Why did we abandon Ubuntu so quickly?

[j804]

We had plenty of opportunities to pull that game out--Jeff Green's inability to reel in a bad cross court pass is not the reason we lost. Ubuntu doesn't heal injuries, make people younger or cause the 2 best players in the league to start sucking.

This. Ubuntu had nothing to do with those. Anyone who said lack of ubuntu is what caused our loss wasn't watching. What i saw was an old, tired and injured team running out of gas during the latter parts of the game.

I think it had more to do with all of our injuries than age though, the core starters having to shoulder the load when guys were dropping Ike flys, trying to hold onto homecourt, also having to deal with the shuffle of guys throug the trade

We were just drained by the end of the year that's why I look forward to next year this team isn't done address a couple of our weaknesses some good luck injury wise and were still one of the elite teams

[GreenFaith1819]

I don't think we abandoned Ubuntu, but we just had a lot of new moving pieces and injuries to deal with, like as discussed.

It's nothing that a good, full training camp won't fix, though.

[Marcus13]

Our GM didn't seem to buy into the whole "Boston is a Brotherhood" thing like the team did.  We were never the most talented team in the league, but we made two Finals appearances because of the WAY we played.  Ainge ruined that

[MBz]

Danny is the one that ignored Ubuntu ......... and it started with the dumb decision not to give James Posey an extra year on his contract - he has spent the last three years making one move after another to replace the guy .......... of course, the latest attempt being the most disastorous (Green).

So you'd take Posey as he is right now over Green as he is right now?

Posey would have killed us financially too.  If we had resigned him Id be surprised if the Jermaine O'Neal signing occurred as well as some other moves.

[Fan from VT]

I think all teams strive for cohesion, whether "chemistry" or "ubuntu," etc. However, it always seems to be the winning clubs that talk about chemistry/ubuntu.

So, I tend to think that Winning CREATES ubuntu/chemistry, but that the players/media, in creating their story/explanation of the season, then retroactively site the ubuntu/chemistry as the CAUSE of the winning, because it makes a better emotional narrative.

For example, we did not win the title this year, so it must be a lack of chemistry (it couldn't be a lack of talent/skill, could it?). Then, it's easy to point to the Perk trade and conclude that that was the moment chemistry was abandoned. However, if we HAD won it this year, i bet we'd see a lot of stories about how that very same trade caused a lot of anger and frustration, and brought the team closer together, causing better chemistry.

That's what is so great/laughable about sports writing: these writers/fans take an outcome, then retroactively pick various signs/moments from throughout the season to explain why a team ended up winning or losing...when such moments can be equally used to explain either a win or a loss, it just depends on the outcome.

So, in sum, we abandoned "ubuntu" as a narrative line the moment the C's just weren't good enough to win anymore.

[Finkelskyhook]

Why did we abandon Ubuntu so quickly?

Because it's a stupid meaningless word?

[mgent]

How soon we forget.

[tenn_smoothie]

Danny is the one that ignored Ubuntu ......... and it started with the dumb decision not to give James Posey an extra year on his contract - he has spent the last three years making one move after another to replace the guy .......... of course, the latest attempt being the most disastorous (Green).

So you'd take Posey as he is right now over Green as he is right now?

yes - for toughness and defense if nothing else. we are rebuilding in one year anyway and jeff green is a fantastic looking player whose actual production is average and whose heart is weak in the throes of battle.

[BballTim]

Danny is the one that ignored Ubuntu ......... and it started with the dumb decision not to give James Posey an extra year on his contract - he has spent the last three years making one move after another to replace the guy .......... of course, the latest attempt being the most disastorous (Green).

So you'd take Posey as he is right now over Green as he is right now?

yes - for toughness and defense if nothing else.

  Putting Posey (at this stage in his career) on LeBron for as long as Green played him would make for some "lock up the women and children" television. It would be a little but not a lot better then putting Wafer on Wade for a while.