#BringBacktheBiz - The Bismack Biyombo Thread

[LamarMatic7]

I disagree. When he was in that was the only time Bledsoe hesitated to take it all the way in.

But for some reason PJ Tucker made a lay-up over Biz and Thomas took it at him numerous times.

Don't remember how Bledsoe looked, might take a peek at it if I watch the game a second time.

Thomas went in a couple times but a number of times either circled back out or tried to draw Biz and dump to someone else. The entire attack process changed when Biz was in there. The confidence in the pick and roll wasn't even the same. Guys pulled up rather than attack. It was obvious from the way the other team played which player was at center last night.

It did change, I can't disagree.

But most of us are over-stating the extent to which it happened. I know it's good times and all, we're all drinking the Biz kool-aid, and believe me - I don't want to rain on the parade.

But the Suns were 2/2 with Biz defending a shot at the rim and 3/4 when Biz was the player contesting the shot. Isaiah Thomas did draw a foul from Biz and 2 free throws after he had got past him on a pick-n-roll. He did go at him that time he faked him out of is shoes, only for himself to travel on what would have been a shot after that pump fake.

Those are facts. You can't deny their existence and relevance, and they do demote the premise of the Suns absolutely avoiding from attacking Biz's paint. That's plenty of stuff to have happened in the matter of 11 minutes for the Suns to have changed their "entire attack process".

[BeesWax]

But for some reason PJ Tucker made a lay-up over Biz and Thomas took it at him numerous times.

Don't remember how Bledsoe looked, might take a peek at it if I watch the game a second time.

Thomas went in a couple times but a number of times either circled back out or tried to draw Biz and dump to someone else. The entire attack process changed when Biz was in there. The confidence in the pick and roll wasn't even the same. Guys pulled up rather than attack. It was obvious from the way the other team played which player was at center last night.

It did change, I can't disagree.

But most of us are over-stating the extent to which it happened. I know it's good times and all, we're all drinking the Biz kool-aid, and believe me - I don't want to rain on the parade.

But the Suns were 2/2 with Biz defending a shot at the rim and 3/4 when Biz was the player contesting the shot. Isaiah Thomas did draw a foul from Biz and 2 free throws after he had got past him on a pick-n-roll. He did go at him that time he faked him out of is shoes, only for himself to travel on what would have been a shot after that pump fake.

Those are facts. You can't deny their existence and relevance, and they do demote the premise of the Suns absolutely avoiding from attacking Biz's paint. That's plenty of stuff to have happened in the matter of 11 minutes for the Suns to have changed their "entire attack process".

Actually you can disagree with them as I am sure you know. How many times did people just decide not to shoot because he was there? That is as good as a block. How many times did they bail on the pick because he was up playing on it? That is much better than them being in their set play.

Watch the game and tell me they did not back away from him. Biz changed their entire attack. Maybe they were so successful because they only took shots they knew they could hit while bailing on everything else. This hurts his measurable stats but if you watch the game you see the change. His game was well deserved of being praised even if the limited stats they keep don't show it. How often do you here about guys changing the game without the stats to back it up. It is the flow and the style of the game he changed and it was obvious and deserved major praise. With out him in that game and his energy and the way it not only changed their game but the guys on our team as well was huge.

[Dancingpanda]

All I gotta say is: I will take Biz's defence where he attempts to contest a shot, over Jefferson staring down a shooter from 10 feet away. Biz was the only one actually blocking out also

[LamarMatic7]

Thomas went in a couple times but a number of times either circled back out or tried to draw Biz and dump to someone else. The entire attack process changed when Biz was in there. The confidence in the pick and roll wasn't even the same. Guys pulled up rather than attack. It was obvious from the way the other team played which player was at center last night.

It did change, I can't disagree.

But most of us are over-stating the extent to which it happened. I know it's good times and all, we're all drinking the Biz kool-aid, and believe me - I don't want to rain on the parade.

But the Suns were 2/2 with Biz defending a shot at the rim and 3/4 when Biz was the player contesting the shot. Isaiah Thomas did draw a foul from Biz and 2 free throws after he had got past him on a pick-n-roll. He did go at him that time he faked him out of is shoes, only for himself to travel on what would have been a shot after that pump fake.

Those are facts. You can't deny their existence and relevance, and they do demote the premise of the Suns absolutely avoiding from attacking Biz's paint. That's plenty of stuff to have happened in the matter of 11 minutes for the Suns to have changed their "entire attack process".

Actually you can disagree with them as I am sure you know. How many times did people just decide not to shoot because he was there? That is as good as a block. How many times did they bail on the pick because he was up playing on it? That is much better than them being in their set play.

Watch the game and tell me they did not back away from him. Biz changed their entire attack. Maybe they were so successful because they only took shots they knew they could hit while bailing on everything else. This hurts his measurable stats but if you watch the game you see the change. His game was well deserved of being praised even if the limited stats they keep don't show it. How often do you here about guys changing the game without the stats to back it up. It is the flow and the style of the game he changed and it was obvious and deserved major praise. With out him in that game and his energy and the way it not only changed their game but the guys on our team as well was huge.

I'll disagree.

[BeesWax]

It did change, I can't disagree.

But most of us are over-stating the extent to which it happened. I know it's good times and all, we're all drinking the Biz kool-aid, and believe me - I don't want to rain on the parade.

But the Suns were 2/2 with Biz defending a shot at the rim and 3/4 when Biz was the player contesting the shot. Isaiah Thomas did draw a foul from Biz and 2 free throws after he had got past him on a pick-n-roll. He did go at him that time he faked him out of is shoes, only for himself to travel on what would have been a shot after that pump fake.

Those are facts. You can't deny their existence and relevance, and they do demote the premise of the Suns absolutely avoiding from attacking Biz's paint. That's plenty of stuff to have happened in the matter of 11 minutes for the Suns to have changed their "entire attack process".

Actually you can disagree with them as I am sure you know. How many times did people just decide not to shoot because he was there? That is as good as a block. How many times did they bail on the pick because he was up playing on it? That is much better than them being in their set play.

Watch the game and tell me they did not back away from him. Biz changed their entire attack. Maybe they were so successful because they only took shots they knew they could hit while bailing on everything else. This hurts his measurable stats but if you watch the game you see the change. His game was well deserved of being praised even if the limited stats they keep don't show it. How often do you here about guys changing the game without the stats to back it up. It is the flow and the style of the game he changed and it was obvious and deserved major praise. With out him in that game and his energy and the way it not only changed their game but the guys on our team as well was huge.

I'll disagree.

You have that right. Using weak numbers to prove points is rough though. Something that only accounts for limited outcomes is not very useful to prove or disprove a point. If a guy attacks the rim off a pick and roll 90% of the time and when a new guy comes in he attacks the rim 30% then you have taken him out of his game. The only way to see that is to watch the game since stats don't show everything. Using stats for a basic grasp of the game and outcomes is useful but they do not tell the whole story.

[LamarMatic7]

Actually you can disagree with them as I am sure you know. How many times did people just decide not to shoot because he was there? That is as good as a block. How many times did they bail on the pick because he was up playing on it? That is much better than them being in their set play.

Watch the game and tell me they did not back away from him. Biz changed their entire attack. Maybe they were so successful because they only took shots they knew they could hit while bailing on everything else. This hurts his measurable stats but if you watch the game you see the change. His game was well deserved of being praised even if the limited stats they keep don't show it. How often do you here about guys changing the game without the stats to back it up. It is the flow and the style of the game he changed and it was obvious and deserved major praise. With out him in that game and his energy and the way it not only changed their game but the guys on our team as well was huge.

I'll disagree.

You have that right. Using weak numbers to prove points is rough though. Something that only accounts for limited outcomes is not very useful to prove or disprove a point. If a guy attacks the rim off a pick and roll 90% of the time and when a new guy comes in he attacks the rim 30% then you have taken him out of his game. The only way to see that is to watch the game since stats don't show everything. Using stats for a basic grasp of the game and outcomes is useful but they do not tell the whole story.

You come off real pompous acting as if you watch the games and all I do is scroll through stats.nba.com all day. I watched the damn game as well. I used arguments based on what I saw in the previous page. I added stats to give more ammunition to my previous arguments.

[Hornet Mania]

Biz isn't necessarily a defensive force of nature, but he's been head and shoulders above what the team was getting from Maxiell. That's really the bottom line, and the reason he should remain a part of our rotation. If we get a better backup C at some point maybe he becomes expendable but right now I like getting at least a few positive plays each night from that spot. It sure beats suffering through Maxiell getting roflstomped yet again by a taller player he can't hope to guard.

[BeesWax]

I'll disagree.

You have that right. Using weak numbers to prove points is rough though. Something that only accounts for limited outcomes is not very useful to prove or disprove a point. If a guy attacks the rim off a pick and roll 90% of the time and when a new guy comes in he attacks the rim 30% then you have taken him out of his game. The only way to see that is to watch the game since stats don't show everything. Using stats for a basic grasp of the game and outcomes is useful but they do not tell the whole story.

You come off real pompous acting as if you watch the games and all I do is scroll through stats.nba.com all day. I watched the damn game as well. I used arguments based on what I saw in the previous page. I added stats to give more ammunition to my previous arguments.

No I never said you did not watch the game. As a matter of fact you said that their game changed when Biz came in. AlL I said was you hand picked weak numbers that tell 1/10 of a story to try to prove a point. It was a weak argument and someone as talented as you seem to be with math should have done better. I am not trying to be pompous and never said you did not watch the game. With everything you do on here maybe I expected more from you then some average person who would not fully understand what the numbers actually mean and if they are worthwhile. As a fellow math person I held you to a higher standard and for that I am sorry. I was not meaning to offend but it seemed like you were trying to trick me like I would not understand how weak your argument was just because you involved numbers.

[LamarMatic7]

You have that right. Using weak numbers to prove points is rough though. Something that only accounts for limited outcomes is not very useful to prove or disprove a point. If a guy attacks the rim off a pick and roll 90% of the time and when a new guy comes in he attacks the rim 30% then you have taken him out of his game. The only way to see that is to watch the game since stats don't show everything. Using stats for a basic grasp of the game and outcomes is useful but they do not tell the whole story.

You come off real pompous acting as if you watch the games and all I do is scroll through stats.nba.com all day. I watched the damn game as well. I used arguments based on what I saw in the previous page. I added stats to give more ammunition to my previous arguments.

No I never said you did not watch the game. As a matter of fact you said that their game changed when Biz came in. AlL I said was you hand picked weak numbers that tell 1/10 of a story to try to prove a point. It was a weak argument and someone as talented as you seem to be with math should have done better. I am not trying to be pompous and never said you did not watch the game. With everything you do on here maybe I expected more from you then some average person who would not fully understand what the numbers actually mean and if they are worthwhile. As a fellow math person I held you to a higher standard and for that I am sorry. I was not meaning to offend but it seemed like you were trying to trick me like I would not understand how weak your argument was just because you involved numbers.

I barely made grade 11 since we had to pass a geometry exam in order to be transferred. Got just enough points to avoid going to school in summer. Not really talented in math.

Don't agree that those numbers aren't suitable for this conversation.

[BeesWax]

You come off real pompous acting as if you watch the games and all I do is scroll through stats.nba.com all day. I watched the damn game as well. I used arguments based on what I saw in the previous page. I added stats to give more ammunition to my previous arguments.

No I never said you did not watch the game. As a matter of fact you said that their game changed when Biz came in. AlL I said was you hand picked weak numbers that tell 1/10 of a story to try to prove a point. It was a weak argument and someone as talented as you seem to be with math should have done better. I am not trying to be pompous and never said you did not watch the game. With everything you do on here maybe I expected more from you then some average person who would not fully understand what the numbers actually mean and if they are worthwhile. As a fellow math person I held you to a higher standard and for that I am sorry. I was not meaning to offend but it seemed like you were trying to trick me like I would not understand how weak your argument was just because you involved numbers.

I barely made grade 11 since we had to pass a geometry exam in order to be transferred. Got just enough points to avoid going to school in summer. Not really talented in math.

Don't agree that those numbers aren't suitable for this conversation.

Well it seems with some of your logic that you could excel in math. I am a teacher and you logic skills implied to me that you would be a solid math person. Sorry to jump to that conclusion. The problem I see with the numbers is they do not take into account anything other than when someone shoots. It forgoes turnovers forced, plays changed, and other such outcomes. Only accounting for when someone shoots can make anyone look great or bad. It is like me saying Biz was a great scorer because he shot 75% from the field that game. Out of context it looks great but once you watch the game it shows how it is not the case.

Don't worry about the geometry thing it is not normal math and gives way to many people fits. Algebra and upper level math can many times be easier for people than geometry.

[LamarMatic7]

No I never said you did not watch the game. As a matter of fact you said that their game changed when Biz came in. AlL I said was you hand picked weak numbers that tell 1/10 of a story to try to prove a point. It was a weak argument and someone as talented as you seem to be with math should have done better. I am not trying to be pompous and never said you did not watch the game. With everything you do on here maybe I expected more from you then some average person who would not fully understand what the numbers actually mean and if they are worthwhile. As a fellow math person I held you to a higher standard and for that I am sorry. I was not meaning to offend but it seemed like you were trying to trick me like I would not understand how weak your argument was just because you involved numbers.

I barely made grade 11 since we had to pass a geometry exam in order to be transferred. Got just enough points to avoid going to school in summer. Not really talented in math.

Don't agree that those numbers aren't suitable for this conversation.

Well it seems with some of your logic that you could excel in math. I am a teacher and you logic skills implied to me that you would be a solid math person. Sorry to jump to that conclusion. The problem I see with the numbers is they do not take into account anything other than when someone shoots. It forgoes turnovers forced, plays changed, and other such outcomes. Only accounting for when someone shoots can make anyone look great or bad. It is like me saying Biz was a great scorer because he shot 75% from the field that game. Out of context it looks great but once you watch the game it shows how it is not the case.

Don't worry about the geometry thing it is not normal math and gives way to many people fits. Algebra and upper level math can many times be easier for people than geometry.

I'm not looking at their FG%, just the fact that there were plenty of attempts and instances where a player challenged Biz.

[BeesWax]

I barely made grade 11 since we had to pass a geometry exam in order to be transferred. Got just enough points to avoid going to school in summer. Not really talented in math.

Don't agree that those numbers aren't suitable for this conversation.

Well it seems with some of your logic that you could excel in math. I am a teacher and you logic skills implied to me that you would be a solid math person. Sorry to jump to that conclusion. The problem I see with the numbers is they do not take into account anything other than when someone shoots. It forgoes turnovers forced, plays changed, and other such outcomes. Only accounting for when someone shoots can make anyone look great or bad. It is like me saying Biz was a great scorer because he shot 75% from the field that game. Out of context it looks great but once you watch the game it shows how it is not the case.

Don't worry about the geometry thing it is not normal math and gives way to many people fits. Algebra and upper level math can many times be easier for people than geometry.

I'm not looking at their FG%, just the fact that there were plenty of attempts and instances where a player challenged Biz.

Your numbers were attempts where Biz was the challenger. What they did not account for was the number of times people retreated from Biz. Also go back to if the only attack the rim 30% of the time he is in the game vs 60% when he is out we have changed their plans. If you can force a team to play out of their system then you have accomplished part of your goal. The numbers just don't tell much of the story at all because they only look at when guys tried to finish on Biz. What else happened when Biz was out there and how many times he changes the play is not in the numbers you used.

[LamarMatic7]

Well it seems with some of your logic that you could excel in math. I am a teacher and you logic skills implied to me that you would be a solid math person. Sorry to jump to that conclusion. The problem I see with the numbers is they do not take into account anything other than when someone shoots. It forgoes turnovers forced, plays changed, and other such outcomes. Only accounting for when someone shoots can make anyone look great or bad. It is like me saying Biz was a great scorer because he shot 75% from the field that game. Out of context it looks great but once you watch the game it shows how it is not the case.

Don't worry about the geometry thing it is not normal math and gives way to many people fits. Algebra and upper level math can many times be easier for people than geometry.

I'm not looking at their FG%, just the fact that there were plenty of attempts and instances where a player challenged Biz.

Your numbers were attempts where Biz was the challenger. What they did not account for was the number of times people retreated from Biz.

The number of times they didn't retreat from Biz was high enough for his 11 minutes or whatever it was.

[BeesWax]

I'm not looking at their FG%, just the fact that there were plenty of attempts and instances where a player challenged Biz.

Your numbers were attempts where Biz was the challenger. What they did not account for was the number of times people retreated from Biz.

The number of times they didn't retreat from Biz was high enough for his 11 minutes or whatever it was.

I think you are wrong with your numbers. The 3 for 4 number was shots Biz made that were considered contested I believe. The 2 for 2 was right though. Jefferson was challenged at the rim 7 times and the key for me would be how many additional times did he just stare down an open jump shooter?

Edit:
Also if you look Jefferson was challenged inside of 5 feet 19 times in that game while Biz was only challenged twice. They seemed very likely to take it right at Al and yet shied away from Biz. Inside of 10 ft they only attempted 3 shots on Biz to the 28 on Al. This says to me that they were scared to come close to the basket on Biz. Now they pulled up around 20-25 ft more often on Biz likely pull ups off the picks instead of challenging him at the basket.

Those may not be challenged directly but what the other team did while the player was in the game. It would show tendencies and changes when certain players are in or out. They seemed less scared to go inside with Al in the game vs Biz in there. Forcing them into shots further from the basket will drive FG% down and help with team defense.

[SpearNMgicHelmt]

Did anybody else notice that Biz was doing a better job catching passes in the Warriors game?

[Braggins]

Did anybody else notice that Biz was doing a better job catching passes in the Warriors game?

I'm not implying that I think Biz has good hands by any stretch of the imagination, but I've always thought the problems with him catching passes have been overstated. People make it seem like he drops like half the passes that get thrown to him. He drops some occasional passes and a lot of the times when he does it looks really bad because he'll randomly drop really easy passes sometimes but generally I don't think his hands are so terrible that they prevent him from being a decent player.

[SpearNMgicHelmt]

Maybe it's more about being ready for the ball in certain situations, and that's what's improving. Against the Mavs, he only had one miscue when being passed to.

On the other end, he caused Dallas players to travel on two possessions because of his D, which is as good as a block.

I'm really glad he's finally getting to play.

[fatlever]

7. Bismack Biyombo Blocked Shots

Biyombo has thankfully supplanted Jason Maxiell in the Hornets’ big-man rotation, making Charlotte at least 5 percent more entertaining. Biyombo can barely catch the ball on offense, but he is a rim-protecting highlight factory on the other end.

Offensive players struggled badly to finish when Biyombo was near the basket last season, per SportVU data, but Biyombo doesn’t just go vertical like Roy Hibbert and Chandler. He leaps way above the rim, and he wants to straight murder your shot with volleyball spikes that threaten to go way out of bounds or smash holes through the floor. He will eat your self-esteem. Just ask Shaun Livingston, who barely saw Biyombo coming before the big fella smashed Livingston’s shot to dust in Golden State last weekend.

http://grantland.com/the-triangle/death ... f-success/

[JDR720]

over the past 4 games Biz has averaged 5.5 points, 7.3 rebounds and 1.3 blocks in just 15mpg

still have some hope he can be our center of the future, he is just 22

[LofJ]

over the past 4 games Biz has averaged 5.5 points, 7.3 rebounds and 1.3 blocks in just 15mpg

still have some hope he can be our center of the future, he is just 22

13.2 points, 17.5 rebounds, 3.1 blocks per 36 minutes. Those are damn good numbers.