Woody, the root of all, is why we do not score.

[bumpyphish1]

51 points at the end of three quarters. That's right, a measly 17 points per 12 minutes. That is atrocious.

No, it's not Josh Smith. I know he is shooting terrible, but thats because he is determined to get to the hole and get a shot up. Because no one else on our damn team will look for their own shot.

But, that's not the point. WOODSON'S LACK OF AN EFFECTIVE OFFENSIVE SYSTEM IS THE REASON WE CANNOT SCORE. IT IS THE BIGGEST PROBLEM WE HAVE TACTICALLY SPEAK. THAT, AND THE FACT WOODY STILL WON'T FORCE OUR GUYS TO RUN OR TEACH THEM HOW TO DO SO EFFECTIVELY.

I am seriously re-considering the Woody is no Goody sign tomorrow when I sit front row - see my earlier thread for background on this idea.

What the hell is it going to take to fire him? I swear I would rather fire him this season and risk the future of this season than if you offered me a keep Woodson deal and get the 8th seed at the same time guaranteed. This team absolutely CANNOT REACH ITS CEILING WITH WOODSON AT THE HELM. I know if I sacrificed the 8 seed to let Woody go, a decent new coach could have us at the 6th seed or better next year. Plus, I honestly don't believe it could get any worse with Larry Drew (ow whomever) as the coach than it now. The offense could not be any more primitive or less effective.

Management is not really "going for it" unless they fire this clown and replace him with a real coach. And, what was with the close up on Woody's side profile coming back from commercial during the game tonight? They just showed his face zoomed in paused for like 15 seconds. I was hoping they would talk about him being on some sort of hot seat but they really didnt say anything!

Ugh. So frustrating! I am [censored] yelling at the bar at the damn TV and people around me are like "wtf is this guy upset about? what is he doing?" but I am too [censored] pissed to have the discipline to act like a civil human being.

Please Please, if anyone who has any sort of power is listening out there: please fire Woody. Do it for all the fans like these on Hawksquawk who actually care about this team. Do it for Joe Johnson who has waited patiently. Doing it for Dominique. Christ, ASG, do it for yourselves!

[Guest]

follow. Well GD, Woody we played a great first half of defensive basketball (actually in general we played an above average defensive game today). We held Chicago to 34 points in the first half! That is some great defensive basketball. But you know what? It didn't matter if we held them to 24 points, when you can't score you can't win and that right there is a major problem with this team. Now I know Chicago is a good defensive team, but there were no plays ran tonight. Iso Joe, Iso Smoove, Iso Lue...I have been staying away from posting on this subject but man is this frusterating.

It is useless to keep flaming about this subject and just something as Hawks fans we have to cope with because all of our owners are a bunch of doofuses (ASG and Belkin). As a fan, I am angered and I share in everyone elses emotions about this subject.

Man, I hate to hastily post after a game but this one really did it for me. This was an aggravating loss that summed up much of the young season so far, but its still young so maybe this was just an outlier? I doubt it but I'm willing to give it more time.

[AtLaS]

Yeah I know, I really hate when people say that having a good defense will lead to having a good offense, because it's not true, AT ALL. It doesn't matter what kind of D you play if you can't run any kind of offense on the other end. I really haven't been disappointed in our defense much at all this year, it's our offense (again) that sucks.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

Quote:

---

Yeah I know, I really hate when people say that having a good defense will lead to having a good offense, because it's not true, AT ALL. It doesn't matter what kind of D you play if you can't run any kind of offense on the other end. I really haven't been disappointed in our defense much at all this year, it's our offense (again) that sucks.

---

You guys do realize that we got outscored 36 to 21 in the 3rd quarter right? Our lack of DEFENSE in the 3rd quarter, combined with the turnovers, lost the game for us tonight.

We were only down 4 at halftime. But after that quarter, we were down 19.

LOL . . we even shot 7 - 13 FG in that quarter. The Bulls? They went 13 - 26 FG.

But most important, the Bulls stretched the lead out, by playing great defense, and attacking the basket on offense.

Defense keeps you in games when you suck on offense. If you play halfway decent offense, the defense can win a game.

But as soon as you start playing bad defense, look what happens.

A great defense will almost always beat a great offense.

Our offense was definitely terrible, but we lost that game in the 3rd, when we didn't play defense, nor secure the boards.

[Guest]

We scored how many points in the first half? That is called terrible offense no matter how you want to spin it.

Quote:

---

Our offense was definitely terrible, but we lost that game in the 3rd, when we didn't play defense, nor secure the boards.

---

This might just be a difference in what I call defense and you call defense. I make a distinction between defense and rebounding, you can play great defense but then not get a rebound and I say that does not take away from great defense at all. We had a horrible rebounding quarter in the 3rd, not a horrible defensive quarter. That is just how I define it, I don't know how you define defense so we could just be arguing definitions unless you think we played bad defense in the way I define defense.

[Buzzard]

Quote:

---

LOL . . we even shot 7 - 13 FG in that quarter.

---

You are kidding me! We scored 14 pts from the field in one quarter! Hell with offensive output like that the Suns should be trembling in their shoes!

Dude we flat out sucked! No excuses on either end. Our defense did not lose this one; its the only reason they only beat us by 12. The Bulls should have beaten us by 20 easily. The damn Pistons could not have won this game with their D if they put up these same numbers across the stat sheet.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

Quote:

---

We scored how many points in the first half? That is called terrible offense no matter how you want to spin it.

Quote:

---

Our offense was definitely terrible, but we lost that game in the 3rd, when we didn't play defense, nor secure the boards.

---

This might just be a difference in what I call defense and you call defense. I make a distinction between defense and rebounding, you can play great defense but then not get a rebound and I say that does not take away from great defense at all. We had a horrible rebounding quarter in the 3rd, not a horrible defensive quarter. That is just how I define it, I don't know how you define defense so we could just be arguing definitions unless you think we played bad defense in the way I define defense.

---

No sir, we had a horrible defensive quarter because not only did they shoot 50% FG, they got extra possessions to score via offensive rebounds. Defense and rebounding go hand in hand. That's the reason why San Antonio is viewed as the best defensive team in the league. Not only can they make you shoot a low percentage from the field, they also prevent you from getting extra possessions by securing rebounds.

If we'd just played solid defense that 3rd quarter, this would've been one of those "first to 75 points wins the game" type of games. But when you're in one of those types of games, you can't afford to have defensive breakdowns.

We scored 47 points in the 2nd half. The Bulls scored 56.

We had 37 TOTAL rebounds . . they had 36 OFFENSIVE REBOUNDS alone. 60 total. Which means they were +23 in rebounding

When you fail to defend and rebound, you will always lose . . unless you have a Phoenix-type offense. And even then, they have to shoot a very high percentage, to overcome their rebounding and defensive woes.

LOL @ 36 offensive rebounds.

Like Horford said after the game: "We weren't blocking out," said the Hawks' Al Horford, who had 14 rebounds. "That's the thing you can blame it on. You have to be able to hit bodies."

[AtLaS]

You are right that rebounding killed us, and I do consider rebounding a part of defense. However, our offense still lost the game. When you only give up 90 points, you should win the game.

Offensive rebounds definitely killed us, but it doesn't take away from the fact that our offense was even WORSE.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

LOL . . we even shot 7 - 13 FG in that quarter.

---

You are kidding me! We scored 14 pts from the field in one quarter! Hell with offensive output like that the Suns should be trembling in their shoes!

Dude we flat out sucked! No excuses on either end. Our defense did not lose this one; its the only reason they only beat us by 12. The Bulls should have beaten us by 20 easily. The damn Pistons could not have won this game with their D if they put up these same numbers across the stat sheet.

---

LOL . . we had scored 17 and 13 points in the first 2 quarters . . and was getting killed on the boards. Yet, we were only down 4 at the half.

We score 21 points in the 3rd quarter, but get outscored by 15 points in the quarter.

We had our best offensive output in that 3rd quarter, yet, we were down 19 at the end of the quarter.

Why do you think that is?

Even if we'd scored 30 points in the 3rd quarter, we'd still have been down 10 points to start the fourth.

Why?

[Guest]

What you are talking about is rebounding, not defense (as I define it) like I said would more than likely be the reason for disagreement. Clearly this is the reason and yet you still don't understand I make a distinction between the two while you really don't(you said they go hand in hand also treat them as compliments).

Our defense wasn't the reason we lost, I say that our offensive ineptitude (.397 from the field compared to allowing .393 from the field) was the reason. You say it was because we were outrebounded (60 to 37). Nowhere do I see where we played a bad defensive game. Now I agree that rebounding certainly is an issue with this loss, but like I said I do not define that as defense.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

Both teams shot 39% FG.

Bulls made 5 threes ( 15 points ) . . we made 4 ( 12 points ).

We made 5 more free throws than they did. ( 20 to 15 )

We win . . by 2, right? LOL . . wrong !!

Hawks had 68 shot attempts . . Bulls had 89 shot attempts

Hawks make 27 shots . . Bulls make 35 shots

I'm sure those extra 21 shots the Bulls got, because of offensive rebounds and forcing turnovers, really helped them tonight.

Yes, I agree the offense was bad. But they were bad too. So it came down to who could play better defense during a certain period of the game . . and who could continue to hit the boards.

And they won both of those battles.

[Buzzard]

Quote:

---

We score 21 points in the 3rd quarter, but get outscored by 15 points in the quarter.

We had our best offensive output in that 3rd quarter, yet, we were down 19 at the end of the quarter.

---

Our best offensive quarter was in the 4th when we scored 27. Unless you think 21 is greater than 27? We held the Bulls to 90 points and a fg% of 39.3. That is not far from being Piston/Spurs like.

Our problems tonight were:

Rebounding

Shooting

Turnovers

Rebounding is related to defense. Turnovers and shooting are directly related to offense. We sucked tonight in those three categories, but holding the opposing team to 90 pts and 39% fg shooting should get you a win more times than not in the NBA.

[Buzzard]

Quote:

---

So it came down to who could play better defense during a certain period of the game . . and who could continue to hit the boards

---

Why could it not just come down to us SCORING more than 90 pts? Why could it not just come down to us not committing 16 OFFENSIVE turnovers? Why could it not just come down to us boxing people out and gathering some REBOUNDS. Why I ask, oh why?????

You are killing me man. OK I agree. I know nothing at all about basketball and I really believe our defense is so good we should have held them to 77pts. No doubt about it. The final score should have been 78 to 77 and we win! From now on if we cannot hold an opposing team to less than 78 pts, I am going to get on this board and flame all night long about how bad our defense is.

77pts or bust by george! This is the only way we can win and any more than that is just a piss poor defensive effort on our part! On second thought, I really think it would be easier to just go ahead and score 91; than it would be to hold them to only 77. What do you think?

[AtLaS]

It's sad because I usually agree with northcyde most of the time, but for some reason he has a thing for Woody (no pun intended lol), and he's dead wrong on this one. Woody is the reason our offense sucks so bad, and our OFFENSE is why we lost this game. A whopping 14 assists for our entire team?? That's horrible. JJ, Marvin and Smith were a large part of why we were so bad offensively. Those are our top 3 scorers so when they aren't playing well, our offense sucks even more than usual.

[Buzzard]

Quote:

---

It's sad because I usually agree with northcyde most of the time, but for some reason he has a thing for Woody (no pun intended lol), and he's dead wrong on this one. Woody is the reason our offense sucks so bad, and our OFFENSE is why we lost this game. A whopping 14 assists for our entire team?? That's horrible. JJ, Marvin and Smith were a large part of why we were so bad offensively. Those are our top 3 scorers so when they aren't playing well, our offense sucks even more than usual.

---

We sucked on the boards no doubt about it. But when you cannot even break 80 pts in 4 quarters of play, they should be ashamed. They should apologize to us for playing like that.

[leftwich]

I think Shelden should have gotten some significant playing time. If Shelden's not given a chance to neutralize a guy like Ben Wallace (really the perfect match-up for Shelden- undersized, not an offensive threat, and his defense would be wasted on Shelden to a degree), then what's the point in ever playing him at all?

I realize there isn't much love for Shelden around here, but him and Horford really are the two strongest rebounders we have. I can't recall if it was mostly long rebounds or not, but I wonder how a lineup of Horf, Shell, Chill, JJ, and Salim would've fared at some point during that game.

Chill for the long rebounds, JJ and Salim for scoring, and Horf and Shell up front. All of this is hindsight, but it was still very obvious from the second quarter on that we were getting absolutely killed on the boards.

[Buzzard]

Quote:

---

I wonder how a lineup of Horf, Shell, Chill, JJ, and Salim would've fared at some point during that game.

---

They could not have done much worse. This was one of those nights that if Phil Jackson was our coach, Marvin and Smoove would have been riding the pine for half of the 3rd and at least that much of the 4th quarter.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

We score 21 points in the 3rd quarter, but get outscored by 15 points in the quarter.

We had our best offensive output in that 3rd quarter, yet, we were down 19 at the end of the quarter.

---

Our best offensive quarter was in the 4th when we scored 27. Unless you think 21 is greater than 27? We held the Bulls to 90 points and a fg% of 39.3. That is not far from being Piston/Spurs like.

Our problems tonight were:

Rebounding

Shooting

Turnovers

Rebounding is related to defense. Turnovers and shooting are directly related to offense. We sucked tonight in those three categories, but holding the opposing team to 90 pts and 39% fg shooting should get you a win more times than not in the NBA.

---

I should've said . . "up to that point, it was our best offensive quarter". I know that we scored 27 in the 4th, but the game was pretty much over by the start of that quarter. I'm sorry I didn't make that more clear.

I agree with you about the offense in general. But once we saw that this game was going to be low scoring, it turns into a defensive battle. Think of it as if this were an NFL game, in which a good offense is stymied by their own mistakes, and their opponent's defense. Once that happens, you tend to change up the gameplan a bit, and try not to make that critical mistake, and win the game at the end.

That's what the Steelers did last night to the Dolphins, on that horrible field.

The Bulls score 34 points in the first half, but because of the horrible offense, we're down, but only down 4, because of the defense.

Then they turn around and score 36 points in the 3rd quarter alone, while our offense picked up a little bit overall. And you don't think the defense let us down right there?

This game should've played out exactly like the Miami game did, with the Hawks being in relative striking distance the entire way. Instead, the Bulls hit 6 of their first 7 shots in that quarter, and extended that lead to 13 by the 7:30 mark in that quarter.

The little run in the 4th quarter that we made, when Salim was in the game, may have been enough to get us right back in the game, had we stayed solid defensively in the 3rd.

Instead, that run cut a 21 point lead, down to 14 . . instead of an 11 point lead, down to 4.

With a halftime score of 34 - 30, it should've been a grind it out game, in which the first to 75 points, wins the game.

Even though holding the Bulls overall to 39% FG and 90 points is normally damn good . . tonight it was bad, because the Bulls were shooting sub 30% FG and only had 34 points at the half.

We should've held them to 70 - 75 points, and had a chance to win at the end.

[Buzzard]

Quote:

---

With a halftime score of 34 - 30, it should've been a grind it out game, in which the first to 75 points, wins the game.

Even though holding the Bulls overall to 39% FG and 90 points is normally damn good . . tonight it was bad, because the Bulls were shooting sub 30% FG and only had 34 points at the half.

We should've held them to 70 - 75 points, and had a chance to win at the end.

---

You are talking about holding an NBA team to 75 points. Even with their low score of 34 pts in the 1st half, that still would require we hold them to 41 pts or less for the next half.

I think that is to much to expect. We are not the Spurs or the Pistons. We rank in the middle not at the top of the defensive stats. Which is my point. Our offensive output was atrocious while our defensive output was at least close to average for us...

[Packfill]

Can you really call it "good defense" when both teams make very poor shot selections, usually without being forced into such shots, and neither team can hit the broad side of a barn? Was it good defense that made Heinrich toss away a fast break lay-up?

I agree that rebounding is part of a teams defense because it involves positioning and effort, neither of which the Hawks do well.

Let's face it, both teams were garbage last night. The Hawks were just a smellier version of garbage then the Bulls.