I want Jesus here till he retires!

[Roy Hobbs]

In the clutch, I love him shooting the ball.  I dislike him trying to handle the ball.  He makes questionable decisions and turns the ball over too much for me to be comfortable with it. 

Amen! I was watching that last play in regulation in slow motion (don't ask me why, it just helps with the stress), and as he received the ball, thoughts of his idiotic turnover last year vs. San Antonio, when he just kind of gave the ball to Ginobili on the inbounds, crossed my mind. 

That was a poorly designed / executed play.  Perk admitted that he should have called timeout, rather than throw that pass.

Ray can dribble just fine, in my opinion.  In a last play type of situation, I'd prefer Ray to spot up, but it's not like he's particularly turnover prone.  In turnovers per minute, he ranks 10th on the team, and he ranks 12th on the team in turnover percentage.  Also, 23% of his baskets come from inside, and 30% of his points are unassisted, suggesting that he can create his own offense.

[moiso]

i dont think jesus ever really retires... he just comes back.

Nice!

[screwedupmaniac]

i dont think jesus ever really retires... he just comes back.

Wait...so you're telling me that Bret Favre is the second coming of Jesus???

[screwedupmaniac]

The way school need teachers, the way that Kathie Lee needed Regis, that's the way I need Jesus 

[Chief]

Ray scored 22 and the guy he mainly defended scored 44.
I see what you mean. I wonder why the Celtics almost lost this game? Good thing he hit that clutch three but then had the ball stolen from him which almost led to a game winning dunk. If that never happened we'd never had gotten to see Paul Pierce play 5 more minutes on a newly repaired knee.

Well at least Friday, Ray will get an easier match-up. Oh, that's right we have Atlanta again. Didn't they beat us? Last time we faced them Ray's defense helped Johnson and Crawford combine for 42. 

I'll say it again. Ray is a liability on defense.

[housecall]

Ray scored 22 and the guy he mainly defended scored 44.
I see what you mean. I wonder why the Celtics almost lost this game? Good thing he hit that clutch three but then had the ball stolen from him which almost led to a game winning dunk. If that never happened we'd never had gotten to see Paul Pierce play 5 more minutes on a newly repaired knee.

Well at least Friday, Ray will get an easier match-up. Oh, that's right we have Atlanta again. Didn't they beat us? Last time we faced them Ray's defense helped Johnson and Crawford combine for 42. 

I'll say it again. Ray is a liability on defense.

as much as i like Ray and respect him as a player,i have to agree with you...its more evident this season too.I didn't notice it much last season,but he is the weakiest link defensively of the starters.Thats the main reason Joe Johnson,Jamal Crawford is having a field day.You'd think Doc would have made a few adjustments after the second lost to them.tp

[fanofgreen]

Ray scored 22 and the guy he mainly defended scored 44.
I see what you mean. I wonder why the Celtics almost lost this game? Good thing he hit that clutch three but then had the ball stolen from him which almost led to a game winning dunk. If that never happened we'd never had gotten to see Paul Pierce play 5 more minutes on a newly repaired knee.

Well at least Friday, Ray will get an easier match-up. Oh, that's right we have Atlanta again. Didn't they beat us? Last time we faced them Ray's defense helped Johnson and Crawford combine for 42. 

I'll say it again. Ray is a liability on defense.

as much as i like Ray and respect him as a player,i have to agree with you...its more evident this season too.I didn't notice it much last season,but he is the weakiest link defensively of the starters.Thats the main reason Joe Johnson,Jamal Crawford is having a field day.You'd think Doc would have made a few adjustments after the second lost to them.tp

What adjustments can Doc make? Take Ray off JJ or Jamal  and put who on them instead? what are the options? Scal?? Tony?? Eddie?? Walker??, I think I'd stick with Ray also if I was Doc.

But Ray Allen has always been a liability on defense.He was a liability during the championship year. and for most of the playoffs that year he was a defensive and offensive liability. So its not Ray Allen, being the issue. Its a TEAM Defense thing, meaning, we are seeing the affects of not having a healthy KG or a KG at all out on the floor,to communicate defensively and be a secondary line of defense, and altering shots coming into the lane, and on pick and rolls by the wing guys Ray and Paul are suppose to be guarding.

[Roy Hobbs]

I disagree that Ray is a liability on defense, at least consistently so.  He struggles against Joe Johnson, that much is clear.  However, opposing SGs have a 12.7 PER against the Celtics when Ray is on the court, and have an eFG% of .428.  Last season, SGs had a 12.3 PER, and the year before, a 12.4 PER.  These are remarkably consistent and excellent numbers.

There are problems with defensive statistics, but you generally don't see consistency like the above for three straight years unless somebody is a pretty good defender.  As mentioned, there's the occasional game where Ray will struggle keeping up with an elite player, but overall he's pretty good on the defensive end.  If he was as bad as some suggest, there would be a clear track record of SGs consistently exploding for big nights on a regular basis, rather than only on rare occasions.

[ToppersBsktball10]

I <3 Ray Allen. Don't get the wrong idea.

[Spilling Green Dye]

I disagree that Ray is a liability on defense, at least consistently so.  He struggles against Joe Johnson, that much is clear.  However, opposing SGs have a 12.7 PER against the Celtics when Ray is on the court, and have an eFG% of .428.  Last season, SGs had a 12.3 PER, and the year before, a 12.4 PER.  These are remarkably consistent and excellent numbers.

There are problems with defensive statistics, but you generally don't see consistency like the above for three straight years unless somebody is a pretty good defender.  As mentioned, there's the occasional game where Ray will struggle keeping up with an elite player, but overall he's pretty good on the defensive end.  If he was as bad as some suggest, there would be a clear track record of SGs consistently exploding for big nights on a regular basis, rather than only on rare occasions.

Or the method of that statistic is consistently not accounting for Ray's man driving right past ray and compromising the defense.  While I typically agree with most things you write Roy, I have to disagree on Ray's defense.

For starters, I think it'd be nice if Ray retired a Celtic.  However, someone making clutch shots at the end of the game is completely mitigated by the fact that he gives up so many easy buckets on the other end.  My theory is if Ray had not played lead-foot defense all game, the score wouldn't be close.  Ray Allen is glaringly the weakest link on defense amongst the starters. 

Watching him play this year is like watching Wally Szerbiak trying to play D, and it's very frustrating.  Ray isn't as bad as Wally eventually became, but he's getting there.  The irony of this is pretty funny since the night of the trade for Ray Allen my friend and I commented "I'm not sure if I like that trade.  We lost the #5 pick and got Ray Allen, which doesn't necessarily make this team a contender, but we did get rid of Wally.  Wait a second, we don't have to watch Wally on defense anymore!  I actually like this trade!"

I want the Celtics of the near and distant future to continue to be a classy organization that wins games and competes for a championship.  Keeping Ray on during the waning years of his career will only ensure that the Celtics remain classy, but I think it'd ultimately hinder the team's ability to compete.

[housecall]

I disagree that Ray is a liability on defense, at least consistently so.  He struggles against Joe Johnson, that much is clear.  However, opposing SGs have a 12.7 PER against the Celtics when Ray is on the court, and have an eFG% of .428.  Last season, SGs had a 12.3 PER, and the year before, a 12.4 PER.  These are remarkably consistent and excellent numbers.

There are problems with defensive statistics, but you generally don't see consistency like the above for three straight years unless somebody is a pretty good defender.  As mentioned, there's the occasional game where Ray will struggle keeping up with an elite player, but overall he's pretty good on the defensive end.  If he was as bad as some suggest, there would be a clear track record of SGs consistently exploding for big nights on a regular basis, rather than only on rare occasions.

Example:explain D-Wade's busting out the last time we played them.I expect Wade to score 25-30,but he had ridiculous numbers,why?I have been watching Ray's defense a little closer this season so far,and i have to say he is not playing up to his usual standard.Joe Johnson is not a 35pt scorer and he only has these nights when he is playing aganist weak defenses.Johnson is an allstar but if Ray is still being considered a star quality player,he isn't suppose to get scored on like he is a medicore defender.His defense is suspect this season and its putting a strain on the team when they need him to hold his own.KG was always there in the second layer(group) to pick up the slack but he's not walking thru that door for a couple wks. 

[Spilling Green Dye]

I disagree that Ray is a liability on defense, at least consistently so.  He struggles against Joe Johnson, that much is clear.  However, opposing SGs have a 12.7 PER against the Celtics when Ray is on the court, and have an eFG% of .428.  Last season, SGs had a 12.3 PER, and the year before, a 12.4 PER.  These are remarkably consistent and excellent numbers.

There are problems with defensive statistics, but you generally don't see consistency like the above for three straight years unless somebody is a pretty good defender.  As mentioned, there's the occasional game where Ray will struggle keeping up with an elite player, but overall he's pretty good on the defensive end.  If he was as bad as some suggest, there would be a clear track record of SGs consistently exploding for big nights on a regular basis, rather than only on rare occasions.

Example:explain D-Wade's busting out the last time we played them.I expect Wade to score 25-30,but he had ridiculous numbers,why?I have been watching Ray's defense a little closer this season so far,and i have to say he is not playing up to his usual standard.

I've been watching it closely the past two seasons, and I'm telling you.. he's becoming increasingly like Wally Szerbiak was on defense.  Wally played worse D, but at least Wally would box out after his man shot the ball. 

[Roy Hobbs]

I disagree that Ray is a liability on defense, at least consistently so.  He struggles against Joe Johnson, that much is clear.  However, opposing SGs have a 12.7 PER against the Celtics when Ray is on the court, and have an eFG% of .428.  Last season, SGs had a 12.3 PER, and the year before, a 12.4 PER.  These are remarkably consistent and excellent numbers.

There are problems with defensive statistics, but you generally don't see consistency like the above for three straight years unless somebody is a pretty good defender.  As mentioned, there's the occasional game where Ray will struggle keeping up with an elite player, but overall he's pretty good on the defensive end.  If he was as bad as some suggest, there would be a clear track record of SGs consistently exploding for big nights on a regular basis, rather than only on rare occasions.

Or the method of that statistic is consistently not accounting for Ray's man driving right past ray and compromising the defense.  While I typically agree with most things you write Roy, I have to disagree on Ray's defense.

For starters, I think it'd be nice if Ray retired a Celtic.  However, someone making clutch shots at the end of the game is completely mitigated by the fact that he gives up so many easy buckets on the other end.  My theory is if Ray had not played lead-foot defense all game, the score wouldn't be close.  Ray Allen is glaringly the weakest link on defense amongst the starters. 

Watching him play this year is like watching Wally Szerbiak trying to play D, and it's very frustrating.  Ray isn't as bad as Wally eventually became, but he's getting there.  The irony of this is pretty funny since the night of the trade for Ray Allen my friend and I commented "I'm not sure if I like that trade.  We lost the #5 pick and got Ray Allen, which doesn't necessarily make this team a contender, but we did get rid of Wally.  Wait a second, we don't have to watch Wally on defense anymore!  I actually like this trade!"

I want the Celtics of the near and distant future to continue to be a classy organization that wins games and competes for a championship.  Keeping Ray on during the waning years of his career will only ensure that the Celtics remain classy, but I think it'd ultimately hinder the team's ability to compete.

If Ray is giving up so many easy buckets on a consistent basis, why isn't it reflecting in the defensive statistics of either himself individually, or the team as a whole?

Ray Allen leads the team in +/- by a wide margin.  The defense is 3.6 points worse per 100 possessions when he is off the floor.  The Celtics rank third in defensive efficiency, and 5th in eFG% allowed, despite KG missing several games.

If Ray is such a weak link, why isn't it showing up anywhere?  Why, in fact, do the statistics suggest the exact opposite?

[Edgar]

Joe Johnson is this luster ray Allen so dont be madd
he will be fine.
Just a very very very tough matchup for him

[Spilling Green Dye]

I disagree that Ray is a liability on defense, at least consistently so.  He struggles against Joe Johnson, that much is clear.  However, opposing SGs have a 12.7 PER against the Celtics when Ray is on the court, and have an eFG% of .428.  Last season, SGs had a 12.3 PER, and the year before, a 12.4 PER.  These are remarkably consistent and excellent numbers.

There are problems with defensive statistics, but you generally don't see consistency like the above for three straight years unless somebody is a pretty good defender.  As mentioned, there's the occasional game where Ray will struggle keeping up with an elite player, but overall he's pretty good on the defensive end.  If he was as bad as some suggest, there would be a clear track record of SGs consistently exploding for big nights on a regular basis, rather than only on rare occasions.

Or the method of that statistic is consistently not accounting for Ray's man driving right past ray and compromising the defense.  While I typically agree with most things you write Roy, I have to disagree on Ray's defense.

For starters, I think it'd be nice if Ray retired a Celtic.  However, someone making clutch shots at the end of the game is completely mitigated by the fact that he gives up so many easy buckets on the other end.  My theory is if Ray had not played lead-foot defense all game, the score wouldn't be close.  Ray Allen is glaringly the weakest link on defense amongst the starters. 

Watching him play this year is like watching Wally Szerbiak trying to play D, and it's very frustrating.  Ray isn't as bad as Wally eventually became, but he's getting there.  The irony of this is pretty funny since the night of the trade for Ray Allen my friend and I commented "I'm not sure if I like that trade.  We lost the #5 pick and got Ray Allen, which doesn't necessarily make this team a contender, but we did get rid of Wally.  Wait a second, we don't have to watch Wally on defense anymore!  I actually like this trade!"

I want the Celtics of the near and distant future to continue to be a classy organization that wins games and competes for a championship.  Keeping Ray on during the waning years of his career will only ensure that the Celtics remain classy, but I think it'd ultimately hinder the team's ability to compete.

If Ray is giving up so many easy buckets on a consistent basis, why isn't it reflecting in the defensive statistics of either himself individually, or the team as a whole?

Ray Allen leads the team in +/- by a wide margin.  The defense is 3.6 points worse per 100 possessions when he is off the floor.  The Celtics rank third in defensive efficiency, and 5th in eFG% allowed, despite KG missing several games.

If Ray is such a weak link, why isn't it showing up anywhere?  Why, in fact, do the statistics suggest the exact opposite?

You're assuming that his 3.6 points per 100 possessions is a direct reflect on him.  Playing alongside other players who are noted for great defense (Rondo, Perkins, KG, Rasheed, and even Pierce) is probably the single largest reason that his defensive liability is masked, or that the numbers on the court appear good.  I'm not saying that people drive by him and score.  The typical scenario is that the player drives past Ray and is picked up by Perkins etc, and either results in an easier bucket for another player or increases the foul rate of the Celtic big-men.  I would wager that if you replaced Ray, and Ray alone, with someone who could guard someone without consistently requiring interior defense, then the Celtics defense as a whole would be statistically better.  Ray does play with the bench, but the primary amount of his minutes are spent playing alongside superb defenders and in a very good defensive scheme.  Thus, I don't think +/- numbers can reflect it.