Sactown Royalty: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:



Around SBN: On Bobby in the Box Score Bar-right-arrows



How Mike Bibby Has Changed

We've chalked up a hundred things as factors to Mike Bibby's down year: A lingering injury; Eric Musselman; the loss of Rick Adelman; the sporadic presence of Brad Miller; the ascension of Kevin Martin; Ron Artest; age; David Stern's microfiber fetish; bullheaded stubbornness. At least one of these has something to do with it -- but we cannot prove any of those factors (unless someone comes up with either a wrist x-ray or footage of Mike Bibby confessing to his pastor he wants nothing more than Musselman to get canned).

But we know Mike Bibby's game has changed, we can see it. And we can prove how he's changed as a player.


These graphs tell part of the story. Bibby has become more reliant on threes the past two years. The top graph shows the breakdown of Mike's shooting possessions. The bulk of his shots have traditionally been twos, though his reliance on threes has increased quite a bit recently, while the frequency with which he draws fouls has remained rather consistent. That extra reliance on threes hasn't been due to a sudden surge in his efficiency from that range; Bibby's three-point shooting percentage has trailed off a bit since the championship contention years. His two-point shooting and really his overall shooting performance has remained fairly consistent; his effective field goal percentage has been between .478 and .514 every year save his rookie campaign. He's really a very consistent player year-to-year...

...which doesn't explain the major change in his game. This does.

Bibby's assist rate has absolutely plummeted. Even if you ignore the start of his career, when he was much more a distributor than a scorer -- he's no longer really a point guard. Look at 2001-02, his first season in Sacramento. Both his assist and turnover rates sunk sharply. Why? On a team with so many passers (from Doug Christie on up to Chris Webber and Vlade Divac), he wasn't asked to be a typical playmaking point guard. It's common sense, right? So it would be common sense to assume his assist (and even turnover) rate would bounce back up when the team turned back into a more traditional setup, with an ironhands power forward (any one of Shareef Abdur-Rahim, Corliss Williamson and the namesake Kenny Thomas) and a scoring shooting guard (Bonzi Wells, Kevin Martin). But that never happened.

In fact, his assist rate got even worse, which seems unexplainable. We know Bibby can be a point guard -- even on the well-passing Kings teams of 01-02 through 04-05, Mike put up assist rates well north of 20 (24.7 in 2004-05). You'd think when the team again needs a big-time distributor to help Brad Miller with playmaking duties, Bibby would step up. Nope. Instead, he shot the ball more than ever.

Sure, the Kings needed him to look for his shot with Peja Stojakovic gone. But to the point of ignoring his positional duties? And these numbers remove the blame from Musselman, Artest and Martin -- the assist rate was actually worse in 2005-06 than 2006-07. Maybe I'm jumping to conclusions, but it sure looked last season like Bibby was on a one-player team out there, not trying to set up his running mates at all. The statistics show our brains weren't tricking us -- Bibby has had one of the worst assist rates among all point guards the last two years. He's still an above-average player, but he's a point guard in name only. A PGINO, if you will.

This team needs a distributor. Mike Bibby can do it. Will he? Probably not. And that sucks.

0 recs | Comment 11 comments

Story-email Email | Print |

Comments

Display:

Re: How Mike Bibby Has Changed
Amen, sir.  This is what I've been saying all along.  Bibby's game used to be predicated on getting to the hole and either finishing or dishing it off.  Now, it's pretty much a contested three-pointer or nothing.  Either Bibby doesn't have the athleticism to get to the hole, or he doesn't have the will.  Either way, that spells trouble.  And as much as everyone loves to pile every Kings problem at Eric Musselman's feet, this started on Petrie's watch.
Freakin' Kings.

by DB on Sep 13, 2007 3:54 PM PDT   0 recs

Re: How Mike Bibby Has Changed
I'm not certain how Mike's performance has anything to do with GP. Was he coaching him? Whispering in his ear to jack up as many ill-advised 3's as possible, perhaps? What part of the GP-Bibby link am I missing?

Anyhow, I'm thinking not too many of us are surprised that Mike's turned into a freakin' 3pt gunner lately. However, I was not nearly as aware of the assist issue.

by Kusian on Sep 13, 2007 4:23 PM PDT   0 recs

Re: How Mike Bibby Has Changed
I don't see Mike Bibby's shot selection as "ill-advised". Bibby usually shoots when he is open, if he wasn't missing so many shots last year we wouldn't be having this discussion. I was glad he continued to shoot because he was just as shocked that the shots weren't falling as the rest of us but he kept his confidence.

The trend in the NBA over the last half decade is to abandon the mid-range jump shot and create three point set shooters and it's not just Bibby's flow chart that looks like this.

Phoenix and San Antonio base their entire offense off one big man, a penetrator and three set shooters. Why else would Eric Piatowski still have a job? Teams that can't shoot don't make the play-offs, teams that can't score in the post don't win championships.

We are slipping into the NBA abyss.

by jjham15 on Sep 14, 2007 1:19 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Re: How Mike Bibby Has Changed
Wow.  What more need be said?  In this case, the stats don't lie.

by jacquetbg on Sep 13, 2007 4:43 PM PDT   0 recs

Re: How Mike Bibby Has Changed
Just want to point out the use of Lakers colors on the graphing. Bibby's evolution has everything to do with scheme, he has become a product of a system much like Brad Miller. When players become dependent on a system and the system goes away it takes some time to adjust. Can Miller do anything but play the high post? I don't think any of really know the answer to this question.

If you mold Bibby into a screen and role jump shooter who is supposed to stand at the arc when he doesn't have the ball in his hands and wait for the kick out, you have to be understanding when he has an off year shooting. This past season has exposed the weakness in the system, not Mike Bibby in particular. As Kings fans, we all know that Bibby has always been a sub-par defender but we have lived with it because his offensive game has been so efficient.

If Mike Bibby averaged 21 points a game on 45% shooting this last season no one would be complaining about the 13 million he is owed. The Kings would have one 4 or 5 more games and been competitive. Mike Bibby would have also opted out of his contract and gone on to greener pastures and the Kings would be shit out of luck. Let's see what Bibby looks like with a stud running mate at the 2 a defensive specialist at the 3 and a coach who isn't hated by all.

The real question this year is whether or not Mike Bibby can leave the Rick Adelman system behind and return to being a more complete offensive player. If he can I wouldn't doubt that he opts out and gets the 4 year deal he was looking for this off-season.

We are slipping into the NBA abyss.

by jjham15 on Sep 14, 2007 1:05 AM PDT   0 recs

Re: How Mike Bibby Has Changed
Actually I'd still bitch about his piss poor attitude. But I'd only bitch under my breath.

by NYCFan on Sep 14, 2007 7:12 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Re: How Mike Bibby Has Changed
NYC, good point about the fact that no one would be complaining if Bibby hit his shots. Of course, Philly fans used to boo Mike Schmidt when he didn't play well, too. And we used to grumble when Webber missed consecutive elbow jumpers, and we watch through one half closed eye whenever Artest jacks up a three.

Had Bibby hit his shots we would have probably won enough additonal games to make the playoffs, and Eric Musselman would still be earning his contract instead of just collecting it.

What does all of this mean? Not much, I guess. But if Bibby continues to trend to the graph, Kevin Martin is going to have to mug him to get his own shot.

SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!

by section214 on Sep 14, 2007 7:48 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Re: How Mike Bibby Has Changed
This cracks me up.  Of course we wouldn't complain if Bibby hit his shots - fact is, he didn't.  And if he's not making jumpers, he really gives you NOTHING on the court.  No leadership, no defense, no ability to make his teammates better.

And that is the real story behind the data in this diary.

by otis29 on Sep 14, 2007 9:37 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Re: How Mike Bibby Has Changed
I disagree Otis. Unlike most StR posters, the rest of the NBA still respects Bibby and his ability to score. Even when he struggles Bibby is not a guy that can be left alone, he single handedly won games with his late game heroics even during a down year. Bibby's shooting ability still opens the floor for K-marts slashing and Ron-Ron's post game. Bibby still averaged more than 17.1 points a game and shot 36% from three.
We are slipping into the NBA abyss.

by jjham15 on Sep 14, 2007 11:57 AM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Re: How Mike Bibby Has Changed
You do realize that 36% from three ranked Bibby at exactly 69th in the league, no?  His overall FG%?  112th.  Points per game?  35th.

Honestly, I'm curious how this garners respect from the rest of the league. I'm sure they love to see him in the game, considering his defense and ebbing rate of distribution.

Maybe last year was an aberration, and I certainly hope it was. 2005-2006 was a bit better numbers-wise for Bibby, but still rather pedestrian compared to his peers.

So my underlying point stills stands - if our current version of Mike Bibby is not making his outside shots, he gives you very little.

by otis29 on Sep 14, 2007 12:46 PM PDT to parent up   0 recs

Re: How Mike Bibby Has Changed
I meant Adelman, not Petrie.  You're right that we wouldn't be complaining if Bibby actually hit his shots.  What is it about sucking all the time that bothers fans so much?
Freakin' Kings.

by DB on Sep 14, 2007 1:49 PM PDT   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to Sactown Royalty, the best community of Sacramento Kings fans in the universe. That's not my opinion; it's scientific fact.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Small
When do we bury the hatchet?

Recent FanPosts

Img_0922_small
What’s the over/under on Reggie Theus being fired midseason?
Small
Add a favicon to the website please
Small
What's next for the Kings? Look at the past.
Thunderwolf_small
A Kings Fans' Constitution
Small
Kings vs US-team - Where you place the loyalty?
2007_01_mooninite2_small
Updated Salary thoughts
Small
Thoughts on Ricky Rubio...
Tokyo-map_small
Western Standings
Small
New Twist on an Old Idea

Post_icon New FanPost All FanPosts Carrot-mini


Editor

Tom_toon_small Ziller

Joe_kleine_small section214

Associate Editor

Ronnya_small rbiegler

ad

Site Meter