Who's better, Stephen Curry or Prime Allen Iverson?

[bondom34]

Steph - this isn't even remotely close.

it's definitely close. iverson is a top 10 all time scorer

He absolutely is not. And I have his initials in my name.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

Never knew this was why. I'm going to feel dumb but haven't had coffee yet. What is NO?

[HeartBreakKid]

it's definitely close. iverson is a top 10 all time scorer

He absolutely is not. And I have his initials in my name.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

Never knew this was why. I'm going to feel dumb but haven't had coffee yet. What is NO?

New Orleans? Isn't he a Pelicans fan?

[bondom34]

He absolutely is not. And I have his initials in my name.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

Never knew this was why. I'm going to feel dumb but haven't had coffee yet. What is NO?

New Orleans? Isn't he a Pelicans fan?

Gonna make coffee. Good call

[mirrornick]

Can Curry lead the 76ers in 2001 the way AI did? AI had a pretty bad team. He won a game against the superteam Lakers.
I don't know to be honest.. AI was fearless. Steph Curry has the edge as a 3pt shooter that's about it.

[mischievous]

Can Curry lead the 76ers in 2001 the way AI did? AI had a pretty bad team. He won a game against the superteam Lakers.
I don't know to be honest.. AI was fearless. Steph Curry has the edge as a 3pt shooter that's about it.

Considering Curry is a much better scorer than Ai, I don’t see why he couldn’t have. Defense isn’t a meaningful difference for either.

[ronnymac2]

Can Curry lead the 76ers in 2001 the way AI did? AI had a pretty bad team. He won a game against the superteam Lakers.
I don't know to be honest.. AI was fearless. Steph Curry has the edge as a 3pt shooter that's about it.

Considering Curry is a much better scorer than Ai, I don’t see why he couldn’t have. Defense isn’t a meaningful difference for either.

Curry can't play Iverson's MPG. He's too weak. Can't pressure a defense like AI. Imagine if Curry didn't have Klay All Day to bail him out every time the other team went up by 10.

Both Curry and Iverson are one-trick ponies. I think Curry is better, but Curry has severe flaws in his game. Honestly, Iverson meshes better with the Sixer squad to the point that the original question isn't unreasonable to ask.

[BigShaq34]

curry is better

he's a better scorer and a better ball handler.

[Stanford]

Can Curry lead the 76ers in 2001 the way AI did? AI had a pretty bad team. He won a game against the superteam Lakers.
I don't know to be honest.. AI was fearless. Steph Curry has the edge as a 3pt shooter that's about it.

That was the one season he was able to do it. Steph is so much better.

[permaximum]

Besides 6-7% better shooting efficiency compared to league average for Curry, Iverson is better everywhere else. Iverson was a 2 time defensive player of the year in NCAA and he was getting DPOY votes in NBA in his prime. He was a better defender, better ball handler, far faster, quicker, better finisher. He had 42-inch vertical leap and wasn't guardable at all with 1 player on him. You had to double team him all the time.

He also had better basketball IQ, better court vision, he could consistently score 30+ every night and he could play all 48 minutes every night. If you replaced Iverson with Curry in 2001 Sixers, you would get a .500 team that barely made the playoffs.

Ask this question to any NBA player or a basketball person and you'll get Iverson as the answer 9/10.

[Peregrine01]

Besides 6-7% better shooting efficiency compared to league average for Curry, Iverson is better everywhere else. Iverson was a 2 time defensive player of the year in NCAA and he was getting DPOY votes in NBA in his prime. He was a better defender, better ball handler, far faster, quicker, better finisher. He had 42-inch vertical leap and wasn't guardable at all with 1 player on him. You had to double team him all the time.

He also had better basketball IQ, better court vision, he could consistently score 30+ every night and he could play all 48 minutes every night. If you replaced Iverson with Curry in 2001 Sixers, you would get a .500 team that barely made the playoffs.

Ask this question to any NBA player or a basketball person and you'll get Iverson as the answer 9/10.

Lol

[dhsilv2]

Can Curry lead the 76ers in 2001 the way AI did? AI had a pretty bad team. He won a game against the superteam Lakers.
I don't know to be honest.. AI was fearless. Steph Curry has the edge as a 3pt shooter that's about it.

That 01 76ers had about the best possible defensive team you could put around someone for that era.

[dhsilv2]

Besides 6-7% better shooting efficiency compared to league average for Curry, Iverson is better everywhere else. Iverson was a 2 time defensive player of the year in NCAA and he was getting DPOY votes in NBA in his prime. He was a better defender, better ball handler, far faster, quicker, better finisher. He had 42-inch vertical leap and wasn't guardable at all with 1 player on him. You had to double team him all the time.

He also had better basketball IQ, better court vision, he could consistently score 30+ every night and he could play all 48 minutes every night. If you replaced Iverson with Curry in 2001 Sixers, you would get a .500 team that barely made the playoffs.

Ask this question to any NBA player or a basketball person and you'll get Iverson as the answer 9/10.

Iverson was a bad defender most of his career who gambled and got a lot of steals. Curry lead the league in steals as well...if we used that awful defensive analysis of the early 00's, Curry would be seen as a far better defender than he actually is.

There is no basketball person who would pick Iverson over Curry. There's a reason this very question is seen as rather comical to most people here.

[permaximum]

Besides 6-7% better shooting efficiency compared to league average for Curry, Iverson is better everywhere else. Iverson was a 2 time defensive player of the year in NCAA and he was getting DPOY votes in NBA in his prime. He was a better defender, better ball handler, far faster, quicker, better finisher. He had 42-inch vertical leap and wasn't guardable at all with 1 player on him. You had to double team him all the time.

He also had better basketball IQ, better court vision, he could consistently score 30+ every night and he could play all 48 minutes every night. If you replaced Iverson with Curry in 2001 Sixers, you would get a .500 team that barely made the playoffs.

Ask this question to any NBA player or a basketball person and you'll get Iverson as the answer 9/10.

Lol

Lol for what? DPOY votes? Check DPOY and Defense teams between 1998-2005. He didn't make any but he was getting votes in DPOY and Defense voting.

[permaximum]

Besides 6-7% better shooting efficiency compared to league average for Curry, Iverson is better everywhere else. Iverson was a 2 time defensive player of the year in NCAA and he was getting DPOY votes in NBA in his prime. He was a better defender, better ball handler, far faster, quicker, better finisher. He had 42-inch vertical leap and wasn't guardable at all with 1 player on him. You had to double team him all the time.

He also had better basketball IQ, better court vision, he could consistently score 30+ every night and he could play all 48 minutes every night. If you replaced Iverson with Curry in 2001 Sixers, you would get a .500 team that barely made the playoffs.

Ask this question to any NBA player or a basketball person and you'll get Iverson as the answer 9/10.

Iverson was a bad defender most of his career who gambled and got a lot of steals. Curry lead the league in steals as well...if we used that awful defensive analysis of the early 00's, Curry would be seen as a far better defender than he actually is.

There is no basketball person who would pick Iverson over Curry. There's a reason this very question is seen as rather comical to most people here.

Steal is the most important and most impactful stat you can think of in basketbal and Iverson was a good defender even without his steals in his prime.

9/10 basketball person would pick Iverson over Curry. Just like they chose him over Wade, Durant, Nash and many other guys that had better TS% in Open Court by the likes of GMs, coaches and hall of famers.

You guys have no clue about basketball AND you guys have no clue about analytics in the same time.

1. You should start playing basketball.
2. You should start statistical learning exams starting with regression.

[dhsilv2]

Besides 6-7% better shooting efficiency compared to league average for Curry, Iverson is better everywhere else. Iverson was a 2 time defensive player of the year in NCAA and he was getting DPOY votes in NBA in his prime. He was a better defender, better ball handler, far faster, quicker, better finisher. He had 42-inch vertical leap and wasn't guardable at all with 1 player on him. You had to double team him all the time.

He also had better basketball IQ, better court vision, he could consistently score 30+ every night and he could play all 48 minutes every night. If you replaced Iverson with Curry in 2001 Sixers, you would get a .500 team that barely made the playoffs.

Ask this question to any NBA player or a basketball person and you'll get Iverson as the answer 9/10.

Iverson was a bad defender most of his career who gambled and got a lot of steals. Curry lead the league in steals as well...if we used that awful defensive analysis of the early 00's, Curry would be seen as a far better defender than he actually is.

There is no basketball person who would pick Iverson over Curry. There's a reason this very question is seen as rather comical to most people here.

Steal is the most important and most impactful stat you can think of in basketbal and Iverson was a good defender even without his steals in his prime.

9/10 basketball person would pick Iverson over Curry. Just like they chose him over Wade, Durant, Nash and many other guys that had better TS% in Open Court by the likes of GMs, coaches and hall of famers.

You guys have no clue about basketball AND you guys have no clue about analytics in the same time.

1. You should start playing basketball.
2. You should start statistical learning exams starting with regression.

A steal is a nice thing to have, but by your poor analysis we should conclude that Curry is every bit as strong a defender as Iverson.

As for learning regression, perhaps you should look at the RAPM results specific to Iveron's defense. Despite the limited "off" data for iverson we still see with a pretty consistent result that Iverson was a poor to neutral defender and did not have nearly the impact on the court that Curry has had.

As for what basketball people say, well if you have a source by all means lets here it. We both know you don't have 10 people commenting on this question and we both likely know that the result would be unquestionably in favor of Curry here.

[anthony00]

Besides 6-7% better shooting efficiency compared to league average for Curry, Iverson is better everywhere else. Iverson was a 2 time defensive player of the year in NCAA and he was getting DPOY votes in NBA in his prime. He was a better defender, better ball handler, far faster, quicker, better finisher. He had 42-inch vertical leap and wasn't guardable at all with 1 player on him. You had to double team him all the time.

He also had better basketball IQ, better court vision, he could consistently score 30+ every night and he could play all 48 minutes every night. If you replaced Iverson with Curry in 2001 Sixers, you would get a .500 team that barely made the playoffs.

Ask this question to any NBA player or a basketball person and you'll get Iverson as the answer 9/10.

[Wallace_Wallace]

If we are talking about iconic figures and culture impact, then they're pretty much tied. But abilities along, Curry all day.

Iverson's best ability, ball handling, is maybe slightly better than Curry's.......and that's a hard maybe.

[NO-KG-AI]

If we are talking about iconic figures and culture impact, then they're pretty much tied. But abilities along, Curry all day.

Iverson's best ability, ball handling, is maybe slightly better than Curry's.......and that's a hard maybe.

Eh. I wouldn’t go that far. There is a reason when Curry is off on his shooting, his game suffers a ton. He doesn’t have near the ability to create off the dribble that Iverson had, despite playing in a more driving friendly era.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

[Peregrine01]

If we are talking about iconic figures and culture impact, then they're pretty much tied. But abilities along, Curry all day.

Iverson's best ability, ball handling, is maybe slightly better than Curry's.......and that's a hard maybe.

Eh. I wouldn’t go that far. There is a reason when Curry is off on his shooting, his game suffers a ton. He doesn’t have near the ability to create off the dribble that Iverson had, despite playing in a more driving friendly era.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

I think Steph has proven to be plenty effective when his shot's off and he's still handling the rock. Problem is that in Kerr's system, he too often plays off-ball which is often a detriment to his game, especially when his shot's off.

Iverson never had that problem as he was one of the highest usage players ever. And when his shot was off, he still looked engaged because he would still keep taking shots for good or worse.

[DidUSaySometing]

Yes, because he played extremely high MPG, played in the playoffs basically only during his prime years, and had crazy USG%. PPG without context is a terrible measure to use. His TS% has been at 48.9, that's horrid efficiency and a testament to him chucking up bad shots left and right. He had his qualities as a creator and his teams rolled with/relied on him in this regard quite a bit, but it doesn't change the fact that Iverson just took a huge amount of shots at terrible efficiency to get to the PPG you hold in such high esteem. That doesn't make him a top 10 scorer of all time – not even close.

his playoff PPG still shows how dominant he was. AI averaged 35.6 PPG at 50 TS% against shaq and kobe in the finals while his teammates only made 6 3s. the 01 76ers starting lineup only made 15 3s in the entire reg season, yet iverson's TS% was still league average.

in 05 after the rule changes he averaged 31.2 PPG at 56 TS% against the pistons (third best defense) in the playoffs

It shows that he took a lot of shots...if he was dominant he would shoot above league average. He obviously was not a legitimate 35 point scorer, there's a big difference between his 35 and Michael Jordan's 35.

31.2 PPG at 56 TS% vs the pistons isn't dominant? look at duncan, wade, manu, shaq's stats against the 05 pistons... they all struggled