Yes, Ainge, sell high ................... and blow a title opporunity. That group was supposed to be about a short window to win a couple of titles after the acquisition of Allen and KG in 2007. Sooooooooooooo, that window was still open in 2011, so you go for it.
All the talk about Perkins' decline after leaving Boston is misleading. Of course, he wasn't a great player in OKC. But he was a very good player on that Celtics team because his skills fit perfectly into what they needed. Ainge was so anxious to go quick & small that he jumped the gun and gave up our one advantage over the rest of the league - defense & interior toughness. Replacing Perk with soft Jeff Green just made us another team playing the same style as the others. We lost the edge we had over Miami at that point.
Plus, as you can see from this video, these guys had a special bond that also gave them an advantage. Laugh all you want at the notion, but how do you think Russell and his guys won in '68 & '69 - Guts & Pride Baby !!
The Celtics had Shaq, JO back then. We were already an elite team without Perkins before he came back from injury. Plus the trade brought back another good Big in Krstic. The mistake I think was Ainge thinking Shaq would be healthy by playoffs. I dont think Perkins would make us win the chip that year, but rather on Shaq being healthy.
You just made my point for me - Shaq @WAS NOT healthy for the playoffs, not even close. JO was a good player, but neither of those guys was able to do for that Celtic team, what Perk could do. Perk was part of the 5-on-a-string ball-side defense that was Boston's calling card that year. He anchored and moved in perfect coordination with the other four defenders when they would overload the ball side and rotate to defend ball movement. Perk also provided toughness that other contenders did not have.
Shaq and JO playing bench roles as needed would have been great - if he had been able to stay healthy, Shaq could have filled the same role as Bill Walton in '86.
Mentioning Krstic as part of your argument is an embarrassment.
As for others comments that, "they are just showing their off-court personalities" or "the furniture is reclining sofas so it's natural for them to slouch" once again simply restates my argument from my original comments. If slouching around a studio as if you are at home watching HBO instead of appearing on a nationally televised show is your "personality" maybe you need to re-examine basic manners and courtesy in your life. Johnny Carson's show included comfortable sofas and chairs, but his guests took enough pride in their personal appearance and demeanor to wear at least the most basic decent wardrobe for a public appearance and not a hoodie with open, unlaced shoes. Those guests sat up straight and spoke clearly, without the need for stoner-shades or rambling and repetitive comments that required closed-caption to understand what some were saying.
j804's comment taking delight in the possibility that Davis and Pierce may have been stoned perfectly sums up what bothers me about the intentional appearance and attitude these Celtics put on display for everyone to see. Worst of all is, most fans who watched thought it to be perfectly normal, acceptable and even admirable.
Topic: Celtics Reminiscing On Area 21 (Read 6839 times)