You really think that making the playoffs in the Eastern Conference in the late 90's to early 00's is more impressive than hitting the playoffs in the last decade of the Western Conference?
every team we played against during that time should've beaten us with the talent we had. I don't care how bad or good the level of talent was considered back then. pierce would have killed to play with guys like Kenyon martin and marcus camby.
And if Pierce had played with guys like Kenyon Martin and Marcus Camby in the Western Conference from 2003-2008 you'd be saying "I don't want Pierce, he's not a winner."
not true pierce likely would have gotten past the 1st round with those guys.
No way to say either way.
I think Pierce was a better player than Anthony, but I don't think that the gulf is as wide as you're making it out to be.
no there isn't a way to say either way. but i'd definitely take my chances with pierce.
Anthony thus far is no different than say derrick coleman or Antoine walker. all the talent in the world but doing nothing with it.
the reason i'm so offended by Celtics fans even suggesting going after Anthony is because yes i'm using pierce as a barometer, and why shouldn't I?
Pierce could've been the scoring champion or at least been in the running like Carmelo usually is. but that's not what a team needs every night. usually if one guy is taking 30 shots a gm. they're not very good. Pierce realized this very early on in his career. if we needed him to be a rebounder he went out & got 10 boards, if we needed him to get assists he went out & got 10 assists. he was always able to adjust his game accordingly.
there's only a handful of guys I can remember that did that consistently and pierce was one of 'em.
Carmelo has a long way to go before even being mentioned in the same sentence with pierce.