Is Allen Iverson one of the most under-appreciated players ?

[dark_lord]

He took a bunch of shots because he had no one to play with. Those Sixer teams were loaded with trash. Trash and AI - of course.

Extremely tough, extremely quick, and a downright unstoppable scorer at times.

this!  he brought the sixers to the finals with a team in which eric snow was the second best player.

people like to hate on AI for his image.  truth is, he was unbelievably good

[fairweatherfan]

I think he was overrated in his prime, but since then, the needle has swung WAY too far in the other direction to the point that he is very under-rated.  He had his flaws, but in his prime, he was one of the most unguardable players in the history of the league.  He was spectacular to watch, and could really put the team on his back in ways very few others have ever been able to do.

Yeah, I agree.  He was so overrated by so many "casual" fans that the "serious" fans backlashed hard and haven't stopped.  Doesn't help that his personality rubbed a lot of people the wrong way. 

AI's biggest problem was falling into the trap of confusing "I can make it" with "I will make it".  Led to him taking lots of heavily challenged, tough shots.  He made quite a few but missed a lot more, and in the long run, it was never enough to be more than a fringe contender.

I also think the way his career ended did a TON of damage to his reputation.  The way he jumped around from team to team, and then did the whole thing where he wanted to still be a star, but didn't have the skills anymore...it really left a bad taste in a lot of people mouth, that I think puts a bit of an unfair shadow over his prime.

I mean, its the same thing with guys like Tracy McGrady, or even Grant Hill, although that was because of injury, and not attitude.  But, people forget that those two both had a short prime when they made a strong argument to be among the greatest to ever play the game.  But, that is all but wiped out by their recent history as role players, and broken down old guys.

Yeah, but T-Mac and Hill seemed to adjust pretty gracefully to a diminished role.  Iverson was never, ever ok with being anything less than #1 or 1a (in Denver).  Which is why he never got back into the league once he left.  He could've stuck around and been a 6th man on a contender for a few years, but his ego couldn't handle it.

[mmmmm]

Obscenely overrated player.  The Antoine Walker of guards, honestly.

He was fun to watch... but in his prime when he was jacking up shots and averaging 31 a night, he was shooting 39% and 29% from three.  That's just disgustingly inefficient.  He also was averaging about 4.5 turnovers per game during his prime.   His teams improved when he left.  Literally the Antoine Walker of guards.   

Honestly, if Rajon Rondo started taking 28 shots a night like Iverson in his prime, Rondo could probably come close to averaging 30 a night as well.   Iverson was a completely selfish chucker.

Sure, but that kind of misses the point.

Pound-for-pound, AI is almost certainly one of the best basketball players ever.

Disagree.  I'd say he was almost certainly one of the best athletes in the NBA, ever.

But I don't think he was anywhere close to being one of the best _basketball players_ ever.

[Chris]

I think he was overrated in his prime, but since then, the needle has swung WAY too far in the other direction to the point that he is very under-rated.  He had his flaws, but in his prime, he was one of the most unguardable players in the history of the league.  He was spectacular to watch, and could really put the team on his back in ways very few others have ever been able to do.

Yeah, I agree.  He was so overrated by so many "casual" fans that the "serious" fans backlashed hard and haven't stopped.  Doesn't help that his personality rubbed a lot of people the wrong way. 

AI's biggest problem was falling into the trap of confusing "I can make it" with "I will make it".  Led to him taking lots of heavily challenged, tough shots.  He made quite a few but missed a lot more, and in the long run, it was never enough to be more than a fringe contender.

I also think the way his career ended did a TON of damage to his reputation.  The way he jumped around from team to team, and then did the whole thing where he wanted to still be a star, but didn't have the skills anymore...it really left a bad taste in a lot of people mouth, that I think puts a bit of an unfair shadow over his prime.

I mean, its the same thing with guys like Tracy McGrady, or even Grant Hill, although that was because of injury, and not attitude.  But, people forget that those two both had a short prime when they made a strong argument to be among the greatest to ever play the game.  But, that is all but wiped out by their recent history as role players, and broken down old guys.

Yeah, but T-Mac and Hill seemed to adjust pretty gracefully to a diminished role.  Iverson was never, ever ok with being anything less than #1 or 1a (in Denver).  Which is why he never got back into the league once he left.  He could've stuck around and been a 6th man on a contender for a few years, but his ego couldn't handle it.

Absolutely.  But it's the same outcome.  People remember the ugly end, and not the bright beginning.

[slamtheking]

if anything, he's still overrated. 

completely selfish chucker.  didn't make his teammates any better.  The argument that he single-handedly carried a weak team to the finals speaks volumes about the low quality of talent in the league at that time than it does about AI being a great player.

A great player makes those around him better and does what's needed to get his team wins.  AI was all about AI.  He only wanted to win on his terms and he would never consider adjusting his game/style to fit a team concept. 

Personally, I can't see how this player garners any respect from anyone who's more than a casual fan of the game.  I'll grant he was one tough little bugger and didn't back down from anyone on the court but it takes more than that to be a great player.

[Vox_Populi]

One of my favorite players.


To watch YouTube videos of.

[Donoghus]

I think he's viewed pretty accurately these days.  I don't think he's under appreciated that much nor over-rated, either.

One of the very few guys I've ever seen that used to absolutely scare the heck out of me when he had the ball. In his prime, he was that scary.  The quickness and first step were simply amazing.

I remember the first round of the '02 playoffs and being terrified whenever he had the ball.  Luckily, we were on the winning side of that series in the end. 

[moiso]

He was exciting and had tons of scoring binges, but shooting 25 times per game at a 42% clip is a recipe for a lot of losing seasons.  Philly was good only when their defense was incredible.  They weren't good only because AI carried them.

The Antoine Walker comparison is actually pretty accurate in terms of performance.

[CelticD]

i think AI is one of the most overrated players in nba history. ppl gotta look at his percentages, how many shots he took, how many minutes he played, etc.

a lotta ppl love to laud iverson cuz he led a poor 2000-2001 team to the finals but a 34 year old dikembe mutombo was on iverson's team, and dikembe still made it to the all star game, despite havin a regular season average of around 10 points and 13 rebounds shooting below 50% from the field.

that can be interpreted in 2 ways. either A) iverson had more help than ppl want to admit, or B) the nba wasnt oozing talent durin this period.

ill give credit to iverson for beating a prime vince carter and ray allen to reach the finals, but iverson put up playoff averages of 32.9 points with his efg% being jus 42.5%. thats worse than avery bradley last season.

so naw, i dont think iverson is under-appreciated at all. i think ppl gas him up cuz he got handles. he had poor defense and horribly inefficient offense. 

[D.o.s.]

if anything, he's still overrated. 

completely selfish chucker.  didn't make his teammates any better.  The argument that he single-handedly carried a weak team to the finals speaks volumes about the low quality of talent in the league at that time than it does about AI being a great player.

A great player makes those around him better and does what's needed to get his team wins.  AI was all about AI.  He only wanted to win on his terms and he would never consider adjusting his game/style to fit a team concept. 

Personally, I can't see how this player garners any respect from anyone who's more than a casual fan of the game.  I'll grant he was one tough little bugger and didn't back down from anyone on the court but it takes more than that to be a great player.

Interestingly, I've never heard another NBA player of his era say anything other than wonderful things about him and his game.

So, uh, there's that.

Again, I don't think the numbers really explain (or can really capture) what made Iverson such a special player. If you didn't see it, you missed out.

[D.o.s.]

Obscenely overrated player.  The Antoine Walker of guards, honestly.

He was fun to watch... but in his prime when he was jacking up shots and averaging 31 a night, he was shooting 39% and 29% from three.  That's just disgustingly inefficient.  He also was averaging about 4.5 turnovers per game during his prime.   His teams improved when he left.  Literally the Antoine Walker of guards.   

Honestly, if Rajon Rondo started taking 28 shots a night like Iverson in his prime, Rondo could probably come close to averaging 30 a night as well.   Iverson was a completely selfish chucker.

Sure, but that kind of misses the point.

Pound-for-pound, AI is almost certainly one of the best basketball players ever.

Disagree.  I'd say he was almost certainly one of the best athletes in the NBA, ever.

But I don't think he was anywhere close to being one of the best _basketball players_ ever.

Right. That's more of what I was going for--how many sneakered- 6'0 165lb dudes even make the NBA, let alone thrive?

[LarBrd33]

Obscenely overrated player.  The Antoine Walker of guards, honestly.

He was fun to watch... but in his prime when he was jacking up shots and averaging 31 a night, he was shooting 39% and 29% from three.  That's just disgustingly inefficient.  He also was averaging about 4.5 turnovers per game during his prime.   His teams improved when he left.  Literally the Antoine Walker of guards.   

Honestly, if Rajon Rondo started taking 28 shots a night like Iverson in his prime, Rondo could probably come close to averaging 30 a night as well.   Iverson was a completely selfish chucker.

Sure, but that kind of misses the point.

Pound-for-pound, AI is almost certainly one of the best basketball players ever.

Disagree.  I'd say he was almost certainly one of the best athletes in the NBA, ever.

But I don't think he was anywhere close to being one of the best _basketball players_ ever.

The pound-for-pound thing is silly.  Iverson was a chucker who got a lot of turnovers and didn't make his teammates better.  Pound-for-pound there are several Iverson-sized point guards who could have averaged close to 30 a night if they jacked up 28 shots. 

Chris Paul, for instance, once averaged 23 points, 11 assists, 5.5 rebounds and 2.8 steals.  He averaged those points on a mere 16 shots a night.  You can't tell me that Chris Paul wouldn't have averaged 30+ had he been taking and obscenely selfish 28 shots a night.  Chris Paul is roughly the same size as Iverson.

5'5 139 pound Earl Boykins was probably a more efficient scorer than Allen Iverson in his prime.  Pound-for-pound, I'd go with Boykins.

[Onslaught]

I'm just glad he's gone so I'll never have to see someone on this site want him on the Celtics. He was good at putting a ball in a net. That's the only thing he was ever good at.

[thirstyboots18]

Sure, but that kind of misses the point.

Pound-for-pound, AI is almost certainly one of the best basketball players ever.
[/quote]IF you think of basketball as an individual sport, like tennis, you could at least make an argument (don't forget Wilt  ).  If you think of basketball as a team sport...vastly overrated.  "Practice?" is evidently not a team concept in his understanding.

[Eja117]

We talking bout a guy that never won. Not a champion. No no no. Not a champion. We talking bout a guy that never won. I mean we talkin bout a guy that never won. Never won a thing. How silly is that?