RealGM

Who would you rather have on your squad?

tmac

tmac, without question.

McGrady without much hesitation just solely due to impact. There are other numbers that can be argued for Iverson for the scoring side, but simply based on winning and impact McGrady without hesitation.

^^^Winning and McGrady should not be used in the same sentence.

Hussien Fatal wrote:^^^Winning and McGrady should not be used in the same sentence.

It shouldn't? O rly?

Since 2004 the Rockets with McGrady have a 62% winning percentage, while without them they are 23%. If Iverson carried the Rockets team these two past seasons like McGrady did without Yao, the Rockets would have been lottery bound each year. I know your reffering to his playoff statistics, well his playoff statistics still > AI.

Going forward TMac with no question. OVer their history, I'd rather have TMac too since I've never considered Iverson as more than a marginal improvement over a MLE type player due to his shotjacking and poor defense but he has been MUCH more of a gate attraction and has been much more durable over his career than TMAc despite his size and playing style so from that point of view he's been far more valuable.

Tmac for sure, I am just not a fan of Iverson's game. I know he is really talented but in terms of playing winning ball I just don't see it from him. Even though Tmac is not a proven winner either, I think he is versatile and talented enough that in the right system he could contribute to a winning team.

T-Mac, definitely!

This is easily Iverson for me. Obviously a lot of people are still trapped in 2003 with McGrady. Why is there no love for Allen Iverson's sustained greatness? McGrady's passing has gotten better but its still not on par with Iverson. Iverson is also a more capable scorer in terms of volume and efficiency.

I am terrified to death at the prospect of letting an inefficient chucker be my #1 option. McGrady must have been shooting a beach ball last season, scoring only 21.6 points on 19.8 shots, while shooting .419/.292/.684. However, he did post his second-best APG total with 5.9, failing to break the 6 APG mark he passed for the first time last season (which Iverson has done 7 times).

Iverson is a warrior. People keep saying he will fall off every season but its nowhere in sight. Last season, at age 32, he was still matching his career average of 41.8 minutes per game! He scored 26.4 points on 19 FGA, shooting .458/.345/.809. He's been over seven assists per game the past four seasons, but everyone on earth still thinks he's a selfish ballhog. Wade is the only other guard with those kind of numbers who splits time between the 1 and 2.

Sure, Iverson might be near the end but I'm not gonna buy it until I see it. He's still doing a phenomenal job and has shown no signs of slowing down. McGrady, on the other hand, has been steadily dropping off in the past few seasons and it seems almost certain that his career will end in his early 30s when he finally loses all inspiration and calls it quits. Maybe he'll get to the second round by then, but I doubt it.

Iverson now. Iverson career. Iverson future.

I was actually expecting you..

This is easily Iverson for me. Obviously a lot of people are still trapped in 2003 with McGrady. Why is there no love for Allen Iverson's sustained greatness? McGrady's passing has gotten better but its still not on par with Iverson. Iverson is also a more capable scorer in terms of volume and efficiency.

Allen Iverson is great, but since 2001 IMO he has fallen off. Iverson is a better scorer at this point of his career, but thats all the credit he gets. His success hasn't been the same since 2001 in the regular season and playoffs. Most people use the respect factor with Iverson, he isn't what you call one of the more respected players in the league.

I am terrified to death at the prospect of letting an inefficient chucker be my #1 option. McGrady must have been shooting a beach ball last season, scoring only 21.6 points on 19.8 shots, while shooting .419/.292/.684. However, he did post his second-best APG total with 5.9, failing to break the 6 APG mark he passed for the first time last season (which Iverson has done 7 times).

His shot selection got worse during the end of the season (after the 22 game winning streak), where he had a shoulder injury, before that he was shooting over 43%, and 34% from beyond the arc. Iverson has broken the 6 assist mark that many times, but he has also broken the 3.0+ Turnover mark 13 TIMES! Including 5 TIMES averaging OVER 4 TURNOVERS PER GAME! You used the chucking arguement for McGrady, but how about the 5 times Iverson has shot under 42% from the field in his career, 2 TIMES BEING UNDER 39%! And not to mention his 7 TIMES SHOOTING UNDER 30% from beyond the arc, which McGrady has done only once(not counting the 2 out of 3 seasons in Toronto where he didn't attempt the 3 ball at all). Again can Iverson carry a team that McGrady had into the 5th spot in the playoffs? While getting 55 wins? Iverson can BARELY carry a team that has a supporting cast more talented than McGrady's into the playoffs.

Iverson is a warrior. People keep saying he will fall off every season but its nowhere in sight. Last season, at age 32, he was still matching his career average of 41.8 minutes per game! He scored 26.4 points on 19 FGA, shooting .458/.345/.809. He's been over seven assists per game the past four seasons, but everyone on earth still thinks he's a selfish ballhog. Wade is the only other guard with those kind of numbers who splits time between the 1 and 2.

Not just people, most of the experts think hes a cancer to teams. His work ethic is terrible, he can't play in a system, and he wants to do what ever he wants. George Karl said they don't do anything during practice except "do what ever the players feel like doing". Iverson said he puts about 20% effort into his practices, and people wonder why the Nuggets can't succeed.

Sure, Iverson might be near the end but I'm not gonna buy it until I see it. He's still doing a phenomenal job and has shown no signs of slowing down. McGrady, on the other hand, has been steadily dropping off in the past few seasons and it seems almost certain that his career will end in his early 30s when he finally loses all inspiration and calls it quits. Maybe he'll get to the second round by then, but I doubt it.

Iverson now. Iverson career. Iverson future.

This is the best post, Ignorance at its greatest. So your blaming the first round thing on McGrady? His playoff statistics rank among the best of the best in NBA history. McGrady has said numerous times that he wants to retire at the age of 34-35, he will be playing until then. Its funny how people talk about McGrady's failures in the first round, how he is 0-7, while someone by the name of Kevin Garnett was 0-7 in the first round until 2004 (28yrs old). McGrady is the success to his teams, I would love to see Iverson on McGrady's Magic, or Iverson on the current Rockets, can he succeed the way McGrady has during the season? Can he even win 50 games? Can he even make the playoffs two seasons in a row without Yao? Not to mention even in Iverson's MVP season he didn't even beat out McGrady's highest win share total. Iverson's efficiency is horrible, his work ethic isn't even worth talking about, and I'd say just like the experts hes just plain and simple cancer to his team. You can talk about all the numbers Iverson puts up, but those numbers have the word inefficient all over it. And when you take a look at his career, all you see are numbers, are you sure thats not the only thing he cares about? Winning is what matters the most in the NBA, and McGrady has the stats to show during the regular season and the playoffs to show how bad he wants it, but Iverson I don't even see that the impact on the Nuggets team looks like its actually gotten worse.

EDIT: Pen basically summed up my post, which is exactly what I was talking about.

These are my two favorite players, but its AI pretty easily for me just becuase of his durability. With T-Mac there's pretty much a guarantee that he'll miss at least 15 games during the season and play at least another 20 with some sort of injury. If T-Mac wasn't so injury prone, it would probably be a different story, but unfortunately he's not. If I'm a coach, it would be kind of nerve-wrecking to be on the edge of my seat before game in fear that something might be wrong with T-Mac, especially if I already have Yao on my team which is bad enough.

I respect both of these players a lot. But I have to take T-Mac because he is more versatile and he can score on the same par as Iverson in terms of explosiveness. The only concern, as others have mentioned, is his habit to get injured.

Baller 24 wrote:I was actually expecting you.. :)

Likewise...LET US DANCE!

Allen Iverson is great, but since 2001 IMO he has fallen off. Iverson is a better scorer at this point of his career, but thats all the credit he gets. His success hasn't been the same since 2001 in the regular season and playoffs. Most people use the respect factor with Iverson, he isn't what you call one of the more respected players in the league.

Iverson may not be the volatile talent he once was, but we're comparing him to McGrady. Obviously neither of these players measure up to the greats they once were, but Iverson is still producing at a phenomenal statistical rate, while McGrady's numbers just outright scare me.

His shot selection got worse during the end of the season (after the 22 game winning streak), where he had a shoulder injury, before that he was shooting over 43%, and 34% from beyond the arc.

A few things here:

1. 43/34 is still absolutely dismal for an alleged superstar. And yes, I'm aware that Iverson has shot that poorly several times over his career. But we're talking now.

2. Lots of players get hot and cold during various months. Lots of players see their stats drop when they play through injury. You always bring this up but it doesn't help your argument at all. These factors are a constant through the NBA.

3. He still had horrendous shot selection in the last month. Am I supposed to excuse him for being lackadaisical because his win streak fell out and he didn't feel like fighting for a better playoff spot in the tightest conference race in decades? That's a terrible argument.

Iverson has broken the 6 assist mark that many times, but he has also broken the 3.0+ Turnover mark 13 TIMES! Including 5 TIMES averaging OVER 4 TURNOVERS PER GAME! You used the chucking arguement for McGrady, but how about the 5 times Iverson has shot under 42% from the field in his career, 2 TIMES BEING UNDER 39%! And not to mention his 7 TIMES SHOOTING UNDER 30% from beyond the arc, which McGrady has done only once(not counting the 2 out of 3 seasons in Toronto where he didn't attempt the 3 ball at all). Again can Iverson carry a team that McGrady had into the 5th spot in the playoffs? While getting 55 wins? Iverson can BARELY carry a team that has a supporting cast more talented than McGrady's into the playoffs.

Right, but we're not comparing careers, or I would have gone much more in depth as to their respective playmaking prowess. We're comparing them right now. Right now, Iverson is still at the 3.0 turnover mark, but McGrady is not far behind with 2.4. I think the assists more than make up the difference.

Not just people, most of the experts think hes a cancer to teams. His work ethic is terrible, he can't play in a system, and he wants to do what ever he wants. George Karl said they don't do anything during practice except "do what ever the players feel like doing". Iverson said he puts about 20% effort into his practices, and people wonder why the Nuggets can't succeed.

What "system" do you expect him to play in? George Karl hasn't coached in three years!

This is the best post, Ignorance at its greatest. So your blaming the first round thing on McGrady? His playoff statistics rank among the best of the best in NBA history. McGrady has said numerous times that he wants to retire at the age of 34-35, he will be playing until then.

Yeah, his stats are great until the fourth quarter when he starts chucking his life away and refuses to come within 20 feet of the basket. Particularly in closeout games, McGrady has a tendency to start hucking up a lot a three-pointers, even when they're missing.

Its funny how people talk about McGrady's failures in the first round, how he is 0-7, while someone by the name of Kevin Garnett was 0-7 in the first round until 2004 (28yrs old).

It's funny how someone by the name of Kevin Garnett never had someone by the name of Yao Ming to play with. And how that same someone named Kevin Garnett proved that he can win when he's got talent around him, which McGrady has still failed to do.

McGrady is the success to his teams, I would love to see Iverson on McGrady's Magic, or Iverson on the current Rockets, can he succeed the way McGrady has during the season? Can he even win 50 games? Can he even make the playoffs two seasons in a row without Yao? Not to mention even in Iverson's MVP season he didn't even beat out McGrady's highest win share total. Iverson's efficiency is horrible, his work ethic isn't even worth talking about, and I'd say just like the experts hes just plain and simple cancer to his team. You can talk about all the numbers Iverson puts up, but those numbers have the word inefficient all over it. And when you take a look at his career, all you see are numbers, are you sure thats not the only thing he cares about? Winning is what matters the most in the NBA, and McGrady has the stats to show during the regular season and the playoffs to show how bad he wants it, but Iverson I don't even see that the impact on the Nuggets team looks like its actually gotten worse.

McGrady drags his teams down. You want to talk about inefficiency? Look at the numbers for the current comparison. For some reason you are stuck on 2001-2003, as I mentioned many were at the beginning of my last post. Look at the two players now. McGrady is consistently one of the highest-usage players in the NBA while shooting one of the worst percentages.

Rockets fans will whine about their team being crap, but when they reel off 22 wins and Yao misses half of them, obviously it was McGrady singlehandedly winning every game. Face it, you have serviceable players on your team but they never produce because they can't get the ball out of TarMac's sticky mitts.

On the other hand, Iverson has actually had some success chucking his way through the playoffs on crappy teams. So I'm not sure why you're postulating how he would do on the Magic or the Rockets.

Actually, Iverson is Denver is a lot better than Iverson in Philly. He is tempering his chucking a bit to be more efficient (and is helped considerably by the no handchecking rule change of course). It makes him a better player.

I agree he is honing his game and improving. What I think we meant was that neither player is truly the explosive force that they once were. Considering their chucking ways, I'd much prefer to have the Iverson that evolved rather than the McGrady who devolved.

I agree with most of what you said. But the thing about Yao is, IMO hes the one not showing up, I know McGrady still hast yet to win with the talent around him, but many of us here think this is the final show, if it can't happen this year, then McGrady is gone(big contract, can't live up to it, and aside from the terrific impact numbers, his durability), even though Yao is the one that has gone down the last 3 seasons with injuries, which force him to either not play, or return in bad shape, IMO its most of Yao's fault, but if it came down to trading either one, then McGrady would be the one to go, just because of the things I listed above, also the fact that Yao brings in revenues through global marketing, which most players in the league cannot do.

But like I argued in the other thread, what revenues is Yao generating for the Rockets? Are there that many Chinese people in Houston? Pretty much all international revenue is collected by the NBA itself, and then disbursed to teams, as directed by the CBA.

I agree that you trade McGrady before Yao. Swingmen are infinitely more repalcable than bigs, even with Yao's chronic health problems. Add the contract on top of that and McGrady is clearly the one to go. But this leaves the Rockets in a real tight spot depending on what they get for McGrady.

tmac

This is an insult to Iverson.Except one season T-mac was never at Iverson's level+he is injury prone+he never lead his team anywhere+he doesn't play with 10% of iverson' passion and heart.