Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Biz is a free agent


Recommended Posts

anyone who understands basketball and our roster knows this is an utterly terrible move.  we have two players similar to hawes in frank and cody.  we have no one that can protect the rim half as good as Bizz.  Biz is an elite 22 year old rim protector.  we're not bringing him back so we can open up minutes for SPENCER fuging HAWES.  this is terrible

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't say I am surprised because the past two seasons under Clifford he doesn't seem to have been rated as more than a role player. He went from starting 74% in his first two seasons, to starting just 21%, and that was only boosted due to injury problems last season. And likewise his minutes diminished under Clifford. In his first season he averaged 23.1 mins, that improved to 27.3 mins in his second season and he showed steady improvement. Que Clifford (and Big Al), and those minutes fell to 13.9 mins in 2013-14, and while they increased to 19.4 in 2014-15, that was arguably down to injuries and not more trust and/or desire to play him more. 

For me, I think it is possible that Clifford (and perhaps Cho?) don't see Biyombo as a pivotal piece going forwards, and instead see him as an impact player off the bench. Maybe they'll try and sign him to a long term deal, or try and keep him on a cheaper one to two year deal, or simply let him walk. After all, they've acquired two big men this off season in Hawes and Kaminsky. That's two more players to added to a packed front court, so I suspect someone has to make way...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Terrible move.

After a pretty solid offseason, this kind of ruins it for me.

I just want to make sure I have this straight..

We draft Biz at 18 years of age, knowing he is a project with high upside, then let him walk at the end of his rookie deal...

How foolish. Waste of a draft pick then.

Why draft a project before he reaches the age where he starts putting things together?

In Biz, I saw a player that really came into his own, particularly when called upon to start when Al was hurt. He is one of the better post defenders in the league and blocks everything in the lane.

I honesty do not see us replacing him with an equivalent player, let alone one that is as affordable.

I'm about as butt hurt as someone can be about this. Very disappointed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Oh good lord Interest doesn't mean interest in making a bad trade to take the player, that's why I had such a long post, to accurately describe why those are two different things, but you don't like to listen to that stuff.  Being interested in a player doesn't live in a vacuum. It's very simple... there isn't a #1 draft pick type of grade on any of these QB's, if there was, we'd just take them.  You can't bluff a pick everyone knows you won't make, and trying to trade the pick is the CLEAR signal that you're not taking the QB. Just because the Raiders would have interest, doesn't mean they're going to bail us out of a situation we don't want to be in, they'd be smart about it and just sit put, let us take a non QB as we'd be telling the world we're not taking one just by trying to trade the pick, and then they'd take him at #2 (either with their own pick or by trading less to get that one). Oh, and your point of "if nobody is willing to make the trade, you obviously just take the best QB" is quite literally the dumbest thing I've ever read on here. If nobody is willing to trade up to take the QB, then it's OBVIOUS that the QB isn't worth taking with that pick, so OBVIOUSLY taking the best QB there is just OBVIOUSLY stupid and a bad pick. The moral of it is if there is a QB worth taking, we're taking them and not making the trade.  If there isn't a QB worth taking there, nobody is trading up to #1 to take one, we just showed the NFL how bad of an idea that is 2 years ago, it's really not hard to see. You keep making up this mythical situation where there is a QB who has shown to be worth trading up to #1 for and we'll be able to leverage that into a trade.  But we're the most QB needy team in the league, if we end up with the #1 pick, either we are taking a QB #1 or no QB is going #1 unless we get VERY lucky and two teams in the Top 5 fall in love with one prospect and we can play them off each other and fleece one of them. But again, I can't see that happening, as if there was a QB worthy of that, we're just taking him ourselves.
    • Sanders is with Tom Brady brand and that's his mentor. The Raiders owner was with Sanders taking pics at a Vegas game together.   It doesn't take much to connect the dots that Vegas will be interested in Sanders as their franchise QB. Oh yeah and guess who hasa small ownership stake in the Raiders Tom Brady.   I guess this is just another made up Madden idea by me huh?
    • Bro I don't mind debating you, but did you really have to write all that to get your point across.   This isn't Madden. If you have the #1 pick you literally control your own destiny. If nobody wants to trade which I have a hard time believing they won't then you obviously take the best QB.   I think we will have suitors. If that's Madden then so be it.
×
×
  • Create New...