Post Dallas

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nuzx7-PjwEo&feature=fvw

this is the type of assertiveness a real center will bring us.

• Link
• Report this comment

Those Det. teams did Isaiah have to sit and watch, gather experience through osmosis, take a turn around the league, not get thrown to the wolves too quickly by Coach Daly. Was it his 2nd or 3rd yr. before he got traded to San Francisco or were they already GS by then. Oh! Never mind, they had a real coach, who was interested in developing talent and setting his team on a path for a championship. Kudos to HOF Coach Daly! Also to Isiah [the plyr] top 50 all-time, HOF, playing career.
Off topic but kudos to D.Rodman an all-time great who rarely if ever gets the credit he deserves. Even though he was a nut-case, no one
played harder, rebounded better for his size, nor was a better team player (virtually unnoticed by most), or defender. Except for his attn.getting devices (strangeness) he was all that any coach could/would ever want in a player!!!

• Link
• Report this comment

Rick Mahorn > hmmmm > errily similar to young Mr. Horford.
MaHorn: 6-10, 260, pos. C.
MaHorford: 6-10, 240, pos. C.
RM goes on the Adkin’s diet and we’ve got the same player.

• Link
• Report this comment

Rick Mahorn was the power forward, Laimbeer was the center.

If Al took Steroids he could be a power forward like Mahorn.

• Link
• Report this comment

Let me clarify, I meant that Bill Laimbeer wasn’t a real low post center like Shaq or Hakeem. His offense consisted of floating to the top of the key and drilling the jumper (which Jon Kontract try to emulate). He and Mahorn defended and rebounded well, just like our two headed rebounding monster.

They didn’t have a Shaq or Hakeem that could get points down low at the end of a close playoff game. They did it by forcing turnovers, rebounding well, and finding the hot hand whether it was Isaiah, Dumars, or Vinnie (the microwave).

That is how the hawks will go deep in the playoffs. Their atheleticism and team chemistry is very similar to that Pistons team.

The Hawks and the Celtics schooled the pistons through most of the 80s until they peaked. And they didn’t peak until most of the guys were in their late twenties. Our core is in their mid twenties. I see great things ahead even without a dominant 5.

• Link
• Report this comment

And people knock Josh and Al for being small. They’re both 6′9″, but they play bigger for some reason.

• Link
• Report this comment

I am a Vick fan. Yes, he did badly and made poor decision. I dont throw out the baby with the bath water, neither am I unforgiving or unable to see the racism behind his conviction. 2 Months before he was arrested the crime he committed was a misdemeanor. Im very proud of him that he has chosen to renounce his ways and be the best person he can be from this time forward. Im a fan of the underdog(pun intended), and Vick is an underdog.

• Link
• Report this comment

Truth Serum,

Having fun today, I see. Don’t worry about waking me up. The wife managed to do that this morning while I was sleeping really good, and enjoying the day off. Happens every time, I swear….

Grandad ,

I understand yours and Truth Serum’s issues with our lack of size. There is an alternative to this issue, but I’m not sure it’s anymore feasible at this point than simply adding a bigger guy to the roster, and moving Al to the PF position.

I hate to go back to the “Detroit Model”, as I feel that our team doesn’t fit it. However, there is a reason why it was liked. And it’s what Woody was doing with that awful switching defense. The switching defense isn’t a problem if you 1) Have an entire team that buys into it, and 2) Have the kind of personnel that are capable of executing it.

Detroit had great team defense, the kind that only needed the two Wallaces to cover up mistakes on occasion. They also had length, strength, and/or toughness at each position. What each player may give up in size, they made up in length. What they make give up in height or weight, they made up in near perfect, consistent execution and toughness. Billups could guard 1s and 2s. Rip Hamilton could guard mostly 2s, but also some smaller 3s. Prince had the length and quickness to bother anybody but 5s and the bigger 4s. ‘Sheed and Big Ben had the length and strength to handle 4s and 5s, and got help from Prince when they needed.

Thing is, they all bought into it, and nobody was caught totally or consistently in a mismatch nightmare. It was very hard to exploit their defense.

Not so with Atlanta. Bibby has enough trouble guarding his own position, much less a bigger player (most 2s or 3s). JJ can guard some 1s, most 2s, and some 3s, but he doesn’t do it all game, as the team needs him more on offense (though lately the contrary is certainly arguable). Either way, he doesn’t do it all the time.

Marvin can guard 3s, some 2s, and some 4s. Not always committed, however.

Josh is the greatest help defender in the game. He can guard 3s and 4s, but has to avoid direct confrontation with many 5s.

Al can guard most 5s, and some 4s.

But the problem begins at guard. Which is why our undersized frontcourt is continually exposed….

• Link
• Report this comment

Truth Serum ,

I don’t dislike him, and as I said, I forgive him. I’m glad he’s casting off his past and trying to do the best for himself and his family in the future. I hope he’s cast off those friends and relatives as well. Bottom line, those a$$holes are the ones who dragged him down. He let them use his money to have some illegal fun, and then they turned on him when the interrogations started. You can call it a racist situation if you want, and you may be right. What I see is a man’s own friends dragging him down to save their own asses. What I see is a justice system that found a high profile target.

Vick wasn’t prosecuted because he was black. It was because he was rich and famous. Had he lived next door to me or you, it would have barely made the local papers.

And screw PETA. Somebody needs to send their asses to some version of Jurassic Park so they can hug those dinosaurs, along with the trees.

• Link
• Report this comment

Furthermore we could be in a better situation if we had chosen the path of supporting a young man who had made some very poor decisions.

I get where you’re going with this, but we’d still have been out of a starting quarterback for two years. That, and nobody was sure what the League Commissioner was going to do. Who were we going to play in the meantime, Redman? You see how THAT’S going.

• Link
• Report this comment

Ray its a combination of both one was gasoline the other was fire.

• Link
• Report this comment

Where do I co-sign Big Ray? Ditto.

• Link
• Report this comment

The only thing I don’t agree with is the switching defense. We actually are winning in spite of it. For example, look how we got beat when Smith got ejected from the New York game. Everybody wants to blame Horford for not protecting the rim, but forgets that this switch defense is exactly what kept drawing him AWAY from the rim.

Mike D’Antoni knew this, and they kept running plays that brought David Lee away from the basket, which pulled Horford right along with him. That left protecting the rim up to Marvin and a bunch of guards. It failed, as expected, and the Knicks ran us out of the gym with layups.

We win because we can play enough lock-down defense for enough stretches in games, and because we can score. Dallas was one game that we won without scoring, only because the Mavs shot nearly as bad as we did, because we defended the heck out of them as well. That, and Joe actually shot well (’cause no one else was). But if teams find ways to exploit our switching, then we have to outscore them.

• Link
• Report this comment

Ray your above post is a gem. Its where I’m at with the big picture but it has beeen difficult finding someone to go there with.

In my opinion this problem of getting of the few good centers is not new to the NBA. Its about as old as the league. Being a GM is not a unskilled position. Behind the doors , there is leverage, dirty pool, hustles and moves. Thats why I posed the question earlier(an echo from a question some one else asked) Why is the Boston Celtics interested in whether Sund offers a Contract to Woodson? There is some ulterior motive why the Celtics publicity page is pumping this story, seeing that we are fast becoming their chief challengers and have proven we can kick their butts. Message sent! So why are they running this players comment story about Woodson? Is it possible Woodson has Docs number and they need to disrupt our growth? Remember when Detroit put that move on us with the Kontact Move?- (credit theZaZaGuy ).

Woodson is good for the Hawks and they are within a year or two…. a player or two from the top. Boston knows this, just like Detroit knew back in the day.

Im sure you caught the link. But just in case;

http://www.celticsblog.com/2009/12/7/1189120/should-woodson-get-extension-hawk

Its up to Sund now to show his talents or lack there of. How good is his pool. How strong is his hustle? Can he force a hand, use some leverage?

He built Dallas but they have never crested the top, never got over the hump stuck in the good but not great mode. Is this going to be the Hawks destiny too?

• Link
• Report this comment

Ray we can agree to disagree and move on.
The switch works because of the personnel we have. If a major piece like Josh is taken out of the equation sure, It comes unglued. People blame horford for not being the physical presence that you hope for in a center. OK. I have no problem with that. But like you said. hes the best we have for the spot so we have to play with him there. I don’t think Josh is going to get throw out of every game. I hope not. He has a lot of responsibilities. Just because we compensate for the lack of talent in key area’s with the switch doesn’t mean that the switch is with out weaknesses. It is however the best defense for this team to help Bibby from getting backed down and Horford from getting exploited. When our personnel changes then our options will to.

Right now we are winning considerably more than we are losing. Thats a key point.

• Link
• Report this comment

Grandad,

I’d take any of the three off the bench. Don’t have any idea how we could get any of them though.

• Link
• Report this comment

Saying AHorford is a NATURAL PF is like saying 6′10″ 240lb Willis Reed was a natural center because he played the position in college and made the Allstar team playing the position. He also became an Allstar playing PF next to center Walt Bellamy as well.

Elvin Hayes was an All American center in college and earned NBA ROY and Allstar honors his rookie yr while playing center. He also earned Allstar honors and won a title or 2 while playing PF next to Wes Unseld, 6′7″ 260lbs HOF and top 50 CENTER, would likely be considered a NATURAL PF by you as well.

Is Allen Iverson a NATURAL PG, because he had his most successful season while playing SG next to PG Eric Snow under HC LBrown. Stop all of this crap about natural this and natural that. Some players are just talented and versatile enough to successfully play more than 1 or 2 positions. If they can do it successfully, they should be labeled NATURAL ATHLETES if anything.

It’s revealing how all of you who are so fond of categorizing Horford as a so called NATURAL PF or undersized center, are the same one’s campaigning for us to acquire another center. And in most cases, the centers most of you want as his replacement, usually aren’t more than an inch taller and not much bigger, if as big. TOO MANY SELF SERVING AGENDAS.

• Link
• Report this comment

TRUTH SERUM-The Hawks are already in the 6th yr of their rebuilding plan under Woodson and you’re saying he needs another 2yrs to get there. He’s gotten rid of all but 3 of our previous draft picks, and he’s taking so long to get the job done the only FA signees on the roster that he’s willing to play will be approaching retirement soon.

In other words, you’re saying that although we’ve made the playoffs 2 consecutive yrs, won 47gms and advanced to the 2nd rd of last yrs playoffs, Woodson needs another 2yrs to do better? Hell, during Woodson’s 8yr plan, the Hawks will have had 2GM’s, ownership will have resolved their legal issues and Teague’s rookie contract will be expiring while we’re still waiting on Woodson to make this team better within the next 2yrs, WOW. I GUESS IT’S OBVIOUS TO EVERYONE THAT NO OTHER HC COULD HAVE DONE A BETTER JOB WITH THIS TEAM OVER A 6YR PERIOD THAN WOODSON, WITH ANOTHER 2YRS NEEDED TO FINISH THE JOB.

• Link
• Report this comment

They have only had five years of work to make that determination.

Six year Hornets’ coach, Byron Scott, was fired for a 3-6 record following a poor playoff showing the year before.

Seven year Nets’ coach, Lawrence Frank, was fired for working the Nets plan and far harder than his players did.

Mike Woodson’s done everything that has been asked of him for 5 straight years, yet had to survive one reported attempted firing from a GM (Billy Knight) who quit afterwards, and is being scrutinized by that GM’s replacement, Mr. Rick Sund.

To be fair, Sund believed enough to give Woodson a ‘show me more’ two year extension that ends at the end of this season.

It sounds like Woodson is a survivor. But he’s really been far more that. He’s been downright successful – anyway you want you to measure it. So the delay and non-negotiations until this year is finished are, on the surface, simply puzzling.
Yet, through ownership turmoil and a change of general managers, the Atlanta Hawks have improved 5 straight years. Navigating that rise is head coach Mike Woodson.

Is there any truth to Woodson not being a good tactician?

Joe Smith…

So far this year, (it’s) been so good. Every night different teams are going to present us something different. I think he does a good job of watching enough film, him and his staff do a good job of watching that film and trying to put us in the best situation to be successful out there.

Might there even be a bit of similarity between Woodson and Rivers in the people skills department?

Joe Smith…

I haven’t played for Doc, but outside looking in, I can see the resemblance. And if I never played for Coach Woodson, I’d have never known that. So I really can’t speak on both sides but I know he brings a lot of light to our locker room.

Like the stock market, Mike’s team’s annual jumps have climbed a ‘wall of worry’. Or maybe it is a ‘wall of expectations’. From the youngest team in the league to a second round playoff team last season, they have moved forward every…single….year. But, just like the Cavaliers, and just like the Magic before them, they are not without their doubters.

Keeping score? It goes like this…. 13, 26, 30, 37, and 47 wins. This season, the beat goes on as the Hawks are currently 14-6 and two games off the EC lead to the Orlando Magic.

Credit
Should Woodson Get Extension?: Hawk Players Say Yes

Tiny by tenaciousT on Dec 7, 2009 1:17 PM EST

• Link
• Report this comment

If I were Sund Id sign Woodson to a 3-4 year contract. He deserves it.

• Link
• Report this comment

Question of the day to me is why is Boston covering the Woodson saga through the players view? Why is Boston concerned?

• Link
• Report this comment

Ken Strick is funny.

He doesn’t want to take a 20 game snapshot to project how we’re playing, but would rather take a 7 game snapshot of inconsistent play, and us that to justify his rants. Of course, he’ll say it’s because it’s the most recent 7 games, but it’s still an innacurate reflection of how this team has played overall.

Honestly, you could spin this anyway you want.

- we’won 14 out of 20 overall
- we’ve won 10 out of our last 14 games
- we’ve lost 4 of our last 7 games
- we’ve won 3 of our last 5 games

Take your pick

To me, the major thing that separates good teams from bad teams, are LOSING STREAKS. Bad teams routinely go through 4 to 8-game losing streaks. Even when they play well for a week, you can’t count on that, because they may lose 6 in a row.

Good teams may have a week or two where they play inconsistent at times. And they might have a real bad stretch ( for them ) in which they may lose 3 to 5 games in a row. But overall, they take care of business.

Great teams hardly ever go through even a 3 game losing streak. They tend to dominate teams, and maybe drop a game here or there against a mediocre team. Most of the losses great teams suffer, are against good teams on the road.

This time last year, we had already gone through a 4-game losing streak. This year . . . . only a 2-game losing streak. And we’re winning games that would’ve been automatic losses last year:

- get embarrassed by the Lakers, but then turn around and gut out a win @ Portland? ( traditionally one of the toughest places to play in the league )

- a bad loss to a Bobcat team ( after traveling cross country ), but turn around and manhandle Denver at home?

- get embarrassed by Orlando, but turn around and win in Philly? ( although they were banged up )

- lose a bad game vs the Knicks, but turn around and win in Dallas? ( a place we hadn’t won at in the Woodson era )

Those are 3 road wins that we’d almost surely lose last year. And the home back to back vs Denver, even without Kenyon Martin, would’ve probably have been a loss as well. By the way, 3 of these wins occured on the 2nd night of a back to back.

It’s ironic though. Most Hawk fans feel that Woody should use his bench more. But in 3 of our last 4 losses, the +/- numbers of Crawford, Zaza, Evans, and Joe Smith have been significantly lower than most of our starters..

Even in the Detroit game, in which JJ shot 5 – 19 FG, he only had a +/- number of -1, while

But here are the +/- numbers of our bench in that game:

Crawford: -7
Zaza: -9
Evans: – 5
Joe Smith: -5

And if you look at the Knick, and Hornet game, it’s the same occurence.

In fact, you saw this trend where most of the bench had a significant negative +/- rating in games, compared to the starters, vs:

Indiana
@ Boston
Portland
Houston

And it’s occuring even when we have only one or two of these guys are on the floor. It’s one of the reasons why the only positive +/- lineup we have, are the lineup with the starters, and the lineup with Crawford in place of Marvin. All other 5 man lineups are either near zero or below zero in the +/- department.

The HAWKS are only showing that they may not be a great team. But they’ve more than shown most of the characteristics of a good team. A team that should win 50+ games.

• Link
• Report this comment

“this is the type of assertiveness a real center will bring us.”

For the record, I don’t agree at all with your repeated assertions that Horford’s lack of size in the post is hurting the Hawks regularly. But I thought I would mention that Andrew Bynum was picked 8 spots after Marvin Williams, so it’s not like the Hawks didn’t have a chance to draft him.

Just another example of NBA GMs not doing their homework and unfairly undervaluing a player that chose not to play in the NCAA.

• Link
• Report this comment

Also, comparing heights of players 40 years ago to heights of players now is stupid. Elgin Baylor scored 27 points per game as a 6′5″ forward. As someone pointed out earlier, Bill Russell won 11 titles at 6′9″ playing center. Forty years ago, the idea of a 6′9″ 260 pound player initiating the offense from the perimeter would have been unthinkable. Players have gotten significantly bigger since the beginning of the NBA. Keep your comparisons limited to the last twenty years or so.

• Link
• Report this comment

Ken, I happen to be of the same mind set as North Clyde. I think you are micro analyzing to justify your view, which, has clearly been proven erroneous.I am enjoy this season. The team is play @or above the “Professional”, analyst prediction. We keep getting better and better. Whether you look at this in 10or 20 game snippets we are doing very well. I think its better to look at it in the first half of the season and the second half. You seem desperate. If you dont mind, I wont bother you but Im going to try and connect with people who are excited about the direction the hawks are moving in and are joyfully dancing about this season.

May I suggest that maybe you could create a doom and gloom blog page, and every five minutes you can look for a reason to tear down the Hawks successes. Yes, right now…Woodson= COY

Good post NorthClyde!

Najeh Davenpoop. That’s a point well taken. There were 7 other teams that passed on him too…. which doesn’t excuse us. But your point is exact. As hard as it is to get a legit center and a corner stone of a franchise how could we….

That still hurts to day. Had we made the right choice we wouldn’t have to worry about our guards getting beat as KevinA is addressing. A good center changes the why the game is played. Defending guards will slant you towards their center and dare you to cut that way and cover you from the other angle.

Also every one wants a quick guard.They get faster every year it seems. The younger ones are faster than the older ones and the smaller ones over the bigger ones. At one point there was a move on to switch to big guards. Magic became the prototype, A 6′9″ point guard who could handle the ball and run like a gazelle. It turned out he was a freak of nature and a rare find.

The center is usually the fail safe against getting beat in the paint against guards whose sole purpose is to break down defenses by penetrating the paint and scoring or dishing.

KevinA and I have agreed to disagree with out radical confrontation or disrespect. We actually agree on most point. Our area of disagreement is whether the defense and or offense starts inside as i believe or outside as Kevin subscribes.

Id rather have the center as assurance in case you beat my guard to the spot. Kevin, I believe, would rather have a guard that you cant beat.

All of that to say although I don’t completely agree, Kevin, I enjoy your post and can see the merit in your point.

Yes, thank God for Josh!

• Link
• Report this comment