Beasley key to draft

[gandlogo]

Not sure we should trust these stats. Beasley shot 38.8% from 3 last season.

People can name themselves anything they want on twitter. “Elite Media Group” doesn’t even have 1000 followers.

It took 5 seconds to realize the guy accidentally pulled the 2018-19 3-point percentage instead of 2019-20. But I guess I can't be trusted either. I only have 55,000 posts on RGM and have only been on the site for 15 years.....

To me, a name like “Elite Media Group” tries to connote a major publishing conglomerate, servicing multiple media sources. When I saw they didn’t post the correct number, I wondered how their fact-checkers missed this, and let them post the error.

I expected a hundred thousand followers - and saw they had only a fraction of that. I don’t think this is a company — their “Elite Media Group” might be a single, amateur poster.

Elite Media Group makes me think of Prestige Worldwide.

[Jedzz]

44-45% on 500 plus attempts in a season? Say between 6-8 per game?

Beasley hasn't had a chance to be a full season starter yet, so his total amount of shots can't be comapred to other full season starters. But his averages attmpts is still high in the 6-8 attempts range and he has held averages from 42.6-45+ while starting. This is the very top end range for starters of this league. I expect his attempt to go much higher here and so far all indications are he's best the more he's involved.

You asked Someone previosly asked what is the difference betwen a player who has topped out at 38% or 40%, and truly the difference is that only the most elite have had seasons over 40%. It's hard to get there. Yes 38 and 40 are both pretty good. But maintaining a season over 40 is special for this league at any kind of decent volume. For Beasley to prove such abilility at such a young age and then to top that best season average with this average during his starts by a substantial margin only proves he's just getting started. If Wiggins was ever capable of such for each season this team would have been competing in the playoffs every year and would have been worth his max extension. He couldn't even get close to a season average like that (33 or 35% his best) and the Wolves maxed him anyway. He wasn't a good defender, didn't bring energy every night, didn't push himself in games, wasn't high skill level at really anything. Yes Wolves maxed him, and shrink wants to keep Beasley from making over 10, why? Slight difference between 12-15 a season and 30-35 a season. But shrinks wants to treat the situations over overpay as similar. Paying Beasley well over ten/season isn't an overpay. They just puchased DLO at an overpay, and I know shrink hated that with good reason. But there were also reasons the Wolves did it. But this, this Beasley deal, has true shooting skill propelling it that they only way you get it is to pay for it.

Want a Steph Curry level shooter? You can pay Curry 40mil a season like the Warriors do. Or, you can try not to be a stupid GM and try not to loball Beasley too much. It's not just business for the GM to try and get as low as possible. There are only 5 starting spots and starting minute loads on these teams. If you want someone like this to stay you try as GM to make him as happy as your teams wallet can make him, be honest with him, tell him he's got the starting role for his own, and give him your best offer. In your GM afterhours you can go sell used cars for bottom dollar.

The skill of shooting 3s is a paramount need for this team. Absolutely paramount for this system they are now using. To have a shooter like this is necessary if they truly want to start winning and playing their system strict no matter the opponent.

[Norseman79]

44-45% on 500 plus attempts in a season? Say between 6-8 per game?

Beasley hasn't had a chance to be a full season starter yet, so his total amount of shots can't be comapred to other full season starters. But his averages are in the 6-8 attempts range and he has held averages from 42.6-45+ while starting. This is the very top end range for starters of this league.

You asked previosly what is the difference betwen a player who has topped out at 38% or 40%, and truly the difference is that only the most elite have had seasons over 40%. It's hard to get there. Yes 38 and 40 are both pretty good. But maintaining a season over 40 is special for this league at any kind of decent volume. For Beasley to prove such abilility at such a young age and then to top that best season average with this average during his starts by a substantial margin only proves he's just getting started. If Wiggins was ever capable of such for each season this team would have been competing in the playoffs every year and would have been worth his max extension. He couldn't even get close to a season average like that (33 or 35% his best) and the Wolves maxed him anyway. He wasn't a good defender, didn't bring energy every night, didn't push himself in games, wasn't high skill level at really anything. Yes Wolves maxed him, and shrink wants to keep Beasley from making over 10, why? Slight difference between 12-15 a season and 30-35 a season.

The skill of shooting 3s is a paramount need for this team. Absolutely paramount for this system they are now using. To have a shooter like this is absolutely necessary.

I don't recall asking the difference between 38-40%, there is a decent difference.

I was simply asking Shrink what he considers elite. I like Bea's, I wouldn't max him or anything, but I want him back.

[Jedzz]

44-45% on 500 plus attempts in a season? Say between 6-8 per game?

I don't recall asking the difference between 38-40%, there is a decent difference.

I was simply asking Shrink what he considers elite. I like Bea's, I wouldn't max him or anything, but I want him back.

Yeah that was Old Skool guy I guess that asked the difference or was saying there really might not be a difference, that both are fine. I corrected the post. But it is a marker or a mark to reach that only the elite really have reached for a season.

I think Simmons has a career average at 33%. These are the kinds of numbers shrink wants us to focus on. Career percentages that are truly meaningless. Ben Simmons has only made two 3pt shots in his carerr. But his average is the same as Wiggins, only WIggins has made 540 on over 1600 attempts. Looking at career numbers is one thing, using it to say anything is absolutely useless.

[old school 34]

I don't recall asking the difference between 38-40%, there is a decent difference.

I was simply asking Shrink what he considers elite. I like Bea's, I wouldn't max him or anything, but I want him back.

Yeah that was Old Skool guy I guess that asked the difference or was saying there really might not be a difference, that both are fine. I corrected the post. But it is a marker or a mark to reach that only the elite really have reached for a season.

I think Simmons has a career average at 33%. These are the kinds of numbers shrink wants us to focus on. Career percentages that are truly meaningless. Ben Simmons has only made two 3pt shots in his carerr. But his average is the same as Wiggins, only WIggins has made 540 on over 1600 attempts. Looking at career numbers is one thing, using it to say anything is absolutely useless.

Yeah...i guess my comments about is there a difference between 38 & 40% was more to the extent that regardless to which way you leaned...the outcome &/or plan most likely remains the same....all that argument really gets to is what's the final specifics on the contract he signs? I think from a GM'S perspective if your trying to negotiate the best deal for the Wolves....you don't argue are you very good or elite & instead you argue around the limited opportunities....Jedzz to your point he can spin those in his favor as well but the sample size might be small enough that it helps the # some to the wolves favor?

Sent from my SM-G973U using RealGM mobile app

[shrink]

Whether Beasley is a 38% or a 40% shooter from 3....is this the hill to die on? Either one his a very good to elite shooter..

My issue was labeling him “elite.”

He shot 38% and I don’t think that is elite - it’s very good.

It would be like labeling him elitely bad at defense or passing. He is only bad at those skills.

What percentage do you consider elite, and what would you say is the minimum attempts per game required to make it valid?

You are right that it’s harder to quantify 3P% because you need both percentage and volume. Without digging in deep, he was 47th last year in 3P%, so I would expect an elite player to be far better than 47th.

I mentioned earlier in the thread that there are four active players with a career 3P% of 42.6 or better... the two Currys, Korver, and Duncan Robinson. I think those are the elites, and Robinson might need to show he can repeat it over multiple years before I drop the e-word on him. These 3-4 players are Elite to me, because those guys are the ones out on the end of the bell curve.

We have multiple players shooting 40% in a season these days, so to me, “elite” needs to be north of that, and demonstrated for multiple seasons, so a high career average.

BTW, I know of no evidence that shows that starting automatically adds to your three point percentage. In fact, we often see players who have been starters for several years go up and down over that time. This isn’t because they forget how to shoot some years..- it’s because with the smaller sample sizes, sometimes the ball will drop and sometimes it won’t - and a week of either can really change an overall number.

[minimus]

Guys like Korver, J.J. Redick, Set Curry, Duncan Robinson are high-level role players. They have complementary roles, they do not carry offense every game.

In the case of Malik Beasley, he has all tools to be a 20ppg scorer and an elite 3pt shooter. We are gambling on this combination. It is not like bringing here an excellent shooter Wayne Ellington who shot 37,6% from 3pt for us, but scored only 6.5ppg. He did not impact the game like Malik does. Malik is also an excellent athlete, aggressive rebounder. He is not a high usage, low impact playeк like Wiggins. That is why his next contract worth more than MLE. I'd be happy if we sign him for MLE, but it does not seem realistic at all.

[shrink]

Guys like Korver, J.J. Redick, Set Curry, Duncan Robinson are high-level role players. They have complementary roles, they do not carry offense every game.

In the case of Malik Beasley, he has all tools to be a 20ppg scorer and an elite 3pt shooter. We are gambling on this combination. It is not like bringing here an excellent shooter Wayne Ellington who shot 37,6% from 3pt for us, but scored only 6.5ppg. He did not impact the game like Malik does. Malik is also an excellent athlete, aggressive rebounder. He is not a high usage, low impact playeк like Wiggins. That is why his next contract worth more than MLE. I'd be happy if we sign him for MLE, but it does not seem realistic at all.

What are the “tools to be an elite three point shooter?” Opportunity for volume and that the ball drops in three times per hundred more than a good three point shooter? To me, to be elite at that skill means he’d need to show that he can consistently shoot 42% on medium to high volume, for a few seasons.

I agree that those three are role players, and agree with where you are on his salary. But Malik Beasley is not a star - he’s a useful starter/sixth man. He can score given opportunity, and so far has shown he is a pretty good three point shooter. However, he is clearly not a good passer, and pretty bad at defense, which is especially concerning for us when paired next to Russell. Overall, he’s an average NBA starter, which is why his salary will be close to the MLE.

[minimus]

Guys like Korver, J.J. Redick, Set Curry, Duncan Robinson are high-level role players. They have complementary roles, they do not carry offense every game.

In the case of Malik Beasley, he has all tools to be a 20ppg scorer and an elite 3pt shooter. We are gambling on this combination. It is not like bringing here an excellent shooter Wayne Ellington who shot 37,6% from 3pt for us, but scored only 6.5ppg. He did not impact the game like Malik does. Malik is also an excellent athlete, aggressive rebounder. He is not a high usage, low impact playeк like Wiggins. That is why his next contract worth more than MLE. I'd be happy if we sign him for MLE, but it does not seem realistic at all.

What are the “tools to be an elite three point shooter?” Opportunity for volume and that the ball drops in three times per hundred more than a good three point shooter? To me, to be elite at that skill means he’d need to show that he can consistently shoot 42% on medium to high volume, for a few seasons.

I agree that those three are role players, and agree with where you are on his salary. But Malik Beasley is not a star - he’s a useful starter/sixth man. He can score given opportunity, and so far has shown he is a pretty good three point shooter. However, he is clearly not a good passer, and pretty bad at defense, which is especially concerning for us when paired next to Russell. Overall, he’s an average NBA starter, which is why his salary will be close to the MLE.

It is not fair to say that Beasley is not an elite shooter just because he could not crack DEN rotation and therefore does not have many years of consistent shooting. It did not depend on him, DEN failed to make a big trade when they needed it the most. They signed Murray and Harris to big contracts therefore Beasley did not have a chance to see much playing time. DEN should have assembled a big trade, a combination of FRPs, Harris and Juancho and Beasley to acquire a third star. They could have got Jrue Holiday or Beal, but now IMO DEN stacked in mediocrity.

Again, I am not saying that we should overpay Beasley like Tim Hardaway Jr, Evan Fournier. But saying that his price is MLE sounds like a joke. MLE is price of E'Twaun Moore (34mil/4yrs), or declining Marco Belinelli (12mil/2yrs), but even declining 36yrs old J.J. Redick got 26mil/2yrs contract.

Another example is FVV. He is an extremely streaky offensively, defensively limited player who happen to play within good organisation under good coach. He is the champion now. I think Beasley has enough IQ, motor and heart to be a winner.

[Jedzz]

I do agree, but what do they do if Beasley is too expensive? Does that make Edwards the obvious target?

I'm sure they already have a pretty good idea of how much they can afford to pay Beasley and what they need to do if he gets above the number.

Cuts everywhere necessary to make Beasley here happen. Skyrocket over the lux for all we care. They are in the bed they designed. Now make it work for more winning. It doesn't matter who's left standing. As many here always say, there are only a couple key peices that matter and they are willing to give everyone else up. Well this player matters.

[Jedzz]

You are right that it’s harder to quantify 3P% because you need both percentage and volume. Without digging in deep, he was 47th last year in 3P%, so I would expect an elite player to be far better than 47th.

I mentioned earlier in the thread that there are four active players with a career 3P% of 42.6 or better... the two Currys, Korver, and Duncan Robinson. I think those are the elites, and Robinson might need to show he can repeat it over multiple years before I drop the e-word on him. These 3-4 players are Elite to me, because those guys are the ones out on the end of the bell curve.

Oh wonderful. Let's rip into this catastrophe of a post.
Over and over and over you do this. "Without digging in deep" you say you see he's 47th... Why do you keep doing this?

You can't spout out the fact that we need to look deeper at things such as volume (and other situational context), and then turn around and say "Look he's 47th on the list of anybody shooting a single 3 per year because I didn't look deeper" and try to convince us with that.

Look deeper before posting things about how much you think he's worth or how elite a shooter you claim he isn't. Better yet, just take our word for it because we already have and we have already showed you. Take the blinders off.

We have multiple players shooting 40% in a season these days,

No you don't. Certainly not with Volume.

so to me, “elite” needs to be north of that, and demonstrated for multiple seasons, so a high career average.

yes I've noticed how your goalposts have moved since this all started. Now to you it must be 42%. Of course we've already shown that Beasley's average is over 42% for games he started and it's not an insignificant number of games, it just hasn't been a fulltime gig yet. These games, and nonstarting games are decently high volume that we even saw an increase in since arriving here.

BTW, I know of no evidence that shows that starting automatically adds to your three point percentage.

What? What kind of statement is that? Who is claiming that?

What has been claimed is that starting and not starting can affect your volume and or how involved the player is with game plans. There is a difference between being filler giving someone multiple short rest minutes or filling in out of position or in a strange lineup, and otherwise being the starter getting more minutes in more consistent lineups for more of your minutes and more oppotunity for shots or to impact the game more in not just shooting but now expending more energy on more aspects of the game. Some players excel at coming of the bench only being asked to be a fireplug shooter, but if asked to start and increase minutes the extra responsibilities in both offense and defense just kills their shot consistency. Simply being more tired might also be affecting their consistency and focus. Most players will see their average drop with increased attempts and increased minutes.

We are looking for the players that don't see their numbers drop as their minutes/involvement climb into starters roles. Into the level we are seeing is the elite range. Beyond your claimed necessary range that isn't even necessary.
[/quote]

In fact, we often see players who have been starters for several years go up and down over that time. This isn’t because they forget how to shoot some years..- it’s because with the smaller sample sizes, sometimes the ball will drop and sometimes it won’t - and a week of either can really change an overall number.

Smaller sample sizes? What? How does that fit your narrative now on this? It does not.

Changes over each season on what they specifically have been working on could imact them.
Changes over years with their team have just as much to do with things.
- Changes over the years with their role on that changing team.

All reasons to look at the per year context. Something you are refusing to do.

Especially so with a young player that wasn't instantly gifted a starting gig.


45% range as a starter,
42.6% starting games with Wolves,
48.5% starting games with Denver in 2018/19,
40%+ full season avg with Denver in the books with both starting and bench role games.

I know you won't respond to this. Guaranteed you have no answer for these things.

[Klomp]

You are right that it’s harder to quantify 3P% because you need both percentage and volume. Without digging in deep, he was 47th last year in 3P%, so I would expect an elite player to be far better than 47th.

Like you said, you need volume too. He's up to 29th among players with 5.0 or more attempts.

[Klomp]

We have multiple players shooting 40% in a season these days, so to me, “elite” needs to be north of that, and demonstrated for multiple seasons, so a high career average.

24 players shot 40.0% or greater last season. Only 14 were on at least 5 3-point attempts per game.

[shrink]

You are right that it’s harder to quantify 3P% because you need both percentage and volume. Without digging in deep, he was 47th last year in 3P%, so I would expect an elite player to be far better than 47th.

Like you said, you need volume too. He's up to 29th among players with 5.0 or more attempts.

In your opinion, do you think 29th is “elite?”

Among all players who have 5 attempts, which percentile is he? I’m guessing that’s not even in the top 10%

[Jedzz]

2018-2019 season. How many players with at least 400 3pt attempts that season averaged 40%?

First, Beasley was no were near a fulltime starter. Only 18 games started that year. But did have 405 attempts so let's start at the 400 minimum of attempts and work upwards.

43 players had at least 400 3pt attempts.
7 players with at least 400 attempts reached a 40% average in 2018-19! Only 7!

These players are:
Steph Curry 43.7 810 att 69 starts of 69 games
Buddy Heid 42.7 651 att 82 starts of 82 games
Klay Thomson 40.2 599 att 78 starts of 78 games
Danny Green 45.5 435 att 80 starts of 80 games
Kyrie Irving 40.1 434 att 67 starts of 67 games
Bryn Forbes 42.6 414 att 81 starts of 81 games
Malik Beasley 40.2 405 att 18 starts of 81 games

This list of top 7 season averages of the top 43 in 3pt attempts includes 6 fulltime starters and one player that absolutely should have been a fulltime starter like the rest of them. It also shows that Denver at least allowed him to have a nice volume of shots when not starting so they knew what they had in him. They just weren't prepared to pay him for the level he plays at.

Buddy Heild was on rookie deal making 3.9mil. Bryn Forbes was on his rookie year of rookie deal below 3mil and starting. Beasley was on rookie deal still at even less. Everyone else on the list are stars players starting every game as well.

[Jedzz]

You are right that it’s harder to quantify 3P% because you need both percentage and volume. Without digging in deep, he was 47th last year in 3P%, so I would expect an elite player to be far better than 47th.

Like you said, you need volume too. He's up to 29th among players with 5.0 or more attempts.

In your opinion, do you think 29th is “elite?”

Among all players who have 5 attempts, which percentile is he? I’m guessing that’s not even in the top 10%

2018-19.

Of the players with exactly 5 att/g like Beasley had, (7 players), only Shamet, Beasley, Forbes reached over 40%. Bellinelli was only 37%, Durant was only 35%, Kawhi Leonard was only 37%, Korver was 39.7%.

Durant must suck to you. He played 78 games that year, starting all of them. Not shrink qualified.
Kawhi must suck to you. 60 starts of 60 games played. Not shrink qualified.

Are these two not stars known for shooting prowess?

[shrink]

Like you said, you need volume too. He's up to 29th among players with 5.0 or more attempts.

In your opinion, do you think 29th is “elite?”

Among all players who have 5 attempts, which percentile is he? I’m guessing that’s not even in the top 10%

2018-19.

Of the players with exactly 5 att/g like Beasley had, (7 players), (3 of 5 starters), only Shamet, Beasley, Forbes reached over 40%. Bellinelli was only 37%, Durant was only 35%, Kawhi Leonard was only 37%, Korver was 39.7%.

Durant must suck to you. He played 78 games that year, starting all of them. Not shrink qualified.
Kawhi must suck to you. 60 starts of 60 games played. Not shrink qualified.

This is exactly the type of post that gives you your reputation here.

Bravo.

[Jedzz]

In your opinion, do you think 29th is “elite?”

Among all players who have 5 attempts, which percentile is he? I’m guessing that’s not even in the top 10%

2018-19.

Of the players with exactly 5 att/g like Beasley had, (7 players), (3 of 5 starters), only Shamet, Beasley, Forbes reached over 40%. Bellinelli was only 37%, Durant was only 35%, Kawhi Leonard was only 37%, Korver was 39.7%.

Durant must suck to you. He played 78 games that year, starting all of them. Not shrink qualified.
Kawhi must suck to you. 60 starts of 60 games played. Not shrink qualified.

This is exactly the type of post that gives you your reputation here.

Bravo.

You put it out there. Can't handle the results?

All you want to do is get 500 players into your list carrying not about context, amounts, anything. All so you can try and rank a nonstarting player lower.

Go ahead, read the other post for 2018-19 season. Where he is top 7 among the rest starters in attempts from the miniature set of players that actually reached 40% with substantial volume.

Come on man! Tell us how Kevin Durant doesn't make your special shooters list. Tell us how Kawhi should go work for the MLE.

My reputation? You've taken this odd hate parade too far.


Exactly 10 players in 2018-19 reached 40% on the season while shooting at least 5 att/g. The total number attempting that many was 58 players. I'll let you go and rank the 40% capable ones. There are only ten.

[shrink]

2018-19.

Of the players with exactly 5 att/g like Beasley had, (7 players), (3 of 5 starters), only Shamet, Beasley, Forbes reached over 40%. Bellinelli was only 37%, Durant was only 35%, Kawhi Leonard was only 37%, Korver was 39.7%.

Durant must suck to you. He played 78 games that year, starting all of them. Not shrink qualified.
Kawhi must suck to you. 60 starts of 60 games played. Not shrink qualified.

This is exactly the type of post that gives you your reputation here.

Bravo.

You put it out there. Can't handle the results?

All you want to do is get 500 players into your list carrying not about context, amounts, anything. All so you can try and rank a nonstarting player lower.

Go ahead, read the other post for 2018-19 season. Where he is top 7 among the rest starters in attempts from the miniature set of players that actually reached 40% with substantial volume.

Come on man! Tell us how Kevin Durant doesn't make your special shooters list. Tell us how Kawhi should go work for the MLE.

My reputation? You've taken this odd hate parade too far.

I asked KLOMP what percentile Beasley’s 3P% placed him for players with 5 attempts AND OVER, and whether he considered that an ELITE percentile for THREE POINT SHOOTING.

Your “results” were for 2019, for players with EXACTLY 5 attempts, there is NOTHING about percentile, and then you make a Couple strawman arguments like I must think Durant must “suck” because he didn’t make elite criteria in 3 point shooting.

Look, nobody was talking to you, but you burst in with this angry, immature stat parsing rant that is simply embarrassing. You have shown many times this is who you are, and how you choose to post - even when many people have pointed it out? You have earned this reputation many times over, but you can change it. You can either learn from this, or more likely, just keep doing what you’re doing. Whichever you choose, I don’t want to waste time with you.

[Jedzz]

then you make a Couple strawman arguments like I must think Durant must “suck” because he didn’t make elite criteria in 3 point shooting.

It's not strawman at all. Durant shot 3s worse than Beasley did at the same 5 attempts per game in the same season. You brought up the 5 att/g requirement. I went to a year he had that attempt rate. I focused there because it's your number and low and behold lot's of really good players being maxed around this league are right there in the list next to him on attempts/percentage that year. So obviously you think Durant isn't an elite shooter either. MLE limit for Durant right? Is Durant a defensive juggernaut? Bear hugging Towns until Durant falls to the floor? That guy? He's a scoring star making ching, just a little bit shy of what a young Beasley can shoot it seems.

Look, nobody was talking to you.

Right, you weren't. I'm talking at you and your repeat claims posted here for us all to see. I'm responding to unbelievably posted disinformation lines from you lately. You are the one throwing down claims that one of the best players this team currently has, a player that could very well mean playoffs in the next season or without him yet another round of developing jokers, a player much better than recent max players here that can be had cheaper than that, but to you isn't good enough to deserve more then an MLE, and hasn't proved elite shooting skill when he clearly has.

It's been clear for weeks your only intention is to constantly rain repeat vague statements about career percentages all in the hopes of what? Now you want to start forcing the argument into new cherry picked percentiles and ask people here if your guess is right? You go do the searching. We've posted enough information for you.

If you can't handle having these attempts repeatedly vetted, stop posting them. That or go PM Klomp where no one but he can see it. I disagree and I think he's that important to the next season here. On to your next claim.