More disrespect!

[Wurider05]

http://www.nba.com/2009/news/features/john_schuhmann/07/29/072909schumann.fiveteams/index.html

5. Atlanta Hawks (47-35)

This spot was reserved for a second Western Conference team (perhaps the Jazz or Hornets). But last year's gap between the top nine and the bottom six in the West makes two changes hard to fathom.

A more likely scenario is the Raptors and Wizards returning to the postseason, and either the Sixers or Pistons hanging on. In that case, either the Bulls or Hawks would have to slide out. Chicago lost Ben Gordon, but will be getting Luol Deng back from injury and will have Derrick Rose with a year of experience under his belt. Further, the experience of taking the Celtics to seven games should help them like it did the Hawks a year earlier.

Atlanta could be set for a letdown. They clearly improved last season, but just aren't ready to take the next step. The addition of Jamal Crawford (who has never made the Playoffs in nine seasons, by the way) could make things easier on Joe Johnson, or it could create a chemistry problem. And they're still playing Al Horford at center.

Houston,Detroit,Miami, Philadelphia, Atlanta are the teams most likely to fall off next season!!

[Mrs. Joe Johnson]

That's ok they will learn one day. The hawks will be the SILENT KILLER next year!!!! :thumbsupsmileyanim:

[LordOfNYork]

http://www.nba.com/2009/news/features/john_schuhmann/07/29/072909schumann.fiveteams/index.html

5. Atlanta Hawks (47-35)

This spot was reserved for a second Western Conference team (perhaps the Jazz or Hornets). But last year's gap between the top nine and the bottom six in the West makes two changes hard to fathom.

A more likely scenario is the Raptors and Wizards returning to the postseason, and either the Sixers or Pistons hanging on. In that case, either the Bulls or Hawks would have to slide out. Chicago lost Ben Gordon, but will be getting Luol Deng back from injury and will have Derrick Rose with a year of experience under his belt. Further, the experience of taking the Celtics to seven games should help them like it did the Hawks a year earlier.

Atlanta could be set for a letdown. They clearly improved last season, but just aren't ready to take the next step. The addition of Jamal Crawford (who has never made the Playoffs in nine seasons, by the way) could make things easier on Joe Johnson, or it could create a chemistry problem. And they're still playing Al Horford at center.

Houston,Detroit,Miami, Philadelphia, Atlanta are the teams most likely to fall off next season!!

Why are you so angry?

[Flight]

Hahahahaha man why would you post anything you got predicting the Hawks future? Especially from NBA.com. ESPN sucks at it too. Has no one learned but me that these type of 'Experts' are usually wrong? They have basically said we suck for the past 5 years. Has it really ever came true? They said we wouldn't make the playoffs first. Then we got the 8 seed. Then they said we would get swept by Boston. We took them all the way to 7 games. Then they were smart enough to say that year was luck and we would be right back in the lottery. We got the 4 seed. Then the latest stupid claim is that the Heat would upset us. Looks like they were wrong again. So why waste any of our time believing what the so called 'experts' say? They suck when it comes to giving a prediction about the hawks so why bother reading? These are the reasons I don't even give credit to NBA.com or ESPN when it comes to the Hawks cause their always wrong about us.

[lunar]

i figured that this article was a sham for us once he said "they just aren't ready to take that next step". the next step is the conference finals not the playoffs. we would have to fall pretty damn far to not make the playoffs. this sounds like a guy that had a deadline to meet and he just thought of all the teams in the playoffs and the hawks came up fifth to last. he didn't even give a good reason as too why. i could see if he said something like "joe johnson may regress this year due to injuries" or "is mike bibby gonna come down to earth now that he has his contract." but instead he realizes that those aren't gonna happen and just says "they aren't gonna make the next step", like sund is just gonna blow the team up and start anew.

*rant mode commencing*

this is one reason why i don't care for writers that obviously don't cover the teams that they don't talk about, and then only look at superfluous stereotypes when forced to talk about them. it's easy as hell to talk about the deficiencies of teams that get national attention, when you can't even make up a good argument as to why a team that was better than over 75% of the league, (but still got less coverage than the golden state warriors) can't be better than 50% of the league after losing nobody and actually improving on two positions. then you don't deserve to be writing for a national audience. the fact that this guy actually puts to paper that the raptors who got no one who can actually defend (unless you are talking about the mass of space known as reggie evans) and who lost to us on a fairly consistent basis last year are gonn a surpass us and the bulls (who are counting on a second year point guard and a hodgepodge of role players to rally and take the east by storm. nevermind that both teams were handled easily by the hawks and didn't do anything to stop us from losing (better defense) i don't think this guy thought this thing through.

p.s. the only reason i'm not calling this guy totally worthless as a reporter in general is that even he gives the chances of the hawks falling to reach the postseason are slim at best.

[terrellgroup]

This article is true. We need a center, badly. The East are loaded with talented centers, and all we have is ZaZa. I don't understand why we did not seek after Wilcox and/or Gooden. If we would add just a decent starting center, this article would review something different. HAWKS GO GET A CENTER. If possible trade some bench players(hint:Evans/Morris). I don't understand why Joe Smith is the only bigman(he isn't really) that has come here for a visit. What is it? Does Sund question personalities, does he like small bigman, or is he thinking that the Hawks style of play is similar to the old Sun's team.

[frosgrim]

This article is true. We need a center, badly. The East are loaded with talented centers, and all we have is ZaZa. I don't understand why we did not seek after Wilcox and/or Gooden. If we would add just a decent starting center, this article would review something different. HAWKS GO GET A CENTER. If possible trade some bench players(hint:Evans/Morris). I don't understand why Joe Smith is the only bigman(he isn't really) that has come here for a visit. What is it? Does Sund question personalities, does he like small bigman, or is he thinking that the Hawks style of play is similar to the old Sun's team.

The East has two true centers and the rest are more like the Hawks right?

Boston- Powe

NYK- Curry? Darko? Please

NJ- Lopez, more of a PF type

Philly- Dalembert- not an offensive threat

DC- Heywood- good but Horf seems to do well against him

Indy- Hibbert? Rasho?- eh neither are better than Horford

Cleveland- Shaq- obviously an issue

Detroit- Kwame Brown- really?

Chicago- Brad Miller- was good, but on down side of career, plus his game is jump shooting from the top of the key

Bucks- Bogut- nice player, but not better than Horford

Miami- O'Neil- certainly played well against Horford in the playoffs, but due to age and wear I wouldn't expect a repeat

Orlando- Howard- obvious problem

So, there are maybe 2 centers in the East that are a problem. Shaq is fading and can be nuetralized by a wide open game, and the Hawks could run at will.

Obviously it would be great to have a real center, but no one outside of Orlando, and maybe Cleveland and DC, have a true, power game center. The rest of the East has guys very similar to Horford. Point is, that Horford can match up most nights against the East.

The problem will come in the playoffs, but this thread is about the regular season :)

[DrReality]

I think we play better as the underdog. People like to kick Atl around.

[terrellgroup]

The East has two true centers and the rest are more like the Hawks right?

Boston- Powe

NYK- Curry? Darko? Please

NJ- Lopez, more of a PF type

Philly- Dalembert- not an offensive threat

DC- Heywood- good but Horf seems to do well against him

Indy- Hibbert? Rasho?- eh neither are better than Horford

Cleveland- Shaq- obviously an issue

Detroit- Kwame Brown- really?

Chicago- Brad Miller- was good, but on down side of career, plus his game is jump shooting from the top of the key

Bucks- Bogut- nice player, but not better than Horford

Miami- O'Neil- certainly played well against Horford in the playoffs, but due to age and wear I wouldn't expect a repeat

Orlando- Howard- obvious problem

So, there are maybe 2 centers in the East that are a problem. Shaq is fading and can be nuetralized by a wide open game, and the Hawks could run at will.

Obviously it would be great to have a real center, but no one outside of Orlando, and maybe Cleveland and DC, have a true, power game center. The rest of the East has guys very similar to Horford. Point is, that Horford can match up most nights against the East.

The problem will come in the playoffs, but this thread is about the regular season :)

You are joking right,,,look at our size. Miami,Boston, Orlando,Washington, Indiana, Philly, Cavs. thats seven teams.

[coachx]

The East has two true centers and the rest are more like the Hawks right?

Boston- Powe

Perkins is a beast at center for Celtics.

[NineOhTheRino]

until Sund solidifies the front court I'll have to agree with the pundits.

Edited July 31, 2009 by NineOhTheRino

[frosgrim]

Perkins is a beast at center for Celtics.

Ugh, my mistake and I agree. Should have had more coffee before I started writing.

[Gray Mule]

Hawks still have 3 or 4 open slots on the roster to be filled - - Not starters, but players

who will make some difference.

Yet, these "EXPERTS KNOW" how the entire Hawks season will play out. Wow!

:white flag:

[frosgrim]

You are joking right,,,look at our size. Miami,Boston, Orlando,Washington, Indiana, Philly, Cavs. thats seven teams.

Actually, Atlanta is the biggest team of that group. Atlanta is bigger in average starter height and weight, as well as, bigger in average F-C height and weight. Some of the differences are very small, but for some of the teams its several inches (e.g. Atlanta F-Cs avg 82" but Indy's avg 78.6). So, I reject your premise.

Here are the stats (taken from official team pages):

Atlanta

1. Avg. Starters height = 78.6"

2. Avg. Starters weight= 224

3. F-C Avg. height = 82"

4. F-C Avg. weight = 250

Miami

1. = 77.6"

2. = 220.6

3. = 78.9"

4. = 241.1

Indy

1. = 77.7"

2. = 221.8

3. = 78.6"

4. = 244.8

DC

1.= 78.6"

2.= 217

3.= 81.3"

4.= 238.5

Philly

1.= 78.2"

2.= 220.4

3.= 80"

4.= 242.3

Boston

1.=78.4

2.=220.6

3.=81.8

4.=248.4

[xhawk]

If the number 5 (Miami), 6 (Philadelphia) and 8 (Detroit) teams in the East last year are going to fall? That leaves one team who still made the playoffs below us (Chicago). All they did this offseason was lose a starter. Where possibly can the hawks fall?

Like previous posters have said, this article deserves no credibility. Here is what happened. The writer had a close deadline to meet and realized he had not even started. So he just picked 5 teams that he does not like (making sure to find teams that are not ranked too highly). Then he just copied and pasted criticisms of each team that we have all heard before.

[ShooterMcGavin]

Actually, Atlanta is the biggest team of that group. Atlanta is bigger in average starter height and weight, as well as, bigger in average F-C height and weight. Some of the differences are very small, but for some of the teams its several inches (e.g. Atlanta F-Cs avg 82" but Indy's avg 78.6). So, I reject your premise.

Here are the stats (taken from official team pages):

Atlanta

1. Avg. Starters height = 78.6"

2. Avg. Starters weight= 224

3. F-C Avg. height = 82"

4. F-C Avg. weight = 250

Miami

1. = 77.6"

2. = 220.6

3. = 78.9"

4. = 241.1

Indy

1. = 77.7"

2. = 221.8

3. = 78.6"

4. = 244.8

DC

1.= 78.6"

2.= 217

3.= 81.3"

4.= 238.5

Philly

1.= 78.2"

2.= 220.4

3.= 80"

4.= 242.3

Boston

1.=78.4

2.=220.6

3.=81.8

4.=248.4

Averages are meaningless, unless we can use genetic engineering, construct an "average" player for each team, and make them play one-on-one for 82 games.

Basketball is a game of outliers/superstars, which is why there are so are so many cases of individual players taking over games.

Averages, again, are meaningless.

[lethalweapon3]

The day the "Experts" begin praising the Hawks is the day I start to get scared...

~lw3

[Endy9]

I learned the "experts" would neve praise the Hawks when we started 11-0 in 1997. All they did was trash us and talk about how it wouldn't last. Not one bit of credit for putting an 11 game winning streak together to start the season.

[frosgrim]

Averages are meaningless, unless we can use genetic engineering, construct an "average" player for each team, and make them play one-on-one for 82 games.

Basketball is a game of outliers/superstars, which is why there are so are so many cases of individual players taking over games.

Averages, again, are meaningless.

Those were posted in response to the claim the Hawks were smaller than other teams. When you are talking about the size of a team, then averages come into play. I can post the standard deviations as well. The Hawks, not surprisingly, have the least variation in their measures.

The point is that the Hawks are actually a comparatively "big" team, but they don't have a lot a variation in their size. Other teams have a lot of variation.

The proper response to my post is that size and weight only matter when you have the skills and coaching to utilize your mismatches properly. The Hawks have only two real mismatches in the East: Clevaland and Orlando. The team needs another very big guy to help nuetralize Shaq/Big Z in Cleveland, and Howard in Orlando. Other nights, however, the Hawks do fine in the size matchups.