Yikes... Ray frustrated with Doc?

[Roy Hobbs]

[Ray] Allen was the hottest player on the court. After that 3-pointer early in the fourth quarter, he was 8-for-11 from the floor. He had made all five of his 3-pointers. He was carrying his team, and then for some reason Doc Rivers ripped the team out of Allen's hands and gave it back to Garnett and Pierce on nights they clearly didn't have it.

And Allen doesn't pretend to understand why.

"That's just where the offense went," he said. "I think from a coaching perspective, that's where the plays were directed. That's what we ran. For me, any time my number gets called, I'm going to be ready to shoot the ball."

So, someone asked Allen, wasn't your number called in the fourth quarter?

"What you saw is what we got," he said.

Interesting. That sounded very much like a player pointing a finger -- softly, nicely, but clearly -- at his head coach.

Link.

[Last Train]

Yeah, a little bit.

But they showed this interview in the post game and it didn't sound quite as bad as it reads. The reporter was hounding him for this sort of answer and basically wasn't going to stop until Ray said something like this.

[Hrvoje]

This is topic for offseason or mid-season, not now.

Please stop it.

[Roy Hobbs]

This is topic for offseason or mid-season, not now.

Please stop it.

Why is this an off-season topic?  Whether or not our third best player is frustrated could be relevant to the rest of the series, and whether Ray should have gotten more touches is as worthy of discussion as any other topic.

Nobody is saying fire Doc due to this.  It's just something to look at.

[Hrvoje]

gosh you are awake already?

tough night, ha?

I couldn't sleep much either

[Roy Hobbs]

gosh you are awake already?

tough night, ha?

I couldn't sleep much either

Haha.  Yeah.  There are only so many hours in the day, so my priorities have become 1) work 2) Celticsblog 3) sleep. 

[celticmaestro]

rightly so. when garnett or pierce have a hot hand, doc rides them so why not the same with ray?

that didn't make sense to me. and the thing that really got to me last night was taking posey out and leaving pierce in in the fourth quarter when he was on 5 fouls and completely ineffective.

i'm not a doc basher by no means - but he got these two wrong in my opinion.

[nickagneta]

I think you and the writer of the article are reading way too much into Ray's words and body language, body language that you didn't even see but are taking for granted what happened on the words of a writer that already had a slanted view because of the article he was writing.

I'm not going to pretend to have been there. I wasn't. But I do believe there is a heck of a lot of reading between the lines going on here that might be dead wrong.

The Celtics offense went where it has always gone in the fourth. Do you expect it to be so different after 100 games of working so well?

[Roy Hobbs]

I think you and the writer of the article are reading way too much into Ray's words and body language, body language that you didn't even see but are taking for granted what happened on the words of a writer that already had a slanted view because of the article he was writing.

I'm not going to pretend to have been there. I wasn't. But I do believe there is a heck of a lot of reading between the lines going on here that might be dead wrong.

The Celtics offense went where it has always gone in the fourth. Do you expect it to be so different after 100 games of working so well?

How am I reading anything into anything?  I posted a link and asked a question.  No value judgment there at all.

Any insight on why our best player last night only got three shots in the fourth?  By your comments in another thread, you pointed out that Doc was calling plays for KG down the stretch, despite him having a terrible night shooting.  Might it have made sense to call some plays for Ray?

Also, over those 100 games where our fourth quarter offense "work[ed] so well", our team was the sixth worst team in the entire NBA in scoring in "clutch" situations (less than five minutes left, lead for either team of 5 points or less).  Our fourth quarter offense has struggled all year long when the game has been tight.

http://82games.com/CTSORT11.HTM

[nickagneta]

I think you and the writer of the article are reading way too much into Ray's words and body language, body language that you didn't even see but are taking for granted what happened on the words of a writer that already had a slanted view because of the article he was writing.

I'm not going to pretend to have been there. I wasn't. But I do believe there is a heck of a lot of reading between the lines going on here that might be dead wrong.

The Celtics offense went where it has always gone in the fourth. Do you expect it to be so different after 100 games of working so well?

How am I reading anything into anything?  I posted a link and asked a question.  No value judgment there at all.

Any insight on why our best player last night only got three shots in the fourth?  By your comments in another thread, you pointed out that Doc was calling plays for KG down the stretch, despite him having a terrible night shooting.  Might it have made sense to call some plays for Ray?

Also, over those 100 games where our fourth quarter offense "work[ed] so well", our team was the sixth worst team in the entire NBA in scoring in "clutch" situations (less than five minutes left, lead for either team of 5 points or less).  Our fourth quarter offense has struggled all year long when the game has been tight.

http://82games.com/CTSORT11.HTM

No value judgement??

You are saying he was frustrated and instantly jumping to a conclusion that it is with his coach and what the coach asked his team to do late in the game.

That assumption sure sounds like a value judgement to me.

You don't think that maybe, just maybe, Ray could have been frustrated with the fact that the Celtics losss. Or the fact that he finally had a stellar game only to have it at the same time when so many others were bad?

Why does Ray's frustration have to be with Doc and his not getting his # called?

Should Doc have called more plays for Ray, absolutely, I was screaming for him to. But possibly going inside to KG was the right move, trying to be aggressive going in, so that if we missed a shot we might have a shot at going to the line. Calling Ray's plays there are a tough call because most of his plays revolve around the 3 pt line and if he misses you are looking at long rebounds, possible fast breaks and no possibilty of FTs. All rather disasterous things in a close game.

As for the bad clutch #s I imagine the sample size on that has to be tremendously small considering that the Celtics average score had a point differential of 10 point something points per game. That means there weren't a heck of a lot of times where with less than five minutes left, lead for either team of 5 points or less in the fourth quarter the Celtics needed to be clutch.

That does make sense right.

[crownsy]

I think you and the writer of the article are reading way too much into Ray's words and body language, body language that you didn't even see but are taking for granted what happened on the words of a writer that already had a slanted view because of the article he was writing.

I'm not going to pretend to have been there. I wasn't. But I do believe there is a heck of a lot of reading between the lines going on here that might be dead wrong.

The Celtics offense went where it has always gone in the fourth. Do you expect it to be so different after 100 games of working so well?

How am I reading anything into anything?  I posted a link and asked a question.  No value judgment there at all.

Any insight on why our best player last night only got three shots in the fourth?  By your comments in another thread, you pointed out that Doc was calling plays for KG down the stretch, despite him having a terrible night shooting.  Might it have made sense to call some plays for Ray?

Also, over those 100 games where our fourth quarter offense "work[ed] so well", our team was the sixth worst team in the entire NBA in scoring in "clutch" situations (less than five minutes left, lead for either team of 5 points or less).  Our fourth quarter offense has struggled all year long when the game has been tight.

http://82games.com/CTSORT11.HTM

No value judgement??

You are saying he was frustrated and instantly jumping to a conclusion that it is with his coach and what the coach asked his team to do late in the game.

That assumption sure sounds like a value judgement to me.

You don't think that maybe, just maybe, Ray could have been frustrated with the fact that the Celtics losss. Or the fact that he finally had a stellar game only to have it at the same time when so many others were bad?

Why does Ray's frustration have to be with Doc and his not getting his # called?

Should Doc have called more plays for Ray, absolutely, I was screaming for him to. But possibly going inside to KG was the right move, trying to be aggressive going in, so that if we missed a shot we might have a shot at going to the line. Calling Ray's plays there are a tough call because most of his plays revolve around the 3 pt line and if he misses you are looking at long rebounds, possible fast breaks and no possibilty of FTs. All rather disasterous things in a close game.

As for the bad clutch #s I imagine the sample size on that has to be tremendously small considering that the Celtics average score had a point differential of 10 point something points per game. That means there weren't a heck of a lot of times where with less than five minutes left, lead for either team of 5 points or less in the fourth quarter the Celtics needed to be clutch.

That does make sense right.

I don't know how you CANT read it the way roy reads it nick.

ray was destroying the lakers, and suddenly we went away from running plays for him in the fourth. he said;

1. no plays were called for me in the fourth That's just where the offense went," he said. "I think from a coaching perspective, that's where the plays were directed

so, he's saying doc didn't run plays for him. not sure how thats open to interpertation.


2. The reporter asked him why and he said What you saw is what we got

thats clearly saying we ran what doc told us to run, and im not happy about it. nor should he be, why doc decided that the middle of the fourth was the time to establish a cold KG on the block, something they should ALWAYS do from the start of the game, i have no idea.

[connerhenry43]

gosh you are awake already?

tough night, ha?

I couldn't sleep much either

Haha.  Yeah.  There are only so many hours in the day, so my priorities have become 1) work 2) Celticsblog 3) sleep. 

you need to adjust your priorities. Celtics blog is #1, at least until the end of this series. work can wait! 

[Roy Hobbs]

You are saying he was frustrated and instantly jumping to a conclusion that it is with his coach and what the coach asked his team to do late in the game.

That assumption sure sounds like a value judgement to me.

I posted an article, and my title had a question mark after it.  That's not exactly a definitive statement of fact.  Rather, it connotes one possible reading of Ray's quote, which the author of the story made.  I simply posted it, without commentary.

You don't think that maybe, just maybe, Ray could have been frustrated with the fact that the Celtics losss. Or the fact that he finally had a stellar game only to have it at the same time when so many others were bad?

Why does Ray's frustration have to be with Doc and his not getting his # called?

That was the author's take on it.  That being said, look at crownsy's post above.  I think it's pretty clear that one of the things Ray was frustrated with was the offense and the coaching. 

Should Doc have called more plays for Ray, absolutely, I was screaming for him to. But possibly going inside to KG was the right move, trying to be aggressive going in, so that if we missed a shot we might have a shot at going to the line. Calling Ray's plays there are a tough call because most of his plays revolve around the 3 pt line and if he misses you are looking at long rebounds, possible fast breaks and no possibilty of FTs. All rather disasterous things in a close game.

Ray was by far our best player all night.  As you said, he needed more plays called for him.  There's absolutely no excuse for your best player getting three shots in the fourth.  None.

As for the bad clutch #s I imagine the sample size on that has to be tremendously small considering that the Celtics average score had a point differential of 10 point something points per game. That means there weren't a heck of a lot of times where with less than five minutes left, lead for either team of 5 points or less in the fourth quarter the Celtics needed to be clutch.

That does make sense right.

Boston was solidly in the middle of the pack amongst NBA teams in terms of having clutch situations, ranking 19th out of 30 teams.  The Celtics experienced such "clutch" situations in 37 of their 82 games, so it's a large enough sample size, I'd say.

[CT34]

I was upset with Doc myself for a number of reasons.  One being taking Ray Allen out of the game in the 4th and not calling Rays number late in the game.  Also why did Doc bring Rondo back into the game when I was clear that Eddie House presents on the court was helping the team?  I also think having House on the floor not only helps KG but he also helps Ray Allen. 

But if Ray Allen is frusrated with Doc I don't blame him.  Last night he wasn't the only one who was.

[nickagneta]

You are saying he was frustrated and instantly jumping to a conclusion that it is with his coach and what the coach asked his team to do late in the game.

That assumption sure sounds like a value judgement to me.

I posted an article, and my title had a question mark after it.  That's not exactly a definitive statement of fact.  Rather, it connotes one possible reading of Ray's quote, which the author of the story made.  I simply posted it, without commentary.

My bad, I got my understanding of the situation from your second post but even then I misinterpretted that.

This is topic for offseason or mid-season, not now.

Please stop it.

Whether or not our third best player is frustrated could be relevant to the rest of the series, and whether Ray should have gotten more touches is as worthy of discussion as any other topic.

From the above quote I somehow got that you were inferring Ray's frustration was specifically with Doc. Sorry.

You don't think that maybe, just maybe, Ray could have been frustrated with the fact that the Celtics losss. Or the fact that he finally had a stellar game only to have it at the same time when so many others were bad?

Why does Ray's frustration have to be with Doc and his not getting his # called?

That was the author's take on it.  That being said, look at crownsy's post above.  I think it's pretty clear that one of the things Ray was frustrated with was the offense and the coaching. 

It could be interpretted that way but I am not convinced of it. I think it had more to do with the loss. I think we love to try to read backhanded pot shots at others into players comments when most of the time those comments have nothing to do with the inference we try to place in it.

Ray was frustrated. He was on. He wanted the ball. But I don't think he was voicing frustration Doc's way. He was just voicing frustration.

Should Doc have called more plays for Ray, absolutely, I was screaming for him to. But possibly going inside to KG was the right move, trying to be aggressive going in, so that if we missed a shot we might have a shot at going to the line. Calling Ray's plays there are a tough call because most of his plays revolve around the 3 pt line and if he misses you are looking at long rebounds, possible fast breaks and no possibilty of FTs. All rather disasterous things in a close game.

Ray was by far our best player all night.  As you said, he needed more plays called for him.  There's absolutely no excuse for your best player getting three shots in the fourth.  None.

No argument there.

But towards the end or last three minutes I don't have a problem with the logic of trying to go inside to KG. It's good coaching logic. Bang inside to get the easier shots, better opportunity for an offensive rebound, better opportunity to go to the line, less likely opportunity for a disasterous fastbreak the other way.

My problem is why wasn't Ray taking about every shot possible up until that final 2-3 minutes. That's where I have a prob with Doc. I kinda agree with wanting to go inside late.

As for the bad clutch #s I imagine the sample size on that has to be tremendously small considering that the Celtics average score had a point differential of 10 point something points per game. That means there weren't a heck of a lot of times where with less than five minutes left, lead for either team of 5 points or less in the fourth quarter the Celtics needed to be clutch.

That does make sense right.

Boston was solidly in the middle of the pack amongst NBA teams in terms of having clutch situations, ranking 19th out of 30 teams.  The Celtics experienced such "clutch" situations in 37 of their 82 games, so it's a large enough sample size, I'd say.

Fair enough 37 out of 82 is large enough, although the solidly entrenched in the middle at the 66th percentile might be stretching it a bit.