Folks . . the problem is on DEFENSE

[TheNorthCydeRises]

I understand that people want more movement in the offense. I understand that people don't want to see ISOs ( which won't happen, because all teams run ISO to some extent ).

But the main reason we didn't give a better showing in the playoffs, was because our defense was pizz poor.

Remember my sig:

OFFENSE sells TICKETS . . DEFENSE wins GAMES . . REBOUNDING wins CHAMPIONSHIPS.

This comes from Pat Head Summitt . . womens basketball coach at the University of Tennessee. And she's dead on target when she says this. Boston doesn't have a great offensive team. But when they win games, they do 2 things very well. Defend and rebound the basketball.

Ironically, this was the philosophy of the departing coach. And when we did these 2 things, we won games . . a lot of games. But in the playoffs, we couldn't stop anybody.

I like what I hear from Coach Drew about the offense. But even with a new offense, it won't mean a thing if we don't become a much better defensive team. We'll simply be a good offensive team that can't stop anybody when it matters.

The coach, and especially the front office, must address our defense and rebounding issues. The focus can't mainly be on the offense, because it wasn't the ofense causing us to lose games. It was the DEFENSE.

[coachx]

Our poor showing in the 2nd round was due more to offense and here is why:

1.) Ourt top scorer ,JJ, averaged 12.75 PPG vs. the Magic while shooting a putrid 29%

2. Crawford only shot 35% in Round #2

Why is this ? B/c we played iso street ball against the DPOY roaming the paint. We were so predictable. This is exactly how Woody played as player.......and iso chucker.

3. In 3 of 4 games vs. Orlando the Hawks averaged 76 points ! 76 POINTS !

That is a broken offense my friend.

Our defense sucked too but if we could have scored some more points our players would have tried harder on defense.

Edited June 17, 2010 by coachx

[TheNorthCydeRises]

Offensive 4 factors

FG% - 50.6% ( 12th in the league )

* This was mainly due to guys like JJ and Crawford being able to make difficult shots, and Horford and Josh getting into a rhythm offensively. It was also due to our tremendous ability to get out and run, after we got stops. When we were in transition, we were an unstoppable team just about. Even if other guys couldn't pull their weight, on most nights, these 4 were good enough offensively to help us win games.

Turnover %: .114 ( 1st in the league )

* This was due to the low risk type of offense we ran, which pretty much saw us not completely waste possessions without getting a shot up.

Offensive rebound %: .282 ( 5th in the league )

* Horford and Smoove, and sometimes even Zaza, helped to keep possessions alive when they hit the offensive boards. The ability to get 2nd chance opportunities to score, was a big part of our offense.

Free throw to field goal attempts ratio: .213 ( 23rd in the league )

* The achilles heel of last year's team. This was something we used to be real good at ( when we had Josh Childress here ). But last year, it was definitely a weak spot. Our inability to get to the free throw line, especially when we went through scoring droughts, directly led to us blowing leads left and right.

@ Coachx . . . . when you look at the 2nd round series with Orlando, the presence of Dwight Howard took away the #1 thing we did well as an offense. Actually . . he took away 2 things.

- On the offensive end, we had absolutely no answer for him. Because he was able to score at will, those made baskets prevented us from scoring in transition . . something we did extremely well as a team, and probably our best asset as an offense.

- On the defensive end, he forced the Hawks into being a jumpshooting team . . . and when we missed shots, he gobbled up the rebounds. This prevented us from doing another thing we did well as an offense . . which was gobble up offensive rebounds for 2nd shots.

So when JJ and Crawford couldn't keep us in the game with their shot making, and the other guys missed wide open shots as well, it was a recipe for disaster. When we didn't double Howard, he killed us. When we did, their shooters killed us.

No time right now . . . but I'll get into the defensive aspects later on today,

[macdaddy]

An offense that's successful based on jump shots and offensive rebounding is going to fail against the better teams as we saw in the 4th quarter of a lot of tough regular season losses and in the playoffs.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

3. In 3 of 4 games vs. Orlando the Hawks averaged 76 points ! 76 POINTS !

That is a broken offense my friend.

Our defense sucked too but if we could have scored some more points our players would have tried harder on defense.

OK Coach . . . let's do it this way. Since you took out the high point game of that series ( 98 pts in Game 2 by the Hawks ), let's take out the low point game by Orlando ( 98 pts in Game 4 ).

So if you do that . . . in 3 of the 4 games vs Orlando . . the Magic averaged a whopping 110 POINTS

As much as people has talked about the offense in that series, the defense in that series was absolutely PITIFUL. Even moreso than the offense, in my opinion.

Let's go one more.

In the Milwaukee series, these were the averages for each team when they won and when they lost.

ATL WINS - 95 ppg . . . . ATL LOSSES - 93 ppg

MIL WINS - 103 ppg . . . . MIL LOSSES - 80 ppg

Look at the disparity in that series. A series that many will remember for the embarassment of Game 3 and the meltdown in Game 5 . . . but not the absolutely stellar defensive 3rd quarter in Game 6 and the continued lockdown defense in Game 7. In wins and losses, our ppg output only decreased by 2 points. But for Milwaukee, it decreased by 23 POINTS PER GAME.

That either means that the Milwaukee offense just couldn't get it done . . . or . . . the Hawks defense showed up in those games and shut them down. Anybody who watched that series knows that it was our DEFENSE that won that series for us. Just like it does for just about every playoff team in the NBA.

At this time of year, it's much more about defending at a very high level, than it is about scoring a lot of points. And for the Hawks going into next season, the defense better be addressed just as much, if not more, than the offense.

Edited June 18, 2010 by northcyde

[TheNorthCydeRises]

Defensive 4 factors

defensive eFG% - .496 ( 16th )

. . . the league average was .501 Here's something that's interesting. Of the 16 playoff teams, we had the 15th worst eFG% on defense. Only Portland at .502, was worse. Two other teams ( Dallas and Denver ), posted .495 eFG%. All 3 of the Western confernce teams lost in the 1st round, and we had to go 7 games with Milwaukee, in those games in which we couldn't stop them.

turnover % - .132 ( tied 18th )

. . . we didn't cause a lot of turnovers as a defense. When we did force a turnover, we were off to the races. When we didn't, the game got real difficult for us.

defensive rebound% - .727 ( 24th )

. . . this was the KILLER folks. And Exodus noticed this as early as December. As the Hawks got worse and worse rebounding the other teams misses, we saw this team come back down to earth from that outstanding start. I remember this stat being as low as 26th in the league at one time. The commitment and flat out laziness that was show in rebounding the basketball, is something that Drew needs to address IMMEDIATELY. 2nd chance points KILLED this team at times.

free throws to field goal attempts ratio: .208 ( tied 7th )

. . . I don't know if this is good or bad. I guess it's good, because we didn't give people cheap points all the time by fouling them. But then again, we should've.

Edited June 18, 2010 by northcyde

[TheNorthCydeRises]

So in the offensive view of the 4 factors, we're 12th - 1st - 5th - and 23rd in those categories

But in the defensive view of the 4 factors, we were 16th - 18th - 24th - and 7th in thsoe categories.

Yet, people are more concerned about the offense than they are the defense?

Like I said, I have no problem with what Coach Drew wants to do on offense. But he and this front office DAMN WELL better address this defense, which is a below average defense for a playoff team. And it may take more than a change in scheme to get the defense right. He may have to bring in better players to get the job done, especially when it comes to rebounding the basketball.

[GameTime]

Woody was a horrible coach. I'm shocked we weren't 30th with that switching crap he called D.

[sillent]

I understand that people want more movement in the offense. I understand that people don't want to see ISOs ( which won't happen, because all teams run ISO to some extent ).

But the main reason we didn't give a better showing in the playoffs, was because our defense was pizz poor.

Remember my sig:

OFFENSE sells TICKETS . . DEFENSE wins GAMES . . REBOUNDING wins CHAMPIONSHIPS.

This comes from Pat Head Summitt . . womens basketball coach at the University of Tennessee. And she's dead on target when she says this. Boston doesn't have a great offensive team. But when they win games, they do 2 things very well. Defend and rebound the basketball.

Ironically, this was the philosophy of the departing coach. And when we did these 2 things, we won games . . a lot of games. But in the playoffs, we couldn't stop anybody.

I like what I hear from Coach Drew about the offense. But even with a new offense, it won't mean a thing if we don't become a much better defensive team. We'll simply be a good offensive team that can't stop anybody when it matters.

The coach, and especially the front office, must address our defense and rebounding issues. The focus can't mainly be on the offense, because it wasn't the ofense causing us to lose games. It was the DEFENSE.

I Agree!!

The real belief is that not only will our offense improve but morals will change for the better. We have defensive minded players but if their morale is down because of lack of ball movement they are not going to want to play defense. The switch defense works because or when you have long athletic guys that are committed to helping and playing hard defense. We are not changing the players just making them more affective. If they are getting easy shots on offense it's going to be a lot easier to flow on defense. The team will be saving more energy and be able to be more aggressive and in sync on defense.

Edited June 18, 2010 by sillent

[Diesel]

I understand that people want more movement in the offense. I understand that people don't want to see ISOs ( which won't happen, because all teams run ISO to some extent ).

But the main reason we didn't give a better showing in the playoffs, was because our defense was pizz poor.

Remember my sig:

OFFENSE sells TICKETS . . DEFENSE wins GAMES . . REBOUNDING wins CHAMPIONSHIPS.

This comes from Pat Head Summitt . . womens basketball coach at the University of Tennessee. And she's dead on target when she says this. Boston doesn't have a great offensive team. But when they win games, they do 2 things very well. Defend and rebound the basketball.

Ironically, this was the philosophy of the departing coach. And when we did these 2 things, we won games . . a lot of games. But in the playoffs, we couldn't stop anybody.

I like what I hear from Coach Drew about the offense. But even with a new offense, it won't mean a thing if we don't become a much better defensive team. We'll simply be a good offensive team that can't stop anybody when it matters.

The coach, and especially the front office, must address our defense and rebounding issues. The focus can't mainly be on the offense, because it wasn't the ofense causing us to lose games. It was the DEFENSE.

The biggest problem was Howard in the middle and our guys not being able to stop him, outrebound him or to match Orlando scoring.

A coach has to find a way to make one of those thing easier.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

I Agree!!

The real belief is that not only will our offense improve but morals will change for the better. We have defensive minded players but if their morale is down because of lack of ball movement they are not going to want to play defense. The switch defense works because or when you have long athletic guys that are committed to helping and playing hard defense. We are not changing the players just making them more affective. If they are getting easy shots on offense it's going to be a lot easier to flow on defense. The team will be saving more energy and be able to be more aggressive and in sync on defense.

If that's the motivation these players are going to use to give more effort on defense, then we'll never be a top level playoff defense.

Tonight's game is a perfect example of what I'm talking about. Kobe and the Lakers were horrible in that 1st half. Then they get down by 12. Great offense wasn't going to get them back in that game. They had to literally grind that game out and see if they could put themselves in position to win.

And that's exactly what they did.

Like my sig says . . . REBOUNDING WINS CHAMPIONSHIPS. And without the effort that the Lakers put forth on the boards, especially Kobe with his 15 rebounds, that team would've been dead in the water.

[Diesel]

If that's the motivation these players are going to use to give more effort on defense, then we'll never be a top level playoff defense.

Tonight's game is a perfect example of what I'm talking about. Kobe and the Lakers were horrible in that 1st half. Then they get down by 12. Great offense wasn't going to get them back in that game. They had to literally grind that game out and see if they could put themselves in position to win.

And that's exactly what they did.

Like my sig says . . . REBOUNDING WINS CHAMPIONSHIPS. And without the effort that the Lakers put forth on the boards, especially Kobe with his 15 rebounds, that team would've been dead in the water.

Rebounding is about effort and technique. That doesn't win championships. It's a component of what wins championships. What wins championships is consistency and mental toughness. Last night what won the championship for the Lakers were the refs. That was one of the worst officiated games I have seen. And it was game 7. However, in a more fair situation, the consistency is going to have to be there on offense and defense and in rebounding. If a team is a very good offensive team and they score regardless of what you do, they will beat the breaks off of their opponents. There are a few teams wondering right now, How did Phoenix beat us. We're a better defensive team than them... However, Phoenix is a super scoring team and they do that consistently. Sometimes, you can have a great defensive team and not win nothing. You're just tough. You got to be able to score. Sometimes, you can have a great rebounding team that does nothing. I think when you look at Cleveland. They were a great defensive team and a good rebounding team too. They didn't win a championship because their offense was simple.

[AtLaS]

Although I agree Northcyde that our defense needs improvements, there is only so much we can do against teams with players like Howard in the middle whom we have noone even remotely able to stop. Not to mention the constant switching that every good team will exploit. We desperately need a big man who can hold it down inside before we become a top defensive team. But, I do agree that we could have been better than we were last year even with our current personnel.

But, the biggest problem for me is offense. Isolations can work during the regular season against most teams, as it did for us, but against the great teams in a playoff atmosphere it is MUCH tougher to constantly isolate. Defenses bog down and the game becomes much more half-court oriented, not to mention the teams are better and a lot more fired up. You have to have ways to score other than isolations, we did not, which is why we absolutely BOMBED against Orlando.

[frosgrim]

I think Diesel has it right. It's about mental toughness. The Hawks have no toughness at all.

They get down and out very easily. They respond poorly to in-game adversity.

I also think Northcyde has it right. Defense and rebounding have to improve. But those factors are related to mental toughness.

Areas that have to improve, and probably in this order:

1. Rebounding- this is a terrible rebounding team. Smith is deplorable in his technique. He can't box anyone out. Horford has good technique, but can be swallowed up by stronger and bigger centers.

2. Defense at point of attack- Bibby is just awful as a defensive player. We have to be able to stop opposing guards with our guards. Expecting Horford to handle both centers and PGs is insane, and it contributes to issue 1.

3. Ball movement on offense- without getting everyone touches the team gets stagnent. You keep the opposition moving on defense, you tire them out for their offensive possesions, making it easier to play defense. But as everyone points out, sharing the ball gets everyone in the game.

Solutions:

1. First idea is to get Smith better at boxing out. With better technique Smith could be a monster rebounder. If that doesn't work, a trade will have to be looked at.

2. Remove switching defense. Play man to man, accuontable defense. If you can't play defenese, then you don't get minutes. Teague gets first shot at being the guy at PG. This should improve the defense as he has to be better than Bibby.

3. Offensive system that keeps the ball moving should help. We'll see what happens from there.

In all, I think this team just had a fundamental problem of poor coaching. This lead to little mental toughness, and the associated defensive and rebounding problems.

[Plainview1981]

I understand that people want more movement in the offense. I understand that people don't want to see ISOs ( which won't happen, because all teams run ISO to some extent ).

But the main reason we didn't give a better showing in the playoffs, was because our defense was pizz poor.

Remember my sig:

OFFENSE sells TICKETS . . DEFENSE wins GAMES . . REBOUNDING wins CHAMPIONSHIPS.

This comes from Pat Head Summitt . . womens basketball coach at the University of Tennessee. And she's dead on target when she says this. Boston doesn't have a great offensive team. But when they win games, they do 2 things very well. Defend and rebound the basketball.

Ironically, this was the philosophy of the departing coach. And when we did these 2 things, we won games . . a lot of games. But in the playoffs, we couldn't stop anybody.

I like what I hear from Coach Drew about the offense. But even with a new offense, it won't mean a thing if we don't become a much better defensive team. We'll simply be a good offensive team that can't stop anybody when it matters.

The coach, and especially the front office, must address our defense and rebounding issues. The focus can't mainly be on the offense, because it wasn't the ofense causing us to lose games. It was the DEFENSE.

The problem is lack of fundamentals and discipline on both ends of the floor. The Hawks problems aren't going to be solved by working on one end of the floor and not the other. This team will have to execute on both ends of the floor. Without a superstar that's the only way.

[thescout]

Good points guys on solving the Hawks problems. I think anyway you look at it we need another big.Boston was able to defeat Orlando with their big tandem although Dwight still had a good series.Not sure how to get another big but rebounding is a key as well as the other points like ball movement,defense. Even if Smoove gets better at boards how do you slow Dwight down. Dwight can score on any of our front court players at will.

Besides the Dwight problem ball movement has always been a probelm even back to the 1980's. We always play an isloated game and unless you have a kobe or lebron who can carry a team so far by scoring alot it won't work in the later rounds of the playoffs. Teams are to good and will slow your top scorer down thus getting everyone involved is critical. I think we need some better players. We can talk about improving what we have but I don't this team is talented enough to get to a NBA championship. We have to many parts and not a team concept.You can beat alot of average and below average teams in the regular season but in the playoffs 2nd round on unless you play a team game your history. Players like Allen,Pierce Rondo for Boston stepped it up players on losing teams don't perform to their capabilties.

[Diesel]

Good points guys on solving the Hawks problems. I think anyway you look at it we need another big.Boston was able to defeat Orlando with their big tandem although Dwight still had a good series.Not sure how to get another big but rebounding is a key as well as the other points like ball movement,defense. Even if Smoove gets better at boards how do you slow Dwight down. Dwight can score on any of our front court players at will.

Besides the Dwight problem ball movement has always been a probelm even back to the 1980's. We always play an isloated game and unless you have a kobe or lebron who can carry a team so far by scoring alot it won't work in the later rounds of the playoffs. Teams are to good and will slow your top scorer down thus getting everyone involved is critical. I think we need some better players. We can talk about improving what we have but I don't this team is talented enough to get to a NBA championship. We have to many parts and not a team concept.You can beat alot of average and below average teams in the regular season but in the playoffs 2nd round on unless you play a team game your history. Players like Allen,Pierce Rondo for Boston stepped it up players on losing teams don't perform to their capabilties.

Boston beat Orlando purely on mental toughness. They don't fold it in. They realize that somebody has to step up. And Rondo was beastly in those first 3 rounds.

We have never had that toughness. We need a player like Oakley. Even if he's not a starter, just a guy who comes in and is tough. We are soft like Cleveland was when they had Mark Price. (No disrespect). However, Brad Daughterty would fold against the likes of Ewing. He was a finesse big.. and I think Smoove is that too. Horf is tough, he just doesn't have enough fundamentals to be great.

[Jody23]

I think it bears mentioning that Josh deals with many of the same struggles that Al Horford deals with as far as being undersized at the position he plays. This also plays apart in the rebounding issues. Let's not forget that Josh came into the league playing small forward. Having to battle bigger and stronger guys for rebounds for a whole season will wear on you at some point.

[thescout]

Boston beat Orlando purely on mental toughness. They don't fold it in. They realize that somebody has to step up. And Rondo was beastly in those first 3 rounds.

We have never had that toughness. We need a player like Oakley. Even if he's not a starter, just a guy who comes in and is tough. We are soft like Cleveland was when they had Mark Price. (No disrespect). However, Brad Daughterty would fold against the likes of Ewing. He was a finesse big.. and I think Smoove is that too. Horf is tough, he just doesn't have enough fundamentals to be great.

I agree mental toughness this team lacks but it also lacks a player that can slow down Howard.Orlando rained 3's on the Hawks so they had an inside and outside game. Boston beat Orlando but after a few games Orlando started to make a comeback which fell short. Smoove is a tweener at least for now,Marvin unreliable doesn't add much, Bibby to slow,Horford gets eaten up by bigs. There are many problems and I doubt were going to find the answers with the current squad.

[kalaps]

The problem is chemistry, the NBA is built on offense, but basketball is mad of 2 parts; offense feeds defense and vice verse, you have to play as a team to win and you have to play both ends of the court.