Re: RAY: 63% from the field, 56% from 3... it was a WISE choice!
posted at 11/11/2012 8:10 PM EST
In response to COMMIE-CONTRARIAN's comment:
In response to snakeoil123's comment:
In response to darkman20's comment:
In response to Gasthoerer's comment:
You can be considered a hater when you only forcus on the negative aspects (and on top use fals arguments).
You can be considered a fanboy when you only look at the positive aspects (see above).
1. Ray will not going to shot the same number like in the first 3 games. Terry and Lee will come around.
2. Ray was better than either Terry or Lee last year and without an injury it is not unlikely similiar this year.
3. Ray was always a starter and Star player. Lee is a journeyman and Terry was always a benchplayer (a great one though) --> There is a reason for that.
4. Terry NEVER was a better defense player than Ray. He is not focused and too small. Check what Doc said after what was a good defensive game of Terry: Celtics coach Doc Rivers said: âÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂAnd, you know, itâÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂs funny, we left Jason in because he was playing great defense. That may be a first in his career that thatâÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂs ever been said about Jason Terry. ..."
5. Both Lee and Terry (and AB as well) are not better rebounders than Ray.
6. Lee (and AB) is not a better ball handler than Ray (Terry only a little).
7. Ray is not a turnover machine --> I proved that with facts several time.
8. Ray's defense is underappreciated --> prove last playoffs.
9. Over a long season: Terry & Lee & Allen might be better than Allen & AB due too the risc of injury --> but if healthy it might be the other way around.
10. Our biggest problem is NOT at the SG positions. SF and C is an issue so far. Green is terrible at the moment!
Great post. But wasted on Ray Allen haters. To them, 1 turnover by Ray equals 5. If he misses a shot, he's all washup and needs to be traded immediately.
They won't even admit this simple truth: The Celtics always started strong during the Ray Allen era.
So why the slow start this year? What's different now? Simple: No Ray Allen.
But they will never admit it; they will come up with this excuse and that exuse instead of the obvious: No Ray Allen. Off course, now that Jeff Green has been thrown to the wolves, they now have their hopes on their other savior= Avery Bradly. LOL Sorry but it's simple delusion to think Avery Bradly will be the difference maker for Title contention...he will always be simply a role player at best; use as a diffensive stopper.
It's hard to tell whether you are serious or not, by the end of February last year the Celtics were 17 and 17 with ray allen. this year they are starting 3 and 3 without Ray Allen. I dont know if you can figure that out without a calculator but its the same winning percentage.
u haters keep wasting time bringing in ray's record AFTER he got hurt with the spurs. with healthy ray early in the season we were doing awesome. heck the team's record without ray was worse than that of the other 3 (incl rr, pp and kg)...
What are you talking about? the Celtics started 17 and 17 last year with a healthy Ray Allen.
I guess being a hater means you have a brain and access to google.