Allen Iverson Chokes Up

[vagrantwade]

I'm not defending Iverson getting a contract, but his career? He got an MVP award while Shaq and C-Webb were in their primes

And it just shows how pathetic his MVP award, LOL @ Iverson being better or more valueable than Shaq was.

Who would have done better? The Lakers without Shaq, or the 76ers without Iverson?

Who would have done better, the Lakers if they traded Iverson for Shaq or the Lakers with Shaq?

How about if the Sixers traded Iverson for Shaq and compare that to if they had just kept Iverson?

How does that make any sense? Why would I make that comparison? The MVP award is given to whomever is most valuable to their team.

[PerkinsIsABEAST]

Didn't Iverson lead a team to the NBA Finals?

Perhaps it has more to so with his supporting cast?

yes 1 time in an incredibly weak eastern conference (actually it was probably the weakest the east has ever been in my lifetime and i'm 25), what did he do the rest of his career?

He was actually really good that year, and has a great body of work through his career. He's one of the greatest scorers, and for a guy his size to have that much of an injury free career is a feat in itself. It's too bad he never found the right system, or got a better attitude or he could have one something.

You can fault his attitude, but you really can't fault his gifts as a player.

he wasn't even a top 5 player that year. Shaq, Duncan, KG, Vince Carter, Cwebb and even our own Paul Pierce were better

Wow are you kidding me? He led the league in scoring and steals.

And it wasn't even close to being one of Pierce's best years.

And he was horribly inefficent doing it, 51.8 TS% (compare that to shaq who had a 57.2 TS% while scoring only like 1.5 pts less) and playing way better defense.

But hey at least Iverson gambled a ton for his steals allowing the times when he didn't steal to give the player he was guarding an easy lane to the basket.

Why would I compare scoring efficient of a 5'11 PG to that of a 7' Center?

Ok compare it to VC or PP (VC shot 55.1 TS% and Pierce shot 56.3 TS% while playing great defense).

I'll give u that Iverson was the best PG in the league tho that year.

[ToppersBsktball10]

Didn't Iverson lead a team to the NBA Finals?

Perhaps it has more to so with his supporting cast?

yes 1 time in an incredibly weak eastern conference (actually it was probably the weakest the east has ever been in my lifetime and i'm 25), what did he do the rest of his career?

He was actually really good that year, and has a great body of work through his career. He's one of the greatest scorers, and for a guy his size to have that much of an injury free career is a feat in itself. It's too bad he never found the right system, or got a better attitude or he could have one something.

You can fault his attitude, but you really can't fault his gifts as a player.

he wasn't even a top 5 player that year. Shaq, Duncan, KG, Vince Carter, Cwebb and even our own Paul Pierce were better

hahahahahaha is that a joke? here's AI's numbers in every game from that year I suggest you look at them... http://www.basketball-reference.com/fc/pgl.cgi?player=iversal01&year=2001

[GKC]

He's got almost 23,000 career points.

2nd amongst active players. And he did most of this before the hand check era.

[PerkinsIsABEAST]

I'm not defending Iverson getting a contract, but his career? He got an MVP award while Shaq and C-Webb were in their primes

And it just shows how pathetic his MVP award, LOL @ Iverson being better or more valueable than Shaq was.

Who would have done better? The Lakers without Shaq, or the 76ers without Iverson?

Who would have done better, the Lakers if they traded Iverson for Shaq or the Lakers with Shaq?

How about if the Sixers traded Iverson for Shaq and compare that to if they had just kept Iverson?

How does that make any sense? Why would I make that comparison? The MVP award is given to whomever is most valuable to their team.

then vince carter deserves MVP that year, that raptors team was beyond awful yet they were a game winning shot away from beating the 76ers

[PerkinsIsABEAST]

He's got almost 23,000 career points.

2nd amongst active players. And he did most of this before the hand check era.

PPG is super overrated if u do it horribly inefficently like Iverson does. Give pretty much any top 10 player 20+ shots per game and almost all would score more points than Iverson. Oh and most of them would play far better defense as well.

[ToppersBsktball10]

I'm not defending Iverson getting a contract, but his career? He got an MVP award while Shaq and C-Webb were in their primes

And it just shows how pathetic his MVP award, LOL @ Iverson being better or more valueable than Shaq was.

Who would have done better? The Lakers without Shaq, or the 76ers without Iverson?

Who would have done better, the Lakers if they traded Iverson for Shaq or the Lakers with Shaq?

How about if the Sixers traded Iverson for Shaq and compare that to if they had just kept Iverson?

How does that make any sense? Why would I make that comparison? The MVP award is given to whomever is most valuable to their team.

then vince carter deserves MVP that year, that raptors team was beyond awful yet they were a game winning shot away from beating the 76ers

Yet, he didn't hit the game winning shot. And they had McGrady. Plus don't forget that AI was playing with a messed up right shoulder. I saw something that said for a week in the season he played with 17 injuries at ONE TIME. If AI wasn't on the sixers that year they don't one double digit games.

[ToppersBsktball10]

He's got almost 23,000 career points.

2nd amongst active players. And he did most of this before the hand check era.

PPG is super overrated if u do it horribly inefficently like Iverson does. Give pretty much any top 10 player 20+ shots per game and almost all would score more points than Iverson. Oh and most of them would play far better defense as well.

Funny seeing as he's the third leading scorer as far as ppg of all time. So everybody with 20+ shots would do better than AI? That definitly makes sense... 

[PerkinsIsABEAST]

I'm not defending Iverson getting a contract, but his career? He got an MVP award while Shaq and C-Webb were in their primes

And it just shows how pathetic his MVP award, LOL @ Iverson being better or more valueable than Shaq was.

Who would have done better? The Lakers without Shaq, or the 76ers without Iverson?

Who would have done better, the Lakers if they traded Iverson for Shaq or the Lakers with Shaq?

How about if the Sixers traded Iverson for Shaq and compare that to if they had just kept Iverson?

How does that make any sense? Why would I make that comparison? The MVP award is given to whomever is most valuable to their team.

then vince carter deserves MVP that year, that raptors team was beyond awful yet they were a game winning shot away from beating the 76ers

Yet, he didn't hit the game winning shot. And they had McGrady. Plus don't forget that AI was playing with a messed up right shoulder. I saw something that said for a week in the season he played with 17 injuries at ONE TIME. If AI wasn't on the sixers that year they don't one double digit games.

they did not have Tmac, http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/TOR/2001.html

[GKC]

He's got almost 23,000 career points.

2nd amongst active players. And he did most of this before the hand check era.

PPG is super overrated if u do it horribly inefficently like Iverson does. Give pretty much any top 10 player 20+ shots per game and almost all would score more points than Iverson. Oh and most of them would play far better defense as well.

Out of the good teams that year in the east (Raptors, Pacers, Bucks, Sixers), take out Iverson, VC, Reggie and Ray, and the Sixers probably had the worst team.

That being said, Iverson may have had a low shooting %, but he did get to the line almost 10 times a game, converting over 80%. So his shooting may have been innefficient, but his scoring was not.

Also remember, his shooting percentage was actually VERY efficient when he was in denver. 26ppg at a 44% clip with a good amount of FT's leads to a very high eFg%

[PerkinsIsABEAST]

He's got almost 23,000 career points.

2nd amongst active players. And he did most of this before the hand check era.

PPG is super overrated if u do it horribly inefficently like Iverson does. Give pretty much any top 10 player 20+ shots per game and almost all would score more points than Iverson. Oh and most of them would play far better defense as well.

Funny seeing as he's the third leading scorer as far as ppg of all time. So everybody with 20+ shots would do better than AI? That definitly makes sense... 

I didn't say everybody, I said a top 10ish player. Also AI was super durable throughout his career and constantly took 20+ shots which is why he is the 3rd leading ppg scorer of all time. If u gave Shaq, Kobe, heck even Pierce 20+ shots and they all played the same amount of games as Iverson, they'd all have more points.

[Eja117]

He's got almost 23,000 career points.

2nd amongst active players. And he did most of this before the hand check era.

PPG is super overrated if u do it horribly inefficently like Iverson does. Give pretty much any top 10 player 20+ shots per game and almost all would score more points than Iverson. Oh and most of them would play far better defense as well.

Funny seeing as he's the third leading scorer as far as ppg of all time. So everybody with 20+ shots would do better than AI? That definitly makes sense... 

In our era of sports we will see more and more contextless stats. Toine may be in the top 100 scorers but there's no way he's a top 100 player.

Drew Bledsoe is probably in the top 20 passing yards, but no way is he a top 20 QB.

In college football we have QBs at places like New Mexico St hitting 72% compeletion percentages and throwing for more yards in a season than guys like Namath threw for in a career, but they never go to a bowl game.

This may very well fall into the category of "There are lies, bloody lies, bold faced lies, statistics, and then there are politicians"

[ToppersBsktball10]

I'm not defending Iverson getting a contract, but his career? He got an MVP award while Shaq and C-Webb were in their primes

And it just shows how pathetic his MVP award, LOL @ Iverson being better or more valueable than Shaq was.

Who would have done better? The Lakers without Shaq, or the 76ers without Iverson?

Who would have done better, the Lakers if they traded Iverson for Shaq or the Lakers with Shaq?

How about if the Sixers traded Iverson for Shaq and compare that to if they had just kept Iverson?

How does that make any sense? Why would I make that comparison? The MVP award is given to whomever is most valuable to their team.

then vince carter deserves MVP that year, that raptors team was beyond awful yet they were a game winning shot away from beating the 76ers

Yet, he didn't hit the game winning shot. And they had McGrady. Plus don't forget that AI was playing with a messed up right shoulder. I saw something that said for a week in the season he played with 17 injuries at ONE TIME. If AI wasn't on the sixers that year they don't one double digit games.

they did not have Tmac, http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/TOR/2001.html

That's my bad I forgot they traded him after 3 years. Still there's not much of an argument. The Hawks were one game away from moving on the play the Cavs in the eastern semifinals. You can't say that they were better than the Celtics. Same with the 76ers and the Raptors.

[PerkinsIsABEAST]

He's got almost 23,000 career points.

2nd amongst active players. And he did most of this before the hand check era.

PPG is super overrated if u do it horribly inefficently like Iverson does. Give pretty much any top 10 player 20+ shots per game and almost all would score more points than Iverson. Oh and most of them would play far better defense as well.

Out of the good teams that year in the east (Raptors, Pacers, Bucks, Sixers), take out Iverson, VC, Reggie and Ray, and the Sixers probably had the worst team.

That being said, Iverson may have had a low shooting %, but he did get to the line almost 10 times a game, converting over 80%. So his shooting may have been innefficient, but his scoring was not.

Also remember, his shooting percentage was actually VERY efficient when he was in denver. 26ppg at a 44% clip with a good amount of FT's leads to a very high eFg%

TS factores in FT attempts, even with him going to the line a ton and converting at a pretty high rate he still only shot 51.8 TS%.

Yes he was efficent with Denver, that's the only season in his career he ever was. He still played his usual awful defense though.

[PerkinsIsABEAST]

He's got almost 23,000 career points.

2nd amongst active players. And he did most of this before the hand check era.

PPG is super overrated if u do it horribly inefficently like Iverson does. Give pretty much any top 10 player 20+ shots per game and almost all would score more points than Iverson. Oh and most of them would play far better defense as well.

Funny seeing as he's the third leading scorer as far as ppg of all time. So everybody with 20+ shots would do better than AI? That definitly makes sense... 

In our era of sports we will see more and more contextless stats. Toine may be in the top 100 scorers but there's no way he's a top 100 player.

Drew Bledsoe is probably in the top 20 passing yards, but no way is he a top 20 QB.

In college football we have QBs at places like New Mexico St hitting 72% compeletion percentages and throwing for more yards in a season than guys like Namath threw for in a career, but they never go to a bowl game.

This may very well fall into the category of "There are lies, bloody lies, bold faced lies, statistics, and then there are politicians"

exactly, well said