RealGM

That's not very encouraging...what it does mean is that we only have 11 some games where it's been that close of a game, we usually beat other teams handily or gain control and win going away.

In Doc's other winning season, his first as the C's head coach 2004-2005 we were something like 11-7 (6-1 post trade deadline).

Now the last couple losses can be attributed to poor free throw shooting and not being able to grab those elusive key defensive rebounds.

But overall, is our close game failures a representation of Doc Rivers, or our players unsure of who to go to down the stretch of ball games?

Mostly the former.

Late game coaching is not just offensive plays coming out of timeouts.

Then again, it could just mean we mostly only lose in very close games, because we're so good, and Doc's doing such a good job! [pokes a fake smile into cheeks]

wigglestrue wrote:Then again, it could just mean we mostly only lose in very close games, because we're so good, and Doc's doing such a good job! [pokes a fake smile into cheeks]

ORRRRRRRRRR.... Doc can't coach his way out of a paper bag when it comes to close games!
[equally fake smirk]

One question to pose.... where was our 7' shot blocker in the 4th quarter?.... (I noticed Nellie had his in the game!)

Yes, it's true. The C's have a better scoring differential than any NBA team this decade. Therefore, they are winning by too many points.

One question to pose.... where was our 7' shot blocker in the 4th quarter?.... (I noticed Nellie had his in the game!)

Yea coach, you hit the nail on the head. Where was our 7 footer who committed 4 turnovers in 20 minutes, hadn't blocked a shot all game, and is coming off an injury? If only Perkins had played the Celtics would have won the game.

The Doc haters are such a joke. Remind me of the guys who call sports radio and bag on Francona because if only he had pinch hit Lou Merloni or some other scrub, the Sox would have won.

If the C's were gonna play Perkins last night down the stretch, who should they have taken out? KG, Pierce, and Allen are all playing. We know that. Last night, Doc went with Tony, who was playing great and is the only guy on the team remotely capable of sticking BD, and Rondo, who is the teams only legit ball-handler and, oh yeah, is also nasty.

So I want to know from all the second-guessers who think playing Perk would have changed the game, who should he have played over? Rondo or TA? Maybe KG? Come on Coach...lets hear how Doc should have played it.

I'm with BLJ, Perk actually is approaching the "sucks" stage. After 5 years in the NBA with daily professional coaching, he still brings the ball down every time he catches it under the basket. Must be dumber than a leather ball. It's great to shoot 50% when every attempt is standing under the hoop. Powe better be the starting center soon, that's Doc's real test.

5-6 in 3 pts or less? It's about right.

Close games are coin tosses.

Theres more "broken" with your reasoning than just your "lefty jumper" my friend...

Nellie simply outcoached Doc last night...Biedrens was the difference maker in this game...and he did so when inserted without any interferance...

We were outboarded by 12 overall....and by eight on the offensive glass.....Garnett needed some help...and he is far more effective IMO when he has it...

Might I add that while Perk was out there the C's were + five....while Tony was out there we were - 8....Posey, another of Doc's favorite small ball additives, was -12.... Golden State simply got too many second chances....Sure... we missed free throws....but we created opportunities for Golden State (they took twelve more shots) by not matching up and blocking out inside....

Again I ask "Where was Perk in crunchtime?" You dont have to be a "Doc hater" to ask yourself that question?

And if not Perk... then (at least) where was Powe (+5) then?

You know what BLJ? I think those who point their fingers in another posters direction and cry "Doc hater" are even a bigger joke...and I wouldn't waste the price of a phone call on any such BS as you described.....havent we heard that "tired" old argument before?

I agree, I don't understand why Doc thinks KG is D-12. He's not a Center rebounding machine he's a PF rebounding machine at 220ish pounds.

KG got a lot of rebounds but he can't clog the lane and fight off two guys if you want him to get all your rebounds.

You need at least one other guy in the post battling so KG can fight for rebounds one on one instead of two on one.

I think in crunch time we had Pierce as our PF. Give me Powe on AL Harrington and we get the same defense + rebounding prowness in the post.

I know TA was a diffrence maker defensively on B.Diddy so I think having him at PG and having Pierce bring up the ball would of been better for us that way we'd have a more balanced lineup of:

TA,Allen,Pierce,Garnett,Powe

instead of

Rondo,TA,Allen,Pierce, Garnett

u do realize that KGs won the rebounding title the past 5 seasons or so?

but his numbers have dropped this season, mostly due to help he has w/perk, pp, rondo, powe, etc. he never been on this good of a rebounding team before.

& he's still coming off a injury that might hamper some of his rebounding ability.

& btw, biedrins is a beast on the boards. he's a very underrated player. i dont feel too bad that they outrebounded us w/him on the team. i DID feel bad when jamison had like 20 rebs or w/e. that was inexcusable, but biedrins is a freakin beast.

Yeah he did get the most rpg for the past 4 seasons. But that's why I said KG will get your rebounds but if you want him to get all the rebounds [i.e. dominate on the boards and give us the rebounding advantage] you need to put another rebounder next to him so he can fight one on one rather then two on one.

D-12 and Shaq can fight 2 on 1 because they're huge, KG is also a marvel athletically and with his reach but he can't clog the entire lane.

KG the past 4 seasons was in the situation that D-12 is in right now, it's time for him to win titles not RPG accolades.

Theres more "broken" with your reasoning than just your "lefty jumper" my friend...

Nellie simply outcoached Doc last night...Biedrens was the difference maker in this game...and he did so when inserted without any interferance...

We were outboarded by 12 overall....and by eight on the offensive glass.....Garnett needed some help...and he is far more effective IMO when he has it...

Might I add that while Perk was out there the C's were + five....while Tony was out there we were - 8....Posey, another of Doc's favorite small ball additives, was -12.... Golden State simply got too many second chances....Sure... we missed free throws....but we created opportunities for Golden State (they took twelve more shots) by not matching up and blocking out inside....

Again I ask "Where was Perk in crunchtime?" You dont have to be a "Doc hater" to ask yourself that question?

And if not Perk... then (at least) where was Powe (+5) then?

You know what BLJ? I think those who point their fingers in another posters direction and cry "Doc hater" are even a bigger joke...and I wouldn't waste the price of a phone call on any such BS as you described.....havent we heard that "tired" old argument before?

Thanks for the "bombed" out reasoning. The entire basis of your argument is the +/- stat. Going on your same reasoning, Nelson was a dope for having Davis in the game (-2), and Kendrick Perkins (4 pts and 5 rebounds, no blocked shots, 4 turnovers in 20 minutes) should have been playing over Tony (18 points, 4 rebounds, 3 assists in 23 minutes) because his +/- stat was better. Eddie House had a +10, and Rondo had a -12, was Doc a moron for not playing Eddie House more?

And once again you ask "where was Perk or even Powe during crunchtime?" And I will once again respond, who comes out? You seem to think that if Doc wanted to, he could just put Perk in and play with 6 players.

Say you take TA out and put Perk in, who guards Davis? What would have happened if you took Tony out and Perk goes in, and then BD goes to work against Rondo or Ray? I know one thing that would have happened, you would have been on this thread today, crying about how Doc is a moron for not keeping TA on Baron.

The situation was like this, the C's are gonna play the big three at crunch time. Rondo is almost just as necessary, because him being out leaves them without a real PG on the floor. There is one spot left. Now what would be your next priority? I would say making sure you have your best defender on the floor covering Baron. That would be TA. Now if TA was having one of his brutal games, I might say well, lets roll with Rondo or Ray on BD, and get Perk or Powe out there to slow down Biedrins on the glass. But TA was playing pretty well, Perkins was kinda sucking, so its a no-brainer. You may disagree, but at worst its a 50-50 roll of the dice, and it all depends on how the players play. Don't see how that would be Doc being outcoached by Nelson.

The only time Perk belonged in that game last night was when GS had that lug Webber in.

jfs1000d wrote:5-6 in 3 pts or less? It's about right.

Close games are coin tosses.

Given that the Cs have stormed back from deficits only to lose, stormed back to win, held off rallies, and succumbed to rallies -- yeah, I'd say that overall they're having pretty average results in this regard.

BrokenLeftyJumper wrote:The only time Perk belonged in that game last night was when GS had that lug Webber in.

It's pretty hard to help the situation when you are riding Doc's bench....

I would think focusing on containing Harington was just as important.... Had Perk been in there on Biens then Garnett could have better neutralized some of Harington's agressive play...and cut down on the second shot efforts for them and took away some of those easy buckets.....thats what hurt us last night.... it was that rebounding deficit that hurt the most!...we can't continue to give that up in these close playoff type games....we are just not that good defensively without some bigman to help KG....

Tony Allen is playing well right now....no question... but that shouldn't be the emphasis when we are not gaining ground with him in there...but if he needed to be in there to contain Davis, maybe it was Ray Ray who should have sat down?...

You know back in the day, I can remember K.C Jones playing Tony's role of defensive stopper....and it was the shooter, Bill Sharman who sat out when K.C was needed to play "D" in fact, most times Cousy sat too in favor of the tandem of K.C. and Sam Jones when defence was the key...The team kicked it up a gear too!......Red probably would have substituted Tony and Ray back and forth.... defence / offence....IMO you need to play to your strengths..... and shore up your weaknesses....It was pretty apparent we were getting beat on the defensive boards....and IMO, that's what hurt our cause the most last night....

Still 41-11 is pretty darn good... but I'd like to see us do better in these close games and I'm a bit worried about a Doc coached team in the playoffs..... I still remember what happened a few years ago with Indy....