Newyork, I completely agree that this is a players league and the coaches are the ones that show them the way. However, you gotto realize that maybe while Garnett could have policed this team, MJ probably policed the Bulls even more. I don't think it really would have mattered who coached the Bulls. Nobody was getting passed Jordan (Far most importantly), Pippen and Rodman. Phil might have made up the Xs and Os, but Michael Jordan was THE BOSS. People bowed down to and made way to him. Not Phil Jackson.

And this isn't taking anything away from Phil. He's a very good coach. Doc is a very good coach, abut I'm willing to bet that this current Celtic team wont ask for anything different, in terms of coaching, even if they lose. And if they do lose, it's because Kobe magically turned from 24, to 23, and Pau magically turned into Shaq.

Doc Rivers coaching shouldn't be put into question. I think Phil has actually been more questionable with his media tactics (The way they always have been) and they way he benches, but even so. Both good coaches. Rivers has been coaching better. Rivers deserves the ring.

Posted by Allanfan20:

Newyork, I completely agree that this is a players league and the coaches are the ones that show them the way. However, you gotto realize that maybe while Garnett could have policed this team, MJ probably policed the Bulls even more. I don't think it really would have mattered who coached the Bulls. Nobody was getting passed Jordan (Far most importantly), Pippen and Rodman. Phil might have made up the Xs and Os, but Michael Jordan was THE BOSS. People bowed down to and made way to him. Not Phil Jackson.

And this isn't taking anything away from Phil. He's a very good coach. Doc is a very good coach, abut I'm willing to bet that this current Celtic team wont ask for anything different, in terms of coaching, even if they lose. And if they do lose, it's because Kobe magically turned from 24, to 23, and Pau magically turned into Shaq.

Doc Rivers coaching shouldn't be put into question. I think Phil has actually been more questionable with his media tactics (The way they always have been) and they way he benches, but even so. Both good coaches. Rivers has been coaching better. Rivers deserves the ring.

There was no need for however because I agree with all that. I never went out of my way to praise Phil Jackson and put him on that pedistel. Phil Jackson is Phil Jackson because he has 9 rings ESPN & the Media make him who he is. I do like Phil Jacksons style though. He has an aura to him. I think Pippen had as much to do with Jordan winning championships as Phil Jackson. Pippen in todays NBA would probably be around what Kobe is.

All im saying is this.

If you were to look at all the coaches in the NBA who won the NBA finals im sure Doc Rivers name would probably stand out in a negative way. Im not even talking about coaching ability or nothing like that anyway he just doesn't have that aura to me(I think Avery Johnson has it though) thats really all im really saying. That and players win NBA championships.

Same as when Steve Nash won MVP. If you look at all the players who have won the MVP in the past.

Like I said, I'm not taking anything away from Phil. He deserves what he has. I don't like certain things about him, but he's a good coach. And yes, he has that "Aura" just like Aurback and Holzman and Pat Riley do and did. Doc Rivers doesn't. Lets see what happens next season though, when the Celtics are officially the hunted.

I don't think you and I disagree on anything here. I just think Rivers should get some more credit. He's hardly getting ANY.

You should have an asterick placed next to your name.

Posted by newyorknewyork:

He is about to win one. I never really thought of him as a championship calibre coach.

If he wins then this more then ever proves that players run the NBA. I think Garnett coaches that team as much as Doc Rivers.

Maybe we should have traded Frye for Garnett when we had the chance LOL.

LOL! i remember those debates... some posters around here were on the shrooms or somethin big time back then.

Thibodeaux has a lot to do with their success. One of the chief knocks against Rivers was that he couldn't coach defense. Now he's got someone on his staff who's very good at it.

Doc was a great Knick because he worked so hard and was such a class act. He seems to have carried that over to his coaching. I am always surprised whenever he has Eddie House in but it always seems to work. I think a big thing for a coach is establishing a rotation. He has a great rotation. Bringing in Brown, Powe, Cassell, Posey, and House at times is a huge luxury. They all are very talented guys. Garnett has so much to do with their success. However, if you look at any good coach they have their star player in their pocket. Don Nelson failed because he tried to make Mason his star. Van Gundy was successful because he went with Patrick. The franchise guy is key to a coach. If they are not with you as a coach you will lose your job. See Doug Collins.

Posted by Ira:

Thibodeaux has a lot to do with their success. One of the chief knocks against Rivers was that he couldn't coach defense. Now he's got someone on his staff who's very good at it.

thibodeaux and Garnett and Pierce and Allen and Rondo and Posey etc. all have a ton to do with his success. Without them who knows where the Celtics would be. This still should not take away from the fact that Doc is a good coach. Some of you guys just have a hard time dropping your perceptions