Beasley and consistency

Post #1 » by **revprodeji** » Fri Oct 8, 2010 10:28 pm

http://nbaplaybook.com/2010/10/08/micha ... nsistency/

Good article

AQuintus · Post #2 » by **AQuintus** » Fri Oct 8, 2010 11:30 pm

I have to say, I believe Michael Beasley is destined to be inconsistent his entire career. He has all of the talent in the world, but I never think he is going to be able to display it on a nightly basis. So what makes me think this inconsistency will continue in Minnesota? All you have to do is look at his preseason performance in the first two games:

It's waaaaay too early and this is waaaaay too small a sample size to make these kinds of conclusions.

Esohny · Post #3 » by **Esohny** » Sat Oct 9, 2010 12:02 am

AQuintus wrote:
I have to say, I believe Michael Beasley is destined to be inconsistent his entire career. He has all of the talent in the world, but I never think he is going to be able to display it on a nightly basis. So what makes me think this inconsistency will continue in Minnesota? All you have to do is look at his preseason performance in the first two games:

It's waaaaay too early and this is waaaaay too small a sample size to make these kinds of conclusions.

Whatever dude. We already know that Evan Turner and Derrick Favors are incredible busts, don't we? Sample size, schmample size.

shangrila · Post #4 » by **shangrila** » Sat Oct 9, 2010 2:53 am

Yeah, way too early for a conclusion like that and the fact that it's at the start of the article discredits the rest, for the most part. Still an interesting read I guess but I've never thought that the Playbook was as insightful as some people thought.

shangrila · Post #5 » by **shangrila** » Sat Oct 9, 2010 6:51 am

I'd like to go into a little more detail with this, now I'm off from work.

I think this is the first article I've seen from the Playbook where it plays more into the consensus opinion then actual research and where he's, surprisingly, failed to do his homework.

For starters, one of his main criticisms of Beasley is his turnovers. Now, I'll admit he's averaging a hell of a lot of turnovers but the Playbook hasn't bothered to put it into context. As everyone here knows, not only is he trying to get used to a new offence that's completely different to anything he's ever run, but he's also trying to get used to new teammates and new responsibilities. You can tell, even by watching the clips that the Playbook uses, that most of his errors are overthinking. The pass to Love would have been fine if it was a second earlier, but you could tell he was asking himself if it was the right thing. Same with the travel at the 3pt line against the Knicks. He jumped to take the shot, saw the man running at him and suddenly thought he should pass it. I mean, it's not hard to see it's not the fundamental flaw in his mind that the Playbook makes it out to be, it's just something that will take time.

The other thing I had an issue with was his analysis of the Knicks game. Yes, Beasley had a bad game, but all of his clips come from the first half of the game where Beasley was settling and looked frustrated, especially early. But when the second half came around he was a lot more aggressive driving the ball and was doing a lot of the things that the Playbook highlighted as positives in the Laker game. To not even mention that just seems stupid to me and leads me to think he probably made his mind up about this issue long before he started doing his research.

I'll admit I've probably got more faith in Beasley then others but I think we can all agree this article is stupidly early and, despite what he says, clearly based off the two mostly meaningless preseason games. It's lost my respect at this point.

Kurosawa · Post #6 » by **Kurosawa** » Sat Oct 9, 2010 10:42 am

We all want Beasley to live up to his potential. And we're all more than a little nervous that, for reasons related mostly to personality and mental focus, he may never do so. Personally, I don't think this analysis is stupidly premature at all. There is real and legitimate concern here. Let's hope the light goes on for this great young talent.

TyKixx · Post #7 » by **TyKixx** » Sat Oct 9, 2010 7:35 pm

In the 2 preseason games I thought Beasley looked anxious and excited. I think he kinda got ahead of himself trying to make things happen. I don't believe this is a bad, unfixable problem. As I coach, you'd rather have a guy who you have to get to relax a bit than a player who you always need to pump up. In this case I think motivation or a lack thereof was actually one of the concerns for Beasley and it seems like he is making a concious effort in that area. Will he ever develop consistency? Who knows, especially based on 2 preseason games. However, I do believe he will settle down, get more comfortable, and begin to play within himself over the course of the season. If he can harness this positive energy he seems to have maybe (hopefully) we will be able to see some of the player everyone thought he was going to be coming out of KState.

AQuintus · Post #8 » by **AQuintus** » Sat Oct 9, 2010 9:28 pm

shangrila wrote:The other thing I had an issue with was his analysis of the Knicks game. Yes, Beasley had a bad game, but all of his clips come from the first half of the game where Beasley was settling and looked frustrated, especially early. But when the second half came around he was a lot more aggressive driving the ball and was doing a lot of the things that the Playbook highlighted as positives in the Laker game. To not even mention that just seems stupid to me and leads me to think he probably made his mind up about this issue long before he started doing his research.

This is my biggest problem with the article, too. Especially since the writer states that:

If Beasley did the same exact thing in the Lakers game, but just missed every shot, I wouldn’t be complaining, because he is attacking and showing aggressiveness. If Beasley did the same exact thing in the Knicks game, but made every shot, I wouldn’t be happy because he settled.

, but, when you consider the whole game (including the second half drives), the biggest difference between Beasley's game against the Lakers and his game against the Knicks is that against the Lakers he was making his jump shots. Maybe I'm not being fair, but that quote rings false to me.

Edit:

Kurosawa wrote:There is real and legitimate concern here. Let's hope the light goes on for this great young talent.

I agree. There is some reason for concern. Beasley was supposed to dominate from day one and so far he hasn't, but making wide, sweeping statements like:

However, the mental aspect of the game is holding him back, and in my opinion it will prevent him from ever being a star.

and

I have to say, I believe Michael Beasley is destined to be inconsistent his entire career.

based on 2 years (when the player is only 19 to 21) and 2 preseason games (where the player is in a whole new system with new teammates, new coaches, and a new role) is completely premature and more than a little ridiculous.

SSUBluesman · Post #9 » by **SSUBluesman** » Sun Oct 10, 2010 4:11 am

The last 2 years (if not his entire life) should have been enough of a sample size to question his mental toughness, focus, etc. all of which play a big role in consistency from game to game over a long season. That being said he'll be hidden away on a team that will expect and NEED him to come back firing after a 5 for 17 game. It'd be prudent to at least give him a little time in this situation before writing the rest of his career for him...

Dewey · Post #10 » by **Dewey** » Sun Oct 10, 2010 2:17 pm

Geez, after two preseason games most have thrown Brewer under the bus and determined he 's got to battle Ellington for a roster spot ... now someone claims Beasly has issues with inconsistency, and whoa ... it's only two preseason games.

Nice

Anyway, it's looking to me like we have two role players

Post #11 » by **revprodeji** » Sun Oct 10, 2010 10:09 pm

I think we are reacting because he is only using clips from the first two games to show his point. His argument does make sense, but he needs to justify it better. Stats, shot charts, etc would be a huge assistance.

eyeteeth · Post #12 » by **eyeteeth** » Mon Oct 11, 2010 11:12 pm

It's an interesting long bet. It is a bad bet that it will be a sound analysis ten years from now, but a totally safe bet that no one will remember the article or evaluate the analysis. In other words, it's journalism, not analysis. :noway:

shangrila · Post #13 » by **shangrila** » Tue Oct 12, 2010 1:23 am

Dewey wrote:Geez, after two preseason games most have thrown Brewer under the bus and determined he 's got to battle Ellington for a roster spot ... now someone claims Beasly has issues with inconsistency, and whoa ... it's only two preseason games.

I can't speak for others but I wasn't that impressed with Brewer last year so, for me, he had one foot out the door the moment they brought in Johnson, Webster and Beasley. His pre-season just kind of sums up what I saw last year which was a skinny player with really poor handles who's mildly overrated as a defender.

revprodeji wrote:I think we are reacting because he is only using clips from the first two games to show his point. His argument does make sense, but he needs to justify it better. Stats, shot charts, etc would be a huge assistance.

Again, I can't speak for others, but I'm reacting because he's trying to justify writing off a 3rd year player using two preseason games and little else. As AQ points out, the guy makes sweeping statements with little evidence to support them, blatantly overlooks obvious pieces of evidence that go against his theory and then tries to pass the whole thing off as fact. It's just a poorly written article that's not up to his usual standards.