Ryan Hollins, pt. ii: defense
by Stop-n-Pop on Aug 13, 2009 6:36 AM CDT
26 comments
OK, I want each and every one of you to close your eyes and think back to last season. The Wolves are playing the Atlanta Hawks and Mike Bibby is bringing the ball up the floor. As he crosses the mid-court line he begins to angle to the left just as Al Horford pushes off from the low block and moves towards the right wing. At this point it becomes obvious to everyone in the entire building that the Hawks are going to run a screen-and-roll with Bibby and Horford. One would think that Horford's guardian, Big Al Jefferson, would be preparing himself to hedge on the screen or to pass off coverage in a switch or to even jump the whole damn thing in a trap with a relatively slow point guard like Bibby initiating the action. One would be thinking incorrectly.
Instead of any of these three options, we Wolves fans are all too aware of what happens next: Big Al meanders out in the general direction of the screen and flaps his arms in the direction of Horford as the big fella makes a dramatic cut to the basket the second he sees Big Al lollygagging out towards what would have been the point of attack.
Repeat this sort of ineptitude a couple hundred times throughout the season. Rinse. Repeat again.
Folks, there are no two ways about it: last season, the Wolves' front court displayed some of the most atrocious pick-and-roll defense I have ever witnessed. Between general indifference (Jefferson), rookie inexperience (Kevin Love), and role-playing levels of non-excellence (Mark Madsen + Brian Cardinal) the Wolves 100%, absolutely, completely, and terminally lacked a big man who could properly switch, hedge, or jump a pick-and-roll...which, funny, just happens to be the single most important play that makes the NBA go 'round.
Enter Mr. Ryan Hollins.
Do not get me wrong. Hollins is not the be-all/end-all of defensive pick-and-roll prowess. What he is is the only player on the Wolves' roster who a) has size and b) can move well enough to be an effective defensive big on the pick-and-roll. I think Love is a smart and savvy enough player to eventually master this sort of thing but Hollins gives the Wolves a 7-footer who can provide...ummm...what's the word (we Wolves fans haven't seen this sort of thing in quite a while)...defensive flexibility, albeit in short stretches and with something of a negative pull on the offensive end of the court.
Hollins is a remarkably agile big man. He can handle switches, hedges, and jumping the point of attack for a trap with enough athletic juice to recover to his proper spot in the lane. Again, I'll remind our readers that we're talking about a backup big who will be the 3rd or 4th front court player on the roster, but this is a skill that is foreign to the current roster. Hollins may not be the best athletic defensive big; he may foul a ton and rely on overly-aggressive plays on the ball, but the simple fact remains that he is the only forward or center on the current roster who can show on a screen and make his way back into position strictly on the basis of his physical gifts. This is a big thing. KG was the last player who was able to perform this sort of task with a Minnesota across his chest, and no, I'm not comparing the two players; rather, I'm simply saying that Hollins is athletic enough to do something no other big on the roster can do and that, by itself, means something.
Beyond physicality, there are some things that stand out about Hollins' defensive game:
(via the always-excellent Basketball Prospectus)
First of all, let us clearly state that we are dealing with Small Sample Size Theater (Brian Cardinal factored in about 290 more possessions than the Wolves' newest big). Secondly, the thing that most stands out about Hollins (in his very limited court time) is that he holds his opponents to production well below what they normally put up (dMULT). The kicker is that he plays against competition that is significantly less than NBA average (dQUAL). Let's take a quick look at his on/off numbers (via the wonderful 82Games.com)
Many stats are shown on a 'per 48 minute' basis
Here are his numbers from Charlotte:
Many stats are shown on a 'per 48 minute' basis
Please keep in mind that Hollins is a 10 mpg backup (and that we're talking about less than 500 minutes of floor time), but what we can see here is that he is a better performer on defense than he is on offense. This general sentiment is also played out in his adj +/-. As always, the kicker with +/- and on/off stats for guys like Hollins is that they often log minutes without all of the team's best players surrounding them. Does that mean something for the Wolves? We'll have to wait and see.
The bottom line with Hollins the defender is that he is an incredibly athletic and agile big who has the potential to defend the pick-and-roll, get back into position, trap, and provide some weak-side shot blocking help. He brings a skill set to the Wolves that simply did not exist on the roster before his acquisition. Love and Big Al are not athletic dynamos and they will never be able to do the things that Hollins is naturally capable of. That being said, we're still talking about a guy who will likely play under 20 mpg (my guess is 13-17 mpg) and who will put up most of his numbers against non-starting 5-man rotations. If Hollins can maintain his dMULT numbers, and if he can perform at or slightly above replacement-level, the Wolves will have made a fairly savvy move.
While this is cliche on several levels, at the end of the day, Hollins' performance will be measured by how much he hustles. There is no pressure on this guy to not foul. There is no pressure on this guy to make big shots. All he has to do is go out there and go 150 mph. I really don't know if this is his type of personality (it could be judging by what we saw in the playoffs) but he is going to be placed in a position where an up-tempo athletic game such as his should be rewarded on both ends of the court. If he can use his athleticism to be an effective defender on the p-n-r with Love or Big Al, he will immediately have found a good home, as both of these guys need the things that Hollins brings to the table.
All in all I'm pretty happy with this signing. While Hollins seems to be a fairly awful 1/2 court offensive player he does have some interesting potential when it comes to transition play and defense. In terms of improvement, he looks like he could bulk up a bit, hit the boards with more aggressiveness, and avoid as many jump shots as possible. Running, dunking, defending, and crashing the boards should be this guy's MO from day one. As for his contractual worth, frequent poster McCleak put it nicely in a recent comment thread with this little ditty:
Hollins had a Win Score last year of 1.0. If you look at centers with a WS between 0.5-1.5 (DeSagana Diop, Theo Ratliff, Aaron Gray, DeAndre Jordan, Kosta Koufos, Jamaal Magloire, Robin Lopez, Hollins, Spencer Hawes, Robert Swift, and Olekisy Pecherov)*, you see that they earned $19,420,831 last season, for an average of $1,618,402.58 per player. So it’s more than the average contract for a center of his caliber last season. However, if you limit it to people who have signed second contracts (Diop, Ratliff, Magloire), than you see a contract total of $7,180,162 or $2,393,387.33 per player. And that’s almost exactly what Hollins received.
The guy is being paid at (or very near to) market value and he has some potential within the style of ball the Wolves hope to play as well as the roster they are shaping up to have. For me, the biggest thing about this deal is that Hollins represents a player that a) cost the Wolves' front office a considerable amount of scouting and research and b) is about as far away from a McHale-type signing as could be imagined. This is a guy you take a swing on only after a significant amount of research and you do so to have him play in a fairly specific role. That has to be worth something by itself, right? It sure as hell beats Mark Blount. Would Kevin McHale have even known about Hollins? Did UCLA play an NCAA game at the Dome during Hollins' time in Westwood?
What say you ?
0 recs |
26 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
I think that Hollins
provides a great deal of team flexibility and the value of that can not be overstated. He doesn’t have to be good at putting up the traditional stats to be worth the contract. When the wolves finally get into the playoffs (assuming he is still on the roster then), he will make us a much more complete team that is more able to change the style of play to counter our competition. The last thing you want on a team is 5 starters and a whole bunch of scrubs who don’t complement the starters. Teams should gel…I can’t tell you how often people just want the 20 pt scorer or the 10 pt 10 reb center (even if he gives up 20+ pts and all reb come against bench players).
by TheEvilProfessor on Aug 13, 2009 7:15 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
While we're cobbling up that list
To his credit, Kahn seemed perfectly aware of exactly the tradeoffs you’re talking about here when he described his motives for the signing. Not a starter, complement to Jefferson and Love based on defensive matchup flexibility, and so on.
It seems certain that, having identified Hollins as a player of interest, McHale’s regime would not have had the discipline to patiently wait on the Mavs to make other salary commitments that prevented them from matching that market value offer in the Wolves’ offer sheet. Kahn spelled out that process when he explained the signing with the team’s PR writer. (He also tossed in that he wouldn’t have done the offer without unloading Telfair’s option year first.)
This wasn’t a major signing, but it showed levels of cap shrewdness and general active thinking that are a real, positive departure from the team’s past.
by feral on Aug 13, 2009 7:58 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Isn't that just great?
I mean, we don’t have any idea right now how Kahn’s plan is going to play out. Still, we just aren’t used to a front office that obviously approaches business decisions with so many layers of strategy and planning. In the short term, until we really need to see the team starting to come together, I can sit back and enjoy the Machiavellian nature of the new front office.
by Krotz the Wall on Aug 13, 2009 8:13 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It was an astute move.
When I first looked through the move, my first thought was that it was obviously a well researched and reasoned move for the Wolves. That just seemed so odd after the last decade, especially for a role player.
by Krotz the Wall on Aug 13, 2009 8:14 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I like that it will give us a glimpse of what Al and Love look like playing next to a long C who can do some dirty work. Even if Hollins is just mediocre, it lets the FO know if they should go after Cole Aldrich or if it’s necessary to use a later pick on a guy like Jerome Jordan next year. Hollins contract is small enough that he can be be relegated to spot duty and a useful 5 fouls down the line if need be, so it’s a good opportunity to evaluate how our plodders work with some length and athleticism (something we’ve only seen during Theo’s rare few appearances).
Jennings: F*** the Knicks, them n***** is always going to be weak.
by Xand1 on Aug 13, 2009 8:18 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Do you really think that Cole Aldrich is a fit?
I mean, after reading the commentary on him at Draft Express and watching him in the tourney this year, I have concerns about his ability to complement Al or Love and play an up-tempo game and actually defend the pick n roll. He may be able to block some shots, but his game is just so mechanical it makes me cringe. I would much rather draft Evan Turner with our first pick and try to grab someone like Solomon Alabi with our second pick. Someone who basically gives us what Hollins does but with a higher ceiling who could develop into a future starter. Let someone else buy into the Aldrich hype. Favor will be undersized…cousins reminds me of Eddie Curry…If we are willing to develop a big (Kahn did emphasize player development) why not draft someone with the right attitude and skill set but who may be raw to get a legitimate center who can both block shots and defend the pick n roll without being a total offensive liability?
by TheEvilProfessor on Aug 13, 2009 8:35 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think Aldrich would be a solid fit, yeah. Perfect? No, but he’s a big big boy who seems like he has the potential be a very solid all-around defender while providing more than adequate offense. He may not be the athletic freak we all want, but he looks like a legit 6’11-7’ with length to match, so I do think he’d be a good complement and great 3rd big in the rotation.
The way things are set up right now, I’d prefer Evan Turner as well. I think he’s going to be a great player and would be nearly perfect on the wing for this team. I also agree that taking a value big like the guy you mentioned or Jerome Jordan might make sense. However, where Aldrich comes in is if it so happens that the team has the option to bring in a proven, not-too-old wing via trade using our exiprings/assets. It just seems more likely that we can land a wing than a legit big given the current league situation. We’ll have to see how things play out down the line, but there could be worse results than landing Aldrich, IMO.
Jennings: F*** the Knicks, them n***** is always going to be weak.
by Xand1 on Aug 13, 2009 9:59 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I have to point out that it is unlikely
that the expirings will be used to acquire any proven player. We may take on a contract with an additional year and get another draft pick…hopefully in this years draft. So you have to ask yourself. If you need both the wing and center, which position do you think the “Player Development program” will get the most out of? My gut tells me that you will get more bang for the buck taking turner, because as hard as it is to find a legit big, finding a player that is explosive who can play the 2/3 and 1 in a pinch is harder to find. There are enough big prospects in this years draft to get a good enough big because they all held out of last years draft. I understand your position as far as if you can only draft one and you can get one in a trade…but as long as the wolves stick to the player development and give their center prospect enough playing time with the proper instruction they will improve. Your post player just needs the raw abilities/BBIQ/Mentality. Then all you need is PT and coaching. As long as the prospect has those qualities…the wolves will be more than okay. While you can’t teach size…you also can’t teach people to do what Turner does.
At the end of the day, I just believe that Turner would make his teammates better more so than Aldrich would. And isn’t that what we are really talking about?
by TheEvilProfessor on Aug 13, 2009 10:39 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
What makes you think they won’t try to speed up the rebuild if the right opportunity presents itself? They can keep rolling the dice on draft picks and hoping they turn out, but, barring winning the lottery (literally and figuratively), at some point you need to cash in assets and bring in some proven talent if you ever want to try to compete. The timing is important and it must be done at the right moment or not at all, but I happen to think that the best way to get return on their current assets (especially cap space) is to look to take advantage of a team that is not in a position to compete but has a good player signed to a deal the team can’t afford given their non-competitive status.
I’m just speculating, but there are numerous wings out there that I could see as potentially being available at some point, so I was merely detailing one way things could transpire. In all honesty, I do like Evan Turner better, but something like, and i’m just throwing this out there, Kevin Martin + Aldrich would be pretty damn good as well.
Jennings: F*** the Knicks, them n***** is always going to be weak.
by Xand1 on Aug 13, 2009 10:56 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
True enough
But I get the impression that they want players that are all around the same age. So do you think Kahn would accept a Kevin Martin who I believe is 29 turning 30? If he can get one that is 27 or less I think he will, but I have my doubts about other teams giving up those assets. We will know more come trade deadline, which luckily is well before the draft. Just to be clear, if they can’t get a wing prospect…I think they should draft Turner first, if they can get one…I would be much more accepting of Aldrich, although we are so weak at that position….I might even want to still take him. If you stock up on enough Turner like talents…someone if going to trade you a good big.
by TheEvilProfessor on Aug 13, 2009 11:19 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Martin is 26.
Jennings: F*** the Knicks, them n***** is always going to be weak.
by Xand1 on Aug 13, 2009 11:26 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
He was just an example of guys who may be out there, though.. I’m not sure if he is/will be available, but Sac’s not going to compete for a long time.. longer than us. Would they turn down a good enough combo of young, cheap talent, picks and cap space? No idea, but I think it’s likely that, given the economic crunch, some very good swingmen will be available down the line. I’m not sure Kahn wants to just stick to developing youngsters until we hit the jackpit, so at some point, the opportunity to add proven talent to a very talented core of youngsters makes sense to me.
Don’t get me wrong – I’m not normally an advocate for trading for older guys on long-term deals, but I think we could be closer to turning the corner than a lot of people think. If we can roll with our picks next year added to our current core, a little veteran seasoning could go a long way toward getting us where we need to be. Assuming we’re confident enough in the stud quality of our youngsters (and we’ll have quite a stable at that point), it makes
As I said before, the timing has to match up with where our team is, as in he has to be someone who can not only help them make the leap, but be young enough to be in his prime after they turn the corner. I’m a bit short on examples and timelines at the moment because I’m at work and can’t give my full attention to this, so bear with me. At the very least, I wouldn’t advocate making such a move until at the deadline this year at the earliest, but more likely sometime during the 2010/2011 season, at which point we could use our massive amount of cap space to give some relief to a team that’s not competitive but has a high payroll.
Jennings: F*** the Knicks, them n***** is always going to be weak.
by Xand1 on Aug 13, 2009 11:47 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Either that or old enough and
on a couple year contract to bridge the gap between the development of some young talent and what would have been the natural learning curve. I just think that ideally Kahn would like to acquire another 2-3 first rounders to really improve the talent level to see what they need. But beggers can’t be choosers.
by TheEvilProfessor on Aug 13, 2009 2:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’m 100% for doing it right, which is why I put such an emphasis on timing. I just think that if done right you could set the team up to contend for years. I’m really just hoping that we get lucky with the players we have (and the ones we’ll be acquiring) and that we can get back to playing competitive ball without languishing in the lotto for years and years.
Jennings: F*** the Knicks, them n***** is always going to be weak.
by Xand1 on Aug 13, 2009 3:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
whoops
mixed him up with Kenyon Martin in my head.
by TheEvilProfessor on Aug 13, 2009 2:10 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
heh, “jackpit.”
Jennings: F*** the Knicks, them n***** is always going to be weak.
by Xand1 on Aug 13, 2009 3:02 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's good to have you back, SnP.
Great post. More than anything else, now, I just want to see something on the court. Enough speculation—bring out the ‘stache and glasses and let’s get going!
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
by biggity2bit on Aug 13, 2009 8:19 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
thanks..
…and yes, it’s time to see some basketball. only 1 month before training camp.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Aug 13, 2009 10:26 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree
Its time to lace em up and show us what they got. I live in Cali right now but I usually try to make to back to the Target center once a year to check out the wolves and vikes. I think this year i’m looking forward to making the trip more than ever.
btw… yes its refreshing to have a voice of reason back. SNP ROCKS!
by GHACAN BLACKSTAR on Aug 13, 2009 1:18 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I envy your Cali life..for me, wishing for Wolves season is wishing away the warmest part of the year. It just feels wrong, yet I can’t keep myself from doing it.
Jennings: F*** the Knicks, them n***** is always going to be weak.
by Xand1 on Aug 13, 2009 1:22 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Good stuff...
The PnR defense can’t be understated as a huge defensive weakness last year. So many teams run it, and the Wolves’ inability to run it or stop it is something that needed to be addressed. I’d also rather have Hollins on, say, Memo Okur on the perimeter in a tie game than Jefferson or Love.
This isn’t meant to unfairly critique KG, but I remember his last season and how much more effective Mark Blount was at showing hard on the pick and roll and slowing the guard down. Jim Petersen mentioned multiple times that Blount was their best PnR defender (probably his only strength besides shooting jump shots), and I think KG’s D in that area improved after the trade to Boston.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Aug 13, 2009 11:37 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Let's not forget about Pekovic
Cole Aldrich comes up a lot here in terms of the 2010 draft, but we may want to look at one of the elite wings or combo forwards first. There is still a possibility Pek will come over after next season and give us a guy that can provide instant offense off the bench and offer us some nice insurance in case Jefferson gets injured. If Ryan Hollins takes a step forward this year and gives us a solid 15 – 20 minutes per game, Pekovic may not look quite as bad on this squad. Suddenly we’ve got ourselves a pretty big four-man rotation upfront. And based on how prolific Pekovic is in Europe, my guess is he would be pretty successful against most NBA second units. Hollins gives us just enough athleticism and spark to help offset the “earthbound” nature of the other three guys.
by Rascal Flatts on Aug 13, 2009 8:38 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I think that ultimately
Pekovic plays for one year or so for the wolves and then get traded to an admiring team for another prospect, but the trade value would be so much better after seeing him succeed in the NBA first as a competent backup. While I love having two really good low post players, that is just two much roster space for a Big Al clone with slightly less offense.
by TheEvilProfessor on Aug 14, 2009 7:42 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You can never have enough talented Bigs
They get injured so much in our league. Al himself has played only one season where he didn’t miss 10+ games (the season before last). Look at what Orlando ponied up to keep Gortat. We are still extremely thin behind Big Al and Love. Having a bruising low-post presence like Pekovic to throw against other team’s second units would be a great asset for a contending team. And I hope that team would be us. If he can be dealt for some other area we have a gaping hole in, then great. But I’m hoping we can fill the wing positions through next year’s draft or the use of our cap space.
by Rascal Flatts on Aug 14, 2009 11:49 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
By the way
he is a different offensive player than Big Al. Unlike Al, Pekovic seeks out contact and makes a living from the charity stripe. He average a Euroleague best 12.6 FTA’s on a pace adjusted per 40 minutes basis. That is just absurd. Oh, and on the shots he didn’t get fouled on, he made 63.4% of them. He had a ridiculous true shooting percentage of 70%! Although he would go up against bigger, more athletic players in the NBA, I’m pretty sure he can translate some of this production against NBA second units.
by Rascal Flatts on Aug 14, 2009 11:58 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes...
assuming they call the game evenly. Rookies don’t get calls, but eventually they should come for him. I guess it will depend on how much Rambis values his contributions to the team. He is definitely better than Songaila, blount, hollins, pecherov and gomes. IMO. So who knows, maybe they can keep him. I think you will see the wolves take a number of prospects in the second round and convince them to sign and play in europe if they are too raw. Why not? If their problem is being too raw, stick them in europe for 2 years or so. It depends on whether the FO will draft a couple of bigs next year you can only give 5 maybe 6 roster spots to players that can only play the 4/5. You would probably want 2 1’s, 2 2’s and then one each of a 1/2, 2/3 and 3/4 combo for match up reasons.
by TheEvilProfessor on Aug 14, 2009 3:46 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
