Kyrie Irving is now a...

[Shaqdaddy11]

You really don't understand that you didn't mention only game 7 until I called you out. Even though I directly quoted you you're still insisting that's not what you really meant, meaning the entire series & not just game 7. So how exactly am I slow for posting the correct info showing Pierce was not outplayed for the entire Finals (like you originally said) by Artest? Do you even realize there's a difference in saying the entire series compared to only 1 game?

I said 'In the finals' not the entire series. You just automatically assumed. It's ok, I was ripping on your Celtics so I can understand why you're so pissy.

 

[Wamu]

I said 'In the finals' not the entire series. You just automatically assumed. It's ok, I was ripping on your Celtics so I can understand why you're so pissy.

Not upset @ all. All I did was prove you wrong & that greatly bothered you. It wasn't until then did you even mention just game 7. When you say something like "in the Finals" w/o mentioning a specific game that means the entire series.

 

[Shaqdaddy11]

When you say something like "in the Finals" w/o mentioning a specific game that means the entire series.

Thanks mom.

It clearly bothered you.

 

[trojanfan12]

Pierce averaged more points, rebounds, assists, shot better from the field, better from downtown & better from the FT line than Artest did during the '10 Finals. Here are the #'s...

Pierce: 18.0 ppg, 8.3 rebs, 3.0 asts, .439 from the field & .400 from downtown & .865 from the line
Artest: 10.6 ppg, 4.6 rebs, 1.3 asts, .361 from the field & .344 from downtown & .550 from the line


Yes the Lakers won but how exactly did Artest outplay Pierce in that series?

This is how:

 

[trojanfan12]

Did I say the entire series or are you getting you panties in a twist again?

Both

 

[Rockinkuwait]

Why? You said Artest outplayed Pierce for the Finals. I proved you wrong. Why mention the entire Finals & then after being proven wrong narrow it down to 1 game of the entire series?

I agree with you in that finals, but it is tough when talking about great defenders. Rodman got "outplayed" in every finals with the bulls. Ben Wallace was outplayed in Detroit's championship. Bruce Bowen outplayed repeatedly.

It is a tough one when talking about those types of players.

Ben Wallace was outplayed by Shaq statistically, but his ability to limit Shaq to good numbers one on one rather than using double/triple teams to do the same and letting perimeter guys wide open is 100% why Det won that series. In that respect Wallace did what he does, and kept Shaq from doing what he does (40 a game if you play him man up without help). Ben technically was outplayed, but when it came down to who takes the other out of what is expected of them to win you games, you could make the argument he outplayed Shaq.

Those last 3 laker wins in that series, Artest did what Artest does and Pierce was unable to be a top playmaker which is what Boston needed him to be in order to win.

 

[msgkings322]

That's fine and all but put it this way, I don't think you can put Kyrie on let's say a team like Portland and see him get further than Lillard took them. Now put a true batman on that team (Lebron or KD) and they probably make a deeper run

So you're saying adding LeBron or Durant to Portland would (probably?) make them significantly better? You can't get that kind of analysis just anywhere, folks.

 

[msgkings322]

He wasn't even out of the first round of the playoffs till 26

And at 27 he lost in the first round

Not bad winning a first round playoff series all by himself at age 26 though. Kyrie's always had 4 other players on the court with him.

 

[CodeBreaker]

At least Wade can always say he won a title without Lebron, and did before him.

Irving will have to prove that at some point.

But will never prove that he wins BEFORE Lebron.

 

[flyerhawk]

He wasn't even out of the first round of the playoffs till 26

And at 27 he lost in the first round

At age 27, Steph Curry won an MVP and NBA title. But cool story otherwise, bro.

 

[tducey]

I agree, Irving's a good player and quite accomplished at just 24.

 

[bksballer89]

He wasn't even out of the first round of the playoffs till 26

And at 27 he lost in the first round

Why are you lying on the guy? He got out of round 1 at the age of 25 and won a title at 27

 

[knowyourenemy]

I can't figure out why the age of any of these guys matters. Are we supposed to compare 24 year old Kyrie Irving to 24 year old Steph Curry? That seems like a tremendous waste of time.

 

[WiggyRuss]

I can't figure out why the age of any of these guys matters. Are we supposed to compare 24 year old Kyrie Irving to 24 year old Steph Curry? That seems like a tremendous waste of time.

whats the alternative? waiting till their careers are over to compare them? or just ignoring the fact that Kyrie was one of the youngest all stars in NBA history while Steph Curry was lighting up Ball State?

 

[flyerhawk]

whats the alternative? waiting till their careers are over to compare them? or just ignoring the fact that Kyrie was one of the youngest all stars in NBA history while Steph Curry was lighting up Ball State?

Not all players develop at the same rate or reach the same level.

Not all players get to play with one of the greatest players of all time.

 

[TurnUpTheHeat]

whats the alternative? waiting till their careers are over to compare them? or just ignoring the fact that Kyrie was one of the youngest all stars in NBA history while Steph Curry was lighting up Ball State?

Nice try, but Curry has developed himself into the current 2x league mvp.
Kyrie without James has only seen the playoffs on TV.

 

[knowyourenemy]

whats the alternative? waiting till their careers are over to compare them? or just ignoring the fact that Kyrie was one of the youngest all stars in NBA history while Steph Curry was lighting up Ball State?

The alternative is to compare 2016 Curry to 2016 Irving. Curry is better right now and that's really all that matters.

 

[WiggyRuss]

The alternative is to compare 2016 Curry to 2016 Irving. Curry is better right now and that's really all that matters.

LeBron is better than Jordan is right now too!! YIPPEEEE! lol

Jr sMith is a lot better than Paul Pierce at this point too!

and if you just want to talk about what happened in the NBA Finals- Kyrie scorched Curry.

 

[knowyourenemy]

LeBron is better than Jordan is right now too!! YIPPEEEE! lol

Jr sMith is a lot better than Paul Pierce at this point too!

and if you just want to talk about what happened in the NBA Finals- Kyrie scorched Curry.

I get that everyone like to compares LeBron and Jordan. That makes sense. We're talking about two of the best players of all-time -- who by the way never played against one another. If LeBron and Jordan played against one another in their primes, who would waste their time talking about whether Jordan was better at age 21?

I notice that you don't dispute that Curry is better than Irving. It's why we end up talking about something pointless like Irving's stats and accomplishments at a certain age. That's all he has going for him -- the hope that he will get better with time and eventually surpass Curry. Hasn't happened yet and it may never happen.

 

[bksballer89]

I get that everyone like to compares LeBron and Jordan. That makes sense. We're talking about two of the best players of all-time -- who by the way never played against one another. If LeBron and Jordan played against one another in their primes, who would waste their time talking about whether Jordan was better at age 21?

I notice that you don't dispute that Curry is better than Irving. It's why we end up talking about something pointless like Irving's stats and accomplishments at a certain age. That's all he has going for him -- the hope that he will get better with time and eventually surpass Curry. Hasn't happened yet and it may never happen.

You're arguing with an idiot.....Just a heads up