PDA

View Full Version : Can we confirm this now? Is Billups offcially better than Iverson?



Pages : [1] 2

JordansBulls
12-16-2008, 05:20 PM
Looking at how the Pistons were doing with Billups and the Nuggets with Iverson and now vice versa, is that the best to determine really who was better?

Westbrook36
12-16-2008, 05:22 PM
I dont think it is, Allen Iverson just dosnt fit what DET always is doing,.

SteveNash
12-16-2008, 05:30 PM
Chauncey = Fits anywhere, transforms any team into a winner.

AI = Team cancer that eventually brings down any team he's on. Might give you 1 good year if you surround him with talent that hides all of his weaknesses.

barreleffact
12-16-2008, 05:32 PM
Iverson was successful with every team he's been on before now. if you put billups on AI's philly teams, they never would have come close to the finals. AI is prolific and a scorer, but the players around him are system layers. they need someone to create for them. AI creates for himself and thinks of others after. Billups is not better in totality than AI. he is a better shooter, defender, and PG but AI if a better scorer and better at shouldering a team. AI will have the better legacy even without a ring and he is a level above Billups. Even with Denver it's a marathon not a sprint, and AI got denver to 50 wins before just like billups is about to do..and that was with a 2nd man who was focused only about himself. He didnt get this new Melo who actually wants to step up.

superkegger
12-16-2008, 05:35 PM
I don't think you can say hands down Chauncey is better. Chauncey fits better with Melo. Chauncey has worked better in Denver as well as Detroit. I think Chauncey is a more valuable player. I'm not a fan of Iverson's, but he is a good player.

SteveNash
12-16-2008, 05:46 PM
Iverson was successful with every team he's been on before now. if you put billups on AI's philly teams, they never would have come close to the finals. AI is prolific and a scorer, but the players around him are system layers. they need someone to create for them. AI creates for himself and thinks of others after. Billups is not better in totality than AI. he is a better shooter, defender, and PG but AI if a better scorer and better at shouldering a team. AI will have the better legacy even without a ring and he is a level above Billups. Even with Denver it's a marathon not a sprint, and AI got denver to 50 wins before just like billups is about to do..and that was with a 2nd man who was focused only about himself. He didnt get this new Melo who actually wants to step up.

Iverson is only successful if you have low standards set for him. Going 1-8 in the playoffs is not successful on a good team like Denver had. Spending your final years in Philadelphia doing nothing but killing the team is not successful.

Billups is the better winner, and that's all that matters and right now Billups is showing that he's the much better scorer and better at shouldering a team. How do you think he got the name Mr Big Shot? Billups showed the way to become a winner, a Finals MVP, to transition your game into point guard skills. He got better through hard work and dedication.

AI cried about practice because he just didn't care.

SUNDUNDIDIT
12-16-2008, 05:50 PM
Iverson = BETTER INDIVIDUAL PLAYER


Chauncey = BETTER TEAM PLAYER.


But I would rather have Chauncey if it ever comes to a clutch shot....He's already made plenty of thos with Denver.....For example, when a team catches up, Chauncey takes away their momentum by drainin a 3 outta nowhere...And then steals the ball,comesback, and drains another 3 back to back....He's did it plenty of times already.....A.I. would never get us a clutch shot like that...He might drive to the rim and get a foul, but nothin like Chauncey does.

The Answer3
12-16-2008, 05:53 PM
Definitely. Allen Iverson is a garbage pathetic player and a ballhogging chucker who never plays any defense. While Billups > _______

Never has a player caused such a massive turn around in team history. Billups made this garbage Denver team a contender. He deserves MVP, DPOY for causing a team that was non-existent on defense to a team that plays amazing defense and MIP. Pistons are now Denver from last year while Denver's booked to make the WCF and have a very good shot to destroy the Lakers. Now you may know why Billups > Iverson. Though nothing to confirm. Billups was better than the team cancer ever since his rookie year.

:worthy:

EDIT: I forgot to my add to my post that Billups>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>THE HOT TRASH AKA STEVE NASH

barreleffact
12-16-2008, 05:53 PM
ima put it this way.
AI is better for a garbage team that you want to make respectable

Billups is better for a championship caliber team

barreleffact
12-16-2008, 06:01 PM
Iverson is only successful if you have low standards set for him. Going 1-8 in the playoffs is not successful on a good team like Denver had. Spending your final years in Philadelphia doing nothing but killing the team is not successful.

Billups is the better winner, and that's all that matters and right now Billups is showing that he's the much better scorer and better at shouldering a team. How do you think he got the name Mr Big Shot? Billups showed the way to become a winner, a Finals MVP, to transition your game into point guard skills. He got better through hard work and dedication.

AI cried about practice because he just didn't care.

Mr big shot is his name for being clutch. It has nothing to do with carrying a team. Big shot Rob, James Posey, etc they are clutch but you would NEVER argue that they carry anything. Billups is great at making a team function/running a team, but he has never carried a team by any means. AI worked hard to be an individual talent. His practice gripe was because he didnt think he could make others better by practice, meaning that it benefitted him in no way because he's always worked for his. 1-8 in the playoffs with a garbage defensive team, injured players, a unrespect worth coach, and other players that also played for themseves...melo, jr, etc. as good as they were they never were gonna be able to contend for a title with that roster and coach...and they still wont with billups. they may get to the 2nd round, but thats about as far as it gets for them...AT BEST.

FortyDubs
12-16-2008, 06:02 PM
Completely different players.

SteveNash
12-16-2008, 06:03 PM
ima put it this way.
AI is better for a garbage team that you want to make respectable

Billups is better for a championship caliber team

So basically AI can't win with good players but might get you to the playoffs were you might be able to beat a crappy team if you're lucky and you have the Coach of the Year, Defensive Player of the Year and Sixth Man of the Year on your team.

While Billups can win you a championship even when his team isn't supposed to win one.

cambovenzi
12-16-2008, 06:07 PM
Completely different players.

bingo.


iverson is more of a scorer, and creates shot with ballhandling and driving.
billups jumpshoots and passes and whatnot.

they are better at different things.

barreleffact
12-16-2008, 06:09 PM
So basically AI can't win with good players but might get you to the playoffs were you might be able to beat a crappy team if you're lucky and you have the Coach of the Year, Defensive Player of the Year and Sixth Man of the Year on your team.

While Billups can win you a championship even when his team isn't supposed to win one.

AI's team overachieved that year. Name 1 team in history that didnt overachieve but got ever major award like that....AI's number 2 was who??? His team was garbage but he made it respectable

pd7631
12-16-2008, 06:12 PM
Iverson is only successful if you have low standards set for him. Going 1-8 in the playoffs is not successful on a good team like Denver had. Spending your final years in Philadelphia doing nothing but killing the team is not successful.

Billups is the better winner, and that's all that matters and right now Billups is showing that he's the much better scorer and better at shouldering a team. How do you think he got the name Mr Big Shot? Billups showed the way to become a winner, a Finals MVP, to transition your game into point guard skills. He got better through hard work and dedication.

AI cried about practice because he just didn't care.


Dude, I wish you would just shut up about things you know nothing about. All you know about AI is what you see on Sportscenter. I don't know where your from, but I know where I'm from, and I've been front and center for AI's whole career, so for you to say that he was killing the team while he was in Philadelphia is just an ignorant statement.

You also say that he didn't care.......???? It's funny that he cried after a second round playoff loss to the Pacers, but I guess that was just because he didn't score 40 points or something, which is the way you want to see him.

You say that Billups transitioned into point guard skills, well he's a freaking point guard!!! Allen Iverson isn't a point guard, I don't need to tell you this because there's been a ton of other people telling you this in other threads.

Not every player is a good fit anywhere, it was stupid of Denver to acquire AI because he's not the type of player they need. Other teams need a type of player like Allen Iverson, mainly my Philadelphia 76ers could use him badly right now, we have no SHOOTING GUARD and we could desperately use a guy who can create a shot for himself.

Get it through your thick skull that Allen Iverson is one of the greatest players of All Time and he's a future HOF'er, and stop bashing the guy.



And to the answer the thread question.....Billups is NOT better than AI, he's simply a better fit.

SteveNash
12-16-2008, 06:14 PM
Mr big shot is his name for being clutch. It has nothing to do with carrying a team. Big shot Rob, James Posey, etc they are clutch but you would NEVER argue that they carry anything. Billups is great at making a team function/running a team, but he has never carried a team by any means. AI worked hard to be an individual talent. His practice gripe was because he didnt think he could make others better by practice, meaning that it benefitted him in no way because he's always worked for his. 1-8 in the playoffs with a garbage defensive team, injured players, a unrespect worth coach, and other players that also played for themseves...melo, jr, etc. as good as they were they never were gonna be able to contend for a title with that roster and coach...and they still wont with billups. they may get to the 2nd round, but thats about as far as it gets for them...AT BEST.

First don't compare Horry or Posey, those are guys that stand in a corner and have the ball bounce their way so they can hit an open 3, they could never hit a big shot like Billups can.

Second, carry a team is winning games, and to win games you have to hit clutch shots, when they matter the most. AI hasn't done that, because he can't carry a team. Mr Big Shot started in the playoffs against Orlando where he had 40 and 37 games back to back to win the series. Something I don't think AI's ever done, or at least he hasn't done it while shooting a good percentage.

AI couldn't make other players better because he's a bad player that doesn't know how to play team ball and like you admitted, only cares about himself.

AI has run out of excuses, I'm just finally glad people are starting to see the light on this cancer. Billups will just prove himself to be better and better than AI because Billups transitioned his game and should have a much longer longevity in the NBA. While AI will be stuck with no other team wanting to bring them in because of all the trouble he causes. I only hope that AI kills his legacy enough to not be put in the hall of fame.

Oh and 2nd round is pretty good, that'd mean Billups won at least 4x as many games in 1 year with Denver then AI did in 2. All without the supposedly better player in AI, without the DPOY, with Birdman, etc.

pd7631
12-16-2008, 06:18 PM
First don't compare Horry or Posey, those are guys that stand in a corner and have the ball bounce their way so they can hit an open 3, they could never hit a big shot like Billups can.

Second, carry a team is winning games, and to win games you have to hit clutch shots, when they matter the most. AI hasn't done that, because he can't carry a team. Mr Big Shot started in the playoffs against Orlando where he had 40 and 37 games back to back to win the series. Something I don't think AI's ever done, or at least he hasn't done it while shooting a good percentage.

AI couldn't make other players better because he's a bad player that doesn't know how to play team ball and like you admitted, only cares about himself.

AI has run out of excuses, I'm just finally glad people are starting to see the light on this cancer. Billups will just prove himself to be better and better than AI because Billups transitioned his game and should have a much longer longevity in the NBA. While AI will be stuck with no other team wanting to bring them in because of all the trouble he causes. I only hope that AI kills his legacy enough to not be put in the hall of fame.

Oh and 2nd round is pretty good, that'd mean Billups won at least 4x as many games in 1 year with Denver then AI did in 2. All without the supposedly better player in AI, without the DPOY, with Birdman, etc.


You are the only person on the planet who apparently thinks that AI didn't carry a mediocre Sixers team to the Finals......congratulations:clap:

Master Mind
12-16-2008, 06:22 PM
Trade wise Billups was the better player to trade for but talent wise AI's still the man...

pd7631
12-16-2008, 06:23 PM
First don't compare Horry or Posey, those are guys that stand in a corner and have the ball bounce their way so they can hit an open 3, they could never hit a big shot like Billups can.

Second, carry a team is winning games, and to win games you have to hit clutch shots, when they matter the most. AI hasn't done that, because he can't carry a team. Mr Big Shot started in the playoffs against Orlando where he had 40 and 37 games back to back to win the series. Something I don't think AI's ever done, or at least he hasn't done it while shooting a good percentage.

AI couldn't make other players better because he's a bad player that doesn't know how to play team ball and like you admitted, only cares about himself.

AI has run out of excuses, I'm just finally glad people are starting to see the light on this cancer. Billups will just prove himself to be better and better than AI because Billups transitioned his game and should have a much longer longevity in the NBA. While AI will be stuck with no other team wanting to bring them in because of all the trouble he causes. I only hope that AI kills his legacy enough to not be put in the hall of fame.

Oh and 2nd round is pretty good, that'd mean Billups won at least 4x as many games in 1 year with Denver then AI did in 2. All without the supposedly better player in AI, without the DPOY, with Birdman, etc.




That statement there just proves how little you know about AI and how you were probably like 8 years old when AI did take the Sixers to the Finals. The man had 2 50 point games in the second round series against Toronto. Please give us all an honest answer of how much you watched the Sixers play that year....

cambovenzi
12-16-2008, 06:25 PM
Second, carry a team is winning games, and to win games you have to hit clutch shots, when they matter the most. AI hasn't done that, because he can't carry a team. Mr Big Shot started in the playoffs against Orlando where he had 40 and 37 games back to back to win the series. Something I don't think AI's ever done, or at least he hasn't done it while shooting a good percentage. what are you talking about?
he carried his team to the finals. and made the playoffs many other times.


AI couldn't make other players better because he's a bad player that doesn't know how to play team ball and like you admitted, only cares about himself.
yeah sure?:eyebrow:
so he is not a pass first player. that doesnt mean he is bad. he is a very good scorer, and gets his assists too.


AI has run out of excuses, I'm just finally glad people are starting to see the light on this cancer. Billups will just prove himself to be better and better than AI because Billups transitioned his game and should have a much longer longevity in the NBA. While AI will be stuck with no other team wanting to bring them in because of all the trouble he causes. I only hope that AI kills his legacy enough to not be put in the hall of fame.
lots of imagination you have right there. AI has been in the league 12 years.
and has been an elite scorer in almost every one of them b/c he had to carry his teams. the last two years in denver he could chill offensively a little bit, and pick his spots better. his FG% shot up to over 45%.
as long as he can score tons of points, and do what he does even semi-efficiently, teams will want him.


Oh and 2nd round is pretty good, that'd mean Billups won at least 4x as many games in 1 year with Denver then AI did in 2. All without the supposedly better player in AI, without the DPOY, with Birdman, etc.

the pistons have been a very good team for many more reasons than just billups.
using the pistons past success for why billups is better is very ridiculous.

some players are team players and "role" players like billups.
then there are HOF guys like iverson who need to do the scoring, and carry teams.

SteveNash
12-16-2008, 06:26 PM
Dude, I wish you would just shut up about things you know nothing about. All you know about AI is what you see on Sportscenter. I don't know where your from, but I know where I'm from, and I've been front and center for AI's whole career, so for you to say that he was killing the team while he was in Philadelphia is just an ignorant statement.

You also say that he didn't care.......???? It's funny that he cried after a second round playoff loss to the Pacers, but I guess that was just because he didn't score 40 points or something, which is the way you want to see him.

You say that Billups transitioned into point guard skills, well he's a freaking point guard!!! Allen Iverson isn't a point guard, I don't need to tell you this because there's been a ton of other people telling you this in other threads.

Not every player is a good fit anywhere, it was stupid of Denver to acquire AI because he's not the type of player they need. Other teams need a type of player like Allen Iverson, mainly my Philadelphia 76ers could use him badly right now, we have no SHOOTING GUARD and we could desperately use a guy who can create a shot for himself.

Get it through your thick skull that Allen Iverson is one of the greatest players of All Time and he's a future HOF'er, and stop bashing the guy.



And to the answer the thread question.....Billups is NOT better than AI, he's simply a better fit.

I've watched Allen Iverson enough since before he even came into the league. He's a team cancer and he hasn't been able to change his game. You just look at the team he's ruining now. They've had successful scoring guards become great point guards. Isiah, Dumars, Billups, and now Stuckey. But AI has never changed because he doesn't care.

I asked in another thread and I'll ask it again here. Does AI suck because he doesn't care or because he's too stupid, it's got to be one of the two. He should have figure out by now that his style of play won't win squat yet he still plays the same crappy game without ever changing. AI trying to be AI the team player is him just giving up the ball to let teammates do something with it. He'll still try to get his, but he can't play without the ball, can't defend, can't do anything worthwhile to help the team win.

Billups was a scoring guard coming out of Colorado. And was a scoring guard his first few years in the league. Allen Iverson needs to be a PG, but he doesn't care to win. Again why can't Allen Iverson play point guard? Too stupid?

AI thought it was a great fit in Denver, he thought he could win in Denver, he forgot that he was AI, the career loser. And that's why Denver didn't do anything. Philadelphia doesn't need him, he'll just make the team worse, which is what AI does.

AI is one of the most selfish players of all time, he might be in the hall of fame, but he doesn't belong there.


AI's team overachieved that year. Name 1 team in history that didnt overachieve but got ever major award like that....AI's number 2 was who??? His team was garbage but he made it respectable

The overachieved in spite of AI, not because of him.

The Answer3
12-16-2008, 06:28 PM
Iverson is only successful if you have low standards set for him. Going 1-8 in the playoffs is not successful on a good team like Denver had. Spending your final years in Philadelphia doing nothing but killing the team is not successful.

Billups is the better winner, and that's all that matters and right now Billups is showing that he's the much better scorer and better at shouldering a team. How do you think he got the name Mr Big Shot? Billups showed the way to become a winner, a Finals MVP, to transition your game into point guard skills. He got better through hard work and dedication.

AI cried about practice because he just didn't care.


Dude, I wish you would just shut up about things you know nothing about. All you know about AI is what you see on Sportscenter. I don't know where your from, but I know where I'm from, and I've been front and center for AI's whole career, so for you to say that he was killing the team while he was in Philadelphia is just an ignorant statement.

You also say that he didn't care.......???? It's funny that he cried after a second round playoff loss to the Pacers, but I guess that was just because he didn't score 40 points or something, which is the way you want to see him.

You say that Billups transitioned into point guard skills, well he's a freaking point guard!!! Allen Iverson isn't a point guard, I don't need to tell you this because there's been a ton of other people telling you this in other threads.

Not every player is a good fit anywhere, it was stupid of Denver to acquire AI because he's not the type of player they need. Other teams need a type of player like Allen Iverson, mainly my Philadelphia 76ers could use him badly right now, we have no SHOOTING GUARD and we could desperately use a guy who can create a shot for himself.

Get it through your thick skull that Allen Iverson is one of the greatest players of All Time and he's a future HOF'er, and stop bashing the guy.



And to the answer the thread question.....Billups is NOT better than AI, he's simply a better fit.

To add to that Billups was developed/created by Larry Brown. Don't tell me AI was created by LB. LB just made him a SG and used him the best way possible. He realized AI's strengths. AI was great ever since his rookie year and basically the same player 2 years later. Billups on the other hand was never anything spectacular till his reign with the Pistons. Billups is not a pass-first PG. He's a shoot-first PG. He has a career FG% of 41.6. I don't care if scoring isn't his job but he has a bad FG%. Things Billups does better than AI: plays better d, he's a much better leader and a playmaker. He's more clutch as well. AI always gets a bad rep for his %. Now I'll wait for someone to tell me "AI should get a bad rep because he's the primary scorer." Sorry, but that argument fails miserably.

People flat-out credit Billups for Denver's success. It has a lot to do with Billups but people don't realize EVERYONE ON THE DAMN TEAM has picked up on defense, they got a great C in Nene which they didn't have last year, George Karl's doing a better job and Melo has stepped on defense/rebounding. I still don't get the argument of AI holding Melo back. And it's not like AI totally failed with Denver. They lost to the NBA Champs and the NBA finalists. And blame Denver, because if the Knicks-Nugz brawl didn't happen, AI would have never been traded to Denver. He was getting dealt to the Kings I believe.

pd7631
12-16-2008, 06:28 PM
And for anyone that wants to use the FG% argument for Billups against AI....AI's a career 42% shooter and Billups is a career 41% shooter......eat it

pd7631
12-16-2008, 06:33 PM
I've watched Allen Iverson enough since before he even came into the league. He's a team cancer and he hasn't been able to change his game. You just look at the team he's ruining now. They've had successful scoring guards become great point guards. Isiah, Dumars, Billups, and now Stuckey. But AI has never changed because he doesn't care.

I asked in another thread and I'll ask it again here. Does AI suck because he doesn't care or because he's too stupid, it's got to be one of the two. He should have figure out by now that his style of play won't win squat yet he still plays the same crappy game without ever changing. AI trying to be AI the team player is him just giving up the ball to let teammates do something with it. He'll still try to get his, but he can't play without the ball, can't defend, can't do anything worthwhile to help the team win.

Billups was a scoring guard coming out of Colorado. And was a scoring guard his first few years in the league. Allen Iverson needs to be a PG, but he doesn't care to win. Again why can't Allen Iverson play point guard? Too stupid?

AI thought it was a great fit in Denver, he thought he could win in Denver, he forgot that he was AI, the career loser. And that's why Denver didn't do anything. Philadelphia doesn't need him, he'll just make the team worse, which is what AI does.

AI is one of the most selfish players of all time, he might be in the hall of fame, but he doesn't belong there.



The overachieved in spite of AI, not because of him.



What was Philadelphia before the Sixers drafted him???? He took them to the Finals in his 5th year, so yeah, you're right he doesn't make teams better. You're so dense it's laughable.

SteveNash
12-16-2008, 06:38 PM
You are the only person on the planet who apparently thinks that AI didn't carry a mediocre Sixers team to the Finals......congratulations:clap:

Lets see AI do it for more than one year. Lets see AI actually win against a good team, a weak Milwaukee team is not impressive. Not when Philadelphia had a good team surrounding AI.


That statement there just proves how little you know about AI and how you were probably like 8 years old when AI did take the Sixers to the Finals. The man had 2 50 point games in the second round series against Toronto. Please give us all an honest answer of how much you watched the Sixers play that year....

I said back to back, to win the series, while shooting as well as Billups had. Has AI done that? I don't think so.


what are you talking about?
he carried his team to the finals. and made the playoffs many other times.

1 year in an extremely weak East, you figured someone as great as AI would be able to do it again.


yeah sure?
so he is not a pass first player. that doesnt mean he is bad. he is a very good scorer, and gets his assists too.

A very good scorer that shoots a horrible percentage. A scorer who passes for the sake of getting assists, and player that turns the ball over too much.


lots of imagination you have right there. AI has been in the league 12 years.
and has been an elite scorer in almost every one of them b/c he had to carry his teams. the last two years in denver he could chill offensively a little bit, and pick his spots better. his FG% shot up to over 45%.
as long as he can score tons of points, and do what he does even semi-efficiently, teams will want him.

Teams might want him, but they won't be teams that want to win. He'll just be a ticket draw to get fans into the stands. He won't win anything.


the pistons have been a very good team for many more reasons than just billups.
using the pistons past success for why billups is better is very ridiculous.

Billups was their best player.

JJ81
12-16-2008, 06:41 PM
Yes, he'd make every team he's on better. Whereas Iverson plays for himself.

The Answer3
12-16-2008, 06:42 PM
Lets see AI do it for more than one year. Lets see AI actually win against a good team, a weak Milwaukee team is not impressive. Not when Philadelphia had a good team surrounding AI.



I said back to back, to win the series, while shooting as well as Billups had. Has AI done that? I don't think so.



1 year in an extremely weak East, you figured someone as great as AI would be able to do it again.



A very good scorer that shoots a horrible percentage. A scorer who passes for the sake of getting assists, and player that turns the ball over too much.



Teams might want him, but they won't be teams that want to win. He'll just be a ticket draw to get fans into the stands. He won't win anything.



Billups was their best player.


I stopped reading there. You fail. The Truth.

hotpotato1092
12-16-2008, 06:45 PM
Chauncey is a better point guard but AIs a better player. AI is one of the greatest to ever play the game and is a first ballot hall of famer, when people look back at this era they're going to think of Allen Iverson way before they think of Billups.

pd7631
12-16-2008, 06:47 PM
I stopped reading there. You fail. The Truth.

^^agreed

Whenever someone calls him out he changes his words around so he doesn't look stupid. I guess two 50 point games in a series isn't as good as a 37 point game and a 40 point game

GrkGawdofWalkz
12-16-2008, 06:53 PM
I think Billups is much better to any team he goes to than Iverson is. While Iverson may be the better scorer and individual performer, I know think that Iverson has to be in the right system. His ability to score is second to almost none, and he's not a great defensive guard. Billups is a natural point and an aggressive defender. His ability to open up the game for Carmelo as well as hit his own shots and defend make him more valuable.

SteveNash
12-16-2008, 06:54 PM
To add to that Billups was developed/created by Larry Brown. Don't tell me AI was created by LB. LB just made him a SG and used him the best way possible. He realized AI's strengths. AI was great ever since his rookie year and basically the same player 2 years later. Billups on the other hand was never anything spectacular till his reign with the Pistons. Billups is not a pass-first PG. He's a shoot-first PG. He has a career FG% of 41.6. I don't care if scoring isn't his job but he has a bad FG%. Things Billups does better than AI: plays better d, he's a much better leader and a playmaker. He's more clutch as well. AI always gets a bad rep for his %. Now I'll wait for someone to tell me "AI should get a bad rep because he's the primary scorer." Sorry, but that argument fails miserably.

People flat-out credit Billups for Denver's success. It has a lot to do with Billups but people don't realize EVERYONE ON THE DAMN TEAM has picked up on defense, they got a great C in Nene which they didn't have last year, George Karl's doing a better job and Melo has stepped on defense/rebounding. I still don't get the argument of AI holding Melo back. And it's not like AI totally failed with Denver. They lost to the NBA Champs and the NBA finalists. And blame Denver, because if the Knicks-Nugz brawl didn't happen, AI would have never been traded to Denver. He was getting dealt to the Kings I believe.

Yes, Billups learned from LB. AI could have learned to, but AI was just too stupid to learn from Larry. Larry used AI at SG because he knew he was never going to be able to teach the selfish Iverson so he caved while developing better players too surround AI.

Billups has a career 41.6 FG% but his FG% is down so much because he takes so many threes. Almost half of his shot attempts are threes. And he shoots a much better percentage from 3 than AI does. The other thing that makes Billups so much more efficient then AI is getting to the line, which is pretty impressive for a jumpshooter like BIllups. So many times he'll use his body and strength to create contact, not get the call and end up throwing a bad shot. Still he gets to the line a lot and shoots a tremendous percentage when he gets there. That's why Billups true shooting percentage is so much higher than AI's.

Billups has everything to do with Denver's success because of his leadership and defense. Things you admitted AI isn't good at. And the Kings should be praying tonight that they never got AI. For they may be bad now, but AI would end up leaving them much worse.


^^agreed

Whenever someone calls him out he changes his words around so he doesn't look stupid. I guess two 50 point games in a series isn't as good as a 37 point game and a 40 point game

Go back and read my posts. My original point being that Billups was just as good of a scorer as AI was when it mattered most. Billups could put up the big scoring numbers, if the team needed it, when the games mattered the most, with the team facing elimination in back to back games and do so in an efficient manner. This coming from Billups who isn't known for chucking up all the shots AI is known for.

The Answer3
12-16-2008, 06:56 PM
^^agreed

Whenever someone calls him out he changes his words around so he doesn't look stupid. I guess two 50 point games in a series isn't as good as a 37 point game and a 40 point game

Not to mention. He's the only player in history other than MJ to have scored 50 points twice in 1 series.

And AI has always been efficient while putting up 50+

dec 5th, 2007 vs LA, AI dropped 51 on 18-27 shooting = 66% w/ 8 assists

feb 12th, 2005 vs ORL, AI dropped 60 on 17-36 shooting = 47% w/ 6 assists

dec 23rd, 2005 vs ATL, AI dropped 53 on 17-31 shooting = 54% w/ 5 assists

dec 18th, 2004 vs MIL, AI dropped 54 on 17-29 shooting = 58% w/ 5 assists

dec 20, 2004 vs UTAH, AI dropped 51 on 18-31 shooting = 58% w/ 6 assists

nov 29, 2003 vs ATL, AI dropped 50 on 20-34 shooting = 59% w/ 6 assists

apr 20th, 2003 vs CHA, AI dropped 55 on 21-32 shooting = 66% w/ 8 assists

jan 15th, 2002 vs HOU, AI dropped 58 on 21-42 shooting = 50% w/ 6 assists

jan 6th, 2001 vs CLE, AI dropped 54 on 20-30 shooting = 66% w/ 3 assists

jan 21st, 2001 vs TOR, AI dropped 51 on 20-40 shooting = 50% w/ 4 assists

may 9th, 2001 vs TOR, AI dropped 54 on 21-39 shooting = 54% w/ 3 assists

may 16, 2001 vs TOR, AI dropped 52 on 21-32 shooting = 66% w/ 7 assists

feb 6, 2000 vs SAC, AI dropped 50 on 20-40 shooting = 50% w/ 6 assists

he also dropped 50 on CLE in his rookie season shooting over 50%

barreleffact
12-16-2008, 06:56 PM
First don't compare Horry or Posey, those are guys that stand in a corner and have the ball bounce their way so they can hit an open 3, they could never hit a big shot like Billups can.

Second, carry a team is winning games, and to win games you have to hit clutch shots, when they matter the most. AI hasn't done that, because he can't carry a team. Mr Big Shot started in the playoffs against Orlando where he had 40 and 37 games back to back to win the series. Something I don't think AI's ever done, or at least he hasn't done it while shooting a good percentage.

AI couldn't make other players better because he's a bad player that doesn't know how to play team ball and like you admitted, only cares about himself.

AI has run out of excuses, I'm just finally glad people are starting to see the light on this cancer. Billups will just prove himself to be better and better than AI because Billups transitioned his game and should have a much longer longevity in the NBA. While AI will be stuck with no other team wanting to bring them in because of all the trouble he causes. I only hope that AI kills his legacy enough to not be put in the hall of fame.

Oh and 2nd round is pretty good, that'd mean Billups won at least 4x as many games in 1 year with Denver then AI did in 2. All without the supposedly better player in AI, without the DPOY, with Birdman, etc.

wow...that is the most rediculous thing ive ever read. horry and posey have hit huge shots in championship game...MULTIPLE TIMES and MULTIPLE YEARS. you lose all credibility and I havent read any further...please believe I may respond to more later but it seems others are ripping you apart nicely enough

bagwell368
12-16-2008, 07:00 PM
it's been confirmed for years, all you needed was a pair of eyes, and a brain.

pd7631
12-16-2008, 07:05 PM
Yes, Billups learned from LB. AI could have learned to, but AI was just too stupid to learn from Larry. Larry used AI at SG because he knew he was never going to be able to teach the selfish Iverson so he caved while developing better players too surround AI.

Billups has a career 41.6 FG% but his FG% is down so much because he takes so many threes. Almost half of his shot attempts are threes. And he shoots a much better percentage from 3 than AI does. The other thing that makes Billups so much more efficient then AI is getting to the line, which is pretty impressive for a jumpshooter like BIllups. So many times he'll use his body and strength to create contact, not get the call and end up throwing a bad shot. Still he gets to the line a lot and shoots a tremendous percentage when he gets there. That's why Billups true shooting percentage is so much higher than AI's.

Billups has everything to do with Denver's success because of his leadership and defense. Things you admitted AI isn't good at. And the Kings should be praying tonight that they never got AI. For they may be bad now, but AI would end up leaving them much worse.



Go back and read my posts. My original point being that Billups was just as good of a scorer as AI was when it mattered most. Billups could put up the big scoring numbers, if the team needed it, when the games mattered the most, with the team facing elimination in back to back games and do so in an efficient manner. This coming from Billups who isn't known for chucking up all the shots AI is known for.



And another shot to your credibility.....Chauncey Billups isn't anywhere close to getting to the free throw line as much as AI. And for someone his size to go in and take a beating every night is much more impressive than a bigger guard like Billups to do it, even though he only does it half as much.

$KnicksAndKobe$
12-16-2008, 07:06 PM
Can we confirm this now?

No we can not. Iverson got you 50W, Billups looks like he will get you it too but lets wait until the playoffs before we start judging.

Hawkeye15
12-16-2008, 07:28 PM
Billups is a true point, which is what Denver needed. He is also 6'3", strong, and shoots well, which means he will age well. Everyone knew AI would go down a bit after 31-32 years old, he is tiny, and relies on speed. But for their careers, AI is better, easy. From the age of 24-28, this wouldn't have even been a topic. Right now, Billups is a better player if you are looking for a lead guard. AI can still light you up, but he is not the AI from 5 years ago. And Denver is still not a contender, so I am not sure how well the trade works out for them long term when AI's deal comes off the books this summer

IversonIsKrazy
12-16-2008, 08:18 PM
wayy to early to judge. im not going to be biased in this answere to make it fair. i'll say that Billups is the better team leader. AI is the better player though. Hes still not fitting w/ detroit. Hes 3rd in all-time PPG, 6th in all-time SPG. Lets break down there game.

Billups: A fantastic pg, who has great eyes and doesnt turn the ball over and is clutch. what did denver need, a pg. a SG was not needed w/ JR. THey finally realized that JR is enough talent at the sg spot, and wut they need is a pg, which ai can't provide.

AI: The greatest combo-guard of all-time. Nugz needed a pg, which ai couldn't provide kuz' he naturally is a SG. In his prime, he wuz absolutely amazing, took a talent-less philly team to the finals, dropped 50 to make it the only win. Then finally went to nugz, nene and ai 2gether all in-total had played under 50 games together. k-mart wuz injured the whole season of ai's arrival. AI isn't a leader, but a great player.

It's to early to judge, once the first round of the playoffs r over, thas when we can judge. if u r comparing overall career, then theres no comparison, ai is one of the best of all-time. if u r talkin as in rite now this season, its way too early. AI is the greatest 6 footer that stepped foot in the NBA.

Leader: Billups
Skills: Iverson
Overall Career: Iverson
Current: Whoever lasts longer in the playoffs, is the better player. The pistons and nuggets r pretty evened out teams. whoever lasts longer in the playoffs, are the better team. lets c who wins.

Nexus
12-16-2008, 08:57 PM
Billups is the better point guard.

LeBrowns
12-16-2008, 08:59 PM
Allen Iverson is a hall of famer, Chauncey Billups is not. Just because AI didn't fit into Detroit or Denver's system as well as Billups doesn't mean that Billups is necesarilly better.

JayW_1023
12-16-2008, 09:01 PM
As a team player Chauncey can impact the game on more ways than just scoring. Iverson is spectacular in terms of individual brilliance, but this ain't no street ball. This is the NBA.

In the pro game, Chauncey Billups is without a doubt a better OVERALL basketball player than Iverson.

ntat
12-16-2008, 09:03 PM
Iverson was successful with every team he's been on before now. if you put billups on AI's philly teams, they never would have come close to the finals. AI is prolific and a scorer, but the players around him are system layers. they need someone to create for them. AI creates for himself and thinks of others after. Billups is not better in totality than AI. he is a better shooter, defender, and PG but AI if a better scorer and better at shouldering a team. AI will have the better legacy even without a ring and he is a level above Billups. Even with Denver it's a marathon not a sprint, and AI got denver to 50 wins before just like billups is about to do..and that was with a 2nd man who was focused only about himself. He didnt get this new Melo who actually wants to step up.

Successfulhow? Indiviudally, yes. His teams, no.

JayW_1023
12-16-2008, 09:12 PM
Iverson did have a more high profile career and the intangibles in his game make him a special type of player. That's what gets him into the Hall of Fame more than anything else.

But I'm an old skool guy and Billups is one of the most fundamentally sound guys at his position. I just rate a player for what he can do as a whole to a team than what his individual skillset is.

I respect Iverson alot, even though I'm not too fond of how he plays the game. But if I had to pick one I would pick Chauncey Billups.

kylem4711
12-16-2008, 09:13 PM
individually better? no

barreleffact
12-16-2008, 09:20 PM
Successfulhow? Indiviudally, yes. His teams, no.

philly- playoffs and finals
Denver- 50 win seasons and playoffs
He got his nickname because he was the answer to what philly needed. a guy who could carry his team. he did that almost singlehandedly(offensively)

His career is more successful IMO because he carried a far bigger burden than Billups was ever asked

SteveNash
12-16-2008, 09:21 PM
Not to mention. He's the only player in history other than MJ to have scored 50 points twice in 1 series.

And AI has always been efficient while putting up 50+

21-42, 20-40, 21-39 are not as efficient as the games I mentioned. Taking that many shots is being selfish, and that's the point. Billups can get big numbers but when he does, it's 40 points on 23 shots, 37 points on 19 shots. That's the kind of efficiency AI needs to be an elite player like Billups.


wow...that is the most rediculous thing ive ever read. horry and posey have hit huge shots in championship game...MULTIPLE TIMES and MULTIPLE YEARS. you lose all credibility and I havent read any further...please believe I may respond to more later but it seems others are ripping you apart nicely enough

Show me Posey or Horry doing this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tZQzLOmFv0Q

It's not like that was that great of a move, it's just that Horry and Posey can't really create their own shot. Hell Horry's biggest shot came when he lucked out to have the ball bounce his way.


And another shot to your credibility.....Chauncey Billups isn't anywhere close to getting to the free throw line as much as AI. And for someone his size to go in and take a beating every night is much more impressive than a bigger guard like Billups to do it, even though he only does it half as much.

AI gets to the line more, but he does it by dribbling the shot clock out try to get his own shot killing the team game.

Sixerlover
12-16-2008, 09:36 PM
I'd rather have Chauncey, and I watched AI just as much as the next sixers fan. And don't give me he had a bad team and went to the finals. He had 4 potential 1st team all defenders around him, with the DPOY behind him. Almost any scorer could of gotten that team to the finals.

kntresistheheat
12-16-2008, 09:47 PM
Why is thread up again???? I mean they are two different players and Iverson is mention as one of the best players in nba history....Billups is a great pg yes! But not a superstar that can have his way against an appoising team like AI. Also why the heck is iveson being compared to billups again, Is it because the trade:confused: Get real!!!! AI is in a system that he does not fit in just like he was in denver.....I mean come on explain why he was so sucessful in phily??? OH yeah because he was what 5yrs younger:mad:


Close thread

DenButsu
12-16-2008, 11:48 PM
In his prime, AI was more dominant. I don't think it could be accurately said that Chauncey could come close to Iverson when it comes to singlehandedly taking a game over and leading a team to a win through sheer force of will. And obviously, AI is the more prolific scorer.

So those points go to Iverson, but in just about everything else, I think the scales tip to Chauncey.

Defense first and foremost makes Billups a more complete player.

Adaptability. One thing that I think is really fair to say is that while Iverson bends a team to his will and forces it to adapt to him, Billups has greater flexibility and adaptability in adjusting to the team. AI has a hard time fitting into existing team structures because blending ain't exactly his thing. Look at Chauncey now, though, learning to balance the slower, controlled, defensively-oriented game he brings to the Nuggets with the team's propensity for running the floor at a much quicker pace than he was accustomed to in Detroit. He still might not be completely comfortable with it at times, but he is in fact bringing the positives of his game to the table without overly altering or undermining other positives Denver already had going on.

Leadership. AI is great in the locker room, as far as I can tell. He's inspirational and motivating. His attitude is much more positive than people give him credit for. But at the end of the day, Billups is just a more natural and more effective leader on the court, talking on defense, controlling the offense, talking down players who are getting too angry/etc., and like AI, firing up his teammates.



To say who the "better player" is depends on your definition of what qualifies one player as "better" than another. If you're measuring it by statistical production and such, Iverson probably has a stronger case to be made for him. But I think Billups would have - like he has had in Denver - a more positive overall impact on more NBA teams than AI would, so by that measure I think Chauncey wins.

alexander_37
12-17-2008, 12:00 AM
right now obv. billups is better

in their prime billups is not one tenth of iverson

innovator
12-17-2008, 12:08 AM
iverson = better individual player


chauncey = better team player.


but i would rather have chauncey if it ever comes to a clutch shot....he's already made plenty of thos with denver.....for example, when a team catches up, chauncey takes away their momentum by drainin a 3 outta nowhere...and then steals the ball,comesback, and drains another 3 back to back....he's did it plenty of times already.....a.i. Would never get us a clutch shot like that...he might drive to the rim and get a foul, but nothin like chauncey does.

agree

Theanswer76
12-17-2008, 12:15 AM
I dont think it is, Allen Iverson just dosnt fit what DET always is doing,.

I agree 100 percent

Chronz
12-17-2008, 05:12 AM
I dont know why it needs to take so long for people to realize this, Billups has been the better player for a number of years now.....





You are the only person on the planet who apparently thinks that AI didn't carry a mediocre Sixers team to the Finals......congratulations:clap:
You speak on behalf of the entire planet now? I know of Sixers fan that feel the same way. He had the best team in the conference, and he still almost screwed it up.


wow...that is the most rediculous thing ive ever read. horry and posey have hit huge shots in championship game...MULTIPLE TIMES and MULTIPLE YEARS. you lose all credibility and I havent read any further...please believe I may respond to more later but it seems others are ripping you apart nicely enough
Your not understanding his wordage, the degree of difficulty on their clutch shots is completely different, Billups can break you down or overpower his position, Horry and Posey just hit timely 3's. Billups hits timely 3's as well, his greatest shot being that halfcourt jumper that sent game 5 or whatever into OT.


And another shot to your credibility.....Chauncey Billups isn't anywhere close to getting to the free throw line as much as AI. And for someone his size to go in and take a beating every night is much more impressive than a bigger guard like Billups to do it, even though he only does it half as much.
The point in mentioning his ability to get to the line is that he combines it with 3pt precision, which is easily the rarest feet to accomplish, about the only guy I can think of who can do both consistently is Pierce. Billups is the Pierce of PG's. Im not positive but Im pretty sure on a possession basis, Billups gets to the line more frequently.


As a team player Chauncey can impact the game on more ways than just scoring. Iverson is spectacular in terms of individual brilliance, but this ain't no street ball. This is the NBA.

In the pro game, Chauncey Billups is without a doubt a better OVERALL basketball player than Iverson.
:clap:

Chronz
12-17-2008, 05:22 AM
In his prime, AI was more dominant. I don't think it could be accurately said that Chauncey could come close to Iverson when it comes to singlehandedly taking a game over and leading a team to a win through sheer force of will. And obviously, AI is the more prolific scorer.

So those points go to Iverson, but in just about everything else, I think the scales tip to Chauncey.

Defense first and foremost makes Billups a more complete player.


Adaptability. One thing that I think is really fair to say is that while Iverson bends a team to his will and forces it to adapt to him, Billups has greater flexibility and adaptability in adjusting to the team. AI has a hard time fitting into existing team structures because blending ain't exactly his thing. Look at Chauncey now, though, learning to balance the slower, controlled, defensively-oriented game he brings to the Nuggets with the team's propensity for running the floor at a much quicker pace than he was accustomed to in Detroit. He still might not be completely comfortable with it at times, but he is in fact bringing the positives of his game to the table without overly altering or undermining other positives Denver already had going on.

Leadership. AI is great in the locker room, as far as I can tell. He's inspirational and motivating. His attitude is much more positive than people give him credit for. But at the end of the day, Billups is just a more natural and more effective leader on the court, talking on defense, controlling the offense, talking down players who are getting too angry/etc., and like AI, firing up his teammates.
Agreed with everything youve said thus far....




To say who the "better player" is depends on your definition of what qualifies one player as "better" than another. If you're measuring it by statistical production and such, Iverson probably has a stronger case to be made for him.
I couldnt make one when I was trying to understand Detroits reason for the trade. To me it was more of a lets hope he DOESNT choke and/or breakdown in the ECF the way Chauncey has the past few years (I heard Chauncey admitted to dogging it in Detroit the past few years because he didnt have the same self motivation he now has in Denver) and will the team to the Finals again, but as far as their statistical output in the regular season Billups has been more impressive throughout the past few years, Detroits sluggish pace and his limited PT versus AI's 40MPG in an all out system, just makes it seem less impressive.


But I think Billups would have - like he has had in Denver - a more positive overall impact on more NBA teams than AI would, so by that measure I think Chauncey wins.

Definitely agree, they both bring different dynamics to a team and can make their teammates better in different ways, its just easier to play with a guy like Billups.

Hawkize31
12-17-2008, 05:49 AM
iverson was successful with every team he's been on before now. If you put billups on ai's philly teams, they never would have come close to the finals. Ai is prolific and a scorer, but the players around him are system layers. They need someone to create for them. Ai creates for himself and thinks of others after. Billups is not better in totality than ai. He is a better shooter, defender, and pg but ai if a better scorer and better at shouldering a team. Ai will have the better legacy even without a ring and he is a level above billups. Even with denver it's a marathon not a sprint, and ai got denver to 50 wins before just like billups is about to do..and that was with a 2nd man who was focused only about himself. He didnt get this new melo who actually wants to step up.

+1

UnWantedTheory
12-17-2008, 05:50 AM
This is a ridiculous thread and shouldnt even be discussed. AI is a better individual player who shouldered a team to the finals, whereas Billups is more of a system team player(which is why he has a ring) who can distribute. They are two completely different players.

Chronz
12-17-2008, 06:01 AM
This is a ridiculous thread and shouldnt even be discussed. AI is a better individual player who shouldered a team to the finals, whereas Billups is more of a system team player(which is why he has a ring) who can distribute. They are two completely different players.
Its a very reasonable thread that should be discussed. Billups is a FLOOR GENERAL that makes any system work, AI lacks the shooting ability and strength to play as efficient as Billups does. They are definitely 2 completely different players, the thing is that Billups makes his teams much better. The NBA is not a 1 on 1 game, the impact you have on the players around you is very real.

DerekRE_3
12-17-2008, 06:05 AM
1. Chauncey Billups fits in with pretty much every single team in the NBA. Iverson does not. In fact, does AI fit in with any team?

2. Given the choice, I'd much rather have Billups on my favorite team than AI. He's a winner and a team player.

3. There is a reason why people say stats are overrated. Billups may not put up the gaudy stats that AI does, but he's a winner, and look at what he has done in Denver.

4. The person that said Billups is great on a championship caliber team and AI can help bring a mediocre team to a playoff team was spot on. AI can carry a team to respectability, but Chauncey can take and lead a good team and help make them great.

Chronz
12-17-2008, 06:13 AM
1. Chauncey Billups fits in with pretty much every single team in the NBA. Iverson does not. In fact, does AI fit in with any team?

2. Given the choice, I'd much rather have Billups on my favorite team than AI. He's a winner and a team player.

3. There is a reason why people say stats are overrated. Billups may not put up the gaudy stats that AI does, but he's a winner, and look at what he has done in Denver.

4. The person that said Billups is great on a championship caliber team and AI can help bring a mediocre team to a playoff team was spot on. AI can carry a team to respectability, but Chauncey can take and lead a good team and help make them great.
Not trying to bust your bubble especially because I agree with all of your points but I find people who say stats are overrated to be usually those who have trouble understanding them. Billups is practically the poster child for underrated stat players. Its true players can exceed their statistical worth in a variety of ways and Billups is in that category but the scary part is that his numbers are already crazy good, better than AI's in fact.

So if he has the better intangibles, the better stats, better defense and leadership, more wins and playoff success, the title and the Finals MVP, what else does he need to be deemed the better player?

DerekRE_3
12-17-2008, 06:36 AM
Not trying to bust your bubble especially because I agree with all of your points but I find people who say stats are overrated to be usually those who have trouble understanding them. Billups is practically the poster child for underrated stat players. Its true players can exceed their statistical worth in a variety of ways and Billups is in that category but the scary part is that his numbers are already crazy good, better than AI's in fact.

So if he has the better intangibles, the better stats, better defense and leadership, more wins and playoff success, the title and the Finals MVP, what else does he need to be deemed the better player?

Agreed, I also think they look at the wrong stats to determine how good a player is.

JayW_1023
12-17-2008, 06:41 AM
Chronz has a great point here. My mantra on these forums is that stats are overrated...but it's usually because many people emphasize the wrong stats to prove a players worth. Like you said, Derek_RE3.

adamsison
12-17-2008, 08:23 AM
everyone need to give iverson a break.... he is one of the greatest players ever (name another player 6 foot nothing who can score like AI! He one a MVP award, and ran into an unstoppable lakers team in the finals). and most of his career he has been a winner.
he simply did not fit as well as billups does.

im a nuggets fan, and am very happy that we got billups, he is much better for the nuggets. Which is weird is because iverson and melo are my favorite players and loved having the both on the same team.

this season billups is have a better season so far.... all the iverson haters are going too far...

DenButsu
12-17-2008, 10:06 AM
everyone need to give iverson a break....

Leave Allen alone! (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/06/Crocker1.JPG)











(sorry, I love AI but I couldn't resist that one)

barreleffact
12-17-2008, 10:12 AM
I dont know why it needs to take so long for people to realize this, Billups has been the better player for a number of years now.....

Your not understanding his wordage, the degree of difficulty on their clutch shots is completely different, Billups can break you down or overpower his position, Horry and Posey just hit timely 3's. Billups hits timely 3's as well, his greatest shot being that halfcourt jumper that sent game 5 or whatever into OT.


His 1st post was about how the name Mr big shot came around. We were talking about actually carrying a team, not just being clutch.

Billups has never carried a team in his career. He has just been the best part of teams that can mesh it all together. AI has single handedly, or at least it would seem, carried teams offensively. Regardless of efficiency, how can you compare a player that has never carried a team to a player that has, and did it quite well? Overall talent is easily AI, Individual awards is easily AI, career....thats iffy. But thats like comparing Domonique Wilkens' career to that of James Worthy or Kevin Mchale...the latter 2 actually had great teams and were an afterthought compared to the real star. May be a bad comparison because the pistons had no 1 star, but i know you understand my point

The Ooh Child
12-17-2008, 10:48 AM
There is no question that Billups is better for the Nuggets' line-up and was better for the Pistons' line-up. But, and this is probably my Philly bias talking, I still think that Iverson has had a bigger impact on the league and is a better player when you look at there entire careers. Although, as of right now Billups is the better player and probably has been for the last 2-3 years.

Frrrrank!!!
12-17-2008, 11:00 AM
Leave Allen alone! (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/06/Crocker1.JPG)











(sorry, I love AI but I couldn't resist that one)

:laugh: nice. To me Billups is better for a team because he is what you want in a pg:clutch, pass first, past second, solid D, good shooter. IMO teams run a lot smoother when your pg is looking to pass the ball not shoot it.

king4day
12-17-2008, 11:03 AM
1 on 1 AI is better.

Team player, it's Billups.

JayW_1023
12-17-2008, 11:16 AM
The irony is...for AI to be the focal point of a team and have success, playing alongside a guy like Billups is a must. An allround guard with the size and strength to guard SG's so Iverson won't have to.

The Pistons need Stuckey to fulfill the Billups role now.

austinj215
12-17-2008, 11:17 AM
Billups was a possible better fit in Detroit.... but to say he is better based on the Nuggets playing well against mostly losing teams for 25 games is ridiculous. AI is a HOFer whose career avgs. blow Billups away.

DenButsu
12-17-2008, 12:49 PM
Billups was a possible better fit in Detroit.... but to say he is better based on the Nuggets playing well against mostly losing teams for 25 games is ridiculous. AI is a HOFer whose career avgs. blow Billups away.

Have you even watched a Nuggets game since Billups joined? The wins are great and all, because the proof is in the pudding, but if you reduce it to that you are badly missing the point. And the point is that the quality of basketball that the Nuggets are playing has been elevated to a level this team hasn't seen since probably the 1980s. The difference is massive. The only "ridiculous" thing happening here is that you either haven't seen that, or have ignored it, but still see fit to ridicule others' better informed opinions on it. Because the difference isn't just win totals, and it's completely in-your-face obvious if you've watched and compared last season's and this season's team. The flow and control of the offense is worlds better, the team can now (whereas it couldn't before) execute effectively in the halfcourt, the chemistry and communication of the teammates is much improved, and the strides Denver has made defensively, well, to call them impressive would be an understatement. Amazing would be more like it.

Now, how much credit Billups gets for this, and whether this makes him a "better player" than AI are separate questions with less clear answers, but the fact that Chauncey is a far better fit for the Nuggets than Iverson was is really just beyond dispute to me now.

IndyRealist
12-17-2008, 01:03 PM
I didn't think this would be such a contested thread. AI's one of the best scorers in the league. He gives up his body on almost every play. He's clutch. He is not a playmaker. He is not a defender. He is ultimately not a leader. Those are the things that Billups is good at. Is Billups a better, more talented player? No. Would I rather have him on my team? In a heartbeat.

NYstateofMinD
12-17-2008, 01:06 PM
Does anyone but me look at the fact that George Karl had Anthony Carter playing the point not AI. Iverson is the better player maybe not in this system but he is overall.

DenButsu
12-17-2008, 01:17 PM
Does anyone but me look at the fact that George Karl had Anthony Carter playing the point not AI. Iverson is the better player maybe not in this system but he is overall.

AI spent a good half of his minutes in Denver at the 1.

eugene
12-17-2008, 01:26 PM
such topics makes me sicks... how can you compare two absolutely different types of a player in a different situation? chauncey is a great defence oriented teamplayer, ivy is an unique 6'0 scoring machine, great athlete... led his team to the NBA finals..
is bosh officially better than kg or duncan?? his stats are better...
is malone officially better than olajuwon?
and so on...

sportsnutzz
12-17-2008, 01:40 PM
Billips>Iverson

KG#1
12-17-2008, 01:47 PM
its all about chemistry
billups was exactly what they needed to give themselves a defensive identity

chicagowhitesox
12-17-2008, 02:44 PM
better pg, not better player

legendkillerv2
12-17-2008, 02:44 PM
Iverson to me is more of a two guard, he shouldn't be playing point guard, like jason terry.

ink
12-17-2008, 03:32 PM
Iverson to me is more of a two guard, he shouldn't be playing point guard, like jason terry.

I agree. But he was still unsuccessful as a SG with the Nuggets wasn't he? Didn't Karl use him there?

------

About the thread topic, I'd say that Billups has shown what happens when you have less talent but a better understanding of the game, and more determination to get your team to produce. I'd reward that over individual talent 100 times out of 100, so Billups is definitely the better player.

DerekRE_3
12-17-2008, 03:40 PM
1 on 1 AI is better.

Team player, it's Billups.

Which doesn't mean much and pretty much proves my point. Basketball is 5 on 5 and a team game.

NYMetros
12-17-2008, 03:40 PM
I still think Iverson is better.

barreleffact
12-17-2008, 03:47 PM
Which doesn't mean much and pretty much proves my point. Basketball is 5 on 5 and a team game.

i agree and disagree. when 1 person can score more by himself than the other 4 players combined...that 1 on 1 ability becomes VERY useful

DerekRE_3
12-17-2008, 03:47 PM
I still think Iverson is better.

Does AI have more talent? Absolutely. Do I want him on my team? Hell no.

ink
12-17-2008, 03:57 PM
I still think Iverson is better.

It's really all about how you decide who's better. Does AI have better physical skills? Yes. Does he have better mental skills, team skills, ball IQ? Not even close. If it's just a physical display, Iverson wins hands down. If it's a basketball game where the outcome matters, he just can't compete.


Does AI have more talent? Absolutely. Do I want him on my team? Hell no.

+1

NYMetros
12-17-2008, 04:00 PM
It's really all about how you decide who's better. Does AI have better physical skills? Yes. Does he have better mental skills, team skills, ball IQ? Not even close. If it's just a physical display, Iverson wins hands down. If it's a basketball game where the outcome matters, he just can't compete.

It's not like Iverson can't win games. He almost single-handedly led Philadelphia to the Finals, which is a pretty good accomplishment considering he didn't have much around him.


Does AI have more talent? Absolutely. Do I want him on my team? Hell no.

It depends on who he would replace on your team. :D

DerekRE_3
12-17-2008, 04:03 PM
It's not like Iverson can't win games. He almost single-handedly led Philadelphia to the Finals, which is a pretty good accomplishment considering he didn't have much around him.



It depends on who he would replace on your team. :D

Allen Iverson could replace Kenny Thomas on the Kings and we would still not be good. Now that is more dissing my teams lack of talent than I am AI's talent.

jimbobjarree
12-17-2008, 04:06 PM
teams suck with Iverson because they continually think he can play point guard, or not play a decent point guard with him, every new team he goes to thinks it and fails.

ink
12-17-2008, 04:14 PM
It's not like Iverson can't win games. He almost single-handedly led Philadelphia to the Finals, which is a pretty good accomplishment ...

No. That's exactly why it isn't a good accomplishment. Of course every player should do everything to take his team as far they can. But the biggest mistake in the NBA since MJ is for players to try to do it single-handedly. A great player should live or die by his team.

JordansBulls
12-17-2008, 04:29 PM
teams suck with Iverson because they continually think he can play point guard, or not play a decent point guard with him, every new team he goes to thinks it and fails.

He was good with the Sixers in 2001 but I think that was the only really successful season he had.

charlsdq7
12-17-2008, 04:31 PM
not better, NO WAY, but he does make his team better...

NFLNBA
12-17-2008, 04:35 PM
I voted billups isnt better then Iverson but only because Iverson isnt better then Billups also!

Look i dont think we can judge who is better since the trade because of the different styles of play. Iverson would be the better player if he was teamed up with coach Mike D'Antoni because of his style of Offense. I think Billups teamed up with Phil Jackson would be perfect for his style. We can agree they both are amazing athlets and great PG and we all perfer a differnt stle of play. I personally would want Billups because i like a organized offense that goes inside out.

Lakers4ItAll
12-17-2008, 04:42 PM
No and it would be dumb to say it is.


Looking at how the Pistons were doing with Billups and the Nuggets with Iverson and now vice versa, is that the best to determine really who was better?

Chronz
12-17-2008, 06:04 PM
His 1st post was about how the name Mr big shot came around. We were talking about actually carrying a team, not just being clutch.
So Horry and Posey carried teams? Why else would you compare Billups to him. The point remains he was talking about how Billups got the name BIGSHOT, and how he earned his reputation for being a clutch scorer is much more significant than those 2.


Billups has never carried a team in his career. He has just been the best part of teams that can mesh it all together. AI has single handedly, or at least it would seem, carried teams offensively. Regardless of efficiency, how can you compare a player that has never carried a team to a player that has, and did it quite well? Overall talent is easily AI, Individual awards is easily AI, career....thats iffy. But thats like comparing Domonique Wilkens' career to that of James Worthy or Kevin Mchale...the latter 2 actually had great teams and were an afterthought compared to the real star. May be a bad comparison because the pistons had no 1 star, but i know you understand my point
Yes its the timeless debate of efficiency vs usage, just because your an inefficient player doesnt mean your bad, if its the result of inferior teammates who NEED you to take those shots then you taking them actually makes the players around you better. However the disparity in efficiency vs usage is too great to ignore in Billups case, both are about equal statistically but the difference in their intangibles give Billups the edge, hes a far superior defender (even though hes been slightly overrated IMO) hes a greater leader who makes him teammates better. AI can make no such claim other than being better at creating a ton of looks, that has proven ultimately not to be as vital to his teams success as Billups efficiency has. If AI was asked to make an offense work and be a top offensive team he couldnt do it, he doesnt have the shooting ability to be a play finisher off of other players set ups. People always mention how Detroit runs sets where they have AI standing in a corner not doing anything, well thats the problem, Billups is a threat even when hes standing, AI must have the ball in his hands to be effective, he cant 3pt stance from the top of the key and kill you in a variety of ways.

And I compare them by how theyve reacted to different environments over the course of their career, how they impact the players around them, and how much success they have. Billups has simply been the better player, all things considered. Obviously a case can be made either way, but in the recent 3-4 years hes been the better player.

If Im building a lottery team with a bunch of nobodies and want to sell tickets I take AI, if Im trying to build a contender and win a championship over time, Billups is the better piece. That to me is the ultimate sign of a players greatness, the point of the game is to win, Billups gives me the best chance to do so.

NYMetros
12-17-2008, 06:05 PM
No. That's exactly why it isn't a good accomplishment. Of course every player should do everything to take his team as far they can. But the biggest mistake in the NBA since MJ is for players to try to do it single-handedly. A great player should live or die by his team.

He didn't have any talent around him. He carried his team much farther than they should have went.

ink
12-17-2008, 06:13 PM
He didn't have any talent around him. He carried his team much farther than they should have went.

You miss the point. This "carrying teams" BS is what has killed the game. It's just a bad sports cliche. 1. his game is incompatible with ANY team, 2. a great player sticks with the team concept no matter what. They live or die with the team, regardless of the "talent around him". The "talent around him" argument is also a sports cliche. It's not 1on1. It's basketball.

Chronz
12-17-2008, 06:15 PM
Chronz has a great point here. My mantra on these forums is that stats are overrated...but it's usually because many people emphasize the wrong stats to prove a players worth. Like you said, Derek_RE3.
Per game averages is basically what people use, thats probably why you have a problem with the whole ___ > _____ player. TS% and eFG% have raised the awareness but you'll still find people that try to diminish Billups efficiency because of his low FG% even though hes usually been the most efficient PG not named Steve Nash. In this thread alone you'll find about 3 people making this mistake...

Overall I understand your mantra, but sometimes people give you the wrong viewpoint on a player statistical worth so the idea is magnified more than it should be. Like how many times have you heard KG's stats fell off when he joined Boston from one year to the next, when in reality about the only thing that declined was his rebounding and even that was slightly a result of being on one of the best rebounding teams. LeBron right now is having the best statistical season of his career but people seem to think they are lesser than Wades. There are endless comparisons that people are oblivious to.

Lakersho
12-17-2008, 06:32 PM
ai is a taker, not a maker. teams will struggle unless used as 6th man!!!

barreleffact
12-17-2008, 06:42 PM
So Horry and Posey carried teams? Why else would you compare Billups to him. The point remains he was talking about how Billups got the name BIGSHOT, and how he earned his reputation for being a clutch scorer is much more significant than those 2.


Yes its the timeless debate of efficiency vs usage, just because your an inefficient player doesnt mean your bad, if its the result of inferior teammates who NEED you to take those shots then you taking them actually makes the players around you better. However the disparity in efficiency vs usage is too great to ignore in Billups case, both are about equal statistically but the difference in their intangibles give Billups the edge, hes a far superior defender (even though hes been slightly overrated IMO) hes a greater leader who makes him teammates better. AI can make no such claim other than being better at creating a ton of looks, that has proven ultimately not to be as vital to his teams success as Billups efficiency has. If AI was asked to make an offense work and be a top offensive team he couldnt do it, he doesnt have the shooting ability to be a play finisher off of other players set ups. People always mention how Detroit runs sets where they have AI standing in a corner not doing anything, well thats the problem, Billups is a threat even when hes standing, AI must have the ball in his hands to be effective, he cant 3pt stance from the top of the key and kill you in a variety of ways.

And I compare them by how theyve reacted to different environments over the course of their career, how they impact the players around them, and how much success they have. Billups has simply been the better player, all things considered. Obviously a case can be made either way, but in the recent 3-4 years hes been the better player.

If Im building a lottery team with a bunch of nobodies and want to sell tickets I take AI, if Im trying to build a contender and win a championship over time, Billups is the better piece. That to me is the ultimate sign of a players greatness, the point of the game is to win, Billups gives me the best chance to do so.

he got the name mr big shot...from hitting big shots. it had nothing to do with carrying a team. thats why i compared him to horry and posey. they arent carrying teams either. they are hitting big shots and playing their roles. never said billups had a lesser role than those 2, but he's NEVER carried a team.

you are right about the efficiency of AI. he isnt going to hit J's like Ray or execute plays to the level billups. he isnt a system player. he's a player you build a system around. thats why he's a horrible fit for detroit.

It's just as I said earlier and you just agreed with, if you have a team of scrubs and want them to be respectable, you choose AI. If you already have talent and want someone to just make it work you choose Billups. Tell me, how is a piece better than an entire product? Billups is a piece to a system and enables it to run well. AI is the entire product and others are just accessories. Chauncey ONLY gives you the best chance to win IF you have a team thats capable.

I cant say that Billups has ever been better than AI because he's never had the responsibility that AI has had. As I've said, he's never carried ****. Even last year AI got a team with no defense to win 50 games. Thats about what Chauncey is going to get. same result different(more efficient) process.

sep11ie
12-17-2008, 06:44 PM
Yea, that 8 pt game against Aaron Brooks really sealed that argument

$KnicksAndKobe$
12-17-2008, 07:00 PM
MJ with no championships = AI

bleedprple&gold
12-17-2008, 07:21 PM
If Billups and AI played one-on-one I have no doubt Iverson would win. He is the more talented player. But put those guys on the same team against each other and Billup's team wins. Iverson is a better individual player, but Billups is the better team player. So to answer the question, who is the better player, it depends in what context.

SteveNash
12-17-2008, 08:09 PM
I have to ask just one more thing for the Iverson fans.

If Iverson really cares about winning, why hasn't he gotten it done in Detroit so far? You can use the cop out that he doesn't fit, but if your best argument is that AI plays best on a crappy team that won't win a championship, then your argument is already pointless. You play to win the game, Iverson said he wants to win, if he can only fit on crappy teams that most likely won't make the playoffs, then Billups is better than him.

ShaunRiching9
12-17-2008, 08:16 PM
nice i was vote 100

Chronz
12-17-2008, 08:17 PM
he got the name mr big shot...from hitting big shots. it had nothing to do with carrying a team.
If your so certain about this then tell me how he got the name, when did it start and how? Heres a hint, it was from carrying the team in the playoffs.


thats why i compared him to horry and posey.
Thats why SteveNash told you it was a ridiculous comparison. The degree of difficulty in their shots arent the same and neither earned the reputation for putting the team on his back.


they arent carrying teams either. they are hitting big shots and playing their roles. never said billups had a lesser role than those 2, but he's NEVER carried a team.

The term carried a team is so far fetched, Billups carried a team in his own way, EFFICIENCY.


you are right about the efficiency of AI. he isnt going to hit J's like Ray or execute plays to the level billups. he isnt a system player. he's a player you build a system around. thats why he's a horrible fit for detroit.

Hes a horrible fit on any team that stresses ball movement, teamwork and defense. You know the type of things required to win a championship...



It's just as I said earlier and you just agreed with, if you have a team of scrubs and want them to be respectable, you choose AI. If you already have talent and want someone to just make it work you choose Billups. Tell me, how is a piece better than an entire product? Billups is a piece to a system and enables it to run well. AI is the entire product and others are just accessories. Chauncey ONLY gives you the best chance to win IF you have a team thats capable.
I didnt agree with you, I said if I wanted to build a Championship contender I take Billups, AI is for selling tickets and maybe making the playoffs if I have enough talent to mask his deficiencies. In your terms, Billups is a championship PIECE, while AI is a flawed product. Chauncey gives your team the best chance to win unless hes surrounded by no one who can score, ultimately the goal is to win at the highest level. Chauncey is the better player because a players legacy isnt about individual talent, its how you mesh them into a team framework that matters.


I cant say that Billups has ever been better than AI because he's never had the responsibility that AI has had. As I've said, he's never carried ****. Even last year AI got a team with no defense to win 50 games. Thats about what Chauncey is going to get. same result different(more efficient) process.

He doesnt have to, to be considered the better player. Why does he have to carry a team? Why doesnt AI have to prove he can be an EFFICIENT player on a championship squad to be better than Billups. This absurd belief that you have to take all the shots on the team to be deemed the better player is irrelevant, Billups is the better player because he brings more to the table than AI, and their impact on the game statistically is fairly close. So if the numbers are close, and the intangibles+defense are drastically different how do you begin to make a case for AI?


Also AI was part of the reason the Nuggets were a less than impressive defensive team but they were definitely not a NO-D team.The difference in the Nuggets level of play is drastic, hes made them much better and thats with Melo yet to discover his shooting touch.

blacknell
12-17-2008, 08:30 PM
no iverson is better he is just a different type of player

DenButsu
12-17-2008, 08:57 PM
I have to ask just one more thing for the Iverson fans.

If Iverson really cares about winning, why hasn't he gotten it done in Detroit so far? You can use the cop out that he doesn't fit, but if your best argument is that AI plays best on a crappy team that won't win a championship, then your argument is already pointless. You play to win the game, Iverson said he wants to win, if he can only fit on crappy teams that most likely won't make the playoffs, then Billups is better than him.

I made my case earlier in this thread that Billups will have a much better overall impact on many more NBA teams, but I will jump to AI's defense on this point. When we Nuggets fans found out AI was coming to Denver, one concern was his reputation (the "practice" rant, previous coach issues, locker room issues, etc.). One thing I will absolutely give him credit for, though, is that he brought a ****load of passion to the court and to the organization on a very consistent basis. Not 100% of the time - and of course, when it came to basketball much more on offense than on defense - but on a very regular basis he clearly gave it everything he had, and that included in the locker room and, yes, actually in practices as well. He did become the team's leader - with the known mixed results, of course - for a reason. And that reason most definitely did not include because he didn't really care about winning. He cares. He wants to win.

But the way that I would put it, at least in Denver, was that he was either incapable of understanding they type of changes he needed to implement in his game to better help the team (from a purely scoring-oriented game to more of a playmaking game), or incapable of making those changes, or (and this is what I believe) a little bit mindful of it with a powerful tendency to forget and let his old, career-long habits take over. I'd even suspect that this latter take might be supported by stats: I don't know if this information is "out there", available for number crunching, but if you could look at AI's assists per quarter or per half, I'd guarantee you that he averaged more assists early in games (when he started off with a better team focus) than later in games (when he naturally slipped back into his old balll-dominating groove).

So maybe it was unfair for Denver to ask him to be something he's not, but on the other hand we have ample evidence that Iverson is perfectly capable of playing the point pretty damn well when he puts his mind to it. So I don't think that there's a problem with him not caring about winning, but there's a problem with him stubbornly refusing to adapt his game to the needs of the team rather than insisting the team adapt to him.

---------------------------------

On a side note, here's a great scouting report of why it's nearly impossible to effectively run a halfcourt offense when Iverson is the primary ball handler:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pDjAygeisHc

Chronz
12-17-2008, 09:16 PM
I have to ask just one more thing for the Iverson fans.

If Iverson really cares about winning, why hasn't he gotten it done in Detroit so far? You can use the cop out that he doesn't fit, but if your best argument is that AI plays best on a crappy team that won't win a championship, then your argument is already pointless. You play to win the game, Iverson said he wants to win, if he can only fit on crappy teams that most likely won't make the playoffs, then Billups is better than him.
Thats basically the idea, but to be fair the guy is 33 and is finally on a decline, he doesnt have the skill and size Billups has to remain effective as he enters his mid 30's.

LA_Raiders
12-17-2008, 09:44 PM
lol, He is not....

t-mac1nukka
12-17-2008, 09:49 PM
iverson is a loser and billups is a winner. plain and simple.

JayW_1023
12-17-2008, 09:53 PM
With Iverson it's one or the other: he can win a game singlehandedly or lose a game singlehandedly. He can be unstoppable, but he can also shoot himself out of the game and the low shooting percentages pile up. Like DenButsu said, his unpredictability makes it hard for his teammates to adapt and anticipate.

With Billups, wether he struggles or lights out, he always finds a way to contribute on both ends. When he isn't scoring he is still playing defense, passing the ball and finding ways to help his team win. Billups is smart enough to stop shooting when his shot isn't falling...AI however is not.

Lakersfan2483
12-17-2008, 09:58 PM
Looking at how the Pistons were doing with Billups and the Nuggets with Iverson and now vice versa, is that the best to determine really who was better?

Not at all, when Iverson was in his prime he won an MVP and led his team to the finals. Iverson is more of a franchise type of player, whereas Billups is more of 2nd or 3rd option. Billups is a great player, but Iverson is one of the greatest players of all time.

Lakersfan2483
12-17-2008, 10:02 PM
In order for Iverson to be successful, he must be the focale point on offense and not be asked to play point guard. He has a scorer's mentality and is more effective in that role. His best yrs. were in Philly under Larry Brown. The offense was designed to fit his style of play and he was succesful under that system.

As far as Billups, he's a better fascilitator and can run an offense much better than Iverson. Billups is a true point guard and fits in Denver's system perfectly.

barreleffact
12-17-2008, 10:17 PM
If your so certain about this then tell me how he got the name, when did it start and how? Heres a hint, it was from carrying the team in the playoffs.


Thats why SteveNash told you it was a ridiculous comparison. The degree of difficulty in their shots arent the same and neither earned the reputation for putting the team on his back.


The term carried a team is so far fetched, Billups carried a team in his own way, EFFICIENCY.


Hes a horrible fit on any team that stresses ball movement, teamwork and defense. You know the type of things required to win a championship...


I didnt agree with you, I said if I wanted to build a Championship contender I take Billups, AI is for selling tickets and maybe making the playoffs if I have enough talent to mask his deficiencies. In your terms, Billups is a championship PIECE, while AI is a flawed product. Chauncey gives your team the best chance to win unless hes surrounded by no one who can score, ultimately the goal is to win at the highest level. Chauncey is the better player because a players legacy isnt about individual talent, its how you mesh them into a team framework that matters.


He doesnt have to, to be considered the better player. Why does he have to carry a team? Why doesnt AI have to prove he can be an EFFICIENT player on a championship squad to be better than Billups. This absurd belief that you have to take all the shots on the team to be deemed the better player is irrelevant, Billups is the better player because he brings more to the table than AI, and their impact on the game statistically is fairly close. So if the numbers are close, and the intangibles+defense are drastically different how do you begin to make a case for AI?


Also AI was part of the reason the Nuggets were a less than impressive defensive team but they were definitely not a NO-D team.The difference in the Nuggets level of play is drastic, hes made them much better and thats with Melo yet to discover his shooting touch.

you write too much just because you dont like me. its really bothersome, annoying, petty, and starting to piss me off actually.

regardless(here we go again)
1- he has NEVER carried a team. IDC what you say. You carry a team when you are the most talented. He has ALWAYS been surrounded by equal talent. Running a team and carrying a team are very different. and he got his name from hitting shots and running the team efficiently when it counted.

2- my point was that none of them CARRY a team. get it? thats why my point is valid. It had nothing to do with the degree of difficulty nor how they got off their shots.

3- Billups hasnt carried ****. you carry a team when you are the clear best. you run a team when you have set duties and are responsible for a role. Billups fits the latter.

4-Yea because AI was a horrible fit for the team he CARRIED to the finals. Billups would have obviously taken that team just as far. with billups they probably would have won a ring with that garbage:rolleyes:

5-Taking **** to the playoffs IS respectable...or are you dissing your boy tmac? AI is not a flawed product....he may be of a specialized design tho. ultimately you are better if you have a bigger role. AI's roles have always been bigger. I wonder why that is...regardless your saying individual talent is under how you tie together a team doesnt work here. AI has never had players around him that couldve worked cohesively. Plus, its like I said already. to compare players based their teams successes cant be done always. its like saying D Wilkens is worse than Mchale or James Worthy because they had better teams around them

6- I never said a player has to be a volume scorer nor inefficient to be better. I said he had to have a bigger role, and AI always has had a bigger role. Hence teh name the answer. he was the answer to what philly needed. a guy who could come in and fill up the stands, take over a game, and get you results. and why not compare Billups to what AI can do? the only reason people are saying AI is worse is because they are comparing him to Billups strengths. NO! its a 2 way street. and the numbers arent close. AI drops a similar number of assists while having nearly double the points...how is that close? this year they may be close, but not the past few years. compare billups final results this year(50 wins in a less competitive west and 1st round exit-most probable) to AI last year and the result is the exact same. now you look at talent and AI is far more talented.

7- as far as them being no D...ima listen to the many analysts that said multiple times per half, let alone per game, that they looked lost and had no D far before i will listen to you.

barreleffact
12-17-2008, 10:20 PM
With Iverson it's one or the other: he can win a game singlehandedly or lose a game singlehandedly. He can be unstoppable, but he can also shoot himself out of the game and the low shooting percentages pile up. Like DenButsu said, his unpredictability makes it hard for his teammates to adapt and anticipate.

With Billups, wether he struggles or lights out, he always finds a way to contribute on both ends. When he isn't scoring he is still playing defense, passing the ball and finding ways to help his team win. Billups is smart enough to stop shooting when his shot isn't falling...AI however is not.

you dont stop shooting when you are a star. thats a sign of greatness. you find other ways to score, you get to the line, you drive and dish. all things AI can do. It isnt smart if you are the only one capable of scoring on your team and you stop shooting because you're off. the players that would be shooting in your place probably have a worse chance of making a shot than you do even when you're cold.

barreleffact
12-17-2008, 10:21 PM
iverson is a loser and billups is a winner. plain and simple.

coming from a guy with tmac in his name:rolleyes:

IBleedPurple
12-17-2008, 10:34 PM
Iverson was successful with every team he's been on before now. if you put billups on AI's philly teams, they never would have come close to the finals. AI is prolific and a scorer, but the players around him are system layers. they need someone to create for them. AI creates for himself and thinks of others after. Billups is not better in totality than AI. he is a better shooter, defender, and PG but AI if a better scorer and better at shouldering a team. AI will have the better legacy even without a ring and he is a level above Billups. Even with Denver it's a marathon not a sprint, and AI got denver to 50 wins before just like billups is about to do..and that was with a 2nd man who was focused only about himself. He didnt get this new Melo who actually wants to step up.

Yes Iverson was successful everywhere he went, but his teams were not.

AI=better scorer and probably better player
Chauncey=better teammate, winner, and leader

Think of Dan Marino and Troy Aikman. Marino put up the best numbers ever, but never won a championship. Aikman was not as flashy, but lead the talent he had to Championships

JayW_1023
12-17-2008, 10:37 PM
you dont stop shooting when you are a star. thats a sign of greatness. you find other ways to score, you get to the line, you drive and dish. all things AI can do. It isnt smart if you are the only one capable of scoring on your team and you stop shooting because you're off. the players that would be shooting in your place probably have a worse chance of making a shot than you do even when you're cold.

IMO, this isn't exactly a great mindset on how to win your teammates trust. Even the best scorers have to involve their teammates. It's not like Iversons basketball talent allows him just give in to his itchy trigger fingers everytime he gets the rock. If your shot isn't falling, you make the extra pass. And you find other ways to impact the basketball game.

ink
12-17-2008, 10:44 PM
you write too much just because you dont like me. its really bothersome, annoying, petty, and starting to piss me off actually.

regardless(here we go again)
1- he has NEVER carried a team. IDC what you say. You carry a team when you are the most talented. He has ALWAYS been surrounded by equal talent. Running a team and carrying a team are very different. and he got his name from hitting shots and running the team efficiently when it counted.

2- my point was that none of them CARRY a team. get it? thats why my point is valid. It had nothing to do with the degree of difficulty nor how they got off their shots.

3- Billups hasnt carried ****. you carry a team when you are the clear best. you run a team when you have set duties and are responsible for a role. Billups fits the latter.

4-Yea because AI was a horrible fit for the team he CARRIED to the finals. Billups would have obviously taken that team just as far. with billups they probably would have won a ring with that garbage:rolleyes:

5-Taking **** to the playoffs IS respectable...or are you dissing your boy tmac? AI is not a flawed product....he may be of a specialized design tho. ultimately you are better if you have a bigger role. AI's roles have always been bigger. I wonder why that is...regardless your saying individual talent is under how you tie together a team doesnt work here. AI has never had players around him that couldve worked cohesively. Plus, its like I said already. to compare players based their teams successes cant be done always. its like saying D Wilkens is worse than Mchale or James Worthy because they had better teams around them

6- I never said a player has to be a volume scorer nor inefficient to be better. I said he had to have a bigger role, and AI always has had a bigger role. Hence teh name the answer. he was the answer to what philly needed. a guy who could come in and fill up the stands, take over a game, and get you results. and why not compare Billups to what AI can do? the only reason people are saying AI is worse is because they are comparing him to Billups strengths. NO! its a 2 way street. and the numbers arent close. AI drops a similar number of assists while having nearly double the points...how is that close? this year they may be close, but not the past few years. compare billups final results this year(50 wins in a less competitive west and 1st round exit-most probable) to AI last year and the result is the exact same. now you look at talent and AI is far more talented.

7- as far as them being no D...ima listen to the many analysts that said multiple times per half, let alone per game, that they looked lost and had no D far before i will listen to you.

See, my problem with that is that CARRYING A TEAM is a sports cliche. I don't want a player to "carry a team". It's unnecessary and it's self-defeating. It's not basketball no matter how much it's marketed to you that way. Repeat: players, especially PG's, DO NOT need to carry teams to prove their worth. They need to WORK WITH their team. They need to lead their team, work with the coaches, run the offense, run the plays, be efficient, make the right play at the right time, move the ball. Can we just stop with the sports cliches about "carrying the team"?

ink
12-17-2008, 10:49 PM
you dont stop shooting when you are a star. thats a sign of greatness.

Oh boy. :pity:

t-mac1nukka
12-17-2008, 11:22 PM
coming from a guy with tmac in his name:rolleyes:

which would make sense if i was saying tmac was a winner. sixers, pistons, and nuggets all better without ai. that is fact.

Chronz
12-17-2008, 11:39 PM
you write too much just because you dont like me. its really bothersome, annoying, petty, and starting to piss me off actually.
I write to make my point clear, I do this to everyone, so stop thinking your special, and dont let me annoy you, Im strictly talking ball, if its getting to your head then maybe you should take this alittle less seriously. But yes I dont like you



1- he has NEVER carried a team. IDC what you say. You carry a team when you are the most talented. He has ALWAYS been surrounded by equal talent. Running a team and carrying a team are very different. and he got his name from hitting shots and running the team efficiently when it counted.

Wrong, he got the name when he CARRIED his team in the playoffs.


2- my point was that none of them CARRY a team. get it? thats why my point is valid. It had nothing to do with the degree of difficulty nor how they got off their shots.

None of them carry a team the way Billups does, get it? Thats why your point was invalid, it has everything to do with the degree of difficulty of their shots because there are obviously different degrees of clutchness. Billups doesnt just hit timely 3's created by other players, he breaks you down individually and drains them in your eye. Still lets stop arguing semantics, I stopped caring about where you think his name came from since you obviously dont know where it all began.


3- Billups hasnt carried ****. you carry a team when you are the clear best. you run a team when you have set duties and are responsible for a role. Billups fits the latter.

You sound like a pissed off child, he has carried his teams in a variety of ways.


4-Yea because AI was a horrible fit for the team he CARRIED to the finals. Billups would have obviously taken that team just as far. with billups they probably would have won a ring with that garbage:rolleyes:
Nope, he had a great run and won with a great supporting cast, they were far from garbage. They were the best team in the conference. You seem to think Im saying AI wasnt a great player, hes just not Billups great. If thats due to me calling him flawed it was only because you tried to diminish Billups status.


5-Taking **** to the playoffs IS respectable...or are you dissing your boy tmac?
Im not dissing anyone, its just that winning a title with efficiency and maintaining that efficiency while playing both ends and making your teammates better and being a better leader for years is more respectable.


AI is not a flawed product....he may be of a specialized design tho. ultimately you are better if you have a bigger role.
What does specialized design mean? If your calling Billups nothing but a piece while AI is an entire product then yes he is flawed while Billups is a championship piece, if he wasnt then why cant AI play efficiently? Like SteveNash said, if your best argument is that AI can only play good on crap teams then your point is irrelevant to begin with.


AI's roles have always been bigger. I wonder why that is..
Why are you wondering, it should be fairly obvious to everyone, its because he cant play with the efficiency that champions play with, and because he was a hog early in his career.


regardless your saying individual talent is under how you tie together a team doesnt work here. AI has never had players around him that couldve worked cohesively.
Thats because its so hard to build around him, the talent AI has had, always seemed to do better without him, whereas Billups made the talent he had better, coincidence??


Plus, its like I said already. to compare players based their teams successes cant be done always. its like saying D Wilkens is worse than Mchale or James Worthy because they had better teams around them
I dont see the connection, can you be more clear?


6- I never said a player has to be a volume scorer nor inefficient to be better. I said he had to have a bigger role, and AI always has had a bigger role.
The term bigger role is subjective, what makes his role bigger. I consider the fact that Billups has the ability to play both sides of the court to be a bigger role. If your talking about shot attempts its because he cant play with efficiency and the only way he can impact a game is by holding the ball.


Hence teh name the answer. he was the answer to what philly needed. a guy who could come in and fill up the stands, take over a game, and get you results. and why not compare Billups to what AI can do? the only reason people are saying AI is worse is because they are comparing him to Billups strengths. NO! its a 2 way street.
The only reason people are saying AI is better is because they are comparing what he does (Hog) to what Billups does (Win with efficiency). Of course its a 2-way street, which is why I said its the efficiency vs usage debate, come on man lets not have another one of those debates where you go in circles. Coincidentally AI has been traded twice for players who were more efficient than ballhoggers, and twice the team that traded AI away has gotten better without him. The Answer indeed.....



and the numbers arent close. AI drops a similar number of assists while having nearly double the points...how is that close?
Account for pace, minutes, take into account efficiency and usage and you have your answer. If you dug deeper into your analysis you wouldnt be asking such questions.


this year they may be close, but not the past few years. compare billups final results this year(50 wins in a less competitive west and 1st round exit-most probable) to AI last year and the result is the exact same. now you look at talent and AI is far more talented.

What kind of double standard is that, your basically using the, replace player A with player B on this team and see how they do, yet when we use that for AI its because he doesnt fit with the team. You cant have it both ways.


7- as far as them being no D...ima listen to the many analysts that said multiple times per half, let alone per game, that they looked lost and had no D far before i will listen to you.

Thats because your as ignorant as they are, they werent a great defensive team due to their inconsistencies but atleast half of the league was worse than they were.

DenButsu
12-17-2008, 11:46 PM
barreleffect, Chronz, please keep it non-personal. Thanks.

Chronz
12-17-2008, 11:50 PM
barreleffect, Chronz, please keep it non-personal. Thanks.

Yessir, but this isnt personal, the fact that I dont like him doesnt change my response, even if he was my best friend not a single word would be changed.

Chronz
12-17-2008, 11:51 PM
See, my problem with that is that CARRYING A TEAM is a sports cliche. I don't want a player to "carry a team". It's unnecessary and it's self-defeating. It's not basketball no matter how much it's marketed to you that way. Repeat: players, especially PG's, DO NOT need to carry teams to prove their worth. They need to WORK WITH their team. They need to lead their team, work with the coaches, run the offense, run the plays, be efficient, make the right play at the right time, move the ball. Can we just stop with the sports cliches about "carrying the team"?
Agreed, its a joke of a term that is totally subjective. He basically threw Billups role in an offense into the same group of players as Posey and Horry. His reasoning; neither carried a team. So obviously Posey, Billups, and Horry all had equal responsibilities in an offense.

barreleffact
12-17-2008, 11:52 PM
barreleffect, Chronz, please keep it non-personal. Thanks.

why my name gotta come first???? jp...seriously jp but seriously, my responses wont change, however they wont get out of hand


Agreed, its a joke of a term that is totally subjective. He basically threw Billups role in an offense into the same group of players as Posey and Horry. His reasoning; neither carried a team. So obviously Posey, Billups, and Horry all had equal responsibilities in an offense.

i never said they had the same role nor even equal roles. i did say the name isnt about carrying anything. big shot bob...yep...he carried teams:rolleyes:


which would make sense if i was saying tmac was a winner. sixers, pistons, and nuggets all better without ai. that is fact.

what have the sixers doen without him??? 1st round exit. anything else? werent they the 8th seed too?
the nuggets are debateable. they run more efficiently, however the end result will be the same.


I write to make my point clear, I do this to everyone, so stop thinking your special, and dont let me annoy you, Im strictly talking ball, if its getting to your head then maybe you should take this alittle less seriously. But yes I dont like you



Wrong, he got the name when he CARRIED his team in the playoffs.


None of them carry a team the way Billups does, get it? Thats why your point was invalid, it has everything to do with the degree of difficulty of their shots because there are obviously different degrees of clutchness. Billups doesnt just hit timely 3's created by other players, he breaks you down individually and drains them in your eye. Still lets stop arguing semantics, I stopped caring about where you think his name came from since you obviously dont know where it all began.


You sound like a pissed off child, he has carried his teams in a variety of ways.


Nope, he had a great run and won with a great supporting cast, they were far from garbage. They were the best team in the conference. You seem to think Im saying AI wasnt a great player, hes just not Billups great. If thats due to me calling him flawed it was only because you tried to diminish Billups status.


Im not dissing anyone, its just that winning a title with efficiency and maintaining that efficiency while playing both ends and making your teammates better and being a better leader for years is more respectable.


What does specialized design mean? If your calling Billups nothing but a piece while AI is an entire product then yes he is flawed while Billups is a championship piece, if he wasnt then why cant AI play efficiently? Like SteveNash said, if your best argument is that AI can only play good on crap teams then your point is irrelevant to begin with.


Why are you wondering, it should be fairly obvious to everyone, its because he cant play with the efficiency that champions play with, and because he was a hog early in his career.


Thats because its so hard to build around him, the talent AI has had, always seemed to do better without him, whereas Billups made the talent he had better, coincidence??


I dont see the connection, can you be more clear?


The term bigger role is subjective, what makes his role bigger. I consider the fact that Billups has the ability to play both sides of the court to be a bigger role. If your talking about shot attempts its because he cant play with efficiency and the only way he can impact a game is by holding the ball.


The only reason people are saying AI is better is because they are comparing what he does (Hog) to what Billups does (Win with efficiency). Of course its a 2-way street, which is why I said its the efficiency vs usage debate, come on man lets not have another one of those debates where you go in circles. Coincidentally AI has been traded twice for players who were more efficient than ballhoggers, and twice the team that traded AI away has gotten better without him. The Answer indeed.....



Account for pace, minutes, take into account efficiency and usage and you have your answer. If you dug deeper into your analysis you wouldnt be asking such questions.


What kind of double standard is that, your basically using the, replace player A with player B on this team and see how they do, yet when we use that for AI its because he doesnt fit with the team. You cant have it both ways.


Thats because your as ignorant as they are, they werent a great defensive team due to their inconsistencies but atleast half of the league was worse than they were.

1- I realize we both have a distaste for each other. we could argue the same opint and still argue, that fact alone and your arrogance are plenty of reason enough for me to dislike you. the same way toward me toward everyone else??? so you stalk everyone elses posts too? lol. hilarious.

2- ok bud. w/e you say. as i said tho, you dont carry a team if you arent the clear best player. there have been times where otehr players have stepped up and elevated their games but they still didnt carry anything.

3- billups doesnt carry a team...get it? he runs the team. executes it very well. i am neither dissing him nor taking anything away from him, but in totality he has nothing on AI...a player that actually carried a team. Billups does execute in the clutch to ways posey nor horry cant, but thats irrelevant esp because ive never disagreed with that.

4- lol...and you sound like a #@$%&^&%$*%^^*%...the point is he hasnt CARRIED anything. prove to me how he has by all means.

5- So basically you just admitted you're childish. you let others actions affect your own? great...even less of a reason to respect you. regardless, his team was gifted DEFENSIVELY. his supporting cast offensively was absolutely garbage. and ive yet to meet anyone who disagrees. and by all means please show me another team taht has won every individual award but didnt overachieve...ive been waiting on that for a while now

6- And i think individual talent and results are above that. Trust me, I love defense. When I play I am more like billups in the sense that I pride myself in D and making players better and doing what point guards should do, however I have respect for AI becuase Ive had to be him many times too and AI's role is FAR harder to execute. its damn near impossible at times but he maes it possible.

7- he's of a specialized design...limited edition, unique, very few can emulate him, he is a rarity.....is that better? I never said He can only play on bad teams. He is just built best to be the main guy. He has never been anything but in his entire career. to make him be anything else now is to essentially be making him into a rookie at the age of 33.

8- Lol...thats hilarious. He cant play efficiently so we give him a larger role...perfect logic.

9- The only team that will have better results without AI is detroit and that still remains to be seen. You have to give him time.

10- Domonique didnt win a ring if Im not mistaken but he was better that James Worthy or Kevin Mchale. Would you argue against that just because the latter 2 won rings and had better teams? Nique was a 1st option guy(i.e. he carried his team), the latter 2 just were pieces that did their jobs VERY well.

11- Yup...holding the ball allows you to average about 6 assists per game for your career. You are exactly right. Billups had just as much impact as AI. put him on AI's philly team and they do just as well:rolleyes:

12- show me results as to how they actually got better. did they win rings w/o him? did they go deper in the playoffs? then they didnt get better. nuff said

13- forget pace and adjusted stats. I understand how they are relevant, however actuality is very relevant too. who is to say that if billups was in AIs shoes that he would have been able to make those adjustments reality??? nobody. it means next to nothing. you could argue that X player got more adjusted steals per game than V but V got more steals in general so whats better? actual results.

14- O AI isnt a good fit with Detroit. Billups was easily better at this point. However, Billups in Denver will give you the same result. Im not givin a duoble standard Im just making a case for AI thats realistic. AI plays for AI, Detroit are all system players. You cant expect a group of system players to function aff the bat with a player that creates for himself 1st and second. it just doesnt work off the bat if at all. but you can have players that create for themselves allow someone else to create for them.

15- yup...they're ignorant. they make 6 figures a year to be ignorant, and they ALL said the same thing. wow..

t-mac1nukka
12-18-2008, 12:13 AM
didnt the sixer record improve? and look at the pistons thus far.

Chronz
12-18-2008, 12:21 AM
i never said they had the same role nor even equal roles. i did say the name isnt about carrying anything. big shot bob...yep...he carried teams:rolleyes:
Thats why SteveNash told you mentioning him in the same breath because of a nickname is foolish. They obviously differ and so do how they got their names. Billups got his for carrying the pistons in the playoffs. Horry and Posey theirs for hitting timely shots. Categorizing them simply by subjectively chosing what fits into carrying an offense is laughable at best.



what have the sixers doen without him???
Improve as a team


1st round exit.
.... is better than missing the playoffs.


teh nuggets are debateable. they run more efficiently, however the end result will be the same.
The end result is that the team improved immensely, go ahead and tell Den that the trade was for nothing just because you think it was a lateral move.

td0tsfinest
12-18-2008, 12:21 AM
In denver's case, they play a lot better with a good PG. When Andre Miller was there, these guys were an up and coming team. And IMO Andre Miller is a poor mans Chauncey Billups. Chauncey gives them that good PG, Denver has missed since Andre Miller plus Better shooting and defense. AI and Melo was an experiment, which obviously did not work.
AI plays best when he's the SG. You would think GMs knew this buy now, especially Joe Dumars. When he played for the pistons, they had two PGs playing the backcourt (himself and Isiah). I honestly thought when Dumars made the trade for AI; he was also close in dealing RIP. He got a contract extension the next day.

barreleffact
12-18-2008, 12:29 AM
Thats why SteveNash told you mentioning him in the same breath because of a nickname is foolish. They obviously differ and so do how they got their names. Billups got his for carrying the pistons in the playoffs. Horry and Posey theirs for hitting timely shots. Categorizing them simply by subjectively chosing what fits into carrying an offense is laughable at best.



Improve as a team


.... is better than missing the playoffs.


The end result is that the team improved immensely, go ahead and tell Den that the trade was for nothing just because you think it was a lateral move.

worse than a finals exit...

it was a lateral move, but they did improve. im not arguing that the team doesnt run more like a team. they do in every way. however the result wont change and thats all that matters. idc how you get a job done if you get the job done

Chronz
12-18-2008, 12:36 AM
worse than a finals exit...
Yes because that obviously happened the year before he got traded:rolleyes:


it was a lateral move, but they did improve.
Do you have any idea how dumb that sounds..


im not arguing that the team doesnt run more like a team. they do in every way. however the result wont change and thats all that matters. idc how you get a job done if you get the job done

The fact that you dont care how a job gets done is why your so bad at evaluating teams and players. Knowing how you win and why you lose is crucial when it comes to improving your team.

nstachowski
12-18-2008, 12:37 AM
Trade wise Billups was the better player to trade for but talent wise AI's still the man...

x2

barreleffact
12-18-2008, 01:32 AM
Yes because that obviously happened the year before he got traded:rolleyes:


Do you have any idea how dumb that sounds..


The fact that you dont care how a job gets done is why your so bad at evaluating teams and players. Knowing how you win and why you lose is crucial when it comes to improving your team.

the fact that it happened at all puts AI leagues ahead in this debate and cancels out that part of this argument. his team was offensively trash and it didnt matter with AI

Do you know how dumb you are for not understanding? a W is a W, an L is an L...they improved but the results will be the same.

I care how we lose, but i dont care how we win. id like to be efficient and win in an elite way, but at the end on teh day a quarter is 25 cents and so is 25 pennies...wats the difference when you are speaking results/or in this case value

ink
12-18-2008, 01:33 AM
^ Seriously guys, make your points without making it personal or there will be infractions. Thanks.

cahawk
12-18-2008, 01:38 AM
AI better & definetly more exciting.
Billups is great but cannot carry a team.

pd7631
12-18-2008, 02:16 AM
which would make sense if i was saying tmac was a winner. sixers, pistons, and nuggets all better without ai. that is fact.


False

The team has more overall talent than we've had in years, but we are still not very good....why?...because we lack a guy with a killer instinct, a guy with a desire to win, a guy who can takeover a game when his teammates shy away from the challenge, basically what I'm saying is we don't have ALLEN IVERSON anymore...

Allen Iverson brought basketball back to Philly, and since he's been gone it's disappeared again. What he did for us was nothing short of amazing, and no matter how bad the team was around him, most Sixer fans felt like we could win as long as AI was playing.

I'd be willing to bet that Pistons fans felt that they could get by without Chauncey Billups not in the lineup for awhile, but on the Sixers teams that AI was on we would be the Clippers of the East if he didn't play

Sox Appeal
12-18-2008, 02:44 AM
False

The team has more overall talent than we've had in years, but we are still not very good....why?...because we lack a guy with a killer instinct, a guy with a desire to win, a guy who can takeover a game when his teammates shy away from the challenge, basically what I'm saying is we don't have ALLEN IVERSON anymore...

Allen Iverson brought basketball back to Philly, and since he's been gone it's disappeared again. What he did for us was nothing short of amazing, and no matter how bad the team was around him, most Sixer fans felt like we could win as long as AI was playing.

I'd be willing to bet that Pistons fans felt that they could get by without Chauncey Billups not in the lineup for awhile, but on the Sixers teams that AI was on we would be the Clippers of the East if he didn't play

There's no doubt the Pistons team's Chauncey has been apart of the past few seasons were better then ANY of the team's AI has played on his entire career.. Until he went to Denver. He had enough talent around him where he should have had NO problem getting to at-least the Conference Finals. He didn't even win a playoff series in his tenure in Denver. Something I would expect Chauncey will have no problem doing, when the playoffs role around.

Chronz
12-18-2008, 03:10 AM
1- I realize we both have a distaste for each other. we could argue the same opint and still argue, that fact alone and your arrogance are plenty of reason enough for me to dislike you. the same way toward me toward everyone else??? so you stalk everyone elses posts too? lol. hilarious.
Ok now that we've gotten that off your chest, lets not talk about it anymore, Den just said to not have this get personal.


2- ok bud. w/e you say. as i said tho, you dont carry a team if you arent the clear best player. there have been times where otehr players have stepped up and elevated their games but they still didnt carry anything.

Thats entirely inaccurate, in the past 4 years no team has relied more on 2 players than the Rockets have on Tmac and Yao. The burden those 2 carry is very real, to say that only one of them gets the recognition for carrying a team (Again Im only using your definition for "carrying") is truly moronic.


3- billups doesnt carry a team...get it? he runs the team. executes it very well. i am neither dissing him nor taking anything away from him, but in totality he has nothing on AI...a player that actually carried a team. Billups does execute in the clutch to ways posey nor horry cant, but thats irrelevant esp because ive never disagreed with that.

AI isnt capable of doing what Billups does... get it? He cant run a set offense the way Billups can, a player that actually played EFFICIENT WINNING basketball. And how is it irrelevant, you dont even know how the name came about. You continue to put him in the class of Horry and Posey when he should be more with Reggie type class.


4- lol...and you sound like a #@$%&^&%$*%^^*%...the point is he hasnt CARRIED anything. prove to me how he has by all means.

Nevermind youve officially become one, again why does he have to carry anything when hes won in ways AI could never dream of??


5- So basically you just admitted you're childish. you let others actions affect your own?
Where did you pull this one from?


great...even less of a reason to respect you.
Please buddy, your always talking about respect, when your neutral you say you have respect for me, when Im debating with you, your totally switch your persona. Please keep this on basketball


regardless, his team was gifted DEFENSIVELY. his supporting cast offensively was absolutely garbage. and ive yet to meet anyone who disagrees.
Me neither .... whats your point. It was fairly obvious to everyone with a brain not in kindergarten.


and by all means please show me another team taht has won every individual award but didnt overachieve...ive been waiting on that for a while now
What does that even mean? And more importantly what element of that is so crucial to your point?


6- And i think individual talent and results are above that. Trust me, I love defense. When I play I am more like billups in the sense that I pride myself in D and making players better and doing what point guards should do, however I have respect for AI becuase Ive had to be him many times too and AI's role is FAR harder to execute. its damn near impossible at times but he maes it possible.

LOL So you think because you play some form of organized ball it compares to the real NBA game? LMFAO

If it was so EASY to do what Billups does then why cant he, you dont just transform to whatever player you want.


7- he's of a specialized design...limited edition, unique, very few can emulate him, he is a rarity.....is that better? I never said He can only play on bad teams. He is just built best to be the main guy. He has never been anything but in his entire career. to make him be anything else now is to essentially be making him into a rookie at the age of 33.

Billups is a rarity as well, or did you forget my whole ft drawer/3pt shooter aspect? There is literally only 1 other player who can better what he does, and thats Paul Pierce. Another player better than Iverson


8- Lol...thats hilarious. He cant play efficiently so we give him a larger role...perfect logic.
Thats because you dont know what your talking about. Hes only valuable on teams that are bad enough where he cant make anyone worse with his chucking. He cant be effective with limited touches.



9- The only team that will have better results without AI is detroit and that still remains to be seen. You have to give him time.

I am giving him time, Im not basing this argument on what they do as of now, Im basing it off of Billup's superiority over the last 3-4 years.


10- Domonique didnt win a ring if Im not mistaken but he was better that James Worthy or Kevin Mchale. Would you argue against that just because the latter 2 won rings and had better teams? Nique was a 1st option guy(i.e. he carried his team), the latter 2 just were pieces that did their jobs VERY well.
Nique was a 1st option because he didnt play with Larry Bird, thats all youve proven. McHale was easily a better player and he came off the bench.


11- Yup...holding the ball allows you to average about 6 assists per game for your career.
It does, being an unselfish player isnt about getting assists. Assists are measures of playmaking and how often they look to create for others relative to the amount of possessions they use.


You are exactly right. Billups had just as much impact as AI. put him on AI's philly team and they do just as well:rolleyes:

Just like putting AI on Billups team makes them MUCH BETTER ..... oh wait...


12- show me results as to how they actually got better. did they win rings w/o him? did they go deper in the playoffs? then they didnt get better. nuff said

Will do but after I get off work


13- forget pace and adjusted stats.
LMFAO go tell that to all the GM's, apparently your the voice on this matter and theyve all been wasting their time and money.


I understand how they are relevant, however actuality is very relevant too.
They are actuality


who is to say that if billups was in AIs shoes that he would have been able to make those adjustments reality??? nobody. it means next to nothing.
The point isnt about replicating his numbers, its about putting them on equal grounds from an analysis standpoint, besides have you not been watching the Nuggets this season.


you could argue that X player got more adjusted steals per game than V but V got more steals in general so whats better? actual results.

So you think nobody has ever come close to matching Bill Russel's rebounding averages because they arent as good rebounders? Im sorry but your stance on stats is irrelevant, you clearly dont understand.


14- O AI isnt a good fit with Detroit. Billups was easily better at this point. However, Billups in Denver will give you the same result. Im not givin a duoble standard Im just making a case for AI thats realistic. AI plays for AI, Detroit are all system players. You cant expect a group of system players to function aff the bat with a player that creates for himself 1st and second. it just doesnt work off the bat if at all. but you can have players that create for themselves allow someone else to create for them.

Sorry buddy thats a double standard, your saying its ok to let the trade be the barometer for Billups but when he passes with flying colors pass it off as him being in a perfect situation, his team succeeds with him and gets much better without Iverson the player that is according to you so rare that his value cannot be denied. Think about it, 2 players switched jerseys one played just as well in both and Iverson has yet to do so. Yet somehow its easier to be Billups.


15- yup...they're ignorant. they make 6 figures a year to be ignorant, and they ALL said the same thing. wow..

Yes theyre ignorant rich guys, was I suppose to be impressed. Why dont you make the case for them, there were were many worse defensive teams than the Nuggets, FACT.

barreleffact
12-18-2008, 04:16 AM
Ok now that we've gotten that off your chest, lets not talk about it anymore, Den just said to not have this get personal.


Thats entirely inaccurate, in the past 4 years no team has relied more on 2 players than the Rockets have on Tmac and Yao. The burden those 2 carry is very real, to say that only one of them gets the recognition for carrying a team (Again Im only using your definition for "carrying") is truly moronic.


AI isnt capable of doing what Billups does... get it? He cant run a set offense the way Billups can, a player that actually played EFFICIENT WINNING basketball. And how is it irrelevant, you dont even know how the name came about. You continue to put him in the class of Horry and Posey when he should be more with Reggie type class.


Nevermind youve officially become one, again why does he have to carry anything when hes won in ways AI could never dream of??


Where did you pull this one from?


Please buddy, your always talking about respect, when your neutral you say you have respect for me, when Im debating with you, your totally switch your persona. Please keep this on basketball


Me neither .... whats your point. It was fairly obvious to everyone with a brain not in kindergarten.


What does that even mean? And more importantly what element of that is so crucial to your point?


LOL So you think because you play some form of organized ball it compares to the real NBA game? LMFAO

If it was so EASY to do what Billups does then why cant he, you dont just transform to whatever player you want.


Billups is a rarity as well, or did you forget my whole ft drawer/3pt shooter aspect? There is literally only 1 other player who can better what he does, and thats Paul Pierce. Another player better than Iverson


Thats because you dont know what your talking about. Hes only valuable on teams that are bad enough where he cant make anyone worse with his chucking. He cant be effective with limited touches.



I am giving him time, Im not basing this argument on what they do as of now, Im basing it off of Billup's superiority over the last 3-4 years.


Nique was a 1st option because he didnt play with Larry Bird, thats all youve proven. McHale was easily a better player and he came off the bench.


It does, being an unselfish player isnt about getting assists. Assists are measures of playmaking and how often they look to create for others relative to the amount of possessions they use.


Just like putting AI on Billups team makes them MUCH BETTER ..... oh wait...


Will do but after I get off work


LMFAO go tell that to all the GM's, apparently your the voice on this matter and theyve all been wasting their time and money.


They are actuality


The point isnt about replicating his numbers, its about putting them on equal grounds from an analysis standpoint, besides have you not been watching the Nuggets this season.


So you think nobody has ever come close to matching Bill Russel's rebounding averages because they arent as good rebounders? Im sorry but your stance on stats is irrelevant, you clearly dont understand.


Sorry buddy thats a double standard, your saying its ok to let the trade be the barometer for Billups but when he passes with flying colors pass it off as him being in a perfect situation, his team succeeds with him and gets much better without Iverson the player that is according to you so rare that his value cannot be denied. Think about it, 2 players switched jerseys one played just as well in both and Iverson has yet to do so. Yet somehow its easier to be Billups.


Yes theyre ignorant rich guys, was I suppose to be impressed. Why dont you make the case for them, there were were many worse defensive teams than the Nuggets, FACT.

1- i chill or act as i see fit. im a grown man. i dont need anyone to tell me what to do. i care about an infraction??? lol. not in the least. however, i will calm down as long as you do. respect is earned not given. if you act respectful, i have no problem doing the same. honestly id rather avoid you all together tho. still that remains a statistical improbability.

2- When Yao goes out whats their record? When mac goes out whats their record? They have proven to be able to win w/o Yao. you yourself have said that they struggle significantly w/o mac.

3- Im not putting him with Posey and Horry. Ive said he's had a bigger role. however he hasnt carried a team. all ive said. In fact, I started to bring up big shot bob and Posy because of mr big shot the name. you get those names for a clutch performance, not because you carry a team or are the face of a franchise.

4- He's won in 2 ways AI hasn't. He has a ring and a finals MVP....AI has far more individual awards and records than billups. AI's legacy will be remembered as being greater because of it.

5- "If thats due to me calling him flawed it was only because you tried to diminish Billups status"

6- Have I EVER said I respect you when we agree without being sarcastic? If I have PLEASE let me know. NEVER again will I. I assure you. I have next to zero respect for you. However I am not above admitting that at ttimes you have great points and have actual facts to support them. you know which sites to go to etc to better make a case. Regardless...that has nothing to do with respecting you. I respect KG's game but that doesnt make him less of an ***.

7- You are always talking about his supporting cast. no matter how good a team is on defense they have to be able to score. If you cant then you are garbage and his supporting cast was just that.

8- You've argued that many times. "when is a team that won every individual award considered garbage" or something along those lines. you've said it time and time again, and I always say when they overachieved. when they are so garbage that they had no prayer of being where they ended up and still they got there. I always say name a team that didnt overacheive that won every individual award, yet you have never responded to that. And its entirely relevant considering billups couldnt elevate a team to that level. he couldnt force an entire team to overacheive like that. in fact, it is often said that come playoff time billups teams actually UNDERacheive.

9- No. I was saying I respect Billups but from my personal experience I know which one is tougher. Do you have any personal experience to base things on...or is there an adjusted stat for the difficulty of a role:rolleyes:

I never said it was easy. I said AI's role was harder. Could AI...idk. the man is 33. his time to learn is over. He has been the same player for some 12+ years, and NOW he's supposed to change? not very likely.

10- Billups isnt a rarity. Chris Paul is a rarity, D-will is a rarity. Billups is just the definition of a prototypical point guard. He runs an offense smoothly, but not to any extent of true greatness. He plays solid D, he is long. He is everything you want from a SOLID PG. He wont be a legend like Deron or Paul or even Rose, but AI will always be a legend in terms of SG's. He came in as a franchise player, billups came in as a system player. i will never call a system player a rarity in terms of overall greatness/talent

11- Yup...you ALWAYS get larger roles the less efficient you are. makes perfect sense. lol. Anyway, Ive said you choose AI on a sub par team and billups on an above par team already. Why argue the same point?

12- and over the past 3-4 years Billups teams have been projected to get by, but they get pushed by philly in the 1st round...they lose 5 of 6 years in teh ECF when a few times they were favored to win. Great! that proves to me he's better than a player that carried a team into the playoffs with no defense. that proves to me that he's a leader because only leaders allow your team to fall to Cleveland. Only a leader would allow his team to falter 5 of 6 times. AI was never gonna win with the nuggets. and news flash...no1 will

13- so ur saying Nique is a lesser player than Mchale???? WOW

14- Ppl were still calling Kobe selfish when his assist/usage rate was almost equal with lebrons. so what. idc about the labels. he got results. he never had anyone to pass to in philly yet he got like 6 per. in denver he was getting 7-8.

15- AI isnt a fit on Billups Detroit team either just yet, if he will be at all. He's still had the better career, still been a franchise player, had a bigger role, and carried teams. He is the more impactful player and the better player.

16- get off soon or take ur time...idc. results will be the same. philly aint win squat and denver wont either. nuff said.

17- just like ur the voice on what team plays defense. forget the analysts and guys that actually played the game. ur the only one that matters cuz ur not a common man:rolleyes:

18- ive watched denver. they play better. but they arent getting by any of the top 4 teams. thats even IF they get to the 2nd round. and thats a big if. if you dont at least get to the 2nd round then this entire thread is an even bigger joke. and ur on equal grounds as soon as you step foot on the court. ur in the nba right? you could argue that a player that plays 2 garbage minutes a game but averages 2 points per game is one of the best in the league if you adjust his numbers...no. actuality counts.

19- i understand. never question my intellect. question your own. ur saying that if there are less rebounds to be gathered in a game that a player will get less of them. as in if player A has 75 posessions per game thats far fewer chances at a rebound than playerB who's team has 100 posessions per game. Im not inept like some nor am I an idiot. NEVER try to down me especially over something so simple. I am saying adjustments only go so far, and no matter how you adjust it you cant prove that billups can does or has ever gotten the same ACTUAL numbers as AI. AI has actually produced. Billups has adjustedly produced...on a better team...with a lesser role. it hardly compares.

20- IDC how many teams were worse than Denver's. If they suck they suck others just suck worse.

19-

DenButsu
12-18-2008, 04:26 AM
18- ive watched denver. they play better. but they arent getting by any of the top 4 teams. thats even IF they get to the 2nd round. and thats a big if. if you dont at least get to the 2nd round then this entire thread is an even bigger joke. and ur on equal grounds as soon as you step foot on the court. ur in the nba right? you could argue that a player that plays 2 garbage minutes a game but averages 2 points per game is one of the best in the league if you adjust his numbers...no. actuality counts.

The Nuggets won't be getting taken out in the first round again this season.

barreleffact
12-18-2008, 04:53 AM
The Nuggets won't be getting taken out in the first round again this season.

so you think they are better than Portland, LA, SA, Houston, or the Hornets??? yea...I dont see them gettin into the 2nd round if they have to play anyone other than pheonix

ink
12-18-2008, 04:54 AM
so you think they are better than Portland, LA, SA, Houston, or the Hornets??? yea...I dont see them gettin into the 2nd round if they have to play anyone other than pheonix

I could see them beating all of those teams except the Lakers and maybe SA.

DenButsu
12-18-2008, 05:02 AM
I definitely think we're better than Portland, I think (in spite of yesterday's loss) that we're as good as or nearly as good as the Rockets - and that would go for Utah, too, and I think we're nipping at the heels of San Antonio and New Orleans, but not quite there yet. We'll see if any additional moves get made by the deadline, but with just one or two additions I think we'd be poised to clinch the NW and get past the 1st and maybe the 2nd round. The Lakers are the only team right now that I don't think we would have much of a chance of taking to 7 games in a series, and any series you can take to 7 games is one that you have a legit chance of winning.

barreleffact
12-18-2008, 05:10 AM
I definitely think we're better than Portland, I think (in spite of yesterday's loss) that we're as good as or nearly as good as the Rockets - and that would go for Utah, too, and I think we're nipping at the heels of San Antonio and New Orleans, but not quite there yet. We'll see if any additional moves get made by the deadline, but with just one or two additions I think we'd be poised to clinch the NW and get past the 1st and maybe the 2nd round. The Lakers are the only team right now that I don't think we would have much of a chance of taking to 7 games in a series, and any series you can take to 7 games is one that you have a legit chance of winning.

i moderately agree with you. esp the last part, but i just cant see them beating Any of the top teams as they are now. maybe with a good trade, but I cant see it happening. Portland and Utah are the best hopes tho, but only time will tell

DET UNIT
12-18-2008, 05:22 AM
Both great players, I say no Billups is declining faster, And if I was a coach take AI. DETROIT WILL STEP UP THIS YEAR$$$$

Chronz
12-18-2008, 05:31 AM
I definitely think we're better than Portland, I think (in spite of yesterday's loss) that we're as good as or nearly as good as the Rockets - and that would go for Utah, too, and I think we're nipping at the heels of San Antonio and New Orleans, but not quite there yet. We'll see if any additional moves get made by the deadline, but with just one or two additions I think we'd be poised to clinch the NW and get past the 1st and maybe the 2nd round. The Lakers are the only team right now that I don't think we would have much of a chance of taking to 7 games in a series, and any series you can take to 7 games is one that you have a legit chance of winning.

Before I get to the other guy, doesnt it sting you that even if Denver loses in a very closely contested game 7 to the eventual champion of the league, the trade becomes insignificant from a season standpoint. I mean thats like saying even with all the improvements Denver has made it still wont mean squat in his eyes.

DerekRE_3
12-18-2008, 05:50 AM
Here are some stats from 82games.com...

-The Denver Nuggets rank 2nd in Production Rank at the PG position.

-The Detroit Pistons rank 16th at the PG position and 13th at the SG position. I did both because AI plays both positions.

-Chauncey Billups Net On Court/Off Court is +11.6, by far the highest on the Nuggets roster.

-Iverson's is +4.0

DenButsu
12-18-2008, 05:52 AM
Before I get to the other guy, doesnt it sting you that even if Denver loses in a very closely contested game 7 to the eventual champion of the league, the trade becomes insignificant from a season standpoint. I mean thats like saying even with all the improvements Denver has made it still wont mean squat in his eyes.

Well the reallly good news for Denver is that Billups-JR-Melo-KMart-Nene is a lock through 2011, with a lot of flexibility and assets to keep improving around this core. At the end of last season, it looked like thing were only going to get worse for Denver, but now (injury notwithstanding) it's just the opposite.

And to the poster above who said Billups is declining faster than AI - what are you smoking, man? :laugh2: Billups is on track in Denver to match his best seasons in Detroit, while AI's production has dropped off considerably. Not only that, Billups' game - controlled, paced - is of a style that will almost certainly age better than Iverson's, which is based on speed and quickness and his ability to dart around the floor.

---------

edit - As for the core players, I expect we'll probably see the FO make a stab at an upgrade to K-Mart along the way, too.

DerekRE_3
12-18-2008, 05:57 AM
Yeah Billups is going to age much more gracefully than Iverson will. Iverson has spent his entire career playing heavy minutes, especially in Philadelphia when he was really the only guy on that team. Not to mention the way he plays. Don't get me wrong he's a tough player. But like Den said, a lot of his game is based on quickness, and that will fade as he ages. It's been said on average that a player starts to decline after he plays 30,000 minutes. Iverson has played over 35,000.

Billups on the other hand, is more of a game manager. He runs the offense and just makes smart decisions, and can hit the big shot as well. I see him having a good amount of years left in the tank.

JordansBulls
12-18-2008, 01:05 PM
Here in this thread many said they would build around Iverson.

http://www.prosportsdaily.com/forums/showthread.php?t=255588&page=5&highlight=Iverson

barreleffact
12-18-2008, 02:03 PM
Before I get to the other guy, doesnt it sting you that even if Denver loses in a very closely contested game 7 to the eventual champion of the league, the trade becomes insignificant from a season standpoint. I mean thats like saying even with all the improvements Denver has made it still wont mean squat in his eyes.

why would that mean anything when last year they lost to the hottest team in the league at the time? the year before they lost to the spurs...who also won the championship. whats your point??? they wont push a game 7 against any upper level team(SA or LA...the same teams that beat them while AI was there).

E-ROC
12-18-2008, 02:46 PM
Iverson - HOF
Billups - not a HOF

In that essence, Iverson is better. Iverson has never played with a team like the Pistons. The Pistons have never had a player like Iverson, at least in this era. The Pistons are still trying to get used to Iverson's pace of the game. Billups has added stability to the Nuggets. The Nuggets still can't defend. I think the trade is pretty even. We'll find out more about the trade in May and June.

SteveNash
12-18-2008, 06:44 PM
why would that mean anything when last year they lost to the hottest team in the league at the time? the year before they lost to the spurs...who also won the championship. whats your point??? they wont push a game 7 against any upper level team(SA or LA...the same teams that beat them while AI was there).

Last year the Nuggets were a joke in the postseason. No fight at all, most people expected the Lakers to win, but I'm sure most people also thought there would at least be one competitive game.

DenButsu
12-18-2008, 09:06 PM
The Nuggets still can't defend.

This statement could only be written by somebody who hasn't watched the Nuggets much, if at all, this season. At 99.9, Denver has the 5th best defensive efficiency rating in the NBA right now, and it has consistently been in the top 5-8 all season long. At this point, their biggest defensive weakness is rebounding. By just about any measure, they're probably somewhere around 15th-18th in the league in rebounding. But at top 5 in defensive efficiency, 3rd in steals and 3rd in blocks in the league, and with the 3rd lowest opponent field goal percentage at 42.69 (after only Boston and Cleveland), and the 8th lowest opponent 3-point percentage at .33 (a very encouraging sign for Nuggets fans of an improved perimeter defense), to say the Nuggets "can't defend" is just absolutely absurd.

We're one of the better defensive teams in the league now. Time for NBA fans to pull their brains out of 2007-08 and get with it. :cool:

DenButsu
12-18-2008, 09:12 PM
Last year the Nuggets were a joke in the postseason. No fight at all, most people expected the Lakers to win, but I'm sure most people also thought there would at least be one competitive game.

J.R. Smith was better than Iverson and Melo in that series, which speaks well of J.R. but poorly of the other two. To Melo's credit, though, he got the memo, and has undergone a dramatic re-focusing of his game to a more selfless, defensively-focused, team-oriented approach that has made him much more effective and dangerous this season, even as his scoring average has dropped. I honestly haven't watched Iverson enough since he joined the Pistons to know if he's making sincere efforts to adapt his game to what they need him to do to be most effective there, or is remaining settled in his old habits. But that joke of a playoff series was a major wake up call that I'm glad Melo heard, and I hope AI heard it, too, for his sake and that of the Pistons.

DenButsu
12-18-2008, 09:15 PM
why would that mean anything when last year they lost to the hottest team in the league at the time?

Because of the nature of the loss. We weren't even competitive. We completely rolled over.

JayW_1023
12-18-2008, 11:38 PM
Heck even Piston vet McDyess (who went out of his way to sign with Detroit after the trade, instead of staying with the new look Nuggets) even said that the Pistons should adapt to AI...it seems the smaller quicker line-up Curry has now works more to AI's strengths.

The problem is that their defense will take a hit, especially in the half court.

Chronz
12-19-2008, 04:11 AM
Heck even Piston vet McDyess (who went out of his way to sign with Detroit after the trade, instead of staying with the new look Nuggets) even said that the Pistons should adapt to AI...it seems the smaller quicker line-up Curry has now works more to AI's strengths.

The problem is that their defense will take a hit, especially in the half court.
Easy to say for him, he has yet to play with the guy, seriously though there probably is some truth to it, there should be room for AI to be himself the only thing I expect from AI in return is that he not take away much from everyone else's or the teams game in doing so. If the cost of AI playing to the best of his abilities means everyone around him has to suffer it can cause problems internally and on the court. Unless AI is really dominant, something I find doubtful at this stage in his career

I dont think its easier for 8-10 guys to change their game for the benefit of one, rather than 1 adapting to his new weapons. To AI's credit, the last time he was traded it took him awhile to find that balance, the only thing Im saying is that even if he played as good as he did last year, its still not better than Billups.

DenButsu
12-19-2008, 04:46 AM
I think the perfect situation for AI to have gone to Detroit actually would have been when Big Ben was still there as a dominant inside presence. I actually made a thread about that a few months ago - would the Pistons have won more than one ring if AI had replace Rip in that starting 5? I think possibly so... Billups-AI-Prince-Sheed-Wallace... it would be hard to design a better team than that around Iverson, imho. 3 guys who definitely don't need the ball all the time to be effective, a lot of size and length and a lot of defense to surround AI with. But now without really having that same post presence, with Sheed somewhat of a "bigger Melo" in the sense that he overly relies on his wing game instead of being more aggressive to the basket, I think some of the same pitfalls that Denver faced may exist there in Detroit. Getting Dice back should help some at least, though.

SteveNash
12-19-2008, 08:57 AM
Heck even Piston vet McDyess (who went out of his way to sign with Detroit after the trade, instead of staying with the new look Nuggets) even said that the Pistons should adapt to AI...it seems the smaller quicker line-up Curry has now works more to AI's strengths.

The problem is that their defense will take a hit, especially in the half court.

Smaller lineup will never work if the Pistons want to win anything in the postseason.

Also note how Stuckey has transitioned well from SG to PG in just 1/2 year in the NBA, something AI still hasn't been able to do in 12 years with the NBA.

It's unrealistic to expect Rip to be able to defend top SFs and Tayshuan to defend top PFs. The only good team in the East they might be able to get away with doing that is the Magic. This is just a case of the Pistons bending over backwards to please AI, because they probably know what a problem he'd become if they moved him to the bench where he actually belongs.

barreleffact
12-19-2008, 09:09 AM
Smaller lineup will never work if the Pistons want to win anything in the postseason.

Also note how Stuckey has transitioned well from SG to PG in just 1/2 year in the NBA, something AI still hasn't been able to do in 12 years with the NBA.

It's unrealistic to expect Rip to be able to defend top SFs and Tayshuan to defend top PFs. The only good team in the East they might be able to get away with doing that is the Magic. This is just a case of the Pistons bending over backwards to please AI, because they probably know what a problem he'd become if they moved him to the bench where he actually belongs.

Stuckey always was going to fill teh PG role in detroit and he was able to learn from Chauncey. Has AI EVER had anyone on his team that was better than him at all? no, so he wouldnt have anyone to learn from. He wouldnt have anyone to show him anything in practice, which was his whole gripe in philly. I agree with you about rip and tayshaun vs the elites, but you dont bring in a player of that caliber and not bend to him. you have to bend to the best payer on teh team otherwise its stupid to bring tehm in at all.

SteveNash
12-19-2008, 11:49 AM
Stuckey always was going to fill teh PG role in detroit and he was able to learn from Chauncey. Has AI EVER had anyone on his team that was better than him at all? no, so he wouldnt have anyone to learn from. He wouldnt have anyone to show him anything in practice, which was his whole gripe in philly. I agree with you about rip and tayshaun vs the elites, but you dont bring in a player of that caliber and not bend to him. you have to bend to the best payer on teh team otherwise its stupid to bring tehm in at all.

The problem is that AI isn't the best player on the team.

AI should learn from Stuckey, the better player.

And it's not like Larry Brown couldn't have taught AI if Iverson was willing to listen and not skip out on practices. Larry was a fine PG in the ABA and I don't see Denver stressing out to bend to Billups, and that's because Billups is the better player.

Faneik
12-19-2008, 11:54 AM
Billups.

Iverson is one of the best 1 vs 5 players in the world. But I prefer system oriented guys.

DenButsu
12-19-2008, 12:36 PM
The problem is that AI isn't the best player on the team.

AI should learn from Stuckey, the better player.

I really disagree with barreleffect's argument, but that, too, is reaching way too far. Stuckey has a long road to travel before any sort of legit claim to him being up on AI could be made.

JonnyBrav000
12-19-2008, 12:47 PM
Actually they are just two different players and Allen Iverson is the better player, Chauncey just fits the needs of both the Nuggets and Pistons more because both teams already have good SG's and Chauncey is a better point guard than Iverson, but it doesn't mean he is better, Iverson is just playing out of position and the Pistons now have two SG's Rip and AI when AI's natural position is SG, if the trade was AI for RIp and chauncey was still on the team the Pistons would absolutely be doing better than they are now, however I like RIP and I think right now AI is great to have also but we need a PG to run the offense, maybe we can trade Tashaun for a true PG, is Kirk Hienrick available?

KnicksorBust
12-19-2008, 01:00 PM
This statement could only be written by somebody who hasn't watched the Nuggets much, if at all, this season. At 99.9, Denver has the 5th best defensive efficiency rating in the NBA right now, and it has consistently been in the top 5-8 all season long. At this point, their biggest defensive weakness is rebounding. By just about any measure, they're probably somewhere around 15th-18th in the league in rebounding. But at top 5 in defensive efficiency, 3rd in steals and 3rd in blocks in the league, and with the 3rd lowest opponent field goal percentage at 42.69 (after only Boston and Cleveland), and the 8th lowest opponent 3-point percentage at .33 (a very encouraging sign for Nuggets fans of an improved perimeter defense), to say the Nuggets "can't defend" is just absolutely absurd.

We're one of the better defensive teams in the league now. Time for NBA fans to pull their brains out of 2007-08 and get with it. :cool:

:clap: Great post!

Iverson will go down in history as the better player. But when I'm thinking about who I'd take I'd go with Chauncey all day. Iverson is the type of player who for all his talent, needs the perfect storm around him to go anywhere (the hyper-defensive minded teammates in Philly), whereas Billups can roll with any talented squad.

Chronz
01-24-2009, 10:34 AM
Detroits offense has fallen to 23rd now, I think its safe to say AI wont be recovering any time soon now and their schedule gets worse, I wouldnt be surprised to see them fall out of the playoff picture, they have gotten lucky in close games, they should be a .500 team right now.

AI, Sheed and RIP are all regressing

durtee
01-24-2009, 10:45 AM
Detroits offense has fallen to 23rd now, I think its safe to say AI wont be recovering any time soon now and their schedule gets worse, I wouldnt be surprised to see them fall out of the playoff picture, they have gotten lucky in close games, they should be a .500 team right now.

AI, Sheed and RIP are all regressing

Falling out of the playoff picture? I will guarantee that they will make the playoffs. AI is a 1st ballot hall of famer.. is Billups? People seem to forget that Billups was a mediocre player before he came to Detroit. Billups is great and doing great things for Denver, but just because a player fits in better somewhere doesn't mean he is a better player.

Chronz
01-24-2009, 10:54 AM
Falling out of the playoff picture? I will guarantee that they will make the playoffs. AI is a 1st ballot hall of famer.. is Billups? People seem to forget that Billups was a mediocre player before he came to Detroit. Billups is great and doing great things for Denver, but just because a player fits in better somewhere doesn't mean he is a better player.
Billups took longer to develop but once he did he was amazing. The HOF is based on their own standards, Billups should be a first ballot HOF'er but who knows what the voters will elect to do. And Im not saying Billups is better than AI because he fits in better, Im saying hes a better player because hes more efficient and his style of play is more conducive to winning ball games.

cHi8DaL5LA420
01-24-2009, 11:10 AM
i believe you definitley can confirm this... you just have to look at the pistons and see that they are playing barely over 500 with iverson... its not even a question that was a dumb move on the pistons part... i like iverson... but billups is obviously the better team guy

nygiants242
01-24-2009, 11:20 AM
How is this even close? Billups is a great team player, he's dishing the ball, leading the Nuggets. Meanwhile, Rodney Stuckey is actually playing a lot better than AI and AI isn't really doing **** for Detroit honestly. Worst trade ever for them, I can't believe they did it (other than for the cap obviously) but still.

Missing56&33
01-24-2009, 12:58 PM
AI will be back. I think the trade took a lot out of him mentally. He was happy in Denver, he was smiling and enjoying the game, something he could never do in Philly. I think the trade shocked him and hes fed up with the business aspect of the game. But he will be back, I think Dumars have to start him or trade him because hes that type of player, hes not a bench player

Raps18-19 Champ
01-24-2009, 02:00 PM
IMO Its cause AI doesnt have good chemistry with teamates so they end up doing average

KB24PG16
01-24-2009, 02:35 PM
its because he doesnt fit in detroit

NYM09
01-24-2009, 02:37 PM
This answer is simple.Iverson has more talent than Billips, however Billips is the better team player than Iverson

durtee
01-24-2009, 06:26 PM
Billups took longer to develop but once he did he was amazing. The HOF is based on their own standards, Billups should be a first ballot HOF'er but who knows what the voters will elect to do. And Im not saying Billups is better than AI because he fits in better, Im saying hes a better player because hes more efficient and his style of play is more conducive to winning ball games.

I really don't think that I would call him Amazing. It took 5 different teams and a number of years and a number of different coaches to get him to be the player that he is now. I am not sure that a guy who averages 15 ppg and 5 ast is going to be a 1st ballot HOFer. AI is one of the best players ever and for his career he averages 27 ppg and 6 ast. Yes Billups has fit in with the Nuggets perfectly and he makes them a better basketball team, because he allows other guys to do there thing. It is really ridiculous to even compare the two. When the trade went down every Piston fan knew that it was going to be tough for AI and Rip to play well together since they both demand the ball, so most of us are really not that surprised. This thread has been one ridiculous statement after another. Billups= Great PG (Game Manager), Iverson= top 15 player ever.

JordansBulls
01-24-2009, 06:50 PM
Another month has passed since the deal. Denver is in first place in their division and 28-15 while the Pistons are in 2nd place at 24-18.

Anyone have the exact records of Denver and Detroit since the trade?

Also what is Denver's record since Melo has gone down?

Chronz
01-24-2009, 07:15 PM
I really don't think that I would call him Amazing. It took 5 different teams and a number of years and a number of different coaches to get him to be the player that he is now. I am not sure that a guy who averages 15 ppg and 5 ast is going to be a 1st ballot HOFer.
Thats because people dont know how to interpret Billups stats, if your looking at per game averages hes not going to stand out. If you look at the efficiency that his game comes with youd know his stats are far more remarkable than simply 15-5, and easily first ballot worth, so yea I disagree


AI is one of the best players ever and for his career he averages 27 ppg and 6 ast. Yes Billups has fit in with the Nuggets perfectly and he makes them a better basketball team, because he allows other guys to do there thing.

In other words he allows others to shine and finds ways of helping his team win without being cancerous. AI's style of play forces his teammates to become bystanders for the most part, AI may have had the greater career but hes not as good as Billups has been the past few years.


It is really ridiculous to even compare the two. When the trade went down every Piston fan knew that it was going to be tough for AI and Rip to play well together since they both demand the ball
Actually they cant play well together because teams dont respect AI's shooting ability, Rip doesnt demand the ball he requires spacing and movement. RIP is the games best OFF-THE BALL, AI is a BALL STOPPER. The reason the 2 dont click isnt because they both require the ball but because when AI doesnt have the ball hes useless, and isnt a threat. Rip needs someone who looks to pass, not AI.


, so most of us are really not that surprised. This thread has been one ridiculous statement after another. Billups= Great PG (Game Manager), Iverson= top 15 player ever.

Yea I wasnt surprise either, in fact I remember before the trade happened all the stat heads I knew were saying how the trade was the best thing to happen to possession analysis because it would open the eyes of the general public to the importance of efficiency. Billups has had it his entire career since arriving in Detroit, AI is only effective if your team is bad enough to allow him to waste all of your possessions, in other words if hes surrounded by scrubs. Billups is a championship player, AI is a guy youd want if you werent trying to win a title but sell merchandise.

It is not a ridiculous statement to say Billups has been better than AI, not when the facts are staring you right in the face. Its sad that we have to make excuses for AI's lack of winning play, Ive never known of any superstar to be more needy than AI, all you guys are admitting is that he cant adapt.

Seriously how does a team ADD an allegedly gifted offensive player and get worse offensively? How do the Nuggets get better on both sides? Its easy, just open your eyes and you too will see the light.

MossIsBoss
01-24-2009, 07:16 PM
Iverson would kill Billups in a 1-1 match up. He's quicker, more athletic, and backs down from nobody. But the NBA isn't 1-1, A.I. is also a ball hog who cant shoot like billups and has ruined the detroit pistons. The Nuggets have gone from an 8 seed every year that will get swept in the first round to a legitimate contender. The Pistons have gone to crap. A.I. is bad for the NBA

Westbrook36
01-24-2009, 07:18 PM
AI will be back. I think the trade took a lot out of him mentally. He was happy in Denver, he was smiling and enjoying the game, something he could never do in Philly. I think the trade shocked him and hes fed up with the business aspect of the game. But he will be back, I think Dumars have to start him or trade him because hes that type of player, hes not a bench player

:laugh2: You must have not watched Basketball.

Wahoo I almost fell off my seat with that one, Please tell me more jokes? PLEASE? :laugh2:

....

Wait Wait Im done..

Nope :laugh2:

thedfactor
01-24-2009, 07:39 PM
No. I think Billups obviously has made the Denver Nuggets a better team and the Detroit Pistons have declined. Overall though you cannot say Billups is a better player than Iverson over their careers. Billups has 1 title yes, but his team was solid. Whereas Iverson led a scrub club to the Finals and eventually lost.

Chronz
01-24-2009, 07:43 PM
So you think its more admirable to beat up on horrible teams when the East was really pathetic and make the Finals because you have the best overall team and lose than to be the Finals MVP?

THE MTL
01-24-2009, 07:54 PM
Allen Iverson would destroy Billups in a one-on-one game. Billups is better for team play. However, the way Iverson affected Detroit is not all his fault cause he doesnt fit in with that team at all.

Mets4Life101
01-24-2009, 07:56 PM
not even close AI is a first ballot hall of famer chauncey not so much

certain fool
01-24-2009, 08:04 PM
AI has more talent and determination. But, he's a me first player. And, does not really have the best BB IQ. Iverson is a better player than Billups. But, he doesn't know his limitations.

Billups is a team first player that will do what it takes to elevate his team. But, he could never do it himself. Billups knows his limitations and plays within them.

I don't think its really a fair question to ask. Iverson is a better. But, I'd pick Billups every time cause the team is more important than the individual.

Duncan = Donkey
01-24-2009, 08:23 PM
iverson has more talent. but i rather billups on my team anyday.

IversonIsKrazy
01-24-2009, 08:25 PM
No. AI doesnt fit w/ detroit. AI was better in denver. as is billups. Watch, pistons will make the playoffs we all noe that. they'll pass first round but wont make finals. Nuggets, will once again have another first round exit, and then wut r u guys going to be saying abt billups? AI got them 50 wins, and a first-round exit with 26ppg, 7apg, 2spg. lets c wut billups will do.

DenButsu
01-24-2009, 08:33 PM
Another month has passed since the deal. Denver is in first place in their division and 28-15 while the Pistons are in 2nd place at 24-18.

Anyone have the exact records of Denver and Detroit since the trade?

Also what is Denver's record since Melo has gone down?

The Nuggets are 4-3 in the 7 games that Melo has missed so far. He's scheduled to return on January 30th against Charlotte (and that date looks to be set pretty solid), and if that holds then he'll miss 3 more games, vs. Utah, @ Memphis and @ New Orleans. I'm expecting the Nuggets to emerge from this 10 game stretch at 6-4, which would just be fantastic considering the opposition (Miami, Detroit, DallasPhoenix, Orlando, @ Houston, Sacramento, Utah, @ Memphis, @ New Orleans).

The Nuggets are 28-15 (.651) overall, and 27-12 (.692) with Billups (and with Melo having been out 10 of those games, 7 this month so far and 3 in December).

DenButsu
01-24-2009, 08:35 PM
No. AI doesnt fit w/ detroit. AI was better in denver. as is billups. Watch, pistons will make the playoffs we all noe that. they'll pass first round but wont make finals. Nuggets, will once again have another first round exit, and then wut r u guys going to be saying abt billups? AI got them 50 wins, and a first-round exit with 26ppg, 7apg, 2spg. lets c wut billups will do.

Hi, IversonIsKrazy. I remember you from when you used to post in the Nuggets forum. Guess your fandom ended with the AI trade? :rolleyes:

Anyhow, I'd be interested to hear why you think Denver faces another first round exit this season, because I'd like the opportunity to respond and tell you why we don't. :cool:

ivylleague1
01-24-2009, 09:07 PM
Hi, IversonIsKrazy. I remember you from when you used to post in the Nuggets forum. Guess your fandom ended with the AI trade? :rolleyes:

Anyhow, I'd be interested to hear why you think Denver faces another first round exit this season, because I'd like the opportunity to respond and tell you why we don't. :cool:


Iverson is a lot better than Billups. Has always ranked in the top 10 in three major categories (Scoring, Steals, and assists), and currently an all-star starter, there is no comparison between AI and Billups. I like Nuggets to go beyond the first round, but, I have not seen anything to tell me that they can or will. Will Melo make the all-star this year ? No AI, No all-star!!!!

theimortalone
01-24-2009, 09:58 PM
:nod: Numbers don't lie.

SJSHARKIES
01-24-2009, 10:13 PM
Detoit messed up trading Billups I knew it wasn't going to work out right away when it happened, Billups had great chemistry with the team and fit in perfectly with what they were trying to do. Same with Ben Wallace, why was Ben Wallace so successful?Easy he fit in the system perfectly. He played hard on Defense. Rebounding, Blocking and providing a presence inside. It worked out because the system he was in was perfect and worked to his strengths. Iverson on the other hand is a great player, but I always found it hard that he can never really fit in with a team. He just does his own thing kind of, as far as the question who is better I don't know, I do know that Billups fit in better with Detroit and even now in Denver.

Sox Appeal
01-24-2009, 10:23 PM
Detoit messed up trading Billups I knew it wasn't going to work out right away when it happened, Billups had great chemistry with the team and fit in perfectly with what they were trying to do. Same with Ben Wallace, why was Ben Wallace so successful?Easy he fit in the system perfectly. He played hard on Defense. Rebounding, Blocking and providing a presence inside. It worked out because the system he was in was perfect and worked to his strengths. Iverson on the other hand is a great player, but I always found it hard that he can never really fit in with a team. He just does his own thing kind of, as far as the question who is better I don't know, I do know that Billups fit in better with Detroit and even now in Denver.

I'm with you on that one. Trading Chauncey for AI was Joe Dumars way of rebuilding, with out actually rebuilding. Chauncey is a better player then is Iverson, and he's also a better team player, but his contract situation wasn't going to work with the Pistons. Especially with Rodney Stuckey (who plays the same position as Billups) waiting in the wings. Iverson has a 21M expiring contract which the Pistons I'm sure will make the most of, by being major players for the FA's this season, and in 2010.

Fire&Ice2&33
01-24-2009, 11:06 PM
A.I. is way better than Billups,Billups isnt a bad player,but A.I. is one of a kind...he just doesnt fit in with what the Pistons wanna do,trade him to the rockets and they can have Rafer Alston and some picks...A.I.,T-Mac,Artest,Scola,Yao...Championship;even though we winning it this year anyway

ivylleague1
01-24-2009, 11:21 PM
I'm with you on that one. Trading Chauncey for AI was Joe Dumars way of rebuilding, with out actually rebuilding. Chauncey is a better player then is Iverson, and he's also a better team player, but his contract situation wasn't going to work with the Pistons. Especially with Rodney Stuckey (who plays the same position as Billups) waiting in the wings. Iverson has a 21M expiring contract which the Pistons I'm sure will make the most of, by being major players for the FA's this season, and in 2010.


Who is a better coach Flip Saunders or curry ? Larry Brown or curry ? Iverson, the four time NBA scoring champion, perennial top 10 in scoring, assists, and steals is a Superdupa player and a great team player !!!!
The trade was not made for rebuilding purposes, it was made for championship. It was made because AI is a better player than Billups !!!!! All that is needed is the coalescence of the players around AI and Prince (Could be the most deadly duo in the league). The coach should stay with that and stop allowing AI haters and detractors to disrupt them through him and his coaching staff.
Furthermore, no team has ever won the NBA championship with more than one player that has less than five years experience in their starting lineup. The use Johnson and Sturkey in the starting lineup should be done with caution.

KIDDSNETS0324
01-25-2009, 12:57 AM
this is like asking who is better out of J-Kidd and Devin Harris...some may say that harris is better than kidd because of how the mavs fell off since the trade when in reality it is because j-kidd just isnt a good fit for dallas. kidd is still better than harris.
same case with ai and billups. billups is a better fit for detroit and denver, but overall ai is better

hotpotato1092
01-25-2009, 01:08 AM
Chauncey is a better point guard but AIs a better player. AI is one of the greatest to ever play the game and is a first ballot hall of famer, when people look back at this era they're going to think of Allen Iverson way before they think of Billups.

yea

RapsGuy23
01-25-2009, 01:48 AM
Clearly Billups is a better team player and overall teammate than Iverson. Billups possesses leadership qualities that make his teammates better and wins championships. There isn't a team in the league that wouldn't improve with Billups on their roster....and the proof is in the pudding (just look at Nuggets post Billups..enough said!!!)

Iverson on the other hand may not be an ideal teammate but his raw talent/skill set may be superior to Billups. AI's quickness and ability to finish at the rim is matched by few others in the league (especially during his years in philly). AI still has the ability to go off for 50+ pts on a given night and so long as he's able to do that he'll be serious threat.

I'm not sure if I can confirm that Billups is better than Iverson. They're two different types of players. That being said I would rather have Billups on my team than Iverson.

JordanPippen
01-25-2009, 02:03 AM
the debate is in what you define a better player as.

A)makes teamates better

B)better individually regardless of the effect on teamates

that is where the debate is coming from.

in this regard, AI fits into category B, while Chauncy fits into A

RapsGuy23
01-25-2009, 02:21 AM
the debate is in what you define a better player as.

A)makes teamates better

B)better individually regardless of the effect on teamates

that is where the debate is coming from.

in this regard, AI fits into category B, while Chauncy fits into A

Agree. That essentially what I said in my previous post. Its difficult to say if a type a player is better than a type b player...in an ideal world a team would have both

McPeak92
01-25-2009, 02:29 AM
5 v 5 give me Billups, 1 on 1 give me Iverson.

charlsdq7
01-25-2009, 03:05 AM
its not about whos better cuz AI deres no question...its just dat Mr Big shot makes da players around him better...GO SIXERS!!!!!

DenButsu
01-25-2009, 05:08 AM
Iverson is a lot better than Billups. Has always ranked in the top 10 in three major categories (Scoring, Steals, and assists), and currently an all-star starter, there is no comparison between AI and Billups. I like Nuggets to go beyond the first round, but, I have not seen anything to tell me that they can or will. Will Melo make the all-star this year ? No AI, No all-star!!!!

Ah, yes, the other "Nuggets fan" who left the forum after the trade. You and IversonIsKrazy need to make an AI homer fan club. :p

nipo10847
01-25-2009, 05:39 AM
AI should go back to sixers....i think he will better fit there now....sixers may be a contender if they add him now...Igudala or Miller will come off the bench...and Brand is there...wow!!!

JayW_1023
01-25-2009, 05:51 AM
If it was a pick-up game Iverson is prolly better. But this is a professional basketball league, and Billups is the far better player now, it's not even close. He plays better defense, makes better decisions with the ball and knows how to lead a team.

Now that Iverson has to play on a balanced team, his weaknesses and selfishness are exposed as a result. Iverson is a better scorer than Billups, and for some reason people believe that makes him a better player than Billups.

As an allround player, fundamentally, Billups is superior.

ntat
01-25-2009, 06:28 AM
Iverson was successful with every team he's been on before now. if you put billups on AI's philly teams, they never would have come close to the finals. AI is prolific and a scorer, but the players around him are system layers. they need someone to create for them. AI creates for himself and thinks of others after. Billups is not better in totality than AI. he is a better shooter, defender, and PG but AI if a better scorer and better at shouldering a team. AI will have the better legacy even without a ring and he is a level above Billups. Even with Denver it's a marathon not a sprint, and AI got denver to 50 wins before just like billups is about to do..and that was with a 2nd man who was focused only about himself. He didnt get this new Melo who actually wants to step up.
Yeah ALLEN was successful(I.E. he scored a lot and took a lot of shots), none of his teams were.

JayW_1023
01-25-2009, 06:48 AM
^^Agreed...I mean, how many times has Iverson -led- his team past the first round since that 2001 fairytale?

In comparison...how many times has Billups taken his teams past the first round?

Exactly.

TMAC94
01-25-2009, 06:57 AM
he is playing better atm

DenButsu
01-25-2009, 07:01 AM
If your measure of "better" is, "will the player occasionally totally take over a game and dominate?" then you could probably make a strong case for Iverson.

But if your measure of "better" is, "will the player ultimately contribute more to the overall success of his team?", then Billups wins in a landslide.

Here's a good youtube video on why Iverson is worse than Billups (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pDjAygeisHc). He totally loses his teammates when he dominates the ball and dribbles it around aimlessly. There's no deliberation to his actions on the offensive end of the court, which is fine if he's playing with 4 guys who are not expecting to actually end up with the ball in their hands, but instead only to set picks for him. But if he's on a team with Carmelo Anthony and J.R. Smith and some other players who actually can (and should) do some scoring when they get the ball, he's a detriment to the effectiveness of the offense. Does he get some assists? Sure, but they usually come when there's about :05 left on the shot clock and after he's dribbled it around for the first :19 he's found himself out of shooting options. His assist numbers are more a default result of anybody else shooting having gotten the ball out of his hands since he's the one who's always got it than they are of him actually being a proactive playmaker. And whether he's playing at the 1 or 2 when he's doing this is completely beside the point, because if he's going to be the one taking the ball up the court and hanging onto it until further notice, he's initiating the offense and playing the role of point guard, even if he's at the 2.

Iverson is a warrior, and he plays with a ton of heart. I love his fight and his passion.

But the list of things he doesn't do to help his team that Chauncey does is very long.

JayW_1023
01-25-2009, 07:12 AM
If your measure of "better" is, "will the player occasionally totally take over a game and dominate?" then you could probably make a strong case for Iverson.

But if your measure of "better" is, "will the player ultimately contribute more to the overall success of his team?", then Billups wins in a landslide.

Here's a good youtube video on why Iverson is worse than Billups (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pDjAygeisHc). He totally loses his teammates when he dominates the ball and dribbles it around aimlessly. There's no deliberation to his actions on the offensive end of the court, which is fine if he's playing with 4 guys who are not expecting to actually end up with the ball in their hands, but instead only to set picks for him. But if he's on a team with Carmelo Anthony and J.R. Smith and some other players who actually can (and should) do some scoring when they get the ball, he's a detriment to the effectiveness of the offense. Does he get some assists? Sure, but they usually come when there's about :05 left on the shot clock and after he's dribbled it around for the first :19 he's found himself out of shooting options. His assist numbers are more a default result of anybody else shooting having gotten the ball out of his hands since he's the one who's always got it than they are of him actually being a proactive playmaker. And whether he's playing at the 1 or 2 when he's doing this is completely beside the point, because if he's going to be the one taking the ball up the court and hanging onto it until further notice, he's initiating the offense and playing the role of point guard, even if he's at the 2.

Iverson is a warrior, and he plays with a ton of heart. I love his fight and his passion.

But the list of things he doesn't do to help his team that Chauncey does is very long.

Great post.

Iverson is amazing because he CAN singlehandedly win a game. For a player his size that's impressive. But basketball isn't played one on five. In the complete floor game Chauncey is just a better player.

People just get mezmerised by Iversons flash and individual brilliance to the extent that they base their arguments entirely on skills. Basketball is as much a game of instincts and intelligence as the physical aspects.

Billups just know when to make the right play at the right time. He reads the game. Iverson just has that killer instinct, that scorers mentality. It is really a matter of what weighs more to people in the game of basketball.

The media just is fixated by the thought of players carrying their teams on their back. But very few players can do that and elevate the rest of their teammates. Iverson can win a game by himself, but also lose a game by himself by not making good decisions or shooting himself out of the game. It's all or nothing with him.

Billups on the other hand, when his shot isn't falling always finds a way to make an impact one way or the other. By passing, defending or just being a vocal leader. In that sense he is just far more valuable to have in a team concept, because he hardly makes a foolish move and let's the game come to him.

GSW fan
01-25-2009, 07:53 AM
Players like Iverson, Crawford and other pgs who are shoot first will never win

La11
01-25-2009, 02:19 PM
iverson is a not a team oriented player and he is a ME ME attitude when having the ball

JordansBulls
01-25-2009, 06:31 PM
the debate is in what you define a better player as.

A)makes teamates better

B)better individually regardless of the effect on teamates

that is where the debate is coming from.

in this regard, AI fits into category B, while Chauncy fits into A

I think it is always impact on a team.

twoearl
01-25-2009, 06:54 PM
this is question does not make sense. Allen Iverson will be in the Hall of Fame one day. While Billups will not.

If you want to know who is a better TEAM PLAYER, then yes billups is better fit for a team.

But if you want to know who has is better NBA players its Iverson.

How dare you even think of this question. Billups has never even averaged over 20 points i dont think. Iverson has put up 30 in several season, Iverson is a MVP for goodness sakes.

Please respect greatness when you see it.

NyYaNkEeS 91
01-25-2009, 07:28 PM
chauncey makes any team he is on better, though iverson is the better player statistically

durtee
01-25-2009, 09:20 PM
iverson is a not a team oriented player and he is a ME ME attitude when having the ball

Then you could say the exact same thing about Jordan, Kobe, DWade etc... When you are the star of a team, then you demand the ball. That is what AI does. He has been nothing but a team player since he has arrived and says over and over that he is willing to do whatever it takes to win. That sounds like a team guy to me.

It has been two months since the trade and the records of both teams are similar. I really don't want to hear nonsense about injuries either. Melo has been out, Rip & Sheed were both out at the same time and I am pretty sure that the Pistons were like 6-1/5-0 something like that when those two were out.

The Pistons will be fine, they didn't make the trade just for this season. Joe D wanted to get Stuckey in the starting lineup and get another expiring contract for the huge FA summer of 2010. I love Billups and he has always been one of my favorite players, but in no way is he a HOF player or better than Iverson. Iverson took a team of nobody's to the finals and Billups went to two finals with the best starting lineup in the league. Not to mention, they don't even play the same position. AI's natural position is the 2 and Billups is a natural PG... really can't even compare the two.

EDIT- Pistons went 6-2 w/out RIP and 3-1 w/out RIP and Sheed.

DenButsu
01-25-2009, 09:35 PM
chauncey makes any team he is on better, though iverson is the better player statistically

Not in contributing to better team offensive efficiency and defensive efficiency statistics, which are more important to a team's ability to win than any individual player's scoring statistics. Individual players don't exist in a bubble; to properly evaluate them, it's important to take measure of all things.

DitchDat
01-25-2009, 09:36 PM
Well, Billups is a better facilitator than AI.

ink
01-25-2009, 09:58 PM
I just turned on the Pistons-Rockets game and the announcer said "... AI is basically a cheerleader in this game".

Says it all for me.

G-Funk
01-25-2009, 10:05 PM
No. Both players needs a different type of team. Ai needs a team that will compliment his style of play. Players who will know their roles. If you put Billups on a team where he needs to be a domintant scorer, he will fail. Billups needs scores to succeed while Iverson needs complimentary players to succeed.

ink
01-25-2009, 10:07 PM
^ That's what people say about every team AI is on. "He just needs a team that will complement his style of play." In the off-season, people were saying "hey, the Pistons would the right type of team for AI". He's running out of career.

AirJordanXVIII
01-25-2009, 10:12 PM
No. Both players needs a different type of team. Ai needs a team that will compliment his style of play. Players who will know their roles. If you put Billups on a team where he needs to be a domintant scorer, he will fail. Billups needs scores to succeed while Iverson needs complimentary players to succeed.

Excellent post. I agree with you.

Muttman73
01-25-2009, 10:25 PM
Was there ever a question about this? Billups hands down

luckynumber_752
01-26-2009, 12:29 AM
Iverson is only successful if you have low standards set for him. Going 1-8 in the playoffs is not successful on a good team like Denver had. Spending your final years in Philadelphia doing nothing but killing the team is not successful.

Billups is the better winner, and that's all that matters and right now Billups is showing that he's the much better scorer and better at shouldering a team. How do you think he got the name Mr Big Shot? Billups showed the way to become a winner, a Finals MVP, to transition your game into point guard skills. He got better through hard work and dedication.

AI cried about practice because he just didn't care.


Dude, I wish you would just shut up about things you know nothing about. All you know about AI is what you see on Sportscenter. I don't know where your from, but I know where I'm from, and I've been front and center for AI's whole career, so for you to say that he was killing the team while he was in Philadelphia is just an ignorant statement.

You also say that he didn't care.......???? It's funny that he cried after a second round playoff loss to the Pacers, but I guess that was just because he didn't score 40 points or something, which is the way you want to see him.

You say that Billups transitioned into point guard skills, well he's a freaking point guard!!! Allen Iverson isn't a point guard, I don't need to tell you this because there's been a ton of other people telling you this in other threads.

Not every player is a good fit anywhere, it was stupid of Denver to acquire AI because he's not the type of player they need. Other teams need a type of player like Allen Iverson, mainly my Philadelphia 76ers could use him badly right now, we have no SHOOTING GUARD and we could desperately use a guy who can create a shot for himself.

Get it through your thick skull that Allen Iverson is one of the greatest players of All Time and he's a future HOF'er, and stop bashing the guy.



And to the answer the thread question.....Billups is NOT better than AI, he's simply a better fit.

Woah bro. Chill out. U get way to emotional about all of this. I think AI is a great one on one player offensively. He's not quite the player he used to b in Philly. When he was in Philly, he could carry an entire team to the Finals. The one thing about Iverson is that he doesn't make his teamates better. Billups makes his teamates better. At this point in AI's career, he can't carry a team into the Finals by himself. AI would b better on a team that doesn't have as much talent as Detriot anyway. I knew said it from the day that the trade went down that it was a great trade for Denver and a very bad trade for the Pistons. Of course Iverson would b better for a different team, but Billups would b better than AI for most teams in the NBA. At this point in AI's career, he could take a team that isn't a playoff team to the playoffs, but he can't take a playoff team to the next level in the way that Billups can. I'm a Blazer fan, and I would much rather have Billups on my team than Iverson. I think Billups is better than Iverson, but not as good as Iverson once was, cause if Philly had one more piece, they would have one a title with him. Billups won his titles with an incredible team.

DenButsu
01-26-2009, 12:30 AM
^ That's what people say about every team AI is on. "He just needs a team that will complement his style of play." In the off-season, people were saying "hey, the Pistons would the right type of team for AI". He's running out of career.

I was the one pushing that idea. I think I made a thread called "Replace Rip with AI, do the Pistons win more rings?" or something like that. And in fact, I did think that the Pistons would be about the best possible fit for him in today's NBA. Obviously, I didn't exactly hit a homerun with that prediction.

Which brings me to my point:

Ai needs a team that will compliment his style of play.

So why is a player who an NBA organization must completely design their team around in order to make him effective better than a player who can join any team in the league and fit in, integrate with the chemistry, and make an immediate contribution to their success?

Denver needed a point guard for real, but Billups playing in the Nuggets free-flowing system put him in a very counter-intuitive position. For him to adjust to the increased pace (which must have felt lightening fast to him), to adjust to the often reckless back and forth style that Denver plays running up and down the court, to adjust to a less disciplined (both in terms of the players' mentalities and in terms of their style of basketball) organization, it all was an enormous challenge to which he adapted to very quickly, integrating the skills and leadership he has to bring to the Nuggets into the existing team framework without undermining it or causing the team to lose its way or its identity. And what is the result?

28-12 (.700) under Billups.

-----------------------------------

edit-
This debate will never be resolved, because people will look at it in different ways (often including homeristic goggles). But for my part, as a Nuggets fan more than an Iverson fan or a Billups fan, I thank the basketball gods that Denver made the trade.

ink
01-26-2009, 12:51 AM
I was the one pushing that idea. I think I made a thread called "Replace Rip with AI, do the Pistons win more rings?" or something like that. And in fact, I did think that the Pistons would be about the best possible fit for him in today's NBA. Obviously, I didn't exactly hit a homerun with that prediction.

I could be mistaken, but I think JB also thought it would work. So did Joe Dumars. ;) So you're in good company.

DenButsu
01-26-2009, 12:58 AM
I could be mistaken, but I think JB also thought it would work. So did Joe Dumars. ;) So you're in good company.

On paper, it seemed like the best fit to me. What should be the ideal situation for AI? To be on a team where he's surrounded by very capable defenders who don't need the ball to play effectively and are good at setting picks, so he can be the primary ball handler the majority of the time in an offense that maximizes his effectiveness, while not being too great a defensive liability on the other end. It really should be the perfect scenario for him.

Which kind of begs the question: Why isn't it? :shrug: :rolleyes:

Iggydelphia
01-26-2009, 01:03 AM
i still think AI has more talent.. but Billups is a much better fit with the Nugs

The Answer3
01-26-2009, 09:33 AM
Iverson should retire. He isn't doing **** anyway. Only if he was never traded in the first place.

DenButsu
01-26-2009, 01:37 PM
Iverson should retire. He isn't doing **** anyway. Only if he was never traded in the first place.

The only thing AI should retire is his ego.

He still has a s**tload to offer as an NBA player. He still has some incredible talent and skill and contributions to offer to any team that employs him in the right way. But as long as he refuses to be a role player, as long as he refuses to come off the bench on a team that could best utilize him in that manner, as long as he absolutely insists on being THE MAN when, like it or not, he's really just not "the man" anymore, he'll be at odds with the Pistons organization or any other he ends up playing for.

bahama0811
01-26-2009, 01:56 PM
I loved watching AI here in Denver. He's a great player and deserves all the credit he gets. At the end of the day though he is a selfish player who'll never win a championship. He is and always has been a me-first player.

On the other hand Chauncey's one of the most unselfish players in the league. He may not be as good a player but he continually makes the players around him better. He's a great team player and a great leader on the floor.

Both players are great but I gotta give the edge to CB, after all this is a team sport. You can't win by yourself.

Fear_GAS_OLDier
01-26-2009, 02:24 PM
i say no he is not a better player...billups is a better team player iverson would take bilups one on one, but since we're talking about the nba in that aspect ya bilups is and possibly always has been better, cuz iverson has never been much of a team player had these 2 not been traded for each other i dont think there would have ever been a comparison.

The Answer3
01-26-2009, 04:03 PM
The only thing AI should retire is his ego.

He still has a s**tload to offer as an NBA player. He still has some incredible talent and skill and contributions to offer to any team that employs him in the right way. But as long as he refuses to be a role player, as long as he refuses to come off the bench on a team that could best utilize him in that manner, as long as he absolutely insists on being THE MAN when, like it or not, he's really just not "the man" anymore, he'll be at odds with the Pistons organization or any other he ends up playing for.

About the ego part, he has already stated he's willing to be the 6th man. And why shouldn't he retire? He will never win a ring, not his fault. Its just that his game isn't built for success. Anywhere he goes, it'll hurt the team thus hurting his legacy. Unless he pulls a Sam Casselll/PJ Brown and bandwagons to the team with the best chance to get a ring. I hate to admit it, but he's no longer the player he was 6 or 7 years ago. Not even half of the player. Not to mention, one of the biggest defensive liabilities. So, its better for him to retire after this season. Add in the fact, he's a VERY disliked player.

JordansBulls
01-26-2009, 05:30 PM
100-100 now.

DenButsu
01-26-2009, 09:42 PM
About the ego part, he has already stated he's willing to be the 6th man.

Yeah, we've heard that song before in Denver. When he was on the Nuggets he was always like, "Melo's the leader of this team, not me, I'm just here to help him out" blah blah blah but he never actually played basketball that way when he got out on the court. My confidence in his ability to change his ways was very high when he joined the Nugs, but decreased practically game by game as his 1.5 seasons there went along, and now I'll just have to say I'll believe it when I see it.

DerekRE_3
01-26-2009, 10:36 PM
The only thing AI should retire is his ego.

He still has a s**tload to offer as an NBA player. He still has some incredible talent and skill and contributions to offer to any team that employs him in the right way. But as long as he refuses to be a role player, as long as he refuses to come off the bench on a team that could best utilize him in that manner, as long as he absolutely insists on being THE MAN when, like it or not, he's really just not "the man" anymore, he'll be at odds with the Pistons organization or any other he ends up playing for.

I saw the same thing happen to Chris Webber after his knee surgery. It took him awhile to accept that he couldn't be "the man" anymore because of the injury. Once he got to Detroit though (funny because AI is now with them) he had finally come to terms that he was a role player, and not a star anymore.

ElMarroAfamado
01-26-2009, 10:37 PM
for the simple fact that AI ****s up every team he goes to..
ima have to give the edge to billups

JordansBulls
01-26-2009, 10:38 PM
for the simple fact that AI ****s up every team he goes to..
ima have to give the edge to billups

Iverson did carry a team to the finals.

qwestion13
01-26-2009, 10:58 PM
AI=HOF
Chauncey=???

Legitimate
01-26-2009, 11:07 PM
When will Iverson realize he can't carry a team? and its just not about him..

TheBlackHole
01-26-2009, 11:13 PM
bilups will never be as good as Iverson

jaysfan4ever
01-26-2009, 11:25 PM
Iverson has a ton more talent. Billups wins more games. It's that simple. Billups makes the offence run very smoothly, and is really clutch. Iverson takes a lot of bad shots, because he thinks that he is the SH**, and should get the ball every possession. The reality is that he's just not that good anymore.

jaysfan4ever
01-26-2009, 11:26 PM
AI=HOF
Chauncey=???

Who's got more rings? Who's won more playoff games?

Duncan = Donkey
01-27-2009, 01:38 AM
this is question does not make sense. Allen Iverson will be in the Hall of Fame one day. While Billups will not.

If you want to know who is a better TEAM PLAYER, then yes billups is better fit for a team.

But if you want to know who has is better NBA players its Iverson.

How dare you even think of this question. Billups has never even averaged over 20 points i dont think. Iverson has put up 30 in several season, Iverson is a MVP for goodness sakes.

Please respect greatness when you see it.

thats right chauncy has never had a 20+ point year, so that automatically makes iverson a better player:rolleyes:

hockeypro68
01-27-2009, 01:55 AM
I think this is a horrible analysis of who is the better player. No way Billups is better than Iverson.

DerekRE_3
01-27-2009, 02:47 AM
I think this is a horrible analysis of who is the better player. No way Billups is better than Iverson.

Iverson has more talent than Billups, but Billups can make the players around him better, Iverson on the other hand, does not and you could argue that he makes the players around him worse. Just ask John Salmons.

Kyle916
01-27-2009, 03:11 AM
Billups has a better impact on his team.

Iverson has the better numbers. But that doesn't translate to wins.

JayW_1023
01-27-2009, 06:46 AM
Iverson did carry a team to the finals.

The East was atrocious back then. Both times that Chauncey went to the Finals they beat the Lakers and took the Spurs to seven.

They have made the ECF ever since.

DenButsu
01-27-2009, 06:52 AM
Billups has a better impact on his team.

Iverson has the better numbers. But that doesn't translate to wins.

And therefore, I'd say, Billups is the better player.

There's no better measure of success and effectiveness, ultimately, than winning.

I'd point specifically to Iverson's two playoff runs with the Nuggets.

Bishnoff
01-27-2009, 07:09 AM
They are completely different players. I doubt that Billups could do what AI did in Philly 00-01, and I doubt AI could do what Billups did in Detroit 03-05. AI is a franchise player who can (and wants to) carry a team on his own back while Billups makes those around him better but requires assistance.

AI is really an undersized scoring SG whereas Billups is a true PG. Just because they switched teams and Denver got better while Detroit got worse doesn't make Billups a better player, just better suited to both situations.

JayW_1023
01-27-2009, 07:26 AM
They are completely different players. I doubt that Billups could do what AI did in Philly 00-01, and I doubt AI could do what Billups did in Detroit 03-05. AI is a franchise player who can (and wants to) carry a team on his own back while Billups makes those around him better but requires assistance.

AI is really an undersized scoring SG whereas Billups is a true PG. Just because they switched teams and Denver got better while Detroit got worse doesn't make Billups a better player, just better suited to both situations.

I bet that Billups in his prime could take those Philly teams pretty far. People always say he isn't the scorer that Iverson is, but in his prime when he had to score in bunches he usually delivered.

In the 2005 finals against San Antonio he seemed to score at will when he set his mind to it. No player scared me more back then than Chauncey Billups. The Spurs were a great defensive team, but during those finals Billups was unstoppable.

He was so dangerous...he could drive, use his strength to post up, hit the three and get himself to the line. Give him the amount of shots AI gets every game and I guarantee that he can put up similair scoring numbers if not better.

The difference is mentality. Chauncey plays the complete floor game and let's the game come to him. AI has that scoring mentality.