<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Nitro1118 @ Mar 25 2006, 06:15 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>He isn't injured so much, just this year! Last year he played over 75 games!I like your comparison a whole lot, though. I don't know why people underrate T-Mac so much in clutch. In every playoff series he has been in he has played amazingly, and his team has let him down. And where the hell did this rumor come from that in his 62 point game his team lost?</div>Probably from TMac hating Kobe Bryant loving biatches
"He isn't injured so much, just this year! Last year he played over 75 games!"Lolz, Nitro, that's the problem.
Paul pierce is much more clutch than tmac. Hitting 1 shot in the last 3 seconds and hitting you're shots in the 4th quarter, the latter is better. So in that department it's Paul pierce. Tmac is semi-clutch because he hasn't proven himself [last year in the dallas round he just disappeared in the 4th quarter ot the losses]. However he also hit a gamewinner in game 2 and 13 in 35.See with kobe people knock off his achievements because of shaq, but pierce didn't have a shaq. He was the first option of an ecf team.
Read my posts. Holding a Franchise playoff scoring record, playing the best defense of your career in the palyoffs, going for 13 in 35 isn't clutch? TMac averages 30/7/6 in the Playoffs, and if that's not clutch, what is?
Tmac in game 31-5 in the 4th quarterTmac is game 41-5 in the 4th [including a critical turnover with the game in the balance]Tmac game 5 2-5 in the 4th misses 2 freethrows get the offensive rebounds and missesI know he was clutch in game 2 and other games but he choked in those 3 games. All 3 were losses. I am not saying he was totally at fault for the loss but him being the leader should've done better when needed.The fact is that Tracy has never been out of the first round and Pierce has. As the leader of the team might i add.
So the Magic's scoring record for a Playoff game, best defense of his career in the playoffs to go along with 30+ PPG, and a 30/7/6 average in the playoffs is not clutch?And name the great Pierce accomplishments in comparison to TMac?
I'm not saying his not clutch. But he's also choked in the playoffs just as i have picked up.What has pierce done? He's been out of the first round, been a leader of an ecf team. Is averaging 26-8-5 in the playoffs. Tmac has the stats part down, not the success.
TMac s the better shooter. Maybe not this year, because he has been injured but when he was healthy last year he posted a good fg% when most of his shots were on jumpers. idk about defense, Pierce looks great sometimes but other times he gets kind of sloppy.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Waqas @ Mar 25 2006, 07:30 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>"He isn't injured so much, just this year! Last year he played over 75 games!"Lolz, Nitro, that's the problem.</div>Grrr. Amare has been down all this year, and misse dmany games 2 years ago. Does that makes him a worse player than jermaine O'Neal? Answer is no.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Clutch_Melo_061 @ Mar 25 2006, 08:59 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I'm not saying his not clutch. But he's also choked in the playoffs just as i have picked up.What has pierce done? He's been out of the first round, been a leader of an ecf team. Is averaging 26-8-5 in the playoffs. Tmac has the stats part down, not the success.</div>Saying TMac has never had success while comparing him to Paul Pierce really isn't a great argument. Pierce has been to the Eastern Conference Finals once, and the Semis twice. While that is more success than TMac, it's not enough to justify a "Major Success Advantage"
Remember guys, Paul Pierce had Antoine Walker and a good team with Celtics. T-Mac had a crap team with orlando, and mananged to push Pistons to 7 games. Last year he was unlucky as he won over 50 wins, but had to play Dallas first round. If they landed 6th seed, they woulda played Sonics, and won. Nontheless, T-Mac played superior ball in the series, won game 1 and 2 almsot single handedly, and pushed Mavs to 7 games.
Exactly. My definition of clutch is playing your best, or better than everyone else when you need to. He did it throughout that series, except for maybe 3 out of 6 meaningful 4th quarters. And, in terms of clutchness, TMac actually has a higher completion rate on last second plays than Paul Pierce over the past 3 years (Playoffs included)So TMac has better playoff stats, and has higher late game completion percentages over the past 3 years. (24 seconds left, down 1 or 2)
Getting to the ecf and the semis twice is more succesful than a 1st round exit. Thefore pierce has the advantage in that.What i'm saying is that Pierce does have things on tmac, never have i said pierce is better than tmac.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BCB @ Mar 24 2006, 11:18 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Tracy McGrady can be a lazy son of a <Censored> but what he did in Orlando doesn't get enough attention. I watched him in a handfull of games and he was unstoppable. Not to many 6'10" guys have his skills.</div>This is one I've always wanted to discuss. How is TMac lazy?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Clutch_Melo_061 @ Mar 25 2006, 11:52 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Getting to the ecf and the semis twice is more succesful than a 1st round exit. Thefore pierce has the advantage in that.What i'm saying is that Pierce does have things on tmac, never have i said pierce is better than tmac.</div>T-Mac also has 2 scoring titles, led a team to 50 win season, been voted to more starting all star lineups, was one dunk away from pushing VC to limit in dunk contest (he missed his last dunk attempt), has had a 62 point game, etc...
1- One of the scoring titles had no use seeing as how they won 21 games2- Dunk contests have no value3- 62 points was niceThe perfect players is one who can put stats and winning together. Can you say that about tmac? no.Pierce? possiblly [winning is not always winning championships, it can mean getting you're team far into the playoffs].\Tmac is the better basketball player, more skillful, better shooter and so on. However other stuff have to be taken into count.
Pierce played with Walker and a good Celtics team. Hell, you could even call him 2nd option to Walker in some cases. He sort of has Kobe syndrome. T-Mac only had a good team last year, winning over 50 games. If it wasn't for a really bad playoff seed, he would have easily advanced to 2nd round.Pierce has only gotten past 1st round twice, both with far better teams than T-Mac's Magic. I would hardly give him such a huge edge in terms of winning, and that edge barely effects this arguement at all.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Nitro1118 @ Mar 25 2006, 05:15 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>He isn't injured so much, just this year! Last year he played over 75 games!I like your comparison a whole lot, though. I don't know why people underrate T-Mac so much in clutch. In every playoff series he has been in he has played amazingly, and his team has let him down. And where the hell did this rumor come from that in his 62 point game his team lost?</div>you're acting like playing 75+ games is a feat. It's what players are expected to do. Plus, we're not talking about last year. He has a back problem THIS year. He is not very dependable.<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Nitro1118 @ Mar 26 2006, 12:54 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Pierce played with Walker and a good Celtics team. Hell, you could even call him 2nd option to Walker in some cases. He sort of has Kobe syndrome. T-Mac only had a good team last year, winning over 50 games. If it wasn't for a really bad playoff seed, he would have easily advanced to 2nd round.Pierce has only gotten past 1st round twice, both with far better teams than T-Mac's Magic. I would hardly give him such a huge edge in terms of winning, and that edge barely effects this arguement at all.</div>That post is complete <Censored>. Pierce was 10x better on an off night than Walker was in his prime. His team was not very good at all. He had Antoine, Tony Battie, Eric Williams. So that's one other legit scorer, a few good defenders, and the rest were garbage. He took them to the ECF. Far Better teams? God, when will people stop making that excuse. Pierce and Walker were that team. T-Mac still had Mike Miller and Drew Gooden. The teams were not that far apart.How does the player's ability to win barely effect this argument?? That's what defines a player's career!!
Look at it this way:You're never going to be remember as the NBA's greatest if you don't win. Kareem and Michael are there because they WON. Not just games, but playoff series, MVP's, and much, much more!!So look at today. Paul Pierce and T-Mac. Which one will be remembered more ? None of them have gotten TOO far into the playoffs, but T-Mac's explosiveness is just naturally unforgettable.
That's the thing: Paul Pierce and TMac both haven't won jackshit, so you can't compare that facet of their game. It's like when you compare Nick Van Axel to Steve Nash and say Nick is better because he plays better defese. None of them really play defense, so it's not a valid argument.Saying Paul Pierce is a better winner than TMac may be true, but getting a team to the ECF once and the Semis twice is still nothing to brag abour on an argument. If Pierce got his team to the Finals or won a Championship, thet'd be different, but he's never gone that far either, so you can't use that comparison.For example, Dominique Wilkins got to the Semis, ECF numerous times in his career, but never got any furhter. Therefore, people simply don't remember him as a winner. They don't remember him as a player who only got to the conference Finals, they simply remember him as a loser. That's how Pierce and TMac will be judged until they can get into a Finals series, or push their team to incredible regular season success
