Doc calling out bloggers

[Scintan]

Interesting quote from the Herald today:

But then, in so many words, the good Doc did tell his critics to kiss off.

“I like what we’ve done,” he said. “I coach the way I coach. I’ve always laughed at some of the criticism. I was joking with someone the other day, and I said, ‘Answer me this. Why would someone listen to a guy that hasn’t played, he hasn’t coached . . . some of the guys have never even been reporters, they’re bloggers, and not listen to a guy and his whole staff who have played and coached? Now who’s the fool? Me, or the people listening to them?’ ”


Doc really calling out his critics.  Ya know what?...good for him.  We've mostly all criticized him at some point.  He is a professional doing his job, and quite frankly, has his team one win away from the NBA Finals.  He knows he must be doing something right.

Good ol' Doc.  He can't coach, but he's good for a laugh.  I assume he's never given his wife advice or criticism on anything pertaining to women, women's relationships, etc...

Yeah, he can't coach.  He took 3 future HoF'ers, one extremely volatile one, to the ECF and probably the finals in his first year, garnering the NBA's best record along the way.  Terrible coach if you ask me.

Wow, he can coach 3 Hall of Famers in a staggeringly weak conference?  That's amazing and, doubtless, nobody's ever won a lot of games with 3 Hall of Famers in their lineup before.  Hey, how'd he do last season?

Oh yeah, I'm sure it was just a given that the Celtics would be on the brink of the Finals going into the season.  Please.  The majority of people laughed at the notion of the Celtics being a contender a year after being the "laughing stock" of the league, even many on this blog (but not you I'm sure).  They apparently didn't have a bench, wouldn't be able to coexist with 3 all stars, especially 3 all stars who have never won anything, couldn't play defense, didn't have a point guard, etc.

Here's ESPN.com's preseason predictions for the Celtics.  Marc Stein was the ONLY one to pick the Celtics to finish 1st in the East.  There were a couple people that didn't even pick them to win the Atlantic, or even get home court in the 1st round.  Not to mention the fact that Vegas had the o/u on wins during the regular season at 49.  But you're right.  66 wins (the 3rd most in franchise history) was a given going in, and any coach would've done the same.   

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/dailydime?page=dime-BostonPreview0708

Actually, I don't believe that I made any predictions about the team this year, because personal situations kept me from posting much here over the past many months.  However, in the summer, I did note that I thought 55 wins would be a successful season, so I'm not sure what your point is.

Does the team winning games = coaching acumen?  Is that your argument?

If so, again....  How'd he do last year?

I never said wins and losses where the sole measuring stick of a coach.  You implied that the Celtics success this year was pretty much a foregone conclusion and that any moron could've coached the team this far.  And the fact that you are harping on last season when the Celtics are one win away from the NBA Finals shows exactly where your head is at.  But you're right, I'm sure if they didn't have Doc as a coach, the 06-07 Celtics would've made some real noise.  Nevermind the injuries.  That didn't mean anything.

I implied nothing of the kind, as you well know.  As for "harping on last season", go back and notice that my comments about last season are in response to people pointing to this season as proof of Rivers' coaching ability.  You should at least be intellectually honest if you're going to attack me over something as plainly responsive as my 'last season' posts have been. 

Of course, blaming the team's record on injuries shows exactly where your head is at.

[BrickJames]

I for one have been a Doc sympathizer given the foolish criticism I've seen and given the crap teams he's had since he's been an NBA coach.  His Orlando teams were pretty garbage too.

I take the accounts of players, who all laud Doc as a good player's coach, as the best indicator.  Combined with this team's success after coming together on 7/31 until now, I think Rivers has done a good job.

Again, good for Doc - he's laughing all the way to the bank.

[Eja117]

To the guy that compared last year's squad to DUNCAN(!?!?), Igoudala, Parker and Miller - thanks for the laugh.  Al ShareefAbdurRahim Jefferson is Tim Duncan, right.

Well let's see. The Big three have 25 all-star appearances. So let's add up Duncan, Iguodala, Parker his rookie year, and Miller. What do we get 10 for Duncan...0 for Iguodala, Tony didn't go his rookie year and only twice his whole career, Miller has never been to an All-Star game, and certainly not this year like Ray Allen, so actually it was a poor comparison cause actually the Big Four are much better

[Bozo]

I think you can criticize Doc.  And he can clearly laugh back at the thought that bloggers actually think their opinion merits being heard. 

While everyone has the right, it does take away from the credibility of this site.  This is particularly true for sharp criticism. It is somewhat misleading, that people who don't even have a clue, dominate the commenting, and in a sense dominate the overall opinion of this site. 

We do look like fools.   Maybe the overall rating of the opinion of this site, is that we obviously are.

 

[fairweatherfan]

<megasnip>

I implied nothing of the kind, as you well know.  As for "harping on last season", go back and notice that my comments about last season are in response to people pointing to this season as proof of Rivers' coaching ability.  You should at least be intellectually honest if you're going to attack me over something as plainly responsive as my 'last season' posts have been. 

Of course, blaming the team's record on injuries shows exactly where your head is at.

You're missing the fact that if he has an obligation to consider last year's record in evaluating Doc, you have to consider this year's record just as strongly in your evaluation.  If he's unfairly downplaying last year's record to support his positive opinion of Doc, and you're downplaying this year's record to support your negative opinion, then you're both being intellectually dishonest.

[Michael Anthony]

Here is something else to keep in mind:

This team got here on defense, thank you Tom Thibodeau.

[Scintan]

<megasnip>

I implied nothing of the kind, as you well know.  As for "harping on last season", go back and notice that my comments about last season are in response to people pointing to this season as proof of Rivers' coaching ability.  You should at least be intellectually honest if you're going to attack me over something as plainly responsive as my 'last season' posts have been. 

Of course, blaming the team's record on injuries shows exactly where your head is at.

You're missing the fact that if he has an obligation to consider last year's record in evaluating Doc, you have to consider this year's record just as strongly in your evaluation.  If he's unfairly downplaying last year's record to support his positive opinion of Doc, and you're downplaying this year's record to support your negative opinion, then you're both being intellectually dishonest.

How so, when I said that 55 wins would be a successful season?

[Roy Hobbs]

I think you can criticize Doc.  And he can clearly laugh back at the thought that bloggers actually think their opinion merits being heard. 

While everyone has the right, it does take away from the credibility of this site.  This is particularly true for sharp criticism. It is somewhat misleading, that people who don't even have a clue, dominate the commenting, and in a sense dominate the overall opinion of this site. 

We do look like fools.   Maybe the overall rating of the opinion of this site, is that we obviously are.

 

Speak for yourself.  There are plenty of intelligent and articulate people on here who back their opinions up with facts, statistics, and close personal observation.  If you look at those who "dominate the commenting", at least in the forums, there is a wide mix of opinion on not just Doc, but on a whole host of other issues, as well.  For as many sharp, biting criticisms of Doc as there are, you'll find an equal number of articulate and intelligent (if misguided ) defenses of him.

In terms of the blog's credibility, you won't find many blogs with a more articulate and dedicated staff, starting with Jeff and Steve.  They're both top notch, as are all the other front page contributors.

[Mr October]

I think you can criticize Doc.  And he can clearly laugh back at the thought that bloggers actually think their opinion merits being heard. 

While everyone has the right, it does take away from the credibility of this site.  This is particularly true for sharp criticism. It is somewhat misleading, that people who don't even have a clue, dominate the commenting, and in a sense dominate the overall opinion of this site. 

We do look like fools.   Maybe the overall rating of the opinion of this site, is that we obviously are.

 

Speak for yourself.  There are plenty of intelligent and articulate people on here who back their opinions up with facts, statistics, and close personal observation.  If you look at those who "dominate the commenting", at least in the forums, there is a wide mix of opinion on not just Doc, but on a whole host of other issues, as well.  For as many sharp, biting criticisms of Doc as there are, you'll find an equal number of articulate and intelligent (if misguided ) defenses of him.

In terms of the blog's credibility, you won't find many blogs with a more articulate and dedicated staff, starting with Jeff and Steve.  They're both top notch, as are all the other front page contributors.

I agree that there are a lot of great opinions out there, and particular on this blog. This is the only one I like by the way. ...but, at a quick glance, a person really has to sift through all the negative overreaction threads in order to get to the good stuff.

[Scribbles]

Here is something else to keep in mind:

This team got here on defense, thank you Tom Thibodeau.

Yea excellent point right there.  TP.  

I really don't care what Doc is saying.  He has a right to say that, just like we have a right to call him out on what we think he is doing wrong.  He is pretty much saying that bloggers can't call him out because none of us have played, coached, or have been boardcasters for basketball.  Well I guess that means Lawerance Frank shouldn't be coaching the Nets right?    Or Jeff Van Gundy shouldn't be doing anything, because those two guys never played basketball in their lifes.  Maybe Rick Majerus shouldn't be coaching college ball because he never played basketball.  It's just a dumb argument.  There are alot of people that know the game of basketball just as well as some people that have coached, commentated, etc.  While they may not know everything, nobody really does.  

Also you I don't think Doc is that  great a coach.  I think he's a good person yes, but not a great coach...not even a decent one really.  His success on this team is because he has 3 great players and TT as an assistant.  If he is such a great coach then why has he never one a playoff series until this year?  Don't tell me that he's never had a good team garabage because that supports my argument.  He was up 3-1 over Detroit in Orlando and somehow blew that one.  He couldn't win game 7 in Boston against Indy a few years back.  You are only as good as the players you have and even then Doc still makes it a rollercoaster ride.  

I will say that he has started to wake up lately.  It took him a while to figure out that House should be playing, but now he's back to not playing him.  I think Doc knows how to coach somewhat but it takes him forever to make adjustments when other coaches can do it in a half or w/e it takes him a game or two to realize it.  Okay I'm done with this argument, Doc just go out and coach the Celtics to victory tonight to shut me up until you do something stupid again.  

[guava_wrench]

I think it's perfectly appropriate for bloggers to criticize public figures, whether it be coaches, players, politicians, actresses, or whoever. 

I don't buy the "you have to have been in the field to properly criticize it".  That's bunk, and even moreso, plenty of professionals have been questioning Doc lately.

The other part of Doc's argument -- that people should listen to him and his coaching staff about the job he's doing -- is even more ridiculous.  What coach is going to admit "you know, I suck at my job, and I'm really in over my head"?

I'm not criticizing Doc's coaching here -- there are plenty of other threads for that -- but his reasoning about bloggers is pretty asinine.

I agree that bloggers have the right to criticize. It provides entertainment.

I also like hearing Doc point out the facts -- the bloggers tend to be clueless. Even commentators like Stephen A Smith are jokes. They just ramble on out of their ignorance of the sport. It is funny when Smith is arguing with someone like Jalen Rose. Smith's lack of knowledge is bared for all to see.

Too many sports journalists speak beyond their knowledge. They are just the average layman pretending they have insight into the game.

[fairweatherfan]

<megasnip>

I implied nothing of the kind, as you well know.  As for "harping on last season", go back and notice that my comments about last season are in response to people pointing to this season as proof of Rivers' coaching ability.  You should at least be intellectually honest if you're going to attack me over something as plainly responsive as my 'last season' posts have been. 

Of course, blaming the team's record on injuries shows exactly where your head is at.

You're missing the fact that if he has an obligation to consider last year's record in evaluating Doc, you have to consider this year's record just as strongly in your evaluation.  If he's unfairly downplaying last year's record to support his positive opinion of Doc, and you're downplaying this year's record to support your negative opinion, then you're both being intellectually dishonest.

How so, when I said that 55 wins would be a successful season?

You're insisting he consider last season when evaluating Doc as a coach - he's insisting you consider this season.  Neither of you are doing it, because the season in question contradicts your pre-existing opinions of him.  You may agree this is a successful season, but it's obvious you don't think Doc is a good coach (you said as much in what I think was your first post) - which means you're downplaying this season as being indicative of Doc's ability.  Which is exactly what you're accusing CelticsWhat of doing with last season.  The truth is probably somewhere in the middle - Doc's not 66-win good all by himself (I doubt anyone is), but he's certainly not 24-win bad either (I doubt all but the very worst in NBA history are). 

[CelticsWhat35]

 

Of course, blaming the team's record on injuries shows exactly where your head is at.

No.  I blame last year on injuries, youth and heavy incentive to lose.  I'm not saying Doc is a great coach, but he was not the reason for last season.  As you see, a very similar team to last year's Celtics took the court in Minnesota, and much the same thing happened.  And that was with an extra year of experience for Big Al, Gomes, etc.  It's been proven over and over again in this league.  Youth doesn't win.  Especially when that youth is compiled from the late 1st and 2nd rounds of the draft.

But the whole point of this thread, or I should say the length of this thread is that people are getting so bent out of shape because Doc pretty much just said he's not gonna listen to what a bunch of people on blogs are saying.  And why should he??  Of course he makes mistakes.  He makes mistakes every game, win or lose.  Every coach does.  But as much as some like to harp on every mistake he makes.  There's even more mistakes that we don't even notice.  There's also great moves that we don't even notice.  But you know who I'm sure does notice them, either during the games or in watching film?  Doc and his assistants.  They know more about what goes on in practice, the games, huddles, etc. than anyone else.

But as I said before.  We have every right to criticize.  We just shouldn't get so bent out of shape when Doc does it back.

[mustang]

For what it's worth, I think he was (derisively) referring to Bill Simmons. I doubt he reads Celticsblog and the like...

And a porcupine with three <edited> could have coached this team to the ECF with this roster plus Tom Thibodeau (though I give him points for "cohesion," I think KG played locker-room cop more than Glen). Heck, the porcupine would've probably only needed five games against ATL.

No profanity please.  Thanks - redz

[Scintan]

<megasnip>

I implied nothing of the kind, as you well know.  As for "harping on last season", go back and notice that my comments about last season are in response to people pointing to this season as proof of Rivers' coaching ability.  You should at least be intellectually honest if you're going to attack me over something as plainly responsive as my 'last season' posts have been. 

Of course, blaming the team's record on injuries shows exactly where your head is at.

You're missing the fact that if he has an obligation to consider last year's record in evaluating Doc, you have to consider this year's record just as strongly in your evaluation.  If he's unfairly downplaying last year's record to support his positive opinion of Doc, and you're downplaying this year's record to support your negative opinion, then you're both being intellectually dishonest.

How so, when I said that 55 wins would be a successful season?

You're insisting he consider last season when evaluating Doc as a coach - he's insisting you consider this season.  Neither of you are doing it, because the season in question contradicts your pre-existing opinions of him.  You may agree this is a successful season, but it's obvious you don't think Doc is a good coach (you said as much in what I think was your first post) - which means you're downplaying this season as being indicative of Doc's ability.  Which is exactly what you're accusing CelticsWhat of doing with last season.  The truth is probably somewhere in the middle - Doc's not 66-win good all by himself (I doubt anyone is), but he's certainly not 24-win bad either (I doubt all but the very worst in NBA history are). 

I insisted no such thing.  People pointed to this season's record and the team's being in the conference finals as a sort of proof that Rivers was a good coach.  I responded by asking about last year and the lousy record. That wasn't intellectually dishonest in the least, that was pointing out something they were deliberately choosing to overlook.