Resigning Beasley
by catinhat on Jan 19, 2012 7:35 AM CST
Email
PrintHey first post here on CH
Obviously a lot of talk on resigning Love but what sort of contract would be considered fair to reign Beas?
His value has probably never been as low as it is at the moment.
So he can probably be signed on the cheap.
I'm thinking a fair offer would be 18 mill over 3 seasons is fair.
Its not worth just letting him walk too talented for that especially when we arn't going to be getting a high draft pick. And he seems to be making a much better effort on d this season.
142 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I think he's a good candidate for RFA.
Let the new coach evaluate for a year. Extend the qualifying offer if Adelman thinks he’s a long term keeper. Let him find a better situation if not.
600 N First Ave "like a Pirate's cove".
yes
I don't know what an art house is, I don't know what goes on in an art house, I have never been in an art house, and I can't imagine it's any place I ever want to be.
This or just move him at the deadline as an expiring contract.
Which unfortunately may be where most of his value lies. In any case no way I’d want to spend 6/18 on him.
Unless he has a MAJOR revelation about his game,
I don’t want to pay him 8.2M next year.
Adelman certainly sees more than we do.
However, evaluating Beasley seems to me totally more difficult than evaluating Love. Right now I would want to pay lower than his rookie contract. Would that offend him? Kahn did give extensions to two players last year and traded one off successfully (Hayward) while keeping Ellington.
Did this prevent us from not having the capital to get a better free agent? I can see the argument for the Restricted free agent because it allows time to judge Beasely’s value to the team and ties up no money for going into free agency for a player to fill the teams need.
He picked up their options
Because it is at “filler” numbers. Kahn has a real good feel for that sort of thing, and I think it had little to do with either’s actually ability to play. Beasley’s $$$ will hurt not matter whether it’s $4 mil, $6 mil, or $10 mil. That qualifying offer is over $8 million. If it gets offered, it’s because this time off has allowed MB to see how he has to play, and he follows through. I doubt it gets offered.
You can't...dust...for vomit.
by twinstalker on Jan 19, 2012 12:04 PM CST up reply actions
I think 3/18 is too much.
It’s basically what he gets now and he’s producing at the level of the worst players in the league. Sure he has “talent” but until he shows results I’m not convinced his value is anything more than a expiring contract. RA has Wayne looking ok so maybe he can salvage Beasley but I’ve more hope in Webster right now.
It's all relative
and if we lowball him, we could accidentally create a locker room cancer. Beasley deserves more respect than he gets here most days. We may not want him on the team after this season, but if we keep him we should pay him the going rate for players of his caliber.
Yo ho ho and a FirstRow stream!
Which is what?
I can’t think of a comp that I actually want on our team. If we respectfully say go test free agency, so be it, but if all we want out of him is 6th man instant offense, I think Barea will provide that at $5 mil / year.
Beas just needs to learn to pllay within aldermans offence.
No more of this stare up your opposite and shoot the long 2.
Id love to see him in the corner waiting for those kick outide passes that ricky throws.
6 mill a yr is fair whe n u compare to kapono, reddick, r lewis, vlad rad.
Hes a better player than LJ pre injury and he wants to play in MIn.
Our biggest issues are Manna from heaven and how to get something for Wes which im on the trade wes for foye bandwagon.
"Hes a better player than LJ pre injury and he wants to play in MIn."
uhh…no. Not even close.
And just because Rashard Lewis and Vlad have stupid overpaid contracts doesn’t mean we should overpay a mediocre player like Beasley.
And I’d trade Beasley for Reddick in a heartbeat.
"LJ pre injury" clearly means Larry Johnson
And he,s very, very wrong about that.
Hell, LJ post injury was better than Beasley.
Still have hope
I think people need to remember back to the first half of last year when everyone was in love with Bease. He is a talent and I believe RA could really do something with him. When Kahn was on with Paul Allen a couple weeks ago he said he had this year to prove his worth. I hope Kahn is true to his word see how it goes then make a decision we need exactly what Beasley could provide if RA can bring it out of him.
Beasley seems to have a good attitude
and he was really rebounding the ball before his foot injury.
I just have concerns whether he has the mental discipline needed to play quality, low-mistake basketball over most of a game. Same concern with Anthony Randolph. If you could just merge Tolliver’s hustle and BB IQ with Beasley’s athleticism.
"It's tough to make predictions, especially about the future." -- Yogi Berra
Despite the fact he didn’t hit the ground running like many expected when he entered the league, Beasley did show decent promise with the Heat. He’s just regressed to the point he’s been really underwhelming in his two years with the Wolves.
Now, there are several factors to consider. He was playing off of Dwayne Wade in Miami, whereas here he’s almost considered a go-to guy. He also seems to have several lingering injuries here.
And oh yeah, in Miami he was a power forward, nearly exclusively. Almost all his minutes were at the 4, per 82games.com. In MIN, he was mostly a 3 last year, with part-time duty at the 4. And this year he’s a 3, with even less pt-duty at the 4.
Now, nobody knows how to explain his regression fully, and nobody knows what the future holds for him.
But I suspect he’s just not a wing. So on the Wolves, he’s probably just not a great fit outside of a 6th-man type role, and even there the Wolves might be developing other options such as Barea and/or Williams. So I’m not sure something like 3/$18 would be wise; Wolves need to stop latching on to these types of contracts and consolidate to find some starters, instead. I’d prefer they get aggressive and maybe seize a potential opportunity such as Batum (even if they fail) than to sign Beasley.
FWIW, Zgoda mentions as an aside that he thinks the team will let both Beasley and Randolph become RFA’s this summer.
Why wouldn't they trade them as expirings then?
that’s my hope. there could be draft picks gotten for those two
unless of course they are saving money to sign someone….
I don't know what an art house is, I don't know what goes on in an art house, I have never been in an art house, and I can't imagine it's any place I ever want to be.
by VoodooMagic on Jan 19, 2012 10:33 AM CST up reply actions
I tend to agree
but the problem is finding a likely match. Who exactly wants Beasey/AR/Johnson/Darko? The first two at least you can play the expiring contract card and the first three nominally have potential. The problem then becomes not just finding a team that wants them, but a team that has piece they will move that we actually want. Most of us would love to get an Okafur/Gortat/Dudley/DDR/McGee type back but those guys are just more valuable to their teams than an expiring contract and whatever oncourt skills these guys offer.
someone who doesn't have Kevin Love at PF
might want Beasley. If the Wolves didn’t have Kevin Love, I’d be a lot more interested in keeping him.
by dontbesomean youngfella on Jan 19, 2012 11:51 AM CST up reply actions
PF is the deepest position in the NBA
It’s hard to find teams that really need a Beasley there.
don't have rosters in front of me, but
while I acknowledge it’s a relatively deep position, I have a hard time believing there isn’t a team or three out there that have the opposite problem of Minny – too many wings and no good PFs.=. My general sense over the past 15 years is that there’s always an ample supply of near-average to average wings. Surely, somebody’s got a glut.
by dontbesomean youngfella on Jan 19, 2012 11:56 AM CST up reply actions
I'm sure if a nice offer is made, they wouldn't hesitate to make a deal.
But, you can’t just snap your fingers and get what you want. We don’t know what’s out there, but it’s very possible the better option is to avoid more salary and simply clear the decks for possibly a bold move for someone like Batum or Asik/Noah (for example).
Don't they only become RFAs
if we make the qualifying offer? I might do that for Randolph (~$4m), but Beasley would have to show enormous improvement for me to give him the QO (~$8.2m). I don’t want to keep him at that price.
Not sure how that works
Someone here does, I’m sure.
If that’s correct, then I agree: Don’t even risk the RFA route. That $8 million could very well be his best option.
Collectively CH seems to subscribe to the sell low philosophy
Until Beasley plays a year with RA, we won’t know what we have. He started taking it to the hole, playing respectable D and getting boards before he got injured. His shot was ice cold. He’s too good of a player to not be able to be a big help to us.
The beauty of his injury now, is we’ve gotten a chance to establish Rubio and Love in their roles. Now everyone else has to learn to fit in with that.
Yes but if he is the guy whose name is next to the stats he created in the NBA
then it’s not really selling low, it’s just accepting that hes a draft bust and dealing with it.
Beas isn't a draft bust
Flynn is a draft bust. Oden is a bust.
He's a bust for the same reason Kwame Brown is a bust
Being taken that high implies that you’re going to be a superstar, average production simply doesn’t cut it (Beas doesn’t even make this cut). Oden actually has looked good when he plays…
Being taken high does not imply you should be a superstar
It implies the team thinks you’re the second best player in the draft, in Beasley’s case. When there are like 10 superstars in the entire league i dont see how being drafted second implies you will a superstar. In fact it was more unlikely that he would.
average production doesn't cut it
So the majority of lotto picks are busts? Doesn’t sound right, that should only be reserved for the worst of the worst.
by TO12 on Jan 19, 2012 4:36 PM CST via iPhone app up reply actions
Beas doesn't provide average production
not even close
by zebano on Jan 19, 2012 8:01 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
"Until Beasley plays a year with RA, we won’t know what we have."
I’d rather sell low now than let him walk for nothing – or worse, overpay to keep him.
Just curious
But what’s so terrible about letting Beasley just walk? I mean, ideally sure, if you can use him to net a productive player, that’s great. But short of that, I don’t think it’s a bad idea to just let go.
He was an ultimate low-risk/high-reward move, and barring some remarkable change of course in the near future, it just looks like the reward isn’t going to happen, at least not here. It was a worthwhile gamble, but it isn’t like they paid so much for the two-year audition that they have to recoup something just to recoup something.
Barring a good trade, I think the Wolves need to learn from the sins of their past on this front, particularly how they handled a somewhat comprable player/situation in Michael Olawakandi, whose expiring deal they rolled into Marc Blount’s long deal (granted, as part of a much more complicated trade, but still was a major component).
I prefer letting him walk to resigning him.
But I’d prefer getting something – even a very average swing for him before the deadline.
The only thing
really compelling me to advocate for keeping Beasley is that he and Love seem to be really good friends (witness the “I love you” moment from the Love interview earlier this season).
"Of what use is a philosopher who does not hurt anybody's feelings?" -Diogenes of Sinope
by Cynical Jason on Jan 19, 2012 1:33 PM CST up reply actions
So don't trade Beasley until after Love signs his extension.
Look at how much trouble we got into by resigning all KG’s friends… I don;t want to go back down that slope.
Are you trying to say
that THud wasn’t worth his contract? Hmmmmm?
"Of what use is a philosopher who does not hurt anybody's feelings?" -Diogenes of Sinope
by Cynical Jason on Jan 19, 2012 1:36 PM CST up reply actions
I love to pretend McHale was the problem with everything
But when Garnett wanted those guys back? You’ve gotta sign them whether they’re good or not. Also, see LeBron in CLE
90% of the crap I say on here is sarcastic
by CoffeeJanitor on Jan 19, 2012 11:55 PM CST up reply actions
McHale was the problem
I’m guessing he leaked KG wanted those guys to cover his ass. When you’re in charge, it’s on you. Period.
McHale had a very clear signing philosophy that changed over the years…
1. Early on he played the know-it-all who refused to play the game. Then Googs left (after he refused to deal with the lakers where we could have gotten Eddie Jones and Elden Campbell I believe). So Googs walked, and then Marbury walked.
2. Then he started signing everyone to ridiculously long deals. THud. Maddog (7 years??? seriously?). And tried to run around league rules (Joe Smith debacle).
Look at the salaries on KG's final MN team...What a mess.
KG: 21M
Blount: 7.2M
Davis: 6.3M
Hudson: 5.6M
Jaric: 5.2M
James: 5.2M
Hassell: 4.3M
Griffin: 2.7M
Foye: 2.4M
Madsen: 2.2M
McCants: 1.6M
Reed: 1.3M
This just goes to show that it really wasn't KG's 21M that killed us.
It was the 40M+ to the rest of the team that was so poorly invested.
You've presented this as an argument in favor of signing guys Love would want you to sign.
But, actually what you’ve done is present the perfect counter-arguments. Treating your star players with significant respect and taking their opinions seriously is a good thing. Letting 20-somethings (and their agents) make major decisions for a franchise? Not a good idea.
He who rides a wolf cannot dismount.
I have a completely different impression. Love wants to win.
Even if he and Beas are close (I saw the video, too—I got the impression that Beas is a guy who is all about saying “I love you, man” to his good friends), do you doubt that Love’s #1 priority is the best team possible? I imagine he doesn’t want the organization to treat Beas like crap (and, to DK’s credit, it appears he has a reputation of treating players well/fairly), but I don’t think his loyalty to Beas causes him to intervene/potentially lead to a bad basketball decision. Love knows it’s a business and he wants to win.
You're probably right.
As long as the team doesn’t offend Love with how they deal with Beasley, they probably don’t harm that relationship.
"Of what use is a philosopher who does not hurt anybody's feelings?" -Diogenes of Sinope
by Cynical Jason on Jan 19, 2012 1:47 PM CST up reply actions
I agree with this
There’s nothing wrong with letting the market dictate whether or not you want to keep a dude. Right now, he’s not worth the $8 mill qualifying offer…he just isn’t. Just like Corey Brewer wouldn’t have been worth whatever his QO number was. Barring any significant change, you either make the player an offer commensurate with his production thus far, or let someone else dictate the price and decide if that value meets your cost structure. That’s part of the business. There should be nothing offensive about that.
Personally, I would like to see more contracts that have a base salary and kickers based on production and Beasley seems like an excellent candidate for that type of…incentive.
Reason is the first victim of strong emotion.
Denver is happy
we felt that way about Brewer. He is making his presence felt in the mile high city. Can’t wait to play them.
"I don't think I've ever seen a group that is as good at turning the ball over as this one." Rick Adelman
Also,
is it possible for us to sell him for less than we bought him for? I don’t think the term “sell low” is even possible here.
It absolutely is possible
What if we took on a longer and more damaging contract?
With RA he's basically doing what he did last season his shot just isn't going down.
His rebounds have gone up slightly but he’s still an awful defender, a ball stopper, and he just isn’t the type of player you build around. Regardless of whether this is selling low, I can’t imagine his trade value actually being that high in first place all he showed last is that if you give him a lot of shots he can score a lot of points, I’d much rather not overpay or even keep that type of player.
Rebounds are almost back up to his 2 years in Miami,
but his assists are WAY down and his turnovers are WAY up. And he’s never shot the ball so poorly.
He’s off to a truly terrible start.
I prefer the term 'firing' Beasley, but if it makes him feel better, Beasley can 'resign' instead
I’d like Kahn to get our 2 draft picks back that he paid for him, but if not, he still should be gone one way or another by next season.
The only caveat to that is that Adelman has impressed me so much that if he thinks Beasley is worth hanging on to, then I’m on board.
Ha! I wondered if anyon else caught that.
I guess the proper spelling would be re-sign? Adelman is a great coach. He even has Wes driving to the rim. It’d be interesting to see if he can finally turn Beas’ game around. He does have potential. But he should be on a short leash. Defense and rebounding should be the priority. The scoring will come.
"I don't think I've ever seen a group that is as good at turning the ball over as this one." Rick Adelman
Yeah, one of my pet peeves
It took all the energy I had not to say something, so thank you for letting me release it here.
You can't...dust...for vomit.
by twinstalker on Jan 19, 2012 12:09 PM CST up reply actions
I especially hate when someone butchers the spelling of your
using it instead of you’re. That one really gets me. :-)
"I don't think I've ever seen a group that is as good at turning the ball over as this one." Rick Adelman
I'm glad you guys are having this conversation.
That means I can keep to my New Year’s resolution and still get some gratification.
"Of what use is a philosopher who does not hurt anybody's feelings?" -Diogenes of Sinope
by Cynical Jason on Jan 19, 2012 1:34 PM CST up reply actions
I thought this going to be a very different posting
1. to give up an office or position, often formally (often followed by from ): to resign from the presidency.
2. to submit; yield: to resign before the inevitable.
I was thinking that Beasley might be resigned to the idea that he should not be a starter in the league and yield his starting spot to players that give consistent effort. As a bench player, maybe he could put forth a lot of energy in 4-8 minute burts rather than trying to conserve his energy and coast through much of the game without playing defense.
by Imyourhuckleberry on Jan 19, 2012 1:54 PM CST up reply actions
No problem - Just doing my best to help you out
Your doing great, but you could of said something if you really needed to.
*snort*
"Of what use is a philosopher who does not hurt anybody's feelings?" -Diogenes of Sinope
by Cynical Jason on Jan 19, 2012 3:53 PM CST up reply actions
could of had what?
…
(is you’re eye twitching yet Jason?)
by rickyp on Jan 19, 2012 4:48 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
your going to need to be careful or he might loose it
by Madison Dan on Jan 19, 2012 4:54 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Irregardless of what was said,
I know Jason could care less.
Gary, you didn't kill your brother. Those gorillas did.
by nja700 on Jan 19, 2012 10:24 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
*explosion*
Flarglaginham!
"Of what use is a philosopher who does not hurt anybody's feelings?" -Diogenes of Sinope
by Cynical Jason on Jan 19, 2012 11:31 PM CST up reply actions
Wolves record without Beas is 4-3
Wolves record with Beas is 2-5. He’s still a black hole, and needs to subscribe to the share the ball style Adelman wants. Until he does that, his game, and the team, will suffer.
"I don't think I've ever seen a group that is as good at turning the ball over as this one." Rick Adelman
even if he "subscribes"
of what value is he to us if our two choices are using him in the wrong position? I think what he’s more or less proven in his time at MN is he’s not a wing. He can’t beat smaller players off the dribble. Hence, the turnovers & the long j’s.
by dontbesomean youngfella on Jan 19, 2012 11:53 AM CST up reply actions
uh, I guess that was *one* choice
by dontbesomean youngfella on Jan 19, 2012 11:54 AM CST up reply actions
I was gonna say....
"I don't think I've ever seen a group that is as good at turning the ball over as this one." Rick Adelman
The roster definitely needs some balance
but who would want Beasley? He hasn’t shown anyone he’s capable of making a team better. We already have a glut at the 4 with Love and Williams. Beas’ time in Minny may be numbered.
"I don't think I've ever seen a group that is as good at turning the ball over as this one." Rick Adelman
He definitely has not proven he's capable of making a team better
But I don’t think he’s proven that he can’t. Again, he’s been asked to play out of position.
by dontbesomean youngfella on Jan 19, 2012 11:59 AM CST up reply actions
Practically our whole team is playing out of position
Wes at the 2, Luke and JJ at the 2, Ellington at the 3, Darko at the 5…… :0
That’s the way we roll.
I hope he has to earn his way back in the starting lineup. If not, then the lineup would be :
Darko, Love, Beas, Luke and Ricky.
Our bench is our strength.
"I don't think I've ever seen a group that is as good at turning the ball over as this one." Rick Adelman
an insane thing to say when 9 or 10 of our 13 players are below average
but true.
Also crazy but possibly true: Luke may no longer be playing out of position. He may be a very undersized SG, but it might be a better fit for his skills & mindset.
by dontbesomean youngfella on Jan 19, 2012 12:18 PM CST up reply actions
It looked like that 2 games ago
yesterday, not so much. If he’s cold, his value at the 2 is limited. But I do like him there. His versatility is a boon to our backcourt. I’m glad we have him.
"I don't think I've ever seen a group that is as good at turning the ball over as this one." Rick Adelman
Maybe
We beat the Hornets, Kings, Pistons and Wizards without him.
We beat Dallas and San Antonio with him.
This is one I’m happy to defer to Adelman on.
600 N First Ave "like a Pirate's cove".
by Airete on Jan 19, 2012 1:58 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
I hate Beasel more than the next guy,
but you have a point.
I would also like to counter, though, and state that when he was playing we lost to a Z-Bo-less Memphis team, Cleveland and Milwaukee.
Beasel stats
OKC:_______36 min, 11-27 fg, 2-3 ft, 5 reb, 1 ast, 1 stl, 1 blk, 2 to, 2 pf, 24 points.
Milwaukee:____25 min, 6-13 fg, 2-6 ft, 7 reb, 3 to, 4 pf, 15 points.
Miami:_______22 min, 2-6 fg, 0-0 ft, 3 reb, 1 ast, 1 stl, 2 to, 4 pf, 4 points.
Dallas:______31 min, 3-10 fg, 2-4 ft, 7 reb, 1 ast, 1 stl, 2 to, 2 pf, 8 points.
San Antonio: _43 min, 8-15 fg, 1-2 ft, 5 reb, 3 ast, 1 blk, 3 to, 3 pf, 19 points.
Memphis_____36 min, 5-16 fg, 0-2 ft, 10 reb, 1 ast, 5 to, 3 pf, 11 points.
Cleveland:___28 min, 4-12 fg, 1-1 ft, 14 reb, 1 blk, 3 to, 4 pf, 9 points.
Season total: ~221 min, 39-99 fg, 4-10 3p, 8-18 ft, 49 reb, 7ast, 3 blk, 3 stl, 20 to, 22 pf, 90 points.
What bothers me the most is that he played with the injured hand, AND he told the media that he’ll have to shoot less because his shot would be affected.
Nice work, Dupey
Can we really hope he comes back and starts shooting well? Starts sharing the ball? Keeps the offense moving? In other words, can we expect a completely different player when he returns? This will be the mark of a great coach if he does.
"I don't think I've ever seen a group that is as good at turning the ball over as this one." Rick Adelman
I want to see him in that 6th man off the bench role.
Come off the bench bring some scoring power, hustle, intensity, and flow into the game then each game we can decide if he is “feeling” it and play in the 4th quarter.
If he can’t do that then let him walk but we’ve got nothing to lose the rest of this year so I think thats the best way to go about it.
But so far we’ve been better since he’s been gone. I love how a 3 game injury is lasting longer. Touche Adelman, touche.
by Doug West Domination!!! on Jan 19, 2012 11:52 AM CST reply actions
He sprained his ankle twice last year
not sure if it’s the same ankle, but if it is, it could be a recurring thing.
He may not come back until it’s 110%
"I don't think I've ever seen a group that is as good at turning the ball over as this one." Rick Adelman
I think Adelman is going to keep him out as long as possible
to see how the rest of the team plays without him. When he is healthy though I want him off the bench.
by Doug West Domination!!! on Jan 20, 2012 3:01 PM CST up reply actions
At the risk of being mocked comparison
Career Averages:
Beasley: 29 min.; 15.8 ppg: 2.0 turnovers: .07 steals: 1.5 Assists 5.8 rebounds 45.5% field goal percentage (This is also taking in this years 7 games in which all his averages are lower)
Love: 30.4 minutes; 15.7 ppg; 1.9 to; .06 steals; 1.9 Assists; 11.8 rebounding; 45.9 field goal percentage….
These two guys both drafted in the same year have nearly identical career statically except Loves rebounds. Does this mean that Love was a bust…I think not the fact is Love has shown more improvement in the past year were Beasley has stayed the same. Who is to say that the eye test improvement that Love made last year doesn’t happen this year to Beasley with RA as a guide (note he has only played 7 games).
by eyecatcher on Jan 19, 2012 12:04 PM CST reply actions 1 recs
Good point, but...
I don’t think anyone would argue that Love and Beas are even in the same hemisphere, talent wise. I do like the idea that Beas has the potential for great things. Let’s keep our fingers crossed. If Beasley explodes, that can be a great thing.
"I don't think I've ever seen a group that is as good at turning the ball over as this one." Rick Adelman
Talent wise
Beasley has way more going for him than Love has. Love is simply one of the hardest working players in the NBA but his “talent” is actually quite modest. Love also has sky high BBIQ but I’d still argue Beaz is way more “talented” and if Beasley ever grew his game like Love has, he’d be an All Star easy.
The caveat on talent is that Rashad McCants had tons of it and look where that got him. Last I checked he was playing for the Texas Legends.
Yo ho ho and a FirstRow stream!
I don't like this definition of talent.
To me, BBIQ is a talent. The ability to make shots is a talent. Knowing where a ball will go so you can get more rebounds is a talent. Your definition of talent sounds more like “athleticism” to me. Bird was not a very athletic player, but he was obviously talented.
by Madison Dan on Jan 19, 2012 3:30 PM CST up reply actions 2 recs
Agree
Apropos of nothing, Madison Dan, where oh where is PoorDick?!?!?!?!? You intimated that you have some knowledge of his whereabouts? Is he ok?
I've just developed my creepy stalker skills,
so I know that I can look up someone’s page and see when they last logged in, and their record of commenting, recommending, and voting. Just checking now, I can see that he logged in today and last recommended a post on the 11th. He last commented on the 4th.
I don’t remember him earning any sort of suspension, so I’d guess (hope) that he’s just taking a break. I should probably do that more often, too.
Every night on the way home from the game, I promise that I will not read the game thread
and instead just go to sleep. Want to guess how many times I’ve actually done that? ;) So you are in good company, on the “should probably take a break” thing.
Athleticism might be a better word for it
but Love’s skills seem to be the result of hard work whereas Beasley . . . .
Let me put it this way. Take both players. Put them on the court blindfolded, spin them around then take off the blindfold hand them a basketball and say, SHOOT! My guess is that Beasley would make a lot more shots than Love would. Beasley could learn to do what Love does, but I don’t think Love could ever learn to drive to the hole like Beasley does (not do nearly often enough).
Beasley strikes me as having an enormous upside, but there’s no guarantee of him putting it together other than trust in Adelman. I have huge respect for Love, but I also remember his rookie season when it often took him three tries to make a basket from two feet away.
Yo ho ho and a FirstRow stream!
I disagree...
I think Beasley’s moves/game/skills look a little cleaner or a lot better because he seems to be more physically gifted/athletic than Love but I quite sure that Beasley had to work on said game I just think that Love works on his game a lot harder than Beasley. Unless your just an uber athlete(i.e. Lebron, Griffin, Rose) you can’t just coast on ability, which I really think Beasley has done because there seems to be little to no improvement in his game from his rookie year to now, just more shots and a different position.
I may disagree even more fundamentally...
I may bringing just a bit of a devil’s advocate approach to this, but…I’ve actually started to question this whole notion of “Beasley” and “talent.” No discussion of the guy can occur without some reference being made about his unquestionable, sky-high level of talent. Really? I swear, I’m not seeing the evidence. I agree with Madison Dan, above, that the ability to harness raw athleticism and focus it & use it properly may, in and of itself, be a huge part of the very definition of “talent.” But even if we limit the definition to mere athletic prowess – IMHO, a 6’9" guy with otherworldly athleticism should be able to beat 3s off the dribble.
by dontbesomean youngfella on Jan 20, 2012 9:28 AM CST up reply actions
ex. Durant, James, etc.
Obviously, I’m picking the elite of the elite, here, but isn’t that what Beasley was supposed to be, coming out of college? Even if the mental part wasn’t there, wasn’t that supposed to be the level of physical gifts he brought to the table?
by dontbesomean youngfella on Jan 20, 2012 9:30 AM CST up reply actions
At some point "upside" and "potential"
are just kind words for “disappointment” and “wishful thinking”.
I'm with you TMiss on Beasley's talent..
He is the one player among Randolph, Milicic, Johnson and Beasley, I am unwilling to give up on. Every time I hear proposed trades on this site where we trade Beasley for players like Reddick, Morrow, etc., I cringe. He is still in his early 20s and has not had time with Adelman. In the short time he was on the court this year his offensive and defensive approaches were noticeably changing in an auspicious fashion. I think he can still be an above-average to great player either as a starter or a sixth man, and I don’t want to trade him or just let him walk until we’ve seen how he plays under Adelman.
but TMiss also made the point that talent alone ends you up in the d league
If you are holding out hope on Darko, Beas, Wes and Adolph, you might need to loosen your grip.
by TO12 on Jan 19, 2012 7:48 PM CST via iPhone app up reply actions
TMiss also saith
that if you give Rick Adelman a few more months, He’ll sort out the wheat from the chaff.
Yo ho ho and a FirstRow stream!
Isn't it a CH consensus
That we’re one consistently above-average wing from being a pretty dangerous team? If so, man – it seems like there should be some combination of these pipe dream players we can unload to bring in one solid, consistent contributor at the 2 or 3.
by dontbesomean youngfella on Jan 20, 2012 9:33 AM CST up reply actions
The field goal percentages are not a good way to compare their shooting,
because Love gets to the line a lot more often and shoots FTs better when he gets there. He also takes a higher share of threes, and shoots those with a higher percentage.
TS% sums this up with career numbers of 0.565 for Love and 0.511 for Beasley. That’s a big difference. Last year, that would have been the 28th percentile in TS% versus the 74th percentile. (That’s their career numbers placed in the distribution of TS% from last year for players with more than 750 minutes played.)
Plus, rebounding is really important.
by Madison Dan on Jan 19, 2012 12:56 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Rebounding is Important
I knew my stats wouldn’t go in depth for most of you all, but I am a newbie to the advanced stats game. Rebounding is important and I think Beasley is starting to get that I saw him put more effort in his rebounding this year then I have ever seen. If his shooting gets on track this year I see the other areas of his game making strides thanks to emphasis by RA.
His game has been a mess all the way around this year.
It’s been his second-lowest rebounding percentage; his lowest TS%; assist, steal, and block percentages all at career lows; turnover percentage at a career high. That’s probably not the guy we’re going to see in the longer term, but there’s a lot of stuff that needs fixing. But whether I like it or not, I think we’ll get to see what RA can do with him.
I'm suprised their FG % is so close.
It seems Beasley is always jacking up shots and Love hasn’t. I wonder if his tip in attempts go against this?
by Doug West Domination!!! on Jan 20, 2012 3:02 PM CST up reply actions
Before Beasley got injured,
my lasting memory of him this season was a bad turnover around the free throw line that started a fast break for the other team. As other Wolves attempted to contain the fast break and the camera panned towards the other end of the court, Beasley never entered into the screen, which stretched well beyond the 3-point line. I need to point out that Beasley did not fall to the ground when he turned the ball over. He was perfectly upright and he was the closest person to the ball when it was turned over. He simply chose not to run back on defense, and the other team scored. Even if you want a player like this on your team, you don’t want him making more than players that actually put forth effort on EVERY possession. I wouldn’t give him more than $3-4Million per year. When someone is overpaid, you shouldn’t reward them with higher salary and expect more. You take something away and make them work for it. Plus, DWill is going to be better than him next season anyway.
by Imyourhuckleberry on Jan 19, 2012 1:24 PM CST reply actions
+1
I agree, but in pro sports, it usually doesn’t work that way. Take the Twins for example. Even though they had a historically bad year, some of their players are eligible for arbitration, which means automatic raises. It’s just a question of how much. The longer you play, the more they pay. Liriano is getting a 1.2M raise, even though he’s stinking up the winter league right now. Beasley will get paid, and he will get a raise. But he’s nowhere near a huge contract.
"I don't think I've ever seen a group that is as good at turning the ball over as this one." Rick Adelman
Let Beas walk and...
Sign Alonzo Gee in the offseason for nothing. However, I think the 25 MPG he’s getting in Cleveland is finally going to clue the league in that he’s a decent wing.
Give it a bit more time...?
I’d still like to wait and see what Rick Adelman and the coaching staff can ultimately do to improve Michael Beasley as a player.
In short Michael has a chance coming off the injury to show the Coach that he has got his head right, that he can produce more than Darko, Wes and AR, can become an integral part of the “team”. If that means coming off the bench Mike has to swallow that and work his a** off. The injury did seem to come at a fortuitous moment as he alluded to himself.
I have a feeling that Adelman won’t bin him immediately ( look at his patience with Wes?)…Beasely’s an intriguing commodity….meaning his stock is at an all-time low but could, if he has the capacity to buy into Adelman’s teaching, all of a sudden ignite.
There are lots of ifs and buts here but I think he deserves an extended chance.
On a side note…he did look alarmingly akin to a six year old ( no offence intended to any discerning six year olds who may be reading!) sitting eating Skittles on the bench last night….you’ve got to smile.
That is how he always looks on the bench.
I am wondering why he’s still not traveling with the team on the road trip, yet Webster and Miller both are. Methinks this is a little strange…I’d wonder if the trade winds were blowing, if his value weren’t so seemingly low right now.
You'd think so...
The fact that his trade value is so low would, you’d think, be incentive enough for Beasley.
Me thinks he needs to cut out the E-numbers…there’s an invitation for someone…
Think it has to do with the nature of the injury
You don’t want to walk around unnecessarily on a foot sprain.
One a different note, did you see Beas eating Skittles on the bench last night? Ah, I wish I could see what he’d be like not all jacked up on sugar and artificial coloring.
Eating Skittles all the time can't be good for a professional athlete
Straight sugar gives a short term energy buzz followed by blood sugar levels crashing down, and lethargy. He needs to grow up and eat healthy.
It might work for him when he is playing in celebrity charity games or AAU in the past, but it ain’t going to cut it when he is going up against cold blooded and fully focused professional basketball players.
I would like to venture a guess
That there are issues way beyond skittles affecting his game. We can probably let this one slide.
Lamar Odom ate candy before every game and another star (forget the name) just stopped drinking mountain few by the crate after doing it for his whole career.
Moral of the story: when you exercise as much as them (unless your a doughy white guy from Oregon) you can eat junk.
by TO12 on Jan 19, 2012 7:50 PM CST via iPhone app up reply actions
Complete lyrics are always different than I remember them...
My brother Bill runs a still on the hill
Where he turns out a gallon or two
And the buzzards in the sky get so drunk they can not fly
Just from sniffing that good old mountain dew.
Chorus
They call it that good old mountan dew,
And them that refuse it are few.
I’ll hush up my mug if you’ll fill up my jug
With that good old mountain dew.
My aunt Lucille had an automobile,
It ran on a gallon or two.
It didn’t need no gas and it didn’t need no oil,
It just ran on that good old mountain dew.
Repeat chorus
My uncle Mort, he is sawed off and short,
He measure ‘bout four foot two,
But he thinks he’s a giant when you give him a pint
Of that good old mountain dew.
Repeat chorus
Old Auntie June had a brand new perfume,
It had such a wonderful “pew”
But to her surprise, when she had it analyzed,
It was nothing but that good old mountain dew
Repeat chorus
I know a guy named Pete, his hair ain’t so neat,
Though he fixes it with syrup and blue,
But it stays right in place when he uses just a trace
Of that good old mountain dew.
Repeat chorus
The preacher-he walked by, with a big tear in his eye
Said that his wife had the flu
And hadn’t I ought just to give him a quart
Of that good old mountain dew
Repeat chorus
My uncle Klaus had a real mean old mouse
When they asked how it happened,
He said it was a lappin’
That good old mountain dew
Repeat chorus
There’s an old hollow tree, just a little way from me
Where you lay down a dollar or two
If you hush up your mug, then they’ll give you a jug
Of that good old mountain dew
Repeat chorus
You take a little trash and you mix it up with ash,
And you throw in the soul of a shoe,
Then you stir it awhile with an old rusty file,
And they call it that good old mountain dew.
Repeat chorus
During the last war, we couldn’t get no more,
We didn’t have no sugar for the dew
With a few old potaters and a few ripe tomaters,
We turned out some stuff, I’m tellin’ you
Repeat chorus
Old Deacon Crane took a trip in the rain,
Said his wife had come down with the flu,
But she’ll be all right if you give her a pint
Of that good old mountain dew.
Repeat chorus
Mr. Franklin Roosevelt, he told me how he felt
The day the old dry law went through:
If your likker’s too red, it will swell up your head
Better stick to that good old mountain dew
2012 the year of Twolves porcelain extraction?
Let him walk or trade him, I prefer the latter but I wouldn't be surprised if we got little for him.
He gives up the third most ppp on the team(Ridnour and DWill are right behind him), for all the talk that he is going to the basket more he averaged 3.7 attempts at the rim last year and is averaging 4.1 this season which is a career high for him but not a big difference from his previous career high of 3.9. He’s still a blackhole that shoots too many long twos, his assist percentage is at a career high and his turnover percentage is at a career high…not a good combination.
The more and more Beasley plays the more and more he looks like a stretch pf. Nothing in his game indicates that he is a consistent go to guy on the perimeter, having that type of player at 6mil a year is way too much because if he isn’t scoring he isn’t consistently helping you win games and you can always find a player that do nothing but score the league has tons of those types of players, I’d much rather see if we can get anything for him in a trade.
This trade theoretically works
http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=7md8oxa
Toronto does this cause they are looking for a starting-calibre SF and potentially getting out of Amir Johnson’s long term deal
ATL: needs frontcourt depth and drops 9 million off their books this year
Min: gets a starting caliber SG and Amir Johnson who could kinda play the PF for Love’s Center much like we were thinking a Derrick Favors could.
Who says no? I think this is legit.
I don't know what an art house is, I don't know what goes on in an art house, I have never been in an art house, and I can't imagine it's any place I ever want to be.
Actually use this trade instead
http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=6onmb3r
I felt like in my original one we were trading a little too much junk, so I made it so we had to give up a little more with Ridnour.
Every team wins in this. Hawks have only Ridnour’s ridiculously cheap contract as long-term commitment (which they don’t really have a back up point on their roster) they get two PF’s for depth this season and drop 9 million off salary for this summer.
Toronto gets a starting SF in Williams and while Wes Johnson’s contract is theoretically for 3 more years at 4 mil a year they don’t have to pick up the options so it is only partially guaranteed.
I don't know what an art house is, I don't know what goes on in an art house, I have never been in an art house, and I can't imagine it's any place I ever want to be.
by VoodooMagic on Jan 19, 2012 10:24 PM CST up reply actions
Why wouldn't they then?
Since you read my explanation why do you think they wouldn’t? I’m not saying you’re wrong…but I’ve given a reason for why they do it, not that I’m right but it’s at least a reason
I don't know what an art house is, I don't know what goes on in an art house, I have never been in an art house, and I can't imagine it's any place I ever want to be.
by VoodooMagic on Jan 20, 2012 12:59 PM CST up reply actions
Why wouldn't they?
Because Amir’s Johnson’s contract isn’t nearly as toxic as you make it out to be (6M next year, 6.5M the following for a young, solid big man) and DeRozan is young, still cheap and talented.
They’d be getting Marvin Williams who has consistently underperformed his contract and while he’s off to a decent start, he’s hardly setting the world on fire. And Wes Johnson who, to this point, is looking like a bust.
And for Atlanta it mostly looks like a salary dump. They don;t get much talent back.
2 thoughts
1st: at least you gave an explanation
2nd: Atl gets 4 depth and a back up point which they currently do not have on their roster. they have McGrady to play at the 3 in the absence of Williams but really only have J-Smoove as the only compotent post player, Randolph would at least give them another option, Beasley would be mostly salary dump. Ridnour would very much help their bball team. They would come out of this trade at worst no lesser than they already are, and maybe even a bit better as they can actually have a bench. Plus they would be dumping salary.
Toronto: AJ’s contract is not toxic per se, but that is a contract they are going to want to move at some point as they have Ed Davis, Klezia, Bargs and soon to be JoVal all vying for 2 spots. They’d also get the best player in the trade which is generally rule 1 of trading (at least so I’ve heard).
if it’s really that bad of a trade then so be it….but I don’t think that’s the case, I actually think every team comes out of it better than they were before…unless DD becomes a stud, that would be the variable, but Williams is only 24 and playing good basketball…probably has a pretty similar chance of being a stud as DD.
I don't know what an art house is, I don't know what goes on in an art house, I have never been in an art house, and I can't imagine it's any place I ever want to be.
...
I think from an overall value perspective, considering upside and contract, Derozan is the obvious best player in that deal, and Amir is probably second (debatable. I used to really like Marvin but don’t really anymore) . I’d love for something like that to happen, but I think Demar is pretty untouchable. Toronto sees him as part of their core.
Well right now
Williams is producing like the best player in the deal, and still only 24
I don't know what an art house is, I don't know what goes on in an art house, I have never been in an art house, and I can't imagine it's any place I ever want to be.
He has a nice PER...
But this is his 7th year in the league and his first 6 years were pretty similar.
I’m not going to say that in 280 minutes he’s become much better than the guy who has played over 13,000 for his career.
His rebounding rates are up a lot, but his TS% and 3FG% are the 2nd lowest of his career.
He’s a 10/6 player in 23 minutes. If that’s the best player in the deal, there are no really good players in it.
Kleiza is a SF
And I’m not so sure Marvin Williams is the best player in this trade. He’s vastly overpaid, and even if he continues his play this year, will still be.
Fair to say, VoodooMagic
My apologies for not making a claim as to why it wouldn’t work.
I believe that DD is a much better player than all the other parts. Marvin Williams, on top of being a bust because of the “Darko-Wade rule”, would be even worse in Toronto fighting for playing time on a team already holding several small forwards. On top of it they’re not even getting a power forward back to replace the overpaid Johnson.
Maybe if they got Beasel for the year instead of both Beasel and Randolph going to Atlanta; who already have Josh Smith.
If by promising you mean "shoots a lot and made an unsustainable amount of long 2s"
I totally agree.
Exactly...
Right after he had his streak of 25+ point games he started to come back to reality before he got hurt. It was just unrealsitic to think that he would continue to knock down so many long twos with a hand in his face.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
NBA Playoffs Content Module
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- Jrue Holiday needs to shoot more for Sixers to win, according to Doug Collins
- Create-a-Caption: Jeff Pendergraph scares his Pacers teammates
- James Harden is a cake now
- Mike Miller loses shoe, plays two possessions without it, Pacers don’t score (VIDEO)
- Larry Bird calls his Indiana Pacers ‘soft’ following the team’s physical Game 5 loss to Miami
