RealGM

If you like it vote yes if no vote no


SAC Get: Wilson Chandler

UTH Get: Tyreke Evans

DEN Get: Alec Burks, Raja Bell


Why for SAC?
They get an athletic SF to add to their frontcourt of TROB|Cousins and clear logjam at PG

Why for UTH?
Burks was rumored to be available and they get a big PG to maybe groom as their future point next to Hayward. Foye has also played well at SG so Alec is expendable

Why for DEN?
They get a young SG and a vet SG who can shoot the 3 which is something their in dire need of. Corey Brewer can fill in as the backup SF

Sacramento has given up on Evans being a PG...... What exactly is going to change about that in Utah?

As a fan of none of the teams involved, I actually think this is decent.

Utah won't look at Tyreke as a pure PG, IMO, but paired with Mo Williams or Randy Foye and he should be fine I think. Tyreke will be RFA, but Utah will have more than enough space to re-sign him.

Sacramento's return is a bit light, but with Tyreke's future in Sacramento uncertain this might be the best they could do. IMO they need to swap some of their upside for some solid consistent production, and that's what they should get in Chandler.

With Denver, it seemed that they re-signed Chandler solely to use as a trade asset (as with Nene). This deal gives them a pretty solid return in a former lotto pick with upside.

KOTB yes.

vote Yes, Burks really does not fill the need for outside shooting but he is a talented scorer which the Nuggets could use off the bench. the Kings get a starting quality SF that fits there need for a defender at the 3. The Jazz could put Evans in the backcourt making a very nice pairing with Williams.

YES. (but with a few additional minor adjustments)

Utah should ideally give up Millsap to get a guard, but it seems like they don't have a too high opinion of Burks anyway, based on the minutes he gets. For his sake, I hope George Karl wouldn't be a douchebag.

red4hf wrote:Sacramento has given up on Evans being a PG...... What exactly is going to change about that in Utah?

Utah can experiment with that a little bit, Sacramento is stacked at the PG spot.

I actually like this a lot, very balanced in terms of value and a great fit in terms of needs for every team. Yes!

I like it. I see Evans as a small forward and I think he'd be a good fit in Utah. It allows us to do something with Marvin as well.

KOTB: Yes.

flipwise wrote:

red4hf wrote:Sacramento has given up on Evans being a PG...... What exactly is going to change about that in Utah?

Utah can experiment with that a little bit, Sacramento is stacked at the PG spot.

And we're not?

red4hf wrote:

flipwise wrote:

red4hf wrote:Sacramento has given up on Evans being a PG...... What exactly is going to change about that in Utah?

Utah can experiment with that a little bit, Sacramento is stacked at the PG spot.

And we're not?

Utah is now stacked at pg?

Scored a point, nice trade.

I like the premise but it needs some adjustments. If all sac is getting is Wilson Chandler, then why wouldn't denver just take tyreke themselves? Kings need to be getting more value for tyreke and both Utah and Denver need to give up a little more. Denver could possibly take Francisco Garcia since they have a tpe.

I'd rather have Alec Burks in Denver than Tyreke Evans. I think the Nuggets do this, good trade.

Very good trade and as a Jazz fan, I could see the Jazz giving up a little more in the deal - say the NJ #2 in 2015 or Jeremy Evans or even a heavily protected #1. Sacramento is going to want a little more ( rightly or not..) for Tyreke than just Chandler...

In this case it might not matter, but Denver would have to sent out another player or waive someone (e.g. Julyan Stone) to make this trade happen.

I think SAC should get a small sweetener, but the concept is alright, though I can see the Kings (fans) still wanting more for Tyreke.

RRFB wrote:I'd rather have Alec Burks in Denver than Tyreke Evans. I think the Nuggets do this, good trade.

Seems like a better idea to me as well, don't forget, Tyreke has to get PAID this summer.

red4hf wrote:

flipwise wrote:

red4hf wrote:Sacramento has given up on Evans being a PG...... What exactly is going to change about that in Utah?

Utah can experiment with that a little bit, Sacramento is stacked at the PG spot.

And we're not?

Well ok, you could include Earl Watson as a part of this trade if you insist.

I'm sorry, I must have missed Chris Paul and Derek Rose getting traded to the Kings.......

You have two PGs, one is averaging 9 points and 2 assists, and the other 7 points and 2 assists.......

The Jazz have Mo Williams averaging 15 and 7, and two other solid PGs...... So yeah, the Jazz are more stacked than the Kings at that position.......

Evans is not our PG, Brooks has been starting there for the last 2 games and prior to that, it was Thomas. So this trade does not clear the logjam at all. If anything, it adds to it at the 3. Add Chandler to the mix and we'd have Salmons, Garcia, Honeycutt (D-league), Outlaw and Johnson. At the point guard spot we'd still have Thomas, Brooks and the Jimmer. Not sure this trade is anything more than a lateral move at best even when you consider Evans' contract situation. I would think if you were willing to take on some of the excess we have at SF that a deal could be worked out but we simply can't have that many SFs on one roster IMO.

humboldtkingsfan wrote:Evans is not our PG, Brooks has been starting there for the last 2 games and prior to that, it was Thomas. So this trade does not clear the logjam at all. If anything, it adds to it at the 3. Add Chandler to the mix and we'd have Salmons, Garcia, Honeycutt (D-league), Outlaw and Johnson. At the point guard spot we'd still have Thomas, Brooks and the Jimmer. Not sure this trade is anything more than a lateral move at best even when you consider Evans' contract situation. I would think if you were willing to take on some of the excess we have at SF that a deal could be worked out but we simply can't have that many SFs on one roster IMO.

Then that would be Sacramento's problem to deal with after this trade, because they would absolutely have to say yes to this trade. Evans is mediocre and definitely will not be valuable for the Kings and is not part of their future anymore. Meanwhile they need PRODUCTION and quality from the SF position, not just a bunch of names, none of whom deserve to be NBA players anymore let alone starters.ll handling duties

I like it for all teams involved. No, Evans is not a PG, but he fits very well next to Williams at SG. Williams is not a real PG himself, so they would share ball handling duties and their skill sets compliment each other well. Mo is a great outside bomber and he can guard PG's while Tyreke is the slasher and he can guard SG's. It would work very well.

YES from me.

Thanx for the feedback guys. I know when i make Laker deals (my team) i somewhat overvalue our players but whenever i make deals not involving my team they seem to work out.

GhostX wrote:Thanx for the feedback guys. I know when i make Laker deals (my team) i somewhat overvalue our players but whenever i make deals not involving my team they seem to work out.

Homer Simpson, is that you?

Evans is hitting jumpers for 5 games in row, got his confidence back and today coach Dumb was kind enough to get out of the way as well. This team is starving for guys who can hit an open shot and stay out of the way of Boogie and Reke so Kings should look for those rather than trade Evans.