Allen Iverson vs Steve Nash - Build a New Team Around

Moderators: Clyde Frazier, Doctor MJ, trex_8063, penbeast0, PaulieWal

Allen Iverson vs Steve Nash, who would you rather build around?

Allen Iverson
16
29%
Steve Nash
39
71%
 
Total votes: 55

JordansBulls
RealGM
Posts: 60,467
And1: 5,348
Joined: Jul 12, 2006
Location: HCA (Homecourt Advantage)

Allen Iverson vs Steve Nash - Build a New Team Around 

Post#1 » by JordansBulls » Mon Feb 25, 2008 11:58 pm

Allen Iverson vs Steve Nash, who would you rather build around?


My initial thoughts was to say to take Iverson. Afterall when on a good team he took them to the finals. However when I think about it now, well he has a good team in Denver as well and while it is only his 2nd season they seem to be struggling to make the playoffs. Nash has always had good players around him, the difference is that the team was not successful without him in Phoenix. They were 29-53 the year before Nash got their and they were 62-20 the year he got their. So all in all I think Nash makes his team better.

Who do I take, well if I need a game or so to win or if I need someone in the playoffs I would take AI, however if I need someone build around I think Nash is the better choice.
Image
"Talent wins games, but teamwork and intelligence wins championships."
- Michael Jordan
Derekman
Banned User
Posts: 2,832
And1: 0
Joined: Feb 08, 2007
Location: 519

 

Post#2 » by Derekman » Tue Feb 26, 2008 12:03 am

If i have defenders on the team, i take Iverson. If i have a run & gun team, full of finishers, you take Nash.

It depends on your teams philosophy.
big123
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,892
And1: 0
Joined: Feb 03, 2008
Contact:

 

Post#3 » by big123 » Tue Feb 26, 2008 12:58 am

Derekman wrote:If i have defenders on the team, i take Iverson. If i have a run & gun team, full of finishers, you take Nash.

It depends on your teams philosophy.


I agree. Nash wasn't as useful with his game in Dallas before he came into the Suns system. The Suns system fits perfect with his skill set and the team It was a match made in heaven. Also, Nash is an even worst defender than AI, if that's even possible :lol:
That Nicka
Banned User
Posts: 15,350
And1: 34
Joined: Jun 28, 2005
Location: USC

 

Post#4 » by That Nicka » Tue Feb 26, 2008 1:09 am

Nash easily
Twinkie defense
RealGM
Posts: 20,380
And1: 1,642
Joined: Jul 15, 2005

 

Post#5 » by Twinkie defense » Tue Feb 26, 2008 1:49 am

Look at what Nash hoes done for Phoenix vs. what AI has done for Denver.

Seems pretty clear.
big123
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,892
And1: 0
Joined: Feb 03, 2008
Contact:

 

Post#6 » by big123 » Tue Feb 26, 2008 1:54 am

jrhester wrote:Look at what Nash hoes done for Phoenix vs. what AI has done for Denver.

Seems pretty clear.


The Suns didn't build a team around Nash, they had a team already that Nash could excel in and was the missing piece.

Iverson wasn't so lucky.
That Nicka
Banned User
Posts: 15,350
And1: 34
Joined: Jun 28, 2005
Location: USC

 

Post#7 » by That Nicka » Tue Feb 26, 2008 2:14 am

big123 wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



The Suns didn't build a team around Nash, they had a team already that Nash could excel in and was the missing piece.

Iverson wasn't so lucky.


What would be the perfect team built around AI?
Gerald3Wallace
Assistant Coach
Posts: 3,794
And1: 99
Joined: Apr 12, 2007
Location: cali baby

 

Post#8 » by Gerald3Wallace » Tue Feb 26, 2008 2:21 am

jrhester wrote:Look at what Nash hoes done for Phoenix vs. what AI has done for Denver.

Seems pretty clear.


iverson lead his team to the finals
User avatar
hermes
RealGM
Posts: 96,562
And1: 25,528
Joined: Aug 27, 2007
Location: the restaurant at the end of the universe
 

 

Post#9 » by hermes » Tue Feb 26, 2008 2:34 am

Derekman wrote:If i have defenders on the team, i take Iverson. If i have a run & gun team, full of finishers, you take Nash.

It depends on your teams philosophy.

the trick about building around a player is you choose the players
Hussien Fatal
Veteran
Posts: 2,942
And1: 1,428
Joined: Jul 07, 2006
Location: N-E-W Jers where plenty murders occur

 

Post#10 » by Hussien Fatal » Tue Feb 26, 2008 2:35 am

That Nicka wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



What would be the perfect team built around AI?



I think a perfect Team to build around Iverson would be a team full of defensive Juggernauts, and good offensive rebounders that can also knock down open shots when needed.
They call me Hussien Fatal its a two game table im robbin you **** cradle wit a knife in your navel....
That Nicka
Banned User
Posts: 15,350
And1: 34
Joined: Jun 28, 2005
Location: USC

 

Post#11 » by That Nicka » Tue Feb 26, 2008 2:58 am

Hussien Fatal wrote:-= original quote snipped =-




I think a perfect Team to build around Iverson would be a team full of defensive Juggernauts, and good offensive rebounders that can also knock down open shots when needed.


I was thinking a team with a big SG that can play defense, slash, and hit open jumpers (Iguoudala), a SF that can spread the floor and hit open 3s (Korver), a PF that can hit the open jumper and rebound (Webber) and a C that can defend and rebound (Dalembert)

The 76ers were built around AI just fine imo, he's just not as good as Nash... Granted Webber and Korver werent the greatest defenders, but they still should have been able to make something happen in the east
User avatar
Kabookalu
RealGM
Posts: 63,103
And1: 70,115
Joined: Aug 18, 2006
Location: Long Beach, California

 

Post#12 » by Kabookalu » Tue Feb 26, 2008 3:04 am

That Nicka wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



I was thinking a team with a big SG that can play defense, slash, and hit open jumpers (Iguoudala), a SF that can spread the floor and hit open 3s (Korver), a PF that can hit the open jumper and rebound (Webber) and a C that can defend and rebound (Dalembert)

The 76ers were built around AI just fine imo, he's just not as good as Nash... Granted Webber and Korver werent the greatest defenders, but they still should have been able to make something happen in the east


I think it would be better if AI has a big point guard alongside with him that's capable of defending 2 guards (Payton, Kidd, Hinrich).
That Nicka
Banned User
Posts: 15,350
And1: 34
Joined: Jun 28, 2005
Location: USC

 

Post#13 » by That Nicka » Tue Feb 26, 2008 3:11 am

Choker wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



I think it would be better if AI has a big point guard alongside with him that's capable of defending 2 guards (Payton, Kidd, Hinrich).


I agree but there are only a handful of those in the league and other teams arent necessarily looking to give a player like that up... imo, unless you have a player that fits into the category that you just mentioned, you have to play Iverson at PG... he is too much of a liability trying to defend Kobe, Manu, Wade, TMAC, Redd, Carter, Richardson, JJ etc etc etc

I feel the same way about Terry, Barbosa, Gordon, Ellis etc... imo they have to either adapt and play PG, or come off the bench
netsforever
Veteran
Posts: 2,714
And1: 26
Joined: Aug 05, 2004

 

Post#14 » by netsforever » Tue Feb 26, 2008 3:45 am

Nash without thinking twice about it.

I'll take the guy who makes his teammates better over "it's just practice" anyday.
Malinhion
Banned User
Posts: 10,071
And1: 3
Joined: Oct 03, 2006
Location: Holding a Players-Only Meeting

 

Post#15 » by Malinhion » Tue Feb 26, 2008 4:51 am

Iverson.

1. Nash is useless unless he's surrounded by all-star finishers, so its pointless to build around him.

2. Iverson will generate more jersey sales and ticket revenue.

3. A bad/new franchise will fare better with a scorer who can carry them to victories than a pass-first guy who rarely ever takes over a game.
Malinhion
Banned User
Posts: 10,071
And1: 3
Joined: Oct 03, 2006
Location: Holding a Players-Only Meeting

 

Post#16 » by Malinhion » Tue Feb 26, 2008 5:07 am

That Nicka wrote:What would be the perfect team built around AI?


Kirk Hinrich - catch'n'shoot on offense, big enough to cover both guard spots on D, solid three-ball, can also bring the ball up the court enabling the team to run more, which maximizes Iverson's potential. He probably also doesn't eat that much cap room.
Other Options: Raja Bell, Kevin Martin

Shawn Marion - fast-paced intangibles guy who can lock down the opponent's best guy on a night-in, night-out basis. Need someone here that can stuff the stat box, but there is a variety of options IMO...
Other Options: Josh Howard, Tayshaun Prince, Caron Butler, Richard Jefferson, Josh Smith

Amare Stoudemire - around-the-basket finisher who can run the floor with AI, his skillset should supplement the center spot
Other Options: David West, LaMarcus Aldridge

Marcus Camby - DPoY calibre defender who focuses on rebounding but has a dynamic game in general, also has a decent j from 15-22.
Other Options: Rasheed Wallace, Tyson Chandler

There's is a difference between a perfect team and a practical team. For cap reasons I'd probably skimp on the more expensive forward options. I think the other guard spot and the center position are most important for AI.

My team would probably wind up looking something like this:

G: Iverson (absurd contract)
G: Hinrich (making $11M on a declining scale to $8M in 2012)
F: Butler ($8.5M this season, signed through 2011 for $10.5M)
F: Aldridge (making just over $4M on rookie scale, QO in 2011)
C: Camby (making $8M/per for three seasons)

And I'd fill out the bench with guys like Kapono, who can drill the trey all season, and sparkplugs for when the offense stalls. Otherwise the defense in my starting 5 should hold its own.
Twinkie defense
RealGM
Posts: 20,380
And1: 1,642
Joined: Jul 15, 2005

 

Post#17 » by Twinkie defense » Tue Feb 26, 2008 5:57 am

Great players make those around them better, and maybe no one has done a better job of that than Steve Nash.

AI on the other hand seems to make those around him worse.
youngcrev
RealGM
Posts: 28,777
And1: 9,691
Joined: Jun 12, 2005
Location: Philadelphia(ish)
   

 

Post#18 » by youngcrev » Tue Feb 26, 2008 6:45 am

jrhester wrote:Great players make those around them better, and maybe no one has done a better job of that than Steve Nash.

AI on the other hand seems to make those around him worse.


Yeah, AI sure made those superstars Eric Snow, George Lynch and Tyrone Hill look like crap.
User avatar
Teddy KGB
General Manager
Posts: 9,306
And1: 1
Joined: Nov 03, 2006
Location: London, United Kingdom
Contact:

 

Post#19 » by Teddy KGB » Tue Feb 26, 2008 7:12 am

yeah wtf all this "AI doesn't make ppl better" stuff is BS. Don't shooters benefit from when he drives? Thought so.

I would take Iverson. Nash is great but it's easier to find the defensive role players to put around AI than it is to put superstar highflyers around Nash
Formerly ss_maverick, JHos Hydro
User avatar
sca
Head Coach
Posts: 7,457
And1: 9,344
Joined: Aug 21, 2004
Location: Turkey
 

 

Post#20 » by sca » Tue Feb 26, 2008 9:43 am

Malinhion wrote:Iverson.

1. Nash is useless unless he's surrounded by all-star finishers, so its pointless to build around him.

nash took a team which was missing amare all the year and had boris diaw as its starting center to the third seed in the west. nash is clearly better than iverson at "making everyone around him better."

also, don't forget the fact that iguodala broke out just after iverson left the sixers and amare broke out just after steve nash joined the suns. that's a big indicator imo.
RaptorsLife on Mon Jun 11, 2018 7:45 pm wrote:
nabbs wrote:
RaptorsLife wrote:Nurse can’t be our head coach

Why not? Who is your choice?

Def Messina

RaptorsLife on Tue Jun 12, 2018 6:31 pm wrote:Messina sucks

Return to Player Comparisons