Beal has done very well the last few games. He is really showing his potenial despite the Wizards losing.
He don't have star potential...but he can be really good player in the future
i dont think he would have 7 RPG if this where a good team with decent rebounding
I also doubt his scoring would be this high on a good team
that's the key here to make the all-star game unless its trough fan vote you typically have to win.
You also need to be a standout guy on a team that Wins.
even if in the next few years we turn out good with/without Bynum Turner wont be our best player when we do. If anyone gets an alstar nod within the next few years its Jrue
I was comparing Crawford at 22 to Beal at 19. I don't think that's even a very significant difference, considering Beal's always been shorter and slightly heavier, and body build is more important than tree years' difference.This is Crawford's 3rd year and I believe he is now 24 versus Beal is still in his 1st year and 19. I will agree with you that I don't have definitive proof that Beal is better, but I do have circumstantial evidence.
For his rookie season, Beal is 35.8 percent on his field goals, 30.5 percent from three and 84.3 percent from the line. For his career, Crawford is 39.4 percent on his field goals, 28.8 from three and 81.4 from the line. The differences at least equal out, and Crawford has kept a 3.6-percent higher field goal percentage throughout two and a quarter seasons.Crawford is a career 41/31/81 shooter on 13 shots with this year just being a hair better. Beal so far is 36/32/86 on 11. Which is better?
Crawford's also averaging 3.5 points per 36 minutes more than Beal, who gets slightly more playing time.
Beal averages 47.1 on his true shooting percentage and 41.3 percent on his effective field goal percentage. While Crawford averaged 45.6 percent as a rookie, he's averaged 47.9 percent over his entire career. He also averages a 43.8 effective field goal percentage. He's also got a higher percentage as a rookie.If we're talking about rookie years, we're talking about Beal having higher true shooting percentages and effective field goal percentages as well as superior offensive and defensive ratings. Crawford actually produced a negative win share his rookie year.
While averaging a slightly lower true shooting percentage as a rookie, he scored two more points per 36 minutes.
Check your numbers better.
As for him being a chucker, he's averaged more points per 36 minutes and a higher effective field goal percentage, so he must be doing something right. He has been a more effective and efficient scorer over two and a quarter seasons than Beal has been in a quarter of a season.All that and here's really what is at the heart of my Crawford argument: he's a chucker. He's played enough seasons with a low enough FG% and a high enough volume of shots to classify him as that. He just looks better right now because the Wizards are hard up for scoring options just like the Wolves with Beasley a couple years ago. Beal is adjusting to the league, Crawford has been chucking at 18attempts/36minutes for 3 years now.
I'm going to give you a couple guesses as to why Beal plays more. Then, I'm going to tell you it's because the coaching staff knows Crawford is a chucker whereas Beal attempts to get his teammates involved and because Beal is a rookie who needs time to adjust to the league and show what kind of player he really is.
The sample size is too small on Beal and the returns are too early to make any solid determinations. Crawford has had time to show what he is and "Buckets Junior" as I just heard him called on TNT last night is a chucker.
As for getting other teammates involved, Crawford averages 2.8 more assists per 36 minutes. He gets 2.3 more assists per game than Beal even while getting slightly less playing time.
Let's both agree that making judgments on Beal's overall worth is pointless at this time.