<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (nale @ Jul 17 2007, 03:49 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I was just bowsing the web for info on Allen's injuries and came upon your post. Incredible. I don't beleive I have ever read a post with so much WRONG information presented as facts. 1: Allen has played 12 years not 11. That means 984 total games. 2: Even if it was 11 year that would be 902 games not 870. 3: Allen has NEVER had steak of 5-season straight without missing a game. His best was 2 years in a row. 4: There have been FIVE season not two where he missed considerable time. IE: over a quarter of the season. 32 games, 25 games, 53, games 26 games and 27 games. 5: Allen had not missed 80 games in his career he has missed 176 ! More then twice what you claim. 6: So instead of playing 91% (790 of 870) He has played closer to 80% or less (790 of 994). Funny thing is I agee Allen's current injury is minor and that he will be fine for his first season with teh C's.</div>You are incorrect, because he has played in 91% of his games. The 98-99 season only contained 50 games due to the lockout, and Ray played all of them. I did all the math in my previous post in either this thread or another one, and he has in fact played in 91% of his games. Also, he has played 11 seasons, not 12. You looked at his stat sheet wrong because there are 2 bars for the 2002-2003 season, where he was traded. One bar has the 47 games he played in Milwaukee, the bar underneath has the 29 games he played for Seattle that year. So, he only missed 6 games that entire year.Games Missed1996-1997: 01997-1998: 01998-1999: 01999-2000: 02000-2001: 02001-2002: 132002-2003: 62003-2004: 262004-2005: 42005-2006: 42006-2007: 27So, throughout his first 5 seasons, Ray Allen didn't miss a single game, and he has played in 790 out of a possible 870 games, which is 90.8%.Check your facts before you refute there, buddy.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (CelticBalla32 @ Jul 17 2007, 03:24 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>You are incorrect, because he has played in 91% of his games. The 98-99 season only contained 50 games due to the lockout, and Ray played all of them. I did all the math in my previous post in either this thread or another one, and he has in fact played in 91% of his games. Also, he has played 11 seasons, not 12. You looked at his stat sheet wrong because there are 2 bars for the 2002-2003 season, where he was traded. One bar has the 47 games he played in Milwaukee, the bar underneath has the 29 games he played for Seattle that year. So, he only missed 6 games that entire year.Games Missed1996-1997: 01997-1998: 01998-1999: 01999-2000: 02000-2001: 02001-2002: 132002-2003: 62003-2004: 262004-2005: 42005-2006: 42006-2007: 27So, throughout his first 5 seasons, Ray Allen didn't miss a single game, and he has played in 790 out of a possible 870 games, which is 90.8%.Check your facts before you refute there, buddy.</div>haha, that should go in the owned thread.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (GrizzFanTaylor @ Jul 17 2007, 05:06 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Ray Allen only played 50 games that year.http://aol.nba.com/playerfile/ray_allen/career_stats.htmlTherefore, only 4 out of his first 5 seasons did he not miss a game.</div>Again, the 1998-1999 season only contained 50 regular season games because of the lockout. Ray Allen played in all of them. If you need ultimate proof, so google it.. or look at any other player's playerfile on NBA.com.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (CelticBalla32 @ Jul 17 2007, 04:12 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Again, the 1998-1999 season only contained 50 regular season games because of the lockout. Ray Allen played in all of them.</div>Yeah, I just had realized that as you were posting, hence why I just deleted my post. My bad.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (The Lefty @ Jul 17 2007, 08:25 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Sucks for him to be in Boston.</div>Yeah, it's real horrible to be teamed up with Paul Pierce and Al Jefferson.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (The Lefty @ Jul 17 2007, 09:59 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Not going to win the East... and not for a while either.</div>He wouldn't be doing any better on Seattle in the West. Boston has a much better situation for Ray Allen right now. Seattle is rebuilding around Kevin Durant, he'd be stuck on a lottery team for a couple more years.
Lottery team or be lucky to get past the 2nd round of the playoffs.Boston won't beat Detroit, Chicago, Cleveland, Miami or Washington in a 7 game series. Tough break Ray Allen.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (The Lefty @ Jul 18 2007, 12:13 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Lottery team or be lucky to get past the 2nd round of the playoffs.</div>Ray Allen would probabely much rather be on the latter. I don't know why you think he'd be better in a rebuilding situation. Ray Allen's days in the NBA are starting to become numbered and he should try to accomplish as much as he can. Celtics may not be the beasts of the east but they're still better than the rebuilding Sonics.
It's unfortunate most members of the Boston sports media couldn't do the simple research members here at BBW perform every day when discussing things like this."He hads seeergury? Oh noess! Bad Danny! He'sss weeek."
Yeah I know he wouldn't want to be in a lottery situation, but I said it sucks for him because he's not going to win in Boston either. He's in a lose-lose situation.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (The Lefty @ Jul 18 2007, 12:27 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Yeah I know he wouldn't want to be in a lottery situation, but I said it sucks for him because he's not going to win in Boston either. He's in a lose-lose situation.</div>Why do you say that? What player has he ever played with that's as good as Paul Pierce? And what 3rd option has he ever played with that's as good as Al Jefferson?
He's still in a lose-lose situation. Who cares if you're playing with Pierce and Jefferson, you aren't going to even come close to the ECF.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (The Lefty @ Jul 18 2007, 01:24 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>He's still in a lose-lose situation. Who cares if you're playing with Pierce and Jefferson, you aren't going to even come close to the ECF.</div>You're not getting this at all buddy. In Seattle, Ray Allen would be on a lottery team, while in Boston, he has a great chance to:- Win more games than he would in Seattle- Go to the playoffs- Win a series or two in the playoffs.He's in a much better situation than he was in Seattle, where they are rebuilding around Durant. Sure, he may not win a championship, but then again, 28 other NBA teams won't win a championship next season.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (The Lefty @ Jul 18 2007, 02:24 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>He's still in a lose-lose situation. Who cares if you're playing with Pierce and Jefferson, you aren't going to even come close to the ECF.</div>But the point is that the Celtics have a better shot to succeed than Seattle within the next 3 years. I don't think we're done making moves and improving this team either. No, I'm not expecting a contender overnight and I'm not expecting the conference finals this season, but Ray is in a much better situation in Boston than he would be in Seattle.You talk about Boston not being contenders, and that's true, but Seattle won't sniff the playoffs any time soon.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (The Lefty @ Jul 18 2007, 02:24 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>He's still in a lose-lose situation. Who cares if you're playing with Pierce and Jefferson, you aren't going to even come close to the ECF.</div>So if Kobe and KG teamed up they would win 5 titles, right?
I know this people. Obviously Boston is the BETTER place to be, but it's still a LOSE-LOSE SITUATION. GeezI never mentioned anything about KG and Kobe or the Lakers.
Just saying.And how do you know that Boston won't win? Sure, the odds are against them but when you have that kind of connection with Pierce-Allen-Jefferson and a nice young team that's ready to prove people wrong and exceed expectations then your odds get better.
The odds are too much. Like I said Chicago, Cleveland, Miami, Detroit, and Washington are better teams IMO.
