|
Post by esco33 on Dec 18, 2005 17:45:06 GMT -5
I remember reading part of Derren's article how Doc said that it usually takes 7-8 days to get a feel for the lineup. We are now past a quarter of the way of the season, and Doc still has not gotten a feel for a consistent rotation yet. I think that this is one of the main reasons that we are playing so poorly this year. I agree that playing guys in terms of opposition matchups, and tweaking with your lineup to get a better lineup on the floor can be advantageous to a team, but only if that team is a veteran team. We are filled with young guys, and what I think they need is to find constant roles. We have a lot of solid players on our team, and a few would be left out whether be Gomes, Reed, Greene, Scalabrine but I think Doc needs to find either a 9 or 10 man rotation and stick with it.
If their was a record for different combinations of a lineup in one year, I think we would have the record this year. It is good to be versatile and to be able to change your lineups frequently, but I do not think that that is what this team needs. Every great team has a rotation with defined roles. (Spurs, Pistons, Nets a few years back, Yankees late 90's) When people step onto the court they know what their role is. They may have to sacrifice a part of their game so the TEAM can win.
I believe we have unselfish players, but they just need to know WHAT their job is. Doc needs to find a rotation, stick with it, and let the young guys grow into their roles. He does this and we are at least a .500 team this year.
-esco
|
|
|
Post by Roadrunner on Dec 18, 2005 18:45:45 GMT -5
Great post. Rotation, or rather lack of a rotation is one of the main issues w/ the team. Plus, along those lines, distribution of minutes, and a third scorer.
P2, and Davis play way too many minutes, avg 40 in a 48 minute contest. In an 82 game season, not including the playoffs, too much. Also, AJ could be our third scorer, leading the team w/ a 53% shooting percentage. However, limited minutes and only 6 attempts a game?
All great teams can play inside, and out. This team only plays out.
|
|
|
Post by esco33 on Dec 18, 2005 18:56:48 GMT -5
Exactly. Not only is there no consistent rotation, but the substitution patterns are very questionable at times. I am not in a position to think that I know more than an actual NBA coach but I know enough to see that if one of our guys is dominating the game in one way or another (Perk-rebounding, Al-low post scoring) and the other team has no answer, then they need to be playing more, and playing when it matters in crunch time. You need to go with the hot hand. It seems as if Doc waits for players to heat up then sits them, then brings them back in when there cold. I understand managing a players minutes when he has fouls, but lately Perk has not been fouling a lot like he has done in the past. I think one game he had 9 boards in 20 minutes of play, and only 1 foul. He could have had 16,17 boards if he would have played 30-35 minutes.
I also agree that Big Al's role of third scoring option needs to be more clearly defined. A couple of weeks ago I was saying that Big Al's breakout season would be next year. I still believe that but with more minutes this year, I think that he could average 12 points and 7 boards at least, and shoot a good percentage from the field (53% right now)
Hopefully things change for the better, and Doc finally gets a rotation and stops experimenting. I have a feeling that that was what the talk was about between Ainge and Doc.
|
|
|
Post by DERRENMATTS on Dec 18, 2005 22:06:22 GMT -5
I tend to believe that players who understand their roles and know when they are coming into games can be a lot more effective and consistent on the court. Sure every player should be ready to produce whenever they are called upon, but that's not realistic to ask from every player.
The crazy thing is that Doc has 8 players who he needs to develop. On top of giving Pierce, Ricky, Blount, and Raef big minutes, he needs to figure out how to incorporate all these young players.
|
|
|
Post by esco33 on Dec 19, 2005 18:41:08 GMT -5
That's just it Derren. If he played Perk and Al big minutes instead of Raef and Blunt, or at least give them more minutes, he actually would be developing these young players.
|
|
|
Post by DERRENMATTS on Dec 20, 2005 1:48:31 GMT -5
I agree. We need to decide what's best for ths team in the long run. Either make a stab at winning a title now, using mostly what we have (trading some of our young talent and replace them with proven veterans), or start looking toward the future and start developing the kids now.
|
|
|
Post by esco33 on Dec 20, 2005 14:45:40 GMT -5
We really need to start looking to the future. After we let go of Payton and Walker, two of our better vets, we basically were taking 2 steps back. Definitely no titles anytime soon.
That is why Doc needs to play Perk and Al more. The funny thing is if he were to do that, they would improve and get better and I actually think they would do a better job and give us more of a chance to win then with Raef and Blunt.
Blunt did play good last night (vs. Warriors), but Perk was a rebounding machine again, and Big Al was DOMINANT in the first half offensively. He could have easily had 20 points if they would have played him more. He also rebounded and was blocking shots.
I could understand not playing Big Al and Perk more if they were behind on the depth chart, behind Shaq or Kevin Garnett, but Raef and Blunt are not Shaq and Garnett. Perk and Al give us just as much a chance to win as Blunt and Raef, if not a better chance.
Last year we had Walker, and we were competing for a playoff spot, and actually won the division title. This year is different. I think Doc needs to sway the minutes about 7-9 minutes in the other direction. (Blunt and Raef 7-9 minutes less/Perk and Al 7-9 minuters more).
One of the explanations I have heard being bandied about by different posters has been that Ainge and Doc are showcasing Blunt/Raef. Never thought of that, but hopefully this is true, and that is why Perk and Al aren't playing bigger minutes. -esco
|
|
|
Post by FLCeltsFan on Dec 20, 2005 21:12:23 GMT -5
Excellent thread and I agree 100%. I just shake my head at Doc's substitutions at times. He will pull Perk out who is playing great and leave him on the bench for most of the game. In the meantime he will play Raef and Veal who are doing nothing good out there and then Doc whines about how we are out rebounded and out played in the paint. Players need to know their roles. Until Doc can give the players some consistency in their roles, we are going to be an inconsistent team and have trouble winning two in a row.
|
|
|
Post by Roadrunner on Dec 20, 2005 23:40:30 GMT -5
One of these days, I am thinking Danny will pull a Pop, and start coaching this team.
|
|
|
Post by DERRENMATTS on Dec 21, 2005 1:16:47 GMT -5
Plain and simple, Doc needs to take this year and make it a developmental year. Forget about playing Raef and Blount big minutes and let Perk and Al play a whole lot more. This may upset Ricky and Pierce because there will be a lot of ups and downs and we may not win as many games, but a) we are already up and down, and b) it is better for the long haul. Hope they see it that way too.
|
|
|
Post by mev17 on Dec 21, 2005 4:19:27 GMT -5
Boy, I was interested in this thread, but everyone has spoken so well on this that there is nothing left to say, except sign the Perkins petition (it's on another thread).
|
|
|
Post by DERRENMATTS on Dec 21, 2005 11:14:45 GMT -5
Well, what do you guys think about the possibility that RR threw out there, about Ainge taking over for Doc?
Do you think he'd do it?
Do you think he'd be a good coach?
|
|
|
Post by FLCeltsFan on Dec 21, 2005 13:03:37 GMT -5
He did a great job coaching the Suns and left to spend more time with his family so he wasn't fired. In fact, they really wanted him to stay on because he was doing a good job. So, I think he would be a very good coach.
|
|
|
Post by VI_CelticsFan on Dec 21, 2005 13:19:39 GMT -5
Well, what do you guys think about the possibility that RR threw out there, about Ainge taking over for Doc? Do you think he'd do it? Do you think he'd be a good coach? I would like the idea of Ainge as coach. Anything is better than Doc Rivers right now. Danny will get the picture that the kids need to play to get better. Doc just can't see that.
|
|
|
Post by esco33 on Dec 21, 2005 13:58:22 GMT -5
I could see Ainge coaching, but not anytime soon. We would have to be on a REAL losing streak, like lose 12 in a row or something. I just keep hearing that the two are genuine friends. Don't know if that is BS or what. Friends can still fire friends, but I don't see it happening just yet.
I also think another reason why Ainge won't be coaching is that something tells me that hopefully with Banks and Allen back, we will start to win more games. Not that they will single handedly just make us win more games, but they add elements to our team that have been missing, such as defense, speed, athleticism, and more defense. I think we may finally get onto a little roll, and maybe actually win 3 games in a row.
Two ways Ainge becomes coach I think:
1 - Doc loses 12 games in a row
2 - Doc's contract expires, Ainge takes over.
I think when Doc's contract expires, Ainge will definitely be coaching this team (if we still stink). I see Ainge ala Pop coaching this team in the future, just not anytime soon.
|
|