Paul Pierce...best in the world

[D Dub]

I'm not sure that Paul outplayed Lebron.

Point totals:

Lebron: 12, 21, 21, 21, 35, 32, 45
Paul: 4, 19, 14, 13, 29, 16, 41

Assist totals:

Lebron: 9, 6, 8, 13, 5, 6, 6
Paul: 4, 2, 5, 3, 3, 3, 5

Rebound totals:

Lebron: 9, 5, 5, 6, 3, 12, 5
Paul: 5, 6, 3, 5, 7, 5, 4

Shooting totals:

Lebron: 2-for-18, 6-for-24, 5-for-16, 7-for-20, 12-for-25, 9-for-23, 14-for-29
Paul: 2-for-14, 7-for-13, 3-for-8, 6-for-17, 8-for-19, 5-for-15, 13-for-23

Overall, then, you see that Lebron outscored and out-assisted Paul in every game, and outrebounded him in five of them.  Overall, Lebron shot 35.5% for the series, while Paul shot 40.4%.  That's not such a difference to negate the other contributions Lebron made.

whats it look like when adjusted for the fact that lebron runs the point and has the ball 90% of the time? i'm sure if paul played suedo PG and just passed to spotted up shooters, his stats would also be inflated.

Perhaps true, but I'm really not sure where all the "Everyone would concede that Pierce clearly outplayed Lebron" statements are coming from.  What is that conclusion based upon?

Because we won. 

And because Paul was basicly guarding him 1 on 1 and held him under 40% for 5 out of 7 games -- no other defender in the league can do that. 

And then there is the 41 clutch points in the defining game his career, and the tommy-point play he made to take the jump ball from lebron and seal the W.

Most bball people I talk to conclude that Paul 'clearly' outplayed Lebron. 
Of course, this should not be confused with, 'Paul is better than Lebron', no one is saying that.

[bigjohnson34st]

I'm not sure that Paul outplayed Lebron.

Point totals:

Lebron: 12, 21, 21, 21, 35, 32, 45
Paul: 4, 19, 14, 13, 29, 16, 41

Assist totals:

Lebron: 9, 6, 8, 13, 5, 6, 6
Paul: 4, 2, 5, 3, 3, 3, 5

Rebound totals:

Lebron: 9, 5, 5, 6, 3, 12, 5
Paul: 5, 6, 3, 5, 7, 5, 4

Shooting totals:

Lebron: 2-for-18, 6-for-24, 5-for-16, 7-for-20, 12-for-25, 9-for-23, 14-for-29
Paul: 2-for-14, 7-for-13, 3-for-8, 6-for-17, 8-for-19, 5-for-15, 13-for-23

Overall, then, you see that Lebron outscored and out-assisted Paul in every game, and outrebounded him in five of them.  Overall, Lebron shot 35.5% for the series, while Paul shot 40.4%.  That's not such a difference to negate the other contributions Lebron made.

whats it look like when adjusted for the fact that lebron runs the point and has the ball 90% of the time? i'm sure if paul played suedo PG and just passed to spotted up shooters, his stats would also be inflated.

Perhaps true, but I'm really not sure where all the "Everyone would concede that Pierce clearly outplayed Lebron" statements are coming from.  What is that conclusion based upon?

Because we won. 

And because Paul was basicly guarding him 1 on 1 and held him under 40% for 5 out of 7 games -- no other defender in the league can do that. 

And then there is the 41 clutch points in the defining game his career, and the tommy-point play he made to take the jump ball from lebron and seal the W.

Most bball people I talk to conclude that Paul 'clearly' outplayed Lebron. 
Of course, this should not be confused with, 'Paul is better than Lebron', no one is saying that.

I think that sums it up perfectly.

[LB3533]

Basketball is more than just shooting or scoring, so to that end, Lebron played better basketball than Pierce did in that Cav's series.

Pierce, however, outplayed Lebron in Game 7 because Paul was playing tremendous basketball.

That being said, Lebron played tremendous basketball too, in that Game 7. However, Lebron needed one Delonte West 3 pointer to go in and Lebron needed to box out Pierce for that loose jump ball...and quite possibly the Celtics would have lost another Game 7 on their home floor.

[Roy Hobbs]

Perhaps true, but I'm really not sure where all the "Everyone would concede that Pierce clearly outplayed Lebron" statements are coming from.  What is that conclusion based upon?

Because we won. 

And because Paul was basicly guarding him 1 on 1 and held him under 40% for 5 out of 7 games -- no other defender in the league can do that. 

And then there is the 41 clutch points in the defining game his career, and the tommy-point play he made to take the jump ball from lebron and seal the W.

Most bball people I talk to conclude that Paul 'clearly' outplayed Lebron. 
Of course, this should not be confused with, 'Paul is better than Lebron', no one is saying that.

Yes, the Celtics had a better team than Cleveland did.  That's why they won.

Pierce played good defense on Lebron.  Lebron played good defense on Paul, as well.  I mean, people act like Paul had a great offensive series.  He didn't.  He had one mediocre game, one good one, one great one, and four poor ones on the offensive end.

Paul came up clutch in that game in Game 7, but it's not like he was the dominant force prior to that game that some are saying.  In fact, I seem to remember a bevy of "what's wrong with Paul Pierce" posts and threads after the first several games in that series.  It's only after his phenomenal Game 7 performance that people have in hindsight suggested that he outplayed Lebron, which did not, in fact, happen.

[cordobes]

I'm not sure that Paul outplayed Lebron.

Point totals:

Lebron: 12, 21, 21, 21, 35, 32, 45
Paul: 4, 19, 14, 13, 29, 16, 41

Assist totals:

Lebron: 9, 6, 8, 13, 5, 6, 6
Paul: 4, 2, 5, 3, 3, 3, 5

Rebound totals:

Lebron: 9, 5, 5, 6, 3, 12, 5
Paul: 5, 6, 3, 5, 7, 5, 4

Shooting totals:

Lebron: 2-for-18, 6-for-24, 5-for-16, 7-for-20, 12-for-25, 9-for-23, 14-for-29
Paul: 2-for-14, 7-for-13, 3-for-8, 6-for-17, 8-for-19, 5-for-15, 13-for-23

Overall, then, you see that Lebron outscored and out-assisted Paul in every game, and outrebounded him in five of them.  Overall, Lebron shot 35.5% for the series, while Paul shot 40.4%.  That's not such a difference to negate the other contributions Lebron made.

whats it look like when adjusted for the fact that lebron runs the point and has the ball 90% of the time? i'm sure if paul played suedo PG and just passed to spotted up shooters, his stats would also be inflated.

Perhaps true, but I'm really not sure where all the "Everyone would concede that Pierce clearly outplayed Lebron" statements are coming from.  What is that conclusion based upon?

Because we won. 

And because Paul was basicly guarding him 1 on 1 and held him under 40% for 5 out of 7 games -- no other defender in the league can do that. 

Bruce Bowen disagrees. 22 ppg, shooting 32-90 (under 36%) from the field while being swept.

[crownsy]

1 man show or not, he's still extremely effective. more so than kobe even. he missed wide open jump shots this year. if he made those, we would've been in big trouble.

true that, although to be fair, his mid range jumper is horrid. when teams make him shoot it they win. If there's one thing he needs to improve, its that jumper.

it's just that against the majority of defenses in the league, hes going to the rim, so he doesnt see it as a need i don't think. but that jumper from mid range is soooo streaky for him. Kobe's used to be, and then he really worked on it, and it makes him much, much tougher to gaurd.

If lebron, with his physical advantages over kobe (I.e being a middle linebacker) got a consistant mid range pull up? un-stoppable.

[cordobes]

I don't care enough to check the stats, but I wouldn't be surprised at all if LeBron has a more efficient mid-range jump-shot than Kobe, crownsy. Not surprised at all. Kobe is better from downtown and from the FT line. He's also better making difficult shots, that are aesthetically more enjoyable.

[crownsy]

Perhaps true, but I'm really not sure where all the "Everyone would concede that Pierce clearly outplayed Lebron" statements are coming from.  What is that conclusion based upon?

Because we won. 

And because Paul was basicly guarding him 1 on 1 and held him under 40% for 5 out of 7 games -- no other defender in the league can do that. 

And then there is the 41 clutch points in the defining game his career, and the tommy-point play he made to take the jump ball from lebron and seal the W.

Most bball people I talk to conclude that Paul 'clearly' outplayed Lebron. 
Of course, this should not be confused with, 'Paul is better than Lebron', no one is saying that.

Yes, the Celtics had a better team than Cleveland did.  That's why they won.

Pierce played good defense on Lebron.  Lebron played good defense on Paul, as well.  I mean, people act like Paul had a great offensive series.  He didn't.  He had one mediocre game, one good one, one great one, and four poor ones on the offensive end.

Paul came up clutch in that game in Game 7, but it's not like he was the dominant force prior to that game that some are saying.  In fact, I seem to remember a bevy of "what's wrong with Paul Pierce" posts and threads after the first several games in that series.  It's only after his phenomenal Game 7 performance that people have in hindsight suggested that he outplayed Lebron, which did not, in fact, happen.

I agree, i just think they were pretty much a wash, which allowed us to beat the far inferoir "and friends" part of the lineup. Lebron is a better player than pierce, to be sure, but pierce played him to a wash that series (most of the games paul struggled offensivly, so did lebron. i feel like they wore each other out on defense. that last game, both thier defensive efforts were off i felt, while the focused on scoring)

getting back to the orginal point of the post, is paul an arrogant SOB for saying this, i still maintain no, and the glibbness of his next response makes me think he said the first statment while wearing one of these  

Pauls a ham, he even embraced the whole "you faked an injury" thing for the tonight show in LA. he's a class clown, and i think this was more of that, but this reporter wants a bit of outrage so he didn't add the phrase "jokingly said"

nothing to see here, IMO.

[crownsy]

I don't care enough to check the stats, but I wouldn't be surprised at all if LeBron has a more efficient mid-range jump-shot than Kobe, crownsy. Not surprised at all. Kobe is better from downtown and from the FT line. He's also better making difficult shots, that are aesthetically more enjoyable.

I'll check when i get home, but i really doubt it, though mabey he would, because he shoots jumpers inside the arc alot less than kobe, since he can usually just dominate people on the way to the rack. He's not great at shooting over the top from the mid range though. i'm not saying he can't do it or that hes bad at it and clanks em all, or its some magical way to defened him (not easy to keep a guy liek lebron from getting past you or backing you down, thats for sure, you'd need some sort of awesome team defense for that  )

but its been mentioned several times by experts as a slight weakness, that he's real streaky on those pull uup midrangers. It certainly hurt him against us for the most part.

But its not like its some achilles heel, its just something he can shore up to continue to get better.

[zerophase]

lebrons mid range turn around fade is like non existant. thats the key part of pierce's game though. lebron can hit the mid range shot, just not turn arounds.

[drza44]

KG's role has to be kept in context. He is not the best player on this team but he is the anchor. And considering he is 1 of only 5 legitimate anchor's (Timmy, Dwight, Shaq) in this league I think his role is more valuable. You cant put role players around KG and expect him to accomplish anything. Ask McHale. But you can do so with Pual. Note the Celts of the early part of this millenium. We were a legitmate east contender with lil more than Paul and some old role players. Walter (I love walt), Kenny Anderson, Toine, etc..... KG didnt make it out of the first round until he had Sam and Spree in their primes. But when you put an anchor like KG with a player like Paul the result is a ring.... A la Dr. & Moses, Kobe & Shaq, Magic & Kareem, D-Wade & Shaq, Manu/Parker & Timmy, etc....

Sam and Spree weren't nearly in their primes in Minny.  Not even close.  They were a combined 67 years old in year 1, Spree was completely running on fumes and Sam's age manifested in becoming an injury risk (and he got injured at the worst possible time). 

And the 2002-2003 team when KG led a bunch of mud ducks to 51 wins was a better team than the Celtics of 2001-02.  The difference was that in the first round the Celtics got to play the Sixers, while the Wolves had to play the prime Shaq/Kobe Lakers.

It's also interesting that your list of "anchors" have won 9 of the last 10 championships, while none of their non-anchor partners have won a single championship when not next to the anchor.  It just seems like you make an interesting distinction between "anchor" and "best", when more often than not it is the anchor that leads the team to the chip.

All of that said, I'm glad Pierce feels that he's the best.  He absolutely should feel that way, and I'm sure that confidence makes him a better player.

[tenn_smoothie]

i can't believe you guys are actually debating the validity of this supposed claim by paul pierce.

hopefully, he was having some fun, hopefully.

if pierce was serious, then he is stupid, stupid, stupid. i don't seem to remember Bird or Magic making any such claims when they were trading places actually being the best player on the planet back in the '80s. i'm afraid this is just more of this generation's nonsense. gang signs and bragging - that ain't the Celtic way.

[bigjohnson34st]

It's also interesting that your list of "anchors" have won 9 of the last 10 championships, while none of their non-anchor partners have won a single championship when not next to the anchor.  It just seems like you make an interesting distinction between "anchor" and "best", when more often than not it is the anchor that leads the team to the chip.

All of that said, I'm glad Pierce feels that he's the best.  He absolutely should feel that way, and I'm sure that confidence makes him a better player.

[/quote]

I fully agree. It is very difficult to win without the anchor. It's what you build your team around. As stated this is the most valuable piece to the puzzle.

[nickagneta]

The phrase "el mejor en todo el mundo" literally translates to "best in all the world". But in many areas of the spanish speaking world it is just an overexaggerated way of saying "the best".

I would love to have been there to have heard the question asked, then heard the translation given Pierce, and then the translation of Pierce's response. If that is indeed the way the interview was conducted.

Because obviously the interviewer was looking for Pierce to state who his favorite players, as in a fan's perspective from the outside looking in, were and expecting answers along the lines of other superstars. But of course, Pierce's favorite players are himself and the guys he plays with.

It's cliche, but lots of stuff lost in translation there.

Again, does anyone know where a spanish version of the interview is or is there audio on it? That would probably clear up a bunch of misconceptions that are being formulated from his responses.

[cordobes]

Nick:

http://www.celticsblog.com/index.php?option=com_smf&Itemid=64&topic=21561.0