The truth? You can’t handle the truth!

[DrReality]

Please note highlighted re Woody's comment: we can't run.

By Sekou K Smith | Friday, January 18, 2008, 12:03 PM

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

TORONTO - Don’t worry, my friends.

You’re not alone.

You’re like fans of every other team in every other sport in every other city on the planet.

And just like ol’ Jack told Tom Cruise in a Few Good Men, “You can’t handle the truth,” anymore than any of the rest of us.

You want perfection, or something close to it or on the path to it.

The truth is, the Hawks (and at least 27 other teams) are far from perfection.

The truth is, the Hawks are just now making to the path. And that path is filled with potential potholes that they are sure to step in. It’s a part of the process.

You remember the process don’t you? It’s those lean years of struggle before any team is able to become a legitimate player on the biggest stage. All the big boys have had to endure suffer through it, despite revisionist history in places like Boston, Detroit and Phoenix.

Some other truths about the Hawks a mere 36 games into the roller coaster ride that this season is sure to be:

The truth is, the Hawks still haven’t solved their point guard dilemma. Anthony Johnson was supposed to be the security blanket, not the starter. The Hawks are in deep water without their floaties on, because one wrong step puts them back in point guard purgatory. Those of you who panned the notion of a Luke Ridnour fitting a need here don’t seem to giggling now.

The truth is, the Hawks have ventured into deep waters in the paint. Al Horford was supposed to be a bonus to what was already there (Zaza Pachulia, were he to make a miraculous return to his 2005-06 form the Hawks wouldn’t need to make deal for a big). Yet he’s being asked to do things (as Cheryl Miller so astutely pointed out the other day) that he shouldn’t. That he’s held up so well just 36 games into his pro career speaks volumes about the young fella. But there is still an obvious need for another big man on this roster. And as much as I like Solomon Jones and the potential he’s shown, he’s not the answer if this team is to finally end their playoff drought. Remember, we’re talking truth here. There’s a reason that teams that work the Hawks inside tend to always finish on top at the end of the night (and that’s not just with big men, but teams that attack the Hawks inside with guys big and small seem to always come away with the win).

The truth is, things aren’t nearly as dire as you think they are on a bad day. And they aren’t nearly as peachy as you think they are on a good day. Part of this team maturing into a legitimate playoff team comes with the ability to manage the emotional ebb and flow of a season - something a similarly young, talented and incomplete young team like Portland seems to have already conquered. Truth. At 18-18 ( the league can take wins away all they want but I won’t abide by that foolishness here, not in Blog-Z’s world) the Hawks are just about where you expected them to be right now.

The truth is, things have to change going forward. Whether it’s a cosmetic change, the physical removal of humans from their current spots or a philosophical shift in how they’re going to approach the second half of this season, it should be clear to everyone by now that the current approach will not provide the desired results to finish the regular season. Not if the Hawks aspire to more than just a noble chase for a playoff spot. The aim has to be higher. All the teams in the hunt now should have their sights set on slots 4-6 as opposed to one of the final two spots, which spell almost certain doom in the first round of the playoffs. Land anywhere between 4-6 and the first round foe is probably going to be a team you can match up with and a have a fighting chance of advancing to the second round, which would be the true mark of progress - for the Hawks or any other team trying to measure the strides that have been made.

Real talk.

Truth.

[DrReality]

Here's the paragraph that will bring ire (got omitted); IE the Hawks can't run . . . . .

The truth is, the Hawks aren’t playing to their strengths every night by dictating tempo as opposed to being dictated to. My stance won’t change on what I think is the best attack for this team. Hawks coach Mike Woodson has pointed out to me on many occasions that the Hawks can’t “run” because I, or anyone else, wants them to. I disagree. If a team makes up its mind to play a certain way, they can do whatever they want. But it has to be a commitment made by all. And the Hawks, while saying all the right things in the preseason about being committed to that style, simply haven’t stayed true to that. Blame whomever you want for that one.

[DJlaysitup]

Looks to me like Sekou has been reading Hawksquawk...or maybe it's just so obvious that most folks are thinking the same thing.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

And I'd tell Sekou to refer to his paragraph about the PG situation here.

The I'd ask him to name one good running team that doesn't have a good PG running the show.

I believe the Hawks can't run for that exact reason. The "truth" is that good running teams don't have their main finishers leading the break and being the playmaker ( Smoove, Chill, and Horford ). Good running teams also have good shooters to toss the ball out to on the break.

If the Hawks want to run, play defense, get in the passing lanes and deflect some balls, and run when you have the advantage. Don't run just to be running, and watch the crowd and fan base whine and cry about committing turnovers when we try to play too fast.

Play defense and rebound the basketball. Whenever you can outscore your opponent 25 - 2 in fast break points, but still lose the game, running or playing fast isn't the problem.

[DJlaysitup]

Quote:

---

...Whenever you can outscore your opponent 25 - 2 in fast break points, but still lose the game, running or playing fast isn't the problem.

---

Very good point.

[AHF]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

...Whenever you can outscore your opponent 25 - 2 in fast break points, but still lose the game, running or playing fast isn't the problem.

---

Very good point.

---

I'll add that when you are as incompetent as the Hawks were playing halfcourt basketball that game, that IS a huge part of the problem. A commitment to running is a way to deal with problems executing in the halfcourt. Our offense under Woodson is still a problem without a solution.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

Let me rephrase this another way. If you knew the west coast offense works, but Mike Vick is your QB, do you make a commitment to run it?

[AHF]

Quote:

---

Let me rephrase this another way. If you knew the west coast offense works, but Mike Vick is your QB, do you make a commitment to run it?

---

Better the west coast offense than no offensive system at all. My expectations for Woodson's offense are low and he keeps meeting them.

[exodus]

As far as the running goes he isn't entirely correct. The Hawks have been running much more lately, although they only had 8 fast break points against the Raps. 'They also have seemed to slow it down in the second halves for some reason.

Over the previous 20 games the hawks are averaging 20 fast break points per game. Last season only one team (GS) averaged more than 20 fast break pionts on the season.

As far as needing a big man Sekou is correct. The idea that Horford can play center full time is just wrong. He is struggling to defend bigger players and he hasn't been able to score at all.

I found a funny thread from last summer comparing him to Mourning.

Quote:

---

I am sure someone has mentioned this before BUT I think it bears repeating. Mourning is 6 10 260. Al is 6 10 245. It isnt very hard to pack on 15 pds. I believe anyone would have loved to have mourning even now play for atl. So, I dont understand the fuss about horford not being able to play center in the nba. Especially now that centers of mournings era are all but gone. Horford will be fine at the 5 for the hawks. He wont have to be the man at the 5 this yr which will give him time to get a little bigger and stronger. I was scared to death that knight would take yi and I am so thankful that we ended up wiht horford. Granted I would have much rather have the proven player in stoudamire but.....

I would love tio know what zo's measurments were coming into the league if anyone knows.

Al and Alonzo

Alonzo averaged 22/11 as a rookie shooting 51% along with 3.7 blocks per game.

Horford is averaging 9/10 shooting 48% with 1.1 blocks per game.

I don't think that comparison works very well.

[DJlaysitup]

Quote:

---

Alonzo averaged 22/11 as a rookie shooting 51% along with 3.7 blocks per game.

Horford is averaging 9/10 shooting 48% with 1.1 blocks per game.

I don't think that comparison works very well.

---

Mourning was a guy who was initially thought of as a PF/C combo guy. Mostly (IMO) because he came out of Georgetown and wasn't 7 foot. Still, his size and strength is still in excess of Horfords...no offense AL.

[Diesel]

Quote:

---

And I'd tell Sekou to refer to his paragraph about the PG situation here.

The I'd ask him to name one good running team that doesn't have a good PG running the show.

I believe the Hawks can't run for that exact reason. The "truth" is that good running teams don't have their main finishers leading the break and being the playmaker ( Smoove, Chill, and Horford ). Good running teams also have good shooters to toss the ball out to on the break.

If the Hawks want to run, play defense, get in the passing lanes and deflect some balls, and run when you have the advantage. Don't run just to be running, and watch the crowd and fan base whine and cry about committing turnovers when we try to play too fast.

Play defense and rebound the basketball. Whenever you can outscore your opponent 25 - 2 in fast break points, but still lose the game, running or playing fast isn't the problem.

Exactly.

There's more to running than just getting up and down the court quickly. Running is calculated. It's starts with a rebound and everybody knowing their assignments. Wings don't handle the ball, they run the wing. You're 100% correct we don't have the shooters to do it like most teams, but in the classical system, you don't need great shooters. Just great wings and a great rebounder.

[DrReality]

I think Sekou has had to walk a fine line about his criticism of Woody becasue if he blast him to hard he will lose access to the team. But it's pretty clear here that he exposes Woody.

Makes me think of the old song: Even a bad love is better than no love at all? A bad running offense would be better than none at all.