What was your first memory?

For me, it was going to Boston to see my first Celtics game and my hero, Larry Bird.

I was only five, and Larry was by then at the tail end of his career, but I’d heard all about his play.

My older cousins had already made me admire Larry Bird with surreal awe – they talked about him in reverent tones that they reserved for no other player in any sport. I looked up to my cousins a lot, so when they voiced their opinions – especially when said with the conviction they used when talking about Bird – I couldn’t help but take their side.

I might have been too young to even understand some of the things they said, but I could certainly comprehend the respect and wonder with which they regarded Larry Legend – they were so obviously impressed by everything Larry did that even at five years old I got excited about visiting the Boston Garden to see him play.

So excited, in fact, that I shook like a recovering alcoholic in withdrawal the whole time I was in the building. Seeing Larry Bird play – even to a five year-old who didn’t even fully understand the depths of his brilliance – was an otherworldly experience. He was the greatest Celtic of my lifetime, by far, and to see him play gave me the chills.

I wasn’t like a kid on Christmas morning waiting to open his presents – I was far more than that. I was like a kid going to meet Santa Claus at his house and watch him and his elves make my presents. Just to be in the same building as my idol, to see Larry Bird no more than sixty feet away from where I sat, was enough to keep me happy for weeks, even months.

And my veneration didn’t stop when his career ended. Rather, it got greater as I got older and became more aware of everything that Larry was about.

He was the perfect Celtic. For a franchise that preaches “Celtic Pride” and has such vaunted history, he was the ideal player. Bird is clearly a prideful man, and played every game as if he had something to prove. He was arguably the greatest player from his era, but played as if he were an unsigned rookie yearning for his first contract. He was the type of player who brought his lunch-pail to work every day, ready for another day on the job, another day of unmatched effort and determination.

Once he attained his spot as one of the all-time greats, Larry Bird didn’t stop working. Instead, he played every game as if he didn’t want anybody in the crowd or on the opposing team to ever forget just how good he was.

Like anybody could ever forget. When a guy scores 61 points and the Atlanta Hawks’ bench – the opposing team’s bench – cheers every shot like it was their own team’s game-winner? You could never forget that – never.

Or the shot against Houston, when he missed a shot to the right side and, before the rebound even came down, he was there to put it in from halfway behind the basket. Oh yeah, and it was with his left hand, too.

There was the duel with Dominique Wilkins, the 49 points, 14 rebounds and 12 assists against Portland in his final season, three MVPs, three championships and too many game-winners to count. There are so many highlights you can talk about when discussing Bird’s career.

But his career was far more than just the highlights, far more than the game-winners, and far more than his exploits. For every game-winner Bird made, he dove into the first row after dozens of loose balls to save possessions for his team. For every highlight reel, how-the-hell-did-he-do-that pass, there was a simple swing pass that kept the Celtics’ ball movement crisp and led to smooth execution. For every award he won, there were hundreds of times he outhustled quicker players to get to a loose ball.

It was for that whole package that I loved Larry Bird. He was cocky, but he earned it. He was a 6’9 forward, but he was the best passer on the Celtics and maybe in the entire league. He was exceptionally gifted in so many areas, but he worked as hard as anybody in the league. He has some highlights that would make even Michael Jordan jealous, but his biggest contributions were often the so-called “little” plays that go unnoticed in the box scores. He was considered to be slow and unathletic, but he put together a career that is only rivaled by a very elite few.

Bird was a player who brought joy to the game of basketball. He was able to bring grown men to their feet, constant applause to an arena, and a sense of community to all of Boston. Because he was a selfless superstar, teammates loved playing with him. They revered him as much as any fan did, looked up to him like I did when I was a little five year-old shivering in a fit of unbridled excitement.

Since that first game, I’ve followed Larry Bird in every way I possibly could. I’ve rehashed all his moments on “ESPN Classic,” I’ve read and reread his autobiography, “Drive,” and I’ve watched “Larry Bird: A Basketball Legend” a million times. Worshipping him from the time I was three or four years old, I still get wound up every time I see one of his old highlights – even the ones I’ve seen over and over.

They take me back to that time when I was five, a bundle of innocent ecstasy among a crowd full of pleased spectators.

I don’t remember who the Celtics played that day, I don’t even remember if they won.

But I sure as hell remember the feeling I got from being in the same building as Larry Bird.

Kevin Garnett, overrated?

According to Charley Rosen, yes. FOXSports.com’s NBA analyst is apparently as crazy as Stephon Marbury, including Kevin Garnett and Chris Paul among his list of most overrated players – just one day after including Kwame Brown and the Collins twins as part of his underrated list. Huh?

In case you have yet to read Rosen’s column, here is what he said about KG:

“His performance in the 2008 NBA Finals against the Lakers was a good indication of where he’s really at.

In Boston’s six-point loss in Game 3, Garnett shot 6-for-21.

In Boston’s five-point loss in Game 5, Garnett scored only 13 points and missed several shots in the fourth quarter.

In Boston’s championship-clinching, 39-point win in Game 6, Garnett registered his series high of 26 points.

In other words, it is well-known among the league’s coaches that Garnett is a frontrunner who will inevitably choke when a critical game is up for grabs.”

I wonder if he even watched that series. I bet he didn’t realize that KG spearheaded a Celtics defense that held the Lakers’ offense – which had been running circles around every other team in the playoffs – to only 93.8 points per game. I guarantee he didn’t understand that Kobe Bryant’s underwhelming performance in that series (only 25.7 points per game on only 40.4% shooting) was mostly due to the Celtics’ help defense, solidified and led by the one and only Kevin Garnett. And he certainly failed to mention that Garnett brought his effort, intensity and skill to the table every night for the Celtics – even in the finals, when Garnett struggled with his perimeter shooting, he had a double-double every game and was a monster defensively.

Garnett doesn’t need to put up scoring numbers to help the Celtics win, because he does so many other things on the court to improve his team. He was the Defensive Player of the Year and is rightfully given the lion’s share of the credit for the biggest single-season turnaround in NBA history.

KG may not score the most in crunch time, but he’s not the type of player to force shots. Even when he doesn’t score, his mere presence allows Paul Pierce and Ray Allen more room to operate for a shot. Remember when Big Baby canned that 17-footer at the buzzer to beat the Magic? Well, KG likely wouldn’t have been open on that play. The Magic just wouldn’t have left him. But you can be damn sure that Pierce, coming off the ball screen, would have been far more open due to the attention paid to Garnett. He may not look to score every possession, but Garnett makes plays – throughout the entire game – that help his team win.

To call Kevin Garnett overrated shouts of an ignorant plea for more people to read his column. Rosen knew that calling Kevin Garnett overrated would get people talking about his work, and as they say “No publicity is bad publicity.” Well, I disagree with you on that one, Charley. Your claims have taken away some of your credibility – if you had any to begin with.

In the spirit of defending KG, here is an excerpt from a 2007 article written by Celtics play-by-play announcer Sean Grande (who also announced KG in Minnesota):

“Kevin Garnett plays the game of basketball, the way it’s supposed to be played.

You know what? I’ll go one better.

Kevin Garnett plays the game of basketball, the way life is supposed to be lived.

With joy, and with passion, and with purpose. Present in every minute he’s on the floor.

Playing to win, in an NBA age of playing it cool. Intensity, in an age of apathy. Boundless, almost limitless loyalty, in an age of me-first. An age where ‘it’s all a business’ has become the same free pass to avoid allegiance that ‘I’m not a role model’ was to avoid responsibility.”

Grande gets it right. No matter what you feel about Garnett’s antics on the court (which can be a little overbearing at times), you have to admire the way he plays the game of basketball. Selflessly, passionately, and dedicated.

Garnett brought his intensity and attitude to Boston, and immediately the Celtics were transformed from a cellar dweller to the best team in the NBA. Yeah, the C’s also brought in Ray Allen, but it was Garnett who changed the team’s whole outlook and is given credit for bringing the team together in solidarity. It was Garnett who demanded the same effort from his teammates he demands from himself. It was Garnett who epitomized the Celtics’ rallying cry “ubuntu,” who led the Celts in every sense of the word. It was Garnett who the Celtics missed desperately as their defense fell apart during his injury-induced stay on the bench.

Kevin Garnett, overrated?

Not in the least.

After my Tony Allen column yesterday, I received a bunch of comments regarding the column and Tony and one thing was evident – Celtics fans are extremely split between either hating Tony and wanting to see him hit by oncoming traffic or remembering the Tony of a couple years ago when he seemed poised to become a very solid player and expecting Tony to regain that year’s form with additional playing time.

It’s a good thing we have the Celtics Town Mailbag so I can set everybody’s mind straight.

I think your disgust with the play of Tony Allen is a bit misguided. I recall a very productive bench player/starter on some occasions prior to his most recent knee injury (a bone-headed play that doesn’t support my argument by the way) several years ago. There were a couple games that season where Tony led the team in scoring and played a very well rounded floor game. His aggression and defense kept him in the rotation night after night. He had definitely turned the corner of mediocrity and was heading toward being a key part of the organization moving forward. I think that stats will also show that it takes at least two years to come back from a serious knee injury; if at all. Tony is about a 1 1/2 years into his return and I’ve noticed increased confidence, lateral movement, and athleticism. If he can return to the form of two years ago, coupled with the return of Big Baby, we have a very formidable bench. Getting any contribution from Bill and JR would surely go a very long way. So, before we completely write-off Tony, let’s give him until December to see what he can provide. I think he’ll surprise us all. – Sean King (Sacramento, CA)

I hope he does, Sean, but I think you’re wrong. And here’s why.

Tony was pretty productive a couple years ago, when the Celtics were mired in one of their worst seasons ever. During that season, he averaged 11.5 points and 3.8 rebounds per game. But – when Pierce was out with an injury – he was often the focal point of the offense, with the ball in his hands a whole lot. Tony needs the ball in his hands to thrive and, with so many stars on the Celtics’ roster, he will never – nor should he ever – have the ball that much. If Tony ever played for a down-and-out team, I am certain he could put up pretty big numbers. But for the Celtics? He hasn’t been a great fit.

You want to know another guy who averaged almost the same stats as Tony in ’06-’07? Gerald Green, with 10.4 points and 2.6 rebounds per game in slightly less minutes than Tony. And nobody would ever want him back on the C’s. A lot of guys in the NBA can thrive when they get more shots and opportunities.

But other guys can fit in with a contending team and really push them over the top. That’s what makes players like James Posey so valuable to contending teams. They know their role, take good shots, and play D. And knowing his role was something Tony Allen has never figured out, and I don’t think he ever will. Which makes him, in my eyes, completely expendable.

Do you think that the Celtics acquiring Rasheed will make them once again the most dominating team in the NBA? – Pete (MA)

In a word, yes.

A lot of the NBA’s top teams have gotten better this offseason. Cleveland with Shaq, Anthony Parker and Jamario Moon. Orlando with Vince Carter, Brandon Bass and Matt Barnes. The Lakers with Artest.

But the Celtics picked up exactly what they needed. Remember, this was a 62-win team last year even without KG for a big chunk of the season. Now, KG will be back, hopefully healthy, Rondo and Perk are a year older, Rasheed provides a backup center the C’s sorely lacked, and Marquis Daniels gives Paul Pierce and Ray Allen a dependable backup they desperately needed last year. Plus, the KG and Rasheed combination will shatter all previous records for most intensity during a sporting event. The Celtics are as good or better than they were last year at every position, with backup PG their only potential weak link.

Which takes us to…

What do you think about all these Starbury rumors? After 3.8 points and 3.3 assists per game, he’s not worth bringing back. – Bob (Lynn, MA)

Okay. I admit it. Marbury had a bad year last year – I could have shot a better percentage from the field, and I haven’t worked out once since I quit my college basketball team. Marbury was tentative, hesitant, and timid on the court – and I just used three words that mean the exact same thing to describe it because he played THAT cautious last year (and that’s a fourth).

What you can’t forget about Marbury is that he was out of basketball for an entire year before he joined the Celtics. He hadn’t played a game in that long. So for him to struggle last year should have been expected. With a full training camp to become acquainted with the offense and shake the rest of the rust off, Steph should be back to his normal self – even last year, when he struggled so mightily, he still had his trademark explosiveness and quickness.

Just a quick note about Steph – I was at Knicks training camp last year, and I got to see Steph play right before the Knicks told him to eat shit and wouldn’t let him play. At their training camp, he completely surprised me. I was expecting to see the guy who had been labeled a problem child but, instead, Marbury was the hardest worker at the camp and was the best player there for the Knicks. When they wouldn’t let him play, after I had just seen him murder Chris Duhon and Nate Robinson throughout training camp, I was shocked.

Another note about Steph from the Knicks’ training camp, and this is a true story. During one practice the sole of his Starbury shoe became completely detached from the rest of his shoe and flew across the court. The Knicks’ equipment manager went to find Starbury his backup pair of shoes, but the pair didn’t fit – how? I don’t know. So Steph asked me – yes, your’s truly, a lowly ballboy at the camp – if he could wear my shoes for the rest of practice. I wear a size 13, though, and Steph is only a size 11.5, so he couldn’t use mine, and Steph spent the rest of practice sitting on the bench, wearing his broken Starbury’s and watching his teammates play. Moral of the story? Don’t trust a ten dollar pair of shoes.

Anyways, back to Stephon’s situation with the Celtics, recent rumors have stated that Marbury is close to resigning with the C’s. However, Marbury has denied the rumors, and claims to have no idea where he will end up. Right now, it seems like it’s either Boston or Europe, and hopefully Boston will work out. Otherwise, the Celts’ backup point guard position will still be in limbo.

How do you think that the signing of Ron Artest will affect the Lakers and Artest himself? – Arnie (MA)

To be honest, I’m not sold on the Artest signing for the Lakers. Ariza fit in perfectly with the Lakers – he is an athletic defensive stopper who was opportunistic on offense and didn’t command a lot of touches. Artest, while an upgrade defensively and the first truly tough player the Lakers have added in a long time, isn’t nearly as good a fit on offense. He is more talented than Ariza, yeah, but I don’t know how Kobe will feel when Artest is firing fadeaway jumpers from all over the court.

I don’t see Artest as being willing to change to more team-centered play, but I could be wrong.

If the Lakers can resign Odom, and word is that they have resigned him for four years and $40 million, then I see them as taking a big step sideways this offseason. And, the way everyone else is improving, that may not cut it for next year.

Just wanted to ask one thing: Does Rasheed Wallace’s bald spot in his hair amount to the worst hair in NBA history? – Andrew (Cross, South Carolina)

Not even close. I can definitively say that Rasheed, though his hair may not be perfect, is certainly surpassed in the hair category by a former Celtic great, Dwayne Shintzius. Shintzius, who played 16 games for the C’s in the 1998-1999 season, has – far and away – the worst hair in NBA history. With that mullet, Shintzius looks more like Stifler in Old School than he does an NBA basketball player (look right).

If anyone is asking, honorable mention for the worst NBA hair ever goes to Chris Mullin, Chris Kaman, a younger Rony Turiaf, and Joakim Noah, and Rasheed isn’t even close.