WorldBFree

some folks are upset at the "culture of ineptitude" the ASG has allowed to fester. Chillz leaving is just another sign that ATL has a hard time attracting/keeping good players. maybe if ASG had "been more respectful" (whatever that means), Chillz would have turned down a contract that pays him significantly more than what any NBA team was willing to offer. otoh, some people are just being dumb about this. the offer from Greece is WAY more than any NBA team could have paid. stupid to blame ASG for not paying what would be stupid to pay a 6th man. i also think people are ignoring the unique qualities of Chillz that makes a move to Europe more amenable to him than many other players. he's college educated, comes from a more 'worldly' background - he'll find Europe more appealing b/c he won't be freaked out at the "foreignness" of it. NBA players who have not traveled extensively, or came to the NBA just out of high school(e.g., Josh Smith), are much less likely to find European league play appealing. Quote: I don't get it? Sure, I'm upset Chillz left for Greece, but here is the bottom line: The Greek offer was way more than we or any other NBA team could have given him. I don't blame Chillz for taking that deal at all. I would take it too. How is any of this the fault of the ASG?

Al Horford has proven he has the physical AND MENTAL skills to be a key component of a winning team. Josh Smith has shown he has rare athletic ability... everything else about his game requires using words like "potential" "ceiling" and "if here ever learns to...".

does two more years of Woody = Acie stuck on the bench and not being developed? imo, the biggest disappointment this year was Acie not getting the minutes he needed to get better. almost a lost year in terms of development, and it's hard to excuse all of that due to an injury that didn't sideline him THAT much

at some point, a player's ability to lead their team to wins has to matter more than individual stats. i agree with you 100% on Wade. my other four from the list are: LeBron, Paul, Howard, and D Williams. i struggled with Anthony and Bosh, but ultimately believe that Howard is more dominant than either and Deron led his team to a conference finals.

i agree with your point that Josh Smith is a uniquely marketable player, a great athlete who shows promise of improving into a great basketball player - overall, someone the Hawks should do their best to keep around. BUT, i find the comparisons to Dominique interesting in that they point to one of the main problems with the standards too many Hawks fans use to judge players/teams: They overvalue the superficiality of "flash" and undervalue the foundational objective of winning. Rather than asking how high he jumps, how much the rim shakes when he dunks, or how far the ball goes into the stands when he blocks a shot, the REAL questions to ask are: Does he lead the team in pressure situations? Does he take over in crunch time? Does he score when it matters? Does he make his teammates better? Does he contribute directly to the team winning games? It says a LOT about the Atlanta Hawks that its best player ever never played in a conference finals. to his credit, Dominique did improve his game - his jump shot in particular. and in several big games, he did step up to lead his team. Basketball is a sport - not just an athletic display. It's about winning, not just "looking good." Basketball players should be judged on whether or not they help their teams win, not whether they create "pretty highlights." as i prefaced, i think Josh Smith CAN be a great player. IF he continues to improve. He needs to make the commitment to improving the areas of his game - shot selection, post moves, ball-handling, decision-making - that keep him from being more than just an exciting player.

you're right about Smith, and in all honesty, ATL needs him taking LESS 3pt shots, not more. i do think the needs of the team are harder to gauge and harder to fix with such a poor offensive system being run.

yes, another consistent threat from the perimeter would be a great answer to the double-teaming of JJ. but so would decent-freakin execution of a half-court offense! this was my first year as a season-ticket holder, so i got to see a lot more of each game than TV shows. and what i saw on offense was pathetic. NO off-ball movement. none. literally 85% of Hawks possessions were ball-handler (usually JJ) trying to take his defender while the other four players cleared out of the way and either a) stood still, waving their hand in the air asking for a pass, or b) stood still waiting to see if JJ would shoot (and maybe, just maybe, they'd rush toward the basket for a potential rebound). for me, it's hard to speculate on who (if anyone) the Hawks should trade for b/c i can't see anyone making a big difference if the offensive set is more of the same. imo, it's irrelevant whether the problem is that Woody doesn't actually coach movement or call for particular plays to be run OR he is doing that but the players aren't listening, b/c both causes point to a coaching problem (unless someone is suggesting that ATL should get rid of its roster and start over). it'd be interesting to see what would happen if, while JJ had the ball, the other Hawks were running around, trying to get open, setting real screens, etc. we might discover that everyone's 3pt FGP would increase in a world where they were more open and got the ball with a defender not standing beside them (as they stand still). until the offense looks more like a legit basketball TEAM and less like a hot mess of playground 'ballin', it's hard to say what player(s) would really be the solution.

nm

for as great as ATL looked at home, they looked that bad on the road, and four of the seven games are in Boston. it's now a best 2 of 3, with two of those in Boston, where they have drubbed Atlanta all year, twice in this series. i'm ecstatic the Hawks have made this a real series, and the momentum going into next year is BIG no matter what happens from here on. BUT until they show they can compete, let alone win, in Boston, the Hawks are still a long shot.

AJC reporting Horford called Durant Wednesday before practice to congratulate him. here's what Horford said to the AJC: "I'm happy for Kevin and he's more than deserving," Horford said. "That award wasn't something I spent my season focused on. When I came here the only thing on my mind was helping my team make the playoffs, period. We're in the midst of that right now and I wouldn't trade what we're doing right now for anything." imo, Durant had a very good year and is deserving of ROY. if the award was MVR, Horford wins in a landslide, and is just as deserving of ROY as Durant. either way, we all know no Hawks fan would trade Horford for Durant or any other rookie. he's been the biggest difference this year - providing the Hawks with the swagger and attitude they had been lacking.

Going into games 3 & 4, JJ and JS needed to step up their games. done. make that DONE. As a result, ATL tied the series up 2-2. my best-case scenario coming in was a 6 game series, but after seeing the Hawks run around and through Boston, there's every reason to believe Atlanta can win another home game. the question is: (how) can the Hawks win game 5 and give themselves a real shot at the biggest upset in NBA playoff history? here's my take on the three keys to winning game 5: 1) Defensive stops and defensive rebounding. a team can't run if it's constantly throwing the ball in after a made basket. second chances eliminate ATL's running game and get the crowd fired up; 2) adjust to the Celts defensive adjustments. they won't let JJ beat Ray Allen like a rented mule again (will they?). Bibby needs another good start. JS needs to drive to the basket and play under control. but someone else HAS to step up with 15-20 pts: MW? Big Al? Chillz? if the Hawks can get a 15+ point game from someone other than the scoring trio of Bibby/Johnson/Smith (and assuming those three can provide 60pts), they will have a chance to win late in the 4th; 3) withstand the inevitable hot start by Boston. just like game 4, expect Boston to come out fired up. except this time, THEY'LL have the home crowd energy to feed off of. if the Hawks can stay w/in 6 (2 possessions) at the end of each of the first three qtrs, the pressure will be on the Celtics, big time. THEY are the team that has been getting tired late, the OLD team, the team EXPECTED to win. i'm not sure it can happen, but the Hawks have done a great job so far of proving doubters wrong.

while i'd prefer Fratello (the marketing advantages you listed in a reply below are important for this franchise, which needs the boost), i think it's more likely Harris would come here than the czar of the telestrator would come out of "retirement." either one would create a 5-10 game improvement in the record, even with the same roster as this year.

nm

and the "craptors" finished with a better record than the Hawks. great players don't make excuses, they make plays. yes, the Celts are a very good team. Horford accepted that as a challenge, instead of using it as a crutch for shrinking in the spotlight of the playoffs.

Dwight Howard's comment after his second consecutive 20pt, 20reb game. He understands playoff intensity and how those who consider themselves the best in the game step up when it counts. Chris Paul becomes the first player in NBA history to record consecutive 30pt, 10asst, 3stl games. He gets it. These players not only get it, they prove that true stars step up, regardless of excuses about being young or lacking playoff experience. Al Horford, 20 and 10 in his first playoff game, while not as spectacular as those two, also understands that the playoffs are when players who want to be considered among the best step up their game. Joe Johnson, Marvin Williams, Josh Smith - if you want to be considered among the league's best, THIS is when you step up. not against Milwaukee in Jan, not against Memphis in Nov. the playoffs are where the true stars separate themselves from the rest. (at least) three games left to prove yourselves as stars.

a 66 win team beat a 37 win team by 23 at home in the 1st game of the the first round of the playoffs. no one should be shocked by that. i thought going in that ATL would be doing GREAT things to make this a 6 game series. proper perspective should focus on the following: 1) Hawk's youth is getting playoff experience. Horford showed he is up to the task, and then some. what needs to happen is for the other young Hawks - especially Josh Smith and Marvin Williams - to LEARN from these games. this is their first taste of the real NBA season. if the hawks are gonna win in the playoffs next year, MW and JS must be offensive and defensive keys. 2) evaluating Woodson under the spotlight. IF Hawks mgt can make a coaching change, then they should be watching this series to see a) if Woodson is who they want coaching this team, and b)if not, what kind of coach do they want running the show? 37 wins and an 8th seed in a weak conference should not = a guaranteed return to the bench next year. here's a chance to see of Woodson can maximize his team's chances in the playoffs, when it counts. but don't fire him only to replace him with someone who's gonna have the same flaws. 3) EXPOSURE for the Hawks is a GOOD thing. yes, there'll be plenty of snickers as Boston blows out the Hawks (Game 1 will not be the only 15+ point win by the Celts). but if the Hawks can play hard and some of their key players (JJ and JS especially) can step up their games the way that Horford did in Game 1, those who follow the league will take notice. a young team with lots of upside will benefit from such exposure. the only way this playoff experience doesn't end up being positive for the team is if they interpret as validation that they (players, coaches, mgt) don't need to make any improvements.

unfortunately, the fact that he's exceeded expectations as the #4 pick doesn't make it any easier watching him play so well. it's not Marvin's fault. but like many draft-day stories, he will always be compared to the PGs that went next in terms of his production and contribution to his team's success. #2 picks kinda have to be stars to justify where they were picked. may not be fair, but it's what happens.

while Marvin was listed on many draft boards as one of the top 2-3 players, ATL was expected to fill its PG needs by many. the fact that that the next two picks were PGs - D Williams then C Paul - is fairly strong evidence that the top two PGs were also considered among the best players. this isn't a case of some 2nd roundc choice proving everyone wrong. in the days before the draft, there were plenty of people - on ESPN, etc - saying ATL should choose a PG to fill the obvious need. this wasn't after-the-fact. it was before and during the draft. what i don't get from your post is the last two sentences: "Has Marvin become the player we all thought or hoped he would? Of course not, but he is much closer to being that player than Paul is to the player we all thought he would be." huh? if the consensus was that MW was the 2nd best choice (after Bogut), how can it be that he's "closer to being what was expected" than Paul? shouldn't he further along than he is given how he was projected? and as i noted, Paul wasn't considered chopped-liver. he was the 4th overall choice, not some late pick who shocked everyone. the following is from ESPN's 2005 Draft coverage: "The Hornets are the big winners early on in the draft. They get an elite point guard at No. 4..." this isn't a review years later. it's the day after the draft.

Chris Paul's playoff debut: 35 points, 10 assists, 4 steals, ONE turnover. he'll finish in the top 3 in the MVP race (with a very legit argument as to why he should be the MVP). as a Hawks fan, it KILLS me to watch him, and yet he's SO good, as a basketball fan, it's impossible not to watch and admire his play. the post-hoc rationalizations (ATL stinking for another year allowed the Hawks to get Horford) don't really remove the bitter taste when you watch Paul...

Horford, Smith, MWilliams, Johnson, and Law are the best 5, especially in terms of a reasonable starting five. Hawks need another SG that can play D more than they need a C at this point. Shelden and Zaza can provide enough backup minutes at C to get by.

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.

there were two misjudgments: 1) the judgment that Shelden could be the complete low post presence the Hawks need. at best, he's a solid rebounder who can also contribute 8-10 points 2) using a top 5 pick on him. no one had him projected that high, and there was no reason for ATL to pick him that high. EVEN IF the Hawks felt strongly about him, they could have traded down 3-4 spots and still have easily picked him up. but alas, both misjudgments were made, and so he will always be judged by standards that likely exceed his contribution. it doesn't mean he has nothing to contribute and THAT should be the focus now: how to maximize what he does offer.

there wasn't any draft expert or pre-draft speculation that had Shelden going as high as the top 7 (at least), and there was near unanimous agreement after the draft that ATL reached for Shelden b/c no other team had him rated that high.

in the case of Childress, he's a great player to have on a team - smart, energetic, team guy, has well-rounded (if no amazing) skills. it's just that such a 'role' player is not worth a #6 pick. that's the kind of player one can pick up in the middle or late first round, sometime in the 2nd round. he's NEVER gonna live up to the expectations that come with being a top-6 pick. but that doesn't mean he's not a very necessary component to a playoff team. playoff teams need players that can come off the bench with energy, bench players that can play multiple positions and start for awhile with decent results. Marvin's a different problem. teams can only get by with drafting "potential" if they have a coaching staff that can develop talent. otherwise, you end up with young players who never improve their skillset. MW has loads of athletic talent, but he's very young and needs coaching. OR he's not the prospect the Hawks thought he was and they made a mistake making him the #2 pick. the Hawks could have had Childress lower than #6, just like they could have had Shelden lower than #5. it stinks they don't how to trade down...