Author Topic: Will Boston retire Rondo's number?  (Read 11012 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: Will Boston retire Rondo's number?
« Reply #45 on: November 14, 2010, 06:41:34 PM »

Offline crownsy

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8469
  • Tommy Points: 157
I disagree with this big time. The Celtics wouldn't have retired Barkley's number? Not sure on this, but I'm pretty sure the Celtics have retired more numbers than any other team, including the likes of Satch Sanders, Bill Sharman, Ed Macauley, Frank Ramsey, and Jim Loscutoff.... If Rondo stays with the Celtics his whole career and doesn't suffer any serious injuries, he should get his number retired, because he's gonna put up silly assist and steal numbers and he's already been NBA first team all defense.

Satch Sanders: 8 titles
Bill Sharman: 4 titles
Loscutoff: 7 titles

Guys with less than 2 Championships as players with their #'s retired:
Ed McCauley, Red Auerbach, Walter Brown, Reggie Lewis

Guys who played after '70 with less than 2 titles as a player with their #'s retired:
Reggie Lewis

Tell me how Barkely would've been retired if he had won no chips?


  How many players have we had that were as good as Barkley that didn't get their numbers retired? And, note, Barkely made all nba 1st team 5 times and 2nd team 5 times, PP made all 2nd team once. Paul's only top 10 finish in MVP voting was in 08-09 when he finished 6th, Barkley has finished 6th or better 8 times. If you're saying Barkley wouldn't have had his number retired without a title, you're saying PP wouldn't have been close to being in the discussion for having his number retired without the title.

I am saying exactly that. PP would not have had his # retired without winning a title.

Could not disagree more. Even without the title, you are talking about a player who is going to end up with several of the all time Celtic records, has been a warrior here for over a decade, and is (arguably) the best pure scorer of any player the Celtics have ever had.

Even celtic fans who don't like him have had to start conceding he's probably the 6th man, mabey 7th on an "all time celtics roster"

34 was going up, assuming he stayed in green till the end. the championship just makes it a stone cold lock :D
“I will hurt you for this. A day will come when you think you’re safe and happy and your joy will turn to ashes in your mouth. And you will know the debt is paid.” – Tyrion

Re: Will Boston retire Rondo's number?
« Reply #46 on: November 14, 2010, 07:31:12 PM »

Offline Dybdal

  • Jaylen Brown
  • Posts: 620
  • Tommy Points: 31
I disagree with this big time. The Celtics wouldn't have retired Barkley's number? Not sure on this, but I'm pretty sure the Celtics have retired more numbers than any other team, including the likes of Satch Sanders, Bill Sharman, Ed Macauley, Frank Ramsey, and Jim Loscutoff.... If Rondo stays with the Celtics his whole career and doesn't suffer any serious injuries, he should get his number retired, because he's gonna put up silly assist and steal numbers and he's already been NBA first team all defense.

Satch Sanders: 8 titles
Bill Sharman: 4 titles
Loscutoff: 7 titles

Guys with less than 2 Championships as players with their #'s retired:
Ed McCauley, Red Auerbach, Walter Brown, Reggie Lewis

Guys who played after '70 with less than 2 titles as a player with their #'s retired:
Reggie Lewis

Tell me how Barkely would've been retired if he had won no chips?


  How many players have we had that were as good as Barkley that didn't get their numbers retired? And, note, Barkely made all nba 1st team 5 times and 2nd team 5 times, PP made all 2nd team once. Paul's only top 10 finish in MVP voting was in 08-09 when he finished 6th, Barkley has finished 6th or better 8 times. If you're saying Barkley wouldn't have had his number retired without a title, you're saying PP wouldn't have been close to being in the discussion for having his number retired without the title.

I am saying exactly that. PP would not have had his # retired without winning a title.

Could not disagree more. Even without the title, you are talking about a player who is going to end up with several of the all time Celtic records, has been a warrior here for over a decade, and is (arguably) the best pure scorer of any player the Celtics have ever had.

Even celtic fans who don't like him have had to start conceding he's probably the 6th man, mabey 7th on an "all time celtics roster"

34 was going up, assuming he stayed in green till the end. the championship just makes it a stone cold lock :D

I just imagined the Captain smashing a beer can against his forehead after saying that with a southern accent to someone, ahh the days when wrestling was relevent
"Leadership is diving for a loose ball, getting the crowd involved, getting other players involved. It`s being able to take it as well as dish it out. That`s the only way you`re going to get respect from the players"

- Larry Bird

Re: Will Boston retire Rondo's number?
« Reply #47 on: November 14, 2010, 07:55:01 PM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 63547
  • Tommy Points: -25456
  • Bo Knows: Joe Don't Know Diddley
I think the only way the Celtics would have declined to retire Pierce's number would have been if he forced his way out of town prior to the KG trade.  Even without a title, I think that Pierce would have gotten his number retired, assuming that he had played his entire career here.


I'M THE SILVERBACK GORILLA IN THIS MOTHER... AND DON'T NONE OF YA'LL EVER FORGET IT!

Re: Will Boston retire Rondo's number?
« Reply #48 on: November 14, 2010, 11:34:25 PM »

Offline Eja117

  • NCE
  • Bill Sharman
  • *******************
  • Posts: 19274
  • Tommy Points: 1254
Magic 8 ball says ....most likely.



Re: Will Boston retire Rondo's number?
« Reply #49 on: November 14, 2010, 11:38:26 PM »

Offline clawlin

  • Luke Garza
  • Posts: 76
  • Tommy Points: 9
Why is PP's "what if" number retiree status being debated?

Its going to be retired.  No question.

And rondo, if he stays to usher in the new celtics era, then yes.

Re: Will Boston retire Rondo's number?
« Reply #50 on: November 15, 2010, 06:18:21 AM »

Offline 2short

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6080
  • Tommy Points: 428
Paul Pierce with no titles easily gets his number retired.
If Rondo continues playing at this level his number gets retired.  I feel his is still improving.

One thing to take into consideration is Max had his number retired.  :-\
Nice player, bad pre bird team he one of the best players.  After Bird arrived he was an important cog in the machine and except the finals mvp just a cog.  Looking at complete game and stats compare PP and Max.  No comparison.  Max is a sub on this team.

DJ, love him and I've said this many many times (finally happened) he belongs in the hall of fame but I can't see him having his number retired.  Or at the least he deserved to be in the hall before his number was retired.  Incredibly important part of the Bird era, great player who was better before celtic days.  Anyone who got to see dj in seattle saw quite a basketball player (and team)  Look at his celtic career, how many years, the stats, great defense.  Compare young mr rondo's current career with dj.  I feel if rondo plays 10 years with the c's he's a lock, at his current level.  Again I think he will be improving more.  Once the big 3 are gone, his triple double numbers will jump and he will dominate more because he will have to.

I feel the celtics do not retire a players number because of championships.

Re: Will Boston retire Rondo's number?
« Reply #51 on: November 16, 2010, 05:31:28 PM »

Offline celtics2

  • Jayson Tatum
  • Posts: 847
  • Tommy Points: 42
If he keeps playing this way they'll hang his jock strap up there. Actually there's room for him to grow and completely dominate games with scoring. He's showing signs of hitting shots.