Re: Why Pierce Got the 61m
posted at 9/29/2010 4:37 PM EDT
In Response to Re: Why Pierce Got the 61m
[QUOTE]The problem is Pierce has been paid franchise money when he was never a franchise player. He was good enough to be Robin to a true Batman but unfortunately Celtic management never recognized that. It was only the addition of KG that got the Celtics over the line. Alas, Pierce will end up costing the Celtics a chance to re-build with younger, better players but the decision has been made so lets roll the dice.
Posted by RUMcHale[/QUOTE]
You say Pierce was never a franchise player. I find that statement inaccurate.
Kobe is a great player and he has won 5 championship rings, but all 5 years that he won he was placed in the best situation in the NBA. The one year that Pierce won the ring, he was placed in the best situation.
This "franchise player" label that we speak about has more to do with branding, marketing and hype than anything else. Allen Iversion has won 0 rings, but he would be considered a franchise player. Lebron has won 0 rings, but he would be considered a franchise player. Paul Pierce who has won 1 ring, will not be considered franchise player by most. Why? Because collectively, the NBA, the media, and companies in the US spent more money hyping up Allen Iversion, and Lebron compared to Pierce. Thats it!
In 2008 when Boston won the championship, Paul Pierce was presented with the MVP trophy. And rightly so. He went head-to-head against Lebron James and Kobe Bryant, and most experts believed (even before the results of the series were final) that Pierce outplayed both.
So, if Pierce had the ability to outplay those two (believed to be the 2 best in the NBA that year) then why is it that he couldn't be considered a franchise player. To me it seems ridiculous.
The whole concept of "franchise player" is deeply rooted in this capitalistic economy's desire to ride the coat-tails of marketable athletes.
As fans of basketball, and students of the game, he shouldn't worry about "who is a franchise player? and who isn't?" This talk is stupid. We should worry about whether an athelete can will his team to victory, and in this count both Kobe and Pierce fit the bill. And in my mind, pretty equally.