Celtics are too old is getting too old

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from MontyHalll. Show MontyHalll's posts

    Re: Celtics are too old is getting too old

    Hollinger thinks the Celtics are old. He doesn't say that about the Lakers.

    Biggest Weakness: Age

     

    All these guys were good last season. How many of them will still be good in 2010-11? With so many players in their mid-30s, the risk of collapse shouldn't be dismissed. Boston will start a 32-year-old, a 33-year-old, a 34-year-old and a 35-year-old; two of those four have been in the NBA since they were 18 and thus have played more minutes (and taken more pounding) than nearly any similar-aged player in history. The bench isn't exactly a bunch of spring chickens either, with a 38-year-old Shaq the most likely sixth man. 

    Boston has some youth if you look hard enough -- Rondo and Davis are 24, and Perkins is 25. Bradley, obviously, skews the average down at just 19. Additionally, Boston's older players are regarded as some of the league's most dedicated and best-conditioned, Shaq excepted. 

    Nonetheless, the vast majority of the minutes will come from players that are very long in the tooth, and Boston's chances of repeating as conference champion depends almost entirely on those players maintaining their levels of production. They appeared to lag badly in that department a year ago before rallying in the postseason. Can they pull off an encore?

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from BirdandCowens. Show BirdandCowens's posts

    Re: Celtics are too old is getting too old

    In Response to Re: Celtics are too old is getting too old:
    [QUOTE]Hollinger thinks the Celtics are old. He doesn't say that about the Lakers. http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/trainingcamp10/insider/columns/story?columnist=hollinger_john&page=CelticsForecast1011 Biggest Weakness: Age   All these guys were good last season. How many of them will still be good in 2010-11? With so many players in their mid-30s, the risk of collapse shouldn't be dismissed. Boston will start a 32-year-old, a 33-year-old, a 34-year-old and a 35-year-old; two of those four have been in the NBA since they were 18 and thus have played more minutes (and taken more pounding) than nearly any similar-aged player in history. The bench isn't exactly a bunch of spring chickens either, with a 38-year-old Shaq the most likely sixth man.   Boston has some youth if you look hard enough -- Rondo and Davis are 24, and Perkins is 25. Bradley, obviously, skews the average down at just 19. Additionally, Boston's older players are regarded as some of the league's most dedicated and best-conditioned, Shaq excepted.   Nonetheless, the vast majority of the minutes will come from players that are very long in the tooth, and Boston's chances of repeating as conference champion depends almost entirely on those players maintaining their levels of production. They appeared to lag badly in that department a year ago before rallying in the postseason. Can they pull off an encore?
    Posted by MontyHalll[/QUOTE]

    Let's make a deal, Monty................let's WATCH the games before we say anything. lakers fans counted us out last year as well....something about us being too old.......before rallying in the playoffs.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from P34. Show P34's posts

    Re: Celtics are too old is getting too old

    I think the Celtics should be evaluated after the month of January. Ever since KG and Ray came to the Celtics January and February are usually the months where the Celtics start to become sluggish.  
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share