spotatl

Ok... who can admit that Woodson has done a good job with the offense this year?

I am just paraphrasing and going to the logical conclusion of your ridiculous statements. You do want the Hawks to play more like other teams. Other teams that have better personnel on offense but aren't getting nearly as much production. You can try and distance yourself from that but its exactly what you are saying. Of course you don't like it when its pointed out but thats not my problem. When you say you want more motion and the ball in the hands of lesser offensive players- the result of that is going to be more turnovers. Maybe thats a tradeoff you are OK with- but that is going to be the result. If we had hired Rick Adelman I do think the offense would look different because I think the Hawks personnel would be different. I don't think that Adelman would build a team with Josh Smith and Horford as the frontcourt and Crawford would never have set foot in Atlanta. If we were having this discussion in the offseason and I was saying that I thought that the Hawks should take the ball out of Marvin and Josh's hands on offense and only giving it to them once the defense was unsettled we'd be having the same argument. But once they have DONE THIS and they have the best offense in the league you are still having the same argument. I believe that this is the best offense for the Hawks to run and making players do things they suck at would make the offense worse. If I were building a team I'd build it to have more flexibility. I'd want a stretch the floor bigman who could draw players away from the basket. I'd want a PG that can exploit poor defenders at the point. I'd want an actual post threat. But none of that has anything to do with what I would do if handed the roster the Hawks currently have. You are just wishcasting all sorts of skills on Hawks players and are completely ignoring how much better the Hawks offense has been compared to teams that are doing more of what you want. I do think that NBA coaches overall are far too full of themselves and make things too complicated. The NBA makes 1 on 1 defense illegal- I want a team that is going to take advantage of that fact and then kill the defense when they are forced to help by spreading the floor with shooters. I wish that Joe Johnson would force contact and get to the line more. I wish that Marvin woudl bust his *ss rebounding more so he could spend time as a stretch PF. But overall I am not going to criticize the coach for not going to a more traditional offense when he is getting such great results.

And what Kills me is that right now the Hawks have the best offense in the league this season even though the Hawks don't at all have the best personnel on offense. Yet you want the Hawks to mimic what other teams are doing that aren't getting nearly as much production. Instead of looking at what the Hawks are doing right that other teams would be smart to imitate you are bitching and moaning because the offense doesn't look like everyone else's offense. Ridiculous.

holy god are you delusional about the Hawks talent on offense AHF. If Marvin was a PF and taking a slower defender outside sure- but otherwise there isn't much use doing a 2/3 PnR when the guy marvin is bringing to the ball is likely quicker than Marvin. Horford is not AT ALL the guy I want bringing his defender out to the perimeter. I don't want Horford getting the ball more than 10 feet from the basket except as a last resort when the clock is winding down and the defense leaves him open for a jumper. If I am the defense I WANT horford taking that shot.

Pencil him in? I'd put major money that he doesn't get in. I think that between Lopez, Bogut, Perkins (if Doc's picking) and "pretend Bosh is a center" that Horford is at best 10% to make it. Whether he deserves it is a whole different discussion but who actually makes the allstar game is far different than who deserves to make it.

AHF- my contention is the Lakers have a better plan B than the Hawks because they have better talent on offense than the Hawks. If Kobe isn't working they have Gasol. If Gasol isn't working they have Bynum. IF the top 3 options aren't working they have Odom creating mismatches. or Artest. YES the Lakers have ,more options- they have MORE OPTIONS! AHF- simply put I think you would like to see more turnovers for the hawks. You want Smith and Horford to get the ball more when the defense is focused on them and I think thats a tremendous mistake. Woodson is maximixing the Hawks talent right now- there is nothing magical about the playoffs that will suddenly make Al Horford a good post player or make Josh Smith smarter with the ball. If I am building a team damn right I want a low post threat so I can hurt teams with weak interior defense. If I am building a team I want a team with more guys who can exploit weak defenders. But as a coach I am not going to ask guys on the team to do things that they are not capable of. The offense has taken off in large part because the Hawks don't give Josh Smith the ball against a settled defense so often. GIve it to him after the defense is already in motion. In the playoffs more than ever I don't want Josh Smith to get the ball when the defense is focused on him. In a pick and roll you still are bringing Josh Smith's man out to the ball far from where Josh smith is a threat to score. I'd rather Josh Smith work the back of the defense waiting for the help to come and crashing the offensive boards. And in the playoffs thats still where I want him because thats where I think he helps the offense the most. Not with the ball in his hands looking to make something happen

Put this another way. The Hawks don't have A Duncan. They Don't have an Hakeem. They don't have a Shaq. They don't have a Howard, They don't have a Gasol. They don't even have a Bynum. Yet you still think the Hawks should be running the same offense as those teams. Ridiculous.

The Heat won the championship going pretty mcuh strictly Iso. I don't know why you skipped over that. IF you want to say that teams with bigtime post threats have an advantage in the playoffs then hell yes I'm on board with that. But that has nothing to do with the offense the Hawks should be running. If the Hawks had Gasol or Howard on the roster and Woodson wasn't using him then sure lets have the discussion about whether the Hawks need to throw the ball down in the post more often. But the Hawks bigmen are FAR better in transition and are highly limited in the halfcourt- I think that its smart to only give them the ball when the defense is unsettled.

The Hawks score fewer points per game than Golden state but they actually have a pretty terrible offense. When I say the Hawks have the second best offense it has nothing at all to do with points per game. The Lakers have more options on offense than the Hawks do. If the Hawks had a Bynum or Gasol on the roster And woodson wasn't using them in the half court then hell sure you can blame that on Woodson. But the Hawks bigmen are better in transition than they are in halfcourt but you are still pouting about the fact that Woodson doesn't use them for things tehy aren't good at. I just think its ridiculous.

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.

Sorry- all offenses look worse in the playoffs because you are facing better teams and the defenses are better. It doesn't matter whether its ISO's or motion- all offenses have a tougher time. If you want to say that the Hawks defense isn't up to the task then I'm right there with you. But complaining about the offense this season is just ridiculous. In the playoffs I still think the Hawks offense shoudl be about not turning the ball over and keeping the ball in the Hawks of the best offensive players until the defense is unsettled. In the playoffs the Hawks aren't going to be better off running an offense they dont' have the personnel for just because the calendar changes. The NBA has made 1 on 1 defense virtually illegal yet you are complaining about woodson taking advantage of that. I just don't get it.

The roster is build to be better in transition than in the half court so Woodson gets criticized for having the #2 offense in the league despite this? Ridiculous. I repeat- the Hawks are the #2 offense in the league even though there are many teams personnel I'd rather have on offense. The Hawks have had a better offense this season than the Lakers yet Woodson still gets criticized. Seriously... People here are acting like the Hawks would have the best offense in the history of the league if they simply had a coach that was paying more attention. 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'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'll continue to trust Woodson's judgement on young players. People were crucifying Woodson for not playing Acie enough- turns out that Acie was just a terrible pick and he didn't even have his 4th year team option- Woodson just recognized it before the fans did. People crucified Woodson for not using Salim right- it turns out that Salim is now out of the league because he simply wasn't good enough and Woodson recognized it before anyone else here did. People crucified Woodson for his handling of Sheldon- he is now a journeman. I want to see Teague do great against backups- then I'll start giving him consistent minutes. I think early in the season the lack of a summer league hurt Teague's development and he simply wasn't ready. Now that he is showing more signs of being useful I'm fine with him getting more minutes. But I don't believe in giving minutes to people who aren't ready where they are set up to fail. Make people earn playing time in practice. Make people earn playing time playing against backups. THEN give them a bigger role- don't just play people because you think you are supposed to play them no matter what. And really thats what many people want- Teague to get 10 minutes no matter what.

If the Knicks miss out on lee then I think they would rather sign JJ then have all this caproom just go unused. they could easily bring back Lee and Joe with the room they have. Same with Chicago- if they miss out on Bosh and Wade I can easily see them thinking Joe is the key for them to take the next step. Same With Dallas. We'll see. I just think that once teams miss out on plan A (Lebron and Wade) then the plan B players will get overpaid. I think that Bosh, Amare, and Joe will all get max offers- there are simply too many teams that are going to have max room to offer for them not to.

The ASG has been willing to spend for talent on the court. I never thought in a million years that they would have made the bibby trade when they did. I personally would never have made the Crawford trade because of how much he is paid but the ASG wrote the check to get the deal done. I'm more interested by the people here who are adamant that the Hawks should not give JJ a max contract this offseason. I'm rather sure that someone will give him that offer and for the Hawks to keep him thats what it will take. But saying JJ isn't worth the max isn't really all that useful. Saying you would rather let Joe walk rather than paying him the max is a real statement because thats the decision the ASG will likely be faced with.

The Question isn't whether Joe is worth a max contact. (eveyone would prefer that he not get the max- thats an irrelevant question) The question is whether you think the Hawks would be better off letting him walk away for no compensation rather than paying him the max. SOMEONE is going to give Joe max money this offseason. There are so many teams desprately trying to clear caproom for players they aren't going to get (Wade, Lebron, etc) And once those 2 pieces fall then there are going to be a lot of teams fighting over Amare, Bosh, and Joe. If you think the team would be better off with 10 million in caproom instead of Joe then probably you should be looking to trade him now.

I don't get why anyone would bother taking the time to go out of their way to vote for Joe and Josh. Neither one of them has any chance at all of starting the ASG

Thats a .700 winning percentage. The Hawks are willing over 70% of their games right now and you still want to see Woodson fired. Like I said- its just a knee jerk reaction from you and it has nothing at all to do with the results on the court. You will just focus on the losses and never give woodson any credit at all for the wins. IF you hear an announcer talk about how the Hawks have a kindergarten offense and its a TOP THREE OFFENSE in the league then you should think that the announcer is dumb as a post. Announcers say ridiculous things constantly. And if you happen to agree with the announcer then the same thing applies.

The hawks are the best in league at not turning the ball over (pace adjusted) by a big margin. The difference between the hawks and second place is the same as the difference between 2nd place and 18th place teams. The Hawks are up to being a top 3 pace adjusted offfense this season and the lack of turnovers has a lot to do with it. For how much people get all warm and fuzzy when they see lots of ball movement that does have the downside of often putting the ball in the hands of lousy offensive players and making them do something with the ball.

Right... this all comes down to who gets selected as the backup center in the East behind Howard. Really the choices are Shaq, Lopez, Horford, and Bogut. (Noah was on the list but the Bulls are just too putrid) Shaq doesn't deserve it on any level whatsoever but it wouldn't shock me for him to get it. Since I don't think that Jennings will get selected I think that Bogut will get it.

Of course Woodson will get no credit for the fact that the team turns the ball over little. For how much people complain about iso joe, it keeps the ball in the hands of the best offensive players until the defense is unsettled. The Hawks are also middle of the pack as far as assist percentage goes so its not like the team just refuses to pass.

Buzzard- a .700 team wins 58 games. You are setting that as the BASELINE for what an OK coach would do with this team. Seriously- the team would have to go 62-20 for you to think that Woodson is doing a good job. Just as a comparison if you were willing to bet in vegas before the season that the Hawks would win more than 46 games you would have made money. You are just setting up unrealistic expectations then bitching and moaning when the team doesn't meet them. And you do it because you simply dislike woodson and want him gone no matter what results he gets on the court. And thats fine- you are a fan so you don't have to have realistic expectations and thats part of what being a fan is all about. But you should at least be aware of what you are doing and where your knee jerk reactions are coming from.

Like I said- you overestimate how much teams are supposed to win. If you bet on a team to win these games and they do 85% of the time then you will make a lot of money. All casual fans tend overestimate the percentage of time the favorite wins and so they correspondingly overreact when their team loses a game that they considered to be easy. If the Hawks win 85% of the games that they should in this situation they are exceeding expectations. The Hawks will never exceed expectations for you with Woodson in charge because you will only ahve the losses stick out for you and are basically imagining a world in which the Hawks would go almost undefeated with a different coach. But I still look forward to the game when you actually say that the players are to blame for the loss and not Woodson.

So where do you think the point is? I think that you have a ridiculous view of how often good teams win those kinds of games. If you think that the Hawks should win 90% of the games then there are still going to be 2 or 3 disasters in there where the Hawks lose to a team they are better than without it being the fault of the coach. I am just trying to figure out where you believe the line should be. Really whats going on is called confirmation bias. You already believe the Hawks are poorly coached and so whenever you see them struggle its going to VERIFY and stand out in your mind when it happens. But of course no team should be expected to always win against lessor teams. When the hawks overperform you will simply chalk it up to reasons other than Woodson and they won't stand out in your mind at all. The Hawks are 11 point favorites. I am just really curious how often you think that NBA teams who are 11 point favorites SHOULD win the game. (not cover- win)