Woodson believes he deserves to return

[Cwell]

Quote:

---

Hell no! He is teaching them a sophisticated pro offense and defense and if they can't learn it he benches them. .

woody doesn't teach none of that or do any of that,so I don't get your point when it comes to Woody.He doesn't even teach a sophisticated play ground offense.

EVERYBODY knows the Lakers run the triangle offense.NOBODY knows what the hell we run,even the players in the Hawks jersey's.nor Woody himself lol

[bronnt]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Hell no! He is teaching them a sophisticated pro offense and defense and if they can't learn it he benches them. .

woody doesn't teach none of that or do any of that,so I don't get your point when it comes to Woody.He doesn't even teach a sophisticated play ground offense.

EVERYBODY knows the Lakers run the triangle offense.NOBODY knows what the hell we run,even the players in the Hawks jersey's.nor Woody himself lol

Exactly right. My high school team was doing more complicated things on offense, despite the fact that Mario West was beating most teams by himself back in those days.

[Admin]

So do you think we just magically scored something like 105ppg once we acquired Bibby?

You have no idea what Woody does or does not teach. I know for a fact that we run one of the most sophisticated defenses in basketball (as many of the opposing teams commentators point out) and it is pretty innovative and when we have the personnel and effort to run that defense it can be pretty damn good, as evidenced by us being in the top 10 in defensive efficiency for the 1st quarter of the season. Do you think it's easy to teach a team how to play that style of switching defense when it goes against everything they have ever done before?

[bronnt]

Quote:

---

So do you think we just magically scored something like 105ppg once we acquired Bibby?

You have no idea what Woody does or does not teach. I know for a fact that we run one of the most sophisticated defenses in basketball (as many of the opposing teams commentators point out) and it is pretty innovative and when we have the personnel and effort to run that defense it can be pretty damn good, as evidenced by us being in the top 10 in defensive efficiency for the 1st quarter of the season. Do you think it's easy to teach a team how to play that style of switching defense when it goes against everything they have ever done before?

You're right, i have no idea what Woody is teaching.

I know what I see, though, and our offense for the msot part looks like a jumbled mess.

Why do people keep pointing that the offense once Bibby arrived? Wow, Woody's great, when his point guard is a threat to shoot jumpers, he finally manages to get JJ some open looks!

[Admin]

Okay, but then the opposite applies as well.

Why don't people point out that when JJ is the only reliable outside shooter on the team that the opposing team can simply sag in the paint and not let us get to the basket?

Does the offense ever look good to you? If the answer is no then you are obviously biased against Woody. If the answer is an honest yes then you have to question why it doesn't look good to you more often. Obviously Woody has taught them the offense and obviously they can run it, so that would lead me to believe that we have a team with too many guys who are cowboys out there, as JJ has basically alluded to, which creates problems in our offensive (and defensive) sets.

[Cwell]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

So do you think we just magically scored something like 105ppg once we acquired Bibby?

You have no idea what Woody does or does not teach. I know for a fact that we run one of the most sophisticated defenses in basketball (as many of the opposing teams commentators point out) and it is pretty innovative and when we have the personnel and effort to run that defense it can be pretty damn good, as evidenced by us being in the top 10 in defensive efficiency for the 1st quarter of the season. Do you think it's easy to teach a team how to play that style of switching defense when it goes against everything they have ever done before?

You're right, i have no idea what Woody is teaching.

I know what I see, though, and our offense for the msot part looks like a jumbled mess.

Why do people keep pointing that the offense once Bibby arrived? Wow, Woody's great, when his point guard is a threat to shoot jumpers, he finally manages to get JJ some open looks! exactly.The scoring didn't jump because of the offense.Bibby is just one of the best shooting PG's in the league.nothing special.So when either him or Joe is off we can't buy a basket because WE HAVE NO OFFENSE.

When Woody says that he thinks offense takes care of it self.It's obvious he doesn't give a damn and when I watch 4 guys standing still every posession watching one guy going one on one it proves it even more.

If u were to go to a local park or gym and watch normal guys play i'm pretty sure they wouldn't just stand still.If u watch a high school or college or an NBA team besides ours u won't see everyone standing and looking for 24 seconds.The only movement they have is running from the defensive end after the opponents possession is over.

[bronnt]

Quote:

---

Okay, but then the opposite applies as well.

Why don't people point out that when JJ is the only reliable outside shooter on the team that the opposing team can simply sag in the paint and not let us get to the basket?

Does the offense ever look good to you? If the answer is no then you are obviously biased against Woody. If the answer is an honest yes then you have to question why it doesn't look good to you more often. Obviously Woody has taught them the offense and obviously they can run it, so that would lead me to believe that we have a team with too many guys who are cowboys out there, as JJ has basically alluded to, which creates problems in our offensive (and defensive) sets.

You know, there's more than one way to create open looks for your shooters. When your best sshooter is getting double teamed all the time and yet your offense is still predicated on him handling the ball as much as possible, you're not doing enough on offense. Actually, it's fine if it works-like in the case of Lebron-but for us it doesn't work.

If you have a point guard who can penetrate-ahem, Acie Law-you can create open looks for shooters. How often did we see offensive sets where Acie Law penetrated and kicked out to an open shooter? Very few, and most of the time, the open guy on the perimeter was Josh Smith, who has no business being on the perimeter. And then he takes the shot, which just compounds the error. We need to occasionally create open looks for Joe instead of trying to make him create looks for everyone else. We need to isolate Josh Smith on the perimeter-he's a great enough threat down there that he will draw double teams, and we can get him passing out to open players.

There's just so many things that we could do on offense to improve the team. And, trust me, I'm not even all that knowledgeable. But I do know that your offense is generall better if you can run it, on occasion, through an interior scorer. It creates open looks for everyone else. Unfortunately, we don't do this.

[Admin]

Corrected:

Quote:

---

You know, there's more than one way to create open looks for JJ, our only shooter (pre-Bibby).

Corrected:

Quote:

---

If you have a point guard who can penetrate-ahem, Acie Law-you can create open looks for JJ, our only shooter (pre-Bibby).

I'm sorry but when you only have 1 shooter, 2 if you are counting the first quarter (and sometimes half) when Marvin is shooting well, it won't matter if your PG penetrates because you have nobody else capable of knocking down an outside shot. You need guys who can shoot from the outside to open up the middle. Even the Cavs realized that they couldn't win unless they got Lebron some shooting help and their offense is not as good as ours is (Hawks were 16th in offensive efficiency and the Cavs were 19th during the regular season).

[bronnt]

Quote:

---

Corrected:

Quote:

---

You know, there's more than one way to create open looks for JJ, our only shooter (pre-Bibby).

Corrected:

Quote:

---

If you have a point guard who can penetrate-ahem, Acie Law-you can create open looks for JJ, our only shooter (pre-Bibby).

I'm sorry but when you only have 1 shooter, 2 if you are counting the first quarter (and sometimes half) when Marvin is shooting well, it won't matter if your PG penetrates because you have nobody else capable of knocking down an outside shot. You need guys who can shoot from the outside to open up the middle. Even the Cavs realized that they couldn't win unless they got Lebron some shooting help and their offense is not as good as ours is (Hawks were 16th in offensive efficiency and the Cavs were 19th during the regular season).

You make it sounds like JJ is the only guy on this team who can hit an open jumper. I've got news for you-most NBA players can hit open jumpers. Marvin Williams can hit 18 footers at a pretty good rate, and Josh Childress shoots 37% on threes, which is slightly above average. Micheal Redd shot threes at a lower percentage. It's just barely behind Bibby in terms of percentage.

You forget we also had Lue, while he was healthy. We saw instances of Lue and Law in the same backcourt-though of course, Lue was on the ball while Acie was playing off. Which makes no sense since one guy can drive with the ball and get to the rim, and the other can hit open jumpers, but they were set in the opposite positions. But I digress. My point is that Lue also hit jumpers at an above average rate.

Who am I forgetting? Ah yes, Salim. I keep forgetting about him since, as you say, JJ is our only shooter. You've made this easy for me-I don't even have to defend Salim's defense or his ability to play the PG position, I just have to point that, in fact, he was on the team with JJ and is a skilled shooter. Yes, he is. JJ was NOT our only shooter, please don't over dramatize the "Oh poor JJ, he has no one to take pressure off of him" BS.

And, you really avoided the fact that we never run the offense through the interior, where we have, in fact, a highly effective interior scorer. His name is Josh Smith. He gets fouled a lot. Even if it's Kevin frigging Garnett guarding him. He's too strong and too good a jumpter for his shots to end up blocked.

Oh, and Al Horford is a reasonably good passer/ball handler as well. We very seldom get looks for him either that don't come as the result of a missed shot by someone else on offense.

[bronnt]

Quote:

---

Corrected:

Quote:

---

You know, there's more than one way to create open looks for JJ, our only shooter (pre-Bibby).

Corrected:

Quote:

---

If you have a point guard who can penetrate-ahem, Acie Law-you can create open looks for JJ, our only shooter (pre-Bibby).

I'm sorry but when you only have 1 shooter, 2 if you are counting the first quarter (and sometimes half) when Marvin is shooting well, it won't matter if your PG penetrates because you have nobody else capable of knocking down an outside shot. You need guys who can shoot from the outside to open up the middle. Even the Cavs realized that they couldn't win unless they got Lebron some shooting help and their offense is not as good as ours is (Hawks were 16th in offensive efficiency and the Cavs were 19th during the regular season).

Oh, and btw, Lebron is a pretty bad shooter. That's why Cleveland needs people who can shoot jumpers. And he doesn't have Josh Smith on his team, either. If they did...game over.

[thescout5]

I do not see any players other than JJ you can count on the outside shot. Even with a good point guard this team will struggle vs quality defenses. I don't want to go into the Marvin discussion but his outside shot is iffy at best. I don't think he has the work ethic to get much better. Take a guy like Ray Allen he had a bad game whats he do the next day shoot 400 jumpers what does Marvin do probably play video games. You have to want to be great and I think there are to many players on the Hawk's who just mail it in. Perhaps this is why JJ is upset at the talent level they just rest on their laurels and not want to get better by putting in the work.

The Hawk's have poor coaching and not the right players sorry but its true.

[Cwell]

Jeremy Richardson can hit that open shot,he did just that when we first got him. Woody's answer?sit him the rest of the year. Salim can make that shot,especially after a string of games with good minutes he becomes less of a chucker and more blended with the team. Woody uses him wrong. Salim is not a backup PG,that was wasted time Acie could have used at the end but Woody the horrible wasted it on Salim and the starters. a good coach would have made that Miami game a pickup game for our young guys to remember why they are in this league in the first place. Alot of them prolly couldn't even remember what it is they did to get into the NBA in the first place. Woody would never play guys like Leon Powe,Paul Millsap, Daniel Gibson etc. etc. lol what if we drafted Monta Ellis in 05? we would never know what he could do in a Hawks uniform.

[thefloydian]

Quote:

---

What are the areas that you would grade Woody on?

I'm just asking you which areas of coaching you think Woody excels at.

[Cwell]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

What are the areas that you would grade Woody on?

I'm just asking you which areas of coaching you think Woody excels at. I was thinking it doesn't matter what areas because it's a negative in all of them besides losing and making the worst decisions.

[Admin]

I know and I'm asking you to define the areas you want him to be judged on, then I can tell you which ones he is good at.

[thefloydian]

You can pick any. I don't care. I just want to know something he's good at, because I can't think of anything.

[Admin]

You can't think of anything he is good at? So that means you can think of a lot of things he is bad at, right? What are those bad things? Why is he bad at them?

[Dsinner]

Quote:

---

You can't think of anything he is good at? So that means you can think of a lot of things he is bad at, right? What are those bad things? Why is he bad at them?

Why defer the ? Dolf. You really should answer his ? first to be fair. I think it's common knowledge what he's bad at (all of it). He wouldn't be on the bubble (or have a career high of 37) if he had too many good coaching qualities.

I personaly would like to hear one as well, because I can't think of any. And this question is for all Woody supporters. Surly it wouldn't be hard to come up with one reason you support the man.

It really won't matter to me though, as nothing you can come up with can change the fact that we are a better team than 37 wins. If you can change that number 37 then you might have a case.

I'd just like to hear some sort of logic that makes that number 37 appear larger to you than it does to me.

[DJlaysitup]

Woody s_cks big hairy donky d!cks....just my opinion

[Dexmethylphenidate]

1. He's bad at managing the bench's minutes... thus we have an underdeveloped bench. At some point in a blowout, you got to give the young guns some playing time.

2. He's bad at managing the his player's foul. I don't know what the hell he's thinking, but if no-body else is using the 2-foul and sit rule, then that's a sign that it won't work. This means he's coaching very conservatively. When your coach is conservative, how do you expect your players to be aggressive?

3. He's bad at identifying talent on his bench. Acie Law, Solomon Jones would be tremendous off the bench... who cares if they're young? You don't see Detroit or LA or Boston playing stiff veterans like Zaza.

4. He's bad at motivational speeches. Too many times I hear the team's not ready to play.

Base on these reason, he doesn't even qualify as a head coach in the NBA. Forget the offense and defense philosophies... when you can't even manage the game, you shouldn't be an NBA head coach period.