Hawks

By WaCoJacket

October 5, 2005 05:50 PM | Link to this

Uptempo is the only kind of game for the players on the team. We have no Center. We should run teams to death. I expect improvement, but we will likely have 1 more bad season. Why not entertain?

Josh Smith, Marvin Williams, Childress, Salim, Joe Johnson, Lue, Harrington, etc…

LET THE GUYS RUN… We may need 1 more ball handler though…

By J.D. McClain

October 5, 2005 06:49 PM | Link to this

If the Hawks play an up-tempo defense, they will be successful running an up-tempo offense. They have the youth and athletes to get after teams and create fast breaks. Don’t be surprised if the Hawks are in the playoff hunt for an eight seed this year

By Matt

October 5, 2005 08:20 PM | Link to this

I’d rather lose 110-105 than 85-80 any day.

By Ben

October 5, 2005 09:51 PM | Link to this

I agree with Matt. That’s made Georgia Tech’s brand of basketball exciting. As they mature, they can begin to pull out some of those close ones.

By AaronB

October 6, 2005 07:19 AM | Link to this

It’s kinda interesting that this has been brought up. Last season I’ve been telling all of my friends that this team has the athleticism to run an up tempo offense. And that was without JJ, SS, and Marvin. Now with those three guys, I definately believe it is possible. I got a glimpse of this last year when we played the Phoenix Suns. The last time we played them it was a close game. Check out the box scores and you’ll see that there was plenty of lead changes. The Suns would go up by 10, then the Hawks would start to run and gun, just like the Suns, and go up a few themselves. The hawks would stay ahead, untill coach Woodstock would call a time out to tell them to slow down. This team is at it’s best in the run and gun offense. Finally, They are on the right page. If they keep this philosophy, and work on a defense that will support it, I predict post season for the Hawks this year!

By Astro Joe

October 6, 2005 08:46 AM | Link to this

In order to be an effective running team you have to do more than run fast or jump high. We need some excellent rebounders,(as you can’t start a fast break without the ball)and we need a PG who makes good decisions on the break. While I think JJ will be a good PG, I think he will struggle in fast break situations. Making smart, quick decisions and accurate passes is more challenging when you’re on the move than in a half court offense. Al is not exactly the second coming of Charles Barkley under the board, so I guess we are banking on Zaza being our rebounding force.

A running team sounds good on paper, but I do not think they have the personnel to pull it off. I would expect losing 100-80 is a more likely scenario.

By jhan

October 6, 2005 10:10 AM | Link to this

Fast paced ball will be the best syle of play for this team. This will showcase our young athletic team. It will also keep other teams from scheming against our lack of experience at the PG position. This will also allow SS & JJ more open jumpshots which they both will need to hit on a regular basis.

By THL

October 6, 2005 10:27 AM | Link to this

If you have a lack of quality size and experience, you better outrun the competition. I’ve been waiting on this style of basketball from the Hawks.

By AaronB

October 6, 2005 11:13 AM | Link to this

Astro Joe, I know what you’re trying to say, but I’ve actually watched the Hawks play all season long. And I can tell you from my personal experience that you’re wrong about them. They can run, and they can run very well. In fact every time they ran they usually caught up in a game too. It’s not just good descisions from the pg that are important. It’s also other factors; like how good are your transition players, and good team defense to create turnovers. And I can say that our’s are some of the best transitional players in the league. Even remotely questioning JJ’s ability in this playing style is foolish. I won’t even entertain to explain why, if you can’t get it. But I will tell you with the newly robust line up of transitional players, I am even more apt to say we can do it this year more than ever. Rebounding is important, but I think we will improve in this area next year also.

By Jesse

October 6, 2005 11:46 AM | Link to this

As far as rebounding this season, I think we’ll be fine. Zaza is at the very least a competent rebounder (he averaged 5 rebounds a game last season in 18 mintues per game, which means he projects to a very respectable 10+ rebounds in 36 minutes). Also, from what I understand Edwards and Batista are, if nothing else, rugged rebounders, so we should defintiley expect increased rebounding production from the center spot this season.

But our real rebounding strength comes from our guards and swingmen. We have some of the best, if not THE best, rebounding guards in the entire league. Both Joe Johnson and Josh Childress, our starting 1 and 2, are capable of averaging 5 rebounds a game. (Last year Childress averaged 6 rebounds and Johnson averaged over 4 — that’s 10 rebounds a game from your point guard and shooting guard!)

Then you have Al Harrington, Josh Smith, and Marvin Williams at the forward spots, which gives us top notch rebounders at the small forward spot and adequate rebounders at power forward.

So bascially I think we should have the rebounding we need to fuel the running game. I still worry about who’s going to push the ball up the court, but I do think we should be OK in that regard. As for finishing the fast break, we have some of the longest and most athletic group of dunkers in the league in Josh Smith, Marvin Williams, Josh Childress, and Al Harrington, plus Joe Johnson, Tyronn Lue, and Salim Stoudamire give us some deadly fast break three-point shooters.

Overall this team should be incredibly fun to watch — eeasily more fun than any Hawks team in the last 5 - 7 years.

By jason

October 6, 2005 01:22 PM | Link to this

Hey AaronB i also watched the hawks all year long and i have to agree they can be deadly when they push the ball. everybody is making out that this team was just garbage but if you actually watched the games instead of the win-loss record you would have a clear understanding that the team lost games in the fourth quarter. the fourth is when all possessions are coveted and you have little room for error and we lost from inexperience to handle pressure situations down the stretch. which would in turn translate to a 10 pt. loss. but when the game was wide open the hawks were right there always.now you add 2 shooters (JJ and SS) and a serviceable big man (pachulia)and this might be interesting. though i think there is one more move to be made for another legit big man i’m confident with the lineup going into the season , i hope john edwards and batista prove me wrong and i’ll be the 1st to admit it if they do……

By doc

October 6, 2005 03:42 PM | Link to this

hey jason i’ll fall in line to reinforce that idea as it is one i have spouted off in several attempts to rationalize the good in last years performances and part of why it was good to bring jj. there were a few games that they were out of it in the first quarter for whatever reason but there were too many games they were in at crunch time and lost even many games were led going into the fourth quarteronly to lose. we heard the excuse that it was inexperience but i think it was a severe lack of the guy that could keep other teams honest on the perimeter and sink foul shots in the fourth quarter. i dont care who brings the ball up but ss and jj can do their thing from deep and the line and marvin can go to the board and come back to the foul line with equal ability. that along with hardnosed d and boards is what will carry them through the last quarter.

a concern i have is a team also has to learn how to win whether it is little league, colllege or the pros and that will have to come from coaches and the few pros to up the ante there. now before we get on the bandwagon even if there is a great start there will come the wall that the first and second year guys are going to experience and that will be hard to overcome. so before we talk playoff lets be realistic to that point, as we saw it in js and jc last year.

one more thing about jj, frequently we read someone say he broke the bank. his contract is one that put a lot of the money at the front so relatively speaking it is a bargain. the hawks have more money to spend next year for a guy since jj got his this year almost like a bonus, we also beef up our required payroll which we would not have met if he didnt come. without him in the mix we literally would have to be throwing away money to someone that wasnt wanted. there is a cap both ways and jj helped us there from my understanding so please lets stop the money thing with jj. to not get jj was going to cost as well, the way the collective bargaining agreement works. the union protects the players by forcing the teams to always agree to spend a certain amount.

by the way it is great to read the arguments as there are many great ideas and insights passed back and forth without the rants that go on elsewhere. keep passing the knowledge guys.

By Astro Joe

October 6, 2005 03:44 PM | Link to this

AaronB, I guess I do need a lesson, because I did not see JJ lead that many fast breaks last year for Phoenix, so I will trust your opinion that his decision making ability in unquestionable. And I guess if you have blind faith that JJ can go from wing layer on the break to leading the break, then sure, a running style should be good. But we do not create turnovers, our lone shot blocker may be playing 18 feet from the basket and our best rebounder is our SG. True, if JJ can pull down 5-6 boards, it will help us to start the break faster, but I think there are far too many unknowns at this point.

What we do know is that at the end of the game, we need Al in the post with Salim up top and JJ in the corner so that if someone doubles Al, he can kick to Salim or JJ. Like Jason said, it will likely come down to executing the half-court offense in the 4Q more than a fee highlight worthy fast breaks in the 1Q.

By Aaron B.

October 6, 2005 04:55 PM | Link to this

Regardless if he’s leading the charge or if he’s just charging, JJ knows the charge. That’s the key point. Oh yeah, and he did play back up pg for Nash when Nash sat down, so that takes care of offense. Plus he guarded Tony Parker one of the fastest pg’s in the league, (shut him down) in the playoffs so that takes care of defense. It doesn’t even matter if he becomes savior for the Hawks. The point is he absolutly will improve the Hawks overall game level greatly. And I honestly think that SS will eventually take over as starting pg, moving Childress to the bench. The whole “blind faith” comment is a little silly, but since you’ve been pretty knowledgable till now Astro Joe, I’ll pay it no mind.

By doc

October 6, 2005 07:13 PM | Link to this

aaron b, unfortunately though i really like jj and have argued for his presence here, the games that phoenix lost last year were when nash was out during the regular season or when jj went down with facial fractures. they complimented each other well. i dont know who is going to miss whom. im not saying that jj cant do it but plan b may need to be thought about.

By ray

October 6, 2005 07:56 PM | Link to this

You fellas are all making some good points/arguments. Doc, I think that that JJ being the PG is not set in stone. Not only is it likely that Woody and BK have come up with alternatives, but I’m willing to bet that those other options will be explored in training camp, the preseason, and the regular season. Also, if they’re smart, and they probably are, they’ll be watching to see how the team runs with different guys at the point. Whomever the team runs the best with should be the guy who starts. Of course, this isn’t always completely cut and dry position-wise. But I don’t think there will be a complete melt down if JJ doesn’t remain the starting PG. As much as versatility has been preached, this should extend also to the PG position.