Author Topic: Are Celtics better off without Allen  (Read 1929 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Are Celtics better off without Allen
« on: January 30, 2012, 05:00:31 PM »

Offline Texstyles

  • Derrick White
  • Posts: 438
  • Tommy Points: 44
I was thinking back to what happened last night compared the the previous 5 games.  Here is what I was thinking,  Are Celtics a much better team with Peitrus on the floor over Allen.  I know Allen is better then Pietrus,  but I think Peitrus D may outway Allens shooting.  That being said i dont think Allen will except a back seat to MP.  So would it be  good idea to trade Allen for a future guy and start MP.

Re: Are Celtics better off without Allen
« Reply #1 on: January 30, 2012, 05:48:12 PM »

Offline 33_Larry Legend_33

  • Jaylen Brown
  • Posts: 588
  • Tommy Points: 87
Yeah, I've always thought it was a good move to let Allen Ray go.....

Re: Are Celtics better off without Allen
« Reply #2 on: January 30, 2012, 05:57:57 PM »

Offline ScoobyDoo

  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2649
  • Tommy Points: 447
I like the concept but with a twist to what you've suggested. Start Pietrus, bring Ray off the bench with the second unit rather than trading him.

One of the things I like best about our recent run without Rondo and Ray is the tenacity of the defensive effort from guys like Bradley, Moore and Pietrus - those three guys get after it on D and it brings a different overall edge to the team - a more physical edge. Pietrus also makes us a bit bigger and more physical on the glass.

As much as I love Ray and think he has a lot of gas left in the tank, it was hard last year watching Wade do a layup line to the rim during the playoffs. Even though Ray is a physical specimen, much like KG there comes a time to dial it back a notch and let the young legs carry the busy work load of the season.

Ray and Bass firing off the bench would be a good one-two punch. Let Ray and KG save their legs for the postseason.
   

Re: Are Celtics better off without Allen
« Reply #3 on: January 30, 2012, 05:59:57 PM »

Offline ScoobyDoo

  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2649
  • Tommy Points: 447
I suppose you could just start Ray and pull him earlier as with KG....

But, KG is more important to the overall defense of the team than Ray is. I think our D improves with Pietrus VS. Ray and I also think our scoring punch off the bench improves with Ray in that spot.

Re: Are Celtics better off without Allen
« Reply #4 on: January 30, 2012, 06:07:14 PM »

Offline PosImpos

  • NCE
  • Frank Ramsey
  • ************
  • Posts: 12383
  • Tommy Points: 903
  • Rondo = Good
Unless one of the people advocating that we bench Allen can show some +/- numbers suggesting that our best lineup doesn't include him playing alongside the other starters, I don't think there's much of an argument.
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: Are Celtics better off without Allen
« Reply #5 on: January 30, 2012, 06:09:00 PM »

Offline 2dark

  • Luke Garza
  • Posts: 96
  • Tommy Points: 31
While this is somewhat plausible I don't understand the opssesion with "scoring punches" off of the bench. Every team would keep best scorer in 6th man role if it was that simple + we re not getting long droughts in first 3 qtrs, its always the 4th qtr that kills us.
Ray or MP starting is same for me, it won t change anything though.

I do think MP should get more minutes split with ray, not for his defence, but for his rythm, he really sucked last night with less minutes, defensive and offensive (ugh those 3 wide open 3s missed).

Re: Are Celtics better off without Allen
« Reply #6 on: January 30, 2012, 06:20:31 PM »

Offline ScoobyDoo

  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2649
  • Tommy Points: 447
I'm not a big numbers and stats guy so I won't be providing the statistical pros and cons of Ray starting or coming off the bench.

But I will say my gut says we're a more physically imposing team with Pietrus more in the mix. And my gut also tells me we are likely to be more sluggish when KG, Ray and Jermaine are on the floor together to start every game.

But I like to mix it up. I was advocating for Green to start with Pierce this year, or Ray. Get him more involved early and often.

Ultimately is doesn't matter who starts. But as was just mentioned I would reduce Ray's minutes and increases Pietrus' - it will make us fresher, stronger in the long run this year.

I think a real concerted effort needs to be made to mix energy in the form of our younger players with our vets at this point. Doc's actually been doing a pretty good job of it so far this season, moreso than he normally does. 

Re: Are Celtics better off without Allen
« Reply #7 on: January 30, 2012, 06:54:28 PM »

Offline xhfjc36

  • Ron Harper Jr.
  • Posts: 9
  • Tommy Points: 2
According to 82games, Allen has been +4.2 on the court than off. So yea.Not to mention holding opponents to an amazing 9.8 PER so far. That means that every time Allen has been on court, the Celtics score 4.2 more points than the opposing team than without Allen. For reference, Pietrus has a healthy -3.7 +/-, holding opponents to a 14.7 PER.

Sigh. Overreacting as usual much?

Re: Are Celtics better off without Allen
« Reply #8 on: January 30, 2012, 08:05:01 PM »

Online Celtics4ever

  • NCE
  • Johnny Most
  • ********************
  • Posts: 20218
  • Tommy Points: 1340
Ray is one of the reasons we were in the game at all.  It was not Ray who didn't do his job.  None of our PG's showed.  Irving ate Bradley and Moore up.    We didn't rebound well and allowed too many offensive rebounds.  That too had nothing to do with Ray.