Hollinger with a lot of love for Smith and the Hawks

[Admin]

Say what you will about Hollinger but when the Hawks deserve to be given credit he's usually pretty good about giving it. I wonder if he was at the game last night?

http://espn.go.com/n...anta-game-1-win

Smoove's moves trump Rondo bump

ATLANTA -- Yes, the big story is that the Boston Celtics may have handed the Atlanta Hawks Game 2 by losing their minds at the end of Game 1. But before any of that happened, the Hawks had to take the opener.

And take it they did, in a way that was best exemplified on the play that everyone will be replaying all week. Before Rajon Rondo lost his mind and bumped referee Marc Davis, possibly earning a suspension, the Hawks had to win a scrum for a loose ball on the floor that resulted in Brandon Bass fouling Josh Smith.

Atlanta won Game 1, 83-74, by doing exactly that for 47 minutes even as their offense was stuck in a deep funk.

"We wanted to win the hustle game," said Hawks coach Larry Drew, and man did they ever. The Hawks couldn't make a shot after the first quarter, but repeatedly outhustled Boston to 50-50 balls and came out with dramatically more energy.

Smith was the catalyst -- "an animal," said Drew -- and his line was the end product of a classic Josh Smith night. You take the bad (needless long jump shots), with the good (pretty much everything else) and it adds up to an All-Star caliber player who swung the balance Sunday night. Smith finished with 22 points, 18 rebounds, 4 assists, exemplary defense and, er, a true shooting mark in the high 40s.

While you wonder if he'll ever get it on the jump shots -- he talked with a straight face about "not settling" after a game in which he took 11 long 2s -- the magnificence of the rest of his game tends to get lost in the teeth-gnashing throughout Philips Arena every time he tees up a J early in the clock. The Hawks were +17 with Smith on the court Sunday night and -8 in the five minutes they slogged through without him -- including a key stretch to start the fourth that let Boston get back in the game.

"Every now and then he'll take a crazy shot," Drew said, "which I'm willing to live with for all the things he does do well."

Moreover, Smith's jumper might actually have some value in this series. On a night where the two teams combined to shoot a hair less than 40 percent -- something we can expect to see all series based on the regular-season meetings between these teams -- Smith's 20-footers aren't as much of a liability.

Rivers, in fact, was upset that Smith's jumpers weren't more contested, especially in the first half.

At the start, Atlanta's energy advantage was particularly palpable. The Celtics stood flat-footed on the game's opening play while Josh Smith fired a touchdown pass to Joe Johnson for a lay-up, and the Celtics were down 14 a little more than five minutes into the game. The lead didn't get inside double digits until the fourth quarter, when Boston finally rallied.

"We came out thinking our jerseys were going to win the game," Celtics coach Doc Rivers said. "We didn't play like us."

But Boston did rally; Atlanta's offense locked up after the first quarter and Boston had cut the lead to its smallest margin since the first two minutes -- four points -- before Rondo's meltdown. Josh Smith was isolating in the high post and lost his dribble against Bass, with those two ending up in a wild scrum with several players from both sides. Ultimately, Smith grabbed the ball and Bass grabbed him, or at least that's how Davis saw it.

"It was definitely a foul," Smith said of that fateful play. While he's technically correct, Chowderheads will note that refs call a jump ball nearly every time in that situation even if there was a foul. On the other hand, so it's a Smith-Bass jump ball. Who are you taking?

Perhaps Smith beating Bass to that loose ball (which he clearly did, even if you think Bass tied him up at some point afterward) was what sent Rondo over the edge … because he'd seen it too many times already. Atlanta enjoyed a 50-41 rebound advantage, but if we'd had a separate loose ball tracker in the arena it would have been all Hawks.

Smith's energy helped Atlanta overcome a disastrous night from Johnson, who shot 3-for-15 with four turnovers and missed all nine 3-point attempts -- most of them wide-open looks that just rattled in and out. Several of those robbed Smith of assists, after deft crosscourt passes found Johnson open on the weak side.

Smith had plenty of help in the loose-ball department, of course. If it wasn't him, it was Ivan Johnson, or Jeff Teague, or Kirk Hinrich, or Jannero Pargo, or even the ghost of Tracy McGrady -- like when a committee of three Celtics somehow couldn't handle a rebound and he scooped up the leftovers for a dunk. It was one of five boards T-Mac had, two offensive, in just 14 minutes off the pine.

Another unexpected hero was Jason Collins, who started at center, played 32 minutes -- which he'd last done in December of 2010 -- and defended Kevin Garnett extremely well. Teague, meanwhile, scored 15 and was unaffected by the pressure of Boston's ball-hawking guard Avery Bradley. And Kirk Hinrich awoke from an offensive slumber to make four of his six 3-point tries, putting him in double figures for just the second time in 16 games.

Smith pointed out it was just one game, but it was a hugely encouraging one for the Atlanta side. Not only did they hold serve, but Rondo likely faces a suspension for Game 2, and could get multiple games as a repeat offender -- he earned a two-game ban earlier this season for throwing a ball at an official.

For Boston, meanwhile, one wonders how Ray Allen's absence impacts an offense that never got untracked -- even their big rally came in a quarter in which they mustered just 21 points.

"I never thought offensively we played well," Rivers said. "We were a first option team and a same-side team for most of the game."

The question, now, is what type of team they'll be for Game 2 with Rondo likely out. Just remember to credit Smith and the Hawks for helping to put them in that position.

[Supporter]

Good article. Gave props to the team unlike some analysts

[lethalweapon3]

http-~~-//www.youtube.com/watch?v=kSep7QJXKlE

~lw3

[DocWilkins]

Love is in the air...Has ESPN fired him yet?

[benhillboy]

We don't need Hollinger on the bandwagon. He picked us to miss the playoffs even with Al. F&@k him. He wish he was smart or as knowledgable as Bill Simmons, who I read over everyone else at ESPN.

[macdaddy]

We don't need Hollinger on the bandwagon. He picked us to miss the playoffs even with Al. F&@k him. He wish he was smart or as knowledgable as Bill Simmons, who I read over everyone else at ESPN.

At what point does he admit that his stats aren't very good at predicting things.

[NineOhTheRino]

22 points, 18 rebounds, 4 assistsspeaks for itselfthis line alone should make this dude forever off limits to criticism

[AHF]

22 points, 18 rebounds, 4 assists

speaks for itself

this line alone should make this dude forever off limits to criticism

(Emphasis added)

I'm not sure I follow this one. Guys like Andray Blatche (36 points, 19 boards, 4 assists); Zach Randolph (43 points, 17 boards); Al Jefferson (40 points, 19 boards); Brad Miller (38 points, 17 boards); David Lee (36 points, 21 boards); Rashard Lewis (36 points, 19 boards); and Jermaine O'Neal (38 points, 18 boards) among many others are not "forever off limits to criticism" in my world view.

What Josh deserves is not immunity from future criticism, but praise for what he accomplished in this game. If he keeps playing like this, he will get even more of that praise on a national level and if he improves the shot selection then his future will be exceptionally bright.

Edited April 30, 2012 by AHF

[Admin]

What is so bad with what Hollinger said at the beginning of the year?

The Hawks won 44 games and made the second round of the playoffs in 2010-11, but that's misleading. They gave up more points than they scored in the regular season, went 10-17 after the All-Star break, lost one of the top sixth men in free agency and didn't do much to replace him, and will be without Kirk Hinrich for nearly half the season.

Pressed face-first against the luxury tax thanks to the bad contracts they lavished on Joe Johnson and Marvin Williams, the Hawks were left to fill in around the edges with veteran retreads such as Tracy McGrady and Vladimir Radmanovic. These weren't bad pickups for the price, but they don't offset losing Crawford and Hinrich.

How many Hawks fans here felt the same way about us losing Crawford and seemingly not doing much to replace him? At that point we didn't have Willie Green (signed the following day after this article) and had just signed Pargo and possibly hadn't when he actually wrote the piece. None of us expected much out of T-Mac and/or Vlad and honestly those two didn't give us a whole lot this year.

On the plus side, Jeff Teague takes over at the point after breaking out as a slashing, scoring guard in last season's playoffs, and Al Horford (25) and Josh Smith (26) provide a solid foundation as a frontcourt. Smith, however, is frustrated and spent the offseason angling for a trade.

Can we disagree with any of this? These all seem like fair and accurate statements and seem to give our players their due props.

Atlanta's bench looms as a major weakness; past editions of this team weren't deep, either, but Crawford and Zaza Pachulia often gave them an advantage against opposing second units. I can't see that happening with the current group, especially with McGrady likely to be the backup point guard until Hinrich returns. (Pape Sy, who has been talked up for this spot, has no chance of keeping it beyond the second quarter of the first game.)

Once again, did ANY of us have any good expectations of our bench the day this article was written? Ivan Johnson was unknown and we were talking about guys like Pape Sy possibly playing significant minutes.

As a result, this is going to be a harder slog for the Hawks than they might think, especially with a schedule that does a short-benched team few favors. Unless they're blessed with outstanding health, they're in danger of falling out of the playoffs entirely. After three straight trips to the second round, that's going to be a jolt.

MANY of our fans here thought we were screwed losing Crawford and might have trouble making the playoffs and Hollinger doesn't say we WOULD miss the playoffs, he said we were in danger of it.

Hollinger relies too much on his stats but he's probably been the most complimentary of the Hawks over the years when they've deserved it and he's been one of their biggest critics when they've deserved it, but at least he's based it good or bad off his stats and not off of simply hating the Hawks like the TNT clowns and many national writers and analysts.

[AHF]

He gave his predictions for the seasons and predicted the Hawks would miss the playoffs. For the last 5 years, I think he has picked a lower record than Atlanta actually achieved every season. He picked the Hawks to lose against Orlando last year and against Boston this year. This is the issue a large block of our fans have with him. Another group of squawkers also have a problem with his arbitrary use of numbers such as developing his PER formula not due to any inherent value in the numbers but to try to correspond with the public belief as to how good certain players were (which led to problems like PER rewarding guys for volume shooting even below 35% from the floor).

[Admin]

He gave his predictions for the seasons and predicted the Hawks would miss the playoffs. For the last 5 years, I think he has picked a lower record than Atlanta actually achieved every season. He picked the Hawks to lose against Orlando last year and against Boston this year. This is the issue a large block of our fans have with him. Another group of squawkers also have a problem with his arbitrary use of numbers such as developing his PER formula not due to any inherent value in the numbers but to try to correspond with the public belief as to how good certain players were (which led to problems like PER rewarding guys for volume shooting even below 35% from the floor).

His predictions aren't based off of emotions though, they're based off of stats. Obviously his stats aren't the end all be all, but they're not skewed to make the Hawks look bad.I give Hollinger props for saying good things about us when we win, which he did after this game and he did last year after we beat the Magic and I believe he did when we won game 1 against the Bulls as well.

[NineOhTheRino]

will add this. I associate rebounds with want-to / hustle. However...Probably can't give him too much credit for the rebounding numbers since the Celtics don't crash the glass by design. Still 16 defensive rebounds look damn nice on the stat sheet.

[Admin]

will add this. I associate rebounds with want-to / hustle. However...Probably can't give him too much credit for the rebounding numbers since the Celtics don't crash the glass by design. Still 16 defensive rebounds look damn nice on the stat sheet.

Smoove has become a significantly better rebounder this year and it's purely based off of his increased hustle. He still doesn't box out all that well but he's trying a lot harder to be a better rebounder this year and it's really paid off. He's had numerous Kevin Love / Dwight Howard types of points / rebounds games this year and then you throw in the assists, steals, blocks, birdbrained jumpers and you've got a recipe for the best Smoove ever and still improving.

[AHF]

His predictions aren't based off of emotions though, they're based off of stats. Obviously his stats aren't the end all be all, but they're not skewed to make the Hawks look bad.

His actual projections don't claim to be based on anything and don't identify any methodology - unlike his in-season predictions which are based on a formula weighing success to date during the year, difficulty of schedule, etc.http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/preview2011/story/_/page/EastForecast/nba-eastern-conference-projected-standings

[atlbraves93]

I don't get the Hollinger bashing, he is like one of the only legit contributors at E!SPN.

[Admin]

His actual projections don't claim to be based on anything and don't identify any methodology - unlike his in-season predictions which are based on a formula weighing success to date during the year, difficulty of schedule, etc.http://insider.espn....ected-standings

Knowing Hollinger's history it's a fairly safe assumption that all of his predictions are stat based.

[AHF]

Knowing Hollinger's history it's a fairly safe assumption that all of his predictions are stat based.

Hollinger repeatedly gives you his methodology (or references it at least) in article after article, but I haven't seen any stat basis cited for his preseason predictions for league standings.2010 predictionshttp://sports.espn.go.com/nba/preview2010/news/story?page=Predictions1011-Hollinger2009 predictionshttp://insider.espn.go.com/nba/insider/columns/story?columnist=hollinger_john&page=west-090811I don't see any reason to think these are stat based given that they go entirely without any stat explanation or support year after year whereas his stat based predictions like his playoff predictor or individual player projections are driven by his methodology and explained as such year after year.I'm not bashing the guy here but I just don't see the stat support for the preseason predicted W/L records and don't see how anyone can think that a stat (PER) that rewards a guy for shooting 33% might not have a flaw or two related to rewarding volume rather than quality of possessions. This dovetails into the methodology that hawksfanatic has provided background on in the past where Hollinger explains that he looked to what players people thought were good and then developed a methodology for a system that would result in an outcome describing those same players as being good - unlike (for example) OPS or xFIP which have much of their value in demonstrating where the stats show weaknesses in the common beliefs of baseball observers.I will give credit to Hollinger for being willing to admit his mistakes on the Hawks after the fact and give them credit where they succeed. Many members of the press aren't willing to give Atlanta any credit for exceeding their predictions.