Revis Island Posted August 9, 2009 Report Share Posted August 9, 2009 (edited) I am leaning towards a Yes, Here are the only small forwards I think are better..... Bird, Erving, Pippen, Hondo, Barry, Baylor, Worthy and Arizin. Every other small forward existent I feel Pierce is better, LeBron will eventually surpass him but at this point you gotta go with Pierce. Edited August 9, 2009 by ClutchCityOwns Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Goods Posted August 9, 2009 Report Share Posted August 9, 2009 LeBron will be the top SF of all-time when he retires, right now it's Larry Bird. And how is Ariza even in the conversation? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trutrojan8 Posted August 9, 2009 Report Share Posted August 9, 2009 LeBron will be the top SF of all-time when he retires, right now it's Larry Bird. And how is Ariza even in the conversation?Ariza =/= Arizin ha Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flight Posted August 9, 2009 Report Share Posted August 9, 2009 It depends on what ECN/TT say. My answer is the opposite. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DWhiTex34 Posted August 9, 2009 Report Share Posted August 9, 2009 Yes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cleveland's Finest Posted August 9, 2009 Report Share Posted August 9, 2009 No imo. Tmac and Vince Carter aren't top SG's of all time. They are second-tier all-stars. They were never "The Face" of this league. Bird was, and so were the other mentioned. Imo though, Pierce is as close as it gets from not being a second-tier all-tar. No doubt a hall of famer though. Pierce was never the most dominant force in the league and is simply an annual all-star. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Revis Island Posted August 9, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 9, 2009 LeBron will be the top SF of all-time when he retires, right now it's Larry Bird. And how is Ariza even in the conversation?Paul Arizin....Not Trevor Ariza. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Goods Posted August 9, 2009 Report Share Posted August 9, 2009 Paul Arizin....Not Trevor Ariza. Oh, thought you misspelled it. My bad Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DWhiTex34 Posted August 9, 2009 Report Share Posted August 9, 2009 You forgot Bernard King also. And my answer is still yes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Revis Island Posted August 9, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 9, 2009 You forgot Bernard King also. And my answer is still yes.Injured too frequently, his legacy is below Pierce's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtTheDriveIn Posted August 9, 2009 Report Share Posted August 9, 2009 Alex EnglishAdrian Dantley are the other two I would put on your list before Pierce. LeBron as well and maybe a few others players who are in the league right now of they pan out properly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billt chamberlain Posted August 9, 2009 Report Share Posted August 9, 2009 would this thread be made if he didn't win a ring? talent wise i think melo and lebron will surpass him when he was at his best. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DWhiTex34 Posted August 9, 2009 Report Share Posted August 9, 2009 would this thread be made if he didn't win a ring? talent wise i think melo and lebron will surpass him when he was at his best. lol Melo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trutrojan8 Posted August 9, 2009 Report Share Posted August 9, 2009 lol 24.2 ppg > 22.9 ppg And no, Pierce isn't a top SF of all-time. He's barely even a top SF of his playing era. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Revis Island Posted August 9, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 9, 2009 lol 24.2 ppg > 22.9 ppg And no, Pierce isn't a top SF of all-time. He's barely even a top SF of his playing era.Damn, What I meant was is he a Top 10 SMALL FORWARD OF ALL-TIME. damn. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Goods Posted August 9, 2009 Report Share Posted August 9, 2009 Damn, What I meant was is he a Top 10 SMALL FORWARD OF ALL-TIME. damn. In that case, I would say yes he is a top 10 SF of all-time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flight Posted August 9, 2009 Report Share Posted August 9, 2009 lol 24.2 ppg > 22.9 ppg And no, Pierce isn't a top SF of all-time. He's barely even a top SF of his playing era.In that case yes, he's a top 10 SF of all time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billt chamberlain Posted August 10, 2009 Report Share Posted August 10, 2009 lol Meloonce again your a celtics fan..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Owner Real Deal Posted August 10, 2009 Owner Report Share Posted August 10, 2009 BirdBaylorPippenBarryErvingHavlicekWorthyEnglishWilkinsDantley Arizin was a poor shooter and didn't play very long. If you're going to stick him in there, you might as well stick in Billy Cunningham, also. And by the way, Pierce is lucky that Grant Hill was injured. In fact, everyone is...because Grant Hill could've went down as one of the greatest players of all-time. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EastCoastNiner Posted August 10, 2009 Report Share Posted August 10, 2009 And by the way, Pierce is lucky that Grant Hill was injured. In fact, everyone is...because Grant Hill could've went down as one of the greatest players of all-time. I wish he never would have gotten injured. He would have been better than Michael Jordan and all of the other great players. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billt chamberlain Posted August 10, 2009 Report Share Posted August 10, 2009 I wish he never would have gotten injured. He would have been better than Michael Jordan and all of the other great players.i doubt he would have been better than mj and all of the other great players. he was a beast before he was hurt though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Revis Island Posted August 12, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 12, 2009 BirdBaylorPippenBarryErvingHavlicekWorthyEnglishWilkinsDantley Arizin was a poor shooter and didn't play very long. If you're going to stick him in there, you might as well stick in Billy Cunningham, also. And by the way, Pierce is lucky that Grant Hill was injured. In fact, everyone is...because Grant Hill could've went down as one of the greatest players of all-time.Pierce was better than Wilkins, Dantley and English. English couldn't defend a paperbag, Dantley? I don't need to say much. Wilkins never came big when his team was on the line. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Owner Real Deal Posted August 12, 2009 Owner Report Share Posted August 12, 2009 Pierce was better than Wilkins, Dantley and English. English couldn't defend a paperbag, Dantley? I don't need to say much. Wilkins never came big when his team was on the line.Wilkins also didn't have Garnett, Ray Allen, Rondo and Perkins on his team. He was better than Pierce. What do you mean "I don't need to say much" regarding Dantley? Do you know what he accomplished? He was a multiple-time all-star (couldn't tell you how many times), won ROY, had maybe the highest career field goal percentage of any non-center (of all-time), is top ten on the all-time scoring list the last time I looked, had 3-4 consecutive 30+ PPG seasons, and he was a very good player. English was also putting up excellent field goal percentages (over 50% for his career, I believe), and he's a 25k scorer over the decade and a half he played. If Pierce hadn't won a championship with Garnett and Allen, this wouldn't even be a discussion. Pierce has never played good defense (I even followed the guy when he was a Jayhawk, and he wasn't that great of a defender in college), and he only started playing it this last season, just as Ray Allen magically did, because guards and forwards were reluctant to drive with Garnett and Perkins in the paint. It's what you see with Turkoglu and Shard, who both have a ton of trouble defensively, but have it easy with Howard in the way. Just 2-3 years ago, people were asking if McGrady was on the top ten list, and how much better he was than Pierce. It's funny how the tides turn so quickly once a guy wins a title with two other future HOF'ers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Revis Island Posted August 12, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 12, 2009 Pierce made the ECF in 2002. He's no bum without two HOFers. Wilkins on the other-hand greatest battle was in the 2nd round of the playoffs, Not to mention he frequently lost to the Bucks in the playoffs so it wasn't really the ERA of why he failed so much in the playoffs. It's just a weak excuse for an athletic player that can do anything but help the team win games. I don't know too much about Dantley, but he also wasn't much until he played for the Pistons. At least in the playoffs. As for English, It's nice if you can score. But winning is the most important stat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DWhiTex34 Posted August 12, 2009 Report Share Posted August 12, 2009 (edited) Wilkins also didn't have Garnett, Ray Allen, Rondo and Perkins on his team. He was better than Pierce. What do you mean "I don't need to say much" regarding Dantley? Do you know what he accomplished? He was a multiple-time all-star (couldn't tell you how many times), won ROY, had maybe the highest career field goal percentage of any non-center (of all-time), is top ten on the all-time scoring list the last time I looked, had 3-4 consecutive 30+ PPG seasons, and he was a very good player. English was also putting up excellent field goal percentages (over 50% for his career, I believe), and he's a 25k scorer over the decade and a half he played. If Pierce hadn't won a championship with Garnett and Allen, this wouldn't even be a discussion. Pierce has never played good defense (I even followed the guy when he was a Jayhawk, and he wasn't that great of a defender in college), and he only started playing it this last season, just as Ray Allen magically did, because guards and forwards were reluctant to drive with Garnett and Perkins in the paint. It's what you see with Turkoglu and Shard, who both have a ton of trouble defensively, but have it easy with Howard in the way. Just 2-3 years ago, people were asking if McGrady was on the top ten list, and how much better he was than Pierce. It's funny how the tides turn so quickly once a guy wins a title with two other future HOF'ers. Teams back then in the early 2000's with Pierce running the show ALWAYS over achieved due to who?... PIERCE. he always took those Celtic teams FARTHER then they were supposed to go, ALWAYS. he never choked in the playoffs EVER. Every time Pierce's teams have lost in the playoffs it was vs teams they were SUPPOSED to lose too. I mean come on Walter McCarty, Eric Williams, Rodney Rodgers, Tony Delk, Kenny Anderson and them were solid players but do you really think they were types of guys you want to build around your star to win a title..... PLEASE....... Pierce always was EVERYTHING for the Celtics. Kevin Garnett was always EVERYTHING for the Timberwolves and where did KG go without PIERCE?? He went to the SAME LEVEL PIERCE DID which was the conference finals. So does that take away from Kevin Garnett's legacy because he didn't win anything without Pierce? no it doesn't, so it shouldn't for Pierce. Edited August 12, 2009 by DWhiTex34 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.