Official Trade Thread - Part XXX

[nate33]

FWIW, I've ramped up the "Beal hate" with an intentional purpose. I believe that management and the players read this board (and BulletsForever), or at least are in communication with people who read this board, and that this board does affect the group think around and within the organization.

I really want the conventional wisdom among hard core fans on this board and BulletsForever to change on Beal. I want Beal to be seen as "just a guy" and not a "budding superstar" because that is what he is. If that opinion percolates throughout the organization, then maybe Beal's agent and/or EG will get more realistic on his asking price.

Maybe I'm just kidding myself on the influence of the board, but maybe not.

As smart as you are I find this reassuring. I poured so much in the past into this forum with the same hopes and motivation.

Right now I have much better things to do. I've had ideas in the past but right now I am happy to no longer obsess over this team or Realgm. They are not friendly to me so F them. There's a whole lot more to life.

They have had years of FREE good advice from some great minds, yourself and Dat2U included.

You can keep the fight. I feel like I'm happy with my life elsewhere. Leonsis can take his billions and remain up there on high with Ernie.

And to clarify, it's not so much that I think EG has an underling who reads this board everyday in case there is a good idea. I just think that hard core basketball fans read these boards, and eventually these opinions filter into the in-the-know basketball community. Eventually, a guy like Zach Lowe or Kevin Pelton picks up on it and broadcasts it to a bigger audience. Sooner or later, Wizards' management will adopt a similar opinion.

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

I remember when Kevin Pelton was a student. Sonic fan IIRC.

They know who we are.

[payitforward]

FWIW, I've ramped up the "Beal hate" with an intentional purpose. I believe that management and the players read this board (and BulletsForever), or at least are in communication with people who read this board, and that this board does affect the group think around and within the organization.

I really want the conventional wisdom among hard core fans on this board and BulletsForever to change on Beal. I want Beal to be seen as "just a guy" and not a "budding superstar" because that is what he is. If that opinion percolates throughout the organization, then maybe Beal's agent and/or EG will get more realistic on his asking price.

Maybe I'm just kidding myself on the influence of the board, but maybe not.

And to clarify, it's not so much that I think EG has an underling who reads this board everyday in case there is a good idea. I just think that hard core basketball fans read these boards, and eventually these opinions filter into the in-the-know basketball community. Eventually, a guy like Zach Lowe or Kevin Pelton picks up on it and broadcasts it to a bigger audience. Sooner or later, Wizards' management will adopt a similar opinion.

I think your clarification makes any influence all the less likely -- lot of moving parts there -- and esp. in re: influencing how the organization views Bradley Beal.

Then again... who the h@ll has any idea of what influences these guys.

[Illmatic12]

FWIW, I've ramped up the "Beal hate" with an intentional purpose. I believe that management and the players read this board (and BulletsForever), or at least are in communication with people who read this board, and that this board does affect the group think around and within the organization.

I really want the conventional wisdom among hard core fans on this board and BulletsForever to change on Beal. I want Beal to be seen as "just a guy" and not a "budding superstar" because that is what he is. If that opinion percolates throughout the organization, then maybe Beal's agent and/or EG will get more realistic on his asking price.

Maybe I'm just kidding myself on the influence of the board, but maybe not.

As smart as you are I find this reassuring. I poured so much in the past into this forum with the same hopes and motivation.

Right now I have much better things to do. I've had ideas in the past but right now I am happy to no longer obsess over this team or Realgm. They are not friendly to me so F them. There's a whole lot more to life.

They have had years of FREE good advice from some great minds, yourself and Dat2U included.

You can keep the fight. I feel like I'm happy with my life elsewhere. Leonsis can take his billions and remain up there on high with Ernie.

And to clarify, it's not so much that I think EG has an underling who reads this board everyday in case there is a good idea. I just think that hard core basketball fans read these boards, and eventually these opinions filter into the in-the-know basketball community. Eventually, a guy like Zach Lowe or Kevin Pelton picks up on it and broadcasts it to a bigger audience. Sooner or later, Wizards' management will adopt a similar opinion.

What opinion? That Beal isn't a developing young player with potential?

The general opinion on Beal is that he is a high-character young player with good potential at a thin position, but has been terribly misused by poor coaching. The Wizards aren't exactly known for player development. Other teams and GMs aren't thinking "Man, that guy has a 15 PER.. he sucks" . They're thinking "Lol, the Washington Wizards have bottom 5 coaching and player development in the league.. we would love to have Beal and develop him here". That's what sets his value, not your blind hate that a young player isn't producing at a star level for your favorite team (which happens to be historically terrible at player development, personnel decisions, in-game coaching, etc etc).

Express your frustration all you want. But you're not going to convince smart basketball people to trash a 22yo player who's been a successful starter on winning teams. There are too many examples of 'average' young players who eventually became very good as they gained more professional experience. Klay Thompson was considered average, 'replacement level' etc early on in his career.

You really think people are going to sour on a 22yo SG who's shot 40% from three for his career? Yeah.. no. Think about what you claim to be doing, and the likelihood that it will actually make a single difference in the grand scheme.

[AFM]

BODY BAG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[nate33]

As smart as you are I find this reassuring. I poured so much in the past into this forum with the same hopes and motivation.

Right now I have much better things to do. I've had ideas in the past but right now I am happy to no longer obsess over this team or Realgm. They are not friendly to me so F them. There's a whole lot more to life.

They have had years of FREE good advice from some great minds, yourself and Dat2U included.

You can keep the fight. I feel like I'm happy with my life elsewhere. Leonsis can take his billions and remain up there on high with Ernie.

And to clarify, it's not so much that I think EG has an underling who reads this board everyday in case there is a good idea. I just think that hard core basketball fans read these boards, and eventually these opinions filter into the in-the-know basketball community. Eventually, a guy like Zach Lowe or Kevin Pelton picks up on it and broadcasts it to a bigger audience. Sooner or later, Wizards' management will adopt a similar opinion.

What opinion? That Beal isn't a developing young player with potential?

The general opinion on Beal is that he is a high-character young player with good potential at a thin position, but has been terribly misused by poor coaching. The Wizards aren't exactly known for player development. Other teams and GMs aren't thinking "Man, that guy has a 15 PER.. he sucks" . They're thinking "Lol, the Washington Wizards have bottom 5 coaching and player development in the league.. we would love to have Beal and develop him here". That's what sets his value, not your blind hate that a young player isn't producing at a star level for your favorite team (which happens to be historically terrible at player development, personnel decisions, in-game coaching, etc etc).

Express your frustration all you want. But you're not going to convince smart basketball people to trash a 22yo player who's been a successful starter on winning teams. There are too many examples of 'average' young players who eventually became very good as they gained more professional experience. Klay Thompson was considered average, 'replacement level' etc early on in his career.

You really think people are going to sour on a 22yo SG who's shot 40% from three for his career? Yeah.. no. Think about what you claim to be doing, and the likelihood that it will actually make a single difference in the grand scheme.

Klay Thompson? Seriously?

See, this is what I'm talking about. People keep comparing Beal to top 5 SG's. That's just absurd. Beal isn't even in the same ballpark.

Thompson's 3rd season: 108 ORtg, .112 WS/48, 22.6 USG
Thompson's 4th season: 112 ORtg, .172 WS/48, 27.6 USG

Beal's 3rd season: 102 ORtg, .085 WS/48, 22.5 USG
Beal's 4th season: 98 ORtg, .033 WS/48, 25.8 USG

If you want to compare Beal to somebody, compare him to Victor Oladipo or Tyreke Evans. Those are the kinds of players in his wheelhouse. Surely, those guys belong in the league, and can probably start on a lot of teams; but they're not stars and they don't deserve anything near max money.

To be an All-Star caliber SG in this league, you either need to be a deadly shooter with a quick release like Thompson, Korver, Matthews and Redick, or you need to create shots and draw fouls like Harden, Butler and DeRozan. Beal does neither and he never will. All he is going to do is tease you with good games and good streaks from time to time when his shot is falling. But just when you start to believe, his hot streak will end and he'll have a bunch of 5-for-15 stinkers.

[Illmatic12]

And to clarify, it's not so much that I think EG has an underling who reads this board everyday in case there is a good idea. I just think that hard core basketball fans read these boards, and eventually these opinions filter into the in-the-know basketball community. Eventually, a guy like Zach Lowe or Kevin Pelton picks up on it and broadcasts it to a bigger audience. Sooner or later, Wizards' management will adopt a similar opinion.

What opinion? That Beal isn't a developing young player with potential?

The general opinion on Beal is that he is a high-character young player with good potential at a thin position, but has been terribly misused by poor coaching. The Wizards aren't exactly known for player development. Other teams and GMs aren't thinking "Man, that guy has a 15 PER.. he sucks" . They're thinking "Lol, the Washington Wizards have bottom 5 coaching and player development in the league.. we would love to have Beal and develop him here". That's what sets his value, not your blind hate that a young player isn't producing at a star level for your favorite team (which happens to be historically terrible at player development, personnel decisions, in-game coaching, etc etc).

Express your frustration all you want. But you're not going to convince smart basketball people to trash a 22yo player who's been a successful starter on winning teams. There are too many examples of 'average' young players who eventually became very good as they gained more professional experience. Klay Thompson was considered average, 'replacement level' etc early on in his career.

You really think people are going to sour on a 22yo SG who's shot 40% from three for his career? Yeah.. no. Think about what you claim to be doing, and the likelihood that it will actually make a single difference in the grand scheme.

Klay Thompson? Seriously?

See, this is what I'm talking about. People keep comparing Beal to top 5 SG's. That's just absurd. Beal isn't even in the same ballpark.

Thompson's 3rd season: 108 ORtg, .112 WS/48, 22.6 USG
Thompson's 4th season: 112 ORtg, .172 WS/48, 27.6 USG

Beal's 3rd season: 102 ORtg, .085 WS/48, 22.5 USG
Beal's 4th season: 98 ORtg, .033 WS/48, 25.8 USG

If you want to compare Beal to somebody, compare him to Victor Oladipo or Tyreke Evans. Those are the kinds of players in his wheelhouse. Surely, those guys belong in the league, and can probably start on a lot of teams; but they're not stars and they don't deserve anything near max money.

To be an All-Star caliber SG in this league, you either need to be a deadly shooter with a quick release like Thompson, Korver, Matthews and Redick, or you need to create shots and draw fouls like Harden, Butler and DeRozan. Beal does neither and he never will. All he is going to do is tease you with good games and good streaks from time to time when his shot is falling. But just when you start to believe, his hot streak will end and he'll have a bunch of 5-for-15 stinkers.

The thing is ..nothing you said is going to affect Beal's value. He's played on midrange-heavy teams that have terrible offensive execution, his advanced stats would naturally look much better on a team that valued shot selection more than Wittman's Wizards. He has a lot of untapped potential as a floor spacer in a modern offense, that's what pretty much every other team in the league would see in him.

Victor Oladipo and Evans can't play off the ball, and can't shoot.. at all. No one would look to add those guys to their teams with the expectation that they'd provide value as floor spacers. Beal is young, can shoot threes, run the floor in transition, knows how to play off the ball, good athlete. High character and no off court problems. Those things have inherent value in the NBA.

Really, the #1 thing that would lower Beal's value come FA would be injury issues. It's possible he would sign for a 'discount' as a result of that.

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

Nate and illmatic, discussions like this are great. I miss Dat2U and feel very conflicted posting at all.

FWIW, I think trading Beal for Oladipo would work well for both the Wizards and the Magic.

Oladipo is a better player than Beal.

I would trade Beal and a future pick for Victor Oladipo. He's flat out more athletic, more explosive, better defensively, and is a legitimate perennial all star on the right team. Beal is the far superior deep ball shooter.

Both are tremendous character young men.

[nuposse04]

Beal has been bad this season but I don't think he will finish the season much worse then Klay Thompson did at age 22. Klay had a PER of 12.7, TS of 53, and WS/48 of 0.070 that season. Pretty mediocre across the board, much like Beal.

I put more stock in age matched development then seasons...not sure if I should but I think age is more reflective of how much upside if left rather then which number season they are in.

Don't think it justifies giving Beal the max however. Dude still needs to prove he is worth it...

[nate33]

Beal has been bad this season but I don't think he will finish the season much worse then Klay Thompson did at age 22. Klay had a PER of 12.7, TS of 53, and WS/48 of 0.070 that season. Pretty mediocre across the board, much like Beal.

I put more stock in age matched development then seasons...not sure if I should but I think age is more reflective of how much upside if left rather then which number season they are in.

Don't think it justifies giving Beal the max however. Dude still needs to prove he is worth it...

It's a fair point, but I don't think it's proper to compare players exclusively by age. Experience matters too. Professional players have a lot more time and opportunity to practice their game than college players. All else being equal, a player who went pro at age 19 and practiced for 3 years at an NBA level should be a lot better than a guy who went pro at age 21 and practiced for just 1 year at an NBA level.

I really don't think it's wise to presume Beal has a big leap in front of him. Very few wings make a big leap in their 5th season.

[Illmatic12]

The reason many put more stock into age is because athletes improve as they approach their physical prime.

Your track of physical development doesn't change regardless of what age you entered the league. Especially when Beal's present limitations seem to largely be physical imo (ie he doesn't seem like he's fully grown into his body, which may be the cause of some of his growing pains)

Joe House, a Wiz fan, noted this in Bill Simmons podcast below. At the 10:00 mark:

https://soundcloud.com/the-bill-simmons-podcast/ep-38-nba-nfl-best-bets-w-joe-house

He has an interesting theory on Beal, he says that to the eye, it looks like Beal is still growing and may be 1-2 years away from reaching his physical peak.

I get that sense too, that Beal is going to develop over a period of time, rather than breakout all at once. Some will disagree, but I think physical development and age matters a lot for athletes. And every single person has a different body and develops at different rates.

[Illmatic12]

Nate and illmatic, discussions like this are great. I miss Dat2U and feel very conflicted posting at all.

FWIW, I think trading Beal for Oladipo would work well for both the Wizards and the Magic.

Oladipo is a better player than Beal.

I would trade Beal and a future pick for Victor Oladipo. He's flat out more athletic, more explosive, better defensively, and is a legitimate perennial all star on the right team. Beal is the far superior deep ball shooter.

Both are tremendous character young men.

If anything, the Wiz would get a pick out of the Magic for that trade. Oladipo is currently coming off the bench, whereas Beal is a starter.

And would the Wiz look to move Wall also? Because a backcourt of two players that can't space the floor is going nowhere fast in today's league.

[dandridge 10]

As smart as you are I find this reassuring. I poured so much in the past into this forum with the same hopes and motivation.

Right now I have much better things to do. I've had ideas in the past but right now I am happy to no longer obsess over this team or Realgm. They are not friendly to me so F them. There's a whole lot more to life.

They have had years of FREE good advice from some great minds, yourself and Dat2U included.

You can keep the fight. I feel like I'm happy with my life elsewhere. Leonsis can take his billions and remain up there on high with Ernie.

And to clarify, it's not so much that I think EG has an underling who reads this board everyday in case there is a good idea. I just think that hard core basketball fans read these boards, and eventually these opinions filter into the in-the-know basketball community. Eventually, a guy like Zach Lowe or Kevin Pelton picks up on it and broadcasts it to a bigger audience. Sooner or later, Wizards' management will adopt a similar opinion.

What opinion? That Beal isn't a developing young player with potential?

The general opinion on Beal is that he is a high-character young player with good potential at a thin position, but has been terribly misused by poor coaching. The Wizards aren't exactly known for player development. Other teams and GMs aren't thinking "Man, that guy has a 15 PER.. he sucks" . They're thinking "Lol, the Washington Wizards have bottom 5 coaching and player development in the league.. we would love to have Beal and develop him here". That's what sets his value, not your blind hate that a young player isn't producing at a star level for your favorite team (which happens to be historically terrible at player development, personnel decisions, in-game coaching, etc etc).

Express your frustration all you want. But you're not going to convince smart basketball people to trash a 22yo player who's been a successful starter on winning teams. There are too many examples of 'average' young players who eventually became very good as they gained more professional experience. Klay Thompson was considered average, 'replacement level' etc early on in his career.

You really think people are going to sour on a 22yo SG who's shot 40% from three for his career? Yeah.. no. Think about what you claim to be doing, and the likelihood that it will actually make a single difference in the grand scheme.

I don't think the problem with the Wizards is developing players. I think the problem with the Wizards is that they pick the wrong players to begin with. The problem is player evaluation not player development. There hasn't been too many young players drafted by the Wizards that have developed elsewhere.

[nate33]

Beal has been bad this season but I don't think he will finish the season much worse then Klay Thompson did at age 22. Klay had a PER of 12.7, TS of 53, and WS/48 of 0.070 that season. Pretty mediocre across the board, much like Beal.

I put more stock in age matched development then seasons...not sure if I should but I think age is more reflective of how much upside if left rather then which number season they are in.

Don't think it justifies giving Beal the max however. Dude still needs to prove he is worth it...

It's a fair point, but I don't think it's proper to compare players exclusively by age. Experience matters too. Professional players have a lot more time and opportunity to practice their game than college players. All else being equal, a player who went pro at age 19 and practiced for 3 years at an NBA level should be a lot better than a guy who went pro at age 21 and practiced for just 1 year at an NBA level.

I really don't think it's wise to presume Beal has a big leap in front of him. Very few wings make a big leap in their 5th season.

I decided to dig a bit deeper into the numbers and see what they say about this. Here's a screen of wing players 6-4 to 6-7 who came into the league at age 20 between the year 1985 and 2012. There are 39 unique players (some have 2 seasons under their belt).

I went down the list and looked only at players who made something of themselves in this league. I counted 27 players. I then went through those players to determine which ones hit a peak level of performance later than their 4th season. I used WS/48 as a metric. Anybody with a WS/48 in year 5 or later at least 0.25 points higher than the best of their first 4 seasons made the cut.

K.Bryant - Never significantly beat his 4th year production
A.Burks - Peaked in 4th year. Current 5th year is significantly below
D.Cook - Peaked in 4th year and collapsed after that
*J.Crawford - Peaked in 9th year. A true late bloomer.
R.Davis - Peaked in 3rd year. Most of his career significantly below that
*D.DeRozan - Peak is current (7th) year and much higher than his 4th year peak.
T.Evans - Peaked in 4th year
E.Gordon - Peaked in 3rd year
G.Green - Flamed out of the league but had a late career resurgence at age 28.
J.Harden - Incredible peak in 3rd year, dropped a bit after that, until last year where he outdid his 3rd year.
J.Holiday - Peaked in 3rd year. His 6th year was better, but shortened by injury, sample size is small.
*L.Hughes - Peaked in 7th year.
J.Johnson - Peaked in 4th year. Eventually broke that peak in 9th year, but not really a late bloomer.
*K.Leonard - 4th year was brilliant. 5th year is even better. Still on upswing
S.Livingston - Injuries
*C.Maggette - Peaked in 5th year.
CJ.Miles - Peaked in 3rd year.
Q.Richardson - Peaked in 1st year.
JR.Smith - Peaked in 3rd year.
L.Stephenson - Peaked in 4th year
*D.Stevenson - Peaked in 6th year.
S.Vujacic - Peaked in 4th year.
J.Wall - Peaked in 3rd year.
*G.Wallace - Peaked in 9th year.
M.Webster - Injuries
*R.Artest - Peaked in 5th year and collapsed after that.
*D.Wright - Peaked in 6th year

So out of 39 players, I count 9 players who peaked after their rookie contract: Crawford, DeRozan, Hughes Leonard, Maggette, D.Stevenson, Wallace, Artest and Wright. And among those players most of their peaks weren't particularly impressive or long lasting. There are only 5 players whom a team might have regretted letting them walk instead of paying big money: DeRozan, Leonard, Hughes, Maggette and Wallace. And I think it's fair to say that Leonard and Maggette were clearly and obviously still on the upswing when their rookie deal expired so it was pretty predictable that they would improve more (which is why they were kept).

So out of 39 players, there are only 3 cautionary tales with respect to Beal: Toronto with DeRozan, Philly with Hughes, and Charlotte with Wallace. Those are the only players whom the team would have later regretted letting them walk. And frankly, Wallace really doesn't belong on this list because he's more of a PF than a wing. Toronto and Charlotte chose to keep their player (at far less than a max salary). Philly let Hughes walk and we signed him for the MLE.

I'll also point out that most of these other players showed steady statistical improvement throughout their rookie contracts. Beal has not.

[nate33]

The reason many put more stock into age is because athletes improve as they approach their physical prime.

Your track of physical development doesn't change regardless of what age you entered the league. Especially when Beal's present limitations seem to largely be physical imo (ie he doesn't seem like he's fully grown into his body, which may be the cause of some of his growing pains)

Joe House, a Wiz fan, noted this in Bill Simmons podcast below. At the 10:00 mark:

https://soundcloud.com/the-bill-simmons-podcast/ep-38-nba-nfl-best-bets-w-joe-house

He has an interesting theory on Beal, he says that to the eye, it looks like Beal is still growing and may be 1-2 years away from reaching his physical peak.

I get that sense too, that Beal is going to develop over a period of time, rather than breakout all at once. Some will disagree, but I think physical development and age matters a lot for athletes. And every single person has a different body and develops at different rates.

I think you have to make a big distinction with position here. I agree that age and physical maturity is a significant factor when talking about big men. It simply takes time to fill out and get strong. I think it's much less of a factor with wings. By about age 22 or so, most wing players are physically close to their peak. The wing position is also less demanding mentally, unlike a PG or a defensive big. The extra experience of understanding the game seems to help wings a little less.

Basically, wings should be expected to hit the ground running. It should only take them two or three years to become an impact player. WYSIWYG. I expect improvement after that to be incremental at best.

[Illmatic12]

The reason many put more stock into age is because athletes improve as they approach their physical prime.

Your track of physical development doesn't change regardless of what age you entered the league. Especially when Beal's present limitations seem to largely be physical imo (ie he doesn't seem like he's fully grown into his body, which may be the cause of some of his growing pains)

Joe House, a Wiz fan, noted this in Bill Simmons podcast below. At the 10:00 mark:

https://soundcloud.com/the-bill-simmons-podcast/ep-38-nba-nfl-best-bets-w-joe-house

He has an interesting theory on Beal, he says that to the eye, it looks like Beal is still growing and may be 1-2 years away from reaching his physical peak.

I get that sense too, that Beal is going to develop over a period of time, rather than breakout all at once. Some will disagree, but I think physical development and age matters a lot for athletes. And every single person has a different body and develops at different rates.

I think you have to make a big distinction with position here. I agree that age and physical maturity is a significant factor when talking about big men. It simply takes time to fill out and get strong. I think it's much less of a factor with wings. By about age 22 or so, most wing players are physically close to their peak. The wing position is also less demanding mentally, unlike a PG or a defensive big. The extra experience of understanding the game seems to help wings a little less.

Basically, wings should be expected to hit the ground running. It should only take them two or three years to become an impact player. WYSIWYG. I expect improvement after that to be incremental at best.

I don't know, this doesn't seem like the kind of thing you can make a blanket statement about, imo. From an anecdotal standpoint, many athletes will note how they continued improving their strength with age. I don't think age 22 is the sweet spot so much as it is age 24-25+. And a 'wing' player in basketball terms is still a 'big man' relative to average human height and physical dimensions. It's really hard to make blanket statements when every single person has a different physical makeup.

I mean, to the eye Wall is clearly stronger now than he was at age 22yo. He couldn't post up or finish through contact nearly as well as he does now. With training, athletes continue to gain core strength and physical coordination into their adult years, I don't believe this is something that peaks at age 22.

[nate33]

The reason many put more stock into age is because athletes improve as they approach their physical prime.

Your track of physical development doesn't change regardless of what age you entered the league. Especially when Beal's present limitations seem to largely be physical imo (ie he doesn't seem like he's fully grown into his body, which may be the cause of some of his growing pains)

Joe House, a Wiz fan, noted this in Bill Simmons podcast below. At the 10:00 mark:

https://soundcloud.com/the-bill-simmons-podcast/ep-38-nba-nfl-best-bets-w-joe-house

He has an interesting theory on Beal, he says that to the eye, it looks like Beal is still growing and may be 1-2 years away from reaching his physical peak.

I get that sense too, that Beal is going to develop over a period of time, rather than breakout all at once. Some will disagree, but I think physical development and age matters a lot for athletes. And every single person has a different body and develops at different rates.

I think you have to make a big distinction with position here. I agree that age and physical maturity is a significant factor when talking about big men. It simply takes time to fill out and get strong. I think it's much less of a factor with wings. By about age 22 or so, most wing players are physically close to their peak. The wing position is also less demanding mentally, unlike a PG or a defensive big. The extra experience of understanding the game seems to help wings a little less.

Basically, wings should be expected to hit the ground running. It should only take them two or three years to become an impact player. WYSIWYG. I expect improvement after that to be incremental at best.

I don't know, this doesn't seem like the kind of thing you can make a blanket statement about, imo. From an anecdotal standpoint, many athletes will note how they continued improving their strength with age. I don't think age 22 is the sweet spot so much as it is age 24-25+.

I mean, to the eye Wall is clearly stronger now than he was at age 22yo. He couldn't post up or finish through contact nearly as well as he does now. You naturally continue to gain core strength and physical coordination into your adult years, I don't believe this is something that peaks at age 22.

Statistically, Wall peaked in his 3rd season. There are probably intangible things he does better now, but the numbers don't show it.

[Illmatic12]

I think you have to make a big distinction with position here. I agree that age and physical maturity is a significant factor when talking about big men. It simply takes time to fill out and get strong. I think it's much less of a factor with wings. By about age 22 or so, most wing players are physically close to their peak. The wing position is also less demanding mentally, unlike a PG or a defensive big. The extra experience of understanding the game seems to help wings a little less.

Basically, wings should be expected to hit the ground running. It should only take them two or three years to become an impact player. WYSIWYG. I expect improvement after that to be incremental at best.

I don't know, this doesn't seem like the kind of thing you can make a blanket statement about, imo. From an anecdotal standpoint, many athletes will note how they continued improving their strength with age. I don't think age 22 is the sweet spot so much as it is age 24-25+.

I mean, to the eye Wall is clearly stronger now than he was at age 22yo. He couldn't post up or finish through contact nearly as well as he does now. You naturally continue to gain core strength and physical coordination into your adult years, I don't believe this is something that peaks at age 22.

Statistically, Wall peaked in his 3rd season. There are probably intangible things he does better now, but the numbers don't show it.

1) you're looking at a 49 game sample size, he didn't play a full season that year
2) Thus far, Wall is statistically peaking right now, in his 6th season. He's posting career highs in almost every advanced statistic

[nate33]

I don't know, this doesn't seem like the kind of thing you can make a blanket statement about, imo. From an anecdotal standpoint, many athletes will note how they continued improving their strength with age. I don't think age 22 is the sweet spot so much as it is age 24-25+.

I mean, to the eye Wall is clearly stronger now than he was at age 22yo. He couldn't post up or finish through contact nearly as well as he does now. You naturally continue to gain core strength and physical coordination into your adult years, I don't believe this is something that peaks at age 22.

Statistically, Wall peaked in his 3rd season. There are probably intangible things he does better now, but the numbers don't show it.

1) you're looking at a 49 game sample size, he didn't play a full season that year
2) Thus far, Wall is statistically peaking right now, in his 6th season. He's posting career highs in almost every advanced statistic

No he isn't. His assists are down, rebounds are down, and turnovers are up. His WS/48 is way down, as is his VORP and his box score plus minus.

Wall peaked in his 3rd year going by PER and WS/48. His 4th and 5th year were roughly the same. He's down a bit this year but that's probably do to his really poor start. I expect his numbers to climb up to the general level he achieved in years 3, 4 and 5.

[Illmatic12]

Statistically, Wall peaked in his 3rd season. There are probably intangible things he does better now, but the numbers don't show it.

1) you're looking at a 49 game sample size, he didn't play a full season that year
2) Thus far, Wall is statistically peaking right now, in his 6th season. He's posting career highs in almost every advanced statistic

No he isn't. His assists are down, rebounds are down, and turnovers are up. His WS/48 is way down, as is his VORP and his box score plus minus.

Wall peaked in his 3rd year going by PER and WS/48. His 4th and 5th year were roughly the same. He's down a bit this year but that's probably do to his really poor start. I expect his numbers to climb up to the general level he achieved in years 3, 4 and 5.

I'm looking at bball ref - isn't he posting a career high PER right now? And a career high TS%, career high 3pt%, career high OBPM, and his total BPM is right around his peak level, not 'way down'.

He's turning the ball over more and not drawing as many fouls, compared to his 3rd season. But if your strongest argument is ws/48, I don't think I can fundamentally agree with your analysis that Wall hasn't gotten better as a basketball player. Which ties into why I disagree with the idea that Beal can't improve.