"In the wee small hours of the morning ..."
First of all, let's get this out of the way: Allen Iverson is an amazingly talented athlete, and those who think or say otherwise are not being honest with themselves or anyone else. The reason I don't say "amazing basketball player" is because I believe very strongly that a great basketball player is great on every level ... not just athleticism, but also skills, knowledge of the game, offensive and defensive execution, and ability to communicate and interact with teammates and coaches, etc..
The reason I say Paul Pierce is the best "basketball player" in the NBA today, is because I feel he fills all these requirements better than anyone else. The reason I don't say this about players like LeBron James and Kobe Bryant, is because I feel they come up short on some of these same requirements, and do not fit into the brackets of what I consider a "complete" player. Anyone who is more concerned with their own numbers than they are with the success of the team, is not a complete player, and never will be, so long as they keep that attitude.
I'm not about to call Iverson names and bash him for his personality quirks, because frankly, I don't know the man, and I'm not about to judge him that way ... there are enough people doing that already. But I have seen and read enough to come to the conclusion that for many reasons, he is to this point in his career, not a complete player, or the type of player that can be easily acclimated to a full "team" concept, or in Celtic terms, the concept of Ubuntu. He's most effective as a core player or catalyst - a player that a team is built around - with him as the primary facilitator and leader. That in itself, (before even considering other factors), is enough to disqualify him for this team.
We already have a core in Boston, and one of the strongest and least selfish cores to be put together in a long time. Is it realistic to think that a player like AI could be inserted into this system easily and fluidly, without upsetting the team-first balance that Doc and Danny and Tom have worked so hard to cultivate? I honestly don't think so, and it would take a lot of proof to the contrary to convince me otherwise. Everything that "The Answer" has done in the past, both on and off the court, has shown that he is, right or wrong, a "Me First" kind of guy ... not to the point of the selfishness I've seen from many others, but at least to the level where it seems highly unlikely that he could bend to the Ubuntu concept.
A confession: Allen Iverson used to be my favorite "Non-Celtic" basketball player, long before I realized there was much more to playing basketball than just skills and athleticism. I love to watch the guy play ... he brings a level of excitement and energy to the game that only a very few have ever shared, and despite his age, he can still play to that level, (albeit not to the level of his prime). He also didn't seem to gravitate toward fame and self-promotion in the same way players like Kobe and LeBron do, and I mean the whole Hollywood scene and associations with those kinds of cliques. Despite his troubles, he has tried to be a family-first guy, and I respected his efforts in that direction.
There were times, before KG and Ray, when I would have tried to embrace bringing him here to play in green ... not because he was a favorite player of mine, but because I leaned more to the side of him being the kind of player that could meld with others on a similar level, like Pierce, and at least share the core responsibilities and leadership. But everything I've seen or read or heard him say in the last few years, contradicts that process, and just screams that he would never be able to play with or come off the bench for guys who he feels are not on the same level as himself. The chemistry and team-play and selflessness that has been nourished and grown over the last couple of years in Boston, is completely dependent on the leadership and guidance of Paul and KG, and I don't think there's any way AI would be cool with deferring to them.
I could be totally wrong, and maybe I and many others are selling him and his ability to adapt short, but history and past behavior points in the opposite direction. Unfortunately the Celtics don't have the money or resources to make such a huge gamble, and sadly for AI, neither do most other teams. But the gamble would involve so much more than just financial considerations ... it would involve rolling the dice with our team chemistry and leadership, our "We not Me" philosophy, our defense-first play structure, our rotation and fluidity, and the very fabric of what holds this team together - what makes it the force in the NBA that it has become. Is that a gamble that we need to take? Is it a gamble that even makes sense at the present time? I, for one, don't think so.
It's not for me to judge Iverson on his personality and mistakes and social inadequacies ... I'll leave that up to others who feel the necessity to do so. But I do have my opinion on how he would or could fit into this Celtics line-up, and whether or not it's worth taking the gamble. Everything I know about him and basketball and the makeup of this team, says a loud and resounding: "No". There was a time when I would have argued to the contrary, but with this team and the success it's had and the direction it's going in, that time has long passed. Like I said, he's an amazing athlete, and he's given more to the game than most people want to admit now ... or give him credit for. But whatever the considerations, and despite his talents, I don't want to see him in a Celtics uniform.
From what I know of this team and what he could bring to it, the minuses far outweigh the pluses ... and it's a huge gamble that we just don't need to take.
Topic: "We DO/DON'T Want Allen Iverson" Thread (merged) (Read 116115 times)