What set us back in the 1990s

  1. This post has been removed.

     
  2. This post has been removed.

     
  3. This post has been removed.

     
  4. This post has been removed.

     
  5. This post has been removed.

     
  6. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: What set us back in the 1990s

    In response to rameakap's comment:

    In response to Fiercy's comment:

    In response to rameakap's comment:

     

    Whose decisions set us back more in the 1990's Fierce? It is a simple question.

     



    Mental illness.

     

    You keep asking the same question and you expect to get a different answer every time.

     

    I'll give you a hint.

    What was done to correct those decisions that you didn't like?



    It's quite simple... the terrible decisions in 1989 made by Red set the Celtics franchise back in the decade of the 1990's more than Gavitt's decisions after Bird retired.

    If you disagree with that statement.... you are wrong.

    You have yet to provide any proof otherise. 

    Be careful rame.... our masochist has you right where he wants you.... kickin' his azz again... exactly what he set out to accomplish.

    He now has three viable options:

    (1) Squalling that you are a racist for daring to 2nd guess him....

    2) squalling that you are a redcist for daring to 2nd guess Red...

    or

    (3) his dreaded last option...  going nuclear...

    Squalling that you are a  racist redcist for pretending to 2nd guess both of them.

    Pud

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

    Re: What set us back in the 1990s

    I'd still say the death of Lenny Bias trumped all of the above decisions. Instead of Michael Jordan of the 90s it would been Bias vs Jordan. Similar to Bird vs Magic of the 80s. 

     
  9. This post has been removed.

     
  10. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: What set us back in the 1990s

    In response to rameakap's comment:

    Had Red done what his front office wanted/expected it would have resulted in FOUR big trade assets by 1993, instead of two (Dee Brown and Fox) and a MONSTER mutiple 1st round pick trade asset in Hardaway (if they decided to rebuild then). 

    My argument was not flawed b/c "Gavitt could have got something for Parish who played until 1997' Really? Hahahahahaha

    Parish was 39 in 1992 so Gavitt not getting a late first rd pick in the 20's for him in 1992 or a 2nd rd pick for him when he was 40 in 1993 but instead watching him leave as a free agent in 1994 (when everyone thought he would retire) makes my argument flawed?

    HA! If Parish could have been traded for ANYTHING CLOSE TO the 1989 McHale deal Gavitt would have done it.

    Red set the 90's back with what he did in 1989 more than Gavitt's tenure of doing little with the situation Red left.




    In '92, that "something" Gavitt might have gotten for Parish in trade was at best a half pound of imported weed.

    By '94, maybe a quarter pound of stale home grown and a few roach clips.

    So technically fungus is correct.

    Gavitt could have scored... but dropped the bong ball.

    Pud

     
  12. This post has been removed.

     
  13. This post has been removed.

     
  14. This post has been removed.

     
  15. This post has been removed.

     
  16. This post has been removed.

     
  17. This post has been removed.

     
  18. This post has been removed.

     
  19. This post has been removed.

     
  20. This post has been removed.

     
  21. This post has been removed.

     
  22. This post has been removed.

     
  23. This post has been removed.

     
  24. This post has been removed.

     
  25. This post has been removed.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share