Hollinger article on the Posey signing

[Barnabas]

Ok, I agree with Danny's decision to not match the offer.  It's water under the bridge now.  So, where do we go from here?

1)  Would you be satisfied in splitting the MLE for House and TA?  Do you think that bench (House, TA, O'Bryant, Powe, Giddens, BBD, Pruitt, Scal) will be good enough to make another run?

2)  How would you use the MLE?  How would you allocate it?  Should we distribute it with a bias towards getting a really backup PG, and a serviceable backup SG/SF?  Or vice-versa?

3)  Any really good quality players out there that you would like Danny to sign? 

[sk7326]

Hollinger's piece made a lot of sense.  It is easy to rip him since he has the temerity to make a quantitative argument, and most people are scared of math.  However, he watches games also, although he is looking for different things -- I like the perspective, and he pegged the disaster that was the Jason Kidd deal way before anybody else did a year ago.  

[Fan from VT]

I'm not a Hollinger fan.

I think sometimes he gets caught up so much in the numbers of the players, he misses the game that the players bring as a whole. Sometimes, because of this, he comes to some pretty asinine conclusions. But I can see where his style of thinking, number crunching, and observations would make him a valuable tool as an assistant to a GM type.

I thought this was one of the better and more logical things Hollinger has ever said:

And, as I mentioned, he's a 31-year-old who will be handsomely paid 'til age 35. Nobody wanted to pay him this kind of dough when he was 30, and his production wasn't any different last year -- just the result in June.

And since this is so hard for people to remember, I'll say it again: The Hornets aren't paying for what Posey gave the Celtics last year, or what he gave the Heat in 2006, but for what he can potentially give the Hornets from 2008 to 2012. And that production is likely to diminish substantially from its already modest levels.

Spot on and it's why I am glad Danny didn't give Posey a similar contract.

I don't think Hollinger is perfect, and I agree with the text you quoted and agreed with (so I'm not picking on you), but what I see is that Hollinger is often the one that points out that EVERY championship team has different bench players that come up big for them, that their overall production was not that great, and if it hadn't been that particular bench player, some other random bench player would have been just as likely or unlikely to come through in the same way, but that said bench player suddenly getting paid starter's money based on the success of a very good team is usually a mistake.

Say we don't pull it out in game 7 in cleveland. does posey still get 4/25? he's the exact same player regardless of what happens that game. If you wouldn't be ready to pay him 6 mil a year for four years after a second round loss, you shouldn't pay him 25 for being on the bench of a team that won it all.

[Robb]

If you wouldn't be ready to pay him 6 mil a year for four years after a second round loss, you shouldn't pay him 25 for being on the bench of a team that won it all.

Very good point.

[dmar123]

yo what bout d west as a backup point guard hes a free agent move eddie to the 2 with tony allen and giddens is a 1 but the 3rd maybe even marbury

[nickagneta]

I'm not a Hollinger fan.

I think sometimes he gets caught up so much in the numbers of the players, he misses the game that the players bring as a whole. Sometimes, because of this, he comes to some pretty asinine conclusions. But I can see where his style of thinking, number crunching, and observations would make him a valuable tool as an assistant to a GM type.

I thought this was one of the better and more logical things Hollinger has ever said:

And, as I mentioned, he's a 31-year-old who will be handsomely paid 'til age 35. Nobody wanted to pay him this kind of dough when he was 30, and his production wasn't any different last year -- just the result in June.

And since this is so hard for people to remember, I'll say it again: The Hornets aren't paying for what Posey gave the Celtics last year, or what he gave the Heat in 2006, but for what he can potentially give the Hornets from 2008 to 2012. And that production is likely to diminish substantially from its already modest levels.

Spot on and it's why I am glad Danny didn't give Posey a similar contract.

I don't think Hollinger is perfect, and I agree with the text you quoted and agreed with (so I'm not picking on you), but what I see is that Hollinger is often the one that points out that EVERY championship team has different bench players that come up big for them, that their overall production was not that great, and if it hadn't been that particular bench player, some other random bench player would have been just as likely or unlikely to come through in the same way, but that said bench player suddenly getting paid starter's money based on the success of a very good team is usually a mistake.

Say we don't pull it out in game 7 in cleveland. does posey still get 4/25? he's the exact same player regardless of what happens that game. If you wouldn't be ready to pay him 6 mil a year for four years after a second round loss, you shouldn't pay him 25 for being on the bench of a team that won it all.

Absolutely, could not agree more and the getting booted by Cleveland is the perfect example. TP4U.

[Big Ticket]

Haven't read the article yet... but I heard he thinks Posey won't make the Hornets better?  I cannot see anyway that this is true.

Posey is a perfect backup/complement to Peja.  Peja is not the stingiest of defenders, so if he's having an off night and having trouble holding his man, Posey can come in and bring toughness, defense, and still solid 3 point shooting.  The Hornets also lack the kind of finals experience and glue that Posey brings big time.

The Hornets might not add many more regular season wins,  but Posey makes them a much tougher playoff contender in my opinion.

[winsomme]

And, as I mentioned, he's a 31-year-old who will be handsomely paid 'til age 35. Nobody wanted to pay him this kind of dough when he was 30, and his production wasn't any different last year -- just the result in June.

And since this is so hard for people to remember, I'll say it again: The Hornets aren't paying for what Posey gave the Celtics last year, or what he gave the Heat in 2006, but for what he can potentially give the Hornets from 2008 to 2012. And that production is likely to diminish substantially from its already modest levels.

guys like Hollinger who focus on "production" simply do not understand why Posey was so important to the Cs this year IMO.

i know it gets scary when things can't be quantified using a formula, but Posey time and time again came up big for this team when we needed him. and that game 4 performance in the Finals was potentially series saving.

[timepiece33]

Hollinger was critical of the Posey signing last year.  Not sure I would use his opinion as gospel though I do view PER as a useful tool.

[Fan from VT]

Ok, I agree with Danny's decision to not match the offer.  It's water under the bridge now.  So, where do we go from here?

1)  Would you be satisfied in splitting the MLE for House and TA?  Do you think that bench (House, TA, O'Bryant, Powe, Giddens, BBD, Pruitt, Scal) will be good enough to make another run?

2)  How would you use the MLE?  How would you allocate it?  Should we distribute it with a bias towards getting a really backup PG, and a serviceable backup SG/SF?  Or vice-versa?

3)  Any really good quality players out there that you would like Danny to sign? 

Some options:
1. -Offer the full MLE to Childress, hope Atlanta doesn't match. Very solid underrated bench at the 2/3, only 25 right now. Long, rebounds, better career 3-ball shooter than Posey.
-Try to get a big like David Harrison, earl barron, Elson or Kwame brown as big insurance for the vet min
-go after a backup point that would play for the min, e.g. salim stoudemire, Juan Dixon, Telfair, etc.

2. -Offer the full MLE to Louis Williams, hope Philly doesn't match because of the huge money tied up in Iggy, Brand, Dalembert, Andre Miller. He's 21 and would be a great 6th man who could comfortably slide to the point when rondo sits or play the 2 beside RR. More than takes care of bench scoring and backup point.
-Try to get a big like David Harrison, earl barron, Elson or Kwame brown as big insurance for the vet min
-Try to get T.A. or Quinton Ross to sign for the min

3. -Offer the full MLE to Ben Gordon, hope that Chicago won't match because they're working on an extension with Deng and don't really have any fit for Gordon in their plan. Huge upgrade over house, can play the point for stretches, very good shooting and bench scoring. Not as high a ceiling as Williams, less of a point guard.
-Try to get a big like David Harrison, earl barron, Elson or Kwame brown as big insurance for the vet min
-Try to get T.A. or Quinton Ross to sign for the min

4. -Split the MLE:
-Dooling would be a good backup point, but rejected a 2 yr 4 mil contract from the magic. If nothig else develops for him, offer 4 yrs 9 mil, starting at 1.8 or so.
-Offer a lesser deal to Kirk Snyder at the 2/3 position, say 3 yrs 6 mil starting at 1.5 or so. Failing that, go after barnes or mo eavans with an offer similar to the above for Dooling.
-Take a flyer on a big man. Assuming the 2 mil or so leftover isn't enough to convince Kurt thomas to leave San Antonio (probably around a 2yr/$6mil or 3yr/9mil offer), try to get Chris Andersen for 2-3 yrs 4-6 mil or a little less than that for kwame if kwame refused to play for a 1 yr. minimum contract. Assuming, of course, Andersen or kwame want more than the vet min. if not, get Andersen for the vet min.

Other possibly viable names for very small contracts:
Walter Herrmann (3/4 tweener can rebound and hit the 3)
Austin Croshere (repetitive as a PF, but has some range and experience)
Randolph Morris (good size and talent, but hasn't put it together. worth a small risk?)
Jackie Butler (big, good offensive natural talent, hasn't put it together)
Jannero Pargo (tweener 1/2, can play point, a lot like house off the bench)

[BballTim]

And finally, you have this:
"But those strengths need to be seen in the context of the bigger picture. The guy has all but abandoned shooting anything besides a 3 -- two-thirds of his shots were triples, the fourth-highest rate in the league and the highest among nonguards -- so despite the 3s, he's a fairly inert offensive player."

What Hollinger is missing is that Posey's the ultimate role player. Hollinger usually says some crazy things about role players because stats are blind to the concept. A big part of Posey's offensive game was precisely bringing the spacing to the table. This doesn't translate to stats, but that's what Riley and Doc asked him. Last season he was basically a weakside spot-up shooter, so of course most of his shots were going to be triples.

  Posey's a good role player, but I think that one role is all he's capable of. His 3 point shooting wasn't a one year aberration. His percent of 3 point shots taken over the last 5 years is 38%, 50%, 73%, 60% and 67%. He's  good defender, but his offensive game is pretty much that of a spot up shooter. He can't really create his own shot and he doesn't post up much.

[cordobes]

And finally, you have this:
"But those strengths need to be seen in the context of the bigger picture. The guy has all but abandoned shooting anything besides a 3 -- two-thirds of his shots were triples, the fourth-highest rate in the league and the highest among nonguards -- so despite the 3s, he's a fairly inert offensive player."

What Hollinger is missing is that Posey's the ultimate role player. Hollinger usually says some crazy things about role players because stats are blind to the concept. A big part of Posey's offensive game was precisely bringing the spacing to the table. This doesn't translate to stats, but that's what Riley and Doc asked him. Last season he was basically a weakside spot-up shooter, so of course most of his shots were going to be triples.

  Posey's a good role player, but I think that one role is all he's capable of. His 3 point shooting wasn't a one year aberration. His percent of 3 point shots taken over the last 5 years is 38%, 50%, 73%, 60% and 67%. He's  good defender, but his offensive game is pretty much that of a spot up shooter. He can't really create his own shot and he doesn't post up much.

Well, offensive game doesn't equate to scoring. But the point is that it's exactly that role we need to fill. We don't need our secondary winger to create his own shot because he doesn't even play on the ball. We already have two wing players who can do that - when Pierce is out, it's Allen who plays his role, not Posey. The 3rd part of the rotation only needs to play the other role.

[Steve Weinman]

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/columns/story?columnist=hollinger_john&page=Posey_Hornets-080716

I found the comparisons Hollinger used fairly insightful and this certainly reinforced my belief that DA made the right move not paying the MLE for 4 years.

Settle down people there are a bunch of James Posey's scattered around the league who just need to be on the right team (i.e. Celtics) to shine, I'm fairly confident DA can find us another.

Such as who?

I don't doubt that there are some other very good role players around the league, but to imply that Posey is a relatively easily replaceable commodity (which sounds a lot like what you're saying) strikes me as grossly unfair to the contributions he made to this team.  And given the weak FA market, I'm also not sure how it is that the Celts will be acquiring said players.

-sw

[Steve Weinman]

Is Bruce Bowen completely washed up or is he worth taking a look at for the vet min?

Signed through 2010 at $4 million per year with the championship-contending Spurs.  Not an option so far as I can tell.

-sw

[winsomme]

And finally, you have this:
"But those strengths need to be seen in the context of the bigger picture. The guy has all but abandoned shooting anything besides a 3 -- two-thirds of his shots were triples, the fourth-highest rate in the league and the highest among nonguards -- so despite the 3s, he's a fairly inert offensive player."

What Hollinger is missing is that Posey's the ultimate role player. Hollinger usually says some crazy things about role players because stats are blind to the concept. A big part of Posey's offensive game was precisely bringing the spacing to the table. This doesn't translate to stats, but that's what Riley and Doc asked him. Last season he was basically a weakside spot-up shooter, so of course most of his shots were going to be triples.

  Posey's a good role player, but I think that one role is all he's capable of. His 3 point shooting wasn't a one year aberration. His percent of 3 point shots taken over the last 5 years is 38%, 50%, 73%, 60% and 67%. He's  good defender, but his offensive game is pretty much that of a spot up shooter. He can't really create his own shot and he doesn't post up much.

Well, offensive game doesn't equate to scoring. But the point is that it's exactly that role we need to fill. We don't need our secondary winger to create his own shot because he doesn't even play on the ball. We already have two wing players who can do that - when Pierce is out, it's Allen who plays his role, not Posey. The 3rd part of the rotation only needs to play the other role.

good point. the diversity of Posey's game would only be a factor if we were looking for him to start.......but the key thing about our match with him is that his abilities met our needs.

and he was a known quantity on this team because he just did it.

that's why i wasn't as excited about MAggette (who clearly is a better more diverse player than Posey) because he did clearly fit our needs in terms of his defense.

and that is also why i would have been willing to have overpaid for Posey....because he filled needs that we have.