Ozymandias
All-Star
both of them are woefully flawed. not remotely good enoguh to get off the ground.Not even funny how much better the first team is.
both of them are woefully flawed. not remotely good enoguh to get off the ground.Not even funny how much better the first team is.
So when you look at those highlights do you think to yourself "that looks like a player in decline, There goes raggedy old Bradley Beal again! he'll be in the retirement home soon, how sad"LOL.
So 2 seasons where his numbers were in decline doesn't matter.
Him playing 90/164 possible games doesn't matter
BUT ONE GAME WHERE HE JUST WENT OFF. THAT'S ALL THE PROOF WE NEED
I read an article on Yahoo about the Bulls quietly gauging the market for LaVine. He's going to cost more than Beal, but if we trade for a star SG, that's the one we should shoot for. Zach is finally healthy. I've wanted him on this team since his Minnesota days. He has a long-term contract, but it's much cheaper than Beal's (8-10mpy cheaper every year). Maybe he's the one we wait for...
Beal's contract is just way too awful imo.
23-24: 46.7million
24-25: 50.2million
25-26: 53.6million
26-27: 57.1million
I can't get behind those numbers even if I think he's a good player. Washington giving him that contract was absolutely insane in the first place.
So when you look at those highlights do you think to yourself "that looks like a player in decline, There goes raggedy old Bradley Beal again! he'll be in the retirement home soon, how sad"
Is that the association that comes to your mind when you look at the footage?
Well have you considered that if we win next year with Huerter or Monk that their gonna try to gouge us for as much as they can as well?Lavine would be a bit better, but I still don't understand the theory of why in the world would we pay through the noise to get that archetype of player. These dudes aren't Devin Booker/Ant Edwards that can vault a team into a title contender just by being on the team. They haven't shown that the last 3-4 years where they've been the "man" of their squads. Could certainly argue that as a #3, they get significantly better, but still.
you cant even directly respond about Brad Beal dropping 36 - 6 - 7 on 87% shooting 3 months ago because it doesnt fit the narrative your trying to push..
Why would I pay $50 mil for Brad Beal when Monk is clearly better and is 1/5th the cost? Have you seen these highlights? Look at him score at will and hit clutch shot after clutch shot! This dude is the next Devin Booker!
That's the argument you just made to me lol. You're better than that, come on now.
Do you think Barnes would re-sign here to come off the bench?Fox Reggie Jackson
Monk Andre Jackson
Keegan Barnes
OG Sasha
Sabonis Lyles
or
Fox Monk
Beal Andre Jackson
Keegan Edwards
Sasha Lyles
Sabonis Queta Tshiebwe
I mean, Denver is going to lose Bruce Brown and they're going to lose KCP next season. And Jamal Murray has 2 years left on his deal until his contract becomes a super mega deal as well. So by 25-26, they'll have 54 to Jokic, 38 to MPJ, probably like 45? to Murray and Gordon at 23 on PO. Depending on how the CBA actually works, they'll probably have to get off MPJ or Gordon before Murray signs that new deal.
With Beal, you're just forcing us into that cap hell now. Ruining all the flexibility we still have over the next few years. AND you're forcing a major major decision in 26-27 with Beal/Fox/Sabonis all on huge max deals and whatever Keegan ends up commanding with his extension. That severely limits optionality over the next 3 years while Fox and Keegan are still on very affordable contracts.
It's just a bad deal all around. Makes literally no sense and would truly ruin all the good-will and progress they built this season. Maybe you could justify it if Beal were still a bonafide star, but he couldn't be anymore of a risk with his decline in play, his age and injury history over the last 4 years.
you cant even directly respond about Brad Beal dropping 36 - 6 - 7 on 87% shooting 3 months ago because it doesnt fit the narrative your trying to push..
IN DECLINE
BRAD BEAL WHOS LIVED IN A GYM HIS WHOLE DAMN LIFE IS IN DECLINE AT 29 YEARS OLD WITH ALL THE BEST MEDICINE IN THE WORLD AT HIS DISPOSAL...
I'd 10000% rather ink these three for 50 mil combined over the next 4 years than Beal. That's not even close to a question.
SO say it then what are you so scared of...I thought you were sharp because of your draft scouting takes. Guess not.
But I'll respond anyway. I don't care about one game. He's had two seasons of being worse than he was at his peak when he was scoring 30 PPG. He's been injured constantly the last 4 seasons. He's going to be 30. That's not a recipe for continued success. If you don't understand that, that's on you. It's basic common knowledge.
I'll take the brightest burn. And you're also assuming the majority of them are going to be worth that from the bench. Davion, that's a ticking time bomb of gone or overpaid IMO.
Fox Reggie Jackson
Monk Andre Jackson
Keegan Barnes
OG Sasha
Sabonis Lyles
or
Fox Monk
Beal Andre Jackson
Keegan Edwards
Sasha Lyles
Sabonis Queta Tshiebwe
SO say it then what are you so scared of...
why cant you just say it... are you terrified to speak on the footage?
"When I look at those highlights of Brad Beal 3 months ago dropping 36, 6 and 7 on 87% shooting, I see a player In decline, 2017 Brad Beal shoots 18/15 (yes thats right 120% from the floor) in that game" - The_Jamal
I think you're underselling their talents and impact on a team. They are legitimate NBA All-Stars who would be #2/3 options on any team in the league. You aren't getting Devin Booker/Ant Edwards unless you give up Fox AND Sabonis. They are superstars who are entirely out of the equation (Edwards is a soon to be superstar).Lavine would be a bit better, but I still don't understand the theory of why in the world would we pay through the noise to get that archetype of player. These dudes aren't Devin Booker/Ant Edwards that can vault a team into a title contender just by being on the team. They haven't shown that the last 3-4 years where they've been the "man" of their squads. Could certainly argue that as a #3, they get significantly better, but still.
Yeah but I can still move Davion. I can move HB, I can move Monk. I can't move Beal at $50 mil with a no trade clause. Especially if he's giving us a reason to want to move him and isn't performing to standard.
You just have to be very very sure that Beal is the piece that makes you a title contender. Because you're out of assets after that.
I assume you're basically looking at Huerter+Davion+at least one FRP+Holmes for Beal. We can all wishfully think Huerter+Holmes gets it done, but it's not going to happen. So:
Fox || ??
Beal || Monk
Keegan || Kessler
Trey Lyles? || Vezenkov
Domas || ??
Also have Queta/Ellis on ice and pick 38+54 to fill out the roster. Is that enough?
I think you're underselling their talents and impact on a team. They are legitimate NBA All-Stars who would be #2/3 options on any team in the league. You aren't getting Devin Booker/Ant Edwards unless you give up Fox AND Sabonis. They are superstars who are entirely out of the equation (Edwards is a soon to be superstar).
You're not trading for Beal or LaVine to be the "man" of our team, you're trading to give us another star. Consistent players who can score 20ppg every single night. Someone who can legitimately take the load off of Fox and Domas. They won't turn into a deer in headlights if Sabonis gets shut down by the other team (Huerter) nor will they struggle to show up for big moments (Barnes).
Reading through these pages, it seems like a lot of people are on the high of Denver winning a ring and think we can have the same success with their formula....
Domas: 16.4pts 11rebs 4.7asts on 49.5/20/57.1
Jokic: 30.0pts 13.5rebs 9.5asts on 54.8/46.1/79.9
They are nowhere on the same level. Our AS didn't show up in the playoffs at all. This is where a Beal or LaVine would help too...
I think you're underselling their talents and impact on a team. They are legitimate NBA All-Stars who would be #2/3 options on any team in the league. You aren't getting Devin Booker/Ant Edwards unless you give up Fox AND Sabonis. They are superstars who are entirely out of the equation (Edwards is a soon to be superstar).
You're not trading for Beal or LaVine to be the "man" of our team, you're trading to give us another star. Consistent players who can score 20ppg every single night. Someone who can legitimately take the load off of Fox and Domas. They won't turn into a deer in headlights if Sabonis gets shut down by the other team (Huerter) nor will they struggle to show up for big moments (Barnes).
Reading through these pages, it seems like a lot of people are on the high of Denver winning a ring and think we can have the same success with their formula....
Domas: 16.4pts 11rebs 4.7asts on 49.5/20/57.1
Jokic: 30.0pts 13.5rebs 9.5asts on 54.8/46.1/79.9
They are nowhere on the same level. Our AS didn't show up in the playoffs at all. This is where a Beal or LaVine would help too...
Possibly. I don't think Lavine and Beal are particularly valuable assets when they cost 40 and 50 mil. At that tag, you better be Devin Booker/Ant Edwards good and they're tiers below them.
Again, I was on record of this after the playoffs, but I think if you gave Monk a starting role, he'd put up very similar numbers to both of them. 20-6-3 type stuff. He showed flashes of offensive brilliance throughout the season and it really did come together for him in the playoffs. I'd much much rather gamble on that than pay any sort of assets to bring in Lavine or Beal.
I think too many people were quick to forget what happened in the playoffs. A lot of fans were content losing to "last year's champs" just because we were happy to be in the playoffs. Well.. against an inferior "lol lakers" team, "last year's champs" looked like they didn't belong on the court with 38-year-old LeBron. That same Lakers team proceeded to get swept by the Nuggets like it was a no-big deal regular season series.That's the other reason I think adding a 3rd star is mandatory. Domas actually did for what he is basically. The passing wasn't there because of the reliance on a somewhat gimmicky offensive system that didn't translate to playoff ball because his shooters were hounded, scouted, and hunted on the DHO. At least for most of the games.
LaVine's contract isn't too horrible when you compare him to the rest of the league. Still not a great contract, but if he keeps staying healthy, it's probably just right in or above the market for him. But I understand reservations about Beal.. I don't want him here at those figures either. It's an albatross contract.Possibly. I don't think Lavine and Beal are particularly valuable assets when they cost 40 and 50 mil. At that tag, you better be Devin Booker/Ant Edwards good and they're tiers below them.
Again, I was on record of this after the playoffs, but I think if you gave Monk a starting role, he'd put up very similar numbers to both of them. 20-6-3 type stuff. He showed flashes of offensive brilliance throughout the season and it really did come together for him in the playoffs. I'd much much rather gamble on that than pay any sort of assets to bring in Lavine or Beal.
Out of assets? as in like when someone whos broke looks in their pocket for a quarter and cant find one? Your being dramatic.. Your analysis of this situation is OVERLY DRAMATIC...
You guys think your being prudent or whatever looking ahead but you lump things together that are separate events, which is really puzzling...
We've got people talking about "id rather resign Davion" Davion is a Restricted Free agent in the summer of
I dont believe that.. GOod thing yall arent calling the shots there's such a lack of resourcefulness in some of these posts...
"Lets REsign BARNES put him as Keegans backup and start Vezenkov at PF" Its just completely absurd levels of "grass is greener on the otherside" going on here..
I would much rather have Beal than the combo of Huerter Monk and HB I think it was that someone mentioned.
Keeping those guys instead of making this deal and you can guarantee that the team won't be good enough.
Would we be financially better off?
Yea, probably, but the team would be worse.
I think that's a horrid contract but at the same time one would think we would have some leverage there due to how horrid it is.
I definitely think Beal is a baller and combining him, Fox, and Domas would be a super scary combo I feel.
Another poster made a post about Beals injury history and I think it's overblown and he really actually doesn't have injury problems but moreso was out due to Covid, tanking, and some other non essential stuff I believe.
Is Beal the right move to get us to the top?
Not sure about that, but I think we'd be a finals team with him.
Not trading Keegan though gtfo with that.
Anyone else fair game though I guess.
I'm also not enamored with Huerter, thought he sucked many times last year and was a major disappointment in the playoffs.
Can't risk that imo.
I don't want to put hope that he's going to be great in the playoffs and possibly just waste another year of the team's timeline because he didn't show up in the playoffs.
Playoffs is when it matters, don't care about the regular season.
Fox, Beal, Keegan, and Domas isn't a bad 4 core to work with.
I'm sure we would be great for a long time if it was just those 4 and we kept a rotating machine around them
Expensive yes, but I think we would be really great.
Not sure if it's a CHAMPIONSHIP squad though.
By contrast, Huerter is 5 years younger, makes a third of money, and his %ages are similar to Beal.