Absolutely. Pierce was pretty unremarkable before the Big 3 in Boston. He had that successful 02 post season where the underdog Celtics took the Nets to 6, but that was a fluke.

In '05, the Celtics had home-court against the Pacers and got blown out in Game 7. Pierce got ejected from that game and threw his jersey in the stands. Pretty bad look for the captain of your squad. This was a huge indicator of his next two season. 05-06 was bad, and 06-07 was straight horrible. The Celtics lost 18 in a row, most in Boston were calling for Pierce traded, Pierce himself demanded help that off-season or a trade. On top of that, Pierce missed 36 games in 06-07, and there was a lot of talk that he was healthy and just didn't want to play on a losing squad.

Pierce before the Big 3 was known as a volume scorer, an ISO guy, and a black hole. He a tier below Melo but faced the exact same criticism. The only difference is that they got Pierce help in the prime of his career, and Pierce adapted his game to adjust for Allen and KG. Pierce also tried on defense starting 07-08, something he never did prior.

Pierce as a player is absolutely not better than Melo. I've seen that bullshit argument thrown around here but it's just false. Melo made the playoffs every year in the West while in Denver. Melo was the leading scorer on the 04 Nuggets that made the 8th seed as a rookie. Pierce struggled to make the playoffs most years in a weak Eastern conference. Pierce has 4 All NBA team selections, 2 of which coming after the Big 3 formed, so team record had something to do with that. Melo made 6 All NBA teams, doing so without having the caliber of teammates Pierce had after the Big 3.