CNNSI Grade of Hawks' Regular Season: C+

[AHF]

The Hawks will not improve their regular-season record for the first time in six years. And worse than finishing at least eight wins short of last year's 53-victory season, they actually have been outscored in 2010-11 and will open the playoffs on the road. New coach Larry Drew promised to install a passing offense that would feature second-year point guard Jeff Teague and move away from isolation plays for Joe Johnson. But Teague has disappointed to the extent that Atlanta parted with Mike Bibby, Jordan Crawford and a first-round pick to acquire Kirk Hinrich to play the point, and Drew's new system has the Hawks ranked only 21st in offensive efficiency. Playoff success is required to salvage one of the most listless winning seasons in recent memory.

Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/britt_robson/04/12/regular.season.grades/index.html#ixzz1JLPFeiV5

[APE]

I don't see how Teague dissapointed to the point they traded Bibb, but ok.

[niremetal]

I don't see how Teague dissapointed to the point they traded Bibb, but ok.

Before the trade, all I ever saw Teague do was pass the ball to Jamal and get out of the way on offense, and defend with his hands (ie reaching for a steal but not moving his feet) on defense. Those were things that he could have done better regardless of minutes, because you don't need a "rhythm" to move your feet on defense or be aggressive on offense. The trade seemed to wake him up. He's been more assertive (even in games where he's had limited minutes) and has moved his feet WAY better since the trade.

I think the vast majority of people who watched the Hawks were disappointed in Teague before the trade. I also think the vast majority have been impressed since the trade. I still don't think he'll be an All-Star, but I now think he at least has the chance to become a solid backup PG. I wouldn't have said that 2 months ago.

Edited April 12, 2011 by niremetal

[macdaddy]

A little faith in Teague at the beginning of the season and I think he would have been playing even better now. And Bibby could still be here as a backup knocking down threes. I blame LD for this.

I'd give us a D+. The first half of the season was pretty good but we've been skidding for months with only the occasional good win.

[Sothron]

They were far too kind. D+ from myself. This team failed on essentially every level and the coach has been completely exposed as an assistant with no inkling how to be a NBA head coach.

Can anyone remember a winning NBA team that has looked as horrible as the Hawks were this past season?

[CBAreject]

Season grades or draft grades given by sportswriters are almost always stupid because they're basically arbitrary. The accepted meanings of ABCDF grading scales are that C is dead average, D is below average but still passable, and B is above average (with A being exceptional and F being unacceptable). Generally, we're grading according to expectations with all sports grades, so that a team chock full of stars is expected to mostly win, a team full of rookies is expected to mostly lose, and exceeding those expectations in either case will be reflected in above average grades. A similar view applies to teams with high vs low draft picks. In other words, it's what you do with what you have. When a team that was considered by some to be Eastern conference "elite" loses 8 wins off their total from last year, sets records for home blowouts, loses homecourt in the playoffs, and posts a negative season point-differential without major subtractions/overhaul to explain the regressions, this would have to be considered coming up short of expectations and having a below average season. We were expecting 48-52 wins with competitive play, but we fell short. I mean, this team outscored its opposition by about 400 points last season but got outscored this season with basically the same roster (and substantial improvement from Horford). That's a baffling swing. The season was passable, but just barely, so I'd give them a D to be generous.

And, Sothron, I don't think I've seen a 5th seed look so bad. I did some research a few days ago and saw that a team seeded 5th or higher has only been outscored by its opposition 5 times in the last 10 years (out of 100 total teams). Only the Miami Heat of 2007 were outscored as badly as the Hawks, but they were the 4th seed only as "champions" of the Southeast that year with 44 wins, which was probably the weakest division in the NBA. Not sure we're worse than they were, but we're in special company.

Edited April 12, 2011 by CBAreject

[Seano]

I would say a C+ is generous given by the way we've fallen off from last season. It's not just the number of wins, but the quality of wins and quality of overall play even in defeat. Last (regular) season we were much more competitive and proved that we could play with everyone. We beat virtually every contender both West and East and some of them multiple times, and we didn't get blown out of the gym hardly at all, whereas this season we have suffered a fricken lot of awful, humiliating beatdowns, losses so bad that it's made me question sometimes how much these guys are really into it, and that is not a good doubt to have in your mind.

[Sothron]

I would say a C+ is generous given by the way we've fallen off from last season. It's not just the number of wins, but the quality of wins and quality of overall play even in defeat. Last (regular) season we were much more competitive and proved that we could play with everyone. We beat virtually every contender both West and East and some of them multiple times, and we didn't get blown out of the gym hardly at all, whereas this season we have suffered a fricken lot of awful, humiliating beatdowns, losses so bad that it's made me question sometimes how much these guys are really into it, and that is not a good doubt to have in your mind.

last season we beat every team in the NBA at least once except for the Thunder and both those games were competitive. This season we were routinely blown out esp. at home. This postseason is the greatest gutcheck this current roster has ever been in and if they fail which I sadly think they will then Gearon/Sund need to blow this up.

[AHF]

This regular season comes in at a D+ for me. Underachieved in the regular season and the number of times they were blown out without resistance along with the negative point differential on the year adds up to a very poor regular season.

The rubber hits the road in the post-season, though, and while I have little hope I will reserve judgment on the season until that last part is completed.

[spotatl]

This to me is pretty much the definition of a C season. I expected the team to take step back but they went even further back than I thought. (outscored on the season... wouldn't have ever expected that) But its hard to give them too low of a grade considering they still got the 5th seed and were never in serious contention to miss the playoffs.

[JackB1]

It's hard to argue with anything said in that article

[Gray Mule]

:kickcan:

The later in the season, the lower the grade. C- sounds about right. Hawks did make

the playoffs and this is a plus. The way they played recently is a big minus.

Then, we have to give the bench a big A+ for their preformance in the last game.

This lifts everyone up to that C-.

:warning: