What really set the Celtics back in the 1990's

  1. This post has been removed.

     
  2. This post has been removed.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from raider3524. Show raider3524's posts

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

    In response to Fiercy's comment:

    In response to raider3524's comment:

     

     

    we had m.l. carr..chris ford..both i think were horrible coach'sand you add rick pitino...i still think pitino is a good coach...but we gave him to much power to keep trading players...and bias and lewis were the main part that we took the hard fall...bias was to be the one to take over for bird...i don't think gavitt was to blame here.

     



    Yeah, but who hired the coaches?

     

    Who drafted the players?

    And who gave the green light to sign Xavier McDaniel and a 35-year old Dominique Wilkins?

     

    Also, I'm not talking about the Rick Pitino era, I'm only referring to 1992-1996.



    at the time i liked the mcdaniel and wilkins signing...and who knew montross would be a bust? not me and we needed a center...and a.walker was alright.

     
  4. This post has been removed.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from raider3524. Show raider3524's posts

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

    In response to Mployee8's comment:

    In response to Fiercy's comment:

    In response to Mployee8's comment:

     

     

    Like I said ... his final years and the years you just sited, read any story after a game and McHale will tell you he and Birdie spend all their time in the trainers room or whirlpool trying to overcome the game they just finished ... they were both walking wounded for years!

     



    Agree that they were walking wounded for years.

     

    But so was Pierce and KG after 2010 and the Celts still made it to the ECF in 2012.

     

    We can argue that Red should've broken up the Big 3 in 1989.

    But you can't argue the fact that the Celtic front office in the 1990s did NOTHING to turn the Celtics into contenders again.




    Red had no intention of breaking up the Big Three ... the was part of the Celtics mystique and the Celtic Family thing ... they took care of guys that were champions. None of them would be traded under Red ... Period!!!

    It seems to me also that under Gavitt (CEO) and Jan Volk (GM), the ownership was transferred from Dan Gaston to his son Paul (1993) who began prepping the team to be sold if my memory is correct. They were told not to sign any big contracts and to get the team salary down so the new owners could do their own thing. With "Thanks Dad" running the show and as much sucked out of the organization as possible by then (Media outfits acquired, stock sold etc) there was not big backer to fuel any rebuild. Gavitt knew the Big East and USA Basketball and had some insight to the new crop of kids coming up but depended on Volk for day to day ops. It took Paul about 10 years before they finally found the current ownership to take over ...



    that's pretty darn good mployee8.

     
  6. This post has been removed.

     
  7. This post has been removed.

     
  8. This post has been removed.

     
  9. This post has been removed.

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

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

    In response to Fiercy's comment:

    You don't need short stories to explain what happened.

     

    Red Auerbach will be remembered for trading Joe Barry Carroll and Rickey Brown for Kevin McHale and Robert Parish in the 1980.

     

    Danny Ainge will be remembered for bringing KG and Ray Allen to Boston in 2007.

     

    You guys remember anything Dave Gavitt did during his time with the Celtics?

     

    Like I said, no short stories needed to explain what happened in the 1990s.


    I find the short stories to be utterly fascinating reading so keep it up guys.

    Very educational and it brings back lots of faded memories.

    If fungus isn't comfortable weaving together the many diverse threads of knowledge/intrigue/subplots/guesswork about C's ownership behind the scenes goings-on and he prefers to stick to his simplistic  "They did NOTHING... Bingo.... HAHAHA!" quips,  that would not surprise me at all.

    Great story-telling thread that uplifts us all.

    Pud

     

     

     
  11. This post has been removed.

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

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

    In response to Fiercy's comment:

    In response to rameakap's comment:

     

     

    Like I said, Red Auerbach's decisions in 1989 hurt the team far more than ANYTHING Dave Gavitt did or did not do in 1992 and 1993.

    Anyone who says Gavitt's 'do nothing' offseasons of 1992 and 1993 hurt the Celtics rebuilding effort more than Red not trading McHale in '89, trading Ainge instead and drafing Michael Smith over Tim Hardaway is wrong.

    If Fiercy believes Gavitt is more to blame than Red for why the 90's rebuild took so long... he is WRONG. End of Story.

     

     



    I'm asking you, what did Dave Gavitt do to improve the Celtics in the 1990s?

     

    It's simple, tell everybody here what Dave Gavitt did, who he signed as free-agents, who were his draft picks, and who were the players he traded for.

     

    Fungus is PO'd!

    He's going to hold his breath until he gets an answer!!!

    Pud

     

     

     
  13. This post has been removed.

     
  14. This post has been removed.

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

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

    In response to Fiercy's comment:

    In response to Mployee8's comment:

     

     

    He's looking to re-establish his "BRAND" before other readers catch on. He's been getting pummeled the last few weeks. Last thing he need's is Danny to become a buyer rather than seller and you can check him into the institution.

     



    That's because you're so gullible.

     

    Like I said, don't believe everything you read.

     

    You and rame spend hours and hours talking about Fiercy.

    Even at 3am you guys are still talking about Fiercy.

     

    So who got pummeled for not being able to get enough sleep?

    HAHAHA



    Still holding your breath, fungus????

    Looks like it.

    Pud

     

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from chris33. Show chris33's posts

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

    Three days to the trade deadline, and it doesn't look like much is happening.

    It is not hard to understand why no one wants Bass or Bradley or Rondo's bloated contract.

     
  17. This post has been removed.

     
  18. This post has been removed.

     
  19. This post has been removed.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from aciemvp. Show aciemvp's posts

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

    In response to TheBigTicket05's comment:

    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

     



    take it easy!

     
  21. This post has been removed.

     
  22. This post has been removed.

     
  23. This post has been removed.

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

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

    If the fungus were a jelly donut, he would look like this about now.....

    Hemorrhaging...

    Pud

     

     

     
  25. This post has been removed.

     
Sections
Shortcuts