Doc's new team......

[Meadowlark_Scal]

So, with these new guys, will Doc play the "rookies", and the last year "rookies"...? Will he go back to the big 3-4, plus 1 or 2..?

 Will he adjust the attitude " Don't go for REBOUNDS, just get back on D" Yes, our team did well this way, but when you have outside shooting experts, you need rebounders.....guys who love and live to rebound. This is a WHOLE court game, and we have youth to cover the floor AND go for rebounds..it isn't that much of a stretch to ask for this. Rondo showed how great rebounds are, but your pg should be able to get back up top to stop the fast break outlet, while a rebounder makes sure there is no eassy rebounds and easy, open pass.

Our new youth guys will also be hard to cover, and will wear out the other teams...IF they play, and learn from our vets, and hopefully play/practice with them also..!!!

[j804]

That's the plan to expand the rotation Ainge wants that and somewhat even called Doc out on it in an article so well see.

[Meadowlark_Scal]

That's the plan to expand the rotation Ainge wants that and somewhat even called Doc out on it in an article so well see.

I sure hope so...guys like jjj, a good shooter, shot blocker/rebounder...who knows how good he could be, and who he could defend.....defense is EASY to teach...move your feet, where is your man....right..? We COULD be stocked well with youth / age-vets.....or we could have aged guys on the floor, while young guys get splinters, and hope for a trade..!

[j804]

That's the plan to expand the rotation Ainge wants that and somewhat even called Doc out on it in an article so well see.

I sure hope so...guys like jjj, a good shooter, shot blocker/rebounder...who knows how good he could be, and who he could defend.....defense is EASY to teach...move your feet, where is your man....right..? We COULD be stocked well with youth / age-vets.....or we could have aged guys on the floor, while young guys get splinters, and hope for a trade..!

yea it's no wonder we run out of gas deep into the playoffs the goal is to keep our vets fresh this year

[All Star Matt Clement]

it's funny how Doc is lionized now as one of the top 2-3 coaches. winning does that, i guess.  don't get me wrong, i think he's a very good coach, i just want him to play the rookies more. i still remember the days when CelticsBlog members thought he was incompetent and were screaming to have him replaced (see wdleehi's signature).  the truth is somewhere in between. winning really reshapes one's outlook. his success as a coach is intricately tied to the success of the Big 3.  i'm curious what people would think of Doc if we've been a middling team this whole time and never put up Banner 17.  Would a coach be perceived as a good coach if he never won? it's like the chicken or the egg question.  good players are required to win.  could a coach be considered good without winning? is it the players who make the coach or the coach who makes the player?

[ScottHow]

Ainge has made comments in the recent days that make me believe the rookies will get pt. Saying things like putting the rookies on a "speed coarse" is a good sign.

[chambers]

To the OP, just remember it's much easier to get defensive rebounds than offensive rebounds. If we start going for offensive rebounds more, it is possible it would jeopardize our ability to get back and stop fast transition teams like the Heat, the 76ers, the Thunder etc... from getting easy baskets.

It's hard to get guys who love to rebound and get back on defense- the guys who rebound have a nose for the ball and it's very rare to find someone with those two talents- let alone someone with the talent to score and pass as well. This is what makes guys like Rondo and Lebron so valuable to me.
Anyway, personally I'd always pick a defensive first team that can shoot well over a very good rebounding team that doesn't play defense as well- note the Lakers this year, and the Clippers.
Defense wins championships.

[looseball]

it's funny how Doc is lionized now as one of the top 2-3 coaches. winning does that, i guess.  don't get me wrong, i think he's a very good coach, i just want him to play the rookies more. i still remember the days when CelticsBlog members thought he was incompetent and were screaming to have him replaced (see wdleehi's signature).  the truth is somewhere in between. winning really reshapes one's outlook. his success as a coach is intricately tied to the success of the Big 3.  i'm curious what people would think of Doc if we've been a middling team this whole time and never put up Banner 17.  Would a coach be perceived as a good coach if he never won? it's like the chicken or the egg question.  good players are required to win.  could a coach be considered good without winning? is it the players who make the coach or the coach who makes the player?

I think Doc's greatness lies in the grind of the season.  He's a great teacher and preacher who keeps his team motivated and focused.  In his eight years with the Celtics they've won the division six times, then usually run out of gas in the playoffs.  If this were racing, you'd be wise to bet on Doc to "show".

[jambr380]

That's the plan to expand the rotation Ainge wants that and somewhat even called Doc out on it in an article so well see.

I sure hope so...guys like jjj, a good shooter, shot blocker/rebounder...who knows how good he could be, and who he could defend.....defense is EASY to teach...move your feet, where is your man....right..? We COULD be stocked well with youth / age-vets.....or we could have aged guys on the floor, while young guys get splinters, and hope for a trade..!

I am anxious to see what JJJ has to offer this year. He was also a very good defensive player in college, so that should help his transition. Let's not underrate how difficult NBA defense really is, though. It is easy to work as hard as you can to stay in front of your man, but rotations and instincts are huge in order to be a good defensive player. He isn't going to be anchoring the defense down low so he will have to learn a lot more than just staying in fron of his man.

[clover]

I can't believe Danny won't give Doc at least a starting-caliber vet at both the 4 and 5 positions.
 
And given salary cap restrictions, that means at least KG and Bass--or now KG and Krstic--or some sort of vet that he might land in a Bass S&T.  Any other vets would by necessity by at the vet minimum or the BAE, and for the 4 and 5 positions such players are likely of marginal utility.

With Ray presumably gone, likely to the Clips, I think he has the salary room to bring in both Bass and Krstic if that works out.

The most stacked, therefore, that they could end up at the 4 and 5 would be KG, Bass (or S&T replacement), Curly, Wilcox, Stiemer and the younger guys.

I actually think now that if Bass gets traded, Danny's likely to bring in a guard/swingman in S&T return, and he'd thus likely go with Krstic and one of Wilcox or Stiemer (whomever they can land with the BAE).

The rest will be the young guys, and I wouldn't overlook their summer league invite who was taken 6 slots ahead of 3J, but one year earlier.

Shall be interesting.

[clover]

it's funny how Doc is lionized now as one of the top 2-3 coaches. winning does that, i guess.  don't get me wrong, i think he's a very good coach, i just want him to play the rookies more. i still remember the days when CelticsBlog members thought he was incompetent and were screaming to have him replaced (see wdleehi's signature).  the truth is somewhere in between. winning really reshapes one's outlook. his success as a coach is intricately tied to the success of the Big 3.  i'm curious what people would think of Doc if we've been a middling team this whole time and never put up Banner 17.  Would a coach be perceived as a good coach if he never won? it's like the chicken or the egg question.  good players are required to win.  could a coach be considered good without winning? is it the players who make the coach or the coach who makes the player?

I think the issue with rookies is as much getting them prepared to play in their first year as it is actually playing them in their first year.  Doc tends to treat his players like men, which is good.  But of the two Boilermakers last year, I'd say EM was getting it early on and Doc erred in leaving him stuck to the bench mid-year, so he wasn't ready (and was pressing) come playoffs.

3J was a slightly different story, however, in that the team should never have been so slack as to not make sure he learned the defensive and offensive playbooks.  That mistake is on both Doc and Danny IMO, because if they'd been more attentive early on he too could have been useful by the playoffs.  They want their young players to be more responsible than that--as Stiemer was--but too often they're not.

From taking direct managerial control of the Red Claws' basketball operations to overseeing a more intensive program for this year's rookies, Danny can be expected to be more hands on this year in handling the young guys.  I expect that to be complementary to Doc's style and to pay off for the team.

[mctyson]

So, with these new guys, will Doc play the "rookies", and the last year "rookies"...? Will he go back to the big 3-4, plus 1 or 2..?

We are going to see a lot from our younger guys next year.

I personally expect to see 15 min a game from Sullinger, if not more.  I think JJJ will be worked into the rotation at the 4, especially if we lose Bass and don't replace him with a PF.  We all know ABsolute Zer0 will be on the court all the time.  I think Melo may get some minutes too, particularly if Stiemer leaves to Minnesota.  I could even see Kris Josephs getting run at the backup 3 if we don't resign Pietrus.  I don't consider Jeff Green part of this "youth group" but he will get 20+ minutes every game.

The only person really affected by the Terry signing is E-twaun Moore.  If we resign Dooling, which seems likely, I just don't see where Moore is going to get minutes.  In fact you could make a case that he shouldn't be on the roster at all.  I would prefer him over Dooling, but I am not the GM.

[Meadowlark_Scal]

To the OP, just remember it's much easier to get defensive rebounds than offensive rebounds. If we start going for offensive rebounds more, it is possible it would jeopardize our ability to get back and stop fast transition teams like the Heat, the 76ers, the Thunder etc... from getting easy baskets.

It's hard to get guys who love to rebound and get back on defense- the guys who rebound have a nose for the ball and it's very rare to find someone with those two talents- let alone someone with the talent to score and pass as well. This is what makes guys like Rondo and Lebron so valuable to me.
Anyway, personally I'd always pick a defensive first team that can shoot well over a very good rebounding team that doesn't play defense as well- note the Lakers this year, and the Clippers.
Defense wins championships.

I MOST deef know a lot about rebounds, D ones are important, O ones are frosting on the cake....O-bounds make defenders MAD, more likely to foul, and if you have a few moves and jump, and can finish..well and 1...! Did you see us play Indiana..a guy like Jeff Foster was all over us....when you have a rebounder in your face, you cannot make ANY fast break passes, you get the ball if you are lucky, and elbow out some space...IF your team is plugged into D, they stay near thier man....instead of just running back to some position, this further cuts passes down, and makes D easier...it is rare that a decent rebounder isn't near the rebound, and then contesting ball movement.....while playing 1 sided hoop sorta worked for us..it is also much easier on the other team, many times i saw the ball actually hit the ground vs the heat...a shot, rim, then floor...no one there.....that is lazy pick-up hoop....out of shape old guys....with a team of 11-15 guys, there is no reason to not be "on it" the ball is money, go get it.

[clover]

To the OP, just remember it's much easier to get defensive rebounds than offensive rebounds. If we start going for offensive rebounds more, it is possible it would jeopardize our ability to get back and stop fast transition teams like the Heat, the 76ers, the Thunder etc... from getting easy baskets.

It's hard to get guys who love to rebound and get back on defense- the guys who rebound have a nose for the ball and it's very rare to find someone with those two talents- let alone someone with the talent to score and pass as well. This is what makes guys like Rondo and Lebron so valuable to me.
Anyway, personally I'd always pick a defensive first team that can shoot well over a very good rebounding team that doesn't play defense as well- note the Lakers this year, and the Clippers.
Defense wins championships.

One guy who's good with offensive rebounds--just so-so overall--is Curly.

But I expect a modified, increased emphasis on it this year: neither everyone running ahead, nor everyone holding back for the board.

[bobthemarley]

Defense is not easy to teach. If you've ever played any level of basketball you realize that it becomes harder to move your feet depending on the player you are defending. Moving your feet at the right, the boldness to step in front of someone are important. Why don't we see too man Avery Bradley defenders if it was just moving your feet?