Wow Bibby tells Woody No!

[yardbird]

Quote:

---

What's up man, I think I owe you a beer!

I know it's hard to know what is on the coach and what is on the players. For instance on that final play of regulation last night, who knows? I know that Woody's entire focus during the timeout should have been NO MATTER WHAT, DO NOT LET YOUR MAN GET TO THE RIM, because they have to look for an alley-oop pass with a half second to play. Maybe the players blew it, or maybe he didn't convey the message, or maybe both. I think that applies to a lot of our poor defensive play. I don't think our defense was ever as good as some thought it was. Our defensive rotations have always been poor, we frequently double team and leave world-renowned shooters WIDE OPEN when it just doesn't make sense. But even then, I'm willing to admit that we don't really know if Woody is clueless, or the players just aren't getting it done. I'm inclined to believe that Woody knows defense based on reputation, and that the players screw up a lot.

I still put a decent amount of blame on Woody on this front because a coach is only as valuable as he gets the players to perform. I don't really care about knowledge that Woody has that he can't get across to the players. With the exception of Josh Smith, most of these guys were supposed to be high IQ guys on real winning programs in college, and all of the sudden they "stop getting it" under Woody.

So even if you give him a pass on defense, I have never seen an offensive system that is as bare-boned and inadequate as what we've been watching for 3-4 years. I know our PPG have gone way up with Bibby showing up, mostly due to sheer firepower and Bibby making it happen. But we have never set up an offensive system to take advantage of our strengths and get our players in a position to succeed. It's all 1-on-1 and pray that Joe can carry us through. And that applies doubly in the clutch. Our offensive system overall under Woody has been a total embarassment.

Then there's the ridiculous substitutions and minutes. I think everyone would have to agree here. No NBA head coach should be that bad, and if he is, he should hire someone to take care of it for him.

The one real positive overall has been that he's kept the troops motivated and hungry throughout the losing. I thought he was losing the team around All-Star break, but the bibby trade seemed to give the team the boost it needed.

I know he excelled as an assistant coach, and I'm sure he has a lot of knowledge. But when you look at the major components and what you expect out of your coach, I'd say:

-defensive system / execution: B-

-offensive system / execution: F

-adjusting the system to the talent he has: D-

-substitutions: F

-execution out of timeouts: D

-player development: C+

-season management (minutes ... ): D-

-motivating/focusing the team: B+

-representing the team well: A

So really, I don't see how any NBA - caliber coach could be worse. Yes, I know that he too wants to strangle the players sometimes, but I want to strangle him. I honestly don't know which NBA coaches are worse, other than Isiah, and I don't know much about Randy Wittman as a coach.

Let me put it this way, I can understand where you can often say "Woody might not have screwed up, it might have been the players that didn't listen". Ok. But what do you see in Woody that you think is above average for an NBA caliber head guy?

Had to put my 5-year-old to bed, so took me awhile to respond. I respect your opinion and your right to have it. Hell, I even understand why you feel that way and I agree with you on some points.

I don't pretend that I know enough to say what's a good offensive strategy and what isn't, so you may have one up on me there. Frankly, unless there's a meaningful low post presence, to me most NBA offense seems like isolation of skilled players like Joe, Kobe, Lebron, etc. to force defenses to compensate against the mismatch by sending help, sometimes resulting in a great one on one play or an open teammate elsewhere. Then that teammate has to be able to convert. Pre-Bibby, the Hawks haven't been able to convert for the most part.

I agree that defending the alley-oop s/h/b first priority at the end of regulation. But unless you had J-Smoove play one-man zone at the rim, I don't know how anyone could stop a player with the speed and hops of Ford from getting to the rim coming from the perimeter. Seems almost indefensible to me. Chill doesn't have the foot speed to defend it, nor Bibby or anyone else on our team unless you have Smoove camped out, in my opinion.

As for players from winning college programs with high IQs, I think college and pro is just night and day. Some players game is suited for college only (Shelden). Some more for the pros (Bosh). Some quickly transition and are successful on both levels (CP3, though it's taken 3 years for serious excellence. Also Tim Duncan and hopefully Al Horford) while others transiton more gradually, but still eventually excel (Chauncey). I don't think the players "stop getting it" under Woody, just that the level of competition is quite different.

I'm ecstatic about the team's recent progress, but I'm not sure I see significant strengths we can regularly exploit against other teams aside from Joe's skills. Our greatest strength is athleticism, which can be offset in the inevitable half court sets because we usually have been at a height disadvantage at every position save the 2 spot and sometimes the 3, and when we share the ball ala the Pistons. But sharing the ball requires point guard skills we haven't had until recently.

On substitutions, I just don't see where any of the current roster other than Chill and lately ZaZa have done anything to convince Woody that more play would do anything but cost us games, and we haven't been in position to sacrifice even one of our wins to date. As to substitution patterns, isn't it said that players are most comfortable when they know their roles? I'm sure that players at the end of the bench would like to play more, but I believe the reason they don't isn't some dogged commitment to formulaic substitutions, rather, those players own limitations. When we have more reliable bench players, I bet you'll see Woody looking like a better substitutor, just like the offense looks smoother with a real point guard than it did without one.

I can't think of a team in the league that has had as shaky a situation at the point over the last 3.5 years as the Hawks have. To answer your question, I see nothing above average or NBA caliber about Woody, except that he hasn't lost the players in all this time (no small feat, given our record). But I don't think he's ever had anything approaching a full deck player-wise. While we're growing, he still doesn't since there's no quality depth or size. If Woody loses his job and we bring in a better coach, I'm fine with that. It would be interesting to see what scorecard you'd give him, putting aside any baggage from current perceptions, with a full season of Bibby at point and a consistently effective (not superstar, just steady) defensive and offensive low post presence, though.

I'll take you up on the brewski at the first home playoff game, if you're in the house!

[Lascar78]

Quote:

---

I'm ecstatic about the team's recent progress, but I'm not sure I see significant strengths we can regularly exploit against other teams aside from Joe's skills. Our greatest strength is athleticism, which can be offset in the inevitable half court sets

But the point on this is that our strength is athleticism, so we should have been running. We should have been running every single chance we get for the past 4 years. And it took a full 3 years for him to acknowledge that we should try to run, and even then he didn't commit to it much at all this year unless we get a turnover. Everything is on a 2-3 year delay. After 2-3 years he figures out we are athletic so we should run. After 2-3 years he figures out that Smith shouldn't be shooting 3s and should be in the post more.

Quote:

---

I see nothing above average or NBA caliber about Woody, except that he hasn't lost the players in all this time

Ok, so we agree. So don't you think that if we really want to succeed we should have a guy who is above average at least in some areas? I'm not asking for Phil Jackson or Red Auerbach. I'm asking for a guy who at the very least is above average in some areas even if he's not the best in all areas. I don't see how a guy who is horrible in some areas and not as horrible in other areas is good enough.

[AHF]

Quote:

---

I know he excelled as an assistant coach, and I'm sure he has a lot of knowledge. But when you look at the major components and what you expect out of your coach, I'd say:

-defensive system / execution: B-

-offensive system / execution: F

-adjusting the system to the talent he has: D-

-substitutions: F

-execution out of timeouts: D

-player development: C+

-season management (minutes ... ): D-

-motivating/focusing the team: B+

-representing the team well: A

You left out one area in which Woody has proven terminally deficient.

-halftime adjustments: F-

[Traceman]

I am no Woody apologist and I have called for him to be fired on MANY occasions this season but I do think that a lot of the things that go wrong on BOTH ends of the floor can be attributed to the players rather than the coach. Of course it is impossible most of the time for us to know what the coach tells the players in practice and during games so we base our opinions on our perceptions.

A perfect example of this can actually be found in the last game with TOR but it involves Mitchell and Ford not Woody. Apparently, according to Ford, Mitchell instructed him to foul Bibby before he could attempt that last 3 point shot. Ford said that he lost Bibby for a second though and Bibby managed to get free and get the ball in a position to shoot. He said that Bibby used a great veteran move on him and that he was afraid to fould him at that time because he didn't want to foul him in the act of shooting.

Many fans of BOTH teams and many of the so-called experts have been critical of Mitchell for not telling his players to foul in that situation but he DID tell them to foul. They just didn't execute the plan as instructed.

[jhay610]

Quote:

---

I agree that defending the alley-oop s/h/b first priority at the end of regulation. But unless you had J-Smoove play one-man zone at the rim, I don't know how anyone could stop a player with the speed and hops of Ford from getting to the rim coming from the perimeter. Seems almost indefensible to me. Chill doesn't have the foot speed to defend it, nor Bibby or anyone else on our team unless you have Smoove camped out, in my opinion.

Please. This is so easy to defend. Knowing that there is not enough time to catch/shoot, by default all you have to do is defend the rim. So (as you said) you keep somebody w hops and/or size (smith has both) around the rim to swat anything away up there. Then you play everything else underneath. You know they are going to try to set up some kind of back pick, so you chuck your man as he sets you up for the screen and if you can't fight through then you switch with the guy playing D on the screener. Just keep the lanes to the rim congested. TJ Ford is not running through or jumping over anybody.

Ford didnt outquick or outjump anyone to get wide open. He went off a simple back-pick that Chillz switched because he thought he had help on, and then no one helped (I think it was Marvin that should have picked him up).

I'm sure everyone was looking for J. Moon to get that play, but the fact is the movement was still the same. That was inexcusable, an indictment on not only the coach but also the players, who supposedly have been playing the game for a long while now.

[Johnnybravo4]

Even better why not put your tallest player, Zaza, on the inbounds passer. Or better yet put smoove on the inbounds guy to just stand there and jump up and down. Any Alley oop thrown over smoove would definitely be way too high.

And what other coach would run basically a 7 man rotation with no back up guard development whatsoever.

[coachx]

Quote:

---

Even better why not put your tallest player, Zaza, on the inbounds passer. Or better yet put smoove on the inbounds guy to just stand there and jump up and down. Any Alley oop thrown over smoove would definitely be way too high.

B/c you block the passes with your hands and not your head.

ZaZa has T-Rex arms and NO verticle. Horford has to have him by at least a couple of inches in standing reach and probably 6 to 8 inches in verticle extension.

Horfords big body could have picked up a cheap foul in the paint. I like where Woody had him.

Plus Horford "tipping" the ball is going to save us from a succesful dispute but the Raps.

[AHF]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Even better why not put your tallest player, Zaza, on the inbounds passer. Or better yet put smoove on the inbounds guy to just stand there and jump up and down. Any Alley oop thrown over smoove would definitely be way too high.

B/c you block the passes with your hands and not your head.

ZaZa has T-Rex arms and NO verticle. Horford has to have him by at least a couple of inches in standing reach and probably 6 to 8 inches in verticle extension.

Horfords big body could have picked up a cheap foul in the paint. I like where Woody had him.

Plus Horford "tipping" the ball is going to save us from a succesful dispute but the Raps.

I agree. Horford was a good choice to guard the passer.

[Lascar78]

Quote:

---

You left out one area in which Woody has proven terminally deficient.

-halftime adjustments: F-

A major oversight on my part. You're right. No in-game adjustments.