NBA Trade Rumors: Moving Tyreke Evans Is Best Option for Sacramento Kings
The former No. 4 overall pick in the 2009 NBA draft has played three positions since being drafted out of Kentucky and has seen his numbers decline each year since winning the 2010 Rookie of the Year award.
His points-per-game average has dropped from 20 to 17 to 16, his rebounds from 5.3 to 4.8 to 4.6, and his assists from 5.8 to 5.6 to 4.5. His shooting percentage has fluctuated and, no, he still can't hit a three.
According to Ailene Voisin of the Sacramento Bee, the Kings are actually willing to listen to offers for their former budding star: "Kings executives will entertain trade offers for Tyreke Evans this summer, and they should."
She's right, and it's the best move for Evans, too.
Just as recently as this week, another Sacramento Bee writer, Jason Jones, says the Kings are "reluctant" to extend Evans' deal. He's entering the final year of his contract and he could walk at season's end.
While Evans has struggled to find an identity in the NBA, the Kings have only made matters worse. They've been unable to surround him with legitimate talent and they're doing nothing to help him develop.
At only 22 years old, Evans is still extremely young and full of potential and, as of now, still holds a good amount value on the market.
As to where he goes depends heavily upon what position a team thinks he can play. Evans isn't used to working without the basketball, but he's not a true point guard.
What Should the Kings Do with Evans?
He has so many positives to his game, but he offers just as many question marks, and at times negatives, as well.
So far the Kings have done nothing but waste time on the potential superstar, and it may be time to cut the cord. If they can find a deal worthy of his potential (which means it should still be a hefty price), they should seriously consider making the move.
Sooner than later the decision will have to be made whether to keep him in for the long haul, but the Kings can control the situation by working on it now.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?