Iverson - " I'll Retire before i do this again.."....... on his role on Piston.

[jefffort5]

Originally Posted by TraSoul82

Originally Posted by jefffort5

Originally Posted by TraSoul82

Originally Posted by jefffort5

Originally Posted by TraSoul82

Originally Posted by codex57

This isn't a shock to me as I've always thought Iverson as selfish and pretty one dimensional. However, I still have way more respect for him than Marbury. He recognizes he's limited. He needs the ball and knows that one day, he's not gonna be able to keep up with young bucks. At that point, he's gonna retire. He's mad that Detroit thinks he can't focus, but at least he's restraining his comments and is willing to retire. He could have pulled a Marbury and made it more about money than respect. Jordan wasn't exactly a pleasing personality. However, Jordan and Iverson made it to the Finals their way. They were clearly people so good, that they could make it deep in the playoffs through both their talents and will. Plus, Iverson was still putting up monster numbers up until very recently. Marbury was never their level even though he thought he was. He's more like Derrick Coleman than an all time great. Very good, but not great. Not worth the emotional baggage. That's besides the pure money grubbing. I guess Sprewell is the best contemporary for Marbury. Even Artest, despite his temper, can be seen as "classier" than Marbury.

Not true, sir. Jordan made it to the finals once he committed to a system and realized that he needed to get his teammates involved. Jordan started his career as a chucker but then rounded out his game to reach the level he did.

no wrong...jordan made it to the finals once he got a supporting cast..jordan started as a shooter and ended as a shooter..in the middle somewhere he had players he could trust with the ball..and much better leadership than allen iverson

you kno the common sense question that nobody wants to answer is (drumroll please) what nba superstar would want to come off the bench and take the roll he's taking (dont worry I will wait again)

4 Questions:

Do you realize that there is more to basketball than just offense?

Do you realize that Michael Jordan was member of the All-Defensive 1st team 9 times in his career?

Do you also realize that Iverson has never made an All-Defensive squad (and I don't mean the creation of his fan base)?

Do you realize that (drumroll please) Iverson is no longer a superstar?

where.where..is those 4 questions u just asked knocked my theory that jordan didnt hit the finals until he got a good supporting cast...hmmmm not one of em

There are plenty of reasons of why Jordan finally made it to the finals and was successful. Did you know that the flagrant foul was introduced due to the way the Pistons were literally beating him up (as well as other Bulls) in the Eastern Conference Finals of 1988? I'm sure that the rule changes helped Jordan get over the hump as well. Jordan likely would have already had trips to the finals if those rules were already in place. You actually think Jordan suddenly got a team and wallah, he's suddenly got 3 titles in a row? It wasn't an extra commitment to defense or becoming the closest thing to a player/coach the game has seen since Bill Russell? It had nothing to do with the formation of what would later be referred to as "The Breakfast Club"?

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler [+]

Spoiler

Yes, we're talking about "practice."

This is just more proof that the average AI supporter is just a casual fan of basketball and doesn't know the history of the game. I'll also let you in on something: I choose my specific questions carefully and when you dodge them, just as others have throughout this post, you're basically proving my point for me. AI had the potential to be a champion, but he never had the commitment of a champion. If you don't respect your craft, ultimately your craft will not respect you. This is how an MVP can become a journeyman. You are witnessing it live and in color.

i can sit here an answer your question..i can sit here and argue.or just realize that you have your side and you will never understand mine..eventhough i understand yours

as a matter of fact..let me answer your questions
1. yes its playing the other side of the ball..and its called defense..which can be done collectively as a team..no ai is not a good defender...not defendingthat
2. Yes i kno the stats on mike
3. yes i kno the stats on mike an iverson
4. Iverson was still a superstar until he came to the pistons

no let me address the rest of yo bs....i already said ai was wrong on the practice said..and i also said two posts ago that Mike was a much better team leaderthan ai was or will ever be..but u aint peep that did you..i realize ai's weaknesses..but yall knocking him like he sum scrub

and u can cut out all that casual basketball fan +#+$#%!#....whoa check u out..ur a die hard fan of basketball...i dont give a @%+$ if ya grandfather was jamesnaismith I KNO BASKETBALL I GIVE A @%+$ WHAT U SAY

Michael Jordan was destined to be great...once he got the right pieces to the puzzle along with his leadership..the championships came..and you can sit hereand talk about "the breakfast club" blah blah blah..but its plenty of other superstars and legends who didnt work as hard as mike did..so what are uto say about that?

the pistons made the dumb move by trading a point guard for another shooting guard when they already had rip hamilton
AI was never in a position to be a champion..since he's been in the league..u give me a team put together well enough to beat any other team that was inthe league at that time? dont worry ill wait

 

[jefffort5]

Originally Posted by Enlightened Thought

^they all seemed to be averaging pretty good numbers to me. even webber at an old age. while they were not the best supporting cast, they were still good players. aside from robinson and webber (i suppose), iverson couldn't co-exist with any of his teammates. we can take it a step further and talk about his cast in denver. defend him not being successful in denver with carmelo, camby, nene, smith and whoever else was on that squad last year. you can't. denver was a better team with andre miller and now, an even better team with billups. he's had opportunities to succeed, in Philly and in Denver but it just never panned out and i think it's a direct result of the style of offense he demands from the team: an offense that is solely to revolve around the ball in his hands.

maybe the reason he never had a second option was because he refused a second option to exist as long as he's on the court. to iverson, he was both first and second options.

you kno the common sense question that nobody wants to answer is (drumroll please) what nba superstar would want to come off the bench and take the roll he's taking (dont worry I will wait again)

that shouldn't change the fact that iverson should know when he should change his style of play in order to fit the team's needs. swallow your pride a little bit. nobody wants to become a role player after being a superstar in the league, but sacrifices should be made in order to win. if he wants to win under his own terms, then that's cool. if he's able to accomplish that, more power to him. but the fact of the matter is, for the past 10+ seasons, it hasn't been working out (he's gotten close, but it never happened).

u give me an example where a superstar has sacrificed to get a ring..and not sold out? and ivo wasnt that close to a ring..even when they made thefinals they had no chance against a power house like LA

 

[jefffort5]

Originally Posted by eeibaby

Originally Posted by Enlightened Thought

where.where..is those 4 questions u just asked knocked my theory that jordan didnt hit the finals until he got a good supporting cast...hmmmm not one of em

i hope this argument of 'he never had good players around' gets dropped quick. he's always had a number two option (stackhouse, hughes, robinson, webber, iggy) and big men (deke, webber, coleman, hill). But those players got ran out of town.

Are you serious?

Stackhouse = Wasn't Iversons fault, he didn't demand nor did he asked for him to be traded
Hughes = Reason he got traded was because he didn't like to play the SF position
Robinson = Dude played like what less than 10 games as a Sixers? He was basically done when he got to Philly
Webber = Dude was in the downfall of his career, bad knee and everything
Iggy = Was the most recent and they had success together

Deke, Coleman, Hill, = Deke is probably the best out of the 3 but other than that TYRONE HILL, DERRICK COLEMAN?!?

You telling me that Larry Hughes, Tyrone Hill, Old age Webber, Glenn Robinson, Derrick Coleman are good 2nd options?

Iverson never had the Shaq to Kobe, Duncan to Parker, Pippen to Jordan, he never had an All Star offensive calibur 2nd option.

Please don't include Webber because when he came in 04 he wasn't an All Star anymore.

co-sign everything u just said..u cant be serious with the players u named..u said Tyrone hill? leave the post my dude..this dude said tyronehill...tyrone hill.and then derrick coleman..oh my goodness..smmfh

 

[i dont pass]

Originally Posted by jefffort5

Originally Posted by eeibaby

Originally Posted by Enlightened Thought

where.where..is those 4 questions u just asked knocked my theory that jordan didnt hit the finals until he got a good supporting cast...hmmmm not one of em

i hope this argument of 'he never had good players around' gets dropped quick. he's always had a number two option (stackhouse, hughes, robinson, webber, iggy) and big men (deke, webber, coleman, hill). But those players got ran out of town.

Are you serious?

Stackhouse = Wasn't Iversons fault, he didn't demand nor did he asked for him to be traded
Hughes = Reason he got traded was because he didn't like to play the SF position
Robinson = Dude played like what less than 10 games as a Sixers? He was basically done when he got to Philly
Webber = Dude was in the downfall of his career, bad knee and everything
Iggy = Was the most recent and they had success together

Deke, Coleman, Hill, = Deke is probably the best out of the 3 but other than that TYRONE HILL, DERRICK COLEMAN?!?

You telling me that Larry Hughes, Tyrone Hill, Old age Webber, Glenn Robinson, Derrick Coleman are good 2nd options?

Iverson never had the Shaq to Kobe, Duncan to Parker, Pippen to Jordan, he never had an All Star offensive calibur 2nd option.

Please don't include Webber because when he came in 04 he wasn't an All Star anymore.

co-sign everything u just said..u cant be serious with the players u named..u said Tyrone hill? leave the post my dude..this dude said tyrone hill...tyrone hill.and then derrick coleman..oh my goodness..smmfh

Son's opinion is now null and VOID

 

[enlightened thought]

i'm trying to figure out what was wrong with hill or coleman. were they not good role players? that veteran leadership that most teams need/want? hillwas a pretty good rebounder and defender for a 4, same with coleman (who was still averaging about 15 ppg at the time). ididn't say hill was a number two option, probably where you guys have failed to understand the point. i said hewas a serviceable big man who did the dirty work for the team (reading is fundamental guys). every team needs a player to do the dirty work. the pointis, iverson had those players and he never capitalized.

EDIT: i've bolded that sentence so maybe you guys will go back, and reread what i actually typed (differentiating number two options from big men)

defend him not being successful in denver with carmelo, camby, nene, smith and whoever else was on that squad last year. you can't. denver was a better team with andre miller and now, an even better team with billups. he's had opportunities to succeed, in Philly and in Denver but it just never panned out and i think it's a direct result of the style of offense he demands from the team: an offense that is solely to revolve around the ball in his hands.

maybe the reason he never had a second option was because he refused a second option to exist as long as he's on the court. to iverson, he was both first and second options.

true or false?

u give me an example where a superstar has sacrificed to get a ring..and not sold out? and ivo wasnt that close to a ring..even when they made the finals they had no chance against a power house like LA
there are many players who've tried and failed as there are many players who've tried and succeeded. Karl Malone and Gary Payton wantedto win a chip so they went to the lakers and failed. Then GP went on to become the backup for the Heat and won. I don't think the players care as muchabout "selling out" as much as their fans do because i think the pros care more about winning that championship. Maybe iverson doesn't want to"sell out," and maybe from your perspective, that's honorable or noble. But when it comes to sports, especially a team sport like basketball, ithink you gotta be willing to let go of your ego a little bit, play accordingly to help the team win.

 

[enlightened thought]

Please don't include Webber because when he came in 04 he wasn't an All Star anymore.
also wanna add that webber in philly averaged 20 and 10 in 75 games in 05-06. maybe not an allstar, but with those numbers, it's clear hestill made an impact on the court.

 

[trasoul82]

Originally Posted by jefffort5

Originally Posted by TraSoul82

Originally Posted by jefffort5

Originally Posted by TraSoul82

Originally Posted by jefffort5

Originally Posted by TraSoul82

Originally Posted by codex57

This isn't a shock to me as I've always thought Iverson as selfish and pretty one dimensional. However, I still have way more respect for him than Marbury. He recognizes he's limited. He needs the ball and knows that one day, he's not gonna be able to keep up with young bucks. At that point, he's gonna retire. He's mad that Detroit thinks he can't focus, but at least he's restraining his comments and is willing to retire. He could have pulled a Marbury and made it more about money than respect. Jordan wasn't exactly a pleasing personality. However, Jordan and Iverson made it to the Finals their way. They were clearly people so good, that they could make it deep in the playoffs through both their talents and will. Plus, Iverson was still putting up monster numbers up until very recently. Marbury was never their level even though he thought he was. He's more like Derrick Coleman than an all time great. Very good, but not great. Not worth the emotional baggage. That's besides the pure money grubbing. I guess Sprewell is the best contemporary for Marbury. Even Artest, despite his temper, can be seen as "classier" than Marbury.

Not true, sir. Jordan made it to the finals once he committed to a system and realized that he needed to get his teammates involved. Jordan started his career as a chucker but then rounded out his game to reach the level he did.

no wrong...jordan made it to the finals once he got a supporting cast*..jordan started as a shooter and ended as a shooter..in the middle somewhere he had players he could trust with the ball..and much better leadership than allen iverson

you kno the common sense question that nobody wants to answer is (drumroll please) what nba superstar would want to come off the bench and take the roll he's taking (dont worry I will wait again)

4 Questions:

Do you realize that there is more to basketball than just offense?

Do you realize that Michael Jordan was member of the All-Defensive 1st team 9 times in his career?

Do you also realize that Iverson has never made an All-Defensive squad (and I don't mean the creation of his fan base)?

Do you realize that (drumroll please) Iverson is no longer a superstar?

where.where..is those 4 questions u just asked knocked my theory that jordan didnt hit the finals until he got a good supporting cast...hmmmm not one of em

There are plenty of reasons of why Jordan finally made it to the finals and was successful. Did you know that the flagrant foul was introduced due to the way the Pistons were literally beating him up (as well as other Bulls) in the Eastern Conference Finals of 1988? I'm sure that the rule changes helped Jordan get over the hump as well. Jordan likely would have already had trips to the finals if those rules were already in place. You actually think Jordan suddenly got a team and wallah, he's suddenly got 3 titles in a row? It wasn't an extra commitment to defense or becoming the closest thing to a player/coach the game has seen since Bill Russell? It had nothing to do with the formation of what would later be referred to as "The Breakfast Club"?

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler [+]

Spoiler

Yes, we're talking about "practice."

This is just more proof that the average AI supporter is just a casual fan of basketball and doesn't know the history of the game. I'll also let you in on something: I choose my specific questions carefully and when you dodge them, just as others have throughout this post, you're basically proving my point for me. AI had the potential to be a champion, but he never had the commitment of a champion. If you don't respect your craft, ultimately your craft will not respect you. This is how an MVP can become a journeyman. You are witnessing it live and in color.

i can sit here an answer your question..i can sit here and argue.or just realize that you have your side and you will never understand mine..even though i understand yours

as a matter of fact..let me answer your questions
1. yes its playing the other side of the ball..and its called defense..which can be done collectively as a team..no ai is not a good defender...not defending that
2. Yes i kno the stats on mike
3. yes i kno the stats on mike an iverson
(1) 4. Iverson was still a superstar until he came to the pistons

(2) no let me address the rest of yo bs....i already said ai was wrong on the practice said..and i also said two posts ago that Mike was a much better team leader than ai was or will ever be..but u aint peep that did you..i realize ai's weaknesses..but yall knocking him like he sum scrub

(3) and u can cut out all that casual basketball fan +#+$#%!#....whoa check u out..ur a die hard fan of basketball...i dont give a @%+$ if ya grandfather was james naismith I KNO BASKETBALL I GIVE A @%+$ WHAT U SAY

(4) Michael Jordan was destined to be great...once he got the right pieces to the puzzle along with his leadership..the championships came..and you can sit here and talk about "the breakfast club" blah blah blah..but its plenty of other superstars and legends who didnt work as hard as mike did..so what are u to say about that?

(5) the pistons made the dumb move by trading a point guard for another shooting guard when they already had rip hamilton
AI was never in a position to be a champion..since he's been in the league..u give me a team put together well enough to beat any other team that was in the league at that time? dont worry ill wait

(1) I guess we have differing opinions on what a "Superstar" is. To me, if you give thetitle "superstar" to more than 5 or more people in the league at any give time, then you start to water down the value of said title. If there are 20"All-Stars" out of about 400 players. I think the term Superstar should be reserved for the top 5 max. And AI hasn't been top 5 for quite sometime. And my top 5 will never include a person who is only committed to one side of the ball. You don't have to agree, I'm just letting you know whereI'm coming from on that point.

(2) My point was not to say you gave AI unjust credit for committing to practice. MJ being better than AI as aplayer (both offensive and defensive) and a leader is a given, whether you said it or not. My point is, you tried to base MJ's finals run solely on'having the right pieces' (* I highlighted the quote I'm refering to). I'm letting you know that there was plenty of hardwork and commitment involved. There are no plug and play title contenders.

(3) Yes, I follow NBA basketball. In fact, I follow it enough to understand AI's path from superstar tovagabond. I also follow it enough to know that the myriad of excuses for AI don't hold water. (I'm not talking solely to you with the following statement, nor am I trying to turn this into an A vs Btype of thing) Earlier, Kobe was called out and compared to AI for the break up of the Lakers because his "me-first" attitude. But no onebrought up the fact that Kobe recommited himself, mended his relationship with his coach, bought into the coaches system, is well-noted as a great team leaderand teammate these days, and has his team back on top of his conference over the course of 3-4 years. Kobe's story is now about redemption ('MVP'chants in Denver), AI's story is still about selfishness. Another example of someone progressively getting better with his team year-after-year has beenLeBron.

(4) I really don't understand how commitment to the game is brushed to the side in order to support Iverson.That's what I see happening. But to answer your question, what I have to say is that Jordan is considered by many to be the greatest of all-time. He iscredited with being The Standard of commitment to both sides of the ball, both on and off the court, both during the season and the off-season. I'll alsosay that there aren't many with more rings than Mike, and only one "superstar/legend" that I can think of (Russell). There are a few other"star" names, but they don't resonate in this modern era, mostly because they played with Bill Russel anyway. The point, as it relates toIverson, is that Jordan's legacy will resonate loudly thoughout the basketball realm for decades and decades, while Iverson's career will fade into thebackground much more quickly.

(5) And as for your last point... I'm not gonna lie to you. I'm honestly not 100% sure what you are askingme. But I think you are saying "What team has AI been a part of that was actually the best team in the league at any point?" If that's thequestion, then I will say that none of them have. But that's not the end of it. I believe AI is a big reason for that. Those "pieces" that nevercame to Iverson likely tried to avoid him like the plague once it became clear that he had no intention of being a team player. Obviously, that's justspeculation, but it's my best guess based on what I've seen. I'm really not a big fan of this puzzle analogy, but I'll humor you:
Let's say most NBA players are the typical puzzle piece: not perfectly balanced, but shaped in a way that they can latch on to another piece and form abond. Even if the puzzle isn't perfectly put together (no team is perfect), they can fit together well enough that the gaps cannot be fully breached orexploited by the opposing puzzle. AI is like a large, perfectly circular disc, that wants to be in the middle of his puzzle. He provides nothing for the otherpieces to really latch on to, but he always wants to be the centerpiece. Sure, you can still build around him with typical puzzle pieces, but the bond in themiddle of the puzzle is suspect at best. Hopefully you can understand my point in that. In a way, you and I kind ofagree. It's just that you seem to believe that MJ was predisposed to winning ("destined to be great": your words), and I'm saying that AI isactually predisposed to losing in a industry that involves teamwork and full commitment to one's craft in order to be considered on of the true greats.

Lastly, I'll say that I can do this until the end of time, in a classy manner, for as long as anyone wants to discuss it. I love discussions like this, ifyou can't tell. What I want to be understood is that I am not being this persistant to offend AI. I am being this persistant in defense of NBA basketball.I appreciate credit being given when credit is due. What I don't like is people not getting the credit they deserve, or in this case, people getting waymore credit than is due. I do use negative hyperbole when referencing AI, but those are mostly "jabs" thrown at his fans who are interested in himmostly as a pop icon, yet pretend to really follow basketball (not necessarily you, jeffort5).

Your ball.

 

[drob2345]

Originally Posted by Mamba MVP

Originally Posted by CP1708

This guy practically writes my posts for me.

AI showin his true colors. He ain't about winnin, he about AI and only AI.

Yep. Don't know how his staunch defenders can defend this. Other stars have sacrificed for the betterment of their teams, AI doesn't want to do that or even try. He needs to be on a team with only scrubs so he can play 40 min and jack up 30 shots like he did in Philly. I'm almost sure he said when he came to the Pistons that he would do "whatever is necessary" to help the team, guess he lied.

First off Allen Iverson wasn't used properly in Detroit but i'm not going to get into that. When he said that he was willing to do"whatever is necessary" to win, i honestly believe he meant it....but upon arriving and only playing around 18 mins a game its only natural for aplayer like him to get frustrated, and allen iverson has always kept it real with the media if nothing else he speaks his mind. I mean really, it was aninsult...They knew he was coming back from a back injury and it is very important in his case to stay warm...Instead thye give him no mins and pair him withwill bynum (who i think is a good player) but puts him at an instant disadvantage....much like when he had to play with Anthony Carter in Denver, they put himin the positions to fail. Yet in Denver they were a 50+ win team, without nene, cris andersen....not to mention players who have developed more since lastseason (like JR smith).

So no i dont think any less of allen iverson...He is STILL one of the best offensive talents in the league

 

[theyoungestgun]

y'all who laugh at derrick coleman being a 2nd option?? dude you dont know anything.. coleman was a monster and has been an all star, but also at the endof his career. just like webber.. he came from microfracture right?

i dont think what iverson is doing is wrong, but it isn't smart.. he should shut up and then end of the season leave, cause talking stupid like that isgonna drop his value