Hawks vs Bucks: A foregone conclusion?

Six games, tops. Better yet, five games.

That’s how long it should take the Atlanta Hawks to beat the Milwaukee Bucks in the first round of the playoffs. Or so we say to ourselves, no? Here are just four reasons why Atlanta should put the quick beat-down Milwaukee:

1) Talent. Although I list this reason first, it is not the first and foremost reason. But it is the most obvious. Going from position to position, the Hawks are simply more talented than the Bucks. It’s part of the reason (but not the whole reason) that the Hawks are the third seed, while the Bucks are the sixth. Subtracting Andrew Bogut from the equation only magnifies this point. There really is not much to say here that shouldn’t be obvious to even the casual eye. Inspect both rosters, and see that the Hawks have not just the edge, but the plateau. Their best player is not as good as our best player. Their second best player is not as good as our second best player, and so on.

2) Experience. There is no subsitute for it, particularly in the playoffs. Milwaukee head coach Scott Skiles has been to the NBA playoffs more times as a head coach than Mike Woodson has. However, this is Woodson’s third time in the playoffs with the Hawks, while Skiles is enjoying his first trip to the playoffs witht he Bucks. Edge goes to Woodson in this one. Other than the coach, there are two “positions” that matter most experience-wise in the playoffs. Your best player/team captain, and your point guard. Mike Bibby is so far ahead of Brandon Jennings in this area that it’s not even funny. Typically, rookie point guards (or we can expand that to young point guards in general) do not take teams far in the playoffs. An exception to that rule would be Chris Paul, and simply put, Brandon Jennings is no Chris Paul. By the same vein, John Salmons is no Joe Johnson. Make no mistake, with Andrew Bogut out, John Salmons is the Bucks’ best player. He does not match Johnson in either talent or battle-tested playoff experience.

3) Homecourt Advantage and Improved Road Play.  The Hawks have it, and should not lose it. Atlanta won an incredible 34 of 41 home games this regular season, which was good enough to match Southeast Division Leader and #2 seed Orlando, as well as Denver, and the Western Conference #1 seed L.A. Lakers. Only one team had a better home record (by the slim margin of 1 win and 1 loss): the team with the NBA’s top record this season, the Cleveland Cavaliers. How is that for perspective? The Hawks also became a better road team this year, and won in Milwuakee as the regular season wound down. Knowing how well they play at home, and then beating what was a potential playoff opponent at the time, on the road? That can only add to Atlanta’s confidence.

4) Mentality. This is the last, but most certainly not the least reason why the Hawks should beat the Bucks in six games or less. In some ways, it’s not a reason, but something they have to prove. This Milwaukee team is a first-timer in the playoffs. Their mentality is different. They want to experience the playoffs, compete well, and maybe even “shock the world.” That’s how the Hawks felt in the ‘08 playoffs when they faced the top-seeded Celtics. Such is often the case with the lower three seeds (6, 7, and 8), though I’d argue that this applies more to the Eastern Conference than it does to the West. Of course, ballclubs like the Bobcats and the Bucks tend to have a tougher mentality than the average (an extension of their head coaches, no doubt). However, their mentality is not that of a team that expects not only to get to the second round, but to do some damage while they’re there.

This is the difference. Every man wearing a Hawks uniform should be thinking this way. Such an attitude is necessary if you want to get something done in the second round of the playoffs. Take your first round opponent seriously and dispatch them as quickly as you can. You will need the rest. Also, this requires good execution on both ends of the court, something that any team looking to advance, had better tighten up on. The Bucks figure to make for a good first round tune-up, and that is how the Hawks need to treat them: do all of the necessary work, but finish the job quickly.

 

So what do you think? Will the Hawks take the Bucks too lightly and drag the series out? Which is more reasonable to expect, a series win in six games, or one in five games?

What do you think of player-to-player matchups?

It’s the playoffs, baby!

230 comments Add your comment

HAWKS RULE

April 16th, 2010
4:58 pm

Hawks in four!!!!

[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Hawks Fan Zone, Michael Cunningham. Michael Cunningham said: AJC's fan blog: Hawks vs Bucks: A foregone conclusion? http://bit.ly/cCtwBY [...]

[...] Hawks vs Bucks: A foregone conclusion? Atlanta Journal Constitution (blog) – Apr 16th – 16:30 [...]

Ben

April 16th, 2010
5:29 pm

First off I would not just assume we are going to beat the Bucks. This is the Hawks might i add. This team is so up and down it’s not even funny. But yes we should dispatch the Bucks in 5 games at the most. There is no excuse not to especially without Bogut. I just don’t think we should make it a given we are going to win the series yet. I’m just not that confident in this team but we should win.

Ric Roc

April 16th, 2010
7:04 pm

Hawks win in Five for the same reasons Big Ray mentioned above — particularly, the Bucks just can’t match our talent… sure, they’re “scrappy and tough-minded” like their coach, but the are Hawks are the superior team 1-9 and collectively have waaaay more experience where it counts.

Just like Jay-Z, the Hawks will be “on to the next one!!”

vava74

April 16th, 2010
8:41 pm

Salmons is not as complete as Joe but he will finish – with a high degree of probability – with an average around 4 to 6ppg more than Joe.

Regardless of what JJ said – that he want to assert himself – Salmons will continue to be difficult to contain and will light us up for a bunch of points.

Hopefully that will happen with JJ and Marvin forcing him to lower prcentage shots and us controlling the glass and the games.

My advice to JJ if I were the coach would be: assert yourself shutting down Salmons not competing basket per basket.

If we contain Salmons to 40% shooting and keep him under 22ppg we should win easily.

If we let him explode for 47/48% and 27/29ppg we will probably lose at least 2 games.

LouFan

April 16th, 2010
8:43 pm

The Hawks have a certain “Swagger” going into these playoffs and have something to prove to the NBA. Either it be Jamal Crawford showing that he is good enough for playoffs, Joe Johnson getting the respect he deserves, Josh showing why he should have been an All Star, and Woodson showing why he should be considered a top coach. I think they come out and dominate them in a sweep. I also agree with Big Ray on the fact that the Hawks have too much playoff experience as a team not to be victorious.

NCBravesFan

April 16th, 2010
9:01 pm

Nice post, Big Ray! My guess is it’ll go, at most, six games. Given the Hawks’ regular season struggles against opponents with not as much talent, it will be interesting to see if the team goes for the kill in the playoffs, or reverts to regular season form.

Melvin

April 16th, 2010
9:55 pm

Interesting player rating for Eddie Johnson. I disagree with Bosh, Gasol and Roy rank higher than Joe.

http://blogs.hoopshype.com/blogs/johnson/2010/04/15/the-new-top-25/

Big Ray

April 17th, 2010
12:09 am

Vava,

If Salmons does indeed average more ppg than JJ in this series, will it be because he is more aggressive, or because the Bucks will really need him to do that, to be competitive?

Melvin ,

I disagree with the idea of Gasol being better. I think Chris Bosh is dang close, though he doesn’t make his teammates better the way Joe can do it. As for Brandon Roy….I’ll just say this-

JJ- better 3 point shooter, fewer injuries, more versatile defender due to size and strength

Roy- quicker, more aggressive with the ball, gets to the basket more effectively

Stats are dang near the same. To avoid spitballs from certain corners, I’ll leave it at that.

Big Ray

April 17th, 2010
12:15 am

I don’t agree with where Eddie Johnson has Amare Stoudamire. Kid’s good, but what would that team be without Nash? What would Amare be without Nash? Disgruntled and traded, is my guess.

Interesting to see where he had Deron Williams and Chris Paul. sigh ….

Big Ray

April 17th, 2010
12:19 am

One more thing Vava .

If John Salmons goes off, it will be on Joe Johnson to contain him. Look for Woody to (hopefully) quit the switching to an extent and put Joe on him. Jamal won’t be able to get it done (unless somebody gives him about 4 redbulls and a blood transfusion from Mario West), and just about nobody else who can score (this is why it won’t be Mario on the court) can do it. Maybe Marvin. If he can remember to play defense, that is.

Big Daddy

April 17th, 2010
7:36 am

Great post Big Ray. I agree with your assessment. The Hawks have more experience, athleticism and a great home court record. This alone should be the difference. John Salmons is someone to be concerned about but should not be our only focal point. Milwaukee has guys who can be very aggressive going to the basket. If Josh or Al get in foul trouble, Zaza can not match the interior presence that those two demonstrate and we don’t have others who can really take up that slack.

I still think that especially because this is the first game of the playoffs that our guys are going to come out jacked and are going to play their butts off. Our guys seem to have trouble with strong interior presence and that won’t be the case here. If they play good defense and with the people that are out (I have erased the Detroit game as an aberration), they should win in 5 games. My hope throughout this series is that they don’t get into one of their really cold spots where all they want to do is put up jump shots and they are not falling. Too many times they don’t take the ball inside and that kills them.

Finally, Woody and JJ are, as everyone knows, in the final years of their contracts and certainly have a lot to prove. JJ wants to get paid at an elite level and Woody wants to come back and get paid like a coach of a 53 win team should get paid. I truly believe we will be off to a good start and win our first two home games. That will give us confidence going up to Milwaukee. Go Hawks!!!!

Melvin

April 17th, 2010
9:14 am

Big Ray,

One of the reason why I would rank Joe over Gasol, Roy and Bosh is b/c he took his team further than any of them being the Batman. I had similiar thoughts about Amare. At this stage in their career, is Nash and Kidd really better than Joe? Paul and Deron I can live with b/c they are really the engine that makes their teams go…..

O'Brien

April 17th, 2010
10:23 am

Everytime I read about CP3 and Deron, I can’t help but think about Marvin, especially since when Bibby leaves we will in the market for a starting PG again…And thats after going through guys like Speedy, Lue, Anthony Johnson, Royel Ivy, Acie Law etc.

I wish Marvin could be the Hawks top defender, because that way his main focus would be to guard Salmons when the Bucks have the ball, because I dont want JJ guarding Salmons all game, while carrying a big part of the load of the offensive load too.

That being said, since the Bucks will need a lot of points from Salmons, I hope JJ takes it on himself to play the kind of defense he played against Kobe the last game in ATL.

As for the Bucks series, I’m not sure what to expect from these Hawks. We should win in 6 games or less, but you never know what our focus, defense and offensive execution will be.

Melvin

April 17th, 2010
1:20 pm

OB,

I take it you don’t think Teague could be a quality starter?

I agree Marvin hasn’t lived up to the draft day hype but I think the Shelden pick was even worst. To be fair to BK, the 2006 draft class was weak.

http://www.nbadraft.net/nba_draft_history/2006.html

O'Brien

April 17th, 2010
1:49 pm

Melvin,

I think highly of Teague, and I like what I have seen from him so far. I also think Woody should have given him more consistent minutes this past season.

However, in my opinion, its too early to tell if he can be a quality starter. Who knows if he his ceiling will be a solid backup PG.

The point I was making is we still dont know who our starting PG will be when Bibby leaves, whereas if we had taken Deron or CP3, we would have been set at PG for 10 years.

I agree that the Shelden pick was way worse. At least a lot of media had Marvin as a top 2 pick. I dont think anybody had Shelden in their top10.

niremetal

April 17th, 2010
6:41 pm

This just isn’t fair :-D

Sautee

April 17th, 2010
6:42 pm

Yeah, it’s like when my son played rec league.

Melvin

April 17th, 2010
6:49 pm

I want to see NO MERCY… Finish them…

niremetal

April 17th, 2010
6:51 pm

Melvin,

I agree, with this caveat: If “no mercy” means playing JJ and Josh another 21.5 and 18.7 minutes in the second half, I want to see some mercy…

Melvin

April 17th, 2010
6:56 pm

Nire,

I say if we have a 20+ lead at the start of the 4th then I say let the starter have the rest of the night off.

Melvin

April 17th, 2010
7:01 pm

I hope the Hawks dont let a rookie in his 1st playoffs game score 50 on them…

O'Brien

April 17th, 2010
7:07 pm

Bucks cut the lead to 12. Hawks with only 8 points in the 3rd quarter so far. Come on Hawks. Dont come with that scoring drought again…

niremetal

April 17th, 2010
7:21 pm

Why is it that Woody always seem to pull Joe at the exact wrong time?

Big Ray

April 17th, 2010
7:23 pm

Scoring drought again, and it has all of the same symptoms of the regular season: Joe and Jamal taking all of the shots, and missing most of the ones they are taking.

How aggravating is that? Still have a lead we can build on, though. Will the frontcourt continue to get ignored? Will we continue to shoot from the outside instead of sharing the ball and finding ways to cut through the defense (even if it’s a zone)?

Big Ray

April 17th, 2010
7:38 pm

O’brien ,

It may be annoying to hear 5 years later, but those two drafts have haunted us for some time now. Every time somebody complains about Bibby’s defense (or him not hitting shots), every time somebody talks about Teague not being ready/not proven/possibly not starter material, I can only think back to the draft. Two positions are most important in this game: the pivot and the point.

I love me some Al Horford, and I realize that drafting better in ‘05 or ‘06 would have meant we couldn’t get him. But I get tired of hearing that. Why? Because the same people who tell you THAT are the same ones who will tell you that re-signing Joe Johnson must happen at any and all costs. So clearly, the presence of Al Horford can NOT be all it’s cracked up to be according to their logic .

And…we should not fear Joe going to Chicago. Why? Because obviously pairing JJ with a damn good and talented pg will not prove to make a team very dangerous… again, according to their logic . Obviously “pairing” him with one here was an idea that never took root. :roll:

Anyway…beating an equine fossil by now….

O'Brien

April 17th, 2010
7:50 pm

Ray,

If we add CP3 or Deron (and we dont get Horford), I think this team is better. Our PG would set everybody up for easy shots (especially Josh with the alleyoops, and JJ for open jumpers of penetration), our defense would be better (less switching), and ZaZa would have been decent at Center. And I’m sure we could have found another backup C.

Bucks can’t seem to get over the hump. Hawks picking up the defense. Getting the lead down will be a moral victory for the Bucks. But the win is the most important victory.

Lets finish strong Hawks

Big Ray

April 17th, 2010
8:00 pm

O’brien ,

I have felt the same way, but I get screamed at every time I say it. It’s funny how Teague’s aggression comes into conversations. We stared right at two pgs who knew how to run a team before they even hit the league. Neither of those guys would have let Josh take the ball up the court. Hell, he would be running the floor and filling the lane like Stoudamire and Marion used to for Phoenix.

Although my crystal ball has never worked, I’d bet we could have come up with more than Zaza at center. The Jazz have, and so did the Hornets, and both have a smaller market than we do. Besides, as many times as we’ve heard from some of our regulars here how rich and willing to spend the ASG is, surely they’d go out and get some good complimentary pieces in the low post (and on the bench).

We may as well stop, though. We can’t change the past, can’t tell the future, and will get scolded for even thinking about either one. ;)

cleveland cavaliers | TrendyTwits

April 17th, 2010
8:03 pm

[...] Canadian Press2010 NBA Playoffs Prediction: Atlanta Hawks vs. Milwaukee BucksAssociated ContentAtlanta Journal Constitution (blog) -Seattle Post Intelligencerall 841 news [...]

Big Ray

April 17th, 2010
8:08 pm

Bucks don’t have enough weapons, and we are able to clamp down on the ones they do have.

Salmons 6-18

Stackhouse 3-8

Ridnour 3-8

Jennings started off very hot, and has been cooled down to nearly 50% shooting now.

O'Brien

April 17th, 2010
8:26 pm

If only Salmons OR Jennings go off, thats fine. The important thing is we can;t allow both of them to go off.

Bucks will come in extra confident for game 2, because they outscored us by 12 in the second half. And I dont think Skiles will leave Jennings on the bench in the fourth for as long as he did. Bad move.

Hawks were inconsistent (again), but most importantly, a win is a win. I just hope we dont have a letdown like we did against Miami in game 2 last year.

Big Ray

April 17th, 2010
8:49 pm

Over and done. Despite the deficient offense in the second half (same old symptoms), we win by 10.

Gimme 3 more in a row, I want a sweep, baby!

Go Hawks!

Big Ray

April 17th, 2010
8:50 pm

O’brien ,

Agreed.

D3

April 17th, 2010
9:24 pm

Big Ray – Excellent job on the Hawks my man! The Hawks tried to give that one away, but did what needed to be done to win and that’s all that matters. Smith and Horford were phenomenal at blocking shots.

niremetal

April 17th, 2010
9:31 pm

I love me some Al Horford, and I realize that drafting better in ‘05 or ‘06 would have meant we couldn’t get him. But I get tired of hearing that. Why? Because the same people who tell you THAT are the same ones who will tell you that re-signing Joe Johnson must happen at any and all costs. So clearly, the presence of Al Horford can NOT be all it’s cracked up to be according to their logic.

Who’s saying “at any and all costs?” Unless you think there are people out there saying “we need to re-sign JJ at the max even if it means losing Horford” (which no one is saying, and which is a false choice anyway since there is no reason we can’t re-sign both to near-max deals, since we could do that and still stay out of luxury tax territory), that paragraph doesn’t really make since.

niremetal

April 17th, 2010
9:32 pm

Big Ray

April 18th, 2010
5:02 am

Niremetal ,

1) I did not and am not suggesting anything related to the organization’s ability to re-sign both Johnson and Horford. We’ve been over this in a different conversation, and I thought I’d made that clear then . I don’t doubt the ability, and I don’t care about the luxury tax. To cover all bases, I also know those two contracts won’t approach the luxury tax, though we could reach that level if enough money is spent upgrading other areas. Again, I don’t care about that, at least not right now. “Any and all costs” does not refer to “regardless of whether or not we can re-sign Horford.”

2) I don’t know how many sites you go to, and how many comments you read. But if you think nobody has ever said we must re-sign Joe “at any and all costs” or “no matter the cost”, then you probably don’t believe that people say “JJ hogs the ball too much” or that “Bibby is slow and fat”. But here is an example of that type of wording, just for you:

northcyde

April 17th, 2010
3:52 pm
Poor Chicago. Just not enough offense to compete with Cleveland. That’s why we can’t let this team get their hands on Joe Johnson . . no matter what the cost.

See those last five words? “No matter what the cost” doesn’t sound too much different from “at any and all costs” in the grand scheme of things. Check that post out if you still think I’m making up stuff. I’m still not referring to anything having to do with contracts, though, despite having read very similar (and sometimes more vehement and extreme) comments on other sites. That one came from MC’s blog.

3) I could go into a very long diatribe explaining what my comments meant. But I won’t. O’Brien knew what I was talking about, and it was O’Brien who I was talking to . So I’ll keep it somewhat short: simply put, drafting a top tier pg would have indeed made us good enough that we would not have been able to draft Al Horford. But to say so, and imply that we wouldn’t be a better team with such a pg, as we are with Horford, makes no sense to me. Implying such also implies that we would have never gotten anybody better in the low post than Zaza and our other bench big men. Why else don’t I agree? Because in that argument, you are isolating one player versus another (example: CP3 or Deron vs Al Horford). Both of those pgs are capable of, and in fact DO dominate their positions. Al Horford does not dominate the position of center, or even the low post in general. According to some people’s logic, we should be happy we didn’t draft either pg (that is able to dominate their position) because we would then miss out on a guy who is forced to play out of position, and does not dominate his position (center). Again…this makes no sense to me. That was my point.

As I said, I like Al Horford a great deal, and hope to see him make the all-star squad many times. I’d also like to see us in a position where we don’t have him logging as many minutes at the 5 spot, particularly against bigger guys who give him trouble. But that previously discussed hypothetical draft scenario-based argument is not one I’ll ever agree with.

vava74

April 18th, 2010
6:25 am

Looking back at “what if” scenarios may be entertaining but leads to nothing.

I can kill any “what if” with another “what if” immediately: “what if” we had drafted Chris Paul but he had a career ending injury?

In case you have noticed, Chris Paul has been injured significantly for extended periods of his career, missing 18 and 37 games in 2 of his first 5 seasons.

That makes his “what if” value lower immediately and a lot more than you all believe, specially since it seems that he will have that type of career: “great ability but several injuries made him miss important periods of time, leading to an overall satisfactory career but maybe no trophy until late in his career”

“What ifs” are strictly for entertainment purposes and worthless beyond that point.

Bill Simmons is the king of “what ifs” and he makes a good living out of that, both in his books and his columns.

To bitterly look back as fan and think about “what ifs” brings nothing to the table. Let’s look into the future and see what we can do from this moment on.

Also, I have not seen Utah and NO reach the finals yet with Williams and Paul at the helm yet, so don’t make their play (which is terrific) look like its a guarantee for success.

vava74

April 18th, 2010
6:37 am

As for the game, unfortunately the early tip off made me miss it since I went out for dinner with my better half and upon our return I preferred to keep her company listening to music rather than ending our night off without our daughter with me looking at a game.

Priorities: never make a pregnant woman mad!

As for Tuesday’s game, count me in.

Nonetheless, reading the commentaries and the reports, it seems that this was yet another typical Hawks performance: came out roaring and then could not counter re-adjust and had to grind out the win.

Blame should be probably shared between the players and Woody BUT I note that the bench played few minutes and as far as I could understand from what read here and there, hardly played in the second half.

KevinA

April 18th, 2010
8:18 am

We just need a PG next year that controls the offense. No hand offs to Jamal and JJ. Last game Bibby started walking the ball up the court and handed off to JJ and by the time JJ decided to pass it there was 7 sec left. That is no kind of offense.

The Hawks play just great till Jamal and JJ decide to take over. When we recover is when they go back to involving the team. One of the reasons our team has improved is the play of Al on the offensive end. But many games (even when Al has been hot) they find a way to forget him. These are usually during our scoring droughts.

Next year it will be important to expand the role of Josh, Al and yes, even Marvin. Time for the guards to wake up and smell the coffee.

Feed a big – get a win.

niremetal

April 18th, 2010
12:07 pm

Heh…I stand corrected, Ray. Shoulda known northcyde had wrecked the curve like that for me…

niremetal

April 18th, 2010
12:10 pm

Not incidentally, I pretty much never read the comments in MC’s blog anymore, so it’s a safe bet that I don’t catch anything that gets said over there :neutral:

O'Brien

April 18th, 2010
1:42 pm

vava,

Our bench did not play much, but in the playoffs, thats expected, becuase most teams go to a 8 man rotation. And Woody has already said he will play ZaZa, Crawford, and Mo, so everybody else is up in the air, and will only be situational.

Despite the Cavs deep bench, and despite the fact that the Bulls cut their deficit from 22 to 7, the Cavs still did not use many bench players. Thats the norm this time of the year.

Hopefully, our starters will play more consistent defense to offset our lack of a true offensive system. But we will probably need our bench more in the next round.

KevinA

“We just need a PG next year that controls the offense. No hand offs to Jamal and JJ”.

Dude, its not the PG’s fault. Its the HC and his system, so thats how Woody wants it. It works because JJ and Jamal are so good, but it creates issues sometimes.

Consequently, I agree with you. And thats one of the things I like about Teague. He is able to get guys involved.

Big Ray

April 18th, 2010
6:54 pm

Niremetal ,

I kinda figured that was the case, but it’s all good. You should see some of the comments from other sites. Well, I know you’ve seen some from Hawksquawk.

Vava ,

There isn’t a single “what if” scenario that you can kill with a different take, that somebody else can not come behind and offer another perspective on. Yes, it is entertaining to talk about. O’brien and I were having an amiable conversation about it, that’s about it. My angst had to deal with the nature of an argument, rather than the situation and details surrounding it.

Bitterness? That’s actually somewhat amusing to hear from a person who has been hardly anything but dour and disappointed for the last two months. When confronted or asked about it, you become even more negative. Judging even by your last post, I’d have thought we won by a single point and probably never led by more than 5, if I didn’t know better. In fact, nothing about your post had a positive vibe to it. Nothing. Let’s see, this is your reaction to a win:

“Nonetheless, reading the commentaries and the reports, it seems that this was yet another typical Hawks performance: came out roaring and then could not counter re-adjust and had to grind out the win.

Blame should be probably shared between the players and Woody BUT I note that the bench played few minutes and as far as I could understand from what read here and there, hardly played in the second half.”

“Blame” for the 10 point win. That’s a new one. Wow. And no, I’m not saying they played a great game. Funny how so many failed to notice that mighty Cleveland only managed to beat Chicago by 13 after giving up a 22 point lead. I guess both teams deserve to spread the “blame” for a win amongst their players and coaches.

Let’s look into the future and see what we can do from this moment on.

The most positivity I’ve heard from you in a while. I’m proud of ya. :)

Big Ray

April 18th, 2010
7:04 pm

KevinA ,

I agree with what the general idea of your post is. I think we need more than one thing from a pg. We need a guy who can guard his own position, for one thing. If we continue with the switch defense, we then also need for that pg to be able to at least contend with bigger players, using guile or whatever to keep them off balance or from getting totally comfortable.

Secondly, we need for that pg to be able to get his teammates involved (as you mentioned), but to know when to do it. When Joe is hot, it’s not time to get the ball in to Josh or Al. Keep feeding Joe if he’s hot and beating his man one-on-one. If things aren’t going as well as they could be along that avenue, recognize when and where to get the ball to other guys.

A pg needs to have the total plan of attack in his mind. That’s why point guards are known as “floor generals.” They have to know from situation to situation (because the game can change quickly on you) what to do: 1) who has the mismatch? , 2) If no obvious mismatch, who is hot? , 3) if nobody is hot, who has the best chance of scoring? 4) Should I take/create the shot myself?

And not necessarily in that order, either. Nor is that all the pg should be thinking about.

O'Brien

April 18th, 2010
8:35 pm

Home teams are 6-0 in the playoffs so far. Its hard to win on the road, especially in the playoffs.

I wish the Hawks games were on TNT, because their analysts are not as biased.

I’m keeping an eye on the Spurs game. Popovich must have liked the way the Spurs played the last month of the season with Hill starting. So rather than making a change, he decided to start George Hill in the playoff game, and bring Tony Parker off the bench.

Interesting move by Greg. I dont know if I would have done that…

Astro Joe

April 18th, 2010
10:08 pm

Well, if we had CP3, we wouldn;t likely be in this year’s playoffs… since dude missed most of the season and this team without a quality PG and Horford would not likely be a playoff team. Another year of injuries and CP3 may end up being this generation’s Penny Hardaway. He’s already missed quite a few games over his career, more than many probably realize.

MitchC

April 18th, 2010
10:37 pm

I’ve learned that the playoffs is a toss up, and that nothing is a “foregone conclusion”. That having been said, the Hawks did play well yesterday, and should win this series.

I’ll be very surprised if the Hawks sweep. If we continue to play as we did yesterday, Hawks in five.

Big Ray

April 18th, 2010
11:08 pm

Astro Joe ,

True. Very true. But we would also get to see “lil’ Chris” commercials like Hardaway used to have, instead of the exact same Philips Arena commercials that they were playing last year. Hell, if I hear “conquered the skies, conquered the neck” one more time, I’m going to either puke or petition that they bring back the young couple who are necking on their couch (after she tells him to go shave, that is) and end up with two babies mere seconds later…..

:)