Kevin Garnett's #5 to be retired by the Celtics on March 13

[PAOBoston]

We've debated this before, but KG does not belong in the rafters.

This is the correct answer. He really shouldn’t but based off the way the Cs operate he fits their criteria. The Cs literally retire everyone’s number. It makes the act of retiring a number meaningless. KG was awesome when he was here but not here long enough imo.

It's meaningless? Tell that to all the players up there. Tell that to their families, teammates and coaches.

What on earth do random fans know about the meaning behind a retired number over the actual players?

Yes, they make it meaningless because they literally retire every players number. Retiring a jersey should be for a literal cornerstone player (like a Russell or Bird for example).

[gouki88]

I'm probably in the minority, but I think the only players with retired numbers should have been Russell, Bird and Reggie Lewis (cause he literally gave his life for the Celtics). No Pierce, no KG, no Tommy, not even Havlicek. Instead of retiring their number, I'd put their name in the rafters, like we've done with Loscy. But that's just me.

KG was obviously amazing. No one's arguing against that.

Why?

Being a european, I'm probably influenced by soccer culture. It's almost impossible to get your number retired in soccer. There are numerous all-time legends who have never seen their number retired. For instance, AC Milan has retired the numbers of only Maldini and Baresi. Both of them spent their entire career with the club. They are considered 2 of the best defenders of all time in soccer. Possibly in the top 3 alongside Franz Beckenbauer. Napoli has retired the number of Maradona. He's arguably the best soccer player of all time. Real Madrid, Barcelona, Bayern Munich, Man Utd, Liverpool, Chelsea, Arsenal and numerous other famous clubs have no retired numbers whatsoever.

Retiring a number is the ultimate honor in sports. Imo, it should be reserved only for the best of the best. I get it though: Different sports - different countries/regions of the world - different cultures.

That's fair enough. In Melbourne in the major sport (Australian football) there is only one retired number in the whole competition (#42 by the Collingwood Football Club), but that was a Reggie Lewis situation where the player died during his career.

I think that's why I like the liberal attitude the Celtics have with it. Honour the many contributions

[gouki88]

We've debated this before, but KG does not belong in the rafters.

This is the correct answer. He really shouldn’t but based off the way the Cs operate he fits their criteria. The Cs literally retire everyone’s number. It makes the act of retiring a number meaningless. KG was awesome when he was here but not here long enough imo.

It's meaningless? Tell that to all the players up there. Tell that to their families, teammates and coaches.

What on earth do random fans know about the meaning behind a retired number over the actual players?

Yes, they make it meaningless because they literally retire every players number. Retiring a jersey should be for a literal cornerstone player (like a Russell or Bird for example).

Where's the rule that says that retired numbers is only for cornerstones?

[Jvalin]

We've debated this before, but KG does not belong in the rafters.

This is the correct answer. He really shouldn’t but based off the way the Cs operate he fits their criteria. The Cs literally retire everyone’s number. It makes the act of retiring a number meaningless. KG was awesome when he was here but not here long enough imo.

It's meaningless? Tell that to all the players up there. Tell that to their families, teammates and coaches.

What on earth do random fans know about the meaning behind a retired number over the actual players?

Yes, they make it meaningless because they literally retire every players number. Retiring a jersey should be for a literal cornerstone player (like a Russell or Bird for example).

Where's the rule that says that retired numbers is only for cornerstones?

There's no such rule, obviously. Here's my only objection though: Don't you think there should be a way to distinguish between all-time greats like KG/Pierce/Hondo and GOAT candidates like Russ and Bird? All these guys were great, but Russell had a way bigger impact compared to KG. The same goes for Bird vs Pierce/Hondo etc.

[PAOBoston]

We've debated this before, but KG does not belong in the rafters.

This is the correct answer. He really shouldn’t but based off the way the Cs operate he fits their criteria. The Cs literally retire everyone’s number. It makes the act of retiring a number meaningless. KG was awesome when he was here but not here long enough imo.

It's meaningless? Tell that to all the players up there. Tell that to their families, teammates and coaches.

What on earth do random fans know about the meaning behind a retired number over the actual players?

Yes, they make it meaningless because they literally retire every players number. Retiring a jersey should be for a literal cornerstone player (like a Russell or Bird for example).

Where's the rule that says that retired numbers is only for cornerstones?

There's no such rule, obviously. Here's my only objection though: Don't you think there should be a way to distinguish between all-time greats like KG/Pierce/Hondo and GOAT candidates like Russ and Bird? All these guys were great, but Russell had a way bigger impact compared to KG. The same goes for Bird vs Pierce/Hondo etc.

This. They could do like a Celtics Hall of Fame or something like that and then just leave the jersey retirement for the true “greats”.

[Jvalin]

We've debated this before, but KG does not belong in the rafters.

This is the correct answer. He really shouldn’t but based off the way the Cs operate he fits their criteria. The Cs literally retire everyone’s number. It makes the act of retiring a number meaningless. KG was awesome when he was here but not here long enough imo.

It's meaningless? Tell that to all the players up there. Tell that to their families, teammates and coaches.

What on earth do random fans know about the meaning behind a retired number over the actual players?

Yes, they make it meaningless because they literally retire every players number. Retiring a jersey should be for a literal cornerstone player (like a Russell or Bird for example).

Where's the rule that says that retired numbers is only for cornerstones?

There's no such rule, obviously. Here's my only objection though: Don't you think there should be a way to distinguish between all-time greats like KG/Pierce/Hondo and GOAT candidates like Russ and Bird? All these guys were great, but Russell had a way bigger impact compared to KG. The same goes for Bird vs Pierce/Hondo etc.

This. They could do like a Celtics Hall of Fame or something like that and then just leave the jersey retirement for the true “greats”.

They could do what we've already done with Loscy and put their name in the rafters instead of their number. It would still be a massive honor.



Having your number retired is the ultimate honor in sports. I just think it should be reserved only for the ultimate players.

Anyway, it is what it is. I have nothing against KG. I absolutely loved his game!

[Ogaju]

We've debated this before, but KG does not belong in the rafters.

Agreed. I love KG, but he wasn’t in Boston long enough and the C’s only got one ring while he was here. Should Rondo and Perk get there numbers retired too? Wouldn’t have one banner 17 without them either.

The quality of play of KG, and his importance to the team, dwarfs that of Perkins.  It's not close, and to suggest it's only about the number of years on a team and whether a ring was won is silly.  Being great actually matters.  Finishing top 3 in MVP award voting during a title season should, in fact, matter.   Setting the culture of the team matters.

An argument could be made for Rondo, and that may in fact happen once he's done playing, but while he had a couple of absolutely terrific seasons, he was a notch less than KG.  Obviously his last half-season in Boston was disappointing as well, and tarnished his legacy a bit.  Perhaps he comes back in a year and is a model vet PG off the bench while we win a title and his legacy is re-established.

But comparing KG to Perk is blasphemy.

Obviously KG was more important than Perk, but my point is that he didn’t singlehandedly deliver a championship to Boston. Rondo and Perk played a large role as well and they played in Boston longer. I feel like a player needs to be on the team for more than 5 or 6 years for their number to be retired or they need to have delivered several championships.

I don't really agree with this. You could sub out Rondo and Perk for a dozen other similar level role players. You cannot sub out KG for anyone else and get the same culture transformation that occurred in Boston.

Agreed. We weren't winning titles with Pierce, Allen, and Al Jefferson.

We aren't winning the title with Jeff Green instead of Ray Allen either.  If KG did enough, then Allen did enough and the fact that no one mentions Allen is quite telling. 

When Kyrie Irving and Robert Williams are on more Celtics franchise top 10 leaderboards than Kevin Garnett, Kevin Garnett didn't do enough to be in the rafters.  Let that sink in for a minute.

What do you mean no one mentions Allen….read above.

[gouki88]

We've debated this before, but KG does not belong in the rafters.

This is the correct answer. He really shouldn’t but based off the way the Cs operate he fits their criteria. The Cs literally retire everyone’s number. It makes the act of retiring a number meaningless. KG was awesome when he was here but not here long enough imo.

It's meaningless? Tell that to all the players up there. Tell that to their families, teammates and coaches.

What on earth do random fans know about the meaning behind a retired number over the actual players?

Yes, they make it meaningless because they literally retire every players number. Retiring a jersey should be for a literal cornerstone player (like a Russell or Bird for example).

Where's the rule that says that retired numbers is only for cornerstones?

There's no such rule, obviously. Here's my only objection though: Don't you think there should be a way to distinguish between all-time greats like KG/Pierce/Hondo and GOAT candidates like Russ and Bird? All these guys were great, but Russell had a way bigger impact compared to KG. The same goes for Bird vs Pierce/Hondo etc.

Why the need? The Celtics franchise knows the impact of these players much better than any of us do, and they think the honour is appropriate. Who are we to question that? If it ain't broke...

[Jvalin]

We've debated this before, but KG does not belong in the rafters.

This is the correct answer. He really shouldn’t but based off the way the Cs operate he fits their criteria. The Cs literally retire everyone’s number. It makes the act of retiring a number meaningless. KG was awesome when he was here but not here long enough imo.

It's meaningless? Tell that to all the players up there. Tell that to their families, teammates and coaches.

What on earth do random fans know about the meaning behind a retired number over the actual players?

Yes, they make it meaningless because they literally retire every players number. Retiring a jersey should be for a literal cornerstone player (like a Russell or Bird for example).

Where's the rule that says that retired numbers is only for cornerstones?

There's no such rule, obviously. Here's my only objection though: Don't you think there should be a way to distinguish between all-time greats like KG/Pierce/Hondo and GOAT candidates like Russ and Bird? All these guys were great, but Russell had a way bigger impact compared to KG. The same goes for Bird vs Pierce/Hondo etc.

Why the need? The Celtics franchise knows the impact of these players much better than any of us do, and they think the honour is appropriate. Who are we to question that? If it ain't broke...

''Who are we''? We are the fans. The Celtics exist only because the fans support the team. Just because the owners have money, it doesn't mean they know better. It doesn't work like this.

If it ain't broke...

Imo, it's broke. That's what I'm saying. Having your number retired is the ultimate honor in sports. We've made it relatively cheap. But again, this is just my opinion.

[gouki88]

We've debated this before, but KG does not belong in the rafters.

This is the correct answer. He really shouldn’t but based off the way the Cs operate he fits their criteria. The Cs literally retire everyone’s number. It makes the act of retiring a number meaningless. KG was awesome when he was here but not here long enough imo.

It's meaningless? Tell that to all the players up there. Tell that to their families, teammates and coaches.

What on earth do random fans know about the meaning behind a retired number over the actual players?

Yes, they make it meaningless because they literally retire every players number. Retiring a jersey should be for a literal cornerstone player (like a Russell or Bird for example).

Where's the rule that says that retired numbers is only for cornerstones?

There's no such rule, obviously. Here's my only objection though: Don't you think there should be a way to distinguish between all-time greats like KG/Pierce/Hondo and GOAT candidates like Russ and Bird? All these guys were great, but Russell had a way bigger impact compared to KG. The same goes for Bird vs Pierce/Hondo etc.

Why the need? The Celtics franchise knows the impact of these players much better than any of us do, and they think the honour is appropriate. Who are we to question that? If it ain't broke...

''Who are we''? We are the fans. The Celtics exist only because the fans support the team. Just because the owners have money, it doesn't mean they know better. It doesn't work like this.

If it ain't broke...

Imo, it's broke. That's what I'm saying. Having your number retired is the ultimate honor in sports. We've made it relatively cheap. But again, this is just my opinion.

More correctly, you're the minority of the fanbase. Because most Celtics fans have no issue with this.

[Jvalin]

We've debated this before, but KG does not belong in the rafters.

This is the correct answer. He really shouldn’t but based off the way the Cs operate he fits their criteria. The Cs literally retire everyone’s number. It makes the act of retiring a number meaningless. KG was awesome when he was here but not here long enough imo.

It's meaningless? Tell that to all the players up there. Tell that to their families, teammates and coaches.

What on earth do random fans know about the meaning behind a retired number over the actual players?

Yes, they make it meaningless because they literally retire every players number. Retiring a jersey should be for a literal cornerstone player (like a Russell or Bird for example).

Where's the rule that says that retired numbers is only for cornerstones?

There's no such rule, obviously. Here's my only objection though: Don't you think there should be a way to distinguish between all-time greats like KG/Pierce/Hondo and GOAT candidates like Russ and Bird? All these guys were great, but Russell had a way bigger impact compared to KG. The same goes for Bird vs Pierce/Hondo etc.

Why the need? The Celtics franchise knows the impact of these players much better than any of us do, and they think the honour is appropriate. Who are we to question that? If it ain't broke...

''Who are we''? We are the fans. The Celtics exist only because the fans support the team. Just because the owners have money, it doesn't mean they know better. It doesn't work like this.

If it ain't broke...

Imo, it's broke. That's what I'm saying. Having your number retired is the ultimate honor in sports. We've made it relatively cheap. But again, this is just my opinion.

More correctly, you're the minority of the fanbase. Because most Celtics fans have no issue with this.

Sure, no problem at all. We ain't in an echo chamber. Allow me to have an opinion regardless of what the majority thinks. We all have different opinions and that's great.

[makaveli]

I have to take side with those who think he doesn’t deserve it. Not in terms what everyone else who is up there did for the ball club.

[Moranis]

Cousy, Russell, Havlicek, Cowens, Bird, and Pierce

That would be the guys whose number I think should clearly be retired. 

I'd listen to arguments for Sam Jones, Parish, McHale, and Lewis. 

Anyone else cheapens it for the rest of the players.  Just my opinion, but the ultimate honor a team can bestow on a player is having his number retired.  There should absolutely be some level of games played, statistical feats, and winning.  If KG was the anchor (or a main player) on 3 or 4 title teams in his 6 seasons in Boston, then I think you overlook the fact that it was just 6 mostly injured seasons, but the team won just 1 title and he played just 396 regular season games and just 84 playoff games (missing a post season entirely).  That shouldn't be the standard for getting your number retired.  it just isn't enough.

[hpantazo]

KG changed the culture of the organization back to what it used to be before the dark era following Reggie and Leo Bias' deaths and the Pitino years. He also changed the perception of the Celtics organization around the league, making Boston an attractive destination again. He still constantly praises the Celtics organization to this day. That's all in addition to his accomplishments on the court to bring us banner 18. He totally deserves it.

[GreenEnvy]

We've debated this before, but KG does not belong in the rafters.

This is the correct answer. He really shouldn’t but based off the way the Cs operate he fits their criteria. The Cs literally retire everyone’s number. It makes the act of retiring a number meaningless. KG was awesome when he was here but not here long enough imo.

It's meaningless? Tell that to all the players up there. Tell that to their families, teammates and coaches.

What on earth do random fans know about the meaning behind a retired number over the actual players?

Yes, they make it meaningless because they literally retire every players number. Retiring a jersey should be for a literal cornerstone player (like a Russell or Bird for example).

Where's the rule that says that retired numbers is only for cornerstones?

There's no such rule, obviously. Here's my only objection though: Don't you think there should be a way to distinguish between all-time greats like KG/Pierce/Hondo and GOAT candidates like Russ and Bird? All these guys were great, but Russell had a way bigger impact compared to KG. The same goes for Bird vs Pierce/Hondo etc.

The Yankees do that. They retire a lot of numbers also, I believe they are up to 22. For their highest honor (bestowed upon Gehrig, Ruth, Mantle, and DiMaggio… along with owner Steinbrenner and coach Huggins), monuments are given in addition to the retired number and plaque. I could see Rivera being worthy of a monument.