The complete Statistical break down of the 08-09 Hawks !

[Wurider05]

Player PPG

Joe Johnson 21.4

Josh Smith 15.6

Mike Bibby 14.9

Marvin Williams 13.9

Ronald Murray 12.2

Al Horford 11.5

We were 23rd in rebounding but the top team (Lakers) averaged four more than us. We were 8th in rebounds allowed. Our differential was only 1.87 not bad.

We were 12th in points scored (98.12)

We were 10th in points allowed (96.54)

We were 23-10 when we scored 100.

We were 9-22 when our opponents scored 100.

We were 24 in turnovers. One less turnover and we would have led the league in fewest a game (this surprised me).

We were 11th in FG%

We were 20th in FG% allowed.

We were 15th in 3pt%.

We were 24th in 3pt% allowed. This was impressive and not far off the league leader.

We were 28th in free throw%. This sucks bad!!

We were 23rd in Assists a game (20 apg)

We were 20th in block shots (4.58 bpg)

The thing I find extremely strange is our record when neither us nor our opponents score 100 and that is 32-32. When neither the Hawks or our opponents score 100 we are .....................15-3!!!!! Is this like the strangest stat ever!!! Maybe Woody is on to something!! We apparently play best when we go at a slower pace!!

Edited May 25, 2009 by Wurider05

[Diesel]

Your point doesn't read well.

However, this team would probably go from good to elite if we could do better at rebounding.

IF there's an assistant that can focus on boxing out and team rebounding, I think we need that guy.

[Dsinner]

Rebounding isn't the key, the key is defense. With the amount of athletic "tweeners" we have on this team our defense should be top 5 easily. Better defense leads to more rebounds which leads to more fast break points which is our offensive strength.

Edited May 25, 2009 by Dsinner

[Diesel]

Rebounding isn't the key, the key is defense. With the amount of athletic "tweeners" we have on this team our defense should be top 5 easily. Better defense leads to more rebounds which leads to more fast break points which is our offensive strength.

I beg to differ. We got beat on the rebounds this year. We were especially killed on the offensive rebounds. Teams averaged 11.6 Offensive rebounds per game on us. Those are 2nd chance shots. We were 23rd in the league in opponents offensive rebounding and 11th in the league in opponents FG% and 10th in the league in defensive Points per game.

Bottom line is that you can have a killer defense. However, if the offense gets the rebound and can reset, your defense will eventually give up the points.

[Wurider05]

Correction (I was playing Halo 3 and trying to proofread)

Our record when either we score 100 and our opponent scores 100 is 32-32. When neither the Hawks or our opponents score 100 we are 15-3! Is this like the strangest stat ever!!! Maybe Woody is on to something!!

We apparently play best when we go at a slower pace!!Just looking at that stats is it possible to see where we need the most help.

Diesel I know what you said about the rebounding but couldn't lack of offensive rebounding be the result of poor positioning on defense.

Edited May 25, 2009 by Wurider05

[Dsinner]

I beg to differ. We got beat on the rebounds this year. We were especially killed on the offensive rebounds. Teams averaged 11.6 Offensive rebounds per game on us. Those are 2nd chance shots. We were 23rd in the league in opponents offensive rebounding and 11th in the league in opponents FG% and 10th in the league in defensive Points per game.

Bottom line is that you can have a killer defense. However, if the offense gets the rebound and can reset, your defense will eventually give up the points.

What?!? Giving up offensive boards is a direct correlation to defense. What you are arguing is that we need to work on not giving up the offensive board. That sir is called DEFENSIVE rebounding. Defensive rebounding is considered part of the defense.

[Diesel]

What?!? Giving up offensive boards is a direct correlation to defense. What you are arguing is that we need to work on not giving up the offensive board. That sir is called DEFENSIVE rebounding. Defensive rebounding is considered part of the defense.

No doubt about that.

However, to say we should address defense without specifically talking about BOXING OUT, FIGHTING FOR POSITION, and TEAM Rebounding is to miss the point. We can decrease our defensive switching and be a better defensive team... We can learn to defend the pick and roll and we'd be a better defensive team. However, if we do that without working on the specifics of rebounding we will still be a good defensive team and a poor rebounding team.

[Diesel]

Correction (I was playing Halo 3 and trying to proofread)

Our record when either we score 100 and our opponent scores 100 is 32-32. When neither the Hawks or our opponents score 100 we are 15-3! Is this like the strangest stat ever!!! Maybe Woody is on to something!!

We apparently play best when we go at a slower pace!!Just looking at that stats is it possible to see where we need the most help.

Diesel I know what you said about the rebounding but couldn't lack of offensive rebounding be the result of poor positioning on defense.

I'm somewhat worried about our offensive rebounding, but I was talking about our defensive rebounding and other teams offensive rebounding. COuld it be a result of poor positioning. YES. However, when you watch out team, we make no effort to box out. We do have problems getting into defensive positions, but we do a lot of standing around once the ball goes up.

[frosgrim]

No doubt about that.

However, to say we should address defense without specifically talking about BOXING OUT, FIGHTING FOR POSITION, and TEAM Rebounding is to miss the point. We can decrease our defensive switching and be a better defensive team... We can learn to defend the pick and roll and we'd be a better defensive team. However, if we do that without working on the specifics of rebounding we will still be a good defensive team and a poor rebounding team.

I think you are on to something here D. With all the switching the Hawks do, its hard for Horford and Smith to get into position for the defensive rebound. As Dolfan has pointed out several times, the Hawks play a modified zone. Zone defenses are notorious for giving up offensive rebounds. Add in that both Smith and Horford have poor footwork for defensive rebounds AND they are undersized, you have a recipie for getting killed on the glass.

Solutions:

Stop the zone switch mess. Go to a man-to-man defense that emphasizes staying with your man on picks.

Have Horford stay around the basket so he can actually use positioning to get the board.

Smith needs to work on rebounding all summer, esp. the fundamentals of boxing out and understanding how the ball comes off the rim. Athletism has gotten Smith this far, now its time to put some skill to it.

Lastly, get a true 7' rebounder on the team.

[Diesel]

I think you are on to something here D. With all the switching the Hawks do, its hard for Horford and Smith to get into position for the defensive rebound. As Dolfan has pointed out several times, the Hawks play a modified zone. Zone defenses are notorious for giving up offensive rebounds. Add in that both Smith and Horford have poor footwork for defensive rebounds AND they are undersized, you have a recipie for getting killed on the glass.

Solutions:

Stop the zone switch mess. Go to a man-to-man defense that emphasizes staying with your man on picks.

Have Horford stay around the basket so he can actually use positioning to get the board.

Smith needs to work on rebounding all summer, esp. the fundamentals of boxing out and understanding how the ball comes off the rim. Athletism has gotten Smith this far, now its time to put some skill to it.

Lastly, get a true 7' rebounder on the team.

IF we do that, somebody has gotta teach this team how to defend the pick and roll.

About 95% of the league plays some form of Pick and Roll. Our team seems clueless everytime it comes up. Earlier in the Miami series, they punished our ignorance. And Cleveland not only punished our ignorance, they were laughing and Joking on the side while they were doing it. The switch causes more problems than it solves. Guys are switching off and they always leave a shooter wide open. Weather it be the picker or some guy off in the corner ready to burn us with yet another three. We play better Man to Man.

However, back to the pioint though.. I dont think switching and being out of position is our problem on the rebounds. We just don't box out.

[crimedog]

Correction (I was playing Halo 3 and trying to proofread)

Our record when either we score 100 and our opponent scores 100 is 32-32. When neither the Hawks or our opponents score 100 we are 15-3! Is this like the strangest stat ever!!! Maybe Woody is on to something!!

We apparently play best when we go at a slower pace!!Just looking at that stats is it possible to see where we need the most help.

Diesel I know what you said about the rebounding but couldn't lack of offensive rebounding be the result of poor positioning on defense.

Not sure where you got that but it isn't true.

[lunar]

it seemed to me that the hawks were only exploited on their switching defense when teams figured out that bibby couldn't guard jack. if the switch was smith to marvin, or johnson to smith, then the switch would work and the defense would hold. but if that second man was ever bibby, then we were screwed. the team suffered from the gameplan not fitting the personnel. or even better "we gotta hide bibby somehow" the solution would be to get a defensive backup for bibby so that the defense would work and a part-time defensive set for when bibby is in the game. something like making the team fight through picks every other posession and then going into their switch defense when the backup is in.

come to think of it, wouldn't it be great to have javaris crittenton playing after bibby. the guy is like 6'5" and i never heard anyone say anything about his lack of defense prowness. i wonder if we can get him from the wizards.

[frosgrim]

However, back to the pioint though.. I dont think switching and being out of position is our problem on the rebounds. We just don't box out.

But its very hard to block out if you are Al Horford and you just switched to the PG and you are at the top of the key. The problem is that with switching our main rebounders find themselves scrambling to get back the paint to get the board. This compounds the problem that both Smith and Horford have bad box-out technique.

In all the switching defense is a joke. It causes problems across the board that the team doesn't need to have. The Hawks would be much better with a funnel defense that brings penetrators to Smith or Horford, instead of the notion that Horford is better at defending PGs than Bibby...

[Wurider05]

Not sure where you got that but it isn't true.

I got the info from NBA.com!!

[crimedog]

I got the info from NBA.com!!

Nov 28

Dec 9

Dec 10

Dec 17

Jan 2

Jan 26

Feb 17

Mar 1

Mar 6

Mar 27

Mar 31

Apr 4

Apr 15

Are all losses where no team scored in the triple digits, per the NBA's Hawks website.

[Diesel]

come to think of it, wouldn't it be great to have javaris crittenton playing after bibby. the guy is like 6'5" and i never heard anyone say anything about his lack of defense prowness. i wonder if we can get him from the wizards.

Crittenton should be easily obtained from Washington. I think they want to get rid of him. He is one of their "lazy" young players who don't want to work. Yes, it's not a ringing endorsement. The fact that he's been on 3 teams already and nobody has had a problem sending him away should tell us that maybe he does have some problems. I don't think it's a problem of confidence. From most of the sources I have read, they say it's work ethic. That Wizard team should be much better than they play and even without Arenas, they should be able to play a strong inside out game. They have all the pieces. The problem is that Critt and Blatche has not delivered on their potential.

The Wiz has picked up Cassell and that's probably to work specifically with Critt...

It's never bad to have a guy who followed and partially guided last year's champions in your corner, especially now that Rajon Rondo is a triple-double machine. How back-up point Javaris Crittenton will improve is another story.

Cassell on Wizards: "This team is loaded with talent, and it's a great way for me to start my coaching career."

For a guy like Cassell, unable to find minutes this year in Boston due to the unexpected play of Eddie House and the maturation of Rajon Rondo, expect him the be about as hands on as any assistant coach Washington has ever had, always ready to jump in and challenge Crittenton. But will Crittenton meet the challenge, and unlock potential, or will it take more than Cassell to fix Washington's backcourt issues?

Washington finished 25th in the league with an assists per game difference of negative 4.56. They placed 29th in the league with a 33% three point accuracy while allowing their opponents to shoot 38.7% from beyond the arc. Cassell is an important step forward, but Washington, as a team, has a lot of proving to do next season.

Head Coach Flip Saunders certainly knows how to coach talented PGs, just look at what Chauncey Billups is doing for Denver in the NBA Playoffs. Arenas is happy with Saunders, and if DeShawn Stevenson can come back a few shades of his former self, then Washington should be set.

This year, Javaris Crittenton had his moments, and made some mistakes. The Wizards backcourt relied so heavily on the play of reserve shooting guard Nick Young to score points, and no other Wizard played consistently off the bench other than Andray Blatche and Darius Songaila in the front court.

[Diesel]

it seemed to me that the hawks were only exploited on their switching defense when teams figured out that bibby couldn't guard jack. if the switch was smith to marvin, or johnson to smith, then the switch would work and the defense would hold. but if that second man was ever bibby, then we were screwed. the team suffered from the gameplan not fitting the personnel. or even better "we gotta hide bibby somehow" the solution would be to get a defensive backup for bibby so that the defense would work and a part-time defensive set for when bibby is in the game. something like making the team fight through picks every other posession and then going into their switch defense when the backup is in.

Yeah, this is the part that makes me say, let's go another direction than Bibby. However, if Bibby can come in below 8 per, his leadership may lead me to say.. maybe we ought to keep Bibs. However, if we have to have a surrogate PG to play defense for Bibs... What's the point? Let's develop Acie or let's go out and get Blake or Sessions or Felton and let's be done with that.

[Diesel]

But its very hard to block out if you are Al Horford and you just switched to the PG and you are at the top of the key. The problem is that with switching our main rebounders find themselves scrambling to get back the paint to get the board. This compounds the problem that both Smith and Horford have bad box-out technique.

In all the switching defense is a joke. It causes problems across the board that the team doesn't need to have. The Hawks would be much better with a funnel defense that brings penetrators to Smith or Horford, instead of the notion that Horford is better at defending PGs than Bibby...

Fros, I can't help but agree with you. I see the switching defense as being a lazy man's defense. We should be out there fighting through picks... defending the pick and roll/fade with Smart assignments.

I was watching how Cleveland destroyed our defense. The lane was always open. I would have rather we just played a 3-2 matchup Zone and had a man out on the shooters and two back to defend the lane than to do what we were doing. Gosh... Our defense looked like something from a middle School girls team (losing).

[crimedog]

Fros, I can't help but agree with you. I see the switching defense as being a lazy man's defense. We should be out there fighting through picks... defending the pick and roll/fade with Smart assignments.

I was watching how Cleveland destroyed our defense. The lane was always open. I would have rather we just played a 3-2 matchup Zone and had a man out on the shooters and two back to defend the lane than to do what we were doing. Gosh... Our defense looked like something from a middle School girls team (losing).

Yeah that is something I'd never thought of... in fact, if we continue to use the technique we have now we are better off with a small frontcourt. If Al/Smith are at the top of the key trying to defend someone quicker than them and they get beat, there is obviously one fewer help defender near the rim.

What we do definitely shouldn't be used all the time the way we use it. Maybe for a team like Miami where everyone has to be concerned with Wade and only Wade regardless of who else is on the floor.

[AHF]

I count us being 23-13 in games where one team or the other scores 100 points.

IMO, this is not surprising given that we run an offensive non-system that breeds inconsistency and is therefore less likely to result in us winning when another team is generating consistent offense.