Detroit Pistons

At RealGM, a look at their recent winning streak and the triumph of 4-out basketball.

Atlanta Hawks Big Men

Over the last month, the Atlanta Hawks have quietly become the talk of the league. The Hawks have never been the most high-profile franchise and now that they are being run like San Antonio East, their media profile has never been smaller. However, like the Spurs, their play on the court speaks volumes for what they are about. Atlanta is 26-8 and they have won 18 of their last 20 games. Nor are they beating up on a bunch of sorry East teams either - their recent streak includes wins at Houston, at Dallas, at Portland and at the Clippers.

In a recent article over at True Hoop, Kevin Arnovitz tries to diagnose the unexpected success of the Hawks, a team many had barely sneaking into the playoffs and now looks like a legit contender to win the Eastern Conference:

These are the Atlanta Hawks, who are every bit as measured off the court as they are on it. These are grown men who go about the business of surgically dissecting two Western Conference contenders, then go en masse to a non-mandatory team dinner, something they do routinely after both wins and losses. The camaraderie is authentic, even if the personalities are, with a few exceptions, pretty mellow.  

“The reason it’s authentic is that everyone has bought in,” Al Horford said. “We enjoy working with each other.”

Working isn't an idle word choice. Locker rooms come in any number of shapes and sizes.  A giddy one doesn’t mean the players inside aren't serious about winning basketball games, but spend time with the Hawks and there’s a distinct air of buttoned-up professionalism -- an office populated by well-balanced adults who understand work-life balance and the division of labor. 

“We have guys who don’t play, who have guaranteed contracts beyond this year and they work their asses off because they want us to be better and want to contribute,” veteran big man Elton Brand said.   

One thing that often gets lost in the discussion about culture and chemistry -- the system installed in Atlanta by way of San Antonio demands a strict selflessness. Break off from the sequence of actions in the half court and the stuff falls apart. Everyone on the floor devotes himself to the idea that if you stay in motion, the ball will work its way to the logical recipient before the shot clock expires.

The Hawks, as Arnovitz tells us, are full of professionals who always give reporters good quotes, who eat dinner together after games and who play the game The Way It Was Meant To Be Played.

I'm not saying any of those things aren't true because I'm sure they are. What I'm wondering is if all those things held true last season, when the Hawks had a 38-44 record and barely snuck into the playoffs. Did the players become more professional in the off-season? More unselfish? More willing to hang out together after games? Or maybe it was because they got better players? Maybe having Al Horford healthy all season is the biggest reason for their turnaround and we should act like it instead of trying to pretend that the Hawks are better gentleman than the rest of the league. Because even if they are - who cares? The NBA is a bottom line business and the reason the Hawks are succeeding is because of what they are doing on the court.

If anything, my guess is the lines of causation are reversed. Atlanta isn't winning games because of their amazing on-court chemistry as much as all this winning has caused them to have this great chemistry. It's easy to be everyone's friend when everything is go well. Point me to the team that wins 18 of 20 games and doesn't have great chemistry and I'll be impressed.

The vast majority of NBA players, especially once they are in their second or third contracts, are pros who understand how to balance life and work, how to interact with their colleagues and how to make sense of their coach's X-and-O's schemes. The reason they don't win as many games as Atlanta is because A) they don't have the same type of schemes because B) they don't have the types of players to pull them off.

The biggest mistake you can make with the Hawks is to buy into the idea that they don't have a lot of talent, especially upfront. While they are built around a system, it's a system that requires very skilled, athletic and versatile big men and not many big men around the NBA can run it. When we focus on what type of dinner conversation they have, we are missing the picture on just why they have been so successful.

The first (and really the only) thing you need to know about the Hawks is that it all comes down to spacing. Atlanta plays five-out basketball, in that neither of their big men start the possession on the block. Al Horford and Paul Millsap can score with their back to the basket, but they are primarily used in Atlanta as face-up floor spacers, operating out of the high post and stretching defenses out to the three-point line.

All the space

If you look at the diagram, the first thing that should jump out to you is the amount of space around the rim. Unless the defense wants to play a zone, and open up shots along the three-point line for the Hawks shooters, there's no one they can keep around the basket. Everyone has a responsibility 25+ feet from the rim and it opens up driving lanes for all 5 of the Atlanta players on the floor. Ever since Mike D'Antoni and Steve Nash teamed up in Phoenix, the NBA game has been all about spacing and Mike Budenholzer, Danny Ferry and the Hawks are taking that revolution to its logical conclusion.

They play five-out basketball for all 48 minutes, bringing in two more big men off the bench - Pero Antic and Mike Scott - who can shoot 3's. You can see they are fully committed to their system in their drafting of Adreian Payne, a stretch 5 from Michigan State. Payne hasn't been able to get any minutes on this season's team, but he might as well have been built in a laboratory due to how perfectly he fits the Hawks system - an athletic 6'10 240 with a 7'4 wingspan who shot 42% from 3 in his final season of college.

Atlanta isn't the first basketball team to play true five-out basketball - Fred Hoiberg has been doing it for awhile at Iowa State and Miami did it with Bosh and LeBron. A generation ago, guys like Horford, Millsap, Bosh and LeBron wouldn't have been able to beat you from 20+ feet on offense. It's their ability to stretch the floor while still playing D and cleaning the defensive glass that allows their teams to be so successful.

If the Hawks do end up making the NBA Finals, it will be because Horford and Millsap can play enough interior defense to get them past huge teams like the Wizards and the Bulls and uber explosive offensive teams like the Raptors and the Cavs.

The really interesting thing, though, is what happens down the line, as more and more big men come out of college with games like Adreian Payne. In a lot of ways, you almost have to divide the best young big men in the sport along one dimension - can this guy play for the Atlanta Hawks or can't he? Given the way the league is going, someone who can't answer this question in the affirmative is going to have a hard time scratching out his career, unless he's big enough to be the only C in a four-out configuration, ala Andre Drummond in Detroit.

Over the last generation, the big question in the NBA has been four out vs. three out. A three-out team is a traditional team with three perimeter players and two post men. This is your archetypal mid 1990's Eastern Conference team. In this alignment, the PF doesn't necessarily need to be a great outside shooter because he is playing in either the high post or the low post for most of the game. A four-out alignment makes use of the stretch PF to open up the floor for four perimeter players to drive to the rim. Think Shawn Marion on the Suns. Five-out is the next step - two big men on the perimeter and no one in the paint. My guess is the next great philosophical battle in basketball will be five out vs. four out.

When it comes to evaluating young big men, you can put them in three categories. A five-out guy is a jump-shooting, perimeter-oriented big man who can function as a 5 or a 4 in a small-ball offense. A four-out guy, in this sense, is the traditional big man who dominates the paint and has the size and athleticism to be the sole big man protecting the rim on defense. A three-out guy is an interior minded player who doesn't have the offensive game to play on the perimeter or the defensive game to be the only rim protector. The key is that a five-out guy can play in a four-out and a four-out can play in a three-out but not vice versa. If you are thinking archetypes, five-out is Al Horford, four-out is Andre Drummond and three-out is David Lee.

Let's take a quick look at this year's crop of big men and see where they fit in. These are most of the guys in the most recent DraftExpress mock:

Five-out	Four-out	Three-out
Karl Towns	Jahlil Okafor	Cliff Alexander
Kriztaps Porzingis	Willie-Cauley Stein	Montrezl Harrell
Kevon Looney	Robert Upshaw	Chris McCullough
Myles Turner	Dakari Johnson	Kennedy Meeks
Frank Kaminsky	Mouhammodou Jaiteh	Chris Walker
Bobby Portis	AJ Hammons
Jarrell Martin	Kaleb Tarczewski
Jonathan Holmes

A few notes:

- I could go either way on Looney, Turner or McCullough. Turner might not have the mobility to be a five-out guy while Looney doesn't currently have the J, which is the same problem with McCullough. All three of those guys are uber-talented but (at the moment) those are the three who could probably use another season of school the most.

- Bobby Portis (Arkansas) and Jarrell Martin (LSU) are my two most underrated players at the moment. These are big-time athletes with the size to be NBA big men and the skill-set of perimeter players. They could both play for the Atlanta Hawks, let's put it that way.

- You don't want to be a three-out guy in the modern NBA. All the guys on that right list should be living in the gym to become better jump-shooters. Unless you are a 7'0, the bell tolls for the non jump-shooter. Even if you are a 7'0, the league would still like you to be able to shoot.

Check out this interview from the always fascinating Holger Gerschwinder, whom you might know as Dirk's Mr. Miyagi:

SPOX: How do you grade the balance of power int the NBA? Are the Spurs still the team to beat?

Geschwindner: The Spurs under Gregg Popovich have a concept. For example they know they’ll never get a high draft pick because of their constant success, so they look in other directions. They get players which fit into their system, like Tiago Splitter. It’s striking, that Gregg Popovich is one of the few remaining old school coaches. Even members of the next generation, like Rick Carlisle, have become rare and a whole new generation of coaches appears, like Jason Kidd, Steve Kerr and Jeff Hornacek - and with them, basketball is going to further develop and change a lot.  

SPOX: What do you mean?  

Geschwindner: We’re going to return to the basic idea of basketball. The game of basketball was designed as an offensive game, and when watching Golden State under Steve Kerr, the game returns exactly to that concept. Previously, teams had a specific players branding on them: Kobe Bryant and his Lakers, Dirk and the Mavs. In today’s NBA it’s more of a team challenge. You need at least three to five performers with firepower. I think in two or three years, any professional who can’t shoot has little chance to stay in the NBA. Even for the big guys, it won’t be enough to get a rebound and give it to a shooter. 

SPOX: The Spurs team basketball is only an interim stage? 

Geschwindner: In the past it was enough to be athletic. Now, almost everyone is. After that, teamwork and basketball IQ became increasingly important. Many have caught up in those fields. What matters now is shooting. Hit rates in today's basketball are not as high as they could be. Eventually, the guideline for made three-pointers won’t be 40 percent anymore, but 50 percent. That’s the future. Intelligent coaching can ensure the last possession and the team with the very last shot has an increased chance to win close games. 

When you are trying to project players into the NBA, skill-set is what you should be worrying about, not whether or not his facial muscles code him to be a good person. More often than not, basketball is the reason guys bust out and you can't always trust college statistics, not that some guys can't handle their money or don't have the mentality to be pros. As David Stern would say, it's all about them basketball reasons.

Here's the problem. If you aren't looking for "basketball reasons" for why a guy didn't make it, you are going to start talking about his character and the way he conducts himself off the court. And here's the problem with that - EVERYONE has things in their character that don't reflect well upon them. Even the guy with the most impeccable character has things that they struggle with. We are all sinners. It doesn't matter who a person is or what he does, if I go into a story wanting to write something negative about him, I can do that. So when a guy doesn't win a championship or doesn't stick in the NBA, it's pretty easy for us to come up with reasons why.

"In the playoffs, u r eliminated somewhere along the way by your chemistry, character or intelligence." @CoachKarl22 pic.twitter.com/xyHMB3VVlO
— Eric Musselman (@EricPMusselman) January 7, 2015

Karl Towns vs. Jahlil Okafor

At The Cauldron, a look at why the statistics don't tell the full story in the race to be the No. 1 overall pick in 2015.

Rookie of the Year Race

At RealGM, a look at the career paths of Nikola Mirotic and Tobias Harris and why the award no longer matters.

Oklahoma Preview

At Barking Carnival, a look at what Lon Kruger has going on in his fourth season in Norman.

Post Rondo Rotation

At Mavs Moneyball, a look at the new mix of players that Rick Carlisle is using.

Dallas Cowboys

The Dallas Cowboys may not end up winning a Super Bowl, but they have the best team since the last time they won in 1996. They have a 12-4 record and a remarkable 8-0 record away from home - their style of play translates anywhere and gives them a chance against anyone. The big difference for this year's team is their offensive line, which allows them to control the clock and keep the other team's offense off the field. The Cowboys control tempo as well as any team in the NFL and they force you to play their style of football.

The Cowboys have always been able to put up a bunch of points with Tony Romo at QB, but they have mostly done that through the air, with Romo connecting to guys like Terrell Owens, Dez Bryant and Jason Witten. Under Romo and Jason Garrett, Dallas has traditionally thought pass first, pass second and pass third - the idea was to pass in order to set up the run. That philosophy has allowed Romo to break almost every passing record in Cowboys history, but it repeatedly came up short in the month of December and in the playoffs, where Romo has a career 1-3 record. 

The big change in their philosophy this season is they run to set up the pass. With DeMarco Murray running behind Tyron Smith, Zack Martin and Travis Frederick, Dallas has been able to control the line of scrimmage for most of the season. It's real simple football. They force teams to commit extra men into the box to stop the run and then they kill them over the top with Dez Bryant, one of the most indefensible 1-on-1 players in the league. If they overload on Dez, Romo can kill them with guys like Witten, Terrence Williams and Cole Beasley. With the offense holding the ball for most of the game, the defense gets to play from ahead and the other offense has a hard time getting into any rhythm against them. 

That was the formula they used in one of the most impressive wins anyone has had all season - a 30-23 victory in Seattle in November. DeMarco ran the ball 28 times for 115 yards and they held the ball for 37 minutes. There's not much the Legion of Boom can do when the Cowboys are constantly picking up 4-5 yards on the ground on first down. Even if they have to go into Seattle in an NFC championship game, the Cowboys style of play gives them a chance. 

In that sense, they remind me a lot of the Memphis Grizzlies. Memphis is one of the biggest and most physical teams in the NBA and they are one of the teams that no one wants to face in the playoffs precisely because of their style of play. Since the Grit 'N Grind train got rolling, take a look at what they have done in the post-season:

2011:

- Beat Spurs (61 wins) in 6

- Lose to Thunder (56 wins) in 7

2012:

- Lose to the Clippers in 7

2013:

- Beat Clippers (56 wins) in 7

- Beat Thunder (60 wins) in 5

- Lose to Spurs in 4

2014:

- Lose to the Thunder (59 wins) in 7

They have sent three 55+ win teams home in the last four season and it's just not a match-up issue with one particular group of players - they have W's over the Thunder, Spurs and Clippers. Even when you beat them, it takes a lot out of you, as three of their four L's came in seven game series. 

The secret is their ability to control tempo with Marc Gasol and Zach Randolph. When people say the games slow down in the playoffs what they mean is that eventually you will run into a team with a lot of big men who can dictate tempo and force you to win in the half-court. It doesn't matter how fast you want to play, when the Grizzlies can hold the ball for 20 seconds and throw the ball inside, the game is eventually going to be played at their pace. The only other alternative is to speed up the game by aggressively pressuring and trapping their guards, but they have an All-Star caliber PG in Mike Conley who can't really be sped up. For a look at what this dynamic looks when a big team with shaky guard play has to face a small team that wants to play in transition, take a look at Game 7 of the 2013 Eastern Conference Finals between Miami and Indiana. 

Going into a series against Memphis, you know that their big men are going to hold the ball, create offense for themselves and create offense for others. On defense, they are going to control the offensive glass, beat you up physically and not allow you to get many free looks at the basket. Over the course of a series, as the refs get more used to their style of play, they are able to get away with more and more. Z-Bo has choked guys out and punched guys in the face on national TV. Ask Kendrick Perkins about how real it can get against the Grizzlies. 

#NeverForget

That's something you need to keep in mind when you hear some of these offensive gurus talk. All that scheming stuff is great until someone on the other team decides to physically assault you. You are going to have to take and deliver some blows if you play the Grizzlies. It's the same thing with the Cowboys - Chip Kelly's schemes are great, but they couldn't get his defense off the field when the Dallas offensive line imposed their will on the game.

When you compare them across sports, three big things stand out between Memphis and Dallas:

1) The Cowboys offensive line doesn't play defense. With Gasol and Randolph, the Grizzlies control the paint on both sides of the ball. Imagine how good an NFL team with one of the best OL's and best DL's in the league would be and you can see why Memphis is a perennial title contender.

2) The Cowboys secondary doesn't have anyone like Tony Allen. Allen is the Darrell Revis of the NBA - he's the best 1-on-1 perimeter defender in the league and no one has consistently made Kevin Durant's life more difficult. If you imagine a team like the Detroit Lions lining Calvin Johnson 1-on-1 against Revis and throwing the ball at him 15-20 times, you can see that Allen is still going to give up points to big-time scorers, but that he's always going to make you work for them. Dallas, on the other hand, has pretty average DB's. That could come back to kill them if they end up facing a QB like Aaron Rodgers in the playoffs.

3) There's no Dez Bryant on the Grizzlies. Conley is their Romo, but he doesn't have any big time playmakers on the perimeter he can give the ball to in order to close out games. When the game is on the line, Dallas can give the ball to Dez in any part of the field and hope he makes a play. Even if the defense can contain him, he will command so much attention that someone else will be open. The Grizzlies best 1-on-1 scorer on the wings is Vince Carter, who could end up being a huge addition for them.

Throw that X up!!

Neither one of these teams is perfect, but their weaknesses can only be exposed by other elite teams ... i.e in the playoffs. And if you are wagering on which sport is more likely to have a flawed champion, you have to go with the NFL. 

However, here's the good news for the Grizzlies and the Cowboys. As long as each team has those big guys upfront, they will be a threat to beat anyone. Big guys can play practically forever. Marc Gasol is 30 and he is playing the best basketball of his career. He is one of the best offensive linemen and best defensive linemen in the sport and he has Memphis playing high-level basketball on both sides of the ball. That's why he's my MVP of the first third of the season - he gives the Grizzlies a chance against anyone.

It's the same thing in basketball as it is in football. The MVP always goes to the perimeter playmaker, whether it's the QB, the RB, the WR, the PG or the SG. Those guys are important, but if you don't control the line of scrimmage and you can't dominate what Hubie Brown liked to call "the painted area", it doesn't matter. Eventually, you are going to run into a team that does and you have a real good chance of losing. Marc Gasol doesn't have the pure offensive numbers to beat guys like Steph Curry and James Harden for the MVP in the same way that the Cowboys offensive line doesn't have the statistics to put them above Tony Romo and DeMarco Murray. Romo and Murray are great. There's no question about it. But the Cowboys have had great RB's and QB's for awhile and have never been as good as they are now.

If they end up winning a Super Bowl, it's because they became the 1998 Denver Broncos. The pieces are there - Romo is John Elway, DeMarco is Terrell Davis and Jason Garrett is Mike Shanahan. None of that would matter without the guys upfront. There's only one thing Romo or Murray would need to say at a press conference for an MVP award: