Does Iverson deserve a 6 year extension?
Posted: Fri Apr 4, 2008 3:38 pm
I was reading this article about the race for the 7th and 8th playoff spots in the West and it talked about Iverson wanting a 6 year extension.
http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news;_ylt=AiliYakM_gVDv8p0Dxg3yyG8vLYF?slug=teamsscrambleforfinalwes&prov=tsn&type=lgns
http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news;_ylt=AiliYakM_gVDv8p0Dxg3yyG8vLYF?slug=teamsscrambleforfinalwes&prov=tsn&type=lgns
Nuggets
Would you give Iverson, who will turn 33 in June, the six-year extension he wants or risk him becoming disgruntled next season in the last year of his contract? Remember
Posted: Fri Apr 4, 2008 3:41 pm
I'd let Iverson walk before I gave him a 6-year extension. That's murder to a franchise- especially one who's already locked up Nene and K-mart to ridiculous deals.
Posted: Fri Apr 4, 2008 3:44 pm
that experiment failed, hes gettin trade this offseason or next season imo.
Posted: Fri Apr 4, 2008 3:45 pm
man, 6 years is a long time, 33 or 23...it's a dangerous move really...man...iDK...I say no...
Posted: Fri Apr 4, 2008 3:46 pm
BrooklynBulls wrote:I'd let Iverson walk before I gave him a 6-year extension. That's murder to a franchise- especially one who's already locked up Nene and K-mart to ridiculous deals.
Agreed, but i think he will resign with Denver.....
Posted: Fri Apr 4, 2008 3:52 pm
If he really wants max money, no way. For someone his age to get the security of a 6-year deal, he'd need to take a major paycut.
Posted: Fri Apr 4, 2008 3:53 pm
No way. Look what happened to Gary Payton in the six year after he turned 33. When he was 33, he has a PER if 22.9, now he can't find a job.
Posted: Fri Apr 4, 2008 4:22 pm
Iverson is pretty gifted physically... the amount of minutes and contact he gets, yet no injuries and not much decline..
but 6 years... thats too long... 3 year contract at 15 million a year...
but 6 years... thats too long... 3 year contract at 15 million a year...
Posted: Fri Apr 4, 2008 5:19 pm
I love Iverson, but he is nuts to want 6 years; give em 4 tops
Posted: Fri Apr 4, 2008 5:41 pm
Give him a 6yr deal with team options on the last 3.
Posted: Fri Apr 4, 2008 6:11 pm
Love the guy, but he wont be as quick in 4 years. Thats the basis of his game - quick and crafty. He looses his quickness and he becomes a spot up shooter with the ability to ball handle and pass. Keep him for 2 years with an option for 2 more.
Posted: Fri Apr 4, 2008 6:13 pm
Maybe 3 but not 6 .
Posted: Fri Apr 4, 2008 6:18 pm
TonyMontana wrote:Maybe 3 but not 6 .
Exactly what I was thinking--MAYBE 3. 2, no sweat.
6? No way in hell.
Posted: Fri Apr 4, 2008 6:26 pm
man the more i think about it, no way...6 years, get outta here...
Posted: Fri Apr 4, 2008 6:52 pm
Umm, never, no way, not a chance, no way in Hell, not on your life...
Etc.
Iverson is past 30, you do NOT give lengthy extensions to a player in his mid-30s. Duncan, maybe, there are some kinds of forwards and centers who deserve it but really, it's almost always a bad move. Iverson has been very good but I'd let him walk a lot faster than I'd extend him.
He's actually holding Denver back anyway, the Nuggets need a different player than he before they'll go forward.
Etc.
Iverson is past 30, you do NOT give lengthy extensions to a player in his mid-30s. Duncan, maybe, there are some kinds of forwards and centers who deserve it but really, it's almost always a bad move. Iverson has been very good but I'd let him walk a lot faster than I'd extend him.
He's actually holding Denver back anyway, the Nuggets need a different player than he before they'll go forward.
Posted: Fri Apr 4, 2008 7:17 pm
tsherkin wrote:Umm, never, no way, not a chance, no way in Hell, not on your life...
Etc.
Iverson is past 30, you do NOT give lengthy extensions to a player in his mid-30s. Duncan, maybe, there are some kinds of forwards and centers who deserve it but really, it's almost always a bad move. Iverson has been very good but I'd let him walk a lot faster than I'd extend him.
He's actually holding Denver back anyway, the Nuggets need a different player than he before they'll go forward.
How is Iverson holding Denver back? You do realize despite the west being crazy this team is on pace for its best record in 25 years....If they still had Miller I doubt they would be even better or close to making the playoffs when Melo struggles.
Posted: Fri Apr 4, 2008 8:24 pm
tsherkin wrote:Umm, never, no way, not a chance, no way in Hell, not on your life...
Etc.
Iverson is past 30, you do NOT give lengthy extensions to a player in his mid-30s. Duncan, maybe, there are some kinds of forwards and centers who deserve it but really, it's almost always a bad move. Iverson has been very good but I'd let him walk a lot faster than I'd extend him.
He's actually holding Denver back anyway, the Nuggets need a different player than he before they'll go forward.
I agree, AI isn't the save all or final piece to a championship, but he does and has made Denver a better team, even with a d-leaguer in a stacked West at PG.
I think 6 years is too long, I agree with 3-4, but 6 years isn't as crazy as some are making it out to be. At max-money it is however. He's still playing at a very high-level of basketball right now and showing no signs of slowing down. He's not as reckless as he was before and is a more efficient player now.
Denver still needs a few changes to be a real contender, AI or not.
Posted: Fri Apr 4, 2008 8:41 pm
big123 wrote:-= original quote snipped =-
I agree, AI isn't the save all or final piece to a championship, but he does and has made Denver a better team, even with a d-leaguer in a stacked West at PG.
Not really, no. At least not in terms of postseason success or significant improvement in regular-season record, anyway.
Posted: Fri Apr 4, 2008 8:49 pm
I'd say he "deserves" it in that he has worked his butt off his whole career, but it would still be a terrible move.
It probably wouldn't be that bad if it was like no more than like $42-45million over those 6 years....in fact a rule of thumb could be that if the extension is 3 years or more, that it shouldn't be more than $42million.
It probably wouldn't be that bad if it was like no more than like $42-45million over those 6 years....in fact a rule of thumb could be that if the extension is 3 years or more, that it shouldn't be more than $42million.
Posted: Fri Apr 4, 2008 9:00 pm
6 years?? Max deal??? 33 years old!!! Are you kidding me??? I hope Denver does it though!! 