Pops is proof that Doc isn't all that great

[blink]

In contrast, we always had a Rondo, who couldn't shoot from the outside. And unlike JoJo, he rarely drove, to setup the outside shooter. Instead, he dribbled, waiting for someone to come off the screen to make the assist. Parker was making all the JoJo White modifications during those Ginobili injured playoffs.

  Rondo drives more than almost anyone in the league. And if you're going to laud Pops for Parker's "transformation" you might want to ask why he didn't do it sooner, Parker's been on the Spurs for 11 years or so.

Very simple, Parker's not that great of a player. The top player for the Spurs, prior to the 2008 season, was Ginobili pre-injury. And then, as a defensive anchor, T Duncan as a mature version of Robinson, but not Robinson in his prime.

In other words, the Celts were always better than the Spurs but unlike them, we never truly overachieved except for that 2010 playoff series, which BTW, I'd predicted with Operation Fo'Fo'Fo'.

Ok you just lost all credibility with the 'Parker's not that great of a player'.  To me he is the MVP of this years playoffs.  To just discount his great play this year really destroys your whole point.

[NocturnalRebel]

In contrast, we always had a Rondo, who couldn't shoot from the outside. And unlike JoJo, he rarely drove, to setup the outside shooter. Instead, he dribbled, waiting for someone to come off the screen to make the assist. Parker was making all the JoJo White modifications during those Ginobili injured playoffs.

  Rondo drives more than almost anyone in the league. And if you're going to laud Pops for Parker's "transformation" you might want to ask why he didn't do it sooner, Parker's been on the Spurs for 11 years or so.

Very simple, Parker's not that great of a player. The top player for the Spurs, prior to the 2008 season, was Ginobili pre-injury. And then, as a defensive anchor, T Duncan as a mature version of Robinson, but not Robinson in his prime.

In other words, the Celts were always better than the Spurs but unlike them, we never truly overachieved except for that 2010 playoff series, which BTW, I'd predicted with Operation Fo'Fo'Fo'.

Ok you just lost all credibility with the 'Parker's not that great of a player'.  To me he is the MVP of this years playoffs.  To just discount his great play this year really destroys your whole point.

Parker should be MVP period. How Steve Nash has 2 MVP awards while Tony Parker has none is beyond me.

[dasani]

Parker is a bit of a system player, no? I mean two years ago they were going to trade him to the Kings. I think he really knows Pops system, I don't know how he would do on another. Which isn't bad. D-Will is a self admitted system player and people still have him in their top 6 point guards and top 15 players. MVP of the finals if the the Spurs win, yes. MVP of the league, no.

[TitleMaster]

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.

And I agree on the whole Nash, not being worthy of dual MVPs. He's another rack-up-the-assists, but no overall dramatic success as a team player type of person. Nash would only win a title, on a team with another Olajuwon type of player.

With all of the above stated, it's still not clear that the Spurs would win, this time around either, unless Parker really dons the cloak and becomes Superman for his team. Neither Duncan nor Ginobili have that youthful zeal to close out the big games, in these latter years. The remaining Spurs, though decent role players, are not all stars.

If the Spurs win this year, it's because of Pop's game management, not because Parker, Ginobili, nor Duncan are a youthful big three of the pre-2008 era.

[Yogi]

Title, I suggest you go look at Tim Duncan's stats this year.  Then try to list 10 stars who had better numbers.  Here is a hint.  You will fail.

[edwardjkasche]

Since 2007-08, when the Celtics got KG and Allen, and, incidentally, won a championship, and one year after the Spurs won in 2006-07, this is what the Spurs have done...

07-08 - lost in the WCF
08-09 - lost in the FIRST ROUND
09-10 - lost in the SECOND ROUND
10-11 - lost in the FIRST ROUND
11-12 - lost in the WCF
12-13 - playing in the FINALS

This is what the Celtics have done...

07-08 - won championship
08-09 - lost in the SECOND ROUND
09-10 - lost in the FINALS
10-11 - lost in the SECOND ROUND
11-12 - lost in the ECF
12-13 - lost in the FIRST ROUND

Their playoff success has long been determined by health.

Pops and Doc are both great coaches.  Both have flaws.  Both have strengths.  Both rely heavily on Hall of Fame talent.  When that talent has been healthy, they've gone to the Finals.  When that talent hasn't been healthy, they've struggled in the playoffs.

The coaches are only as good as what they have to work with.  Pops had a healthy squad this year.  Doc did not. 

Both are top-3 NBA coaches.  Oh, wait, George Karl was fired and is no longer a NBA coach... Pops and Doc are top-2 NBA coaches.

[Ogaju]

enough of the Doc is a great coach posted on this board all the time. The word great should be reserved for the very best over a career.

Great Coaches in Pro BB historically

Red Auerbach

Pat Riley

Phil Jackson

Greg Popovich

Enough!!!!

[bfrombleacher]

enough of the Doc is a great coach posted on this board all the time. The word great should be reserved for the very best over a career.

Great Coaches in Pro BB historically

Red Auerbach

Pat Riley

Phil Jackson

Greg Popovich

Enough!!!!

I don't think anybody is saying Doc is a great coach.

But he's not a turrrible coach like some make him out to be.

[staticcc]

Who do you want then? Doug Collins? Vinny Del Negro?

[LGC88]

Well, I always wonder why the celtics deteriorate in offense since 2010. Back there against the Lakers who score in their last 5 games respectively 91, 89, 86, 89 and 83. Those were great numbers for Boston. Reducing the best offensive team in nba to such performance should be more than enough to win a title, specially LA wasn't that good on defense.
The hard cold fact is that Boston offense has been too predictable and easy to stop. Is it Doc's fault, or DA fault for not providing the players Doc needs?
To me it's simple, a good coach provides the best out of his players. I'm sure Doc manages to do that on the defense event. But on the other side of the floor, not at all.
I don't say Doc is a bad coach, but I wonder what is his problem with the offense. What would doc do if he was coaching the spurs? He will probably ask TP to find Manu or Duncan open and make Green run in circle for an open 3... Yeah, sounds about right.
On his last interview, Pop said they have many solutions on offense and they make sure they don't use the same one too often, or else the opponent adapt to it.

[mr. dee]

Who do you want then? Doug Collins? Vinny Del Negro?

Collins? Maybe but that's only if Doc decided to leave.

Del Negro? Pass.

If we can convince Jerry Sloan to coach for the C's then I don't mind firing Doc.

[bfrombleacher]

Who do you want then? Doug Collins? Vinny Del Negro?

Collins? Maybe but that's only if Doc decided to leave.

Del Negro? Pass.

If we can convince Jerry Sloan to coach for the C's then I don't mind firing Doc.

Someone once pointed out how Doc's been running the same schemes since he started coaching (offensively and defensively).

Would be interesting to see how Sloan uses the talent here.

However:
1. KG and Pierce may leave with Doc leaving
2. Sloan isn't that great a defensive coach. I think our offensive woes are at least partially due to the roster. Is it such a great idea to lose the defense too? Or are we going full rebuild if we add Sloan?

[Meadowlark_Scal]

Gotta wonder about a guy who says he doesn't want/need rebounds.....and his plan showed he was serious....he would take a chance on ANY GUARD.....and then take NO chances on any big man...except kg...who isn't just any big man......Doc has sat and ignored more big men than any coach I know...!

[TitleMaster]

Well, I always wonder why the celtics deteriorate in offense since 2010. Back there against the Lakers who score in their last 5 games respectively 91, 89, 86, 89 and 83. Those were great numbers for Boston. Reducing the best offensive team in nba to such performance should be more than enough to win a title, specially LA wasn't that good on defense.
The hard cold fact is that Boston offense has been too predictable and easy to stop. Is it Doc's fault, or DA fault for not providing the players Doc needs?
To me it's simple, a good coach provides the best out of his players. I'm sure Doc manages to do that on the defense event. But on the other side of the floor, not at all.
I don't say Doc is a bad coach, but I wonder what is his problem with the offense. What would doc do if he was coaching the spurs? He will probably ask TP to find Manu or Duncan open and make Green run in circle for an open 3... Yeah, sounds about right.
On his last interview, Pop said they have many solutions on offense and they make sure they don't use the same one too often, or else the opponent adapt to it.

Finally, someone gets it!

Yes, this Rondo running around, dribbling out the clock  for a pass to the big two is an Achilles heel during big playoff moments. And yes, Doc falls back to that or having Pierce run his pre-2008 one-on-one isos, also predictable and now, easier to stop with an older scorer.

In contrast, Pops has his squad mix it up and thus, gets more out of everyone on the court. Thus, we would have won the 2010 finals with Pops in charge, regardless of the Perks injury, as everyone else would be running a fresh offensive set than in falling back on our Achilles's heel maneuvers.

And then again, does everyone forget how great of a player, Pierce is? How could be have a talent, as amazing as him but still have a floundering team offense?

[Vermont Green]

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.

Of the potential replacements for Doc, there was one maybe (Doug Collins) and one probably (Jerry Sloan).  For the record, I don't think either Collins or Sloan would be better than Doc overall but maybe they would do something a little different that would allow one player or another to flourish.

You can look at things all sorts of ways and convince yourself that this thing or that thing proves your point of view.  My favorite is when some says that Rondo shoots 48% or something while, I don’t know, Chris Paul shoots only 46% so see, Rondo is a better shooter than Chris Paul (or Doc is a better coach than Del Negro).

My feeling is that Doc is a great coach as compared to contemporaries.  Maybe not great as compared to all time but he has gotten just about all anyone was going to get out of the big three window what was only supposed to last 3-years.

Who knows, maybe if Pop was the coach we would have won few more playoff series, I doubt it but there is nothing I can say that would prove my opinion unequivocally.  Just like nothing said here proves the opposite.  This is a good Blog topic.  Everyone can have an opinion, and there is no way to ever prove who is wrong or right (as opposed to debating who will win a series or something like that).