Woody is NBA Coach of the Year

[spotatl]

You put someone like Shaq on the roster who has an actual postup game and then I'll complain that Woodson doesn't use them. The Hawks have zero post up threats on the team. The Hawks plan A is Joe. The Hawks plan B is Crawford. I don't really know what you want the Hawks plan C to be because they just don't have the talent on offense. Put the Ball in Josh's hands and let him try and draw a slow defender outside and take him off the dribble? Ha. Horford blowing past a slow center 1 on 1? Bibby taking guys off the dribble? Marvin?

The Roster was built to have forwards that excel in transition but who are not very strong halfcourt players. Thats just who the Hawks are and I don't see how thats Woodson's fault.

Orlando's plan A is Howard. Plan B is Howard Kicking out to a bunch of 3 point shooters. Plan C is Vince Carter. Plan D is Jameer Nelson. Plan E is Rashard Lewis exploiting a mismatch. The Magic simply have more weapons and more options on offense.

And I think Utah fans would have much more reason to complain about the Jazz having the 12th best offense in the league this season than the Hawk fans about having the 4th best offense yet you still think that Sloan is doing a better job. Absolutely ridiculous.

I mean its clear that some people here think that Horford could start abusing people in the post if the Hawks just let him do it. But thats just wishcasting a skill on someone where we have absolutely no reason to think the skill is there.

Edited November 30, 2009 by spotatl

[AHF]

You put someone like Shaq on the roster who has an actual postup game and then I'll complain that Woodson doesn't use them. The Hawks have zero post up threats on the team. The Hawks plan A is Joe. The Hawks plan B is Crawford. I don't really know what you want the Hawks plan C to be because they just don't have the talent on offense. Put the Ball in Josh's hands and let him try and draw a slow defender outside and take him off the dribble? Ha. Horford blowing past a slow center 1 on 1? Bibby taking guys off the dribble? Marvin?

Plan B should be something other than isolation. You are familiar with something other than 1 on 1 play, right? Why does option B or C have to be 1 on 1?

If Reggie Miller played for Woodson he would never have even made an All-Star team.

The Roster was built to have forwards that excel in transition but who are not very strong halfcourt players. Thats just who the Hawks are and I don't see how thats Woodson's fault.

I think Horford and Smith are both good passers and could do more in a structured half-court offense. Marvin isn't such a great passer but could do more outside of an isolation halfcourt offense where he is running off of screens and moving off the ball.

Orlando's plan A is Howard. Plan B is Howard Kicking out to a bunch of 3 point shooters. Plan C is Vince Carter. Plan D is Jameer Nelson. Plan E is Rashard Lewis exploiting a mismatch. The Magic simply have more weapons and more options on offense.

Agreed.

And I think Utah fans would have much more reason to complain about the Jazz having the 12th best offense in the league this season than the Hawk fans about having the 4th best offense yet you still think that Sloan is doing a better job. Absolutely ridiculous.

Just for clarification, in your mind Jerry Sloan is not as good an offensive coach as Mike Woodson. Is that what you are saying because I don't want to put words in your mouth if that is not what you are saying.

I mean its clear that some people here think that Horford could start abusing people in the post if the Hawks just let him do it. But thats just wishcasting a skill on someone where we have absolutely no reason to think the skill is there.

That isn't what I am saying at all. I am saying that neither Marvin nor Horford would simply abuse people under any system but that they will never be close to as effective in our isolation offense as they would be in an offense where there was actual structure. Both could be good at pick and roll scenarios, both could set screens, Marvin could shoot around a screen, Horford can pass on the interior, etc. Horford can improve his driving and other offensive skills but you are taking a point and trying to make it look ridiculous. It would be like me saying "Anyone who thinks Woodson is the greatest offensive mind in NBA history is just wishcasting." I know you aren't saying that, so I don't bother to make it sound otherwise.

[spotatl]

AHF- I am not saying that Woodson is a better offensive coach than Sloan. I am saying that the players matter more than the coach does. And if the Jazz had a much better offense than the Hawks then maybe you can point to coaching being the reason why. But when you are saying that the Hawks should be emulating a team with a worse offense because its prettier I just think its ridiculous.

I think at the core all offense is built on creating a mismatch that the defense has to adjust to. A pick and roll is trying to get the ball in hte hands of someone where the defense has to rotate or adjust to stop it. I don't think that Josh Smith shoots well enough where I want him as part of a pick and roll- to me thats just dragging Josh Smith's Defender out to the ball where Josh Smith doesn't have to be covered at all. Horford I do not think has anywhere close to the offensive skill for me to want to involve him in a Pick and Roll. I don't want my 5th option on offense dragging his defender closer to my guy who is more of a threat to score. If Marvin becomes a PF then I'll be all about Marvin being part of a Pick and Roll but when he plays SF I don't think that creates a mismatch.

In the end I think with the current NBA rules the best way to create a mismatch is to just spread the floor and take someone 1 on 1 because the handchecking rules make 1 on 1 defense pretty much impossible. You guys are bitching about Isos even when the Hawks have a more effective offense than teams you want to emulate and I think its just disconnected from reality. I'll take results over what looks pretty.

Edited November 30, 2009 by spotatl

[AHF]

AHF- I am not saying that Woodson is a better offensive coach than Sloan. I am saying that the players matter more than the coach does. And if the Jazz had a much better offense than the Hawks then maybe you can point to coaching being the reason why. But when you are saying that the Hawks should be emulating a team with a worse offense because its prettier I just think its ridiculous.

I am glad that you agree that Sloan is the better offensive coach. I am saying that Woodson should be emulating the better offensive coach because it will help his players win games - especially as adjustments are made over the course of a season and a series.

I think at the core all offense is built on creating a mismatch that the defense has to adjust to. A pick and roll is trying to get the ball in hte hands of someone where the defense has to stop the other team. I don't think that Josh Smith shoots well enough where I want him as part of a pick and roll- to me thats just dragging Josh Smith's Defender out to the ball where Josh Smith doesn't have to be covered at all. Horford I do not think has anywhere close to the offensive skill for me to want to involve him in a Pick and Roll. I don't want my 5th option on offense dragging his defender closer to my guy who is more of a threat to score. If Marvin becomes a PF then I'll be all about Marvin being part of a Pick and Roll but when he plays SF I don't think that creates a mismatch.

Agreed on Josh Smith. He should be taking the ball to the hoop off screens and using his passing a mobility to maneuver around slower interior players but but should not be running a pick and roll (or ever playing the perimeter on offense). I do think Horford and Marvin could be very successful on a pick and roll.

In the end I think with the current NBA rules the best way to create a mismatch is to just spread the floor and take someone 1 on 1 because the handchecking rules make 1 on 1 defense pretty much impossible. You guys are bitching about Isos even when the Hawks have a more effective offense than teams you want to emulate and I think its just disconnected from reality. I'll take results over what looks pretty.

If I had any confidence that the iso-offense would not end up being shut down, I would be on board with that. That is the approach Cleveland takes and I think it is a mistake.

I guess this ultimately comes down to me just not believing in the type of perimeter iso offense we run as being a viable offense to challenge the top teams in the East, and you believing that it is the offense that gives our guys the best chance to do this.

[Buzzard]

You put someone like Shaq on the roster who has an actual postup game and then I'll complain that Woodson doesn't use them. The Hawks have zero post up threats on the team. The Hawks plan A is Joe. The Hawks plan B is Crawford. I don't really know what you want the Hawks plan C to be because they just don't have the talent on offense. Put the Ball in Josh's hands and let him try and draw a slow defender outside and take him off the dribble? Ha. Horford blowing past a slow center 1 on 1? Bibby taking guys off the dribble? Marvin?

The Roster was built to have forwards that excel in transition but who are not very strong halfcourt players. Thats just who the Hawks are and I don't see how thats Woodson's fault.

I mean its clear that some people here think that Horford could start abusing people in the post if the Hawks just let him do it. But thats just wishcasting a skill on someone where we have absolutely no reason to think the skill is there.

When we get a real coach you will see something new ( Plan C and D) called screens, picks, and pick and rolls.

Plan C- Both Horford and Smoove have very good passing skills and good hands; they would be great in pick and rolls.

Plan D- All of our starters are big, quick, and fast enough to set picks and run through the lane. Marvin, JJ, Craw, Bibby would do well getting freed up for short jumpers, dunks (not Bibby here), and layups by cutting through the lane.

We have the talent to do those two things; yet when our offense goes stagnant, it is still Iso Joe/Craw Left, Right. and Middle...

What you described as who we are, is really who Woodson is; unless you don't think a coach could impliment Plan C or D with our current talent. If thats the case, we are just going to have to agree to disagree on this one. I think we could do those two things easily anytime we want.

Edited November 30, 2009 by Buzzard

[spotatl]

Buzzard- with the offense you think the Hawks should have where do you think they would rank in the league in terms of offense?

Edited November 30, 2009 by spotatl

[MaceCase]

Sort of off topic but AHF I always wondered how good Sloan would look without his Stockton analog and Malone analog. His offense has seemingly always been predicated on the versatility of his perimeter and post initiators but I could be wrong and he is simply just maximizing the talent that he has always had at those two positions. He certainly was able to make Milsap look good but the offense is clearly smoother with a versatile post threat like Boozer and lesser extent Okur. I don't know if Sloan would be a better coach for us simply because I feel he needs players that fit his system but a coach like Adelman would because he has been succesful with far more varying personnel that he always seems to get the best out of despite their talent level.

I'm pretty much torn on Woody this season, I seriously question whether it is scheme or personnel that truly hurts us now. Our lofty rankings certainly further cloud my judgment on the matter but I too would like to see some more variety but apparently it's working as is. Just so I can find any bit of consensus, would you say our scheme in particular is merely in need of tweaking or general overhaul with regards to us maximizing our frontcourt's abilities?

[spotatl]

buzzard- I think that while you would like the aethetics of the offense more if the Hawks were running more PnR and motion offenses- I think the hawks would rank lower ahon offense because of how much more time the ball would be in the hands of guys who are not good halfcourt offensive players. I don't want Horford to be part of a PnR where the team Jumps the screen and forces the ball to Horford outside- he just can't do much with the ball other than toss up a long jumper. I'd rather see Crawford and Joe take a guy 1 on 1 and pass to Horford streaking to the basket if his guy goes to help. I hope that Teague can develop into someone who can exploit a weak defender at PG. I wish that Marvin could develop into that kind of guy as well but I've given up hope. I honestly think that marvin woudl be better off playing as a stretch the floor PF where he could take bigger guys off the dribble and drag guys outside because of his outside shooting.

Clearly you just think that Horford is more ready to carry a heavy offensive load than I do. I think Horford is basically Kendrick Perkins on offense and trying to make him have more of a role is just likely to hurt the offense overall even as it makes people here feel warm and fuzzy about how the hawks are mixing it up.

[Buzzard]

Buzzard- with the offense you think the Hawks should have where do you think they would rank in the league in terms of offense?

If you factor in pace, it could actually be a little lower to about .20 to .40 ppg game better. The real difference would be the lack of long horrible stretches; and us being so dependent on our guards having to always shoot well.

Edited November 30, 2009 by Buzzard

[spotatl]

When it comes to pace adjusted stats- do you think the Hawks should be a top 10 offense? top 5? top 2? I think its critically important. To me there are at least 10 or 11 teams that simply have better personnel than the Hawks and if they have better offenses than the Hawks then I don't blame the coaching- I blame Sund and the ASG. But it seems that people here have a different baseline. So how good do you think the Hawks offense should be? The stat I like is offensive efficiency which is the number of points scored per 100 possessions. I don't see how thats biased at all. I don't care of the hawks score fast or slow so long as they score. last year I believe the Hawks were 10th and I think that was a good job by Woodson. Do you think that the Hawks are so good on offense that if they don't have a top 5 offense that its the coach's fault? Here's the link to this year's offensive efficiency for comparison.

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/hollinger/teamstats

I see Sacramento at #9 and I think the coach is doing a great job. I see Miami at 18 and think that the Coach is doing a poor job and needs to reassess the offense.

But seriously- if you really are complaining this much about woodson and you think the difference is half a point a game over the course of the season then I really think you are just missing the point.

Edited November 30, 2009 by spotatl

[Buzzard]

buzzard- I think that while you would like the aethetics of the offense more if the Hawks were running more PnR and motion offenses- I think the hawks would rank lower ahon offense because of how much more time the ball would be in the hands of guys who are not good halfcourt offensive players. I don't want Horford to be part of a PnR where the team Jumps the screen and forces the ball to Horford outside- he just can't do much with the ball other than toss up a long jumper. I'd rather see Crawford and Joe take a guy 1 on 1 and pass to Horford streaking to the basket if his guy goes to help. I hope that Teague can develop into someone who can exploit a weak defender at PG. I wish that Marvin could develop into that kind of guy as well but I've given up hope. I honestly think that marvin woudl be better off playing as a stretch the floor PF where he could take bigger guys off the dribble and drag guys outside because of his outside shooting.

Clearly you just think that Horford is more ready to carry a heavy offensive load than I do. I think Horford is basically Kendrick Perkins on offense and trying to make him have more of a role is just likely to hurt the offense overall even as it makes people here feel warm and fuzzy about how the hawks are mixing it up.

Its ok to rank lower as long as our pace during half court sets slows down the other team as well. Slower pace, less quick jumpers when players our cold, opposing teams pace is slowed down also. Our overall pace would not slow down to a snails crawl either. Instead of ISO JJ dominating the ball for 10 to 20 seconds, we would be running plan C or D sometimes.

It s a balance that good teams have. We do not have any balance. Its ISOs and 3pt shots or nothing at all in our 1/2 court sets. If we have time for JJ to dominate the ball on his bad nights we also have time for C and D.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

Running Kobe/Wade isos with Shaq post-ups sounds good to me. Running isos with JJ/Crawford doesn't. It will go great until the perimeter jumpers aren't falling (which will happen with decent regularity) and then you need a Plan B and we don't have one.

I would trade Sloan coaching our offense in a second for Woodson coaching it.

Since you're one of the more rational critics of Woody, I'll address this.

You're right about one thing. Running Isos with JJ and Crawford is great when the jumpers are falling. That's one of the reasons why we won 47 games last year, with JJ controlling the ball in the halfcourt, drawing double teams, then passing to wide open shooters who could knock shots down. The flaw, is that both JJ and Crawford tend to shy away from contact when going iso. They'd much rather take a difficult mid-range jumper, than to look for contact and get to the FT line. That's what prevents JJ from getting to that next level as a player . . his inability to get to the FT line. Crawford can do it, but he draws fouls off jumpshots, not by going hard to the basket.

But with Marvin struggling the way he's been this season, the offense stagnates even more these days. Bibby is the only one consistently making open jumpshots on this team. JJ and Crawford are wildly inconsistent in that area.

The only way we could run Sloan's offense, is if we gave control to Crawford at the point, because you need a versatile guard to effectively run pick and roll. Bibby isn't quick enough to run the pick and roll. Teague may could run it, but he isn't finishing well going to the hole right now because he isn't strong enough. So it would have to be up to Crawford to initiate that attack. But as we've seen with Crawford, he doesn't like going all the way to the basket either. He'd much rather bring the pick to him, only to take 2 dribbles and take a jumpshot.

JJ lacks the quickness to run it as well. And because he shys away from contact, he can't get to the FT line. That's the fatal flaw in his game at this point in time.

The beauty of Sloan's offense, is that the team is well constructed to play a variety of ways. They can run pick and roll. They can run Iso Deron or Iso Boozer down on the block, and be effective. And they surround those guys ( usually ), with sharpshooters who can knock down 3s. I would be all for running that type of halfcourt offense, if we had a PG like Andre Miller, instead of Crawford. Dre will take the ball to the hole, and usually make the right decision with the ball.

As spotatl is pointing out, I think a lot of people just need to be real about the offensive capabilities of this team, especially in the halfcourt. We don't even have a post player as good as Zach Randolph ( who is a better offensive player than Smith ) or Marc Gasol ( who is a better offensive player than Horford ). According to the most current NBA.com Hotspot data, here's what Horford and Smith are shooting on the left and right blocks.

Left block: Horford - ( 2 - 10: 20% ) . . . Smith - ( 1 - 3: 33% )

Right block: Horford - ( 4 - 13: 31% ) . . . Smith - ( 2 - 2: 100% )

Horford takes more shots on the block, while Smith's low post game is pretty much non-existant, if he can't get all the way to the rim. Gasol is damn near a low post demon on both sides of the block, while Zach shoots a low percentage, but at least tries to score from those areas.

But it's obvious that Horford and Smith are the far more athletic and better defensive players. In the open floor, they may be the best 2 in the league. That is their strength. And this is why the coach puts far more emphasis on defense and rebounding, than he may do on offensive halfcourt sets.

As far as Woody, I think he does need to utilize Iso JJ more down on the blocks, instead of on the perimeter, especially when Crawford and Bibby are at the guards. But that means that you'll have to pull either Horford or Smith away from the basket. If either could consistently knock down 20 foot jumpshots, the offense would be lethal.

It's like I've said in the past. Show me a highly efficient offense, and I'll probably show you a team that has a very good low post scorer, along with a very good guard who can get people open shots. We're better off just simply trying to create offense, by playing great defense and rebounding the basketball, instead of trying to force mediocre offensively skilled players, to become good offensive players in the halfcourt.

If JJ could get to the damn line when he's ice cold, like the other elite level players, we'd be more than OK.

[AHF]

Sort of off topic but AHF I always wondered how good Sloan would look without his Stockton analog and Malone analog. His offense has seemingly always been predicated on the versatility of his perimeter and post initiators but I could be wrong and he is simply just maximizing the talent that he has always had at those two positions. He certainly was able to make Milsap look good but the offense is clearly smoother with a versatile post threat like Boozer and lesser extent Okur. I don't know if Sloan would be a better coach for us simply because I feel he needs players that fit his system but a coach like Adelman would because he has been succesful with far more varying personnel that he always seems to get the best out of despite their talent level.

I was all over Adelman a few seasons ago when he was leaving the Kings and disappointed we didn't get him. I would take my chances with Sloan but he would have to move farther from his Stockton/Malone days than he has with the current incarnation of the Jazz to be truly successful with this team. I am a big fan of his as a coach, though, and feel that it is really to his credit that Utah only had 1 losing season after Stockton and Malone retired and that they have averaged 50 wins over the last 3 seasons.

I'm pretty much torn on Woody this season, I seriously question whether it is scheme or personnel that truly hurts us now. Our lofty rankings certainly further cloud my judgment on the matter but I too would like to see some more variety but apparently it's working as is. Just so I can find any bit of consensus, would you say our scheme in particular is merely in need of tweaking or general overhaul with regards to us maximizing our frontcourt's abilities?

I would have liked more of an overhaul in the offseason.

At this stage, it would need to be tweaking because you can't make changes that big in-season. That said, we need to develop some team offense for when iso-JJ and iso-Crawford is not working. I think we have the talent to do that if we can identify a scheme and implement it in a limited format this season (and more extensively in the offseason).

I have never been a Woody fan but feel he should absolutely not be fired this year and that he should get credit for what the team does this season. If he stays after this year, I would love him to have the confidence to bring in an offensive specialist like Phil Jackson did with Tex Winters. (For that matter, some team will get a deal if they can bring Lawrence Frank in as an assistant during the season.)

[spotatl]

Better teams have better plans C & D because better teams have better players. As I said as Orlando's coach if Howard is having a bad day I still have Vince Carter, Jameer Nelson, and Rashard Lewis who all give me good options on offense. In the half court of Joe and Crawford are not working then I think you have an entire roster of guys who need someone else to create chances for them. Its not Woodon's fault that the roster is built that way

If you want a better plan C then lets get an actual post threat on the roster. Lets get a PG that can take on more than a Jim Paxson role. Lets spend the luxury tax to actually compete with teams that are willing to spend the luxury tax. You are blaming Woodson when he is doing more with less on offense because of your preconceptions on what a good offense is supposed to look at. I simply care more about the results.

[AHF]

he only way we could run Sloan's offense, is if we gave control to Crawford at the point, because you need a versatile guard to effectively run pick and roll. Bibby isn't quick enough to run the pick and roll. Teague may could run it, but he isn't finishing well going to the hole right now because he isn't strong enough. So it would have to be up to Crawford to initiate that attack. But as we've seen with Crawford, he doesn't like going all the way to the basket either. He'd much rather bring the pick to him, only to take 2 dribbles and take a jumpshot.

JJ lacks the quickness to run it as well. And because he shys away from contact, he can't get to the FT line. That's the fatal flaw in his game at this point in time.

The beauty of Sloan's offense, is that the team is well constructed to play a variety of ways. They can run pick and roll. They can run Iso Deron or Iso Boozer down on the block, and be effective. And they surround those guys ( usually ), with sharpshooters who can knock down 3s. I would be all for running that type of halfcourt offense, if we had a PG like Andre Miller, instead of Crawford. Dre will take the ball to the hole, and usually make the right decision with the ball.

I am not advocating that we simply port Sloan's offense over to Atlanta. I agree that a simple application of that scheme to our roster is not a good idea. What I like about Sloan's approach, however, is just what you say. The team can play a variety of ways effecitively. We need to do that here and have enough talent to do that, IMO. It does not need to be the set of options that Utah uses but it needs to be broader than 1. iso 2. pray.

Let me add that outside of the halfcourt, I like the way Woodson uses our players to generate fastbreak points.

As far as Woody, I think he does need to utilize Iso JJ more down on the blocks, instead of on the perimeter, especially when Crawford and Bibby are at the guards. But that means that you'll have to pull either Horford or Smith away from the basket. If either could consistently knock down 20 foot jumpshots, the offense would be lethal.

I like this idea as well and think that JJ's size advantage would give him some easier shots on the blocks against opposing shooting guards when his long-range game is off target. Horford needs to be the one taking the open jumpers, IMO, if/when the Hawks do run this set.

It's like I've said in the past. Show me a highly efficient offense, and I'll probably show you a team that has a very good low post scorer, along with a very good guard who can get people open shots. We're better off just simply trying to create offense, by playing great defense and rebounding the basketball, instead of trying to force mediocre offensively skilled players, to become good offensive players in the halfcourt.

If JJ could get to the damn line when he's ice cold, like the other elite level players, we'd be more than OK.

I totally agree that a focus on great defense and rebounding is key for this team and that it would be so nice if JJ could get himself to the line by initiating contact like elite players in the league. I just don't see that happening given his track record.

Edited November 30, 2009 by AHF

[Buzzard]

But seriously- if you really are complaining this much about woodson and you think the difference is half a point a game over the course of the season then I really think you are just missing the point.

I think you are missing the point. Good teams can shut us down. For me it is not just the stats; its the win/loss column. If my primary concern was the stats I would be calling for Woody's head over our defensive stats.

We only have one offensive plan and one defensive plan.

We are a ISO/jump shooting 1/2 court team and I think we could be much more than that.

And when was the last time we actually trapped a player outside of the paint instead of switching? Just for shits and giggles I would like to see that happen once.

You like Woody; it is painfull for me to watch Woody coach.

Edited November 30, 2009 by Buzzard

[Buzzard]

Better teams have better plans C & D because better teams have better players. As I said as Orlando's coach if Howard is having a bad day I still have Vince Carter, Jameer Nelson, and Rashard Lewis who all give me good options on offense. In the half court of Joe and Crawford are not working then I think you have an entire roster of guys who need someone else to create chances for them. Its not Woodon's fault that the roster is built that way

If you want a better plan C then lets get an actual post threat on the roster. Lets get a PG that can take on more than a Jim Paxson role. Lets spend the luxury tax to actually compete with teams that are willing to spend the luxury tax. You are blaming Woodson when he is doing more with less on offense because of your preconceptions on what a good offense is supposed to look at. I simply care more about the results.

We care about the samething then. I think we are good enough to push above the 4th seed; and good enough with both the Celtics and Cavs aging front lines to get out of the 2nd round. I do not think Woody is going to get us there. Orlando is still young and IMO the only one of the big three we do not match up well against.

[MaceCase]

I would have liked more of an overhaul in the offseason.

At this stage, it would need to be tweaking because you can't make changes that big in-season. That said, we need to develop some team offense for when iso-JJ and iso-Crawford is not working. I think we have the talent to do that if we can identify a scheme and implement it in a limited format this season (and more extensively in the offseason).

I have never been a Woody fan but feel he should absolutely not be fired this year and that he should get credit for what the team does this season. If he stays after this year, I would love him to have the confidence to bring in an offensive specialist like Phil Jackson did with Tex Winters. (For that matter, some team will get a deal if they can bring Lawrence Frank in as an assistant during the season.)

Fair enough and I definitely agree with your latter points. It's funny because I too have thought about the possibility of Lawrence Frank coaching the team more as an assistant than a head man. He is a good Xs and Os guy and motivator but seems to share some of Woody's deficiencies when it comes to game management. Despite it all Woody does seem destined for an extension but it would be a perfect situation if his new contract is negotiated with an impetus that he entrust his offense to a coach like Frank and share the situation similar to how Brown and Kuester operated last year.

[spotatl]

And I think that if you want to be higher than the 4th seed then tell that to Sund and the ASG and have them make a move. The Celtics, Magic, and Cavs simply have better talent than the Hawks and coaching isn't going to matter no matter what offense the Hawks run. Over and over in the NBA we have seen that the players matter more than the coaches but people here act like Woodson is somehow holding the team back despite good results. If you want to say that we should fire woodson because he isn't a HOF coach thats great but I think its more likely the Hawks will end up with a coach that gets decidedly worse results. I simply think that having Horford run the PnR makes the Cavs job easier and if I am coaching against the Hawks thats 100% what I would like you to do.

Edited November 30, 2009 by spotatl

[TheNorthCydeRises]

CHRISTMAS UPDATE:

1) Mike Woodson - Atlanta

2) Doc Rivers - Boston

3) Rick Adleman - Houston

4) Phil Jackson - LA Lakers

5) Rick Carlisle - Dallas