Garnett vs Pierce, in the 2008 playoffs, who was

JordansBulls · Post #1 » by **JordansBulls** » Fri Jul 11, 2008 6:50 pm

Many seem to believe that Pierce was the best player on the Celtics for the playoffs as a whole. While I agree he was the best in the finals and in that game 7 against Cleveland, overall it seems to be that KG was the best player on the Celtics for the entire playoffs.

Here is how they compare.

Kevin Garnett
20.4 ppg / 10.5 rpg / 3.3 apg / 1.35 spg / 1.12 bpg / 49.5% FG / 25% 3pt / 81.0% ft / 23.08 PER

Paul Pierce
19.7 ppg / 5.00 rpg / 4.6 apg / 1.08 spg / 0.31 bpg / 44.1%FG/ 36.1% 3pt / 80.2% ft / 17.41 PER

Silk Wilkes · Post #2 » by **Silk Wilkes** » Fri Jul 11, 2008 6:56 pm

Without KG the Celtics wouldn't have even been a title contender. However, Pierce was HUGE in the Finals. Personally, I'd take KG because he was more of a quiet producer in the playoffs. He provided a defensive anchor and a leader while also putting up 20 & 10.

Wade3Iverson · Post #3 » by **Wade3Iverson** » Fri Jul 11, 2008 7:35 pm

I would say most of the knowledgeable posters on the site will say KG and pretty easily. I don't even think I would've given Pierce the Finals MVP (let alone the playoff MVP) but I'm not going to argue with that one because he did come up clutch.

But again, I still see Pierce as overrated after the Finals. Nothing close to underrated.

Post #4 » by **dockingsched** » Fri Jul 11, 2008 7:55 pm

pierce's finals appearance torching one of the worst defenders in the league really shouldn't put him over KG. KG was the better player.

ronnymac2 · Post #5 » by **ronnymac2** » Fri Jul 11, 2008 10:24 pm

Kg was the MVP of the celtics in the playoffs. I think he's the main reason why they beat the lakers, too (though Pierce def played well enough to get finals mvp). It's not even really the stats that make kg better in the playoffs. Though it looks like statisistically he has pierce beat overall. 20 and 10, almost 50%, over a steal and a block a game. But his d, ability to make the offense perform well in more ways than scoring or even passing, and leadership put him over the top as the mvp of the celtics for the playoffs. Plus he was more consistent. And his game 6 in the finals was excellent, too.

Post #6 » by **NO-KG-AI** » Sat Jul 12, 2008 3:36 am

KG was the best player over the course of the playoffs for the Celtics.

Ray Allen should have been finals MVP Imo.

Reks · Post #7 » by **Reks** » Sat Jul 12, 2008 10:12 am

KG definately was the best player in the playoffs for the C's.
Ray Allen did have a strong case for Finals MVP but I would have given it to Garnett. I would have given it to Allen rather than Pierce, though.

Post #8 » by **tkb** » Sat Jul 12, 2008 11:05 am

NO-KG-AI wrote:Ray Allen should have been finals MVP Imo.

I agree.

Post #9 » by **NO-KG-AI** » Sat Jul 12, 2008 12:23 pm

KG and Pierce were both up and down offensively in the finals, though KG's defense helps his case, but Ray Allen was smoking, and seemed to be making the momentum changing plays in that series to me IMO.

It was funny, I felt like KG was the only one who was playing decent in the Hawks series, then Pierce was the best player in the Cavs series, KG dominated the Pistons series, and Ray finally came on for the Finals.

I really liked seeing all the guys have their time to shine, good stuff.

Albanian Damien · Post #10 » by **Albanian Damien** » Sat Jul 12, 2008 3:18 pm

Garnett really led the team to the finals and then Pierce just took over the finals. I don't know what Pierce has against LA that just causes him to go ape **** on them.

I_Like_Dirt · Post #11 » by **I_Like_Dirt** » Sat Jul 12, 2008 5:47 pm

Ignoring Allen, I'd say Pierce was the better player in the first round, KG in the second and third rounds (although the Celtics desperately relied on Pierce in game 7 against the Cavs) and Pierce was better in the finals. On average KG was a bit better but he wasn't better the whole way through and the Celtics really relied on Pierce whenever they were desperate for offense- defensively they relied on KG but Pierce was pretty damn good in that regard, too.

BlazersRizing · Post #12 » by **BlazersRizing** » Sat Jul 12, 2008 10:10 pm

lol @ all the KG votes

what were you guys watching?

KG played terrible in the Finals, (shot around 42% i believe, not including the last blowout game he shot 38%)

Pierce was the best player for Boston EASILY.

without his Game 7 performance vs LeBron, the Celtics are watching another team in the Finals.

and without Pierce and Ray Allen playing great in the Finals bailing KG out... no ring.

:lol:

@ the KG stans. wowzers

eatyourchildren · Post #13 » by **eatyourchildren** » Sun Jul 13, 2008 4:36 am

Albanian Damien wrote:Garnett really led the team to the finals and then Pierce just took over the finals. I don't know what Pierce has against LA that just causes him to go ape **** on them.

he has vladimir radmanovic

kbitboc · Post #14 » by **kbitboc** » Sun Jul 13, 2008 5:04 am

BlazersRizing wrote:lol @ all the KG votes

what were you guys watching?

KG played terrible in the Finals, (shot around 42% i believe, not including the last blowout game he shot 38%)

Pierce was the best player for Boston EASILY.

without his Game 7 performance vs LeBron, the Celtics are watching another team in the Finals.

and without Pierce and Ray Allen playing great in the Finals bailing KG out... no ring.

@ the KG stans. wowzers

LOL. Without KG, Boston wouldn't even get past the first round.

I_Like_Dirt · Post #15 » by **I_Like_Dirt** » Sun Jul 13, 2008 3:36 pm

kbitboc wrote:LOL. Without KG, Boston wouldn't even get past the first round.

Given that the Celtics remaining bigs weren't anything special that's almost surely true, but I'm not convinced the Celtics get out of the first round without Pierce, either. Without Pierce, opposing teams would have been able to shift their defensive focus a lot. The question is nearly as easy as some posters in this thread are making it out to be.

Malinhion · Post #16 » by **Malinhion** » Sun Jul 13, 2008 5:06 pm

Garnett, obviously.