Did the Celtics Run Too Hard and Peak Too Soon?
Can a coach or the players themselves control when a team peaks? Can the coach modulate pace and development?
Could the Celtics have taken a different road, one that even might have led to a stronger team at the end? Was Garnett experiencing discomfort in his leg much earlier than we might think? Are there lessons learned that can be used this season?
Michigan Coach John Bielin, (from Eric Musselman’s Coaching blog) on the subject when asked if his 10-2 record in December was too much too soon….
"The peaking question has always been interesting with me," he said. "What do you do? Do you tell your team not to go too hard in December because you want to peak later on? I don’t think there’s a key to it. I think you just have to make sure your team has a good combination of not losing their edge and also making sure they have enough rest."
Not losing their edge. Making sure they have enough rest. Check.
The Celtics won 66 games and the NBA Championship in 2008. Then they won a surprising 62 games after losing two key bench players, and sustaining an injury to their star team defender and went deeper into the playoffs than many thought they would. It was a heartbreaking season of staggering genius. Or was it?
By any normal standard that two year record should make Doc Rivers pretty much bullet proof. It was quite a run last season by the limping Celtics.
Questioning last season reminds me of a story in Bill Russell’s book, Red and Me….
In Russell’s second season, Russell said that…
"I came out like a wild beast and we ate up every opponent, one after another." (sound familiar?)
At the All Star break, Red chastised Russell for letting up with a 12 game lead….
"You’re coasting! We got the big lead so I can understand why you are letting up…..even you ain’t that good. You can’t turn it on and off in this league. You have to go hard all the time Russ. Christ, you got these guys so terrorized they can’t play against you. But if you let up on them and they start believing they can play against you, then they can play against you."
I totally get that.
But that mostly works against inferior teams. The teams the Celtics would face in later playoff rounds weren’t going to be intimidated by a regular season record.
There have been a few questions rolling around in my mind for a while, even before last season was half over. Most agree that Doc Rivers coached masterfully….at least in the sense of getting the utmost out of his team. In many ways, he did just that.
But a couple of things have been bothering me for a while.
Somewhere along the way….early last season…. Doc Rivers appeared to have changed his mantra. Wins seemed to matter over everything. Eve…ry…thing.
The previous season, Doc would dismiss every attempt to judge the team on the season’s won loss record.
Clearly and often, in year one of the Big Three, we heard Doc Rivers caution about not caring about who wins the most regular season games. Whenever media broached the subject of wins, Coach Rivers response was always to down play it with, "Does anyone remember who won the most games last year?"
For the record, it was the Dallas Mavericks with 67 wins. It was the Year of the Great Don Nelson Belch at Dallas, his former team, with the overachieving Golden State Warriors. But it was San Antonio with a mere 58 wins and only the 3rd best record that won the Championship. Point made.
Doc invoked Gregg Popovichian-like answers like (paraphrase), ‘We’re just trying to play the right way.’ ‘We want to do what we do as a team.’ ‘We’re not worried about the best record.’
Doc didn’t want his team racing all out for the best season record. He wanted them to gel, to learn to play together, play team defense, play team offense, and play the right way. Honestly, he sounded a bit like Gregg Popovich. That is the Popovich way. Get your team playing the right way and be ready in time for the playoffs – when it counts. That is when the wins count the most.
Ironically, the Celtics ended up with the best record, yet desperately needed home court advantage in the first two rounds to advance. They won the title. What is over looked is that they didn’t need home court the rest of the way.
But those early scares seemed to leave a lasting impact on the psyche of the team and maybe Doc, as well. Henceforth, there was no more downplaying of home court advantage. There would be no more references to Dallas.
The ideas of a) pace and b) peaking are very real but somewhat elusive subjects. They can be quantified statistically sometimes and sometimes stats can be deceiving. It is as much about ‘feel’ as about stats. As the famous saying goes, "I know it when I see it."
It first occurred to me during the 27-2 run. No one, especially myself, thought that the team had that kind of run in them. I was expecting a slightly tempered version of the high adrenaline previous season. It was spectacular….and unexpected.
But I don’t think it was driven by Doc. I believe that it was largely driven by the intense and unrelenting Kevin Garnett.
An article titled Fueled By Emotion, Running on Empty by Yahoo Sports’ Adrian Wojnarowski on January 10th developed the ‘KG driven’ pace in a full and ‘no holds barred’ way. While you may disagree with some of Adrian’s conclusions and opinions, I thought he brought up some valid ideas to ruminate on.
"As much as anyone, KG’s voice rules these Celtics. They play at his speed, his fever pitch and ultimately rise and fall with the tone of his talent. When the Celtics were the most destructive there was a grudging acceptance of Garnett’s relentless ramblings on the floor, his penchant for starting small skirmishes. His greatest gift can be his greatest burden. Sometimes, these Celtics can be exhausting to everyone else. Sometimes, they’re just exhausting to themselves."
While we were all giddy over the 27-2 start, there were a very, very few on the message boards that worried about the effort the Celtics were putting forth in that streak that could result in premature burn out. People say that the NBA season is a marathon. I’ll add that it is a marathon of sprints.
Re-read the whole Wojarowski article if you have the time. It is worth the read. Part of it is that the Celtics were emotionally exhausted after that run and went into a tailspin. True enough. Yahoo Sports' Kelly Dwyer had this to say soon after....
It's not normal for a team like Boston to win as many games as they did over the first two months of the season against competition that stiff.
ESPN's Daily Dime made the counterpoint that all NBA teams that make extended runs like that go into a funk shortly after. Also true.
Was that run necessary? What were the Celtics trying to prove? Were they trying to carve out a special regular season niche in NBA history? When did the regular season victory total become so important?
Or were they just pummeling straight ahead at breakneck speed because that is how the new KG led Celtics do it?
Add to that, the team was beginning to woof at the refs and even Doc was getting into the act as far as technical fouls go. Doc used to constantly calm down the players about the refereeing. Now he was engaging them often, as well.
By December 15th, Doc was tied with Larry Brown for the most techs by a coach with four. Perkins led the league with 9 and KG and Paul Pierce had three each. Odds Bodkins, Sam Cassell had 2 techs and an ejection and hadn’t played a single minute. What was going on? Did the Celtics think they could intimidate the refs because they were the NBA champs?
Wojnarowski again….
"If you keep punching your gas pedal as hard as you can, all the time, eventually you’re going to run out of gas," one rival NBA general manager said. "You can only do that hype and talking for so long. You have to maintain a pace and a certain emotional level to stay up there for a long time. You can’t scream non-stop forever."
Some may recall that right after that article appeared, Garnett did calm down a bit. There was a moment when Ray Allen and Paul Pierce even playfully came up to KG when he was surrounded by media, asking him mock questions after a game, as if they were reporters. It was a first. It was well timed. It was much needed.
When jockey Kevin Borel switched horses for the Preakness, after winning the Kentucky Derby with a 50-1 shot (Mine That Bird) to 8-5 favorite Rachel Alexandra, Doc Rivers joked about NBA coaches being able to do the same thing with NBA teams.
But in so doing, he made a good analogy. Coaches ‘ride’ their teams through each season’s race. They help set the tone and the pace. The question of peaking arises and it can be elusive.
Did the Celtics peak too soon? What if they explored an early fix on KG’s leg? From the very start of the season, a few observers noted that Garnett was playing outside more than the year before. He was rebounding less, as well. Is it possible that was intentional to reduce the need to bang, leap, and rebound as much?
And did they run too hard at the expense of working in a few more players, like say Bill Walker, and then later Stephon Marbury? Just like popping a soap bubble, popping those bubbles in that packing material, or squeezing that Play Dough, I have to ask that question.
So the question is: Can a coach affect when a team peaks? How about the players themselves?
Did Doc not cause, but allow them to run too hard? A digression here....
It really all starts during the first year of the Big Three.
Somewhere between the season of 2007-8 and this last season, 2008-9, Doc Rivers’ mantra subtly changed.
After down playing having the best record in 2007-8, the Celtics ended up with the best record anyway.
Then the Great Playoff Road Drought of 2008 occurred.
After winning their first two games at home, players started telling Rajon Rondo, in particular, that the playoffs don’t really start until you win a playoff game on the road. By that measure, the playoffs didn’t start until round three, game three in Detroit.
I remember the locker room silence in even the home pre-games that the Celtic players exhibited. By round two, they were out of answers themselves. It was the elephant in the room. The best team in the regular season, and the best road team, was being staggered by inferior opponents away from home. They found their mojo in Detroit and the rest was a crushing rollick through L.A for Banner 17.
Cut to the next season.
The Celtics bolted from the gate to a 27-2 NBA best start. Another thing happened. Ubuntu seemed to lose its luster. Like James Posey, Harry Potter and George Bush’s daughters, the cry of ‘Ubuntu’ seemed so ‘last year’.
Is it simply that a new motivational concept was needed? Rally slogans like ‘We Are Family’ (1979 Pirates) ‘Ya Gotta Believe!’ (1973 Mets), ‘Reverse the Curse’(2004 Red Sox) each had a one year shelf life. Did Ubuntu quietly run its course?
It appeared as if the Cs were pulling out all stops to get as high up the standings for as much home court advantage as they could possibly obtain. Belching smoke and fire, near to ripping at the seams, the Celtic train click-clacked down the tracks at a speed that belied its condition. Rivers was stoking the Celtic engine with all the coal he could shovel in. Players, especially the remaining stars, were playing heavy minutes in an effort to keep speeding well above the posted limits in an effort to gain home court.
No doubt the KG injury was huge. Bench support was inconsistent. But the goal remained ‘win at all costs’, it seemed.
When starting to fall away from catching the Magic, Rivers properly downplayed the significance, yet did not down play the importance of home court. It remained a goal, come heck or high water. One can only think that the 2007-8 post season experience may have changed Rivers mindset. The best record possible became the goal. When a Celtic team, under duress, caught and passed the Magic for home court advantage, there was great pride. Looking back, was it done at the expense of bench development?
Ironically, Garnett’s injury may have exacerbated the perceived need to press harder. The Cavaliers’ incredible home record may have driven some of the Celtic determination. Orlando’s success certainly warranted concern.
Seeing things as Doc saw them, I think that Doc Rivers did a tremendous job. But I’m wondering how different things might have been if Doc moderated the Celtics’ mindset as he did in the first season, when regular season wins and home court advantage weren’t the big goal. Getting players worked in and getting a team to play together a certain way was the objective.
Doc had a choice to make. Continue to develop a bench that was experiencing difficulties or go with who brung you. Regarding Garnett’s injury, there are questions of, what did they know, and when did they know it? Could he have been shut down early for surgery and recovered for the playoffs?
What if Doc tried to develop Bill Walker, Stephon Marbury, and even a bewildered Mikki Moore a bit more during the season?
This season
This coming season might be the better case to run for the top record. The bench is stronger and more set. If you believe that Cleveland and Orlando have both gotten better, the top seed will only have to face only one of those two teams in the playoffs, assuming Boston, Cleveland and Orlando are the top three teams.
The only unanswered questions are if Bill Walker or JR Giddens can help this team. Can Walker back up Pierce? Can Giddens offer something special? Who guards the top small forwards when Pierce is out?
Kevin Garnett
Should Doc reign in Kevin Garnett just a bit? Garnett is not getting any younger and doesn’t seem to be able to pull back by himself. He will want to prove how healthy he is. There is a dance that Doc plays with this team and he often gives them a lot of latitude. How do you deal with the ambiguities of playing hard, but conserving enough for the long run?
This Celtic team has the talent and the toughness of mind to win games on opposing teams’ courts in the playoffs. Should they be the ‘Home Wreckers’ or fight for home court at all costs?
In the last ten years, three times the NBA title was won by teams with the best regular season record. Four NBA Championships were won by the team with the second best record. Three titles were won by teams below first or second. Obviously, each year offers its own specific challenges.
This year there will be 3-4 other ‘superteams’. Because of that, would you pull out all stops to gain home court this season? Or are you confident enough in this strengthened Celtic team to steal away home court from anyone, therefore the key is tuning the team to play their best ball as the season ends?
97 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Maybe, just maybe...
You wanna add a break in that one ;)
goes to read
- Dirk 'DaarisDirk' van Boxtel
Sorry, bad mood.
Just felt like nitpicking :P
Decent comment coming soon though :)
- Dirk 'DaarisDirk' van Boxtel
I'm in the Minority
I don’t believe Doc did a great job last year. When you have the best starting five in the league, playing them into the ground isn’t masterful. People say Doc did a great job because he squeezed 62 wins out of a depleted team. No, he just played his best players too much and did little to develop the rest of the team. Again, I fail to see how great that is.
People kept repeating like it was a mantra that the Cs had no bench last year. Certainly it wasn’t as good as the year before, but it also wasn’t as bad as people believed. When a coach pulls players after a couple minutes because of mistakes, and sits them the rest of the game; and when a coach cancels practices to rest his starters because they are playing too many minutes, this does not help develop the bench, and this weakens long term the team. This doesn’t get the most from the team, just a few players.
People look at the wins and see a great job. I look at the minutes, the comments by Doc over the season, and say he reverted back to many mistakes he has a reputation for. Doc was not a ‘big picture’ guy last year. Until he does, the Cs will still be a great team because of talent, and their love for Doc. But the talent and depth of the team won’t be maximized.
Oh, I totally disagree. Once Garnett went down we had no bench whatsoever. Mikki Moore at the 5 was a disaster. Davis was in the lineup. Powe was injured. Marbury accomplished basically nothing at the point, and the front office decided we didn’t need a competent 3 off the bench, instead opting for the hardly-trustworthy Tony Allen.
Great job listing Tony Allen when he was injured himself.
by BudweiserCeltic on Sep 8, 2009 8:12 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Right… only about half the season. He was injured for more games than Garnett and Powe. So try again.
by BudweiserCeltic on Sep 8, 2009 10:00 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I guess I'm in the minority too.
Of course one can’t really know, but my guess is if they’d treated Garnett conservatively up front, they’d have had him back for the playoffs, which is when they needed him. If the team was glaringly thin up front, then Doc could have exposed that and maybe got Danny to do something more about it at midseason anyway.
I think Doc got spoiled in their championship year and didn’t want to settle for bench substitutions that would have brought the team down to 50 wins—but that would have been the right thing to do.
Losing more games and exposing the teams needs would have helped the team win??
Makes no sense. You are seriously telling me that Danny doesn’t have the ability to at even great teams and see their weaknesses and know what he has to do, personnel wise, to make the team better?? he had been saying all year that the team needed a backup center, a veteran PG and a defensive veteran SF. He was acknowledging that all year. Just because they didn’t lose more games and expose that fact to you more doesn’t mean that a professional President of Operations that built a World Championship team didn’t see it. He just couldn’t get the help he needed at a price he was willing to spend is all.
Not grinding down an injured KJ and developing what bench they had
would have been better than limping into the playoffs and overplaying their other aging stars.
Who ground down an injured KG?
KG was averaging about 32 MPG when he got hurt and played much less than that when he tried to return. KG was playing the least amount of minutes in his entire career.
As for the other Big Three, once KG, Scal, Powe and Tony went down Doc was left with a mess of a bench. In order to try to keep an attempt at keeping home court advantage it was up to him to play the others more. Losing 4 of your top 9 players and having Mikki Moore, Stephon Marbury and Eddie House as your primary bench thereafter severely limits the options.
And you do not reward players like Pruitt, Walker, and Giddens by GIVING them minutes they haven’t earned for the right to lose games and learn nothing about how to play the game properly.
You totally nailed it!
Doc is a great “player`s coach” but,…..a disastrous “in-game tactician”.
Coaches must utilize their entire bench, not just the one or two “big name” veterans who are your first two options. With Doc, everyone beyond his 8th on the roster is viewed as “guilty until proven innocent”.
When your team is up 20 points, against a lottery team, with 10 minutes remaining…clear the entire bench! Stop leaving KG and PP on the floor, with a 15 point lead, and only 3 minutes showing on the clock.
agree
i have been upset at doc for under playing bench guys for years. Players coach but not a good development coach. Its only when he has to play others due to injuries that we have seen real bench development… 30 somethings should average 30mpg.. that’s it.
Not A Good Development Coach?
When Doc came here he was a remedial basketball coach for high schoolers and guys close to it. He did such a bad job of developing players that Danny was able to take a bunch of guys who Doc was incabable of developing and turned them into KG and Ray Allen. In addition, one player that Doc was unable to develop, Kendrick Perkins, is now thought of as being almost indispensable to this team. We come to a moment in time when the guys who don’t like Doc can get on him. Where were you guys when Doc lead a team of 15 guys who basically never played together to a championship in 2008. I know you’ll say it was the players. Well last year Doc lost his players because of injury and we are complaining because we won 4 games less than the previous year. As to not being a good in-game tactician Doc is known thruout the league as having the best record of positive plays out of time outs. It was also Doc who took out Rondo in game 4 of the 2008 championship series and subbed Eddie House. This poor tactical move spread the floor and the C’s made the greatest comeback in a final series in NBA history.
"I don't come to play, I come to WIN"--Larry Bird
"Criminally Negligent Officiating"--Tommy Heinsohn
i have this discussion with people all the time. we got ra and kg for players that developed mostly because others were out injured. Al Jef blossomed when pierce was out in 06/07 for 2 months..
i didnt say doc was a bad tactitioner, nor did i say he couldnt teach players how to play.. but i said that he didnt develop young players due to court time. due to not giving them enough time in games because he over played the starters esp pierce.
i can remember fuming at him because he was risking rondo’s ankle in nothing games when the playoffs were not far away. Even pushing KG last season. He injured his other leg and then came back to play and who knows if he played too hard too soon and favoured it causing the injury to the other knee. Look at Ray Allen in his first season with us. he had no lift because his ankles were not right. he said that he had trouble all season. But did doc keep his minutes down to try to let them heal? no.
this is how it looks to me. but i may be wrong i am not all knowing /end rant
I agree with many of your points here, but you’re making a ton of bad assumptions here. First KG’s problem had nothing to do with Doc, in fact, if anything it was Doc who was trying to make him rest more. Secondly, Ray kept quiet for the most part about his injuries… he said so himself because he didn’t want to disappoint the team.
I’m all for saying that Doc has overused his starters, but let’s use actual facts.
by BudweiserCeltic on Sep 8, 2009 11:31 AM EDT up reply actions
This is so far from the truth it's ridiculous
Doc’s philosophy with young talent has always been that they play as long as they earn the minutes. Period. the reason Gomes, Rondo, Telfair, Jefferson, Perkins, Baby, Leon, West and others never got consistent minutes early in their careers and were pull in and out was because of their own inconsistencies. Doc eventually started playing them conistent minutes ONCE THEY EARNED THOSE MINUTES.
Want proof? Go back and find me just one player Doc ever coached when he was young that Doc didn’t give consistent minutes to that became mush better and a player after leaving Doc’s coaching. Just one. Doc develops great young talent and uses a system that teaches young players that in order to play you have to play the way the coach wants, without constant mistakes. Do that you play. Don’t and you sit.
by nickagneta on Sep 8, 2009 12:17 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Even when the bench yaks up a lead, as happened last season?
I just see this complaint as a red herring. It’d be legitimate this year, because the pieces are in place for depth. There was little to choose from on the bench, and no coach is going to play players he has no faith in.
Rivers isn’t the greatest coach in the association, but he’s not as bad as some of you want him to be.
I doubt you are a better in game tactician
As has been mentioned, Doc’s choices were limited. He is directly responsible for them overachieving in fact last year. The bench against Orlando was House, Marbury and Scal. Think about that for a minute when considering that Orlando team they played. No real backup for Perk to contend with Dwight, no real wing, a guy who had not played in over a year. There was no bench to play really, despite the disappointment of losing a Game 7, they really had no business being in a Game 7 with the squad they were running out there
Monday Morning Quarterbacking - NOT!!!
I do not buy all this peaking issue; if the Green was a younger team, I would entertain it, but not with a veteran team. The team won 66 games year one of the Big Three and was a outstanding 27-2 in the the second season with streaks of 19 and 12. People forget that Green had major injuries and still wound up winning 62 games.
We will look back on this as a good thing because of the maturation of Rondo, Perk, and Big Baby as now significant contributors in game situations.
As far as Doc’s coaching he has proven that he can coach; no he is not Larry Brown or Greg Popovich, but he flat out out-coached Phil Jackson the year before last.
perhaps
Doc’s coaching he has proven that he can coach; no he is not Larry Brown or Greg Popovich, but he flat out out-coached Phil Jackson the year before last.
Doc kept his poise, Phil lost it in the ’08 finals. That was the difference.
Realize, we didn’t clinch the series until Paul made his plea to Doc… “Give me Kobe!” and really, that was the end of the Lakers.
That gift of 28 more fts in game 2 arguably had as much to do with the result
Has any team in the modern era received that big of a differential IN THE FINALS?
All that help and “won” by six…
by nba is the worst on Sep 9, 2009 9:27 PM EDT up reply actions
Doc gets no respect
The man wins the championship by taking a team just thrown together that offseason and turning it into the greatest defensive juggernaut in the last 20 years and wins 66 games and a championship and that gets no respect. He then wins 62 games and gets his team into the second round of the playoffs, a breath away from beating the team that went to the Finals, without the services of his best player, a PF, his backup PF, and with a bench consisting of a guy who hadn’t played competitive basketball in 20 months, Marbury, a complete stiff, Moore, a PG that is really an undersized SG who if he isn’t hitting threes is basically useless, and a PF who can’t rebound, can’t jump, can’t run fast, and can be overpowered underneath in Scal.
Yet Doc did a poor job because after injuries depleted his team in the final 25-30 games and playoffs and after he was given a horrible bench to overcome those injuries with, he only took his over achieving team to game 7 against the Magic. When are people going to see that Doc is exactly the coach this team needs. A coach who can manage the vets and their personalities, teach, motivate and develop the youth and inspire and lead the team during games.
Well, . . .
First of all, regarding my points, I never suggested Doc did anything ‘after’ people got injured. He didn’t do a good job of integrating players from the bench throughout the season. In doing so he ran his players into the ground. That’s not good coaching. And just because Doc is being criticized by some of us for last year, doesn’t mean we think he isn’t the right coach for this team, nor that he didn’t do a good job the championship season.
Also Nick, comparing younger players from the pre-championship team is misleading. Who was Doc going to play? Our team was younger literally than many college teams for two years straight. And it’s difficult for bench players to play themselves into the lineup if Doc cancels practice to rest the starters. It’s illogical. And then the players look rusty in the game or there’s a lack of continuity amongst the players. Well, yeah, what should we expect?
Now obviously all of us have limited access to all the info, so we’re all speculating. But c’mon is being critical of Doc the same as throwing him under the bus? Everything is not polar. Being critical of Doc in one season doesn’t mean people are calling for his head.
The playing them into the ground statement...
isn’t being critical of him after the injuries? Pierce was averaging 36.3 MPG, Ray 36.2 MPG, Rondo 32.4MPG, Perk 28.4 MPG and KG 32.4 MPG when the end of January came and KG started taking his first games off for knee problems. For reference these were the season totals of MPG for the entire 2007-08 season which includes major minimized minutes in April that skewed the numbers down: Ray 35.9, Pierce 35.9, KG 32.8, Rondo 29.9 and Perk 24.5.
Please point out to me where at the point where KG got hurt Doc was running the team into the ground and not developing the bench. He was definitely developing Perk and Rondo and Powe and Baby, all players 25 and younger because they were all playing more minutes up to that time than the year before. Eddie was playing about a minute less and Tony about the same when he was playing. So if they were playing about the same amount of minutes as the year before nd those minutes for the Big Three were all at or near career lows, how exactly did he run them into the ground the entire year.
Just because he didn’t play Pruitt, Walker, Giddens, O’Bryant, doesn’t mean he wasn’t developing them. It just means they hadn’t earned time. They all sucked last year. Giving them game time at the expense of wins isn’t going to make them any better.
Listen, I’m all for criticizing someone for valid reasons but when completely made up and false claims are made as a reason to criticize someone that bothers me. There is zero proof of Doc running this team into the ground before the injuries struck this team and forced him to use the more reliable players more in an attempt to not lose ground to Orlando and Cleveland awaiting the injured players’ return.
Want to criticize Doc’s defense or offense, his overuse of certain plays and matchups, his substitution patterns, his use of timeouts and his hard stance with rookies, I have no problem there. Doc has warts like all coaches and people. But stop giving the man grief for something he didn’t do or didn’t have a responsibility for.
Fair Enough
I thought the minutes prior to the injuries were higher than that. My bad on that one.
We’ll have to disagree on the playing of the other players. I don’t think it’s certain that if Doc would have played those guys it would translate into losses. Also, the more they played, the better they would become, so even if your point were true, which I’m not conceding, they would eventually be competitive enough. There still was talent there.
Given your other points regarding Doc’s strengths and weaknesses, I think we’re in total agreement. So I guess getting back to the Tenacious T piece, I would only say that the team could have been in better shape even with the injuries if players on the bench, weaknesses and all had spelled the starters late in the season, even possibly giving up some wins in the process. Especially given that we weren’t going to catch Cleveland, and with Orlando it really didn’t matter because they were not a strong home team.
But in all honesty, I’m just tired of people saying Doc did a great job last year. I thought he was far better the year before. I think he got back into some of his bad habits last year. Was he awful? Nope, just not “masterful” as T said.
very good-tenacious t- a good in depth perception of last year’s c’s. i do agree with amenhotep04, tho that doc got on the win and push the starters button and very little talk of ubuntu.hopefully, this year he has the depth and he knows he has to baby kg. in a long race to stay with the jockey mental image, you have to rate and pace your horse to have some pop at the end. horses are either sprinters-ie for short races or raters-for longer races and the c’s need to be rated.ergo, let’ssee more walker and i do worry about getting rondo some adequate backup.
Try to win every game
That is the only way to play. Players can’t consciously “pace” themselves when faced with each game in front of them, one at a time. Should the Celts have “let go” one of those 27 wins by resting the starters down the stretch of winnable games? Everyone, including the team, knew that 27-2 was no guarantee of anything, that the season is long and all that matters is standing at the end. But when the specific game you are playing is at hand, as a player, you play to win.
I really don’t agree with the argument that they were hellbent on regular season record and that kept them from playoff success. The matchup with the Bulls was not assured until the final day of the season, the Celts could not have done anything to set up their seeding. The Bulls record after the Salmons/Miller deal, was about the same as the Celtics without Garnett, so it was a very even matchup despite the seedings. The C’s running out of gas against Orlando had far more to do with all the OT games in the Bulls series, then energy expended trying to win as many of their regular season games as they could.
how can you even begin to have this conversation without even a preseason game played yet?
This might have been a good topic for february, if experience proved it relevant.
God bless and good night!
did you read it?
The article is mostly about last year and the theory of peaking, and then tenacious t went out and made a prediction. I don’t see how/why your comment is at all relevant. It’s an off-season discussion about an esoteric topic.
When Perk was asked what he thought of Howard winning the gold medal this summer, he responded: "What’s his impression of me after I won a ring?"
no, i didnt
forgive my misinformed comment but i don’t want to read about if the team has peaked. i would rather anticipating watching them play this coming season, as i am fairly confident they’ll be bringing in banner 18.
didn’t mean to offend anyone. i’ll just refrain next time.
God bless and good night!
“but i don’t want to read about if the team has peaked.”
Which is why you should’ve read the article since this isn’t about that.
by BudweiserCeltic on Sep 8, 2009 10:35 AM EDT up reply actions
Still reading it...
I’m halfway on it. Interesting..
"Winning is a habit. Unfortunately, so is losing." - Vince Lombardi
Not at all meant to be a Doc bashing.
Though I understand that some of that could come out.
There actually are a few (related) ideas running through the piece. And it was written to present a point of view, but allow that there are counter arguments.
The piece was understood to run against the grain when I wrote it.
Or......
If I was from China….. Peking Tom
(Ouch)
Nope in fact
home court is that essential. Look for the team to go full board through the whole regular season.
"Do you know that nonbelievers create the most positive energy?" Davis said
I think it’s more like the team was trying to prove something. They won the last season and they want to show that they can defend their title. And who doesn’t want to win? These guys has egos and pride and whatever you may call it.
And there’s no way you they can control their own pace and peak when they want to. As you’ve quoted from Red they can’t just turn it on and off if they feel like it. They start winning they have to capitalize on that and when they begin to falter they just have to find a way to break out from it.
These guys are aware of what people expected for them to accomplish. The burden of carrying such expectations (of winning it all) is a lot of pressure and with that you have a tendency of always looking behind you’re back, maybe even playing tight.
i mean its not clear that they SHOULDN"T come out full throttle in beginning of season?
spurs and shaq lakers one championships coasting. i think the celtics would do well to let everyone sleep on them and let the cavs and magic runaway with regular season.
you play to win the game!
sincerely,
Herm Edwards
(currently out of work)
"We few, we happy few, we band of brothers" Henry V
he's got a job
Selling beer flavored water from CO.
When Perk was asked what he thought of Howard winning the gold medal this summer, he responded: "What’s his impression of me after I won a ring?"
Yeah Bill Belichick has the same philosophy
His right hand is very tired of carrying around those 5 Super Bowl rings he wears on it because of that philosophy.
apsolutely not, the team was full of veterans nearing the end of threre careers and all they wanted was a ring, so no they did not try to hard
Couldn't disagree more with the premise of this article.
I’ll go with Red’s philosophy of you put out full throttle all the time and beat the competition into the ground. That worked for what, 11 championships in 13 years. It’s stunning that anyone would rethink last year and think it was the pace at which the team played and the team’s desire to win that caused them to lose. I find that simply astounding revisionist history.
The best team’s want to win every game and then go out and do so. And the whole revisionist look at 2008 is quite amusing. They had the best record in the league from the 10th game of the season on. Their whole focus was on winning. Yes Doc said things like trying to be focused and worrying about team chemistry and learning to play with one another and all that good stuff and played down the record but what was he supposed to say? His team was the runaway best team in the league with the best record. His team always had the best record. Of course he is going to minimize that fact to keep his team’s head from swelling and his team from losing it’s “Eye of the Tiger”.
"Was Garnett experiencing discomfort in his leg much earlier than we might think?"
Yes, clearly he was…he wasnt right all season last year, and it reflected on his play on both sides of the ball and in his stats, this problem in his knee dates back to his last years in Minnesotta(remember very clearly him sitting out the rest of the seasons in minnesotta once they werent making the playoffs due to pain in his knee), a lingering pain in his knee that finally caught up to him last season
Im still not convinced by any stretch of the imagination that hes going to be back 100% either
I wonder if all these people who...
are talking about the Celtics pacing themselves will be so understanding and be saying stuff like this:
“Doc’s a great coach because they are pacing themselves because they are 20-14”
“There’s nothing wrong with this team, they are just saving themselves for the playoffs, that’s why they are 22-15.”
“Good to see the team cares so much about winning the championship that they are not giving 100% now so they have energy for the playoffs. It’s a good thing they are 25 and 16.”
My guess is it will be these same people screaming for Doc’s head and writing “What’s wrong with the Celtics” articles if the Celtics have those records.
by nickagneta on Sep 8, 2009 12:31 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
07-08 Detroit Pistons
That team (especially Rasheed Wallace) was known for waiting and trying to turn it on in the playoffs. It didn’t work out for them.
I wonder what effect Rasheed will have on the team. Will they try to “pace” themselves like he did in 08?
First off they won't be pacing themselves
either way so it’s a moot point. But you are correct they would be complaining then as well.
"Do you know that nonbelievers create the most positive energy?" Davis said
Last season wasn't Doc's fault
I know what’s happening for people who are blaming Doc. People are using KG’s to prove Doc didn’t do what he could to limit the starter’s minutes. Come on people, does anyone remember the Big Baby gasps crying?! Yeah, that was because our bench nearly blew a big lead against Portland in the 4th. I remember that game, and even though us winning was almost guaranteed when some of the starters checked in, it ticked me off.
Our bench DID blow last year. You can say what you want about Doc overplaying the starters,although that’s not really true if KG only averaged 32 MPG last year like nickagneta said, but our bench DID NOT HELP AT ALL. POB was a failed project. Marbury and Moore were failed projects. TA became useless when he was injured and tried to come back. Pruitt tried, but wasn’t enough. Walker was ok, but fouled like a madman and didn’t seem to get the defensive rotations. Powe tore his ACL. Giddens ended up in the D-league. That leaves Rondo, Ray Allen, Paul Pierce, BBD, and Perkins has our only truly reliable guys….THE STARTERS. THE STARTERS. Even with KG and Powe, that’s 7 reliable people. But they were out, and we only had 5 truly reliable guys on our team, and we still took the Magic to 7 games. You keep telling yourself its’ Doc’s fault that we didn’t win last year. If it makes you sleep better, please feel free, but I’ve said my peace on that.
And that said, I also agree completely with what nickagneta just posted, since he posted it while I was writing up mine. 27-2 was a good thing last season, and if you told me they could do it again to start this upcoming season, I’d be ready to sip some Hood Egg Nog in celebration of tying last year’s mark, assuming it’d be around Christmas time. Cause you know why? We have an actual bench who could help make that happen, and no one can complain about our team being ran into the ground, unless it’s clear some of our guys are being overplayed. And if it does happen, I don’t wanna hear how we “peaked too early”, when that record can offset a possible slump like it did last year, cause slumps are very likely to happen.
-Is it possible that the Celtics got caught up in the hype about the “greatest start in NBA history” and the winning streak stuff?
-How can you not chase home court when the Cavs go 40-1 at home? (The other home loss they weren’t trying.)
-And as was mentioned above 1st seed doesn’t have to play both the Cavs & Magic while 2nd & 3rd do.
-How would the 2008 Finals have been different if the Celtics didn’t have home court advantage?
All that said, no team is winning it all unless they’re key guys are healthy.
They ran into a tidal wave on Christmas and never recovered.
by thereallargejames on Sep 8, 2009 2:10 PM EDT reply actions
Some tidal wave!
Boston led, 81-79, with 2:42 remaining in the 4th.
But then ended up losing
by like 10 on their HOME COURT to the LAKERS…and didn’t they like lose 9 out of 10 games or 7 out of 9 games afterwards? I remember after losing to the lakers on their home court, the wheels kind of came off the cart for a period of time.
Overtime...
After KG fouled out on an extremely questionable foul…Boston lost by 1 point, in OT, on their HOME COURT to the Lakers.
Then…Boston went 3-1, KG got injured in Utah, followed by the wheels coming off.
Red's Philosophy
Auerbach never overplayed anyone, except possibly Russell and the bionic John Havlicek.
It’s easy to give guys rest when you have Sharman and Cousy playing the first quarter, and then a couple of subs like Sam and KC Jones to come in as replacements. When Sam and KC became starters he had quality backups like Larry Siegfried and Paul Westphal. And Red always had veteran depth in the frontcourt; in fact his specialty was reviving the careers of guys who had been discarded by other teams: Arnie Risen, Willie Naulls, Wayne Embry, Paul Silas, Scott Wedman, Bill Walton… the list goes on.
Plus, Auerbach always had an outstanding 6th man who played starter’s minutes: Frank Ramsay, John Havlicek, Don Nelson, etc. so that for his first 6 guys it was a 40 minute game, not a 48 minute game.
And finally: expansion had not yet diluted the talent pool and until expansion started in the early 1970s, just about every team had more quality depth than teams do today.
I completely agree with that assessment
And now with Marquis and Sheed, I think the Celtics do have great depth, assuming no one gets injured (knock on wood). After the starters, we have Daniels, Sheed, House, and BBD. Heres how I think the minutes should break down (keep in mind that there’s 240 minutes for 5 spots each game):
Rondo-35 mpg
Ray-30 mpg
Pierce-30 mpg
KG-30 mpg
Perk-30 mpg
Marquis- 22 mpg
Sheed- 25 mpg
House- 18 mpg
BBD- 10 mpg
That adds up to 230 minutes, leaving 10 minutes for Scal, Billy Walker, and others. I think that those are optimal values, other than Rondo (but he’s young, he can handle it). The Celtics certainly have plenty of depth this year.
Dilution of talent...
Creates a system whereby Boston is one of maybe 4 teams that has a shot at the title this year. They will face a clearly inferior opponent in more than 85% of their games.
They will have a number of them “won” by the middle of the 3rd quarter. This is where Doc must look for every opportunity to rest his starters, and utilize the “entire” bench, because the season is long and grueling.
Doc needs to learn some math : If the Celts lead by 20 after 3 quarters, the game is over! Clear the entire bench. The opponent is “dead” if your bench scores only 10-15 points in the entire 4th.
If you`re up 15 with under 4 minutes to go…you already have more than enough to win. It`s too late for your opponent to make up the deficit. So, get KG & PP off the damn floor!!!
Nice try but ...
I’m not buying it.
We didn’t match our success because …
A) We wore a bull’s eye as the defending champs
B) We didn’t have the same bench as the previous year
C) Garnett was injured (you never recover from an injury that staggering)
D) Others got injured, too.
If Garnett and the others had come back 100 percent healthy by the playoffs, I believe we THEN would have had a pretty nice bench and would’ve gone further.
It’s really as simple as that to me.
Garnett
With all due respect for Pierce, KG is the leader of this team. Without him , it was all uphill.
IMHO, right now they have the best bench of any team in the EC. Sheed is still an all-star caliber talent. Daniels would start for many teams, and so would BBD.
That’s 8.
holy moly
Sheed is an all-star talent? BBD would START on many teams? Dude, you’re smokin something. Sheed will be 36 or so, right? Phew, that’s old…too old to be an all-star. Sheed is more like an all-star for the senior’s league now…and BBD may start for the fat kids team, but nothing else…
Did I cause all that?
Just a few things at the end of the day…
I’m glad to see some Doc supporters come out and vigorously defend him. He deserves it. He has done a great job, I believe, over his entire career. If you don’t believe, check some of my back articles on him. Mostly supportive to very supportive.
I knew I would catch heck from some if not most. If everyone agreed with me on this one, I’d start my run for Congress. I knew that wouldn’t be the case.
And the rationales used against the article are, for the most part, very good. In fact, 80-90% of the time, I feel the same way. And yes, this is sort of a Monday morning quarterback article…on Tuesday….three weeks before life begins anew for the NBA.
Just so everyone knows, my next article on Doc will be far more supportive.
But 10-15% of the time, the thoughts I shared in this article have roamed through my head.
So, let me state for the record:
1) Doc is a solid developer of young players, IMO.
2) He has a history of playing rookies (contrary to what some might think).
Mike Miller won ROY under Doc. Corey Maggette got lots of PT on a team with many undrafted players. There are other examples even before Doc came to Boston.
3) Doc has shown himself to be quite versatile with the drastic change to a veteran team with a few young players mixed in.
4) Doc has tremendous people skills.
5) Doc has an assured confidence that is necessary to have his position.
Doing an article even slightly critical after the last two years would be done with peril. That is the way it should be.
There is so much more (on both sides of the issues) that I could say, but I’ll try to keep it relatively short.
Many of the counter points paint with broad strokes. Of course, you want your players to play hard every game. The devil is in the details.
Minutes? The coach is always watching minutes and when to make rotation changes. Doc figured out early last season that it was best to take Garnett out at about the eight minute mark of the first quarter. Because KG goes hell bent for leather, his production or energy started to slip around that time.
Playing hard at 33 years old is slightly different than playing hard at 22 years old. No 33 year old will deny it. Some players you have to get to play hard. Others you have to get to calm down a little. KG is that, Bill Russell comparison notwithstanding.
As mentioned, all the early wins were accompanied by a lot of emotion and a higher amount of techs for Doc and the team. It was a new twist. That was not Doc-like. I think it’s fair to question whether that was a positive change. Again, it led one well known writer to question who was in charge.
This year it could be an even bigger challenge with Wallace on the team. I’m betting that last year’s experience will aid Doc in handling it better.
I believe my observations to be accurate and have some merit. As has been done, you can certainly take a different perspective.
I won’t rehash everything. I saw some things as to why Doc might not play Walker more. But according to basketball minds more knowledgeable than me, Bill Walker might have helped if he got more development time.
You can say that players get the time they earn. That is true. But sometimes you have to let them learn on the court, too. Doc knows that, too. My point was that Doc appeared to have changed a bit this past season.
It is no doubt, a touchy situation that Doc and the team ended up in. Do you risk spending more time trying to get something out of a bench that needed work or not?
Some feel that Doc tried, and they were all lost causes. Fair enough. Indeed, he got Marbury and Moore later in the season.
This is long enough. I’ll just say that I agree generally with those who argued against, but my observations stand. Everything is open to interpretation.
I like the stats of who won the title the past ten years. You want to be first ….or second….if you can. 70% of the time the championship team was first or second. Those are good odds. But the Spurs were only first once when they won their three recent titles.
But last year, I thought that the Celtics could win it all from the third position in the east. As it turned out, a few tweaks might have been the difference to get to the title round.
You can argue that Doc and the Celtics couldn’t have done any better than they did. I understand that argument and make it myself often. But sometimes I wonder.
As I said, this season home court might be even more important with the strengthened contenders.
Thanks for the impassioned and challenging responses.
T
What is lost in all the analysis is how quickly and how many opportunities Marbury and Moore got when they arrived. If the argument against playing Walker more is that “he wasn’t ready”, how do you justify Doc giving Marbury and Moore playing time when they clearly weren’t ready to contribute for us. But Doc didn’t hesitate to give them chances, to try and integrate them to the team.
With Marbury and Moore playing as bad as they were for us, we went with a record of 16-7. Are you going to tell me that playing Walker would’ve made that much of a difference record wise… that we would “lose more games”? Again, Marbury and Moore were awful for us, and yet we found ways to win… I find it hard to believe that we wouldn’t be able to accomplish something similar with Walker playing more.
by BudweiserCeltic on Sep 8, 2009 8:05 PM EDT up reply actions
Excellent reply
Being one of the counter arguers(??? is that right?) I will say that you bring up a lot of very salient points. Emotions ran this team almost all of last year and it was there greatest strength but also their biggest weakness. Emotionally, I can agree with the sentiment that they came out to hard and fast and that it cost them. Physically and in how the season results went, I can’t.
If Doc had better control of this teams emotions and brought a bit of the Bill Belichickian, just another day at the job attitude to this team early on, we may have seen a more consistent bunch that would have not had the roller coaster ride they did not only for the season but in a most of their individual games.
I see one of the reasons for Doc’s not being able to get the kids in being the way this team disappeared for long periods of times in individual games, game after game after game. And it wasn’t just the bench giving away leads. It was the starters as well. If this team could have reined in their emotions and played with a more business like manner that brought better consistency, more blow outs may have occurred and the back bench might have gotten more time.
I will hold Doc responsible for that. He let KG and his overemotional ways take over the team early on and it cost the team for the entire season. But that has to do with how things were handled in the locker room and practices and behind the scenes and less to do with minutes played and the other stuff that was brought into the argument.
Other all, interesting article. You are definitely showing signs of being a great addition to the writing staff tenacioust. Keep up the great work.
great post nick....
among many good posts today.
Without making my case you showed that you understand where I’m coming from.
The emotional aspect and theme and that the starters were part of the inconsistency are all good points. At times, the bench played well. ManchvegasBob of CSL at Comcast made that point in a few articles at that time.
The only thing I’ll add was that, if you recall, the team actually was not playing all that well towards the end of 27-2 streak. No one called them on it because they were still winning. But ‘ubuntu’ type problems were there on the court in December.
I think that Doc will approach things with a new eye this season in that regard.
Sounds WWII when Russia and the U.S. just met at the Danube. Now we can argue about who gets to be the U.S. lol
thanks for the kind words.
T
I want the C's to win every single game we play!...
That is without getting our players winded or injured.
Rivers
He is not a topflight coach in my mind, at least not from a technical perspective. I don’t like his offense and his teams are still too half court-oriented. But he has topflight assistants, plus he’s a nice guy. It is what it is.
The only real thing that is keeping us from running constantly is Rondo as far as I’m concerned.
by BudweiserCeltic on Sep 8, 2009 8:35 PM EDT up reply actions
Half-Court oriented teams win championships...
Ever wonder why the Suns never won it… Because Half-Court oriented teams mean defensive oriented teams… And you know this Brick… DEFENSE WINS CHAMPIONSHIPS!
Offense and defense are not mutually exclusive.
by BudweiserCeltic on Sep 8, 2009 8:35 PM EDT up reply actions
Completely irrelevant. The fact is that we have the personnel to play fast and play good defense… something quite rare.
by BudweiserCeltic on Sep 8, 2009 9:00 PM EDT up reply actions
No... It is not completely irrelevant...
There is a reason you couldn’t name a team that won a championship playing an uptempo style and that is because half-court offense wins games in the playoffs and WINS CHAMPIONSHIPS!!!!
Uptempo teams don’t play good defense and if we started to play that way it would hurt our defense.
The problem with this analysis is all this uptempo teams you’re thinking of simply didn’t have the personnel to play good defense. So they opted to play fast to hide their weakness. Conversely, the half court teams that have won it all didn’t have the personnel to constantly push the ball, so they relied on their defense.
The difference here is that the Celtics can do both, and not taking advantage of it is a mistake (in this case mostly because of Rondo). Hate to say it, but the Lakers won last year and they were more uptempo than anything. Only the Knicks and the Pacers played faster.
by BudweiserCeltic on Sep 8, 2009 9:30 PM EDT up reply actions
depends
I think the style of play depends on which team the celtics are playing. Other teams respond better/worse to uptempo/half court offense. It is up to the coaching staff to decide which way to go game by game.
There is a time and place for everything. Good for us if we are capable of winning with both styles of play.
The truth about Doc
He is not and has NEVER BEEN a good coach in the NBA. The only year Doc has been able to do ANYTHING in this league, was the year he got 2 all-stars added to his team. KG and Ray Allen, in the later stages of their prime, in 2008. The team then limped through the playoffs facing no competition yet going to 7 games with different ballclubs. Then they met a depleted Lakers team in the Finals —a Lakers team who had only been together for 1/2 of the season (the Pau Gasol trade 1/2 through the season), and were MISSING 2 of their STARTERS in Andrew Bynum and Trevor Ariza.
The Lakers had no chance to win this year if they were missing Ariza/Bynum. You can’t play and win an NBA championship missing your starting center and your starting small forward! The Celtics barely made it to the NBA finals and beat a watered down lakers team who had only been together for 1/2 of the season and were missing 2 starters. The Celtics on the other hand were gift-rapped 2 hall of famers.
The Celtics won that year due to luck and overall talent. Please don’t tell me that coaching had ANYTHING to do with it. Doc has always been and will always remain a sub-par coach, and next year will PROVE it. It will be touch for an aging Celtic team to get out of the East and win against a Lakers team in their prime.
If the Celtics pull it out next year I will eat my hat.
Couple things
1.) Ariza didn’t start for the Lakers in 2007-08. Of the 35 games(24 with the Lakers) he did play in in the regular season, he started 3. Also, he wasn’t nearly the player he was towards the end of this season when he finally blossomed.
2.) Gasol was the only player added to that team in the second half of the year. The rest of the team, Ariza excluded(you apparently forget he was traded to the Lakers that year) were together the whole year. The were not just thrown together in the second half of the year. Furthermore 10 of the players from 2007-08 for the Lakers were on the 2006-06 Lakers roster. You want to see a team thrown together in 2007-08 look at the Boston Celtics. Only six people returned from the 2006-07 Celtics to the 2007-08 Championship squad. Only two over the age of 25 at the time Pierce and Scal.
3.) For a bad coach that has never done anything anywhere he’s been before KG and Ray got here, Doc’s teams made the playoff 4 out of 8 years, had only 2 losing seasons, won a Coach of the Year Award, and was able to develop a whole bunch of young talent.
4.) My guess is that is a Purple and Gold Troll hat you will be eating next June, but that is only a guess.
Not only that… he seems to forget that the Lakers completely destroyed the competition in rute to the finals, to the point that most experts were heavily choosing the Lakers over the Celtics, even though the Celtics had the best record in the league.
by BudweiserCeltic on Sep 9, 2009 9:38 AM EDT up reply actions
peak too soon
Hello old globe chatroom folks, This forum is wonderful, though sometimes full of itself. It is a great place to get the news in one place. Thanks to all who do all this work. Too the point, my belief is the Rondo to Garnett alley oop contributed to KG’s leg problem. The proof of this belief will be seen if we don’t see that pass this year. It was, imo, very effective, but very costly. Your old friend, old fan
Peak 2 Soon
I believe a team is going to play to win everytime they get on the floor no matter what,to say you can turn KG’s energy on and off you have to be from another planet. Anyway we have R.W. and the dude from Indiana and Big Baby back so our bench I believe is the best by far and Rasheed is alot like K.G. so I say play hard and play to win as a team!Thats what they did the first year , they played as a team and I agree K.G. R.A. and P.P. should get more rest and they will this year, I would’nt worry about that C’s fans Our you ready for number 18????/I AM
Peaks + Valleys
This is a peaks and valleys team. They ride high on their emotions and then they crash.
After a couple of games they’ll regain their rhythm and be back to their best.

by 






















