Detroit Pistons/Atlanta Hawks Game Review: It Wasn't Pretty, But There's #49

by The Human Highlight Blog on Apr 4, 2010 9:38 AM EDT

The march to the milestone 50th win of the season continued at home Saturday night, as the Hawks, minus J-J-J-J-Joe Johnson beat the Pistons minus Richard Hamilton and Ben Wallace and Jason Maxiell, 91-85, and got their 49th win of the season.

Yup, they needed to hold Detroit down to (11) fourth quarter points to do so, but it wasn't as much masterpiece as it was checking the box. Jamal Crawford was on the hot side, scoring (29) points and hitting 6-9 on threes and the Hawks did enough with their front court advantage without Wallace and Maxiell playing to gain a 50-34 advantage on the glass to help put the game into the win column.

Quick thoughts after the break:

Josh Smith struggled shooting-wise (5-14), but we noticed that as the game went on, Smith stayed on the baseline more when the ball was moving around versus "spotting up" outside the three point line as we have seen him do more and more. In the game against CLE, Smith was so insistent to be out there that he was standing right next to another Hawk, obviously Smith being out of position. To the baseline Josh and thank you.

I rather liked the Jumbo lineup that was in the fourth quarter. We'll let the mathemagicians out there tell us how inefficient it was, but seeing Smoove, Horford, and Zaza overwhelm the Pistons on the glass when they were starting to show life on the offensive glass provided a 1970's-esque peaceful, easy feeling.

Besides, it wasn't like any Piston was going to post up. When Tayshaun Prince is providing the only power in your offense--you are definitely playing outside-in.

That said, it surprised me that the Pistons didn't continue to beat the Hawks to the hoop more consistently througout the game. It seemed like Rodney Stuckey and Will Bynum was able to take (insert Hawk guard here) to the hoop, but they would start settling for jump shots. This was especially true of Ben Gordon, who I watched in his pre-draft workouts get to any spot on the floor and get a shot off. Now it seems Ben only wants to get to spots that are a safe distance from the hoop. He was 0-7.

Among the Pistons shooting brigade was known Hawk Hater Charlie Villenueva--but Charlie V was only 3-13 shooting and had (8) points.

All this misfiring Piston shooting was important for the Hawks to maintain a lead because DET only turned the ball over (3) times. The Hawks had (3) turnovers in the last (5) minutes of the game and (14) total.

Mentioned that Smoove was off shooting against DET, but the bigger concern is that he is backsliding terribly in the free throw department, going under 50 percent again(3-8). If he's not careful, there will be a Hack-A-Smoove strategy late in games come playoff time and the Hawks can ill afford defensively to take Josh out late in games.

Al Horford was boss against the weak Piston front line, even though he struggled with his pet jump shot. Al scored (14) first half points, (20) overall and grabbed (14) rebounds. Al seemed to be on about (75) percent power against the Pistons--but it was enough to get by the likes of Kwame Brown.

Admit it, you didn't realize (ok, I didn't) that Zaza had (7) rebounds in his (17) minutes. He must have a friend on the scoring crew.

And now, a final thought

We have to say it--SportSouth and its (100) angles in its telecast can stick it. How many times were we treated to shoe level views of the game or other odd angles, totally randomly, and missed some action because of it? One such play was the alley-oop from Jamal to Josh while we were staring down through the net as the play developed. Another such gaffe was showing the game from what looked like (1) mile away from the opposite baseline. Even in the Official HD Viewing Center we couldn't tell what was going on.

Listen Mr. Producer Man---stop trying to win some kind of production award and just show us the game. Save the clever camera angles for replays, please. Thank you.

Tweet Comment 23 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

The Pistons are a case study

in how to wreck a team by believing your (and others’) role players are capable of being good enough to lead a team. If the Hawks can use the Pistons as a guide to “how to win without a superstar,” they can also use them as a guide to “how to totally destroy your franchise immediately after.”

Everybody thought Rodney Stuckey was so great. And Maxiell. And Ben Wallace. And Prince and Hamilton. And Ben Gordon.

There is a lot to be said for having character guys that lead even when it isn’t obvious to the rest of us that they are really leading. Like in playing through an injury that no one even notices you have…I’ll leave it at that. I’m sure you all can figure out the rest.

Go Hawks, and I can’t wait for that 50th win. Go Cavs today!!

by rbubp on Apr 4, 2010 10:10 AM EDT reply actions

Excellent commentary

by ATLpaul on Apr 4, 2010 11:48 AM EDT up reply actions

I don't disagree with the sentiment

However, making big roster changes to a team who has won one first round series and breaking up a team who was all but penciled in for the ECF every season is COMPLETELY different. If the Hawks make it to the ECF then my views will change, if they don’t then I’m fine with them shuffling the deck. As a matter of fact I’d insist on it.

@cocoqt81

by Co Co on Apr 4, 2010 12:29 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions

I have no issue with change...

just hopeful that we all see: A. how difficult it is to find players who really are the equal of Chauncey Billups and Joe Johnson, much less better; B. that teh Hawk’s current non-JJ players—at this moment in their development— are a lot like Detroit’s…good players who don’t have what it takes to work as a unit for whatever reason.

I fully support letting JJ go if someone as good or better is brought in. I have little confidence that will happen, though, because it is hard to find that player and because it costs money and because the franchise does not have a history of selling out to win.

by rbubp on Apr 4, 2010 1:47 PM EDT up reply actions

REST JOE!

No one wants a repeat of last year’s sucky playoffs. Rest him. They won’t lose home court in the first rd, and unless there’s a major upset they won’t have it in the second rd anyway. Woody needs to think big picture. Let the boy rest his sprained thumb.

@cocoqt81

by Co Co on Apr 4, 2010 11:28 AM EDT via mobile reply actions 1 recs

+1

JJ need to rest. No need to play him vs. Charlotte. Even for the game after. Though he should be assessed day to day. The Charlotte game will be tough any way, as they are in a dogfight, so they be fighting for their lives, and for us, the value is just not there to fight like that. So if we must, give them the game, but rest JJ

by ATLpaul on Apr 4, 2010 11:51 AM EDT up reply actions

Agree that JJ needs rest

but disagree on the value of the game. the teams needs this win to continue to improve on the road. They just need to figure out a way to get it done without JJ, like they did last night. I believe they can do it.

by DPhenomenal1 on Apr 4, 2010 11:54 AM EDT up reply actions

Yep

one win closer to fiddy. 4 road wins closer to .500 on the road. 6 more games until the post season and knowing what seed the team will earn. and whom the team will be playing in that coveted season.

good decision to give jj rest and play the reserves more.

but a win is a win of course. lets get these last half a dozen.

by DPhenomenal1 on Apr 4, 2010 11:51 AM EDT reply actions

Enjoyed the recap

Yes this is a game to just put a check next to game played box. I was switching between NCAAs and Hawks.

Agree with comments on Smoove free throws, he needs to focus. This is now 2 games of poor fee throw shooting performance.

Lol on the angles of the camera during the game, totally right on the alley oop, i kept wondering why Smoove did not dunk, but i could not really tell based on that angle where he was relative to the basket.

Well one comment about rookie. I got scared last night. Woody played him enough to scare me. Our rookie definitely thinks he is a scorer. And when it comes to passing, even against a weak opponent, he struggled mightily. I mean i think he was the reason we started to lose the lead in the 3rd. This is indeed worrisome, if the kid doesn’t have it in his blood to pass and distribute, will he ever get it?

by ATLpaul on Apr 4, 2010 11:58 AM EDT reply actions

tsk, tsk!

Rook took 2 shots, got 2 assists, got to the freebie line and split in 8 minutes and you were worried. Now what about last night gave you the impression, the rook thinks he’s a scorer if he only took 2 shots. Those with a scorers mentality take way more than 2 shot attempts and definitely don’t get 2 assists in 8 minutes. Not to mention in most of the games he’s gotten minutes he mostly passes the ball.

by DPhenomenal1 on Apr 4, 2010 12:18 PM EDT up reply actions

Take a look see:

http://www.nba.com/statistics/player/Assists.jsp?league=00&season=22009&conf=OVERALL&position=0&splitType=9&qualified=Y&yearsExp=-1&sortOrder=5

by DPhenomenal1 on Apr 4, 2010 12:36 PM EDT up reply actions

That was not a good night for the rookie

I am not a big fan of +/-, but how about a -6 for 8 minutes? how about us losing the lead in the 3rd while he was in? Did you see his decision making in the 3rd quarter or are you just repeating the stat line?

Let’s see, he had a good floater and if memory serves some type of alley ooop to Smoove. Now what i remember most, were turnovers in 8 minutes (couple of them) and if you even look at his body language (though i am not suggesting you should watch that game again – lol), he himself is down on him.

As for his scorer vs. point guard mentality, that has been consistently a struggle for rookie. A scorer in the point guard body is what he has had a reputation for. Time will tell whether that is true or whether rookie can transform.

by ATLpaul on Apr 4, 2010 1:35 PM EDT up reply actions

So turnovers are what you remember most

right. Well if you remember those turnovers, how did you miss the two by Boss and the three by Smoove. Or the one by Mo, Crawford, and Zaza.

Never commented that the rook had a good night or bad night. It was okay for the 8 minutes that he got. It was not terrible. And in no way suggested that he considers himself a scorer.

Perhaps I should suggest you go back and watch the 65 games that he played in and rethink that reputation thing because what my eyes tell me is the rook passed the ball more than he shot it. Well whenever he touches the ball that is.

by DPhenomenal1 on Apr 4, 2010 2:13 PM EDT up reply actions

Apples and Oranges

I am not comparing rookie to established players like Lion and Smoove. That is just not relevant, as those two all stars (Smoove is one) turnovers are in in flow of game as opposed to in 8 minutes. You simply ignore the ~~6 +/~~ stat for rookie last night. As for Mo and Jamal and Zaza, they have gotten consistent minutes as subs recently and produced. So again, don’t try to compare their turnovers to rookie as they are playing in flow, again apples and oranges.

Rookie did not have a good 8 minutes. You are contradicting yourself. You say you never commented that he had a good or bad night, but then you say it was not terrible. So which is it? Let me tell you since you are confused, it was not a good night.

Rookie got some minutes last night, and did not produce. I have consistently asked for more minutes for him on this site. But if he does get the minutes and does not produce, I shall call it as is.

As for him being a scorer vs. point guard, I am not telling you something that was not his established rep in college. So if you don’t know that history I can’t help you. The last 65 games in NBA is irrelevant relative to that rep, because he is drafted to be a point guard, but he is not yet shown the ability to naturally distribute the ball. Now he is young, my school of thought is he needs seasoning, but I am also not going to jump and not call a spade a spade if he is not producing.

Remember, he is trying to master point guard position, historically the toughest position in the league to master. So I am willing to be patient, but I also have to compare him to other point guards like Collison, and how he is not producing at same level, and balance my opinion of our rookie’s assessment.

by ATLpaul on Apr 4, 2010 2:56 PM EDT up reply actions

Teague never shoots

@cocoqt81

by Co Co on Apr 4, 2010 12:24 PM EDT via mobile reply actions

Whatever you want to call it

Teague rarely tries to get the ball in the basket. He mostly tries to get the ball in the hand of his team mates that are on the floor with him at the moment.

by DPhenomenal1 on Apr 4, 2010 12:48 PM EDT reply actions

if and when

he touches the ball that is.

by DPhenomenal1 on Apr 4, 2010 1:26 PM EDT up reply actions

Apples and Oranges

Also you are contradicting yourself. You say you never commented that he had a good or bad night, but then you say it was not terrible. So which is it? Let me tell you since you are confused, it was not a good night.

Rookie got some minutes last night, and did not produce. I have consistently asked for more minutes for him on this site. But if he does get the minutes and does not produce, I shall call it as is.

by ATLpaul on Apr 4, 2010 2:56 PM EDT reply actions

I said it was okay. Doesn't sound like confusion to me.

I never overlooked the -6. Exactly established rep in COLLEGE. What is the rep now? IN THE NBA? Okay so you are in the same school of thought as coach then. It’s okay for all stars/starters/vets to make turnovers and get more minutes. Are you saying the rook doesn’t play in the flow of the game?

So you want to compare him to Collison. Do they average the same amount of minutes? Are both on playoff caliber teams?

And by the way you still haven’t given me any reasons why you feel that last night established him as a point guard who considers himself to be scorer. Which was my original question in the first place.

Please tell me why other than his “rep in college” why you think he considers himself to be a scorer and can’t freaking pass the ball even against “weak opponents” now in the NBA, particularly last night.

Players who consider themselves scorers take a lot of shots no matter what position they play.

Apples and oranges what the heck you said you remember (2) turnovers most. I never compared just thought I’d remind you of those turnovers that you overlooked.

by DPhenomenal1 on Apr 4, 2010 3:48 PM EDT reply actions

No it really was not an ok performance

He impacted the flow of the game negatively, which was the point of me highlighting the -6 to you. Obviously you don’t want to argue that point so we move on.

Am I in the same school of thought as Coach Woody? As related to last night Woody took the rookie out at the right time. Or the deficit in 3rd quarter would have been worse. So relative to last night, I agree with Woody and am in the same school of thought. Overall this year, he should have given Rookie more chance. But frankly, the chances he has gotten the rookie has not necessarily shown much promise. Comparing to Collison is fair, because they were drafted in the late first round. Collision used the opportunity of CP being injured to show what he is. Rookie in limited minutes has not really shown yet much on offense. He is fast and plays good defense. And in time he may develop. Frankly getting minutes on a 50+ win team is never easy for a rookie.

As for scorer vs. point guard, he was looking for his shot more than distributing. The moments he tried to distribute, he had turnovers. Clearly, he was more comfortable attacking the basket. Look at the floater he made. While a good point guard should be able to attack, the ability to distribute the ball is what makes a point guard a point guard. I did not see him last night penetrating and distributing. I saw him attacking the basket. Or have turnovers.

If you did not understand the analogy to apples and oranges, you have to read the previous post again But I am going to help you again since you seem to need it. You compared Smoove and his 3 TOs in 43 minutes to 2 TO by rookie in 8 minutes. Do you see how irrelevant your comparison was? Then you compared 2 TOs by Lion in 34 minutes to 2 TOs by Rookie. Again your comparison was/is irrelevant.

by ATLpaul on Apr 4, 2010 5:22 PM EDT up reply actions

wth

why is Smoove playing 43 minutes against a so called “weak opponent”? Yes I like apples and oranges but we are talking about people here.

Again in my opinion the rook had an okay game, why because in 8 minutes he produced 3 points, 2 assists, and got to the freebie line. Now had he only gotten turnovers and fouls, then I would say rook stunk up the place.

Heck, they were just winging the offense anyway, with Joe being out and all. Anyway the entire team was just trying to win a ball game against a “weaker opponent”.

Now this -6, is this the amount of the lead they lost in the 3rd quarter? Cause I’m slow I need help at understanding things.

by DPhenomenal1 on Apr 5, 2010 10:06 AM EDT up reply actions

Answers

Apples and oranges was just an analogy to show you should not compare stats for Rookie to Lion or Smoove.

As for +/- meaning, it is a commonly used NBA stat, that shows the value of various combinations of players on the court. It pretty much looks at point difference when player is in and out. So think of it as how much we score vs. how much the opponent scores for that player.

-6 clearly in this case shows we were hurting when rookie was at the helm. Which correlated to us losing the lead in 3rd quarter.

Now I generally am not a fan of +/- stat in NBA games. Why? Because it is one dimensional. Meaning, a good offensive player like Jamal (look at his +/- for the game +11) has a high +/- rating, but depending on the situation/time of the game, think for example near end of game when the opponent has the ball, you don’t want to play Jamal on defense. At that point in the game, you may want Marvin in, even if Marvin’s +/- is lower because Marvin is a good defensive player. But the thinking is +/- is a good overall value of a player.

I think you would have to look at +/- over many game to use it as a valid criteria.

In this game, for rookie, as related to the flow of the game, I thought it was a good representation of how he was not helping. Also if you watch his body language, it tells a ton.

Now I am a believer that we need solutions at point guard. Bibster is getting old and his defense lacks. Rookie has a lot of good tools, so I hope with seasoning he can be the answer.

by ATLpaul on Apr 5, 2010 12:07 PM EDT up reply actions