PDA

View Full Version : 50 Greatest Players of the NBA (and the next 10) by TNT



JJ_JKidd
10-13-2014, 01:04 AM
Open Court just released their list of 10 players who they think should be considered in the 10 greatest players in the NBA in addition to initial 50.

In no order:

Tim Duncan
Kevin Garnett
Kobe Bryant
Allen Iverson
Chris Webber
Bob Mcadoo
Dominique Wilkins
Dirk Nowitzki
Lebron James

10th- its a debate between Wade and Durant.

Your thoughts?

Cal827
10-13-2014, 01:20 AM
Kinda surprised that Wade doesn't have an automatic spot in the next 10 instead of Iverson or Webber. Durant should with the other two (at least at this moment) for debate on the next 10, IMO, but it shouldn't be too long until he's on the list automatically too.

Kaner
10-13-2014, 02:12 AM
Wade is easily an automatic pick, it's weird that he wasn't already, so is Durant considering the original top 50 players had Shaq on it after just 4 seasons. Webber seems like an obvious guy to knock off to make room for both. Other then that I'd also probably switch Iverson and Wilkins out for Chris Paul and Dwight Howard though am not surprised that they wouldn't.

Dade County
10-13-2014, 02:17 AM
lol

What a joke...

In Order using there list:

Tim Duncan
Kobe Bryant
Lebron James (He will finish top 3 all time)
Kevin Garnett
D Wade
Dirk Nowitzki
Allen Iverson
Bob Mcadoo
Dominique Wilkins
Chris Webber

Let KD play a decade 1st before placing him on any list (but he will finish higher then 95% of the people above.

Raps18-19 Champ
10-13-2014, 03:53 AM
Why are we putting McAdoo, Wilkins and Iverson when there are so much better players like Nash, Dirk, Paul, Kidd, Payton, Pierce, McGrady, Allen, Miller, etc are all better?

P&GRealist
10-13-2014, 05:18 AM
Why are we putting McAdoo, Wilkins and Iverson when there are so much better players like Nash, Dirk, Paul, Kidd, Payton, Pierce, McGrady, Allen, Miller, etc are all better?

There are guys who are currently in the Top 50 that probably shouldn't even be there while guys like McAdoo and Dominique got slighted. It's a sign of respect and a past due selection for those guys.

YAALREADYKNO
10-13-2014, 10:27 AM
well just shows you those guys are either just haters or have no idea what they're talkin about especially shaq. How's he gonna say tmac and penny over wade when wade got him his 4th ring? Cwebb was straight hating on wade too. Only dudes who made sense were reggie miller and isiah Thomas to a certain degee.

YAALREADYKNO
10-13-2014, 10:30 AM
Why are we putting McAdoo, Wilkins and Iverson when there are so much better players like Nash, Dirk, Paul, Kidd, Payton, Pierce, McGrady, Allen, Miller, etc are all better?

Dirks already on the "next 10" list and Iverson is better than every player up you just named except Dirk and maybe kidd

FlashBolt
10-13-2014, 10:40 AM
Iverson, Webber, and McAdoo shouldn't even sniff this list when you have the likes of Wade, Allen, and other legendary players who have established their position in the NBA. Allen Iverson was NEVER better than Paul, Kidd, Payton, Pierce, or Allen in a team. Was he a great ballhogger who shot lights out? Yeah.. but that never translated to being better.

YAALREADYKNO
10-13-2014, 12:27 PM
Iverson, Webber, and McAdoo shouldn't even sniff this list when you have the likes of Wade, Allen, and other legendary players who have established their position in the NBA. Allen Iverson was NEVER better than Paul, Kidd, Payton, Pierce, or Allen in a team. Was he a great ballhogger who shot lights out? Yeah.. but that never translated to being better.

U serious? Iverson led an avg squad to the nba finals and is a MVP. What has cp3 done? he cant even get out of the 2nd round with arguably the most talented roster in the league smh and ray allen???

Raps18-19 Champ
10-13-2014, 02:34 PM
There are guys who are currently in the Top 50 that probably shouldn't even be there while guys like McAdoo and Dominique got slighted. It's a sign of respect and a past due selection for those guys.

There's nothing we can do about that. You have absolute control for the next 10 in this scenario. The hell should I care about them if there are 10 players easily better than those guys.

Raps18-19 Champ
10-13-2014, 02:35 PM
Dirks already on the "next 10" list and Iverson is better than every player up you just named except Dirk and maybe kidd

Didn't see Dirk.

And lol at Iverson being better than everyone there. Nash, Paul, Kidd, Payton are easily better than Iverson alone.

YAALREADYKNO
10-13-2014, 03:01 PM
Didn't see Dirk.

And lol at Iverson being better than everyone there. Nash, Paul, Kidd, Payton are easily better than Iverson alone.

I stopped reading when I saw nash and paul. Nash has more of case cause hes a two time mvp but chris paul? what has he done again?

SLY WILLIAMS
10-13-2014, 03:05 PM
D Wade remains the most over rated player on PSD in my opinion.

Iverson and Webber are borderline so I can see an argument for and against.

I like McAdoo a lot but it depends on which McAdoo we are speaking about. Early in his career? Or for full career?

FlashBolt
10-13-2014, 05:31 PM
U serious? Iverson led an avg squad to the nba finals and is a MVP. What has cp3 done? he cant even get out of the 2nd round with arguably the most talented roster in the league smh and ray allen???

1) Iverson led a fairly weak team in which was a really weak EC.. Ray Allen/Vince Carter were one win away from beating Iverson. It wasn't like the East were stacked. Iverson and his Philly team would have been eliminated by modern day EC... He would have been destroyed by the Bulls. Plus, you're forgetting that Dikembe Mutumbo was an amazing player and posted insane numbers during their playoff run.
2) CP3 is a much better player than AI. He's not as great of a scorer (because he doesn't force shots), but he is a better passer, defender, and statistically, he's ranked as one of the best PG's. Look at AI's PER/WS and his insane USG rate.. His PER/WS is atrocious compared to CP and not to mention his USG is ridiculously high. And you're talking about one of the most competitive WC in recent memory. Think about it.. how many wins does it take to even be in the eighth seed? Nearly 50 wins. You're acting like they are against a weak conference in which they are supposed to dominate everyone. This season Spurs would have eliminated AI and blew Sixers by 50 considering Miami was 10x better than the Sixers.
3) Ray Allen is the greatest shooter in NBA history. He has two rings and has been consistent his entire career. He played his role as a superstar and as a supporting player. Ray Allen has one of the best work ethics in NBA whereas AI lacks work ethic. Ray Allen was a huge part of those two rings.

Allen Iverson was a chucker who many people forget was one of the reasons why USA lost in 2004. He is overrated. Yeah, he had heart but think about this.. Westbrook averaged 17 shots per game last season and most of PSD were lamenting him for doing so. Allen Iverson averaged 26 shots per game for the Sixers in his prime. This dude was nothing but a volume scorer. Not to mention he played over 43 minutes - limiting the Sixers offense and consuming every possession for the Sixers.

If you want to sell tickets, you take AI. If you want to win games and have a successful team, you take CP3 or Ray Allen - two players who play within the system.

Raps18-19 Champ
10-13-2014, 05:42 PM
I stopped reading when I saw nash and paul. Nash has more of case cause hes a two time mvp but chris paul? what has he done again?

Paul is easily a better basketball player than Iverson. Accolades are different story (though Iverson shouldn't have won his MVP and Paul got robbed of an MVP).

hugepatsfan
10-13-2014, 08:16 PM
Iverson, Webber, and McAdoo shouldn't even sniff this list when you have the likes of Wade, Allen, and other legendary players who have established their position in the NBA. Allen Iverson was NEVER better than Paul, Kidd, Payton, Pierce, or Allen in a team. Was he a great ballhogger who shot lights out? Yeah.. but that never translated to being better.

This. Iverson is a tremendous talent and a great player but his game just doesn't translate well to a winning team. When we talk about who the "best" player is we mean who contributes most towards winning, not who the best individual talent is. Obviously there's some overlap in that but Iverson is one of those exceptions where the talent doesn't translate to building a winning team.

Sadds The Gr8
10-13-2014, 08:31 PM
Kinda surprised that Wade doesn't have an automatic spot in the next 10 instead of Iverson or Webber. Durant should with the other two (at least at this moment) for debate on the next 10, IMO, but it shouldn't be too long until he's on the list automatically too.
At the end they took c webb off for wade and kd

I was shocked they didn't have wade as a lock. I was like wtf?

Alayla
10-13-2014, 08:34 PM
Why are we putting McAdoo, Wilkins and Iverson when there are so much better players like Nash, Dirk, Paul, Kidd, Payton, Pierce, McGrady, Allen, Miller, etc are all better?

OK really i am officially 100% done with PSD NBA Forum at least for awhile. From a full career standpoint in what universe is T Mac Better than Iverson? i actually really love T Mac and Carter as players and even i wouldn't make a case for that Iverson is consistently slammed on this forum over and over again and you would think eventually after years of ragging on the guy you would get bored. Or at least take time to educate yourself on his career so that your slamming is at least grounded in reality. You might as well be calling Steve Francis Stephen Marbury and Antone Walker better than AI while your at it why stop there how about going where people like bagwell go and call players like Lynch and Snow better than AI. Its just ****ing ridiculous and its not just AI Russel Westbrook gets the same treatment and that makes NO sense considering everyone thinks Derrick Rose 2 years out of shape is STILL going to be better than Westbrook when in my personal opinion he wasn't even better than Westbrook to begin with.

Anyways back on topic TMac was much less healthy had a shorter career less production less accolades less playoff experience and even in your precious PSD Crazed stat loving nonsense Tmac doesn't separate himself from AI
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/m/mcgratr01.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/i/iversal01.html
he is only JUST BARLEY more effective throughout his career on much less production and over a much shorter time frame.
You cant even argue Tmac was a better locker room guy or any of that mess because he had most of the exact same issues just a lot less publicized

Even if you take the dated best statistical season argument T mac STILL DOESN'T WIN
TMac also had far more help in his career this is madding it boggles the mind just how deep this Iverson disrespect runs

Alayla
10-13-2014, 09:10 PM
Rant aside as i have said many many times please wacth film on the skillsets of these players before just throwing around uneducated guesses about who is better than who study strengths and weaknesses of there games. Compile lists of who does what better than who etc but for the love of god stop rooting your feelings in raw numbers and nothing else.

Chronz
10-13-2014, 09:13 PM
OK really i am officially 100% done with PSD NBA Forum at least for awhile. From a full career standpoint in what universe is T Mac Better than Iverson? i actually really love T Mac and Carter as players and even i wouldn't make a case for that Iverson is consistently slammed on this forum over and over again and you would think eventually after years of ragging on the guy you would get bored. Or at least take time to educate yourself on his career so that your slamming is at least grounded in reality. You might as well be calling Steve Francis Stephen Marbury and Antone Walker better than AI while your at it why stop there how about going where people like bagwell go and call players like Lynch and Snow better than AI. Its just ****ing ridiculous and its not just AI Russel Westbrook gets the same treatment and that makes NO sense considering everyone thinks Derrick Rose 2 years out of shape is STILL going to be better than Westbrook when in my personal opinion he wasn't even better than Westbrook to begin with.

Anyways back on topic TMac was much less healthy had a shorter career less production less accolades less playoff experience and even in your precious PSD Crazed stat loving nonsense Tmac doesn't separate himself from AI
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/m/mcgratr01.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/i/iversal01.html
he is only JUST BARLEY more effective throughout his career on much less production and over a much shorter time frame.
You cant even argue Tmac was a better locker room guy or any of that mess because he had most of the exact same issues just a lot less publicized

Even if you take the dated best statistical season argument T mac STILL DOESN'T WIN
TMac also had far more help in his career this is madding it boggles the mind just how deep this Iverson disrespect runs
Of all the players you chose to highlight the guy who has the best case? Tmac was definitely a better defender so the fact that he is also more productive isn't something to boast about.

JJ_JKidd
10-13-2014, 09:20 PM
The Top 50 list came out in 1996 or 18 years ago. Aside from those who were snubbed in the original Top 50, the question to be considered is- "who are the players from 1996 to present who had excellent careers?"

In terms of pure Championships alone, I can only recall Duncan and Kobe. Perhaps you can include Wade, too but not necessarily a lock.

Wait, can anyone recall the category for the original Top 50?

Chronz
10-13-2014, 09:20 PM
Rant aside as i have said many many times please wacth film on the skillsets of these players before just throwing around uneducated guesses about who is better than who study strengths and weaknesses of there games. Compile lists of who does what better than who etc but for the love of god stop rooting your feelings in raw numbers and nothing else.

Heres the thing, by focusing on skill set you are ignoring the FAR more important element of a Tmac vs AI debate. Its the longevity vs Peak Performance debate. There is no question Tmac was the better player at his peak (IMO), so asking us to watch them play doesn't help your argument. What you have to focus on is the fact that AI may have had the better prime run all things considered. Not sure if I would agree with that but its a better argument than the one your making.

Chronz
10-13-2014, 09:22 PM
The Top 50 list came out in 1996 or 18 years ago. Aside from those who were snubbed in the original Top 50, the question to be considered is- "who are the players from 1996 to present who had excellent careers?"

In terms of pure Championships alone, I can only recall Duncan and Kobe. Perhaps you can include Wade, too but not necessarily a lock.

Wait, can anyone recall the category for the original Top 50?

Should it really be about championships?

JJ_JKidd
10-13-2014, 09:26 PM
Should it really be about championships?

Of course not. Thats why there is the word "in terms." (I know the name Robert Horry btw)

JJ_JKidd
10-13-2014, 09:34 PM
Should it really be about championships?

Of course not. Thats why there is the word "in terms." (I know the name Robert Horry btw)

THE MTL
10-13-2014, 10:15 PM
Iverson, Webber, and McAdoo shouldn't even sniff this list when you have the likes of Wade, Allen, and other legendary players who have established their position in the NBA. Allen Iverson was NEVER better than Paul, Kidd, Payton, Pierce, or Allen in a team. Was he a great ballhogger who shot lights out? Yeah.. but that never translated to being better.

I can name a season where AI was better than all those players you just named.

Hotone1401
10-13-2014, 11:33 PM
U
D Wade remains the most over rated player on PSD in my opinion.

Iverson and Webber are borderline so I can see an argument for and against.

I like McAdoo a lot but it depends on which McAdoo we are speaking about. Early in his career? Or for full career?

This.

Alayla
10-14-2014, 09:41 AM
Heres the thing, by focusing on skill set you are ignoring the FAR more important element of a Tmac vs AI debate. Its the longevity vs Peak Performance debate. There is no question Tmac was the better player at his peak (IMO), so asking us to watch them play doesn't help your argument. What you have to focus on is the fact that AI may have had the better prime run all things considered. Not sure if I would agree with that but its a better argument than the one your making.

First of all im sure TMac himself would tell you Iverson was the more gifted player.
TMacs game depended on his ability to get to the rim at will a little known fact is Iversons Vertical jump was only one inch less than TMacs. Tmac 42 Iverson 41 Iverson was a quicker player could change directions better handle the ball better get to the line better he even dropped them more often when he was there. Oh and Iverson was the better passer, Tmac was at best a better raw shooter and Defender, Iverson got pretty deadly from Mid ranged late in his carrer but he was never much of a factor from 3. Tmac had elilte D there for awhile where as Iverson had average D with a few steals titles behind it. Go and reread my first post i allready mentioned Iverson played longer and stayed at a high level much longer Tmac had at best 4 Iverson quality seasons. the fact that this argument is even a thing is crazy the main arugement for a guy like Allen over Iverson is the fact he held himself together so long and Iverson couldnt adjust his game as he aged right?
So what is with this Doublestanderd by that logic Iverson blows Tmac out of the god damn water.
I understand people are still disappointed Tmac never was as good as he could have been but for an all time list? i am not sure id even take Tmac over Carter let alone Iverson.

mightybosstone
10-14-2014, 09:47 AM
Wade should unquestionably be ahead of Webber, Wilkins and McAdoo, and I think he's got a superior case to Iverson as well. Not a great list.

Alayla
10-14-2014, 09:49 AM
take a look at his career winning % and get back to me on that one how about his high school state championships in football and basketball just because he doesn't have a championship ring at the NBA level doesn't mean what he does doesn't win basketball games. No one ever does it alone and i promise you if LA didnt exist during his Nuggets days especially when Camby was there people would be talking alot different about Iversons ability to fit into a *winning team*.

Alayla
10-14-2014, 09:55 AM
Paul is easily a better basketball player than Iverson. Accolades are different story (though Iverson shouldn't have won his MVP and Paul got robbed of an MVP).

now while ive been defending Iverson alot here let me be very clear anyone who thinks Iverson is better than CP3 is off there rocker or just living in the past.

JLynn943
10-14-2014, 10:22 AM
The argument against Iverson has too much reliance on his shooting inefficiency. I've been over this argument a million times on here about why that's a poor argument - namely because of the offensively inept players he played with in Philly. Sure, many of them were efficient, but that's because they were only taking the easier shots they could make. Unfortunately, there aren't always easy shots available. Having them take more contested or difficult shots instead of Iverson would have been worse for that offense. Him taking a tough shot was still often the best option. Him being a ball-hog was only a part of it, and I don't believe he was any more a ball hog than most star players today.

Knock him for his locker room/off court issues and defensive problems, sure. But, when there is evidence from his days in Denver that he simply needed better offensive talent around him (like practically every other HoF player had) to be a far more efficient player, it's a weak argument to focus on his shooting.

WaDe03
10-14-2014, 10:24 AM
Shaq arguing Penny and Tmac over Wade lol. Idk what happened but Shaq used to be on Wades **** talking about how he was going to be the next greatest.

As for the list Duncan, LeBron, and Kobe should for sure be higher than Wade. Dirk and KG debatable, as for Iverson, Dominique, Bob, Durant, and Webber (Lol) hell no.

Webber was trying so hard to get himself on that list it was embarrassing he's not better than any of those players. His argument was " I'm just going to say Duncan, Dirk, and KG know me really good." He's not better than any of them if you ask me.

YAALREADYKNO
10-14-2014, 11:15 AM
1) Iverson led a fairly weak team in which was a really weak EC.. Ray Allen/Vince Carter were one win away from beating Iverson. It wasn't like the East were stacked. Iverson and his Philly team would have been eliminated by modern day EC... He would have been destroyed by the Bulls. Plus, you're forgetting that Dikembe Mutumbo was an amazing player and posted insane numbers during their playoff run.
2) CP3 is a much better player than AI. He's not as great of a scorer (because he doesn't force shots), but he is a better passer, defender, and statistically, he's ranked as one of the best PG's. Look at AI's PER/WS and his insane USG rate.. His PER/WS is atrocious compared to CP and not to mention his USG is ridiculously high. And you're talking about one of the most competitive WC in recent memory. Think about it.. how many wins does it take to even be in the eighth seed? Nearly 50 wins. You're acting like they are against a weak conference in which they are supposed to dominate everyone. This season Spurs would have eliminated AI and blew Sixers by 50 considering Miami was 10x better than the Sixers.
3) Ray Allen is the greatest shooter in NBA history. He has two rings and has been consistent his entire career. He played his role as a superstar and as a supporting player. Ray Allen has one of the best work ethics in NBA whereas AI lacks work ethic. Ray Allen was a huge part of those two rings.

Allen Iverson was a chucker who many people forget was one of the reasons why USA lost in 2004. He is overrated. Yeah, he had heart but think about this.. Westbrook averaged 17 shots per game last season and most of PSD were lamenting him for doing so. Allen Iverson averaged 26 shots per game for the Sixers in his prime. This dude was nothing but a volume scorer. Not to mention he played over 43 minutes - limiting the Sixers offense and consuming every possession for the Sixers.

If you want to sell tickets, you take AI. If you want to win games and have a successful team, you take CP3 or Ray Allen - two players who play within the system.


Allen Iverson has more accolades than ray allen. He might be the greatest shooter ever but you cant be serious if you're gonna take a guy whos never done anything as the number 1 option. You say the east was weak in 2001 yet the 76ers roster was arguably the weakest of the 3 and ray allen and vince carter couldn't get past Iverson smh

Chronz
10-14-2014, 12:15 PM
First of all im sure TMac himself would tell you Iverson was the more gifted player.
I dont know, Im pretty sure Tmac loved the ability to defend 1-4 and AI hated the fact that he couldn't be trusted with defending his own position. Talent can be pretty subjective but neither of them got the most out of their talent.


TMacs game depended on his ability to get to the rim at will a little known fact is Iversons Vertical jump was only one inch less than TMacs. Tmac 42 Iverson 41 Iverson was a quicker player could change directions better handle the ball better get to the line better he even dropped them more often when he was there.
Nonsense, Tmac wasn't even that great of a finisher/slasher, his game was predicated on vision + being able to rise over the top of defenses and creating space with a low dribble stance but anyways, even if I did believe you, why would I care how high AI jumped? Is that suppose to offset the length+height advantage Tmac had?


Oh and Iverson was the better passer, Tmac was at best a better raw shooter and Defender, Iverson got pretty deadly from Mid ranged late in his carrer but he was never much of a factor from 3.
Passing is debatable, both were gifted passers only AI was more of a playmaker (drive and kick) whereas Tmac was a better facilitator/distributor(PnR), its partly why he has such a better turnover ratio. He could see over the top of defenses and make high risk passes seem effortless. Both could run a team and get quality shots, I just like Tmac's ability to do that abit more and I LOVE his ability to defend ALOT more.

As for getting to the line, thats great, but even when we account for that, Tmac was STILL more efficient.



Tmac had elilte D there for awhile where as Iverson had average D with a few steals titles behind it.
Im sorry, I cant look at a defensive liability who needed tall PG's to defend his position as an average defensive player. Sure, in the right system with an absolutely PERFECT cast of players and coaches, you could make AI a game changer defensively, which he was for awhile, but you can do even more with a more versatile defender like Tmac.



Go and reread my first post i allready mentioned Iverson played longer and stayed at a high level much longer Tmac had at best 4 Iverson quality seasons. the fact that this argument is even a thing is crazy the main arugement for a guy like Allen over Iverson is the fact he held himself together so long and Iverson couldnt adjust his game as he aged right?
By my count, AI had like 1 Prime Tmac quality seasons. Tmac from 20-28 was definitely the better player overall, what gives AI a fighting chance are those 4 extra years he gives you. Its kind of the reverse of Ray Allen vs Iverson.



So what is with this Doublestanderd by that logic Iverson blows Tmac out of the god damn water.
What makes you think so?

Tmac was more versatile on both ends, FAR more productive at his peak, both finished with the same number of All-NBA seasons but Ill admit Tmac didnt deserve his last one so its not that different in terms of longevity, but in terms of sheer individual dominance, Tmac had it.


I understand people are still disappointed Tmac never was as good as he could have been but for an all time list? i am not sure id even take Tmac over Carter let alone Iverson.
Thats just a greater sign that you should rethink your opinion, particularly when it lacks any sort of objective evidence to support your theories. In Vince Carter you are talking about a less productive player who also failed to achieve the same sort of accolades and struggled with a myriad of injuries DURING his prime as opposed to eventually succumbing to them and cutting his prime short.

Tmac at his best was the best swingman in the NBA. AI at his best is still 5"11.

Chronz
10-14-2014, 12:20 PM
Allen Iverson has more accolades than ray allen. He might be the greatest shooter ever but you cant be serious if you're gonna take a guy whos never done anything as the number 1 option. You say the east was weak in 2001 yet the 76ers roster was arguably the weakest of the 3 and ray allen and vince carter couldn't get past Iverson smh

AI easily had the better team. His squad could win PLAYOFF games with him going like 3-20 or whatever sorry *** % he shot, and they did so because they could hold the best offensive teams to middling results. Thats with AI not being tasked to defend his own position.

That the last placed (defensively) Bucks were his biggest threat shows how weak the East was and how much more help AI had.

Dade County
10-14-2014, 12:25 PM
Why are people comparing Ai & Cp3.... They are two different players.

And all of this Ai bashing is just nerds strictly worrying about numbers.

Ask yourself posters, how far in the playoffs would Cp3 have gotten that 2001 6'ers team? This might be a trick question, maybe they would not have even made the playoffs :shrug:

It all depends on what a team needs... I would love them both on my team, because to me AI was a undersize SG.

Cp3
AI
? pure shooter
? a guy that can jump really high
? rim protector

Chronz
10-14-2014, 12:29 PM
The argument against Iverson has too much reliance on his shooting inefficiency. I've been over this argument a million times on here about why that's a poor argument - namely because of the offensively inept players he played with in Philly. Sure, many of them were efficient, but that's because they were only taking the easier shots they could make. Unfortunately, there aren't always easy shots available. Having them take more contested or difficult shots instead of Iverson would have been worse for that offense. Him taking a tough shot was still often the best option. Him being a ball-hog was only a part of it, and I don't believe he was any more a ball hog than most star players today.

Knock him for his locker room/off court issues and defensive problems, sure. But, when there is evidence from his days in Denver that he simply needed better offensive talent around him (like practically every other HoF player had) to be a far more efficient player, it's a weak argument to focus on his shooting.

Not seeing why thats so special to AI nor how it completely exonerates the chucking. By pointing at his offensively challenged teammates you're ignoring why the team built his squad around him in the first place, a squad which was the most successful team hes ever led BTW. He feuded with guys like Jerry Stackhouse, dominated the ball so much that he had to be removed from playing the 1 (IIRC thats precisely was Stackhouse predicted should be done before they had to be separated) and even in Denver his own coach didn't want him at the 1.

So even in that Denver scenario, you're stuck with a SG who cant defend 2's much less 3's and doesn't promote really ball movement, doesn't really stretch the floor. So that means you better have a PG with the size to defend 2's (poor Anthony Carter didnt) and can also be a threat from deep. Good luck finding that combination without him being better than AI.

His scoring efficiency improved with a lower usage/load, but that holds true for most and even with his career best efficiency, it doesn't separate him one iota from the guys I hold above him. Theres also the fact that AI wasn't always WILLING to share the spotlight/ball so lets not just focus on 1 halfway decent campaign in Denver and ignore his entire career.

Chronz
10-14-2014, 12:40 PM
Why are people comparing Ai & Cp3.... They are two different players.
LOL. Because people have been comparing different players since the dawn of the NBA. Just because you have to use that cop out doesn't mean the rest of us do.


And all of this Ai bashing is just nerds strictly worrying about numbers.
Even if it were true, labeling them nerds wouldn't change the facts of those numbers.


Ask yourself posters, how far in the playoffs would Cp3 have gotten that 2001 6'ers team? This might be a trick question, maybe they would not have even made the playoffs :shrug:

LOL, you mean the best defensive team in the conference with the COY, 6MOY and DPOY. Why dont you ask yourself, would a team really build around CP3 the same way they had to with AI? With CP3 you dont need a PG like Eric Snow because CP3 can actually defend his natural position (PG) in fact, CP3 is an All-League defender at the position. Ur right about 1 thing, it is a trick question, but not for the reason you gave.


It all depends on what a team needs... I would love them both on my team, because to me AI was a undersize SG.

Cp3
AI
? pure shooter
? a guy that can jump really high
? rim protector

I can leave with this.

Replace AI with Ray Allen and switch the pure shooter with a pure defender and you have yourself a better squad already.

Chronz
10-14-2014, 12:41 PM
take a look at his career winning % and get back to me on that one how about his high school state championships in football and basketball just because he doesn't have a championship ring at the NBA level doesn't mean what he does doesn't win basketball games. No one ever does it alone and i promise you if LA didnt exist during his Nuggets days especially when Camby was there people would be talking alot different about Iversons ability to fit into a *winning team*.

If LA doesn't exist, the entire seedings are changed in which case alot can happen. I guarantee I would be talking about AI in the same way.

YAALREADYKNO
10-14-2014, 12:54 PM
AI easily had the better team. His squad could win PLAYOFF games with him going like 3-20 or whatever sorry *** % he shot, and they did so because they could hold the best offensive teams to middling results. Thats with AI not being tasked to defend his own position.

That the last placed (defensively) Bucks were his biggest threat shows how weak the East was and how much more help AI had.

I wouldn't say he "easily" had the best roster smh. The east was weak and yet guys that people claim to be better than Iverson (ray allen) still couldn't get past A Iverson led squad. So what if he shot a lot the man still carried them to the finals. When Your team is limited offensively of course your gonna shoot a lot and u act like the that 76ers squad would've made the playoffs without AI. AI is a great player give credit where credit is due. He deserves to be in the "next 10"

bootsy
10-14-2014, 01:12 PM
The Iverson hate and stupidity still exist on this site unfortunately. He's an 11 time All Star, Rookie of Year, League MVP, 2 time All Star MVP, 7 time All NBA(3 1st team), led the league in steals twice, 4 time scoring Champ. Yeah he belongs on the list.

Chronz
10-14-2014, 01:58 PM
I wouldn't say he "easily" had the best roster smh.
Dude, they swept the awards and had a top ranked defense with AI needing someone else to defend his own position. Thats easily more help than any other comparable star in the conference.


The east was weak and yet guys that people claim to be better than Iverson (ray allen) still couldn't get past A Iverson led squad.
Im not seeing what point ur trying to make. These are not mutually exclusive elements, what if Ray Allen is roughly on the same level? Its not hard to picture a slightly better player losing to a better team. Point being, its a debate worth having.


So what if he shot a lot the man still carried them to the finals.
Agreed, he also carried them into the lottery while being a better player than he was in his youth. Thats how much of a team game this is and its why your points are so hollow. He better have made the Finals with that cast, that they were forced to an elimination game in every series is sad IMO.



When Your team is limited offensively of course your gonna shoot a lot and u act like the that 76ers squad would've made the playoffs without AI. AI is a great player give credit where credit is due. He deserves to be in the "next 10"
I dont act like anything, I speak facts. AI is a great player but so are the other guys hes competing against. He might deserve to be in the next 10, again, so do the other guys. Like whats the argument over Nique? Wade, Ray Ray etc...

Chronz
10-14-2014, 02:03 PM
The Iverson hate and stupidity still exist on this site unfortunately. He's an 11 time All Star, Rookie of Year, League MVP, 2 time All Star MVP, 7 time All NBA(3 1st team), led the league in steals twice, 4 time scoring Champ. Yeah he belongs on the list.

Generic argument: Whine about haters, insert accolades, disregard objective analysis and the accomplishments of everyone else. = Win

You won the argument, just like AI won the chip...

YAALREADYKNO
10-14-2014, 02:20 PM
Dude, they swept the awards and had a top ranked defense with AI needing someone else to defend his own position. Thats easily more help than any other comparable star in the conference.


Im not seeing what point ur trying to make. These are not mutually exclusive elements, what if Ray Allen is roughly on the same level? Its not hard to picture a slightly better player losing to a better team. Point being, its a debate worth having.


Agreed, he also carried them into the lottery while being a better player than he was in his youth. Thats how much of a team game this is and its why your points are so hollow. He better have made the Finals with that cast, that they were forced to an elimination game in every series is sad IMO.



I dont act like anything, I speak facts. AI is a great player but so are the other guys hes competing against. He might deserve to be in the next 10, again, so do the other guys. Like whats the argument over Nique? Wade, Ray Ray etc...

you must've forgotten that ray allen had sam cassell, glenn robinson, and tim Thomas. They were one of the top scoring teams in the league at the time. You say cp3 is a better player and I ask, what has he done to prove that hes been better than Iverson? Iverson is better than ray and nique. I'd take wade over him but when yall say cp3 or ray allen? and again you act like that cast was on Bird or magic's supporting cast level. How are you gonna say its sad that he had to go to game 7's in every series but yet look past the fact that cp3 failed against the spurs in game 7 in New Orleans, when they got swept 4-0 by the spurs, or when they lost in the first round against the grizzlies. The fact that the 1st seeded spurs got swept by the lakers that yr and Iverson was able to get the 76ers to even win a game against arguably the most dominant playoff run in NBA history was great to see especially when everyone was expecting the sixers to get swept.

Chronz
10-14-2014, 02:54 PM
you must've forgotten that ray allen had sam cassell, glenn robinson, and tim Thomas. They were one of the top scoring teams in the league at the time.
Nope, they were one of my favorite teams to watch so why would I forget them? I still remember the outcry from a badly officiated series where people felt the Sixers got too much love. Their offense was beautiful to watch, mostly a result of Ray Allen's shooting ability unlike the Sixers, who were dominant defensively in spite of AI.
That series shows just how much support AI had, that he could go 3-30 or whatever and have his team hold down the best offense in the conference in a win, man thats alot of defensive work and alot of room for error. His team would have won comfortably had AI even had a remotely good game. AI was the offense, but offense is NOT what made that team special, it was its unrelenting defense.



You say cp3 is a better player and I ask, what has he done to prove that hes been better than Iverson?
Play the game of basketball at a higher level, not fist fight teammates, be a coach on the floor, be able to defend his own position (heroically defends swings sometimes too), produce at a higher level etc... I mean, am I suppose to blame CP3 for not having the luck of being in the East with its best support in place? No thanks, I prefer focusing on things the individual has more control over, you know, his own individual level of play.


Iverson is better than ray and nique. I'd take wade over him but when yall say cp3 or ray allen? and again you act like that cast was on Bird or magic's supporting cast level.
I dont see what makes him better and again, I dont "act" like anything. That you have to continuously resort to strawman arguments tells us how little you have to stand on.


How are you gonna say its sad that he had to go to game 7's in every series but yet look past the fact that cp3 failed against the spurs in game 7 in New Orleans, when they got swept 4-0 by the spurs, or when they lost in the first round against the grizzlies.
Because AI was on the best team in his conference when everyone pushed them to elimination whereas CP3's teams overachieved to a greater degree to even get that far in the first place. Wake me up when CP3 has the best defense in his conference backing him up against those kind of powerhouses, then I might care.


The fact that the 1st seeded spurs got swept by the lakers that yr and Iverson was able to get the 76ers to even win a game against arguably the most dominant playoff run in NBA history was great to see especially when everyone was expecting the sixers to get swept.
You mean a Lakers team that had to wait through a long lay off while they awaited their next team? They proceeded to dismantle the Sixers once they got their feet wet. It was a great game 1 tho, definitely right about that.

Dade County
10-14-2014, 03:20 PM
LOL. Because people have been comparing different players since the dawn of the NBA. Just because you have to use that cop out doesn't mean the rest of us do.

You just felt like writing something here...lol



Even if it were true, labeling them nerds wouldn't change the facts of those numbers.

lmao



LOL, you mean the best defensive team in the conference with the COY, 6MOY and DPOY. Why dont you ask yourself, would a team really build around CP3 the same way they had to with AI? With CP3 you dont need a PG like Eric Snow because CP3 can actually defend his natural position (PG) in fact, CP3 is an All-League defender at the position. Ur right about 1 thing, it is a trick question, but not for the reason you gave.

Now you are getting into changing the roster for Cp3 to fit him; who's to say that the roster built around AI was the best for him?

I believe that AI would also thrive with the squad that Cp3 has right now, other people might not. Of course you will try to flip players around again, which would make sense if we were playing GM.

I guess I will put it like this... If Cp3 & Ai had the same team, I believe that Cp3 team would have the better regular season record, but AI would take them further into the playoffs and maybe onto the Finals.



Replace AI with Ray Allen and switch the pure shooter with a pure defender and you have yourself a better squad already.

Yeah & switch the pg to a good defender and a keep the pure shooting SF and you still have a good team.


The notion that the team Ai had around him was the best for him is laughable; but I can't blame AI for that, thats the only system he knew for over 7yrs. I just wish AI ended up in L.A with Shaq or another good front office team.

All he needed was other stars around him, when he was in his prime.

Chronz
10-14-2014, 03:49 PM
You just felt like writing something here...lol

Only because it was so fitting. Imagine that, people comparing different players lol.... only been happening since day 1.


lmao
lmFao


Now you are getting into changing the roster for Cp3 to fit him; who's to say that the roster built around AI was the best for him?
Because it was a construct that came about after years of work trying to build around him. They got rid of scorers and guys who would complain about touches and replaced them with workhorses who could impact the game while allowing AI to chuck to his hearts content.

It wasn't perfect but they did build the best team AI ever led and the fact is, nobody would have built a team around CP3 the way they did around AI, so asking how AI's team would fare with CP3 at the helm is still a foolish question. With CP3, there would be no need for Snow the way they needed him for AI.



I believe that AI would also thrive with the squad that Cp3 has right now, other people might not. Of course you will try to flip players around again, which would make sense if we were playing GM.
It makes sense when raising hypotheticals involving 2 different types of players. We could ignore alot of contextual circumstances if they were the same type of player. And I do believe AI would thrive, I just dont think he would bring out the best in the team. For 1 he would be a definite down grade defensively and would only serve in hurting our ball movement, the kind of movement some of our players rely on.


I guess I will put it like this... If Cp3 & Ai had the same team, I believe that Cp3 team would have the better regular season record, but AI would take them further into the playoffs and maybe onto the Finals.

Well having the same team could be an advantage/disadvantage for either of them, this is why we "play GM" because nobody would be stupid enough to build around these 2 in the same manner, but in terms of ur sheer blanket statement, I dont see any advantage to adding an inferior defender who is at his best as an undersized SG and requires specific needs. Offensively, you could make a case for either of them but I think AI would need more help to reach his full potential. Sort of like what we saw in the Olympics, where AI struggled and CP3 thrived alongside more talent.


Yeah & switch the pg to a good defender and a keep the pure shooting SF and you still have a good team.
HUH? You lost me bro, so wats the team u are talking about?



The notion that the team Ai had around him was the best for him is laughable;
I dont think you understand, I said it was the best team hes ever led.


but I can't blame AI for that, thats the only system he knew for over 7yrs. I just wish AI ended up in L.A with Shaq or another good front office team.
If you think AI ran the same system for 7 years then you dont know much about his career. And as much as you wish for that to happen, I thank my lucky stars it never did. Unless you're saying you would just have added him to Kobe+Shaq, in which case that would have been interesting but that wouldn't really be fair.

I agree he had poor management but in their defense, AI wasn't exactly an easy star to build around. He feuded with the best scoring talent they brought him and he required a certain set of players to mask his defensive deficiencies. I actually think they were beginning to turn it around when they drafted Korver+Iggy, but it was too lil too late.



All he needed was other stars around him, when he was in his prime.
Same could be said for every star to never win. Not seeing the point of this kind of talk.

FlashBolt
10-14-2014, 06:02 PM
I can name a season where AI was better than all those players you just named.

Yeah.. and that doesn't prove jack. AI never had a better season than CP3 or Nash. His numbers were high but look at his USG rate and FGA. If it weren't that high, it'd be a travesty.. For someone to play 44 minutes per game, it's only fitting that they SHOULD have high numbers. Unfortunately, that doesn't translate to efficiency. The main thing for me is someone who can lead their team and play within it. Allen never did that. He wasn't a leader of the Sixers.. That was a weak conference in which Bucks/Raptors managed to take Sixers to seven games. Not to mention the fact that Dikembe was playing lights out in the playoffs.


Shaq arguing Penny and Tmac over Wade lol. Idk what happened but Shaq used to be on Wades **** talking about how he was going to be the next greatest.

As for the list Duncan, LeBron, and Kobe should for sure be higher than Wade. Dirk and KG debatable, as for Iverson, Dominique, Bob, Durant, and Webber (Lol) hell no.

Webber was trying so hard to get himself on that list it was embarrassing he's not better than any of those players. His argument was " I'm just going to say Duncan, Dirk, and KG know me really good." He's not better than any of them if you ask me.

Shaq is a notorious bandwagoner. He said the same about Wade/Kobe/Carter.. Dude will say anything these days.


Allen Iverson has more accolades than ray allen. He might be the greatest shooter ever but you cant be serious if you're gonna take a guy whos never done anything as the number 1 option. You say the east was weak in 2001 yet the 76ers roster was arguably the weakest of the 3 and ray allen and vince carter couldn't get past Iverson smh

Oh yeah.. because Allen doesn't have the longer career and more defined. He's a 2x NBA champion who is smart and knows how to play within the system. And Ray Allen DESTROYED Allen Iverson when he was the first option in the Bucks.. He put up 29 points on 49% shooting while your savior took 32 shoots to score 31 points.. basically 34% from the field. Bucks were 1 point away from beating Sixers and going to the Finals.. so I have no idea what you're talking about in regards to Ray Allen doing nothing. And no, 76ers were not "arguably" the weakest. Allen Iverson shot 5/27 from the field in game 5 and they still managed to win.. that Sixers team was great defensively but apparently, people think they were just a bunch of tools running around. But whatever floats your boat.. If you value someone who:

1) Doesn't practice.
2) High volume shooter.
3) An insanely high usage rate+horrible efficiency+huge minutes=total recipe for losing.




Why are people comparing Ai & Cp3.... They are two different players.

And all of this Ai bashing is just nerds strictly worrying about numbers.

Ask yourself posters, how far in the playoffs would Cp3 have gotten that 2001 6'ers team? This might be a trick question, maybe they would not have even made the playoffs :shrug:

It all depends on what a team needs... I would love them both on my team, because to me AI was a undersize SG.

Cp3
AI
? pure shooter
? a guy that can jump really high.
? rim protector

Lmao @ they wouldn't make the playoffs.. Are you insane? CP3 was a better defender and team offense runs better with CP3 whereas AI was often stagnant and relied on volume shooting to score. If it weren't for his team, they wouldn't make it to the playoffs because AI was a huge gambler on defense. He may have led the league in steals a couple of times but his defense was mediocre. He also played 44 minutes per game - meaning he absorbed valuable minutes and his USG rate was mindblowing.. Think Westbrook x2... And we all know CP3 can score if need-be. AI led a strong defensive team to the NBA Finals in a very weak conference.. And there is nothing you say that will prove it wasn't a weak conference.

latinofire21
10-14-2014, 06:16 PM
I think Webber can easily fall out of that list and Durant can take his spot. Wade doesn't belong in that category. He created a superteam to amass his championships and he wont have the longevity in career to compete with the more established players on that list. His knees are about to go.

Bruno
10-15-2014, 03:00 PM
they screwed this up. adding old players? they didn't make the cut in 1997 because? we have two less spots for nearly 20 years of excellent basketball because? Wade is lock for the "next ten".

they should just redo the 50. by adding bob and nique they're implying that they messed up the first 50 the first time around. this is a respectful gesture in that they want those 50 chosen in 1997 to be forever top 50, but it doesn't work like that. every 20 years the list should be redone. every two generations, there should be another evaluation.

FlashBolt
10-15-2014, 10:48 PM
Redoing the list is pretty disrespectful and I'm sure the NBA would get a lot of unwanted attention from those criticizing that. Maybe they should update the list every decade by adding 10 more players? There is no way Wade isn't top 50.. Can't name 2 two-guards better than him. The fact that it wasn't unanimous was a joke. Shaq is an idiot for thinking Anfernee>Wade..

Jarvo
10-16-2014, 11:37 AM
As soon as I seen Iverson name on there I knew the stat junkies will start to come out and say the same ol same ol, Face it he was and is gonna go down as one of the all time greats his Basketball peers of old and new recognize it so I don't know why some of you guys don't.


And STOP comparing CP3 to AI, When he can't even make it to The Finals with a squad 10x better than the one AI had when he went, CP3 is a great player but not up there with AI as of now.

FlashBolt
10-16-2014, 12:02 PM
As soon as I seen Iverson name on there I knew the stat junkies will start to come out and say the same ol same ol, Face it he was and is gonna go down as one of the all time greats his Basketball peers of old and new recognize it so I don't know why some of you guys don't.


And STOP comparing CP3 to AI, When he can't even make it to The Finals with a squad 10x better than the one AI had when he went, CP3 is a great player but not up there with AI as of now.

Because the Western Conference is 10x easier than the Eastern Conference that AI played in.. right..

Jarvo
10-16-2014, 03:17 PM
Because the Western Conference is 10x easier than the Eastern Conference that AI played in.. right..

I don't know how long you guys are gonna use that as an excuse on why these so called Top guys can't reach The Finals, He has Blake who others say/think is in the Top 5 players in The NBA and overall best PF and a damn good supporting cast and an elite coach.

Cry me a damn river.

valade16
10-16-2014, 05:01 PM
Those 76ers teams without Iverson, needless to say, would not win 20 games, let alone go to the Finals.

FlashBolt
10-16-2014, 07:03 PM
I don't know how long you guys are gonna use that as an excuse on why these so called Top guys can't reach The Finals, He has Blake who others say/think is in the Top 5 players in The NBA and overall best PF and a damn good supporting cast and an elite coach.

Cry me a damn river.

So, you're telling me that Iverson's Sixers would have beaten OKC/Spurs of 2013-2014? Okay, good night.