TheNorthCydeRises

Oh we had one in 1994, when we were the top seed in the East. With Jordan out of the way, that should've been our time to shine. But that fool Babcock traded off Nique, because he wasn't going to give him the extension that Nique wanted, which led him to trade for Manning, so he wouldn't lose Nique for nothing. But when Manning bolted to Phoenix, we still ended up losing Nique . . and a 1st round pick . . for nothing. Damn . . .Danny Manning is still the player I hate most of all-time. I didn't like him in college, I didn't like him in the NBA, and i despised his azz when he came here . . which turned to sheer hatred when he signed that BS deal with Phoenix and left us hanging. You just have to wonder if Nique could've elevated his game just one more time during the playoffs, especially with no Jordan around. I knew we weren't going to the Finals after we struggled with Miami. We had no shot vs Indy in that 2nd round.

Quote: Quote: Quote: No skills? Players with no skills are in church leagues, my friend. Smoove has big time skills. Players with no skills don't get DPOY votes, rank high in stat categories and win dunk contests. Last time I checked, players with no skills also don't get drafted. Your theory holds no water. His athletcism is what makes his so great at dunking and shotblocking. When i say skill I mean shooting, ballhandling, and passing. If he had just average athleticism he'd be playing in the NBDL. same can be said for lots of players.and not all of them are as young.and none of them are coached by a retard. I agree that his athleticism is what makes him potentially great. To say that he has no skills though, is totally off-base. You don't keep improving as a player, without having skills. He can't shoot, that is true. But his dribble-drive going to the hole keeps improving. He just shouldn't have the ball in the open court much. The "retard" coach is one of the major reasons why Smith has steadily improved as a player. He and the coaches have worked extensively with that kid for the past 4 years. But they can't make him tougher. He has to develop that on his own. If he gets tougher, the NBA needs to look out. If he doesn't get tough, he'll always be a player who is good, but not an All-Star level player.

Smith is the Michael Vick of the NBA. He has all of the phyiscal tools to be great, but he has at least one major fundamental flaw in his game that will keep him from being great. I don't ever see Smith being a go-to scorer or a guy who will ever average more than 21 ppg in a season. Being a high volume go-to type scorer isn't in his future. What I can see him becoming, is a hybrid of a Shawn Marion / Lamar Odom / Scottie Pippen combination type player. A player in his prime that could average 19 ppg - 11 rebs - 6 assts - 3.5 blks - and 2 stls. It's his playmaking ability that I can see really improving on offense . . IF . . he starts looking to pass more when out on the perimeter, instead of taking the long jumper. And if he gets the courage to really start battling inside to get rebounds, especially offensive ones, his rebounding numbers will be Marion-like. The key for him, just like it was for Vick, is CONSISTENCY. If he can consistently perform at that level every night, that wil be the key for him. Like Vick, too many times he looked like an NBA All-Star one night, and a rec center player the next.

Now we were supposed to be a 45 win team, let some tell it. If we would've won 41 games, people would be whining about how we didn't win 50 games. At the beginning of the season, making the playoffs was the goal. Being competitive was also a goal. Now, those things don't matter because we only won 37 games and "backed" into the playoffs? The playoff run doesn't matter, because the best team in the league blew us out in Game 7? We win 11 of 16 games before we finally clinch the berth, yet, we backed in because we couldn't win road games against the people desperately trying to catch us? Get the (( bleep )) out of here! Coach, I'm glad that guys like you and Swat said that you'll continue to support the team, regardless of who is the coach. That is my postion as well. I wouldn't be overjoyed to see Woody back, and not a high caliber coach like Avery Johnson. But I'm not going to pout like a (( bleepin )) 4-year old and act like we couldn't possibly have a successful season with Woody at the controls. For all of you "fans" that claim that you will not support the team as much, if Woody is retained, YOU CAN AND WILL BE EASILY REPLACED ! Just like a longtime season ticket holder last season, who was so unsatisfied of the progression of the Hawks, that he didn't buy season tickets last year. He still may have attended Hawks games, but i wonder how many of our 25 HOME WINS + 3 PLAYOFF HOME WINS did he witness live last year? He felt that his time and money would be better off doing other things, which is his choice. But his impatience as a fan may have led him to miss out on the great home campaign we had last year. JackB complains, but didn't the Hawks win almost everytime you watched them at Philips? Frog won't get season tickets if Woody comes back. Well, rest assured, someone will get your tickets, and you'll miss out on seeing this team win 25 - 30 home games next year. Let some people talk, this team is going to go on the decline next year. Even if we win 43 games and get a #5 seed in a bad Eastern conference, that won't be enough . . even if we beat the #4 seed in the playoffs. Every fan of this team should be geeked up about the Hawks and our future, especially ifwe retain the core guys and add a few good bench players. Yet, mo-fos fully expect other teams to just pass us by like a broken down car on the interstate, because Woody is supposed to be sooooooooooooooooooooooooo horrible. Please. So Coach, Swat, Dol, and others . . . let those cats act like fairweather fans. Let them act like because we're not good enough to compete for a title yet, thst they shouldn't waste their time rooting for the Hawks next year. Those types of fans can and will be easily replaced. And they'll be right back in the fold, if we start consistently winning games. I'll personally put plastic over their seat on the Hawks bandwagon, until they return.

Think about what transpired each time Smith had an altercation with Woody. Why did it happen?

Quote: I have proved my point. It's obvious that you are just blindly hating on Woody so I'm not going to waste any more time going over this with you. LOL Dol. That's why I called the people giving Woody F's in that Woodson GPA thread "nothing but haters". It's just not being objective at all to flat out said he failed here, when he was given one of the most inexperienced and flawed rosters in b-ball. While I disagree with you about hiring Avery to replace Woody, it is curious that almost NONE of the guys that are being talked about on this board, have been hired by other teams. No Silas. No Porter. No Harris. No Fratello. None of those guys have been hired. And many of them aren't even being rumored for a job. It'll be interesting to see who goes after Saunders, if anybody does. As for our "non-existant" offense, it improved DRAMATICALLY after the All-Star break when we got Bibby. We shot 47% FG . . . up from 44% We shot 39% 3FG . . up from 33% ( and we hit 3 more threes a game ) And we averaged 103.5 ppg . . up almost 9 points a game ( which directly correlates to the increased number of threes we made. So people have to give credit to Woody for having the offense flow better after the break . . or they have to acknowledge that Bibby was a significant talent upgrade at a position Woody needed at, in order to make the offense look better. That's why i place what happened with the Celtics squarely on Bibby. He was the guy who immeadiately made our offense look better. But when Boston was able to limit his point and assist production, it was a death nail for us. And I have to give the Boston defense credit for taking us out of our game too, because they did the same things to Cleveland and Detroit. But you're right Dol, change for the sake of change is useless, unless we can get a coach that is a significant upgrade over Woody. And it's really funny now how guys like Salim and Shelden are now lookd upon as Woody developmental failures, when 80% of this fan base used to dog them out everytime they stepped out on the court, because they were not producing.

Quote: [smith's development came from his own passion and hardwork. He seeked out Hall of Fame players to help improve his own game. Even so, his actual skills really aren't that polished, but he's able to "out-quick" PFs due to his freakish athleticism. He still has a long way to go.. Even when people point out the obvious about Smith, and the role the coaches had in his development, people still want to believe that he did everything on his own. Smith prove from time to time that if he had his preference, that he'd stay out on the perimeter as much as possible. It was Woody and the coaches who not only moved him to the 4, so that he'd be more potent on offense, it was they who told him to attack more. He didn't see the light until he sat out and saw how the team needed someone to attack the rim. He STILL tries to play like a guard at times, and it hurts the team. But when he listens to the coaches and attacks, good things usually happen. Those same coaches have stressed to Marvin to attack the rim as well, resulting in him making the most FTs on the team this year. But all of this would go against the "Woody doesn't know what the hell he is doing" theory, so people will never admit to these points being true. Quote: Horford did get better at the end of the year, but I think that has more to do with Alton Lister. Even then, he wasn't a reliable post scoring option, but he did perform better in the post. I don't know if Woody personally had anything to do with any of his player's development. That's why our assistants are so good. Even JJ praised our assistants when making the case for keeping Woody. Of course. Give Lister the credit for Horford's offensive development. Because we all remember how much of an offensive BEAST Lister was on offense. He used to dominate centers offensively with is great 15 foot jumper and his plethora of bck to the basket post moves. Olajuwon and Moses Malone couldn't dream of stopping Lister. Horford improved offensively, especially after Bibby got here, because a guy like Bibby could get him 1 or 2 more easy baskets a game. He started taking and making the 12 to 15 foot jumper a little mote. He even started to take his man off the dribble when he got the ball around the FT line. Heaven forbid that our coaches try to teach our kids anything. They're part of Woody's staff, but Woody had no role whatsoever in their development . . lol.

Quote: Players that improved in spite of Woody: Smoove, Horford, Marvin It's obvious that Smoove's improvement has come thanks to his work in the offseason... Smoove's improvement started back after he came back from that hernia surgery in Jan 07. Before that point, Woody and the coaches were stressing to him to take the ball to the basket because this team desperately needed a reliable 2nd option, but he just wouldn't do it much. But once he was able to sit for those 8 games while recovering, he was able to see what the coaches were talking about. From that point on, he became an attacker from the PF position using his quickness to get to the basket. While everybody was arguing whether to tank or not, Smith, with JJ out, started putting up the best numbers of his career. All of this took place BEFORE he worked with Hakeem and Calvin.

Quote: Also, I didn't ask if Woody would have played them, CP3 or Deron.... I originally asked if Woody could have developed them into the players they are today... Also, vice versa, if Smoove, Horford, or Marvin would have landed in Byron's or Sloan's lap, do you think their progress would have been excelled? Great young players don't need much devlopment. All they need is playing time to show what they can do. The great players have no problem transferring their game from college to pro. They almost come into the league playing like vets. So no matter where talents like those go, as long as they're getting adequate PT, they're going to be good on the court. That's why people are so high on Horford. He came into the league doing the exact same things that made him great in college, even if he was so-called playing out of position. The only question with him, is if he can be a big time scorer, because that's something he wasn't asked to do in college. He'll have to develop that. But we all know that Woody is such a terrible developer of young talent. That's why Horford's offensive game fell off so much as the season progressed.

Yes, because Paul would've been far and away the best PG on the team 3 years ago. You have to remember that Lue was always more comfortable coming off the bench, and Ivey started a ton of games that year. Paul would've been the starter, with Lue coming off the bench. Having said that, I don't thin Paul starts his rookie year playing 30 minutes a game. Woody, with his loyalty toward Lue, would initially split time between Paul and Lue. But Paul's overall talent would've eventually forced Woody to play Paul 30 minutes a game. And actually, that was the plan with Acie. If you noticed during the Preseason, it was Law and Lue playing the bulk of the minutes at PG, with AJ being completely out of the loop. Then AJ pitched that hissy fit, and coaxed Woody to play him more in some of the preseason games. He plays well, and Woody decides to start AJ and try to work a 3-man rotation at PG, with Lue playing both the point and the 2. Those injuries completely derailed Acie. If he doesn't get injured in November, I'm almost convinced that Woody starts him by mid December. AJ picked the perfect time to play somewhat well ( well for AJ's standards ). If he played like garbage in December, no way is he the starter after Christmas. Woody is the type that will stick with his vets if they are playing good, so he stuck with AJ. Unfortunately for Law now, he may have to wait one more year before the PG reigns are handed to him totally. I'd still start him, with Bibby coming off the bench, playing more minutes than Acie, and playing during crunch time. But we all know that Woody will start Bibby, with Acie as the reserve. It's now up to Acie to prove that he can be a dual scoring and playmaking threat off the bench. Whomever is the coach, they need to start preparing Acie to run this team once Bibby is gone.

Quote: When you have a veteran roster than already has a championship, you can't blame the coach for lack of motivation. Almost everyone on that team knew what it takes to win big, but they just didn't do what needed to be done. It's hard to motivate people who have already got the hardware to win more. I agree with this. That Piston team should've had every motivation in the world to beat Boston, seeing that people were pretty much handing them the Eastern Conference title from day 1. Plus with the way they lost to Cleveland last year, motivation shouldn't have been a factor. I think 3 things did Flip in. - They were the only team to let Boston win on the road in the playoffs. The Pistons did exactly what they needed to do by winning one of the first 2 games in Boston, then they give it right back in Game 3 and end up losing the series in Game 6. Fans and management will use that "if, then why" argument. They're like . . "if a team like the Hawks can beat Boston all 3 games at home, then why couldn't we do it?" - ATL and Cleveland employed a defensive strategy to pretty much make Rondo beat them, while trying to limit the production of one of the Big 3. Detroit didn't do that, pretty much playing everybody straight up. It's strange to see a team that prides itself on defense, not make defensive adjustments. Boston, on the other hand, made defensive adjustments in every series they played. - Flip needed to reign in Rasheed Wallace, and he just couldn't do it. Rasheed is a dominating personality out on the court that has always tended to do whatever he wants to do. Larry Brown, with his dealings with Iverson, could handle Rasheed and make him play within himself sometimes. Flip couldn't do it. He's gettting a lot of criticism for not making Rasheed play down low. Flip is probably taking too much heat fot that, because that's more on Rasheed than anything. So the only thing Flip could've done, is tell the others to freeze Sheed out, or play Maxiell and McDyess more.

I wanna know who are the people NOT voting for D-Wade? He's the only guy on that list that has won a championship and a Finals MVP. Those two things together almost automatically get you into the Hall of Fame, yet, people aren't making him an unaminous pick?

I can namea coach that had 2 all-star caliber players, plus a guy who could be an all-star, that lost more games than Woody this year. I can name anothet guy who had a talented PG and a talented young C, and has managed to missue both of those guys. Those 2 guys, and about 5 others, are worse than Woody.

Quote: Quote: Quote: Quote: The people giving Woody an F are just haters. Please define "hater". I don't hate the man. I don't even know him. I do hate the fact that he's our coach. I hate the fact that he can only muster 37 wins. I hate the fact that he has no "B" game plane. I hate the fact that his "A" game plan rarely works. I hate the fact that we are a young team who still manages to get very little "experience". I hate the fact that he thinks he is above working on anything himself. How can he expect his players to improve and work on things when he isn't even able to acknowledge some of his own flaws? I didn't GIVE him an F because I'm a hater, he EARNED the F because he is the worst coach in the NBA as of this post. So how many games should we have won this year? I don't think 47 was an unreachable number. The way the East panned out and the fact that our injury bug moved on AND taking the Eastern Champs to 7 games I think 45+ was reachable. Please don't ask if that's the number I thought of at the beggining of the year because that has absolutly nothing to do with me grading Woody based on this year and what I saw. Plus I don't really remember what I might of guessed. Why don't you tell me why we will win more than 37 next year with the same squad and same coaches? I know going by BK's "plan" that should put us around 42 wins. So, I'll buy that. Should be a fine year. Wow. Just wow. We're now a team that were supposed to win 45+ games? That's living in fantasy land my friend. To do that, we'd either have to have been one of the best home teams in the league by winning 32+ home games ( with one of the weakest crowds in the league, until the playoffs started ) . . or . . we'd have to become a .500 team on the road. We weren't equipped to do neither of those things this year. I started a thread at the beginning of the season entitled, "Can the Hawks win 25 home games". The 25 home win mark is usually the magic number for reaching the playoffs. I looked back over about an 8 - 10 year period. And around 80% - 85% of the teams that won 25 home games, got into the playoffs. So my theory was if we could win 25 home games, and 16 road games, that those 41 wins should get us in the playoffs. This year, we got those 25 home wins, but only 12 on the road. And how convienent that NOW the 3 home wins vs the Celtics matter, when most discount them as just the Hawks playing way over their heads because of the crowd. Forget that boston was the best road team in the league up until that series with us. Those wins matter, unless you're trying to make a case for Woody, then they don't matter. The difference next year, if we keep this team intact, should be the matuation of our young players and at least a little stability AND TALENT at the point and center spot for the first time since we had Mookie and Deke. The wild card for us may be Andersen, and how Woody integrates him into the rotation IF Andersen's game can make the transition to NBA level. As for Woody and his coaching, he'll continue to do the things that he needs to do in order for us to win games: - emphasizng defense and especially rebounding - properly defining roles for our main rotation guys - motivating the team at all times, even when things go bad - continuing the offensive development of Josh Smith, something he gets absolutely no credit for, but should, because it was his idea to establish him as the 2nd offensive option and play him at the 4. - hopefully becoming better with in-game adjustments, especially on offense. That has already become a little better with bibby at the helm ( minus his performance in the playoffs )

Quote: Quote: The people giving Woody an F are just haters. Please define "hater". I don't hate the man. I don't even know him. I do hate the fact that he's our coach. I hate the fact that he can only muster 37 wins. I hate the fact that he has no "B" game plane. I hate the fact that his "A" game plan rarely works. I hate the fact that we are a young team who still manages to get very little "experience". I hate the fact that he thinks he is above working on anything himself. How can he expect his players to improve and work on things when he isn't even able to acknowledge some of his own flaws? I didn't GIVE him an F because I'm a hater, he EARNED the F because he is the worst coach in the NBA as of this post. So how many games should we have won this year?

To give Woody an F means that people truly believe that we should have won 47 - 50 games this year, a number that no one on this board said before the season started. Most thought we were a .500 or slightly below a .500 team. Now, with like the Chris Paul argument, people have selective amnesia. Then again, even when we were 14 - 12 back in December, Woody was getting little credit for that record and people would have given him D's and F's back then too. Gotta love Hawksquawk. Woody's GPA after 24 votes is a "solid" 1.3. That's definitely low enough to be put on academic probation for a semester, but not quite low enough to get kicked out of school, without the opportunity to raise it to a 2.0. If he's retained, and we start out 3 - 6 next year, that could easily get him fired real quick. It'll be like being on probation, and immeadiately failing your first few major tests.

The people giving Woody an F are just haters. I gave him a C- as well, mainly for the way he managed or mismanaged Acie this year. At the vry least, I wished he would've treated him like he used to do Royal Ivey. Play him with the starters to start halves, even if he doesn't play after he comes out. He would've been much better off in an Ivey type role, until he became consitent enough to be trusted with major minutes. I do understand why Woody didn't play him much though. With his job on the line, he had no time or patience to try to develop players. I personally would love to see Acie be the starter, and Bibby the hired gun off the bench against weaker PGs. Even if Bibby logs more minutes than Acie, it's probably in our best interest to play Acie with a group that can maximize his abilities. Thanks AHF, for making that poll.

After it was pretty much a foregone concluson that Bogut would be the first guy taken, it didn't make a difference to me which one we took . . . Marvin or Chris. My only 2 points of concern were these: - if we take Chris, you damn well better be certain that he is the 2nd coming of Isaiah, because guards that small usually aren't taken that high, unless they are truly great. And to see if he is, you have to give him complete control of the offense, even to the point that he's our leading scorer and not passing as much ( ala Iverson ). - if you take Marvin, you immeadiately ship Harrington's azz outta here, so that Marvin, Smith, and Childress can get the majority of the minutes at the forward spots. The #2 pick in a draft shoud be immeadiately playing 30+ minutes from day 1 on a bad team, not brought along slowly. Keeping Harrington after we drafted Marvin and traded for JJ, delayed the development of Smith at the 4 and Marvin at the 3, for almost a full season. I'm one of the ones that think that the Marvin draft picked spured BK to go all out for JJ, and try to sell him to us as being our PG, to justify passing on Paul. Either that, or BK has planned to go after JJ even before the draft, and wanted another athletic wing on the team, if the decision wasn't made to re-sign Harrington after the 05 - 06 season. You can even make the case that the Salim pick was used to justify passing on Paul. He opted to go with the college vet in Salim, instead of the HS phenom in Monta Ellis. I won't fault him too much for passing on Monta, because a ton of teams could've used that kid as a 1st round pick. But Salim was also sold to us as a guy who was "a player", with Salim himself saying that he was a "lead guard". Having said all of that, this is the 05 - 06 Hawks starting lineup, if we'd taken Paul AND if we'd still gone after JJ: G - Paul G - JJ F - Smith F - Harrington C - Zaza That's actually not a bad squad at all. Instead of 27 wins, that team maybe could win 33 - 37 games. Chill, Lue, and Salim ( or the big man we might've chosen in rd 2 ) would be vital on that team. With Collier dying, spot minutes from Edwards would be crucial. We'd probably have to play a lot of small-ball for stretches. Even if we lost Harrington, we could slide Chill in at the 3 and move Smith to the 4 . . . and still probably take a guy like Shelden @ #10 if he fell that far. But like I said earlier, do we go after JJ as hard as we did, if we take Paul. If not this is the squad. G - Paul G - Chill F - Smith F - Harrington C - Zaza That lineup would force Paul to become more of a scorer and force Woody to go with a Paul - Lue backcourt a lot for more offense. Diaw couldn't be passive off the bench either. But that team without JJ, and the prospect of losing Harrington would be ugh . . . While many people wail away on Marvin, you have to remember that he does have the ability to play both the 3 and the 4. On a team void of a lot of quality big men, his importance to us is kind of undervalued in that regard.

Quote: Johan Petro? How many American brothas do you know that are named Yohan? Petro is French. Kind of like a brotha being named Boris ( well, there is Boris Kudjoe, but there is a chance that his mother is European )

Good post Khaos. I think you addressed the correct points on whether to retain Woody or not. My assessment of Woody all along, is that he is an average coach in this league. Because I don't call Woody a horrible coach, people assume that I think he's a good coach. LOL @ that. My beef in this issue has always been the fact that Woody gets all of the blame for losses, but none of the credit for wins. The same people that constantly whine and cry about Woody, will quickly tell you that we win because of the players ONLY. If that's the case, the players have to take the blame for losses as well, right? I'm all for Woody being replaced by a guy who is clearly an upgrade over him. Let me repeat that. I'm all for Woody being replaced by a guy who is clearly an upgrade over him. If Woody is overall perceived as a D+ coach ( I see him as a C- coach ), you don't replace him with a C- or a C coach. If you do that, you're still going to have some of the problems that you saw with Woody, just in different areas. If a change is to be made, it has to be with a coach that is a B- or above. ( Maybe that should be a Hawksquawk poll question, to really see what grade Woody should get as a coach, without putting their name beside their vote. Then you average out the vote and give him a grade. It'll be Woody's GPA. ) If getting the Hawks to the "next" level is the objective, those coaches aren't going to be able to do it either, without the talent on the roster being changed or the talent improving dramatically. But those coaches, if they won 43 games next year, would get much more love than if a Woody-led Hawks team won 43 games next year. Woody wouldn't get credit next year, unless he won 45+ games. In my opinion, a guy like Fratello is at least a B- coach, so I'm for him replacng Woody. Avery Johnson is a B+ coach, so I'm for that move as well. - Stan Van Gundy: C+ - Terry Porter: C - Paul Silas: C - Del Harris: C- - Dwayne Casey: D+ You replace him with at least a B- coach, in my opinion, if you think coaching is the main element we need to get to the "next" level.

Casey is a defensive coach, much like Woody. It'll be interesting if the fan base is ready for another guy who preaches defense, and is willing to sacrifice offense to be a great defensive team.

Quote: You know, that's a big part of my philosophy of basketball. I believe that defense can be taught and defense can be guided. However, offense can't. A good coach can make a defensive scheme that either hides or get rid of defensive shortcomings. However, finding a solution to a guy who cannot perform on offense is pretty difficult. You guys still overlook the obvious when it comes to this team offensively. Once we got Bibby, this team was a hell of a lot better on offense, even against the weaker teams, because we were struggling to score against anybody before Bibby came here. Basketball is definitely a skill game. And you need offensive skills in order to be a good to great offensive player. The teams that are great on offense, have great offensive players. And vice versa when it comes to defensive players and team. The fact is that if he had a good PG and a guy who can receive the ball 10 feet from the basket and score on the low block, that we'd be a much more efficient offensive ballclub. With the way BK assembled this team, he assembled them in order to be a good to great defensive ballclub, not an offensive one. Now if Sund has a different vision, he'll try to balance this roster out, so that we can play good defense and good offense. A guy like Josh Smith embodies everything that is great about this team, and everything that is wrong about this team. Great, in the fact that he represents our athleticism and versatility that we have at many positions, that make us a very tough team to beat when we have everything clicking. Wrong, in the fact that he represents the lack of key offensive skills we have in certain positions, that would make us a more consistent ballclub. After 4 years of this rebuild, we still have some questions about our PG. We still don't have a guy who can consistently score with his back to the basket. We still don't have enough big bodies on the frontline to protect a guy like Smith or Horford. And we still don't have enough consistent shooters on the team to keep teams honest when they change up defenses. But yet, people place the vast majority of the blame for that on the coach. That's why people want to trade Marvin or Chill for a shooter/slasher, preferably for a guy like Mike Miller or Corey Maggettee. That's why people would trade Smith for a very good PF like an Elton Brand, or even consider moving him for an all-star player like Carmelo Anthony. That's why people still want a big center in here that can play defense, like a DeSagna Diop. If we keep the current team together, we have to make an all-out commitment to becoming a premier defensive team, in order to cover up some of their offensive inconsistencies. Our athleticism and versatility may enable us to do just that. But we can't straddle the fence on this issue. If Smith and Chill are retained, the focus should be on becoming better defensively, because that's what is going to win games for us in the end. That's not saying that you can't add a shooter to the squad, but the main focus has to be on defense. The Celtics have multiple offensive threats, but they win games on the defensive end of the floor. Same with the Pistons. Same with the Spurs. Same with the Lakers.

Quote: I'm not going to fault a coach who has taken his team to the conference finals for three years in a row, particularly with an aging team. Flip has two qualities going for him that makes him a great fit for the Hawks: 1. He has a defined offensive system. This is something a majority of you on this board have complained about with the Hawks. If Flip were to take the Hawks head coaching job, the Hawks would have a defined offensive system. They would run a lot of back screens and off the ball screens to get players open for a jump shot or a slash to the basket. There will be more defined set plays for this team. You won't see as much one on one clear outs with Joe Johnson. That's all true. Flip's strength as a coach is definitely on offense. And because of that, we would see more Salim Stoudamire over Acie Law. You'd see Josh Smith given even more free reign to do whatever he wanted to do. You'd see less of Childress, because of some of his offensive limitations. The question is, would we be a better team if those guys got more playing time? Flip's teams are more carefree and a little less disiplined than most teams. Quote: 2. He does a very good job of developing his young players. I think people forget that Flip was the head coach that brought a young Kevin Garnett along as a young player out of high school. Flip is also the guy that rounded out Chauncey Billups game in Minnesota, before he went to Detroit. Larry Brown isn't the guy that pushed the right buttons on him. He developed in Minnesota. This year, Flip did a very good job of integrating Rodney Stuckey into the game plan and Jason Maxiell into the game plan even more. He also worked Amir Johnson into the rotation. Can't deny that either. You could add Stephon Marbury, Wally Szczerbiak, and Troy Hudson to that list as well. With Flip though, the question has always been with the team's commitment toward the defensive end. Flip's problem is that he'll always prefer playing the guy who is better on offense, than the better overall fit on both offense and defense. The only exception to this, was with my boy Trenton Hassell. But even then, Minny had their "Big 3" in KG, Cassell, and Spree. So Trenton's job was to be the perimeter defensive stopper/deterer, and not concentrate so much on offense, because he got most of his offense from the Big 3. Quote: We have been talking about getting a coach that can get our young players to maximize their talent and improve. Well, Flip Saunders would be at the top of my list for that. If he is available, the move would be a no brainer decision. People talk about how Woody can't break Smith from shooting long jumpers. Well, the same could be said about Flip and Rasheed Wallace, who basically lost the series for Detroit with all of those jumpers he took. Flip's personality as a coach isn't strong enough to buck up to a hardheaded player like that. He had a problem reigning in Troy Hudson, and all of those bad shots he took as well. So I could see him trying not to butt heads with Smith either, if he were the coach here. And like Woody, he'd cater to the wishes of JJ, just like he did with KG.

Quote: People have been throwing out things that Woody has done badly this entire thread. You're just being ridiculous at this point. 1) Quote from Joe Johnson: "We can't spread the floor, and we can't run high pick-and-rolls against a zone." Hey, look, we can't do the most BASIC things on offense. These are two things you learn to do when you're playing in junior high. But the reason why we can't spread the floor is because of the lack of legit shooters who can consistently ( key word: consistently ) make shots. So JJ is right. This has more to do with personnel, than it does with the actual offensive system. Quote: 2) Our offense basically has JJ isolated at the top of the key, one guard standing on the baseline outside the three point line, and three guys standing inside the arc under the three point line, in the general vicinity of the basket, sort of clumped up. If you recognize this look, it's because we use it on no less than 60% of our half court offensive possessions. When we acquired Bibby, Bibby was the guy who had the ball isolated at the top of the key, with JJ in the corner. Bibby's presence was making JJ's life much easier on the offensive end. He was making everybody's life easier on the offensive end. Amazing what a legit PG can do at times. But when Rondo basically locked up Bibby in those first few games in the playoffs, Woody had to revert back to running most everything through JJ. It worked, until Boston decided to treat JJ like he was Kobe starting in Game 5. Then it was up to guys to simply make open shots. They couldn't do it in Games 5 and 7, but they did do it in Game 6. Quote: 3) Our defense is very uneven. Some people point out that we're constantly switching, but this puts in situations where Bibby actually ends up on KG (go back and watch the film if you don't believe me). That's a horrible situation to be in on defense, and it usually ends up with KG getting the basket-and-one. That's more to do with Bibby not fighting through the pick than anything else. Go back and see how he fought ( or didn't fight ) through the screen. Ty Lue used to do those exact same things. Even a guy like Salim will at least try to fight through the screen and be aware that it's coming. Bibby gave a half-hearted effort to fight, forcing either Horford or Smith to respect Rondo or Cassell. Then they throw it back to Pierce or KG, and they have an easy attempt at a 15 foot jumper because Bibby has no chance of stopping that shot from them. Quote: 4) Our substitions are a mess. Mike Woodson overreacts to the most ridiculous of events. There was one game against Golden State where Al Horford had been sitting for a while, then came back in during the fourth quarter. Almost immediately, Golden State ran a play that saw Austin Croshere making a three over Al's outstretched arms. Mike Woodson saw this and immediately took Al out of the game until the end. So, in conclusion, he took Al Horford out of the game because Austin Croshere made a three pointer. If you're the Hawks, I think that's a scenario which I'd take every time down the court-Austin Croshere getting the ball off of a screen and taking a deep jumper. We ending up getting killed after Horford left. But he never came back in. LOL @ this. Horford left the game at the 4:43 minute mark in the 3rd quarter. He returned with a little over 9 minutes to go in the 4th quarter. The ironic thing about this substitution, is that Woody did the exact opposite that everyone always accuse him of, and that is taking out the "hot" man. Chill came in for Horford, instead of Marvin, partially because Marvin had 6 points in the quarter, and was the only guy who was making jumpshots at the time. Golden St had also made a major adjustment, by starting Harrington at center to start the 3rd quarter, instead of Brandan Wright, making them ultra fast and putting an extra shooter on the floor. The reality of the situation was that Horford was in a HORRIBLE matchup with Harrington, who could bring him outside and knock down jumpers. Harrington had scored 5 points when he came out of the game, replaced by Croshere. Then when he hits a 3, Woody decides to give Horford the early rest, instead of Marvin. By this time, we are down 11, and need offense anyway. Quote: 5) During the series against the Celtics, the Hawks sat Al Horford for the entire second quarter of game 4. This resulted in the famous Zaza/KG staredown, but honestly, Al Horford is too good to be sitting just because he has 2 fouls. It's not even foul trouble at that point. Josh Smith later picked up his second foul. Our frontcourt for the last 3:31 of the first half was Soloman Jones and Zaza Pachulia. Somehow, they played the Celtics pretty much even, despite neither of them really doing anything. Solo got one rebound (and one block on the much smaller Rondo), and Zaza got no rebounds and 2 points during that stretch. You may remember people spouting superlatives about Soloman's hustle and determination after that block of Rondo...we've seen Josh Smith do that literally hundreds of times! It was great that Solo replicated the results, but in 3:31, I'd like to think that JSmoove comes up with more than one rebound and one block. There was one sequence that saw the ball bounces off of Soloman's hands, bounce off of Zaza, then bounce off of Solo's hands again to end up out of bounds. These things happen with your starting front court bench for no reason at all. You must have your games mixed up. Because Horford played almost the ENTIRE 2ND QUARTER in Game 4. Matter of fact, he was in the game the ENTIRE WAY, up until the 4 minute mark, when ZaZa came in for him. You could make the argument that he needed the rest anyway. But with Horford basically picking up 2 fouls in 2 minutes, it was WISE to sit him down right when Woody did, to save him for the 2nd half. I don't know what in the world you were watching . . lol. http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/playbyplay?g...428001&period=2 Matter of fact, Horford played 44 minutes in Game 4. So that means the 4 minutes that Horford sat down, was the ONLY TIME Woody sent him to the bench . . LOL. And it wasn't Game 3 either, because he played the majority of that quarter as well . . LOL. Please get your facts straight if you're going to do this. It was actually Josh Smith in Game 1, that Woody sat down the entire 2nd quarter. Even in that game, we were actually OK, until Cassell started abusing Salim and scored 7 straight points to put Boston up 11. Now if you want to beef about THAT, go right ahead. But even in that situation, it wasn't the lack of Smith's presence that caused us to get behind like that. It was the fact that Cassell started making shots, while Salim was missing shots. ( kind of discounting part of your earlier argument in this thread about "shooters" on our team. ) Quote: 6) Have I pointed out that our substitutions are a mess? Joe Johnson picked up his second foul early in the second quarter in game 5 against the Celtics. When he left, we were down by three. When he back in, very late in the first half, we were down by 13. Joe Johnson ended the game with 2 fouls. Why? Because he has one of the lowest damn foul rates of anyone in the NBA. Well, JJ picked up that 2nd foul with 4:26 to go in the 1st quarter. Every coach in the league would've subbed him out at that point. But if you want to make the argument that JJ should've kept playing because he doesn't foul out, fine. But it's a known fact that players usually play ultra conservative when picking up 2 early fouls, so that they won't pick up #3. With the way the refs were calling that game ( JJ's 2nd foul was a BS offensive foul on a so-called push off on Leon Powe ), JJ may have been in jeapordy of picking up a 3rd foul he didn't deserve on a similar type play. I've long said that this team goes to hell, when JJ goes out of the game. That was the perfect time for guys like Marvin, Smith, and anybody else to really step up for a while and try to hold the fort down, while Woody bought JJ some time. And they just couldn't do it. What made this stretch worse, was that while the Boston starters extended the lead to 8 in the 1st quarter, it was Sam Cassell and Leon Powe that we couldn't stop early in the 2nd. They were the only 2 guys to score in that quarter, and they extended the lead to 13. That's when JJ came back. Quote: 7) Mike Woodson commenting on the differential between home/away games during the playoff series with the Celtics. "We play so well at home and on the road it's like two totally different teams. I don't know what it is. It might be the focus or the crowd might be getting to us." He doesn't know what it is? As the head coach, I would hope he'd know something. Maybe point out that the Hawks are missing shots, or are failing in their defensive substitions, or that they are shooting fewer foul shots. But nope, he just doesn't know. I meant to start a thread concerning this very subject last week, based off of an interview I heard with former Laker PG Norm Nixon, who is now part of the Laker TV and radio coverage. Nixon, in that ESPN Radio interview, pointed out that most young players get "shell-shocked" during the playoffs, especially on the road. He specifically mentioned how the Hawks played in Boston and how other young talented players seemed to freeze up when the pressure was really on. He even mentioned how Rondo was looking like night and day, depending on if he was playing at home or on the road. Woody may not know, or he doesn't want to keep making the excuse that he had a very young team in the playoffs. Josh Smith was night and day at home. Marvin played better at home. Only Horford pretty much played the same whether we were at home or on the road, but even his production was down on the road. Quote: 8) Trust me, I'm not running out of things to say yet. There was that one game that I remember quite clearly, against the 76ers, in which Al Horford essentially fouled out with two fouls. I can't explain what the deal was. He's our starting center, our best rebounder, and I can't say enough surperlative things about how much he has helped this team. Anyway, Al Horford was taken out late in teh 3rd quarter with one foul. No big deal. But then he sat for the first 6 minutes and 16 seconds of the fourth quarter. He came in, and then Andre Miller ended up getting a deep offensive rebound a couple minutes later and took off running down the court. The only person who was in a position to get in his way (and this really boggles my mind, since Horford is a center and usually would be under the basket during a rebound opportunity) was Al Horford. He attempted to get in front of Miller only to have Andre Miller blow past him and get fouled. Woodson then immediately Al back out of the game after he'd been in for about 2 and a half minutes. Al did not get back into the game. Why was he sitting for so long? Oh, and I should point out that Al was on the bench while Marvin Williams was guarding Samuel Dalembert. This is after Marvin Williams was taken off of guarding Andre Iguodala because Iguodala abused him for baskets on consecutive possessions. I repeat, Marvin Williams was guarding Samuel Dalembert because he couldn't guard Iguodala, while Al Horford sat ont he bench with two fouls. Ridiculous, right? Not really. What you fail to point out that it wasn't Marvin guarding Dalembert when Horford was out of the game, it was Smith and ZaZa the vast majority of the time. Marvin just happened to be on Daly on a particular play, because Marvin moved to the 4, while Smith was at the 5. And the reason why Woody opted to go back with Marvin, instead of staying with Horford, was because he and Chill were having very good games, while Horford was having a so-so game and was pretty much a non-factor. Plus the Sixers went ultra small and quick, and we needed to try to match what they could put out offensively. The facts of that game are that it was actually Marvin and Chill who were keeping us in the game in the middle part of that 2nd half ( Marvin in the 3rd, Chill in the 4th ). JJ got his points, 13 of them, at the very end of the quarter. But he, nor Marvin, nor Smith, nor nobody else, could stop Iggy in the 4th quarter.

Quote: True the Hawk's do need better players however with what Woody had to work with had FUNDAMENTALS been taught and exercised this team would have done alot better than 37 wins. I mean come on 4 yrs should be enough time to learn how to box out on the boards. I saw over and over again vs the Celtic's where a box out would have helped the Hawk's get a rebound instead Boston cleaned up on the Hawk's lack of fundamentals. Way to much one on one play and not finding the open man.Accountability does Woody have any? This is why you pay the coach why hasn't he done it? People want to point the fact the Hawk's won the home games in the playoffs at the same time they got buried on the road vs the Celtic's. Woody needs to be gone I know players like JJ don't want that but getting a real coach will make a huge difference and more talent. Players don't want to change systems all the time but for the Hawk's own good it would be wise to get some one else that will teach 1.discipline 2.fundamentals Way to many times Woodson let the inmates control the asylum. Players did what they wanted without penalty, that shows a lack of leadership right there. Who do you penalize, without hurting the team overall? People don't want Smoove to stop shooting jumpers, so they say Woody should've benched him. So you bench him, and you're forced to either play Marvin at the 4 with Horford at the 5 . . or ZaZa at the 5 and Horford at the 4. Either way, you hurt the team more than you help it, because the defense falls off significantly when Smith is out of the game. In the end, it's up to Smith himself to play smarter, not Woody make him play smarter by teaching him lessons on the bench. Larry Brown tried to "run the asylum" in NY. But his players still did what they wanted, instead of totally listening to the coach. And players don't come to the NBA to learn fundamentals. NBA players should already have basic fundamentals down pat. Rebounding is all about desire, which is why Horford is already a top rebounder in the league. So is defense. When you want to be a great shooter, all you do is shoot in the offseason. The structure of the offense definitely is on Woody. But players also have to execute. Can't have one without the other, and expect to be successful most of the time. As for the Celtics, the Celtics were supposed to bury us at home too. But they didn't. The fan base gives the Hawks little credit for those home playoff wins, the further we get away from them. By August, it'll be like we didn't even make the playoffs last year, and that 37 wins is all we did last year.