Dismissing Evans' potential was my single biggest column-related misfire this decade, and I'm the...

Dismissing Evans' potential was my single biggest column-related misfire this decade, and I'm the same guy who thought Orlando was crazy for taking Howard over Okafor. In my draft diary, I wrote the joke, "(Stu) Scott on Evans: 'His nickname is 'Hugo' because he was born during Hurricane Hugo.' That pick was a natural disaster. Literally." The whole debacle mortally wounded my chances to become a GM someday. I'm not gonna lie. Evans has a chance to be a top-10 player some day. Although I still believe I was correct with one thing: In no way, shape or form is he a point guard. You will never sell me on that one

Bill Simmons' Trade Column

8 months ago vfettke 26 comments 1 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

At least he admits his wrong

Although, his proposed trade for Sac is the Martin/Thomas for AK47/Korver/NY’s Pick that he posted on Twitter the other day.

Honestly, I think I may like the trade. If they throw in their own pick and/or Fesenko I think I’d do it

www.mancancook.net

by vfettke on Dec 23, 2009 1:52 PM PST reply actions

I don't know. NY's pick would be 8th or 9th if the draft were today

One more year on AK’s contract after this one. I don’t think he’s the same player at 28 that he was at 22 or 23, which is odd. He should be in his prime. Maybe a change of scenery rejuvenates him, but there was also talk about him returning to Europe after his contract. I’d have to feel pretty solid about our chances to resign him at a reasonable salary, to even consider it. Seems like a lot of ifs would need to fall the right way to make this a good trade.

Ball movement ... is like jogging for most people: They do it occasionally, and it makes them happy. Then they go back to not doing it. - Henry Abbott

by Kfan in Korea on Dec 23, 2009 2:10 PM PST up reply actions

I have confidence in Petrie

picking just as good a player at 12-16 as I would at 8 or 9 he would probobly pick the same player at 9 everyone else wouldn’t think about taking til 16

by allbenji's on Dec 23, 2009 2:18 PM PST up reply actions

I just like the idea of two lottery picks

www.mancancook.net

by vfettke on Dec 23, 2009 2:43 PM PST up reply actions

I am very weary about trading martin

but AK47 played his best ball when he was utahs starting 4. Him & JT up front with spence off the bench would be nice. I don’t think we need korver but I believe he is expiring. I would rather trade k9 for AK47 & NY’s pick or maybe noce in there instead of martin. Noce seems like a better fit then AK in utah AK is a power forward playing out of position

by allbenji's on Dec 23, 2009 2:13 PM PST reply actions

You're right

I always thought his best playing was at SF, but it was at the 4 because Boozer took his spot there. I’d gladly play him at the 4 with JT at the 5.

www.mancancook.net

by vfettke on Dec 23, 2009 2:44 PM PST up reply actions

Simmons missed the Kings most obvious contract problem

Andres Nocioni and Francisco Garcia are basically the same player and they’re both being paid too much to come off the bench at a position where we have plenty of quality (Casspi, Greene). One of the two is a mortal lock to move before the deadline.

by Deleran on Dec 23, 2009 2:13 PM PST reply actions

Hopefully Noce

I like noce but Cisco has been with us since he was an nba baby I still would like to see him grow up. I don’t have the same attachment to Noce

by allbenji's on Dec 23, 2009 2:21 PM PST up reply actions

I still see Noc going to the Celtics for some of their exprings

and quite frankly, I’d love to see that due to what happens when you have cap flexibility. Losing Nocioni once Cisco is back won’t hurt us much, if at all. Plus, more cap flexibility next year is not a bad thing, even if we don’t use it for a big name free agent. Just look at OKC. They got the greatest player ever simply for being able to take on an expiring deal. OKC’s done that like mad these past few years. They take on a kind of crappy contract and get a pick for taking it. A late first rounder in Geoff Petrie’s hand is deadly. Especially if we can get this flexibility without losing any part of our core.

www.mancancook.net

by vfettke on Dec 23, 2009 2:49 PM PST up reply actions

Simmons can't be convinced that Evans is a PG

I can’t be convinced that Simmons has any clue as to what he is talking about on this matter.

Guess it’s a push.

SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!

by section214 on Dec 23, 2009 3:19 PM PST reply actions

He's not wrong

Evans is not a PG… he’s better. The important part is that he mentions how Evans might be a top 10 player someday which I’m pretty sure is better than having a true PG. Portland doesn’t seem to mind having a stud guard that can do a bit of everything, do they? And I think ’Reke could be better.

www.mancancook.net

by vfettke on Dec 23, 2009 3:34 PM PST up reply actions

Agreed...but

it is his insistence that Evans is not a PG that leads him to the conclusion that Tyreke and Martin play the same position and therefore cannot co-exist, while I think that Evans at the PG position causes tasty mismatches.

Simmons is a funny and often knowledgeable guy, but he’s talking out of his arse when he makes these comments, in my opinion.

SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!

by section214 on Dec 23, 2009 4:35 PM PST up reply actions

Agree with you completely

I was firmly on the “Not really a PG bandwagon” during the draft, but I jumped off a long time ago. The issue for me was never offense but defense. I never thought he’d be able to keep up with guys like Derrick Rose on defense. Well, not only can he keep up with them he’s practically a stopper. He can guard anyone. And he absolutely destroys the PGs on the offensive end. The matchup problems he causes when he’s playing PG is one of the main reasons he’s so valuable. And meanwhile, you can always bring in Beno or Sergio off the bench to give you some playmaking and give him some time at the 2 to give the team another look if the opposing offense is keying too much on Evans.

Really looking forward to seeing what a Evans/Martin/Greene/Casspi/Thompson lineup can do now that Evans has his feet under him. I think people are underestimating the extent to which Evans’ and Martin’s games complement each other. Martin is best when he’s spotting up/slashing and not being forced to create. Evans is best when he’s driving and dishing. There’s no reason their games should conflict.

by nbrans on Dec 23, 2009 4:53 PM PST up reply actions

Do you blame NBA writers for feeling they won't co-exist?

They have to watch every game, not just focus on the Kings like we do. From their perspective Kevin needs the ball in his hands to score and be effective because, quite honestly, Kevin Martin has been given the ball a lot the past couple years. Granted, he didn’t have it nearly as much as Artest or Salmons. But, from their perspective Kevin’s the one doing most of the scoring and the only guy being effective. Sports columnists really haven’t been given the chance to see Kevin play on a good team as the secondary guy. Once we actually see Tyreke and Kevin play together, if they mesh well I’m sure we’ll be seeing a lot of guys talk about how effective they are.

www.mancancook.net

by vfettke on Dec 23, 2009 7:16 PM PST up reply actions

I do blame them

It is their job, and they should take enough pride in what they do to research their topics before popping off.

If these guys wanted to say that it will be interesting to see how Martin and Evans mesh once Martin returns, I’ll buy that. But the notion that Martin is a ball dominating, shot chucking player is statistically untrue, and they should know that.

They should also know that Evans has started every game at PG this season, and is flourishing in that role. They should notice that he gets off to hot starts in most of these games, when he is paired with Donté Greene or Omri Casspi. He is more effective in that dynamic than when he plays alongside Beno Udrih or Sergio Rodriguez, as it allows the opponent to put their smaller point guard on a player other than Tyreke.

If these guys are too busy to do the basic research, so be it. But if that is the case, they should stick to what they do know, and refrain from throwing crap against the wall to see what sticks.

SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!

by section214 on Dec 24, 2009 10:56 AM PST up reply actions

I definitely agree with that last sentence

and I think its one of the problems with a lot of sports writing these days. Writers need to stick to what they know or whatever their little niche is. When it comes to ESPN guys tend to have their own little shtick that sets them apart, taking their focus away from the game as a whole and forcing them to see it from their own little angles. I really think we need to lower what our expectations are for ESPN writers especially otherwise we’ll just be continuall disappointed.

www.mancancook.net

by vfettke on Dec 24, 2009 11:35 AM PST up reply actions

Agreed 100%

View it more from entertainment value than from actual content value. I always seem to enjoy Simmons (for example) more when I’m looking for laughs and not knowledge.

SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!

by section214 on Dec 24, 2009 12:03 PM PST up reply actions

Just to jump on the bandwagon

I agree with pretty much everything said on these chain of comments.

Godfather of the "nice ass" movement.... the future begins now...

by edm7 on Dec 24, 2009 12:22 PM PST up reply actions

Me too

I loved the Book of Basketball, but I know that it’s always going to come from a slightly biased on humor based perspective. He’s famous for being the Boston Sports Guy so is it totally his fault that ESPN gave him the opportunity (and big money) to be read all over? I view him as a sports fan, more than a sports writer. And he’s continued to write from that perspective because that’s what got him paid. I have no problem with a sports fan making somewhat ignorant statements, because its what we do. Plenty of us discuss other teams and make statements that die hard fans of those teams would probably disagree with quite a bit. It’s just that none of us have been given nice ESPN contracts to make these statements.

Ford and Bucher on the other hand…

www.mancancook.net

by vfettke on Dec 24, 2009 12:34 PM PST up reply actions