Wich ending five is better on paper?

[The Franchise]

Paul plays a ton more minutes than Manu. It could still be argued as to who the better player is. It's not as cut and dry as a few of you make it out. These are their stats from last year (an injured year for Ginobili).
Manu:
PPG 15.5
RPG 4.5
APG 3.6
SPG 1.5
BPG 0.4
FG% 0.454
FT% 0.884
3P% 0.330
MPG 26.8

Pierce:
PPG 20.5
RPG 5.6
APG 3.6
SPG 1.0
BPG 0.3
FG% 0.457
FT% 0.830
3P% 0.391
MPG 37.5

As a Spur fan (After the Rockets they are my favorite team I might add) who would you rather have on your team, if you set loyalties aside? Put Peirce in Manus place and the Spurs would win the le without a doubt.

[Goran Dragic]

Paul plays a ton more minutes than Manu. It could still be argued as to who the better player is.

The efficiency per minute argument is horrible, Manu comes in and plays against bench players. Pierce is playing against starters most of the game.

[BlackBellamy]

Blair has clearly shown he's the next Moses Malone and Jefferson was waiting till he got to SA to show he was the heir apparent to Julius Erving, I know.

Your original comment was directed towards Duncan vs. Dirk. I never mentioned Blair or Jefferson, nor do I place value (and would certainly not overvalue) players prior to...
A. Seeing how they fit our system
B. Seeing them play their first NBA game

[Greg Oden]

Your original comment was directed towards Duncan vs. Dirk. I never mentioned Blair or Jefferson, nor do I place value (and would certainly not overvalue) players prior to...
A. Seeing how they fit our system
B. Seeing them play their first NBA game

My original comment had nothing to do with Duncan vs. Dirk.

[BlackBellamy]

The efficiency per minute argument is horrible, Manu comes in and plays against bench players. Pierce is playing against starters most of the game.

Well how about, he was playing banged up for the entire year that he did see any floor time and in roughly 11 less minutes per game managed to put up similar numbers to Pierce? I don't know alot of teams that don't still run a starter (or D-specialist bench player) at Manu, even if he comes off the bench.

[BlackBellamy]

My original comment had nothing to do with Duncan vs. Dirk.

Ah, I misread. My mistake. Ya, it is a bit presumptive to think that any player will be an impact prior to playing his first game with your squad. That's true.

[Greg Oden]

Ah, I misread. My mistake. Ya, it is a bit presumptive to think that any player will be an impact prior to playing his first game with your squad. That's true.

It's all good brah.

[Cry Havoc]

You're not only a homer, but re ed as well.

He's one of the most efficient players in NBA history.

How's Oden doing these days? Is he getting closer to being the next Wilt? Can we call him a top 5 center all-time like most Blazer fans wanted to do before he played a single game in the NBA?

I like your posts generally especially when you're owning z0sa.

As unimpressive as Pierce was, last I checked he played. Yeah he had nothing left after a season where he averaged 38 points per game, as would Manu. And the year before he won finals MVP.

When Manu and Pierce were both in their prime they were perhaps two of the most under-appreciated (by the media) players in NBA history. If you could go back and look at posts I made pretty shortly after joining the site, I made the argument for Pierce being one of the best players in the NBA. His statline for several seasons when the Celtics were cellar-dwellers was incredible.

Sadly, I think he lost a LOT last year. That's the only reason I say Manu > Pierce, because I think Manu still has that explosiveness. Pierce might prove me wrong and go off again this year, but he really shirked stepping up in the playoffs when the C's needed him. Rondo was better in every aspect of the game in the 09 playoffs.

[Greg Oden]

He's one of the most efficient players in NBA history.

How's Oden doing these days? Is he getting closer to being the next Wilt? Can we call him a top 5 center all-time like most Blazer fans wanted to do before he played a single game in the NBA?

He plays against bench players, he single handedly prevented your team from advancing in the playoffs, before and he's not better than Pierce.

I find it very funny and hypocritical that spurfan would accuse another fanbase of overrating a player that's never been on an nba court.


But don't let trying to make a funny get in your way.

[Goran Dragic]

Well how about, he was playing banged up for the entire year that he did see any floor time and in roughly 11 less minutes per game managed to put up similar numbers to Pierce? I don't know alot of teams that don't still run a starter (or D-specialist bench player) at Manu, even if he comes off the bench.

per 36 minute stats:
Pierce:
19.7 points, 5.4 rebounds, 3.5 assists, 45.7%, 2.7 turnovers

Manu:
20.8 points, 5.3 rebounds, 3.8 assists, 45.4%, 2.7 turnovers


Per minute, they're pretty much the same player, but that doesn't mean Manu = Pierce, that means in order for Manu to play with as much efficiency as Pierce, he needs to come off the bench and play less minutes per game because he can't maintain the same efficiency as long as Pierce.

Pierce > Manu

[Goran Dragic]

he really shirked stepping up in the playoffs when the C's needed him.

Yeah if only he could step up as much for Boston as much as Manu stepped up for the Spurs in the playoffs last year.

[Goran Dragic]

Carmelo Anthony per 36 minutes:
23.8 points, 7.1 rebounds, 3.5 assists, 44.3%, 3.1 turnovers

Beasley per 36 minutes:
20.1 points, 7.9 rebounds, 1.5 assists, 47.2%, 2.2 turnovers

Beasley = Anthony because he'd be the same player if he got as many minutes.

[cobbler]

per 36 minute stats:
Pierce:
19.7 points, 5.4 rebounds, 3.5 assists, 45.7%, 2.7 turnovers

Manu:
20.8 points, 5.3 rebounds, 3.8 assists, 45.4%, 2.7 turnovers


Per minute, they're pretty much the same player, but that doesn't mean Manu = Pierce, that means in order for Manu to play with as much efficiency as Pierce, he needs to come off the bench and play less minutes per game because he can't maintain the same efficiency as long as Pierce.

Pierce > Manu

They both have seen better days and will not even sniff another LOB in thier careers.

[BlackBellamy]

Per minute, they're pretty much the same player, but that doesn't mean Manu = Pierce, that means in order for Manu to play with as much efficiency as Pierce, he needs to come off the bench and play less minutes per game because he can't maintain the same efficiency as long as Pierce.

Pierce > Manu

No, Manu comes off our bench because our starting five scoring option gets too crowded and the second team for the Spurs has been either lacking scoring strength or has sucked all together. Manu also plays the point a good amount of time on second team, and he can create his own shot. Anyways, you have decent points to validate your opinion, but my point was not to determine who between Manu or Pierce is better, it's simply to say that who is better is debatable. Officially Manu is a guard and Pierce is a forward anyways.

[KidCongo]

All this proves is how good LeBron is at 1v5

[KidCongo]

Also I'm a fan of a closing line-up that has 3pt shooters to space the floor for their star. The magic is the most scary to me, but maybe that's because of past horrors.

[Spursfan092120]

They both have seen better days and will not even sniff another LOB in thier careers.

Yeah..you honestly think the Spurs or Celtics will not win another le before Pierce and Manu retire? Wow...just wow..

[mystargtr34]

I love Manu, but Paul Pierce is better.

[LnGrrrR]

Sadly, I think he lost a LOT last year. That's the only reason I say Manu > Pierce, because I think Manu still has that explosiveness. Pierce might prove me wrong and go off again this year, but he really shirked stepping up in the playoffs when the C's needed him. Rondo was better in every aspect of the game in the 09 playoffs.

I think it's because he really put alot of energy out in closing the season strong, because he assumed KG would be coming back for the playoffs. Like you said, he's getting older, and I think he was just gassed. He had a huge lack of elevation on his shots in the Bulls series... to the point where that's not age per se, but exhaustion.

[mystargtr34]

I would say the Celtics have the best closing 5, if only because we have seen what they can do, especially defensively. There's no doubt the Spurs will be much improved, and i think their line up definately has the potential to be the best of the three, but the Celts are the safer bet for now.

[23LeBronJames23]

I would say the Celtics have the best closing 5, if only because we have seen what they can do, especially defensively. There's no doubt the Spurs will be much improved, and i think their line up definately has the potential to be the best of the three, but the Celts are the safer bet for now.

agreed..

[Brazil]

I would say the Celtics have the best closing 5, if only because we have seen what they can do, especially defensively. There's no doubt the Spurs will be much improved, and i think their line up definately has the potential to be the best of the three, but the Celts are the safer bet for now.

I agree but the poll says on paper, for me on paper the spurs ending five is better than the celtics now of course it will depend on team chemistry, how RJ will perform in spurs system and the intensity level he will put on D, I'm not worried by Dice, he will be just fine.

[Chieflion]

I voted for the Celtics. That team can lock down and play some defense and has Ray Allen and Paul Pierce who can make good decisions with the ball and hit clutch shots.