CelticsStrong
Celtics Basketball => Celtics Talk => Topic started by: TitleMaster on September 08, 2008, 10:15:42 PM
-
It's official, next to Bryant and Ewing, Pierce and Hakeem are both underrated top players.
Just look at all the spin on Ewing going into the HoF alongside rival Hakeem, as if it were an even match? Rubbish, in all meaningful games, Olajuwon dominated Ewing.
Then look at the 2008 NBA Finals and see for one, who the Final's MVP was and two, who stopped Kobe in his tracks during key games like 4.
Here's a hypothetical matchup of the Lakers vs the Celtics, Ewing/Bryant vs Hakeem/Pierce. And both teams get role players who can play some "D" and hit periodic open jumpers. I believe that when Bryant initiates the play and then Ewing catches the ball, the next thing the announcer will be saying is "Stolen by Olajuwon". Then when let's say Odam and Ewing try to double up on the Dream, he'll be running the shake 'n bake all night on these clowns, either getting Pierce the open lane for a slash, an outside jumper, or simply beating his so-called defenders and getting the shot off himself.
-
While I think that people generally recognize Hakeem as better than Ewing, I can see why you would say he is underrated. He never had the same level of buzz as Shaq because Jordan was the man and no one else was noticed. I don't think people are too high on Ewing because he never won. He also didn't have the insane moves that Hakeem had.
Perhaps people in the NE just heard about Ewing more because his team is in the NE. I grew up in NY and I felt people accepted that Hakeem was better, but I can't actually speak for everyone there.
-
The way I see it, a youtube clip of HO is a worth a thousand words:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sx5lSt4f4m0
PP and HO would be an unstoppable dynamo, even Garnett doesn't dominate in that manner.
-
I've never gotten the impression that -- among fans who pay attention -- Hakeem has been underrated. During the Jordan years, he was often seen as the second best player in the league, and was regarded as the best player in the NBA during Jordan's first retirement. I think he's pretty much universally admired, and you'll still hear people talk about the "Dream Shake" to describe his moves in the post. He's a phenomenal player, but I get the impression that most people recognize that fact.
As for Pierce vs. Kobe... I love Pierce and I hate Kobe, but I think a lot of Celtics fans are deluding themselves based upon one six game series.
-
If someone asks me a hundred times who I think
was a better player, I'll say "Hakeem" each
and every time. There's a reason he has two
rings and Ewing has none. In his prime, if you
had a fantasy team, you'd pick him every time.
Unlike Shaq, he was a combination of everything:
Moves, skills, power, athleticism, all this spiced
with a deadly and consistent 15-foot jumpshot.
I really don't think HO is underrated. If anyone
does underrate him, he (or she) is a fool.
-
I agree with these last two fellas: Hakeem was never underrated, especially against Ewing. I don't know of anyone who has ever thought Ewing was even close to equal, much less better.
As for Pierce, I agree with Hobbs: I love PP, he's a great player, and I would take PP on my team over Bryant any day, but Kobe . . . at the end of the day is the best player in the NBA.
-
Hakeem the Dream is my favorite non-Celtic C of all time. No disrespect to the other Centers in his time but when Hakeem was on, nobody in the league could stop him.
I remember watching the SA-Hou '95 playoff series on tv and seeing how HO would routinely embarass Robinson at almost every play when he has the ball in his hands. He totally owned Robinson in that series. I also remember Rodman admit in his book "Bad As I Wanna Be" that Robinson, the reigning MVP at that time, looked like a fool against HO in that series. Got news for you pal, anyone would have looked like a fool guarding HO during that time.
As for him being underrated, I won't put too much stock on that statement. Him and Jordan are the first two names you mention when you recall the 90's. Ewing was also good, but his lack of rings killed his reputation. With that said, I'm glad KG, PP and RA got theirs ;D.
As for the Pierce thing, like Hobbs and tmcdon, I'm a solid PP fan. I think he's the better teammate but at the end of the day, especially at fantasy hoops, Kobe's the better player. Wow, I can't believe I just said that :P
-
This thread should be renamed the Hakeem Appreciation Thread. I don't think anyone can disagree that Hakeem was great. In fact, he had two peaks, if you will.
-The first was in the late 80s as Akeem. He was just sick. I don't think there is any big man who could play that defense and still stick the outside shot. The league was just too good at the time. If he played like that a few years ago when the league sucked, we wouldn't be talking about Duncan. We'd be talking about Akeem.
-His second peak was when he was winning the titles (as Hakeem) when Jordan was gone in 94 and 95. He was older, but clearly still dominant. The league, though, wasn't as good as it was in the late 80. If he had won at a time when Boston, LA and Detroit were at their peak, we'd remember him as we do Shaq and Duncan (who get far more love).
Do you think he'd get this kind of love if he didn't win the 2 titles (re: if Jordan didn't retire)?
-
For one, did Kobe make his teammates that much better? I think not, that was LeBron and James deserves a lot of credit for that. In essence, I think PP and KB neutralize each other on a dream team but given Paul's unique ability to get to the free throw line, I'd still give a notch up on him if the game had to go that way w/ repeated foulings.
So, if Pierce is the so-called second fiddle to Garnett, which appears to be the "league consensus" outside of Boston, then what would Pierce look like paired with the greatest big man of our post-ABA time, HO? Think about it, Hakeem was dishing on Robinson, Ewing, and Alonzo whereas Odom and Igaskas were keeping KG busy during those series? I think quite possibly, we'd win a ring with PP, HO, Posey (or Eddie), Perks, and Rondo. We wouldn't need either Ray Ray or the Big Ticket.
-
Paul is probably underrated just for playing on so many bad teams for so long. I think Kobe is overrated honestly, I don't pick him as the first player if I'm starting a team. Throw in I can't stand him, seems to be a bad teammate and shows he has a horrible attitude.
Pat Ewing-very good center who deserves to be in the hall of fame
Akeem-great center, best post moves EVER (sorry kevin), great defender
Both deserve to be in the hall of fame
kobe=lloyd free ;)
-
As for Pierce vs. Kobe... I love Pierce and I hate Kobe, but I think a lot of Celtics fans are deluding themselves based upon one six game series.
Wow. PP still can't convince Celtic fans. I am with Danny Ainge on this. PP is very talented (and Ainge saw that and kept him) what's going on is that PP will 'coast' (Ainge's word) and then turn it on. He has always been able to step up and turn it on. That's how he got the clutch reputation. His abuse of Kobe out West is what got him the nickname the "Truth" long before the LA title series even happened.
What's even more amazing is that despite the talk of how this would become KG's team and KG was the star - if there was one thing that was incredibly apparent is that this is PP's team. He proved to be the best player over the course of the season and the playoffs. he won the finals MVP over the far more decorated KG.
I have also noticed that guys who actually play with and against Pierce (Lebron, Kobe) etc always respected his game greatly. Its the fans who don't really see what he does on the court that think we are 'deluded" in comparing Pierce to Kobe..
Pete
-
What's even more amazing is that despite the talk of how this would become KG's team and KG was the star - if there was one thing that was incredibly apparent is that this is PP's team. He proved to be the best player over the course of the season and the playoffs. he won the finals MVP over the far more decorated KG.
Thank you... that's the crux of this thread.
The national media made this KG's team but really, KG was more the great (if not greatest) facilitator and Paul Pierce... the truth.
All and all, my fantasy team, with Hakeem and Pierce, is equivalent to a normal team with 5 regular all stars. Like Hakeem, Pierce can turn it on in Q4 and obliterate others. Now, with both of them on all cylinders, the Kobe/Ewing tandem will be hapless w/o at least 3 other star-like players (at a relative skill level of a Michael Cooper, Carlos Boozer, or Joe Dumars), sorry to any Odom/Bynum fans out there, on their teams.
-
It's official, next to Bryant and Ewing, Pierce and Hakeem are both underrated top players.
Just look at all the spin on Ewing going into the HoF alongside rival Hakeem, as if it were an even match? Rubbish, in all meaningful games, Olajuwon dominated Ewing.
Then look at the 2008 NBA Finals and see for one, who the Final's MVP was and two, who stopped Kobe in his tracks during key games like 4.
Here's a hypothetical matchup of the Lakers vs the Celtics, Ewing/Bryant vs Hakeem/Pierce. And both teams get role players who can play some "D" and hit periodic open jumpers. I believe that when Bryant initiates the play and then Ewing catches the ball, the next thing the announcer will be saying is "Stolen by Olajuwon". Then when let's say Odam and Ewing try to double up on the Dream, he'll be running the shake 'n bake all night on these clowns, either getting Pierce the open lane for a slash, an outside jumper, or simply beating his so-called defenders and getting the shot off himself.
Saying that Olajuwon was better than Ewing is like saying a Bentley is better than a top end Mercedes. There is no contest there.
I may be in the minority here, but does anybody think that Hakeem was better than Larry Bird? I think Hakeem was one of the 5 best players of all time. He is one player I miss watching him play. One of a kind.
-
It's official, next to Bryant and Ewing, Pierce and Hakeem are both underrated top players.
Just look at all the spin on Ewing going into the HoF alongside rival Hakeem, as if it were an even match? Rubbish, in all meaningful games, Olajuwon dominated Ewing.
Then look at the 2008 NBA Finals and see for one, who the Final's MVP was and two, who stopped Kobe in his tracks during key games like 4.
Here's a hypothetical matchup of the Lakers vs the Celtics, Ewing/Bryant vs Hakeem/Pierce. And both teams get role players who can play some "D" and hit periodic open jumpers. I believe that when Bryant initiates the play and then Ewing catches the ball, the next thing the announcer will be saying is "Stolen by Olajuwon". Then when let's say Odam and Ewing try to double up on the Dream, he'll be running the shake 'n bake all night on these clowns, either getting Pierce the open lane for a slash, an outside jumper, or simply beating his so-called defenders and getting the shot off himself.
Saying that Olajuwon was better than Ewing is like saying a Bentley is better than a top end Mercedes. There is no contest there.
I may be in the minority here, but does anybody think that Hakeem was better than Larry Bird? I think Hakeem was one of the 5 best players of all time. He is one player I miss watching him play. One of a kind.
No.
-
I think Hakeem was one of the 5 best players of all time
I believe he's the best player of the post-ABA era. Unlike other big men, the refs never gave him enough trips to the free throw line so he developed the Dream Shake to make the free throws obsolete to bad referee-ing. Next, during that illustrious '86 finals, he had 8 blocks (see game 5) against our vaunted frontline of McHale, Walton, and Parish and pretty much kept Houston in the series. Sampson, in contrast, disappeared after game 4.
-
As for Pierce vs. Kobe... I love Pierce and I hate Kobe, but I think a lot of Celtics fans are deluding themselves based upon one six game series.
Wow. PP still can't convince Celtic fans. I am with Danny Ainge on this. PP is very talented (and Ainge saw that and kept him) what's going on is that PP will 'coast' (Ainge's word) and then turn it on. He has always been able to step up and turn it on. That's how he got the clutch reputation. His abuse of Kobe out West is what got him the nickname the "Truth" long before the LA title series even happened.
What's even more amazing is that despite the talk of how this would become KG's team and KG was the star - if there was one thing that was incredibly apparent is that this is PP's team. He proved to be the best player over the course of the season and the playoffs. he won the finals MVP over the far more decorated KG.
I have also noticed that guys who actually play with and against Pierce (Lebron, Kobe) etc always respected his game greatly. Its the fans who don't really see what he does on the court that think we are 'deluded" in comparing Pierce to Kobe..
Pete
So... the reason that Kobe has outproduced Paul across the board, and has enjoyed more team and individual success in his career, is because Paul hasn't tried hard enough?
I think the better explanation is that Kobe is simply a better player. Paul gives him trouble head-to-head, and that's to Paul's credit. However, overall, Kobe is better, and I don't think there is anything controversial or "wow" worthy about that at all. Paul is a better teammate, Kobe is a more talented player.
-
As for Pierce vs. Kobe... I love Pierce and I hate Kobe, but I think a lot of Celtics fans are deluding themselves based upon one six game series.
Wow. PP still can't convince Celtic fans. I am with Danny Ainge on this. PP is very talented (and Ainge saw that and kept him) what's going on is that PP will 'coast' (Ainge's word) and then turn it on. He has always been able to step up and turn it on. That's how he got the clutch reputation. His abuse of Kobe out West is what got him the nickname the "Truth" long before the LA title series even happened.
What's even more amazing is that despite the talk of how this would become KG's team and KG was the star - if there was one thing that was incredibly apparent is that this is PP's team. He proved to be the best player over the course of the season and the playoffs. he won the finals MVP over the far more decorated KG.
I have also noticed that guys who actually play with and against Pierce (Lebron, Kobe) etc always respected his game greatly. Its the fans who don't really see what he does on the court that think we are 'deluded" in comparing Pierce to Kobe..
Pete
So... the reason that Kobe has outproduced Paul across the board, and has enjoyed more team and individual success in his career, is because Paul hasn't tried hard enough?
I think the better explanation is that Kobe is simply a better player. Paul gives him trouble head-to-head, and that's to Paul's credit. However, overall, Kobe is better, and I don't think there is anything controversial or "wow" worthy about that at all. Paul is a better teammate, Kobe is a more talented player.
TP, why can't people understand this? it's ok if paul isn't as physicaly gifted as kobe (and he isn't). I'd take paul on my team 100% of the time over kobe, kobe is a better player, Pauls a better team player.
seeing how the NBA is a team sport, i'll take the great team player over the great indivudual talent.
also, respect isn't lying to yourself abotu reality. Paul is my favroite celtic of all time (young, im sure i would have a diffrent opnion if i were older) and favroite basketball player of all time. I have nothing but love and respect for him.
That doesn't mean i have to lie to myself and say he's the best SF in the NBA. to me, he's the third.
1. Kobe (SG/SF anyway)
2. Lebron
3. paul
That doesnt change the fact that on the respect and love meter it goes
1.paul
2.Rest of the celtics equaly
3. uh...otehr assorted players.
-
A great team player is a whole lot greater when he has a great team surrounding him.
-
As for Pierce vs. Kobe... I love Pierce and I hate Kobe, but I think a lot of Celtics fans are deluding themselves based upon one six game series.
Without getting specifically into the "who's better" argument, I think that one six game series showed that a lot of fans haven't been deluding themselves. Are you saying that the way Paul played in the finals was some fluke? Did he play so much better than normal that you can't call his performance something that he's been capable of for most of his career? Before last season Pierce was frequently described on these boards as a fringe top 25 player. That doesn't seem to be the case any more, mainly because he was surrounded by better players and had a reasonable chance of winning.
-
Yeah It can't be just that the media and several people have just completely overrated Kobe. It's the delusional Celtic fans.
I believe that he's been completely underrated because of the teammates around him. The sad part that C's fans fall into the same trap. Bird is my all time favorite C but, put Pierce with McHale, Paris, Johnson, and even Ainge and you have a multiple champion.
Actually put him with Allen and Garnett and they just happen to win more games than Kobe ever did in 1 season. Makes you think.
-
So... the reason that Kobe has outproduced Paul across the board, and has enjoyed more team and individual success in his career, is because Paul hasn't tried hard enough?
Across the board? Wait rebounds don't count? <g> If your going to make points have some meat behind them.
I think the better explanation is that Kobe is simply a better player. Paul gives him trouble head-to-head, and that's to Paul's credit. However, overall, Kobe is better, and I don't think there is anything controversial or "wow" worthy about that at all. Paul is a better teammate, Kobe is a more talented player.
The better fantasy player - sure. But when push came to shove PP showed him up - AGAIN. PP has been saying he is the best. People like you scoffed because of his statistics. But when it came time to walk the walk he did it.
PP was not only the best player that series but the best player in the Cavs series - and MANY people (myself included) think Lebron is now superior to Kobe. You claim we are "deluding" our selves - but your living in denial. PP was able to surpass Kobe in a championship series.
Pete
-
PP was not only the best player that series but the best player in the Cavs series - and MANY people (myself included) think Lebron is now superior to Kobe. You claim we are "deluding" our selves - but your living in denial. PP was able to surpass Kobe in a championship series.
And hence, Pierce is underrated.
Personally, I believe the only overrated player on the '08 championship squad was KG. And here's why... KG was billed out as one of the top big men, in the same vein as a McHale(+) but in reality, he's probably one of the best facilitators, for a big man, with a great ensemble of skills. He didn't score in the post, when it was needed, and he made too many passes on the block, when he should have taken a shot. Those are growing pains and probably a lack of a "Mr Q4" attitude which you see in a lot of swingmen and power forwards. Ok, so that keeps him out of my Hakeem-like clutch PF/C list but that's fine, as long as the rest of the world acknowledges that Pierce is the C's Batman and KG, his Robin (or perhaps, Captain America since he's a bit more effective than Burt Ward). And Ray Ray is our Legolas, from Lord of the Rings.
-
PP was not only the best player that series but the best player in the Cavs series - and MANY people (myself included) think Lebron is now superior to Kobe. You claim we are "deluding" our selves - but your living in denial. PP was able to surpass Kobe in a championship series.
And hence, Pierce is underrated.
Personally, I believe the only overrated player on the '08 championship squad was KG. And here's why... KG was billed out as one of the top big men, in the same vein as a McHale(+) but in reality, he's probably one of the best facilitators, for a big man, with a great ensemble of skills. He didn't score in the post, when it was needed, and he made too many passes on the block, when he should have taken a shot. Those are growing pains and probably a lack of a "Mr Q4" attitude which you see in a lot of swingmen and power forwards. Ok, so that keeps him out of my Hakeem-like clutch PF/C list but that's fine, as long as the rest of the world acknowledges that Pierce is the C's Batman and KG, his Robin (or perhaps, Captain America since he's a bit more effective than Burt Ward). And Ray Ray is our Legolas, from Lord of the Rings.
no, being the 3rd best SF in the league, which is waht most rational people in this thread have put forth, is not underratign pierce. that puts him 3rd out of 60 of the best athletes in the world at the postion. It's refelctive of reality. on physical talents and gifts alone, lebron and kobe are better at the skill of basketball.
But, pierce is the best player within a team dynamic of the three, IMO, and thus the best basketball player, since basketball is a team sport. From a talent aspect, lebron and kobe are better, from a adapting to the flow of the game and being part of a 5 man unit, pierce is the best.
-
PP was not only the best player that series but the best player in the Cavs series - and MANY people (myself included) think Lebron is now superior to Kobe. You claim we are "deluding" our selves - but your living in denial. PP was able to surpass Kobe in a championship series.
And hence, Pierce is underrated.
Personally, I believe the only overrated player on the '08 championship squad was KG. And here's why... KG was billed out as one of the top big men, in the same vein as a McHale(+) but in reality, he's probably one of the best facilitators, for a big man, with a great ensemble of skills. He didn't score in the post, when it was needed, and he made too many passes on the block, when he should have taken a shot. Those are growing pains and probably a lack of a "Mr Q4" attitude which you see in a lot of swingmen and power forwards. Ok, so that keeps him out of my Hakeem-like clutch PF/C list but that's fine, as long as the rest of the world acknowledges that Pierce is the C's Batman and KG, his Robin (or perhaps, Captain America since he's a bit more effective than Burt Ward). And Ray Ray is our Legolas, from Lord of the Rings.
no, being the 3rd best SF in the league, which is waht most rational people in this thread have put forth, is not underratign pierce. that puts him 3rd out of 60 of the best athletes in the world at the postion. It's refelctive of reality. on physical talents and gifts alone, lebron and kobe are better at the skill of basketball.
TP, crownsy. I don't see why it's an insult to Paul to say "he outplayed Kobe over 6 games, but Kobe is still a more talented player".
-
PP was not only the best player that series but the best player in the Cavs series - and MANY people (myself included) think Lebron is now superior to Kobe. You claim we are "deluding" our selves - but your living in denial. PP was able to surpass Kobe in a championship series.
And hence, Pierce is underrated.
Personally, I believe the only overrated player on the '08 championship squad was KG. And here's why... KG was billed out as one of the top big men, in the same vein as a McHale(+) but in reality, he's probably one of the best facilitators, for a big man, with a great ensemble of skills. He didn't score in the post, when it was needed, and he made too many passes on the block, when he should have taken a shot. Those are growing pains and probably a lack of a "Mr Q4" attitude which you see in a lot of swingmen and power forwards. Ok, so that keeps him out of my Hakeem-like clutch PF/C list but that's fine, as long as the rest of the world acknowledges that Pierce is the C's Batman and KG, his Robin (or perhaps, Captain America since he's a bit more effective than Burt Ward). And Ray Ray is our Legolas, from Lord of the Rings.
And are the Celtics there if you take away KG's defense, rebounding and leadership?
Why do you have to downgrade someone else's contributions in an effort to make another player look better?
PS, Pierce is not as individually as talented as Lebron or Kobe. But in a team setting, he is able to play them even.
-
And are the Celtics there if you take away KG's defense, rebounding and leadership?
It's not about whether or not KG was a key component of our championship run. I think it's fairly obvious that he was in terms of all the aforementioned elements.
It's about the concept of being over or underrated. PP has been underrated for years and even him winning Finals MVP didn't shake the cobwebs from peoples' heads. He's kinda contributed in ways that even James Worthy didn't, during his Finals MVP year of '88, but still, PP's only the Truth to Shaq and Bostonians. Big Game James was a national phenomena during the 80s; he was completely respected despite C's fans personal feelings towards the Lakers.
In contrast to PP, KG has been blessed with a slew of superlatives on everything, you name it. The reality of the situation is that perhaps it's more like Harvard Med vs Johns Hopkins Med, Harvard's got a long history, international name recognition, a slew of hospital affiliates, and a great placement history (despite only being Pass/Fail curriculum, no honors rankings) but Hopkins grads consistently score the highest on the medical boards, get direct training/exposure at the best attached university hospital (not an affiliated one, btw), and do the best biomed engineering in the world w/o needing to borrow from MIT's research labs [ *hint: MS at MIT plus MD at Harvard ], etc. I see KG as more like Harvard Med visage, yeah nothing to complain about really but Hakeem, more like Hopkins with a lot of grit, stamina, and ability to play hard and in clutch situations.
-
Ewing and Kobe get extra media love because they play(ed) for NY and LA.
Kobe is an enigma. Individually he is still the best in the league... yet he doesn't play that great in the finals (2/6 have been superstar worthy) and his team game still isn't fully there.
Heck those are 2 big reasons why the Jordan comparisons need to stop between the two, forever!
Anyway, I'd rather have the best team in the league. ;D
-
PP was not only the best player that series but the best player in the Cavs series - and MANY people (myself included) think Lebron is now superior to Kobe. You claim we are "deluding" our selves - but your living in denial. PP was able to surpass Kobe in a championship series.
And hence, Pierce is underrated.
Personally, I believe the only overrated player on the '08 championship squad was KG. And here's why... KG was billed out as one of the top big men, in the same vein as a McHale(+) but in reality, he's probably one of the best facilitators, for a big man, with a great ensemble of skills. He didn't score in the post, when it was needed, and he made too many passes on the block, when he should have taken a shot. Those are growing pains and probably a lack of a "Mr Q4" attitude which you see in a lot of swingmen and power forwards. Ok, so that keeps him out of my Hakeem-like clutch PF/C list but that's fine, as long as the rest of the world acknowledges that Pierce is the C's Batman and KG, his Robin (or perhaps, Captain America since he's a bit more effective than Burt Ward). And Ray Ray is our Legolas, from Lord of the Rings.
no, being the 3rd best SF in the league, which is waht most rational people in this thread have put forth, is not underratign pierce. that puts him 3rd out of 60 of the best athletes in the world at the postion. It's refelctive of reality. on physical talents and gifts alone, lebron and kobe are better at the skill of basketball.
But, pierce is the best player within a team dynamic of the three, IMO, and thus the best basketball player, since basketball is a team sport. From a talent aspect, lebron and kobe are better, from a adapting to the flow of the game and being part of a 5 man unit, pierce is the best.
Which is exactly what anyone saying Pierce is the better player has been stating since the beginning. Who cares who can score 81 points in a game. Who cares who can throw the best dunk. I want the guy that makes his teammates better and is better leader and who when the chips are down can be counted on. Mr. Pierce is that guy. Which is another reason Danny should never be doubted he knew like a select few around here that Paul was the guy to build around. Let us not forget this when questioning his moves. That's why when Pierce was yelling 'I told you' when collecting the MVP trophy I knew exactly what he was talking about..
-
Here's my 2 cents as I chime in on this subject:
Hakeem I don't think got nearly the ink or the pub or the air time that Ewing got because he was on a good team in the biggest market in the country. I think for many younger fans of the time or fans that weren't possibly seriously hardcore at the time, it is possible to come across the idea that Ewing was thought as being a better player than Hakeem simply because they heard people talking about how good he was more often.
But it has always been pretty much common knowledge that Hakeem was the better player. We may not have heard it on television and we may, especially here in the northeast, have heard more and seen more of Ewing, but it's fairly common knowledge that Ewing wasn't nearly as good a player as Hakeem was.
As for Pierce being underrated as compared to Kobe, I think the notion is silly. Kobe is without a doubt one of the two most talented and gifted players in the league. Pierce isn't.
But Pierce matches up well against Kobe and gives him fits. Michael Cooper gave Larry Bird fits. That does not mean that Michael Cooper was a better player than Larry Bird. Wilt Chamberlain may just be the most gifted and athletic basketball player in history. Bill Russell gave him fits. Now maybe it's debatable as to whether Bill was better than Wilt but I feel Wilt was the better player.
But Pierce is a better team player than Kobe. Russell was a better team player than Wilt. Cooper was an extraordinary defensive talent. But in my opinion none of those players were better than the player they gave trouble to.
Same holds here. It is okay to be a Pierce fan and acknowledge that he isn't one of the extreme elite players in the league. Does he give those players troubles in a one on one match up? Sure he does. Pierce is a talented, physical specimen that has a rare combination of size, strength, and talent for his position. These just happen to be attributes that if you roll them all into one player is the type of player that will give Kobe and LeBron problems. Those players can't use there gifts as effectively against Pierce. But against others they are dominant. More dominant than Pierce is over those other players. And more consistently dominant as well.
You can't judge how much better Kobe is than Pierce as an individual player in a head to head battle. Judge them by how good they are against other competition.
Pierce is a way better team player than Kobe will ever be and it is possible that, because of that, they just might end up with the same amount of championships when it is all said and done. A team centered around Kobe might be doomed from the outset because it is centered around a tremendous talent that doesn't work well within a team concept.
That doesn't mean Kobe is a worse player than Pierce, he's just a different player. But he is the more talented player.
-
Pierce is a way better team player than Kobe will ever be and it is possible that, because of that, they just might end up with the same amount of championships when it is all said and done. A team centered around Kobe might be doomed from the outset because it is centered around a tremendous talent that doesn't work well within a team concept.
You do realize it's a TEAM game. <g> IF Pierce was a way better team player then Kobe - he would be a way better player. I personally wouldn't go that far. Kobe is an underrated team player. It's Pierce's talent that your greatly underrating... Maybe if he wins another championship you will learn. I am with the OP. The gap between Pierce and Kobe isn't really that great.
I think it's a creation of the Jordan effect. Jordan REALLY WAS head and shoulders much better then anyone in the league. Not only was he the best scorer he was far and away the best defensive player in his era. So now it's assumed that SOMEONE ELSE in the league is like that. It's not really true. I can see why guys are so anxious to score a ton of points though. It seems that's the only way to get respect with fans.
We have Celtic fans here claiming Kobe is across the boards better when he is a full rebound short of PP for his entire career. It's sad..
If you want proof to PPs underrating by the media at large - the all-defense team. Kobe was FIRST TEAM ALL DEFENSE. That's an amazing honor. That means he is out of this world as a defender (or it should). PP didn't make ANY defense team - he has never even sniffed that. But do you guys HONESTLY IN YOUR HEART believe after watching this championship run that's at all true?
PP defended both Lebron and Kobe much better then they defended him. That's a fact.
Pete
-
Pierce is a way better team player than Kobe will ever be and it is possible that, because of that, they just might end up with the same amount of championships when it is all said and done. A team centered around Kobe might be doomed from the outset because it is centered around a tremendous talent that doesn't work well within a team concept.
You do realize it's a TEAM game. <g> IF Pierce was a way better team player then Kobe - he would be a way better player. I personally wouldn't go that far. Kobe is an underrated team player. It's Pierce's talent that your greatly underrating... Maybe if he wins another championship you will learn. I am with the OP. The gap between Pierce and Kobe isn't really that great.
I think it's a creation of the Jordan effect. Jordan REALLY WAS head and shoulders much better then anyone in the league. Not only was he the best scorer he was far and away the best defensive player in his era. So now it's assumed that SOMEONE ELSE in the league is like that. It's not really true. I can see why guys are so anxious to score a ton of points though. It seems that's the only way to get respect with fans.
We have Celtic fans here claiming Kobe is across the boards better when he is a full rebound short of PP for his entire career. It's sad..
Pete
What exactly am I going to learn?
I will venture to say this. Pierce might be a better team player than Michael Jordan was. Is Pierce better than Jordan? Not close.
One can be an extraordinary team player without being a great player. That is possible. I am not selling Pierce short, he is an amazing talent. He's just not as good as Kobe or LeBron. It's okay as a Celtic fan to admit that.
Those are things I've learned over the years. That one can be a fan of something and still be cognizant that greatness exists elsewhere and could be or is greater than what you are a fan of. And... it's okay to admit it.
-
Pierce is a way better team player than Kobe will ever be and it is possible that, because of that, they just might end up with the same amount of championships when it is all said and done. A team centered around Kobe might be doomed from the outset because it is centered around a tremendous talent that doesn't work well within a team concept.
You do realize it's a TEAM game. <g> IF Pierce was a way better team player then Kobe - he would be a way better player. I personally wouldn't go that far. Kobe is an underrated team player. It's Pierce's talent that your greatly underrating... Maybe if he wins another championship you will learn. I am with the OP. The gap between Pierce and Kobe isn't really that great.
I think it's a creation of the Jordan effect. Jordan REALLY WAS head and shoulders much better then anyone in the league. Not only was he the best scorer he was far and away the best defensive player in his era. So now it's assumed that SOMEONE ELSE in the league is like that. It's not really true. I can see why guys are so anxious to score a ton of points though. It seems that's the only way to get respect with fans.
We have Celtic fans here claiming Kobe is across the boards better when he is a full rebound short of PP for his entire career. It's sad..
Pete
What exactly am I going to learn?
I will venture to say this. Pierce might be a better team player than Michael Jordan was. Is Pierce better than Jordan? Not close.
One can be an extraordinary team player without being a great player. That is possible. I am not selling Pierce short, he is an amazing talent. He's just not as good as Kobe or LeBron. It's okay as a Celtic fan to admit that.
Those are things I've learned over the years. That one can be a fan of something and still be cognizant that greatness exists elsewhere and could be or is greater than what you are a fan of. And... it's okay to admit it.
you keep your crazy rational interpertations of facts out of this homer thread young man!
(TP4U, why is it a instant "your a terrable celtics fan/ hate pierce!!!! reaction if you simply state facts. Just because i ackoledge that those two are better doesn't change the fact that paul pierce has and will be my favroite basketball player of all time.)
-
you keep your crazy rational interpertations of facts out of this homer thread young man!
why is it a instant "your a terrable celtics fan/ hate pierce!!!! reaction if you simply state facts.
It's probably somewhat related to the "homer" reaction to people who are simply stating their "facts".
-
you keep your crazy rational interpertations of facts out of this homer thread young man!
why is it a instant "your a terrable celtics fan/ hate pierce!!!! reaction if you simply state facts.
It's probably somewhat related to the "homer" reaction to people who are simply stating their "facts".
if you say so, i think its people who aren't secure enough in the concept of team to acknoledge that while other players might be more talented, were a better sum of 5.
instead they attack anyone who points out what is incredibly obvious to me, that talent wise kobe and lebron are better, as a "pierce hater" which is ridiculous. Paul's always and will always be my favroite player. It doesn't mean i have to pretend kobe and lebron are worse, or puff up paul.
-
you keep your crazy rational interpertations of facts out of this homer thread young man!
why is it a instant "your a terrable celtics fan/ hate pierce!!!! reaction if you simply state facts.
It's probably somewhat related to the "homer" reaction to people who are simply stating their "facts".
if you say so, i think its people who aren't secure enough in the concept of team to acknoledge that while other players might be more talented, were a better sum of 5.
instead they attack anyone who points out what is incredibly obvious to me, that talent wise kobe and lebron are better, as a "pierce hater" which is ridiculous. Paul's always and will always be my favroite player. It doesn't mean i have to pretend kobe and lebron are worse, or puff up paul.
I personally don't care if you think Kobe's better than Paul. I was just commenting on your post where you insult the people you're arguing with in one sentence and then complain that they're insulting you in the next.
-
Time to take it outside fellahs...Let's get off the personal stuff. Thanks - Redz
-
you keep your crazy rational interpertations of facts out of this homer thread young man!
why is it a instant "your a terrable celtics fan/ hate pierce!!!! reaction if you simply state facts.
It's probably somewhat related to the "homer" reaction to people who are simply stating their "facts".
if you say so, i think its people who aren't secure enough in the concept of team to acknoledge that while other players might be more talented, were a better sum of 5.
instead they attack anyone who points out what is incredibly obvious to me, that talent wise kobe and lebron are better, as a "pierce hater" which is ridiculous. Paul's always and will always be my favroite player. It doesn't mean i have to pretend kobe and lebron are worse, or puff up paul.
I personally don't care if you think Kobe's better than Paul. I was just commenting on your post where you insult the people you're arguing with in one sentence and then complain that they're insulting you in the next.
I didn't write it that way, and wasen't trying to get on anyones nerves, i apologize that something i said has struck a cord, it was never my intent.
In all honesty, i wasen't trying to say someone was insulting me or trying to insult anyone, i was just posting about my views on my favroite player and lamenting that this has become such a black and white issue.
Sorry about the misunderstanding, insult or ill will was never my intent, be assured :(
-
I think it doesn't make sense to judge PP as better than Kobe based on the Finals. PP and Kobe aside, the celtics had a far better supporting cast than the Lakers. I say if you trade PP for Kobe, the celts still win the finals. But if you instead switch Garnett for Gasol (swapping 2nd best players)... not so sure that the celts win it. I think anybody who with a full pool of NBA players would take PP over Kobe would be making a bad decision.
The main argument I've seen from those people here is that PP is a "better team player". But I argue that PP appears to be a better team player because he has a better team around him. It can certainly been seen that Kobe has brought out the best in Gasol. I don't have a strong opinion on who is the better team player, but I do argue that the case made this year by PP is influenced by having a better supporting cast.
-
Kobe vs. Pierce one on one, id say Pierce will win 6 times out of ten.
kobe surrounded with a good supporting cast i.e Shaq equals champion.
Pierce surrounded by good suporting casts i.e KG and RA equals champion.
so is there that much of a difference between the two?, id say Paul is right, if he feels he is a better player than Kobe, then so be it coz its his opinion and he did proved it in the Finals...If Kobe is such a very good player ala Jordanesque then he would have won in the championship series being surrounded by good players as wel like Pau and Odom...He wouldn't have let the Fakers down.
Paul is a very underrated player and his game is appreciated only if you follow his entire carreer.
also im with the OP that id certainly take Paul and Hakeem as against Kobe and Ewing, heck id even take PP and HO over Kobe/Shaq .
-
The main argument I've seen from those people here is that PP is a "better team player". But I argue that PP appears to be a better team player because he has a better team around him. It can certainly been seen that Kobe has brought out the best in Gasol. I don't have a strong opinion on who is the better team player, but I do argue that the case made this year by PP is influenced by having a better supporting cast
Going into the series alot of people thought Kobe had the better supporting cast. Universally the Lakers bench was praised as far superior. Let's face facts the beat down the C's gave the Lakers was SHOCKING to most of the basketball world who predicted the Lakers in five.
So either PP's supporting cast is just awesome or PP is underrated. I am going with option B. You can't make any logical argument to dispute this really. He BEAT DOWN kobe head to head. it's laughable that some claim he is so much less talented then Kobe despite this. It's a bit like Nadal beating Federer at Wimbledom. You might not like his game as much but he got results.
When surrounded with ONLY Antione Walker and - lets face it garbage - ECF. When surrounded with two slightly over their prime all-stars -MVP finals and a championship. Kobe has only won championships with the THEN most dominating center on earth. It's arguable that right now Gasol + Odom < KG + RA. RA layed a **** goosegg for half the playoffs. Literally 75% of the NBA's off guards would be outperforming him in that Cleveland series. Heck Wally got the better of him on occasion. That's really bad..
Pete
-
I will venture to say this. Pierce might be a better team player than Michael Jordan was. Is Pierce better than Jordan? Not close.
If that's the case then the phrase "team player" has no real meaning the way you use it. <g> It's just an empty complement. Like saying Delonte West is a team player because he seems like a "nice guy." I don't care. MJ was a great team player. He might have been an **** but his teams got results. He made Luc Longley look passable..
Pete
-
Going into the series alot of people thought Kobe had the better supporting cast. Universally the Lakers bench was praised as far superior. Let's face facts the beat down the C's gave the Lakers was SHOCKING to most of the basketball world who predicted the Lakers in five.
We Celtics fans new better though, didn't we.
So either PP's supporting cast is just awesome or PP is underrated. I am going with option B. You can't make any logical argument to dispute this really. He BEAT DOWN kobe head to head. it's laughable that some claim he is so much less talented then Kobe despite this. It's a bit like Nadal beating Federer at Wimbledom. You might not like his game as much but he got results.
If we we're having a 1-on-1 tournament in the NBA that would make more sense. That under-rated supporting cast of the Celtics actually had a lot to do with the "beat-down" on Kobe.
When surrounded with ONLY Antione Walker and - lets face it garbage - ECF. When surrounded with two slightly over their prime all-stars -MVP finals and a championship. Kobe has only won championships with the THEN most dominating center on earth. It's arguable that right now Gasol + Odom < KG + RA. RA layed a **** goosegg for half the playoffs. Literally 75% of the NBA's off guards would be outperforming him in that Cleveland series. Heck Wally got the better of him on occasion. That's really bad..
Pete
I think you're greatly overrating the value of taking a team to the ECF in what might have been the weakest year ever for the conference (as fun as it was) and I think you're crazily underrating the two "over their prime" All Stars. Ray had a huge Finals and I'm not going to get into a "merits of KG" argument.
Pierce is awesome. His team beat Kobe's. He won the Finals MVP. He took it to Kobe. Kobe's still a better player. No biggy.
-
Don't worry me knowing Pierce is better player has nothing to do with any insecurity. I can guarantee you that. You can dance around the issue all you want Pierce is better basketball player than Kobe and that is a fact in my mind and will be no matter how many times one of you comments about stats or dunks or amazing fall away 3's. I had the feeling way before Garnett and Allen showed up and it was only reinforced once the talent was in place.
Kobe getting 1st team defense was the cherry on top of the media completely overrating him. He can't guard Paul.
-
Kobe getting 1st team defense was the cherry on top of the media completely overrating him. He can't guard Paul.
I agree that Kobe is overrated, but I also think people are overstating just how dominant Paul was in the Lakers' series. He averaged 21.8 ppg on 43.2% shooting against the Lakers; it's not like he made Kobe look like a matador.
Pierce's best contribution, I think, was on the defensive end; in Games 4 through 6, the defense -- led by Paul -- really clamped down on Kobe, and for the most part made him a non-factor.
-
Personally, I believe the only overrated player on the '08 championship squad was KG. And here's why... KG was billed out as one of the top big men, in the same vein as a McHale(+) but in reality, he's probably one of the best facilitators, for a big man, with a great ensemble of skills. He didn't score in the post, when it was needed, and he made too many passes on the block, when he should have taken a shot. Those are growing pains and probably a lack of a "Mr Q4" attitude which you see in a lot of swingmen and power forwards. Ok, so that keeps him out of my Hakeem-like clutch PF/C list but that's fine, as long as the rest of the world acknowledges that Pierce is the C's Batman and KG, his Robin (or perhaps, Captain America since he's a bit more effective than Burt Ward).
KG didn't score when it was needed? But Pierce was a Mr. Q4? In this year's playoffs? That's just blatantly not true. I've tried to avoid KG vs. Pierce wars on Celtics boards (seems counter-productive considering both are Cs that just led the team to a title), but much of this post is just false yet I see it espoused a lot on the internet. Even if you just completely discount KG's effect as a defensive anchor (which, by the way, played a large part in helping Pierce contain both LeBron and Kobe) and rebounder (which, by the way, was a key component in winning against the Cavs, Pistons, and Lakers), and just look at pure scoring, KG was still the main guy for the Celtics in the playoffs.
To start, KG was the Celtics leading scorer in the playoffs. But maybe that's not enough, so let's go further.
For all of those that say "yeah, but Pierce was the man late in games"...KG was the Celtics' leading scorer in the 4th quarter in the playoffs. Pierce drew more fouls, which is important and I credit him for that, but KG was the leading scorer. KG scored 128 points on 53% from field and 77% from line in 4th quarters across the playoffs, Pierce scored 103 points on 36% from field and 81% from line in playoff 4th Qs.
For those that say "yeah, but Pierce stepped up more than KG late in the close games"...in the 16 playoff games decided by 10 points or less either way KG was the leading 4th quarter scorer. KG: 88 points on 52% FG, 70% FT vs. Pierce's 77 points on 36% FG and 81% FT.
In 12 playoff games decided by 7 points or less either way KG was the leading 4th quarter scorer. KG: 66 points on 49% FG, 72% FT vs. Pierce's 54 points on 31% FG and 82% FT.
In 3 playoff games decided by 4 points or less either way KG was the leading 4th quarter scorer. KG 22 points on 50% FG and 100% FT, Pierce 3 points on 20% FG and 50% FT.
No matter how you slice it, across the playoffs KG was, in fact, the primary scorer. He was the leading scorer overall, and he was the leading scorer late in games, no matter how close the games were. And despite the fact that he committed the sin of scoring away from the rim as well as at the rim, KG still was both the leading scorer and the most efficient scorer late in Cs playoffs games.
From the things I read online sometimes, I almost feel like I'm in the twilight zone with the way people credit Pierce and discredit KG. Pierce is an outstanding players, one of the better players in the league. I give him all of the props for being a main cog on a champion and bringing home the Finals MVP. But please, I wish people would stop distorting what happened to make Pierce look better at the expense of KG. I realize that Pierce is the Captain and the Truth, and that he has been the man in Boston for 10 years while KG is the new guy on the block. But why can't both get props for what they did? I just don't understand it.
-
Excellent post, drza44 (TP). Where did you get your numbers from?
-
Thanks, Roy. I'm a bit of a nerd. I got in an argument with someone that kept insisting to me that KG disappeared in the 4th despite the evidence of my lying eyes, so I went to popcornmachine.net and went through the gameflows for all of the playoffs games to see if I just remembered wrong. I didn't. Popcornmachine breaks down how every player did in each of their stints on the floor in every game, so I wrote the numbers down and added them up. That was 20 minutes of job time well spent, so I'm glad my boss wasn't looking over my shoulder while I did it...
-
Great post indeed, another TP. I've always felt that KG has been underrated and one of the top 5 most desirable players to build a team around in the NBA until about 1 or 2 years ago. I'd still put him top 8 though.
-
Personally, I believe the only overrated player on the '08 championship squad was KG. And here's why... KG was billed out as one of the top big men, in the same vein as a McHale(+) but in reality, he's probably one of the best facilitators, for a big man, with a great ensemble of skills. He didn't score in the post, when it was needed, and he made too many passes on the block, when he should have taken a shot. Those are growing pains and probably a lack of a "Mr Q4" attitude which you see in a lot of swingmen and power forwards. Ok, so that keeps him out of my Hakeem-like clutch PF/C list but that's fine, as long as the rest of the world acknowledges that Pierce is the C's Batman and KG, his Robin (or perhaps, Captain America since he's a bit more effective than Burt Ward).
KG didn't score when it was needed? But Pierce was a Mr. Q4? In this year's playoffs? That's just blatantly not true. I've tried to avoid KG vs. Pierce wars on Celtics boards (seems counter-productive considering both are Cs that just led the team to a title), but much of this post is just false yet I see it espoused a lot on the internet. Even if you just completely discount KG's effect as a defensive anchor (which, by the way, played a large part in helping Pierce contain both LeBron and Kobe) and rebounder (which, by the way, was a key component in winning against the Cavs, Pistons, and Lakers), and just look at pure scoring, KG was still the main guy for the Celtics in the playoffs.
To start, KG was the Celtics leading scorer in the playoffs. But maybe that's not enough, so let's go further.
For all of those that say "yeah, but Pierce was the man late in games"...KG was the Celtics' leading scorer in the 4th quarter in the playoffs. Pierce drew more fouls, which is important and I credit him for that, but KG was the leading scorer. KG scored 128 points on 53% from field and 77% from line in 4th quarters across the playoffs, Pierce scored 103 points on 36% from field and 81% from line in playoff 4th Qs.
For those that say "yeah, but Pierce stepped up more than KG late in the close games"...in the 16 playoff games decided by 10 points or less either way KG was the leading 4th quarter scorer. KG: 88 points on 52% FG, 70% FT vs. Pierce's 77 points on 36% FG and 81% FT.
In 12 playoff games decided by 7 points or less either way KG was the leading 4th quarter scorer. KG: 66 points on 49% FG, 72% FT vs. Pierce's 54 points on 31% FG and 82% FT.
In 3 playoff games decided by 4 points or less either way KG was the leading 4th quarter scorer. KG 22 points on 50% FG and 100% FT, Pierce 3 points on 20% FG and 50% FT.
No matter how you slice it, across the playoffs KG was, in fact, the primary scorer. He was the leading scorer overall, and he was the leading scorer late in games, no matter how close the games were. And despite the fact that he committed the sin of scoring away from the rim as well as at the rim, KG still was both the leading scorer and the most efficient scorer late in Cs playoffs games.
From the things I read online sometimes, I almost feel like I'm in the twilight zone with the way people credit Pierce and discredit KG. Pierce is an outstanding players, one of the better players in the league. I give him all of the props for being a main cog on a champion and bringing home the Finals MVP. But please, I wish people would stop distorting what happened to make Pierce look better at the expense of KG. I realize that Pierce is the Captain and the Truth, and that he has been the man in Boston for 10 years while KG is the new guy on the block. But why can't both get props for what they did? I just don't understand it.
Wow, very recommended post. Great work (TP).
On topic: Hakeem is my favourite non-Celtic player ever. Ewing was good, very good, but he didn't belong to the same league. I think any discussion on who was better is utterly silly.
Pierce and Kobe are closer, but I give the edge to Kobe by a fair margin. However, Pierce has been underrated through his career; Kobe has been overrated here and there.
-
Well, if Pierce works better in a team setting then Kobe, I'd rather him work with Olajuwon and develop an unstoppable one-two punch which effectively would make a merry go-round defense of Ewing, Odom, and Bynum being unable to stop Olajuwon as they'd be too concerned about the ball going back and forth between PP and HO. My prediction, PP goes to the line 15-18 times per contest, Hakeem scores 30+ on Dream Shake, he blocks 5-8 shots by Laker's frontline, grabs nearly 18 boards per game, and Kobe is held to 24 by Pierce. Ewing is held to his customary 38FG% by Olajuwon. Celtics in 5.