I’m getting sick and tired for the love that is being poured out for Paul Pierce. I understand that he was part of a championship team and that he played a large role in capturing the crown, but anointing him as an all-timer is ridiculous. During the finals, the folks over at ESPN and ABC were waxing poetic about his wonderful leadership skills, and how could one forget his heroic return in Game 1 when he needed the assistance of wheelchair to get off the court. Judging by some of his quotes, I think that Pierce is even believing his own press clippings.
“The championship means everything. You know, I’m not living under the shadows of the other greats now,” said an emotional Pierce, after being named the NBA Finals Most Valuable Player in his first Championship series.
“I’m able to make my own history with my time here and, like I said, this is something that I wanted to do. If I was going to be one of the best Celtics ever to play, I had to put up a banner. And we did that.” (www.bangkokpost.com)
How can some of the Celtic greats of the past feel about this guy? Can he really be considered to be an all-time Celtic great? If so, why? Doesn’t anyone remember the season prior to this championship one, where Pierce led his team to a meager 15 wins and the fifth spot in the lottery.
Let’s face it – the Celtics have been woeful since Pierce’s arrival. So woeful that they had to airlift some legit superstars in KG and Ray Allen onto the team. Listen, I’m not claiming that Pierce isn’t a good ball player. I would be more than willing to state that he is a good complementary player on a great team. But to put him in the ranks of Bill Russell, John Havilcek, Bob Cousy and Larry Legend is just ludicrous.
You don’t even have your facts right. Pierce was injured for half the season last year. The team won 24 games, not 15, and the team was 20-27 in games Pierce played.
Pierce was the best player on the 2002 team that went to the Eastern conference championship, just as far as either Allen or Garnett ever got any of their teams, and they both had better supporting casts.
As for how other Celtic greats feel about Pierce? They love him. Tommy Heinson has said for years that he is the best pure offensive player to ever wear the uniform, and Tommy has played with, coached, or watched all the greats.
Hondo said he could not be happier for Paul because of all of the crap that he has had to put up with over his Celtic career. Even Bird has given him his due, although begrudgingly.
My question? Why the hate?
Thanks for the comments Terry. I truly appreciate it. I can totally see your point of view. I knew when I put the stats into the post that I was wrong and I can dig that. By posting that the Celts were 20-27 with him in the lineup illustrates my point. I don’t recall a Bill Russell team being in that position. Should a great player have records like that? For me no
Thanks again for reading Terry.
Bill Russell never had a starting lineup of Delonte West, Wally Szczerbiak, Al Jefferson, & Kendrick Perkins either.
Look at how those guys (-KP) did in Minnesota this season, and that is with an improved Al Jefferson, although he is still a defensive seive.
When PP had even average talent around him he won more than he lost. His teams had similar records to LeBron’s and Kobe’s, and I’d argue they have better talent than PP ever had.
Doc Rivers has been very forthright in saying until this year they asked Pierce to do everything. Be the scorer, the playmaker, the rebounder, and defend the other teams best player. No one ever asked that of Russell, Bird, Cousy or Hondo.
Look and see how Pierce stacks up against the Celtic greats statistically. http://www.nba.com/celtics/history/Stats_Top10Leaders.html
And these stats don’t include this year.
Not too shabby is it? And he’s not done yet.