The Truth or The Flash

[Ed Monix]

Paul Pierce continues to publicly argue that he was a better player than Dwyane Wade. Although it’s a childish narrative on the part of Pierce, it’s an interesting argument.

IMO, Wade had the highest peak between the two (2009-10), but does that mean he is definitively the better player?

Obviously Pierce is much taller than Wade, whom was only 6’3 without shoes. He definitely had an advantage being switched on defensively and (the reverse) offensively. Pierce was by far the better shooter and although Wade would have a higher average in assists, I believe Pierce had a better range of passes than Wade.

Wade definitely had the better teammates & surrounding infrastructure to flourish, whereas Pierce was drafted into a Celtics organization at its lowest & most dysfunctional point in its history.

What’s your opinion on this discussion?

[Moranis]

Wade was better as he had 2 seasons that were FAR better than any season in Pierce's career.  Pierce played longer so he scored more points and had more rebounds, but even in less seasons Wade ended up with more assists and even had more blocks.  Per game, Wade was better by over 2 ppg. 

Now sure, Pierce almost certainly would have had more than 1 title, if he played with "prime" Shaq and Lebron, but that is because of Shaq and Lebron, not because Pierce is better than Wade.

[Who]

Now sure, Pierce almost certainly would have had more than 1 title, if he played with "prime" Shaq and Lebron, but that is because of Shaq and Lebron, not because Pierce is better than Wade.

Pierce would get more out of those players because his skill-set fits better alongside other great players. He enables them to be their best. He was a much better outside shooter than Wade. He provides more floor spacing. Highly valuable to a post player like Shaq or a driver like LeBron. Pierce is also far less ball dominant than Wade. He will not dribble it as much or hold onto the ball as much. He will share it more. Pierce is easier for talented players to play alongside and flourish.

[gouki88]

I think Wade's prime was better, but Pierce's game was better suited to scaling to different team settings.

[LilRip]

It’s close. I think Pierce was a more versatile player, but I think Wade was a better player. Like if I had to start a franchise and the only two options were Wade or Pierce, I might pick Wade.

As an aside, I think Tatum’s going to be a better player (if he isn’t already) than either of these 2 legends. Isn’t that something?

[Kernewek]

I think it’s quite difficult to say, but Wade absolutely carried the Heat to that first championship in a way that Pierce was never quite able to. Whatever our opinions on the refereeing might be, the guy was an absolute force before his leg injuries started to add up.