Question: Boston Celtics vs. New York Yankees

How come no one says the Celtics are going to buy a championship (which they did) by signing two superstars Ray Allen and Kevin Garnett? When the Yankees sign three players (in a sport that requires much more players per team), people are calling it "terrible for baseball"? Was what the Celtics did "terrible for basketball"? I don't see the difference at all.

Same reason why when a few weeks ago trade talks where being discussed the haters where up at arms saying do we really need all these threads on the yankees? Now that they are filled with blind hatred they are totally acceptable.

tonyrios said:

How come no one says the Celtics are going to buy a championship (which they did) by signing two superstars Ray Allen and Kevin Garnett? When the Yankees sign three players (in a sport that requires much more players per team), people are calling it "terrible for baseball"? Was what the Celtics did "terrible for basketball"? I don't see the difference at all.

Click to expand...

We traded for both of those players...

1. We did not sign them.
2. There is a salary cap in the NBA.

JVC said:

tonyrios said:

How come no one says the Celtics are going to buy a championship (which they did) by signing two superstars Ray Allen and Kevin Garnett? When the Yankees sign three players (in a sport that requires much more players per team), people are calling it "terrible for baseball"? Was what the Celtics did "terrible for basketball"? I don't see the difference at all.

Click to expand...

We traded for both of those players...

Click to expand...

But it's still a significant boost in salary...

bigpapiMA32 said:

1. We did not sign them.
2. There is a salary cap in the NBA.

Click to expand...

So how are the Yankees terrible for baseball by not obeying a salary cap that isn't there?

tonyrios said:

How come no one says the Celtics are going to buy a championship (which they did) by signing two superstars Ray Allen and Kevin Garnett? When the Yankees sign three players (in a sport that requires much more players per team), people are calling it "terrible for baseball"? Was what the Celtics did "terrible for basketball"? I don't see the difference at all.

Click to expand...

Then you are pretty blind.

1. Kevin Garnett and Ray Allen were acquired via trades, not free agency.

2. It's one thing to acquire two extra superstars. It's another to fill each of your 9 lineup spots and each of your 5 pitching spots with superstars, former MVP's, and all-stars.

3. Simply hording superstars doesn't work in basketball. There's a limit to how many shots can go around so having Carmelo Anthony, Kevin Garnett, Tim Duncan, and Allen Iverson on the same team wouldn't work because they would be fighting for shots. The Celtics are winning because they happen to wisely choose 3 very unselfish superstars (who've all been okay with a huge scoring decrease) and most of all, the Celtics are winning via DEFENSE. It's not just Garnett, Allen, and Pierce.

The Big 3's numbers go down because they are willingly making a sacrifice for the team that translates into wins. The Yankees free agents' numbers go down because they were never that good to begin with (Jared Wright, Pavano). They become overrated and overpaid by the Yankees. That translates into losses.

4. The Yankees do this every year. It gets old.

tonyrios said:

How come no one says the Celtics are going to buy a championship (which they did) by signing two superstars Ray Allen and Kevin Garnett? When the Yankees sign three players (in a sport that requires much more players per team), people are calling it "terrible for baseball"? Was what the Celtics did "terrible for basketball"? I don't see the difference at all.

Click to expand...

But basketball isn't a mainstream sport unless I'm mistaken. I really don't care what the Yankees do, I say if you've got the money, do what you want. I wish Polad would give the Twins more money, but thats just the world we live in.

It is completely differant what the Celtics have done and what the Yankees are doing. I hate the Yankees, I am a Red Sox fan. That being said I have no problem with them spending as much as they want to. I would rather teams put money into players then the owners pockets...I know that the owners are still making their money..but they aren't afraid to spend. There is no rule that says they can't spend like they do so it should be no big deal. It will just make it more fun rooting against them this year. I love the rivalry and discussions back and forth. No real need to get upset about a team wanting to put out a winning product.

tonyrios said:

bigpapiMA32 said:

1. We did not sign them.
2. There is a salary cap in the NBA.

Click to expand...

So how are the Yankees terrible for baseball by not obeying a salary cap that isn't there?

Click to expand...

When did I say the Yankees are terrible for baseball? My team's not far behind. I'm saying the Celtics are completely different. There is a salary cap which means one team cannot go out and BUY multiple superstars. Sure, we had an increase in payroll but that's because the previous payroll was next to nothing. We had the pieces to trade for the stars and so we did. That is completely different than just buying the players. The Celtics have not signed a star player for a really long time, not including Pierce's extension.

timryan111 said:

It is completely differant what the Celtics have done and what the Yankees are doing. I hate the Yankees, I am a Red Sox fan. That being said I have no problem with them spending as much as they want to. I would rather teams put money into players then the owners pockets...I know that the owners are still making their money..but they aren't afraid to spend. There is no rule that says they can't spend like they do so it should be no big deal. It will just make it more fun rooting against them this year. I love the rivalry and discussions back and forth. No real need to get upset about a team wanting to put out a winning product.

Click to expand...

Post thanked.

The Celtics traded for Garnett and Ray Allen.

The Celtics don't have the record of signing players to ridiculous contracts the Yankees do.

Basketball can be dominated by individual players more than baseball, so it makes more sense to go chase superstars.

Despite individuals being able to dominate a basektball game, the Celtics have great role players and unmatched team chemistry, traits shared with the Yankees dynasty teams, not so much the recent teams.

tonyrios said:

JVC said:

tonyrios said:

How come no one says the Celtics are going to buy a championship (which they did) by signing two superstars Ray Allen and Kevin Garnett? When the Yankees sign three players (in a sport that requires much more players per team), people are calling it "terrible for baseball"? Was what the Celtics did "terrible for basketball"? I don't see the difference at all.

Click to expand...

We traded for both of those players...

Click to expand...

But it's still a significant boost in salary...

Click to expand...

The Celtics don't have the highest payroll in the NBA. In fact, we only have the 5th highest payroll in basketball.

As mentioned, the Celtics assembled the team through trades, not free agency.

I do think it's kind of bad for baseball that one team can buy up all the talent, but let's also face it - nobody wants to play for a losing team or a team that doesn't appear to be going anywhere in the near future and nearly everybody wants to make as much money as they can in life. So, who can blame these guys for prefering to sign with the Yankees? That's not to say the Royals have no shot at making the playoffs or the Pirates won't win the WS this coming year, but statistically speaking, you would think it would help one of those teams chances to get a power bat like Tex or an awesome arm like Sabathia and with the Yankees being to pay whatever to whoever, it definately limits the chances of some of these other teams ever going anywhere. Thus, their team struggles to win games and the organization struggles to put fans in the seats and the cycle just continues.

What is cool about the whole process is that even though the Yankees can buy whoever they want, they still can't seem to put a championship together in the 21st Century

The Yankees continually sign the big ticket free agents or make deals that get them big name stars. The bottom line before every season always remains, how will they perform as a team? Sure, they look great on paper, but can they get the job done over a 162 game season and still keep it together in the playoffs? They haven't been able to do it in recent years and there is no guarantee they'll do it this year. Injuries, mental health, team spirit, etc., will all play a role in the upcoming season. The Tigers looked unbelievable last year on paper and they sucked. You just don't know. Meanwhile, Tampa, full of very young and inexperienced MLB players (for the most part), had a tremendous season. No one problably would have predicted either team to perform the way they did last season.

Sure, it'd be cool to see some other teams get big name guys and have a fighting chance, but isn't it also cool to see a team get all the best players on the market year in and year out and still not be able to win a WS?! I think it's pretty cool myself!

Brett Keith said:

The Celtics traded for Garnett and Ray Allen.

The Celtics don't have the record of signing players to ridiculous contracts the Yankees do.

Basketball can be dominated by individual players more than baseball, so it makes more sense to go chase superstars.

Despite individuals being able to dominate a basektball game, the Celtics have great role players and unmatched team chemistry, traits shared with the Yankees dynasty teams, not so much the recent teams.

Click to expand...

I heart Brett. By that, I mean I agree with him.