Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 11 of 17 FirstFirst ... 910111213 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 165 of 246
  1. #151
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    5,767
    plenty of objectiveness going on in here.

  2. #152
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    26,463
    Quote Originally Posted by warfelg View Post
    We could. Weíre also penalizing a player for having a bad situation and for the most part overcoming it.
    When did I do that? Don't lump me in either other people.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeffy25 View Post
    If you are that inefficient, it doesn't matter. Hero ball doesn't equate to wins, and that's what we are talking about. You can't win with AI. No team can. He is so inefficient that he becomes a negative value player
    See this is the extension of the argument that loses credibility with me. I grew up on the 90s Knicks and got to see Iverson's entire career. The idea that he was a negative player is an easy argument for people to make now in the modern era of efficiency by using his FG%/TS% but it's a false narrative. I was there. Simplifying his entire offensive impact to field goal percentage ignores aspects of basketball that are tougher to quantify.

    He was guarded by the best defenders, drew the attention of the defense, averaged 10 free throws per game, created for his teammates, etc. How else could a team of mckie/snow/mutombo/ratliff/etc. rank 13th in offensive efficiency even with him "chucking" his way to 30 points? It's because his value goes far beyond his shooting percentage. I don't see people ranking him top 10 point guard or shoot guard. It's accepted by the majority of people that Curry is better. But to say he's a negative player. I just don't agree.


    Kristaps Porzingis
    Stronger than most 15 year old girls.

  3. #153
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    42,970
    Quote Originally Posted by KnicksorBust View Post
    When did I do that? Don't lump me in either other people.
    I wasnít limping you in. Sorry if it seemed that way.

    It just gets old with people making the AI is inefficient comments with never factoring in the teammate part. I sometimes wonder what people would think of those teams without AI on them.

    PROCESSING

  4. #154
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    14,019
    Quote Originally Posted by TheDish87 View Post
    yet neither team won 50 games
    In a tough WC that AI would never had made it past at all. Give me a break, lmao. Russell is far more talented than AI. And our team was 10x worse than the one AI had.

  5. #155
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    1,558
    Quote Originally Posted by Chronz View Post
    They built that team cuz they knew he was a hog. AI pissed off a scoring champ type of talent with his ball hoggery remember...
    are you talking about Stackhouse? really, Stackhouse got mad because they drafted AI and he took over the franchise and took the league by storm with that sick cross over and game to match, its a reason why Jordan said AI reminded him of himself coming into the league, its a reason why most at the barbershop and gym called him the 6ft Jordan, remember when Jordan was labeled a ballhog as well pre titles? Jordan pissed off a lot of people if you let Grant/Pippen tell it

    when you build a team you usually do it from scratch and thru the draft with 3 consecutive years of lottery and you have a franchise all world talent to start with, but I guess you think Mckie/Snow are legit pieces to make up a big 3, which is so far from the truth I don't know where to begin

    they built the team the wrong way, they should have hired J Thompson his rookie year, or Mike D/Nelson style to maximize his talent, you really think that teaming Iverson up with all defenders was a wise investment to winning and sustaining winning? I mean a couple starting defenders and some off the bench is cool but not a entire lineup minus a 5'10'' PG converted to volume shooter, and to top it off Iverson led the league 3 straight times in steals, if any player leads the league for 3 straight years in any major category they are considered elite or damn good, but not AI, you guys really need to re evaluate your bball thinking

    what is your definition of a hog? because last I checked its a whole bunch of those and they could be efficient or not but they always have the ball in their hands, so by your definition Nash and Stockton were hogs because they racked up so many assists and those high assists numbers cant come without the ball being in their hands a lot and the players shooting when they pass them the ball, Iverson was no different in Philly it just pertained to shooting the ball, no different than what Lebron had to do or Jordan, no diff. than Drummond who jobs is to grab 20 boards and chip in with 15pts if he can

    AI is the only player who can do something that others do and get beat down for it, and then he does something only a handful of players in history can do and that is take a bunch of GLeaguers to a Finals and people say it was a magical run, him and Lebron and Dirk and Dream are teams I can recall recent with not super stacked talent to make Finals, and those players went 2-2

    I find it funny that nobody blames the front office for Iverson but will run through a wall screaming and *****ing about Lebron first 7yrs with Cavs, and both were in same situation as far as help but Iverson didn't pound the ball as much as Lebron did, its one thing Barkley was right about that, it was dribble dribble dribble Lebron and then some more and then Lebron decides to either shot or pass it, that is a pure definition of a ballhog

  6. #156
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    1,558
    Quote Originally Posted by FlashBolt View Post
    In a tough WC that AI would never had made it past at all. Give me a break, lmao. Russell is far more talented than AI. And our team was 10x worse than the one AI had.
    So can we use you same excuse you make for Lebron and say Iverson would be playing with way more talent in a more stacked Conference?

    what team was 10x worse? Oladipo is averaging more this year than Snow/Mckie both career highs combined

    go look it up and see for yourself, or read the posts I got on here showing those players stats, they are pathetic

    Russell is nowhere near far more talented, Iverson was all world in football and played baseball at high level, you wouldn't know talent if it slapped you in the face

    Russell held Oladipo back, Iverson never would have done that, Mckie and Snow were never capable of dropping pts like Oladipo, Russell has had 10x more total talent than Iverson has ever dreamed of, now that's for sure, and all he has to show for it is the same number of Finals trips as Iverson, 1, and both got beat in gentlemans sweep, and Iverson 1 win is way more impressive as well, facts

  7. #157
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    5,600
    Quote Originally Posted by TheDish87 View Post
    the east wasnt even that week in 01
    Yeah, it was.

  8. #158
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    14,019
    Quote Originally Posted by warfelg View Post
    I wasnít limping you in. Sorry if it seemed that way.

    It just gets old with people making the AI is inefficient comments with never factoring in the teammate part. I sometimes wonder what people would think of those teams without AI on them.
    Team was built on AI's habits. What's difficult to understand about that? A guy like AI only contributes when he has the ball. He wasn't a great passer, defender, rebounder, or leader. I'm not sure which part of that is winning quality. Meanwhile, Curry is a totally different story. He's the greatest shooter who leads his teams to wins and arguably the greatest offensive weapon in modern NBA. I'm not sure what there is to debate here. AI was a fine player but his cultural impact was greater than his talent. 2001 season, their record was 6-5 without AI. They weren't great offensively but they did their job defensively. The guy doesn't have a winning history so again, what are we basing his greatness from? Scoring? That's all he did and it was a product of inefficient volume shooting. The East was also fairly weak. Championship was decided based on Lakers vs X WC team.

  9. #159
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    1,558
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeffy25 View Post
    I stopped reading with this post. You have to know this is beyond any logic. You guys who defend AI don't care about logic, you care about feelings and nostaligia
    you should stop reading it because you will keep looking more foolish the longer you try and reply to what you say

    you said he was in a weakass East right? so I said he had the weakass roster to match, what does that have to do with feelings and nostalgia? nothing

    it wasn't a miracle to win 50 games with that team? you guys really overrating his support cast to almost unreal levels

    and if they had drafted right after the 96' draft getting Iverson then his fortunes would have been greater, you don't think 3 HOF'ers in their youth is not better than what Iverson had from 98-2004? if you cant see that basic logic then you need to take on another sport or field

  10. #160
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    14,019
    Quote Originally Posted by europagnpilgrim View Post
    you should stop reading it because you will keep looking more foolish the longer you try and reply to what you say

    you said he was in a weakass East right? so I said he had the weakass roster to match, what does that have to do with feelings and nostalgia? nothing

    it wasn't a miracle to win 50 games with that team? you guys really overrating his support cast to almost unreal levels

    and if they had drafted right after the 96' draft getting Iverson then his fortunes would have been greater, you don't think 3 HOF'ers in their youth is not better than what Iverson had from 98-2004? if you cant see that basic logic then you need to take on another sport or field
    His team's record that 01 season without AI was 6-5. That's above average. And when you consider the team was BUILT for AI, that's more than impressive. Back then, the league was FILLED with one star on a team and the rest being pretty average compared to the rest of the league. Your argument is poor. Actually, what is your argument? it was a weak East. 7 teams (almost half) had a negative SRS in the East that season. No one can remotely say that the East was stacked or any good. Your infatuation with Iverson is mindboggling and based off emotion rather than facts.

  11. #161
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    1,558
    Quote Originally Posted by FlashBolt View Post
    Team was built on AI's habits. What's difficult to understand about that? A guy like AI only contributes when he has the ball. He wasn't a great passer, defender, rebounder, or leader. I'm not sure which part of that is winning quality. Meanwhile, Curry is a totally different story. He's the greatest shooter who leads his teams to wins and arguably the greatest offensive weapon in modern NBA. I'm not sure what there is to debate here. AI was a fine player but his cultural impact was greater than his talent. 2001 season, their record was 6-5 without AI. They weren't great offensively but they did their job defensively. The guy doesn't have a winning history so again, what are we basing his greatness from? Scoring? That's all he did and it was a product of inefficient volume shooting. The East was also fairly weak. Championship was decided based on Lakers vs X WC team.
    then why go get Snow and Mckie to handle the ball and why switch a 5'10'' guy to shootingguard if AI just wanted to have the ball

    he wasn't a great passer? could he pass at high level? why did his scouting report say different? I get it you know more, nevermind, I am not saying the scouting report is the be all but it is a pretty damn good indicator on what that player can do coming out of college, and the report was spot on for Shaq/Lebron/KG/Duncan and many others coming into the league

    doesn't have a winning history, wow man you people act like his teams were legit title contenders, they only had a punchers chance because of 1 player, I am pretty sure you know it wasn't Mutombo or Iggy

    oh they weren't great offensively that 01 season? really did you look up the stats for it or actually viewed some of those games back then because that makes a huge difference when speaking on something accurately, if AI was out the team struggled to crack the 80pt mark, you mean to tell me a team without a ballhog couldn't play and score better and more efficient?

    I know the ship was the WC Finals basically, Iverson had the weakest team of the fairly weak East, why does that not get mentioned?

    you act like Iverson played with winners or proven champions and failed, he was put in a losing situation when they failed him building the team when he was 21yrs old
    Last edited by europagnpilgrim; 01-11-2018 at 01:23 PM.

  12. #162
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    1,558
    Quote Originally Posted by FlashBolt View Post
    His team's record that 01 season without AI was 6-5. That's above average. And when you consider the team was BUILT for AI, that's more than impressive. Back then, the league was FILLED with one star on a team and the rest being pretty average compared to the rest of the league. Your argument is poor. Actually, what is your argument? it was a weak East. 7 teams (almost half) had a negative SRS in the East that season. No one can remotely say that the East was stacked or any good. Your infatuation with Iverson is mindboggling and based off emotion rather than facts.
    no not when you have super elite defense that you guys spew on here, that should be enough right there to right the ship, it was just some ugly victories, they didn't win shootouts without Iverson, they won those games that you would not want to televise, even on league pass

    based on emotion rather than facts? ok expert, show me the non facts that I have stated other than me saying what they could and should have drafted that was there for the taking, they passed up sure fire HOF'ers or best players for sub par players in comparison when they drafted in the lottery 2 consecutive years from 97-98, now how is this based on emotion and not fact?

    the East was just as it is now, not the powerhouse conference, just there and it was more up for the taking while the West was basically a 2 horse race as it is now for most part, now is that emotion or closer to factual? I say the latter, the East has 2 horses and the rest are there hoping
    Last edited by europagnpilgrim; 01-11-2018 at 01:32 PM.

  13. #163
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    42,970
    Quote Originally Posted by FlashBolt View Post
    Team was built on AI's habits. What's difficult to understand about that? A guy like AI only contributes when he has the ball. He wasn't a great passer, defender, rebounder, or leader. I'm not sure which part of that is winning quality. Meanwhile, Curry is a totally different story. He's the greatest shooter who leads his teams to wins and arguably the greatest offensive weapon in modern NBA. I'm not sure what there is to debate here. AI was a fine player but his cultural impact was greater than his talent. 2001 season, their record was 6-5 without AI. They weren't great offensively but they did their job defensively. The guy doesn't have a winning history so again, what are we basing his greatness from? Scoring? That's all he did and it was a product of inefficient volume shooting. The East was also fairly weak. Championship was decided based on Lakers vs X WC team.
    A guy that went to the playoffs almost every year in philly and made it to a finals isnít a winner?

    Then neither is PG13, Westbrook, Lowry, DeRozen, Harden, Conley, CP3.

    The team was built the way it was because we were capped out and could only ever trade to improve. And the parts we had to trade were ****. On top of that we never had a quality enough pick to get an impact player outside of drafting Hughes. They tried for years to get a number two for AI and failed time after time because of that situation.

    PROCESSING

  14. #164
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    14,019
    Quote Originally Posted by warfelg View Post
    A guy that went to the playoffs almost every year in philly and made it to a finals isnít a winner?

    Then neither is PG13, Westbrook, Lowry, DeRozen, Harden, Conley, CP3.

    The team was built the way it was because we were capped out and could only ever trade to improve. And the parts we had to trade were ****. On top of that we never had a quality enough pick to get an impact player outside of drafting Hughes. They tried for years to get a number two for AI and failed time after time because of that situation.
    Since when was that the criteria for winning? Curry is a winner. AI is not. Sorry. I would dread building a team with AI.

  15. #165
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    42,970

    How many wins do the '01 76ers get if we swap Iverson with Curry?

    Quote Originally Posted by FlashBolt View Post
    Since when was that the criteria for winning? Curry is a winner. AI is not. Sorry. I would dread building a team with AI.
    So only guys with rings are winners? And all guys without arenít?
    Last edited by warfelg; 01-11-2018 at 01:36 PM.

    PROCESSING

Page 11 of 17 FirstFirst ... 910111213 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •