Iverson was never the Answer

[greg683x]

i dont really think dumars would really care if hes blamed.  with iverson coming off the books, sheed and mcdyess also leaving the teams gonna be going through a face lift anyway.  dumars talked about going deep in the playoffs and winning a title bc that was the right thing to say to the media when the trade was made.  whats he supposed to say? iversons just here for the salary cap and to sell tickets for this wasted season??  going deep in the playoffs would be a bonus for the fans, but this way he gets a better pick while stuckey got a year of experience as a starter under his belt.  did he think the team would turn out this bad, maybe not, is he worried about it? no.  AI was a salary cap bandaid for this season.

this writer is just a p---ed off fan.  this article is the complete opposite of every overblown overrated iverson article theres ever been.  the truth about AI is somewhere in the grey area.

[Spfldkid]

Well, a lot of good points here, cannot read them all....A player who will not "practice" with his team is a fool, especially a new team.....that is how you know them, feel them, as they say.....Even Jordan was a team player, he did not do it by himself, Wilt tried when the league was different by himself, had some success, Iverson could not do it by himself, but never realized that, too much pride...it must suck to be on his team....Detroit got screwed there, they already had a special needs guy---sheed, but it wasn't his fault, you can see that flat spot on his head where his mom whacked him with a pan when he was young....! I like that article...i hate the self centered-ness that pervades the US today....look where it got us...look where it got AI.....

[Reddo]

As usual the media overstates everything that is actually occurring in real life; notably, Whitlock does this a lot.  When Iverson first came to the NBA, there were the inevitable comparisons to Michael Jordan.  Now that he's leaving the NBA, there are, again, the inevitable comparisons to Jordan (except this time, they're used to highlight Iverson's shortcomings).

Yes, Iverson did not live up to the hype but that's because the hype was overblown.  Very few guys actually live up to the media's interpretation of what they are and when they fail, the media overstates that failure.

Take football; Belichick was considered a total failure in Cleveland, then an instant Hall of Famer in New England, then a cheater with no actual skills after Spygate.  Hyperbole sells and the media takes advantage of that fact all the time.

And of course, with the increasing importance of the "what have you done for me lately" mindset, everyone just assumes that the current characterization of what a player is, is what he was all along.  Now that Iverson has failed in Detroit, he's a failure all along. 

I'll remind everyone that KG was headed in the Ewing direction of a great superstar that never won anything, until his T'wolves reached the Conference Finals and even then, it took a trade to the Celtics to turn him into a winner.  Now though, everyone ignores the years of failure in Minnesota by shunting the blame onto his terrible supporting cast there.

[KungPoweChicken]

As usual the media overstates everything that is actually occurring in real life; notably, Whitlock does this a lot.  When Iverson first came to the NBA, there were the inevitable comparisons to Michael Jordan.  Now that he's leaving the NBA, there are, again, the inevitable comparisons to Jordan (except this time, they're used to highlight Iverson's shortcomings).

Yes, Iverson did not live up to the hype but that's because the hype was overblown.  Very few guys actually live up to the media's interpretation of what they are and when they fail, the media overstates that failure.

Take football; Belichick was considered a total failure in Cleveland, then an instant Hall of Famer in New England, then a cheater with no actual skills after Spygate.  Hyperbole sells and the media takes advantage of that fact all the time.

And of course, with the increasing importance of the "what have you done for me lately" mindset, everyone just assumes that the current characterization of what a player is, is what he was all along.  Now that Iverson has failed in Detroit, he's a failure all along. 

I'll remind everyone that KG was headed in the Ewing direction of a great superstar that never won anything, until his T'wolves reached the Conference Finals and even then, it took a trade to the Celtics to turn him into a winner.  Now though, everyone ignores the years of failure in Minnesota by shunting the blame onto his terrible supporting cast there.

I thought Iverson exceeded the little hype he had. He was the best scoring little man to ever play the game. What more did people want than that? Iverson was not coming into the NBA with the kind of hype Lebron had. Sure, AI never won, but his career shouldn't be deemed a failure because of that.

[Reddo]

[quote author=KungPoweChicken
I thought Iverson exceeded the little hype he had. He was the best scoring little man to ever play the game. What more did people want than that? Iverson was not coming into the NBA with the kind of hype Lebron had. Sure, AI never won, but his career shouldn't be deemed a failure because of that.
[/quote]

That's my point; Iverson was a great player that redefined what people thought of his position given his size.  Now that he's unceremoniously leaving the league, the media is very willing to bash him for his failures without recognizing all of his successes.

[Finkelskyhook]

Sure, AI never won, but his career shouldn't be deemed a failure because of that.

    Based on that, would you suggest that the most overrated player in NBA history, a legendary coach and team killer, should be considered a success?

[Reddo]

Sure, AI never won, but his career shouldn't be deemed a failure because of that.

the most overrated player in NBA history

Again with the hyperbole.

[Finkelskyhook]

I'll remind everyone that KG was headed in the Ewing direction of a great superstar that never won anything, until his T'wolves reached the Conference Finals and even then, it took a trade to the Celtics to turn him into a winner.

Minor difference, Reddo.  The two teams Garnett played on were/are better with him on them.  The three teams the coach killer has played on are much better without him.

That, and the fact that Iverson is the most overhyped, overrated, and overexposed player in NBA history, is anything but hyperbole.

Some grotesquely inept NBA GM will sign Iverson because he unexplicably puts people in seats.

[LB3533]

I am pretty sure the most over-hyped player in NBA history is a tie between Darko and Kwame, neither of which lived up to 10% their hype.

If you want to talk about stars that are or were overhyped more than Allen Iverson...I put both Vince Carter and Tracey McGrady ahead of AI.

For Iverson, at the very least he has lived up to the hype taking his team to the Finals once. The two stars above probably had more talented teammates and never made it to one Final between the both of them.

[Reddo]

I'll remind everyone that KG was headed in the Ewing direction of a great superstar that never won anything, until his T'wolves reached the Conference Finals and even then, it took a trade to the Celtics to turn him into a winner.

Minor difference, Reddo.  The two teams Garnett played on were/are better with him on them.  The three teams the coach killer has played on are much better without him.

That, and the fact that Iverson is the most overhyped, overrated, and overexposed player in NBA history, is anything but hyperbole.

Some grotesquely inept NBA GM will sign Iverson because he unexplicably puts people in seats.

I wasn't comparing KG to Iverson.  Just pointing out that today's media portrays players by what they've done recently rather than a whole body of work.

KG was seen as a guy who never fulfilled his championship potential.  Now, he's portrayed as a winner throughout his career that was stuck with bad teammates. 

Now that AI has failed in Detroit and Denver, no one remembers his early successes in Philly, limited though they may have been. I'll refer you to an article by David Halberstam about AI after the first game of the 2001 Finals.  Contrast that with Whitlock's current article and you'll find that neither article fully encapsulates AI.

http://espn.go.com/page2/s/halberstam/010611.html

[Finkelskyhook]

I would ask "what success in Philly?"  Iverson clearly had an untalented team "he" took to the finals.  He had arguably the best defensive center of his era. Philly management brilliantly surrounded Iverson with defensive-minded role players who covered Iverson's defensive deficiencies.  Iverson also had arguably the best coach of his era who built a system around Iverson.  With the exception of that one year, Philly struggled to reach .500 with the great Iverson as their  "leader".

Iverson was a huge individual talent.  But he has never made his team better.  Every team he's ever been on (with the exception of the 2000-2001 team) has been diminished by his presence and immediately improved upon his departure.  It's no coincidence whatsoever that Denver drastically improved post trade and Detroit drastically improved post-injury.

The fact that various media fall all over themselves praising Iverson doesn't change who he is as a player.  Dumars did the right thing sitting him.  He, as a service to Curry, should have sat Iverson as soon as he acquired him.  The trade was strictly financial to begin with.  Dumars is too smart a basketball mind to fathom Iverson being an improvement over Billups.  There is no comparison whatsoever between the two players.  Billups is a winner and champion.  Iverson will never be on a championship team.

[Brickowski]

Yep, and Marbury is exactly the same.

[Spfldkid]

The one time Iverson was "The Answer" is when Denver needed HIM to trade for a real point guard.hahahahahahahahaha.....hahahhaaha, and he was the answer, fooled Detroit.....glad it wasn't us.!

[Brickowski]

I remember when folks here were ready to trade Al Jefferson to get AI.  Ah, how quickly we forget.  I got into huge fights with several posters here when I argued that Iverson was totally overrated, as the Wages of Wins predicted, and then there was a long discussion about how the Wages of Wins approach (regression analysis) was flawed, because how could any statistical approach be correct when it denied the greatness of Alan Iverson?

[Spfldkid]

Well, I will say AI was a great player, a great scorer, impossible to stop....He was good for sure, and that is a fact, it is just what he did with that much talent. One glaring short coming is his percentage, shots taken vs shots made, it doesn't both many people, but it does bother me....especially for a point guard.