What really set the Celtics back in the 1990's

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

    What really set the Celtics back in the 1990's

    It was NOT Dave Gavitt's inability to trade McHale and Parish after Bird retired ('92) and Lewis died ('93).

    It was not even Gavitt who signed Dominigue Wilkins like Fiercy wrongly claimed.

    What set us back in the 1990's: Red Auerbach

    Sorry, the man is incredible, a legend and responsible for 16 titles and unprecedented success between 1956 and 1986 that the sport will never see again. But there were three moments Red could have shaped the rebuild in amazing ways and he failed.

    1. 1989 Trade Deadline

    2. 1989 NBA Draft

    3. Offseason of 1994

    It was Red's failures at these 3 key junctures that led to the Celtics not being able to rebuild on the fly or in just 3-4 terrible years but instead went through a decade in obscurity between the competitive 1992 2nd round loss to the Cavs and the 2002 run to the East Finals when C's fans knew Pierce was truly a superstar, the first since Bird.

     

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from TheOriginalDfury13. Show TheOriginalDfury13's posts

    Re: What really set the Celtics back in the 1990's

    +1

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: What really set the Celtics back in the 1990's

    1989 trade deadline:

    1. Red declined the Maverick trade offer of Detlef Schrempf and Sam Perkins for Kevin McHale. The front office was in the late stages of discussing the tweaks needed to make this work under the cap when 72 year old Red came in and said 'If you trade Kevin you might as well fire me'

    **There were also rumors of Parish to Seattle for Michael Cage and a 1st rd pick. Cage was like Hump. 28-29 near double double PF but nothing special. He fell off by '93 or so, same as Parish. Yet the 1st round pick ended up being Shawn Kemp. But the McHale/Dallas offer was confirmed and this just a rumor so I won't include it.** 

    2. Red traded Danny Ainge instead, in part because smarmy DA had told Red if he was GM he would've trade McHale and Parish (Bird was out for the year with ankle injuries), and in part because rookie Brian Shaw had replaced him in the starting lineup. Ed Pinckney and Joe Kleine were the return. Two guys meant to spell the soon to be 36 Parish and the damaged beyond repair McHale, at the expense of the sharpshooting 30 year old Ainge. Trading McHale would have provided two better players than Kleine/Pinckney.

    1989 NBA draft

    The Celtics were all ready to draft Tim Hardaway to be Dennis Johnson's successor. We all know Hardaway was electric and an all-star in the early 90's and after a major knee injury remained a solid starter and big game player on those Heat playoff teams of the late 90's.

    Someone told Red that 24 year old Michael Smith from BYU 'could be another Bird' and Red overruled the majority and took a guy who would soon be a major bust. Had they had Bird/Perkins at PF and Schrempf/Lewis at SF on the team, Red likely lets the other guys in charge (who were enamored with Hardaway) take their man.

    **It was these two moved that convinced the Celtics owners to hire Dave Gavitt as CEO because Red was getting old. Gavitt was the man behind the Dee Brown and Rick Fox draft steals in 1990 and 1991 and said that nobody was offering any value for McHale and Parish in 1992 and 1993. It is not his fault Reggie Lewis died and the league kept Reggie's salaries on our cap for YEARS after this. The EVIL that is and was David Stern.**

    1994 Offseason

    Gavitt wanted the Celtics to be awful for 3-4 years (year one was the 1994 lotto where the Red Auerbach led front office took Montross over Eddie Jones). Fiercy says it was Gavitt's desire to make the playoffs in 1993-1995 that continued to set the team back. He was wrong overall and technically wrong as far as 1994 when the Celtics were in the lotto. Gavitt continued to say the team needed to get 'real bad' when he angled for a contract extension that winter and was denied.

    In May of '94 he was dropped from CEO to the Board of Director's and gone when his contract ran out that year, along with Chris Ford, his guy, who was also onboard with being bad for a few years and a MUCH better coach than M.L. Carr. In July of 1994 the Red Auerbach led front office signed free agent Dominique Wilkins to replace the void left by the old big 3 and keep the Celtics in the news and going after the playoffs.

    Red was behind it again. Instead of a top 5 pick and guys like KG, McDyess, Joe Smith Stackhouse and Sheed, the Celtics took Eric Williams 14th. When Wilkins fled overseas the Celtics finally embraced the tanking in 1996 and got pick 6 and Antoine.

     

     

     

     

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from CeltsFanInNH. Show CeltsFanInNH's posts

    Re: What really set the Celtics back in the 1990's

    Still boils down to Bias's death. He would have been at his peak and things would have been a lot different. 

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from 37stories. Show 37stories's posts

    Re: What really set the Celtics back in the 1990's

    In response to CeltsFanInNH's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Still boils down to Bias's death. He would have been at his peak and things would have been a lot different. 

    [/QUOTE]

    Put Len Bias and Reggie Lewis on those teams in the early 90's and see what you have.

    it is impossible to blame anyone for two excellent basketball players dying. 

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: What really set the Celtics back in the 1990's

    In response to 37stories' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to CeltsFanInNH's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Still boils down to Bias's death. He would have been at his peak and things would have been a lot different. 

    [/QUOTE]

    Put Len Bias and Reggie Lewis on those teams in the early 90's and see what you have.

    it is impossible to blame anyone for two excellent basketball players dying. 

    [/QUOTE]

    Like I said in Fiercy's damaged and ignorant thread:

    1. You cannot expect a championship team to have the #2 pick. Bias's death was awful but the lucky result of a trade for borderline starter Gerald Henderson back before teams smartly put protection on draft picks. Bird, Parish and McHale were built after the team was bad for 2-3 years and through the draft and a shrewd trade.

    2. It was not like Bird or McHale had died. A championship team lost a 1st rd pick who never played for them. The 1990's were four year away. I am talking about what happened leading up to the 90's that set the team back more than crying over what could have been? Bias death CRUASHED Red. Bias was his local Baltimore boy who would be his black grandson the way Russ was his black son. He was about to be 70 year old and was NEVER the same decision maker again.

    3. Lewis was 28 and like a slightly better Jeff Green in 1993. Interesting they both had heart issues. If you got the absolute best they could be you had a #2 player and still needed a superstar. If you got the drifiting not aggressive Reggie/JG you had a #4 player. So they could only be counted on as the 3rd best player on a contender. It was tragic and horrible and unlike Bias, Reggie was part of the team, Celtic family and the 'rebuild' as the only all-star after the big 3 were gone (like Rondo now). But, the team still needed to rebuild even had Reggie lived and probably would have been forced to trade him like will Rondo.

    **Stern keeping his contract $ on our cap (obviously money should still have gone to his wife) was absolute trash and a shameful black eye on his time as GM as it was all pettiness and a grudge with Red and not fair to an entire organization and fanbase.**

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from 37stories. Show 37stories's posts

    Re: What really set the Celtics back in the 1990's

    In response to rameakap's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to 37stories' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to CeltsFanInNH's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Still boils down to Bias's death. He would have been at his peak and things would have been a lot different. 

    [/QUOTE]

    Put Len Bias and Reggie Lewis on those teams in the early 90's and see what you have.

    it is impossible to blame anyone for two excellent basketball players dying. 

    [/QUOTE]

    Like I said in Fiercy's damaged and ignorant thread:

    1. You cannot expect a championship team to have the #2 pick. Bias's death was awful but the lucky result of a trade for borderline starter Gerald Henderson back before teams smartly put protection on draft picks. Bird, Parish and McHale were built after the team was bad for 2-3 years and through the draft and a shrewd trade.

    2. It was not like Bird or McHale had died. A championship team lost a 1st rd pick who never played for them. The 1990's were four year away. I am talking about what happened leading up to the 90's that set the team back more than crying over what could have been? Bias death CRUASHED Red. Bias was his local Baltimore boy who would be his black grandson the way Russ was his black son. He was about to be 70 year old and was NEVER the same decision maker again.

    3. Lewis was 28 and like a slightly better Jeff Green in 1993. Interesting they both had heart issues. If you got the absolute best they could be you had a #2 player and still needed a superstar. If you got the drifiting not aggressive Reggie/JG you had a #4 player. So they could only be counted on as the 3rd best player on a contender. It was tragic and horrible and unlike Bias, Reggie was part of the team, Celtic family and the 'rebuild' as the only all-star after the big 3 were gone (like Rondo now). But, the team still needed to rebuild even had Reggie lived and probably would have been forced to trade him like will Rondo.

    **Stern keeping his contract $ on our cap (obviously money should still have gone to his wife) was absolute trash and a shameful black eye on his time as GM as it was all pettiness and a grudge with Red and not fair to an entire organization and fanbase.**

    [/QUOTE]

    I don't disagree with most of your points.

    Lewis though was a lot better than Green. A lot.  

    Career per 36 minutes he averaged 19.4 a game on 49 percent shooting.

    In Greens career per 36 he averages 15 points a game on 44 percent shooting.

    Lewis was far better than Green. And my point about Bias is that no one knows what would have happened if he had not died. He could have been a superstar. He could have stayed with Boston.

    Put him  on the Celtics in the early 90's along with Bird, Lewis, Parish and Mchale?

    No telling what you have there. It is all guess work.

     

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: What really set the Celtics back in the 1990's

    In response to 37stories' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to rameakap's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to 37stories' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to CeltsFanInNH's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Still boils down to Bias's death. He would have been at his peak and things would have been a lot different. 

    [/QUOTE]

    Put Len Bias and Reggie Lewis on those teams in the early 90's and see what you have.

    it is impossible to blame anyone for two excellent basketball players dying. 

    [/QUOTE]

    Like I said in Fiercy's damaged and ignorant thread:

    1. You cannot expect a championship team to have the #2 pick. Bias's death was awful but the lucky result of a trade for borderline starter Gerald Henderson back before teams smartly put protection on draft picks. Bird, Parish and McHale were built after the team was bad for 2-3 years and through the draft and a shrewd trade.

    2. It was not like Bird or McHale had died. A championship team lost a 1st rd pick who never played for them. The 1990's were four year away. I am talking about what happened leading up to the 90's that set the team back more than crying over what could have been? Bias death CRUASHED Red. Bias was his local Baltimore boy who would be his black grandson the way Russ was his black son. He was about to be 70 year old and was NEVER the same decision maker again.

    3. Lewis was 28 and like a slightly better Jeff Green in 1993. Interesting they both had heart issues. If you got the absolute best they could be you had a #2 player and still needed a superstar. If you got the drifiting not aggressive Reggie/JG you had a #4 player. So they could only be counted on as the 3rd best player on a contender. It was tragic and horrible and unlike Bias, Reggie was part of the team, Celtic family and the 'rebuild' as the only all-star after the big 3 were gone (like Rondo now). But, the team still needed to rebuild even had Reggie lived and probably would have been forced to trade him like will Rondo.

    **Stern keeping his contract $ on our cap (obviously money should still have gone to his wife) was absolute trash and a shameful black eye on his time as GM as it was all pettiness and a grudge with Red and not fair to an entire organization and fanbase.**

    [/QUOTE]

    I don't disagree with most of your points.

    Lewis though was a lot better than Green. A lot.  

    Career per 36 minutes he averaged 19.4 a game on 49 percent shooting.

    In Greens career per 36 he averages 15 points a game on 44 percent shooting.

    Lewis was far better than Green. And my point about Bias is that no one knows what would have happened if he had not died. He could have been a superstar. He could have stayed with Boston.

    Put him  on the Celtics in the early 90's along with Bird, Lewis, Parish and Mchale?

    No telling what you have there. It is all guess work.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Lewis was better, I guess I can change my slighty better to solidly better. But still, the comparison between the position the teams are/were in remains the same.

    Isn't Rondo just as much better than Sherman Douglas as Lewis is better than Green?

    Wasn't Dee Brown and electric all offense PG sized but can't play PG 5th starter the same way Avery is all those things but all defense?

    The '93 team with Lewis alive would have been in the same position this 2013 team was.

    And Bias is the pipe dream we can't even talk about when it comes to the 1990's rebuild. An impossible gift at pick #2 that championship teams never should expect to have. 3 years later the team should have had long enough to make a plan for the next decade and recovering from that horrible situation and Red's failures in 1989 set them back.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: What really set the Celtics back in the 1990's

    In 2008 Shaq was 36 and the Heat traded him to the Suns 1.5 years after their title with Wade because the window was closed.

    Had the Heat traded a hustling 6th man in 2005 like Damon Jones (28 years old/11ppg) for an unprotected first round pick like the Celtics did Gerald Henderson (28 years old/11ppg) and had the 2nd pick in the 2006 NBA draft right after their title and selected LaMarcus Aldridge... who then blew a ton of coke and tragically died...

    Would the Heat have held onto Shaq 2-3 years too long while making poor decisions while crying about how many titles they would have won in 2007-2010 if Aldridge had lived?

    Or would Riley have still made plans to add LeBron and Bosh and pull his team out of the lottery and back to contention?

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: What really set the Celtics back in the 1990's

    Had the Celtics entered the 1989-90 season with the roster they should have had if Red didn't take a dump on everyone else plans... and also a dedicated plan to reduce the minutes of a 36 year old Parish and 34 year old Bird (off of ankle surgery but the rest of his body was rested) the 90's rebuild would have been a lot different looking:

    C - Parish (26 minutes), Perkins (22 mins)

    PF - Bird (28 mins) Perkins (12 mins) Schrempf (8 mins)

    SF - Schrempf (24 mins) Lewis (24 mins)

    SG - Ainge (20m), Shaw (20m), Lewis (8m)

    PG - Hardaway (28m), Dennis Johnson (20m)

    I also forgot that Red had a silly/arrogant contract battle with Brian Shaw that resulted in a good young player fleeing to Italy. A battle that came about partly b/c the staff benched Ainge in favor of Shaw b/c the too smart for his own good Ainge was voicing his opinions about managenment.

    The above team gives the Pistons and Bulls headaches for the next 4 years, I can honestly see any of these 4 teams winning titles, especially if Bird if kept healthy. He was played an idiotic 39.3 mins per game in 1990 while staying healthy for 75 of them and scoring 25 points. But that is where the back issues began. So stupid.

    Parish even at 37 in 1990 was a 15/11 in 30.3 minutes. Perkins was a 16/7.5 in 35 mins playing for the disfunctional Mavs organization. Imagine the high BBall IQ of Sam and Schrempf combined with less mins for Bird and Parish AND  20/10 all-star PG in Time Hardaway in the early 90's?

     

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from fbombfury. Show fbombfury's posts

    Re: What really set the Celtics back in the 1990's

    In response to TheOriginalDfury13's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    +1

    [/QUOTE]


    -10

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from CelticNut. Show CelticNut's posts

    Re: What really set the Celtics back in the 1990's

    Pitino and the Kenny Anderson trade were devastating to the Celtics in the 90's.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: What really set the Celtics back in the 1990's

    Red making the right decisions in 1989 would lead to 4 years of 'who really knows what could have been' 1990-1993. Only we KNOW the C's are battling harder and making it farther than they did in those playoffs than had they kept McHale and drafted Smith. They still hire Gavitt and draft Brown andFox because those guys were savvy picks taken 5-10 spots ahead of where most saw them going at the time.

    In 1993 Bird retires. He gives it one more year than he did b/c of the extra rest and a more competitive team. Maybe McHale is signed for the last 1-2 years of his career after doing little to help Dallas and retires with him? Ainge and Parish have a year left on their contract and if they want to keep playing are traded together for a late 1st rd pick in '93, say to the Jazz, a Mormon and an old man perfect for Salt Lake City. They still take bust big man Acie Earl with the Jazz pick b/c a C is such a need, but with an exta pick (their own) they listen to Bird (newly appointed GM or advisor to CEO Gavitt) and take Nick Van Exel, who Bird loved and slipped into the 2nd round.

    Then the Lewis tragedy happens still. We can hope it does not and he and his family and the Celtics listen to the majority of Dr's and tell him to retire and never play again. But we have to assume it does.

    Next up in the Gavitt, Bird and Chris Ford rebuild plan, Perkins (oldest), Schrempf and Hardaway (youngest) are sold to contenders for picks over the next 3 summers. First it is Schrempf paired with Dee Brown to say Seattle, for their 1st in 1994 (Eisley) and another in 1996. The C's draft in the 8-12 range of the lotto in '94 (Eddie Jones to replace Reggie Lewis).

    They have a decent enough team in 1994-95 with Hardaway/Eisley, Jones/Van Exel, Fox, Radja, Perkins and Acie Earl. Just weak in the frontcourt. They are a borderline playoff team and know they need to get worse. Their own pick is Theo Ratliff instead of Eric Williams as they start to give up on Earl. They trade Sam Perkins and Rick Fox to the Bulls (anticipating an MJ return) at the deadline for their first round picks in '95 in '97. Michael Finley is our pick over Jason Caffey, who the Bulls took. The team trades Tim Hardaway to Kevin McHale's T'Wolves... he just took KG and they have Gugliotta and need a 'veteran' presence and leader at PG. Hardaway is only 28, who knows if he hurts his knee. Good guy McHale avoids the Starbury-KG rift and drama.

    The 1995-1996 Celtics are pretty terrible even with some bright young players and a rotation of Eisely, Van Exel, Jones, Finley, Radja, Ratliff and Earl. They land the #1 pick in '96  and BEG Duncan to leave school (like Red did with Ralph Sampson in 1980) but if they cannot they instead draft Marcus Camby, not Iverson. The local boy reaches his potential when not going to Toronto. Steve Nash is added with the Minny pick from Hardaway, who helps the Wolves out of the top 5 of the lotto but not into the playoffs. They select Travis Knight with the Seattle pick. Chris Ford was on board to be a good solider for the rebuild and now takes his low key position in the front office helping Bird. Larry Brown, Bird's first choice to coach over Pitino, is hired to complete the rebuild.

    In '97 Duncan is again the dream, but the C's are getting good with rim protector's Camby and Ratliff and Exel, Jones and Finley being 15-17ppg guys. So they 'settle' for Billups still. Choosing him over TMac because they see Finley being around awhile and Van Exel being the odd man out in the backcourt. The team adds some undrafted hustle players we know Larry Bird/Brown liked in Bruce Bowen and Ben Wallace. In 1998 they target moving into the top 10 (if they end up being good enough to land out of it) and trade Van Exel and/or future picks if they need to get there. They draft Dirk and the rebuild is done:-)

    The Camby-Ratliff-Ben Wallace-Dirk-Finley-Bowen-Eddie Jones-Billups-Nash-Eisley rotation in the late 90's early 00's win a bunch of titles between when MJ retires and when Red dies. He lasts a few more years than he did b/c of how much joy the new dynasty brings him. The Celtics battle the Lakers just like in the good old days and constantly frustrate the two superstar Shaq-Kobe system by going 7-8 deep with all-star talent that take less money in extensions to stay together. Almost like the 60's Celtics they win 5-7 titles, Shaq and Kobe get 1-2, like Wilt and West did. It would be cool if Engelewood boy Paul Pierce makes it to LA and into this revised story as a dangerous 3rd wheel that helps LA get those 1-2 titles and keep us to like 7 in the decade.

    THAT is how you rebuild, starting with the decisions RED did NOT make in 1989.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Duke4. Show Duke4's posts

    Re: What really set the Celtics back in the 1990's

    one thing I have to touch on....it has been said that a "championship calibre team" should not be expected to land a #2 pick....

     

    the Lakers added Magic with the #1 and a couple of years later (as champions) added Worthy with a top pick....it does happen....in Boston's case, Red made a shrewd trade of Henderson....

    and after "Max" dogged it with his rehab and fell out of Red's "good grace" he was traded for Walton....and another banner...(by the way, I loved Max....still do...met him years ago over a weekend fundraiser put on by Jo Jo White....Max is one helluva guy....ditto Jo Jo...)

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: What really set the Celtics back in the 1990's

    In response to Duke4's comment:

     

    one thing I have to touch on....it has been said that a "championship calibre team" should not be expected to land a #2 pick....

    the Lakers added Magic with the #1 and a couple of years later (as champions) added Worthy with a top pick....it does happen....in Boston's case, Red made a shrewd trade of Henderson....

    and after "Max" dogged it with his rehab and fell out of Red's "good grace" he was traded for Walton....and another banner...(by the way, I loved Max....still do...met him years ago over a weekend fundraiser put on by Jo Jo White....Max is one helluva guy....ditto Jo Jo...)

     




    I did touch on this.

     

    We were both gifted players with 'shrewd' or what I would consider more of a 'sign of those times' trades. Now the elite franchises can't bully the small ones quite as badly and the concept of protected picks (was it that hard to think up?) would have never landed Worthy in LA or given the Bias pick to the Celtics.

    Worthy lived... Lakers ended up with 5 titles to our 3.

    Had Worthy died of an overdose on draft night in 1982 and Bias not in 1986... the Celtics would have won the '85 and '87 championships and likely gotten past the Pistons and beat the Lakers (with no Worthy) in 1988 as well.

    6 to 2 and 5 in a row instead of 5 to 3. Ah well. That was how things ended up. Not that I wished death on Worthy. Had both players lived the Celtics would have won in '87 for sure in that 'rubbermatch' and put the title number at 4-3 going into a highly anticipated 1988 matchup that could have gone either way.

     

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: What really set the Celtics back in the 1990's

    The 30 years from 1956-1986 belonged to Boston. 16 titles to LA's 4. Those were the #1 and a (DISTANT) #2 franchises. Since Bias died, the next 25 years or so, 1987-2013, have the Lakers leading (7 titles) but hardly dominated the 2nd half of the NBA's history the way the Celtics did the first. The Bulls (6) and Spurs (4) can each claim to have a single dynasty (Bulls '90-'98 and Spurs '99-'13) better than the Lakers 2nd ('98-'12). Kobe swapped Shaq for Gasol, drove out Phil and they were in the lotto in the middle of that run, so it is not like the Spurs or Bulls (even without MJ 'retired' for 1.5 years) sustained excellence. The Heat, with that '06 title slipped in there, are a fast approaching 4th best team. Even the Pistons have won 3 titles since '87. The Lakers 1st dynasty from 1980 until Magic's HIV annoucement was better than all but the Celtics from 1957-1969.

    **I do not count the 5 Lakers asterisk titles that took place in Minneapolis during the pre shot clock era. The first two came during the Truman Presidency. The Lakers themselves did not start counting the titles until Shaq's teams 3 peated 40 years after they left Minneapolis and the Buss family actually thought they had a shot at passing Boston. 5 titles crammed onto one banner and not properly honoring Mikan gives thise titles in another city little to no credibility in my book. The Thunder do not own Seattle's 1979 NBA Championship.**

     
  17. This post has been removed.

     
  18. This post has been removed.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from TheBigTicket05. Show TheBigTicket05's posts

    Re: What really set the Celtics back in the 1990's

    In response to 37stories' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to CeltsFanInNH's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Still boils down to Bias's death. He would have been at his peak and things would have been a lot different. 

    [/QUOTE]

    Put Len Bias and Reggie Lewis on those teams in the early 90's and see what you have.

    it is impossible to blame anyone for two excellent basketball players dying. 

    [/QUOTE]

    + 1

     
  20. This post has been removed.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from TheBigTicket05. Show TheBigTicket05's posts

    Re: What really set the Celtics back in the 1990's

    In response to Fiercy's comment:

     

    Could anyone have prevented Bias and Lewis from dying?

     

    But Celtics front office could have done something about NOT picking Acie Earl and Eric Montross.

    Celtic front office could've opted not to sign Xavier McDaniel and a 35-year old Dominique Wilkins.

     

    No one can prevent people from dying, but you can do something about drafting and signing free-agents.

     



    couldve been avoided if they only treated him the same way as they did to uncle jeff

     

     
  22. This post has been removed.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from TheBigTicket05. Show TheBigTicket05's posts

    Re: What really set the Celtics back in the 1990's

    In response to Fiercy's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to TheBigTicket05's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    couldve been avoided if they only treated him the same way as they did to uncle jeff

     

    [/QUOTE]

     

    Medical technology is more advanced now than before.

    The point is players dying is not the choice of the GM.

     

    But when you draft Acie Earl and Eric Montross, that's on the GM.

    Just like it's the GMs call to sign Xavier McDaniel and a 35-year old Dominique Wilkins.

    [/QUOTE]

    true

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: What really set the Celtics back in the 1990's

    In response to Fiercy's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Just use common sense.

    Ainge traded KG and Pierce when both were at the end of their careers.

    The Celts got 3 1st round picks for KG and Pierce.

    And Ainge didn't sign vets like Xavier McDaniel or a 35-year old Dominique Wilkins so that the Celts will still make the playoffs even when they had no shot at winning a championship.

     

     

    Dave Gavitt let McHale retire and Parish just left for free-agency with the Celts getting nothing in return.

    You can make a lot of essays and short stories, but it doesn't change the fact that what Ainge did last summer is totally the opposite of what Gavitt did in the 1990s.

    Instead of rebuilding when Bird retired, the Celts tried to make the playoffs.

    That set the Celtics back 3 years.

    [/QUOTE]


    I just type the truth.

    I said that there was no way the Celtics were offered anything close for Parish and McHale in 1992 for what the Net's offered them for Pierce and KG in 2013.By the way 1992 is before Lewis died. So make up your mind, when exactly should they have started rebuilding?

    Pierce is an ironman as far as health and had a good three years left in him after last summer. McHale limped through 56 games and everyone knew he was a year from retirement. Parish was TWO YEARS older than KG and was nowhere near the superstar/icon KG is. KG was like Bird as far as name recognition and star status.

    Can you prove otherwise? Do you know the offers? Of course you cannot.

     

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: What really set the Celtics back in the 1990's

    Can you prove that not taking whatever they could get for those two at the time really set the team back 3 years? Nope. All we know is that Gavitt repeatedly said that there was nobody offering 1st round picks or young talent for Parish and McHale. Look it up.

    Do we KNOW that the Celtics were discussing McHale for Schrempf and Perkins back in 1989. YES! It was mentioned by McHale, Ainge, Red, multiple reports even had boardroom quotes of who said what when it was on the table.

    Do we know the Celtics were about to pick Hardaway when Red jumped in and selected bust Michael Smith one pick before him? YES! This was discussed over and over and even Red said it was one of his biggest regrets.

    So can I say that what Red did in 1989 set them team back more than what Gavitt did in the 1990's? YES, yes I can.

    Did I say you were wrong to say that Gavitt should have just traded those guys for whatever he could in 1992? No I didn't. I pointed out the circumstances he was under and that the offer were known to be garbage.

    I just said what RED did in 1989 was what really set the 90's rebuilf back. Not what Gavitt failed to do in 1992 or 1993. If you think Gavitt was more at fault than Red... YOU ARE WRONG.

     

Share