing above average but decent. Not good for threes or at the rim.

It's alright if you do other things--if you're a distributing PG, if you play great D and take care of the ball, if you use a decent midrange game to set up a great driving game--but it's dreadful if that's your main weapon.

PistonHatersGetTheX wrote:Pass on ET, he may be a talented wing with a nice all around game, but his 3 pointer is spotty, defense isn't good, and he's a ball dominant player that isn't good enough to dominate the ball.

You're right but I feel like you're taking a soft approach! Turner was terrible for Indiana over 27 games, and he was very inefficient while racking up numbers on PHL. He's the type of guy that can't be a complementary player (can't shoot reliably, play team D, doesn't cut well) and that you basically never want taking shots from other people because he's always less efficient than other options. He can't shoot 3s but has also shot 42% from two--an epically bad number for a scoring wing--doesn't get to the line much, turns the ball over a lot. He's got some tools but simply never made it to a respectable level of efficiency.

$8m per season for a guy who's 25 and has never mustered a PER higher than 12.6 is absolutely out of the question. If we go after him, it better be as a cheap flier in the hopes he's a serious late bloomer.

Our team has many and diverse needs and ways to improve.

None of them are addressed by the acquisition of Evan Turner.

NOOO, his addition killed the Pacers last season with his lack of shooting. Unless he's gonna be a PG you dont bring him in

Didn't like him at tOSU, don't like him in the NBA, I'll pass.

Seriously? Evan Turner sucks. His ego is way bigger than his production, and we already have that guy on the team in Jennings.

HotelVitale wrote:It's alright if you do other things--if you're a distributing PG, if you play great D and take care of the ball, if you use a decent midrange game to set up a great driving game--but it's dreadful if that's your main weapon.

I don't disagree with that. It was more of just looking at his shooting numbers in a vacuum. I'm definitely not a proponent of going after Turner. Seeing what happens with Singler, Martin, and Datome would be better than tying up cap space for him.

I've brought up Turner before, and I'm still not against it at the right price. I'd really like to see a facilitating "point forward" for us at SF, and Turner has potential in that regard. Again, though, the price has gotta be right (like MLE territory or lower, nothing that could hurt our flexibility too much going forward). I'll definitely take the Thomas deal over Turner, but if we could do both by getting ET for ~$3 to $4M after acquiring Thomas I'd be willing to take that flyer (assuming we could scrape together that cap space).