Should the Boston Celtics retire #9 in to the rafters for Rajon Rondo?

[KeepRondo]

Yes, easily.

Perhaps the most accomplish PG we've had since Bob Cousy and DJ....and we've had some great ones.

Couse...DJ...Rondo.

Yep, put #9 in the rafters...unless he wins a Banner in DAL this year and makes a return trip to BOS?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YZcxYUCQOZI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FX2fs0jYXDE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0xhw-5Txto

Picked the video for Rondo from 13-14 because, supposedly, these were his "Loafing Years", lol....

TP for the vids. My favorite Rondo pass was at 3:45. The spin on the ball and the placement is crazy. Hits Bayless barely below the numbers on a cross court transitional three.

[ssspence]

Guy dogged his way outta town. Not exactly legend material. Maybe some day the years will cool the sour taste I've developed for Rondo, but right now I don't see it. I'd rather see Ainge's ( / Scal's) number retired, frankly.

[BUTerrier]

Going back to the couple of people who have espoused the whole "the Celtics have too many numbers retired!" argument . . .

I think a fair argument is that, though opinions may vary, anyone who's actually enshrined in the Hall of Fame should be immune from debate as to the validity of their number being retired. Sure, some of them had careers beyond the Celtics that buoyed their HoF support (DJ, for example), but I don't think the ones whose numbers are retired in Boston are really ones who came here for a year or two at the end of their careers. So, if we eliminate the HoFers (and Satch/Red/Walter Brown, who are in the HoF but not as players), we're left with:

-JoJo White (#10)
-Don Nelson (#19)
-Cedric Maxwell (#31)
-Reggie Lewis (#35)
-Jim Loscutoff (Technically the same number as Cowens, but, hey, he's up there as "LOSCY")

Of those five, I think that we can reasonably defend JoJo without much effort, and eliminate Loscy because Cowens' jersey retirement made it moot. So that leaves us with three:
-Nelson (who spent 11 seasons with us, and arguably began the "sixth man" trend because he was playing behind a lot of talented players)
-Lewis (who went to Northeastern, was beloved by the fans, and who died young; it's a sentimental pick, of course)
-Maxwell (the arguments for and against have been listed ad nauseum)

So, really, in my eyes the only "illegitimate" retiring was Maxwell's, and even that is at least debatable. I don't think it's fair to NOT retire a number just because a team has had a lot of talented players. I mean, no one would say Pierce shouldn't make it in while comparing him to Bird or Hondo or anyone else.

[tarheelsxxiii]

Agree with pretty much everything BballTim and Celtics18 say. So, what they said.
KeepRondo - thanks for clips of the years Rondo was "dogging it."

[oldtype]

Retiring too many numbers cheapens the honor. It feels more than a little absurd to argue that somebody like Cedric Maxwell should be honored to the same level as Russell or Bird, but under the current system they're all equal up in the rafters. Perhaps the most glaring illustration is that a Celtic retired number only gets a space on 1/8th of a banner at the Garden, as opposed to something like this:



I know it seems like something silly to be complaining about, but it just feels wrong. When I take my kid to the Garden for the first time, he's going to look up to the rafters and ask "Dad, what the heck are all those random numbers about" instead of seeing a banner with "33 Bird" on it and knowing that it's there to honor a truly great player.

Obviously we can't go un-retiring numbers, but we should at least try to apply more stringent standards in the future. Being in the Hall of Fame should probably be the bare minimum standard, with the exception of special cases like Reggie Lewis. Even that should not guarantee that your number is retired if your biggest accomplishments were arguably away from the Celtics (DJ, Don Nelson).

In my opinion, if it's even debatable whether a number should be retired or not, that number should not be retired. KG is probably the absolute lowest I would go for the honor.

[Boston Garden Leprechaun]

heck no!!!!!!!!!!!  Absolutely silly to think he deserves that. SMH 

[Moranis]

Rondo should not have his number retired.  Not a transcendent player and not on the team long enough to be up there and not be a transcendent player.


The more interesting question is, does Miami retire #6 in honor of James? 

[manl_lui]

as much as I love Rondo and a big Rondo supporter, I do not think his number should be retired. Had he been here his entire career, then yes.

[D.o.s.]

Rondo should not have his number retired.  Not a transcendent player and not on the team long enough to be up there and not be a transcendent player.


The more interesting question is, does Miami retire #6 in honor of James?

I don't think so. I always liked how they retired 23, though.

[Donoghus]

Rondo should not have his number retired.  Not a transcendent player and not on the team long enough to be up there and not be a transcendent player.


The more interesting question is, does Miami retire #6 in honor of James?

I don't think so. I always liked how they retired 23, though.

I think Miami should.  4 years, 4 NBA Finals appearances as the guy.  2 Finals MVPs. 

In today's NBA, its very hard to be a lifer with one team (although this CBA might make things a bit easier).   The day of guys playing 15 years with one team are few & far between. 

For a franchise like Miami whose history is roughly 25 years or so, a guy like Lebron with even only 4 years, is still a huge part of their history.

In regards to the thread question of whether Rondo should have his number retired or not, I voted "No" although I will say that I wouldn't fight it if they decided to down the road.  Especially considering Boston's "generous" history of retiring numbers and seeing some of the numbers already up there.

[D.o.s.]

Retiring too many numbers cheapens the honor. It feels more than a little absurd to argue that somebody like Cedric Maxwell should be honored to the same level as Russell or Bird, but under the current system they're all equal up in the rafters.

It's almost like they're celebrating team players in a team game. Shocking!

Max is probably the least defensible, though.

[boscel33]

I voted no because I don't believe he was a "Celtic".

He came here, played hard (some times), and did win a championship, but IMO, he was always looking at what was next and worried about his money. 

Again IMO, he put Rajon Rondo ahead of team, especially the last couple of years. 

The guys in the rafters are legends and you never have to question their desire or commitment to the Celtics.