"Is Disarray Here to Stay?"

[atlhawks4life]

http://blogs.ajc.com/atlanta-hawks-blog/2011/03/07/atlanta-hawks-is-disarray-here-to-stay/?cxntfid=blogs_atlanta_hawks_blog

A tale of three team captains

When the Hawks lose, you can ask Joe Johnson what happened. He is likely to tell you he doesn’t know. You can ask Al Horford. He’ll likely tell you what the problem was, and all but name who was responsible for it. You can also ask Josh Smith. He’ll tell you that the team will get their heads together, they are a tight knit group, and everything will be okay. Is any of this confidence inspiring? Why are they all saying different things?

Let us get one thing out on the table, and it is something that some of you/us have already been saying since the beginning of the season. It was a mistake for Larry Drew to name three team captains. Or do you disagree? Let’s extend that even further – it was a mistake to name Josh Smith as a team captain. Perhaps you disagree more vehemently with this than the first assertion. Perhaps not. Either way, can anybody prove this was a successful venture or even a good idea? These three team captains don’t think alike. They don’t play alike. They don’t react alike. In fact, I’m feeling a bit hard-pressed to come up with something that they have in common at all. It seems that Larry Drew tried to force this team into forming its own locker room and on-court leadership. But his idea of putting three guys into such a position resulted in what looks like more confusion, which has done nothing to increase leadership. Three guys, one position. One seems like he never really felt destined to be a leader, and maybe he should have had that burden thrown on him. Another doesn’t know how to follow, so how can he lead? The third can’t lead if others won’t follow. How was this supposed to work again?

From the Sidelines

Mike Woodson’s tactics, leadership, and his overall body of work was questioned, and it led to him parting ways with the Hawks. General Manager Rick Sund then proclaimed that the Hawks needed to “hear a different voice.” So, he brought them (perhaps at the behest of his host of bosses) a familiar voice and placed that voice in the big chair. Perhaps the results have spoken for themselves. You hear a familiar but previously quiet voice saying the same things the old voice used to say. It seems the “different” voice begins to show signs of strain and frustration. The different voice seems to have given in. The different voice doesn’t know what to do. The different voice screams accountability, but can’t follow through. The different voice…doesn’t seem so different after all. Of course, its not just about the voice.

Here is where one of Larry Drew’s biggest problems may be brewing: with Josh Smith. We used to not like it when Mike Woodson and Josh Smith got after each other. But, at least Woody got after him. And, Josh got after Woody. It wasn’t good. Josh doesn’t get after Drew. Why? Maybe because Drew doesn’t get after him. Drew has agreed to disagree with his team captain on how to play the game. Worse, he’s made this known through public quotes. How in the world can you get an entire team to listen to you when one of the team captains is allowed to disagree with you and do what he wants to do? That’s not to say that Josh isn’t a good player, or even a good person. He has shown more maturity (or at least it seems like it) in most areas, and has put up some pretty good numbers. But….can a team operate like this, when one of its best players is constantly at odds with the head coach on such basic things as when to take certain shots or when to let the point guard run the break?

Let me put this another way – if you can’t convince a team captain not to take long jumpers at the wrong times, then how can you convince the rest of the team to not do so? Just watch the games. See how many long jumpers are being taken, regardless of how unsuccessful that venture turns out to be. Then watch how many times Larry Drew talks about taking too many long jumpers after a loss. And, it’s not just Josh Smith by a long shot. It’s a bunch of guys. Unfortunately, Josh is a team captain, which puts things in a slightly different light.

This isn’t the only problem. Maybe this isn’t really a big problem. Maybe it is. What do you think?

Breaking in the new guys

The arrival of Kirk Hinrich really helped Atlanta on the defensive end, but as scores and fourth quarter numbers have indicated, that’s not all there is to the story. The problem with the offense is that this is where the leadership of this team (or lack thereof) really suffers. A guy like Hinrich knows how to play the game. How long before he becomes frustrated with the way the Hawks play? Everybody within the organization and the fan base can talk about Hinrich’s leadership and toughness until they are blue in the face. It won’t matter. Why? Because we have three team captains already. How is a guy like Hinrich to have a positive effect when all he can do is try to lead by example (something we’ve recognized as a good but incomplete form of leadership)? Can Hinrich even say anything in the locker room? Who will listen?

On the flip side of the coin, Hilton Armstrong has it easier than his backcourt teammate. All he has to do is provide energy, defend the rim and the paint, and grab some rebounds. Maybe even set some screens on offense and be ready to score at the rim if he actually receives the ball. Of course, Armstrong can’t be certain of his role, as neither can Zaza Pachulia (who is very playing-time sensitive) or Jason Collins. Drew doesn’t seem to know what he wants to do with his bench or his frontcourt some days.

More confusion, more disarray.

If Larry Drew and the Hawks aren’t careful, they’ll stunt their own internal growth.

The Final Word….

……comes from General Manager Rick Sund. The normally quiet Sund stated before the deadline that the onus was on this team to prove who they were and what they were capable of. He said that this team would show itself and be judged on what they did through the final stretch of the season, and in the playoffs. By saying this, Sund also put the burden on himself and his bosses. After all, if the proof is in what this team does, and the team falls below expectations, or simply last year’s accomplishments, then who else can be responsible for the final product?

Sund says this core is at the witness stand. He’s right. And after they testify, he’ll be going to the stand next. This summer, in fact.

Call it Now

Hope springs eternal, but its not the offseason yet. Forget gaining ground for now, can the Hawks even maintain their current position? Is this just a late season rut, or is the writing on the wall? If patterns hold where they are, the Hawks face the Magic in round 1 of the playoffs? Can they survive that?

Your call…

[Supporter]

Very good article usual

[Guest]

None of them deserve to be captains.

[Atlantaholic]

Leadership was the problem last year and it has become a bigger problem this year. Woodson was a totally inept coach but at least he had some backbone. All Larry Drew does is bend over backwards for our "captains". We should have hired a coach with a proven track record that was going to demand that this team play intelligent consistent basketball. Not saying it would have solved this team, but it SHOULD have been the starting point. Drew has his fancy offense but it matters not one bit if no one is willing to stick to it, Hinrich was brought in but he can't run the point when he is being phased out by Josh, Joe, and Jamal who all want the ball in their hands all the time, and take any shot they feel like whenever they feel like it. This core group has been together too long, and has developed way too many bad habits that may never be broken. If we fail again miserably in the playoffs (which seems like a likely scenario) we need to blow this team up, no question about it.

[Eddielives]

Personally, I think Al should be the sole captain of this team. He has the demeanor, toughness and heart that others on this team do not make very consistently visible to us, the fans. I bet Kirk would make a great captain too but time will tell. Go ahead and post the panic button but the fact is this team needs some serious personnel changes and I'm not so sure it's the coach's fault for not having the respect of the players. If Drew is unqualified, that's one thing. But players not carrying themselves like mature professionals, ahem, Josh Smith, is what is mainly causing the fractures in this team's chemistry and professional consistency.

[Guest Walter]

Good article. Right on point. My concern? If there was really such a question in Sund's mind about the viability of this team (and we would all expect that there would be) then a larger trade should have been made at the deadline and not after the season. I am less of a believer in off-season trades and by then WE will be the "desperate team" as opposed to another team at the deadline.

...

Let me highlight this from another article,

..."the Hawks became just the second opponent in Knicks coach Mike D'Antoni's three-year tenure to fail to score 80 points against his team,...

Ouch. That is embarrassing.

W

[mrhonline]

Meh. Intangibles, blah, blah, blah.

The problem is that the Hawks are a jumpshooting team, and that in itself leads to the inconsistencies. When the guards are hitting their jumpshots, the Hawks are hard to beat.

[HawkNJersey]

I didn't even have to read the article to know, that it was a blame Smoove article...

[macdaddy]

I hate when people toot their own horn for ideas that are obvious but I did post this yesterday. Just sayin:

They have a problem showing up for big games. Joe is really playing like crap and he's the one who should be leading this team. I like LD but he made a mistake with the three headed captain thing. Lenny put Smitty firmly in charge, Woody (who I did not like) at least put Joe firmly in charge. I saw LD's reasoning at the time because Joe doesn't like to lead but this has just giving him less responsibility when he should have more than everyone else

[JackB1]

Great article! Really gets to the core of our team's problems. We ARE in disarray, Having 3 captains made no sense when it was announced and makes no sense to this day. A captain is a leader. Someone who the rest of the team strives to be like.

The only one worth emulating is Horford. Most nights he plays smart, sticks to his strengths and brings energy, effort and passion. Joe and Josh are not leaders. Joe walks around with his head down and seems more concerned on most nights with matching the other team's star players. He seems "disconnected" from the rest of the team. Josh, as we all know, does what he wants when he wants. That is not how you want the rest of your team to play. I have never seen a more stubborn or foolish player in my life. The fact that Drew gave also made him Captain says a lot about Drew. He thought Josh would take the title and show maturity, discipline and leadership with it, but expecting someone to change just because of a "title" is crazy. Leaders lead without the title "captain".

Drew seems confused as to how to handle this team and his only answer seems to be fiddling with the lineup. That's not "coaching". Heck, if that's all it takes, any one of us could do the job. A coach needs to have it's players stick to their gameplan and buy into the team concept that will get them as far as possible. Drew doesn't have that and won't ever. Players either buy into a coaches philosophy and plan or they don't.

[coachx]

Horford and Hinrich are the only natural leaders on this team.

They are the true captains no matter what titles Drew chooses to toss out.

[AHF]

Frankly, I view the issue as being more fundamental than who gets the label of captain. I am seeing a lack of accountability from the head coach and none of the players being willing to seize the leadership spot or demand accountability from their teammates. Horford or Hinrich seem like the only possibilities to do this going forward and Horford hasn't done it yet.

[HawkItus]

Meh. Intangibles, blah, blah, blah.

The problem is that the Hawks are a jumpshooting team, and that in itself leads to the inconsistencies. When the guards are hitting their jumpshots, the Hawks are hard to beat.

+1

People forget who and what this team is. Everybody said run more and you see when we run we get forwards with no handles in the open court making bad plays. Joe gets blamed for not producing, but if he took the Kobe route people would say get Horf and Smith more involved. Is it Drews fault the team doesn't move in the halfcourt set? We've seen this offense work when people give effort. Every time ESPN does the game the color says the same thing. You can't coach effort. It's not the coach it's the talent.

[AUhawksfan]

I think the problem with Drew is that he doesn't realize there are two parts to coaching: the first part is strategy, the second part is mental. He has the strategy down but doesn't know how to mentally prepare his players nor how to handle the different emotions on the team.

Kind of how I felt about him from the beginning: looks good on paper but when it gets to real time situations you have to be able to deal with them accordingly and get your team prepared to play on an emotional level as well. Just setting up an offense and running plays is only part of the game, then you're left with your team just "going through the motions" which I've seen way too much this season.

[AHF]

It's not the coach it's the talent.

I have a real problem with the coach publicly saying he is disgusted, promising lineup changes, and then failing to deliver on multiple occassions - especially when he has clearly not been taking people to task on other issues. That doesn't bode well for his resolve and his willingness to instill discipline in his players.

[HawkItus]

I have a real problem with the coach publicly saying he is disgusted, promising lineup changes, and then failing to deliver on multiple occassions - especially when he has clearly not been taking people to task on other issues. That doesn't bode well for his resolve and his willingness to instill discipline in his players.

I respect that, but I will add a major trade did take place. With Cpt. Kirk starting that shook up the lineup. Who's to say his change wasn't to permanently put Marv and Bibby on the bench. If that was the case, one half of that move did happen. Then suppose he was going to put Mo Evans in for Marv. What do you do? Not saying this was the case, but it is feasible.

[AHF]

I respect that, but I will add a major trade did take place. With Cpt. Kirk starting that shook up the lineup. Who's to say his change wasn't to permanently put Marv and Bibby on the bench. If that was the case, one half of that move did happen. Then suppose he was going to put Mo Evans in for Marv. What do you do? Not saying this was the case, but it is feasible.

If was going to put Mo Evans in for Marv why didn't he already do that? All it would have done is enhance Mo's trade value and send a message to Marvin. There was no reason not to make this move already.

If the change was to put Bibby on the bench and put Teague or Crawford in as the starter, why didn't he? I can at least understand this if Bibby was being shopped at the time and they were worried about hurting Bibby's value, but if that is the case then don't announce publicly that you are going to shake things up and then wimp out. I am skeptical this was the change, though, since there really is no message to send to Bibby. What could he possibly have done differently? He can't play D no matter how hard he tries.

[AUhawksfan]

I have a real problem with the coach publicly saying he is disgusted, promising lineup changes, and then failing to deliver on multiple occassions - especially when he has clearly not been taking people to task on other issues. That doesn't bode well for his resolve and his willingness to instill discipline in his players.

Anyone else notice his interview with ESPN during the Knicks game? They mentioned how Al was having a quiet night and he claimed he was going to run more plays for him.

Did it happen? I'll leave that up for you to answer.