Tony Allen as a Starter?

[Collinto]

i mean c'mon, you guys are seriously undervaluing Ray Allen here. i love Tony and all but he's not in Ray's area code as far as talent and impact on a game.

So if your argument is simply based on talent, then is Finley in Ginobli's area code as far as talent and impact on a game?

Disclaimer: I am not advocating, just playing devil's advocate. Another fairly successful coaching staff moved a player who was easily superior talent wise to a 6th man position when they had a weak offensive bench...and I don't think they undervalued Ginobli.

[GuyClinch]

seriously, i can't believe anyone here remotely would consider starting Tony over Ray. i mean c'mon, you guys are seriously undervaluing Ray Allen here. i love Tony and all but he's not in Ray's area code as far as talent and impact on a game.

Agreed. There is a reason your best players start - that's lost on the "we need an uber bench player" crowd. It's the useless rest a bench player is getting while waiting on the bench before he comes in.

With a player as good as Ray Allen your trying to keep your guy on the floor as much as possible. That's the real goal. The long Ray Allen is on the floor (and effective) the better your teams chance to win. It's the same thing with PP and KG.

If you bench him to start..and you still play him 36 minutes - his time on the court gets compressed. So he gets winded more. This is why you don't bench your entire starting lineup and have this uber bench that always brings you back.. its bad strategy. You essentially have to make up all this time your guy was on the bench in the beginning and play him more then you would the rest of the game.

But if that guy starts - he can rest more when he is tired - and thus he can stay fresh and increase your chance of winning.

Pete

[Kids Are Alright]

And about the defense....Ray did a pretty neat job in the flow of the Celtics' team defense on Kobe and Rip. The commentators kept talking about how Kobe couldn't guard Pierce effectively during the series, well, Kobe was on Ray and couldn't stay with him (due to all of the double picks) half of the time.

Tony's not moving Ray out of that spot unless injury (or age) catches up with Ray. I still have him at co-MVP in my mind in the Lakers series. Pierce hands-down as MVP for the playoffs though.

[ICanOutreboundWalter]

If you bench him to start..and you still play him 36 minutes - his time on the court gets compressed. So he gets winded more. This is why you don't bench your entire starting lineup and have this uber bench that always brings you back.. its bad strategy. You essentially have to make up all this time your guy was on the bench in the beginning and play him more then you would the rest of the game.

But if that guy starts - he can rest more when he is tired - and thus he can stay fresh and increase your chance of winning.

Pete

This is a point that all too often gets forgotten when people try to project minutes and assume that as long as the minutes all add up, your good.

[GregB]

seriously, i can't believe anyone here remotely would consider starting Tony over Ray. i mean c'mon, you guys are seriously undervaluing Ray Allen here. i love Tony and all but he's not in Ray's area code as far as talent and impact on a game.

Agreed. There is a reason your best players start - that's lost on the "we need an uber bench player" crowd. It's the useless rest a bench player is getting while waiting on the bench before he comes in.

With a player as good as Ray Allen your trying to keep your guy on the floor as much as possible. That's the real goal. The long Ray Allen is on the floor (and effective) the better your teams chance to win. It's the same thing with PP and KG.

If you bench him to start..and you still play him 36 minutes - his time on the court gets compressed. So he gets winded more. This is why you don't bench your entire starting lineup and have this uber bench that always brings you back.. its bad strategy. You essentially have to make up all this time your guy was on the bench in the beginning and play him more then you would the rest of the game.

But if that guy starts - he can rest more when he is tired - and thus he can stay fresh and increase your chance of winning.

Pete

True, The other importand part of that is.

If you did bring Ray Allen off the bench you would constantly have to bring him in early in order to give him the minutes and proper rest. Which would break up Tony Allens minutes even more as a starter. As Ray and Pauls primary backup, He will receive more consecutive minutes on the floor off the bench.

[GuyClinch]

If you did bring Ray Allen off the bench you would constantly have to bring him in early in order to give him the minutes and proper rest. Which would break up Tony Allens minutes even more as a starter. As Ray and Pauls primary backup, He will receive more consecutive minutes on the floor off the bench.

Yes. I imagine the way Doc will do it is to bring out say Pierce first - and add Tony in. They take out RA and bring back in Pierce. Thus TA gets two 12 minute or so stints (at the end of first/start of second) and at the end of the 3rd/start of 4th. Obviously foul trouble or something might change things a bit..but it makes sense for TA.

Either way people seem to think starting is only about ego. It's not. You start guys you want to play the most so you can give them the most effective rest. Once you have a guy playing 35+ minutes you might as well start them in most circumstances..

Pete

[ryaningf]

Well, y'all have convinced me, though I was just advocating it when and if Tony earned it. BiilfromBoston, I'd love if Ray became even more of the offense and KG moved to 3rd option, but I'm not sure that's the case.

In the end, I think this offense becomes more efficient the more Rondo is given the freedom to create. Nobody can guard Rondo one-on-one and they're not going to double-team him either with the other options we have on this team.

I think we had a real problem on offense last season, mainly because we shot too many jumpers. Swapping Tony for Posey will cure some of that, but mostly it's gotta be from Rondo taking the reigns this season. It'll preserve Ray/Paul/KG too...

[billfromBoston]

Well, y'all have convinced me, though I was just advocating it when and if Tony earned it. BiilfromBoston, I'd love if Ray became even more of the offense and KG moved to 3rd option, but I'm not sure that's the case.

In the end, I think this offense becomes more efficient the more Rondo is given the freedom to create. Nobody can guard Rondo one-on-one and they're not going to double-team him either with the other options we have on this team.

I think we had a real problem on offense last season, mainly because we shot too many jumpers. Swapping Tony for Posey will cure some of that, but mostly it's gotta be from Rondo taking the reigns this season. It'll preserve Ray/Paul/KG too...

I'm pretty sure we just watched Ray and Paul become option A and B during the last two rounds of the playoffs...and the team was at its all time offensive best...I expect more of the same

[ryaningf]

I agree with what we saw, BillfromBoston, I'm just not sure it signals a sea change. It seems to me that Ray and Paul and KG (and the team in general) just did what they needed to do to win those games and for those games it meant going to Paul and Ray. If we were playing different teams, it might have meant a different thing. The offense we saw was a product of the teams we played.

Season long, it was clear that team played its best offensive basketball when Rondo was engaged and involved in the offense, initiating it with penetration. To me, next season we see a continuation of that--were Rondo is trusted more and more with the reigns of the offense. I expect to see tons more pick and rolls with Rondo/Pierce or Rondo/KG.

I'm just curious, but when you say that the team was "at its all time offensive best" during the last 2 playoff series, what exactly do you mean? Its most efficient? Its highest scoring? Its hardest to defend? Just expound if you can a little more on what you saw during those last two series and what you think it means...

[Prue]

You guys are crazy... R. Allen is the best player...he should start.

[celticfan42487]

Ray was also at his all time worst the first two rounds of the playoffs. So for what it's worth all around in the playoffs we saw Ray at his best and worse.. I'm not sure if that is going to change anything. This team doesn't have drivers that can finish or low post oriented big men that can score down there. We will always be a jump shooting team with Garnett and Pierce mixing it up and Ray being designated as a ball movement shooter.

In the end the offense runs through Garnett and Pierce when it's at it's best. But Ray will get his shots off ball distribution.

[ryaningf]

Yeah, but to be a more complete team we need to put the ball in Rondo's hands and let him get us easy basket opportunities, either in transition or with penetration. If Tony was in the starting lineup, he would balance our jump shooting tendencies...

We are a jump shooting team, but we have lots of potential for penetrating and low post scoring. Tony is a finisher when healthy. Giddens and Walker should be too, when they're implemented into our scheme and have a little experience under their belts. Rondo is only going to get better at getting to the rim. Leon has a pretty good back to the basket game, and I expect he'll get more opportunities next season. So, yes, we are a jump shooting team, but we have other, more efficient scoring options among our reserves, should we choose to develop and use them....

[campybatman]

I believe you can get away with having a Maggette, Ginobili or Gordon come off your bench as your sixth man/scoring threat. However, I can't see it working with R. Allen. See, he's a veteran and multi-All-Star that is use to starting. I mean did R. Miller get benched during the last few seasons of his career? I don't remember. I feel R. Allen deserves to go out as a starter. Still, I've wondered to myself would starting T. Allen make sense from a defensive standpoint. Your play should dictate whether you start or not and not necessarily your salary. However, R. Allen would be an expensive reserve. For T. Allen, I doubt it matters anymore to him as long as he's getting consistent minutes. Then the difference between him starting and coming off the bench doesn't matter. It probably matters more to younger players than older players, but I still would've a tough time seeing R. Allen as a reserve. And I believe R. Allen has sacrificed enough this season that he shouldn't have to compromise whether or not he'll be a starter next season.

[GuyClinch]

I believe you can get away with having a Maggette, Ginobili or Gordon come off your bench as your sixth man/scoring threat. However, I can't see it working with R. Allen. See, he's a veteran and multi-All-Star that is use to starting. I mean did R. Miller get benched during the last few seasons of his career? I don't remember. I feel R. Allen deserves to go out as a starter. Still, I've wondered to myself would starting T. Allen make sense from a defensive standpoint. Your play should dictate whether you start or not and not necessarily your salary. However, R. Allen would be an expensive reserve. For T. Allen, I doubt it matters anymore to him as long as he's getting consistent minutes. Then the difference between him starting and coming off the bench doesn't matter. It probably matters more to younger players than older players, but I still would've a tough time seeing R. Allen as a reserve. And I believe R. Allen has sacrificed enough this season that he shouldn't have to compromise whether or not he'll be a starter next season.

FWIW I think Ray Allen could excel coming off the bench. But it's not all about ego. As I explained before i think the critical issue is how much is said player going to play.

If you intend to play Ray Allen 35+ minutes it makes sense to start him. It allows him more useful rest during the game. Once his effectiveness falls or Tony Allen (Or Giddens, Pruitt, player X) rises then it can absolutely make sense to bench him as he will not be playing 35+ minutes anymore. If his minutes were to slip to 25 or 20 instead of 35 then he could function as a bench player.

I wouldn't say a guy like Ray Allen is ego free but I think again it's mistake to think the whole "starting" gig is just a matter of ego. A guy like Ray Allen if he was really on the downside could certainly accept a secondary gig.. Personally I absolutely do not think he is there yet. He would start and play 35+ minutes on nearly every team in the league still.

Pete

[billfromBoston]

I believe you can get away with having a Maggette, Ginobili or Gordon come off your bench as your sixth man/scoring threat. However, I can't see it working with R. Allen. See, he's a veteran and multi-All-Star that is use to starting. I mean did R. Miller get benched during the last few seasons of his career? I don't remember. I feel R. Allen deserves to go out as a starter. Still, I've wondered to myself would starting T. Allen make sense from a defensive standpoint. Your play should dictate whether you start or not and not necessarily your salary. However, R. Allen would be an expensive reserve. For T. Allen, I doubt it matters anymore to him as long as he's getting consistent minutes. Then the difference between him starting and coming off the bench doesn't matter. It probably matters more to younger players than older players, but I still would've a tough time seeing R. Allen as a reserve. And I believe R. Allen has sacrificed enough this season that he shouldn't have to compromise whether or not he'll be a starter next season.

FWIW I think Ray Allen could excel coming off the bench. But it's not all about ego. As I explained before i think the critical issue is how much is said player going to play.

If you intend to play Ray Allen 35+ minutes it makes sense to start him. It allows him more useful rest during the game. Once his effectiveness falls or Tony Allen (Or Giddens, Pruitt, player X) rises then it can absolutely make sense to bench him as he will not be playing 35+ minutes anymore. If his minutes were to slip to 25 or 20 instead of 35 then he could function as a bench player.

I wouldn't say a guy like Ray Allen is ego free but I think again it's mistake to think the whole "starting" gig is just a matter of ego. A guy like Ray Allen if he was really on the downside could certainly accept a secondary gig.. Personally I absolutely do not think he is there yet. He would start and play 35+ minutes on nearly every team in the league still.

Pete

...absolutely agree...the guy just came off PHENOMENAL ECF and Championship series and had a pretty damn good finish to his regular season as well...I'm expecting career highs in efficiency next year, not a bench role...after seeing how the team adjusted their offense and basically ran Pierce and Ray as the 1st and 2nd option at the end, i'd expect much of the same...

Last year was a learning experience for the team. They figured they'd utilize KG more in the post and try and make him a true go-to low-post option. In the end, they discovered the best way to run the offense was to just let KG be KG and have the offense run THROUGH him, but allow Ray and Paul to be the main scoring options...

I still think its funny to see the analysis of Ray's struggles against Cleveland, (FYI, he only had 2 bad games against ATL)...Cleveland's whole defensive strategy was to double Ray on the perimeter after the catch and flash hard on his pick-and-roll opportunities.

It was a lack of dynamic involvement in the team offense that ultimately led to his struggles against Clevland-not age or lack of ability. Allen averaged 7 shots a game in that series because the team had no real offensive strategy in place for him.

But once the criticism rose from that series, Ray finally got pissed at all the questions and stated that he needed to be more involved. At that point, all the "haters" who were dying to pin the "old age" tag, or assess him as being "done" started shouting from the rafters that Ray was a malcontent who couldn't cut it.

Low and behold, the team adjusts its offense to incorporate Ray into the sets more, Ray blows up against Detroit and Los Angeles, and the rest is history.

Ray Allen will inevitably begin to decline at some point, but looking at how he is utilized in this offense, how he keeps himself conditioned, and the support he receives from his teammates on offense, I find it hard to believe that his decline will come rapidly-much like I doubt KG or Pierce will decline rapidly either.

Ray is far from done, and certainly not anywhere near the point where I can humor anyone who thinks Tony Allen is ready to supplant him. Forget San Antonio and Ginobili-that has little bearing on how this Celtic team's starting lineup is comprised or how their bench functions in the rotation...

[billfromBoston]

I agree with what we saw, BillfromBoston, I'm just not sure it signals a sea change. It seems to me that Ray and Paul and KG (and the team in general) just did what they needed to do to win those games and for those games it meant going to Paul and Ray. If we were playing different teams, it might have meant a different thing. The offense we saw was a product of the teams we played.

Season long, it was clear that team played its best offensive basketball when Rondo was engaged and involved in the offense, initiating it with penetration. To me, next season we see a continuation of that--were Rondo is trusted more and more with the reigns of the offense. I expect to see tons more pick and rolls with Rondo/Pierce or Rondo/KG.

I'm just curious, but when you say that the team was "at its all time offensive best" during the last 2 playoff series, what exactly do you mean? Its most efficient? Its highest scoring? Its hardest to defend? Just expound if you can a little more on what you saw during those last two series and what you think it means...

I fully agree with you that the team will play according to the situation, but that is different than simply having Ray operate freelance,with no real plays designed for him beyond basic single-screens going across from baseline to baseline and running high-pick-and-roll...

At the end, the team was running Ray through a lot more dynamic screens and looking for him on basket cuts as well as giving him more ISO to work with....the shift in mentality and interest in getting him in positions to score increased his productivity and made the team more effective offensively.

I agree with the idea that Rondo's increased involvement is the greatest way to improve the offense, but I don't subscribe to the notion that he was "held back" at all. While Rondo certainly wasn't as primary a part of the offense as he will be, I think he had enough freedom to earn a larger role through his play. Rondo's inconsistency had more to do with his amount of usage than anything else. When he played well he was a central figure in the offense, when he was indecisive or ineffective he was less involved.

Overall, I think the team will be much more potent offensively this year-despite James Posey's absence..I expect everyone in the rotation: Perk/KG/PP/RA/RR-GD/LP/TA/EH to be more effective than the previous year due to familiarity and, for the younger players, simple development.