In response to Fierce34's comment:
In response to OneOnOne's comment:
Remember, Wade won a championship without Lebron.
Like I said, Boston is not a city that's as attractive as LA or NY.
Let's be realistic, the Celts never got big name free-agents before KG and Ray came to Boston to join Pierce. And KG and Ray were acquired through trades.
If the Celts didn't become the 2nd worst team in the league in 2007, no #5 pick, no Ray, thus no KG!
"Boston is not a city that's as attractive as LA or NY" and not every player can fill out those rosters. Are Memphis, Minneapolis, Milwaukee, Oklahoma City, Indianapolis, et al more of an attraction that Boston? Hardly (even though Milwaukee has seen a remarkable renaissance). If all things were equal, meaning available money, Boston would be a highly desireable place to land if winning is important. If it's just the money then it's just about the money and those players are not going to be that helpful or productive. Does Sidney Wickes ring a bell? Anyway, please don't fall into the homegrown LA/NY glitter syndrome. There are four teams in the two cities, and they can't literally scoop up all of the best FAs or draft all of the best players each year.