ClipsFanSince98 wrote:Again miss entire point of thread and compare careers. Keep up man.
The point of the thread is laughable.
Thomas would not be half the player he is today in Iverson's era, Iverson would give Westbrook a run for his money in the NuBA.
You can post their numbers beside each other all you want but you know there is no common denominator here to make the numbers actually comparable you understand that, I've seen enough of your posts to know you're an intelligent guy, now stop trolling the old people.
If you do not know how good a basketball player Gary Payton was just go and stand near him for a little while, there's a good chance he'll come over and tell you. - Ahmad Rashad
Well guys, time to move on to the next logical discussion.
Was Isaiah Thomas a better scorer this year than any version of Michael Jordan during his title years?
The answer is obviously yes. MJ's two best best scoring seasons during his title runs he averaged 30.6pp36 with a 60.5 TS% and 29.8pp36 with a 56.4 TS%. This season Isaiah put up 30.8pp36 with a 62.5 TS%. Jordan's per game averages are better, but he played more minutes than IT and it took him 3-7 more field goal attempts per game, depending on the specific season, to get those extra points.
In conclusion, Isaiah Thomas is a better scorer than prime Michael Jordan during his title years. I can't wait to hear all the oldies using their feelings to argue that Michael Jordan was a better scorer than Isaiah Thomas, but sorry brehs, your feelings just don't hold up in light of the objective evidence.
permaximum wrote:As someone who watched all three of them in prime:
Career: 1. MJ 2. Kobe 3. Iverson
Peak 1. MJ 2. Iverson 3. Kobe
Young people don't know that until Kobe's 81, Iverson was considered the better player.
From my memory of the discussions we were having then, both here and other places, I don't remember this being the case if we're talking about individual seasons. Career to date? Well, sure, Iverson had a head start.
Peak Iverson above peak Kobe? What's the argument there?
In his MVP season, Iverson was ranked higher than Kobe and in the top 5, but after that, Kobe was generally ranked in the top 5 while Iverson would be in the top 10-15 and was most seasons ranked below Kobe.
Again if you're talking about career as a whole at that point, then sure, Kobe truly became a star in 99-00 when he was the same age as rookie AI. Iverson already had an MVP and more All-Star, All-NBA, etc as he was 3 years older that Kobe. Thays what is used when comparing career to date. It wasn't the 81 point game that put Kobe ahead of AI career wise, it was just Kobe catching up. He was already considered better for about 4-5 seasons by 05-06 and now building up his own set of career accolades while Iverson was not amassing as much anymore and moving below other guys too on a yearly basis.
Kobe beat him in MVP votes in 2002, 2003, 2004, and 2006. Team wins can affect that, though that affects who wins more than who else gets votes, but so can playing with a guy like Shaq. Let's look at All-NBA teams.
I agree with you that Kobe's prime caught up in 2006. But that 81-point game alone had an even bigger factor in people's minds. It was the turning point.
But you hide or miss some points.
1. Iverson's prime started in 1998-99. 2. Iverson playing for Nuggets raised his efficiency but cost his accolades. 3. Team wins do affect a lot and Kobe was either the Robin or had the Robin in those years. 4. Iverson's peak and most of his prime happened in the handcheck era. Kobe's peak and most of his prime happened in the next era. 5. What Iverson accomplished in 2001 was not repeated. 2007 LeBron got close but they were swept by a worse team. There aren't any statistical data for Kobe to think he ever was capable of what Iverson did in 2001. Kobe never raised his teammates' efficiency and decreased TO rates of the team when he was on the floor. Iverson used all those bad shots a team of that kind had to take per night with such high efficiency while providing wide open shots for his teammates because of the tremendous attention he got.
The comman mistake people tend to make is checking individual stats without looking what that player did to their teammates' stats when he was on the floor. RAPM born out of this need but noise, bias and multi-collinearity issues hurt the metric so bad that it's even worse than MPG as an individual player-performance predictor.
Does Iverson's prime starting in 98-99 make much of a difference though? Kobe's prime still didn't start until 00-01. Iverson had the MVP in 00-01 which was the main thing to point to in putting him over Kobe. By the time we reached 05-06, Kobe had been considered the better player on a yearly basis for at least 4/6 seasons from 00-01 when Iverson won MVP to 05-06.
Iverson's accolades of lack thereof as a Nugget was also due to new guards coming into the league who were not scoring 25, 26 PPG, but were impacting the game just as much or more. A better team can decrease your raw stats, but impact is impact, and it should also increase your winning and give a better perception. On the other hand, it still brought more questions about Iverson's ability to perform with another star, whether fair or not, and make them "better" as well as well as his ability to impact games in the playoffs, especially now in a tougher WC. Even in losing their series' in Denver which were expected and I don't fault him for, people still expected them to at least push to 6, or even 7 games with a player like AI and the perception of his impact, but a 5 game series and a sweep in 07-08 was not impressive. Then his quick and rapid decline in an era that was supposed to be favorable to his skills was also quite disappointing to people.
While your 4th point is true, what's the difference that it makes? Kobe was the better player on a year by year basis in hand check era years and non hand check era years. Kobe already had an efficient 28.5 ppg and 30 ppg season in the hand check era at 22 and 24 years old. Kobe was keeping the Lakers afloat and making his team better at points when Shaq would be out with injury. He already got the first teams over Iverson in 2002, 2003 and 2004, and coaches considered him the superior player irrespective if the era we are referring to.
What Iverson did in 2000 was done in his way as a very high volume player, so if that is what you are asking, then sure, no one in recent history did it exactly that way. In terms of primarily defensive teams with a main initiator making it out of a weaker East again, and then competing in the finals? The Nets did it in 02-03 with Kidd as that guy. As an aside, Kidd despite lower volume scoring numbers and not having the same aura of "carry the team on his back" was considered as good or better than Iverson in certain seasons in the early 2000's when people were looking at overall impact on both ends and impact on teammates numbers and success. Back to the Nets again, 01-02 they got there, and they did compete, losing game 1 by 5 points and game 3 by 3 points, but they got swept. Of course you might have forgotten that Duncan did it and did it even better in 02-03. Duncan won a championship while going through tougher teams and producing even more significantly while similarly not having the consistent offensive support. The 02-03 Spurs had 20 year old second year Tony Parker as their second leading scorer. In the post-season Parker was their second leading scorer with 14.8 ppg / 40.3% FG / 26.8% 3PT / 71.3% FT / .468 TS% / 96 Ortg. They went through the Suns, Lakers and Mavs before the finals where they beat the Nets. Duncan averaged 28/12/5 vs the Lakers while anchoring their defense of course. He then averaged 28/17/6 vs the Mavs, then in the finals averaged 24/17/5 vs the Nets. He carried that team in just about every aspect of basketball on both ends. Scoring, rebounding, playmaking, anchoring the defense. Duncan's 02-03 playoff performance was much superior to what Iverson did in 00-01.
People talk about Philly's lack of complimentary offensive support, well Dikembe's 13.9 ppg and McKie's 14.6 ppg were better than what Duncan was getting. In the Milwaukee series, Iverson missed a game an they just lost by just 6 and contained Milwaukee still. In Game 5 which is considered the "turn" game in a series, despite Iverson's 5/27 FG and just 15 points (but 8 rebs and 9 assists too, so he contributed still), they pulled off the win as Snow came off the bench and dropped 18 points including hitting some big shots, and then Deke had 21/13. Duncan's teammates stepped up to, but Duncan consistently carried them to victories, not just on offense, or in scoring, but in everything.
Braggins wrote:Well guys, time to move on to the next logical discussion.
Was Isaiah Thomas a better scorer this year than any version of Michael Jordan during his title years?
The answer is obviously yes. MJ's two best best scoring seasons during his title runs he averaged 30.6pp36 with a 60.5 TS% and 29.8pp36 with a 56.4 TS%. This season Isaiah put up 30.8pp36 with a 62.5 TS%. Jordan's per game averages are better, but he played more minutes than IT and it took him 3-7 more field goal attempts per game, depending on the specific season, to get those extra points.
In conclusion, Isaiah Thomas is a better scorer than prime Michael Jordan during his title years. I can't wait to hear all the oldies using their feelings to argue that Michael Jordan was a better scorer than Isaiah Thomas, but sorry brehs, your feelings just don't hold up in light of the objective evidence.
Excellent post. Stats only comparisons don't cut the mustard.
Braggins wrote:Well guys, time to move on to the next logical discussion.
Was Isaiah Thomas a better scorer this year than any version of Michael Jordan during his title years?
The answer is obviously yes. MJ's two best best scoring seasons during his title runs he averaged 30.6pp36 with a 60.5 TS% and 29.8pp36 with a 56.4 TS%. This season Isaiah put up 30.8pp36 with a 62.5 TS%. Jordan's per game averages are better, but he played more minutes than IT and it took him 3-7 more field goal attempts per game, depending on the specific season, to get those extra points.
In conclusion, Isaiah Thomas is a better scorer than prime Michael Jordan during his title years. I can't wait to hear all the oldies using their feelings to argue that Michael Jordan was a better scorer than Isaiah Thomas, but sorry brehs, your feelings just don't hold up in light of the objective evidence.
Excellent post. Stats only comparisons don't cut the mustard.
In terms of purely a shooting efficiency standpoint yes, marginally. Doesn't mean better scorer though. Jordan was a more consistent volume scorer and couldn't be guarded nearly as easily. He faced entire defenses. Isaiah doesn't deal with that (neither did Iverson).
The comparison is dumb because with Iverson we aren't talking about elite efficiency vs outstanding. We are talking about elite vs pretty awful. In a Jordan comparison you're also talking about the best perimeter defender of all time arguably and huge intangibles and clutch.
Iverson's issue in a comparison is he doesn't offer anything outside of volume scoring. He has a barely better than 1/1 assist to turnover ratio many season of his prime. He's a mediocre defender. He's small and can't crash the glass. Then you combine that with inefficient offense on top of it. So what big value does Iverson add other than a guy who can literally put up 40 shots any given game and make maybe 14 or 15 of those?
“This kid reminds me of a 6-6 Chris Paul. He wants to win everything.”
Braggins wrote:Well guys, time to move on to the next logical discussion.
Was Isaiah Thomas a better scorer this year than any version of Michael Jordan during his title years?
The answer is obviously yes. MJ's two best best scoring seasons during his title runs he averaged 30.6pp36 with a 60.5 TS% and 29.8pp36 with a 56.4 TS%. This season Isaiah put up 30.8pp36 with a 62.5 TS%. Jordan's per game averages are better, but he played more minutes than IT and it took him 3-7 more field goal attempts per game, depending on the specific season, to get those extra points.
In conclusion, Isaiah Thomas is a better scorer than prime Michael Jordan during his title years. I can't wait to hear all the oldies using their feelings to argue that Michael Jordan was a better scorer than Isaiah Thomas, but sorry brehs, your feelings just don't hold up in light of the objective evidence.
Excellent post. Stats only comparisons don't cut the mustard.
In terms of purely a shooting efficiency standpoint yes, marginally. Doesn't mean better scorer though. Jordan was a more consistent volume scorer and couldn't be guarded nearly as easily. He faced entire defenses. Isaiah doesn't deal with that (neither did Iverson).
The comparison is dumb because with Iverson we aren't talking about elite efficiency vs outstanding. We are talking about elite vs pretty awful. In a Jordan comparison you're also talking about the best perimeter defender of all time arguably and huge intangibles and clutch.
Iverson's issue in a comparison is he doesn't offer anything outside of volume scoring. He has a barely better than 1/1 assist to turnover ratio many season of his prime. He's a mediocre defender. He's small and can't crash the glass. Then you combine that with inefficient offense on top of it. So what big value does Iverson add other than a guy who can literally put up 40 shots any given game and make maybe 14 or 15 of those?
Your Iverson/IT argument is based mostly off trying to compare the two "In terms of purely a shooting efficiency standpoint" without any context and use that to say that Thomas was better this season than any of Iverson's seasons (you also largely hinge it on per36 stats lol). You literally can't disagree with that last post without undermining your entire argument about the original topic. How was Jordan a "more consistent volume scorer" who "couldn't be guarded nearly as easily" during his title years if he was shooting at least 4% lower TS% than IT did this year in all but one of the seasons (closest is about -2%) and also would have scored fewer points per game in all of them if he played the same minutes as IT (the actual ppg gap was no bigger than that of Iverson/IT best seasons)? The objective evidence says that it clearly isn't the case that MJ was a better scorer during those years. If MJ was the better scorer he would have been more efficient and scored more per minute than IT did. Remember, you aren't allowed to use context in this discussion, so its just an objective fact that IT was a better scorer this season than MJ was during his title years and there is no argument you can make to dispute that. It doesn't matter if you "feel" that Michael Jordan was the better scorer during those years due to nostalgia or fanboyism or whatever. The numbers clearly say otherwise.
This thread is a joke tbh and should be taken about as seriously as my last post.
DoItALL9 wrote:Excellent post. Stats only comparisons don't cut the mustard.
In terms of purely a shooting efficiency standpoint yes, marginally. Doesn't mean better scorer though. Jordan was a more consistent volume scorer and couldn't be guarded nearly as easily. He faced entire defenses. Isaiah doesn't deal with that (neither did Iverson).
The comparison is dumb because with Iverson we aren't talking about elite efficiency vs outstanding. We are talking about elite vs pretty awful. In a Jordan comparison you're also talking about the best perimeter defender of all time arguably and huge intangibles and clutch.
Iverson's issue in a comparison is he doesn't offer anything outside of volume scoring. He has a barely better than 1/1 assist to turnover ratio many season of his prime. He's a mediocre defender. He's small and can't crash the glass. Then you combine that with inefficient offense on top of it. So what big value does Iverson add other than a guy who can literally put up 40 shots any given game and make maybe 14 or 15 of those?
You literally can't disagree with that last post without undermining your entire argument about the original topic. How was Jordan a "more consistent volume scorer" who "couldn't be guarded nearly as easily" if he was shooting at least 5% lower TS% (closest is about -2%)during the years I am comparing and would have scored fewer points per game if he played the same minutes as IT in all of them? The objective evidence says that clearly isn't the case. If MJ was the better scorer he would be more efficient and score more per minute than IT. Remember, you aren't allowed to use context in this discussion, so its just an objective fact that IT was a better scorer this season than MJ was during his title years and there is no argument you can make to dispute that.
Braggins wrote:Well guys, time to move on to the next logical discussion.
Was Isaiah Thomas a better scorer this year than any version of Michael Jordan during his title years?
The answer is obviously yes. MJ's two best best scoring seasons during his title runs he averaged 30.6pp36 with a 60.5 TS% and 29.8pp36 with a 56.4 TS%. This season Isaiah put up 30.8pp36 with a 62.5 TS%. Jordan's per game averages are better, but he played more minutes than IT and it took him 3-7 more field goal attempts per game, depending on the specific season, to get those extra points.
In conclusion, Isaiah Thomas is a better scorer than prime Michael Jordan during his title years. I can't wait to hear all the oldies using their feelings to argue that Michael Jordan was a better scorer than Isaiah Thomas, but sorry brehs, your feelings just don't hold up in light of the objective evidence.
Excellent post. Stats only comparisons don't cut the mustard.
In terms of purely a shooting efficiency standpoint yes, marginally. Doesn't mean better scorer though. Jordan was a more consistent volume scorer and couldn't be guarded nearly as easily. He faced entire defenses. Isaiah doesn't deal with that (neither did Iverson).
The comparison is dumb because with Iverson we aren't talking about elite efficiency vs outstanding. We are talking about elite vs pretty awful. In a Jordan comparison you're also talking about the best perimeter defender of all time arguably and huge intangibles and clutch.
Iverson's issue in a comparison is he doesn't offer anything outside of volume scoring. He has a barely better than 1/1 assist to turnover ratio many season of his prime. He's a mediocre defender. He's small and can't crash the glass. Then you combine that with inefficient offense on top of it. So what big value does Iverson add other than a guy who can literally put up 40 shots any given game and make maybe 14 or 15 of those?
6.2 assists and 3.6 TOV per game for his career...how is 6.2 assists bad again? that's as good as any scoring guard in history...he was a decent playmaker...he just never had anyone worth making plays for....certainly not in his prime..
Volcano wrote:Kobe must the best at everything. He's faster than Westbrook and stronger than Dwight. He's taller than Yao Ming and shorter than Earl Boykins. Nothing you say is going to change their minds.
Braggins wrote:Well guys, time to move on to the next logical discussion.
Was Isaiah Thomas a better scorer this year than any version of Michael Jordan during his title years?
The answer is obviously yes. MJ's two best best scoring seasons during his title runs he averaged 30.6pp36 with a 60.5 TS% and 29.8pp36 with a 56.4 TS%. This season Isaiah put up 30.8pp36 with a 62.5 TS%. Jordan's per game averages are better, but he played more minutes than IT and it took him 3-7 more field goal attempts per game, depending on the specific season, to get those extra points.
In conclusion, Isaiah Thomas is a better scorer than prime Michael Jordan during his title years. I can't wait to hear all the oldies using their feelings to argue that Michael Jordan was a better scorer than Isaiah Thomas, but sorry brehs, your feelings just don't hold up in light of the objective evidence.
this post is amazing
Volcano wrote:Kobe must the best at everything. He's faster than Westbrook and stronger than Dwight. He's taller than Yao Ming and shorter than Earl Boykins. Nothing you say is going to change their minds.
Braggins wrote:Well guys, time to move on to the next logical discussion.
Was Isaiah Thomas a better scorer this year than any version of Michael Jordan during his title years?
The answer is obviously yes. MJ's two best best scoring seasons during his title runs he averaged 30.6pp36 with a 60.5 TS% and 29.8pp36 with a 56.4 TS%. This season Isaiah put up 30.8pp36 with a 62.5 TS%. Jordan's per game averages are better, but he played more minutes than IT and it took him 3-7 more field goal attempts per game, depending on the specific season, to get those extra points.
In conclusion, Isaiah Thomas is a better scorer than prime Michael Jordan during his title years. I can't wait to hear all the oldies using their feelings to argue that Michael Jordan was a better scorer than Isaiah Thomas, but sorry brehs, your feelings just don't hold up in light of the objective evidence.
Ha, ha, those year, Steve Kerr is 3 point specialist, and took south of 4 3 pts per 36 min with about 45%. Nowadays, a player can not shoot can easily took more than that with less. For example, Robio is took 2.9 per 36 with 30%. IT took 9 per 36 with 37.5% Image MJ did that what will happens to his efficiency. His best year is around 45% to 50% but with very little 3 points per game, not so sure what the volume increase will do to him.
Coach does not allow players do that in that era unless you are specialist.
Prez wrote:Iverson was getting sent to the floor whenever he went to the paint while Isaiah gets a foul call for getting looked at. Denying the rule changes and difference in physicality that favors perimeter players today compared to one of the most brutal defensive eras in basketball is just absurd.
That has more to do with the fact that Isaiah is nowhere near as reckless as Iverson and didn't go to the rim as much. That's a playstyle difference just as much as it was an era difference. Sure, hard fouls/flagrant fouls were worse, but that doesn't have much weight in the gap here in efficiency. Unless you think periodic hard fouls affect TS% tremendously. Iverson just didn't play smart and didn't have the shot to take pressure off of himself more like.
No, no it doesn't. It has to do with a very real and glaring difference in the defensive physicality between Iverson's era and the current league. We're talking one of the most physical, brutal defensive eras in all of basketball in the late 90s early 00s, compared to one of the softest, most guard-oriented defensive environment ever seen. It's not just "periodic hard fouls". It's a completely different environment altogether. At times defenders hesitate to even make contact with Isaiah in fear of getting called for ridiculous touch fouls. I don't know how the difference in defensive eras as it pertains to guard play between then and now could be more obvious.
ClipsFanSince98 wrote:Why did every team Iverson leave dramatically improve? The Sixers bounced back under the emergence of Iggy and made playoffs two straight years. The Nuggets went to the WCF the year after he left. The Pistons lost 20 more games than the year before.
Ah , so your true motives finally come out , so this thread was about your hate on iverson as opposed to ' Thomas doesn't get enough respect"
"We're like Tim Duncan and David Robinson," Villanueva said, following the team's morning shootaround at the America West Arena. "But a younger version. I really feel that."
Prez wrote:Iverson was getting sent to the floor whenever he went to the paint while Isaiah gets a foul call for getting looked at. Denying the rule changes and difference in physicality that favors perimeter players today compared to one of the most brutal defensive eras in basketball is just absurd.
That has more to do with the fact that Isaiah is nowhere near as reckless as Iverson and didn't go to the rim as much. That's a playstyle difference just as much as it was an era difference. Sure, hard fouls/flagrant fouls were worse, but that doesn't have much weight in the gap here in efficiency. Unless you think periodic hard fouls affect TS% tremendously. Iverson just didn't play smart and didn't have the shot to take pressure off of himself more like.
No, no it doesn't. It has to do with a very real and glaring difference in the defensive physicality between Iverson's era and the current league. We're talking one of the most physical, brutal defensive eras in all of basketball in the late 90s early 00s, compared to one of the softest, most guard-oriented defensive environment ever seen. It's not just "periodic hard fouls". It's a completely different environment altogether. At times defenders hesitate to even make contact with Isaiah in fear of getting called for ridiculous touch fouls. I don't know how the difference in defensive eras as it pertains to guard play between then and now could be more obvious.
None of which changes anything I've said. I never denied the league was more physical. They aren't mutually exclusive concepts. The league was more physical and Iverson was also more reckless than he needed to be. Isaiah shouldn't be penalized for being a much smarter player. If the league was so tough, you'd think Iverson would of developed an outside shot instead of getting hammered in the paint and taking low IQ shots.
“This kid reminds me of a 6-6 Chris Paul. He wants to win everything.”
ClipsFanSince98 wrote:Why did every team Iverson leave dramatically improve? The Sixers bounced back under the emergence of Iggy and made playoffs two straight years. The Nuggets went to the WCF the year after he left. The Pistons lost 20 more games than the year before.
Ah , so your true motives finally come out , so this thread was about your hate on iverson as opposed to ' Thomas doesn't get enough respect"
Iverson was one of my favorite players ever. So stop trying to play armchair psych. I may love watching him, doesn't mean I won't speak the truth on the game.
“This kid reminds me of a 6-6 Chris Paul. He wants to win everything.”
ClipsFanSince98 wrote: In terms of purely a shooting efficiency standpoint yes, marginally. Doesn't mean better scorer though. Jordan was a more consistent volume scorer and couldn't be guarded nearly as easily. He faced entire defenses. Isaiah doesn't deal with that (neither did Iverson).
The comparison is dumb because with Iverson we aren't talking about elite efficiency vs outstanding. We are talking about elite vs pretty awful. In a Jordan comparison you're also talking about the best perimeter defender of all time arguably and huge intangibles and clutch.
Iverson's issue in a comparison is he doesn't offer anything outside of volume scoring. He has a barely better than 1/1 assist to turnover ratio many season of his prime. He's a mediocre defender. He's small and can't crash the glass. Then you combine that with inefficient offense on top of it. So what big value does Iverson add other than a guy who can literally put up 40 shots any given game and make maybe 14 or 15 of those?
You literally can't disagree with that last post without undermining your entire argument about the original topic. How was Jordan a "more consistent volume scorer" who "couldn't be guarded nearly as easily" if he was shooting at least 5% lower TS% (closest is about -2%)during the years I am comparing and would have scored fewer points per game if he played the same minutes as IT in all of them? The objective evidence says that clearly isn't the case. If MJ was the better scorer he would be more efficient and score more per minute than IT. Remember, you aren't allowed to use context in this discussion, so its just an objective fact that IT was a better scorer this season than MJ was during his title years and there is no argument you can make to dispute that.
This thread is a joke tbh.
Thread obliterated
Finally.
Iverson if you're reading this , I'm sorry it took 28 ridiculous pages of disrespect to get to this point
"We're like Tim Duncan and David Robinson," Villanueva said, following the team's morning shootaround at the America West Arena. "But a younger version. I really feel that."
DoItALL9 wrote:Excellent post. Stats only comparisons don't cut the mustard.
In terms of purely a shooting efficiency standpoint yes, marginally. Doesn't mean better scorer though. Jordan was a more consistent volume scorer and couldn't be guarded nearly as easily. He faced entire defenses. Isaiah doesn't deal with that (neither did Iverson).
The comparison is dumb because with Iverson we aren't talking about elite efficiency vs outstanding. We are talking about elite vs pretty awful. In a Jordan comparison you're also talking about the best perimeter defender of all time arguably and huge intangibles and clutch.
Iverson's issue in a comparison is he doesn't offer anything outside of volume scoring. He has a barely better than 1/1 assist to turnover ratio many season of his prime. He's a mediocre defender. He's small and can't crash the glass. Then you combine that with inefficient offense on top of it. So what big value does Iverson add other than a guy who can literally put up 40 shots any given game and make maybe 14 or 15 of those?
Your Iverson/IT argument is based mostly off trying to compare the two "In terms of purely a shooting efficiency standpoint" without any context and use that to say that Thomas was better this season than any of Iverson's seasons (you also largely hinge it on per36 stats lol). You literally can't disagree with that last post without undermining your entire argument about the original topic. How was Jordan a "more consistent volume scorer" who "couldn't be guarded nearly as easily" during his title years if he was shooting at least 4% lower TS% than IT did this year in all but one of the seasons (closest is about -2%) and also would have scored fewer points per game in all of them if he played the same minutes as IT (the actual ppg gap was no bigger than that of Iverson/IT best seasons)? The objective evidence says that it clearly isn't the case that MJ was a better scorer during those years. If MJ was the better scorer he would have been more efficient and scored more per minute than IT did. Remember, you aren't allowed to use context in this discussion, so its just an objective fact that IT was a better scorer this season than MJ was during his title years and there is no argument you can make to dispute that. It doesn't matter if you "feel" that Michael Jordan was the better scorer during those years due to nostalgia or fanboyism or whatever. The numbers clearly say otherwise.
This thread is a joke tbh and should be taken about as seriously as my last post.
Yes, in terms of strictly pure scoring and scoring only - Thomas' 30.8 pp/36 in a on 62.5% TS in a league where the offensive environment yielded a league average 55.2% TS is marginally better than the Jordan season 30.6pp36 with a 60.5 TS% in an offensvie environment of 53.7%TS and clearly better than 29.8pp36 with a 56.4 TS% in an offensive environment where league average was 53.6% TS. The first season Jordan season is very close but not quite as good, and the second season is clearly worse.
In terms of overall player Jordan has vast advantages in most other aspects of the game resulting in his being a far superior overall player - but in terms of pure scoring - this 2017 IT season was better than either of the 2 Jordan seasons referenced. Allen Iverson doesn’t have any seasons particularly close to this IT one in terms of scoring efficiency and output relative to environment and doesn’t enjoy a big enough advantage in other aspects of the game to make any of his seasons as good as the 2017 IT season though the gap between them defensively does make it close.
ClipsFanSince98 wrote: In terms of purely a shooting efficiency standpoint yes, marginally. Doesn't mean better scorer though. Jordan was a more consistent volume scorer and couldn't be guarded nearly as easily. He faced entire defenses. Isaiah doesn't deal with that (neither did Iverson).
The comparison is dumb because with Iverson we aren't talking about elite efficiency vs outstanding. We are talking about elite vs pretty awful. In a Jordan comparison you're also talking about the best perimeter defender of all time arguably and huge intangibles and clutch.
Iverson's issue in a comparison is he doesn't offer anything outside of volume scoring. He has a barely better than 1/1 assist to turnover ratio many season of his prime. He's a mediocre defender. He's small and can't crash the glass. Then you combine that with inefficient offense on top of it. So what big value does Iverson add other than a guy who can literally put up 40 shots any given game and make maybe 14 or 15 of those?
Your Iverson/IT argument is based mostly off trying to compare the two "In terms of purely a shooting efficiency standpoint" without any context and use that to say that Thomas was better this season than any of Iverson's seasons (you also largely hinge it on per36 stats lol). You literally can't disagree with that last post without undermining your entire argument about the original topic. How was Jordan a "more consistent volume scorer" who "couldn't be guarded nearly as easily" during his title years if he was shooting at least 4% lower TS% than IT did this year in all but one of the seasons (closest is about -2%) and also would have scored fewer points per game in all of them if he played the same minutes as IT (the actual ppg gap was no bigger than that of Iverson/IT best seasons)? The objective evidence says that it clearly isn't the case that MJ was a better scorer during those years. If MJ was the better scorer he would have been more efficient and scored more per minute than IT did. Remember, you aren't allowed to use context in this discussion, so its just an objective fact that IT was a better scorer this season than MJ was during his title years and there is no argument you can make to dispute that. It doesn't matter if you "feel" that Michael Jordan was the better scorer during those years due to nostalgia or fanboyism or whatever. The numbers clearly say otherwise.
This thread is a joke tbh and should be taken about as seriously as my last post.
Yes, in terms of strictly pure scoring and scoring only - Thomas' 30.8 pp/36 in a on 62.5% TS in a league where the offensive environment yielded a league average 55.2% TS is marginally better than the Jordan season 30.6pp36 with a 60.5 TS% in an offensvie environment of 53.7%TS and clearly better than 29.8pp36 with a 56.4 TS% in an offensive environment where league average was 53.6% TS. The first season Jordan season is very close but not quite as good, and the second season is clearly worse.
In terms of overall player Jordan has vast advantages in most other aspects of the game resulting in his being a far superior overall player - but in terms of pure scoring - this 2017 IT season was better than either of the 2 Jordan seasons referenced. Allen Iverson doesn’t have any seasons particularly close to this IT one in terms of scoring efficiency and output relative to environment and doesn’t enjoy a big enough advantage in other aspects of the game to make any of his seasons as good as the 2017 IT season though the gap between them defensively does make it close.
Great post.
“This kid reminds me of a 6-6 Chris Paul. He wants to win everything.”
So Thomas had that fifty point burst against a 40 win team at home in an offense-friendly era, and we have this game from Iverson against arguably the greatest playoff team ever, on the road, in a much more physical and defensive league.
Lakerfan17 wrote:So Thomas had that fifty point burst against a 40 win team at home in an offense-friendly era, and we have this game from Iverson against arguably the greatest playoff team ever, on the road, in a much more physical and defensive league.
Just look back at any highlights of Iverson playing in his era. The lane is congested, there's no spacing and he's still getting wherever he wants on the court and scoring amongst the trees.
Thomas plays in a league with wide open space, where you have centers guarding the 3pt line and not protecting the basket. He's a nice little player but what he's doing cannot be compared to prime Iverson's accomplishments in his era. It's embarrassing that this thread has gone to this extent
