I'd agree with you 100 percent if Bibby didn't have such a string of poor seasons. And because of Wally's injuries it would make sense to have someone healthier come in to bring scoring off the bench or filling in the pg spot. With paul pierce, tony allen and al jefferson, I think the celtics would benifit with a gaurd geared towards passing.
With that said, I don't think Bibby really brings any "positional need". Because A. you dont have to spend that much to have scoring off of the bench, and B we can find a better way to get rid of Wally.
And speaking of getting rid of Wally, why trade a guy who shoots a career.404 from the 3 (.415 last season, .400 the season before) and a .862 from the free throw line for a guy that shot .360 from the three and .830 from the line? Is it really an upgrade? I don't think so.
overrule, overruled.
The only way I'd get Bibby is for Wally and if he backs Rondo up. However, I have to call you on the following BS you sprouted:
1) Please propose a realistic trade with Wally that's better than getting Bibby. I'd like to see it.
2) Why would we not trade a backup who in the past three years averaged 17 points, 2.5 assists, less than 4 boards, half a steal with serious injuries, for an injury free pg with 19 points, 5.5 assists, 3.5 rebounds, and more than one steal?
BTW Bibby shot 39% from three in 06, a measley .02 lower than Wally, and has compensated for his .02 gap in free throw shooting by getting to the line 100 times more than Wally each of the last three seasons.
3) If Bibby had such a "string of poor seasons," why did he outscore, outpass, outsteal, and outdefend Wally on a better team while getting to the line more and shooting only a bit worse than Wally? WOW, Wally must be having a string of dogpoop seasons.
Please address each of these concerns.
Overruled overrule overruled.
Thanks for calling out my BS,
1. no. if you do not think there is a more realistic trade then wally for bibby straight up than there really is no point trying to think one up for your benifit.
2. If he's so bad, than why would sac take him if bibby is so good?
3. Wally aint a great defender, but as a role player, shooting the three, keeping the floor spread and creating his own offense when needed, he's pretty [dang] good. AND he's got the numbers to prove where he IS good.
- you know why bibby has a lot of numbers at the free throw line? because he has the ball the whole time. know who goes to the line on our team? pierce, allen, jefferson. We don't need someone to take the ball out of there hands. and you know what, bibby out passes Wally by a wopping 2 assists! For the people we already have on our team, i'd rather have delonte than bibby.
They probably wouldn't do it, I agree. If Artest goes, they have a hole at sf around Bibby, Salmons, Martin, Thomas, Miller. If they won't take Wally I don't want Bibby but it's not THAT unrealistic if Artest is dealt, as they like Salmons at point and Wally would fill the SF void.
Oh but you wouldnt want Bibby unless we couldnt get rid of wally. So it's just that wally is that bad and you'd rather take on Bibby's play and contract instead. Ok, well not that Im going to call out your BS or anything...
Man Law.
Topic: Man Law: Bibby going to the Celtics will never be a good idea. (Read 17185 times)