Archives: Rivers after inking extension

By Chris Forsberg | ESPNBoston.com

With all the buzz surrounding Doc Rivers and his future with the Celtics, we went back in the archives and dug out the full transcript from his interview on May 16, 2011 on Boston sports radio WEEI. It was Rivers' first public comments after Danny Ainge announced that the coach had agreed to a five-year, $35 million extension to stay in Boston three days earlier. Given his current situation and all the buzz that Rivers could walk away, some of his answers here are interesting to re-read:

Q: Did you fool everyone by coming back?

Rivers: "Well, last year they were probably more right. Last year I was absolutely leaning [towards walking away]. This year I really never was. After last year's summer and going through the decision that we went through, I was pretty sure I was coming back and I was pretty sure I wanted to come back here. This is a special place and I've said that before. You can't get a lot of these jobs where you coach teams like the Celtics, or the Red Sox, or the Yankees, and I have one of them. I work with a great [general manager] in Danny Ainge and I have good ownership, so why change?"

Q: Whose idea was it for a long-term deal?

Rivers: "Well, Danny brought it up to me. When he first brought it up I was surprised by it. But this was a while ago that he brought it up. I think, actually, he brought up even more years to start. I never thought of it in those terms because we kept doing these one-year or two-year deals, and I never thought of it. And Danny walked in my office and said, 'Listen, I want you to be here with me for a long time, and I want to make this something where we're together for a long time,' and so he brought up the number of years and you've got to process that when you commit to something for that long, and we did, and we thought it was the right thing to do."

Where did talk of you going elsewhere come from?

Rivers: "Well, I don't know where the going somewhere else came from. That was all over, especially of late. And that was one of the reasons I wanted to do this. I hear the rumors just like you guys with all these different teams. My thing is, I have a special team and I have a special group of players, and why change? I look at the Utah situation and Jerry Sloan and I look at the situation in San Antonio, and Danny and I were talking, those are the two most stable franchises, because they've had the same coach and the same GM and the same ownership, and they've been able to draft well, scout well, pick the right players for the system, because they've known the system. And when we talked about it, that's what we want to do."

Q: Aren't you going to rebuild at some point? Are you looking forward to it?

Rivers: "Well I don't think anyone's looking forward to that, but I'm willing to do that. I've had a group that has been very loyal to me, and I think it would have been very easy for me to just run, and go somewhere else and chase something else. Who says that we still can't do that, with free agency and adding the right pieces while our Big Three are getting older? We have to add the right supporting cast to them, and in that transition, hopefully we can still chase what we want. But it would have been easier to do it the other way. I just don't think it's the right thing to do. Coaches talk about loyalty and team all the time and I just thought it was time to show it, and that's what I did."

Could you imagine coaching the Lakers?

Rivers: "Well, I don't know about that. Once you take a year off, you pretty much can coach anywhere. But that would have been strange."

Q: Ethically, could you have done it, given your relationship with the Celtics?

Rivers: "I did have a problem with that if I had, let's say, did it this year. I had a philosophical, a big problem with that. If I had said, 'You know what? I'm going to let my contract expire at the end of this year and then go take -- actually any other team, but especially them or a couple other teams,' I just, I couldn't do it. I told my agent that. That's something I can't do. I don't function that way and I just thought it'd be a very difficult thing for me to do."

112288

Interesting, huh??

Rosalie,

Based on this and the information coming out that Doc feels bad about leaving, I think a deal will be made as follows:

Doc stay one more year.............we are blowing up the team, but we are bringing some vets in possibly ....Big Al.......Milsap....maybe Smith.......

See  how it goes Doc....if the team is not turning you on into staying......next year we will give you permission to talk to other teams.

I think that is how it will play out.

112288

Danny wants to blow the team up.  Or at least, he wants to get something for Pierce that will be one more building block in our future core.  If Pierce goes, KG goes.  If KG goes, Doc goes and if Doc goes so does KG.  There is no doubt in my mind that it would go both ways with KG and Doc.  Doc is trying to back Danny into a corner by forcing his hand into keeping Pierce, in my opinion.  I understand all that and accept it as part of "the game".

Here's the part I don't understand:

Doc doesn't want to be in a full-blown rebuild.  Ok, I can understand that too, no coach does and some, I don't want to mention any names (Phil Jackson) have elevated the ability to get coaching jobs with teams that are only a player or so away from competing for a championship and avoid having to take over a complete rebuild, to an artform.  The only NBA coach I can think of who actually LIKES rebuilds and focuses his job searches on landing those positions, is Larry Brown.  

On the other hand, no coach likes losing either.  Doc may be many things, but delusional is a word I have not heard used in regard to him and thinking he can compete for a championship with a 38 year old Kevin Garnett (his birthday is May, so he'll be 38 by the time the finals come around) and a 36 year old Paul Pierce (birthday coming this October) as their core is delusional.  

His thoughts, wholly supported by Danny's actions and statements, have been that we need to surround these guys with talent, talent that will play well enough to enable Doc to manage their minutes.  Ok, so we've got Jeff Green to take the load off of Pierce.  Well done, Danny, but where are we going to get a legit center that can take 20+ minutes off of KG?  Seasoned, legit NBA backup centers don't grow on trees.  There is no glut of such that I am aware of.  The only way to get one of these, barring a coup by Danny the Trader using our flotsam and jetsam, is to trade someone of value for someone of value (sorry, but I haven't drooled over an unproven, untested rookie since Kevin McHale and that was only because we already had Bird and he came with Parish).  Who do we have, that is of sufficient value, that would not be considered part of our future core (so no Sully, no Rondo, no Green, no Bradley (ok, maybe Bradley) that could land us a legit center?  The guy Doc is hedging in order to keep, that's who.  Once again, sorry, but barring a coup by Danny, I do not see Lee or JET or Crawford or any combo of them getting this job done.  They are the "flotsam and jetsam" I was referring to.  Decent players (at least Lee and JET) but not of such quality that another GM would consider giving up a solid, believable backup 5 for.

I'm not saying we should trade Pierce, keep Pierce or anything else.  What I am saying is that it strikes me as quite odd that Doc seems to be dancing around a fire that burns either way.  If he really doesn't want a rebuild nor a agonizingly frustrating season then he needs to leave, but he's not just doing that.  He's acting like he's waiting for a shoe to drop, but no matter which shoe drops it will produce the same effect, a frustrating season of rebuilding or a frustrating season of harnessing up the old, past-their-prime cavalry horses for one last charge to glory.


bob


.