Author Topic: Better without Ray?  (Read 14308 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: Better without Ray?
« Reply #75 on: January 29, 2012, 10:02:45 PM »

Offline mqtcelticsfan

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2314
  • Tommy Points: 236
I also think maybe we should have had more Moore. But something changed and those changes led to the loss and Ray was one of the changes.

If Boston had hit one more shot, this wouldn't even be a discussion. The defense, which is what everyone is saying was the difference tonight, was outstanding yet again.

Re: Better without Ray?
« Reply #76 on: January 29, 2012, 10:07:54 PM »

Offline rayallen1934

  • Jaylen Brown
  • Posts: 531
  • Tommy Points: 42
If u haven't been following orlando has been attrocious

Losing to new orleans by double digits and getting destroyed by indiana

Re: Better without Ray?
« Reply #77 on: January 29, 2012, 10:19:32 PM »

Offline Celtics4ever

  • NCE
  • Johnny Most
  • ********************
  • Posts: 20218
  • Tommy Points: 1340
Ray is not the reason we lost.  He kept us in the game the first half.

Re: Better without Ray?
« Reply #78 on: January 29, 2012, 10:34:51 PM »

Offline ejk3489

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2233
  • Tommy Points: 215
The team went from dominating what everyone believes are good teams to losing at home to what everyone believes is a bad team.  Ray did a reverse Tebow tonight.

While I was happy as anyone else during this 4 game winning streak, we didn't exactly "crush" all of our opponents. The only dominate win was against Orlando at home, although the win against the Pacers was legit. But it took a huge 27 point comeback to win in Orlando, and we just barely got by a terrible Wizards team in Washington.

Re: Better without Ray?
« Reply #79 on: January 29, 2012, 11:07:16 PM »

Offline Marcus13

  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2578
  • Tommy Points: 119
I SAID this thread would come back if they lost...1 point

sure did - LOL TP

Re: Better without Ray?
« Reply #80 on: January 30, 2012, 12:38:36 AM »

Offline Celticjay

  • Brad Stevens
  • Posts: 210
  • Tommy Points: 19
I didn't see the game tonight. In my mind Ray needs to be used as a one dimensional floor spacer.  Doc's use of him has been poor in my estimation.   He has just gassed Ray and had him taking ridiculously difficult shots running of screens. We need to be a post and kick out team or a drive and kick out team.  Pierce for the last few games really opened up the offense and we saw a lot of easy looks.  Ray is great but he is clearly not used correctly.  Doc is a good coach but this team shouldn't be as bad as it is offensively...

Re: Better without Ray?
« Reply #81 on: January 30, 2012, 02:44:37 AM »

Offline Tai

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2230
  • Tommy Points: 32
Ray's our leading scorer for the game (on 9-14 shooting) and somehow just cause we lost we're better without him. Parker, assuming that's who Ray was infact guarding, didn't even score, though he didn't play much either for a starter.

And, we were up 11 with a lil more than 4 minutes to play.

So, who do you want Ray traded for, guys?  ::)

Re: Better without Ray?
« Reply #82 on: January 30, 2012, 02:53:37 AM »

Offline ImShakHeIsShaq

  • NCE
  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7739
  • Tommy Points: 804
I also think maybe we should have had more Moore. But something changed and those changes led to the loss and Ray was one of the changes.

If Boston had hit one more shot, this wouldn't even be a discussion. The defense, which is what everyone is saying was the difference tonight, was outstanding yet again.

This must be what we call, sarcasm? They had a "bajillion" points in the paint, most for the season. I don't want to get into the Ray discussion but the defense was terrible!
It takes me 3hrs to get to Miami and 1hr to get to Orlando... but I *SPIT* on their NBA teams! "Bless God and bless the (Celts)"-Lady GaGa (she said gays but she really meant Celts)

Re: Better without Ray?
« Reply #83 on: January 30, 2012, 10:45:02 PM »

Offline mqtcelticsfan

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2314
  • Tommy Points: 236
I also think maybe we should have had more Moore. But something changed and those changes led to the loss and Ray was one of the changes.

If Boston had hit one more shot, this wouldn't even be a discussion. The defense, which is what everyone is saying was the difference tonight, was outstanding yet again.

This must be what we call, sarcasm? They had a "bajillion" points in the paint, most for the season. I don't want to get into the Ray discussion but the defense was terrible!

Nope, it's what we call statistical analysis. With the exception of a bad stretch toward the end of the game, the defense was strong.

Re: Better without Ray?
« Reply #84 on: January 30, 2012, 11:23:03 PM »

Offline BudweiserCeltic

  • Bill Sharman
  • *******************
  • Posts: 19023
  • Tommy Points: 1834
Yep, I thought we played well defensively overall. Just gave up plenty of second chance points and our turnovers also hurt us skewing things a bit. But we did a good job defensively overall.

Re: Better without Ray?
« Reply #85 on: January 30, 2012, 11:39:31 PM »

Offline PosImpos

  • NCE
  • Frank Ramsey
  • ************
  • Posts: 12383
  • Tommy Points: 903
  • Rondo = Good
Yep, I thought we played well defensively overall. Just gave up plenty of second chance points and our turnovers also hurt us skewing things a bit. But we did a good job defensively overall.

Eh, we had trouble covering the Varejao / Irving pick and roll and gave up penetration to Kyrie basically whenever he wanted to drive inside.

Otherwise, our defense played pretty well.
Never forget the Champs of '08, or the gutsy warriors of '10.

"I know you all wanna win, but you gotta do it TOGETHER!"
- Doc Rivers

Re: Better without Ray?
« Reply #86 on: January 31, 2012, 01:18:16 AM »

Offline BudweiserCeltic

  • Bill Sharman
  • *******************
  • Posts: 19023
  • Tommy Points: 1834
Yep, I thought we played well defensively overall. Just gave up plenty of second chance points and our turnovers also hurt us skewing things a bit. But we did a good job defensively overall.

Eh, we had trouble covering the Varejao / Irving pick and roll and gave up penetration to Kyrie basically whenever he wanted to drive inside.

Otherwise, our defense played pretty well.

Certainly we had trouble covering them, but fact of the matter is that the team shot 43% from the field, which is quite alright (43% is bottom 10 in the league avg wise at the moment) which was mainly fueled by a quick start, their offensive rebounding, and a 4th quarter letdown when our bench was in the floor giving them momentum. They well also hitting quite a few ridiculous shots throughout the game.

I agree that it's not outstanding defense as the poster above mentioned, but I thought it was an overall strong defensive effort with the exception of that Irving and Anderson combo. But fact remains, that the commutative effort was a good one. And when considering Ray Allen's hand in all of these, it's practically negligible.

Re: Better without Ray?
« Reply #87 on: January 31, 2012, 01:21:51 AM »

Offline PosImpos

  • NCE
  • Frank Ramsey
  • ************
  • Posts: 12383
  • Tommy Points: 903
  • Rondo = Good
Yep, I thought we played well defensively overall. Just gave up plenty of second chance points and our turnovers also hurt us skewing things a bit. But we did a good job defensively overall.

Eh, we had trouble covering the Varejao / Irving pick and roll and gave up penetration to Kyrie basically whenever he wanted to drive inside.

Otherwise, our defense played pretty well.

Certainly we had trouble covering them, but fact of the matter is that the team shot 43% from the field, which is quite alright (43% is bottom 10 in the league avg wise at the moment) which was mainly fueled by a quick start, their offensive rebounding, and a 4th quarter letdown when our bench was in the floor giving them momentum. They well also hitting quite a few ridiculous shots throughout the game.

I agree that it's not outstanding defense as the poster above mentioned, but I thought it was an overall strong defensive effort with the exception of that Irving and Anderson combo. But fact remains, that the commutative effort was a good one. And when considering Ray Allen's hand in all of these, it's practically negligible.

I don't blame Ray, no.  The Celtics did a good job of defending the Cavs aside from Andy and Irving.

Unfortunately Irving went into human blender mode late in the 4th and the C's couldn't do anything to stop him, or to score to keep pace.
Never forget the Champs of '08, or the gutsy warriors of '10.

"I know you all wanna win, but you gotta do it TOGETHER!"
- Doc Rivers