sam_I_am wrote:As a rookie, Larry Bird joined the team with the worst record in basketball and it became aa 60 win team with the best record in basketball. It wasn't until the next year that Parish and McHale came along. At age 23 he was already that good.
I understand that. However, who'd said that Pierce is Bird? I certainly haven't... I was speaking most recently in regards to the quality of teammates of Pierce over the years. What you're implying is a different discussion which I never initiated. Early in the thread, the question is: Why is Bird's name readily brought up when some want to validate Pierce's importance on this team as a long standing Celtics player. By your own comments, you give reason to why Pierce shouldn't be compared to Bird beyond the simplest answer that they both played the same position more or less. Duh. Pierce is who he is: An outstanding basketball talent but one who isn't on the same level as a LeBron James or a young Shaquille O'Neal. He didn't impact Boston in the same ways that a franchise player does. Granted... But, again, I never said Pierce was that phenomenal superstar that immediately turn around the Boston Celtics fortunates as a rookie. No, but Pierce has been an important player that deserves his fair share of credit for helping to gradually turn things around or to improve. Even Rivers' owed credit for improving his coaching staff last season. And Danny Ainge deserves a lot of the other credit for making moves that for the most part have proven to be sound judgments in terms of potential longterm contributors or future trading chips. For instance, Perkins (MEM), Powe (DEN), Rondo (PHO), Davis (SEA) and Bill Walker (WAS) are all players drafted by teams not Boston and then acquired by Ainge via trades.