Ibet makes some logical points that are not incorrect. However, comparing players in a vacuum is moot and for the daytime talk show hosts.
From what we see and what we surmise, players are really only as good as the results indicate. Klay is far more successful than Beal given how he's used and what is asked of him in the scheme and system.
Does that make him better? To a degree yes and to an extent no. Beal has shown that he can do more in terms of versatility given the depletion of the wizards roster. Would Klay have been able to perform an all round game like Beal if he was asked earlier in his career? We will never know the answer to that question regardless of personal beliefs bc we never got to see it tested.
I am firm believer in a player's worth at the end of the day given what he does, what he's asked to do and how successful the team is as a result. Chauncey billups his final years in Detroit and his stellar season in Denver is a good example. He was in my view a top 5 mvp candidate and hands down a top 2 point guard those years. Were there better point guards in terms of vision, passing, shooting, driving, scoring, etc.? Absolutely there were, maybe more than half a dozen but he did what was asked of him and more in terms of what the team needed and winning when it mattered more than stats.
Based on that argument, Klay will always be perceived as the superior player to Beal and many that play similar styles of basketball bc of his success and domination at what he does well while winning.