Poll: Woody in 10-11

ATL DirtyBird · Post #1 » by **ATL DirtyBird** » Sat Mar 27, 2010 4:03 am

Will he be coaching this team?

Other questions I have.
Does our playoff success determine if we keep him?
Does Joe's decision impact him?
Etc.
Discuss. Im very intrigued.

JoshB914 · Post #2 » by **JoshB914** » Sat Mar 27, 2010 5:20 am

Depends what happens in the playoffs.

HoopsGuru25 · Post #3 » by **HoopsGuru25** » Sat Mar 27, 2010 5:28 am

I'm not sure what the Hawks budget is when it comes to hiring a coach. I really don't want to see a situation where the Hawks hire some random assistant and then the team just quits on him mid way through the season like the 2009 Pistons. Getting your team to compete on a game to game basis is more than half the battle in the NBA.

killbuckner · Post #4 » by **killbuckner** » Mon Mar 29, 2010 12:51 pm

I think the hawks will win in the first round and lose in the second. the team will use Woodson as a scapegoat and he will go to another team. I don't think the team will pay what it takes to get an upgrade on woodson and next season the hawks will win fewer games than they did this year.

azuresou1 · Post #5 » by **azuresou1** » Mon Mar 29, 2010 1:35 pm

Let's hire Tom Thibodeau - I'm a fan of his body of work.

theatlfan · Post #6 » by **theatlfan** » Mon Mar 29, 2010 5:32 pm

I'll agree with kb (mostly). Barring a major upset, we're looking @ a 2nd round out in the playoffs. Unless it's a very good series (like we take 'em to 7 games), then I don't think that we can keep Woody. He stated the goal of getting to the Conference Finals this year and if we bow out in 4 or 5 games in round 2, then it'd be hard to argue that we've made significant strides this year.

I don't know about kb's scenario thereafter though. Would the Spirit put out some $$$ to hire a name coach? Does Sund have an ace up his sleeve when it comes to hiring a new coach? I dunno, but I wouldn't doubt either scenario. We've still got a relatively young team and an AS FA. If we go the cheap route and hiring some unknown who isn't highly thought of, then we've blown our window. In this scenario, I will be very interested in watching the process of hiring the new coach.

Skyhawk1 · Post #7 » by **Skyhawk1** » Mon Mar 29, 2010 6:15 pm

He's got to go. With JJ leaving, that shouldn't be hard. I doubt most of the other players like him that much. Our offense is a disaster, Crawford has saved the 2nd unit, and poor Teague looks a lot like A. Law to me. Then, he says stuff like Horford needs more touch when he calls 55 plays for JJ and lets him pound the ball like crazy.

parson · Post #8 » by **parson** » Tue Mar 30, 2010 9:00 pm

I just have to believe that - with our young and talented team - that there are many men who'd give their right arm to coach us.

HoopsGuru25 · Post #9 » by **HoopsGuru25** » Tue Mar 30, 2010 9:08 pm

parson wrote:I just have to believe that - with our young and talented team - that there are many men who'd give their right arm to coach us.

It depends how much the Hawks would be willing to offer. Woody's current salary probably isn't even half of what someone like JVG would ask for.

JoshB914 · Post #10 » by **JoshB914** » Tue Mar 30, 2010 11:30 pm

parson wrote:I just have to believe that - with our young and talented team - that there are many men who'd give their right arm to coach us.

Don't see any established HC's thinking that way when considering how little ASG are willing to pay them.

killbuckner · Post #11 » by **killbuckner** » Tue Mar 30, 2010 11:54 pm

I have an easier time imagining an NBA coach giving up his arm rather than half his paycheck.

I just think that with a lockout looming that there is NO WAY that the ASG pays big money for a coach that they would have to pay during the lockout.

parson · Post #12 » by **parson** » Wed Mar 31, 2010 1:58 am

Y'all may be right, but there are a lot of coaches who aren't presently hired, there are a lot of good men who'd like to become NBA coaches and there are a lot of assistants who need a first job.

Think of it: if you take the Hawks - a historically poor franchise - far in the playoffs, you can acquire a pretty good reputation. Consider the good articles Woodson has received.

We have really good talent. A good coach could make quite a name for himself.

Besides, y'all are acting as if all the prospective coaches are already making more than Woodson's $2million....

"Hey! I'm only earning in the low 6 figures right now, but that pitiful $2million is an unacceptable insult to me."

HoopsGuru25 · Post #13 » by **HoopsGuru25** » Wed Mar 31, 2010 2:56 am

Besides, y'all are acting as if all the prospective coaches are already making more than Woodson's $2million....

"Hey! I'm only earning in the low 6 figures right now, but that pitiful $2million is an unacceptable insult to me."

It amazes me that so many fan bases on realgm are sold that anyone would be an upgrade over their current coach. Replacing Woodson with someone who has no head coaching experience would be beyond stupid.

parson · Post #14 » by **parson** » Wed Mar 31, 2010 8:06 pm

^"Beyond stupid" was hiring a coach who wants ONLY veterans and hates kids (Woodson) to coach a team of youngters. Man, oh man, would I like to have those developmental years back.

But, off the top of my head, since I know a little bit about their situations, I'd say Alex English and Xavier McDaniel would be good gambles. Neither has NBA head coaching experience but both have a good amount of almost every other kind of experience.

HoopsGuru25 · Post #15 » by **HoopsGuru25** » Wed Mar 31, 2010 8:20 pm

Which years or development have been wasted? People who just ended up being bad picks like Shelden,Salim,Acie,or Solo?

The Hawks have improved every year and they compete in nearly every game(which isn't easy to do in today's NBA). You don't change coaches in a situation like that unless you're going to bring in someone whose proven.

azuresou1 · Post #16 » by **azuresou1** » Wed Mar 31, 2010 8:25 pm

You can be a great player and still wither away on a bench because your coach won't play you. Look at Chauncey Billups and Boston. Or T-Mac and the Raptors.

Teague right now is not getting half of the playing time he should be getting, and that is killing his development.

parson · Post #17 » by **parson** » Wed Mar 31, 2010 8:42 pm

HoopsGuru25 wrote:Which years or development have been wasted? People who just ended up being bad picks like Shelden,Salim,Acie,or Solo?

The Hawks have improved every year and they compete in nearly every game(which isn't easy to do in today's NBA). You don't change coaches in a situation like that unless you're going to bring in someone whose proven.

Marvin Williams never has been used by Woodson, nor has Woodson ever revealed a plan for his usage. His "role" is to stand on the right wing OUT OF THE WAY. When we use him, he produces, but right now, it seems as if he's in Joe's way if he moves around.

Josh Smith has improved on his own. Each year, until this one, we've heard of Woodson getting mad at something Smoove's done, because Smoove has been coaching himself. Only now, as the finished product is starting to take shape, do we see Woodson easing off. Josh Smith has developed without Mike Woodson's help -- or even his agreement.

Al Horford has been poorly used by Woodson. The guy has been an afterthought in Woodson's "system."

Acie Law IV is beginning to show what he's got, after being buried on Woodson's bench. There's talent there, although you'd never know by watching how Woodson used him. Jeff Teague is now getting the bench-and-inconsistent-minutes treatment that Woodson gave AL.

And there is no excuse for Woodson not turning Sheldon Williams into at least a Zaza-type at PF. If you can't turn SW into Kurt Rambis-lite, you stink as a teacher. A good coach could've gotten a Paul Silas out of him. That's why teams like the Celtics are willing to take a chance on him.

Turn it around: tell me ONE youngster that Woodson has "coached up" while here?

HoopsGuru25 · Post #18 » by **HoopsGuru25** » Wed Mar 31, 2010 9:57 pm

You are cherry picking your arguments.

Marvin-Your opinion that he's this great offensive weapon who the Hawks don't use means as much as those who think he's just an uncoordinated scrub. The reality is that he's someone in the middle and that he's NEVER lost his starting spot due to performance in 4 years.

Smith-Woodson made a mistake by allowing t to chuck 3s but I don't understand your point. What does 'Josh Smith has developed w/o Mike Woodson's help" mean? Is he supposed to stay after practice and help him work on post moves? A coach develops a player by giving him the opportunity to show what he can do during the games.

Horford-Made the all-star team on a rookie contract while playing an entirely new position in the pros.

Law-Wasn't a fan of his minutes when the team had AJ/Lue but was pretty redundant after the Bibby trade because they were trying to make the playoffs. I still think he can be a decent backup if he ever gets an outside shot but a playoff team shouldn't go out there way to develop a low upside guy who spent 4 years in college. The teams he's been on this year didn't care about his development either judging by his minutes.

HoopsGuru25 · Post #19 » by **HoopsGuru25** » Wed Mar 31, 2010 10:01 pm

Shelden was also too big of a reach to take seriously. The mocks had him late lottery/mid 1st round until the rumors of him being promised at 5. His mpg have gone down every year.

I also don't really put too much stock into "coaching" players up in basketball. The majority of key players on the real contenders(LA/Cle/Orl) weren't developed by their current coach. I guess the one exception would be Bynum but Phil doesn't like him and never plays him at the end of games.

parson · Post #20 » by **parson** » Wed Mar 31, 2010 10:34 pm

"Cherry picking" my arguments? I believe I named the 1st rounders we had, minus Childress (forgot about him; go ahead and add him: what'd Woodson ever do for him?).

As for the rest, I'll leave them as your opinion but let me say that Horford was a center in college, just as he is for us.

Where did Woodson ever develop one of our youngsters? I don't see even one.

Woodson's style of coaching is fine for a veteran team but we chose to go with youth. Youth needs to be nurtured and taught. It was criminal to go with Woodson's approach with such a wealth of young talent.