i guess im asking the wrong place but does any of you know a tool to log back into an instagram account..? I was stupid lost my login password. I would appreciate any assistance you can offer me
The Steve Nash slander really is on full display in the comments. Look, I grew up a Lakers fan - those 2005-2007 years where the Suns regularly embarrassed us? - yup I hated Nash, because he was THAT GUY. When he entered the Suns in 2004 (a 29 win team the prior year even with Marion, IsoJoe and Stoudamire), he immediately made them a offensive juggernaut pushing them to 62 wins. The next year is when people really underestimate him saying that his team was just so good. Well, Stoudamire was injured for the year, they traded away Joe Johnson and Quentin Richardson and yet still had a 54 win record with a decimated team. That is why he got MVPs. Two years, two unlikely top contender finishes. By 2010, Nash had anchored 5 out of the top 10 most efficient offenses of ALL TIME - between the Mavs and the Suns. For comparison, Magic had only 5 out of the top 30 most efficient offenses of all time at that point. The whole argument that Dantoni's system made him who he was, well he was doing it before the system as well. with the Mavs, he had Dirk, yes, but who else? Finley and Walker? They made their offensive rating GO DOWN. Ok, how about Marion, Stoudamire, Diaw, Barbosa? With Nash, Marion was a top slashing two-way wing, Stoudamire was an all star, Diaw was most improved and Barbosa was a perenial 6MOTY. Without him, Marion was a good rotation player, Stoudamire's efficiency/TO rate tanks, and Diaw/Barbosa become journeymen until they get their big break at the end of their careers. Nash impacted his team in a way very few players have. Iverson is great but to say that Nash>Iverson is blasphemous, is silly.
Pure lie off bail. Marbury had that 2003 Suns team in the playoffs where they almost upset San Antonio. They fired Frank Johnson early in 2003-2004,traded Marbury and tanked the rest of the season. Stop trying to rewrite history
All that praise ur giving nash and yet he still has 0 championships and 0 appearances in the finals. Dont ever put his name in the same discussion as some one like magic. It's disrespectful. Who cares about the suns beating the lakers from 2005-2007 when the lakers were a 7th and 8th seed for those playoff years. The lakers still almost beat the suns in a 7 game series in 06 when they were clearly out matched. Once the lakers became a good team again in 2008 they made easy work of the suns. Nash is overrated because he's a white guy that guys like bill and ryan and plenty of other white fans can relate to and that's fine. All of this is subjective. A person can think nash is the goat, whatever floats ya boat. But to most basketball fans especially those old enough like myself who watched nash and Iverson in there prime it's not even close. Nash was great but he had the best offense in the nba for almost a decade and got 0 championships and 0 finals appearances. U can come up with all the excuses u want, but they couldn't get it done. Iverson never had a great team around him like nash did and Iverson still made it to the finals unlike nash and Iverson also won a mvp and won so many scoring titles it's insane. Iverson was overall a better player than nash and honestly it's not even close. Nash played with amar'e, marion, diaw, Quentin Richardson, young joe Johnson, Barbosa and nash's stats got a boost playing in dantoni's offense. And that's just in Phoenix. I'm not even talking about the 50+ win team he had in Dallas that was loaded and couldn't get it done until nash left....Imagine what Iverson would of done in that mike dantoni offense? Maybe they would of made it to the finals one of those years with a Iverson instead...ppl like to make history into what they want it to be but just go back and look at how those Phoenix teams dominated in the regular season with nash but then the playoffs came around and they always folded. Always
@@JDandOL Hey there! First off, I wanna say I appreciate your thoughtful response. This back and forth is what makes sports debates super fun and engaging. To one of your first points about race/ethnicity playing a factor, I agree. There is a fixation on uplifting non-african americans to a pedestal that one could argue is rooted in anti-blackness. We clearly see that with folks who claim Bird was better than Lebron (SPOILER: he is not), and the recent phenomena surrounding players like Kristaps, Doncic, Linsanity 2012, etc. Throwing in the fact that Nash was born in South Africa during apartheid, grew up in Canada, and played basketball in the Silicon Valley, makes this point stand out even moreso. It is a factor that should not be ignored, and deserves to be examined further. For the sake of this argument, I'm going to try and focus mainly on basketball stats and impact. Comparing the offensive effectiveness of Nash and Magic doesn't take away anything from Magic's greatness, but rather shows that Nash's impact shouldn't be taken lightly. I never said that Nash is better than Magic and I know that throwing in other accolades + stats will always fall on the side of Magic so I am not sure where this idea of disrespect comes from? Secondly, the Pau-Kobe era Lakers met the Suns only once in 2010 and it went to 6, so "making easy work" is hyperbole. Thirdly, Nash led the best offense, and yes, he got to 0 finals, but was a consistent playoff contender, always being pushed out by the Mavs or Spurs. All that really proves is that the adage of "defense wins championships" rings VERY true, as Iverson's 1 finals appearance was on his arguably BEST defensive team he ever had, while Nash's teams were never built to support his defensive deficiencies like the Sixers were for AI. Your next point is where I have the most issues. I do very much agree that AI was an overall more talented player, no doubt, but I come from a place of valuing a player based on how they make the team better, putting them in a position to win. You say that "u can come up with all the excuses you want," but immediately follow it with an excuse as to why Iverson only made 1, in the Eastern conference no less. You say that they we should imagine what AI woulda done with that team, but thats the thing, he would have never been desired for that team because a scoring guard would not have made them better. Remember that year him and Melo teamed up? He had an amazing statistical campaign but Billups replacing him made them the better team because of how he made the team as a whole work. You say that "ppl like to make history into what they want it to be" but that is exactly the issue I see with Iverson. We tend to forget who Iverson was near the end of his career, especially after he got traded from Denver: a locker room problem, a somewhat selfish player, and ball-stopper, all the bad things about his game that were ignored because of his spectacular athleticism and offensive game that hadn't aged well. For all the flak that Kobe, Westbrook, Melo get for being arguably selfish players, we have eulogized Iverson for those same tendencies. When A.I. shoots a lot, despite how many times he misses, he is demonstrating heart. I see that as revising history. All in all, I would pick Nash because this video is a redraft: a thought debate about who you would want on your team. Iverson may have won 4 scoring titles, but Nash won 5 assists titles, many of them going on 50-40-90 seasons. Nash regularly scored 16 ppg, and coupled with 10 assists (generating at least 20 points per game before factoring in 3 pointers), and you can see why there is an argument to who you would want on your team more.
@@dylanbach8578 that long-ass comment, and you didn't even address the main point. You said "When he entered the Suns in 2004 (a 29 win team prior year...), he immediately made them a offensive juggernaut pushing them to 62 wins." You conveniently don't mention that they won 44 games in 2003 with Marbury and a ROOKIE Amare and that the Sun completely changed their offensive system with D'Antoni taking over in 2004. Stop commenting on race and reply to the other guy's point. Stop ignoring key facts when you make an argument...you're leaving out a big, relevant part of the picture
Aaron Hooper personally I would had taken Peja in today’s game at 2. Taller version of Klay Thompson that can create his own shot. He can play at the top of the key and facilitate. Describing his game today would literally be considered number 1 draft.
Angelo Amon Agreed! And if his career went similar, in today’s game, as it did for his actual career, he could’ve slid to a stretch 4 in his later years. He was so versatile
Angelo Amon Klay Thompson way better Defense side of ball never a night off on that side and being more Clutch movements . He has a reputation for big Game 6 for closing you the series or bringing you into a gm 7 . Peja was a better Keith Van Horn mister 3/4 quarters
When he said a Quarterback comp for Iverson, it's so simple, it's Michael Vick. Vick was electrifying and extremely fun to watch, in his prime he was an iconic figure in the sport. However, like Iverson, Vick was controversial off the field, never won anything significant and was relatively inefficient (completing around 50-55% of his passes). AI=Vick.
Speaking of QBs... Have you seen Iversons Qb video from high school? Impressive enough playing basketball at that size. He was a damn good football player as well...
BRYANT IS NOBODY NEVER SAW PLAYOFF IN CAREER. NASH ALWAYS HAD 3 OR 4 ALLSTARS SNIPERS. DIRK FINLEY STACKHOUSE ANTOINE WALKER JAMISON...THEN ISO JOE JOHNSON, AMARE, MATRIX THOSE ARE 10 ALLSTARS. NAME ME 1 ALLSTAR IVERSON HAD BESIDE OLD MUTOMBO WHO CANT SHOOT ??? BRYANT IS NOBODY. IM GLAD KARMA PAYBACK TO LIAR. REST IN PIECES FOR GIRL THAT U ABUSED 2003 AND RIGGED RINGS BY TIM DONAGHY.
I love iverson, but I understand why he’s out at 4. What I can’t agree or understand is Ben Wallace and Peja dropping to 7 and 8. They’re so underrated in my opinion. I’d take them earlier than camby at least
? I don't understand how's he's at number 4. Ray Allen over him? Come on.... Kobe and Nash I don't mind but Ray? These so called sports experts today just lose credibility.
@@brandonethereal1084 lets be realistic here and stop the nostalgia, he wasn't efficient, him scoring doesn't translate to playoff success other than that 1 season he had, he can't co exist with another co-star which is hurts the teams he is on cause you will never win a chip being the only Elite/all star level player on the team...he was a great player but lets not overblow his value.
@@ShanLoHoops No nostalgia....... You wanna talk about someone with no playoff success because of their style look no further than James choke Harden. Ai did all he could.🤦🏿♂️🤦🏿♂️
no comment definitely was. Barkley would had a ring if it wasn’t for MJ. Barkley also was able to sign with the best players around him. He was the best player in the 92 Dream Team. Not saying he is the best player out of that team, but during the Olympics Barkley would had been the Olympics Finals MVP if they had individual awards.
@@stevenbarnes7960 and he didn't win shit , just like Dominique. Both are top 50 not top 10 😂😁 Iverson sure ain't top ten you moron child, when we're u born ? In the "I know everything era"¿? Stfu child.
The thing you missed, Chuck to Iverson in the fantasy draft #1 overall because he thought the draft was who would you want in an all-star game but it really was an all-star fantasy draft for who you want all-time...
You guys are severely down playing the lack of support AI had in Philly. Those Bucks team had a prime Glen Robinson, prime Sam Casell and solid veteran rotation players - those teams underachieved every season and the Bucks missed the playoffs in 2002. Although, that's more of an indictment of Robinson Mutombo was 36 years old when traded to Philly and was barely a double digit scorer, sure he was still a great interior defender but c'mon... I don't necessarily disagree with taking Ray #3 but you really discredited Iverson unfairly here
I think that their point was that you could build a team around Ray Allen compared to Allen Iverson. As they mentioned, Stackhouse, van Horn, Iguodala all could've been a great 2nd player for AI for years to come but nothing materialized there. Also, Iverson had to play his style which stunted the offense. As Bill also mentioned, Detroit nosedived once they traded for AI while Denver stayed with their relative amount of wins. They also didn't talk about his inefficiency which I understand that Iverson is barely "6'0" and that he had to shoot more due to a lack of another star, but it doesn't completely explain why AI shot 38.7% and 39.8% in separate seasons. The Bucks also improved by 8 games compared to the 76ers' 4 games in Ray and AI's rookie seasons.
Come on Bill, how can you not remember Stojakovic hitting back-breaking three after back-breaking three on the Lakers in Games 3 & 4 of that second round series when the Mavs swept the Lakers in 2011? That Game 4 is always the first thing I think of when I hear his name. As a Celtics fan how can you not remember his great fuck you Lakers moment?
Saying Allen Iverson didn't care about winning is a downright falsehood. What you mean to say is, 'Allen didn't always put himself and his team in the best position to win...because of his ego.' Ray Allen was always a good player, especially during his time with the Sonics. He was never, ever, the main guy or top player in the NBA. Safer bet to win the title? How is it Ray Allen considering he never made it to the final round until he joined the Celtics and Heat - teams in which he was never the go-to, not the second, or even third option. Longevity is something to celebrate but not over dominance.
Ray is gonna help you win. Iverson is going to make you play his way and not take anything seriously. Look up all the stories and how he almost got traded before the '01 run. The one year he let himself be coached it worked because of the team around him. Otherwise, that dude cared too much about his image.
@@20marvelman Mick, I lived the first 22 years of life in Philadelphia during his run with the 76ers - I know the good and the bad. Your opening line is counter-productive to your argument. Ray Allen is certainly going to help you win but is he a standalone player? Of course not, he doesn't have that star power. The 76ers front office ran by Billy King was atrocious and did little to build a roster. Ray Allen on the 76ers wouldn't have even made the postseason.
Pretty damn good redraft but Camby was too high. Ben Wallace and Peja offer so much more winning value... especially in their prime. Are we drafting Camby just for longevity over these two? I might even take Marbury before Camby.
@@tommycochran1019 ARTEST WAS THIRD MVP VOTE AND WON DPOY U BLIND DAMAGED PATHOLOGICAL LIAR. JERMAINE WASNT REASON U LIAR. ALMOST ??? WELL BIG BEN WASNT ''ALMOST'' HE HUMILIATED KOBRICK AND SHAQ U LIAR.
Let's look at why nash didn't 03 Dirk gets hurt in conference finals 05 Joe johnson breaks his face 06 by the time they hit the conference finals they are missing 3/5th of their starting line still take mavs to 6 07 game 1 bloody nose game 3 the ref goes to prison for betting against them game 5 suspensions
oh kay AND Losing to ALL eventual champions except for that Mavs team that got robbed by DWade. Had Nash broke through in ANY of those years, they’d be overwhelming favorites to win the championship
I think he was the more skilled player than Allen or Nash, but he didn't seem to elevate his teams in the playoffs. He meant more for the culture and perception of the game, than he actually did to his teams' winning on the court. He is a less efficient Kyrie in my opinion. All world handles and ruthless to the cup. He just didn't have "it", whatever in the hell that means.
Look, a reasonable argument can be made for Steve Nash at #2, but Ray Allen over Allen Iverson is what I would expect to hear out of an 18 year old who never saw him play.
kalinwang1 Oh... well in that case, Kobe only won championships in LA with a system that also made Jordan win... don’t pick Kobe either... idiot... now that we established your argument is stupid... Nash didn’t just play well under D’Antoni... a Nash-led team was the best offensive team for 10 straight seasons (how many seasons did D’Antoni coach Nash?) Do you know how many games D’Antoni with Marion Amare, Joe Johnson, Barbosa (the SAME team minus Nash) won prior to Nash’s arrival? 29 games... Nash singlehandedly gave the Suns a historical 33 win turnaround.
@@UtotheJ You feel to make your point with Kobe who played for one team so we have nothing to really know. Steve Nash played for the mavericks With a prime dirk and Steve Nash played with the lakers. The only system he played well in was the same system that brought us linsanity and bloated stats for Harden. Just like with Lin and Harden, Steve Nash only played well in that system. That d antoni system made an average bench player (Lin) play like an all star. It made a 2 year all star player (Nash) play like a back to back MVP(still should not have won) and it made a 7 time all star player (Harden) play like an all time Great. Wake up, Nash was not that good. Meanwhile Jason Kidd played well on every team he's been on. Kidd went back to back to the finals in the east and won in the west with the same players Nash couldn't win with.
kalinwang1 So much stupidity in one comment... 1. Kobe played for one team, so we don’t really know? Kobe without Phil Jackson was a first round exit AT BEST. You don’t have to play for different teams if your argument is SYSTEM 2. Neither Nash nor Dirk were in their primes on the Mavericks and they went to the CONFERENCE FINALS losing to eventual champion Spurs after Dirk was injured 3. You do realize Linsanity lasted TWO weeks, right? Nash lasted 10 years with AND WITHOUT D’Antoni 4. You do ALSO realize the system D’Antoni implemented for Harden is the COMPLETE OPPOSITE? Nash was PnR with shooters rotating the perimeter. Harden was switching to a favorable matchup to ISO... NOTHING alike. 5. What does Kidd have to do with 1996 draft? 6. Yes Kidd is great, but back to back Finals only to be completely embarrassed against the West in both Finals. 7. Won with the same players in the West Nash couldn’t win with? Is this a joke? LITERALLY not a single point you made is a fact... stop wasting my time...
i would of liked to see them go 3 more picks and see which 2 between jerome williams rasho nesterovic and malik rose got left off....thats a nice debate after damp and wright should go 15 and 16 imo...like I think malik was worse than those other 2...I really do but he had big playoff moments so what do you do there....on a neutral team i'm taking those other two over him but rose had a role on the spurs title teams and performed when needed in big games
BRYANT IS NOBODY NEVER SAW PLAYOFF IN CAREER. NASH ALWAYS HAD 3 OR 4 ALLSTARS SNIPERS. DIRK FINLEY STACKHOUSE ANTOINE WALKER JAMISON...THEN ISO JOE JOHNSON, AMARE, MATRIX THOSE ARE 10 ALLSTARS. NAME ME 1 ALLSTAR IVERSON HAD BESIDE OLD MUTOMBO WHO CANT SHOOT ??? BRYANT IS NOBODY. IM GLAD KARMA PAYBACK TO LIAR. REST IN PIECES FOR GIRL THAT U ABUSED 2003 AND RIGGED RINGS BY TIM DONAGHY.
I think Bill was REAL Selective with his opinions of the best Iverson Teammates, Stackhouse was when he was a rookie and Dikembe was never a second option ever. How many times did Dikembe make the Conference Finals??? 1 with AI. Suprised he didnt bring up C-Webb, He was hurt like hell.
@@rashadellison9593 no I mean like how you are wrong saying he only made one conference finals. Now that you have been proven wrong you are trying to what? Change your narrative? You said he made one conference finals. Take your L and move on. Like Iverson used to do.
KG would've had the same problems with Iverson as he had with Marbury. There's only one basketball and both guys wanted to control the offense. It would not have worked.
@@jbizz80 People in Minnesota wanted KG to take more shots late. He was very unselfish, and would pass up contested shots, passing to wide open teammates, who generally sucked... AI and KG could have worked... KG didn't have problems with Marbury, it was Marbury who wanted to be the man.
My only quibble is that I would have Camby behind Wallace, Peja, and Marbury. His peak was nowhere near those 3. I don't really value the minutes-eating portion of his career that much.
this just shows these guys are using win shares off basketballreference.com to decide their picks not stats or eye test cause win shares has to do with your team not you individually hence why rasho nesterovic had a top 10 career of this draft according to that stat because he played next to kg bosh and duncan flat out every year almost of his career so of course he is going to win more games than someone on the grizzlies for example at that time but it had nothing to do with rasho as the stats prove...its lazy to decide this way....according to win shares fisher is a top 11 player of this draft..yeah fucking right... ...brad miller went undrafted in 98 so they didn't even draft him cause he didn't show up in the 98 draft and they forgot about deshawn stevenson in the worst draft ever in 2000, not saying deshawn would be top 15 in most drafts but in 2000 he is cause he had a long solid career albeit a bad stats one he had some tony allen in him or bowen or battier or prince where the stats didn't represent his effect on a defense amongst other picks they did like the often injured career starter on bad teams garbage time minny all star michael dickerson in 98 over some dudes or picking jay will in 2002 when he had no career to speak of due to injury and picking nash over ray allen and ai was just insanity imo...
@@razkable BRYANT IS NOBODY NEVER SAW PLAYOFF IN CAREER. NASH ALWAYS HAD 3 OR 4 ALLSTARS SNIPERS. DIRK FINLEY STACKHOUSE ANTOINE WALKER JAMISON...THEN ISO JOE JOHNSON, AMARE, MATRIX THOSE ARE 10 ALLSTARS. NAME ME 1 ALLSTAR IVERSON HAD BESIDE OLD MUTOMBO WHO CANT SHOOT ??? BRYANT IS NOBODY. IM GLAD KARMA PAYBACK TO LIAR. REST IN PIECES FOR GIRL THAT U ABUSED 2003 AND RIGGED RINGS BY TIM DONAGHY.
@@razkable massive double standard in how they justify some of these picks. Jay Will and Darko picks for upside and “what if” factor like we haven’t already seen how these careers played out and then pick guys for longevity with the benefit of hindsight. The whole concept is that you’re GM with a time machine, how the tf do you pick jay williams top 14? It’s crazy. The guy on the 2003 redraft was an espn writer who had darko at #2 at the time, then picks him at 14 like he still can’t let go of his all time terrible mock draft. At that point you may as well take guys like brandon roy, oden, jay will at #1 bc who knows how good they could’ve been.
Iverson career points avg - 26.7 Nash career points avg - 14.3 nash career assists - 8.5 Iverson career assists - 6.2 Both are bad defenders but Iverson lead the league in steals many times Iverson career steals - 2.2 Nash career steals - 0.7 Iverson's 'bad' season in Detroit-17 ppg Nash's prime in phoenix - 14 ppg
1 - Shooting percentages, mate. Shooting the ball 30 times per game will inflate your scoring average but a poor shooting % like Iverson's decreases your team's chance of winning. 2 - Hockey assists and passing the ball is essential even when it doesn't show on the assist sheet. 3 - Sometime it's preferable to stay in position than to gamble for a steal and get burned for a basket. 4 - Advanced stats show that Nash's impact on winning was basically the same as Iverson's. The difference was between volume vs. efficiency. 5- Nash's prime in Phoenix was not 14 ppg but 17 ppg. Overall, Iverson was a better defender and Nash the better offensive player.
BRYANT IS NOBODY NEVER SAW PLAYOFF IN CAREER. NASH ALWAYS HAD 3 OR 4 ALLSTARS SNIPERS. DIRK FINLEY STACKHOUSE ANTOINE WALKER JAMISON...THEN ISO JOE JOHNSON, AMARE, MATRIX THOSE ARE 10 ALLSTARS. NAME ME 1 ALLSTAR IVERSON HAD BESIDE OLD MUTOMBO WHO CANT SHOOT ??? BRYANT IS NOBODY. IM GLAD KARMA PAYBACK TO LIAR. REST IN PIECES FOR GIRL THAT U ABUSED 2003 AND RIGGED RINGS BY TIM DONAGHY.
@@karimb972 Nash had 10 allstars in Dallas and Phoenix entire decade from 1996 to 2006 won nothing. Nowitzki Joe Johnson Finley Jamison Antoine Walker Van Exel Antawn Jamison Matrix Amar'e Stackhouse etc. Nash is nobody in history Iverson is GOD. Easy to score when Nowitzki and Finley spread floor . You are deranged.
Iverson took a bunch of role players to the Finals and even got a game on a vaunted Lakers team. Nash played with elite players his whole career and never even made it to the Finals. Ray Allen did nothing of note as the leader of a team. The Iverson disrespect is funny, and typically comes from guys who can't dribble a basketball.
It's cute you think Iverson took Philly to the finals in everyone. Everyone knows the NBA finals was really the western conference for the majority of the decade, especially from 00 to 03.
@@josephjohnroe3678 yet during THE FINALS the REAL one Lakers lost their only game While they swept the entirety of the west where according to you there was the ReAl FiNaLs
Steve Nash played with Dirk Nowitzki, Michael Finley, Amare Stoudamire, Shawn Marion, Joe Johnson, Kobe Bryant and Dwight Howard and never sniffed the NBA Finals while Allen Iverson took Eric Snow and Aaron McKie to the Finals.
They say Iverson's career flamed out too soon. Well, the argument could be made that Nash also took too long to develop into a starting point guard. Iverson came to the league ready from day one.
Peter MaDash which makes no sense. Iverson was great for over a decade. And it’s the front offices that forced him out. And you’re right. Iverson came out NBA ready. It took Steve Nash a few years to find his groove.
Steve Nash took a while to develop because at his first stint with Phoenix the PG starting position was held up by JKidd and Kevin Johnson was still playing at the time as well, so you can't really develop quickly when your minutes are spread across other more established PGs. He got better when he got to Dallas and was totally unleashed when he got with D'Antoni in Phoenix. I think the knock on Nash was the pure fact that he was waaay ahead of his time. His abilities just wasn't appreciated fully during his first few years in the league but when he was given the chance, he took the chance. Also his style just aged better with the league. He was in his mid-30s with Phoenix and was still contributing greatly to winning records and long runs in the Playoffs which is something I can't say for AI
@@Wolvie12100 That argument can be made about a lot of great players. Kobe was held back and buried on the Lakers bench by Del Harris. He is still number 1 on any list. That is not an excuse. The fact is, Iverson was better... 4x scoring champion, 7x All-NBA attests to this. I doubt you will find many basketball fans who think Nash had a better career than AI.
@@Wolvie12100 gtfoh Nash didn't become great until the rules changed to a European style. Take y'all asses back to hockey yall made basketball even softer
Barkley drafted Iverson thinking it was an "all-star game only" draft, which makes sense considering how AI was treated in those showcase games and how often he had the ball.
I get the knock on the analytics for iverson but its also silly to think he wouldn't be more efficient with less shots and pass more. They built the offense around him the way they did and honestly he was taking harder shots than all but a few players in the league. I think iverson's become underrated in a weird way which i never saw coming
Exactly. These bums forget he had *no help whatsoever* on offense. He took lots of bad shots because *he had too* . By the time he had another scorer to play with his body was beat to hell ! If he had Melo from yr 1 I think his qvg stays the same *but* his efficiency shoots up along with his assists per game. He was underrated passer and defender imo. Imagine if AI goes to Dallas and plays with Dirk ? Jesus !
Juan M Ray Allen and Rashard Lewis Seattle teams where Dark Horse championship contenders. Behind the Lakers,Spurs,and the rest of the West when 50 wins couldn’t guarantee you a playoff spot
Allen Iverson carried a team to the finals & took a game away from one of the greatest playoff teams in NBA history. I’m sorry but I don’t think Ray Allen or Steven Nash are capable of doing that
Nope, but they're capable of keeping the team afloat and getting the best out of everyone. That was the one year Iverson let himself be coached, and if the dude isnt about winning, why have him on your team? Its why he was almost trades to Detroit befoee that season
People always say he carried that team with the coach of the year the dpoy and the 6th man oh yeah and Iverson the MVP, AI my favorite player of all time but basketball is a team sport Ray Allen ain't better but Nash is arguable
Nash was ridiculously close to doing so and he played in the West against some top tier teams. Ill take him over AI all fucking day! Lets not mention the intangibles, like leadership and overall personality.
Just heard that, paused the video, agreeing with your comment and not bothering to watch the rest. They lost all credibility there. Iverson haters claiming not to be. period.
They tried to justify it as Ray being a safer bet to be part of a championship team. I would think that as a top 3 pick, you should lean heavily on the player that is more likely to lead you to a Chip, to me that’s still Iverson. Otherwise, I would pick someone like Steve Kerr over Iverson.
@Liam Foster People forget that Ray was only taking backseat when he got to the tail end of his career. Ray was an on-ball, off-ball monster like Durant and Curry. He was and could be your primary scorer at his prime. I love AI but as a GM, you take Ray Allen for most teams. AI was predecessor to D. Rose types wherein you need a defensive-minded team around him with shooters. If AI were more like CP3, then yeah, you take him over Ray Allen.
I think that their point was that you could build a team around Ray Allen compared to Allen Iverson. As they mentioned, Stackhouse, van Horn, Iguodala all could've been a great 2nd player for AI for years to come but nothing materialized there. Also, Iverson had to play his style which stunted the offense. As Bill also mentioned, Detroit nosedived once they traded for AI while Denver stayed with their relative amount of wins. They also didn't talk about his inefficiency which I understand that Iverson is barely "6'0" and that he had to shoot more due to a lack of another star, but it doesn't completely explain why AI shot 38.7% and 39.8% in separate seasons. The Bucks also improved by 8 games compared to the 76ers' 4 games in Ray and AI's rookie seasons.
There is a player in this draft who had the following run over a 5 year span: - was the best player on an NBA champion (1x) - all NBA second team (4x) - all nba defensive first team (5x) - defensive player of the year (4x) He was taken 7th in this redraft, behind Marcus Camby The disrespect towards Ben Wallace and defensive players in general is out of hand. Wallace was the anchor of the best defensive team in the league and his team won 50+ games each year during this stretch. He won 50 games in Detroit before Billups or Rip showed up. Ben Wallace was the guy. People had the nerve to question whether he is a hall of famer. Despite having a shorter prime, Ben still managed to earn more individual and team accolades than the majority of "STAR" players do in their entire careers. The majority of players on max contracts in todays NBA can't hold a candle to Ben Wallace and his resume. This is a top 3 defender of all time who had all the accolades to prove it. You can't say his defense is less valuable than a traditional star player. But Wallace won a championship this way with his defense at the core of it. This man had a legendary career and people ignore it because he wasn't scoring 17 points a night. Most star players in this league wish they could have the kind of inidivual and team success Ben Wallace did - and even when they retire, they still won't stack up.
"This isn't an anti-Iverson thing, this is strictly he didn't care about winning." - this would be an example of a praise/stab thing that main-stream media has perfected. I am absolutely sure that he did care about winning more than anything. He just did in a way a soldier would, not a general.
Disagree. If Iverson cared "in a soldier" way, he would have taken better care of his body. And yes, he would have *practiced* more, and expanded his offensive capabilities. There's a reason that he was out of the league as soon as it became apparent to everyone that his body was giving in to age.
Ben Wallace disrespect is unreal. MARCUS CAMBY over him? Sure, his prime was pretty short, but in that short prime HE HAD 4 DPOYS. That’s an nba record! Plus, he had more career blocks than fouls. The offensive play was an issue but I’m sure if he was asked to learn how to shoot corner 3’s (Bruce Bowen style) he could do it
He was fucking terrible on offense, he's basically DeAndre Jordan on an insanely defensively good Pistons team that played the slowest, most painful to watch basketball.
@@here4boxing oh your one of those people who didn't watch the series.. How about the bucks receiving 5 flagrant fouls to Sixers 0. Twelve technical fouls! Scott Williams being suspended for a game seven in the ecf. Milwaukee had no post defense! It wasn't rigged, but you sure as hell got help from the nba. Plus mutombo was great in that series and Aaron McCie was defensive player of the year. Wish I lived in the narrative you believed in when everything is so simple.
Michael Rohde Iverson could barely walk by game 7. Scott Williams wasn’t the x-factor in the series. Milwaukee as a team had horrible shot selection. They blew it themselves.
That why iverson was the second best player and would be picked second in this draft put hem on his back and won over Allen and company and Nash didnt make the final ever I watch the games and iverson was one of a kind
Boston had Wallace out of that draft. He tried out for them but got cut. 1996 Wallace was just a skinny swingman who couldn't shoot. Nobody wanted him until he started talking *ahem* vitamins. And every team got better when they got rid of Marbury.
Oh wait y'all don't know what I'm referring to. I'm talking about AI and Kobe from about 05-07. They both put up huge numbers on shitty teams and didnt make the playoffs. I'm not arguing that Kobe is not better than AI. Thats a stupid argument. I'm saying they criticized Iverson for not winning with no talent and I wanted to point out what happened to Kobe with no talent
In 96 lottery picks were expected to have instant impact. Drafting for potential and waiting for the player to develop wasn't a league wide trend until 4 or 5 years later.
Sort of. Top picks were usually 21-22 years old, so if you drafted a guy top 3 and he didn't show something impressive in the first 2 years, you started second guessing your pick. Chauncey Billups got traded 3 times in his first 2 years, and all 4 teams gave up on him. Teams might have been more patient if he'd been #13 pick or something.
Love that Russillo is staring down at his screen a lot of the time and you assume he's checking stats (as Bill does off to the side). Then he outs himself as simply staring at his own image by debating whether or not to go tank top/jersey for the feed. I love the Sunday pods (or Monday late arvo's over here) whether it be Sal during NFL season or Russillo.
You don’t take Ray Allen over A.I. You have to build really well around Ray Allen to have success, which the Bucks did in ‘01, but that was the only time they had major playoff success during his Bucks era. His 5 years with Sonics he only made the playoffs once until they shopped him to the Celtics. I get their points, but I think they were too hard on Iverson
there is no way I'm taking Steve Nash over Iverson. I like Steve Nash. Iverson was simply better than him. Iverson avg 26ppg and 6 assist a game. Nash was 14ppg and 8 asts. career numbers. Nash would be after AI. Kobe, AI, Nash. Also, you guys are comparing two different mentalities. Iverson isn't a pass-first guy same as Kobe, just like MJ. He was also a student of MJ like Kobe was, he just didn't have the size. AI only had one disadvantage and it was his size. Imagine AI at 6'7..different ball game. Nash was looking to help his teammates score. He could shoot the 3 well and he made other guys better. You can learn that.. you can learn timing and shooting, but scoring... that's different. Iverson was a scoring machine. Scores whenever he wants to..creates space when he wants to.. you just can't teach that. I wouldn't put the ball in Nash hands when the game is on the line.. not over Iverson. Iverson was built for those moments.
Pick8ng Nash before AI is correct, because you're getting more, and you can actually build a well rounded team around him. Everyone would want to play with him. The argument about scoring is bad since Nash is a flat out better shooter than Iverson. If he wanted to score like AI he'd gun as much as Iverson and that would make him hard to to pair up with anybody, which is the problem Philly had. At the end of Nash has a lot less flaws in his game and more team value.
Winging It With Bleep I would take Iverson over Nash too but I think you have one thing wrong. You can learn and teach someone how to score, you can learn footwork and practice post game and shooting etc. You can’t teach all time great passing/court vision. Nash was a once in a generation passer&facilitator. Can’t teach what he had. I’d still take AI over him any day of the week tho
@Jak Jones Not really. His stats went up in the playoffs. He'd have one Finals under his belt if not for a bogus suspension to his teammates. His teams did better in the play offs because you could actually build a team around him.
Better shooter? lol, impossible as Nash's shooting requires being spot up, theres no way he could ever be a good shooter firing on the move like AI running all over the place catching then immediately shooting, no one else in the nba that I have ever seen runs around that much then instantly shoots, no spot up or anything, all his shots were off balance
Guys, Iverson was a league MVP and took a game from the greatest playoff team in NBA history...on the road. He has the second or third highest PPG in playoff history. He actually made the Finals as a lead man, unlike Nash and Allen. 33.0 ppg as his career high and had a 10-year prime. AI is going second. And, when they picked up Mutombo, the team’s defensive rating when down.
The problem is the results. It's all self glossing. Only 1 playoff run in his entire career, his shit just didn't result in team success outside of that 1 run. That's the problem with AI. Reminds me of Westbrook's career. 1 Finals run, rest is all self glossing. Shout out Jim Rome.
You are cherry picking, Nash took a 29 win team to 62 wins, went deep in the playoffs way more times than Iverson in a way tougher conference. Iverson had one great year that people remember. Nash played 10 years longer in the league. Iverson rode the bench by 30.
@@cybersub4693 Westbrook's career is drastically different my misinformed friend, he started out in the league with KD and Harden starting out, then played with paul george, now lebron, he has never been the leader of a team, stop it man
I remember a young Ray Allen absolutely torching my Jazz in the playoffs. Like, we couldn't stop him from doing ANYTHING. The only other player that I remember feeling so helpless against was MJ.
Steve Nash who played high school ball in British Columbia would have saved the Vancouver Grizzlies. It is mind boggling that Stu Jackson (General Manager for Vancouver at the time) did not want to draft or even later trade for a local kid as basketball was bring introduced to a Western Canada.
Sorry guys but I am tuning out. Lost me right after pick 2. Iverson hands down. It was a privilege to watch Iverson play. No knock on Nash but come on. Iverson was a straight Warrior on the court. Just listen how his peers look up to him and admire his game. That alone speaks volumes.
What point about the Allen vs AI argument do you disagree with or are you saying that because you like how AI would cross people in the regular season? lol. AI was a better Kyrie (not that much better btw) which isn't a knock, both great players but they can't win as the best player on a team. Ray got 2 rings, and they needed him in both to win it.
@@sebastian597 The point that Iverson was a clearly better player. He was a better scorer by a significant distance... And didn't his team get to the finals, at Rays expense?
@@theeggreat4 go look it up. Even a referee admitted they don't like him that's why the calls never go his way. I admit, that series against the bucks was questionable in their favor but that was 1 series against a whole lot of games throughout his career
AI at 4??? Camby at 6???? Marbury, peja and walker that's crazy Big Ben was better than camby literally in every way besides scoring and its not by a lot
Was he? Wallace wasn't asked to do anything other then play D and rebound. Camby was a phenomenal dedender and you could ryn offense through as a passer. People cringed when Wallace touched the ball.
Ben Wallace’s was a poor man’s Bill Russell, won with defense. And yeah, he did dominate that entire end of the floor and had a terrible offensive game lol.
Bill Russell could score and was the centerpiece of their offense through his passing. Actually the Celtics struggled when he retired offensively because of his absence. Bill wrote about this in 2009.
Bill is spot on about Iverson's height. I am 5 foot 9 and I saw Iverson up close at a game I could not believe that we were the same height or how slender he was.
It’s a reason why his body broke down, but he is one of the best athletes to lace up, but there is a reason why z Lebron is on season 22 and AI is done at 14… but he beat that 01 Lakers team which demolished everyone that season, Game 1 was a classic & Iverson just wasn’t going to be able to get 46 each game and 4 losses later, Lakers were all time playoff great…
Never Nash over Iverson. When did Nash make the Finals? I like Nash, but until Dantoni he was maybe a 2-4 year All Star and that’s it. Iverson was 6 ft tall ballin’ 40+ minutes and never really had a number 2 scorer. He challenged every big man. AND he changed the game and the appreciation for black athletes to be accepted for who they are and where their from.
I was finally waiting for someone to say that! This is exactly why people treasure Allen Iverson far more than any other player in the draft aside from Kobe. Or maybe even more than him, because being born and raised in the same state as him, I don’t know too many players from that area that would’ve made it and then impacted the NBA like he did. He’s a cultural icon and people seem to dismiss that notion
They successfully mined every negative aspect of AI's career (including hypothetical ones that were taken as if they really happened) and focused on every good detail of other players. Playing long minutes isn't a bad thing man! That's one of the most important factors of AI's greatness. And you know you lose your efficiency in the last two minutes if you played the whole 46. I almost felt *hating* coming out of the screen.
They praised him a lot but he was innefficient and a minus defender. There was zero hate coming out of them. None. You confuse cold assessment and preference for Allen and Nash for hate which is incorrect.
Man it ain’t no way these dudes took ray allen over Iverson it you take both their peek for 10 years it’s AI .. ray allen 2 time all nba 2nd and 3rd team vs AI 7 time all nba 3 1st teams 3 2nd teams and 1 3rd this ain’t even that close
@@user-bq3hq6yg3y you expect an impact to be immediate? lol the big 3 in miami with bron wade and bosh didnt even win on their first try, and that is 3 allstars, so that's a moot point
@Don Cornelius huh? but he made them good enough to get to the finals. Nash couldn't do that and had a way better team. So did nash make his team that much better?
@Don Cornelius yeah I'm a idiot for thinking 2 middle age white males would be bias towards a guy like Iverson. Lol when clearly Iverson was the better player
Lmaooo imma say this here Iverson never had a legit second option. Dikembe was almost finished literally just a defender not great on offense and was OLD. Did they say Jerry Stackhouse?????! Jesus Christ
Big Sky Blue How was AI out of his prime? So basically around 07-08?! When Nash was just got done winning his MVPs? When Kobe was starting his 2nd dynasty run? When Ray Allen was just being recognized as the best shooter outside of Curry? When Peja injury ridden still managed to be a 2nd option to CP3 and became a role player for Mavs 3 years later? AI was already out of his prime? Well he really was so how can you take him over Allen and Nash? When AI peaked early in a conference that was weak and couldn’t cut in the West. Where West players playoff battles were gauntlets, and those better players had a longer caree than AI.
Stack was putting up a consistent 20 plus a night his first 10 years outside of his injury seasons in 98 and 99. They traded him and he put up 30 lol. Not everyone wanted to play with a guy who dribbled for 20 seconds every possession. Stack was a monster on both ends for his 1st 10 years. Stop it.
Iverson = Cam Newton... Short Primes. Inefficient freak athletes that had to be adapted to in order to work. Plus all the injuries trouble they both were riddled with.
@@hailmary7283 - I think I would take Allen and Nash over Iverson to build a franchise around (especially in today's game), but I absolutely agree with you - nobody had more heart than Iverson, and I think Iverson would have won that fumble in SB50... even the big dudes in the NBA were afraid of Iverson.
"inefficient" i would offer you the opportunity to show me who he was inefficient compared to, I can only find jordan that shot as much and had as high or higher of a fg%
Barkey thought they were drafting best all-star game players....he literally says it in that video, obviously a mistake but damn this Iverson negativity is killing this redraft. Iverson is a pound for pound great, just listen to what other NBA greats say about him...smh...
@@petermadash4488 yeah true, partly due to the era they played in and the teams they were on... Camby would probably stretch out to the 3 point line in this era, coupling that with his defensive ability and you would have a problem
They changed the rules the very fall after Iverson got MVP, went to the Finals, and gave the Lakers their only playoff loss. It was no accident. Stern said that no one man (*cough* Iverson *cough*) should be able to beat a team by himself: Zone defense for everyone!!
Funny given they rigged the Eastern Conference Finals just to get Iverson to the NBA Finals. AI fans have selective acceptance of the League "hating" him.
It was because of Shaq. 100%. Everyone knows this. Knew it at the time and know it now. It had nothing to do with Iverson. You are just denying the facts of history.
@@benhaney9629 It was iverson, wtf would they make a rule for a guy all of a sudden after 9 years in the league? Iverson is a whole lot more recent in comparison to when zone was implemented, after 4 scoring titles here comes the zone defense, it makes more sense it was for AI being that he was obviously running football routes over the court, and no one could keep up with him without holding his wrist like lue, they made some lane changes for shaq, but the zone was for AI 100%
You probably can’t win a title with either guy as the number 1, but Iverson can’t be a number 2 or 3 option. He can’t defend and he can’t play off ball. I have no problem having Iverson 4th.
JoJoe Mojo i’m not here saying it’s his fault they didn’t make the playoffs those years, we all know ray was amazing. i don’t even really have a problem with a.i at 4 just the reasoning didn’t make the much sense.
It’s wrong to say that Iverson didn’t want to win. He put so much effort into winning, he just didn’t know how to on the offensive side. But look at his Defense. The dude wanted to win.
This is misleading. Taking Kobe Bryant at the number one pick is not a bad option. But Iverson went number one for a reason. He made his mark right away. I’d also say that Steve Nash teams were better because of talents. Nash played with amare, Shawn Marion, dirk, Shaq, Kobe. Iverson played with Derrick Coleman, Mutumbo, a washed Chris Webber, a ball dominant Carmelo Anthony. Let’s not discredit this legend.
@@justaloe we make a ton of excuses. Idc about talent, I saw T Mac play too much in my life. At the end of the day results matter. T Mac if he is the caliber player you all claim he is or rather the NBA HOF claims he is should have seen the 2nd round of an NBA playoff once. I’m not asking for a finals appearance or even conference final. Just the second round. Now if that’s too much to ask especially when he had Yao Ming then I apologize my expectations are too high 😂
It’s crazy how y’all downplaying Iverson position but all these things you’re saying he should be drafted higher. Steve Nash never even played in the finals and he played with dirk. And the suns
You Drafted the right guys 100% in my opinion. Just disagree with the order...too much love for Marcus Camby there....and I'd still take Iverson 2º.... 01º) Kobe Bryant 02º) Allen Iverson 03º) Steve Nash 04º) Ray Allen 05º) Jermaine O'Neal 06º) Ben Wallace 07º) Peja Stojaković 08º) Stephon Marbury 09º) Zydrunas Ilgauskas 10º) Antoine Walker 11º) Shareef Abdur-Rahim 12º) Marcus Camby 13º) Kerry Kittles 14º) Derek Fisher Honorable Mentions: - Lorenzen Wright - Erick Dampier - Malik Rose - Othella Harrington
ITT: iverson stans who loved iso, low efficiency ball because iverson reflected their streetwear trends, the fuck the establishment MO And most importantly their height
