9 replies to this topic

[HoopsReportCard]

(2 minutes after the Rockets lose to the Chicagp Bulls on national TV, Saturday night on ABC)

Can someone tell me why Beasley is a better option than SAM DEKKER?

[Willk]

(2 minutes after the Rockets lose to the Chicagp Bulls on national TV, Saturday night on ABC)

Can someone tell me why Beasley is a better option than SAM DEKKER?

I would rather play Harrell more.
Obviously, Beasley has not changed offensively. He is still a bad shot chucker. I was at the game today (I'm not watching the fox anymore since they are 0-2 when I go) and I was actually impressed by his work on defense. He did a good job rotating on D which caused the Bulls to make an extra pass to get a scoring opportunity and he did a good job of moving his man off of the post up spot he wanted. Having said that, the offense was so bad, his offense negated any work he did on D.

[HoopsReportCard]

@Willik - ok maybe I didn't pay attention to his defense. I know he took a couple long 20 footers.
I mean seriously. He had an open 3 point shot and took 2 dribbles for a contested 21 footer. And then followed that up with a 19 footer.
I wanted to yank him immediately.... Like seriously, everyone knows our philosophy = paint points and 3 point shots and this guy comes and takes very long non- three point numbers?!!

[Willk]

@Willik - ok maybe I didn't pay attention to his defense. I know he took a couple long 20 footers.
I mean seriously. He had an open 3 point shot and took 2 dribbles for a contested 21 footer. And then followed that up with a 19 footer.
I wanted to yank him immediately.... Like seriously, everyone knows our philosophy = paint points and 3 point shots and this guy comes and takes very long non- three point numbers?!!

Trust me, I don't want to see him again. I would rather see more Harrell

[thejohnnygold]

(2 minutes after the Rockets lose to the Chicagp Bulls on national TV, Saturday night on ABC)

Can someone tell me why Beasley is a better option than SAM DEKKER?

 

No.  No I can not.  I also would prefer we see more Harrell.

 

If anything, Beasley matches our offensive system which seems to focus on one player being able to create a shot for himself without the aid of anything beyond a screen.  Doesn't mean it's a good shot.  

 

I thought RGV was the plan--5 guys flying around attacking the rim and raining threes like a horde of archers.  Instead, we get, more or less, the opposite.

[Sir Thursday]

I don't watch much College basketball, so maybe Dekker was doing something truly exceptional down there. But I have yet to see anything from him in a Rockets uniform that makes me excited. With rookies you don't necessarily expect perfection, but you want to see those occasional exceptional plays that make you think that once their baseline improves to NBA level they'll have something above that to build upon. D-Mo had his post moves, Parsons had his 'Bangs', Harrell has that infectious, Faried-style energy. What does Dekker bring? Maybe it's because he has been injured for a while, but even prior to that I couldn't figure out what he's got that will make him an above-average player in some department.

 

Feel free to enlighten me, those who are higher on him than I am.

 

ST

[Willk]

I don't watch much College basketball, so maybe Dekker was doing something truly exceptional down there. But I have yet to see anything from him in a Rockets uniform that makes me excited. With rookies you don't necessarily expect perfection, but you want to see those occasional exceptional plays that make you think that once their baseline improves to NBA level they'll have something above that to build upon. D-Mo had his post moves, Parsons had his 'Bangs', Harrell has that infectious, Faried-style energy. What does Dekker bring? Maybe it's because he has been injured for a while, but even prior to that I couldn't figure out what he's got that will make him an above-average player in some department.

Feel free to enlighten me, those who are higher on him than I am.

ST

I tend to agree with you. We can only judge on what was seen in the pre season. He did not look athletic enough for the SF position. He also was overpowered at the PF position. He also wasn't "stretchy" enough to overcome the strength disadvantage and athletic disadvantage. If his back was hurt prior to training camp, that would explain some of this. If not, there are reasons to worry.

[HoopsReportCard]

I don't watch much College basketball, so maybe Dekker was doing something truly exceptional down there. But I have yet to see anything from him in a Rockets uniform that makes me excited. With rookies you don't necessarily expect perfection, but you want to see those occasional exceptional plays that make you think that once their baseline improves to NBA level they'll have something above that to build upon. D-Mo had his post moves, Parsons had his 'Bangs', Harrell has that infectious, Faried-style energy. What does Dekker bring? Maybe it's because he has been injured for a while, but even prior to that I couldn't figure out what he's got that will make him an above-average player in some department.

Feel free to enlighten me, those who are higher on him than I am.

ST

Good question!
I am such a rockets fanatic that I don't spend a lot of time on college basketball nor football nor too many other sports or else I'll end up a deadbeat or couch potato. But I'll try to answer your question- Last March Madness, he was the 2nd best player on his Wisconsin team. He was a real leader offensively and defensively. In one game (I think the final four) he was like 7 of 9 from Three! He was like unstoppable. And I'm not talking about wide open shots. He was guarded well and shots were contested. His shots were not even touching the rim. I could be exaggerating but I think he was swishing them all. The commentators kept referring to him as a mini-Kevin Durant. He was tall at 6'9" and could shoot and also put the ball on the floor and create his offense.
Again, normally I don't recognize college players that aren't too 3 picks until they make it to the NBA. Fast forward to the draft when I saw that the Rockets picked him, I was sooooo excited. I was dreaming about how he would fit in with our second team and even how he would space the floor with Harden. How disappointing it is that he has been injured ALL year.
He has potential.
I wish we had a system that developed young players instead of hoped/waited/obsessed on signing free agents.
1. Look at the player development that has occurred over the past 5 years in Golden State (and I'm not talking about Steph & Klay, but look at up and coming players like McAdoo and Rush and Clark)
2. Miami- Observe the development of Justise Winslow for the Heat. Learning under D Wade. Plays solid defense. Has a clear and well defined rule. Tyler Ennis too.
3. Spurs young players. Rookies and second and third year. Nuff said
4. Blazers youth. Great coaching and great story over there.

I'll be honest. I'd rather DEKKER get minutes than Beasley.

[thenit]

Dekker was clutch in Wisconsin hitting big shots and taking over at end of games, but its just hard to evaluate him right now. He has his injurires and didn't get a lot of minutes at the NBA level. although he isn't lighting up the D-League, so there no indication yet that it will translates to the NBA. But I think there is untapped potential and we should judge him next season where he has a full summer workout and full health

[HoopsReportCard]

Dekker was clutch in Wisconsin hitting big shots and taking over at end of games, but its just hard to evaluate him right now. He has his injurires and didn't get a lot of minutes at the NBA level. although he isn't lighting up the D-League, so there no indication yet that it will translates to the NBA. But I think there is untapped potential and we should judge him next season where he has a full summer workout and full health

Yes! That the word. CLUTCH.
He really was. Big shot after big shot in college.
We won't know what we have at this next level until he gets some minutes. Hope he does.