None of the coaches on the short list are better than Woodrow

[sturt]

On a coaching scale from 1 to 10 I would rate Woody a 5. I'm not giving up that 5 until I find a 6 or better.

(I know what I said in the previous post, but I'm just too much of an optimist to let this go by without trying to push the discussion forward... )

Nine, let's assume for the sake of argument Woody is correctly rated as having been a 5.

That's not the point.

Here's the point.

The point is not what Woody HAS BEEN... it's what Woody... with the Atlanta Hawks... in 2010-11... WOULD BE.

EVEN IF... Coach A's coaching ability is a 5, and Coach B's coaching ability is a 5, that does not mean that both would derive the SAME OUTCOME.... in this case, A being Woody, there is a history that has accumulated and in the judgment of many of us, the players, taken as a group, have progressed as far as they're likely to progress with Coach A under his personality, under his way of communicating, under his ways of practicing, under his theories of player development, under his ways of motivating players.

The point is that many of us perceive that Woody has taken this particular roster as far as he's likely to be able to take it.

The point is that, even if we only obtain his equal in terms of coaching ability, THAT is an advantage for 2010-11 over what the team would have achieved with Woody.

I'm sure you still object, but do you, at least, get the counterargument now? Can you, at least, address the counterargument instead of continuing to hold on as-if no counterargument was ever made? Much appreciated.

[Gray Mule]

:thumbsdownsmileyanim:

When people will not listen, they will not learn. People can look you right in the eye and not hear

a word you are saying. My children taught me that.

The Atlanta Hawks have come to the position in their NBA life that they will not listen to Woody.

Not saying he's great or that he's rotten. I'm saying, they will not listen to his voice. They just

will not.

A new - different coach will have their ear. They will listen to a new coach. If the new guy and Woody

have exactly the same rating, one to ten, the new guy will be an improvement because the team will

listen to the new coach.

To me, a great coach is one who has great assistant coaches and he relies on the assistant coaches

to get things done. Poor, stubborn, bull headed Woody apparently either didn't have good assistant

coaches or he, like the team, came to the point where he wouldn't listen.

:kickcan:

[TheNorthCydeRises]

Yep . . . cause in Philly, Eddie Jordan was that "new voice" that they listened to, instead of Mo Cheeks.

. . . and in Detroit, Michael Curry sure did a great job in replacing Flip Saunders.

. . . and in Phoenix, Terry Porter was the right voice to replace D'Antoni

. . . and D'Antoni was just what the Knicks needed, instead of Isaiah

. . . and Vinny Del Negro was a great upgrade over Scott Skiles

. . . and Rick Carlisle has brought up the Dallas Mavericks past what Avery Johnson ever did

I fnd it funny that people truly believe that this team has progressed as far as they can with Woody, but a new coach ( because he's a different voice ) would get more out of the players. History says that a coaching change usually fails, if player/personnel changes aren't made as well.

They had to do that in Phoenix ( get rid of Shaq ) and in Charlotte ( acquire Stephen Jackson ), in order to get those teams to the next level. Even in Milwaukee and the great success story they had, they were a below .500 team, until John Salmons arrived, and gave them another guy who could create his own shot and score.

I wonder what the expectations around here would be, had Woody stayed, the core was intact, and we added a mid-level SF or PG that was capable of really helping us. Would expectations be NBA Finals or Fire Woody? Would it be win 57+ games?

I truly hope the core our team comes back, because I would love to see if the new coach could get more out of those guys. If JJ doesn't come back, that'll at least buy the new coach some time.

And the new coach will have my support. And if I see that the problem STILL has to do with players doing what they supposed to do, the new coach will be defended by me, just like I did with the former coach.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

And Nine . . . going back to your point of wanting a solid upgrade over Woody, I feel you on that. In fact, it's the very thing that most people say, whenever the trade Horford or Smoove topics come up.

They don't want to trade Smoove or Al for just any ol body, just so that the team can be balanced out better. Most fans aren't in favor of trading Al or Josh for a cat like Biendrins or Dalembert, just to obtain a so-called defensive center.

No . . . most fans would rather roll with Al and Josh, before trading one of them for those guys. If a trade happens, they want a Smoove + filler for a Gasol or Amare . . or a Horford for Brook Lopez type deal..

But when it comes to who will be the coach, some of those same folks are like . . . "I don't care who you hire. He could be an assistant coach, a broadcaster, a scout, an arena announcer like Ryan Cameron, a sideline reporter like Rashawn Ali, or even a bum out on Luckie St . . . just bring back ANYBODY BUT WOODY".

It's wild how they can have such high standards on one end when it comes to trading players . . . but want the coach gone regardless, no matter who we brought in or what his qualifications were.

That why I L-O-L all the time. The stuff is funny.

[Endy9]

What is happening here? Can anyone here honestly say that one of these guys could have done a better Job with the Hawks talent.

Better than Woody:

Casey

Jackson

Corbin

Larry Drew

This may end up being as dumb as replacing Dan Reeves with Jim Mora.

Fratello was never a better coach than Hubie Brown, but he enjoyed success taking over Hubie's team, after the team quit listening to Hubie and wouldn't submit to his authoritarian style. We can only hope something similar will happen in Drew's case. And Drew would have to be pretty bad to design a worse offense than Woody. Let's just hope he can keep the defensive intensity up also.

[sturt]

I fnd it funny that people truly believe that this team has progressed as far as they can with Woody, but a new coach ( because he's a different voice ) would get more out of the players.

Re-think this.

The two are not equivalent premises.

A team could have progressed as far as they can with their current coach...

And yet, that doesn't guarantee anything about the new coach.

All we've been saying, north, is that, at least, with another voice, you give your team a better chance to succeed than the seeming-dead-end they would have faced if the same guy had been kept.

History says that a coaching change usually fails, if player/personnel changes aren't made as well.

Many of us have been saying all along that this is the least important major decision the team has this off-season. Good to see you evidently agree.

[BusBoyIsBack]

What is happening here? Can anyone here honestly say that one of these guys could have done a better Job with the Hawks talent.

Better than Woody:

Casey

Jackson

Corbin

Larry Drew

This may end up being as dumb as replacing Dan Reeves with Jim Mora.

Not even close to comparable. Dan Reeves replaced by Jim Mora was one of the dumbest moves in sports ownership history as a coach got fired because their franchise player got hurt. Compounded by the fact that you took that player away from an offense suited around their strengths which led to them being an MVP candidate in their first year as a starter and put that player in an offense that neutralized his strengths and exploited his weaknesses.

Compare that with the Hawks situation who right NOW have the flawed offense and are more than likely replacing it with one that is far more beneficial. We run the same offense that didn't even work for the BEST PLAYER IN THE NBA. The BEST RECORD WISE TEAM in the NBA. So if it doesn't even work for them in the playoffs, how in the heck is it going to work for us???

Isolation offense does NOT work in teh post-season. Michael Jeffrey Jordan couldn't even win a championship with an offense that predictable.

So BY DEFAULT if we abandon that offense we have a better shot than we ever had under Woodson come post-season.

Edited June 12, 2010 by BusBoyIsBack

[NineOhTheRino]

The hiring of Drew will surely be popular with the players, and the Hawks may be hoping that keeping a familiar face on the sideline will help them re-sign Johnson and smooth the transition for the rest of the roster.

this team will improve marginally on offense and tank on defense....I'm done

Makes no sense for me to kill Drew. Even though he will not be an improvement over Woody I honestly thought he was the best of the 3 candidates.

Edited June 12, 2010 by NineOhTheRino