Between Doc (Clippers) & Brad (Boston), who will win a championship first?

[Boris Badenov]

The lack of respect that a former Celtic championship winning coach gets on this, the best Celtics fan site on the internet is truly disturbing.

How many coaches in history have the best single win loss turnaround in NBA history?
How many other coaches have out coaches Phil Jackson to win a title?
How many other coaches have taken a collection of player thrown together in one off season and got them to gel instantly and win a championship in their first year with that group?
How many coaches can brag they may have coached the greatest NBA defense of all time?

That's what Doc Rivers has done. Don't like the guy? Fine. Don't agree with some of the ways he coaches? Fine. But show a little respect. He coached this team to a title and a chance at another and did a hell of a job doing it.

your boy doc blew the 2010 series with his usual buffoonery that we have discussed here ad infinitum. Even with perkins out everybody here remembers what the scoreboard read in the 4th quarter of game 7. He blew it. The perkins excuse does not fly. Doc still had plenty of talent to get it done.

Exactly, TP. He must get all the blame for losing that game.

Furthermore it is patently obvious that he must not get any credit for taking the Cs to the Finals that year. The team would have done just as well if it were coached by a bowl of soup.

It was the players alone who were responsible for a #4 seed beating the #1, #2 and #5 seeds in the East. Those teams only had 61, 59 and 47 victories respectively!  Teams with chumps like Lebron and Dwight Howard are trivially easy to outplay when you have talent like we did. I mean, trot your guys out there and let them do their thing. No coaching required.

And of course the players alone are responsible for getting the Celtics that lead heading into the 4th quarter, without their starting center. Clearly, at that point Doc's horrendous coaching finally overpowered our talent and kept us from what would have been certain victory in his absence.

Terrific example. I can't imagine clearer evidence that Doc can't coach.

Actually this is almost exactly how I see it. That and Thibs and Clifford Ray helped a LOT.

I know, right? And our talent clearly outstripped everyone else's. I mean, who voted Lebron as MVP and Dwight as DPOY that year - Doc Rivers!?!? Haha.

Who manhandled Lebron that year? That would be PP and Ray. It must have been Doc's coaching from working so hard on offense that year.

Well that's hardly a surprise. Ray Allen was well-known for shutting down the opponent's best player long before Doc got his career-ruining hooks into him.

[Nerf DPOY]

The lack of respect that a former Celtic championship winning coach gets on this, the best Celtics fan site on the internet is truly disturbing.

How many coaches in history have the best single win loss turnaround in NBA history?
How many other coaches have out coaches Phil Jackson to win a title?
How many other coaches have taken a collection of player thrown together in one off season and got them to gel instantly and win a championship in their first year with that group?
How many coaches can brag they may have coached the greatest NBA defense of all time?

That's what Doc Rivers has done. Don't like the guy? Fine. Don't agree with some of the ways he coaches? Fine. But show a little respect. He coached this team to a title and a chance at another and did a hell of a job doing it.

your boy doc blew the 2010 series with his usual buffoonery that we have discussed here ad infinitum. Even with perkins out everybody here remembers what the scoreboard read in the 4th quarter of game 7. He blew it. The perkins excuse does not fly. Doc still had plenty of talent to get it done.

Exactly, TP. He must get all the blame for losing that game.

Furthermore it is patently obvious that he must not get any credit for taking the Cs to the Finals that year. The team would have done just as well if it were coached by a bowl of soup.

It was the players alone who were responsible for a #4 seed beating the #1, #2 and #5 seeds in the East. Those teams only had 61, 59 and 47 victories respectively!  Teams with chumps like Lebron and Dwight Howard are trivially easy to outplay when you have talent like we did. I mean, trot your guys out there and let them do their thing. No coaching required.

And of course the players alone are responsible for getting the Celtics that lead heading into the 4th quarter, without their starting center. Clearly, at that point Doc's horrendous coaching finally overpowered our talent and kept us from what would have been certain victory in his absence.

Terrific example. I can't imagine clearer evidence that Doc can't coach.

Actually this is almost exactly how I see it. That and Thibs and Clifford Ray helped a LOT.

I know, right? And our talent clearly outstripped everyone else's. I mean, who voted Lebron as MVP and Dwight as DPOY that year - Doc Rivers!?!? Haha.

Who manhandled Lebron that year? That would be PP and Ray. It must have been Doc's coaching from working so hard on offense that year.

Well that's hardly a surprise. Ray Allen was well-known for shutting down the opponent's best player long before Doc got his career-ruining hooks into him.

Like, the last 5 posts.

[bdm860]

Wait. Did you just say the Clippers are overachieving against expectations? You just said that didn't you?

Context. They (the clippers) were expected to win 45 games this season according to a formula (the expected win-loss formula, actually). The C's, for example, were expected to win 30 games.

You can read more about it here:
http://www.basketball-reference.com/about/glossary.html#wins_pyth

Actually, that's saying the Clippers are underachieving.  That they should have won 45 games at this point in the season, when they've only won 42.

[TitleMaster]

I'm going to write the Doc vs Jackson 2008 story from a Laker's perspective.

In 2008, the LA Lakers were an underpowered team led by Kobe and Gasol. Bynum was injured, Ariza was recovering from prior injuries, and Odom was somewhat inconsistent.

On the other hand, the much despised Boston Celtics were stacked at just about every position, lead by a Hall of Fame trio of Pierce, Garnett, and Allen.

Despite all their strengths, Kobe, under Phil Jackson's direction, hassled the formidable 66 win squad to a full 6 game series, before collapsing in the game 6 closer against a much more intensive defense squad, trained by Tom Thibodeau, one the league's best defensive coordinator.

In the year which followed, the Lakers eliminated their weaknesses and played a near flawless post-season, getting the most out of Odom and Ariza, winning their first title, after Shaquille O'Neil had left the team. Unfortunately, due to injuries, the Celtics did not meet the Lakers in the finals. That would have been the re-match of the ages.

And although the 2010 finals went to the Lakers, it was a much less satisfying win as it was mainly determined from the free throw line, and not in the heat of game 5, where only Kobe was scoring and no one else. In addition, key Celtics players were injured but least the Lakers did get to see a much less effective Paul Pierce in the fourth quarter of game 7 due to the defenses of a Metta World Peace.

[Eja117]

The lack of respect that a former Celtic championship winning coach gets on this, the best Celtics fan site on the internet is truly disturbing.

How many coaches in history have the best single win loss turnaround in NBA history?
How many other coaches have out coaches Phil Jackson to win a title?
How many other coaches have taken a collection of player thrown together in one off season and got them to gel instantly and win a championship in their first year with that group?
How many coaches can brag they may have coached the greatest NBA defense of all time?

That's what Doc Rivers has done. Don't like the guy? Fine. Don't agree with some of the ways he coaches? Fine. But show a little respect. He coached this team to a title and a chance at another and did a hell of a job doing it.

How many coaches sign a very big very long contract and then turn around and quit and scold people for calling it what it is?
How many coaches were given 3 Hall of Famers, and a bunch of excellent players to coach with? I don't understand why people act like he pulled off some miracle.
How many coaches get CP3, Blake Griffin, DeAndre Jordan, Glen Davis, JJ Redick, Jamal Crawford, and Jared Dudley and turn it into a thoroughly mediocre team in the west?

The guy isn't just a bad coach. He's also a phony

The Clippers are thoroughly mediocre?  They have the second best offense in the league, they're on pace to break 50 wins for the third season in a row, they're overachieving against their expectations from a strength of schedule perspective, and they're doing all of this while playing against the tougher conference.

And yet he's no match for Brad Stevens, the little engine that could, I guess. And the East is hot garbage, don't be silly.

Speaking of silly....better than the big engine that can't.  I wonder what the excuse will be this year. Maybe their new owner will say he doesn't like rap music or they'll offer Doc a contract extension without offering him an extra plate of cupcakes.

Wait. Did you just say the Clippers are overachieving against expectations? You just said that didn't you?

Context. They (the clippers) were expected to win 45 games this season according to a formula (the expected win-loss formula, actually). The C's, for example, were expected to win 30 games.

You can read more about it here:
http://www.basketball-reference.com/about/glossary.html#wins_pyth

So they won 56 games two years ago and nothing that mattered. Then they won 57 games last year and nothing that mattered. So this year, naturally they were expected to win 45 games, only they might end up with 50.

How many commercials were CP3 and Blake G expected to make this year while others were doing well in the playoffs? Is that in the formula?

[nickagneta]

I'm going to write the Doc vs Jackson 2008 story from a Laker's perspective.

In 2008, the LA Lakers were an underpowered team led by Kobe and Gasol. Bynum was injured, Ariza was recovering from prior injuries, and Odom was somewhat inconsistent.

On the other hand, the much despised Boston Celtics were stacked at just about every position, lead by a Hall of Fame trio of Pierce, Garnett, and Allen.

Despite all their strengths, Kobe, under Phil Jackson's direction, hassled the formidable 66 win squad to a full 6 game series, before collapsing in the game 6 closer against a much more intensive defense squad, trained by Tom Thibodeau, one the league's best defensive coordinator.

In the year which followed, the Lakers eliminated their weaknesses and played a near flawless post-season, getting the most out of Odom and Ariza, winning their first title, after Shaquille O'Neil had left the team. Unfortunately, due to injuries, the Celtics did not meet the Lakers in the finals. That would have been the re-match of the ages.

And although the 2010 finals went to the Lakers, it was a much less satisfying win as it was mainly determined from the free throw line, and not in the heat of game 5, where only Kobe was scoring and no one else. In addition, key Celtics players were injured but least the Lakers did get to see a much less effective Paul Pierce in the fourth quarter of game 7 due to the defenses of a Metta World Peace.

1. The Celtics were never considered stacked in 2008. Most pundits, said before and during the season that the Celtics bench was very weak and that their PG position was a massive point of weakness.

2. The Celtics played the same defense before and after Tom Thibodeau was associated with the team. He was a very good assistant coach but he was not solely responsible for the construction or design of that defense. He just helped in the coaching of it.

3. After the Gasol trade the Lakers were the favorite to win the tittle every year until Lebron ended up in Miami. Given they had Bynum, Kobe, Gasol, Odom, Ariza, Metta, Fisher, Farmar and some others during those years, it's pretty safe to say if you consider the Celtics stacked, LA was equally or even more stacked.

[Eja117]

I'm going to write the Doc vs Jackson 2008 story from a Laker's perspective.

In 2008, the LA Lakers were an underpowered team led by Kobe and Gasol. Bynum was injured, Ariza was recovering from prior injuries, and Odom was somewhat inconsistent.

On the other hand, the much despised Boston Celtics were stacked at just about every position, lead by a Hall of Fame trio of Pierce, Garnett, and Allen.

Despite all their strengths, Kobe, under Phil Jackson's direction, hassled the formidable 66 win squad to a full 6 game series, before collapsing in the game 6 closer against a much more intensive defense squad, trained by Tom Thibodeau, one the league's best defensive coordinator.

In the year which followed, the Lakers eliminated their weaknesses and played a near flawless post-season, getting the most out of Odom and Ariza, winning their first title, after Shaquille O'Neil had left the team. Unfortunately, due to injuries, the Celtics did not meet the Lakers in the finals. That would have been the re-match of the ages.

And although the 2010 finals went to the Lakers, it was a much less satisfying win as it was mainly determined from the free throw line, and not in the heat of game 5, where only Kobe was scoring and no one else. In addition, key Celtics players were injured but least the Lakers did get to see a much less effective Paul Pierce in the fourth quarter of game 7 due to the defenses of a Metta World Peace.

1. The Celtics were never considered stacked in 2008. Most pundits, said before and during the season that the Celtics bench was very weak and that their PG position was a massive point of weakness.

2. The Celtics played the same defense before and after Tom Thibodeau was associated with the team. He was a very good assistant coach but he was not solely responsible for the construction or design of that defense. He just helped in the coaching of it.

3. After the Gasol trade the Lakers were the favorite to win the tittle every year until Lebron ended up in Miami. Given they had Bynum, Kobe, Gasol, Odom, Ariza, Metta, Fisher, Farmar and some others during those years, it's pretty safe to say if you consider the Celtics stacked, LA was equally or even more stacked.

1. Link?

2. Which team plays better defense? Thibs Bulls or Doc's Clips? I'm watching the Clips right now and they can't defend a cold.

3. Ok, so both teams were stacked and played each other and ended up going one and one against each other. Is that the mark of a great coach? Going .500? And is this to say most coaches would have gone 0-2 in that scenario?

[nickagneta]

I'm going to write the Doc vs Jackson 2008 story from a Laker's perspective.

In 2008, the LA Lakers were an underpowered team led by Kobe and Gasol. Bynum was injured, Ariza was recovering from prior injuries, and Odom was somewhat inconsistent.

On the other hand, the much despised Boston Celtics were stacked at just about every position, lead by a Hall of Fame trio of Pierce, Garnett, and Allen.

Despite all their strengths, Kobe, under Phil Jackson's direction, hassled the formidable 66 win squad to a full 6 game series, before collapsing in the game 6 closer against a much more intensive defense squad, trained by Tom Thibodeau, one the league's best defensive coordinator.

In the year which followed, the Lakers eliminated their weaknesses and played a near flawless post-season, getting the most out of Odom and Ariza, winning their first title, after Shaquille O'Neil had left the team. Unfortunately, due to injuries, the Celtics did not meet the Lakers in the finals. That would have been the re-match of the ages.

And although the 2010 finals went to the Lakers, it was a much less satisfying win as it was mainly determined from the free throw line, and not in the heat of game 5, where only Kobe was scoring and no one else. In addition, key Celtics players were injured but least the Lakers did get to see a much less effective Paul Pierce in the fourth quarter of game 7 due to the defenses of a Metta World Peace.

1. The Celtics were never considered stacked in 2008. Most pundits, said before and during the season that the Celtics bench was very weak and that their PG position was a massive point of weakness.

2. The Celtics played the same defense before and after Tom Thibodeau was associated with the team. He was a very good assistant coach but he was not solely responsible for the construction or design of that defense. He just helped in the coaching of it.

3. After the Gasol trade the Lakers were the favorite to win the tittle every year until Lebron ended up in Miami. Given they had Bynum, Kobe, Gasol, Odom, Ariza, Metta, Fisher, Farmar and some others during those years, it's pretty safe to say if you consider the Celtics stacked, LA was equally or even more stacked.

1. Link?

2. Which team plays better defense? Thibs Bulls or Doc's Clips? I'm watching the Clips right now and they can't defend a cold.

3. Ok, so both teams were stacked and played each other and ended up going one and one against each other. Is that the mark of a great coach? Going .500? And is this to say most coaches would have gone 0-2 in that scenario?

1. Do a google search yourself. I know Bob Ryan very famously along with I think Sam Smith, said the Celtics after the  Big Three were not good. They were just a couple of many.

2. Who cares who's team plays better defense right now. That doesn't change the fact the defense that they play are hybrid's off of the Riley/Van Gundy motion defense which both Doc and Thibs learned under Riley and Van Gundy. They both coach it very well.

3. Is being 1-1 coaching against the winningest coach in league history and being the only coach to beat a Phil Jackson coached team make you a bad coach? Pretty sure winning a championship and doing so against the very best of competition makes you a very good coach at least and maybe a great one given you were able to bring that same excellent competition, Jackson and the Lakers, all the way to the 4th quarter of a seventh game in another series.

[Boris Badenov]

I'm going to write the Doc vs Jackson 2008 story from a Laker's perspective.

In 2008, the LA Lakers were an underpowered team led by Kobe and Gasol. Bynum was injured, Ariza was recovering from prior injuries, and Odom was somewhat inconsistent.

On the other hand, the much despised Boston Celtics were stacked at just about every position, lead by a Hall of Fame trio of Pierce, Garnett, and Allen.

Despite all their strengths, Kobe, under Phil Jackson's direction, hassled the formidable 66 win squad to a full 6 game series, before collapsing in the game 6 closer against a much more intensive defense squad, trained by Tom Thibodeau, one the league's best defensive coordinator.

In the year which followed, the Lakers eliminated their weaknesses and played a near flawless post-season, getting the most out of Odom and Ariza, winning their first title, after Shaquille O'Neil had left the team. Unfortunately, due to injuries, the Celtics did not meet the Lakers in the finals. That would have been the re-match of the ages.

And although the 2010 finals went to the Lakers, it was a much less satisfying win as it was mainly determined from the free throw line, and not in the heat of game 5, where only Kobe was scoring and no one else. In addition, key Celtics players were injured but least the Lakers did get to see a much less effective Paul Pierce in the fourth quarter of game 7 due to the defenses of a Metta World Peace.

1. The Celtics were never considered stacked in 2008. Most pundits, said before and during the season that the Celtics bench was very weak and that their PG position was a massive point of weakness.

1. Link?

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/playoffs2008/news/story?page=FinalsFactors-Bench

[Boris Badenov]

Also here are the ESPN expert picks from that series (9 of 10 had the Lakers).

http://www.bostonsportsmedia.com/2008/05/celtics-return-to-finals

Vegas had the Lakers as a 2-1 favorite.

[Ogaju]

Also here are the ESPN expert picks from that series (9 of 10 had the Lakers).

http://www.bostonsportsmedia.com/2008/05/celtics-return-to-finals

Vegas had the Lakers as a 2-1 favorite.

I don't blame them. No one knew the BIG THREE could overcome the coaching of Doc Rivers. The Celtics were saved by 'forced adjustments'.

Rivers was forced by injuries and fouls to play folks that would have never seen the court, and they delivered in spades.

[D.o.s.]

Wait. Did you just say the Clippers are overachieving against expectations? You just said that didn't you?

Context. They (the clippers) were expected to win 45 games this season according to a formula (the expected win-loss formula, actually). The C's, for example, were expected to win 30 games.

You can read more about it here:
http://www.basketball-reference.com/about/glossary.html#wins_pyth

Actually, that's saying the Clippers are underachieving.  That they should have won 45 games at this point in the season, when they've only won 42.

Whoops! TP for the correction, that's the first time i've used that stat for a season in progress, didn't even occur to me that it would work like that.

[Eja117]

Ok. While we're engaging in revisionism and then asking people to look up links to support said revisionism let's talk about reality for a minute.

Yes sometimes Vegas screws up. They thought Brady would lose a few Super Bowls too.

Yes there is a link here where four out of five guys thought the other team in the finals had a better bench.  I'm not sure how "the other team in the finals has a better bench" suddenly equates to "not stacked".

The Celts had three all stars. One of which was widely considered one of the best players in the game, the other was one of the best shooters that ever lived. Is that common? Is it common for teams to have three top notch all stars? Were they not considered to be in the mix for the championship? Did it really surprise people when they went to the finals?

In the mean time does this mean we all consider Spoelstra a great coach? I mean look at what he had to work with. Just three all stars, but look at his bench and pg position. How can a guy be expected to win a ring with Mario Chalmers and Norris Cole? Udonis Haslem as one of your best bigs? I mean how did he do it? And he won two rings and went to two finals. So he must be like twice the coach Doc is, right? Nobody could expect him to have done what he did.

[JHTruth]

Also here are the ESPN expert picks from that series (9 of 10 had the Lakers).

http://www.bostonsportsmedia.com/2008/05/celtics-return-to-finals

Vegas had the Lakers as a 2-1 favorite.

I don't blame them. No one knew the BIG THREE could overcome the coaching of Doc Rivers. The Celtics were saved by 'forced adjustments'.

Rivers was forced by injuries and fouls to play folks that would have never seen the court, and they delivered in spades.

Good heavens, are you still trying to win?

What other coach has gotten more out of Rajon Rondo, one of the toughest players to coach in the league? Who turned Perk from doughboy scrub to championship Center?

Who else had PP and Ray Allen playing elite defense? Who was James Posey before 2008? He made the careers of BBD and Thibs.

Guy is a great coach, and some of the people on this thread are RIDICULOUS.

[Boris Badenov]

Ok. While we're engaging in revisionism and then asking people to look up links to support said revisionism let's talk about reality for a minute.

Yes sometimes Vegas screws up. They thought Brady would lose a few Super Bowls too.

Yes there is a link here where four out of five guys thought the other team in the finals had a better bench.  I'm not sure how "the other team in the finals has a better bench" suddenly equates to "not stacked".

The Celts had three all stars. One of which was widely considered one of the best players in the game, the other was one of the best shooters that ever lived. Is that common? Is it common for teams to have three top notch all stars? Were they not considered to be in the mix for the championship? Did it really surprise people when they went to the finals?

In the mean time does this mean we all consider Spoelstra a great coach? I mean look at what he had to work with. Just three all stars, but look at his bench and pg position. How can a guy be expected to win a ring with Mario Chalmers and Norris Cole? Udonis Haslem as one of your best bigs? I mean how did he do it? And he won two rings and went to two finals. So he must be like twice the coach Doc is, right? Nobody could expect him to have done what he did.