ISH All-time Top 25 Forwards Project #20: Paul Pierce vs Dolph Schayes.

[G.O.A.T]

Saying Pierce was never top 10 is honestly an awful argument.

1) It's not my argument
2) It's a legit argument
3) It's a better argument than any someone could make against Joe Fulks

[bizil]

\

Pierce IS a top-10/15 sf....

I agree! Pierce at this point is a top 10-15 SF. If u peep his accolades he has a case. The guys like English, Dantley, and King were awesome players. Peak value wise I think King was better than Pierce. But for a career resume, Pierce has passed, King, Dantley, and English by. An in terms of skillset, Piece has a better all around skillset than those three. He's a hair behind in terms of scoring, and Pierce is very, very clutch.

So peak value wise I think these guys are the top SF's: (no order)

Bird
Bron
Doc
Baylor
Barry
Hondo
King
Nique
Grant Hill
English-Dantley

So I feel Paul just misses the top ten. But in terms of GOAT type shit which includes team accolades, solo accolades, numbers, longevity being great:

Bird
Doc
Bron
Baylor
Hondo
Barry
Nique
Pippen

I think if u ask most, these eight are the greatest SF's of all time. But after that u got:

Pierce
Cunnigham
English
Dantley
King
Arizin



So in the GOAT list, I think Pierce has spot in the top ten. I got him over King, English, and Dantley GOAT wise. And honestly, Pierce's game in built to last and he's hasn't slowed much. I can see Pierce getting at least 25,000 points for his career if he plays three to four more years.

[bizil]

\

Pierce IS a top-10/15 sf....

I agree! Pierce at this point is a top 10-15 SF. If u peep his accolades he has a case. The guys like English, Dantley, and King were awesome players. Peak value wise I think King was better than Pierce. But for a career resume, Pierce has passed, King, Dantley, and English by. An in terms of skillset, Piece has a better all around skillset than those three. He's a hair behind in terms of scoring, and Pierce is very, very clutch.

So peak value wise I think these guys are the top SF's: (no order)

Bird
Bron
Doc
Baylor
Barry
Hondo
King
Nique
Grant Hill
English-Dantley

So I feel Paul just misses the top ten. But in terms of GOAT type shit which includes team accolades, solo accolades, numbers, longevity being great:

Bird
Doc
Bron
Baylor
Hondo
Barry
Nique
Pippen

I think if u ask most, these eight are the greatest SF's of all time. But after that u got:

Pierce
Cunnigham
English
Dantley
King
Arizin


So in the GOAT list, I think Pierce has spot in the top ten. I got him over King, English, and Dantley GOAT wise. And honestly, Pierce's game in built to last and he's hasn't slowed much. I can see Pierce getting at least 25,000 points for his career if he plays three to four more years.

[Droid101]

History, accolades, comparisons to peers... yep, Schayes has it.

[magnax1]

1) It's not my argument
2) It's a legit argument
3) It's a better argument than any someone could make against Joe Fulks

I want to see how you could make a case that Pierce was never top 10. There are years where that just doesn't make any sense.

[Real Men Wear Green]

I want to see how you could make a case that Pierce was never top 10. There are years where that just doesn't make any sense.

I already asked him to list 10 better from the ECF year. If he tries he'll have to come with some silly pick like Fulks.

[bizil]

I want to see how you could make a case that Pierce was never top 10. There are years where that just doesn't make any sense.

I think there were definitely years where Pierce at least had a case for top ten players in the L. I think Pierce got underrated in terms of SG's and SF's cause u had more dynamic or freak athletic guys in Carter, Bron, TMac, Wade. Or u had a dynamo like AI at SG. And u have stud scoring machines in Durant and Melo. So Pierce would get underrated in my book. But skill for skill, Pierce is better all around than Carter, Melo, and Durant.

The 2000s had a vast array of SG's, swingmen, and PF's. PG's even started picking up towards the end of the decade. But Pierce was a top ten caliber player in the L in some seasons. Now make no mistake, guys like Kobe, Bron, prime AI, Wade, and a prime TMac were the cream of the crop. But guys like Carter, Pierce, and Allen were great players who all were right around that top ten area where u could make a case certain seasons.

[magnax1]

I already asked him to list 10 better from the ECF year. If he tries he'll have to come with some silly pick like Fulks.

06 you'd have a really tough time making a case too.

[ShaqAttack3234]

06 you'd have a really tough time making a case too.

Not really, I have Pierce top 8-9 in 2002 and probably 10th in 2003, but he wouldn't make my top 10 in 2006. He's close, but just outside top 10.

[magnax1]

Not really, I have Pierce top 8-9 in 2002 and probably 10th in 2003, but he wouldn't make my top 10 in 2006. He's close, but just outside top 10.

Who would you take over him in 06?

[G.O.A.T]

I want to see how you could make a case that Pierce was never top 10. There are years where that just doesn't make any sense.

2009 was the only season he made the all-NBA second team and/or was in the top 10 of the MVP voting. During that season I would say that Dwight Howard, LeBron James, Kobe Bryant, Dwyane Wade, Chris Paul and Dirk Nowitzki were all unquestionably better than Pierce.

That puts him at #7 right away.

There are valid arguments for Yao (played 77 games of 20-10 that year), Carmelo (led his team to conference finals), Duncan (19-11-4-2), Deron Williams (who many thought was nearly as good as Paul), Brandon Roy (career year, also all-NBA second team) and Chauncey Billups (finished above Pierce in the MVP race) and that's not to mention guys like Kevin Durant and Derrick Rose who were young, but more valuable commodities than Pierce.

Just by trusting the voters (and yes their collective opinion should mean more to you than just your own opinion) you can see the outline for a case against him. That's all that was said. That a case can be made that Pierce was never a top ten player and that he certainly never was a top five player. That was brought up in contrast of Fulks who was arguably the best player in the BAA prior to Mikan.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Who would you take over him in 06?

Off the top of my head? Kobe, Wade, Dirk, Lebron, Nash, Duncan, Brand, KG, Iverson, Shaq and other borderlines would be Arenas and Carter.

[magnax1]

Off the top of my head? Kobe, Wade, Dirk, Lebron, Nash, Duncan, Brand, KG, Iverson, Shaq and other borderlines would be Arenas and Carter.

I wouldn't take Dirk or Shaq for sure. Dirk as a scorer is better, but definitely not as an overall player, and Shaq played 20 fewer games while playing on a similar, though probably worse level. Peoples opinions on Brand and Arenas seem to differ pretty greatly, so it's hard to say, but I wouldn't have taken either of them over Dirk.
At very worst, I think Pierce ends up at 11.

[ShaqAttack3234]

I wouldn't take Dirk or Shaq for sure. Dirk as a scorer is better, but definitely not as an overall player, and Shaq played 20 fewer games while playing on a similar, though probably worse level. Peoples opinions on Brand and Arenas seem to differ pretty greatly, so it's hard to say, but I wouldn't have taken either of think over Dirk.
At very worst, I think Pierce ends up at 11.

Dirk led Dallas to 60 wins and the finals that year, averaged 27/9/3/48 FG%/59 TS% in the regular season and 27/12/3/47 FG%/60 TS% in the playoffs. Had a 50 point game in the WCF vs Phoenix and eliminated San Antonio with 37/15 in game 7.

I don't see how Pierce(who led a team to 33 wins in the East that year) has any case over Dirk who was top 3-4, imo.

Shaq is tougher to rank considering his minutes were lowered and he was declining. But still a 20/9/2/2/60 FG% center who was better than his stats suggest. He still had some big games in the playoffs and had a great series vs Detroit.

Second best player on a championship team that was just 10-13 without him(10-11 even when Wade played), and I believe his presence made Wade a better player as Wade's FG% was just 44.7% in 21 games without Shaq and 51.6% in 54 games with him which is a pretty significant sample size, and that was on a pretty similar volume of shots.

No longer in the discussion for best player in the game, but I think his impact was greater than Pierce's in '06. As Chuck Daly put it.

[QUOTE]"It's amusing to me," Hall of Fame coach Chuck Daly said, adding that O'Neal remains one of the top five players in the league regardless of his stats. "Every night, people are playing him with two, 2

[G.O.A.T]

I wouldn't take Dirk or Shaq for sure. Dirk as a scorer is better, but definitely not as an overall player, and Shaq played 20 fewer games while playing on a similar, though probably worse level. Peoples opinions on Brand and Arenas seem to differ pretty greatly, so it's hard to say, but I wouldn't have taken either of them over Dirk.
At very worst, I think Pierce ends up at 11.

Shaq and Dirk were in the NBA Finals and Pierce and Boston won what 40 games?

Shaq should have been MVP in '05 and Dirk had as strong a case (stronger IMO) than Nash for the award in '06.

Pierce was always in that second tier, Dirk and Shaq spent a decade in the top tier.