Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





View Poll Results: Who was a better Celt, Bird or Pierce?

Voters
7. You may not vote on this poll
  • Larry Bird

    7 100.00%
  • Paul Pierce

    0 0%
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 23
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    43,888

    Who is better, Larry Bird or Paul Pierce?

    Who was better while on the Celts?
    I am not a con artist! I am a businessman! I have a big brain and I'm good at making deals! People are just jealous of my BIG BRAIN! BAD!

    Guess who? The future X-Presdent...

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    43,888
    This has been a hot topic around here a few times. Today Lobel was spewing. Usually it's asked as "who was a better scorer, or better offensive player". Well Lobel went right to the PP is better than Bird argument, which I refuse on almost every level.

    Red was asked near the end of Bird's career - who was better, Russell or Bird? Red refused to answer. So Red thinks Bird and Russell rule at the top of the C's mountain.

    Some favor Pierce, and will quote his total points scored, games played. and his volume scoring.

    Offense:

    Bird is the best passing non guard in NBA history. PP? Above average.

    Bird was a more efficient scorer. Better at 2's, better at FT's, and given Bird had to face a longer distance for 3's for a period of years, he's a better 3 shooter.

    Bird was a better offensive rebounder than PP.

    Bird could drive, and shoot and pass off his drive. Pierce could not pass off his drive that well.

    Also Pierce is the all time worst "star" player to hold the ball the last 10 seconds of a quarter. Awful. Incompetent even.

    Defense:

    Bird wasn't a great defender, but worked at it. Pierce didn't know what D was until KG and Coach T showed up at about year 10 of Pierce's career.

    Bird was an excellent defensive rebounder - esp as a SF, and an above average defensive rebounder as a PF. PP was above average as a SF.

    Bird was a tough trash talking hick from French Lick. PP mostly whined about fouls.

    Awards:

    Bird (5.612) is 4th all time in career MVP Award Shares trailing only: Jordan, James, Jabbar.

    Pierece 142nd with .040, below guys like Fat Lever and Jeff Ruland.

    Pierce's MVP Share is .00712 of Birds's - that "seven thousands" out of 1000. Or Pierce would have to play over 2100 MORE years with the same MVP ratings to overtake what Brd did in 12 years.

    Bird also crushes PP in All-NBA, All Defense, Win Shares and anything else you want to trot out.

    It's true that on paper in Bird first title year that Maxwell was probably had a higher impact, but in '84 and '86 it was clear Bird was THE man, on a team with with 3 and 4 other HOF'ers.

    PP has but one ring. He was unquestionably having his best year, and yet, he was 2nd banana to a greater player - KG.

    Maybe people that didn't see Bird can't really imagine what he was like, or maybe others forgot. Never once in all the time I watched PP did I ever think I was watching a player better than Larry Bird.

    No comparison Bird >> Pierce
    Last edited by bagwell368; 02-11-2018 at 11:09 PM.
    I am not a con artist! I am a businessman! I have a big brain and I'm good at making deals! People are just jealous of my BIG BRAIN! BAD!

    Guess who? The future X-Presdent...

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    7,325
    When Parrish made that comment I was pretty surprised. Forget that they were teammates. You didnít need to be on the same team to see how awesome Larry was. Different eraís made different players. Pierce was the guy who had to shoot early on. It wasnít till the end of his career that his all around ability IMO really showed. IMO he wasnít a one trick pony. But having KG and Ray Ray helped a tad. No doubt Larry had great teammates, but he also made them all better. Larry was the thoroughbred...

    I think The Chief was giving respect at a time when Pierce had the spotlight on him. A Celtic giving due to another Celtic...

    Iím sure in his head he was saying Larry was the best scorer in a Celtic uniform, but he had to play nice...

    Hands down Larry was the better Celtic, and in my middle aged opinion the best to wear a Celtics uniform. Nothing against Pierce. He helped put up a much needed banner. But the way Iím sure many see it is Paul Pierce is (not fair to originally say may be) The Truth, but Larry Bird is the Legend...
    Last edited by Forever35; 02-12-2018 at 10:58 AM.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    WOOSTA
    Posts
    4,457
    Paul Pierce was my favorite Celtic to watch!

    But Bird is the best.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    7,325
    I re-watched Pierce's media session... IMO, the C's were so lucky to have him fall to #10... Nobody else you could take at #10 in that draft...

    When Pierce said that due to the CBA and the new NBA landscape regarding FA that it may be a long time until another Celtic has their jersey retired...

    What I took out of that was Red was around for all the careers of past Celtic players who had their numbers retired (obviously not the ceremonies), so Pierce will be the last player that Red was a part of...

    Awesome to be a Celtics fan...

    http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-qPdd1Xs3WM...50c19b970c.jpg
    "I've never been scared of contact. Now I get to bring it, that's what I love to do, so I'm going to bring it."

    Reggie Lewis



    GET OFF YOUR HEELS BILL !!!

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Worcester, MA
    Posts
    540
    Itís not even a comparison, Bird is way better. I wasnít alive when he played but Iíve gone back and watched many of his games. His sheer efficiency and passing easily put him on a different level than Pierce. Bird made everyone around him better.

    Great night for Paul and itís nice that they pumped his tires a bit. One thing you canít deny is that the guy loved playing in Boston. He deserved the recognition even though heís a bit overrated.
    Last edited by BostonBoy; 02-12-2018 at 01:53 PM.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Rhode Island
    Posts
    32,490
    Pierce is a 1st ballot HOFer and "one of the greatest to ever play the game". That's a broad term but it fits for Pierce even if he ain't a top 10 all time player like Bird. I don't see the need for comparisons. Just appreciate that we had him. Sure, some younger fans might not be fully aware that guys like Bird were better back in the day but whatever. He was the star that a generation of Celtics fans grew up with so there's an emotional attachment to him over guys that came before our time.


    NE Patriots Forum HOF (Class of 2011)

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    7,325
    Quote Originally Posted by hugepatsfan View Post
    Pierce is a 1st ballot HOFer and "one of the greatest to ever play the game". That's a broad term but it fits for Pierce even if he ain't a top 10 all time player like Bird. I don't see the need for comparisons. Just appreciate that we had him. Sure, some younger fans might not be fully aware that guys like Bird were better back in the day but whatever. He was the star that a generation of Celtics fans grew up with so there's an emotional attachment to him over guys that came before our time.
    These are always tough threads, but I think the Chief's opinion is a fair reason to get some fresh ideas since the deadline' over and the ASB is coming up...

    I agree with your post also...
    "I've never been scared of contact. Now I get to bring it, that's what I love to do, so I'm going to bring it."

    Reggie Lewis



    GET OFF YOUR HEELS BILL !!!

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    4,267
    Bird was far more accomplished than Pierce and the better all around player. But one thing I don't think Pierce gets enough credit for is the harder road he had.

    Pierces first 10 years was a tough time for the Celtics. He was drafted on a team lacking talent, direction and coaching. He still shined through it all. Many will knock his defense and other areas while he was young, but honestly, he wasn't asked to do much other than score. The team was terrible and they needed a go to guy. Pierce filled that role and then expanded his game afterwards.

    Bird on the other team was drafted by a team that yes, had a bad record, but also had talent and a new direction. Archibald, Maxwell, Cowens, Ford, Carr, Robey were all on the roster when Bird arrived. Those 6 players were in the top 7 in scoring Birds first season (behind Bird) and they made the playoffs Birds rookie season.

    Pierce on the other hand was drafted by a team that had just traded Chauncey Billups the season prior. Had no direction and were following the lead of Antoine Walker. Past that they had Kenny Anderson and Ron Mercer. Not a whole lot else. He dealt with a fluid roster of the next 10 years and he was the only pillar that lasted.

    Bird had a much easier road, more talent around him and in the end was more successful. He was the better all around player and was absolutely great.

    As great as Bird was though, I'd say Pierce made more of his career on his own, than Bird did. Pierce truly earned everything he did. It's interesting too because that was literally his style of play.

    City of Champions

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    43,888
    Quote Originally Posted by hugepatsfan View Post
    Pierce is a 1st ballot HOFer and "one of the greatest to ever play the game". That's a broad term but it fits for Pierce even if he ain't a top 10 all time player like Bird. I don't see the need for comparisons. Just appreciate that we had him. Sure, some younger fans might not be fully aware that guys like Bird were better back in the day but whatever. He was the star that a generation of Celtics fans grew up with so there's an emotional attachment to him over guys that came before our time.
    No need if Lobel, Parish, and Bob Ryan didn't spew garbage.

    I attached to Pierce more than Walker who made me ill, but KG is the straw that stirred that great but short lived dynasty, so PP gets in for longevity, but he's a lunch pail guy eating it in Chelsea and Bird was a 14 course gourmet meal in Bologna, Italy.
    Last edited by bagwell368; 02-12-2018 at 08:11 PM.
    I am not a con artist! I am a businessman! I have a big brain and I'm good at making deals! People are just jealous of my BIG BRAIN! BAD!

    Guess who? The future X-Presdent...

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    43,888
    Quote Originally Posted by Oakmont_4 View Post
    Bird was far more accomplished than Pierce and the better all around player. But one thing I don't think Pierce gets enough credit for is the harder road he had.

    Pierces first 10 years was a tough time for the Celtics. He was drafted on a team lacking talent, direction and coaching. He still shined through it all. Many will knock his defense and other areas while he was young, but honestly, he wasn't asked to do much other than score. The team was terrible and they needed a go to guy. Pierce filled that role and then expanded his game afterwards.

    Bird on the other team was drafted by a team that yes, had a bad record, but also had talent and a new direction. Archibald, Maxwell, Cowens, Ford, Carr, Robey were all on the roster when Bird arrived. Those 6 players were in the top 7 in scoring Birds first season (behind Bird) and they made the playoffs Birds rookie season.
    Cowens was a shadow of himself, retiring shortly. Archibald was also in his decline phase. Ford was one of the worst starters ever on a Championship team. Carr was a bench guy. Robey was limited talent wise and somehow Red was able to squeeze DJ in a deal for him.

    Pierce on the other hand was drafted by a team that had just traded Chauncey Billups the season prior. Had no direction and were following the lead of Antoine Walker. Past that they had Kenny Anderson and Ron Mercer. Not a whole lot else. He dealt with a fluid roster of the next 10 years and he was the only pillar that lasted.
    But he didn't lead the way forward away from that. He threatened to leave, and DA brought in KG, Ray Allen, Coach T, a stunning assortment of very functional bench pieces - all in one huge sweep. Coach T and KG led the way to a ring. Never an MVP, a paltry total of MVP shares as I pointed out. No 1st team awards, no defense awards. No % top 10's in a any type of shot, but lots of high scores for FGA's - even when he was surrounded by talent from 2007-2010.

    As great as Bird was though, I'd say Pierce made more of his career on his own, than Bird did. Pierce truly earned everything he did. It's interesting too because that was literally his style of play.
    Bird had 10 years of health carve out his career, Pierce 15.

    Bird couldn't even make Bobby Knights team. Nobody worked harder and burned to win more than Bird. Just because his talent was so obviously more elite than Pierce he shouldn't be painted as some guy the hit the jackpot as much for his teammates as what he brought.

    In 1978-1979 the C's went 29-53 - 2nd worst in the NBA.

    They shed quite a few old/crap players, added Gerald Henderson (1.7 WS), and Eric Fernsten (1.2 WS), ML Carr (5.2 WS 6th in min), and Bird (11.2 WS, 1st in minutes)

    They go 61-21 - the best record in the league. No Parish, McHale, DJ...

    The year before Pierce - C's win 36 with a pretty scattershot roster. Pierce comes plays 48 games with 4.8 WS (leading the team) and with another crummy roster wins 19.

    +32 vs -17 That's what I call style...

    Pierce is 22nd for total WS, but only 78th in WS48. Longevity over quality. 1343 career games.

    Bird 27th WS, 22nd in WS48, quality over quantity. Awesome for 897 games. Bird played 68.8% as many games as Pierce.
    Last edited by bagwell368; 02-12-2018 at 09:11 PM.
    I am not a con artist! I am a businessman! I have a big brain and I'm good at making deals! People are just jealous of my BIG BRAIN! BAD!

    Guess who? The future X-Presdent...

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    4,267
    Cowens was a shadow of himself, retiring shortly. Archibald was also in his decline phase. Ford was one of the worst starters ever on a Championship team. Carr was a bench guy. Robey was limited talent wise and somehow Red was able to squeeze DJ in a deal for him.
    Archibald was never in his prime in BOS. But was still a very solid player from 78-83.
    Carr was never a great player but a solid 6th man from 79-82
    Robey - nothing special but his best years were from 78-81
    Ford - yeah, not great starter, but solid bench guy/vet

    By Birds second year the C's added Parish and McHale
    Year 3 add in Ainge
    (they still had Carr, Archibald, Ford)

    Conversely by year 2, after Anderson and Walker - Pierce was playing with the likes of Adrian Griffin, Potepenko, Eric Williams, Chaney, Battie, Barros

    By year 3 they added Bryant Stith and Randy Brown.

    There's really no comparison on who had the better team to start out with.


    But he didn't lead the way forward away from that. He threatened to leave, and DA brought in KG, Ray Allen, Coach T, a stunning assortment of very functional bench pieces - all in one huge sweep. Coach T and KG led the way to a ring. Never an MVP, a paltry total of MVP shares as I pointed out. No 1st team awards, no defense awards. No % top 10's in a any type of shot, but lots of high scores for FGA's - even when he was surrounded by talent from 2007-2010.
    He threatened to leave after years of front office turmoil and lack of direction. There was no signs BOS was committed to winning at that time. Can hardly blame the guy for wanting out unless something was done. The thing is, Bird didn't have to ask for Parish, McHale, Ainge, Etc...They were obtained in Birds 2-3rd year. Pierce had to wait 9 years before he got real talent around him.

    How many NBA MVP's played on bad teams?

    Bird had 10 years of health carve out his career, Pierce 15.
    Yup not denying it. As I stated from the beginning, Bird was the better player.

    Bird couldn't even make Bobby Knights team. Nobody worked harder and burned to win more than Bird. Just because his talent was so obviously more elite than Pierce he shouldn't be painted as some guy the hit the jackpot as much for his teammates as what he brought.
    Not talking about work ethic here. Talking about the harder road in the NBA. Bird had talent put around him early on and it was maintained. Pierce was forced to lead a rag tag team of rejects to the playoffs multiple years early in his career ... Then another talent dry spell...After 9 years he finally got a legit cast of players around him.
    In 1978-1979 the C's went 29-53 - 2nd worst in the NBA.
    They were also 3 years removed from the semi finals and 4 from an NBA championship.

    When Pierce arrived, the C's hadn't made the playoffs in 4 years, hadn't won a playoff game in 7 and hadn't been to an NBA championship game in 12.

    They shed quite a few old/crap players, added Gerald Henderson (1.7 WS), and Eric Fernsten (1.2 WS), ML Carr (5.2 WS 6th in min), and Bird (11.2 WS, 1st in minutes)
    Oh so now Carr is something to talk about when it fits your narrative?

    Probably didn't help that Mcadoo only played 20 games, JoJo 47, Knight 40, Robey 36.

    They were an old team that needed to be broken up....But for the most part the team remained the same, subtract McAdoo, JoJo, Knight - Enter Bird, Henderson, Fernsten, Carr. That's a legit roster upgrade in one season compared to what Pierce got.

    Year before Pierce arrived the Celtics were terrible no doubt. That team was led by Walker, Mercer, McCarty, Billups, Anderson, Bowen, Baros.

    Their roster upgrades when Pierce was drafted? Billups never made it to year 2. They add Potapenko and Tony Battie....

    Potapenko and Battie are hardly Carr, Henderson, Fernsten


    Pierce is 22nd for total WS, but only 78th in WS48. Longevity over quality. 1343 career games.

    Bird 27th WS, 22nd in WS48, quality over quantity. Awesome for 897 games. Bird played 68.8% as many games as Pierce
    Again, not arguing Pierce was a better player. Already stated this.

    City of Champions

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    43,888
    Quote Originally Posted by Oakmont_4 View Post

    They were also 3 years removed from the semi finals and 4 from an NBA championship.
    How many players were left over? One. Cowens in his last year as a Celt, one of his lesser years at that. Different coaching staff too. Outside of Red and Cowens all different. Winning culture lost poor 2nd worst record in NBA year before Bird.

    When Pierce arrived, the C's hadn't made the playoffs in 4 years, hadn't won a playoff game in 7 and hadn't been to an NBA championship game in 12.
    Bird's Celts lost 9 MORE games the year before he came, then Pierce's Celts the year before his. 36 > 27.

    Oh so now Carr is something to talk about when it fits your narrative?
    What? He had the most WS and minutes played of any of the new guys that came in outside of Bird, to not list that would be a lie.

    Probably didn't help that Mcadoo only played 20 games, JoJo 47, Knight 40, Robey 36.
    The first 3 all have much greater reputations than the player they were that year.

    JoJo White was done, having a negative WS48 in his last season with Boston.

    McAdoo was a stiff at that point.

    Knight had one of his two worst seasons of his career.

    They were an old team that needed to be broken up....But for the most part the team remained the same, subtract McAdoo, JoJo, Knight
    Jeff Judkins 3rd highest WAR48 - 1521 minutes played, that was a big loss.

    Marvin Barnes, Don Chaney, Curtis Rowe - also played, at times not real well. They had bodies and they won 27 games.

    - Enter Bird, Henderson, Fernsten, Carr. That's a legit roster upgrade in one season compared to what Pierce got.
    Henderson was a rookie w/ limited impact as I already noted. Fernsten is in the same bucket. Carr as I noted was the 6th man with good value. That's about a 5th of what Pierce got in '07-'08

    As for Pierce's rookie year, the team lost a few guys from the year before and didn't add anyone useful but PP, but, he didn't bring the group forward in any notable way even if you consider the guys they lost from the year before.

    Year before Pierce arrived the Celtics were terrible no doubt. That team was led by Walker, Mercer, McCarty, Billups, Anderson, Bowen, Baros.

    Their roster upgrades when Pierce was drafted? Billups never made it to year 2. They add Potapenko and Tony Battie....

    Potapenko and Battie are hardly Carr, Henderson, Fernsten
    Right, as I said, but going from 36 to 19 wins is a big blemish on Pierce as a rookie compared to Bird having about 7-8 WS added by his new teammates and jumping from 27 to 61 wins.

    Even if PP lost 10 WS from the guys that left to what he had as a rookie, that's 26 wins, not 19.

    Bird won titles in '81 and '84 with weaker teams than what PP had in his one year. '86 and '08 are excellent matches for each other. Bird was better than Pierce with the best teams they played for. In addition McHale considered a top 35 all time player had a great year, he was no match for Bird. However Pierce was bettered by a player held to be top 25 all time, having a year nowhere near his peak.

    I can't think of an important way that Pierce was better than Bird - except games played and points scored in the paint.

    Haven't gotten into the playoffs but Bird was better than PP too.
    I am not a con artist! I am a businessman! I have a big brain and I'm good at making deals! People are just jealous of my BIG BRAIN! BAD!

    Guess who? The future X-Presdent...

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    4,267
    Quote Originally Posted by bagwell368 View Post
    How many players were left over? One. Cowens in his last year as a Celt, one of his lesser years at that. Different coaching staff too. Outside of Red and Cowens all different. Winning culture lost poor 2nd worst record in NBA year before Bird.



    Bird's Celts lost 9 MORE games the year before he came, then Pierce's Celts the year before his. 36 > 27.



    What? He had the most WS and minutes played of any of the new guys that came in outside of Bird, to not list that would be a lie.



    The first 3 all have much greater reputations than the player they were that year.

    JoJo White was done, having a negative WS48 in his last season with Boston.

    McAdoo was a stiff at that point.

    Knight had one of his two worst seasons of his career.



    Jeff Judkins 3rd highest WAR48 - 1521 minutes played, that was a big loss.

    Marvin Barnes, Don Chaney, Curtis Rowe - also played, at times not real well. They had bodies and they won 27 games.



    Henderson was a rookie w/ limited impact as I already noted. Fernsten is in the same bucket. Carr as I noted was the 6th man with good value. That's about a 5th of what Pierce got in '07-'08

    As for Pierce's rookie year, the team lost a few guys from the year before and didn't add anyone useful but PP, but, he didn't bring the group forward in any notable way even if you consider the guys they lost from the year before.



    Right, as I said, but going from 36 to 19 wins is a big blemish on Pierce as a rookie compared to Bird having about 7-8 WS added by his new teammates and jumping from 27 to 61 wins.

    Even if PP lost 10 WS from the guys that left to what he had as a rookie, that's 26 wins, not 19.

    Bird won titles in '81 and '84 with weaker teams than what PP had in his one year. '86 and '08 are excellent matches for each other. Bird was better than Pierce with the best teams they played for. In addition McHale considered a top 35 all time player had a great year, he was no match for Bird. However Pierce was bettered by a player held to be top 25 all time, having a year nowhere near his peak.

    I can't think of an important way that Pierce was better than Bird - except games played and points scored in the paint.

    Haven't gotten into the playoffs but Bird was better than PP too
    .
    You seem to think I'm arguing Pierce was better than Bird. I'm not. I've said as much multiple times. I'm arguing Pierce played on worse teams than Bird...Not only in the beginning of their respective careers but throughout (minus the 07-08 team)...I don't even see how this is debatable...

    City of Champions

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    WOOSTA
    Posts
    4,457
    All these new thread so Iíll just ask here....Does KG number get retired?
    Last edited by CELTICS4LYFE; 02-13-2018 at 09:49 PM.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •