Track Records For Aging Shooting Guards and Ray Allen

Zach Lowe at CelticsHub ponders how many good years Ray Allen has left by looking at the career track of similar players in recent history.

2 months ago Jeff Clark 16 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Ray isn’t going to retire until he’s the all time 3 point champion… thats not coming this year. I think we should hook him up for 2 years more.

by jesse_stoneham on Sep 15, 2009 11:20 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

agreed. he will not retire. he still can make some money with the range.

by mandoman10 on Sep 16, 2009 3:01 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Horrible examples to compare Ray with. I saw each one of those guys come into the league. none of those players took care of their body the way does. Ray’s body right now looks better than anyone of those guys body when they were young. I agree that every one is different, but it’s way to early to panic about Ray’s declining health.

Ray will get a contract in the neighborhood of 8 or 9 mil for three years. No less than two years with a team option for the third year
.
This year Doc will finally play the young guys in part because they are ready and also because of all of all the blow out’s we will have.

Several of our rivals have added talent to their teams. But what makes us better is the players we have added fit our style of play. The next two years should be banner years.

by tyquinton on Sep 16, 2009 1:09 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

wot? 8-9? lol.

ya i dont think so. he be almost 35 no? if he demands that much there is no way celtics resign him.

he will most likely get what michael finley got later on his career. his last longer term contract b4 he starts going year to year. Ray’s shooting will be there… but his tacking it to the rack abilities will go from 20% of what it once was to just like 4% real soon. also, lets not start with defense at this age. not saying hes not a good player. but no gm in their right mind would sign ray for that much.

by mandoman10 on Sep 16, 2009 2:59 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Problem with the Analysis

I think there are real problems with this analysis. Maxwell was a journeyman by 30, and by 33 Smith and Rice were bench players whose numbers were clearly plummeting. No wonder their play wasn’t very good after they were 34 – they were already toasted rent-a-players.

The only players in Ray’s class of the 5 comparables during their careers were Richmond and Miller. Richmond’s shooting touch clearly was lost by the time he hit RA’s age while Ray has turned in 2 of his best, including his best EFG% year last season.

The truth is that Ray Allen’s career is pretty unique and his work-out regimen and ethic is legendary. Assuming no dramatic fall-off this season, than a 2-3 year deal seems pretty reasonable.

by colincb on Sep 16, 2009 2:33 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

ya richmond had injury problems too so ia gree with u.

miller is good comparison and to a lesser extent m. finley. Both lost the ability to take it to the hoop. and had no defense to speak of around this age.

by mandoman10 on Sep 16, 2009 3:01 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Good article

I think the article was well researched and there is nothing wrong about the names that were used for comparison. I do think that Ray does resemble Reggie Miller more than he does the others and reminds me of John Stockton in the simple quiet way he takes care of himself.
Having said that, I would think that a 2 year contract for a total of $8.0 mil (valued at $5 mil yr 1, $3 mil yr 2 but spread any way they can) is all the C’s should go. Someone may offer more but Ray’s got his money and he likes where he is.
And finally, I sure as hell wouldn’t negotiate until we see how his body does hold up this year. If Ray wants something now I’d discount the above offer by $1 mil or so.
The Celts have to have the discipline that the Pats showed re Seymour. Everyone liked Seymour but that was a helluva deal for the Pats (Monday’s weak rush aside) made for cold blooded reasons. Same with Ray. Great guy, but the money you give him is money you can’t give younger legs.

by Wildblu1 on Sep 16, 2009 6:42 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

that won't get it done

Ray will get more than 8 for 2 years. He will get somewhere in the neighborhood of 24-25 mill for 3 (probable team option on year 3) if he stays healthy this year and has a similar year to last year.

If he’s injured this year, depending on the severity, he’ll either be shipped out as a major expiring deal at the deadline (career-threatening), brought back as a bench contributor with appropriate bench salary (season ending) or brought back for more than the MLE (minor/nagging injury).

by slamtheking on Sep 16, 2009 7:32 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Total agreement...

Belichick`s “cold-hearted” success this decade has become the “blueprint” that management in all sports seeks to copy.

Furthermore, Danny`s natural mindset strongly leans in that direction anyways. It`s in the “DNA” of DA to risk getting rid of an aging player 1 year too early, rather than 1 year too late.

In the end, it simply doesn`t matter how great Ray takes care of his body.
“Father Time” is UNDEFEATED!

If Ray is a Celtic beyond this year, it will be “strictly” on Boston`s terms!

by Title 18 on Sep 16, 2009 7:46 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

summed up Danny very well

“Furthermore, Danny`s natural mindset strongly leans in that direction anyways. It`s in the "DNA" of DA to risk getting rid of an aging player 1 year too early, rather than 1 year too late.”

Well stated.

by slamtheking on Sep 16, 2009 12:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Thanks, "King"

DA was tough as nails as a player…as a GM he`s much the same.

by Title 18 on Sep 16, 2009 5:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Comparisons

Celtics Hub does a nice job laying out recent history. Mitch Richmond and Steve Smith both took it to the hole more than Ray Allen does. Ray hasn’t taken it to the basket nearly as much since he joined the Celts. I figured it has to do with his role, expected scoring load, and predicted shot selection as defined by Doc but I’m just speculating. Honestly, I think Reggie Miller was the exception to the rule, not the rule. Glenn Rice was another good example since injuries forced his retirement. The observation about defense is critical imho. Never mind, the fact that of the 6 players the author mentioned only Reggie had any real longevity supports such a conclusion. I’m a fan of Ray Allen but I’m not a fan of the money that goes with such loyalty. If the C’s can retain him for a reasonable amount then I’d be all in favor of an extension but not more than 2 or 3 years.

Misquote of the day: “Peja Stojakovic… has fallen off a cliff at age 32.” LOL!

by BleedinGreen417 on Sep 16, 2009 6:58 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Obviously I hope Ray stays healthy and productive. One thing to remember about players at this age, though, is that most times there is just a wall, and players approach that wall without much significant slip, and then once they hit it, it’s over, nothing you can do about it. I doubt Ray hits it this year (hope he doesn’t), but there’s no telling when it will happen and there will probably be no advanced warning.

by Fan from VT on Sep 16, 2009 7:14 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

disagree slightly about no advanced warning

in athletic sports, there are measurables that you can see that can be telling – sprint speed, pure strength etc. How important all those factors are varies. The tricky thing is that with jobs that are more ‘touch’ than speed/strength – such as long-range basketball shooting or hitting a baseball, it is easy to lose it at times even long before your physical skills have changed – those are called ‘slumps’. They happen at all ages and to all players. The tricky proposition with an aging player is trying to determine whether a slump is just a slump or the end of the line.

A lot of folks were certain that David Ortiz was at the end of the line during the first 2 months of this baseball season. But his physical measures were all positive (he still was hitting the ball hard and still taking walks). Since June 1st he clearly is NOT at the end of his line.

I suspect that with Ray what will happen is that at some point he will go into a shooting slump for an extended period and all kinds of folks will jump out of the wood-work calling out that he’s over the hill and lost it and is done and its time to stick a fork in him. Then he’ll get his shot back and be lights out for a while. In other words, same pattern as always for him, but people will become less and less tolerant of the slumps based purely on his age, whether it is truly a factor or not.

The next time he goes into a slump, look at his physical measures (How fast does he get down the court? How high is he elevating on his jump shot?). If those haven’t really changed much, then in all likelihood he will come out of the slump. If they have, then that may be the turning point unless it is accountable to a recoverable injury.

Personally, I think Ray is good to go at a high level for another 2-3 yrs, barring an exceptional injury and probably at least journeyman level for a year or two after that. It helps that on this team he is not expected to play a very physical game. He should almost never be setting screens and only driving the baseline or the lane after it’s been cleared. And the team defense they play doesn’t require him to take charges.

by mmmmm on Sep 28, 2009 5:46 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

The Trading Deadline

IMHO the Celtics should not extend Ray until they see what they can get for him at the trading deadline, or in a sign and trade on draft night. They shouldn’t rush into anything.

Ray may need to come off the bench and become a Del Curry type designated shooter. If that is the case, he can’t expect starter’s money. Two years at 8-10 million a year with a nonguaranteed third year makes sense if they do decide to keep him.

A more interesting question is, if Ray does leave or become a bench player, how do they replace him? Can Marquis Daniels fiull that role, assuming they can sign Daniels long term?

by Brickowski on Sep 16, 2009 9:46 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs