Why do elite players NOT want to play for the Celtics?

[edwardjkasche]

Being from New England, thirty minutes outside of Boston, it annoys the hell out of me that people would mention race as a reason why millionaire athletes won't come to Boston.  Bill Russell was a God in Boston from 1956 on.  Bob Cousy was the child of poor immigrants and a noted anti-racist, in town since 1950.  Coach Auerbach was Jewish.  Outside of Bird, McHale, and Ainge (and Scalabrine!), the team has been almost exclusively black since the 1970s.

Boston may have had race riots back in 1967, but those riots arrived in the wake of riots in Chicago, Philadelphia, and Harlem in 1964.  I don't see anyone saying black athletes don't want to play in Chicago, Philadelphia, or NYC.

There was one noted (accused?) racist in Boston sports history - Tom Yawkey, and he never owned the Celtics.  And, last time I checked, the Sox were beloved for players like Jim Rice, Pedro Martinez, Manny Ramirez (?), and Big Papi.

And, to my understanding, Chris Paul was fine with a trade to the LA Clippers, owned by the most notorious noted racist of modern-day sports, Donald Sterling - a man ordered by a Judge to pay a massive fine for illegally evicting black and latino tenants from their homes.

No, race has nothing to do with NBA players' decisions not to place Boston at the top of their trade/free agency wish list.

There are 2 reasons why NBA players don't push to play for the Celtics:

1) Their understanding of NBA history goes back to the mid-1990s and Michael Jordan (for some, perhaps, the showtime Lakers of the mid-1980s) - These young players have nary a clue who Russell, Cousy, Heinsohn, Havlicek, Cowens, or the Joneses were, and they don't care about 16 of the Celtics first 17 Championships.  It's ancient history to them. They have no knowledge of or respect for the history of the game and what the Celtics accomplished.

2) Boston isn't LA or NYC (or the new South Beach), and therefore isn't considered "flashy" or "hip" - Jay-Z and Rihanna and other celebs don't live in Boston, and Boston doesn't host VMA Awards and the BET Awards and so on...  Boston is a gritty, hard-working, lunch pail city, and these players want glitz and glam and commercials and paparazzi.  They're not getting that in Boston.

In my humble opinion as a fan, if these players don't want to be in Boston (and don't recognize the Celtics place in the game), then I don't want them here.  Let them go to LA, NYC, and South Beach.  We'll win without them.

[fairweatherfan]

Being from New England, thirty minutes outside of Boston, it annoys the hell out of me that people would mention race as a reason why millionaire athletes won't come to Boston.  Bill Russell was a God in Boston from 1956 on.  

Are you sure about that?

Nevertheless, as a result of repeated racial bigotry, Russell refused to respond to fan acclaim or friendship from his neighbors, thinking it was insincere and hypocritical. He decided that since the world hadn't given him anything, he would give the world nothing in return. This attitude contributed to his legendary bad rapport with fans and journalists.[27] He alienated Celtics fans by saying, "You owe the public the same it owes you, nothing! I refuse to smile and be nice to the kiddies."[55] This supported the opinion that Russell (who was the highest paid Celtic) was egotistical, paranoid and hypocritical, and even the FBI described Russell in his file as "an arrogant Negro who won't sign autographs for white children".[55]

The already hostile atmosphere between Russell and Boston hit its apex when vandals broke into his house, covered the walls with racist graffiti, damaged his trophies and defecated in the beds.[55] In response, Russell described Boston as a "flea market of racism".[79] After his retirement, he described the Boston press as corrupt and racist; in response, Boston sports journalist Larry Claflin claimed that Russell himself was the real racist.[80]

  (from Wiki)

Bill Russell was a long way from a "god" in Boston when he played there.  All of the veneration he gets now came decades after he retired.

[RyNye]

Can you show me where these players publicly list Boston as one of the Cities they want to be traded to???

First of all, it is obvious that you are not familiar with the concept "burden of proof." But nevermind that.

Can you show me any place where a player publicly lists cities they want to be traded to? Once again, anonymous sources don't count. The only times we ever hear anything about a "list" anyway are when trade talks START between a team, and ESPN reports, "Clippers on Chris Paul's list." When have we ever actually been given a list?
----------------


Also, for people citing race riots ... are you kidding me? Last time there was a race riot in Boston was in the late 1960s. Guess what major American cities have had race riots in the past 15-20 years? Los Angeles, Chicago, New York, and Miami are on that list. Boston is not. Have you people seriously never heard of Rodney King? Race is not a major factor in this.

Seriously, the major issues are money and winning. In recent years Boston has not had the cap space to make big signings. Before 2008 the team was too mediocre to attract major talent. Is this seriously so difficult for people to understand?

Still waiting for SOMEONE to provide any evidence of Boston being "shunned" by elite players.

[Green Hell]

5. Boston's perceived history of racism;

I'd argue that race is a larger issue than we're acknowledging (I'm curious why the qualifier "perceived" was used- a technically accurate though loaded phrase). Boston is seen as a white city with very little to offer (culturally) that appeals to young black millionaires.

Another poster mentioned that the Celtics were America's white team when today's players were kids, and that reputation may still hang on them. They are of course to young to remember this, but these kinds of events stain a city's reputation for generations:

i can agree with the idea that boston is perceived as too white.  i think the "stuff with bad racial implications has happened here" thing is a bit too much, though.  i mean, there are other cities in areas with much more severe historical racial tension and violence that have no such stigma (athletes are perfectly happy to play in chicago, atlanta, los angeles).

This race discussion is moot in my opinion.

Black football players have zero problems playing for the patriots. They win! And when they cant get as much money, they leave, just like every other race of athlete.

Minorities have no issues playing for the Red Sox. The Red Sox offer the most money and they offer a winning situation.

The Celtics in the 80's were primarily white so they were viewed as the White team.

The Lakers were primarily black. It added an interesting dynamic to the rivalry, but in the last 20 years, what athlete has come to this city and publicly complained of racial issues?

It comes down to money and winning.

Also, whoever thinks of Boston as a "white" city has never been to Boston. The Celtics were a white team in the 80's...20 years ago.

I don't know how to define "white city", but I've spent a lot of time in Boston, NYC, and New Jersey, and a couple weekends in LA, and Boston definitely felt the least diverse from that list.  I'd assume Miami would be even more diverse with their high spanish population, and from my understanding Chicago has the highest ratio of minorities of them all.  I dont think it's really a race thing though.  When it comes down to it, young people may see Boston as a nice place to go to school or focus on academics, but when it comes down to where you want to be to have a good time, it doesnt even rank.  Then NY, LA, Miami, etc. take over.

I was very offended by Roy H qualifying Boston's racist history as "perceived." Shying away from the facts is pretty cowardly imo.

And as for people who can't wrap their head around Boston's lack of diversity, Boston ranks #1 among the least diverse metropolitan cities in the country (when accounting for size of population).



So stop talking out of your asses and accept it.

[PierceMVP08]

In terms of boston being a "white city" it certainly is just the perception.  Boston is a majority minority city with several ethnic neighborhoods such as East Boston, Roxbury, Dorchester, Mattapan,etc.  Of course those aren't the neighborhoods any outsider or tourist would visit for reasons clear to those from the area.  If the players were looking for black neighborhoods, Boston shouldn't be an issue.  But to be honest these players are not spending their time in the ethnic neighborhoods regardless of the city they play in. The players are only frequenting expensive locations and the areas they are hanging out at, the parties they are attending, the majority of the people there will be white.  Same as it will be in Boston.  smaller.

Let's not also forget that each guy is coming to Boston at least once per year, some twice.  We've never head about any of them having any race issues.  Let's not discount personal experience.  I think at the end of the day, they want the bright lights, the women, the warm weather, the media and the nightlife.  Neither of which can be offered by Boston.

On a sidenote, I'm tired of people constantly saying the Celtics are fourth in the list of teams in Boston.  We all know the celts have a rabid fanbase (you all are part of it) and the fans don't come and go.  Yes, the media may not pay much attention to the team but the media is not representative of the people of Boston.  I never watch any local news coverage for that fact.  Boston has and always will be a heck of a Basketball town.

[Greenbean]

They'll play wherever they pay them more money.

If that is taken care of, they'll pick the place that offers them a larger opportunity to win.

Players couldn't care less about perceived racism or the quality of the sushi restaurants. That kind of stuff has zero influence .

TP! See my comments above.

[BigGovy]

I brought up race as a actor in this thread as a reason not to come to Boston. I think I even mentioned it might be a tiny issue among many others. But if you're argument is that these players have a limited history perspective that only dates back to Jordan and the 1990's then it would only go hand in hand that their limited historical knowledge might lean at least subconsciously to race and the little they know about our fine city.

[BigGovy]

PS. If directed at me again ..I never said the celtics were 4th on the list of teams for the city. I merely mentioned that there are 4 dominant teams in Boston where in Los Angeles there really is only one.

[PierceMVP08]

5. Boston's perceived history of racism;

I'd argue that race is a larger issue than we're acknowledging (I'm curious why the qualifier "perceived" was used- a technically accurate though loaded phrase). Boston is seen as a white city with very little to offer (culturally) that appeals to young black millionaires.

Another poster mentioned that the Celtics were America's white team when today's players were kids, and that reputation may still hang on them. They are of course to young to remember this, but these kinds of events stain a city's reputation for generations:

i can agree with the idea that boston is perceived as too white.  i think the "stuff with bad racial implications has happened here" thing is a bit too much, though.  i mean, there are other cities in areas with much more severe historical racial tension and violence that have no such stigma (athletes are perfectly happy to play in chicago, atlanta, los angeles).

This race discussion is moot in my opinion.

Black football players have zero problems playing for the patriots. They win! And when they cant get as much money, they leave, just like every other race of athlete.

Minorities have no issues playing for the Red Sox. The Red Sox offer the most money and they offer a winning situation.

The Celtics in the 80's were primarily white so they were viewed as the White team.

The Lakers were primarily black. It added an interesting dynamic to the rivalry, but in the last 20 years, what athlete has come to this city and publicly complained of racial issues?

It comes down to money and winning.

Also, whoever thinks of Boston as a "white" city has never been to Boston. The Celtics were a white team in the 80's...20 years ago.

I don't know how to define "white city", but I've spent a lot of time in Boston, NYC, and New Jersey, and a couple weekends in LA, and Boston definitely felt the least diverse from that list.  I'd assume Miami would be even more diverse with their high spanish population, and from my understanding Chicago has the highest ratio of minorities of them all.  I dont think it's really a race thing though.  When it comes down to it, young people may see Boston as a nice place to go to school or focus on academics, but when it comes down to where you want to be to have a good time, it doesnt even rank.  Then NY, LA, Miami, etc. take over.

I was very offended by Roy H qualifying Boston's racist history as "perceived." Shying away from the facts is pretty cowardly imo.

And as for people who can't wrap their head around Boston's lack of diversity, Boston ranks #1 among the least diverse metropolitan cities in the country (when accounting for size of population).



So stop talking out of your asses and accept it.

Green, where are you from?  Have you been to Boston?  I'm from the area born and raised.  I'm the child of immigrants from Latin America.  Boston is, as shown by your very own stats 50% white, 50% minority.  True diversity is not measured by one ethnic group being the majority.  A city that is 80% black or hispanic is not diverse, but just the opposite.  Boston has a diversity few cities can match.  

As a Latino, i can personally vouch for the diversity of the city and that the racism experienced here is no worse than in any other parts of the country, and in many ways the city is more welcoming.  It is only when i have travelled to other and other regions of the country that I have felt true racism.  Try the midwest and south.

[Green Hell]

Being from New England, thirty minutes outside of Boston, it annoys the hell out of me that people would mention race as a reason why millionaire athletes won't come to Boston.  Bill Russell was a God in Boston from 1956 on.  

Are you sure about that?

Nevertheless, as a result of repeated racial bigotry, Russell refused to respond to fan acclaim or friendship from his neighbors, thinking it was insincere and hypocritical. He decided that since the world hadn't given him anything, he would give the world nothing in return. This attitude contributed to his legendary bad rapport with fans and journalists.[27] He alienated Celtics fans by saying, "You owe the public the same it owes you, nothing! I refuse to smile and be nice to the kiddies."[55] This supported the opinion that Russell (who was the highest paid Celtic) was egotistical, paranoid and hypocritical, and even the FBI described Russell in his file as "an arrogant Negro who won't sign autographs for white children".[55]

The already hostile atmosphere between Russell and Boston hit its apex when vandals broke into his house, covered the walls with racist graffiti, damaged his trophies and defecated in the beds.[55] In response, Russell described Boston as a "flea market of racism".[79] After his retirement, he described the Boston press as corrupt and racist; in response, Boston sports journalist Larry Claflin claimed that Russell himself was the real racist.[80]

  (from Wiki)

Bill Russell was a long way from a "god" in Boston when he played there.  All of the veneration he gets now came decades after he retired.

I know, right? Bill Russell a God from 1956 on. LOL
Listen, I know we're all fellow greenteamers here but you guys makes the rest of us look bad when you say patently false and stupid crap like this and defend a racist history that should be confronted, not swept under the rug.

[Greenbean]

5. Boston's perceived history of racism;

I'd argue that race is a larger issue than we're acknowledging (I'm curious why the qualifier "perceived" was used- a technically accurate though loaded phrase). Boston is seen as a white city with very little to offer (culturally) that appeals to young black millionaires.

Another poster mentioned that the Celtics were America's white team when today's players were kids, and that reputation may still hang on them. They are of course to young to remember this, but these kinds of events stain a city's reputation for generations:

i can agree with the idea that boston is perceived as too white.  i think the "stuff with bad racial implications has happened here" thing is a bit too much, though.  i mean, there are other cities in areas with much more severe historical racial tension and violence that have no such stigma (athletes are perfectly happy to play in chicago, atlanta, los angeles).

This race discussion is moot in my opinion.

Black football players have zero problems playing for the patriots. They win! And when they cant get as much money, they leave, just like every other race of athlete.

Minorities have no issues playing for the Red Sox. The Red Sox offer the most money and they offer a winning situation.

The Celtics in the 80's were primarily white so they were viewed as the White team.

The Lakers were primarily black. It added an interesting dynamic to the rivalry, but in the last 20 years, what athlete has come to this city and publicly complained of racial issues?

It comes down to money and winning.

Also, whoever thinks of Boston as a "white" city has never been to Boston. The Celtics were a white team in the 80's...20 years ago.

I don't know how to define "white city", but I've spent a lot of time in Boston, NYC, and New Jersey, and a couple weekends in LA, and Boston definitely felt the least diverse from that list.  I'd assume Miami would be even more diverse with their high spanish population, and from my understanding Chicago has the highest ratio of minorities of them all.  I dont think it's really a race thing though.  When it comes down to it, young people may see Boston as a nice place to go to school or focus on academics, but when it comes down to where you want to be to have a good time, it doesnt even rank.  Then NY, LA, Miami, etc. take over.

I was very offended by Roy H qualifying Boston's racist history as "perceived." Shying away from the facts is pretty cowardly imo.

And as for people who can't wrap their head around Boston's lack of diversity, Boston ranks #1 among the least diverse metropolitan cities in the country (when accounting for size of population).



So stop talking out of your asses and accept it.

I would be pretty offended as a white person living in Boston.


White populationhas nothing to d with racism. You are incinuating that the majority of white people are racist.

I did not realize that Boston was so predominantly whte (especially after living there for 5 years...it felt very diverse to me), but looking at the other cities on that list, african american athleses have no problem playing there either.

Chill out on the inflammatory remarks and try to have a civil debate.

[BigGovy]

Maybe for a different thread but being a bostonian living in L.A for the past twenty years gives me a little different perspective. I don't know why Chris paul or anyone else for that matter would want to go to the Clippers.. If we are talking History here Donald Sterling is known for many things but one of them is ..it is all about making a buck. He has never nor will he ever pony up the money to keep a unit together long enough to win anything. The idea of Chris Paul to the lakers is absurd as there is no way Kobe would allow someone else to dominate the ball so much and keep his huge ego in check. A premier point guard who shoots is not a fit for the Lakers. And if you are going to trade away Gasol and Bynum for Howard and already jettisoned off Odom. What length does that really leave you and how much offense is now gone and total rebounds gone just to get a great player with offensive limitations. To me it is the Lakers realizing after their early exit last year they need a complete rebuild especially with Kobe entering his 16th season. It will be fun out here to see the Clippers be the real show in town at least for a couple of years

[Green Hell]

5. Boston's perceived history of racism;

I'd argue that race is a larger issue than we're acknowledging (I'm curious why the qualifier "perceived" was used- a technically accurate though loaded phrase). Boston is seen as a white city with very little to offer (culturally) that appeals to young black millionaires.

Another poster mentioned that the Celtics were America's white team when today's players were kids, and that reputation may still hang on them. They are of course to young to remember this, but these kinds of events stain a city's reputation for generations:

i can agree with the idea that boston is perceived as too white.  i think the "stuff with bad racial implications has happened here" thing is a bit too much, though.  i mean, there are other cities in areas with much more severe historical racial tension and violence that have no such stigma (athletes are perfectly happy to play in chicago, atlanta, los angeles).

This race discussion is moot in my opinion.

Black football players have zero problems playing for the patriots. They win! And when they cant get as much money, they leave, just like every other race of athlete.

Minorities have no issues playing for the Red Sox. The Red Sox offer the most money and they offer a winning situation.

The Celtics in the 80's were primarily white so they were viewed as the White team.

The Lakers were primarily black. It added an interesting dynamic to the rivalry, but in the last 20 years, what athlete has come to this city and publicly complained of racial issues?

It comes down to money and winning.

Also, whoever thinks of Boston as a "white" city has never been to Boston. The Celtics were a white team in the 80's...20 years ago.

I don't know how to define "white city", but I've spent a lot of time in Boston, NYC, and New Jersey, and a couple weekends in LA, and Boston definitely felt the least diverse from that list.  I'd assume Miami would be even more diverse with their high spanish population, and from my understanding Chicago has the highest ratio of minorities of them all.  I dont think it's really a race thing though.  When it comes down to it, young people may see Boston as a nice place to go to school or focus on academics, but when it comes down to where you want to be to have a good time, it doesnt even rank.  Then NY, LA, Miami, etc. take over.

I was very offended by Roy H qualifying Boston's racist history as "perceived." Shying away from the facts is pretty cowardly imo.

And as for people who can't wrap their head around Boston's lack of diversity, Boston ranks #1 among the least diverse metropolitan cities in the country (when accounting for size of population).



So stop talking out of your asses and accept it.

Green, where are you from?  Have you been to Boston?  I'm from the area born and raised.  I'm the child of immigrants from Latin America.  Boston is, as shown by your very own stats 50% white, 50% minority.  True diversity is not measured by one ethnic group being the majority.  A city that is 80% black or hispanic is not diverse, but just the opposite.  Boston has a diversity few cities can match. 

As a Latino, i can personally vouch for the diversity of the city and that the racism experienced here is no worse than in any other parts of the country, and in many ways the city is more welcoming.  It is only when i have travelled to other and other regions of the country that I have felt true racism.  Try the midwest and south.

I from the area and was raised there myself too, buddy. I can "personally vouch" for the fact that there is a racism that still resides in the city (all of Massachusetts for that matter). Better of worse racism than elsewhere is not only IRRELEVANT but an insulting premise in and of itself.

If having someone break into your bedroom, defame your trophies and **** on your bed isn't "true" racism than your glasses must be the rosiest around.

[Greenbean]

Being from New England, thirty minutes outside of Boston, it annoys the hell out of me that people would mention race as a reason why millionaire athletes won't come to Boston.  Bill Russell was a God in Boston from 1956 on.  

Are you sure about that?

Nevertheless, as a result of repeated racial bigotry, Russell refused to respond to fan acclaim or friendship from his neighbors, thinking it was insincere and hypocritical. He decided that since the world hadn't given him anything, he would give the world nothing in return. This attitude contributed to his legendary bad rapport with fans and journalists.[27] He alienated Celtics fans by saying, "You owe the public the same it owes you, nothing! I refuse to smile and be nice to the kiddies."[55] This supported the opinion that Russell (who was the highest paid Celtic) was egotistical, paranoid and hypocritical, and even the FBI described Russell in his file as "an arrogant Negro who won't sign autographs for white children".[55]

The already hostile atmosphere between Russell and Boston hit its apex when vandals broke into his house, covered the walls with racist graffiti, damaged his trophies and defecated in the beds.[55] In response, Russell described Boston as a "flea market of racism".[79] After his retirement, he described the Boston press as corrupt and racist; in response, Boston sports journalist Larry Claflin claimed that Russell himself was the real racist.[80]

  (from Wiki)

Bill Russell was a long way from a "god" in Boston when he played there.  All of the veneration he gets now came decades after he retired.

I know, right? Bill Russell a God from 1956 on. LOL
Listen, I know we're all fellow greenteamers here but you guys makes the rest of us look bad when you say patently false and stupid crap like this and defend a racist history that should be confronted, not swept under the rug.

Historically, yes Boston has a racist past...does it still exist?

I am not so sure that it does any mroe than any other city in the US.

[PierceMVP08]

5. Boston's perceived history of racism;

I'd argue that race is a larger issue than we're acknowledging (I'm curious why the qualifier "perceived" was used- a technically accurate though loaded phrase). Boston is seen as a white city with very little to offer (culturally) that appeals to young black millionaires.

Another poster mentioned that the Celtics were America's white team when today's players were kids, and that reputation may still hang on them. They are of course to young to remember this, but these kinds of events stain a city's reputation for generations:

i can agree with the idea that boston is perceived as too white.  i think the "stuff with bad racial implications has happened here" thing is a bit too much, though.  i mean, there are other cities in areas with much more severe historical racial tension and violence that have no such stigma (athletes are perfectly happy to play in chicago, atlanta, los angeles).

This race discussion is moot in my opinion.

Black football players have zero problems playing for the patriots. They win! And when they cant get as much money, they leave, just like every other race of athlete.

Minorities have no issues playing for the Red Sox. The Red Sox offer the most money and they offer a winning situation.

The Celtics in the 80's were primarily white so they were viewed as the White team.

The Lakers were primarily black. It added an interesting dynamic to the rivalry, but in the last 20 years, what athlete has come to this city and publicly complained of racial issues?

It comes down to money and winning.

Also, whoever thinks of Boston as a "white" city has never been to Boston. The Celtics were a white team in the 80's...20 years ago.

I don't know how to define "white city", but I've spent a lot of time in Boston, NYC, and New Jersey, and a couple weekends in LA, and Boston definitely felt the least diverse from that list.  I'd assume Miami would be even more diverse with their high spanish population, and from my understanding Chicago has the highest ratio of minorities of them all.  I dont think it's really a race thing though.  When it comes down to it, young people may see Boston as a nice place to go to school or focus on academics, but when it comes down to where you want to be to have a good time, it doesnt even rank.  Then NY, LA, Miami, etc. take over.

I was very offended by Roy H qualifying Boston's racist history as "perceived." Shying away from the facts is pretty cowardly imo.

And as for people who can't wrap their head around Boston's lack of diversity, Boston ranks #1 among the least diverse metropolitan cities in the country (when accounting for size of population).



So stop talking out of your asses and accept it.

Green, where are you from?  Have you been to Boston?  I'm from the area born and raised.  I'm the child of immigrants from Latin America.  Boston is, as shown by your very own stats 50% white, 50% minority.  True diversity is not measured by one ethnic group being the majority.  A city that is 80% black or hispanic is not diverse, but just the opposite.  Boston has a diversity few cities can match. 

As a Latino, i can personally vouch for the diversity of the city and that the racism experienced here is no worse than in any other parts of the country, and in many ways the city is more welcoming.  It is only when i have travelled to other and other regions of the country that I have felt true racism.  Try the midwest and south.

I from the area and was raised there myself too, buddy. I can "personally vouch" for the fact that there is a racism that still resides in the city (all of Massachusetts for that matter). Better of worse racism than elsewhere is not only IRRELEVANT but an insulting premise in and of itself.

If having someone break into your bedroom, defame your trophies and **** on your bed isn't "true" racism than your glasses must be the rosiest around.

When has someone broken into your house and defamed your trophies on your bed?  I never said that racism did not exist in this city, because it most clearly did.  African Americans were lynched in the midwest and south.  America as a whole has a tragic racial history.  My point is that Boston is no longer reflective of its historic racist past.  If you do not see that, there must be other factors at play.  To continue to perpetuate those images of Boston not only damages the entire city but the minority groups that reside within it.  Racism is no irrelevant by any means, and it continues to exist across the country.  Boston is no longer the hotbed that you make it out to be.