Joe Dumars would have changed coaches by now.

[Dsinner]

The Hawks have fewer turnovers per possession in the league by a huge margin which is why their offense has been so good. Ironically going to LESS motion has helped the offense. You don't care about results- you care about how pretty the offense is.

The Hawks don't have the personnel to grind it out in the halfcourt game. They dont' have a legitimate post threat on the roster and the PG is terrible at exploiting matchups at this point in his career. Yet you think this is a criticism of Woodson for some ridiculous reason. Woodson has taken this group of players and has the SECOND BEST OFFENSE IN THE LEAGUE. And you are complaining because its not pretty enough. So you want the Hawks to run the same offense as teams who have better personnel who aren't even equaling the hawks production. Ridiculous.

TO's?!?! So you're giving the credit to Bibby then right? Umm, you may be on to something. Woody didn't do any winning till Bibbs got here.

Please stop saying we have the SECOND BEST OFFENSE IN THE LEAGUE. You know nothing about Basketball if you believe this. We score the second most points in the league. There is a HUGE difference.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

Stop being such a homer for once please. It seriously makes your posts nearly impossible to read. The reason Smoove is shooting so well this year is because he is doing the exact opposite of what Woody allowed him to do...he's taking better shots. There is absolutely no other reason that is percentage is up. He's simply not shooting 3's and not nearly as many long jumpers. Are you really that hard up for management and coaching that you can't see the blatant obvious???

Woody was the one who moved him to the 4 in the first place, while 75% of the fan base wanted him at the 3, despite his inability to knock down jumpshots.

Woody was the one who told the kid to start driving the basketball in the first place, to use his speed to take advantage of bigger 4's.

And when Woody moved him to the 4, his blocks and rebounds increased DRAMATICALLY, due to him playing closer to the basket.

Woody was the one who calls ISO plays for Smoove in the half court in the high post, to develop his game offensively.

Woody is the one that lets the kid play free enough to be a playmaker on the team, instead of just strictly having him play like a traditional PF.

Don't get mad at me because I tell the truth on this board, instead of following the fallacy that Woody is the worst coach in the league. He's had to work with whatever the organization has given him. And this team has steadily improved because of his guidance. People are so concerned about the development of Teague, but never give Woody credit for the development of our two biggest stars . . Joe Johnson and Josh Smith.

He could've easily played JJ like Phoenix did, by running him off screens and let him be a spot up shooter. No . . . Woody coaches him like a SUPERSTAR . . . and we're going to reap the benefits of the mindset in JJ come playoff time this year. He finally has enough help to do what he needs to do to get this team right where it should be.

He could've also put a strict reign on Smoove, but he didn't. After the two had their differences in that blowup in 2006, they've been pretty much on the same page. Woody lets Smoove be Smoove, which is to our advantage most nights. When he gets too out of control, Woody has ALWAYS reigned that kid in. ALWAYS.

Sir . . . I'm not the one bytching and complaining about the playing time of the 10th man on our team. I'm not the one bytching and complaining about the Hawks halfcourt offense, just because we don't play it like the Utah Jazz ( WHO AREN'T A BETTER TEAM THAN WE ARE OVERALL ). I'm not the one always trying to find fault in Mike Woodson, even when the guy is 17 - 6 this season.

The problem is that people like you want the Hawks to be PERFECT, instead of just accepting the team for what they are. We're a team built to play defense FIRST, so we use that to fuel our offense. Simple as that.

I'll stay behind this coach as long as we're winning on the court. You guys can bytch and complain about any and everything if you want. LOL.

[Diesel]

Dumars is not a perfect GM by any means and I think it would be crazy to get rid of Woodson at this point in time in light of the success we are having this season. I would play out the year and reassess at the end of it.

The point of this thread was not to bash Woody at all. I was asking who amoung us believe that Woody is the coach to get us to the finals? And how does Woody compare to finals calibre coaches who are unemployed?

[spotatl]

The Hawks score fewer points per game than Golden state but they actually have a pretty terrible offense. When I say the Hawks have the second best offense it has nothing at all to do with points per game.

The Lakers have more options on offense than the Hawks do. If the Hawks had a Bynum or Gasol on the roster And woodson wasn't using them in the half court then hell sure you can blame that on Woodson. But the Hawks bigmen are better in transition than they are in halfcourt but you are still pouting about the fact that Woodson doesn't use them for things tehy aren't good at. I just think its ridiculous.

[Diesel]

AHF . . you've watched the league for a long time. In the playoffs, which teams usually excel on offense? The one plays great defense and the one who has the great ISO player, that's who. The Cavs lost because they couldn't defend Orlando, and their supposed role players weren't making shots. LeBron needs another guy alongside him that can consistently create his own shot. He and Wade are in the same boat this year, which is probably why they won't win. Boston has 3 guys who can create their own shot and the Lakers have 4. At least we have 2 guys who can do it. That does give us a puncher's chance.

If fluid offense is the answer, why hasn't Phoenix ever made it to an NBA Final?

The last time Iso won a championship was when Jordan was playing..and even then, it was still team centered offensive until the end of the game.

All of the detroit championships have come from guys finding an open man.

Houston's two were initiated by Hakeem and finding an open man.

San Antonio's offense was initiated by Duncan (for the most part) then finding the open shooter.

Even Kobe-Shaq started inside and worked outside.

That's not forgetting the celtics and the Lakers last year.

The overall them has either been good ball movement or Inside out play. Iso play doesn't win much.

[spotatl]

The Heat won the championship going pretty mcuh strictly Iso. I don't know why you skipped over that.

IF you want to say that teams with bigtime post threats have an advantage in the playoffs then hell yes I'm on board with that. But that has nothing to do with the offense the Hawks should be running. If the Hawks had Gasol or Howard on the roster and Woodson wasn't using him then sure lets have the discussion about whether the Hawks need to throw the ball down in the post more often. But the Hawks bigmen are FAR better in transition and are highly limited in the halfcourt- I think that its smart to only give them the ball when the defense is unsettled.

Edited December 16, 2009 by spotatl

[TheNorthCydeRises]

The point of this thread was not to bash Woody at all. I was asking who amoung us believe that Woody is the coach to get us to the finals? And how does Woody compare to finals calibre coaches who are unemployed?

Diesel, the teams that get to he Finals, more often than not, are the teams with the best personnel that fits that coach's style of play.

The Lakers were merely a good team before they acquired Gasol. But once they got him, they became a championship level squad. But before the Gasol acquisition, the Lakers ran the triangle, but won games due to Kobe either scoring or passing in ISO situations. Phil Jackson's "brilliance" couldn't even get them out of the first round.

Doc Rivers WAS WOODY . . . until Ainge got him 2 future Hall of Famers ( KG & Ray Allen ) to team up with the possible Hall of Famer that he already had in Paul Pierce. Add a defensive PG like Rajon Rondo to the mix, and Doc now has the type of defensive team that he used to play for in New York back in the 90s. The current Celtics play that old Knicks style of basketball, that tries to beat you up on both ends of the floor. Once they soften you up, they knock you out in the 3rd quarter.

Lawrence Frank had 3 All-Star caliber players who had already been to an NBA Final, when he took over that team. A Hall of fame PG and a borderline Hall of Fame SF. The downfall of Frank should've come about 3 seasons ago, when the Nets couldn't even win with Kidd, Carter, and Jefferson on the court . . 3 all-star caliber players at that time.

Avery Johnson did a great job in Dallas. But don't act like he was some good offensive coach. No . . . Dallas got to that next level because he preached defense. I like Avery. But with him, it's his way or the highway. His inability to mesh with Jason Kidd really sticks out in my mind. Kidd wanted more control of the Dallas offense, but Avery wouldn't budge. Add the fact that his 60+ win team lost a 1st round playoff series to a mediocre Golden St team, is what did him in.

Mike Fratello . . . how many NBA Finals appearances does he have? He's coached a Hall of Famer, an All-Star PG, and an aging center whose also in the Hall of Fame ( in Moses Malone ), and he couldn't even get to an EC Final.

Byron Scott I've always liked. He knows what it takes to win a title, and has coached up the 2 future Hall of Fame PGs he had very well ( Kidd and Chris Paul ). He's let them run the ofense, while he tried to get the team to defend better. It has to be something abrasive about Scott's personality that we don't see, because he didn't deserve to get fired at either place, if you ask me.

So you know way? Nah, I'll keep Woody. Let me see if he can keep this team on the right track of improvement. Unless the ASG coaxes Pat Riley to leave his management position in Miami, to be the GM/Coach of the Hawks, there aren't any Championship winning coaches out there.

[spotatl]

Put this another way.

The Hawks don't have A Duncan. They Don't have an Hakeem. They don't have a Shaq. They don't have a Howard, They don't have a Gasol. They don't even have a Bynum.

Yet you still think the Hawks should be running the same offense as those teams.

Ridiculous.

[h2t]

I've been a Woody basher for a long long time and still have some concerns with how we're gonna score points in the playoffs. But hating on Woody at this point in the season is pretty ridiculous. He's done everything right this year. Everything.

The defense is frustrating at times with all the switching and the mismatches they create but you can't argue with the results.

Offensively we're #2 in offensive efficiency..right behind the Suns. I know we struggle a bit in the halfcourt but still..

Basically I don't think Woody is the worst coach in the NBA like i did a couple years ago. He's closer to middle of the pack. BUT middle of the pack or not..I think he's doing a great f***ing job this year and should get some credit. Not everyone can be Sloan or Jackson or Pop..right now i'm content with Woody.

Again though i'm really interested to see how we fare in the playoffs. In the end I think whether Woody is resigned depends on our postseason success this year and rightfully so.

[AHF]

I would respond to these posts individually but they spend so much more time trying to demonize anyone criticizing Woodson's offense than to actually listen to anyone else's point that it is hard to stomach.

That said, my understanding here is that the main arguments boil down to the view that iso offense is great for winning championships, it is working in the regular season for the Hawks, and that it is the best system for our personnel so why would any rationale, non-Woodson-hater ever want to incorporate any other options on offense.

I will simply say that teams that win in the playoffs win because they play good defense and have offensive versatility in the halfcourt game. An iso approach does not have versatility.

For the two examples of "iso" teams that won championships, the Bulls primarily ran the triangle offense. They were not an iso team in the way we see the Cavs offense run and the Atlanta halfcourt offense. Of course, they ran isolation with the greatest scoring guard in NBA history but they had other options. Iso was their Plan B, the switch from their normal triangle offense.

Miami ran a lot of post-up play and isolation ball. Two very different looks that were both successful. If teams dared to collapse on Wade, they would move the ball to Shaq in the middle and destroy the other team. Shaq in the post was Plan A. Since teams stacked up on Shaq to prevent him dominating them, Miami became a team that ran more isos with Wade because the attention paid to Shaq made the iso theme a strategy that exploited the way that teams defended Shaq. Had teams focused on stopping Wade over Shaq, kind of like Atlanta does, then Shaq's numbers would have spiked and the number of Wade iso's would have declined. Miami challenged opponents to pick their poison and they ended up betting that a young, unproven Dwayne Wade would not stop them and they bet wrong. That same Wade doesn't look quite so good in the playoffs anymore now that he is drawing all the focus of opponents.

Our team doesn't have a Plan B in the halfcourt. That is my biggest problem. When JJ/Crawford are off, that leaves us precious little flexibility to attack other teams in the halfcourt. I would like to see any number of different offensive styles attempted by this coaching staff all with the same goal...keep the other team off-balance and keep options in your repertoire so that when the x's and o's adjustments of the playoffs come that you have a countermove when a team adjusts to take away your isos. Right now we have nothing as a Plan B.

It is also my belief that Smith, Horford and Marvin can all be more productive weapons on offense in formats other than isolation offense, and I would like to see screens, ball movement, interior passing, etc. that will give us easier shots in the playoffs. I see merit in trying to add tools to the toolbox.

[spotatl]

AHF- my contention is the Lakers have a better plan B than the Hawks because they have better talent on offense than the Hawks. If Kobe isn't working they have Gasol. If Gasol isn't working they have Bynum. IF the top 3 options aren't working they have Odom creating mismatches. or Artest. YES the Lakers have ,more options- they have MORE OPTIONS!

AHF- simply put I think you would like to see more turnovers for the hawks. You want Smith and Horford to get the ball more when the defense is focused on them and I think thats a tremendous mistake. Woodson is maximixing the Hawks talent right now- there is nothing magical about the playoffs that will suddenly make Al Horford a good post player or make Josh Smith smarter with the ball.

If I am building a team damn right I want a low post threat so I can hurt teams with weak interior defense. If I am building a team I want a team with more guys who can exploit weak defenders. But as a coach I am not going to ask guys on the team to do things that they are not capable of. The offense has taken off in large part because the Hawks don't give Josh Smith the ball against a settled defense so often. GIve it to him after the defense is already in motion. In the playoffs more than ever I don't want Josh Smith to get the ball when the defense is focused on him. In a pick and roll you still are bringing Josh Smith's man out to the ball far from where Josh smith is a threat to score. I'd rather Josh Smith work the back of the defense waiting for the help to come and crashing the offensive boards. And in the playoffs thats still where I want him because thats where I think he helps the offense the most. Not with the ball in his hands looking to make something happen

[AHF]

Marvin and Horford can run a good pick and roll - not Josh Smith.

Horford and Smith are both superior passers for interior players. I feel that is underutilized.

Marvin should be a prime candidate to post up smaller SFs and take shots off of screens. JJ would also benefit from some screens and off-the-ball movement.

Horford and Smith have shown the ability to take their men off the dribble. That should not be the bread and butter of our offense but should be a viable "goto" play for abusing good matchups.

All three of our forwards are superior athletes that should be able to run off of screens off the ball to generate lanes to the basket. Once Horford and Smith get a step on their opponent, in particular, there are very few bigs with the speed to stop them.

What I think our forwards are not capable of is playing the primary option in a Woodson-iso offense. Not one of them has the skillset to do that. All of them, however, have the skills to do more than they are currently asked to do.

With the way this year is going, keep the iso-offense as our base offense but for the love of god please develop a Plan B because you are going to run into some problems with that in the second round of the playoffs.

We have 5 players who can run and pass very well. We have 4 starters who can hit jumpers within their range. We have several players who can take the ball to hole. That should spark some ideas on how to come up with a Plan B in a coach with a creative offensive mind. I hope Woody is doing this behind the scenes. I think it is a mistake if he isn't trying to add some versatility to our offensive gameplan.

[AHF]

Just to make sure I've address your points.

AHF- my contention is the Lakers have a better plan B than the Hawks because they have better talent on offense than the Hawks. If Kobe isn't working they have Gasol. If Gasol isn't working they have Bynum. IF the top 3 options aren't working they have Odom creating mismatches. or Artest. YES the Lakers have ,more options- they have MORE OPTIONS!

This is why they are champions but I think you are the only one comparing the Hawks and Lakers here. In my book, the Lakers are just one more team that won a championship without using a Cleveland/Atlanta type of isolation offense.

AHF- simply put I think you would like to see more turnovers for the hawks.

Good. I am glad my position was so clearly understood and is being fairly articulated.

You want Smith and Horford to get the ball more when the defense is focused on them

No I don't want them running isolation plays where the defense is focused on them.

and I think thats a tremendous mistake.

The mistake is that you think I want that.

Woodson is maximixing the Hawks talent right now- there is nothing magical about the playoffs that will suddenly make Al Horford a good post player or make Josh Smith smarter with the ball.

What is magical about the playoffs is that the fastbreak points that are so key to our offense will dry up as teams play harder and more disciplined and gameplan against our players.

If I am building a team damn right I want a low post threat so I can hurt teams with weak interior defense. If I am building a team I want a team with more guys who can exploit weak defenders. But as a coach I am not going to ask guys on the team to do things that they are not capable of. The offense has taken off in large part because the Hawks don't give Josh Smith the ball against a settled defense so often.

Again, I don't want Josh Smith to try to play like JJ is used right now where you give him the ball and say "have at it young man." I agree he doesn't have the skillset to do that.

GIve it to him after the defense is already in motion.

Like with screens, ballmovement, motion in the offense, etc.?

In the playoffs more than ever I don't want Josh Smith to get the ball when the defense is focused on him. In a pick and roll you still are bringing Josh Smith's man out to the ball far from where Josh smith is a threat to score. I'd rather Josh Smith work the back of the defense waiting for the help to come and crashing the offensive boards. And in the playoffs thats still where I want him because thats where I think he helps the offense the most. Not with the ball in his hands looking to make something happen

No one but you thinks that Josh Smith is a potential candidate to be running pick and rolls. Most of us have been calling for Woodson to alter his offense and make sure that Josh is playing on the interior and not shooting jump shots while Woodson gave press conferences where he assured everyone that Josh had the green light to keep shooting jumpers. Thank goodness the light finally clicked for Josh this offseason.

Edited December 17, 2009 by AHF

[DJlaysitup]

Marvin should be a prime candidate to post up smaller SFs and take shots off of screens.

Lordy ...and he is a nice guy and all....I haven't seen him post up much of anybody on a regular basis...he can certainly take wide open shots but he misses too many. ....OMG AHF....do you really think this team needs Marvin shooting off screens? We have Craw doing the deal (he don't need no screens) and JJ (needs no screens either) and Bibby hitting threes and Mo hitting threes and Horford working inside and Smoove doing his deal. WFT do we need to set up Marvin for? ....so he can go 2-5....or 4-10?

Edited December 17, 2009 by DJlaysitup

[TruJerz]

This is not a Woody bashing thread. However, I'm wondering... does Woody have it. Is he a coach that can take us to the next level. I know that the players love Woody. I know that Woody has been here for the last 5 years through tough circumstances. A rebuild. However, I still wonder... is Woody a guy who can navigate the playoffs and get us to the finals? Before we say no... let's look at some alternatives:

Avery Johnson = He has been to the finals. He had MVP quality talent. He preaches defense and some has criticized his focus on offense. He failed to develop Devin Harris and allowed a trade for Kidd.

Lawrence Frank = He took two very unworthy NJ teams to the finals. Some say he drafted off of Byron Scott's speed. He is not a defensive coach but he's a good Xs and Os man.

Byron Scott = He is a good developer of teams but he hasn't reached the finals yet. Some say that he's lazy when it comes to preparation. He has been successful everywhere he has gone.

Mike Fratello = Everybody in Atlanta loves to dream about Mike Fratello coaching the Hawks again. He's abrasive which would be good for some of our players. He's a good Xs and Os guy who coaches to his players ability and doesn't try to mold them into a scheme.

Right now, our offense is chugging along nicely. That has been part of the problem previously. I think we need to wait and see how we fare against the elite in the league.

Keep Woody..players like him and he's doing a good job. Byron Scott took Nets to the Finals twice, not Frank..but he was the assistant coach..that should probably count for something. I would go with Fratello if Woody wasnt an option but he is so I have to choose Woody..he's done a good job and should be a top 3 coach of the year candidate along with Scott Skiles and Phil Jackson IMO

[Diesel]

I would respond to these posts individually but they spend so much more time trying to demonize anyone criticizing Woodson's offense than to actually listen to anyone else's point that it is hard to stomach.

That said, my understanding here is that the main arguments boil down to the view that iso offense is great for winning championships, it is working in the regular season for the Hawks, and that it is the best system for our personnel so why would any rationale, non-Woodson-hater ever want to incorporate any other options on offense.

I will simply say that teams that win in the playoffs win because they play good defense and have offensive versatility in the halfcourt game. An iso approach does not have versatility.

For the two examples of "iso" teams that won championships, the Bulls primarily ran the triangle offense. They were not an iso team in the way we see the Cavs offense run and the Atlanta halfcourt offense. Of course, they ran isolation with the greatest scoring guard in NBA history but they had other options. Iso was their Plan B, the switch from their normal triangle offense.

Miami ran a lot of post-up play and isolation ball. Two very different looks that were both successful. If teams dared to collapse on Wade, they would move the ball to Shaq in the middle and destroy the other team. Shaq in the post was Plan A. Since teams stacked up on Shaq to prevent him dominating them, Miami became a team that ran more isos with Wade because the attention paid to Shaq made the iso theme a strategy that exploited the way that teams defended Shaq. Had teams focused on stopping Wade over Shaq, kind of like Atlanta does, then Shaq's numbers would have spiked and the number of Wade iso's would have declined. Miami challenged opponents to pick their poison and they ended up betting that a young, unproven Dwayne Wade would not stop them and they bet wrong. That same Wade doesn't look quite so good in the playoffs anymore now that he is drawing all the focus of opponents.

Our team doesn't have a Plan B in the halfcourt. That is my biggest problem. When JJ/Crawford are off, that leaves us precious little flexibility to attack other teams in the halfcourt. I would like to see any number of different offensive styles attempted by this coaching staff all with the same goal...keep the other team off-balance and keep options in your repertoire so that when the x's and o's adjustments of the playoffs come that you have a countermove when a team adjusts to take away your isos. Right now we have nothing as a Plan B.

It is also my belief that Smith, Horford and Marvin can all be more productive weapons on offense in formats other than isolation offense, and I would like to see screens, ball movement, interior passing, etc. that will give us easier shots in the playoffs. I see merit in trying to add tools to the toolbox.

This is kinda the way I see it too. Somebody above mentioned Miami winning with Iso. I counter with Miami won with Shaq. IF Iso had won in Miami, then Wade could win a playoff series. Still, i think that there's some hope that we can be built like the last Piston Championship team. They did not have a dominated offensive center but they had great defense and a bunch of guys who could score on offense. I think our offense will depend on how much Bibby can do with it. I love seeing Bibby and Smoove playing a 2 man game. That's something that's possible when Joe and Jamal are off. It's rare that both Jamal and Joe are off, but in the playoffs, transition scoring is squelched. So we have to learn a new trick.

[spotatl]

holy god are you delusional about the Hawks talent on offense AHF.

Marvin and Horford can run a good pick and roll - not Josh Smith.

If Marvin was a PF and taking a slower defender outside sure- but otherwise there isn't much use doing a 2/3 PnR when the guy marvin is bringing to the ball is likely quicker than Marvin.

Horford is not AT ALL the guy I want bringing his defender out to the perimeter. I don't want Horford getting the ball more than 10 feet from the basket except as a last resort when the clock is winding down and the defense leaves him open for a jumper. If I am the defense I WANT horford taking that shot.

Horford and Smith are both superior passers for interior players.

Edited December 17, 2009 by spotatl

[spotatl]

And what Kills me is that right now the Hawks have the best offense in the league this season even though the Hawks don't at all have the best personnel on offense. Yet you want the Hawks to mimic what other teams are doing that aren't getting nearly as much production. Instead of looking at what the Hawks are doing right that other teams would be smart to imitate you are bitching and moaning because the offense doesn't look like everyone else's offense. Ridiculous.

[AHF]

Spotatl - I am saying this as a poster and not as a moderator. Stop posting and putting words in my mouth.

Here is some of the garbage you have been posting lately:

"You just want this team to get a lot more turnovers."

"You just want this offense to be pretty, not effective."

"You just want the Hawks to mimic other teams on offense."

Get it through your head. I want the Hawks to have a Plan B so that when we get bounced from the playoffs I don't sit there thinking we wasted a great opportunity by failing to develop a Plan B with our halfcourt offense.

I want this team to be effective in the half-court grind of the post-season. I am thrilled to see our offensive improvement this year and our team's success which has significantly bolstered my view of Woodson. (I am not drinking the kool-aid but my default position right now is paying him the $$ he earns this year with an extension this off-season.)

I do think the playoffs are more of a strategic matchup than the regular season, though, and that the teams that can't make adjustments on both sides of the ball are the ones that are at a huge disadvantage. Right now, I see us fitting that label.

I also do have more faith in the talent of our players than you do. Of course, it would take some time and development to add wrinkles to our offensive to give us more versatility but that is why I think we should have been doing this for some time. Had we hired Rick Adelman two years ago, I guarantee you would see our forwards doing a lot more than they are asked to do today, though.

[spotatl]

I am just paraphrasing and going to the logical conclusion of your ridiculous statements. You do want the Hawks to play more like other teams. Other teams that have better personnel on offense but aren't getting nearly as much production. You can try and distance yourself from that but its exactly what you are saying. Of course you don't like it when its pointed out but thats not my problem.

When you say you want more motion and the ball in the hands of lesser offensive players- the result of that is going to be more turnovers. Maybe thats a tradeoff you are OK with- but that is going to be the result.

If we had hired Rick Adelman I do think the offense would look different because I think the Hawks personnel would be different. I don't think that Adelman would build a team with Josh Smith and Horford as the frontcourt and Crawford would never have set foot in Atlanta.

If we were having this discussion in the offseason and I was saying that I thought that the Hawks should take the ball out of Marvin and Josh's hands on offense and only giving it to them once the defense was unsettled we'd be having the same argument. But once they have DONE THIS and they have the best offense in the league you are still having the same argument. I believe that this is the best offense for the Hawks to run and making players do things they suck at would make the offense worse.

If I were building a team I'd build it to have more flexibility. I'd want a stretch the floor bigman who could draw players away from the basket. I'd want a PG that can exploit poor defenders at the point. I'd want an actual post threat. But none of that has anything to do with what I would do if handed the roster the Hawks currently have. You are just wishcasting all sorts of skills on Hawks players and are completely ignoring how much better the Hawks offense has been compared to teams that are doing more of what you want.

I do think that NBA coaches overall are far too full of themselves and make things too complicated. The NBA makes 1 on 1 defense illegal- I want a team that is going to take advantage of that fact and then kill the defense when they are forced to help by spreading the floor with shooters. I wish that Joe Johnson would force contact and get to the line more. I wish that Marvin woudl bust his *ss rebounding more so he could spend time as a stretch PF. But overall I am not going to criticize the coach for not going to a more traditional offense when he is getting such great results.