Iverson to LA Lakers?

[Real Deal]

No, I'm not referring to the team, but Kobe as the individual and his interactions with his teammates.

He was really good with his teammates. He was praising guys like Smush and even the rookie Vujacic when they did something good. Did you see the Game 4 vs. the Suns, when Smush stole the ball and gave it to Kobe to go into overtime? Kobe was hugging Smush, midcourt. He taught them the triangle offense. He did what he does now.

 

The difference was a big that could contribute as a second option, and that's all she wrote. I don't see how that's difficult to understand.

[Multi-Billionaire]

^He was really bad too at trusting his teammates and containing his emotions. I remember a game in New York when at the end of the game he passed to a tentative Luke Walton who passed it back to him with the time running out, Kobe received the ball but the time ran out so he angrily slammed the ball, basically in front of the crowd pointing fingers at him and embarassing Walton.

 

As he grew to become a leader in 2008-09, you can feel much difference. He's more collected, and more reserved to how he feels about his teammates success and failures. He demands they work as hard as him, and he commands more respect and ears from his teammates. This is no different to his interaction with Pau Gasol. Although Pau is an all star, he still needs to have the leadership skill to communicate and interact with him and maintains his leadership position as well as he does it to lesser role players.

 

This leadership, all the communication and interaction are intangibles and ones you can't see on the stats. Billups has a lot of positive intangibles that allow the team to grow and AI does not have these.

[Real Deal]

Apparently, you didn't see him slap Gasol in the back of the head, or jump Sasha's ass numerous times during the season.

[Multi-Billionaire]

Because he's punishing them for making mistakes to enforce they don't do it again. This assures constant interaction and his assertion as the leader who is consistent. By doing this he's looking at his teammates' mistakes not as weaknesses but as opportunity to improve and turn them into strengths.

 

But slamming the ball and not looking eye to eye were not interactions. It's his personal emotions aka frustration that focuses on and faults his teammate's weakness. Instead of improving it, he's making it worse.

[Real Deal]

Because he's punishing them for making mistakes to enforce they don't do it again. This assures constant interaction and his assertion as the leader who is consistent. By doing this he's looking at his teammates' mistakes not as weaknesses but as opportunity to improve and turn them into strengths.

 

But slamming the ball and not looking eye to eye were not interactions. It's his personal emotions aka frustration that focuses on and faults his teammate's weakness. Instead of improving it, he's making it worse.

He actually tore into Walton in the locker room...but okay. Now you're splitting hairs.

[Multi-Billionaire]

Basically Billups is the Kobe of 2008-09 season, one that shows leadership and AI is Kobe of 2004-05 season, maybe even worse as that Kobe was trying to figure out how to be a leader. AI never cares, he only leads, interacts with, cares about, one person: himself.

 

You put a leader and an individualistic minded player on the same team, the results are very different. Although the quantity (50 - 54 wins) does not show much difference, the quality is very different (consistency, accountability, reliability, fun atmosphere to play), end product is also vastly different (first round exits - WCF).

 

No contenders are willing to sign AI because he said he was not gonna come off the bench or accept a reduced role. Because situations changed (no teams are genuinely interested in signing him), he changed and now said he's going to accept a bench role in Memphis. But before, no contenders were willing to risk their systems to be jeopardized by his presence on their teams.

[Real Deal]

Basically Billups is the Kobe of 2008-09 season, one that shows leadership and AI is Kobe of 2004-05 season, maybe even worse as that Kobe was trying to figure out how to be a leader. AI never cares, he only leads, interacts with, cares about, one person: himself.

 

You put a leader and an individualistic minded player on the same team, the results are very different. Although the quantity (50 - 54 wins) does not show much difference, the quality is very different (consistency, accountability, reliability, fun atmosphere to play), end product is also vastly different (first round exits - WCF).

 

No contenders are willing to sign AI because he said he was not gonna come off the bench or accept a reduced role. Because situations changed (no teams are genuinely interested in signing him), he changed and now said he's going to accept a bench role in Memphis. But before, no contenders were willing to risk their systems to be jeopardized by his presence on their teams.

2004-05 season was filled with injuries. The Lakers were 24-19 before Kobe and Odom were injured, and Tomjanovich left, and Hamblen (who sucked) replaced him.

 

So Kobe and Iverson were similar? Kobe was a major part of a dynasty as a poor leader? Since Shaq was also a poor leader, according to Phil Jackson...who led the dynasty on the court? Amazing. :o

 

And the difference between the first-round exit and the WCF exit? The team the played. Are you telling me that the Spurs' WCF exit in 2008 being different from their 2009 first-round exit is because of poor leadership?

 

And Iverson didn't accept a bench role. He'll be starting.

[Multi-Billionaire]

^You generalize, the Spurs were hit by injuries. Manu didn't even play.

 

Great it even further validated I said about him. He'll be starting, that means that's what matters to him. I was going hesitant with my opinion about him when he said he's signing with the Grizzlies knowing they insist him come off the bench.

 

AI no wonder you're a cancer and a selfish ballhog. What's the difference between Memphis and contenders? Starting role and amount of shots, oh geee...

[Real Deal]

^You generalize, the Spurs were hit by injuries. Manu didn't even play.

 

Great it even further validated I said about him. He'll be starting, that means that's what matters to him. I was going hesitant with my opinion about him when he said he's signing with the Grizzlies knowing they insist him come off the bench.

 

AI no wonder you're a cancer and a selfish ballhog. What's the difference between Memphis and contenders? Starting role and amount of shots, oh geee...

Manu shot like 41% or so for them, and hurt them big time, in 2008. He was a pretty bad player in the playoffs, taking shots away from everyone else and limping up and down the court.

 

The Spurs ran into a better Dallas team. That's what happened. Just as the Nuggets avoided the Lakers in 2009 during that first round.

[Multi-Billionaire]

So I see according to you, Manu hurts them more than helps. You're talking about 41 FG%, which is the career FG% of AI.

[Real Deal]

So I see according to you, Manu hurts them more than helps. You're talking about 41 FG%, which is the career FG% of AI.

Iverson also drops 30 a game and throws assists, and played at least some attempt at defense, making steals. Manu was almost completely useless on the floor if he wasn't scoring the ball.

[Multi-Billionaire]

You had your assumption of me, can I go with my assumption of you? I think you're doing this because AI is your brother's favorite player and you've grown to like AI. In fact you have liked him and his PPG too much to admit his serious detrimental values such as porous defense, too much dribbling, too many shot attempts taken at completely random times without regard to shot clock or teammates positioning, too many contested shot attempts, inconsistency that comes with these.

 

We're not discussing Manu and you can pull out a "which player you prefer on your team: Manu or AI, which player plays better defense: Manu or AI, does Manu help or hurt the Spurs more" poll anytime.

 

Tell me this is a joke, or I have to say you're really blind.

[Real Deal]

You had your assumption of me, can I go with my assumption of you? I think you're doing this because AI is your brother's favorite player and you've grown to like AI. In fact you have liked him and his PPG too much to admit his serious detrimental values such as porous defense, too much dribbling, too many shot attempts taken at completely random times without regard to shot clock or teammates positioning, too many contested shot attempts, inconsistency that comes with these.

 

We're not discussing Manu and you can pull out a "which player you prefer on your team: Manu or AI, which player plays better defense: Manu or AI, does Manu help or hurt the Spurs more" poll anytime.

 

Tell me this is a joke, or I have to say you're really blind.

Why would I support my brother's favorite player when he doesn't even like the NBA anymore, and when we grew up together with him in my ear about how much better Iverson was than Bryant? That's already out of the discussion.

 

I've said numerous times that Iverson doesn't play defense (in the past). I put him in the same category as Larry Hughes, who could steal the ball but gambled too much.

 

I never compared Manu and Iverson. Don't go off-track. I simply stated that the Spurs went from WCF to first-round exits because of the team they played.

 

Answer this: would the Nuggets pass the first round in 2009 if they had played the Lakers? Easy answer.

 

On the other hand, what about in 2008? If Denver had avoided the Lakers, what were the chances they would've beaten the Jazz, or that Hornets team? Rockets? Don't forget to add Nene to the mix, and Chris Andersen...then answer the question.

 

In fact, even better...how many more wins would the 2008 Nuggets have if it were Melo, Iverson, Nene, Andersen, Smith, K-Mart and Kleiza? Four? More? Is Nene that irrelevant to this team?

 

And yeah, I am blind.

[Multi-Billionaire]

Why would I support my brother's favorite player when he doesn't even like the NBA anymore, and when we grew up together with him in my ear about how much better Iverson was than Bryant? That's already out of the discussion.

 

I've said numerous times that Iverson doesn't play defense (in the past). I put him in the same category as Larry Hughes, who could steal the ball but gambled too much.

 

I never compared Manu and Iverson. Don't go off-track.

 

 

Iverson also drops 30 a game and throws assists, and played at least some attempt at defense, making steals. Manu was almost completely useless on the floor if he wasn't scoring the ball.

 

What's this? Have you gone not only blind but senile too?

 

 

 

I simply stated that the Spurs went from WCF to first-round exits because of the team they played.

 

 

Answer this: would the Nuggets pass the first round in 2009 if they had played the Lakers? Easy answer.

 

On the other hand, what about in 2008? If Denver had avoided the Lakers, what were the chances they would've beaten the Jazz, or that Hornets team? Rockets? Don't forget to add Nene to the mix, and Chris Andersen...then answer the question.

 

In fact, even better...how many more wins would the 2008 Nuggets have if it were Melo, Iverson, Nene, Andersen, Smith, K-Mart and Kleiza? Four? More? Is Nene that irrelevant to this team?

 

And yeah, I am blind.

 

Just like AI who's being possessed by a 12 yr old, are you being possessed by 7 year old? Because this is totally stupid, childlike logic.

 

Sure, the Magic were also lucky they were in the East, hey they avoided a first round match with the Lakers...

 

We're also lucky to not be 0-82 in regular season because we only met the Lakers 4 times, instead of 82 games.

 

 

WTF is this?

[moeroadkill]

this has gone wayyyy over my head i cant keep up

[Real Deal]

What's this? Have you gone not only blind but senile too?

I'm pretty sure I didn't compare the two's games in anything you just posted. I told you how their respective teams did with and without them.

 

And I STILL didn't say Iverson played good defense. I said that he at least made an attempt to play it, unlike an injured Manu, which helped cripple his team even more.

 

If anything, THAT would have been the furthest I had gone to compare them, yet it had nothing to do with comparing the two players. Nice sidestep, though.

 

Just like AI who's being possessed by a 12 yr old, are you being possessed by 7 year old? Because this is totally stupid, childlike logic.

 

Sure, the Magic were also lucky they were in the East, hey they avoided a first round match with the Lakers...

 

We're also lucky to not be 0-82 in regular season because we only met the Lakers 4 times, instead of 82 games.

 

WTF is this?

Why not just answer it? The point is, the Nuggets advanced further into the playoffs because they avoided the Lakers in 2009 (until the WCF).

 

If they had done that the previous year, they probably had a chance of getting there, but the Spurs would have been in the way, more than likely.

 

Now if there's anything I need to spell out for you even clearer, you let me know. And so we aren't lost...

 

Your argument is that the Nuggets are four games better, and a WCF team, because of Billups.

 

My argument is that the Nuggets are four games better, and a WCF team, because of Nene, Birdman, the absence of Camby, and the teams you played in the first and second round of the playoffs.

 

Is that all that I need to cover for you?

[Multi-Billionaire]

I'm pretty sure I didn't compare the two's games in anything you just posted. I told you how their respective teams did with and without them.

 

And I STILL didn't say Iverson played good defense. I said that he at least made an attempt to play it, unlike an injured Manu, which helped cripple his team even more.

 

If anything, THAT would have been the furthest I had gone to compare them, yet it had nothing to do with comparing the two players. Nice sidestep, though.

 

Oh yes, sure you compare a healthy and unhealthy player.

 

 

Why not just answer it? The point is, the Nuggets advanced further into the playoffs because they avoided the Lakers in 2009 (until the WCF).

 

If they had done that the previous year, they probably had a chance of getting there, but the Spurs would have been in the way, more than likely.

 

Now if there's anything I need to spell out for you even clearer, you let me know. And so we aren't lost...

 

Your argument is that the Nuggets are four games better, and a WCF team, because of Billups.

 

My argument is that the Nuggets are four games better, and a WCF team, because of Nene, Birdman, the absence of Camby, and the teams you played in the first and second round of the playoffs.

 

Is that all that I need to cover for you?

 

Very funny. I can say the same about how you did not answer me, the Magic who went as far as the Finals, and yet if they were in the West and played the Lakers in the first round, they'd be a quick exit too.

 

How about the Lakers in 2008 playoffs? They did not face the Boston Celtics in the first round? All they got were a pathetic Nuggets team, Spurs and Jazz to the Finals. That's a fluke trip to the Finals. They got it easy.

 

How about past runner ups and the other 13 losers aside of the real opponents in the first round? They were lucky they did not face the eventual champs in the first round. Wow this is as retarded as it gets.

 

 

What are the 82 games played for? Warm up? Or is it to fight for seedings? The same can be said for 1st seed teams... why are they fighting for 1st seeds? Homecourt advantage and...? To match up with lower seeds, and avoid the higher seeds. I don't think 1st seed teams are eager to face 2nd, 3rd, or 4th seeds in the first round?

 

 

This is the most messed up logic I've ever seen coming from you.

 

I don't bother answering, that doesn't deserve a reply.

Edited September 10, 2009 by Snake

[Real Deal]

Don't go off and act like Bosnian. I have decided to sit in this topic and give you a debate, and you want to go that route?

 

Iverson (DEN) in 2008: 26.4 PPG (45.8% FG), 7.1 APG, 2.0 SPG, 3.0 TO/G, 3.0 RPG

Billups (DEN) in 2009: 17.9 PPG (42.0% FG), 6.4 APG, 1.2 SPG, 2.2 TO/G, 3.0 RPG

 

Statistically, you are wrong. Iverson contributed more to Denver. He shot better, scored more, threw more assists (despite missing Nene), had more steals, just as many rebounds as a larger Billups.

 

So here's what you're saying: Allen Iverson's leadership is worse than Billups' leadership. And that's what caused the four extra wins?

 

I think it has more to do with adding Nene's 14.6/7.8 on 60% FG, and Chris Andersen's 2.5 blocks and six rebounds in just 21 minutes of play.

 

I know you're wrong, because Billups didn't produce enough to help this team as much as you're advertising.

 

In fact...

 

Carmelo Anthony, 2008: 25.7 PPG, 49% FG, 7.4 RPG, 3.4 APG

Carmelo Anthony, 2009: 22.8 PPG, 44% FG, 6.8 RPG, 3.4 APG

 

Melo had a worse season with Billups.

 

Kenyon Martin shot a better percentage from the field with Iverson (54% versus 49%).

 

JR Smith shot a better percentage from the field with Iverson (46% to 45%).

 

Linas Kleiza shot a better percentage from the field with Iverson (47% to 45%).

 

Now are you ready to admit that Nene's offensive production, and Chris Andersen's defensive production, helped this team more than anything else? Or are you going to stay in denial because of your hate for Allen Iverson?

[Multi-Billionaire]

Very good Real, statistically you're right. Although I'd like to add Billups averaged 1.1 TPG less and shot significantly better from downtown (41% to 34.5%). Turnovers committed by backcourt players usually result in easy break for opponents. And Billups' three point shooting is crucial as he made the decision to attack when the offense is stagnant.

 

 

However this is the point, what your statistics show is offense. Does it cover defense? No.

 

 

Well of course, aside of Birdman's BPG and AI's SPG. I'd like to add Birdman has eerily similar defense to Marcus Camby, in that he is an awesome weak side shot blocker, but tends to give up good defensive positioning for shot blocking. That's gamble defense as much as AI would like to intercept passes.

 

But real defense is rarely shown in statistics. That's why Bruce Bowen gets recognition for his defense although his SPG and BPG are average. That's why people think Kendrick Perkins is a better post defender than Marcus Camby although the latter's BPG dwarfs the former's.

 

 

---

 

 

With AI, we played at breakneck pace, we were the no 1 team in terms of possessions per game. There are shots to go around, and players averaged more points and score better.

 

With Billups we played more half court and slow the ball down. I'll explain with the Phoenix Suns below...

 

 

 

Phoenix Suns are a good example. They were outrunning and outscoring everyone in D'Antoni era. They had some success, unlike us, partly because their PG was making sure his teammates get open looks and they're a very good three point shooting team.

 

But like us, they never won the championship, they had all the best individual statistics, and kept outrunning every team but the Spurs always stopped them.

 

So they decided if they were to win the championship, they must learn to play defense, and they brought in Terry Porter. As they learned to slow it down and play defense, their defense improved, but like the transition from AI-to-Billups era in Denver, the transition to defense also saw their offensive production dip. Being an offensive oriented player, their leader, Steve Nash got all frustrated, and basically called for Terry Porter's firing. Porter got fired, they brought in the Alvin Gentry to replace him and he made them run again, again the offense worked and everyone got their points again, but that didn't get them anywhere.

 

 

 

... Unlike the Phoenix Suns however, we were committed to defense and never quit. The transition was a lot smoother for us than it was for the Suns as our floor general Billups is defensive minded, while the Suns' Nash is offensive minded.

 

After all championship is won with defense. Although we didn't get the championship, we were closer to it during Billups era than we ever were in AI era. Again, your stats reveal nothing but offense, unfortunately, defense is what it takes to win in this L. Under Billups' leadership, we learned to be disciplined and committed defensively. And this is not shown in statistics.

Edited September 10, 2009 by Snake

[Real Deal]

Again, Denver didn't improve that much, defensively, and there are in fact stats that show it.

 

Defensive rank

 

2008: 10th

2009: 8th

 

Points allowed per 100 possessions

 

2008: 106.3

2009: 106.8 (really?)

 

3PT% allowed

 

2008: 36.3%

2009: 36.6%

 

FG% allowed

 

2008: 45.7%

2009: 44.0%

 

Now here's where the bigs factor in again...

 

Rebounds allowed

 

2008: 3722

2009: 3382

 

Massive improvement in keeping teams off the glass. That has nothing to do with Billups and his Iverson-matching three boards a game, but the fact that you got Nene back, along with Chris Andersen.

 

I'm not sure what else you want to discuss. It's all right there.

[Multi-Billionaire]

From 10th to 8th we improved defensively. FG% allowed improvement from 45.7% to 44% is big, I'm sure that lifted us more than just a couple of ranks higher.

 

AI propensity and tendency to shoot before the bigs can get their position under the basket for any chance of offensive rebounding, and his porous defense that forces our bigs to leave their positions to maintain defensive rebounding, over a season long takes it toll on our bigs to consistently focus on rebounding.

[Real Deal]

From 10th to 8th we improved defensively. FG% allowed improvement from 45.7% to 44% is big, I'm sure that lifted us more than just a couple of ranks higher.

 

AI propensity and tendency to shoot before the bigs can get their position under the basket for any chance of offensive rebounding, and his porous defense that forces our bigs to leave their positions to maintain defensive rebounding, over a season long takes it toll on our bigs to consistently focus on rebounding.

10th to 8th isn't that big of a jump at all, especially when the points per 100 possessions is nearly the same (not improved, actually). From 10th to 8th actually means other teams improved, while Denver stayed nearly the same.

 

Whatever you said about rebounding makes no sense at all, especially your comment about their struggles with offensive rebounding and Iverson's quick shot, when the Nuggets pulled down more offensive rebounds in 2008 than they did in 2009.

 

Anything else?

[Multi-Billionaire]

It does not not make sense, like you point out the rebounding allowed significantly improved from 2008 to 2009. So we did improvement in rebounding offensively and defensively.

 

You want to twist facts with stats and your manipulative words, but go make a poll and ask the general opinion about AI and Billups. Which player likely would lead their team to play better defense.

 

In fact, ask Laker fans on TLN now which player they'd rather have now, AI or Billups. Show them the stats that you showed me that show AI is better than Billups, I don't think you'd convince them to take AI over Billups.

 

 

- Here on RealGM with gazillions of members opinions... large sample, the larger, the better.

 

http://www.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=943111

 

 

- If you think RealGM members have low IQs, here on OTR.

 

http://www.otrbasketball.com/forums/topic/5351-allen-iverson-or-chauncey-billups/

 

 

 

You can copy and paste this on any basketball site you wish, I am eager to see the result.

[Real Deal]

People hate Iverson, just as they do Kobe Bryant. I don't know what else you'd expect asking people those questions.

 

Go ask them who's better out of Kobe and Hakeem, or Malone, or Jerry West, or Jordan, or Magic, or Bird, LeBron, Wade, and you'll see a lot of guys hating Kobe just for the sake of hating him.

 

It's what you're doing with Iverson, and it's getting sickening.

[Multi-Billionaire]

People are not as stupid as you make them to be. They choose and vote based on their own choice and freewill not their feelings.

 

I have faith they are going to answer with their own choice and thinking, not some hate, unless they're 12 year olds.

 

---

 

We've done enough talking between us, and we're going in circles, it's time to let the people vote.

 

It's what I'm doing with AI that's sickening? It's you who are doing with the endless stats that is. Basketball is as quantifiable as it is abstract.