Hawks defensive improvement.

[thecampster]

Still can't answer who was guarding Roy? Maybe you should try watching the games. You might learn something.

There are several reasons for the Hawk improved D lately;

-fewer turnovers leading to fewer fast breaks for the opposition.

-better defensive rebounding

-JJ hitting his shots, leading again to fewer fast breaks.

-a healthy and non sulking Josh Smith.

Mo Evans is not one of those reasons.Roy ripped him a new one.

I notice you haven't volunteered any theories as to why the Hawks defense has improved. I think we all know what your answer is and it has nothing to do with any facts.

Speaking of which. Did you notice how much less switching we did in the Portland game. Sure seemed to be fighting through screens a lot more to me.

[jerrywest]

Speaking of which. Did you notice how much less switching we did in the Portland game. Sure seemed to be fighting through screens a lot more to me.

I've been enjoying your posts thecampster. Don't disappear.

[Kimsey]

Roy played 39 minutes and Mo played 23. It's not all on Mo. He ripped Joe, Smith, Mo, and Marv if he tried to cover him.

[AHF]

He ripped Joe, Smith, Mo, and Marv if he tried to cover him.

Wow. Marvin's absence led to better defense but Roy's going off was partly because he ripped Marv. I do struggle to follow this one.

[Peoriabird]

Wow. Marvin's absence led to better defense but Roy's going off was partly because he ripped Marv. I do struggle to follow this one.

These characters kill me! 1st it was more offensive flow and better scoring without Marv thanks in large part to Smith who plays much better without Marvin in the game. Then when Smith threw in a stinker, the focus was switched to Flip as a better fit than Marv in this offense. Then Flip threw in a stinker! Then it was Mo! Mo then threw in a stinker etc! Until finally when the overall offensive numbers were rechecked and it was discovered that the offense was actually the same or a little worse even with Joe scoring 30+ per game which means that the rest of the team is playing much worse by the way, the argument suddenly switched to defense. And now Marvin would have allowed Roy scored all of those points just like Mo did. Is this the nuttiest fan base you've ever come across? It is to me!

Edited March 17, 2009 by Peoriabird

[Frenzy]

whats funny is that we are continuing to debate this lol

[mrhonline]

Guys,

Kimsey is saying that Roy would have scored easily on Marvin had he not been injured.

[benhillboy]

I'm not one to rely on a small sample of numbers. Anyone who has seen most of the Hawks' home games, as I and surely most of the good folks here have, know that we are a juggernaunt at home on defense, feeding performance on the other side. Numbers don't account for Mario sprinting through the lane, causing havoc on both glasses without posting a board or block, or Al's patented, hard-step, double-team-show in the circle, or Acie fighting through screens, or Marvin's exceptional center of gravity when guarding the post, or Joe's imposing defensive stance, or Bibby's oppurtunistic, blind-side ball swipes/ pokes, or Mo's scrappiness on loose balls, Zaza's fearlessness on tipping battles, Flip's lateral quickness (when he wants to show it), Solomon's length challenging shots, etc, etc. These are the type of factors that lead to so many demoralizing :24 violations for opposing teams, many coming with momentum on our side. Josh is the only player whose numbers come close to illustrating his defensive effectiveness. I feel where you're coming from Diesel, but numbers only back up or illustrate facts, they don't define or set them in stone. With so many different variables in an NBA game (who's injured, who's not, who's guarding whom, etc), to take numbers and base your point or argument on them is basically to turn the game off and look at the box score to report. Those impressive performances are no different than our domination of Orlando on opening night. Numbers suggest that the Lakers are a tough, defensive juggernaunt. The Celtics would laugh at that assertion.

[AHF]

Guys,

Kimsey is saying that Roy would have scored easily on Marvin had he not been injured.

Well, if that is what would have happened then I am sold.

[Kimsey]

Well, if that is what would have happened then I am sold.

Sighs... So Roy has not averaged 24 points his career against the Hawks??? IF Marv was available for the game you really think he would have held Roy to 10 or less when it's fact Roy plays well against Atlanta?????

This is just my response to saying that Mo was the only one that got lit (he did take the brunt).

[Diesel]

Can you post the season averages for home games versus the past 5 games if you have them handy?

I haven't found a site that gives that kind of statistic.

However, what I did find was some truly strange things.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but we have a losing record against poor rebounding teams?

As I was looking up the sortable stats, We shot the 3 pter better Away than we did at home:

37% to 35.7%

As one would expect, our FG% is elevated at home and in wins (47.1 %).

I think this suggests (when coupled with 3pt%) that we take more inside shots when we play at home.

[Diesel]

Still can't answer who was guarding Roy? Maybe you should try watching the games. You might learn something.

Defense in basketball is more than defense on 1 man. You must have missed the Dominique years. Good defensive teams couldn't stop Nique from scoring. Most of the time, they didn't gameplan on stopping Nique. In fact, I remember it said often that a team would allow one hot player to stay hot and stop the rest of the team....so that when that player cools off, his team would not be able to pick up the load. If you had watched the PTL game, you would see that Roy's scoring was what Nique classified as "Inconsequential" i.e. didn't matter... and in the same breath he said our defense has dictated the game.

There are several reasons for the Hawk improved D lately;

-fewer turnovers leading to fewer fast breaks for the opposition.

-better defensive rebounding

-JJ hitting his shots, leading again to fewer fast breaks.

-a healthy and non sulking Josh Smith.

Some of that is true. I think you need to be more specific about rebounding. Our opponents rebounding has not changed over the past 5 game.. They still get about 42 reb per game on us. Our rebounding on the other hand has increase by about 3 rebounds per game. Still, that doesn't make for a 10 ppg turnaround.

A healthy non-sulking Josh Smith... i don't think that can be quantified to mean much. I think the basic increase in Josh's game over the past 5 is his rebounding and blocks. He's up a little more than 1 rpg over his home average and .3 bpg over his home average. However, his minutes are down. Isn't that strange? We lose Marvin and Josh plays less time?

I notice you haven't volunteered any theories as to why the Hawks defense has improved. I think we all know what your answer is and it has nothing to do with any facts.

Well, I don't think it's due to 1 players ability at all. It's not Mo or Flip. I think it has a lot to do with our scoring and our rebounding. On the defensive end, I think that we are limiting teams to 1 shot. While watching I also notice that we fill the passing lanes better. We're basically forcing teams to take harder shots. You have been moaning about Roy... Most of Roy's shots were from outside. Most of Aldridge's shots were from high elbow. There's nobody killing us in the low post or in the paint. If a guy is hitting from outside with a hand in his face, then our defense has done it's job. The other part of that is I think our scoring dictates pace. When we score, we force a team to have to come down and score against our defense. So we cut off fast breaks and we make them score from outside.

The other thing about our defense is that we don't flop. i heard Larry Brown complaining the other day about his young team not getting any calls down the stretch in games. Well, I think our team was brought up to not look for calls either. That actually makes it harder for teams to play us because when they come into our area, we're not laying down. Mo does do 1 thing. He does hound perimeter players and flip hounds guards, but that's not enough to cause our recent changes in defensive play but I think it contributes more strongly than some would believe. We're talking 10 ppg difference and difference in opponents fg%... most of that cannot be explained away by rebounding. Really in a lot of cases, higher rebounding numbers are a symptom of good defense and not the cause. I.e. when you get more stops, you will automatically get more rebounds and we're getting more stops.

[exodus]

Defense in basketball is more than defense on 1 man. You must have missed the Dominique years. Good defensive teams couldn't stop Nique from scoring. Most of the time, they didn't gameplan on stopping Nique. In fact, I remember it said often that a team would allow one hot player to stay hot and stop the rest of the team....

It is hilarious that you are trying to make this argument since you have made such a big deal about JJ spending more time at the 3 on offense, allegedly making it easier for him to score.

Woody plays Flip more and moves Joe to Sf.

Joe chews up wing players. Did you see him dominate Posey? Posey is a darn good defender.. he just can't stop Joe. Joe is as strong as any wing and he handles the ball better than most can defend.. and his footwork is better.

http://www.hawksquawk.net/community/index....335722&st=0

If defense is such a team game then why would it make such a big difference whether JJ plays the 2 or the 3?

[Diesel]

It is hilarious that you are trying to make this argument since you have made such a big deal about JJ spending more time at the 3 on offense, allegedly making it easier for him to score.

Uhm.. Gord,

Where have you been the last ten years?

Offense stopped being a team sport when David Stern took over and the Detroit Pistons were ushered out. Why do you think we hear so much about the Kobes, Lebrons, and Wades? Offense is not a team sport. If you are fortunate enough to have a great offense player, you put the spot light on him and let him carry your team. It's the reason why Oklahoma City will become a playoff team before Golden State does. However, with all of his work, Stern couldn't do anything to remove the team defense concept in basketball. Even Jordan and to fall back into line and play team basketball on defense.

What is your point?

You're trying to contrive an argument with weak points.

Come on Ex, you can surely do better than this? Am I destroying your points so badly that you have gone to the "The team went Ice Cold" and the "Team offense" arguments??

Maybe you've been watching too much footage of Bill Russell's Celtics and you think that all teams still play that way?!??

[exodus]

Uhm.. Gord,

Where have you been the last ten years?

Offense stopped being a team sport when David Stern took over and the Detroit Pistons were ushered out. Why do you think we hear so much about the Kobes, Lebrons, and Wades? Offense is not a team sport. If you are fortunate enough to have a great offense player, you put the spot light on him and let him carry your team. It's the reason why Oklahoma City will become a playoff team before Golden State does. However, with all of his work, Stern couldn't do anything to remove the team defense concept in basketball. Even Jordan and to fall back into line and play team basketball on defense.

What is your point?

You're trying to contrive an argument with weak points.

Come on Ex, you can surely do better than this? Am I destroying your points so badly that you have gone to the "The team went Ice Cold" and the "Team offense" arguments??

Maybe you've been watching too much footage of Bill Russell's Celtics and you think that all teams still play that way?!??

LOL you are trying to have it both ways. On the one hand you say defense is a team game but on the other hand you make a big deal about JJ playing the 3 vs the 2. You can't have it both ways. If defense is such a team game then it really doesn't matter where JJ plays.

You say Roy's points were inconsequential which is a joke. He had 18 in the first half. A 3 point halftime lead might be a blowout in your mind but not in reality.

Even though JJ is lighting it up the Hawks aren't scoring any more points as a team. I guess his points are inconsequential too.

So defense is a team sport but offense isn't? WTF you are flat out contradicting yourself since you have been touting the Hawks alleged better ball movement when Marvin has been out. If offense isn't a team sport then why would ball movement matter?

[Diesel]

LOL you are trying to have it both ways. On the one hand you say defense is a team game but on the other hand you make a big deal about JJ playing the 3 vs the 2. You can't have it both ways. If defense is such a team game then it really doesn't matter where JJ plays.

You say Roy's points were inconsequential which is a joke. He had 18 in the first half. A 3 point halftime lead might be a blowout in your mind but not in reality.

Even though JJ is lighting it up the Hawks aren't scoring any more points as a team. I guess his points are inconsequential too.

So defense is a team sport but offense isn't? WTF you are flat out contradicting yourself since you have been touting the Hawks alleged better ball movement when Marvin has been out. If offense isn't a team sport then why would ball movement matter?

Ex, I think it's very well understood.

Defense and offense are different.

JJ at the 3 is an advantage on offense as we have seen.

Defense it may not matter so much because we switch and zone a lot. That's because we have a team defense concept.

Offense is not as team oriented as defense. You harp about how we play iso joe... Well, I watched the replay of the Lakers Mavs game and the Lakers play iso Kobe. And the Heat play Iso Wade. The reason.. when you have a star player, you want the ball in his hands in the crunch. Is that supposed to be team offense. Hell, we don't even set picks for Joe (regularly). The point is that you can have a completed team dependent defense but not so with offense. You can argue against that if you so choose. You will be wrong.

[AHF]

Sighs... So Roy has not averaged 24 points his career against the Hawks??? IF Marv was available for the game you really think he would have held Roy to 10 or less when it's fact Roy plays well against Atlanta?????

This is just my response to saying that Mo was the only one that got lit (he did take the brunt).

Against the Cavs Marvin played a lot of minutes against Lebron noticeably without being lit up whereas the other Hawks got pretty abused in a shorter amount of time on Lebron. I am not going to assume that Roy lights him up simply because Roy beat up on Mo, JJ and others last game.

For that matter, Marvin may have been on Batum and Outlaw the whole time anyway, depending on his assignment from Woody, which also would mean no possibility of being burned. I just don't assume he would have been burned here.

That is why they play the games, IMO.

[Diesel]

are you really arguing TEAM OFFENSE?

I'm Laughing

[exodus]

Ex, I think it's very well understood.

Defense and offense are different.

JJ at the 3 is an advantage on offense as we have seen.

Defense it may not matter so much because we switch and zone a lot. That's because we have a team defense concept.

I guess the Spurs didn't know what they were doing when they put Bowen man up on the other teams best wing player.

Offense is not as team oriented as defense. You harp about how we play iso joe... Well, I watched the replay of the Lakers Mavs game and the Lakers play iso Kobe. And the Heat play Iso Wade. The reason.. when you have a star player, you want the ball in his hands in the crunch. Is that supposed to be team offense. Hell, we don't even set picks for Joe (regularly). The point is that you can have a completed team dependent defense but not so with offense. You can argue against that if you so choose. You will be wrong.

HAHAHAHAHHA you sure come up with some crazy stuff.

JJ at the 3 would be irrelevant because, from the other teams perspective, defense is a team game. Therefore it wouldn't matter where JJ plays in terms of their defense, at least according to you.

In terms of offense even Jordan needed help. Ferry has been making trades like crazy over the last two years to find guys who compliment Lebron. Kobe hasn't done crap without a quality big man. Ditto Wade.

Lastly JJ isn't on the same level as Lebron, Wade or Kobe which makes team play even more important on offense.

It is hilarious that you try to say that the Hawks ball movement has been better and their scoring is more balanced since Marvin has been out and in the next breath say offense isn't a team game. Might be time to go to the store and buy a clue.

[Diesel]

Against the Cavs Marvin played a lot of minutes against Lebron noticeably without being lit up whereas the other Hawks got pretty abused in a shorter amount of time on Lebron. I am not going to assume that Roy lights him up simply because Roy beat up on Mo, JJ and others last game.

For that matter, Marvin may have been on Batum and Outlaw the whole time anyway, depending on his assignment from Woody, which also would mean no possibility of being burned. I just don't assume he would have been burned here.

That is why they play the games, IMO.

So this brings us to our underlying question of the thread.....

If Marvin is our best defensive player as some have said and he's our best man on man defender....

Then why are we manhandling teams defensively?

I mean, it really doesn't matter about being at home..

It doesn't matter about the replacement.

I'm not saying that we're the same without Marvin...

We are 10 ppg better defensively from our average without Marvin.

At home, we give up 96.4 ppg.

Last 5, we've given up 95.3 ppg.

At home, teams have shot 45.3% on us.

Last 5, teams have shot 42.6% on us.

Now, even if you don't think that losing Marvin has anything to do with our winning, you definitely have to address the fact that without our "best defensive player" our defense is playing better than it has.

If I took Bill Russell away from the Celtics they would have changed defensively.