Kidd, Iverson, Nash

[EGarrett]

Periods go inside quotation marks.

[Dramacydal]

^Not when the quotations aren't used for direct speech if I remember correctly. But who gives a fuck anyway...?

[Matthew]

Even that team could have played a more balanced offense. Do you really think that no other player than Iverson was able to shoot .400? With Nash or Kidd running the point each and every player will get 8 to 15 shots - in their comfort zones where they can do something with the ball. Iverson will dribble until he is surrounded by opponents so his passes are much riskier and his teammates don't neccessarily get the ball where they can need it.

No I dont think they could have. Maybe Dikembe could have, but like I said, he had Shaq on him. I don't care if Iverson was on that team, or Magic. There was no way a roatation that had Mckie and snow (both of whom had fractured feet), Tyronne Hill who was missing open layups, Jurmaine Jones and Raja Bell (both of whom werent even in the rotation until deep into the playoffs) could have shot better than 40% aginst that awesome lakers defence.

Jut to further prove my point, the shooting numbers for the nets in the first two games of the 2002 finals against the lakers:
Game 1 39%
Game 2 35%
And thats with the likes of Kenyon martin, KVH, Kittles who are much better offensive players than Tyronne hill and jurmaine jones.

Maybe he should have taken some more shots in the second half but even one of his own coaches doesn't see that as the reason why the Lakers lost. http://www.hoopshype.com/articles/winter_lazenby.htm
Neither do I: The Lakers lost three games with Kobe taking 30 shots per game in the regular season (they won the last one with him taking 28 shots but the Suns didn't play Nash and Bell) and won three of seven in the playoffs with Kobe taking 20 shots per game and involving his teammates - even stiffs like Kwame. Coincidence?

This is a debate between the two of us, I'm not going to read that. The lakers supporting cast after the bell clothesline disappeared. Kobe did what he had to do to keep them close in game 6, and it wasnt exactly his fault that Thomas drilled that 3 was it? Or maybe you think it was.. lol, i mean, had he involved kwame more, maybe kwame would have been more into playing defense?

But isnt that amazing? When Tmac goes out and says he is only playing for a scoring record, he gets vilifiied. But when role players dont play as hard as they can simply becuase they arent getting as many touches as they want, its quite acceptable?

Yes, I'm blaming Iverson for the Sixers being a team where one player will always look for his own scoring chances and only for those of his teammates when he is shut down.

Blame the coach or the GM. Do you blame Ladanian Tomilson for getting so many touches of a football feild? He is the one they built that team around, and the offensive is structured around.

There hasn't been a successful team playing that way in all history: Neither Chamberlain nor Jordan won anything until they got their teammates involved.

Your comparing the role players Jordan had to that of what Iverson had? You can't be serious. The second team on the Bulls was a superior offensive unit than the starters of the sixers.

The Sixers had some chances to surround Iverson with more reliable offensive players than all those you have named but traded them away because Iverson didn't get them involved

Thats not iversons fault they traded them away. He is and always will be a scoring guard. Maybe those players couldn't adapt to Iverson?

He needed 8 seasons to change this style and even now he and Webber hog the ball too much.
You could maybe argue that there was no other option left than Iverson taking 30 shots per game (which is more likely 33 to 36 as field goal attempts don't count when you are fouled) because the other players weren't good. In my opinion 70 percent of the league's players are capable of scoring 8-20 points when they get involved in the right systems.

If they play in a high tempo then yes, anyone can score that amount. But if they are in the nba finals, against the 2001 lakers, then no, i dont buy it. I can't see Jerome James dropping 16 ppg even with your lovechild Kidd.

I blame Iverson for making the Sixers have to adjust to this system for so many years that was always doomed against teams that would play defense and a better balanced offense.

Do you also blame Kidd for not being able to take games over in terms of scoring? Or nash for being such a liability defensively?

Playing that way Kidd did not miss the playoffs since 1997. Playing his way Iverson missed the playoffs 4 times since 1997.

Compare the teamates and get back to me.

Duncan was shut down in a zone defense because the opponents could stay with him watching Iverson jack up more shots than any other of Team USA. And he only hit .378 of them. That's very impressive for the 'best' player...
He made .366 of his threes. Mediocre as the line is nearer to the basket than in the NBA.
Yes, others were bad, too, but LeBron, Wade and Melo were Rookies. Iverson was labeled the greatest star besides Duncan and teamed up with Marbury in the worst olympic backcourt since NBA players play in the tournament. The one that you call the best player on that team was abused by opponent backcourts (Arroyo and Ayuso or Sarunas Jasikevicius). And as I already mentioned: He is such a erratic shooter that teams could play zone defenses par excellence against Team USA. Even Duncan can't do anything but drawing two or three defenders and hoping that the other 'star' will hit his shots. Which Iverson did not.

You beat a zone but cutting to the weak spots of the zone, not by drawing 3 guys and dishing to a shooter. That plays into the defenses hands becuase its much easiler to scramble and recover. But if thats what your hanging your hat on, the olympics, then I guess MJ isnt the greatest ever becuase he only averaged 15 ppg in 1992...

Um, can you tell if a player is pissed with the refs if he doesn't go to the press and get himself fined? Could you tell Derek Fisher was happy when he hit the .4 shot? Or did he need to sign a contract extension while still on the court?

The ref analogy is stupid. You're stupid. You're entire arguement is stupid.

With the referee, we don't know exactly how "unhappy" a player is, or if he is just trying to work the refs. I don't sit there and go, "hey, kobe wanted that call and didn't get it" and then proceed to spit out my soda, had I been drinking one in shock.

With Derek Fisher, he was obviously happy he hit it, but was he happy with the team, or his own shot? But seriously, you're a spastic. Hey maybe you can bust out the red bolded font for that comment , oh wait .

Iverson's 2001 team was the ultimate team for him at the time because none of them could shoot and they'd just let him isolate and clean up his offensive rebounds.

The majority of the time they'd set a double screen for him along the baseline, then let him run a pick and roll with Mutumbo. That's hardly an isolation.

Come on, a guy who can't spell "successful" must have a great career lined up?

Did you just make up a quote of me, undermining what I said? Oh if only I was as petty as someone who would make a kobe bryant thread and try to get anyone deleted for saying his name outside that.

Don't forget Tim Thomas and Glenn Robinson, in the one year that Robinson could still play.

Glenn Robinson stoped playing becuase he wanted the contract extension, not becuase he was "unhappy" with Iverson. Couldn't you use your pshycic vision and powers to determine that?

Do you know about Tex Winter and his "F" chart? Have you read Phil Jackson's book?

Why would I read Phil Jacksons book and base my arguement off that?

You just described the 2001 Sixers, minus anyone who could shoot so that they could fit with Iverson's 'kind of distribution.'

Wow what a convincing way to finish an argument. The sixers were moulded around Larry Brown more than Iverson. They were defensively minded, played at a slow pace and wanted good ball movement. Think back to how he had the pacers play, and also how he had the pistons play. You can also see how the sixers played the past two seasons with Iverson at the pg.

[Riot]

Neither, I think Chauncey Billups is the best point guard in the league today.

[pencil]

who cares. Iverson is hot.

[Its_asdf]

who cares. Iverson is hot.

These are the kind of knowledgable and thought-provoking posts that NLSC needs more of.

[J@3]

Periods go inside quotation marks.

you must lead a very exciting life.

[Andrew]

You just described the 2001 Sixers, minus anyone who could shoot so that they could fit with Iverson's 'kind of distribution.'

The 2001 team does fit the description better than any of the other Sixers squads Iverson's been a part of; it was also the most successful, suggesting a similar formula without the deficiencies of the 2001 team could indeed work out.

[scrub]

Kidd and Nash are pure pointguards who make the team better. I feel Iverson will only succeed with the right people around him. These players being good defensive players who are given the role to defend when they go out onto the court (ie - Ben Wallace, Bruce Bowen, Trenton Hassell). Iverson goes out each night to do one thing - win. And by doing this he does what he does best - puts up 30 a night. This means he needs guys who are not focussed on filling up the stat sheet (eg - Ricky Davis, T-Mac) but who can score but want to win. Philadelphia need a player who can setup Iverson and who is willing to make his team-mates better (like Nash and Kidd) so they can give the team good balance.

[EGarrett]

Thats not iversons fault they traded them away. He is and always will be a scoring guard. Maybe those players couldn't adapt to Iverson?

Right, so it's everyone else's fault...not Iverson's.

If they play in a high tempo then yes, anyone can score that amount. But if they are in the nba finals, against the 2001 lakers, then no, i dont buy it. I can't see Jerome James dropping 16 ppg even with your lovechild Kidd.

Uhhh, Jerome James is out of shape and can't run the floor. Your point is obvious.

Do you also blame Kidd for not being able to take games over in terms of scoring? Or nash for being such a liability defensively?

But other people can take the game over for Kidd. And other people can cover for Nash defensively. A guy who dominates the ball and refuses to pass screws everyone else up.

Compare the teamates and get back to me.

Or you can look at Nash's teammates. And Iverson's FG%...

The ref analogy is stupid. You're stupid. You're entire arguement is stupid.

"You are entire argument is stupid?"

With the referee, we don't know exactly how "unhappy" a player is, or if he is just trying to work the refs.

Yeah, right. Nash was just trying to work the refs. So hard that he gets a technical at the end of a tie game...

I don't sit there and go, "hey, kobe wanted that call and didn't get it" and then proceed to spit out my soda, had I been drinking one in shock.

You should sit there and try to come up with better insults. Your current ad hominem crap is old and not even clever...

With Derek Fisher, he was obviously happy he hit it, but was he happy with the team, or his own shot? But seriously, you're a spastic. Hey maybe you can bust out the red bolded font for that comment , oh wait .

Maybe Fisher was trying to work the refs?

Come on, a guy who can't spell "successful" must have a great career lined up?

Did you just make up a quote of me, undermining what I said?

No, I pointed out your lack of comeback. And you still lack a comeback.

:lol: Oh if only I was as petty as someone who would make a kobe bryant thread and try to get anyone deleted for saying his name outside that

LOL. Or you can be a loser who's still obsessed with something petty that happened 2 years ago and brings it up every chance he gets. And can't even spell simple words. Do you have a life?

Glenn Robinson stoped playing becuase he wanted the contract extension, not becuase he was "unhappy" with Iverson. Couldn't you use your pshycic vision and powers to determine that?

Too bad a second ago you were saying that you can't determine a player's motivation...

Why would I read Phil Jacksons book and base my arguement off that?

Maybe you could pick up something about basketball...or how to write beyond a 4th grade level...

Wow what a convincing way to finish an argument. The sixers were moulded around Larry Brown more than Iverson.

The whole move to shooting guard was so Iverson could play his style. Oh wait, can't tell because we don't have "pshycic" powers, so I'm not sure how you can argue anything.

They were defensively minded, played at a slow pace and wanted good ball movement. Think back to how he had the pacers play, and also how he had the pistons play. You can also see how the sixers played the past two seasons with Iverson at the pg.

Defense yes, but offensively, are you saying Brown wanted to only have one scorer? Is that his style?

You must lead a very exciting life.

You post 16 times per day...

[jerry]

A.I. IS THE FREAKING ANSWER!

[Its_asdf]

Thank you for enlightening us. Now please provide some more insightful contribution to the damn forum other than your crap-for-brains posting.

[Mayerhendrix]

A.I.'s good but he doesn't fit, which is why Philadelphia is either going to undertake a major rebuilding operation or the faster and possibly better solution in the future, trade the guy. He's probably what, early 30s now? By the time they build around him better he'll be nearing the end of his career.

Either ship him out now for a growing talent or in 1-2 years for a top 5 draft pick.

[J@3]

You post 16 times per day...

And?

16 times per day and I'm still yet to make the entire forum hate me, or be the cause of a revolt, or completely fuck up at the menial task of being a moderator. But hey, if I was a big time Hollywood script writer who was mates with Dikembe Mutombo and spent the rest of the time discussing the NBA with my former basketballing superstar father, I wouldn't be posting 16 times per day anymore either. If there's one thing sadder then all of the above, it's lying about it to impress some people on a forum. Got any more stories for us Ernest? What about the one where you added me to MSN to suck up and beg when Jackal made everyone realise what a pompous tool you are

[BIG GREEN]

who cares. Iverson is hot.

I take it back...we don't need women on this forum.

[Matthew]

This guy is Shane Hefty reincarnated.

Right, so it's everyone else's fault...not Iverson's.

No, nobody should blame any of the sixers for losing to the lakers. Philly overachieved that year and thats all any fan should ask for.

Uhhh, Jerome James is out of shape and can't run the floor. Your point is obvious.

Your point is vague, and I don't think you understood my point.

But other people can take the game over for Kidd. And other people can cover for Nash defensively. A guy who dominates the ball and refuses to pass screws everyone else up.

But Iverson is being blamed for them losing in 2001 to the lakers for not involving his teamates. If thats the case, then Kidd should have criticism for not being able to take over in the finals 2 years in a row and nash for being a liability on the defensive end which has cost his team big playoff games.

Or you can look at Nash's teammates. And Iverson's FG%...

Wow, excellent response. Look at what Marion does for his team, with either kidd, marbury, babosa or nash at the pg and then you will realise there is NO comparison between the two. The fg% arguement is weak, it's like saying Dikembe is a better centre than shaq becuase of the ft%.

"You are entire argument is stupid?"

So you say Jae has "no life" becuase he averages 16 posts a day, but you think pointing out basic spelling mistakes in an internet forum is productive?

Yeah, right. Nash was just trying to work the refs. So hard that he gets a technical at the end of a tie game...

I wonder if you're a budist or not.

You should sit there and try to come up with better insults.

So once again, you criticise Jae for posting too much, yet you encourage people sitting around a computer to simply "come up with better insults"?

No, I pointed out your lack of comeback. And you still lack a comeback.

I don't need one. I dont need to brag about my life on a message board.

LOL. Or you can be a loser who's still obsessed with something petty that happened 2 years ago and brings it up every chance he gets. And can't even spell simple words. Do you have a life?

"you should come up with better insults"? Do you honestly believe what you say even means anything to anyone anymore?

Too bad a second ago you were saying that you can't determine a player's motivation...

He said it publicly.

Maybe you could pick up something about basketball...or how to write beyond a 4th grade level...

"maybe you should come up with better insults"... Spelling mistakes don't mean anything here, sorry to disapoint.

[J@3]

LOL. Or you can be a loser who's still obsessed with something petty that happened 2 years ago and brings it up every chance he gets. And can't even spell simple words. Do you have a life?

That's like the 3rd or 4th reference to somebody's social life, maybe Ernest here is a bit insecure. It's alright Urkel, we all love you.

[EGarrett]

You post 16 times per day...

And?

16 times per day and I'm still yet to make the entire forum hate me, or be the cause of a revolt, or completely fuck up at the menial task of being a moderator. But hey, if I was a big time Hollywood script writer who was mates with Dikembe Mutombo and spent the rest of the time discussing the NBA with my former basketballing superstar father, I wouldn't be posting 16 times per day anymore either. If there's one thing sadder then all of the above, it's lying about it to impress some people on a forum. Got any more stories for us Ernest? What about the one where you added me to MSN to suck up and beg when Jackal made everyone realise what a pompous tool you are

Aww, I touched a nerve. I wonder if this truth-bending will get you to a record 17?

But Iverson is being blamed for them losing in 2001 to the lakers for not involving his teamates. If thats the case, then Kidd should have criticism for not being able to take over in the finals 2 years in a row and nash for being a liability on the defensive end which has cost his team big playoff games.

In that series, it was the team's fault. Not Iverson's. But the team was built that way to fit Iverson's style of play.

The fg% arguement is weak, it's like saying Dikembe is a better centre than shaq becuase of the ft%.

If the argument is weak, you need a better reason. That analogy doesn't work. FG% for leading scorers does mean a lot. Show me someone who can score 30 a game at 57% from the field who wasn't an incredible player...

So you say Jae has "no life" becuase he averages 16 posts a day, but you think pointing out basic spelling mistakes in an internet forum is productive?

When a guy tries to bring up someone's job, and he can't even spell "successful," and he's scared to say what he does for a living...yes, it is productive. Because it reminds you to look in the mirror...

I don't need one. I dont need to brag about my life on a message board.

No, because you have none. And you're repeating crap you heard from someone else on MSN, not because it was posted here. But if you want to continue to talk about it...then we will...

Sorry to everyone else.

[J@3]

I wonder if this truth-bending will get you to a record 17?

What truth bending? A record 17 what? Make sense... you added me sucking up and begging me not to join the other people in flaming you how pathetic do you get, have you written a script about it? Or is your dad too busy showing up to reunions with his old NBA buddies. I'll take 16 posts per day over coming on and bullshitting about my entire life. You've got nothing Urkel.

[Matthew]

Lol steve Urkel.

In that series, it was the team's fault. Not Iverson's. But the team was built that way to fit Iverson's style of play.

That doesn't mean Iverson is to fault. It means the sixers were outplayed . Is that your point?

If the argument is weak, you need a better reason. That analogy doesn't work. FG% for leading scorers does mean a lot. Show me someone who can score 30 a game at 57% from the field who wasn't an incredible player...

Raja Bell! The arguement isnt weak becuase you are usuing one stat to discredit Iverson, so i'm doing the same with shaq. Iverson wasn't the focal point of every defense, he was the only point of emphasis for every defense that season. He had, and I repeat, Mckie as his second option. And want to compare that to having jefferson and kmart or amare and marion? that doesnt need any further explanation.

When a guy tries to bring up someone's job, and he can't even spell "successful," and he's scared to say what he does for a living...yes, it is productive. Because it reminds you to look in the mirror...

Lol, you think i look in the mirror over you? I'm not scared of anything, your just not worthy to know anything about me. i have no respect for you. simple.

No, because you have none.

I have plenty of reasons why i dont respect you. And the mere fact that i dont respect you is enough reason not to give you a reason.

[J@3]

[pencil]

EGarrett, how about you find a girlfriend then we'll all be happy?

[BIG GREEN]

You volunteering for the job?

[EGarrett]

That doesn't mean Iverson is to fault. It means the sixers were outplayed . Is that your point?

The team was built to fit his style.

If the argument is weak, you need a better reason. That analogy doesn't work. FG% for leading scorers does mean a lot. Show me someone who can score 30 a game at 57% from the field who wasn't an incredible player...

Raja Bell!

Raja Bell can average 30 a game at 57% from the field?

The arguement isnt weak becuase you are usuing one stat to discredit Iverson, so i'm doing the same with shaq. Iverson wasn't the focal point of every defense, he was the only point of emphasis for every defense that season.

He had, and I repeat, Mckie as his second option.

And it was their most successful year. When he had Thomas, Van Horn, Stackhouse or Hughes as second options it never worked out.

And how is "focal point" different from being "the only point of emphasis?"

And want to compare that to having jefferson and kmart or amare and marion? that doesnt need any further explanation.

Suns didn't have Amare this year and they did pretty well. Marion isn't a spot-up shooter and can't create his own shot.

I have plenty of reasons why i dont respect you. And the mere fact that i dont respect you is enough reason not to give you a reason.

Sure.

BTW Jae, I would come back with some stupid picture or a list of half-true stuff you've done over the last few years, but I never paid much attention to you and don't care.

You're full of shit Urkel