Hawks/Kings ... again

[parson]

Missed the first half (church) but the 2nd has seen us gradually improve our game. We're walking away on a night when the Kings are having a really good offensive game. The Kings appear to not really care about defense. Oh, they pressure and work but concentration seems to be a foreign concept to the. We just keep working and wait for them to go to sleep.

And Korver gets a praise that I thought only the great Zaza Pachulia deserved: Kyle's a great golden god. Just watching him tonight's been worth it all.

[ATL Boy]

Korver scores 28 and goes 8-10 from the 3 point line (yes, you read that correctly), and Jeff Teague comes away with a stat-line of 18 points, 15 assists, and 8 rebounds. Too bad it wasn't on TV

[parson]

As unbelievable as it seems, since breaking the record, Korver's shooting better now.

[Edit] Since coming back from his injury, he's shooting better.

[DirtybirdGA]

I missed the whole thing...lol

I just was lookin at the ticker.

Sent from my SCH-I110 using RealGM Forums mobile app

[parson]

PG play was terrific: 24 points, 21 assists and 11 rebounds. Plus, they managed the game. We had 38 assists by the whole team - good ball movement. Teague was gimpy in the 4th but gutted it out.

SAC has more talent than we do, by the way.

[Jamaaliver]

I tell you, one of our more opinionated posters here has gotten into the habit of calling Horford a 'diva'. But I wish he really was one. When he shot the ball 23 times ( a season high) last week he scored a season high 34 points on 65% shooting from the field.

He followed that up by only shooting 9 times while scoring 17 points on 78% shooting.

Tonight he shot 19 times from the field en route to a team high 25 points on 63% shooting.

I wish he would DEMAND the ball, he is the leading figure on this team. And a damn good one.

Be a 'diva' AL. I want to see more great games like tonight.

Man I love watching Horford play basketball....

[parson]

He takes open shots.

[ATL Boy]

I don't care who decides to take shots between quarters 1-3 as long as they're good, smart, shots. What I really love seeing, however, is when Horford DEMANDS the ball in late game situations when we need a clutch bucket most: if he's double teamed he'll pass out, if he's fouled he'll be the one at the line, or he'll shoot. I just want to see the ball go through Horford at the end of the game, because he's the leader of this team. The Joe Johnson and Josh Smith era is over, the Al Horford era began the minute Josh Smith signed that contract with the Pistons.

[MaceCase]

Definitely don't see a correlation between team assists being up and Al's scoring being up. Surely a defensive C would help more in that regard than a sweet passing 4

[Jamaaliver]

^Perhaps.

But being 25th in total rebounding this season is problematic.

Being 29th in offensive rebounding is an embarrassment.

Been this way for the better part of a decade.

A 7-foot defensive Center would likely help with those numbers which would improve both offense and defense.
Whether it's Dwight, Asik, Nogueira...we need some help in the paint.

Ferry acquired 5 Centers this summer. He also pursued Dwight & Asik at various times this year. So clearly he is at least aware/concerned of our deficiencies.

[MaceCase]

Well the Hawks are actually 18th in total rebounding, 13th in defensive rebounding, 4th if you actually go by the percentage of defensive rebounds available rather than skewed totals. Perhaps the deficiency on the O boards is not in fact a deficiency but rather strategy, you know, where a team favors transition defense over selling out on second shot opportunities.

Boston only utilized the exact same strategy on their last run to a Conference Finals.

Woody used the inverse strategy on his way to the worst playoff beatdown in NBA history.

The Spurs are also 29th in offensive rebounding this season....Same as last....25th before that....and so on and so forth. Me thinks that ya, it is the strategy as no one could claim that they are team just missing 7 footers.

So how much good does an offensive rebounder do you if that's not the team strategy? How does that improve offense by inserting a player that can neither space, create nor pass? Is an offensive rebound reaaaaally worth more to an offense than any of those other factors? Then consequently, once you factor in pace, the Hawks don't seem to be really hurting on the defensive boards so why again is it that we think that "size" is the cure all to everything?

Ferry picked up a bunch of 6'10" guys and drafted C's weighing 2 stone less than his current C. Clearly he recognizes more ways to skin a cat than the "conventional" thinking that permeates this board. For alas, the reason Hawks won't win it all is because of lack of size.....rather than lacking even a single player that is a lock for an All NBA or even All Star reserve team. Last I checked, even with Deke in the middle the Hawks were perennially curb stomped too in the playoffs but lets keep the focus on size rather than talent though.

[Jamaaliver]

^

<sigh>

Seriously, man. You gotta chill with the attitude.

[ATLHawksfan21]

I don't see where Mace had an attitude in that post. He just dropped a knowledge A-bomb from what I see. Everything he said is logical and true. Just looking at empty stats won't get you very far. Sure we would probably rebound better if we had a 7 footer at C and Horford at PF but our offense would suffer significantly unless we landed one of the three or four 7 footers that actually can produce on the offensive end.

[Jamaaliver]

^Ok.

Here's the thing. Basic tenet of sports: The other team can't score if they don't have the ball.

Better defensive rebounding means fewer shot attempts from the other team.
Better offensive rebounding means more shot attempts for our team, and fewer fast break opportunities for the other team.

And how are the actual rebounding totals considered skewed totals?

[azuresou1]

A couple of reasons:

1) Teams play at different paces
2) Turnovers affect the number of possible rebounds. If you can force opponents to turn the ball over, there are by definition going to be fewer shot attempts and thus rebounds
3) Field goal percentage also affects number of rebounds - if the ball goes in the hoop, there is no rebound to get.

Going by defensive rebounding %, we're actually one of the BEST teams at grabbing defensive boards.

Also, offensive rebounds mean fewer fast breaks, but GOING for offensive rebounds actually usually leads to more fast breaks. By having your players go for the offensive board, it's really easy for the other team to leak out and have numbers on the break.

[Jamaaliver]

A couple of reasons:

1) Teams play at different paces
2) Turnovers affect the number of possible rebounds. If you can force opponents to turn the ball over, there are by definition going to be fewer shot attempts and thus rebounds
3) Field goal percentage also affects number of rebounds - if the ball goes in the hoop, there is no rebound to get.

Going by defensive rebounding %, we're actually one of the BEST teams at grabbing defensive boards.

Fair points, all. Focusing on rebounding and limiting turnovers are the two biggest keys to limiting opponents fast break opportunities.

But we've been a bottom of the barrel rebounding teams for years. Under numerous coaches and in numerous systems. For years we've trotted out an undersized Center AND and undersized PF in our starting frontcourt and watched them get bullied and outrebounded.

We have literally seen losses that occurred because our forwards couldn't(didn't) block out their man and the opponents slammed home a game-winning offensive rebound at the buzzer.

Also, offensive rebounds mean fewer fast breaks, but GOING for offensive rebounds actually usually leads to more fast breaks. By having your players go for the offensive board, it's really easy for the other team to leak out and have numbers on the break.

Agreed. Unless you have a massive, offensive rebounding Center to tip out balls, grab easy rebounds for putbacks or otherwise singlehandedly effect the offensive boards.

We don't need to have Teague and Korver hitting the offensive boards if we have the two biggest men on the court controlling the glass.

Also keep in mind, even if it is strategy, it's not really working. We're still not a very good team. We're in one of the weakest conferences on record and are barely above .500. We're on pace today for yet another 44 win season.

And I honestly don't know if we beat any of the other bigger teams out there with our limited talent base.

[Jamaaliver]

Headline from a year ago:

Atlanta Hawks: Rebounding has been an issue

3:56 pm December 4, 2012, by Chris Vivlamore


Vivlamore reporting from Hawks practice.

The Hawks are looking to rebound – literally – from their last loss.

The Nuggets, the NBA’s top offensive rebounding team, will be at Philips Arena Wednesday. The Hawks had a six-game win streak snapped by the Cavaliers, featuring the league’s top rebounder Anderson Varejao, Friday.

The Hawks (9-5) have been outrebounded in eight games this season, including by a 49-28 margin against the Cavaliers. They are 28th in the NBA in rebounding average (39.4), with only the Heat and Celtics worse. They are also 29th in rebounding differential (minus 4.1). The Nuggets (9-9) are tops in offensive rebounds per game (15.4) and second overall in total rebounds (46.7).

http://blogs.ajc.com/hawks/2012/12/04/a ... -an-issue/

[parson]

Going by defensive rebounding %, we're actually one of the BEST teams at grabbing defensive boards.

We're being outrebounded on the defensive boards. We average 32.0 and the opposition averages 32.9. Hard to see how we're one of the best when, overall, we're 15th in defensive rebounding, with a differential of -0.9. So far as total rebounding, we're 24th in the NBA with a differential of -2.2.

[ATLHawksfan21]

We don't need to have Teague and Korver hitting the offensive boards if we have the two biggest men on the court controlling the glass.

Also keep in mind, even if it is strategy, it's not really working. We're still not a very good team. We're in one of the weakest conferences on record and are barely above .500. We're on pace today for yet another 44 win season.

And I honestly don't know if we beat any of the other bigger teams out there with our limited talent base.

We have a mediocre team because we have average players. If we had an elite SF, we would be contending with Milsap and Horford.

[Jamaaliver]

sometimes, I think we make basketball WAAAAAAAY too complicated around here