It's On Doc

[minijericho29]

So, after Friday’s debacle, I got to thinking what the Cs biggest problem is.  I might be going out on a limb here, but I’m saying it’s the back-up at the 4.
 
I compared the numbers between Green and Baby since the trade and here’s what I came up with offensively.
 
Baby:    28 mpg  10.7 FGA    4.7 FGM   44%
Green:    23 mpg   8.0 FGA    4.2 FGM   52%
 
You could argue that Baby rebounds better and takes charges.  I would argue that Green plays better defense and helps the offense flow better (aka. Not a black hole).  Since this teams biggest issue of late is scoring, I say the guy who helps out on the offensive side is more important.  I’d also argue that Baby gets more minutes with the big three, while Green is exclusively a second-unit guy at the moment.  Playing green with the big three would necessitate moving Garnett to the 5.  Against most teams, I think that’s manageable in small doses, although I admit that’s just my opinion. 
 
In his first game back from his injury, Baby logged 18 minutes, which helps understate his numbers somewhat.  In the 8 games since his 18 minute game, he’s exceeded 30 minutes (yes, 30) in 5 of them…including last nights 35 minute 4 for 15 rockfest.  Sixth man of the year, he is not.  Yet, even Friday night, when Baby fouled out.  Doc went to the bench for Kristic, not Green. 
 
I’m not crazy enough to suggest that Doc has some vendetta against Green.  But I do think that there’s either A.) a fear of losing Baby by not giving him enough playing time or B.) a loyalty thing because of his hustle and taking charges that is causing him to give more minutes to the lesser talented guy.
 
FINAL STAT:  In their last 10 games, the C’s have broken 90 points twice.  (you can't blame that on the Perk trade.) They haven’t broken 100 since March 9th against the defensive juggernaut that is the LA Clippers.

I leave you with this:  Does a team that employs Glen Davis for 30-35 minutes per game have a good chance at winning the championship?  I don’t think so.
 

[kozlodoev]

I am not sure what your comparison is worth, given that Green plays the bulk of his minutes as the backup 3.

[Edgar]

I leave you with this:  Does a team that employs Glen Davis for 30-35 minutes per game have a good chance at winning the championship?  I don’t think so.
 

I am a huge defender of this "hipotesis"
I think this team have enought talent now to make BBD play less
make more effort and try to help not scoring.

I re watch the game yesterday, in his deffense he had little time on the clock most of the time, in his fails he ALWAYS look to score, and failed miserable.


I think now with players like Delonte, Green, Kristic, ahead on him in the rotation ond other players like Murphy who knows his job on rebounding even if he stinked this far.
And specially considering that he sort of duplicates shaq. and JO is better, if he ever comes back, BBD have a great chance of being unnecesary on this Championship celtics.

Now i get blaming doc but without shaq Cs still need his bulk precense and that is killing us, the need

[KungPoweChicken]

I'm with you. Davis is playing too much, and Green is not playing enough. I also want to see Murphy in when he comes back from injury. Right now Doc is playing Davis more minutes than what a hustle/energy guy should be playing on championship contender: 30+ minutes a night, really Doc? The problem with playing Davis this many minutes is that he tries to do more than he's capable of. I like Glen Davis, don't get me wrong, just not at 30+ minutes a game.

[minijericho29]

I am not sure what your comparison is worth, given that Green plays the bulk of his minutes as the backup 3.

Perhaps you overlooked the part where I wrote "Playing green with the big three would necessitate moving Garnett to the 5.  Against most teams, I think that’s manageable in small doses, although I admit that’s just my opinion."

[Fafnir]

I am not sure what your comparison is worth, given that Green plays the bulk of his minutes as the backup 3.

Perhaps you overlooked the part where I wrote "Playing green with the big three would necessitate moving Garnett to the 5.  Against most teams, I think that’s manageable in small doses, although I admit that’s just my opinion."

Davis plays two positions where we are thin at the moment, the 4 and the 5.

Since PP is going to play 30-37 minutes every night, and so is Ray Allen, Green has less potential minutes.

[kozlodoev]

I re watch the game yesterday, in his deffense he had little time on the clock most of the time, in his fails he ALWAYS look to score, and failed miserable.

Right, because at this point of time the team strategy was "Let's sit around for 20 seconds, then throw it to Glen Davis". I watched him yesterday as well, and he didn't seem to force anything that wasn't caused by the team's poor clock management.

[hpantazo]

I am not sure what your comparison is worth, given that Green plays the bulk of his minutes as the backup 3.

Perhaps you overlooked the part where I wrote "Playing green with the big three would necessitate moving Garnett to the 5.  Against most teams, I think that’s manageable in small doses, although I admit that’s just my opinion."

Davis plays two positions where we are thin at the moment, the 4 and the 5.

Since PP is going to play 30-37 minutes every night, and so is Ray Allen, Green has less potential minutes.

according to what both Doc and Danny said when we made the trade, part of the reason we got Green was because he can play both the 3 and the 4 and give us versatility, so I don't buy that. Hopefully when we get at least one Oneal back, Davis will lose some playing time from playing the 5 though.

[wdleehi]

Do we really want to see KG play more minutes against the other teams C during the regular season just to get Green another 4 or 5 minutes?



I know I don't. 


Because KG is the only active big the rebounds enough to play Green at the 4. 



Not to mention, as guys come back (or the Celtics are in real trouble), those minutes at the 4 are going to go down, not up.  Better to prepare Green for what his role is in the playoff now instead of later. 

[kozlodoev]

I am not sure what your comparison is worth, given that Green plays the bulk of his minutes as the backup 3.

Perhaps you overlooked the part where I wrote "Playing green with the big three would necessitate moving Garnett to the 5.  Against most teams, I think that’s manageable in small doses, although I admit that’s just my opinion."

Davis plays two positions where we are thin at the moment, the 4 and the 5.

Since PP is going to play 30-37 minutes every night, and so is Ray Allen, Green has less potential minutes.

You came up with this as a justification for what you're suggesting:

I compared the numbers between Green and Baby since the trade and here’s what I came up with offensively.
 
Baby:    28 mpg  10.7 FGA    4.7 FGM   44%
Green:    23 mpg   8.0 FGA    4.2 FGM   52%

These are not directly comparable, since Green posted the numbers while playing mostly the backup 3 and some backup 4, and Davis -- while playing the backup 4 and 5. So you're really comparing apples to oranges here.

[Edgar]

I re watch the game yesterday, in his deffense he had little time on the clock most of the time, in his fails he ALWAYS look to score, and failed miserable.

Right, because at this point of time the team strategy was "Let's sit around for 20 seconds, then throw it to Glen Davis". I watched him yesterday as well, and he didn't seem to force anything that wasn't caused by the team's poor clock management.

I agree and thats why Doc and other players are not out of the responsability.
Now I say MOST of the times.
He took some horrible shots, without any rush too.

[Marcus13]

Our back up 4 is the soft spot?  Not the back up one or two or our starting five...but the back up 4?

[Edgar]

Our back up 4 is the soft spot?

the use of the backup rotation is the soft spot

 Not the back up one or two or our starting five...but the back up 4?

the backup 2 deffinetly not, Delonte west rocks.

[Marcus13]

Our back up 4 is the soft spot?

the use of the backup rotation is the soft spot

 Not the back up one or two or our starting five...but the back up 4?

the backup 2 deffinetly not, Delonte west rocks.

I like Delonte a lot....if he can stay on the floor, ever.  For a majority of the season, it's been a soft spot

[minijericho29]

I am not sure what your comparison is worth, given that Green plays the bulk of his minutes as the backup 3.

Perhaps you overlooked the part where I wrote "Playing green with the big three would necessitate moving Garnett to the 5.  Against most teams, I think that’s manageable in small doses, although I admit that’s just my opinion."

Davis plays two positions where we are thin at the moment, the 4 and the 5.

Since PP is going to play 30-37 minutes every night, and so is Ray Allen, Green has less potential minutes.

You came up with this as a justification for what you're suggesting:

I compared the numbers between Green and Baby since the trade and here’s what I came up with offensively.
 
Baby:    28 mpg  10.7 FGA    4.7 FGM   44%
Green:    23 mpg   8.0 FGA    4.2 FGM   52%

These are not directly comparable, since Green posted the numbers while playing mostly the backup 3 and some backup 4, and Davis -- while playing the backup 4 and 5. So you're really comparing apples to oranges here.

Why get hung up on who’s a 4 and who’s a 5?  Is the object to win games or stick to a lineup?

Teams play 2 point guards at once or 2 centers at once, or whatever the situation might call for.  This team CANNOT SCORE 90 points in a 48 minute game, and their solution is to leave Jeff Green on the bench? 

 
Right now, Glen Davis is displaying a poor shot selection, not keeping the ball flowing in the offense, not playing down low (he’s a 5 after all, isn’t he?).  I’d also add that he’s listed as the same height at Jeff Green, even though he’s probably several inches shorter than that listed height. 

But, you know, the back of Kevin Garnett’s basketball card says ‘F’ and not ‘C’, so yeah, you’re right.  There’s no way this would work…