was ray allen ever a superstar player?
i just cant tell if he ever was.
Not to me. I didn't think he was ever a superstar at any period of his career. But he is a Hall Of Famer in my eyes.
Star but never a superstar
I would say he was never a superstar.... he has like this level that is hard to explain... but he has been clutch for 10 years running lol.
Star status was earned but not Superstar, I remember how dominant he was on the Supersonics.
no. one all-nba 2nd team and one all-nba third team. Superstars are on the all nba teams regularly.
Yeah never a superstar in my mind.
Me and a friend had an argument the other day between Ray allen in his prime or vince carter in his prime. Who was better?
Prime?..Vince carter and i dont think it is real close. Vince was one of the best in the NBA at one point
ray will probably be remembered for having the better career then vince, but in their prime it was vince alll the way. He had so much potential.
Yeah just wanted to clear that up cause my friend thinks vince was overrated and allen was underated. But i also think it was vince easily.
i think for a period he was in Seattle but more of a star then superstar.
No, but he was an elite player at his position.
He's more than a star, less than a superstar, I'd call him a perennial All-Star.
He has been a star player in his Seattle days but never did he jump into the superstar conversation, or in my opinion even close to being in the discussion of superstar status, and this is coming from a major fan of Ray. I could never really see Ray being a first option on a contending team even in his prime, it just was not his game to be the guy to dominate or take over a game. He is still clutch nevertheless but there is a major distinction between a star and a superstar, superstars bring it , night in and night out, put everything they have into winning and most of the time they are able to get the win, they need to be guys who can effect the game in more then one way but also need to be able to dominate and take over a game when the time comes and they need to not only perform consistently in the regular season but also in the playoffs ( most of the time superstars perform even better in the playoffs).
was there a time in the 2000's where he was considered the second best shooting gaurd in the league?
Compare the numbers.
Ray and Vince in their primes were about the same.
Vince was just a flashier player.
No. T-Mac, Kobe, and AI if you count him as a SG were always better, but Ray Allen has been the best 3 point shooter for much of this decade.
Ray Allen was never a top 10 player in the league..Paul Pierce has never been a top 10 player either..But they'll be Hall of Famers...
The odd thing with Vince Carter was that his prime was basically his second and third seasons in the NBA. Then, he was hit with injuries in consecutive seasons and stopped caring about basketball after that.
Allen unquestionably has had a better career. Carter unquestionably had a better prime.
I'd also strongly disagree with Rude Boy that Paul Pierce was never a top-10 player in the league. In 2001-02, he averaged 26.1 ppg, 6.9 rpg, 3.2 apg, 1.9 spg and 1 bpg. He totaled 12.9 win shares, fifth best in the league. And he led a team with this roster to 49 wins and an Eastern Conference Finals berth.
Adi, I believe he's been a top 12 player.But not top 10..
Ray Allen not only has the numbers but he has the hardware...He was just has lethal as Vince in his prime...Vince played above the rim and fans loved him for it...when he got the success it got to his head and created all the Vinsanity, the ball hogging, shot jacking, high flying quitter that got booed by the fans that supported him when he was Jordan wannabe from the UNC...Ray was always a class act and first rate teammate, he made that Bucks team a legitimately scary squad to play with Cassell and Big Dog Robinson, he gave Seattle great basketball and had they not been horribly inept at drafting talent to surround Allen hell they'd be in Seattle not Hijack City...When The Celtic traded for Allen and Kevin The Big Ticket Garnett he was the after thought, it was all Kg and Pierce plus the guy from He Got Game, but little did they know he would be the key to them winning their championship...yes Ray Jesus Shuttlesworth Allen is and was better than Vincent Cry my a river Carter...the stats and championship ring tell the truth, as does the scarecrow....stop talking bout highlights and potential, I wanna see the proof and the pudding...
Ray Allen was never a superstar because he was never on big market teams. He was the model for consistency. 24-4-4. Elite talent, not flashy enough.
I've never thought of Ray as a great athlete. He was a good athlete with good size/strength and an exceptional jump shot. He was very similar to Reggie Miller, just without the clutch playoff games to hang his hat on.
Ray Allen's career is on another level than Miller, but I agree with you in a sense. Miller was clutch or whatever, but he's never put up the numbers Allen has. I'd choose Ray over Vince because you can utilize Ray in many more ways than you can Vince. You wouldn't be able to win with Vince as a number one option, and I'm not sure how well he would be as a #2. With Ray, you can't win with him as number one either, but he is a great #2 option because of his ability to play off the ball.
His athleticism was always underrated in the media but never in the video game (best player in video games for a large stretch in the mid-2000's when he didn't miss 3's and dunked over anyone.)
back in the day for Milwaukee he was....I was watching him for UConn on ESPN Classic yesterday and he was straight up deadly back in the day when he had pep in his step.....
Ray still has good athleticism in his mid to late 30's. He is a 2 guard with a sweet shot, don't confuse his game style with him not or ever being more than an average athlete. He's very fast, can jump and is strong, not to mention he's always kept his body in great shape.
I disagree with Ray being compared to Reggie Miller. I get it they are both two of the best 3 point shooters in NBA history, but Reggie was weak ( from a strength standpoint) and didn't have a lot of athleticism. Both excell at shooting off screens, but Reggie couldnt' really rebound and didn't create as much off the drive for his team mates ( something Ray did pretty well when he was younger ). If
I agree with those of you who said he is a star, but not a superstar. HOF for sure, but he was probably only a top 10 player in the NBA for one or two years of his career ( argueablyO.
I think the numbers show that they were pretty similar. Ray was a better athlete than Reggie, but Reggie was longer, taller and also had pretty good quickness. Here are some career comparisons:
I give Ray the overall edge in career numbers, but it's pretty close.