[Gotham Dark Knight]

"The Celtics aren't a team," Red Auerbach once said. "They're a way of life."

The Boston Celtics are an institution. The franchise has been an integral part of American history and basketball lore. The story has been fascinating as the years have unfolded and will continue to develop and flourish season after season for future generations to embrace.

So do these statement still hold for this once proud franchise or has the last decade really tarnish the image?

[Lefty Noob]

No, I'm afraid not. They're just another mediocre basketball team these days. The only difference between Boston and some of the other middle-of-the-pack teams is that the Celtics have a really nice history to brag about. But the mystique is dead and buried.

[Gotham Dark Knight]

Originally Posted by Lefty Noob

No, I'm afraid not. They're just another mediocre basketball team these days. The only difference between Boston and some of the other middle-of-the-pack teams is that the Celtics have a really nice history to brag about. But the mystique is dead and buried.

Well there is still the cool Kelly Green uniform

[Wizard of Os]

Strange question...

Like the New York Yankees and Manchester United (or perhaps the Brazilian national team), the Boston Celtics are inextricably internationally linked with their sport.

In my opinion, the answer is "no," the last decade has not tarnished the reputation of the C's one iota. Fact is, if the Pierce-Walker beaneaters of 2002 had managed to pull out one more game after that ridiculous 25-point comeback against the Nets that year, this question would not be asked right now.

Also, consider this: The Celtics franchise has sixteen championships to their credit. Eleven -- count 'em, eleven -- of these were won between 1957-1969. Is UCLA still the NCAA b-ball team, with their eleven championships (ten under Wooden)? When the Yankees were missing from the playoffs from 1965-1975 and 1982-1995, did this tarnish their lore?

This mythical identification of teams is a strange and inexplicable thing. The Lakers will always be looked upon as a legendary franchise no matter how long Kobe stays to prevent them from winning more rings, whereas it appears the Bulls will always be perceived of as a team with a single spurt of greatness in their history. The Red Sox were baseball's heartbreakers, despite a comparable run of futility by the Chisox; never was heard tell of "the Curse of Shoeless Joe." The Dallas Cowboys were touted as America's team by fans and media before they had won their third Super Bowl. A mythos settles on a team and never goes away.

Of course, there is one notable exception. In one sixteen-year run, these guys won the championship six times, including one repeat and one threepeat. In a span of seven years, the team earned five titles. Over the course of their dominance, the team was managed by a Hall Of Fame player and brain and played at a .650 clip. Taking out their single fluke losing season, and that percentage goes up to .658. Truly one of the most dominant squads in history, Cap Anson's 1876-1891 Chicago Cubs.

Cheers.

[Gotham Dark Knight]

Originally Posted by Wizard of Os

Strange question...

Like the New York Yankees and Manchester United (or perhaps the Brazilian national team), the Boston Celtics are inextricably internationally linked with their sport.

In my opinion, the answer is "no," the last decade has not tarnished the reputation of the C's one iota. Fact is, if the Pierce-Walker beaneaters of 2002 had managed to pull out one more game after that ridiculous 25-point comeback against the Nets that year, this question would not be asked right now.

Also, consider this: The Celtics franchise has sixteen championships to their credit. Eleven -- count 'em, eleven -- of these were won between 1957-1969. Is UCLA still the NCAA b-ball team, with their eleven championships (ten under Wooden)? When the Yankees were missing from the playoffs from 1965-1975 and 1982-1995, did this tarnish their lore?

This mythical identification of teams is a strange and inexplicable thing. The Lakers will always be looked upon as a legendary franchise no matter how long Kobe stays to prevent them from winning more rings, whereas it appears the Bulls will always be perceived of as a team with a single spurt of greatness in their history. The Red Sox were baseball's heartbreakers, despite a comparable run of futility by the Chisox; never was heard tell of "the Curse of Shoeless Joe." The Dallas Cowboys were touted as America's team by fans and media before they had won their third Super Bowl. A mythos settles on a team and never goes away.

Of course, there is one notable exception. In one sixteen-year run, these guys won the championship six times, including one repeat and one threepeat. In a span of seven years, the team earned five titles. Over the course of their dominance, the team was managed by a Hall Of Fame player and brain and played at a .650 clip. Taking out their single fluke losing season, and that percentage goes up to .658. Truly one of the most dominant squads in history, Cap Anson's 1876-1891 Chicago Cubs.

Cheers.

Strange Question?...what can I say, i am a strange guy...As for Cap Anson and the Cubs, baseball doesn't really treat does pre 1900 teams in the same breath as its post 1900 teams, that might have something to do with it...Also the Montreal Canadians seem to be notiably absent from your discussion...

So follow up question Wiz, will sports in this modern era of free agency and parity prevent new teams from obtaining such glory?

[Wizard of Os]

Originally Posted by Gotham Dark Knight

...will sports in this modern era of free agency and parity prevent new teams from obtaining such glory?

Gotham,

To some extent, it already has. Note the way we talk about the concept of the "dynasty" or even the "mini-dynasty" a la the recent short-lived glory day of the St. Louis Rams. You can go through sportswriting of the past and never find such stuff. In addition to free agency and all, today we're in such a hurry to apply superlatives and bests that we think of four years as a long time.

New teams entering the pantheon...? Well, teams like the Celts and Yankees have decades' worth of reputation. It's so hard to tell right now, like guessing which songs from the 1990s they'll be playing on classic rock radio in 2040. One interesting case is the Atlanta Braves. They've won their division every year since 1991. If they continue such dominance for five more years or so, they'll definitely be regarded as one of the two monsters (along with, who else, the Yankees) of the "post-1969 expansion era."

Cheers, all.