Iverson's body of work speaks for itself. He pretty much got black balled from the NBA. He quit on his final two teams because he wasn't satisfied with the role his coach gave him. Philadelphia and Denver were almost immediately better when he left town. Detroit was instantly worse when they traded the over rated Iverson and traded away the underrated Billups. Joe Dumars ruined one of the great track records as a GM the moment he traded for Iverson.
So now your basing Iverson's body of work on the last 2 years of his career? Grasping for straws aren't we?
Anyone still defending Iverson is grasping at straws. The guy dug his own grave and then got buried in it.
How do you explain away his teams in every instance being better once he left town? His game was never conducive to winning which is why all of the teams he left did better after they dumped him. He's probably the most over rated players of the past twenty years. He scored a whole lot of points at the expense of his teammates and their ability to win basketball games. You talk about how well he did in Denver but Denver was miles better after he left and was replaced by Billups....a guy who never received the hype Iverson got but a guy who was and is a winner in every sense of the word...something Iverson is not and never was.
Billups is an overrated chuck first PG who's a average passer for a PG that's had some very clutch moments but in reality has quite possibly the worse shot selection i've seen in a PG in recent memory.
It's comical and quite ironic you would describe Billup's in this way because that is exactly how most knowledgeable NBA fans describe Iverson.
Who? Are you talking about your imaginary friends? And i find it [dang] funny how ppl think Billups is better when his career FG% is even worse than Iverson's, and HE had better offensive weapons around him than Iverson did
Why not use a statistic that measures shooting efficiency accurately?
-sw
I really didn't wanna bring up percentages because i like to base what i say mainly on what i see from the games. I'm not arguing for the sake of arguing, Iverson really was a special case. I always hear Laker fans talk about how 05-07 Kobe had to force/jack up many many bad shots because his teammates were incapable of easing his scoring load but imagine Kobe having to do that for just about his entire prime, that was what Iverson was fairing with. Of course his teams were better defensively than 05-07 Lakers but just as flawed offensively
You didn't want to bring up the percentages, but you went ahead and brought up the percentages. And since you did, I'm suggesting you use effective field goal percentage (which accounts for three-pointers) or better yet, true shooting, which accounts for three-pointers and free throws, rather than raw FG%, which has been rendered effectively useless in the three-point era.
Since you mention 2005-07 for Bryant, here are his true shooting figures from those seasons: 56.3%, 55.9%, 58.0%.
Here are Iverson's three best seasons in terms of shooting efficiency: 56.7% (2007-08), 54.3% (2005-06), 54.0% (2006-07).
I've already made my point about Iverson's career shooting efficiency, which was miserable, and if your take is that your visual observation and memories bear more water than statistical evidence (read: facts) in a discussion regarding shooting efficiency over the lengthy careers of multiple players, my words will fall on deaf ears anyway.
As former Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan has been credit with saying, "Everyone is entitled to his own opinion but not his own facts."
-sw
Topic: Does this year's playoffs show that Rondo is (at least) on par with Rose? (Read 29202 times)