insider request: hawks preview

[gsuteke]

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/trainingcamp10/insider/columns/story?columnist=hollinger_john&page=HawksForecast1011&action=login&appRedirect=http%3a%2f%2finsider.espn.go.com%2fnba%2ftrainingcamp10%2finsider%2fcolumns%2fstory%3fcolumnist%3dhollinger_john%26page%3dHawksForecast1011

[HawkItus]

Monday, September 27, 2010

2010-11 Forecast: Atlanta Hawks

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

By John Hollinger

ESPN.com

Have Joe Johnson and Josh Smith taken these Hawks about as high as they're ever going to go?

GO TO: 2009-10 Recap Offseason Moves Biggest Strength/Weakness Outlook

2009-10 Recap

Since the Hawks have virtually the same roster as they did a year ago, the logical place to start for this season is to first look at last season -- a campaign that turned out to be your basic good-news, bad-news proposition.

The good news was that they won 53 games, earned the Eastern Conference's third seed, and made it back to the second round of the playoffs.

HOLLINGER'S '09-10 STATS

W-L: 53-29 (Pythagorean W-L: 56-26)

Offensive Efficiency: 108.9 (3rd)

Defensive Efficiency: 104.0 (14th)

Pace Factor: 92.5 (27th)

Highest PER: Josh Smith (21.04)

The bad news was all the other stuff. For one, Atlanta was completely exposed in the playoffs, barely limping past a wounded Milwaukee team in seven games before suffering a four-game, second-round demolition at the hands of Orlando.

That takes us to the second problem -- the Hawks were at the absolute limits of their powers during an overachieving regular season. Atlanta didn't hit the slightest whiff of adversity the entire campaign, gliding through with virtually pristine health and getting a career year from Jamal Crawford. The Hawks demonstrated they could be a good team if everything fell into place, but they also revealed themselves to be utterly incapable of anything more. That's hardly a great omen going into 2010-11.

The Hawks' success largely came at the offensive end, where Atlanta ranked a surprising third in offensive efficiency. Theirs was a pure volume strategy. The ability of Joe Johnson and Crawford to create a huge quantity of shots without making turnovers allowed the other Hawks to crash the boards, and crash they did. Atlanta ranked fifth in offensive rebound rate, and at the same time, had by far the lowest turnover ratio in basketball (see chart).

Lowest Turnover Rate, 2009-10

Team TO/100 poss.

Atlanta 12.8

Dallas 13.6

Portland 13.6

L.A. Lakers 13.8

Milwaukee 13.9

League average 15.4

Combining those two factors, Atlanta launched more shots per possession than any other team (with "shots" here defined to include free-throw attempts multiplied by 0.44). In fact, the Hawks got a lot more shots -- nearly four more than the league average. That, in turn, accounted for nearly the entire difference between Atlanta's scintillating offense and a league-average outfit (see chart).

The somewhat ugly part was that Atlanta's offense depended so heavily on Johnson and Crawford initiating offense by going one-on-one, or by running a pick-and-roll and then going one-on-one after the switch. Lamented locally as the "Iso-Joe" offense, any team that prevented Atlanta from running in the open court and could control the defensive boards had a great shot at stopping Atlanta.

Most Shots* Per Poss., 2009-10

Team Shots/100 poss.

Atlanta 99.9

Dallas 99.7

Portland 99.5

L.A. Lakers 99.4

Milwaukee 99.4

League average 95.9

* Shots = FGA + (FTA * 0.44)

That latter point was another interesting development -- the Hawks ranked fourth in the NBA with 15.6 fast-break points per game, despite finishing 27th in pace factor. That should give you some indication of just how methodical they were in the half court.

Defensively, the Hawks were almost completely average. Josh Smith's shot-blocking helped them hold opponents to a slightly below-average true shooting mark, but Atlanta's lack of height also hurt on the defensive glass. In fact, the same volume game they played so well on offense plagued them on defense, where they rated just 25th in opponent shot attempts per possession.

It was particularly entertaining to watch the histrionics they went through to avoid having point guard Mike Bibby defend anybody good. Atlanta often had Johnson defending the opponent's point guard while Bibby hid in the corner against the opponents' fifth option.

An even bigger problem was Atlanta's horrific transition defense. Despite outstanding team speed, the Hawks were 25th in fast-break points allowed per game at 15.8, an inexcusable state of affairs. The five teams behind them were all poor defensive teams that barely tried (Memphis, Toronto, Minnesota, Golden State and New Jersey); the Hawks landed in that disreputable group for less obvious reasons.

Undoubtedly, much of this resulted from their willingness to crash the offensive boards. If Johnson or Crawford shot and the three other players crashed the boards, it left only the overmatched Bibby on the back line if the opponent was able to generate a quick outlet.

In the final analysis, this was about all what could be expected from a roster with such shortcomings. The Hawks had four very good players, none of whom were superstars, and four other average ones filling out the rotation. For as badly as "Iso-Joe" was exposed in the playoffs by opponents prepared for a relatively primitive offensive tactic, it gave the Hawks their best chance to win throughout the regular season. If the opponent didn't really have its act together defensively, the Hawks usually did.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Offseason Moves

Here's Atlanta's offseason in one phrase: penny-wise, pound-foolish. The Hawks hired the cheapest coach available and then inexplicably broke the bank to keep Joe Johnson with a deal that will likely hamstring them in any future deals.

Didn't offer Mike Woodson a contract, hired Larry Drew as head coach. Atlanta's max-out season was both the best and worst thing that could have happened to Woodson. On the one hand, he received a lot of credit for winning 53 games and improving the team's record for the fifth straight season. On the other hand, the resounding feeling that the team had reached its ceiling with the Iso-Joe show provided an impetus to seek change.

What the Hawks did next was bizarre, hiring assistant Larry Drew mainly because he would come cheaper than any of the other candidates. Spies in Hotlanta say that ownership made this call despite general manager Rick Sund's preference for Mavs assistant Dwane Casey, adding another layer of intrigue to the proceedings.

While Drew is a well-regarded assistant with whom the players are comfortable, this adds a third puzzling aspect to the decision: If you're firing the coach to change directions, how much really changed if you hired his top assistant?

Signed Joe Johnson to a six-year, $123.7 million deal. This is the worst contract of free agency. I've said in several other places that the rules of the salary cap give teams a huge incentive to overpay to keep their own free agents, and clearly the Hawks followed that line of thinking.

But when you get into mega-contracts of this size, more alternatives are on the table. Atlanta easily could have signed-and-traded Johnson and earned a huge trade exception, much as Utah did with Carlos Boozer. In fact, with the Hawks' other assets, they likely could have outbid the Jazz for Al Jefferson in such a scenario. At the very least, they would have been well-positioned to add pieces around their young core of Al Horford, Marvin Williams and Josh Smith.

Additionally, the reality of Atlanta's financial position is that they can't afford to have an albatross contract, which is exactly what Johnson is likely to become by about the third year of the deal. The team is losing money and can't possibly afford to go into the luxury tax, making his salary a much bigger burden than it would be for, say, New York or even Houston. If you believe that the team had hit its ceiling with this group, then there was nothing to fear from the change, even if it resulted in a step back in 2010-11.

Traded 24th overall pick for picks No. 27 and 31; drafted Jordan Crawford and sold 31st pick to Oklahoma City. I like what Atlanta did getting two picks for one while still getting the player they wanted in Crawford. While he almost perfectly replicates the skills of Atlanta's other Crawford, his namesake is also a free agent after the season. Selling the 31st pick could end up being a mistake, given that they could have used the player the Thunder selected (German Eurostash choice Tibor Pleiss), but it's another example of the Hawks' current financial straits and another example of why the overexuberant deal for Johnson was a huge mistake.

Drafted Pape Sy. The second-round pick is a project who, surprisingly, will be on the Hawks' roster this season. He's regarded as having defensive potential but needing to improve his offensive skills. Atlanta has made shockingly little use of its D-League team but Sy seems an ideal candidate for an extended trip to Utah.

Signed Josh Powell to a one-year deal for the veteran minimum. Powell was awful with the Lakers last season, but it's hard to argue with the price. What's easier to dispute is the Hawks' choice in size. Atlanta still has only one frontcourt player taller than 6-foot-9, which is going to leave it in a world of hurt against the league's elite frontcourts.

Signed-and-traded Josh Childress to Phoenix for a second-round pick. Childress was never going to play in Atlanta at the price he was asking, so the Hawks at least landed a 2012 second-rounder from the Suns for the trouble of relinquishing his rights. The Hawks also received a $3.6 million trade exception, although that's unlikely to see the light of the day until the 2011 draft (if ever) due to luxury tax considerations.

Signed Etan Thomas for one year, veteran's minimum. Atlanta has needed a decent third center for some time, and having Thomas certainly will be preferable to the Randolph Morris cameos Hawks fans suffered through the past two seasons. That said, he's old, injury-prone and undersized, and will spend the year encased in a glass box labeled "break only in case of emergency."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Biggest Strength: Durability

And let's hope it stays that way. Atlanta's greatest attribute the past three seasons has been that it has a bunch of decent players who never get hurt. Four starters skipped the meaningless final game, but up to that point the five starters and Crawford missed only nine games between them. Evans and Pachulia missed another seven, meaning the entire eight-man rotation had only 16 unwanted absences among them.

And that's really important, because Atlanta's "deep depth" is pretty shaky -- especially in the frontcourt, where Powell is a D-League talent posing as the Hawks' fourth big man. Atlanta's best move, in fact, might be to use Williams as the backup power forward this year and play more often with Johnson at the 3. Such a maneuver would take some skillful rotation juggling on Drew's part, but it also would clear more time for Jordan Crawford and Jeff Teague in the backcourt.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Biggest Weakness: Money

Re-signing Johnson only exacerbates what is likely to be the Hawks' greatest issue going forward: the fact that keeping this group together is going to be increasingly expensive, and they don't have the coin to foot the bill. We saw the early stages of that problem in the skinflint offseason that followed the Johnson singing. Atlanta's lone moves were signing the least expensive coach available and a minimum-salary big man who is unlikely to provide any useful solution to the lack of frontcourt depth.

It only gets worse from here. The Hawks could use the Childress trade exception to get a frontcourt body, but that would put them right against the luxury tax. With Jamal Crawford becoming a free agent next year and Horford due to at least double his salary as a restricted free agent, the Hawks will likely perform the luxury tax tap dance for the next few summers.

This wouldn't be a big issue for a team that drew better or had deeper-pocketed owners, but the Hawks are losing money hand over fist already. At some point, pocketbook concerns are likely to spill over into the on-court product, and this past summer was likely the first wave. And I'll state once again for posterity that the Johnson contract only exacerbates this problem.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Outlook

It's hard to be too dismissive of the Hawks' chances they won 53 games last year in an accredited basketball league -- but as I mentioned at the top, that seems to be the absolute ceiling of how far this team could go. Moreover, they did virtually nothing to change the mix in the offseason.

There might be some upgrades if you look hard enough. Under Drew, it's possible we'll see less Iso-Joe and better transition defense; while it's hard to see the offense improving from last year's heights, the defense offers plenty of room for improvement. Teague could move ahead of Bibby as the starting point guard and provide some relief, while Williams could also rebound from a disappointing 2009-10 campaign.

However, much larger tidal trends are pulling the Hawks the other way. Crawford had a Fluke Rule last year and is unlikely to repeat it, while Johnson is at an age where performance can slide suddenly. More importantly, the Hawks are virtually assured to have more injuries this time around. We know they won't have less, let's put it that way. And if and when they do happen, management won't have the dollars to throw around to fill holes.

As a result, the big picture remains the same: They'll easily make the playoffs but have no chance of participating in them for more than three weeks. If you sense a pattern here, there's a reason. The Hawks made the conference finals in their first year in Atlanta; since then they have made the second round of the playoffs 14 different times and lost all 14 of them, including sweeps the past two seasons. There's a decent chance they'll get No. 15 this year, and an even better one that they'll fall a round short this time. While it's unlikely they'll hit last year's ceiling, they'll remain in the same neighborhood as long as the frontcourt stays healthy.

Prediction: 46-36, 2nd in Southeast Division, 6th in Eastern Conference

[gsuteke]

I love how stat nerd's #s speak highly of the hawks yet he tries to dismiss what the players did as a fluke.

Also he reads this board imo after loking at the "local iso-joe" comment.

[spotatl]

The "fluke rule" isn't specific to the Hawks- thats basically saying that when veteran players have a big jump in productivity that they have never matched in their career then its almost always an aberration and the player will regress to the mean the next season. I do think it has a lot of merit actually. I certainly don't expect the same amount of production from Jamal Crawford this season as they got last season.

[gsuteke]

My comment wasn't based on crawford - the hawks were 3rd in this category but - they were 5th here but

[MaceCase]

Prediction: 46-36, 2nd in Southeast Division, 6th in Eastern Conference

So who do we knockoff, Orlando or Miami? Then again, it doesn't seem to matter as we won't even have HCA.

[IHeartAtlanta]

So who do we knockoff, Orlando or Miami? Then again, it doesn't seem to matter as we won't even have HCA.

Yea who do we knock off?

[JTB]

I dont know about you guys but i hate this article! he clearly states us as a team that isnt good in my opnion. also he thinks we will just be flat out garbage in the future. he sees no potential in this team nor the players. then to me he seems as if he is giving signs that the ASG is going to try to sell the team with the statements referreing to how cheap they are and how they will be in huge trouble once the 3rd year of jj contract comes. my question is how do you know how much mone the asg has? hell they could just be a stingy *ss group of people!......really hating this article and it makes me feel once again we get no respect and again we have to prove we are a top 4 team in the east, which we are but i will let the hawks play do the talkin!...bullsh*t article though!

[spotatl]

There must have been a typo because the Hawks are now projected third in the Division.

BTW- for people who want insider access the easiest way is to get a subscription to ESPN the magazine which automatically gives you Insider Access. I think I pay about $4 a year for ESPN the magazine and just throw it away when it comes in the mail.

[HawkItus]

If you thought this was bad don't watch the NBA channel preview on NBA Gametime. Chris Webber said Hawks fans should jump off a bridge. And we won't make the playoffs.

[macdaddy]

Hollinger's prediction for the 2008-2009 Atlanta Hawks is below. Hawks finished 47-35, 2nd in the SE and 4th in the east. His 2009-2010 prediction was much closer but the point is he has no clue.

<P sizset="48" sizcache="0">

Outlook 2008-2009

Atlanta's starting five might be the best in the division, but its bench might not win the D-League. Triangulate between those two extremes and you end up with a team that's unlikely to repeat its playoff appearance of a year ago unless it enjoys an unusually good run of health, because the subs just aren't up to snuff. Additionally, it's naïve to think the tumult in the rest of the organization isn't going to have some effect on the floor. Woodson is back even though multiple players -- most notably Smith and Pachulia -- had issues with him a year ago, and he's working under a new general manager who may not have his back. Meanwhile, the ongoing lawsuit between the current ownership and renegade partner Steve Belkin is still dragging on with no end in sight.

Plus there's the issue of whether the organization can address in-season problems. While Sund almost has to be an improvement over his predecessor, particularly on draft day, the concern remains that Atlanta's ownership will prevent him from making aggressive moves if it involves taking on more salary.

Sum it all up, and it appears this club is ready to take a step in reverse. The Hawks look like they'll be stuck in the NBA's netherworld --- neither good enough to make the playoffs nor bad enough to get a high lottery pick -- and with little young talent in the pipeline beyond the current starting five, they could be in this pickle for a while.

Prediction: 31-51, fifth in Southeast Division, 13th in Eastern Conference

[Gray Mule]

:brick wall:

I know, Drew wasn't the choice of many sports writers, but I keep reading all the bad things

they have to say about him and I wonder, "Do any of them, including this one, have any idea

what they are talking about?"

To not approve of the choice that the Hawks made is one thing, but to speak so about him

without giving him any chance to prove whether or not he is a good coach is arrogance

of the highest order.

Drew may not be a great coach. We don't know - He's never been a head coach. But, he's

OUR head coach and I resent the implications about his abilities without giving him any chance

to prove what he can do.

This writer is very smart. He know all the answers, doesn't he!

[buckeye242424]

That's a dumb statement by Webber, us not making the playoffs. Granted, with better teams, we may slide, but we're still a top 8 team in the East when healthy. I didn't like the article because of the 15 times he mentioned Joe's contract, and the adjectives he used to describe the deal JJ got. This is the same guy...that if we let JJ go, would say how stupid we were to let our all-star, best player go, after all the progress we've made. Either way, he would find a way to bash the Hawks...

[niremetal]

There must have been a typo because the Hawks are now projected third in the Division.

BTW- for people who want insider access the easiest way is to get a subscription to ESPN the magazine which automatically gives you Insider Access. I think I pay about $4 a year for ESPN the magazine and just throw it away when it comes in the mail.

I do exactly the same thing. Just please recycle :wink:

And oh, I've got a good friend who works for ESPN.com. Let's just say that whenever Hollinger hints at having some inside information about any team, you should feel free to laugh hysterically.

Also, I think that the last time anyone on ESPN predicted the Hawks to improve on the previous year's record was...well, never.

Edited September 28, 2010 by niremetal

[Nicholasp27]

he said we should have traded joe for trade exception and then get al jefferson and then build around marvin/josh/horford. So where does al jefferson play then? He wants us to have scrubs/rookies in the backcourt and then our 4 best guys in 3 positions in the front court?

[macdaddy]

While Drew is a well-regarded assistant with whom the players are comfortable, this adds a third puzzling aspect to the decision: If you're firing the coach to change directions, how much really changed if you hired his top assistant?

As others have pointed out countless times this statement is just stupid when you look back at some of the best coaches in the league now and who they were assistants under.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

FYI . . . Hollinger lives in Atlanta and actually goes to Hawk games and watches them. So it's not like he's some clueless national writer that doesn't know jack about the team.

Hollinger is about 75% dead on with what he said, but fans don't want to believe it. Hollinger does have a history of selling us short though, so a 46 win prediction by him really means that we'll probably win 51 games.

- JJ's contract isn't an issue now, but it may be by Year 4, which may hamstring the team ( if ownership doesn't want to pay luxury tax )

- We WERE lucky not to have any significant injuries to the core

- Our biggest weakness IS money, due to lack of deep pockets and more fan support

- Jamal may have very well had a "fluke rule" season, because he's NEVER played that well for an entire season.

- We DID go the cheapest route on everything this offseason ( minus the JJ deal ).

It's not much to dispute in Hollinger's analysis of us. It doesn't mean that we have no shot. But people have to be realistic as well.

Those additions we added were basically throwaway type players, not guys who can crack the rotation and help us on a nightly basis. It's no sense hyping them up to be anything else.

Honestly, the only way I think we get better, is if Drew's new offense turns JJ into a truly lethal scorer, and if Teague can run the point on offense AND defend the position on defense.

The Hawks should still dominate the sorry teams and at the very least split with the teams that are on their level. We were 21 - 9 vs the West last year, and I don't see much changing with that. Even if Orlando and Miami dominate us, no other team in the East should sweep the Hawks or even win a series.

Barring a string of injuries or an extended injury to JJ, Smoove, or Horford, the Hawks shouldn't have much problem winning 48 - 52 games.

But does that help us in the 2nd round? Unless we prove in the regular season that we can win more than 50% of our road games, and beat Orlando and Miami ( and not get trounced when we do lose ) . . . then it probably won't help us get past Round 2.

[HawkItus]

- We WERE lucky not to have any significant injuries to the core

This in my my opinion is just wrong. It is not luck. How many guys did Billy and now Sund pass on that we found out later was due to previous injury history? The scouting department works hard to bring in healthy players. Yes freak things like JJ's face happen. Or Joshes broken hand. But, these are very random happenings that account for very little of the injury issues in the NBA. Majority of the injuries are chronic issues that have a history behind them.

[Crank]

yeah Holinger is a joke he was a joke last year when he said Crawford would be bomb and now that he didnt it was a fluke . So what happens if he repeats then what ? I knew he was wrong about the Hawks last year and he will be wrong again .

Its a reason why you play the game and not buy into what the stat geek who works for the sports version of satan is selling .

[TheNorthCydeRises]

This in my my opinion is just wrong. It is not luck. How many guys did Billy and now Sund pass on that we found out later was due to previous injury history? The scouting department works hard to bring in healthy players. Yes freak things like JJ's face happen. Or Joshes broken hand. But, these are very random happenings that account for very little of the injury issues in the NBA. Majority of the injuries are chronic issues that have a history behind them.

So I guess you forget what happened in 06 - 07, with a team that could've won 40 games that year, but the projected starting lineup of Speedy - JJ - Marvin - Smoove - Zaza only played like 5 games together as a unit? Even Chill missed 10+ games that year.

07 - 08, we were finally above .500 around Christmas. Then Smoove goes down for 8 games and we went 1 - 7 during that stretch. We get him back, then Horford goes down for about 2 - 3 weeks. I think in all, we went something like 6 - 15 as a team, from the time of Smoove's injury to the All-Star break. LOL, then we trade for Bibby, who had hand problems.

The fans routinely cite injuries for ruining both of those seasons, including the injuries suffered by Marvin going into the 08 playoffs, and the injury to Horford during the 08 - 09 playoffs.

Last year, we barely had anyone with even a sprain or a pull . . . but you say that we weren't lucky? The most significant injury last year may have been JJ's thumb injury at the end of the season, which he played through when the playoffs started.

The fact that we didn't lose any of the core to even a nagging injury that would've kept them out of a game for even a week, is dang near a miracle in the NBA.

Sir, we were EXTREMELY lucky last year, when it came to injuries.