Official Game Thread: Hawks at Raptors

[sturt]

27 minutes ago, bleachkit said:

Many here, and particularly one notable poster, claimed last year's team was quite good, just hampered by Covid and injuries. What's going to be the excuse this year?

*shots fired*

 

(hehe)

 

That notable person didn't just "claim" as I recall... actually did the math, and took great pains to answer every attempt at rebuttal, though understanding that one can only lead the proverbial horse to the water, cannot force the horse to consume it and gain from it.

 

For those just catching up.... greetings, you must be new here... Real Hawks were .621 in 2021-22, and it was the 22 games of 12/1/21 to 1/15/22 when the ***starting line-up*** (not merely the 15 man roster) featured players who weren't even G-League all-stars having that major role in deciding the Hawks final season record.

 

That 6-16 stretch was the reason the team's final record placed the team in the play-in... whereas if we take seriously the math, that .621 would have had the team neck and neck with BOS and MIL for the 2nd (!) seed.

 

What's interesting is... even at that... yes, the Real Hawks never really settled into a solid consistent groove as they'd done the previous season, so as good as .621 is, they underperformed by anyone's measure still.

 

But let's address that question...

 

It's easy to be a cynic. It's mentally lazy, in my opinion.

 

It's harder to be the person who is comfortable with ambiguity, content with being patient to let a roster gel and get calibrated with each other, slow to jump to any conclusions. In other areas of life, away from entertainment and where things actually matter, I think they call it "grit."

 

 

25 game pledge. Take it. Or don't.

 

[shakes]

48 minutes ago, bleachkit said:

We are light on shooting, and we only traded Kevin to save money. Can't really blame Travis for that, that's on Ressler. 

I don't agree that we only traded Kevin to save money.  We were a flawed team defensively with 3 horrible defenders playing most of our minutes (Trae/Bogi/Huerter) and we needed to get better defensively.    Getting rid of two of Bogi/Huerter/Gallo and replacing them with guys who can defend was a must for this team in the offseason.

The team is now better defensively (in theory).

 

The issue is the shooting sucks, but if we still had Huerter the issue would be the defense again.

 

 

[terrell]

9 hours ago, Diesel said:

So which sports team do you think are talking about what happened last year?

Somehow someway, you are trapped in a multiverse of madness where all you can see is last year and us taking Trae over Luka. 

Stop Dreamwalking.   We have a whole new team now.  

I have read you bitch and Complain about Trae who came into this game averaging 37 points... 5 assists and only 2 turnovers on this road trip... and you bitching...

It's the same ole thing with you T.

You bitch about Trae..

You bitch about Nate..

You bitch after Every loss...

but when we win...  Crickets. 

What do we call that???

 

BS

[StonedDogs]

What if the Hawks were coached by an NBA coach who has been in NBA with success for some time? To me, Nate will always be an assistant coach to another assistant coach who was fired and now back to being to an assistant coach. I dont think he knows how to use his players and his creativity is 0 across the board. 

[JeffS17]

1 hour ago, JayBirdHawk said:

This is worrisome! and definitely not ideal!

 

 

 

It's very concerning.  Nate's proud rejection of analytics and his lack of adaptation to the modern NBA will be the death of our talented roster.  It's true on defense as well -- Nate seems to love overhelping in the paint like it's 90s basketball while we give up open 3s all over the court.  Open weakside 3 is a favorite for our defenses.  Nate thrived for one season, under LPs offensive system, and a contract-hungry Capela playing like an all defensive center.  Now we are stuck with him... 

Making tough mid rangers is not a winning formula, but this is what Nate loves.  He's in love with the mid range -- he has an unhealthy affinity for it.  You don't have to go full 2018 Houston Rockets to understand getting open looks from 3 and easy buckets around the rim is ideal, but Nate proudly claims he does not pay attention to analytics and dismisses them altogether.  He values open shots from anywhere equally, whether that's an open 3 or an open 20 foot mid ranger just inside the arc.

You can FEEL our shot selection watching the games too.  It feels like we have to make every bucket to stay in the game when we are taking heavy mid rangers.  And the other [good] teams are getting to the FT line constantly and taking open 3s.  It's even worse feeling when we get killed in transition then come back and clank a 20 foot 2 pointer.  The most concerning thing for me is that while we have some decent mid range shooters, a lot of the guys are still developing and we're making the mid range shot a high priority than being efficient from 3 -- this is especially true for Hunter.  Anyways, I'll stop ranting... I think Nate has to go long term, but we would need a competent modern coach to fill his shoes to replace him before we make any rash decisions so it is what it is for now.  I hope we figure something out quick because our schedule started soft (wins against teams that combine to 4-20 and losses v teams that combine to 13-7).

[terrell]

1 hour ago, shakes said:

I've seen enough, this team is the same bucket of garbage as last season.    Can't wait for our big run in the play in tournament!

Shhh.....Theyll come after you...

[JeffS17]

1 minute ago, JeffS17 said:

It's very concerning.  Nate's proud rejection of analytics and his lack of adaptation to the modern NBA will be the death of our talented roster.  It's true on defense as well -- Nate seems to love overhelping in the paint like it's 90s basketball while we give up open 3s all over the court.  Open weakside 3 is a favorite for our defenses.  Nate thrived for one season, under LPs offensive system, and a contract-hungry Capela playing like an all defensive center.  Now we are stuck with him... 

Making tough mid rangers is not a winning formula, but this is what Nate loves.  He's in love with the mid range -- he has an unhealthy affinity for it.  You don't have to go full 2018 Houston Rockets to understand getting open looks from 3 and easy buckets around the rim is ideal, but Nate proudly claims he does not pay attention to analytics and dismisses them altogether.  He values open shots from anywhere equally, whether that's an open 3 or an open 20 foot mid ranger just inside the arc.

You can FEEL our shot selection watching the games too.  It feels like we have to make every bucket to stay in the game when we are taking heavy mid rangers.  And the other [good] teams are getting to the FT line constantly and taking open 3s.  It's even worse feeling when we get killed in transition then come back and clank a 20 foot 2 pointer.  The most concerning thing for me is that while we have some decent mid range shooters, a lot of the guys are still developing and we're making the mid range shot a high priority than being efficient from 3 -- this is especially true for Hunter.  Anyways, I'll stop ranting... I think Nate has to go long term, but we would need a competent modern coach to fill his shoes to replace him before we make any rash decisions so it is what it is for now.  I hope we figure something out quick because our schedule started soft (wins against teams that combine to 4-20 and losses v teams that combine to 13-7).

I'm not actually done -- the games we have won against worse teams all come down to primarily turnovers.  We've won the possession game and had fewer turnovers... and we HAVE to do this to win games because our shot selection is so bad.  We won the turnover battle in all of our wins.  We were near dead even or lost it v MIL TOR and CLT.  We just can't win games without more possessions because our shooting and shot selection are so bad right now.  Have to get on track there or we will have a lot more frustrating games to come.

[cam1218]

For all of you on the get ride of Nate train, I hear the logic. Maybe Quinn Snyder is waiting it out to see if he can return to Atlanta? Or is he going to have the same issues with our squad.

[terrell]

42 minutes ago, bleachkit said:

Many here, and particularly one notable poster, claimed last year's team was quite good, just hampered by Covid and injuries. What's going to be the excuse this year?

This...

[JeffS17]

16 minutes ago, shakes said:

I don't agree that we only traded Kevin to save money.  We were a flawed team defensively with 3 horrible defenders playing most of our minutes (Trae/Bogi/Huerter) and we needed to get better defensively.    Getting rid of two of Bogi/Huerter/Gallo and replacing them with guys who can defend was a must for this team in the offseason.

The team is now better defensively (in theory).

 

The issue is the shooting sucks, but if we still had Huerter the issue would be the defense again.

 

 

Kev would be really nice for us off the bench right now.  He would be a perfect 6th man, actually, and he's been reported to be an amazing team guy and works hard on his game.  I cannot see a scenario where he is not a massive improvement from justin holiday.  Heurter is on fire this season.  50% from 3 v 30%.  Kev can even score from Nate's favorite spot on the court, just around the free throw line.

It was a money saving move through and through.  People can step up and make arguments for strategic tax spending and whatever else but all of that boils down to saving money.  You cannot convince me this team would not be better with Kev getting 30 minutes a game off the bench.

[sturt]

14 minutes ago, terrell said:

Shhh.....Theyll come after you...

 

No worries... he'll be happy to see those nice young men in their clean white coats, I'm sure...

 

[Final_quest]

1 hour ago, Diesel said:

I believe our strength is the midrange and the pick and roll.   We shouldn't be aiming for the fences everytime (like we been doing). 

Problem is, if that is our strength we need to also play defense and get rebounds.  

[sturt]

10 minutes ago, terrell said:

This...

  

28 minutes ago, sturt said:

But let's address that question...

 

It's easy to be a cynic. It's mentally lazy, in my opinion.

 

It's harder to be the person who is comfortable with ambiguity, content with being patient to let a roster gel and get calibrated with each other, slow to jump to any conclusions. In other areas of life, away from entertainment and where things actually matter, I think they call it "grit."

 

 

25 game pledge. Take it. Or don't.

 

[terrell]

22 minutes ago, JeffS17 said:

I'm not actually done -- the games we have won against worse teams all come down to primarily turnovers.  We've won the possession game and had fewer turnovers... and we HAVE to do this to win games because our shot selection is so bad.  We won the turnover battle in all of our wins.  We were near dead even or lost it v MIL TOR and CLT.  We just can't win games without more possessions because our shooting and shot selection are so bad right now.  Have to get on track there or we will have a lot more frustrating games to come.

Yeah I wrote Milwaukee off as a bad matchup for us because they have crazy size and the Giannis/Lopez frontcourt is an aberration.

 

But I'm starting to worry maybe it's just good teams that are a bad matchup for us.

[Spud2nique]

1 hour ago, Sothron said:

I know Brad Rowland,

I’m sorry.

[Final_quest]

36 minutes ago, JeffS17 said:

It's very concerning.  Nate's proud rejection of analytics and his lack of adaptation to the modern NBA will be the death of our talented roster.  It's true on defense as well -- Nate seems to love overhelping in the paint like it's 90s basketball while we give up open 3s all over the court.  Open weakside 3 is a favorite for our defenses.  Nate thrived for one season, under LPs offensive system, and a contract-hungry Capela playing like an all defensive center.  Now we are stuck with him... 

Making tough mid rangers is not a winning formula, but this is what Nate loves.  He's in love with the mid range -- he has an unhealthy affinity for it.  You don't have to go full 2018 Houston Rockets to understand getting open looks from 3 and easy buckets around the rim is ideal, but Nate proudly claims he does not pay attention to analytics and dismisses them altogether.  He values open shots from anywhere equally, whether that's an open 3 or an open 20 foot mid ranger just inside the arc.

You can FEEL our shot selection watching the games too.  It feels like we have to make every bucket to stay in the game when we are taking heavy mid rangers.  And the other [good] teams are getting to the FT line constantly and taking open 3s.  It's even worse feeling when we get killed in transition then come back and clank a 20 foot 2 pointer.  The most concerning thing for me is that while we have some decent mid range shooters, a lot of the guys are still developing and we're making the mid range shot a high priority than being efficient from 3 -- this is especially true for Hunter.  Anyways, I'll stop ranting... I think Nate has to go long term, but we would need a competent modern coach to fill his shoes to replace him before we make any rash decisions so it is what it is for now.  I hope we figure something out quick because our schedule started soft (wins against teams that combine to 4-20 and losses v teams that combine to 13-7).

Solid post.  Someone thought about making a bold prediction regarding Nate getting fired.  Could have been the right call.  Nate will be gone if the roster doesn't perform. 

Schlenk would be next.  The order is always players, coach, then GM.  

[AtLaS]

We have a lot of talent, but we also have a lot of issues.  We lost SO much depth from last year (Gallo/Huerter/Wright/Reddish/LouWill/Dieng), and really only gained Murray.  Everything else was a downgrade.  We also got smaller and Capela is worse. 

Any injury to any of our top 5-6 guys is going to be detrimental.  We can't stomach any injuries.  Last year we could at least manage if 1-2 guys are out, but not now.  If Trae or Murray goes out, who is backup PG?  A. Holiday?   If Capela/Collins/Okongwu go out, who is our next big?  If Hunter or Bogi are hurt, etc etc.  

I just can't see us beating big, physical teams like Boston/Milwaukee/Toronto/Miami, etc.  We are one of the smallest teams in the league AND we don't shoot three's well or get to the FT line.  That's a disaster recipe.

I hope I'm wrong and some guys start stepping up, but at this point I'm pretty worried about this season.

[FL_BRYANT]

12 hours ago, NBASupes said:

That's about it. Capela has an excellent feel, impactful defender, and an elite screener and movement player. Capela is a superior player to Mitch

I think Mitch is a more physical player which would help,but I don't think he knows how to play as well as Clint. Lacks the bbiq of Clint.

[macdaddy]

We have a good team but we have some big question marks so far.   Honestly the most promising thing is that most of the team individually have underperformed.   That won't last.  Trae and Capela have been horrible.   JC, Hunter, Murray have been inconsistent and the bench has been ok at times but lacks scoring.

The key to this Hawks team is Bogi and JJ both being weapons off the bench.  It's a risky personnel strategy but that's where we are.

 

 

 

[JayBirdHawk]

1 hour ago, JeffS17 said:

It's very concerning.  Nate's proud rejection of analytics and his lack of adaptation to the modern NBA will be the death of our talented roster.  It's true on defense as well -- Nate seems to love overhelping in the paint like it's 90s basketball while we give up open 3s all over the court.  Open weakside 3 is a favorite for our defenses.  Nate thrived for one season, under LPs offensive system, and a contract-hungry Capela playing like an all defensive center.  Now we are stuck with him... 

Making tough mid rangers is not a winning formula, but this is what Nate loves.  He's in love with the mid range -- he has an unhealthy affinity for it.  You don't have to go full 2018 Houston Rockets to understand getting open looks from 3 and easy buckets around the rim is ideal, but Nate proudly claims he does not pay attention to analytics and dismisses them altogether.  He values open shots from anywhere equally, whether that's an open 3 or an open 20 foot mid ranger just inside the arc.

I railed against this whole mid-range shots and attacking mismatches in the early part of last season as well - now here we are, AGAIN.  There is nothing imaginative and intuitive about Nate's offense. 

If you going to be a midrange team you need to take more of them and hit at a higher percentage.  We aren't getting to the free throw line except Trae.

People want Trae offball?  AND I JUST DON'T MEAN FOR HIM TO RELOCATE WHEN HE GIVES UP THE BALL WHICH HE DEFINITELY HAS TO DO ? Trae off ball has been about Murray ISO dribble. No player or ball movement by ANYONE!

I expected to see some very specific sets to put Trae in CnS opportunities off ball.  And this isn't about running him like Curry, he isn't that, but if you want him truly off ball and not just someone else bringing the ball upcourt just to give it back to him.  Run an actual play with a screen, back screens, what angle is he going to come off screens, how tight will he come off a screen, INTENTIONALLY AND PURPOSEFULLY screen him open and get him in scoring position.

For that to happen, you have to have that play in your book, since it's about timing and positioning of the screens, who is the screener, how many screens, and who is getting him the ball. This is Nate's Play Book: