Doc's Place In Celtics Coaching History

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from Celtsfan4life. Show Celtsfan4life's posts

    Re: Doc's Place In Celtics Coaching History

    YOu've got  a little Doc hate going on there.  That quote you talk about is actually very good on Doc's part. He's being honest and I like that.  He's sending his players a message and its the right one.  Everyone KNOWS this Celtics team loses focus at times and loses to lesser teams.  Doc knows it and is calling them on it.  He's told them that too many darn jump shots are not acceptable when the jumpers aren't falling.   He's delivering the same message we all scream at the TV!!  

    Doc has been a master at getting this team ready during injuries and getting them to the point of one championship and doing pretty darn well when players were hurt.   

    Ranking, if he wins one or two more championships, he'll be 3rd or 4th in my book (Red, Russell, KC).  if not, he will remain 5th or 6th (below Fitch and Tommy).
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Number6Fan. Show Number6Fan's posts

    Re: Doc's Place In Celtics Coaching History

    He's certainly the best we've had since KC retired. (I liked O'Brien, but I really don't think he would have delivered No. 17 the first year.)

    I'd put him somewhere between 3 and 5.   Auerbach, Tommie, KC, and Fitch are the others.  I am undecided about Russ.  He was certainly the greatest player in NBA history, but as a coach I think he mainly did what he did as a player -- made everyone he played with better -- with an existence championship-level team around him.  As a coach with other teams he was only just okay  I can be dissuaded though.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from hedleylamarr. Show hedleylamarr's posts

    Re: Doc's Place In Celtics Coaching History

    Red
    Heinsohn
    Fitch
    KC
    Doc

    Of course, "Coach" Russell was 2 for 2!!

    Chris Ford and Jim O'Brien were both great coaches, too.  Wonder what they would have done with this team!!
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: Doc's Place In Celtics Coaching History

    Russ was 2 for 3

    He lost in '67 and won in '68/'69

    As a 3 year player-coach I don't really consider him when I think of the all-time greats who also had some sort of longevity. I'd put Russ's 2 in 3 over Fitch's 1 in 4 tho.

    Nobody will ever touch Red obviously.

    Doc passed Fitch with the '08 ring, he's now in his 7th year here, Fitch coached 4 and was ridden out of town by his players.

    Doc needs another title to 100% pass KC, since they'd both have 2 and Doc already has coached 2 more years.

    At that point he'd be neck and neck with Tommy. If Doc just has the one ring he'd need to coach 10+ years to pass Tommy and his 2 rings for 2nd all time.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: Doc's Place In Celtics Coaching History

    Right now...

    1. Red
    2. Tommy
    3. KC
    4. Doc
    5. Russ
    6. Fitch
    7. Ford
    8. Obie

    If we win a title in '11 or '12...

    1. Red
    2. Tommy/Doc (tie)

    If Doc leaves after next year with no rings

    1. Red
    2. Tommy
    3. Doc
    4. KC

    If Doc leaves with Pierce in '14 with no more rings he could challenge Tommy as he'd have more wins, prob 4 East finals trips to Tommy's 5 and 3 NBA finals trips to Tommy's 2.

    If he stays past 2014 (doubtful) and gets 527 wins (100 more than TH) then you can prob safely give him #2.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from kyceltic. Show kyceltic's posts

    Re: Doc's Place In Celtics Coaching History


     Red
     
     Tommy

     Russell

     Fitch

     KC
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from NickFaldo. Show NickFaldo's posts

    Re: Doc's Place In Celtics Coaching History

    Thanks for the comments. I didn't think there'd be any since I haven't posted much.

    I wouldn't call myself a Doc hater, more akin to a rehabilitated Terry Francona hater feeling more respect for the man as years pass.

    I could definitely relate to Bill Simmons' criticism of Doc. I read somewhere Simmons now admits Doc does a good job managing egos.

    Russell was before my time, but I agree with the assessments given he was a better player than coach, that he was very lucky to have himself on those championship teams.

    Fitch was very good, but he was too much of a PJ Carlesimo and lucky not to have been choked. You can't be too much like that nor too nice a guy like Pete Carroll.

    I think Jim O'Brien definitely would have led us to #17. I think most any half-decent coach would have led that team to the mountain top.

    Doc is similar to Phil Jackson until he can show otherwise. It's easy to confuse luck for skill. I don't like how Doc says he will definitely not reach Heinsohn's win total. That would only take about 10-12 years. Why is Doc still thinking of leaving the team? Is he going to retire from coaching? I don't think so. I could see him maybe taking a year or two off to do tv and then returning to the NBA. Missing out on his kid's growing up is now moot. Doc doesn't seem to be the kind of guy who will go into early retirement. I think as soon as the Celtics show any signs of slipping out of title contention, he will "retire" and then be hired by a team rising to the top who needs a coach. Like Phil Jackson did.

    Maybe Doc will become the Miami Heat coach in a couple years. I don't see Doc ever taking another job in which he'd have to roll up his sleeves and develop players. I sense he will only coach for elite teams, just like Phil.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from NickFaldo. Show NickFaldo's posts

    Re: Doc's Place In Celtics Coaching History

    I'd also like to add Chris Ford was in the PJ category for coaches. To this day I still have nightmares of him screaming, "DINO!" Chris Ford was an ok player. He put up a lot of stats for bad teams. He was too negative to excel as a coach. He was too much of a Bill Fitch without the Fitch expertise. Jim O'Brien is a pure coach.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Karllost. Show Karllost's posts

    Re: Doc's Place In Celtics Coaching History

    In my book, the jury is still out on Doc.  Is he a good coach or is success due to all the great players that wound up on the Celtics?

    Trying to be objective, the answer is hard to come by.

    First year of the big 3, they win a title. Baby sat the bench most of the time. I dont thnk he even played in the finals until the 4th or 5th game. The next season we lose KG and Baby is forced into the lineup, where he develops into an emerging star.

    Was BBD's development a stroke of genius by Doc? Was DOc working him into the rotation early on, recognizing his value to the team? No. Baby was rotting on the bench and only KG's severe injury allowed Baby to show his stuff. Doc didnt have a hand in it as far as aim concerned.

    I agree with the poster about DOcs mentality when it comes to the big 3. He virtually seperates them from the rest of the club... and coaches by script.  How many times (believe me, there are tons) has DOc removed a 2nd unit player that just heated up in the game, scored a few baskets.... and put back in the starter?  A player gets his rithym and DOc yanks him cause his script calls for it.

    The Big 3 need rest on their legs. Doc has said this himself and often points to one of his goals is to limit their minutes. Yet, he continues to play them to death with the exception of blowouts.  End of the season & in the playoffs...Ray goes into a massive shooting slump, missing wide open 3's left and right. Pierce can put it in the bucket either.  Are their legs too tired from the long grind & mileage put on their legs during the season?

    I just think Docs thinking is very rigid. He has an image of how he sees things and nothing is going to interfere with that...regardless of game situations. 

    Doc will refuse to pull Rondo late in tight games where all we're getting is slow,  1/2 sets.  Is he managing Rondos ego this way or just afraid of the confrontation?

    Dont get me wrong, I like DOc as a coach but until KG & Ray joined the team, Doc was a non event. OK, what coach is great without having great players? Very few if any...maybe Jerry Sloan can make an argument for himself.

    Where I have issues with ranking Doc highly is the minutes the starters keep getting until the game is locked up. We have good backups and if it means losing a few more games to give Ray, KG & Pierce more rest during the season, then so be it. Running them ragged will tire them later in the season and possibly bring injury to them much quicker. Doc has acknowldged this many tims yet, continues to drive them like sled  dogs.  So, I cant get too nuts with rating him highly just yet
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from jeezem. Show jeezem's posts

    Re: Doc's Place In Celtics Coaching History

    Well Doc is not done yet so hard to say.  I'd like to see him win 1 or 2 more the next couple years then take a few years off which he's said he wants to do.  Then come back to coach several more years after they rebuild to give it another try with Rondo and Perk and the players who come in to fill out the team after KG, Pierce, Allen are retired.  Depends on how many titles he wins, if he can win several - he could be the next real Legacy coach for the team to take over that legacy Folk Hero role.  I think Red will always have the best description, but since Doc is not done in his coaching career yet - he could come in a close second and keep the heart and soul of the franchise strong for years.  He is a great coach and he understands the game.  I think his real strength is that he really likes and relates to the players, and they in return like to play for him.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Karllost. Show Karllost's posts

    Re: Doc's Place In Celtics Coaching History

    In Response to Re: Doc's Place In Celtics Coaching History:
    [QUOTE]Well Doc is not done yet so hard to say.  I'd like to see him win 1 or 2 more the next couple years then take a few years off which he's said he wants to do.  Then come back to coach several more years after they rebuild to give it another try with Rondo and Perk and the players who come in to fill out the team after KG, Pierce, Allen are retired.  Depends on how many titles he wins, if he can win several - he could be the next real Legacy coach for the team to take over that legacy Folk Hero role.  I think Red will always have the best description, but since Doc is not done in his coaching career yet - he could come in a close second and keep the heart and soul of the franchise strong for years.  He is a great coach and he understands the game.  I think his real strength is that he really likes and relates to the players, and they in return like to play for him.
    Posted by jeezem[/QUOTE]

    Very good point about the players wanting to play for Doc. That goes a long way.  Was it this way before the big 3 became an item? 
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from P34. Show P34's posts

    Re: Doc's Place In Celtics Coaching History

    In Response to Re: Doc's Place In Celtics Coaching History:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Doc's Place In Celtics Coaching History : Very good point about the players wanting to play for Doc. That goes a long way.  Was it this way before the big 3 became an item? 
    Posted by Karllost[/QUOTE]

    After Jim O'Brien left I think it was Ricky Davis that said "We want Doc!"

    Doc was already a player's coach even before he joined the Celtics.


     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from Number6Fan. Show Number6Fan's posts

    Another thing

    I was a Doc fan before the KG era.  I think the true test is how you do with a bad team.  Doc was totally on board with Dannie about developing young players until they had value -- and he did it really well --- even in the abyssmal 2006-7 season (when Paul was out much of the year).  I actually loved those bad teams -- because I loved watching Big Al, Ryan G., Delonte, Rondo, Tony Allen, etc. develop as players. They were really fun to watch, and Doc taught them and used them really well.  A lot of people were down on Doc then -- and were praying for him to tank the season so we could get Oden/Durant.  He and Danny knew better than to count on the luck of the lottery, and they developed Danny's draft picks into players who could either A) play, or B) had enough value to trade for stars.  Worked out fine.  Have no complaints.  (Honestly, I don't think Jim O'Brien was on board with strategy, and that's why he bailed.)
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from jeezem. Show jeezem's posts

    Re: Another thing

    In Response to Another thing:
    [QUOTE]I was a Doc fan before the KG era.  I think the true test is how you do with a bad team.  Doc was totally on board with Dannie about developing young players until they had value -- and he did it really well --- even in the abyssmal 2006-7 season (when Paul was out much of the year).  I actually loved those bad teams -- because I loved watching Big Al, Ryan G., Delonte, Rondo, Tony Allen, etc. develop as players. They were really fun to watch, and Doc taught them and used them really well.  A lot of people were down on Doc then -- and were praying for him to tank the season so we could get Oden/Durant.  He and Danny knew better than to count on the luck of the lottery, and they developed Danny's draft picks into players who could either A) play, or B) had enough value to trade for stars.  Worked out fine.  Have no complaints.  (Honestly, I don't think Jim O'Brien was on board with strategy, and that's why he bailed.)
    Posted by Number6Fan[/QUOTE]  Those were fun years to watch even thought they were pretty terrible.    Perk, Pierce, and West are still remnant of those off years.  Fun to see them win after years of futility.  Doc included.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: Doc's Place In Celtics Coaching History

    Doc proved he was a good coach in '05

    He is guilty of having the big 3 handed to him when those guys were 30+ and they could coach themselves, but KC Jones is guilty of the exact same thing

    If he ties KC this year or next with that 2nd ring he is clearly better than him and Russell

    He has already passed Fitch... 1 in 4 and run out of town vs. 1 in 7 and well respected. A no-brainer
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from Celtsfan4life. Show Celtsfan4life's posts

    Re: Another thing

    In Response to Another thing:
    [QUOTE]I was a Doc fan before the KG era.  I think the true test is how you do with a bad team.  Doc was totally on board with Dannie about developing young players until they had value -- and he did it really well --- even in the abyssmal 2006-7 season (when Paul was out much of the year).  I actually loved those bad teams -- because I loved watching Big Al, Ryan G., Delonte, Rondo, Tony Allen, etc. develop as players. They were really fun to watch, and Doc taught them and used them really well.  A lot of people were down on Doc then -- and were praying for him to tank the season so we could get Oden/Durant.  He and Danny knew better than to count on the luck of the lottery, and they developed Danny's draft picks into players who could either A) play, or B) had enough value to trade for stars.  Worked out fine.  Have no complaints.  (Honestly, I don't think Jim O'Brien was on board with strategy, and that's why he bailed.)
    Posted by Number6Fan[/QUOTE]

    Agreed - what makes Doc great is that he's motivated and gotten the best of a young and terrible team as well as a great and talented team.  Doc did in the first year of Ray/Paul/KG what few others could do - he pulled them together and make them play team ball.  He has the talent and personality, but it took an offensive and defensive system and assistant coaches  When a leader pulls it all together, you have to give him credit......and Doc has the heart to coach in good and bad times.   Rondo, Perk, BBD, Semih, and others prove he can work with young players, as well.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from NickFaldo. Show NickFaldo's posts

    Re: Doc's Place In Celtics Coaching History

    I think this is a much more valid debate topic than the one coming from the Perk and Rondo haters. It's strange how the person who hates Rondo also has the same feeling for Perk. Not only that, the few posters in agreement on Rondo also dislike Perk or back his right to make racist comments about Perk being a thug who needs to take ebonic classes. Coincidence or something else?

    How can anyone still be on Rondo's back?

    Two forums developed out of this one. There's Sam's. Dslack also started one which can be reached through my signature. Ours is kind of slow and it's mostly myself, Dslack, and Mooltrikon.

    We've had primarily two heated debates. Myself and Mooltrikon would be considered by many to be Doc haters. Dslack also has this funny idea that momentum doesn't exist.

    Our discussions on Doc have been much more give and take than seen here with the Rondo bashers. That's because myself and Mooltrikon try to be openminded and not sound like idiots.

    The two debate topics kind of feed into each other a bit. One problem I have with Doc is the same one Karllost mentioned. Doc is too quick to pull a hot sub. He doesn't seem to appreciate the need to feed the pig. If a player is hot, then it's still a team concept to let that player keep taking most of the shots. That's different than the hero ball put up by LeBrat and KoMe.

    I also agree with him that Doc is too rigid. This is how I would make substitutions. I would never have close to two separate five man rotations like Doc does it. I would only empty the bench that way if all the starters were having off-nights. When you make wholesale substitutions like that, you're simply throwing away the chemistry that has been working up to that point in that specific game.

    I would bring in one or two players at a time, based on matchups and who's in the zone and working within the concept of Celtics Tradition.

    I may just be some anonymous poster, but I sincerely believe I'd be better than Doc at making substitutions. Yet either Dslack or Mool made sense with the question of whether the team would listen to me. Doc is loved by his players.

    I don't think winning titles has anything to do with who is the better coach or player. Is Rondo better than John Stockton and Pierce better than Karl Malone because they each won a ring and the others didn't? What about Charles Barkley? He was a phenomenal player who never won. What if Bill Russell and Wilt Chamberlain had swapped teams? With Chamberlain instead of Russell, would the Celtics have that many less rings? I doubt it.

    Look at Phil Jackson. Substitute any number of coaches into what he has had to work with in Chicago and LA, and would the results have been that different?

    I have to also agree that Doc doesn't deserve much credit for Big Baby's emergence as explained by the other poster. Doc often contradicts himself. He says he won't run the older guys into the ground but then does. The only reason he rested them the second half of last year was because they were injured. Perk had tendinitis. Paul had various ailments. KG was still recovering from his surgery.

    Doc got mad at Baby for taking too many jump shots a few weeks back. Well, that was after he told Baby to take those shots. I know one of them might have been a crazy three pointer, so maybe that's what upset Doc and he was right to be. But if he was mad at Big Baby for taking too many shots, that was his own decision. I'd like to see Doc absorb some responsibility for bad results. Francona is excellent at that. Even Belichick will say he got out-coached. You win or lose as a team with the coaching staff included. Some humilty out of Doc would go a long way. I didn't like how he put up that #18 banner or whenever he tells the team they are going to win it all before the fact. He's called Doc because he once wore a Julius Erving t-shirt, not because he has a PhD in Psychology. That can stimulate a let's just show up mentality. It fosters a sense of entitlement.

    The Patriots work because no one is entitled to anything. The quiet confidence of Belichick runs through the entire team. Everyone on the roster has the opportunity to emerge. Doc should use the regular season to develop confidence in the bottom half of the roster. It's not Doc's fault Delonte got injured and we've been without a backup for Rajon. But it is his fault that he hasn't found a way to develop Nate and Wafer into legitimate scoring threats for when Ray and Paul just don't have it on a given night. The only reason Semih has emerged is because Doc had no other options, like the poster above mentioned that the only reason we know Big Baby can play is because KG went down with his devastating knee injury.

     

Share