Evans vs. Jennings is a Pitbull vs. a Puppy
Not a Bucks fan, just an NBA fan and Bleacherreport writer looking for a little bit more exposure...
Over the first half of the season, the Sacramento Kings’ Tyreke Evans and the Milwaukee Bucks’ Brandon Jennings have established themselves as the two best rookie point guards in the league.
But which one is better, and how good can each of them be?
In two separate games—Sacramento’s 118-114 victory over the New York Knicks, and Milwaukee’s 97-77 victory over the New Jersey Nets, I set out to answer that question.
Here’s the stat line of each player’s performance:
Evans: 11-26 FG, 0-1 3FG, 5-7 FT, 10 REB, 6 AST, 3 TO, 1 STL, 27 PTS
Jennings: 3-8 FG, 0-0 3FT, 1-2 FT, 3 REB, 3 AST, 5 TO, 2 STL, 7 PTS
Evans Offense
Evans has a wealth of natural talent, which he used to lead Sacramento back from a 15-point fourth-quarter deficit.
He almost always operates from the top of the key where he looks to either feed a wing down screen for one of Sacramento’s perimeter shooters, or receive a screen and go from there. If the down screen doesn’t open up, Evans will stay at the top of the key, get the ball back, and either reverse the ball or go into the screen/roll. Late in the shot clock, Evans will forgo the screen and simply isolate at the top.
Whether he’s isolating or using a screen, Evans gets to the rim an incredible amount of times. Of his 26 shot attempts, 18 came in the immediate basket area, and one was a short floater. While he missed the floater and seven layups, the majority came early in the game or on indecisiveness on which hand to finish with at the rim.
Evans only finishes with his left hand when his attempts are uncontested. In traffic, he has little confidence with his left and makes shot attempts more difficult by attempting to finish with his right on the left side of the rim.
When Evans sees an opening, he covers an enormous amount of ground with his natural speed, explosive first step, and his lengthy strides. He also lulls opponents to sleep because he doesn’t play at full throttle on simple plays. His ability to change gears and play at different speeds overwhelms opponents.
Over the first three quarters, Evans played at three-quarter speed, gliding through the game, setting up teammates, and only attacking when he saw a seam to the basket or a defensive mistake.
All that changed in the second half.
Going one-on-one at the top, left-to-right spin moves straight into Jared Jeffries sent him sprawling backwards while Evans had all the space in the world to finish a layup.
A right-to-left spin left Jeffries frozen in space while Evans found himself uncontested at the basket to sink a layup.
Another drive forced a double team, where a drop off pass to Jason Thompson led to an uncontested dunk and a tied game.
The combination of terrific speed, raw strength, hang time, and creativity puts Evans on an approximate talent level as last season’s version of Derrick Rose. The natural abilities are all there.
However, Evans has major work to do on his jump shot. He still releases the ball over his head (though not as dramatically as early in the season) and doesn’t get enough extension with his elbow. As a result he has little control over where his jumpers will land, and he only connected on one of his seven attempts outside the paint.
He has good court vision and is a creative passer. Three of his assists came on good decisions in transition, two came on accurate passes on down screens, and the sixth was the game-tying dime to Thompson.
However, he failed to read the Knicks overplaying a high post entry pass and the pass was deflected. He also threw a bad pass off the dribble that was deflected out of bounds, and an attempted drive and drop was deflected by David Lee when Evans threw a chest pass that should’ve been a bounce pass.
Evans’ other two turnovers came on a palm early in the game, and a pass straight to Omri Casspi that Casspi failed to attempt to catch. Meaning that despite several bad passes and several turnovers, only once was Evans responsible for a bad pass turnover.
Despite this, Evans has a habit of putting his head down on his drives. This keeps him from inspecting the entire court and seeing events unfurling. At least twice Evans had his head away from the action when a shooter was all alone in the corner and a cutter was wide open under the basket.
Also, Evans literally does nothing on offense without the ball in his hands. Part of this is his responsibility to balance the court, but he never receives the ball with any kind of off-ball action, which limits the possibilities he has to attack. He doesn’t cut, he doesn’t fill, he doesn’t screen away, he simply stands around watching.
The only time Evans made any meaningful basketball move without the ball was on the final play of regulation where Evans was asked to inbound and make a backdoor cut, but he was defended well and the backdoor pass was easily broken up.
For Evans to continue his ascent as an elite point guard, he’ll need to dramatically improve his understanding of how to be a factor without the ball in his hands and how to attack from various parts of the court.
He also has major work to do on his jump shot, and needs to further develop his ability to finish with his left hand.
Based on raw athleticism alone though, Evans is as good as it gets at the point guard spot.
Jennings Offense
Because Milwaukee’s offense features more ball movement, player movement, and general complexity, Jennings’ has a lot more responsibility as a facilitator than a scorer in Milwaukee’s offense.
As so, Jennings’ main attack opportunities come in transition or around screen/rolls going to his left, his dominant hand.
Jennings is fairly quick, but not much quicker than the stable of ultra-quick point guards already employed in the NBA. If Jennings was quick enough to turn the corner on screens, he wasn’t quick enough to beat New Jersey’s contesting helpers converging at the rim.
Jennings shot attempts were equally distributed inside and outside the paint. In the paint, he missed three of his four layups, both his right handed attempts, and a left-handed reverse layup which was swatted by Brook Lopez.
Both of Jennings’ made jumpers were wide open. A short banker after his blocked layup bounced back to him, and an open jumper going left off a screen. A step back jumper going left, and a jumper going right were missed.
If Jennings didn’t force any shots, he forced a pair of passes.
A forced chest pass in traffic needed to be a bounce pass to reach its destination. Instead, Yi Jianlian picked up a steal. Also, an entry pass to a post player being overplayed was knocked away.
Jennings drove parallel to the foul line going right after a screen on the left side, couldn’t turn the corner against a wall of Nets, didn‘t take the jump shot that the Nets gave him, picked up his dribble in able to throw the ball back to the weak side wing, found the angle cut off, and took an extra step to find a passing lane.
His other two turnovers came when he tried to catch a pass with one hand and it rolled out of bounds, and when he didn’t meet the ball, and had it stolen by Courtney Lee, hinting at a lack of focus.
Jennings is far too small to be a reliable finisher, and his overall field goal percentage is actually lower than his three point percentage. His puny size also allows defenses to push him where they want him to go, and he’s not quick enough to compensate. While he has decent vision, he’s prone to stretches where he loses focus, and therefore isn’t adept at running an offense yet.
While Jennings is certainly okay, he’s not the difference maker Evans is.
Evans Defense
Evans’ defense was almost as bad as his off-ball offense. On the weak-side he does nothing but ball gaze, allowing Jared Jeffries to beat him back door once, though the Knicks never took advantage.
When Evans’ teammates get beat off the dribble, Evans ends up in no-man’s land, neither throwing his body in the way of the penetration, nor being in a position to contest his own man should a pass make its way to him. Worse, Evans’ closeouts are atrocious, and any quick move can either get a player past Evans, or get Evans sprawling in the air.
Evans is tentative defending screens, usually needing the screen defender to take a step back so he can go under the screen without giving up too much room for a jump shot. Even with this strategy, Evans had difficulty recovering after reading the screen.
On-ball Evans’ defense of choice is to reach around the ball handler to try and poke away the ball from behind as the ball handler beats him off the bounce.
Indeed, the only player Evans defended with success was Chris Duhon who Evans was able to stay on par with and use his long wingspan to discourage a shot over him.
Otherwise, Evans’ hands are at his sides, he doesn’t contest dribbles, and plays with no aggression whatsoever.
In other words, as talented as Evans is offensively, is as poor as he is defensively.
Jennings Defense
Due to Scott Skiles’ philosophy, Jennings is by default a better defender than Evans simply because Milwaukee’s point guards will pressure the ball up the floor.
While Jennings doesn’t make a major impact on wrecking an opponent’s philosophy, the extra second or two to get an offense set up is an intrinsic help.
Jennings is more willing to move his feet and raise his hands on defense, and he’s slightly more alert in his weak-side defense.
Jennings’ main problem is because of how tiny he is, he gets wiped out by every single screen, and on one play, even fell to the floor after getting nailed by a Brook Lopez pick.
Indeed Devin Harris screen/rolls found great success for the Nets due to Jennings’ diminutive stature. When Jennings did stay within the vicinity of Harris, as he did on one particular drive, Harris just drove to a spot 12 feet away from the hoop and shot over Jennings—something most average-sized point guard can do with regularity against Jennings.
If Jennings has some speed and quickness to play adequate defense, he needs to put on weight or he’ll be at the opposition’s mercy.
Scoreboard
Speed/Quickness
Jennings may be quick, but Evans can get to the basket at will thanks to his natural speed and his long strides. He can also shake and bake with the best of them. If Jennings may be able to beat Evans in a 40-meter dash, Evans beats Jennings to the basket.
Edge: Evans by a little.
Strength
Evans is made of steel while Jennings is a runt.
Edge: Evans by a lot.
Scoring At The Rim
Jennings is one of the worst finishers in basketball right now, while Evans has the body type and body control to be a terrific finisher. Each is uncomfortable with his off-hand, but Evans is stronger with his dominant hand.
Edge: Evans by a lot.
Jump Shooting
Evans’ form still needs major reconstructing. Jennings isn’t a terrific shooter either, but has more range.
Edge: Jennings by a fair amount.
Classic Point Guard Skills
Evans plays in a simpler offense and has somewhat less responsibility than Jennings. Both have good vision, though Jennings sometimes loses focus and Evans plays with his head down. Evans is much more of an attack guard, while Jennings is more of a distributor.
Edge: Jennings by a little.
Defense
Jennings is slightly less awful than Evans, though if Evans learns to take more pride in his defense he has more upside to become a good defender.
Edge: Jennings by a little.
Intangibles
Evans can take over games by his lonesome, as he essentially did against the Knicks. He lives in the paint, has more explosive moves, and his strength and size allow him to be dominant down low. He was given the responsibility of carrying his team back in order to win on the road and succeeded with flying colors.
However, with Evans’ attacking mindset and raw strength, it’s a wonder if he’ll eventually become a playmaking combo guard or if he’s really set in stone as Sacramento’s point guard?
Jennings isn’t even the best point guard on his own team, as Luke Ridnour’s vision, unselfishness, smarts, and tricky mid-range shooting has him on the floor in crunch time and relegates Jennings to the bench much more often than an elite point guard would be.
One caveat—Evans is given maximum playing time because he can play both guard positions, while Jennings really isn’t a two-guard at all. Also, Jennings hasn’t been given full reign to play and make mistakes with the Bucks in contention for a playoff spot.
Edge: Evans by a lot.
Final Score
Jennings has the potential to develop into an above average NBA point guard. Evans has the potential to be mentioned with the best point guards in the NBA.
Edge: Evans, and it’s not even close.
FanPosts are user-generated blogs-within-the-blog. We ask that members abide by our community guidelines and keep things respectable. Thanks.
1 recs |
34 comments
|
Comments
Decent journalism with good points on each player, but why post this over here with that title? I see all the Kings fan ate it up on their blog. We all realize Tyreke will most likely win ROY and you have a man crush on him just like us Bucks fan think Jennings is our savior. I hoped Evans or Curry would have fallen to us, but we are grateful with who we got. In one Sactown comment u said,
“Nothing in how either player performed was far from his usual performances (except maybe Jennings’ turnovers, many of which were unusually bad).”
Really? I didnt know Jennings usually puts up these numbers…3-8 FG, 0-0 3FT, 1-2 FT, 3 REB, 3 AST, 5 TO, 2 STL, 7 PTS. Have u looked at his averages? Guess not. Or compared wins by either team? Ill take slighty lower stats and a playoff spot over what? 9 wins combined in the last month and a half by Sac/GS combined, with 2 coming against each other. Its mostly about winning, but you seem lke a Shareef Abdur-Rahim fan.
I would have posted this on Sac’s blog but I didnt not want to join just to comment. Good luck in your career or hobby, but what kind of reaction did u expect…and we all know DeJuan Blair deserved that MVP in the rookie/sophmore game, even Tyreke thought so.
by 808bucks on Feb 13, 2010 8:41 AM CST reply actions 2 recs
It’s the title I’ve used for all the places I published the article. I don’t expect Bucks fans to be jumping for joy over this article, but it is what it is. Rip me to shreds if you must Bucks fans, just try to read points made and use them as a jumping off point.
Numbers are numbers. He didn’t play major minutes which would’ve given him a few more shot attempts and assists, the shooting percentage is right on target, the missed layups are on target, the general unselfishness and vision is on target, the puny defense is on target, the shiftiness is on target.
There’s more to the game than box score stats (and even advanced stats). See what a player does well and doesn’t do well, and how much he needs to improve in those areas. Also look at raw potential.
And with the playoff spot, Ridnour is doing the heavy lifting. His offensive rating on basketball-reference is 15 points higher than Jennings’, and Ridnour executes the offense better. I wouldn’t be surprised if Ridnour gets more minutes late in games the rest of the way.
I expect discussion and a chance to argue my analysis. Nothing more, nothing less.
by Erick Blasco on Feb 13, 2010 1:26 PM CST up reply actions
With all due respect 808bucks
I take Mr Blasco’s analysis for what it was. And I too thought these observations were based off one game. Since they aren’t I can live with the analysis as much of it makes sense to me (based on my observations of both players—although I’ll admit I haven’t watched Jennings much lately).
And, just because people made comments on that particular piece over at StR doesn’t mean anything more than the comments made here at BH. There’s an asinine trade thread that routinely gets 200+ comment over there too.
No mistakes in the tango, Donna. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....
Wait a minute.
I don’t think anyone will argue Evans is the better player at this point, but are you really using one-game samples to put this together? That’s awfully amateurish.
by derflotr on Feb 13, 2010 1:15 PM CST reply actions 1 recs
I’ve seen more than ONE Bucks and Kings game this season.
by Erick Blasco on Feb 13, 2010 1:28 PM CST up reply actions
As a way of highlighting what they can and can’t do. I don’t think Jennings appears stronger in other games, or slower in other games, or better defensively in other games.
Sometimes players have better or worse performances, but there are constants in each player’s game, and each game reveals truths about who a player is.
I didn’t just watch this game and go “Whoa! Evans is a superstar!” But he has the talent to take games over, because of his speed and his strength. That was revealed in the Knicks game, but even if the Kings lost by 20, you’d still see the measurables.
I didn’t watch this Bucks game and go “Whoa! Jennings is a bust!” He’s not. But he’s a terrible finisher, as his FG percentage, his close FG percentage, and his game against the Nets show. He’s also not a terrific shooter yet, and tends to lose focus for stretches. These are flaws that have shown in nearly every game he’s played.
by Erick Blasco on Feb 13, 2010 3:08 PM CST up reply actions
All of which is fine
However, I would suggest making it more clear you’ve seen more than one game in future comparisons.
Reading your article, it’s hard to tell if you had seen either player before you decided to make your comparison. Perhaps you have, and perhaps most people would give you the benefit of the doubt. Throughout the article describing each player’s game in general terms and on a play-by-play basis. Presumably, your generalities are based upon the entirety of your observations, though it is never made clear how far these extend (One game? Two? Ten?).
Also, and this also would have helped establish you’ve seen these guys play before, there is no discussion of why you picked each game or whether the games you picked were typical for either player, bad nights, or good nights. I feel there is much you can glean from studying players in any sport for each of those situations, so long as you’re comparing apples and apples.
I don’t know much about Tyreke Evans. I have to assume the game you picked for him was one of his better performances (if not, yikes). As someone who follows the Bucks casually, I noted immediately that any game Brandon Jennings finishes with single-digit shot attempts, not to mention zero 3-point attempts, is atypical. That isn’t to say it was better or worse than his usual output, just that a red flag was raised in my mind.
Frankly, I am not knowledgeable enough about basketball to draw as many conclusions as you have here. I don’t really want to quibble about your opinions (though I do feel you may be conflating talent and genetics, i.e., height/body type, a little too much). I just want to note there is no context presented for these games. As such, I believe anyone reading your article cold would find it hard to judge the validity of your comparisons.
by TheJay on Feb 13, 2010 6:37 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Fair criticisms
I have an archive at BR where I’ve written basic scouting reports on each team.
It’s the same paradigm that Charley Rosen (and others) use for their basketball analysis. In other words, the reasoning behind my ideas and the trust that I know what I’m talking about is my selling point. If you don’t believe the reasoning is solid, then I have little credibility.
A small sample size such as a game will cause some problems, but I don’t have access to Milwaukee’s video vault to see every single pass Jennings has made this year and if was a good one or a bad one. Also, how many stats are there for bad shot attempts, or careless turnovers, or things you can’t simply look at an advanced stat sheet and find answers for.
Also, since I try to write about every single NBA team, I don’t have time to string together a bunch of Bucks’ games in a row to watch them. I’m limited to my local market games (Knicks/Nets) who the Bucks have played several times, National TV games (I believe I’ve seen one game, vs. the Thunder), and when League Pass has the free previews, the free preview games the Bucks play.
If it’s too small a first-hand sample size, I also read NBA scripture from Kevin Pelton and crew at Basketball Prospectus to the aforementioned Rosen, to the True Hoop and Yahoo guys.
If you still feel that the sample size is too small, congratulations, you’ll never believe anything more than blanket statements made by any national media member because these guys aren’t watching the Bucks (or any non-elite team) in their entirety without switching games while doing close analysis.
I chose the game because the Bucks and Kings playing against my local market teams gave me a perfect opportunity to use in-game analysis for a comparison article.
There are results from Jennings’ game that are atypical (shot attempts), but the attempts are low because Luke Ridnour essentially played the entire second half. Jennings’ shooting percentages were fairly consistent. His defensive abilities were fairly consistent. Several of his turnovers were fluky, but show a lack of focus (everyone gets one fluke careless turnover, not three).
Also I’m a writer who praises discussion. Making strong points (so long as they are based on research) makes for a better article than something with a final conclusion like “Evans may be better than Jennings or he may not be.”
If anyone reads my articles cold and keeps following up and following up, I trust they’d eventually respect the process and the arguments.
Thanks for the response.
by Erick Blasco on Feb 15, 2010 2:02 AM CST up reply actions
Did you see the last Knicks/Bucks game?
Not sure if you saw it but it was at least a local game for you. Kind of summed up Jennings’ season in many ways: regrettable shooting percentage, good raw numbers, inconsistency around the cup, the guts/ability to take/make shots down the stretch.
by Frank Madden on Feb 15, 2010 3:49 PM CST up reply actions
I'm not in the best position to make a convincing argument here...
But I’m a casual fan who has watched maybe 70-75% of Bucks games this year, and this Jennings kid has shown great composure in late-game situations, more than I think you give him credit for. There have been multiple times the Bucks have needed a big basket in last-minute situations and Jennings has come through more often than not. It sounds extremely cliche, but I’m no NBA analyst, I’m just relaying what I’ve seen. All I can say is I think you underestimate Jennings in terms of intangibles, the guy has been crucial to the Bucks’ success this season. I understand this is a comparison to Tyreke Evans, but calling Jennings a “puppy” is rather biting, don’t you think?
by derflotr on Feb 13, 2010 3:58 PM CST reply actions 1 recs
Absolutely right
Jennings has hit/facilitated some big shots so far, both game-tying and lead-taking makes. The problem is that the baskets don’t come at the buzzer (even if they’re in the last few minutes), so they don’t get on SportsCenter.
That, and other teams have found ways to re-take the lead before the final gun. Including the Kings (Evans himself hit the game-winning layup when the Bucks played them).
"Brandon Jennings needs a nickname before he gives himself one. Oh wait, Young Money, he already did."
calling Jennings a "puppy" is rather biting, don’t you think?
It also creates a very strong title and falls in line with the arguments I’m making, particularly in terms of the raw strength of each player.
by Erick Blasco on Feb 15, 2010 2:05 AM CST up reply actions
Jennings has the potential to develop into an above average NBA point guard. Evans has the potential to be mentioned with the best point guards in the NBA.
Ludicrous. There’s enough evidence from this year to switch the names in the above sentences and still be right.
You can’t pick and choose two individual games (especially these two) to extrapolate these players’ ceilings. Jennings has the potential to be a perennial All-Star because of his offensive ability and his work ethic. He’s special, as is Tyreke Evans. Evans’ future is less clear, though, only because we’ve rarely seen a player with his combination of size and strength at the PG position. He could be above average, or one of the best of the decade; it depends on what parts of his game he focuses on in the next few years.
"Brandon Jennings needs a nickname before he gives himself one. Oh wait, Young Money, he already did."
by Mitchell_M on Feb 13, 2010 7:47 PM CST reply actions 2 recs
Not ludicrous at all
Can I then extrapolate Jennings’ entire season where he has one of the worst shooting percentages at the rim of any NBA player, and where his TS% is an almost embarrassing 47%?
He’s not a terrific shooter and lots of NBA players are quick. How’s quick working out for Devin Harris in one example.
In other words, it takes more than just having one or two very good attributes to become a special player, though explosive finishers usually become better players because they can blow through the best defenses while poor finishers get swallowed up.
by Erick Blasco on Feb 15, 2010 2:10 AM CST up reply actions
Rigorous, but your method needs some serious work. You cannot adequately judge from watching games picked at random. Each game was on a different night, at a different time, against different opponents. Your post reveals very little useful information because of this.
Then understand the context
It still works if you apply the contexts of each game. For example, Jennings was going against the worst team in the league, on the road, in front of about 1000 fans. Shouldn’t he have played better than average?
The Knicks aren’t a great defensive team, but they defended Evans with a pretty good player in Jeffries. Shouldn’t he have had a bad game?
by Erick Blasco on Feb 15, 2010 2:13 AM CST up reply actions
Jeffries is dead weight. He’s certainly a less capable defender than Devin Harris, even in an off year.
by MadTown Hoops on Feb 16, 2010 7:02 PM CST up reply actions
I like to think I’m fairly even-handed when it comes to Jennings, so I think the basic criticisms are all fair. I think the quickness thing is also something people don’t mention very much. In the open court he gets by people really easily, but Brandon really hasn’t figured out how to use his quickness in the halfcourt very well. That said, his game management in the halfcourt has been much better than advertised.
But I also just re-read this twice and it seemed so set on discrediting Jennings that at the end I wasn’t sure if he did anything well. And for what it’s worth I think Skiles has gone with Ridnour over Jennings only a couple times late in games, though they often play together in those scenarios. You can count on one hand the number of times Jennings has been “relegated to the bench” late in games.
by Frank Madden on Feb 13, 2010 11:09 PM CST reply actions 1 recs
Small sample size
Because of the small sample size, the highlights illustrated in Evans’ piece aren’t there, simply because a simple layup and a pair of open jumpers aren’t too revealing, and his main draw (his quickness) didn’t lead to many plays.
I like Jennings as a starter, I don’t think he’s special as a “franchise player,” or an elite player or whatever argument people make.
I think Milwaukee’s been seduced because the Bucks haven’t had this athletic-type scorer in so long, but on a lot of other teams he’d be just another guy.
That being said, Jennings does bring a lot of good to the Bucks. He’s one of the few players who can sometimes create his own shot. He’s easily their best offensive athlete. He’s also easily their most talented player, but talent doesn’t always equate to levels of “goodness.”
Compared to Evans though, there are people who don’t see just how physically gifted Evans is, especially if he stays as a point guard. He has the ability to be close to Derrick Rose, while Jennings will probably top out someday as a top 10-15 point guard.
Before people declare a point guard a really good point guard, look at all the amazing point guards in the game today.
Paul, Parker, M. Williams, Nash, Miller, Billups, Kidd, Rondo, Rose, Evans, Harris, Davis, D. Williams, Nelson, Hinrich, Flynn, West (if you consider Delonte a point guard), Calderon, Ridnour, Brooks, Lowry, Westbrook, and several more.
Is Jennings better than them? He certainly will be better than some in the near future, and there are a few he may be better than now, but he’s not better than most.
Does he have more upside than them? Many, but first the upside has to be achieved, and secondly, the other players can’t reach their upsides.
I like Jennings’ point guard skills. If he keeps getting more disciplined, he could be a very good distributor.
I just don’t feel he’s this prodigious player that Bucks fans want him to be.
With Milwaukee still in the hunt for a playoff spot and Ridnour playing so well, I wouldn’t be surprised if Ridnour gets more minutes late in games the rest of the way.
With Milwaukee still in the hunt for a playoff spot and Ridnour playing so well, I wouldn’t be surprised if Ridnour gets more minutes late in games the rest of the way.
Except he doesn’t, and probably won’t, because Jennings has showed an ability to hit and/or create shots late in games.
Look, we know that Jennings doesn’t have the raw physical strength that Evans has. In a game of one-on-one, Tyreke would probably quadruple Brandon’s score. A terrible mismatch, one I’m sure the Kings will take advantage of against most PGs in the league.
But as a point guard, it’s not so cut and dry. Your breakdown of these players’ offensive games is based almost solely on their ability to score individually, but how about a PG’s main function: setting up the other four guys?
Jennings’ passing is so far above what anyone expected it’s not even funny. As a rookie, he’s made more smart decisions than rookies normally make, and he’s going to get better. Is Evans’ passing that good? Probably not, though it can’t be bad if he’s starting at the point.
One of your biggest critiques is that Brandon has trouble finishing at the rim. Admittedly, it’s a huge problem, but you even said that his explosiveness will help him improve in this area because he’s at least able to get there.
The entire premise is founded on the already-drawn conclusion that Evans is lengths better than Jennings, both now and in the future. As an individual offensive player, the only way Jennings will close the gap is by a) further improving his shooting and b) figuring out how to finish his forays to the basket. As a defensive player, he’ll never be able to body anyone up, so he’ll have to improve his technique.
Calling Evans a pitbull? Acceptable, even appropriate. The guy is scary-talented, and yes, he could end up being a perennial All-Star. Calling Jennings a puppy? Other than the alliteration, the term just doesn’t fit. Give the kid a fair chance, like the one you gave Tyreke.
Besides, they’ve only completed 1/20th of their NBA careers so far. So none of us knows what we’re talking about.
"Brandon Jennings needs a nickname before he gives himself one. Oh wait, Young Money, he already did."
by Mitchell_M on Feb 15, 2010 12:53 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
let's not overlook the fact
that evans was taken 6 spots ahead of jennings. evans should be the better player. if he wasn’t, jennings would have been taken earlier.
it has been said in this discussion already, but the small sample size is worth mentioning.
you (blasco) mentioned the best point guards in the league – names like moe williams and luke ridnour do not help that arguement at all… jennings’ numbers may not look like luke’s this season (as far as efficiency), but luke is putting up probably the best numbers of his career – at the very least, the most efficient. I can’t help but think that that is at least partially because jennings has taken pressure off him running the offense.
also, since the 55 point game, defenses have stepped out on jennings on the high pick and roll. that has opened shots for bogut (best season as a pro), delfino in the corner (best season as a pro), and Ilyasova behind the arc (developing player), among others.
everything i mentioned has helped the bucks to 24 wins before the break, more than a lot of people had them penciled for…
jennings will be a fine pro, something bucks fans need.
If compelled to base things on very small sample sizes, and I am not, but just to illustrate what you might get yourself into…
In the clutch stats (4th quarter of overtime, less than 5 minutes left, neither team ahead by more than 5 points):
Jennings 91 % of team minutes played, +10 net differential, .522 eFG%
Evans 70 % of team minutes played, -47 net differential, .402 eFG%
And that +10 is despite the Bucks’ terrible record in games decided by less than three points.
by MadTown Hoops on Feb 16, 2010 7:07 PM CST up reply actions
Well Done Alex.
This argument is pretty unnecessary in my opinion, but it’s intriguing, especially considering how intent this Kings fan is on proving that he’s right. The truth is that stats can and always will be construed to be things that they are not. The better player is the man who makes a difference, who makes his teammates and therefore team better. Who is the better player? Who knows yet. Who’s having the better Rookie season? Tyreke from a stats perspective, but whatever team ends up with a better record, much less is able to say they made the playoffs, has a legitimate argument. Especially considering where both teams were slated to be coming into this season.
by everyoneruns on Feb 15, 2010 6:24 PM CST reply actions 1 recs
Hey
Kings fan here…Check the top of the page
He is neither a Kings or Bucks fan but just an NBA fan and Bleacherreport writer looking for a little bit more exposure.
Additionally, after initially reading the title of the article on STR, it would conjure up some bad taste in your fanbase. Jennings is an exceptional player and noting that defenses have stepped up their intensity and focus on a rookie guard can more than explain for the diminishing field goal percentages. I can also greatly appreciate his adept passing and court vision skills. Both will be great players but IMHO Tyreke will be better only because of the combination of size and strength and his insistence on driving to the hole. Jennings will be better “pure” point guard and will get his assists and points even more so once the Bucks surround him with all-star complimentary players as well as getting rid of the Redd contract.
The only possible hangup I have is that Jennings seems to be somewhat bravado, He’s not shy to run his mouth, and although I understand that certain players are better suited for it and may use it to their advantage, I enjoy that cold, emotionless stare that Evans displays even after he makes big plays (except for game winning shots). It seems more of a one sided effort by Jennings to psyche or talk down Evans. But that’s about it.
I have one other question: Do you guys believe Jennings has a legitimate shot at winning ROY based on a playoff appearance?
"i thought rasheed wallace was the best kings player or whatever that rookie's name is"
by Imminentfailure on Feb 16, 2010 2:35 AM CST up reply actions
I don't
If Jennings’ numbers get closer to Evans’ then it could be a factor, but as of right now I don’t think the Bucks slipping into the playoffs should be the deciding factor. Bogut’s better than anybody Evans plays with, which is the main reason the Bucks might make the playoffs.
by Frank Madden on Feb 16, 2010 11:25 AM CST up reply actions
Jennings is a Man, Evans is a boy.
I’d rather have Brandon Jennings on my team over Tyreke Evans any day. Brandon is a man who has overcome his father’s suicide to be class-act NBA Star at age 20. Tyreke is a boy who was the driver in a drive-by shooting that killed someone. Compare this:
Brandon: http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?page=Jennings-100212
Tyreke: http://nba.fanhouse.com/2009/06/25/tyreke-evans-red-flag-a-cousins-murder-plea/
Here we go...
The Evans thing was obviously worrying but I think it’s been discussed plenty already. I haven’t heard anything else suggesting Evans’ character is a question mark which is why I don’t think it impacted his draft stock.
by Frank Madden on Feb 16, 2010 11:22 AM CST up reply actions
Tyreke
is straight beastly…..but Jennings could prove to be the better scorer given time….i would never sleep on Jennings, hes the “chip on his shoulder” type, i can see him becoming an assassin like scorer in the years to come.
everyone that has kept an eye on his career knows that he is not a true pg…he just tryna play the role right now, he dont wana make no enemies so he shares and plays nice.
but give him the green light and the majority role in the offense like tyreke? adn jennings will put up the same numbers if not better.
"minds sharpens minds, like steel sharpens steel"

by 














