Fire Joe! ... or critique Joe ... or defend Joe... or worry about Joe's coaching

[Kernewek]

If only Joe had reminded the players to make their free throws and play defense. What a shame…

This is where the Joe apologism is so irrational and frustrating.

All of that can be true - we missed free throws and played lackadaisical defense in the third - but that still doesn’t absolve him of his mistake or release his contribution to this loss. Nobody said he was the only or even primary reason for this loss, but he absolutely played a role and screwed up in this situation, which highlights why many people don’t trust him in the playoffs and end-game situations when he’s just not shown any growth or improvement and continues to dogmatically hold on to a futile philosophy.

This is where your constant complaining and scapegoating of the coach is frustrating. You trying to put every loss on Joe is just laughable.

Jared Weiss: Buddy Hield wouldn’t share what he told Joe Mazzulla, but said that he made some contact with Jaylen Brown yet the officials and replay center made the decision.  – via Twitter JaredWeissNBA

“You trying to put every loss on Joe is just laughable.”

It helps to actually read the posts that you’re responding to, Goldy.

Nobody said he was the only or even primary reason for this loss, but he absolutely played a role and screwed up in this situation, which highlights why many people don’t trust him in the playoffs and end-game situations when he’s just not shown any growth or improvement and continues to dogmatically hold on to a futile philosophy.

This is textbook apologism on a very reasonable and measured critique of Joe, and why your kind of radical position on Joe is unserious.

I’m talking in general here. As sure as the sun will rise tomorrow, Potter will bump this thread after every loss and blame Joe. It’s like clockwork at this point.

Well, I mean, that is what you do when coaches/players regularly make awful decisions that impact the game’s outcome - you critique them.

But, once again, you’re wrong and exaggerating my position. You *literally* only have to go back to our last loss against OKC to find a time that I didn’t bump this thread and blame Joe. And why is that? Because I didn’t perceive him to be instrumental in that loss. Sure, he had some questionable rotations with the double big lineup and the final play when the game was already lost was questionable, but he wasn’t in my eyes materially responsible in some significant fashion to the loss. OKC just beat us by playing over their heads. But games like last night and the GSW loss where Joe’s incompetency is on display due to his poor end-game decision-making? Absolutely I’m going to highlight it.

If anything, the Joe apologists are the extreme ones when they do nothing but defend and absolve him and claim coaching has minimal impact on losses. That’s absurd, especially when he makes the same mistakes over and over and over again that are plain to see.

I think if we're going to correctly point out when people are making straw man arguments and misrepresenting our positions, it's probably good to avoid dipping into those tactics ourselves.

[Kernewek]

Not sure where to put this, but since it's related to coaching I'll stick it here. 

I'm curious how thorough a team's scouting department is expected to be when preparing for a regular season matchup.  For example, we clearly had a gameplan to throw at Haliburton, but I got the sense that we didn't really know what to do with their offense after he exited the game.  It looked like we played the rest of the game on our heels. 

And this isn't the first time I've noticed this.  Against Golden State last month, I had the distinct sense that our guys had no idea who Trayce Jackson-Davis even was.  Further back we can talk about the Patrick Beverley game (though we escaped with the win there, thankfully), or a number of games last season where the other team was missing somebody important and mauled us anyway (the OKC 150-piece without Shai comes to mind). 

Just something that has been nagging at me for a bit.  FWIW I get the sense that other teams share these problems (the Grizzlies beat the Suns without Morant a couple of days ago, for example, and we've won various games despite missing key pieces this season).  So it's not even just us.

This is an interesting post - I think if the flashcards are anything to go by, teams are definitely planning for everyone on the roster to at least some degree, but if the team is missing the main engine it can be difficult to get tape and predict how the team is going to respond.

It's an extreme example, but imagine trying to gameplan for those Harden-led Houston squads without Harden. He's so integral to the way the team plays trying to figure out what they'll do without him is going to be more difficult than it might first appear.

[mobilija]

If only Joe had reminded the players to make their free throws and play defense. What a shame…

This is where the Joe apologism is so irrational and frustrating.

All of that can be true - we missed free throws and played lackadaisical defense in the third - but that still doesn’t absolve him of his mistake or release his contribution to this loss. Nobody said he was the only or even primary reason for this loss, but he absolutely played a role and screwed up in this situation, which highlights why many people don’t trust him in the playoffs and end-game situations when he’s just not shown any growth or improvement and continues to dogmatically hold on to a futile philosophy.

This is where your constant complaining and scapegoating of the coach is frustrating. You trying to put every loss on Joe is just laughable.

Jared Weiss: Buddy Hield wouldn’t share what he told Joe Mazzulla, but said that he made some contact with Jaylen Brown yet the officials and replay center made the decision.  – via Twitter JaredWeissNBA

“You trying to put every loss on Joe is just laughable.”

It helps to actually read the posts that you’re responding to, Goldy.

Nobody said he was the only or even primary reason for this loss, but he absolutely played a role and screwed up in this situation, which highlights why many people don’t trust him in the playoffs and end-game situations when he’s just not shown any growth or improvement and continues to dogmatically hold on to a futile philosophy.

This is textbook apologism on a very reasonable and measured critique of Joe, and why your kind of radical position on Joe is unserious.

I’m talking in general here. As sure as the sun will rise tomorrow, Potter will bump this thread after every loss and blame Joe. It’s like clockwork at this point.

Joe will probably play a role in most close games, no?

Has there ever been a poster that has praised Joe after a game? I don't remember seeing one single post that said "glad Joe bailed us out there".

So the players are responsible when they win, and Joe is responsible when they lose. We can't judge Joe by the Celtics results with a win, but its open season when they lose.

Teams don't generally win when they shoot less than 70% from the line. The Celtics did so and lost by 2 points last night. Let's try to be somewhat objective.

I have plenty of times as have others. They usually result in zero feedback and as far as I can tell are largely ignored (evidently even by u). For example, see bdm’s excellent post a few pages back in response to a “what has Joe done well” question of doubt. Crickets from the peanut gallery and the doubter.

It’s ez to see negative things especially if u need something to scape goat. Boston sports fans love their scapegoats. BTW I think Joe definitely should be calling that last shot timeout more often to help the players generate a better look. They’ve generally proven to not do great on their own. Heck, throw a curve ball every now and again and let someone else take that shot. Porzingis, Jrue and White are all capable of getting a good shot. Joe doesn’t necessarily lose them the game by not calling a TO in those situations but he is not helping them to win either.

[jpotter33]

If only Joe had reminded the players to make their free throws and play defense. What a shame…

This is where the Joe apologism is so irrational and frustrating.

All of that can be true - we missed free throws and played lackadaisical defense in the third - but that still doesn’t absolve him of his mistake or release his contribution to this loss. Nobody said he was the only or even primary reason for this loss, but he absolutely played a role and screwed up in this situation, which highlights why many people don’t trust him in the playoffs and end-game situations when he’s just not shown any growth or improvement and continues to dogmatically hold on to a futile philosophy.

This is where your constant complaining and scapegoating of the coach is frustrating. You trying to put every loss on Joe is just laughable.

Jared Weiss: Buddy Hield wouldn’t share what he told Joe Mazzulla, but said that he made some contact with Jaylen Brown yet the officials and replay center made the decision.  – via Twitter JaredWeissNBA

“You trying to put every loss on Joe is just laughable.”

It helps to actually read the posts that you’re responding to, Goldy.

Nobody said he was the only or even primary reason for this loss, but he absolutely played a role and screwed up in this situation, which highlights why many people don’t trust him in the playoffs and end-game situations when he’s just not shown any growth or improvement and continues to dogmatically hold on to a futile philosophy.

This is textbook apologism on a very reasonable and measured critique of Joe, and why your kind of radical position on Joe is unserious.

I’m talking in general here. As sure as the sun will rise tomorrow, Potter will bump this thread after every loss and blame Joe. It’s like clockwork at this point.

If anything, the Joe apologists are the extreme ones when they do nothing but defend and absolve him and claim coaching has minimal impact on losses. That’s absurd, especially when he makes the same mistakes over and over and over again that are plain to see.

Is there anything you like about Joe, or is it all bad?

I’ve said many times that I think he’s improved some over last year, or at the very least he’s got better support from his coaching staff this year. I will admit that I probably didn’t give him enough credit last year for the difficulty of the role being thrust into it last minute and a dwindling coaching staff. I do like his competitiveness and his willingness to use the challenge early in games when there’s a clear opportunity for us. He’s also improved some on his timeout management, though obviously still struggles with it.

I think what I most dislike about him is he comes off as very dogmatic, especially last year. Whether it’s his offensive philosophy, end-game strategy, or a host of other things, he doesn’t seem to like to deviate from his beliefs at all, which often gets us into trouble, and he seems to even take offense whenever those beliefs are questioned. At this point it’s clear that this team needs more leadership and direction from him in end-game scenarios, yet he refuses to change his strategy and continues to just hope that Tatum/Brown will iso us to victory, despite how many times it fails. Or even with his offensive philosophy, he’s content with us shooting ourselves out of games because he’s willing to play the averages game, even if it loses us individual games when some minor adjustments could be made.

And that dogmatic character trait is what really makes me question whether he has what it takes to lead us to a title, as you have to be more fluid and dynamic at times to make the necessary adjustments to win.

[Roy H.]

As an off-shoot of the "coaching barely / rarely matter" argument:  what do you think of the Spoelstra extension?  8 years, $120 million.  That's about what the average NBA player makes.

[jpotter33]

While the final play in regulation allowing Tatum to just iso against a really strong wing defender in McDaniels was suspect, Joe had some improved end-game decisions down the stretch tonight.

The first one was in regulation calling timeout and running the ATO that created the Towns mismatch on Tatum. Tatum took advantage, got to the line, and it ended up leading to a crucial four point possession off the missed free throw.

The other one was in OT where he saved us a turnover by calling two timeouts in a row so that we can advance the ball and get out of the 8 second backcourt court call. We ended up turning it over that possession anyways, but that wasn't Joe's fault.

Good on him. He needs to continue to be more directive like this in end-game situations.

[SHAQATTACK]

Good Joe .

[SHAQATTACK]

As an off-shoot of the "coaching barely / rarely matter" argument:  what do you think of the Spoelstra extension?  8 years, $120 million.  That's about what the average NBA player makes.

I ll sign him up for that.

[bdm860]

The last 3 games, it seems like a surprise player has killed the Celtics.

vs. the Pacers, Bennedict Mathurin had 26 (tied for 3rd highest this season), but only averaging 14.7 for the year.
vs. the Wolves, Kyle Anderson had 17 (season high), but only averaging 6.8 for the year.
vs. the Bucks, Bobby Portis had 28 (16 of which came in the first half, total was his 2nd highest this season), but only averaging 12.4 for the year.

Probably nothing, and Pacers (Halliburton) and Wolves (Conley, Gobert) were missing key players, so it makes sense that someone would get more shots, and Celtics were tired, traveling and coming off an overtime win against the Bucks.  But still, when you're one of the top defensive teams and have plus defenders at every position, you don't expect to see opposing bench guys flourishing.

[Kernewek]

As an off-shoot of the "coaching barely / rarely matter" argument:  what do you think of the Spoelstra extension?  8 years, $120 million.  That's about what the average NBA player makes.

I ll sign him up for that.

I think the Heat’s whole ‘culture’ is really about getting the most out of the roster (with the OTT exercises and all that) and Spo is clearly a big part of that. The whole organisation has a floor that they never really fall below, regardless of the talent (or lack thereof) on the roster.

Bringing it back to the last few C’s coaches, I think Spo is a lot closer to a Stevens than someone like Doc, who’s clearly at his best with a roster of names (although I think Spo probably has a better resume than both).

[Surferdad]

The last 3 games, it seems like a surprise player has killed the Celtics.

vs. the Pacers, Bennedict Mathurin had 26 (tied for 3rd highest this season), but only averaging 14.7 for the year.
vs. the Wolves, Kyle Anderson had 17 (season high), but only averaging 6.8 for the year.
vs. the Bucks, Bobby Portis had 28 (16 of which came in the first half, total was his 2nd highest this season), but only averaging 12.4 for the year.

Probably nothing, and Pacers (Halliburton) and Wolves (Conley, Gobert) were missing key players, so it makes sense that someone would get more shots, and Celtics were tired, traveling and coming off an overtime win against the Bucks.  But still, when you're one of the top defensive teams and have plus defenders at every position, you don't expect to see opposing bench guys flourishing.

That's the one that irritated me. "Slo-mo" is just not very good. Mathurin has a lot of promise and Portis is an established starter/rotation player.

[Who]

The last 3 games, it seems like a surprise player has killed the Celtics.

vs. the Pacers, Bennedict Mathurin had 26 (tied for 3rd highest this season), but only averaging 14.7 for the year.
vs. the Wolves, Kyle Anderson had 17 (season high), but only averaging 6.8 for the year.
vs. the Bucks, Bobby Portis had 28 (16 of which came in the first half, total was his 2nd highest this season), but only averaging 12.4 for the year.

Probably nothing, and Pacers (Halliburton) and Wolves (Conley, Gobert) were missing key players, so it makes sense that someone would get more shots, and Celtics were tired, traveling and coming off an overtime win against the Bucks.  But still, when you're one of the top defensive teams and have plus defenders at every position, you don't expect to see opposing bench guys flourishing.

That's the one that irritated me. "Slo-mo" is just not very good. Mathurin has a lot of promise and Portis is an established starter/rotation player.

Mathurin is a baller. He can score on anyone. Quick, strong. Can shoot with range. Can beat anyone one-on-one. Can get to the rim. Can finish at the rim. Draws fouls. He is one of the most dynamic young scorers in the league.

His main issue is the rest of his game sucks so if he isn't scoring, he isn't helping. So he gets shunted back onto the bench. If he could just get his non-scoring game to around league average, he would be an All-Star player.

But if he is scoring, if he is hot, there is not much you can do to slow him down. He is that good of a scorer.

[ozgod]

Since nobody else has said it yet - another poor end-game decision by Joe to not call the timeout there. That JB shot was poor, in tons of traffic, too early, and the same kind of awful shot we have Tatum take in those situations when we don’t run a play. He was lucky/bailed out by the foul call that ended up being questionably overturned.

Not sure how you trust this guy when the games matter when he consistently doesn’t learn from these mistakes. The Pacers are hardly a defensive juggernaut, so you absolutely take the dang timeout there and get a better look at the basket than that, especially given our history of futility in those situations.

I mentioned it in one of the previous game threads ... I was listening to the podcast Mazzula did with JJ Redick before the start of the season and was kinda shocked at how he thought about end of game situations. How he approached them. He said what you want in an end of game situation is the ball in the hands of your best player and them taking the shot.

He was talking also about why he didn't call timeouts in those situations and it was basically well we have the ball in our best guys hands and this is what we want so why would we call a timeout.

There was no difference in terms of shot quality, in terms of location of where your best guy gets the ball, makes his move or takes his shot. You just want the ball in your best guys hands and you will live or die with what he does.

That is all you want down the stretch. Your best guy with the ball making the play. So long as you get that, it is a good possession to end the game.

It seemed like such a ridiculous thing to say and maybe he just didn't clarify his thoughts well on the podcast ... but watching all these games this season and seeing the same thing over and over, I have to take those words as an accurate description of what he believes a good end of game situation is. Best player, ball, let him win or lose the game. Nothing more, nothing less. Best player, ball. Make or break.

Was listening to Jaylen's post game presser vs. Houston tonight and he was asked about the impact Ime had on him and the team and his response suggested that it was actually Ime who originated that "best players figure it out on their own" philosophy. He talked about how they were used to playing in Brad's system where he called the shots, he would "think the game for them",  while when Ime took over he made the system about them (the players), "see a play, make a play", he designed the system around what the Jays did best, and empowered them to make more decisions, to "figure it out". And Joe has basically just explanded on that "figure it out" guiding philosophy that Ime implemented, but with more focus on pre-game preparation.

I guess the approaches belie the backgrounds the coaches had - Brad was a college coach, he needed to have a system that needed to survive multiple players coming and going, graduating, etc. And his players were younger. He's a more traditional "football" type coach where he is the one making the most of the decisions and the players are just executing what he decides. Ime came in to a team that had been to the ECF a few times already, and his background was being an assistant in the NBA and he wanted the players to be able to think on their feet more, to improvise more. And that philosophy is something that Joe shares as a guiding principle, having served a year under Ime, but he's having to adjust after his first year, to be better at identifying when the players can't "figure it out" and he has to intervene, which he has done more of this year. But he's never going to be a football style coach where he exerts a heavy hand on the game by calling every play.

It's the first question in the link below.

https://youtu.be/OkW-lB9HB9k?si=fSd2n4kOpVn6iJWs

[Roy H.]

One sequence I thought was interesting last night was the out of bounds call on JB, which was reversed by a challenge.  I was wondering whether a challenge with 3 seconds on the clock made sense.  The team followed that up with a perfect play for White.

Assuming Joe called that play, it was really nice.  I'd like to see us run more plays for White or KP, instead of just Tatum isos.

[SHAQATTACK]

I don’t recall Joe being ejected yet.