Pierce's absence worst than Garnett

[exculpatory]

drza's original comment (somehow his name got removed when I was quoting him)
Pierce is a very good player. Historically he probably wasn't given as much due as his talent and production would have deserved. But he's not nor ever has been in the conversation with the best-of-the-best. If Pierce has to be the best player on this team on a game-in game-out basis we're not winning number 18. Here's to hoping that both he and KG, as well as all of the other key players are
healthy come playoff time so we don't have to see this re-proven again like it was last year.[/quote][/quote][/quote

1. Paul is not a very good player. He is an outstanding player with HOF credentials today! In fact, he will finish close to Hondo as the all time leading scorer in Celtic history with about 25K points.
2. Not "probably". He IS the most vastly underestimated Super Star elite wing in the game over the last decade - even amongst some Celtic fans on this board.
3. Kobe and Bron are the best of the best amongst wings in the game today. The truth is that the Truth is only a smidgeon behind them - without the absurd media hype. In the spring of 2008, he outplayed both of them Mano a Mano in the playoffs to lead us to Number 18.
4. As far as Paul leading us to Number 19, see previous post. He WILL do this IF he has a HEALTHY excellent KG and budding All Star RR right behind him.

Peace. Out.

[Kids Are Alright]

I understand that given his age, Ray is unlikely to reach my expectations as far as his points per game average is concern. I guess it was more of a pleading toward him to attempt more shots and allow Rondo to be more of a facilitator than a scorer--he isn't Chris Paul. Because I prefer not to thrust that responsibility onto Rondo. It's unfortunate that he's seemingly the lone best young player on the team. Especially, since he's the starting point guard. But that's what happens when you don't draft well or you trade away your young players to acquire an All-Star veteran or two. In an ideal reality, Giddens and B. Walker would be paying dividends off the bench right now.

Disagree.
If Ray is doubled (Pistons series 2 years ago), he hasn't got it to take good shots, he's not that athletic and he's old for that role, he'd just kill himself and the C's by putting up low percentage shots and/or getting injured. Ray lets the game come to him, takes the plays run for him, can go inside or outside, inside's been a lot better lately.
Ray hasn't got Pierce's game, even when he used to go off for 40+ points, he wasn't a Pierce-type player, it meant the defense allowed him to score, IMO.

[drza]

Bob Ryan said it this morning, and I have been saying it for 6 years on this board:

"If they do pull it off this year, it will be because of solid team defense and, when the time comes, more virtuoso offense from Paul Pierce, the one Celtic who can always get a shot, who knows how to get to the line, and who thrives on the big moments. Kevin Garnett will never change: He will always regard himself as a facilitator, not a Go-To Guy. It’s time we all reconciled ourselves to that reality."

Hogwash. The question is health and age, not tired talking points that have been repeatedly proven false for years. KG has historically stepped his game up just fine in big moments and late game situations. If he's healthy he's still the best player on this team. If he's not healthy this team won't win a title. Unfortunately, it's that simple.

Hogwash to you also! We will NEVER agree. Ryan is correct, and so am I.

Regardless, history had proven that neither Paul or KG can carry a team to a banner without proper support. In 2008, they blended their skillsets perfectly, and we won the 'ship. I hope to goodness that KG returns to his 2008 excellence. Then Paul will lead us to Number 18 with KG anchoring the D and RR playmaking like a whirling dervish and creating havoc right behind him. And hopefully Ray Ray right behind RR and KG throwing in daggers right and left.

Regarding my response to the issue that you bolded (i.e. whether Garnett can get his shot in crunch time and/or step up in big moments) it's not about agreeing or not, the facts of his career clearly and definitively prove the assertion wrong. It's not about opinion...Garnett scores at a higher rate in crunch time than he does otherwise...it's provable fact. Garnett's scoring (and peripheral stats as well, but let's focus on scoring here) goes up in the playoffs with respect to the regular season. It's a provable fact. Garnett led the '08 championship team in scoring, 4th quarter scoring, crunch time scoring from the field, and last 2-minute buckets when the game was within 2 points. Again, not opinion, provable fact. Thus, Ryan's statement that you quoted is, in fact, hogwash.

Your a Pierce fan. That's great. He's been a great Celtic for a long time. Wonderful. Doesn't give you license to state unsupportable opinion as fact as a means to minimize Garnett's contributions to make Pierce look better.

[drza]

Pierce is a very good player. Historically he probably wasn't given as much due as his talent and production would have deserved. But he's not nor ever has been in the conversation with the best-of-the-best. If Pierce has to be the best player on this team on a game-in game-out basis we're not winning number 18. Here's to hoping that both he and KG, as well as all of the other key players are
healthy come playoff time so we don't have to see this re-proven again like it was last year.

1. Paul is not a very good player. He is an outstanding player with HOF credentials today! In fact, he will finish close to Hondo as the all time leading scorer in Celtic history with about 25K points.
2. Not "probably". He IS the most vastly underestimated Super Star elite wing in the game over the last decade - even amongst some Celtic fans on this board.
3. Kobe and Bron are the best of the best amongst wings in the game today. The truth is that the Truth is only a smidgeon behind them - without the absurd media hype. In the spring of 2008, he outplayed both of them Mano a Mano in the playoffs to lead us to Number 18.
4. As far as Paul leading us to Number 19, see previous post. He WILL do this IF he has a HEALTHY excellent KG and budding All Star RR right behind him.

Peace. Out.

1) Use whatever terms you like (i.e. very good vs outstanding vs whatever), Pierce is one of the better players in the league and has been for more than a decade. You're right, he is likely to be a Hall of Famer. And he is going to go down as one of the best CELTICS of all time. But he is not, was not, and never has been one of the best PLAYERS of all time. And there's no shame in that because, as you point out, a Hall of Fame career is nothing to sneeze at. But the attempts to elevate him to something he's not (especially in so emphatic of a way) doesn't do him any service because it makes people point out his shortcomings.

2) "Underrated" is a hard thing to prove, but as I said before, I agree with you. I do think he was underrated, and I've seen some good quantitative arguments for just how underrated he may have been due to his lack of consistent team success (one good one that I know of off the top of my head is http://dberri.wordpress.com/2007/01/12/ ... ul-pierce/ , and in this stat he did measure about as well as Kobe Bryant at the time.

3) That said, Pierce isn't a "smidgen" behind LeBron or even Kobe right now. Especially LeBron. He is clearly a level below them in the grand pecking order, more on the level with the Vince Carters of the world. Again, this is a matter of distinction...when comparing a borderline All NBA performer to an MVP caliber performer you are still talking about two of the best players in the game, but there is a very distinct difference between the two. And the statement that he outplayed either LeBron or Kobe 1-on-1 over entire series in '08 is laughable, especially when you consider teammate roles, consistency and the way the opponents had to defend Pierce vs LeBron/Kobe that year. It's just not a sound statement to make.

4) Here is where the "agree to disagree" comes in. I'll just say it like this, if despite the facts you choose to believe that in '08 Pierce "led" the team through the playoffs to 17, then yes, he could likely "lead" this team in a similar way to 18 this year if everyone is healthy. Despite these pass-the-time debates we might have, I'm sure that's the outcome that all Celtics fans are hoping for this season.

[Chosen01]

How many of your players will be out for the heat game?i think pierce absence is worse than Garnett, but obviously you guys are beast, when everyone is healthy.

[GreenMachine]

Here is the deal, GreenMachine:

Our biggest weaknesses are lack of a solid back-up for Paul (Gomes?) and a back-up for RR (?). Jammer and I have posted many times about this.

We would be hurting losing either the Truth or RR for an extended period of time - much more than losing KG at this point in his career.

Bottomline: Paul is the guts of the team, the closer, the best scorer, the most well rounded, the best player, the most important player on the team, etc. This has always been true, prior to the arrival of KG and Ray and the emergence of RR, and since then as well. I would not want to lose either Paul or RR for any length of time. However, losing Paul for an extended period would be much much much more devastating for us right now.

Kinda... but a missing Wing player (of which there are 6 or more on the roster) is not as crippling as missing our PG (of which there are... 2? on the roster (House is no PG)).

For all intense and purposes... we have ONE PG on our team. If he is hurt, we are screwed.

[exculpatory]

Drza:

Regarding my response to the issue that you bolded (i.e. whether Garnett can get his shot in crunch time and/or step up in big moments) it's not about agreeing or not, the facts of his career clearly and definitively prove the assertion wrong. It's not about opinion...Garnett scores at a higher rate in crunch time than he does otherwise...it's provable fact. Garnett's scoring (and peripheral stats as well, but let's focus on scoring here) goes up in the playoffs with respect to the regular season. It's a provable fact. Garnett led the '08 championship team in scoring, 4th quarter scoring, crunch time scoring from the field, and last 2-minute buckets when the game was within 2 points. Again, not opinion, provable fact. Thus, Ryan's statement that you quoted is, in fact, hogwash.

You're a Pierce fan. That's great. He's been a great Celtic for a long time. Wonderful. It doesn't give you license to state unsupportable opinion as fact as a means to minimize Garnett's contributions to make Pierce look better.[/quote][/quote]

Drza (by the way, my name is Rob), first let me say that I enjoy how well you express yourself. Some of our fellow Celtic fanatics are not blessed with that skill (but I totally forgive them for that simply because they are Celtic fanatics, i.e. their hearts are in the right place bball-wise.

I will trust you on the stats you quoted. I do not have the time to do alot of stat-checking these days. And the "provable" stats you quoted regarding KG are very very nice to see, and I did not know them before.

However, you might check 82games.com (a place I last looked at about a year ago). Melo > Paul are in the top 5 or so over regarding last minute game-winning scores and passes - ahead of even Kobe and Lebron. KG is no where to be found on that list. That is "provable" fact also. Hence, Paul is generally regarded around the league (and not just by yours truly) as one of the best clutch players in the league.

And I think you misunderstood me. I am not trying to denigrate KG in any way to make my guy look better. I love KG on this team, and I want him HEALTHY and back to his old self as much as anyone on this board. However, when a last shot is needed to win or lose, Doc gives the ball to Paul to take the shot or make the pass for a damn good reason. He does this because he knows that Paul is the much better crunch time player, and has made that game-winning shot or pass 50-100 times in his career.

Rob

[exculpatory]

Here is the deal, GreenMachine:

Our biggest weaknesses are lack of a solid back-up for Paul (Gomes?) and a back-up for RR (?). Jammer and I have posted many times about this.

We would be hurting losing either the Truth or RR for an extended period of time - much more than losing KG at this point in his career.

Bottomline: Paul is the guts of the team, the closer, the best scorer, the most well rounded, the best player, the most important player on the team, etc. This has always been true, prior to the arrival of KG and Ray and the emergence of RR, and since then as well. I would not want to lose either Paul or RR for any length of time. However, losing Paul for an extended period would be much much much more devastating for us right now.

Kinda... but a missing Wing player (of which there are 6 or more on the roster) is not as crippling as missing our PG (of which there are... 2? on the roster (House is no PG)).

For all intense (INTENTS) and purposes... we have ONE PG on our team. If he is hurt, we are screwed.

Yup, we only have 1 real point, and he is becoming an All Star right in front of our eyes. But Paul has proven that he can be a very serviceable "point forward".

And none of the other wings, can hold a candle to what Paul brings to the table.

[exculpatory]

1. Paul is not a very good player. He is an outstanding player with HOF credentials today! In fact, he will finish close to Hondo as the all time leading scorer in Celtic history with about 25K points.
2. Not "probably". He IS the most vastly underestimated Super Star elite wing in the game over the last decade - even amongst some Celtic fans on this board.
3. Kobe and Bron are the best of the best amongst wings in the game today. The truth is that the Truth is only a smidgeon behind them - without the absurd media hype. In the spring of 2008, he outplayed both of them Mano a Mano in the playoffs to lead us to Number 18.
4. As far as Paul leading us to Number 19, see previous post. He WILL do this IF he has a HEALTHY excellent KG and budding All Star RR right behind him.

Peace. Out.[/quote]

Use whatever terms you like (i.e. very good vs outstanding vs whatever), Pierce is one of the better players in the league and has been for more than a decade. You're right, he is likely to be a Hall of Famer. And he is going to go down as one of the best CELTICS of all time.

TOTALLY AGREED.

But he is not, was not, and never has been one of the best PLAYERS of all time. And there's no shame in that because, as you point out, a Hall of Fame career is nothing to sneeze at. But the attempts to elevate him to something he's not (especially in so emphatic of a way) doesn't do him any service because it makes people point out his shortcomings.

I only compare wings to wings. I think it is ridiculous to compare wings to points or bigs. And I disagree. He is one of the best wings of all time. He is not Lebron or Kobe, but he is not far off.

"Underrated" is a hard thing to prove, but as I said before, I agree with you. I do think he was (has always been and still is) underrated, and I've seen some good quantitative arguments for just how underrated he may have been due to his lack of consistent team success (one good one that I know of off the top of my head is http://dberri.wordpress.com/2007/01/12/ ... ul-pierce/ , and in this stat he did measure about as well as Kobe Bryant at the time.

AGREED.

That said, Pierce isn't a "smidgen" behind LeBron or even Kobe right now. Especially LeBron. He is clearly a level below them in the grand pecking order, more on the level with the Vince Carters of the world. Again, this is a matter of distinction...when comparing a borderline All NBA performer to an MVP caliber performer you are still talking about two of the best players in the game, but there is a very distinct difference between the two. And the statement that he outplayed either LeBron or Kobe 1-on-1 over entire series in '08 is laughable, especially when you consider teammate roles, consistency and the way the opponents had to defend Pierce vs LeBron/Kobe that year. It's just not a sound statement to make.

Disagree. Paul has been selected All Pro I think 3 times and I think the number should be closer to 5-6 times. Kobe and LeBron are the best of the best amongst wings right now, and Paul is simply not that far behind. He did personally shut Kobe down during the great comeback game in LA, and he played LeBron even during that playoff series.

4) Here is where the "agree to disagree" comes in. I'll just say it like this, if despite the facts you choose to believe that in '08 Pierce "led" the team through the playoffs to 17, then yes, he could likely "lead" this team in a similar way to 18 this year if everyone is healthy. Despite these pass-the-time debates we might have, I'm sure that's the outcome that all Celtics fans are hoping for this season.

Agreed.

[campybatman]

I understand that given his age, Ray is unlikely to reach my expectations as far as his points per game average is concern. I guess it was more of a pleading toward him to attempt more shots and allow Rondo to be more of a facilitator than a scorer--he isn't Chris Paul. Because I prefer not to thrust that responsibility onto Rondo. It's unfortunate that he's seemingly the lone best young player on the team. Especially, since he's the starting point guard. But that's what happens when you don't draft well or you trade away your young players to acquire an All-Star veteran or two. In an ideal reality, Giddens and B. Walker would be paying dividends off the bench right now.

Disagree.
If Ray is doubled (Pistons series 2 years ago), he hasn't got it to take good shots, he's not that athletic and he's old for that role, he'd just kill himself and the C's by putting up low percentage shots and/or getting injured. Ray lets the game come to him, takes the plays run for him, can go inside or outside, inside's been a lot better lately.
Ray hasn't got Pierce's game, even when he used to go off for 40+ points, he wasn't a Pierce-type player, it meant the defense allowed him to score, IMO.

Without Pierce, Ray's the only scorer left on the roster. So it's his responsibility to step forward and take on that challenge. As the adage goes, shooters keep shooting. Because age doesn't prevent you from shooting. Look at Reggie Miller... Ray isn't Miller but he's a similar age and capable player. Again, my point was that Rondo shouldn't be in that role. He should be helping to make that role somewhat simpler for Ray. A leading scoring is going to be double-teamed. It comes with the territory. But that shouldn't deter you... It doesn't Pierce, it shouldn't deter Ray. If you're being double-teamed and you're Ray, then you must look for your teammates and become a play-maker. I mean Ray did average quite a few assists over his career with Milwaukee, and has a career 3.7 APG average which isn't bad for a scorer. A player who's a scorer isn't typically expected to pass the ball. For instance, Redd's career average in assists is 2.3 with his best being 3.4 in his career. Conversely, Ray has averaged 3.0 APG or more his entire career except for his rookie season and last season.

This is when I feel it's appropriate for someone else besides Ray to assume that scoring role whenever his shot is failing him.

[drza]

Rob, this has been a good discussion so far. I'm glad we can disagree without acrimony, and I'm glad that if either of us learns something new in the discussion we can admit the other's point without digging in our feet and putting our fingers in our ears the way a lot of message boards debate go. With that said, I'm going to try to respond to your last 2 messages all in this one, so hopefully it doesn't get too long.

However, you might check 82games.com (a place I last looked at about a year ago). Melo > Paul are in the top 5 or so over regarding last minute game-winning scores and passes - ahead of even Kobe and Lebron. KG is no where to be found on that list. That is "provable" fact also. Hence, Paul is generally regarded around the league (and not just by yours truly) as one of the best clutch players in the league.

And I think you misunderstood me. I am not trying to denigrate KG in any way to make my guy look better. I love KG on this team, and I want him HEALTHY and back to his old self as much as anyone on this board. However, when a last shot is needed to win or lose, Doc gives the ball to Paul to take the shot or make the pass for a damn good reason. He does this because he knows that Paul is the much better crunch time player, and has made that game-winning shot or pass 50-100 times in his career.

I have absolutely no problem agreeing unequivocally that Pierce is one of the best clutch players in the league. He always has been. And I'm familiar with the last-second (actually last 24 seconds) offense list that you referenced: http://www.82games.com/gamewinningshots.htm. Pierce is near the top because he led that list in assists and was 3rd in free throws made while also making a solid 11 field goals. He is an outstanding clutch option.

But what you might want to go back and re-check is that there are also 2 other Celtics rather prominently on that list. Ray Allen actually had more last-second shots (15) than Pierce at a higher percentage. KG was also on that list, second only to Dirk Nowitzki among bigs in last second field goals made with 9.

The point is, I NEVER argued that Pierce wasn't a great clutch option. What I call "hogwash" on is that he is the ONLY great clutch option on the Celts or that the Celts always run through him late. Neither of those are even close to being true. In general the Celtics' offense in crunch time has 3 different but effective options. Pierce is the best off the dribble (which is the reason that the last-second shots list is dominated by perimeter players) and he is good at breaking defenses down, but he can also hit the spot up shot. Allen is probably the best spot-up clutch shooter in the NBA, but he can also break his man down off the dribble (ask Sasha Vujacik about that). KG is probably the best spot-up shooting big not named Dirk, but he can also operate with his back to the basket or take his man off the dribble late (ask Joe Smith or the Lakers in game 4 about that).

The Celtics' crunchtime offense is great because they have THREE of the top crunch scorers at their individual positions all on one team. The 82games.com numbers for crunch time on THIS team backs that up (I didn't post those here for the sake of length, but I can in the response if you like). Pierce, KG and Allen all split the puzzle pretty equally as clutch scorers. Trying to make it an island where Pierce is the only (or even the primary) member is incorrect.

That said, Pierce isn't a "smidgen" behind LeBron or even Kobe right now. Especially LeBron. He is clearly a level below them in the grand pecking order, more on the level with the Vince Carters of the world. Again, this is a matter of distinction...when comparing a borderline All NBA performer to an MVP caliber performer you are still talking about two of the best players in the game, but there is a very distinct difference between the two. And the statement that he outplayed either LeBron or Kobe 1-on-1 over entire series in '08 is laughable, especially when you consider teammate roles, consistency and the way the opponents had to defend Pierce vs LeBron/Kobe that year. It's just not a sound statement to make.

Disagree. Paul has been selected All Pro I think 3 times and I think the number should be closer to 5-6 times. Kobe and LeBron are the best of the best amongst wings right now, and Paul is simply not that far behind. He did personally shut Kobe down during the great comeback game in LA, and he played LeBron even during that playoff series.

(ETA: I completely forgot to address the Kobe "shut down" or the playing LeBron "even" thing, and for the sake of space I won't go back and add it now. But if you want to continue this conversation further I can include that in my next response to you)

Kobe has been All NBA 11 times in 13 years, including 7 1st teams and 7 top-5 MVP finishes
LeBron has been All NBA 5 times in 7 years, including 3 1st teams and 4 top-5 MVP finishes
Carter has been All NBA 2 times in 11 years, with 0 1st teams (1 2nd) and 0 top-5 MVP finishes
Pierce has been All NBA 4 times in 11 years, with 0 1st teams (1 2nd) and 0 top-5 MVP finishes

And this pattern isn't just in accolades that require votes. You see the same pattern if you look at advanced stats that are completely independent of a vote. LeBron and Kobe would measure out at "MVP level", the very top of the league that would also include very few others (Shaq, Duncan, KG, Dirk) while Pierce and Carter measure out at least a tier down. The difference between a potential MVP and a borderline All NBA player.

Again, Pierce is a great player. It is no shame to be one of the best 15 or so players in the league over a generation. But when you state emphatically that Pierce is an MVP caliber player when in fact he isn't, and then repeatedly and emphatically state that Pierce is better than the actual MVP caliber player that IS on the team it prompts people like me to be the bad guy and point out Pierce's shortcomings and that he isn't, in fact, what you are propping him up as.

It'd be like if you were a Spurs fan and every time you came to your team's message board there was someone consistently insisting that Tony Parker was arguably the best point guard in the league and better than Duncan from 2007-09. Even though Parker is a great player and is also on your team and you don't want to speak ill of him, if it's said enough times and enough people start agreeing because they also are Parker fans, eventually you would feel compelled to point out all of the many (and easily pointed out) reasons that Parker isn't in fact on that level and that Duncan is clearly the better player. It doesn't mean that you're against Parker (or on-topic Pierce) or that you don't appreciate what that player brings to the table, it's just that if the facts all line up the same way it seems silly to completely ignore them.

Dre'

[exculpatory]

Rob, this has been a good discussion so far. I'm glad we can disagree without acrimony, and I'm glad that if either of us learns something new in the discussion we can admit the other's point without digging in our feet and putting our fingers in our ears the way a lot of message boards debate go. With that said, I'm going to try to respond to your last 2 messages all in this one, so hopefully it doesn't get too long.

However, you might check 82games.com (a place I last looked at about a year ago). Melo > Paul are in the top 5 or so over regarding last minute game-winning scores and passes - ahead of even Kobe and Lebron. KG is no where to be found on that list. That is "provable" fact also. Hence, Paul is generally regarded around the league (and not just by yours truly) as one of the best clutch players in the league.

And I think you misunderstood me. I am not trying to denigrate KG in any way to make my guy look better. I love KG on this team, and I want him HEALTHY and back to his old self as much as anyone on this board. However, when a last shot is needed to win or lose, Doc gives the ball to Paul to take the shot or make the pass for a damn good reason. He does this because he knows that Paul is the much better crunch time player, and has made that game-winning shot or pass 50-100 times in his career.

I have absolutely no problem agreeing unequivocally that Pierce is one of the best clutch players in the league. He always has been. And I'm familiar with the last-second (actually last 24 seconds) offense list that you referenced: http://www.82games.com/gamewinningshots.htm. Pierce is near the top because he led that list in assists and was 3rd in free throws made while also making a solid 11 field goals. He is an outstanding clutch option.

But what you might want to go back and re-check is that there are also 2 other Celtics rather prominently on that list. Ray Allen actually had more last-second shots (15) than Pierce at a higher percentage. KG was also on that list, second only to Dirk Nowitzki among bigs in last second field goals made with 9.

The point is, I NEVER argued that Pierce wasn't a great clutch option. What I call "hogwash" on is that he is the ONLY great clutch option on the Celts or that the Celts always run through him late. Neither of those are even close to being true. In general the Celtics' offense in crunch time has 3 different but effective options. Pierce is the best off the dribble (which is the reason that the last-second shots list is dominated by perimeter players) and he is good at breaking defenses down, but he can also hit the spot up shot. Allen is probably the best spot-up clutch shooter in the NBA, but he can also break his man down off the dribble (ask Sasha Vujacik about that). KG is probably the best spot-up shooting big not named Dirk, but he can also operate with his back to the basket or take his man off the dribble late (ask Joe Smith or the Lakers in game 4 about that).

The Celtics' crunchtime offense is great because they have THREE of the top crunch scorers at their individual positions all on one team. The 82games.com numbers for crunch time on THIS team backs that up (I didn't post those here for the sake of length, but I can in the response if you like). Pierce, KG and Allen all split the puzzle pretty equally as clutch scorers. Trying to make it an island where Pierce is the only (or even the primary) member is incorrect.

That said, Pierce isn't a "smidgen" behind LeBron or even Kobe right now. Especially LeBron. He is clearly a level below them in the grand pecking order, more on the level with the Vince Carters of the world. Again, this is a matter of distinction...when comparing a borderline All NBA performer to an MVP caliber performer you are still talking about two of the best players in the game, but there is a very distinct difference between the two. And the statement that he outplayed either LeBron or Kobe 1-on-1 over entire series in '08 is laughable, especially when you consider teammate roles, consistency and the way the opponents had to defend Pierce vs LeBron/Kobe that year. It's just not a sound statement to make.

Disagree. Paul has been selected All Pro I think 3 times and I think the number should be closer to 5-6 times. Kobe and LeBron are the best of the best amongst wings right now, and Paul is simply not that far behind. He did personally shut Kobe down during the great comeback game in LA, and he played LeBron even during that playoff series.

(ETA: I completely forgot to address the Kobe "shut down" or the playing LeBron "even" thing, and for the sake of space I won't go back and add it now. But if you want to continue this conversation further I can include that in my next response to you)

Kobe has been All NBA 11 times in 13 years, including 7 1st teams and 7 top-5 MVP finishes
LeBron has been All NBA 5 times in 7 years, including 3 1st teams and 4 top-5 MVP finishes
Carter has been All NBA 2 times in 11 years, with 0 1st teams (1 2nd) and 0 top-5 MVP finishes
Pierce has been All NBA 4 times in 11 years, with 0 1st teams (1 2nd) and 0 top-5 MVP finishes

And this pattern isn't just in accolades that require votes. You see the same pattern if you look at advanced stats that are completely independent of a vote. LeBron and Kobe would measure out at "MVP level", the very top of the league that would also include very few others (Shaq, Duncan, KG, Dirk) while Pierce and Carter measure out at least a tier down. The difference between a potential MVP and a borderline All NBA player.

Again, Pierce is a great player. It is no shame to be one of the best 15 or so players in the league over a generation. But when you state emphatically that Pierce is an MVP caliber player when in fact he isn't, and then repeatedly and emphatically state that Pierce is better than the actual MVP caliber player that IS on the team it prompts people like me to be the bad guy and point out Pierce's shortcomings and that he isn't, in fact, what you are propping him up as.

It'd be like if you were a Spurs fan and every time you came to your team's message board there was someone consistently insisting that Tony Parker was arguably the best point guard in the league and better than Duncan from 2007-09. Even though Parker is a great player and is also on your team and you don't want to speak ill of him, if it's said enough times and enough people start agreeing because they also are Parker fans, eventually you would feel compelled to point out all of the many (and easily pointed out) reasons that Parker isn't in fact on that level and that Duncan is clearly the better player. It doesn't mean that you're against Parker (or on-topic Pierce) or that you don't appreciate what that player brings to the table, it's just that if the facts all line up the same way it seems silly to completely ignore them.

Dre'

Dre'

Great response. I do not agree with all of it, but great response.

I do not have time to continue this until about a week from now.

I do not know if you read the "Pierce knee" thread where I was discussing his "septic arthritis" etc with Sam-I-am and others. I am by the way a Professor of Medicine/endocrinologist if you did not know that. In that thread, I mentioned that my entire life has been taken over for the last couple of months by a manuscript deadline that I MUST meet. I just got an extension until 1 week from today. Then I can start living again. I can take my very understanding (and sweet, kind and HOT) GF to a movie, go to NYC and see my daughters in grad school, go to Vail and ski, etc. LOL.

We can resume in a week if you like.

Rob

P.S. My email is Atorvastat@aol.com if you are ever inclined to communicate "off board".

[drza]

Dre'

Great response. I do not agree with all of it, but great response.

I do not have time to continue this until about a week from now.

I do not know if you read the "Pierce knee" thread where I was discussing his "septic arthritis" etc with Sam-I-am and others. I am by the way a Professor of Medicine/endocrinologist if you did not know that. In that thread, I mentioned that my entire life has been taken over for the last couple of months by a manuscript deadline that I MUST meet. I just got an extension until 1 week from today. Then I can start living again. I can take my very understanding (and sweet, kind and HOT) GF to a movie, go to NYC and see my daughters in grad school, go to Vail and ski, etc. LOL.

We can resume in a week if you like.

Rob

Believe it or not my main job has some similarities to yours and I'm a family man as well, so I completely understand. That's the reason I'm only on here in fits and starts myself. I'm just coming off a pretty hectic period, which is why I've been around more this week, but you never know what the future holds. I can't promise I'll have a lot of message board time next week, but I'll gladly resume this conversation or others if we're in the same "place" at the same time.

Good luck with your deadline,

Dre'