Dsinner

I've felt this way since the regular season. If Al fouls out he fouls out. But, we can't let the other guys, especially Nelson get going.

I agree. We HAVE to stop double teaming Dwight so early. We have infinity fouls to give him. Let's give it to him and make him earn it on the line. If Horford fouls out so what. It's not like he's being utilized on the offensive end anyway. Dwight's FT's and challenged 3 pt shots will have to beat us. If we were smart that's what we'd do.

Exactly.

Fratello's playoff record in his last 6 trips:

2 - 20

LOL . . even Woody has a better playoff winning % than Fratello.

Funny thing is even after that fact he would still be an upgrade. Woody sucks, time to admit it and move on.

I am so sick of hearing about Woodson; he should have been fired years ago. We would be so much further along with a proven vet coach by now it is sickening.

It is a given the Woody can't coach and will be fired at the end of this season; nothing left for discussion.

Yeah but we put up 50+ wins. Blah blah blah blah blah blah. A lot of you wanting this man to remain our coach better be happy we're 3 years behind were we could have been. With a 40 pt playoff shalacking to boot.

That's a great plan and all but if it was that easy I don't think it would take a 40 pt taco kicking for him to decide to step up. Either he can't do it or he needs a massacre to get motivated. Either way it's not becoming of a max player.

No, he really could be elite. If he changed his gameplan, his substitution pattern, changed up his switching D once in a while, ran ANY kind of offense and didn't let his players quit on games it is possible he could be an elite coach.

But if it were true, this speaks much worse about those two guys, than it does the coach.

You boggle my mind.

Hell, when your coach says we're shooting for 3rd place and the 2nd round why would any players NOT lower their goals? F%&* Woody and f*&%@ his loser mentality. We made it exactly to where we were shooting for so why would our players think we can go any further? Marvin's not the problem, Woody is (and this is coming from a Blue Devil).

Is there anywhere online I can get a live feed of the game?!!?

LMAO @ this thread.

It's killing people to give Woody any kind of credit. It's like pulling teeth . . haha

I see a lot more people on here giving at least a little credit to Woody (which is arguably more than he deserves) than you ever acknowledging his flaws. Only you would actually, after this near and still possible embarrassment, fail to realize he's holding us back. Look at the proof (EVERY single person with any sort of basketball IQ has mentioned it) and it's hard to deny the guy is in waaaayyyy over his head. Is he your uncle or something?

A few of us have been saying this for years. Our increasing win total blinded a few of you and still some now but to some it was always obvious that the guy is not an NBA quality head coach. Not one that will get a decent team past the second round. Playoffs is all about adjustments. Ask anyone. That is Woody's weakness. Basic math will tell you the two don't add up.

He wasn't our best but Laettner at least deserved to make that list. He was an all star with the Hawks which is more than I can say for most of that list.

You can't compare the two guys offensive stats to determine the better player. Lenny's needing to keep the score 80 something to 80 something in order to win really hampered Smitty's scoring numbers. Anyone want to tell us what Smitty's Hawks PPG was compared to JJ's PPG? Personally I think JJ is the slightly more talented player (their games are so similar it's kinda eery) but I think Smitty was a bonafide leader. I'd take Smitty over JJ based on his leadership.

The problem with this thread, is that the focus is sitll on the offensive side of the basketball, when the reason we don't win games most of the time, is because of the defense. But no one has addressed the defense one time in this thread, as a reason why we're either overachieving or underachieving.

The 111.4 offensive rating that we now possess, is currently the 4th best in Atlanta Hawk history Only the 1988 - 1990 Hawks with Nique, Moses, and Doc, and the 1986 - 87 Hawks in which Nique almost averaged 30 ppg and won 57 games ( a franchise record ), are the only teams more offensively efficient than this year's version of the Atlanta Hawks.

Defensively, the 106.2 rating they currently have right now, ranks 20th all time. Lenny's 1998 - 99 team ranks first. Dominique's/Manning's 1993 - 94 team ranks 7th. The Mookie - Dikembe ball hawking team of 1996 - 97 ranks 8th. But this current group ranks 20th.

With the lesser teams we have coming up on the schedule, we do have a chance to improve that defensive rating. And by that same token, we have a chance to improve the offensive rating for the same reason. Before it is all said and done, this could very well be the most offensively efficient Atlanta Hawk team in history. The 113 offensive rating that the 1988 - 89 team posted, is well within reach of this team, if we take care of business against these lesser teams.

The entire fan base knows that Horford ( and especially Smith ) are more efficient players when they're able to beat their opponent down the floor during transition. The strength of their games is NOT halfcourt offense, because they're not good at creating and making shots. Against the big frontlines, their offensive inefficiencies are exposed even more.

I think it just kills some of you that Woody is actually playing the "safe" route offensively, instead of "experimenting" on trying to develop Josh Smith and Al Horford as go-to like offensive weapons. We would no doubt sacrifice a few games off of that win total, if he did that. And people would be having a fit if we were 28 - 21, and only a few games ahead of Toronto. Iso-JJ and Iso-Crawford is the safe way out.

* It limits turnovers.

* It puts the offensive decision making in JJ's hands, whether it be from a scoring or passing standpoint.

* It enables Crawford to do what he does best, without worrying about also being a playmaking guard.

* And it enables your most explosive offensive weapons to potentially take over a game.

That's been the case in just about every big win we've had this season. When the running game gets going, that's when Horford and Smith look like very good offensive players. If anything, you could see a transition in this offense in which Josh Smith handles the ball more, and creates for others. This may increase turnovers, because Smoove still likes to force passes a little. But it would give you an different look to the offense, as we saw in the Bulls game. Developing Smith as a point forward type, may be the way to go, before we try to force Smith and Horford to be more efficient halfcourt players.

LOL . . this argument is almost like criticizing a wishbone offense for not being able to pass the ball, when the real problem with them is that their defense is highly schizophrenic.

So basically you're saying our Defensive coach sucks at coaching defense. So we have a team that plays all Iso's and no D and you want to KEEP the coach? It irritates the hell out of my why anyone would want to keep a Defensive minded coach who can't coach defense and only has a decent offense due to fast breaks and offensive rebounds both of which have NOTHING to do with the coach. You keep throwing out offensive stats and ppgs like it has something to do with our coach's X's and O's. Are you really that deep into Woody's pockets or just that clueless about coaching?

I disagree. The offense is better when the TEAM is shooting the ball well. Passing doesn't equal points if your teammates aren't making shots.

No, but a good pass sets up a higher % shot. Assists generally equal more scoring.

The Hawks have fewer turnovers per possession in the league by a huge margin which is why their offense has been so good. Ironically going to LESS motion has helped the offense. You don't care about results- you care about how pretty the offense is.

The Hawks don't have the personnel to grind it out in the halfcourt game. They dont' have a legitimate post threat on the roster and the PG is terrible at exploiting matchups at this point in his career. Yet you think this is a criticism of Woodson for some ridiculous reason. Woodson has taken this group of players and has the SECOND BEST OFFENSE IN THE LEAGUE. And you are complaining because its not pretty enough. So you want the Hawks to run the same offense as teams who have better personnel who aren't even equaling the hawks production. Ridiculous.

TO's?!?! So you're giving the credit to Bibby then right? Umm, you may be on to something. Woody didn't do any winning till Bibbs got here.

Please stop saying we have the SECOND BEST OFFENSE IN THE LEAGUE. You know nothing about Basketball if you believe this. We score the second most points in the league. There is a HUGE difference.

The defense and rebounding creates a lot of our offense . . . just like Woody likes it. Which is why he preaches defense and rebounding more than he does half court offense.

Good job Woody.

For all the defense and rebounding preaching he does he's never had a team do either well. You do realize that don't you?? For the record the Lakers and the Celtics, you know the past 2 Champs, have an offensive scheme. You CAN NOT WIN in the playoffs without one. The game slows down and iso Joe is not going to work. Please explain to me how iso Joe is going to work for us.

Why do people think he's shooting so well this year? He's getting the ball a lot in transition, and in early offensive opportunities.

Stop being such a homer for once please. It seriously makes your posts nearly impossible to read. The reason Smoove is shooting so well this year is because he is doing the exact opposite of what Woody allowed him to do...he's taking better shots. There is absolutely no other reason that is percentage is up. He's simply not shooting 3's and not nearly as many long jumpers. Are you really that hard up for management and coaching that you can't see the blatant obvious???

.

I wish people would stop bitching and moaning about how ugly the offense is and start looking at the results. Seriously- you have been bitching about the offense for so long that you can't even stop to recognize when its time to stop.

I'll "recognize" when it's time to stop when I see a different system. You take away our fast breaks and our offensive put backs and it is the SAME offense. Please explain what is so different about it this year than the last 4? One example will do, thanks.

If. You will have no reliability issues with a newer 360.

I really wish you'd stop posting such utter crap. I love the console but the problems are still there BIG time. Do some research before purposely (I say purposely because I've already shown you PROOF) being disingenuous with other people's money.

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you didn't read my post in the 360 thread. Here is the info that is readily available for everyone. Please provide some info about your claim that the problem is "fixed." I doubt there is even one article that comes even close to saying that.

Chillz you say you are a professional gamer so I must ask if you are sponsered by MIcrosoft in some form or fashion? Just wondering because for the past 3 or so years you've been in complete denial about the 360's failure rate. At it's highest peak it was above 50% and most considered that too gracious. While it's improved temendously the latest reports (and there are plenty with a wide array of numbers) have it listed at around 10%. (as of earlier this year). That is remarkable progress and proves that the new chips are working better but lets put it into perspective shall we...The PS3 and the Wii both hover around a 1% failure rate. That means that the 360 is STILL 10X more likely to fail on you than the PS3. On the other end of the spectrum a readers survey listed ¥ Xbox 360 has a 54.2 percent failure rate ¥ PS3 has a 10.6 percent failure rate ¥ Wii has a 6.8 percent failure rate. None of these numbers are from any of the manufacturers themselves but even Square trade put out their findings and, while not as drastic, it listed the 360 as only twice as likely to die. Better but still risky. Not sure how you're coming up with your claims but perhaps you should research it before giving out misleading info. Microsoft simply puts out an inferior product in terms of reliability.

Here is the latest article I've seen on the matter. This is a compressed version of a Game Informer article from Sept of '09. These numbers are from actual gamers NOT from any company.

http://consumerist.com/2009/08/xbox-360-failure-rate-is-542-percent-game-informer-finds.html#comments-content

I doubt Sund gets fired if Joe and Woody walk. Sund strikes me as the type that has ownership's support behind him for the position he is taking now. He made a good offer to Joe and can't control if he goes elsewhere.

With Woodson, we only lose him if someone else comes offering a good offer. That then only looks bad if Woodson goes on to do great things with that team and we don't hire an equally good replacement. If Woodson takes a job with the Nets, as some have speculated, that won't look bad at all for Sund when Woodson is winning 35% of his games next season.

If Woody takes a job with the Nets his .391 will actually drop. I wouldn't have thought that possible.

Dumars is not a perfect GM by any means and I think it would be crazy to get rid of Woodson at this point in time in light of the success we are having this season. I would play out the year and reassess at the end of it.

Don't get me wrong, as much as I think Woody is mediocre on a good day, it would be absolutely insane to make a coaching change now. For all you Woody lovers you still forget the man has ONE winning season and a career .391 winning %. Those are the facts no matter what you want to make him out to be.

I'd EASILY rather have Woodson than any of those guys. Seriously... the Hawks have the top offense in the league and people are still complaining about the offense wanting woodson to be fired. Ridiculous.

(Just checked- and Phoenix passed the Hawks last night so the Hawks are now the second best offense. FIRE HIM!!!)

I wish people would stop confusing our scoring with an offense. Our "offense" is because we are top 3 in the league in fast break points, second chance points, and rebounds. Those are all hustle stats that have nothing to do with "offense" or Woody. Woody blows and the only reason our team is doing this good this year is because they are finally running, The team does what it wants and thankfully the athletic talent is superior to Woody's offense.

If I really wanted a Blu Ray player I'd probably buy a stand alone unit since I'm not a big fan of playing movies on a game system and there's no way that the Playstation Blu Ray player is advanced and has as many options as a decent stand alone version.

Actually the PS3 Blu Ray player (not the new cheap one) is better than most stand alone players an has all the options as it has it's own HD and can therefore download any updates for free. BTW there aren't a lot of "options" with BR players. While there still isn't a definite format yet the only true option outside of formatting is BR Live which requires your BR player to be hooked up to the internet (something a console should already be doing). Bottom line is that a stand alone BR player equal to PS's would cost the same, if not more, than a PS3. I can't understand anyone's logic that wouldn't spend that money and get a free next gen system. Even if you're not a gamer you are able to use PS's free network for Netflix and internet radio which makes it a complete no brainer for anyone looking to spend their money wisely.

Given what you're interested in I'd go PS3 all the way. XBox DOES NOT play Blu Ray movies. Be warned though the "slim" PS3 does not have the same "top notch" BR player as the regular PS3. Not sure exactly what the differences are but there are some. Knowing what I know now I would have never purchased my 360 over the PS3. Odds are you can count on going through 2-3 360's.

I just got back and it was very solid. I had a lot of fun. Don't expect a lot of back story or don't expect a deep satire of horror movies and you should have a good time. A lot of people on rottentomatoes felt this was better than Shaun of the Dead... And damn it, I guess that movie has grown on me because I can't quite agree with that. Still, it's fun. It's pretty gory and filled with lots of one liners. But make no mistake, this is Woody Harrelson's film. I have to believe this part was written for him. Honestly, it seemed like his character was split between his role in Natural Born Killers and The Cowboy Way. Elsenberg was somewhat entertaining and the chick from Superbad did well with her role. She might develop into a decent actress one day. Abigail Breslin didn't really do anything with her role though.

The movie is over the top fun, but probably a notch below the hype that it has. I guess I would give it a 7.5/10 or maybe an 8. I'll just have to wait and see how it holds up on DVD.

Should be a great movie and like you I am a Woody fan also. That and part of the movie was filmed at an amusment park 30 miles from my house in Valdosta Ga.

She can go dry her eyes with 100 dollar bills that she gets from exploiting teens that don't know any better. She's really no different than Britney Spears or Beyounce. But at least they can probably dance; She can't sing a bit live and her lyrics are brutal 14 year old stuff. No doubt West is a douche, but if she wasn't a studio creation anyway I would have more sympathy for her.

Dude she is WAY different than Britney or Beyonce. For one she writes her own music. 2nd she plays her own instrument. I'm not a fan but those two facts alone make her the exact opposite of what you're trying to portray her as.