Why in the world do you think Iverson would fit ?

[coachx]

I do not understand why some think we should trade for AI to fix the "PG" situation. The roster he is on in Philly is not bad on paper but there is no chemistry. He simply does not make his team mates any better

Did I miss something. Since when is he a PG ? Last I heard the 76ers were talking about moving Iguodala to PG. That should tell you something.

Johnsomn is finally maturing into an elite player who can be THE LEADER. AI would take the ball out of JJ's hands.

Marvin is prime to step up and be scorer. Well, with AI here Marvin will not have any touches and will not develop on offense. Ditto for Childress, Salim, and Smoove.

We are trying to build a team built on a hardwork mentallity while teaching solid fundementals to our younger players. What kind of role model is AI to the young nucleus. Remember: "Practice, we talkin' 'bout practice", repeated 10 X in a row, ya that is the same guy we are talking about.

Detriments of AI

1. AI would be nothing but a cancer on this team.

2. BAD CHEMISTRY MOVE.

3. Retard the growth of the younger players

4. While Marvin and Chils have good heads on them. AI would turn Smoove and Stroudamire into young thugs just like him.

5. Paying a player 18 million per year on the down slope of his career. No thanks.

Positives of AI:

1. More tickets sold, only a possibility. We are selling tickets just fine without AI. 4 seelouts already !

2. Um...... maybe better defense out of the PG position but I think AI is 32, Speedy is 28, Lue is 29.

NO to IVERSON !!!!

The arguement fun to watch means nothing to me. It is not fun for me to watch loseing.

Does anyone else think this way ?

Comments ?

[exodus]

Quote:

---

Did I miss something

---

No I think you pretty much covered everyting.

[mrhonline]

I'm not necessarily an advocate of trading for AI. I simply think it's a feasible deal the Hawks should consider.

Still, I'll bite.

Quote:

---

Did I miss something. Since when is he a PG ?

---

He's every bit the distributor that Speedy is.

Quote:

---

Johnsomn is finally maturing into an elite player who can be THE LEADER. AI would take the ball out of JJ's hands.

---

By all means, this is a legitimate argument. I have no doubt that JJ would succeed next to AI, but I wonder if AI/JJ would really be that much better than JJ/current young players.

Quote:

---

Marvin is prime to step up and be scorer. Well, with AI here Marvin will not have any touches and will not develop on offense. Ditto for Childress, Salim, and Smoove.

---

Again, Iverson can distribute. He's a good passer and his offensive ability demands that teams play off the other guys. Still, if you, as the Hawks' GM, have questions about his selfishness, you don't make an offer.

Quote:

---

We are trying to build a team built on a hardwork mentallity while teaching solid fundementals to our younger players.

---

Fair enough.

Quote:

---

What kind of role model is AI to the young nucleus.

---

Iverson has always played hard. The "practice" thing is old news.

[vdunkndunk]

I actually think trading for AI would be a bad idea overall, but not a terrible. Here's my devil's advocate case for AI (but only if the deal is Smoove, Speedy, Lorenzon, and Indiana's first):

1. REBUILDING THE FAN BASE & THE HAWKS' BRAND

-With AI, Philips Arena would be rockin' every night. Not only does the ownership get benefits in terms of ticket sales, but maybe more importantly, AI can help rebuild and reengerize an apathetic and downright hostile fan base here in Atlanta, so that we can continue to sell tickets after he's gone.

-The Hawks will play far more games on National TV and get more spotlight focus on SportsCenter, etc. Basically, AI would restore national legitimacy to the franchise, which can only help the Hawks in the rebuilding process. We would finally be an attractive destination again.

2. MAY NOT HURT LONG-TERM DEVELOPMENT AS MUCH AS WE THINK

-Beyond just rebuilding the Hawks brand and reengergizing the fan base, AI might also help teach the young guys what it means to be a real franchise in the spotlight. He plays hard on the court, he expects to win, and he's bigtime in terms of media exposure and all that stuff. So he could prepare the young guys for that type of attention.

-Either way, his contract only lasts 2 more years. So he could help lift us up a little bit, then move on his way, and we could continue with Joe, Marvin, Chill, Shelden, Zaza, and Solomon in their primes.

-Getting rid of Speedy's 4 year contract could be a long-term plus anyway if his problems are chronic, and Smoove may eventually demand a big payday when we also have Marvin, Chill, Shelden, and Solomon at his position who will need extensions soon.

3. MAY ACTUALLY WORK OUT ON THE COURT

-There are definitely concerns about how AI would impact JJ's game and the devlopment of the young guys. BUT, it's not impossible to imagine these guys developing some chemistry with AI. AI draws a crowd, and JJ and Marvin and the rest of our shooters would get plenty of wide open looks while they space the floor.

-AI is exactly like what we thought we had in Speedy...a small, quick, shoot-first PG who gets a lot of steals...except AI is basically better in every conceivable way, including his ability to stay healthy.

-AI and JJ could easily switch-off PG duties on offense...easily making for the best backcourt duo in the NBA.

[exodus]

Quote:

---

AI is exactly like what we thought we had in Speedy

---

Wrong. AI isn't now and never has been a tough man defender like Speedy is. Speedy's injury problems are definitely a concern but don't degrade him by comparing AI's defense to his.

If you don't believe me check any Philly board.

[mrhonline]

I agree that Speedy is the better defender. Iverson is an average defender; he often gambles for steals.

Still Iverson's O >>>>>> Claxton's D, while

Claxton's O

[capstone21]

...not to mention that he is about to begin the downside of his career. He is at the point where players hit a wall and suddenly can't put together the type of play he used to. It will happen in the next year or two.

[exodus]

Quote:

---

Still Iverson's O >>>>>> Claxton's D, while

---

Did i mention offense?

And don't even get me started on Iversons contract, shooting percentage, etc.

I would say BK is about as interested in trading for Iverson as he is signing me to a 10 day contract.

[vdunkndunk]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

AI is exactly like what we thought we had in Speedy

---

Wrong. AI isn't now and never has been a tough man defender like Speedy is. Speedy's injury problems are definitely a concern but don't degrade him by comparing AI's defense to his.

If you don't believe me check any Philly board.

---

Speedy does play better on-the-ball defense than AI...but only if he's healthy enough to actually get on the court. (Which isn't all that often so far.) And that's literally the ONLY area in which Speedy can hope to compare to AI.

Also, I think it's a little much to say that a comparison between AI and Speedy is "degrading" to Speedy. When you're talking about what guards are in the same overall class as AI, Speedy isn't even in the conversation.

[mrhonline]

Quote:

---

I would say BK is about as interested in trading for Iverson as he is signing me to a 10 day contract.

---

Can you distribute? Get to the line?

[exodus]

Quote:

---

Can you distribute? Get to the line?

---

No. I am a straight up chucker, except for the fact that my shots actually go in.

[vdunkndunk]

Quote:

---

And don't even get me started on Iversons contract, shooting percentage, etc.

---

Iverson's true shooting percentage isn't actually all that bad when you adjust for all the freethrows he makes.

Last season AI scored 33 ppg on 25 shots per game.

This season JJ is scoring 28 ppg on 21 shots per game.

The difference is that AI got 11 freethrow attempts per game, while Joe gets only 6 per game.

Basically, that's about the same rate of efficiency for both players.

[exodus]

Quote:

---

except AI is basically better in every conceivable way

---

That is your quote, which is wrong.

If AI was as committed to winning as everyone says then he would pressure the ball handler, stop his man from constantly driving, etc instead of focusing so much on padding his stats.

[AHF]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

except AI is basically better in every conceivable way

---

That is your quote, which is wrong.

If AI was as committed to winning as everyone says then he would pressure the ball handler, stop his man from constantly driving, etc instead of focusing so much on padding his stats.

---

I am not a big fan of AI's style of play but I don't question his commitment on the floor. That Philly team is better with him putting more energy into his offensive game than on focusing his energy on defense, IMO. With the minutes and responsibilities they give AI, I don't think he can truly do both. I don't have a problem with him putting more energy on offense. (I do have a problem with structuring the team around him the way the Sixers do, though.)

[vdunkndunk]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

except AI is basically better in every conceivable way

---

That is your quote, which is wrong.

If AI was as committed to winning as everyone says then he would pressure the ball handler, stop his man from constantly driving, etc instead of focusing so much on padding his stats.

---

I was wrong, you were right: there is one conceivable way in which Speedy is better than AI. But that's getting pretty nit-picky, in my opinion.

Look at it this way: if Speedy was as committed to winning as everyone says then he would actually play games and get his shooting percentage above .250%, etc instead of focusing so much on missing games and shots.

[exodus]

You've put your finger on the problem with AI but I am not sure you realize it.

The only team success AI has ever had was when he was surrounded by a group of defensive role players who didn't look to shoot much. Does that look like the Hawks roster to you?

[TheNorthCydeRises]

LOL @ the thought that Iverson wouldn't fit. There's a lot of things that people forget about Iverson, and why he is the player that he is these days.

1) NO one in the NBA. And I mean NO ONE works harder on the floor to try to get his team victories, than Iverson.

2) Most playoff caliber NBA teams have 2 or 3 high quality players on their team. Now, go back and name the best players that Iverson has ever played with.

- a young Jerry Stackhouse, who was a good player when he stepped into the league.

- Derrick Coleman, one of my favorite players from Syracuse, but arguably one of the most disappointing big time prospects to ever suit up in the NBA. That guy only reached 1/2 of his potential as a player. DC had the talent to literally be one of the top 10 - 15 players of his generation. But he's not even in the top 100.

- a young Larry Hughes, who was a very erratic player when he played with Iverson.

- Toni Kukoc, who was supposed to fill the role as the #2 scorer with the Sixers, but ended up being just a shooter to bring off the bench in his years in Philly.

- a young Theo Ratliff, who was a nice young defensive center, before he got hurt.

- Aaron McKie, who was the perfect complimentary player to Iverson. He didn't need many shots, but he played great defense.

- Dikembe Mutumbo, who was a little past his prime, but still good enough defensively to help Philly go deep into the Playoffs and get to the NBA Finals.

- Eric Snow, the good defensive, but average PG of those Larry Brown coached teams in Philly.

- Keith Van Horn, another guy brought in to be a solid #2 scorer with Iverson, and played decent in his only year with the Sixers, even though he was a defensive liability.

- Big Dog, who we all know and love . . LOL.

- A crippled Chirs Webber, who would still be a good compliment to AI, if he shot anywhere near his career average. But the guy can't even make 40% of this shots these days.

- Iggy, a nice athletic player that AI actually plays well with. But as a total player, Iggy isn't much better than Josh Childress . . . if he's any better than him at all.

So when people call Iverson a "cancer" or say that he doesn't make people around him better, you need to look at who he's playing with first.

Iverson is in the same boat as Kevin Garnett and Stephon Marbury. Put some good veteran players around those guys to take the load off of them, and they can flourish, along with their team. AI did it when Mutumbo joined the Sixers. Garnett did it when Cassell and Spreewell joined the Wolves. When you look at who Marbury has played with, he's never played with a great veteran player. He's always played with good young talent, who weren't quite ready to make the jump to being a big time player.

But if you keep surrounding these guys with young marginal talent, you can't expect their team to win. And because of that, the star player has to take it upon himself to try to do it all.

IF AI came to the Hawks, he'd have NO PROBLEM getting JJ the ball. Why? Because he's NEVER played with a player as talented as JJ. And I don't know what games of the Sixers you guys are watching. But AI is on his way to averaging 6.8 assists or more, for the 4th straight time this season. This may shock some of you, but the ONLY other player that can make that claim . . . is Steve Nash

AI has no problem tossing the ball up to Iggy on the fast break. So what do you think he'd do if he had Marvin or Smoove on the fast break with him?

An AI - JJ backcourt would be the most feared in the league. It'll be pick your poison. And because JJ is an unselfish player, he'd be able to get Iverson better looks at the basket, instead of the highly forced shots that Iverson always takes. Which means that AI would shoot a higher percentage.

Iverson takes all of those tough shots, because he doesn't trust his teammates. But JJ is such a good player, that he'd have no choice but to trust him.

This topic is moot anyway. To get Iverson, we'd have to trade JJ . . because we don't have enough big money players to make the deal work anyway. And the deal may instantly put us in luxury tax land, a place we don't want to be anyway. And even if we could do the deal with that included Speedy, ZaZa, Marvin, and Lorenzen ( contracts equal about 18 million ) that would severly depleat our bench, especially on the frontline. But it would give us this lineup.

G - AI

G - JJ

F - Childress

F - Smoove

F - Shelden

Bench

G - Lue

G - Salim

G - Bozeman or Ivey

F - Solomon Jones ( I had Freije here at first, but forgot about Solomon )

C - Batista

F - Freije

Then again . . . that's still a damn good team . . possibly better than what we already have right now. We might have to find a decent backup SF or PF with that squad though.

But if AI wants to be traded, the easy deal would be to send him to Minnesota, for Kevin Garnett. Both of those franchises aren't going anywhere fast, so they might as well switch superstars and see if it'll work out.

[vdunkndunk]

Quote:

---

You've put your finger on the problem with AI but I am not sure you realize it.

The only team success AI has ever had was when he was surrounded by a group of defensive role players who didn't look to shoot much. Does that look like the Hawks roster to you?

---

You're right that JJ isn't a role player. The thing is, our guys (including JJ) are not like the Knicks, in that we don't have a whole bunch of guys who all need to dominate the ball to get shots. JJ and Chill and Marvin and Zaza and the rest all have very different skill sets that could mesh fairly well with AI (in a way that Steve Francis or Jamal Crawford or Stephon Marbury or Nate Robison could not).

For instance, JJ is a deadly standstill jumpshooter and three-point specialist...it's just that can also do everything else too. But I think JJ would be getting open looks that compare to his days with the Suns when he shot nearly .50% from 3.

Not only that, but JJ and AI both demand double teams these days, and I could definitely imagine Marvin and Chill and the rest of our guys benefiting from wide-open looks and the chance to slash and move without the ball.

And AI and JJ are interchangable at PG or SG on offense, without creating mismatches for the Hawks on defense.

Like I said from the beginning, I'm only playing devil's advocate...but I don't think it's a ridiculous idea that AI could fit in with and improve this team.

[mrhonline]

Quote:

---

This topic is moot anyway. To get Iverson, we'd have to trade JJ . . because we don't have enough big money players to make the deal work anyway. And the deal may instantly put us in luxury tax land, a place we don't want to be anyway. And even if we could do the deal with that included Speedy, ZaZa, Marvin, and Lorenzen ( contracts equal about 18 million ) that would severly depleat our bench, especially on the frontline. But it would give us this lineup.

---

You were motoring along so well until here.

The Hawks don't have to send out the full $18M of Iverson's salary, only $11M or so because they are under the cap.

Speedy/Wright/Smith/1st should work under the cap, and it would mean the Hawks are right up against the cap, nowhere near the luxury tax.

[exodus]

Your entire post discusses offense while ignoring defense.

AI consistently lets guys get past him off the dribble. When they went to the finals they had Deke to back him up. We have Zaza.

Last year the young guys didn't get a lot of attempts because Al dominated the ball. What do you think will happen with AI? Why do you think they can't win with him?

He has never sacrificed his shot attempts to accomodate another player. I haven't even looked but I would bet he is currently leading the league in attempts.

JJ is just now becoming a legit star in this league who combines scoring and playmaking and you want to team him up with possibly the biggest ball hog in league history?