I’m really not seeing how that reflects on his comments on this. He’s backing his ex teammate, which he should. Would you have preferred he said he didn’t think it was a big deal and PP should shut up? He was asked the question, that was the best possible answer in my opinion. A ‘no comment’ isn’t flying in that situation. I understand you’re frustrations with him when he wore green and I share them but you’re conflating two different things. And you’re letting your bias show. I fully understand what IT brought to the team and what he went through, but bottom line he was here 2.5 seasons and didn’t do anything. Rondo is right. These stupid videos are overly gratuitous to begin with, it shouldn’t be on PP night.Because he left here having, in both my opinion and his own, disgraced the Celtics with his effort. What people love about IT is that he left everything on the floor even in spite of horrific off court situations and debilitating pain, and I find Rondo's efforts to belittle IT4's contribution petty at best and cruel at worst. Rondo should just shut up and go back to reviewing his postage stamp collection from the last couple years 'playing' for the Celtics.
...edited to add that he was the one who said he didn't try, I was the one who said its disgraceful.
He can 'back his ex-teammate' without denigrating the contributions of IT. He chose to do so, and sure my bias affects the intensity of my reaction. I'm not one of those people insisting Hanley blow out a hammy sprinting to 1st on a dropped third strike, but Rondo's sustained loafing did change how I view his Celtic career.I’m really not seeing how that reflects on his comments on this. He’s backing his ex teammate, which he should.
Now I feel like you are the one conflating Rondo's takedown of IT with whether PP gets a night to himself. Rondo is wrong, IT does deserve a video tribute. Yes, they are overly gratuitous but no more than your observation that they are overly gratuitous. Yes, it shouldn't be on PP night, which I agree with and so does nearly everyone. That has nothing to do with a gratuitous crushing of IT's time in a Celtics jersey, which he wore with pride and Rondo eventually to cheapen.Rondo is right. These stupid videos are overly gratuitous to begin with, it shouldn’t be on PP night.
"Danny and I talked about it for 40 minutes," Pierce explained to ESPN early Tuesday afternoon. "He told me, 'This is what we have planned,' and at the end of the conversation, he said, 'If you don't want us to do Isaiah, we won't.' So I told him, 'I really don't.' So that was it.
"That's how we left it."
...Earlier in the day, before Thomas' tweet, Pierce explained why he objected to plans to honor Thomas on Feb. 11.
"(Thomas) had a shot to be honored," Pierce said. "You came to Boston. Whether you are playing or not, you should have had your tribute then. I just don't see how, if someone is having a jersey retirement, they're going to be running other tributes for other players.
"Danny tried to sell me on it, but I told him, 'He had a shot, Danny, and he punked you on it. He pretty much dictated everything.' They let it happen because they felt sorry how (the trade to Cleveland) went down. It's guilt. That's what it is."
(bolded because that point was in question earlier in the thread)Ainge said Tuesday night that Thomas intended all along to bow out of the video tribute once he learned of Pierce's reservations. He also said when he and Thomas' agent, Aaron Goodwin, first discussed an alternate date for a Thomas tribute, which was originally scheduled for Jan. 3, neither of them realized the next time the Cavaliers came to town would be the night that Pierce was being honored.
The bride analogy is spot on. They'll find another time to give Thomas his moment in the sun - which I do feel he deserves, regardless of the mix-up over this.Pierce conceded that he gave his position some additional thought after his objections to a joint tribute made headlines. He says he consulted his agent, his wife, his mother and Garnett.
"Everyone understood where I was coming from," Pierce said. "KG was like, 'Isaiah who? Hell no, you're damn right you're not sharing your night with him.'"
I’m not conflating anything. As you say, it shouldn’t be on the same night and we pretty much all agree on that. (Frankly I don’t think he necessarily needs one, but sure, on another night no big deal.) But there is something of a standard to being honored by the Celtics. They’re the most storied NBA franchise and despite Rondo’s antics, he did in fact contribute to a ring. I fully grasp how mercurial and frustrating he was, that he could have been much more etc. but end of day, he contributed a lot more to the franchise than IT did in his 2.5 seasons here, which culminated with the team getting trounced in conference finals. He was fun, he played with his heart on his jersey, he ponied up through personal issues, through injuries. I respect all that and enjoyed him. I wish him well in returning to that level and hope he does. But Rondo got asked a question - just as KG did - and responded in a way that speaks to the standard of the team, whether he lived up to it 100% or not. I don’t read it as gratuitously denigrating IT, I read it as respect for PP and what he meant and accomplished. But to each their own, I guess I can see how you’d possibly take it like that. I just think you’re letting your frustrations with Rondo cloud you. Anyway, everything seems to be cleared up and this all should have been a non issue if the marketing guy had looked at a calendar when they rescheduled.Rondo was the man during that Championship run and I'm not taking that away from him. Watching him come back from a dislocated elbow after Wade's reprehensible 'play' was otherworldly as well.
He can 'back his ex-teammate' without denigrating the contributions of IT. He chose to do so, and sure my bias affects the intensity of my reaction. I'm not one of those people insisting Hanley blow out a hammy sprinting to 1st on a dropped third strike, but Rondo's sustained loafing did change how I view his Celtic career.
Now I feel like you are the one conflating Rondo's takedown of IT with whether PP gets a night to himself. Rondo is wrong, IT does deserve a video tribute. Yes, they are overly gratuitous but no more than your observation that they are overly gratuitous. Yes, it shouldn't be on PP night, which I agree with and so does nearly everyone. That has nothing to do with a gratuitous crushing of IT's time in a Celtics jersey, which he wore with pride and Rondo eventually to cheapen.
Two things come to mind there just in terms of the source: 1) he bounced around 6 teams and clashed with various coaches. Maybe he knows a thing or two about petty. 2) What has he done that has a pro team retiring his jersey?Agree with him or not you gotta respect Jalen Rose calling Pierce petty to his face instead of on Twitter or elsewhere
1) That was replying to the post that said it was a "huge drama." I'd call it more of a "minor side story" even in Boston.If you get your news in places not called Boston, it is pretty universal thinking in that Pierce is acting like a whiner in all of this
Deadspin, Bleacher Report, ESPN, USA Today, etc. have all covered it. It is a story - and a contrasting data point from someone who is also not in BostonAs a data point (and someone not in Boston) I've only heard of it on this thread. I'm sure it's been on ESPN at some point, but not that I've noticed
Yes! The worst part about this is the criticisms both players have received.On some level, might it not be the worst thing in the world for the organization to have all these guys identifying as Celtic4Lyfe and fighting over what Pride in the Green really means?
Like, on a scale of severity of problems to have, this seems fairly awesome. I’d love to know what Danny secretly thinks of all this.
I was at the game and my wife "Geesh Big Baby looks horrible". "I agree, and thats not big baby thats 'toine!" WTF happened to him - he needs to take better care of himself.Quote of the night in my house from the wife: "Is that Big Baby sitting next to KG and Rondo?"
Because his name is Ray (not Rey), and 34 was his number in college (and probably high school and AAU) and on three of the four NBA teams he played on.Why is his handle "tray four"? Oh and also, someone is bitter they didn't get invited.