Reasons for hope.

[thecampster]

1) https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask/atlanta-hawks-record-on-back-to-back. The Atlanta Hawks were 3-10 on the 2nd game of a back to back this year. There are typically no back to backs during the playoffs.

2) https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask/boston-celtics-record-on-back-to-back. The Boston Celtics were 10-3 on the 2nd game of a back to back this year. There are typically no back to back games.

 

Extracting that record The Celtics were 44-20 on 1-2 days rest.  The hawks were 35-30 on 1-2 days rest.

The Hawks were 5 games over .500 when Clint Capela Played this season and 3 games over .500 when John Collins played.  When both played, the Hawks were 7 games over .500 32-25.

Although the Hawks did not lose a lot of games due to injuries (see chart), their injuries were to their bigs and/or their bigs played through nagging injuries leading to a lot of games played with players unfamiliar with the other players all season (DJ and Trae, the Holiday brothers new and seeing lots of time, etc).

Deep looks at the stats tell the story of a team that struggled with key injuries and fatigue due to play style and a coaching staff unwilling to play young players.  Those issues seem to be fixed and the Hawks are getting 3 and a half days of rest/practice to get healthy.

 

 

The above really speaks to Sac's inflated record with few injuries at all, same with Knicks and Philly.  Boston and Milwaukee lost a lot of player games to non-key players inflating these numbers.  LA really got hurt the most in the above and should be 15 games better in the standings.

 

I feel Atlanta's numbers are deflated as their injuries were almost exclusively to key contributors, same with LAL and the Cavs.  Mil/Bos/Sac/NYK/PHI are all inflated.  I feel the East is wide open and for the first time in years, I think its possible that none of the 1/2 seeds end up in the finals.

[REHawksFan]

6 minutes ago, thecampster said:

1) https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask/atlanta-hawks-record-on-back-to-back. The Atlanta Hawks were 3-10 on the 2nd game of a back to back this year. There are typically no back to backs during the playoffs.

2) https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask/boston-celtics-record-on-back-to-back. The Boston Celtics were 10-3 on the 2nd game of a back to back this year. There are typically no back to back games.

 

Extracting that record The Celtics were 44-20 on 1-2 days rest.  The hawks were 35-30 on 1-2 days rest.

The Hawks were 5 games over .500 when Clint Capela Played this season and 3 games over .500 when John Collins played.  When both played, the Hawks were 7 games over .500 32-25.

Although the Hawks did not lose a lot of games due to injuries (see chart), their injuries were to their bigs and/or their bigs played through nagging injuries leading to a lot of games played with players unfamiliar with the other players all season (DJ and Trae, the Holiday brothers new and seeing lots of time, etc).

Deep looks at the stats tell the story of a team that struggled with key injuries and fatigue due to play style and a coaching staff unwilling to play young players.  Those issues seem to be fixed and the Hawks are getting 3 and a half days of rest/practice to get healthy.

 

 

The above really speaks to Sac's inflated record with few injuries at all, same with Knicks and Philly.  Boston and Milwaukee lost a lot of player games to non-key players inflating these numbers.  LA really got hurt the most in the above and should be 15 games better in the standings.

 

I feel Atlanta's numbers are deflated as their injuries were almost exclusively to key contributors, same with LAL and the Cavs.  Mil/Bos/Sac/NYK/PHI are all inflated.  I feel the East is wide open and for the first time in years, I think its possible that none of the 1/2 seeds end up in the finals.

I think the bottom line as it pertains to this series is this...the Hawks are a lot better than most everyone thinks they are which bodes very well for pulling an upset.  There's virtually no chance that Boston is going to come into the series with proper respect for their opponent and taking them seriously.  I just don't see it.  

And Boston is obviously a better team, but the gap ain't that large, imo.  So the recipe is there for an upset.  Hawks have to play well, very well.  But they can make this an interesting series.  

[JayBirdHawk]

It'll be interesting to see how Mazzulla coaches if adversity hits his team.

[REHawksFan]

Here's some more reason for Hope:

Under Q

Bench Data:

 

 

Bench HAS to be huge in this series. They can really help some of the deficiency that the starters will face compared to the celtics.  

Edited April 13, 2023 by REHawksFan

[REHawksFan]

I won't post the charts, but for comparison sake, the Hawks starters rank (Post AS under Q):

• 12th in pts
• 14th in FG%
• 27th in 3pt FG%
• 23rd in Reb
• 25th in Blocks
• 22nd in Pt Diff

Now, they also rank just 18th in Min so we are at least playing the bench more each game.  That's good to see.  And as you would expect, Boston's starter's rank considerably higher than the Hawks in most of these categories.  

[Gray Mule]

I've often said, and had it disputed, that this Hawk team tends to play up or down to their opponent.  If this is true, expect this to be a great series.  Don't expect the Hawks to take their opponent lightly.  Quin knows what he's doing and has a pretty good idea now of what all these Hawks are capable of.

Some of those "experts" around and about expect Boston to have a cake walk over Atlanta, taking it in four easy attempts.  I hope that the Celtics believe this too.  Don't want to have them awake when we drop in for our visit.

[Vol4ever]

Quin is the only reason I'm sticking around.   I've been a fan since the mid 70s and except for a very short period of times this franchise has been the worst in NBA history.  Hopefully Quin can make this team competitive. 

[AHF]

2 hours ago, Vol4ever said:

Quin is the only reason I'm sticking around.   I've been a fan since the mid 70s and except for a very short period of times this franchise has been the worst in NBA history.  Hopefully Quin can make this team competitive. 

From 1977 through 1999, we made the playoffs 19 times and missed the playoffs 4 times.  We were one of the most consistent playoff teams in the entire league for over two decades.

More recently, we’ve made the playoffs 12 of the last 16 years and twice made the ECF.  
 

Compare that with a history like the Clippers.  We aren’t close to the worst franchise.

[sturt]

55 minutes ago, AHF said:

Compare that with a history like the Clippers.  We aren’t close to the worst franchise.

Or...

 

And.

If this roster gives ATL fans something to cheer about these next 3 games, a game six in SFA could be wild.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

11 hours ago, Vol4ever said:

Quin is the only reason I'm sticking around.   I've been a fan since the mid 70s and except for a very short period of times this franchise has been the worst in NBA history.  Hopefully Quin can make this team competitive. 

 

LOL .. now you know that's not true. 

Hawks have made the playoffs 13 of the past 16 seasons.  That's either #1 in the league or top 3.  I actually looked that up a few months ago.  I think the Miami Heat are the only team with just as many appearances in that span.

Hawks also have 2 Conference Finals appearances in that span, with the last one just coming 2 seasons ago.

If anything, the Hawks are the poster child for lower level playoff teams.  They're good enough to make the playoffs, but not championship level.  We got 6 1st round series losses, 4 semifinal losses and 2 conference championship losses.

The last time we had a long stretch like that, was from 1978 - 1999, where we made the playoffs 18 out of 22 times.  9 1st round losses. 9 semifinal appearances. 0 conf final appearances.

 

So the only time this team has been totally out of the picture, was the early-mid 2000s era after the "Playoff guarantee" Hawks failed miserably, and we completely blew it up.

 

I can't tell people how they should feel, but I think the fan base is too emotional at times.  Normally in the NBA, a team doesn't go from 0 - 60 to win a championship. What Trae and the boys did 2 years ago was something special.  But normally, a team like that makes an appearance and gets bounced out in the 1st round.  And it may happen the following year.  It's in the 3rd year that you start to see a group that has been together, start to put things all together.

It has kind of gone the opposite way for us, which is why people are frustrated.

9 hours ago, AHF said:

From 1977 through 1999, we made the playoffs 19 times and missed the playoffs 4 times.  We were one of the most consistent playoff teams in the entire league for over two decades.

More recently, we’ve made the playoffs 12 of the last 16 years and twice made the ECF.  
 

Compare that with a history like the Clippers.  We aren’t close to the worst franchise.

 

LOL . . damn.  I should've kept reading before I made my last post.  Could've saved me a lot of extra typing.

[JayBirdHawk]

1 hour ago, TheNorthCydeRises said:

LOL . . damn.  I should've kept reading before I made my last post.  Could've saved me a lot of extra typing.

Thought I was having dejavu,  

1 hour ago, TheNorthCydeRises said:

I think the fan base is too emotional at times.