Pops is proof that Doc isn't all that great

[Celtics4ever]

Doc is a good manager of personalities and a great come from behind coach.   But small ball does not work on any level.   We have yet to win a series going small.  At least Pops always has two bigs in there.

Death to small ball....

[Boris Badenov]

It's pretty funny that for all the Doc-bashing that goes on here, the one alternative even the bashers compare him to consistently is Popovich, who is in the conversation as a top 3-5 coach of all time.

It's a little bit like saying "Lebron is not all that great, because Michael Jordan was better."

It's the utmost in flattery. I suspect that Doc himself would be very pleased to know that his name and Popovich's are mentioned together so often.

[dasani]

So the argument seems to be that because the Spurs made the finals this year and because Tony Parker is a really good shooter/scorer while Rondo still can't shoot, that Doc is a bad coach.  There is something also about managing minutes that I don’t understand that is illustrated by the fact that both Ginobili and Duncan are both healthy for the first time in “like forever” while I guess Pierce looked worn down in the playoffs.

What does this have to do with anything? I don't see this argument being made. Pop and Doc are different coaches with different coaching philosophies. For better or worse, this year was not great for the Celtics and Doc shares some of the culpability.

[TitleMaster]

Paul Pierce, up until this last season, had one of the most durable bodies in the league. In contrast, his western coast peer Ginobili, went south starting 2008. Thus, in terms of clutch performance & long lasting plays, Manu was not the man he was, before that year. With that in mind, Pops did not have a one-two punch, which he could rely on, playoff series after playoff series, as in PP-KG. He had to improvise and in this league, stars win playoffs.

Next, if Parker had started with the C's, he'd be warming the pine for much of his early years, playing a role not to distinct from a Tony Delk or a JR Bremer, as oppose to Eddie House or Tony Allen. Hence, he'd probably be traded, as Doc wouldn't see his natural brilliance in bolting *no look* passes to the big three. In contrast, Pops pushed TP for years, and molded him into the JoJo White that he is today.

[dasani]

Paul Pierce, up until this last season, had one of the most durable bodies in the league. In contrast, his western coast peer Ginobili, went south starting 2008. Thus, in terms of clutch performance & long lasting plays, Manu was not the man he was, before that year. With that in mind, Pops did not have a one-two punch, which he could rely on, playoff series after playoff series, as in PP-KG. He had to improvise and in this league, stars win playoffs.

Next, if Parker had started with the C's, he'd be warming the pine for much of his early years, playing a role not to distinct from a Tony Delk or a JR Bremer, as oppose to Eddie House or Tony Allen. Hence, he'd probably be traded, as Doc wouldn't see his natural brilliance in bolting *no look* passes to the big three. In contrast, Pops pushed TP for years, and molded him into the JoJo White that he is today.

Well both Doc and Pop are similar in relying heavily on vets, and utilizing the younger guys for specialist and defensive roles. Tony Parker was molded by Pop, but he has had his up and down years as well. Two seasons ago, no one even included him in their top 5 PG discussion, This season he is a top 2 PG at 31 years old. Older than all the younger PGs fans salivate on. So Doc and his staff isn't fully done molding Rondo, he could still have Parker-like success in his thirties as well. Let's not forget that the Spurs were trying to trade him two years ago because of the Spurs window being seemingly shut.

http://www.slamonline.com/online/nba/2011/06/report-san-antonio-spurs-shopping-tony-parker/

As much as this year was not a great year for Doc or anyone on the C's, conclusions can't be made just yet.

[TitleMaster]

So Doc and his staff isn't fully done molding Rondo, he could still have Parker-like success in his thirties as well.

Then perhaps this is a good litmus test on Doc. And that's to see whether or not he can transform Rondo [ who's more talented than TP ] into a true combo-guard than just some fella looking to pad his assists record, while dribbling out the clock.

[Ogaju]

It's pretty funny that for all the Doc-bashing that goes on here, the one alternative even the bashers compare him to consistently is Popovich, who is in the conversation as a top 3-5 coach of all time.

It's a little bit like saying "Lebron is not all that great, because Michael Jordan was better."

It's the utmost in flattery. I suspect that Doc himself would be very pleased to know that his name and Popovich's are mentioned together so often.

Doc is not even in the Pop conversation, so do not kid yourself.

Doc is in the same conversation as Spoelstra who won one chip with a big 3, Collins, Sloan, THIBS who helped Doc win the chip he won, Carlisle in Dallas who won a chip with Nowitzki and a bunch of helpers, Larry Brown. Yeah lump Doc in with those coaches. Pop is far superior to Doc.

[RJ87]

Doc is a good manager of personalities and a great come from behind coach.   But small ball does not work on any level.   We have yet to win a series going small.  At least Pops always has two bigs in there.

Death to small ball....

When Doc has quality bigs, he plays them. See: Shaq, Perk, Leon Powe, Glen Davis, Jermaine O'Neal, Sully, etc. I'm sure Doc would've loved to switch out Tiago Splitter for Shavlick Randolph

[BballTim]

You folks don't get it, Parker has flourished under Pop's system. Yes, he's become a type of JoJo White, all around great combo-guard player but within a system, not as as solo artist. Rondo, on the other hand, is attempting to become a stats fodder, much like Stockton but w/o an outside shot, to compliment his passing game. If Rondo had played under Pops, the C's today, would be the most unstoppable squad in the league. Rondo would hit his jumpers, every single time, if a team played 5-on-4 against him. Thus, opponents would never be able to adjust their defenses against a team lead by Rondo.

  File this one right next to "Rondo rarely drives". Over the last 7 seasons Rondo's fg% from 10-15 feet and from 15-23 feet are almost identical to Parker's. Your view of Rondo's game doesn't match what's really happening on the court. Also, you seem to be under the impression that the ideal for every point guard is JoJo White. That's probably not the case.

  Rondo taking more shots and passing less wouldn't really be good coaching because the team scores more efficiently off of passes from Rondo than Rondo (or Parker or White for that matter) score when they shoot. Pops might have ended up with a better player (and more success in the playoffs) if he'd taught Parker to pass and run an offense better rather than shoot more. Look at the difference in KG's scoring in the last 2 playoffs. The reason for the difference is his not having Rondo, who has that habit of getting his teammates good shots that you seem to detest so much.

[TitleMaster]

In an alternate reality ...

Pops led Celtics:

2008, Win finals 4-1

2009, Lose finals 4-2, no true answer for Bynum/Gasol/Odom down low w/o KG and Powe.

2010, Win finals 4-3

2011, Lose ECSemis to Heat 4-2

2012, Win finals 4-1

3 titles in 5 years

[BballTim]

So Doc and his staff isn't fully done molding Rondo, he could still have Parker-like success in his thirties as well.

Then perhaps this is a good litmus test on Doc. And that's to see whether or not he can transform Rondo [ who's more talented than TP ] into a true combo-guard than just some fella looking to pad his assists record, while dribbling out the clock.

   Rondo's been at least as successful in the playoffs as Parker had been at the same stage in their careers. I don't think much molding needs to be done for that to continue. Also, it's hardly unusual for a player to be a bit better and have a more well-rounded game at 30 compared to 25 or 26, I think you're giving Pops way too much credit for "molding" Parker.

[BballTim]

In an alternate reality ...

Pops led Celtics:

2008, Win finals 4-1

2009, Lose finals 4-2, no true answer for Bynum/Gasol/Odom down low w/o KG and Powe.

2010, Win finals 4-3

2011, Lose ECSemis to Heat 4-2

2012, Win finals 4-1

3 titles in 5 years

  I wonder how that "alternate reality" Pops would do with the Spurs over that same time period, obviously much better than the "real" Pops, who's teams rarely if ever outperform their talent/experience.

[D.o.s.]

So Doc and his staff isn't fully done molding Rondo, he could still have Parker-like success in his thirties as well.

Then perhaps this is a good litmus test on Doc. And that's to see whether or not he can transform Rondo [ who's more talented than TP ] into a true combo-guard than just some fella looking to pad his assists record, while dribbling out the clock.

   Rondo's been at least as successful in the playoffs as Parker had been at the same stage in their careers. I don't think much molding needs to be done for that to continue. Also, it's hardly unusual for a player to be a bit better and have a more well-rounded game at 30 compared to 25 or 26, I think you're giving Pops way too much credit for "molding" Parker.

By the time Tony Parker was 25 he'd won three rings as the starting PG, winning a finals mvp in the process.

[TheReaLPuba]

This is just ridiculous.

Pop is a great coach but because he's back in the Finals he's some how even better than every other coach out there?

Doc has his flaws but he's definitely a top tier coach in his own right.

What he did with last year's team was just incredible.

The C's drop in talent each and every year add on to that the countless injuries to key players and stars....this team should not be contending every year and we still do (except this year).

It's taken the Spurs 6 years to get back to the Finals with a core that has remained intact.

Danny can't even keep our core together for Doc to coach.

[NocturnalRebel]

It's pretty funny that for all the Doc-bashing that goes on here, the one alternative even the bashers compare him to consistently is Popovich, who is in the conversation as a top 3-5 coach of all time.

It's a little bit like saying "Lebron is not all that great, because Michael Jordan was better."

It's the utmost in flattery. I suspect that Doc himself would be very pleased to know that his name and Popovich's are mentioned together so often.

Doc is not even in the Pop conversation, so do not kid yourself.

Doc is in the same conversation as Spoelstra who won one chip with a big 3, Collins, Sloan, THIBS who helped Doc win the chip he won, Carlisle in Dallas who won a chip with Nowitzki and a bunch of helpers, Larry Brown. Yeah lump Doc in with those coaches. Pop is far superior to Doc.

Then what is this 5 page debate about then? If Doc isn't in tha same conversation as Pop, why is Pop tha only one a lot of you Doc bashers compare him to?

And to say Doc is in tha same conversation with Spoelstra is hog wash. Get off tha boo boo. Doc should be shown more respect than that. Spoelstra isn't in tha same conversation as Doc. Spoelstra isn't proven. Doc is. Spoelstra is coaching tha best player in tha NBA who makes his job easy for him just like he did for Mike Brown. Give Spo a team without tha talent he has now and see how he fairs before saying him and Doc are in tha same conversation. If somebody's in tha same conversation with Spo, it's Mike Brown.