A.Randolph vs M.Beasley

WadeKnicks2010 · Post #101 » by **WadeKnicks2010** » Sun Apr 5, 2009 12:03 am

Also keep in mind that Spo is trying to win as many games as possible this year. Spo's the one who's on a short leash. He can't go around developing players like Beasley over players who will actually help him win games. If Beasley was better suited to help this team win, Spo would play him. He's an NBA coach, he's not stupid, he needs to win games or he's out of here. He doesn't have enough name value to suffer a losing year.

Wade2k6 · Post #102 » by **Wade2k6** » Sun Apr 5, 2009 12:07 am

WadeKnicks2010 wrote:Also keep in mind that Spo is trying to win as many games as possible this year. Spo's the one who's on a short leash. He can't go around developing players like Beasley over players who will actually help him win games. If Beasley was better suited to help this team win, Spo would play him. He's an NBA coach, he's not stupid, he needs to win games or he's out of here. He doesn't have enough name value to suffer a losing year.

Now you're just making ridiculous claims. He can't go around developing players like Beasley over player who will actually help him win games? If Diawara helped them win games he would of played more then 25 minutes in the previous 5 games. But he didn't. If you can't see that Beasley is a better player now then Diawara you're either 1) blind or 2) a hater.

And right now you just sound like a hater.

WadeKnicks2010 · Post #103 » by **WadeKnicks2010** » Sun Apr 5, 2009 12:09 am

If Beasley is better than Diawara why wouldn't Spo play him? He's younger and playing him now will likely help the Heat in the playoffs and next season. If he's better NOW and considering he'll certainly be better than Diawara in the future, Spo has no reason not to be playing him. But he isnt. Diawara is playing now. I'll trust Spo's judgment over yours.

Wade2k6 · Post #104 » by **Wade2k6** » Sun Apr 5, 2009 12:18 am

WadeKnicks2010 wrote:If Beasley is better than Diawara why wouldn't Spo play him? He's younger and playing him now will likely help the Heat in the playoffs and next season. If he's better NOW and considering he'll certainly be better than Diawara in the future, Spo has no reason not to be playing him. But he isnt. Diawara is playing now. I'll trust Spo's judgment over yours.

You can say the same about Randolph. If Randolph was as good as GS fans say he is, he would be getting more then 16 minutes a game on a rebuilding team that's 22 games under .500.

WadeKnicks2010 · Post #105 » by **WadeKnicks2010** » Sun Apr 5, 2009 12:21 am

Some coaches just don't trust rookies. Nelson is notorious for it. and that's why Golden State is doing so poorly this year. Spo has given Mario Chalmers, a 2nd round pick all the playing time in the world. Spo will play his best players, regardless of their tenure in the league. Thats why the Heat are winning.

Wade2k6 · Post #106 » by **Wade2k6** » Sun Apr 5, 2009 12:30 am

WadeKnicks2010 wrote:Some coaches just don't trust rookies. Nelson is notorious for it. and that's why Golden State is doing so poorly this year. Spo has given Mario Chalmers, a 2nd round pick all the playing time in the world. Spo will play his best players, regardless of their tenure in the league. Thats why the Heat are winning.

So why is it that Nelson is playing Morrow, an undrafted rookie, more then Randolph. If he doesn't trust rookies you would think a SG wouldn't be able to find 20 MPG when Monte Ellis, Azuibuke and Crawford all playing 30+ minutes a game, and in Ellis and Crawfords case 35+ MPG.

Post #107 » by **BBallFreak** » Sun Apr 5, 2009 1:17 am

WadeKnicks2010 wrote:
BBallFreak wrote:
First of all, who said a word about him being a superstar?

A little disappointing. That was in response to the same "ceiling" argument you keep bringing up. Since you fail to see what the term even means, I can see why my responses are confusing you. So forget it.

I actually don't think you understand what it means. If you did, you wouldn't be so convinced that Beasley was at his.

WadeKnicks2010 wrote:If Beasley is better than Diawara why wouldn't Spo play him? He's younger and playing him now will likely help the Heat in the playoffs and next season. If he's better NOW and considering he'll certainly be better than Diawara in the future, Spo has no reason not to be playing him. But he isnt. Diawara is playing now. I'll trust Spo's judgment over yours.

Wow, no...

Diawara averages 12 minutes a game in 57 games, making him a situational role player. Beasley averages 24 minutes a game in 75 games, making him a rotation player (and Miami's 6th man). Diawara is starting tonight because he's a better defender, not because he's a better player than Beasley. Their is a difference. Spo clearly likes to balance the bench scoring with the starters, meaning Wade and O'Neal with the starters and Beasley and Cook off the bench.

Claiming that Yakhouba Diawara is a better player than Michael Beasley is just beyond ridiculous, and the sad part is you know it...

WadeKnicks2010 · Post #108 » by **WadeKnicks2010** » Sun Apr 5, 2009 1:20 am

BBallFreak wrote:[

you wouldn't be so convinced that Beasley was at his.

Yeah, I just stopped reading after this. I never said this. Keep making up stuff that I said.

Post #109 » by **BBallFreak** » Sun Apr 5, 2009 1:24 am

WadeKnicks2010 wrote:
BBallFreak wrote:[

you wouldn't be so convinced that Beasley was at his.

Yeah, I just stopped reading after this. I never said this. Keep making up stuff that I said.

exaggerated, I admit. I apologize. I didn't need to resort to that, especially after you plopped this doozy down in the bowl:

WadeKnicks2010 wrote:If Beasley is better than Diawara why wouldn't Spo play him? He's younger and playing him now will likely help the Heat in the playoffs and next season. If he's better NOW and considering he'll certainly be better than Diawara in the future, Spo has no reason not to be playing him. But he isnt. Diawara is playing now. I'll trust Spo's judgment over yours.

No one in their right mind believes that Diawara is better than Beasley, yet you seem to. What does that say about you?

Wade2k6 · Post #110 » by **Wade2k6** » Sun Apr 5, 2009 1:25 am

All you do is pick and choose what to comment on, and when you know you're wrong or obviously exaggerating something (like saying Diawara> Beasley) you just choose not to comment on it. I'm done with this argument because you're obviously a Beasley hater.

Post #111 » by **BBallFreak** » Sun Apr 5, 2009 1:30 am

Wade2k6 wrote:All you do is pick and choose what to comment on, and when you know you're wrong or obviously exaggerating something (like saying Diawara> Beasley) you just choose not to comment on it. I'm done with this argument because you're obviously a Beasley hater.

I really don't like calling people a hater. I think it's kind of lame, to be honest. However, when the guy flatly states that he believes the Yakhouba Diawara is a better player than Michael Beasley, and believes our coach believes it because he starts Diawara, I question his motivations.

Drew Gooden comes off the bench in San Antonio. Matt Bonner starts ahead of him. Manu Ginobili used to come off the bench for a worn out old Michael Finley. Does WadeKnicks2010 believe Popovich thinks Bonner and Finley are better than Gooden and Ginobili, respectively?

Knicksfan1 · Post #112 » by **Knicksfan1** » Sun Apr 5, 2009 1:40 am

They both are going to be great players but, Beasley is better due to unlimited scoring ability, he can do anything and is starting to get better on D. If Randolf can develop a perimeter game he would probably be an all star really soon.

GswStorm3 · Post #113 » by **GswStorm3** » Mon Apr 6, 2009 4:30 pm

Randolph has at least ten rebounds his last five games. For all the questions about his weight, he sure seems like a better rebounder than Beasley.

killacalijatt · Post #114 » by **killacalijatt** » Mon Apr 6, 2009 6:41 pm

Randolph is only the 2nd rookie this year to get 10+ rebounds in 5 straight games, Love had 6 straight according to the Warriors Commentators, the only thing thats going to stop him is that the season is going to run out

Yeserday Randolph with 8points 13 boards 4 steals 2 blocks 0 turnovers in 30 minutes

BROWN · Post #115 » by **BROWN** » Mon Apr 6, 2009 6:58 pm

I like Beasley, and I like Randolph. Beasley can make a massive impact on the offensive end like Carlos Boozer, while Randolph shows glimpses of being a lock down defender, a Tayshaun Prince type player.

It's your choice, do you want a Tayshaun Prince, or a Carlos Boozer type player.
Apples and Oranges...

GswStorm3 · Post #116 » by **GswStorm3** » Mon Apr 6, 2009 7:39 pm

Randolph and Prince are Apples and Oranges.

Post #117 » by **BBallFreak** » Mon Apr 6, 2009 8:03 pm

GswStorm3 wrote:Randolph and Prince are Apples and Oranges.

That's right. Prince is a far more complete player.

GswStorm3 · Post #118 » by **GswStorm3** » Mon Apr 6, 2009 8:13 pm

BBallFreak wrote:
GswStorm3 wrote:Randolph and Prince are Apples and Oranges.

That's right. Prince is a far more complete player.

Considering he's nine years older than Randolph, that's not saying much.

BROWN · Post #119 » by **BROWN** » Mon Apr 6, 2009 10:04 pm

BBallFreak wrote:
GswStorm3 wrote:Randolph and Prince are Apples and Oranges.

That's right. Prince is a far more complete player.

I didn't say HE was him, I said he's molding his game like his. Beasley like Boozer. It's obvious that both boozer an prince are far more complete, these guys are only rookies..

Post #120 » by **BBallFreak** » Mon Apr 6, 2009 10:29 pm

GswStorm3 wrote:
BBallFreak wrote:
GswStorm3 wrote:Randolph and Prince are Apples and Oranges.

That's right. Prince is a far more complete player.

Considering he's nine years older than Randolph, that's not saying much.

Kinda is, though. It's sorta like saying he'd be lucky to ever get to that level, which is true.

brownwarriors wrote:I didn't say HE was him, I said he's molding his game like his. Beasley like Boozer. It's obvious that both boozer an prince are far more complete, these guys are only rookies..

I wasn't criticizing you, only the poster who seemed willing to imply that Randolph was somehow better than Prince.