Iverson is a (insert noun) ...

[Mighty_Wingman]

Great post, DD. (I may just have to insert that phrase into AutoText.)

It's a little ridiculous that the only thing shotty feels worthy of comment is the one line, though.

 

[shotglass]

Two. And I really don't feel ridiculous for it, M_W.

 

[GB-Hack]

Keep railing on the shooting. Kobe went 8-26 last night. Everyone has bad nights.

Iverson has a career .421 FG percentage, which wouldn't be possible if he went 9-30 every night. When you're a shooter, you have 9-30 nights, but you also have 15-23 nights as well to balance it all out.

GB, I'm not going to say that isn't true, but I can't remember many 15-23 nights from Allen Iverson. I sure can remember 9-for-30 nights, because every time I look at a box score, it's staring back at me. So what's happening here? Did he shoot 70% his first two seasons in the league?

I'm sure 9-30 night by Iverson are memorable. As are 8-26 nights by Kobe, or 7-22 nights by Steve Francis. The thing is we see the numbers and remember them. When Iverson goes 12-19 or 21-30, or 15-30, 16-17 from the line as he did earlier this season against the Bulls, it's expected.

He has the preconception that he's a star to fight when cynics get together, despite everything he's done for the Sixers. He's Allen Iverson. He should be shooting like that. When he doesn't, it stands out not only because of who he is but also because of what he is to the Sixers franchise. Without him, they are 0-3.

 

[jimnorden]

a person.

 

[SoSueMe]

The best indicator I've heard of why AI is not a championship contender is Bird and Magic cherished practice as a way to prepare to win and well, we all know AI's view.

Funny. The best indicator I've heard is:

Bird = McHale, Parish, Ainge, D.J., Walton, et al
Magic = Worthy, Kareem, Cooper, Scott, et al

A.I. = Snow, McKie, Geiger, Barry, Mutombo ... ???

Buck. I agree with the supporting cast arguement. But Walton? Please. He was a non-factor. toss DJ on that list though!

getting steals doesn't mean you can defend. it means you are playing the passing lanes, leaving your man and gambling so you can pick off a pass to get an easy bucket and pump up your scoring average.

the first time iverson stops a player from scoring or shuts somebody down .... well, it would be the first time.

You've obviously never played, coached or watched basketball.

Getting into the passing lanes IS playing defence. It's what you do when you play man-to-man; you sag off and shade to the strong side of the floor. The better/faster you are, the more you shade and sag. In a zone, it's ALL ABOUT playing in the passing lanes.

then you better tell popovich and the spurs -- and most of the league's good defensive teams -- that they've been doing it wrong all this years. i'm sure pop will love the idea of his players sagging off more and more in his man-to-man sets. brilliant.

as for steals? they CAN be a part of good d. but more often than not, the gamble for a steal means a player is putting more pressure on his teammates and the leaving the team defense vulnerable.

your "concepts" of defense may work in high school and college ball, but in the association the speed, strength, quickness and athletic ability of the players is just too much. you start playing passing lanes and cheating and sagging, and you are dead.

what makes a good defender?
1) well, the ability to guard someone one-on-one. iverson can't do that.
2) discipline in rotating and funneling offensive players to certain spots. not an iverson strongsuit.
3) consistency within the team defense conepts. iverson would have to care to be consistent.

Simply put: You're wrong.

Either that or I must be watching four bad teams then, all of which have no concept of defence. Because in the Raptors/Magic game and Suns/Heat game, EVERYONE is sagging off weak-side. It's what you do. I don't think the first-place Magic, of first-place Suns, who at one point won, what? 12 consecutive games this year?

In man-to-man, you DO NOT a) play your man attached to his hip or b) chase him around the court like a dog does a rabbit.

If a player is quick, as you claim everyone in the NBA to be, you play FURTHER off the man with the ball because he'll go right by you. After all, the man with the ball has the advantage. You play up tight on a man who either a) can shoot or b) is slower.

I'm sorry, I hate playing this card, but I played and coached and cover the sport.

Some of what you say is true (funnelling players to spots, rotation). But it's not all correct.

 

[silvershadow1981]

I know for the last 10-plus years, Allen Iverson has been a pretty damn good reason to be a Sixer fan, when prior to his arrival, we were saddled with the likes of Charles Shackleford, Orlando Woolridge, Lloyd "Sweet Pea" Daniels, Trevor Ruffin, and players of that ilk. Like him or not, A.I. helped the Sixers regain their place in the Philadelphia sports landscape.

While no one should excuse him for his aversion to practice, his "9-for-30" nights and other grievances folks seem to have against him, no one can deny that a kid that MIGHT be 5'10 and 155 pounds takes an ass kicking night after night and cares enough to get up and keep going to the hole with reckless abandon. The Sixers are going to have a hard time getting back to a competitive level without him, and I'll be rooting for him whereever he goes (except for Boston. That's just one damn thing I won't do.)

 

[Guy_Incognito]

...last name

I see both sides of this & don't feel strongly either way, though I agree that whoever gets him will get a Sprewell/Barkley like deal paying 40 cents on the dollar, and reap the benefits.

What bugs me here, is the notion that Eric Snow, Bill Cartwright & Will Perdue were better than Mutumbo when they went to the finals. Iverson was the same guy he always was (despite the kissy-face SI article with Brown) that year, Mutumbo was the difference.

 

[MC Sports Guy]

There are plenty of guys in sports who have Iverson's attitude off the court/field, and who carry it into the game (Randy Moss, Terrell Owens). Many of these people are often accused of taking plays off, with plenty of video evidence to support it. No one makes that claim about Iverson. Say what you want about the guy's practice habits or locker room appeal (and there's plenty to say), but he busts his ass as much or more than anyone in the league. Maybe that's not everything, but it sure is a lot.

I used to really dislike this guy, until I started paying attention to the way he plays. You can't take that away from him. He leaves everything he has on the court every night, and that's all you can ask from an athlete who plays for the team you cheer for.

 

[boots]

This is it in a nutshell. To a few, AI is a punk and selfish. To others he's an American success story, coming from nothing to get something. To others he's a talented player. To me, he's one thing, human. And because he's human, he has flaws.
Take him as he is or not at all.

 

[Songbird]

... rock-hard trooper to the bone, the bone, the bone
full grown
consider me stone ...

[/Chuck D]

 

[qtlaw]

special player.

Do I think he'd make a new team better? Unlikely given what will likely be taken from the team.

Would I have wanted him on my team the past 10 years? Yes. The Warriors have been horrible. Even if Iverson was 9-30, seeing his drive would have been a gift. Yes he's supposed to play hard but after watching Sprewell dog it for a few years until he was traded Iverson's effort is amazing.

He's a great, special player. But he will not be that Bird, Magic, MJ type icon because he did not win a championship while making others around him better. Had they finished off the Lakers in '01, he would have been viewed that way.

As for the practice rant, I admit I might have misperceived the root of the rant, maybe it was about the windsprints and not practicing the actual plays. If that was truly the case, I was totally off base. However, I recall he did have a habit of blowing off practices too.

 

[Herbert Anchovy]

... something less than an afterthought.