# Paul Pierce = Top-Tier Player?



## D5 (Jun 23, 2003)

A couple of seasons ago, we could consider The Truth one of the best players in the game but could we still consider him one now? Since the 01-02 season, Pierce's statistics have all gone down but that's not what could make him a 2nd-tier player. He doesn't seem like he can take over a game anymore like he could in 01-02.

2001-2002 Statistics 
26.1 PPG (44.2% FG, 40.4% 3P)
6.9 RPG (1.0 ORPG, 5.9 DRPG)
3.2 APG
1.88 SPG
1.05 BPG
2.94 TOPG

2002-2003 Statistics 
25.9 PPG (41.6% FG, 30.2% 3P)
7.3 RPG (1.3 ORPG, 6.0 DRPG)
4.4 APG
1.76 SPG
0.78 BPG
3.65 TOPG

2003-2004 Statistics 
23.0 PPG (40.2% FG, 29.9% 3P)
6.5 RPG (0.9 ORPG, 5.7 DRPG)
5.1 APG
1.64 SPG
0.65 BPG
3.79 TOPG


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

He got fat and lazy that's what happened. If he is in shape and ready to do other things besides go one on one, he should have a great season.


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

His team got sorrier and sorrier, for one. But in general, I just don't think he was ever that good a player, as in tier one. He's definitely very close, and arguably top 10. Definitely top 15.


----------



## LX (Oct 14, 2004)

Pierce is easily in the top 5 as far as shooting guards go, and I think he is a top-tier player. Sure, his numbers have decreased some, but he hasn't exactly had that great of a supporting cast in recent years. I mean when your starting lineups consist of Kenny Anderson, Eric Williams, Antoine Walker and Tony Battie in 02-03, and Chucky Atkins, Jiri Welsch, Mark Blount, and Chris Mihm last year, you don't really have a 2nd option. I'm pretty sure his numbers will improve, if not this year, then next year, as the rest of the team matures.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

He's been a little down stat-wise, but he still has the ability to be top tier. I think he started taking the "by himself" talk to the head, and started not caring and shooting anything last year, and then using the "by myself" excuse. He still definetly has the ability, he's in his prime age.


----------



## Shanghai Kid (Mar 7, 2003)

His 3-pt percentage has gone down ridiciously. He shot 40% on 3s 3 years ago and last year he shot 29%?


I think Pierce is past his prime in all honesty. Last year he settled for jumpshots too much and didn't seem as interested. He was exposed as the most turnover prone SG/SF in the league without Antoine, and Artest completely shut him down in the playoffs. I think Antoine Walker leaving DID affect his game as he saw more double teams and starting shooting AI like percentages. 

Personally, I'm not a huge Pierce fan. I think in a few years he's going to have a huge Stackhouse like decline. His game has become eerily similar to Stackhouse. I wouldn't be surprised if some team ends up trading some good young talent for Pierce only to be dissapointed in a few years.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

I agree Pierce seems to have gotten fat and lazy. But I look for him to be rejuvinated this year some. I think he's got to like the youth and vigor of the team around him now.

But it's too late, he's on the fringe of the top tier, and I think he'll be passed by this year by several young guys.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Pierce is a great competitor with a winning attitude. Compare celtics last year minus Pierce vs the Magic minus Tmac.

Yes I'll take him over TMac.

If you want to sit here and analyze stats thats great. Computers can do your part then.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

I wouldn't put Pierce in the overall top-ten. Or even in the top-15. He's probably top-20.

A few years ago, I considered him just a notch below McGrady/Bryant, but with his field goal percentage dropping off so steeply and his turnovers shooting up, it just isn't the case anymore.

As far as shooting guards go, I'd place him fifth in the league if Vince Carter is counted as a guard and fourth otherwise. But I expect Pierce to be passed up by LeBron James this season.


----------



## RP McMurphy (Jul 17, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Jamel Irief</b>!
> Pierce is a great competitor with a winning attitude. Compare celtics last year minus Pierce vs the Magic minus Tmac.
> 
> Yes I'll take him over TMac.
> ...


Agreed.


----------



## Clutch (Jun 2, 2004)

*top 20*

I think Paul is about a top 15-20 talent. Great player if you have a good supporting cast to take pressure off of him but not that effective as a "Lone" superstar I guess you could say.


----------



## c_dog (Sep 15, 2002)

Pierce is still among the best players in the league, and easily top 5 in terms of sg's/sf's. I have been really frustrated by his decline in shooting though. He was once one of the most deadly shooters in the game, but then he just couldn't shoot anymore. That takes away a lot of his game because his shooting was what separated him from the other good sg's.

But for some weird reason guys like Kobe and T-Mac's fg% also took a dip last year? Maybe it was just a fluke. As his preseason stats indicate, PP can still shoot. His fg% and 3p% are excellent so far. Let's hope PP rebounds from a horrible season.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>c_dog</b>!
> Pierce is still among the best players in the league, and easily top 5 in terms of sg's/sf's. I have been really frustrated by his decline in shooting though. He was once one of the most deadly shooters in the game, but then he just couldn't shoot anymore. That takes away a lot of his game because his shooting was what separated him from the other good sg's.
> 
> But for some weird reason guys like Kobe and T-Mac's fg% also took a dip last year? Maybe it was just a fluke. As his preseason stats indicate, PP can still shoot. His fg% and 3p% are excellent so far. Let's hope PP rebounds from a horrible season.


He can't get locked into silly one-on-one plays. He needs to move without the ball and get to the FT line. He has been very one-dimensional the last two years.


----------



## Kapono2Okafor (Oct 20, 2004)

i agree with his team gettin crappier he has no supporting cast until MAYBE this year and its still not to good...


----------



## walkon4 (Mar 28, 2003)

Paul has lost what he had in 2001- a second scoring option which pulled a defensive problem.

Antoine was also playing probbaly his best basketball, and Pierce fed off his play as well. Teams really couldnt double team both, so Paul and Antoine really thrived. Now however, he has foight through double teams and it has been tough for Paul to get those great looks.

I think with payton he will be able to get a better look at the basket.


----------



## Bad Bartons (Aug 23, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Jamel Irief</b>!
> Pierce is a great competitor with a winning attitude. Compare celtics last year minus Pierce vs the Magic minus Tmac.
> 
> Yes I'll take him over TMac.
> ...


This is right.


----------



## JT (Mar 1, 2004)

*hells*



> Originally posted by <b>futuristxen</b>!
> But it's too late, he's on the fringe of the top tier, and I think he'll be passed by this year by several young guys.


I also think Carmelo should pass him this year.



> Originally posted by <b>Minstrel</b>!
> But I expect Pierce to be passed up by LeBron James this season.


And why is that.


----------



## JT (Mar 1, 2004)

*why*

-anti-


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Hong Kong Fooey</b>!
> He got fat and lazy that's what happened.


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Hong Kong Fooey</b>!
> 
> He has been very one-dimensional the last two years.


It wouldn't hurt if Pierce had a PG to play with.


----------



## MongolianDeathCloud (Feb 27, 2004)

I like him better asa SF and better with some ball-handlers and playmakers around him. He doesn't possess the playmaking abilities, handles, or agility to setup a good shot for himself all on his own (but really, how many do ave these things?). Don't get me wrong, he;s still capable of doing this stuff, just not nearly as effective as when he's got some help and structure around him and less responsibilities with the ball.

I expect his FG% and TOs are a result of him having too much respnsibility handling the ball and creating his own shots.


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

PP led his team in PPG, RPG _and_ APG last year. Talk about not having any help.

With Payton in Boston, I think he'll get his numbers back up to where they were with Walker.


----------



## Debt Collector (Mar 13, 2003)

Pierce is still the man to me. i love the way he plays the game, he goes balls out every night. and he had a pretty weak supporting cast around him but was still able to get them to the playoffs. i think he needs a change of scenery however and i thought the PP for Vince rumors were a good idea but regardless Pierce is hovering around top 10 for me and will bounce back this year.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>VincentVega</b>!
> 
> 
> It wouldn't hurt if Pierce had a PG to play with.


I've been watching him on League Pass the last two years. He plays a lot of one on one basketball and rarely moves without the ball. It's not a myth, it's a fact.


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Hong Kong Fooey</b>!
> 
> 
> I've been watching him on League Pass the last two years. He plays a lot of one on one basketball and rarely moves without the ball. It's not a myth, it's a fact.


I really don't think it's any different than what Tmac has been doing the past few years. Pierce is just aggressive and has realized his teammates suck. In fact, I'd say that Tmac was probably too passive sometimes in Orlando the last couple yeasr, especially last year. 

And I don't know if you've watched Boston this preseason, but Pierce has been very good about sharing the ball.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

I disagree that Pierce's regression has to do with losing Antoine Walker. His fall-off began in 2002-03...Walker's final season with the Celtics. In fact, 2002-03 was a very dramatic drop-off from 2001-02.

Whatever caused Pierce to decline, it wasn't losing Walker. Most of it happened with Walker still in green and white.


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Hong Kong Fooey</b>!
> 
> 
> I've been watching him on League Pass the last two years. He plays a lot of one on one basketball and rarely moves without the ball. It's not a myth, it's a fact.


...because he had no PG.


----------



## CrossOver (May 19, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>VincentVega</b>!
> PP led his team in PPG, RPG and APG last year. Talk about not having any help.
> 
> With Payton in Boston, I think he'll get his numbers back up to where they were with Walker.


I believe if Payton buys into what the Celtics are preaching, PP is going to have a SOLID year.


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

Pierce is obviously obese. From a few days ago:


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

So you've been watching all those Celtic games from the last two years? 

And when I say out of shape, I mean basketball shape. He wasn't in shape last year and it was painfully obvious by the playoffs.


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Minstrel</b>!
> I disagree that Pierce's regression has to do with losing Antoine Walker. His fall-off began in 2002-03...Walker's final season with the Celtics.


Perhaps this is the case because Walker had arguably his worst season in a Boston uniform in '02-'03.



> In fact, 2002-03 was a very dramatic drop-off from 2001-02.


Pierce '01-'02: 40.3 mpg, 26.1 ppg, 6.9 rpg, 3.2 apg, 44% FG, 40% 3PT, 81% FT.

Pierce '02-'03: 39.2 mpg, 25.9 ppg, 7.3 rpg, 4.4 apg, 42% FG, 30% 3PT, 80% FT.

PP shot better in '01-'02, but he rebounded and assisted more efficiently the following year. Everything else is virtually identical. 



> Whatever caused Pierce to decline, it wasn't losing Walker. Most of it happened with Walker still in green and white.


Pierce's decreased efficiency is directly correlative to the dearth of PG in Boston. It's also somewhat related to the departure of Walker, a guy who took a lot of pressure off Pierce and allowed each player better, more efficient shots.


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Hong Kong Fooey</b>!
> So you've been watching all those Celtic games from the last two years?


Most of them, yeah.


----------



## Bron_Melo_ROY (Apr 12, 2004)

Paul Pierce is still a 1st-tier player, he is being overlooked because he doesn't have a half-way-decent supporting cast. The quality of the team has declined ever since Danny Ainge came and Jim O'Brien left.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>VincentVega</b>!
> 
> 
> Perhaps this is the case because Walker had arguably his worst season in a Boston uniform in '02-'03.


Walker had declined even more the previous year with no damage to Pierce's numbers.



> Pierce '01-'02: 40.3 mpg, 26.1 ppg, 6.9 rpg, 3.2 apg, 44% FG, 40% 3PT, 81% FT.
> 
> Pierce '02-'03: 39.2 mpg, 25.9 ppg, 7.3 rpg, 4.4 apg, 42% FG, 30% 3PT, 80% FT.
> 
> PP shot better in '01-'02, but he rebounded and assisted more efficiently the following year. Everything else is virtually identical.


The shooting is what I consider so significant. .442 FG% is elite these days for a high volume perimeter scorer. .416 is mediocre at best. One season of shooting like that wouldn't be concerning, but two straight seasons is. Losing such efficiency as a scorer makes him considerably less valuable.

The other part of his decline is that his turnovers went up. More so in 2002-03, with Walker around, then in 2003-04, when his turnovers increased again but not by as much.


----------



## Pan Mengtu (Jun 18, 2004)

I can't see what anyone likes about Pierce. He's a bad, check that, horrible, ball handler, average 3 point shooter, average slasher, average jump shooter (with bad form). He does nothing well really, he just takes a lot of shots and loves isolation. He's not a good basketball player. He's above average.


----------



## goNBAjayhawks (May 3, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Pan Mengtu</b>!
> I can't see what anyone likes about Pierce. He's a bad, check that, horrible, ball handler, average 3 point shooter, average slasher, average jump shooter (with bad form). He does nothing well really, he just takes a lot of shots and loves isolation. He's not a good basketball player. He's above average.



So horrible + average + average + average= above average -- you learn something new every day.


----------



## D5 (Jun 23, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>goNBAjayhawks</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> So horrible + average + average + average= above average -- you learn something new every day.


:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:


----------



## ZWW (Jan 17, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>TheTruth34</b>!
> Paul has lost what he had in 2001- a second scoring option which pulled a defensive problem.
> 
> Antoine was also playing probbaly his best basketball, and Pierce fed off his play as well. Teams really couldnt double team both, so Paul and Antoine really thrived. Now however, he has foight through double teams and it has been tough for Paul to get those great looks.
> ...


Bingo.


----------



## Vermillion (Mar 23, 2004)

I'm not sure about his placing, arguably top10-15, definitely top5 SG though. And yes, I'd take him over TMac.


----------



## John (Jun 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Minstrel</b>!
> 
> 
> Walker had declined even more the previous year with no damage to Pierce's numbers.
> ...


Good protection on T-mac FG%.
lol at one season isnt concering, but two!


----------



## Pan Mengtu (Jun 18, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>goNBAjayhawks</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> So horrible + average + average + average= above average -- you learn something new every day.


I didn't account for defense (which is good) and other areas of the game.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>John</b>!
> 
> 
> Good protection on T-mac FG%.
> lol at one season isnt concering, but two!


You always gotta guard against the haters and homers, yo.

Besides, one season is a blip. More than one season, especially getting worse, starts to look like a trend.

There is a difference between one and more-than-one.


----------



## goNBAjayhawks (May 3, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Pan Mengtu</b>!
> 
> 
> I didn't account for defense (which is good) and other areas of the game.


So what you are saying is that you have a bias and you only wanted to comment on his bad aspects rather then also point out his good qualities to paint a complete picture.


----------



## Pan Mengtu (Jun 18, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>goNBAjayhawks</b>!
> 
> 
> So what you are saying is that you have a bias and you only wanted to comment on his bad aspects rather then also point out his good qualities to paint a complete picture.


Since my post was not a scouting report, there was no need to point out his positive aspects as well as his negative. I was pointing out why he's highly overrated.


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Minstrel</b>!
> The shooting is what I consider so significant. .442 FG% is elite these days for a high volume perimeter scorer. .416 is mediocre at best. One season of shooting like that wouldn't be concerning, but two straight seasons is. Losing such efficiency as a scorer makes him considerably less valuable.
> 
> The other part of his decline is that his turnovers went up. More so in 2002-03, with Walker around, then in 2003-04, when his turnovers increased again but not by as much.


...because he had no PG.


----------



## lastlaugh (Oct 30, 2003)

You obviously have never watched more then ten minutes of a Celtics game over the last few years.


Pierce is not a guy who can lead a team. The Celtics team of last year shot a better FG % then the two years before. It was Pierce who would shoot them out of games because he felt the need to drive in between the 5 players on the other team insetad of passing it to an open teammate who shot a better % then him.

Pierce never showed up for the first 3 quarters of a game and Walker would be the guy doing all the dirty work till Pierce decided to show up for the forth quarter and take all the credit for those wins.

If Pierce was this great amazing player his fans make him out to be he would be able to takeover a game like Jorden or be a team player like Magic and get his teammates involved.

Walker didn't have a bad season in 2002/2003 he had an injury ridden season. If Pierce didn't need another player to carry the team till he decided to show up then there wouldn't be a problem in Boston.

In Boston it used to be all about the team. Pierce is not and never will be a true Celtic.








> Originally posted by <b>Minstrel</b>!
> I disagree that Pierce's regression has to do with losing Antoine Walker. His fall-off began in 2002-03...Walker's final season with the Celtics. In fact, 2002-03 was a very dramatic drop-off from 2001-02.
> 
> Whatever caused Pierce to decline, it wasn't losing Walker. Most of it happened with Walker still in green and white.


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

35 points (14-18 FT), 13 rebounds, 8 assists last night playing alongside a decent PG for the first time in years.

Yeah, Pierce sure is fat and overrated.


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

Pierce's first week of action with a legit PG:

24.5 ppg
8.3 rpg
6.3 apg
3.2:1 A/TO ratio
1.5 spg
46% FG
33% 3PT
81% FT
+27.75 Efficiency Rating


----------



## deranged40 (Jul 18, 2002)

It's amazing what a good point guard can do for ya.


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

It's amazing what happens when Pierce doesn't have to try to play three positions at once.


----------



## c_dog (Sep 15, 2002)

this is what i meant when i say i still think he's among the best players in the game. kobe and t-mac are the best sg's,hands down, but pp is a great player too, and even if he's not as good as t-mac and kobe, he can certainly hang with them on any given night.

i hope his high fg% holds up. he looks to be the pp of 2002.


----------



## lastlaugh (Oct 30, 2003)

Pierce is getting credit for Gary Paytons talent. Pierce was nothing last year. He got his points because he was the only guy on the team shooting the ball but the team was a mess and in disarray.

The years before that Walker did all the work till the forth quarter when Walker had to yell at Pierce to wake him up. Now Gary is being a leader and Pierce is following in his foot steps. It is about time people start giving credit to the leaders of the Celtics doing all the damn work while Pierce rides on their coattails. There is a reason that the one year Pierce had the chance to be a leader and lead his team he accomplished nothing but double digit playoff losses.
First tier players lead their teams. Shaq did it, Magic did it, Bird did it, MJ did it, Duncan is doing it etc... for Pierce's name to even be mentioned as a top tier player should make every real 1st tier player throw up in their soup right about now.

Last time I checked when all these above players were in their prime they made their teammates better. Pierce makes his worse and thats when he isn't berating them.


Pierce has never played 3 postitons in his career. He lived off Vin Bakers first great half last year and Mark Blounts second great half. Typical more excuses. I can't wait for more Kansas stalkers to show up and toot his horn.


----------



## deranged40 (Jul 18, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>lastlaugh</b>!
> Shaq did it, Magic did it, Bird did it, MJ did it, Duncan is doing it


Pierce isn't in their league, obviously, but they also had a lot better cast around them than PP has had the past few years.


----------



## John (Jun 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>lastlaugh</b>!
> Pierce is getting credit for Gary Paytons talent. Pierce was nothing last year. He got his points because he was the only guy on the team shooting the ball but the team was a mess and in disarray.
> 
> The years before that Walker did all the work till the forth quarter when Walker had to yell at Pierce to wake him up. Now Gary is being a leader and Pierce is following in his foot steps. It is about time people start giving credit to the leaders of the Celtics doing all the damn work while Pierce rides on their coattails. There is a reason that the one year Pierce had the chance to be a leader and lead his team he accomplished nothing but double digit playoff losses.
> ...


Great post, yeah Pierce sux! I wish there wasnt any "highpot" area on a basketballcourt, then look for his freaking numbers!


----------



## lastlaugh (Oct 30, 2003)

Shaq had Kobe
Duncan had no one but Parker yet they all learned how to make their teammates better without yelling at them and belittleing them.
Pierce gets his numbers but unless he has someone else telling him what to do he is useless and I can guarentee you that none of the real 1st tier players need other people to motivate them to do what they get paid to do.

Pierce did nothing last year but get his own numbers. It wasn't till Payton came along (or even last year when Vin did all the work the first half and Mark the second) that Pierce all of a sudden lead his team anywhere.





> Originally posted by <b>deranged40</b>!
> 
> 
> Pierce isn't in their league, obviously, but they also had a lot better cast around them than PP has had the past few years.


----------



## deranged40 (Jul 18, 2002)

Ok, Shaq only had Kobe. But those are two top-5 caliber players, not to mention an at least decent supporting cast. Duncan not only had Parker, but Ginobli, Bowen, and not to mention a future Hall-of-Famer in Robinson. I'm not saying Pierce is in their class at all, but it's pretty obvious you're a Pierce-hater and have nothing positive to say about him.


----------



## lastlaugh (Oct 30, 2003)

No one on that Spurs Championship team is better then Gary Payton ( edited because I forgot to add besides Tim Duncan)and after Kobe and Shaq that Laker team looks like the Celtics of this year and if you mean speaking the truth about Pierce and the player he is as hate then you must be right.
Anyone who doesn't kiss his a$$


I have watched the Celtics for 40 years and for you to even attempt to put him as a top tier player (everyone has their own opinion on what constitutes a top tier player and in my list the player has to be able to motivate himself in order to even be thought about as a top tier player.) is a joke. Top tier players lead teams to Championships.

Shaq had Kobe and Kobe is a big help but Duncan had no one, he basically did it all himself. Shaq was MVP so Kobe couldn't have been that much of a help. Regardless the best a Paul Pierce team could do was make the playoffs in the East and it wasn't because Pierce led them there. Vin Baker had a huge first half till he started drinking again and Mark Blount was the reason the Celtics last year did anything in the second half.


----------



## f22egl (Jun 3, 2004)

If you are referring to the current gary payton then comparing it to the 2003 NBA champtionship team, then.

Tim Duncan, David Robinson, Tony Parker, Manu Ginobli, and Bruce Bowen are all better than Payton.


----------



## deranged40 (Jul 18, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>lastlaugh</b>!
> 
> Shaq had Kobe and Kobe is a big help but Duncan had no one, he basically did it all himself. Shaq was MVP so Kobe couldn't have been that much of a help.



:laugh: You said Kobe was a big help, and then he wasn't much of a help. Yeah I'm sure a top 5 player in the league alongside the most dominant player since Jordan isn't about all the supporting cast you would need. Not to mention one of the best coaches ever.


----------



## c_dog (Sep 15, 2002)

wow, i didn't know pierce haters existed. i guess he's good enough to have a hater that must mean he's pretty darn good.

pierce is the heart and soul of the celtics. take away pierce and you're looking at a team not much better than the atlanta hawks.

payton is a great player, but he's a shell of his former self. he's still a top 10pg, but no way is he the leader of the celtics. he's one of the best pg to ever play the game, and he and pierce are playing very well together, but in no way is her telling pierce what to do. pierce got the c's to the playoffs(despite danny hoping that they tank), so that's got to say something about his ability to lead the team. you can twist his stats all you want, but you're just too blinded by hate to see how good a player he really is. no doubt payton's being on the team helped pierce regain his old top tier form, but pierce is always this good, this just shows what a good pg can do for you.


----------



## zero2hero00 (May 1, 2004)

no he isnt i would still take tracy mcgrady and kobe over pierce anyday.


----------



## Premier (Oct 30, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>c_dog</b>!
> 
> payton is a great player, but he's a shell of his former self. he's still a top 10pg, but no way is he the leader of the celtics.


 ...And who is exactly? Pierce? To make it simple, our chemistry was terrible last year. This year, there has been no reported chemistry problems thus far. Did trading away Chris Mihm really lose all of our chemistry problems.  ...Pierce has never been a leader in his NBA career and he isn't to blame. Guys like Antoine Walker, Erick Strickland, Eric Williams, Chucky Atkins, and now Gary Payton were/are the leaders of the Celtics. 


> pierce got the c's to the playoffs(despite danny hoping that they tank)


 ...Wrong. The lackluster play of the bottom of the Eastern Confrence go the Celtics into the playoffs last year where they were easily ousted by the Pacers. The additon of Chucky Atkins certainly didn't hurt.


> Originally posted by <b>Celts11</b>!
> 
> You are forgetting that we are in the Eastern Confrence and last year, while trying to tank the season, we ended up with the #8 seed, with a terrible coach, bad team chemistry, and an overall worse team than what we are putting out this year.





> so that's got to say something about his ability to lead the team


No it really doesn't.

...And to restate my opinion, I like Pierce as a player. I think he is a very good player. Top 15 even, but in no way is he a leader.


----------



## ZWW (Jan 17, 2004)

Pierce must've ate some bad chowder because his performance against the Bobcats was a stinker.


----------



## lastlaugh (Oct 30, 2003)

Any Celtic fan who has watched Pierce play last year and the years before that will tell you he is not a leader.

I don't hate Paul Pierce but that doesn't mean I like him either. I don't like people who spit at other teams benches when they are wearing the Celtics uniform. I also don't like player he berate their teammates, blame them for loses when they themselves are the reason the team is losing but Pierce has no problem taking credit when the team wins.
It is easy to label anyone who call's him out a hater.

Pierce is not a first tier player. I don't understand how anyone could ever think he was.





> Originally posted by <b>c_dog</b>!
> wow, i didn't know pierce haters existed. i guess he's good enough to have a hater that must mean he's pretty darn good.
> 
> pierce is the heart and soul of the celtics. take away pierce and you're looking at a team not much better than the atlanta hawks.
> ...


----------



## Anima (Jun 3, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>ZWW</b>!
> Pierce must've ate some bad chowder because his performance against the Bobcats was a stinker.


But his team still won by 17. That wouldn't have happened last year or the years before. And it's not just because of Payton, although he is a big help, he also has Davis and a healthy LaFrentz, along with some good young players.

Davis is scoring while which is taking some pressure off of PP. Although, I really hope he's rebounding improves.

LaFrentz got off to a slow start but he's improving every game. He's already had one double double this year and came close to another one tonight despite playing limited minutes.

Jefferson is developing rapidly and is already the first big off the bench. He could soon take over Blounts starting spot.

Allen is a lil Artest without the insanity. Nuff said.

They also have some other kids like West, who is on IR with a broken thumb, and Perkins who will very good players in a couple of years.


----------



## ZWW (Jan 17, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Epadfield</b>!
> 
> 
> But his team still won by 17. That wouldn't have happened last year or the years before. And it's not just because of Payton, although he is a big help, he also has Davis and a healthy LaFrentz, along with some good young players.
> ...


I agree. I am very encouraged by the supporting casts' performances this year, albeit it's still early in the season. I'm still optimistic and am not jumping ship.


----------



## LX (Oct 14, 2004)

I dont see how you can say Pierce's performance was bad. You don't have to put up 20+ points to have a good outing. Granted, yeah he turned the ball over 6 times, but most of those were in the first half, he settled down nicely in the 2nd. He had quite a few steals, and assists. Not his best but good enough for the win.


----------



## ZWW (Jan 17, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Lanteri</b>!
> I dont see how you can say Pierce's performance was bad. You don't have to put up 20+ points to have a good outing. Granted, yeah he turned the ball over 6 times, but most of those were in the first half, he settled down nicely in the 2nd. He had quite a few steals, and assists. Not his best but good enough for the win.


I just expected at least 10 points and a better shooting night from Pierce. The 7 turnovers shouldn't happen unless he gets the ball a 100 times.


----------



## c_dog (Sep 15, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>lastlaugh</b>!
> Any Celtic fan who has watched Pierce play last year and the years before that will tell you he is not a leader.
> 
> I don't hate Paul Pierce but that doesn't mean I like him either. I don't like people who spit at other teams benches when they are wearing the Celtics uniform. I also don't like player he berate their teammates, blame them for loses when they themselves are the reason the team is losing but Pierce has no problem taking credit when the team wins.
> ...


Based on what are you saying he's not a leader, just based on personal opinion from watching him play?

i watch pierce play too and he certainly is a leader in my eyes. i've said it before, he's the reason the celtics are a respectable team. not a leader? take out pierce and we'll see how good the c's are. you can say he's a poor leader all you want but fact of the matter is he is only a positive on the team.

and i think pierce can be a first tier player, and he's always been able to hang with the very best. kobe and t-mac may be the best sg's in the league, but really, pierce is not that far behind them.


----------



## Premier (Oct 30, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Lanteri</b>!
> 
> I dont see how you can say Pierce's performance was bad. You don't have to put up 20+ points to have a good outing. Granted, yeah he turned the ball over 6 times, but most of those were in the first half, he settled down nicely in the 2nd. He had quite a few steals, and assists. Not his best but good enough for the win.


Pierce was just horrendous in this game. If you watched the game, I don't see how you wouldn't agree. Even stats can easily show how bad Pierce performed last night against a bad team.

37 MIN 3-13 FG 4-7 FT 7 REB 7 AST 7 TO 4 STL 10 PTS

Pierce is expected to produce better numbers and be more of an overall help toward his team. Everyone has their off night, but...

Marcus Banks outshined Pierce. Hopefully, Pierce will rebound againts the Wizards in 4 days.


> Originally posted by *Epafield*!Jefferson is developing rapidly and is already the first big off the bench. He could soon take over Blounts starting spot.


I seriously doubt that Jefferson will take over a starting spot this year. I think he's a good player and I'm certainly a fan of him, but I don't think he is ready as a defender just yet. I would rather have Perkins see some of Jefferson's minutes. And if Jefferson does start, he would certainly not take over Blounts starting spot. He is borderline 6' 10". He would takeover the PF spot, which is Lafrentz's for now. Plus, Blount is 5x better than Lafrentz.


----------

