niremetal

Also, there probably isn't a GM in the league who would prefer Collins over Zaza to guard Dwight. We brought Collins here in case people got hurt. Anyone who thought a minimum-salary vet center who spent last year playing garbage time minutes for a 25-win team was brought over to guard the best center in the NBA...well, just think about that.

The links are in my original post. For this year, the link is: http://www.teamrankings.com/nba/stat/fastbreak-points-per-game

Close - we were #5.

In 2006-2007, the Hawks averaged 38.7ppg in the paint, good for 18th in the league. We also averaged 11.8 fast break points per game in 2006-2007, tied for 17th in the league. This year, we are averaging a whopping 51.4ppg in the paint, tops in the NBA. We also are averaging 17.6 fast break ppg, good for 3rd in the league. Against New Orleans, we scored just 40 points in the paint, more than 20% below our season average. We got just 13 fast break points, 35% below our season average. Hmmmmmmmmmm... :whistling:

Btw - I currently live in the other city with notoriously terrible bball fans. Philadelphia cheers for the Phillies first, Eagles second, Flyers third, Nittany Lions fourth, Big Five hoops fifth, and Sixers last. I went to opening night (against the Hawks, as a matter of fact) here a couple years ago. Couldn't have been more than 5000 people in the stands.

I take strong issue with the idea that there is a good pro bball market in Atlanta. Atlanta is NOT a bball town, and certainly not a pro bball town. Unlike in Portland, Sacramento, and (most notably) Utah, the Hawks are not the only show in town. In fact, football and baseball have always been the first and second loves around here, and college sports have always trumped pro sports in the hearts and minds of fans. Add to that the fact that Atlanta is a really sprawling metro area (and without a supermassive population like LA), and the fan base of people who root for the Hawks before anyone else (which is what it normally takes to get them to buy a significant number of tickets) just isn’t that big. Atlanta fans are also notoriously casual and fair-weathered (remember how the Braves couldn't sell out playoff games during years where the Indians, who had been even more futile in the playoffs, were selling out every regular season game?), but I think that’s more due to the fact that Atlanta has so many people who were born and raised elsewhere than anything else. Just for context, though: The Hawks have never gotten higher than 8th in the NBA in attendance since they came to Atlanta, and the last two times they won more than 55 games (in ‘94 and ‘98), they ranked 21st and 27th in attendance. We ranked 27th in attendance in the lockout year, even though we ended up being the #3 seed in the East. Compare that to Utah, which ranked 8th in attendance even when they lost 56 games a few years ago. Simply put, when compared to NBA teams in other cities as well as to other sports teams in our own city, Hawks attendance takes longer to get going even when we are winning (and even then they don’t come in high numbers), and tails off much more quickly when they start losing. And of course, we’ve all seen the games at Phillips where there were more Knicks/Celtics fans than Hawks fans in the audience – even when the Knicks and Celtics were terrible. Hopefully, the “fair weather” and “casual” aspect will start to disappear over the course of the next 10-20 years as the number of Atlantans who were born and raised here increases, but that probably won’t change the fact that college football, baseball, pro football, and college basketball will all garner more attention than the NBA in Atlanta. Atlanta is NOT a good basketball market for a metro area of its size.

Fair enough, and good point.

I'm not sure our offense has been fine when we run ISO-Jamal. Like with ISO-Joe, it's fine if we run it every once in awhile. But the ISO-Jamal followed by ISO-Joe that we saw ad nauseum last night was not working. ISO plays are too easy to predict and cover if you run them as frequently as we do. I'd like to see Jamal off more screen-rolls rather than ISOs.

You're hilarious, dude. You're basing on what the Phoenix owner told the public and are dismissive of the possibility that the owner was bluffing, basically arguing that those self-interested statements are obviously more reliable than the read of a player who sat across the negotiation player from the owners, and acting as if no one else has ever said that Phoenix was bluffing (when in reality MOST Hawks fans who've talked about this here and on the AJC blog have said Phoenix was bluffing). Yet in your original post, you said that Phoenix "was" going to match and called your opinion "facts." How is that not speaking with certainty? Whatever. You keep trying to climb down from your high horse; have fun.

You spoke with absolute certainty in your original post on the subject ("Phoenix was willing to match our offer and keep him."). I responded with similar certainty. But unlike you, I didn't make a barely-veiled suggestion that you made your source up. That's the difference, buddy. You spoke with certainty and I responded in kind, but you were the one who proceeded to condescend by suggesting that I merely "thought" JJ said something. Everyone speaks with certainty around here when they state their opinions. That's part of being on a blog. But you're the first person I've seen respond to someone's post by saying something like your "what you think JJ said" statement. So don't try to equate our posts, unless you want other people to start responding to all your posts in the same way. Because if that happens, you'll find yourself having to provide links and citations for everything you say.

Here is a link with the quote: The original article on AJC has been archived, but you can find it reprinted on lots of other blogs. Since lots of Hawks fans remember and talk about that interview, it didn't occur to me that you'd be such a condescending jackass as to challenge me to find a link to it and dismiss me as only citing "what I think JJ said one or two years ago." My mistake for overestimating you.

Both Craw and JJ do it. It's a natural byproduct of an offense where isolations and 1-on-1s make up a majority of the half-court plays.

Phoenix most definitely was not willing to match our offer and keep him. Knight got bluffed. Do you really think Phoenix was about to invest $55-60M/year in just 4 players? JJ even said a year or two ago that Phoenix would never have matched. Phoenix wasn't going to give JJ a contract any better than the one we gave Smoove. He would have to take a pretty massive pay cut (relatively speaking) to stay put.

Even in a perfect world, if you play Smoove at small forward, he'll be out on the perimeter most of the time on defense. Why the hell would we want our best help defender - hell probably the league's best help defender - spending most of his time far away from the basket?

I disagree that Lopez is a better shot-blocker than Horford. I think they have equal abilities in that regard but Horford doesn't have to play help D as much because his teammates are better on-ball defenders than Lopez's are, and Josh is our primary help defender in terms of blocking shots. In short, Lopez has more opportunities to block shots, so I'm not surprised he took them. It's not unlike how Smoove's block numbers went down last year after Horford's block numbers ticked up (although now they're both back up as they've adjusted to each others' presence). That's what happens when you play for a better team - the individual players' stats usually are less than they otherwise would be. In any case, I don't see YOU disagreeing that Horford is less foul-prone, a better rebounder, better on-ball defender, better passer, and better running the floor on the break. But hey, if you think the fact that Lopez is a better scorer for a worse team trumps all that, fire away. Good luck convincing people you're right.

I wonder if his entourage's expense accounts have been cut significantly since he came to Atlanta and got his new, smaller contract.

I have watched the Nets play. And Horford is a better defender, a better rebounder, less foul-prone, a better passer, and just a more efficient player than Lopez. Lopez has a smoother offensive game, but Horford has lit it up a couple times this year and has consistently played more efficiently on both ends. Lopez is getting a lot of touches because the team sucks. His FG% is one of the league's worst among centers. And he gets a couple blocks on help D, but he also is playing frankly terrible on-ball D. Does he have a smoother post game on offense? Yes. But I seriously don't see any other area in which he has an edge over Horford. As for Lopez being in the league a year less than Horford...so what? What does that have to do with who should make the All-Star team THIS year? Sorry, but you seem to basing your assessment almost entirely on Lopez's scoring. And when you're talking about an 0-12 team, that's not much to hang your hat on.

Uh....first off, yes you can hold it against them, unless they are playing transcendent basketball. That's why Kevin Durant hasn't made an All-Star team yet, and why JJ only got selected as an alternate after 2 guys got hurt when he was averaging 25ppg back in 06-07. Brook Lopez is playing very good, but far from transcendent, basketball. He's giving up lots of points to opposing centers and his stats aren't as impressive as you seem to think - he's below 18ppg and 9rpg. For a center, that's hardly incredible. Winning team isn't a prerequisite, nor should it be, but it absolutely is and should be a factor to consider. After all, Horford probably would be averaging more points and more blocks if he and Lopez switched places, since he'd get more touches and would be the #1 help defender. And conversely, Lopez would probably have much less gaudy stats if he were playing on a team whose only other offensive threat so far this year wasn't Chris Douglas-Roberts (which is why, btw, Harris's absense is a double-edged sword as far as Lopez's production). Second and related, it's not like Lopez is clearly outplaying Horford even on paper. He's averaging 17.2 and 8.5. Horford is averaging 13.8 and 10.3. Lopez has more blocks, but Horford is also holding opposing centers to way fewer points than Lopez has been. Horford is also averaging 2 fewer minutes per game. No doubt Lopez is a stud, but I think Horford has played better this year, and for a MUCH better team. I admit that I may have overreached when I said Horford was the "clear-cut" second best center in the East. But you think Lopez is clearly the second best center in the East? Good luck convincing people that you're right, and good luck convincing people that it's clear.

If the Nets are like 5-23 at the time the reserves are announced, I would be shocked if Lopez's name were even breathed in the same sentence as "All-Star." Assuming Dwight wins the fan vote, the only centers besides Horford who should even be in the discussion are the O'Neals and Bogut. Joakim Noah would normally be in contention considering that he is leading the NBA in rebounding, but he (like Battier) got shafted when the All-Star ballots were made. That will make it tough for the coaches to include him, since it would be too embarrassing for the Bulls and the NBA for a guy to be put on the team who didn't even make the ballot. Right now, Horford is the clear-cut second-best center in the East (behind Howard), and probably the third-best center in the NBA (Howard and Bynum - assuming you're counting Duncan as a PF). Ain't that somethin'?

Right now, I agree. The concern that a lot of people have, though (myself included), is that once the playoffs arrive, teams will be able to break our offense down. It's much easier to scheme against an ISO offense than one that has a lot of ball movement.

MVP? He's been great, but come on, now. I'm sure there's plenty of people on this board who will argue he's not even the MVP of this team.

It's Manu slapping the bat out of midair: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yT-F5QznjrA

Maybe they realized how idiotic it was to give COY to Brown.

Same here.

I just close and re-open it during timeouts. Seems to keep it from falling more than a few seconds behind.