Minnesota Sports Forum

Bismack Biyombo has said would like to stay with the Toronto Raptors next season.

What he wants more than that is to get paid.

Which is why, as was long expected, he opted out of his $3 million deal with the Raptors -- because he will make more than five times that on the open market next season. Via the well connected Eric Pincus:

Biyombo is a free agent and the going rate could be $17 million a year. Biyombo had a breakout playoffs -- in a league where rim protecting bigs are at a premium -- but said he would even consider a hometown discount to stay with the Raptors. The Raptors want to bring him back, but the salary cap makes it difficult. The Raptors do not have Biyombo's Bird rights, so they need to use their salary cap space to re-sign him. Toronto's top priority is bringing back DeMar DeRozan (who will be a max or near max player.

Expect some teams to try and poach Biyombo. The questions become what do they offer, and how much of a discount would Biyombo take to stay in Toronto?

http://nba.nbcsports.com/2016/06/06/its-official-as-expected-bismack-biyombo-opts-out-with-raptors/?ocid=Yahoo&partner=ya5nbcs&yptr=yahoo

A good question would be...

Would you rather have Bismack (at 17m a year)?
or
Would you rather have Gorgui?

I take Gorgui because of cost and I really worry that Biyombo was a flash in the pan during the playoffs and not live up to his contract...tough to say. I do like his defense and rebounding though!

I would look for next Bismack then sign him at a premium.

Bis is going to get paid, no doubt. But I really wouldn't want to be the franchise that takes that risk. High risk, high reward for this guy.

kurrdog53 wrote:A good question would be...

Would you rather have Bismack (at 17m a year)?
or
Would you rather have Gorgui?

I take Gorgui because of cost and I really worry that Biyombo was a flash in the pan during the playoffs and not live up to his contract...tough to say. I do like his defense and rebounding though!

As with most free agents this summer, I would suggest you need to go in knowing that most will not live up to their contract from a salary perspective. When people are throwing around max (or near max) deals for guys like Barnes, Bismack, etc, it is pre-determined that their pay will out-weight their play. It is simply the nature of the market. What you need to figure out is if you can make the contract work in the scope of your team, and how that particular player can drive towards a higher win share.

In the backs of most peoples minds, I think they realize that a guy like Bismack is NOT who you want starting for your team for 82 games. Playoffs are another story. Defense tightens, and it only takes a stolen game here or there to advance. Bismack certainly played well when the lights were on him, and he will get paid handsomely for it. $17MM per season for a guy with as many shortcomings as he has is a putrid deal for the Wolves. That being said, we need help defensively, and he certainly could help in that aspect. I still don't pay him....but there are worse things this team could do.

We may just be better off sitting out this free agent frenzy, and taking some good value guys on longer term deals to address our depth issues.

If we have the cap room I wouldn't be against giving him 17M a year. It would be for 1 year and a team option for year 2. I would do that for right young player for this team. I would throw that at some other teams RFA. Maybe throw 20M at Meyers Leonard and Evan Fournier on that type of deal.

Flash in the pan is right, no way you pay him 17 million. That's insane. Or Bradley Beal is about to get 22. I don't know anymore. Whoever got these cable TV deals signed is a genius, but hard to believe this trend can continue.

BizarroJerry wrote:Flash in the pan is right, no way you pay him 17 million. That's insane. Or Bradley Beal is about to get 22. I don't know anymore. Whoever got these cable TV deals signed is a genius, but hard to believe this trend can continue.

The next lockout looms...

... there's simply so much money... anything can happen during that one.

The only thing I know for certain is that if anybody loses on the deal, it'll be the fans.

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

BizarroJerry wrote:Flash in the pan is right, no way you pay him 17 million. That's insane. Or Bradley Beal is about to get 22. I don't know anymore. Whoever got these cable TV deals signed is a genius, but hard to believe this trend can continue.

The next lockout looms...

... there's simply so much money... anything can happen during that one.

The only thing I know for certain is that if anybody loses on the deal, it'll be the fans.

Indeed. Would be fun to see a chart of the last 50 years-avg. us household income vs. avg nba salary.

Maybe throw 20M at Meyers Leonard and Evan Fournier on that type of deal.