30 thoughts on “Beasley or Boozer?”

1. Yes, but then again, Beasley was only slightly below average in WP48 compared to NBA rookies.

   But since Lamar Odom re-signed with L.A., I find it doubtful that the Lakers would engage in a S&T unless they got a really good deal. Because if he isn’t around, and Andrew Bynum isn’t healthy, they’re still the West’s top team, but not by very much.

2. If Bynum isn’t healthy and they had lost Odom then I believe the Spurs > Lakers by a slight margin. Assuming the Spurs have Ginobili healthy.

   As for Beasley I think he could make the second year jump Durant made this year. Beasleys midpoint WP48 was -.050 and year end was .048. So he clearly improved in the second half.

   As for this article I think it is solid. However, I’m not sure if you’re allowed to take an insider article for ESPN and pretty much copy the entire gist of the article since they charge for that. I have no problem with it and I’m not positive it’s against any rules, I’m just saying it might be. I would look into it just be safe.

3. Rob O,
   Not sure what I did initially was incorrect, but I re-did the post anyway. Now I am just reporting what Hollinger said, with just one small quote.

   Peter,
   Hollinger was not saying Beasley was good for a rookie. He was saying Beasley is as good as Boozer right now. By the way, both Odom and Boozer were above average NBA players as rookies.

4. Dave,

   I was fully aware of what Hollinger said. I was referencing your metrics and your data in making my conclusion, not Hollinger’s.

   There is another minor point here, one that was covered in the Rashard Lewis post. Beasley can play, and has seen time at, both forward spots, as has Odom. Boozer, however, is more of a true PF. I’d give Beasley at least two more seasons before he gets labeled a bust. Talent is not the problem.

5. Peter,
   I am definitely not labeling Beasley a bust. I am simply noting that what he did as a rookie wasn’t as good as what Boozer and Odom did last year.

6. Peter/Prof: Bragnani would be a bust (supersized one too). Beasley is just very average. I remembered back then he was said to be stronger (than college SF) and faster (than college PF). However he now looks very ordinary when comparing these attributes to BGriffin coming out of college this year. That, to me, says that draft “evaluation” are more marketing than truly comprehensive.

   Rob O: I think Dallas and Denver looks more promising than the Spurs in challenging the Lakers.

7. Dr. Berri,

   This is somewhat unrelated to this post, but I just wanted to thank you for providing so many posts responding to critiques of your methods on the internet. My friend and I are both kinda nerdy guys just out of high school, and we stumbled upon your blog and needless to say have been hooked ever since. We’re both from Portland tend to get into arguments with others on Blazersedge about the merits of your metrics. I just love how your blog has ready-made responses to practically all critiques. It makes things much easier on the typing.

   Anyway, keep up the good work. My friend and I both love the combination of scientific theory and basketball.

   Muad’Dib

8. How did you decide Beasley was a power forward? The few Miami games I watched, he played primarily at small forward. He also played power forward, but his position was more fluid on the court than being designated one or the other.

   Also, his primary problem was a coaching problem. He was incredibly effective when forced to play close to the basket on offense (in the painted area) in all the games I saw, but he had a tendency (like many guys do) to want to play on the perimeter (maybe because it requires less work to get an open shot, maybe because he just wants to prove that he can shoot, I don’t know.) If Spoelstra took him out whenever he did that, and left him in when he played down low on offense, his rebounding and field goal efficiency numbers would have been a ton better.

   Also, if he played in D’antoni’s system in which all those long two pointers he was shooting (and there are a ton of them) become three pointers, he would look a ton better. Two simple changes to his game and he becomes an above average player. 1)Play closer to the basket. 2) If you don’t play close to the basket, play beyond the three point line.

   And lastly, I think he’d be a better player if the Heat played at a faster pace. They played incredibly slow in the games I saw. And I don’t think it was necessarily a coincidence that his best game was against the Knicks at the end of the year. (They also had atrocious defenders.) Playing at a fast pace highlights his strengths compared to other power forwards, his speed, and his skill when he has the space to use it, while playing down his weakness (size), though he does have extremely long arms, excellent timing and the ability to position himself in good spots and use his lower body which allow him to board if he plays in close.

   Of course, there is also no rule against playing Boozer and Beasley at the same time, with Boozer playing center. Since Utah is over a barrel in the Boozer situation, I think that all they can really demand is financial relief, instead of both financial relief and talent back in a deal. If they trade Boozer, I wouldn’t expect them to get more than Memphis got in the Gasol deal.

9. I believe the problem with Beasley is Dwayne Wade. If you are looking at Wins Produced, Beasley had very little opportunity to contribute especially in game deciding situations because of Wade’s desire to be seen as the next Jordan, which leads Wade to take all sorts of bad shots at end of shot clock and end of game situations. Beasley, another player who is not afraid of the moment, saw very little playing time at the end of games because everything was oriented to Wade. The entire Heat team was afraid of shooting in these situations for fear of outshining Wade. A more experienced coach might be able to reign in the ego of Wade. The only hope for the Heat is for Wade to recognize that the Heat will be stronger with a tandem of Wade and Beasley, than with Wade going it alone.

10. WDM,
    Wins Produced tends to reward players who do not take the hard shots which lower one’s shooting percentages. I think that if what you said about Wade is true, it only makes Wade seem all the more amazing for being as efficient as he is even while taking all of those “bad shots.” In addition, since Beasley gets .98 points per shot and the average PF gets .97, it really doesn’t matter much how many or few shots he takes. Win Score gives no credit for shot volume, only shot efficiency, and his shooting efficiency neither helps not hurts him in the ratings.

11. Monkfish,
    Hollinger’s argument is that Boozer takes the place of Beasley. Boozer is a power forward.

    WDM,
    The only thing Beasley does well is take shots. So I am not sure Wade is limiting Beasley with respect to this aspect of the game.

12. Maud’Dib,
    Would it help your arguments if I offered a post on how good the Blazers will be next year? Andre Miller does help quite a bit.

13. Would it help your arguments if I offered a post on how good the Blazers will be next year? Andre Miller does help quite a bit.

    I can’t answer for Maud’Dib, but I’d love to hear it anyway!

    I’m also very curious about Dallas after adding Gooden and the final version of SA after adding McDyess.

    Also, I would like you to convince Joe Dumars to trade Rip Hamilton :)

14. A post telling me how the good the Blazers will be is always welcome. I’m not sure it would change everyone’s minds, though. There are quite a few people who will vehemently dismiss any argument based on your work. I think it’s because that, unlike Hollinger, your methods are based on regression and not on whether the results match preconceived notions of how good players are. My friend and I always run into trouble when we suggest LaMarcus Aldridge is overrated because of his poor shooting efficiency and rebounding for a PF. It makes sense, but I don’t think anyone wants to hear it. Although, we have hope because LaMarcus’s numbers picked up significantly in the second half of the season.

    But I am very excited about the Blazers’ next season. My friend ran a quick estimate based on last year’s production numbers, factoring in improvements for the rookies, and he had the Blazers as a 60+ win team. I was always pulling for Andre Miller or Ramon Sessions because of their terrific efficiency. I was very glad when we dodged the Turkoglu bullet. The media would have you think that Turkoglu would have been a much better addition to the Blazers than Miller because of “fit.” Of course, we know better hear at WoW.

    Muad’Dib

    P.S. Any chance you’ll be doing another guest visit to BYU? I thought I saw you mention a visit to that effect in a post. I’ll be going to college there in a month and definitely would not miss a chance to sit in on a presentation of yours.

15. Dr. Berri,

    Any chance we get a comparison of Beasley’s rookie year to Durant’s? Somewhat similar and interesting story:

    - They both grew up in DC (and are friendly, apparently).
    - Both got drafted second and were touted as being the best prospect in their respective drafts even though everyone knew they were going second.
    - Both jacked up a ton of shots in their rookie season while playing little to no defense and being relatively poor at everything else.
    - Both had significant improvements from the first half of their rookie season to the second half of their rookie season.

    I ask, bc if Mike Beasley makes the jump that Durant did, and Mario Chalmers turns into a cross between Rajon Rondo and Andre Miller (as can be reasonably expected by a Heat fanatic), the Heat will probably make up those 9 wins without making any moves this offseason and head somewhere in the range of 50+. Adding Boozer would put us in contention with the Magic for that third spot in the East and could even make us dangerous to a healthy Boston and the retooled Cavs.

    Where dreams may go…

16. Seems like Beasley is motivated to improve. He’s critical of the time he spent playing AAU ball. See the WSJ’s “American kids flunk Basketball 101,” of 7/13/09.

17. Dr. Berri,

    I’m Muad’Dib’s friend and I would like to echo pretty much everything he said. A Blazers post would be much appreciated – like Muad’Dib said, I tried to be pretty conservative with my estimates and still had the Blazers winning 62+ games (assuming all key players stay healthy).

    Also, using the splits from basketball-reference.com, it looks like Aldridge posted much improved numbers after the All-Star break (particularly FTA). I’d be interested to see how much his WP48 actually changed.

    Finally, I’d love to see more of the math that goes into all your calculations, even just reference tables or whatever is available.

    Thanks again for the excellent metric and analysis,
    -Austin

18. Austin,

    Miller is definitely a good fit for what Portland wants to do. If you noticed closely, a number of Kevin Pritchard’s primary targets in free agency were versatile ballhandlers (Lamar Odom, Turkoglu) or defensive stalwarts (Paul Millsap, David Lee). Okay, what’s more likely is that Pritchard picked names out of a hat or was just looking for a way to spend some of Paul Allen’s money. Regardless, Miller definitely gives them a second ballhandler.

    And if the Blazers are for real, their matchups with the L.A. Lakers become *really* interesting.

19. Peter – I mostly agree. David Lee isn’t a defensive stalwart by most accounts though, and neither is Miller. The logic with Miller is that although he’s not a great individual defender, he SHOULD be a good team defender – plus as a fairly big, strong PG he has some advantages against small quick guards that Blake doesn’t.

    Personally I’m just happy that we now have two rather productive PGs rather than Sergio Rodriguez or Jerryd Bayless at the backup spots.

    The Lakers are indeed the team to beat – along with the Spurs if Jefferson can be forced to make a big role adjustment.

20. I wouldn’t discount a guy with all those double-doubles, though. But that’s just me.

    That being said, the Lakers’ biggest problem is getting Bynum healthy. They hit a home run with Odom, but it will definitely cost Jerry Buss luxury-tax wise. But if somehow, some way, Greg Oden gets healthy and motivated enough next season, it will give the Blazers some valuable length to slow L.A. down.

    Regardless of Jefferson’s willingness to adjust, he is still a solid pickup and provides a cushion in case Tim Duncan, Tony Parker, or especially Manu Ginobili get hurt again.

    That being said, the Nuggets could end up as a dark horse in the West. Yes, Chauncey Billups is on the wrong side of 30, but he’ll also get the luxury of actually having an offseason with his team, even if much of it was nullified by playing almost all of last season with them. Ty Lawson, he of the 5’11″ stature and the March toe injury, will likely leapfrog Anthony Carter at some point to become the backup. And J.R. Smith starting, well, oh dear…

21. Yes, But Boozer could easily guard basically any center in the league, and almost every center in the league would have an incredibly difficult time guarding him. I see no reason why he couldn’t play center with Beasley playing power forward. The one thing Boozer doesn’t do is block shots and play particularly good help defense, but it’s not like Miami has anyone who does a particularly good job there as Jermaine O’Neal, even if he were not involved in a deal, is nowhere near the athlete he was before all the injuries. I also don’t see you couldn’t play Beasley at small forward and Boozer at power forward.

    The positions just aren’t that rigid. Take the playoffs two years ago, well I think it was two years ago, when Houston played Utah. Defensively Utah had Okur on Yao, but when Utah was on offense Yao was guarding Boozer and Okur was sitting on the three point line. So who is the center? Seems like, at times, they are both playing the position.

22. The position argument keeps coming up. I think the best way to think about it is by monitoring what the best players each position do best(according to WOW). For the most part the best Centers and Power Forwards are great rebounders. For the most part the best point guards help with rebounding, don’t turn the ball over, and shoot a high percentage. For the most part the best sf,sg are high usage players who help distribute and have offensive ratings in the 112 and up range.

    Anyway, my original point I wanted to make was that you need your big men to play big or else your defense will suffer no matter what they bring to the table offensively. Defense is every posession. Even the highest usage players only use 1/3 of all posessions.

23. To me, Beasley looks like another of those hybrid type players that will always look bad on this model when compared to other PFs. To me, he’s almost certainly going to be a very good player but whether anyone notices will be dependent on whether he is used and evaluated properly.

24. Italian,

    Lamar Odom is a hybrid PF/SF, but he rates very high in WP48. The same goes for Shawn Marion.

    What kind of hybrid would you say Beasley is?

25. He’s a hybrid who doesn’t play defense, rebound, or get to the free throw line.

    I was very unimpressed with beasley when i saw him last year, but I think he definitely has a lot of potential to be good.

26. Anthony Lewis, an AAU coach from Baltimore who helped develop Rudy Gay of the Memphis Grizzlies, who was the No. 8 draft pick in 2006, says AAU helped teach the skinny 13-year-old not to settle for easy shots.

    “We taught him to work away from the bucket,” Mr. Lewis says. “Working on mid-range at a young age, putting the ball on the floor, making him aggressive.”

    LOL

    Has this been blown up all over the Internet? I hope so. That is hysterical. “No, don’t take easy shots. Taking shots far from the basket is best”.

    That was taken from the AAU article in the WSJ.

27. Based on percentage of rebounds he pulls down, Beasley was a better rebounder then Odom his first 4 years in the league. He also out rebounded bosh his rookie year in terms of %trb. I honestly think that the difference between Boozer and Beasley next year in terms on rebounding will be essentially nothing assuming beasley gets to play pf and not sf.

28. Pingback: Jefferson > Boozer? « Roblog

29. Pingback: Carlos Boozer vs. Al Jefferson and other great stories from The Wages of Wins Network « The Wages of Wins Journal

30. Pingback: The Four Horseman of Negative Productivity in Toronto | The Wages of Wins Journal