Hey Cousin It,

Always a pleasure to hear from you — seems like it’s been too long ;) Appreciate the kind words, and glad you agree with me. Here’s hoping for a better effort in this area on Saturday.

-sw

Steve:

Well though-out and well stated. It’s amazing how not sustaining good defense can void the defense altogether. Yes, they played good defense, (for the most part), for about 20 seconds, then would have mental lapses and just totally let down. Seriously, playing good defense requires being able to [i[sustain[/i] it for however long the opponent has the ball, and is completely nullified by a lapse of even a second or two.

Anyway … it also amazes me how little it seems to sink in with this team that they need to run consistently, especially with Detroit. As I stated in my thread yesterday, the half-court game is Detroit’s game, and as soon as we’re lulled into it by laziness or weariness, (or a hundred other less important reasons), then we’re right where they want us: pounding the ball and letting them set up their defense. If we run, however, they’re on their heels and we’re playing the way we need to to be most effective.

The wood-warmers were completely useless tonight, and that hurt us as well. Can’t complain much about the Big Three, but that alone is not gonna get it done. The bench has got to contribute significantly, or we’re doomed … and thankfully, I think they realize it. As you stated quite eloquently, there was a major loss of intelligence by the C’s tonight, and it was painfully obvious. They certainly can be their own worst enemy at times, but that’s expected a bit with a “new” team.

Also reiterating, I don’t think this series is done, by any means. Ray seems to be “back”, and that can be difference enough right there to put us over the top in Detroit, (if our bench is playing decently, that is), and spark us to a road win or two. Attack the basket, play with some smarts, and get the bench involved … the rest will take care of itself. Honestly, when both these teams are playing their best, the Celtics are a much better team. There’s no way that the Pistons will keep shooting this well, either, and that’s another thing in our favor.

Really great work, Steve! As usual, you articulate so much of what I’m thinking, and do it in a way that’s a pleasure to read! The Guru must be a truly proud man … as well as gifted with a timeless wisdom. I hope to hear that he’s smiling after a win on Saturday! Nice piece, SW.

All the best,

Bahku

I wish I could believe that the refs called against the Celts. There were certainly missed and miffed calls, but the Celts really have no one to blame but themselves for that foul-plagued performance. How many times did they grab a Piston who was whizzing by?

That said, the Celtics can correct that if they try hard enough and I DO believe the Celtics can win in Detroit. More stops (and please better rebounding!), more quick outlets, more efficient offense. We’ll have to watch, cheer our guys on and see what happens.

Right on target, Steve. And while I agree this is on te team not the refs, there were some more doozies last night, my fav being the one in the first qtr where Ray got called for a shooting foul, feet flat on the parquet, arms down, no play on the ball. The NBA, where phantom fouls happen.

well done Steve, as usual

I agree on Tony Allen – I think my unprofessional assesment of him is that he’s just unfocused – he probably knows what to do, but gets “lost” when he’s distracted or under pressure

if you can coach him up and get him concentrating on one thing, I think he can do anything you tell him on defense, but the Pistons are just too smart and will poke and prod and figure out a weakness before too long

Nice job, Steve.

Don’t forget Rondo’s “illegal hands to the face” foul. What an idiotic play. Completely unnecessary.

Bahku,

Thanks as always for the kind words and insights. Always a pleasure to hear from you. I’ll definitely take a look at that thread you mentioned to me later on today — my apologies for not getting a chance over the last couple of days.

And as always, you know I share your faith. We’re far from done here, just like you said. Go green!

-sw

Ryan,

You’re far too kind, but I appreciate your words. Really, thank you for starting the “It was NOT the refs” thread, which I posted on late last night as I was writing the column. Certainly part of the inspiration for the particular line you liked about the refs. Maybe you’ve got more of that way with words than you’re giving yourself credit for! :)

Here’s hoping we’ll all have something more pleasant to agree on after Game 3.

-sw

Tony could dribble circles around Rondo – Tony could guard better than ALL Celtics with possible exception of Kevin Garnett (with height difference)

If so… when is he going to show it? I’ll give Steve first crack at rebuttal, but I’d say that he’s a bit more objective in his evaluation.

Hey Babyeater,

Thanks for the comments, and much thanks for having the thick skin assuredly needed to come aboard in enemy waters. We’ve had some very insightful “other siders” around the site this season, especially throughout the playoffs, and your insights are certainly welcome in this space — never hurts to have that other perspective, particularly when it is an informed one.

I agree with just about everything you said, and I’m looking forward to hearing more from you. Thanks again for the time.

-sw

Wasn’t Joe Forte the ACC Player of the Year? What does winning a college conference award have to do with his ability to play at the next level?

I think both Nanc and Steve had parts of Tony’s problem…

One part knee, one part head, one part head worrying about knee. Call it what you like but Tony’s at his best when he has fewer decision to make. He’s enough to make any fan of the Celtics nutty. When he’s good he’s great, when he’s bad he’s horrendous.

Hey Thruthelookingglass,

Thanks for the comment. Agreed with your assessments about the fouling, but I would add that one of the things that upset me most about this lost was that I thought the C’s did do a very good job in some of the areas you talked about improving — thanks for touching on this, actually, as I meant to mention it in the original piece.

The team shot over 48 percent from the field, got to the line 25 times and hit 88 percent from there. The C’s had 13 offensive boards and were plus-8 on the glass overall. The three big boys combined for 75 points, hit every one of 13 FT attempts and were incredibly efficient from the field. I can’t in good faith complain about those parts of the game, although as you begin to allude to, allowing another 9 o-boards is certainly not so wonderful.

-sw

Tony Allen…

… has the highest turnover-per-minute ratio on the team;

… has the lowest assist-per-minute ratio of any guard on the team;

… has roughly a 1:1 assist-to-turnover ratio, which is terrible for a guard;

… has the highest personal-foul-to-minute ratio on the team, by a wide margin.

He also is significantly behind where he should be development wise, because he injured his knee by getting into a brawl in Chicago, for which he was brought up on felony charges (although ultimately acquitted). Additionally, as I recall he had some major issues at Oklahoma State related to yet another brawl.

This isn’t a guy who screams out “tremendous IQ” either on the court or off. Steve, if anything, was much too kind by only calling him brainless.

Tenacious D,

Your words are appreciated. And since you touched on it, let me take a moment to say that I hope I didn’t emit the perception that I thought the refs were great — as you mention, there were plenty of calls that left me screaming at my TV and pacing my living room. Rough times all around.

-sw

Jeff,

Thanks for your thoughts. I’m with you — as a fan of this team, I’ll root for TA for as long as he wears the green. I’ll tell myself time and time again that he can gain the basketball IQ to become the player his athleticism should allow him to be with the right coaching. But we’re still a ways away.

-sw

RH,

Excellent point. The Rondo ‘palming’ of Prince’s face definitely should have been mentioned in the column as well.

Always good lookin’ out.

-sw

CoachBo,

Thanks a lot for the appreciative words. I’m glad my work today resonated with you.

Out of curiosity, I’m not sure where our ‘disagreement’ on TA comes in, but I’m right with everything you said about his current style of play. Far more succinct than any extended commentary I have on him, and just as effective.

-sw

Red2,

Thanks for the thoughts. Has PJ been a breath of fresh air lately or what? Keeps playing consistent ball every time out. And to think I thought he looked like our weakest link due to rust about six weeks ago. As always, shows what I know.

-sw

nazzbo,

I’m hoping quite a bit that you’re absolutely right that I was too harsh. This team has been through the ringer over the last few weeks, and that certainly takes a toll — here’s hoping it was an isolated one-game situation.

-sw

peckerneck,

Thanks for the comment. As I note above to Tenacious D, please don’t for a second think that I haven’t had my share of complaints about the officials, both last night and throughout the playoffs. No qualms with your assessment that we’ve been on the short end of the stick a few times, but I’d merely point out that one would have to imagine that every team’s fan base likely sees it the same way for them.

-sw

[A]s a fan of this team, I’ll root for TA for as long as he wears the green. I’ll tell myself time and time again that he can gain the basketball IQ to become the player his athleticism should allow him to be with the right coaching. But we’re still a ways away.

And I’ll keep telling myself Scal can become the next Charles Barkley. More likely, though, the only thing they’re going to have in common is the “Round Mound” part.

Your hopes for Tony are about as realistic, sadly enough.

Roy and Redz, re: TA

Very well put, both of you. And now, to piggyback, if I may…

-sw

Hi Nanc,

Thanks for taking the time to write in, and I appreciate your candor is disagreeing with me.

That said, I have a hard time accepting much of what you’re saying. I will preface my response with the comment that this piece was not intended as a Tony Allen bash-fest invite. I had what I considered to be an entertaining anecdote to share that I thought made both a pertinent point about Tony’s on-court decision-making and the Celtics last night, and it was a segue into the greater point of the column. However, since you’ve chosen to pursue this path, I feel compelled to respond on several accounts…

You talk about watching TA in college. He was[/i] a good player at OK State, and his numbers show that, as does the fact that he was an integral part of a Final Four team in 2004. However, as Redz so helpfully points out with his Joe Forte example, being good at one level doesn’t necessarily equate to being good or great the next. Tony has had a lot trouble on this level. I would presume the major knee injury you refer to was the one incurred last year while dunking after a whistle. As you’re likely aware, Tony had played two and a half NBA seasons prior to that injury — and my feelings about him before the injury weren’t much different from what they are now. I commend his efforts to return from that injury — I have no doubt that it is immensely difficult — but you can rest assured that I’ve taken it into account in my assessment of Tony.

In fact, as I tried to point out throughout the column, I’ve never been down on Tony’s physical skills. He plays hard, has good strength, quickness and — at least prior to the injury — excellent leaping ability. All integral tools to being a good player, specifically on the defensive end. I also don’t know Tony personally, and as should have been clear from the context provided by the column (I’m curious as to whether you read the rest of it), the “brain” comment wasn’t about Tony as a person — although the police history Roy alludes to doesn’t make it look all that good there either. However, my comments were about Tony’s play on the court.

From watching Tony Allen as a professional basketball player, I can tell you this much — as several of my readers have echoed: He is not a smart decision-maker on the basketball court. Tony has great energy, but that energy often gets the best of him, leading him to jump into shooters on ball-fakes as well as to take lunges and gambles that often result in his being out of position, committing silly fouls and allowing easy baskets. Similarly, on the offensive end, for all of Tony’s athleticism, save for a month-long span right before the injury in late 2006/early 2007, TA spent most of his time consistently breaking plays, settling for jump shots that he couldn’t hit (he isn’t a good pure shooter, by the way), dribbling into traps and getting hit with offensive fouls for attempting to put his head down and bull his way through defenders. On both of sides of the ball, all the signs point to his being an [i]out-of-control player. An out-of-control player is not a smart player. That was my point about Tony. As I’ve written above, I have no personal dislike for him, and I’ll root for him and believe to some extent for as long as he wears green. I certainly believe he has the skills needed in order to make a big play at some point for this team, even down the stretch this year. But he hasn’t yet proved that he can be a consistently reliable contributor.

As for a couple of the other points you touch on…

(continued)

…I have no idea what the relevance of the Rondo commentary here is. Contrary to the belief espoused by a select few at the very outset of this season, Tony Allen is not a point guard. He is a shooting guard. In college, John Lucas was the point guard on his OSU teams. In the NBA, save for a couple of short stints early this season (in which I’ll give him credit for performing admirably at times), Allen has been a two-guard. From watching him play, it is evident that he is not a major-league ball handler. I defer to Roy’s point about your “circles around Rondo” comment. When he even comes close to demonstrating that, then those words will merit some consideration.

As for the issue of the leeway accorded the other players on this team, given the flaws with Tony I delineated above, the other players all bring more to the table than Tony does. Thus, they get more leeway. Do you really wish to compare the bodies of work and contributions offered by Ray Allen (despite his recent cold run) and Rajon Rondo? I should hope not, but I’m open to the discussion if you choose to pursue it.

Finally, the point that irked me beyond all others: “UNBELIEVABLE – and we wonder why the Celtics haven’t won on the road? NOBODY else has a clue about what wins championships – DEFENSE!”

No, the Celtics haven’t been particularly good on the defensive end on the road, but the “nobody else has a clue” comment seemed to be a shot directed at the rest of this team in general (especially since last night’s loss came at home), and I can’t allow that to stand in this space without rebuttal. Lest I remind you that the primary reason why this team has gotten this far in the first place is because the Celts blew everyone in the league away in being the Association’s top team in defensive efficiency this year. The 2007-08 Celtics have been by all statistical measures one of the best defensive teams the league has seen in years. They also possess the current Defensive Player of the Year as well as several other players (James Posey and Paul Pierce in particular) who stepped up to have excellent defensive campaigns. So far as I can tell — since it didn’t seem from the context to be completely centered on the team’s road performance in the playoffs — this comment is completely unfounded and unwarranted.

While my response may seem a bit harsh, I appreciate the time on your part, and I would welcome any further thoughts you have on the matter.

-sw

Steve, you are right. It’s probably the times that the team did push, did run the offense efficiently that made the missteps so groaningly obvious. Take the first part of the third vs. the last part.

Really appreciate your breakdown of the game and this whole thread. Have always known that Celts fans are the most knowledgeable! I am fired up for Saturday, and I root for Tony Allen just like I root for the rest of our guys!

Steve wrote:

Hey Thruthelookingglass,

Thanks for the comment. Agreed with your assessments about the fouling, but I would add that one of the things that upset me most about this lost was that I thought the C’s did do a very good job in some of the areas you talked about improving — thanks for touching on this, actually, as I meant to mention it in the original piece.

The team shot over 48 percent from the field, got to the line 25 times and hit 88 percent from there. The C’s had 13 offensive boards and were plus-8 on the glass overall. The three big boys combined for 75 points, hit every one of 13 FT attempts and were incredibly efficient from the field. I can’t in good faith complain about those parts of the game, although as you begin to allude to, allowing another 9 o-boards is certainly not so wonderful.

Nanc,

Thanks again for your willingness to take the time to speak candidly about this. You’re absolutely right that I would expect a Tony Allen fan to have something to say about my comment, and I’m honored that my words meant enough that you took the time to respond. However, despite my continuous attempts over the last few hours to understand it from your angle, I still find myself quite at odds with your viewpoint.

For what it’s worth, I stressed the first time around that the “brain” comment was a figure of speech and that the context of the column — which I again question if you’ve read, since it actually questioned the minds of the rest of the team for Thursday night’s performance — was demonstrative of the fact that it was centered on TA’s on-court behavior.

Once more, as I clarified in my first response to you, this was never an attack on Tony Allen the person. I responded only to Roy’s brief comments regarding Tony’s police history, and I specified then that there was no need for this to become a bash session of Tony the person. Yet you’ve chosen to fixate on questions about TA’s past transgressions. I have no desire to provoke an argument on these grounds, particularly since it was never the focus of my comment. However, it seems worth pointing out to you that these incident are largely a matter of perspective. You have your opinion on what happened. Other sources have theirs (for example: http://sports-law.blogspot.com/2005/10/tony-allen-and-whataburger-incident.html). Given Tony’s semi-lengthy history of run-ins with the law and off-court trouble, you’ll understand why I’m not necessarily inclined to take your comments on the matter as gospel and as such why the matter bears further research for me. Whether or not the idea of getting in a fistfight because someone called you a name is justified (or absurd) is beside the point and ultimately of little consequence to this discussion. I’d be happy to chat further with you about that in another forum, but I’m simply not sure that here in this comments section is the time or the place.

Your jab at “so-called Celtics fans” is simply uncalled for. I don’t know if that’s directed at my readers or myself personally, and frankly, it doesn’t matter. There is absolutely no need for that here. Fans are fans, and we come in all different styles. Some of us are eternally optimists, some of us are realists, some of us like to use the site to vent. So on and so forth. This is a site for all Celtics fans, and it isn’t up to any individual member to decide the code others need to follow in order to qualify for “true fanhood.” That’s an incendiary remark on your part, and it borders on baiting. Though I don’t mean to step on the toes of our moderators, I would kindly recommend that you refrain from similar commentary in that vein in the future.

Now, back to basketball…

(continued)

…you say the following:

“As to Tony’s stats- well, it’s extremely hard to get good statistics in the short amount of time that he plays – in fact, it’s just not possible…”

False. So far as ‘per game’ statistics are concerned, you may well be right. But one of the great things about basketball statistics is the relatively recent rise to prominence of per-minute statistics, which have been found by several studies (see Tom Ziller’s work at Ballhype) to hold relatively constant with increased minutes. Per-minute statistics normalize player production so that we can more fairly statistically compare players with varying amounts of playing tim

While you’re right that Tony has played few minutes in the playoffs, he did average 18.4 per game during the regular season (and he made 11 starts in 75 games), so taking a look at those stats seems to be a reasonable proposition.

TA averages 13 points per 36 minutes, which is a decent but not spectacular figure, and it’s particularly unimpressive for someone who adds so little else. His 4.4 rebounds per 36 rank him 11th on the Celtics 15-man roster, ahead of only back-up point guards Eddie House and Sam Cassell as well as Ray Allen and Gabe Pruitt. His 3.0 assists per 36 minutes rank him well below every guard on the roster. But the real statistical kicker is that — even for all the claims that TA hasn’t had consistent enough minutes to really get himself into a groove, per-minute stats not withstanding — he has managed to vault to the top of the team charts in turnovers per 36 minutes (as Roy Hobbs notes above), and he sits well ahead of every guard in the rotation in personal fouls per 36 minutes (4.4), with nobody closer than Sam Cassell at 3.5. The personal statistics that are[/i] available to us certainly don’t add much credence to your claim about Tony’s productivity.

As I acknowledged earlier, Tony did an admirable job in a brief bit of spot work at the point this year. However, it’s worth noting that he was not [i]the[/i] back-up point guard at any point this season. Eddie House and Cassell have alternated in that role. Allen has been an emergency guy all year, and he made a few spot starts in Rondo’s brief absence because Doc wanted to have Eddie’s energy and instant offense coming off the bench. I commend Tony for the work he did in that time, but the case remains solid — through both the statistical and anecdotal evidence my readers and I have provided — that he currently isn’t capable of consistently succeeding at the point in this league with any sort of regularity.

I understand the effort comments on your part, and I’ve noted this with commendation to him on several occasions already, both in the column (immediately prior to the “brain” comment, in fact) and in my initial response to you. However, without the [i]basketball IQ to accompany that effort — an IQ that hasn’t yet appeared much thanks to Tony’s aforementioned out-of-control play at the pro level — that effort often goes to waste. As rigolega points out, you might take 10 Tony Allens on your team, but that team would end up turning the ball over with abandon, scoring little and sending the opponent to the foul line with too much regularity. Not particularly conducive to winning basketball.

You still largely have yet to address the basketball-related points I made in my first reply to you, and so I’ll wrap up my current thoughts at this point to see if this helps clarify my initial commentary. Again, I thank you for coming on today, and I stress to you that this wasn’t begun as a Tony Allen bash-fest and isn’t now. It’s simply my analysis of what I’ve seen of Tony, which seems to resonate with a fair number of Celts fans despite its contrast to your viewpoint. I appreciate the chance to hear out a different perspective, but I’m not yet seeing it.

On one other slightly related note, I have indeed seen the personal e-mails you sent me and can assure you that those will not go ignored either. As it is a bit late, I’ll likely address those tomorrow, but I just wanted to let you know that they were received and to thank you for taking the time to send them. I look forward to hearing back from you.

-sw