Bismack Biyombo: Where Do We Go From Here?

In the 2011 draft, the then-Bobcats selected Bismack Biyombo with the 7th overall pick. While some people leaned towards drafting a future Finals MVP, the die was cast. Going into Year 4, his substantial physical potential has yet to be realized on the court. While it appears that Biyombo is headed for some form of free agency (restricted or otherwise) next summer, a few questions arise: what do lottery big men look like in year 3, and does it say anything about their future productivity? Looking at the lottery big men drafted from 2000 to 2010 yielded some answers.

TIER 1: Year 3 PER of 18+

As is fairly obvious from this group, lottery big men at this level are already pointed in the direction of an All-Star berth, or at the very least a productive career. Two players missed their third seasons due to injury, but posted 18+ PER's in year two: Brandan Wright and Sean May. So, out of this group, the average case appears to be NBA All-Star, and that's obviously worth a well-paying extension.

TIER 2: Year 3 PER of 15-18

Among this group, it's more of a mixed bag. While members of this group earned All-Star and All-NBA accolades (Joakim Noah, Chris Kaman, Andrew Bogut), there are some frustrating cases of unrealized potential in this group. The expected case here looks more like average productivity, so worth a reasonably priced extension.

TIER 3: Year 3 PER below 15

This is where it gets it a little dicey. Of the 26 players in this group, only 13 have produced a PER of 15 in any season after Year 3. And 15 is league average productivity. So the expected case in this group? Somewhere around average productivity, or a little below that. This is the group that Biyombo currently finds himself in. There is one All-Star in this group: Tyson Chandler. He did manage to get there, after 13 seasons, and stints with Chicago, New Orleans, Charlotte, Dallas, and New York.

So what, if any, conclusions are to be drawn from this group? First, there seems to be a grain of truth in the idea that the third year for an NBA player is important; at that point, players seem to slot fairly neatly into bands of productivity. Second, the lottery picks that ascended above "good rotation guy" largely show that potential on the court in regular season games, and they show it in their first three years.

For Biyombo, all indications are that he possesses the talent and work ethic to round into a useful NBA player at some point. However, there's enough evidence to realistically reset the ceiling below the Ibaka / Ben Wallace comparisons from a few years ago. If he ends up a productive rim protector with limited utility as a screener/roll man on offense, he has value, it's just not an indispensable value. And, if push comes to shove, would you rather pay guys like Hilton Armstrong (abroad), Ed Davis (1mm per year), or Ian Mahinmi (4mm per) for 15 minutes of rim protection? Or would you rather give Biyombo a hometown premium hoping that he makes a leap? Frankly, I'd rather give those minutes to Noah Vonleh.

Postscript: There isn't enough to merit a whole post, but Vonleh was an extremely sensible pick for the Hornets at #9. The best #9 picks over the years (Andre Drummond, Joakim Noah, Amare Stoudemire, Shawn Marion, Dirk Nowitzki, Tracy McGrady) have tended to to follow a "just grab the guy with the talent, and let's figure it out" pattern. This hopefully fits that pattern.

The Hornets Window is Open... Where Does It Lead?

Two years removed from historical futility and a different team name, the 2014-2015 season begins with a far different outlook. The Hornets boast a returning All-NBA player (Al Jefferson, 3rd team), an infusion of All-Star caliber talent (Lance Stephenson), young draft picks (Vonleh, Hairston, Zeller, MKG, Walker, Biyombo, Henderson) with varying degrees of upside, and a few plausibly useful veterans (Gary Neal, Brian Roberts, Marvin Williams, Jannero Pargo). It's undoubtedly the best team this Charlotte franchise has ever had, and the talent has caught some mainstream attention. So, if you wanted to assume a best case scenario, what would that mean for the Hornets?

Over the last 15 NBA seasons, here's how many opportunities there were to achieve what most fans would call success.

15 championships, 15 losing Finals berths, 30 losing conference finals berths (60 total spots)

Now, since the best players in the game tend to dominate the sport, here's that list without the Spurs, Lakers, and Heat.

3 championships, 10 losing Finals berths, 26 losing conference finals berths (39 total spots)

Looking back at the last 15 years, the rules of the NBA have held pretty firm: every championship team has at least one All-NBA player, 2nd team or better. When your team doesn't have Shaq/Duncan/Kobe/Lebron near their prime, making it to the top is pretty tough. So how far did the other 27 teams get?

CHAMPIONS: '04 Pistons, '08 Celtics, '11 Mavericks

The Celtics added a former 1st Team and 2nd Team All-NBA player in the previous offseason, so that's not the Hornets. Both the Mavericks and Pistons had one 2nd team All-NBA guy (Dirk, Ben Wallace) surrounded by some solid veteran players. That's probably not the Hornets this year or next year, barring a substantial trade or two and a very durable Al Jefferson.

NBA FINALS: '00 Pacers, '01 76ers, '02-'03 Nets, '05 Pistons, '06 Mavericks, '07 Cavaliers, '09 Magic, '10 Celtics, '12 Thunder

The Cavaliers and Thunder possess two obvious differences from this year's Hornets. The 76ers, Magic, and Nets surrounded a singular talent with a very well-matched roster, which could be a best (read: BEST) case scenario for Al Jefferson in the low post. The Pistons and Mavericks were, as before, largely veteran teams.

CONFERENCE FINALS: Blazers, Bucks, Bulls, Cavaliers, Celtics, Grizzlies, Jazz, Kings, Knicks, Magic, Mavericks, Nuggets, Pacers, Pistons, Suns, Thunder, Timberwolves

17 different franchises have reached the conference finals in the last 15 years, and that's excluding the Spurs, Lakers, and Heat. These teams include teams growing into title form, multi-year runs in contention, and borderline NCAA tourney-style surprises. The sheer volume and variety of teams here suggest this is a reasonable target given a 3-4 year window.

In summary, despite the quality and potential of the current Hornets roster, the rarefied air of the NBA Finals is just that - rare. How should Hornets fans feel about the team's prospects with this nucleus, however long it stays together? In short... a title seems extremely unlikely, a Finals berth seems very unlikely, and the conference finals seems a reasonable possibility, but maybe not an expectation.

If all that seems a little too morose, there's always this: can Hornets fans at least expect to get to the 2nd round? Yes. In the last 15 seasons, only one franchise failed to win a single playoff series... the Bobcats. And they're gone.

Talking Yourself Into Lance Stephenson

As a Hornets fan that pinned a lot of hope on signing Gordon Hayward, the last week has seen the team go in a decidedly different direction. The knee-jerk reaction to signing Lance Stephenson involves questions about conduct and maturity, both on and off the court. But is there a way to talk yourself into the signing?

1. LANCE STEPHENSON IS A GOOD PLAY-MAKER.

NBA Rank Among Non-Point Guards: #10 (minimum 41 games played)

During the 2013-2014 regular season, Stephenson averaged 4.6 assists per game. Aside from the raw number being impressive, he generated a good amount of "assist opportunities" (passes that would have been assists had teammates made their shots), particularly for a non-point guard. In fact, only nine players did better last year (Lebron James, James Harden, Gordon Hayward, Monta Ellis, Joakim Noah, Kevin Durant, Nic Batum, Tyreke Evans, and Dwyane Wade). 

2. LANCE STEPHENSON DOES NOT NEED TO DOMINATE THE BALL.

NBA Rank Among Non Point Guards: #11 (minimum 41 games played)

Despite the fact that Indiana operated with Lance as a de facto point guard at times, it turns out that Lance did not dominate the ball while on the floor. His time of possession fits nicely with the role of a secondary playmaker, coming in lower than a host of creators from the wing (Lebron James, James Harden, Monta Ellis, Carmelo Anthony, Kevin Durant, Gordon Hayward, Tyreke Evans, Paul George, Dwyane Wade). This bodes potentially well for his ability to mesh with a (typically) ball dominant point guard in Kemba Walker.

3. LANCE STEPHENSON IS A VERY GOOD REBOUNDER.

NBA Rank Among Non Big Men: #4 (minimum 41 games played)

There's no denying Stephenson's raw rebounding numbers this season. While it's fair to point out that this is one area of rumored stat-hunting (aka stealing rebounds from teammates), the fact is that he did grab a lot of "uncontested" rebounds (no opponent in the area). But he actually grabbed a comparable amount (72.3% of total rebounds) to Lebron James (75.2%) and Kevin Durant (77.8%). It's certainly possible that he tended to fight Pacers for rebounds more than the other team, but his overall motor for rebounding, particularly at the guard/forward spot, cannot be denied.

4. LANCE STEPHENSON IS A COMPARABLE SHOOTER TO OTHER NOTABLE SHOOTING GUARDS.

There are several things to note for Lance as a scorer, particularly with respect to other notable 2's/3's in the league. First, He was a strong finisher in the restricted area, a result of both drives and offensive rebounding. While his mid-range efficiency leaves something to be desired, it's the corner 3 numbers that are the most encouraging from a Hornets perspective.

Stephenson shot better from the corners than Josh McRoberts (48% versus 30%) on twice as many attempts per game. He shot better than Anthony Tolliver (39%), Chris Douglas-Roberts (45%), and Gary Neal (38%). While he clearly had a preference in location (right corner), Big Al has a preferred side of the floor too. There's enough here to work with as far as spacing the floor off the ball.

5. LANCE STEPHENSON IS A LEGITIMATE TWO WAY PLAYER.

As much as I am a fan of Gordon Hayward, even I can't dispute that his ability to defend well was largely dependent on using his height as an oversized shooting guard. There is no such debate about Stephenson. He's a plus defender at both wing positions, and is capable of hounding opposing wing players with length, strength, quickness, and motor. And in crunch time, he does not have to be a part of any offense/defense substitutions.

CONCLUSION

Looking at what Stephenson brought to the court last year, it's hard not to appreciate his overall talent level. There just aren't a lot of young two guards in the league that possess his package of skills. The problem with Lance, particularly the last six months, is that all sentences about his outlook start with the word "if." There are examples of talented guys in the league who realized their potential (Zach Randolph, Amare Stoudemire, Allen Iverson) despite conduct/character concerns, and maybe Stephenson is one of those guys. As a Hornets fan, I hope he is. But I'd be lying if I said I wasn't a little worried.

(all stats from www.nba.com)