|
>his name and legacy are brought up, current players/coaches
>speak highly of him and how great and unique a player he was
>given his diminutive size....
>
>
This is entirely accurate. He was a great player for a guy his size. This we agree upon.
>>His MVP is among the more controversial ones in history, and
>>his Finals appearance and upset-win over the juggernaut
>Lakers
>>in Game 1 did well for his mythical status, but there's an
>>ugly set of data under the rug.
>
>LOL - What? How was his MVP controversial? He was a clear-cut
>favorite to win it before the season concluded. This is some
>revisionist history at its worst
Like Derrick Rose in 2011, the story was set up for the entire year, and most of the media bought into it. In retrospect, it looks bad. The MVP award is hardly a reliable measure for best player of the year, but this one missed the mark by a long shot. If we were to evaluate the top players of the league that year by impact, he wouldn't be top 10.
>>
>>If we really step back and look at Iverson as an impact
>>player, it doesn't look very good. He ran average offenses
>>that tended to perform just as well without him.
>
>The Sixers offense performed well w/o him?????
>
>
In his MVP year, he improved a 100.2 ORtg team to 104.1, good for 12th best in the league.
>He
>>spearheaded a defensive team that he had little effect on,
>>steals be damned.
>
>How are you coming up w/this? He gave as much effort on D as
>anybody else on the Sixers
>
>
If only his effort result in actual results. He improved the defense by a mere -0.2 pts per 100 in 2001. RAPM that year lists him at a net negative on the court defensively, which is no surprise given his offensive effort.
> He kept the offense afloat often, and played
>>like a warrior for a guy his size, so it wows you every time
>>he gets into the paint and actually scores. Just keep your
>>eyes off the box score, because his attempts could go north
>of
>>40 if you let him. And oftentimes, they did.
>
>Show me the number of times he shot the ball 40x or more?
He has done this 4 times in his career. He's shot over 30 FGA in 117 games. For measure, Lebron James has shot over 30 FGA in 32 games.
>>
>>The truth is that he was the face of every fringe,
>>Eastern-conference team in the 2000's that were defensive
>>teams with a singular, often inefficient isolation scorer
>>(see: Carter's raptors, Lebron's Cavs, etc.) It would often
>>result in improbable Finals appearances if they were lucky
>and
>>a certain embarrassing sweep thereafter. Teams have figured
>>out that this isn't successful and Iverson's game looks
>worse
>>and worse as time goes on. Those who adjusted (Lebron, for
>>instance) went on and flourished with a refined, balanced
>game
>>and those who did not (Marbury, Iverson) suffered.
>>
>>Carmelo seems to be making that adjustment, though we are
>>tentatively in the middle of it. I'm thinking this answer
>>inevitably becomes Carmelo Anthony.
>
>Exactly how is Carmelo making that adjustment when ppl/Phil
>are saying he has to change his game up instead of shooting
>30x a gm? Melo has been called far more than AI for being a
>"ball stopper."
>
That might have to do with the era we're in. We now laud efficiency over volume. Melo is hardly a pass-first player, but he's certainly finding his way better than Iverson did in his athletic decline. As I said before, the jury is still out on this one, but Melo's 2013 year is a strong indicator that better things are to come than the way AI's game transformed during his post-prime.
|
Printer-friendly copy 
Email this topic to a friend
Okay Sports
(31 votes)
(9 votes)
