while i agree that pierce cannot be the number one guy on a champiionship type team i dont think the answer is nessecarily to get rid of pierce and is certainly not to trade him for tmac. how many victories did tmac lead his team to last year? he had ust as much to work with as pierce
While P.Pierce does get annoying at times, I still think he should stay. He wasn't as effective last year as he has been in the past. That is because he was being coached poorly. I believe Doc Rivers has the coaching brains to use Paul to his full potential. So many times, I would sit in front of the TV or at the game frustrated because Pierce always seemed to be attempting to take his man 1 on 1. I think Rivers will bring a much better Offense to the table. I think he has the sense to use Pierce to set picks and get other good shooters open shots. Pierce will be getting the ball off screens, double screens, triple screens, and from the post. Doc is big on ball movement, which is great because I'm sick of the C's running an Iso for Pierce 90% of the time. Pierce might not be a great vocal leader, like Toine was, but he still can lead by example. Plus, with Rivers as coach, this young team now has someone to look up to besides the team captain. Bottom Line, Pierce has had some extraordinary games in the past and built himself a reputation. A ball movement oriented offense NEEDS a player with a reputation such as his to be successful. He draws double teams and defenders will very rarely leave him on a pick. This makes it easier for other guys to get open shots, and puts less of a scoring burden on Pierce.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting 44calibathrila:</div><div class="quote_post">While P.Pierce does get annoying at times, I still think he should stay. He wasn't as effective last year as he has been in the past. That is because he was being coached poorly.</div> I think the reason he may have fallen off from last year is because the C's didn't have a legit second leader (Antoine Walker) to take the scoring load off of him. Defenses are able to be more effective against him because they know the ball is going through him on almost every possession. Mind you I don't watch many Celtics games so this is purely hypothetical but it is does make sense. As for trading away Paul Pierce I still don't know about that. He brings a lot to the table in terms of defence and offense. You can't really replace what he has done for the Celtics with a few draft picks but to make any sense of Ainges philosophy of building through the draft it would only make sense. He isn't getting any younger and his value is very high at this point
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting CourtVision:</div><div class="quote_post"> Defenses are able to be more effective against him because they know the ball is going through him on almost every possession. </div> Exactly, but to go even further than that, not only did they know that the ball would be in his hands at some point, they also knew he would try to take his man 1 on 1. He also has a tendency to rely on getting to the line too often and gets himself stuck in the air underneath with nowhere to go. If nobody fouls him, he ends up throwing up garbage, making an eratic pass, or losing the ball. He earned the nickname "Turnovers Pierce" from me this year. Hopefully, this will all be a thing of the past, because there is no way Doc Rivers is going to stand for that type of play from any of his players.
I think we need to forget the issues that worreid us about Pierce last year. It was just a bad all-around situation. Every team knew who to focus on before the game even started. PP responded by trying to do too much. Hence, increased turnovers, bitching at the refs(which coincidentally, I hate), bad shooting %. We've got a coach who isn't going to be going through the motions this year and with Perk ready to contribute, Raef hopefully healthy(let's all pray) and Ricky working on his developement with PP all summer. I think we're more solid than we were no matter what happens in the draft
I wonder, how could you get rid of Pierce and get equal value? If you trade for players, you want superstar value, if you trade for picks, in reality you'd be stoked if someone nearly as good as Pierce came along with the selection(s). Bottom line is this is a guy capable of putting up a triple double every night. He can go off for 40 with ease, and the bottom line is he is a superstar. You trade him, and that's what you want back, so you're really setting yourself back a few seaons just for the sake of change. He is a franchise player, you don't give them up unless they demand a trade. Instead you build the pieces around him. Think about it this way: - To use hagrid's terminology, Pierce has a target on his head whenever he goes on court. As CV said, teams know the ball is going through his hands, and can pressure accordingly. - Pierce doesn't have a legitimate point guard to entrust the ball too, nor does he have a reliable, consistent second option. He is caught between and rock and a hard place, and you're not going to avoid turnovers and poorer shot selection in that scenario. Therefore, you build around him, not in place of him.
^I agree 100% with everything said but you have to take into account the "Ainge" factor. He is not a normal GM and has made the trades to develope his "Vision". I mos definitely would see him making a draft day trade with Pierce involved. I agree that there is almost a 1,000,000 to 1 chance that the C's would get equal value for Pierce. If people are thinking that Gordon is the guy to do it they better be prepared for some bad years in Bean Town.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Philjacksonsux:</div><div class="quote_post">Now dont be trying to behead me as I am a huge Pierce fan. That being said I am a Celtic fan first. For the sake of the Celtics Pierce must be dealt. It is rather obvious that he is not a number one option. He just didnt look like the same player this year as he had the prior couple. The fire wasnt there and his leadership he showed somehow disappeared. He will always put up numbers but numbers are deceiving. If there is a way to package him for T mac,its a must do. The C's need a guy who can create his own shot. Pierce seems to be more and more reliant on the jumper. They also need a guy who can can freakin rebound. If we can get one of these assets for Pierce,it needs to be done. I dont know what FAs are out there but I know they wont come to Boston. In a perfect world we would make a trade of Blount and Pierce for TMAC and sign Dampier. A team of TMAC,Raef at the 4,Welsch,TMAC,and Atkins would be a better lineup with Davis,Jones,Mihm,and Banks serving off the bench. Any thoughts??</div> I think he is a No. 1 option, he just needs a strong-willed teammate who isn't afraid of criticism and can create for himself and OTHERS. i.e. Antoine Walker. I agree that 'Toine may have shot too much (although that's exactly what he had to do, and what his coach wanted him to do) but you can't just give away a 20-8-4 guy with a high hoops I.Q. for a 10-7 guy with no on-court savvy and a foreign rookie and expect things to work out. Pierce is a No. 1 option, but he needs help and Ainge isn't getting it for him.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting hagrid:</div><div class="quote_post"> We've got a coach who isn't going to be going through the motions this year and with Perk ready to contribute, Raef hopefully healthy(let's all pray) and Ricky working on his developement with PP all summer. I think we're more solid than we were no matter what happens in the draft</div> I love your optimism man, but those are three massive "ifs" and any GM banking on those three things panning out deserves to be fired.
Pierce struggled coz of poor coaching? ppppfft!! yea frigggin right. jim obrien was the best coach the celtics have had in a decade plus. a hell of a lot better than doc rivers ill tell ya that. look how well doc did with a magic team which included a better gaurd than paul pierce and what many believed was a better supporting cast before the season began
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting olskoolFunktitude:</div><div class="quote_post">Pierce struggled coz of poor coaching? ppppfft!! yea frigggin right. jim obrien was the best coach the celtics have had in a decade plus. a hell of a lot better than doc rivers ill tell ya that. look how well doc did with a magic team which included a better gaurd than paul pierce and what many believed was a better supporting cast before the season began</div> yeah, Jim O'Brien was a great defensive coach, but a terrible offensive coach. He openly said that his philosophy was to play good enough D so that Pierce and Antoine could outscore the opposition. He wasn't a bad coach, but when his defensive schemes stopped being effective, his sloppy offense was exposed. I'm a fond believer of ball movement, movement without the ball, and effective use of the pick-and-roll. Oh, and here's the better supporting cast you speak of: -Tyronn Lue -Gordon Giricek -Juwan Howard (washed up) -Andrew DeClercq -Drew Gooden Please introduce me to the "many" who belived that this was a better supporting cast than the Celts had. I would like to laugh at them. Back when Doc had decent players playing for him, they were always over .500. Also, don't forget that the Magic were trying to compete with a short-handed roster, due to Grant Hill's inability to play. (His contract isn't insured which means it DOES count towards the cap)
Not only wasn't OB a "great" coach, he wasn't a good defensive coach either, that was Dick Harter's role. People can use the ECF run as justification to prop OB up, but anyone watching the games knew that he wasn't making adjustments the way he should have been and PP and AW were the ones making it happen. Harters' defense (as assinine as it was) worked well for a while, but was exposed for what it was in the playoffs, a gimmick. OB set this franchise back at least 3 years, by refusing to particpate in legitimate player development. JR Bremmer is the best example of him using a rookie and that was because we had injuries and he was the only guy left on the bench. OB's hand was forced. This continuing perception that Jim O'Brien was some kind of savior who was unjustly pushed out the door is ridiculous and quite frankly, makes me nautious to even think about. John Carroll absolutely went through the motions. He did nothing during his tenure as interim. He could have tried, but was content to sit back and let the end come, while guys like Pierce damn near killed themselves to keep this team moving forward. I'm not concerned with our progresss this year. It will be more comprehensive than most will give credit for. We'll improve to a .500 record at a minimum.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting 44caliberThrila:</div><div class="quote_post"> Oh, and here's the better supporting cast you speak of: -Tyronn Lue -Gordon Giricek -Juwan Howard (washed up) -Andrew DeClercq -Drew Gooden Please introduce me to the "many" who belived that this was a better supporting cast than the Celts had. I would like to laugh at them. Back when Doc had decent players playing for him, they were always over .500. Also, don't forget that the Magic were trying to compete with a short-handed roster, due to Grant Hill's inability to play. (His contract isn't insured which means it DOES count towards the cap)</div> lol, but still the Magic were supposed to be good, they nearly took out the Pistons in the Opening round the season b4. I thought the magic would do pretty good, did not expect that big losing streak to open up the season, at least they didn't get the worst record in the NBA..wait they did, um at least they got the #1 pick and took Okafor..wait they took Dwight Howard..i guess he's got potential... Pierce to the Bulls is the latest, that would be cool to have Paul play on the Bulls, an experienced player with tons of talent, but i doubt the trade would ever happen, only if we still had brand..
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting hagrid:</div><div class="quote_post">Not only wasn't OB a "great" coach, he wasn't a good defensive coach either, that was Dick Harter's role. People can use the ECF run as justification to prop OB up, but anyone watching the games knew that he wasn't making adjustments the way he should have been and PP and AW were the ones making it happen. Harters' defense (as assinine as it was) worked well for a while, but was exposed for what it was in the playoffs, a gimmick. OB set this franchise back at least 3 years, by refusing to particpate in legitimate player development. JR Bremmer is the best example of him using a rookie and that was because we had injuries and he was the only guy left on the bench. OB's hand was forced. This continuing perception that Jim O'Brien was some kind of savior who was unjustly pushed out the door is ridiculous and quite frankly, makes me nautious to even think about. John Carroll absolutely went through the motions. He did nothing during his tenure as interim. He could have tried, but was content to sit back and let the end come, while guys like Pierce damn near killed themselves to keep this team moving forward. I'm not concerned with our progresss this year. It will be more comprehensive than most will give credit for. We'll improve to a .500 record at a minimum.</div>Yes and yes. I would have came out and said OB was a bad coach offensively and defensively, but I wasn't sure if there was any more knowledgeable people who would back me up. But now that you've said it, I'll jump on board and say you are 100% correct.
Pierce will not and can not go anywhere, Celtics for life baby, I couldn't picture him playin for any other team, I refuse too. Why would anyone in Boston wanna see him go? He's the franchise player whether you like it or not, how can you not wanna keep a guy who attacks the basket every chance he gets, this guy's ruthless finisher.
The only way i could see pierce going if he was in a package deal that sent pierce and maybe lefrentz for Ai and Kenny thomas. And even thats a long shot. look for Pierce to saty a celt until the right trade prop comes around. This is a business. and teams are always looking to improve.
<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">The only way i could see pierce going if he was in a package deal that sent pierce and maybe lefrentz for Ai and Kenny thomas.</div> I assume that your point was that we need to get another star in return, which I agree with. I'd NEVER want AI on the Celtics.(I will qualify that by saying that I have no illusions of the mans talent to play basketball. He's got game. It's his other issues that concern me)
I like the prospects of Jalen Rose being Boston's scorer and Mo Pete and Donyell Marshall getting into the mix for Peirce and Lafrentz. Mo Pete may do well on another team and Donyell already proved to be a solid scorer, shot blocker and rebounder. Jalen could score just as much as Paul if he had to, (see stats with Bulls).
I wouldn't mind Marshall, but aren't particularly interested in Mo Pete or Rose. Rose's attitude has always put me off and I don't view him as a good leader, particularly for young guys.
