What annoys me right now about Doc Rivers. (not a fire Doc or blame Doc thread)

[scoop]

  Unrelated rant that I also don't want Doc fired for: his substitution patterns. That, almost by itself, is why we lost the Orlando game. He needs to stagger his subbing more and possibly have the players come out a few times for shorter breaks.

  Rondo played 37 minutes against Orlando, which is a reasonable amount. But if you consider that the 11 minutes he was out included both quarter breaks it's 25-30 minutes real time.

  So Doc starts pulling his starters and goes for a while with 0-2 starters on the floor. The team slowly loses momentum. This is especially true on the offensive end when Rondo's out. The team starts to struggle and Doc always tries to wring a couple of extra possessions out of the 2nd unit. So after the other team's on a run Doc puts back in players like Rondo and KG who have been sitting on a bench for about 15+ minutes. The team continues to struggle while they re-acclimate themselves to the game. The opponent's runs from right before the subs come out until a few minutes after them are hurting us.

Generally, the offense works better with Rondo on the bench, unless the other team just gives away full control of the tempo.

Our offense looks absolutley horrible when Rondo is out...that's why he's been playing 40+ minutes in 8 of the last 12 games. Doc has no other point guard on the bench to go to.

The Celtics score less points per possession when Rondo is on the floor compared to when he's off. It's not a starters thing, because they score a lot more when Pierce/Ray Allen are on the court relatively to when they're out.

In the half-court set, Rondo still has a lot to grow, especially when facing good defensive teams.

  First of all, I didn't say there was an immediate dropoff on the offensive end when he left the game, I said the offense gets progressively worse over time.

I'm not sure what this means. Yeah, I suppose that when starters get progressively replaced by bench players, the quality of the team will progressively get worse.

Secondly, those points per possession can fluctuate from year to year or during a season based on a few bad sets. If you look at the net points Paul is slightly ahead of Rondo but I think a few weeks ago Rondo was ahead bit a decent amount. Also, last year the team played better offensively with Rondo on the court than with Pierce on the courtDoes that mean that Paul had a lot to grow, especially when facing good defensive teams?

No, it means you have some sort of difficulty with numbers. Last season, the team was better with Paul on the court than with him off the court - and I'm saying this without even checking numbers. Net Points include defence, but I wasn't addressing that issue. It's difficult to sustain that an offence is better with a player on the court when the team scores less points per possession when that player is on the court, isn't it?

[scoop]

Since when has Doc been good with substitution patterns? 

But I agree that the 4th quarter of yesterday's game was agonizing to watch.  Their offense, not defense, completely reverted to Pierce-iso and take the ball out of Rondo's hands.  Rondo had 11 assists by the end of hte 3rd quarter... he should have been involved more in the 4th.  Not one player drove to the hoop.

Asides from the struggle to close a game out, the most glaring problem currently is that our bench is flat out awful.  If it weren't for Eddie House hitting some nice 3's, the lead would have been blown quicker.  Glen Davis fell down on one play, couldn't score on the offensive end, and got disgustingly outplayed.  He looked useless out there, and it wasn't just him.  Sheed didn't bang down low, and Scalabrine won't do anything against LA. 

I think it's time that Doc, Pierce, and other stop trying to take over the offense.  Put it in Rondo's hands and tell him to attack.  (note, that travel call on Rondo was complete BS.)

Nice, but this entire paragraph is a fantasy. The first play where Pierce had the ball on his hands in the 4th was the one where he fouled Artest with the off-arm. That was basically the Celtics last full clock offensive possession. Before that, Rondo was running the offense like during the rest of the game - he just sucked at it. Please, re-watch the final 10 minutes of the game if you have any doubt about this.

  People see what they're going to see. You don't seem to think that the Celts run a play where the pg dribbles the ball while Ray tries to run off a few screens and get open, although other people seem to be familiar with it.

Huh? Of course Ray runs through screens, he does during the entire game. What's exactly your point?

[biggjonn75]

Trade Doc and Ray to Harvard for Tommy Amaker and Jeremy Lin

[scoop]

Since when has Doc been good with substitution patterns? 

But I agree that the 4th quarter of yesterday's game was agonizing to watch.  Their offense, not defense, completely reverted to Pierce-iso and take the ball out of Rondo's hands.  Rondo had 11 assists by the end of hte 3rd quarter... he should have been involved more in the 4th.  Not one player drove to the hoop.

Asides from the struggle to close a game out, the most glaring problem currently is that our bench is flat out awful.  If it weren't for Eddie House hitting some nice 3's, the lead would have been blown quicker.  Glen Davis fell down on one play, couldn't score on the offensive end, and got disgustingly outplayed.  He looked useless out there, and it wasn't just him.  Sheed didn't bang down low, and Scalabrine won't do anything against LA. 

I think it's time that Doc, Pierce, and other stop trying to take over the offense.  Put it in Rondo's hands and tell him to attack.  (note, that travel call on Rondo was complete BS.)

Nice, but this entire paragraph is a fantasy. The first play where Pierce had the ball on his hands in the 4th was the one where he fouled Artest with the off-arm. That was basically the Celtics last full clock offensive possession. Before that, Rondo was running the offense like during the rest of the game - he just sucked at it. Please, re-watch the final 10 minutes of the game if you have any doubt about this.

  I didn't tape the game but according to espn's game log Paul had an assist with about 4 minutes left. Is that an error on their part?

I see there's a misunderstanding: I was saying that the Celtics only started going for Pierce ISOs in that play, of course he touched the ball in other moments (if you actually though a player went for 10 minutes or so without touching the ball, you really need to start watching basketball games).

You may say that the Celtics started running their offense through Paul in the 4th and that's why Rondo stopped producing 1000 times: it still won't make it true.

[gar]

Why were we going for three at the end - we only needed two to win it?

[BballTim]

  Unrelated rant that I also don't want Doc fired for: his substitution patterns. That, almost by itself, is why we lost the Orlando game. He needs to stagger his subbing more and possibly have the players come out a few times for shorter breaks.

  Rondo played 37 minutes against Orlando, which is a reasonable amount. But if you consider that the 11 minutes he was out included both quarter breaks it's 25-30 minutes real time.

  So Doc starts pulling his starters and goes for a while with 0-2 starters on the floor. The team slowly loses momentum. This is especially true on the offensive end when Rondo's out. The team starts to struggle and Doc always tries to wring a couple of extra possessions out of the 2nd unit. So after the other team's on a run Doc puts back in players like Rondo and KG who have been sitting on a bench for about 15+ minutes. The team continues to struggle while they re-acclimate themselves to the game. The opponent's runs from right before the subs come out until a few minutes after them are hurting us.

Generally, the offense works better with Rondo on the bench, unless the other team just gives away full control of the tempo.

Our offense looks absolutley horrible when Rondo is out...that's why he's been playing 40+ minutes in 8 of the last 12 games. Doc has no other point guard on the bench to go to.

The Celtics score less points per possession when Rondo is on the floor compared to when he's off. It's not a starters thing, because they score a lot more when Pierce/Ray Allen are on the court relatively to when they're out.

In the half-court set, Rondo still has a lot to grow, especially when facing good defensive teams.

  First of all, I didn't say there was an immediate dropoff on the offensive end when he left the game, I said the offense gets progressively worse over time.

I'm not sure what this means. Yeah, I suppose that when starters get progressively replaced by bench players, the quality of the team will progressively get worse.

Secondly, those points per possession can fluctuate from year to year or during a season based on a few bad sets. If you look at the net points Paul is slightly ahead of Rondo but I think a few weeks ago Rondo was ahead bit a decent amount. Also, last year the team played better offensively with Rondo on the court than with Pierce on the courtDoes that mean that Paul had a lot to grow, especially when facing good defensive teams?

No, it means you have some sort of difficulty with numbers. Last season, the team was better with Paul on the court than with him off the court - and I'm saying this without even checking numbers. Net Points include defence, etc.

  No, you're the one that can't understand the numbers. You're claiming that the fact that the team scores more when Rondo's off the court than when he's on the court shows that Rondo struggles on offense. You also managed to figure out that the team doesn't struglle when Paul and Ray are in. But last year the offense performed better with Rondo than it did with Paul. Doesn't that show that Paul struggled on offense more than Rajon last year? If not, your conclusion doesn't hold.

[scoop]

No, you're the one that can't understand the numbers. You're claiming that the fact that the team scores more when Rondo's off the court than when he's on the court shows that Rondo struggles on offense. You also managed to figure out that the team doesn't struglle when Paul and Ray are in. But last year the offense performed better with Rondo than it did with Paul.

I say that Rondo struggles on offence when the tempo slows down and the game is reduced to half-court sets instead of a more free-wheeling pace and the other team is a good defensive team because I see it happening, I don't trust on/off numbers that much.

Once again, last season the team wasn't worse offensively with Pierce on the bench than it was with him on the court - the team was better offensively with Pierce on the court.

Doesn't that show that Paul struggled on offense more than Rajon last year? If not, your conclusion doesn't hold.

Of course not. It can show that Pierce played lots of minutes along an inept bench, for example.

[BballTim]

No, you're the one that can't understand the numbers. You're claiming that the fact that the team scores more when Rondo's off the court than when he's on the court shows that Rondo struggles on offense. You also managed to figure out that the team doesn't struglle when Paul and Ray are in. But last year the offense performed better with Rondo than it did with Paul.

I say that Rondo struggles on offence when the tempo slows down and the game is reduced to half-court sets instead of a more free-wheeling pace and the other team is a good defensive team because I see it happening, I don't trust on/off numbers that much.

Once again, last season the team wasn't worse offensively with Pierce on the bench than it was with him on the court - the team was better offensively with Pierce on the court.

Doesn't that show that Paul struggled on offense more than Rajon last year? If not, your conclusion doesn't hold.

Of course not. It can show that Pierce played lots of minutes along an inept bench, for example.

  This is what you don't seem to understand. The same way the numbers can show that Paul played lots of minutes along with an inept bench last year, they can be showing that Rondo plays a lot of minutes with an inept bench this year. If the numbers didn't prove anything last year they don't prove anything this year.

  Beyond that, you need to look at the numbers from past years to see whether they're actually saying what you think they are. For  instance, last year the team's offense was much better with Rondo on the court than off. What does that say? That last year he was significantly better in the half court set than he is this year? Or is it merely that you don't know what the numbers mean?

[scoop]

No, you're the one that can't understand the numbers. You're claiming that the fact that the team scores more when Rondo's off the court than when he's on the court shows that Rondo struggles on offense. You also managed to figure out that the team doesn't struglle when Paul and Ray are in. But last year the offense performed better with Rondo than it did with Paul.

I say that Rondo struggles on offence when the tempo slows down and the game is reduced to half-court sets instead of a more free-wheeling pace and the other team is a good defensive team because I see it happening, I don't trust on/off numbers that much.

Once again, last season the team wasn't worse offensively with Pierce on the bench than it was with him on the court - the team was better offensively with Pierce on the court.

Doesn't that show that Paul struggled on offense more than Rajon last year? If not, your conclusion doesn't hold.

Of course not. It can show that Pierce played lots of minutes along an inept bench, for example.

  This is what you don't seem to understand. The same way the numbers can show that Paul played lots of minutes along with an inept bench last year, they can be showing that Rondo plays a lot of minutes with an inept bench this year. If the numbers didn't prove anything last year they don't prove anything this year.

  Beyond that, you need to look at the numbers from past years to see whether they're actually saying what you think they are. For  instance, last year the team's offense was much better with Rondo on the court than off. What does that say? That last year he was significantly better in the half court set than he is this year? Or is it merely that you don't know what the numbers mean?

Again, the team's offence was never better with Pierce off the court. This is a factual question. You want to equate different things at all costs, I have no idea why.

And you have to make up your mind: whether the problem is that the offence slows down when Rondo is substituted or that Rondo + the bench is a bad offensive line-up.

[looseball]

Doc said (postgame) he thought about putting Tony Allen in for Ray to cover Kobe on the Lakers' last possession, but decided it was best to "have a star guarding a star".  Neither choice was best, and the Lakers showed why:

There isn't any one player in the league who can stop Kobe from getting a shot off in that situation.  The best you can do is make the shot as difficult as possible, and Ray did just that.  He was all over Kobe, but Kobe still got the shot off and made it.

Now, the Celts have one last chance and the Lakers are determined to not let Paul Pierce take the last shot, nor KG.  They were willing to gamble on Ray because he's been off lately and has played a lot of minutes (over 40 in half the games this past month).  So when the ball goes to Pierce he is immediately doubled-teamed (by Ray's man) and has to give up the ball.  The Lakers have a man in the passing lane between Pierce and KG, so Paul does the right thing and loops the ball over to wide-open Ray, who fails to knock it down.  Game over.

So the Lakers get the guy they want to take their last shot, and he makes it.  And they force the Celts to have their third option take the last shot, and he misses.  They played the percentages better than we did.

Now, my question is: why wasn't Kobe double-teamed and forced to give up the ball?  Who else has been knocking down game winners for the Lakers lately?

[Spilling Green Dye]

Scoop, you can't look that detailed into the +/- information.  I'm pretty sure you're one of the BBD fans on this site, and based upon last year's stats one would convincingly have to conclude that Scalabrine should be taking all of Davis' minutes.  Is this what you'd suggest too?

Also, not that it's really bugging me, but I don't think Ray played "as good of D as you can" on that last play.  Ray played great D all game, but he never got a hand in Kobe's face.. he just had his hands up at the end not to foul.  Again, it was probably the right move, but that shot wasn't that impossible.

[BballTim]

No, you're the one that can't understand the numbers. You're claiming that the fact that the team scores more when Rondo's off the court than when he's on the court shows that Rondo struggles on offense. You also managed to figure out that the team doesn't struglle when Paul and Ray are in. But last year the offense performed better with Rondo than it did with Paul.

I say that Rondo struggles on offence when the tempo slows down and the game is reduced to half-court sets instead of a more free-wheeling pace and the other team is a good defensive team because I see it happening, I don't trust on/off numbers that much.

Once again, last season the team wasn't worse offensively with Pierce on the bench than it was with him on the court - the team was better offensively with Pierce on the court.

Doesn't that show that Paul struggled on offense more than Rajon last year? If not, your conclusion doesn't hold.

Of course not. It can show that Pierce played lots of minutes along an inept bench, for example.

  This is what you don't seem to understand. The same way the numbers can show that Paul played lots of minutes along with an inept bench last year, they can be showing that Rondo plays a lot of minutes with an inept bench this year. If the numbers didn't prove anything last year they don't prove anything this year.

  Beyond that, you need to look at the numbers from past years to see whether they're actually saying what you think they are. For  instance, last year the team's offense was much better with Rondo on the court than off. What does that say? That last year he was significantly better in the half court set than he is this year? Or is it merely that you don't know what the numbers mean?

Again, the team's offence was never better with Pierce off the court. This is a factual question. You want to equate different things at all costs, I have no idea why.

  Again, I never said the offense was better with Pierce off the court than with Pierce on the court. I said the offense was better with Rondo than with Pierce.

And you have to make up your mind: whether the problem is that the offence slows down when Rondo is substituted or that Rondo + the bench is a bad offensive line-up.

  I don't see why one of them has to be false.

[BballTim]

Since when has Doc been good with substitution patterns? 

But I agree that the 4th quarter of yesterday's game was agonizing to watch.  Their offense, not defense, completely reverted to Pierce-iso and take the ball out of Rondo's hands.  Rondo had 11 assists by the end of hte 3rd quarter... he should have been involved more in the 4th.  Not one player drove to the hoop.

Asides from the struggle to close a game out, the most glaring problem currently is that our bench is flat out awful.  If it weren't for Eddie House hitting some nice 3's, the lead would have been blown quicker.  Glen Davis fell down on one play, couldn't score on the offensive end, and got disgustingly outplayed.  He looked useless out there, and it wasn't just him.  Sheed didn't bang down low, and Scalabrine won't do anything against LA. 

I think it's time that Doc, Pierce, and other stop trying to take over the offense.  Put it in Rondo's hands and tell him to attack.  (note, that travel call on Rondo was complete BS.)

Nice, but this entire paragraph is a fantasy. The first play where Pierce had the ball on his hands in the 4th was the one where he fouled Artest with the off-arm. That was basically the Celtics last full clock offensive possession. Before that, Rondo was running the offense like during the rest of the game - he just sucked at it. Please, re-watch the final 10 minutes of the game if you have any doubt about this.

  People see what they're going to see. You don't seem to think that the Celts run a play where the pg dribbles the ball while Ray tries to run off a few screens and get open, although other people seem to be familiar with it.

Huh? Of course Ray runs through screens, he does during the entire game. What's exactly your point?

  Last try on this. In another thread you were complaining about Rondo dribbling around aimlessly. Often this is becase the play the Celts are running involves the pg waiting for Ray to cut past some screens to try and get open. If he does Rondo gets the ball to him. If he doesn't they do something else. While he does often run off of screens it's not always the case that the team's waiting for Ray to get free, and it's not always the case that Rondo's "dribbling around aimlessly" while Ray runs past screens.

[Edgar]

why not give the ball to your all star point guard?

And let him decide.


Why give chance to a comeback without using time outs?


Why a 3?

[scoop]

Scoop, you can't look that detailed into the +/- information.  I'm pretty sure you're one of the BBD fans on this site, and based upon last year's stats one would convincingly have to conclude that Scalabrine should be taking all of Davis' minutes.  Is this what you'd suggest too?

As I've said, I dont' put much faith into on/off court information. Please re-read my previous post.

Yes, I actually defended many times last season that Scalabrine should be playing more - before Doc eventually started playing him more.

I think Glen Davis is a very flawed 3rd big and a competent 4th big - but not a good fit as the 4th big for the Celtics team as currently constructed (I was hoping we would sign Ben Wallace instead of Davis). I'm not sure if this makes me a fan of him - generally, I tend to care very little for individual players in those terms.