|
Post by Roadrunner on Aug 20, 2017 10:53:14 GMT -5
I pondered this question while running recently. BOS does not hang division, or conference championships, only NBA (world) championships. Almost every retired Celtic number, the player was on a championship team. Yes, no? Why?
|
|
|
Post by DERRENMATTS on Aug 21, 2017 2:20:25 GMT -5
His stats speaks for itself -- he belongs among Celtics greats even without a ring. It wasn't Pierce's fault that he played his early years under a bad owner. It wasn't his fault he played for a terrible GM (Chris Wallace) who decided Kedrick Brown was going to be a better player than Joe Johnson, who traded for Vin Baker, etc.
Thankfully Ainge came along!
|
|
|
Post by jmost on Aug 21, 2017 6:56:38 GMT -5
I must be not understanding the question. Pierce won a title in 2008 with KG, Allen etc.
|
|
|
Post by FLCeltsFan on Aug 21, 2017 7:21:43 GMT -5
I must be not understanding the question. Pierce won a title in 2008 with KG, Allen etc. I'm understanding the question to be that if Pierce had not won a championship with the Celtics would they still have retired his number. I think they should have, whether they would have or not it tough to say. But as Derren said, his stats speak for him. He was one of the great Celtics and even if Danny hadn't put together that team in 2007, I think he belonged in the rafters.
|
|
|
Post by jmost on Aug 21, 2017 15:59:00 GMT -5
Oh, I get it now. I think he'd deserve it based on his stats and All-Star appearances. Certainly more than many whose numbers are up there.
|
|
|
Post by Roadrunner on Aug 21, 2017 22:20:30 GMT -5
I voted "yes" too. Bob Ryan, Boston Globe, was quoted as saying Pierce was a top-5 BOS Celtic player offensively.
|
|
|
Post by DERRENMATTS on Aug 22, 2017 1:11:58 GMT -5
I voted "yes" too. Bob Ryan, Boston Globe, was quoted as saying Pierce was a top-5 BOS Celtic player offensively. Easily. You could argue top 4, maybe 3. Havlicek Bird Archibald McHale Pistol? Pierce belongs somewhere there.
|
|
|
Post by eja117 on Aug 22, 2017 11:41:34 GMT -5
Definitely
|
|