Ramon Sessions and Mike Bibby, a second guesser's paradise.

by hawksdawgs on Sep 8, 2009 4:16 PM EDT Comment 12 comments

More photos » Ron Hoskins - NBAE/Getty Images

Over at Hawks Str8 Talk, an excellent discussion has been going on over Ramon Sessions' recent offer sheet signing for sixteen million dollars over four years by the Minnesota Timberwolves. Larry summarizes his feelings quite succinctly,

Ramon Sessions signs for 4 years, $16M for the Timberwolves. I am only posting this, so that I have something to reference when either a) Mike Bibby is a situational player or worse for the Hawks in year 2 or year 3 of his current contract at $6M/yr or b) Jeff Teague turns out to either not be useful or simply unable to find great utility as a point guard.

It makes sense, but the more I looked into the idea the more I tend to think the Hawks made the right move. Despite the fact that I think in a quick poll most would side with Larry.

The Sessions legend

Being the only young point guard on the market this summer, Sessions seems to have developed a bit of a legend that after looking at the stats is largely unwarranted. For instance, did you know Sessions played 17 games in his rookie season? 17. He has only played 96 games total. Just started 46 games in the NBA. For a large part of his career, for whatever reason, Ramon Sessions could not beat out Luke Ridnour for the starting role.

Sessions did average 12.5 points and 5.7 assists per game in only 27.5 minutes. Those are decent numbers. But the Bucks were without Michael Redd for most of the season and Andrew Bogut for half of it, and if you watch NBA games, someone is going to score the points. It does not matter how bad they are. The 2004 Hawks didn't average 60 points a game. On that team, Tyronn Lue averaged 13.5 points and 5.4 assists in about 30 minutes of action.

In a sense, I would be fearful of saying I found the answer at point guard with a guy who only managed 29 minutes and only started half the games for a slightly below average team. Plus, I struggle to see how he would be good enough for the Hawks and not for the Bucks who had no problem looking for an answer in the draft. Four years 16 million is still a decent contract for a backup point guard, but calling him "the answer" would have involved a good deal of risk.

Styles of play

I agree that Mike Bibby's best days are behind him (but those were pretty good days he is declining from), and toward the end of the contract, those glory days may seem further in the rear view mirror, but Bibby did not play good defense last year and 91% of his shots were jumpers. Those are not areas that are going to see huge decline because either they can't (defense) or their effectiveness has nothing to do with age or athleticism (quick release shooting). Mike Bibby actually has a game that is sustainable. So assuming the best he can do is be a situational player is not an inevitable conclusion.

Moreover, Ramon Sessions tends to dominate the ball and is a borderline horrible jump shooter (he shot 17 percent from long range). Well, Joe Johnson dominates the ball for the Hawks and needs jump shooters to create space and provide outlets out of the double team. Not exactly a match made in heaven. And while I think Joe should probably be less of the focal point in the offense, that was going to be one crowded paint area if Sessions was there. When the only guys on your team that can shoot jumpers are Joe Johnson, Mo Evans, and Marvin Williams, any one in the paint is going to see constant double teams.

And I know, of course, stats can prove any argument but for those that think any driving, kicking, scoring PG is more effective than one who can run the offense and shoot would be troubled to know that the Hawks baskets off assists actually go up 11% from 48 to 59 percent with Bibby on the floor

Also, everyone knows Bibby scored almost 15 points a game and had five assists right?

Jeff Teague

Our first round draft pick is more athletic, faster, and has a better jump shot than Ramon Sessions. He also had a better resume coming out of college. What Ramon Sessions has is almost a 100 more games in the league and the ability to have average stats on a below average team. Jeff Teague has shown the ability to hit the three point shot and drive past anyone. His potential is the best of both worlds.

If Jeff Teague is a bust, the Hawks don't have a future point guard. But I would not be satisfied if Ramon Sessions was our future point guard. Above average starting point guards are sought after, Ramon Sessions was sought after by the media because there was nothing else to cover. Plenty of teams need point guards and none felt Sessions was worth signing to an offer sheet. In three years, Sessions may be a better bet for the Hawks than Teague but that does not make him the answer. He would have to improve a good deal to be that, and right now, I would take Teague, a man with a far greater upside, being mentored by a veteran point guard and a year or two to grow into the NBA game in the development race.

What do you think? Sessions vs. Bibby and Teague. Let's find Ramon a partner and make this a cage mask.

0 recs | Comment 12 comments | Share

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Bibby and Teague v, Sessions and Acie with Chris Paul as the special guest referee

like you wouldn’t order the PPV

by thirdfALCON on Sep 8, 2009 4:47 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

no price would be too high.

by hawksdawgs on Sep 8, 2009 4:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

although bibby and teague may need a little boost

i would give them speedy for a round or two. you expect little from him but simply the man advantage would even it out nicely.

by hawksdawgs on Sep 8, 2009 4:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Sessions

While a good outside shooting PG like Bibby might be a better fit for the current Hawks team, I disagree with your assessment concerning Sessions. First, as a starter last year, he averaged roughly 15 and 8. As you indicated, 2 of the key Bucks’ starters (Redd/Bogut) missed most of the season…and I personally saw a lot of nice basket opportunities missed by slubs like Gadzuric, Elson, Malik Allen, Mbah A Moute, etc., all of which were set up by Sessions.

Second, I watched several Bucks games last year and I don’t see Sessions as someone who dominates the ball. For me, I saw someone who looked ahead and was more than willing to pass the ball ahead to set up a quick basket opportunity. I saw someone in half court sets who was willing to pass to an open player. He’s not exactly the dominate the ball for 18 seconds and then give it up with the clock running down.

Third, at the time the Hawks had to move on Bibby, Sessions was unavailable for 4 and $16…he was looking for a full MLE offer until his agent realized there was no money to go around. Also, the Hawks turn around from relatively recent crap happened when Bibby was acquired at the trade deadline 2 seasons ago…so it made sense for the Hawks to keep him.

Finally, as for the relative lack of other suitors, blame the economy. In any other year, Sessions would have received multiple MLE offers.

by hunter11 on Sep 8, 2009 5:24 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

great points

thanks for posting hunter.

admittedly, i stole the idea of sessions a guy who operates best with the ball in his hands (which is different than dominating the ball and something I probably should have emphasized) from John Hollinger. and i disagree with Hollinger a lot so am willing to say I may overstated that.

but i would say bad teams and/or being the best player around bad players more often than not pads the stats of the best players more than it hurts. especially from a points per game area. so i stand by that for the most part.

finally, i am not saying Session is not worth the price he got or even worth more, but I am saying that staking your team on Sessions being your starter is a pretty big risk considering the limited sample size.

basically, i was arguing for Bibby with the Hawks and not Sessions with the Hawks. Not against Sessions. clearly, i did an extraordinary bad job of this.

by hawksdawgs on Sep 8, 2009 5:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

fair enough

also, on the jump shooting thing. while Sessions stinks from long range, at least he acknowledges his weakness there (as opposed to a certain Hawks player). I believe Sessions took only about 10 shots from long range after the season’s first month. His 80ish% from the FT line suggests that he would probably make a fair number of his mid-range jump shots….and his 45% overall FG% isn’t terrible. Sure, its nice to have a PG who is more of a threat from long range….but let me lay out something. Would you rather have Devin Harris chucking up long range shot after long range shot and converting at a 29% clip….or a player who recognizes his limitations and might throw up 6 outside shots a month (4 of which would be to beat the play clock or the end of the quarter long heave type)? Frankly, I’d rather have Harris trying to drive and draw a double team, or drive for a better shot, then go 1 for 6 from outside. My guess is that if Sessions took more outside shots in games, he’d probably hit at between 25 and 30%. We all think of Rondo as a bad jump shooter…yet his 3 point% was the same as Devin Harris in 07/08 and better than Harris last year (if I recall correctly).

Again, I agree that for the Hawks, Bibby’s outside shooting is critical and he’s one of the best outside shooters in the league.

by hunter11 on Sep 9, 2009 9:32 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

If you look at Sessions hot spots data

He doesn’t shoot really well unless he’s driving to the cup. All his mid range stuff are below 34% with the exception of the top of the key (41%) and the left baseline (39%).

You compare that with Bibby who only has 2 spots in the mid range area where he shoots worse than Sessions does, and obviously Bibby’s proficiency from 3 also helps. I think the Hawks and Sessions are not a good match given how much Sessions drives inside. (I think that’s a problem with Minnesota too, but we’ll see.)

No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....

by pookeyguru on Sep 12, 2009 2:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I think that in saying

that the Hawks baskets off assists actually go up 11% from 48 to 59 percent with Bibby on the floor

you forgot that He (Bibby=God) would be replaced by Flip(burger). I think you have a good point, but what about Sessions and Teague? That would be a pretty ridiculous fast/athletic tandem.

by acie4mvp on Sep 8, 2009 6:42 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

ahh the flip factor.

i cant argue that. and didnt think of it. good point.

i would be much more likely to agree with an argument for sessions and teague. rather than sessions as our starter and not having bibby or teague. i just dont see how sessions has proved he can be anything other than average. and since bibby has proved he can be average and a good fit for the team i would take him.

my problem with sessions and teague would be

1. it would have been more expensive to sign sessions when we signed bibby. and we needed to sign someone when we signed bibby. or at least it would have been very risky to wait so long to find your starting pg.
2. i can’t think of a team that has two young pg without knowing which one is the pg of the future. that is not to say it cant work, but i would be hesitant. i like the idea of a serviceable veteran and an upside younger guy better.

by hawksdawgs on Sep 8, 2009 7:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Great Article...

I agree with you Hawksdawgs… As much as I love Sessions, It would not be a good idea to have Sessions and Teague at the point. 2 very young point guards will be a recipe for disaster. If the Hawks had not drafted a point guard, then I would have gone for a Bibby, Sessions back court. But right now, it makes sense to have a veteran and a young guy at the point.

by dkrib on Sep 9, 2009 11:55 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Sessions vs. Bibby & Teague

If all it took to get Sessions was to offer him a $16 mil deal over 4 years, the Hawks really blew it. I’m sure Bibby, who made $14 mil last year, thanks to his Sacramento max deal, isn’t taking a pay cut to the extent of earning Sessions’ $4 mil this year (or any year of his 3-year extension w/the Hawks). And, given that his numbers weren’t so much better than Sessions’ last season (15 pts 5 assts vs. 12 pts, 6 assts for Sessions in 27 mins per), is Bibby really worth it? At 31, with a game that consists of steady, yet unspectacular, play including NO penetration, safe perimeter pasing and mainly jumpshooting, Bibby is certainly on the way down, whereas Sessions, at 23, is clearly on the way up. Yes, Sessions needs to improve his jumpshot — he’s not a bricklayer, but isn’t a consistent threat — but is a FAR superior penetrator and creator than is Bibby — he really gets into the seams and puts pressure on the defense, which is what any good point guard is supposed to do.

Had Sessions signed with New York, or been given starter’s minutes in Milwaukee, this season (i.e. no Brandon Jennings competition), he very likely would have been a real threat to make the All-Star team in the East AND win Most Improved. For my money, the only 2 points perhaps better than Sessions in the East are Rose and Rondo, and that’s debatable. Certainly, he’s better than Mo Williams, Jameer Nelson, and Devin Harris — all of whom were All-Stars this past season. Bibby has NEVER been an All-Star in his 10-year career, and likely ain’t making it before he’s done, either. Bottom Line: considering Sessions hasn’t even played 100 NBA games and is putting in work as a sometime-starter, it stands to reason that he’s only gonna get better and more productive with major minutes. The South Carolina native (who is a frequent visitor to Atlanta, incidentally) would have been a great fit for the Hawks at the point, and would have given them the firepower to better counter Cleveland and Orlando as the next team ready for the EasternConference Finals.

And as for Jeff Teague, for now, he’s an unproven rookie who may struggle if asked to play a distributor’s role as a point guard. He’s a slasher/scorer with fairly limited vision, who could be a valuable contributor with the departed Flip Murray’s minutes, but who shouldn’t be asked to do much more than put points on the board and maybe defend in a bench role. NO WAY is he better than Sessions, and he hasn’t even hit an NBA floor yet.

by ManofSteelo on Sep 9, 2009 2:03 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs