Mar 31, 2012; Milwaukee, WI, USA; Milwaukee Bucks forward Ersan Ilyasova (7) during the game against the Memphis Grizzlies at the Bradley Center. The Grizzlies defeated the Bucks 99-95. Mandatory Credit: Jeff Hanisch-US PRESSWIRE

Ersan Ilyasova, Milwaukee Bucks — five-years, $45 million

Milwaukee made an aggressive stab at retaining Ilyasova. They may overpaid for a 25-year old who elevated his play in a contract season (fishy, huh?) that did, to his credit, display a unique ability to score from the interior and perimeter while hauling a high percentage of rebounds. How much of that is repeatable though?

That is the underlying question and that’s the crux of Milwaukee’s problem: Do they place more credence on his most recent success, as tantalizing as the numbers suggest, or do they trust the three years of data that contradict his finest season? Ilyasova raised his 3-point percentage to an abnormal rate of 45.5%. Juxtaposed against his career norm (33.5%), it could easily be an outlier. Or it can be attributed to a young player that underwent a noticeable internal improvement that was supported by statistics.

Milwaukee felt the risk of acquiring the younger, less effective Ilyasova was worth the potential value of netting a guy who can shoot for 40% from behind the arc and grab greater than 20% of his teams rebounds. It probably isn’t a great value but I don’t have any qualms with Milwaukee’s risk assessment.

Jeff Green, Boston Celtics — four-years, $36 million

On the other hand … I have serious questions about this deal. Why would Boston shell out $9 million per year to a guy who missed the entire 2011-12 season with an aortic aneurysm and, prior to the consummation of this contract, performed at a rate that can be best described as bleh. Bleh. Like 12.8 PER bleh.

There’s nothing particularly special about Green — his game has the potential of resembling some flawless, esoteric piece of art, albeit unremarkable in any facet. The “art” would probably feel insufficient. Green has the potential of playing solid defense and scoring at a palatable rate. But don’t you think $9 million per year for four-years is a little bit much for a player that, at this juncture, is strictly potential at this point?

Orlando signed Ryan Anderson to a four-year, $36 million contract then traded to New Orleans for Gustavo Ayon (sign-and-trade)

The New Orleans’ front office should deserve major credit for their efforts. They’ve unloaded a couple of poor contracts, relented on re-signing Chris Kaman and they’ve found an elite spot-shooter that can do more than just shoot.

Paying Anderson $9 million per year, compared to the enigma that is Ilyasova, is less risky with three consecutive successful seasons under his belt. Anderson’s shooting proficiency is, therefore, more reliable. But not only is Anderson an elite stretch 4, but he excelled as an offensive rebounder. Plus, it isn’t insane to theorize that Anderson will see his defensive rebounding percentage rise without Dwight Howard corralling every defensive rebound in sight.

I also like this deal for the Hornets because, though Anderson is an highly effective weapon, he won’t take away possessions from Eric Gordon, Austin Rivers and Jarrett Jack. His efficiency is still highly dependent on catch-and-shooting, as spot-ups represented 35.4% of his offensive possessions last year. Relying on a guy that scores 1.09 points per possession isn’t a bad fallback option.

As for Orlando: They acquired a cost-effective forward in Ayon. Ayon will only garner $3 million over the next two seasons, both of which are team options. (Flexibility!) He won’t help Orlando retain Dwight but he’ll be a nice option on pick-and-rolls and he won’t screw up too much. The Magic should avoid building a mediocre basketball team at all costs and paying Anderson would’ve ensured a couple extra years as a borderline playoff threat.

Jun 06, 2012; Oklahoma City, OK, USA; Oklahoma City Thunder small forward Kevin Durant (35) drives to the basket as San Antonio Spurs center Tim Duncan (21) defends during the first half in game six of the Western Conference finals of the 2012 NBA playoffs at Chesapeake Energy Arena. Mandatory Credit: Kevin Jairaj-US PRESSWIRE

The San Antonio Spurs finished with the 10th most efficient defense, allowing 103.2 points per 100 possessions, which tied Oklahoma City. You would think that the Spurs’ lack of athleticism would be their downfall, and it still is — to an extent, but they managed to put up surprisingly solid defensive numbers.

They mitigated their lack of turnovers by preventing fouls and grabbing the highest percentage of defensive rebounds in the league. Still their lack of interior defense, though Matt Bonner allowed a pristine 0.67 points per possession in the post, and athleticism hampered their ability to defend a team of Oklahoma City’s caliber.

Perhaps their most glaring weakness was in their pick-and-roll defense, an attack that is extensively used in the NBA. It’s a simple mode of attack. Yet it remains a difficult possession type to defend because of the multiple options that result from the initial point of attack. There are lot of things that can go wrong for the opposing defense. For the Spurs, that happened more often than not.

San Antonio allowed the ball handler in pick-and-rolls to score a league high 0.88 PPP. The ball handler finished with points 42% of the time. What made this particularly damaging, besides the efficiency, is that the Spurs were pressed into defending pick-and-rolls early and often because A) they struggled to defend screens and B) the majority of offenses revolve around pick-and-rolls.

If all else fails, then teams usually resort to their second and third options (generally isolations at the end of the shot clock). San Antonio, though, made it very easy to get away with that kind of attack. Any team with an adept ball handler can take advantage of their defense.

The only Spurs big man who defended the pick-and-roll well was, unsurprisingly, Tim Duncan, who finished as the 39th best defender in the league. With Duncan on the floor the Spurs defended at a better rate than the Celtics. Without Duncan the Spurs defended at a level akin to the Toronto Raptors. Big difference.

So, with the growing reliance on screens, it’s simply not possible to achieve a modicum of defensive success without being able to defend it — at least at an average level. A mobile power forward who can defend screens and bang in on the interior is imperative.

Here are some potential solutions to San Antonio’s defense. (Note: The Spurs still have their full midlevel exception, worth $5 million.)

***

Ersan Ilyasova (unrestricted) — Unless the Spurs orchestrate a sign-and-trade, they do not have the resources to pry away Ilyasova away from Milwaukee, who offered him a five-year, $40 million contract. In a limited sample size Ilyasova stymied the pick-and-roll effectively.

Ryan Anderson (restricted) — He’s out of the Spurs price range and, even if he wasn’t, Orlando will match any offer. Anderson would be an ideal fit because he can shoot from the perimeter (38.4% career 3-point shooter) and he finished as the 58th best pick-and-roll defender in the league.

Kris Humphries (unrestricted) — Also out of San Antonio’s price range. Humphries grabbed 18.3% of Brooklyn’s rebounds when he was on the floor in addition to creating a turnover 11.5% of the time in pick-and-rolls.

Andrei Kirilenko (unrestricted) — Kirilenko has until July 15 to decide whether he wants to return to the NBA. Kirilenko is a long, athletic wing that can shift over to the 4 and still guard 3′s on the perimeter. Excels at blocking shots.

Greg Stiemsma (restricted) — Stiemsma is actually in San Antonio’s price range and he’s taller than 6’8″. Boston’s elite defense was slightly better with him on the floor.

Ian Mahinmi (unrestricted) — Former Spur who will come relatively cheap, as the mini midlevel exception represents a ceiling for his value. He’s athletic enough to defend the pick-and-roll and long enough to guard centers. The only caveat: Mahimni has a tendency to foul often. He averaged 6.7 fouls per 36 minutes. That’s something that needs to be tamed for him to succeed in one of the most stingy defenses in the league.

Ryan Hollins (unrestricted) — Hollins doesn’t have any actual basketball skills but he’s tall and athletic and, potentially, an above-average pick-and-roll defender. He won’t command much money either, eliminating any risk.

So what do you think Spurs fans? Who should the Spurs acquire in free agency and is their pick-and-roll defense a legitimate worry?