Where does Paul Pierce rank all time as a SF?

[penbeast0]

Assuming, as seems likely, that the Celtics win the title and Pierce is named Finals MVP, is he a top 10 SF of all time? (he did get to the playoffs on a team that used Antoine Walker as a go to guy, that should count for something, lol)

1. Bird
2. Erving
3. Baylor
4. Havlicek
5. LeBron
6. Pippen
7. R. Barry

These 7 are clearly superior, where would you rank the following 10"

P. Pierce
J. Worthy
S. Marion
G. Johnson
G. Hill
D. Wilkins
A. Dantley
B. King
A. English
M. Aquirre
C. Mullin

[BugsBunny]

Assuming, as seems likely, that the Celtics win the title and Pierce is named Finals MVP, is he a top 10 SF of all time? (he did get to the playoffs on a team that used Antoine Walker as a go to guy, that should count for something, lol)

1. Bird
2. Erving
3. Baylor
4. Havlicek
5. LeBron
6. Pippen
7. R. Barry

These 7 are clearly superior, where would you rank the following 10"

P. Pierce
J. Worthy
S. Marion
G. Johnson
G. Hill
D. Wilkins
A. Dantley
B. King
A. English
M. Aquirre
C. Mullin

"King James" is already an all-time top 5 SF? WTF!!!

[penbeast0]

Yeah, he is. He has a 5 year peak as good as any 3 not named Larry Bird in history (roughly equal to Dr. J's ABA years but against NBA competition); if he sufferred a career ending injury this offseason, he'd still be considered one of the all-time greats though I could see arguments for ranking him anywhere from 4-20.

[BugsBunny]

Yeah, he is. He has a 5 year peak as good as any 3 not named Larry Bird in history (roughly equal to Dr. J's ABA years but against NBA competition); if he sufferred a career ending injury this offseason, he'd still be considered one of the all-time greats though I could see arguments for ranking him anywhere from 4-20.

Well, in my opinion he needs to get at least a ring to be in the top 5 all-time.

[penbeast0]

ok, well assuming Pierce gets one, where do you rank PIERCE?

[BugsBunny]

ok, well assuming Pierce gets one, where do you rank PIERCE?

To be honest, assuming Pierce dose get one, i still wont judge till his career is over. Same goes for Lebron.

[JordansBulls]

I tried before to mention that I believe that MJ and Pierce would have won 6 or more rings together like MJ and Pippen did and now I am convinced. Just like at how KG's influence help mold Pierce into a great defensive player. Now just imagine Pierce playing with MJ for years and having to defend him? Not only can Pierce defend but he can score as well.

To me I believe Pierce and Pippen are pretty close in ability and seeing how Pierce's defense has risen I could take him over Pippen. But that is just my opinion on the matter.

[Warspite]

I would take the following over Pierce

Nique, King, English, Mullin, Dantley, Hill, Arizen G. Johnson As well as the aforementioned HoFers.

Worthy, M Johnson, Kiki, X, Elliot, Ellis, B. Love, Rudy T, Wicks, Wilks, Danbridge, C Walker, Cunningham and Twyman are right there with Pierce


Its hard to put someone in the top 10 who was never 1st or 2nd team ALL NBA. If you werent one of the best SFs in the NBA any yr you played its hard for me to pick you.

Just as Wade was considered a top 10 SG of alltime and the Kobe hysteria continues it always seems like if you can play well in June the rest of the yr or your career for that matter doesnt realy matter.

I for one am not ready either to put LBJ on the GOAT list yet. 5 yrs does not a career make. If that were true B King and G Hill would be a top 20 players alltime.

[penbeast0]

He's not a GOAT but you can make a good argument that either King or Hill was top 8 SF of all time . . . and I've heard both . . . and James's peak is higher than either of them.

I have Pierce toward the bottom of that list of 10, which would leave him around 15th SF all-time . . . but may have missing players (Paul Arizin? Connie Hawkins? someone that I should have remembered but didn't?) that list was off the top of my head.

[Fencer reregistered]

Assuming, as seems likely, that the Celtics win the title and Pierce is named Finals MVP, is he a top 10 SF of all time? (he did get to the playoffs on a team that used Antoine Walker as a go to guy, that should count for something, lol)

1. Bird
2. Erving
3. Baylor
4. Havlicek
5. LeBron
6. Pippen
7. R. Barry

These 7 are clearly superior, where would you rank the following 10"

P. Pierce
J. Worthy
S. Marion
G. Johnson
G. Hill
D. Wilkins
A. Dantley
B. King
A. English
M. Aquirre
C. Mullin

The problem in these judgments is that Pierce has PROVED he can play defense, but we don't know whether other stars with lots of talent around them would also prove something similar.

That said, I'm going to dismiss the Mullin, Aguirre, King, and even Wilkins options from the list because I don't recall anybody saying anything favorable about their defense.

Also, I think modern perimeter players as a group are way ahead of the old-timers, with very few exceptions (basically West and Hondo, whose games translate well to the modern day). In particular, on what basis can we say that Pierce is anything but an IMPROVED version of Baylor (e.g., with more defense and more shooting range)? Yes, Baylor had better numbers, but that was in the context of the opposition of the day.

Guys I'd rank ahead of Pierce -- assuming this year we saw the "real" Pierce -- include:

Bird
Erving (probably could have defended better if asked to)
Havlicek
LeBron
Pippen
probably Hill
maybe English
maybe TMac-as-SF

But that's about as far as it goes.

[shawngoat23]

I have it like this, but they're all pretty close, except for Marion. I didn't rank Gus Johnson because I don't know much about him.

G. Hill
D. Wilkins
A. English
C. Mullin
B. King
J. Worthy
A. Dantley
P. Pierce
M. Aquirre
S. Marion

[TrueLAfan]

Well...SF is probably the most loaded position in NBA history. Marques Johnson, for instance, wasn't on penbeast0's original list. What do you do about him? Good defender--not great, but above average. Great all around game. All-NBA and MVP recognition. Didn't shoot threes or go to the line like Pierce, but shot well over 50% in his best years which more than makes up for it.

Then you've got someone like Grant Hill, who everyone has heard of. Everyone remembers the first round crashes and, especially. the injury. We forget the 5 top ten finishes in MVP voting (peaking at #3).

Then you've got Willie Wise. Willie Wise? Sure, Willie Wise. Besides Bobby Jones, probably the best perimeter defender in the ABA. Short peak--only three years--but he was a 21-9-3 player that shot 50% from the field and was spectacular on D. How does he rank against, say Mark Aguirre, who could score more and did so for more years...but probably didn't do anything else as well.

Gus Johnson was a PF; he was the Charles Barkley of his era. In this comparison, I'm glad. I have no idea how to rank him.

James Worthy's career is very good...but is also largely "what if?" As in....what if Worthy hadn't been the #3 option on those great Laker teams. I think everybody assumes he would have much gaudier numbers (which I agree with)...but would that have made him a better player? How do we adjust for that?

What about Billy Cunningham? Cunningham has to be in the top 7 SFs. Has to be. Twice in the top 5 of MVP voting. Four All-NBA or ABA first teams. Incredible hops, consistent winner, great teammate, one of the smartest players to play the game. I'd rank him above Rick Barry; maybe above Pippen.

What about Connie Hawkins? He was a SF. (Played alongside Silas and Walk and some other 1500-1800 minute PF/C with the Suns). He was at about 80% after his first year in the NBA, and still made three All-NBA first teams. If you add in the ABA years...well, he's another guy I'd take over Rick Barry.

I'm saying all this as a big fan of Paul Pierce. Durable, good passer, has range, plays D--terrific all around game. I have no idea where he fits in...I'd say he's probably very near the top 10 SFs. But, man, there are a TON of great SFs.

[penbeast0]

Hawk's ABL and ABA seasons were as a PF before the knee injuries turned him into a jump shooter. Looking solely at his NBA career he isn't close (not his fault but still). Billy C should be around the top 10, no question. Worthy can only be considered for what he did, super efficient, excellent defense, coming up big, not a great volume scorer, rebounder, or playmaker. Gus played both. In his 4 all-star seasons his running mates at forward were Bailey Howell for the first two (a definite low post four) and Jack Marin for the last two (a definite jump shooting three). Willie Wise was another terrific defensive player with athletic skills but limited shooting range, convert his numbers to NBA and even peak, he doesn't quite match up to Bob Dandridge or Jamaal Wilkes. And as for Marques Johnson, injuries limited him to a very short peak though in that peak he was as good as his best peers (B. King, English, Nique, Aquirre).

[TrueLAfan]

Gus Johnson was (much) more of a PF than SF. Yes, he played at SF in 1965, and maybe part of the time in 1966 and 1967...but that was largely because of Ray Scott. Both he and Johnson could play either forward position as well as C...they were completely opposite in body type, though. ,ERven if Ray Scott spend all his time at SF--and he didn't--Gus Johnson was much more of a PF after 1966. 1969 is a good example...after the Bullets drafted Unseld, they had Unseld/Scott/Ellis/Johnson...among those four players, about 500 minutes went at SF. It wasn't Unseld or Ellis; between Scott and Johnson, Ray Scott was more likely to be at SF. Even if Scott didn't play any time at SF, that means 70-75% of Gus's court time was at PF. Tjhat;s pretty typical. Even if Ray Scott played all his minutes at PF, more than half Gus Johnson's time in other seasons (usually much more than half) was at PF. The most comparable player in terms of size and court time was Dave DeBusschere, and their matchups were legendary...and I actually think DeBusschere spent more time overall at SF than Gus. But I really don't think either of them played that much at SF, not enough to be considered SFs. I'd be surprised if, other than 1965, Gus Johnson played 3000 total minutes at SF. That's something like 25% of his career minutes. Part of a disagreement is because forwards weren't as clearly defined in the 60s...like DeBusschere, Gus was considered a "strong" forward. But I think it's a real stretch to call him a SF.

As to Marques Johnson...I don't know how long you have to be a great player, but Marques Johnson was first or second team All-NBA three times, and received MVP votes in five seasons. He had two other seasons than those five when he averaged a combined 20-8-3 and shot close to 52%. That's seven season of elite or near elite play...more than, for instance, Grant Hill. If you had well over 500 games where you averaged 21.5-8-4 and shot over 52% and received that sort of recognition, your peak is actually pretty long in my book.

And Willie Wise had plenty of shooting range. He didn't have it out to three...but he had a very good midrange jumper out to 20 feet. He played on a team that played at a medium pace (to rest Zelmo's knees as much as possible), but was hyper efficient...the Stars were first or second in the league in FG%, FT%, and FT attempts in Willie's best years. This is a team that didn't shoot more than the mid-70s Bucks, and Wise still scored 22-23 a game in his peak...more than Dandridge did, and Dandridge's teams shot just as often/played at a similar or higher pace. Same with Jamaal. Sports Illustrated said Willie Wise was the best two way player in basketball...in either league. You can knock him for having only a three season peak, but not for his offense.

[GJense4181]

Paul Pierce=most boring SF ever.

[Baller 24]

I agree with most of Pens list, but IMO I think King and Hill rank higher then Pierce just because they were freaking amazing in during their peak. And I think Grant Hill would have been a top 7 SF if the guy didn't get injured in 2000, because he was bound to win an MVP sometime after that unbelievable season of 25pts, 9reb, 7 ast.

[Kakish]

Top 30 maybe...

[Fencer reregistered]

So which of these great SFs:

1. Were consistently good-to-great defenders?
2. Showed, as Pierce has, that they could be good-to-great at defense when they didn't also have to carry their teams' primary scoring load?

My first cut:

Pippen, Havlicek -- obviously great defenders
Bird -- made 2nd team All-Defense for team defense. Couldn't necessarily stay with his man, and often covered PFs while McHale covered the SF.
Hill, Worthy -- solid defenders
English -- ditto?
Pierce, LBJ -- great defense at times
Erving -- ditto?
Bobby Jones, Matrix -- duh
Wilkins -- Bird once said that Wilkins covered him better than anybody ever had before. However, the credence one should ascribe to that statement is debatable, as he said it right after the great shootout game. This is the only compliment I ever recall anybody paying to Nique's defense.

[thegreatblaze]

Well, in my opinion he needs to get at least a ring to be in the top 5 all-time.

Not even that. He needs to play for more than 5 seasons to be a top-5 Sf of all-time. He has not earned the right to be listed ahead of most of those players. Period. I don't care how good his numbers are.

[Baller 24]

Well, in my opinion he needs to get at least a ring to be in the top 5 all-time.

Not even that. He needs to play for more than 5 seasons to be a top-5 Sf of all-time. He has not earned the right to be listed ahead of most of those players. Period. I don't care how good his numbers are.

Bingo. Its really funny how one ring can get you to so many different places in the all time list.