Higher on GOAT list - Paul Pierce vs. Dominique Wilkins

[Lightning25]

Who do you guys have ranked higher in your GOAT list, Pierce or Dominique? For me, I have Pierce ranked above Nique but I'd like to know what you guys think.

[BattleTested]

Yeah I have Pierce above Nique as well.

Dominique peaked as a better scorer, and was really a more prolific scorer in general, hovering around that 26-30 PPG range in his 10 year prime. Pierce was more of a 23-26 PPG type of guy. Both were decent rebounders. Pierce was a slightly better passer and a better defender. Both achieved similar results as 1st options, borderline contenders at their peak but not really as close as they seemed.

We never saw what Dominique could do on a great team, but we shouldn't penalize Pierce for getting a chance Wilkins didn't get. Pierce has the distinction of putting up numbers on a great team, being thought of as a better big game player (arguable) and clutch scorer (probably.) He also has a Finals MVP on his resume.

Maybe if the Lakers picked Dominique over James Worthy with that 1st pick in 83 he's way above Pierce. I don't know. But working with what they did, I've got to put Pierce above him on a GOAT list.

[kasino]

Nique very easily

[Brooklyn718]

Dominique

[rocopc]

Nique very easily

This is not easily in any way man... not even close to be easy and I have Nique above PP to but its not easy for sure

[JordansBulls]

Well Nique never had the opportunity to play with someone better than him on his teams and winning so cant use the 2008 title for Pierce as an advantage here.

[wigglestrue]

Wilkins, although Pierce has made it pretty close. I have Nique in the 35-45 range, Pierce in the 40-50 range.

[Laimbeer]

Nique was the better peak player and has a slight edge for me. Not sure either is top 50.

[JordansBulls]

The sad thing is that Nique should have been in the top 50 originally.

[Lightning25]

Well Nique never had the opportunity to play with someone better than him on his teams and winning so cant use the 2008 title for Pierce as an advantage here.

You can't take it away from Pierce either though. Pierce proved that he could win a title as the #2 option on a team. You always have to go with the proven player.

[penbeast0]

Yeah I have Pierce above Nique as well.

Dominique peaked as a better scorer, and was really a more prolific scorer in general, hovering around that 26-30 PPG range in his 10 year prime. Pierce was more of a 23-26 PPG type of guy. Both were decent rebounders. Pierce was a slightly better passer and a better defender. Both achieved similar results as 1st options, borderline contenders at their peak but not really as close as they seemed.

We never saw what Dominique could do on a great team, but we shouldn't penalize Pierce for getting a chance Wilkins didn't get. Pierce has the distinction of putting up numbers on a great team, being thought of as a better big game player (arguable) and clutch scorer (probably.) He also has a Finals MVP on his resume.

Maybe if the Lakers picked Dominique over James Worthy with that 1st pick in 83 he's way above Pierce. I don't know. But working with what they did, I've got to put Pierce above him on a GOAT list.

Then adjust for the faster era Nique played in and the volume scoring difference is probably halved. Meanwhile Pierce gives you far more offensive versatility, better efficiency, better passing although lesser rebounding, and of course . . . there are two ends to the basketball floor only one of which Nique was really interested in. Add to that Pierce's greater playoff success relative to his regular season stats and that adds to the Pierce argument.

But of course, Nique had a better nickname . . .

[tsherkin]

Nique wasn't a better scorer than Pierce, only higher volume. Those aren't directly equatable.

Anyway, I think it's clear that Pierce has had a career that ranks higher on an all-time list, given that Nique never exited the second round and Pierce was in the ECFs before Garnett joined the team, and then won a Finals MVP in his title season in 08... and was in the Finals two years later. He's got the greater individual recognition, the greater team success... and he's a better player. Slightly better defender, definitely better passer, much more efficient scorer who himself scored 25+ ppg 5 times, including in 3 straight seasons. It's not like he wasn't a good scorer himself; wasn't a scoring title kind of player, but that's not necessarily a bad thing.

In any case, there's no seriously effective pro-Nique argument for an all-time ranking with Pierce. Player to player, I wouldn't agree with it, but you can at least conceive of an argument for Nique, but an all-time list accounts for individual recognition through accolades and also examines team success, both areas where Pierce ranks more favorably for the most part... although Pierce topped out at 7th in the MVP vote (09) and Nique was second behind Bird in 86 and was 5th on two other occasions (top 10 5 total times).

Food for thought.

[kasino]

Nique very easily

This is not easily in any way man... not even close to be easy and I have Nique above PP to but its not easy for sure

it is very easy
better scorer/better rebounder and never had capable talent around him and continuously led his team to the PS where he was relied on more then Pierce
a career all-star starter and higher MVP voting

team success is only in Pierce favor and everyone argues KG should have been Finals MVP
TS% might seem to be in Pierce favor but thats only for his great 3pt shooting ability, while Wilkins is better from the field and line...I rather 2 out of 3 when it comes to efficiency

[penbeast0]

The myth that Nique didn't have good talent around him is just that, a myth. HE may not have had anyone as good as KG but he certainly was playing with solid talent, particularly defensively. Far better than the Antoine Walker years in Boston and I would argue, better on the average than Alex English who played at the same time, scored as much in a more efficient manner while showing greater versatility, passing, and better defense . . . while accomplishing about the same playoff success.

Let's look at the talent Nique had around him . . .
His rookie year, he replaced John Drew whose drug problems had been a distraction on the 42-40 Hawks of 1981-82, That team had All-Pro and All-Def Dan Roundfield, All-Def Fast Eddie Johnson who had been an All-Star the previous two years, All-Def candidate Tree Rollins, and some excellent backcourt depth. Hardly no talent! They improved a total of 1 game to 43-39 then slipped back to 40-42.

The Hawks then replaced Roundfield with Cliff Levingston and added Doc Rivers, Antoine Carr, and Kevin Willis to improve the frontcourt depth -- not as good but still not bad. Good defenders and solid players but no true second all-star as Eddie Johnson was no longer making All-Star teams with Nique taking the majority of the shots on a slow paced team. They went 34-48 and missed the playoffs.

Rather than blaming Nique, they blamed Eddie Johnson and got Randy Wittman to be the new starting 2 plus they made the biggest drafting mistake of that era and drafted Jon (Johnny Contract) Koncack who was mediocre rather than terrible. But he took time from Tree which was a big mistake. Still very good depth and they won 50 games as Rivers matured and the team came together and even won a playoff series before running into the 86 Celtics (nuff said). This lineup of Tree/Koncak, Willis/Levingston, Nique/Carr, Wittman, Rivers/Spud Webb, and a series of good backup guards was their most successful peaking at 57 wins but never making it out of the 2nd round of the playoffs.

In 1990 they added Moses Malone (and lost Wittman) but fell from a 4 year stretch of 50 win teams to 41-41 although with their best Ortg ever (and worst Drtg). Nique was now 30 but sufferring no visible decline in skills. They fired longtime coach Mike Fratello, Tree Rollins retired, and Moses was showing his age.

After another year of mediocrity, they let Moses move on, traded Doc Rivers and added another all-Def type in Stacy Augmon to cover for Nique plus Kevin Willis was peaking at an All-Star level; possilby because Nique had his only real injury year in a terrifically long and healthy career. Mookie Blaylock also came aboard the next year for a second perennial All-Def guard although with Willis as the main big, the team defensive ratings were poor.

Finally, the next year they traded Nique in mid-season . . . oddly enough it was in the middle of tieing their record for franchise wins in Atlanta!

So Nique generally had on the average:
2 All-Defensive types around him
At least one sometimes all-star
Solid players at almost every position
Good depth
Respected coaches

Not great talent around him but well above average and as good or better than his peers like English, B.King, Aquirre, Dantley (except during their short stretches with the Pistons) . . . and he didn't seem to lift them or hurt them particularly. Classy guy, great to watch, often overrated because people look at his scoring and the great dunks and ignore the lazy defense and relative inefficiency compared to the other top SFs of his era.

[tsherkin]

TS% might seem to be in Pierce favor but thats only for his great 3pt shooting ability, while Wilkins is better from the field and line...I rather 2 out of 3 when it comes to efficiency

Ooh, not true. Not solely true, anyway.

Career FTA/FGA:

Nique: .345
Pierce: .457

That's a HUGE difference, and it isn't even just from the post-04 era, either (he was at .473 in 02/03, for example). It was one of his greatest strengths, and you're reducing it to a difference based on 3pt shooting, which is a big mistake. His prolific usage of the 3 certainly helped, but his incredible ability to parlay his size and usage of the post to a degree greater than Wilkins' was likewise extremely valuable.

[JordansBulls]

Well Nique never had the opportunity to play with someone better than him on his teams and winning so cant use the 2008 title for Pierce as an advantage here.

You can't take it away from Pierce either though. Pierce proved that he could win a title as the #2 option on a team. You always have to go with the proven player.

But Nique was never the #2 player. It is like saying you take Gasol over Barkley because Gasol won as the #2 player. Nique was more of a MVP caliber player than Pierce.

Nique
1984-85 NBA 0.004 (17)
1985-86 NBA 0.522 (2)
1986-87 NBA 0.168 (5)
1987-88 NBA 0.069 (6)
1990-91 NBA 0.030 (8)
1992-93 NBA 0.055 (5)
1993-94 NBA 0.001 (11)
Career 0.849 (38)

Pierce
2000-01 NBA 0.004 (13)
2001-02 NBA 0.017 (11)
2002-03 NBA 0.001 (11)
2007-08 NBA 0.001 (14)
2008-09 NBA 0.017 (7)
Active 0.040 (25)
Career 0.040 (108)

[Red-Blue-Green]

Well Nique never had the opportunity to play with someone better than him on his teams and winning so cant use the 2008 title for Pierce as an advantage here.

You can't take it away from Pierce either though. Pierce proved that he could win a title as the #2 option on a team. You always have to go with the proven player.

But Nique was never the #2 player. It is like saying you take Gasol over Barkley because Gasol won as the #2 player. Nique was more of a MVP caliber player than Pierce.

Nique
1984-85 NBA 0.004 (17)
1985-86 NBA 0.522 (2)
1986-87 NBA 0.168 (5)
1987-88 NBA 0.069 (6)
1990-91 NBA 0.030 (8)
1992-93 NBA 0.055 (5)
1993-94 NBA 0.001 (11)
Career 0.849 (38)

Pierce
2000-01 NBA 0.004 (13)
2001-02 NBA 0.017 (11)
2002-03 NBA 0.001 (11)
2007-08 NBA 0.001 (14)
2008-09 NBA 0.017 (7)
Active 0.040 (25)
Career 0.040 (108)

Bad example, Gasol won as the #1 or at worst 1A/1A in 2010.

I don't agree with using MVP votes to put Nique over Pierce.
The MVP voters have shown over the years that they can be poor judges of actual talent/impact and value.

In the end they are just the opinions of a few random people (sportswriters / broadcasters) who have their own biases and none of us know what their actual knowedlege and understanding of the game is and how good their ability to determine talent/ability and impact actually is.

They can probably be woo'd by big scoring numbers or exciting highlight plays.
They are the media... and the media has been proven to be unknowedlegabe/stupid when it comes to real basketball knowedlege/opinons.

I'd trust the opinions of some of the better users here way more then anyone from the ESPN/Media... especially after some of the garbage they spew on the air and some of their past votes for NBA awards.

Iverson winning MVP in 01
Kobe finishing 4th last year... just some examples of how you could misuse MVP votes to say a player was much better then they actually were.

[kasino]

TS% might seem to be in Pierce favor but thats only for his great 3pt shooting ability, while Wilkins is better from the field and line...I rather 2 out of 3 when it comes to efficiency

Ooh, not true. Not solely true, anyway.

Career FTA/FGA:

Nique: .345
Pierce: .457

That's a HUGE difference, and it isn't even just from the post-04 era, either (he was at .473 in 02/03, for example). It was one of his greatest strengths, and you're reducing it to a difference based on 3pt shooting, which is a big mistake. His prolific usage of the 3 certainly helped, but his incredible ability to parlay his size and usage of the post to a degree greater than Wilkins' was likewise extremely valuable.

isn't that free-throw rate?
that doesn't say anything about efficiency, he just gets to the line more and still can't gain more point totals
Nique is a better scorer/rebounder
Pierce is only better as a playmaker and not elite in that regard
pre-big 3 clearly Wilkins and with no clear distinction as the best player on his championship team still goes to Dominique, the career all-star starter and more respected MVP candidate

[Red-Blue-Green]

I will go with Pierce.

More efficient/consistent scorer.
Better passer and a significantly better defender.

I love Nique as a dunker and he was more exciting to watch for sure but Pierce is the player I want on my team if I wanna win.

btw... Dominique in 86 had a whopping 16.7 PER in the playoffs putting up 26 / 5 / 2.5apg on 51%TS

[bostonfan34]

I will go with Pierce.

More efficient/consistent scorer.
Better passer and a significantly better defender.

I love Nique as a dunker and he was more exciting to watch for sure but Pierce is the player I want on my team if I wanna win.

btw... Dominique in 86 had a whopping 16.7 PER in the playoffs putting up 26 / 5 / 2.5apg on 51%TS

Agreed with all of this - it's Pierce.