Speaking Of No Adjustments!

At the end of a recent Celtics game that was very close at game's end, I heard a Rivers instruction to Paul Pierce that left me shaking my head - yet again. As Pierce was heading toward the huddle during a timout, Rivers met him and said "I want you handling the ball". Now, if I am the opposition, I am saying to myself, "Thank you Doc. The number of possibilities has just shrunk about 85%. Makes my job a whole lot easier". Because I guarantee you the Celtics are the most predictable team in the NBA coming out of timeouts and at the end of halves and games. Embarrassingly, their plays very seldom work. Why not?

Since Doc joined the Celtics he has heavily relied on Pierce to "make something happen". Pierce many times has. But top of the key screens and isolations for Pierce has resulted in far too may fruitless trips down court when possessions become critical.

I am sorry, but "Paul, you handle the ball" just isn't great coaching. It reflects little creativity and trust in rest of Celtics team.

C'mon, Doc. You're better than that!

Go Celtics!

Outside

Problem is too many people feel this is "Paul's" team.

People are slow to change. Where I work sometimes things become bogged down because "that's the way we have always done things" is the general response. The Court system is a great example.

With this team I totally agree with you. We seem to have little problem sharing the ball the first 46 minutes, why not the last 2?

beat

Hes not perfect,but he creates his own shot better than anyone else on the team,in game 2 of Finals vs LA who converted big time when LA came roaring back in crunch time?He still has a bigger history of big shots than almost any player in the game playing right now,easily in top 3.Wasn't he great against Cavs in opener?

Cow

Thats true BUT when he does, the others tend to stand around and Paul is not getting younger. We need to take the game over as a team, withan occasional clear out for PP.

beat

First of all let me say that, YES, this team needs to improve (and I think they will--I for one do NOT believe the tank is empty just yet; we just haven't found the right mixture of fuel!) However, I don't necessarily believe that having the ball in Paul's hands is our worst option. Here's my reasoning by other players as end-of-game "ball-handler":

1. Rondo--If the opposition is in the penalty (which they usually are at that point), Rondo becomes a liability with his current lack of prowess at the line. "Hack-a-Rondo" will become the defensive method.

2. Eddie--Not the best option if he has to create his own shot. That's not his forte. Also, if he's double-teamed up top or in the corner, he's not tall enough to pass out of it successfully--Paul is (and HAS many times e.g.--last game against NY and the pass to Big Baby in the playoffs plus passes to Ray and Eddie that we've seen the last two seasons).

3. Ray--Granted, Ray HAS gotten better at creating his own shot recently, but he's still not as good as Paul in that situation and is NOT the best passer out of pressure/double-teaming situations. While we would prefer him to be at the line in a foul situation, he's not as good a ball-handler as Paul.

4. KG or Perk--Obviously, neither are our ball-handlers or "playmakers". Not even an option for starting the offense.

So.... Unless one of the youngsters starts getting prime-time pressure minutes and proves himself our "man", Paul is still our best option for end-of-game ball-handling/creating. If the game's on the line, he's the man I want creating a shot. If the double-team comes, he's shown the ability to trust his teammates and give it up to the open man with great results.

Who cares if the opposition "knows" that Paul is going to have the ball in his hands in the last few seconds?? Everyone used to "know" that Bird or Jordan would have the ball too!! It didn't matter. They created a play for themselves or their teammates. I'm not saying Paul is as good as Bird or Jordan, but he's still our best.

All that said, I would be all for some new in-bounds plays that might catch the opposition off guard a bit. Could be useful against certain opponents/defenses. However, Paul is still da man otherwise!!

--BloodRunsGreen

beat wrote:Cow

Thats true BUT when he does, the others tend to stand around and Paul is not getting younger. We need to take the game over as a team, withan occasional clear out for PP.

beat

agreed beat and last game Pierce got the ball in Garnetts hands for a clean look,do you want the ball in Rondos hands?Ray even before he got here never had a body of work as a closer.....I'm all for sharing the ball,sometimes it gets frustrating when they overpass,we've all seen that and I love Rondo,but he doesn't have experience getting it done in crunchtime situations and his FT whoes are a mental block so its still gonna come back to Pierce,why didn't Rondo drive at end of Knick game in regulation when play broke down?do we want him heaving jumpers?

BloodRunsGreen wrote:First of all let me say that, YES, this team needs to improve (and I think they will--I for one do NOT believe the tank is empty just yet; we just haven't found the right mixture of fuel!) However, I don't necessarily believe that having the ball in Paul's hands is our worst option. Here's my reasoning by other players as end-of-game "ball-handler":

1. Rondo--If the opposition is in the penalty (which they usually are at that point), Rondo becomes a liability with his current lack of prowess at the line. "Hack-a-Rondo" will become the defensive method.

2. Eddie--Not the best option if he has to create his own shot. That's not his forte. Also, if he's double-teamed up top or in the corner, he's not tall enough to pass out of it successfully--Paul is (and HAS many times e.g.--last game against NY and the pass to Big Baby in the playoffs plus passes to Ray and Eddie that we've seen the last two seasons).

3. Ray--Granted, Ray HAS gotten better at creating his own shot recently, but he's still not as good as Paul in that situation and is NOT the best passer out of pressure/double-teaming situations. While we would prefer him to be at the line in a foul situation, he's not as good a ball-handler as Paul.

didn't read your thread before my last one,but agreed and very good overall analysis

4. KG or Perk--Obviously, neither are our ball-handlers or "playmakers". Not even an option for starting the offense.

So.... Unless one of the youngsters starts getting prime-time pressure minutes and proves himself our "man", Paul is still our best option for end-of-game ball-handling/creating. If the game's on the line, he's the man I want creating a shot. If the double-team comes, he's shown the ability to trust his teammates and give it up to the open man with great results.

Who cares if the opposition "knows" that Paul is going to have the ball in his hands in the last few seconds?? Everyone used to "know" that Bird or Jordan would have the ball too!! It didn't matter. They created a play for themselves or their teammates. I'm not saying Paul is as good as Bird or Jordan, but he's still our best.

All that said, I would be all for some new in-bounds plays that might catch the opposition off guard a bit. Could be useful against certain opponents/defenses. However, Paul is still da man otherwise!!

--BloodRunsGreen

didn't see this before my last post,agreed and very good analysis

I actually think that it's a good idea to have the option of someone else handling the ball besides Rondo. The problem is that Pierce forces things at times when I think he should set things up more with passing. The more hands that can handle the ball the better, especially with Rondo's poor freethrow shooting and iffee perimeter shooting. The idea is fine it's just the execution that isn't up to snuff IMHO.

In the game you are speaking about SD....Paul Pierce was the only hot player on the team and had 33 points at that point...so I have no clue where you are coming from on this one.

At the end of a close game, I agree with Doc 100%. I want to ball in a proven closer's hands - Paul Pierce.

9 times out of 10 - he is either going to over power his defender and get his shot, or get the ball to a teammate in a good scoring position.

He is a proven winner...end of story.

Kleen

With you there. Dont always like PP's iso during game cause I feel it jams up our flow. But at the end of the game...give the ball to superman and take your chances. He trust his team and he draws contact (whether or not it is called) almost every time.

jeb65 wrote:Kleen

With you there. Dont always like PP's iso during game cause I feel it jams up our flow. But at the end of the game...give the ball to superman and take your chances. He trust his team and he draws contact (whether or not it is called) almost every time.

I agree that when Pierce starts bringing it up and isolating too early in the game, it gums up the flow. But less than 2 minutes to go in a close game, I want The Truth with the ball.

jeb65 wrote:Kleen

With you there. Dont always like PP's iso during game cause I feel it jams up our flow. But at the end of the game...give the ball to superman and take your chances. He trust his team and he draws contact (whether or not it is called) almost every time.

with you,just wanted to say it was so great watching him pound Kobe and lead us to title in 08,still brings a smile to my face thinking about it.Pierce exceeded my expectations in that series,was great in first two games,led the great comeback in game 4,brutal and bullish in game 5 even though we lost that game,then whole team was on for butt kicking in 6th game.

You people who want the ball in Pierce hands at games' end must be a whole lot more patient than I am, or have shorter memories of many failed possessions. Forced shots, offensive fouls, and no shots at all ring familiar in my memory. Visions of players standing around with the clock running down dance in my head.

And not just this season. Many of the current posters remember this same topic being argued 4 years ago. Do you honestly see an improvement? With this talented, experienced team, I would think the Celtics would have quite an advantage at games'end. Their possessions should run efficiently and smoothly. Haven't seen an improvement, even with improved roster.

I will be the first to acknowledge improvement, but feel it will take coaching creativity, with team and ball movement. My vote is enough with Pierce isolations at critical times. I would love to ge the ball into Pierce hands with the game on the line. But only at the end of player and ball movement.

Go Celtics!

sdceltfan wrote:You people who want the ball in Pierce hands at games' end must be a whole lot more patient than I am, or have shorter memories of many failed possessions. Forced shots, offensive fouls, and no shots at all ring familiar in my memory. Visions of players standing around with the clock running down dance in my head.

And not just this season. Many of the current posters remember this same topic being argued 4 years ago. Do you honestly see an improvement? With this talented, experienced team, I would think the Celtics would have quite an advantage at games'end. Their possessions should run efficiently and smoothly. Haven't seen an improvement, even with improved roster.

I will be the first to acknowledge improvement, but feel it will take coaching creativity, with team and ball movement. My vote is enough with Pierce isolations at critical times. I would love to ge the ball into Pierce hands with the game on the line. But only at the end of player and ball movement.

Go Celtics!

SD...did you miss the 2008 playoffs where Paul Pierce carried the team to the championship by isolating at the end of close games against Lebron and Kobe (amongst others) and torched them?

Guess so.

No, in fact I taped the entire series, and have watched it many times. I remember successful isolations and failed ones. My impressions of what will improve Celtic basketball remains improved coaching creativity and strategy in combination with player and ball movement.

In my opinion there are better ways to close out games. I admire Doc very much, but feel this team's potential in crucial possessions has not been nearly reached. In this I feel Doc has failed thus far.

Go Celtics!

It seems to me that using Pierce in iso at crunch time is basically the same as what Cleveland does with LeBron and is the "hero ball" that many people have said is the antithesis of winning Celtic basketball. Am I incorrect?

Outside

Our hero passes. See last Knicks game.

Jeb,

Point taken, but Kobe passes sometimes too. It just seems counter to what so many people have said, that other teams play hero ball and the Celtics play team ball, and that team ball is an advantage that the Celtics have over other teams.

Kobe is a different player than he once was. Way less selfish. He passed quick out of doubles in the Denver series and in the finals. When he does that the Lakes are tough to beat.

I think it is good basketball to have the ball in your best players hands at the end of a game if he is a guy that knows your O and trust his team mates. Kobe is getting there. PP is def there. "king" james has a long way to go.

Rondo cant handle the ball because he cant shoot free throws. Somebody has to do it. I vote PP.

You're right that Pierce will pass out of a double-team, unlike LeBron. In the Knick game, he made the pass out of a two-man, pick-and-roll play, although most of the time, they run a straight isolation, often with Pierce at the right elbow where he can fade right for a jumper or drive it to the hoop. In that typical situation, the other players spread the floor so that Pierce has room to operate.

If you force him to take the outside shot, he's obviously a dangerous shooter and can make that shot as well as anyone, particularly if he gets his preferred shot fading right from the right elbow. If he drives, most of the time he's going to initiate contact and try to draw a foul. Historically, he's been very successful at that, but I'm seeing more and more that he doesn't get the foul call. Often when he initiates contact, drawing the foul is his primary objective, and he jerks his head, flails his arms, and falls to the floor. Sometimes he gets the call, but more and more refs seem to consider it an acting job (which it frankly is) and not give him the call. I like him MUCH better when he drives and concentrates on making the basket with drawing the foul a secondary objective.

I think my problem is that I'm philosophically opposed to the whole isolation idea because the other players are basically stationary and don't generate the opportunities you get with movement, both on the initial play (hitting a cutter or an open man on the perimeter) or on the offensive boards. If you're fine with Pierce doing it, then I should be fine with it, too.

Regarding Rondo, I just think at some point Doc has to trust him to be a guy who can make a play, and the regular season is the time to instill that in him. You can afford to take a chance on him so that he gains that experience. As far as the free throws, yes it's maddening, but that ultimately is not the main reason to keep him on the bench at crunch time because you know he's not going to shoot 25% all year. More important is his ability to hit a mid-range shot so that his defender doesn't leave him to double someone else. He has to make them pay to leave him, either by making that shot or creating an opportunity for someone else. He has to grow into being that player, and he needs Doc to help him get there.

Happy Thanksgiving to all.

Outside

Outside sez: "Regarding Rondo, I just think at some point Doc has to trust him to be a guy who can make a play, and the regular season is the time to instill that in him. You can afford to take a chance on him so that he gains that experience. As far as the free throws, yes it's maddening, but that ultimately is not the main reason to keep him on the bench at crunch time because you know he's not going to shoot 25% all year. More important is his ability to hit a mid-range shot so that his defender doesn't leave him to double someone else. He has to make them pay to leave him, either by making that shot or creating an opportunity for someone else. He has to grow into being that player, and he needs Doc to help him get there."



Outside: I'm not sure that I can remember Rondo ever making a play at crunch time. Granted my memory is a bit foggy but I have no trouble remembering PP, Ray or KG making the play. My mind is full of such heroics. Rondo.... not at all. I cannot recall.

My sense is that he tends to shy away from those situations, perhaps, and I don't want to be unfair, even if his number is called at the offensive end.

Not sure how Doc helps Rondo to grow. It is such a fine line. Do you lean on Rondo by calling his number and then inadvertantly setting him up to fail? Do you hurt his confidence by not calling his number? Or do you simply wait and hope that the rest of his game develops to offset this liability, wait for maturation to occur?

Seems to me that the latter is the safest route to take, avoiding confrontation, and Doc has done so. Otherwise you risk a complete meltdown, throwing him into deep water when he is not ready.

I'm not sure that Rondo's 25% FT shooting represents a high water or a low water mark. It could likely get worse as pressures grow. It is certainly not a give that it will improve based on any sort of law of averages... not like flipping a coin.

Exactly how do you "coach" a player who may be quite a bit shaky at crunch time?

I wonder what Bill Russell would say? Perhaps he has already spoken to this matter.

I am reminded of Russ's comment after winning (maybe said to KG) #17 that real leadership shows when you are able to bring (encourage) your teammates along with you toward greatness and Russ gestured by opening his arms wide as though sweeping teammates up.

He made it clear that you cannot pull them or drag them along. (You can't make them! You can't do it for them!) It is much more subtle than that.

Maddening indeed waiting for Rondo to show 4th quarter take charge leadership. It is more likely that he simply may not have it in him despite the big contract extension that was made with the expectation (and the prayer) that you can build a team around Rondo.

GC

If you are philosophically opposed to running isolation plays at the end of games, then I don’t know how you can possible enjoy the NBA. That is simply the way things are done down the stretch, and has been for a very long time.

Wade does it….Kobe does it…Lebron does it….Pierce does it….heck, I would like to have someone tell me ONE TEAM that doesn’t isolate their best 1 on 1 player at the end of a close game? In fact, I will go further. I would like to have someone mention a time in the last 30 years when this wasn’t the case.

Larry Bird and Magic Johnson used to iso – ALL THE TIME in close games. Michael Jordan’s two most famous shots of all time were isolations, one where he swept aside Craig Ehlo and one where he did the same to Byron Russell.

This not a new thing and complaining about it in 2009 is akin to complaining about email being annoying or fundamentally disagreeing with reality television – i.e., that ship has long since sailed.

I just got done watching some of the 08 finals again. (is it possible to wear out a DVD) Rondo seemed so in control of RUNNING the team, he stepped to the line and made his share of foul shots too. Almost seems in some ways he's regressed a bit from then.

I know we are all concerned or we wouldn't be here voicing out thoughts. Tommy uses the expression "master of the 1/2 inch" many times, well when you don't jump good, that 1/2 inch means a lot. PP has never been a leaper but maybe that 1/2 inch just isn't there at least not like it was 2 years ago.

I don't care how well you take care of yourself, work out, whatever, you cannot turn back the clock, perhaps delay it some. It is obvious RA PP KG and Sheed are on the backside of their careers. Dozens of new KIDS with young legs come into the league every year, those legs are tough to stay with.

Lastly we won 2 years ago, so for some the urgency will never be the same especially in November-December.....as the playoffs approach I'd like to think the focus will happen and providing we have realative health and have rationed minutes appropriately, we stand a good chance of going deep into the playoffs.

The journey really has just begun, we are a long way from getting to OZ!

beat

I think I stepped on a hornets' nest here. First off, I hope I haven't offended anyone, because that certainly wasn't my intent, but I'm concerned that I have based on how strongly people have objected to what I tried to say. It's your forum, and I'm just a visitor here, so I'm mindful of not stepping on anybody's toes. I'm sorry if that was the case.

I think I shot myself in the foot by getting off track, but I my original question was to politely, respectfully reconcile these two positions:

-- The best chance the Celtics have to win is to give the ball to Pierce in isolation.

-- The oft-expressed position that Celtic basketball is team basketball, other teams play "hero ball," and team ball will win out over hero ball.

Again, I'm sorry if I offended anyone. I sincerely just wanted to get people's opinions. I hope that my mistake was the way I originally posed the question and the fact that I confused the issue by straying off on tangents. I thought that it was okay to ask the question. In any event, I'll do my best to be more careful in the future.

Outside

I have no problem with any of it PERIOD.
I dislike ISO ball period!!

Having ANYONE play hero ball is a roll of the dice. PP is not getting any younger and what he has done for this team is amazing. BUT is it something we can continue to count on?

Some of us look at Bron, as you say, and are critical of his getting the ball on the last play yet are happy with the C's giving it to PP.

Certainly if i'm the Cleveland coach and down a point with under 10 seconds to go I want Bron to make a play.

And not to step on toes either, I'm not so sure I want PP to have the ball in this situation as much as before. There have I skated around this enough?

beat