Tyreke Evans, anyone?

OnFire · Post #1 » by **OnFire** » Mon Apr 23, 2012 3:50 am

Here's the Wiretap:
http://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/22 ... reke_Evans\

Here's the Full Article:
http://www.sacbee.com/2012/04/22/443295 ... =Kings/NBA

if i remember correctly,
Larry Legend had interest
in Tyreke when he declared
for the draft.

he's a big, strong combo
guard that can attack
the rim with the best of
'em - an element that can
definitely create opportunities
for the bigs and wings.

if we had a penetrator-type
guy like him, methinks we'd
have a complete arsenal
offensively.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EFsDrMXQsUg[/youtube]

if at all, would you consider
dealing for him in the summer?

what do you think it would
take?

Post #2 » by **Miller4ever** » Mon Apr 23, 2012 4:52 am

It would take Williams/Nash not coming with us. I think the Kings want to keep him next to Cousins. Then we'd probably need to include a first or George or both.

I wouldn't want to deal for him, because he's less efficient than the guys we have manning the backcourt now (Even less efficient than Granger, with the bad year he's been having). Penetration hasn't been a huge need for us, especially with bigs who anchor inside. Right now we are missing distribution and ballhandling the most, so those defined PG's Nash and Williams, and even Dragic and Sessions I would inquire about before trading with the Kings, especially since we can sign one of those guys outright.

Wizop · Post #3 » by **Wizop** » Mon Apr 23, 2012 11:57 am

I think a note of Bill Polian caution is deserved here. if the Kings don't want him given their needs, should we?

Post #4 » by **Nuntius** » Mon Apr 23, 2012 12:04 pm

Penetration does not work with bigs who pack the lane.

If we could land Tyreke without giving up Hibbert, Granger or George then I'd take it. But it's not going to happen.

Post #5 » by **Scoot McGroot** » Mon Apr 23, 2012 2:13 pm

Decent enough player and all, but for the price (it would take George, Granger, Hill, or Hibbert), he's not worth it.

If we could move Dahntay and our 1st this year? Absolutely. But Tyreke is worth much more than that. Just not to us.

Moooose · Post #6 » by **Moooose** » Mon Apr 23, 2012 5:57 pm

Nah thanks, if we're going to give up any of our main assets in Granger, George, or Hibbert, i'd be hoping for a healthy Eric Gordon in return.

Boneman2 · Post #7 » by **Boneman2** » Tue Apr 24, 2012 3:52 am

Scoot McGroot wrote:Decent enough player and all, but for the price (it would take George, Granger, Hill, or Hibbert), he's not worth it.

If we could move Dahntay and our 1st this year
? Absolutely. But Tyreke is worth much more than that. Just not to us.

What about Hans/DC/2012 1st/capspace for Evans/ Hayes. I'd add a lottery protected 2014 1st too, if need be.

Wizop · Post #8 » by **Wizop** » Tue Apr 24, 2012 8:54 am

that's effectively four first round picks for a guy who hasn't been able to find a position on a bad team. I'd consider Hans for him straight up but that's about it.

8305 · Post #9 » by **8305** » Tue Apr 24, 2012 11:20 am

Who moves to the bench Granger, George or Evans? Good luck with whoever you pick for that demotion.

Boneman2 · Post #10 » by **Boneman2** » Wed Apr 25, 2012 4:45 am

8305 wrote:Who moves to the bench Granger, George or Evans? Good luck with whoever you pick for that demotion.

Or George Hill.. or Darren Collison.

If I had Tyreke I'd roll with him at pg. and PG & Danny on the wings.

Sacramento eff'd up cause they put too much on his plate (assists/rbs/pts/stls), and they haven't really put enough quality scorers around him to allow him to be most effective.

Here he could penetrate any defense with ease, and dish to a variety of options. He cannot shoot a lick, but here that would be less critical an issue than it is in Sac.

tocooks · Post #11 » by **tocooks** » Wed Apr 25, 2012 5:50 am

I dont mind him at point if the price is right, but there are better options out there for both teams. Great player, tough fit.

Post #12 » by **Nuntius** » Wed Apr 25, 2012 8:22 am

I don't consider him a PG. Sure, he can drive & dish but it's not the easiest thing to do when your bigs clog the lane.

freeman · Post #13 » by **freeman** » Wed Apr 25, 2012 12:40 pm

He's naturally an SG with excellent handles, but he is not a PG. That was the problem they had in Sacramento when they tried playing Tyreke at PG and it didn't work. Stats-wise he can average decent assists but it affects the game a lot because he's not a playmaker. Sure he can always find an open teammate but George Hill is a better playmaker IMO.

Boneman2 · Post #14 » by **Boneman2** » Wed Apr 25, 2012 7:58 pm

^^^ His best seasons were early, when he strictly played point guard.

Since he's been at sg he has been exposed as a horrible shooter, and less of a defender.

chube · Post #15 » by **chube** » Wed Apr 25, 2012 11:21 pm

Gotta add to this and go with the consensus. Fine player, nice versatility, but not worth what it would probably take to get him.

Post #16 » by **Miller4ever** » Thu Apr 26, 2012 12:15 am

They were trying to make him an SF? Straight-up, he needs to do work on his shot for a whole summer or two before I'd look at him.