Hollinger picks Vince Carter over Pierce or Allen

[Toine43]

Hollinger has been sipping too much of his PER juice... Vince Carter is not an all star. And winning absolutely should be taken into account for all star selections.
 

And what should also be taken into account is the fact that Paul Pierce is, was and always will be a better all-around player than Vince Carter.  The only thing Carter has on Pierce is vertical.

PPG, APG, 3PT%, FG%, BPG, and TPG would all beg to differ.  

Nice try, but Pierce's and Carter's season and career shooting stats are virtually even in all departments. Their career ppg stats are about the same, with Carter having the edge this season for obvious reasons. Carter has the assists edge this year by about 1 assist per game, but the players' career assist numbers are also even. In BPG, Carter has a 0.1 BPG edge over Pierce both season-wise and career wise, and Carter beats Pierce by roughly 0.6 TPG both this season and over their careers. It is also worth noting that Pierce has outrebounded Carter by about a rebound per game.

The lesson here: As I've shown twice already in this thread, it's definitely worth going back and checking others' stats, because often you'll fine that they've either slanted them to fit their argument or flat out made them up.

Once again, I'll reiterate that Pierce and Carter are a statistical wash offensively. Add in Pierce being more reliable in the clutch, his superior offensive talent to Carter (that of course is just my opinion), and the fact that Carter is atrocious on defense, and there is why Pierce deserves to be an All-Star over Carter.

[fairweatherfan]

Hollinger has been sipping too much of his PER juice... Vince Carter is not an all star. And winning absolutely should be taken into account for all star selections.
 

And what should also be taken into account is the fact that Paul Pierce is, was and always will be a better all-around player than Vince Carter.  The only thing Carter has on Pierce is vertical.

PPG, APG, 3PT%, FG%, BPG, and TPG would all beg to differ.  

Nice try, but Pierce's and Carter's season and career shooting stats are virtually even in all departments. Their career ppg stats are about the same, with Carter having the edge this season for obvious reasons. Carter has the assists edge this year by about 1 assist per game, but the players' career assist numbers are also even. In BPG, Carter has a 0.1 BPG edge over Pierce both season-wise and career wise, and Carter beats Pierce by roughly 0.6 TPG both this season and over their careers. It is also worth noting that Pierce has outrebounded Carter by about a rebound per game.

The lesson here: As I've shown twice already in this thread, it's definitely worth going back and checking others' stats, because often you'll fine that they've either slanted them to fit their argument or flat out made them up.

Once again, I'll reiterate that Pierce and Carter are a statistical wash offensively. Add in Pierce being more reliable in the clutch, his superior offensive talent to Carter (that of course is just my opinion), and the fact that Carter is atrocious on defense, and there is why Pierce deserves to be an All-Star over Carter.

I agree with your general stance, but career statistics are irrelevant for All-Star selections - only this year can be considered.  I don't think we have to worry though, he'll probably make it, and if he doesn't he'll be rested and PO'ed for the rest of the season.  Win-win.

[Toine43]

Hollinger has been sipping too much of his PER juice... Vince Carter is not an all star. And winning absolutely should be taken into account for all star selections.
 

And what should also be taken into account is the fact that Paul Pierce is, was and always will be a better all-around player than Vince Carter.  The only thing Carter has on Pierce is vertical.

PPG, APG, 3PT%, FG%, BPG, and TPG would all beg to differ.  

Nice try, but Pierce's and Carter's season and career shooting stats are virtually even in all departments. Their career ppg stats are about the same, with Carter having the edge this season for obvious reasons. Carter has the assists edge this year by about 1 assist per game, but the players' career assist numbers are also even. In BPG, Carter has a 0.1 BPG edge over Pierce both season-wise and career wise, and Carter beats Pierce by roughly 0.6 TPG both this season and over their careers. It is also worth noting that Pierce has outrebounded Carter by about a rebound per game.

The lesson here: As I've shown twice already in this thread, it's definitely worth going back and checking others' stats, because often you'll fine that they've either slanted them to fit their argument or flat out made them up.

Once again, I'll reiterate that Pierce and Carter are a statistical wash offensively. Add in Pierce being more reliable in the clutch, his superior offensive talent to Carter (that of course is just my opinion), and the fact that Carter is atrocious on defense, and there is why Pierce deserves to be an All-Star over Carter.

I agree with your general stance, but career statistics are irrelevant for All-Star selections - only this year can be considered.  I don't think we have to worry though, he'll probably make it, and if he doesn't he'll be rested and PO'ed for the rest of the season.  Win-win.

Sorry, I didn't mean to make it sound like I thought career stats mattered in this year's selections. Pierce deserves to be an All-Star based on his performance this year.

[Brendan]

Ironically 82 games had a +/- analysis that showed Pierce and Carter were two of the best defenders despite having bad raps a few years ago. Now last year has Pierce rated "lock down" defender and everyone still says Vince stinks.

The Karma/fans argument is the best justification for Pierce over Vince. (Frankly I don't care who goes in.)

[Moranis]

Hollinger has been sipping too much of his PER juice... Vince Carter is not an all star. And winning absolutely should be taken into account for all star selections.
 

And what should also be taken into account is the fact that Paul Pierce is, was and always will be a better all-around player than Vince Carter.  The only thing Carter has on Pierce is vertical.

PPG, APG, 3PT%, FG%, BPG, and TPG would all beg to differ.  

And every coach in the NBA wouldn't care what those stats had to say and would pick Pierce anyway.  Did I say the only stat Carter had on Pierce was vertical??  All you have to do is watch the two play.  It's not hard.

you said the only thing he had on Pierce was vertical, but he is a better shooter, a more prolific passer, a better shot blocker, and takes better care of the basketball.  VC is vastly under rated and Pierce is vastly over rated on this board.

[Fafnir]

Hollinger has been sipping too much of his PER juice... Vince Carter is not an all star. And winning absolutely should be taken into account for all star selections.
 

And what should also be taken into account is the fact that Paul Pierce is, was and always will be a better all-around player than Vince Carter.  The only thing Carter has on Pierce is vertical.

PPG, APG, 3PT%, FG%, BPG, and TPG would all beg to differ.  

And every coach in the NBA wouldn't care what those stats had to say and would pick Pierce anyway.  Did I say the only stat Carter had on Pierce was vertical??  All you have to do is watch the two play.  It's not hard.

you said the only thing he had on Pierce was vertical, but he is a better shooter, a more prolific passer, a better shot blocker, and takes better care of the basketball.  VC is vastly under rated and Pierce is vastly over rated on this board.

Their efficiency is equivalent. Pierce is more versatile at this point offensively because he can post up but its all within small percentages. Pierce has a better true shooting number though. Same with assists and rebounds. Both get about one more than the other this year in one respective category. Rebounds are more important than assists honestly but I'd call it a wash. Both are good passers.

I find it hilarious that you talk about shot blocking though. As if its really a relevant skill to compare between the two. Especially when the difference is .3 and .42 per game. Man those 5 extra blocks this year really show how superior he is!

My counter if it were worth arguing about would be PP has a 1.1 steals per compared to VC's 1.02....

I do think people underrate Vince Carter now a days. They used to wildly overrate him, things tend to swing like that.

A better comparison would be Ray Allen to Vince Carter. Ray is a much better 2. Pierce is still better than VC though.

[crownsy]

Hollinger has been sipping too much of his PER juice... Vince Carter is not an all star. And winning absolutely should be taken into account for all star selections.
 

And what should also be taken into account is the fact that Paul Pierce is, was and always will be a better all-around player than Vince Carter.  The only thing Carter has on Pierce is vertical.

PPG, APG, 3PT%, FG%, BPG, and TPG would all beg to differ.  

And every coach in the NBA wouldn't care what those stats had to say and would pick Pierce anyway.  Did I say the only stat Carter had on Pierce was vertical??  All you have to do is watch the two play.  It's not hard.

you said the only thing he had on Pierce was vertical, but he is a better shooter, a more prolific passer, a better shot blocker, and takes better care of the basketball.  VC is vastly under rated and Pierce is vastly over rated on this board.

He's also vastly more injury prone, doesn't play anything approching defense, forces his shots, even when he was on good teams, and pouts like a dog when he wants out of a luctrative contrct.

Also, I was going to say it, but  faf beat me too it, your going to argue he plays better defense than paul based on a percentage diffrance that equals out to 5 total blocks per 82 games? seriously? stretching it juuuussssttt a bit to try to find a statistic to back yourself up aren't we?

lastley, what you don't mention, and if im looking at thier career stats (as i assume you are) to back the rest of the stat diffrences, it doesn't take into account the drop in production in PPG and APG that paul had last year as he took less shots and played more as a teamate than one guy with 4 young kids who he had to carry.

If you put paul back up to his pre-unbutu days, vince's PPG and APG diffrences are much less.

also note that none of this means vince isn't a very good player, but lets put it this way, no ones putting that number in any rafters anytime soon.

[Moranis]

Hollinger has been sipping too much of his PER juice... Vince Carter is not an all star. And winning absolutely should be taken into account for all star selections.
 

And what should also be taken into account is the fact that Paul Pierce is, was and always will be a better all-around player than Vince Carter.  The only thing Carter has on Pierce is vertical.

PPG, APG, 3PT%, FG%, BPG, and TPG would all beg to differ.  

And every coach in the NBA wouldn't care what those stats had to say and would pick Pierce anyway.  Did I say the only stat Carter had on Pierce was vertical??  All you have to do is watch the two play.  It's not hard.

you said the only thing he had on Pierce was vertical, but he is a better shooter, a more prolific passer, a better shot blocker, and takes better care of the basketball.  VC is vastly under rated and Pierce is vastly over rated on this board.

He's also vastly more injury prone, doesn't play anything approching defense, forces his shots, even when he was on good teams, and pouts like a dog when he wants out of a luctrative contrct.

Also, I was going to say it, but  faf beat me too it, your going to argue he plays better defense than paul based on a percentage diffrance that equals out to 5 total blocks per 82 games? seriously? stretching it juuuussssttt a bit to try to find a statistic to back yourself up aren't we?

lastley, what you don't mention, and if im looking at thier career stats (as i assume you are) to back the rest of the stat diffrences, it doesn't take into account the drop in production in PPG and APG that paul had last year as he took less shots and played more as a teamate than one guy with 4 young kids who he had to carry.

If you put paul back up to his pre-unbutu days, vince's PPG and APG diffrences are much less.

also note that none of this means vince isn't a very good player, but lets put it this way, no ones putting that number in any rafters anytime soon.

VC's defense is not nearly as bad as its made out to be.  I believe it was posted in this thread actual hard evidence showed that VC was a pretty good defender.  Not on the level of PP, but still much much better than atrocious.

VC has played 742 games, PP has played 778 games since they entered the league in the same year.  So Vince has played about 3 games less per year than Paul has.  Not much difference really. 

VC may or may not force shots, but he still hits at a higher percentage than PP.  How does that help your point?

If you start pulling out seasons, then let's pull out VC's seasons when he played with Jefferson and Kidd.  You can't just pull seasons out that help you, when you don't do it when they don't.

BTW, since this is a discussion of this years all star possibilities, let's look at the stats from this season.
36.6m, 21.3p, 4.7a, 5.0r, 1.0s, 0.4b, 2.1t, 2.8f, 44.3%, 39.6%, 81.0%
36.5m, 19.1p, 3.7a, 5.8r, 1.1s, 0.3b, 2.8t, 2.7f, 44.2%, 40.0%, 84.6%

No contest, VC has had the better year and therefore VC should be on the all star team ahead of PP.  Not a knock on PP at all, it is just the reality.  VC's PER is 3.0 higher to boot. 

[dark_lord]

pierce, ray, granger, and joe johnson all deserve it over VC

[crownsy]

Hollinger has been sipping too much of his PER juice... Vince Carter is not an all star. And winning absolutely should be taken into account for all star selections.
 

And what should also be taken into account is the fact that Paul Pierce is, was and always will be a better all-around player than Vince Carter.  The only thing Carter has on Pierce is vertical.

PPG, APG, 3PT%, FG%, BPG, and TPG would all beg to differ.  

And every coach in the NBA wouldn't care what those stats had to say and would pick Pierce anyway.  Did I say the only stat Carter had on Pierce was vertical??  All you have to do is watch the two play.  It's not hard.

you said the only thing he had on Pierce was vertical, but he is a better shooter, a more prolific passer, a better shot blocker, and takes better care of the basketball.  VC is vastly under rated and Pierce is vastly over rated on this board.

He's also vastly more injury prone, doesn't play anything approching defense, forces his shots, even when he was on good teams, and pouts like a dog when he wants out of a luctrative contrct.

Also, I was going to say it, but  faf beat me too it, your going to argue he plays better defense than paul based on a percentage diffrance that equals out to 5 total blocks per 82 games? seriously? stretching it juuuussssttt a bit to try to find a statistic to back yourself up aren't we?

lastley, what you don't mention, and if im looking at thier career stats (as i assume you are) to back the rest of the stat diffrences, it doesn't take into account the drop in production in PPG and APG that paul had last year as he took less shots and played more as a teamate than one guy with 4 young kids who he had to carry.

If you put paul back up to his pre-unbutu days, vince's PPG and APG diffrences are much less.

also note that none of this means vince isn't a very good player, but lets put it this way, no ones putting that number in any rafters anytime soon.

VC's defense is not nearly as bad as its made out to be.  I believe it was posted in this thread actual hard evidence showed that VC was a pretty good defender.  Not on the level of PP, but still much much better than atrocious.

VC has played 742 games, PP has played 778 games since they entered the league in the same year.  So Vince has played about 3 games less per year than Paul has.  Not much difference really. 

VC may or may not force shots, but he still hits at a higher percentage than PP.  How does that help your point?

If you start pulling out seasons, then let's pull out VC's seasons when he played with Jefferson and Kidd.  You can't just pull seasons out that help you, when you don't do it when they don't.

BTW, since this is a discussion of this years all star possibilities, let's look at the stats from this season.
36.6m, 21.3p, 4.7a, 5.0r, 1.0s, 0.4b, 2.1t, 2.8f, 44.3%, 39.6%, 81.0%
36.5m, 19.1p, 3.7a, 5.8r, 1.1s, 0.3b, 2.8t, 2.7f, 44.2%, 40.0%, 84.6%

No contest, VC has had the better year and therefore VC should be on the all star team ahead of PP.  Not a knock on PP at all, it is just the reality.  VC's PER is 3.0 higher to boot. 

I didn't pull out any season's, im not a fan of that. but since the orginal poster who brought vince up decreed that all his seasons with jason kidd shouldn't count, since everyone knows kidd sucks now, i think im justified in cherrrypicking his numbers right back.

Also qoute me this hard evideance that vince is a good defender in this thread? because im not seeing it.

also, its no question you say, but outside of PPG (which as noted, are going to be lower for our players) VC is leading in 8 of those catagories by less than a point. of these catagories by less than a point, 5 of them are by less than 5 tenths of a point.

so really, the only area its "no contest" is PPG, and thats at a whopping 2.

I mean, unless you consider .1 of a steal, .1 of a block, .6 of a TO, .1% of a percent in FG%, and .4% from 3 point land "clear cut"


I for one don't find tenths of a percentage compelling. NJ has one guy who absolutly deserves to be an allstar, devin harris.

I wouldn't be over the moon if VC made it ahead of pierce, its very close. but to say "clearly vince has had the better season" when he leads in one stat by 2.1, and thats the go to? please.

why doesn't pauls 4.5% edge in FT shooting, by far the biggest discrepancy, nudge him up if were goign to compare stats that are 1/10ths of a point off each other?

[Toine43]

Hollinger has been sipping too much of his PER juice... Vince Carter is not an all star. And winning absolutely should be taken into account for all star selections.
 

And what should also be taken into account is the fact that Paul Pierce is, was and always will be a better all-around player than Vince Carter.  The only thing Carter has on Pierce is vertical.

PPG, APG, 3PT%, FG%, BPG, and TPG would all beg to differ.  

And every coach in the NBA wouldn't care what those stats had to say and would pick Pierce anyway.  Did I say the only stat Carter had on Pierce was vertical??  All you have to do is watch the two play.  It's not hard.

you said the only thing he had on Pierce was vertical, but he is a better shooter, a more prolific passer, a better shot blocker, and takes better care of the basketball.  VC is vastly under rated and Pierce is vastly over rated on this board.

He's also vastly more injury prone, doesn't play anything approching defense, forces his shots, even when he was on good teams, and pouts like a dog when he wants out of a luctrative contrct.

Also, I was going to say it, but  faf beat me too it, your going to argue he plays better defense than paul based on a percentage diffrance that equals out to 5 total blocks per 82 games? seriously? stretching it juuuussssttt a bit to try to find a statistic to back yourself up aren't we?

lastley, what you don't mention, and if im looking at thier career stats (as i assume you are) to back the rest of the stat diffrences, it doesn't take into account the drop in production in PPG and APG that paul had last year as he took less shots and played more as a teamate than one guy with 4 young kids who he had to carry.

If you put paul back up to his pre-unbutu days, vince's PPG and APG diffrences are much less.

also note that none of this means vince isn't a very good player, but lets put it this way, no ones putting that number in any rafters anytime soon.

VC's defense is not nearly as bad as its made out to be.  I believe it was posted in this thread actual hard evidence showed that VC was a pretty good defender.  Not on the level of PP, but still much much better than atrocious.

VC has played 742 games, PP has played 778 games since they entered the league in the same year.  So Vince has played about 3 games less per year than Paul has.  Not much difference really. 

VC may or may not force shots, but he still hits at a higher percentage than PP.  How does that help your point?

If you start pulling out seasons, then let's pull out VC's seasons when he played with Jefferson and Kidd.  You can't just pull seasons out that help you, when you don't do it when they don't.

BTW, since this is a discussion of this years all star possibilities, let's look at the stats from this season.
36.6m, 21.3p, 4.7a, 5.0r, 1.0s, 0.4b, 2.1t, 2.8f, 44.3%, 39.6%, 81.0%
36.5m, 19.1p, 3.7a, 5.8r, 1.1s, 0.3b, 2.8t, 2.7f, 44.2%, 40.0%, 84.6%

No contest, VC has had the better year and therefore VC should be on the all star team ahead of PP.  Not a knock on PP at all, it is just the reality.  VC's PER is 3.0 higher to boot. 

I didn't pull out any season's, im not a fan of that. but since the orginal poster who brought vince up decreed that all his seasons with jason kidd shouldn't count, since everyone knows kidd sucks now, i think im justified in cherrrypicking his numbers right back.

Also qoute me this hard evideance that vince is a good defender in this thread? because im not seeing it.

also, its no question you say, but outside of PPG (which as noted, are going to be lower for our players) VC is leading in 8 of those catagories by less than a point. of these catagories by less than a point, 5 of them are by less than 5 tenths of a point.

so really, the only area its "no contest" is PPG, and thats at a whopping 2.

I mean, unless you consider .1 of a steal, .1 of a block, .6 of a TO, .1% of a percent in FG%, and .4% from 3 point land "clear cut"

Crownsy, that's exactly what I tried to say to him earlier, but he's not listening for some reason. Statistically, besides PER this year, VC and Pierce are a wash. And even if you put a lot of stock in PER, how about taking a look at opponent PER, which as I said earlier Pierce destroys Carter in.

And I'm not sure why Moranis is so convinced that Carter is a better shooter than Pierce. Has there ever been anything more automatic than Pierce at his sweet spot in crunch time?

[BballTim]

Hollinger has been sipping too much of his PER juice... Vince Carter is not an all star. And winning absolutely should be taken into account for all star selections.
 

And what should also be taken into account is the fact that Paul Pierce is, was and always will be a better all-around player than Vince Carter.  The only thing Carter has on Pierce is vertical.

PPG, APG, 3PT%, FG%, BPG, and TPG would all beg to differ.  

And every coach in the NBA wouldn't care what those stats had to say and would pick Pierce anyway.  Did I say the only stat Carter had on Pierce was vertical??  All you have to do is watch the two play.  It's not hard.

you said the only thing he had on Pierce was vertical, but he is a better shooter, a more prolific passer, a better shot blocker, and takes better care of the basketball.  VC is vastly under rated and Pierce is vastly over rated on this board.

  Pierce is not vastly overrated on this board. Before this year he was vastly underrated. You've been here long enough to remember all of the "Paul isn't a top 25 player" threads.

[BrickJames]

What, Moronis came back just to bash Pierce?

[dark_lord]

What, Moronis came back just to bash Pierce?

whether we agree with him or not, its not cool to intentionally misspell his name "moronis". 

[cornbreadsmart]

I'M JOHN HOLLINGER AND I LOVE MATH.