Doc Rivers

[Edgar]

sad thing is that we managed to put both of his best bigs in foul trouble just to see the team stop attacking and making or trying to make rushed 3s.
Man yesterdays game is a bad memory for me right now.

[Chris]

It's long looked like Doc prefers BBD in the big games.

I don't think it is big games as much as disciplined teams that move the ball well.

The only relevant stats can't be stats against Detroit, as you argued in a previous post, because in that case you wouldn't play Brown at all since he had 0's across the board in the regular season against Detroit.

Please read my posts more carefully, I said Detroit IN THE PLAYOFFS, since Detroit is a very different team in the playoffs than the regular season.

Here is another way to frame it -- is there any decision-making pattern that would lead you to believe Doc is not making the correct decisions?  Or would all Doc decisions in this particular area (relative minutes for Brown, Davis, Powe, and to some extent Perkins) be correct?

I was just confused based on your statement.  I think you have to be able to lay out a coherent theory of when a decision would make sense and when it wouldn't that is falsifiable, i.e. not just "do what works", since you could justify that with post facto type logic.

Basically, I am not sure if you just don't think Powe should get minutes or if you think Doc makes great decisions in general.  So I am interested in the conditions in which you would think Doc is performing well v. poorly.  What's the story?

If the C's win, Doc made the correct move.  If they lose, then he made the wrong moves.  How about that?

What I was saying was that based on skillset, I would not have gone with Powe in the series (I would prefer using the 3 man frontcourt to using Davis, but if they need to go with 4 guys, I would go with Davis).  After two games, I feel that my preference was supported based on Powe's play.

My comment about putting Powe in for the right situation is because I think Powe can still be effective if he goes into the game when the defense is already on their heals.  If the C's can get the Piston's defense scrambling and on their heals, Powe could come in and continue to attack, and be effective.

The problem is, the C's have yet to get the Piston's defense scrambling too much this series.  The Piston's have remained poised defensively (which is not surprising, because it is one of their biggest strengths).

I think if the Piston's defense is set, and playing well, then Powe will not be effective, and would then end up being a liability defensively.

Does that clarify it for you?

[Chris]

That's a *great* point.  I think you are accurately describing the way Doc has thought about this.  The question is whether we think he is right or not (obviously he is the pro, etc., etc., but the whole point of this is to "discuss" these issues). . .

Exactly.  Clearly I think Doc was right (at least in his rationale...he could have had a quicker trigger finger).  You clearly don't think he is right.  This is the part where I think we will have to agree to disagree, because I don't think either of us will be swayed.

[Bahku]

Both Big Baby and Leon have great things to contribute to this team and this series, and the fact that Doc would not use either one of these guys is baffling ... as well as using Sam for extended minutes, when he obviously slows the tempo and does very little that's positive. Eddie sustains the tempo at a higher level, attacks the basket more effectively, and is a greater 3-point threat. To have Cassell on the floor at any time, especially against Detroit, makes very little sense.

[expobear]

Another stat:  when BBD gets 10+ minutes in the playoffs, this team is 2-3.  When Powe gets at least 7 minutes, the team is 8-3.  They're 2-5 when Powe gets 6 or less minutes.

There's a big difference between how they gain their minutes. Powe plays bigger minutes when he plays well. Davis plays bigger minutes when Powe doesn't play well. Not because of Davis great form/performances, only because he's the last ditch option.

It's same with several of Cassell's minutes and Rondo's play. A lot of Sammy's extra minutes came when from Rondo's inconsistency.

As for the stat, the play of either one of them hardly ever decides the result. It's like the Ray Allen stat where the team has a better record in the postseason when he shoots badly.

Maybe statistics don't tell the whole story, but if BBD is having a positive impact (especially a more positive impact than Powe), I have yet to see it manifest itself *anywhere*.

I might be mis-understanding you here but I've seen you say the same thing in a few other posts. I think you're expecting too much out of the bench players if you expect them to have net positives game in game out. How many bench players have that in the playoffs? I'd say a fairly low percentage.

Powe has better individual statistics.

The team has better offensive and defensive numbers when Powe is on the court, and better overall rebounding numbers, as well.

I haven't seen the numbers for the postseason but for the regular season the team rebounding numbers are best when KG is on the floor, then Perk, then BBD, then Powe. Defensive rebounding percentages were 73.1% for KG, 72.9% for Perk, 71.2% for BBD, 69.6% for Powe. The offensive rebounding were both higher from the bench than starters (27.8% and 28% respectively), with Powe going 32.8% and BBD 31.4%. BBD is the better defensive rebounder, Powe the better offensive rebound, BBD has a slight edge overall.
Also Powe's better numbers in the playoffs are helped heavily by the Atlanta Hawks. His numbers were racked up against a poor ball club who were awful on the road all season and through the playoffs. Powe got most of his minutes milking a weak opposition and in blowouts in several cases.

BBD's minutes have been against superior teams in Cleveland and Detroit.

Powe's production has been down by a sizeable enough margin which is putting more pressure on his weak points. He was going for 7.9 and 4.2 in 14.5 minutes during the season on 57% shooting. He's now going for 4.7, 2.6 on 48% shooting. It was a much bigger gap between the two before Powe's production started to slip. Steady defensive play grew in importance and that's why BBD has gotten a look in.

Oh Roy, I agree with you that Powe should be the one playing. He brings more to the table. I don't think it's quite as distant as some of the statistics mentioned above suggest it to be .... but I do think there's daylight between the two and Powe should play.

<<<Powe's production has been down by a sizeable enough margin which is putting more pressure on his weak points. He was going for 7.9 and 4.2 in 14.5 minutes during the season on 57% shooting. He's now going for 4.7, 2.6 on 48% shooting. It was a much bigger gap between the two before Powe's production started to slip. Steady defensive play grew in importance and that's why BBD has gotten a look in.>>>


Powe's production has "slipped" because he has played 29 minutes in the last 8 playoff games.  If you take out these last 8 games plus one other game against Atlanta where Powe played 6 minutes, Powe's average is 7.2 and 4.1 per game on about 19 minutes per game. I don't think anybody on this board thinks Powe will single handedly carry the Celtics to victory.  But 7 and 4 over 19 minutes is worth the risk in my book, especially when the Celtics have stagnated on the offensive end. After seeing the Celtics give up 94 last night, a few charges taken by Powe might offset any missed rotations on his part.  I certainly think Powe's offensive potential is worth taking a chance at this point in time, despite what River's thinks about Powe's defensive deficiencies. To say Powe's production is down due to poor play on Powe's part is a big misnomer being spread by the anti-Powe crowd. Anybody's production would be down, including Garnett, Kobe or Duncan if they played 29 minutes over 8 games.  Give Powe a chance.....he will not disappoint!

[Who]

Powe's production has "slipped" because he has played 29 minutes in the last 8 playoff games.  If you take out these last 8 games plus one other game against Atlanta where Powe played 6 minutes, Powe's average is 7.2 and 4.1 per game on about 19 minutes per game.

That's still down

He played 5 more minutes a game (that's 1/3 more minutes than he played during the regular season) and averaged slightly less points and slightly less rebounds than the regular season ... and that was against an easier opponent.

[kenmaine]

Well, I've read all the posts and my mind is reeling from all the stats.
Here's my two cents- energy and hustle are not stats, but they matter.
So, give me House and Powe in the game.
If Sam and Big Baby were actually doing anything productive, it would make sense to use them, but it just isn't happening.
And, like I've been wondering all year, WHY does Ray Allen play so much, especially now in the middle of an endless "slump"?
And I have to agree with others about the lineups he puts out there with four bench players. Just too risky, IMO. 

[nickagneta]

Some fascinating reading guys about statistics and how they can either confirm or deceive what the mind interprets as to what is happening on the court.

However, there seems to be a lot of talk as to whether it should be Powe and BBD and as to why BBD is taking minutes away from Powe. I look at it as Powe lost his minutes to P.J. Brown, and he should have because Brown, at least in my mind's eye, has been terrific since about halfway through the Atlanta series.

Now we can all be saying that Brown should be playing and that the discussion now goes to whether it is Powe/Baby. But perhaps that had been answered a long time ago in Doc's eyes. They both bring some good things to the table for a guy who will, at the very most, be playing 10-12 minutes per game.

We are talking about the 9th position on a nine man rotation here and I don't see where Doc can honestly be blamed for going with one guy over another. Their insertion into the game is not going to be the reason why this team wins or loses. Yet, for people with obvious biases against Doc that is where the some of the vitriol comes from. That Doc fluctuates in his use of 2 separate interchangable parts for the number 8 and 9 positions on the 9 man rotation.

Can anyone please point out to me where the 8th and 9th players on any other remaining playoff team is making an impact as to the final result of wins and losses in this playoff season?

Is Ronny Turiaf and Jordan Farmer winning or losing any games for LA? What about Barry and Udoka in San Antonio or Hunter and Ratliff in Detroit?

None of these players are impacting the final results of any of their teams games. Yet when Doc plays around with switching Sam/Eddie and Leon/Baby in the 8th and 9th positions people here go ape.

No matter who plays in our eighth or ninth rotation position, IMO, just like in Detroit, LA and SA, it's not going to matter because it's the guys in the 1st through 7th positions that impact the outcome of the game and not the 8th and 9th guys.

Maybe I need to visit other team's fan's blog sites to see if Saunders, Popovich, and Jackson gets raked over the coals by their hometown fans over the use of their 8th through 11th players on their roster as much as Doc does here.

Honestly I don't think there's a right or wrong answer in the "Which do you use Eddie or Sam and Leon or Baby debate". You want to critique Doc talk about when he is subbing players and which 5 mans he puts together on the floor. You've been given a lot better ammo by Doc for questioning him in those areas than you have in who plays in two positions that aren't going to greatly impact the end result of the game.

[jay_jay54]

Well, I've read all the posts and my mind is reeling from all the stats.
Here's my two cents- energy and hustle are not stats, but they matter.
So, give me House and Powe in the game.
If Sam and Big Baby were actually doing anything productive, it would make sense to use them, but it just isn't happening.
And, like I've been wondering all year, WHY does Ray Allen play so much, especially now in the middle of an endless "slump"?
And I have to agree with others about the lineups he puts out there with four bench players. Just too risky, IMO. 

I agree with 99% of what you are saying here,especially the stats vs hustle statement,sometimes stats are not the important factor in entering into whether or not a player is worth playing at times.I would like to see House given a shot over Cassell this next game,but Powe is not solving our inside play in the paint.It is obvious,we are being manhandled in the paint,when the bench has been on the floor.Even though PJ,has served us some good minutes,he is not the doing a good job on the boards,and BBD can't get a shot off.Does he think he's still in college,where we can just go straight up,and not get rejected.He doesn't even try to give any pump fakes or draw a foul.I think he is out of shape,and tired early in the games.So his effort is very slow,and noneffective.Powe has had problems with defensive rotations,and just hasn't shown up much with any productivity when he has played of late...but i would give him another shot,with a certain time limit for him to produce.I was hoping,they would activate Scali for this series.Problem with Doc is,he leaves a player(bench) in to long,when its obvious he is not playing well.Doc needs to set a time limit to how long he expects a bench player to be effective. 

[Roy Hobbs]

Can anyone please point out to me where the 8th and 9th players on any other remaining playoff team is making an impact as to the final result of wins and losses in this playoff season?

Is Ronny Turiaf and Jordan Farmer winning or losing any games for LA? What about Barry and Udoka in San Antonio or Hunter and Ratliff in Detroit?

None of these players are impacting the final results of any of their teams games. Yet when Doc plays around with switching Sam/Eddie and Leon/Baby in the 8th and 9th positions people here go ape.

Odd timing, Nick, after Brent Barry had 20+ points last night and had the opportunity to win the game on a last minute shot.

Didn't Powe contribute to a number of wins during the season?  Powe scored in double digits in 24 of the 56 games he played in, including 19 of the 24 games he played 15+ minutes in.  He pulled down 8+ boards 10 times.  How is this not a guy who can influence games?

(By the way, BBD had 4 double digit games, and eight games with 8+ rebounds, despite playing more minutes overall and approximately the same number of minutes on a per game basis).

It's just strange to me to argue that neither Powe nor BBD makes a difference, when Powe made a difference in so many games during the regular season.

[WedmanIsMyHero]

While we are here, while I agree that PJ Brown played very well initially when given the opportunity, lately he has not been quite as solid.

Game 1 v. Detroit: 17:59 minutes/4 pts (2-3 FG, 0-1 FT)/1 ORbnd/1 DRbnd/2 Assists/1 Block/2 PF
Game 2: 18:35 minutes/4 points (2-2 FG, 0-0 FT)/1 ORbnd/1 DRbnd/2 Assists
Game 3: 21:19 minutes/4 points (1-4 FG, 2-2 FT)/2 ORbnd/2 DRbnd/ 0 Assists/1 Block/2 PF
Game 4: 16:33 minutes/4 points (0-0 FG, 4-4 FT/0 ORbnd/3 DRbnd/ 2 Turnovers/2PF

My point is not that Powe deserves all of Brown's minutes.  My point is just that it is not like Brown is lighting things up.  I think we may have a bit of a warm-fuzzy feeling about him from his contributions in the Cleveland series.  But even in that series, besides Game 4 and Game 7, he didn't have a great series.

Furthermore, even given Brown's performance, Powe's PER in the playoffs is still higher (Ranked 87th v. 102nd for Brown and 117th for Davis -- ironically, Ray Allen is 90th).

There was some discussion in the Cleveland and Atlanta series about how, in some ways, Doc has coached really conservatively.  Actually, that's probably the wrong phrase.  But basically, if you play the veterans and it doesn't work out, you can always say you went with experience, etc., etc.

[wdleehi]

I think the Celtics need to pull Perkins out earlier in the 1st and 3rd for PJ.  (say with 5-6 minutes left in the quarter)


Then, instead of bringing in Powe or Davis to start the 2nd/4th, bring Perkins back in for KG. 


Use a three man rotation down low (much like the three man rotation at SG/SF)   

The 4th big man is only for foul trouble insurance.



And I think the Celtics are using the wrong 4th big man.  They needs someone to be able to step in is little minutes, play good team defense.   


If that does describe Scali, I don't know what does.  This is the perfect role for him.  In long enough to help, but not so long that his weaknesses are exposed. 

I just keep thinking of the defensive numbers Roy pointed out when Scali was starting this year. 

[WedmanIsMyHero]

Chris -- you really think if the Celtics win it means Doc did a good job and if they lose he didn't?  As many people on this blog have pointed out, teams win and lose for lots of reasons -- players, officials, coaches, the other team, etc.  So it seems like an inference problem to say that he is doing a good job if they win and a bad job if they lose.  It seems totally plausible to me that a coach could be doing the absolute best at maximizing the talent his team has, but that talent is not very good so the team does not do well.  Does that mean the coach of the losing team is a worse coach than a coach that sleeps through the games, but the players are so good it doesn't matter most of the time so the team wins a lot?

It's long looked like Doc prefers BBD in the big games.

I don't think it is big games as much as disciplined teams that move the ball well.

The only relevant stats can't be stats against Detroit, as you argued in a previous post, because in that case you wouldn't play Brown at all since he had 0's across the board in the regular season against Detroit.

Please read my posts more carefully, I said Detroit IN THE PLAYOFFS, since Detroit is a very different team in the playoffs than the regular season.

Here is another way to frame it -- is there any decision-making pattern that would lead you to believe Doc is not making the correct decisions?  Or would all Doc decisions in this particular area (relative minutes for Brown, Davis, Powe, and to some extent Perkins) be correct?

I was just confused based on your statement.  I think you have to be able to lay out a coherent theory of when a decision would make sense and when it wouldn't that is falsifiable, i.e. not just "do what works", since you could justify that with post facto type logic.

Basically, I am not sure if you just don't think Powe should get minutes or if you think Doc makes great decisions in general.  So I am interested in the conditions in which you would think Doc is performing well v. poorly.  What's the story?

If the C's win, Doc made the correct move.  If they lose, then he made the wrong moves.  How about that?

What I was saying was that based on skillset, I would not have gone with Powe in the series (I would prefer using the 3 man frontcourt to using Davis, but if they need to go with 4 guys, I would go with Davis).  After two games, I feel that my preference was supported based on Powe's play.

My comment about putting Powe in for the right situation is because I think Powe can still be effective if he goes into the game when the defense is already on their heals.  If the C's can get the Piston's defense scrambling and on their heals, Powe could come in and continue to attack, and be effective.

The problem is, the C's have yet to get the Piston's defense scrambling too much this series.  The Piston's have remained poised defensively (which is not surprising, because it is one of their biggest strengths).

I think if the Piston's defense is set, and playing well, then Powe will not be effective, and would then end up being a liability defensively.

Does that clarify it for you?

[WedmanIsMyHero]

Can Brown play that many minutes?  He is not the youngest guy in the world and he has already played quite a few minutes in the playoffs.  I think your theory makes some sense, but my suspicion is Brown can't handle that kind of load.

I think the Celtics need to pull Perkins out earlier in the 1st and 3rd for PJ.  (say with 5-6 minutes left in the quarter)


Then, instead of bringing in Powe or Davis to start the 2nd/4th, bring Perkins back in for KG. 


Use a three man rotation down low (much like the three man rotation at SG/SF)   

The 4th big man is only for foul trouble insurance.



And I think the Celtics are using the wrong 4th big man.  They needs someone to be able to step in is little minutes, play good team defense.   


If that does describe Scali, I don't know what does.  This is the perfect role for him.  In long enough to help, but not so long that his weaknesses are exposed. 

I just keep thinking of the defensive numbers Roy pointed out when Scali was starting this year. 

[wdleehi]

Can Brown play that many minutes?  He is not the youngest guy in the world and he has already played quite a few minutes in the playoffs.  I think your theory makes some sense, but my suspicion is Brown can't handle that kind of load.

I think the Celtics need to pull Perkins out earlier in the 1st and 3rd for PJ.  (say with 5-6 minutes left in the quarter)


Then, instead of bringing in Powe or Davis to start the 2nd/4th, bring Perkins back in for KG. 


Use a three man rotation down low (much like the three man rotation at SG/SF)   

The 4th big man is only for foul trouble insurance.



And I think the Celtics are using the wrong 4th big man.  They needs someone to be able to step in is little minutes, play good team defense.   


If that does describe Scali, I don't know what does.  This is the perfect role for him.  In long enough to help, but not so long that his weaknesses are exposed. 

I just keep thinking of the defensive numbers Roy pointed out when Scali was starting this year. 

That would only work out to somewhere between 18-22 minutes a game.  Perkins would pick up more minutes.  (36-38 minutes)