Paul Pierce says KD is best player in world?

[cousytoheinsohn]

Lebron is still the best player in the world.

I might take KD over Kawhi for #2.

I actually think Leonard is the best player in the world. We saw how competitive they were without him. He never gets any credit cause he is soft-spoken, does not play in a huge market and isn't abrasive at all. However, he is a tremendous force on both ends of the team.

Agree with you celticsclay, Kawhi is my #1, especially if we're talking two way impact. The ability to clamp down on a team's best player 1-4 and then go down the other end and drop 25-30 points is unreal.

Completely agree about Kawhi.

Very well-said, and thanks for saying so.

[liam]

Lebron is still the best player in the world.

I might take KD over Kawhi for #2.

I actually think Leonard is the best player in the world. We saw how competitive they were without him. He never gets any credit cause he is soft-spoken, does not play in a huge market and isn't abrasive at all. However, he is a tremendous force on both ends of the team.

I agree I think Leonard is the best two way player in the game.

[mspring]

It's kind of funny because in the fourth quarter I was talking with my 2 sons as I was watching the game and I said the exact same thing, "he may be the best player in the world now."  Then Paul Pierce said the same thing during the post game and they thought he was drunk.

Ultimately these arguments are hard to prove for sure, but his play in the finals definitely puts him in the conversation.  The other thing I have been thinking about is if he had signed with us in the offseason I really think we had a chance to beat Cleveland or Golden State.  Anyone else think that, or have I been drinking too much of the cool aide?

[celticsclay]

How long till you can buy Lebron James' tears on amazon?

[RodyTur10]

It's kind of funny because in the fourth quarter I was talking with my 2 sons as I was watching the game and I said the exact same thing, "he may be the best player in the world now."  Then Paul Pierce said the same thing during the post game and they thought he was drunk.

Ultimately these arguments are hard to prove for sure, but his play in the finals definitely puts him in the conversation.  The other thing I have been thinking about is if he had signed with us in the offseason I really think we had a chance to beat Cleveland or Golden State.  Anyone else think that, or have I been drinking too much of the cool aide?

Of course, Durant signing with us would've made all the difference in the world. For the Celtics and the league. It's a decision which effects can hardly be overestimated. I made a topic in which I did an ultimate proposal of making the Celtics a contender, but realistically there probably is noone. Had Durant signed, we'd have had lots of options to improve the roster furthermore by trades.

By not signing the contract of Horford instantly became a bad one, which blocks the possibility of adding two All-stars to the team. It made the great contracts of Thomas, Bradley and Crowder largely redundant as we're not able to capitalize on that.

Ainge wanted to have a flexible situation where we could immediately make moves to compete for the short or long term, but Durant actually made the decision for us. We now have to fully focus on the long term (5 years +), since we won't have any of the lucrative contracts (all stars for cheap) like the Warriors or Cavaliers.

Also now that Durant is with the Warriors the threshold for building a potential championship team has enormously increased. We see how the Cavaliers get smashed around. The Warriors are still unbeaten in this year's playoffs! It's ridiculous. Teams like Houston, Utah or Washington that look to be on the right path are miles away of contending. Noone can assemble a core that consists of four All Stars (of which two former MVP's) in their prime.

[celticsclay]

It's kind of funny because in the fourth quarter I was talking with my 2 sons as I was watching the game and I said the exact same thing, "he may be the best player in the world now."  Then Paul Pierce said the same thing during the post game and they thought he was drunk.

Ultimately these arguments are hard to prove for sure, but his play in the finals definitely puts him in the conversation.  The other thing I have been thinking about is if he had signed with us in the offseason I really think we had a chance to beat Cleveland or Golden State.  Anyone else think that, or have I been drinking too much of the cool aide?

Of course, Durant signing with us would've made all the difference in the world. For the Celtics and the league. It's a decision which effects can hardly be overestimated. I made a topic in which I did an ultimate proposal of making the Celtics a contender, but realistically there probably is noone. Had Durant signed, we'd have had lots of options to improve the roster furthermore by trades.

By not signing the contract of Horford instantly became a bad one, which blocks the possibility of adding two All-stars to the team. It made the great contracts of Thomas, Bradley and Crowder largely redundant as we're not able to capitalize on that.

Ainge wanted to have a flexible situation where we could immediately make moves to compete for the short or long term, but Durant actually made the decision for us. We now have to fully focus on the long term (5 years +), since we won't have any of the lucrative contracts (all stars for cheap) like the Warriors or Cavaliers.

Also now that Durant is with the Warriors the threshold for building a potential championship team has enormously increased. We see how the Cavaliers get smashed around. The Warriors are still unbeaten in this year's playoffs! It's ridiculous. Teams like Houston, Utah or Washington that look to be on the right path are miles away of contending. Noone can assemble a core that consists of four All Stars (of which two former MVP's) in their prime.

Durant signing has been bad for the league. I will be shocked if ratings are not tanking next year for the whole season.

[the TRUTH]

Last night Paul Pierce created a minor stir by saying Durant was already the best player in the world. Is this a ridiculous take? One thing I have noticed this finals is that Lebron certainly getting tired easier than he used to. He looked incredibly wiped when he went to the bench in the 3rd. Obviously Lebron had an amazing game in his own right, but is he already able to do it for less time than he used to be?

It would be so fascinating to see guys like Harden, Westbrook, Durant and James all switch teams for a month at a time and see how the team did. Durant has looked unstoppable and like a defensive force with his blocks. However, maybe James averages 13 assists on the Warriors. What do you all think?

My understanding of Pierce's comment - and I agree with this - was that he was saying KD is currently playing like the best player in the world, with an implicit acknowledgement that the sample size is way too small to definitively give KD that title.

[Tr1boy]

Yes he is