True or False in Hawksville!
What's Joe Johnson going to do, take the Hawks' extension offer or leave it? No one knows because the Hawks' quiet All-Star and captain isn't saying.
HAWKSVILLE - While we wait for this week’s transaction(s) to be completed, why don’t we dive into a quick game of True or False-Hawksville style.
True or False, Joe Smith is going to sign with the Hawks?
True. And it could happen any day (if you haven’t leaned by now how critical that phrase is around here, I can’t help you). So what’s the hold up? Well, these contracts don’t work themselves out magically. They have to be negotiated and fine-toothed by agents and attorneys and whoever else has a stake in them. It’s not rocket science on this one, a one-year deal at the veteran’s minimum (of $1.3 million). I’d tell you to be patient and that things will work out but you’ve been doing that for weeks now. Again, the deal could be finalized any day now, so stay tuned.
True or False, the Hawks are interested in adding Jason Hart to their point guard mix?
False. It was reported somewhere that the Hawks were one of three teams in the running to add the veteran to their mix. I’ve since found out that someone got it twisted. The Hawks were never in the market for Hart (or any other point guard they were interested in adding). They’ve got Mike Bibby, Jeff Teague and veteran safety net in Jamal Crawford. If the Hawks were going to add another 6-3 point or combo guard to their mix they could have retained Flip Murray rather than hitting the free agent market for someone else. And before you ask, no, they do not have designs on bringing Flip back (that’s right, no more FlipMo Squad references around here).
True or False, the Hawks will add another veteran big man or two in addition to Joe Smith?
True. And we’ve already discussed two guys in particular, Johan Petro and Jason Collins, that could be in that mix. And that doesn’t include rookie behemoth Garret Siler, who will be on the Hawks’ training camp roster. But all of those reasonable fears about this team’s size and depth on the frontline could be wiped away with the addition of any two of these aforementioned larger humans.
True or False, the Hawks’ ownership feud is officially over?
Not exactly true or false. But things took a decisive turn with Monday’s court ruling in favor of the seven-man Atlanta/Washington, D.C., contingent. The options for the other partner, Boston-based Steve Belkin, were mapped out in today’s paper. One more option Belkin has that wasn’t listed: he can just walk away from his initial investment in the teams. He wouldn’t have to pay the $25.8 million in cash calls he’s missed during the litigation but he would also have to forfeit his 30 percent ownership stake. It will be interesting to see where things go from here.
True or False, the Hawks will sign Joe Smith before Joe Johnson agrees to a contract extension?
True. Barring a sudden change in the tone I’m hearing from folks in the know, Mr. Smith will definitely beat JJ to the punch on this one. In fact, no one seems to know which way JJ is leaning since the Hawks extended their offer for an extension. We’ve already talked about the figures (4-years, $62-$64 million range). It’s a huge decision and JJ has time, it’s not like he has to decide this minute. So I didn’t expect his process to be sped up just for our sake. If nothing shakes (one way or the other) by the start of training camp … then it might be time to start wondering what the heck is going on.
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
528 comments Add your comment
gwite
August 22nd, 2009
12:32 pm
I also had similar thoughts, but it wasfrom the viewpoint that Joe would be signed first, then Woody. Keep it going.
JSS
August 22nd, 2009
12:40 pm
Live via cell phone from Berlin Well, the Americans women just screwed the pooch in 4 x 100, another year, another US sprint disaster x100’s have gone poof!!!, both 4
doc
August 22nd, 2009
12:46 pm
o’brien he hasnt looked like a rick adelman yet with his coaching. even the support of aj cant look past what adelman did even when he had two stars down and they pushed the lakers to max effort which he reminded me of recently. dont forget point three in game adjustment:
we need to rebound better.
again, i can wait until the season is over, to completely evaluate woody for our future. he can tell us to stuff it or accept a lucrative contract for four years and continue what he has started and asked his players to do. he may be the second coming of tom landry with his demeanor of …. HAT ON and HAT OFF.
themanduh
August 22nd, 2009
12:50 pm
al is not a top 5 center lets be truthful he is not better than dwight,shaq,jefferson,okafor or biedris he would be in the top ten doe…
I MUS WRITE
August 22nd, 2009
1:03 pm
Myth Buster is going hard LOL…… Melvin that list stinks,horford is definitely better than “honorable mention’ status…. I dont know if he’s top 5 but i would take him over Okafor any day.
Poop- I feel you man this blog has gotten so boring, we know what happens around here in late August every year…CANIBALISM
KMJICE- Go back to the lab homie!!!!
gwite
August 22nd, 2009
1:15 pm
He’s better than “biedris”, for all that’s worth.
Probably only Howard and Shaq are/were dominate enough to be the sole difference makers. Jefferson, maybe.
We’ll probably know by midseason if Okafor deserves mention with that group. I do think however that he is a solid player.
dos hawkquis
August 22nd, 2009
1:31 pm
KEN,
Why do you speak so condesendingly? When I mentioned that the Hawks may need to re-sign Woodson before he leads them to another playoff berth and possibly a 2nd round. You implied that I was “short sighted” in my assessment of Woodson. I don’t think that anyone on this blog knows for sure why the Hawks have not resigned Woodson, unless Sund is on this blog posing as DOC, ARIOSE, NIRE, MYSTICAL, BIG RAY, et al.
All that I am saying is that if Woodson takes the Hawks deep into the playoffs, other competitors may compete for his services other than the Hawks and their are no good, cheap coaches that the Hawks can bring in with credibilty. If they don’t re-sign Woodson, who are they going to bring in? Any top tier coach will want atleast 4mil per. Woodson can probably be had cheaper.
SAMUEL,
You had a good point!! JJ may just be waiting to see what happens with Woodson. So KEN, would you trade JJ to get a different coach? I really think that if Woodson is not re-signed, JJ walks, too.
I don’t always watch basketball, but when I do, I prefer the Hawks. Stay thirsty my friends!”
JSS
August 22nd, 2009
1:54 pm
Live from the the cell phone… Berlin again
Damn those Kanyans are tough!!! CONGRADS TO ATLANTA’S DWIGHT PHILLIPS WORLD CHAMPION in the long jump!!!
cp
August 22nd, 2009
2:08 pm
This blog is starting to look like the old Falcons blog. The season cant start fast enough.
doc
August 22nd, 2009
2:33 pm
dos, i think woody is going for the second year of a 4 mil for two resign after last year. i am relying on memory and that hopefully is not a mistake or conjecture. i do think he came in at 3 mil a year and got a raise for two years. sund also never discusses contracts. so by your measure he already isnt cheap or had cheaper.
Samuel
August 22nd, 2009
2:42 pm
Bottom line is if we bring in a different coach, the best he can do is go backwards. No coach will put us in the “top 3″ this year so why risk it. With Woody, he has proven that he can take an undermanned roster to the 4th Spot.
If I were JJ, I definately would not sign until Woody is signed. Under Woody he became an AllStar. Hopefully, he understands that and forces the ASG’s hand. Woody scratched his back so it’s time to repay the favor.
Blast
August 22nd, 2009
2:42 pm
Why are folks getting their knickers all twisted up about Woody? Why all the wee-weeing when we all know Woody and his staff are not getting contract extensions this year? Sund made it clear at the start of the off-season when he met with Woody and his staff. No extensions. Sund knows that. So does Woody. I didn’t know the off season was so boring that folks just start making stuff up just to have something to blab about. And where in hell did we read or hear that JJ is waiting for Woody to be extended b/f he agrees to one? That is a load of bull.
Coach your one year out, Woody. Prove that you deserve to be retained as Hawks head coach.
Blast
August 22nd, 2009
2:55 pm
How about them Dream ladies, huh? 14-11 record, 10 more games won from last season, 2nd in the East, they have two players that lead the league in scoring, and amazing rookie Angel who poured in 34 points last game? They meet LA on Sunday at 3pm. Please give it up for the Atlanta Dream!
The Truth
August 22nd, 2009
2:56 pm
This is the sort of press that could dampen the Cavs enthusiasm of winning a title
Samuel
August 22nd, 2009
3:09 pm
Just because you havn’t read it doesn’t mean it’s not happening. IMO, Woody has nothing to prove. He’s already proven he can win when given the player to do it.
themanduh
August 22nd, 2009
3:18 pm
http://msn.foxsports.com/nba/pgStory?contentId=9966898#sport=NBA&photo=9968302
i do agree a little i dont knoe why you guys like crawford that much all he does is jack up bad shots and plays no defense and josh is immature….
RealSquawk
August 22nd, 2009
5:31 pm
Enter your comments here
RealSquawk
August 22nd, 2009
5:43 pm
Samuel,
your brought up an excellent point about JJ not wanting to sign without Woody. They have very serious man crushes for each other and I think it stems for Woodys affinity with putting JJ in the position to get doubled and tripled team and JJ loving the challenge.
IT is no secret or maybe it is.
If you think the problems with Woodson stem from him not resting his starters, not developing his young talent, and his horrid offensive sets then guess what you are indirectly or directly hating on JJ.
I won’t say which one is the ring leader because I don’t know, but what I will say is that the two out of those three problems: not resting starters and horrid offensive sets come from a JJ and Woody collaboration.
They both want JJ to get to the all star game and they both want JJ to win a MVP nomination or at least finish in the top 3 for voting.
So there it is of you want Woody gone then JJ will probably going to. And since neither of their names are Phil or Kobe then I am perfectly fine with both of them leaving whether it be before training camp, before the all star game, or at the end of the season.
they can take their crushes for each other and go or Woody can refine in 09!! JJ can take a new offensive system in stride and we can see what this team is really made of.
Highlight Factory= Terror Dome!!!
That should be the new name where we let Hawks fly free all the time.
Blast
August 22nd, 2009
6:27 pm
Just because you havn’t read it doesn’t mean it’s not happening. IMO, Woody has nothing to prove. He’s already proven he can win when given the player to do it.
That’s what I’m saying. Now he has better players and a deeper bench. Can he take his team to the next level?
dos hawkquis
August 22nd, 2009
7:23 pm
HEY KEN,
Sam Mitchell, Maurice Cheeks, Eddie Jordan, Reggie Theus, Randy Whitman of the Timber Wolves, and P.J. Carlesimo were all fired last year, as head coaches of NBA teams. The 1st 3 had recent playoff pedigree and one coach of the year. The last 3 were garbage coaches. Did nothing for their teams. Woodson has done nothing but increased his win totals for 5 yrs and you want him gone?
It is funny how when the Hawks win, you say that they won “inspite” of Woodson, but when they lose, it was because of him. YOU manipulate data to substantiate your thesis. That is a cardinal sin of research. You take the data, regardless to PROVE your thesis or you have to restate or change your thesis.
Mike Woodson Data:
1.Increased his win total for the past 5yrs, going 13, 26, 30, 37, 47 wins respectively.
2.Prior to the beginning of the 07-08 season, said, “We need to make the playoffs!”
3.Took the Hawks to 1st playoff berth in 10yrs against the Celts, pushing them to the brink in 07-08.
4.Prior to 08-09 season said, “We need to get a top seed and make it to 2nd round.”
5.Made a 2nd playoff appearance in consecutive years beating Miami in 7 games.
6.Took the Hawks to 2nd rnd of playoffs, getting swept in the process against the Cavs.
I know that he shortens his rotation, I know that he plays the hell out of JJ, I know he runs the ISO JJ, I know that he doesn’t develop his bench, but he keeps WINNING!, which is why those 1st 6 coaches were fired. THEY STOPPED WINNING!!
KEN,
YOU DON’T KEEP A JOB IN THE NBA BY 1.DEVELOPING YOUR BENCH, 2.SPARING YOUR STAR PLAYER 3.NOT RUNNING ISO 4.LENGHTHENING YOUR ROTATION.
You keep a job by WINNING in the NBA and Mike Woodson has been winning. When he starts to lose and lose big, then FIRE WOODY!! (shout out to CLYDE).
Until then, re-up the man!!
“I don’t always watch basketball, but when I do, I prefer the Hawks! Stay thirsty my friends!”
Big Ray
August 22nd, 2009
7:58 pm
Dos Hawkquis,
This isn’t a Woody bash, believe it or not. But define “winning.” To me, winning is having better than a .500 record, which Woody does not. And the Hawks had their first winning season this past season, in Woody’s five years here. I think the word we’re looking for here is “improving”, rather than “winning.” Now that I’m done splitting hairs, back to your normal scheduled program…
Astro Joe ,
Stop making a coach jump through hoops? Did you miss the last few years, buddy? Jumping through hoops has been the entire show, man! The ASG debacle, the Billy debacle, you name it. I believe it was Doc who mentioned that other organizations have let their coaches go under similar circumstances. In fact, I’ve seen “better” coaches let go for less.
I understand the idea of giving the man job security. Only, he HAS made it through two general managers so far. And despite all that has gone on, he’s retained his job. Sure, he only got a two year extension when Sund came on board. He could have been canned instead. Happens all the time. And now they want to see what he can do with possibly his best roster ever (i.e., can he and the team maintain a winning record and playoff appearance), and this is unreasonable?
I realize things have been bad, but at least the guy got to keep his job through all of it. He never was fired, even though his former boss kept trying to do it. If you ask me, Woody has a great attitude, and I’ve come to appreciate him more than I ever had. In fact, I’m looking forward to seeing what he can do with a stronger roster. As far as admitting his faults, I agree that this shouldn’t have anything to do with a new contract (or lack thereof). Hell, that’s natural progression. If he can’t do that, and subsequently improve the way he does his job, then he’ll fire himself eventually. I’m not worried about that. It’s a ticking clock that can and will go either way.
Of course, he could take your tack and walk into Gearon’s office and say “Hey man, quit making me jump through hoops! Either give me an extension, or fire me and hire somebody else!”
Wonder how that would turn out?
Big Ray
August 22nd, 2009
8:15 pm
Samuel,
I agree. No other coach could put us in the top 3 teams in the East. Improvement has to first come from within (or from without) the roster. Even on paper we don’t match some teams. Not that we have a bad roster by any stretch of the imagination. But I think that Woody is a shoo-in to keep his job if he can maintain a winning record and playoff appearance. Not sure where to split the hairs, considering how the East may or may not have improved drastically. We should be able to maintain our hold on the 4th spot, maybe 5th at worst. Any less, and we’re going backwards.
I don’t see Woody getting cut loose unless the team starts off badly, and injuries aren’t the reason why. When judging such a thing, the first 15-20 games is probably enough games to establish the patterns of what would be causing us to lose. 20 games is one-quarter of the season.
dos hawkquis
August 22nd, 2009
8:18 pm
KEN,
I am going to research and either prove or debunk your thesis regarding Mike Woodson. I am using your post August 21 @ 12:00 p.m.
When you stated:
5-We need to provide more rest for our starters by utilizing more of our bench, utilize more in gm strategy and commit more time and effort to player development.
I am going to look at utilizing more of our bench and player development, which you state as a problem with Mike Woodson.
I am going to look at the Lakers, Orlando, Boston, and Cleveland data from the 08-09 season. I will compare these 4 teams to the Hawks, since all would agree that last year, these teams were better than the Hawks. I will look at:
1.How many minutes their bench players had compared to ours.
2.I will look at the draft position of these bench players. (If they had better bench players than ours, then of course they would get more minutes.
3.I will look at how long the bench players has been with the team. (if the bench player was with the team for a longer period of time, he would be more familiar with the system)
4.I will then look at wins and losses.
5.I will look at the starting 5 and the top 2 players on the team.
My theory is that little time is spent “developing” 2nd tier players because they are usually journeymen’ not staying with a team long enough to be significant. They are sometimes used as trade bait, to acquire picks or to free up money.
“I don’t always watch basketball, because I am too busy doing research, but when I do, I prefer the Hawks. Stay thirsty my friends!”
You stated:
Big Ray
August 22nd, 2009
8:19 pm
Blast,
Not this year.
Big Ray
August 22nd, 2009
8:36 pm
Dos Hawkquis,
In my experience, all the stats and everything else you can use to compare teams when it comes to player development and bench use, has a way of being a two-edged blade.
On the one hand, you can debunk somebody else’s thesis. On the other, somebody can use the same resources to debunk yours as well.
Player development in my mind has to do with younger players. Yes, some are journey man (Randolph Morris will be one if he’s not careful…and maybe even if he IS careful). But most are not. Let me ask you a question when it comes to bench use and development: would the Boston Celtics have won a championship in 2008 without bench use and player development? I know, I know. You wanted to use the 08-09 stats and what not as a basis for facts. But I think their 2008 run is a great example. In fact, so was their run this past season.
Three key young guys to their championship win in 2008, and their tough 2nd round loss in 2009: Rajon Rondo, Glen Davis, and Leon Powe (in 2008, injured in 2009). Davis was drafted 35th and by the Sonics, not the Celtics. Rondo was drafted 21st, and by the Suns, not the Celtics. Powe was drafted 49th. Again, not by the Celtics, but by the Nuggets.
Davis was a rookie, and Powe and Rondo 2nd year players when they won the championship. All three played significant minutes that year and were significant contributors (and in the playoffs) in a 9-10 man deep Celtics rotation that helped keep Garnett, Allen, Pierce, and Perkins fresh. Gee, perhaps player development means something after all.
And based on their draft position, could you call them anything but 2nd tier players?
Just asking. Not arguing.
Big Ray
August 22nd, 2009
9:06 pm
John Schumann:
Atlanta Hawks
Key additions: Jamal Crawford, Jeff Teague
The Hawks needed another playmaker and they got it in Crawford. He’ll be able to keep teams from paying too much attention to All-Star Joe Johnson. But Crawford’s addition won’t keep foes from leaving Josh Smith alone when he ventures outside of the paint.
That’s what the Cavs did in the conference semifinals, and Smith obliged them by missing jumper after jumper. Smith is an athletic freak and a defensive force, but these days, teams need at least four guys on the floor who can shoot. With Smith playing power forward and either Al Horford or Zaza Pachulia playing center, the Hawks come up short on that end.
Smith shot just 42 percent from the field and 2-for-15 from 3-point range in the Playoffs. If he hasn’t improved his jumper, the addition of Crawford won’t make the Hawks much better.
Much as I don’t agree with Schumann, I agree with THIS. Josh HAS to improve that jumper, and all those who want him to stay glued to the paint be damned. Sure, much of his offense should be centered around attacking the rim, but not ALL of it. Think I’m crazy? Why is Yao Ming so dangerous? Why are people saying that Dwight Howard also needs to develop a face-up jumper? Why are Tim Duncan and Al Jefferson able to do what they do? Josh Smith is not and never will be one of these, but one thing is for certain: neither great athleticism, nor crazy hops last forever. Even the enigmatic Amare Stoudamire has a decent jumper.
Josh needs one. Hope he gets it.
Big Ray
August 22nd, 2009
9:11 pm
NBA PM: Hawks Planning Well
By: Jason Fleming Last Updated: 8/21/09 4:58 PM ET | 3373 times read
Adjust font size:In this edition of the NBA PM: Give the Hawks credit…Some international signings…A Michael Jordan retrospective…Scrolling through the contracts…HOOPSWORLD chats.
Rick Sund Being Crafty: It’s time to give out some general manager credit to Atlanta Hawks negotiator Rick Sund. With three key pieces of the fourth-best team in the Eastern Conference last season as free agents (point guard Mike Bibby, forward Marvin Williams, and center Zaza Pachulia), Sund was able to lock all three of them up at relatively modest amounts.
Bibby cost them $18 million for three years – not bad at all for a starting point guard. Williams cost them up to $40 million over five years, with the team banking on the fact he continues to blossom and become more consistent. Pachulia cost them about $21 million over four years, solid money for a big man even if he isn’t starting.
But, it’s not just that Sund was able to get all three of them for less than $80 million; he also got them to agree to sign contracts that DECREASE in value in 2010-11. All three of these players will make the same amount in years one and three of their deals, but in year two is scales downward. For Williams and Pachulia, it scales upward again in year four.
Why is this significant? Because not only does it mean the trio will cost the Hawks about $2 million less in 2010-11 than in 2009-10, it also allows them to have a little bit of flexibility next summer if they want or need it.
The Hawks also reportedly have a four-year, $60 million contract extension offer on the table to All-Star guard Joe Johnson, who will be an unrestricted free agent next summer. The Hawks would love to lock him up as soon as possible, but Johnson is considering hitting the market.
It takes quite a bit of convincing for a player to sign a contract that will decrease. Even if all three players go out and have the best seasons of their lives, they will end up making less money the next year – it’s easy to see how uninspiring that might be. However, it also takes a lot of trust on the part of Hawks management to believe they can convince the players to sign that kind of deal and still bring 100% every night, knowing they will get a pay decrease.
If Sund gets Johnson to sign an extension (which given likely structure of a four-year, $60 million contract would probably mean Johnson would make less than this year’s $14.98 million in 2010-11 as well) and the Hawks continue to improve as they have over the last two years, he has to be in the discussion for Executive of the Year with Toronto’s Bryan Colangelo (if everything works out there as well). Sund also was able to trade Speedy Claxton and Acie Law for Jamal Crawford to strengthen the bench and bring in a big rookie point guard in Jeff Teague.
Discount the Hawks in 2009-10 at your own risk – they are quietly making themselves even better.
Big Ray
August 22nd, 2009
9:19 pm
Ok. I’m bored, and there’s nobody else here, apparently…
Sautee
August 22nd, 2009
9:37 pm
More Mike Woodson data:
Games coached: 410
Wins: 153
Losses: 257
Winning percentage: .373%
Playoff games coached: 18
Playoff wins: 7
Playoff losses: 11
Playoff winning percentage: .389%
Didn’t Herm Edwards say “You PLAY to WIN the game” ????????
Dos Hawkquis,
you said this: KEN,
YOU DON’T KEEP A JOB IN THE NBA BY 1.DEVELOPING YOUR BENCH, 2.SPARING YOUR STAR PLAYER 3.NOT RUNNING ISO 4.LENGHTHENING YOUR ROTATION.
I’ll ask you to take a look at Gregg Popovich. He does ALL of the above and wins championships. Four of ‘em, in fact.
One size does not fit all.
dos hawkquis
August 22nd, 2009
9:54 pm
BIG RAY,
I am here. I was watching TAKEN. Damn good movie. I just want to analyze KEN’S thesis. I don’t have one. If Woodson stay, I am fine if he leaves, I am fine, depending on who they bring in. I have not had a chance to analyze Celt’s bench to our bench, yet. But based on your thorough analysis, the Celt’s bench is not 2nd tier, however ours is, so naturally their bench would have more minutes.
BIG RAY,
Having 3 hall of famers on a team matters, too. They are better mentors, model for the young guys and guys are more motivated playing with a hall of famer versuses playing with JSmoove.
I will post my findings. If they say Woody be gone, I will be with KEN. If the research proves inconclusive, then KEN should tone down with the FIRE WOODY rants.
“I don’t always watch basketball, but when I do, I prefer the Hawks. Stay thirsty my friends.”
Ken Strickland
August 22nd, 2009
10:10 pm
SAMUEL-if, as you say, PROGRESS is all that counts, why didn’t Woodson receive a contract extension after all of the PROGRESS the team made last season? Surely winning 47gms, securing the 4th seed in the East and going to the 2nd rd in the playoffs would be considered PROGRESS over last yrs accomplishments, don’t you think. Yet, you and all of the rest of the Woodson loyalist are still crying for Sund and the SAASG to offer him an extension. Maybe, just maybe management isn’t as sold on his overall contributions to the Hawks success, or PROGRESS, especially over the last 2yrs, as you Woodifites. SAMUEL, BASED ON THE FACTS I’VE JUST PRESENTED, DO YOU STILL INSIST THAT PROGRESS IS THE ONLY THING THAT MATTERS, ESPECIALLY WHEN IT COMES TO WOODSON?
DOS HAWKQUIS-I wasn’t trying to imply that you are a short sighted individual, but when it comes to Woodson coaching the Hawks, you are rather short sighted. Some of you Woodson supporters have criticize and berated me for my opinion of him as our HC. But, isn’t it blatantly obvious that Hawks management also has issues with his coaching as well? Otherwise, why else would they wait another season before making a decision on his coaching future, especially after his team just completed such a successful season.
Finally, in my 10:50am post I challenged all of Woodson loyalist to explain where any of the issues I listed were wrong. As expected, instead of addressing the message, you’ve continued to attack the messenger. BOTTOMLINE, IF WOODSON STEPS IT UP AND GETS THE MOST OUT OF THIS TEAM, WHILE TAKING IT TO THE NEXT LEVEL, I’M ALL FOR GRANTING HIM A NEW CONTRACT.
Samuel
August 22nd, 2009
10:12 pm
Blast,
Yes he does have better players but so do the teams ahead of us.
We added:
J Teague and J Crawford
celtics added:
R Wallace
S Williams
A Healthy KG
Orlando added:
V Carter
B Bass
M Barnes
R Anderson
Cleveland added:
Shaq
A Parker
J Moon
D Green
Even if we sign Joe Smith, we still haven’t really improved our positioning.
Now, if the Hawks totally go backwards and fall out of the playoffs. I’m with yall. Woody needs to go but if we finish in the Top 6 or 7, he needs to stay. These teams are basically even, roster wise.
Big Ray
August 22nd, 2009
10:18 pm
Dos Hawkquis,
You picked Boston as one of the teams to compare to, that’s the only reason I brought them up. No doubt 3 Hall of Famers helps, but notice the minutes the bench played, and the minutes those Hall of Famers played. One definitely helped the others. Based on their draft positions, would you say the Boston bench was second tier? I would. Based on their play, however, you probably would not. The reason? Development, pure and simple. Part of the development is definitely the influence of good veterans (especially Hall of Fame level). But are we to give all the credit of such development to those players, and keep it from the coach? Again, just rhetoric, as I would not compare Woody to Doc Rivers. Heh, heh, heh…
As for the movie “Taken”, I agree wholeheartedly. Awesome.
And as for Woody, I think he’s got a great attitude right now, especially towards his new rookie pg, and the additions to the roster (Crawford).
dos hawkquis
August 22nd, 2009
10:40 pm
SAMUEL,
Thanks for clearing that up. I think that a lot of people are confusing my position. If Woodson has us in the top 5 in the East, again. I say re-sign him, but KEN wants him fired, unless he takes the Hawks to the Finals.
“I don’t always watch basketball, but when I do, I prefer the Hawks. Stay thirsty my friends.”
themanduh
August 22nd, 2009
10:53 pm
http://msn.foxsports.com/nba/pgStory?contentId=9966898#sport=NBA&photo=9968302
i do agree a little i dont knoe why you guys like crawford that much all he does is jack up bad shots and plays no defense and josh is immature….
O'Brien
August 22nd, 2009
11:05 pm
I am not a Woody fan either. But if the Hawks maintain their top 4 seed and make it to the 2nd round of the playoffs, (and even if they lose the 2nd round series, as long as they win at least 2 games), in my opinion, Woody will have earned a 3 year extension.
I think Orlando and Cleveland may start out slow because of the new teamates, so I hope the Hawks start out on fire like they did last year. If the Hawks stumble out of the blocks, it will be hard to chase down the top 3.
Big Ump
August 22nd, 2009
11:07 pm
Ken why you get so upset when people disagree with you? You do the same with them. Check some of the post you wrote, and you will see what I’m talking about.
Big Ray
August 22nd, 2009
11:47 pm
Astro Joe,
A few more opinions on Woody and what you call the duress that he’s been under. There’s been plenty of turmoil within this organization. An owner of a bigger stake has nearly been ousted. Woody’s still here. A team president was let go. Woody’s still here. The general manager who hired was offered no better than an insulting one year offer. He walked. Woody’s still here. The same said former GM attempted to fire Woody more than once (as reported by Sekou). Woody’s still here. We hired a new GM, who had no reason or ties to keep Woody. Woody’s still here, and was offered a 2 year contract. The economy is bad. Woody’s still here.
Am I missing something? I’d say he’s not doing bad for a first-time head coach, with a team that has had it’s fair share of upper-management and ownership level issues. Not to mention, it’s his first head coaching gig. He’s made it five years. How have others fared in comparison?
I like Woody’s attitude, and it will serve him well, regardless of whether he’s extended here, or goes elsewhere: “I am still the head coach of the Hawks, until someone tells me otherwise.”
Now, having heard that from HIS mouth, I would be led to think that he is saying that he is still responsible for the duties of head coach. In other words, I’m assuming that his attitude is that as long as he wears that title, and gets that pay, he is doing what the head coach is supposed to do. All anecdotal NFL analogies aside, it sounds to me like Woody does not buy into your argument of young player development.
You say that if a coach is in his last year of a contract, then why would he be concerned with developing a rookie or fringe player. Perhaps because that’s what he is supposed to be doing in the job that he’s still getting paid to do. I think the difference of opinion here is based on whether or not you assume he’s a lame duck coach. That appears to be your position. Why assume Woody is a lame duck coach, just because he doesn’t have an extension yet? He has improved from year to year, finally enjoying his first winning season and his first playoff series victory.
He doesn’t have an extension yet because he has not proven that he can maintain a winning product with the same (or even better) resources to work with. With the signing of Joe Smith, the acquisition of Crawford and Teague (and the subtraction of the ineffective Law and Claxton), and the subsequent rounding out of the roster, would you say that Woody has sufficient resources to have a winning season? If you do, then is it not reasonable to expect him to have a winning season (especially with more adequate depth)?
I don’t see anything wrong with letting a guy have this, his sixth year, as a chance to prove that he can indeed continue to win, provided that he has the resources to do so. Again, if Smith is signed, he pretty much already has the resources to do so. After that would only be the matter of adding the players that will be at the end of the bench.
I understand that developing guys like Teague are not to be the main focus if one wants to win. But like it or not, developing him is part of the job. And why would Woody not develop him if he expects to keep the job? Why would he NOT expect to keep his job? If you ask me, all he has to do is prove he can have another winnng season and make the playoffs. Sure, I want more than that personally. I want to maintain status quo, which I think we can do with what he have.
Developing a youngster like Teague may not be the focus for how to win NOW, but it certainly has bearing on winning in the future, does it not? So if you want to be a part of the future, surely you are concerned with how that future looks once you get there. The rookies of today are the veterans of tomorrow, so to speak. Besides, what happens when your vets are hurt and tired, and you are out of options? Do you stand there and go “gee, if only the owners and general manager would buy me some more talent to my liking, I could win.” No, you find ways to win with what you have, because that’s your job.
The best coaches have found ways to develop young players and still win. They do so by finding the proper balance. I think Woody is in a good position to do so right now. We explain away the criticisms of bench use and young player development by constantly citing that he was under pressure to win, but we also cling desperately to the fact that the team improved each year, for the purposes of giving him credit and saying he deserves to have the job, in lieu of actually having a winning season. There we go again, trying to use two sides of a point of view to win an argument. Translation: trying to have it both ways.
I would say that last year was the first year Woody truly was under pressure to win. He had the pieces to do so, and he, along with the team, succeeded in doing so. I dare say another losing record would have been nearly (if not literally) unacceptable after so much losing, regardless of improvement. And only key injuries to the frontcourt may have been enough to mitigate what would have been countless calls for the man’s head.
But before then? We are right to say that win totals improved from year to year, when a winning regular season record was a less reasonably attainable goal. Of course, ‘07-’08 is a season of some debate, as I think that team should have won more games, but could not say with any definite certainty that a winning record was reasonably within reach.
Such banter aside, young player development was nearly impossible to avoid for Woodson in the earlier years, as young players were mostly what he had to put on the court. There were few veterans of any repute, otherwise guys like Smith and Williams would have seen far less court time than they did. This alone makes the amount of minutes they played a moot point when discussing how much time rookies and second year players got under Woodson in his first few years as a head coach. If he would’ve had half-way decent veterans to play at the forward positions, rest assured: they would have played the lion’s share of those minutes. But that is also neither here nor there in the context of this conversation…more or less.
Again, why expect Woodson to be working under the idea of losing his job? If he deserves credit for all that his supporters say he does, then there is no question except for the one that Gearon, Sund, and company should be asking right now: can he win consistently. Once more, a fair question I think, and I have no reason to believe that he cannot attain this goal, and at season’s end (or whenever they think reasonable), get a healthy extension.
Woodson now knows precisely what it takes to win, and knows that he has the resources to do so, even in the event of injuries. Last year has taught him the answers. Is not such knowledge “half the battle”, as it were? Then surely the pressure to win is now LESS than before, and the ability to focus on other aspects of the job, easier. Or so my admittedly fallable thinking goes, though I don’t see the fallacy in this line of thought.
I don’t think Woody wants to go elsewhere. If he wishes to stay, then working on the future NOW is advisable. Again, not necessarily a main objective, but the pressure to win should be less, as I stated just a few sentences ago. There is no reason to believe that we will overtake the Big 3, and advance deep into the playoffs. I think we could all agree (being of sound mind and body, that is….the latter more important than the former) that the existing roster is not sufficient to do so.
Thus, extended use of the bench, and development of young players (Teague) should be both easier and attainable goals than ever.
But that’s just my viewpoint.
rusty
August 22nd, 2009
11:49 pm
ken
you are so on with your assessment of the hawks & our beloved woody. our offense & defense sucks. i watched the knicks in there championship years. the ball movement was unbelievable, the hawks ball movement is just horrible {there is none}just a lot
of isojoe. our defense leaves a lot of mismatches,is this good coaching. it was said in an earlier blog that josh only made 42% of his shots. he played so much better than jj,but people keep saying how great jj is. when woody is gone & jj starts playing team ball we will improve.
Big Ray
August 22nd, 2009
11:59 pm
Now, were Woody to take the approach of “damn the first round pick, I have games to win”, it would not serve him well. Better yet, it would be damning evidence if this team were to fall behind. Why? Because the teams most likely to offer him a job are teams that are starting over, with young nuclei. Would such a team want to offer a man a head coaching job if he doesn’t show an ability to develop younger players, unless absolutely forced to? Wouldn’t be at the top of my list.
No, I think Woody will be fine. The team will be fine. If this team can maintain or stay rather close to last year’s position, Woody will get a handsome reward. The coach’s seat is always the hottest one (unless you’re name’s Nellie and you work in Golden State, California). Woody has to know this, and the lack of an extension should not trouble him nearly as much as it does some of us. Hence his constant quote, “I don’t know why it’s so much of a bother for so many of you. It’s not a concern for me.”
Again, I like his attitude. He knows the situation is indigenous to the business he’s in, and he’s going right back to work. That will always look better on the resume than “screw this bench and development nonsense. I can’t let small job descriptions like that get in the way.”
Samuel ,
I agree with your 10:12 p.m. post.
Newkid ,
I agree that Josh Smith could be the perfect trade fodder for acquiring the “yin” to JJ’s “yang”, if he signs the extension offer (whatever it ends up being). It may not be an idea that makes me feel all warm inside, but I’ve recognized this as a strong possibility a long time ago. I only hope that whatever happens, works out for the best. It may be the best way for this team to take a step forward. And if JJ leaves, the team will have to find a way to do it anyway. After all, he’s the basket we put the bulk of our eggs in.
And I don’t mean “eggs” by way of money. I mean the way this team is run. It’s run through, around, and all about JJ, and the backcourt. The chickens may soon come home to roost. You never know…
Hawksman Jones
August 23rd, 2009
1:24 am
So the Hawks and Joe Smith are still in contact… That’s great, because the Hawks need him badly. And, I don’t think the Hawks will sign another big man until they get a better look at Garret Siler. I can not wait until the season starts… GO HAWKS!
Pulleeze
August 23rd, 2009
1:43 am
I think the Hawks’ record of 47 wins is skewed by their road success…or should I say lack of. Their unimaginative offense gives them little chance for success unless their outside shots are falling. I mean JJ’s outside shot is falling. Thay have to work so hard on other aspects of their game, i.e. blocking out, rebounding, on ball defense etc., that it takes away the accuracy of the outside shot. There’s not enough cutting to the basket. There’s no double back screens to get JJ open for easier shots. And I think he’d be more effective without the ball. And how about at least implimenting the pick-n-roll. They have the athletes to make it work. Then they’d have a better idea of how to defend it come playoff time.
Ken Strickland
August 23rd, 2009
2:00 am
BIG RAY-your comments were well put. The idea that I hate Woodson is pure BS, because I don’t know enough about him personally to harbor such strong feelings towards him. I just don’t like the way he’s gone about coaching the Hawks, and in some instances, dealing with the talent he’s had over the last 2yrs. I was a big Woody fan at first, just ask CLYDE. We had some serious issues about Woodson in the beginning.
All teams have weaknesses. Even Boston had weaknesses during their championship season and we exposed some of them during our playoff matchup. Their main weakness was their very poor transition DEF, which we successfully exploited during home gms, by playing uptempo. When playing in Boston, we slowedd it down and tried to match their halfcourt superiority, and got blown off the court each time.
My #1 problem with Woodson’s coaching is his stubborn resistance to allowing the team to consistently play the uptempo style of OFF our team and talent is best suited to play. He insists on forcing the team to play a halfcourt OFF even though virtually everyone that’s seen the Hawks play recognizes we are at our best when we consistently run run run.
I think forcing the team to play so much halfcourt is his way of compensating for overplaying his starters and using such a short rotation. If he releases the hounds and allows the team to run, run, run, he’d have to expand his rotation, which would require the utilization of more players.
I won’t be upset if Woodson is offered a new contract at the end of this season because it would mean he did something right, and the team had a very successful yr.
Mystikal
August 23rd, 2009
2:05 am
Big Ray,
I know you said you were bored, but wow that was a long post.
Ya know I have to admit that Woody has accomplished a lot since he has been here and has been a good coach (although he may not be the “best” coach to take us where we want to go). I’m wondering how big a difference it would make if he changed his staff. Mainly get an offensive-minded assistant who can help us take advantage of our athleticism and an upgrade of Tyrone Hill. I don’t know what/if Hill has done anything to help our bigs develop. Woody has held it down on the defensive side though, you cannot take that away from the man.
Mystikal
August 23rd, 2009
2:09 am
Have to point out that if the hawks are successful again more than likely next summer we will again be debating whether it was due to Woody’s coaching or “natural progression” from our younger guys. I know everyone is bored and this topic is just the flavor of the minute, but still.
KevinA
August 23rd, 2009
2:23 am
Ray, You stated In fact, I’m looking forward to seeing what he can do with a stronger roster.
In another post you mentioned – young player development was nearly impossible to avoid for Woodson in the earlier years, as young players were mostly what he had to put on the court.
Woody is like our young players and is learning on the run. How much we improve and how many more wins we will acquire will depend more on team chemistry and the organic growth of ZaZa, Josh, Marvin and Al. I would say Woody still has to consider these players as still in their early years. Still needing development.
JJ and Bibby need to adjust the offense flow to the front court as part of this chemistry improvement.
The additions of Crawford, Joe Smith and Jeff Teague on paper make us a stronger but I think the test will come later rather than sooner. Foul trouble and injury can crack a Woody rotation. If history repeats it’s self not much else will.
He has survived this long by playing his best players for as many minutes as he thinks they can take. I don’t see Woody changing from that philosophy.
If Bibbby goes into a shooting slump he might be the one to lose minutes. Only if Teague becomes a defensive stopper without to many turn overs or Crawford comes in and does a better job than Flip did. For the most part our stronger roster comes from the improvement of ZaZa, Al, Josh and Marvin.
KevinA
August 23rd, 2009
2:39 am
Mystikal
Have to point out that if the hawks are successful again more than likely next summer we will again be debating whether it was due to Woody’s coaching or “natural progression” from our younger guys. I know everyone is bored and this topic is just the flavor of the minute, but still.
It is what it is. We do not have a veteren team. Woody coaching young players is what happens when we dump all the vets and decide to rebuild. Remember 5 years ago? By the way, they are still young.
Ken,
JJ is the man, JJ likes to slow it up and play iso. JJ likes the walk it up the court style of offense. JJ has led the charge to 47 wins. I don’t think Woody will change anything JJ does.
This is why I don’t like the idea of JJ getting an early contract. If the season goes bad look for JJ and Woody to be gone. If the season goes well look for both to be resigned with a raise.
Big Ray
August 23rd, 2009
3:39 am
KevinA,
You are so right. Chemistry and cohesion will determine how this team goes forward. Right now, we are still lacking that, as well as solid leadership on the road. An improvement in those two areas suddenly makes us a team that even the Big 3 would have a tough time with. Doesn’t make us better, but it closes the gap. You’re also correct that Woody is learning on the run, though he has had a lot of experience as an assistant coach under Larry Brown (and others). Still, the position of head coach is less forgiving than any other position of note in the NBA.
Mystikal,
I can’t take much of anything away from Woody. He’s got class. He’s a professional. He’s not a liar or a two-faced goon. And he definitely believes in defense. He has his areas to work on, and if he works on them, he will continue to enjoy success in most cases.
Big Ray
August 23rd, 2009
3:43 am
Ken Strickland,
I know you don’t hate Woody. And I understand the frustrations that you have with him, all too well. It doesn’t make you a hater, though you may be labeled that way. As you say, I’ll be happy to see him get an extension if he keeps this team winning. Right now, he’s in a good position. He has to help this team tread water until we have what it takes on the roster to contend with the top teams. But that’s all. Nobody is asking him to take this roster and forge a Larry O’Brien trophy out of it. Nobody in their right mind, that is. However, if this roster improves, by either organic growth or transactions (draft, trade, free agency), and he is not able to help the team get to contend at the highest levels, it’s time to look in other directions. Until then, no sense in judging him for not doing a job that can’t currently be done by any coach.
Stating the Obvious
August 23rd, 2009
7:26 am
Samuel,
“He’s already proven he can win when given the player to do it.”
Thanks for that awesome freudian slip. He only knows how to coach a team by overutilizing one PLAYER. But you need to be able to develop and utilize more than one PLAYER to win a title.
Woody can’t do that. I don’t think the Hawks win a title this year anyway, but there’s no question that the Hawks have a ceiling as long as Mike Woodson is the head coach.