2017 Isaiah Thomas is better than any version of Iverson.

[RaptorRed]

You don't know the impact he has had on the game ? Come on man take your hate goggles off. This is from Chris Paul who is from north carolina yet even he admits Iverson had a greater impact than Jordan.

http://clipperholics.com/2016/09/10/chris-paul-allen-iverson-nba-culture/

This is why we can't have nice things.

?? It's not my words, there's a direct quote from Chris Paul saying he had a bigger impact than Jordan...

[The_Hater]

Iverson was woefully inefficient even for his era. He has the aura of being a great player without really being one.

[HeartBreakKid]

Lol yeah that sixers team was so stacked
So let's get this straight, you're on here preaching the entire 01 east is garbage but now that someone uses this theory against you , you claimIverson's team wasn't garbage ? Seems like you are saying whatever fits your argument at the moment ....

The east was garbage in terms of how strong the parity and competition was. It doesn't mean Iverson's team was garbage. I'm referring to the competition. If anything I'm arguing Iverson's supporting cast was better than Vince Carter's, Tmac's and Ray Allen's. So of course the better team won. But he played like **** in much of those playoffs and got taken to 7 games twice by inferior teams.

So now Iverson had the best supporting cast in the east ? I'm done with this thread.

Who had a better one the year he went to the finals?

I don't think you can answer this. If I had to guess you were really young during that time and probably got caught up in narratives by Sports Center.


Having a bad team is relative. Iverson's teams are only bad compared to the Spurs and Lakers - they weren't bad compared to the Magic, Celtics or Raptors at that time.


If you're seriously going to argue that, then let's hear it. How are you going to tell me that Iverson had less help than Tracy McGrady? I want you to describe their rosters.

[OkcSinceSGA]

Are we really going to play this game with how weak the East is and Iverson's supporting cast? Lets put Thomas ahead of Lebron while we are it, with this logic. Iverson's supporting cast was trash. Revisionist history? lol, no his supporting cast was trash. Was it him or his supporting cast that got him a game 1 victory and the Lakers only defeat in the postseason?

Iverson's team was trash yet he had the DPOY, 6th man of year and 12 players with above league average WS/48. Makes sense. How many other stars in NBA history have had the 6th man of year+DPOY on their team?

That team was loaded with guys who couldn't put the ball in the basket. Yeah it makes sense that his supporting cast sucked.
By the way, I seem to recall Shaq eating and spitting out the DPOY.

When you build around a volume guy who takes 30 shots a game nearly and plays 40+ mpg, you don't add a bunch of scorers. You add a bunch of defenders, enforcers and utility guys. That's exactly what the Sixers did. As me and others are arguing here, the Sixers had a better supporting cast than the teams they played in the east. So the argument of "weak supporting cast" doesn't hold up. As for Shaq... well considering hes arguably the most physically dominant force ever, I don't think it's a knock on Mutumbo to get destroyed.

[HeartBreakKid]

Fact is Jason Kidd who was was less celebrated at the time because he didn't do that iso ball crap did the same exact thing Iverson did, twice, with a WORSE roster.

Stop with the victim card with Allen Iverson. His team was no worse than anyone elses at the time, and outside of 2001 he barely won any playoff series during a long prime.

[RaptorRed]

The east was garbage in terms of how strong the parity and competition was. It doesn't mean Iverson's team was garbage. I'm referring to the competition. If anything I'm arguing Iverson's supporting cast was better than Vince Carter's, Tmac's and Ray Allen's. So of course the better team won. But he played like **** in much of those playoffs and got taken to 7 games twice by inferior teams.

So now Iverson had the best supporting cast in the east ? I'm done with this thread.

Who had a better one the year he went to the finals?

I don't think you can answer this. If I had to guess you were really young during that time and probably got caught up in narratives by Sports Center.


Having a bad team is relative. Iverson's teams are only bad compared to the Spurs and Lakers - they weren't bad compared to the Magic, Celtics or Raptors at that time.


If you're seriously going to argue that, then let's hear it. How are you going to tell me that Iverson had less help than Tracy McGrady? I want you to describe their rosters.

Funny that you don't mention the bucks ?
Ray Allen's cast wasn't better ?
http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/MIL/2001.html

[sikma42]

Fact is Jason Kidd who was was less celebrated at the time because he didn't do that iso ball crap did the same exact thing Iverson did, twice, with a WORSE roster.

Stop with the victim card with Allen Iverson. His team was no worse than anyone elses at the time, and outside of 2001 he barely won any playoff series during a long prime.

Not even an Iverson fan but that statement is silly.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[Xherdan 23]

Fair enough. They earned it fair and square and Lakers did go to 15-1, still a record I'm pretty sure. It was an impressive finals showing considering the competition. I'm just saying what they had to go through in the east wasn't as impressive as these guys are saying. Beating the Lakers even once is far more impressive to me.

I agree that the east wasn't as great as some posters here try to make it look but all of the teams in these years were very tough defensively and almost all of them had a true all-time great offensive star.

I think the average player and team are better today, but a series in '90s and '00s in the east was still a tough battle to go through.

I can accept that. The early 00s had a lot of 1 superstar one man teams offensively it seemed. It was ISO ball lol. Tmac, VC, Iverson etc. But the league now top to bottom is way more stacked and I'm confident the Cavs, Raptors, Celtics, Wizards of 2017 would still kill the east of 2001. 01 Sixers may be 2 or 3 seed but the rest of teams seeding would get flooded out by 2017 ones.

Well, yes, but you can say that about every era.

'90s Bulls would get spanked by the Warriors or even the Rockets - the 3pt bombing would kill them.

IT is just had a great regular season but it's still at best only the third best this year (behind Westbrook and Harden for sure and arguably Kawhi, Curry and LeBron).

I don't think you can fault AI for playing ISO ball in a league that's built around ISO ball.

[Louie_Ruckuz]

I got mad love for Isaiah Thomas but he's not even the best point guard in the league right now let alone better than any Iverson version. Why do people hate on Iverson so much?

[Wolfy1983]

Iverson's team was trash yet he had the DPOY, 6th man of year and 12 players with above league average WS/48. Makes sense. How many other stars in NBA history have had the 6th man of year+DPOY on their team?

That team was loaded with guys who couldn't put the ball in the basket. Yeah it makes sense that his supporting cast sucked.
By the way, I seem to recall Shaq eating and spitting out the DPOY.

When you build around a volume guy who takes 30 shots a game nearly and plays 40+ mpg, you don't add a bunch of scorers. You add a bunch of defenders, enforcers and utility guys. That's exactly what the Sixers did. As me and others are arguing here, the Sixers had a better supporting cast than the teams they played in the east. So the argument of "weak supporting cast" doesn't hold up. As for Shaq... well considering hes arguably the most physically dominant force ever, I don't think it's a knock on Mutumbo to get destroyed.

So you bring up the fact that the team had the DPOY and when I bring up Shaq, I should just ignore Shaq dominating him because he is Shaq? Yeah, that makes sense. I seem to Recall a guy named Olajuwon handling a Shaq lead team to a sweep, but you will find a way to sweep that bit of fact under the rug as well.

[og15]

Lol yeah that sixers team was so stacked
So let's get this straight, you're on here preaching the entire 01 east is garbage but now that someone uses this theory against you , you claimIverson's team wasn't garbage ? Seems like you are saying whatever fits your argument at the moment ....

The east was garbage in terms of how strong the parity and competition was. It doesn't mean Iverson's team was garbage. I'm referring to the competition. If anything I'm arguing Iverson's supporting cast was better than Vince Carter's, Tmac's and Ray Allen's. So of course the better team won. But he played like **** in much of those playoffs and got taken to 7 games twice by inferior teams.

So now Iverson had the best supporting cast in the east ? I'm done with this thread.

That's actually true, I'm not sure if you watched the NBA back then or just looked at the Sixers roster and not at other teams rosters. That's the problem, people look at the roster in isolation and say it is "bad", but your roster only needs to be better than your opponents. That teams biggest strengths were defense and rebounding. Most of the good offensive teams were in the West except for Milwaukee who was very good at offense but awful on defense.

The East consisted of a lot of one man teams. This is the same as the Nets. People say Kidd took a weak roster to the finals, but that roster outside of Kidd was still as good or better than the rosters of the other East teams they faced.

If basketball was played in a vacuum, then isolated evaluations of rosters without taking into account opponents are valuable, but because the strength of a roster is relative to who you are playing, those general statements of "weak roster" aren't usually useful for discussion.

[XtotheDeezy]

He's what Jean Val Jean is to Manuel Ferrara. Both are legends in their own right, but new blood has arrived.

[Xherdan 23]

You don't know the impact he has had on the game ? Come on man take your hate goggles off. This is from Chris Paul who is from north carolina yet even he admits Iverson had a greater impact than Jordan.

http://clipperholics.com/2016/09/10/chris-paul-allen-iverson-nba-culture/

This is why we can't have nice things.

?? It's not my words, there's a direct quote from Chris Paul saying he had a bigger impact than Jordan...

Well, I'd quote Chris Paul if I could to tell him that's insane.

[OkcSinceSGA]

So now Iverson had the best supporting cast in the east ? I'm done with this thread.

Who had a better one the year he went to the finals?

I don't think you can answer this. If I had to guess you were really young during that time and probably got caught up in narratives by Sports Center.


Having a bad team is relative. Iverson's teams are only bad compared to the Spurs and Lakers - they weren't bad compared to the Magic, Celtics or Raptors at that time.


If you're seriously going to argue that, then let's hear it. How are you going to tell me that Iverson had less help than Tracy McGrady? I want you to describe their rosters.

Funny that you don't mention the bucks ?
Ray Allen's cast wasn't better ?
http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/MIL/2001.html

No. Bucks were more top heavy, but top to bottom they were not a better team. Big Dog Glenn Robinson was an inefficient black hole. Sam Cassell in the playoffs was mediocre that year. Tim Thomas was the 2nd best player in the playoffs for them. I'd take Iverson's cast that year.

[Louie_Ruckuz]

Iverson was woefully inefficient even for his era. He has the aura of being a great player without really being one.

That makes no sense. IVERSON was a great player, you numbers guys are taking this to another level.

[HeartBreakKid]

So now Iverson had the best supporting cast in the east ? I'm done with this thread.

Who had a better one the year he went to the finals?

I don't think you can answer this. If I had to guess you were really young during that time and probably got caught up in narratives by Sports Center.


Having a bad team is relative. Iverson's teams are only bad compared to the Spurs and Lakers - they weren't bad compared to the Magic, Celtics or Raptors at that time.


If you're seriously going to argue that, then let's hear it. How are you going to tell me that Iverson had less help than Tracy McGrady? I want you to describe their rosters.

Funny that you don't mention the bucks ?
Ray Allen's cast wasn't better ?
http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/MIL/2001.html

First off, by defaulting to the Bucks - you admitted that Iverson did have a better cast than the Magic, Celtics and Raptors. Good, we're making progress.

Second, the Bucks are the only team that were comparable talent wise.

Third, the Sixers barely beat the Bucks, and the Bucks were missing players. Glen was not a great player either, the Bucks were overrated but this one likely won't get by you.

Four, That series is widely considered to be one of the worst officiated games of all time. There are nearly as many conspiracy theories for that game as there were for Lakers vs Sacramento.


But sure, I'll give you the Bucks. The Bucks are the only team of comparable talent Allen Iverson ever beat. Do you disagree with that?

[RaptorRed]

This is why we can't have nice things.

?? It's not my words, there's a direct quote from Chris Paul saying he had a bigger impact than Jordan...

Well, I'd quote Chris Paul if I could to tell him that's insane.

It really isn't considering Paul is not the only one saying it , everyone wanted to be like iverson. Even isaiah thomas

[OkcSinceSGA]

Who had a better one the year he went to the finals?

I don't think you can answer this. If I had to guess you were really young during that time and probably got caught up in narratives by Sports Center.


Having a bad team is relative. Iverson's teams are only bad compared to the Spurs and Lakers - they weren't bad compared to the Magic, Celtics or Raptors at that time.


If you're seriously going to argue that, then let's hear it. How are you going to tell me that Iverson had less help than Tracy McGrady? I want you to describe their rosters.

Funny that you don't mention the bucks ?
Ray Allen's cast wasn't better ?
http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/MIL/2001.html

First off, by defaulting to the Bucks - you admitted that Iverson did have a better cast than the Magic, Celtics and Raptors. Good, we're making progress.

Second, the Bucks are the only team that were comparable talent wise.

Third, the Sixers barely beat the Bucks, and the Bucks were missing players. Glen was not a great player either, the Bucks were overrated but this one likely won't get by you.

Four, That series is widely considered to be one of the worst officiated games of all time. There are nearly as many conspiracy theories for that game as there were for Lakers vs Sacramento.


But sure, I'll give you the Bucks. The Bucks are the only team of comparable talent Allen Iverson ever beat. Do you disagree with that?

Come work in sales with me haha. Got em. Seriously though Bucks as you mentioned were comparable to some degree but injury problems+less depth+the talent on Milwaukee being less cohesive makes me lean Sixers relatively clearly. Sixers cast were extremely complimentary with one each other in comparison unless my memory is failing me.

[Kevin Johnson]

IT will never be greater than AI until he takes 4 Stiffs to a finals and gets a game.
CASE CLOSED.

Another, we missed out on Iverson's real potential. He had 0 offensive talent around him on the Sixers. You're lying if you never felt bad for the dude lol. Eric Snow, Aaron Mckie, Raja Bell lol wtf? This is what Iverson DRAGGGEDDDDD to the finals.

Iverson carried a garbage ass team to the finals bro. Leading a Boston team to the ECF is considered a higher feat for you?

Iverson 34% FG for the Eastern Conference finals 7-game series. Mutumbo averaged 17ppg and 16 rpg for the series and Mckie averaged 17ppg, 7apg and 5prg for the series. And Mutumbo, Hill, Mckie and Snow were defensive beasts. A better argument could be made that they carried Iverson and his chucking.

Iverson had his games but generally was atrocious to watch. Even that series, he singlehandlly chucked away games and even despite that the Sixers sometimes won games just because of their defense.

Game 2: 5-26 @ 19% FG
Game 4: 10-32 @ 31% FG and Philly still won
Game 5: 10-27 @ 19% FG and Philly still won

The hate on Iverson is astonishing considering everything he has done for the game

What exactly did Iverson accomplish or do for the game? Are we talking about the same Iverson that chucked away at 40% for his career and got dragged into the finals chucking multiple games at 19% shooting? The same Iverson who made it to the 2nd Round a total of 4 times in his career? Iverson was a icon for a generation of kiddies who didn't know what good basketball was but wasn't a Jordan/Bird/Magic who brought in waves of non-casual basketball fans to game, grew the game or popularized the game internationally. On the contrary, ratings were dismal and most viewers were turned off his chucking, lack of respect for the game and lack of professionalism.

Growing up in the Bird/Magic/Jordan era, it was painful to watch a media narrative that pushed Iverson as the MVP and it's ridiculous that those who worshiped Iverson as kiddies preach to a younger generation how great he was.

You don't know the impact he has had on the game ? Come on man take your hate goggles off. This is from Chris Paul who is from north carolina yet even he admits Iverson had a greater impact than Jordan.

http://clipperholics.com/2016/09/10/chris-paul-allen-iverson-nba-culture/

Every generation idolizes the generation before it. Michael Jordan idolized David Thompson. Magic Johnson idolized Earl the Pearl. That doesn't magnify David Thompson or Earl the Pearl's impact on the game when you talk about what they did for the game. When we talk about what they did for the game, we're talking about how successful they made their teams, how they increased the popularity of the game, brought in more fans, helped internationalize the game, revolutionized the way the game was played for the better, etc.

Iverson did none of that. Ok, he had more of an influence on Chris Paul and Paul's generation of NBA players but Chris Paul was only around 11 when Jordan played his last season with the Bulls. He's going to grow up 13-17 worshiping choices between a young Iverson, Carter and Kobe. Iverson because of his swag, hip-hop culture and his size.

[True Story]

Just saw this thread. What blatant disrespect for one of the greatest scorers this league has ever seen.

Iverson did it without having to carry the ball like IT does.