RealGM

I think it's more important that the team helps Ray to get going rather than Pierce, because just like Ray said in his interview today, he is at the mercy of whether or not the ball is moving. Pierce, not so much. I feel as though the team should always make Ray the priority at the start of games, moving the ball, setting screens, and going to him early. That way, we'll have him when we need him late because he's already in a rhythm.

He_Got_Game wrote:I think it's more important that the team helps Ray to get going rather than Pierce, because just like Ray said in his interview today, he is at the mercy of whether or not the ball is moving. Pierce, not so much. I feel as though the team should always make Ray the priority at the start of games, moving the ball, setting screens, and going to him early. That way, we'll have him when we need him late because he's already in a rhythm.

I haven't seen the interview yet, but that's exactly right. Ray depends on an offensive flow -- his brilliance lies in the fact that the offense doesn't really have to accomplish very much for the shot created for him to be "good".

Pierce can rescue partially-unsuccessful offensive sequences a lot more effectively than Ray can.

Both of them are longshots to score when the offensive set is completely FUBARed, but still likelier than lesser players would be.

I think Ray needs to be shooting a lot more than 12 shots a game especially with KG out, I think the Celtics were still too used to playing the Bulls in that grueling 7 game series, they will adjust and start setting screens and Ray should have a big game 2.... hopefully

Ray has JJ freakin Redick on him... we need to get him the ball

Pierce will always get his, his main job is to get his points as usual and focus on defending turk

Ray turned down several shots and the then the team ended up with a worse shot. He had a bad case of House last game.

I'd rather see Ray play more like PP and force up shots, and PP play more like Ray and work to get open by running off screens. There's big boys, they better be able to get themselves off (sounded weird).

And Courtney Lee is slated to return for game three. If Boston fails to win game two, they would've squandered two opportunities to exploit a favorable match-up against Redick. I don't think it's a coincidence that Boston loses both game ones in the first and second rounds with Ray struggling each time. When Ray gets it going... You're apt to have more 20+ and 30+ games from him. I mean Ray should have had dropped forty on Redick or at least you would've expected it going into that game.

Boston needs to get Ray's offense going early and let Pierce follow as he pleases. Because Pierce is capable of going off at any time. While Ray can fade sometimes if his shots aren't falling or plays aren't being ran for him. Or he simply cools off and doesn't heat up again.

The answer to this question in the OP is Ray. Pierce can create when the ball is stagnant, although it's ugly and not efficient. When we are passing well and moving the ball, the entire offense is better and Ray gets great looks.

Neither; it's more important to get Rondo going. When he's going, he gets Ray going.

Paul is another matter. We can just iso him if we need to...

I actually think entire team needs to be going. One or two players won win you a game, unless you have Kobe or James.

ryaningf wrote:Neither; it's more important to get Rondo going. When he's going, he gets Ray going.

Paul is another matter. We can just iso him if we need to...

God, Paul going iso is one of the worst things...a BAD old habit we need to break. He invariably gets stripped, turns it over, or doesn't make the shot. BALL MOVEMENT, people!!

My Insat

You have no frigging idea what you are talking about - so think and research data before you type. You are perpetuating the "Pierce hater/underappreciator" bunch of **** that never seems to go away from this board - no matter how well he plays, no matter if he was the Finals MVP last year.

I will wager you anything you want to wager that, over the course of his career, Paul has made at least 50 gamewinning or gametieing shots during crunch time by ISOing. He has missed his share also -but he has the balls and the skill to get it done. For christ sake, he ISO'd 7 straight times at the end of Game 5 against Chicago and did not even hit the rim on all 7.

That does not mean that he has to ISO at the end of every tight game. It would be a good thing to mix his ISOs with setting up Ray for a three or Rondo for a drive, etc. But when the Truth needs to get it done, he steps up to the plate and more often than not gets it done.

Ex

Redick is not a bad defender.

Well, when Ray is scoring he becomes like a shot blocking center. The defense always has to account for him whenever he's on the floor. That opens things up down low for Perkins because the defense can't afford to come in. Ray spreads the floor, Pierce attacks the gut of the defense with his ability to slash and create his own outside shot opportunities.

I concur, everything begins with Rondo. He's the one who finds Ray off of screens and picks. Ray relies on him in that sense. Whereas, both Pierce and Rondo can just go and score whenever they feel like it. Like Rivers tries to emphasize to him, Rondo's speed is his asset and a weapon on offense.

for some reason Ray has struggled in game one of playoff series. He will be more aggressive tonight and I think he will have a good night. the funny thing is we almost beat the magic with our backcourt going 4 for 24. The Magic have great outside shooting but we allowed them to get comfortable. If we play tough d and challenge their shots and on the other end push the ball, we should win this game.

exculpatory wrote:My Insat

You have no frigging idea what you are talking about - so think and research data before you type. You are perpetuating the "Pierce hater/underappreciator" bunch of **** that never seems to go away from this board - no matter how well he plays, no matter if he was the Finals MVP last year.

I will wager you anything you want to wager that, over the course of his career, Paul has made at least 50 gamewinning or gametieing shots during crunch time by ISOing. He has missed his share also -but he has the balls and the skill to get it done. For christ sake, he ISO'd 7 straight times at the end of Game 5 against Chicago and did not even hit the rim on all 7.

That does not mean that he has to ISO at the end of every tight game. It would be a good thing to mix his ISOs with setting up Ray for a three or Rondo for a drive, etc. But when the Truth needs to get it done, he steps up to the plate and more often than not gets it done.

Ex

Dude, WTF? I love Pierce, I've been a Pierce fan since we drafted him, so your first sentence is flat out wrong right off the bat. Yes, I have seen Pierce hit loads of game winning shots on iso plays at the end of games, but I've also seen him botch them horribly, and it's not an 80-20 split we're talking about here. Witness the 2 games in the Bulls series where we tried this and it went awry.

Maybe instead of acting like an a$$hole you could discuss things a little bit more civilly...I never had a problem with you before even after your amazing exposition on Scrabble playing and your academic qualifications (I have an advanced degree, too, so don't even start that $hit with me)...sorry we can't all do such in-depth "research and analysis", as you said, to break down every Pierce iso play between 1998 and 2009...some of us have lives and jobs, you know....

Insat

I apologize for sounding a bit gruff. I am pleased that you are not part of the "Pierce underappreciation crew" (more or less hiding in the weeds for the last couple of years). What you wrote originally is a common misconception, and I 100% stand by what I responded. It is not 80-20, but it is still a very good option in many circumstances. I also reiterate that mixing Pierce ISOs leading to step-back Js with Paul driving to the hoop, Paul as a decoy drawing the D and then kicking out to Ray for a dagger 3, or a play initiated by Rondo would be optimal = "keep them guessing".

Peace.

Pierce's foul trouble more or less ended the Redick-Allen match-up three minutes into game two. Boston went small, and Allen was matched up with Hedo or Pietrus (the human foul) for the rest of the night.

exculpatory wrote:Insat

I apologize for sounding a bit gruff. I am pleased that you are not part of the "Pierce underappreciation crew" (more or less hiding in the weeds for the last couple of years). What you wrote originally is a common misconception, and I 100% stand by what I responded. It is not 80-20, but it is still a very good option in many circumstances. I also reiterate that mixing Pierce ISOs leading to step-back Js with Paul driving to the hoop, Paul as a decoy drawing the D and then kicking out to Ray for a dagger 3, or a play initiated by Rondo would be optimal = "keep them guessing".

Peace.

Peace man...no hard feelings! I just wish teams in general could be more creative than the iso plays at the end of quarters/games. Pierce is great, no doubt, but the D is keyed in on him, even when he acts as a decoy. A better play, getting the ball to him or Ray, might work better and keep the D off-balance. Who knows, we're just fans on a message board!