Gearon Jr. ON 790...

[Admin]

Come on you have to admit that Woody was better with his substitutions, with his play calling, etc. in the playoffs. Just like with young players he was a young coach when he first started and granted it has taken him a long time to improve but there is no way that you can say Woody hasn't improved.

[bronnt]

I just can't give Woody any credit for those three wins against Boston. Our average point differential was something like -12, and the efficiency differential over the series was -13.51. We pulled game 4 out of JJ's ass because he just couldn't miss when he was repeatedly taking tough, tough shots. He can't do that every game-if he could, we'd have won 55 games. Game 4 was an anomaly. Game 6 was another instance in which we got lucky because Ray Allen couldn't hit anything, Marvin Williams was hitting all his shots, and Paul Pierce fouled out of a close game on a strange call.

Game 3 was a legitimate victory, but we stole two others that we probably didn't deserve to win. In shot, Mike Woodson earned one victory but gets credit for three.

[Admin]

I say he can't get it done as a head coach because he NEVER has. He is a mediocre coach and there is a reason why he remains unemployed.

Regardless of whether the Celtics were the better team in 86 we had them on the ropes, at our house, and to quote Dennis Green we let them get away. Just as Kenny Smith said last night when you win/lose a game by 7 points or less it's usually tactical/coaching decisions that determine the outcome. While I think Kenny Smith is an ass I have to agree with him on that general statement.

[Admin]

Quote:

---

I would much rather be, however, in a position where the playoffs are a near certainty and the results are bad ...

Isn't the reason that we blew this thing up because we got tired of that in the first place? Every year we would win 50 or close to it, make the playoffs, and then know we were going home.

[bronnt]

Quote:

---

Come on you have to admit that Woody was better with his substitutions, with his play calling, etc. in the playoffs. Just like with young players he was a young coach when he first started and granted it has taken him a long time to improve but there is no way that you can say Woody hasn't improved.

Yes, he was brilliant in game 6 when he sat Al Horford for the entire second quarter with two fouls (is that legimately foul trouble?). Horford only ended up with four fouls.

I suppose he KNEW that Zaza would play well in game 6, but I don't see how he could have. He had just chewed Zaza out for playing like crap in game 5, and pratically put the entire loss on him, from what I heard about the locker room argument following the game. In fact, in game 4, when Woodson went out onto the court to get Zaza out of that scrum with KG, Zaza looked ready to deck him. He does not like Woody, and I assume it's somewhat mutual.

Woody benched JJ for several minutes in the second quarter of game 5 when the Hawks were down by three because HE got two fouls in the first half. And JJ has a ridiculously low foul rate-I'm pretty he's only fouled out once or twice in the past two season. JJ actually ended that game with two fouls.

Woodson did NOT coach this team to three victories. A frenzied home crowd actually pumped up the home team, and some lucky offense, rather than effective offense, bailed us out.

[Admin]

Did I say he was perfect? No! Did I say he was the second coming of Phil Jackson? No!

The point is that Woody deserves credit (and he got plenty of it during games 3 and 4 on here) for making much better decisions and generally looking like a good coach. Certainly as good as Doc Rivers, Mike Brown, Mo Cheeks, etc and all of those are playoff teams. There are only a handful of good coaches in this league and those guys are employed (for the most part).

[bronnt]

Quote:

---

Did I say he was perfect? No! Did I say he was the second coming of Phil Jackson? No!

The point is that Woody deserves credit (and he got plenty of it during games 3 and 4 on here) for making much better decisions and generally looking like a good coach. Certainly as good as Doc Rivers, Mike Brown, Mo Cheeks, etc and all of those are playoff teams. There are only a handful of good coaches in this league and those guys are employed (for the most part).

What exactly did he do in game 4 that was so different from what we did, ineffectively, in our four losses at Boston? I can't give him credit for that.

I'll give him credit for game 3, though. It looked like a completely different team. But the fact that we couldn't replicate what we were doing in that game in any later game, including our other two victories, makes me hesistant to assign Woodson the credit for it.

[Admin]

Nope, you can't give him credit for anything other than the losses. He gets no credit for the win (other than your generous credit for game 3) so what's the point in me arguing about it.

[AHF]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

I would much rather be, however, in a position where the playoffs are a near certainty and the results are bad ...

Isn't the reason that we blew this thing up because we got tired of that in the first place? Every year we would win 50 or close to it, make the playoffs, and then know we were going home.

We blew up a team that was certain to make the playoffs and replaced it with one where we are lucky to make the playoffs. That is not an upgrade. We blew it up so we could challenge for a championship.

[AHF]

Quote:

---

I just can't give Woody any credit for those three wins against Boston. Our average point differential was something like -12, and the efficiency differential over the series was -13.51. We pulled game 4 out of JJ's ass because he just couldn't miss when he was repeatedly taking tough, tough shots. He can't do that every game-if he could, we'd have won 55 games. Game 4 was an anomaly. Game 6 was another instance in which we got lucky because Ray Allen couldn't hit anything, Marvin Williams was hitting all his shots, and Paul Pierce fouled out of a close game on a strange call.

Game 3 was a legitimate victory, but we stole two others that we probably didn't deserve to win. In shot, Mike Woodson earned one victory but gets credit for three.

I disagree. He had us in position to win every home game. We may have gotten a few breaks but those games (4&6) were at worst toss-ups and given Boston's dominance, I think that is a good result.

[bronnt]

Quote:

---

Nope, you can't give him credit for anything other than the losses. He gets no credit for the win (other than your generous credit for game 3) so what's the point in me arguing about it.

This is no way to have a discussion. You haven't offered me any evidence of actual coaching, just told us that Woodson deserves credit for those wins. I say it was an outstanding individual performance by JJ which is near impossible to replicate-he did that to Boston once in the 10 games we played against them this year. None of his other games against Boston were close to being that impressive. And this is despite the fact that our offense inevitably is run almost entire through him.

[Admin]

I know it wasn't an upgrade but we shouldn't be looking to have a team that makes the playoffs every year and has no chance to win. That gets frustrating and old real quick.

[gsuteke]

Is that Woodson coming back next year is not the ideal situation.

Some want him gone no matter what alternatives are available.

Some want him gone only if a "better" coach can be found to replace him.

The bottom line is this. If the Hawks are even remotely thinking about replacing Mike Woodson they better make a decisive move and make it quickly.

If they wait 2-3 weeks to hire a new GM and then decide to move in a different direction in regard to Woodson after the fact much of the available coaching talent out there right now will have signed on elsewhere.

But then again I ask myself the following question. When have the Hawks organization ever been decisive about anything?

[Admin]

Yep, whatever they decided to do it needs to be decisive and it needs to be done soon!

[exodus]

Quote:

---

Come on you have to admit that Woody was better with his substitutions, with his play calling, etc. in the playoffs. Just like with young players he was a young coach when he first started and granted it has taken him a long time to improve but there is no way that you can say Woody hasn't improved.

I didn't think you could come up with anything.

[KDT88]

Listening to Gearon talk was painful. I like how he approaches direct questions. He wonders with his answers to the point where he hopes the listeners forget what the question was in the first place.

[AHF]

Quote:

---

I know it wasn't an upgrade but we shouldn't be looking to have a team that makes the playoffs every year and has no chance to win. That gets frustrating and old real quick.

I totally agree that our goals should be higher than that. I just think Woodson was lucky to make the playoffs this year with talent that should be in without a problem. The fact that he then had a two-face playoff run home/away is an upgrade from there but is such a small sample size that I think the regular season the last two years is the best measuring stick for Woodson.

[Admin]

Ahh, hello McFly, I listed 2 different things but there is no sense in me repeating what I have said ad-nauseum in this thread.

[Admin]

He was without a doubt lucky to make the playoffs. I'm still not sure exactly how much credit he deserves for our success or how much blame he deserves for our failure though. I still think we have some problems with players not doing what they are supposed to like Joe referred to with his comments after the playoffs but the only way to determine if that is true or not is to replace Woody and I don't think that's going to happen at this point.

[exodus]

Quote:

---

Ahh, hello McFly, I listed 2 different things but there is no sense in me repeating what I have said ad-nauseum in this thread.

You didn't name anything.

I gave you specific instances of Woody's mistakes (Acie, sitting out JJ with 2 fouls).

You gave no specific instances of anything Woody did well, or different other than playing a shorter rotation. Just saying "he called better plays" doesn't work.

I guess he must have forgotten to call those same plays on the road.