Will The Real Paul Pierce Stand Up?
So far Paul Pierce is averaging 20.5 points and 7.5 rebounds in this series. Not horrible, but not great either. He also missed a critical end of game free throw and has at times looked sluggish on the court.
A blog by the name of Basketball.org went so far as to call Pierce "overrated." I'm not even going to justify that with a response but you are welcome to in the comments (keep it clean please).
Me? I think he's a little off, and maybe a little tired, but I'm far from worried about him.
Scott Souza says this about Paul:
While Paul Pierce expressed concern about Leon Powe after his ACL tear on Monday, he did not express any concern about his own offensive uneveness in the series so far.
“It’s not really bothering me, guys,” he said. “It’s about the team. I don’t go into the game thinking I need more space (to shoot). Other guys are playing well. Other guys are stepping up for us. That’s what’s big for us right now.
“You’ve got Big Baby stepping up, Rondo playing the way he’s playing, (Kendrick Perkins) Perk … I don’t really worry about that stuff - coaches finding a way to scheme for me. Over the course of this series, I’ll figure it out.”
I'm thinking we'll see a big game out of Pierce on Thursday. I can just feel it.
35 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Calling Pierce overrated
Sounds like something I would have said before last season, which really was the icing on the cake for him. (OK, the Finals was.)
I figured we’d have to be clicking on all cylinders (injuries aside) for us to advance in the playoffs, and we’re not. If Paul and Ray Allen were hot, we’d be fine.
We need Paul to step up soon. Tomorrow night would be great.
Paul Picks His Spots
He is usually appropriately lazy though. That is, he turns it on when it counts.
One thing that’s worrisome is a total lack of respect from the refs. There have been more than a few no-calls with lots of contact. This makes it hard for him to score if the threat of the drive is taken away. Guys over play him and he settles for pull-ups. He knows that he’s not going to get a call at the rim and he’s going to get hammered.
You only had to make 1 foul shot, without anybody guarding you and the team would be up 2-nada. You choked, PP thats all. It can happen to anybody; but the ultimate truth is, if you had made that shot, we would have won the first game game.
That's true...
But he also made shots down the stretch with people guarding him, so what would you say to that?
I would say...
…some shots matter more than others. Game-on-the-line shots, you know, the kind that a single shot determines the outcome of the entire game, and preserves home court advantage. Pierce is not a one-shot-one-kill type sniper, er, I mean player.
by The Village Idiot on Apr 22, 2009 10:54 PM EDT up reply actions
"Pierce is not a one-shot-one-kill type sniper, er, I mean player."
Now that I would agree with. However, one free throw miss with 2 secs left isn’t really enough evidence to support choking. Which is more likely, that he chocked or that he just missed? He misses 17% of his free throws. Given his entire history (I’m especially thinking of his two free throws in that 2002 Conf Finals Game 3) do you say he choked or he just missed. Choking is Gilbert Arenas missing two FTs right after LeBron told him he’d lose if he did exactly that. This? I dunno. Certainly there isn’t enough evidence to just throw him under the bus like that.
I did not use the word "choke"
I just thought I’d point that out. Whatever terminology is used for what happened, all I’m saying is I expect a veteran captian of a championship team to covert uncontested shots with the game on the line. Paul Pierce is not Gilbert Arenas. I expect better from him, and I refuse to make any excuses for him. He cost us that game.
by The Village Idiot on Apr 22, 2009 11:17 PM EDT up reply actions
What did Paul average for the season?
It’s not about the #s anyway, haven’t we learned this about the current Celtics? Paul is fine, I actually thought the times he really looked for his own is when the Celts have played the worst in the first 2 games. If your team scores 118 points and wins, I don’t think any individuals’ offensive #s are in question. Paul will step up big, in some way, before this series is through. All he cares about are the W’s.
pp has not been magnifico but he has been better than mediocre. he’s hustled on defense and on the boards. salmon has never been a good defender but seems to be sticking pretty good to pp and this is what is worrying people. i see pp trying to stay within the team play limitts and really hate it when he and the rest let him go on the 1 to 1 mode where he hogs the ball and no one moves.we need a good team movement game and good d and we win.
I think that he plays best when he is kind of forcing it. Meaning, when no one else can step in, he always does. Guys around him have been really turning it on (Ray, BBD, Rondo). He has definitely been giving it up to the whoever is hot. He’s been doing it all season. He will have his moments before this series is done. It’s funny, Ray’s off, the media goes crazy, Paul has a few 20 point games and he is “overrated”. Ha.
Pierce isn’t the problem, except for occasional loafing on defense, which he has done throughout his career.
Really?
He’s the captain, with lots of experience to boot. I would hope making a free throw with the game on the line is not asking too much of him at this point in his career?
by The Village Idiot on Apr 22, 2009 10:57 PM EDT up reply actions
The Village Idiot's Law of Diminishing Chances...
…states that when a tired, injury-ridden team is playing a youthful, athletic team, the former’s chances of winning the game diminishes significantly the longer the game goes on. In other words, Paul Pierce did not give us a chance to win in overtime. He merely made us work harder for an inevitable loss. A better option would have been to miss both free throws so we can take the loss and get it over with quickly. Overtime just wore us out even more, with nothing to show for it.
Folk, take it from me… OT is not going to favor the Celtics this year.
by The Village Idiot on Apr 22, 2009 11:31 PM EDT up reply actions
umm...
“A better option would have been to miss both free throws so we can take the loss and get it over with quickly. "
that is absurd. that is counting an outcome that hasn’t occured yet as an inevitable fact. going into overtime the celtics still had a chance to win. the one made free throw allowed that. at that moment, which was all that existed then, that free throw allowed the game to continue. that matters. yes things would be better had pp made both but to say that made free throw was a bad thing is ridiculous.
by ChainSmokingLikeDino on Apr 23, 2009 12:32 AM EDT up reply actions
You missed my sarcasm
It is not absurd at all, let recap…. Someone suggested OT gave us a chance to win. Given the current circumstances of the Celtics, our chances of winning diminish the longer the game goes on, especially against this youthful and athlectic Bulls team. That’s what makes an OT loss against the Bull inevitable for the Cs (as i see it – and I stand by that). Hence my being sarcastic in saying that better to have missed both free throws and end the game sooner so they can all go home and get their beauty sleep.
Whatever you do, don’t ignore the facts. Simply put, OT does not favor this Celtics team.
by The Village Idiot on Apr 23, 2009 1:22 AM EDT up reply actions
well,
sarcasm doesn’t always translate well into typed language (no fault of your own), and yes, a youthful team may stand a better chance than an injured one going into overtime but i still disagree fundamentally that an ot game is inevitably a loss. p
perhaps i’m snappy at times around here, and this is not directed at you, because people are all too comfortable to dismiss a season, and a career, of basketball for snap judgements based upon one play. there is so much cynicism posted here after an unfortunate loss that is oozing with short sighted, rash proclomations. ray allen had a bad game, better trade him asap. then he hits a game winner so forget that you were calling for his head. normally this is a pretty intelligent group of commentators but sometimes the lack of perspective is astonishing. so sorry for misreading your sarcasm but i will maintain that ot, while not favoring the celtics, is by no means the grim reaper knocking on their door.
by ChainSmokingLikeDino on Apr 23, 2009 2:21 AM EDT up reply actions
He made two with 36 seconds left to put the Celtics ahead by 1. No one seems to remember that. If we play any kind of decent defense at all (Rondo) we don’t let Rose go straight to the basket for a layup 6 seconds later.
Sure, Pierce missed a free throw that probably would have won the game but if he hadn’t made the two earlier, if he hadn’t made the one to tie, and he hadn’t gotten Noah to foul him in the first place, we never would have had a chance.
In between Ray missed a shot, Rondo gave up the layup and then Rondo fouled Rose 20 ft from the basket to send him to the free throw line. No one is talking about any of those three things, only a single missed free throw, which as even the announcers pointed out couldn’t have been any closer to going in. Those are the breaks of the game.
"...only a single missed free throw"
…is all that matters because that was game was on the line; el Capitan knew that, he had the game in his hands. Last I checked, free throws are still uncontested shots, and there was no shot clock pressure to worry about. If you ask me, Paul should be working on his free throws instead of Twittering.
by The Village Idiot on Apr 22, 2009 11:57 PM EDT up reply actions
Choking
Would be Garnett in the 4th quarter of game 5 of the 2008 NBA finals. Patrick Ewing, or Dirk Nowitski ring bells as well. Pierce is famous for his ability to take it to another level in the 4th quarter alone. I’ll cut him the slack for missing that free throw besides, who do we think was effected more by it? The fans? or Pierce himself? Pierce probably wanted to punch himself in the face for missing it.
I think one must know the average...
…FT shooting percentage in single posession games for “superstar” players at the wing before you can look at going 3/4 under a minute to go in a single posession game and call it a “choke.”
“Choke” references a certain truth about how the player performed relative to the norm, not relative to blind expectation.
Pierce shot 3/4 in the last 36 seconds – I’d bet that’s better than average…sucks that we lost because of it, but come on – you can’t throw out peer execution level when making such a blatant claim.
by BillfromBoston on Apr 22, 2009 11:43 PM EDT reply actions
Ok, let's talk about averages and peer execution levels
NOT! The playoffs is where impossible happens. Forget peer execution levels, averages, or normal performance metrics. Case in point… How does Derrick Rose’s Game 1 performance stack up relative to his norm? I bet it was closer to what you called “blind expectation” than to his norm. If he can do it, so can Paul. After all, Paul is the veteran who’s been there before. All Paul had to do was sink a single free throw and we’d have won the game. It’s not the loss of a single game that’s pissing me off. It’s the way it was lost.
Going to OT served to embolden the Bulls, as they went on to beat us fair and square. If they had won in regular time based on PP missing both free throws, it would have been viewed as the Celtics beating themlseves rather than the Bulls beating the Celtics. Not to mention OT further wore out an already tired and depleted Celtics team. Observe how confident the Bulls were in Game 2 (expect that confidence for the rest fo the series). If they had hoped to make a decent showing, now they know they can take us down. That of course would be blind expectation, but hey, it’s the playoffs where the impossible becomes possible.
While I do expect the Celtics to win the series, I think they’ve made it more difficult than necessary.
by The Village Idiot on Apr 23, 2009 1:05 AM EDT up reply actions
Paul Pierce is not overrated
Guys, I’ll say the same thing about Paul that I said in the game 2 thread about Ray. He’s Paul Pierce. He’s be back to his superman heroics eventually and everything will be a-ok.
If there’s anything to take away from that article, it’s that Ray is underrated, not that Paul is overrated.
paul pierce had the oppurtunity as captain to control the floor. he demanded the ball on offense/took it on defensive rebounds numerous times and brought the ball up himself so that he could make sure to give it to ray to get him going as a lights out shooter and creative offensive player that takes high percentage shots. by doing this he took the ball out of rondos hands in a positive way. he made the decision for rondo. im a young fan when it comes to the celtics, but im willing to bet that there has never been a celtic who understood the flow of a game while in it more than pierce. he understands what it takes to win in every game that hes in and he does whatever he can to make it happen. i havent seen anything less than this and after watching his whole career i expect nothing less from him.
by MichaelJCraven on Apr 23, 2009 12:23 AM EDT reply actions
We Don't Need a Big Offensive Game From Pierce
Scoring isn’t the problem. The Celtics have been well over 100 points in both games with the Bulls.
Defense is the problem, especially getting back in transition. It’s also obvious that they have to do a better jub of clamping down on Rose and Gordon. Chicago has no low post game, so defending the perimeter shouldn’t be that hard.
Isn't It A Bit Early
To be jumping off the bandwagon?
"I don't come to play, I come to WIN"--Larry Bird
"Criminally Negligent Officiating"--Tommy Heinsohn
I think its just plain sad that we are not going to get to defend this thing with KG and Powe and now to not have PP’s best energy/movement/athleticism is just over the top. He’s tired, hurt, old, whatever, its really sad.
That said, unless he is hurt, there is one thing I really want to see. The team needs to figure out a way to punish the Bulls when they put Hinrich on him. Hinrich is a fantastic defender. He gaurds guys he has no business gaurding, Tmac, Carter, etc., But PP can’t allow this to happen. Everything should stop and the ball should go to PP in the post every time they try to get away with this (because unfortunately Hinrich can gaurd pp on the perimeter, even that foul line shoot over you or step away move) PP can’t allow hinrich to push him out of the post out toward the three point line.
Punish Hinrich PP, please, that at least is a matchup where it is your job to dominate.






























