This is an important poll regarding Allen Iverson. I am investigating Iverson's career and will be issuing new special reports during the coming year. This subject is important; there are relatively complex issues involved that I will be reporting on later. It is now considered a certainty that Allen Iverson will be inducted into the professional NBA Hall of Fame at some point after he retires. It is considered a near certainty, however, that Iverson will never win an NBA Championship. Almost everyone now agrees that the odds that he will win an NBA Championship with the Nuggets are now less than 1/1000. Although Iverson played point guard (or 1-guard or "the 1") almost exclusively in high school, in college, in his first NBA year when he was rookie of the year, and in all or parts of 3 other NBA seasons, he has actually not been the designated point guard for roughly 70-75% of his pro career. At the beginning of Iverson's second year in the NBA, former Philadelphia 76'ers Coach Larry Brown made the decision to take away his point guard designation and to assign him to shooting guard (2-guard or "the 2"). To vote in this poll, all you have to do is imagine what would have happened had Iverson never been shifted from point guard to shooting guard. How differently would basketball history in general and Iverson's career in particular have turned out if Iverson had always been the designated point guard in all of his NBA seasons? There might have been dozens of differences that you could think of, and the question actually deserves more polling than this poll. But for this poll, I am going after what I think are some of the most important things that might or might not have turned out differently. If you don't have enough knowledge about basketball, and/or if you are not the type of person who can imagine how things could be different, than you probably should not vote. Remember, this question is your best estimate of what would have happened had history played out differently. QUESTION: If Allen Iverson had always been the designated point guard during all of his NBA career, which of the following is most true. 1. Iverson would still have almost certainly become a Hall of Famer, and he would have been substantially more likely to win an NBA Championship than he was while largely not being the designated point guard. 2. Iverson would still have almost certainly become a Hall of Famer, and he would almost certainly not have won an NBA Championship. 3. Iverson would have been substantially less likely to become a Hall of Famer, and he would have been substantially more likely to win an NBA Championship than he was while largely not being the designated point guard. 4. Iverson would have been substantially less likely to become a Hall of Famer, and he would almost certainly not have won an NBA Championship. Thanks much. You will be able to read my reports here at Sports Two during the course of the coming year. This poll is being posted at several forums that have traffic and the combined results will be reported back here. I anticipate leaving this poll open until roughly the end of January 2009.
Is it a given that Allen Iverson is a Hall of Famer right now? He did have that MVP year, so I guess the answer yes. But without that year, I don't think he's had a HOF career. So to answer your question, I'd say no HOF for him if he was exclusively a PG.
Regardless of position, he's been one of the top very few players for his height in the history of the league. He'd have been in the HOF at either position.
He's consistently been an elite scorer. I'm not talking about a guy like Stack who won the scoring title once and immediately fell off (plus I think it was the lockout year when he won). Ivy has always been one of the best scorers in the league. He shoots a Steve Francis-like percentage though, so had he been a pg he might be where Francis is now, lol. I do think that if AI had always been a pg his career fg % would be much lower.
I think he'd still make the HOF, and still not be a champion. There's not much of a difference for him when it comes to the 1 or the 2. Either way, he is still going to have the ball in his hand, and he'll do whatever he wants with it.
I think basically the question your asking is, if Iverson was less selfish over his career and shot less and got more assists would he be a hall of fame player? I think that the guy is just so incredibly talented that there is nothing that could keep him out. However, asking Iverson to not score as much and get more assists is like asking Steve Nash to get less assists and score more. Why? Iverson did his whole career his way, and he did what he does well. I don't think he would be more likely to win a championship because eric snow was a huge part of those days in philly, and ES would have not started, or not been on the team if AI was a full time one. Also, i would say a top 3 scorer in the league has better chances than 1/1000 to win a championship before his career is over. Remember, he can go anywhere after this season. How about Iverson finishes his career like he started it at the PG spot in Boston with KG, Ray Allen, Paul Pierce, and the rest?
In Iverson's defense his role on teams he's played for was to be the primary scorer. I don't think the selfish tag is warranted because Iverson does give the ball up when a teammate actually works to get open. His size has limited his impact on the defensive end, and sometimes he tries to make a spectacular play instead of making a simple pass, but superstars take chances to be a difference maker. I voted for the last option because I don't think it would have made a difference either way in his career.
