Tony Allen Surprised By Boston's Preference For Shooters Over Defense

[The Regime]

Tony Allen was surprised the Celtics have chosen to go away from players like he and Kendrick Perkins over the past year.

 

“I guess they wanted to get more offensive-minded,” Allen says. “They got rid of me, and, well, now who do you get to defend the perimeter? OK, you guys got shooters. Now you get rid of Perkins, and who sticks the best post man? Who sticks Dwight [Howard] and Amar’e [stoudemire]? Well, I guess they want to spread the floor a little more. I don’t know. It all caught me by surprise. I guess they want to be more of a shooting team than a defensive team.”

 

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?slug=aw-wojnarowski_allen_inspires_grizzlies_playoff_run_041511

[Make It Naaaashty]

It's true, why wouldn't you keep a defender like Allen and keep a guy like House who doesn't play many minutes and doesn't contribute much offensively. This is why the Celtics will get eliminated by the Knicks in the first round, losing Perk and a guy like Allen will hurt them a lot.

[Check my Stats]

Umm, it has nothing to do with offense over defense, it has to do with money. Some players are just oblivious I guess.

 

EDIT: I mean seriously, they can either pay Tony Allen 3M for 3 or 4 years whatever it is, or get someone on the vets min, or a bought out player, either way someone quality to fill in his 15-20 minutes.

Edited April 17, 2011 by Check my Stats

[Nitro]

Getting rid of Tony Allen I can understand because he doesn't provide much offensively, and the Celtics needed some offensive firepower behind Allen/Pierce. Even though he's a great defender, he was expendable, and great interior defense often has just as much of an effect on elite perimeter players as the actual on-ball defender does. However, getting rid of Perkins, who is still young and was one of their anchors defensively, was a terrible move, especially since both of the O'Neal's are injury risks and are on the brink of retirement.