No. But possibly All-Star. Pierce was never a Superstar but he was an All-star player who could raise him game certain nights. That is what I hope Marcus can do. At the very least I think he can make it to be between Lewis and Pierce in terms of game impact.
What.
I don't understand how anyone can ever say Pierce was and never ever been considered a superstar.
Paul Pierce career averages are 20.7 PPG, 3.7 APG, and 5.8 RPG.
That isn't superstar numbers to you? If he didn't have such a bad team, Pierce would've definitely have had a lot more success.
Also the crazy thing is Pierce has NEVER ever been an Allstar starter, which is very disrespectful to Pierce.
One player conspicuously absent from that list is Paul Pierce, who never finished higher than seventh in MVP voting. Pierce has always been underappreciated, even in his prime when he averaged 25 points, seven rebounds and four assists while missing only eight games during a six-year stretch. He made 10 All-Star appearances without ever being voted in as a starter and was never a first-team All-NBA player.
From the beginning, Pierce was never a pretty player. His game was based on skill as much as style, his athleticism masked by a brawny body that was more brute force than cut stone. Despite his gaudy stats, Pierce never cracked the top 10 in MVP voting during those prime seasons from 2000-2006. His Celtics teams were often decent, but never great. They made the playoffs four times in that span, reaching the conference finals once and the second round on one other occasion. Those years would barely be a footnote in their distinguished history if not for Pierce.
"I'm the classic case of a great player on a bad team," he said famously, which would have served as his NBA epitaph if not for the dramatic series of events that unfolded next. Garnett arrived shortly thereafter along with Ray Allen, and Pierce finally had the help he'd been craving for years.
It was then that we came to understand Pierce's genius as a player. Freed from the burden of carrying mediocre teammates, Pierce's game took shape in a remarkable second act. His scoring went down, but his shooting went up. His playmaking, long an underappreciated talent, became the backbone of the Celtics' half-court sets. His defense, which had been maligned, turned into yet another strength.
"When you play on bad defensive teams, you get labeled as a bad defender," Pierce said back then, delivering yet another line that went right to the heart of the matter.
People compare Pierce to Melo, which I kind of disagree. There are definitely a lot of similarities, but I would surmise that Melo has had more gifted physical traits and athleticism during his beginning years in the NBA. Pierce has relied more on skill, crafty scoring, and patient offense built around iso, stepbacks, elbow jumpers, and an arsenal of creative finishes.
Pierce has been one of the most underrated superstars of our era. I mean when people mention the greats of our era, you instantaneously think of Dirk, KG, Allen, Kobe, Wade, etc. But rarely do people besides the exception of Celtic fans, does Pierce ever get mentioned in the same sentence, nonetheless the same breath.
Finally, without Pierce on the 07-08 team, I don't think we would've won. Yes, Garnett and Allen were extremely vital, but Pierce was the main go to scorer, and a testament to how gracefully, Pierce has aged.
Pierce has singelhandely destroyed the Raptors on the Nets and on the Wizards, especially when the Wizards were struggling inherently. Pierce called game, and there's the reason why Shaq once grabbed a reporter to say,
Pulling a reporter aside, he shook his head and said, ‘Paul Pierce.’ Paul Pierce what? Leaning toward the notepad, he said, ‘Take this down. My name is Shaquille O’Neal, and Paul Pierce is the (very long expletive) truth. Quote me on that, and don’t take nothing out. I knew he could play, but I didn’t know he could play like this. Paul Pierce is the truth.’
Topic: Yes or No? Marcus Smart Our Next Superstar? (Read 48881 times)