TroyMcClure

if it doesn't happen? This is the worst defensive Hawks team I've seen since, well, last week.

Quote: If a couple guys could get it going for us and we could pull this out (Indy is stinking too - except Foster rebounding) - we have a hurt NOK team tomorrow night - could piece together a three game winning streak... You know that's not happening. This is one of the most disfunctional teams I have ever seen. Poor ownership. Poor Management. Juvenile coaching.

Quote: Quote: He's always been a wanna be????? Nah, he was an exceptionally good player. There's no doubt there. Really? You don't think he was just a scorer?

Like he can't grow a full team?

Quote: Quote: What are you retarded? Even with all the injuries we've had, we're 10-21 (.323). To not win 20 we'd have to go 9-42(.176), meaning that once we start to get healthier you think we'll lose roughly twice as often. You think the coach, the GM, and the owners should go, fine. But you weaken your argument by making an impossible prediction like we'll win less than 20 games. i remember reading Troy's first post. in it he called somebody an idiot. it may have been Gutzy. classic. So what are you saying? I think you did as well! He said the Hawks only made the playoffs twice in the 90's. By the way, I said he was "too dumb" to remember those teams. He was. I also asked if he was an idiot. I recieved no response to the question.

You showed me! You are missing the point. I bet we win 20, maybe 25! Your point is? Please don't say injuries. This team has pieces. It also has some wrong ones. Like I said 'Bk had his chance to fire Woodson.' He didn't. While not perfect, this team could have won 40 games. J.J. has not been injured. We were sucking way before he went down. Same with Josh Smith.The only injury I see with Speedy is talent.(Essential Talent Ligament) It seems to have suffered a career ending injury. The Lo signing was just awesome as well. We'll do the will we win 30? poll later. Probably next year.

I say no, without a coaching change. With a change, even an assistant, I think we win 20. BK had his chance recently to fire Woodson. He didn't. BK must go. The Spirit must go. Belkin is not worse than this. We are a joke.

What gives?

Off the top of my head: Jeff George, Michael Booker, Andre Bruce, Bruce Pickens, Michael Vick. Yes, Mike Vick. I had hoped for the best with him. His attitude and lack of overall knowledge, however, make him the biggest disappointment in franchise history. It's always someone elses fault with him. Jeff George is a strong second.

I know you don't have to play pro to coach pro. If you did play though, and lost almost every year, what does that say about what you were? If you want to make a case that he was a great player and his team failed him, go ahead. My point is he has been associated with a lot of losing. It is more than coincidence. He was hired by a friend. I'm sorry, but if I want friends hiring friends, I want them to have been winners at some point. That's just me though.

The information in this thread is merely an addition to what we've seen for over two years. Not a debate about coaches who played or didn't, etc. The evidence against Woodson is overwhelming!

I'll take a "horrible" figure head like that any time. I have problems with Woodson as an x and o guy and as a motivator. Are you actually trying to say that Mike Woodson knows more, or knows how to win a game as a coach more than Larry Bird? I actually shorted him. They went to the Finals!

Larry went to the Eastern confernce Finals. He had a record of 147-67 as a coach! 32-20 in the playoffs! We have very different views of what "horrible" are. I thought that same crap about Woodson before I saw him coach. http://www.basketballreference.com/coaches...oachid=BIRDLA01

You are way smarter than me! I have enough trouble with one language. Happy New Year to all!

Quote: Agreed. I could not care less how he did as a player. The only relevant fact on there is his record as a head coach, but of course his only job so far has been during our rebuilding. Either way it seems pretty clear that he's just not good enough. No point firing him until we have a real replacement though. My main point is: Everything he has heard since leaving Indiana was probably the wrong idea of how to win. How could he know how to win, when all he has experienced is losing? Is it any wonder we are the new Clippers, when he was the go-to guy for said old Clippers. If a good manager/coach rubs off on the players, what makes you think Woodsons' stink won't infect our players minds?

Quote: I really don't see that who Mike Woodsen played for 20 and 30 years ago is really relevant. A lot of great coaches never even played NBA basketball. Look at Bobby Cox, he barely scratched the majors, but has stuck around as a really quality manager for the Braves forever. Woody should be judged on what he has done with the Hawks alone. And what he has done has sucked. So I agree with you, but not for the reasons you state. Bobby played for the Yankees and Dodgers. That's not the Kings and Clippers.

Some people are so stupid. I guess you should be the next coach, with that line of logic. Phil Jackson was a smart player who played for a title team. How can a resume' not be important? All of this supposed knowledge was aquired while playing. Coaches who did not play at an NBA level had to work to get where they are. They weren't 6'5". How anyone could think that a person's work in the field he is managing is not important is, quite frankly, beyond me. Please tell me why, as the go to guy, his record was not important?

Quote: Quote: Excellent posts. Babcock by a landslide. Anyone who disagrees isn't smart enough to be in the conversation. Look at the numbers. Number of hall of famers on the team when he took over (2)? Number of playoff seasons before he took over? (7 of 8 years)? Number of lottery picks he blew with bad picks or trades (5)? Number he didn't (1)? Number of first round picks he blew (13)? Number he didn't (1)? (To be fair, you can make arguments that the Augman and Hendu picks were not blown. Also to be fair, you can add in another first rounder for Dan Dickau if you want for the blown column.) Despite your insulting comments and the lack of substance in your post, I think you find yourself in the minority by arguing that a GM who couldn't draft and who had a mixed record in FA and trades is better suited to take over an expansion team than one who at least has consistently gotten useful players in the draft. I don't have the time to soapbox, but I'm a wins and losses kind of guy. There are a number of things BK could have done to make this work. That is what is so sad. He is close, but keeps missing with a Speedy or a Lo. I was basically saying Babcock had teams that went to the playoffs. Has BK? I think Pete would have fired Woody. Really, I don't think he would have hired him. What was so insulting, by the way? I didn't realize how pigeon-holed and nerdy the point you are making was. Sorry. I just thought the question was which one was an idiot, and which one would not stand behind his idiot friend? I like some of BK's picks. His best bud as the coach though? Watch the games. The playoff curve with Woodson would be about 35 years, if he were to coach a new team.

Did you know that Mike Woodson's teams compiled a record of 345-466 in his 10 full seasons as a player? He was so good that he was the leading scorer for the 5th worst team in history. He also led two franchises... to different cities. (K.C. became Sacramento and San Diego became L.A.) Only two teams he played signifigant minutes on, and three in total, posted winning seasons. He never escaped the first round of the playoffs. He has a record of 48-144 as a head coach. Coached the 6th worst team in history. In his breif period of winning as a college player, he managed to be a relative loser there. Indiana won the NCAA title the year before he got there, and the year after he left! He was a King and a Clipper. We were sold a fake bill of goods with Detroit on his resume'.

Excellent posts. Babcock by a landslide. Anyone who disagrees isn't smart enough to be in the conversation. Look at the numbers.

Quote: Hey again i'm not a BK fan by any means I just find it laughable that Ron is saying Babcock is so much better. They are both horrible GM's in my book. What's laughable is that you can't refute one point he makes, and still you say Bk is better. You have already said that you were young in the 90's. You don't know what you're talking about. It's people like you that make this town have a bad fan reputation. You're too stupid to know we used to be in the playoffs. Virtually every year. Usually a 4 or 5 seed. We are in our 8th year of misery. Any REAL fan knows Babcock was a good NBA Gm. He gambled at the end and failed. I was not his biggest fan, but look at the numbers. Are you an idiot?