2017 Isaiah Thomas is better than any version of Iverson.

[Laure]

I'm comparing regular seasons in 2017 vs 2001 primarily. Not their all time standing or playoff success. I've said that now multiple times. Not my fault you and many others can't keep up with the topic and keep changing the argument into something else. I don't care that he beat the inferior Bulls or dropped 53 on Wizards. His body of work from 2017 in the regular season was superior.

So by your logic you'd determine that 2015-2016 Warriors are the best team of all time, because they had the best regular season of all time?

I don't understand what you're arguing, regular season performance or playoff performance? Because playoffs are still only in the 2nd round.

IT still has a lot to prove until you can compare him to 2001 Iverson. You're really underselling on what he managed to achieve that year.

Ever hear of a Strawman? Read my original post and stick with that criteria. You're all over the place with your argument. Obviously I'm starting this thread in game 2 of the semis, so the playoffs aren't the main premise if at all. The premise as I specified multiple times now was the general perception that Isaiah isn't a superstar, MVP candidate or even a top 10 player, but Iverson apparently was all of those things in 01 or his best seasons. Nobody waited until they got a game in the finals from the Lakers to proclaim him MVP which he got BTW based on the regular season.

You're OP doesn't provide any insight whatsoever, all you say is that you're upset that Thomas is not valued as much as Iverson.

And that answer is simple - this is the first year we see this level from Thomas. He has not had many highlights in his career, till now. Iverson was a hype MVP, I can agree on that, but he got proclaimed 'all those things' because he had simply done more in the league before getting the MVP.
I guarantee you, if Thomas continues this form next year, he will be in contention for MVP. People are just tentative of giving someone an MVP without the track record or the hype.

[Birth of the Cool]

I can see the argument for OPs statement. IT is basically playing a Harden game..hitting 3's and getting to the FT line making him quite efficient when compared to Iverson who by all accounts was a volume shooter that wasn't very efficient. However, they are playing in different eras making harder to compare....Iverson played in a more physical era which didn't rely/understand efficiency and therefore the 3pt shot was not a focus to offenses like they are now (the cause of the death of the traditional big man game). Iverson didn't have a great 3pt shot either.

I think Iverson will also get some favour on this board because he is an iconic figure in the NBA beyond his on court play (dress code, antagonistic attitude towards the league, classic practice rant, etc). Iverson's impact on the game goes beyond the #'s and therefore he is polarizing. Some people respect & hold him high due to his "attitude" and others look at a purely #'s impact & see an inefficient volume shooter whose style has become outdated.

Either way I think the fact that this conversation is happening speaks to how good IT has been and I didn't expect him to show this much in the playoffs either - the battle between him & Wall has opened my eyes up to how good this guy is and I don't think the comparison to Iverson is unwarranted.

[Patches Perry]

Wouldn't he have to lead his team to a title to be considered better?

Like Iverson did?

Iverson carried a garbage ass team to the finals bro. Leading a Boston team to the ECF is considered a higher feat for you?

The finals that year in the east was something like the 2nd round in the west. And Dikembe Mutombo was All-NBA 2nd team that year, and defensive player of the year. Iverson did have a garbage team most of his career, and that's why he didn't win much, but the year he did have some team success, it was because he had better teammates combined with a terrible east.

[OkcSinceSGA]

Wouldn't he have to lead his team to a title to be considered better?

Like Iverson did?

Iverson carried a garbage ass team to the finals bro. Leading a Boston team to the ECF is considered a higher feat for you?

The 01 Sixers weren't garbage. That's revisionist history. The supporting cast stepped up in the playoffs and complimented him well. Just because they didn't have a 20 ppg scorer among them doesn't automatically make them suck.

They had literally 12 guys with above league average WS/48 for example. That was a very deep, cohesive team outside of Iverson.

[RaptorRed]

IT will never be greater than AI until he takes 4 Stiffs to a finals and gets a game.
CASE CLOSED.

Another, we missed out on Iverson's real potential. He had 0 offensive talent around him on the Sixers. You're lying if you never felt bad for the dude lol. Eric Snow, Aaron Mckie, Raja Bell lol wtf? This is what Iverson DRAGGGEDDDDD to the finals.

Iverson carried a garbage ass team to the finals bro. Leading a Boston team to the ECF is considered a higher feat for you?

Iverson 34% FG for the Eastern Conference finals 7-game series. Mutumbo averaged 17ppg and 16 rpg for the series and Mckie averaged 17ppg, 7apg and 5prg for the series. And Mutumbo, Hill, Mckie and Snow were defensive beasts. A better argument could be made that they carried Iverson and his chucking.

Iverson had his games but generally was atrocious to watch. Even that series, he singlehandlly chucked away games and even despite that the Sixers sometimes won games just because of their defense.

Game 2: 5-26 @ 19% FG
Game 4: 10-32 @ 31% FG and Philly still won
Game 5: 10-27 @ 19% FG and Philly still won

The hate on Iverson is astonishing considering everything he has done for the game

What exactly did Iverson accomplish or do for the game? Are we talking about the same Iverson that chucked away at 40% for his career and got dragged into the finals chucking multiple games at 19% shooting? The same Iverson who made it to the 2nd Round a total of 4 times in his career? Iverson was a icon for a generation of kiddies who didn't know what good basketball was but wasn't a Jordan/Bird/Magic who brought in waves of non-casual basketball fans to game, grew the game or popularized the game internationally. On the contrary, ratings were dismal and most viewers were turned off his chucking, lack of respect for the game and lack of professionalism.

Growing up in the Bird/Magic/Jordan era, it was painful to watch a media narrative that pushed Iverson as the MVP and it's ridiculous that those who worshiped Iverson as kiddies preach to a younger generation how great he was.

You don't know the impact he has had on the game ? Come on man take your hate goggles off. This is from Chris Paul who is from north carolina yet even he admits Iverson had a greater impact than Jordan.

http://clipperholics.com/2016/09/10/chris-paul-allen-iverson-nba-culture/

[OkcSinceSGA]

So by your logic you'd determine that 2015-2016 Warriors are the best team of all time, because they had the best regular season of all time?

I don't understand what you're arguing, regular season performance or playoff performance? Because playoffs are still only in the 2nd round.

IT still has a lot to prove until you can compare him to 2001 Iverson. You're really underselling on what he managed to achieve that year.

Ever hear of a Strawman? Read my original post and stick with that criteria. You're all over the place with your argument. Obviously I'm starting this thread in game 2 of the semis, so the playoffs aren't the main premise if at all. The premise as I specified multiple times now was the general perception that Isaiah isn't a superstar, MVP candidate or even a top 10 player, but Iverson apparently was all of those things in 01 or his best seasons. Nobody waited until they got a game in the finals from the Lakers to proclaim him MVP which he got BTW based on the regular season.

You're OP doesn't provide any insight whatsoever, all you say is that you're upset that Thomas is not valued as much as Iverson.

And that answer is simple - this is the first year we see this level from Thomas. He has not had many highlights in his career, till now. Iverson was a hype MVP, I can agree on that, but he got proclaimed 'all those things' because he had simply done more in the league before getting the MVP.
I guarantee you, if Thomas continues this form next year, he will be in contention for MVP. People are just tentative of giving someone an MVP without the track record or the hype.

I hashed this out in responses throughout though. I'm not comparing their legacy or standing in general. That would be idiotic to compare IT legacy to a hall of famer. I don't buy the flash in the pan theory though because whenever Isaiah has been given a shot, he's killed it. He just hasn't had much opportunity in his career. In that sense he reminds me of Ben Wallace.

[tundraknight]

Different eras, different rules

Yeah just imagine how dominate AI would be in today's era

He would be Light Years Ahead of IT.

[Xherdan 23]

His 01 run was pretty pathetic in terms of competition. Let's be real. Pacers were terrible, Raptors had weak supporting cast, even compared to Sixers and even that went to 7 games. Bucks also took them to 7. Then they got smoked 4-1 by a juggernaut team.

You mean "then they won a game against one of the best teams of all time that sweeped a stacked western conference"?

Fair enough. They earned it fair and square and Lakers did go to 15-1, still a record I'm pretty sure. It was an impressive finals showing considering the competition. I'm just saying what they had to go through in the east wasn't as impressive as these guys are saying. Beating the Lakers even once is far more impressive to me.

I agree that the east wasn't as great as some posters here try to make it look but all of the teams in these years were very tough defensively and almost all of them had a true all-time great offensive star.

I think the average player and team are better today, but a series in '90s and '00s in the east was still a tough battle to go through.

[Wolfy1983]

Are we really going to play this game with how weak the East is and Iverson's supporting cast? Lets put Thomas ahead of Lebron while we are it, with this logic. Iverson's supporting cast was trash. Revisionist history? lol, no his supporting cast was trash. Was it him or his supporting cast that got him a game 1 victory and the Lakers only defeat in the postseason?

[OkcSinceSGA]

You mean "then they won a game against one of the best teams of all time that sweeped a stacked western conference"?

Fair enough. They earned it fair and square and Lakers did go to 15-1, still a record I'm pretty sure. It was an impressive finals showing considering the competition. I'm just saying what they had to go through in the east wasn't as impressive as these guys are saying. Beating the Lakers even once is far more impressive to me.

I agree that the east wasn't as great as some posters here try to make it look but all of the teams in these years were very tough defensively and almost all of them had a true all-time great offensive star.

I think the average player and team are better today, but a series in '90s and '00s in the east was still a tough battle to go through.

I can accept that. The early 00s had a lot of 1 superstar one man teams offensively it seemed. It was ISO ball lol. Tmac, VC, Iverson etc. But the league now top to bottom is way more stacked and I'm confident the Cavs, Raptors, Celtics, Wizards of 2017 would still kill the east of 2001. 01 Sixers may be 2 or 3 seed but the rest of teams seeding would get flooded out by 2017 ones.

[RaptorRed]

Like Iverson did?

Iverson carried a garbage ass team to the finals bro. Leading a Boston team to the ECF is considered a higher feat for you?

The 01 Sixers weren't garbage. That's revisionist history. The supporting cast stepped up in the playoffs and complimented him well. Just because they didn't have a 20 ppg scorer among them doesn't automatically make them suck.

They had literally 12 guys with above league average WS/48 for example. That was a very deep, cohesive team outside of Iverson.

Lol yeah that sixers team was so stacked
So let's get this straight, you're on here preaching the entire 01 east is garbage but now that someone uses this theory against you , you claimIverson's team wasn't garbage ? Seems like you are saying whatever fits your argument at the moment ....

[OkcSinceSGA]

Are we really going to play this game with how weak the East is and Iverson's supporting cast? Lets put Thomas ahead of Lebron while we are it, with this logic. Iverson's supporting cast was trash. Revisionist history? lol, no his supporting cast was trash. Was it him or his supporting cast that got him a game 1 victory and the Lakers only defeat in the postseason?

Iverson's team was trash yet he had the DPOY, 6th man of year and 12 players with above league average WS/48. Makes sense. How many other stars in NBA history have had the 6th man of year+DPOY on their team?

[sikma42]

In 2008, Iverson's per36 ppg was 22.8ppg which would put him 32nd in the NBA this season. Again, Iverson's career per36 ppg is 23.3. Only one of Iverson's per36ppg seasons would even rank in the top 10 in the NBA this season. He was a good scorer, but he largely benefited from heavy usage.

Kobe Bryant in his MVP season did not have a top 10 PER. Are you willing to continue this silly argument?


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

I'm not sure what your point is... Bill Russell in his MVP season did not have a top 10 per36 ppg either. That, just like Kobe Bryant, has no relevance to Iverson's scoring ability.

You're the one that said that Iverson would be the "best scorer in the league" today and I pointed out using facts that this is unlikely based on Iverson's actual production.

1. It has bearing only because that was a premise of the person I quoted argument. As this doesn't apply when used with Kobe and others players of the same era, it's not a good measure in this instance.

2. I never said AI would be the best scorer today. You seem confused.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[HeartBreakKid]

Wouldn't he have to lead his team to a title to be considered better?

Like Iverson did?

Iverson carried a garbage ass team to the finals bro. Leading a Boston team to the ECF is considered a higher feat for you?

Garbage team?

What teams did he beat that were more talented?

Mutumbo had 20/15 games in some of those series. Vince Carter didn't have any thing like that on his team.

[OkcSinceSGA]

Iverson carried a garbage ass team to the finals bro. Leading a Boston team to the ECF is considered a higher feat for you?

The 01 Sixers weren't garbage. That's revisionist history. The supporting cast stepped up in the playoffs and complimented him well. Just because they didn't have a 20 ppg scorer among them doesn't automatically make them suck.

They had literally 12 guys with above league average WS/48 for example. That was a very deep, cohesive team outside of Iverson.

Lol yeah that sixers team was so stacked
So let's get this straight, you're on here preaching the entire 01 east is garbage but now that someone uses this theory against you , you claimIverson's team wasn't garbage ? Seems like you are saying whatever fits your argument at the moment ....

The east was garbage in terms of how strong the parity and competition was. It doesn't mean Iverson's team was garbage. I'm referring to the competition. If anything I'm arguing Iverson's supporting cast was better than Vince Carter's, Tmac's and Ray Allen's. So of course the better team won. But he played like **** in much of those playoffs and got taken to 7 games twice by inferior teams.

[Xherdan 23]

You don't know the impact he has had on the game ? Come on man take your hate goggles off. This is from Chris Paul who is from north carolina yet even he admits Iverson had a greater impact than Jordan.

http://clipperholics.com/2016/09/10/chris-paul-allen-iverson-nba-culture/

This is why we can't have nice things.

[OkcSinceSGA]

Like Iverson did?

Iverson carried a garbage ass team to the finals bro. Leading a Boston team to the ECF is considered a higher feat for you?

Garbage team?

What teams did he beat that were more talented?

Mutumbo had 20/15 games in some of those series. Vince Carter didn't have any thing like that on his team.

They won't have an answer for this. They will just change the argument like they've done with me 9 times.

[RaptorRed]

The 01 Sixers weren't garbage. That's revisionist history. The supporting cast stepped up in the playoffs and complimented him well. Just because they didn't have a 20 ppg scorer among them doesn't automatically make them suck.

They had literally 12 guys with above league average WS/48 for example. That was a very deep, cohesive team outside of Iverson.

Lol yeah that sixers team was so stacked
So let's get this straight, you're on here preaching the entire 01 east is garbage but now that someone uses this theory against you , you claimIverson's team wasn't garbage ? Seems like you are saying whatever fits your argument at the moment ....

The east was garbage in terms of how strong the parity and competition was. It doesn't mean Iverson's team was garbage. I'm referring to the competition. If anything I'm arguing Iverson's supporting cast was better than Vince Carter's, Tmac's and Ray Allen's. So of course the better team won. But he played like **** in much of those playoffs and got taken to 7 games twice by inferior teams.

So now Iverson had the best supporting cast in the east ? I'm done with this thread.

[og15]

Yes he is..the efficiency in which he scores at high clip is simply too much to ignore and leading that marginally talented Celtics team as #1 seed over a stacked cavs team led by arguably the best player in basketball is impressive to say the least. Iverson is obviously the bigger name and nostalgia may cloud ppls judgment and have some bias towards him..but back to original premise if looked at facts objectively..Thomas is slightly better than Iverson best season (01) and thats only bc Iverson went to the final that year.

You see here you have to either admit that you aren't a good judge of what good talent looks like, or you haven't paid attention to their roster because this is false

[Wolfy1983]

Are we really going to play this game with how weak the East is and Iverson's supporting cast? Lets put Thomas ahead of Lebron while we are it, with this logic. Iverson's supporting cast was trash. Revisionist history? lol, no his supporting cast was trash. Was it him or his supporting cast that got him a game 1 victory and the Lakers only defeat in the postseason?

Iverson's team was trash yet he had the DPOY, 6th man of year and 12 players with above league average WS/48. Makes sense. How many other stars in NBA history have had the 6th man of year+DPOY on their team?

That team was loaded with guys who couldn't put the ball in the basket. Yeah it makes sense that his supporting cast sucked.
By the way, I seem to recall Shaq eating and spitting out the DPOY.