Thinking Basketball Offensive Legends, Allen Iverson

[OneLifeLoveKing]

AI got that dawg in him

[dhsilv2]

Iverson was one of those players I loved watching so much I just don't even care about the stats and analytics. Only guy who ever made me root for the Sixers haha.

I might be the weirdest person alive but for a stretch my two favorite players were AI and Duncan. I loved that Duncan was the guy who did the right things, want to college, played fundamentals, etc. And I loved AI because he was the exact opposite in the most fun way possible. Just two completely different examples of greatness.

But now older...I'm so glad they only failed on the olympic team and never played together. That would have been a disaster lol.

[dhsilv2]

Nah you specifically said other PG’s when he’s not a PG and IMO he’s def in the conversation

Okay so I'll clarify, I'm talking about gaurds.

And I don't have him in the same conversation as guys like Kidd, Nash, CP3, Wade, Kobe, Curry, Thomas etc. he's a tier behind. I have him in my top 50 ever, not my top 30.

That’s your list and I get it… but my list… I have everyone you mentioned above him, but Nash and cp3 unless cp3 wins 1. Nash 1 doesn’t count to me… and AI not far behind the ones with rings after taking the squad he had to the finals… you don’t take that type of squad to the finals by yourself… that was something to see and you won’t ever see again

Deke was hardly some "nobody else" in 2001. The man was all nba as a center, DPOY, and was the anchor of their defense which drove them to the finals. The only 2 teams that year with 2 all nba players, played in the finals.

[og15]

Watch on YouTube

Interesting video on AI.

I was watching a lot of early 00's Sixers last summer and what stood out was how much of an off-ball player AI was. This video touches on that and a lot of other things.

- Volume scoring and playmaking as hybrid SG and PG
- 99th percentile in teammate shot creation during peak years
- Unorthodox shooting form, size, and lots of long 2's led to inefficient shooting %'s
- All-time ballhandling and court navigation
- Good floor-raising but neutral effect on better teams
- Off-ball movement produced mini Reggie Miller effect

I've mentioned this a few times to people when discussing him, people seem to lack balance. You either have people acting like ppg is everything or people who act like he was not even an impactful player, but in regards to this part, so many people act like he was just pounding the ball.

It's either bad memory of his years in Philly, specifically when LB coached him, or not watching much of him, but he was run off a lot of actions off the ball to catch and shoot or attack. The way some people discuss him, you would think he just handled the ball all game and isolated. He wasn't Houston Harden.

[picc]

I've mentioned this a few times to people when discussing him, people seem to lack balance. You either have people acting like ppg is everything or people who act like he was not even an impactful player, but in regards to this part, so many people act like he was just pounding the ball.

It's either bad memory of his years in Philly, specifically when LB coached him, or not watching much of him, but he was run off a lot of actions off the ball to catch and shoot or attack. The way some people discuss him, you would think he just handled the ball all game and isolated. He wasn't Houston Harden.

It's not just AI either.

The recent trend of extreme heliocentrism has made people kind of assume the old dominant wings played the same way. I was watching a bunch of old Laker and Raptors games too, and Vince Carter and Kobe were also off-ball players compared to the helios of today. Both of those guys looked like Reggie Miller compared to what I see from contemporary wings and guards.

AI was probably the most so, and how much he would move, how fast he was going, and the ground he would cover was amazing. It was nonstop. If nothing else his defender was going to be sucking wind through the game.

Gilbert Arenas talks about it here.

Watch on YouTube

[CP3nthusiast]

AI was kind of in the perfect situation for his play style. He didn't have to worry about playing great defense or getting his teammates going on offense. All he had to do was score the ball, which wasn't easy by any means, especially in that era, but it did make things simple for him. Dikembe anchored the defense and got all the 2nd chance points, Eric Snow kept the ball moving and defended the opposing team's best guard, Aaron McKie was the spark plug coming off the bench, Theo Ratliff was an elite shot blocker. This was the only way he could be the best player on a competitive team. If he had played with someone like J Kidd or T Mac or Vince Carter, he'd have experienced more team success but he'd also have been relegated to being the 2nd best player on that team and I don't know how he would have taken to that. You'd be asking someone who had a 35% usage rate throughout his prime to give up the ball more and do all the other little things on offense.

That kind of "get out of the way and let me cook" mindset that was so popular among guard/wing scorers in the 2000s would not fly today. You look at the best players in the league today and they're either elite two-way bigs (Giannis, Embiid) or elite offensive players who elevate their teammates through their passing (Jokic, Luka, LeBron) or through their movement (Curry). The outlier is KD, who is one of those isolation players but he's so efficient that he doesn't inhibit the flow of the offense in any way. Plus he's still one of those players who needs things to be perfect around him in order to win because he doesn't have that two-way impact or the ability to consistently get his teammates great looks. Games are just too high-scoring now for a player to lead their team to victory 55 times a season with something like a 32/4/4 stat line.

[Snakebites]

Loved the Wilt and Reggie episodes of the series.

Hoping for a Nash episode next. Or Ginobili.

AI? I thought the video was fair. Talented guy, can make a terrible offense passable but doesn’t scale well with other very good offensive players due to extreme on ball style and lack of outside shooting.

[og15]

AI was kind of in the perfect situation for his play style. He didn't have to worry about playing great defense or getting his teammates going on offense. All he had to do was score the ball, which wasn't easy by any means, especially in that era, but it did make things simple for him. Dikembe anchored the defense and got all the 2nd chance points, Eric Snow kept the ball moving and defended the opposing team's best guard, Aaron McKie was the spark plug coming off the bench, Theo Ratliff was an elite shot blocker. This was the only way he could be the best player on a competitive team. If he had played with someone like J Kidd or T Mac or Vince Carter, he'd have experienced more team success but he'd also have been relegated to being the 2nd best player on that team and I don't know how he would have taken to that. You'd be asking someone who had a 35% usage rate throughout his prime to give up the ball more and do all the other little things on offense.

That kind of "get out of the way and let me cook" mindset that was so popular among guard/wing scorers in the 2000s would not fly today. You look at the best players in the league today and they're either elite two-way bigs (Giannis, Embiid) or elite offensive players who elevate their teammates through their passing (Jokic, Luka, LeBron) or through their movement (Curry). The outlier is KD, who is one of those isolation players but he's so efficient that he doesn't inhibit the flow of the offense in any way. Plus he's still one of those players who needs things to be perfect around him in order to win because he doesn't have that two-way impact or the ability to consistently get his teammates great looks. Games are just too high-scoring now for a player to lead their team to victory 55 times a season with something like a 32/4/4 stat line.

It was relatively "easy" role wise. What I mean by relative is that it was easy because the competition was also one star teams with worse role players or unbalanced teams when the Sixers went to the finals. So in that sense, yes, it was an easy situation for him, but as soon as there was tougher competition, we saw that such teams really couldn't have much success.

Of course Theo and Mutombo were swapped for each other, so they should be combined as one in terms of his help.

I think we have to also take that into account with AI. I think some of his biggest fans who are drawn into both his skills as well as cultural appeal overrate how good he would be impact wise compared to many other players especially ones who didn't put up as high raw ppg, but AI also has enough skill and ability to adjust to how teams would play now and be impactful.

I think early AI was reported to have had some issues with other scorers / ball handlers, but he played with Carmelo and was the second option, it's just that his skillset was not ideal to be much of a ceiling raiser.

[Dangun]

Okay so I'll clarify, I'm talking about gaurds.

And I don't have him in the same conversation as guys like Kidd, Nash, CP3, Wade, Kobe, Curry, Thomas etc. he's a tier behind. I have him in my top 50 ever, not my top 30.

That’s your list and I get it… but my list… I have everyone you mentioned above him, but Nash and cp3 unless cp3 wins 1. Nash 1 doesn’t count to me… and AI not far behind the ones with rings after taking the squad he had to the finals… you don’t take that type of squad to the finals by yourself… that was something to see and you won’t ever see again

I said AI was a great player but had his limitations.

He also played in a weak Eastern Conference and generally apart from the 2001 season, his Philly teams were very mediocore.

1997 - 22 wins
1998 - 31 wins
1999 - 28 wins
2000 - 49 wins
2001 - 56 wins
2002 - 43 wins
2003 - 48 wins
2004 - 33 wins
2005 - 43 wins
2006 - 38 wins

And even on the Nuggets him and Melo never got past the 1st round.

Why are you leaving the part out that everyone on your list had help whether it’d be the “big 3”, cp3 with prime Blake and deandre and Kobe with prime Shaq etc etc… AI had melo late in his career and that’s not really a good fit… but the fact is AI is in the conversation whether he’s on your list or not. You need to accept people gonna call your list out and not gonna agree with it…

[TheGeneral99]

That’s your list and I get it… but my list… I have everyone you mentioned above him, but Nash and cp3 unless cp3 wins 1. Nash 1 doesn’t count to me… and AI not far behind the ones with rings after taking the squad he had to the finals… you don’t take that type of squad to the finals by yourself… that was something to see and you won’t ever see again

I said AI was a great player but had his limitations.

He also played in a weak Eastern Conference and generally apart from the 2001 season, his Philly teams were very mediocore.

1997 - 22 wins
1998 - 31 wins
1999 - 28 wins
2000 - 49 wins
2001 - 56 wins
2002 - 43 wins
2003 - 48 wins
2004 - 33 wins
2005 - 43 wins
2006 - 38 wins

And even on the Nuggets him and Melo never got past the 1st round.

Why are you leaving the part out that everyone on your list had help whether it’d be the “big 3”, cp3 with prime Blake and deandre and Kobe with prime Shaq etc etc… AI had melo late in his career and that’s not really a good fit… but the fact is AI is in the conversation whether he’s on your list or not. You need to accept people gonna call your list out and not gonna agree with it…

I said he's in my top 50, but not my top 30.

You think I'm slandering him for saying he's a top 50 player, but not a top 30 player?

WTF?

[og15]

That’s your list and I get it… but my list… I have everyone you mentioned above him, but Nash and cp3 unless cp3 wins 1. Nash 1 doesn’t count to me… and AI not far behind the ones with rings after taking the squad he had to the finals… you don’t take that type of squad to the finals by yourself… that was something to see and you won’t ever see again

I said AI was a great player but had his limitations.

He also played in a weak Eastern Conference and generally apart from the 2001 season, his Philly teams were very mediocore.

1997 - 22 wins
1998 - 31 wins
1999 - 28 wins
2000 - 49 wins
2001 - 56 wins
2002 - 43 wins
2003 - 48 wins
2004 - 33 wins
2005 - 43 wins
2006 - 38 wins

And even on the Nuggets him and Melo never got past the 1st round.

Why are you leaving the part out that everyone on your list had help whether it’d be the “big 3”, cp3 with prime Blake and deandre and Kobe with prime Shaq etc etc… AI had melo late in his career and that’s not really a good fit… but the fact is AI is in the conversation whether he’s on your list or not. You need to accept people gonna call your list out and not gonna agree with it…

Is AI not being in a top 30 controversial?

AI played with Melo late prime, of course for him that's also late career as he fell off drastically after his prime was over. Billups who had more success with those Denver teams was the same age. Paul who was mentioned for example had success with New Orleans, with Houston in late prime, even a very good season with OKC while just passing through, then some really good seasons with Phoenix. Even post prime he dropped 40+ to help his team get to the finals and still had 22/3/8 on 55/52 in the finals being guarded by Holiday. Those things definitely differentiate these players where we are discussing the upper echelon of players. It is a problem that AI without significant injured was not even a positive player anymore at 33.

[Quattro]

Okay so I'll clarify, I'm talking about gaurds.

And I don't have him in the same conversation as guys like Kidd, Nash, CP3, Wade, Kobe, Curry, Thomas etc. he's a tier behind. I have him in my top 50 ever, not my top 30.

That’s your list and I get it… but my list… I have everyone you mentioned above him, but Nash and cp3 unless cp3 wins 1. Nash 1 doesn’t count to me… and AI not far behind the ones with rings after taking the squad he had to the finals… you don’t take that type of squad to the finals by yourself… that was something to see and you won’t ever see again

I said AI was a great player but had his limitations.

He also played in a weak Eastern Conference and generally apart from the 2001 season, his Philly teams were very mediocore.

1997 - 22 wins
1998 - 31 wins
1999 - 28 wins
2000 - 49 wins
2001 - 56 wins
2002 - 43 wins
2003 - 48 wins
2004 - 33 wins
2005 - 43 wins
2006 - 38 wins

And even on the Nuggets him and Melo never got past the 1st round.

They were mediocre because they were awful awful teams. That Philly team that Iverson led to the finals would be the worst finals team in the history
of the league without Iverson on it. It might be the worst even with Iverson on it.

[Dangun]

Okay so I'll clarify, I'm talking about gaurds.

And I don't have him in the same conversation as guys like Kidd, Nash, CP3, Wade, Kobe, Curry, Thomas etc. he's a tier behind. I have him in my top 50 ever, not my top 30.

That’s your list and I get it… but my list… I have everyone you mentioned above him, but Nash and cp3 unless cp3 wins 1. Nash 1 doesn’t count to me… and AI not far behind the ones with rings after taking the squad he had to the finals… you don’t take that type of squad to the finals by yourself… that was something to see and you won’t ever see again

Deke was hardly some "nobody else" in 2001. The man was all nba as a center, DPOY, and was the anchor of their defense which drove them to the finals. The only 2 teams that year with 2 all nba players, played in the finals.

I prob should’ve worded it better. You need another scorer to go to and they had no one but AI… you was not counting on mutombo to give you 20-25 and you need that 2nd go to especially in the playoffs

[og15]

That’s your list and I get it… but my list… I have everyone you mentioned above him, but Nash and cp3 unless cp3 wins 1. Nash 1 doesn’t count to me… and AI not far behind the ones with rings after taking the squad he had to the finals… you don’t take that type of squad to the finals by yourself… that was something to see and you won’t ever see again

I said AI was a great player but had his limitations.

He also played in a weak Eastern Conference and generally apart from the 2001 season, his Philly teams were very mediocore.

1997 - 22 wins
1998 - 31 wins
1999 - 28 wins
2000 - 49 wins
2001 - 56 wins
2002 - 43 wins
2003 - 48 wins
2004 - 33 wins
2005 - 43 wins
2006 - 38 wins

And even on the Nuggets him and Melo never got past the 1st round.

They were mediocre because they were awful awful teams. That Philly team that Iverson led to the finals would be the worst finals team in the history
of the league without Iverson on it. It might be the worst even with Iverson on it.

Any of the East teams who came out that year would have been the same.

[TheGeneral99]

That’s your list and I get it… but my list… I have everyone you mentioned above him, but Nash and cp3 unless cp3 wins 1. Nash 1 doesn’t count to me… and AI not far behind the ones with rings after taking the squad he had to the finals… you don’t take that type of squad to the finals by yourself… that was something to see and you won’t ever see again

I said AI was a great player but had his limitations.

He also played in a weak Eastern Conference and generally apart from the 2001 season, his Philly teams were very mediocore.

1997 - 22 wins
1998 - 31 wins
1999 - 28 wins
2000 - 49 wins
2001 - 56 wins
2002 - 43 wins
2003 - 48 wins
2004 - 33 wins
2005 - 43 wins
2006 - 38 wins

And even on the Nuggets him and Melo never got past the 1st round.

They were mediocre because they were awful awful teams. That Philly team that Iverson led to the finals would be the worst finals team in the history
of the league without Iverson on it. It might be the worst even with Iverson on it.

The East was also really bad that year.

Sixers nearly lost to a 47 Raptors team who basically had VC and an even worse roster surrounding him.

Meanwhile in the West you had powerhouses like the Lakers, the Spurs, the Jazz, the Mavericks, the Suns, and the Blazers who were all arguably as good or better than the Sixers.

[dhsilv2]

That’s your list and I get it… but my list… I have everyone you mentioned above him, but Nash and cp3 unless cp3 wins 1. Nash 1 doesn’t count to me… and AI not far behind the ones with rings after taking the squad he had to the finals… you don’t take that type of squad to the finals by yourself… that was something to see and you won’t ever see again

Deke was hardly some "nobody else" in 2001. The man was all nba as a center, DPOY, and was the anchor of their defense which drove them to the finals. The only 2 teams that year with 2 all nba players, played in the finals.

I prob should’ve worded it better. You need another scorer to go to and they had no one but AI… you was not counting on mutombo to give you 20-25 and you need that 2nd go to especially in the playoffs

The problem was that AI didn't fit with a second go to scorer! And we saw that play out when he and Melo teammed up. Yeah, it would have been nice to have a better second scorer than McKie for sure. But would they have been better off with a better scorer than him but worse defender? Likely not.

Sure if you could have paired AI with Dray and Klay + Deke now we're talking a contender! But this was 2001...it was really hard to build teams with talent all around back then. Those 76ers were built to let AI do his on offense and the defense was built to do the rest.

[dhsilv2]

That’s your list and I get it… but my list… I have everyone you mentioned above him, but Nash and cp3 unless cp3 wins 1. Nash 1 doesn’t count to me… and AI not far behind the ones with rings after taking the squad he had to the finals… you don’t take that type of squad to the finals by yourself… that was something to see and you won’t ever see again

I said AI was a great player but had his limitations.

He also played in a weak Eastern Conference and generally apart from the 2001 season, his Philly teams were very mediocore.

1997 - 22 wins
1998 - 31 wins
1999 - 28 wins
2000 - 49 wins
2001 - 56 wins
2002 - 43 wins
2003 - 48 wins
2004 - 33 wins
2005 - 43 wins
2006 - 38 wins

And even on the Nuggets him and Melo never got past the 1st round.

They were mediocre because they were awful awful teams. That Philly team that Iverson led to the finals would be the worst finals team in the history
of the league without Iverson on it. It might be the worst even with Iverson on it.

If you take a top 2 player from nearly any finals team it would be among the worst finals teams...

[Dangun]

I said AI was a great player but had his limitations.

He also played in a weak Eastern Conference and generally apart from the 2001 season, his Philly teams were very mediocore.

1997 - 22 wins
1998 - 31 wins
1999 - 28 wins
2000 - 49 wins
2001 - 56 wins
2002 - 43 wins
2003 - 48 wins
2004 - 33 wins
2005 - 43 wins
2006 - 38 wins

And even on the Nuggets him and Melo never got past the 1st round.

Why are you leaving the part out that everyone on your list had help whether it’d be the “big 3”, cp3 with prime Blake and deandre and Kobe with prime Shaq etc etc… AI had melo late in his career and that’s not really a good fit… but the fact is AI is in the conversation whether he’s on your list or not. You need to accept people gonna call your list out and not gonna agree with it…

Is AI not being in a top 30 controversial?

AI played with Melo late prime, of course for him that's also late career as he fell off drastically after his prime was over. Billups who had more success with those Denver teams was the same age. Paul who was mentioned for example had success with New Orleans, with Houston in late prime, even a very good season with OKC while just passing through, then some really good seasons with Phoenix. Even post prime he dropped 40+ to help his team get to the finals and still had 22/3/8 on 55/52 in the finals being guarded by Holiday. Those things definitely differentiate these players where we are discussing the upper echelon of players. It is a problem that AI without significant injured was not even a positive player anymore at 33.

IMO AI should be top 30 at least.. who can you name that’s above him in 30 spots

They were in two completely different situations. Paul had help in his prime and also now in his after years, and AI majority of his prime had nobody and that’s a huge game changer

[Dangun]

Deke was hardly some "nobody else" in 2001. The man was all nba as a center, DPOY, and was the anchor of their defense which drove them to the finals. The only 2 teams that year with 2 all nba players, played in the finals.

I prob should’ve worded it better. You need another scorer to go to and they had no one but AI… you was not counting on mutombo to give you 20-25 and you need that 2nd go to especially in the playoffs

The problem was that AI didn't fit with a second go to scorer! And we saw that play out when he and Melo teammed up. Yeah, it would have been nice to have a better second scorer than McKie for sure. But would they have been better off with a better scorer than him but worse defender? Likely not.

Sure if you could have paired AI with Dray and Klay + Deke now we're talking a contender! But this was 2001...it was really hard to build teams with talent all around back then. Those 76ers were built to let AI do his on offense and the defense was built to do the rest.

AI was done when he teamed with melo though, but klay is the exact type of player I had in mind that could’ve teamed with AI and flourished … maybe even a player like booker also… them with mutombo controlling the defense and rest of the squad IMO could’ve beat the Lakers that series

[NZB2323]

He just lacked synergy with other players. As a result there was just a cap on what he could do for you. Loved watching him. His off ball game was truly elite.

This is false. He simply didn't have a team around him in his prime. He didn't really have a decent supporting cast until Denver which he wasn't at his prime anymore.

It's still amazing he got that team to the Finals.


AI is a strange player he's probably one of the most popular players to ever play the game yet it seems like he's one of the most disrespected players as well. This guy was a top 5 sg in NBA history and he was 6ft playing that position. He played bigger than his size. He was amongst the best scorer's in the league for a 5 year stretch when his competition was against players like Shaq/Kobe/Duncan/KG/Tmac/Dirk.

AI was a problem he just lacked a supporting cast. He had to shoot a lot because that team had no scorers besides him.

I don’t know how you can call Iverson a top 5 SG when Jerry West, Jordan, Kobe, Wade, and Harden have played.

AI is definitely underrated by some, he played in the toughest era to score, and didn’t have any teammates who could score. 05-07 he was more efficient than he was 97-04.