FanHouse's Tom Ziller argues his ranking of the top 50 players in the NBA.
That photo isn't a glimpse into repressed frenzy finally relieved. In a league of smooth, abnormally calmed athletic freaks -- the small forward position being perhaps the most notorious in its coolness on the court -- Paul Pierce stands out as one of the most guttural, primal masters. His game isn't driven entirely by angles and head games. The Truth attacks with a rage and spirit matched only perhaps by a few others (his nutty co-star Kevin Garnett included). Each dribble-drive is more an attack than an attempt, each step-back a hearty slice of himself. The phrase "giving all that you've got" is worn out, but Pierce does leave everything he brings on the court. It sometimes works against him -- he's prone to ill-timed mistakes, he can try to do more than he's able to -- but it has, of course, at the same time made him a very special player.
Pierce has really had two careers, both strong. Before 2004, Pierce was your prototypical superstar swingman: an elite scorer, a decent rebounder, a good defender, a nice ball-handler with a few passes in him. The shooting wasn't efficient, and the rebounds came more in the flow of the game than because of any talent for the boards within. This isn't a bad place to be -- it did get Boston to the conference finals without much else in the cupboard (save gunner extraordinaire Antoine Walker).
In the '04-05 season, Pierce transformed. His game became so much more efficient -- less shots to get the same points, fewer turnovers, renewed emphasis on free throws over fadeaways. As such, Pierce became a better player ... a much better player. The following season, '05-06, Pierce took his shots back but stayed highly efficient. Boston was bad, but Pierce was outstanding, and he likely deserved some low-level MVP consideration.
And while, like everyone, Pierce became a bit subjugated under the Boston troika of '07-08, he has still been able to maintain surprising efficiency -- The Truth is more efficient than Kobe, Wade or LeBron. If Pierce still needed to score 26-27 points a game, there's no doubt he could do it. Would his efficiency dip, or would his defense and rebounding slide with the extra responsibility at this age (he turns 31 next month)? It's possible, but not a given. That's the rub: Pierce could be a superduperstar -- a surefire top 10 MVP finisher, a top scorer, a repeat Player of the Week cat. But his primacy, his instincts allow him to fit like soft clay next to Kevin Garnett, the rock. One of the most unfairly unheralded stories out of Boston last June wasn't the group jigsaw fitting the roster did with the big additions, it was the pure sacrifice of self Pierce and Ray Allen executed. KG didn't do a thing different in Boston. Pierce and Allen did. In The Truth's case, it meant controlling the innate urges we've seen for almost a decade to pound, to fight, to slice, to attack, to score. Lord forbid any injuries to the Celtics, but give us the chance to see full-throttle Pierce one more time in his career. Few players can hold our attention so flawlessly.
NBA Top 50
No. 50, Andris Biedrins, Warriors
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
9-22-2008 @ 1:14PM
dj kahn said...
Pierce's stock understandably soared, along with his visibility, during the playoffs. I am a life-long Celtics fan who has watched Pierce's entire career and though my inner bias was hoping for at least a top-ten ranking, #17 is far better than I could have expected just a few years ago.
You have been taking a lot of guff on these posts; people need to cool off until the ranks are finished. So far, you are doing a fair and interesting job.
Reply
9-22-2008 @ 1:33PM
Jacob Hart said...
I think this placement is fine for the truth and i agree with DJ Kahn in people need to chill a little, but mostly is probably bias when there fav player isnt number one :D~~
I think most have been around the mark except the absurd D Will at 20 buts its all good :)
Keep up the good work i have enjoyed the reading
Reply
9-22-2008 @ 1:35PM
Matt said...
Tom "Kobe hater" Ziller will put Kobe outside of the top2 just to be "unique".
Reply
9-22-2008 @ 2:30PM
Step said...
It's a fair write-up. As a Celtics fan whose favorite player is Pierce, I'm just glad he had the opportunity to play on a team with other great players around him before he started to decline. To see him and Ray and Garnett get to be the leaders of a championship team, not some gun-for-hire veterans on one, was truly great to see.
For a while, it looked like the only way Pierce was going to be on a championship caliber club was as a 34 year old veteran coming off the bench providing scoring spark. That was sad to think about. NBA careers are just so unfair and unlucky sometimes. I can't imagine how frustrated Pierce must have been playing on teams on which over the years Ricky Davis was the second best player and Mark Blount was the best big man (Miami shot themselves in the foot creating that situation in the second half of last year, as did Garnett in Minnesota), Antoine Walker had the free rein of a no.1 option, there were four mistake-prone former high schoolers at one time (Telfair, Al Jefferson, Perkins, Gerald Green) and Wally Szcerzbiak post two ankle surgeries was the second best player. Every year up until this past season, the next best player after Pierce had never had a positive offensive/defensive rating differential except for Jefferson in 2007 and Pierce missed most of that season with injury. That was messed up.
Reply
9-22-2008 @ 3:25PM
henryclemente said...
Interesting that there's no way Pierce would have been up here one year ago. Then again, it's hard to argue with a Finals MVP trophy.
Reply
9-22-2008 @ 4:50PM
Steps said...
I don't get why Pierce at 17 is supposed to be such a steep climb from previous years. Because he was a team that was so overmatched in 2007 it lost 18 games in a row while he was out? He averaged 25/5.9/4.2 in 2007 and went 26.8/6.7/4.7 in 2006. He's not a guy riding the backs of his teammates. He's been a stellar player for a long time who has had the misfortune of playing on badly constructed teams.
Personally, with the Celtics having no chance to legitimately compete during some of the past years, I'd rather have seen Pierce jack up 22 shots a game rather than the 18 he averaged. He could've averaged 28-30 a game. A lot of other players in his situation, being by far the best scorer, would have attempted a lot more shots but he's never been an all out shot chucker. That was why I dismissed concerns people had of whether Pierce was going to be able to tone down his offensive urges or not. In context, he had, and the same went for Garnett who was almost too unselfish to a fault in Minnesota and Allen who had co-existed with guys like Cassell and Glenn Robinson who loved to shoot.
Reply
9-22-2008 @ 4:56PM
Ziller said...
For the record, Pierce wouldn't have been much lower in other recent years. He's been incredible since '04-05 and deserve much more MVP dap than he received in '05-06.
Reply
9-25-2008 @ 11:31PM
PierceOVERRATED said...
Another idiot clueless to the sport. If you knew anything about the 2002 ECF you would know Walker had a much bigger part then you gave him credit for.
If it wasn't for Walker I can tell you 100% what would have happened on that floor. The years 2003-2004-2006 save 2005 after the trade deadline. Until 2008
Pierce has never done anything to carry a team and I am laughing at the MVP award that should have been Ray Allen's.
Pierce is not a top 30 player he benefits from other players then gets all the credit. All the proof you need is the record Pierce had when he didn't have Antoine or Garnett carrying the load. Pierce led 3 teams to joke records and one playoff series that really the credit belonged to Mark Blount trying to piss off Ainge after he said the team should lose.
Reply
9-23-2008 @ 10:29AM
Mike M said...
It's worth noting that 04-05 was Doc Rivers' first year as head coach of the Celtics. I give Doc a good amount of credit in Pierce's mid-career development, but it's also worth noting that Pierce has been quoted as saying the Celtics didn't practice offense under Jim O'Brien. If you heard Obie during those years and watched his teams, that's probably not an exaggeration at all. The offense was basically give it to Pierce (or Walker) while the others wait at the 3-point arc for a bailout pass. The difference in Pierce becoming an *efficient* offensive dynamo was basically a coach who actually, ya know, coached offense.
Reply
9-24-2008 @ 4:11PM
Perkisabeast said...
Ziller, once again your transparent disdain for the great city of Boston is showing. Did I miss something here? The NBA Finals MVP is the 17th best player in the league. Turn in your credentials right away. You have no business writing about basketball. Paul Pierce is a top ten player in this league without a doubt. Did he not just dethrone the child King in the playoffs? Did he not destroy China's favorite player and the self-proclaimed "greatest player on the planet" in a seven game series? Has he not been statistically one the best players in the past ten years. What more could he do to merit your respect? Put on a Sacramento Queens jersey. For shame Ziller. We're not even into the preseason and you're already pissing me off. This is an outrage.
Reply