Wyc Grousbeck accepted the trophy from Dave Cowens, hoisted it with both arms, and repeated the mantra of all winners of the last 40 years . . .When you water down your predictions with qualifiers and caveats, you're really trying to have it both ways in case things go south. The mention of all his bad predictions is merely a smokescreen for this fact.
“Nobody believed in this team,’’ said the Celtics owner.
Au contraire, Mr. Moneybags.
I believed in these Celtics when “nobody believed.’’ And I can prove it.
Before shamelessly wading deeper into this pool of indulgence and self-congratulation, let’s get something straight: I am almost always wrong about these things. I said there was no way the Red Sox were going to win the World Series after they lost Game 3 of the 2004 ALCS. I said the Patriots would win the Super Bowl in Glendale, Ariz. I bought stock in Tweeter and Circuit City. I said David Ortiz was done. I predicted “Gigli’’ would win best picture. I delayed getting a cellphone because I thought it was a fad that would fade over time.
But I saw this Celtic run coming back in March when things looked hopeless. And it’s all in print.
To see it in action, take Shank's latest "prediction":
So this is it. Celtics win banner No. 18.He was pretty upbeat about that game, wasn't he?
I haven’t felt this good about a pick since I bet the house on the Bruins in Game 7.
3 comments:
Vainglorious … only a Shank can accomplish that!
Most of us fans of “athletic competition” understood that once the Celtics got off to a 25-3 start this season they decided to slow down the horses and trot in for the final sprint at the end. Celtics management was going for the juggernaut in the playoffs and the season was just a training session.
I’m sure that Mr. Moneybags (Grousbeck) agreed with the strategy that Ainge + Rivers outlined.
Here is a fans response to the March 16 Shaughnessy article:
manorborn wrote:
Anyone who takes the trouble to think back a few months would remember that this team demonstrated its abilities when it was the dominant team in the NBA and projected by many scribes to win it all. Then they got hurt, got tired and (somewhat understandably) got bored.
Funny how only the Shank would be Vainglorious! Says a lot about the Shank’s character.
Perhaps I should have used a different term … Vainglorious is = “excessive or ostentatious pride especially in one's achievements”
What has the Shank ever achieved?
g
What an arrogant oaf....putting his OWN NAME in the HEADLINE of the column......yes,yes, I know writers don't usually write the headlines to columns but you can't tell me Shank didn't have some say in this.....narcissistic S.O.B.....he really does think it's ALL ABOUT HIM
Post a Comment