Any chance keeping Woody pays off?

[killbuckner]

Tontoz- what team with worse offensive personnel do you think has used superior coaching to surpass the Hawks offense that "blows". You can think you would do things differently but I think its abundantly clear that a different coach could have easily finished this season without a top 10 offense. I just don't see how the Hawks personnel indicates that Woodson is incompetent for not finishing higher up in the rankings

[tontoz]

Tontoz- what team with worse offensive personnel do you think has used superior coaching to surpass the Hawks offense that "blows". You can think you would do things differently but I think its abundantly clear that a different coach could have easily finished this season without a top 10 offense. I just don't see how the Hawks personnel indicates that Woodson is incompetent for not finishing higher up in the rankings

Yet again you are dodging the issue. Do you ever watch the games? The issue is whether or not the Hawks would be better off running more plays that are different from 10 dibbles followed by a fadeaway.

You somehow believe that half court offense and offense mean the same thing. They don't. Half court offense means half court offense. It isn't complicated.

Given that the Hawks are 8th in the league 3 pointers made and top 5 in fast break points it would be hard NOT to be at least 10th in the league in offensive efficiency.

[killbuckner]

And I think that the Hawks offense is about as good as could ever be expected considering the personnel that Woodson has been given to work with. THe team is a top 10 offensive team and I think without a major roster change getting the Hawks into the top 5 is a total pipedream. More likely with a different coach next season the Hawks would still regress out of the top 10. I am just astounded that even with a top 10 offense people here still cling to the idea that Woodson doesn't deserve any credit.

[tontoz]

And I think that the Hawks offense is about as good as could ever be expected considering the personnel that Woodson has been given to work with. THe team is a top 10 offensive team and I think without a major roster change getting the Hawks into the top 5 is a total pipedream. More likely with a different coach next season the Hawks would still regress out of the top 10. I am just astounded that even with a top 10 offense people here still cling to the idea that Woodson doesn't deserve any credit.

The reason you don't get it is because you don't watch the games. If you watched the games you would see the constant isos, overdribbling and guys standing around watching.

apparently you don't understand that being a top 3 pt shooting team and a top fast break team will automatically make a team better than average offensively regardless of the coach.

It doesn't take a lot of talent to pass and move without the ball. The Hawks do very little of this and the reason is Woody.

[killbuckner]

I think that many teams pass around the outside to feel like they are doing something, but in reality they are just wasting the time putting the ball into the hands of people who aren't a threat to do anything with it. You can watch and think the Hawks play ugly basketball all you want, but Woodson was able to squeeze more offense out of this team than anyone could have expected and he deserves credit for that.

[tontoz]

I think that many teams pass around the outside to feel like they are doing something, but in reality they are just wasting the time putting the ball into the hands of people who aren't a threat to do anything with it. You can watch and think the Hawks play ugly basketball all you want, but Woodson was able to squeeze more offense out of this team than anyone could have expected and he deserves credit for that .

So he deserves credit because the Hawks have 5 guys shooting at least 35% from 3? he deserves credit because the Hawks have so many guys who run the break?

Nonsense. when you have a team full of guys who can hit 3s and run the break it is hard NOT to have a better than average offense.

If you pass and move without the ball you force the defense to move and anticipate where you are going to go. Only the offensive player knows where he is going. the defender has to guess and sometimes will guess wrong. When you move without the ball the defender has to fight through traffic and sometimes will get knocked off course or turn his head at the wrong time, leaving a guy wide open.

When 1 guy is dribbling and everyone else is standing around that makes things as easy as possible for the defense.

[killbuckner]

The Hawks have a bunch of guys who are better in transition than they are in halfcourt and woodson gets criticized for that? He has guys who are better at hitting open 3's than they are beating their man off the dribble, so he has 1 person attacking the defense with the others waiting for kickouts and he doesn't deserve any credit for that either? THe Hawks are a flawed offensive team that Woodson has in teh top 10 in the league. Several teams with better personnel on offense who run a style you would like more have worse offenses.

[tontoz]

The Hawks have a bunch of guys who are better in transition than they are in halfcourt and woodson gets criticized for that? He has guys who are better at hitting open 3's than they are beating their man off the dribble, so he has 1 person attacking the defense with the others waiting for kickouts and he doesn't deserve any credit for that either? THe Hawks are a flawed offensive team that Woodson has in teh top 10 in the league. Several teams with better personnel on offense who run a style you would like more have worse offenses.

Please list all the teams that have 5 of their top 8 players shooting 35% or better from 3 and are also top 5 in fast break points. Woodson doesn't "have" them 10th in the league in offense. They are there basically by default. It would be hard for a team to be below average in offense when they are so far above average in fast break points and 3 pt shooting.

No he doesn't deserve any credit for his iso nonsense. A gradeschool team can pass and move without the ball. It doesn't take a lot of talent to do that and it makes things much tougher on the defense.

We don't have a dominant one on one scorer like Lebron or Shaq so running isos all the time is just plain dumb.

[killbuckner]

tontoz- like I said, which team with a higher offensive efficency do you think has worse personnel than the Hawks? Which teams do you think that the Hawks should clearly be ahead of with competent coaching? You think the Hawks are a top 10 offensive team by default- I think that the hawks personnel on offense makes a top 10 spot on offense a pretty nice achievement and most coaches would have had the Hawks further down. For whatever reason Woodson was able to just get more production out of Flip and Bibby than other coaches have been able to and I do think he deserves credit for that. Either you think that the hawks were such an offensive juggernaut that you think that teams with weaker personnel were able to put up more points or you think the Hawks did about as well as could be expected given the roster. I just can't look at the list of teams that were more efficient than the Hawks and think that Woodson sucked because he couldn't rank higher on that list.

[tontoz]

tontoz- like I said, which team with a higher offensive efficency do you think has worse personnel than the Hawks? Which teams do you think that the Hawks should clearly be ahead of with competent coaching? You think the Hawks are a top 10 offensive team by default- I think that the hawks personnel on offense makes a top 10 spot on offense a pretty nice achievement and most coaches would have had the Hawks further down. Either you think that the hawks were such an offensive juggernaut that you think that teams with weaker personnel were able to put up more points or you think the Hawks did about as well as could be expected given the roster. I just can't look at the list of teams that were more efficient than the Hawks and think that Woodson sucked because he couldn't rank higher on that list.

That is your whole problem right there. You are looking at a list of teams instead of looking at what actually happens in the games.

There is no telling how much better the Hawks would be in the efficiency rankings if they actually ran plays other than just playing pickup ball. But it is pretty easy to see that their iso offense blows if you actually watch the games.

Since you like to look at lists of teams why don't you list all the teams that have 5 guys shooting at least 35% from 3 and can run the break like the Hawks?

[killbuckner]

You said its looking at lists- I say its looking at results. The Hawks have an ugly offense that is effective. I'd strongly prefer that over a pretty offense that is uneffective. You think that by running a different style of offense the Hawks would be more efficient- I look at the Hawks roster and think that the coach did an awfully good job getting them into the top 10. Once again- which teams with worse personnel do you think that were made into better offensive teams than the Hawks just because of coaching? You think the Hawks shoudl have been better than a Jazz team with Deron Williams, Carlos Boozer, Okur, and Milsap? Better than Denver with Carmelo, JR SMith, and Billups? I mean if you think the Hawks are only #10 on the list because of crappy coaching it should be easy to list the teams you think they should have been better than

[tontoz]

You said its looking at lists- I say its looking at results. The Hawks have an ugly offense that is effective. I'd strongly prefer that over a pretty offense that is uneffective. You think that by running a different style of offense the Hawks would be more efficient- I look at the Hawks roster and think that the coach did an awfully good job getting them into the top 10. Once again- which teams with worse personnel do you think that were made into better offensive teams than the Hawks just because of coaching? You think the Hawks shoudl have been better than a Jazz team with Deron Williams, Carlos Boozer, Okur, and Milsap? Better than Denver with Carmelo, JR SMith, and Billups? I mean if you think the Hawks are only #10 on the list because of crappy coaching it should be easy to list the teams you think they should have been better than

I don't care where they are on the list. I care about what happens on the floor. I understand something that you don't, that a guy on the move is tougher to guard than a guy standing still.

Your list won't tell you that Boozer missed most of the season and that Deron missed a lot of time as well.

You talk over and over about the hawks poor personnel but you won't give them any credit for their fast break success and their ability to hit threes. Even with all the shots the Heat made last night the Hawks still outscored them on the break 25-10.

still waiting for that list of teams that have 5 of their top 8 shooting 35% or better from 3 that can run with the Hawks. Since the Hawks roster is so bad it should be no trouble to come up with a list for someone so interested in lists.

[killbuckner]

I am still baffled that you think that Woodson deserves no credit for the Hawks scoring a lot of points from 3. Or the fact that the Hawks have personnel more suited to transition points which is an indictment on Woodson's offense.

And I absolutely disagree that the guy on the move is always tougher to guard than the guy standing still. If the guy standing still is a good spot up 3 point shooter then him running around like a chicken with his head cut off very well could be counterproductive to him standing still in a good position and waiting to hurt a team that wants to double team. Proper spacing can absolutely be more dangerous than movement. I actually do think that teams screw up by running too many Pick and Rolls and superfulous screens that don't do anything. Honestly I think that teams are overall better off letting a guy initiate the offense while setting up the rest of the players to make help defense more difficult. REally this is the core of the DDM offense which I think that more teams will start going to. If you don't have a post game and do have a lot of guys who can knock down an open 3, then letting someone initiate the offense to draw a double team and then starting the motion against an unsettled defense is a perfectly valid option given what is available.

Players are GOOD at attacking a player 1 on 1. Handchecking rules make it brutally tough to stop someone 1 on 1 and help defense is almost mandatory. Its not the motion that some basketball fans consider to be pretty but it doesn't mean that its not effective.

[tontoz]

I am still baffled that you think that Woodson deserves no credit for the Hawks scoring a lot of points from 3. Or the fact that the Hawks have personnel more suited to transition points which is an indictment on Woodson's offense.

JJ, Bibby and Mo were accomplished 3 pt shooters before they ever came here. the only reason Marvin started shooting them is that Sund gave him a mandate to shoot 3s when he took over. Flip gave credit to Price for his newfound success from 3.

I am not indicting Woody because the hawks have guys who can run. I am indicting him because his half court offense sucks.

And I absolutely disagree that the guy on the move is always tougher to guard than the guy standing still.

And you would be wrong. You are thinking of help D on another player which is a completely different subject. The guy standing is the easy one to guard. It is the guy driving to the basket that is the one who is tough to guard.

Proper spacing can absolutely be more dangerous than movement

That is assuming the ball actually gets passed around to the open man. It is ironic that you mention the Jazz since they are noted for passing and moving without the ball. They are on the complete opposit end of the spectrum from the Hawks.

We don't have a Lebron, Wade or Duncan. When you don't have a dominant player that makes it even more important to keep the ball moving. Ball movement is a foreign concept to Woody. Woody loves the dribbledribbledribbledribbledribble contested fadeaway.