He is growing up before our eyes

[GratefulCs]

He's a system coach, and where I'm from, that's not a compliment, it's a subtle dig which means "not up for the big time".

The best coaches get the best talent and make it work, they don't compromise the talent for the system.

He's small time.

so what you're saying is "he aint a BIG BALLER"

hehe

[aefgogreen]

I think the main reason why the Celtics have been so successful under Stevens is that he does what gives the team the best chance to win.  Now that might sound obvious, but that's not what coaches always do.  Often times, they try to play to their teams strengths.  However, sometimes what your team does best is not what gives you the best chance of winning. 

The reason why teams shoot so many threes now is not necessarily because they are great 3 point shooting teams.  It's because this is the clearest path to victory.  Stevens has been able to pick up on more subtleties than simply shooting more 3s.  And I think this is why he outshines his competition.

[kozlodoev]

He still looks 6'1 to me. Strange.

[Greenbean]

He's a system coach, and where I'm from, that's not a compliment, it's a subtle dig which means "not up for the big time".

The best coaches get the best talent and make it work, they don't compromise the talent for the system.

He's small time.

Care to expand on that? Assuming youre stuck on the the repirt that Stevens didnt want Cousins at the deadline? The report that cant even be confirmed?

Bill Bellichick, Greg Popovich...2 of the best system coaches around who built winning cultures by focusing on guys that love to compete and dont undermine the teams goals at any time.

Anyone can assemble an all star roster filled with A Holes. And MAYBE you turn that into one championship. Byt its proven in almost every sport if youre trying to build a championship team that cam compete for 10-20 years, which is clearly what Dannys goal is, then you need a coach who is consistent, and puts the teams success as overarching goal over everything else.

Brad is a pragmatist, and his players respect him, the best players in the league rave about him.

Brad Stevens being "small time" is such a lazy, outdated take. He has proven he can coach NBA players and the stars around the league WANT to play for HIM. Im glad hes selective.

Comparing American Football and Basketball is like comparing apples and oranges, and Pop is most certainly not a system coach, unless you think Duncan, Ginobili, Parker or Leonard are system guys. In fact, Pop changes his system basically every season.

A much better comparison is soccer, and in soccer, I've seen that approach hundreds of times already, and it never ever works. Even Pep Guardiola, who is held up as the prime example of a succesful system coach, is on record saying that he doesn't think he's a system coach, and that talent wins.

Now, granted, it's still an unfair comparison, given that it's a cross-sports reference and all, but then again, how many times has this approach worked in the NBA before?

MJ was an ****, so was Kobe. Bird, Magic, Shaq, Garnett, all ****s. Ask people on this forum about Lebron or DWade, they will tell you they're ****s.

Who cares? This is not a freaking kindergarten, it's the NBA, and the best talent wins championships.

This is such a late response but now that I know you were talking about a system of play I disagree with your take even more. By system I thought you were talking about culture and Stevens wanting a certain type of character and competitiveness. Basically he wants guys who prioritize basketball and winning.

As far as his on court system goes, I love their offense and approach. And once they get the talent that you are talking about all those open looks that get created in the "system" will be converted at a much higher rate.

But im very glad they are trying to build a winning culture here which makes a huge difference. Fostering a winning culture is the system I was talking about with Pop and Bellichick.

[biggs]

I love Steven's, but I would like to use this conversation to talk about something he could improve in his offense-

Big men on the perimeter-

I'm sure many of you have heard of the new blue print for a modern NBA team- if you haven't- it basically says you need a PG and big man that can shoot, and three interchangeable wings between them.

So, looking at our system compared to an established west coast offense-

You'll notice that when the big man gets the ball on the perimeter they actually look for a shot, whereas when the Celtics get the ball on the perimeter to their big man you can tell there's no chance they're shooting and the screens that they set are somewhat pointless. In order to create some space and actually get the other team's big man out on the perimeter our big men actually need to not only flirt with but actually take a shot when they get the ball.

Our guys just seem like they're going through the motions. Horford was able to add a 3-point shot to his repertoire, but it seemed like he only shot 3's when we needed a bucket, and not within the flow if the offense. Kelly was an ice cold killer when given room, but couldn't hit a contested shot to save his life (spacing).

So, I'm wondering- can we legitimize the big man as an offensive threat on the perimeter this season?

Any thoughts? Anyone else notice this from us?

[dmopower]

CBS is light years ahead of our last coach.  And thats all I got to say about that.

[Chris22]

Brad is good.
He took the Bad News Bears to the Eastern Conference Finals.

[Chris22]

CBS is light years ahead of our last coach.  And thats all I got to say about that.

You got that right.

[Somebody]

I love Steven's, but I would like to use this conversation to talk about something he could improve in his offense-

Big men on the perimeter-

I'm sure many of you have heard of the new blue print for a modern NBA team- if you haven't- it basically says you need a PG and big man that can shoot, and three interchangeable wings between them.

So, looking at our system compared to an established west coast offense-

You'll notice that when the big man gets the ball on the perimeter they actually look for a shot, whereas when the Celtics get the ball on the perimeter to their big man you can tell there's no chance they're shooting and the screens that they set are somewhat pointless. In order to create some space and actually get the other team's big man out on the perimeter our big men actually need to not only flirt with but actually take a shot when they get the ball.

Our guys just seem like they're going through the motions. Horford was able to add a 3-point shot to his repertoire, but it seemed like he only shot 3's when we needed a bucket, and not within the flow if the offense. Kelly was an ice cold killer when given room, but couldn't hit a contested shot to save his life (spacing).

So, I'm wondering- can we legitimize the big man as an offensive threat on the perimeter this season?

Any thoughts? Anyone else notice this from us?

I do. However Horford is a legitimate threat from outside, he's just not looking for buckets but his man has to stay glued to him or he'll pay. Not too concerned since it'll only be Horford and Morris doing it, with the former being an all star center and the latter a gunner.

[GreenWarrior]

brad has yet to prove he can coach the NBA superstar ego. x's, o's and philosophy are such a miniscule part of what makes a great NBA coach.

need an example? phil Jackson won a championship with the same players del harris couldn't get anything out of and were ready to blow that team up because kobe and shaq "couldn't get on the same page".

the knicks over the last few seasons have been running the triangle offense...with no success. but "phil Jackson was so successful because of triangle"?!!?!? no there were NBA superstars running that offense, that's all.

we lost to a team in the playoffs this yr. coached by tyronn lue. should we induct him now because he beat the great brad stevens? or should we acknowledge that the cavs just had 2 NBA superstars to our none?

how a coach manages to get the NBA superstars to play together is the criteria in which we need to asses what makes a coach great in the NBA.

[Boris Badenov]

Has there ever been a big game or playoff series in which Brad's coaching was viewed as a detriment, either overall or in terms of specific decisions?

How many players have come to the Celtics and started under-performing?

How many players have come to the Celtics and played the best ball of their careers?

How many opposing players have offered unsolicited praise of Stevens?

How many coaches have exceeded expectations by taking an underdog team deep into both the NBA playoffs and NCAA tournament?

[rochrist]

He's a system coach, and where I'm from, that's not a compliment, it's a subtle dig which means "not up for the big time".

The best coaches get the best talent and make it work, they don't compromise the talent for the system.

He's small time.

You're an idiot.

[GreenWarrior]

Has there ever been a big game or playoff series in which Brad's coaching was viewed as a detriment, either overall or in terms of specific decisions?

How many players have come to the Celtics and started under-performing?

How many players have come to the Celtics and played the best ball of their careers?

How many opposing players have offered unsolicited praise of Stevens?

How many coaches have exceeded expectations by taking an underdog team deep into both the NBA playoffs and NCAA tournament?

there's a lot of contributing factors to the "success" of the Celtics. if we're putting it all on Stevens then he deserves the credit for this team losing badly in the east finals.

or we could look at it realistically and say sure Stevens has had his share in the Celtics winning but a big part of their success is the east is weak and the Celtics are one of the few teams that seem to have some sense of focus that 90% of the rest of the east don't.

this team easily could've been an 8 seed this yr. if a couple other teams lived up to the hype made before last season started.

[Boris Badenov]

Has there ever been a big game or playoff series in which Brad's coaching was viewed as a detriment, either overall or in terms of specific decisions?

How many players have come to the Celtics and started under-performing?

How many players have come to the Celtics and played the best ball of their careers?

How many opposing players have offered unsolicited praise of Stevens?

How many coaches have exceeded expectations by taking an underdog team deep into both the NBA playoffs and NCAA tournament?

there's a lot of contributing factors to the "success" of the Celtics. if we're putting it all on Stevens then he deserves the credit for this team losing badly in the east finals.

or we could look at it realistically and say sure Stevens has had his share in the Celtics winning but a big part of their success is the east is weak and the Celtics are one of the few teams that seem to have some sense of focus that 90% of the rest of the east don't.

this team easily could've been an 8 seed this yr. if a couple other teams lived up to the hype made before last season started.

Where exactly is anyone "putting it all on Stevens" and saying there aren't other "contributing factors to the success of the Celtics"?

Your entire post is a non sequitur.

[Ilikesports17]

Has there ever been a big game or playoff series in which Brad's coaching was viewed as a detriment, either overall or in terms of specific decisions?

How many players have come to the Celtics and started under-performing?

How many players have come to the Celtics and played the best ball of their careers?

How many opposing players have offered unsolicited praise of Stevens?

How many coaches have exceeded expectations by taking an underdog team deep into both the NBA playoffs and NCAA tournament?

Brad Stevens has not taken an underdog deep into the NBA playoffs.