Archives
Jun 23, 2008
Pre-Draft Summit: Boston Celtics

Jun 20, 2008
Believe In The Celtics

Jun 9, 2008
How The Celtics Are Up 2-0

Jun 4, 2008
Computing The Finals

May 3, 2008
What If Boston Goes Down...

Full Archive

Putting Doc In Perspective
Authored by Elrod Enchilada - February 21, 2008 - 11:50 pm



Current Featured Columns
Final Thoughts On The 2008 NBA Draft
This year's draft was decidedly more calm and casual than the Oden/Durant showdown, which made for a more candid and personal experience.

Grading The Deal: Knicks Sign Duhon
The Knicks overpaid for a below average starting point guard, but the move should still pay dividends.

Oh Danny Boy
Danny Granger, who has just three years of NBA experience under his belt, will undoubtedly be the man in Indiana beginning this summer.
$10 Million For Five Players?
The Orlando Magic will be limited by the NBA's Luxury Tax in terms of filling the remaining spots on their roster. It is also possible it could cost them Keyon Dooling or Maurice Evans.
Raptorland’s New Carnivore
The Raptors are bringing in a player who will have an immediate impact (unlike Hibbert or whomever the Raptors would’ve drafted at 17), plays a position of need (unlike Ford,) and carries a reputation of intimidation (unlike Nesterovic).
More from RealGM's Columnists

RealGM Search
Search:
For most of Doc Rivers’ first three years as Celtics coach, the range of debate concerning his performance ranged from “he is an absolutely terrible coach” to “he is a decidedly below average coach.” Bill Simmons probably owes Doc royalties for all the columns he wrote bashing the guy as the source of the Celtics’ problems. Doc had very few defenders on the numerous message boards, including RealGM, where I graze. This does not mean everyone was bashing Doc, merely that those not in the hate-Doc crowd mostly remained quiet. It was not a fight to get into, especially as the team sinked to the depths of the league standings the past two years.

I was one of the quiet voices. It was not so much that I thought Doc was a great coach as much as I thought he was in an impossible situation to judge him against other head coaches. No one in Doc’s position, I reasoned, could have done much better. And I confess I found Doc to be an unusually likeable man of integrity, so I was rooting for him to succeed. The difference between Doc and Belichick, the genius, at the human level was night and day.

Now, of course, that is ancient history. The message boards are filled with appreciative threads concerning Doc, often quite thoughtful and impressive. Even Bill Simmons has backed off. Doc is no longer such a moron that he could be outcoached by a caveman, as the avatar for one poster repeatedly announces.

What was most striking to me during the rabid denunciation of Doc from 2004 to 2007, was the absurdly unfair and high standard most fans had for judging NBA coaches. By that standard, very few coaches could stay employed for more than a few months, let alone a season or two. Perhaps it is the nature of the beast, or perhaps it is a function of the Internet and cable TV and our general immersion in sports information that would have been unthinkable a few decades ago.

Consider this.

Imagine a team has the same NBA coach for six seasons. During those six seasons this team has two first-team all-NBA players on three occasions, and a first team all-NBA player the three other seasons. The team has three sure-fire Hall-of-Famers in their prime for the last five of the six years. One of the three players is commonly considered the very best player in the game during most of these six years.

In other words, the team is loaded with talent, and only one other NBA team over this six year period produces as many first and second team all-pros, and no other team produces as many first-team all-NBA players.

If there is one iron law in NBA history, it is that the teams with the most superstars tend to win championships. It is what any coach prays for, because teams without first-team all-NBA talents almost never ever win NBA titles, or even get close. Speed dial Phil Jackson if you want any elaboration on this point.

Imagine also that there was no other dominant team in the Eastern Conference with it during these six years. It is not like this team played in the shadow of some other dynasty.

So how did this team and this coach do over the course of these six seasons?

In a word: terrible. This team did not win a title ever. This team did not even make it to the NBA finals ever during those six years. Three times the team was defeated in the opening round of the playoffs – being swept twice -- and three times the team was defeated in the conference finals.

Moreover, the team never had the best record in the Eastern Conference. In fact, the last two years of the six years in question the team produced is worst winning percentages, exactly as its three superstars were at their peak performance. One year it had a .500 winning percentage.

The coach of this team must have really sucked, right? What a bloody idiot. He must make Doc Rivers of 2006-07 look like a combination of Albert Einstein and Stephen Hawking. That coach must have been the team owner or something, because this goes down as maybe the worst coaching performance in NBA history. Never has so much talent accomplished so little.

As you probably guessed, the team I am describing is the Boston Celtics, circa 1950-1956. The three superstars are Bob Cousy, Bill Sharman, and Ed Macauley.

The coach is none other than Red Auerbach.

Moral of the story: be patient when evaluating coaches. Red took a long time before he coached a championship team in Boston. It took John Wooden even longer, 16 seasons, to win his first championship at UCLA. Doc may not belong in the same paragraph as those guys, but he is, at the very least, a highly credible NBA coach.

Here are the numbers:

Boston Celtics Annual Record:

Year / Record / Conference finish
1955-56 / 39-33 / .542 / 2 (6 GB)
1954-55 / 36-36 / .500 / 3 (7 GB)
1953-54 / 42-30 / .583 / 2 (2 GB)
1952-53 / 46-25 / .648 / 3 (2 GB)
1951-52 / 39-27 / .591 / 2 (1 GB)
1950-51 / 39-30 / .565 / 2 (2 GB)

Boston Celtics Playoff Performance:

50-51: lost 2-0 in first round (conference semi-finals)
51-52: lost 2-1 in first round (conference semi-finals)
52-53: won first round 2-0; lost 3-1 in conference finals
53-54: lost first round 2-0 (conference finals…one less round of playoffs this year)
54-55: won 2-1 in first round; lost 3-1 in conference finals
55-56: lost 2-1 in first round (conference semi-finals)

Boston Celtics All-NBA seasons:

50-51: one first-team all-NBA (Macauley)

51-52: two first-team all-NBA players (Macauley, Cousy)

52-53: two first-team all-NBA players (Macauley, Cousy); one second-team all-NBA (Sharman)

53-54: one first-team all-NBA player (Cousy); one second-team all-NBA (Macauley)

54-55: one first-team all-NBA player (Cousy); one second-team all-NBA (Sharman)

55-56: two first-team all-NBA players (Cousy, Sharman)