After Much Debate: Post-Mortum On Our Offense This Season

[AHF]

We never developed a “Plan B” to our offense that would allow us to have a versatile attack and make adjustments in the playoffs. I cannot imagine this having my fears for this team played out any more obviously. As I stated earlier:

If they maintain their 3rd best position in the post-season (not the same stats but the same relative ranking), then I will post a thread congratulating Woodson and admitting I was wrong about the iso offense this season for sure.

Now I am posting my thread. Unfortunately, it is not to congratulate Woodson but just confirms that we can't expect to succeed in the post-season unless we develop more versatility to our offense.

Our next coach must have this on his "to do" list. Our players will need a lot of coaching after the last few years but there is some real upside to using some different schemes, employing different positioning of players (no more Josh Smith outside the 3pt line), etc.

Here is some of the history on this one:

In my opinion, isolation offense without equally prominent structure to the offense mixed in (motion, pick and roll, inside/outside, etc.) is as fundamentally flawed as the run and shoot in the NFL. It can look good during the regular season but by its nature it will limit how far a team can go -- especially when you run into the defensive intensity of the post-season where you will be facing off 7 consecutive times against opponents who are going to scheme and adjust to try to stop what you are doing. You better have ways getting matchups to exploit and easy shots for your players via screens, etc.

I can't complain about the bottomline results on offense this season (although I think you may be underrating the offensive talent on this team) but I do think the offensive gameplan is doomed to failure unless we install some structure to our offnese.

I am mad that we are running an offense that does not well serve our young forwards and, more importantly, is very limited.

What NBA contender has run an iso offense like we do? (Of course, no NBA champion has done it but how about simply contenders?) The only one that comes to mind to me is Cleveland and I likewise think their offense blows.

I would like the iso offense Woodson runs more if he put more emphasis on the part you describe as "then kill the team when they start rotating after the doubleteam."

Maybe we will be the first iso offense to do great things in the NBA but to me you still need more structure. If you like isolations, run a structured dribble-drive offense rather than simply spreading the floor and calling for JBATTLE.

Sorry. When the game turns into a halfcourt battle in the post-season, I don't believe the Hawks or Cavs are well-served by going with an iso heavy offense.

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.

Edited May 11, 2010 by AHF

[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.

No matter how many times you say that (that being that people just want something pretty), I continue to complain that we don't have a Plan B for when the isos aren't working. I love our efforts to start a fastbreak whenever possible off our defensive rebounds. That won't happen nearly as much in the playoffs, though. Consequently, we will be down to our one note iso halfcourt offense. I don't think you can be effective over a 7 game series against a good team without some variety in your halfcourt sets. If we have a Plan B that isn't pretty but is effective that is fine with me. I don't trust putting all my eggs into the iso basket, though - especially when it is iso-jumpshot.

The message should have gotten through years ago that we need a Plan B to our iso scheme. This won't be a moment of epiphany for Woodson.

I still think that our offensive efficiency is highly at risk to dip relative to other playoff teams because of our reliance on fastbreak points and offensive rebounding which will not come so easily in the post-season. While I remain skeptical and that our iso offense is likely better suited for the regular season than the post-season, I'll be crossing my fingers and hoping the regular season offensive success continues into the post-season.

I am more skeptical of our ability to sustain success in the post-season without a good halfcourt plan B in place for when teams are (as I fully expect) forcing JJ and Jamal into lower % shot opportunities in the iso sets than they see in the regular season.

I fully expect they [our offense] will slow down relative to other teams because our offensive numbers rely on fast break points and offensive rebounding more heavily than other teams and because our halfcourt offense is not very versatile and in the post-season when you are matching up against the same team over and over it is essential to be flexible and versatile so you can counter the defensive adjustments teams are making against you (which they don't really do in the regular season).

Rick Sund and the ownership must demand more from our next coach on our offensive scheme.

[Joker]

AHF, I love you man. Your a brain and our offense system is flawed. The bigger problem is our roster is a lot more flawed than our offensive system. Joe is an isolation strong player. He was great with Steve Nash but there is only one Steve Nash. Jamal Crawford was disappointing till he was traded to Atlanta. Horford is a PF. Smith is one on offense and a big reason why our defense gives most teams fits. Marvin lulls around the offense like Andrew Bynum does because he's really not involved. He's not like Childress who can create without the ball. Marvin has never showed that ability and moving him to 5th option basically hurt him on the offensive end. The problem is we only have one ball and Jamal, Joe, Horford, and Smith are better options. Mike Bibby severely on the decline. There isn't much you can do to be honest.

Edited May 11, 2010 by nbasuperstar40

[buckeye242424]

Rick Sund and the ownership must demand more from our next coach on our offensive scheme.

I agree, 110%.

You can't just roll the ball out there on offense and tell the guys to go score. That's what Woody did, and where did it get us? A playoff record for the worst beat-down. We won 53 games this year on talent alone, that's it. it had nothing to do with the coaching. I'm sure just about every other coach in the NBA, when scouting the Hawks, knew those 53 wins were all smoke and mirrors - because once the real season starts, we're an easy stop. It's not hard to stop iso plays over the course of a game, or a series. Look at our track record the in the playoffs, same story. Our numbers go down across the board on offense, and our best player's numbers go down.

Joe's poor performance in the playoff's is as much circumstance than it is his ability. He falters when in counts because he's put in the position, the only position, in our offense to score. When the playoffs start, when it matters, teams (Orlando) will simply take that option away....and what do we have left? Nothing. Except our sixth man trying to do the same things. That won't cut it, and we're seeing the results when it's tried.

There has to be a stronger philosophy on offense at the highest level of basketball than one-on-one. There's a reason there are 5 guys on the court.

Sorry Woody, you've got to go. Thanks for the wonderful last couple of regular seasons, those were enjoyable, I like winning. But I hate getting downright embarrassed, almost to a comical state, in the playoffs much worse. We simply need a coach with higher basketball IQ. We need a coach that does care about offense and will instill some philosophies, some parameters, about how we're going to go about scoring the basketball.

[coachx]

AHF, I love you man. Your a brain and our offense system is flawed. The bigger problem is our roster is a lot more flawed than our offensive system. Joe is an isolation strong player. He was great with Steve Nash but there is only one Steve Nash.

I disagree on that.........any dribble drive PG can create easy looks for JJ in the right offensive system (not in Woody's system).

Nash, Paul, D. Williams, Rondo, Rose, M. WIlliams, D. Harris, Parker, Collison, Miller, Conley, G. Hill, Westbrook. That is 13 in the league right now. Add Wall coming up. Even Billups and Kidd can still get in the paint and create to make that number 15. Additional guys like TJ Ford, Calderon, or even Ridnour (and that backup for Phoneix) could create easy shots in the right offensive system.

Hopefully a new coach can and will allow Teague to be that type of PG. He has the physical ability. He just needs some on the job training to see if he is capable.

Woody told Teague to go stand in the corner when JJ and/or Crawford were on the floor with him. That is not how use a Tony Parker / D. Harris / Rondo type of PG who are not perimeter oriented catch and shoot jump shooters. Those are the types of PGs that Teague has the potential to turn into. (Rondo without the 15 rebound games that is).

We either have to draft a guy who turns into this type of PG or get a coach to help Teague become what he can be.

Edited May 11, 2010 by coachx

[Atlantaholic]

AHF, I love you man. Your a brain and our offense system is flawed. The bigger problem is our roster is a lot more flawed than our offensive system. Joe is an isolation strong player. He was great with Steve Nash but there is only one Steve Nash. Jamal Crawford was disappointing till he was traded to Atlanta. Horford is a PF. Smith is one on offense and a big reason why our defense gives most teams fits. Marvin lulls around the offense like Andrew Bynum does because he's really not involved. He's not like Childress who can create without the ball. Marvin has never showed that ability and moving him to 5th option basically hurt him on the offensive end. The problem is we only have one ball and Jamal, Joe, Horford, and Smith are better options. Mike Bibby severely on the decline. There isn't much you can do to be honest.

If our team is as flawed as you state, than how did we finish in the top three on offense? Why were we one of the best regular season teams in the NBA this year? How did FOUR players on our roster have all star type seasons. PG is the big obvious flaw, and Woodson did NOTHING this year to develop Teague who is our only viable solution. Woodson offense doomed us in the playoffs. Not hard for a team like Orlando to shut you down when ALL year you've only been doing ONE thing consistently on offense, and defense. Every time an Orlando player attacked they knew EXACTLY where to go with the pass, and the players playing off the ball knew EXACTLY where to spot up on the floor to receive an open shot. Us? we just stood around with our hands on our hips while JJ shot over three Orlando players. On defense we continued to play each drive and each post up with the exact same defensive rotation... You could see Orlando players licking their chops every-time they set up their offense. On the other hand every Hawks possession consisted of either Jamal or Joe Johnson dribbling at the top of the three point line, looking around helplessly for a screen that no one was sure if they were supposed to be setting or not, then going one on one... either that or dumping the ball down on the post, where we would then continue to, you guessed it, stand around waiting for Josh or Horf to score.

With the balance in talent on our team we should have been developing a scheme all year that consisted around getting everyone involved. like the Pistons during their Championship run. The Woodson offense is designed to work when you can dictate the game on the defensive end. Problem is, you need to have an offense that can be effective when the game slows down in the playoffs, as well... that's what well coached teams have. A lot of us have been seeing these things since the first Boston series, where our offense looked beyond putrid in the four games we couldn't get our running game going. This team is talented. We are, for example, easily as talented as the Boston team that is tied 2-2 against Cleveland. We may not be championship caliber, but we should be able to dominate teams like MIlwaukee and Miami, and give teams like Orlando and Cleveland some trouble.

[Joker]

If our team is as flawed as you state, than how did we finish in the top three on offense? Why were we one of the best regular season teams in the NBA this year? How did FOUR players on our roster have all star type seasons. PG is the big obvious flaw, and Woodson did NOTHING this year to develop Teague who is our only viable solution. Woodson offense doomed us in the playoffs. Not hard for a team like Orlando to shut you down when ALL year you've only been doing ONE thing consistently on offense, and defense. Every time an Orlando player attacked they knew EXACTLY where to go with the pass, and the players playing off the ball knew EXACTLY where to spot up on the floor to receive an open shot. Us? we just stood around with our hands on our hips while JJ shot over three Orlando players. On defense we continued to play each drive and each post up with the exact same defensive rotation... You could see Orlando players licking their chops every-time they set up their offense. On the other hand every Hawks possession consisted of either Jamal or Joe Johnson dribbling at the top of the three point line, looking around helplessly for a screen that no one was sure if they were supposed to be setting or not, then going one on one... either that or dumping the ball down on the post, where we would then continue to, you guessed it, stand around waiting for Josh or Horf to score.

With the balance in talent on our team we should have been developing a scheme all year that consisted around getting everyone involved. like the Pistons during their Championship run. The Woodson offense is designed to work when you can dictate the game on the defensive end. Problem is, you need to have an offense that can be effective when the game slows down in the playoffs, as well... that's what well coached teams have. A lot of us have been seeing these things since the first Boston series, where our offense looked beyond putrid in the four games we couldn't get our running game going. This team is talented. We are, for example, easily as talented as the Boston team that is tied 2-2 against Cleveland. We may not be championship caliber, but we should be able to dominate teams like MIlwaukee and Miami, and give teams like Orlando and Cleveland some trouble.

Because those four players are extremely talented and they are All Star caliber players. In fact two of them can reach higher heights with Joe already being a star. Orlando had a complete mismatch, have you ever played a team where you had a complete mismatch. They had two of those. I explained this earlier, our offense is based off of screens, picks, and isolations. We do not have a to go post guy. Horford is a PnR PF, meaning he can do great work but things have to be in order for him to do so. We did not get easy baskets because of Dwight. Since Dwight was playing help side defense for most of the series, it took away the base of our offense. Where can you go on a pick, the Magic are playing you high, you can't slash thanks to Dwight and Dwight doesn't respect Horford game as a center. There is only so much you can do. You can't ask Joe and Jamal to pass on screen and rolls since they never do it during the season. We changed things up quite a bit on the defensive end after timeouts, the result was the same, Magic scores. The roster is a bigger problem man. We knew this last season. We knew this going into this season. We know it again. We finished our pre-season like we finished up the playoffs. Blown out by the Magic.

Edited May 11, 2010 by nbasuperstar40

[Joker]

I disagree on that.........any dribble drive PG can create easy looks for JJ in the right offensive system (not in Woody's system).

Nash, Paul, D. Williams, Rondo, Rose, M. WIlliams, D. Harris, Parker, Collison, Miller, Conley, G. Hill, Westbrook. That is 13 in the league right now. Add Wall coming up. Even Billups and Kidd can still get in the paint and create to make that number 15. Additional guys like TJ Ford, Calderon, or even Ridnour (and that backup for Phoneix) could create easy shots in the right offensive system.

Hopefully a new coach can and will allow Teague to be that type of PG. He has the physical ability. He just needs some on the job training to see if he is capable.

Woody told Teague to go stand in the corner when JJ and/or Crawford were on the floor with him. That is not how use a Tony Parker / D. Harris / Rondo type of PG who are not perimeter oriented catch and shoot jump shooters. Those are the types of PGs that Teague has the potential to turn into. (Rondo without the 15 rebound games that is).

We either have to draft a guy who turns into this type of PG or get a coach to help Teague become what he can be.

How are we going to get the bolded? T.J. Ford? Hill couldn't stay in front of Nash. Conley struggled in Memphis iso-heavy offense, it doubt he will do much here.

I disagree. We need a PG but Teague is still learning and could be solid in a 6th man role next season. I see a lot of a young Jason Terry in him as well as flashes Kevin Johnson. I do not know how we will get a PG for our offense that will come cheap.

The only way to take the ball out of J.J. hand is to show the ability to create at a consistent level. Basically you need to be an All Star caliber player or at least very good.

Edited May 11, 2010 by nbasuperstar40

[AHF]

have you ever played a team where you had a complete mismatch.

We saw that in the first round when we had a complete mismatch against the inferior Bucks roster. You can see what happened after they made adjustments. It wasn't enough to win the series, just like I expect Orlando would have ultimately won in the second round, but they were competitive because they were able to keep the Hawks on their heels for 3 consecutive games. They moved the pieces around in a way that led to a 3-2 series lead despite being completely outmatched as far as the total roster.

[Joker]

We saw that in the first round when we had a complete mismatch against the inferior Bucks roster. You can see what happened after they made adjustments. It wasn't enough to win the series, just like I expect Orlando would have ultimately won in the second round, but they were competitive because they were able to keep the Hawks on their heels for 3 consecutive games. They moved the pieces around in a way that led to a 3-2 series lead despite being completely outmatched as far as the total roster.

I agree and that's why you haven't heard me say Woody needs to stay. I understand that Woody has to go because we should have swept or beat Mil in five games. Even though we got swept v. Orl, I would have felt better knowing we performed v. Mil.

[Buzzard]

We saw that in the first round when we had a complete mismatch against the inferior Bucks roster. You can see what happened after they made adjustments. It wasn't enough to win the series, just like I expect Orlando would have ultimately won in the second round, but they were competitive because they were able to keep the Hawks on their heels for 3 consecutive games. They moved the pieces around in a way that led to a 3-2 series lead despite being completely outmatched as far as the total roster.

AHF I am with you here. A new coach that knows Xs and Os could steal a game or two for us. I also think a PG is seriously needed if Teague is not the answer. I would much rather trade Craws expiring for a PG than risk getting one with our pick in the draft. I also think we should go after another SG with our late pick whether we lose JJ or not. Decent SG's where taken in the 2nd round two seasons in a row; we should be able to get a good one in the 1st hopefully.

[AHF]

On the Bibby issue, that was why my other pet peeve this year was that we would need Teague this season due to injury or ineffectiveness of Bibby and that it was irresponsible not to give him a consistent role to develop. By failing to develop Teague, it left us with only two choices: Bibby at the point or Crawford at the point. Both have their limitations. I didn't feel like running a similar thread on this but you can see the quotes like this from back in December:

Teague is progressing towards a blister in his rear after the nice Toronto game, despite Bibby's limiting injury. He is not going to be prepared when playing 60% of his games between 5 minutes and change and DNP. How do you get a sense of what is expected or a sense of rhythm with that? Hope Woodson has a good Bibby-plan-B for when there are injuries and ineffectiveness (esp defensively) for Bibby.

Edited May 11, 2010 by AHF

[Atlantaholic]

I understand it was a complete mismatch. But it wasn't the biggest mismatch in the history of the NBA playoffs and we shouldn't have had the worst performance of NBA history against them.

[Atlantaholic]

AHF I am with you here. A new coach that knows Xs and Os could steal a game or two for us. I also think a PG is seriously needed if Teague is not the answer. I would much rather trade Craws expiring for a PG than risk getting one with our pick in the draft. I also think we should go after another SG with our late pick whether we lose JJ or not. Decent SG's where taken in the 2nd round two seasons in a row; we should be able to get a good one in the 1st hopefully.

We should have had a better idea on Teague by now. Bibby was playing sub-NBDL caliber basketball for three straight months this year and Teague couldn't see more than 9 minutes a game every other game. Our PG defense was something that everyone knew would be an issue in the playoffs, and we did NOTHING to prepare for it throughout the season.

[MaceCase]

It's funny because when the quoted arguments were occurring I saw this thread coming a mile away even though Woody was starting to woo me with his top 3 offense. Props to AHF for holding steady, I will admit I continously avoided thoughts of postseason success as I was basking in the instant gratification of the regular season. If only Sund is as observant as many of the posters here on the 'Squawk.

[AHF]

It's funny because when the quoted arguments were occurring I saw this thread coming a mile away even though Woody was starting to woo me with his top 3 offense. Props to AHF for holding steady, I will admit I continously avoided thoughts of postseason success as I was basking in the instant gratification of the regular season. If only Sund is as observant as many of the posters here on the 'Squawk.

The regular season success was nice but unfortunately it was fool's gold. I wish the team could have proved otherwise.