One is the number 2 draft pick of the 2010 class. The other is was acquired for Royal Ivey.
One was honored with the NCAA Player of the Year Award. The other fled to the draft when three touted freshman were coming on campus.
One shares a similar skill-set with Andre Iguodala. The other fills the gaping hole of an outside shooter.
As you have probably gathered from the title, one is Evan Turner, and the other is Tanner Jodie Meeks. Up until last night, Jodie was going as cold as cold can be for a shooter, having shot under 35% from the field in the past month. Turner had started asserting himself on the offensive end without Iguodala, even though his percentages hadn't yet caught up with it. Despite Doug Collins' recent comments that Turner will turn(er?) it around, he's shown that even when #9 is on the sidelines, Evan doesn't deserve to be starting just yet. Meeks, meanwhile, has started in 18 consecutive games.
It's clear to most (hopefully all) that Evan Turner has the brighter future with this organization. He has a wider skill-set and his first half struggles should not condemn him to a bust-labeled career. Meeks is a nice complimentary player that should top out as a 6th man on a good basketball team -- he's simply not good enough at anything besides shooting, making him far too weak to start on a good basketball team. The Sixers are not a good basketball team, so he's snuck into the lineup since the beginning of December.
But as of now, it is evident that they are better with Meeks at shooting guard than with Evan because of Jodie's ability to stretch the floor with his jump shot. If Andre gets traded or continues to sit, some would rather see both of them than Andres Nocioni, but that's a separate argument. Basically, as always, this debate is whether it's more important to win now or develop the players with the highest potential.