Printable View
Got to a finals and lost like Iverson, too. At the 6:38 mark, the Spurs take the lead (for good) on DG 3 b/c Iverson, I mean Westbrook went for a heroball steal and left a great shooter wide open in the corner...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gj7SMyP_C3k
Iverson was better. Basketball blasphemy to say Westbrook is better.
Iverson is maybe the most over-rated player of all-time. Never seen people get so excited about a 42 FG on 25 shots player.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kikoluna
Well, considering he was the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4a option on that 6ers team for offense, he really didn't have much of a choice.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spurtacular
Not like Westbrook, who will shoot 9-26 despite lining up alongside the best offensive player in the NBA in a long time (outside of Curry now).
Watch Kawhi swat Iverson 2 at the 8:22 mark and get a call. Then, Brook has this smirk like that was not a foul.
Ask any coach. They all prefer to play an over-dribbler. Iverson played hero ball and it cost his team despite all the spurious myths such as the one you present.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cry Havoc
Spurious myth.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spurtacular
So, perhaps you'd like to shed some light on the elite offensive weapons the 6ers had? I'm not saying Iverson played the game entirely the right way, dude obviously had a screw loose, but that was one of the most limited offensive teams ever to make the Finals.
Iverson took a bunch of towelboys to the finals.
Westbrook made the finals with a guy that is a top 10 SF already, won MVP just a year or so later and a guy OFF THE BENCH that was runner up for MVP when he got his own team. Iverson made the finals with Eric Snow as his running mate. And if you wanna say weak eastern conference. Realize Iverson's historic finals game 1 put the ONLY chink in the Lakers otherwise undefeated armor and they fared better than OUR team did with peak Tim Duncan. Iverson's inefficiency can't be excused but it can be better understood. He was a sub 6'0 two guard that was in every literal sense of the word the only capable offensive player for much of his first 6 years. His volume shooting was by pure necessity (now his shot selection is another thing). Aaron McKie was probably the ONLY other guy on those squads that could score 20 points if he tried really really hard. Being the only capable offensive player means teams can throw everything and the kitchen sink at you and dare the others to beat you and often time iverson had to challenge that scheme (again with a sub 6'0 ft scrawny frame).Quote:
Originally Posted by Spurtacular
And Iverson had to play well above his statistical mean for it to happen. Inevitably, he couldn't keep it up for one last round.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cry Havoc
Both way better than Jimmer
Don't forget Snow played with broken foot that finals and mckie I believe was also injured. Not to mention Iverson had a number of maladies.Quote:
Originally Posted by keeferob25
That was the last Finals before the defensive 3 second rule. That means Shaq could camp in the lane. It helped Iverson's team on the defensive end having a rim protector like Mutumbo allowed to do the same thing. I'd say a Phil Jackson coached Lakers team would destroy the Heatles. I think what Iverson accomplished was far more impressive than Westbrook. Though Westbrook is the better all around player.
Westbrick gambles A LOT defensively. Goes for too many risky steals. I remember watching this game with my brother when kawhi had RW posted up and I told him,"Watch, he's gonna go for the steal." Sure enough, he did and was called for a foul. So not only does he do it often, but its predictable.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spurtacular
Did you know the Lakers had some guy named Kobe Bryant on their roster for awhile.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spurtacular
:lolQuote:
Originally Posted by ElNono
Those 2000-2001 Sixers were 13th in ORtg and 5th in DRtg (Phoenix was 1st :lol). Iverson only gets credit for carrying the team to the Finals because of the age-old bias towards scoring points. Defense is what got the Sixes that far.
:toastQuote:
Originally Posted by Kikoluna
He must have been the GOAT if he was able to turn 25 shots into 42 FGs.:wowQuote:
Originally Posted by Spurtacular
I think when a guard in hero system knows he's not going to grab some bench for sloppy defense, he'll gamble more / play lazy defense. Iverson did it; Kobe did it despite all the phony defense award. That doesn't happen in the Spurs system. Players play defense of they're out. What NBA coach could reign Wesbrook in? Pop is the only one who'd even have a chance, tbh.Quote:
Originally Posted by PopTheGOAT
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kawhitstorm
"Iverson is maybe the most over-rated player of all-time. Never seen people get so excited about a 42 FG on 25 shots player"
Obvious to anyone who is not moron or troll that 42 FG was abridged for 42 FG%. Which category you in?
I thought about him. But honestly, Kobe did shoot about 45 FG. You can compare the stats if need be. But certainly, Kobe had plenty of Iverson-like games.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrainOfThought5
"His volume shooting was by pure necessity"Quote:
Originally Posted by keeferob25
No. It was stat stuffing. And brass was okay with it b/c the dude was filling the seats. But from a basketball standpoint, he was far from brilliant. And he certainly wasn't playing sh** defense out of "necessity" either. Iverson shot 42 percent, which is about 3 plus percent what the rest the team did just standing around. There may have been cases that it worked out, but on the whole he was a sh** teammate. And that's why he rants about practice being bad, btw. Yes, that sold in the media; but the underlying the reality is that he was an a-hole for a teammates. And the EC was weak. One win against the Lakers does not erase that fact.
So... you're not going to even comment on the quality of Iverson's teammates? That's pretty telling tbh.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spurtacular
They weren't that bad in a weak conference.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cry Havoc
Kukoc, past his prime but could have handled more offensive load in a non hero ball system. Snow looked slow but he got to his spots and he knew how to run an offense. Dikembe was a solid presence in the middle. George Lynch was Mr. Intangibles. Theo Ratliff was a very under rated PF; and he would get more blocks than even Dikembe. A guy like McKie did what he was asked to do; stand in a corner and make threes; but he was capable of more. It's clear though that the team was built on defense and rebounding and hope that was enough for whatever Iverson was going to produce. But it was built that way b/c Iverson wasn't a team player and the team didn't want to give up their $tar. Also, Snow was an efficient PG who ran the offense and controlled tempo masterfully.
Actually Westbrook is much better. Iverson was a career stat padding chucker with average at best defense and inefficient offense. Prime example of "sells tickets, doesn't win championships".Quote:
Originally Posted by Kikoluna
I'm no fan of Westbrook, but he is better than Iverson.
Yeah Iverson has averaged 30 PPG before. . .and one of those years his FG% was under 40% and 3pt under 30%. :| Which kinda makes the PPG meaningless.
And fucking won game 1 on the road.Quote:
Originally Posted by hater
I'm in here saying Iverson is better than people give him credit for, but AI was notorious for caring more about steals than defense.Quote:
Originally Posted by PopTheGOAT
...in your mom's vagina.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spurtacular