Yes, I realize this debate is goign on in the Paul Pierce thread, but it desperately needs a poll. The argument is that Pierce and Francis shoot almost the same % for their career. However, Paul Pierce shoots a few more shots in a slightly less minutes. The debate is that since Pierce shoots more but with the same %, he's basically a better shooter. The general question is, who's the better SHOOTER, Paul Pierce or Steve Francis, based on stats as well as your own opinion/experience/whatever? NOTE: Paul Pierce has been in the All Star 3-pt shooting contest, I think on more than one occasion. If you have any similar supporting facts for Steve, feel free to share them.
what? are you XXXXting me? Paul Pierce... he's known as a great shooter. Great midrange game, if not a little streaky. That's what makes him good... his shooting... because his handles and athleticism are not as good as the other top flight swingman.
what? people are arguing that steve is better at shooting than paul pierce? there's no reason to do that unless you're a steve only fan. if you want to say more desire, better handles, more athleticism, anything like that... Steve over Pierce is a no-brainer. i live in boston and i see paul pierce a lot. the only reason he's able to score 25 points a game is because he's a lights out shooter. also... he is very strong so he can finish at the hoop despite not being as athletic as Kobe or TMac... he's not in their league because of that. there is no argument who the better shooter is...
I agree with you. In fact, I STRONGLY agree with you. Just like the 80% that have voted for Pierce so far.
Apparently, since Pierce is only slightly better than Steve for his career in FG5 and 3pt%, that means Steve is as good. Apparently, the stats don't lie.
while i agree to an extent... i also disagree. our team would be at least as good with pierce instead of francis. pierce would really thrive on a team with a big man to create him open looks. on such a team he could be 46% shooting, 25ppg, 6 rebs, and 4 to 5 assists.
So Paul Pierce is going from a team where he's the only scoring option to a team where he's #2, and his scoring will go up? I like Yao, but he can't turn a Stackhouse-type player into a Kobe Bryant clone.
disagree. last year pierce's numbers were top five nba with Antoine Walker as a second option. This year he's had no other options and hence has suffered as TMac and AI suffered. He's not as good as either of those two players. But having a big man would help the numbers of any player currently stuck being a one man show.
I think that SF is the better overall player. He just brings more to the table(including turnovers...ugg).Pierce can do nothing but shoot(rather poorly FG% wise).
Is Yao going to turn into that player tho? I'm beginning to question. BTW..Ming is my favorite player on the team...so don't call me one of those "Yao or Steve only fans". I root for my team....not the players.
yao is better than antoine walker. i hate the XOF term as much as you... so you don't gotta worry about that.
Paul Pierce was a poor percentage shooter in 2002/03 as well. I really like the guy as a scorer and a heart-type player, but he shot 40% and 42% the last two seasons, the latter with Walker. His game is scoring and penetrating and drawing fouls and in general having the offense run through him. I think he'd chafe being a standstill, kick-in, kick-out player. If that's what you want, get a 3 point specialist like Hoiberg (the Mayor) or Peeler or (god forbid) Allan Houston.
The only thing is that Pierce has never been asked to defer to anyone or has been given the chance to. So I see Pierce having the same problems SF had at the beginning with Yao, but its not like that couldn't be changed.
Some of you guys are really clueless. Change for the sake of change will not improve this team. Question for some of you. Guess who had more TOs than Francis last season (03). If you guys use the Pistons as the blueprint, you will realize that Pierce is not quick enough to be an integral part of an attacking defense. If Yao is the anchor on defense, then you surround him with quick athletic players. I am not taking anything away from Pierce, he is not the right complement on this (YAO's) team. As for the question, who cares? Neither one of the two are going to ever shoot a high percentage. Both turn the ball over but one is a point guard in the West and the other is a shooting guard in the East. That's comparing apples to oranges. I say we go out and surround Yao and Steve with long athletic players. Billups has learned to play within the right system. Steve learned that this year, WATCH OUT NEXT YEAR!
I really hate comments like this (even though I use them too sometimes). It's like when a sports commentator is asked "Is this game a must win?" and they respond with "Well, it isn't, but they have to win it!" or something stupid like that. Don't conditionalize the response, it was a yes or no question... Anyway, nothing bad on you, yipengzhao, just a random thought... Pierce is overrated as a shooter, IMHO. He's a decent 3pt threat, and he can score from almost anywhere from the floor, but he also needs volumes of shots to get those points. I would prefer a stronger shooter on the 3 teamed with Yao...back to the original point, I think Pierce is a better shooter, marginally, only because Steve got many percentage points on layups, dunks, and short jumpers.
