Another call for Woodson's job

[macdaddy]

From the AJC. I don't know if this has been posted:

Quote:

---

Part of Hawks’ problem: Woodson

By Jeff Schultz | Monday, January 30, 2006, 07:01 PM

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

Jeff Schultz

Two losing coaches had dinner Sunday night and split an order of misery, well done.

Of course, once you get past the malnourished win-loss percentages and the dueling hang-in-theres, there’s really only so much that Larry Brown and Mike Woodson have in common. The New York Knicks can morph into a Toronto Raptor starter kit and Brown isn’t going anywhere. Brown doesn’t get fired. He promises his undying love for a team and then quits, or he coaches one in the NBA Finals while negotiating with another. It’s the benefit of not having a conscience.

Woodson doesn’t have Brown’s comfort zone. Notwithstanding’s Monday’s 120-101 win over the Knicks, the Hawks aren’t morphing into anything. That’s the problem. They’re still the Hawks.

Change the owners, the general manager, the players, the coach, the formula for artificially inflating attendance figures. Doesn’t matter. They’re still the face Murphy was thinking about when he said, “Hmmm. I’ve got this idea for a law.”

Even with the victory, the Hawks are on pace to finish 23-59. The scary reality: That would be an improvement over last year’s franchise-worst 13-69. But that’s sort of like comparing a clean rag with a used one. In the end, it’s still a rag.

Woodson is 25-100 after a season and a half. He was the fastest to 100 defeats in Hawks coaching history, breathing or otherwise. The team let that plateau pass without a commemorative cyanide capsule giveaway.

Now, this isn’t all Woodson’s fault. The Hawks are missing parts. They have been molded by the thumbs of Billy Knight. But when a team continually fizzles down the stretch of games, there’s a problem. When a team looks as lost after a timeout as before it, there’s a problem.

When a team is getting punked by Boris Diaw, there’s a problem.

The problem is Woodson.

Brown doesn’t think so. He believes any speculation that Woodson might be fired is undeserved.

“I’ve never had an assistant who was better,” said Brown, Woodson’s boss in Detroit and Philadelphia. “If they [Hawks owners] think they can do better, they ought to coach.”

I’m thinking: Could they do worse?

Let’s be clear: The Hawks should not have been considered a playoff team before this season. But they should have been considered somewhere between a playoff team and this. Youth aside, when players make the same mistakes nightly, it does not scream significant improvement.

Either what Woodson is preaching to his players is wrong (unlikely), or what he’s preaching isn’t sinking in (more likely). Blame the message or the messenger. Regardless, it falls on Woodson.

He’s the nicest, classiest guy in the world. But it’s not working. He’s not working. Losing close games shouldn’t be taken as a sign that things are getting better. Everybody loses close games. If the Hawks were 20 games under .500 after a full season (31-51), that would be progress. But 20 games under .500 after 42 — big problem.

Here’s another problem: Almost everybody can cross the Hawks’ roster with their record and conclude, “They’re underachieving.”

Not Woodson. When asked if this team had underachieved, he said: “I can’t say that. What I am saying is there have probably been at least 10 games we controlled and were somewhat our own worst enemy.”

Guess what? Every team can make those claims. Lucky shots, bad breaks, unfair calls, tired legs — all that stuff evens out. They’re losers’ excuses.

Woodson attributed late-game breakdowns to the team’s youth, then said: “I have to take responsibility for that. I can’t put it all on the players because we’re all in it together.”

They’re in it together. But they’re not on even footing. The Hawks have already fired all the players. They’re not going to do that again. When Boris Diaw turns into a threat, it’s not all because of his supporting cast.

Woodson says he still comes to work “excited about my job every day.”

Well. That’s one.

He dismissed speculation on his future, saying: “If a head coach has to look over his shoulder always worrying about his job, he can’t do his job.”

Tunnel vision gets you through a day. But it hasn’t helped his record. Brown can relate to the loss total, but he can fall back on his résumé. Woodson is trying to fall back on hope. Good luck with that.

---

[shock]

A very weak argument by shultz in my opinion. I agree with him, but he didnt exactly lay out some hard evidence to support his claim. He's had much better columns in his days. But maybe it was one of those pieces to just get the owner and gm's attention, and echo the sentiments of the fans.

[chillzatl]

but his analysis of why shows that this guy knows next to nothing about the NBA. I mean c'mon, he bases it on our record and HIS paper-ideals about how good this time can or should be. Larry Browns team is just as bad or worse, they lose games just like we do (close giveaways and total blowouts) yet he gets a pass because of his previous results. It shows that he doesn't understand how it is in the NBA. More pointedly, what it is like being a young, inexperiened team with very little depth.

Quote:

---

But when a team continually fizzles down the stretch of games, there’s a problem. When a team looks as lost after a timeout as before it, there’s a problem.When a team is getting punked by Boris Diaw, there’s a problem.

---

Stuff like this just backs it up. When you have a team chock full of young inexperienced players and no real floor leader, what do you expect? Look around the league at the bad teams and you will find that nearly every one of them suffers these same "symptoms" and most are stocked with young, inexperienced players. It's how it is in the NBA.

I agree with his sentiment that Woodson probably needs to go. I say probably because i'm still not 100% convinced of that. As the Knicks have proven, the coach can only do so much. Supposedly Larry Brown is as good as they get. Yet he can't make his young, inexperienced, bad team, good. Woodson will learn and just like our players, he will improve. I'm not sold that creating more instability in an effort to get another coach would be worth the trouble.

[macdaddy]

I was very surprised to see him have a column about it when he rarely writes about the nba. There is obviously mounting sentiment for it, but even though I lean that way I agree it might not make a difference this season.

I think the situation with Brown is different in that he's only been there half a season. Its all about improvement and obviously we have improved over last year but have we improved enough?

[chillzatl]

I don't see the situation being any different for Brown. He's got a team with some big names, he's got some hot young talent and he's the coach of the century. He was supposed to be about getting the most out of his players. Hell they look worse this year than they were last year, and that's not an easy thing to do!

But that's the reality of the game. You have young players, inexperienced players, it doesn't matter if god himself coached your team, you would not win games. All the mistakes that our team makes, that so many people piss themselves over and call for the coaches head, those are things that ALL young teams do and will always do, regardless of who their coach is.

actually, I've just changed my stance. Woodson should not be fired. THere just isn't any point. Sure he's made mistakes, I will not overlook that. I think his mistakes have cost us probably 2-3 wins. But he still has his players ears and they still play hard for him and TRY to do the right thing. For a really bad team, that is the hardest thing for a coach to do. And I know good and well that there isn't a coach on the planet that is going to get much more out of these guys than he's getting right now. They might not make the mistakes he's made. But as long as he learns from those mistakes and we see improvement from everyone, him included, I see no reason to change for hte sake of changing.

[er9dverk]

a-men there chillz, at least for the moment. i see no reason to keep burning down the house out of impatience.

the one thing that gives me pause about woodie is the diaw situation. d'antoni sticks him at the 4 and he flourishes. makes me wonder about woodie's flexibility and instincts a little.

i know there are lots who say diaw didnt try for us (and lots who cant stand him cuz hes french), but it seems woodie may have forced him to be a one, or sit. a one, he aint. a good player, he is, there is no question now. good interior d, great hands and handles for a big guy. odd for a team who has no interior d to include a tall defender like that as a "throw-in." makes me wonder if we even knew what he could do.

[chillzatl]

I don't think Diaw was forced to do anything more than what his abilities allowed. He was put out there and asked to play. The position in the lineup that he occupied was meaningless. Make passes, rebound, play some D and hit open shots. That's what he was asked to do and those things don't change regardless of where you stand in the lineup. The problem was that he refused to shoot the ball, to the detriment of his team. He still doesn't like to shoot the ball. But his current team is good enough that is just doesn't matter. When he passes up an open shot, the guy he passes to is usually a better scorer than he is anyway.

So I don't really pin any of diaws failings here on Woody. He asked him to do what any coach in his situation would do. Diaw just didn't want to do it and complained to the media about it. You can't let a player show up the coach like that. Let alone a nearly anonymous player like Diaw was at the time. Had our team been more developed, he would have been a nice player to have. If we had him RIGHT NOW, with JJ and AL, he would probably look just as good as he does in Phoenix.

[Nicholasp27]

Quote:

---

but it seems woodie may have forced him to be a one, or sit.

---

why do people keep saying this?!?!?

diaw played ZERO minutes at pg one season and only 4% of pg mins another

he played in the upper teens at the 2/3 each year but 0 and 4% at the one

woody

did

not

force

diaw

to

be

a

one

[er9dverk]

well i'll take you guys' word for it since i didnt see diaw play much when he was here.

really what you say is reassuring to me, since my one real misgiving with woodie, so far, was the thought that he didnt know what to do with boris.

otherwise, i think its too early to judge woodie. we dont have all the pieces. hes new to coaching in general, and this job would be a challenge to the best coach.

[Nicholasp27]

he didn't know what to do with boris

boris would play very very well, singlehandedly taking the knicks game into ot and then almost winning the game despite the rest of the team sucking and then got DNP the next few games

woody caused boris to be traded because he made it certain that boris would never re-sign here

[bralin1]

John, it is not too early to judge Woody. If you go to games consistently then you would know. The guy is well beyond his capabilities and if you can't see it you are blind.

I am utterly amazed that Mike Woodson has anybody left defending him. That just proves that there are some people who have zero idea what they are seeing on the court. They probably don't know the difference between a basketball game and a hockey game. Unbelievable.

[Guest Walter]

It was Diaw's fault he played significantly better under Stotts and D'antoni than Woody? That's two coaches that showed his promise and were utilizing his rare talents respectively. Woody? He all-but ran the guy out of town with his incompetence?!?

Woody is flat out incompetent. He is a "defensive specialist" of one of if not the worst defensive team(s) in the league. He forgets players entirely and ADMITS IT! The guy just needs to get gone.

Flat out, if we could have traded Pheonix Woody instead of Diaw we should have. Instead, we traded away a rare skill set as part of the deal for JJ to ease the suffering of a lame, lame duck coach.

[KB21]

I posted not long ago that a veteran coach like Mike Fratello might have 3-4 more wins at this point than Mike Woodson does right now with this team.

How long have I been stressing that this is all part of the natural progress a young team makes.

For those that haven't noticed, the Hawks have matched last season's win total, and it isn't even the All-Star break yet.

The Hawks are on pace to win around 23 games, which is a 10 game improvement over last season. I believe the Hawks will probably end up somewhere between 25-30 wins, which would be a truly astonishing turn around from last season. You can take a look at the history of the NBA and see that teams rarely have 10+ game turnarounds from one season to the next.

[bralin1]

You will sell out anytime to defend your two buddies. If Mike Fratello would have 3-4 more wins than Woodson then Fratello is a better coach. The fact is that he would have 6-7 more wins and the Hawks would be required to play defense.

Defending the GM is bad enough...the coach is indefensible. Maybe you should attend some classes on how basketball should be played. Then you might be able to spot a lousy coached team. This young team deserves better. A whole lot better.

[gsuteke]

Quote:

---

I don't see the situation being any different for Brown. He's got a team with some big names, he's got some hot young talent and he's the coach of the century. He was supposed to be about getting the most out of his players. Hell they look worse this year than they were last year, and that's not an easy thing to do!

But that's the reality of the game. You have young players, inexperienced players, it doesn't matter if god himself coached your team, you would not win games. All the mistakes that our team makes, that so many people piss themselves over and call for the coaches head, those are things that ALL young teams do and will always do, regardless of who their coach is.

actually, I've just changed my stance. Woodson should not be fired. THere just isn't any point. Sure he's made mistakes, I will not overlook that. I think his mistakes have cost us probably 2-3 wins. But he still has his players ears and they still play hard for him and TRY to do the right thing. For a really bad team, that is the hardest thing for a coach to do. And I know good and well that there isn't a coach on the planet that is going to get much more out of these guys than he's getting right now. They might not make the mistakes he's made. But as long as he learns from those mistakes and we see improvement from everyone, him included, I see no reason to change for hte sake of changing.

---

ok so how do you explain, or DEFEND rather Woodson's use of Royal Ivey. it's plain DUMB!

[gsuteke]

Quote:

---

I posted not long ago that a veteran coach like Mike Fratello might have 3-4 more wins at this point than Mike Woodson does right now with this team.

How long have I been stressing that this is all part of the natural progress a young team makes.

For those that haven't noticed, the Hawks have matched last season's win total, and it isn't even the All-Star break yet.

The Hawks are on pace to win around 23 games, which is a 10 game improvement over last season. I believe the Hawks will probably end up somewhere between 25-30 wins, which would be a truly astonishing turn around from last season. You can take a look at the history of the NBA and see that teams rarely have 10+ game turnarounds from one season to the next.

---

if you have one of the 5 worst EVER records in the NBA the previous year there is nowhere to go but up. ignorant statement on your part. 'astonishing' my white @ss. i hate to be the negative one here but wake up dude.

[Squawker24]

Your right, this team deserves better coaching, alot better. Right now we are 8 games away from the eigth seed, a win here and a win there could have made a big difference.

[chillzatl]

Quote:

---

ok so how do you explain, or DEFEND rather Woodson's use of Royal Ivey. it's plain DUMB!

---

I'm not one of the people who think that Ivey deserves blanket minutes. He's all over the map. Sometimes he has good games where he's a factor and sometimes he's a complete void out there. The only thing he really does consistantly is play solid D. That's not very good or great D. But solid D. He's just too inconsistant in his overall game to deserve blanket minutes just because he's on the roster and some people here like him.

[Jdawgflow]

Ivey might not play great (maybe not even good) all of the time, but he definately deserves more minutes than he is getting. The offense seems to flow better with Ivey in the game. And the defense is MUCH improved when Ivey is playing. The starters seem more comfortable with Ivey in my opinion.

I like Lue okay, but it really bothers me watching him run the same pick and roll play (often multiple times) on almost every possession. And then I have to watch his man go past him on almost every possession. It gets old. He is a good backup when he is scoring points, but I do not think he deserves that many more minutes than Ivey.

Give Ivey the credit he is due. He definately deserves

~20 minutes a game. And I, for one, would like to see how he handles finishing out the game. The end of game lineup I would prefer would be:

Ivey

Johnson

Childress

Smith

Marvin/Zaza

Anyways, just my two cents.

[Plainview1981]

Quote:

---

I don't think Diaw was forced to do anything more than what his abilities allowed. He was put out there and asked to play. The position in the lineup that he occupied was meaningless. Make passes, rebound, play some D and hit open shots. That's what he was asked to do and those things don't change regardless of where you stand in the lineup. The problem was that he refused to shoot the ball, to the detriment of his team. He still doesn't like to shoot the ball. But his current team is good enough that is just doesn't matter. When he passes up an open shot, the guy he passes to is usually a better scorer than he is anyway.

So I don't really pin any of diaws failings here on Woody. He asked him to do what any coach in his situation would do. Diaw just didn't want to do it and complained to the media about it. You can't let a player show up the coach like that. Let alone a nearly anonymous player like Diaw was at the time. Had our team been more developed, he would have been a nice player to have. If we had him RIGHT NOW, with JJ and AL, he would probably look just as good as he does in Phoenix.

---

He just "didn't want to do it" in Atlanta... But he goes over to the Suns and now he just wants to.

hmmmmm... sounds like a problem with the ones running the team to me. I mean, why would he just not want to do it for Woody, but easily do it for Mike?

I think apart of it is that Woody is used to crappy american ball and doesn't understand how to use Euro's... You know, sorta like Larry Brown. No wonder american coaches are getting schooled by the coaches that coach the euro teams.