Danny was wrong about Red

[steve]

He thinks Red should have traded Bird and Mchale toward the end of their careers.  I'd argue that by not trading your legends you establish your franchise as a family with loyalty.  If the Celtics traded away Russell and Havlicek and Heinsohn I don't think they have the same reputation today.  These guys come back year after year and add to the mystique of the C's.  We are built on our legends.  And I think Red new that.
   

[indeedproceed]

He thinks Red should have traded Bird and Mchale toward the end of their careers.  I'd argue that by not trading your legends you establish your franchise as a family with loyalty.  If the Celtics traded away Russell and Havlicek and Heinsohn I don't think they have the same reputation today.  These guys come back year after year and add to the mystique of the C's.  We are built on our legends.  And I think Red new that.
   

I disagree, although I understand what you're saying, and I understand that you think its significant.

Winning has a habit of giving you whatever 'tradition' you want to have. Winning and time will eventually make Kobe and Shaq look like reluctant friends who overcame their differences to play inspired basketball. It will make Phil Jackson look like a genius, and will forever regulate Jerry Sloan to 'good but not great' status.

In the end, especially considering the way the Celtics spent the 90s and most of the 00s, I think the 'loyalty' factor doesn't measure up to the oscillating performances between 'mediocre' to 'god-awful'.

And I think that'll be the case here unless there is a rapid turnout. Celtics fans value honor, and 'family', and tradition, but not as much as they value winning.

[Change]

Don't believe Danny Ainge. He speaks in Hyperbole. Coulda Woulda Shoulda enough already. Red had a plan.


RIP

[timpiker]

I'm as sentimental and traditional as most anyone.  I would have hated to see Red do it and glad he didn't.  It still bothers me that Cheif left.  Most of these old guys do go onto other teams then retire.  We just forget about it as time goes on.  In a perfect world the GM's are doing a good job and the old player just gradually moves to the bench for a year or two then quietly retires as a coach or a play by play announcer.  One of the problems in today's world is that there's always a team out there willing to pay way more than somebody's worth and away they go for the money.  If KG can make $10M next year playing for another team, should Danny pay him $10M?  Pretty soon when you're talking millions you start talking real money....and you have a salary cap.  Where do you draw the line?  Think Ray will want to play when he's 42?  Why not if he can get $5M from a contender that just needs a spot up shooter. I guess I'm saying I don't like it but I've come to accept it.  

[guava_wrench]

It's not like we haven't traded guys who contributed more to the C's that Ray and KG. For example, we traded Cedric Maxwell.

[steve]

I'm talking C's legends.  I'm not even talking about KG and Ray.  Pierce's history puts him in C's legend territory. 

I understand it's a business but there's a difference between not resigning a player and trading him to the nuggets.

Who's gonna want to sign with a team whose GM blindsides the greatest celtic since Bird?   

[2short]

tp!
You keep players who make the team better, bird mchale pierce
you trade good role players to improve team, ainge, westphal, maxwell, even though it was a mistake silas 

who is going to want to sign with a team/gm which pushes the history & family thing if they are dumping the best players just to get out of a contract
bad enough pitino mess made bird head back to indy

[Eja117]

I'm talking C's legends.  I'm not even talking about KG and Ray.  Pierce's history puts him in C's legend territory.  

I understand it's a business but there's a difference between not resigning a player and trading him to the nuggets.

Who's gonna want to sign with a team whose GM blindsides the greatest celtic since Bird?    

This generation of player is totally totally different than in the past. Their union has fought very hard to do things that yesterday's players never would have conceived of. They force trades. They tamper at the Olympics. They go where Nike tells them.  I totally agree with what you are saying, but its time is long long past.

[guava_wrench]

I'm talking C's legends.  I'm not even talking about KG and Ray.  Pierce's history puts him in C's legend territory. 

I understand it's a business but there's a difference between not resigning a player and trading him to the nuggets.

Who's gonna want to sign with a team whose GM blindsides the greatest celtic since Bird?   

Guys who want a GM who will build a team around them that can win. If Pierce goes to a good team, how does that make the Celtics look bad? They end up saving Pierce from finishing his career watching the playoffs from home and playing on an irrelevant team.

Considering all the talk already out there, I'm not sure that 'blindsides' is an appropriate term.

[timpiker]

Ok - this loyalty thing goes 2 ways you know.  If PP is the legend you're talking about and I want him to retire a C too....  what happens down the road someday when PP is only worth $5M for a year or 2 and the Heat offers him 3 years at $30M which might be crazy talk for the C's.  What do you do Danny?  What do you do Paul?  Pretty soon you're talking about real money here.  So be as emotionally tied to these players as you want but I want you to know - the home team discount only goes so far.  Sure pay him the match and keep him but try managing the cap and having a great team.  Not gonna happen.

In Red's day with Bird nearing the end, there was no cap to worry about.  And Bird did not go out gracefully because of injuries.  But Red's ways would have worked out fine if it hadn't been for Bias and Lewis.

[Marcus13]

I see what youre saying, but in the grand scheme of things having that reputation hasn't helped us land any key free agents anyway

[ThaPreacher]

 

He thinks Red should have traded Bird and Mchale toward the end of their careers.  I'd argue that by not trading your legends you establish your franchise as a family with loyalty.  If the Celtics traded away Russell and Havlicek and Heinsohn I don't think they have the same reputation today.  These guys come back year after year and add to the mystique of the C's.  We are built on our legends.  And I think Red new that.
   

Red didn't expect that Bird would have the physical problems he did at the end.  Red valued loyalty, however he had not problem making trades of Celtics legends or not!
Cowens, Russell, White, Maxwell Ainge, all finished their careers in other teams uniforms.  Red simply believed that had Bird been healthy he could have played until he was 40.  McHale simply couldn't carry the Celtics at the end.
Bias and Lewis had more to do with the Celtics demise, that and the Spurs lottery pick.
I don't know if Danny should make a trade, I think he will wait to see how things play out.

But Red would give Danny the go ahead and then light a cigar.

[BASS_THUMPER]

lol

love the...
             ~light a cigar~

he was kool like dat

[greenpride32]

The game has changed, not just basketball, but all sports.  The amount of player movement you have today is much greater than in the past, so I don't think it's really fair to compare differnet eras in this way.  If Pierce got traded today nothing is going to take away what he's already done for this franchise; his Celtics legacy is already cemented.  

[Celtics4ever]

He traded Ed McCauley who was an allstar for Russell. So he would ditch his guys for the right trade folks.