Did Woodson undermine Billy Knight?

[evildallas]

Everyone knows that Billy Knight tried to fire Mike Woodson, but did Woodson intentionally make coaching decisions to undermine Billy Knight? For years I thought Woodson was just an idiot, but now I'm starting to wonder if he was devious. Willing to hurt himself to make Knight look worse in matters that they disagreed upon. I put forth the following arguments.

Exhibit #1
Joe Johnson as PG
When BK signed Joe Johnson to the max he explained that he felt he had the skills to run the point. This was a cornerstone in the fabled all 6'9" lineup that could switch anything defensively.

Woodson action:
The experiment lasted a game and a half before Woodson pulled the plug and inserted Ty Lue in the starting lineup. Not exactly a big commitment to BK's vision. By the way who was benched to make room for Lue? 2nd year player Josh Smith. It was theorized at the time that Woodson wanted to win now, but that isn't exactly how it worked out as the team started 0-9.

In retrospect it seems that Woodson wanted a different draft direction (PG over Marvin). Rather than play it out to see if it could develop, he went back to Lue to illustrate what a flawed lineup he had been given. I'm not saying that Joe Johnson would have been a great PG, just that Mike Woodson didn't give it a serious trial.

Exhibit 2:
Shelden Williams the #5 pick overall.
BK thought the team needed defense and toughness and chose to reach on the big reputation of Shelden Williams. A lot of people disagreed with this pick.

Woodson's action:
Although Shelden Williams had played 4 years of college ball he was brought along slowly. I didn't make much of it at the time, but it did make BK's miss look more horrible because BK had stated that he thought Shelden could impact the team immediately.

Exhibit 3:
Shelden Williams Year 2
During the off season BK stated that Shelden Williams would see more time at C.

Woodson's action:
Shelden played big minutes for 3 games then had his playing time cut to almost nothing. His minutes were inconsistent for his entire stint here. When he did play, it was weird in that some sets were run to get him the ball offensively. I call that weird because few of those sets were run for Al Horford at the time. It seemed like Woodson wanted to show that Shelden was an offensive liability by goiing to him.

Exhibit 4:
Marvin Williams substitution patterns
The only way BK could survive the public reminders of the 2005 draft was if Marvin Williams turns into a star.

Woodson's action:
Unless foul problems to Josh Smith or Joe Johnson dictated other action, Marvin Williams was pulled at the 6 minute mark on the first half regardless of how he was playing at the time to insert Childress. Whether Marvin can ever become a star is up for debate. Marvin still had the 3rd most minutes on the team, but the automatic pull at 6 minutes seems to be a subtle undercutting of him. If he was allowed to stay in the game when he had the hot hand in the first quarter it could have easily resulted in 2 more points per game for his average. I wrote the rigid substitution patterns off to Woodson being a stubborn idiot, and that may have been the case, but the particular substitution seems a little suspect when it undercut many a hot start.

Summation:
When possible Mike Woodson didn't take overt actions. He was subtle like a passive-aggressive manipulator. Joe Johnson isn't a bad ball player, just not the PG that Billy Knight envisioned. Marvin Williams isn't a bad ball player, just not the superstar Billy Knight gambled on. Shelden Williams required more. If he was able to find a niche and contribute then he have been seen as salvageable, so Mike Woodson decided that he wasn't good enough to even be on the court.

When the jury decides on Mike Woodson's future, I want you to reflect on the full body of evidence and decide whether Mike Woodson tried to get most out of his personnel in the best interest of the Hawks or was he willing to let the Hawks suffer if it helped him gain the upper hand against Billy Knight. This isn't a referendum on Billy Knight. His dismissal was justified. It is a referendum on Mike Woodson. Did he do the best he could with the lineup he was given? You the jury should find Mike Woodson guilty. Guilty of not being the best coach for the Hawks. Because his personal agenda came ahead of what was best for the team.

[conleyorbust]

Well that doesn't explain why he puts so much offensive responsibility in the hands of Josh Smith, a player he fairly obviously doesn't get along with. Don't get me wrong, I think Smith takes some liberties but he is, by design, the guy that gets the ball on the perimeter.

If Woody didn't care as much about maximizing the win potential of the roster, he wouldn't play Smith as much as he does.

I see where you are coming from, especially with regards to Marv, but I think a lot of it is that Woody has no clue how to manage a roster and is therefore very methodical in his subsitutions and he is terrible at using his bit players. Also, like every coach, he loves "his guys" - in our case that would be Chil, Lue, and Lo - and overplays them, or at least plays them when they don't need to be in (Chil as a late game point guard).

[JoshB914]

Of course he undermined him. BK had terrible ideas and Woody tried to make them work.

Yes he moved JJ to SG. Mainly because it wasn't going to work with him as PG. Woody didn't move JJ to SG because of a personal agenda, he did it because JJ is more effective at SG.

Shelden played quite a bit for Woody in his rookie season until it became clear he could not cut it. So if Woody benching BK's terrible draft pick is undermining him, then kudos to him. BK handed him a scrub, and Woody treated him like one when it became clear he wouldn't be anything more than that.

Shelden year 2 was simple. If Shelden was on the floor either Smoove or Horford would not be. For BK to tell us to expect to see him more at center was both hilarious and idiotic.

The Marvin stuff I don't buy. As you said, Marv has played big minutes here for basically his entire career. Woody knew how important Marvin's production was for our offense. Him pulling him at that time was just simple substitution pattern.

I don't think Woody did the best with his personnel. But he had no choice but to "undermine" BK. The guy gave him a flawed roster from the beginning and refused to fix it.

[killbuckner]

Its pretty much a cointoss for whether marvin or Childress is better. Bringing Childress in halfway through the first quarter to see which matchup works better sounds like a good idea to me.

Scrapping bad ideas and undermining bad ideas look pretty much the same from the outside.

[JoshB914]

Woody also undermined BK when he benched Lo Wright at the end of last year and this year. He undermined BK on a lot of stuff, mainly because BK was screwing everything up.

[IDoIt4TheA]

You're giving Woody too much credit. I don't think he's that smart. Those are just examples of poor coaching.

[conleyorbust]

Its pretty much a cointoss for whether marvin or Childress is better. Bringing Childress in halfway through the first quarter to see which matchup works better sounds like a good idea to me.

Scrapping bad ideas and undermining bad ideas look pretty much the same from the outside.

KB, you have passed the point of objectivity when it comes to Woodson.

He doesn't make this particular substitution due to matchups. He does it literally every game at almost the exact same point. Even in the Seattle game where Marv had his career high, Marvin had accounted for half of our points up until the halfway point of the first, without missing a shot at that, and then Chil comes in for him.

If you think that is "seeing which matchup works better" I don't know what to tell you because it seems a lot like either sabotage or stupidity.

I think most people on this board go overboard in their reactions to you, I do generally think you are an objective guy but if you can't see Woody's rotations as automatic and unchanging then you really aren't watching.

[JoshB914]

You're giving Woody too much credit. I don't think he's that smart. Those are just examples of poor coaching.

Moving Smoove to PF, benching Shelden, and moving JJ to SG was bad coaching? If anything, the moves where Woody went against BK were his few good ones.

People will blame Woody for anything and everything nowadays.

[killbuckner]

COB- I am just saying that getting childress into the game by itself doesn't seem like a bad idea. Frankly I would have been starting him since I think Marvin's offense would have been more valuable with the backups. But that would be seen as undermining again I am sure.

I absolutely do think it was an "automatic" no matter what thing. And I think the reason for it was that he wasn't sure that Marvin was better so he was trying to split the PT. But absolutely I would prefer a coach with more flexibility.

[HoopsGuru25]

Woody also undermined BK when he benched Lo Wright at the end of last year and this year. He undermined BK on a lot of stuff, mainly because BK was screwing everything up.

Woody is probably one of the only coaches in the league who would let Lo Wright log 1000 minutes after drafting two big men the same year. I don't see how you can say Woodson benching Lo Wright(the worst player on the team) after even attempting to start him during one stretch is a ringing endorsement.

Woodson and BK both did awful jobs. Knight hired a defense and rebounding coach and failed to give him the point guard or defensive center needed to play at the pace Woody likes to play. It's also Woodson's fault that the Hawks didn't play at a faster pace(topping at 18th this year). I don't think any of it had to do with undermining BK. I think both were just bad.

Woodson and Knight were best friends before this year so I don't really get the Marvin/Joe examples. I do think that both did everything they could THIS YEAR to save their own jobs even if it meant throwing the other under the bus. BK tried to fire Woody(and you know he probably leaked it)multiple times and agreed with the fans criticisms of Woody during the townhall meeting a couple of months ago. Woody basically said he did the best he could do(37 wins?)with what he had which is basically saying that Knight gave him a horrible roster to work with(which is somewhat true). Woodson also coached like someone who was coaching for his job...thats the only explanation as to why he gave our starters no rest down the stretch...including playing them against Orlando and Miami's backups when trailing in the 4th quarter in meaningless games.

[tontoz]

BK did a pretty good job of undermining himself. he really didn't need Woody's help.

[conleyorbust]

COB- I am just saying that getting childress into the game by itself doesn't seem like a bad idea. Frankly I would have been starting him since I think Marvin's offense would have been more valuable with the backups. But that would be seen as undermining again I am sure.

I absolutely do think it was an "automatic" no matter what thing. And I think the reason for it was that he wasn't sure that Marvin was better so he was trying to split the PT. But absolutely I would prefer a coach with more flexibility.

Right, well the lack of flexibility must have been stupidity then. However, working with a fragile ego like Marv's, he should be able to manage that a little better.

Of course, its not Woody's fault that Marv has a fragile ego. Then again, its not Woody's fault that BK overdrafted certain positions, it is his fault that he managed them ineffectively.

There seem to be 2 basic schools of thought on this board. One is that regardless of the job BK did, Woody did so poorly with the roster that it is hard to evaluate BKs moves. The other seems to be that BK did such a poor job at filling out the roster that it is impossible to judge Woody's coaching.

They were both terrible and should both be gone and there is really no good argument against it. Passing up on Paul and then drafting Shel the next season was enough in my mind to put the nail in BK's coffin. For Woody, a fourth year head coach should be able to manage substitution patterns without having explicit formulas (2 fouls your out, pull Marv halfway through first, etc.).

[JoshB914]

Of course Woody coached like he was coaching for his job. He was!

BK did throw Woody under the bus to try and save his job, but amazingly Woody didn't do the same to BK. I really gained some respect for him for keeping his mouth shut.

COB (how did you get your own nickname on this board by the way?), I think there is a third school of though regarding Woody. Personally I don't see him as an especially good coach, but he was given an incredibly flawed roster, which was the reason for us losing while he was not. I just think coaching is simply overrated until you are a championship caliber team, and we are nowhere close to that level.

[CWell]

Of course Woody coached like he was coaching for his job. He was!

BK did throw Woody under the bus to try and save his job, but amazingly Woody didn't do the same to BK. I really gained some respect for him for keeping his mouth shut.

COB (how did you get your own nickname on this board by the way?), I think there is a third school of though regarding Woody. Personally I don't see him as an especially good coach, but he was given an incredibly flawed roster, which was the reason for us losing while he was not. I just think coaching is simply overrated until you are a championship caliber team, and we are nowhere close to that level.

Woody said something in the ball park of "I keep hearing about all this talent,but what talent do we have?where is all this talent?"

u don't call that opening his mouth and bashing Knight back?

[JoshB914]

^^^ Find the quote where Woody said that please. He said we were too young, needed a PG, and things of that like. But he never said anything about not having talent that I remember.

[evildallas]

I bash Woodson for blaming Youth after saying youth would no longer be an excuse, but that's a different story.

The playing of Josh Smith was a neutral subject and wouldn't undermine BK either way. Same story with Al Horford. I am accusing Woodson of making decisions on the court to reinforce the impression that whenever he and BK disagreed and BK got his way that BK was wrong.

As for abandoning bad ideas, I get that, but if we are going to go that far down a road I think they should have got more than 2 game trials. My epiphany was really that GM and Coach haven't been on the same page since year 1 and ownership should have seen this and stepped in earlier. Maybe the ownership civil war prevented doing anything? Maybe BK should have giving more weight to the input of others (actually, I think this point is obvious). My point is that Woodson hasn't been an angel or necessarily a good company man in all aspects like some have portrayed him. If Woodson doesn't fully embrace the vision of the new GM then I advocate a new coach because track history shows that Woodson isn't willing to compromise to make a vision other than his own successful regardless of what he may say publicly.

Maurice Cheeks adapted and got the most out of his roster in Philly this year. Given what I've observed from Woodson, that won't happen when he's in charge. Atlanta won't get anywhere good if we have 3 more years of front office and bench moving in different directions.

[IDoIt4TheA]

-= original quote snipped =-



Moving Smoove to PF, benching Shelden, and moving JJ to SG was bad coaching? If anything, the moves where Woody went against BK were his few good ones.

People will blame Woody for anything and everything nowadays.

Those are really common sense moves. anyone who knows basketball could see that JJ was not a good fit at PG. He is what 6'9", has a sweet J, and is a scorer. He shouldn't be used solely to create offense for other guys that takes away from his offensive game. That's why he's a SG he has the size and the touch. Shelden sucked, so of course you bench him. Smoove is not a good jump shooter, so you move him down near the basket where he is much more effective.

If you can explain to me why Woodson ALWAYS took Marv out with 6 minutes left in the first, or why he sits his players for a whole quarter when they only have 2 fouls in the game, or why he let Acie Law rot on the bench for most of the season instead of helping develop him, or why he seems to forget he has his star players on the bench (like the instance when he forgot Smoove) then maybe I will change my stance.

[killbuckner]

He took marvin out beause he wanted to get Childress in. Since Joe is the best player on the team, Marvin was the person to take out. SUre I'd prefer some more flexiblity but thats the reason. Its not at all clear that Marvin is better than CHildress. If Childress sometimes didn't play in the first quarter then people would probably be here bitching about that as well.

He let Acie Law rot on the bench because he was probably the worst PG in the league that got significant minutes this season. He didn't deserve any more playing time. Put it this way- Shelden showed more as a rookie than Acie did. If my job was on the line I wouldn't have played Acie any more either.

[JoshB914]

-= original quote snipped =-



Those are really common sense moves. anyone who knows basketball could see that JJ was not a good fit at PG. He is what 6'9", has a sweet J, and is a scorer. He shouldn't be used solely to create offense for other guys that takes away from his offensive game. That's why he's a SG he has the size and the touch. Shelden sucked, so of course you bench him. Smoove is not a good jump shooter, so you move him down near the basket where he is much more effective.

If you can explain to me why Woodson ALWAYS took Marv out with 6 minutes left in the first, or why he sits his players for a whole quarter when they only have 2 fouls in the game, or why he let Acie Law rot on the bench for most of the season instead of helping develop him, or why he seems to forget he has his star players on the bench (like the instance when he forgot Smoove) then maybe I will change my stance.

I agree with a lot of this. All I'm saying is doing the obvious was also undermining BK because the guy was such a moron. He wanted JJ as a PG, Smoove as an SF, and Shelden on the team. All of these were ridiculous ideas. So I don't see what's wrong with Woody undermining him by doing things a different way than BK wanted.

[CWell]

He took marvin out beause he wanted to get Childress in. Since Joe is the best player on the team, Marvin was the person to take out. SUre I'd prefer some more flexiblity but thats the reason. Its not at all clear that Marvin is better than CHildress. If Childress sometimes didn't play in the first quarter then people would probably be here bitching about that as well.

He let Acie Law rot on the bench because he was probably the worst PG in the league that got significant minutes this season. He didn't deserve any more playing time. Put it this way- Shelden showed more as a rookie than Acie did. If my job was on the line I wouldn't have played Acie any more either.

why do u even post?u have not a clue as to what you're talking about.U didn't watch not one game so what makes u think u have an input?u have to know something to speak on it.If not,that's the definition of ignorance.