Over the final four minutes of the first quarter in Game 2 of the NBA Finals, as he does for stretches on most nights, Oklahoma City Thunder big man Chet Holmgren showed a little bit of everything he can do.
Defensively, Holmgren slid from the corner, where he was hidden on Indiana Pacers center Thomas Bryant, to block one-time slam dunk champion Obi Toppin at the rim. A few possessions later, Holmgren switched onto T.J. McConnell, sticking with Indiana’s pest and forcing him into a contested long 2-pointer.
Offensively, Holmgren spotted up from the left arc for an in-rhythm 3-pointer. That set up his next attack a few plays later, as he took another pass on the left arc, drawing Pacers big Myles Turner to the perimeter. Holmgren took him off the dribble, finger-rolling home a layup from his outstretched 7-foot-6 wingspan.
Otherwise, Holmgren keeps the ball moving with his passing, even calmly registering an assist from his backside on a broken play early in the second quarter. As it turns out, everything he can do is quite a lot.
In other words: Every NBA team could use a Chet Holmgren.
Sure, it is easy to say: Get yourself a 7-foot-1 No. 2 overall pick who can shoot the 3, attack close-outs, pass with aplomb and hold his own defensively in space. But, as his Thunder remain betting favorites to win the championship, according to BetMGM, he begs the question: Does a team need some semblance of a Chet Holmgren — or, at the very least, a floor-spacing rim protector — to compete for a title?
Holmgren finished the Thunder’s Game 2 victory against the Pacers with 15 points, 6 rebounds, 1 assist and 1 block, hardly the stuff of legend, but his contributions to Oklahoma City go well beyond stat lines.
While 3-and-D wings were once the craze — and still are (they are extremely necessary, too) — the 3-and-D big is what unlocks every lineup combination for his team. Put him at center, and he can anchor smaller five-out units, which feature shooters everywhere and a more versatile defensive approach. Slide him to the power forward position, and he can help to physically punish opponents in double-big combinations.
As Thunder head coach Mark Daigneault said after Game 2, “When we play small, we tend to be a little bit more of a turnover defense. When we play bigger, we have other strengths. It’s a combination of things.”
Typically, teams will have to choose between sacrificing rim protection in small-ball lineups or versatility in double-big outfits, but with someone like Holmgren, that sacrifice is minimized, or eliminated entirely.
Case in point: The Thunder outscored opponents by roughly 15 points per 100 meaningful possessions regardless of whether Holmgren manned the 4 or the 5 position during the regular season, per Cleaning the Glass. That dominance was nearly halved to a mortal figure whenever he was off the floor.
The Thunder inexplicably abandoned their double-big lineups in their Game 1 loss to Indiana, which was curious, because the Pacers have no counter for them. They have Myles Turner, a center whose ability to space the floor and protect the rim has unlocked a sensational small-ball outfit that has carried Indiana this far. What they lack is a second big who can play alongside him. What they lack is a Chet Holmgren.
And maybe that is the final piece to a championship puzzle: Teams need a facsimile of Holmgren to unlock the double-big arrow in their quiver, and they need that second capable big to employ it. This is why the Thunder felt compelled to give Isaiah Hartenstein a three-year, $87 million contract last summer.
Consider the Boston Celtics, who won last year’s championship with a pair of big men, Al Horford and Kristaps Porziņģis, both of whom could shoot the 3 and anchor a defense. They could play separately or with each other, and the ability to do both is what unlocked their full potential. They survived without Porziņģis for much of last year’s playoffs, but this year they ran into New York Knicks big Karl-Anthony Towns, whose ability to play as a 4 or a 5 allowed then-head coach Tom Thibodeau to toy with lineup combinations until he found one with Mitchell Robinson at center that punished the smaller Celtics.
Look at the league’s recent champions, and you will find someone who can flutter between the 4 and the 5 and be effective at both. As we saw again this season, Aaron Gordon could play alongside Nikola Jokić or spell him at the 5 for the Denver Nuggets. Draymond Green was the original “Every Team Needs A Version of This Guy” for the Golden State Warriors. He played with Kevon Looney or without.
Look at the standings, too. Every good team has someone like Holmgren (i.e., Evan Mobley of the 64-win Cleveland Cavaliers). Every bad team does not (the Washington Wizards, for example, hope Alex Sarr can become him). Every middling team wishes its version of Holmgren was as good as he is. (Imagine, for a moment, if you swapped Isaiah Stewart for Holmgren and what the Detroit Pistons might look like.)
Think of the Houston Rockets. They boasted both Alperen Şengün and Steven Adams, either of whom could man the center position and neither of whom was best positioned to play power forward. While they enjoyed some success as a double-big combination, the Rockets rarely trusted them, because they lacked versatility on defense and shrunk the floor on offense. It made them susceptible to the first-round loss they suffered against the Warriors, who practically invented this concept of an ultra-versatile big.
Think of the Chicago Bulls, who feature Nikola Vučević. He can shoot but cannot defend the rim. Think of the Atlanta Hawks, whose bigs can defend the rim but cannot shoot. You can get paid handsomely to do one or the other, but can you win on the highest level? Not if the most recent champions are indicators.
It is not a novel concept to consider that every team needs a Chet Holmgren or someone who can do a bit of everything in the frontcourt. But it may be a necessary one if you hope to win the championship.
Read the full article here