Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 41

Thread: 2001 Sixers

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Russia
    Posts
    435

    2001 Sixers

    Swap Iverson with Westbrook on that team. How far would the Sixers go? Would they beat the Lakers? Would they even make it to the NBA Finals?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    109,446
    They still lose to the lakers... I am one nomatter how much i love iverson for being with the sixers I think he is hella overrated... I think with westy the team is still just as good potentially better but not good enough to beat the sixers.. Westy is by far a better player than iverson ever was.... Westy would have gotten more out of the supporting cast.... A better question... With westy instead of iverson the year Webber played in 79 games how good would we have been? I think Westy in his prime with Webber that year makes noise.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    6,873
    They don't make it to the Lakers....Westbrook isn't as good as Iverson, and that team was built to have a supporting cast around Iverson not Westbrook.

    Swapping players with different play styles on a team that had success won't work in general.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    5,844
    God no they wouldn't beat the lakers. Yes they'd absolutely make the finals. All AI defenders always point to him dragging that team to the finals, but anything less would have been embarrassing. That eastern conference was disgustingly weak.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    6,873
    Quote Originally Posted by KingPosey View Post
    God no they wouldn't beat the lakers. Yes they'd absolutely make the finals. All AI defenders always point to him dragging that team to the finals, but anything less would have been embarrassing. That eastern conference was disgustingly weak.
    Iverson was the shooting guard not point guard, yes the ball was in his hands quite a bit but Eric Snow was the point guard. Westbrook, while he can certainly score, wouldn't work as well because that team was built solely to have guys with specific skills around Iverson doing the specific skill they do. There are few players you can replace Iverson with and have the team work, you also would have to replace him with a shooting guard as to not clutter the court. That is all I am saying.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1,465
    They'd make the finals. WB >>> Iverson. That team got to the finals due to its defense not Iverson. Iverson was extremely overrated.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    4,745
    Quote Originally Posted by LOb0 View Post
    They'd make the finals. WB >>> Iverson. That team got to the finals due to its defense not Iverson. Iverson was extremely overrated.
    LOL that you actually believe this nonsense. Get outta here.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    4,745
    Quote Originally Posted by KingPosey View Post
    God no they wouldn't beat the lakers. Yes they'd absolutely make the finals. All AI defenders always point to him dragging that team to the finals, but anything less would have been embarrassing. That eastern conference was disgustingly weak.
    The East wasn't any weaker than it is right now. The Sixers beat the Raptors with Carter and Antonio Davis and the Bucks with Cassel, Robinson, and Allen. The non-Cavs contenders in the East right now don't have teams as good as those two teams in 2001.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    5,844
    Quote Originally Posted by PhillyFaninLA View Post
    Iverson was the shooting guard not point guard, yes the ball was in his hands quite a bit but Eric Snow was the point guard. Westbrook, while he can certainly score, wouldn't work as well because that team was built solely to have guys with specific skills around Iverson doing the specific skill they do. There are few players you can replace Iverson with and have the team work, you also would have to replace him with a shooting guard as to not clutter the court. That is all I am saying.
    He had the ball every single time on offense and had a huge usage Number. It doesn't matter what title you give him on offense AI was the ball handler, and he really doesn't do anything better than westy regardless so it all remains the same.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    6,873
    Quote Originally Posted by KingPosey View Post
    He had the ball every single time on offense and had a huge usage Number. It doesn't matter what title you give him on offense AI was the ball handler, and he really doesn't do anything better than westy regardless so it all remains the same.
    If you watched that team that year, and I saw pretty much every game, Iverson was the sg and Snow was a true PG for that team....if you don't have Iverson or an Iverson type of player at the SG position you don't have any offense even if it comes for you PG. That team, that year more than any other of Iverson's career was built for Iverson at SG.

    If you don't have a true SG on that team it may not even make the playoffs. It was a team perfectly built with role players around Iverson.

    Stats don't show Iverson's role in general and Snow took the ball in more times than not that particular year and playoff run. Did Iverson touch the ball regularly, off course he did, that is exactly how the team was built and coached.

    A PG even a Westbrook type would not work at all from that team.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1,465
    Quote Originally Posted by bootsy View Post
    LOL that you actually believe this nonsense. Get outta here.
    Only because its true. Team of defensive players built around one guy shooting in a weak east. The defense was the key to that team Iverson just got to jack shots up.

    Why do you think he never had success after that? He was having his standard year on Philly, was traded to Denver, and they got worse. Billups was added and the same team went to the West finals. Iverson then refused to change his selfish game, and was out of the league a few years later.

    Iverson was an overrated black hole, that gets all the credit for a finals team where he wasn't even the main reason they got there.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1,465
    Quote Originally Posted by PhillyFaninLA View Post
    If you watched that team that year, and I saw pretty much every game, Iverson was the sg and Snow was a true PG for that team....if you don't have Iverson or an Iverson type of player at the SG position you don't have any offense even if it comes for you PG. That team, that year more than any other of Iverson's career was built for Iverson at SG.

    If you don't have a true SG on that team it may not even make the playoffs. It was a team perfectly built with role players around Iverson.

    Stats don't show Iverson's role in general and Snow took the ball in more times than not that particular year and playoff run. Did Iverson touch the ball regularly, off course he did, that is exactly how the team was built and coached.

    A PG even a Westbrook type would not work at all from that team.
    Westbrook is a better offensive player than Iverson.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    27,089
    I cant decide if this is an anti-Iverson troll or a pro Westbrook troll.


    Kristaps Porzingis
    Stronger than most 15 year old girls.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    4,745
    Quote Originally Posted by LOb0 View Post
    Only because its true. Team of defensive players built around one guy shooting in a weak east. The defense was the key to that team Iverson just got to jack shots up.

    Why do you think he never had success after that? He was having his standard year on Philly, was traded to Denver, and they got worse. Billups was added and the same team went to the West finals. Iverson then refused to change his selfish game, and was out of the league a few years later.

    Iverson was an overrated black hole, that gets all the credit for a finals team where he wasn't even the main reason they got there.
    Absolute nonsense with these sports talk radio talking points. Iverson is a first ballot HOFer, 11 time All Star, regular season MVP, and 4 time scoring champ. Those FACTS can't be disputed. Your opinion will never outweigh those FACTS.
    Last edited by bootsy; 02-19-2017 at 04:36 PM.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    1,877
    Quote Originally Posted by LOb0 View Post
    Only because its true. Team of defensive players built around one guy shooting in a weak east. The defense was the key to that team Iverson just got to jack shots up.

    Why do you think he never had success after that? He was having his standard year on Philly, was traded to Denver, and they got worse. Billups was added and the same team went to the West finals. Iverson then refused to change his selfish game, and was out of the league a few years later.

    Iverson was an overrated black hole, that gets all the credit for a finals team where he wasn't even the main reason they got there.
    the front office is to blame for putting all defensive players around him, that's just ignorant in itself to do that to a 5'10'' dynamic superstar player, he never had success after leaving Philly but put up almost 27 and 7 and 2spg in his only full season in Denver, they never gave that team a chance to gel properly and The Answer was pushing 33yrs of age at that time and Billups was added and they had a 1 hit wonder year because what happen the year after reaching the conf. finals? didn't they get put out 1st round by Jazz or something similar to that effect? why didn't they reach the finals since Billups was such a diff. maker? the team stayed healthy for the most part when Billups got there but when The Answer was traded there Melo was suspended and the following year Nene was out for the year with cancer, Melo/Answer led the league as a scoring duo in only full season together but it means nothing because they didn't reach the Finals

    how did he not change his game from shooting 23+ times per game in Philly to 18 in Denver to 14 in Detroit? he gets all the credit offensively because he was all the scoring options they basically on that 01' team because the front office didn't draft or trade for the right pieces to give him offensive help, he led the league in steals 3 straight years so he helped the defense but carrying a offensive load like that would be hard for any player to be a defensive stalwart, that team had all defenders and outside of Mutombo(old at that stage) who made 1st team all nba defense? or 2nd/3rd team? it wasn't like Snow/Lynch were defensive stoppers, solid but nothing of Artest/Bowen/Leonard//Frazier/Robertson like

    you didn't have to game plan to stop the other guys on that 01' team so of course he should get the boatload of credit like pretty much all the majority of the players do who achieve things on the court and are the best player(s) on that team

    the Pistons had the 4th seed after that Billups trade early on and that was before the benching of him and Rip for that Stuckey guy, where is Stuckey at now? then after that they dropped to the 8th seed so I don't get all this black hole non sense, hell the Nuggets won 50 games his only full season there and got the 8th seed, how many games will the 8th seed win this year or have this past decade? Denver lost to Spurs/Lakers with The Answer in 1 and a half seasons there and both of those teams went to Finals in 07'&08'(Spurs won/Lakers lost) so they beat everybody in the playoffs and were favorites to win(or make it there) so that's not a failure at all if you use common bball sense
    Last edited by europagnpilgrim; 02-19-2017 at 05:02 PM.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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