Your Atlanta Hawks now have the 3rd most efficient offense in the NBA.

[mrhonline]

This $%#@ works!

http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_2010.html

Very similar 4Factor stats to Portland, FWIW.

[Diesel]

This $%#@ works!

http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_2010.html

Very similar 4Factor stats to Portland, FWIW.

We're more offensive than defensive but on the offensive side of the ball, we need to get to the FT line more.

Defensively, more rebounds, more turnovers.

[mrhonline]

You're exactly right, D.

Which is why I think a guy like Damion James should get some interest from the Hawks this June...

[mrhonline]

BTW, best case scenario is getting the 3rd seed, but finishing with a worse record than a bunch of the WC teams battling for positioning. Hawks are now looking at the 23rd pick...

It sure would be nice if Boston lost three in a row.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

People may despise the ISO offense that we run at times, but that's a major reason for our offensive efficiency. The ISO, on most possessions, may not get us the best shot possible . . . but it does guarantee on most possessions that we're going to at least get a shot up. Taking a shot and missing is better than turning the ball over, because with a missed shot, you do at least have an opportunity to rebound the basketball and get another shot up.

It's a low-risk offense that we run here, that is enhanced tremendously by our ability to get out on the break and score in transition. We're the #4 team in fast break points ( because of the ability of our frontcourt people to get out and fill the lane ) . . . and #5 in the league in points in the paint ( because of the transition buckets, post-ups, and JJ's floater in the lane ). In the halfcourt, our offense is definitely dependent on guys making shots when being guarded one on one.

It may not be the prettiest offense in the world, but it is efficient overall. And depending on how we and Denver play down the stretch, we could end up at #2 in the league in offense.

OFFENSIVE FOUR FACTORS:

- .505 eFG% ( 11th in league ) . . . #9 amongst all playoff teams

- .113 TOV% ( 1st ) . . . #1 amongst all playoff teams

- .279 Off Reb% ( 6th ) . . . #3 amongst all playoff teams

- .214 FT per FGa% ( 23rd ) . . . . last amongst all playoff teams

The FT per FTa% is the only troubling number come playoff time, especially when the game slows down in that 4th quarter. If we're not getting to the line, our main ISO guys ( JJ, Crawford, Smoove ) MUST make shots down the stretch . . or we must play lights-out defense and score in transition.

And of course, it's the defense that is most troubling, when it comes to the Hawks. The defense fuels the transition offense, which enables us to also get points in the paint. Defensively, we're ranked 13th in the league . . . up from 14th. But when you look at the 4 factors on defense, you see why we're ranked 13th.

DEFENSIVE FOUR FACTORS:

- .497 eFG% ( 15th in the league ) . . . #13 amongst all playoff teams

- .133 TOV% ( 18th in the league ) . . . #10 amongst all playoff teams

- .726 Def Reb% ( 24th in the league ) . . . #14 amongst all playoff teams

- .209 FT per FTA% ( 7th in the league ) . . . #5 amongst all playoff teams

Definitely don't have to tell any Hawks fan what one of our major problems on defense is. We have to make a commitment to secure defensive rebounds to prevent 2nd chance points. If we can do that, that'll give us a great chance to advance in the playoffs. If we don't defensive rebound, this team is dead in the water come that 2nd round . . and might force us to play 6 or 7 games to advance in the first round. Smoove and Horford ( and hopefully a guy like Marvin ), need to dominate the boards on any given occasion.

[mrhonline]

I kinda like the idea adding Craig Smith in the offseason as the anti-Josh...

[coachx]

I kinda like the idea adding Craig Smith in the offseason as the anti-Josh...

Love Craig Smith as a minimum salary guy. Big bruiser that would fit right in.

Good thread so far. Every one, so far, seems to be spot on with your analysis.

+1 for everybody !

Edited April 5, 2010 by coachx

[NineOhTheRino]

could someone please forward this info to Nique.

[Atlantaholic]

Our offense is efficient because of our second chance points and our fast break points. You take those two aspects and lower them to average levels and our offense isn't too impressive. Our halfcourt offense is a big problem, and we've seen it time, and time, and time again against strong defensive opponnents. When the defense is set, we struggle to score consistantly.

[spotatl]

You know this topic absolutely fascinates me. The hawks have a top 3 offense, are top 7 in assist rate and fans here act like the Hawks are grossly underachieving and any other coach would be getting dramatically better results. Woodson deserves credit for how productive the Hawks offense has been this season.

Edited April 5, 2010 by spotatl

[frosgrim]

You know this topic absolutely fascinates me. The hawks have a top 3 offense, are top 7 in assist rate and fans here act like the Hawks are grossly underachieving and any other coach would be getting dramatically better results. Woodson deserves credit for how productive the Hawks offense has been this season.

Rather Rick Sund. Crawford has a lot to do with it. Also, Josh Smith's better shot selection and Horford doing something in the post.

The over efficiency may be high, but against better teams in the 4th it isn't. Not to say that the better teams don't have something to do with that, they do, but better ball movement in the 4th would have meant several more wins by now.

I don't see where Woodson is doing anything substantively different than he has in the past few years, ergo its the players.

[exodus]

Defensive rebounding could easily be the Hawks downfall in the playoffs. The Hawks don't box out and the switching defense puts Smith and Horford out on the perimeter too much and leaves small guards trying (or not) to get rebounds against much bigger guys.

Offensively talent is always better than no talent. When all of your top 6 guys have averaged at least 14 ppg in the last 3 years it makes life easier. Being the healthiest team in the league doesn't hurt either.

[AHF]

I love that we have kept this up all season because I will be the first to admit I was skeptical that we could keep up either the rebounding numbers or the offensive numbers we posted right out of the gate.

I still think that our offensive efficiency is highly at risk to dip relative to other playoff teams because of our reliance on fastbreak points and offensive rebounding which will not come so easily in the post-season. While I remain skeptical and that our iso offense is likely better suited for the regular season than the post-season, I'll be crossing my fingers and hoping the regular season offensive success continues into the post-season.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

I love that we have kept this up all season because I will be the first to admit I was skeptical that we could keep up either the rebounding numbers or the offensive numbers we posted right out of the gate.

I still think that our offensive efficiency is highly at risk to dip relative to other playoff teams because of our reliance on fastbreak points and offensive rebounding which will not come so easily in the post-season. While I remain skeptical and that our iso offense is likely better suited for the regular season than the post-season, I'll be crossing my fingers and hoping the regular season offensive success continues into the post-season.

We have 2 guys ( JJ and Jamal ) who can create and make shots. They're the ones that are going to have to keep us afloat in the playoffs. Every other squad in the playoffs have those types of guys, and the same bodes for them. We need both JJ and Jamal to be playing at optimum level, for us to make noise. If they miss shots, we're in trouble.

Sounds too simplistic, but that's really what it comes down to. We can't expect one of those guys to have a bad playoff series, but expect Horford or Smoove to suddenly become 20+ ppg scorers to make up for it.

[AHF]

We have 2 guys ( JJ and Jamal ) who can create and make shots. They're the ones that are going to have to keep us afloat in the playoffs. Every other squad in the playoffs have those types of guys, and the same bodes for them. We need both JJ and Jamal to be playing at optimum level, for us to make noise. If they miss shots, we're in trouble.

Sounds too simplistic, but that's really what it comes down to. We can't expect one of those guys to have a bad playoff series, but expect Horford or Smoove to suddenly become 20+ ppg scorers to make up for it.

A big part of our regular season offensive efficiency has little to do with how JJ and Jamal do in iso situations, though. The offensive rebounding number is helped by the low number of turnovers in our iso offense but is also a product, IMO, of our superior athleticism and the relative lack of attention on fundamental blocking out in the regular season versus the playoffs where those details are more closely monitored and emphasized and where teams adapt to take away the opposition's strengths in a 7 game series. Likewise, the fast break points have nothing to do with JJ and Jamal's iso success. Because the fast breaks points and offensive rebounding are a much larger portion of our high regular season rating than for other playoff teams, I am more skeptical of our ability to sustain success in the post-season without a good halfcourt plan B in place for when teams are (as I fully expect) forcing JJ and Jamal into lower % shot opportunities in the iso sets than they see in the regular season.

[Sothron]

You know this topic absolutely fascinates me. The hawks have a top 3 offense, are top 7 in assist rate and fans here act like the Hawks are grossly underachieving and any other coach would be getting dramatically better results. Woodson deserves credit for how productive the Hawks offense has been this season.

Disagree strongly. Running a no risk, no frill offense is fine for first year in a system. At this point our offense should be performing better. We don't attack the basket enough and we don't get any fouls in the low post because we almost never put anyone in the low post with a position to get fouled. Our pace is almost the last in the NBA. We survive on transition points but that's it. A new coach with a real offense who "gives a ****" about offense would do wonders for this team.

[spotatl]

At this point our offense should be performing better

So if the Hawks had a "better" coach how good do you think the offense SHOULD be this season? Best in the league? one of the top 10 in the past 10 years? The hawks are top 3 in the league!! There are several teams that I think have better personnel than the Hawks that aren't getting as much production out of the offense. I'm sure you would rather see the Hawks run the lakers offense- the Lakers have the better team but Woodson's offense has done better. There is a lot more evidence that the Lakers are misusing their personnel but you still complain about the Hawks offense. Seriously- how good do you think the Hawks offense would be with a different coach? Or maybe you think that Coaching is the only reason the Hawks don't have a better offense than the Suns?

Edited April 6, 2010 by spotatl

[Sothron]

So if the Hawks had a "better" coach how good do you think the offense SHOULD be this season? Best in the league? one of the top 10 in the past 10 years? The hawks are top 3 in the league!! There are several teams that I think have better personnel than the Hawks that aren't getting as much production out of the offense. I'm sure you would rather see the Hawks run the lakers offense- the Lakers have the better team but Woodson's offense has done better. There is a lot more evidence that the Lakers are misusing their personnel but you still complain about the Hawks offense. Seriously- how good do you think the Hawks offense would be with a different coach? Or maybe you think that Coaching is the only reason the Hawks don't have a better offense than the Suns?

I'm trying to think of a single time in 13 years of posting on Hawks fan boards that I've ever suggested the Hawks run a triangle offense and I'm drawing a blank.

The glue holding our offense together are lack of turnovers and transition points. That's not much coaching. That's players making chances and not turning the ball over.

[spotatl]

What team do you currently think is getter better production out of hte offense with worse players? I mean if coaching is holding the Hawks back there should be other coaches getting more out of less. There are plenty of teams that I think have better players than the Hawks where Woodson is getting more production and of course I think he deserves credit for that. I think too often coaches end up shooting themselves in the foot by doing ridiculous things on offense and many would be better off just getting back to basics.

I mean seriously- the Hawks have a better offense than the Celtics, Cavs, Magic, and Lakers. Do you think that all of these teams also have terrible coaching?

Edited April 6, 2010 by spotatl

[Sothron]

What team do you currently think is getter better production out of hte offense with worse players? I mean if coaching is holding the Hawks back there should be other coaches getting more out of less. There are plenty of teams that I think have better players than the Hawks where Woodson is getting more production and of course I think he deserves credit for that. I think too often coaches end up shooting themselves in the foot by doing ridiculous things on offense and many would be better off just getting back to basics.

I mean seriously- the Hawks have a better offense than the Celtics, Cavs, Magic, and Lakers. Do you think that all of these teams also have terrible coaching?

Error: the Hawks do NOT have a better offense than those teams you named. The Hawks have a more efficient offense perhaps but that in no way makes it better. Two of the teams you just listed have won titles and the other two have been to the Finals. Can we say the same? Of course not.

I can think of several teams getting better production than the Hawks. You want a real coach go like at the job Scott Skiles has down with the Bucks with a roster that looked more like a D league team at the beginning of the year. Woodson is a joke of a coach. The man himself admitted he doesn't even CARE about offense. He lets our guards call the plays and run the offense. How in the world do you think he deserves any credit for our offense is astounding.