 |
 |
 |
|
LOS ANGELES -- This question would have been a gross overreaction to Game 1 of the NBA Finals, when Paul Pierce basically matched Kobe Bryant's scoring production with less than half Bryant's shots from the floor.
This question would have been too much, too soon, to wonder after Game 2, when Pierce again needed a fraction of the shots to produce on par with Bryant.
 | |
|
Paul Pierce has been effective at slowing Kobe Bryant ... (Getty Images) |
This question would have been a joke after Game 3, when Pierce was 2-for-14 from the floor while Kobe was scoring 36 points.
But after Game 4 this question popped back into my head, and after Game 5 I'm starting to wonder if this question has already been answered. Even if it hasn't yet been asked:
Is Paul Pierce a better basketball player than Kobe Bryant?
Note the wording of that question. Nowhere do you see words, or derivatives of words, like score or points. The question isn't all that hard. Don't make it more than it is. I'm just asking: Is Pierce better than Bryant?
Normally I'm not one to ask. I prefer to tell. It's more bold that way. But just asking this question is bold enough. Paul Pierce, better than Kobe Bryant? That's crazy talk.
Isn't it?
Or is it?
There are several ways to look at this, and most ways favor Bryant. I get that. If you look at championship rings, Bryant has three, Pierce none. Even if Boston wins the 2008 NBA Finals, the Lakers' Bryant will still have a 3-1 lead. Advantage, Kobe.
If you look at MVPs, Bryant wins by a score of 1-0; Pierce has never even finished in the top 10.
Career points? Bryant has two more years in the league and he's ahead by roughly 5,000 points. Advantage, Kobe. All-NBA spots? Bryant has made the first team six times. Pierce, never.
On paper, it's a blowout for Bryant.
So on the court, why does Pierce look like the better player?
You're watching the same NBA Finals I am, right? This isn't just a matter of supporting casts. Clearly Pierce has the better cast, the better team. Five games into this thing, most of us are aware of that. Los Angeles can still win because of Boston's injuries or because of Ray Allen's family issues or simply because the Lakers could get hot in Games 6 and 7 while the Celtics pick a bad time to play poorly. It can happen, but it probably won't. Just because Boston wins the NBA Finals, that wouldn't mean Pierce -- as his team's best player -- is better than Bryant.
So let's look deeper than the team scores and just watch the action on the court. Don't be fooled by the difference in vertical leap or baseline-to-baseline speed, because Bryant beats Pierce in both categories by a large margin. And J.R. Smith of the Nuggets beats Bryant. The NBA game isn't about pure athletic ability, because if it was, Gerald Green would be starting for the Celtics.
But just watch the games. There have been five of them, so if you've not picked up on this whole Pierce-or-Bryant question, expand your mind and consider the possibility. Watch what Pierce does when he has the ball. Watch what Bryant does. Best of all, watch what happens when they guard each other.
Other than his 36-point outburst in Game 3, Bryant has been inefficient. He is getting tons of points -- he's the leading scorer in the Finals with 132 in five games -- but he has needed tons of shots (109). Pierce isn't far behind Bryant in points (114) but is way, way back in shots (75).
And in the past two games, Bryant's worst two games, Pierce has defended Kobe. Not shut him down, but definitely slowed him down. Kobe struggles to score against Pierce, but the opposite cannot be said. It hasn't mattered who the Lakers put on Pierce -- Kobe, Sasha Vujacic, whomever. When Pierce wants to score, he scores. He doesn't look terribly quick, but he beats Bryant off the dribble. He's definitely stronger than Bryant, and uses that strength to bull him under the basket.
In these NBA Finals, Pierce has shot with a higher percentage from the floor (45.3 percent to Bryant's 42.2 percent) and has been more accurate from 3-point range (42.8 percent to Bryant's 31.5 percent) and the foul line (82.2 percent to 77.2 percent). Their assist-to-turnover ratios are a push. So is their rebounding.
The numbers don't scream out that Pierce is the better player.
But they're not even whispering in favor of Bryant.