Fire Doc

[BballTim]

I can't imagine anyone watching the Celts and thinking that they are well coached. No adjustments and a look of "dear in the head lights" on both ends of the floor.
Woodson is owning Doc. Pierce posting up 18 feet out looks pretty easy to defend to me. When they went on the post Rondo run, they moved the ball. It was very simple and hard to cover. In the playoffs, they are very predictable. I like Doc, but he is not a good coach.

  You could pretty much divide the board into two groups after Rondo's injury, the group that was gushing over our offense and the group that told them to wait until the playoffs when teams try harder on defense and the pace of the game is much slower.I'm guessing you were in the first group.

I would agree with your premise of the two groups, but it is only valid if the same line up and rotation were being judged. The group that played immediately post Rondo did well. It is not the same line up or rotations that is in the playoffs. You can't compare them. My premise is, Doc should have immediately went the the older line up and rotation. It worked very well. The "wait til the playoffs" opinion doesn't apply because it's not the same team. Right now, Doc has a bunch of players that are not use to playing with each other.

  When the playoffs roll around the opponents generally try and take better care of the ball and hustle back on defense. Those two changes negate the main thing we were successful at after Rondo left. The team struggling on offense was very predictable. Doc talked about it, Danny talked about it, even Wyc talked about it during one of the games. It's not rocket science. And there's no way you can say that Doc's playing a bunch of players that aren't used to playing with each other. The bulk of the playoff minutes are going to players (KG, Bass, Green, PP, Bradley, Jet) who were 2nd through 7th in mpg behind Rondo this year.

That's not true. My point is the original post Rondo rotation played great. The beat Miami, Indiana,Denver, Chicago. How do you know they would have the same trouble? Doc changed what was working.

No he didn't he had the same rotation and they regressed to roughly a .500 basketball team after a very good initial stretch of ball. (which coincided with a home heavy schedule and a number of weak defenses)

Only after Jeff Green began to put up bigger numbers as KG sat and the team struggled overall did he change the rotation up.

That's not true.
After Rondo got hurt. The starting line up was Lee, AB, Bass, Pierce, KG. The Bench was Green, Wilcox, Jet and Barbosa.  They went on a 15-6 run(+/-). KG and Lee got hurt. Which change the line up to AB, Pierce, Green, Bass, and whoever in the middle. That's what made them go sub 500. When Lee came back he got demoted. When KG came back, Doc changed to AB, Pierce at the 2, Green, KG and Bass.(They had 2 games together(Maybe). I admit, at first I liked the potential, but I feel Doc should have gone back to the original post Rondo rotation. As I said, they went on a run in which they beat Miami, Indiana, Chicago, Denver.

  Are you really watching our team struggle to score points at the level that they are and thinking "The best thing to do in this situation is to bench our leading scorer to give some minutes to the lowest scoring guard on our roster? Yikes.

  You talk about the win against Chicago, but they play playoff level defense all season long under Thibs and we were lucky to break 70 against them. It was a preview of things to come. Again, the Celtics *themselves* were saying they were going to have trouble executing their offense in the playoffs, people were just too excited about a few regular season wins without Rondo to pay any attention to that.

The Celtics still won and played better with that line up. Score board matters. We could go back and forth which is a waste for me. Let me ask you straight up. Is Doc doing a good job coaching in the playoffs. Yes or No?

  Okay, so you refuse to acknowledge (or haven't noticesd) that there's a difference in the nba between the regular season and the playoffs. Fine.

  Is Doc doing a good job coaching in the playoffs? I don't see a different coach having much better results. One thing that's pretty clear though. He wouldn't be doing a better coaching job if he took a combined 20-25 minutes from PP and Green and gave all those minutes to Courtney Lee. That might have a chance of working if he also went back to the model from that hot streak of playing most of our games at home against teams that were near the bottom of the league in defense though.

[Pucaccia]

I can't imagine anyone watching the Celts and thinking that they are well coached. No adjustments and a look of "dear in the head lights" on both ends of the floor.
Woodson is owning Doc. Pierce posting up 18 feet out looks pretty easy to defend to me. When they went on the post Rondo run, they moved the ball. It was very simple and hard to cover. In the playoffs, they are very predictable. I like Doc, but he is not a good coach.

  You could pretty much divide the board into two groups after Rondo's injury, the group that was gushing over our offense and the group that told them to wait until the playoffs when teams try harder on defense and the pace of the game is much slower.I'm guessing you were in the first group.

I would agree with your premise of the two groups, but it is only valid if the same line up and rotation were being judged. The group that played immediately post Rondo did well. It is not the same line up or rotations that is in the playoffs. You can't compare them. My premise is, Doc should have immediately went the the older line up and rotation. It worked very well. The "wait til the playoffs" opinion doesn't apply because it's not the same team. Right now, Doc has a bunch of players that are not use to playing with each other.

  When the playoffs roll around the opponents generally try and take better care of the ball and hustle back on defense. Those two changes negate the main thing we were successful at after Rondo left. The team struggling on offense was very predictable. Doc talked about it, Danny talked about it, even Wyc talked about it during one of the games. It's not rocket science. And there's no way you can say that Doc's playing a bunch of players that aren't used to playing with each other. The bulk of the playoff minutes are going to players (KG, Bass, Green, PP, Bradley, Jet) who were 2nd through 7th in mpg behind Rondo this year.

That's not true. My point is the original post Rondo rotation played great. The beat Miami, Indiana,Denver, Chicago. How do you know they would have the same trouble? Doc changed what was working.

No he didn't he had the same rotation and they regressed to roughly a .500 basketball team after a very good initial stretch of ball. (which coincided with a home heavy schedule and a number of weak defenses)

Only after Jeff Green began to put up bigger numbers as KG sat and the team struggled overall did he change the rotation up.

That's not true.
After Rondo got hurt. The starting line up was Lee, AB, Bass, Pierce, KG. The Bench was Green, Wilcox, Jet and Barbosa.  They went on a 15-6 run(+/-). KG and Lee got hurt. Which change the line up to AB, Pierce, Green, Bass, and whoever in the middle. That's what made them go sub 500. When Lee came back he got demoted. When KG came back, Doc changed to AB, Pierce at the 2, Green, KG and Bass.(They had 2 games together(Maybe). I admit, at first I liked the potential, but I feel Doc should have gone back to the original post Rondo rotation. As I said, they went on a run in which they beat Miami, Indiana, Chicago, Denver.

  Are you really watching our team struggle to score points at the level that they are and thinking "The best thing to do in this situation is to bench our leading scorer to give some minutes to the lowest scoring guard on our roster? Yikes.

  You talk about the win against Chicago, but they play playoff level defense all season long under Thibs and we were lucky to break 70 against them. It was a preview of things to come. Again, the Celtics *themselves* were saying they were going to have trouble executing their offense in the playoffs, people were just too excited about a few regular season wins without Rondo to pay any attention to that.

The Celtics still won and played better with that line up. Score board matters. We could go back and forth which is a waste for me. Let me ask you straight up. Is Doc doing a good job coaching in the playoffs. Yes or No?

  Okay, so you refuse to acknowledge (or haven't noticesd) that there's a difference in the nba between the regular season and the playoffs. Fine.

  Is Doc doing a good job coaching in the playoffs? I don't see a different coach having much better results. One thing that's pretty clear though. He wouldn't be doing a better coaching job if he took a combined 20-25 minutes from PP and Green and gave all those minutes to Courtney Lee. That might have a chance of working if he also went back to the model from that hot streak of playing most of our games at home against teams that were near the bottom of the league in defense though.

Of course I acknowledge there is a difference between playoff and regular season. Your totally missing the point of the discussion. The thread is "Fire Doc".  I am saying Doc is being owned by Woodson. Doc went into the playoffs with the team not prepared. The post Rondo team played well, this playoff rotation team is getting schooled and I am saying Doc has a lot to do with it. And if you bothered reading my points, beating Miami, Indiana, Chicago and Denver with that unit isn't beating bottom of the league teams.

[Neurotic Guy]

Of course I acknowledge there is a difference between playoff and regular season. Your totally missing the point of the discussion. The thread is "Fire Doc".  I am saying Doc is being owned by Woodson. Doc went into the playoffs with the team not prepared. The post Rondo team played well, this playoff rotation team is getting schooled and I am saying Doc has a lot to do with it. And if you bothered reading my points, beating Miami, Indiana, Chicago and Denver with that unit isn't beating bottom of the league teams.

The big issue is not Doc being owned by Woodson -- the big issue is that the C's are being owned by a better team.   There was little doubt in my mind prior to the playoffs that the Knicks were better than the C's (it is a 2-7 match-up), and there is even less doubt now.  They are more talented in every phase of the game.  They have more size, better ball-handlers/distributors, better shooters, better rebounders, younger legs, and even better defensive players overall (though this is close).  Woodson may be outcoaching Doc -- I actually can't say for sure -- but what i can say for sure is that the most significant variable in this series is that the Knicks are a more talented team than the C's.  Rondo/Sully could possibly equalize the talent differential, but I doubt it.

[BballTim]

I can't imagine anyone watching the Celts and thinking that they are well coached. No adjustments and a look of "dear in the head lights" on both ends of the floor.
Woodson is owning Doc. Pierce posting up 18 feet out looks pretty easy to defend to me. When they went on the post Rondo run, they moved the ball. It was very simple and hard to cover. In the playoffs, they are very predictable. I like Doc, but he is not a good coach.

  You could pretty much divide the board into two groups after Rondo's injury, the group that was gushing over our offense and the group that told them to wait until the playoffs when teams try harder on defense and the pace of the game is much slower.I'm guessing you were in the first group.

I would agree with your premise of the two groups, but it is only valid if the same line up and rotation were being judged. The group that played immediately post Rondo did well. It is not the same line up or rotations that is in the playoffs. You can't compare them. My premise is, Doc should have immediately went the the older line up and rotation. It worked very well. The "wait til the playoffs" opinion doesn't apply because it's not the same team. Right now, Doc has a bunch of players that are not use to playing with each other.

  When the playoffs roll around the opponents generally try and take better care of the ball and hustle back on defense. Those two changes negate the main thing we were successful at after Rondo left. The team struggling on offense was very predictable. Doc talked about it, Danny talked about it, even Wyc talked about it during one of the games. It's not rocket science. And there's no way you can say that Doc's playing a bunch of players that aren't used to playing with each other. The bulk of the playoff minutes are going to players (KG, Bass, Green, PP, Bradley, Jet) who were 2nd through 7th in mpg behind Rondo this year.

That's not true. My point is the original post Rondo rotation played great. The beat Miami, Indiana,Denver, Chicago. How do you know they would have the same trouble? Doc changed what was working.

No he didn't he had the same rotation and they regressed to roughly a .500 basketball team after a very good initial stretch of ball. (which coincided with a home heavy schedule and a number of weak defenses)

Only after Jeff Green began to put up bigger numbers as KG sat and the team struggled overall did he change the rotation up.

That's not true.
After Rondo got hurt. The starting line up was Lee, AB, Bass, Pierce, KG. The Bench was Green, Wilcox, Jet and Barbosa.  They went on a 15-6 run(+/-). KG and Lee got hurt. Which change the line up to AB, Pierce, Green, Bass, and whoever in the middle. That's what made them go sub 500. When Lee came back he got demoted. When KG came back, Doc changed to AB, Pierce at the 2, Green, KG and Bass.(They had 2 games together(Maybe). I admit, at first I liked the potential, but I feel Doc should have gone back to the original post Rondo rotation. As I said, they went on a run in which they beat Miami, Indiana, Chicago, Denver.

  Are you really watching our team struggle to score points at the level that they are and thinking "The best thing to do in this situation is to bench our leading scorer to give some minutes to the lowest scoring guard on our roster? Yikes.

  You talk about the win against Chicago, but they play playoff level defense all season long under Thibs and we were lucky to break 70 against them. It was a preview of things to come. Again, the Celtics *themselves* were saying they were going to have trouble executing their offense in the playoffs, people were just too excited about a few regular season wins without Rondo to pay any attention to that.

The Celtics still won and played better with that line up. Score board matters. We could go back and forth which is a waste for me. Let me ask you straight up. Is Doc doing a good job coaching in the playoffs. Yes or No?

  Okay, so you refuse to acknowledge (or haven't noticesd) that there's a difference in the nba between the regular season and the playoffs. Fine.

  Is Doc doing a good job coaching in the playoffs? I don't see a different coach having much better results. One thing that's pretty clear though. He wouldn't be doing a better coaching job if he took a combined 20-25 minutes from PP and Green and gave all those minutes to Courtney Lee. That might have a chance of working if he also went back to the model from that hot streak of playing most of our games at home against teams that were near the bottom of the league in defense though.

Of course I acknowledge there is a difference between playoff and regular season. Your totally missing the point of the discussion. The thread is "Fire Doc".  I am saying Doc is being owned by Woodson. Doc went into the playoffs with the team not prepared. The post Rondo team played well, this playoff rotation team is getting schooled and I am saying Doc has a lot to do with it. And if you bothered reading my points, beating Miami, Indiana, Chicago and Denver with that unit isn't beating bottom of the league teams.

  I'm not sure why you're saying that you acknowledge that there's a difference between regular season and playoff basketball and also refusing to believe that things that worked in the regular season wouldn't be equally successful in the playoffs. Teams that rely on transition offense and don't execute their half court offense well regularly falter in the playoffs and that's what you're seeing. Again, giving many of PP and Green's minutes to our lowest scoring guard isn't going to create the big offensive improvement you're obviously expecting.

  Woodson might be "owning" Doc when we're missing our best player. Put Rondo in the series and take out Melo (or even Smith) and Doc would be in the 2nd round by now. How can you attribute all of that to coaching?

[Boris Badenov]

I'm not sure people appreciate how little talent Doc has to work with here.

By my estimation our current roster has exactly three starting-caliber NBA players: Pierce, Green and Garnett. One is a borderline All-Star (Pierce), one is a solid starter (Green) and one is a superb but old and injured defensive specialist who can give you around 20 minutes of solid effort before running out of gas (Garnett).

Then, we have three or four rotation players who should be coming off the bench on a legit contender: a defensive specialist who can't shoot (Bradley), an aging sixth man who can't play D (Terry), and an undersized but hustling PF (Bass). Lee is a legitimate NBA player (but not starting quality) mired in the worst slump of his career.

Beyond that we have no one who belongs on an NBA court during the playoffs. No one. Crawford is over-achieving for us but just to put things in perspective, he was given away by one of the worst teams in the league halfway through the season.

I would make the claim that there is not a single roster in the playoffs this year with less overall talent on it. LAL might have been close (once Kobe and Nash went out, but not before) and they just got swept. If someone else can name another, I'm all ears.

Seriously, go look at the roster for Houston, or Denver, or the Clips, or Brooklyn - all of whom are facing first round exits - and make an honest assessment of how talent on those rosters compares to ours, from the top all the way down the bench. Tell me whose is worse.

Heck, even Milwaukee compares pretty favorably to us, particularly in terms of bench depth. There's another thread on this forum right now proposing Sam Dalembert as a "realistic big" who could "fix our rebounding and size problems" - and he cannot even get off Milwaukee's bench right now! He's played 9 minutes in four playoff games.

In light of all this, please tell me how it is that you believe Doc is somehow the primary reason for where we are right now.

[Tgro]

I'm not sure people appreciate how little talent Doc has to work with here.

By my estimation our current roster has exactly three starting-caliber NBA players: Pierce, Green and Garnett. One is a borderline All-Star (Pierce), one is a solid starter (Green) and one is a superb but old and injured defensive specialist who can give you around 20 minutes of solid effort before running out of gas (Garnett).

Then, we have three or four rotation players who should be coming off the bench on a legit contender: a defensive specialist who can't shoot (Bradley), an aging sixth man who can't play D (Terry), and an undersized but hustling PF (Bass). Lee is a legitimate NBA player (but not starting quality) mired in the worst slump of his career.

Beyond that we have no one who belongs on an NBA court during the playoffs. No one. Crawford is over-achieving for us but just to put things in perspective, he was given away by one of the worst teams in the league halfway through the season.

I would make the claim that there is not a single roster in the playoffs this year with less overall talent on it. LAL might have been close (once Kobe and Nash went out, but not before) and they just got swept. If someone else can name another, I'm all ears.

Seriously, go look at the roster for Houston, or Denver, or the Clips, or Brooklyn - all of whom are facing first round exits - and make an honest assessment of how talent on those rosters compares to ours, from the top all the way down the bench. Tell me whose is worse.

Heck, even Milwaukee compares pretty favorably to us, particularly in terms of bench depth. There's another thread on this forum right now proposing Sam Dalembert as a "realistic big" who could "fix our rebounding and size problems" - and he cannot even get off Milwaukee's bench right now! He's played 9 minutes in four playoff games.

In light of all this, please tell me how it is that you believe Doc is somehow the primary reason for where we are right now.

One of the best posts I've ever seen here!

You said it so well man.

Thank You,

TP

[LarBrd33]

I'm not sure people appreciate how little talent Doc has to work with here.

By my estimation our current roster has exactly three starting-caliber NBA players: Pierce, Green and Garnett. One is a borderline All-Star (Pierce), one is a solid starter (Green) and one is a superb but old and injured defensive specialist who can give you around 20 minutes of solid effort before running out of gas (Garnett).

Then, we have three or four rotation players who should be coming off the bench on a legit contender: a defensive specialist who can't shoot (Bradley), an aging sixth man who can't play D (Terry), and an undersized but hustling PF (Bass). Lee is a legitimate NBA player (but not starting quality) mired in the worst slump of his career.

Beyond that we have no one who belongs on an NBA court during the playoffs. No one. Crawford is over-achieving for us but just to put things in perspective, he was given away by one of the worst teams in the league halfway through the season.

I would make the claim that there is not a single roster in the playoffs this year with less overall talent on it. LAL might have been close (once Kobe and Nash went out, but not before) and they just got swept. If someone else can name another, I'm all ears.

Seriously, go look at the roster for Houston, or Denver, or the Clips, or Brooklyn - all of whom are facing first round exits - and make an honest assessment of how talent on those rosters compares to ours, from the top all the way down the bench. Tell me whose is worse.

Heck, even Milwaukee compares pretty favorably to us, particularly in terms of bench depth. There's another thread on this forum right now proposing Sam Dalembert as a "realistic big" who could "fix our rebounding and size problems" - and he cannot even get off Milwaukee's bench right now! He's played 9 minutes in four playoff games.

In light of all this, please tell me how it is that you believe Doc is somehow the primary reason for where we are right now.

One of the best posts I've ever seen here!

You said it so well man.

Thank You,

TP

Yeah he nails it.  I'd say that KG and Pierce are still our two best guys when healthy... but KG is dealing with injury issues and Pierce hasn't been shooting well.  Beyond those two you have Rondo (who is injured right now), Jeff Green (who is a capable starter)... and the rest is fodder.  Good enough for 41 wins...  If KG and Pierce play vintage ball without minute limitations, you can upset the Knicks... but if those two struggle, you sure as heck can't blame Doc Rivers.  That's ridiculous.


Same story since 07-08... we only go as far as our best 2-3 guys take us.  Once KG and Pierce are gone, you're looking at a lotto team.  Nothing to do with Doc.

[BballTim]

I'm not sure people appreciate how little talent Doc has to work with here.

By my estimation our current roster has exactly three starting-caliber NBA players: Pierce, Green and Garnett. One is a borderline All-Star (Pierce), one is a solid starter (Green) and one is a superb but old and injured defensive specialist who can give you around 20 minutes of solid effort before running out of gas (Garnett).

Then, we have three or four rotation players who should be coming off the bench on a legit contender: a defensive specialist who can't shoot (Bradley), an aging sixth man who can't play D (Terry), and an undersized but hustling PF (Bass). Lee is a legitimate NBA player (but not starting quality) mired in the worst slump of his career.

Beyond that we have no one who belongs on an NBA court during the playoffs. No one. Crawford is over-achieving for us but just to put things in perspective, he was given away by one of the worst teams in the league halfway through the season.

I would make the claim that there is not a single roster in the playoffs this year with less overall talent on it. LAL might have been close (once Kobe and Nash went out, but not before) and they just got swept. If someone else can name another, I'm all ears.

Seriously, go look at the roster for Houston, or Denver, or the Clips, or Brooklyn - all of whom are facing first round exits - and make an honest assessment of how talent on those rosters compares to ours, from the top all the way down the bench. Tell me whose is worse.

Heck, even Milwaukee compares pretty favorably to us, particularly in terms of bench depth. There's another thread on this forum right now proposing Sam Dalembert as a "realistic big" who could "fix our rebounding and size problems" - and he cannot even get off Milwaukee's bench right now! He's played 9 minutes in four playoff games.

In light of all this, please tell me how it is that you believe Doc is somehow the primary reason for where we are right now.

One of the best posts I've ever seen here!

You said it so well man.

Thank You,

TP

Yeah he nails it.  I'd say that KG and Pierce are still our two best guys when healthy... but KG is dealing with injury issues and Pierce hasn't been shooting well.  Beyond those two you have Rondo (who is injured right now), Jeff Green (who is a capable starter)... and the rest is fodder.  Good enough for 41 wins...  If KG and Pierce play vintage ball without minute limitations, you can upset the Knicks... but if those two struggle, you sure as heck can't blame Doc Rivers.  That's ridiculous.


Same story since 07-08... we only go as far as our best 2-3 guys take us.  Once KG and Pierce are gone, you're looking at a lotto team.  Nothing to do with Doc.

  The season pretty much ended when Rondo was injured. After all of the posts about how the team doesn't need Rondo we're getting a first hand look at how accurate all of those claims were.

[cltc5]

Oh please, doc needs to go.  Every year it's an excuse.  Okc  seems to be doin fine, golden state too.  Horrible rotations, over using tired players, not usin the ones he has, no adjustment.  Someone please explain what he does do right other then encourage players who should already be motivated by their millions.

[nickagneta]

If Doc wasn't fired after a year in which he lost 18straight games and had one of the worst years in Celtics' history, he isn't getting fired this year, a year where his best player, his best low post option and a valuable backup all went down for the year in January and then Doc had to deal with a player leaving basketball to go home to take care of mom, two players coming back from heart surgery, and four SGs that all had poor offensive years and 2 fair overall years at best out of the four of them.

Add to that the aging KG and Pierce showing signs of the inevitable decline and I can't see how Danny and ownership don't simply trust Doc to come back and try again next year with a fully healthy squad and some changes in personnel.

[CoachBo]

It's amazing how many threads on this board get hijacked by Rondo worship.

Absolutely amazing.

[BballTim]

It's amazing how many threads on this board get hijacked by Rondo worship.

Absolutely amazing.

  Maybe instead you can wax poetic about how enjoyable the offense is to watch without Rondo, or how the team's play after Rondo was injured conclusively showed that the Celts wouldn't have trouble scoring points without him, especially against a below average defensive team in the playoffs.

[eugen]

First of all the ownership has to fure DA first rather than firing Doc.

[bobbyv]

I'm not sure people appreciate how little talent Doc has to work with here.

By my estimation our current roster has exactly three starting-caliber NBA players: Pierce, Green and Garnett. One is a borderline All-Star (Pierce), one is a solid starter (Green) and one is a superb but old and injured defensive specialist who can give you around 20 minutes of solid effort before running out of gas (Garnett).

Then, we have three or four rotation players who should be coming off the bench on a legit contender: a defensive specialist who can't shoot (Bradley), an aging sixth man who can't play D (Terry), and an undersized but hustling PF (Bass). Lee is a legitimate NBA player (but not starting quality) mired in the worst slump of his career.

Beyond that we have no one who belongs on an NBA court during the playoffs. No one. Crawford is over-achieving for us but just to put things in perspective, he was given away by one of the worst teams in the league halfway through the season.

I would make the claim that there is not a single roster in the playoffs this year with less overall talent on it. LAL might have been close (once Kobe and Nash went out, but not before) and they just got swept. If someone else can name another, I'm all ears.

Seriously, go look at the roster for Houston, or Denver, or the Clips, or Brooklyn - all of whom are facing first round exits - and make an honest assessment of how talent on those rosters compares to ours, from the top all the way down the bench. Tell me whose is worse.

Heck, even Milwaukee compares pretty favorably to us, particularly in terms of bench depth. There's another thread on this forum right now proposing Sam Dalembert as a "realistic big" who could "fix our rebounding and size problems" - and he cannot even get off Milwaukee's bench right now! He's played 9 minutes in four playoff games.

In light of all this, please tell me how it is that you believe Doc is somehow the primary reason for where we are right now.

I am the one who said Dalembert would help us, and I stand by my statements. Just because he fell out of Milwaukee rotation doesn't mean he couldn't help us in the right role. Look at his stats and PER the times Milwaukee has allowed him to contribute. Or perhaps you have a better idea of who we could get to help this team reasonably?

[Boris Badenov]

I'm not sure people appreciate how little talent Doc has to work with here.

By my estimation our current roster has exactly three starting-caliber NBA players: Pierce, Green and Garnett. One is a borderline All-Star (Pierce), one is a solid starter (Green) and one is a superb but old and injured defensive specialist who can give you around 20 minutes of solid effort before running out of gas (Garnett).

Then, we have three or four rotation players who should be coming off the bench on a legit contender: a defensive specialist who can't shoot (Bradley), an aging sixth man who can't play D (Terry), and an undersized but hustling PF (Bass). Lee is a legitimate NBA player (but not starting quality) mired in the worst slump of his career.

Beyond that we have no one who belongs on an NBA court during the playoffs. No one. Crawford is over-achieving for us but just to put things in perspective, he was given away by one of the worst teams in the league halfway through the season.

I would make the claim that there is not a single roster in the playoffs this year with less overall talent on it. LAL might have been close (once Kobe and Nash went out, but not before) and they just got swept. If someone else can name another, I'm all ears.

Seriously, go look at the roster for Houston, or Denver, or the Clips, or Brooklyn - all of whom are facing first round exits - and make an honest assessment of how talent on those rosters compares to ours, from the top all the way down the bench. Tell me whose is worse.

Heck, even Milwaukee compares pretty favorably to us, particularly in terms of bench depth. There's another thread on this forum right now proposing Sam Dalembert as a "realistic big" who could "fix our rebounding and size problems" - and he cannot even get off Milwaukee's bench right now! He's played 9 minutes in four playoff games.

In light of all this, please tell me how it is that you believe Doc is somehow the primary reason for where we are right now.

I am the one who said Dalembert would help us, and I stand by my statements. Just because he fell out of Milwaukee rotation doesn't mean he couldn't help us in the right role. Look at his stats and PER the times Milwaukee has allowed him to contribute. Or perhaps you have a better idea of who we could get to help this team reasonably?

You should read what I wrote more carefully. I agree with you about Dalembert. That was actually my point - he's languishing in MIL because they are deep but would help us because we have so little talent.