Do you like Doc's "no hero ball" philosophy?

[ManUp]

What "no hero ball" philosophy? I'm being dead serious. Doc allows PP to keep shooting NO MATTER WHAT, same for KG, and he let's RR do w/e he wants to. Then don't get me started on the hero ball end of quarters and games. He also wanted Crawford to shoot all the time and same for LeBo. That's why we need a good offensive coach b/c our offense is a mess... I wonder sometimes if we actually run an offense.

Now, If you said he has "no hero ball" on defense then I'd agree, he is big on team defense.

Want to hear something funny, ImShak. About 6-7 years ago until about 2010, most people complaining about Doc on this site said he was an awful defensive coach who could only coach offensive ball. Now here you are alling Doc a defensive coach without a clue as to how to run an offense.

Perhaps, just perhaps, the system Doc runs is pretty much what he ran 6-8 years ago but the players went from good offensively and horrible defensively(pre Big 3), to dominant defensively(2008-2010) and okay offensively to awful offensively and just very good  to great defensively(2011 to present).

I think what we have seen on the court from the team over the years has much much less to do with Doc's coaching and almost everything to do with the healthy players he was given to play.

I think those people 6-8 years ago were right. I give Doc credit for maintaining a top rated defense since Thibodeau left, but we all know Thibs was the mastermind of that 08 defense. On the teams prior to the big three where Doc had found success his team were middle of the road defensively and pretty good offensively. What it looks like is thast Doc has incorporated Thibodeau's defense into his own coaching. It's fair to say Doc is a good defensive coach now, but I don't think that's always been true.

As for the Hero ball, I think Doc has shown he's all for it when it's the right guy shooting. Certain guys have tighter leashes then others. Garnett and Pierce have free reign for example because Doc trusts them to take the right shots, make the right decisions and play within themselves (i.e. take shots they can make).

[nickagneta]

What "no hero ball" philosophy? I'm being dead serious. Doc allows PP to keep shooting NO MATTER WHAT, same for KG, and he let's RR do w/e he wants to. Then don't get me started on the hero ball end of quarters and games. He also wanted Crawford to shoot all the time and same for LeBo. That's why we need a good offensive coach b/c our offense is a mess... I wonder sometimes if we actually run an offense.

Now, If you said he has "no hero ball" on defense then I'd agree, he is big on team defense.

Want to hear something funny, ImShak. About 6-7 years ago until about 2010, most people complaining about Doc on this site said he was an awful defensive coach who could only coach offensive ball. Now here you are alling Doc a defensive coach without a clue as to how to run an offense.

Perhaps, just perhaps, the system Doc runs is pretty much what he ran 6-8 years ago but the players went from good offensively and horrible defensively(pre Big 3), to dominant defensively(2008-2010) and okay offensively to awful offensively and just very good  to great defensively(2011 to present).

I think what we have seen on the court from the team over the years has much much less to do with Doc's coaching and almost everything to do with the healthy players he was given to play.

I think those people 6-8 years ago were right. I give Doc credit for maintaining a top rated defense since Thibodeau left, but we all know Thibs was the mastermind of that 08 defense. On the teams prior to the big three where Doc had found success his team were middle of the road defensively and pretty good offensively. What it looks like is thast Doc has incorporated Thibodeau's defense into his own coaching. It's fair to say Doc is a good defensive coach now, but I don't think that's always been true.

As for the Hero ball, I think Doc has shown he's all for it when it's the right guy shooting. Certain guys have tighter leashes then others. Garnett and Pierce have free reign for example because Doc trusts them to take the right shots, make the right decisions and play within themselves (i.e. take shots they can make).

Disagree with this. Doc;s system before Thibs was pretty much the same blitz the high pick and roll and rotate accordingly, fall back to stop the transition offense, run three point shooters off the three point line and play the open spaces on the weak side looking for the steal or block from that side. He has since Thibs left, instituted a zone as well as a zone and rotating one.

No Doc has run this system since he started coaching. Its Riley's New York Knick defensive system that the Van Gundys and Thibs also use. All are disciples of that system with minor changes here and there. I don't think Thibs brought a system in as he helped refine and coach the defensive system while simultaneously being given excellent young healthy defensive talent(Perkins, Rondo, Powe, TAllen) and excellent veteran talent that suddenly rejuvenated their careers and decided playing in the system and getting a title was more important than scoring lots of points.

[ManUp]

What "no hero ball" philosophy? I'm being dead serious. Doc allows PP to keep shooting NO MATTER WHAT, same for KG, and he let's RR do w/e he wants to. Then don't get me started on the hero ball end of quarters and games. He also wanted Crawford to shoot all the time and same for LeBo. That's why we need a good offensive coach b/c our offense is a mess... I wonder sometimes if we actually run an offense.

Now, If you said he has "no hero ball" on defense then I'd agree, he is big on team defense.

Want to hear something funny, ImShak. About 6-7 years ago until about 2010, most people complaining about Doc on this site said he was an awful defensive coach who could only coach offensive ball. Now here you are alling Doc a defensive coach without a clue as to how to run an offense.

Perhaps, just perhaps, the system Doc runs is pretty much what he ran 6-8 years ago but the players went from good offensively and horrible defensively(pre Big 3), to dominant defensively(2008-2010) and okay offensively to awful offensively and just very good  to great defensively(2011 to present).

I think what we have seen on the court from the team over the years has much much less to do with Doc's coaching and almost everything to do with the healthy players he was given to play.

I think those people 6-8 years ago were right. I give Doc credit for maintaining a top rated defense since Thibodeau left, but we all know Thibs was the mastermind of that 08 defense. On the teams prior to the big three where Doc had found success his team were middle of the road defensively and pretty good offensively. What it looks like is thast Doc has incorporated Thibodeau's defense into his own coaching. It's fair to say Doc is a good defensive coach now, but I don't think that's always been true.

As for the Hero ball, I think Doc has shown he's all for it when it's the right guy shooting. Certain guys have tighter leashes then others. Garnett and Pierce have free reign for example because Doc trusts them to take the right shots, make the right decisions and play within themselves (i.e. take shots they can make).

Disagree with this. Doc;s system before Thibs was pretty much the same blitz the high pick and roll and rotate accordingly, fall back to stop the transition offense, run three point shooters off the three point line and play the open spaces on the weak side looking for the steal or block from that side. He has since Thibs left, instituted a zone as well as a zone and rotating one.

No Doc has run this system since he started coaching. Its Riley's New York Knick defensive system that the Van Gundys and Thibs also use. All are disciples of that system with minor changes here and there. I don't think Thibs brought a system in as he helped refine and coach the defensive system while simultaneously being given excellent young healthy defensive talent(Perkins, Rondo, Powe, TAllen) and excellent veteran talent that suddenly rejuvenated their careers and decided playing in the system and getting a title was more important than scoring lots of points.

I find that a bit hard to believe, but I'll take you word for it. I guess a defense looks a lot different when it's executed to near perfection. It's just that Doc hasn't show anywhere near this type of defense until 08.

[nickagneta]

What "no hero ball" philosophy? I'm being dead serious. Doc allows PP to keep shooting NO MATTER WHAT, same for KG, and he let's RR do w/e he wants to. Then don't get me started on the hero ball end of quarters and games. He also wanted Crawford to shoot all the time and same for LeBo. That's why we need a good offensive coach b/c our offense is a mess... I wonder sometimes if we actually run an offense.

Now, If you said he has "no hero ball" on defense then I'd agree, he is big on team defense.

Want to hear something funny, ImShak. About 6-7 years ago until about 2010, most people complaining about Doc on this site said he was an awful defensive coach who could only coach offensive ball. Now here you are alling Doc a defensive coach without a clue as to how to run an offense.

Perhaps, just perhaps, the system Doc runs is pretty much what he ran 6-8 years ago but the players went from good offensively and horrible defensively(pre Big 3), to dominant defensively(2008-2010) and okay offensively to awful offensively and just very good  to great defensively(2011 to present).

I think what we have seen on the court from the team over the years has much much less to do with Doc's coaching and almost everything to do with the healthy players he was given to play.

I think those people 6-8 years ago were right. I give Doc credit for maintaining a top rated defense since Thibodeau left, but we all know Thibs was the mastermind of that 08 defense. On the teams prior to the big three where Doc had found success his team were middle of the road defensively and pretty good offensively. What it looks like is thast Doc has incorporated Thibodeau's defense into his own coaching. It's fair to say Doc is a good defensive coach now, but I don't think that's always been true.

As for the Hero ball, I think Doc has shown he's all for it when it's the right guy shooting. Certain guys have tighter leashes then others. Garnett and Pierce have free reign for example because Doc trusts them to take the right shots, make the right decisions and play within themselves (i.e. take shots they can make).

Disagree with this. Doc;s system before Thibs was pretty much the same blitz the high pick and roll and rotate accordingly, fall back to stop the transition offense, run three point shooters off the three point line and play the open spaces on the weak side looking for the steal or block from that side. He has since Thibs left, instituted a zone as well as a zone and rotating one.

No Doc has run this system since he started coaching. Its Riley's New York Knick defensive system that the Van Gundys and Thibs also use. All are disciples of that system with minor changes here and there. I don't think Thibs brought a system in as he helped refine and coach the defensive system while simultaneously being given excellent young healthy defensive talent(Perkins, Rondo, Powe, TAllen) and excellent veteran talent that suddenly rejuvenated their careers and decided playing in the system and getting a title was more important than scoring lots of points.

I find that a bit hard to believe, but I'll take you word for it. I guess a defense looks a lot different when it's executed to near perfection. It's just that Doc hasn't show anywhere near this type of defense until 08.

Go back and look at some of that playoff run he made with Jefferson as a rookie and Pierce, Walker, Payton and so forth in 2005. Its pretty much h the same system only with some few refinements and a whole host of better  and smarter defensive players playing it.

[kgainez]

not sure i like many of Doc's philosophies
so there's that.

[LGC88]

It's all about balance in both end of the floor.
Too much energy spent on defense and you ran out of gas on the offense event.
Watch Miami and San antonio. They both have great balance. They are tough defensively but they make sure they score more than you.
I know how defense won championships before. But now there are many good defensive teams, so you need to be better than them on the offense event.
Boston is unbalanced since few years. And it's getting worse. It's time to admit that basketball involves and systems have to be revised from time to time.

[KG Living Legend]

No. Not at all.

[Celtics4ever]

Our heroes (PP used to be the best at finishing a game out)  have become zeroes.  I don't see him creating space as well for his shot as he used to do so.

[Eja117]

On the surface, it seems like part of the basis for a team-oriented style of play, but I think it affects how Doc Rivers hands out playing time in a way that earns the scorn of some fans.

Unless you are almost as good of a scorer as Paul Pierce, having a tendency to be a chucker will limit how much you are allowed to contribute to the team.  If Doc is coaching, I don't think you can shoot your way into meaningful playing time by making garbage time buckets.  Scoring ten points in the final five minutes of a blowout won't get you more minutes. 

This makes Danny Ainge's off-season quests to find instant offense off the bench a misallocation of resources.  While some chuckers have their uses, they will be less valuable in the Celtics system.

As long as Doc is the coach, I think the Celtics should be looking to acquire players who can score efficiently but need to be encouraged to look for their offense than instead of players who need to be taught to take fewer shots with smarter shot selection.

Personally I can't understand how Doc hands out playing time, because it doesn't have much to do with achievement. If you're a player that absolutely refuses to rebound....that's ok. If you refuse to play defense? That can be ok too. If you're Rasheed Wallace you can shoot any dumb shot you want and infect the whole team with your careless laziness...and Doc will play you lots of minutes.

Doc comes to some conclusions that are wrong ....like for example...Old geezer Ray Allen > young Avery Bradley and then sticks to these decisions until something unforeseen (like an injury) forces his hand. By that time it's too late.

That's my problem with Doc. 

[kozlodoev]

Doc comes to some conclusions that are wrong ....like for example...Old geezer Ray Allen > young Avery Bradley and then sticks to these decisions until something unforeseen (like an injury) forces his hand. By that time it's too late.

Except the "something unforeseen" happening was Bradley starting to play out of his mind. This wasn't a given, and the jury is quite obviously still out on whether it was an aberration or not.

[Celtics18]

On the surface, it seems like part of the basis for a team-oriented style of play, but I think it affects how Doc Rivers hands out playing time in a way that earns the scorn of some fans.

Unless you are almost as good of a scorer as Paul Pierce, having a tendency to be a chucker will limit how much you are allowed to contribute to the team.  If Doc is coaching, I don't think you can shoot your way into meaningful playing time by making garbage time buckets.  Scoring ten points in the final five minutes of a blowout won't get you more minutes. 

This makes Danny Ainge's off-season quests to find instant offense off the bench a misallocation of resources.  While some chuckers have their uses, they will be less valuable in the Celtics system.

As long as Doc is the coach, I think the Celtics should be looking to acquire players who can score efficiently but need to be encouraged to look for their offense than instead of players who need to be taught to take fewer shots with smarter shot selection.

Personally I can't understand how Doc hands out playing time, because it doesn't have much to do with achievement. If you're a player that absolutely refuses to rebound....that's ok. If you refuse to play defense? That can be ok too. If you're Rasheed Wallace you can shoot any dumb shot you want and infect the whole team with your careless laziness...and Doc will play you lots of minutes.

Doc comes to some conclusions that are wrong ....like for example...Old geezer Ray Allen > young Avery Bradley and then sticks to these decisions until something unforeseen (like an injury) forces his hand. By that time it's too late.

That's my problem with Doc.

Rasheed Wallace was a big key to us making a run to game seven of the finals in 2010.  Last year's Ray Allen was better than Avery Bradley until he wasn't.  Once Avery earned the playing time, well, he got it. 

[Eja117]

Doc comes to some conclusions that are wrong ....like for example...Old geezer Ray Allen > young Avery Bradley and then sticks to these decisions until something unforeseen (like an injury) forces his hand. By that time it's too late.

Except the "something unforeseen" happening was Bradley starting to play out of his mind. This wasn't a given, and the jury is quite obviously still out on whether it was an aberration or not.

Well we definitely know it's no aberration that Ray isn't a starter any more. He wasn't playing helpful defense. He wasn't a starter. Do you try to force a 36 year old non starter into being a starter? Or do you start backing off his minutes?  And I have to doubt Avery just suddenly started playing great. I would think he was playing very well in practice for a long time and Doc just ignored it.

Doc doesn't make people earn playing time. He makes people prove him wrong and sometimes it's almost impossible to do.  That's why Shav got no time in the playoffs. Seeing him get 20 rebounds just didn't matter to Doc. He was convinced of something else. What's the point if you can do that and not get rewarded with playing time?  Wasn't Shav doing at least a little of playing out of his mind? At least in comparison to other guys?  Instead Doc left in players that got outrebounded by New York;'s point guards...repeatedly.

Sometimes it's not just about who is doing great. It also has to be about who is doing his job. If you're a vet not doing your job you have to take a seat and let a younger guy learn.

[Eja117]

On the surface, it seems like part of the basis for a team-oriented style of play, but I think it affects how Doc Rivers hands out playing time in a way that earns the scorn of some fans.

Unless you are almost as good of a scorer as Paul Pierce, having a tendency to be a chucker will limit how much you are allowed to contribute to the team.  If Doc is coaching, I don't think you can shoot your way into meaningful playing time by making garbage time buckets.  Scoring ten points in the final five minutes of a blowout won't get you more minutes. 

This makes Danny Ainge's off-season quests to find instant offense off the bench a misallocation of resources.  While some chuckers have their uses, they will be less valuable in the Celtics system.

As long as Doc is the coach, I think the Celtics should be looking to acquire players who can score efficiently but need to be encouraged to look for their offense than instead of players who need to be taught to take fewer shots with smarter shot selection.

Personally I can't understand how Doc hands out playing time, because it doesn't have much to do with achievement. If you're a player that absolutely refuses to rebound....that's ok. If you refuse to play defense? That can be ok too. If you're Rasheed Wallace you can shoot any dumb shot you want and infect the whole team with your careless laziness...and Doc will play you lots of minutes.

Doc comes to some conclusions that are wrong ....like for example...Old geezer Ray Allen > young Avery Bradley and then sticks to these decisions until something unforeseen (like an injury) forces his hand. By that time it's too late.

That's my problem with Doc.

Rasheed Wallace was a big key to us making a run to game seven of the finals in 2010.  Last year's Ray Allen was better than Avery Bradley until he wasn't.  Once Avery earned the playing time, well, he got it.

Rasheed Wallace was that year's Jason Terry.  Kind of amazing a second team All-NBA defender just sorta came out of nowhere.  By the time Avery overtook Ray it was extremely obvious.  I mean when you earn your playing time under Doc you rrrrrreeeeealllllyyy earn it. I mean after all the fans and and all the media and all the NBA have realized what Doc should do ....like start Avery over Ray...that's about the time Doc starts thinking about it.

[Celtics18]

On the surface, it seems like part of the basis for a team-oriented style of play, but I think it affects how Doc Rivers hands out playing time in a way that earns the scorn of some fans.

Unless you are almost as good of a scorer as Paul Pierce, having a tendency to be a chucker will limit how much you are allowed to contribute to the team.  If Doc is coaching, I don't think you can shoot your way into meaningful playing time by making garbage time buckets.  Scoring ten points in the final five minutes of a blowout won't get you more minutes. 

This makes Danny Ainge's off-season quests to find instant offense off the bench a misallocation of resources.  While some chuckers have their uses, they will be less valuable in the Celtics system.

As long as Doc is the coach, I think the Celtics should be looking to acquire players who can score efficiently but need to be encouraged to look for their offense than instead of players who need to be taught to take fewer shots with smarter shot selection.

Personally I can't understand how Doc hands out playing time, because it doesn't have much to do with achievement. If you're a player that absolutely refuses to rebound....that's ok. If you refuse to play defense? That can be ok too. If you're Rasheed Wallace you can shoot any dumb shot you want and infect the whole team with your careless laziness...and Doc will play you lots of minutes.

Doc comes to some conclusions that are wrong ....like for example...Old geezer Ray Allen > young Avery Bradley and then sticks to these decisions until something unforeseen (like an injury) forces his hand. By that time it's too late.

That's my problem with Doc.

Rasheed Wallace was a big key to us making a run to game seven of the finals in 2010.  Last year's Ray Allen was better than Avery Bradley until he wasn't.  Once Avery earned the playing time, well, he got it.

Rasheed Wallace was that year's Jason Terry.  Kind of amazing a second team All-NBA defender just sorta came out of nowhere.  By the time Avery overtook Ray it was extremely obvious.  I mean when you earn your playing time under Doc you rrrrrreeeeealllllyyy earn it. I mean after all the fans and and all the media and all the NBA have realized what Doc should do ....like start Avery over Ray...that's about the time Doc starts thinking about it.

Granted, Rasheed Wallace had a fairly poor showing during the regular season that year.  In the playoffs he was our fourth big behind Garnett, Perk, and Baby.  What did you want him to do?  Give 'Sheed's minutes to Shelden Williams?

The public debate on Bradley vs. Allen wasn't anywhere near as unanimous in favor of Avery as you remember it.  Avery got the job when Ray went down with an injury and managed to keep it. 

[nickagneta]

Shav Randolph had three good games. That's it. Two of those games were blow outs. Watching him at them end of the season it was fairly clear his defense was bad and he made his living as a garbage man on the offensive boards.

If Shav was hanging around for offensive rebounds and not getting back in transition defense or playing well within the defensive scheme, he wasn't going to get playoff minutes.

He was brought in as a late season sub to give KG time off and some rest before the playoffs started. He did that. But let's not confuse him with some great player that was snubbed minutes in the playoffs after having some "great" season.