The Bradley 20-8 Run was overrated

[blink]

must step away from this thread before I explode...

if Ray looked bad, it was because HE looked bad not because someone else's play was dragging him down.  

I am amazed that anyone can really even try to make that statement.  I mean I am sure there is a heat board somewhere that you can post this stuff on right?  you aren't going to find many who will agree with you.

I for one disagree.  But more I really wonder what your point of this post is?  You think that if Ray Allen was playing in those games we would have had a better record?  Is that what you are implying?

I really don't know how anyone who watched the C's last year game in game out can say that the reason we got on our run was the lack of competition.  The reason we went on the run was KG got into shape and started playing like the monster he is and AB stepped up big time and added to the clamp down / lock down def.  We were way more athletic and aggressive on both ends and we played to our potential.

So exactly what are you complaining about?

Do people even look at the boxscores. Watching the game is one thing, but when you take a look at the teams they beat, the players who performed and the record. Then compare it to the beginning of the season, you will start to see the real reason why that 20-8 was overrated.

How many days did those 20-8 games come in? No matter the competition ANY team can beat you on ANY given day! A lot of factors of last season made the teams we face harder to defeat than just the players on that team! If it had nothing to do with AB, do you think Doc would have risked Ray's ego and would he change what had been working if it was? I guess Doc and everyone else (the people who really know and not some "fan") must be lying b/c they all credit the change to AB as the catalyst for the better play... mainly b/c of his defense! Before AB moved into the starting lineup KG and PP both had already begun to play much better... we still we losing! Are "you" telling me KG and PP were playing terrible until the last 28 games? Come on now!

The Celtics played the Lakers twice. Two big games for Celtics and Celtic fans right?

The first on February 9th 2012

We lost that game 88-87 .............1 POINT

Kevin Garnett was 6-23

Paul Pierce was 7-18 , 18 points ,did contribute with 7 assists

Ray Allen was a decent 9-20, 22 points

2nd game

Allen 6-13, 17 points, 6 assists

Pierce 4-14 , 13 points

Garnett, 7-11, 14 points , 0 attempts at the FT LINE




All i know is you continue to look at these games. The real reason the Celtics were not better was because these guys either were lazy, or not in shape...

So it made Ray look a lot worse...

That 20-8 record could have easily been 20-8 or better, the way these guys finally kicked into high gear, especially Garnett...


The more and more i see , I begin to think Rondo didnt want Allen here anymore. And that was the biggest reason for Ray's crazy decision

[rayallen1934]

Watching those games, Bradley brought that spark that our team needed. Before that we were heading for the lottery.

Nobody said he didnt, and i didnt either

but i really dont think there better with him starting this past year.....the evidence isnt there as people think it is.

[rayallen1934]

must step away from this thread before I explode...

if Ray looked bad, it was because HE looked bad not because someone else's play was dragging him down.  

I am amazed that anyone can really even try to make that statement.  I mean I am sure there is a heat board somewhere that you can post this stuff on right?  you aren't going to find many who will agree with you.

I for one disagree.  But more I really wonder what your point of this post is?  You think that if Ray Allen was playing in those games we would have had a better record?  Is that what you are implying?

I really don't know how anyone who watched the C's last year game in game out can say that the reason we got on our run was the lack of competition.  The reason we went on the run was KG got into shape and started playing like the monster he is and AB stepped up big time and added to the clamp down / lock down def.  We were way more athletic and aggressive on both ends and we played to our potential.

So exactly what are you complaining about?

Do people even look at the boxscores. Watching the game is one thing, but when you take a look at the teams they beat, the players who performed and the record. Then compare it to the beginning of the season, you will start to see the real reason why that 20-8 was overrated.

How many days did those 20-8 games come in? No matter the competition ANY team can beat you on ANY given day! A lot of factors of last season made the teams we face harder to defeat than just the players on that team! If it had nothing to do with AB, do you think Doc would have risked Ray's ego and would he change what had been working if it was? I guess Doc and everyone else (the people who really know and not some "fan") must be lying b/c they all credit the change to AB as the catalyst for the better play... mainly b/c of his defense! Before AB moved into the starting lineup KG and PP both had already begun to play much better... we still we losing! Are "you" telling me KG and PP were playing terrible until the last 28 games? Come on now!

The Celtics played the Lakers twice. Two big games for Celtics and Celtic fans right?

The first on February 9th 2012

We lost that game 88-87 .............1 POINT

Kevin Garnett was 6-23

Paul Pierce was 7-18 , 18 points ,did contribute with 7 assists

Ray Allen was a decent 9-20, 22 points

2nd game

Allen 6-13, 17 points, 6 assists

Pierce 4-14 , 13 points

Garnett, 7-11, 14 points , 0 attempts at the FT LINE




All i know is you continue to look at these games. The real reason the Celtics were not better was because these guys either were lazy, or not in shape...

So it made Ray look a lot worse...

That 20-8 record could have easily been 20-8 or better, the way these guys finally kicked into high gear, especially Garnett...


The more and more i see , I begin to think Rondo didnt want Allen here anymore. And that was the biggest reason for Ray's crazy decision

I didnt defend ray for his bad games.

Im defending him when he played well, and consistent, the other 2 were playing horrendous.


In short, the real reason was either Rondo wasnt going to play with Ray Allen

Or Garnett and Pierce were either lazy or out of shape to start the season

You decide.

[syfy9]

I for one disagree.  But more I really wonder what your point of this post is?  You think that if Ray Allen was playing in those games we would have had a better record?  Is that what you are implying?

I really don't know how anyone who watched the C's last year game in game out can say that the reason we got on our run was the lack of competition.  The reason we went on the run was KG got into shape and started playing like the monster he is and AB stepped up big time and added to the clamp down / lock down def.  We were way more athletic and aggressive on both ends and we played to our potential.

So exactly what are you complaining about?

Do people even look at the boxscores. Watching the game is one thing, but when you take a look at the teams they beat, the players who performed and the record. Then compare it to the beginning of the season, you will start to see the real reason why that 20-8 was overrated.

How many days did those 20-8 games come in? No matter the competition ANY team can beat you on ANY given day! A lot of factors of last season made the teams we face harder to defeat than just the players on that team! If it had nothing to do with AB, do you think Doc would have risked Ray's ego and would he change what had been working if it was? I guess Doc and everyone else (the people who really know and not some "fan") must be lying b/c they all credit the change to AB as the catalyst for the better play... mainly b/c of his defense! Before AB moved into the starting lineup KG and PP both had already begun to play much better... we still we losing! Are "you" telling me KG and PP were playing terrible until the last 28 games? Come on now!

The Celtics played the Lakers twice. Two big games for Celtics and Celtic fans right?

The first on February 9th 2012

We lost that game 88-87 .............1 POINT

Kevin Garnett was 6-23

Paul Pierce was 7-18 , 18 points ,did contribute with 7 assists

Ray Allen was a decent 9-20, 22 points

2nd game

Allen 6-13, 17 points, 6 assists

Pierce 4-14 , 13 points

Garnett, 7-11, 14 points , 0 attempts at the FT LINE




All i know is you continue to look at these games. The real reason the Celtics were not better was because these guys either were lazy, or not in shape...

So it made Ray look a lot worse...

That 20-8 record could have easily been 20-8 or better, the way these guys finally kicked into high gear, especially Garnett...


The more and more i see , I begin to think Rondo didnt want Allen here anymore. And that was the biggest reason for Ray's crazy decision

I think Ray Allen is overrated.

He wasn't going to save our offense or drastically improve compared to Bradley's contributions. I'm sure you've taken it upon yourself like many fans to watch games the early part of the season; You would have seen Ray struggling to score in a half court offense, and having our team waste precious shot clock time to try to get him open on curls and screens.


I love Ray during fast breaks where Rondo passes to him as he trails, or when the defense isn't set and make a mistake leaving Ray wide open, but he's a liability now in a half court offense...For the Celtics anyway - we have too few that can dribble penetrate/attract help defense.

Bradley provides so much better man to man defense than Ray - That's a fact, and not really arguable. But on offense, Bradley was and is a more ideal compliment to Rondo. He can move without the ball - one of the best in the league, if you've watched the run. He's also shown flashes of a spot up shooter during the stretch. Bradley is cherished - but for good reason.

[BballTim]

Do people even look at the boxscores. Watching the game is one thing, but when you take a look at the teams they beat, the players who performed and the record. Then compare it to the beginning of the season, you will start to see the real reason why that 20-8 was overrated.

In the playoffs when he was on the court we also played a lot better than without him.

That was against Hawks/76ers squads who pushed the C's to 6/7 games respectively.

I don't think it was overrated, it was a great stretch of high level play. That doesn't mean he'll be able to do it again, or for a whole season.

One of the reasons fans rave about is the 20-8 record......

when you look at it more in depth you see a lot of bad teams with the exception of Miami.

Then you look more into it and you see lots of good games by Garnett and Pierce.

These guys were almost worthless at the start of the season. Garnett failed to attempt a free throw in his first few games.

Pierce was shooting 30% in the first 20 games.

  Don't forget about Bass starting for JO as well.

  Bass and Bradley going into the starting lineup was big for us because we went from Rondo and 4 guys in their mid-30s to having more players on the court that were under 30 than over 30. We were able to compete athletially with our opponents, and our transition offense didn't consist of Rondo and 4 guys trailing the play.

[rayallen1934]

I for one disagree.  But more I really wonder what your point of this post is?  You think that if Ray Allen was playing in those games we would have had a better record?  Is that what you are implying?

I really don't know how anyone who watched the C's last year game in game out can say that the reason we got on our run was the lack of competition.  The reason we went on the run was KG got into shape and started playing like the monster he is and AB stepped up big time and added to the clamp down / lock down def.  We were way more athletic and aggressive on both ends and we played to our potential.

So exactly what are you complaining about?

Do people even look at the boxscores. Watching the game is one thing, but when you take a look at the teams they beat, the players who performed and the record. Then compare it to the beginning of the season, you will start to see the real reason why that 20-8 was overrated.

How many days did those 20-8 games come in? No matter the competition ANY team can beat you on ANY given day! A lot of factors of last season made the teams we face harder to defeat than just the players on that team! If it had nothing to do with AB, do you think Doc would have risked Ray's ego and would he change what had been working if it was? I guess Doc and everyone else (the people who really know and not some "fan") must be lying b/c they all credit the change to AB as the catalyst for the better play... mainly b/c of his defense! Before AB moved into the starting lineup KG and PP both had already begun to play much better... we still we losing! Are "you" telling me KG and PP were playing terrible until the last 28 games? Come on now!

The Celtics played the Lakers twice. Two big games for Celtics and Celtic fans right?

The first on February 9th 2012

We lost that game 88-87 .............1 POINT

Kevin Garnett was 6-23

Paul Pierce was 7-18 , 18 points ,did contribute with 7 assists

Ray Allen was a decent 9-20, 22 points

2nd game

Allen 6-13, 17 points, 6 assists

Pierce 4-14 , 13 points

Garnett, 7-11, 14 points , 0 attempts at the FT LINE




All i know is you continue to look at these games. The real reason the Celtics were not better was because these guys either were lazy, or not in shape...

So it made Ray look a lot worse...

That 20-8 record could have easily been 20-8 or better, the way these guys finally kicked into high gear, especially Garnett...


The more and more i see , I begin to think Rondo didnt want Allen here anymore. And that was the biggest reason for Ray's crazy decision

I think Ray Allen is overrated.

He wasn't going to save our offense or drastically improve compared to Bradley's contributions. I'm sure you've taken it upon yourself like many fans to watch games the early part of the season; You would have seen Ray struggling to score in a half court offense, and having our team waste precious shot clock time to try to get him open on curls and screens.


I love Ray during fast breaks where Rondo passes to him as he trails, or when the defense isn't set and make a mistake leaving Ray wide open, but he's a liability now in a half court offense...For the Celtics anyway - we have too few that can dribble penetrate/attract help defense.

Bradley provides so much better man to man defense than Ray - That's a fact, and not really arguable. But on offense, Bradley was and is a more ideal compliment to Rondo. He can move without the ball - one of the best in the league, if you've watched the run. He's also shown flashes of a spot up shooter during the stretch. Bradley is cherished - but for good reason.

If Rondo could step up and shoot during Ray Allens running around screens , we wouldnt have to see 20 seconds wasted...

But Rondo cant shoot unless he wants too

Rondo is special but he is unique for this team

I believe he will suffer not having a shooter back there

[Smitty77]

Let me reiterate:  With Avery on the court we were a +15 and with him on the bench we were a -4.



Smitty77

[syfy9]

I for one disagree.  But more I really wonder what your point of this post is?  You think that if Ray Allen was playing in those games we would have had a better record?  Is that what you are implying?

I really don't know how anyone who watched the C's last year game in game out can say that the reason we got on our run was the lack of competition.  The reason we went on the run was KG got into shape and started playing like the monster he is and AB stepped up big time and added to the clamp down / lock down def.  We were way more athletic and aggressive on both ends and we played to our potential.

So exactly what are you complaining about?

Do people even look at the boxscores. Watching the game is one thing, but when you take a look at the teams they beat, the players who performed and the record. Then compare it to the beginning of the season, you will start to see the real reason why that 20-8 was overrated.

How many days did those 20-8 games come in? No matter the competition ANY team can beat you on ANY given day! A lot of factors of last season made the teams we face harder to defeat than just the players on that team! If it had nothing to do with AB, do you think Doc would have risked Ray's ego and would he change what had been working if it was? I guess Doc and everyone else (the people who really know and not some "fan") must be lying b/c they all credit the change to AB as the catalyst for the better play... mainly b/c of his defense! Before AB moved into the starting lineup KG and PP both had already begun to play much better... we still we losing! Are "you" telling me KG and PP were playing terrible until the last 28 games? Come on now!

The Celtics played the Lakers twice. Two big games for Celtics and Celtic fans right?

The first on February 9th 2012

We lost that game 88-87 .............1 POINT

Kevin Garnett was 6-23

Paul Pierce was 7-18 , 18 points ,did contribute with 7 assists

Ray Allen was a decent 9-20, 22 points

2nd game

Allen 6-13, 17 points, 6 assists

Pierce 4-14 , 13 points

Garnett, 7-11, 14 points , 0 attempts at the FT LINE




All i know is you continue to look at these games. The real reason the Celtics were not better was because these guys either were lazy, or not in shape...

So it made Ray look a lot worse...

That 20-8 record could have easily been 20-8 or better, the way these guys finally kicked into high gear, especially Garnett...


The more and more i see , I begin to think Rondo didnt want Allen here anymore. And that was the biggest reason for Ray's crazy decision

I think Ray Allen is overrated.

He wasn't going to save our offense or drastically improve compared to Bradley's contributions. I'm sure you've taken it upon yourself like many fans to watch games the early part of the season; You would have seen Ray struggling to score in a half court offense, and having our team waste precious shot clock time to try to get him open on curls and screens.


I love Ray during fast breaks where Rondo passes to him as he trails, or when the defense isn't set and make a mistake leaving Ray wide open, but he's a liability now in a half court offense...For the Celtics anyway - we have too few that can dribble penetrate/attract help defense.

Bradley provides so much better man to man defense than Ray - That's a fact, and not really arguable. But on offense, Bradley was and is a more ideal compliment to Rondo. He can move without the ball - one of the best in the league, if you've watched the run. He's also shown flashes of a spot up shooter during the stretch. Bradley is cherished - but for good reason.

If Rondo could step up and shoot during Ray Allens running around screens , we wouldnt have to see 20 seconds wasted...

But Rondo cant shoot unless he wants too

Rondo is special but he is unique for this team

I believe he will suffer not having a shooter back there

But the thing is, Doc does have Ray Allen running screens for 20 seconds (in the beginning of the season, at least).

Even if Rondo was talented in the art of the pull up, it wouldn't help Ray Allen's screen running time a lot, if at all.

Ray would still take 20 seconds running through screens even if Rondo's defender was all up on him.

Rondo will have a great shooter this season in Terry, whose Top 5 in All time 3 pointers made.

[Smitty77]

This was per John Hollinger (pretty respected EXPERT on NBA stats):

The Celtics outscored opponents by about 15 points per 100 possessions when Bradley played. When the 19th pick in the 2010 draft sat, Boston was outscored by more than four points, for a nearly twenty-point swing. When a shoulder injury forced Bradley to the bench ten games into the playoffs, Boston lost a ton.

Waiting on a response, ever so patiently, from all you Ray Allen worshippers:-)))

Smitty77

[j804]

This was per John Hollinger (pretty respected EXPERT on NBA stats):

The Celtics outscored opponents by about 15 points per 100 possessions when Bradley played. When the 19th pick in the 2010 draft sat, Boston was outscored by more than four points, for a nearly twenty-point swing. When a shoulder injury forced Bradley to the bench ten games into the playoffs, Boston lost a ton.

Waiting on a response, ever so patiently, from all you Ray Allen worshippers:-)))

Smitty77

Our defensive numbers were also historically one of the best during that stretch

[Fafnir]

Just because Ray Allen left, doesn't mean you have to try desperately to tear his replacement down.

When Avery Bradley was on the court with KG as a starter our defense was the best in the NBA by a massive margin, like 87 PP100 and our offense also at its best for this team (though not as amazing).

Was he scoring all those points? Of course not, but he still had an impact on the team. That's what the game is about.

[blink]

I agree 100% with this.  Bass was way more active and made us way better than with JO as well.  I think this shouldn't be overlooked.  I am glad we resigned Bass.  We have our full starting 5 from last year, + Green +Jet + Sully + Melo and hopefully a couple more to come.  I feel like our lineup next year will be better.  Hopefully it works out that way.

Do people even look at the boxscores. Watching the game is one thing, but when you take a look at the teams they beat, the players who performed and the record. Then compare it to the beginning of the season, you will start to see the real reason why that 20-8 was overrated.

In the playoffs when he was on the court we also played a lot better than without him.

That was against Hawks/76ers squads who pushed the C's to 6/7 games respectively.

I don't think it was overrated, it was a great stretch of high level play. That doesn't mean he'll be able to do it again, or for a whole season.

One of the reasons fans rave about is the 20-8 record......

when you look at it more in depth you see a lot of bad teams with the exception of Miami.

Then you look more into it and you see lots of good games by Garnett and Pierce.

These guys were almost worthless at the start of the season. Garnett failed to attempt a free throw in his first few games.

Pierce was shooting 30% in the first 20 games.

  Don't forget about Bass starting for JO as well.

  Bass and Bradley going into the starting lineup was big for us because we went from Rondo and 4 guys in their mid-30s to having more players on the court that were under 30 than over 30. We were able to compete athletially with our opponents, and our transition offense didn't consist of Rondo and 4 guys trailing the play.

[rayallen1934]

This was per John Hollinger (pretty respected EXPERT on NBA stats):

The Celtics outscored opponents by about 15 points per 100 possessions when Bradley played. When the 19th pick in the 2010 draft sat, Boston was outscored by more than four points, for a nearly twenty-point swing. When a shoulder injury forced Bradley to the bench ten games into the playoffs, Boston lost a ton.

Waiting on a response, ever so patiently, from all you Ray Allen worshippers:-)))

Smitty77

Too many factors for me to even care about. Who did they beat? Did they blowout teams...i mean its a silly stat.

In the playoffs, Ray Allen was a decent in that category, and

in the heat series better than anybody in the starting lineup in that category


does it mean anything?

[Smitty77]

I don't think Hollinger was JUST talking about this time period alone.  Perhaps I am mistaken, but I don't think he was just talking about those 28 games.

Smitty77

[CelticHooligan3]

I for one disagree.  But more I really wonder what your point of this post is?  You think that if Ray Allen was playing in those games we would have had a better record?  Is that what you are implying?

I really don't know how anyone who watched the C's last year game in game out can say that the reason we got on our run was the lack of competition.  The reason we went on the run was KG got into shape and started playing like the monster he is and AB stepped up big time and added to the clamp down / lock down def.  We were way more athletic and aggressive on both ends and we played to our potential.

So exactly what are you complaining about?

Do people even look at the boxscores. Watching the game is one thing, but when you take a look at the teams they beat, the players who performed and the record. Then compare it to the beginning of the season, you will start to see the real reason why that 20-8 was overrated.

How many days did those 20-8 games come in? No matter the competition ANY team can beat you on ANY given day! A lot of factors of last season made the teams we face harder to defeat than just the players on that team! If it had nothing to do with AB, do you think Doc would have risked Ray's ego and would he change what had been working if it was? I guess Doc and everyone else (the people who really know and not some "fan") must be lying b/c they all credit the change to AB as the catalyst for the better play... mainly b/c of his defense! Before AB moved into the starting lineup KG and PP both had already begun to play much better... we still we losing! Are "you" telling me KG and PP were playing terrible until the last 28 games? Come on now!

The Celtics played the Lakers twice. Two big games for Celtics and Celtic fans right?

The first on February 9th 2012

We lost that game 88-87 .............1 POINT

Kevin Garnett was 6-23

Paul Pierce was 7-18 , 18 points ,did contribute with 7 assists

Ray Allen was a decent 9-20, 22 points

2nd game

Allen 6-13, 17 points, 6 assists

Pierce 4-14 , 13 points

Garnett, 7-11, 14 points , 0 attempts at the FT LINE




All i know is you continue to look at these games. The real reason the Celtics were not better was because these guys either were lazy, or not in shape...

So it made Ray look a lot worse...

That 20-8 record could have easily been 20-8 or better, the way these guys finally kicked into high gear, especially Garnett...


The more and more i see , I begin to think Rondo didnt want Allen here anymore. And that was the biggest reason for Ray's crazy decision

I think Ray Allen is overrated.

He wasn't going to save our offense or drastically improve compared to Bradley's contributions. I'm sure you've taken it upon yourself like many fans to watch games the early part of the season; You would have seen Ray struggling to score in a half court offense, and having our team waste precious shot clock time to try to get him open on curls and screens.


I love Ray during fast breaks where Rondo passes to him as he trails, or when the defense isn't set and make a mistake leaving Ray wide open, but he's a liability now in a half court offense...For the Celtics anyway - we have too few that can dribble penetrate/attract help defense.

Bradley provides so much better man to man defense than Ray - That's a fact, and not really arguable. But on offense, Bradley was and is a more ideal compliment to Rondo. He can move without the ball - one of the best in the league, if you've watched the run. He's also shown flashes of a spot up shooter during the stretch. Bradley is cherished - but for good reason.

If Rondo could step up and shoot during Ray Allens running around screens , we wouldnt have to see 20 seconds wasted...

But Rondo cant shoot unless he wants too

Rondo is special but he is unique for this team

I believe he will suffer not having a shooter back there

Jason Terry is not a "shooter"