Now that these teams with true centers are getting better, the Heat is cooling

[NBASupes]

This is a big man's game. You have to have a legit big to win in this league. That's the reason why CP3 can never get pass the 2nd round. Look at the Heat, their center is Bosh. They lost to Dallas. They are in a series of the life v. Indy which they will probably win. They will lose to San Antonio or Memphis. Wade is flabby and it's likely over for the Heat with Indy getting better. Atlanta NEEDS to land CP3 and Dwight. Would be the best 1-2-3 punch with a bunch of shooters around them as well. Atlanta has the right pieces to win around our supporting players. We just need a couple superstars to close it out.

[Diesel]

Here's something we can agree upon. It's a big man's game...when officiated correctly. The refs will set the tone for game 3 and probably 4. Look for foul trouble for Hibbert and no calls for George. Still, I also agree that having a big will make a big impact on how well we do.

IF we can get Howard and CP3... Ferry should do that.. I would rather keep Horf with Howard because their games match. High Post/Low Post. Draft a slasher and a BU Big.

Ferry has his work cut out for him but the good news is that the rumor has already been floated for him.

[coachx]

The art of war......attack the opponents weakness and the Heats weakness is that they struggle with size.The Pacers and Grizz have no major stars but look where they are.Evan if we lose on Howard and CP I still like the idea of a bruising post scorer like Jefferson or Pekovic to be complimented by a rim protector like Dieng. We know Ferry would surround them with shooters just as he did their year.

[Wretch]

The key is points in the paint. Jumpshots will stop falling and you need to be able to get high percentage basket. In the playoffs, where the rules are a little more flexible at time, you REALLY need to be able to get high percentage shots. A big will do that for you.

Miami doesn't have a dominant post presence, but they've got two dudes that excel at getting into the paint - drawing fouls, drawing the defense, and setting up others. I've said it a zillion times, but this is why I felt Chicago would have put them on their ass last year. The way to beat Miami is to give their main guys the jumper. Cut off the lane, don't let Battier or Bosh beat you, and make James and wade take jumpers.

There are teams that have made the ECF's and Finals that were not powered by a dominant post presence: OKC, Jordan's Bulls, Pistons (both eras), 2001 Bucks, and the Mavericks (Dirk's not a bruiser) just to name some. The real key is simply great talent. I don't think you need a super-duper, mega-fantastic, All-Pro guy to win big...but you do need REALLY good players. I don't think Memphis goes this far if Westbrook is healthy and people are really underselling the Pacers and especially Paul George. I've been talking them up for a long time. They're an up and coming team that has finally come up.

[wolvetigers]

The Pacers and Memphis are good teams and they play to their strengths...as simple as that...They dont have SF/PF taking ill advised shots or pretending to be a PG.

[Buzzard]

The Pacers and Memphis are good teams and they play to their strengths...as simple as that...They dont have SF/PF taking ill advised shots or pretending to be a PG.

Agreed and we play our strength, Horford with his midrange game and dunks and weakness, Shawty's I want a midrange game and dunks. We need a true post presence first and foremost on this team, then fill it in with three point shooters and wings.

[cam1218]

The Pacers and Memphis are good teams and they play to their strengths...as simple as that...They dont have SF/PF taking ill advised shots or pretending to be a PG.

I agree with this, but I will have to say that Stephenson kind of reminded me of Josh last night with his erratic play.

[PSSSHHHRRR87]

The Pacers and Memphis are good teams and they play to their strengths...as simple as that...They dont have SF/PF taking ill advised shots or pretending to be a PG.

Another thing you can add to that is that Hollins and Vogel have a game plan and everybody knows their role. It makes it so much easier for the players when they play with a script instead of having to make it up on the fly. Coaching is a big deal here too.Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CJB]

I agree with all of this. We need to get bigger.

What I would like:

Sign CP3, Sign Dwight, Sign Korver, Draft Jammal Franklin (or a better shooter, but with this group i'd like his slashing ability and defense), Draft Dieng/Withey (or other shot blocking big), sign bench players

CP3/ Lou

Franklin/ Jenkins

Korver/ ??

Horford/ Ivan/ Scott

Dwight/ Deing

or plan B:

Resign Teague, Sign Al Jefferson (i know his defense sucks but he kills the Heat), draft Schröder instead? Still need a shotblocking big (Dieng/Withey/ Bebe)

Teague/ Schröder

Jenkins/ Lou

Korver/ ??

Horford/ Ivan/ Scott

Jefferson/ Dieng

[frizzledizzle]

The key is points in the paint. Jumpshots will stop falling and you need to be able to get high percentage basket. In the playoffs, where the rules are a little more flexible at time, you REALLY need to be able to get high percentage shots. A big will do that for you.

Miami doesn't have a dominant post presence, but they've got two dudes that excel at getting into the paint - drawing fouls, drawing the defense, and setting up others. I've said it a zillion times, but this is why I felt Chicago would have put them on their ass last year. The way to beat Miami is to give their main guys the jumper. Cut off the lane, don't let Battier or Bosh beat you, and make James and wade take jumpers.

There are teams that have made the ECF's and Finals that were not powered by a dominant post presence: OKC, Jordan's Bulls, Pistons (both eras), 2001 Bucks, and the Mavericks (Dirk's not a bruiser) just to name some. The real key is simply great talent. I don't think you need a super-duper, mega-fantastic, All-Pro guy to win big...but you do need REALLY good players. I don't think Memphis goes this far if Westbrook is healthy and people are really underselling the Pacers and especially Paul George. I've been talking them up for a long time. They're an up and coming team that has finally come up.

So what makes you think the Bulls would have been any better against the Heat last season as opposed to the previous season when Miami's trio first formed. In 2011, Bulls were 3-0 against Miami during the regular season and went up 1-0 in the playoffs before Miami rolled off 4 in a row.

And I'm also not sure I agree with the lack of post presence when it came to some of the teams you mentioned. Is Kendrick Perkins amazing? No... but he's huge and clogs up the paint. Is Ben Wallace tall? No, but he played big. He looked massive, could outboard people and he looks like he could bring Bosh to his knees with one arm tied behind his back. And I think you're forgetting about Luc Longley... he's 7'2 so the Jordan era did consist of having an anchor. If you mean did any of them score... no. But they were big down low and presented a big threat defensively and on the boards. Shaq, Bynum, Perkins, Duncan, Chandler, Ben etc. were all down low over the past decade when those teams were winning championships.

[frizzledizzle]

I agree with this, but I will have to say that Stephenson kind of reminded me of Josh last night with his erratic play.

Yeah but he's 22 and this is his first year really getting any playing time.

Now Rudy Gay, he reminds of Josh Smith as of late. Chucking bad shot after bad shot.

[NBASupes]

Yeah but he's 22 and this is his first year really getting any playing time.

Now Rudy Gay, he reminds of Josh Smith as of late. Chucking bad shot after bad shot.

If Josh didn't play and impact defense so well he would have been benched and replaced.

[DrReality]

Surprised that the Heat are so vulnerable. At this point it becomes a cat and mouse game to see if the Heat can counter the Pacers bigs.

[Wretch]

So what makes you think the Bulls would have been any better against the Heat last season as opposed to the previous season when Miami's trio first formed. In 2011, Bulls were 3-0 against Miami during the regular season and went up 1-0 in the playoffs before Miami rolled off 4 in a row.

And I'm also not sure I agree with the lack of post presence when it came to some of the teams you mentioned. Is Kendrick Perkins amazing? No... but he's huge and clogs up the paint. Is Ben Wallace tall? No, but he played big. He looked massive, could outboard people and he looks like he could bring Bosh to his knees with one arm tied behind his back. And I think you're forgetting about Luc Longley... he's 7'2 so the Jordan era did consist of having an anchor. If you mean did any of them score... no. But they were big down low and presented a big threat defensively and on the boards. Shaq, Bynum, Perkins, Duncan, Chandler, Ben etc. were all down low over the past decade when those teams were winning championships.

For the sake of the discussion, let me clarify my standpoint. Speaking of the last 30 years or so... We have not won a championship. We have not been to the ECF's. We've not signed, traded for, or drafted an All NBA First. We've had not a single MVP candidate - not MVP selection...*candidate*

Relative to the teams that really matter, we haven't been a winner.

Mediocrity and average-ness is all Hawks fans know. So we tend to do two things around here...

A) We overvalue secondary achievements like 50 win seasons, consecutive playoff appearances, and we celebrate regular season wins over contenders...because it's all we know. It should say something when we hold a game 7 loss as the pinnacle of Atlanta Hawks basketball.

B) We look past the obvious reasons why teams are successful, ignoring the most glaring common denominator, simply because we're unacquainted with it; and we look at the factors that got a contending team over the hump: leadership, PG play, rebounding, and a serviceable big man.

In the case of B, we think, "Oh...all we need is a good point guard, a decent wing defender/3pt shooter, and a serviceable big man to move Al to the 4 and we could be just like the Spurs!"

And it simply doesn't work like that. Those secondary pieces are filled in around a championship core -phenomenal talent...and we just look right on past that because it seems so impossible to obtain. Bottom line is...you need a guy that can and will take the ball and put it in the basket. The object of the game is to OUTSCORE the other team. You can't win if you don't score more points than the other team. You don't out-rebound them, you don't out-defense them, you don't out coach them, you don't out-[insert secondary objective]...you outscore them.

Does that mean rebounding, coaching, defense and all that are not important? Absolutely not. Certainly not from my perspective because you will not find a more vocal supporter of the necessity of GOOD DEFENSE. What it means is, the primary reason for teams being able to reach that elite level is elite SCORING talent. Teams are not built around defenders or coaches or bench players or rebounders. They are built around guys who excel at scoring.

All that being said...the teams that I mentioned did not reach that level because they had a DOMINANT POST SCORER. Of course they all had bigs, just as they all had PG's and coaches too. You could argue the importance of their coach or bench...the same way you could argue the importance of Ron Artest to the championship Lakers a few years ago - but at the end of the day, they're not in that position because of Artest. They are there because of Kobe Bryant.

All THAT being said, it is my opinion that we need to be less concerned about acquiring a big man and more concerned about acquiring the kind of scoring talent that we can lean on...and building around HIM.

As for Miami/Chicago...

The Bulls are a superior defensive team. That team is built for playoff basketball and they're really the counter punch to Miami. The way they hustle, defend the paint, cut off the lane, rebound....it's a favorable matchup for the Bulls... Chicago simply lacks the offensive punch to counter on the other end when DRose is not on the floor. In his MVP form, you just can't stop that kid from scoring. So the Bulls grind you down on one end, keep the score close, and then rip you apart with Rose on the other. They have the perfect offensive weapon...and they play damn near perfect blue-collar basketball. That is a winning formula.

Now, if the aging Celtics took the Heat to 7 games, with a couple of OT's...then I can only imagine the fight they would have had with the Bulls. We could go round and round on if's and but's and toss numbers and whatnot around. There's no way to know what would have happened without it actually happening. But, I imagine the matchup would have been more like what the Heat are going through with the Pacers right now...but against a superior defense, far more hustle, with better rebounders, a better coach, and an APEX scorer...an MVP SCORER. It would have been on a far different ECF's.

[MaceCase]

Wretch, I think you are still missing the fact that in Rose's MVP season, when they had the best record in the league and the Heat had just formed that the Bulls were still rolled in the ECF in 5 games. It's not a hypothetical, that actually happened. I don't see how the Bulls or Rose have been any better since or how you can transcribe the Celtics taking the Heat to 7 last year as a means to forget the dismantling that the Heat had personally delivered to the Bulls previously.

[Alex]

Surprised that the Heat are so vulnerable. At this point it becomes a cat and mouse game to see if the Heat can counter the Pacers bigs.

At this point it becomes a referee game. Indiana is physical. Here come the whistles tonight.

[KB21]

There is a major difference between scoring and efficient scoring as the fans perceive it, IMO. The key to WINNING is EFFICIENCY, not volume.

This is why a player like Carmelo Anthony will never win anything.

I don't think fans really understand the negative value a missed shot gives the team. Even if you are a great offensive rebounding team, chances are, you are only getting them at a 30% rate, which means, 70% of the time, a missed shot is a wasted possession for your offense and you are giving the other team a possession.

Because of that, I will never buy into this idea that you have to have that one guy that can get points anytime he wants to, because to me, all that description is is an excuse to allow a player to take as many shots as he wants, even if he misses them.

[cam1218]

There is a major difference between scoring and efficient scoring as the fans perceive it, IMO. The key to WINNING is EFFICIENCY, not volume. This is why a player like Carmelo Anthony will never win anything. I don't think fans really understand the negative value a missed shot gives the team. Even if you are a great offensive rebounding team, chances are, you are only getting them at a 30% rate, which means, 70% of the time, a missed shot is a wasted possession for your offense and you are giving the other team a possession. Because of that, I will never buy into this idea that you have to have that one guy that can get points anytime he wants to, because to me, all that description is is an excuse to allow a player to take as many shots as he wants, even if he misses them.

I agree. There are only a few players that deserve to take as many shots as they want, and it isn't the guys like Carmelo. What really hurts us is having a player like Josh that has the mentality that he can take shots whenever he wants. He really thinks he can do no wrong on the court because any shot he takes is a shot he can make. It might be true, but what he fails to realize is there is probably a higher percentage shot that won't happen if he jacks up the long two that he thinks he can make.

[Wretch]

Wretch, I think you are still missing the fact that in Rose's MVP season, when they had the best record in the league and the Heat had just formed that the Bulls were still rolled in the ECF in 5 games. It's not a hypothetical, that actually happened.I don't see how the Bulls or Rose have been any better since or how you can transcribe the Celtics taking the Heat to 7 last year as a means to forget the dismantling that the Heat had personally delivered to the Bulls previously.

In that same season, they were in their 1st season with Thibs and had gone from an 8th seed, to 1st. They went from a young and promising team to tops in the East. I'm sure you can quantify it with a number of stats to improved defensive efficiency (they did actually best their 2011 numbers, holding teams to less than 90ppg in 2012) and improved play... You can also probably attach a psychological factor to suddenly being in in the spotlight... Call it figuring a team out, but for whatever reasons, teams get over the "hump." The squad you play one year is not always the same as the next. It happens...as Miami may find out with the Pacers this year.

What I'm looking at though...is that the Bulls, Celtics, and Pacers (jumping from 10th to 2nd this year in PPG allowed) play a similar style on the defensive end. If you're going to beat Miami, this is the kind of game you MUST have because you're not going to simply outgun them. The Heat will struggle when you slow the game down and get physical with them. Chicago is one of the better teams that I have seen doing that and a 2nd year to absorb that system may have made the difference. I'm not going to waste much time going round about on it, because it's all hypothetical at this point. We'll see next year if Rose returns to form.

There is a major difference between scoring and efficient scoring as the fans perceive it, IMO. The key to WINNING is EFFICIENCY, not volume.

This is why a player like Carmelo Anthony will never win anything.

I don't think fans really understand the negative value a missed shot gives the team. Even if you are a great offensive rebounding team, chances are, you are only getting them at a 30% rate, which means, 70% of the time, a missed shot is a wasted possession for your offense and you are giving the other team a possession.

Because of that, I will never buy into this idea that you have to have that one guy that can get points anytime he wants to, because to me, all that description is is an excuse to allow a player to take as many shots as he wants, even if he misses them.

Well sure, if you're basing the conversation on one player being your entire strategy for winning. That would not be the case with the Bulls, because while Rose is their offensive identity, they compliment that with trademark very stingy defense on the other end. I'd also be inclined to agree if we're talking about an inefficient volume scorer (which I'm not); but your assumption - that he can shoot it, he is supposed to shoot it, and he will shoot it, and if he does this often he will likely miss when it counts - is just as subjective as mine.

...with the difference being those are the kinds of players that are highly coveted, built around, and very rarely parted with. These players are the engines in the teams that make the ECF's and Finals - a place that, again and not coincidentally, we have never been.

[KB21]

I agree. There are only a few players that deserve to take as many shots as they want, and it isn't the guys like Carmelo.What really hurts us is having a player like Josh that has the mentality that he can take shots whenever he wants. He really thinks he can do no wrong on the court because any shot he takes is a shot he can make. It might be true, but what he fails to realize is there is probably a higher percentage shot that won't happen if he jacks up the long two that he thinks he can make.

Basically, all those 16-23 foot jumpers that Josh takes are shots taken away from players who will probably shoot a higher percentage shot. What's maddening is that Josh had the third highest FG% on shots at the rim, and he only shot 5.9 of those per 40 minutes. He shot 7.4 shots per 40 minutes on 16-23 footers and three point shots combined.