yet another example of Doc's inability to make mid game adjustments

[dark_lord]

doc wasnt the issue last night, the players were.  doc's strengths far outweigh his weaknesses, imo. 

[billysan]

How many FT and jumpshots did Doc miss?

How many times did Doc get out hustled on the boards?

All goofiness aside, we got outplayed by a young, hungry and very athletic team. This team is very likely going to finish 4th in the east and could be as high as 2nd behind us IMO. It isnt like it was a 'lower echelon' group out there on the opposition.

We could not keep them off the boards and we couldnt get back in or stay in the game by launching three pointers. This is not new, it happens to all good teams. Even great teams have down nites and that is the way I view this past game with the Hawks.

If there is a single legitimate shortcoming on the Celtics it is age IMO. I think we more than make up for it on most nites with experience and smart basketball.

[gar]

Haven't seen the second half yet, but I think Doc gets a lot of blame he's not due ... very often it's not so much his inability to make proper mid-game adjustments, as it is the team's inability to execute those adjustments, (which Doc gets the ultimate blame for). To this point in the game, I think Doc has made the proper rotations.

Was wondering if having MDaniels play PG or at least bring the ball up is taking him out of a needed rebounding role. Also if you have an older team that is worried about getting back on D they may be hesitant to hang arround for offensive rebounds. In any case this needs to be addressed. Shelden looked good he was just a little too amped up to face his old team; but Sheed just stands arround and does not block. You can't play the hawks and not have someone bodying up Horford at all times.

[ManUp]

My biggest issue with Doc Is that he won't give the Big 3 Stuff a rest. That's one bus you know he's going to ride until the wheels fall off. Instead of easing Rondo into a bigger role he's still counting on the big 3 to carry all of the load. they could be in their forties and Rondos job would still be to get them the ball.

[Donoghus]

IMO, last night wasn't on Doc.  The Celtics were outhustled and outplayed by a younger, hungrier team.  For most of the game, the C's looked like they were lethargic and simply "going through the motions". 

Doc can only do so much in that situation, its still up to the players out on the court to bring fire to the game and play to the competition.  They didn't really seem that way last night.

[gar]

Doc was clearly out coached. Atlanta was the first team to be athletic enough to shut down the three point game and not give away the store. At the same time they were vulnerable to attacking the rim and to the mid range game. KG was OK but could have been more involved.

Hard to win when you are giving away 10 shot attempts.

[nickagneta]

Huge Doc supporter here, everyone knows that I think. I'll support him until the end. Now that doesn't mean that when he screws up I don't call him on it.

Last night, for a bunch more of the Celtics half court offensive than we are used to seeing, Paul Pierce initiated and ran the offense. Rondo was hanging out on the other side of the court. Doc either allows this to happen or purposefully does this for entire games 4-5 times a year and for good portions of games a lot more. I don't know why. Matchups? Not sure.

It happened last night for the first time that for large portions of the time when the starters were in the offensive became Pierce-centric. It is a half court set with a ton less ball movement that takes two players completely out of the offense and usually results in Pierce dribbling on the outside for much of the 24 second clock before going one on one or driving and dishing for an outside shot.

If this is by design, shame on Doc, it's bad. You have a star PG who when running the offense, and I mean running not walking up, and is penetrating and working passes around the, is an efficient deadly offense. If it is not by design, he has to confront his captain and let him know it's not acceptable.

Now did that have anything to do with last night's loss? I don't think so. The perimeter defense on the guards of Atlanta was atrocious, the boxing out on rebounding was equally bad, and the three point shooting, something I have been saying from the beginning that this team relies on too much, was almost as bad as it could get.

Is any of that Doc's fault? Hell know!! Rondo, Eddie, and Ray were all bad defensively on the perimeter. Perk, Wallace, Pierce, Williams, and KG were all terrible on the boards and Pierce, Ray, Sheed and Eddie were all bad shooting from deep. When you entire arsenal of weapons in your regular rotation lays an egg, you're going to lose. Throwing scrubs who's best isn't as good as your rotation players worst, isn't solving any problems except the anger and frustration of the coach and fans who don't like the coach.

[ManUp]

My biggest issue with Doc Is that he won't give the Big 3 Stuff a rest. That's one bus you know he's going to ride until the wheels fall off. Instead of easing Rondo into a bigger role he's still counting on the big 3 to carry all of the load. they could be in their forties and Rondos job would still be to get them the ball.

.

By the way this post has nothing to do with last nights game, which I was unable to catch.

I just think Doc doesn't correct veteran players the way he does younger players. This applies even more so to older established players.

[guava_wrench]

Silly thread topic. There are 82 games. Teams will get beat at times. Even if a coach makes the right moved 90% of the time, that would still leave 8 games for whining like the subject of this thread.

[Jon]

How much should a team like Boston "adjust" when it plays a team like Atlanta?  I mean sure, Wallace and Pierce weren't shooting well, but what happens if they started hitting like they do most games?  The C's would've won. 

This seems a bit too much like Monday morning quarterbacking for me.  We're one of the best teams in the league.  Usually the game plan will yield victories. 

[kozlodoev]

as for PP he missed to many free throws, also he settled for jumpers to much. need to drive to the lane. do you happen to have his 4th quarter FG stats?

Did we watch the same game, or did you fall asleep when Pierce was driving to the hoop and routinely getting hammered without a call (or when he was shooting free throws for that matter).

For the record, Pierce was 8-11 on free throws, took a grand total of 4 three-pointers (on 16 shots total), and shot 8-12 for two-point shots.

Seriously...

[Rondo_is_better]

My biggest issue with Doc Is that he won't give the Big 3 Stuff a rest. That's one bus you know he's going to ride until the wheels fall off. Instead of easing Rondo into a bigger role he's still counting on the big 3 to carry all of the load. they could be in their forties and Rondos job would still be to get them the ball.

.

Uhhhh.....


He's the point guard.

And not the way Allen Iverson was a point guard.

He's actually the point guard.

[crownsy]

as for PP he missed to many free throws, also he settled for jumpers to much. need to drive to the lane. do you happen to have his 4th quarter FG stats?

Did we watch the same game, or did you fall asleep when Pierce was driving to the hoop and routinely getting hammered without a call (or when he was shooting free throws for that matter).

For the record, Pierce was 8-11 on free throws, took a grand total of 4 three-pointers (on 16 shots total), and shot 8-12 for two-point shots.

Seriously...

TP for trying to bring logic and actual facts into a post loss assassination of the team, it's chances and it's players.

A losing effort against the vast wave of "OMG WE ARE THE WORST TEAM EVERRRARAS!!! PLAYER X, Y AND Z SUCK!!!" threads for today, but appreciated none the less my friend.

Last night does not requre the crazy threads going on today it was very simple.

1. we got out worked by a young good team
2. when you give up 24 points off offensive rebounds, your going to lose.

It happens, I;d be more concerned if this had happened (or does happen tonight) against a bad team. It's a let down, to be sure, but Atlanta is a Good team. I have them third in the east.

When you play a C+ game against another good team who brings their A game, your going to lose, and that's that. there's 82 games in a season and sometimes it happens. as long as it doesn't happen consistently or to teams like the pacers, were fine.

[317]

i guess i should have made my main point more clear. by half way through the 4th you knew the Hawks had won the game. at that point, especially with the lack of effort shown and the road game tonight you need to take your starters out. the reason is 2 fold, it gets them some rest, and it sends them a message that they just were not playing with effort.

missing shots is one thing, but playing without effort is inexcusable. the hawks won by wanting it more and playing harder, lack of effort from the players needs to be addressed by your leaders. that means at halftime when we were out rebounded by was it 10 already, doc should yell at his team about not putting forth effort. if he did then he failed to pull his players who didn't go out and put forth that effort in the second half. the best example is sheed getting any run in the 4th quarter, his lack of effort on defense and the glass was basketball criminal.

[Steve Weinman]

i guess i should have made my main point more clear. by half way through the 4th you knew the Hawks had won the game.

Perhaps you have some psychic powers that I do not possess.

At the 6:07 mark of the fourth quarter, the Hawks led the game by the gargantuan margin of seven points.

After some fluctuation in the wrong direction for the Celtics, the Hawks led by only seven again at the 2:12 mark.  One stop and a bucket the right way, and that's a two-possession game with 90 seconds to play.

I did not know anything at the midway point of the fourth.

As for your "main point," I think you made that quite clear when you said, "Long term I just plain don't like Doc."  What you have yet to do is offer a substantive explanation for why that is.

-sw