North Station Sports

The 2009-10 Celtics have drawn comparison to the post ‘86 squad, a team that struggled to remain competitive while the aging bodies of Dennis Johnson, Scott Wedman, Robert Parish, Kevin McHale, Bill Walton and Larry Bird began to decay. The Celtics of that era remained very competitive and led the Eastern Conference in 1987 and 1988. After appearing in the NBA Finals in 1987, the Celtics failed to return. The 1988 Eastern Conference Finals versus the Piston featured a Celtics team that looked to be burned out from nearly a decade of Finals appearances and three NBA titles.

The 1989 season was a bust as Larry Bird only played in 19 games, succumbing to bone spurs in both feet. Danny Ainge was traded mid-season (heartbreaking to me) to help bring some much needed length to a front line void of Larry Bird.

The 1990 season headlined the return of a healthy Bird. The league-wide talk was a return to championship form. The result– team chemistry issues, an ineffective new coach (Jimmy Rogers) and a first round playoff exit.

The 1991 team (57-25), perhaps the last truly dominant Celtics team for the next 17 years, started the season very strong, was reinvigorated by the addition of youthful guards Dee Brown and Brian Shaw, accentuated by the emerging star status of the late Reggie Lewis, and anchored by the stability of the original big three. The three legends slowly fell to injuries and the team was ditched from the playoffs by the dreaded Detroit Pistons in the Eastern Semi’s.

Do these Celtics teams, finishing out  the “Original Big Three Era”, draw any similarities to the current day roster? Slightly, yes. Danny Ainge would disagree, however, though still citing his displeasure with the team’s current play. Ainge recently told the media,

From the Boston Herald:

“You can’t sit around and wait,” he said. “To be honest, I don’t see a lot of similarities between the ’86 team and this one.

“I don’t buy into those excuses,” Ainge said of the long-term argument. “The bottom line is that we’re a better team than (how) we’re playing. We’re just not showing it. We’re playing well some times, and not well at others. (The players) just need to focus like the coaches focus.

“If we’re not paying attention to that, and we’re thinking that we’re so good, then we’re in trouble. I see a difference in how we play when we have our backs to the wall, so you can tell that we have what we need, but it has to be more than that.”

“Our team can win right now without focusing on the little things, but that’s not going to last. (Coach Doc Rivers) is doing a good job, and the players want to win and do it. Are they willing to pay the price in practice? But I don’t think there’s much to it yet.”

When I read this story in the Herald this morning, I was kind of satisfied that Ainge spoke up. Fact is, Danny Ainge was their during the tragic demise of the late 80’s Celtics. He witnessed the struggles of a team frustrated by their inability to utilize the strategies that had, in previous year’s, made them unstoppable. Of any member of the Boston community, Ainge has the right to draw or dispel comparisons to the team’s he started for, contributed so much to and was traded away from.

Many people believe that front office officials and team owners don’t have any place publicly voicing their dissatisfaction with the line-ups they recruited. I can’t say I disagree. Nothing frustrates me more then seeing Mark Cuban sitting behind the Mavs bench yelling into the ears of Rick Carlisle’s players. Their is no place for that nonsense. You hire a coach for a reason– now let the guy coach.

On the flip side, Danny rarely meddles into his coaches business. However, though Doc Rivers is one of the league’s best skippers, he has become like a broken record. At this moment, I feel a higher voice needs to be heard, a voice that worked closely with Red Auerbach over their relationship that spanned 23 years. One that has fought the battles for the green and now holds the keys to the team’s ignition.