Doc Makes Same Mistake Twice
A Daily Babble Production
With 50.8 seconds left in last night's game between the Celtics and Bulls, Paul Pierce strode to the foul line to try to slice into a five-point Chicago lead.
After he made the first one, Doc Rivers made a decision that seemed odd at the moment and infuriating half a minute later. The Celtics' coach replaced Kendrick Perkins - only his biggest player and best available rebounder - with Stephon Marbury, a 6-2 guard with no known propensity for playing defense or rebounding. Bringing Steph into the game for defensive purposes didn't make a lot of sense, and neither did having him on the floor for a potential rebound off a Pierce miss.
Pierce made the foul shot, creating a one-possession game in the final minute. Vinny Del Negro then did the Celtics a huge favor: He called for time. This provided Doc a full minute to undo the prior substitution and get his center back on the floor. At the time, Bulls center Brad Miller had only posted 21 points and 13 rebounds, four of which came at the offensive end. Pedestrian, I know. It wasn't like he was killing the Celts or anything.
No dice. The Celtics rolled back onto the floor with Marbury, Rajon Rondo, Eddie House, Ray Allen and Paul Pierce. That's a 6-foot-7 small forward, a 6-5 off-guard and three other guards 6-2 or shorter. Miller stands seven feet tall.
You can see where this goes from here.
The Celtics play 16 seconds of good defense, led by Pierce forcing Derrick Rose into a contested jumper from the left elbow, which he misses. And Miller rebounds. With 33 seconds to play.
Miller dishes to John Salmons, who will hereafter be known in this space as Unstoppable John Salmons. Unstoppable John Salmons lays the ball in the basket. Instead of having the ball with a shot to tie and a chance for two more possessions without fouling, the Celtics trail by five with less than 30 seconds to play.
This would be annoying, agitating even, if it happened once. But it hasn't. It would be frustrating if it had happened twice, which it has in the last month alone. But given that this is at the minimum the third time such a coaching move has come back to bite the Celtics in the final minute of a game during the Doc era, it's downright nauseating.
Due to the combination of my current level of aggravation and the fact that I'm not sure I have a better way to explain it than I did then, here's what I wrote the day after the Celtics lost in Utah on February 19:
- One major coaching issue for me in this game: the personnel on the floor for Andrei Kirilenko's second free-throw attempt with eight seconds to play. The Celtics were down three at this point with no timeouts left. Barring a miracle, a miss followed by a defensive rebound and a three-pointer was going to be this team's only realistic shot to tie the game. In theory, that makes grabbing the rebound off any potential Kirilenko miss rather important. With Brian Scalabrine fouled out and Garnett injured, Doc Rivers' three choices for the two low blocks spots appeared to be Large Baby, Leon Powe and Kendrick Perkins. He went with...drumroll please...Paul Pierce and Ray Allen. Those two were on the floor along with Rajon Rondo, Eddie House and Gabe Pruitt. I understand the idea of looking to maximize perimeter shooting, but none of that is relevant if the team can't gain possession of the ball while still trailing by only one possession. You know the rest by now. The ball comes off to Allen's side. He fails to get the rebound. Ronnie Brewer does and hits two foul shots to douse the Celtics' hopes.
The most infuriating part? This isn't the first time a Doc team has lost a game in that sort of situation. It happened against the Magic back on November 13, 2006. In his most prominent anti-Doc rant of that nightmare season, Bill Simmons described that situation in vivid and painful detail:
Eventually, Orlando regained the lead and clinched the game on one of those "team grabs an offensive rebound off a missed free throw, then gets the backbreaking layup off a bad defensive switch" sequences that have defined the Doc era. Following the game, Doc blamed Pierce for failing to box out on the missed free throw, which was interesting for two reasons. First, Pierce DID box out. I recorded the game on TiVo. The ball just bounced over his head. It happens. And second, instead of putting in two rebounders with Trevor Ariza at the line (a poor free throw shooter), Doc went in the other direction and yanked Kendrick Perkins (our tallest guy) for Ryan Gomes (who's 6-foot-7), leaving two small forwards on the low block to grab a potential Ariza miss with less than 90 seconds to play. I mentioned that he's a career 60 percent FT shooter, right? The important thing to remember is that the whole thing was Pierce's fault because he was too short to grab the rebound. Whatever.
This isn't to say the Celtics win the game last night if Doc substitutes before the free throw. The team still had just eight seconds and needed a trey just to tie the game. But at least the Celts would have likely had a shot.
Same deal once again. Making a three-pointer is far from a cinch in this league, so it seems unfair to allege that Doc cost the team the game. There were plenty of other concerns that got the Celtics to that point, including their inability to guard Unstoppable John Salmons, the trouble caused by Brad Miller all night before the back-breaking rebound, the fact that they couldn't keep Tyrus Thomas off the foul line early on and the realities of playing shorthanded, to name a few. There is always a chance that Perk doesn't get the rebound if he is on the floor. There's no guarantee that the team even ties much less wins the game if it gets the ball back in that spot. But there's a much higher chance of success in that situation than there is trailing by five in the final half-minute.
With a timeout left at that point and Miller on the court, having Marbury on the floor for the defensive possession served no purpose. If Rivers wanted extra outside shooting, he could have made the switch at the stoppage after the Celtics got the ball back.
I understand that three games in three seasons isn't a whole lot. But it's a mistake that seems easily preventable, if not the first time, then on every subsequent occasion. Since it has recurred, it's hard not to worry about this sort of thing costing the Celtics in an even bigger spot down the road.
Doc commented after the game (hat tip to my pal Lee) that referee Bill Kennedy goaded him during the timeout, and I've got no reason not to trust Doc's account of events. So we'll skip the obligatory screed here about how unacceptable it is to pick up a tech and give the other team a free point in that spot under any circumstances that come even close to qualifying as "normal."
But so long as he was going to get thrown out, it might as well have happened 30 seconds earlier.
40 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
you and Rich Levine are on the same wavelength
http://newengland.comcastsportsnet.com/wickedgoodsports/celtics/docs-curious-substitution/
"We few, we happy few, we band of brothers" Henry V
Playing small ball in that situation is dumb anyways.
Its not like having 4 guards and a small forward actually helps you get a good three point shot off either. What, all 5 are gonna stand around the three point line? That’s just not good spacing.
Perk was exhausted
I could actually see it in mid 4th that he didn’t move his feet well.
and he sat him down and it was ok for a litle bit, b/c Chicago did the stupid thing to bringing in thomas to defend Paul.
But with 1 minute to go and you have a shot at the game, you don’t sit your only big guy.
Another bad point about Doc, he is playing Steph too much off the ball. Steph isn’t learning anything from these games and this might come back to hunt us in the playoffs.
Good point about Marbury
There’s no use wasting him out there on the perimeter. He’s not even that good of a 3 point shooter historically (his last 2 seasons have been pretty good, though).
by SalmonAndMashedPotatoes on Mar 18, 2009 2:00 PM EDT up reply actions
I was saying the same thing to the TV last night, Steve
It was really a head-scratching move. And you know what? You didn’t even mention that Pierce had 5 fouls at the time, making the move even more indefensible. Doc intentionally substituted himself into an 5-6 inch height disadvantage involving his best offensive option who just happened to have 5 fouls, making him that much more disadvantaged on the defensive end. I really wish the reporters would have asked him about that one in the post-game press conference.
by SalmonAndMashedPotatoes on Mar 18, 2009 1:59 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Good point about Pierce's foul situation, SaMP
Thanks for bringing that up. And to think – he wound up playing fine defense that possession, forcing Rose into a tough shot that he missed.
-sw
Manuel Aristides Ramirez is the greatest hitter I've ever seen.
by Steve Weinman on Mar 18, 2009 2:37 PM EDT up reply actions
Great writing as usual, Steve
The fact that we can do nothing to change doc is a hopeless feeling but maybe there will be some effect from your actions.
Change Doc?
Do you really think you would do a better job, on the court, with all the multiple decisions that have to be made on the fly, vs. sitting on your couch in the living room? Did you want to change him after Game 6 last year? This micro analysis is extremely flawed and is too much like baseball second-guessing which just is not the same in basketball. There is no “book” for every move like 1st and 3rd 1 out, etc. Would another coach have done this specific thing differently? Maybe, but there are literally thousands of decisions a coach makes, focusing too much on one particular one in assessing the quality of a coach really misses the mark. I realize it is frustrating to watch your team lose, but it is a bit much to think that as a fan, you have what it takes to “change” the current NBA Champions coach for the better. I’ll take Doc for this team when all the pluses and minuses are lined up, clearly there are many more positives than negatives, and the sum is all that matters, not 1 specific game situation.
Having ridden the crest of the “Danny makes no mistakes” crowd, it’s humorous to tap into the “Doc makes no mistakes” crowd.
It’s a coaching blunder, pure and simple, and one he’s made before. Coaches make mistakes all the time – rather like GMs – and the idea is to learn from it, and not make it again.
I don’t think anyone in this very well-written and correct article, or in the comments section, has suggested that Doc Rivers isn’t the right coach for the Celtics. He is, but he seems to be repeating a fairly fundamental coaching mistake. That’s the point, and it’s well-taken.
Doc isn’t perfect, just like Danny Ainge isn’t perfect – as much as that shocks some people’s senses.
Hmmmm....
Miller was playing the high post and giving Derrick Rose and Salmons free reign to penetrate – Perk didn’t have the footspeed to challenge Miller’s set shot and recover to defend the penetration…
This was a case of not having the personnel to defend the situation, not an enlightenment of Doc – we all watched Perk get burned by the Bulls options – Miller’s rebound simply gives fuel for a subjective argument – its not proof positive of anything other than a frustrated fan bases longing for answers…
…KG is back Friday and by playoff time this team should have 7-10 games under their belt with a real rotation…patience…
Rondo had switched onto Miller
I believe that Pierce and Rondo got switched on the pick and roll, which was why Rondo was on Miller. I don’t think Perk being in would have directly changed that. I think the match up would have ended up perhaps even worse if you’d have had Perk switched onto Rose. That is what happened the previous couple of plays when Perk got burned.
So, while I’m not sure I love the idea of stick a 5 foul PP on Miller and keeping the top rebounder on the bench, I’m not sure it was definitely.
As I wrote in the piece, Bill, I'm not claiming that what happened means doing it the other way is any guarantee of success,
but I have a hard time believing that having Marbury in the game – not only not a rebounder but also a putrid defender for his entire career who hasn’t done much at that end as a Celtic (improved effort notwithstanding) hardly inspires confidence that the problem you bring up with Perk and Miller as solved.
Since I don’t see Marbury in his current condition (I’d love to feel differently about this in a few weeks) as an improvement in any regard at the defensive end, I’d rather have the team’s best available rebounder in the game at that point. That’s especially true when one considers that Miller had three previous offensive rebounds in the fourth quarter alone, which had led to two lay-ins and a drawn shooting foul.
Maybe it was more of a pick-your-poison situation, as you seem to be alluding here – and no doubt, it’s tough to manage personnel too creatively when you don’t have many options – but given the move in the Utah game (which seemed even less defensible), I have a hard time letting this one go.
Thanks for providing the other side.
-sw
Manuel Aristides Ramirez is the greatest hitter I've ever seen.
by Steve Weinman on Mar 18, 2009 2:46 PM EDT up reply actions
Nor should you.
Perkins is well compensated. He could rightly be expected to dial up a little intensity for 60 seconds, rather than turning the game over to a historically poor defender.
It was, indeed, a pick your poison situation. Doc picked the wrong one. It happens. Hopefully, it won’t happen again.
Celtics fans make same mistake twice
Thank you Bill.
This discourse of second guessing Doc is tiring. But it’s understandable. All fans think they can run a basketball or baseball team. It’s never what it seems.
And there’s always two sides to every coin. Steve’s post seems a little biased.. you should give some room for a rival hypothesis. I think Bill’s point is convincing
“Celtics fan makes same mistake twice”
by international celtics fan on Mar 18, 2009 2:20 PM EDT reply actions
What mistake have I made twice?
I’m not suggesting this is an overall indictment of Doc Rivers as coach of the Celtics, and I’ve never suggested that I think I’m capable of doing his job. But I found that particular decision befuddling, particularly in light of the history I referenced later in the post. I’ve talked in the past about how guilty I felt for some of the hammering I did of him two seasons ago because of the age-old lesson that it takes players to win – and for the most part, I think Doc really fits well with the team we’ve had here over the last two seasons.
But that doesn’t mean that I’m not going to speak up when I’m confused by something – as I did when I wasn’t sure I understood what the plan with minutes distribution was last week. Generally speaking, this space tends to be far from a haven for second-guessing Doc. As far as being “biased” is concerned, I’ve never propagated the idea here that what I’m writing is anything but my opinion, formed based on my observations and research. This isn’t a news piece, so I’m not sure what your complaint is there.
Beyond that, as DJ Bento Box references below, I think I did leave room for a rival hypothesis, though I didn’t spend as much time on it as Bill did. As I wrote to him above, I appreciate that he provided the contrasting view, although I’m not thrilled with it.
Thanks for the time and thoughts, and I hope that clarifies where I stand.
-sw
Manuel Aristides Ramirez is the greatest hitter I've ever seen.
by Steve Weinman on Mar 18, 2009 2:52 PM EDT up reply actions
You suggested you were capable
merely by spending so many words questioning one specific decision. You don’t outright directly say it, but you infer it by how much magnitude you place on one call by devoting an entire article to it. There are hundreds of other decisions made before that, many that most fans don’t even know happened, that done differently, could have led to a situation where one offensive rebound would not have made the difference.
Since most fans are in the dark about so many decisions, being on the outside, it is fairly insignificant to point out one specific case where one would have decided differently than Doc. Of course you have a right to your opinion, it’s just that to presume one is even in the realm of being able to question the hundreds of decisions an NBA coach has to make, without nearly all the information the coach has, is a bit arrogant, in my opinion.
Hear, hear!
As one who has always appreciated Doc as a coach (but who’s well aware that he, like any other coach, player, executive,etc, makes mistakes) I completely agree with you. One day fans won’t be able to discuss pro-basketball, because they’re always second guessing someone and it seems that exercise is now a manifestation of arrogance…
This is a very reasonable and well-thought article, which puts an interesting coaching question, not some knee-jerk rant, so the criticism doesn’t seem to hold much validity from my POV as well.
I can't figure out why posters get so upset when other posters question a move or a play?
I thought the point of this blog was to discuss the Celtics and their games?
If a player (say Pierce) did a boneheaded move (like passing to the other team) in the final minute of a close game, would we not discuss it?
And no one is putting the lose of the game on Doc’s shoulders. They are just asking about a questionable move he made towards the end of the game.
Not upset
Just tired of people lifting themselves up enough to analyze things they couldn’t possibly understand. Just as someone can do that, someone else can disagree, that is also what the point of the blog is about.
Then disagree.
Tell us why you think Doc made the right choice taking out Perk for Marbury at that moment.
Don’t attack the writers or poster and how they write it.
Of course they make mistakes
It’s just most are not qualified to analyze all the decisions, especially the ones they don’t even know about in the locker room, at practice, etc.
I'm not digging the Starbury experiment. I know he's been out 14 months, but
he shows no signs of making anything positive happen on the court. He just seems to be a body on the court at this point.
I believe he made that sub...
so that the celtics could switch on everything. Rose was wreaking havoc off the pick and roll because perkins would have to sag to protect the hoop, as opposed to blitzing as our defense usually calls for.
With perkins(or whoevers man was setting the pick) sagging off it resulted in multiple situations where rose was at the free throw line with room to operate and explode to the hoop.
While I understand your frustration, it was done to force the bulls to make a contested jump shot, which they didn’t. The rebound bounced in the one direction we couldn’t have it go, and it burned us.
Sorry WillyBeamin
The rebound did not bounce in the one direction we couldn’t have it go. Miller went right over Rondo for that rebound, because he is taller. he was taller than anyone the Celtics had on the court by about 8". While I can understand wanting a defensive stopper like Marbury on the court, there was no way Doc should not have countered Miller with Perkens. There was no luck in that rebound, just bad planning.
my man...
miller was only in a posistion to get the rebound on a short jumper that came off the left side of the rim.
If that ball bounes out torwards the middle of the key, or goes long, we get the rebound. Miller is not athletic enough to chase down a rebound that doesn’t come into his space.
and your sarcasm is not necessary
I know marbury is not a defensive stopper, but he is much better suited to keep rose infront of him on the permiter then perkins is. and since we were playing a switch-everything defense this was the way to play it.
While I agree that in retrospect the decision was wrong...
I think that it’s just silly(sorry, Steve, I usually love your Babble but I’m about as far on the other side of this as one can be) to be criticizing Doc’s move in the last minute of a close game that was only close because of Doc’s creative use of a modicum of personnel. This game had no business being close. None whatsoever.
No power forwards after the 4 minute mark.
Only one center left to use after Moore fouls out half way through the third.
Perk playing long minutes he just isn’t used to playing.
Eddie nursing a sore ankle.
Rondo rolling an ankle early in the third.
Pierce fighting a sore throat and cold.
Ray’s shot going dead cold over the last few games.
Walker, Pierce, Moore, and Perkins in foul trouble.
A huge FT attempts advantage for Chicago.
All that coupled with the fact that KG, Baby, Scal and Tony Allen were out and it’s a miracle the Celtics were in the game whatsoever. I’m not exactly happy about the events that are transpiring wth our beloved basketball team, but I find criticizing a late move of a coach that has his hands basically tied due to the circumstances of the moment akin to ridiculing the blind guy on American Idol because he isn’t good at the dance choreography of the group numbers.
Give Doc a full compliment of players and if he bungles I’ll be the first to say he screwed up. But given what was happening, critiquing Doc over a move in last night’s game just seems like unwarranted frustration being thrown in a direction where it just doesn’t belong.
Thanks for the thoughts, Nick,
and I certainly understand what you’re saying here. I tried to make passing mention of it with the “realities of playing shorthanded” comment, and I’ve talked in days past about how tough it is to win games while as undermanned as this team is. I agree completely about the difficulties of coaching in this situation, and I credit the players for battling and Doc for fighting through under the circumstances. Perhaps I should have made that clearer in the piece – again, this isn’t a call for Doc’s head by any means (or even in that universe), and I hope it doesn’t come off like that.
A lot of my frustration with this particular decision comes from the fact that I feel like it’s something we’ve seen before (while he didn’t have a full complement of players in Utah either, he was a lot closer to it than he was last night), and it’s difficult for me to understand why this sort of move on his part happens. Yes, I realize that my level understanding isn’t (and shouldn’t be) Doc’s concern, but since I’m confused, I don’t have a problem voicing that.
I’ve written above in the comments here as well as in the past that Doc has really done a fine job with this team overall and made me feel quite guilty regarding some of my previously held beliefs about him from when he didn’t have the players to succeed. But I remain unsure about this particular sort of late-game move.
Looks like it may have to be us agreeing to disagree on this one. Either way, it’s always good to hear from you, and I appreciate the well-articulated sentiments, Nick.
-sw
Manuel Aristides Ramirez is the greatest hitter I've ever seen.
by Steve Weinman on Mar 18, 2009 6:01 PM EDT up reply actions
That's cool, Steve
And in the Utah game, even though they were shorthanded, though not even close to the manner they were last night, I agree. The sudden idea of going small during free throws with the knowledge that you will be desparate to get the rebound there or after a miss up court, makes little sense to my amatuer basketball coaching mind. I’m not even going to attempt at figuring out what was going on in that game except to note that we all know Doc loves small ball, always has. It drove me nuts at times last year defending his use of it.
But as you mentioned, yesterday’s game he had circumstances that made the decision easier for him. He only had Perk and no one else. But we don’t know how gassed Perk was, other than observing that he couldn’t make a wide open layup on the offensive end twice, late in the game. On the CSN feed, Doc was shown calling for a sub for Perk during those Pierce FTs you spoke of. He called for Walker but both Walker and marbury got up. He waved Marbury off and then waved Walker off and then told Marbury to go in.
It appeared he was dead set on getting Perk out, almost as if Perk was calling to come out, though I sure that would have been reported if it was the case. He also seemed to be undecided, almost lost for an answer, regarding who to put in at that moment, vascillating between Marbury and Walker and knowing that one was too inexperienced to be in at the moment and the other wasn’t the right type of player to put in.
It’s just conjecture, but there was definite indecision on his part there and he looked as if he really wasn’t comfortable with the options he had.
If Doc was bent on removing Perkins, then considering the short time span that you’re asking the substitute to play, that further compounds the problem – and I suspect Doc would admit that today.
I don’t see the logic in tapping a poor defender over Walker’s inexperience, assuming that you’re determined to remove Perkins. You’re playing a minimum of possessions, and you’re looking for someone who can dial up a couple of decent defensive possessions. That’s never been Steph.
I agreed with the decision in Utah
This one I didn’t like it from the beginning: not playing Perkins is a decision that has its merits and can be argued. KP was wasted and that lineup would allow the team to switch everything without running the risk of a huge mismatch. Miller isn’t really that dangerous in the blocks (that’s why they didn’t go to him, even after the switch on the screen) and would be easily doubled. I personally don’t like this line of reasoning though, way too risky when there’s still almost a minute in the clock and 1 TO to use. Arguable, I understand the concept, but it doesn’t convince me at all, not a bit. Now, what I completely disagreed with was with the use of Marbury instead of Pruitt, who would give you a better, bigger defender and arguably a better shooter on the other side.
In Utah, with no timeouts and only 8 seconds left, I’d run the risk of losing the rebound and I’d try to maximize my chances of getting a good 3 point shot from a good 3 point shooter as quick as possible (and I’d instruct my players that if the FT was made, we’d take a shot in 5 seconds or less and try to play another possession). No way I’m wasting a body with someone (the rebounder) the other team would ignore after the outlet pass.
Armchair warriors
Yes, those do seem like very obvious coaching errors. Doc also coached the C’s to a 24-point comeback victory against LAL in game of the Finals. Let’s not forget his calm and confidence in two game 7’s in the first two round of the playoffs last year. Perkins is known to be foul-prone (not as much as Moore), but nevertheless, he frequently has 5 fouls throughout the 4th quarter. Yes, Doc should have had Perkins in there. What if Perkins committed a foul on the ensuing rebound and turned it over? The difference between genius and stupidity(coaching decisions) in close games is usually the outcome, not the decision itself.
When the playoffs start and it’s do or die almost every night, let’s watch Doc’s coaching decisions then. This is the end of a season when he’s openly conceded the #1 seed. These games are more for the purpose of trying rotations, and getting the new players enough time to get ready for the playoffs. You’ll almost NEVER see Marbury in the game in the final 30 sec if KG, Pierce, Allen and Rondo are healthy.
Coaches need practices too ...
Not only players, but coaches need games like these to practise their decision making. Hopefully they have learned and will improve in the playoffs. But at this time, i still can’t get over the fact that we got beaten by a guy like Miller.
Lots of people say how good and dangerous we will be when we have our full team back. But unfortunately, the NBA won’t wait till we are all healthy and ready to start the playoffs.
Chicago's loss can blamed on attrition
The Celtics had no healthy bigs at the end of the game. Perkins was too tired to finish. The only criticism of Doc here is not going small earlier to keep Moore out of foul trouble.
Chicago imposed their will on us and Milwaukee basically did the same thing on Sunday. Once Garnett, Powe, BBD, and even Scal come back, you can bet your sweet _—— that the this nonsense is going to stop and the Celtics will impose their will from April fools through Independence Day.
Boston Celtics - 2008 World Champions

by 






















