Pressure Makes Diamonds out of Coal

[Eric Albert]

>Mark Piotrowski <markp at pop3.coe.ufl.edu> wrote:
>
>Of course there's no perfect coach, Kim.  But I guess if nothign else 
>i"d like a coach that sets a rotation and defines roles.  Yes Doc is 
>great at human rleations and his plyaers seem to like him.  But he's 
>doing the same thing he did in ORL --- which drove the Magic fans 
>crazy.  I've read too many times from players, ex-players and coaches 
>that guys in the NBA want defined roles.  And young guys need defined 
>roles to not be constantly pressing to get mins.
>
>guys might not always be happy about their roles, but i'd rather that 
>than what i fear awaits Delonte this season -- 30 mins one game, 10 
>the next, followed by a start.

 From today's Globe:
=====
Rivers noted that part of the difficulty was having a roster with so
many players who can play multiple positions.  All that versatility
makes it time-consuming to practice offensive and defensive sets . . .
Rivers would not commit to Ryan Gomes as the starting power
forward, raising the possibility of the Celtics being "a multiple start
team, like Dallas has done over the last couple of years where they
start different lineups against different teams."
=====
I agree with Mark that this is a huge problem with Doc's coaching.
I've already complained that, so far as I can tell, he made *no*
attempts to settle rotations or roles during preseason.  Again and
again, he played combinations of players -- sometimes for twenty
minutes in a row -- that were clearly never going to play together
in the real season.  (Indeed, some of those players have since
been cut.)

You could argue that he was "seeing what players could do under
game conditions."  But Doc has always insisted that what players
do on the floor means nothing in terms of playing time; what's
important is what they do in practice.  (This makes no sense to me,
and I've wondered if it's just a way to keep people from second-
guessing his odd decisions about how many minutes each player
gets.)

In any case, he could have given the new players a look-see
*and* also worked on rotations/roles.  He did not.  He seems to
be caught in an eternal hell of "trying things out" with a terror
of ever committing to anything.  I think that's a recipe for
failure.

The Globe quote points out yet another problem with not
settling roles/rotations: it spreads practice time more thinly.
Versatility is supposed to be a *good* thing.  If it's not working
for you, then drop it -- just because a player *can* do
something doesn't mean he *has* to do it.  Simpler rotations/roles
would mean more meaningful reps per player.

As it was, Doc cut yesterday's practice *short* because the
players' focus "was not where it needed to be," something he
partly attributed to the difficulty of them learning multiple
positions.  (Which supports Mark's point about players wanting
fixed roles and minutes.)

All this monkeying around would have a little justification if
Doc was brilliant at game-time substitutions, and was planning
to use all that "versatility" to vigorously take advantage of
match-ups.  Does anyone on the list think that sounds like Doc?

-- Eric