bfwolf

I'm surprised by this post. I think we played horribly against NJ but pretty well the first two games. I'm encouraged by our results...we're better than I thought we'd be, and I think 40 wins is pretty likely.

I think it's faulty logic to say that Woody has to pull Law when he makes a few mistakes in a short time span. It suggests that if a player makes 4 mistakes at the beginning of a game, and then plays 20 minutes of error free basketball, he is less willing to make a mistake in the following 10 minutes than a player who plays 20 minutes of error free basketball and then makes 4 mistakes. I don't believe this is true at all. If Acie Law turns the ball over a few times in a short period of time, that is just a coincidence, not some sort of trend that you can use to extrapolate how he'll play the next 10 minutes of the ball game. He's a rookie and will make mistakes, but every thing about him suggests that he's a gamer who is mentally tough and is not going to be rattled when he makes a few errors. The team is better with him in the game than Lue and Woody is going to have to learn to turn the team over to Acie. Lue doesn't commit many turnovers because he rarely tries to pass the ball in a way that sets up his teammates for easy shots...that low turnover rate does not make him a better player than Acie who is actively getting his teammates involved with his penetration and dishing.

Or pass the ball to JJ, or to Marvin, or to Childress. There are always at least 2 and usually 3 players on the court with better handles than JS.

While I think Walter's math is off here, his point is well taken. Lue should be in the game anytime JJ comes out and also if both Marvin and JS need to come out. Other than that, let Law get his 35 minutes!

In all honesty, I think there are only 2 rules that he needs to apply to eliminate 80% of his mental mistakes: 1) Do not shoot a 3-pointer unless there's less than 2 seconds on the shot clock. 2) Pass the ball to the PG immediately after getting a defensive rebound.

Great post.

But who is he going to take minutes from? I'd rather have Law and Lue out there.

I did say that. Too early to tell which way that will go this year. Durant's P+R+A+B is 32.3, JS's is 32.5.

I'm pretty sure our goal is to make the playoffs. Everybody knows we're not good enough to contend for the title right now. We've got time to see how Horford develops as an offensive player before pulling the trigger on a trade for an offensive post player.

Everybody would love a big man who can post up and score. There aren't that many of those guys available. Our PRIMARY needs were a real PG and a big man who can rebound and play good D. I was critical of the Horford draft pick, but I am happily eating crow right now because he looks great in that respect. Law looks like the PG of the future. We have room for personnel improvement but we no longer have the glaring holes we had last year. Do we need somebody who can post up and score before we will contend for an NBA championship. No doubt. But I don't think winning it all is our goal this year.

Quote: Durant's an offensive beast. I wouldn't have taken that bet. He's pretty much been given the green light in Seattle and he is NOT bashful! I'm not 100% convinced he knows he's not still playing for Texas!

I would be OK losing a game by having Woody bench JS for extended minutes when he plays out of control if that's what it takes to get him to play under control for the other 79 games this year.

It's going to be interesting to see as the season goes on whether he gets better with experience or whether he wears down as a lot of NBA rookies who aren't used to the 82 game grind do. He's such a thin guy that I think wear down is a real possibility. Maybe he'll get a season ending injury while walking his dog tonight and then I won't have to worry.

I thought it was assists, not steals?

One thing I noticed in the first two games is we are really hitting the boards hard. Having Horford has been a big part of improving that from last year, but it seems like our other guys are hitting the boards harder too. Detroit did take advantage of that by opening up some 2 on 1 and 3 on 1 fast breaks when our guys failed in a bid for an offensive rebound, and I was disappointed that Woody didn't adjust to that, but overall I've been really happy with the way we are fighting for every ball.

Though 3 games, he's at 32.3. Looks like this bet could prove to be a close one that goes down to the wire.

Quote: You are 100% correct on all counts. The Marvin hate started the day he was drafted and never let up. But it has only been two games, we'll see if he can change some minds. About Josh, he needs to calm down and play within his own ability. I think he'll be fine. A little humility would go a long ways. It's a great bunch of kids starting to play well. but Lue sucks Lue was very important for us last year when we didn't have as many weapons and needed a guy who could put up points. But now that we've got other weapons, his ball-hogging is a real problem. I mean, we obviously still need him on the team because Law can't play 48 minutes and we're not going to get anything out of Speedy/AJ, but we need to give Law as many of those minutes as he and his wrist can handle. I agree with you about humility for JS. The thing is, we know he's capable of doing it--just look at the second half of last season when he started playing so much smarter. Marvin is playing great! I never thought he would amount to much after two forgettable seasons, but he has really turned the corner this year.

Quote: he can play good backside defense (i.e., blocks shots), rebound, and run the floor. he's not a good jumpshooter, and can't dribble well enough to take his man to the hoop or create his own shot consistently. as long as he plays within his current limits, and doesn't try to do things he's just not good at right now (e.g., 3pt shooting), he's a very good piece to what can be a playoff team. he's still very young. hopefully, he'll work on the areas of his game that need improvement. as is, he's still one of the five best Hawks players and should be on the floor. No doubt he is one of the best Hawks players. You hit the nail on the head though--he's not playing within his limits. I know he is young, but in his 4th year in the League I expect him to play smarter than this. You take a guy like Shelden Williams--now, I am no fan of Shelden's. He's not very good. But he played a smart game today--didn't force anything, got rebounds. He knows his role on this team and is embracing it. Does that mean I'd rather have Shelden than JS? Of course not. But it does mean that Shelden is playing a better mental game than JS. The good news is that this JS stuff is easily corrected if he gets his head on straight. Shelden Williams will never be a great NBA player even with 4 more years in the League, but JS can turn this around OVERNIGHT if he wants to.

I think what's frustrating is that JS can be a very good player, and he did contribute this game, but he keeps trying to do things that everybody knows he's not good at (except for him seemingly). I'm sure the coaches are telling him not to hoist up 3's, but he still does it. I'm sure the coaches are telling him not to bring the ball up the court and try to be a PG but he still does it. It's the game between the ears where he's letting us down, and that's harder to excuse than physical mistakes. Childress did not play well, but he was doing the things we should want him to be doing. He just wasn't executing. Law turned the ball over a bunch, but again, it was for understandable mistakes. A lot of JS's mistakes are very hard to understand and could be eliminated easily if he would just embrace his role.

I was especially embarrassed by how JT was getting such easy shots. Now, JT is fast and a good player, but he was getting gimme 10 footers by just driving right around his man. I thought AJ looked absolutely terrible out there defensively. He does not have the foot speed to handle quick PGs. Law appears to be our best defensive PG option by far until Claxton can play.

I live in Chicago and was able to get tickets to the Bulls-Hawks game in late November for well below face on Stubhub. You can't do that if you're a Phoenix fan!

Quote: would be hesitant to put him in the starting lineup on opening night. I am beginning to wonder if JT put a curse on the franchise after he was traded because it seems that no PG we get can stay healthy. Not just the starting lineup--I would fully support sitting him for the first two weeks of the season. I bet some rest would do him a world of good. I'd rather lose him for 2 weeks than have this nagging him the whole season. Now of course, I know nothing about the nature of his injury so I'm just talking out my ass, but I've got a bad wrist too (carpal tunnel) and rest is the only thing that really helps it.

about Law's wrist. I've got that uneasy feeling in my stomach that this is going to be something that nags at him all year and maybe his whole career.

I think Ty Lue's value to the Hawks is greatly diminished this year. Last year, we had so few offensive weapons that we needed Lue to carry a significant part of the load, and his skills in this area offset his deficiencies in ball movement and defense. We have more/better weapons this year and will not be as dependent on points from the PG position. This makes Lue less useful and his deficiencies harder to live with.

Fair points, AHF. Cruel and unusual is a judgment call. The Court has to use their personal opinion of whether they and society consider the punishment cruel and unusual. What I'm suggesting is that in this case, the tremendous public outcry and DRAMATIC change to the punishments associated with the law suggests that both the legislature and the people of Georgia believe the old punishment is cruel and unusual. And it passes the sniff test of whether this sort of thing should be punishable by 10 years in jail and registered sex offender status--the answer from most reasonable people is clearly no. I don't see how the Court determining that this was a cruel and unusual punishment is strange or out of place. I'm not suggesting that every change in a punishment means that the old punishment was cruel and unusual, but in THIS case, I think the argument is very reasonable.