It looks like a lot of people are going to disagree with me here, but I have to say this. I think KG has already done enough to have his number retired.
Based on what's up there, I don't think there's any specific requirement for what a player has to do, it goes on a case-by-case basis. There's already too many retired, and there's no specific criteria, it used to just be Red's assessment. While there's a lot of talk about how many years you have to play, what you have to accomplish, etc., those criteria are all made up by the individual posters. And any criteria that results in Jim Loscutoff and Don Nelson having their numbers retired but requiring more from Garnett quite frankly should not be applied. Those guys were great contributors and I take nothing away from them, but people seem to be missing the forest for the trees. KG is on a level above most Celtics.
To me, it comes down to this: until last year, there had only been five guys in Celtics history to be the best player on a Celtics championship team - Bob Cousy, Bill Russell, John Havlicek, Dave Cowens and Larry Bird. After last year, we have a sixth - Kevin Garnett. Now, other guys who were never the best player are probably more deserving and belong higher on the list of all time Celtics than KG due to the sheer volume of titles they won - i.e., Tommy, Sam Jones - or because of years of great service with some championships won - i.e., McHale, Chief, Pierce, Jo Jo. But everybody's lumping KG in like he's just a guy who like many other Celtics won a title and that's ridiculous.
The comparisons to guys like Bill Walton and Dennis Johnson are inappropriate because as much as I love those guys, you're talking about a different caliber player, and a different level of contribution to the team when you switch from DJ and Walton to KG. Walton was not even one of the four best players on his lone Celtics championship team. He'd be comparable to Posey and does anybody really think KG and Posey should be judged by the same criteria? DJ (my alltime favorite Celtic, by the way) was one of the top four, maybe top three, players on two Celtics championship teams, but he was never close to being the best player on a Celtics champion. Allen (and even Rondo) would be a good comparison there - another title and a few more years of service, retiring as a Celtic, and they'd be in line. But does everybody think that Allen and Rondo gave the same thing to the Celtics team, organization and fans last year that Garnett did?
KG goes beyond those guys and is in the company of only five other men in Celtics history - Cooz, Russell, Hondo, Cowens, Bird. Pierce was Finals MVP but KG was the Celtics' MVP and the number one reason we won 66 games and raised our 17th banner after a 22 year drought. He was the man who came in, changed the team culture and made the Celtics relevant again. He did things for this team and franchise that dozens of guys whose numbers are retired never did. His contribution even just for one year was and is enough for me.
Now, I expect him to do more here, so I expect everybody will agree within a couple of seasons at most that this is a moot conversation. And yes, he could definitely change my opinion negatively if, somehow, he got in a bitter dispute with the team and pulled a Vince Carter on us. But honestly, that's never gonna happen. I expect more wins, All-Star games, honors and even titles, but if KG just played out the rest of his career (or just the rest of his contract even if he goes elsewhere afterward) in green, that title last year would be enough for me to retire his number regardless of how good or bad the team was over the next few seasons.
What's strange to me is that I respect the views of almost every poster on here (I'm not around much anymore so I don't know all the new guys), but I don't understand all the requirements being set forth. To me, this isn't even that close an argument.
Now, if there were only a dozen or so numbers retired, I'd understand the arguments that KG needs to do more to have his number in the rafters. But we have always had an overly permissive attitude toward retiring numbers. Why would that change for one of the six guys in history to be the best player on a Celtics championship team?
Topic: To retire 5 in honor of Kevin Garnett (Read 9400 times)