Who’s had the better career, Paul Pierce or Ray Allen?

[BKDomer]

My vote would go to Pierce b/c he is a more complete player, and its not even that close in my opinion. 

And in response to the comments that earlier in Pierce's career he was immature, etc, I recall Ray's behavior during that playoff series the Bucks lost to Philly in 2001 as not exactly stellar (threw a brutal elbow at Iverson, publicly whined about officiating to the point of suggesting conspiracy). 

[xmuscularghandix]

Not that it will answer this question, but I'm curious: Is there a way to look at their records and stats vs each other?

yea i'll do it.

I haven't figured the head to head stats but W/L is leaning hard towards Ray.

Since the drafting of PP, Ray Allen is 17-6 against the Celtics.

[Fafnir]

Not that it will answer this question, but I'm curious: Is there a way to look at their records and stats vs each other?

yea i'll do it.

I haven't figured the head to head stats but W/L is leaning hard towards Ray.

Since the drafting of PP, Ray Allen is 17-6 against the Celtics.

Here are their stats head to head.

Not that head to head stats tells you a lot about their overall careers.

[Fafnir]

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/tiny.cgi?id=WO0HY

Those are their stats side by side. I think Paul overall has been the better player. He was a much more dynamic player, and also could effect the games in more ways than Ray Allen.

His 3 year peak was higher in my mind as well.

[xmuscularghandix]

Not that this is a huge 'game-changer' I'd like to to analyze the best players on the best teams that each has played with.

Paul Pierce:
2001-02 (Antoine Walker, Kenny Anderson, Tony Battie, Tony Delk)


Ray Allen:
2000-01 (Glen Robinson, Sam Cassell, Tim Thomas, Lindsay Hunter, Ervin Johnson)

Ray's best team actually had other starting players in their prime. While PP's 02 team was basically Him and 'Toine with MANY different fringe players being moved in and out of the lineup.

I'd say that PP did just as much with less, because if Pierce had the opportunity to play with that Bucks lineup I think they're in the finals.

[xmuscularghandix]

Why do these threads come up when one has a career game and one is perceived as struggling?

They have the same number of championships.  

It's an article in Slam magazine, I also think that it's a good debate because they have very similar careers.

[papa shuttlesworth]

Thanks Fafnir and Ghandi.  TPs for each of you. I was looking at that site, but didn't have the time to figure out how to compare.

I know it doesn't add much to the discussion, but their head to head matchups are still interesting.

[papa shuttlesworth]

Another thing to keep in mind when looking at how "complete" of a player each is what their roles are on the team.  Ray used to have much higher assist and rebounding numbers before the Celtics because the offense flowed through him and he was asked to rebound.  Doc wants Ray (and others) to get back on defense and leave the rebounding to others and he has a low usage rate (I assume).

Similarly, as someone mentioned, Pierce had the Jim O'Brien years where his 3pt% probably suffered, but his 3PA was high. 

So we must always be aware of the systems/coaching (not everyone can play for the Suns) and even divisional opposition (ie going against Jordan in the playoffs in the 90s) when comparing players' careers.

[3ptAndOne]

I am not going to vote right now. I think how each player finish the 2010 Finals will tell me who has a better career.

[dysgenic]

It's Pierce and it's not even that close.  Pierce is a better offensive player, a better defensive player, a better rebounder, and a better passer.  Also, Pierce has the edge on 'intangibles'.  Ray's intangibles are very good, Pierce's are all world.  Consider the following:

1. Overcoming the stabbing innocent.
2. Facing and overcoming all the adversity from fans that he faced mid-career.  He also faced sustained criticism pertaining to the way he comported himself when he played for the olympic team.
3. Willingly subjugating his offensive game in '08 for the benefit of the team.
4. Along with Doc, repairing a rocky relationship w/ Doc in 2k8 (number 3 probably had a lot to do with it).  Their relationship went from being rocky to being a strength.
5. Pierce vs. Lebron, game 7 in '08.
6. Arguably the best player vs. Detroit in Easter Conference finals, '08.
7. Outplaying Kobe in '08.

They are both very poised players- although it took both of them awhile to get there.  But Pierce is the better leader.  He was the captain of the '08 championship team and the players deferred to him in the biggest moments.  Even now after the emergence of Rondo as the best player on the team, he is still the one that his teammates look to in the biggest moments.  And he usually delivers.

Paul Pierce is one of the most mentally tough basketball players I've ever seen.  I think he is one of the most underrated players ever.  In my lifetime (I'm in my mid 30's), he's the 2nd best Celtic after Bird.

[dpaps]

I am not going to vote right now. I think how each player finish the 2010 Finals will tell me who has a better career.

yeah if Pierce wins a second Finals MVP this discussion is pretty much over. I'd agree with what seems to be the consensus, that they've had very similar type careers, but Pierce has been the better player. Especially because of his defense, I think Pierce wins this battle, because as good as Paul has been offensively for the past 10 years, Ray has probably been just as good. And he carried a weak seattle team to a good season, along with the Bucks to the ECF.

One thing about how their careers will be remembered, Ray will probably go down as the best 3 point shooter ever once he breaks Reggie's record, and arguably the best pure shooter ever. Paul will not be remembered with any superlatives from a national view. He will be remembered for being great, but I don't think anyone can argue he's the best at anything. Not in the way you can argue Ray Allen is the best shooter, atleast.