RealGM

I'm surprised that this team couldn't at least have played like a poor mans Atlanta Hawks team.

I contribute it to poor coaching from Scott, because he came in with the wrong mentality. He tried to run this team like Kobe was 26, not 36. We had no hope of a watch Kobe jack it up offense. He was also so caught up in being differnt from dantoni, that he discouraged the three ball. The nba today is all out spacing and the three ball. Played mind games with Lin instead of telling him to run the show.

We needed ball movement and a system that was built around everyone getting up shots. It's obviously too late now, but it's the way we need to be ran moving forward.

Our most competitive basketball comes when they keep running the Princeton. Although I hate the offense because it leads to way too many long 2s. Disaster in modern bball.

I feel like if we had a Budenholzer coach who had a different emphasis, this season would've been much different. We're even built pretty similar to the Hawks.

Teague - Lin (penetrator)
Korver - Swaggy (shooter off screens)
Carroll - Kobe (jack of all trades)
Milsap - ???
Horford - Hill (jump shooting big)

Brand - Boozer (vet big)
Scott - Kelly (floor spacer)
Thabo - Wes (shooter with length)
Schroeder - Clarkson (athlete)
Mack - Ellington (shooter)
Antic - ???

Despite no antic, it's pretty close. Everyone keeps saying Julius is like zach Randolph/Kenneth faried but I disagree. I flat out see Paul milsap 2.0 IF he can develop a 3 point shot. Both are smaller power forwards that kill the defender off the dribble with his first step. It's who he should model his game after because it's the way the modern 4 can be most effective.

I'm not saying we'd be anywhere as close to as good as those guys. I feel like we'd been a LOT better than what our record is today if we had a popovich like coach.

That said I prefer to suck, we need that top 5 pick lmao

Thoughts?

Not even close talent wise. You're talking about a team filled with bench players compared to a team with the best shooting SF and two big men playing like All-Stars.

But yes, Budenholzer is a superior coach with a much better system.

Jordan Hill is no Horford, Swaggy P is no Korver and Lin definitely is not consistent like Teague. We also lack a back up PG like Schroeder, not to mention playing in the Pacific division isn't as easy as in the Southeast where 3/5 teams is below 0.500.

The talent disparity in your comparisons is pretty wide. Take the Horford and Hill comparison in which you labeled them as jump shooting bigs. Horford is an elite shooting big, Hill really shouldn't be shooting all that much.

Maybe I should've used the word POOR mans team when I said similar lol... Talent is no where on the same level but from a role perspective they could be ran the same...

Why do guys think we always have to copy cat somebody else ? The Hawks have a coveted C/PF in Al Horford who happens to be better than any front line guy we have, then they also have a fairly decent lead guard in Teague who can hold his own most nights against any guard in the league. Atlanta has talent and I admit I doubted them coming into the season, but I knew everything hinged on Horford. Once he got fully healthy they took off.

Our situation has NOTHING....absolutely NOTHING to do with Scott or his system. Simply put we don't have the players. Budenholzer was one more bad season from being axed, especially with the Hawks up for sale a new owner wouldn't have had any problem pink slipping him. But now that they're winning in an extremely weak eastern conference, I'm not all that surprised by what they're doing.

But I bet anything they won't see the Finals....believe that.

TyCobb wrote:Not even close talent wise. You're talking about a team filled with bench players compared to a team with the best shooting SF and two big men playing like All-Stars.

But yes, Budenholzer is a superior coach with a much better system.

not to mention Jeff Teague playing at an All Star level.

The Hawks have all star level talent. We don't.

DEEP3CL wrote:Why do guys think we always have to copy cat somebody else ? The Hawks have a coveted C/PF in Al Horford who happens to be better than any front line guy we have, then they also have a fairly decent lead guard in Teague who can hold his own most nights against any guard in the league. Atlanta has talent and I admit I doubted them coming into the season, but I knew everything hinged on Horford. Once he got fully healthy they took off.

Our situation has NOTHING....absolutely NOTHING to do with Scott or his system. Simply put we don't have the players. Budenholzer was one more bad season from being axed, especially with the Hawks up for sale a new owner wouldn't have had any problem pink slipping him. But now that they're winning in an extremely weak eastern conference, I'm not all that surprised by what they're doing.

But I bet anything they won't see the Finals....believe that.

Hawks and Budenholzer didn't have a "bad season" last year. That's a HUGE, HUGE overstatement. They played remarkably well considering Horford was hurt most of the year which meant that Milsap and Mike Scott (both barely 6'8) got the lion's share of the PF/C minutes.

Slava wrote:Jordan Hill is no Horford, Swaggy P is no Korver and Lin definitely is not consistent like Teague. We also lack a back up PG like Schroeder, not to mention playing in the Pacific division isn't as easy as in the Southeast where 3/5 teams is below 0.500.

Hey Slava. I disagree with you here. At least for the "lack of PG back up" we have Lin and Price who would/are great back up point guards (more so Price) but that's it back up guards is what they are.

We need a starting PG and a Starting C and we'll be ready to go:)

Many teams are also trying to get the big #threeorfour# we need to stick to what works best. #ABIG2 AND some great roll playing shooters.

I wouldn't mind having a Jennings or another ball dominant SG as teams won't be able to double Kobe or Swaggy all the time.

also they play in the east

Pop's protege, he's no kidding. It took them a while to gel but gel they did. OTOH Scott has always sucked in his first year, let's see if this is like Cleveland or NO/NJ. He's trying to get that pick while getting people to watch the games, not easy. Changing from historically bad D to historically O in the starting lineup in the name of experimentation, I doubt he would do that in a normal situation. One can't judge him based on this year afterall.

This team lacks consistency. Lin in everything, especially the mind; Wes, Hill and Nick in shooting; Boozer and Hill in defense; Kobe in minutes and physique. If these guys play consistently, they are in the East and there's no Nash/Pho pick problem, they'd be gunning for the playoffs for sure.

Horford and Millsap are far from elite jump shooting bigs. Their shots just count for more points.

DEEP3CL wrote:Why do guys think we always have to copy cat somebody else ? The Hawks have a coveted C/PF in Al Horford who happens to be better than any front line guy we have, then they also have a fairly decent lead guard in Teague who can hold his own most nights against any guard in the league. Atlanta has talent and I admit I doubted them coming into the season, but I knew everything hinged on Horford. Once he got fully healthy they took off.

Our situation has NOTHING....absolutely NOTHING to do with Scott or his system. Simply put we don't have the players. Budenholzer was one more bad season from being axed, especially with the Hawks up for sale a new owner wouldn't have had any problem pink slipping him. But now that they're winning in an extremely weak eastern conference, I'm not all that surprised by what they're doing.

But I bet anything they won't see the Finals....believe that.

I disagree. I think it has a LOT to do with Scott. I'm not going with this Atlanta comparison but this team could do a lot better with a different coach that exploits the strength of players. The players are better than some of the assessments of them here.

bws94 wrote:

DEEP3CL wrote:Why do guys think we always have to copy cat somebody else ? The Hawks have a coveted C/PF in Al Horford who happens to be better than any front line guy we have, then they also have a fairly decent lead guard in Teague who can hold his own most nights against any guard in the league. Atlanta has talent and I admit I doubted them coming into the season, but I knew everything hinged on Horford. Once he got fully healthy they took off.

Our situation has NOTHING....absolutely NOTHING to do with Scott or his system. Simply put we don't have the players. Budenholzer was one more bad season from being axed, especially with the Hawks up for sale a new owner wouldn't have had any problem pink slipping him. But now that they're winning in an extremely weak eastern conference, I'm not all that surprised by what they're doing.

But I bet anything they won't see the Finals....believe that.

I disagree. I think it has a LOT to do with Scott. I'm not going with this Atlanta comparison but this team could do a lot better with a different coach that exploits the strength of players. The players are better than some of the assessments of them here.

The best coaches will give you something like 10 wins max. So if you gave Popovich this roster, the Lakers might finish with 30 wins with the pick handed over to Phoenix.

You could hire a first year coach who run and gunned his way to a 40 win team. But those teams won't win the important games. The same holds true with the slow the pace down, score in the 90s teams. Those 2 styles generate wins in the regular season, but they're not built for the playoffs. To get to and win in the playoffs, you need a talented roster.

While it's true that the team doesn't have enough talent, I do think Scott hasn't maximized some players' strengths. It doesn't matter this season but it will matter if we get some semblance of a competitive team next year.

ArC_man wrote:While it's true that the team doesn't have enough talent, I do think Scott hasn't maximized some players' strengths. It doesn't matter this season but it will matter if we get some semblance of a competitive team next year.

Which players do you feel like should be playing significantly better?

skullz wrote:

Slava wrote:Jordan Hill is no Horford, Swaggy P is no Korver and Lin definitely is not consistent like Teague. We also lack a back up PG like Schroeder, not to mention playing in the Pacific division isn't as easy as in the Southeast where 3/5 teams is below 0.500.

Hey Slava. I disagree with you here. At least for the "lack of PG back up" we have Lin and Price who would/are great back up point guards (more so Price) but that's it back up guards is what they are.

We need a starting PG and a Starting C and we'll be ready to go:)

Many teams are also trying to get the big #threeorfour# we need to stick to what works best. #ABIG2 AND some great roll playing shooters.

I wouldn't mind having a Jennings or another ball dominant SG as teams won't be able to double Kobe or Swaggy all the time.

Yeah if we consider Lin a back up at this point then he might be same caliber as Schroeder. Schroeder is more hyper on defense but that would mean we have a better player at that position, which we lack.

ChokeFasncists wrote:Changing from historically bad D to historically O in the starting lineup in the name of experimentation, I doubt he would do that in a normal situation. One can't judge him based on this year afterall.

You keep referencing to the historically bad offense without any proof or backing in terms of statistical evidence when in reality, the offense is not even much worse than league average at this present moment, not to mention history wise.

aaron_gray wrote:

ArC_man wrote:While it's true that the team doesn't have enough talent, I do think Scott hasn't maximized some players' strengths. It doesn't matter this season but it will matter if we get some semblance of a competitive team next year.

Which players do you feel like should be playing significantly better?

Significantly better is a stretch. I do think players like Ellington and Kelly could be put in better positions to succeed. For example, I think many of the opportunities we give to Hill at the elbow would be much better suited for someone like Kelly as he has better ball handling, passing, shooting, and decision making.