If the playoffs started today

[Peoriabird]

I didn't have a problem with anything Sund did in the offseason other than rehiring Woody which i don't think was his call.

I'm starting re-think the Woodson is a mediocre/bad coach assumption held by the majority of the board. I was thinking back on some of those talented teams of the 80's/90's with Dominique, Willis, Doc, Livingston, Carr, Web etc. And some of those teams did not play well together because they were selfish and didn't move the ball. At least now there is a system in place with more ball movement on offense. And there is better understanding of the defense. Now are there kinks that need to be worked out? Yes a lot of them! And believe me, I get as frustrated as anyone when our center ends up on their point guard and Bibby is guarding their center >50% of the time while defending the pick and roll. But all of this is apart of the growing process. We are 32 games into this season so lets give this team a chance. If we are still messing up screens on offense and on defense after the all star break, then I'll be a little more concerned. But for now, lets enjoy!

[exodus]

Making excuses for the other team is nothing new for Exodus...

AND I will say now what I said then:

It don't matter if we beat Mello and his Mama.. If she was wearing a Nuggets jersey... then it's still a win for the Hawks.

Great example. the Hawks lost 5 of 6 after that Denver game and finished the season with 26 wins.

Isn't that the time when you predicted 10 straight wins after we got blown out by Miami?

:lol6:

[Peoriabird]

So ex can talk about Luck all the way to the finals, but in actuality he will still be nothing but a troll.

Lighten up big D, Ex will come around! He and I share some of the same frustrations with this team so I know where he is coming from. I think that his take is that the team's personnel is good enough to do great things if they played good sound fundamental basketball but have been lucky to win some their games without play sound basketball because of other team's injury issues. In other words, we are better talent wise than the teams that we beat and would beat them at full strength if both teams played to their full potential.

You on the other hand have not shared this view which has been clearly illustrated with your past post and numerous trade proposals. Suggesting trades to me suggest that you are not satisfied with our current roster to the point where you don't believe that they can be successful if changes are not made. This is the fundamental difference between you and me.

[Admin]

It's the mentality of a troll. A fan cheers when his team is winning. So ex can talk about Luck all the way to the finals, but in actuality he will still be nothing but a troll.

This goes for everyone but especially you in this instance Diesel, saying someone is a troll is uncalled for and especially so when using that type of word on someone who has more than 12,000 posts here. Let's just please stick to the discussion and leave the personal insults out of it.

[AtLaS]

I just don't agree with this injury thing at all. We played TONS of teams that had injuries last year and still couldn't win. We lost to the Bobcats without J-Rich, Okafor and Felton if I'm not mistaken. What makes good teams is the fact that they can win games even when they aren't playing well.

Hell, the Celtics this year started out like 8-1 or something and were playing terrible basketball. They were playing down to some sorry teams and were barely beating bad teams every night. On Cleveland's big streak they beat nothing but crap teams and injured teams. Same with the Lakers.

Regardless, in the NBA you play 82 games, you are what your record says you are until proven otherwise.

[Swish]

All I want to know is if you grown men really believe in luck?

I agree with Atlas' post above though...fifty wins or x amount of wins is what it is. Its like the Titans. Underrated, but they have the best record in the NFL. That says alot.

[exodus]

I just don't agree with this injury thing at all. We played TONS of teams that had injuries last year and still couldn't win. We lost to the Bobcats without J-Rich, Okafor and Felton if I'm not mistaken.

That doesn't mean that the teams' injuries didn't hurt them. We won some games when Smith was out. Does that mean we were just as good without him?

[AHF]

All I want to know is if you grown men really believe in luck?

How can anyone not believe in luck?

Seattle getting Kevin Durant, the Knicks getting Ewing, etc. Good luck. (assuming no conspiracies on these)

Use that lottery pick on DeMarr Johnson, Bobby Hurley, etc. Bad luck.

Happen to play the Pistons the night Rasheed Wallace hits a half court shot to tie the game at the buzzer? Unlucky. Happen to play with someone who ties the game on a half court shot? Lucky.

Etc.

[AtLaS]

That doesn't mean that the teams' injuries didn't hurt them. We won some games when Smith was out. Does that mean we were just as good without him?

That's not my point at all. My point is that we are MUCH improved from last season, as shown by our record. Last season we lost TONS of games against sorry teams, and teams with injuries. Your main point is that we've been lucky to face many injured teams, we did it last year and couldn't consistently win. This season we are keeping those bad losses to a minimum. You think the other great teams don't have letdown games against sorry teams? Great teams play down to sorry teams and make dumb turnovers all the time. It happens. The fact is that we are 22-11 right now which is 4th best in the east, and we have also beaten some good teams.

I'm simply saying that in the NBA you play 82 games a season. You don't play well every night. Being a good team involves winning games when you aren't playing well, even if it's against a sorry team. The Celtics have had this problem, as have the Lakers, Magic and Cavs.

[exodus]

That's not my point at all. My point is that we are MUCH improved from last season, as shown by our record. Last season we lost TONS of games against sorry teams, and teams with injuries.

I am not arguing that we aren't better than last season. that is a given. But it is much easier to beat teams that are missing key players. I have never seen the Hawks play a series of games with more injuries to other teams than this year.

Just because a team that is missing key players wins some games that doesn't mean they are just as good as they were with those players. Indiana has beaten the Lakers and the Celtics but they are still 10 games under .500.

It is easy to try and minimize the absence of someone like Dunleavy but the fact is that last year he averaged 19 ppg shooting 47%, 42% from 3. Last year against us he averaged 20.7 ppg shooting 58%, 64% from 3. That type of production isn't easy to replace.

[Diesel]

Great example. the Hawks lost 5 of 6 after that Denver game and finished the season with 26 wins.

Isn't that the time when you predicted 10 straight wins after we got blown out by Miami?

So is that what you really want?

You want us to go on a losing streak? So that you can be right??

I mean, at the end of the day, that's all that you really have huh Ex.

I can't call you the "t" word.. but your 12,000 post doesn't make you a true fan either...

Truth is that you're just a guy trying to get an argument. The Hawks to you is just a tool...

You don't have to say it. Every post of yours supports it.

[Diesel]

Lighten up big D, Ex will come around! He and I share some of the same frustrations with this team so I know where he is coming from. I think that his take is that the team's personnel is good enough to do great things if they played good sound fundamental basketball but have been lucky to win some their games without play sound basketball because of other team's injury issues. In other words, we are better talent wise than the teams that we beat and would beat them at full strength if both teams played to their full potential.

You on the other hand have not shared this view which has been clearly illustrated with your past post and numerous trade proposals. Suggesting trades to me suggest that you are not satisfied with our current roster to the point where you don't believe that they can be successful if changes are not made. This is the fundamental difference between you and me.

Again, you miss the big picture PB...

Suggesting trades can mean that I am unsatisfied with what we have currently....

or

It can mean that I think we need to prepare for the future.

Lately, it has been more of the second than the first reason. I believe that we need to get out of Speedy's contract before the end of the year.

on the other side, I also believe that we need to consider getting a player who attacks the rim in lieu of several jump shooters (in the absence of a big). However, that doesn't lead to me devaluing what this team has contributed thus far. Can we all say that?

When you say that we won because of Luck... what does that say about our players?

I would love to see Ex have this conversation in the presence of our Hawks. They would kick his tail. You know why... They have a pride of what they have accomplished. As a fan, we should have that same kind of pride for what they have accomplished. You don't see that in what Ex. is saying.

[exodus]

So is that what you really want?

You want us to go on a losing streak? So that you can be right??

I mean, at the end of the day, that's all that you really have huh Ex.

I can't call you the "t" word.. but your 12,000 post doesn't make you a true fan either...

Truth is that you're just a guy trying to get an argument. The Hawks to you is just a tool...

You don't have to say it. Every post of yours supports it.

Again you still have no clue. When i made that post back in 2005 (when the Hawks beat Denver without 5 of their top 7 players, at the end of a long road trip) I didn't like the way the Hawks were playing. I knew if they kept playing the same way they would lose a lot of games, which is exactly what happened.

Right now i think the Hawks have a chance for a record good enough to have home court advantage in the first round. But i don't think they will get it the way they are playing now. If they continue to make careless turnovers and don't box out they will lose games they should win, just like the last NJ game.

[Diesel]

How can anyone not believe in luck?

Seattle getting Kevin Durant, the Knicks getting Ewing, etc. Good luck. (assuming no conspiracies on these)

Use that lottery pick on DeMarr Johnson, Bobby Hurley, etc. Bad luck.

Happen to play the Pistons the night Rasheed Wallace hits a half court shot to tie the game at the buzzer? Unlucky. Happen to play with someone who ties the game on a half court shot? Lucky.

Etc.

Sure there's luck... but on this level.. we can't talk about luck. The players that make it to the NBA are far from Lucky... and those that have worked hard enough to be first or second unit are definitely not there by Luck. There's a lot of work, sweat, tears, and sacrifice that goes into a player making it to that level. So for somebody to talk about this player being out is bad luck is really disrespectful for the professional that has busted his butt all his life to be in the league to replace him. How long did Steve Nash come off the bench before he finally became a starter... I guess his 2 time MVP of the league was just Luck? Him working hard had nothing to do with it?

So when we beat a team... it doesn't matter who didn't play or who was having a "bad game".. it's all in the game!!!

[DrReality]

I guess there is an element of luck in this whole thing . . . . . but we certainly were do for some luck.

[Peoriabird]

Again, you miss the big picture PB...

Suggesting trades can mean that I am unsatisfied with what we have currently....

or

It can mean that I think we need to prepare for the future.

This is amusing! So all of those trade you've suggested for Marvin, Horford, Smith and Bibby were designed to preparing this team for the future? My god dude! You must think that we all are morons on this mb

[AHF]

Sure there's luck... but on this level.. we can't talk about luck. The players that make it to the NBA are far from Lucky... and those that have worked hard enough to be first or second unit are definitely not there by Luck. There's a lot of work, sweat, tears, and sacrifice that goes into a player making it to that level. So for somebody to talk about this player being out is bad luck is really disrespectful for the professional that has busted his butt all his life to be in the league to replace him. How long did Steve Nash come off the bench before he finally became a starter... I guess his 2 time MVP of the league was just Luck? Him working hard had nothing to do with it?

So when we beat a team... it doesn't matter who didn't play or who was having a "bad game".. it's all in the game!!!

Just to be clear, I am not claiming that everything in the game is luck! Of course, hard work, talent, etc. are MUCH, MUCH more important than sheer luck. However, luck can be hugely significant such as playing the Cavs without Lebron versus playing them when they are on a hot streak.

[High5]

1) I rather play Boston than Cleveland. It's about matchups and we matchup better with Boston.

2) The Hawks haven't been "lucky" with other teams injuries. That's the NBA. Every team plays teams at less than full strength. Not just the Hawks. So stop with that garbage.

For instance, every team that plays Denver over the next 3 weeks or so will have no Melo to worry about. It's the NBA, though. Denver isn't going to roll over and go winless.

Edited January 7, 2009 by High5

[AtLaS]

But it is much easier to beat teams that are missing key players.

Of course it is.

Just because a team that is missing key players wins some games that doesn't mean they are just as good as they were with those players.

Again, agreed. But that is my point, all the teams with good records benefit from playing injured teams, including us. The key is to consistently beat them and not have many letdowns. For the most part, we have done that. We've won most of the time against the bad/injured teams and also played very competitive against the top teams. We are a good team but we obviously aren't a top team that dominates average/bad teams every night, and I don't think it's realistic to expect that. It's almost impossible to expect that much improvement in one offseason without any major additions. EVERY team makes dumb, unforced turnovers nightly, it's going to happen during a 48 minute game and we aren't immune.

[Diesel]

Just to be clear, I am not claiming that everything in the game is luck! Of course, hard work, talent, etc. are MUCH, MUCH more important than sheer luck. However, luck can be hugely significant such as playing the Cavs without Lebron versus playing them when they are on a hot streak.

Point is that we beat a streaking Cav team that Had Lebron. Should we then say... We got Lucky? Some here would. However, we are what we are. That's is a 22-11 team with no asterisk. That means, that we beat 22 of the teams that came before us. Period.