Re: Cedric Maxwell

[Douglas342@aol.com]

In a message dated 9/28/99 6:03:55 PM Pacific Daylight Time, karhu@umich.edu 
writes:

> Should Maxwell's number be retired?
 It depends.  Many might opine that the Cs have retired too many numbers. 
What are the criteria?  IIRC, Ed MacCauley's #22 is up there because he 
agreed to go to SanFrancisco (? St. Louis?) in the deal that brought the 
Celts the pick that became Russell.  Frank Ramsey was known as a sixth man.  
Should bench players, no matter how exalted, have numbers retired?  The only 
franchise close to the Celts in league history, the Lakers, have five numbers 
on the wall:  Worthy, Wilt, Magic,. Kareem and West.
   By Laker criteria, Max's number shouldn't be there.  But by Celtic 
criteria, why not?  And if so, why not DJ and Ainge?  All were starters on 
championship teams.  With the exception of Parish and McCauley, though, 
didn't all the rest end their careers with Boston?  (Well, forget Cousy's 
game or two with Cincinnati/KC/Omaha or whoever)