Good Sports Guy article

[greenmachine_2849]

Thanks Falstaff,
people need to realize that a championship rests on one win or loss alone and this is what a great coach can do for you.

True enough. I have never said Doc Rivers is a great coach, and there are probably coaches out there that, were they the Celtics' head coach, might have guided the Celtics in the playoffs a little more smoothly.

However, I am just sick and tired of the mentality of some of the more extreme posters on this board that, if a Phil Jackson or whoever was the head coach instead of Doc Rivers, this team would be 8-0 currently in the playoffs. That Ray Allen would suddenly be playing like he was 25 years old again. That Garnett would be a dominating offensive force inside. The truth of the matter is, these players are who they are, regardless of whoever the coach is.

I cut Doc Rivers more slack than most, partly because it is SO easy to monday morning quarterback the coaching performance. There is no one correct way to coach a game, and every decision that comes up short can quickly be criticized as the wrong decision, with one of the infinite paths not chosen being offered up as the obvious right decision. People complain about Sam Cassell being the back-up point guard in the playoffs, but wasn't that exactly why he was brought in for? I guarantee that if Rivers went with House instead of Cassell, and he had an unproductive game, the same posters currently screaming for playing time for House would be screaming for the veteran point guard that Ainge spent so much time trying to get to the Celtics precisely for the playoffs. There are literally hundreds of decisions in a playoff series and, whether it is playing PJ Brown quality mintues or resting the Big Three at the end of the 3rd quarter, you can always come up with an alternative that can never be proven wrong and offer it up as evidence that Rivers is a bad coach. Unless the Celtics win, it is really a no-win situation for Doc Rivers (pardon the pun).

[Scoonie]

This article was right on the money. I don't see how anyone can legitimately argue that.

Good thing is that a lot of the mistakes were at least partially corrected in tonight's game.

[Ed Pinkney]

A few things.

First, I agree Simmons style is getting a bit old and I don't really care about all the pop culture nonsense he writes about. I also don't know enough (or really care about to be honest) baseball and American football to know if what he writes is any good. But I do believe he has a very good feel for basketball and how it should be played. So regardless of all the crap, his NBA articles are still very good in my opinion and are also usually pretty spot on.

Second, I think this is a good example of that writing. It sums up what has been going wrong with this team in the playoffs, and probably since Cassell arrived to be honest. I dont think you can argue with the fact that him completely changing rotations that won us 66 games and had the best defence and point differential in the league has had a huge impact on the team come playoff time. Particularly when they have never played a playoff game together and were relying on the chemistry they had built up since training camp.

Third, I generally read most of his NBA articles and he certainly did not turn pro-Doc this season. He said things along the lines that with this team, a lot of his problems as a coach were no longer necessarily problems. Picking a rotation and sticking with it (this roster was pretty easy to organise), defending pick and rolls (Garnett known for being one of the best at it), jerking around player minutes (particularly Rondo as there was no other option but to play him big minutes), dodgy game plans (we were up by twenty so often, gameplans weren't that necessary).

Fourth, I agree that players like Pierce and Allen are good enough that they should be able to sort their problems out, but it up to a coach to put them in the best possible way to do so. And I think Pierce and Allen are prime examples of not being used properly in the playoffs. I also agree that Garnett should have been tearing the Hawks apart but the road games the whole team settled for jump shots then got out worked and hustled.

This article sums up my own issues with the two different Celtics teams that we have been seeing in the playoffs. It was a good read.

[BrokenLeftyJumper]

I cut Doc Rivers more slack than most, partly because it is SO easy to monday morning quarterback the coaching performance. There is no one correct way to coach a game, and every decision that comes up short can quickly be criticized as the wrong decision, with one of the infinite paths not chosen being offered up as the obvious right decision. People complain about Sam Cassell being the back-up point guard in the playoffs, but wasn't that exactly why he was brought in for? I guarantee that if Rivers went with House instead of Cassell, and he had an unproductive game, the same posters currently screaming for playing time for House would be screaming for the veteran point guard that Ainge spent so much time trying to get to the Celtics precisely for the playoffs. There are literally hundreds of decisions in a playoff series and, whether it is playing PJ Brown quality mintues or resting the Big Three at the end of the 3rd quarter, you can always come up with an alternative that can never be proven wrong and offer it up as evidence that Rivers is a bad coach. Unless the Celtics win, it is really a no-win situation for Doc Rivers (pardon the pun).

I wholeheartedly agree, especially about the Cassell/Eddie House part. After the one Detroit game in mid-season where Eddie House got ripped a few times by Lindsey Hunter and the C's lost the game, this board had like 7 different threads along the lines of "We need a backup PG/House sucks/Damon Stoudamire?/ Trade for Cassell/ Sign Gary Payton." So I refuse to believe that the people who are crying for Eddie House would not be doing the same Doc hating if Eddie had one bad game in the playoffs, and Cassell did not see any PT. People on this board would be pulling their hair out praying for Doc to play Cassell the first time Eddie House hit rim on a three pointer.

[MyInsatiableOne]

-= original quote snipped =-



True enough. I have never said Doc Rivers is a great coach, and there are probably coaches out there that, were they the Celtics' head coach, might have guided the Celtics in the playoffs a little more smoothly.

However, I am just sick and tired of the mentality of some of the more extreme posters on this board that, if a Phil Jackson or whoever was the head coach instead of Doc Rivers, this team would be 8-0 currently in the playoffs. That Ray Allen would suddenly be playing like he was 25 years old again. That Garnett would be a dominating offensive force inside. The truth of the matter is, these players are who they are, regardless of whoever the coach is.

I cut Doc Rivers more slack than most, partly because it is SO easy to monday morning quarterback the coaching performance. There is no one correct way to coach a game, and every decision that comes up short can quickly be criticized as the wrong decision, with one of the infinite paths not chosen being offered up as the obvious right decision. People complain about Sam Cassell being the back-up point guard in the playoffs, but wasn't that exactly why he was brought in for? I guarantee that if Rivers went with House instead of Cassell, and he had an unproductive game, the same posters currently screaming for playing time for House would be screaming for the veteran point guard that Ainge spent so much time trying to get to the Celtics precisely for the playoffs. There are literally hundreds of decisions in a playoff series and, whether it is playing PJ Brown quality mintues or resting the Big Three at the end of the 3rd quarter, you can always come up with an alternative that can never be proven wrong and offer it up as evidence that Rivers is a bad coach. Unless the Celtics win, it is really a no-win situation for Doc Rivers (pardon the pun).

A perfect encapsulation of the irrationality of the Doc haters.

Also, since Doc coached well last night and we won, I bet Simmons is back on the bandwagon now. He's such a frontrunning fan...

[MyInsatiableOne]

This article was right on the money. I don't see how anyone can legitimately argue that.

Good thing is that a lot of the mistakes were at least partially corrected in tonight's game.

Because Simmons' next article will probably be about how Doc made a great coaching adjustment and Rondo busted out and KG stepped up, Pierce was aggressive, etc...basically refuting everything from this article and almost pretending like he never wrote this crap.

Simmons=frontrunning C's fan (like a lot of you here on this board)