#50 NBA Player Of All-Time According to InsideHoops

[Boston C's]

I suggest you take a look at his playoff performances especially as a Celtic from 2008-2010.

2008 - Ray Allen was playing like hot garbage until the NBA finals. In the ECSF vs. the Cavs, Ray scored less than 10 ppg and wasn't even the 3rd leading scorer on the team, KG, Pierce, and even Rondo averaged more ppg than Ray did in that series.

The only reason why that series went to 7 games was because of how bad Ray played. If he played better than that, that series would have went to 5 games max. It shouldn't have went to 7 games but it did due to how poorly Ray played.

Ray vs. 2008 Cavs in ECSF- 9.3 ppg, 32.8% FG, 16.7% 3P.

2009 - Ray Allen plays like hot garbage against the Orlando Magic. This was the series where JJ Redick made a name for himself. In the past, people considered Redick a bust, a joke, and practically the Adam Morrison of the league. JJ Reddick literally shut down Ray in that series.

Ray vs. 2009 Magic in ECSF - 13.1 ppg, 34.4% FG, 19% from 3.

2010 - Ray Allen flames out in the Finals. He had a historic performance in Game 2 of the Finals but was invisible for the rest of the series. He shot 0/13 in Game 3 and 3/14 in Game 7.

Ray vs. 2010 Lakers in NBA Finals - 14.6 ppg, 36.7% FG, 29.3% from 3.


The choking label is warranted for Ray.

no its not...ray from the ecf finals to the nba finals stepped up when the celtics needed him too...if he played like trash like in the first 2 rounds we wouldnt even be talking about tryin to get banner 18...i suggest you go look at his seattle days and bucks days...dude played twice as good in the playoffs...if you wanna nitpick series or games pierce was pretty average until that game 7 of the cavs that yr and in 09 didn't play well against orlando at all really...if ray didnt go bolistic in the first round against chicago we wouldnt even had made it to round two...and when game 7 against orlando rolled around ray allen was the only one who stepped up to play and that includes pierce because he was pretty bad in that deciding game...lets not also forget game 6 at home this yr...pierce was God awful...but I don't consider him a choker... a choker is someone who consistently fails int he playoffs so you should check rays resume again before you say that because he has had some big time games when his team needed him too especially in his prime...the 45 against the kings in 05 and the 41 against the sixers in game 6 are a couple that come to mind when his team desperately needed a win

[Boston C's]

It's pretty impressive that a guy who can't create his own shot on a regular basis was still capable of averaging 25-30 ppg in the post-season. I think that just makes him even more valuable since he doesn't disrupt the flow of the offense and he was super efficient at getting his points.


Ray went 0/13 and 3/14 in the biggest games of his life. How is that much better? Anyone can cherry pick games.

Like I said, Ray could do more than Reggie could, no one should deny this.

However, Ray was not necessarily more productive nor was he some all-around beast like Lebron James.

Ray was a better rebounder, passer, and defender than Reggie was but that doesn't necessarily mean Ray was actually good in this area, it just means he was better than Reggie at it. They are not correlated.

how is being able to average 5 assists and 5 boards not good in that area...i wonder what you constitute as good for that?

ray was a far superior player to reggie period

[colts19]

Reggie Miller

[L.Kizzle]

U mad? Pierce, top 50 player of all-time, I told you but at least you weren't one of those a-holes that purposely changed their vote to Rodman to prevent Pierce from making it so props. But lol at Gasol not being top 100.

Pierce is closer to the late 50s than the late 40s for me, not much of a diference really. And Pau is not top 50, epecially over guys like Worthy, Thurmond ect who are gettin votes n9ow.

[Deuce Bigalow]

Results

6- Dennis Rodman
5- James Worthy
4- Nate Thurmond
2- Reggie Miller
2- Ray Allen
2- Dwight Howard
1- Chris Paul
1- Hal Greer
1- Pau Gasol

[StateOfMind12]

how is being able to average 5 assists and 5 boards not good in that area...i wonder what you constitute as good for that?

ray was a far superior player to reggie period

Ray never averaged 5 assists and 5 boards, maybe 4/4 or 3/3 but never 5/5.

no its not...ray from the ecf finals to the nba finals stepped up when the celtics needed him too...if he played like trash like in the first 2 rounds we wouldnt even be talking about tryin to get banner 18

If Ray didn't play like trash in the first 2 rounds then the Celtics wouldn't have taken them 7 games each to beat two pretenders.

Ray has never been that clutch and certainly not clutch compared to Reggie. Ray is the most overrated clutch player of all-time with Bird and Kobe close by.

[Boston C's]

Ray never averaged 5 assists and 5 boards, maybe 4/4 or 3/3 but never 5/5.


If Ray didn't play like trash in the first 2 rounds then the Celtics wouldn't have taken them 7 games each to beat two pretenders.

Ray has never been that clutch and certainly not clutch compared to Reggie. Ray is the most overrated clutch player of all-time with Bird and Kobe close by.

2003-2004 ray averaged 23-5-5 while playing the point for seattle the whole season...I'd like to see reggie play point for a few games let alone for a whole season lol

you wanna go look at clutch go compare ray and pp's clutch stats when the game is on the line its not even close really...and don't think for a second i dont think pierce is clutch as hell because hes a cold blooded dude i won't dismiss his accomplishments because even though i don't feel hes a top 50 player he is more deserving then ray or reggie but I really don't see the case for reggie above ray I don't...ray if anything is underrated in the clutch because NOBODY talks about him ever...dude was cold blooded as they come...not more clutch then reggie but ray is up there in clutchness compared to the all time greats

so basically what I'm saying is your second statement is absolutely asinine and if you don't believe me ask paul pierce and k.g yourself

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_b6KhDJJEME

[StateOfMind12]

2003-2004 ray averaged 23-5-5 while playing the point for seattle the whole season...I'd like to see reggie play point for a few games let alone for a whole season lol

He didn't average 5-5, he averaged 5.1 and 4.8, and that isn't 5-5.

We would be saying that Magic Johnson averaged a triple double in 1982 since he averaged 9.5 apg and 9.6 rpg if we just rounded up. .

you wanna go look at clutch go compare ray and pp's clutch stats when the game is on the line its not even close really

I would rather compare how they do in the post-season and Pierce is much better than Ray in those moments. He always has been and he always will be because Pierce was always a better player.

I really don't see the case for reggie above ray I don't...ray if anything is underrated in the clutch because NOBODY talks about him ever...dude was cold blooded as they come...not more clutch then reggie but ray is up there in clutchness compared to the all time greats

I think Ray peaked higher due to having more abilities and being able to do more but I'm not sure if he was better career wise or all-time wise because Miller was pretty much the Karl Malone of SGs.

[Boston C's]

He didn't average 5-5, he averaged 5.1 and 4.8, and that isn't 5-5.

We would be saying that Magic Johnson averaged a triple double in 1982 since he averaged 9.5 apg and 9.6 rpg if we just rounded up. .


I would rather compare how they do in the post-season and Pierce is much better than Ray in those moments. He always has been and he always will be because Pierce was always a better player.



I think Ray peaked higher due to having more abilities and being able to do more but I'm not sure if he was better career wise or all-time wise because Miller was pretty much the Karl Malone of SGs.

First point taken

Second point...that wasn't always the case... in 05 not only did ray perform better in the regular season then pierce he also did in the 05 playoffs and that is when they were both in their prime...so I'll tell you in 05 ray was definitely better then pierce '

Third point makes absolutely no sense...go look at their careers and compare resumes...twice as many all star appearances ray was an all nba second teamer while scoring rebounding and assisting more and better then reggie did all while playing in the golden era of swingmen...reggie failed to make all star teams against player not even close to the caliber of what ray faced...ray literally has accomplished more then reggie in his career and the one trump card reggie had (his 3 point record) ray took that from him as well so no there is literally nothing in his career that reggie did that was better then ray no accomplishments no stats literally nothing

[StateOfMind12]

Second point...that wasn't always the case... in 05 not only did ray perform better in the regular season then pierce he also did in the 05 playoffs and that is when they were both in their prime...so I'll tell you in 05 ray was definitely better then pierce '

No he didn't. Pierce was great in the 2005 playoffs, he didn't win a playoff series like Ray did but Pierce still played well.

23/8/5 with 51% FG, 65% TS if you want me to round up.

Not to mention, Pierce went up against a better defense. Pierce went up against the Pacers, Ray got to go up against the Kings. Ray didn't play that well against the Spurs, probably because they were actually a defensive team.

Third point makes absolutely no sense...go look at their careers and compare resumes...twice as many all star appearances ray was an all nba second teamer while scoring rebounding and assisting more and better then reggie did all while playing in the golden era of swingmen...reggie failed to make all star teams against player not even close to the caliber of what ray faced...ray literally has accomplished more then reggie in his career and the one trump card reggie had (his 3 point record) ray took that from him as well so no there is literally nothing in his career that reggie did that was better then ray no accomplishments no stats literally nothing

Reggie came out to play in the post-season and he was far better than Ray was when those times came. Ray was a better regular season player, no doubt, but post-season is more important.

[Owl]

I think Ray peaked higher due to having more abilities and being able to do more but I'm not sure if he was better career wise or all-time wise because Miller was pretty much the Karl Malone of SGs.

I know what you're getting at here (longevity) but you might want to throw a caveat in there so it's clear that you're not thinking that Miller was ever at Malone's level. And whilst he remained productive for longer than most, looking at it, he didn't really age as well as Malone either, though there's hardly any shame in that (Ken Berger did a list of the NBA seasons by over 35 year olds, Malone appears 3 times, as does Jabbar and there's one appearance each from Wilt, Alex English, Elgin Baylor and MJ). To be fair it's harder for wing to age gracefully than any other position (many bigs can still get by on their size and a few of the better pgs remain useful through passing, decision making and leadership).

[Boston C's]

No he didn't. Pierce was great in the 2005 playoffs, he didn't win a playoff series like Ray did but Pierce still played well.

23/8/5 with 51% FG, 65% TS if you want me to round up.

Not to mention, Pierce went up against a better defense. Pierce went up against the Pacers, Ray got to go up against the Kings. Ray didn't play that well against the Spurs, probably because they were actually a defensive team.


Reggie came out to play in the post-season and he was far better than Ray was when those times came. Ray was a better regular season player, no doubt, but post-season is more important.

Ray actually played well against the spurs...his stats don't look good because in game 1 he left with an injury early in the middle of the first quarter which he had 8 points... game 2 he scored 25, game 3 he had 20 7, and 7 game 4 he dropped 32 and game 6 he scored 25 again...game 5 was his only bad game that series... and not to mention where pierce failed in the first round ray put up 33 6 and 5...so id believe that constitutes being better that yr

and for your second quote your basically saying that because reggie played better in the postseason (which he never won anything) we should disregard everything else that ray did better then him...that logic makes no sense at all really...and if anything in their primes reggie played marginally better in the big stage...the fact is ray is just a superior player then reggie and had a superior career period

[StateOfMind12]

so id believe that constitutes being better that yr

So It's Pierce's fault that his team was worse? It's Pierce's fault that played against a better team and a better defense in the 1st round even though he put up great numbers himself?

Ray's numbers vs. the Spurs were not even close to being as good as Pierce's numbers vs. the Pacers or even his own numbers vs. the shitty Kings defense.

I can cherry pick and take away games from Pierce too which makes his series vs. Pacers even better. Pierce in Game 1 only scored 12 points and shot 2/11, yet he still put up 51% shooting and 23 ppg. I would like to know how much better Pierce's numbers would be if I cherry picked like you but I don't need to cherry pick to make a point.

I don't care if Ray had a better year because having a better year usually just means having a better situation and better teammates. Ray was not a better player though, he never was and he never will be.

and for your second quote your basically saying that because reggie played better in the postseason (which he never won anything) we should disregard everything else that ray did better then him

There is a better slight difference in Ray's ability advanage over Reggie.

On the other hand, there is a HUGE difference in Reggie's post-season performances than Ray's. It's not always about how many differences, it's sometimes about how big the differences are.

.the fact is ray is just a superior player then reggie and had a superior career period

Keep telling yourself that.

[Boston C's]

So It's Pierce's fault that his team was worse? It's Pierce's fault that played against a better team and a better defense in the 1st round even though he put up great numbers himself?

Ray's numbers vs. the Spurs were not even close to being as good as Pierce's numbers vs. the Pacers or even his own numbers vs. the shitty Kings defense.

I can cherry pick and take away games from Pierce too which makes his series vs. Pacers even better. Pierce in Game 1 only scored 12 points and shot 2/11, yet he still put up 51% shooting and 23 ppg. I would like to know how much better Pierce's numbers would be if I cherry picked like you but I don't need to cherry pick to make a point.

I don't care if Ray had a better year because having a better year usually just means having a better situation and better teammates. Ray was not a better player though, he never was and he never will be.


There is a better slight difference in Ray's ability advanage over Reggie.

On the other hand, there is a HUGE difference in Reggie's post-season performances than Ray's. It's not always about how many differences, it's sometimes about how big the differences are.



Keep telling yourself that.

for one the celtics were better...two the sonics sucked everyone picked them to finish last that yr just face that ray was a better leader and a better player then pierce that yr period...im not cherry picking ray played 5 minutes and scored 8 points and never returned so how is that cherry picking he probably would have scored 30 if he was healthy that game...and yea I'll keep telling myself that ray is superior to reggie because its true and theres no way around it...go look at their stats and accomplishments one more time...once again and for the last time ray did literally EVERYTHING better then reggie on the court and his career its just fact and theres no disputing it but your entitled to your own opinion...i wont debate this anymore

[StateOfMind12]

for one the celtics were better...two the sonics sucked everyone picked them to finish last that yr

No they weren't. Pierce had nobody on his team in 2005 while Ray had Rashard and good bigs. Pierce had literally no one. He had Antoine Walker back who was declining, cancerous Ricky Davis, and 40 year old Gary Payton? That's really better than what Ray had in Seattle, alright

just face that ray was a better leader and a better player then pierce that yr period

How was Ray a better player that year?

What could Ray do that year that he couldn't ever do? Did Ray all of a sudden just pass better? Did Ray get to the hoop better? Did Ray rebound better? Defend better?

No he didn't. Ray was never better than Pierce as a player, ever because there was nothing Ray could do that Pierce couldn't. Ray was a better shooter that was it, Pierce was a better scorer, better slasher, better ball-handler, better passer, better rebounder, better defender, you want anymore?

Ray is a better shooter than just about every NBA player in NBA history, so if shooting is all you care about than Ray is the GOAT. Ray was not better than Pierce ever and at anything besides shooting, that's just the truth.

It's funny how you say Ray was better than Reggie at everything so there is no debate. The same could be said about Pierce vs. Ray, but you are arguing that Ray was better than Pierce at one point, nice double standard, idiot.