Iverson still does not get it.

[Dogen]

http://basketball.realgm.com/src_wireta ... _personal/

After all these years--- from the scoring championships, finals appearance, the controversies about his character, feuds with Larry Brown, and PRACTICE--- Iverson manages yet again to point out that it's about him personally. Does anyone else really care at this point if he 'proves his critics wrong". I really don't think he would have been a good choice for the Celtics.

[Bcustom28k]

im sure if he goes out there and scores 15 a game dishes out 8 everyones happy- Griz and AI

Also i think thats quite possible , i see alot of assists for iverson this year, because i thnk he DOES get that he's past his prime and can no longer shoulder the load.

And hes got some good scorers to pass to.

[SonicYouth34]

im sure if he goes out there and scores 15 a game dishes out 8 everyones happy- Griz and AI

Also i think thats quite possible , i see alot of assists for iverson this year, because i thnk he DOES get that he's past his prime and can no longer shoulder the load.

And hes got some good scorers to pass to.

Someone on that team has to pass the ball. Unless they start playing with multiple balls...

[hairybyrd]

To play in the NBA for so many years one must be cocky to survive and thrive. Allen Iverson is still the best player pound-for-pound so, let him talk. More importantly, what's there to get? This whole idea of "winning" bothers me sometimes because it's commonly being looked at from a fan perspective who, oddly, has a lot more invested in the team than the player. The reality is that most NBA players don't really care about doing what's best for the team because when they do, they get treated like Leon Powe who played with his guts on the floor before the C's waived him. If owners and GMs were always held accountable for acting like respectable human beings then it might wear off on the players but it's really about making money. I'm confused as to how you can you think that Iverson "does not get it" when he's so far from the top of the ladder. The people that really "don't get it" are wearing suits and drinking tea with their pinky finger waving in the air while watching a telecast of the team they own from the fluffiness of their private jet. The people that don't get it are so far removed from the game itself that they don't understand what's really going on. Iverson has a chip on his shoulder, sure, but it's a measure of self-confidence more than it is an indictment on the people that wronged him in the past. Iverson is cocky but he is also a respectable person that supports 30+ people on his paycheck. To me, that's a good reason to sign the biggest contract on the table. How can you fault a guy who came from very little for trying to live the best life possible? Would we not all do the same thing if the opportunity presented itself? The problem is not the player, it's the system.

[ParticleMan]

it isn't always about the most money. just ask Marquis Daniels.

what AI doesn't "get" is that he's not a marquis player (so to speak) anymore. instead of slipping gracefully into a support role he still thinks he has to prove everyone wrong and be The Man. doing what exactly, "leading" your team to 30 some odd wins? whatever. he's quickly slipping into irrelevancy. it's too bad, i've always admired his warrior spirit.

[Dirty Water]

The reality is that most NBA players don't really care about doing what's best for the team because when they do, they get treated like Leon Powe who played with his guts on the floor before the C's waived him.

He got waived because he got a serious injury, and the Celtics could not afford to pay a guy who most likely will not play. I can't make myself any clearer. So please, don't say it's because "he played with his guts on the floor."

[Hemingway]

it isn't always about the most money. just ask Marquis Daniels.

It is still about the money for MD. He is just taking a little gamble. Sure he could have made a bit more this season but he knows if he plays well here, wins a ring and is considered a critical part of the team effort that he will be able to get a bigger contract than he otherwise could.

[hairybyrd]

The reality is that most NBA players don't really care about doing what's best for the team because when they do, they get treated like Leon Powe who played with his guts on the floor before the C's waived him.

He got waived because he got a serious injury, and the Celtics could not afford to pay a guy who most likely will not play. I can't make myself any clearer. So please, don't say it's because "he played with his guts on the floor."

Point taken - I think we both agree that basketball is a big business. So, how is the Celtics decision to cut Leon Powe more of a business decision than Iverson signing for the most money? If ownership is supposed to look out for its best interests, how can you fault any player for doing exactly the same?

Furthermore, in the words of Darth Vader, I find your lack of faith disturbing. He was asking for a 2-year contract at the veteran's minimum with a team option...I mean, c'mon...that's great value/little risk. Powe deserved some security and he got the shaft. The Celtics couldn't afford to pay him $1 million but they can afford to pay Scal $3 mil? Really?

DirtyWater, in case you misunderstand my argument I want to be clear that I'm not comparing Iverson to Powe, I'm comparing all players to its teams' management.

[Paeds]

To play in the NBA for so many years one must be cocky to survive and thrive. Allen Iverson is still the best player pound-for-pound so, let him talk. More importantly, what's there to get? This whole idea of "winning" bothers me sometimes because it's commonly being looked at from a fan perspective who, oddly, has a lot more invested in the team than the player. The reality is that most NBA players don't really care about doing what's best for the team because when they do, they get treated like Leon Powe who played with his guts on the floor before the C's waived him. If owners and GMs were always held accountable for acting like respectable human beings then it might wear off on the players but it's really about making money. I'm confused as to how you can you think that Iverson "does not get it" when he's so far from the top of the ladder. The people that really "don't get it" are wearing suits and drinking tea with their pinky finger waving in the air while watching a telecast of the team they own from the fluffiness of their private jet. The people that don't get it are so far removed from the game itself that they don't understand what's really going on. Iverson has a chip on his shoulder, sure, but it's a measure of self-confidence more than it is an indictment on the people that wronged him in the past. Iverson is cocky but he is also a respectable person that supports 30+ people on his paycheck. To me, that's a good reason to sign the biggest contract on the table. How can you fault a guy who came from very little for trying to live the best life possible? Would we not all do the same thing if the opportunity presented itself? The problem is not the player, it's the system.

Very nice Post

[Jammer]

To the two posters who said that the Celtics waived Leon Powe, they did not.

Leon's contract expired. The Celtics elected not to re-sign Leon, because they wanted another able body immediately available (Shelden Williams) given the uncertainty around KG's knee, Perk's shoulder and possible age/mileage issues developing in 35 year old Rasheed Wallace.

[greenmachine_2849]

The reality is that most NBA players don't really care about doing what's best for the team because when they do, they get treated like Leon Powe who played with his guts on the floor before the C's waived him.

He got waived because he got a serious injury, and the Celtics could not afford to pay a guy who most likely will not play. I can't make myself any clearer. So please, don't say it's because "he played with his guts on the floor."

Right, but he aggravated the injury by playing in the playoffs, when from a long-term, individual standpoint he should not have, because he put the team ahead of himself. And, as it turns out, the Celtics did not return the favor when it came time to discuss contracts. So the point is still valid.

As far as the Celtics not being able to afford paying a guy who probably won't pay, then why did they allegedly offer Powe a contract (once they got wind of the Cavs negotiating with him)? If this was true, then the Celtics could have afforded to pay him, but were trying to get by on the cheap and wait until later in the year to sign him to a pro-rated contract. Which was risky, and it backfired. And given that there is a very good chance that the Celtics meet the Cavs in the playoffs next spring, and a pretty good chance that Powe is contributing to the Cavs at that point, this move could easily come back to haunt us.