Coincidentally, it was Ray who sacrificed the most out of the Big 3.
Sorry bro, but I call BS on that. How did he sacrificed more than KG who all of a sudden had to play center position but thrived in it regardless and didn't complain, who took way less money to come back this season than he should've just for the greater good of the team?
Or how did he sacrificed more than Paul, who has been the Celtic right from day one but still was on the trading block just like everyone else (including Ray)?
Ray didn't have to sacrifice much if at all. His nagging injuries and diminishing talent dictated how he was supposed to be used.
All of it irrelevant at the matter at hand, we're talking about the games here, not crap outside of the court.
KG played center? Well, Ray Allen played SF and at times played a bit of PG when needed.
Paul did too (still doing it). So...your point is...?
From a team perspective, they were all used to being the alpha dog. Now Pierce was the alpha on Offense, Garnett was the alpha on defense, and Ray was the alpha on shooting technicals?
In their first year in Boston, Ray got 36% less shot attempts, to Pierce's 24% decrease and Garnett's 21% decrease. Ray's FGA continued to drop every year, while Pierce and Garnett's kind of plateaued (and they actually saw some increases in FGA in years 4 and 5, something Ray never got).
Similarly, Ray scored 34% fewer points that first year, while Pierce decreased 22%, and Garnett decreased 17%.
Ray Allen got 24% less assists, while Pierce got 10% more, and Garnett decreased by 17%.
From a Usage perspective, Ray saw a decrease of 27%, while Pierce and Garnett only decreased 19% each.
I'm sure there's a stat somewhere for touches or how long you have the ball in your hands, I just don't know where to find it. But I imagined Ray decreased the most.
Sure, I think Ray Allen was the worst of the Big 3 too, and also his game fell off the most during his time in Boston, but I definitely understand the argument of Ray sacrificed the most. He saw the biggest decrease in touches, shots, points, and plays where he created for others of the Big 3 while in Boston. (Though not saying I don't see justification for the decreases).
He took the biggest decrease in production and got the least amount of credit. That's a sound argument for "sacrificing the most" I think. Though I guess you could argue that it wasn't a "sacrifice" it was just his natural decline, but then I'd fell like we're just talking semantics.