Time to give credit where it is due Woody haters

[TheNorthCydeRises]

Quote:

---

... or even close to it, Woodson would be exposed to the rest of the world as the completely horrible coach that he is. It's like we're in a bubble or something. No one has paid attention to us for years. If there is more attention on the team, there will be more scrutiny of the coach.

---

I would love to see this team to do the unthinkable, and win their next 5 games. That would give us an 8-game win streak, and run our record to 15 - 10.

LOL . . . Woody still wouldn't get any credit. This is exactly what Sekou was talking about in his blog today.

[DavidSomerset]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

... or even close to it, Woodson would be exposed to the rest of the world as the completely horrible coach that he is. It's like we're in a bubble or something. No one has paid attention to us for years. If there is more attention on the team, there will be more scrutiny of the coach.

---

I would love to see this team to do the unthinkable, and win their next 5 games. That would give us an 8-game win streak, and run our record to 15 - 10.

LOL . . . Woody still wouldn't get any credit. This is exactly what Sekou was talking about in his blog today.

---

Yep, no matter what he does, people will never give him credit...

[BusBoyIsBack]

Quote:

---

I would love to see this team to do the unthinkable, and win their next 5 games. That would give us an 8-game win streak, and run our record to 15 - 10.

LOL . . . Woody still wouldn't get any credit. This is exactly what Sekou was talking about in his blog today.

---

And the reason why such a win streak isn't feasible is BECAUSE of Woodson. He hurts this team more than he helps it

We are built to run, yet how often do we do so?

He is too dumb to bench Pachulia or give Marvin more minutes instead of Childress

Only when they are injured does it look like he has a clue

But even still, we don't run nearly as much as we should

And of course the worst part about him is that he doesn't call timeouts until the other team goes on a 10-0 run

[MikeWilksBooth]

Woody is a moron. lol@thing about Fiz being high. I missed the game tonight because of a combination of females and football but a good win. Woody still sucks and he looks like Willie Randolph except fatter...but both have the whole clueless what the hell is going on look down perfectly

[TexasPete]

People will never give Woody credit because he is a horrible head coach. And if you knew what you were watching you would know that much.

What, are you an Atlanta Spirit employee or something?

[DavidSomerset]

Quote:

---

People will never give Woody credit because he is a horrible head coach. And if you knew what you were watching you would know that much.

What, are you an Atlanta Spirit employee or something?

---

No.

FWIW, I agree that Woody does some real strange things as a coach that I don't agree with.

However, he has this team playing great defense and playing their absolute hardest every single night (which is a VERY hard thing to motivate an NBA team to do night in and night out).

We could talk about substitution patterns, offensive schemes, blah blah blah all day long, but at the end of the day there is one and only one thing that I care about.

Wins.

Of course looking at Woody's overall record and comparing him to any other NBA coach is not a valid comparison.

You have to look at the SITUATION, and looking at the situation of personnel on this team, there is absolutely no way I could have expected any more wins than Woody has gotten us during the years he has been coaching.

As I said, I think in two of his 3 years so far, we were about right on par with the level of NBA ready talent on our team ('04, '06...Injuries), and he actually OVERACHIEVED relative to our talent in 2005.

I'm not going to complain about him as long as the bottom line (WINS) matches my expectations for the roster.

As of right now, looking at this team and our schedule, I would have expected 8-12...He has us at 10-10...IMO, he is already overachieving this year.

Not to mention how there is only 1 out of the 12 or so ESPN experts that even picked us to finish higher than 10th in the EC, and right now we are 7th or whatever.

We are OVERACHIEVING so far this year compared to all REASONABLE people's expectations.

Woody's gotta be doing something right.

[BHayley]

I have to agree with jdu00743.

Woody has us playing great basketball right now.

Stan Van Gundy said after the game we're the FIRST team they've played all year who has contested every shot.

With better substitution and offensive plans however, we'd easily have 3 or 4 more wins right now.

It was just so frustrating these last few years, game after game giving up 6 point leads at the end of EVERY OTHER GAME and not being able to maintain intensity in the 4th.

This year is different though.

I hope this team comes out and fights tonight. I'd love to see Marvin/Childress get huge minutes (assuming Childress is back), get the win, and not have to play JJ all game

[AHF]

Quote:

---

he has this team playing great defense and playing their absolute hardest every single night (which is a VERY hard thing to motivate an NBA team to do night in and night out).

---

I wish I could agree with this. Some games we are clearly motivated. Others we seem to have problems sleepwalking through significant portions of the game.

The best thing I can say about Woody is that the team hasn't quit on him in his 3+ years of coaching.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

Quote:

---

And the reason why such a win streak isn't feasible is BECAUSE of Woodson. He hurts this team more than he helps it

We are built to run, yet how often do we do so?

He is too dumb to bench Pachulia or give Marvin more minutes instead of Childress

Only when they are injured does it look like he has a clue

But even still, we don't run nearly as much as we should

And of course the worst part about him is that he doesn't call timeouts until the other team goes on a 10-0 run

---

Yep, we need to run. Forget that the vast majority of running teams have a PG that can create for others at a very high rate, or take over the scoring load himself. Forget that most running teams have shooters galore that can knock down open shots from anywhere. Even though we have none of that here, we need to run.

Some of you are holding onto this idea of running, yet, are completely ignoring why we've won 7 out of 10. DEFENSE.

Like I said a week ago, we're built to defend, not to run. We resemble the Pistons more than any other team you can compare us with. And if you play good defense, you'll create quick transition opportunites. We should only run when we get stops. And even then, we need to have the advantage to make the most out of that opportunity.

I had friend in college about 13 years ago at the U. of Tennessee, that used to get frustrated everytime Alabama would beat us. Back in the early and mid-90s, it wasn't Florida we couldn't beat, it was Bama. Forget that offensively we were always superior, we still found unbelievable ways to lose to Bama.

But on this occasion, Arkansas had come to Knoxville and stunned the Vols. I think they ended up beating us on a punt return. LOL . . . it was so silent after the game. You'd think that you'd just come from a memorial service.

At the same time, Alabama was winning one of those ugly Alabama type games in which they dominated you on defense, and did just enough on offense to win the game.

My friend turns to me, and says something that I'll never forget:

In a high-pitched, frustrated voice, he says . . .

"I would LOVE to win a 10 - 7 ballgame!!!"

He understood that no matter how pretty or how explosive of an offensive team we were, having a good to great defensive team was always better to have.

With all of the great offensive players we had throughout the 90s, the Vols didn't win a national title until they had a great defense. Peyton Manning with an average defense, couldn't get it done. Tee Martin with a great defense, did.

I'll take a game like last night, in which our defense won, over a 109 point game in which we still lose by 7. Damn looking pretty and winning. I just want to win, PERIOD.

Good job these last 10 games Woody. Let's see if you can get these guys to play another 10 like that.

[AHF]

The Celtics won a h#$& of a lot of championships both playing uptempo offense and suffocating defense.

The two ideas are not mutually exclusive.

[BusBoyIsBack]

Quote:

---

The Celtics won a h#$& of a lot of championships both playing uptempo offense and suffocating defense.

The two ideas are not mutually exclusive.

---

Not to mention we are clearly a better team when we run.

Running isn't all about Nash

With BK's vision you have 5 guys who can push the ball up the court to create the numbers game.

So many times when a Horford pushes the ball up the floor it opens up an easy jam for Marvin.

We are a helluva lot better team when we push the ball after a rebound and it's not even close.

[thesheedera]

Quote:

---

Great defensive game plan, and just an overall good coaching job by the head man.

Put aside the hate, and admit he did a good job.

10-10 with this team at this point in the season with the eastern conference looking the way it is works for me!

---

I'll give Woody some love - this team is playing tough, playing great D, and actually appears to be running some creative sets. It seems to be a series of curls and post ups withing 15 feet and it is getting a lot of our players touches and opportunities. I hope it's a tren and not just a blip on the screen.

I don't think he'll ever be a championship quality coach, but I think he's doing a solid job at the moment.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

Quote:

---

The Celtics won a h#$& of a lot of championships both playing uptempo offense and suffocating defense.

The two ideas are not mutually exclusive.

---

AHF . . what did those great Celtic teams have? Guards like Cousy, Havlicek, Archibald, and Dennis Johnson. Do we have any guard on this team with 1/3rd of the taent of any of those guys? And how many of those guards are in the Hall of Fame?

I guess Smoove is our Bill Russell? JJ our Larry Bird? Salim our Danny Ainge? Marvin our KC Jones? Horford our Robert Parish?

(( talking like Ozzie Guillen ))

"Ppppfffff . . . please."

Good lord man. Those Boston teams could do it all. Defend you. Run with you. Play half court and destroy you. The current Celtics resemble the old school Cetics, because they can win any type of game. Same wth the Spurs, which is the reason why they have 4 titles in 9 years.

The Hawks can't do that ish. We win when we defend well. But we can be good offensively, and stll lose a game ( see Seattle )

Yet, people blame the coach for not running . . . incredible. I totallly agree with Woody when he said earlier in the year that the Hawks can't run like they wanted, because they didn't defend and rebound well enough. It's incredible that you guys will settle for Smoove or Horford to lead a fast break, just for the sake of playing uptempo.

I only want them to run when the opportunity presents itself. I dont want them running, just for the sake of running. LOL . . and don't want the PF or our C making decisons in the open court on the fast break.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Great defensive game plan, and just an overall good coaching job by the head man.

Put aside the hate, and admit he did a good job.

10-10 with this team at this point in the season with the eastern conference looking the way it is works for me!

---

I'll give Woody some love - this team is playing tough, playing great D, and actually appears to be running some creative sets. It seems to be a series of curls and post ups withing 15 feet and it is getting a lot of our players touches and opportunities. I hope it's a tren and not just a blip on the screen.

I don't think he'll ever be a championship quality coach, but I think he's doing a solid job at the moment.

---

Sheed, we've always ran that offense under Woody. Execution is another thing. This isn't something that he's recently come up with. And I agree, he's doing a solid job right now. That doesn't make him a good coach, but it doesn't make him a bad or clueless one either.

Most of Hawksquawk tries to have it both ways. When we lose, it's all because of Woody. When we win, it's in spite of Woody. Sorry, but people can't have it both ways. Some games, the blame should go to Woody. Other games, it's more of the players fault. But most of the time, both players and coaches have t take responsiblity.

At least you're willing to give him a little credit when we are playing well enough to win.

[oken]

look i want woody to do well.

sometimes threatening to fire someone will get them to work harder.

i kept yelling during the twolves game for him to get off his butt and start coaching...

i dont like it when he sits there and looks confused...

get up get into the game talk to ur players and communicate and be passionate about winning!

and if you're players aren't responding, put some players in that are!

anyhow i think this recent good fortune has to do with the return of Acie Law, and also the injuries of Zaza and Lue...

we really don't need Zaza's lack of defense and clumsy offense...

and I think Lue is a good shooter when he's open, but he is NOT A POINT GUARD.

if the hawks can keep up their play night in and night out then we have nothing bad to say about this team...

its up to the coach to get that effort out of his players...

[DrReality]

The paper said it was Fizdale's idea to put JJ on their pg which disrupted their offense. Can't give Woody that credit. He obviously needs to listen to them more and let them give direction.

[AtLaS]

Quote:

---

Sheed, we've always ran that offense under Woody. Execution is another thing.

---

I just don't agree with that. Our offense didn't look good at all last night. Had Orlando actually hit some of those open threes they got, or if they made some free throws, we'd be in here talking about how bad our offense looked. Bottom line is our offense got very stagnant last night in the 2nd half, and we are lucky Orlando kept turning the ball over (alot of which can be attributed to our D), but also because of their missed threes and free throws.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

Quote:

---

The paper said it was Fizdale's idea to put JJ on their pg which disrupted their offense. Can't give Woody that credit. He obviously needs to listen to them more and let them give direction.

---

Because Fitz came up wth the right idea to limit the Magic, Woody can't get any credit. Even though it's part of Fitz's job to help the coach, when he does, coach can't get any credit. I wonder if Popovich ever got help from one of his assistants about an elemet of the gameplan?

If we lose tonight, I'm sure it will be all his fault. If we win, it'll be because of some other element outside of Woody.

Woody might as well resign then. Damned if he does . . . damned if he doesn't.

[AHF]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

The Celtics won a h#$& of a lot of championships both playing uptempo offense and suffocating defense.

The two ideas are not mutually exclusive.

---

AHF . . what did those great Celtic teams have? Guards like Cousy, Havlicek, Archibald, and Dennis Johnson. Do we have any guard on this team with 1/3rd of the taent of any of those guys? And how many of those guards are in the Hall of Fame?

I guess Smoove is our Bill Russell? JJ our Larry Bird? Salim our Danny Ainge? Marvin our KC Jones? Horford our Robert Parish?

(( talking like Ozzie Guillen ))

"Ppppfffff . . . please."

Good lord man. Those Boston teams could do it all. Defend you. Run with you. Play half court and destroy you. The current Celtics resemble the old school Cetics, because they can win any type of game. Same wth the Spurs, which is the reason why they have 4 titles in 9 years.

---

You are mixing several things together, such as Celtics teams that ran (the Red era) and Celtics teams that were designed to excel in the halfcourt (the Bird era). I have no idea why you are comparing the older Celtics to the Spurs other than the fact that they are both able to succeed in multiple styles of play. The Spurs are a halfcourt team that can run. The Celtics were a running team that could play halfcourt. Not comparable.

In either case, I don't understand your comparison. Are you suggesting that since we don't have players who match up with Bill Russell, Bob Cousy, etc. that we can't run?

By that rationale, we should not play any kind of offense. The Rockets played inside-out. Horford=Hakeem? No? Then you better not play inside-out.

Want to play like the Pistons? Law is not the same player as Billups. Smoove is not the same as either Wallace. Marvin can't D or play point forward like Tayshaun. Guess we can't play that style either.

That kind of comparison is not helpful or insightful, IMO.

Quote:

---

The Hawks can't do that ish. We win when we defend well. But we can be good offensively, and stll lose a game ( see Seattle )

Yet, people blame the coach for not running . . . incredible. I totallly agree with Woody when he said earlier in the year that the Hawks can't run like they wanted, because they didn't defend and rebound well enough. It's incredible that you guys will settle for Smoove or Horford to lead a fast break, just for the sake of playing uptempo.

---

Ever tire of being accused of raising a strawman? Then find a single post where I have ever suggested that Smoove should be the one leading a fast break. Good luck.

Quote:

---

I only want them to run when the opportunity presents itself. I dont want them running, just for the sake of running. LOL . . and don't want the PF or our C making decisons in the open court on the fast break.

---

Who is saying we should run for the sake of running? Again quote a post or stop making lame strawmen that you can knock down.

I could just as easily refuse to actually discuss this with you by falsely misrepresenting your position by saying: "I don't want the Hawks giving up our entire offense by focusing everything on defense. And I sure don't want to play five power forwards just to improve our defensive rebounding LOL"

The whole idea that you have to stop focusing on rebounding and defense in order to run is not part of what I am advocating. I am pointing out that if I was scheming against the Hawks I would want them playing a slow-paced offense (like we do) that eliminates many of the advantages on the offensive end of the court of our athleticism. We have shown we can run when we move the ball and it is a beautiful thing. Grab the rebound, make the outlet pass, and finish the break!

[Lascar78]

Quote:

---

That's just such a horrible argument, because EVERY NBA head coach gets TONS of ideas from their assistants, this is nothing new.

---

You're completely missing the point. For years this team has looked like a coachless team. For the FIRST TIME in Woody's tenure, we actually looked like a well-coached team with an intelligent game plan going in. And then we find out (unsurprisingly) that it was Fizdale's idea.

There is nothing wrong with listening with your assistants. The reason it is yet another proof of Woody's ineptitude is because this is the first time in Woody's tenure that we had a real game plan. It would be different if we frequently had good strategies, some from him, some from assistants. That is not the case.