Why was Iverson drafted 1st?

[Mik317]

Don't argue about Iverson. Moreso than any player it is a pointless endeavor.

[Witzig-Okashi]

One thing that wasn't mentioned was the fact that he was a two time Big East DPOY, and that was thought to have translated to success as a defensive player...

[theonlyclutch]

This is complete nonsense.

Iverson would be even better today if he was on a team with better management that valued modern analytics. On those Sixers teams he was basically asked to just iso and score, and the other four guys would handle the defensive end. Today nobody would build a team like that around Iverson, they would surround him with athletic shooters and a rugged and mobile big man who can finish. Furthermore the Sixers played at a slow pace, when it couldn't be more obvious to modern fans that with a player of Iverson's ability his teams need to get out in transition to let him make plays.


AI could penetrate at will and score or dish, could draw 10+ FTs/game in the post-handcheck era, and he was a complete monster in transition. If you swapped prime Iverson for Harden on the current Rockets team, not only would there be zero dropoff but that team would be much harder to play against. And the MVP voting would have looked like a dead heat, rather than Curry running away with it.

In 04-06, we did see Iverson being the main option on a fast paced team (2nd and 6th in league) with some shooters on the team, while his scoring efficiency definitely increased, it only went to barely league average (53.2 - 54.3% TS). A big part of that is Iverson's shot selection, despite his ability to "penetrate at will", as he shot a hilarious ton of long 2s, without the requisite accuracy from that range to make it useful, in those 2 seasons, 25.7% of his FGAs were from the long 2 range, which he was making at 37.7%, there's no indication that he would be more efficient doing this sort of activity now.

Iverson instead of Harden on this team would be a big minus, as not only would the team lose out defensively from starting two 6ft dudes in the backcourt, they would also lose out on a lot of outside shooting from Harden himself, and there's also no guarantee that, on the injury-disrupted Rockets roster, Iverson wouldn't just takeover scoring (ala '15 Westbrook) to the detriment of team results.

In that period you're describing ('04-'06) Iverson was trying to protect his body at that point by not hurtling to the rim. He was nearing the end of his athletic prime and had suffered a ton of injuries, and was also carrying an insane load playing 42+mpg ( ) . And people were calling Harden an ironman this season for playing 38-40mpg after the Rockets' injuries..

Put *prime* Iverson next to a guard who can defend 2s, + the rest of the Rockets roster and that team would be better than current Houston. I stand by that. Assuming he's playing a normal 36-38mpg and not 40+, prime AI would be a beast in that type of system and statistically more efficient.

He went to the rim more from 04-06 (30.4% of FGAs in 0-3 ft) than 00-04 (25.3% of FGAs in 0-3 ft) so that arguments bunk.

Disregarding the argument that a hypothetical Iverson in the Rockets system would be more efficient, where exactly do you find PGs long enough to guard 2s, and be able to shoot well from outside (to provide spacing for Iverson) for anything like the cost of Houston's existing PG rotations?
Just looking around the NBA for (non-franchise) PGs who can guard 2s and shoot from outside:
Michael Carter-Williams: Nope, he's completely terrible at anything that resembles shooting (and offense) in general
Shaun Livingston: Nope, has shot precisely two 3s this past RS
Jrue Holiday: Would work, but on the hook for 10 mil per for two more years on exisitng contract (and is pretty inefficient anyway), so no.
Goran Dragic: Would work, but this means you would have to pay close to a max contract for a PG (alongside the max to Iverson), so too expensive
Eric Bledsoe: Would work, but on the hook for 14 mil per for four more years on existing contract, he's also not a particularly great shooter, so too expensive.
Tyreke Evans: LOL

As you can see, this demonstrates the difficulty of trying to build around Iverson with a big PG

[Jack_Tretton]

You had to have been a fan back then to understand why Iverson was picked 1st, and why he'd be the first pick in the upcoming draft.

But no, Tim Duncan was the better prospect going into his own draft. A lot of us 76ers fans back then were kind of bummed about winning the lottery in 96 instead of 97. This is no knock on Iverson the prospect. Going back 20 years, there were only a handful of prospects greater than Iverson. In my opinion only 3 for sure: Duncan, Yao, and Lebron. I think Anthony Davis, Oden and Durant are close.

I don't want to debate Iverson's actual impact in the league too passionately, but I've always felt that Larry Brown sacrificed developing Iverson as a better PG for a short term success. The way it turned out, I think the #2 spot from that draft is debatable between AI and Nash. He could've been so much more, and his peak probably longer had he been developed properly.

[Illmatic12]

In 04-06, we did see Iverson being the main option on a fast paced team (2nd and 6th in league) with some shooters on the team, while his scoring efficiency definitely increased, it only went to barely league average (53.2 - 54.3% TS). A big part of that is Iverson's shot selection, despite his ability to "penetrate at will", as he shot a hilarious ton of long 2s, without the requisite accuracy from that range to make it useful, in those 2 seasons, 25.7% of his FGAs were from the long 2 range, which he was making at 37.7%, there's no indication that he would be more efficient doing this sort of activity now.

Iverson instead of Harden on this team would be a big minus, as not only would the team lose out defensively from starting two 6ft dudes in the backcourt, they would also lose out on a lot of outside shooting from Harden himself, and there's also no guarantee that, on the injury-disrupted Rockets roster, Iverson wouldn't just takeover scoring (ala '15 Westbrook) to the detriment of team results.

In that period you're describing ('04-'06) Iverson was trying to protect his body at that point by not hurtling to the rim. He was nearing the end of his athletic prime and had suffered a ton of injuries, and was also carrying an insane load playing 42+mpg ( ) . And people were calling Harden an ironman this season for playing 38-40mpg after the Rockets' injuries..

Put *prime* Iverson next to a guard who can defend 2s, + the rest of the Rockets roster and that team would be better than current Houston. I stand by that. Assuming he's playing a normal 36-38mpg and not 40+, prime AI would be a beast in that type of system and statistically more efficient.

He went to the rim more from 04-06 (30.4% of FGAs in 0-3 ft) than 00-04 (25.3% of FGAs in 0-3 ft) so that arguments bunk.

Disregarding the argument that a hypothetical Iverson in the Rockets system would be more efficient, where exactly do you find PGs long enough to guard 2s, and be able to shoot well from outside (to provide spacing for Iverson) for anything like the cost of Houston's existing PG rotations?
Just looking around the NBA for (non-franchise) PGs who can guard 2s and shoot from outside:
Michael Carter-Williams: Nope, he's completely terrible at anything that resembles shooting (and offense) in general
Shaun Livingston: Nope, has shot precisely two 3s this past RS
Jrue Holiday: Would work, but on the hook for 10 mil per for two more years on exisitng contract (and is pretty inefficient anyway), so no.
Goran Dragic: Would work, but this means you would have to pay close to a max contract for a PG (alongside the max to Iverson), so too expensive
Eric Bledsoe: Would work, but on the hook for 14 mil per for four more years on existing contract, he's also not a particularly great shooter, so too expensive.
Tyreke Evans: LOL

As you can see, this demonstrates the difficulty of trying to build around Iverson with a big PG

Why are you only looking at PGs? You could effectively put Iverson next to any guard with length, Shumpert for instance. Danny Green, Wesley Matthews, the list goes on..

And like I said, we're putting Iverson on the Rockets in Harden's role. They start Trevor Ariza who can defend 1-3 as well depending on matchups. And let's not act like Iverson was totally incapable of defending his own position, he was pesky with quick hands and would be a plus defender in today's modern schemes (and back then, most teams star players were expected to conserve energy on defense).

I'm questioning if you actually watched Iverson play or are aware of his skillset. He was incredibly dynamic, if you don't think he would tear up the league in any era with the right pieces around him, your bball knowledge is highly questionable..