Re:Pierce

[Joe Hironaka <j.hironaka@unesco.org>]

Witch Craft wrote:

> You continue to worship a false god.  Repent and follow the path
> of Pierce, the best player on the C's: A better shooter than Walker
> and a better rebounder than Mercer.
> WC

Since I admire and share your Celts Pride optimism, I won't take you to
task for already proclaiming superstar status on a guy who's never
played at the NBA level.   :-)    But I do think the reason nine GM's
passed up the chance to draft Paul Pierce is because he is viewed as a
'tweener who is not yet an adequate dribbler.

For what little it's worth, I don't think Paul Pierce is particularly
outstanding by NBA standards at any particular skill (I think he could
be a surprisingly solid rebounder, but his lack of size might negate
that). I think Pierce's strong grasp of fundamentals could help shape
team chemistry in a huge way, and also that he is a far more
well-rounded college player than Ron Mercer ever was. If Paul Pierce
makes it in the NBA, he'll have to do it on guts like a Dan Majerle/John
Havlecek. I don't think he has anything like the court sense of a young
Danny Manning, for example, much less the sheer physical explosiveness
of Ron Mercer, Vince Carter types.

Aesthetically, I would prefer a Celtics team of Paul Pierce-type guys to
the one-man wrecking crew of Antoine Walker. But I think it is foolhardy
to imagine the team will advance throught the playoffs without both
Antoine Walker and Paul Pierce at forward. In an ideal world, Antoine
Walker would evolve into the type of champion athlete he was at
Kentucky, where he delivered serious  production per minute (15ppg and
10 rebounds on over 55% shooting in just 26 minutes per night I think)
on the road to a championship. I still think Antoine Walker will make
every sacrifice in exchange for wins (provided he is recognized by his
peers as a yearly All Star).  He takes the game so personally. He really
is competitive in this sense.

Cheers,

Joe

****