Tony Allen

[jchen1731]

al jefferson?

[nickagneta]

Oh and just so others can get this jist of what is going on:
.
.
.

Bball returned to his claim that Tony played most of his time in those 20+ minute games in the first half when the game wa on the line and after researching it I found that allegation to be utterly false and he confirmed it by stating that playing 8 minutes out of 20+ in the first half and the rest in garbage actually confirmed his statement and not mine. I think we all know that's crazy.

There, now everyone is caught up and doesn't have to read the past three pages of this ridiculous discussion.

  Par for the course, Nick. Here's what I said:

  "In the games that Tony Allen got more than 20 minutes he generally got a significant chunk of those minutes in the first half when the games were still competitive."

  Here's an attempt of mine to correct your misconception that I was saying that TA played most of his minutes in the first half:

  "And, just for the record, I didn't say that he played his minutes mostly in the first half. I said that he played a significant chunk of his minutes in the first half, and from the little checking I did it would appear that I was correct."

  Here's my comment while I again tried to explain this to you:

  "You didn't see that because you're showing that he played the majority of his minutes in the second half. I never said that he played a majority of his minutes in the first half. In fact I corrected that mischaracterization in my previous post which you quoted in your response."

  Here's Nick trying his best to summarize the discussion:

  "Bball returned to his claim that Tony played most of his time in those 20+ minute games in the first half when the game wa on the line and after researching it I found that allegation to be utterly false and he confirmed it by stating that playing 8 minutes out of 20+ in the first half".

  All in all, you did a good job of summarizing what was going on in the discussion. Anyone who can follow the post I just made can see what was going on. All things considered, you did a fine job of refuting the point that TA played most of his minutes in the first half of those games, the fact that I never made the point you refuted notwithstanding.

Dude, you can stick to your diction all you want and quote and requote all you want but everyone knows what you meant. You meant that Tony was playing "significant" minutes in a non garbage time situation making his 20+ minutes stat of 18-3 relevant when it is not because he played mostly mop up time this year in those game.

Tonight if he is playing 20-25 minutes they will not be in mop up minutes and hence, if he plays those minutes and they are meaningful, I say we lose. Go on and on with your re-quotes and misdirection all you want but I stand by everything I said about Tony and his playing minutes in tonight's game and my reasoning for it.

[KungPoweChicken]

If TA plays big minutes tonight, we will beat the Bulls.

[Roy Hobbs]

If TA plays big minutes tonight, we will beat the Bulls.

Probably, because as nick mentioned above, that means we'll be seeing a lot of garbage time.  Doc doesn't have much trust in the guy, and I don't expect him to see minutes unless the game is well in hand.

[BballTim]

Also, Tony playing in 18 wins with an average win total of almost 18 points is not proof that he played those minutes mostly in the first half. On the contrary, since he is a bench player, it can be argued that the starters played most if not all of the first and third quarters and the end of the second quarter, which is Doc's norm, and that Tony played a majority of his minutes in fourth quarters of those blowout games that were already decided before the fourth quarter started.

  I looked at the first three wins that TA played 20+ minutes in (all double digit wins). His first halves were 10 minutes (+5), 9 minutes (+5), and 13 minutes (+17). So he played a decent amount of minutes in the first half of all three games and we did well with him in the game all three times. I'm not going to waste my time checking further, since I suspect you're making up your arguments as you go along. But if you're really interested that still leaves you with about 15 wins (14 by your count) to check if you feel that those games were flukes and Doc mainly plays subs in the 4th quarter. And, just for the record, I didn't say that he played his minutes mostly in the first half. I said that he played a significant chunk of his minutes in the first half, and from the little checking I did it would appear that I was correct.

Actually you weren't correct. As usual.

I did check. In most games that Tony Allen played over 20 minutes, most games he was receiving the majority of his minutes in the second half by playing the end of the third quarter and all of the fourth and in a large majority of those games, he stayed in for the entire fourth quarter because the game was out of hand.

  Too funny. Since you can't admit when you're wrong I wasted some more of my time and checked all of the wins where he played 20+ minutes through the end of December, which was 14 games. He played at least 8 minutes in the first half of all but 1 game. Over those 14 games he played about 40% of his minutes in the first half, which is a significant chunk. I was correct. You didn't see that because you're showing that he played the majority of his minutes in the second half. I never said that he played a majority of his minutes in the first half. In fact I corrected that mischaracterization in my previous post which you quoted in your response.

Maybe next time you should check further than three games. Also next time maybe you should reveal all the facts like in those games you mentioned the amount of time Tony played in the second half and the score at the time. If those were the first three games of the year that Tony played 20+ in and the Celtics won, maybe the good people here would like to know that he did play the majority of his minutes in those games in meaningless time in the second half.

  Maybe you should figure out what you're looking for before you check any games. Maybe if most of those points affected my argument one way or the other I would have mentioned them.

Also, nice cherry picking of data. Tony was playing well the first six games of the year and was an integral part of Docs lineup. When he came back down to Tonyland, He saw more and more mop up time as most of the rest of his 20+ minutes games will attest to.

  Seeing that his first half minutes in the next 11 20+ minute wins average out to be about 1 minute less than the average of his first three games I'll assume that you have no more knowledge about what happened during the first half of the season than you seem to know about what happened during last year's playoffs.

I'm not going to argue this any further as you obviously, as usual, just like to argue points without ever stating you might be wrong about something.

  Show me where, in this discussion, you stated that you might be wrong. Your original thought, that if TA plays 20-25 minutes we'll lose was and is completely unsupported and clearly goes against past performance. The current discussion centers around your claim that the only reason TA doesn't get playoff minutes is because Doc doesn't trust him. DO you have any quotes or any proof at all? Of course not. Do you admit that you might be wrong? Of course not.

The fact remains that Tony has never been given time in the playoffs by Doc because Doc doesn't trust him and not because of some hairbrain excuses that Doc was shortening his rotation or because Tony isn't physically ready yet. He doesn't play because he isn't good enough and Doc doesn't trust him in important games. That's soooooooo easy for everyone else to see, why you can't is beyond me.

  It's a hairbrain excuse that Doc shortened his rotation during the playoffs? Are you serious? You might be the only person I know of who didn't notice this.

you really think 8 minutes in a first half is a significant chunk when the other 12 come in the 4th quarter when your up 20+?

I disagree completly.

  I said that he played a significant chunk of his minutes in the first half of those games. From the games I checked he played 40% of his minutes in the first half. If you want to completely disagree that 40% of something is a significant chunk of it then go for it. It's a subjective word and I'm not going to argue it's meaning.

I love when people act like percentages always prove something.

Lets say he plays 4 minutes a game total, if he plays 75% of his minutes in the first half, does that mean he made a huge contribution?

12 blowout minutes in the 4th would also seem to indicate the score was probley wider in the first half as well. 40% is a ncie number, but it means 60% of his time was crap. you can screw with percentages to make his 8 minutes sound super important all you want, you still haven't addressed why he can't get consistant miutes when he's healthy (I.E games where he plays 10-20 minutes without 60%   of them coming in an already decided game) If he's such a key role player.

  That's all exciting but it has nothing to do with what was being discussed. Nick said that if Tony played 20-25 minutes tonight we'd lose. And, yes, Nick did get that right in his summary. I pointed out that we generally won when Tony Allen played 20+ minutes. I didn't say that TA was the reason we won. I didn't say that TA made huge contributions to those wins. I did say that he played a significant chunk of his minutes in the first half. You might still disagree with it.

[BballTim]

If TA plays big minutes tonight, we will beat the Bulls.

Probably, because as nick mentioned above, that means we'll be seeing a lot of garbage time.  Doc doesn't have much trust in the guy, and I don't expect him to see minutes unless the game is well in hand.

  It could also mean that Paul or Ray are unable to play much due to injury or foul trouble.

[crownsy]

Also, Tony playing in 18 wins with an average win total of almost 18 points is not proof that he played those minutes mostly in the first half. On the contrary, since he is a bench player, it can be argued that the starters played most if not all of the first and third quarters and the end of the second quarter, which is Doc's norm, and that Tony played a majority of his minutes in fourth quarters of those blowout games that were already decided before the fourth quarter started.

  I looked at the first three wins that TA played 20+ minutes in (all double digit wins). His first halves were 10 minutes (+5), 9 minutes (+5), and 13 minutes (+17). So he played a decent amount of minutes in the first half of all three games and we did well with him in the game all three times. I'm not going to waste my time checking further, since I suspect you're making up your arguments as you go along. But if you're really interested that still leaves you with about 15 wins (14 by your count) to check if you feel that those games were flukes and Doc mainly plays subs in the 4th quarter. And, just for the record, I didn't say that he played his minutes mostly in the first half. I said that he played a significant chunk of his minutes in the first half, and from the little checking I did it would appear that I was correct.

Actually you weren't correct. As usual.

I did check. In most games that Tony Allen played over 20 minutes, most games he was receiving the majority of his minutes in the second half by playing the end of the third quarter and all of the fourth and in a large majority of those games, he stayed in for the entire fourth quarter because the game was out of hand.

  Too funny. Since you can't admit when you're wrong I wasted some more of my time and checked all of the wins where he played 20+ minutes through the end of December, which was 14 games. He played at least 8 minutes in the first half of all but 1 game. Over those 14 games he played about 40% of his minutes in the first half, which is a significant chunk. I was correct. You didn't see that because you're showing that he played the majority of his minutes in the second half. I never said that he played a majority of his minutes in the first half. In fact I corrected that mischaracterization in my previous post which you quoted in your response.

Maybe next time you should check further than three games. Also next time maybe you should reveal all the facts like in those games you mentioned the amount of time Tony played in the second half and the score at the time. If those were the first three games of the year that Tony played 20+ in and the Celtics won, maybe the good people here would like to know that he did play the majority of his minutes in those games in meaningless time in the second half.

  Maybe you should figure out what you're looking for before you check any games. Maybe if most of those points affected my argument one way or the other I would have mentioned them.

Also, nice cherry picking of data. Tony was playing well the first six games of the year and was an integral part of Docs lineup. When he came back down to Tonyland, He saw more and more mop up time as most of the rest of his 20+ minutes games will attest to.

  Seeing that his first half minutes in the next 11 20+ minute wins average out to be about 1 minute less than the average of his first three games I'll assume that you have no more knowledge about what happened during the first half of the season than you seem to know about what happened during last year's playoffs.

I'm not going to argue this any further as you obviously, as usual, just like to argue points without ever stating you might be wrong about something.

  Show me where, in this discussion, you stated that you might be wrong. Your original thought, that if TA plays 20-25 minutes we'll lose was and is completely unsupported and clearly goes against past performance. The current discussion centers around your claim that the only reason TA doesn't get playoff minutes is because Doc doesn't trust him. DO you have any quotes or any proof at all? Of course not. Do you admit that you might be wrong? Of course not.

The fact remains that Tony has never been given time in the playoffs by Doc because Doc doesn't trust him and not because of some hairbrain excuses that Doc was shortening his rotation or because Tony isn't physically ready yet. He doesn't play because he isn't good enough and Doc doesn't trust him in important games. That's soooooooo easy for everyone else to see, why you can't is beyond me.

  It's a hairbrain excuse that Doc shortened his rotation during the playoffs? Are you serious? You might be the only person I know of who didn't notice this.

you really think 8 minutes in a first half is a significant chunk when the other 12 come in the 4th quarter when your up 20+?

I disagree completly.

  I said that he played a significant chunk of his minutes in the first half of those games. From the games I checked he played 40% of his minutes in the first half. If you want to completely disagree that 40% of something is a significant chunk of it then go for it. It's a subjective word and I'm not going to argue it's meaning.

I love when people act like percentages always prove something.

Lets say he plays 4 minutes a game total, if he plays 75% of his minutes in the first half, does that mean he made a huge contribution?

12 blowout minutes in the 4th would also seem to indicate the score was probley wider in the first half as well. 40% is a ncie number, but it means 60% of his time was crap. you can screw with percentages to make his 8 minutes sound super important all you want, you still haven't addressed why he can't get consistant miutes when he's healthy (I.E games where he plays 10-20 minutes without 60%   of them coming in an already decided game) If he's such a key role player.

  That's all exciting but it has nothing to do with what was being discussed. Nick said that if Tony played 20-25 minutes tonight we'd lose. And, yes, Nick did get that right in his summary. I pointed out that we generally won when Tony Allen played 20+ minutes. I didn't say that TA was the reason we won. I didn't say that TA made huge contributions to those wins. I did say that he played a significant chunk of his minutes in the first half. You might still disagree with it.

why does attacking your premise that 40% of his minutes coming in the first half indicates he's a key player in wins and is a daming statstic to nick's point that he only gets significant time when we win huge and he gets 20+ minutes "have nothing to do with what your talking about?"

because you an't defend it beyond making up a statistical arguemnt that has no merit and don't want to discuss it?

[nickagneta]

If TA plays big minutes tonight, we will beat the Bulls.

Probably, because as nick mentioned above, that means we'll be seeing a lot of garbage time.  Doc doesn't have much trust in the guy, and I don't expect him to see minutes unless the game is well in hand.

  It could also mean that Paul or Ray are unable to play much due to injury or foul trouble.

Which would mean Tony playing significant minutes and the Celtics losing which has been my entire point.

[BballTim]

Dude, you can stick to your diction all you want and quote and requote all you want but everyone knows what you meant. You meant that Tony was playing "significant" minutes in a non garbage time situation making his 20+ minutes stat of 18-3 relevant when it is not because he played mostly mop up time this year in those game.

Tonight if he is playing 20-25 minutes they will not be in mop up minutes and hence, if he plays those minutes and they are meaningful, I say we lose. Go on and on with your re-quotes and misdirection all you want but I stand by everything I said about Tony and his playing minutes in tonight's game and my reasoning for it.

  Of course, Nick. My position in the discussion isn't the one I've been arguing. It isn't what I typed. It isn't what I said I was saying. It's whatever you said it is, no matter how much I protest. Some things never change.

  on the other hand, your refusal to accept the possibility that I actually meant what I said and not your confused view of what I might have meant adds humor to your earlier complaint that I "obviously, as usual, just like to argue points without ever stating you might be wrong about something". I'm not sure how I'm supposed to know when I'm wrong when you haven't finished telling me what I believe about what we're discussing.

  In the future, you should consider making a new user name maybe like WhatBballTimReallyMeansWhenHeSaysSomethingCompletleyDifferent (you may have to work on the name, I don't know if there's a character limit) and argue with it. Since you can assign both sides of the argument your posts will seem much more coherent.

[BballTim]

Also, Tony playing in 18 wins with an average win total of almost 18 points is not proof that he played those minutes mostly in the first half. On the contrary, since he is a bench player, it can be argued that the starters played most if not all of the first and third quarters and the end of the second quarter, which is Doc's norm, and that Tony played a majority of his minutes in fourth quarters of those blowout games that were already decided before the fourth quarter started.

  I looked at the first three wins that TA played 20+ minutes in (all double digit wins). His first halves were 10 minutes (+5), 9 minutes (+5), and 13 minutes (+17). So he played a decent amount of minutes in the first half of all three games and we did well with him in the game all three times. I'm not going to waste my time checking further, since I suspect you're making up your arguments as you go along. But if you're really interested that still leaves you with about 15 wins (14 by your count) to check if you feel that those games were flukes and Doc mainly plays subs in the 4th quarter. And, just for the record, I didn't say that he played his minutes mostly in the first half. I said that he played a significant chunk of his minutes in the first half, and from the little checking I did it would appear that I was correct.

Actually you weren't correct. As usual.

I did check. In most games that Tony Allen played over 20 minutes, most games he was receiving the majority of his minutes in the second half by playing the end of the third quarter and all of the fourth and in a large majority of those games, he stayed in for the entire fourth quarter because the game was out of hand.

  Too funny. Since you can't admit when you're wrong I wasted some more of my time and checked all of the wins where he played 20+ minutes through the end of December, which was 14 games. He played at least 8 minutes in the first half of all but 1 game. Over those 14 games he played about 40% of his minutes in the first half, which is a significant chunk. I was correct. You didn't see that because you're showing that he played the majority of his minutes in the second half. I never said that he played a majority of his minutes in the first half. In fact I corrected that mischaracterization in my previous post which you quoted in your response.

Maybe next time you should check further than three games. Also next time maybe you should reveal all the facts like in those games you mentioned the amount of time Tony played in the second half and the score at the time. If those were the first three games of the year that Tony played 20+ in and the Celtics won, maybe the good people here would like to know that he did play the majority of his minutes in those games in meaningless time in the second half.

  Maybe you should figure out what you're looking for before you check any games. Maybe if most of those points affected my argument one way or the other I would have mentioned them.

Also, nice cherry picking of data. Tony was playing well the first six games of the year and was an integral part of Docs lineup. When he came back down to Tonyland, He saw more and more mop up time as most of the rest of his 20+ minutes games will attest to.

  Seeing that his first half minutes in the next 11 20+ minute wins average out to be about 1 minute less than the average of his first three games I'll assume that you have no more knowledge about what happened during the first half of the season than you seem to know about what happened during last year's playoffs.

I'm not going to argue this any further as you obviously, as usual, just like to argue points without ever stating you might be wrong about something.

  Show me where, in this discussion, you stated that you might be wrong. Your original thought, that if TA plays 20-25 minutes we'll lose was and is completely unsupported and clearly goes against past performance. The current discussion centers around your claim that the only reason TA doesn't get playoff minutes is because Doc doesn't trust him. DO you have any quotes or any proof at all? Of course not. Do you admit that you might be wrong? Of course not.

The fact remains that Tony has never been given time in the playoffs by Doc because Doc doesn't trust him and not because of some hairbrain excuses that Doc was shortening his rotation or because Tony isn't physically ready yet. He doesn't play because he isn't good enough and Doc doesn't trust him in important games. That's soooooooo easy for everyone else to see, why you can't is beyond me.

  It's a hairbrain excuse that Doc shortened his rotation during the playoffs? Are you serious? You might be the only person I know of who didn't notice this.

you really think 8 minutes in a first half is a significant chunk when the other 12 come in the 4th quarter when your up 20+?

I disagree completly.

  I said that he played a significant chunk of his minutes in the first half of those games. From the games I checked he played 40% of his minutes in the first half. If you want to completely disagree that 40% of something is a significant chunk of it then go for it. It's a subjective word and I'm not going to argue it's meaning.

I love when people act like percentages always prove something.

Lets say he plays 4 minutes a game total, if he plays 75% of his minutes in the first half, does that mean he made a huge contribution?

12 blowout minutes in the 4th would also seem to indicate the score was probley wider in the first half as well. 40% is a ncie number, but it means 60% of his time was crap. you can screw with percentages to make his 8 minutes sound super important all you want, you still haven't addressed why he can't get consistant miutes when he's healthy (I.E games where he plays 10-20 minutes without 60%   of them coming in an already decided game) If he's such a key role player.

  That's all exciting but it has nothing to do with what was being discussed. Nick said that if Tony played 20-25 minutes tonight we'd lose. And, yes, Nick did get that right in his summary. I pointed out that we generally won when Tony Allen played 20+ minutes. I didn't say that TA was the reason we won. I didn't say that TA made huge contributions to those wins. I did say that he played a significant chunk of his minutes in the first half. You might still disagree with it.

why does attacking your premise that 40% of his minutes coming in the first half indicates he's a key player in wins and is a daming statstic to nick's point that he only gets significant time when we win huge and he gets 20+ minutes "have nothing to do with what your talking about?"

because you an't defend it beyond making up a statistical arguemnt that has no merit and don't want to discuss it?

  Unbelievable. For the umpteenth time, my premise wasn't that 40% of his minutes coming in the first half indicates he's a key player in wins. It was that we don't necessarily lose if TA plays 20-25 minutes. I'm sorry that I'm not defending a position that I never took. I hope it doesn't ruin your day.

[BballTim]

If TA plays big minutes tonight, we will beat the Bulls.

Probably, because as nick mentioned above, that means we'll be seeing a lot of garbage time.  Doc doesn't have much trust in the guy, and I don't expect him to see minutes unless the game is well in hand.

  It could also mean that Paul or Ray are unable to play much due to injury or foul trouble.

Which would mean Tony playing significant minutes and the Celtics losing which has been my entire point.

  How concise. I made your point, yet Roy kind of made my point (we could be far enough ahead that Paul and Ray can get a breather). All in one short post.

[crownsy]

Also, Tony playing in 18 wins with an average win total of almost 18 points is not proof that he played those minutes mostly in the first half. On the contrary, since he is a bench player, it can be argued that the starters played most if not all of the first and third quarters and the end of the second quarter, which is Doc's norm, and that Tony played a majority of his minutes in fourth quarters of those blowout games that were already decided before the fourth quarter started.

  I looked at the first three wins that TA played 20+ minutes in (all double digit wins). His first halves were 10 minutes (+5), 9 minutes (+5), and 13 minutes (+17). So he played a decent amount of minutes in the first half of all three games and we did well with him in the game all three times. I'm not going to waste my time checking further, since I suspect you're making up your arguments as you go along. But if you're really interested that still leaves you with about 15 wins (14 by your count) to check if you feel that those games were flukes and Doc mainly plays subs in the 4th quarter. And, just for the record, I didn't say that he played his minutes mostly in the first half. I said that he played a significant chunk of his minutes in the first half, and from the little checking I did it would appear that I was correct.

Actually you weren't correct. As usual.

I did check. In most games that Tony Allen played over 20 minutes, most games he was receiving the majority of his minutes in the second half by playing the end of the third quarter and all of the fourth and in a large majority of those games, he stayed in for the entire fourth quarter because the game was out of hand.

  Too funny. Since you can't admit when you're wrong I wasted some more of my time and checked all of the wins where he played 20+ minutes through the end of December, which was 14 games. He played at least 8 minutes in the first half of all but 1 game. Over those 14 games he played about 40% of his minutes in the first half, which is a significant chunk. I was correct. You didn't see that because you're showing that he played the majority of his minutes in the second half. I never said that he played a majority of his minutes in the first half. In fact I corrected that mischaracterization in my previous post which you quoted in your response.

Maybe next time you should check further than three games. Also next time maybe you should reveal all the facts like in those games you mentioned the amount of time Tony played in the second half and the score at the time. If those were the first three games of the year that Tony played 20+ in and the Celtics won, maybe the good people here would like to know that he did play the majority of his minutes in those games in meaningless time in the second half.

  Maybe you should figure out what you're looking for before you check any games. Maybe if most of those points affected my argument one way or the other I would have mentioned them.

Also, nice cherry picking of data. Tony was playing well the first six games of the year and was an integral part of Docs lineup. When he came back down to Tonyland, He saw more and more mop up time as most of the rest of his 20+ minutes games will attest to.

  Seeing that his first half minutes in the next 11 20+ minute wins average out to be about 1 minute less than the average of his first three games I'll assume that you have no more knowledge about what happened during the first half of the season than you seem to know about what happened during last year's playoffs.

I'm not going to argue this any further as you obviously, as usual, just like to argue points without ever stating you might be wrong about something.

  Show me where, in this discussion, you stated that you might be wrong. Your original thought, that if TA plays 20-25 minutes we'll lose was and is completely unsupported and clearly goes against past performance. The current discussion centers around your claim that the only reason TA doesn't get playoff minutes is because Doc doesn't trust him. DO you have any quotes or any proof at all? Of course not. Do you admit that you might be wrong? Of course not.

The fact remains that Tony has never been given time in the playoffs by Doc because Doc doesn't trust him and not because of some hairbrain excuses that Doc was shortening his rotation or because Tony isn't physically ready yet. He doesn't play because he isn't good enough and Doc doesn't trust him in important games. That's soooooooo easy for everyone else to see, why you can't is beyond me.

  It's a hairbrain excuse that Doc shortened his rotation during the playoffs? Are you serious? You might be the only person I know of who didn't notice this.

you really think 8 minutes in a first half is a significant chunk when the other 12 come in the 4th quarter when your up 20+?

I disagree completly.

  I said that he played a significant chunk of his minutes in the first half of those games. From the games I checked he played 40% of his minutes in the first half. If you want to completely disagree that 40% of something is a significant chunk of it then go for it. It's a subjective word and I'm not going to argue it's meaning.

I love when people act like percentages always prove something.

Lets say he plays 4 minutes a game total, if he plays 75% of his minutes in the first half, does that mean he made a huge contribution?

12 blowout minutes in the 4th would also seem to indicate the score was probley wider in the first half as well. 40% is a ncie number, but it means 60% of his time was crap. you can screw with percentages to make his 8 minutes sound super important all you want, you still haven't addressed why he can't get consistant miutes when he's healthy (I.E games where he plays 10-20 minutes without 60%   of them coming in an already decided game) If he's such a key role player.

  That's all exciting but it has nothing to do with what was being discussed. Nick said that if Tony played 20-25 minutes tonight we'd lose. And, yes, Nick did get that right in his summary. I pointed out that we generally won when Tony Allen played 20+ minutes. I didn't say that TA was the reason we won. I didn't say that TA made huge contributions to those wins. I did say that he played a significant chunk of his minutes in the first half. You might still disagree with it.

why does attacking your premise that 40% of his minutes coming in the first half indicates he's a key player in wins and is a daming statstic to nick's point that he only gets significant time when we win huge and he gets 20+ minutes "have nothing to do with what your talking about?"

because you an't defend it beyond making up a statistical arguemnt that has no merit and don't want to discuss it?

  Unbelievable. For the umpteenth time, my premise wasn't that 40% of his minutes coming in the first half indicates he's a key player in wins. It was that we don't necessarily lose if TA plays 20-25 minutes. I'm sorry that I'm not defending a position that I never took. I hope it doesn't ruin your day.

and i'm sorry you took a simple question about a statistical argument you devoted a whole paragraph to as some sort of personal attack that you had to become super sarcastic about in your response.

This topic, and the tone posters are taking with simple questions, is whats unbelivable. I'm out of this, its not worth my time to ask questions and be labled a "hater" and talked down to like im 4 years old for having the audacity to disagree with the almighty BBall Tim.

you Win BBall, everythign i think about TA is wrong, and everythign you think is right, sorry for having a discussion with you on a message board, thought thats what we did here, but i guess what we do is belittle people for holding contrary opnions.

I  love all you guys, but this topic has gotten ridculous with the saracsm and venom going around over tony freaking allen.

/Crownsy out.

[BballTim]

Also, Tony playing in 18 wins with an average win total of almost 18 points is not proof that he played those minutes mostly in the first half. On the contrary, since he is a bench player, it can be argued that the starters played most if not all of the first and third quarters and the end of the second quarter, which is Doc's norm, and that Tony played a majority of his minutes in fourth quarters of those blowout games that were already decided before the fourth quarter started.

  I looked at the first three wins that TA played 20+ minutes in (all double digit wins). His first halves were 10 minutes (+5), 9 minutes (+5), and 13 minutes (+17). So he played a decent amount of minutes in the first half of all three games and we did well with him in the game all three times. I'm not going to waste my time checking further, since I suspect you're making up your arguments as you go along. But if you're really interested that still leaves you with about 15 wins (14 by your count) to check if you feel that those games were flukes and Doc mainly plays subs in the 4th quarter. And, just for the record, I didn't say that he played his minutes mostly in the first half. I said that he played a significant chunk of his minutes in the first half, and from the little checking I did it would appear that I was correct.

Actually you weren't correct. As usual.

I did check. In most games that Tony Allen played over 20 minutes, most games he was receiving the majority of his minutes in the second half by playing the end of the third quarter and all of the fourth and in a large majority of those games, he stayed in for the entire fourth quarter because the game was out of hand.

  Too funny. Since you can't admit when you're wrong I wasted some more of my time and checked all of the wins where he played 20+ minutes through the end of December, which was 14 games. He played at least 8 minutes in the first half of all but 1 game. Over those 14 games he played about 40% of his minutes in the first half, which is a significant chunk. I was correct. You didn't see that because you're showing that he played the majority of his minutes in the second half. I never said that he played a majority of his minutes in the first half. In fact I corrected that mischaracterization in my previous post which you quoted in your response.

Maybe next time you should check further than three games. Also next time maybe you should reveal all the facts like in those games you mentioned the amount of time Tony played in the second half and the score at the time. If those were the first three games of the year that Tony played 20+ in and the Celtics won, maybe the good people here would like to know that he did play the majority of his minutes in those games in meaningless time in the second half.

  Maybe you should figure out what you're looking for before you check any games. Maybe if most of those points affected my argument one way or the other I would have mentioned them.

Also, nice cherry picking of data. Tony was playing well the first six games of the year and was an integral part of Docs lineup. When he came back down to Tonyland, He saw more and more mop up time as most of the rest of his 20+ minutes games will attest to.

  Seeing that his first half minutes in the next 11 20+ minute wins average out to be about 1 minute less than the average of his first three games I'll assume that you have no more knowledge about what happened during the first half of the season than you seem to know about what happened during last year's playoffs.

I'm not going to argue this any further as you obviously, as usual, just like to argue points without ever stating you might be wrong about something.

  Show me where, in this discussion, you stated that you might be wrong. Your original thought, that if TA plays 20-25 minutes we'll lose was and is completely unsupported and clearly goes against past performance. The current discussion centers around your claim that the only reason TA doesn't get playoff minutes is because Doc doesn't trust him. DO you have any quotes or any proof at all? Of course not. Do you admit that you might be wrong? Of course not.

The fact remains that Tony has never been given time in the playoffs by Doc because Doc doesn't trust him and not because of some hairbrain excuses that Doc was shortening his rotation or because Tony isn't physically ready yet. He doesn't play because he isn't good enough and Doc doesn't trust him in important games. That's soooooooo easy for everyone else to see, why you can't is beyond me.

  It's a hairbrain excuse that Doc shortened his rotation during the playoffs? Are you serious? You might be the only person I know of who didn't notice this.

you really think 8 minutes in a first half is a significant chunk when the other 12 come in the 4th quarter when your up 20+?

I disagree completly.

  I said that he played a significant chunk of his minutes in the first half of those games. From the games I checked he played 40% of his minutes in the first half. If you want to completely disagree that 40% of something is a significant chunk of it then go for it. It's a subjective word and I'm not going to argue it's meaning.

I love when people act like percentages always prove something.

Lets say he plays 4 minutes a game total, if he plays 75% of his minutes in the first half, does that mean he made a huge contribution?

12 blowout minutes in the 4th would also seem to indicate the score was probley wider in the first half as well. 40% is a ncie number, but it means 60% of his time was crap. you can screw with percentages to make his 8 minutes sound super important all you want, you still haven't addressed why he can't get consistant miutes when he's healthy (I.E games where he plays 10-20 minutes without 60%   of them coming in an already decided game) If he's such a key role player.

  That's all exciting but it has nothing to do with what was being discussed. Nick said that if Tony played 20-25 minutes tonight we'd lose. And, yes, Nick did get that right in his summary. I pointed out that we generally won when Tony Allen played 20+ minutes. I didn't say that TA was the reason we won. I didn't say that TA made huge contributions to those wins. I did say that he played a significant chunk of his minutes in the first half. You might still disagree with it.

why does attacking your premise that 40% of his minutes coming in the first half indicates he's a key player in wins and is a daming statstic to nick's point that he only gets significant time when we win huge and he gets 20+ minutes "have nothing to do with what your talking about?"

because you an't defend it beyond making up a statistical arguemnt that has no merit and don't want to discuss it?

  Unbelievable. For the umpteenth time, my premise wasn't that 40% of his minutes coming in the first half indicates he's a key player in wins. It was that we don't necessarily lose if TA plays 20-25 minutes. I'm sorry that I'm not defending a position that I never took. I hope it doesn't ruin your day.

and i'm sorry you took a simple question about a statistical argument you devoted a whole paragraph to as some sort of personal attack that you had to become super sarcastic about in your response.

This topic, and the tone posters are taking with simple questions, is whats unbelivable. I'm out of this, its not worth my time to ask questions and be labled a "hater" and talked down to like im 4 years old for having the audacity to disagree with the almighty BBall Tim.

you Win BBall, everythign i think about TA is wrong, and everythign you think is right, sorry for having a discussion with you on a message board, thought thats what we did here, but i guess what we do is belittle people for holding contrary opnions.

I  love all you guys, but this topic has gotten ridculous with the saracsm and venom going around over tony freaking allen.

/Crownsy out.

  I'm honestly sorry you're offended, believe it or not. I don't have any idea what your opinions on Tony Allen are, so I don't even know if I'd disagree with them or not. I don't think you really took an opinion that was contrary to mine, I think you took an opinion that was contrary to either what you thought I meant or what Nick claimed that I meant.

  If your simple question was "you really think 8 minutes in a first half is a significant chunk when the other 12 come in the 4th quarter when your up 20+?" I guess my answer is yes. It's 40% of his minutes (which I'd call a significant amount, consider a 40% increase or decrease to your paycheck). I also think that if he played the same amount in the 2nd half as the first he'd end up (on average) at about 19 minutes which is good playing time for a reserve.

  If your simple question was "you still haven't addressed why he can't get consistant miutes when he's healthy (I.E games where he plays 10-20 minutes without 60%  Roll Eyes of them coming in an already decided game) If he's such a key role player", then I can address that even though it doesn't relate to the point I was making. Around the time TA stopped playing (I just used the pre-allstar splits from espn) he was leading our reserves in minutes. He was averaging 19 a game, Davis and House were 17.7 and 17.4 and Leon was 15.8. If you look at Tony's games that he played less than 20 minutes he still averaged about 15 minutes a game. If Tony's playing in the 4th quarter of a blowout he's not in there with 4 starters, he's in there with reserves including Davis, House and Powe. If you take out the "blowout minutes" that they played in those 4 games their averages will also dip, so again they'll likely be playing the same or less than Tony in the non-blowout games that occurred before he was injured. I'm not going to check game-by game for who played when the lead was big (in part because this is unrelated to my original point). I don't think it's the case at all that TA sat on the bench until the score got out of hand and then only went in for mopup minutes earlier this year. Do you disagree with that?

[youcanthandlethetruth113]

I actually appreciate his purpose on this team; now that Posey is gone, he's the only one on the bench who can guard elite wings.  However, tonight was one game where he wasn't needed.  Ben Gordon, for as good as he is, is short.  Eddie House easily could've guarded him.  And not only would Eddie not have fouled him, he might have actually hit a couple threes so the C's wouldn't be in that position. 

Tony Allen will be very useful against the likes of Orlando and Cleveland, but the Bulls are all so undersized, this is the last series they really need to be doing this. 

Next year, however, they need to find an alternative, whether it is Walker/Giddens or a FA. 

Is it just me or are Tony Allen's defensive abilities completely overrated? He may have the athletic ability to guard but his lack of basketball IQ completely negate his natural abilities IMO.

[ScoobyDoo]

Not only do we need to play Tony Allen more. We should see a bit more of Marbury, Scal and House and Moore. I'm convinced if we can give our starters just a little more rest early in the game towards the end of the third and into the beginning of the fourth, they will have enough legs to take it down the stretch. That's the key issue for me.

The Bulls are young and they are running hard. We need to figure out a way, given our injury problems, to get our starters more rest throughout the game.

This in itself will boost our odds of winning.