Bradley Beal - Part II

[TheSecretWeapon]

SOMEBODY STAB ME

SLAM: You love shooting the midrange jumper, even though that’s an unpopular shot in today’s NBA. Is that something you’re going to keep doing?

BB: That’s definitely a shot that, even though a lot of people in the NBA don’t like, I’m going to continue to work on it. It’s an open shot and I think you’re probably more open shooting that shot than a lot of other shots. It’s just about being able to get the mechanics down and the rhythm down and being able to knock it down.

SLAM: Has the team ever told you to stop taking them?

BB: Not really, nah. They just let me play my game. Coach Wittman loves those shots. He wants you to shoot ever


Read more at http://www.slamonline.com/nba/bradley-beal-interview-wizards-2/#6e8Omh2TQvIeBQiT.99

I even hate the question. The mid-range jumper isn't "unpopular," it's a bad shot except when the offense can't generate a good shot and the shot clock is running down.

That said, he SHOULD continue working on mid-range shooting. As a guard, it's inevitable that he'll have to take some at least some of the time, and he ought to be proficient. But, it would be wise for the coaching staff (or someone) to work with him on shot selection.

[nate33]

http://www.csnwashington.com/basketball-washington-wizards/talk/serious-talks-open-bradley-beals-contract-extension/?utm_network=twitter&utm_post=3919511&utm_source=TW%20%40NBCSports&utm_tags%20=srm%5Bsport%20%E2%80%93%20nba%2Ccontent%20-%20text-based%2Cbrand%20%E2%80%93%20probasketballtalk%5D

Interesting. If Beal signs a contract similar to Matthews' contract, then it's a steal, especially since he could get $7 million more simply by waiting until next offseason. Maybe that's why Ernie is so hesitant to get something done, Beal's market is set, maybe his agent knows that.

Wes Matthews contract starts at $16,407,500 with 4.5% raises.

That first year salary of $16.4M is ostensibly 25% of the cap; but it's not actually 25%, it's more like 23.4% thanks to a bunch of arcane minutiae involving BRI. If we assume the same 23.4% multiplier applies next year, and we assume an $89M salary cap, then Beal would be eligible to earn $20.8M in the first year of his contract next year. So if Beal agrees to a max extension now, he is leaving $4.4M on the table. That $4.4M, compounded with 7.5% raises over the next 3 years, would ultimately cost him $19.6M over the duration of the contract.

So if he agrees to a Wes Matthews sized extension now, he is trading $19.6M in future earnings for the security of locking in a long deal. From the Wizards' cap perspective, it would result in Beal's $14.3M 2016 cap hold now being valued at $16.4M.

Applying Beal's new salary to our cap, and assuming a cap of $89M, and with Durant's salary costing $25.4M, we would be left with $8.6M in cap room after signing Durant. This accounts for Webster's $2.5M buyout and our 2016 draft pick, but does not count Humphries' option or 4 minimum salary cap holds. (If Webster's buyout can be stretched, it frees up another $1.7M in cap room.)

[nate33]

http://www.csnwashington.com/basketball-washington-wizards/talk/serious-talks-open-bradley-beals-contract-extension/?utm_network=twitter&utm_post=3919511&utm_source=TW%20%40NBCSports&utm_tags%20=srm%5Bsport%20%E2%80%93%20nba%2Ccontent%20-%20text-based%2Cbrand%20%E2%80%93%20probasketballtalk%5D

Interesting. If Beal signs a contract similar to Matthews' contract, then it's a steal, especially since he could get $7 million more simply by waiting until next offseason. Maybe that's why Ernie is so hesitant to get something done, Beal's market is set, maybe his agent knows that.

If Beal is willing to sign for the same money as Matthews ($70M over 4 years), I'd go ahead and do it. We could actually backload it a bit more than Dallas could because we could start lower and go with 7.5% raises instead of 4.5%. By doing so, we could start Beal out at $15.75M instead of the $16.4M that Matthews started with. That's another $700K in cap room to use elsewhere next year.

So best case scenario is that Beal agrees to a contract starting at $15.75M. Webster gets bought out and stretched. Blair is cut. That would leave us with $10.9M in cap room, though four additional vet minimum cap holds actually gets us down to $8.9M in room we could actually use to bid on a free agent. Either that or we can keep Humphries and have $4.8M to bid on another free agent.

[Higga]

I love Beal but $70 MIl over 4 years? I want to see one consistent, healthy 82 game season first.

[nate33]

I love Beal but $70 MIl over 4 years? I want to see one consistent, healthy 82 game season first.

Okay. So let's assume Beal plays 71 games with moderate improvement. Let's assume he averages 17 points, 4 rebounds, 4 assists and an ORtg of 105. (Last year, he was 15, 4 and 3 with an ORtg of 102). Let's assume he asks for $70M.

Are you going to just let him walk? Who do you plan to replace him with?

[Ruzious]

I love Beal but $70 MIl over 4 years? I want to see one consistent, healthy 82 game season first.

Okay. So let's assume Beal plays 71 games with moderate improvement. Let's assume he averages 17 points, 4 rebounds, 4 assists and an ORtg of 105. (Last year, he was 15, 4 and 3 with an ORtg of 102). Let's assume he asks for $70M.

Are you going to just let him walk? Who do you plan to replace him with?

What about offering him an option to take lower annual salaries in exchange for an early option out - after 2 or 3 years? He gets security and the chance to earn a lot more. We get more cap room.

[mictic]

I love Beal but $70 MIl over 4 years? I want to see one consistent, healthy 82 game season first.

I'd be happy with $70M/4years. The max would be something like $93M so we're still 5M per year away from that. With the rising cap we need to completely rethink what a fair contract is. Porter in 2017 actually will be eligible for $25M/year

A question with giving him a max ($93M) contract is: he'd make way more then Wall yet this is still Wall's team. Could that be a potential source of friction?

[Rafael122]

I love Beal but $70 MIl over 4 years? I want to see one consistent, healthy 82 game season first.

I'd be happy with $70M/4years. The max would be something like $93M so we're still 5M per year away from that. With the rising cap we need to completely rethink what a fair contract is. Porter in 2017 actually will be eligible for $25M/year

A question with giving him a max ($93M) contract is: he'd make way more then Wall yet this is still Wall's team. Could that be a potential source of friction?

Porter's eligible to make that, but unless the kid seriously blows up over the next two years I can see something in the 4 yr/$50 mil range for him.

Beal would be doing us a favor signing a Matthews-esque or Thompson contract. Maybe add an opt out after 3 years to make it that much sweeter for him.

[mictic]

I love Beal but $70 MIl over 4 years? I want to see one consistent, healthy 82 game season first.

I'd be happy with $70M/4years. The max would be something like $93M so we're still 5M per year away from that. With the rising cap we need to completely rethink what a fair contract is. Porter in 2017 actually will be eligible for $25M/year

A question with giving him a max ($93M) contract is: he'd make way more then Wall yet this is still Wall's team. Could that be a potential source of friction?

Porter's eligible to make that, but unless the kid seriously blows up over the next two years I can see something in the 4 yr/$50 mil range for him.

Never said I'd pay him that I was just trying to make a point that we have to get used to a different level of ridiculousness when judging the contracts handed out to young men for playing a game as opposed to the level of ridiculousness of the contracts we are used to

[nate33]

I love Beal but $70 MIl over 4 years? I want to see one consistent, healthy 82 game season first.

Okay. So let's assume Beal plays 71 games with moderate improvement. Let's assume he averages 17 points, 4 rebounds, 4 assists and an ORtg of 105. (Last year, he was 15, 4 and 3 with an ORtg of 102). Let's assume he asks for $70M.

Are you going to just let him walk? Who do you plan to replace him with?

What about offering him an option to take lower annual salaries in exchange for an early option out - after 2 or 3 years? He gets security and the chance to earn a lot more. We get more cap room.

I think it's highly likely that Beal will get a max contract offer from someone next year. There's just too much money floating around. If Beal agrees to an extension at $5M a year lower a max offer, I'd jump on it.

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

SOMEBODY STAB ME

SLAM: You love shooting the midrange jumper, even though that’s an unpopular shot in today’s NBA. Is that something you’re going to keep doing?

BB: That’s definitely a shot that, even though a lot of people in the NBA don’t like, I’m going to continue to work on it. It’s an open shot and I think you’re probably more open shooting that shot than a lot of other shots. It’s just about being able to get the mechanics down and the rhythm down and being able to knock it down.

SLAM: Has the team ever told you to stop taking them?

BB: Not really, nah. They just let me play my game. Coach Wittman loves those shots. He wants you to shoot ever


Read more at http://www.slamonline.com/nba/bradley-beal-interview-wizards-2/#6e8Omh2TQvIeBQiT.99

It's not as if any of them realize that if Bradley Beal took 2 or 3 more threes a game in place of long twos, he would be a much more efficient player.

Assume a generous 40% of his long twos go in. That is. 8 points per attempt. Three long twos equals 2.4 points. At the same percentage on three point attempts, he would score 1.2 points per attempt. Beal would increase his effective field goal percentage greatly and he would score at least 1.2 points more per game.

[willbcocks]

I will be interested to see when the two point shot becomes an efficient shot again. What the statisticians have found is not that 3 point shots are inherently more efficient than 2 point shots, but that they are more efficient in today's NBA. Essentially, they've found an inefficiency in the way that teams defend, and have opened the door for offenses to exploit that. Once defenses adjust by giving no space for open 3's and layups but TONS of open space for two-point shots, the efficiency will disappear and the equilibrium will return. But that will take a readjustment for players and coaches--I think it's hard to sag 5 feet off your man and watch him bury a few shots, even if it is the most efficient play.

[TheSecretWeapon]

I will be interested to see when the two point shot becomes an efficient shot again. What the statisticians have found is not that 3 point shots are inherently more efficient than 2 point shots, but that they are more efficient in today's NBA. Essentially, they've found an inefficiency in the way that teams defend, and have opened the door for offenses to exploit that. Once defenses adjust by giving no space for open 3's and layups but TONS of open space for two-point shots, the efficiency will disappear and the equilibrium will return. But that will take a readjustment for players and coaches--I think it's hard to sag 5 feet off your man and watch him bury a few shots, even if it is the most efficient play.

This is an interesting issue. The real difficulty is that the first principle of defense is to protect the paint. At-rim shots go in at a high percentage and have the benefit of also drawing fouls. And free throw possessions are extremely efficient, on average. So, the challenge for defenses is to defend the rim AND defend the 3pt line. It's a little easier for defenders to close out on long twos than threes because they don't have to cover as much difference. Also, shorter jumpers -- in that 3-10 foot range -- are very low percentage (and will almost certainly continue to be so) because they often represent failed attempts by the offense to get to the rim.

The math says that 3pt shots have been more efficient than all but at-rim twos for a very long time. It's taken awhile for the game to adjust to it.

The quality of long-range shooting (league-wide) has been reasonably stable for a couple decades now. When the shot was introduced, the league shot sub-30% for 7 seasons. The ABA had the 3pt shot for all nine of its seasons and they never cracked the 30% barrier. But, the NBA hasn't shot worse 33% since 1993-94.

Your point about how difficult it is for a defender to sag off a man and letting him hit take an 18 footer is a good one. Defenses can (and generally do) overreact to perceived success. If a guy hits a couple 18 footers, the right play (unless it's one of the handful of guys who are actually 50+% shooters from that range) is to encourage him to keep shooting from there.

[Sluggerface]

The only mid-range shots I can take are elbow jumpers. Triple-threat / Pick and Pop. That's it. It's extremely easy for guys to shoot 40%+ from basically free throw range. Even a guy like Nene who has no touch whatsoever can chuck a ball in with 45% accuracy. It also helps a point guards ability to manipulate defenders. I believe the best position to be in as a facilitator is the center of the court, and someone like Wall/CP3 only needs a defender to take one step out of position to contest in order to make a play. You have the advantage of the backboard, and you also keep yourself in play for your own rebound.

Passing up three's to dribble into the long twos, or having bigs drift 18 feet out for spot ups is the thing I can't stand. It makes me want to punch holes in my wall, and it's the number one reason this team hasn't cracked a top ten offense in the Wall era IMO. At least 10 of the teams shots per game can be attributed to **** like that.

[TheSecretWeapon]

The only mid-range shots I can take are elbow jumpers. Triple-threat / Pick and Pop. That's it. It's extremely easy for guys to shoot 40%+ from basically free throw range.

In a sense, yes. Free throws are 15-foot shots. On attempts from 12-18 feet, 134 guys last season shot 40% or better (25 or more attempts). But, a 40% shot is still a bad one, except in an "emergency" like the shot clock running down. The break-even point is about 50% from that range, and there were just 24 players last season who shot 49% or better. Most of those good shooters from that range were low volume -- 8 of the 24 had 100 or more attempts from that range.

The only Wizards player last season who shot 50% or better from that range was Andre Miller.

Even a guy like Nene who has no touch whatsoever can chuck a ball in with 45% accuracy.

Sorta confused by this. Nenê has been a decent jump shooter for several seasons now. Crummy FT shooter, but he's been basically a 40+% shooter on long twos since the 2008-09 season. With the Wizards, he shoots too many of them based on what I posted above -- even as an average shooter on 2pt jumpers, it's still an inefficient shot.

It also helps a point guards ability to manipulate defenders. I believe the best position to be in as a facilitator is the center of the court, and someone like Wall/CP3 only needs a defender to take one step out of position to contest in order to make a play. You have the advantage of the backboard, and you also keep yourself in play for your own rebound.

For Chris Paul, who shot 52% in that 12-18 foot range, yes. For Wall, who shot 41%, it's giving the defense a break.

Passing up three's to dribble into the long twos, or having bigs drift 18 feet out for spot ups is the thing I can't stand. It makes me want to punch holes in my wall, and it's the number one reason this team hasn't cracked a top ten offense in the Wall era IMO. At least 10 of the teams shots per game can be attributed to **** like that.

Yeah -- that step-in two is maddening. Just no reason for it. As for the bigs, I'd still like to see those guys get out to the 3pt line if they're going to shoot jumpers. If a guy can shoot 40% on long twos, I suspect he can shoot 27% or better from three.

[keynote]

Beal will represent "Team World" in the NBA's first-ever exhibition game in Africa.

http://www.supersport.com/basketball/nba/news/150716/Paul_Deng_Gasols_headline_NBA_Africa_Game

The National Basketball Association (NBA) and the National Basketball Players Association (NBPA) announced today the full rosters for the first NBA game in Africa, which will take place August 1 at Ellis Park Arena in Johannesburg, South Africa.

The sold-out NBA Africa Game 2015 will feature a Team Africa v Team World format and will be played in support of Boys & Girls Clubs of South Africa, SOS Children’s Villages Association of South Africa and the Nelson Mandela Foundation. The game will air live in the US on ESPN at 9:00 a.m. ET and in Africa on SuperSport at 3:00 p.m. CAT.

Team Africa, comprised of players born in Africa and second-generation African players, will feature team captain and two-time NBA All-Star Luol Deng (Miami Heat; Great Britain; born in South Sudan), Al-Farouq Aminu (Portland Trail Blazers; US; parents from Nigeria), Giannis Antetokounmpo (Milwaukee Bucks; Greece; parents from Nigeria), Nicolas Batum (Charlotte Hornets; France; parent from Cameroon), Bismack Biyombo (Toronto Raptors; Democratic Republic of the Congo), Boris Diaw (San Antonio Spurs; France; parent from Senegal), Gorgui Dieng (Minnesota Timberwolves; Senegal), Festus Ezeli (Golden State Warriors; Nigeria), Serge Ibaka (Oklahoma City Thunder; Congo)*, and Luc Mbah a Moute (Sacramento Kings; Cameroon).

Team World, comprised of players from the rest of the world, will feature team captain, NBPA President and eight-time NBA All-Star Chris Paul (Los Angeles Clippers; US), Bradley Beal (Washington Wizards; US), Kenneth Faried (Denver Nuggets; US), Marc Gasol (Memphis Grizzlies; Spain), Pau Gasol (Chicago Bulls; Spain), Jeff Green (Memphis Grizzlies; US), Marcus Smart (Boston Celtics; US), Evan Turner (Boston Celtics; US) and Nikola Vucevic (Orlando Magic; Montenegro).

[Wizardspride]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/MrMichaelLee/status/622066684019388416[/tweet]

[Rafael122]

That article is depressing, Nate is there any way to structure a contract where he does get his $90 mil but it starts off at like his cap hold or something similar and it tops at at $22 mil?

[nate33]

That article is depressing, Nate is there any way to structure a contract where he does get his $90 mil but it starts off at like his cap hold or something similar and it tops at at $22 mil?

No. The biggest per year raise we can grant is 7.5%. A deal starting at the cap hold of $14.3M with 7.5% raises only gets him $63.6M over 4 years.

I'd push hard to try and lock Beal into an extension roughly similar to what Wesley Matthews signed. That's a 4-year, $70M deal starting at $15.8M. It would be a bit more than his cap hold up front, but we can afford it.

To get Beal a $90M deal, we'd have to start at $20.25M with 7.5% raises. If that's what he wants, I'd wait until next season and negotiate a deal with him after KD2DC plays out. At least that way, we can utilize his much lower cap hold for salary cap purposes.

[WizarDynasty]

Beal is average at best. Undersized with no post games. the only reason his numbers are inflated is because he milks off of Wall's hard work.

All he has to do is sit in one spot, catch and shoot wide open 3 pointers. He doesn't create mismatches ever. He is below average defensively.

He is an average shooting guard with inflated stats. When he shows that he can get the line at will, then and only then will i consider him even close to above average player because he can't shut a guy down defensively.

We need a serge ibaka like player for kevin durant next year. I would trade beal in a second. I hope we sign anderson to a moderate contract and send beal and his max contract desires to another team for assets. I predict that anderson will outplay beal.

I think oubre has far more potential than Beal.