Author Topic: Is it really Doc's fault?  (Read 54614 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: Is it really Doc's fault?
« Reply #90 on: May 15, 2008, 10:58:18 AM »

Offline Who

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 52883
  • Tommy Points: 2569
The team that executes their offense better gets more high percentage shots and shoots a higher percentage from the field. The team that shoots a higher percentage wins the game. It all starts with offensive execution.

The Cavs simply do not have enough offensive weapons to match the Celtics if Boston do a good job of executing their offense. They can't do it. The whole series is going to be decided by how well the Celtics execute, it's that simple.

Tonight's game was a perfect example of why I keep saying you're wrong.  Boston won despite Cleveland executing their offense better.  Not surprisingly, however, Boston won the rebounding battle and shooting percentage battle.  If you think Boston was running plays to get Rondo free for 3 pointers, both I and LeBron have some bridges we'd like to sell you.  And, on the off chance that you claim that was Boston's intent, that would clearly be poor coaching by Rivers.

On the other hand, look to what Boston did well tonight, even as the offensive execution remained shoddy:

Rivers subbed Rondo back in at the perfect time
Rivers subbed Davis in, which paid off extremely well tonight
Rondo shot well
Pierce became a scoring threat again
BOSTON WON THE BATTLE ON THE BOARDS, including a 12-7 edge in offense rebounds

In other words...  the two players who needed to improve their offense did just that, and Rivers coached better tonight than he had for the past 2 games.  That's not execution, but it was the difference between a win and a loss.

No, last night proved why I'm right!  :)

The Celtics executed their offense and got better shots. The players made the extra pass and got more open looks. They attacked the rim and got better looks. They won because the offense was better. Pierce being more aggressive and getting better opportunities is execution. Because of our ball movement we had 25 assists on 37 buckets. The ball was moving.

You were the one saying Rondo needs to be sat down because he can't shoot on two different threads. That Eddie House or Tony Allen should get some of his minutes. Rondo was great tonight. He made the quick pass, he kept the ball moving, he used the drive and kick instead of taking tough contested layups all the time. He didn't settle, he was in attack mode all night and went at Delonte from start to finish.

Execution was better = better shots = more rebounds. Perk only played 28 minutes, he had 5 rebounds. A great rebounder gets 1 board every three minutes, a good rebounder gets 1 every 4 minutes. Perk was just under 1 every 6 minutes. We won the boards not because his subbing in or out but because KG hits the boards (16 of the teams's 38) like he should have been doing all series. I agree with you that rebounding was a big factor tonight.

Better execution = more half court defense = harder shots for Cleveland = lower percentage = more effective C's defense

Everything was execution tonight.

The players did a great job in the second half and they blew the game open and won.


Anyways let's move on from this we clearly disagree on the order of the world and how this game was won.

I have one question though, why do you think the execution was "shoddy" tonight? That boggles my mind. I don't understand that.
« Last Edit: May 15, 2008, 11:07:50 AM by Who »

Re: Is it really Doc's fault?
« Reply #91 on: May 15, 2008, 11:00:19 AM »

Offline Who

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 52883
  • Tommy Points: 2569
Doc gets too much credit when we win, and way too much blame when we lose.

Some of you are ignoring the huddle evidence that television provides. He's been begging for three games for what he finally got in the second half last night - aggressive offense, attacking the rim with authority, great team defense.

There isn't a switch Doc turns on and off. As a coach, you can ask, beg and plead all you want - but until your players carry that pleading out, it means bupkus.

Agreed. Doc did well but this was all about the players doing their jobs better.

Re: Is it really Doc's fault?
« Reply #92 on: May 15, 2008, 11:03:47 AM »

Offline Who

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 52883
  • Tommy Points: 2569

Is Avery Johnson a good coach?  His Dallas team won 67 games last year and went to the NBA Finals the year before.  He wasn't a particularly good coach and now it looks like Dallas has missed its chance at a championship.  Their roster only could take them so far before they needed a little coaching to put them over the top.

I'm afraid that the same thing could happen with the Celtics.  Doc will take the team far enough to keep his job but not to the promised land.  I hope we fire him before the window of this core group closes.

FIRE DOC RIVERS!

Avery is a good head coach. He took that further than they had any right to go. If they didn't have Avery they don't make the finals, not with that team.

Re: Is it really Doc's fault?
« Reply #93 on: May 15, 2008, 11:06:46 AM »

Offline EJPLAYA

  • NCE
  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3816
  • Tommy Points: 127
Well, the second half was probably his best coached half as the Celtics coach, but suppose Rondo wasn't able to play 24 minutes, then what?

And why did it take 12 games for Rivers to do something right?

Let's see, we won 7 out of those 12 games... We are one win in two tries from moving on to the conference finals against a team that went to the finals last year and has a pretty good team with a player on their squad that is better than any player we have on ours.

Do something right?! Come on. He has made mistakes, but not as many as the players out there have. We have a veteran team that when we win forces themselves to play right. They lose when they lose concentration or start trying to win it by themselves.

You won't give him any credit if we won the whole thing, so why bother I guess.

Re: Is it really Doc's fault?
« Reply #94 on: May 15, 2008, 12:17:36 PM »

Offline nickagneta

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 48121
  • Tommy Points: 8800
  • President of Jaylen Brown Fan Club
Doc gets too much credit when we win, and way too much blame when we lose.

Some of you are ignoring the huddle evidence that television provides. He's been begging for three games for what he finally got in the second half last night - aggressive offense, attacking the rim with authority, great team defense.

There isn't a switch Doc turns on and off. As a coach, you can ask, beg and plead all you want - but until your players carry that pleading out, it means bupkus.

I was more of the opinion that most people here give Doc almost no credit, if not zero, when the team wins and almost all of the blame, if not all, when they lose.

And Doc implored the team to drive to the basket and be aggressive in the third quarter of game 4 because Cleveland and LeBron were in foul trouble. That's the right move.

Last night the video evidence had Doc impploring the troops to have better spacing and pass more. One time TNT went to the mike when Doc was talking to an assistant and Doc was commenting that the team was hesitating with the ball when they received it, allowing the defense to get to them before they passed the ball. He mentioned the need for immediate ball movement.

Last night, Doc was also right.

My opinion is that if we could ever have audio of everything Doc is saying during a game, from start to finish, then most wouldn't think he was such a horrible coach.

Re: Is it really Doc's fault?
« Reply #95 on: May 15, 2008, 12:23:36 PM »

Offline 2short

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6080
  • Tommy Points: 428
I haven't read all the posts for the topic since i"m busy at work.  So my thoughts are...I think doc's coaching is a reason the last series was close and this one is also, to a point.
BUT Doc finally let rondo play (he's the key), I'm not sure if this is because lots of media were saying sit sam?  But either way last night we saw pierce at sg with posey, davis and less sam.  So I'm giving doc some credit since I haven't thought him to be a good coach since day 1.
Sam will help in spots, eddie will help in spots (if his legs stillwork)

Re: Is it really Doc's fault?
« Reply #96 on: May 15, 2008, 12:25:02 PM »

Offline Edgar

  • Kevin McHale
  • ************************
  • Posts: 24646
  • Tommy Points: 445
  • No contaban con mi astucia !!!
Doc gets too much credit when we win, and way too much blame when we lose.

Some of you are ignoring the huddle evidence that television provides. He's been begging for three games for what he finally got in the second half last night - aggressive offense, attacking the rim with authority, great team defense.

There isn't a switch Doc turns on and off. As a coach, you can ask, beg and plead all you want - but until your players carry that pleading out, it means bupkus.

I was more of the opinion that most people here give Doc almost no credit, if not zero, when the team wins and almost all of the blame, if not all, when they lose.

And Doc implored the team to drive to the basket and be aggressive in the third quarter of game 4 because Cleveland and LeBron were in foul trouble. That's the right move.

Last night the video evidence had Doc impploring the troops to have better spacing and pass more. One time TNT went to the mike when Doc was talking to an assistant and Doc was commenting that the team was hesitating with the ball when they received it, allowing the defense to get to them before they passed the ball. He mentioned the need for immediate ball movement.

Last night, Doc was also right.

My opinion is that if we could ever have audio of everything Doc is saying during a game, from start to finish, then most wouldn't think he was such a horrible coach.

In this line of toughts
i have to say i HATE national broadcasting always on Cs loker room
isnt this Spy work
Do they have any privacy to plan their strategy
Is it marginally posible that the other team have acces via close circuit to waht the other team coach is saying
I am very mad about that
and the broadcast happens ONLY on cs loker rooom  >:(
« Last Edit: May 15, 2008, 02:06:06 PM by Edgar »
Once a CrotorNat always a CROTORNAT  2 times CB draft Champion 2009-2012

Nice to be back!

Re: Is it really Doc's fault?
« Reply #97 on: May 15, 2008, 01:59:05 PM »

Offline dmopower

  • Jaylen Brown
  • Posts: 557
  • Tommy Points: 46
Yep its docs fault when we dont run pick and rolls for over 3 quarters, like an idiot.

And I guess it must be his fault that we ran them last night and took over the game.

Ill give him props for now, but if in the next road game we dont continue to run them, it will be docs fault also, as has been the case on the road.

Yes we were better on offense, we ran pick and rolls and they had to guess what we were going to do, that is why you run them, this allowed less attention to paul and he got off as well.

The whole thing came down to running pick and roll offense, then we score and set our D.

Seems to simple but this is how simple the whole thing is.
blind optimist or GENIUS

Re: Is it really Doc's fault?
« Reply #98 on: May 15, 2008, 02:07:32 PM »

Offline winsomme

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6058
  • Tommy Points: 255
Yep its docs fault when we dont run pick and rolls for over 3 quarters, like an idiot.

And I guess it must be his fault that we ran them last night and took over the game.

Ill give him props for now, but if in the next road game we dont continue to run them, it will be docs fault also, as has been the case on the road.

Yes we were better on offense, we ran pick and rolls and they had to guess what we were going to do, that is why you run them, this allowed less attention to paul and he got off as well.

The whole thing came down to running pick and roll offense, then we score and set our D.

Seems to simple but this is how simple the whole thing is.


i wish it were that simple.

the fact is that CLE has been playing very good defense and been exploiting matchups.

they will certainly watch a lot of video and make some adjustments like they did after game 2 and do a better job of defending the high pick and roll with Rondo.

and we will need to be ready to adjust to that.

the spacing was also much better in the second half of that game which opened up space for Pierce to maneuver...

Re: Is it really Doc's fault?
« Reply #99 on: May 15, 2008, 02:23:22 PM »

Offline dmopower

  • Jaylen Brown
  • Posts: 557
  • Tommy Points: 46
Go back and watch the games, when we run them we score much better than everyone for them selves.

You can watch vidoe all you want and maybe they do a better job next game, but this is what got us going.

I challenge everyone on this board to go back and watch any or all of our playoff games, when we run them our offense clicks and everyone ends up playing better offense.

You see two people cant occupy the same space at the same time, you cant go through a player, you have to go around them this gives the offense an advantage every time.

Even slow vertically challenged teams know this.

You think bird got 3 rings playing free for all ball while shooting 50% for his career, I dont think so, this also allowed him to rack up all of those assist.
blind optimist or GENIUS

Re: Is it really Doc's fault?
« Reply #100 on: May 15, 2008, 02:39:04 PM »

Offline ScoobyDoo

  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2644
  • Tommy Points: 447
But as a coach sometimes beggin, pleading or asking your players to do something isn't enough. Sometimes it has to be demanded. I think that is one of the key things that separates a good coach from a great coach. A great coach knows when to go over the line and almost challenge, fear and anger the player into what it is that needs to be done. He fins the way to drag it out of the player.

I am a big Doc fan in terms of his likeability, his ability with the press, his influence of character and class with the team and the fact that his players do gnerally play hard for him.

It's his seeming inability to make logical rotations on most occasions and to make in game adjustments quickly that are my main gripe.

Last night, outside of the obvious contributions of KG, Pierce and Rondo, I thought Big Baby was the most important move Doc made. The last game of the year Big Baby was a wrecking ball against Cleveland. Why it took until the 5th game to use him again was a mystery to me. I'm just glad I finally saw the kid.

Everyone can and geenrally does grow. Last night Doc did very well overall. I hope it's a trend.   

Re: Is it really Doc's fault?
« Reply #101 on: May 17, 2008, 12:11:02 AM »

Offline Scintan

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3066
  • Tommy Points: 656

No, last night proved why I'm right!  :)

The Celtics executed their offense and got better shots. The players made the extra pass and got more open looks. They attacked the rim and got better looks. They won because the offense was better. Pierce being more aggressive and getting better opportunities is execution. Because of our ball movement we had 25 assists on 37 buckets. The ball was moving.

You were the one saying Rondo needs to be sat down because he can't shoot on two different threads. That Eddie House or Tony Allen should get some of his minutes. Rondo was great tonight. He made the quick pass, he kept the ball moving, he used the drive and kick instead of taking tough contested layups all the time. He didn't settle, he was in attack mode all night and went at Delonte from start to finish.

Execution was better = better shots = more rebounds. Perk only played 28 minutes, he had 5 rebounds. A great rebounder gets 1 board every three minutes, a good rebounder gets 1 every 4 minutes. Perk was just under 1 every 6 minutes. We won the boards not because his subbing in or out but because KG hits the boards (16 of the teams's 38) like he should have been doing all series. I agree with you that rebounding was a big factor tonight.

Better execution = more half court defense = harder shots for Cleveland = lower percentage = more effective C's defense

Everything was execution tonight.

The players did a great job in the second half and they blew the game open and won.


Anyways let's move on from this we clearly disagree on the order of the world and how this game was won.

I have one question though, why do you think the execution was "shoddy" tonight? That boggles my mind. I don't understand that.

Well, now that Rivers is on record about the rebounding, I assume you'll finally admit you were wrong... or are you going to continue drawing the clearly false equating of rebounds with execution?


When people are free to do as they please, they usually imitate each other.

Sorry, Doc ... Enough Is Enough
« Reply #102 on: May 17, 2008, 05:35:00 AM »

Offline Bahku

  • CB HOF Editor
  • Bill Sharman
  • *******************
  • Posts: 19771
  • Tommy Points: 3632
  • Oe ma krr pamtseotu
So I'm sitting here after the game, and I'm really angry. I'm watching the "posts" go by, as usual, and contemplating the fact that so many people see so many different problems as the "key" to this loss: the officials, the coach, the lack of execution, Rondo's lack of energy, Ray's slump, Pierce's reliance on the outside shot, Perk's lack of effectivenes in the post, the overall lack of offense, and on and on ad nauseum. And I agree ... with pretty much all of it on some level, and as usual, it's not just one thing, but all the same elements involved in a win, just in reverse. OK ... bad game, it happens.

But understanding this doesn't help ... I'm still mad. The refs were not good tonight ... horrible really, and while you'd expect the Cavs to get the benefit of the calls in their house, you wouldn't expect it to be this unbalanced. Thirteen to twenty-five free-throw attempts, that's a pretty big discrepency, even for the home team. There were obvious traveling calls not made at the end of the game that could have made the difference, there were goal-tending calls not made that could have made the difference, and that charge call on Pierce was frankly the worst call I've seen all year. Let's face it, if this game had been called with even a modicum of fairness in the foul column, we would have won ... easily. OK ... the refs stunk ... it happens.

But even taking this into consideration makes me feel no better .... I'm still mad ... seething, really, and it has nothing to do with the refs, the team's poor play, or even the loss itself. While the question "Why am I still so angry?" is forming more solidly in my mind, the answer becomes clear. It's there, on my television screen, staring me in the face ... Doc. I spend the next five minutes or so trying with all my might to not throw my KRZR, my Logitech 870, or my bottle of Stewart's Orange Cream Soda through the screen. I know that may seem a bit drastic to some, but in the throws of paasion these kinds of thoughts can be very powerful, and difficult to resist, despite one's better judgement. OK ... I'm mad at Doc ... it happens.

But for some reason even this realization doesn't help ... I'm still seething, and Doc's face is no longer staring at me. Here's the thing: I've been sticking up for Doc for the most part this year. As some here know, I've questioned his decisions at times, but always done so objectively, encouraging discussion, but not bashing, or hating, or getting carried away about it. I've been giving him the benefit of the doubt all season long, because I think he's done a fair job overall, and well ... he's a likable guy, and I think he does the best he can ... for the most part. He's been given a big responsibility, and this is a very new team, with truly huge expectations, and that can't be easy. OK ... it's a tough job ... that's life.

Doesn't help ... not one bit ... rationalizing the rigors of the job makes me no less angry. It may be in part because I have tried so hard to be on his side, and he keeps letting me down. I don't think he coached this game that badly ... he leaned toward the rotation that we won with all year, and got Eddie off the bench, (finally), to bring his energy and spark into the game ... and it worked. But that's exactly what set this time-bomb off in me ... seeing Eddie come onto the floor, attacking the paint, influxing his energy and momentum, and nailing three-pointers like he'd never left, all after warming the wood for weeks. Why? Why now? Where the heck has he been, and why in the name of all that's green would you completely abandon a player who's been contributing so successfully all year?!? Because you have this odd affinity for veterans? Even though they're destroying the tempo and energy of the team? I don't get it.

The first thought in my mind is: I wonder what difference Eddie could have made before this, when we so desperately needed to sustain tempo and attack? But no, Doc likes Sammy ... period. He likes the experience he brings to the game and his ability to hit the "big shot" ... never mind that he only hits his shots in about one of every 4 or 5 games. Never mind that he pounds the ball and looks for his shot before even considering passing the ball. Never mind that he still is confused with the play-calling and totally disrupts the rhythm of the game. Doc likes him ... he's the number two option, and Doc has ignored one very important player in the mean time, a player who was a great help to getting us this amazing record. There's a good chance, especially in games like tonight's, that Eddie could very well have been the difference, and that the rotation we've gone to all year, might have meant a shorter series ... and more rest. It's really poor coaching to not recognize these things, and not put your team in the best position to win.

But the final thing that got to me about Doc tonight, was the post-game interview. Honestly, I think 90% of the people on this blog could tell you what Doc's going to say in the post-loss interview ... the same excuses, the same lackidaisical attitude, the same "don't worry about it, we're cool" statements, and the same absence of emotion. This is what puts the icing on it for me, because a coach should be emotional at times, especially after a loss like this. Now, I'm not naive' enough to think that he's going to show the same emotion, or say the same things to the press that he does in the locker-room to the team. But still, he needs to let the team see that he's not timid about expressing his disappointment to the public, and he needs to show the fans that he's angry and not so passive about these losses.

I mean, c'mon ... you're the COACH, Doc, and you should be upset! Show some emotion, for-crying-out-loud ... let the boys know that you're calling them out, that you're not just their "Buddy", but their LEADER and mentor! A lack of emotion very often translates into apathy, and if your team sees you always in control of that emotion, they begin to wonder just how much this really means deep-down. Get angry, man! Raise your voice once in a while in that post-game interview, and show that you really care about these guys, and that you're not ashamed to let them know when you're upset and disappointed. Let us, the fans, know that this kind of game gets to you, too, and that you recognize how poorly they performed, and aren't afraid to be more of a "coach" once in a while, and less of a "friend".

I know there will be plenty who will reply in disgust, wondering how in the world I can criticize Doc, but frankly, I've reached my saturation point, and I don't care any more. This season is not over, and I'm pretty confident we'll win on Sunday. I'll continue to support Doc for all our remaining games, and pray that he does a good job for our team. But for me, it's over ... my vote is in, whether we win it all or not. The last straw has been added to this camel's back ... the fat lady has sung, and good or bad, I've had it with Doc. It's not so much a couple of huge things, but many, many little things over the season, that have added up and boiled over ... and regardless if this puts a target on my back or not, it's finally very clear for me: when the season's over, I want a new coach ... period. Say I'm a traitor, say it's too early 'cuz the season's not over, say he's too nice a guy to let go ... you could be right on all points, but it makes no difference for me.

I'm tired of the head-scratching rotations, the highly questionable play-calling, the odd substitutions, the failure to make correct adjustments from game-to-game, the buddy-buddy attitude, and the lack of assertiveness and aggression. Sorry folks, I like Doc very much as a person, and I think he's done the best job he can ... but therein lies the rub: his best just isn't good enough, not on this level. I just can't bring myself to look the other way any more, or to keep giving him the benefit of the doubt. The Eddie House thing just made it so evident that he really doesn't know what he's doing half the time, and that his game-plans and rotations follow no linear progression, or no clear strategy, but are more of a coin-toss. We just can't afford to keep "shooting in the dark" with this guy. If we're ever going to grow into the dynasty franchise we hope to, it's going to have to be behind the leadership of someone who's a little more grounded, and who knows the meaning of "putting your team in the best position to win".

It's finally obvious to me that Doc really has no idea how to do just that, and that this "Emerald City" needs a breath of fresh air.
« Last Edit: May 17, 2008, 05:45:01 AM by Bahku »
2010 PAPOUG, 2012 & 2017 PAPTYG CHAMP, HD BOT

* BAHKU MUSIC *

Re: Sorry, Doc ... Enough Is Enough
« Reply #103 on: May 17, 2008, 07:19:54 AM »

Offline rmcc4444

  • Lonnie Walker IV
  • Posts: 65
  • Tommy Points: 12
great post.  doc doesn't seem to adapt well to game situations.  ray allen could go 0-20 and he would keep marching him back out there to find his shot.  it's so frustrating.


Re: Sorry, Doc ... Enough Is Enough
« Reply #104 on: May 17, 2008, 07:35:33 AM »

Offline Hondo

  • Xavier Tillman
  • Posts: 27
  • Tommy Points: 5
Is Doc on a 1 year deal?