A-List Teams Are AARP Eligible

by Jeff Clark on Feb 2, 2011 8:33 PM EST in Boston Celtics News & Links

I have to admit that there was always something fun about watching younger players and dreaming of the future when they might be great players. Watching Al Jefferson, Delonte West, and Kendrick Perkins in their early years made up for also watching Gerald Green, Kedrick Brown, and Marcus Banks.

On the other hand, I really don't miss the "youth movement years." Because losing stinks.

If there's one rule that the NBA tends to stick by, it is that the NBA eats its young. The same story has been played out time and time again. Remember the "Baby Bulls?" The new darling team of the NBA was supposed to the OKC Thunder. But instead of taking The Leap to contender status, they are stuck in that classic "don't want to face them in the first round" status, which as to be a bit of a disappointment. (Obligatory plug for my buddy Dogburt's "Welcome To Loud City" blog)

Which brings me to this article by Kurt Helin of ProBasketballTalk.

Old man game is winning in the NBA | ProBasketballTalk

The Miami Heat top the list at an average age of 31.32 (all those older veteran minimum deals to put around their big three cause that). Followed by the Lakers (29.98), Mavericks (29.47), Nuggets (29.09), Celtics (28.69), Magic (28.44) and Spurs (28.42). You know what else that is? A list of every NBA title contender. And Denver.

The lesson: Experience wins.

Which brings me to our next opponent, the Dallas Mavericks. In the West a lot of attention is rightfully being given to the Spurs for their record and the Lakers for their defending Champs status. But quietly, the Mavericks are a team to be reckoned with. Like Pierce and Ray Allen, Dirk has aged very well and both he and Jason Kidd have Finals experience but no title (read: motivation). Toss in 6th man specialist Jason Terry and sprinkle in a little Shawn Marion and Tyson Chandler and you've got a pretty good recipe for contending.

Can they put it all together for a run to the Finals? Only if some other old team doesn't knock them off first.

Tweet Comment 18 comments | 1 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

+1 for the whole article

I always mention this little fact when someone tells me the Celtics are too old to compete.

by KY Celts fan on Feb 2, 2011 9:35 PM EST via mobile reply actions

Agreed.

All they need to do is stay healthy…ALL OF THEM.

"There's no place like it, and it's ours." - Stephen King on Fenway Park

by 808BostonSportsFan on Feb 3, 2011 7:48 AM EST up reply actions

The lesson:

If you´re thirty and still in the NBA, you´re probably not a bad player.

by Casperian on Feb 2, 2011 9:59 PM EST reply actions

I like that

by Tai on Feb 2, 2011 10:09 PM EST up reply actions

very much true

by mmmmm on Feb 3, 2011 1:07 AM EST up reply actions

put another way

Non-contending teams don’t want older journeymen, and older good players don’t want to play for non-contenders. Consider also: Big Baby, Delonte, Perk, and Rondo, still heading into their prime, and Semi, Avery, and Luke, as well as Wafer and Nate. There are actually a lot of young players holding down that average.

by Silverlock on Feb 3, 2011 12:37 PM EST up reply actions

"And Denver."

That made me smile :)

- Dirk van Boxtel, the wandering Celtic fan.
Twitter: @4Hoopz

by Kiorrik on Feb 2, 2011 10:15 PM EST reply actions 1 recs

+1

by keychey on Feb 3, 2011 2:36 AM EST up reply actions

Hollinger has the Lakers #1..

…the Spurs 2, the Magic 3 and your Boston Celtics #4.

Fool.

by Siggy on Feb 2, 2011 10:17 PM EST reply actions

His formula

Who cares.

by Tai on Feb 3, 2011 11:16 AM EST up reply actions

This is a little misleading

As our core players (Big 3) will probably all be done in 3 years. Rondo and PErk will be in their prime. That’s Danny next challenge.

by thereallargejames on Feb 2, 2011 10:34 PM EST reply actions

Rebuilding should be easier this time around...

Hopefully having Rondo, Perk, Baby, Pierce(in his last year) will entice some big name FA to us. We will have a lot of room to work with under the cap. Maybe Erden, Harangody, and Bradley will develop by then and we won’t see a huge drop in performance. I haven’t looked to see who is available in two years…other than Howard.

No matter what happens, we should be in good shape salary cap wise to get a couple higher profile players at the 2 and 3 position to keep us going for a long time. I don’t know alot about contract rules and the cap but it makes sense because a lot of our contracts expire at the same time. After next year we only have Pierce and Rondo under contract with a team option on Bradley. I would like to see Perk resigned long term and Baby, Marquis, and Delonte stick around for a couple more years.

by gizmo010101 on Feb 2, 2011 11:06 PM EST up reply actions

Although I'd like to keep him

I don’t think Baby will be sticking around. A lot of teams will be interested, and he can make a lot more $ elsewhere.

"There's no place like it, and it's ours." - Stephen King on Fenway Park

by 808BostonSportsFan on Feb 3, 2011 7:43 AM EST up reply actions

experience+youth=18

the big 3 have been wicked awsome this year, and seem to have that chip on their shoulder like they did in "08 ….and with rondo gettin’ better running the point ,perk hopefully gettin’ close to 100% as he can before playoff time ……shaq(experience)big baby(youth) d.west has experience and youth and if nate and m.daniels can fill some minutes here and there ,the skys the limit for this team,…….and if jermaine o’neal still has any kind of fire left in his belly it would be a lock

by wal mark on Feb 3, 2011 1:33 AM EST reply actions

Dallas should present a particular motivation for the Cs

The Cs record so far this season:

v Heat: 2-0
v Lakers: 1-0
v Magic: 1-1
v Spurs: 1-0
v Bulls: 1-1
v Mavs: 0-1
v Thunder: 1-1
v Hornets: 0-1

So Dallas and New Orleans are the only two elite teams that the Cs of the have not notched a W against (lost by just 2 pts to each of them).

I’m pretty sure the Celtics are very much aware of that.

Overall, the C’s are 7-5 against all those teams. Pretty good considering they STILL are not a completely healthy team.

by mmmmm on Feb 3, 2011 1:35 AM EST reply actions

U made a mistake...

vs Bulls: 2-1

by KWW on Feb 3, 2011 9:28 AM EST up reply actions

oops!

You are correct.

8-5 overall then.

Main point remains: C’s need to beat Mavs to remove that particular blemish.

by mmmmm on Feb 3, 2011 3:40 PM EST up reply actions

I think it's a mistake

…to look at the average age of ENTIRE teams. More relevant would be the average age of the guys who actually PLAY, with starters weighted most heavily, 2nd team next, etc.

One easy, excellent way to judge the age of a team would be to weight each player’s age by their average minutes/game (where the denominator = ALL scheduled games, not just the ones they played in). I bet if you did that, the Cs would be #1 or #2 oldest team, CERTAINLY way older than Miami, who shouldn’t be #1 at all… far from it. Counting the age of some vet sitting at the end of the bench as EQUAL to DWade or LBJ, in determining the average effective age of a team, can’t be right.

by DRJ1 on Feb 3, 2011 12:46 PM EST reply actions