We are going to be better than people think

[Celtics4ever]

The real question is he the same Rondo.  None of us know because preseason was not something we could observe him in.  What I saw last year doesn't fill me with hope but I think he was still recovering.

[Celtics18]

Interesting that the crowd of bloggers that put tremendous stock in youth are the ones in this thread suggesting a playoff berth for the Celtics. Many of those same bloggers are the same ones that call for Rondo to be gone at any cost and feel his input to this team will hinder it from winning.

I have been watching NBA basketball religiously since 1974 and my experience is that young teams lose and lose a lot. Experienced players with talent win in this league. This team winning more than say, 32-35 games just goes against everything I have seen in the NBA over the last 40 years with the exception of one team, the 2009-10 and 2010-11 OKC Thunder.

We aren't that young.  We actually have a good mix of youth and experience on this team.  You may have an issue with our talent level, but we aren't a particularly inexperienced team. 

[DarkAzcura]

Interesting that the crowd of bloggers that put tremendous stock in youth are the ones in this thread suggesting a playoff berth for the Celtics. Many of those same bloggers are the same ones that call for Rondo to be gone at any cost and feel his input to this team will hinder it from winning.

I have been watching NBA basketball religiously since 1974 and my experience is that young teams lose and lose a lot. Experienced players with talent win in this league. This team winning more than say, 32-35 games just goes against everything I have seen in the NBA over the last 40 years with the exception of one team, the 2009-10 and 2010-11 OKC Thunder.

Portland, Indiana, Toronto, Phoenix, Washington, GSW, Charlotte just last year. A lot of these teams are actually very young with some veteran balance. Sure Indiana has David West, but their two best players were Lance and George, who are what? In their 4th year each? Phoenix had a rookie or second year starting center. The Morris twins and Eric Bledsoe. Dragic was one of their vets, and he's not incredibly old himself. Toronto was led by the trio of Lowry, Demar, and Ross. Charlotte had Al Jefferson who is close to 30, but a large amount of their lineup is made up of young guys. Kemba and MKG. Now Lance. Washington has a veteran front court, but their backcourt was Wall and Beal last year. Most of the top talent on all of these teams were 25 or younger. Rondo, Bradley (fifth year coming in), Green, Bass, and Wallace are our veterans. They are of comparable age to all of the veterans on the teams mentioned above.

If we starting going into past years, there are a lot of examples of young playoff teams. The mid 00s Wizards. "The Baby Bulls".  The early 90s Sonics.

It happens more than you think then.

[nickagneta]

Interesting that the crowd of bloggers that put tremendous stock in youth are the ones in this thread suggesting a playoff berth for the Celtics. Many of those same bloggers are the same ones that call for Rondo to be gone at any cost and feel his input to this team will hinder it from winning.

I have been watching NBA basketball religiously since 1974 and my experience is that young teams lose and lose a lot. Experienced players with talent win in this league. This team winning more than say, 32-35 games just goes against everything I have seen in the NBA over the last 40 years with the exception of one team, the 2009-10 and 2010-11 OKC Thunder.

We aren't that young.  We actually have a good mix of youth and experience on this team.  You may have an issue with our talent level, but we aren't a particularly inexperienced team.

At 24.9 years of age for the average Celtic, the Celtics as a team are currently tied for the 4th youngest team in the NBA.

[D.o.s.]

Keep your facts out of here.

[DarkAzcura]

Interesting that the crowd of bloggers that put tremendous stock in youth are the ones in this thread suggesting a playoff berth for the Celtics. Many of those same bloggers are the same ones that call for Rondo to be gone at any cost and feel his input to this team will hinder it from winning.

I have been watching NBA basketball religiously since 1974 and my experience is that young teams lose and lose a lot. Experienced players with talent win in this league. This team winning more than say, 32-35 games just goes against everything I have seen in the NBA over the last 40 years with the exception of one team, the 2009-10 and 2010-11 OKC Thunder.

We aren't that young.  We actually have a good mix of youth and experience on this team.  You may have an issue with our talent level, but we aren't a particularly inexperienced team.

At 24.9 years of age for the average Celtic, the Celtics as a team are currently tied for the 4th youngest team in the NBA.

We are actually the 8th youngest team last I checked. Potential playoff teams behind us in age are as follows: OKC, Phoenix, and NOP. The Celtics average age is 25.8. Playoff teams within half a year are as follows: Charlotte, Houston, and Toronto. Portland (26.7) and GSW (27.1) are not far off either.

16 NBA teams are 26.7 years old or younger on average. The average age of the league itself is 26.9. We really aren't as young as you think, and I don't think it's really a detriment either considering we actually have a guy in his prime with championship experience, which is something most young teams can't say.

[Celtics18]

Interesting that the crowd of bloggers that put tremendous stock in youth are the ones in this thread suggesting a playoff berth for the Celtics. Many of those same bloggers are the same ones that call for Rondo to be gone at any cost and feel his input to this team will hinder it from winning.

I have been watching NBA basketball religiously since 1974 and my experience is that young teams lose and lose a lot. Experienced players with talent win in this league. This team winning more than say, 32-35 games just goes against everything I have seen in the NBA over the last 40 years with the exception of one team, the 2009-10 and 2010-11 OKC Thunder.

We aren't that young.  We actually have a good mix of youth and experience on this team.  You may have an issue with our talent level, but we aren't a particularly inexperienced team.

At 24.9 years of age for the average Celtic, the Celtics as a team are currently tied for the 4th youngest team in the NBA.

According to this:

http://basketball.realgm.com/nba/transactions/composition_search

We are the eighth youngest team in the NBA. 

[nickagneta]

http://en.hispanosnba.com/teams/comparison

Says 4th

Remember teams didn't finalize rosters until today so the most up to date site probably has the right numbers. Not sure which site that is but we did cut Bynum today.

[Vox_Populi]

http://en.hispanosnba.com/teams/comparison

Says 4th

Remember teams didn't finalize rosters until today so the most up to date site probably has the right numbers. Not sure which site that is but we did cut Bynum today.

This is correct.

[DarkAzcura]

http://en.hispanosnba.com/teams/comparison

Says 4th

Remember teams didn't finalize rosters until today so the most up to date site probably has the right numbers. Not sure which site that is but we did cut Bynum today.

That's still ignoring the point that plenty of teams are in the playoff hunt within the Celtics' age range. If that really is the most up to date, see how much of a difference Bynum makes to the average age of this roster. Who knows who is at the end of the bench for a ton of these younger/older teams. Like I said before, we have Rondo. He's a prime veteran with championship experience, which is something a lot of young teams can't say. I've already listed the young teams who have made the playoffs above. OKC is not the only young team to ever make a playoff run. That's just false.

NOP, Houston, Phoenix, OKC, Charlotte, Detroit (likely to make a bit of a run this year with SVG) and Toronto are still within a year of the Celtics in average age.

ESPN has weighted in FWIW.  Below is the east order with overall rank in ( ) and the ---- being the playoffs cutoff.

1. Cle (2)
2. Chi (3)

3. Tor (9)
4. Wash (11)

5. Cha (13)
6. Atl (15)
7. Mia (16)
8. Bkn (19)
----------------------------------------
9. Det (20)
10. Nyk (21)
11. Ind (22)

12. Mil (26)
13. Bos (27)
14. Orl (29)
15. Phi (30)

I agree completely with the top 4 and the bottom 4, the middle 7 could go a lot of different ways.

Not sure why NY and Indiana are in your middle 7 other than for reputation. Indiana lost two of their best and most versatile offensive players. Both players were also their best perimeter defenders. Hibbert is a great defender, but he had perfect synergy with George/Lance. He's pretty slow footed, and Lance/George were really good on the perimeter. It allowed Hibbert to bounce back and help when he would typically be too slow with worse defenders around him. They were already a mediocre offensive team with George and Lance. I'm not even sure what they will be without both players. Even on defense, they will slide back a bit. If George comes back in February, they may win a few more games. Hill will miss the next 3-4 weeks also, and he was their third best offensive perimeter player after George and Lance. It will take a coaching miracle to see Indiana battling for the playoffs. I see them in the bottom 4 if George is out the whole year.

The Knicks are installing a brand new system with a first year coach with no experience. Their backcourt is Calderon, Smith, Shum, and Hardaway JR. Their front court is Bargs, Amare, Smith, and Dalembert. Obviously they have Carmelo. I guess they may be a middling team, but man..that team just screams blah.

[Celtics18]

The reason that I trust the site that DarkAzcura and I are referring to is because on that page they actually link to who is on the rosters for each of the teams. 

Their listing for the Celtics roster is spot on and looks up-to-date.  They, for example, don't have Bynum listed as a member of the Celtics. 

I won't claim to know which of these sites has the right numbers for sure.

DarkAzcura brings up some excellent points, however.  Let's say your fifteenth man becomes the 23 year old Dwight Powell instead of the 32 year old Joel Anthony.  Now, your team just became a click younger on average.  Does anyone think that the difference in ages between Dwight Powell and Joel Anthony is going to be the difference between this team's chances at winning 35 to 40 games or only winning 25 games or less?  I don't. 

[DarkAzcura]

The reason that I trust the site that DarkAzcura and I are referring to is because on that page they actually link to who is on the rosters for each of the teams. 

Their listing for the Celtics roster is spot on and looks up-to-date.  They, for example, don't have Bynum listed as a member of the Celtics. 

I won't claim to know which of these sites has the right numbers for sure.

DarkAzcura brings up some excellent points, however.  Let's say your fifteenth man becomes the 23 year old Dwight Powell instead of the 32 year old Joel Anthony.  Now, your team just became a click younger on average.  Does anyone think that the difference in ages between Dwight Powell and Joel Anthony is going to be the difference between this team's chances at winning 35 to 40 games or only winning 25 games or less?  I don't.

Yeah, exactly. Sure veterans tend to win more, but a lot of young teams win too. It's not as rare or uncommon as nick was saying.

Anyway, I calculated the numbers. Both websites are wrong, but realGM is "more right".

Basically, the website nick linked to calculated the ages based on their face value without taking days into account. So, sure Sullinger is 22 years old, but he's turning 23 in ~100 days. He's closer to 23 than 22. Bradley is 23, but he's actually 23.9. Much closer to 24 than 23. realGM takes this into account, but they haven't officially taken Bynum off so their calculation is still with Bynum on the team.

Nick's site took Bynum off the roster, but they calculate average age based off the raw number.

The actual average age of the Celtics is 25.3. Neither 25.8 (realGM) nor 24.8 (nick's site). That would still have us at 4th youngest, but honestly the difference between 4th and 9th youngest is 0.6 years. Meh. I'd be more interested in knowing the average age of each team's actual rotation. Leave the bench filler out of this. Players like Joel, Bynum, Young, and Powell just throw off the average in both directions and none of these players are going to play significant minutes most likely.

The difference between taking days into account or not plus Bynum or not just shows how minor age can be in the NBA. We are still within the age range of Toronto, NOP, OKC, Phoenix, Portland, Houston, and Detroit.

[Celtics18]

TP to DA

[mgent]

Interesting that the crowd of bloggers that put tremendous stock in youth are the ones in this thread suggesting a playoff berth for the Celtics. Many of those same bloggers are the same ones that call for Rondo to be gone at any cost and feel his input to this team will hinder it from winning.

I have been watching NBA basketball religiously since 1974 and my experience is that young teams lose and lose a lot. Experienced players with talent win in this league. This team winning more than say, 32-35 games just goes against everything I have seen in the NBA over the last 40 years with the exception of one team, the 2009-10 and 2010-11 OKC Thunder.

We aren't that young.  We actually have a good mix of youth and experience on this team.  You may have an issue with our talent level, but we aren't a particularly inexperienced team.

At 24.9 years of age for the average Celtic, the Celtics as a team are currently tied for the 4th youngest team in the NBA.

According to this:

http://basketball.realgm.com/nba/transactions/composition_search

We are the eighth youngest team in the NBA.

Haha, only 5 players on Philly's roster were picked in the first round.  6 of them were undrafted.  How do they get away with that?

[hwangjini_1]

Interesting that the crowd of bloggers that put tremendous stock in youth are the ones in this thread suggesting a playoff berth for the Celtics. Many of those same bloggers are the same ones that call for Rondo to be gone at any cost and feel his input to this team will hinder it from winning.

I have been watching NBA basketball religiously since 1974 and my experience is that young teams lose and lose a lot. Experienced players with talent win in this league. This team winning more than say, 32-35 games just goes against everything I have seen in the NBA over the last 40 years with the exception of one team, the 2009-10 and 2010-11 OKC Thunder.

We aren't that young.  We actually have a good mix of youth and experience on this team.  You may have an issue with our talent level, but we aren't a particularly inexperienced team.

At 24.9 years of age for the average Celtic, the Celtics as a team are currently tied for the 4th youngest team in the NBA.

According to this:

http://basketball.realgm.com/nba/transactions/composition_search

We are the eighth youngest team in the NBA.

Haha, only 5 players on Philly's roster were picked in the first round.  6 of them were undrafted.  How do they get away with that?

clearly incompetence is not illegal in the nba.