Author Topic: The evolution of Tony Allen: 4 years later, he still has "potential"  (Read 30160 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: The evolution of Tony Allen: 4 years later, he still has "potential"
« Reply #105 on: July 28, 2008, 06:13:45 PM »

Offline timpiker

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1725
  • Tommy Points: 113
I don't need stats or more film - based on his play this year Tony Allen just plain sucks.  

You know there's something wrong when you are talking POTENTIAL for a player that's been in the league 4 years.  

I usually do not question Danny much but to pay Tony Allen more than the minumum is just plain wrong.

Re: The evolution of Tony Allen: 4 years later, he still has "potential"
« Reply #106 on: July 28, 2008, 06:42:47 PM »

Offline kozlodoev

  • NCE
  • Kevin Garnett
  • *****************
  • Posts: 17914
  • Tommy Points: 1294
I don't need stats or more film - based on his play this year Tony Allen just plain sucks.  

You know there's something wrong when you are talking POTENTIAL for a player that's been in the league 4 years.  

I usually do not question Danny much but to pay Tony Allen more than the minumum is just plain wrong.
Based on the fact that half of those 4 years were spent coming back from 2 major knee injuries, I'd hazard the guess that the news of Tony Allen's death has been greatly exaggerated.

Plus, this thread is what fabricated the talk about Tony Allen's potential. He has none. He is what he is, and when he's healthy and his head is in the right place, he will be a great player for us. But there is no potential to speak of there -- he likely won't show you anything that you haven't already seen from him.
"I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve."

Re: The evolution of Tony Allen: 4 years later, he still has "potential"
« Reply #107 on: July 29, 2008, 12:16:57 AM »

Offline timepiece33

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1747
  • Tommy Points: 78
The PER numbers from 82games are a little higher than those on the ESPN website for all players. It has Tony with a higher PER than 10.7, and it's higher than his opponent's PER, so my statement was true. Food for thought,

 http://www.82games.com/ROLRTG3.HTM

  sort on opponent's production (which is akin to opponent's PER) and you'll see Tony at the top of the list for the entire league.

So Hollinger can't figure out the statistic he developed?

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/insider/columns/story?columnist=hollinger_john&id=2136379

He has him as the 60th ranked SG in the league with regards to PER.   

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/hollinger/statistics?sort=per&qual=false&pos=sg&seasonType=2&action=login&appRedirect=http%3a%2f%2finsider.espn.go.com%2fnba%2fhollinger%2fstatistics%3fsort%3dper%26qual%3dfalse%26pos%3dsg%26seasonType%3d2

How accurate is 82games?  Is it an adjusted number?   Just curious. 
« Last Edit: July 29, 2008, 08:12:03 AM by timepiece33 »

Re: The evolution of Tony Allen: 4 years later, he still has "potential"
« Reply #108 on: August 10, 2008, 10:58:11 PM »

Offline Tony Allen 08

  • Anton Watson
  • Posts: 4
  • Tommy Points: 0
Tony Allen will become an All Star this season.

Re: The evolution of Tony Allen: 4 years later, he still has "potential"
« Reply #109 on: August 10, 2008, 11:01:03 PM »

Offline Roy Hobbs

  • In The Rafters
  • The Natural
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 33333
  • Tommy Points: 6430
  • Doc could learn a thing or two from Norman Dale
Tony Allen will become an All Star this season.

Only if he's playing in the D-League.  ;D

Welcome to the blog, by the way.

All the negativity in this town sucks. It sucks, and it stinks, and it sucks. - Rick Pitino

Portland CrotoNats:  2009 CB Draft Champions

Re: The evolution of Tony Allen: 4 years later, he still has "potential"
« Reply #110 on: August 10, 2008, 11:06:51 PM »

Offline Tony Allen 08

  • Anton Watson
  • Posts: 4
  • Tommy Points: 0
Yea, thanks. Tony Allen will blow because he has changed even though he has failed in the past.