Beasley key to draft

[shrink]

But Beasley is an elite shooter, not only a good scorer.

Let’s pump the brakes a bit here. Beasley is a good shooter, not elite. Last year, Beasley shot 38.8%, which was 47th in the NBA. 38.8% is also his career average.

In addition, 3 point percentage is one of the most variable stats because of smaller sample size, and we want to extrapolate his 14 games here at 42.6% to believe he’ll be a 42.6% three point shooter. Towns isn’t even a career 40% three point shooter, so I doubt 42.6% is likely to be who he is forever.

Now, I am a big advocate of adding better three point shooting, and 38.8% is pretty good, but 47th doesn’t get you to the elite level.

I agree with you though that he may get a deal slightly above the MLE. I am concerned that it will be a deal we regret.

His career average as a bench sub. The moment he got more he jacked that percentage above 42%. It did not go down. He also has averaged over 40% in a season. Name all the greats playing now that even have. He's in that tier of shooter. It's not like when he averaged 40% he was only attempting 1 a game. This is a real example.

He's an elite shooter in this league.

and we want to extrapolate his 14 games here at 42.6% to believe he’ll be a 42.6% three point shooter.

Do you think this argument is fair? Umm no. "We" are not suggesting he's automatically going to be 42.6 for the remainder of time in Minnesota. That's just you playing a wee bit a funny business, yeah?

What you can take from that number, like mentioned already, is that the moment he was handed starts and more 3s, that number went up, his involvement going up improved him. It didn't drop through the floor like often is the case with others.

Given he's shot 40% in a season prior at just over 7 attempts per game, to show us 42.6% when attempting 8.8 shots per game is a nice little indicator of an Elite NBA shooter.

For the record, there are only 4 active players in the NBA right now that have a career 3P% at 42.6% .. the two Curry’s, Duncan Robinson, and Korver. So if 42.6% became his career average (and he would have to shoot better than this to average out his seasons in the 30’s!) I would say being #5 would be truly elite. At the same time, since we see only four players at that level, it shows that it is a truly difficult level to repeat.

He was shooting 36% in DEN last season before he got here, and while he shot 40.2% the previous year In his best season (is 17th in the nba “elite?”), you didn’t mention the 32.1% and 34.1% his first two years.

I think you are putting way too much stock into 14 games, especially in such a volatile stat as 3P%.

[Mattya]

Nothing strawman there. I don't want a single draft pick from this draft to get lofted into Beasleys starting position based on nothing but idiotic projections of his future or some kind of claim about how great he was in training camps. Find a Lebron if you wan to unseat a young 40% SG.

Typical from some of you though. To totally leave your arguments and start trying to attack character of posters when your arguments don't hold water.

Ask shrink about his little strawman attempt earlier today, same thread. See if you can find that smart guy.

So here is my exact quote

I don’t think Beasley has any impact on the Wolves trying to add talent. I think that Beasley would be best in the Eric Gordon/JJ Reddick role off the bench. Very solid starter, but potential 6th man of the year candidate off the bench.

find where I said he should lose his starting role to a draft pick. You won't.

A legitimate post would be to ask who I wanted to replace Beasley in the starting lineup with.

Right. We are going to trade for Beal, pay him 25 million. Get Beasley to play for 1Mil so he can play on the bench. I get your dreams now. Carry on.

Spoiler:

lieing sack of dung. I know you have a rookie in your heart behind that thought.

Imagine getting exposed like you did here today and not even having the guts of name calling without a spoiler tag. How pathetic. Then on top of that you want to straw man in the very next post after getting exposed for strawmanning. Absolutely classic fail. That is how natural your BS comes to you.

[Jedzz]

Do you think this argument is fair?

Yes. Because to unseat a perfectly capable elite shooter from the shooting guard position any draft pick blindly chosen to do so sure better be a sure thing like Lebron was coming into the league. Nearly every other draft pick is a crapshoot.

LOL! I gave you the chance to step back, and you doubled-down.

No player would ever lose his starting role if the standard is “his replacement must be as good as LeBron coming out of the draft.”

No. Actually you went on to post a real unfair statement that had no business being said. Right after your little off base stab here. It was the strawman of the year so far. Congrats. "we all believe he will shoot 42.6% for his career...just because he did in 14 games..." Nice one. sarcastic strawdaddy

No player in this draft is likely to be better than Beasley as starting SG here in Rosas system for at least the next two seasons even if they found a good future player.

Even if the rook could instantly show us a 40% 3 all rookie season, they would still be a rookie clusterfk with no clue hurting the team in other ways. Ergo, the only sane reason to attempt to plan to move Beasley to bench or 6th man would be if you have a Lebron level talent at the top of the draft that everyone knows is a lock to be a solid rookie with great game IQ, many developed skills already, and the athleticism to assure it at this level. Then you could safely plan such an idiotic decision. Short of that, no you do not even think about it.

Not quite sure why you can't follow that. But I'll try to give you the Layman's tour.

The draft is a crapshoot, hyped halfways upside down at times by many crap nostredames.
Rosas already gaffed one top pick. So he's already starting like prior Wolves GMs.
Rosas already gaffed the decision to start his high draft pick too soon. Another similarity to former GMs here.
So the probability of the perfect pick being made is about as good as usual. As good as we have come to expect.

The likelihood that they not only choose well enough to find an instant start capable player for any role, but also specifically for a SG in Rosas system that would instantly be better than Beasley as starting SG now is astronomica nostradamica talk and you know it. You would need a generational talent everyone is aware of and you would need pick#1 to get him, and he would have to be a SG/wing.. Otherwise you are making the wrong choice even contemplating planning to move Beasley out of the starting lineup.

If the Timberwolves start Josh Okogie over Beasley and claim some kind of fit in the starting group over Beasley's fit, they should all be fired immediately.
If they start planning now to move Beasley to 6th man, and therefore make contract offers with that in mind, and with part of that plan being to draft a crapshoot to start as a rookie instead, then they also should all be fired immediately.

If they can't afford to pay what Beasley wants and are forced to go on without him with a different player, that is a completely different situation.

[King Malta]

I don't want to contribute further to the derailing of this thread, but I will just say that the ignore function exists guys...

On Beasley, I sympathise to a degree with both sides of the argument (those making legitimate points, anyway). Beasley is definitely not the messiah, but I do like him and think he's a decent to good starting 2 guard in this league. Whilst I totally agree that we shouldn't hand on contracts based on past failures, as a franchise we have really struggled to find reliable shooting from the 2 guard spot for lengthy periods.

As far as the draft, Beasley is immaterial to the selection from my perspective. In the position we're in we should be taking BPA and evaluating our options after that. Rosas has proven that he can be a savvy operator in the trade market, so I have total confidence in him being able to move the pick if need be, or even move Beasley if a better option presents itself.

[Jedzz]

I don't want to contribute further to the derailing of this thread, but I will just say that the ignore function exists guys...

On Beasley, I sympathise to a degree with both sides of the argument (those making legitimate points, anyway). Beasley is definitely not the messiah, but I do like him and think he's a decent to good starting 2 guard in this league. Whilst I totally agree that we shouldn't hand on contracts based on past failures, as a franchise we have really struggled to find reliable shooting from the 2 guard spot for lengthy periods.

As far as the draft, Beasley is immaterial to the selection from my perspective. In the position we're in we should be taking BPA and evaluating our options after that. Rosas has proven that he can be a savvy operator in the trade market, so I have total confidence in him being able to move the pick if need be, or even move Beasley if a better option presents itself.

A. List the better options out there that would be a better SG in Rosas system and cost lesss or even be able to pay for them at all.
B. Underlined: You admit we haven't had a SG that shoots as well as him for a long time. Yet you don't want to pay him fairly and you actually like the idea of attempting again in draft to roll dice again. Or otherwise trading for who that is cheaper and better? Makes lots of sense, right? Do we have to go back to Anthony Peeler days?

Do we have to listen to people all over again, like they did with Lavine? When they said WIggins should be SG and LaVine should be 6th man? Really? Or watch another mistake like when the team paid Wiggins a Max instead of Butler and the Butler plan first?

Im adamant about this because of how badly this team has needed an elite shooter at SG all these years. Neither Butler or LaVine have shown anything like what Beasley is showing. Plus, everyone talks about how you can't compete until you have 3 "stars". Well you either buy them as established stars, or you become the team that was first to allow them to be a starter. As a starter he could be a third star in the making here. Still, we could get him cheaper than many of the star SGs out there. Because he has to prove that level fulltime as a starter yet. So his contract after this one is where he can expect to get top dollar. But he's shown enough now to deserve a real deal.

I don't want to hear more about how some here don't think his defense is enough for the role. You don't know. He's only 23 and was only allowed to be a bench role player so far. He could improve that yet. But there are more star players that are ragged to bad at defense than there are good ones. With three really good shooters starting on the team, then maybe they could start mixing in higher level defenders that aren't very good at shooting. They aren't winning jack with only two players starting that are high level shooters. Certainly not in this system. Solidify a 3rd.

[shrink]

Yes. Because to unseat a perfectly capable elite shooter from the shooting guard position any draft pick blindly chosen to do so sure better be a sure thing like Lebron was coming into the league. Nearly every other draft pick is a crapshoot.

LOL! I gave you the chance to step back, and you doubled-down.

No player would ever lose his starting role if the standard is “his replacement must be as good as LeBron coming out of the draft.”

No. Actually you went on to post a real unfair statement that had no business being said. Right after your little off base stab here. It was the strawman of the year so far. Congrats. "we all believe he will shoot 42.6% for his career...just because he did in 14 games..." Nice one. sarcastic strawdaddy

No player in this draft is likely to be better than Beasley as starting SG here in Rosas system for at least the next two seasons even if they found a good future player.

Even if the rook could instantly show us a 40% 3 all rookie season, they would still be a rookie clusterfk with no clue hurting the team in other ways. Ergo, the only sane reason to attempt to plan to move Beasley to bench or 6th man would be if you have a Lebron level talent at the top of the draft that everyone knows is a lock to be a solid rookie with great game IQ, many developed skills already, and the athleticism to assure it at this level. Then you could safely plan such an idiotic decision. Short of that, no you do not even think about it.

Not quite sure why you can't follow that. But I'll try to give you the Layman's tour.

The draft is a crapshoot, hyped halfways upside down at times by many crap nostredames.
Rosas already gaffed one top pick. So he's already starting like prior Wolves GMs.
Rosas already gaffed the decision to start his high draft pick too soon. Another similarity to former GMs here.
So the probability of the perfect pick being made is about as good as usual. As good as we have come to expect.

The likelihood that they not only choose well enough to find an instant start capable player for any role, but also specifically for a SG in Rosas system that would instantly be better than Beasley as starting SG now is astronomica nostradamica talk and you know it. You would need a generational talent everyone is aware of and you would need pick#1 to get him, and he would have to be a SG/wing.. Otherwise you are making the wrong choice even contemplating planning to move Beasley out of the starting lineup.

If the Timberwolves start Josh Okogie over Beasley and claim some kind of fit in the starting group over Beasley's fit, they should all be fired immediately.
If they start planning now to move Beasley to 6th man, and therefore make contract offers with that in mind, and with part of that plan being to draft a crapshoot to start as a rookie instead, then they also should all be fired immediately.

If they can't afford to pay what Beasley wants and are forced to go on without him with a different player, that is a completely different situation.

“Not quite sure why you can’t understand” how immature it is that you can’t admit that making “be better than LEBRON as a rookie” is an impossible standard. LeBron is unique - not a standard.

But you top the immaturity with your “Strawman? I didn’t - you did!” defense.

This isn’t an elementary school. Grow the hell up, and KingMalta is right .. welcome to my ignore list.

[King Malta]

I don't want to contribute further to the derailing of this thread, but I will just say that the ignore function exists guys...

On Beasley, I sympathise to a degree with both sides of the argument (those making legitimate points, anyway). Beasley is definitely not the messiah, but I do like him and think he's a decent to good starting 2 guard in this league. Whilst I totally agree that we shouldn't hand on contracts based on past failures, as a franchise we have really struggled to find reliable shooting from the 2 guard spot for lengthy periods.

As far as the draft, Beasley is immaterial to the selection from my perspective. In the position we're in we should be taking BPA and evaluating our options after that. Rosas has proven that he can be a savvy operator in the trade market, so I have total confidence in him being able to move the pick if need be, or even move Beasley if a better option presents itself.

A. List the better options out there that would be a better SG in Rosas system and cost lesss or even be able to pay for them at all.
B. Underlined: You admit we haven't had a SG that shoots as well as him for a long time. Yet you don't want to pay him fairly and you actually like the idea of attempting again in draft to roll dice again. Makes lots of sense, right?

Besides Butler and LaVine, who by the way many Wolves fans and team GM wanted to instead keep and pay WIggins instead, you have to start going way back to find elite shoting guards from 3. The 3 is ultra important in Rosas system. Maybe go back to Anthony Peeler days? By the way, the fan speak back in the LaVine days was to move him to 6th man so the "better" Wiggins could man the SG role. As it.

I never said that I didn't even mention his pay or what I would deem to be fair. You're straw manning again.

For the record, I've had you on ignore for months, it's why none of your nonsensical replies to me get a response. I'm not going to reply to whatever you nonsense you send to me after this either, just had to point out that you're continuously doing what Mattya and Shrink have accused you of.

[Mattya]

I don't want to contribute further to the derailing of this thread, but I will just say that the ignore function exists guys...

On Beasley, I sympathise to a degree with both sides of the argument (those making legitimate points, anyway). Beasley is definitely not the messiah, but I do like him and think he's a decent to good starting 2 guard in this league. Whilst I totally agree that we shouldn't hand on contracts based on past failures, as a franchise we have really struggled to find reliable shooting from the 2 guard spot for lengthy periods.

As far as the draft, Beasley is immaterial to the selection from my perspective. In the position we're in we should be taking BPA and evaluating our options after that. Rosas has proven that he can be a savvy operator in the trade market, so I have total confidence in him being able to move the pick if need be, or even move Beasley if a better option presents itself.

A. List the better options out there that would be a better SG in Rosas system and cost lesss or even be able to pay for them at all.
B. Underlined: You admit we haven't had a SG that shoots as well as him for a long time. Yet you don't want to pay him fairly and you actually like the idea of attempting again in draft to roll dice again. Makes lots of sense, right?

Besides Butler and LaVine, who by the way many Wolves fans and team GM wanted to instead keep and pay WIggins instead, you have to start going way back to find elite shoting guards from 3. The 3 is ultra important in Rosas system. Maybe go back to Anthony Peeler days? By the way, the fan speak back in the LaVine days was to move him to 6th man so the "better" Wiggins could man the SG role. As it.

I never said that I didn't even mention his pay or what I would deem to be fair. You're straw manning again.

For the record, I've had you on ignore for months, it's why none of your nonsensical replies to me get a response. I'm not going to reply to whatever you nonsense you send to me after this either, just had to point out that you're continuously doing what Mattya and Shrink have accused you of.

He told me he was going to stop replying to me months ago yet continued to do so. I ignore him the vast majority of the time because I learned his routine, but he was begging to get his BS exposed here. Now he just continues to make my point for me.

[WolfAddict]

C'mon gents, we're all Wolves fans... Can't we all just get along?

[King Malta]

C'mon gents, we're all Wolves fans... Can't we all just get along?

I can fix this Addict:

"David Kahn".

[Calinks]

Come on guys, keep the jabs out of it. Nothing wrong with disagreements and dissenting perspectives. Underhanded comments, snide remarks, etc aren't necessary. Be better.

[King Malta]

Come on guys, keep the jabs out of it. Nothing wrong with disagreements and dissenting perspectives. Underhanded comments, snide remarks, etc aren't necessary. Be better.

For the record I don't think that's the problem at all, it isn't for me anyway. I'm just not a fan of people attempting to argue against points that other posters haven't made whilst clearly misrepresenting that posters' stance.

Warning noted though. That's the subject done for me.

[Jedzz]

“Not quite sure why you can’t understand” how immature it is that you can’t admit that making “be better than LEBRON as a rookie” is an impossible standard. LeBron is unique - not a standard.

Lebron level example is the standard needed to attempt to illlustrate your silly plans safely to replace Beasley's ability by rolling dice in the draft. It's not immature, I'm pointing out how inescapably unnacceptable your plans are...how inextricably low probability that plan is to pay off with a player that is either better or as good and cheaper than Beasley on a fair deal. You are giving up too much of known player and that a normal educated guess on standard draft picks isn't good enough to actively make that kind of choice.

It's not that difficult to follow. I know you can.

[Jedzz]

Come on guys, keep the jabs out of it. Nothing wrong with disagreements and dissenting perspectives. Underhanded comments, snide remarks, etc aren't necessary. Be better.

For the record I don't think that's the problem at all, it isn't for me anyway. I'm just not a fan of people attempting to argue against points that other posters haven't made whilst clearly misrepresenting that posters' stance.

Warning noted though. That's the subject done for me.

I didn't misrepresent anything if you are referring to me.

[Jedzz]

I don't want to contribute further to the derailing of this thread, but I will just say that the ignore function exists guys...

On Beasley, I sympathise to a degree with both sides of the argument (those making legitimate points, anyway). Beasley is definitely not the messiah, but I do like him and think he's a decent to good starting 2 guard in this league. Whilst I totally agree that we shouldn't hand on contracts based on past failures, as a franchise we have really struggled to find reliable shooting from the 2 guard spot for lengthy periods.

As far as the draft, Beasley is immaterial to the selection from my perspective. In the position we're in we should be taking BPA and evaluating our options after that. Rosas has proven that he can be a savvy operator in the trade market, so I have total confidence in him being able to move the pick if need be, or even move Beasley if a better option presents itself.

A. List the better options out there that would be a better SG in Rosas system and cost lesss or even be able to pay for them at all.
B. Underlined: You admit we haven't had a SG that shoots as well as him for a long time. Yet you don't want to pay him fairly and you actually like the idea of attempting again in draft to roll dice again. Makes lots of sense, right?

Besides Butler and LaVine, who by the way many Wolves fans and team GM wanted to instead keep and pay WIggins instead, you have to start going way back to find elite shoting guards from 3. The 3 is ultra important in Rosas system. Maybe go back to Anthony Peeler days? By the way, the fan speak back in the LaVine days was to move him to 6th man so the "better" Wiggins could man the SG role. As it.

I never said that I didn't even mention his pay or what I would deem to be fair. You're straw manning again.

For the record, I've had you on ignore for months, it's why none of your nonsensical replies to me get a response. I'm not going to reply to whatever you nonsense you send to me after this either, just had to point out that you're continuously doing what Mattya and Shrink have accused you of.

No. Some of that was Mattya. But as you noted, you jumped into the argument going on with him and added your thoughts on it, while also leaving your thoughts on my posts. My answer is to help you understand the entirety of this.

[Mattya]

A. List the better options out there that would be a better SG in Rosas system and cost lesss or even be able to pay for them at all.
B. Underlined: You admit we haven't had a SG that shoots as well as him for a long time. Yet you don't want to pay him fairly and you actually like the idea of attempting again in draft to roll dice again. Makes lots of sense, right?

Besides Butler and LaVine, who by the way many Wolves fans and team GM wanted to instead keep and pay WIggins instead, you have to start going way back to find elite shoting guards from 3. The 3 is ultra important in Rosas system. Maybe go back to Anthony Peeler days? By the way, the fan speak back in the LaVine days was to move him to 6th man so the "better" Wiggins could man the SG role. As it.

I never said that I didn't even mention his pay or what I would deem to be fair. You're straw manning again.

For the record, I've had you on ignore for months, it's why none of your nonsensical replies to me get a response. I'm not going to reply to whatever you nonsense you send to me after this either, just had to point out that you're continuously doing what Mattya and Shrink have accused you of.

No. Some of that was Mattya. But as you noted, you jumped into the argument going on with him and added your thoughts on it, while also leaving your thoughts on my posts. My answer is to help you understand the entirety of this.

Where did I say I don't want to pay him, pay him fairly, or anything at all about pay?

[Klomp]

OK Jedzz, I think you are confusing things people are saying.

Drafting a guard does NOT mean they want to bench Beasley, underpay Beasley or replace Beasley. I know personally my thought for months has been to draft a guard but use the draftee as the third guard in the rotation behind both Russell and Beasley.

[shrink]

Drafting a guard does NOT mean they want to bench Beasley, underpay Beasley or replace Beasley. I know personally my thought for months has been to draft a guard but use the draftee as the third guard in the rotation behind both Russell and Beasley.

This is what I think as well, and I would add that this is a very common asset play for teams in our situation.

MIN is the youngest team in the league, and few rookies are positive players their first season. MIN however wants to be competitive with Towns and Russell. If Rosas thinks the BAP is a guard, I think he drafts him, regardless of Beasley. Beasley gets a fair contract this summer for what he has shown so far (let’s say, 3x$33), but he continues to get lots of minutes and outplays his contract. If MIN is struggling to make the playoffs at the trade deadline, they can trade him for an asset, and invest even more minutes into the rookie (and improve the tank).

As always, the key is to offer good contracts to all players, so they are not just affordable if they stay on our team, but give us a sack of assets if we need to make changes.

For the record, if Beasley reverts back to his career averages, he’s still the second best guard on the team - I just worry about his fit defensively with Russell. He would destroy second units though as a sixth man, but you don’t want to pay your sixth man eight figures.

[winforlose]

OK Jedzz, I think you are confusing things people are saying.

Drafting a guard does NOT mean they want to bench Beasley, underpay Beasley or replace Beasley. I know personally my thought for months has been to draft a guard but use the draftee as the third guard in the rotation behind both Russell and Beasley.

I have two problems with this.

1. The third overall pick comes with a high salary. We would essentially be paying a backup SG or backup PG considerably more than we would a backup vet with a proven track record. Also in that vein, if they player is a bust we are stuck for a longer period of time, with a higher cap investment.
2. The third overall pick is a tradeable asset. Even if it doesn’t land a star, a role player and a latter pick in the first (just like the suns did last year,) is a better decision than drafting a backup guard.

[Jedzz]

So here is my exact quote



find where I said he should lose his starting role to a draft pick. You won't.

A legitimate post would be to ask who I wanted to replace Beasley in the starting lineup with.

Right. We are going to trade for Beal, pay him 25 million. Get Beasley to play for 1Mil so he can play on the bench. I get your dreams now. Carry on.

Spoiler:

lieing sack of dung. I know you have a rookie in your heart behind that thought.

Imagine getting exposed like you did here today and not even having the guts of name calling without a spoiler tag. How pathetic. Then on top of that you want to straw man in the very next post after getting exposed for strawmanning. Absolutely classic fail. That is how natural your BS comes to you.

Mattya. You can go play games with somone else. Your 'exposed' proclamation might work on little kids from the 90s but these things don't even work on kids today. Nobody was Pwnd! Nobody won or lost anything. Your post was not well thought through and you are just having trouble accepting that. Cut little snippets out all you want now. I don't have the time for you or this. I've asked you multiple times to give you a chance to explain your post further by offering examples of who you would suggest if not a rookie that would/should push him to a bench role and you won't/haven't. You just want to play games. cya