Michael Beasley

[actrived]

I think the Wolves keep Randolph, another high-risk low-reward player.


Also, I see no reason to trade Beasley. He could become the #1 option they need in the long run. Not like they're competing anytime soon, so just continue the Beasley experiment for now.

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1097669&start=25

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1097669&start=30

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1097669&start=45

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1097669&start=60

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1097669&start=75

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1097669&start=90

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1097669&start=105

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1097669&start=120

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1097669&start=135

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1097669&start=150

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1097669&start=165

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1097669&start=180

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1097669&start=195

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1097669&start=210

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1097669&start=225

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1097669&start=240

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1097669&start=255

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1097669&start=270

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1097669&start=285

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1097669&start=300

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1097669&start=315

JackFinn, I do believe you are my hero.

You have been consistently bringing these beautiful links to every thread that I have seen dookieguy post in.

Thank you. From the bottom of my heart.

[Dr Positivity]

I just don't see how anyone could argue Beasley has a positive impact on the game, while also supporting Kevin Love's impact. It's either Love is great and playing with absolutely nothing... or Beasley is a 0 on the court. I'm going with a bit of both, but more that Beas is a zero playing SF. A SF at .509 TS% who's a massive, massive defensive liability and an overall dumb player, isn't doing much for you

[WeAreVenom]

I think the Wolves keep Randolph, another high-risk low-reward player.


Also, I see no reason to trade Beasley. He could become the #1 option they need in the long run. Not like they're competing anytime soon, so just continue the Beasley experiment for now.

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1097669&start=25

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1097669&start=30

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1097669&start=45

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1097669&start=60

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1097669&start=75

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1097669&start=90

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1097669&start=105

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1097669&start=120

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1097669&start=135

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1097669&start=150

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1097669&start=165

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1097669&start=180

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1097669&start=195

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1097669&start=210

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1097669&start=225

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1097669&start=240

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1097669&start=255

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1097669&start=270

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1097669&start=285

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1097669&start=300

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1097669&start=315

[WhatsaTDot]

I would much rather Love, Beasley than Love, Varejao on my team.

That would put you in the sole company of yourself.

[WhatsaTDot]

Beasley gets really underrated, he was averaging 22ppg 6rbs(on the dot) on 49% FG 40% 3pt before he had a recurring ankle injury.

So now he has a recurring injury to add to the existing list of concerns held against him. Awesome way to increase value.

[Mindflayer]

Had the Lakers traded two seconds for Beasley half the board would be pissing and moaning about another rip-off trade.

[WhatsaTDot]

Had the Lakers traded 2 seconds for Beasley have the board would be pissing and moaning about another rip-off trade.

Really? After he was passed around and offered to every team? Is that what happened with Pau is it?

[[RCG]]

Had the Lakers traded 2 seconds for Beasley have the board would be pissing and moaning about another rip-off trade.

Really? After he was passed around and offered to every team? Is that what happened with Pau is it?

Is that hard to comprehend?

[WhatsaTDot]

Had the Lakers traded 2 seconds for Beasley have the board would be pissing and moaning about another rip-off trade.

Really? After he was passed around and offered to every team? Is that what happened with Pau is it?

Is that hard to comprehend?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhetoric_question

Learn it, love it.

[BBallFreak]

I would much rather Love, Beasley than Love, Varejao on my team.

That would put you in the sole company of yourself.

Then he and I must be the same dude, because I'd much prefer Beasley and Love to Varajao and Love. Maybe it's because I've seen Beaz' potential. Maybe it's because I think very little of Varajao. Not sure which. Either way, I'm pretty comfortable with that. Don't get me wrong, I'd want strong defenders around them and a strong defensive minded coach to guide them, but I'd rater have a first and second option on offense in place over a first and fifth option...

[[RCG]]

Had the Lakers traded 2 seconds for Beasley have the board would be pissing and moaning about another rip-off trade.

Really? After he was passed around and offered to every team? Is that what happened with Pau is it?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhetoric_question

Learn it, love it.

The answer to your supposedly rhetorical question is no Pau wasn't shopped, do you have evidence he was or that Beasley was? And if the Lakers got Beasley and similar production this year, people would have questioned Stern and the NBA.

[NCHeels2008]

I think the Wolves keep Randolph, another high-risk low-reward player.


Also, I see no reason to trade Beasley. He could become the #1 option they need in the long run. Not like they're competing anytime soon, so just continue the Beasley experiment for now.

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1097669&start=25

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1097669&start=30

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1097669&start=45

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1097669&start=60

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1097669&start=75

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1097669&start=90

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1097669&start=105

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1097669&start=120

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1097669&start=135

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1097669&start=150

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1097669&start=165

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1097669&start=180

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1097669&start=195

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1097669&start=210

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1097669&start=225

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1097669&start=240

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1097669&start=255

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1097669&start=270

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1097669&start=285

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1097669&start=300

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1097669&start=315

you have me laughing so hard im crying

[[RCG]]

If you want to gauge Beasley's value you have to start with this offseason. The most Miami could get from Beasley was two high second round picks. Minny wasn't the only team with space to take him, so you have to assume Miami talked with several teams and that was the most they could get.

Given these basic facts, you aren't getting a lotto pick for Beasley unless you take back an ugly contract. Mid-first + expiring is as much as you could hope for, and even that seems fairly optimistic.

I really don't think that the argument that what a player was gotten for/where he was drafted should have much merit. Just because Thabeet was taken overall doesn't mean he has the value of a top-5 pick should he be traded. How much would you offer for Granger?

Per 36:
21.1 ppg - 6 rpg - 2.4 apg - .8 spg - .9 bpg - .451 fg% - .733 ft% - .352 3p%
20.9 ppg - 5.5 rpg - 2.6 apg - .8 spg - .8 bpg - .431 fg% - .853 ft% - .386 3p%

I would argue that Beasley's age and room for improvement closes most if not all of the gap between their current defensive play. Beasley is the 1st line and Granger the 2nd btw.

[twxnsnckrs]

luis scola for beasley + rubio

[hiphop1]

Ray Allen

[City of Trees]

Come on, Beasley was traded for a couple 2nds so Miami could sign Mike Miller and resign Haslem.

I am against valuing a player based on what he was traded for.. There are some GM's out there that dont have all their screws tightened. Its all about production and IQ... Not a money saving trade his previous team made to fill the roster..

[B Calrissian]

luis scola for beasley + rubio

Nope. We most certainly do not need another PF.

Ray Allen

I would love that but I don't see Boston doing it.

[rugby-hook]

BTW, Beasley was moved to create cap space for LBJ and Bosh, not for signing Miller. Miller was signed with MLE dollars, which are not available for FA signings. Without the dump of Beasley, there is no big 3. Also, Beasley probably could not be shopped because Miami may have needed him to hold Wade against his possible move to Chicago. Teams with free agents had to play offense and defense last summer. lack of offense really hurt Cleveland. Miami succeeded because they played both sides superbly.

[Master Shake]

BTW, Beasley was moved to create cap space for LBJ and Bosh, not for signing Miller. Miller was signed with MLE dollars, which are not available for FA signings. Without the dump of Beasley, there is no big 3. Also, Beasley probably could not be shopped because Miami may have needed him to hold Wade against his possible move to Chicago. Teams with free agents had to play offense and defense last summer. lack of offense really hurt Cleveland. Miami succeeded because they played both sides superbly.

This is not accurate, once under the cap you forfeit the MLE. Miller was not signed with the MLE.

[loserX]

BTW, Beasley was moved to create cap space for LBJ and Bosh, not for signing Miller. Miller was signed with MLE dollars, which are not available for FA signings. Without the dump of Beasley, there is no big 3. Also, Beasley probably could not be shopped because Miami may have needed him to hold Wade against his possible move to Chicago. Teams with free agents had to play offense and defense last summer. lack of offense really hurt Cleveland. Miami succeeded because they played both sides superbly.

This is not accurate, once under the cap you forfeit the MLE. Miller was not signed with the MLE.

Correct. The money saved by trading Beasley was used to sign Mike Miller; the "big 3" were already accounted for.