Paul Pierce vs Scottie Pippen

[kNIOKAS]

I haven't seen that much of Pippen (although he's one of my favourite players from 90ies), and I do think both of them are underrated. I would think it is very close and depends on what aspect you want to improve your team.

[PP34Deuce]

As big of a PP fan.... This is tough...

If you put Scottie in his prime with Antoine Walker those celtics probably get as far as PP took them which is ECF.

If you put Prime PP on those Bulls teams, They win titles, but do they win 6?

I do think if you put PP on the team that Scottie led, they would be about what they were.

I still haven't answered the question. I think Pierce has shown you need a 1a or 1b hes better.

[Living Being]

This is actually one of the more interesting VS threads. I'm sick of the KG/Dirk ones...

If we're talking about who we'd rather have on our team, it obviously depends on what kind of player you want, and these two, although they have certain similarities, are on pretty opposite ends of the spectrum.

Pierce is a bona fide scorer. Idc who you put on him -- over a large enough sample size, he'll get his points, just like any other great scorer. For an aggressive wing, he also assists and boards well, and he's clutch. Defense, not so much, especially when on those shitty Celtics teams. It's not so much inability, but let's not pretend like he was ever a physically dominating player, either.

Scottie does most things a bit better, and plays D a whole lot better, obviously. I don't think he was a better playmaker, actually; just more conscious of his playmaking role, whereas Pierce had to score, score, score if the Celtics were gonna win double digit games in the post-Toine, pre-Big 3 era. Scottie was a better rebounder. Idc what the numbers show in this case -- I don't remember Scottie that much, but I've seen enough full Bulls games to realize this. Pierce is a better rebounder than people seem to remember, but Scottie was just better.

I don't buy the whole alpha-beta thing. But I will say that Scottie might have have been a bit too self-conscious of off court things than I would like. Yeah, he was forever (and will forever be, unfortunately) in MJ's shadow, his contract blew serious donkey d*ck, and he never got enough credit, even in the wake of Jordan's retirement(s), but bitching out of that last play was ridiculous. And this wasn't young-Scottie; he should have known better. For what it's worth, Pierce, one of my favorites all time, was a dick earlier in his own career.


I think it's interesting that they're underrated for opposite reasons. Scottie's teams were too successful, and Pierce's were too unsuccessful. You've got Pierce being rated higher in these ESPN pre-season rankings when he's 33-34-35 than 7 years earlier when he was in his prime, dropping 24-27 ppg, and all around better stats.

Just shows you that public perception is A. fickle, B. arbitrary, C. mostly irrelevant (when deciding who actually was a better player). I would say it is relevant in talking about impact on the sport; whether or not you think Kareem or Wilt are better than MJ, the latter has had more impact on the sport, even if most of that was a product of the time-period/perfect storm.

I appreciate your analysis. It's true that Pippen, no matter how good, will always be a sidekick. Pierce was at his best with a lot of other stars like Kobe, VC, McGrady, Iverson, and then after the Celtics won he didn't receive as much attention. It's like he was all ready an aging star at the time.

[Djsonny]

On a 1on1, I would give it to piece since he is a more natural scorer, but pippen can score on his own as well, not as good but still can score. You have to add one of the better defenders during his time. On top of that, Pippens leadership should outweigh piece, given I havent seen either in the locker so thats possible to judge but Pippen is always yelling on the court. If I had to add someone to my team, it would be pippen. We havent seen a player with his style since then, Nicholas Batum is probably the closest but still a ways away.

[kshutts1]

Maybe I'm mistaken, but I struggle to think of anything that Pierce does better than Pippen other than shoot...

[andgar923]

Two different players, different mentalities and more importantly different roles, hard to compare.

But to play along....

Is PP's defense better than Pip's scoring abilities?

And vice versa

Those are their strengths.

No I don't think the bulls win 6 with PP because MJ didn't need a player like PP, he needed a player that can get him the ball and help with defense.

[Smoke117]

Pippen is really underrated as a scorer especially people saying he couldn't create his own shot. It isn't as if the Bulls played at this blazing pace and he was running and gunning. He was one of the better players off the dribble in his athletic prime and he had a good post up game which Pierce has never had. His jumper was also much improved in the mid 90s. The person that said Pippen was not a better play maker is absolutely wrong. Pippen was a natural PG coming into the league who just ended up playing in an offense with no real ball dominant guard. Paul Pierce is not close to the play maker and passer scottie was. Defensively Pierce has always been solid, but Pippen is all time, all world. It's not even close defensively. If you replaced Pierce at his Peak on that 1994 team with the same amount of missed games where the Bulls went 4-6, they absolutely don't win 55 games. Pierce's couple extra points can't fill the void that Scottie filled with his defense and all around game. Those two seasons in 1994 and 1995 are the two best seasons by a perimeter defender ever. The 1994 Bulls were built and won with defense and they were only so good because Scottie was so dominant. A couple extra points from Pierce would do nothing to make that team better.

On the other hand all these Celtic teams pre big three would only improve with Pippen instead of Pierce.

[andgar923]

Pippen is really underrated as a scorer especially people saying he couldn't create his own shot. It isn't as if the Bulls played at this blazing pace and he was running and gunning. He was one of the better players off the dribble in his athletic prime and he had a good post up game which Pierce has never had. His jumper was also much improved in the mid 90s. The person that said Pippen was not a better play maker is absolutely wrong. Pippen was a natural PG coming into the league who just ended up playing in an offense with no real ball dominant guard. Paul Pierce is not close to the play maker and passer scottie was. Defensively Pierce has always been solid, but Pippen is all time, all world. It's not even close defensively. If you replaced Pierce at his Peak on that 1994 team with the same amount of missed games where the Bulls went 4-6, they absolutely don't win 55 games. Pierce's couple extra points can't fill the void that Scottie filled with his defense and all around game. Those two seasons in 1994 and 1995 are the two best seasons by a perimeter defender ever. The 1994 Bulls were built and won with defense and they were only so good because Scottie was so dominant. A couple extra points from Pierce would do nothing to make that team better.

The defensive advantage some say Pip has over PP, PP has scoring wise over Pip.

Offensively PP is much better. You mentioned PP not having a post game as good as Pip's is wrong. PP's post game is noticeably better than Pip's.

I will get heat for this but PP's 1 on 1 D is on par with Pip's. Pip was the better help defender but PP's individual D can be comparable.

[veilside23]

to say that pierce is a miles away as a defender is underrating his defense as well....

Pip maybe a bit better on D but on one the other side of the court .. id bet my money on paul pierce...

also just imagine being stabbed and still played great after that.. i dont know if pip would be the same player or even better.

[Whoah10115]

The defensive advantage some say Pip has over PP, PP has scoring wise over Pip.

Offensively PP is much better. You mentioned PP not having a post game as good as Pip's is wrong. PP's post game is noticeably better than Pip's.

I will get heat for this but PP's 1 on 1 D is on par with Pip's. Pip was the better help defender but PP's individual D can be comparable.

It's just not true tho. Pippen was the better post player. Pierce does have a little post game but Pippen was better.


And Pierce was not on par with Pippen in any kind of way, defensively.


Pierce is one of the great scorers, but Pippen was always a very good scorer. And he was an all-around offensive player. The all-time point forward.

[coolnate202]

I always wondered what paul peirce's career wouldve been like, had he actually conditioned..

[andgar923]

It's just not true tho. Pippen was the better post player. Pierce does have a little post game but Pippen was better.


And Pierce was not on par with Pippen in any kind of way, defensively.


Pierce is one of the great scorers, but Pippen was always a very good scorer. And he was an all-around offensive player. The all-time point forward.

Pip is not a better pos player, he's long and took advantage of smaller players. He had a good semi hook in the post with decent turnaround, but nothing spectacular. Pierce has better footwork, balance, is def stronger, and can do everything Pip could do in the post while being the inferior athlete. Shit I'll even go as far as saying that Pierce is the second best non big post player behind Kobe in today's era.

[Whoah10115]

Pip is not a better pos player, he's long and took advantage of smaller players. He had a good semi hook in the post with decent turnaround, but nothing spectacular. Pierce has better footwork, balance, is def stronger, and can do everything Pip could do in the post while being the inferior athlete. Shit I'll even go as far as saying that Pierce is the second best non big post player behind Kobe in today's era.

Anthony is a better post player than Pierce is.



Pierce really doesn't play in the post with kind of regularity.

[andgar923]

Anthony is a better post player than Pierce is.



Pierce really doesn't play in the post with kind of regularity.

I did forget Anthony. But I feel as tho Anthony pummels his way into the post more than PP. Not that Anthony doesn't have a good post game, I just feel as tho Antony isn't as refined in the post as PP and Kobe in regards to balance and footwork.

But you do have a good point.

[Teanett]

Pierce is a good defender but he is not in the same class as Pippen.
Pippen was All-Defense selection for a decade as well as All-NBA 1st team multiple times.