So does no Woody mean this team gets out the 2nd rnd in 2010-11?

[NineOhTheRino]

So does no Woody = Hawks goody?

Same team.... no! No as in they will not play with pride and they will not win a single game.

Same team while getting 10-15pts and 8 asst. from Teague.... maybe.

Edited June 1, 2010 by NineOhTheRino

[MaceCase]

You fail to realize that if the next coach at least wins a single game in the second round, wait, stays within under 10 points with a team in the second round then they've already improved over Woody. Heck, if the team closes out a lower seed in the first round in less than 6 games he's already improved on Woody's resume.

Oh and your thread title says make it out the 2nd round but your poll says make it to the 2nd round. Did you intend on that or am I just nitpicking?

Edited June 1, 2010 by CrawfulToCrawesome

[NineOhTheRino]

You fail to realize that if the next coach at least wins a single game in the second round, wait, stays within under 10 points with a team in the second round then they've already improved over Woody. Heck, if the team closes out a lower seed in the first round in less than 6 games he's already improved on Woody's resume.

that's why I added the 'play with pride' option

Oh and your thread title says make it out the 2nd round but your poll says make it to the 2nd round. Did you intend on that or am I just nitpicking?

fixed

Edited June 1, 2010 by NineOhTheRino

[AHF]

Too much depends on the moves made in the offseason...but I do expect our coach to have our team ready to play with some pride and to give them a chance in terms of how they are used in the playoffs.

[spotatl]

There is a signifcantly better chance that the Hawks don't make it back to the second round than they make it past the second round.

Edited June 1, 2010 by spotatl

[frosgrim]

Too early in the off season to tell.

Keep this poll for the middle-end of July when we have a better understanding of what the team will look like.

What I would like to see next year:

More consistent play across the board.

More attention to details- e.g. box out your man...

Adapting to what the other team is doing- if you are getting killed on the pnr, then do something different!

Less iso, more movement on offense-

Less complaining to the refs

More hustle

Do those things and I think the team is a 2nd round caliber with what they have now. But too much is uncertain right now to see what will happen with this team.

Edited June 1, 2010 by frosgrim

[gsuteke]

the team is significantly flawed at PG right now. Woody (although he sucks) was just the fall-guy. the end was inevitable. we should have saw it coming.

[lethalweapon3]

It does mean that the team that played last year, if the key player returns, will have a realistic chance of competing against second-round-caliber competition.

~lw3

[capstone21]

If we lose Joe then we might barely be able to scape into the playoffs.

[AHF]

There is a signifcantly better chance that the Hawks don't make it back to the second round than they make it past the second round.

Because we are losing Woodson, because we are likely to lose Joe Johnson, etc.?

[spotatl]

Because we are losing Woodson, because we are likely to lose Joe Johnson, etc.?

Even if Joe Johnson comes back I'd say this. Coaching isn't the reason that this team isn't making the conference finals and the Hawks will have a VERY tough time upgrading the roster because of their financial situation.

Edited June 2, 2010 by spotatl

[Buzzard]

I voted no. My expectations with the exact same team and a different coach would be a solid 2nd round series. At least we go six games with the same players vs the same team. That is all I expected this season as well.

If a new coach implements a better 1/2 court Def and Off who knows what may happen? We may just shock someone in the second round.

Edited June 2, 2010 by Buzzard

[NineOhTheRino]

You must have players willing to give maximum effort. All the best defensive coaches around say that 90% of any defensive strategy revolve around effort. I can honestly say the the Hawks played lifeless defense vs the Magic but I'm not like many of you that blame that on Woodson. Woodson tried to discipline his guys for playing poor defense but didn't get the backing of management. Management rewarded the 1 guy that routinely went against everything Woody taught with a $60m contract. Management (BK) also tied Woody's hands by leaving him with one of the worst defensive players in the NBA.

But Woody is yesterday. Let's hope the new guy get the support he needs to turn this group overpaid schoolgirls into legitimate NBA players. My idea of support would be letting Al, Josh or anyone playing lackadaisical defense rot on the bench until they decide to go all in. I don't want to hear about MGJ criticizing this new coaching staff for not playing guys that they have deemed to be soft on either side of the ball. The new message has to be you're either in or out.

Edited June 2, 2010 by NineOhTheRino

[AHF]

Woodson tried to discipline his guys for playing poor defense but didn't get the backing of management. Management rewarded the 1 guy that routinely went against everything Woody taught with a $60m contract. Management (BK) also tied Woody's hands by leaving him with one of the worst defensive players in the NBA.

It is a shame Woody didn't have the power to bench players like other coaches do when they are disciplining people who don't give good effort or listen to them. The mandate from management must have been that he has to bench them with two fouls but is not allowed to bench people for disciplinary reasons.

[Buzzard]

It is a shame Woody didn't have the power to bench players like other coaches do when they are disciplining people who don't give good effort or listen to them. The mandate from management must have been that he has to bench them with two fouls but is not allowed to bench people for disciplinary reasons.

I don't know about a mandate but its possible; just does not seem likely. Especially early in Woodys reign. It will be interesting as the seasons go by to hear from the players as far as him playing favorites. Like with Smoove...was he a favorite and was not being benched for that reason or a mandate from upper mangement? Or Marvin was it a mandate he start or was it Woody playing favorites by not calling plays for him?

His coaching style, defense and offense, rotations, apparent doghouse, and who played even though someone else was hot confused the hell out of me every year and not just this one.

[AHF]

I don't know about a mandate but its possible; just does not seem likely. Especially early in Woodys reign.

I was being sarcastic. Woody always could have adjusted minutes and time on the bench to address problems with players not following his game plan or failing to give reasonable effort.