Harison wrote:Bad-Thoma wrote:If he played Paul 32 minutes and we lost the usual suspects would be criticizing Doc for not playing Paul enough. At least give Doc some credit for holding himself accountable, he's just doing his best to win games but he's not going to be right all the time.
Exactly, Celtics lost simply because KG is out, defence sucks
and Ray with Rondo had terrible night. If game would be blowout, of course Doc would have rested starters more, but it was close and there was a chance to pull it off, would you sit your best player in such case and definitely lose instead? I dont think so.
I think that a lot more went into that loss than K.G. being out. The way that they played that game they might have actually lost with K.G. out there. Doc really lost all focus on the big picture in that game. A few observations
1. Garnett being here would have not mattered with regards to Paul's minutes, or would have been a minimal issue. The only backups Paul has on this squad are Ray and Bill Walker. Tony Allen is NOT a small forward, and neither is Scal.
2. Doc evidently forgot that Rondo is our best point guard. Rajon came out with 1:30 to go in the 3rd after picking up his fourth foul. He didn't get back into the game until there were under 3 minutes to play. That is INEXCUSABLE. How many times does it have to play out on the court that NO ONE is a better option than him down the stretch run of games? Eddie hit a couple of three and Doc "forgot" that Eddie can't dribble, play make, or defend. Paul and Ray are "dribble challenged" as well, which was put on full display at the end. No Rondo = no offense when Detroit put their stretch run lineup in. They went after Paul and Ray BIGTIME. Eddie "spacing the floor" didn't mean much. Did it?
If Doc's goal was to assure a loss AND to get Rondo looking over his shoulder, then he did a smashing job.
3. The Celtics needed to crank the pace of the game UP, and that did not happen. The main culprit behind this was Doc, and it wasn't just an "in game decision". Doc has evidently put ZERO emphasis on one of the most basic methods of KEEPING the pace of a game up:
INBOUND MADE BASKETS SOON AS POSSIBLE!!!!!!!!
There are two guys on this team who do that - Scal and K.G. (who is just starting to pick up the knack). Scal learned it from playing on the Scott/Kidd Nets, and Kevin seemed to be picking up the habit from Scal. Scal doesn't just get the ball out of bounds quickly, sometimes he will actually get himself out of bounds, when a teammates grabs the ball, so that it can be passed to him so that he can inbound it ASAP. THAT is how you help to crank the pace of the game up.
We are supposedly trying to push the pace of the game up, yet whenever our opponents hit a shot you have a "designated inbounder" WALKING to the ball, WALKING the ball out of bounds, and in NO hurry to get the ball back in. This allows the defense to get back EASILY, and even INVITES them to set up a full court press. That garbage approach SLOWS a game down, and is just one basic example of what actually happens. Doc likes to TALK about "uptempo basketball", but the fact of the matter is that he coaches slow down, halfcourt basketball, and always has, despite the skill set of the team. Seriously, didn't anyone notice that when Veal went down our pace slowed to a crawl?