Golden State 36-22 @ Atlanta 24-33

tontoz · Post #61 » by **tontoz** » Wed Mar 5, 2008 10:34 pm

JoshB914 wrote:We had 40 more FT's than them and lost by 17 points. They just couldn't miss from the outside.

They had around 30 points off turnovers and at least 20 second chance points. That just can't happen considering the Warriors are weak defensively and on the boards.

We had 14 turnovers in the second half for chrissakes.

JoshB914 · Post #62 » by **JoshB914** » Wed Mar 5, 2008 11:08 pm

Indeed. I was at the game and it was just bizarre from start to finish. I've never seen two teams run like that without post guys, it looked like a good high school game.

D21 · Post #63 » by **D21** » Thu Mar 6, 2008 1:27 pm

JoshB914 wrote:Indeed. I was at the game and it was just bizarre from start to finish. I've never seen two teams run like that without post guys, it looked like a good high school game.

Right, and I did not understand why Woody let them play a "run and gun" style like that in the first quarter, because even if ATL can do it and was doing it right, it a thing you have to not play like GS. At the end, they will be better.

conleyorbust · Post #64 » by **conleyorbust** » Thu Mar 6, 2008 4:39 pm

D21 wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

Right, and I did not understand why Woody let them play a "run and gun" style like that in the first quarter, because even if ATL can do it and was doing it right, it a thing you have to not play like GS. At the end, they will be better.

I don't know how you could blame Woody's first quarter strategy for this game. It was brutally obvious that we lost that game because we came out flat as hell in the second half. We proved in the first half we could play at their pace, I don't buy all that, "we tried to run with them and they were just better at it" nonsense. We came out flat, they took advantage of it and we just couldn't get back into it once we lost our rythm.

D21 · Post #65 » by **D21** » Thu Mar 6, 2008 7:00 pm

conleyorbust wrote:I don't know how you could blame Woody's first quarter strategy for this game. It was brutally obvious that we lost that game because we came out flat as hell in the second half. We proved in the first half we could play at their pace, I don't buy all that, "we tried to run with them and they were just better at it" nonsense. We came out flat, they took advantage of it and we just couldn't get back into it once we lost our rythm.

This is not what I wanted to show. I am happy that we can run like GS, and I know that Woody should let them run more, but GS is always playing like that. ATL don't have play this rhythm the majority of the games. And knowing that, watching the first quarter, I was thinking "we won't be able to keep this rythm all the game, but GS will have no problem with that", that's all.

JoshB914 · Post #66 » by **JoshB914** » Thu Mar 6, 2008 7:04 pm

We beat PHX running, and we beat Dallas running. We can beat GS when we run as well. They just couldn't miss a shot.

conleyorbust · Post #67 » by **conleyorbust** » Thu Mar 6, 2008 7:17 pm

D21 wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

This is not what I wanted to show. I am happy that we can run like GS, and I know that Woody should let them run more, but GS is always playing like that. ATL don't have play this rhythm the majority of the games. And knowing that, watching the first quarter, I was thinking "we won't be able to keep this rythm all the game, but GS will have no problem with that", that's all.

That is what I was saying, our problem wasn't that we "couldn't keep up". It was the same problem we have been killed by a few times lately. We let other teams go on runs and then fall all over ourselves trying to compensate. We could have beat them running, we could have beat them slowing down... don't get me wrong, they are more talented but they aren't a bad matchup for us because we have big men that CAN run.

D21 · Post #68 » by **D21** » Thu Mar 6, 2008 9:06 pm

Maybe that was stupid to think that, but I had a bad feeling during this first quarter that if they started to hit all their shoots during some minutes, we would be dead, because that's a thing a already see GS do, but at this moment, it's a thing ATL doesn't do. We lost lots of game like that, being on the same level except during 3, 4 or 5 minutes where the opponents hit all their shots.
It a pessimist view, I agree, but it was what I was feeling during this game.

conleyorbust · Post #69 » by **conleyorbust** » Thu Mar 6, 2008 9:57 pm

D21 wrote:Maybe that was stupid to think that, but I had a bad feeling during this first quarter that if they started to hit all their shoots during some minutes, we would be dead, because that's a thing a already see GS do, but at this moment, it's a thing ATL doesn't do. We lost lots of game like that, being on the same level except during 3, 4 or 5 minutes where the opponents hit all their shots.
It a pessimist view, I agree, but it was what I was feeling during this game.

haha, the Hawks turn pessimistic views into realist ones too often.

My point is that we were up by 5 at the half so our first half strategy wasn't the problem. The problem was that Woody let Nelson successfully adjust and Woody's counteradjustment was worthless.