Wednesday, December 2, 2009

Game Recap - Raptors @ Hawks

Preamble Ramble

Well, that's how you respond to what should be looked at as our worst loss of the year. Losing to a short handed Pistons left us blog-less for 3 days and then, rant-i-fied when we did, so thanks Hawks for making us take a break and simply enjoy a game full of winning basketball plays. And with that, we give you a full game recap.

Game Recap - Hawks 146, Raptors 115

Overall Observations:
  • Let's not get too excited - a game where the main Raptor starters don't play half the game should be taken with a grain of salt. Not their night!
  • That said, it would be nice if the Raptors even attempted to play defense in the game. I mean 146 points...come on, son!
  • Let's hope that Hedo was true to his word that he felt that his family would fit better in Toronto b/c passing up Orlando and Portland for Toronto...hmmm, not the best basketball move.
  • This would be a good time to reiterate that when the game plays through the frontcourt - it is so much easier to win a game.
  • File this under the "Never Gonna Happen Again" category - Horford leads the team in shot attempts while Crawford and Johnson are healthy and in the game.
  • Finally, when Morris and Collins get more than 2 minutes in a game something has either gone horribly right or horribly wrong. There's no in-between on this.
  • Did Mo Evans fall into a Woodson doghouse? Not playing in this blowout until the late 3rd quarter seems kinda off...
Str8 Butter Award - Mike Bibby came out ready to show that his ankle is nothing to worry about and that he will not be Wally Pipp'ed anytime soon. A big night from him steadied the Hawks until they determined that the Sixers had no answer for Horford and Josh Smith on the interior.

Starter Kudos/Smackdown -

* M. Williams - Good Game, Marvin..not sure there is anything to glean from this game, but if you are shooting better and you're more aggressive then we'll take that.
* Josh Smith - More evidence that your defensive player of the year bid is actually not fool's gold.
* M. Bibby - Can hit the 3s, but not the free throw...typical!
* J. Johnson - Truly, truly, truly - this is what we want to see from you..no overdribbling, just quick passing and playmaking and taking over a game when and only when the situation dictates it.
* A. Horford - Again, don't get used to it - you as our shot leader might never happen again, but way to take advantage and show how easy the game is when you provide production in the paint.

Bench Kudos/Smackdown

* J. Crawford - What can we say - kudos to the bench all around!
* J. Teague - Ah, young Teague - save not knowing how to finish without getting your shot blocked, I STILL, for the life of me, can't figure out why this guy can't get consistent minutes.
* M. Evans - The doghouse watch has officially begun...
* Joe Smith - Great spark off the bench tonight - every time he gets good minutes we say - Solomon Who?
* Z. Pachulia - All you need to know about Zaza was on display when you saw Zaza in the stands saving a ball during a blowout. Respect the Zaza!
* R. Morris - Yes, almost a full quarter of action - dropping in bunnies! Man, blowouts are so fun.
* J. Collins - Yes, almost a full quarter of action - fouling and looking like he needed minutes to losing some weight! Yes, we said it - NOW, we understand why he's been glued to the bench - we've gotta Eddy Curry situation going on here.
* Hunter - Inactive

Coaching Kudos/Smackdown

No need to repeat our last rant on this, so we'll just say - great response, great use of the bench - please continue it. If you were paying attention, the bench EXTENDED the lead. See, Woody - you actually can do better when you play your bench. That is all.

Str8 Talk Love

Final Notes - Again, nothing to get excited about - Raptors didn't even play, so let's take our health and W and keep it moving!

Season Prediction

50-32!!!!

22 comments:

thirdfalcon said...

I'm a little curious that you think we will only win 50 games this year. Do you think we are going to get worse as the year goes along? We are currently on pace to win 59 games. To win 50 we would have to go 37 and 27 the rest of the way. A winning percentage of 56%. Or basically the same pace we had last year. You really don't think that any of the improvement we've seen so far is tangible?

Surely you don't still think that the East is better. The only teams that appear to be any better are us and the Heat. The Wizards suck, ditto for the sixers and raptors. And it appears the bulls don't have enough scoring or an improved Derrik Rose. So what is it?

thirdfalcon said...

Forgot about Detroit. They are worse too. Though I forgot about Milwaukee, they are certainly better.

ATL_Hawk_Luv said...

@TF, I'm not sold on us on the road and that's where we need improvement to win games. We are doing what we did at home, but it only took some injuries and getting worn down in the latter half of the season to get us off track.

So, I'm not predicting that, but I think not accounting for injuries and losing games to injury ravaged teams just says that we aren't elite. Winning 60 games would be elite. Winning 50 means we're good. I think we're good. Haven't seen anything but being slightly better than last year. So, none of that means that I can't be convinced that we could do better, but that would require more reliance on the frontcourt and less on the back court.

I also think you're acting as if the East hasn't be injury ravaged. Washington has been ravaged, Detroit has been ravaged, Sixers with 2 major injuries, Chicago hasn't clicked yet and has a few injuries including Rose in the preseason. So, only Toronto looks like it's a bad team, but again - you have to account for the fact that all of these teams (unlike the Hawks) had lots of changes that still need to mesh.

So, I don't think it's smart to think that what's happening now is a complete predictor of what will happen later. I still consider the East a Big 3 - we still have some work to do to convince me that we can contend for the division with Orlando or the East. So, I'm happy to increase my prediction, but I'm not ready to do that yet. I thought we turned the corner last year too and we spent the last 3 months playing average basketball. I wouldn't be surprised to see something similar happen to this squad. I'm not saying it will, but I have to account for all of this in my prediction. I think you are only accounting for the best case scenario and a belief that all the teams are going to perform as they have to date. i don't believe that that's going to be the case.

thirdfalcon said...

Ok, just wanted to hear your reasoning. I just think that at least half those teams (to be kind) are going to end up like they look right now. And I think that barring injuries we are better than we were last year.

Maybe we slide a bit, but not to the level that were were at last year imo. The only player who I'm worried about wearing down is Joe, no one else is really playing that many minutes.

But just to be clear if your saying that we are going to go the rest of the way with a 57% winning percentage, then you are actually saying that we are the not any better than last year going forward. Props for sticking to your guns though.

ATL_Hawk_Luv said...

But don't be too tied to this prediction thing - I'm not trying to say anything about the Hawks or the East as a result of my prediction. I don't have a problem with being wrong about the prediction or that we might be a part of the Big 3 to make a Big 4.

I simply am saying that about 20% of the season in...there are still a lot of variables that haven't stabilized yet. I'd like to believe in the start, but I really think we won only 3 good games (at Portland, at home vs. Portland and at Boston). The rest we should have won and as much as we destroyed the Raptors and Nuggets - neither team even showed up. So, right now - I can't say what we have yet to say that we can make a 10 game leap in wins. I feel a lot better with 5 at the high end, but again - I can be swayed.

Right now, we look like the easy 4th seed, but I need more convincing and I need to see teams at full strength before I determine how good or bad the East is. We may end up being the 4th seed as a result of injuries and still be worse come the postseason.

Changing the subject - so you really trust Woodson to play Joe less minutes as the season goes on...I really don't have any faith that Joe is going to play less - I think it's a lot more plausible that Mike Woodson tries to ensure that Joe gets his numbers for an All Star bid and then as soon as he thinks that we need to win games down the stretch - Joe's playing even more minutes to make sure that happens. I just don't see him ever trusting Jeff.

If your assertion that he should earn minutes, did Jeff earn minutes vs. the Raptors? Should he play vs. the Knicks based on what he did vs. the Raptors?

thirdfalcon said...

I get it with the prediction, and I'm not taking it that seriously. I just thought it was pretty low, and was curious what your reasoning for that is at this point.

About Joe, no I don't really trust that he's going to play a lot less minutes. But I think he will play slightly less this year. I think we are going to blow more teams out so he will have games where he doesn't have to play in the forth quarter like last night.

It probably won't be that big a difference though. Something like 37 minutes per when the playoffs start seems about right to me.

In any case, I don't think the All-star game will have anything to do with it. Overusing him to get him into the All-star game sounds like something you do when you are still in the dark ages to me. We have several candidates this year, and we don't need the marketing pub like we used to.

As for Teague, he seems like he has his head on straight. this is based mostly on body language and a couple of quotes I've heard from him, but he seems like a confident guy, and a good teammate.

So if he doesn't let the lack of PT effect him. and he can keep his confidence up, I see no reason why his minutes won't increase as the year goes on.

Again nothing dramatically different. 11 or 12 minutes per and 5 or 10 DNP choaches decisions by the end of the year seems about right to me. While I think his minutes have more to do with his performance than you do, It's still a tough road to hoe taking minutes from the three guys in font of him.

ATL_Hawk_Luv said...

fair enough - I think he should be getting 15-20 minutes by the end of the season if his talent dictates it. it's not just Joe who needs rest - Bibby does too. So, I don't want either of those guys playing heavy minutes. And I don't want all of his minutes to be in garbage time. I want him playing against Bynum, against Collison, against Lawson, against the backups in the league. And a little vs. the starters - I want him to get a taste of Jennings, Parker, Devin Harris and see how he holds up. Not in a way that keeps us from winning, but as a way to see if he can take a little heat and that's what I don't trust Woodson to give him.

That's why I say what I say about Acie Law - I don't care about his career now, but I never saw him against anyone good to see if he could handle it. I saw 2 seasons of Marvin, Josh, etc when they were getting roasted that allowed us to see flashes, but also understand that they just had to learn on the job. I don't want learning on the job to the point that we lose games, but I do think about 10 more minutes a game would be good for Teague and the Hawks. We can't assume that every minute given to Teague is a losing minute. I haven't seen that yet from him that being on the court is causing the Hawks to play losing basketball.

thirdfalcon said...

I'm sick of scrolling all the way down on the main page so I'm just going to to your post about Teague here.

So 12 percent of his shots have been blocked. That in addition to 11.5 turnover rate and close to a quarter of the possession he has taken up while he has been on the floor have been wasted possessions.

That's not going to cut it. His true shooting percentage is .423. In the 6 games where he played more than 15 minutes, he has shot 35% from the field. Keep in mind this has almost all been in garbage time against teams second units.

You can blame Woodson for that if you want, but he hasn't been good so far. So to answer your question, no he hasn't earned more minutes yet. He had a decent game last night because he got to the line as he did in the preseason, but that hasn't really shown up in most of his time on the court so far. If he can do the same against New york, then maybe we can start talking about playing him more.

ATL_Hawk_Luv said...

@TF, Come on - you're just making up things to try to prove your point now. This is Str8Talk. I'm not going to let you just make up stats to try to prove a point that you are wrong about.

So, no, getting your shot blocked is not an indicator of whether or not you get PT. Sorry...not when 70% of those minutes are garbage time minutes. Turnover rate - 11.5! What is that...again, the guy has turned the ball over 8 TIMES! in 155 minutes and has a assist to turnover ratio of 3.5 to 1 which is GREAT. Stop with trying to find something to justify your stance. If you don't think he should play, say that. We already disagree on this. I would say what I'm saying if he had a 1 to 1 ratio or if he got every shot blocked.

You still haven't accounted for the fact that Joe gets no rest, Bibby gets no rest if Jeff doesn't play. Plain and simple. You and I disagree about the fact that you get better by playing - you seem to think that it happens in practice or happens by playing sporadic minutes in garbage time. I do not. So, until we have some good data samples - none of this stuff you're saying is going to sway me - esp. not the ones where you cherry pick one to try to show some bad components to justify keeping him benched.

As I said before, you can use stats for or agaisnt you. Teague has 4 games where he shot above 50%, but he didn't shoot a lot. In garbage time in 4 games, he didn't shoot well, but he also shot a LOT. That's our sample size. He shot 31 times in those 4 games which make up over 60% of his shots all season. So, I'm not sure what you're saying. There's nothing of value to take from garbage time minutes in any games - they are sloppy, have turnovers, missed shots, no defense and teams playing with combos they aren't accustomed to. So, to use that as your litmus test for why Teague hasn't earned minutes is not fair to this debate.

Interestingly, you are making statements about what would account for earning minutes and when Woodson doesn't follow those guidelines - you aren't willing to call that out either. You can't have it both ways, TF. When he shot well (hit his only 3, got 2 steals, 3 assists, vs. 1 TO against the Lakers, what was the justification for not playing at all against the Blazers or barely vs. the Kings? In my mind, it was because it was against scrubs, so if Woodson can ignore that in garbage time - he's got to ignore poor shooting (which really has only happened 3-4 times) in garbage time too, right?

So, that's why we are so diametrically opposed on this. My belief is that he has to play consistently to learn what we have in him and we need to do it now and he's done enough to show me that there's no reason to fear his limited minutes affecting the outcome negatively anymore than it will positively. It's also my belief that it's irresponsible not to play him OR it's irresponsible to not have another backup point guard that you trust enough to play when Bibby plays poorly or is hurt or in foul trouble. I don't think having a 3 guard rotation will keep us from fatigue down the stretch, so it's important that we get Teague ready and confident - that's not happening from the bench.

If you look at all the rookies in the league, Teague is playing the least of all of them save the bottom 10 of the 2nd round. Ty Lawson is a rookie point guard playing for arguably a better team with a great PG and other guards who deserve PT and yet he's playing 21 MPG. Same for almost every other rookie - I watch Blair, Beaubois, and E. Clark play for teams equal or better than ours (SAS, DAL, and PHX) and they all have more minutes than Teague and so, I'm just going to keep saying - it's Woodson's blind spot. Not some logical, shooting based, team based answer - it's just trust..plain and simple and he's not going to play a rookie. Period. Even when every indicator says he should.

ATL_Hawk_Luv said...

@TF, and by wrong - I'm only saying wrong about the reasoning for Teague not playing. I do not believe that I'm right about whether Teague deserves anything - I just want him to get a TRUE chance to show us what he can offer this team. That's all I've ever wanted for Acie Law or any other player.

With a true chance, if they fail - they fail and I'll say that.

thirdfalcon said...

His turnover rate of 11.5% means that everytime he has the ball in his hands and does something to end a possession, be it a shot, assist, or turnover, 11.5% of the time he turns the ball over. This is basically fine by itself, but when you combine it with his shots that get blocked (at a much higher rate than most players) it becomes a problem.

I didn't make anything up. It's just raw numbers. The guy has not played well thus far anyway you look at it. His assist rate is solid, but not spectacular at 25.6%, and he has stolen the ball at a high rate, those are the only positives that I can see in his play thus far.

thirdfalcon said...

Also the reason that I looked at the games that he played the most in was because of your belief that if he plays more he will play better. That may be true over a long period of time, but not necessarily immediately, which is what you were asking me.

And are you really accusing me of cherry picking? a quarter of the time he makes a play, it's either a turnover or he gets his shot blocked, he isn't an efficient on feildgoal attempts, and his assist numbers are only decent.

He shot over 50% in 4 games were he shot 3 times? what is anyone supposed to do with that?

ATL_Hawk_Luv said...

@TF, Here's why I think you're stuck trying to support your stance with arbitrary numbers rather than understand that my argument is not based on raw numbers, but rather by watching the games and sticking with a philosophy that develops a player. With that in mind, I think your comments and beliefs on this are flawed.

So, here's where I'll say - where are you getting these numbers and what context do they provide us? Here's my numbers...(and I'm going to provide them while saying - the NUMBERS DON'T MATTER b/c he hasn't had enough shots, enough minutes, enough time to make them actually relevant. That's what you're not getting. You can claim a guy is shooting 34% and if he's only shot 15 times - I'm gonna say...well, I don't know if that's a slump or he's a bad shooter. If he's shot the ball 300 times and this wasn't done over the course of 82 games where he only shot 3-4 times a game, then yes - he's a bad shooter.)

Ok, to the numbers - I'm not sure what turnover % is derived from, but I went to ESPN.com and went to the stats - of all rookies, Jeff Teague's TO rate is the ..wait for it - BEST of all rookie PGs and 5th overall for rookies and 49th overall in the league. You can look up how that's assessed, but it is normalized by possessions. His assist rate is uh...4th BEST for all rookies and 26th right behind Mike Bibby in all of the NBA. Those would be the best indicators of point guard play to me. You keep putting up scoring numbers, but we don't need Teague to score to be a backup point guard. If he was starting in the Woodson system, that is probably necessary, but to come in for 10 minutes - why does he have to score - just protect the ball, pass it, and let Jamal or Marvin or whoever score.

So, in total, the numbers don't require being benched. Guys are doing worse and are just as young and are getting PT. His numbers aren't bad if you ask me. Yes, his shooting percentage is low, but low based on a very small number of shots and skewed heavily by bad shooting on 4 nights. I don't even see any value in your blocked shot analysis on Teague. The point here is that I reject your assessment that he hasn't played well. There are some bumps in his development in a few games, but most games - he's been fine. And fine with room to grow to be more than fine. Fine enough to play more than garbage minutes.

So, I know we see this differently - very differently in fact. The only way you'll find out if he can get better again is TO PLAY HIM meaningful minutes and let him get through the good and bad associated with learning the NBA in order to get him battle tested for postseason play. The way you and Mike Woodson would treat this guy will lead him to be useless this season and if you're ok with that - fine, but then you and Woodson should be asking for another backup point guard to be signed.

thirdfalcon said...

Look, you asked me if I thought he had earned minutes or not, and I said no. I gave you reasons why, and statistics that say he is wasting possessions at a much higher rate than most players and other rookies and not really giving us anything in return.

In a lot of cases your right, the numbers don't matter. But that's only true when a player is giving you something that doesn't show up in the stat sheet. I sure can't think of what that would be for Teague.

Now, your saying that he needs to play to learn to avoid those mistakes, and to generally get better. And your right, but there is time for that, as it's a long season that isn't even a quarter of the way through.

If you think he should just be given minutes that's fine. But most of the teams that are doing that with rookies are really bad. We aren't. It's much better to ease him in. At least wait for him to play more than 4 out of 16 good games before you throw him to the wolves. There are coaches in all sports and at all levels that use young guys this way, and it works just fine for them.

You don't trust Woodson to handle that, and that's your prerogative. But I'm not so sure that he's had a young guard that's worth doing that with. And I don't care if you've seen enough of any of those guys to determine if that's true or not. That doesn't mean you have to assume that a guy that's been playing with, or coaching basketball players all his life is wrong about Acie, Salim, and everyone else.

thirdfalcon said...

I'll tell you one thing though. Hell will freeze over before I ever let you get away with accusing me of "playing gotcha", or cherry picking ever again.

Jesse said...

"That doesn't mean you have to assume that a guy that's been playing with, or coaching basketball players all his life is wrong about Acie, Salim, and everyone else."

This also means that you don't have to assume that he's right all the time either. Just because he played basketball and has been a coach does not mean that he is a good player evaluator. Please see Isiah Thomas as Example A. Woodson has barely shown any aptitude to play match-ups in his five years as a head coach, so it's really not a stretch to assume that he has any skill in evaluating players outside of can that player shoot: check yes or no.

As for the numbers, while tempo-free stats would be the best source to look at in helping determine Teague's worth thus far, it still has to be taken with a grain of salt because it's A) such a small sample size and B) most of his minutes have been played during mop-time thus making them less meaningful than if he were earning those minutes as a starter or playing with the first unit.

Personally, I think Teague should get a little more PT with the first unit to see how he handles that type of pressure and that he should get more PT at the ends of halfs so that his learning experience is less likely to be a detriment to the team winning the game. Here's the thing that many people tend to forget when debating if a rookie should play more minutes. If during those minutes it becomes evident that the player is becoming a liability to the short-term goal of winning the game, then the coach can always pull him out before it gets too bad. The fact that the rookie presents the possibility of that happening is not a logical reason to not play him to begin with. If that's the case, then let's just trade all of our picks and get rid of most of our bench so Woodson can just play his favorites from now on.

ATL_Hawk_Luv said...

@TF, I'm questioning if you watched the games and I'm certainly saying I think you are picking stats to make a point.

So, you put up three points to make the assertion that Jeff Teague shouldn't play 10 minutes a game. I retorted with - 1) the blocked shot analysis is pretty meaningless and 2) the TO rate is not only misleading, but actually not even something that was bad - it's actually a feather in his cap and 3) that his shooting percentage can't be held against him when he hasn't shot the ball enough to make a guess. If a guy goes 2 of 8, he's a 25% shooter, but he's only 3 made shots from a 50% shooter. So, my point is - he hasn't shot enough for you to know if he's a bad shooter and for that to be the reason not to see him on the court.

So, I question if you're watching ALL the games because I have and others have and they all are saying - there's NOTHING that you can point to that he's doing bad enough that would say he can't get 2 stints a game. So, I said tell me what you're seeing that's so bad. If it's blocked shots, then I'm saying - well, you are ignoring almost everything else, good. I'm watching him not get roasted on defense, I'm watching him not lose the ball, I'm watching him attack the basket, I'm watching him get assists, and so - in limited action, he's doing fine. Not bad, not below average, doing just what a backup point guard should do when given the rock.

And on two occasions, I've watched him show skills that no one else has on the team, so I'm saying utilize and grow that. You say - we need to give Woodson time. That's bunk...you think he's going to give Teague MORE time after not seeing him perform under less pressurized situations. You must have missed the interviews after each season where he said he SHOULD have given Acie more PT, but that he needed to win down the stretch and in the playoffs. You want me to trust a guy who when the guy ahead of him is INJURED and it's 5 minutes into the game and he still gets no time on the court. So, you think he's going to trust a player who hasn't played.

So, no, I'm not waiting for him to play some magical good game just like I'm not waiting for Joe to play good games or Marvin to play good games to see them get minutes. Slump or not, they should get minutes, period. Again, your logic on this is completely escaping me. This offseason, I gave leeway to being very wrong on lots of things, but I'm not yielding very much to the fact that Woodson should never be given a talent guard to develop.

So, to be clear, I think he should be GIVEN at least 10 minutes until he proves over the course of many games that he is costing us Ws. I think he's EARNED at least 10 minutes with his play so far. That's where we disagree. You don't think he should be given or that he's earned it. I would simply say that we're gonna disagree on that. I don't think 4 bad shooting games (and that's all you can convince me he's done wrong all season) against scrubs is reason to ignore the big picture of resting starters and developing confidence, trust, and his game. He has got to be thrown to the wolves to learn and EVERY other rookie is doing that - you predictably ignored the fact that there are other rookies (I listed them in anticipation of that point from you) out there on contending teams who are contributing.

And you can keep bringing up things to get away from this point, but other sports aren't pro basketball and the point guard position and so unless you can show me where that's happening on contending teams in the sport we're talking about - it's just more cherry picking to me.

ATL_Hawk_Luv said...

@TF, Final note - Jesse makes a great point. Are you seriously thinking that just b/c you play or coach a player that you can't make mistakes about certain things or players. Not just Isiah, Magic Johnson, Michael Jordan, and so MANY guys have done this all their lives and still didn't know how to deal with teammates or coaching players.

Somebody was playing with Joe Johnson and let him sit on the bench until they said - hey, let's trade him to Phoenix b/c he doesn't fit here. Same with Billups. Same with so many players, so come on - that's not a good litmus test...it can simply be - hey, the guy isn't good with developing a point guard. I know you like Woodson and you want to defend lots of his philosophies anyway you can (or more specifically, you don't think coaches matter much), but this is where it does matter. If we go through this season without developing Teague to be ready and our guards are tired OR injured. I'm placing the blame SQUARELY on Woodson's shoulders for the outcome.

Jesse said...

I'd like to clarify my stance on this rookie development issue, but also Teague and the PG position specifically. It is my belief that Woodson is good at taking a known entity and making that piece fit but either lacks the ability or the desire to groom, teach, and develop a younger piece. It is also my belief that some of this is inherited from his days with Larry Brown in Detroit but that more recently it has been because he seems to have always been fighting and coaching to keep his job. It's well known that Knight attempted to fire Woodson and we all know the that he is currently coaching without a future, so it's reasonable to think that it's a combination of both.

But what's even more important than that is the fact that the PG position is the most difficult to not only play, but to learn and the most difficult position in the NBA to adjust to coming in as a rookie. It's a position that can't just be picked up overnight and it's not a position that you can just jump in and expect to play well. There are just too many nuances in the pro game that take time to learn, something that players like to call "the feel of the game". I think this is key to the core of this discussion and how it relates to the Woody/Teague relationship, as well as the past rookies that have come through Atlanta under Woodson.

As for Teague specifically, I really only point to one thing that bothers me more than anything and is a perfect example of why I think Woodson is horrible in the player development department and that's the recent Bibby injury. It is my understanding that Teague was drafted to back up Bibby now and be the starter in the future. It is my belief that they cut Wilks because they thought Teague was talented enough to perform in the back-up PG role. Yet, when Bibby went down with his ankle injury early in that game, we saw no substantial minutes for Teague. To me, this is completely unacceptable and a total waste of resources. Teague should have at that moment become the starter at PG and recieved starter minutes. If Teague isn't going to be the back-up PG, then trade his pick or him now for say Sessions so that you have someone who can fill in for Bibby and will have some established minutes under their belt so that Woodson can consider them a veteran.

The rest of Teagues PT is a wash, but that one instance sums up everything I dislike about Woodson as a coach. He has no grasp of the future and the only way we can have a future is by developing our talent today, plain and simple.

thirdfalcon said...

I didn't even read half of those walls of text, and I don't care what they say. You asked me a question and I answered. That doesn't mean that I don't want to see him play, but there is no way that a non-biased person can look at his stats and say that he has "earned" playing time. I'm sorry if you don't like the answer, but you're still allowed to believe that he should be given minutes anyway.

From what I did read, I saw that you took exception to me pointing out that Woodson probably knows more about basketball than you. But until I see a guard that he "wronged" catch on with another team, I will continue to believe that they weren't that good in the first place, and Woodson was right not to play them.

ATL_Hawk_Luv said...

@TF...so, anymore questions about why I'm not predicting any 59-23 seasons for the Hawks.

And as for your last comments, the blind spot I think you have is that you're looking at stats to determine whether you're right about something when those stats don't tell the story that you think they do. So, that's why me and almost all the fans and even a few NBA writers are asking that same question.

So, again, I say - if we agreed that Wednesday's game was a good one for Teague, then why only 1 minute vs. the Knicks? It's either that or maybe Teague is just bad. If so, I keep asking you - then why no criticism for not looking for a backup point guard who can get more minutes. Sure would be nice to have someone who doesn't allow Chris Duhon to go for 25...so if it's not Bibby, not Crawford, then either we find out if it's Teague or we get a backup who it can be...

So, no I don't take exception to your assertions that Mike Woodson knows more than me - I simply believe that none of your arguments (or even Woodson's quotes) square with the evidence on the court or practices that good coaches use. Woodson wouldn't be the first coach to be inadequate with player development or evaluation. Teague wasn't even the worst example last night - Joe Smith - the backup power forward - who I think we might be able to agree has done fine this season sat on the bench for all but 5 minutes. Might he have been useful last night in stopping the layup line in Josh Smith's absence?

thirdfalcon said...

I think your blind spot is that you haven't seen Teague get his shot blocked a crap load of times. All I was ever doing was answering the question you asked. Did Teague earn more minutes with his performance against the Raptors? I said no, and gave you statistical reasons that in addition to my own observation make me believe the answer is no.

A quarter of his shots have ended in a turnover or a blocked shot. It could be a fluke, but we don't know that. I'm sure it's a correctable flaw in his game, but it hasn't been corrected. So based on what we've seen so far he hasn't earned more minutes. That's all.

But sure Old Smith probably should have played more last night. I never said Woodson was perfect, or even good by NBA standards. Just interchangeable with all but a few coaches.