Real Deal

So I guess this was wrong, because Taylor Swift got her VMA.

...seriously? So you're telling me that Rivers is stupid enough to play Iverson like that? Switching his position nine times in a game? And where do you get off thinking Ray Allen is old? He scored 51 or so against the Bulls in the playoffs just this past season. He's arguably the most important player for Boston right now. Rivers will not split 5:30 for the other guards. Eddie House comes off the bench and plays 18 minutes a game by himself. What a great way to completely destroy a backcourt, not to mention you act as if the Celtics have all of those timeouts to sub in and out at least 6-7 times per quarter, at the exact time. Not going to work. Especially this funny part: Here Eddie, you go in for one play, then I'M BRINGING YOUR ASS RIGHT BACK OUT OF THE GAME, SON! 30 SECONDS!

Probably Michael Jordan.

Probably because the people that need free health care the most can't even afford a television to know anything about it, let alone participate in the 1,000-person surveys relating to it that are supposed to represent an entire country.

It'll definitely have a negative effect on his passing accuracy and strength. As a wideout or almost any other player on the field, you aren't involved in EVERY play with the ball in your hands. McNabb has to take the snaps and will have to rely on the run game much more, until those ribs heal up.

Was I the only one that was overly excited to see Kanye not win any of the two awards he was nominated for after he burned Taylor Swift the way he did? Especially when Beyonce knocked him out on video of the year, then proceeded to give Taylor time on the stage to finish her speech. HUGE slap in the face. Kanye was punked in the end.

He forgot Iverson's tats and arm sleeve.

He's just pissed because nobody cares about him anymore.

Exactly. That means that if Iverson gets 26 total minutes, Rondo and Allen get just nine minutes together on the court, which is stupid.

LMAO, I hope you're kidding. That would require a lineup of: C - Perkins PF - Garnett SF - Pierce SG - Iverson PG - Iverson Not sure that's possible. Or, what you're telling me is that Boston will play Rondo and Allen for only nine minutes together? That's it? That's definitely stupid. Iverson would have to spend 13 minutes on the floor with each guard, or else it doesn't work. And that doesn't work for a Rajon/Allen duo of just nine minutes.

In terms of years, Snake, it's zero. You can't have one year without having 12 months first. You're wrong again.

So Iverson is going to play 25 minutes a game in Boston, while Rondo and Ray Allen play 35+ minutes? Nelson and Carter playing 35+ minutes a game...and Iverson gets 25 in that rotation? I hope you're a math major. Both guard slots are filled. No bench player will play 25 minutes behind those two.

It's called the 2000 NBA championship, not the 1999 NBA championship. The majority of the season was in 2000 (six months of it), so the first Lakers title was in the new decade, which ended in 2009. Zero is a number. You have to get to one somehow. I can't believe this is even a question.

An NBA decade starts at 1999-2000, because the majority of the season is in 2000. So your decade is from the 2000 NBA Finals on. Ten of them. Ends in 2009. 2000-2009.

So, a "player of his caliber" (even though he's past his prime, and very selfish, according to you) would take $1.2 million a year to play less than 30 minutes a game, be unhappy, and have a big chance of losing to the Lakers in 2010? The Lakers aren't signing Iverson, ever. He's not a spot-up shooting point, which is all we go after. Iverson will compete for a starting role on any team, and against Rondo and Jameer, he would win. Probably not against Parker (Spurs), but the contenders aren't going to put their young all-star caliber players on the bench and risk losing them in free agency. Rondo is perfect for Boston. He doesn't shoot the ball much, defers almost too much, plays defense. Jameer is perfect for Orlando. He shoots threes all the time. Iverson slashes to the rim and scores, or finds his teammates in corners and on elbows. Memphis is perfect for him if you remove Zach Randolph. Charlotte would've been nice as well, but they are having their own problems with Raymond Felton. Houston? Possibly, but that team can win anywhere between 15-40 games, who knows how they will do. And Miami? Well, if Iverson was looking to finish his career off with this final team, it's a good thing he didn't pick the Heat, because in a year, they'll be missing Wade, possibly Riley. Excellent signing by Memphis. Excellent choice by Iverson.

The whole world thought Kobe was selfish for 5-6 seasons or longer...so if you're going to give me "the whole world" in your argument, you might as well dismiss your own assumptions. Fact was, Kobe was still running the dynasty's offense as a selfish player. Talk about a single season, but not about the other two? You would.

How many times does it have to be said? Iverson wasn't able to sign with a contender because all contenders are already set, have no money, and have stars (mostly all-stars) at their point guard positions. And Iverson went to Memphis because they only need a scorer to be a pretty good team. Maybe they need Wade, or Kobe, but Iverson doesn't think he's a piece of trash, like you do. The more you dig into this, the more I will anticipate those Denver/Memphis meetings, and the more I can't stand anyone hating on him. Good going. Might as well let the Sixers fans come in and take their pot shots at him, and any Pistons fans we have, also.

So Jordan wasn't selfish for "letting Hamilton average 20" but Kobe was selfish for the first two seasons of the dynasty, even though Shaq averaged nearly 30? I see the hypocrisy here. It's all about Iverson signing with Memphis, that's it. You wanted him back in Denver for $3.5 million and a bench role...you even stated it. Otherwise, it's an Iverson bashing fest for you. As I said in the other topic, the debate is over. If Iverson wanted to mentor Mayo, it wouldn't be possible, since he's Allen Iverson. But Jordan? That's cool. He can mentor Courtney Alexander all he wants. But NOBODY is Iverson. It's your argument, and it's a waste.

Awesome. Because that means that Kobe shared the ball with Shaq in 2000 and 2001, even though you say he had trouble doing such until that ankle injury. Can't have it both ways. It all falls back to Iverson signing with a non-contender, and that's why you're doing this. What if Iverson wants to help out Mayo? :o What if it's not just about winning championship, as Jordan said? :o It wouldn't matter, though, because obviously, Jordan isn't Iverson. Nobody is Iverson. And that's your argument. Good luck to Denver this season. For me, this debate is over.

Actually, and I did this purposely, my trouble with defense lies in the post. I'm an excellent perimeter defender. Anyways... Nobody on those two teams could score, huh? Richard Hamilton averaged 20 with Jordan. Jerry Stackhouse averaged 29.8 PPG just two seasons before teaming with Jordan, and all of that was pre-injury (he had that severe injury after Jordan's retirement). What else is there to say? Everything you assume, it just gets shot down.

...and the streak you're talking about was due to Shaq averaging 35.8 PPG, and it was a four-game win streak until Bryant came back. The only ball movement on that Lakers team was Kobe to Shaq, Shaq to Kobe, and other players to Kobe or Shaq. The rare kick-outs happened, but it wasn't enough to define team play more than it did duo play, especially when Kobe and Shaq both averaged 28+ PPG that year (28.7 and 28.5 PPG, to be exact) and the second leading scorer, Rick Fox, threw up 9.6 PPG (Fisher only played in 20 games that year). I don't know what team game you're talking about that suddenly changed Bryant, but he never did change. The first time Kobe started becoming noticeably passive was in 2008, and he's still selfish (which is a good thing).

And what he meant by "missing the game" is that he misses playing the game, and that the "competitive problem" means he wants to be out on the court, winning games himself, and that the challenge is showing that he can still do it. If all he was doing was trying to help the Wizards players, he would've wanted to be a coach, or he would've averaged much less PPG. He led the team in scoring, and he dominated teams with 40+ point performances at age 38, scored 50 also. How is that helping the kids? What a ballhog, right? Eleven 30's, four 40's, one 50 in 2001-02. Six 30's, three 40's the following season. You think he came back just to teach the young guys how to play? It's crystal clear why he did.

Continue reading. You know why he came back. He wanted to play longer than two years, and would have, if it wasn't for the torn cartilage in his knee. It's obvious you know nothing about MJ. When he said he still wants to play (just last year, and at the HOF ceremony), do you think it's so he can teach kids how to play the game? Give me a break.

I'm comparing the two because I'm not biased. Iverson isn't the better overall player, not even close, but I'm not going to let you crush Iverson's scoring and passing abilities without doing the same to my favorite player. Imagine that. Perfect? Right after Bryant went down, the Lakers went 3-3 in that first six-game span. They averaged 88.5 PPG in those six games. It took Shaq to dominate every game after that to take out a couple of pathetic teams (the 15-win Bulls were one of them), and a Suns team that had Kidd sitting most of the game. When Bryant returned, he attempted 24 and 21 shots against the Wolves and Blazers, before the season ended. 11 of the 16 games they played in the playoffs, Bryant attempted 20+ shots, eight games 23+ shots, two games 30+ shots. He recorded double-digit assists in the playoffs just one game, Game 4 against the Spurs. I have no idea what book you took that out of, but it's false. And what do you expect, it's Michael Curry. It's the same guy that didn't play Iverson, Hamilton, Prince, Sheed and McDyess at the same time, not even once.

Prey on those that need help with something, like homework, or even relationship problems. Every single girl in high school needs help with something every now and then. Jump on it, become a good guy, and push the limit far enough to where you become a friend, but not THAT great of a friend...then go for the kill.