Better Player Right Now: Bradley Beal vs. Kyrie Irving

[Vladimir777]

Someone was talking about Kyrie making First Team All-NBA over on the General Discussion board, which I personally thought was a bit crazy. I never thought of Kyrie as a First Team guy myself, but then others posted his stats, and they do look efficient. That being said, he's basically the third option on his team. He never did well with his own team.

Myself being a Wizards homer, I really want Bradley Beal to make Third Team All-NBA this year for the first time, but realize this might be a long-shot, considering how awful the Wizards are doing this year. But if Kyrie was on the team, would they do any better?

Anyways, I figured you guys on the PC board would know way more than me in terms of deciding who the better player is RIGHT NOW, so I figured I'd post the question on this board.

Have away!

[Texas Chuck]

Kyrie is the better player, but I'd rather have Beal on my team just because I don't trust the reliability of Kyrie.

[penbeast0]

Kyrie is the more spectacular player and can go off more when he's on but his consistency isn't there in addition to his personality issues. Beal gets a "quiet" 30 ppg on a team where everything has been dysfunctional for years without complaining, asking for trades, or ripping his teammates. You can count on him to put on a professional performance every night and I value that more than Kyrie's flashy handles.

[Hal14]

Kyrie is the better player, but I'd rather have Beal on my team just because I don't trust the reliability of Kyrie.

Agreed.

[Vladimir777]

Agree with you guys about the consistency of Beal vs. Kyrie. Personally, I value consistency and availability a lot, so I ended up picking Beal. I'm really happy that Beal is finally getting some recognition throughout RealGM this year. For years and years he was slept on. I'd say he's a top 15 player.

[HeartBreakKid]

If the season were to end now then Beal would probably have been more impressive. Kyrie's numbers aren't as good and he's had the benefit of a smaller sample size also.

[Sign5]

Hmmmmmmm, was gonna say can't pick but chose Kyrie, We're talking currently sure but his impact on winning has at least been proven. Then again some will reference pre-Lebron. So it's tough, they're about equal as scorers but I think Kyrie has the edge in playmaking.

[bondom34]

Think they're probably ballpark similar but prefer Beal. Not sure if reliability is the right word, Beal rates a bit better offensively and worse defensively (generally a hair worse overall statistically), but given off court stuff and fit I'd prefer Beal for both teams I kind of think. Plus we've seen him be a decent defender in the past. Don't have a great case statistically but its close enough where I'd just say it.

He's a more willing and able off ball guy IMO and he's shown he can lead a really great offense just last year too, so kinda think he'd be better for both teams.

Edit: Maybe Chuck's wording was the right way to put it.

[Amare_1_Knicks]

Oof, hard to say. If we’re taking into consideration their personalities, then I go with Beal. Sometimes you just don’t know what you’re going to get with Kyrie (wanting out of Cleveland, then wanting out of Boston, the Nets having to put an APB out for him a few weeks back) and as others have mentioned, it speaks to his reliability — or lack thereof, rather.

Personality aside, I probably go with Kyrie. He built up so much credibility in my mind with those 2016 and 2017 postseason runs.

[Prokorov]

Someone was talking about Kyrie making First Team All-NBA over on the General Discussion board, which I personally thought was a bit crazy. I never thought of Kyrie as a First Team guy myself, but then others posted his stats, and they do look efficient. That being said, he's basically the third option on his team. He never did well with his own team.

Both of these things are incorrect:

1) he is a "third option" isn't accurate. he takes more shots then KD and Harden and is the guy hitting all the big shots down the stretch. Really Kyrie and KD are co-number 1 options with Harden sacraficing and really asserting himself more when those guys are on the bench

2) "kyrie never did well with his own team". This one has been proven wrong time and time again in Kyrie threads. He had his "own team" twice:
- As a 19-21 year old on a Cavs team that kept blowing top 3 picks (Bennett, Waiters, etc..). He increase their win total by 11 despite them having 0 around him

-2 years in Boston. Year 1 they were a #2 seed which despite all the false claims, they were better with him on the floor vs without him that year (in Wins, win%, oRTG, dRTG, and differential). He was hurt for the playoffs, they may have made the finals if he wasnt. Year 2 in boston they were worse without him (in a 14 game sample) but still a .580 team with him and they got to the second round losing to the MVP and #1 seeded bucks.

Myself being a Wizards homer, I really want Bradley Beal to make Third Team All-NBA this year for the first time, but realize this might be a long-shot, considering how awful the Wizards are doing this year. But if Kyrie was on the team, would they do any better?

Anyways, I figured you guys on the PC board would know way more than me in terms of deciding who the better player is RIGHT NOW, so I figured I'd post the question on this board.

Have away!

Kyrie is dropping 29/6/5 on an absurd 54/45/95 line with 65 TS%. His 4th quarter numbers are off the carts and top 3 across the board. He has performed even better than those numbers vs top competition. You can say he plays with KD/Harden but he put up 26/6/5 on near 50/40/90 over the past 3 seasons.... And this year he's been great prior to harden and when KD/Harden dont play. He blew the jazz out by 35 with no KD/Harden. And we all saw what he just did to the clippers.

Maybe Kyrie isnt quite 1st team, but if he isnt he is easily 2nd team just missing out.

I think Kyrie has been better then beal this season. his numbers are better across the board with the exception of volume scoring. and if you give Kyrie 5 more shots a game im fairly certain he would score at least 5 more points to make up that difference.

Kyrie gets a ton of hate. some warranted, some not. but he has been absolutely elite this year... nothing close to a 3rd option, an assasin late in games, and has showed up vs top teams in a big way.

If you do the portability test i think Kyre could give you 35/5/5 on as good/better efficiency then beal and manage to get the wiz to as good or better then 5-13.

If you put beal on the nets im not sure he scores 29 on 60/40/90 with 65 TS%. mainly because kyrie is a superior off-ball player and harden would run point over beal the way he runs point over kyrie

[Prokorov]

If the season were to end now then Beal would probably have been more impressive. Kyrie's numbers aren't as good and he's had the benefit of a smaller sample size also.

how are kyries numbers "not as good"?

Volume stats:
-Beal score more points (on 5 more shots and 9% more usage)
-Beal more steals
-Kyrie more assists
-Kyrie more rebounds
-Kyrie more blocks

Shooting
-Kyrie higher FG% (+5%)
-Kyrie higher 3PT (+9 % on 6.9 attempts vs beals 7.6)
-Kyrie higher FT% (+8%)
-Kyrie higher eFG% (+8%)

Advanced
-Beal higher PER (25.9 vs. 25.5)
-Kyrie Higher TS% (+5%)
-Kyrie better BPM (5.3 to 5.1)
-Kyrie better RPM (3.89 to 3.10)
-Kyrie better ORPM (5.30 to 5.26)
-Kyrie better DRPM (-1.41 to -2.16

The only place Beal really has Kyrie beat statistically is volume scoring... and thats on 5+ more shots per game. If you give Kyrie 5 more shots he is going to score 5+ more points a game. Shooting wise it isnt remotely close. Kyrie is better across the board and if you go deeper better from every distance. Kyrie is more efficient with an absurd 65 TS% for a small. Beat has a slightly higher PER, which the margin is miniscule and when you factor in significant more usage, Kyrie probably has an edge there anyhow.

[Prokorov]

Think they're probably ballpark similar but prefer Beal. Not sure if reliability is the right word, Beal rates a bit better offensively and worse defensively (generally a hair worse overall statistically), but given off court stuff and fit I'd prefer Beal for both teams I kind of think. Plus we've seen him be a decent defender in the past. Don't have a great case statistically but its close enough where I'd just say it.

He's a more willing and able off ball guy IMO and he's shown he can lead a really great offense just last year too, so kinda think he'd be better for both teams.

Edit: Maybe Chuck's wording was the right way to put it.

I don't see any evidence of beal being a better off-ball player.

[bondom34]

Think they're probably ballpark similar but prefer Beal. Not sure if reliability is the right word, Beal rates a bit better offensively and worse defensively (generally a hair worse overall statistically), but given off court stuff and fit I'd prefer Beal for both teams I kind of think. Plus we've seen him be a decent defender in the past. Don't have a great case statistically but its close enough where I'd just say it.

He's a more willing and able off ball guy IMO and he's shown he can lead a really great offense just last year too, so kinda think he'd be better for both teams.

Edit: Maybe Chuck's wording was the right way to put it.

I don't see any evidence of beal being a better off-ball player.

I think he's more willing and capable of it, looking at this year alone Irving's spent more time per game w/ the ball in his hands by a significant margin. He's also more reliable overall. Like was said, don't see a huge gap between them but as others noted lean Beal due to reliability.

Seems plenty of people think Beal is better too.

[VDT]

Similar tier players, but Beal is a bit taller and i think he is easier to fit within a system.

[nate33]

Think they're probably ballpark similar but prefer Beal. Not sure if reliability is the right word, Beal rates a bit better offensively and worse defensively (generally a hair worse overall statistically), but given off court stuff and fit I'd prefer Beal for both teams I kind of think. Plus we've seen him be a decent defender in the past. Don't have a great case statistically but its close enough where I'd just say it.

He's a more willing and able off ball guy IMO and he's shown he can lead a really great offense just last year too, so kinda think he'd be better for both teams.

Edit: Maybe Chuck's wording was the right way to put it.

Take it from a guy who watched every Wizards game. Beal really has been rock solid defensively this year. Way better than last year.

[GYK]

Same tier player imo. Would say Kyrie is a tad bit better because of his playmaking and his hair up in all around play. Nevertheless same tier. Beal should be on better team.

[RCM88x]

I think Kyrie is a better pure player, he's a bit more portable I think and has shown he can be a very impactful offensive player in multiple situations.

I'd rather have Beal though for the obvious reasons.

[Vladimir777]

Think they're probably ballpark similar but prefer Beal. Not sure if reliability is the right word, Beal rates a bit better offensively and worse defensively (generally a hair worse overall statistically), but given off court stuff and fit I'd prefer Beal for both teams I kind of think. Plus we've seen him be a decent defender in the past. Don't have a great case statistically but its close enough where I'd just say it.

He's a more willing and able off ball guy IMO and he's shown he can lead a really great offense just last year too, so kinda think he'd be better for both teams.

Edit: Maybe Chuck's wording was the right way to put it.

Take it from a guy who watched every Wizards game. Beal really has been rock solid defensively this year. Way better than last year.

Agreed. He's not perfect, but he's a much better player defensively than those who don't watch Wizards game would suggest.

And to those comparing Kyrie's numbers on this Nets team versus Brad's numbers, as much as you don't want to say that Kyrie is a third option (maybe he IS a second option sometimes), teams are still putting far more defensive pressure on Brad every game than they are on Kyrie.

I can see based on the poll numbers that they are very evenly matched players, however.

[bondom34]

Think they're probably ballpark similar but prefer Beal. Not sure if reliability is the right word, Beal rates a bit better offensively and worse defensively (generally a hair worse overall statistically), but given off court stuff and fit I'd prefer Beal for both teams I kind of think. Plus we've seen him be a decent defender in the past. Don't have a great case statistically but its close enough where I'd just say it.

He's a more willing and able off ball guy IMO and he's shown he can lead a really great offense just last year too, so kinda think he'd be better for both teams.

Edit: Maybe Chuck's wording was the right way to put it.

Take it from a guy who watched every Wizards game. Beal really has been rock solid defensively this year. Way better than last year.

Agreed. He's not perfect, but he's a much better player defensively than those who don't watch Wizards game would suggest.

And to those comparing Kyrie's numbers on this Nets team versus Brad's numbers, as much as you don't want to say that Kyrie is a third option (maybe he IS a second option sometimes), teams are still putting far more defensive pressure on Brad every game than they are on Kyrie.

I can see based on the poll numbers that they are very evenly matched players, however.

Defensively I know he's been better in the past too, just looking into some APM stuff and the last few years he's rating out lower. I'd also venture to guess that some of it is due to increased offensive load (though I haven't watched much Wizards since the first few games).

I do think Beal would actually be a better fit in both situations, he's played alongside a ball dominant guard a few times now. Fred Katz (the Athletic's beat reporter) compared his offensive role a bit to how Paul George plays off ball and I kind of like the comparison of that part of their games. Beal can run the offense a bit too. He's certainly not as flashy but in terms of effectiveness he's up there.

[HeartBreakKid]

I think Kyrie is a better pure player, he's a bit more portable I think and has shown he can be a very impactful offensive player in multiple situations.

I'd rather have Beal though for the obvious reasons.

More portable in what sense? Beal doesn't need to dribble as much before making a move and he is a better off ball player. Kyrie gives you another handler (to say the least), but I'm not sure if that means he is more portable.