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

[xmuscularghandix]

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.

i don't think that bird would just walk over paul, pierce did a pretty [dang] good job last year covering lebron/kobe who are considered to be the best 2 players in the league. Bird is Bird but Paul isn't a slouch on D.

[nickagneta]

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.

i don't think that bird would just walk over paul, pierce did a pretty [dang] good job last year covering lebron/kobe who are considered to be the best 2 players in the league. Bird is Bird but Paul isn't a slouch on D.

Bird would post Paul all day long and then start jumping out for three's. Bird had so much he could do to Pierce that Kobe and LeBron can't or won't do. Power forwards had a hard time guarding Bird's post moves and the last thing the 2008 team would want to do is help down low on Bird and leave a sliver of space available for Bird to get the ball to Chief and Kevin.

I think Paul is a great player and much improved defender but he's never had to face a SF with the versatile skills and deadly shooting ability of Bird, ever.

[mattmc33]

Now I love this edition of the Celts, how could you not? The intensity, the athleticism and flat-out aggression of KG, the all-around play of PP, the deadly shooting of RA, the brilliance of Rajon and the lunch-pail work ethic of KP, added to Eddie's enthusiasm, the constant improvement of Leon - all that with a defensive mindset unequalled by any other team means this group, especially if they go back to back, has to enter the conversation as one of the ten best teams in NBA history.

But to compare them to the 85/86 Cs - unquestionably the greatest team that ever walked the face of the earth - is somewhat asinine IMO.

That 86 team featured a guy in Bird who you could make an argument for as the best player ever, and at the very least there is no argument that he is the greatest forward in history. A guy in McHale who sits as one of the top three power forwards of all time. A guy in Chief who might have been one of the most underrated players ever (not surprisingly considering who his frontcourt running mates were). A great backcourt with an awesome defender/clutch player in DJ (and its a disgrace he isn't in the HOF yet) and a scrappy, intelligent two guard in Danny. Then that bench with Walton - one of the best big men ever - and Wedman, who was a phenomenal outside shooter, plus a bunch of guys like Greg Kite and Jerry Sichting who played their roles to perfection.   

The 85/86 team was the perfect storm. Adding a Walton to that group, and most importantly, a Walton that was healthy and played 80 games, is what pushes this team beyond all others. You're talking about three (should be four) first ballot Hall of Famers in the starting five and a first ballot Hall of Famer coming off the bench.  Ainge and McHale always say that if they were as committed to winning in the regular season as they maybe should have been they would have won 75 games. Although 40-1 at home isn't bad. And then to go 15-3 in the playoffs, including the legendary 36-6 third qtr against Atlanta and the back to back 30+ point victories, just illustrates clearly that this team, for my money, stands alone as the best ever. And please don't ever talk about the 72 win Bulls in this discussion - they played in the NBA expansion era and the level of competition was nowhere near as tough as it was in the mid 80s.

Now, if the 08/09 Cs manage to go 40-1 at home, win 74 games and then go 15-2 in the playoffs - then I might entertain the idea that they could take 2, heck, even three games from the 85/86 squad in a seven game series. But better than them? No way, no how.



 

[BrickJames]

Is this really still being debated?  Anyone over the age of like 24 on here?

'86ers in 4, especially with '86 officiating.

[TerreHaute]

I would take the 86 team. Their front line is just too imposing for any team in history, in my opinion. It's not just the starters, either. Walton and Wedman were starters for 75% of the teams in the league at that time. Can you name another team where their 2nd big off the bench would start for that many teams (BBD for this team). Wedman wasn't just a great shooter. He was an all-star for the Kansas City Kings, averaging 20ppg.

I think the gaurds for the 86 team are also vastly underrated. As stated many times, DJ should be in the Hall of Fame. Don't forget that Danny Ainge was a GREAT athlete. In addition to being an all-star caliber basketball player, he was good enough to be a major league baseball player. He was also recruited by numerous schools to be a Div. I college quarterback. Their gaurds were so good that Sam Vincent (college all-american the year before) hardly played. How many college all-americans hardly see the floor anymore their first year in the NBA? There are some, but not many. Sichting was the perfect compliment for this team, as Eddie House is for our current team. Do you think that this year's gaurds are better than the gaurd combination of Magic, Byron Scott, and Micheal Cooper? I don't. The gaurds on the '86 team played them pretty well. The '86 gaurds would do pretty well against this year's version.

Lastly, Bird is just Bird. PP needs to be in the conversation when talking about all-time Celtic greats, but has his name ever been mentioned in the conversation of best player who ever lived? No. I just don't see the current team having an answer for Bird, Mchale, Parish, Walton, and Wedman. The "old gaurds" would more than hold their own.

To take this a step further, I would even take the '84 team over this team, at this point.

[Toine43]

Is this really still being debated?  Anyone over the age of like 24 on here?

Try age 35! If you're 35 years old then you were about 13 in 1986. Who that age or younger is honestly going to know what they're talking about when it comes to comparing these two squads.

I'm young, and I haven't tryed to compare them, because I know that I have no right to do so.

[mobanners]

I usually hate these discussions. Theres no way to know and they usually amount to a shouting match between those who idealize the past and those who have no appreciation for it. But maybe because I know and admire so much about both teams Im willing to think about it seriously this one time. And having done so Im surprised that no one is standing up for our 08 Celts. because people are crazy if they think this team couldnt play with Bird's. Aside from the undenaible fact that athletes are better conditioned today (weight training above all)--just look at the matchups:

86Cs vs 08Cs overall
There's no doubt the 86 Cs were a better offensive team--and had a better bench. But I also dont think its debatable that the 08 Cs play better team defense, and are also--nearly to a man--better individual defenders as well. In these kinds of matchups the team that dictates pace usually has an advantage. While there's no way to know who could set the tempo in a matchup I will say that because the 86 Celts were not a run-first team (they were excellent in transition of course--it just wasnt their bread and butter)--this would force them to go straight at the 08 Cs strength in half-court defense. Forgive the blasphemy, but it almost makes me wonder if the 08Cs might have had more trouble with the Magics' Showtime Lakers in 87.

DJ:       14ppg (16.2)      Rondo:   12ppg (10.2)
Two excellent defensive pgs who can also manage the game effectively. Rondo has a clear speed advantage, but DJ is far more experienced and thus also less prone to mistakes. DJ is a better shooter as well. Though DJ has the overall advantage, if Rondo continues to develop offensively at his recent pace he could close in on DJ--potentially even by this years playoffs.

Ainge:    13ppg (15.6)      RAllen:  21ppg (15.6)
Danny was a smart and tenacious player--with a decent shot--but this is the largest mismatch to the advantage of the 08 Cs. If Ainge was able to focus only on shutting Ray down he might have some succeess, but the fact is that he'd be playing help defense, especially with the next two matchups.

Bird:     24ppg (25.9)      Pierce:  23ppg (19.7)
This truly is a dream matchup. Both are versatile players with a wide array of HOF quality skills. Both are mentally tough and fearless. Obviously Larry was the superior passer, outside shooter and rebounder. But Paul is no slouch on those fronts and is superior going to the hoop and also--importantly--as a man-on defender. Though I think Paul would have more success slowing Larry's game than Larry would have slowing Paul's I still give the nod to Larry because, well, he's Larry freaking Bird. But make no mistake, Paul Pierce is the Truth.

McHale:   22ppg (24.9)      Garnett: 21ppg (20.4)
Another dream matchup--but here the skill sets are quite different. McHale was an offensively minded player who liked the block, and KG is a defensively minded player who likes to shoot from 8-16 feet. Again, though I'm more confident that KG could slow McHale than McHale could slow KG, I still give a slight edge in points to McHale--because that was his game. KG would almost certainly have had an edge on the glass though--which might help the 08Cs to push the ball, where I think they'd have some success offensively. And his intensity would keep the 08Cs fired up and mentally in the game.

Parish:   17ppg (15.0)      Perkins: 11ppg (6.6)
This is probably the biggest mismatch for the 86Cs--and I'd expect Parish to have a big game offensively. Perk is a good low-post defender mind you, but that wasnt Parish's offensive game. He'd be shooting rainbows over Perk all night. I almost wonder whether Doc might switch defensive assignments and have Perk guard McHale and KG guard Parish. Of course I fear that Perk might foul out in about 10minutes of game time trying to handle McHale. Some might argue I'm giving too many points to Perk here but I think he's really turning the corner on offence and going to average over 10points in the playoffs this year.

Walton:    8ppg (7.9)       Powe:     4ppg (5.0)
Sichting:  3ppg (3.2)       TAllen:   4ppg (1.3)
Wedman:    4ppg (3.3)       Davis:    2ppg (2.3)
Vincent:   3ppg (2.4)       House:    4ppg (2.5)
Kite:      2ppg (1.2)       DM/PJ?:   4ppg
Walton is a huge advantage off the bench--especially if either KG or Perk get in foul trouble. There's just too much size here. In fact, I'm going to assume that Danny gets a big like Dikembe or PJ for the playoffs this year. And if they do, then actually I think the imbalance isnt as great as people are suggesting--especially given that the weakness of the 08 bench has largely been due to youth (ie lack of experience)--and there's a good chance the bench will have imporoved come playoff time. Ultimately my guess is that the 08Cs bench would try to push the pace on the 86C bench. And looking at the matchups I think theyd have some success.

In the end, the 86 Celts win 110 to 105.

But the bottom line is that anyone who thinks this would be a total blowout is drinking "those were the good old days" flavored Kool-Aid.

[Schupac]

But the bottom line is that anyone who thinks it would be a blowout is drinking "those were the good old days" flavored Kool-Aid.

TP.

I'm too young to really offer analysis, but this is the feeling I usually have.  If you put the teams head to head, I do believe it would be close.

[QuinielaBox]

I like that analysis of mobanners.....(Gave out a Tommy)

Here is a thought. Why not compare the '08 Celtics to the '87 Lakers? If the 08 Celtics can beat the '87 Lakers than they earn the right to compete against the 1986 Celtics.

One match up to watch is Rondo vs DJ. Can DJ keep Rondo out of the paint? If the answer is yes, than this debate ends very quickly.

Ray Allen is better than Danny Ainge at the 2 guard.

Parish is better than Perkins.

McHale = Kevin Garnett

Bird a razor thin margin over Pierce who will have his moments of truth. But Larry Bird is one of the greatest to lace 'em up.

Walton in 1986 was much better than Powe or Davis, no question.

Wedman vs Tony Allen - I pick Tony Allen here as the better athlete.

Eddie House vs Sichting - push.

KC vs Doc - both have dream jobs but I give the edge to KC.

Boston Garden Homecourt vs TD Banknorth Garden Homecourt - OLD SCHOOL ALL THE WAY BABY. Mexican Hat Dance vs Everybody Clap Your Hands - Give me a freakin break. The Celtics had a 97-4 streak in the old building at one point including 50 games in a row at one point. A loss at home in the Old Building was absolutely unthinkable in the Mid 80s. That alone made the 1986 Celtics what they were.

[Roy Hobbs]

Bird a razor thin margin over Pierce who will have his moments of truth. But Larry Bird is one of the greatest to lace 'em up.

I like Pierce a lot, but I don't think the margin is razor thin at all, or even thin at all.  Pierce is a great player, probably top ten in the NBA right now, but Bird is unquestionably a top five player of all time.

[Andy Jick]

i don't think people here realize how much of a matchup problem McHALE would be for these celtics...there is NO ONE (including KG) that could stop him in the low post.  mchale has always been the unsung guy, and obviously people aren't mentioning him much in this thread either.

what's worse, is that there's no one coming off the bench that has any length that could shut down the big 4 (which includes walton).

i think you could use the '86 Hawks as a favorable comparison (to the current celtics) and the celtics beat that group 4-1 that series, and then swept a tough milwaukee team to get into the finals.  they also swept the season series against a powerful lakers team that season as well.

there is no one in the atlantic division (today) that's even comparable to the '86 76ers, whom i believe won well over 50 games that season as well (after getting off to a slow start).

[housecall]

i don't think people here realize how much of a matchup problem McHALE would be for these celtics...there is NO ONE (including KG) that could stop him in the low post.  mchale has always been the unsung guy, and obviously people aren't mentioning him much in this thread either.

what's worse, is that there's no one coming off the bench that has any length that could shut down the big 4 (which includes walton).

i think you could use the '86 Hawks as a favorable comparison (to the current celtics) and the celtics beat that group 4-1 that series, and then swept a tough milwaukee team to get into the finals.  they also swept the season series against a powerful lakers team that season as well.

there is no one in the atlantic division (today) that's even comparable to the '86 76ers, whom i believe won well over 50 games that season as well (after getting off to a slow start).

No one is realizing that Perk would  foul out of the game.Parrish has to  many post moves for him to handle.tp

[cordobes]

i don't think people here realize how much of a matchup problem McHALE would be for these celtics...there is NO ONE (including KG) that could stop him in the low post.  mchale has always been the unsung guy, and obviously people aren't mentioning him much in this thread either.

what's worse, is that there's no one coming off the bench that has any length that could shut down the big 4 (which includes walton).

i think you could use the '86 Hawks as a favorable comparison (to the current celtics) and the celtics beat that group 4-1 that series, and then swept a tough milwaukee team to get into the finals.  they also swept the season series against a powerful lakers team that season as well.

there is no one in the atlantic division (today) that's even comparable to the '86 76ers, whom i believe won well over 50 games that season as well (after getting off to a slow start).

No one is realizing that Perk would  foul out of the game.Parrish has to  many post moves for him to handle.tp

Hmm... but Doc would never put Perkins on Parrish, that by the way, had far less post moves than McHale. But even if he survives McHale (doubtful), there's no way he could survive to McHale plus Walton. This has probably been said, but the '86 team had too much height, depth and offensive talent for the current team to deal with.

[RebusRankin]

We worry about this team going up against bigger teams like Cleveland. Walton/McHale/Parrish is better than any combo today. Plus Bird was flat out head and shoulders above Paul.

[Redz]

We worry about this team going up against bigger teams like Cleveland. Walton/McHale/Parrish is better than any combo today. Plus Bird was flat out head and shoulders above Paul.

Literally and figuratively