Author Topic: TWill getting the Darko treatment!  (Read 8360 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: TWill getting the Darko treatment!
« Reply #75 on: February 26, 2013, 12:57:11 PM »

Offline BudweiserCeltic

  • Frank Ramsey
  • ************
  • Posts: 12384
  • Tommy Points: 1197
I have no problem with benching Terrence, but I just wished it didn't coincide with a game in which we could've used his length to guard some of Utah's wing players.
So who are you subbing him in for, then? Pierce? Bradley, who was having a great game? Lee, who is virtually the same size?

Exactly.

I swear people don't even look at options and alternatives when criticizing Doc's subs.  Like "Don't play Wilcox at C!" when we have no other options right now.

Ding ding ding!  It's a pretty good rule of thumb that the more vehemently someone complains about playing/not playing some guy, the less they've thought about the context of the move.  Add in a healthy splash of "grass is always greener" for the guys who don't play much, too. 

There are exceptions of course, but that's how it usually plays out.

And what actual context have I missed? I'm pretty sure I've covered everything in my thought process.
The fact that what Doc did didn't cost the team the game. He won the game and taught T Will a lesson, do what you are supposed to do or your chances of getting another 10 day contract are not good. I don't see the problem.

Nothing you mentioned has any bearing on anything I've said in this thread. He could've used the same lesson on Crawford, "do what you are supposed to do or your chances of playing with this team are not good," yet he played him when the obvious choice in this particular game was Williams, if you were going to play one of them.

Re: TWill getting the Darko treatment!
« Reply #76 on: February 26, 2013, 12:57:14 PM »

Offline RIPRED

  • Jared Sullinger
  • Posts: 510
  • Tommy Points: 42
    • Twitter: @MrGravesz
Yeah, he had a bad game last night, so there's a reason for him not playing. I don't think he should've been benched for the full game, particularly when Doc went with Crawford today, and more importantly, we could've used his size and speed at the wings very badly for defensive purposes.

Green couldn't guard Hayward, Pierce couldn't guard Hayward, Lee did a good job though, all this to say Terrence Williams could've been useful.

Crawford played limited minutes too. Doc wanted to win his game.

I know. But when you have a 6'6 guy on the bench with his agility, and a 6'8 SG Hayward, who's too mobile for Green and Pierce, it would've been wise to use him.

Playing Green on Hayward, considering how bad he was all game, makes no sense if you actually wanted to win this game. The obvious choice was Williams, and if that's not an option for Doc, then he should've extended Lee's minutes while Hayward was on the floor, and give him that defensive assignment.

What has T will done to deserve the benefit of the doubt? The kid was playing in China up until a few weeks ago (until his team unexpectedly cut him heading into the playoffs). He's not an allstar.

He looked great against Pheonix, but he needs to keep that up. You don't get playing time just because your 6'6". In the pro's they play to win. There's no participation trophy's here.

Re: TWill getting the Darko treatment!
« Reply #77 on: February 26, 2013, 01:00:54 PM »

Offline BudweiserCeltic

  • Frank Ramsey
  • ************
  • Posts: 12384
  • Tommy Points: 1197
Yeah, he had a bad game last night, so there's a reason for him not playing. I don't think he should've been benched for the full game, particularly when Doc went with Crawford today, and more importantly, we could've used his size and speed at the wings very badly for defensive purposes.

Green couldn't guard Hayward, Pierce couldn't guard Hayward, Lee did a good job though, all this to say Terrence Williams could've been useful.

Crawford played limited minutes too. Doc wanted to win his game.

I know. But when you have a 6'6 guy on the bench with his agility, and a 6'8 SG Hayward, who's too mobile for Green and Pierce, it would've been wise to use him.

Playing Green on Hayward, considering how bad he was all game, makes no sense if you actually wanted to win this game. The obvious choice was Williams, and if that's not an option for Doc, then he should've extended Lee's minutes while Hayward was on the floor, and give him that defensive assignment.

What has T will done to deserve the benefit of the doubt? The kid was playing in China up until a few weeks ago (until his team unexpectedly cut him heading into the playoffs). He's not an allstar.

He looked great against Pheonix, but he needs to keep that up. You don't get playing time just because your 6'6". In the pro's they play to win. There's no participation trophy's here.

You're under the impression that I think Williams should've gotten playing time because he's a good player. All I've said is that he could've been useful in a particular match-up, a match-up that was killing our team yesterday with the exception of Lee and in occasions Bradley. Yet, Doc saw fit to play Crawford, who also sucks by the way, with no solid reason behind it that is evident to me.

So yes, I very much question Doc's thought process.

I'd be more comfortable with what Doc did if neither Crawford or Williams played.

Re: TWill getting the Darko treatment!
« Reply #78 on: February 26, 2013, 01:07:56 PM »

Offline Smitty77

  • NCE
  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1528
  • Tommy Points: 115
Terrance Williams measurements:

http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Terrence-Williams-507/

6' 9" wingspan
8' 7.5" standing reach
37" max vertical

Dang it.  I could NOT find Lee's measurements:-(((

Here is an article listing him at 6'4", but I saw in other articles on Nets' blogs that fans think is is more like 6'2".

http://sports.espn.go.com/espnmag/story?id=3448141

If someone finds his predraft measurements, please post them so we can compare these.

Thanks,

Smitty77

Re: TWill getting the Darko treatment!
« Reply #79 on: February 26, 2013, 01:28:20 PM »

Offline kozlodoev

  • Satch Sanders
  • *********
  • Posts: 9900
  • Tommy Points: 561
Terrance Williams measurements:

http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Terrence-Williams-507/

6' 9" wingspan
8' 7.5" standing reach
37" max vertical

Dang it.  I could NOT find Lee's measurements:-(((

Here is an article listing him at 6'4", but I saw in other articles on Nets' blogs that fans think is is more like 6'2".

http://sports.espn.go.com/espnmag/story?id=3448141

If someone finds his predraft measurements, please post them so we can compare these.

Thanks,

Smitty77
The Draft Express numbers are accurate -- their "predraft measurements" are from when players were officially measured in predraft camps.

Lee, it seems, wasn't measured pre-draft.
Managing Rilski Sportist to glory at http://www.buzzerbeater.com

Re: TWill getting the Darko treatment!
« Reply #80 on: February 26, 2013, 01:37:51 PM »

Offline nickagneta

  • Paul Pierce
  • ***************************
  • Posts: 27210
  • Tommy Points: 2046
I have no problem with benching Terrence, but I just wished it didn't coincide with a game in which we could've used his length to guard some of Utah's wing players.
So who are you subbing him in for, then? Pierce? Bradley, who was having a great game? Lee, who is virtually the same size?

Exactly.

I swear people don't even look at options and alternatives when criticizing Doc's subs.  Like "Don't play Wilcox at C!" when we have no other options right now.

Ding ding ding!  It's a pretty good rule of thumb that the more vehemently someone complains about playing/not playing some guy, the less they've thought about the context of the move.  Add in a healthy splash of "grass is always greener" for the guys who don't play much, too. 

There are exceptions of course, but that's how it usually plays out.

And what actual context have I missed? I'm pretty sure I've covered everything in my thought process.
The fact that what Doc did didn't cost the team the game. He won the game and taught T Will a lesson, do what you are supposed to do or your chances of getting another 10 day contract are not good. I don't see the problem.

Nothing you mentioned has any bearing on anything I've said in this thread. He could've used the same lesson on Crawford, "do what you are supposed to do or your chances of playing with this team are not good," yet he played him when the obvious choice in this particular game was Williams, if you were going to play one of them.
Of course it has a bearing on what you are saying.

Doc coached the game and won. He didn't have to do any of what you said because what he did won the game. So the obvious choice wasn't anyone. He didn't have to use either but decided for 5 minutes to use the guy they have a long term contract on who didn't play lousy the game before.

This is just much ado about absolutely nothing.

Re: TWill getting the Darko treatment!
« Reply #81 on: February 26, 2013, 01:40:22 PM »

Offline cltc5

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1722
  • Tommy Points: 117
Wow doc pulled a young player who messed up.  That's great coaching there. Forget the fact that he sticks with guys most of the game that go 1-14 on the nite ::).   Let's not kid ourselevs.  Dic gets bailed out by his players not his coaching.

Re: TWill getting the Darko treatment!
« Reply #82 on: February 26, 2013, 01:54:52 PM »

Offline BudweiserCeltic

  • Frank Ramsey
  • ************
  • Posts: 12384
  • Tommy Points: 1197
I have no problem with benching Terrence, but I just wished it didn't coincide with a game in which we could've used his length to guard some of Utah's wing players.
So who are you subbing him in for, then? Pierce? Bradley, who was having a great game? Lee, who is virtually the same size?

Exactly.

I swear people don't even look at options and alternatives when criticizing Doc's subs.  Like "Don't play Wilcox at C!" when we have no other options right now.

Ding ding ding!  It's a pretty good rule of thumb that the more vehemently someone complains about playing/not playing some guy, the less they've thought about the context of the move.  Add in a healthy splash of "grass is always greener" for the guys who don't play much, too. 

There are exceptions of course, but that's how it usually plays out.

And what actual context have I missed? I'm pretty sure I've covered everything in my thought process.
The fact that what Doc did didn't cost the team the game. He won the game and taught T Will a lesson, do what you are supposed to do or your chances of getting another 10 day contract are not good. I don't see the problem.

Nothing you mentioned has any bearing on anything I've said in this thread. He could've used the same lesson on Crawford, "do what you are supposed to do or your chances of playing with this team are not good," yet he played him when the obvious choice in this particular game was Williams, if you were going to play one of them.
Of course it has a bearing on what you are saying.

Doc coached the game and won. He didn't have to do any of what you said because what he did won the game. So the obvious choice wasn't anyone. He didn't have to use either but decided for 5 minutes to use the guy they have a long term contract on who didn't play lousy the game before.

This is just much ado about absolutely nothing.
LOL, yes, Doc coached the perfect game. Doc is infallible. It's worthless to scrutinize Doc's decision making because we won a game.

Also, Crawford did play lousy the game before...

Re: TWill getting the Darko treatment!
« Reply #83 on: February 26, 2013, 02:09:41 PM »

Offline nickagneta

  • Paul Pierce
  • ***************************
  • Posts: 27210
  • Tommy Points: 2046
Hey criticize Doc all you want. In this case I think he deserves some defense.

What is your motivation for the criticism. To show Doc could have won the game easier? Maybe? Because let's face it, just because T Will would have been put in the game guarantees nothing. His entrance into the game for 5 minutes could have cost the Celtics the game.

Hence, why I think criticizing this coach for doing what just about any other coach would have done is ridiculous. After a loss in which Doc's coaching costs us the game...go wild. Timing here is stupid in my opinion as is the nature of the criticism

Re: TWill getting the Darko treatment!
« Reply #84 on: February 26, 2013, 02:48:36 PM »

Offline BudweiserCeltic

  • Frank Ramsey
  • ************
  • Posts: 12384
  • Tommy Points: 1197
Hey criticize Doc all you want. In this case I think he deserves some defense.

There's plenty you can defend Doc about, there's no need to pick up a cause for the sake of defending him.

As I mentioned previously, I have no problem with Doc not playing Williams, but I do question if it was a wise move to do so.

Reason given:

Doc wanted to win the game, so he shorten the rotation - hey, I'm completely on-board with this, but start questioning why play Crawford at all if this was to be.

The only semblance that would make sense is that he wanted to give some time for our guaranteed contract player in Crawford, but that contradicts the wanting to shorten the rotation aspect + the wanted to win aspect because as far as fit and match-ups, Williams was the choice, if a choice between them had to be made.

Which simply adds to the fact that Green was horrible last night, particularly defensively, and on that respect, so was Pierce.

So the winning options in my mind were, limit Green's minutes (which he did, but could've used even less guarding Hayward). Then extend Lee's minutes, and Avery's so that they could guard Hayward through longer stretches, and also use less Terry in the first half. And no Crawford. If none of those works, then the next answer would've been Williams to me so that he could shadow Hayward a bit better, but I'm not sweating that he didn't get any playing time. I do question though the reasoning behind it when considering the Utah match-ups.

And I did see the Portland game, and thought Williams was horrible and quite disappointing, so I understand Doc's reluctance to use him, and I don't blame him for it. Just question if overall it was the correct call. Just because something can be reasoned or forgiven doesn't make it right, or wrong as the case may be. Just as I understood why Doc kept playing Cassell over Eddie House in our championship run, just like I understood why Doc went with James Posey despite us not being enamored with the small ball units.

Quote
What is your motivation for the criticism. To show Doc could have won the game easier? Maybe? Because let's face it, just because T Will would have been put in the game guarantees nothing. His entrance into the game for 5 minutes could have cost the Celtics the game.

Hence, why I think criticizing this coach for doing what just about any other coach would have done is ridiculous. After a loss in which Doc's coaching costs us the game...go wild. Timing here is stupid in my opinion as is the nature of the criticism

My motivation for the criticism? What? I thought we were in a discussion board, were people come and argue using their opinions, and sometimes they even use facts.

You know what could've cost us the game? Green and Pierce guarding Hayward for as long as they did, thankfully it didn't because Pierce went wild from the mid-range.

You want to pick a cause to defend Doc? Why not pick on the "play Green over Bass" against Utah crowd because that idea makes zero sense to me, or shouldn't make any sense to anyone who watched the game.

Let me put it this way, forget about Williams, my Doc criticism is that he should've worked better the Hayward match-up. Williams was merely a tool he could've used, a tool which made sense. Maybe that tool wouldn't have worked, who knows, but considering the way Pierce and Green defended him, I think there's a strong possibility he would've done better. But as mentioned, this wasn't his only recourse... Lee should've played more if anything.

Re: TWill getting the Darko treatment!
« Reply #85 on: February 26, 2013, 03:31:02 PM »

Offline elcotte

  • Avery Bradley
  • Posts: 285
  • Tommy Points: 29
Hey criticize Doc all you want. In this case I think he deserves some defense.

There's plenty you can defend Doc about, there's no need to pick up a cause for the sake of defending him.

As I mentioned previously, I have no problem with Doc not playing Williams, but I do question if it was a wise move to do so.

Reason given:

Doc wanted to win the game, so he shorten the rotation - hey, I'm completely on-board with this, but start questioning why play Crawford at all if this was to be.

The only semblance that would make sense is that he wanted to give some time for our guaranteed contract player in Crawford, but that contradicts the wanting to shorten the rotation aspect + the wanted to win aspect because as far as fit and match-ups, Williams was the choice, if a choice between them had to be made.

Which simply adds to the fact that Green was horrible last night, particularly defensively, and on that respect, so was Pierce.

So the winning options in my mind were, limit Green's minutes (which he did, but could've used even less guarding Hayward). Then extend Lee's minutes, and Avery's so that they could guard Hayward through longer stretches, and also use less Terry in the first half. And no Crawford. If none of those works, then the next answer would've been Williams to me so that he could shadow Hayward a bit better, but I'm not sweating that he didn't get any playing time. I do question though the reasoning behind it when considering the Utah match-ups.

And I did see the Portland game, and thought Williams was horrible and quite disappointing, so I understand Doc's reluctance to use him, and I don't blame him for it. Just question if overall it was the correct call. Just because something can be reasoned or forgiven doesn't make it right, or wrong as the case may be. Just as I understood why Doc kept playing Cassell over Eddie House in our championship run, just like I understood why Doc went with James Posey despite us not being enamored with the small ball units.

Quote
What is your motivation for the criticism. To show Doc could have won the game easier? Maybe? Because let's face it, just because T Will would have been put in the game guarantees nothing. His entrance into the game for 5 minutes could have cost the Celtics the game.

Hence, why I think criticizing this coach for doing what just about any other coach would have done is ridiculous. After a loss in which Doc's coaching costs us the game...go wild. Timing here is stupid in my opinion as is the nature of the criticism

My motivation for the criticism? What? I thought we were in a discussion board, were people come and argue using their opinions, and sometimes they even use facts.

You know what could've cost us the game? Green and Pierce guarding Hayward for as long as they did, thankfully it didn't because Pierce went wild from the mid-range.

You want to pick a cause to defend Doc? Why not pick on the "play Green over Bass" against Utah crowd because that idea makes zero sense to me, or shouldn't make any sense to anyone who watched the game.

Let me put it this way, forget about Williams, my Doc criticism is that he should've worked better the Hayward match-up. Williams was merely a tool he could've used, a tool which made sense. Maybe that tool wouldn't have worked, who knows, but considering the way Pierce and Green defended him, I think there's a strong possibility he would've done better. But as mentioned, this wasn't his only recourse... Lee should've played more if anything.

Easiest thing in the world is to sit around and criticize. You have no idea as to what was going on with TWill and/or Doc.
Doc is a good manager of people and i trust him.

Re: TWill getting the Darko treatment!
« Reply #86 on: February 26, 2013, 03:37:41 PM »

Offline LooseCannon

  • Satch Sanders
  • *********
  • Posts: 9773
  • Tommy Points: 743
Wow doc pulled a young player who messed up.  That's great coaching there. Forget the fact that he sticks with guys most of the game that go 1-14 on the nite ::).   Let's not kid ourselevs.  Dic gets bailed out by his players not his coaching.

You don't pull people for missing shots if they are taking the shots they are supposed to be taking within the flow of the offense.  On the other hand, the coach should consider pulling players who continually take shots they shouldn't be taking, even if they are making them.
"The worst thing that ever happened in sports was sports radio, and the internet is sports radio on steroids with lower IQs.” -- Brian Burke, former Toronto Maple Leafs senior adviser, at the 2013 MIT Sloan Sports Analytics Conference

Re: TWill getting the Darko treatment!
« Reply #87 on: February 26, 2013, 03:39:57 PM »

Offline CelticConcourse

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6175
  • Tommy Points: 382
  • Jeff Green
It was a must-win, not a chance for TWill to show off his talents. We had so much rest that it would look bad, if we didn't play very hard. That's why we only played (essentially) eight guys.

TWill can show his worth at practice.
Jeff Green - Top 5 SF

[Kevin Garnett]
"I've always said J. Green is going to be one of the best players to ever play this game"

Re: TWill getting the Darko treatment!
« Reply #88 on: February 26, 2013, 03:43:55 PM »

Offline Snakehead

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3875
  • Tommy Points: 215
I have no problem with benching Terrence, but I just wished it didn't coincide with a game in which we could've used his length to guard some of Utah's wing players.
So who are you subbing him in for, then? Pierce? Bradley, who was having a great game? Lee, who is virtually the same size?

Exactly.

I swear people don't even look at options and alternatives when criticizing Doc's subs.  Like "Don't play Wilcox at C!" when we have no other options right now.

Ding ding ding!  It's a pretty good rule of thumb that the more vehemently someone complains about playing/not playing some guy, the less they've thought about the context of the move.  Add in a healthy splash of "grass is always greener" for the guys who don't play much, too. 

There are exceptions of course, but that's how it usually plays out.

And what actual context have I missed? I'm pretty sure I've covered everything in my thought process.
The fact that what Doc did didn't cost the team the game. He won the game and taught T Will a lesson, do what you are supposed to do or your chances of getting another 10 day contract are not good. I don't see the problem.

Nothing you mentioned has any bearing on anything I've said in this thread. He could've used the same lesson on Crawford, "do what you are supposed to do or your chances of playing with this team are not good," yet he played him when the obvious choice in this particular game was Williams, if you were going to play one of them.

I'm not sure why you say this is an obvious choice (Williams over Crawford).

We needed scoring.  And you add in the practical matter that Crawford is fully locked into our team on a contract right now and we need to see what he can do and get him comfortable with teammates and in the system... yeah it's not obvious.


"I really don't want people to understand me." - Jordan Crawford

Re: TWill getting the Darko treatment!
« Reply #89 on: February 26, 2013, 04:03:59 PM »

Offline ItStaysYang

  • Marcus Smart
  • Posts: 383
  • Tommy Points: 25
I have no problem with benching Terrence, but I just wished it didn't coincide with a game in which we could've used his length to guard some of Utah's wing players.
So who are you subbing him in for, then? Pierce? Bradley, who was having a great game? Lee, who is virtually the same size?

Exactly.

I swear people don't even look at options and alternatives when criticizing Doc's subs.  Like "Don't play Wilcox at C!" when we have no other options right now.

I'm more like "Don't play Bass at C!".

I'm more like "Don't start Bass!"

 

Hello! Guest

Welcome to the CelticsBlog Forums.

Welcome to CelticsBlog