1st option building a team: Pierce Or Allen ?

[veilside23]

Since the thread about pierce making it to HOF ... i want to know if you are building a team being the #1 option would you take pierce or ray allen and why?

[Hamtaro CP3KDKG]

The Truth and its not even fcking close
More consistent, way better defender, way better peak/prime, better in playoff, more reliable and most importantly isnt a fakkit

[Random_Guy]

Da truth

[Shade8780]

Da truth

[BuffaloBill]

Da truth

[KyrieTheFuture]

Raymundo Allen

[Harison]

This guy, no idea who it is :confusedshrug:

http://dimemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/Paul-Pierce-2.jpg

[JGXEN]

Mr Knicks killer, Paul Pierce

[Hamtaro CP3KDKG]

This guy, no idea who it is :confusedshrug:

http://dimemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/Paul-Pierce-2.jpg
http://larrybrownsports.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/paul-pierce-buzz-light-year.jpg

[CelticBaller]

Pierce, Allen is just a pos jumpshooter :facepalm

[Ronaldinho]

Slow pierce. But Ray Allen is an excelent 2nd option.

[LEFT4DEAD]

Well since just 1% of ISH have seen Allen's peak, most of answers will be Paul Pierce.

For me its a tough one. Pierce has done nothing before big 3.
He was putting up empty stats while not being able to do anything other than losing one or two times in early rounds of playoffs.

Allen has led the Sonics to 3rd seed back in 2005 if Im not mistaken with just Lewis playing near an all star level.

Also, idk how many of you remember that 76ers-Bucks ECF, when refs won the game 7 for 76ers and since Iverson was one of the faces of NBA at the time and NBA wanted that Iverson vs Shaq&Kobe finals, nobody ever talked about it.

Very tough to call but I would take Allen.

[LilEddyCurry]

Well since just 1% of ISH have seen Allen's peak, most of answers will be Paul Pierce.

For me its a tough one. Pierce has done nothing before big 3.
He was putting up empty stats while not being able to do anything other than losing one or two times in early rounds of playoffs.

Allen has led the Sonics to 3rd seed back in 2005 if Im not mistaken with just Lewis playing near an all star level.

Also, idk how many of you remember that 76ers-Bucks ECF, when refs won the game 7 for 76ers and since Iverson was one of the faces of NBA at the time and NBA wanted that Iverson vs Shaq&Kobe finals, nobody ever talked about it.

Very tough to call but I would take Allen.
This. But it wouldn't mind anyone taking Paul Pierce.

[veilside23]

Well since just 1% of ISH have seen Allen's peak, most of answers will be Paul Pierce.

For me its a tough one. Pierce has done nothing before big 3.
He was putting up empty stats while not being able to do anything other than losing one or two times in early rounds of playoffs.

Allen has led the Sonics to 3rd seed back in 2005 if Im not mistaken with just Lewis playing near an all star level.

Also, idk how many of you remember that 76ers-Bucks ECF, when refs won the game 7 for 76ers and since Iverson was one of the faces of NBA at the time and NBA wanted that Iverson vs Shaq&Kobe finals, nobody ever talked about it.

Very tough to call but I would take Allen.

ive seen ray allen since college ... he had a good team with the bucks ... but they didnt reach anything ... In my opinion ray allen is one of the best as a second option when you need a sidekick in your offense i wouldnt mind having allen as that guy. Pierce on the other hand can pretty much do it all on both sides

[kells333]

Pierce, Allen is just a pos jumpshooter :facepalm

Someone never saw jesus when he still had ups^^^

[LEFT4DEAD]

ive seen ray allen since college ... he had a good team with the bucks ... but they didnt reach anything ... In my opinion ray allen is one of the best as a second option when you need a sidekick in your offense i wouldnt mind having allen as that guy. Pierce on the other hand can pretty much do it all on both sides
And tell me, what Pierce exactly managed to reach before the BIG 3? I dont remember him leading HIS team to game 7 of ECF where he was robbed by the referees.
And Ray Allen was not just a spot up shooter as most of you think. Guy could do it all on offense in his prime and if you ask me he was a better scorer than Pierce prime vs prime.

[imdaman99]

Mr Knicks killer, Paul Pierce
Killed the Knicks over the years, was their most valuable player in the playoffs last year, and killed their chances at playoffs last night. The answer is Pierce.

[veilside23]

And tell me, what Pierce exactly managed to reach before the BIG 3? I dont remember him leading HIS team to game 7 of ECF where he was robbed by the referees.
And Ray Allen was not just a spot up shooter as most of you think. Guy could do it all on offense in his prime and if you ask me he was a better scorer than Pierce prime vs prime.

i never said that ray allen was just a spot up shooter if i did then feel free to quote it . ray allen can score no doubt about that.. but he isnt a great ball handler he isnt a good defender... he is clutch but pierce is just as good and often times he creates for himself something that allen isnt really known for.

i also find it interesting that despite the longevity of ray allen, paul pierce has scored more ... allen is ahead of pierce for 3 seasons... so to prove your point that he was a better scorer i doubt that

[swagga]

i never said that ray allen was just a spot up shooter if i did then feel free to quote it . ray allen can score no doubt about that.. but he isnt a great ball handler he isnt a good defender... he is clutch but pierce is just as good and often times he creates for himself something that allen isnt really known for.

i also find it interesting that despite the longevity of ray allen, paul pierce has scored more ... allen is ahead of pierce for 3 seasons... so to prove your point that he was a better scorer i doubt that

ISN'T =/= WASN'T
I'd say they are quite on par as a first option. Pierce is better 1v1 but Rayray puts so much presseure on the defense running those curls that for a PO team I'd actually go with him as the first option.

Actually I think BOS went with Allen as the first option too..

[Meticode]

Definitely Paul Pierce. IN his early career he was semi-athletic, he could finish at the rim, hit the jumper, and most importantly he stepped up to being a leader and a closer in close games. Ray Allen is a great player, but I feel more times than not his style of play was more perfect for a second option than a first option.

[#number6ix#]

I take Pierce but Ray Allen isn't far behind him in terms of skills... Pierce is just more capable of getting his shot off

[Random_Guy]

why do some here just assume that people picking pierce hasnt seen prime Ray Allen? We all know how great he was in his prime, but let's not act like Pierce wasn't a monster back in the days. Just because I pick pierce that means Ive never seen Prime Allen play? Ray gun was great in his prime but at the time he wasnt this deadly from three, he was more of a slasher, and he isnt half the defender that PP was. Paul Pierce in his prime could finish at the rim, was already a great shooter, and could basically score anywhere on the court. He prime is very underrated to be honest.

[Marlo_Stanfield]

Imo Pierce but you cant deny Allen did many things on unstacked teams, even nearly got to the finals.
Pierce>Kobe doe

[CelticBaller]

Someone never saw jesus when he still had ups^^^
:oldlol:
Clown

[JimmyMcAdocious]

This guy, no idea who it is :confusedshrug:

http://dimemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/Paul-Pierce-2.jpg

Sam Cassell

[KyrieTheFuture]

I think Ray Allen might be the most perfect second option of the 2000 era. Scottie has that title for the 90s for me. I wouldn't want either as my number one, but those would be my first choices for 2nd option

[Charlie Sheen]

Well since just 1% of ISH have seen Allen's peak, most of answers will be Paul Pierce.

For me its a tough one. Pierce has done nothing before big 3.
He was putting up empty stats while not being able to do anything other than losing one or two times in early rounds of playoffs.

Allen has led the Sonics to 3rd seed back in 2005 if Im not mistaken with just Lewis playing near an all star level.

Also, idk how many of you remember that 76ers-Bucks ECF, when refs won the game 7 for 76ers and since Iverson was one of the faces of NBA at the time and NBA wanted that Iverson vs Shaq&Kobe finals, nobody ever talked about it.

Very tough to call but I would take Allen.

Your entire argument is based around the premise that you're in the small segment of basketball fans who were watching nba basketball 15 years ago? This isn't a topic about basketball in the 1950's. Get over yourself.

[LEFT4DEAD]

i never said that ray allen was just a spot up shooter if i did then feel free to quote it . ray allen can score no doubt about that.. but he isnt a great ball handler he isnt a good defender... he is clutch but pierce is just as good and often times he creates for himself something that allen isnt really known for.

i also find it interesting that despite the longevity of ray allen, paul pierce has scored more ... allen is ahead of pierce for 3 seasons... so to prove your point that he was a better scorer i doubt that
Scoring more doesnt necessarily mean that you are a better scorer. It depends also how weak your team is.
Prime Allen had a better arsenal is all Im saying.

I agree that Allen was not a good defender, but Pierce was nothing special too. Just an average one.

They are both clutch, with Allen being just a little above Pierce IMO.

Nothing against Pierce but I think Allen would always manage to do more with less than him, and thats the point of this thread.

[veilside23]

Scoring more doesnt necessarily mean that you are a better scorer. It depends also how weak your team is.
Prime Allen had a better arsenal is all Im saying.

I agree that Allen was not a good defender, but Pierce was nothing special too. Just an average one.

They are both clutch, with Allen being just a little above Pierce IMO.

Nothing against Pierce but I think Allen would always manage to do more with less than him, and thats the point of this thread.

what is more then if its not scoring? your post is misleading. you mentioned allen is not a good defender and you said pierce is nothing special... just look at this picture at age 36 http://thenypost.files.wordpress.com/2013/11/nets2.jpg

i dont know even if a prime ray allen could do that

that separates them... where can you base that allen is more clutch because of the finals last year? then you would say that most ish people only know allen by 1% when in all honesty most of the points scored by ray is a jumpshot.

allen never did more when it comes to overall impact of the game

career average for pierce is 6 that is not outstanding i understand allen if 4. . assists are just about even... please educate me

[aboss4real24]

ill tk the guy who doesnt go 3-19 every other game

and keeps him self in shape

[veilside23]

ill tk the guy who doesnt go 3-19 every other game

and keeps him self in shape



lol about keeping in shape if anything a guy who got stabbed 11 times shouldnt have played like PP did ...

[fpliii]

Give me Pierce.

[aboss4real24]

lol about keeping in shape if anything a guy who got stabbed 11 times shouldnt have played like PP did ...

50 cent was shot 9times in kept in great shape

[Cold soul]

Da truth

[secund2nun]

Neither are first option caliber players on a title or even title contender team (unless it is a rare balanced team like the 04 Pistons, but that's not really a first option then)

[ProfessorMurder]

Pierce, because he was a better playmaker and ballhandler.


Neither are first option caliber players on a title or even title contender team (unless it is a rare balanced team like the 04 Pistons, but that's not really a first option then)

That must be why they were both first options on deep playoff runs before being on the same team? Stop it.

[secund2nun]

Pierce, because he was a better playmaker and ballhandler.



That must be why they were both first options on deep playoff runs before being on the same team? Stop it.

They both reached the ECF once a in historically weak ECF where they both lost and had no shot of actually winning the title, made the 2nd round once, and then missed the playoffs and lost in the first round every other season until they were traded to Boston.

They can be first options, but not on a team that can win a title or even seriously compete for a title.

[Smoke117]

Neither. Ray Allen is one of my favorite players of all time, but if I'm being honest I don't think either player belongs as your 1st option. If you want to be realistic, Allen had much better success as his teams best player and was basically screwed out of getting to the finals on the Bucks. It took the eventual 2005 championship Spurs 6 games to beat the Sonics too. Pierce never had any real success till Ray and Garnett showed up and frankly was considered a little diva and cry baby during his prime.

[Real Men Wear Green]

For me its a tough one. Pierce has done nothing before big 3.
He was putting up empty stats while not being able to do anything other than losing one or two times in early rounds of playoffs.
Neither. Ray Allen is one of my favorite players of all time, but if I'm being honest I don't think either player belongs as your 1st option. If you want to be realistic, Allen had much better success as his teams best player and was basically screwed out of getting to the finals on the Bucks. It took the eventual 2005 championship Spurs 6 games to beat the Sonics too. Pierce never had any real success till Ray and Garnett showed up and frankly was considered a little diva and cry baby during his prime.

Pierce lead the Celtics to the ECF in 2002. And, "diva crybaby?" You mean the guy that didn't miss a game after being stabbed 20+ times?

[CelticBaller]

Neither. Ray Allen is one of my favorite players of all time, but if I'm being honest I don't think either player belongs as your 1st option. If you want to be realistic, Allen had much better success as his teams best player and was basically screwed out of getting to the finals on the Bucks. It took the eventual 2005 championship Spurs 6 games to beat the Sonics too. Pierce never had any real success till Ray and Garnett showed up and frankly was considered a little diva and cry baby during his prime.
Yep, let's act like pierce never led his team to the ECF with a terrible cast of players :oldlol:

[Smoke117]

I just don't like Paul Pierce nor his game, but you can't deny that Ray Allen had more success as his teams best player. They got screwed in that game 7 vs the Sixers in 2001 and should have been in the finals vs the Lakers and like I said...they pushed that 2005 championship Spurs to six games when he was on the Sonics. It's also common knowledge that Pierce had some attitude problems in the mid 2000s.

[D.J.]

Pierce at his best was putting up around 25/6/4 on 44/40/80. He wasn't the most athletic guy out there but he could use his body to get to the hoop and line(got to the line 8-9 times a game before the rule changes), could post up, could hit threes, was a decent playmaker, and could play D.


Ray at his best was around 23/5/4 on 45/41/90. He wasn't the spot up shooter like some think. He could handle the ball, create for himself, was athletic and would dunk in your face, could shoot threes like very few could, and wasn't a bad defender either.


Now with that being said, I'd rather have Pierce. Neither were one dimensional scorers, but Pierce to me was more versatile. He was much better at attacking the hoop and getting to the line, could post up, and his three point shooting ability was very good as well. He was also a better defender than Ray. Pierce's size and skillset also allowed him to create mismatches as he could play the 2 and the 3.


And also to Pierce's credit, he took the 2002 Celtics to the ECF with Antoine Walker jacking up 8 threes a game and no one else averaging double digit points(unless you count Rodney Rogers who arrived at the trade deadline). After Pierce and Walker, Kenny Anderson was the high scorer at 9.6 PPG. Other top players were Tony Delk, Tony Battie, Eric Williams, and Erick Strickland. Then the following year, Pierce led the Celtics to a 1st round upset over Indiana as a 6 seed with Walker jacking up 8 threes a game again and no one else averaging double digit points.

[Hamtaro CP3KDKG]

Ray was absolutely a mediocre defender at best. Not the worst but no one was saying he was decent defender. Funny what playing w/ KG will do for ur career:oldlol: :oldlol: :oldlol: :oldlol:

[Killbot]

Allen.

[Smoke117]

Ray was absolutely a mediocre defender at best. Not the worst but no one was saying he was decent defender. Funny what playing w/ KG will do for ur career:oldlol: :oldlol: :oldlol: :oldlol:


Actually I'd say he was a decent one on one defensive player. Considering my favorite player of all time is Scottie Pippen...I know what good defense is and hold it in high regard. I was actually thinking about the Rockets how Dwight can't lift them up like he did the Magic and I've come to the conclusion that defense really starts with THE COACH. The Magic didn't have stellar defensive players, but Stan Van Gundy instilled a very defensive style of coaching that allowed players that were mostly mediocre into a an overall great defensive unit built around Howard. On the Rockets Mchale is not doing that...Dwight is healthy again, but Mchale is just not a defensive coach like Stan was. If the Coach doesn't instill a defensive philosophy there is only so much a defender as good as Dwight is can do.

My point though as far as Ray Allen is that he was never really a bad defensive player. The fact of the matter is the Bucks had no defensive identity at all. They were never lower than 17th while he was on the team and were 26th in 2000 (while being 2nd in offense) and 20th in defense in 2001 while being the number 1 ranked offense. In 2002 they were 23rd in defense while being 8th in offense. In 2003 they were 28th in defense and 1 again in offense that year Allen was traded. Seattle is basically the same exact story...when they had that good run in the 2005 playoffs and took the Spurs to six games who went onto when the championship...while being 27th in defense and 2nd in defense.

I'm not saying Ray Allen was a great defender...because he wasn't. I think he was a good one on one defensive player, but he didn't have that defensive basketball IQ to be any kind of good team defender. It actually takes more work to be a good team defender than one on one. Ray was a pretty good one on one defender he just didn't have the know how and basketball IQ as far as defense goes to be a good team defensive player.

The reason I posted all those numbers was to show that the Bucks nor Sonics put any concept into to defense. The defense starts with the coach and how he runs the team and George Karl and Nate McMillan never pushed their teams defensively. They coached the teams to be effective offensively, but they instilled nothing defensively. When Ray finally went to the Celtics and went to a team where defense was pushed he was a decent to good defender. He was never a great help defender because he just never understood defense like he did offense, but he was a very able one on one defensive player.

[salwan]

I would take the guy who actually played as a 1st option through his whole career

[kNIOKAS]

Well since just 1% of ISH have seen Allen's peak, most of answers will be Paul Pierce.

For me its a tough one. Pierce has done nothing before big 3.
He was putting up empty stats while not being able to do anything other than losing one or two times in early rounds of playoffs.

Allen has led the Sonics to 3rd seed back in 2005 if Im not mistaken with just Lewis playing near an all star level.

Also, idk how many of you remember that 76ers-Bucks ECF, when refs won the game 7 for 76ers and since Iverson was one of the faces of NBA at the time and NBA wanted that Iverson vs Shaq&Kobe finals, nobody ever talked about it.

Very tough to call but I would take Allen.
Whoa now son, it makes me think you have never watched PP before big 3.

He went as far as Ray Allen has ever went, and led the biggest 4th quarter comeback in Playoffs ever, of course after that he was the reason for the biggest Finals comeback ever but that's 08. He was leading the team in three categories - well, tells you how poor those Celtic teams were, and together with Antoine they were second scoring duo in the NBA for a while.

This is pretty silly of you to claim he had done nothing and put up empty stats.

[Real Men Wear Green]

I just don't like Paul Pierce nor his game, but you can't deny that Ray Allen had more success as his teams best player. They got screwed in that game 7 vs the Sixers in 2001 and should have been in the finals vs the Lakers and like I said...they pushed that 2005 championship Spurs to six games when he was on the Sonics. It's also common knowledge that Pierce had some attitude problems in the mid 2000s.How? Both made a conference Finals. What, is losing in Game 7 instead of Game 6 that important? Your argument so far has been the inaccurate claim that Allen did a lot more as his team's top player and Pierce is somehow a crybaby. The only thing that you've said that can't be disputed is that you don't like Pierce. You are entitled to that opinion but it's not much of a case.

[CelticBaller]

I just don't like Paul Pierce nor his game
Then gtfo within your biased bs, acting like pierce never did shit smh

[veilside23]

50 cent was shot 9times in kept in great shape


when did 50 cent become a basketball player? :facepalm

[cltcfn2924]

Well since just 1% of ISH have seen Allen's peak, most of answers will be Paul Pierce.

For me its a tough one. Pierce has done nothing before big 3.
He was putting up empty stats while not being able to do anything other than losing one or two times in early rounds of playoffs.

Allen has led the Sonics to 3rd seed back in 2005 if Im not mistaken with just Lewis playing near an all star level.

Also, idk how many of you remember that 76ers-Bucks ECF, when refs won the game 7 for 76ers and since Iverson was one of the faces of NBA at the time and NBA wanted that Iverson vs Shaq&Kobe finals, nobody ever talked about it.

Very tough to call but I would take Allen.

Wrong answer. Pierce took the '01-'02 team to the ECF, with a bunch of castoffs, except for Antoine "fatso" Walker.

[cltcfn2924]

And tell me, what Pierce exactly managed to reach before the BIG 3? I dont remember him leading HIS team to game 7 of ECF where he was robbed by the referees.
And Ray Allen was not just a spot up shooter as most of you think. Guy could do it all on offense in his prime and if you ask me he was a better scorer than Pierce prime vs prime.

Care to explain why PP has scored more points than Allen? Allen a better scorer?
Nope, Allen a better shooter, Pierce a better scorer.

[cltcfn2924]

Neither are first option caliber players on a title or even title contender team (unless it is a rare balanced team like the 04 Pistons, but that's not really a first option then)

Well, then please tell us who was first option on the '07. '08 team? I want to see this one.

[cltcfn2924]

Are we done yet? I think OP really answered his own question because the 2007,2008 C's were built around Pierce and Allen was on that team?????

[sketchy]

Like a few have already said, this isn't even close and shouldn't even have to be asked. I don't even feel compelled to explain why Paul Pierce is the far superior #1 option.

In other news, I'm loving all the praise my boy is finally getting. I knew once his career started to wind down people would go back and look at what he's accomplished. Getting that respect he deserves.

:applause: