PDA

View Full Version : Would you build your team around Allen Iverson if he was 21 years old?



Pages : [1] 2

JordansBulls
12-24-2010, 11:32 PM
I here a lot of people say they would never want to build their team around Iverson because of his low efficiency and that a guy like him could never take a team to the championship as the best player on the team.

Here is my question, would you take Iverson and build your team around him if he was 21 years old?


NOTE: This doesn't have to do with any other players in the league, just a simple if you would want him to be the best on your team or not?

Hawkeye15
12-24-2010, 11:33 PM
nope. I don't think Iverson could lead a team to a ring as the #1 guy. Even when his team went thru the weak east, the Lakers crushed his squad.

Gators123
12-24-2010, 11:34 PM
Nope, Hawkeye pretty much summed it up.

Sixerlover
12-24-2010, 11:38 PM
nope. I don't think Iverson could lead a team to a ring as the #1 guy. Even when his team went thru the weak east, the Lakers crushed his squad.

Regardless if it was a "weak" east, he still led his team to the finals. And he had one of the best finals games ever to beat a team that was unbeaten up until that point.

Of course I would build around Allen. He was one of, if not the best scorer of the decade, and could guard the other teams PG. A strong defensive team behind him, with a post scorer is what he needed to flourish.

godolphins
12-24-2010, 11:39 PM
nope. I don't think Iverson could lead a team to a ring as the #1 guy. Even when his team went thru the weak east, the Lakers crushed his squad.

That's because the front office didn't do a good job building a team around him, imagine if he had a good big man on his team

godolphins
12-24-2010, 11:40 PM
What Iverson needed was player around him that can contribute game in and game out but he didn't have that

homestarunner93
12-24-2010, 11:40 PM
Hell yes I would. He's one of the most talented and creative scorers of all-time, people are too jaded by his recent exploits.

PhillyFan001
12-24-2010, 11:45 PM
This thread has to be a joke, If Iverson had shaq and kobe didn't, I really wonder how many championships iverson would have. I think you people forget how great iverson was because of how far he has fallen. The only problem iverson had was that he never reinvented himself into a shooter/ passer later in his career or he would be still be playing at high level like kobe. Iverson took a beating in the lane plus his speed diminished as he got older.

CHANGO
12-24-2010, 11:45 PM
I honestly do not. Well, I do not think Iverson is a leader, as a scorer was excellent, but as a leader, it was not.

NYKalltheway
12-24-2010, 11:45 PM
With the right teammates/chemistry all is possible. And with Iverson's talent, the only reasonable answer is yes.

Hawkeye15
12-24-2010, 11:46 PM
Regardless if it was a "weak" east, he still led his team to the finals. And he had one of the best finals games ever to beat a team that was unbeaten up until that point.

Of course I would build around Allen. He was one of, if not the best scorer of the decade, and could guard the other teams PG. A strong defensive team behind him, with a post scorer is what he needed to flourish.

The Lakers lost that game because they were waiting a month for the Sixers to close out series against crappy teams.

Best scorer? How on earth does a poster like you, who understands how to measure such a term, give AI the nod as a great scorer. He is the perfect definition of a chucker. If he didn't have the foul draw rate he had, he is not even remembered.

No doubt the Sixers surrounded him with the perfect chance to win a ring. But in the end, Iverson was not the #1 guy who could take over an entire series and be efficient.

No player with a career high of 115 for an offensive rating (and that was when he wasn't even the top option), and a career rating of 105, is an elite offensive player.

Iverson basically kept shooting. Non stop. It made his per game scoring numbers pretty. But he is not #1 option material unless you put an ELITE big next to him, with the perfect combination of defenders, rebounders, and depth. Basically he needs to be on a totally stacked team.

So sure, if AI happened to be on a team with prime KG, defenders abound, a great coach, and shooters, why not?

Most overrated superstar in the last 20 years.

thekmp211
12-24-2010, 11:48 PM
knowing everything i know, i voted no. if he were coming out of college, you absolutely draft him.

the only problem i've ever had with iverson's game is his trigger-happiness. everyone can see that he was one of the most talented guys to play in the NBA, but talent does not equal effectiveness.

larry brown has bridled pretty much every point guard that he's coached in his time. felton and marbury come to mind as players with open-court skill-sets that brown pretty much forced to change. and even he couldn't get iverson to change.

i just don't think it's that out there or disrespectful to say that you can't build a contender around 6'1 shooting guards who aren't efficient scorers and can't defend big guards. if you took the name iverson out of the equation, no one would argue this.

PhillyFan001
12-24-2010, 11:53 PM
The Lakers lost that game because they were waiting a month for the Sixers to close out series against crappy teams.

Best scorer? How on earth does a poster like you, who understands how to measure such a term, give AI the nod as a great scorer. He is the perfect definition of a chucker. If he didn't have the foul draw rate he had, he is not even remembered.

No doubt the Sixers surrounded him with the perfect chance to win a ring. But in the end, Iverson was not the #1 guy who could take over an entire series and be efficient.

No player with a career high of 115 for an offensive rating (and that was when he wasn't even the top option), and a career rating of 105, is an elite offensive player.

Iverson basically kept shooting. Non stop. It made his per game scoring numbers pretty. But he is not #1 option material unless you put an ELITE big next to him, with the perfect combination of defenders, rebounders, and depth. Basically he needs to be on a totally stacked team.

So sure, if AI happened to be on a team with prime KG, defenders abound, a great coach, and shooters, why not?

Most overrated superstar in the last 20 years.

You honestly need to shut the ****** up, you have to be serious, yes iverson took a ton of shots but which star doesn't. Iverson never had a strong supporting cast. Iverson had to do everything by himself. People like you make me mad because you have no idea what you are talking about.

LakersIn5
12-24-2010, 11:53 PM
Hell yes I would. He's one of the most talented and creative scorers of all-time, people are too jaded by his recent exploits.

HELL YEAH! just because he sucked recently doesnt mean he sucked before. ai in his prime is better than wade in his prime. yes wade has a championship ring and a finals mvp but he had shaq. ai had noone else to score. if ai had someone like shaq he would of won atleast a championship.

and to hawkeye so what? its not iverson's fault that the east is weak. and doesnt matter because thats what the nba is. then base on your argument then pierce sucks cuz his team didnt get through the weak east. same with VC's raptors, miller's pacers, kidd's nets, etc.

hell atleast iverson in his prime led his team to more playoffs and better records than KG in his prime. :rolleyes:

LTBaByyy
12-24-2010, 11:55 PM
All yall trippin hes obviously a def HOF so it has to be yes. his teammates were not good at all

Ex: Lebron with Cleaveland

John Walls Era
12-24-2010, 11:55 PM
Yes. Pair him with a legit big man and you're a contender.

Hawkeye15
12-24-2010, 11:58 PM
You honestly need to shut the ****** up, you have to be serious, yes iverson took a ton of shots but which star doesn't. Iverson never had a strong supporting cast. Iverson had to do everything by himself. People like you make me mad because you have no idea what you are talking about.

I have no idea what I am talking about? How was Iverson's cast not good? Please explain that to me before I even bother responding. Because he had a great cast in all reality. He may not have had a guy who could score 30 every other night, but no star had better defenders around him.
Its laughable that people feel he had no support.

Point stands. If AI was the #2 option with a dominant big, and support, then sure, he could have won a ring. The OP asked if AI could be a #1 option. I don't think there is a chance really. Not in his era especially

Sixerlover
12-24-2010, 11:58 PM
The Lakers lost that game because they were waiting a month for the Sixers to close out series against crappy teams.
How does a month break equate to the Sixers outplaying the Lakers in overtime of game 1 in LA? I don't see the correlation. None of the teams in the "stacked" west could beat LA on their courts, much less in LA. Something the Sixers did.


Best scorer? How on earth does a poster like you, who understands how to measure such a term, give AI the nod as a great scorer. He is the perfect definition of a chucker. If he didn't have the foul draw rate he had, he is not even remembered.

No doubt the Sixers surrounded him with the perfect chance to win a ring. But in the end, Iverson was not the #1 guy who could take over an entire series and be efficient.

No player with a career high of 115 for an offensive rating (and that was when he wasn't even the top option), and a career rating of 105, is an elite offensive player.

Iverson basically kept shooting. Non stop. It made his per game scoring numbers pretty. But he is not #1 option material unless you put an ELITE big next to him, with the perfect combination of defenders, rebounders, and depth. Basically he needs to be on a totally stacked team.

So sure, if AI happened to be on a team with prime KG, defenders abound, a great coach, and shooters, why not?

Most overrated superstar in the last 20 years.
This one is personal. It can be compared to how you must view KG as underrated because of everything he had to do for those T-Wolves teams to be what they were.

Allen HAD to shoot with the personnel he was given in his prime. It was a difficult fit because of how he played of course, but players like Eric Snow, Tyrone Hill, and George Lynch were standout defenders but totally inept offensively. So with a heavy load of course he'll also miss a great deal of shots and lower his overall offensive ratings. An unfortunate burden.

Jarvo
12-24-2010, 11:58 PM
You damn right I Would! If Iverson had a nice big guy on his team and some much needed help *all he had was snow amd mckie* he wouldve won hella titles, He had passion and put his body on the line every game. Yeah he has a attitude problem and issues but his heart over looks all that and left EVERYTHING on the court.

Hawkeye15
12-24-2010, 11:58 PM
From the posters who say, "pair him with a great big", you do understand that that big would probably need to be #1, right?

netsgiantsyanks
12-25-2010, 12:00 AM
The Lakers lost that game because they were waiting a month for the Sixers to close out series against crappy teams.

Best scorer? How on earth does a poster like you, who understands how to measure such a term, give AI the nod as a great scorer. He is the perfect definition of a chucker. If he didn't have the foul draw rate he had, he is not even remembered.

No doubt the Sixers surrounded him with the perfect chance to win a ring. But in the end, Iverson was not the #1 guy who could take over an entire series and be efficient.

No player with a career high of 115 for an offensive rating (and that was when he wasn't even the top option), and a career rating of 105, is an elite offensive player.

Iverson basically kept shooting. Non stop. It made his per game scoring numbers pretty. But he is not #1 option material unless you put an ELITE big next to him, with the perfect combination of defenders, rebounders, and depth. Basically he needs to be on a totally stacked team.

So sure, if AI happened to be on a team with prime KG, defenders abound, a great coach, and shooters, why not?

Most overrated superstar in the last 20 years.

eric snow, todd Mccullogh and other scrubs classify as trying to surrond AI with good players??

Hawkeye15
12-25-2010, 12:00 AM
well, this one will become those who don't understand how to evaluate a chucker vs those who do.

Laters.

blacknell
12-25-2010, 12:01 AM
heck yea i would he was the best lil man in NBA history pound for pound top 5 all time. just need a center and another shooter

knickerbockerny
12-25-2010, 12:04 AM
These past couple of years and his past transgressions have made people come up with a severe case of amnesia. Allen Iverson was as dominant as a player could be from 98 all the way to about 06 or 07. His 6'0ft 165 pound just could not sustain the constant abuse and slowly shut down on him.

Now I could care less for all the advance stats one can come up with to screw his overall impact. Allen Iverson consistently took over playoffs series and advanced his teams with players like Matt Geiger starting along side him.

LTBaByyy
12-25-2010, 12:05 AM
I have no idea what I am talking about? How was Iverson's cast not good? Please explain that to me before I even bother responding. Because he had a great cast in all reality. He may not have had a guy who could score 30 every other night, but no star had better defenders around him.
Its laughable that people feel he had no support.

Point stands. If AI was the #2 option with a dominant big, and support, then sure, he could have won a ring. The OP asked if AI could be a #1 option. I don't think there is a chance really. Not in his era especially

So eric snow, aron mckey, tyrone hill, and mutombo is a great cast???

Wow, he had to score 30+ every night just to BE IN THE GAME, he had no help at all

He didnt win MVP for nothing

thekmp211
12-25-2010, 12:06 AM
How does a month break equate to the Sixers outplaying the Lakers in overtime of game 1 in LA? I don't see the correlation. None of the teams in the "stacked" west could beat LA on their courts, much less in LA. Something the Sixers did.


This one is personal. It can be compared to how you must view KG as underrated because of everything he had to do for those T-Wolves teams to be what they were.

Allen HAD to shoot with the personnel he was given in his prime. It was a difficult fit because of how he played of course, but players like Eric Snow, Tyrone Hill, and George Lynch were standout defenders but totally inept offensively. So with a heavy load of course he'll also miss a great deal of shots and lower his overall offensive ratings. An unfortunate burden.

you're missing a few key points. hawk was referring to being rusty, which is absolutely possible after doing nothing but practice for a month. but, regardless of the circumstance, it's one largely irrelevant game in the spectrum of his career. i'm fully aware of how captivated fans were during that 76ers run .... he was inspiring.

but we know better now. first of all, KG and iverson is comparing apples and oranges for a variety of reasons, but most importantly to this argument at least is the fact that KG produced incredible, hall-of-fame numbers at an incredible efficiency while largely surrounded by scrubs.

iverson fans don't seem to understand the concept of efficiency. i don't care how much he had to shoot -- he didn't do it well. lebron did it well. kobe did it well. iverson had to chuck.

as for teammates...the entire REASON he was surrounded by defenders was because he couldn't coexist with any other scorers. stack, van horn, glenn robinson, melo...never worked. so brown decided to go all-in and surround his best player with guys that complemented him perfectly, and that didn't work either.

i feel no matter what i say, iverson fans will never even ackowledge that these things are true.

edit: http://basketballreference.com/players/playerpage.htm?ilkid=IVERSAL01

the man averaged 30 ppg on 39 percent shooting!!! who does that???

PhillyFan001
12-25-2010, 12:08 AM
I have no idea what I am talking about? How was Iverson's cast not good? Please explain that to me before I even bother responding. Because he had a great cast in all reality. He may not have had a guy who could score 30 every other night, but no star had better defenders around him.
Its laughable that people feel he had no support.

Point stands. If AI was the #2 option with a dominant big, and support, then sure, he could have won a ring. The OP asked if AI could be a #1 option. I don't think there is a chance really. Not in his era especially

OK, you got me because you are right about the fact iverson had a great defending team but Iverson was a number one option that needed a big man as a number 2 option like rasheed wallace. iverson had dikembe at center and all the other guys would play their role but rasheed would have helped iverson on the offensive end a lot.

Look if Iverson had a solid number 2 option early in his career than iverson wouldn't have had to carry the load himself and would have trusted his teams more. All stars chuck up a ton of shots. Lebron is an all rounder, kobe is an all rounder, Iverson was much smaller he got points, assists, and steals. KG honestly had a better supporting cast around him and his cast suited him really well

Jarvo
12-25-2010, 12:10 AM
Damn this its off topic but I hope that Iverson comes back and get on a contenders team to win his ring, I remember wishing him and KG ended up together in Philly or Minnesota to win because they was in the same boat and had to carry they're team year in and year out. Now that KG has his come on Iverson get yours!

John Walls Era
12-25-2010, 12:11 AM
From the posters who say, "pair him with a great big", you do understand that that big would probably need to be #1, right?

Sure. I like AI as a 2nd guy. TBH, Dikembe was a very solid C to play alongside. Imagine if the 76ers had gotten CWebb 5 years earlier....

Sixerlover
12-25-2010, 12:18 AM
you're missing a few key points. hawk was referring to being rusty, which is absolutely possible after doing nothing but practice for a month. but, regardless of the circumstance, it's one largely irrelevant game in the spectrum of his career. i'm fully aware of how captivated fans were during that 76ers run .... he was inspiring.

but we know better now. first of all, KG and iverson is comparing apples and oranges for a variety of reasons, but most importantly to this argument at least is the fact that KG produced incredible, hall-of-fame numbers at an incredible efficiency while largely surrounded by scrubs.

iverson fans don't seem to understand the concept of efficiency. i don't care how much he had to shoot -- he didn't do it well. lebron did it well. kobe did it well. iverson had to chuck.

as for teammates...the entire REASON he was surrounded by defenders was because he couldn't coexist with any other scorers. stack, van horn, glenn robinson, melo...never worked. so brown decided to go all-in and surround his best player with guys that complemented him perfectly, and that didn't work either.

i feel no matter what i say, iverson fans will never even ackowledge that these things are true.

edit: http://basketballreference.com/players/playerpage.htm?ilkid=IVERSAL01

the man averaged 30 ppg on 39 percent shooting!!! who does that???
Trust me when I say I totally contradict myself when it comes to Iverson, he was efficient at all, but he was asked to do so much it was crazy. Look at his usage % throughout his career, and his minutes played. He gave his heart night in and night out, and that's why he was respected in Philly so much. Talented along with giving your all on the court.


As I said before, personal subject. I realize the facts don't support me on this one.

heatking
12-25-2010, 12:23 AM
AI would be a better option than about 90% of the league so yes i would build around him.

SA5195
12-25-2010, 12:25 AM
I'm kinda mixed in this one.

Hustlenomics
12-25-2010, 12:25 AM
Regardless if it was a "weak" east, he still led his team to the finals. And he had one of the best finals games ever to beat a team that was unbeaten up until that point.

Of course I would build around Allen. He was one of, if not the best scorer of the decade, and could guard the other teams PG. A strong defensive team behind him, with a post scorer is what he needed to flourish.

+ 1


That's because the front office didn't do a good job building a team around him, imagine if he had a good big man on his team

^^^^


You honestly need to shut the ****** up, you have to be serious, yes iverson took a ton of shots but which star doesn't. Iverson never had a strong supporting cast. Iverson had to do everything by himself. People like you make me mad because you have no idea what you are talking about.

^ thank you he does not know what the hell he's saying lmao , just talking off of blind hate


eric snow, todd Mccullogh and other scrubs classify as trying to surrond AI with good players??

lol according to him

Pens_fan_21
12-25-2010, 12:26 AM
AI as the main guy...i think a team tried that before...just can't put my finger on what team...oh well..it will come to me in time...GO 76ers!

Utahjazzfan18
12-25-2010, 12:27 AM
The Lakers lost that game because they were waiting a month for the Sixers to close out series against crappy teams.

Best scorer? How on earth does a poster like you, who understands how to measure such a term, give AI the nod as a great scorer. He is the perfect definition of a chucker. If he didn't have the foul draw rate he had, he is not even remembered.

No doubt the Sixers surrounded him with the perfect chance to win a ring. But in the end, Iverson was not the #1 guy who could take over an entire series and be efficient.

No player with a career high of 115 for an offensive rating (and that was when he wasn't even the top option), and a career rating of 105, is an elite offensive player.

Iverson basically kept shooting. Non stop. It made his per game scoring numbers pretty. But he is not #1 option material unless you put an ELITE big next to him, with the perfect combination of defenders, rebounders, and depth. Basically he needs to be on a totally stacked team.

So sure, if AI happened to be on a team with prime KG, defenders abound, a great coach, and shooters, why not?

Most overrated superstar in the last 20 years.

I agree with this whole post.

Hellcrooner
12-25-2010, 12:33 AM
Never.

And id never build a team around a Sg to be honest.

Gators123
12-25-2010, 12:36 AM
you're missing a few key points. hawk was referring to being rusty, which is absolutely possible after doing nothing but practice for a month. but, regardless of the circumstance, it's one largely irrelevant game in the spectrum of his career. i'm fully aware of how captivated fans were during that 76ers run .... he was inspiring.

but we know better now. first of all, KG and iverson is comparing apples and oranges for a variety of reasons, but most importantly to this argument at least is the fact that KG produced incredible, hall-of-fame numbers at an incredible efficiency while largely surrounded by scrubs.

iverson fans don't seem to understand the concept of efficiency. i don't care how much he had to shoot -- he didn't do it well. lebron did it well. kobe did it well. iverson had to chuck.

as for teammates...the entire REASON he was surrounded by defenders was because he couldn't coexist with any other scorers. stack, van horn, glenn robinson, melo...never worked. so brown decided to go all-in and surround his best player with guys that complemented him perfectly, and that didn't work either.

i feel no matter what i say, iverson fans will never even ackowledge that these things are true.

edit: http://basketballreference.com/players/playerpage.htm?ilkid=IVERSAL01

the man averaged 30 ppg on 39 percent shooting!!! who does that???

:speechless:

justinnum1
12-25-2010, 12:51 AM
I would never build my team around a shoot first PG, how many teams built around scoring Pg's hav won a ring? Not a good recipe for success.

Chi-Town Sports
12-25-2010, 12:57 AM
Definetly yes, by the way in my opinion who the hell cares what cast he had in Philly! The question was would YOU build your team around him so for all you who say with a great big he would flourish well its your team so your going to make it! He was one of the most talented scorers of the decade, how can you not build around a primetime performer.

dee279
12-25-2010, 12:58 AM
hell yes. I say he is the best 6 foot player the NBA has ever had.

Hustlenomics
12-25-2010, 01:02 AM
I would never build my team around a shoot first PG, how many teams built around scoring Pg's hav won a ring? Not a good recipe for success.

Isiah Thomas?

3RDASYSTEM
12-25-2010, 01:16 AM
So a guy who's 5'10 and gets Jordan Rules(tripled teamed) and was his teams scoring options #1-4 from 99-06 gets clowned for being a chucker and shooting a low FG pct and worst of all a 'overrated Superstar' and played more injured than ya fav player,and got a 'PRACTICE' segment made off him cuz he played ''INJURED'' in the ''PLAYOFF'' game not 'hurt',and last time i checked who would want to talk about a 'playoff practice' and not ''THE GAME'' after being eliminated from the playoffs like AI was saying to reporter? and also won ROY and 1st scoring title in 3rd season and league MVP in 4th or 5th season(finished 2nd in 2000 behind Shaq) and was a top 3 scorer the yr Bryant wins his 1st league MVP in 08 behind Bryant/James at the ripe age of 33 and never had a legit 1a/Robin but for only 1 full season in Melo and they were the highest scoring duo in league in 08, and just to think Shaq/Kobe had 8 seasons together with 4 Finals in 5 seasons with 3 rings and got swept twice in playoffs to Jazz/Spurs or something like that,just imagine if they would have broke up that after getting swept twice, you keep Superstar talent together at least 3-5yrs, surely not 1, i'll even give ya the other 40 games or so they played together when Melo returned from the suspension from MSG incident in 07... so 1 1/2 seasons,and before he got traded to DEN he was droppin over 31ppg
If you couldnt build a team around a once in a lifetime talent like a AI/VICK/L.JAMES/SHAQ/JORDAN/KG/GRIFFEY JR/B.SANDERS/R.MOSS then sports aint for ya
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G1Lizyp1YOI

John Walls Era
12-25-2010, 01:23 AM
Never.

And id never build a team around a Sg to be honest.

Aren't you a Lakers fan? You don't support Kobe?

Hustlenomics
12-25-2010, 01:26 AM
So a guy who's 5'10 and gets Jordan Rules(tripled teamed) and was his teams scoring options #1-4 from 99-06 gets clowned for being a chucker and shooting a low FG pct and worst of all a 'overrated Superstar' and played more injured than ya fav player,and got a 'PRACTICE' segment made off him cuz he played ''INJURED'' in the ''PLAYOFF'' game not 'hurt',and last time i checked who would want to talk about a 'playoff practice' and not ''THE GAME'' after being eliminated from the playoffs like AI was saying to reporter? and also won ROY and 1st scoring title in 3rd season and league MVP in 4th(finished 2nd in 2000 behind Shaq) and was a top 3 scorer the yr Bryant wins his 1st league MVP in 08 behind Bryant/James at the ripe age of 33 and never had a legit 1a/Robin but for only 1 full season in Melo and they were the highest scoring duo in league in 08, and just to think Shaq/Kobe had 8 seasons together with 4 Finals in 5 seasons with 3 rings and got swept twice in playoffs to Jazz/Spurs or something like that,just imagine if they would have broke up that after getting swept twice, you keep Superstar talent together at least 3-5yrs, surely not 1, i'll even give ya the other 40 games or so they played together when Melo returned from the suspension from MSG incident in 07... so 1 1/2 seasons,and before he got traded to DEN he was droppin over 31ppg
If you couldnt build a team around a once in a lifetime talent like a AI/VICK/L.JAMES/SHAQ/JORDAN/KG/GRIFFEY JR/B.SANDERS/R.MOSS then sports aint for ya
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G1Lizyp1YOI
+ 1
that clip was good , he was crazy athletic for his height

llemon
12-25-2010, 01:27 AM
No

Blazers#1Fan
12-25-2010, 01:45 AM
i would build around him but i would want another player to build with him i would want a decent Center and a All Star Power and a good SF and a Pass First SG that way he could take more shots

3RDASYSTEM
12-25-2010, 01:46 AM
No doubt HUSTLENOMICS and what made him more scarier was the skill set to match, its just his brain never caught up with his talent but he was smart player, and its only a few players who played the same style/game for yrs and its AI/FAVRE/MOSS off top and a few others im sure and i give JORDAN and B.SANDERS props for playing same style for long time but JORDAN went to post game and SANDERS retired early but was still playing same way...that clip was from 94 and they told him to ride the pine in 09 after being a top 3 scorer year before ...JORDAN is the only player i can recall off top to be 33yrs old and win scoring title, but i'd take a top 3 finish anyday behind KOBE/JAMES...am i trippin or does the media/ESPN ride the hell out of those 2 players as top dawgs in the league, so how does a top 3 scorer get relegated to bench very nxt season finishing behind those 2 ''best players on the planet''?

Blazers#1Fan
12-25-2010, 01:48 AM
hell i would take Ai now on the blazers then we could do some trading to be honest

Blazers#1Fan
12-25-2010, 01:49 AM
No doubt HUSTLENOMICS and what made him more scarier was the skill set to match, its just his brain never caught up with his talent but he was smart player, and its only a few players who played the same style/game for yrs and its AI/FAVRE/MOSS off top and a few others im sure and i give JORDAN and B.SANDERS props for playing same style for long time but JORDAN went to post game and SANDERS retired early but was still playing same way...that clip was from 94 and they told him to ride the pine in 09 after being a top 3 scorer year before ...JORDAN is the only player i can recall off top to be 33yrs old and win scoring title, but i'd take a top 3 finish anyday behind KOBE/JAMES...am i trippin or does the media/ESPN ride the hell out of those 2 players as top dawgs in the league, so how does a top 3 scorer get relegated to bench very nxt season finishing behind those 2 ''best players on the planet''?
:clap:

OaklandsFinest
12-25-2010, 01:50 AM
AI had the most heart I have seen prolly ever. When he wasn't going to be denied he was not going to lose. He was pound for pound the best player in a league full of guys a half of foot taller than him. people made a big deal about lack of practice but he showed up every night hurt and everything. He to this day has like 3 or 4 of the best playoff performances ever.

Hustlenomics
12-25-2010, 01:53 AM
No doubt HUSTLENOMICS and what made him more scarier was the skill set to match, its just his brain never caught up with his talent but he was smart player, and its only a few players who played the same style/game for yrs and its AI/FAVRE/MOSS off top and a few others im sure and i give JORDAN and B.SANDERS props for playing same style for long time but JORDAN went to post game and SANDERS retired early but was still playing same way...that clip was from 94 and they told him to ride the pine in 09 after being a top 3 scorer year before ...JORDAN is the only player i can recall off top to be 33yrs old and win scoring title, but i'd take a top 3 finish anyday behind KOBE/JAMES...am i trippin or does the media/ESPN ride the hell out of those 2 players as top dawgs in the league, so how does a top 3 scorer get relegated to bench very nxt season finishing behind those 2 ''best players on the planet''?

i still don't get that ..im guessing dude got black balled from the league lol this interview Iverson questioning it http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3h00oBDCODs

Tha Truth
12-25-2010, 01:59 AM
Duh. This guy was ridiculously talented coming into the league.

Who wouldn't build around a superstar?

3RDASYSTEM
12-25-2010, 02:07 AM
And to me this makes his Finals run even more greater because the next season his starting lineup was
2002
Corie Blount
Matt Harpring
Mutombo
Snow
Iverson

Now to those who saying he played with talent/help or watever you would like to call 'good to great' defenders and mistake'em for their offensive talent, replace AI with your fav player or any other Superstar and tell me how far would they take them,any one from DUNCAN to KOBE to DURANT to JAMES to BIRD to JORDAN to MAGIC...thats flat out disrespect to your Franchise player to give him this type of lineup after going to the Finals season before....and that Finals lineup aint too much better, jus Hill/Lynch were better defenders, and thats Tyrone,not Grant Hill

KKell2507
12-25-2010, 02:09 AM
I would in a second and not think twice about it. No one could ever find the right "guy" to put next to Iverson. All these years the guy to me who would fit perfect was KG. A dominating superstar big man who didnt dominate the ball. Give me AI and KG in their primes together and ill pick 9 new guys to fill out the roster every season and go into battle with that team.

knicks4life33
12-25-2010, 02:12 AM
Who ever said they wouldnt doesnt know anything about basketball lol iverson is prob the best little guard ever and he played with heart and you all are basing him on the past 3 years and philly didnt build around him . So yeaaaaaaaa

Hellcrooner
12-25-2010, 02:25 AM
Aren't you a Lakers fan? You don't support Kobe?
Since he is what we have i have to "support" him but im no fan of him , his personality his game or anything he does.
I wish back in 2002 when Phil told Buss to trade BOTH Kobe and Shaq they woudl have done it, they could have probably gotten back Kg , Dirk and Nash and have won 5 rings from then to now isntead of 2

Hustlenomics
12-25-2010, 02:31 AM
who ever said they wouldnt doesnt know anything about basketball lol iverson is prob the best little guard ever and he played with heart and you all are basing him on the past 3 years and philly didnt build around him . So yeaaaaaaaa

+ 1

Gators123
12-25-2010, 02:34 AM
Who ever said they wouldnt doesnt know anything about basketball lol iverson is prob the best little guard ever and he played with heart and you all are basing him on the past 3 years and philly didnt build around him . So yeaaaaaaaa

I'd take Isiah over AI.

Hellcrooner
12-25-2010, 02:37 AM
I'd take Isiah over AI.

Or Calvin Murphy or World B Free or Downtown Fred or Nate Archibald or......and so on and this is only talking bout Chuking Guards.

JLynn943
12-25-2010, 02:46 AM
Lol. I'd easily build around Iverson. Look how much better all around he played when on Denver with players with legit offensive games.

I love the argument that Iverson played on a team built to win it all in 2001 yet couldn't win. Sure they were a very good defensive team, but that's only half of the game. There wasn't a single other legitimate scoring threat on that team, yet he still took them to the Finals and shocked the Lakers in game 1.

Iverson did what he was asked to do (scoring/being the offense in Philly, balanced PG in Denver) and has been vilified for it.

mttwlsn16
12-25-2010, 02:50 AM
I honestly do not. Well, I do not think Iverson is a leader, as a scorer was excellent, but as a leader, it was not.

how can a Heat fan comment negatively about AI when u have LeQuit on your team? You guys will NEVER beat the Celtics, NEVER beat the Lakers, been better off keeping d wade and signing Chris Soft Bosh and getting a lot of role players instead of LeHomo

ChiSox219
12-25-2010, 03:19 AM
I watched (more like idolized) Iverson from the minute he entered the NBA. He was a joy to watch and an inspiration to many.

But I would not want the Bulls to build around a 6'0 SG, especially one that was not exceptionally efficient.

WeAreClutch
12-25-2010, 03:32 AM
can someone help me out, who was the second best overall player on the 76s when they made they NBA finals?

SchyGuy11
12-25-2010, 03:34 AM
no way could he ever lead a team to a title as the number one guy. never

WeAreClutch
12-25-2010, 03:37 AM
with iverson of course

NetsPaint
12-25-2010, 03:38 AM
If Iverson didn't take as many shots as he did then he might have been just your usual 20 PPG All-Star that DESPERATELY needed other players to help. He took it upon himself to go all out to try to win a championship.

You could argue it would have been better if he made plays for others more, but a lot of people might say he can't which is a load of crap, Iverson is an exceptional passer.

People thinking shooting that much means you're selfish, well then if that's the case you can say it's selfish to pass just to pass instead of trying to do what you think is best for the team.

SMH!
12-25-2010, 03:44 AM
Or Calvin Murphy or World B Free or Downtown Fred or Nate Archibald or......and so on and this is only talking bout Chuking Guards.

your ignorant, your letting your hate get in the way, I would gladly make my team around a young AI.

Hustlenomics
12-25-2010, 03:45 AM
I watched (more like idolized) Iverson from the minute he entered the NBA. He was a joy to watch and an inspiration to many.

But I would not want the Bulls to build around a 6'0 SG, especially one that was not exceptionally efficient.

wait who's the bulls franchise player right now? lololol

AFlagRules
12-25-2010, 04:09 AM
Obviously :)

Giants-49ers-Ws
12-25-2010, 04:21 AM
as much as i loved AI when he was younger and was my favorite player in NBA..I'm not sure I would...its very risky to build around that small of a guard who doesn't even play point..to give him the benefit of the doubt, he never had any supporting cast what so ever when he was in his prime..

ChiSox219
12-25-2010, 04:24 AM
wait who's the bulls franchise player right now? lololol

:facepalm:

6'3 true PG with better scoring efficiency than Allen Iverson...

SeoulBeatz
12-25-2010, 04:57 AM
Of course i would.

The talent speaks for itself.... some of you forgot how amazing this guy really was....

you guys need to wake-up!

http://video.yahoo.com/watch/4569385/12234685

he was one of a kind in his prime.

kobe24>lebron23
12-25-2010, 05:04 AM
This thread has to be a joke, If Iverson had shaq and kobe didn't, I really wonder how many championships iverson would have. I think you people forget how great iverson was because of how far he has fallen. The only problem iverson had was that he never reinvented himself into a shooter/ passer later in his career or he would be still be playing at high level like kobe. Iverson took a beating in the lane plus his speed diminished as he got older.

So your comparing Kobe with iverson?:confused: IMO Kobe and shaq complimented each other perfectly idk if they would have won with iverson well atleast not 3-peat I think AI just like Kobe has a big ego so I don't think shaq and AI would have gotten along especially AI cuz AI had a much bigger ego then Kobe during those three championship winning seasons!

cargobox
12-25-2010, 05:04 AM
no way could he ever lead a team to a title as the number one guy. never

if he lead his team to the finals with a bunch of scrubs, why can't he lead his team to a championship if he had support? hm :eyebrow:

DoJoTheSlasher
12-25-2010, 05:15 AM
Yes. Dude could drop 40 on any given night.

MTar786
12-25-2010, 05:20 AM
as long as my other star is d12.. he would be the perfect compliment

SeoulBeatz
12-25-2010, 05:27 AM
Of course i would.

The talent speaks for itself.... some of you forgot how amazing this guy really was....

you guys need to wake-up! gotta watch this

http://video.yahoo.com/watch/4569385/12234685

he was one of a kind in his prime.

fixed link

JayW_1023
12-25-2010, 05:37 AM
Nope.

Blazers#1Fan
12-25-2010, 05:51 AM
Shaq & AI would of been deadly in there primes even more then Kobe or Wade

Mcdoh
12-25-2010, 06:09 AM
yup i would build my team around him.. and have a support big man.. too bad he didnt get a another chance to play in the NBA this season..

kblo247
12-25-2010, 07:00 AM
Shaq & AI would of been deadly in there primes even more then Kobe or Wade

Yeah because AI would have destroyed the Blazers, Kings, Suns, and Spurs religiously every series that they played. He would have facilitated the offense primarily and toned down his own shooting to get the ball to Shaq, while not losing enough of his rhythm to turn it on and close games. He would have defended the best perimeter player be they a PG, SG, or SF one on one every night. And he would have taken Phil riding him constantly and forcing him to practice and build cohesion with his teammates and other options

To answer the OP's question bluntly HELL NO.

5 Reasons why not

AI was a chucker and a very inefficient one who really only excelled at creating fouls.
AI could not defend.
AI did not like to practice or put in the time and effort to build any cohesion with any secondary option that the team brought in. Due to the fact he didn't value practice he never clicked with guys like Stackhouse, KVH, Hughes, Robinson, Kukoc, and Webber because he was above it as long as his speed was second to none.
AI did not fit any system as he liked to be the system, which would bring problems. Coaches would have to have a world of patience to deal with him, and there is only one whoever really got through that thick skill for a prolonged time.
AI's ego isn't what you want in a locker room for a prolonged time. He played hard, but he said and did all the wrong things for a long time and still has the problem to the point he can't get a deal in the league where Chris Quinn and Chris Duhon are getting contracts.


Oh an to those saying, look at Denver and what AI did there and how he fit in. The guy chucked away Denver's chances against San Antonio by shooting 114 shots in 5 games and only making 39% of them. He went to the playoffs the next year and did nothing to help his team even win a game versus LA, not dominate with his scoring or even make plays as his assists and points averages both went down.

AI wasn't the guard equivalent of a young Shaq who you just ignore his attitude, baggage, and cancerous nature for because he helped teams win. He was just a guard who only knew how to fell it up but couldn't help any team win (it took almost being traded to get his *** to act right for that finals run btw)

Raidaz4Life
12-25-2010, 07:05 AM
Nope and I wouldn't even think about it. He is just not a good "team" player.

MTar786
12-25-2010, 07:12 AM
ai would win if this was his team

pg: AI (prime)
sg: shane battier
sf: trevor ariza
pf: boozer
c: dwight

:)

THE MTL
12-25-2010, 08:48 AM
People are really blinded but his recent years. Seriously, I can tell the majority of the posters here like 13-15. Iverson is a legend. He led the Sixers to the Finals on his back! He never did have a team built around him.

I would have love to see him get a quality big man who can score in the paint. A couple of shooters and see how much rings he could have won.

People talk about KObe this and that. Kobe had SHAQ ppl. Give Allen Iverson, Shaq and watch them rape the league.

JayW_1023
12-25-2010, 09:19 AM
The East was an embarrassment those days, and the Sixers had some elite defenders around AI who didn't need the ball in their hands.

JordansBulls
12-25-2010, 10:34 AM
no way could he ever lead a team to a title as the number one guy. never

Not many guys could, it doesnt mean you wouldn't build around them though.

alexander_37
12-25-2010, 10:39 AM
Probably the best scorer of the last 2 decades next to MJ .... obv?

Sadds The Gr8
12-25-2010, 11:51 AM
he's disgusting but I don't want my PG scoring 30+ ppg, or a 6"0 SG. Not gonna win too often with those.

Hustlenomics
12-25-2010, 12:51 PM
:facepalm:

6'3 true PG with better scoring efficiency than Allen Iverson...

lol

JordansBulls
12-25-2010, 02:02 PM
wait who's the bulls franchise player right now? lololol

Huh???

ChiSox219
12-25-2010, 02:02 PM
wait who's the bulls franchise player right now? lololol


lol

grow up

Hustlenomics
12-25-2010, 02:18 PM
Huh???

Rose fit the description the poster used minus 3 inches

ChiSox219
12-25-2010, 02:25 PM
Rose fit the description the poster used minus 3 inches

Rose is bigger, faster and stronger than Iverson ever was.

Rose sets up his teammates at a higher rate while turning the ball over at a lower rate. (you'd think a knick fan would know this after seeing Rose drop 14 dimes on 'em earlier this year)

Rose scores at a more efficient rate.

Rose is a much better mid-range and long distance shooter.




Both had to carry immense loads from the start of their career, if you want a similarity.

AIRMAR72
12-25-2010, 02:30 PM
NOPE!! even though he helped getting them to the finals against lakers he the main reason why they lost

KmB728
12-25-2010, 02:31 PM
Of course I would! He was one of my favorite players to watch when he was in his prime days on the 76ers

Hustlenomics
12-25-2010, 02:39 PM
Rose is bigger, faster and stronger than Iverson ever was.

Rose sets up his teammates at a higher rate while turning the ball over at a lower rate. (you'd think a knick fan would know this after seeing Rose drop 14 dimes on 'em earlier this year)

Rose scores at a more efficient rate.

Rose is a much better mid-range and long distance shooter.




Both had to carry immense loads from the start of their career, if you want a similarity.

no way in hell was he faster than iverson, and Iverson averaged more assists than Rose and he DEFINITELY had a better mid range game c'mon he'd drop like 40 any night off his jumper and who's the knick fan?

llemon
12-25-2010, 02:46 PM
how can a Heat fan comment negatively about AI when u have LeQuit on your team? You guys will NEVER beat the Celtics, NEVER beat the Lakers, been better off keeping d wade and signing Chris Soft Bosh and getting a lot of role players instead of LeHomo

WOW!!!! A little AI-sensitive, ain'tcha?

LakeShowRaider
12-25-2010, 02:48 PM
Hell yes!

All you people saying no must have either never seen him play or you're just hating on him

llemon
12-25-2010, 02:51 PM
can someone help me out, who was the second best overall player on the 76s when they made they NBA finals?

The second best player got traded after he got injured. Theo Ratliff.

But that team was built on defense, which would allow for Iverson's selfish play.

Hawkeye15
12-25-2010, 03:16 PM
no way in hell was he faster than iverson, and Iverson averaged more assists than Rose and he DEFINITELY had a better mid range game c'mon he'd drop like 40 any night off his jumper and who's the knick fan?

please go look up Iverson versus Rose on mid range and long 2's. It will alarm your eyes, since that is all you ever use

PippensBulls
12-25-2010, 03:17 PM
I think if the Lakers did not have Shaq in '01, or if someone else came out from the West, the Sixers would have had a better shot in winning it all.

Hawkeye15
12-25-2010, 03:19 PM
OK, you got me because you are right about the fact iverson had a great defending team but Iverson was a number one option that needed a big man as a number 2 option like rasheed wallace. iverson had dikembe at center and all the other guys would play their role but rasheed would have helped iverson on the offensive end a lot.

Look if Iverson had a solid number 2 option early in his career than iverson wouldn't have had to carry the load himself and would have trusted his teams more. All stars chuck up a ton of shots. Lebron is an all rounder, kobe is an all rounder, Iverson was much smaller he got points, assists, and steals. KG honestly had a better supporting cast around him and his cast suited him really well


here is where you and I agree yet still differ. Iverson would have been a great #2 option. That I have no doubt.
But scoring 30 a night on under 40% shooting is horrid. It is the pure case of chucking till ya get it right. He had some value, no doubt. Put his advanced numbers don't even compare to the real superstars. A career offensive rating of 105 is not anything remotely close to a superstar. He just shot. A LOT

Hawkeye15
12-25-2010, 03:26 PM
Trust me when I say I totally contradict myself when it comes to Iverson, he was efficient at all, but he was asked to do so much it was crazy. Look at his usage % throughout his career, and his minutes played. He gave his heart night in and night out, and that's why he was respected in Philly so much. Talented along with giving your all on the court.


As I said before, personal subject. I realize the facts don't support me on this one.

I know dude, which is why I won't push this subject with you. You love AI, I know this, so you won't post in your normal rational fashion.
We all watched AI. He was inspiring, and captivating. He made plays that would make you jump out of your seat.

But the fact is, Iverson was never able to be next to another #1-2 option, because of his own selfishness. The Sixers did a GREAT job of giving him the only equation around him that would offer up a lot of wins.

Nobody questions his heart. We just question the fact that he was honestly nothing more than a shoot first, second, third, and fourth type player.

Hustlenomics
12-25-2010, 03:28 PM
please go look up Iverson versus Rose on mid range and long 2's. It will alarm your eyes, since that is all you ever use

Rose doesn't get doubled or tripled like Iverson did ..if they had a midrange shooting contest i put all my money on iverson winning.. get me the stats for their midrange jumpers on open attempts


here is where you and I agree yet still differ. Iverson would have been a great #2 option. That I have no doubt.
But scoring 30 a night on under 40% shooting is horrid. It is the pure case of chucking till ya get it right. He had some value, no doubt. Put his advanced numbers don't even compare to the real superstars. A career offensive rating of 105 is not anything remotely close to a superstar. He just shot. A LOT

he shot 43 % for his career :(

Hawkeye15
12-25-2010, 03:30 PM
wait who's the bulls franchise player right now? lololol

a 4"+ (I have seen AI up close. 6' my ***), more athletic, better shooting PG.
At least I think you are referring to Rose. 21 years old...

Hawkeye15
12-25-2010, 03:35 PM
Rose doesn't get doubled or tripled like Iverson did ..if they had a midrange shooting contest i put all my money on iverson winning.. get me the stats for their midrange jumpers on open attempts



he shot 43 % for his career :(

In 01-02', he shot 39% on 30 a night. I was referring to a single year. Sorry I didn't make it clear. A career eFG% of 45%, with an offensive rating of 105 and that usage????? Eeck. That is pathetic dude.

And what are you talking about with the triple team? I don't think anyone was triple teaming Iverson dude (I watched so many of his games its not even funny).

But sure, go to hoopdata.com, and look up their various ranges and percentages. I don't feel the need to look it up and post something you will disregard.

Westbrook36
12-25-2010, 03:48 PM
In 01-02', he shot 39% on 30 a night. I was referring to a single year. Sorry I didn't make it clear. A career eFG% of 45%, with an offensive rating of 105 and that usage????? Eeck. That is pathetic dude.

And what are you talking about with the triple team? I don't think anyone was triple teaming Iverson dude (I watched so many of his games its not even funny).

But sure, go to hoopdata.com, and look up their various ranges and percentages. I don't feel the need to look it up and post something you will disregard.

The whole advanced statistics are pretty skewed actually when talking about Allen Iverson. I've seen you post quite a bit in my time in the NBA Fourm (Where i've posted less for various reasons) and you love these advanced numbers. I suppose you could say I'm against them cause I can't stand how some people only use these numbers to prove anything. Do these numbers take into account the double teams and how Allen Iverson literally had to put the team on his back?

All these numbers mean nothing either if you are talking about Allen Iverson being 21 years old. I'm 99% sure he would have ended up a different type of player if he hadn't been forced to be the man from the start. Of course he was going to be a scorer, but with more parts around him he would have been different. While of course, i'll hear about how he didn't do that with the Nuggets. That's like a 60 year old trying to learn spanish, it's always easier when you are younger. That's why saying, "This team should have drafted this player instead of him," doesn't always work, different coaching and surroundings have a lot to do with the way the player turns out.

MTar786
12-25-2010, 03:59 PM
I know dude, which is why I won't push this subject with you. You love AI, I know this, so you won't post in your normal rational fashion.
We all watched AI. He was inspiring, and captivating. He made plays that would make you jump out of your seat.

But the fact is, Iverson was never able to be next to another #1-2 option, because of his own selfishness. The Sixers did a GREAT job of giving him the only equation around him that would offer up a lot of wins.

Nobody questions his heart. We just question the fact that he was honestly nothing more than a shoot first, second, third, and fourth type player.

they could have done a lot better. eric snow? tyrone hill? u guys ***** about lebron not ever having any help on the cavs yet iverson had WAYYYYYY less backup and yes, that cleveland team had a lot of backup imo and was built around lebron to the best potential. iverson didnt have a good team.. stop kidding ur self.

llemon
12-25-2010, 04:28 PM
they could have done a lot better. eric snow? tyrone hill? u guys *****

Those player were chosen by Larry Brown in order to get Iverson to the Finals. They played great defense to make up for Iverson's terrible defense, and were limited offensively so that Iverson could shoot and shoot and shoot.

Hawkeye15
12-25-2010, 04:41 PM
The whole advanced statistics are pretty skewed actually when talking about Allen Iverson. I've seen you post quite a bit in my time in the NBA Fourm (Where i've posted less for various reasons) and you love these advanced numbers. I suppose you could say I'm against them cause I can't stand how some people only use these numbers to prove anything. Do these numbers take into account the double teams and how Allen Iverson literally had to put the team on his back?

All these numbers mean nothing either if you are talking about Allen Iverson being 21 years old. I'm 99% sure he would have ended up a different type of player if he hadn't been forced to be the man from the start. Of course he was going to be a scorer, but with more parts around him he would have been different. While of course, i'll hear about how he didn't do that with the Nuggets. That's like a 60 year old trying to learn spanish, it's always easier when you are younger. That's why saying, "This team should have drafted this player instead of him," doesn't always work, different coaching and surroundings have a lot to do with the way the player turns out.

see, this is what irks me. Not only can I tell you with my eye that Iverson was a chucker, but when I show statistically he was indeed a chucker, posters like yourself use a player like Iverson, to attempt to blow off the proof.

LeBron, Kobe in the mid 2000's, and many other stars have also had to "carry" teams on their back. But they were so much more efficient its laughable.

Look, as I have said, everyone likes Iverson, and likes watching him play. But when you peel back the layers of his game, and examine his numbers, they show us a high minute per game player who just kept letting it rip, despite poor percentages. Really no arguing that.

Hawkeye15
12-25-2010, 04:44 PM
they could have done a lot better. eric snow? tyrone hill? u guys ***** about lebron not ever having any help on the cavs yet iverson had WAYYYYYY less backup and yes, that cleveland team had a lot of backup imo and was built around lebron to the best potential. iverson didnt have a good team.. stop kidding ur self.

but Iverson SHOWED that when you put a good/great scorer next to him, it doesn't work.
And there is a lot of youth on this site. So many underrate the defensive ability and dominance of that team, and the ability of his teammates to play different positions, and score when needed.

Iverson defenders literally have nothing to use as concrete defense of his selfish game. If you watched him at GTown, you knew what was coming.

Hustlenomics
12-25-2010, 04:46 PM
see, this is what irks me. Not only can I tell you with my eye that Iverson was a chucker, but when I show statistically he was indeed a chucker, posters like yourself use a player like Iverson, to attempt to blow off the proof.

LeBron, Kobe in the mid 2000's, and many other stars have also had to "carry" teams on their back. But they were so much more efficient its laughable.

Look, as I have said, everyone likes Iverson, and likes watching him play. But when you peel back the layers of his game, and examine his numbers, they show us a high minute per game player who just kept letting it rip, despite poor percentages. Really no arguing that.

He took alot of shots because he had zero help offensively..when he was with Denver his shot attempts with down same with detroit and his second stint with philly..and Lebron and Kobe are like 7 inches taller than him c'mon i'd hope they could make shots at a higher percentage and Kobe is definitely a chucker Lmao look at game 7 holy **** ..and advanced statistics don't show the whole truth like how many shots he'd take double teamed, with the shot clock winding down, with the game winding down, when he got knocked down with no call, when he took jumpers with contact yet no call etc.

Hawkeye15
12-25-2010, 04:47 PM
Those player were chosen by Larry Brown in order to get Iverson to the Finals. They played great defense to make up for Iverson's terrible defense, and were limited offensively so that Iverson could shoot and shoot and shoot.

pretty much dude. At that time, any coach in the east knew if they could just put together a team around a player like Iverson, they could go through the pathetic east, and at least have a sliver of a chance. They didn't build that team to compete for years. They built it to take advantage of a situational era of the weakest conference I can remember. The Sixers would have been lucky to make the playoffs out west those years.

Hawkeye15
12-25-2010, 04:50 PM
He took alot of shots because he had zero help offensively..when he was with Denver his shot attempts with down same with detroit and his second stint with philly..and Lebron and Kobe are like 7 inches taller than him c'mon i'd hope they could make shots at a higher percentage and Kobe is definitely a chucker Lmao look at game 7 holy **** ..and advanced statistics don't show the whole truth like how many shots he'd take double teamed, with the shot clock winding down, with the game winding down, when he got knocked down with no call, when he took jumpers with contact yet no call etc.

and whose fault is that? Iverson has never been able to co-exist with another player who needs shots.
Advanced statistics don't show everyone what you think, therefore you disagree. I am still laughing at how much attention you think he got.

Gee, no star is put in situations where they need to hoist a shot to beat the clock, or put in positions where they need to get their team a bucket under any circumstances, right?

You bet they are. And the real superstars do it at a better clip than 43% (since you like the archaic numbers, I will use them for you).

Was Iverson a star? Sure. Was he a player you can build a championship contender around, as the OP asked? Not a chance.

Hustlenomics
12-25-2010, 04:54 PM
and whose fault is that? Iverson has never been able to co-exist with another player who needs shots.
Advanced statistics don't show everyone what you think, therefore you disagree. I am still laughing at how much attention you think he got.

Gee, no star is put in situations where they need to hoist a shot to beat the clock, or put in positions where they need to get their team a bucket under any circumstances, right?

You bet they are. And the real superstars do it at a better clip than 43% (since you like the archaic numbers, I will use them for you).

Was Iverson a star? Sure. Was he a player you can build a championship contender around, as the OP asked? Not a chance.
the gm man not his fault his team sucked his teammates did praise his efforts though, and every defense would try to adjust their whole gameplan to stop Iverson everyone knew that going into games the commentators said it the opposing teams said it yet he was able to score plenty and win games

Bruno
12-25-2010, 04:59 PM
HELL YEAH! just because he sucked recently doesnt mean he sucked before. ai in his prime is better than wade in his prime. yes wade has a championship ring and a finals mvp but he had shaq. ai had noone else to score. if ai had someone like shaq he would of won atleast a championship.

and to hawkeye so what? its not iverson's fault that the east is weak. and doesnt matter because thats what the nba is. then base on your argument then pierce sucks cuz his team didnt get through the weak east. same with VC's raptors, miller's pacers, kidd's nets, etc.

hell atleast iverson in his prime led his team to more playoffs and better records than KG in his prime. :rolleyes:

I'd say that a prime DWade is better than a prime Iverson.

Millers Pacers and Kidds Nets did get through the east. The Pacers went to the finals in 2000 and the Nets made it to the finals in 2002 and 2003.

If you check advanced stats, AI's playoffs numbers don't come close to KGs. He might have gotten his team one round further in 2001 than KG did in 2004, but the west was the tougher road.

llemon
12-25-2010, 05:08 PM
the gm man not his fault his team sucked his teammates did praise his efforts though, and every defense would try to adjust their whole gameplan to stop Iverson everyone knew that going into games the commentators said it the opposing teams said it yet he was able to score plenty and win games

Give it up, pal.

Sounds like you're trying to convince yourself.

NetsPaint
12-25-2010, 05:40 PM
How many "efficient" guards could have did what Iverson did with those teams? Not a lot, but I'm sure everybody will list off Westbrook and Rose as better players (I like them, but this guard ratings is ridiculous the last couple or so years).

llemon
12-25-2010, 05:52 PM
How many "efficient" guards could have did what Iverson did with those teams? Not a lot, but I'm sure everybody will list off Westbrook and Rose as better players (I like them, but this guard ratings is ridiculous the last couple or so years).

No NBA team would INTENTIONALLY build a team like that around any other player than Iverson.

It's funny. Larry Brown builds the only type of team that can get Iverson to the Finals, and then Iverson fans complain about that team.

NetsPaint
12-25-2010, 07:12 PM
No NBA team would INTENTIONALLY build a team like that around any other player than Iverson.

It's funny. Larry Brown builds the only type of team that can get Iverson to the Finals, and then Iverson fans complain about that team.
Actually I give credit to his teammates to giving him the defensive help, but he was the only one to really lead them to wins on the other end. Iverson wasn't taking shots from a good scorer. His FG% shouldn't be looked at as it is by a lot of people.

And as far as the FT argument, he's great around the rim so that's why he got to the line so much. His FG% for his career might be higher if it wasn't for that.

llemon
12-25-2010, 07:21 PM
Actually I give credit to his teammates to giving him the defensive help, but he was the only one to really lead them to wins on the other end. Iverson wasn't taking shots from a good scorer.

Again, that was the point of the team being assembled that way.

However, players that are team leaders show up and show up on time for practice.

JordansBulls
12-25-2010, 09:39 PM
Again, that was the point of the team being assembled that way.

However, players that are team leaders show up and show up on time for practice.

Sadly that is the truth

bagwell368
12-25-2010, 10:43 PM
Poison on and off the floor.

Guards unless they are named Jordan or Bryant do not win consistently as the #1 player on a team, and they both needed very high level support players to do it.

What's my other choice(s)?

Jewelz0376
12-25-2010, 11:16 PM
Yup I would...you don't finish with a top 5 scoring average in the nba with all the players that have played this game being a "overrated superstar" or any of the other bs I've heard him called in this thread... There would need to be a big man with him in order to win because you don't win titles in this league unless you got a good big man...The best bigman AI has ever played with is Mutombo and looked what happened that year...

HuRRiCaNeS324
12-25-2010, 11:36 PM
AI was my favorite players growing up. He actually inspired me to like basketball tbh. I ****ing love Iverson.

So yes, i would definitely start a franchise with him at age 21. AI's single handedly led his team to the Finals. Put one or two good players around him that fit, and thats all you need.

llemon
12-25-2010, 11:50 PM
Yup I would...you don't finish with a top 5 scoring average in the nba with all the players that have played this game being a "overrated superstar" or any of the other bs I've heard him called in this thread... There would need to be a big man with him in order to win because you don't win titles in this league unless you got a good big man...The best bigman AI has ever played with is Mutombo and looked what happened that year...

Actually, best bigman AI played with was Theo Ratliff.

But let's not quibble about who killed who.

Jewelz0376
12-26-2010, 12:03 AM
Actually, best bigman AI played with was Theo Ratliff.

But let's not quibble about who killed who.

:laugh:

You think Ratliff was better than Mutumbo?? lol.. Mutumbo won dpoy of the year with AI...Mutumbo was def better than Ratlif...(which is why they traded Ratliff FOR Mutumbo)

Lucky Junior
12-26-2010, 12:32 AM
maybe it's just me, but I think that Iverson is one of the top 20 players of ALL TIME! He pass the numbers test, and the eye test with flying colors. People say he's not a leader, but when have you ever heard a teammate say that? I honestly think he specifically would of benefitted from having a black coach, or maybe a Phil Jackson. Aside from his team not winning that much, one of those Nash mvps should of been Iverson's. 30 points, top 5 in steals, and 7 assist a game, passing it to the the Korvers of the world is an amazing year. I think if they'd of just kept him at PG his whole career, he'd of went down as probably the second best pg ever!

If I was the Celtics GM, and Iverson was coming into the league right now I'd trade Rondo for him (I might package it because Rondo's value is perceived so high). What talent did Rondo have his first year that Iverson didn't have? NONE!

llemon
12-26-2010, 01:12 AM
:laugh:

You think Ratliff was better than Mutumbo?? lol.. Mutumbo won dpoy of the year with AI...Mutumbo was def better than Ratlif...(which is why they traded Ratliff FOR Mutumbo)

LOL. They traded Ratliff for Mutombo because Ratliff got injured and Mutombo wanted a new contract that Hawks weren't going to give him.

Sixers were 36-14 with Ratliff, won the next 5 games with Ratliff out, then traded for Mutumbo, and finishe 15-12 over the last 27 games.

Theo fit the Sixers offense/defense perfectly. Deke slowed them down considerably.

Mutombo lasted one more season with the Sixers, then was traded to the Nets for KVH.

Byronicle
12-26-2010, 01:30 AM
to me the offense looks pretty ugly when its runned by a shoot first pg so I would have to say no, i would not build around him but I definitely would've drafted him and traded him during the draft since he was definitely going to be the 1st pick overall and I am sure many teams wanted him at the time

Byronicle
12-26-2010, 01:31 AM
his whole "im a thuglyfe" mentality is a real turnoff, and an obvious sign of immaturity

PrettyBoyJ
12-26-2010, 01:42 AM
A.I. with a good big man would have done some damage in the East.. but A.I. never had a 2nd option he was 1st and 2nd and prob 3rd option.. He carried that sixers team on his back..

PHX2daDEATH
12-26-2010, 02:34 AM
ts been argued that you could lump McGrady, Iverson, Carter, Ray Allen together.. put them alongside Duncan or Shaq and they'd have 3 or 4 titles by now also.. The best player Iverson ever played with was a shot blocker and rebounder. Philly passed up Paul Pierce for Larry freaking hughes.. Dikembe, Pierce, Iverson..lets say they go out and get some better role players on that team and yeah they might win a championship.. Ive been trying to find the details of the 14 player trade in 2000 that failed, when AI woulda went to the Pistons.. my point is if you put AI Next to a big man and an all-star wing player.. you would compete for titles.. but you would also need a good coach to balance the that out

JordansBulls
12-26-2010, 10:35 AM
Actually, best bigman AI played with was Theo Ratliff.

But let's not quibble about who killed who.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/PHI/2001.html

Deke led the team in Win Shares in the playoffs that year.

JayW_1023
12-26-2010, 01:38 PM
Iverson fans make out the one season he led his team to the finals in 2001 in that pathetic Eastern conference to state their case. Even Allan Houston led a depleted Knicks team to the finals..despite an injured Ewing.

But meanwhile they stay mum on each time his team underachieved and failed to make even the postseason...which was more often than not.

Jason Kidd in his prime was way better.

llemon
12-26-2010, 01:58 PM
http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/PHI/2001.html

Deke led the team in Win Shares in the playoffs that year.

Don't know what that means, but Sixers were 12-11 in the '01 playoffs

KingOf215
12-26-2010, 03:33 PM
Yes.

The Sixers surrounded him with bums, and he still took them to the finals and beat arguably the best 1-2 punch in NBA history in game 1.

Hawkeye15
12-26-2010, 03:33 PM
Don't know what that means, but Sixers were 12-11 in the '01 playoffs

it simply means Deke's statistical production and efficiency were better than AIs that year.

llemon
12-26-2010, 03:40 PM
it simply means Deke's statistical production and efficiency were better than AIs that year.

He said in the playoffs, and we were comparing Theo and Deke. Theo wasn't in the playoffs.

And Theo (healthy, naturally) was a much better fit with that Sixer team than Deke was.

llemon
12-26-2010, 03:44 PM
Yes.

The Sixers surrounded him with bums, and he still took them to the finals and beat arguably the best 1-2 punch in NBA history in game 1.

No, those bums took Iverson to the Finals.

And Pacers beat that 1-2 punch twice the in the Finals the season before.

Hawkeye15
12-26-2010, 04:08 PM
He said in the playoffs, and we were comparing Theo and Deke. Theo wasn't in the playoffs.

And Theo (healthy, naturally) was a much better fit with that Sixer team than Deke was.

no, that link shows that in the Sixers finals run playoffs, Deke statistically contributed to more wins than Iverson.

And I agree with your second statement to a degree. A player like Deke kind of fits any team, but Theo was a great fit there

210Don
12-26-2010, 04:13 PM
i cant beleive so many people picked yes. lmao guess they dont wanna win championships.

DeyAce
12-26-2010, 04:23 PM
put talent around him and then hell yes

Jewelz0376
12-26-2010, 04:40 PM
LOL. They traded Ratliff for Mutombo because Ratliff got injured and Mutombo wanted a new contract that Hawks weren't going to give him.

Sixers were 36-14 with Ratliff, won the next 5 games with Ratliff out, then traded for Mutumbo, and finishe 15-12 over the last 27 games.

Theo fit the Sixers offense/defense perfectly. Deke slowed them down considerably.

Mutombo lasted one more season with the Sixers, then was traded to the Nets for KVH.

How they finished the regular season has no relevance considering what they did in the playoffs...
Mutumbo was the dpoy AND 2nd team all-nba that season...Face it Mutumbo was better..

The only big man AI has ever played with that was on an All-Nba team was that season...not any season with Ratliff lol..so like I said before Mutumbo was the best big man AI played with

ewing
12-26-2010, 04:42 PM
He said in the playoffs, and we were comparing Theo and Deke. Theo wasn't in the playoffs.

And Theo (healthy, naturally) was a much better fit with that Sixer team than Deke was.


How so? Deke was as good a shot blocker, as good a scorer, a much better rebounder, a better one on one defender, and imo just a better basketball player.

Jewelz0376
12-26-2010, 04:50 PM
But meanwhile they stay mum on each time his team underachieved and failed to make even the postseason...which was more often than not.


Please tell me which sixer team he was on that underachieved?? hahaha

llemon
12-26-2010, 05:19 PM
How they finished the regular season has no relevance considering what they did in the playoffs...
Mutumbo was the dpoy AND 2nd team all-nba that season...Face it Mutumbo was better..

The only big man AI has ever played with that was on an All-Nba team was that season...not any season with Ratliff lol..so like I said before Mutumbo was the best big man AI played with

Hey, you can say what you want. But while Ratliff was healthy in the '00-'01 season, Sixers had the best record in the league. After winning 5 games in a row without Ratliff or Deke, the Sixers finished the season 15-12, then went 12-11 in the playoffs, making the Finals because Vince Carter and Glenn Robinson miss series-ending wide open jumpers.

Of course, I'm not saying Deke isn't the better Center career-wise, but Theo fit that Sixers team to a tee, although I must admit that with Theo at Center, Sixers may not have won that one Finals game.

Sly Guy
12-26-2010, 06:34 PM
This thread has to be a joke, If Iverson had shaq and kobe didn't, I really wonder how many championships iverson would have. I think you people forget how great iverson was because of how far he has fallen. The only problem iverson had was that he never reinvented himself into a shooter/ passer later in his career or he would be still be playing at high level like kobe. Iverson took a beating in the lane plus his speed diminished as he got older.

I agree. Team AI up with a beast down low, and any joe who can play a natural PG [derek fisher], and they'd have 3-4 rings.

llemon
12-26-2010, 07:03 PM
I agree. Team AI up with a beast down low, and any joe who can play a natural PG [derek fisher], and they'd have 3-4 rings.

That's pretty funny.

JordansBulls
12-26-2010, 07:29 PM
it simply means Deke's statistical production and efficiency were better than AIs that year.

This

ewing
12-26-2010, 07:34 PM
LOL. They traded Ratliff for Mutombo because Ratliff got injured and Mutombo wanted a new contract that Hawks weren't going to give him.

Sixers were 36-14 with Ratliff, won the next 5 games with Ratliff out, then traded for Mutumbo, and finishe 15-12 over the last 27 games.

Theo fit the Sixers offense/defense perfectly. Deke slowed them down considerably.

Mutombo lasted one more season with the Sixers, then was traded to the Nets for KVH.



Interesting theroy. I dont remember those sixers running much in fact most of there offensive consisted of clearing a side and letting AI work as far as I can remember. I like it if you could explain slowing them down. The win loss records are interesting but could also account for an adjustment period.


Theo defintely changed end better and could cover more ground on D. But in a 1/2 court game where i'm running iso's all the time on offensive i think on paper Deke is the better chioce on paper.

topdog
12-26-2010, 07:35 PM
Too small and ball dominant as well as a poor defender. I'll take my chances on the lottery.

llemon
12-26-2010, 07:58 PM
How so? Deke was as good a shot blocker, as good a scorer, a much better rebounder, a better one on one defender, and imo just a better basketball player.

Geez, I don't know. Why was Deke such a bad fit on the Nets that he got benched and got many 'DNP-Coach's Decision', and Byron decided to let Jason Collins start?

But the answer to your question is Deke just slowed the Sixers down. Ratliff would block a shot, and then be down the floor quick enough to finish the break.

And the Sixers depended on team defense, not man-to-man defense.

To me, there is no question Theo (healthy) was the better fit on that team.

And, of course, the clincher was that Deke only spent one more season on Sixers. Celtics pick-and-rolled Deke to death in the '02 1st rd, and took them in 5. Deke was then sent to the Nets for an injured Todd Mac & KVH.

smith&wesson
12-26-2010, 08:01 PM
I would def do it.

ppl forget how good iverson was when he was younger, infact he was solid right up till when he got traded from denver. did you guys know he averaged 24 points 7 assists in denver playing along side melo.

any ways if iverson was 21 right now, replace baron davis with him on the clippers and i think the clippers would be really really good.

Bring The Heat
12-26-2010, 08:07 PM
Have respect for AI and he was a great scorer... but does that actually translate into being a great overall player?

AI seemed to me like he just wanted to get points and stats and not get his teammates involved.. Someone explain to me this...


AI plays in denver( good team) with carmelo anthony who is a top 5 player.... How come they never get out of the first round but as soon as denver trades him for Chauncey Billups.. They end up becoming a great team and get to the western conference finals and actually almost beat the Lakers?

That to me tells me AI is just a good individual player but not someone who can lead his team and make them better..

llemon
12-26-2010, 08:13 PM
I would def do it.

ppl forget how good iverson was when he was younger, infact he was solid right up till when he got traded from denver. did you guys know he averaged 24 points 7 assists in denver playing along side melo.

any ways if iverson was 21 right now, replace baron davis with him on the clippers. and i think the clippers would be really really good.

You know not of what you speak.

Can you imagine how the rest of the players would come down on Del Negro for letting Iverson get away with all those infractions?

And how well did that Iverson/'Melo thing work out?

Jewelz0376
12-26-2010, 08:59 PM
Geez, I don't know. Why was Deke such a bad fit on the Nets that he got benched and got many 'DNP-Coach's Decision', and Byron decided to let Jason Collins start?

But the answer to your question is Deke just slowed the Sixers down. Ratliff would block a shot, and then be down the floor quick enough to finish the break.

And the Sixers depended on team defense, not man-to-man defense.

To me, there is no question Theo (healthy) was the better fit on that team.

And, of course, the clincher was that Deke only spent one more season on Sixers. Celtics pick-and-rolled Deke to death in the '02 1st rd, and took them in 5. Deke was then sent to the Nets for an injured Todd Mac & KVH.

Sixers were not a fast breaking uptempo team...Larry Brown teams are not about pushing the pace... They are about controlling the tempo and limiting the number possessions...Thats what most good defensive teams like to do...It makes no sense to speed up the pace with that team because they aren't going to win games out scoring people...So with that style Mutumbo fit well because he could also score sometimes in the post...

I will agree though that it wasn't a very good trade as far as the future of the Sixers go, because of Mutumbo age but the sixers felt like they had one good run and they tried to make it so I can't blame them for that...

Jewelz0376
12-26-2010, 09:04 PM
Have respect for AI and he was a great scorer... but does that actually translate into being a great overall player?

AI seemed to me like he just wanted to get points and stats and not get his teammates involved.. Someone explain to me this...


AI plays in denver( good team) with carmelo anthony who is a top 5 player.... How come they never get out of the first round but as soon as denver trades him for Chauncey Billups.. They end up becoming a great team and get to the western conference finals and actually almost beat the Lakers?

That to me tells me AI is just a good individual player but not someone who can lead his team and make them better..

Having a healthy Nene and Birdman def helped....

llemon
12-26-2010, 09:09 PM
Sixers were not a fast breaking uptempo team...Larry Brown teams are not about pushing the pace... They are about controlling the tempo and limiting the number possessions...Thats what most good defensive teams like to do...It makes no sense to speed up the pace with that team because they aren't going to win games out scoring people...So with that style Mutumbo fit well because he could also score sometimes in the post...

I will agree though that it wasn't a very good trade as far as the future of the Sixers go, because of Mutumbo age but the sixers felt like they had one good run and they tried to make it so I can't blame them for that...

The '00-'01 Sixer team got offense from there defense. With Theo, when the opportunity to run was there they did. Theo avgd 3.7 bpg and 8.3 rpg and knew to get the ball into a ball handler's hands quickly, and was fast enough to finish the play he started (muck like Kenyon did with the Nets, except for the blocks)

ewing
12-26-2010, 10:02 PM
Geez, I don't know. Why was Deke such a bad fit on the Nets that he got benched and got many 'DNP-Coach's Decision', and Byron decided to let Jason Collins start?

But the answer to your question is Deke just slowed the Sixers down. Ratliff would block a shot, and then be down the floor quick enough to finish the break.

And the Sixers depended on team defense, not man-to-man defense.

To me, there is no question Theo (healthy) was the better fit on that team.

And, of course, the clincher was that Deke only spent one more season on Sixers. Celtics pick-and-rolled Deke to death in the '02 1st rd, and took them in 5. Deke was then sent to the Nets for an injured Todd Mac & KVH.


Sorry your not convincing me with the fact that Theo was a better finsher on the fast break. For one they didn't break much and when they didn't Theo was rarely finishing the play.

As for help D vs man to man D. Deke was an excellent helper so long as you funneled drivers towards him. Again i see this as something the team would have to adjust to but overall when playing good team D i take Deke at the 5 on D over Theo


As for the "clincher" well sorry but the Sixers were hardly dynasty and you cant convince me that they would have not be eliminated in the 1st round that year with Theo. Also, on NJ I remember Scott tring to make Deke hit cutters out of the high post. Well he cant. I think if Scott used him differently he could have been effective. That is alittle of an excuse but coming into and with the Sixer I saw an effective Deke. I can tell you didn't but I just disagree:)

llemon
12-26-2010, 10:43 PM
Sorry your not convincing me with the fact that Theo was a better finsher on the fast break. For one they didn't break much and when they didn't Theo was rarely finishing the play.

As for help D vs man to man D. Deke was an excellent helper so long as you funneled drivers towards him. Again i see this as something the team would have to adjust to but overall when playing good team D i take Deke at the 5 on D over Theo


As for the "clincher" well sorry but the Sixers were hardly dynasty and you cant convince me that they would have not be eliminated in the 1st round that year with Theo. Also, on NJ I remember Scott tring to make Deke hit cutters out of the high post. Well he cant. I think if Scott used him differently he could have been effective. That is alittle of an excuse but coming into and with the Sixer I saw an effective Deke. I can tell you didn't but I just disagree:)

Feel free to disagree. And I don't care if I convice you of anything.

I'm just stating what I saw.

Theo finished the fastbreak with some FEROCIOUS jams.

Great teams run the break when the opportunity arises.

Like when Theo would block a shot. Sixers didn't funnel the oppositions offense into Theo. Ratliff was a tremendous off-the-ball shotblocker.

And although Theo wasn't the rebounder Deke was, Ratliff was MUCH BETTER at the outlet pass and running the floor.

Deke liked to cradle his rebounds, slowing down the Sixers offense.

I'll break it down this way. In the 50 games Theo was the Sixers' Center, the Sixers scored in the 70 point range 5 times.

In the 27 games Deke was the Sixers' Center, the Sixers scored in the 70 point range 6 times.

And once again, with Theo, 36 and 14. Best record in the NBA. Then Sixers win 5 games in a row after Theo suffers a season ending injury.

Sixers trade for Deke (a good trade, no doubt). Sixers finish the season 15-12, do not finish with the best record in the NBA.

In my opinion, Sixers breeze through the Eastern Conf Playoffs with a healthy Theo, losing MAYBE 3 games.

But again, not sure Sixers win that one Finals gane vs. Lakers without Deke.

So many, many things we'll never know.

Chronz
12-27-2010, 12:03 AM
Only if my other option was antoine walker

JordansBulls
12-27-2010, 01:07 AM
Only if my other option was antoine walker

:speechless:

thekmp211
12-27-2010, 01:38 AM
Feel free to disagree. And I don't care if I convice you of anything.

I'm just stating what I saw.

Theo finished the fastbreak with some FEROCIOUS jams.

Great teams run the break when the opportunity arises.

Like when Theo would block a shot. Sixers didn't funnel the oppositions offense into Theo. Ratliff was a tremendous off-the-ball shotblocker.

And although Theo wasn't the rebounder Deke was, Ratliff was MUCH BETTER at the outlet pass and running the floor.

Deke liked to cradle his rebounds, slowing down the Sixers offense.

I'll break it down this way. In the 50 games Theo was the Sixers' Center, the Sixers scored in the 70 point range 5 times.

In the 27 games Deke was the Sixers' Center, the Sixers scored in the 70 point range 6 times.

And once again, with Theo, 36 and 14. Best record in the NBA. Then Sixers win 5 games in a row after Theo suffers a season ending injury.

Sixers trade for Deke (a good trade, no doubt). Sixers finish the season 15-12, do not finish with the best record in the NBA.

In my opinion, Sixers breeze through the Eastern Conf Playoffs with a healthy Theo, losing MAYBE 3 games.

But again, not sure Sixers win that one Finals gane vs. Lakers without Deke.

So many, many things we'll never know.


it certainly sounds like you watched a lot of these games.


any time the finals run argument gets to me, i just remember all the

FINAL SCORE: 76ers 77, Celtics 68

scores that riddled the eastern conference at this time. speaks volumes that a pass first player in jason kidd took a slightly more talented group to back-to-back finals appearances.

llemon
12-27-2010, 01:45 AM
it certainly sounds like you watched a lot of these games.


any time the finals run argument gets to me, i just remember all the

FINAL SCORE: 76ers 77, Celtics 68

scores that riddled the eastern conference at this time. speaks volumes that a pass first player in jason kidd took a slightly more talented group to back-to-back finals appearances.

Funny thing is, Kidd was also their go-to guy.

NetsPaint
12-27-2010, 01:49 AM
Iverson fans make out the one season he led his team to the finals in 2001 in that pathetic Eastern conference to state their case. Even Allan Houston led a depleted Knicks team to the finals..despite an injured Ewing.

But meanwhile they stay mum on each time his team underachieved and failed to make even the postseason...which was more often than not.

Jason Kidd in his prime was way better.
AND Sprewell.

JayW_1023
12-27-2010, 09:57 AM
^^^

Still those Knicks teams had way more holes defensively than AI Sixers teams during those days. They were pisspoor on the boards.

raptor fan
12-27-2010, 12:14 PM
i would definitely build my team around him if he was 21. At that time, he was one of the best players of the league, and most teams would have wanted him as their franchise player. Albeit, he's not the perfect player to build upon, a 21 year old iverson is a better player to build around than what most teams currently have. However, I'd make more of an effort to bring in players around him that can play off of him. He'd need a big guard to play with him (someone like Rodney Stuckey). He'd also need a young PF to complement him, someone like blake griffin (who doesn't necessarily need the ball in his hands all the time). If you pair them with a defensive SF who can stroke from long range, and a defensive C (someone like samuel dalembert in his prime), it'd be a great team.

AIMelo=KillaDUO
12-27-2010, 12:21 PM
Knowing what we know now... No. But... Not knowing, Yes.

JordansBulls
12-27-2010, 03:48 PM
AND Sprewell.

Yep Sprewell and Kurt Thomas:D

ink
12-27-2010, 04:02 PM
Answer to thread: nope.

thekmp211
12-27-2010, 04:22 PM
Yep Sprewell and Kurt Thomas:D

and camby!

Rivera
12-27-2010, 04:40 PM
hell yea AI was a beast

all u need to know is eric snow and aaron mckie were key contributors to AI getting to the finals...imagine if he had someone to help him out??

Rentzias
12-27-2010, 04:45 PM
Not to get away from OP's original question, but 21 is impressionable and the issue is as your starting point/building block. Find a complementary coach, strategy, teammate, and AI is not a bad starting point.

Rentzias
12-27-2010, 04:46 PM
And I was a huge Iverson fan, but :facepalm: to the dude who called him Top 20 all time and possibly the second best PG of all time. I imagined your post read out in a voice that was still changing.

JJ81
12-27-2010, 05:02 PM
I here a lot of people say they would never want to build their team around Iverson because of his low efficiency and that a guy like him could never take a team to the championship as the best player on the team.

Here is my question, would you take Iverson and build your team around him if he was 21 years old?


NOTE: This doesn't have to do with any other players in the league, just a simple if you would want him to be the best on your team or not?

What are the other choices?

Chronz
12-27-2010, 05:17 PM
hell yea AI was a beast

all u need to know is eric snow and aaron mckie were key contributors to AI getting to the finals...imagine if he had someone to help him out??

Uhh he had the best team in the East and still almost ****ed it up

Rivera
12-27-2010, 05:24 PM
Uhh he had the best team in the East and still almost ****ed it up

and so did lebron???


doesnt mean AI wasnt a once in a generation talent...in his prime i would take him on my team any day

Tony_Starks
12-27-2010, 05:44 PM
Yessir. 21 yr old AI had the league on smash.

Chronz
12-27-2010, 05:58 PM
and so did lebron???
If your asking me the answer is no

If your telling me please dont use ? and explain your stance



doesnt mean AI wasnt a once in a generation talent...in his prime i would take him on my team any day
Being a once in a generation talent isnt always a good thing

Ill say this about AI, he came into the league too soon. AI in this environment under these rules, would have been a better player. Still wouldnt start my franchise with a guy who cant defend his position and never learned to shoot off the ball.

WeBallin
12-27-2010, 06:07 PM
Iverson could never been #1 option on my team...Here's why although he is an affective player at 21, he was also uncoachable, an if

Rentzias
12-27-2010, 06:16 PM
So how would you re-draft the 1996 NBA Draft? Personally, I would take pick 23 first this time around.

KingPosey
12-27-2010, 06:29 PM
HELL YEAH! just because he sucked recently doesnt mean he sucked before. ai in his prime is better than wade in his prime. yes wade has a championship ring and a finals mvp but he had shaq. ai had noone else to score. if ai had someone like shaq he would of won atleast a championship.

and to hawkeye so what? its not iverson's fault that the east is weak. and doesnt matter because thats what the nba is. then base on your argument then pierce sucks cuz his team didnt get through the weak east. same with VC's raptors, miller's pacers, kidd's nets, etc.

hell atleast iverson in his prime led his team to more playoffs and better records than KG in his prime. :rolleyes:haha

drama1386
12-27-2010, 06:32 PM
i'm torn on this one. AI is one of my all-time favorite players (and a pretty nice guy...I was able to meet him at a bucks game a couple of seasons ago when he was on the pistons) but I'm not sure he would be the type of person I would want to build my team around. like a poster said before, he seemed to have been more interested in individual stats rather than contributing to a TEAM win.

-Kobe24-TJ19-
12-27-2010, 06:36 PM
So how would you re-draft the 1996 NBA Draft? Personally, I would take pick 23 first this time around.

Efthimios Rentzias:confused:

kingkenny01
12-27-2010, 06:38 PM
^^^ i was confused too
i think you meant pick 13 kobe bryant

JordansBulls
12-28-2010, 12:35 AM
HELL YEAH! ai in his prime is better than wade in his prime.

Um no.

JayW_1023
12-28-2010, 07:33 AM
AI was like Pistol Pete, a great one man circus act to watch...but a team player and a winner? Not a chance.

JordansBulls
12-28-2010, 11:19 AM
AI was like Pistol Pete, a great one man circus act to watch...but a team player and a winner? Not a chance.

He was better than Pistol Pete though.

S-Dot
12-28-2010, 11:27 AM
Um no.

I have to disagree with you JB. AI in his prime is undoubtedly better than Wade in his prime. AI in his prime carried a team with Aaron McKie as their second best scorer to the 2001 NBA Finals. Wade has the ring, but AI on that 2006 team would have won it as well with Shaq on his team. His stats from 1996-2008 were ridiculous for a questionable 6'0 guard.

rhymeratic
12-28-2010, 11:37 AM
Um this is an easy Yes. His team made the finals, period. Once you make the finals, anything is possible depending on the matchup. He got hosed and ran into Lakers with 2 HOF in Shaq and Kobe, what more can you ask for.

JordansBulls
12-28-2010, 12:05 PM
I have to disagree with you JB. AI in his prime is undoubtedly better than Wade in his prime. AI in his prime carried a team with Aaron McKie as their second best scorer to the 2001 NBA Finals. Wade has the ring, but AI on that 2006 team would have won it as well with Shaq on his team. His stats from 1996-2008 were ridiculous for a questionable 6'0 guard.

Totally disagree. How did AI carry the Sixers when it was Mutombo that led them in the playoffs in Win Shares by a considerable margin? Not only that but Wade is more efficient and productive than AI.

BoognishMN
12-28-2010, 12:06 PM
I personally wouldn’t build a team around AI, I don’t care for his game regardless of his supporting cast, he is inefficient, a chucker, and from everything I’ve ever heard a terrible human being. If he couldn’t get it done in his prime so why would you want to try again.

That said if I had to build a team around him, the only way you could build a real threat to win it all around Iverson's game would be to put a team like the late 80's Pistons around him. Intense world class defenders and rebounders like an in his prime Rodman, Laimbeer, and Edwards. And solid scorers who don't need the ball like Johnson and Dumars to supplement AI's 40 shots a game.

S-Dot
12-28-2010, 12:18 PM
Totally disagree. How did AI carry the Sixers when it was Mutombo that led them in the playoffs in Win Shares by a considerable margin? Not only that but Wade is more efficient and productive than AI.

I trust you with the stats JB, and Mutombo was defintely an upgrade from Ratliff, but I think everyone who watched them take out Indiana, Toronto, and Milwaukee that year saw AI carry that team on his back.

BlondeBomber41
12-28-2010, 01:17 PM
No. Just isn't the type of player I would wanna build around. You would have to put together the absolute perfect supporting cast that perfectly complimented what he does to have a chance at a championship.

thekmp211
12-28-2010, 01:48 PM
I have to disagree with you JB. AI in his prime is undoubtedly better than Wade in his prime. AI in his prime carried a team with Aaron McKie as their second best scorer to the 2001 NBA Finals. Wade has the ring, but AI on that 2006 team would have won it as well with Shaq on his team. His stats from 1996-2008 were ridiculous for a questionable 6'0 guard.

Iverson would have shot that heat team out of the series. Wade took over and was unstoppable.

The whole debate surrounding his 2001 supporting cast has been well-debunked through out this thread. the team was created FOR his playing style because he couldn't coexist with scorers, and he wasn't even the most quality player on his team during the playoff run.

And, to be honest, the talent disparity between the two teams isn't even that drastic. Shaq at that point was not leaps and bounds better than Mutumbo was in 2001, and the rest of the casts were equally scrubby.

mrblisterdundee
12-28-2010, 02:09 PM
When Philadelphia last went to the playoffs, it was on Allen Iverson's back. He played as well as Dwayne Wade did when the Heat won the championship. You do, though, need shooters and big, burly defensive specialists around Iverson. He'd be a great leader in a system where he could score tons and have shooters and dunkers to drive and dish to.

S-Dot
12-28-2010, 02:16 PM
Iverson would have shot that heat team out of the series. Wade took over and was unstoppable.

The whole debate surrounding his 2001 supporting cast has been well-debunked through out this thread. the team was created FOR his playing style because he couldn't coexist with scorers, and he wasn't even the most quality player on his team during the playoff run.

And, to be honest, the talent disparity between the two teams isn't even that drastic. Shaq at that point was not leaps and bounds better than Mutumbo was in 2001, and the rest of the casts were equally scrubby.

The 2006 Mavs also weren't the 2001 Lakers. That was when the Shaq and Kobe combo was at its best.

Hawkeye15
12-28-2010, 02:21 PM
has this moved to Wade vs AI now? haha
Cmon, Wade is in his peak, and its better than Iverson ever played.

thekmp211
12-28-2010, 02:24 PM
The 2006 Mavs also weren't the 2001 Lakers. That was when the Shaq and Kobe combo was at its best.

http://www.nba.com/playerfile/allen_iverson/career_stats.html

iverson shot 39 percent for the playoffs in 2001.

wade shot 49 percent for the playoffs in 2006.

his finals performance was also one of the greatest of all time. understand the 2001 lakers were a superior team to the 2006 mavericks but let's not discount wade's accomplishments.

if iverson had done it, we wouldn't be hearing the end of how he "willed" his team to victory with "heart" and "grit".

wade is the better player.

ink
12-28-2010, 02:25 PM
has this moved to Wade vs AI now? haha
Cmon, Wade is in his peak, and its better than Iverson ever played.

Wade is also wired to see his teammates on the floor. AI never did get that, as was evidenced by the dramatic improvement in the Nuggets when they replaced him with Billups. Basically that trade exposed one of the central problems of the 98-2008 decade -- the league glamourized flashy solo scorers at the expense of the team and the sport.

S-Dot
12-28-2010, 02:26 PM
has this moved to Wade vs AI now? haha
Cmon, Wade is in his peak, and its better than Iverson ever played.

You're right, its not a Wade vs. AI thread, but I honestly don't see how Wade in his prime is better than AI in his prime, which was about 10 straight seasons as a 6'0 guard. The guy was an MVP. Dwyane has the ring, but besides that, I honestly don't see it. :shrug:

Hawkeye15
12-28-2010, 02:28 PM
You're right, its not a Wade vs. AI thread, but I honestly don't see how Wade in his prime is better than AI in his prime, which was about 10 straight seasons as a 6'0 guard. The guy was an MVP. Dwyane has the ring, but besides that, I honestly don't see it. :shrug:

what would you consider AI's peak year? I will do a quick comparison between the two.

And winning MVP doesn't mean a ton in my eyes. Not when Steve Nash wins 2 in a row.

S-Dot
12-28-2010, 02:30 PM
Wade is also wired to see his teammates on the floor. AI never did get that, as was evidenced by the dramatic improvement in the Nuggets when they replaced him with Billups. Basically that trade exposed one of the central problems of the 98-2008 decade -- the league glamourized flashy solo scorers at the expense of the team and the sport.

Wade and AI's numbers are pretty comparable when it comes to assists. Look at players like Beasley and Dorrell Wright. Both are achieving much more since they left the Heat. Don't get me wrong, Wade is a great shooting guard, but AI changed the game.

Rivera
12-28-2010, 02:31 PM
has this moved to Wade vs AI now? haha
Cmon, Wade is in his peak, and its better than Iverson ever played.

damn i hope not cause i just took a peak at the advanced stats with both players through 7 full seasons...and wades ahead...by a sizable margin

PER TS% eFG% oRTG dRTG OWin shares D Win shares Total win shares

all in wades favor over AI....i was just a bigger fan of AIs than i ever was of wade and i do love wades game....i just dislike who he plays with and hope that doesnt influence him

ink
12-28-2010, 02:32 PM
what would you consider AI's peak year? I will do a quick comparison between the two.

And winning MVP doesn't mean a ton in my eyes. Not when Steve Nash wins 2 in a row.

You don't think those 2 MVPs didn't have a clear message/directive from the league that they valued team players over solo players? It was obvious they were trying to steer the league back towards the team game. That's why they rewarded the guy that exemplified team strategy. They were already realizing that the 1on1 league was going nowhere and needed to return to its roots.

S-Dot
12-28-2010, 02:32 PM
what would you consider AI's peak year? I will do a quick comparison between the two.

And winning MVP doesn't mean a ton in my eyes. Not when Steve Nash wins 2 in a row.

Nash deserved those but thats defintely off topic. As far as AI, any years between 2000-2007. You can argue the MVP year of 2001 I guess.

ink
12-28-2010, 02:33 PM
Wade and AI's numbers are pretty comparable when it comes to assists. Look at players like Beasley and Dorrell Wright. Both are achieving much more since they left the Heat. Don't get me wrong, Wade is a great shooting guard, but AI changed the game.

But AI was supposedly a PG. And AI did not change the game. He ruined the game and it is recovering now.

Hawkeye15
12-28-2010, 02:33 PM
You're right, its not a Wade vs. AI thread, but I honestly don't see how Wade in his prime is better than AI in his prime, which was about 10 straight seasons as a 6'0 guard. The guy was an MVP. Dwyane has the ring, but besides that, I honestly don't see it. :shrug:

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=0&p1=iversal01&y1=2001&p2=wadedw01&y2=2009

here is Wade from 08-09' versus Iverson's MVP year (his best year). Its a buttkicking by Wade here.

On top of that, there are some players who should have won that MVP (cough, Shaq or TMac) over AI

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/psl_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=0&type=totals&per_minute_base=36&lg_id=NBA&is_playoffs=N&year_min=2001&year_max=2001&franch_id=&season_start=1&season_end=-1&age_min=0&age_max=99&height_min=0&height_max=99&birth_country_is=Y&birth_country=&is_active=&is_hof=&pos=&qual=&c1stat=mp_per_g&c1comp=gt&c1val=20&c2stat=&c2comp=gt&c2val=&c3stat=&c3comp=gt&c3val=&c4stat=&c4comp=gt&c4val=&c5stat=&c5comp=gt&c6mult=1.0&c6stat=&order_by=ws

S-Dot
12-28-2010, 02:37 PM
http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=0&p1=iversal01&y1=2001&p2=wadedw01&y2=2009

here is Wade from 08-09' versus Iverson's MVP year (his best year). Its a buttkicking by Wade here.

On top of that, there are some players who should have won that MVP (cough, Shaq or TMac) over AI

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/psl_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=0&type=totals&per_minute_base=36&lg_id=NBA&is_playoffs=N&year_min=2001&year_max=2001&franch_id=&season_start=1&season_end=-1&age_min=0&age_max=99&height_min=0&height_max=99&birth_country_is=Y&birth_country=&is_active=&is_hof=&pos=&qual=&c1stat=mp_per_g&c1comp=gt&c1val=20&c2stat=&c2comp=gt&c2val=&c3stat=&c3comp=gt&c3val=&c4stat=&c4comp=gt&c4val=&c5stat=&c5comp=gt&c6mult=1.0&c6stat=&order_by=ws

you give numbers to justify your opinion. I respect that. I can agree to disagree with you on this one, fair enough. But AI deserved that MVP. Maybe Shaq...not Tmac. Not a homer fan here either. I was cheering for Milwaukee in the ECF that year.

Hawkeye15
12-28-2010, 02:37 PM
Nash deserved those but thats defintely off topic. As far as AI, any years between 2000-2007. You can argue the MVP year of 2001 I guess.

Nash did not deserve those, but that is another topic.
And I picked AI's best year, read above.

And AI did in fact put the game back with his play. Tunnel vision shooting guard who was blessed with a coach/GM that put the perfect talent around him to feed his ego, and keep games close despite a horrid shooting night from AI, allowing him to have time to get a few chucks right and create seperation late many times. EIther that or their defense simply won the game for them.
And three 50 win teams made it out of the east that year. AI should have gone home well before the finals, but Vince and Big Dog both missed open jumpers at the buzzer, and the Philly dream season kept on keepin on

Hawkeye15
12-28-2010, 02:44 PM
You don't think those 2 MVPs didn't have a clear message/directive from the league that they valued team players over solo players? It was obvious they were trying to steer the league back towards the team game. That's why they rewarded the guy that exemplified team strategy. They were already realizing that the 1on1 league was going nowhere and needed to return to its roots.

they may very well have been a message. However, with the players who have been awarded the MVP over the past 12 seasons, I stopped trying to figure out the motives of the NBA.
And if that was the case, 1 should have sufficed. No way a PG who can't defend butter should win 2 of them, regardless of how much he exemplified team strategy

S-Dot
12-28-2010, 02:49 PM
they may very well have been a message. However, with the players who have been awarded the MVP over the past 12 seasons, I stopped trying to figure out the motives of the NBA.
And if that was the case, 1 should have sufficed. No way a PG who can't defend butter should win 2 of them, regardless of how much he exemplified team strategy

It was the way he changed that Phoenix team with his presence to the best record in the NBA that year in 2005. Yes, they added Joe Johnson and Q-Rich, but it was ultimately Steve who changed them into contenders. Then the next season in 2006, they lost Joe Johnson and Q-rich to trades and amare to a season ending injury, and what does he do? Turns them into title contenders again, and gets Boris Diaw the Most Improved player. I couldn't argue against Nash there. Kobe had a great individual season, but the Suns overachieved and knocked the Lakers out after being down 3-1 that series.

playaman
12-28-2010, 02:49 PM
Practice? Practice??? Practice??? We talkin about practice??? Have fun building around that... He was a great player though. Just don't trust his leadership skills. Just my opinion...

llemon
12-28-2010, 02:50 PM
You're right, its not a Wade vs. AI thread, but I honestly don't see how Wade in his prime is better than AI in his prime, which was about 10 straight seasons as a 6'0 guard. The guy was an MVP. Dwyane has the ring, but besides that, I honestly don't see it. :shrug:

First, what does being a 6' 0" guard have to do with anything?

And AI was MVP, but Wade was Finals MVP.

Of course, you can debate anything, but saying Wade in his prime (which I imagine is still going on) is better than AI in his prime isn't really a huge stretch.

Hawkeye15
12-28-2010, 02:53 PM
It was the way he changed that Phoenix team with his presence to the best record in the NBA that year in 2005. Yes, they added Joe Johnson and Q-Rich, but it was ultimately Steve who changed them into contenders. Then the next season in 2006, they lost Joe Johnson and Q-rich to trades and amare to a season ending injury, and what does he do? Turns them into title contenders again, and gets Boris Diaw the Most Improved player. I couldn't argue against Nash there. Kobe had a great individual season, but the Suns overachieved and knocked the Lakers out after being down 3-1 that series.

playoffs don't matter when talking about the MVP.
And like I said, fine, give him one for bringing team basketball back to the forefront. But two???? For a PG who can't defend whatsoever?

And it all depends on what you define as MVP. Mine is, Best player in the NBA that year.

S-Dot
12-28-2010, 02:56 PM
playoffs don't matter when talking about the MVP.
And like I said, fine, give him one for bringing team basketball back to the forefront. But two???? For a PG who can't defend whatsoever?

And it all depends on what you define as MVP. Mine is, Best player in the NBA that year.

If thats your opinion then I defintely can see where you're coming from with your argument. Nash was never the best player in the league, but that Phoenix team would not have been in the top 2 in the west for two consecutive seasons without him. Thats why I think he was most valuable...to his team though,

ink
12-28-2010, 03:06 PM
playoffs don't matter when talking about the MVP.
And like I said, fine, give him one for bringing team basketball back to the forefront. But two???? For a PG who can't defend whatsoever?

And it all depends on what you define as MVP. Mine is, Best player in the NBA that year.

If the award was Best Player in the NBA that year they would have called it that. But they didn't. They call the award MOST VALUABLE PLAYER. The only issue then is to define what "most valuable" means. S-Dot's reasoning works perfectly for the name of the award.

sargon21
12-28-2010, 03:19 PM
efficiency stats are overrated when you don't take them in context, and this is an example, so hell yea i would build around A.I

King Henrik
12-28-2010, 03:19 PM
yall forgetting how great Iverson was when he was younger. the man was The Answer. he earned that name. Without a doubt i'd build a team around AI.

Only current players I'd build franchise around over AI(in their primes):
Kobe
Shaq
Duncan
Lebron(maybe he's not a true gamer)

thekmp211
12-28-2010, 03:31 PM
efficiency stats are overrated when you don't take them in context, and this is an example, so hell yea i would build around A.I

the context of iverson is, outside of one memorable run to the finals, he constantly chucked, clashed with teammates on the court and left the playoffs earlier than a player of his caliber was expected to.

if iverson's attracting of the defense was helping his team to perform better, that would be one thing. but his selfish game in no way opened up the court for his teammates. not one guy he played with was better as his teammate, and many found success in the league after leaving philly.

the last time guy's as inefficient as him were considered top-tier guards was the 60's.

ink
12-28-2010, 03:44 PM
the context of iverson is, outside of one memorable run to the finals, he constantly chucked, clashed with teammates on the court and left the playoffs earlier than a player of his caliber was expected to.

if iverson's attracting of the defense was helping his team to perform better, that would be one thing. but his selfish game in no way opened up the court for his teammates. not one guy he played with was better as his teammate, and many found success in the league after leaving philly.

the last time guy's as inefficient as him were considered top-tier guards was the 60's.

But he looks so good in highlights. ;)

Rivera
12-28-2010, 03:47 PM
the context of iverson is, outside of one memorable run to the finals, he constantly chucked, clashed with teammates on the court and left the playoffs earlier than a player of his caliber was expected to.

if iverson's attracting of the defense was helping his team to perform better, that would be one thing. but his selfish game in no way opened up the court for his teammates. not one guy he played with was better as his teammate, and many found success in the league after leaving philly.

the last time guy's as inefficient as him were considered top-tier guards was the 60's.

before u say AI didnt make anyone better.....look at the team he was with when he did indeed make it to the finals vs LA in the 2000-2001 season

Mutumbo -was already established pre AI

aaron Mckie - was a nobody before he joined AI and the 6ers
Eric Snow - great defender solid PG but wasnt a scorer limited offensivley
tyronne hill - physcial in the paint just a tough rebounder n defender type player

Jumaine Jones - He Owes His Short NBA Career to AI for makin him look like an athletic wing who could shoot and score and defend...so much for all of that

George Lynch - lockdown defensive type of player....had some of his highest PPG seasons with AI in philly (which really isnt sayin much)

Todd MacCulolololch - LOL nothing is needed to b said here
Matt Geiger - Same category as TMacc LOL
Kevin Ollie - I dont want to talk bad abt Kevin Ollie cause hes UCONNs finest and i actually have personally met and talked to the dude...smart guy just wasnt a great basketball player
Raja Bell - When Bell was a rookie so he wasnt a key contributor
and Rodney Buford



ok now looking back at that sixer team...they had no other scorers besides AI all of them were solid defenders all of them...they built a crazy defensive team around AI and basically said AI GO green light do whatever on offense because its gonna be hard to score on us on defense...but i will say as far as AI made better or made them look better than they actually were, mckie, snow, geiger, n jumaine jones

Hawkeye15
12-28-2010, 03:55 PM
efficiency stats are overrated when you don't take them in context, and this is an example, so hell yea i would build around A.I

you mean they are overrated when they don't prove your point...

Stats aren't everything. But you would be hard pressed to find anyone here who didn't watch over 100 AI games minimum. Couple that with the advanced stats, and oh yeah it shows us what we need to see

llemon
12-28-2010, 03:57 PM
before u say AI didnt make anyone better.....look at the team he was with when he did indeed make it to the finals vs LA in the 2000-2001 season

Mutumbo -was already established pre AI

aaron Mckie - was a nobody before he joined AI and the 6ers
Eric Snow - great defender solid PG but wasnt a scorer limited offensivley
tyronne hill - physcial in the paint just a tough rebounder n defender type player

Jumaine Jones - He Owes His Short NBA Career to AI for makin him look like an athletic wing who could shoot and score and defend...so much for all of that

George Lynch - lockdown defensive type of player....had some of his highest PPG seasons with AI in philly (which really isnt sayin much)

Todd MacCulolololch - LOL nothing is needed to b said here
Matt Geiger - Same category as TMacc LOL
Kevin Ollie - I dont want to talk bad abt Kevin Ollie cause hes UCONNs finest and i actually have personally met and talked to the dude...smart guy just wasnt a great basketball player
Raja Bell - When Bell was a rookie so he wasnt a key contributor
and Rodney Buford



ok now looking back at that sixer team...they had no other scorers besides AI all of them were solid defenders all of them...they built a crazy defensive team around AI and basically said AI GO green light do whatever on offense because its gonna be hard to score on us on defense...but i will say as far as AI made better or made them look better than they actually were, mckie, snow, geiger, n jumaine jones

And that team is what got AI to the Finals.

Hawkeye15
12-28-2010, 03:57 PM
If thats your opinion then I defintely can see where you're coming from with your argument. Nash was never the best player in the league, but that Phoenix team would not have been in the top 2 in the west for two consecutive seasons without him. Thats why I think he was most valuable...to his team though,

I can side with that as well. But I still think their were more important players to their teams. But if that is how YOU measure MVP, then I can understand your logic.

Rivera
12-28-2010, 04:00 PM
And that team is what got AI to the Finals.

yea but who was the leader of that team??

who was the man on that team???

who carried the scoring burden on that team because no one else on that team could create a shot on there own???

can u guess that answer?? ill tell ya

Allen the mother f'n Answer Iverson

llemon
12-28-2010, 04:13 PM
yea but who was the leader of that team??

who was the man on that team???

who carried the scoring burden on that team because no one else on that team could create a shot on there own???

can u guess that answer?? ill tell ya

Allen the mother f'n Answer Iverson

SCORING BURDEN????? For Iverson, the burden would be not to shoot, play defense and PRACTICE.

Check out Sixers team the following season. By your measure, they are a better team, but Iverson suffered a 1st rd exit.

Rivera
12-28-2010, 04:16 PM
SCORING BURDEN????? For Iverson, the burden would be not to shoot, play defense and PRACTICE.

Check out Sixers team the following season. By your measure, they are a better team, but Iverson suffered a 1st rd exit.

y?? because dikembe was on his last legs and they picked up a washed up derrick coleman :facepalm:

llemon
12-28-2010, 04:29 PM
y?? because dikembe was on his last legs and they picked up a washed up derrick coleman :facepalm:

So somewhere over the '01 offseason, Deke strapped on his last legs?

And Coleman scored and rebounded better than the player he was traded for, George Lynch. Took some of the SCORING BURDEN (LOL!!!!) off of Iverson's back.

They also added Speedy Claxton and Matt Harpring, and Eric Snow had a better season.

But they broke up the formula that got them to the Finals, and got knocked out in the 1st rd.

bringinwood
12-28-2010, 04:33 PM
Iverson had the 48th best career Player Efficiency Rating in history...

If you aren't going to build a team around Iverson, you aren't going to be willing to build a team around these players...

Bob Cousy
Steve Nash
Billy Cunningham
Walt Frazier
Paul Pierce
Carmelo Anthony
Bill Russell
Bob MacAdoo
Alex English
Robert Parish...


Anyone who wouldn't needs to read a few things...
He's one of the most creative, best scoring, most efficient players in basketball history...

llemon
12-28-2010, 04:41 PM
Iverson had the 48th best career Player Efficiency Rating in history...

If you aren't going to build a team around Iverson, you aren't going to be willing to build a team around these players...

Bob Cousy
Steve Nash
Billy Cunningham
Walt Frazier
Paul Pierce
Carmelo Anthony
Bill Russell
Bob MacAdoo
Alex English
Robert Parish...


Anyone who wouldn't needs to read a few things...
He's one of the most creative, best scoring, most efficient players in basketball history...

Sorry, but the Allen Iverson whose NBA career I watched was not a player I would call efficient.

And that's not getting into all of AI's attitude problems.

bringinwood
12-28-2010, 04:46 PM
Sorry, but the Allen Iverson whose NBA career I watched was not a player I would call efficient.

And that's not getting into all of AI's attitude problems.

Regardless of what your definition of " efficient " is, he is still considered one of the most efficient players in NBA history...

I watched Iverson's career since he was drafted, he was one of the most dynamic scorers in history...

He had " zero " help... If Iverson had Shaq, we wouldn't be having this conversation...

Rivera
12-28-2010, 04:47 PM
So somewhere over the '01 offseason, Deke strapped on his last legs?

And Coleman scored and rebounded better than the player he was traded for, George Lynch. Took some of the SCORING BURDEN (LOL!!!!) off of Iverson's back.

They also added Speedy Claxton and Matt Harpring, and Eric Snow had a better season.

But they broke up the formula that got them to the Finals, and got knocked out in the 1st rd.

lol matt harpring was and always was a bum i hated that guy and speedy claxton was nothing better than an overhyped streetball player....

dude go look at the staps before u try to embarass someone

when philly traded george lynch for coleman they traded for a 34 year old player who didnt have much left....and as far as dekembe...he was traded to the 76ers through there championship run at age 34...so he was going to the next season during the offseason wheere players do there most traning and of course a 35 year old man isnt gonna have the same legs....do some research!

thekmp211
12-28-2010, 04:50 PM
before u say AI didnt make anyone better.....look at the team he was with when he did indeed make it to the finals vs LA in the 2000-2001 season

Mutumbo -was already established pre AI

aaron Mckie - was a nobody before he joined AI and the 6ers
Eric Snow - great defender solid PG but wasnt a scorer limited offensivley
tyronne hill - physcial in the paint just a tough rebounder n defender type player

Jumaine Jones - He Owes His Short NBA Career to AI for makin him look like an athletic wing who could shoot and score and defend...so much for all of that

George Lynch - lockdown defensive type of player....had some of his highest PPG seasons with AI in philly (which really isnt sayin much)

Todd MacCulolololch - LOL nothing is needed to b said here
Matt Geiger - Same category as TMacc LOL
Kevin Ollie - I dont want to talk bad abt Kevin Ollie cause hes UCONNs finest and i actually have personally met and talked to the dude...smart guy just wasnt a great basketball player
Raja Bell - When Bell was a rookie so he wasnt a key contributor
and Rodney Buford



ok now looking back at that sixer team...they had no other scorers besides AI all of them were solid defenders all of them...they built a crazy defensive team around AI and basically said AI GO green light do whatever on offense because its gonna be hard to score on us on defense...but i will say as far as AI made better or made them look better than they actually were, mckie, snow, geiger, n jumaine jones


well, there's a couple ways to look at this. a lot of these guys put up career stats because they were being asked to play WAY more minutes than most teams would allow them to play. jones, mckie, lynch, snow (at that point in time) all were featured more prominently than ever. that doesn't mean they were any better as players, though.

more-so, while iverson shot below average while chucking more than anyone, his team as a whole only managed to hover around the league average for shooting percentage. so, it's not like his inefficiencies help the 76ers become a well oiled machine.

http://basketballreference.com/leagues/leagueyear.htm?lg=N&yr=2000

something i just put together. Aaron McKie won 6th man of the year that year, did not realize.

so the 76ers had the league MVP, the Defensive Player of the Year, the Sixth Man of the Year and the Coach of the Year.

Sounds like a pretty terrible supporting cast to me.

thekmp211
12-28-2010, 04:51 PM
Regardless of what your definition of " efficient " is, he is still considered one of the most efficient players in NBA history...

I watched Iverson's career since he was drafted, he was one of the most dynamic scorers in history...

He had " zero " help... If Iverson had Shaq, we wouldn't be having this conversation...

his finals team featured the leagues best defender, best bench player and best coach.

llemon
12-28-2010, 04:52 PM
lol matt harpring was and always was a bum i hated that guy and speedy claxton was nothing better than an overhyped streetball player....

Yeah, well Speedy got his ring, and was a big contributor in the Finals for the Spurs.

Maybe AI will get his ring in Turkey.

ink
12-28-2010, 05:00 PM
Yeah, well Speedy got his ring, and was a big contributor in the Finals for the Spurs.

Maybe AI will get his ring in Turkey.

It says everything about the way the NBA sees Iverson that they just let him go after Billups proved to be the better player. His fans want to hang onto the fantasy but the league itself gave up on the player. And it's not just because of personal issues or age. His playing style never amounted to much except personal stats.

Rivera
12-28-2010, 05:09 PM
It says everything about the way the NBA sees Iverson that they just let him go after Billups proved to be the better player. His fans want to hang onto the fantasy but the league itself gave up on the player. And it's not just because of personal issues or age. His playing style never amounted to much except personal stats.

NO...see this is where i have to put u in ur place....AI isnt in the NBA cause the NBA gave up on AI or not because of his ability at his age....whats wrong with the elder AI is his mentallity....he still believes that hes the best player in the leauge and that he can win MVP...thats his problem....he could be a great asset to any team as a 6th man scorer off the bench bringing instant energy into any arena cause when AI enters the game the fans will go nuts cause people like me still love AI...its that he doesnt want to be a 6th man...AI doesnt want to accept that his skills diminished and he wasnt the same player he was before....THATS Y AI isnt in the NBA not because of the way how he plays or because he cant anymore...hes just still trying to do it as the man which he isnt any more

but AI was the man and one of the best NBA players in his time

bringinwood
12-28-2010, 05:16 PM
his finals team featured the leagues best defender, best bench player and best coach.

It didn't matter...

The reason Brown won coach of the year is because his team seriously and I stress seriously overachieved...

There was absolutely no second scoring option on that team...

Iverson carried all the offense... They had no second option....


Also, who cares what happened in one 7 game stretch ???

This is Iverson as a 21 year old... One 7 game stretch doesn't personify his entire career...

Iverson is the 48th most efficient player in basketball history...

He did that while having George Lynch, Aaron McKie, a washed up Cliff Robinson, and a washed up Chris Webber as his 2nd scoring options...

Not bad...

Hawkeye15
12-28-2010, 05:16 PM
Iverson had the 48th best career Player Efficiency Rating in history...

If you aren't going to build a team around Iverson, you aren't going to be willing to build a team around these players...

Bob Cousy
Steve Nash
Billy Cunningham
Walt Frazier
Paul Pierce
Carmelo Anthony
Bill Russell
Bob MacAdoo
Alex English
Robert Parish...


Anyone who wouldn't needs to read a few things...
He's one of the most creative, best scoring, most efficient players in basketball history...


PER rewards shot creation, ie, chuckers. How is that offensive rating looking career wise.......He is around #280-300, the list cuts off at #250, who was 2 points higher than Iverson's 105. Even his peak year would rank #130 all time (if that were his career average) His all time high isn't even top 300 for a single season.

Again, one of the more overrated superstars I can think of. Would he have been a good #2 on a team with a dominant big man? I honestly don't think so. AI was not one to sacrifice shots, so I don't think he would have ever accepted being #2 in his career. And he is not a #1.
The Sixers beat a .500 team in round 1, by my account the 14th best team in the NBA in round 2 (only cause VC missed an open 18 footer), and then escaped a Bucks team that I have around 7th best in the NBA by the hair of their chinny chin chins (thanks to another miss by another all star, Big Dog), and then got wasted by the Lakers, who went thru much tougher competition.

Iverson's final run was the product of the east being at nearly its weakest, having great defense (in fact every one of their players, including AI, had more defensive win shares than offensive in the playoffs, so it was pure defense that got them that far), and his one good season, when speaking of efficiency (relative to a normal all star player). Iverson was the product of a system that allowed him to chuck away, while grisly vets did the dirty work and kept games close, and let their defense win.

If you want to go off just PER, that will never work. You have to look at all of it. Its all right there

llemon
12-28-2010, 05:19 PM
Regardless of what your definition of " efficient " is, he is still considered one of the most efficient players in NBA history...

I watched Iverson's career since he was drafted, he was one of the most dynamic scorers in history...

He had " zero " help... If Iverson had Shaq, we wouldn't be having this conversation...

Yeah, yeah. The old 'if (fill in the blank) had Shaq' argument.

Hawkeye15
12-28-2010, 05:20 PM
Yeah, yeah. The old 'if (fill in the blank) had Shaq' argument.

I think I used that about 5 players back then haha. God I hate Kobe. But at least I grew up and realized its not just about mixing player A with B. They have to match

ink
12-28-2010, 05:24 PM
NO...see this is where i have to put u in ur place....AI isnt in the NBA cause the NBA gave up on AI or not because of his ability at his age....whats wrong with the elder AI is his mentallity....he still believes that hes the best player in the leauge and that he can win MVP...thats his problem....he could be a great asset to any team as a 6th man scorer off the bench bringing instant energy into any arena cause when AI enters the game the fans will go nuts cause people like me still love AI...its that he doesnt want to be a 6th man...AI doesnt want to accept that his skills diminished and he wasnt the same player he was before....THATS Y AI isnt in the NBA not because of the way how he plays or because he cant anymore...hes just still trying to do it as the man which he isnt any more

but AI was the man and one of the best NBA players in his time

Well that wouldn't put anyone in their place. AI was ineffective early, middle and late in his career except in terms of his own stats. If it was a 30 PERSON league and not a 30 team league his stats might have amounted to something. But since it's a team sport and he ultimately failed, even in his prime, to do anything, even with a very good Nuggets team, there's no way to conclude that AI would be any more successful today than he was before. Life doesn't give second chances and his first chance was good enough. He was just impossible to build around. Like I said, he was a by-product of the highlight age. People judged him on his highlights, negative and positive, when the real problem was lack of substance as a team player. Teams have long ago figured out how to let the other team's scorer go off for 30+ points and still beat them. They let you fall on your own sword -- you use the opposition's best weapon against them. Let one player dominate the ball, give them their 30+ points, and keep the rest of the team from being meaningfully involved. No team structure ever develops, no cohesion ever develops, no second, third, fourth options ever really develop, and a good-great team can beat that ball dominant player's team every time.

Just take a look at what Larry Brown did as soon as he was done with the ball dominant AI and Philly. He went over to Detroit and created a team of no superstars who won the title with pure team work, fundamentals, and defence. Ironically, they also had Chauncey Billups, a PG pre-disposed to playing as a facilitating PG. The same Billups who showed up Iverson in Denver too btw. I'd call that sound *** kicking the reason why AI fell out of favour in the league. And AI wasn't the only player from the ball hog era to fall short of doing much that was meaningful. There were/are others. None of them have accomplished much in the team department, and the league is moving on without them.

bringinwood
12-28-2010, 05:24 PM
PER rewards shot creation, ie, chuckers. How is that offensive rating looking career wise.......He is around #280-300, the list cuts off at #250, who was 2 points higher than Iverson's 105. Even his peak year would rank #130 all time (if that were his career average) His all time high isn't even top 300 for a single season.

Again, one of the more overrated superstars I can think of. Would he have been a good #2 on a team with a dominant big man? I honestly don't think so. AI was not one to sacrifice shots, so I don't think he would have ever accepted being #2 in his career. And he is not a #1.
The Sixers beat a .500 team in round 1, by my account the 14th best team in the NBA in round 2 (only cause VC missed an open 18 footer), and then escaped a Bucks team that I have around 7th best in the NBA by the hair of their chinny chin chins (thanks to another miss by another all star, Big Dog), and then got wasted by the Lakers, who went thru much tougher competition.

Iverson's final run was the product of the east being at nearly its weakest, having great defense (in fact every one of their players, including AI, had more defensive win shares than offensive in the playoffs, so it was pure defense that got them that far), and his one good season, when speaking of efficiency (relative to a normal all star player). Iverson was the product of a system that allowed him to chuck away, while grisly vets did the dirty work and kept games close, and let their defense win.

If you want to go off just PER, that will never work. You have to look at all of it. Its all right there

So, you are discrediting Jordan's PER....

Jordan was a chucker and had all of the grisly vets doing the dirty work ???

That's kind of laughable...

I've said it before and i'll say it again, give Iverson a superstar second option and the skies the limit... Jordan had Pippen... Kobe had Shaq and now Gasol.... Pierce has Garnett and Allen... Barkley had Olajuwon and Drexler... What happened when Wade lost Shaq ????

What happened when Kobe lost Shaq ???
Thomas had Dumars...

Iverson had George Lynch... lmao

Hawkeye15
12-28-2010, 05:32 PM
So, you are discrediting Jordan's PER....

Jordan was a chucker and had all of the grisly vets doing the dirty work ???

That's kind of laughable...

I've said it before and i'll say it again, give Iverson a superstar second option and the skies the limit... Jordan had Pippen... Kobe had Shaq and now Gasol.... Pierce has Garnett and Allen... Barkley had Olajuwon and Drexler... What happened when Wade lost Shaq ????

What happened when Kobe lost Shaq ???
Thomas had Dumars...

Iverson had George Lynch... lmao


no, I am discrediting ONLY using PER. Jordan? Are you serious? Every stat he had was far better than AI.
I was talking about PER specifically, and attempting to use it alone when evaluating.
Understand now?

I will say it again. Iverson didn't want a second superstar, or at least in his history of play he didn't allow it. Iverson had to be the man. Look what happened when he left Denver. All of a sudden they were really good.

so the rest of your post is obsolete for my argument. Iverson was given exactly what was necessary to give him the best team he could play for. Defenders, and low turnover offensive players who would let him shoot away. He was also a beneficiary of playing in a pathetic conference, with minimal competition to his defense.

Iverson, when all is said and done, in about 10 years, when you guys forget the cool looking crossovers, will go down as an overrated star.

llemon
12-28-2010, 05:35 PM
So, you are discrediting Jordan's PER....

Jordan was a chucker and had all of the grisly vets doing the dirty work ???

That's kind of laughable...

I've said it before and i'll say it again, give Iverson a superstar second option and the skies the limit... Jordan had Pippen... Kobe had Shaq and now Gasol.... Pierce has Garnett and Allen... Barkley had Olajuwon and Drexler... What happened when Wade lost Shaq ????

What happened when Kobe lost Shaq ???
Thomas had Dumars...

Iverson had George Lynch... lmao

The real problem was Iverson's teams had Iverson

bringinwood
12-28-2010, 05:39 PM
no, I am discrediting ONLY using PER. Jordan? Are you serious? Every stat he had was far better than AI.
I was talking about PER specifically, and attempting to use it alone when evaluating.
Understand now?

I will say it again. Iverson didn't want a second superstar, or at least in his history of play he didn't allow it. Iverson had to be the man. Look what happened when he left Denver. All of a sudden they were really good.

so the rest of your post is obsolete for my argument. Iverson was given exactly what was necessary to give him the best team he could play for. Defenders, and low turnover offensive players who would let him shoot away. He was also a beneficiary of playing in a pathetic conference, with minimal competition to his defense.

Iverson, when all is said and done, in about 10 years, when you guys forget the cool looking crossovers, will go down as an overrated star.

No, I don't understand...

I don't understand how Jordan ( who had the highest PER in the history of basketball ) isn't a chucker and Iverson is ???

The top 5 PERs in NBA history are

Jordan
LeBron
Shaq
D. Robinson
Wilt


How is that a bad testiment to player efficiency ??? Who, among those top 5, is a chucker ???

3RDASYSTEM
12-28-2010, 05:43 PM
I can tell who actually play and know a little bit than from the ones who call him a 'chucker' and everybody keeps saying Harping and a 36yr old Mutombo was so great and tallking about how inefficient he is, and they best perimeter D man was Lynch who was injured and didnt play in Finals, but this is all i will say, take AI off and add your fav player to that roster and tell me what will happen, everytime i look at that roster i laugh and cringe at same time...

People keep saying he had those defenders around him and like i say L.BROWN was a D minded stubborn coach who did it his way but kept AI who was a 'unique' talent who did it his way, not Sterns way, so he was already doomed from day one cuz he didnt wanna be a 'robot' and told to dress 35 at age of 20

If they would have drafted Pierce and kept the same D then i wouldnt even be talking cuz he would have another guy who could drop 30ppg on any given night..do you understand how easy the game would be if he had another BATMAN type,like how SHAQ/KOBE 3peat dynasty...and just to think they swept DUNCAN/Spurs and whoeva else and the only team to beat them was 48pts from the 'chucker' on the road in game 1 and the next 2 games were dogfights and he didnt even score for like 15minutes strait in game 1 cuz T.LUE was literally holding his jersey like a NFL lineman(he coulda dropped 55-60), so give me AI and another 30pt scorer and its a wrap with L.BROWN D scheme...heres an xample, me and my kinfolk played in league, when i didnt show up he would avg like 30ppg and more,and he would be like when i show up it takes the scoring load off him and makes it easier on him cuz i could drop 25-30 also and vice versa, damn are yall this damn dumb to keep talking bout him chucking the ball when he was ''ballhoggin with a purpose''(only ball players know this), sorta like how MJ did when he first came in the league and i had to hear people call MJ a ballhog, and to me winnning rings dont discount you from being a ballhog, you're just a BH with a ring(s)

Wats so funny is he improved everybodys game that came and played with hiim, how can a 6th man avg ''11 ppg'' and win the damn award,get the hell out of here..and then somebody brings up Speedy Claxton and said he has a ring cuz he played with Spurs dynasty and for some reason they forgot to say MBenga/Vujiac has 2 also,so wat does that mean? Bill Wennington has 3, Levingston has 3, Purdue has 5...so yea the ring thing has little to no weight when we talking bout the individual player/athlete/talent combination package...only ones i can put in his category is SHAQ/JORDAN/LEBRON/AMARE/GRIFFIN/ROSE/G.HILL/WADE and DUNCAN wasnt the freakish athlete, he was every bit the player and its a few more im sure but yall get my drift

Nobody on here is saying he played with legit talent, all yall is sayin they had the best D and other nonsense, well guess wat Ravens in the NFL has had the best or top 3 D since like 99 and how many titles they got to show for it...1, ya wanna know why? Cuz they was in same position like 76ers, no OFF, all DEF........gotta score to win games, D keeps ya in it and OFF wins, but keep lettiin ESPN educate ya and see where it get ya..a bunch of PER BS and all that other stuff that ''NON PLAYERS'' make up to justify they fave player whos a role player and is limited at pretty much everythang,except for being efficient cuz he has a line of 3-4 FG 4-4FT in 15min, but they dont understand the pressure of a guy 5'10 carrying and making a franchise relevant while gettin JORDAN ruled...who in the hell triple teams Nate Robinson/Steve Nash,nobody...well they did it with Iverson for yrs, but i blame the GM of Sixers not the 'haterade sippers'

And for those who are right around his height, do me a fav and go to the gym and have 2/3 guys contest all ya shots rather ya shoot a jumpshot or drive to the paint and see how many ya make, and make sure your team is full of Defenders and nobody who can score and then tell me how many shots ya make after being game planned for nite in and nite out....thats what he faced, the same D that Pistons Bad Boys put on 'JORDAN' and i also seen SHAQ get triple teamed during his 3peat run before he even touched the ball, so how can a guy shootin over 2/3 trees each possession going to shoot a high pct when he's the 1st,2nd,3rd, and more times than not the 4th option and wait he aint a Footer, hell he aint even 6'8 or 6'5..hes closer to 5'10, a inch or so and we have N.ROBINSON, just imagine if Nate did wat AI did facing that type of pressure and load, who in the hell would front on Nate?

After that Finals run in 01 they make the team weaker next yr so he could fail,when does a Finals team unload and not reload? Harpring/Blount/Mutombo/Snow the next yr ..please get off wateva legal or illegal drug yall usin out here....name me one player AI played with in Sixerland in those 10yrs that you wouuld trade for? I'll be waitiin a mighty long time for whoevas ''ANSWER''

When i think of teams going to Finals i think of Killer Combos or trios
AI/MUTOMBO/MCKIE - Weakest combo or trio ever to play in Finals, people fail to realize Mutombo was 35/36 yrs old then the nxt yr they put in zone and 3 second lane and he became bout as valuable as the comments made my non players on here

How come nobody admits his talent level was poor OFF. wise, i said they had good to real good D people but everybody keep sayin he shot and shot and shot, well how could you not shoot and shoot when everybody from SNOW/MCKIE/LYNCH/GEIGER/RATLIFF/MUTOMBO/J.JONES/ is telling you to create/score and when the shot clock is runnin down imma throw it to ya and hopefully i wont kill your already poor FG pct, so instead of havin a legit 7footer to bang and get points in the paint, the smallest guy on the court by far gotta play 'big man' for his team and score in the paint....and with all this efficiency talk how come when he went and played with MELO his PCT's went up everywhere they lacked in Sixerville, i wonder why...wait he had another 30ppg scorer beside him, so that kills ya efficient talk, jus had to wait 12yrs to see it....how sad is that a Superstar player who carried a Franchise and made'em relevant had to wait 12yrs to play with actual scoring talent

3RDASYSTEM
12-28-2010, 05:45 PM
The reason why they mad also is at 33 he didnt slow down, top 3 scorer..who in the hell does that at that stage/age in Pro sports? He wasnt playing like his age and in sports you have to,especially if ya rockin braids/tatts/arm sleeves.....Stern is just milkin Lebron, deep down he hates him cuz he sees AI minus the braids and bout 10inches taller, but still that same breathtakin talent/ability