What's new
By:

All-Time Draft 2nd round: Spycam1 vs White Chocolate

Who would win in a 7 game series?

  • Total voters
    36
  • Poll closed .
I'll give you Laimbeer. I meant to mention him but those other guys all won one riding the coattails of the players who truly won it.

No comparison here to me. Spy is full of winners. Your team, not so much. You're still my dawg doe.
 
QuinSnydersHair said:
This is an awful lineup. Pierce is light years better than McGrady. Maybe McHale but to doesn't matter.
Click to expand...

pierce is better than prime tmac? that's new. never heard of that. very refreshing


tmac
2× All-NBA First Team (2002–2003)
3× All-NBA Second Team (2001, 2004, 2007)
2× All-NBA Third Team (2005, 2008)
2× NBA scoring champion (2003–2004)

pierce
All-NBA Second Team (2009)
3× All-NBA Third Team (2002–2003, 2008)


why prime tmac is better than prime pierce

1. and 9 out of 10 GM would take prime tmac to start a team over pierce. hell, if kobe and tmac were both FA in 02-03, i would say it would say 5 out 10 GMs would've taken tmac over friggin KOBE.

2. arguably tmac was the best player in the league in 02-03 season. 32.1 avg. carried his team to playoffs.

3. tmac is much better basketball talent. This is not debatable. tmac was better scorer, better passer, and better rebounder

4. tmac has better measurables - taller, longer, and more athletic.

only thing pierce has on tmac is intangibles and perceived clutchness. i'm not a big 'clutch' guy. it's overrated. it's a team game. and tmac put up very good numbers in the playoffs. and he made plenty of big shots in his career. IMO, tmac would've been a great pippen. he never was a lead dog material. he puts too much pressure on his shoulders.

and clutch factor doesn't even matter in this debate. because both pierce & tmac aren't lead dogs here. tmac won't have a pressure to carry the team. he will cruise as #3 or even 4th option.


light years better?
 
Last edited:
QuinSnydersHair said:
Pierce will be a first ballot Hall of Famer. McGrady will take years to make it. If he ever does. So yeah, Pierce is better.
Click to expand...

But how much of Pierce's success was due to Garnett and Allen joining him though? He was good but not great, and I don't think he would be a HOF if those guys hadn't arrived.
 
Hotttnickkk said:
But how much of Pierce's success was due to Garnett and Allen joining him though? He was good but not great, and I don't think he would be a HOF if those guys hadn't arrived.
Click to expand...

Don't think that's fair to Pierce. He was on some really bad Celtics teams before Garnet and Allen got there.
 
Fabtrey said:
pierce is better than prime tmac? that's new. never heard of that. very refreshing


tmac
2× All-NBA First Team (2002–2003)
3× All-NBA Second Team (2001, 2004, 2007)
2× All-NBA Third Team (2005, 2008)
2× NBA scoring champion (2003–2004)

pierce
All-NBA Second Team (2009)
3× All-NBA Third Team (2002–2003, 2008)


why prime tmac is better than prime pierce

1. and 9 out of 10 GM would take prime tmac to start a team over pierce. hell, if kobe and tmac were both FA in 02-03, i would say it would say 5 out 10 GMs would've taken tmac over friggin KOBE.

2. arguably tmac was the best player in the league in 02-03 season. 32.1 avg. carried his team to playoffs.

3. tmac is much better basketball talent. This is not debatable. tmac was better scorer, better passer, and better rebounder

4. tmac has better measurables - taller, longer, and more athletic.

only thing pierce has on tmac is intangibles and perceived clutchness. i'm not a big 'clutch' guy. it's overrated. it's a team game. and tmac put up very good numbers in the playoffs. and he made plenty of big shots in his career. IMO, tmac would've been a great pippen. he never was a lead dog material. he puts too much pressure on his shoulders.

and clutch factor doesn't even matter in this debate. because both pierce & tmac aren't lead dogs here. tmac won't have a pressure to carry the team. he will cruise as #3 or even 4th option.


light years better?
Click to expand...
Most of this post is bad, but my god!!! Not one gm would take Tmac over Kobe, and any gm that would, would lose his job.
 
Fabtrey said:
pierce is better than prime tmac? that's new. never heard of that. very refreshing


tmac
2× All-NBA First Team (2002–2003)
3× All-NBA Second Team (2001, 2004, 2007)
2× All-NBA Third Team (2005, 2008)
2× NBA scoring champion (2003–2004)

pierce
All-NBA Second Team (2009)
3× All-NBA Third Team (2002–2003, 2008)


why prime tmac is better than prime pierce

1. and 9 out of 10 GM would take prime tmac to start a team over pierce. hell, if kobe and tmac were both FA in 02-03, i would say it would say 5 out 10 GMs would've taken tmac over friggin KOBE.

2. arguably tmac was the best player in the league in 02-03 season. 32.1 avg. carried his team to playoffs.

3. tmac is much better basketball talent. This is not debatable. tmac was better scorer, better passer, and better rebounder

4. tmac has better measurables - taller, longer, and more athletic.

only thing pierce has on tmac is intangibles and perceived clutchness. i'm not a big 'clutch' guy. it's overrated. it's a team game. and tmac put up very good numbers in the playoffs. and he made plenty of big shots in his career. IMO, tmac would've been a great pippen. he never was a lead dog material. he puts too much pressure on his shoulders.

and clutch factor doesn't even matter in this debate. because both pierce & tmac aren't lead dogs here. tmac won't have a pressure to carry the team. he will cruise as #3 or even 4th option.


light years better?
Click to expand...

Negged for worst post of the year, and for a complete lack of intelligence.
 
Pierce has had the better career, but I would say that McGrady's best year was better than Pierce's best year.
 
Thee jazz fan said:
Most of this post is bad, but my god!!! Not one gm would take Tmac over Kobe, and any gm that would, would lose his job.
Click to expand...

my memory is fine. kobe and tmac were equal back in 03. kobe still had 'he plays with shaq' tag back then. and tmac was a league leading scorer and many considered him the best player that year.

between 2000-2001 to 2002-2003 stats

tmac
26.8/7.5/4.6 .457 fg% .355 3fg% (all nba 2nd team)
25.6/7.9/5.3 .451 fg% .364 3fg% (all nba 1st team)
32.1/6.5/5.5 .457 fg% .386 3fg% (all nba 1st team)

kobe
28.5/5.9/5.0 .464 fg% .305 3fg% (all nba 2nd team)
25.2/5.5/5.5 .469 fg% .205 3fg% (all nba 1st team)
30.0/6.9/5.9 .451 fg% .383 3fg% (all nba 1st team)


many people had mixed feelings on kobe. many of them are probably just MJ homers who were threatened by kobe's greatness. no joke, there were plenty of 'kobe puts up number because of shaq' crowd.

and if you objectively look at those 3 years (both didn't hit their prime yet) both were pretty much equal in terms of talent/skill. kobe was quicker of the two, but tmac was taller and longer. overall offensive arsenal was pretty much wash. tmac was actually more consistent 3pt shooter of the two at this stage and tmac was year younger and kobe was 1 year more experienced.

so in 2003

both puts up great stats
tmac is year younger
both were known for defense
tmac didn't have anybody around him compared to kobe



there would've been plenty of GM who would've taken tmac over kobe. it's not like kobe one those final mvps. kobe was league wide considered a 'robin'.

but hey, it would be a grave mistake for sure. i'm a major kobe guy. i love kobe. never really embraced tmac even when he was a rising superstar. ultimately tmac never achieved better season than 2003 because of his back. he was still a great all around player, but his back problem wasn't going away and he gradually loses his explosive athleticism.

anyway, paul pierce can't touch those stats tmac put up. pierce was not better than 2003 tmac at any point of his career. none. zero. nada. numbers lie, but not in this case. superior talent is superior.
 
Last edited:
Hantlers said:
Pierce has had the better career, but I would say that McGrady's best year was better than Pierce's best year.
Click to expand...

it's been an epidemic. some dudes here can't grasp prime/peak vs. career. no matter how many time i preach the damn thing, bozos won't try to learn
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top