Should KG's number be retired

[BudweiserCeltic]

Yes he should, yes he will... nothing left to say beyond that.

[Moranis]

Yes, his number should be retired.

and - Un-retire numbers?  Really?  who do you think doesn't belong and why? http://www.nba.com/celtics/history/RetiredNumbers.html

I mean the one that seemed most unworthy to me, at first glance, was Max, but...7 years, 2 titles and a Finals MVP really kind of make a compelling argument.  He told them "Jump on my back, boys" and delivered. 

Interestingly enough, Max is also an argument that would support the idea of retiring Ray's number. For the record, I wouldn't retire Ray's number, but Max was also a key contributor whose departure involved some bad blood.

Brown and Red shouldn't have numbers.  I have no issue with their names being in the rafters, but they shouldn't have numbers associated with them.

If I was doing this I think you could at least make solid arguments that the following people should not have their number retired (in order by number): Dennis Johnson, JoJo White, Tom Heinsohn, Tom Sanders, Don Nelson, Ed Macauley, Frank Ramsey, KC Jones, Cedric Maxwell, and Jim Loscutoff.  And as I said I think you could at least make a solid argument not that they should all be out or that they are all on the same level.

And for the record that would leave these 10 players still in the rafters: Bill Russell, Bob Cousey, John Havlicek, Dave Cowens, Bill Sharman, Sam Jones, Kevin McHale, Larry Bird, Reggie Lewis, and Robert Parish.


There are just too many numbers up there cheapening it for the players that truly deserve it.

[GreenFaith1819]

Yes, as should Ray's - unless MIA retires his jersey 1st.

I'm as upset about who he went off to join as the next guy, but Ray Allen was a key part of Banner 17.

He will also go down as one of the best shooters of all time.

Also consider his community service while in the BOS area as well.

[Tr1boy]

I agree with your list. Though still iffy about reggie lewis number going up.

For me it sb a no brainer that your number gets retired. Like pierce, bird, cousy. Otherwise then no.

[bostonsportsfan]

May #5 & #34 rest in the Boston Garden rafters for EVERR

[Section301]

Yes, his number should be retired.

and - Un-retire numbers?  Really?  who do you think doesn't belong and why? http://www.nba.com/celtics/history/RetiredNumbers.html

I mean the one that seemed most unworthy to me, at first glance, was Max, but...7 years, 2 titles and a Finals MVP really kind of make a compelling argument.  He told them "Jump on my back, boys" and delivered. 

Interestingly enough, Max is also an argument that would support the idea of retiring Ray's number. For the record, I wouldn't retire Ray's number, but Max was also a key contributor whose departure involved some bad blood.

Brown and Red shouldn't have numbers.  I have no issue with their names being in the rafters, but they shouldn't have numbers associated with them.

If I was doing this I think you could at least make solid arguments that the following people should not have their number retired (in order by number): Dennis Johnson, JoJo White, Tom Heinsohn, Tom Sanders, Don Nelson, Ed Macauley, Frank Ramsey, KC Jones, Cedric Maxwell, and Jim Loscutoff.  And as I said I think you could at least make a solid argument not that they should all be out or that they are all on the same level.

And for the record that would leave these 10 players still in the rafters: Bill Russell, Bob Cousey, John Havlicek, Dave Cowens, Bill Sharman, Sam Jones, Kevin McHale, Larry Bird, Reggie Lewis, and Robert Parish.


There are just too many numbers up there cheapening it for the players that truly deserve it.

Interesting position.  I would say leaving Reggie Lewis on the list implies that sentiment is more important than on-court contribution.  If he stays on the list, it becomes much easier to argue for any other player staying on the list. Of the players who have been retired, his contribution (0 rings) is clearly the least.

I would also suggest that JoJo White was as important (if not more so) to the two championships in the 70's as Parish or McHale were to the teams in the 80's. He should probably have his number retired for his performance in that triple OT  game alone.  And he was a finals MVP.

And I'd say Max gets in on the Finals MVP ticket as well.  It can always be argued that a player shouldn't get his number retired just for being on a winner (also know as the Robert Horry award), but if you get a finals MVP you probably made a pretty sizable contribution to a championship. 

I'd also say Ramsey and Nelson get the nod for their importance as sixth men on multiple champions, but I think that's a weaker argument if you're going strictly by who were the best players on the best teams. 

 

[Boston Garden Leprechaun]

Absolutlely.  No question.

KG changed the culture of that team and the franchise when he came in 2007.  An organization that had been trying to find itself since the Bird/McHale/Parish days.  First season, he brings them a championship and came inches within a 2nd title in '10.

KG helped turn around the franchise and the perception of professional basketball in Boston.  His impact can't be explained enough.

agreed

[Afam]

So, I've been hearing people asking this question a lot after yesterdays game. I honestly thought it was a no brainer that 5 should be retired, he brought so much to the Celtics organization even if he was only here for 6 seasons. What do you guys think?

Yes his number should be retired. As for Ray Allen no.

[Jon]

It's pretty obvious, we can debate the way the Celtics have handled the retirement process, but given their over-zealousness (and the continued over-zealousness that Wyc has continued, as he's talked about retiring Danny Ainge's number) they should. 

On a talent level, he's a top 10, maybe top 5 Celtic of all time.  And he's won his title.  As others have said, if they've retired the likes of Cedric Maxwell, Reggie Lewis, and K.C. Jones, they have to do it for KG too. 

And none of this is even getting into how he changed the culture of the Celtics almost overnight.  That alone is worth raising his number over. 

[Neurotic Guy]

Sorry if  this has been mentioned earlier, but I think DJ is a pretty good comp for KG.  7 years on the C's after a good career in Seattle/Phoenix. 

DJ participated in 2 championships but was clearly the #4 guy on the HOF-loaded 80's teams.  If DJ is in the rafters, KG is there.

[celts10]

Yes.

And as much as I hate the way Ray left, I can't deny his importance and contribution to the Big Three's success.

[Yoki_IsTheName]

This should not even be a question.

No KG = No Banner 17.

That and the impact and the way he changed the identity of this team, despite only staying for 6 years.

#5 should go up.

[Birdman]

yes!!!!!!!!!!!

[PAOBoston]

I don't think they should but based on the organization's history with retiring numbers,they will retire #5. This precedent has already been set so it's hard to justify not retiring his number at this point.


The Celtics are a joke when it comes to retiring numbers. Maxwell? Ainge? DJ? Don't get me wrong. They were nice players and helped bring some titles but are they really worthy to have their jerseys retired? Do they deserve to be in the same breath as Russell, Cowens, Bird? It's devaluing what having a jersey number retired really means. It almost makes it meaningless.
I personally don't agree with what they are doing. If they want to recognize everyone that helped win title, make a Celtics Hall of Fame. Retiring everyone's number isn't the way to go. At this rate, they are gonna run out of numbers by 2030.

Kg was here for 6 years, won one title, and was a great player for his first 2 years and declined every year after those first 2. I know he helped the Celtics mean something again but 6 years isn't enough imo to warrant his number being retired for eternity.

My 2 cents.

[Moranis]

Yes, his number should be retired.

and - Un-retire numbers?  Really?  who do you think doesn't belong and why? http://www.nba.com/celtics/history/RetiredNumbers.html

I mean the one that seemed most unworthy to me, at first glance, was Max, but...7 years, 2 titles and a Finals MVP really kind of make a compelling argument.  He told them "Jump on my back, boys" and delivered. 

Interestingly enough, Max is also an argument that would support the idea of retiring Ray's number. For the record, I wouldn't retire Ray's number, but Max was also a key contributor whose departure involved some bad blood.

Brown and Red shouldn't have numbers.  I have no issue with their names being in the rafters, but they shouldn't have numbers associated with them.

If I was doing this I think you could at least make solid arguments that the following people should not have their number retired (in order by number): Dennis Johnson, JoJo White, Tom Heinsohn, Tom Sanders, Don Nelson, Ed Macauley, Frank Ramsey, KC Jones, Cedric Maxwell, and Jim Loscutoff.  And as I said I think you could at least make a solid argument not that they should all be out or that they are all on the same level.

And for the record that would leave these 10 players still in the rafters: Bill Russell, Bob Cousey, John Havlicek, Dave Cowens, Bill Sharman, Sam Jones, Kevin McHale, Larry Bird, Reggie Lewis, and Robert Parish.


There are just too many numbers up there cheapening it for the players that truly deserve it.

Interesting position.  I would say leaving Reggie Lewis on the list implies that sentiment is more important than on-court contribution.  If he stays on the list, it becomes much easier to argue for any other player staying on the list. Of the players who have been retired, his contribution (0 rings) is clearly the least.

I would also suggest that JoJo White was as important (if not more so) to the two championships in the 70's as Parish or McHale were to the teams in the 80's. He should probably have his number retired for his performance in that triple OT  game alone.  And he was a finals MVP.

And I'd say Max gets in on the Finals MVP ticket as well.  It can always be argued that a player shouldn't get his number retired just for being on a winner (also know as the Robert Horry award), but if you get a finals MVP you probably made a pretty sizable contribution to a championship. 

I'd also say Ramsey and Nelson get the nod for their importance as sixth men on multiple champions, but I think that's a weaker argument if you're going strictly by who were the best players on the best teams.

I left Lewis up there because he tragically died before he even entered his prime.  I suppose he probably should be in the other list, but I think a tragic death has to have more weight than a trade or guy leaving in free agency.

I would have JoJo White up there, but I think there are credible arguments as to why he shouldn't be. 

Guys who were essentially 6th men have no business having their number retired.  It is just silly.