CELTICS HAVE NOTHING TO OFFER : BUMBLING BOSTON IS A BIG LOSER IN NBA SWEEPSTAKES.

Byline: Bob Ryan Boston Globe

The Lakers have signed Shaquille O'Neal. The Knicks have traded for Larry Johnson and have signed Allan Houston and Chris Childs. Basketball fans in those cities have a major buzz on.

And Boston?

Geez, I don't know. Jim McIlvaine, maybe?

The Celtics were never in any Shaquille O'Neal sweepstakes. The very idea is laughable. They were never in any Juwan Howard or Allan Houston or Reggie Miller sweepstakes, either.

I realize these are not exactly news bulletins.

The official reason for the Celtics not being in any of these high-level, free agent discussions is the salary cap. The Celtics have only $4 million and change to spend on free agents. That gets you a backup point guard with ambition, as the Knicks can testify. Four million barely pays for O'Neal's CD holders.

The Celtics would have you think their lack of money is the only reason they aren't out there shoring up the roster. That is only part of the reason, and a very minor one, at that.

The reason the Celtics are not involved where the NBA action is couldn't be more frightening. You want to know the reason? I mean, do you honestly want to know the real reason Boston's name never enters anyone's mind and is never heard uttered from anyone's lips?

Very simple: In the modern NBA, the Boston Celtics are irrelevant.

They are not merely a has-been team run by incompetents. They are just plain not relevant. They are the Sacramento of the East.

There are several reasons free agents change teams. Among them:

(1) Money. You either have it to offer, or you don't.

(2) A chance to win a title in the near future. A player says, ``Can I get myself on a championship team, or can I perhaps even be the difference in a team winning or not winning?''

(3) Is it a glamorous city? In other words, is it either a warm-weather port or a place where, in a modern player's mind, things are happening?

(4) Is there an A-list coach or general manager with a track record of success?

(5) Is the facility big-time?

(6) Will my endorsement opportunities be enhanced by relocating from Point A to Point B?

Depending on the individual, there could be other reasons. A possible inducement is coming back home, for example. Another might be the chance to reunite with a friend, although we found out how much weight that carried in the Howard situation, didn't we? Howard and official best buddy Chris Webber will now be communicating via AT&T.

Keep in mind that we are talking about the NBA as it exists in 1996. Things like history and tradition do not factor into the equation. Factors that once made Boston an attractive place to be no longer carry weight.

So let's examine the list.

(1) The Celtics are telling the truth. They have only enough money to go after second- and third-tier free agents. When a Chris Childs can command $4 million a year, you know this is a bizarre market. Keep in mind that until Kenny Anderson was traded, Childs was a backup.

(2) The Celtics have won 32, 35 and 33 games the past three years. The first digit for the 1996-97 victory total will again be a 3. They are not knocking on the door of a championship.

(3) To a modern player, Boston is an old, decrepit Eastern city where it's too cold. A new shopping mall in Coral Gables? Now we're talking.

(4) M.L. Carr an A-list coach or GM? Au contraire. If anything, Carr is the flip side of the equation. Agents are far more likely to advise players to avoid playing for an M.L. Carr than to seek reasons to play for him.

As for Celtic management in general, agents can point out that there is a very good reason a 33-49 team has so little money to spend. What exactly have the Celtics done lately in terms of roster manipulation that would lead any NBA observer to believe they know what they're doing? So why would any player with real options come to Boston?

(5) Yes, the facility is OK, but just OK. America West or the Rose Garden it ain't. It should be clear by now that the FleetCenter was very much the Kmart of new arenas.

(6) Endorsements?

As near as I can figure, the Celtics are one-half up and five down, the half being the arena. If they were still stuck in Boston Garden, they'd be pitching a shutout.

Forget about the history and the tradition. We're talking about modern players, not a weepy Bill Walton, who grew up worshipping Bill Russell. The Celtics last won in 1986. It's been nine years since they were in the NBA Finals and eight years since they were in the Eastern finals. Names like Russell, Cousy, Havlicek, the Joneses, Cowens and Silas mean zero to this crop. The flags have no meaning. The glorious Boston Celtics tradition has no meaning for a historically ignorant crop of kids who can barely recall Dr. J., let alone Elgin Baylor.