So I was called a hater for pointing out that Iverson jacks up too many shots, ignores his teamates, does not play a style condusive to winning, and is a horrible shooter. His apologists said he shoots a low % because he has no teamates to pass to and is forced into taking wild shots (which is false, he has had good teamates). So he was traded to a team with (at the time) the NBA's leading scorer and one of it's top rebounders and defensive players. A team that was 14-9 when the trade was made. So adding a superstar like Iverson would help, right? Eh, wrong. The Nuggets were 31-28 since the trade. With Melo and AI on the court together the Nuggets were 23-19, Hardly world beating. So his old team fell apart since Iverson left right? I mean since he had no one to pass to that means there were no good players left, right? Eh, wrong. The Sixers went 29-29. They were 5-13 with Iverson. The simple fact is that Andre Miller was better for the Sixers than Iverson. So How did Iverson play? I am sure since his teamates are better he shot pretty good, right? I am sure he got his teamates involved, right? eh, no. He still jacked up over 20 shots per game. game 1: 11-22 game 2: 9-25 game 3: 7-20 game 4: 9-25 game 5: 6-22 total series: 37% By the way, he was also 2nd in the NBA in turnovers. But I'm just a hater. If Kobe or Lebron had stats like that they would get killed in the media. Why does AI get a free pass?
You can't say AI isn't good. I'm guessing your stats are correct, but there are other factors going into these games. I don't think AI has as big an impact as Kobe or Gilbert or James, but hes still nasty. Just watch the highlights on sports center once in a while...
You also pointed out McGrady as a great player in the NBA way back then. And now McGrady might finally win his first playoff series!!!! Start a thread homeboy. Let the trumpets sound!! Stackhouse, McKie, Larry ********in Hughes, Eric Snow, George Lynch...yep, you are right dog....their hands are so weighed down with rings you can hardly see them raising their hands to thank Iverson for their time in the sun! I know this thread was half baiting me, but when are you gonna burn that other ones cd and send it to me? that would be a better use of your time.
They lost to the Spurs, a better team, who cares. When the Nuggets actually stayed healthy long enough to get used to playing together, remind me how they closed out the season, was it 9 straight wins or 10 out of 11, that was the barometer of how good they can be together even without KMart. Denver wins 50 next season, Id put a bet on it. The simple fact is you are a hater, why else would you start a thread the day after Denver goes out to a clearly better team in the playoffs? Or not mentioning how Carmello is terrible at getting his teammates involved? 3.8 assists per game compared to Iverson's 7.2 Heres another fact Iverson shot better than McGrady, Ray Allen, Arenas, and wasnt far off from kobe, and none of those guys dish out the assists AI does, play as much, or get as many steals. Not condusive to winning? 7 winning seasons out of 11, sounds like another fact. Not too bad considering: 1.Philly never put shit around him and 2.How bad off they were before they got him, 5 straight losing seasons prior to his arrival, 4 of which never saw them top 30 wins. Something suggests they were much better off with him. Let's see how long it takes Andre Miller and the Sixers to get to the Finals without A.I? And how well Denver plays a full season with him and 'Melo together before finger pointing begins. If Denver adds a better PG who can shoot, they're serious contenders next season with Ai, 'Melo, KMart, Camby, Nene, Smith Sounds like your biggest fear
Ok let me try this: what would it take for you Iverson lovers to admit he is not great? So far shooting under 40% doesn't do it. Having your old team improve while failing to help your new team improve doesn't do it. Turning the ball over alot doesn't do it. Having tons of NBA beat writers point out Iverson's major flows doesn't do it. Having an entire career of mediocre seasons (aside from 1) doesn't do it. Apparently there is nothing Iverson can do for you "lovers" to admit it. Facts won't get you to admit it. What will it take? Questions: 1) looking at his shooting numbers for the Spurs series, do you think he played well? 2) he shot 38% with team USA, he shoots 42% for his career, he shot 38% in the NBA finals, is this good shooting? 3) Larry Hughes, Andre Igoudala, Glen Robinson and more have had great numbers either directly before or after playing with Iverson, how come he doesn't make his teamates better but those guys are good when Iverson is NOT on the court? 4) He is always near the top of the NBA in turnovers, isn't that a problem? 5) When he was on the trading block teams weren't exactly fighting to get him on their team, if he is so great why did he sit for 2 weeks without any serious offers until a suspension made Denver desperate? 6) Several (and I can link them) writers have been bashing Iverson's game all season long, if he is so great then why do so many writers agree with me? And please never again bring up his assist totals. Hollinger wrote about this, his numbers are inflated because he dominates the ball. Basically he is the only one who can have assists for Denver on most posessions.
He made the Nuggets better, see them when they were at full strength(the entire team) and having time to Gel and elarn to play together, they reeled off 10 out of 11 wins to end the season. He played like shit against San Antonio, they're the better team, it happens, Dirk just laid an egg against an 8 seed, why arent you coming down on him, especially when we're talking about a completely one dimensional player up for MVP? Who ever called Iverson a great shooter? He is a great scorer, because he finishes int he lane like no other and knows how to get to the line, he also has usually in his career been pretty clutch and never scared to take big shots, hello LeBron and Dirk. Larry Hughues and the Big Dogg are crap, certainly not allstars. How else do you explain a team with 3 all stars, Robinson, Ray Allen, and Cassell, losing to a team with 1(Iverson) in a 7 game series? I guess Iverson was pretty good at making those teammates better. Eric Snow, George Lynch, Aaron McKie, Todd McCulloh, real forces without Iverson. The Sixers were shit before Iverson, Fact. The sixers had more winning seasons with Iverson than losing seasons, Fact. Dwayne Wade averaged more Turnovers than Iverson this season. And for guys who dont dominate the ball, Melo, Igoudala were right there with him, and the top 15 also includes Kobe, Nash, Lebron, Arenas, etc. Pretty overstated stat. You're chalking up Iverson's assist numbers to him dominating the ball? How silly is that? That is what superstars do, dominate the ball, hello Nash, Kobe, LeBron, Wade, Arenas, etc etc etc. How many of the superstar scorers averaged more assists than Iverson? Only 1, Wade, and he average more Turnovers than IVerson. And btw, since I know how uninformed you are and post without facts, Blake averaged 5 assists a game, so I guess Iverson isnt the only one who can get assists for Denver. Writers have nothing but opinions, trying to use that for an argument is silly, Shaq thinks Iverson is one of th ebest all time, who cares? Its funny how I address everything in your posts, but you dodged everything in mine.
Your points are bizrre and factully wrong, so it would be hard to address them. Now, answer the questions above instead of bringing in other players. You obviously have no iea what "real assists" are and you clearly you don't know what dominating the ball means. Furthermore, Lebron has more game winning shots than Iveson and you call Iverson clutch? Yeah Iverson is a regular Reggie Miller It really doesn't matter what you think though, te Sixers tried to trade Iverson several times (they traded him to the Pistons for Stackhouse, remember? the trade was nixed because Geiger failed a physical) and usually the Sixers had no takers for him. And no, the Nuggets were not better with Iverson. Check the numbers, you are wrong. They did win 10 of their last 11 but 3 of those teams were resting players for the playoffs (you don't really think they were better than Dallas do you? ) You're clearly an idiot who has excuses for every bad stat Iverson has (and he has alot). I am sorry you don't know anything about basketball, perhaps watching some games might help you out. This is why so many writers have been bashing Iverson lately. Do you really disagree with all those articles? And yes, Nowitzki choked. What does that have to do with the fact that Iverson does not help a team win? (it's funny you talk about all those winning season for the Sixers, his career winning % is barelt above .500 - and the Nuggets were barely above .500) And Larry Hughes is crap huh? Face it, you're an asshat who doesn't know anything about basketball.
Many in the Denver media are starting to say the trade may have been a mistake: http://www.gazette.com/sports/iverson_21920___article.html/nuggets_nba.html "Big mistake. Iverson had served as the undisputed leader of the Philadelphia 76ers. He essentially ran the team and shot whenever he liked. His me-first act led the 76ers straight to the bottom of the NBA. He should have been challenged to mature into a brand new player. " http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/sports_columnists/article/0,1299,DRMN_83_5519824,00.html Listen to Jim Rome, many in Denver are saying the same thing. There are also many articles from Phili about how glad they are that Iverson is gone. Shall I dig them up?
Like I said you dodged every single point i made, for the second consecutive post I made and instead with your defeatist style turned to more opinions, which make for shit arguments unlike facts and stats...... Until you can do better, just stop trying...
No no, see the facts are this: Iverson's style is not condusive to winning. You and his lovers blame his teamates but the facts say otherwise. You blame his lack of teamates for his lack of wins in Phili but the facts are this: - Webber averaged close to 20 and 10 last year and is playing well in Detroit. But he sucks right? - The sixers had the defensive player of the year and the 6th man of the year. - When Larry Hughes got away from Iverson his scoring increased dramatically as did Igoudala's. -Jerry Stackhouse has excelled at Detroit and Dallas since leaving Iverson so much so that Pili tried to get him back by trading Iverson for him You claim the Sixers were much improved because of Iverson but the facts are this: 1996-97 Sixers 22 wins 60 losses did not make playoffs 1997-98 Sixers 31 wins 51 losses did not make playoffs 1999 Sixers 28 wins 22 losses lost in 2nd round 2000-01 Sixers 56 wins 26 losses lost in finals 2001-02 Sixers 43 wins 39 losses lost in 2nd round 2002-03 Sixers 48 wins 34 losses lost in 2nd round 2003-04 Sixers 33 wins 49 losses did not make playoffs 2004-05 Sixers 43 wins 39 losses lost in 1st round 2005-06 Sixers 38 wins 44 losses did not make playoffs Total: 1 good season in a very weak east, several mediocre season and a few horrible seasons. He played 9 seasons in Phili and didn't make the playoffs 4 times. That one season seems to be a fluke considering more often than a 50 win season the sixers missed the playoffs. You claim Iverson is a great finisher Then that only confirms that his shot selection is horrible. His career field goal percentage is 42%. You claim Iverson is clutch Right. In this years playoffs he was up there with Dirk and Dwyane Wade as worst player in the playoffs. You admit he played bad, right? So how did he do in the NBA finals then? game 1: 18 for 41 (see this is why he scores so much, he jacks up more shots than anyone, he has lead the league in shot attempts 5 times) game 2: 10 for 29 game 3: 12 for 30 game 4: 12 for 30 game 5: 14 for 32 field goal percentage: 40%......now find me a star who shot that low in the finals. Hint: Rip, Billups, Kobe, Ginobili, Parker, Kidd, Wade.....none of them shot that low of a percentage in the finals. Iverson shot 38% with USA Basketball. You claim I am just a "hater" Well I am not alone. As you'll recall, Iverson was not welcome on USA basketball. Why is that? As you'll recall the Sixers tried to trade him several times. As you'll recall Iverson fueded with THREE different coaches. In the other thread I linked several articles where writers slammed Iverson's game. Are all these people just imagining that he just runs down the court wildly and takes many crazy shots? His shot selection might be the worst of any player I've ever seen. conclusion Iverson is one of the most talented players in the history of basketball. There is no denying that. However he doesn't know how to play winning team basketball. It might work for one season in a conference where your biggest threat is the Raptors but it doesn't work against real teams (As the Lakers proved). A team like the Pistons is better off with Richard Hamilton than Iverson even though Iverson has more talent. Ditto for the Spurs and Ginobili. The big IF is whether Iverson changes. If Iverson changes (he didn't change enough this year) then the Nuggets can possibly win in the playoffs. He will have to stop jacking up 25 shots a game, he will have to work at not turning the ball over so much, he will have to not dominate the ball on a team where the leading scorer also dominates the ball. In defending Iverson you've ripped other players. I actually agree with those players you ripped. Arenas is too streaky. His good games are among the best in the NBA but he has way too many of those Iverson-like 9 for 25 games. Wade is very good but he is a turnover machine and decision making against the Bulls were among the worst in playoff history. If he didn't have such a good NBA finals and didn't play with Shaq I am not sure Wade would be considered as great as he is. No denying his talent though. But unless he improves a few parts of his game then the Heat won't be winning anything since Shaq is declining fast. Nowitzki choked. Plain and simple he was dreadful in the final game and should be ashamed. HangthaDJ said I said Mcgrady was great. I don't remember saying that but if I did I was wrong. He is good, not great. WHy stop there? Steve Nash is among the best offensive players I've ever seen. Too bad is defense is a complete joke so much so that teams like the Spurs and Pistons have dominated him over the past few years because if you slow him down he is less effective and Billups and Parker completey destroy him. I pick the Spurs to win in 6 this series. So yeah Nash's passing leads to 50 points a game or whatever but his defense gives up alot of points too. Carmelo Anthony is another volume shooter. I am not impressed with 35 points when you need 30 shots to do it. I am certain that Michael Redd and Rip Hamilton could score 35 a night if they wanted to shoot that much. Lebron James I disagree with you on. He is a legend in the making and it is far too early in his career (he is younger than most rookies this season) to say anything bad about a guy with his numbers and impact on the Cavs.