Amir Johnson found it hard to find an available jersey number with the Celtics

[greece66]

un-retiring numbers would be possibly the least-Celtics-y thing I could think of the franchise doing, short of moving to Los Angeles.

Agreed. Moreover, future retired jerseys could always do what Loscy did- having your name retired is even cooler in some ways. (Just imagine: 'The Truth' hanging in the TD)

[MSceltic]

I understand both sides of the argument. It would be really unceltic like to do this, but what about asking the players still alive permission to still have their number in the rafters and let others wear them. Its their decision, what about asking russell if only the captain can wear 6 or Larry about 33. I graduated from Ole Miss where every year the football team votes for a defensive player to wear 38 in honor of Chucky Mullins who was tragically handicapped during a game. It is a absolute honor for every recipient. I think we should have veterans tell rookies to not be disrespectful to the best of the best, but goodness we have a ton of numbers retired.

[chambers]

I'd actually be in favor of keeping the numbers in the rafters as they are, but letting current Celtics use the numbers in an honorary system.
33 is the Larry Bird
5 is the Kevin Garnett
34 is the Pierce
0 is the Bill Russell.

To wear that number the Celtics brass have to vote on it. Another option is that the owner of the retired number can delegate that number to whoever he thinks deserves it. Make a big ceremony at the start of the season...use it to sweet talk free agents etc..
if Bill Russell came and said to Anthony Davis, we want you to wear my number, youre the only one good enough etc...that would be quite an honor.
Those names will forever own those numbers, but they may also have co-owners if someone's good enough.

If Kevin Durant wanted number 34, and Pierce is cool with it, then boom.

I do see the other side of the coin though.

[Fan from VT]

We have too many jerseys retired. I think we should do one of two things. Either have a 20 year limit, and once a jersey has been hung for 20 years it stays there but you can use the number again. Or, have a "top 15" where there are an unlimited number of jerseys retired, but 15 that no one can use...then if a new number is retired they also have to decide if it is a "top 15" player, and if it is, they have to bump one of the current top 15s into circulation (that jersey still hangs, but the number can be used).

[Hemingway]

No way we should unretire numbers. If down the road we have lot of guys using numbers 50-100 it will just be a cool thing that separates us from other teams. It's not really a problem and if it were, I'd say it's a god problem to have.


On a side note, I've lived in China the last 3 years and they have a really useful thing. They use hand signals (all can be done one on hand) for 6-10 so it is very easy to show any number with your hands very fast. Maybe refs could start using this lol.

[Donoghus]

Don't unretire numbers.  Its a slap in the face to those who had them retired.  Now if they agree to have their number unretired, then I might be a little more open to it.  Still, not a fan on unretiring.

Just make the criteria or justification for getting your number retired in the future more stringent.  Let's face it.  Some of those numbers up there are more for sentimental reason than anything else and probably don't belong up there.  Still, don't unretire them, though.

[bdm860]

This is probably the way to go.



You have 42 for Donyell Marshall and again for Khalid El-Amin (and you actually have 42 two other times too that aren't shown in this pic).  You have 13 for Chris Smith, and the number covered is 13 for Shabazz Napier (also there's another 13 not shown).

(Of course it helps that UConn started this in 2007, so much easier to do this in hindsight).

But if the C's hung jerseys like these from the rafters, it still has the same feel as a retired jersey, at least to me (plus I think it looks cooler than the current format of having a bunch of numbers crammed together on 3 banners).  Of course that leads to another problem, where I don't think the Celtics have any good space inside the Garden to display something like this (unlike the UConn example or the Lakers who have big open walls inside their arenas).  But I still think it would look cool:

Ed Macauley
22
1950-1956

Tom Heinsohn
15
1956-1965

Reggie Lewis
35
1988-1993

Paul Pierce
34
1998-2012, 2016-2017

Kevin Durant
35
2016-2024

Demarcus Cousins
15
2016-2026

Ben Simmons
22
2016-2032

[Tr1boy]

Amir complaining already. There alot of numbers to choose from, even though quite a few numbers from 00-35 are not available

[Donoghus]

Amir complaining already. There alot of numbers to choose from, even though quite a few numbers from 00-35 are not available

Yup.  He's complaining alright.   What a scumbag.   

“Every number 1-34 is basically retired. My first initial number, I picked No. 5, but I know there was going to kind of be some controversy with that because Kevin Garnett won a championship. So I knew that was pretty much out the water. My number [15], of course, was retired. And I recently posted a picture on my social network, I don’t know if you guys checked it out, it was a team back in the ’90s, like ’97, ’96, I played for my first organized basketball team, which was the Burbank Celtics. It was a Celtics team. So I just kind of just put that together. The ’90s were good. I was born in ’87 but the ’90s were good.”

[Bosstown]

I really hate how many numbers we have retired, it's really ridiculous. We have had some great players here but honestly these are who should have retired numbers IMO:

00 - Parish
6 - Bill Russell
14 - Cousy
15 - Heinshon
16 - Sanders
17 - Havlicek
18 - Cowens
32 - Mchale
33 - Bird
34 - Pierce (when it's time)

think that's really it, honestly.

[hwangjini_1]

I really hate how many numbers we have retired, it's really ridiculous. We have had some great players here but honestly these are who should have retired numbers IMO:

00 - Parish
6 - Bill Russell
14 - Cousy
15 - Heinshon
16 - Sanders
17 - Havlicek
18 - Cowens
32 - Mchale
33 - Bird
34 - Pierce (when it's time)

think that's really it, honestly.

"hate"? really? in an attempt to tone down the widespread hyperbole that is often invoked here on cb, perhaps you might settle for being merely "peeved"? that is a valid state of emotions to have over issues such as this. 

[D.o.s.]

I really hate how many numbers we have retired, it's really ridiculous. We have had some great players here but honestly these are who should have retired numbers IMO:

00 - Parish
6 - Bill Russell
14 - Cousy
15 - Heinshon
16 - Sanders
17 - Havlicek
18 - Cowens
32 - Mchale
33 - Bird
34 - Pierce (when it's time)

think that's really it, honestly.

Your username is pretty funny in the context of this post.


edit: and, again, we are talking largely about players that aren't as good as the players who got the numbers retired in the first place and the convenience of the referees -- two groups that, frankly, rate very low on my "I hope they like the Celtics" spectrum.

[Bosstown]

I really hate how many numbers we have retired, it's really ridiculous. We have had some great players here but honestly these are who should have retired numbers IMO:

00 - Parish
6 - Bill Russell
14 - Cousy
15 - Heinshon
16 - Sanders
17 - Havlicek
18 - Cowens
32 - Mchale
33 - Bird
34 - Pierce (when it's time)

think that's really it, honestly.

"hate"? really? in an attempt to tone down the widespread hyperbole that is often invoked here on cb, perhaps you might settle for being merely "peeved"? that is a valid state of emotions to have over issues such as this. 

maybe i over reacted. it just sucks seeing players wear numbers like "36" and "90", they just look ugly... 

[Jon]

I really hate how many numbers we have retired, it's really ridiculous. We have had some great players here but honestly these are who should have retired numbers IMO:

00 - Parish
6 - Bill Russell
14 - Cousy
15 - Heinshon
16 - Sanders
17 - Havlicek
18 - Cowens
32 - Mchale
33 - Bird
34 - Pierce (when it's time)

think that's really it, honestly.

Sam Jones should be on that list. He arguably is a top 5 Celtic of all time and certainly a top 10.

While I like Satch Sanders, he was really just a great role player on championship teams and probably shouldn't have his number retired.

[rocknrollforyoursoul]

Unless I missed it, I'm surprised no one's picked on Cedric Maxwell yet. I like Max, but he's the one retired number (from my lifetime, that is) that always seemed to be a bit of a stretch.