Should we have signed Biyombo?

[hwangjini_1]

Obviously I was a fan of signing rich man's Willie Cauley Stein for cheap this summer.   A lot of folks here would have rather we traded upwards of 4 first round picks to trade up and take Willie Cauley stein in the top 8.   I didn't see the point when biyombo was sitting there in free agency.  We could have added him for nothing.

Biyombo over his last 6 games is averaging 15 rebounds and 3 blocks.  He's temporarily starting in place of Jonas valanciunas.  Raptors have continued to win at a decent rate with him manning the middle as a defensive rim protector.   I get why we ended up giving Amir Johnson 12 million per year, but Biyombo is 23 years old and could still improve.  The raptors got biyombo for $3 mil per year.  Should we have signed biyombo ?

you forgot to add that he is averaging only 5.6 points a game and his ft% is 66%. i am not saying he is not worth signing, only that you need to provide a fuller picture of a player when asking for the opinions of others.

we might ask why so many other teams were not clamoring for biyombo? what was it about his game that made so many teams hesitate to sign him?

well, one thing might be his stunningly limited shooting range. using 2014-15 (which would have been the most recent basis for signing him for this season) biyombo took a total of 169 shots in the entire season. of those 169 shots, SIX were from outside 5 feet of the basket. (and he was 2 for 6 on those.)

this means that biyombo took 94% of his shots from 5 feet or less. he shot for about 60% on these shots.

see for yourself: http://vorped.com/1-nba/2014-2015/player/1330/bismack-biyombo/shotchart/

now then, let's engage in this conversation in light of this new info.

yes, biyombo this year has shown the ability to rebound (9/g) and block shots (1.5/g). but both his scoring (5.6/g) and his incredibly limited shooting range (he basically cant do anything but dunk or lay ups) would give any GM a least a moment of pause.

would like him on the celtics? maybe, as a role player. CBS can work miracles with most players it seems.

Please do not forget to mention the FACT that Amir is shooting 56% at the line and Sully is shooting 59%!!:-)))))  Both WORSE than Biz.  I personally would LOVE to sign him next year as he will DEFINITELY opt out and pursue a more fair contract with the cap exploding.

Smitty77

Smitty77

and yet both of them outscore biyombo. they must do it through magic. 

[Smitty77]

Obviously I was a fan of signing rich man's Willie Cauley Stein for cheap this summer.   A lot of folks here would have rather we traded upwards of 4 first round picks to trade up and take Willie Cauley stein in the top 8.   I didn't see the point when biyombo was sitting there in free agency.  We could have added him for nothing.

Biyombo over his last 6 games is averaging 15 rebounds and 3 blocks.  He's temporarily starting in place of Jonas valanciunas.  Raptors have continued to win at a decent rate with him manning the middle as a defensive rim protector.   I get why we ended up giving Amir Johnson 12 million per year, but Biyombo is 23 years old and could still improve.  The raptors got biyombo for $3 mil per year.  Should we have signed biyombo ?

you forgot to add that he is averaging only 5.6 points a game and his ft% is 66%. i am not saying he is not worth signing, only that you need to provide a fuller picture of a player when asking for the opinions of others.

we might ask why so many other teams were not clamoring for biyombo? what was it about his game that made so many teams hesitate to sign him?

well, one thing might be his stunningly limited shooting range. using 2014-15 (which would have been the most recent basis for signing him for this season) biyombo took a total of 169 shots in the entire season. of those 169 shots, SIX were from outside 5 feet of the basket. (and he was 2 for 6 on those.)

this means that biyombo took 94% of his shots from 5 feet or less. he shot for about 60% on these shots.

see for yourself: http://vorped.com/1-nba/2014-2015/player/1330/bismack-biyombo/shotchart/

now then, let's engage in this conversation in light of this new info.

yes, biyombo this year has shown the ability to rebound (9/g) and block shots (1.5/g). but both his scoring (5.6/g) and his incredibly limited shooting range (he basically cant do anything but dunk or lay ups) would give any GM a least a moment of pause.

would like him on the celtics? maybe, as a role player. CBS can work miracles with most players it seems.

Please do not forget to mention the FACT that Amir is shooting 56% at the line and Sully is shooting 59%!!:-)))))  Both WORSE than Biz.  I personally would LOVE to sign him next year as he will DEFINITELY opt out and pursue a more fair contract with the cap exploding.

Smitty77

Smitty77

and yet both of them outscore biyombo. they must do it through magic. 

There is NO magic involved:-))  Sully take 9.6 shots per game and Amir takes 6 per games and Biz only takes 4 shots.  Amir is much more efficient, but Sully is MUCH LESS efficient.

Smitty77

[max215]

Yeah, probably. We could have signed both Amir and Bismack and never traded for Lee.

[hwangjini_1]

Yeah, probably. We could have signed both Amir and Bismack and never traded for Lee.

and still the corpse of wallace? no thanks.

[max215]

Yeah, probably. We could have signed both Amir and Bismack and never traded for Lee.

and still the corpse of wallace? no thanks.

Wallace was content with riding the pine, Lee is not.

[crimson_stallion]

No.  Biyombo is a fine defender, but useless on offense.  Our defense is not lacking on this team.  Offense sometimes is.  We were short in roster spots, and Ainge was correct in trying to find players who could help in both ends of the floor, such as Amir.

This. 

This Celtics team needed (& still needs) more offensive firepower.  Not another defender and certainly not someone who basically has zero offensive game.

These things don't exist in a vacuum. Example: I'd be very happy to have Biyombo playing Sullinger's minutes -- essentially adding defensive length, while removing the worthless jumpers Sully takes -- for the cheap price BB comes at, then trading Sully for somethig so we don't waste money on his this summer.

If Sully is that worthless, a) he's not tradeable and b) he's just taking the qualifying offer this summer.  So no major lost opportunity.

I imagine Ainge could convince an inferior GM that Sullinger has upside (by comparison to the pure defensive role of Biyombo), at least beyond what he currently is.

But that may be getting more difficult.... he's already looking tired after <2 months of the season.

Can we please put a stop to this whole belief in the concept that NBA GM's know absolutely nothing about players who are not on their own team?

We are Celtcs fans.  We have no professional NBA involvement whatsoever.  Yet just from being fans and watching games, we have a very good knowledge of what Sully's strengths/weaknesses are, and we have a pretty decent idea of his potential.

To try and suggest that any of the NBA's opposing GM's (guys who are paid hundreds of thousands, if not millions, purely to know everything there is to know about the league) would be gullible enough to allow Danny Ainge to falsely "convince" them them of Sully's potential is not only laughable, it's a borderline insult to the intelligence of everybody on this forum.

Yet people continue to make such comments.

Let me just get this straight for everybody here.  Every single NBA GM has an entire team of employees at their disposal.

* They have scouts who are entirely responsible for knowning everything there is to know about every college/high school/international/NBDL/NBA players on the planet who might potentially fit their needs. 

* They have financial advisor's who can provide them with advise on contracts

* They have coaches who can provide them with advise on which players out there may/may not fit their teams and play styles

* They have medical teams dedicated to assessing the health risk of other players around the league

You can take the person on this forum with the greatest level of basketball knowledge, and you can guarantee you that even the WORST GM in the entire league has at least 10x more knowledge of the NBA than that person.

NBA GM's make bad calls all the time - gambles on players / trades that don't work out.  I can assure you that in most (if not all) of these cases, those GM's are well aware of the risks presented, and decided to gamble on the hope that the benefits outweigh the risks.  They just happen to lose on that. 

I assure you that if there is any team out there who takes a flyer on Sully it's going to be because their own staff / advisors recommended it, not because Danny Ainge convinced them of it.  If Ainge was THAT high on Sully's potential then he wouldn't trade him / let him go, would he?

So to all the people who do this whole thing of:
"Danny should showcase player X to increase his trade value"
"Danny is just saying this in media to try to increase the players trade value"
"Danny should tell opposing GM this guy has huge potential"

Please, stop.  No offence intended by all this, but the whole idea of GM's being so gullible is just laughable.  The NBA's opposing GM's know a hell of a lot more about Sully than any of us does.

[Eja117]

No. 

[BudweiserCeltic]

No. 

I'm convinced.

[Yenohb]

No mainly because of how our offense is being played. A total of 315 games played in his entire NBA career averaging 21.5 mpg he only has a total of 94 assists which bring his career average @ 0.3 per game. That's atrocious. He might be serviceable to teams like Toronto who has many go-to-scorers but definitely not in Boston with Brad Stevens on the helm.

[ssspence]

No.  Biyombo is a fine defender, but useless on offense.  Our defense is not lacking on this team.  Offense sometimes is.  We were short in roster spots, and Ainge was correct in trying to find players who could help in both ends of the floor, such as Amir.

This. 

This Celtics team needed (& still needs) more offensive firepower.  Not another defender and certainly not someone who basically has zero offensive game.

These things don't exist in a vacuum. Example: I'd be very happy to have Biyombo playing Sullinger's minutes -- essentially adding defensive length, while removing the worthless jumpers Sully takes -- for the cheap price BB comes at, then trading Sully for somethig so we don't waste money on his this summer.

If Sully is that worthless, a) he's not tradeable and b) he's just taking the qualifying offer this summer.  So no major lost opportunity.

I imagine Ainge could convince an inferior GM that Sullinger has upside (by comparison to the pure defensive role of Biyombo), at least beyond what he currently is.

But that may be getting more difficult.... he's already looking tired after <2 months of the season.

Can we please put a stop to this whole belief in the concept that NBA GM's know absolutely nothing about players who are not on their own team?

We are Celtcs fans.  We have no professional NBA involvement whatsoever.  Yet just from being fans and watching games, we have a very good knowledge of what Sully's strengths/weaknesses are, and we have a pretty decent idea of his potential.

To try and suggest that any of the NBA's opposing GM's (guys who are paid hundreds of thousands, if not millions, purely to know everything there is to know about the league) would be gullible enough to allow Danny Ainge to falsely "convince" them them of Sully's potential is not only laughable, it's a borderline insult to the intelligence of everybody on this forum.

Yet people continue to make such comments.

Let me just get this straight for everybody here.  Every single NBA GM has an entire team of employees at their disposal.

* They have scouts who are entirely responsible for knowning everything there is to know about every college/high school/international/NBDL/NBA players on the planet who might potentially fit their needs. 

* They have financial advisor's who can provide them with advise on contracts

* They have coaches who can provide them with advise on which players out there may/may not fit their teams and play styles

* They have medical teams dedicated to assessing the health risk of other players around the league

You can take the person on this forum with the greatest level of basketball knowledge, and you can guarantee you that even the WORST GM in the entire league has at least 10x more knowledge of the NBA than that person.

NBA GM's make bad calls all the time - gambles on players / trades that don't work out.  I can assure you that in most (if not all) of these cases, those GM's are well aware of the risks presented, and decided to gamble on the hope that the benefits outweigh the risks.  They just happen to lose on that. 

I assure you that if there is any team out there who takes a flyer on Sully it's going to be because their own staff / advisors recommended it, not because Danny Ainge convinced them of it.  If Ainge was THAT high on Sully's potential then he wouldn't trade him / let him go, would he?

So to all the people who do this whole thing of:
"Danny should showcase player X to increase his trade value"
"Danny is just saying this in media to try to increase the players trade value"
"Danny should tell opposing GM this guy has huge potential"

Please, stop.  No offence intended by all this, but the whole idea of GM's being so gullible is just laughable.  The NBA's opposing GM's know a hell of a lot more about Sully than any of us does.

What's insulting is the suggestion that NBA GMs are robots with mirror opinions of players. A deal that turns out to be a win for both or all teams involved is the exception, not the rule, in the NBA. That said, perhaps you've heard the theory that opposing GMs fear dealing with Danny due to the strong chance they'll look foolish in the end.

Crafting trades in the NBA is an art with a variety of subtleties -- one that Ainge is pretty skilled at. Deal with it, and give up the rant.

[littleteapot]

What's insulting is the suggestion that NBA GMs are robots with mirror opinions of players. A deal that turns out to be a win for both or all teams involved is the exception, not the rule, in the NBA. That said, perhaps you've heard the theory that opposing GMs fear dealing with Danny due to the strong chance they'll look foolish in the end.

Crafting trades in the NBA is an art with a variety of subtleties -- one that Ainge is pretty skilled at. Deal with it, and give up the rant.

There are a lot of trades in the NBA that are slanted towards one team, but it doesn't just magically happen because Danny is a wizard. Every other GM in the league knows way more about our players than anyone on this blog. The only way to reliably benefit from a trade is to deal with a desperate team that thinks they have to make a move regardless of value lost, not convince them that there is value in an asset when there isn't. And the idea that teams are afraid to trade with us is ridiculous. Were the Mavs or Suns afraid to trade with us last year?

With the way post players have been deemphasized and the rise of shooting and/or athelticism at the 4, I don't think any GM is stupid enough to drink the koolade on Sully. I think a lot of GM's would like him as a big off the bench for a playoff team this year, but they're not going to go hard after him. Any GM that actually wants him will just wait till the offseason when they can probably take him with little opposition.

[LooseCannon]

Having Sullinger, Johnson, and Olynyk as you three main bigs, Crowder and Jerebko as smallball options, and Lee and Biyombo as an offense-defense platoon for fourth big would have made some sense.  Obviously, that leaves Zeller out of the loop.

[ssspence]

What's insulting is the suggestion that NBA GMs are robots with mirror opinions of players. A deal that turns out to be a win for both or all teams involved is the exception, not the rule, in the NBA. That said, perhaps you've heard the theory that opposing GMs fear dealing with Danny due to the strong chance they'll look foolish in the end.

Crafting trades in the NBA is an art with a variety of subtleties -- one that Ainge is pretty skilled at. Deal with it, and give up the rant.

There are a lot of trades in the NBA that are slanted towards one team, but it doesn't just magically happen because Danny is a wizard. Every other GM in the league knows way more about our players than anyone on this blog. The only way to reliably benefit from a trade is to deal with a desperate team that thinks they have to make a move regardless of value lost, not convince them that there is value in an asset when there isn't. And the idea that teams are afraid to trade with us is ridiculous. Were the Mavs or Suns afraid to trade with us last year?

With the way post players have been deemphasized and the rise of shooting and/or athelticism at the 4, I don't think any GM is stupid enough to drink the koolade on Sully. I think a lot of GM's would like him as a big off the bench for a playoff team this year, but they're not going to go hard after him. Any GM that actually wants him will just wait till the offseason when they can probably take him with little opposition.

If being a GM were as easy as "knowing players", all teams would be good. The fact is you have no idea which GMs are warm on Sully's long term potential, and which aren't. Sure, it's unlikely that anyone sees him as the next Tim Duncan -- I'm talking about relative perspective and value. Regardless, this notion of the unilateral intelligence of NBA front offices is just dead wrong.

[Celtics4ever]

The fact is you have no idea which GMs are warm on Sully's long term potential, and which aren't. Sure, it's unlikely that anyone sees him as the next Tim Duncan -- I'm talking about relative perspective and value.

The same could be said of you, in regards that you have no idea that the GMs like Sully.  I would guess the following to be true.

I would bet that they love his rebounding and hands - this is undeniable and there will always be someone who values these qualities.

I would bet that GMs are aware that he lacks athletic ability.   That being said they are also likely aware that he can play in the NBA given his body of work despite limitations in that area.    But is he a guy you build a team around?   I would wager no.   He requires someone who can protect the rim behind him on D.  He is rarely going to out run his man.

We know that 20 or so teams passed on his talents in the draft- not a ringing endorsement

I would bet that they are aware that he has battled his weight - 300 lbs for a man his size is not a good thing

I would bet that they are aware that he has had conditioning issues - this is evident several seasons of this career.   I think he has improved some of his career but it is a contract year

I would bet that they are aware of his penchant for getting injured -   He has played in 208 out of a possible 277 regular season games.   That means that he misses 25% of the games he could have played.   I think his weight and conditioning play a role in this also his bad back.   This is almost as low as his 3 P shooting percentage.

Is he chopped liver, but it is a myth that people think he is a borderline all star outside of Boston.   I live in Ohio and they love the guy due to the OSU play but you will not hear the CAVs guys when they broadcast the games talk about how dangerous he is outside of rebounding.

[Jvalin]

Having Sullinger, Johnson, and Olynyk as you three main bigs, Crowder and Jerebko as smallball options, and Lee and Biyombo as an offense-defense platoon for fourth big would have made some sense.  Obviously, that leaves Zeller out of the loop.

Biz for Zeller straight up. Who says no?