todays celts vs Bird's / Gorman's opinion (merged)

[Celtics17]

Before this year I would have laughed and thought about how time erases many memories. In this case how it erased the reality of how good the 86 team really was. But, lately I have been reconsidering. I really believe todays starting 5 versus the 86 starting 5 would be a great, great series. I loved Larry Legend and still regard McHale as the best power forward in league history with apologies to Timmy D. but I really do believe our starting 5 today would give the 86 starting 5 a good series. Perk could definitely play D on the Chief and I would take Ray any day over Danny. Right now Rondo is probably playing in the top 5 point guards in the league, maybe even top 3 so I give the edge to him over DJ (and I saw DJ play too).

All that being said, basketball teams are comprised of more then 5 players. Big Red would destroy Powe and BBD, Wedman was a better bench player then any we have now and even Sichting was as good or better then house. Sorry but 86 team in 6 with Bird being Bird and averaging 30, 10, and 12 for the series.

[Andy Jick]

'86 Celtics sweep series...

The Celtics ran through the NBA that season like a hot knife through butter.  The NBA was not as watered down with expansion and too many young players who aren't ready to play at this level.  Sure, there were bad teams, but not as many as there are now.

The '86 team would just keep throwing it down low in the post.  Perk would get into foul trouble and there would be NO ONE who could then guard anyone down there.  Plus you had a healthy Bill Walton on that team and Sichting was much like Eddie House coming off the bench as the third guard.

For those who never saw that team play you really missed out.

[Finkelskyhook]

86 in 5 as the 09 bench of Baby, Powe, House and Allen would get killed playing against the likes of Walton, Sichting, Wedman and Vincent. I can just see Baby and Powe trying to guard McHale and Walton down under. It would get very ugly.

Think O'Bryant could guard them?

86 in 5

[Brickowski]

And Scott Wedman may have been the best shooter on the team after Bird.

Yes, those were the pre-expansion days, when good teams went 8-9 deep.

[nickagneta]

And let's not forget what a great running team they were. No they weren't the Lakers of Showtime but they ran better than any Mike D'Antoni team I've ever seen with three different players being able to lead the break and two great running big men. people forget that Parish beat just about every center he ever played against down the floor until he was past his mid thirties.

Go back and watch some footage of the Celtics fast break in 86. It was a thing of beauty.

[moiso]

i think through the first three quarters it'd be a stalemate with big plays from mchale/garnett trying to one-up eachother, Ray breaking away from danny on screens(every once in a while vice-versa), Parish having a good game but hitting below his season avg's, a VERY big matchup with DJ/Rondo, but down the stretch it'd be all bird/pierce trading buckets.

AMAZING to think about. 

there might be a wee bit of trash talking too

yea... a wee bit....

Could you imagine KG and Bird's dialogue?  Both would want the last word.  It would be classic trash talking!  And I'm someone who really doesn't even like trash talking.

[moiso]

I'd like to see either the 1986 or the current team play the 2002 celts, just so I can see what its like to root against a C's team.  I wouldn't be rooting for the 2002 team.

[Jon]

My money is on the '86 team still; but I think it might be closer than some would think.  DJ is a better player than Rondo, but Rondo would also be able to penetrate at will against him.  As strong of a defender as DJ was, he couldn't keep up with Rondo.  Ray Allen is better than Ainge by more than Bird is better than Pierce.  KG and McHale are probably roughly a draw.  Parish obviously has a big advantage on Perk.  While there is a huge disparity in terms of the bench, how much would that matter in a 7 game series?  The starters would all play 40+ minutes and Doc would never put a solely "green" team on the floor at once. 

Still, the '86 team would win.  I just think it might go to 6 or 7 games. 

I don't think the current team can hang with the depth of the great '80s NBA teams; however, I think they may be the best team in the past 15 years (including the Jordan Bulls). 

[the moops]

86 in 5 as the 09 bench of Baby, Powe, House and Allen would get killed playing against the likes of Walton, Sichting, Wedman and Vincent. I can just see Baby and Powe trying to guard McHale and Walton down under. It would get very ugly.

Sam Vincent played 7 minutes a game in 85-86 for a reason. He was not that good.

Eddie House is a better player than Sichting.

Walton and Wedman are better than anything the current Celts have though.

Rondo and Allen have a pretty large advantage over their counterparts from the 86 Celts. Garnett is at worst an equal to McHale. Bird has a decided advantage over Peirce, but Larry would sure have one hell of a time trying to do anything to stop Pierce. Parish over Perkins is as large of a mismatch as Allen over Ainge.

If Ainge picks up a PJ Brown and a competent backup PG, then I go with them over the old-timers.

[86 Celtics]

I'd take the 86 Team in 4 games. Of course, I'd take that team over ANY NBA team...ever!  But hey, that's just me - I LOVED that team!!!!  Makes me want to post a whole game of that 86 team on YouTube (could be a nice Sunday project!).  If I do, I will post a link!

[drza44]

This debate still needs to season.  When it came up last year it was dismissed out of hand because this group was unproven, never champs, etc. 

When it came up after last season it was still pretty much dismissed: this group had trouble in the playoffs, no legendary players (Most Boston fans still, as much as they appreciate him, still don't quite realize what we've got in Garnett), only one title, etc.

Now it's still not quite taken seriously by most, but a few are starting to at least entertain the thought that it'd be a good series.

If the Cs lose this year and don't win any more titles, eventually this question will go away.  But if this year's Cs win the title, and look distinctly better than last year along the way...it'll start getting more interesting.  And if they just flat dominate, the way they have been, THEN the conversation gets more fun...

[mobanners]

ok, so my "scientific" method was to look at the playoff scoring averages for the 86 Celts and 07 Celts--and then adjust a bit for the matchups and to account for changes between the 07 and 08 teams.

EDIT: I decided to add the 86 and 07 playoff scoring averages in parens (xx) so others can do the same

Here's my projection on scoring for the series:

86Cs                           08Cs
DJ:       14ppg (16.2)      Rondo:   14ppg (10.2)
Ainge:    13ppg (15.6)      RAllen:  22ppg (15.6)
Bird:     25ppg (25.9)      Pierce:  24ppg (19.7)
McHale:   22ppg (24.9)      Garnett: 21ppg (20.4)
Parish:   19ppg (15.0)      Perkins: 10ppg (6.6)
Walton:    9ppg (7.9)       Powe:     4ppg (5.0)
Sichting:  3ppg (3.2)       TAllen:   7ppg (1.3)
Wedman:    5ppg (3.       Davis:    3ppg (2.3)
Vincent:   2ppg (2.4)       House:    5ppg (2.5)

Looks like the 86 Celts win 112 to 110.

[Andy Jick]

Wedman was injured (ribs) during most of the playoffs, and only made an appearance, i believe, in game 6 of the Houston series in garbage time.

Honestly, as fun as this is it's pointless.  We'll never know so it's an exercise in futility.  But let the debate live on...

[Roy Hobbs]

Eddie House is a better player than Sichting.

By what standard?  Sichting shot 57% from the field in '86; he was a very good role player, who would have looked a lot better if he wasn't playing with a team full of all-stars.

I don't think it's fair to predict a sweep, but I'll say the '86 team wins in 5 or 6.

[Redz]

Sichting could jump too (#12 for those of you keeping score at home)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H_RJ5XN8TK8