ESPN.com: Hollinger: Atlanta Hawks Player Profiles

John Hollinger's player profiles for the Atlanta Hawks (Insider) are officially up today. For those of you without Insider access, today's 5-on-5 is all about the Hawks.

ESPN.com: Hollinger: Marginal Value of Assists

There's no basketball but John Hollinger, who might serve as a humbling example to others, hasn't let that stop him from writing his annual player comments (Insider). Because of the lockout, the fine editors of the NBA section at ESPN.com are doling Hollinger's player comments out one team at a time. The Mavericks and Heat are the only two teams revealed thus far, so it might be a couple weeks until we get a full set of comments about the Atlanta Hawks but, within the LeBron James comment, we learn that, among players with at least 300 assists last season, Joe Johnson's assists provided the lowest average marginal value. The league average assist during the 2010-11 season was worth two-thirds of point. The average Joe Johnson assist was worth .572 points.

The methodology:

Based on shooting percentages at each distance, I calculated that the marginal value of an average dunk/layup assist is about 1.329 points in 2010-11, whereas the marginal value of an assist on a long 2 was just 0.356 points.

As always, this is surely down both to Joe Johnson's particular skills and style of play and a generally dysfunctional Atlanta Hawks offense to which we were witness last season. Atlanta Hawks in long 2-point predilection shocker!

Perhaps more time for Johnson at small forward will make a positive difference whenever we resume regular operations.

ESPN.com: Hollinger: Good Teams Under the Radar

Nine days ago, John Hollinger wrote:

The Hawks and Knicks are overwhelming favorites to be fifth and sixth [in the East] in some order. Other than New York, no team projects to finish within five games to either side of the Hawks.

By Hollinger's methods, the Hawks were projected to win 46 games.

Yesterday, Hollinger wrote (Insider):

The Hawks could not be further off the radar right now, but it might be time for that perception to change. For instance, Orlando is a big story after having won nine straight games. But did you know that Orlando has gained only two games on the Hawks during its current streak?

...

Atlanta held down the fort without Joe Johnson, going 5-4 while he missed nine games with an elbow problem; when he returned, the Hawks won three of four even with Jamal Crawford out.

As a result, the Hawks are on the upswing -- winners of eight of 10, including a 23-point beatdown of the Jazz in Utah last week -- and up to fifth in the Power Rankings. No, not fifth in the East -- fifth in the entire league. Atlanta projects to win 52 games according to today's Playoff Odds and is a serious threat to grab a top-four seed in the East.

What a difference wins over Sacramento, Utah, and Indiana can make. I can see winning those three games adding a win or two to Atlanta's projected total, but six wins? A further example of the current volatility of Hollinger's Playoff Odds? The Hawks are, this morning (as opposed to yesterday morning) projected to win 51 games despite just 12 of the league's 30 teams (and just 6 of 15 Eastern Conference teams) playing last night.

ESPN.com: Hollinger: Breaking Down the Best Playoff Races

In today's PER Diem, his first of 2011, John Hollinger looks at the NBA playoff races (Insider). In doing so, he furthers the notion that the Atlanta Hawks uniquely exist at the mid-point between truly good and truly bad NBA teams (see also the most recent NBA power rankings from ProBasketball Talk):

The Hawks and Knicks are overwhelming favorites to be fifth and sixth [in the East] in some order. Other than New York, no team projects to finish within five games to either side of the Hawks.

Emphasis mine.

A status that befits a team ranked 10th in the league in defensive efficiency, 12th in the league in offensive efficiency, and which ranks between 10th and 13th in the league in half of the four factors.

ESPN.com: Ford/Hollinger: Future Power Rankings

Chad Ford and John Hollinger have updated their future power rankings and the Atlanta Hawks moved up to 16th from 19th (Insider):

We really like Atlanta's roster … we're just not sure where the Hawks go from here. With Josh Smith and Al Horford both likely to make the East's All-Star team, the Hawks' frontcourt is set for the next decade. Throw in a few other solid younger players (Marvin Williams, Jeff Teague) and still-productive older ones such as Joe Johnson and Jamal Crawford, and the Hawks have a solid base from which to contend in the East.

The question is how they get any better or how they fend off the rot and avoid becoming worse. Johnson's six-year, $123 million deal was an egregious overreach by a franchise that doesn't have the financial wherewithal to easily absorb a dead-weight contract, and once Horford's extension kicks in a year from now, the Hawks will be walking the luxury-tax tightrope for the foreseeable future.

The Hawks rank 7th in the league in quality of players but are rated below average in each of the other four categories under consideration: management, money, market, and draft.

ESPN.com: Hollinger: 2010-11 Atlanta Hawks Forecast

John Hollinger projects the Atlanta Hawks to win 46 games, sixth-best in the Eastern Conference. To my mind, the key excerpt from the fine preview concerns a relatively open secret published for the first time:

Atlanta's max-out season was both the best and worst thing that could have happened to Woodson. On the one hand, he received a lot of credit for winning 53 games and improving the team's record for the fifth straight season. On the other hand, the resounding feeling that the team had reached its ceiling with the Iso-Joe show provided an impetus to seek change.

What the Hawks did next was bizarre, hiring assistant Larry Drew mainly because he would come cheaper than any of the other candidates. Spies in Hotlanta say that ownership made this call despite general manager Rick Sund's preference for Mavs assistant Dwane Casey, adding another layer of intrigue to the proceedings.

Emphasis mine.

ESPN.com: Hollinger: Hawks' Style Not Suited For Playoffs

John Hollinger examines the difficulties the Hawks (and Trailblazers) have had in recreating their low-possession, high-efficiency offense in post-seasons past and present (Insider):

[T]heirs is a volume strategy. The Hawks and Blazers might not take better shots than other teams, but they take a lot more of them. Over time, that gives them enough of an advantage to make them potent offensive squads overall.

...

Atlanta, as the league's third-best offense, should at least be able to battle these defenses to a draw. But even before Tuesday's Game 1 implosion against Orlando, they were struggling. The Hawks can't make shots, ranking just 14th out of 16 teams in postseason TS percentage. While they've still been able to generate second shots (they lead all teams in playoff Offensive Rebound Rate) and have been somewhat successful at avoiding turnovers, the net result put the Hawks 11th among the 16 playoff teams in postseason Offensive Efficiency.

...

Is there something about iso-heavy offenses that makes them vulnerable in the playoffs? We can't say it with certainty yet, but the case is building rapidly. The Hawks have three games left to show that Iso-Joe can be as effective in May as it is between November and April.

Nuggets From John Hollinger's Player Comments

Atlanta Hawks (Insider)

Mike Bibby:

Look for Bibby to see a reduction in minutes to about 30 or so per game as Atlanta plays more often with Crawford or Teague at the point. Don't be surprised if Bibby's 2-point shooting percentage slips back a bit from last season's heights. That said, his off season in 2007-08 now looks like an outlier, and on a per-minute basis he should come close to matching last season's output.

Jason Collins:

Though he's slipped form his peak years in New Jersey, he still frustrates opposing post players with his size, textbook positioning and knack for drawing charges. He's a good help defender, too, and though he doesn't block shots he protects the basket with his size and positioning. His vertical leap is measured in angstroms, however, and his lack of ups makes him both an awful rebounder and an absolutely horrendous finisher.

Jamal Crawford:

Crawford is as disinterested a defender as there is in basketball. He makes token efforts to get through screens and challenge shots, and he routinely jogs back in transition. He has the length and quickness to be quite good and can hold his own in isolations for that reason, but his idea of help defense is catching the inbound pass after the ball goes through the basket.

Al Horford:

His lack of offensive creativity and shooting ability lowers his ceiling, but even if he doesn't improve one iota from this day forward, his solid defense and rebounding make him a valuable piece. Look for him to average around 13 and 10 with a shooting percentage in the low 50s, with little potential for surprise in either direction.

Joe Johnson:

Although he made his third straight All-Star team, Johnson isn't producing points as efficiently as he once did. He shot 43.7 percent to follow 2007-08's 43.2 percent, and his true shooting percentage slipped below the league average for his position. Once again, midrange jumpers proved his undoing. Johnson's shot mix has been almost exactly the same his last four seasons, but in his first two seasons in Atlanta, he made 42.2 percent of his long J's; the past two seasons, he's at 36.8 percent. Multiply that over 300 shots a season and it makes a big difference.

Zaza Pachulia:

Defensively, Pachulia gets by with brawn rather than speed. He's a poor leaper and doesn't defend the rim -- only three centers blocked shots less often. He has reasonably good feet, however, and has become a good pick-and-roll defender. Additionally, his physicality helps keep opposing post players away from the rim.

Joe Smith:

Smith fell off the radar with his trade to Oklahoma City, and so did his offense. He lost more than four points off his 40-minute scoring average despite playing much of the season for a team desperate for more scoring. His usage rate slipped by nearly a third, one of the biggest one-season drops you'll ever see, as he became a much-less-adventurous shooter. This benefited his turnover rate, which ranked third among power forwards, but it didn't improve his percentages any. Smith landed only 37.6 percent of his long 2s, and his free-throw rate plummeted to just one foul shot for every four field-goal attempts.

The net result was a three-point drop in PER that makes his 2007-08 season seem like an outlier. While he gave Cleveland some strong minutes early in the playoffs after his late-season liberation from the Thunder, he was an afterthought in the conference finals, where his inability to match up defensively against Orlando's frontcourt rendered him unplayable.

Marvin Williams:

Williams shifted from taking 436 long 2s in 2007-08 to just 115 last season, which translates into nearly three-quarters of his long 2s vanishing overnight.

Instead, he pursued higher-value shots, both farther and closer. He tried nearly three 3-pointers a game last season and made a respectable 35.5 percent, while taking more than half his 2-point shots in the immediate basket area. Williams maintained his high free-throw rate, ranking seventh among small forwards in free-throw attempts per field-goal attempt, and shot a solid 80.6 percent at the stripe. The net result was a jump to 56.9 in true shooting percentage.

Williams also did yeoman's work on the boards, ranking ninth among small forwards in rebound rate, and established himself as the team's defensive stopper on the perimeter.

ESPN.com: Marc Stein Believes; John Hollinger Is Tempered

In the inaugural edition of his 2009-10 NBA power rankings Marc Stein positions himself unequivocally in the zone of positivity regarding the Hawks, ranking them 9th and offering the following appraisal:

The Hawks are going to be better. They haven't improved enough to worry the elites, but keeping Bibby, Pachulia and Marvin Williams and adding Jamal Crawford and Joe Smith seals them as No. 4 in the East.

John Hollinger's outlook is similar to that which I've advanced this summer: 44 wins and 4th in the East:

The Hawks bring back the same team that won 47 games a year ago, with a few upgrades: Teague offers a vast improvement over the departed Law as a fourth guard, and Joe Smith provides a fourth big man that simply didn't exist a year ago.

On paper, all that should make the Hawks a better team than a year ago, but not so fast. Crawford is a better player than Murray if you're comparing careers, but he'll be hard-pressed to match the season Murray put together a year ago. Similarly, Pachulia and Bibby may also struggle to match their solid 2008-09 campaigns.

And the Hawks aren't as youthful as they once were. While they still own three 23-year-olds in the frontcourt, the four veteran backcourt players are 31, 30, 29 and 28; additionally, Smith is 34 and Pachulia's listed age of 25 is only believable if you use a 500-day calendar.

Between the limited scope for improvement and the lack of star power, it seems the Hawks shouldn't be much worse than a year ago … but neither should they be any better. It's quite possible they'll finish this season in the exact same position as last season -- at the top of the East's pretender heap, but miles away from the ruling Cleveland-Boston-Orlando trinity.

The emphasis is mine. Great minds and all that.

ESPN.com (Insider): Offseason Buzz

John Hollinger and Ric Bucher look at the Hawks in the 28th installment of the Offseason Buzz series. Hollinger pegs breakout candidate Josh Smith as Trending up* and writes:

Smith is only 23 years old, and while he hasn't figured things out as quickly as Hawks fans might have hoped, it's easy to forget the considerable progress he's made. Atlanta's addition of more perimeter players may help him focus on sticking to his knitting in the paint, and it would help him further if the Hawks' play calls gave him something to do besides stand 20 feet from the rim waiting for a kickout.

Ric Bucher writes about the other Smith, Joe:

The Hawks' talent, envied around the league, is undercut by immaturity and sometimes an appalling lack of discipline. Hence the contractual vote of no confidence for Woodson; the overwhelming sense is that the Hawks listen to Woodson only when it suits them.

...

Does ol' Joe have enough game left for Josh Smith to heed any cautionary tale he might offer? Will the older Smith even offer it? He spurned Cleveland to sign with Atlanta because the Cavs shelved him come playoff time. At this point in his career, he doesn't want to sit on the bench, even if it affords a better chance of getting a ring. He'd rather make an impact with a playoff team trying to reach that championship level. There's no bigger contribution he could make than convincing the young Hawks that as early in their careers as it might seem, the clock moves fast, and sometimes early opportunities to make a mark are the only ones a player gets.

Emphasis mine and not because I have a problem with Joe Smith or any other player wanting to play but rather because I already worry that Mike Woodson won't recognize that, at this point in Joe Smith's career, he deserves to be the fourth** big man in the rotation and should never get a minute that could reasonably go to Josh Smith, Al Horford, or Zaza Pachulia. Now the specter appears of a disgruntled Joe Smith rather than a positive veteran influence Joe Smith if Woodson relegates him to an appropriate role in the rotation.

*Mike Bibby is pegged as Trending down but not disastrously so.

**At best, he says, thinking optimistically about Othello Hunter and Courtney Sims.

John Hollinger Augments PER

He's added VA (Value Added) and EWA (Estimated Wins Added). I'm a little wary of the mis-interpretation of the latter's handle as PER* doesn't measure defense beyond one's steal and block rates but this should provide some help to those who never quite grasped that the "E" in PER stands for efficiency.

Sortable leader boards and what-not available here.

*As the man himself writes further down the piece:

So is Bruce Bowen the worst player in the league?

No. He has the worst VA because it becomes negative for players with a PER under the replacement level at their position. Of such players, Bowen has played far more minutes than the rest thanks to his on-ball defensive ability (which PER doesn't measure). Those minutes make his rating even more negative than the rest, dragging him to the bottom of the pile. For genuine awfulness, however, one could argue that Adam Morrison (-47.1) and Stephon Marbury (-1.1) have done as much to hurt their teams as anyone else in the league.

Further reading: Kevin Pelton compares EWA to his WARP.

John Hollinger on the Hawks' Bench

Link (HT:@peachtreehoops)

The Hawks have been absolutely killing opponents in second quarters, when Murray and Zaza Pachulia normally play nearly the entire frame, and it has been the main reason the Hawks won all seven games on their just-completed homestand.

Consider this stat: In their past eight games, the Hawks have won the first, third and fourth quarters by a combined total of just seven points.

The second quarter? They've won that by 67. That margin, over eight total quarters of basketball, is the rough equivalent of winning consecutive games by 33 points.

Under-the-radar post-season matchup consideration: Does the Hawks' opponent have a big guard that can bother Flip Murray?

Links of the 6th

ESPN.com unveiled John Hollinger's new toy today: The Playoff Predictor. As of today, 3,000 out of 5,000 times the Hawks make the playoffs. I'm guessing that they'll need to beat Minnesota tonight and Memphis on Saturday to maintain that rate.

In his accompanying explanatory article, he writes:

This tool really shows how the East has split into the Big Three and the Little 12. Orlando, Detroit and Boston all show up as locks to win their respective divisions, while Atlanta limps into the No. 8 seed with just 37 wins.

Elsewhere, check out Kelly Dwyer's new home at Yahoo! Sports. Eleven posts in two days. Let's see if he can keep that pace up.

As for tonight's game, the Timberwolves will be without Randy Wittman (back surgery) while Antoine Walker (ankle) and Marko Jaric (foot, ankle) are both questionable.

Hollinger's Collegiate Evaluation

Previously: Oden v. Durant, First-Round Point Guards, Second-Round Point Guards, First-Round Shooting Guards, Lottery Small Forwards, Second Tier Small Forwards, Wilson Chandler, Lottery Post Players, Second Tier Post Players

Hollinger went and took some of the wind out of my sails this afternoon. It's impressive and interesting work which appears (the formula he uses isn't published with the article) to have all the benefits and drawbacks of one, true number formulas.

To take one example, I have a hard time seeing how Wilson Chandler's statistical profile scores slightly better than Julian Wright's.

Their 06-07 seasons:

Year	%Min	eFG%	FT%	PPWS	Pts	A	TO	BS	S	OR%	DR%
Chandler	79.1	48.8	65.1	1.03	28.8	2.9	3.3	2.7	1.3	6.9	18.3
J Wright	68.3	55.3	61.3	1.14	25.2	4.5	5.0	2.7	3.0	11.0	20.0

And their freshman seasons:

Year	%Min	eFG%	FT%	PPWS	Pts	A	TO	BS	S	OR%	DR%
Chandler	70.0	45.7	66.2	0.98	23.6	2.0	4.0	3.3	1.7	8.0	20.4
J Wright	50.3	57.8	55.7	1.17	24.3	5.1	5.7	3.4	2.9	9.2	14.2

Going down Hollinger's six factors indicative of pro success

1. Age: Wright is 12 days younge than Chandler. I'd guess that makes them even.

2. Steals: Wright averaged 3 steals/100 possessions as a sophomore and 2.9 S/100 as a freshman. Chandler averaged 1.3 S/100 as a sophomore down from 1.7 S/100 as a freshman. That's a significant, consistent advantage to Wright.

3. Blocks: Wright averaged 2.7 blocks/100 possessions as a sophomore and 3.4 BS/100 as a freshman. Chandler averaged 2.7 BS/100 as a sophomore and 3.3 BS/100 as a freshman. I would assume this one is even also.

4. Rebounds: Quoting Hollinger, "Boards, especially offensive boards, are a good indicator of future pro success as well." Wright got 159% as many offensive boards per opportunity as did Chandler last year and 115% as many offensive boards per opportunity as did Chandler in their freshman seasons. Chandler did have significant defensive rebounding edge in their freshman seasons (144%) but Wright was the better defensive rebounder last year (109%). Wright is a significantly better offensive rebounder. That the formula likely doesn't take into account Wright's improvement as a rebounder between his freshman and sophomore seasons is a limitation.

5. 3-Pointers: The formula would be really helpful here as this could be where Chandler must make up a lot of ground on Wright. Chandler has made 41 more three-pointers than Julian Wright in their college careers. Of course, Chandler needed 137 attempts to make 41 threes. Julian Wright can't make three-pointers. This is a fact. At least he has the good sense not to attempt them.

6. Pure Point Ratio: Whatever ground Chandler doesn't make up with his three-point shooting is made up here. Pure point ratio = (((A*2/3)-TO)*100)/Min. Wright and Chandler both played 1048 minutes last year. Chandler had 48 assists and 54 turnovers. Wright had 82 assists and 91 turnovers. Chandler's PPR is -2.1. Wright's is -3.5.

I would have guessed that Wright's extra assists and slightly better A:TO would be an advantage. I do not, however, write basketball analysis for a living. This is something I obviously need to study.

That I find it difficult to imagine a world where Wilson Chandler has roughly equal potential to Julian Wright as basketball players doesn't diminish the usefulness of Hollinger's formula. (Again, I'd like to know what the formula is but I understand why might not want to publish it.)

I don't think that Thaddeus Young, Nick Fazekas, Josh McRoberts, and Jared Dudley have more potential than Joakim Noah (Noah, Julian Wright, and Brewer really look bad in this formula. They are also three of the best defensive players in the draft in that they were good defensive players in college and they figure to be physically able to guard at least one position well in the NBA.) but I'm also the guy who thought that PJ Tucker deserved to be taken in the lottery last year. I'm used to being wrong some of the time and I like learning new things.

Here's hoping Hollinger continues to discuss the particulars of his formula and that he's wrong and I'm right about some of these players.