When the team loses you hate doc but when they win you like him?

[cordobes]

I've always liked Doc, but dare to say that any coach in any sport is going to be loved more by his fans more when he wins than when he loses

   Pretty interesting concept. I've to find time to reflect about it, but it's a view I'll eventually endorse.

Anyway, I've always liked Doc as well, even before he joined the C's. I liked his Orlando teams, he had them playing decent defence with guys like Pat Garrity, the corpse of Horace Grant and the spoiled brat version of TMac. I mostly like how he doesn't over-coach; Red used to say it was the biggest and most common mistake among NBA coaches.

Btw, I'm always puzzled why fans in general focus their coaching critics so much on micro-management stuff, substitution patterns, in-game adjustments and that kind of thins. IMO, it's precisely the part of a coaching job more difficult to assess, especially because there's lot of information (X is tired, Y is not following the game-plan, etc) that we don't know. Plus, 95% of a professional coach job is done before the tip-off, so it's kind of bizarre to focus so much attention on what a coach is doing during the game. I wonder what people would have to say about someone like Phil Jackson, who rarely changes rotations or makes in-game adjustments.

[TatteredOnMySleeve]

i was pretty critical of doc his first few years.  however, i think he does MUCH better managing a veteran team.  the players love him, which is key.

he isnt the best coach, as i think he could do a couple things better, but he is no where near as bad as some on here would like to say.  he is the best fit for our team and im glad he is our coach.

he is a decent fit with the team but i don't feel confident to be able to win another ring this year with him(he will stay though). Last year we had the ultimate championship team makeup that even an ncaa coach could have led us to the title. But this year we don't and its frustating to see him mess the rotation and not utilize guys like scal(till he was forced to cuz of injury reasons). A good coach doesn't make mistakes on those things more than once

Wrong, doc was a key part in that championship team last year...who created Ubuntu? who got the team to believe it, play like it and live it? PJ brown came to the team and he said right away he could see doc just had these guys..they love doc, and he's never seen anything like it... the big 3 love doc, they listen to doc and want to win for doc...seriously man, enough
scal should start? HA! yeah lets play kg out of position and become worse defensively, brilliant

[crownsy]

To also add another point why is below par compared to some other coaches, on some other thread i stated that mchale is a better coach than rivers. Everyone pretty much disagreed with that notion. So i provided the ultimate example that if you replace rivers with mchale right now the celts would be as good of a team if not better however if you replaced mchale with rivers, the wolves would stink again.

Well, you're clearly oozing with unequivocal logic, and clearly you've done a good job of using actual facts when creating this thread.

In all seriousness, what do you want to discuss since your post is pretty much a complete fabrication of what is actually going on.

yea this is the problem tri, that anolgy makes no sense on so many levels it's hard to take it seriously. For one, it assumes the ability to be nostrdumous. You ASSUME that this team would be just as good with mchale, but thats not a fact, for all you know they would stink. You can be like;

"The sky is red, and if you don't think it is to, clearly your the one with a problem, not me. everyone knows thats the way it is." as a base for a discussion.

I'm really not trying to be a jerk, its just that alot of your posts depend on total agreement with a flawed or illogical premise.

dude not to be a jerk back but look up the meaning logic vs. rational.

""The sky is red, and if you don't think it is to, clearly your the one with a problem, not me. everyone knows thats the way it is."

your example is irrational because the sky is blue.

If a coach from a bad team can overmaximize their talents in theory he should do amazing things with an well equiped team.

Same should be the said that a good coach which everyone thinks doc is should help overmaximize a team like the wolves. But just as the proof two years ago when doc didnt prevent the celts from being an embaressment(and that the team to the current wolves team are simliar in talent), he wont likely help maximize the current wolves team.

Listen i know its not actual facts but is reasonable speculations

no, it really isn't. things you dont address of the top of my head without thinking about it.

- the Twolves squad is much better than the 2007 celtics with paul hurt. They have several high draft picks alongside al (Foye is very good, Love is going to be  good.) which were not on the team, and they are all two years older and more experianced so its not the "almost the same team" as you claim.


- They have been good for two weeks. they lost last night. If they lose 4 more does Mchale now become a bad coach instead of great one in your eyes?

- you assume in your logic leap that mchale will be great on the C's. you can't know that, not even a little bit. We are a very good team, so its likely, but not assured.

- you assume rivers will be bad, which you also can't know. The wolves are a bad team playing well, so its likely, but you can't know.

- You entirely discount the 8 game losing streak when cherry picking mchale's coaching numbers to say he's achieved a miricle with the 2007 celtics in t wolves uni's (also false). he-s not 10-2. he's 10-10.


- You discount chemistry, a huge part of teams playing well. This would destroy ours, even though you hate his guts, the players love him, and fireing him for no reason would probley not go over well.

- You discount that people can improve at there jobs, or that thier players are irrelevant to determining a coachs worth. That 2007 team was awful, god awful, doubly so when paul was out. We all know this. That team in Minny isn't the same team.

[cordobes]

But this year we don't and its frustating to see him mess the rotation and not utilize guys like scal(till he was forced to cuz of injury reasons). A good coach doesn't make mistakes on those things more than once

I've defended here that Scal should be worked into the rotation and I can't remember many people agreeing with me. In fact, what I remember best is 90% of this board wanting to cut Scal after the pre-season.

[crownsy]

And i stick by my opinion scal should start because it helps the starters by opening up the floor without our defense being affected and we already have proof we can beat teams that have centers like shaq without perk.

Perk also would be better than scal in the 2nd unit.

If you replace scal with perk in the starting unit than the middle is clogged, rondo, allen, pierce cant play their inside outside game and scal is uselesss with the 2nd unit

so you take your pick. We will win with perk starting because we are a great team still but against smarter teams like lakers and cavs we will pay

Going a little off topic but like i say i will stick to my opinion that scal should start

so your going to go ahead and not address the parodox that you can blame doc rivers for being to stupid to figure out scal should be the starting center but yet you and I, among others, wanted him cut from the team during training camp?

[BudweiserCeltic]

But this year we don't and its frustating to see him mess the rotation and not utilize guys like scal(till he was forced to cuz of injury reasons). A good coach doesn't make mistakes on those things more than once

I've defended here that Scal should be worked into the rotation and I can't remember many people agreeing with me. In fact, what I remember best is 90% of this board wanting to cut Scal after the pre-season.

I'm pretty sure it was 99%, but who's counting?

[JR Giddens]

Perkins, Pierce, and Bill Walker are the only celtics in my book who I like EVEN when they play bad. I dont give any1 else exceptions.

[Chris]

But this year we don't and its frustating to see him mess the rotation and not utilize guys like scal(till he was forced to cuz of injury reasons). A good coach doesn't make mistakes on those things more than once

I've defended here that Scal should be worked into the rotation and I can't remember many people agreeing with me. In fact, what I remember best is 90% of this board wanting to cut Scal after the pre-season.

I'm pretty sure it was 99%, but who's counting?

99% wanted him benched or traded, but there were a lot of people who understood that it would not have made much sense to cut him due to his contract.

[Roy Hobbs]

There are a lot of individual things about Doc that I don't like, mostly to do with game management.  However, the team performs for him, and seem to respect his leadership.  He's a great "locker room" coach, even if he isn't a great in game coach (although I know some disagree).  On balance, then, I'm going to cut him some slack at this point and realize that there are more important things than getting every in-game nuance exactly right.

(That being said, Doc still has areas he could improve on.  For instance, putting four or five bench players in the game at the same time is a bad strategy that ends up costing us games.  He's shown improvement in that area lately, though, and I don't think it will be a big issue in the playoffs.)

[yall hate]

I always thought Doc was a better manager then coach.  I think you see this when looking at his records with talented v. untalented teams. I dont think he necessarily is good at game planning and scheming, which is why given a vet team like this one they dominate and given a poor team they are awful.  But Doc is a great manager of the ego's and personalities.  there is no doubt about that.

As for two face reactions, just look at this board after any of the non stars have a good or bad game.  When baby plays poorly he is a fat slob who hasnt progressed and should be cut. when he plays well he is a solid athlete who uses his weight to his advantage and has some real potential.

Same with Scal.  when he is playing poorly, he is a no talent, overpaid white guy.  when he is playing well, he spaces the floor excellently, uses basketball iq, makes those around him better.

fans tend to judge everything on what have you done for me lately.  nothing else.

[ACF]

I love Doc regardless.
I'm a loving person.

[nickagneta]

I think we all know where I stand, I love the guy and think he's been a [dang] good coach since day 1 in Orlando.

Does some of his game time micromanagement need some adjusting? Yeah, but that's only going to take him from being a very good to great coach to a Hall of Fame coach, IMO. Everything else he does so much better than just about everyone else in the game.

His ability to motivate his players are superb. His Duck Boat trip last year and the spotlight on the empty spot in the Waltham practice facility to show where the banner was going were brilliant motivational tools. I also think the way he makes players earn their minutes is great for personal motivation and the video clips during the playoffs last year that had Doc in the huddle and getting them up and past their mistakes and adversities(Ray's injury, Paul's injury, 22 point deficit)are just more examples of how great he is at that end of things.

He has a great andle on when the team needs time off and when it's time to push the button. So often over the years I've heard him say that he just gave the guys the day off because he felt they needed it and then the team responded.

He gets the most out of his players. Even in the two years before the Big Three, this team  never seemed to be out of many games. Night in and night out this team could easily been blown out by 25 points per game or more but weren't. Their talent sucked and yet they were in every single game, virtually, until the very end, never giving up. Even during the 18 game losing streak they were in and could have pulled out at least 12 of those games.

He gets great results in creating good to great players out of young inexperienced pros. Rondo, Gomes, Jefferson, Powe, Davis, T-Mac, Ben Wallace, Mike Miller, Pat Garrity, Delonte, Perk....... All players that he had real young that grew and prospered and became better while under his tutiledge.

His ability to get his team to focus and stay in the moment. They set goals, they focus on those goals, tey achieve those goals and then move on to the next goal. When they are in the regular season they play game to game not looking ahead. In the playoffs it's about the team in front of you not the one you might be playing next. In games if you fall behind it's about winning the next couple of minutes and then winning the quarter and then the next quarter and then the game. His ability to break things down to the sublime and get his team to believe in it is a huge accomplishment.

He knows good coaching talent and isn't insecure about surrounding himself with good people to help him achieve his goal as a head coach. To often at that level guys are looking over their shoulders wondering who's there to replace him. Even a hint of this type of attitude will show and make you a weaker coach overall.

He handles the media well and knows when to use them to motivate a player and when to keep things in the locker room.

He's a likable guy and he has the respect and admiration of his peers and players. That says more than most people would credit that it does.

Overall, I think he has more championships in him not only with this squad but possibly with others. Now if he'll just stop being so pigheaded about using 5 player bench units, I'd want to adopt hum.

[Tr1boy]

There are a lot of individual things about Doc that I don't like, mostly to do with game management.  However, the team performs for him, and seem to respect his leadership.  He's a great "locker room" coach, even if he isn't a great in game coach (although I know some disagree).  On balance, then, I'm going to cut him some slack at this point and realize that there are more important things than getting every in-game nuance exactly right.

(That being said, Doc still has areas he could improve on.  For instance, putting four or five bench players in the game at the same time is a bad strategy that ends up costing us games.  He's shown improvement in that area lately, though, and I don't think it will be a big issue in the playoffs.)

we are pretty much in the same page. He has shown improvements by luck(with other guys getting hurt) and i don't like that kind of method of improvements.

He could be good at preparation stuff but the in game missmagement will cost us a really big important game sooner or later. (if it hasn't already against the lakers and cavs last game)


"- you assume in your logic leap that mchale will be great on the C's. you can't know that, not even a little bit. We are a very good team, so its likely, but not assured.

- you assume rivers will be bad, which you also can't know. The wolves are a bad team playing well, so its likely, but you can't know."

like i said i'm rationalizing the idea mchale would take the celts to another level and doc wouldn't do as well coaching the lowly wolves. Its not only judging by the winning streak the wolves have gone on but they actually can beat bad teams consistantly. The celtics two years ago couldn't be nobody. And i want to compare the team that even had paul pierce playing. (we still didn't win and tahts why he was retired for the season)

I'm personally having  a hard time digestion your reasons why doc is a good coach in the same level as mchale. Rivers might be a decent coach for our team but he prob is not decent for every team. I'm also not too sure about phil jackson and we already know what larry brown and pat riley can do without a team full of superstars.

Guys like mchale who we have no reason to believe will not help the wolves be a good team this year(even if they play close to 500) and hubie brown for the most part are excellent coaches in my books regardless which team they would coach

[Tr1boy]

nickagneta some good points. Basically he is more like a sr captain, manager like someone said, cheerleader and a better fit with teams stacked with some good vet talent.

Like you said he is not good at some of the micro managing stuff, but to me that is as important if not slightly more than the personality stuff.

The basics is that players are signed to big deals to perform at a professional level and the coach who can further inspire their play is a bonus but their main essential dudties are running plays, adapting, matching players with other players etc. (things players can't do themselves)

If doc can one day get those technical parts down i will even admit he is a top 5 coach in the league and can pretty much coach any team in the league to respectable levels. Right now he is missing the basics

[dark_lord]

nickagneta some good points. Basically he is more like a sr captain, manager like someone said, cheerleader and a better fit with teams stacked with some good vet talent.

Like you said he is not good at some of the micro managing stuff, but to me that is as important if not slightly more than the personality stuff.

The basics is that players are signed to big deals to perform at a professional level and the coach who can further inspire their play is a bonus but their main essential dudties are running plays, adapting, matching players with other players etc. (things players can't do themselves)

If doc can one day get those technical parts down i will even admit he is a top 5 coach in the league and can pretty much coach any team in the league to respectable levels. Right now he is missing the basics

what else does the guy have to do?  look at our record this season.  he brought a title here last year.