Paul would like to think he's better than Kobe. But Kobe Bryant is the best closer in the game. He's the best player in the game. You have to remember he's done it for a long time at a high level. I'm not biased. I'm going to tell it like it is. Kobe Bryant has won three championships for a reason.
--Magic Johnson, Former Lakers' Player and Current Lakers Executive and Owner
When I first read this title, I asked myself, this is news? The owner of the Lakers coming out and saying a Lakers' player is better than a Celtics' player. Imagine that! Now if Magic would have said he thought Pierce was better, yes, that would have been news.
The by-line did nothing to add legitimacy (good old Shira Springer).
Kobe has won three championships.
Indeed.
Paul Pierce, stuck with the likes of Tony Battie, Rodney Rogers, Mark Blount, Vin Baker, Raef LaFrentz, and Walter McCarty as his primary bigs for most of his career, is being judged as a lesser player than someone who boasted as a teammate one of the ten best big men ever to play the game.
Once Shaq lost interest, the Lakers were toast, not even Karl Malone, Gary Payton, and Horace Grant could push LA over the top again, much less Pau Gasol and company.
Paul Pierce?
The first year Pierce is surrounded by talent, the Celtics win 66 games and Pierce wins Finals MVP going away. Hell, he would have won MVP of the entire playoffs had there been such an award. Magic conceded as much: "Was Paul Pierce better than Kobe in the Finals? Of course, he was better than everybody in the whole playoffs."
Still, one has to question the quality of an analysis that compares a Kobe Bryant teamed with Shaq to a Paul Pierce teamed with Tony Battie and concludes, yeah, Kobe is better.
Give me a flippin' break.
3 comments:
I love Paul Pierce but I have to agree with Magic and give the devil his due. Kobe Bryant is better than Paul Pierce and always has been in every season leading up to now.
What surprised me was that Magic considers Paul Pierce to be one of the 5 best players in the league. That's the 1st time I've heard an ABC/ESPN guy rank Paul that high.
I guess my point isn't who is better, but rather the evidence isn't there to make a comparison.
Kobe didn't put the Ls over the top before 2000 and he hasn't done so since 2003.
What was the difference?
Shaq playing at the top of his game.
Now move over to Boston.
Celtics fans have known since his rookie year how good Paul Pierce was.
But we didn't know how good until the opportunity presented itself to demonstrate how great he was.
He did so in the playoffs in 2002, and again last year.
Bottom line: It is impossible to draw a comparison between the two, because the two didn't have an equal supporting cast.
My other point is that it's hardly news for a Laker owner/exec to make this statement.
Post a Comment