Great Rotations by Doc!

[winsomme]

If you look at my posting history, you will notice that I am far from a fan of Doc.  He did a solid job today. 

However, it is important to keep things in perspective.  Doc did his job -- he did not prevent the Celtics from winning.  On the one hand, that's great.  But we shouldn't lower the bar too much here. . .

If you want to argue Doc deserves praise than you have to show a substitution he made that was smarter than a substitution the "average" coach would make.  This is part of how they calculate manager win-shares in baseball.

For example, playing House over Cassell in Games 6 and 7 does not count since he had kept House on the bench for 12 games in a row, etc. .

So for those Doc supporters out there, what move did he make that was different than what the mean vote, say, of the fans would have suggested, or what the average coach would have done? 

That is the relevant metric. . .

how about Posey playing over Ray Allen...

this allowed Paul some time not guarding LeBron so that he could have some extra energy to focus on his offense on a night where he was carrying the team.

[Bidder225]

Not a doc fan, but I am happy to give him the credit for what he did today.  Good job Doc and way to go PJ Brown!

[wdleehi]

If you look at my posting history, you will notice that I am far from a fan of Doc.  He did a solid job today. 

However, it is important to keep things in perspective.  Doc did his job -- he did not prevent the Celtics from winning.  On the one hand, that's great.  But we shouldn't lower the bar too much here. . .

If you want to argue Doc deserves praise than you have to show a substitution he made that was smarter than a substitution the "average" coach would make.  This is part of how they calculate manager win-shares in baseball.

For example, playing House over Cassell in Games 6 and 7 does not count since he had kept House on the bench for 12 games in a row, etc. .

So for those Doc supporters out there, what move did he make that was different than what the mean vote, say, of the fans would have suggested, or what the average coach would have done? 

That is the relevant metric. . .

how about Posey playing over Ray Allen...

this allowed Paul some time not guarding LeBron so that he could have some extra energy to focus on his offense on a night where he was carrying the team.

Actually, I disliked that.


Pierce was so much more effective against James then Posey.  I would have rather seen Pierce on James and force Lebron to get more help from his teammates.


It worked out, so, fine. 

[winsomme]

If you look at my posting history, you will notice that I am far from a fan of Doc.  He did a solid job today. 

However, it is important to keep things in perspective.  Doc did his job -- he did not prevent the Celtics from winning.  On the one hand, that's great.  But we shouldn't lower the bar too much here. . .

If you want to argue Doc deserves praise than you have to show a substitution he made that was smarter than a substitution the "average" coach would make.  This is part of how they calculate manager win-shares in baseball.

For example, playing House over Cassell in Games 6 and 7 does not count since he had kept House on the bench for 12 games in a row, etc. .

So for those Doc supporters out there, what move did he make that was different than what the mean vote, say, of the fans would have suggested, or what the average coach would have done? 

That is the relevant metric. . .

how about Posey playing over Ray Allen...

this allowed Paul some time not guarding LeBron so that he could have some extra energy to focus on his offense on a night where he was carrying the team.

Actually, I disliked that.


Pierce was so much more effective against James then Posey.  I would have rather seen Pierce on James and force Lebron to get more help from his teammates.


It worked out, so, fine. 

well, to be fair, it more than worked out....Pierce had an epic game.

how do we know what would have happened to Pierce's game if he was chasing LeBron around the whole final quarter. Pierce said after the game that guarding LeBron was physically grueling for him.

[Roy Hobbs]

If you look at my posting history, you will notice that I am far from a fan of Doc.  He did a solid job today. 

However, it is important to keep things in perspective.  Doc did his job -- he did not prevent the Celtics from winning.  On the one hand, that's great.  But we shouldn't lower the bar too much here. . .

If you want to argue Doc deserves praise than you have to show a substitution he made that was smarter than a substitution the "average" coach would make.  This is part of how they calculate manager win-shares in baseball.

For example, playing House over Cassell in Games 6 and 7 does not count since he had kept House on the bench for 12 games in a row, etc. .

So for those Doc supporters out there, what move did he make that was different than what the mean vote, say, of the fans would have suggested, or what the average coach would have done? 

That is the relevant metric. . .

how about Posey playing over Ray Allen...

this allowed Paul some time not guarding LeBron so that he could have some extra energy to focus on his offense on a night where he was carrying the team.

Actually, I disliked that.


Pierce was so much more effective against James then Posey.  I would have rather seen Pierce on James and force Lebron to get more help from his teammates.


It worked out, so, fine. 

well, to be fair, it more than worked out....Pierce had an epic game.

how do we know what would have happened to Pierce's game if he was chasing LeBron around the whole final quarter. Pierce said after the game that guarding LeBron was physically grueling for him.

On the other hand, how do you know that Lebron wouldn't have been better contained if Pierce matched up more against him, like all series?

That argument is a double-edged sword.  As wdleehi said, it worked out, so fine.  It's a cost / benefit thing the coaching staff will have to consider, though, should we have to play another superstar swing man in these playoffs.

[wdleehi]

If you look at my posting history, you will notice that I am far from a fan of Doc.  He did a solid job today. 

However, it is important to keep things in perspective.  Doc did his job -- he did not prevent the Celtics from winning.  On the one hand, that's great.  But we shouldn't lower the bar too much here. . .

If you want to argue Doc deserves praise than you have to show a substitution he made that was smarter than a substitution the "average" coach would make.  This is part of how they calculate manager win-shares in baseball.

For example, playing House over Cassell in Games 6 and 7 does not count since he had kept House on the bench for 12 games in a row, etc. .

So for those Doc supporters out there, what move did he make that was different than what the mean vote, say, of the fans would have suggested, or what the average coach would have done? 

That is the relevant metric. . .

how about Posey playing over Ray Allen...

this allowed Paul some time not guarding LeBron so that he could have some extra energy to focus on his offense on a night where he was carrying the team.

Actually, I disliked that.


Pierce was so much more effective against James then Posey.  I would have rather seen Pierce on James and force Lebron to get more help from his teammates.


It worked out, so, fine. 

well, to be fair, it more than worked out....Pierce had an epic game.

how do we know what would have happened to Pierce's game if he was chasing LeBron around the whole final quarter. Pierce said after the game that guarding LeBron was physically grueling for him.

Except Pierce played most of his best offense when he was on James. 

[nickagneta]

If any you know me here, and considering how much I post you probably do, I am a huge Doc supporter. I support him because he's our coach and because I just think most of the crap he takes on this site is completely unjustified.

But lets not get crazy with how Doc managed yesterday. He managed a good game, not great or excellent or fantastic or any other over the top adjective. He was good. He made the right moves. That's his job.

But the win yesterday was because the players, like they always do at home, came to play. And yesterday, they outplayed a team that played championship caliber basketball. LeBron was immense, Delonte clutch and probably a lot better than I ever thought, and their defense was tremendous.

So if you Tivo'ed the game go back and watch it(it definitely has more twists, turns, excitement and drama than anything else that will be on TV). Doc did some things different that were good, but some of those were making up for mistakes he was making. He did a good job, nothing more nothing less. He's done a good job all postseason, nothing special, but good.

But I maintain and will throughout the rest of this year, the main responsibility for the way this team has played and the results they have transpired lie with the players.

[BudweiserCeltic]

If you look at my posting history, you will notice that I am far from a fan of Doc.  He did a solid job today. 

However, it is important to keep things in perspective.  Doc did his job -- he did not prevent the Celtics from winning.  On the one hand, that's great.  But we shouldn't lower the bar too much here. . .

If you want to argue Doc deserves praise than you have to show a substitution he made that was smarter than a substitution the "average" coach would make.  This is part of how they calculate manager win-shares in baseball.

For example, playing House over Cassell in Games 6 and 7 does not count since he had kept House on the bench for 12 games in a row, etc. .

So for those Doc supporters out there, what move did he make that was different than what the mean vote, say, of the fans would have suggested, or what the average coach would have done? 

That is the relevant metric. . .

how about Posey playing over Ray Allen...

this allowed Paul some time not guarding LeBron so that he could have some extra energy to focus on his offense on a night where he was carrying the team.

Actually, I disliked that.


Pierce was so much more effective against James then Posey.  I would have rather seen Pierce on James and force Lebron to get more help from his teammates.


It worked out, so, fine. 

well, to be fair, it more than worked out....Pierce had an epic game.

how do we know what would have happened to Pierce's game if he was chasing LeBron around the whole final quarter. Pierce said after the game that guarding LeBron was physically grueling for him.

On the other hand, how do you know that Lebron wouldn't have been better contained if Pierce matched up more against him, like all series?

That argument is a double-edged sword.  As wdleehi said, it worked out, so fine.  It's a cost / benefit thing the coaching staff will have to consider, though, should we have to play another superstar swing man in these playoffs.

True, but also consider the 3-pointers LeBron was hitting 5 feet behind the 3 point line, and consider the posibility of Pierce fouling James on the 4th as he starts getting more aggressive and driving more.  If there's a way to avoid that risk, especially with a excellent defender as Posey at your disposal, you take it.

[winsomme]

If you look at my posting history, you will notice that I am far from a fan of Doc.  He did a solid job today. 

However, it is important to keep things in perspective.  Doc did his job -- he did not prevent the Celtics from winning.  On the one hand, that's great.  But we shouldn't lower the bar too much here. . .

If you want to argue Doc deserves praise than you have to show a substitution he made that was smarter than a substitution the "average" coach would make.  This is part of how they calculate manager win-shares in baseball.

For example, playing House over Cassell in Games 6 and 7 does not count since he had kept House on the bench for 12 games in a row, etc. .

So for those Doc supporters out there, what move did he make that was different than what the mean vote, say, of the fans would have suggested, or what the average coach would have done? 

That is the relevant metric. . .

how about Posey playing over Ray Allen...

this allowed Paul some time not guarding LeBron so that he could have some extra energy to focus on his offense on a night where he was carrying the team.

Actually, I disliked that.


Pierce was so much more effective against James then Posey.  I would have rather seen Pierce on James and force Lebron to get more help from his teammates.


It worked out, so, fine. 

well, to be fair, it more than worked out....Pierce had an epic game.

how do we know what would have happened to Pierce's game if he was chasing LeBron around the whole final quarter. Pierce said after the game that guarding LeBron was physically grueling for him.

Except Pierce played most of his best offense when he was on James. 

Pierce stated very clearly that guarding LeBron was killing him physically.

so it is not a matter of how he did while he was guarding him or not....it is a matter of Pierce getting a rest from guarding him in the 4th so he would have something left in the tank at the end....

[winsomme]

If you look at my posting history, you will notice that I am far from a fan of Doc.  He did a solid job today. 

However, it is important to keep things in perspective.  Doc did his job -- he did not prevent the Celtics from winning.  On the one hand, that's great.  But we shouldn't lower the bar too much here. . .

If you want to argue Doc deserves praise than you have to show a substitution he made that was smarter than a substitution the "average" coach would make.  This is part of how they calculate manager win-shares in baseball.

For example, playing House over Cassell in Games 6 and 7 does not count since he had kept House on the bench for 12 games in a row, etc. .

So for those Doc supporters out there, what move did he make that was different than what the mean vote, say, of the fans would have suggested, or what the average coach would have done? 

That is the relevant metric. . .

how about Posey playing over Ray Allen...

this allowed Paul some time not guarding LeBron so that he could have some extra energy to focus on his offense on a night where he was carrying the team.

Actually, I disliked that.


Pierce was so much more effective against James then Posey.  I would have rather seen Pierce on James and force Lebron to get more help from his teammates.


It worked out, so, fine. 

well, to be fair, it more than worked out....Pierce had an epic game.

how do we know what would have happened to Pierce's game if he was chasing LeBron around the whole final quarter. Pierce said after the game that guarding LeBron was physically grueling for him.

On the other hand, how do you know that Lebron wouldn't have been better contained if Pierce matched up more against him, like all series?

That argument is a double-edged sword.  As wdleehi said, it worked out, so fine.  It's a cost / benefit thing the coaching staff will have to consider, though, should we have to play another superstar swing man in these playoffs.

it's a double-edged sword in theory, but in practice, Pierce's play combined with the result more than validates the decision.

[Roy Hobbs]

it's a double-edged sword in theory, but in practice, Pierce's play combined with the result more than validates the decision.

Like I said, we won, so it doesn't really matter.  However, Lebron still went off for 45.  If Cleveland hits one more shot over the course of the game, that decision goes up in smoke. 

It's something for us to consider for the coming rounds; does it make sense to keep Pierce fresh, and put an inferior defender on the opposing team's superstar (and in this series, Posey was clearly inferior to Pierce defensively)?  Or do we potentially get reduced production from Pierce, but also limit the production from the opposing star?

I don't think the answer to that question is nearly as clear as you suggest.  The fact that Lebron went off, and the fact that the Cavs cut a 13 point lead down to 1, suggest that there are at least questions to be raised about that strategy.

[winsomme]

it's a double-edged sword in theory, but in practice, Pierce's play combined with the result more than validates the decision.

Like I said, we won, so it doesn't really matter.  However, Lebron still went off for 45.  If Cleveland hits one more shot over the course of the game, that decision goes up in smoke. 

It's something for us to consider for the coming rounds; does it make sense to keep Pierce fresh, and put an inferior defender on the opposing team's superstar (and in this series, Posey was clearly inferior to Pierce defensively)?  Or do we potentially get reduced production from Pierce, but also limit the production from the opposing star?

I don't think the answer to that question is nearly as clear as you suggest.  The fact that Lebron went off, and the fact that the Pistons cut a 13 point lead down to 1, suggest that there are at least questions to be raised about that strategy.

well i don't totally disagree with what you are saying about the future. but i also don't think bad defense is the reason that LeBron went off for 45.

and there is no future matchup that could be as physically grueling to Pierce. so i'm not sure where that decision will come in to play.

i'm just going by what Pierce said after the game about how worn down he felt guarding LeBron during this series. he basically said that he was beat to hell after every game.

so considering that, and the fact that it took an epic game from him to win that game, i think for yesterday, giving Pierce a break from guarding him in the 4th has to be looked at as a great call.....for that game.

[nickagneta]

it's a double-edged sword in theory, but in practice, Pierce's play combined with the result more than validates the decision.

Like I said, we won, so it doesn't really matter.  However, Lebron still went off for 45.  If Cleveland hits one more shot over the course of the game, that decision goes up in smoke. 

It's something for us to consider for the coming rounds; does it make sense to keep Pierce fresh, and put an inferior defender on the opposing team's superstar (and in this series, Posey was clearly inferior to Pierce defensively)?  Or do we potentially get reduced production from Pierce, but also limit the production from the opposing star?

I don't think the answer to that question is nearly as clear as you suggest.  The fact that Lebron went off, and the fact that the Pistons cut a 13 point lead down to 1, suggest that there are at least questions to be raised about that strategy.

Excellent question Roy and TP4U for asking it.

I'm not sure that question will need to be answered unless we play the Lakers though. Detroit has a concept much like Boston's in that they have so many weapons offensively that there really is no need to shut down one in particular. Just excellent team defense like they played in this Cavs series will be necessary.

But if we play Kobe and the Lakers, that's a different story. Pierce has always played Kobe very well defensively and has always gotten up for great games aginst Kobe and the Lkaers, even during the recent Laker championship run. So do we once again put Paul on Kobe or not?

LA can score, not doubt about it. With Gasol, Odom, Kobe and Fisher it's a tough matchup for the C's. Ray Allen proved that he can't guard Wally Szczerbiak, nevermind Kobe.

Should Pierce be put on Kobe and start Posey on Odom? Ray Allen will get killed by Kobe. He might be better used as a sniper off the bench with the second unit. At least in this series. And, Pierce might need to sacrifice his offense to guard Kobe. It might be the smartest thing to do in that series.

Which is why we probably won't see it because Doc is so set in his starting five I'm not sure he'd even consider it.