Hollinger chimes in with "The Big Backfire"

BillsCarnage

ASFN Addict
Joined
Dec 2, 2005
Posts
5,827
Reaction score
1,196
Location
The Flip Side
I'm sure most of you will call him a Suns hater, but he has some very valid points. And his explanation of how much a rookie Kerr is with his comments about seattle waiving Barry are valid too.

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/insi...ory?columnist=hollinger_john&page=Suns-080307

"If it works, I'm a genius. If it doesn't, I'm a moron, I guess." -- Steve Kerr

Anyone who has dealt with Steve Kerr during his more than two decades as a player, writer, broadcaster and now general manager can attest that the man is no moron. In fact, he's one of the sharpest players of his generation.

However, that hasn't stopped his biggest move as Phoenix Suns general manager from looking foolish so far. Early returns on Kerr's trade of Shawn Marion and Marcus Banks for Shaquille O'Neal haven't been favorable, with the Suns going 3-5 with Shaq in the lineup and tumbling from first to sixth in the Western Conference by going 6-7 since the day of the trade.

To be fair, some of this can be explained by the schedule. Phoenix accumulated its 34-14 mark prior to the trade against an unusually soft slate, one that is far more difficult down the stretch. The Suns' average opponent in the first 48 games had a winning percentage of just .474; in the final 34 games, that increases to .550.

Nonetheless, the increased difficulty only accounts for a small portion of the drop in the Suns' own results. Phoenix outscored opponents by just over six points a game in the 48 games prior to the trade; since making it, they've been outscored by 2.4 per contest. That whopping differential goes far beyond anything the schedule-makers could dole out; it would be as if the Spurs suddenly morphed into the Hawks.

I made no secret of my opposition to the trade at the time it was made, so I won't recount that reasoning here. But now that we have some hard data from the first eight games of the Shaq era, we can pinpoint where Phoenix has fallen short -- and, if the Suns are to recover, where they need to improve.

In doing so, one thing stands out: Most of the reasons given for making the trade with the Heat are instead looking like reasons the Suns should have passed on it.

An easy way to juxtapose this is by examining the collision between theory and reality. "Theory" below is the case that's been made by the Suns and others in favor of the trade. "Reality" is the actual result thus far.

To wit:

Theory: The Suns have better off-court chemistry without Marion
Reality: The Suns had better on-court chemistry with Marion


The Suns thought they could play better without Marion doing his Debbie Downer act in the locker room, but his effect on the court was decidedly more positive. Take a look at Phoenix's performance with Marion on and off the court the past few seasons and the numbers will hammer you over the head: He was essential to making this system work.

On a per-game basis, Phoenix was about 10 points better with Marion on the floor over the past three and a half seasons. Ten points is a huge, huge gap -- it's the difference between the Hornets and Bobcats, essentially -- so for one player to have that impact so consistently over a period of years speaks volumes about his importance to their system. In fact, his differential was greater than that of Amare Stoudemire in each of the past four seasons.


Suns' point differential per 48 minutes



Marion on court Marion off court Difference 2007-08 +9.6 -1.5 +11.1 2006-07 +9.7 +0.5 +10.2 2005-06 +6.5 +1.9 +4.6 2004-05 +10.5 -3.1 +14.6 Source: 82games.com

That trend has continued in Marion's absence, with opponents outscoring the Suns by 2.4 points per game since the trade. Many scribes have already detailed the ways in which Marion was integral to Phoenix's system, so I won't belabor the point here. Suffice it to say the Suns haven't received an equally offsetting contribution from Shaq.

As for the locker room stuff, I don't want to minimize whatever issues there were between Marion and the other Suns -- certainly you have to wonder about a guy who is traded from first place to last and seems happy about it. But in this exchange, Phoenix appeared to lose so much in on-court chemistry that almost no amount of esprit de corps could make up for it.


Theory: The Suns are struggling only because of all the turnovers
Reality: The Suns are making turnovers because they traded for them


A lot of the chatter from Phoenix is that they're struggling right now because they're making too many turnovers, and that this brief nuisance will go away once they've worked out the kinks.

Somebody needs to remind them that they traded one of the league's most extreme low-turnover players for one of its most extreme high-turnover players. Of course they're going to turn the ball over more; it would be shocking if they didn't.

As a Sun, Marion turned the ball over on just 6.3 percent of his possessions, the third-best rate among the league's 62 power forwards and the ninth-best overall (his rate has since gone up, after making 26 miscues in 11 games in his new role in Miami).

In contrast, O'Neal has turned the ball over on 18.3 percent of his possessions this season, a rate more than double that of Marion. Only 10 players in basketball have a worse rate, and Shaq is the only one in that group whose teammates actually throw him the ball.

By comparison, the next closest player with a usage rate over 20 is New York's Eddy Curry, who turns it over on 15.1 percent of his possessions. So Shaq is in a league of his own for high-usage offensive players who turn the ball over. As a Sun he's handing it over to opponents three times a game, or three times as often as Marion did. There's no reason to expect the trend to abate.


Theory: Shaq's presence improves the Suns' rebounding
Reality: Shaq's presence improves the Suns' rebounding


OK, we can throw Phoenix a bone on this one. The Suns had the league's worst rebound rate at the time of the trade; with Shaq's help, they're already out of the cellar.

With Marion, the Suns grabbed 20.6 percent of their offensive misses and 69.2 percent of the defensive caroms. That has improved dramatically in the eight games with Shaq, especially at the defensive end -- the Suns have grabbed 78.5 percent of opponents' misses, and over the course of the eight games actually have a rebounding advantage on their opponents.

Unfortunately, this one positive hasn't nearly offset all the negatives. Such as …


Theory: Phoenix can still run with Shaq
Reality: Phoenix's opponents can run on Shaq


Last season, the Suns scored 17.0 fast-break points per game, the third-most in the league. That won't surprise people, but another stat might: Phoenix was also very good at cutting off the other team's break. The Suns permitted only 10.5 fast-break points per game, which ranked fourth in the NBA.

Keep that in mind as you look at these numbers with Shaq. Phoenix's transition game doesn't seem to have slowed down much -- they're at 17.8 fast-break points per game in the eight games since Shaq arrived.

But their opponents' running game is the real story. Phoenix's opposition is scoring a whopping 19.9 fast-break points per game, or roughly double what the Suns gave up last season with Marion. Even the plodding Pistons, who play at the league's slowest pace, rolled Phoenix for 20 fast-break points in the Suns' own gym.

Obviously, Shaq is a huge part of this -- a staple of nearly every Phoenix game has been the sight of O'Neal barely getting over half court while somebody dunks on the Suns' basket. Which takes us to the next problem:


Theory: Having Shaq in the middle solidifies the defense
Reality: Losing Marion on the wing worsens the defense


At the time of the trade, Phoenix ranked 12th in the league in defensive efficiency (points allowed per 100 possessions), at 103.0. Since then? They're at 109.6. As you can see in the rankings, that number for a full season would put them behind the Knicks as the league's worst defense.


Much has been made of Marion's ability to defend quick point guards and remove that responsibility from Steve Nash, and indeed several quick point guards (Chris Paul, Andre Miller, Baron Davis and Mike Conley) have had nice games against the Suns lately. Also, as outlined above, the Suns' transition defense was a strong suit thanks to Marion's speed and agility; that obviously isn't the case with Shaq.

However, there's one other part of the equation folks might be missing: Marion made life easier for Raja Bell because he could defend bigger 3s. Watching Phoenix's rough night in Denver on Wednesday, it was easy to see the impact of his absence.

The Suns had to put Bell on the much bigger Carmelo Anthony. Anthony pounded Bell on the blocks, putting him in foul trouble much of the night and grabbing six offensive boards en route to a 30-point night. Similar troubles happened against Memphis (Rudy Gay blew up for 36 in a game that was close 'til the last five minutes), Philadelphia (Andre Iguodala had 32 points on 15-of-23 shooting), and Washington (the Wizards played Antawn Jamison at the 3 and he scored 28 points).

The Suns' upcoming schedule doesn't do them any favors in this regard. They still face Anthony and Gay twice more and Iguodala once, plus they have big 3s like Richard Jefferson, Josh Howard and Ron Artest on the remaining slate. Using Bell, Grant Hill or a whole lot of smoke and mirrors, somehow they have to improve the D against players of this ilk.


Theory: The Suns' style was less effective in the playoffs because teams made them play half-court
Reality: The Suns' style was less effective in the playoffs because they played better teams


This is perhaps the most confounding part of the Suns' reasoning behind the Shaq trade: The idea that in the slower pace of the playoffs, having Shaq would be to their advantage.

This might be a valid reason for making the trade, if one knew the pace of Phoenix's recent playoff games was significantly slower.

But look at the Suns in the Nash era. They haven't played much slower in the playoffs than they have in the regular season. For instance, according to 82games.com, last season they took 73 percent of their shots in the first 15 seconds of the shot clock in the regular season, and 73 percent in the playoffs. And rather than slowing things down, their opponents actually played faster, launching 35 percent of their shots in the first 10 seconds compared to 30 percent in the regular season.

A similar thing happened in 2004-05, when 75 percent of Phoenix's shots came in the first 15 seconds of the clock in both the regular season and the playoffs.

The only season in which the Suns' numbers slowed noticeably was in 2005-06, and that was entirely because of a single tactical decision by one opponent. The Lakers essentially sabotaged their own offense to slow the pace to a crawl in a seven-game series in the first round that season. I argued at the time, and continue to believe, that the tactic cost them the series.

That brings us to the next point: It takes two to tango. When the Suns have played slow in the postseason, the opponent has been the main reason. In 2005 the Suns lost to San Antonio, who played the league's eighth-slowest pace. In 2006, they lost to Dallas, who was the fifth-slowest. San Antonio continued the progression last season, playing the fourth-slowest pace and knocking Phoenix out of the playoffs.

I wonder if these losses caused Phoenix to internalize the idea that they lose to slow-paced teams in the postseason. However, a far more important differentiating factor was that they lost to better teams. In all three seasons, the Suns' opponent had a superior regular-season point differential, so it shouldn't have come as a shock that they lost. After all, the one time they played a slow-paced team with inferior regular-season results -- Memphis, the sixth-slowest team in 2004-05 -- the Suns blew them off the court in four games.

So over the past three seasons, the Suns have had only a minor deviation in pace in the playoffs, at worst. And that's a justification for a massive transformation of the roster? Furthermore, the irony is that a slower pace might not be what the Suns see this postseason.

Look at Phoenix's potential playoff opponents. The three Texas teams are plodders (though Dallas' profile with Jason Kidd may be changing), but the others can run all day. Golden State and Denver actually play a faster pace than the Suns, and the Lakers and Utah aren't far behind. If Phoenix ends up playing one of those teams -- or better yet, has a playoff path that includes three of them -- won't it seem kind of silly that they traded Marion for Shaq to accommodate for a slower postseason pace?

Of course, that might be all moot, which takes us to our final point.


Theory: This trade can't be measured until we see the Suns in the playoffs
Reality: We might not see the Suns in the playoffs


Despite its recent struggles, Phoenix seems in a comfortable position as far as reaching the playoffs goes. The Suns have a 3.5-game lead over Denver, and also are ahead of Dallas and Golden State. Finishing ahead of any of those three will guarantee them a trip to the postseason, and with just 21 games left, there isn't much time for the others to catch up.

But remember what I said about Phoenix's schedule earlier? It's rough. The Suns' finishing kick includes one top opponent after another, starting with tonight's contest against Utah. Included in that finish are two games each against Denver and Golden State. Moreover, the Suns are all but certain to lose the tiebreaker to Golden State and need a sweep to avoid the same fate with Denver.

The Hollinger Playoff Odds are starting to sense the Suns as less than a sure thing, with Phoenix's playoff odds dropping below 90 percent this week for the first time in eons. Even that percentage overstates their chances, because a good chunk of their power ranking is based on their success when they had Marion.

If you look at how the Suns have played since the trade, and the difficulty of the remaining schedule, a finish somewhere around 9-12 or 10-11 in their final 21 games doesn't seem unreasonable.

That would put them at 49 or 50 wins, which should get them in … unless the losses are to the wrong teams. If they fail to beat Denver or Golden State, for instance, it's likely that both of those teams would reach the 49-win threshold themselves. And since those teams would win the tiebreakers, it would leave Phoenix out of the mix.

I should emphasize that it's still more likely the Suns make it than not; one brief hot streak should pretty much wrap it up. That said, it would be a rather ironic conclusion to the Shaq trade. The stated purpose was to help the Suns once they got to the postseason, but nobody ever considered that it might prevent them from getting there.
 

MiamiHeat

Registered
Joined
Feb 6, 2008
Posts
313
Reaction score
0
maybe thats why MARION was so mad all the time. he knew all the hard work he was doing, making up for nash and the team's defensive liabilities, doing lots of the dirty work and not getting credit he wanted
 

jandaman

Hall of Famer
Joined
Feb 24, 2005
Posts
1,263
Reaction score
3
yeah i read thi at realgm earlier today

its a good read.

and about Marion..

I'm sure some and myself here, always knew what Marion was and appreciated him and miss him.

But in this league, you can only wish them the best of luck, I still stand by the franchise... even when they made a big mistake.
 

devilalum

Heavily Redacted
Joined
Jul 30, 2002
Posts
16,776
Reaction score
3,187
Statistics are stupid. The only stat you have to look a is wins and losses. When the Suns win they have better stats than their opposition. When they lose its worse. All that "expert" analysis is just mental masturbation.
 

jandaman

Hall of Famer
Joined
Feb 24, 2005
Posts
1,263
Reaction score
3
i would expect better rebuttal than what some have said so far.

Stats are a mental masturbation?

I hate to say it..

But in the real world, the only way to state facts is by stats and information.

Yes its basketball and watching how the players play and move tells as much as stats.. but guess what.. Suns stats are as bad as they look on the court recently.. so wheres the argument there?

huge amounts of TOs can be seen..
Missed shots can be seen...
rebounds can be seen...

what cant be seen on the stat sheet is how players move...
how players react..
the energy level...
the chemistry on court...

Now.. can someone describe what they see on the court when they watch the suns of late...


Stats doesnt tell all.. but to prove facts... FACTS.... not BS crap... not opinions... not blinded opinions at that btw... you need stats..

If you say MJ was the player ever without showing his stats... its an opinion... when you show facts... stats.. combined with visual proof then your argument is so much better...

Hollinger is in love with stats.. but the real world... to prove facts you need stats.



And about the Suns running into better teams in the playoffs... I dont see how thats wrong...

Spurs won the ring... Mavs got to the finals and choked.. both teams had as good as record or better than the Suns... the last few seasons.. yet simply had better record playoffs wise.. so its a good argument that the Suns did lose to the better teams...


Still feel cheated? thats BS and a half... thats the one thing I hate.
Everyone gets screwed.. get over it.
Better teams would of rebounded back and win the series.... simple.. Spurs were up either way b4 the suspensions... and saying its "close" all series.. doesnt hold candle.. because when the buzzer sounded.. the other team stopped you from outscoring them... the point of the game...

so please stop the blind sided debates..
 

mojorizen7

ASFN Addict
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Posts
9,159
Reaction score
431
Location
In a van...down by the river.
i would expect better rebuttal than what some have said so far.

Stats are a mental masturbation?

I hate to say it..

But in the real world, the only way to state facts is by stats and information.

Yes its basketball and watching how the players play and move tells as much as stats.. but guess what.. Suns stats are as bad as they look on the court recently.. so wheres the argument there?

huge amounts of TOs can be seen..
Missed shots can be seen...
rebounds can be seen...

what cant be seen on the stat sheet is how players move...
how players react..
the energy level...
the chemistry on court...

Now.. can someone describe what they see on the court when they watch the suns of late...


Stats doesnt tell all.. but to prove facts... FACTS.... not BS crap... not opinions... not blinded opinions at that btw... you need stats..

If you say MJ was the player ever without showing his stats... its an opinion... when you show facts... stats.. combined with visual proof then your argument is so much better...

Hollinger is in love with stats.. but the real world... to prove facts you need stats.



And about the Suns running into better teams in the playoffs... I dont see how thats wrong...

Spurs won the ring... Mavs got to the finals and choked.. both teams had as good as record or better than the Suns... the last few seasons.. yet simply had better record playoffs wise.. so its a good argument that the Suns did lose to the better teams...


Still feel cheated? thats BS and a half... thats the one thing I hate.
Everyone gets screwed.. get over it.
Better teams would of rebounded back and win the series.... simple.. Spurs were up either way b4 the suspensions... and saying its "close" all series.. doesnt hold candle.. because when the buzzer sounded.. the other team stopped you from outscoring them... the point of the game...

so please stop the blind sided debates..
Busy watching the game.:shrug:
 

French Fries

Mangaworm
Joined
Feb 6, 2008
Posts
557
Reaction score
0
Location
Sacramento, CA
hmm... good read, thanks for that. the guy maybe a notorious suns hater but he's got good points. i just hope the coaching staff notices the things outsiders notice that lack in the suns game (but i'm not blaming the coach yet)
 

cly2tw

Registered User
Joined
Oct 26, 2002
Posts
5,832
Reaction score
0
Stats are "facts", from which one can draw all kinds of wrong conclusions!!

Hollinger claims that we lost to "better" teams, in the playoffs. But he fails to account for our rationale that with Marion we'd be losing in the same manner again. So, who cares whether we don't make the playoffs or just play one round. With Nash aging, we'd risk the former if we had a slight chance to win it by by making the Shaq deal. What's hard to grasp here?
 

AceP

Registered
Joined
Feb 7, 2008
Posts
941
Reaction score
0
Let them talk the talk. Hollinger is paid to write stupid stuff like this.

This team is doing all the necessary work to fine turn the new roster, eduring the growing pain. In these few tough losses, I saw steady progress. Give our guys time!

How stupid it is to say such thing after just 3 losses? We lost to the mighty and red hot Pistons, Utah, Lakers. Come on, would we beat these team with ease b4 the trade?
 

MiamiHeat

Registered
Joined
Feb 6, 2008
Posts
313
Reaction score
0
Let them talk the talk. Hollinger is paid to write stupid stuff like this.

This team is doing all the necessary work to fine turn the new roster, eduring the growing pain. In these few tough losses, I saw steady progress. Give our guys time!

How stupid it is to say such thing after just 3 losses? We lost to the mighty and red hot Pistons, Utah, Lakers. Come on, would we beat these team with ease b4 the trade?

wha? 3 losses? you have the record confused. it's 3 wins, 6 losses
 

DeAnna

Just A Face in The Crowd
Joined
Jun 13, 2002
Posts
7,267
Reaction score
735
Location
Goodyear, AZ
Stats are "facts", from which one can draw all kinds of wrong conclusions!!

Huh? How can you draw wrong conclusions if you've got visual evidence to go along with that? Like, actually watching the games and seeing the energy, chemistry, etc., along with the stats.

So, who cares whether we don't make the playoffs or just play one round.

Um...we care. Not make the playoffs?? That would be very disappointing indeed.

Unfortunately, his article has lots of valid points. Except for the 'losing to better teams.' That one I don't buy.
 

cly2tw

Registered User
Joined
Oct 26, 2002
Posts
5,832
Reaction score
0
with all the stats "facts" backing up Hollinger's "big backfire" claim, I believe we'll win it all this year. after all is said and done, we'll have a prime example here of how stats can mislead people.
 

mojorizen7

ASFN Addict
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Posts
9,159
Reaction score
431
Location
In a van...down by the river.
I love statistics but this isn't baseball where literally every single thing that affects the game is there for all to see in the box score.
It's not that simple when determining wins and losses in football,basketball and hockey.
There's a "formula" for success in most sports according to most experts,coaches, and fanatics....in general....
Football: Run the ball and be able to stop the run.
Basketball: Play defense and rebound.
Hockey: Get more shots on goal and commit to the forecheck.
Again, keep the stats coming because they're always an interesting discussion and debate but IMO I think this article is a fun read, but ultimately an overkill.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Simply put, the SUNS before the trade were a poor defensive team and were last in rebounding. It appears after 10 games that we've become a good rebounding team but have gotten worse defensively.
We're the only team to my knowledge that routinely plays with 7.5 guys every night and that must mean that about 30 other teams are playing with 9-10 guys.
Whats the benefit of what the SUNS are trying to accomplish with that short rotation? Is our situation here talent-wise a special one?
My point is that i seriously doubt that Mike D'Antoni & co. have figured out what everybody else has overlooked in terms of bench play & that playing 7.5 guys is somehow the secret key to success.
If the argument is that we haven't had good enough talent on our bench over the last 4 yrs(which i'm not buying) then why hasn't this been addressed?
It's been documented (and disputed)that the SUNS are a flourishing franchise relative to many other teams in the league. I would guess that it's in the top 7 or 8 at least as far as gross profit(probably higher).
Is the bottom line the reason behind our short rotation?
Management or lack thereof?
Talent?
Scouting?
Philosophy?
In my opinion it's a combination of some mismanagement in recent years in terms of inexperience at the top, the lack of a GM with a track record, along with D'Antoni's philosophy that you always go with your best guys when at all possible with little regard to development or flexability.
 

MiamiHeat

Registered
Joined
Feb 6, 2008
Posts
313
Reaction score
0
i think shaq read this article before the spurs game to motivate himself.

not kidding. it was the front page article for 2 days on espn and talked about on the ESPN channel
 

nowagimp

Registered User
Joined
Nov 2, 2005
Posts
3,912
Reaction score
0
Location
Gilbert, AZ
The fundamental assumption that Hollinger makes is that from game 1, the players are adjusted to each other. Certainly the suns are playing other teams that are adjusted to each other. When he averages his stats over the 8 games the performance is under adjustment. So from square 1, he's badly wrong, as the turnovers are historically way higher when the suns incorporate new pieces, up to 5 a game. Alot of ball movement means that it must be executed precisely to avoid alot of turnovers. Teams that play alot of inside out and one on one offense dont have to adjust much. Its also why the Mavs are struggling, they went from a low ball movement offense to a high movement one. It was that way a few years back when the suns incorporated new pieces, turnovers were high for awhile, 10-12 games and they struggled to play .500 ball. But sunday the suns committed a low 13 turnovers against the spurs and "wa la" few easy baskets and 35% FG defense against an efficient offense. The suns will be adjusted to each other when they can average 13-14 TO's a game. Taking shaqs numbers, TO's from miami is just crap as they had no serious PG. The PG is the one who handles the ball most and influences the passing of the other players. The suns are adjusting to new defensive schemes that are being thrown at them as well. The team is still adjusting, meaning tha compiling statistics on a drifting expectation is BS. Hollinger, the "emperor of stats", has no clothes.
 

dreamcastrocks

Chopped Liver Moderator
Super Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2005
Posts
45,668
Reaction score
10,867
^ What he said! Hollinger is just way off base.

I think that Hollinger has too small of a data set.

Some of what he says make sense..... some of it.
 

HooverDam

Registered User
Joined
May 21, 2005
Posts
6,560
Reaction score
0

Right.


Wrong.

You love this ridiculous sports stereotype don't you? Nevermind that the Suns scoring was consistently about the same in the regular season and the playoffs the last 3 years, as was possessions per game- but whatever. YOU CANT RUN IN THE PLAYOFFS HURRRRRR
 

mojorizen7

ASFN Addict
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Posts
9,159
Reaction score
431
Location
In a van...down by the river.
You love this ridiculous sports stereotype don't you? Nevermind that the Suns scoring was consistently about the same in the regular season and the playoffs the last 3 years, as was possessions per game- but whatever. YOU CANT RUN IN THE PLAYOFFS HURRRRRR
:)How do stereotypes become stereotypes i wonder?
 
Top