Josh Smith answers Hawks’ coach’s call

[Packfill]

I think too much is being made of the fact that the end of the bench guys on this team don't get any PT. The truth is that guys like Morris, West and Gardner are marginal NBA players at best and they wouldn't get regular PT on ANY team in this league.

A case can be made to give Solo and Acie more minutes but Acie certainly doesn't do himself any favors with his inability to stay healthy. With Marv and Al out, he likely would have had the opportunity to play more (as Solo did with Smoove and Al out). Instead, he gets hurt AGAIN.

Finally, I don't really have a huge problem with limiting the regular rotation to 8 players (with Solo getting regular spot minutes) but if Woody is going to do that, I would like to see him give Zaza, Flip and Mo more minutes and JJ and Bibby fewer minutes. I think JJ would be a LOT more effective over the course of the season averaging around 37 mpg rather than 40 and I would like to see Bibby down around 32 rather than 35. I think Smoove and Marv are fine at 36 mpg and 35 mpg respectively.

Agreed. If Morris, Hunter, West or Garner are getting regular minutes it means the Hawks have serious issues - whether they be injury related or otherwise.

The only one who I would like to see get more minutes is Acie, but only to see if he has game - not because he has earned them. If I Bibby was signed for another season I probably would care alot less about Acie's minutes.

[Admin]

I know it was a direct quote but I have a hard time believing that Smoove meant that the way it sounds. Surely to God not! :no-no:

Giving him the benefit of the doubt, maybe he was trying to say that "he assumed every shot was going to be a miss and that HE could actually get EVERY rebound" or something like that. If he meant it the way it sounded though that is pretty incredible.

Agreed on both thoughts Trace! I hope that he meant something else but after being chastised for hoping for the same with the Woody "we're not telling him to not shoot 3's" quote I think I'll just take quotes at face value from now on.

Fanatic you're right if he does actually learn to box out and go for rebounds consistently then he could really become something special.

[AHF]

I know it was a direct quote but I have a hard time believing that Smoove meant that the way it sounds. Surely to God not! :no-no:

Giving him the benefit of the doubt, maybe he was trying to say that "he assumed every shot was going to be a miss and that HE could actually get EVERY rebound" or something like that. If he meant it the way it sounded though that is pretty incredible.

Unlike Woody's quote, look at what Smoove actually said. He didn't say this was something new for him or something he just figured out. Sekou put in the bit about the key for grabbing these rebounds. All Josh is quoted as saying is that he got the rebounds by thinking every shot would be a miss.

“I’ve been attacking the offensive glass and trying to get some defensive rebounds,” Smith said. “I’m just trying to help my team a little bit and limit the other team to one shot.”

Smith has a little key that’s been helping him snag rebounds.

“I’m treating every shot as if it’s a missed shot,” Smith said.

I think people are reading into the quote something that isn't there - that Josh just had a revelation about how to rebound. You have to read in either way, but my read on this is that Josh was asked what he was doing that led to this good rebounding and he said that the key was treating every shot as if it was going to be missed. If Josh said, "I am trying something new....I am assuming every shot will be a miss and looking for the rebound" I would be much more concerned about his development as a player.

With Woodson's quote, he made it very clear that he considered the downside to Josh shooting 3's but still wanted him to continue to shoot them - albeit with better decision-making as to when to take them.

Edited January 23, 2009 by AHF

[Admin]

Unlike Woody's quote, look at what Smoove actually said. He didn't say this was something new for him or something he just figured out. Sekou put in the bit about the key for grabbing these rebounds. All Josh is quoted as saying is that he got the rebounds by thinking every shot would be a miss.

I think people are reading into the quote something that isn't there - that Josh just had a revelation about how to rebound. You have to read in either way, but my read on this is that Josh was asked what he was doing that led to this good rebounding and he said that the key was treating every shot as if it was going to be missed. If Josh said, "I am trying something new....I am assuming every shot will be a miss and looking for the rebound" I would be much more concerned about his development as a player.

With Woodson's quote, he made it very clear that he considered the downside to Josh shooting 3's but still wanted him to continue to shoot them - albeit with better decision-making as to when to take them.

I don't see how you can read “I’m treating every shot as if it’s a missed shot,” Smith said. to mean anything different than he wasn't doing that before. It's probably a pretty harmless quote and I sincerely hope that this isn't something new to him, but I'm not convinced that it's not.

On the Woody quote I don't believe he said that he wanted Smith to continue to shoot them, he said that they weren't telling him to not shoot them. That's a huge difference, especially when he also mentioned that the onus was on Smith to realize when he shouldn't be shooting them. The more I think about that quote the more it seems to me that the coaching staff is basically saying they're okay with him shooting the 3 if he's on but if he's not then he needs to stop shooting them and I don't think that's such a bad thing assuming the player has the ability to know when he should and shouldn't be attempting 3's and I believe Smith certainly has that ability.

[AHF]

I don't see how you can read “I’m treating every shot as if it’s a missed shot,” Smith said. to mean anything different than he wasn't doing that before. It's probably a pretty harmless quote and I sincerely hope that this isn't something new to him, but I'm not convinced that it's not.

I ask you how you became employee of the month last month and you tell me, "I'm treating everyone I meet the way I want to be treated." Does someone really have to read that this is something new? I don't buy that at all.

There is nothing that Smith says in that article that suggests this is something new. It is the way Sekou's portion of the article reads that makes that suggestion.

[Admin]

I ask you how you became employee of the month last month and you tell me, "I'm treating everyone I meet the way I want to be treated." Does someone really have to read that this is something new? I don't buy that at all.

There is nothing that Smith says in that article that suggests this is something new. It is the way Sekou's portion of the article reads that makes that suggestion.

That is exactly what it suggests. If it wasn't something new then there would be no reason to mention it as a reason for recent success. Even in your example it suggests that this person made a decision to do something that they weren't doing before.

[AHF]

On the Woody quote I don't believe he said that he wanted Smith to continue to shoot them, he said that they weren't telling him to not shoot them. That's a huge difference, especially when he also mentioned that the onus was on Smith to realize when he shouldn't be shooting them. The more I think about that quote the more it seems to me that the coaching staff is basically saying they're okay with him shooting the 3 if he's on but if he's not then he needs to stop shooting them and I don't think that's such a bad thing assuming the player has the ability to know when he should and shouldn't be attempting 3's and I believe Smith certainly has that ability.

I agree Woodon didn't say he wanted Smith to continue to shoot them but when he spells out that there are appropriate circumstances for Smith to shoot them and times when Smith should lay off of them (after missing "4 or 5 jump shots") then I don't see that as being a huge difference between saying he wants Smith to shoot them under those parameters.

[AHF]

That is exactly what it suggests. If it wasn't something new then there would be no reason to mention it as a reason for recent success. Even in your example it suggests that this person made a decision to do something that they weren't doing before.

I disagree. When a coach says that the reason the team is succeeding during a winning streak is that "we are taking things one game at a time" do you really view that as the coach having had an epiphany and trying something new?

Is the coach really saying, "All season we have been looking two, sometimes three games down the line. This month we decided to try something different and focus on our next opponent. Man, I am so glad I thought of this before we spent another month distracted from our next opponent by our desire to look ahead in the schedule."

I don't think there is a suggestion that this is something new in any of these contexts. In each case, the person is simply pointing to a very basic fundamental that they credit for their recent success.

[Admin]

I disagree. When a coach says that the reason the team is succeeding during a winning streak is that "we are taking things one game at a time" do you really view that as the coach having had an epiphany and trying something new?

Is the coach really saying, "All season we have been looking two, sometimes three games down the line. This month we decided to try something different and focus on our next opponent. Man, I am so glad I thought of this before we spent another month distracted from our next opponent by our desire to look ahead in the schedule."

I don't think there is a suggestion that this is something new in any of these contexts. In each case, the person is simply pointing to a very basic fundamental that they credit for their recent success.

I think you're getting a little carried away trying to find a reason to support your understanding of the quote but in your example yes it's quite logical that if the coach said "we are taking things one game at a time" to come to the conclusion that "we had been looking two, sometimes three games down the line" and in fact you hear teams talking about why they lose games sometimes say exactly that.

Why else would you say that you're doing x as an explanation for the result y if x wasn't what you were doing before? Plus if this wasn't something new that he was doing how else do you explain him getting nearly twice as many rebounds as his season average in back to back games? I could see if it was simply because Al wasn't there but Al has been out longer than those 2 games so that can't be the reason. Do you think he wasn't putting effort into it before? Do you think it was luck?

[AHF]

I think you're getting a little carried away trying to find a reason to support your understanding of the quote but in your example yes it's quite logical that if the coach said "we are taking things one game at a time" to come to the conclusion that "we had been looking two, sometimes three games down the line" and in fact you hear teams talking about why they lose games sometimes say exactly that.

You and I will have to agree to disagree on what you can read into these types of statements. Because someone says they credit success they are having now to X, I don't then read that they weren't doing X before.

Why else would you say that you're doing x as an explanation for the result y if x wasn't what you were doing before? Plus if this wasn't something new that he was doing how else do you explain him getting nearly twice as many rebounds as his season average in back to back games? I could see if it was simply because Al wasn't there but Al has been out longer than those 2 games so that can't be the reason. Do you think he wasn't putting effort into it before? Do you think it was luck?

When Josh Smith was healthy he started the season with double digit rebounds in 3 consecutive games. I think the biggest factor we are seeing as he comes back is that Josh is getting healthier. I fully expect to see his shotblocking start to go on the upswing as well over the next week as he starts getting healthier and more confident in his ability to rebound and attack people defensively.

Since Josh came back hurt, he has been a shadow of his former self on the boards and with shotblocking. Now we see his rebounding coming around. I think that is the first of two dominoes we are going to see fall.

[Admin]

You and I will have to agree to disagree on what you can read into these types of statements. Because someone says they credit success they are having now to X, I don't then read that they weren't doing X before.

When Josh Smith was healthy he started the season with double digit rebounds in 3 consecutive games. I think the biggest factor we are seeing as he comes back is that Josh is getting healthier. I fully expect to see his shotblocking start to go on the upswing as well over the next week as he starts getting healthier and more confident in his ability to rebound and attack people defensively.

Since Josh came back hurt, he has been a shadow of his former self on the boards and with shotblocking. Now we see his rebounding coming around. I think that is the first of two dominoes we are going to see fall.

I'm happy to agree to disagree here. Let's see where he goes from here. If he continues to get ~14 rebounds ever game from now on I think you'll have to agree that he has changed something since he's a career 7.4 rpg average player. Heck even if he becomes a consistent 10 rpg player I think you'd have to admit that he's doing something differently.

As far as him being a shadow of his former self he's only down 1 rpg from last year and is only slightly under his career average so I don't think the injury has affected him that much in terms of rebounding, but I'm certain it's affected his shotblocking since he's just under half of what he did last year.

[AHF]

I'm happy to agree to disagree here. Let's see where he goes from here. If he continues to get ~14 rebounds ever game from now on I think you'll have to agree that he has changed something since he's a career 7.4 rpg average player. Heck even if he becomes a consistent 10 rpg player I think you'd have to admit that he's doing something differently.

I'll admit something has really changed if he significantly improves from last year. His career 7.4 average doesn't mean much to me when he averaged roughly 8.4 rpg the last two years and started this year off ripping double digit boards each game. If he does 11-14 rpg consistently I will definitely agree something has changed (or several things with that improvement). 9-10 rpg and that might be natural improvement (more investigation needed!).

As far as him being a shadow of his former self he's only down 1 rpg from last year and is only slightly under his career average so I don't think the injury has affected him that much in terms of rebounding, but I'm certain it's affected his shotblocking since he's just under half of what he did last year.

You are counting his healthy games and the last two in that number. If you take away the 14 rebound games and the start to the season, he has only averaged 6.25 rpg. Among those games he has several games with the following totals in games where he played more than 20 minutes: 2, 2, 3, and 3. In the span of games since he returned, he equaled the total of 2 & 3 rebound games where he played more than 20 minutes over the prior two seasons combined.

Last season 1 such game. The prior season, 3 such games.

[bronnt]

Bronnt thanks for the work on that it's certainly insightful! I doubt that you considered injuries to starters when looking at those minutes so some of those guys further down the bench most likely have skewed numbers like what we have with Solo. If I'm wrong then I apologize for assuming that, but that's probably a lot more effort than what was needed to show your results for this thread.

I did account for injuries, to an extent-it's not perfect.

I basically went down the list and checked to see how many guys per team were averaging over 15 minutes or so. Then I quickly checked the number of games each guy had played in against the team's total games just to get an idea of how many injuries there were. Then I'd pull up guys who were apparently injured and pull up their game logs, and see how many guys were getting 10+ minutes per night in games when everyone was healthy.

It was a quick, messy survey, but pretty much everyone was getting more than Solo's 12 minutes from their 9th man, and we've been missing people in the front court in more than half our games.

It's not that our bottom of the bench guys like Othello Hunter or Thomas Gardner need more minutes...it's that Brian Scalabrine is getting substantially more minutes than Acie Law. It's Mikki More playing loads more minutes than Solomon Jones.

That's what bothers me about this team-the fact that we're not developing any kind of second unit, even though three of our 8 guys playing regular minutes are unrestricted after the season, and we have another who is restricted following the season.

[lethalweapon3]

Referring to Woody's assertions, I don't expect Solo/RandMo to come in and be "world-beaters," by any stretch. I DO expect them to come in and be Scalabrine/MikkiMoore/MarcinGortat-beaters, though... so Hofo and Zaza don't have to.