Author Topic: Iverson - Best Thing that Didn't Happen to the Celts?  (Read 7065 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: Iverson - Best Thing that Didn't Happen to the Celts?
« Reply #30 on: July 14, 2009, 06:33:27 PM »

Offline Finkelskyhook

  • NCE
  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2892
  • Tommy Points: 285
Detroit was garbage with Chauncey on the team before the trade, had nothing to do with Iverson! When you are starting Kwame Brown at center, you have BIG problems. Chauncey was more motivated to play in front of his hometown fans than he was in Detroit at the end. He had gotten stale as did the whole team in Detroit. And that is why Dumars blew up the team.
Kind of an aside, but how far has AI's legacy fallen in the last few years?  This guy was one of the biggest stars in the league for a long time, and still is to some degree (popularity-wise).  Now, he's a free agent, surefire HOFer who's still relatively healthy, but is a free agent afterthought for most teams and it looks like only the Clippers will even give him the MLE.  He's gonna be maybe the most forgotten great player of his generation, and the sad thing is, the personality that drove him to play so hard is exactly what's hurting him now. 

Iverson would be stockless with any team that cared about winning. 

However, if a team is disinterested in winning but still hopeful of putting people who know nothing about basketball beyond the name on the back of the jersey, Iverson will inexplicably put people in arenas.

Hey, A.I. won for quite awhile, including a conference championship as the only superstar on his team - more than guys like T-Mac, Steve Nash, or any of the Big 3 individually can say.  As others have said, he was a great player who was capable of carrying a team built around him. 

But he was never quite good enough to carry such a team to a title, or to adapt his game once his skills started to decline.  I'm as down on A.I. being able to contribute to a good team these days as anyone, but that's personality and pride, not talent.  What I was saying was his prior accomplishments are being forgotten quickly now that the holes in his game have become enormous and he refuses to change his mindset to adjust.

There was one great year, with arguably the best defensive center of this era, arguably the best coach of this era, and a team specifically built to cover for his ( ;D) defense while allowing him a zillion shots a game.   Obviously, to some, that makes up for alienating every coach and organization he's ever played for and for a career of hard, but selfish play?  

It's sad a that stat hound and career malcontent on and off the court will probably be a hall of famer while a career winner and champion like Dennis Johnson never lived to see induction.  

What kind of rational GM gets rid of a malcontent and considers bringing on a bigger one?  


Re: Iverson - Best Thing that Didn't Happen to the Celts?
« Reply #31 on: July 14, 2009, 06:43:26 PM »

Offline mgent

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7567
  • Tommy Points: 1962
Kind of an aside, but how far has AI's legacy fallen in the last few years?  This guy was one of the biggest stars in the league for a long time, and still is to some degree (popularity-wise).  Now, he's a free agent, surefire HOFer who's still relatively healthy, but is a free agent afterthought for most teams and it looks like only the Clippers will even give him the MLE.  He's gonna be maybe the most forgotten great player of his generation, and the sad thing is, the personality that drove him to play so hard is exactly what's hurting him now. 

Iverson would be stockless with any team that cared about winning. 

However, if a team is disinterested in winning but still hopeful of putting people who know nothing about basketball beyond the name on the back of the jersey, Iverson will inexplicably put people in arenas.

Hey, A.I. won for quite awhile, including a conference championship as the only superstar on his team - more than guys like T-Mac, Steve Nash, or any of the Big 3 individually can say.  As others have said, he was a great player who was capable of carrying a team built around him. 

But he was never quite good enough to carry such a team to a title, or to adapt his game once his skills started to decline.  I'm as down on A.I. being able to contribute to a good team these days as anyone, but that's personality and pride, not talent.  What I was saying was his prior accomplishments are being forgotten quickly now that the holes in his game have become enormous and he refuses to change his mindset to adjust.
I don't think AI was ever really talented enough to win the championship.  I agree that things might've been different if he actually had a SG's body.  He thrived off of being selfish.  He was always a do it by himself kind of guy and he did his best work when he had to carry a team by himself.  Unfortunately it's impossible for anyone to win the championship by himself, especially in this day and age.  If he had been a better team player he wouldn't have been as great as some people think he is.  He MIGHT'VE won a ring, but he wouldn't have been an MVP and he wouldn't be a 4-time scoring champion.
So i disagree with people who think he's less of a player for playing the way he played because he is more than likely much more successful for doing it.  Is he gonna be as memorable as guys who did win?  No.  But i just don't think he's a Kobe or a KG who can be an MVP and a team-playing champion.
Philly:

Anderson Varejao    Tiago Splitter    Matt Bonner
David West    Kenyon Martin    Brad Miller
Andre Iguodala    Josh Childress    Marquis Daniels
Dwyane Wade    Leandro Barbosa
Kirk Hinrich    Toney Douglas   + the legendary Kevin McHale

Re: Iverson - Best Thing that Didn't Happen to the Celts?
« Reply #32 on: July 14, 2009, 06:52:05 PM »

Offline fairweatherfan

  • Johnny Most
  • ********************
  • Posts: 20738
  • Tommy Points: 2365
  • Be the posts you wish to see in the world.
There was one great year, with arguably the best defensive center of this era, arguably the best coach of this era, and a team specifically built to cover for his ( ;D) defense while allowing him a zillion shots a game.   Obviously, to some, that makes up for alienating every coach and organization he's ever played for and for a career of hard, but selfish play?  

It's sad a that stat hound and career malcontent on and off the court will probably be a hall of famer while a career winner and champion like Dennis Johnson never lived to see induction.  

What kind of rational GM gets rid of a malcontent and considers bringing on a bigger one?  

I don't see our posts as being particularly different - A.I. carried a team (offensively) that was built around him, with some good (one great) defenders, and a very good coach.  I don't know if you're including me in "some people" but I've been far from gushing over A.I.  I'm saying the same thing crownsy is - he's fallen so far so fast in the eyes of many NBA fans that people are forgetting he was legitimately a top 10 player for most of his career.  It's silly to pretend he's still that top talent, but it's equally silly to pretend he never was.  A.I. is maybe the definition of a mixed bag as a player - he did great things and horrible things for teams, and any assessment of him needs to include both.

Also, DJ was seen as a "career malcontent" when he came to Boston, which is part of why we were able to trade for him.  The C's have a long history of welcoming supposed malcontents and cancers to the team - our policy has always been that if you can play, you can play for us.  And I have faith that DJ'll get in eventually, and that "never living to see it" will only be because he died at a tragically young age.  If nothing else I think the Veterans Committee will put him in after his normal eligibility has expired.

Re: Iverson - Best Thing that Didn't Happen to the Celts?
« Reply #33 on: July 15, 2009, 12:22:06 PM »

Offline Finkelskyhook

  • NCE
  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2892
  • Tommy Points: 285
If Iverson brought the same approach to basketball that he does his first 10 games with his new teams, he'd be an NBA champion.  For his first 10 games with Denver and Detroit it occured to him that there are two ends of the court and that he actually has teammates.  Then it occurs to him how exhausting it is to play defense...Not to mention that it's not worth winning if you don't get your 25 shots.

Re: Iverson - Best Thing that Didn't Happen to the Celts?
« Reply #34 on: July 15, 2009, 12:58:38 PM »

Offline Greg

  • Brad Stevens
  • Posts: 249
  • Tommy Points: 30
Not really! Iverson could have helped us, but only in a reserve scorer role off the bench for the Vet. Minimum. Iverson can still play & you can't believe in everything that your earlobes captures.

Really?  When Iverson was like 29?  And we were giving up a package that included Big Al, Gerald, Telfair, etc? 

I don't think you understand this thread.

In 06-07 the C's were trying to push a major trade for AI... and he would have started.

And if you think Iverson could come off the bench... look at what he did in Detroit.

Re: Iverson - Best Thing that Didn't Happen to the Celts?
« Reply #35 on: July 15, 2009, 01:07:42 PM »

Offline vjcsmoke

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3220
  • Tommy Points: 183
The OP might be referring to us trading for AI before the KG deal went down.  Which I'm very glad didn't happen.

That's what I'm thinking too.  If we had traded for AI, we wouldn't have had the pieces to get KG.  Getting KG was obviously the right move.