<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Mr Wolf @ Jul 11 2006, 09:26 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Paul Pierce is a better defender, rebounder and leader. McGrady quit on his team back when he was with the Orlando Magic. Meanwhile, Pierce doesn't quit and he stays with his team through the fire. That really tells you a lot about a man. His teammates have a lot of respect for him and he always plays hard. McGrady has a tendency not to play as hard as he should and he has the injury problems.Pierce is one of the best players in the league at getting to the free throw line. So if you add everything together I'll take Pierce over McGrady. It just seems like it would be easier to build a winning team around Pierce than it would be around McGrady.</div>All of those things are true but you would HAVE to take a healthy T-Mac. I know its hard to say that cnosidering hes not healthy but he is just that good. He is the closest thing to Kobe.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (nba dogmatist @ Jul 11 2006, 10:38 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>LMAO holding dirk to 23 ppg is locking him down? TMac is simply NOT on a different level. Did i ever say Pierce was better than TMac defensively? No, i didn't. I'm not being a homer at all. They are about even, bc it doesn't matter how they CAN play defense sometimes, it matters how they DO play defense, and neither of them are spectacular. So shut it.</div>He shot 40% that series. That is what I meant by locking him down. Also, look at the height difference. TMac is 6"8 or 6"9, Dirk is 7"0 tall and plays Power Forward. It is amazing for TMac to hold him to 40% shooting. That is my point right there. When TMac wants to, he can play defense on a different level then Paul Pierce.This goes to you and your post too, ballerman.
it's not "locking him down: when he still gets 23 ppg. Dirk still got the job done. That's playing pretty good defense, far from lock down defense.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Mr Wolf @ Jul 11 2006, 10:26 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Paul Pierce is a better defender, rebounder and leader. McGrady quit on his team back when he was with the Orlando Magic. Meanwhile, Pierce doesn't quit and he stays with his team through the fire. That really tells you a lot about a man. His teammates have a lot of respect for him and he always plays hard. McGrady has a tendency not to play as hard as he should and he has the injury problems.Pierce is one of the best players in the league at getting to the free throw line. So if you add everything together I'll take Pierce over McGrady. It just seems like it would be easier to build a winning team around Pierce than it would be around McGrady.</div>T-Mac is the better scorer, playmaker, passer, and IMO equal defender. Pierce is better at rebounding. Leadership wise, Pierce hasn't shown me anything. T-Mac meanwhile has put his team on his back MANY times. He did it with those Orlando teams that were average at BEST, he did it with Rockets 2 years ago where he played fantastically in playoffs, and he is probably the most valuable to his team in the NBA. Without Mac the Rockets can't win for sh*t. He is also clearly the more vocal leader on court. He didn't "quit" on the Magic team, but he took off games at the end of the season. 99% of the players in the league would as he had a back injury towards the end of the season, and instead of playing in pain when you're team has only won 18 games, take it off, heal, then start warming up for next year.While Pierce is better at driving to basket, T-Mac is better jumpshooter, so it balances out. If you don't look at T-Mac's injury, I feel the clear-cut favorite is T-Mac. Better defender when his team needs it, better scorer, just as good in clutch moments (13 in 35, GW in playoffs, shot against Lakers, block on JRich, GW vs Chicago, 30 in 2nd half against NJ when team was down, and all that is in past 2 years). It may seem like it is easier to build a team around Pierce, but the 2x he got past 1st round, he had a very good supporting cast and shared much of the spotlight with Antwan Walker. Outside of those 2 years, he hasn't shown much in playoffs, hasn't led his team anywhere, and hasn't really made teammates better. I just feel T-Mac is a better overall player, especially on offensive side.NBAdogmatist- He had 21.3PPG against Houston, not 23PPG. T-Mac had 31PPG and 7APG that series.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (nba dogmatist @ Jul 12 2006, 01:03 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>it's not "locking him down: when he still gets 23 ppg. Dirk still got the job done. That's playing pretty good defense, far from lock down defense.</div>Holding a Power Forward in this League to 40% shooting is great defense. If Dirk still scored 23 ppg, that just means that he was desperate, and shot more..Tmac "still got the job done", right?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (CB4AllStar @ Jul 11 2006, 08:44 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>He shot 40% that series. That is what I meant by locking him down. Also, look at the height difference. TMac is 6"8 or 6"9, Dirk is 7"0 tall and plays Power Forward. It is amazing for TMac to hold him to 40% shooting. That is my point right there. When TMac wants to, he can play defense on a different level then Paul Pierce.This goes to you and your post too, ballerman.</div>40% would be great if Dirk played like a power foward. With the amount of outside shots he takes thats nowhere close to "amazing". And this "different level" thing you keep talking about does it have to do with like rehab or something, not sure what your talking about :g: :shifty2:
pierce is all class, his style is flawless.. i think individually tmac, but if i was building a franchise i would give to pierce as he is just way more reliable. i mean there is only so much influence tmac can give from his suit on the benchpierce is so clutch, my best memory of him is from a few years back in the playoffs against indy, he took artest off the dribble, and kept toying with him, shaking his arms like a baby to mock him, he then span and drained a huge jumper over artest... i know mcgrady hit like 10 3s in 20seconds or summnm but so what!!! hes a better outside shooter i think mcgrady had his two chances for greatness, 2001 playoffs were baron killed him, and 2005 when the mavs killed him, pierce just hasnt had that chance, if celts had finished better in some of there seasons pierce would have an mvp trophy by nowlocking down a teams star player is when your team wins the series. locking down implies both a physical and mental break down of the player... dont think dirk was too phazed
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (DRob-50-Forever @ Jul 12 2006, 06:51 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>40% would be great if Dirk played like a power foward. With the amount of outside shots he takes thats nowhere close to "amazing". And this "different level" thing you keep talking about does it have to do with like rehab or something, not sure what your talking about :g: :shifty2:</div>Dirk's fg% was .460 that year..
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (CB4AllStar @ Jul 12 2006, 04:49 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Dirk's fg% was .460 that year..</div>Oh wow! 6% :yahoo:
The point is, that's not locking him down, and Dirk still got the job done. That was a poor example of how TMac is supposedly on a different level than Pierce defensively.
WTF are you talking about. Stop ignoring the facts. TMac made Dirk shoot alot more in order for him to get his 23 ppg. He made his fg% slip by .060 which is a ton, in the playoffs. I dont think Paul Pierce could have done that on a 7 footer. That is my point. Stop being a dumbass on purpose and understand what I am saying here. Thats how TMac locked him down. He made him shoot more shots then usual, on a lowe ppg average, and on a MUCH, MUCH, MUCH lower fg%.I bolded the word much so you would stop ignoring it..
Wow, you guys can't admit it. T-Mac played great defensively. Holding a player to 6PPG below his average and 6% lower than his normal FG % is DAMN good. if you watched the series you would have seen just how much of a non-factor he was. Like in the SA series this year, Jason Terry is what won the series, not Dirk's terrible play.
Thankyou Nitro. Maybe they wont be as ignorant towards what I was saying to you, as they were for me. Guys, I already explained this over and over again, but still DRob and NBA Dogmatist just didnt get it..
Let me try to explain this to you. Say TMac guarded Dirk every game this season. And because TMac is such a great defender he held Dirk 6% below is FG%, Dirk would have scored 23ppg this season. Is that great? I guess if the Mave only won all their games by 3 points, but the fact is that is not the case. If you need help figuring out the math PM me.
Yes but the 23 ppg would be much more inefficient then 25 ppg on 46% shooting. Hold a guy .06 below his average is very good defense too. It doesnt matter if he scored 23 points. That just means that he shot alot more, and tried to force shots.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (DRob-50-Forever @ Jul 12 2006, 03:37 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Let me try to explain this to you. Say TMac guarded Dirk every game this season. And because TMac is such a great defender he held Dirk 6% below is FG%, Dirk would have scored 23ppg this season. Is that great? I guess if the Mave only won all their games by 3 points, but the fact is that is not the case. If you need help figuring out the math PM me.</div>First of all, T-Mac held him to 21PPG, not 23PPG. And you can't bring the Mavs as a team into it, as T-Mac can't guard the whole team. But yes, a swingman holding a superstar 7ft PF to 21PPG on 40% shooting is DAMN good. And as I said, he took Dirk out of the games. Dirk had a VERY quiet 21PPG that series. He wasn't nearly an emotional or physical factor that he was in the SA or Miami series' this year.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (CB4AllStar @ Jul 12 2006, 12:42 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Yes but the 23 ppg would be much more inefficient then 25 ppg on 46% shooting. Hold a guy .06 below his average is very good defense too. It doesnt matter if he scored 23 points. That just means that he shot alot more, and tried to force shots.</div>No it doesn't buddy, like I said if you need help with the math pm. It just means that he missed 6% more of the shots he took.
Dude, are you stupid or something. You honestly dont realize how 23 ppg on 40% shooting is less efficient then 25 ppg on 46% shooting? If you dont, im not even going to bother anymore..
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (CB4AllStar @ Jul 12 2006, 12:51 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Dude, are you stupid or something. You honestly dont realize how 23 ppg on 40% shooting is less efficient then 25 ppg on 46% shooting? If you dont, im not even going to bother anymore..</div>I realize that, you said he would have to take more shots to get 23ppg, and he wouldn't thats what he would have scored this season(taking the exact same amount of shots) if TMac guarded him everygame according to your theory.
