GT #66: Hawks @ Wizards 7:00 PM 03/08 (NBCSW/980 AM)

[Kanyewest]

Gafford indirectly responsible for a few of those turnovers, there were a couple of alley oops where he didn't even make an attempt to jump. Maybe it was the fact that this was his 4th game in 5 days, but I'm wondering if the Wizards need to transition out of this big lineup. 4 points and 2 rebounds is pretty awaful- although Clint Capella wasn't much better. I think Unseld went to Gibson just to see if he could provide anything but it wasn't much- I'm wondering if Xavier Cooks would see that role.

Monte Morris seemed pretty bad off the bench at least in the 2nd half. He was forced to be more aggressive in the bench role which he apparently forgot how to do in his Denver days and was more inefficient. The pairing of Morris and Kispert was bad defensively although Kispert had a couple nice defensive plays, but than had to give up an obligatory free lane and dunk to the basket to remind us that he still has room to grow in that aspect of his game.

[payitforward]

Do you know why there are so many timeouts in the 4th quarter and the coach tries to save his timeouts , easy the Coach has the say in what he wants done .
Saying its on the players ,duhhh ,is ignoring the playcalls the Coach is calling for.

How many times do you have to see the same plays play out in close games to see another loss from a winnable game.
Now the real closeminded are not paying attn to Kuz and KP telling all of us the plays being called and runned for Beal are from WUJs directive.
Whats worst is the other team is running plays and passing the ball for the best shot . We are seeing the contrast between winning plays and losing plays called during late game timeouts.
Quit making excuses for Wes Unseld Jr , you are becoming a minority opinion quickly.

As I pointed out, we allowed them to take 2 more shots than we took & 9 more FTAs than we took.
They were able to turn those 11 extra scoring opportunities into exactly how many extra points, tleikheen? The answer is 2 -- they managed 2 more points than us on 9 extra FTAs & 2 extra shots.

Except for giving them those extra shots & FTAs we outplayed them in every way. In fact, the turnovers alone, the extra turnovers & nothing else, cost us the game.

You're entitled to your opinion, of course. Opinions are free.

But for you to be right, Wes Unseld Jr. must be the one responsible for those extra turnovers. &, honestly, I'd be surprised if that were true.

Oh, & all that stuff about bad play calls is obviously false.
In fact, we ran an incredibly efficient offense, a far more efficient offense than Atlanta -- an unbelievably efficient & effective offense in fact!

Or did you miss the fact that we scored 106 points on only 83 shots? That we went 14-17 (.824) from the line?

Once again, if you give your opponent 9 more trips to the line than you get, & you also give your opponent 2 more FGAs than you get to take, you can't be surprised if they wind up scoring more points than you score -- what would you expect to happen if not that?

We outplayed Atlanta in every way last night. Except for one.

We called better plays than they did, we scored way more efficiently on those plays. We had way more assists than they did. We had way more defensive rebounds than they did.

Only one problem. We turned the ball over 6 more times than they did. Had 2 fewer steals than they did. That & only that sufficed to cost us a game which was, as you say, "winnable."

Nothing else.

[CntOutSmrtCrazy]

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

This is exactly what I've been saying. PREDICTABLE. When even the players have to fess up, you know it is undeniable. Force feed, ISOs, looking off teammates. It's what I see with my two eyes every game, and folks want to talk about the other players. The way we play the game is a morale crushing brand of basketball. It's the Beal Show, and when it's not him it's either the Kuzma or Porzingis Show. Not the Wizards.

I didn't see this until today, but feel vindicated that even Kuzma, a supposed member of the Big 3, knows that their is a hierarchy on the team, no matter if it is for the good of the team. "Live and die by it" is code for mostly dead because of it.

WUJ is a weak coach and the players know it.

[payitforward]

I just don't understand that concluding sentence. I see no reason to believe that it has anything to do with the body of your post.

If you're suggesting that we should maybe bench Bradley Beal, because of... whatever... then are you asking to win games with Nunn at the 2?

As well, do you think our owner wants us to bench Bradley Beal?

[CntOutSmrtCrazy]

I just don't understand that concluding sentence. I see no reason to believe that it has anything to do with the body of your post.

If you're suggesting that we should maybe bench Bradley Beal, because of... whatever... then are you asking to win games with Nunn at the 2?

As well, do you think our owner wants us to bench Bradley Beal?

I assume you are talking to me...

He's a weak coach because he let's the 4th quarter be Beal Ball, and the players know that it's his ball because its his team regardless of the impact it has on a winning product. WUJ doesn't have the stomach to tell his player, to lead, and that it can't be that way. He is by default a weak coach. Coaching is about winning ball games. IF WUJ is so risk adverse as say Nate talks about, then wouldn't you do everything in your power to win games instead of doing something that loses you games.

And no, I don't expect Nunn to be in there, Beal should be in there. We can both say Beal can be in the game and play a smart brand of basketball at the same time, right? This bull of watching him pound the rock, turn the ball over, and have lapses on defense (because he's exerting too much energy on offense) is a tried and trued method that has consistently led to poor results.

[payitforward]

To me, this comment...

...exactly what I've been saying. ...Force feed, ISOs, looking off teammates. It's what I see with my two eyes every game, and folks want to talk about the other players. The way we play the game is a morale crushing brand of basketball. It's the Beal Show, and when it's not him it's either the Kuzma or Porzingis Show. Not the Wizards....

...seems to ignore what I thought was the key remark in that trio of tweets -- namely this one:

Read on Twitter

"We can fill up points."
No problem with our offense the other night, that's for sure!

As a team, we had one of our best nights of the year offensively.
If you can turn 83 FGAs & 17 FTAs into 120 points, you don't have a problem on offense.

Not only that, but we had 34 assists -- almost certainly the highest number of any game this season, & certainly one of the top 2 or 3.

So much for "force feed, ISOs, looking off teammates."
Especially given that Bradley Beal had 8 assists that night!

We lost that game for one main reason -- turnovers.
We had 17 to their 11. & lost by 2 points. Duh.

Do you need a secondary reason?
Ok, then you can ask how we managed to give them 26 FTAs while commiting only 16 fouls?

The answer is obvious, isn't it?
Most of those fouls were committed while one of the Hawks was shooting.

In short, the loss can be blamed exclusively on turnovers & sloppy defense.

Nothing else. Above all certainly not on Brad somehow being "selfish." Brad took 19 shots in 37 minutes. That's below his career average -- & way below what he was doing 2-3 years ago.

[payitforward]

I just don't understand that concluding sentence. I see no reason to believe that it has anything to do with the body of your post.

If you're suggesting that we should maybe bench Bradley Beal, because of... whatever... then are you asking to win games with Nunn at the 2?

As well, do you think our owner wants us to bench Bradley Beal?

I assume you are talking to me...

Yes, asking for help in understanding your point.

...He's a weak coach because he let's the 4th quarter be Beal Ball, and the players know that it's his ball because its his team regardless of the impact it has on a winning product....

I hope we can exchange ideas about this without it becoming unpleasantly argumentative. We both experience the same repeated frustration as Wizards fans.

I think I addressed this point in my previous post.
Essentially, we lost because of turnovers & sloppy defense.

Brad bears some responsibility for turnovers, obviously -- he had 5 of them!
But, overall, guards always turn the ball over more than bigs, because they handle the ball more. Yet, Kuz, Gafford & Deni combined for 9 turnovers.

6 more TOs than the Hawks along with managing to put them on the line 26 times on only 16 fouls (i.e. playing bad defense) that's what cost us the game.

Nothing else.

...WUJ doesn't have the stomach to tell his player, to lead, and that it can't be that way. He is by default a weak coach. Coaching is about winning ball games. IF WUJ is so risk adverse as say Nate talks about, then wouldn't you do everything in your power to win games instead of doing something that loses you games....

Turnovers & sloppy, fouling defense lost us the game. How can this not jump out at you from the obvious facts? Those two things & nothing else.

...Beal can be in the game and play a smart brand of basketball at the same time, right? This bull of watching him pound the rock, turn the ball over, and have lapses on defense (because he's exerting too much energy on offense) is a tried and trued method that has consistently led to poor results.

Brad's not a very good defender; we can all see that. But, in the case of this game, his defense was a trivial issue.

I suppose, after all, that if we lose by two points we can pick any single event we want to -- & blame the loss on it.
But, in the end, if we give an opponent 11 more chances to score than we have, which is what happened the other night, they are pretty likely to beat us, don't you think?

So, if as fans we're going to be frustrated by the loss, shouldn't we point out this team weakness? I don't see how they are the fault of the coach. Well... they are not.