# Paul Pierce is the league's most underrated superstar



## Louie (Jun 13, 2002)

I know that sounds like an oxy moron, but there seems to be kind of a stigma around Pierce that he's not in the same class as Kobe or TMac. He just dropped 40 on two of the league's best perimeter defenders (Harrington and Artest) to singlehandedly drag his Celtics team to victory, absolutely taking over down the stretch. He is incredibly clutch- that was one of the most amazing performances I've seen in a while.
On the other hand, I'm starting to think that Jermaine O'Neal may be the most overrated. Note to Isaiah- STOP GIVING IT TO JERMAINE DOWN THE STRETCH! You have Reggie freakin' Miller on your team!!:upset:


----------



## W1Z0C0Z (Jun 18, 2002)

Yup, Pierce is.


----------



## kcchiefs-fan (Oct 28, 2002)

I'll second that. He had freakin Vince Carter voted onto the all-star game, while playing only 10 mediocre games, before him. I don't know how big a margin, but last year Carter got more than a million votes more than Pierce. And Pierce isn't quite as good as Tmac or Kobe, but he's right there, he's very close. A hell of a lot closer than many give him credit before. How could he not be top 10 in the NBA? Seriously, people in here all the time are saying it's between Kobe and Tmac as the best player in the league, and then leave Pierce off of their Top 10 list. The guy's a star, plain and simple, one of the toughest guys to stop in the league. And who is better at getting to the foul line? Easily Top 10 IMO.


----------



## Pinball (Aug 3, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>kcchiefs-fan</b>!
> I'll second that. He had freakin Vince Carter voted onto the all-star game, while playing only 10 mediocre games, before him. I don't know how big a margin, but last year Carter got more than a million votes more than Pierce. And Pierce isn't quite as good as Tmac or Kobe, but he's right there, he's very close. A hell of a lot closer than many give him credit before. How could he not be top 10 in the NBA? Seriously, people in here all the time are saying it's between Kobe and Tmac as the best player in the league, and then leave Pierce off of their Top 10 list. The guy's a star, plain and simple, one of the toughest guys to stop in the league. And who is better at getting to the foul line? Easily Top 10 IMO.


I'll give you that much. He's easily a top 10 player in this league and is everybit as good as TMac and Kobe on a few select nights. I don't think he'll ever be as good as they are because he's not quite as good right now and he's older so he'll peek sooner. However, in an era where there are so many great perimeter players it isn't a bad thing being 3rd best. I still can't believe that some people rate Vince Carter ahead of Pierce. Vince hasn't been healthy for 2 years and even when he was he was never as well rounded as Pierce is.


----------



## kcchiefs-fan (Oct 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Pinball</b>!
> 
> 
> I'll give you that much. He's easily a top 10 player in this league and is everybit as good as TMac and Kobe on a few select nights. I don't think he'll ever be as good as they are because he's not quite as good right now and he's older so he'll peek sooner. However, in an era where there are so many great perimeter players it isn't a bad thing being 3rd best. I still can't believe that some people rate Vince Carter ahead of Pierce. Vince hasn't been healthy for 2 years and even when he was he was never as well rounded as Pierce is.


I don't think he'll ever be as good as Tmac or Kobe either. The main reason being he doesn't have the athletic skills they do. He's not a slouch athletically, he's very gifted, but Kobe and Tmac are among the best in the league as far as athleticism goes. And he's not as good as they are right now, but he's damn close. And people laugh when somebody tries to point that out to them, they don't actually consider how good he really is. The Celts aren't on TV all that often, maybe they don't get to see him enough. Maybe they point to his FG% without thinking about what kind of system the Celtics run and the kind of shots Pierce sometimes has to put up. The man averaged 26, 7.5, and 4.5, and is a better defender than Tmac, yet he gets no respect from casual and hardcore fans alike. The guy's very talented, and a very hard worker. He's very underappreciated for what he does. I'd put him over Dirk at this point, as well as Iverson. Not many people on these boards, or in the media, and certainly not in the general public, would do that. He's not in the Top 5. Kobe, Tmac, KG, Duncan, and Shaq all make sure of that. But he's right there on the bubble IMO.


----------



## SkywalkerAC (Sep 20, 2002)

i'd say the fact that i don't even consider him a superstar is indicative of how underrated he really is


----------



## JNice (Jul 13, 2002)

He is a superstar. I'd say he is on a level just below Tmac/Kobe as far as wing players.

I don't think there is a better 4th quarter player in the league though.

He needs better players around him. Walker is way overrated.


----------



## TheLastTruePG (Mar 25, 2003)

Paul is a very good player.. But he's underrated by the fans not his peers..


----------



## rocketeer (Oct 7, 2002)

yeah pierce is definately a great player. i think he might be top 5 in the league. 1 and 2 are duncan and garnett. 3 and 4 are tmac and kobe. but after that pierce, iverson, kidd, and shaq are all pretty close. but he is no doubt a top 10 player.


----------



## JNice (Jul 13, 2002)

Well, Shaq is #1. And more than likely he will be until he retires. So Pierce is not top 5. I think clearly the top 5 in the league are Shaq, Duncan, KG, Tmac and Kobe.


----------



## rocketeer (Oct 7, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Dee Bo</b>!
> Well, Shaq is #1. And more than likely he will be until he retires. So Pierce is not top 5. I think clearly the top 5 in the league are Shaq, Duncan, KG, Tmac and Kobe.


i don't think shaq is #1 anymore. but i guess he has these playoffs to prove that he still is. we'll see. 

but if shaq is top 5, that just means that pierce is fighting with iverson and kidd for 6th in the league. and 6th in the entire league is pretty good for a guy that most people don't talk about.


----------



## kcchiefs-fan (Oct 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>rocketeer</b>!
> 
> 
> i don't think shaq is #1 anymore. but i guess he has these playoffs to prove that he still is. we'll see.
> ...


He's better than Iverson and Kidd IMO. His percentage isn't much better than Iverson's this year, but most years it's a good 5% better, and this is in a system in which they hoist three's damn near every trip down the court. As for Kidd, they're completely different, but I definitely think he's better. Personally, I think GP is better than Kidd (although it definitely didn't appear that way in today's game). Shaq isn't number 1 anymore, people are just used to calling him that. He doesn't even put up that great of numbers anymore, and he doesn't play as often as the other stars. Would I put him before Pierce? Yes, IMO Pierce is 6th in the league, behind KG, Duncan, Kobe, Tmac, and Shaq. But there's an arument to be made that Pierce belongs in the Top 5 as well.


----------



## Pinball (Aug 3, 2002)

Another apect of his game that people sleep on is his D. It is very good and he puts a great deal of effort into it. Again, the fact that he isn't a spectacular athlete hurts him a little because he doesn't look like a great defender but he's very good. Vince has never heard of the word and he's probably more consistent than McGrady.


----------



## kcchiefs-fan (Oct 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Pinball</b>!
> Another apect of his game that people sleep on is his D. It is very good and he puts a great deal of effort into it. Again, the fact that he isn't a spectacular athlete hurts him a little because he doesn't look like a great defender but he's very good. Vince has never heard of the word and he's probably more consistent than McGrady.


Yes, that might be the most underrated aspect of his game. Everyone knows he can score, but they don't notice his all-around game. He's a much better defender than Tmac IMO, he just puts a lot of effort into it. I've seen him win games down the stretch because of his D. He's not as good as Kobe defensively, because Kobe puts forth the effort and has more ability, but he's a notch ahead of Tmac I think.


----------



## walkon4 (Mar 28, 2003)

*I LOVE THE SUPPORT*

THE TRUTH IS THE TRUTH..


PIERCE WAS JUST SICK TODAY. 


HOLLA


----------



## South Stunna (Feb 25, 2003)

*Re: I LOVE THE SUPPORT*



> Originally posted by <b>TheTruth34</b>!
> THE TRUTH IS THE TRUTH..
> 
> 
> ...


Caps?


----------



## ThereisnoIinteam3 (Apr 19, 2003)

Pierce is hardly underated. Not by the fans of the Boston Celtics, not by the media and certainly not by the refs or coaches/GM's who voted him onto the top ten players in the NBA.


Kobe has won three rings and deserves all the credit he gets. T-Mac is an incredible scorer who also deserves the credit he gets.

I don't see how anyone could even consider him under-rated.


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ThereisnoIinteam3</b>!
> Pierce is hardly underated. Not by the fans of the Boston Celtics, not by the media and certainly not by the refs or coaches/GM's who voted him onto the top ten players in the NBA.
> 
> 
> ...


Pierce is underrated, by everyone. I myself am not a huge PP fan (of this year), but what he did today it just felt like Retro Pierce, he was awsome today.


BTW Twan is not overrated, he's underrated.


----------



## walkon4 (Mar 28, 2003)

*toine is overrated*

he is pretty lazy on the floor.

Plays NO D

Never hustles

chucks threes

Pierce is underrated. Toine is overrated


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

*Re: toine is overrated*



> Originally posted by <b>TheTruth34</b>!
> he is pretty lazy on the floor.
> 
> Plays NO D
> ...


Nah, your wrong, your a Pierce fan, so you'll try to kill Twan with every chance you get.


----------



## ThereisnoIinteam3 (Apr 19, 2003)

*Re: Re: toine is overrated*



> Originally posted by <b>aquaitious</b>!
> 
> 
> Nah, your wrong, your a Pierce fan, so you'll try to kill Twan with every chance you get.


Exactly.






Antoine Walker is hardly on the rated scale so him being overrated makes little to no sense.


----------



## walkon4 (Mar 28, 2003)

*man be real*

if I was a pierce fan or wasnt, I would still think it..

You have to look from an outsiders point of view man.


Walker does nothing but shoot threes. When he cant do that, he is pretty much useless. 

so slow and lazy

he has 2 moves... Alittle shake and bake on the perimiter, and alittle shoulder fake in the post


----------



## ThereisnoIinteam3 (Apr 19, 2003)

*Re: man be real*



> Originally posted by <b>TheTruth34</b>!
> if I was a pierce fan or wasnt, I would still think it..
> 
> You have to look from an outsiders point of view man.
> ...



You are obviously not a Celtics fan or you would understand it takes a team to win a game. Your comment are the exact opposite of someone who is looking at an "outsiders" point of view. I could bring %'s into this but I won't.

Who ever heard of a New York Celtics fan anyway lol


----------



## John (Jun 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Louie</b>!
> I know that sounds like an oxy moron, but there seems to be kind of a stigma around Pierce that he's not in the same class as Kobe or TMac. He just dropped 40 on two of the league's best perimeter defenders (Harrington and Artest) to singlehandedly drag his Celtics team to victory, absolutely taking over down the stretch. He is incredibly clutch- that was one of the most amazing performances I've seen in a while.
> On the other hand, I'm starting to think that Jermaine O'Neal may be the most overrated. Note to Isaiah- STOP GIVING IT TO JERMAINE DOWN THE STRETCH! You have Reggie freakin' Miller on your team!!:upset:


Did he just screns to get to the line? Please Advise!


----------



## Rocket23 (Jul 12, 2002)

*Re: Re: man be real*



> Originally posted by <b>ThereisnoIinteam3</b>!
> 
> 
> Who ever heard of a New York Celtics fan anyway lol


That's an oxymoron, isn't it? That's like a Boston Yankee fan.


----------



## MiamiHeat03 (Mar 28, 2003)

u gotta be good if you carry a team to win.paul pierce 21 FT in the 4th quarter.IN THE PLAYOFFS.


----------



## kcchiefs-fan (Oct 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ThereisnoIinteam3</b>!
> Pierce is hardly underated. Not by the fans of the Boston Celtics, not by the media and certainly not by the refs or coaches/GM's who voted him onto the top ten players in the NBA.
> 
> 
> ...


Are you saying he didn't belong listed in the Top 10? Nobody's saying he's as good as Kobe or Tmac, and THAT'S THE POINT. Nobody mentions him in the same breathe as those guys. He's not as good as them, but the distance between them is much closer than most people think. The coaches and GM's know what they're talking about. But when was he voted Top 10 by them? Anyway, the fact is if they held a poll for the Top 10 players in the NBA on ESPN.com, Pierce wouldn't be on it. And he deserves to be, the man is easily top 10. Where exactly would you rate him? I mean, you're talking about how Kobe and Tmac deserve all their credit, but Pierce doesn't get anywhere close to the credit those guys get. Hell, there are probably quite a few people out there that just occasionally flip on an NBA game to spend the evening relaxing, that don't even know who the hell he is. Yes, Kobe and Tmac deserve the credit they get, that's why they're not underrated, Pierce deserves more credit than he gets, that's why he is underrated.


----------



## jazzy1 (Jul 16, 2002)

Pierce was the 2nd best 4th quarter scorer this year in the league behind Kobe and is the league's 2nd best clutch wing player. 

This is the list
1. Kobe
2. Pierce
3. AI
4. Mashburn
5. Tmac

This is just about being clutch, not all around game, just in the 4th to bring home wins . Pierce's creativity off the dribble is very impressive his handle is only 2nd to Kobe's as far creativity among wings.


----------



## mrsister (Sep 9, 2002)

Pierce not only led the fourth quarter offensive surge, but he also led the team in rebounds, steals, and assists. That's incredible. He looked way off his game for three quarters but didn't give up at all. The guy is fearless. You don't get to the line 21 times by being tentative. He may not be as pretty as Kobe or T-Mac, but he gets the job done. The commentators were ga-ga over Artest's steals, but Pierce had just as many. I don't really care if he's top 5 or top 10 as long as he's on my team. 

I think Pierce got a bad rap after the World Basketball Championships. Stupid George Karl told him he was the main offensive option and to keep shooting the ball, and then when they lost, he called Pierce selfish. Pierce prevented them from losing much earlier and was the only reliable scorer on the team. Not to mention, he was 3rd in assists on the team behind the 2 point guards (by only a couple assists). 

On Antoine... he brings so much more to the team than scoring. He's slow and prodding and plays no D? Are you sure you're watching the same games I am? He's one of the quickest PFs in the league. He blew by a lot of defenders tonight. He also has fast hands and can deflect a lot of balls and bother people. He's a good rebounder and great passer. Most importantly, though, he's a leader and motivator. I bet he had a hand in not letting Pierce get down on himself after the first three quarters. Both Walker and Pierce have their faults, but you can't deny they're the reason the Celtics are even in the playoffs. A lot of what they do is because of the coaching, which a lot of people don't agree with, but you can't blame them for that. With another coach, you probably wouldn't see so many threes, but those two would be just as valuable. By the way, only 5 of Walker's 20 shots tonight were threes.


----------



## kcchiefs-fan (Oct 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>mrsister</b>!
> Pierce not only led the fourth quarter offensive surge, but he also led the team in rebounds, steals, and assists. That's incredible. He looked way off his game for three quarters but didn't give up at all. The guy is fearless. You don't get to the line 21 times by being tentative. He may not be as pretty as Kobe or T-Mac, but he gets the job done. The commentators were ga-ga over Artest's steals, but Pierce had just as many. I don't really care if he's top 5 or top 10 as long as he's on my team.
> 
> I think Pierce got a bad rap after the World Basketball Championships. Stupid George Karl told him he was the main offensive option and to keep shooting the ball, and then when they lost, he called Pierce selfish. Pierce prevented them from losing much earlier and was the only reliable scorer on the team. Not to mention, he was 3rd in assists on the team behind the 2 point guards (by only a couple assists).
> ...


Walker has a lot of talent, but his main problem is shot selection. Basically, it's horrible. They needa move him to SF, because that's what he really is, and find a PF. Maybe Collison will still be around for their pick, but probably not. He's a very good athlete for his size, and is a good passer, but he needs to take better shots and occasionally be a little more unselfish.


----------



## Louie (Jun 13, 2002)

> Did he just screns to get to the line? Please Advise!


What do you mean?


----------



## c_dog (Sep 15, 2002)

I've always liked Pierce. I love watching players like Pierce, Ray, and T-Mac who just manages to make basketball look so damn easy.


----------



## walkon4 (Mar 28, 2003)

*yea*

I just dont like Walkers game..


I play ball seriously, and cant see watching antoine walker to watch to improve my own skills..

Hes just so lazy. I dont care what anyone says. ALL he does it shoot threes.. If that doesnt work, hes pretty much done, because none falls for the dumb walker shake on the perimeter.


----------



## BEEZ (Jun 12, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>kcchiefs-fan</b>!
> 
> 
> I He's very underappreciated for what he does. I'd put him over Dirk at this point, as well as Iverson.


This is going a little to far right here. No way hes better than Dirk and no way in hell is he better than Iverson. When Paul Pierce leads the league in scoring or when Paul takes a team to the Finals then I'll mention him above AI. Dont say he has to share the ball with Antoine either, because if anything that is a luxury for him to shoot even more.


----------



## chapi (Apr 4, 2003)

i think pp is 2nd best SG/SF type of player in the league.

SG/SF:
1st Kobe (can't compare he got shaq)
2nd Paul (makes his team better)
3rd T-mac (orlando don't have to many wins)

as a pure SG none of the three is 1st

SG:
1st Iverson
2nd R.Miller


----------



## kcchiefs-fan (Oct 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BEEZ</b>!
> 
> 
> This is going a little to far right here. No way hes better than Dirk and no way in hell is he better than Iverson. When Paul Pierce leads the league in scoring or when Paul takes a team to the Finals then I'll mention him above AI. Dont say he has to share the ball with Antoine either, because if anything that is a luxury for him to shoot even more.


No way in hell he's better than AI? Come on man, he averages more points, rebounds, and shoots a better percentage. I can't remember AI's apg off the top of my head, but Pierce gets 4.5 a game. Really the only thing Iverson has on him is steals, but that's just because he plays a different kind of defense then Pierce. Pierce is much better than AI IMO. Dirk, that's closer. But I personally wouldn't hesistate in calling Pierce the better player. I think he does more than Dirk, and is a better all-around scorer as well. I'm not talking about AI's past, there was a point when he was better than Pierce, but that time is long gone.


----------



## BEEZ (Jun 12, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>kcchiefs-fan</b>!
> 
> 
> No way in hell he's better than AI? Come on man, he averages more points, rebounds, and shoots a better percentage. I can't remember AI's apg off the top of my head, but Pierce gets 4.5 a game. Really the only thing Iverson has on him is steals, but that's just because he plays a different kind of defense then Pierce. Pierce is much better than AI IMO. Dirk, that's closer. But I personally wouldn't hesistate in calling Pierce the better player. I think he does more than Dirk, and is a better all-around scorer as well. I'm not talking about AI's past, there was a point when he was better than Pierce, but that time is long gone.


Please tell me one season where he has avg more points than AI. He is what 7-8 inches taller than AI wieghs 70 pds more than he does and has NEVER and I mean NEVER avg more points than him. AI avg a full assist a game more than him, only 3 rebounds less than him only shoots .002 percent less than him and steals 1 more steal per game more than PP and Paul Pierce is better than him. Yeah Right. Also. To be his size Paul Pierce gets lit up quite often but yeah hes better than AI


----------



## TMOD (Oct 12, 2002)

Its so hard to rank players, as some are more suited to their team and others around them, so all I'll say is this: Paul Pierce is an elite offensive player, with an all-around game to back that up. He won't ever be more than a scorer thats decent at the rest of the game. Guys like McGrady, Kobe, maybe Iverson, could or do go beyond that. That is what separates them, especially T-Mac and Kobe, for me.


----------



## kcchiefs-fan (Oct 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BEEZ</b>!
> 
> 
> Please tell me one season where he has avg more points than AI. He is what 7-8 inches taller than AI wieghs 70 pds more than he does and has NEVER and I mean NEVER avg more points than him. AI avg a full assist a game more than him, only 3 rebounds less than him only shoots .002 percent less than him and steals 1 more steal per game more than PP and Paul Pierce is better than him. Yeah Right. Also. To be his size Paul Pierce gets lit up quite often but yeah hes better than AI


PP is a much better man defender that AI. He can shut his opponents down, all AI can do is fill the lanes and get steals. I didn't mean to put down he averaged more points, my fault. But, he normally shoots much better % than AI, and he still is this year playing in a system in which he has to take ill-advised shots all the time. Pierce is a tremendous rebounder for a guard, and very good passer, and he's a better scorer than AI IMO. AI can get his, but most of the time you look at the stat sheet, he's 10-35. I would choose PP well before I would choose AI. Your entitled to your opinion, but I think Pierce is a far superior player.


----------



## Desert Nomad (Jul 15, 2002)

Pierce is too inconsistent! Don't get too excited over Boston's win. I can't stand either team, but Indiana still should win the series.


----------



## TheRifleman (May 20, 2002)

*Re: yea*



> Originally posted by <b>TheTruth34</b>!
> I just dont like Walkers game..
> 
> 
> ...



You and Larry Bird don't see eye to eye when it comes to Walker. Bird sees <b>"ALL" </b> that Walker does BESIDES scoring when almost nobody else is scoring. 
Like covering the weak side when nobody else is.
Like being a great team defender by his dang fast and ACCURATE rotations. 
Like setting a million and one screens for his teammates. 
Like getting the ball to his teammates when and where they need the ball. 
Like changing the tempo of the game when it is needed.
ETC.


----------



## BEEZ (Jun 12, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>kcchiefs-fan</b>!
> 
> 
> PP is a much better man defender that AI. He can shut his opponents down, all AI can do is fill the lanes and get steals. I didn't mean to put down he averaged more points, my fault. But, he normally shoots much better % than AI, and he still is this year playing in a system in which he has to take ill-advised shots all the time. Pierce is a tremendous rebounder for a guard, and very good passer, and he's a better scorer than AI IMO. AI can get his, but most of the time you look at the stat sheet, he's 10-35. I would choose PP well before I would choose AI. Your entitled to your opinion, but I think Pierce is a far superior player.


If hes so far superior how come he hasnt even made it to a conference final yet. He has a legitimate 2nd scorer and you say he takes a bunch of ill-advised shots. Why??? I didnt know that Paul Pierce is a better scorer how come he hasnt won a scoring title yet. Please dont say its because he has to share the ball with Walker, because if anything that should free him up much more


----------



## kcchiefs-fan (Oct 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BEEZ</b>!
> 
> 
> If hes so far superior how come he hasnt even made it to a conference final yet. He has a legitimate 2nd scorer and you say he takes a bunch of ill-advised shots. Why??? I didnt know that Paul Pierce is a better scorer how come he hasnt won a scoring title yet. Please dont say its because he has to share the ball with Walker, because if anything that should free him up much more


Where were you last year, he DID make it to a conference final. And he beat Iverson in the process of doing it. Are you a Sixer fan or just an Iverson fan, don't you remember the the first round last year? Pierce killed the sixers in Game 5, one of the best performances I've ever seen. Then they went on to beat the Pistons fairly easily, and damn near beat the Nets in the Conference Finals (were up 2-1). Pierce hasn't won a scoring title basically because he doesn't take nearly as many shots. Iverson takes the most shots on the planet, that's why he scores. Most of the time AI is barely 40%, this year he shot a little over 41%, which is a very good year shooting for him. Pierce had a very off year shooting, normally he's mid 40's. The reason he takes ill-advised shots is because O'Brien doesn't know anything about the offensive side of the ball, so they basically just go down and hoist threes. Larry Brown on the other hand is a terrific all-around coach, and Iverson doesn't have that achilles heel. Pierce is obviously a better rebounder, he's a better shut-down defender, and when you consider how often he has the ball in his hands compared to Iverson, he's at least an equal passer. If you think Iverson is better, I'm not going to argue with you, you can have your opinion. But Pierce is the far better player IMO.

And btw, the opponents don't have to key in on Toine, they know they can leave him along and he'll take the dumbest shot you'll ever see. He has about as bad of shot selection as I've ever seen. I wouldn't call him a legitimate second scorer. And Iverson has the superior supp. cast, so that frees him up too.


----------



## The_Franchise (Mar 30, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>BEEZ</b>!
> 
> 
> This is going a little to far right here. No way hes better than Dirk and no way in hell is he better than Iverson. When Paul Pierce leads the league in scoring or when Paul takes a team to the Finals then I'll mention him above AI. Dont say he has to share the ball with Antoine either, because if anything that is a luxury for him to shoot even more.


I love Nowitzki, but are you telling me he has carried his team better than Pierce? They'll give you the same results on offense, although Pierce can take over games like no other, but Dirk has yet to develop a defensive game! This is crazy saying Dirk is better than Pierce at THIS MOMENT right now... If you don't remember, Pierce almost carried the whole Celtics team into the NBA Finals a year ago!


----------



## kcchiefs-fan (Oct 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>The Franchise</b>!
> 
> 
> I love Nowitzki, but are you telling me he has carried his team better than Pierce? They'll give you the same results on offense, although Pierce can take over games like no other, but Dirk has yet to develop a defensive game! This is crazy saying Dirk is better than Pierce at THIS MOMENT right now... If you don't remember, Pierce almost carried the whole Celtics team into the NBA Finals a year ago!


I personally think it's more far fethced to say AI is better than Pierce, let alone much better, like Beez was implying. I think Pierce is better than both of them, but Dirk is better than AI IMO.


----------



## mrsister (Sep 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BEEZ</b>!
> 
> 
> If hes so far superior how come he hasnt even made it to a conference final yet. He has a legitimate 2nd scorer and you say he takes a bunch of ill-advised shots. Why??? I didnt know that Paul Pierce is a better scorer how come he hasnt won a scoring title yet. Please dont say its because he has to share the ball with Walker, because if anything that should free him up much more


Who puts so much stock in a scoring title? They put up a graphic before the Magic-Pistons game that showed how the teams that had the player who won the scoring title that year fared in the playoffs, and they all lost at some point - most of the time early on. Jerry Stackhouse almost had a scoring title a couple years ago, and his Pistons sucked big time. It wasn't until he started concentrating less on scoring that his team did well. 

Anyway, the argument isn't who's a better scorer. It's who's a better player. There's a difference. And it's also not who's a better player for their size. Then you'd have to say AI is better than Kobe and T-Mac, too. Pierce and AI have their strengths and weaknesses and can both carry their respective teams. I really couldn't say who's better, but I can say AI isn't better because of the reasons you've given. You'll have to come up with something else.


----------



## ThereisnoIinteam3 (Apr 19, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>kcchiefs-fan</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> And btw, the opponents don't have to key in on Toine, they know they can leave him along and he'll take the dumbest shot you'll ever see. He has about as bad of shot selection as I've ever seen. I wouldn't call him a legitimate second scorer. And Iverson has the superior supp. cast, so that frees him up too.


It's very interesting to see you mention the 76ers and last years playoff games. Pierce played great at home but on the road against Philly it was Antoine carrying the team. We were in both games because of Antoine and lost both games because we changed the way that was working and decided to play pass the ball to Pierce and Pierce only in the fourth.) I love how Pierce fanatics forget things like this.
THIS IS THE PROBLEM with so called Celtics fans. It always has to be Pierce OR Walker you can't just celebrate two great players.
This is why people like you are not really fans.
:upset:


----------



## kcchiefs-fan (Oct 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ThereisnoIinteam3</b>!
> 
> 
> It's very interesting to see you mention the 76ers and last years playoff games. Pierce played great at home but on the road against Philly it was Antoine carrying the team. We were in both games because of Antoine and lost both games because we changed the way that was working and decided to play pass the ball to Pierce and Pierce only in the fourth.) I love how Pierce fanatics forget things like this.
> ...


I was a Celtic fan long before Pierce was drafted, and I've liked Toine since Kentucky. Don't tell me what I am and am not. I've grown weary of Toint the past couple years, he has great talent, but doesn't utilize it the right way. I'm not a Pierce fanatic, I'm a Pierce fan, and a Celtic fan, just because I've lost some respect over the years for Toine doesn't make me any less of a fan of the Celtics or any more of a Pierce fanatic. Walker used to be one of my favorite players, I even have his autograph, but I get tired of his horrible shot collection and occasional sloppy and/or selfish play. I thought he would remedy this but he still has yet to. You jump to conclusions pal, if you're a Celtic fan, which apparently you are, then I don't see the point in arguing with you, because we're in the same boat. But don't accuse me of being something I'm not based simply on the fact that I don't think Walker is as good as you might.


----------



## ThereisnoIinteam3 (Apr 19, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>kcchiefs-fan</b>!
> 
> 
> I was a Celtic fan long before Pierce was drafted, and I've liked Toine since Kentucky. Don't tell me what I am and am not. I've grown weary of Toint the past couple years, he has great talent, but doesn't utilize it the right way. I'm not a Pierce fanatic, I'm a Pierce fan, and a Celtic fan, just because I've lost some respect over the years for Toine doesn't make me any less of a fan of the Celtics or any more of a Pierce fanatic. Walker used to be one of my favorite players, I even have his autograph, but I get tired of his horrible shot collection and occasional sloppy and/or selfish play. I thought he would remedy this but he still has yet to. You jump to conclusions pal, if you're a Celtic fan, which apparently you are, then I don't see the point in arguing with you, because we're in the same boat. But don't accuse me of being something I'm not based simply on the fact that I don't think Walker is as good as you might.


 Your last opinions on Walker have nothing to do with why I said what I said.

It is obvious you are a Pierce fan and when you make Walker as the bad guy and use it as an example of why Pierce is great it under-minds your claim of being a "real" Celtics fan.


----------



## kcchiefs-fan (Oct 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ThereisnoIinteam3</b>!
> 
> Your last opinions on Walker have nothing to do with why I said what I said.
> 
> It is obvious you are a Pierce fan and when you make Walker as the bad guy and use it as an example of why Pierce is great it under-minds your claim of being a "real" Celtics fan.


Meh, I was using it as an argument, but what I said is pretty much true. Walker does have horrible shot selection, and while he is a legitimate 2nd scoring option, he could be much better with his talent. Yes, I am a Pierce fan. Have been since college. But that doesn't have anything to do with my look on Walker. Walker was probably one of my 5 favorite players in the league until the past couple years. I've pretty much given up on hope that he'll mature as a player. And what you're saying about me almost applies to you with Pierce. It seems like you're always aggravated that Pierce is getting some recognition for how good he is. I'm guessing Walker is your favorite player, but just because Pierce does get more credit than Walker doesn't mean he gets too much credit. In fact, I'll be Walker is awfully close to Pierce in all-star voting. I think pretty much everyone will agree that Pierce is the better player, it's only natural for him to get a little more love from the media. I just don't get why you make such a big deal out of it.

I was never making Walker out to be the bad guy, I was pointing out his obvious flaws, because I was countering what the other poster said. I don't see anything that I've said that should under-mind me being a "real" fan. You need to relax just a little, Walker gets the respect amongst many that he deserves.


----------



## ThereisnoIinteam3 (Apr 19, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>kcchiefs-fan</b>!
> 
> 
> Meh, I was using it as an argument, but what I said is pretty much true. Walker does have horrible shot selection, and while he is a legitimate 2nd scoring option, he could be much better with his talent. Yes, I am a Pierce fan. Have been since college. But that doesn't have anything to do with my look on Walker. Walker was probably one of my 5 favorite players in the league until the past couple years. I've pretty much given up on hope that he'll mature as a player. And what you're saying about me almost applies to you with Pierce. It seems like you're always aggravated that Pierce is getting some recognition for how good he is. I'm guessing Walker is your favorite player, but just because Pierce does get more credit than Walker doesn't mean he gets too much credit. In fact, I'll be Walker is awfully close to Pierce in all-star voting. I think pretty much everyone will agree that Pierce is the better player, it's only natural for him to get a little more love from the media. I just don't get why you make such a big deal out of it.
> ...



I never said Pierce DIDN'T deserve credit. I said the team won that game and listening to the media and "fans" like you give all the credit to Pierce makes me sick.
Did the first 3 quarters of this game not count? Did the other members of this team scoring the points and getting the rebounds not count?
My problem isn't with Pierce (I love Pierce) It is with people like you who refuse to even acknowledge that this was a team win. I don't have to point out what Walker brought to this game and deminish what Pierce didn't bring to this game to make a point. You obviously do.

This isn't about Walker getting respect. I have pretty much gotten that this will never happen till he is gone playing in another uniform. (If then)This is about giving a team some credit.
Just Pierce fans refuse to do this.


----------



## Pinball (Aug 3, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>kcchiefs-fan</b>!
> 
> 
> Meh, I was using it as an argument, but what I said is pretty much true. Walker does have horrible shot selection, and while he is a legitimate 2nd scoring option, he could be much better with his talent. Yes, I am a Pierce fan. Have been since college. But that doesn't have anything to do with my look on Walker. Walker was probably one of my 5 favorite players in the league until the past couple years. I've pretty much given up on hope that he'll mature as a player. And what you're saying about me almost applies to you with Pierce. It seems like you're always aggravated that Pierce is getting some recognition for how good he is. I'm guessing Walker is your favorite player, but just because Pierce does get more credit than Walker doesn't mean he gets too much credit. In fact, I'll be Walker is awfully close to Pierce in all-star voting. I think pretty much everyone will agree that Pierce is the better player, it's only natural for him to get a little more love from the media. I just don't get why you make such a big deal out of it.
> ...


I agree with everything you said. Walker is often unfairly blamed for all of the Celtics problems but he is clearly the inferior player. He does some great things on the court but they are often negated by his poor shot selection and decision making. Antoine is important to the Celtics and they wouldn't win w/o him but that doesn't mean he's free from criticism. He has obvious flaws and I wish the coaching staff would check him at some point. I see it this way: If Kobe, TMac, Shaq, and AI can be criticized then so can Antoine.


----------



## ThereisnoIinteam3 (Apr 19, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Pinball</b>!
> 
> 
> I agree with everything you said. Walker is often unfairly blamed for all of the Celtics problems but he is clearly the inferior player. He does some great things on the court but they are often negated by his poor shot selection and decision making. Antoine is important to the Celtics and they wouldn't win w/o him but that doesn't mean he's free from criticism. He has obvious flaws and I wish the coaching staff would check him at some point. I see it this way: If Kobe, TMac, Shaq, and AI can be criticized then so can Antoine.


 This is my last word on the subject because neither of you live in Boston so you can not see this from my side. You can not understand it from my side either.

No one said Antoine can't be criticized. This isn't even about Antoine. 

This is about people giving the entire team credit.


----------



## kcchiefs-fan (Oct 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ThereisnoIinteam3</b>!
> 
> 
> This is my last word on the subject because neither of you live in Boston so you can not see this from my side. You can not understand it from my side either.
> ...


*sigh*

I do give the entire team credit. Hell, last year in the Sixer series Eric Williams was right there along with PP and Toine for most of the series in terms of the MVP on the team, he was hitting those baseline three's all series long, killing them. Yesterday, he was at it again. Not hitting the baseline three's, but what'd he have, 9 1st qtr. points? He was one of the reasons they stayed in the game, and Toine hit big buckets throughout the game as well, and then Pierce brought them over the top. The Celtics are probably my favorite team, and although Pierce is one of my favorite players, he's not the only guy I root for. I don't hope Toine screws up the whole game and then Pierce saves the day at the end, I hope for a win, that's it. How it's done, I don't really care, as long as it gets done. I don't know how the media down in Boston treats Walker, but the general public doesn't critique him nearly as bad as you describe. Pierce gets a lot of credit, but Walker gets his fair share too, how many all-star games does he have? Isn't it around 3 now? You don't get to 3 all-star games if you're not getting recognition for what you do. The Mass. media may make him out to be the bad guy, but don't mistake me for them, I don't blame Walker for anything unless it's rightfully deserved.


----------



## BEEZ (Jun 12, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>mrsister</b>!
> 
> 
> Who puts so much stock in a scoring title? They put up a graphic before the Magic-Pistons game that showed how the teams that had the player who won the scoring title that year fared in the playoffs, and they all lost at some point - most of the time early on. Jerry Stackhouse almost had a scoring title a couple years ago, and his Pistons sucked big time. It wasn't until he started concentrating less on scoring that his team did well.
> ...


Exactly how much more do you need. Hes a former league MVP, has been a serious MVP candidate the last three years. All-Star game MVP, taken his team to the finals. I guess Pierce can say hes done these things to. How about AI 55 points and 8 assts. Also those 55 came on 21-32 shooting. I dont even see how this is being argued. AI is clearly the better player


----------



## mrsister (Sep 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>kcchiefs-fan</b>!
> 
> 
> Meh, I was using it as an argument, but what I said is pretty much true. Walker does have horrible shot selection, and while he is a legitimate 2nd scoring option, he could be much better with his talent. Yes, I am a Pierce fan. Have been since college. But that doesn't have anything to do with my look on Walker. Walker was probably one of my 5 favorite players in the league until the past couple years. I've pretty much given up on hope that he'll mature as a player.


Just a side note, but I do think Walker has matured as far as his leadership, motivation, and effort. You're enthusiasm for Walker has dropped in the past couple years. Coincidentally, that's the extent of O'Brien's stint as head coach. I firmly believe OB has a lot to do with Walker's shot selection. Walker is entirely capable of making smart plays as evidenced by his team leading assists and the times when he actually does get the ball in the post. The problem is the offense isn't designed to utilize Walker to his full potential. I believe under a different coach, Walker could really flourish. Unfortunately, Walker and OB have formed a rapport that Walker really cherishes. He says he won't play for another coach. I think that's a mistake because OB just looks really good after playing under Pitino for so many years in college and at the pro level. Don't get me wrong. I think it's great that OB took over and got the team on the same page where they could be confident and feel they had a say in how the team was run. However, I don't think OB's philosophy will carry them any further than where they got last year. Pierce and Walker are doing ok for themselves in the system, but I think they could be so much better if plays were designed to get them the ball in an ideal situation instead of making them create their own offense. Teams like the Kings, Mavs, and Nets rarely have players go one-on-one. The run the fast break, pass like crazy, and move without the ball. The few times the Celtics do that, they fare quite well. They just don't do it often at all. Walker's passing ability is wasted by not running and not moving in the half court offense. Some of his shots are just plain stupid, but many of them are by design, so I feel that often the design is flawed, not Walker.


----------



## kcchiefs-fan (Oct 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BEEZ</b>!
> 
> 
> Exactly how much more do you need. Hes a former league MVP, has been a serious MVP candidate the last three years. All-Star game MVP, taken his team to the finals. I guess Pierce can say hes done these things to. How about AI 55 points and 8 assts. Also those 55 came on 21-32 shooting. I dont even see how this is being argued. AI is clearly the better player


AI is not clearly the better player. If anything Pierce is clearly the better player. If you think Iverson is better, fine, but don't act like it's fact. That insults my intelligence, seeing as I think Pierce is the better player. We're not talking about who has had the better past, we're talking about who's better now, and who has a brighter future. I think the answer is obviously Pierce, you're entitled to your opinion though, the same way I'm entitled to mine. Just don't act like yours is better than the many people who think Pierce is the superior player.


----------



## kcchiefs-fan (Oct 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>mrsister</b>!
> 
> 
> Just a side note, but I do think Walker has matured as far as his leadership, motivation, and effort. You're enthusiasm for Walker has dropped in the past couple years. Coincidentally, that's the extent of O'Brien's stint as head coach. I firmly believe OB has a lot to do with Walker's shot selection. Walker is entirely capable of making smart plays as evidenced by his team leading assists and the times when he actually does get the ball in the post. The problem is the offense isn't designed to utilize Walker to his full potential. I believe under a different coach, Walker could really flourish. Unfortunately, Walker and OB have formed a rapport that Walker really cherishes. He says he won't play for another coach. I think that's a mistake because OB just looks really good after playing under Pitino for so many years in college and at the pro level. Don't get me wrong. I think it's great that OB took over and got the team on the same page where they could be confident and feel they had a say in how the team was run. However, I don't think OB's philosophy will carry them any further than where they got last year. Pierce and Walker are doing ok for themselves in the system, but I think they could be so much better if plays were designed to get them the ball in an ideal situation instead of making them create their own offense. Teams like the Kings, Mavs, and Nets rarely have players go one-on-one. The run the fast break, pass like crazy, and move without the ball. The few times the Celtics do that, they fare quite well. They just don't do it often at all. Walker's passing ability is wasted by not running and not moving in the half court offense. Some of his shots are just plain stupid, but many of them are by design, so I feel that often the design is flawed, not Walker.


Yea, OB has a lot to do with Walker's poor FG%, as well as Pierce's mediocre FG%. I just kind of get the feeling the guy doesn't know anything when it comes to the offensive side of the ball.


----------



## mrsister (Sep 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BEEZ</b>!
> 
> 
> Exactly how much more do you need. Hes a former league MVP, has been a serious MVP candidate the last three years. All-Star game MVP, taken his team to the finals. I guess Pierce can say hes done these things to. How about AI 55 points and 8 assts. Also those 55 came on 21-32 shooting. I dont even see how this is being argued. AI is clearly the better player


AI could be the better player. I just don't think it's that clear. Over their careers, Pierce has a better FG%, 3-pt FG%, FT%, off. rebounds, def. rebounds, blocks, and fewer turnovers. All while averaging nearly 4 fewer minutes per game than AI and having Walker on his team to share the load. AI averages more points, steals, and assists. AI has more accolades. Neither has a title. I'm sorry, but I just don't think it's so clear cut. I'm not saying one is better than the other, but you are stating positively that one is better than the other. And one night of 21-32 shooting doesn't mean a whole lot considering his average is nowhere near that. Tony Delk had a 53 point game once. That doesn't make him better than someone who hasn't.


----------



## BEEZ (Jun 12, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>mrsister</b>!
> 
> 
> AI could be the better player. I just don't think it's that clear. Over their careers, Pierce has a better FG%, 3-pt FG%, FT%, off. rebounds, def. rebounds, blocks, and fewer turnovers. All while averaging nearly 4 fewer minutes per game than AI and having Walker on his team to share the load. AI averages more points, steals, and assists. AI has more accolades. Neither has a title. I'm sorry, but I just don't think it's so clear cut. I'm not saying one is better than the other, but you are stating positively that one is better than the other. And one night of 21-32 shooting doesn't mean a whole lot considering his average is nowhere near that. Tony Delk had a 53 point game once. That doesn't make him better than someone who hasn't.


I am not the argumentative type at all, but I dont see how this could be a question. Also while I like him alot I am not the biggest AI fan and until Paul Pierce come close to what AI has done over the course of his career than I cannot say hes better. IT was stated earlier that you cant use past accomplishments, well you have to. AI clearly is playing at a level Paul Pierce is yet to get to. I agree with some of the points stated here though.

Nice convo fellas


----------



## mrsister (Sep 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BEEZ</b>!
> 
> 
> I am not the argumentative type at all, but I dont see how this could be a question. Also while I like him alot I am not the biggest AI fan and until Paul Pierce come close to what AI has done over the course of his career than I cannot say hes better. IT was stated earlier that you cant use past accomplishments, well you have to. AI clearly is playing at a level Paul Pierce is yet to get to. I agree with some of the points stated here though.
> ...


Cool. As long as you can somewhat see other people's point of views, that's all that matters. We're not here to change your mind, just inject a little doubt.


----------



## -33- (Aug 6, 2002)

mash is most underrated in my opinion


----------



## kcchiefs-fan (Oct 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BEEZ</b>!
> 
> 
> I am not the argumentative type at all, but I dont see how this could be a question. Also while I like him alot I am not the biggest AI fan and until Paul Pierce come close to what AI has done over the course of his career than I cannot say hes better. IT was stated earlier that you cant use past accomplishments, well you have to. AI clearly is playing at a level Paul Pierce is yet to get to. I agree with some of the points stated here though.
> ...


You don't have to use past accomplishments to determine who the better player is now. Iverson has defintely had the better career up to this point, but right now, Pierce is the better player IMO. Pierce was better last year as well. Before that, Iverson was the better player. The last 2 seasons Pierce has established himself as a premier player in this league, whereas Iverson's dropped off a bit since his MVP season. Regardless, they're both great players, there's really no need to drag this out, this is beginning to look like a Tmac/Kobe thread. The only thing I didn't agree with is you making it sound like Iverson's without a doubt the far better player. It's a debate either way, and I think Pierce is superior at this point.


----------



## BEEZ (Jun 12, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>kcchiefs-fan</b>!
> 
> 
> You don't have to use past accomplishments to determine who the better player is now. Iverson has defintely had the better career up to this point, but right now, Pierce is the better player IMO. Pierce was better last year as well. Before that, Iverson was the better player. The last 2 seasons Pierce has established himself as a premier player in this league, whereas Iverson's dropped off a bit since his MVP season. Regardless, they're both great players, there's really no need to drag this out, this is beginning to look like a Tmac/Kobe thread. The only thing I didn't agree with is you making it sound like Iverson's without a doubt the far better player. It's a debate either way, and I think Pierce is superior at this point.


I respect the that you have your opinion and I have mine


----------



## John (Jun 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Louie</b>!
> 
> What do you mean?


Was he having problems going by defenders but went to the line thru screens and picks?

Paul Pierce is pathentic as u can get! The guy tries and copies Penny and thinks he is skillfull buy the GESTURE he plays looks so awful to me.


SURE AS LONG AS HE WINS GAMES, SO WHAT JOHN EH? BUT THE BOTTOM LINE IS NBA IS AN ENTERTAINMENT FOR THE WORLD, AND PAUL PIERCE DONT AND NEVER WILL ENTERTAIN ME FOR LIFE!


----------



## shazha (Nov 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>John</b>!
> 
> 
> Was he having problems going by defenders but went to the line thru screens and picks?
> ...


how is 21 points in 8 minutes of the 4th quarter not exciting? that game was nail biting and thanks to pierce, the celtics won.


----------



## 33 (Nov 18, 2002)

Mashburn is more underrated than Pierce. Pierce sucks until the fourth quarter


----------



## Scott (Jan 15, 2003)

I too think Mashburn is more underated than Pierce. And I also think Antoine Walker can be a very good player (when he takes it inside which he often doesn't). In fact Walker kept the Celtics close enough in that game to allow Peirce to bring them back after Artest got in foul trouble. Pierce couldn't score on Artest so Walker and E Williams had to keep the Celtics in it.


----------



## 33 (Nov 18, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Scott</b>!
> I too think Mashburn is more underated than Pierce. And I also think Antoine Walker can be a very good player (when he takes it inside which he often doesn't). In fact Walker kept the Celtics close enough in that game to allow Peirce to bring them back after Artest got in foul trouble. Pierce couldn't score on Artest so Walker and E Williams had to keep the Celtics in it.


Thanks for noticing that too. Walker held it down when Pierce couldn't get his shot off against Artest. Williams had a nice game too, but I don't expect him to do that the whole series


----------



## kcchiefs-fan (Oct 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BEEZ</b>!
> 
> 
> I respect the that you have your opinion and I have mine


There we go, that's what I was looking for 

And 33, Pierce doesn't suck until the 4th, it's just that he's probably the best 4th quarter player in the league. He's still a star in the first 3 as well.


----------



## Scott (Jan 15, 2003)

look at todays box score. It shows why I think Pierce is not the most under-rated.


----------



## ThereisnoIinteam3 (Apr 19, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Scott</b>!
> look at todays box score. It shows why I think Pierce is not the most under-rated.


With all due repsetc he had an off night. 
By the way I think he shot better tonight then he did the other night. If he had not taken 7 3 pointers the Celtics might have pulled this game off.
I agree with you that he is not under-rated by any means but the difference in last Sunday night and tonight was the free throws. He didn't shoot well either night.
Pierce plays his best games at home in Boston. So Thursday and Sunday should be fun


----------



## mrsister (Sep 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ThereisnoIinteam3</b>!
> 
> With all due repsetc he had an off night.
> By the way I think he shot better tonight then he did the other night. If he had not taken 7 3 pointers the Celtics might have pulled this game off.
> ...


I'm glad he only got 14 points in the loss. If he had done his usual damage and lost, it wouldn't have been as good. History has shown that if Pierce has a bad night, he comes back and dominates the next game. I hope that holds up because that's the game I'm going to see in person. The Pacers shouldn't get too confident that they shut him down. Pierce will also have 2 days of rest and will hopefully be able to get rid of his head cold.


----------

