You know the one where that dude sits down with those kids and asks them obvious questions like "Which is better, faster or slower?". Whenever I look at the advanced stats on Beal, I see that he is shooting practically the exact same % on 2 point fg's than he is on 3 pointers. I'm talking 2 point shots as a whole, including layups. Don't even get me started with his long two shooting percentage. So knowing that Beal shoots an equivalent percent on shots worth 2 and 3 points respectively, why the fuck does he take 3x more 2's than he does 3's? I feel like we need to get Randy on one of those T-Mobile commercials where he can be asked, "Which is worth more 2 or 3 points?"
After watching how Beal is used, it is apparent that Witt either doesn't understand basic math, doesn't care, or both. I'm going with the latter. He is pretty old school and a lot of those guys don't get it. I was watching the most recent Bill Simmons interview with George Gervin yesterday, and when asked why he didn't shoot more threes, he responded "because it is a bad shot". He actually believed that because he could shoot 50% from 2, if you shoot 40% from 3 it is a worse shot. Some of these old school dudes just never really adjusted to the 3 point line and even worse, they don't understand something as fundamental as what constitutes as a "good shot". With Beals stroke from behind the arc, unless you are Lebron James and can shoot 80% in the paint, you simply can't be shooting so little 3's and that many two's. I don't care if we win the championship, if our coach can't see that our second best player needs to be shooting 3's instead of long 2's, he needs to go.
By the way, sorry to beat a dead horse on this one. I just cringe during a lot of games watching Beal because he should be playing like Klay Thompson, not OJ Mayo.