redraft the current league in their primes

[Catchall]

People also forget the pre-micro-fracture version of Amare Stoudemire who was unguardable playing with Steve Nash and probably would have won a chip with the Suns if he didn't jump off the bench during 'cheap-shot Bob'.

[excision]

Mine would probably go something like this:
1. Lebron
2. Duncan
3. Durant
4. Dirk
5. Kobe
6. KG
7. Davis
8. Howard
9. Wade
10. Paul
11. Howard
12. Curry
13. Love
14. Aldridge

Are you counting Orlando Dwight and Laker/Houston Dwight as separate players or did you mean Josh Howard?

Ah I meant to delete him from number 8, my mistake

[schnakenpopanz]

People also forget the pre-micro-fracture version of Amare Stoudemire who was unguardable playing with Steve Nash and probably would have won a chip with the Suns if he didn't jump off the bench during 'cheap-shot Bob'.

some peoples logic is only based on a ring. so karl malone and john stockton are garbage to them. just because they competed alongside the GOAT does not mean they are unsuccessful.

[j_angel]

1. LeBron James
2. Tim Duncan
3. Kevin Garnett
4. Kobe Bryant
5. Kevin Durant
6. Dwayne Wade
7. Paul Pierce
8. Dirk Nowitski
9. VInce Carter
10. Steve Nash

[j_angel]

If Pierce isnt in your top 10 you need to reevaluate.

You aren't the first one to say this, which surprises me a little. Make a case for Pierce over any of these guys:

Lebron
Duncan
Durant
Kobe
KG
Dirk
CP3
Dwight
Wade
Melo

I think there's 10 who are clear-cut over Pierce, and that doesn't count guys like Griffin, Davis, Love, or Curry who will likely have better careers. Sure, his longevity is great, but he was never the kind of player who could carry a team to the playoffs, as everybody on the above list has done. Before KG and Ray got to Boston, he was leading them straight to the lottery in the bad conference.

Hang on, what case can you make for Melo over Pierce? or CP3?

[excision]

Mine would probably go something like this:
19. Irving

33. Pierce

There are a lot of things wrong with this list, but on what planet is Paul Pierce 14 spots lower than never-did- **** -all-in-my-career-other-than-a-commercial Kyrie Irving?

Oh really, there are a lot of things 'wrong' with this list because they don't line up with your opinions? How about next time you read the rest of my posts before you arrogantly talk ****? Or better yet, why don't you go ahead and post your own list that has nothing 'wrong' with it. I listed 60 players off the top of my head without any editing so it's not surprising that there are some inaccuracies. I already said this in another post, but I actually love the Truth as a player, he just slipped my mind when I was making the list and I wasn't bothered to go back and work him in and have to backspace a bunch of numbers etc. I'm not ashamed to admit I made a mistake by putting him that low, and if I had to do the list again I would put him higher.

In regards to Kyrie, I obviously know that he isn't nearly as accomplished as the Truth, who's on the tail end of his career. With Young guys you draft based on potential. Dude is 22 years old, has an absolutely elite skillset, is extremely clutch and is yet to have a completely healthy season. Not to mention he's stuck playing for a really crappy team. I personally think that if(big if, but I have faith) he's able to stay healthy he will turn into a superstar, I can easily picture him putting up 25/8 on 46/40/88 at his peak. Steph Curry is 26 and this season took a huge step forward in terms of his production and establishing himself as a superstar, and he's had a reputation for being injury prone in the past. Kyrie hasn't suffered any devastating injuries so I don't think it's crazy to think that he'll get healthier and better from here on out.

Also, I don't care if you don't take the All Star game seriously, but if you win the All Star MVP, you have superstar potential, period. Just look at all the past winners of the award. If at 22 years old you're able to out-shine the likes of Lebron James and Kevin Durant (In a game that was pretty competitive, mind you) then you're a pretty special player, or at least you have the potential to become one. Plenty of players and coaches will agree with me on this.

Ultimately I think it just comes down to your team's needs. If your team needs a point guard, you draft Irving. If your team needs a wing, you draft Pierce. If you disagree with me, I honestly couldn't care less but tell you what, if Kyrie ends up having a mediocre career or pulls a D-rose, you can come back here and tell me that you told me so.

[DarkAzcura]

I think there's 10 who are clear-cut over Pierce, and that doesn't count guys like Griffin, Davis, Love, or Curry who will likely have better careers. Sure, his longevity is great, but he was never the kind of player who could carry a team to the playoffs, as everybody on the above list has done. Before KG and Ray got to Boston, he was leading them straight to the lottery in the bad conference.

You have no idea how bad of a roster Pierce had to play with then. Everyone talks about how "bad" Kobe (for all of two years) and Garnett had it, but the most unspoken thing in the NBA media is how bad Pierce had it before Ainge came on board and blew it all up. It's unfortunate people around here never got to see Pierce play on a good team more often during his prime. Btw Pierce actually brought his team to the ECF before Ray and Garnett got there. You came up with that lame reason for Pierce going to the lottery but have Carmelo ahead of him? Give Pierce Carmelo's rosters in Denver and New York. Pierce would never have any of those teams underachieving. I'd love to see Pierce play with a real point guard and front court during his prime (before 2008) like Carmelo has been so lucky to have played with.

The Celtics with Pierce made the playoffs for the first time in 2002. Fourth season in the league after dropping Pitino like a bad habit. The guy was a terrible GM and coach in the NBA. He had no patience whatsoever and turned over the roster like mad. Joe Johnson was also traded in 2002 in an incredibly shortsighted move, ECF or no. The Celtics only missed the playoffs in 05-06 and 06-07 after that, Pierce being injured for over half the season in 06-07. The Celtics actually had a 20-27 record with Pierce that season but only a 4-31 record without him. Pierce's impact on wins and losses is ridiculously good. Back in 05-06, Pierce's second best player was Ricky Davis or Wally. Throughout Pierce's prime, the best centers he played with barely mustered over 5.5 RPG. It was crazy how bad his rosters were. He still only missed the playoffs once in a healthy, prime year.

To say someone like Carmelo's accomplishments are already higher than Pierce's is kind of crazy when you actually compare their rosters throughout their career. Pierce did some real carrying in 2002. The win/loss differential in 2007 speaks for itself. Not sure what Carmelo has done that compares to that, though, the guy is a freakin' great scorer in his own right. I really don't care that you don't have Pierce in your top 10. I just really, really disagree with your reasoning.

Out of the list you made, I've never seen any one of them actually carry their team to the playoffs except Lebron and KG. It's kind of a silly qualifier. All of them had the opportunity to play with pretty awesome rosters. Even Lebron's rosters (Cleveland) were pretty good, though, not 65 win good. I still have no idea how he did it.

[brownbobcat]

Oh really, there are a lot of things 'wrong' with this list because they don't line up with your opinions? How about next time you read the rest of my posts before you arrogantly talk ****? Or better yet, why don't you go ahead and post your own list that has nothing 'wrong' with it. I listed 60 players off the top of my head without any editing so it's not surprising that there are some inaccuracies. I already said this in another post, but I actually love the Truth as a player, he just slipped my mind when I was making the list and I wasn't bothered to go back and work him in and have to backspace a bunch of numbers etc. I'm not ashamed to admit I made a mistake by putting him that low, and if I had to do the list again I would put him higher.

I have nothing against different opinions, I'm not going to quibble with every single ranking, but putting Irving ahead of Pierce let alone 14 spots higher is just an idiotic opinion. There is no reason to think Kyrie is magically going to turn into a dominant superstar based on anything we've seen in his career.

In regards to Kyrie, I obviously know that he isn't nearly as accomplished as the Truth, who's on the tail end of his career. With Young guys you draft based on potential. Dude is 22 years old, has an absolutely elite skillset, is extremely clutch and is yet to have a completely healthy season. Not to mention he's stuck playing for a really crappy team. I personally think that if(big if, but I have faith) he's able to stay healthy he will turn into a superstar, I can easily picture him putting up 25/8 on 46/40/88 at his peak.

Elite skillset? There's not a single thing he does better than Chris Paul in terms of raw ability. That's not exactly a big criticism, but just a reality check. He has great handles, a very good jumper and scoring instincts. That's it. Slightly above average size, average wingspan, athleticism and speed. Mediocre vision/playmaking and terrible D. Staying healthy is actually an important part of being an NBA player, you don't get a pass on that - quite the opposite. He's stuck playing on a crappy team? So are most high lottery picks, that's who usually gets the best picks. You can make a pretty good case that Kyrie's had zero progression in his career so far.

[mysticbb]

Assuming I get each player at their best for one season:

1. LeBron James
2. Kevin Garnett
3. Tim Duncan
4. Dwyane Wade
5. Dirk Nowitzki
6. Kobe Bryant
7. Chris Paul
8. Kevin Durant
9. Steve Nash
10. Dwight Howard

[NickAnderson]

Wow just wow. LeBron over Duncan??? Wow wow wow wow and another **** wow

Sent from my SM-G900P using RealGM Forums mobile app

[excision]

Oh really, there are a lot of things 'wrong' with this list because they don't line up with your opinions? How about next time you read the rest of my posts before you arrogantly talk ****? Or better yet, why don't you go ahead and post your own list that has nothing 'wrong' with it. I listed 60 players off the top of my head without any editing so it's not surprising that there are some inaccuracies. I already said this in another post, but I actually love the Truth as a player, he just slipped my mind when I was making the list and I wasn't bothered to go back and work him in and have to backspace a bunch of numbers etc. I'm not ashamed to admit I made a mistake by putting him that low, and if I had to do the list again I would put him higher.

I have nothing against different opinions, I'm not going to quibble with every single ranking, but putting Irving ahead of Pierce let alone 14 spots higher is just an idiotic opinion. There is no reason to think Kyrie is magically going to turn into a dominant superstar based on anything we've seen in his career.

In regards to Kyrie, I obviously know that he isn't nearly as accomplished as the Truth, who's on the tail end of his career. With Young guys you draft based on potential. Dude is 22 years old, has an absolutely elite skillset, is extremely clutch and is yet to have a completely healthy season. Not to mention he's stuck playing for a really crappy team. I personally think that if(big if, but I have faith) he's able to stay healthy he will turn into a superstar, I can easily picture him putting up 25/8 on 46/40/88 at his peak.

Elite skillset? There's not a single thing he does better than Chris Paul in terms of raw ability. That's not exactly a big criticism, but just a reality check. He has great handles, a very good jumper and scoring instincts. That's it. Slightly above average size, average wingspan, athleticism and speed. Mediocre vision/playmaking and terrible D. Staying healthy is actually an important part of being an NBA player, you don't get a pass on that - quite the opposite. He's stuck playing on a crappy team? So are most high lottery picks, that's who usually gets the best picks. You can make a pretty good case that Kyrie's had zero progression in his career so far.

I already said in an earlier post and in this post that I agree Pierce should be significantly higher on the list, so bringing up the '14 spots' argument is pretty pointless and it shows you aren't really listening to what I'm saying.

If you don't see any superstar potential in Kyrie, you're the one who has truly idiotic opinions. He's the youngest player to ever average 22, 6 and 1.5 while shooting 39% from deep. An arbitrary stat? Maybe, but it's impressive nonetheless. Not to mention he's the third youngest all star ever behind Anthony Davis and Kobe Bryant, and the second youngest All Star MVP behind Lebron James. His raw career numbers have been skewed by injuries and don't really do him justice, but they're still very impressive. 21/6 on 45/37/86 and 55TS% and you're telling me there's no superstar potential? You're out of your mind.

Pretty ridiculous that you try and brush off his elite dribbling and shooting while giving him credit for nothing else. Also, its funny that you felt the need to compare him Chris Paul, the clear-cut best point guard in the league, as some sort of 'reality check', what's even funnier is that what you said isn't even true. He's clearly a better 3-point shooter, is as good of a ball-handler and can get his shot off much easier cause of his size advantage. Obviously an inferior passer (as is everyone else in the league besides maybe Rondo) but Kyrie doesn't have 'mediocre' vision, he simply has no talent around him. Look at Chauncey Billups' assist numbers when he was Kyrie's age; he eventually had a season where he averaged 8.6 APG at 29 years old. Steph Curry had worse assist numbers when he was Kyrie's age and he averaged 8.5 dimes last season. That's what happens when you mature as a player and you have better talent around you, your assists go up. Oh, and you lost all credibility when you said Kyrie Irving had 'average' speed, that's one of the most laughable statements I've ever read. I'm also just going to assume that you don't factor body control into your definition of athleticism, because there's no way you would have referred to him an average athlete if you did.

Yes, he obviously needs to stay healthy in order to reach his full potential. But so far all of his injuries have been relatively minor and once again, he's 22 dude. 22. For you to say there's no reason to suggest that he could turn into a superstar, well...it's borderline insane, and I honestly feel kind of bad for you and your inability to appreciate a special talent when you see one.

Gonna leave you with a quote from Frank Voegel because frankly he said it best: "The history of the league is to reward the teams with winning records and the best players on those teams" with All-Star selections, Vogel said. "But there's certain players that stand out beyond that, and Kyrie is definitely one of them. ... He's one of the best in the world, and he showed it tonight."

[giordunk]

Because I like doing stuff like this, after aggregating all the lists in this thread...

Player Last Name, Average Position.

James 1.5
Duncan 1.826086957
Bryant 3.913043478
Garnett 4.086956522
Durant 4.708333333
Nowitzki 6.434782609
Wade 6.772727273
Paul 8.913043478
Howard 9.045454545
Nash 10.7
Stoudemire 11.83333333
Pierce 12.77777778
Carter 13.25
Davis 13.33333333
Allen 15
Rose 15.14285714
Aldridge 15.2
Anthony 15.5
Griffin 15.54545455
Curry 15.75
P Gasol 16
Love 17.08333333
Westbrook 18.18181818
Artest 19
Parker 20
Marion 21
Billups 22
O'Neal 22.28571429
Bosh 22.85714286
Brand 23.5
Wallace 24.5
George 25
Harden 25.6
Jefferson 27
Ginobili 27.5
Wall 27.5
Kirilenko 29
Williams 29.4
M Gasol 30
Odom 30.33333333
R Jefferson 30.5
Cousins 32
Drummond 32.33333333
Irving 32.5
Rondo 33.5
Randolph 33.5
Ellis 37
Noah 37.5
Lopez 38
Johnson 38.33333333
Hayward 40
Horford 43
Thompson 43
Bynum 43
Deng 44.5
Green 46
Chandler 47
Boozer 47
Dragic 48
Iguodala 48
Lee 48
Richardson 50
West 51
Lewis 52
Ibaka 53
Kenyon Martin 53
Anderson 55
Prince 57
DeRozan 58
Millsap 60

[Ortho Stice]

Mine would probably go something like this:
1. Lebron
2. Duncan
3. Durant
4. Dirk
5. Kobe
6. KG
7. Davis
8. Howard
9. Wade
10. Paul
11. Howard
12. Curry
13. Love
14. Aldridge
15. Griffin
16. Nash
17. Ray Allen
18. Carter
19. Irving
20. Anthony
21. Amare
22. Bosh
23. Parker
24. Westbrook
25. Marion
26. Harden
27. Noah
28. Jefferson
29. Pau Gasol
30. Wall
31. Marc Gasol
32. Cousins
33. Pierce
34. Brand
35. Deng
36. Ellis
37. Jermaine O'neal
38. Elton Brand
39. Rondo
40. Brook Lopez
41. Joe Johnson
42. Hayward
43. Z-bo
44. Deron Williams
45. Klay Thompson
46. Jason Richardson
47. Lewis
48. Jeff Green
49. Tyson Chandler
50. Dragic
51. Drummond
52. Odom
53. Horford
54. Ginobili
55. Horford
56. Ibaka
57. Kenyon Martin
58. Ryan Anderson
59. Iguodala
60. Boozer

This list is assuming that you draft each player young and you knowing/predicting how their careers panned or will pan out. The list would change if you meant one season peak (I would definitely include Rose, lol)

Klay thompson and Gordon Hayward over Horford and Ginobili? Monta Ellis and Luol Deng over Joe Johnson?? wow.

Spare me your 'wows.' I did this list very quickly and honestly it's all just a matter of opinion, no need to get all defensive.
This list isn't necessarily a ranking of how good players are, but who you would draft in order to meet your own 'winning' formula.

Klay and Gordon are obviously young and less proven but I personally think they have potential to turn into very valuable contributors to a contending team. Klay is tall and has a really quick release which can gives him potential to be one of the best floor-spacing two guards in the game. Hayward I'll admit should probably be lower, but I'm still a huge fan of his game. He's a great all-round player with solid size, athleticism, shooting, passing and rebounding who could really flourish if he played for a better team.

I love Manu but he's always been third in the pecking order behind Timmy and Tony. I'm sure if he played on a different team he could have put up better raw stats but I don't know if his body would have been able to handle it, Klay and Gordon just seem a little bit durable to me. Horford really isn't that great of a player, a career 14 and 9 guy with pretty average defense for a big man, so I don't see what the big deal is in taking those other guys over him. The whole thing is pretty subjective and you can make a case for any of these players depending on your team's needs/wants.

I like Joe but his main asset is his ability to shoot and score the basketball, Monta adds a different element which is elite slashing. I always felt he was underrated in G-state and he really impressed me with his play in Dallas this year. Deng is a different mould of player from JJ, obviously not as good of a scorer but he's the perfect complementary wing player, an Elite defender that can still score/space the floor as well as help out on the boards, one of the best guys you can have on your team. Again, a case can be made for either player depending on your team's needs.

lol at the fact that you have Ginobili #53 with players like Jeff Green and Klay Thompson ahead of him and are getting super defensive over it . That has to be the most off-base ranking I've ever seen.

[Vinsanity_GOAT]

1. lebron
2. duncan
3. garnett
4. anthony davis (if he continues to improve)
5. durant
6. dirk
7. drummond (like davis, if he continues to improve)
8. vince
9. rose
10. kobe
11. howard
12. cp3
13. wade
14. nash
15. griffin
16. westbrook (as shooting guard)
17. pau
18. curry
19. love
20. rondo
21. pierce
22. ray
23. melo
24. brand
25. odom

[excision]

Klay thompson and Gordon Hayward over Horford and Ginobili? Monta Ellis and Luol Deng over Joe Johnson?? wow.

Spare me your 'wows.' I did this list very quickly and honestly it's all just a matter of opinion, no need to get all defensive.
This list isn't necessarily a ranking of how good players are, but who you would draft in order to meet your own 'winning' formula.

Klay and Gordon are obviously young and less proven but I personally think they have potential to turn into very valuable contributors to a contending team. Klay is tall and has a really quick release which can gives him potential to be one of the best floor-spacing two guards in the game. Hayward I'll admit should probably be lower, but I'm still a huge fan of his game. He's a great all-round player with solid size, athleticism, shooting, passing and rebounding who could really flourish if he played for a better team.

I love Manu but he's always been third in the pecking order behind Timmy and Tony. I'm sure if he played on a different team he could have put up better raw stats but I don't know if his body would have been able to handle it, Klay and Gordon just seem a little bit durable to me. Horford really isn't that great of a player, a career 14 and 9 guy with pretty average defense for a big man, so I don't see what the big deal is in taking those other guys over him. The whole thing is pretty subjective and you can make a case for any of these players depending on your team's needs/wants.

I like Joe but his main asset is his ability to shoot and score the basketball, Monta adds a different element which is elite slashing. I always felt he was underrated in G-state and he really impressed me with his play in Dallas this year. Deng is a different mould of player from JJ, obviously not as good of a scorer but he's the perfect complementary wing player, an Elite defender that can still score/space the floor as well as help out on the boards, one of the best guys you can have on your team. Again, a case can be made for either player depending on your team's needs.

lol at the fact that you have Ginobili #53 with players like Jeff Green and Klay Thompson ahead of him and are getting super defensive over it . That has to be the most off-base ranking I've ever seen.

Did you even read what i said? 1. I did this list off the top of my head 2. This is not a GOAT list, i obviously know Manu is the better and more accomplished player at this point, the list is strictly on who i would DRAFT depending on my own personal vision on how I would construct a team. The list can change drastically depending on who's on my roster already and whether I'm drafting based on one season peak, or for their entire careers. It's not outrageous to think that Klay or Green could be more valuable to a team than Manu depending on the team's needs. For example, Ray Allen would be more valuable than Chris Paul on a team with Magic Johnson on it even though Chris Paul is the better player.

If I'm coming off as defensive it's because the GB seems to be full of arrogant internet warriors who act like their opinion is gospel instead of respectfully disagreeing or formulating actual arguments, and it's just really annoying. They talk **** to people who they disagree with so they can feel better about themselves instead of engaging in healthy, intellectual debate. Unfortunately I'm not the type of person who's just gonna sit there and do nothing after being insulted, so you can call me a fool for taking the time to respond to immature instigators such as yourself

[6ixSideSniper]

I'll take prime Kobe Bryant 1st overall.

[brownbobcat]

If you don't see any superstar potential in Kyrie, you're the one who has truly idiotic opinions. He's the youngest player to ever average 22, 6 and 1.5 while shooting 39% from deep. An arbitrary stat? Maybe, but it's impressive nonetheless.

Damon Stoudamire is the 2nd youngest player to ever average 20/8/4 with better than 35% 3pt percentage
Tyreke Evans is the youngest player ever to average 20/5/5 with better than 42% FG percentage.
What do they have in common with Kyrie? Also not superstars.

Not to mention he's the third youngest all star ever behind Anthony Davis and Kobe Bryant, and the second youngest All Star MVP behind Lebron James. His raw career numbers have been skewed by injuries and don't really do him justice, but they're still very impressive. 21/6 on 45/37/86 and 55TS% and you're telling me there's no superstar potential? You're out of your mind.

Have you actually watched him play over the last few years? Very little to zero progression in his game. Superstars don't stagnate to start off their careers short of serious injury. You can't play the injury card and have it both ways, saying they weren't serious but yet limited his production. It's one or the other.

Pretty ridiculous that you try and brush off his elite dribbling and shooting while giving him credit for nothing else. Also, its funny that you felt the need to compare him Chris Paul, the clear-cut best point guard in the league, as some sort of 'reality check', what's even funnier is that what you said isn't even true. He's clearly a better 3-point shooter, is as good of a ball-handler and can get his shot off much easier cause of his size advantage. Obviously an inferior passer (as is everyone else in the league besides maybe Rondo) but Kyrie doesn't have 'mediocre' vision, he simply has no talent around him.

I didn't brush it off, I gave him credit for being a very good scorer, just not an elite one. He's gotten less efficient every year and falls short of Steph Curry in his worst year in that regard. Prime Paul shot 37% to 40% from 3 and Irving's career % is around 38%. Doesn't seem like a significant gap to me, but I'll give that to you. For a guy whose size supposedly lets him get off more shots, why do the stats show Kyrie gets blocked more than Paul? Look it up on 82games.com. Assist numbers aren't everything, they can be a heavy function of team system and how ball-dominant a player is. If you actually WATCH the games, you can see that Kyrie simply doesn't excel at running an offense or creating for teammates other than occasionally passing out of the double. He doesn't run the pick-and-roll well, doesn't throw good entry passes, doesn't make good decisions with the ball ... he simply isn't very good (and certainly isn't great) at the other 95% of stuff that PGs should be doing other than score.

And yes, Kyrie has average speed for a point guard. He makes up for it with great footwork, great handles, a boatload of hesitation moves, fakes, and a good shooting stroke that forces defenders to play him close. But looking at speed/athleticism alone, he's average for the NBA.

[rich316]

I think there's 10 who are clear-cut over Pierce, and that doesn't count guys like Griffin, Davis, Love, or Curry who will likely have better careers. Sure, his longevity is great, but he was never the kind of player who could carry a team to the playoffs, as everybody on the above list has done. Before KG and Ray got to Boston, he was leading them straight to the lottery in the bad conference.

You have no idea how bad of a roster Pierce had to play with then. Everyone talks about how "bad" Kobe (for all of two years) and Garnett had it, but the most unspoken thing in the NBA media is how bad Pierce had it before Ainge came on board and blew it all up. It's unfortunate people around here never got to see Pierce play on a good team more often during his prime. Btw Pierce actually brought his team to the ECF before Ray and Garnett got there. You came up with that lame reason for Pierce going to the lottery but have Carmelo ahead of him? Give Pierce Carmelo's rosters in Denver and New York. Pierce would never have any of those teams underachieving. I'd love to see Pierce play with a real point guard and front court during his prime (before 2008) like Carmelo has been so lucky to have played with.

The Celtics with Pierce made the playoffs for the first time in 2002. Fourth season in the league after dropping Pitino like a bad habit. The guy was a terrible GM and coach in the NBA. He had no patience whatsoever and turned over the roster like mad. Joe Johnson was also traded in 2002 in an incredibly shortsighted move, ECF or no. The Celtics only missed the playoffs in 05-06 and 06-07 after that, Pierce being injured for over half the season in 06-07. The Celtics actually had a 20-27 record with Pierce that season but only a 4-31 record without him. Pierce's impact on wins and losses is ridiculously good. Back in 05-06, Pierce's second best player was Ricky Davis or Wally. Throughout Pierce's prime, the best centers he played with barely mustered over 5.5 RPG. It was crazy how bad his rosters were. He still only missed the playoffs once in a healthy, prime year.

To say someone like Carmelo's accomplishments are already higher than Pierce's is kind of crazy when you actually compare their rosters throughout their career. Pierce did some real carrying in 2002. The win/loss differential in 2007 speaks for itself. Not sure what Carmelo has done that compares to that, though, the guy is a freakin' great scorer in his own right. I really don't care that you don't have Pierce in your top 10. I just really, really disagree with your reasoning.

Out of the list you made, I've never seen any one of them actually carry their team to the playoffs except Lebron and KG. It's kind of a silly qualifier. All of them had the opportunity to play with pretty awesome rosters. Even Lebron's rosters (Cleveland) were pretty good, though, not 65 win good. I still have no idea how he did it.

That's fair, TBH I was in kind of a rush when I typed that and didn't really make good arguments Melo v. Pierce is probably something you can make an argument about, but I do think that you can't win a title with Pierce as your best player. KG was the best player for them in 2008, and as soon as his knees went they couldn't win. Melo, IMO, could definitely lead a team of shooters/defenders to a title ala Dirk 2011. He's the sort of guy you can build your entire offense around. I don't think Pierce has ever been that good, he has never really had one elite skill. Still, it's pure speculation what either guy would have done with the other's team. The Knicks had a garbage roster around Melo this year, and he consistently got to the playoffs out West on the Nuggets.

I also forgot about Nash - I would draft him over either Pierce or Melo.

[DarkAzcura]

That's fair, TBH I was in kind of a rush when I typed that and didn't really make good arguments Melo v. Pierce is probably something you can make an argument about, but I do think that you can't win a title with Pierce as your best player. KG was the best player for them in 2008, and as soon as his knees went they couldn't win. Melo, IMO, could definitely lead a team of shooters/defenders to a title ala Dirk 2011. He's the sort of guy you can build your entire offense around. I don't think Pierce has ever been that good, he has never really had one elite skill. Still, it's pure speculation what either guy would have done with the other's team. The Knicks had a garbage roster around Melo this year, and he consistently got to the playoffs out West on the Nuggets.

I also forgot about Nash - I would draft him over either Pierce or Melo.

Wish I could show you some Pierce tapes from the mid 00's then. Pierce could do it all. His mid-range game was elite. His driving was elite. Ability to get to the line was elite. He was a good passer and a really good 3 point shooter. Probably one of the most, if not most, underrated wings to play the game. I'm hoping he gets more respect from the general media when he retires, but we'll see.

FYI, Pierce was most definitely the Celtics offensive leader in 2008. Garnett was the best all around player, but he was mostly the heart of our defense. Pierce is the one who was going to toe to toe with Lebron and Kobe. Defending both of them one on one in the second half of 4th quarters. Game 7 against Lebron in 2008 is a showdown I'll never forget. If you believe Carmelo can lead a team with just shooters/defenders than you should probably believe Pierce could do it. Their offensive games are pretty much identical except Pierce's passing was better, his shot selection was a bit better, and he got to the line more. Their mid-range game is pretty much exactly the same down to the percentages.

If you want my honest opinion? I don't think Carmelo or Pierce could do what Dirk did in '11. Take a look at his mid-range percentages. He is ridiculously good in the mid-range. I'm not sure I've ever seen anyone shoot as well from 10-23 feet as that guy in the playoffs.

While you are correct that the C's never won after Garnett's knee issues, I wouldn't say that 100% means Garnett was our top dog on offense. The C's were literally minutes away from winning a second championship. It just didn't happen. As close a game 7 as you'll get that one was. Every year after that was a case of injuries from a bunch of players. Kinda sad.

Probably going to be an unpopular opinion but the Celtics were a legit center away from the Finals in 2002, and Pierce used to torch the Lakers back then. Honestly think the Celtics could have given them a run for their money. It could/would have been a fun Finals. Come to think of it Pierce making the Finals in his fourth year probably would have done a hell of a lot for his "legacy". Never really thought of it. It's unfortunate people kind of forget he almost did that with freakin' Walker as his running mate.

Walker's shot selection.

Everyone talks about the missed out rivalry between Kobe and Lebron, but man, you all missed out on a great rivalry between Pierce and Lebron. Record between the two is 31-30 I believe in favor of Pierce. Fun showdowns between the two over the years.

[FlopShow2013]

So basically you are asking who is the best player in current league?