Thanks for the article. Nice link.
Two parts I'd quibble with:
The fact is this: after winning banner number 17 in June, Pierce said he considers himself the best player in the world. Now that the league and fans across the country see him chasing down every record on the best franchise in NBA history to accompany his new ring, who can argue?
and
So as Red Auerbach hunches over the Celtics record book in basketball heaven, lighting another cigar with each Paul Pierce achievement, it is hard to argue that there is another player in the NBA that is more important to his teammates, franchise, and fans.
I'd argue both of those points. I don't think Pierce is the best player in the game, and I think his place in the Celtics record books is largely irrelevant to that status. Maybe that's important in discussing his place in Celtics history, but in terms of how he relates to his peers in the league presently, I just don't think it matters.
Secondly, Pierce is definitely important to our team, but I don't think he's more important to his franchise than, say, Lebron or Kobe. Take Pierce off the Celts and replace him with an average player, and we're a playoff team still. Replace Lebron with an average player, and that team finishes at the bottom of the lottery.
Still, it was a nice read, reminding everyone of Pierce's place in Celtics lore. It's no small feat, what he's been able to accomplish here. I don't think, though, that those accolades increase his standing around the league. He either is or is not the best player in the league; where he stands statistically relative to other Celtics greats shouldn't be a factor in that debate.