Why aren’t the Celtics as successful as they were in the 80s?

I’m asking older fans, what happened? I know we’re spoiled as Boston fans. The Celtics have 2 titles in the 21st century, I know that’s more than most of other teams, but that’s below our standards. Even before the Title Town era from 2001 to 2018, Boston has always fallen back on the Celtics to rep the city.

The Patriots in the 21st century are 6-4 in Super Bowls. Two of those super bowls are arguably the best super bowls ever played 49 and 51

The Red Sox didn’t reach a dynasty level, honestly I thought they had a chance for 2004, 2005 and 2007, but we settled for 2004 and 2007. Sox are 4-0 this century, we’ve dominated all of those wins.

The Celtics underachieved with the big three in 2008. We got one title, but we shouldn’t have lost 2010 and the group was aging in 2010. I still get mad about Ray Allen leaving to join LeBron, when LeBron started the super team trend. Anyone who says the 2008 Celtics were a super teams is a moron.

We lost to an older Warriors team in 2022. We did beat the Mavericks in 2024, but they were an overrated team. So the 2008 title is weighted more than 2024 one. I will gladly take beating Kobe than beating an aging Kyrie Irving and a fat Luka.

I hope the Celtics fan figure something out next season.

godawgsathens

40 | 5 days ago

They don’t have Larry Bird

Former-Bathroom9687

10 | 5 days ago

Yeah Brown and (especially) Tatum are great players, but theyre not bonfire top 5 players of all time like Larry Legend.

Electrical_Swing8166

1 | 5 days ago

AND there’s more competition. The only people who could match up to Bird/McHale/Parrish were Magic and company, and since they were out West we wouldn’t face them in the playoffs before the finals. There are way more elite, game changing players today than in the mid-80s. Wemby. Giannis. Joker. Tatum. Embid (when healthy). SGA. And the level of non-superstars is also higher.

Alternative-Farmer98

1 | 5 hours ago

Maybe I mean I don’t know in 2024 there wasn’t much competition. And we don’t have to worry about the Lakers the way we did back then. I guess we can point though to Golden state’s great run like even if we made it to the finals we really would have had no chance of beating them in 2017 or 2018 or 2019.

Ever since 2020 that hasn’t been an unbeatable team.

People like to talk about age but Larry Bird was a rookie when he won the first title I think

SunsetStarlightFan

-1 | 5 days ago

Imagine if they were allowed to play defense? lmao

In the WNBA at least the women are allowed to foul each the other. I am tired of the traveling and flopping, it’s disgusting.

Electrical_Swing8166

2 | 5 days ago

If Wemby were allowed to play 80s style defense, he’d genuinely be unstoppable

EveryoneLovesNudez | I like to defense

31 | 5 days ago

“Why don’t the Patriots just win the Super Bowl every year? It’s not that hard”

OrlandoMB | Miss You, Rob

7 | 5 days ago

It’s so crazy that the Pats basically averaged a Super Bowl appearance every other year since Brady was named starter. Even typing this out is nuts. That will never be replicated.

SmurfAtLarge

1 | 4 days ago

It will. Everything always gets replicated sooner or later. Likely no time soon though.

we360u45

3 | 5 days ago

I was in middle school when the pats won their first Super Bowl and won 3 out of 4 when I started watching. So I definitely had this thought as a kid lol

SunsetStarlightFan

-1 | 5 days ago

That 2003 and 2004 squad felt invincible, I don’t know how Jake Plumber in 2005 happened to prevent a threepeat lol.

SunsetStarlightFan

-4 | 5 days ago

Even though Super Bowl 60 sucked, we weren’t ready. Offensive line looked like beer league players. I am happy AJ Brown is ours. People joke about being 6-6 in super bowls, that’s a better record than other poverty franchises lol

DynamicProxy

5 | 5 days ago

So if you understand that 6-6 is legendary… what part of the Celtics recent success confuses you?

Over the last 10 seasons, the Celtics made the playoffs 10 times, reached the Eastern Conference Finals 4 times, and reached the NBA Finals 2 times. That’s ELITE!!!

SunsetStarlightFan

-2 | 5 days ago

The goal is the title though.

Yeah 6-6 you could say is bad, but 2 of those losses are when the Patriots were a C level franchise before 2001. Also 5 of these 6 wins are legit the most iconic super bowls, except that boring one in 2018.

Celtics vs Lakers was the height of the franchise in the 80s

DynamicProxy

3 | 5 days ago

HALF of the teams in the NBA have NEVER won a chip! You greedy SOB! (I say that with love)

Mindless_Panic_5947 | 2024 NBA Executive of the Year

1 | 5 days ago

Strictly speaking, in terms of the number of championships and league dominance, the franchise’s best era was with Russell.

The reasons we haven’t won at previous levels are what everyone else has told you in the thread. Since the 80s, the best player we’ve drafted has been Tatum, and the best player we’ve acquired from another team has been Kevin Garnett in his twilight years at a high level. Essentially, we haven’t had a player who truly competes for the title of NBA’s best player since the 80s, so our level of success is acceptable considering that.

The other period where this happened was in the post-Russell and pre-Bird era, where we also won two championships in an era of high talent parity, similar to the current one, but also where the average talent level is considered lower than in other eras.

DynamicProxy

10 | 5 days ago

Compared to most of the teams in the league… We are just as successful as we have ever been.

But it’s a different league now, different owners, different rules, different salary, etc., etc. etc. etc.

Edit to add: after some additional contemplation, I need to ask… WTF are you talking about?

Over the last 10 seasons, the Celtics made the playoffs 10 times, reached the Eastern Conference Finals 4 times, and reached the NBA Finals 2 times. Those seasons span 2017 through 2026, with playoff appearances every year in that stretch; they made the ECF in 2020, 2022, 2023, and 2024, and the Finals in 2024 and 2022.

We are a top 5 organization. What more could you ask for???

bananajunior3000 | SMARF

1 | 5 days ago

The difference between that and the 80s Celtics is the difference between Larry Bird and Jayson Tatum and the difference between the salary environment’s ramifications for teambuilding then and now.

[deleted]

7 | 5 days ago

[deleted]

jljfuego

3 | 5 days ago

Yeah, KG injury cost us a title shot in 09 and probably contributed to losing in 2010 as well. He was still a beast but he definitely wasn’t ever quite the same after. That injury doesn’t happen and we probably win 3 in a row, or at least ²⁄₃.

And then losing Perk for game 7 in 2010 just sealed it.

Laszlo-Panaflex

7 | 5 days ago

3 reasons: Len Bias, Reggie Lewis and Rick Pitino.

The death of Bias meant there wasn’t a star to bridge from the Bird era to the next one and to reduce Bird’s workload to play longer. Even if Bias didn’t pan out, he would’ve been a major trade chip. Then Reggie dying took away our next star who would’ve bridged to a new era (or been paired with Bias and continued to compete for chips). And Pitino not only sucked as a coach, he made bad decisions and ruined our continuity.

That all led to our irrelevance from the ‘90s to ‘08. If they didn’t happen, we might’ve seen similar success as the Spurs during that span.

Rich-Ad-4314

1 | a day ago

Very few people remember we ever had Chauncey Billups or Iso Joe as young guys and even nearly drafted Tony Parker (granted Red was the problem there - but if anybody gets a pass, it’s definitely him)

Laszlo-Panaflex

1 | a day ago

I remember those days. The Billups trade was a Pitino move that made no sense at the time. Billups was the #3 pick and we were excited about him. I don’t know if he would’ve ever reached his potential on the Celtics, but keeping him would’ve been the better move.

The Johnson trade was a Chris Wallace one, but it happened in the aftermath of Pitino and because the Celtics were rudderless. We could also lump the Tony Parker veto in that category because Chris Wallace wanted to make the pick, but gave Red too much of a say in it. I don’t think it would’ve happened if Ainge was at the helm.

Rich-Ad-4314

1 | 19 hours ago

Yeah, definitely get what you’re saying all around. Honestly just wonder what would’ve happened if we kept some of those guys. Oh well. I like to tell myself that the ‘08 trade makes up for it; at least we got to see KG and Ray Ray in green

syphax

3 | 5 days ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Len_Bias

CurdFedKit

3 | 5 days ago

…go to bed, kiddo

MundaneExtension3195

3 | 5 days ago

Ownership was weak and clueless in the 90s, they tried to make a big move to regain winning ways by giving Rick Pigino charge over the team, this just made the situation worse. Then Wyc/Pags bought the team in 2003, it took 2 or 3 to rebuild the asset base and then the team traded for KG and Ray Allen in 2007, since then Cs have been back to their winning ways

fredinNH

3 | 5 days ago

Because bird, parish, and mchale aren’t walking through that door

tonylouis1337 | Hugo González

2 | 5 days ago

In the 90s we were legitimately a bad team with bad management and bad coaching. It took us a long time, till 2008 to be exact, to get a team capable of winning the championship.

Thing to keep in mind about the ‘08 team is that we got KG when he was arguably out of his prime and he ended up getting injured. That ended our short run after also making the Finals again in 2010.

We got truly one of the greatest steals ever in terms of trade deals, when the Brooklyn Nets agreed to a trade that sent the aging Paul Pierce and Kevin Garnett to Brooklyn in exchange for the draft picks that would become Jayson Tatum and Jaylen Brown.

Finally in 2024 they win a championship. A lot of us think that they were good enough to win one sooner, but I guess at that time it was Giannis’s turn first.

Longjumping_Top281

1 | 5 days ago

Regs have to much to say who wins

Most_Maintenance5549

1 | 5 days ago

gif

Kid_Crayola | The Timelord⏳🍀

1 | 5 days ago

what 😂

heyuBassgai

1 | 5 days ago

Why is pure unoxegenated water not compressible? Larry Bird. Be water my friend.

Desperate-Oil-1842

1 | 5 days ago

times changed, it took boston a good what 20or so yrs to finally figure things out and start being competitive again, they were literally shitballs in the 90s and Pierce man he carried us in the early to mid 2000s but still not relevant enough then. Celtics must not relent and must find a way to win multiple while the Jays can still compete. bec after the jay… well i dunno…. limbo time for the Cs again

SunsetStarlightFan

0 | 5 days ago

I know it’s a hot take, but I prefer the old big three to the Js. I know they were old, but imo they played with more passion on the court.

Desperate-Oil-1842

1 | 5 days ago

i kinda agree with you,, Garnett being the emotional drive for our team back in the 2008, its just a bummer he got injured and when we returned 2010 but got duped by the Lakers… then Lebron and the heat emerged so yeah it was fun while it lasted

here’s to hoping the current Cs develop that grit back… the defend your homecourt grit, defense, and respect you opponent but not laughing with them while we down 20 on an elimination game kinda things tsk tsk

TheJoser

1 | 5 days ago

This is a top tier organization that almost every other fan base would kill for. My recommendation:

embrace chaos, randomness, and luck as much larger factors for success than most people want to admit (both NBA and life in general).
don’t take any of this for granted. We’re incredibly lucky
comparison is the thief of joy. Relax

NormalGuyPosts

1 | 5 days ago

Yeah, we lost two titles we should’ve had (2010, 2022)

nathanwilson26

1 | 5 days ago

Since 2000, the celtics have the 3rd most regular season wins 1,235, behind the spurs and Mavs. 20 playoff appearances, 10 eastern conference finals appearances, 4 finals appearances, 2 NBA Championships (2008 and 2024).

Despite all those accomplishments, there is a kernel of truth behind what you say. The truth is the team had 3 devastating franchise altering events that took the team off their historical track.

Reggie Lewis dying put the team in a bad place for years not just because they lost their best player but because his contract counted against the cap. They were a rebuilding team for the 1990s and had lost the Celtics way. To shake the team out from these doldrums, they choose to bring in Rick Patino, to be the HC AND GM. he was shit at both.
Kevin Garnett’s knee injury in 2009. The 2008 championship was a surprise, and they were looking even better in 2009 when he got injured. That team should have been able to get 2 championships.
Gordon Hayward’s broken leg. That 2017 is the 2nd most talented roster the Celtics have put together since 1986. Kyrie Irving, Hayward, Jaylen Brown, Marcus Smart, Terry Rozier, Jayson Tatum and Al Horford. Even without both Irving (injured before the playoffs), and Hayward (injured game 1 of the season), the team still went to the ECF. The following season the Hayward returns but was never the same player pre injury. If Hayward doesn’t get injured, it’s possible the Celtics get at least another championship between 2008 and 2018.

chinesefox97

1 | 5 days ago

We don’t have a Jokic or Wemby type talent that are te undisputed ¹⁄₂ of the NBA. Unlike the 80s when he had Bird or in the 60s when we had Bill.

jma7400

1 | 5 days ago

Celtics in the 80s had 4 hall of famers on their team for the entirety of that run. They also had Tiny Nate in the early 80s and Bill Walton near the end of the 80s who also enter led the hall.

Open-Kaleidoscope942

1 | 3 days ago

I watched the 30 for 30 last night and the amount of extra passes for easy layups and EASY buckets was so cool to see as someone who was not alive in the 80’s. The current Celtics do a pretty good job of moving the ball around but we take 50 threes a game and when you live or die by the three you take the bad wirh the good.

Alternative-Farmer98

1 | 5 hours ago

I mean there’s lots of reasons but I think part of it is playstyle.

If we If we have a bad shooting night we lose pretty much. The Celtics weren’t like that.

Alternative-Farmer98

1 | 5 hours ago

We’re kind of like the 2006 colts. That era of the team where the must always had 12 or 13 wins. And then almost always lost in the second or third round of the playoffs.

But they did get the one

You could make a similar argument that were a lot like Aaron Rodgers Green Bay Packers. They did win a title and you can’t take that away. But it’s ultimately disappointing that they didn’t win more than one which is also true the 2008 Celtics

But the 2008 Celtics had a shorter window I mean this Celtics team has been good enough to compete for a title since 2018.