Wow! This shouldn't even be a question. It is Allen Iverson without question. He can score more easily than Parker can, and he has less to work with than Tony Parker does. If you want to make a huge emphasis on comparing their FG%, then you have to take into account the talent each of the players has around him. The fact of the matter is that the talent of the players around Parker opens up so many opportunities for Parker. If you put Parker on the Sixers and you put Iverson on the Spurs, the Spurs would be on the same level they are right now and the Sixers would have had a worse season than they had this year.Parker is a good defender? Why? Because he can guard Mike Bibby for two games in the playoffs? Awesome! Give me a break! Neither Parker nor Iverson are good defenders, but Iverson get's the edge on defense from me as well because he plays the passing lane (although at times he gambles too much), and in late game situations he is as deadly on the defensive end as he is on the offensive end.<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (mavsfan1000 @ Apr 28 2006, 02:59 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Parker is pretty much unstoppable when he is hitting that midrange shot.</div>And Iverson isn't unstoppable when he is hitting his shot? Hell, Iverson is unstoppable even when he isn't hitting his jumpers. Any superstar is unstoppable when they are hitting their shot... that is common sense.Iverson also has better court vision and is a better passer than Parker. Much of Parker's success can be attributed to the Spurs' system. Although he has matured as a player and is a very valuable asset to the Spurs, you have to wonder if he'd be putting up the same stats if he was with a different team, and a team where he doesn't have the deepest roster in the league (arguably) around him.Let's take a look at their stats this past season:IversonPPG 33.0RPG 3.2APG 7.4SPG 1.94BPG .14FG% .447FT% .8143P% .323MPG 43.1ParkerPPG 18.9RPG 3.3APG 5.8SPG 1.04BPG .05FG% .548FT% .7073P% .306MPG 33.9Iverson has the edge in every category aside from FG%, and much of Parker's efficiency is a product of his attacking the rim every single possession, and how much Duncan, Ginobili, etc., open up the game for him with their ability.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Fabolous @ Apr 28 2006, 07:28 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>if ur comparing gfs then of course parker!</div>Haha, yeah..Seriously, though, if I had to pick a player right now it would be Parker..I think he has a much brighter future ahead of him..Overall its obviously Iverson, but I think he is nearing the end of his career while Parker is just getting started..If you pick a guy for your team right now I think you have to go with Parker..
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (hoopskidd5 @ Apr 28 2006, 06:30 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Haha, yeah..Seriously, though, if I had to pick a player right now it would be Parker..I think he has a much brighter future ahead of him..Overall its obviously Iverson, but I think he is nearing the end of his career while Parker is just getting started..If you pick a guy for your team right now I think you have to go with Parker..</div>But it really depends on what your team needs. Parker can't carry a team...
I know he shouldnt be the main man on a team, but either way, I think he is the better choice to have on your team right now, assuming you have other pieces around him..If you are expecting him to be your maing player and cary your team, youre better off with AI, but if you have some established players around Parker and another all-star caliber player, I think he is the better choice right now...
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (hoopskidd5 @ Apr 28 2006, 06:35 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I know he shouldnt be the main man on a team, but either way, I think he is the better choice to have on your team right now, assuming you have other pieces around him..If you are expecting him to be your maing player and cary your team, youre better off with AI, but if you have some established players around Parker and another all-star caliber player, I think he is the better choice right now...</div>Exactly, but it would be a close call in my eyes, and I'd still go with Iverson.
Oh its definatly a close one, but like you said, it depends on your situation..If youre looking to the future, I think it has to be Parker, assuming you have other pieces around him..If you want the best player right now, its Iverson..
Yeah, if you are building a team for the future you have to go with Parker simply because of the age difference. That is a no-brainer.
I think some people might still say Iverson because he still has 5 or so good years in him..Some people would prefer to have him for those 5 years as opposed to looking ahead to what Parker can give you in the long run..
As big of an Allen Iverson fan as I am, I honestly only see him having two or three more great seasons (i.e. what he's doing right now), and then he'll start falling off bit by bit.If the Sixers had any brains as a front office, they would have surrounded Iverson with enough talent to extend his career.Realistically, if Iverson is traded, and the team he is traded to has solid players around him, Iverson could really play 5 or so more years of terrific basketball. It depends on what role he has to play.
You forgot to add turnovers in the category. Iverson has more for sure. San Antonio is a very disciplined team and they don't allow anyone to be chuckers. Iverson though is doing much better than I thought this year I would still feel more comfortable with Parker on a championship level team like the Spurs over Iverson. Parker finishes stronger around the basket and that is the main reason I pick him. Iverson plays 10 more minutes and averages 1.6 assist more so that means they average the same amount of assist per minute.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BigMo763 @ Apr 28 2006, 07:48 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>As big of an Allen Iverson fan as I am, I honestly only see him having two or three more great seasons (i.e. what he's doing right now), and then he'll start falling off bit by bit.If the Sixers had any brains as a front office, they would have surrounded Iverson with enough talent to extend his career.Realistically, if Iverson is traded, and the team he is traded to has solid players around him, Iverson could really play 5 or so more years of terrific basketball. It depends on what role he has to play.</div>Im not saying 5 years of terrific basketball, Im saying 5 years of productive basketball..I definatly think his play is going to take a hit because of the abuse he takes every single game..I would trade him while his value is still high, because once he starts declining, his value will do the same, and you will get less and less in return for him..
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Fabolous @ Apr 28 2006, 05:52 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>well parker mainly shoots layups. so why isnt he shooting 70%</div>Just because most of his shots come in the paint, off of layups and floaters doesn't mean that Parker would shoot 70%. Infact, 55% is very impressive as most big men that shoot all of their shots in the paint can't even shoot that high of a percentage. When Parker does drive, there are 7 footers in the paint waiting on him to try to block his shot, it is hard enough just to get the ball up over those people. To get the ball up over the big men, and to go into the basket is very hard, and very impressive that Parker can do it 55% of the time. As far as who i would rather have, it depends on the team around them. If you have a worse off team, and need someone to carry the team, score alot of points and monopolise the ball then Iverson is your man. Basketball skills he is better than Parker, and a better player to have carrying your team than Parker. If i had a good team in place, and needed a point guard that could get into the lane, pass the ball, and play well with the team, then i would pick Parker.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (mavsfan1000 @ Apr 28 2006, 06:51 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>You forgot to add turnovers in the category. Iverson has more for sure. San Antonio is a very disciplined team and they don't allow anyone to be chuckers. Iverson though is doing much better than I thought this year I would still feel more comfortable with Parker on a championship level team like the Spurs over Iverson. Parker finishes stronger around the basket and that is the main reason I pick him. Iverson plays 10 more minutes and averages 1.6 assist more so that means they average the same amount of assist per minute.</div>I just used the "Compare Player" feature on NBA.com to derive the stats, and for some reason they don't include the turnover statistics on that. Anyway, here they are:Iverson: 3.4 TOPGParker: 3.1 TOPGNot that big of a difference.As for your assist per minute theory, you are correct. Iverson averages 8.2 assists per 48 minutes, and Parker averages 8.1 assists per 48 minutes.Again, if you put Iverson on the Spurs, they would still be an elite team, whereas if you put Parker on the Sixers they would have had a worse season than they had this year.If you have a team with a lot of solid players and want a player for the future, the obvious choice is Parker because he is younger. If you have a team built to win now, I'd rather have Iverson.EDIT: I forgot to add the turnovers per 48 minutes statistic, and here it is:Iverson: 3.8 turnovers per 48 minutesParker: 4.4 turnovers per 48 minutesIverson has the edge there too. So Parker isn't that disciplined with the ball, now is he?
Well I would still argue that I think Parker is the better defender. You don't become the best defensive team in the league with a poor point guard on defense. Their passing is about the same and if Poppovich wasn't concerned about resting players during the regular season than Parker could play 40+ minutes. If it is all about winning a championship than I pick Parker. If it was about making a poor team look decent than I pick Iverson.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (mavsfan1000 @ Apr 28 2006, 07:09 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Well I would still argue that I think Parker is the better defender. You don't become the best defensive team in the league with a poor point guard on defense. Their passing is about the same and if Poppovich wasn't concerned about resting players during the regular season than Parker could play 40+ minutes. If it is all about winning a championship than I pick Parker. If it was about making a poor team look decent than I pick Iverson.</div>Parker is not a better defender. The reason the Spurs are a great defensive team is because of their great team defense, not because each player is a superb one-on-one defender. Team defense is different from man-on-man defense.The only situation in which I would pick Parker over Iverson is if I'm building a team to win in the future, simply because of the age difference, as I've already stated. In nearly every other situation, my pick is easily Iverson.
Team defense can only take you so far. You have to have good defenders because helping out on defense allows someone else an opportunity to score. I don't see teams constantly attacking San Antonio's guards and constantly getting in the paint. Parker is an average defender and Iverson is a poor defender.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (mavsfan1000 @ Apr 28 2006, 07:17 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Team defense can only take you so far. You have to have good defenders because helping out on defense allows someone else an opportunity to score. I don't see teams constantly attacking San Antonio's guards and constantly getting in the paint. Parker is an average defender and Iverson is a poor defender.</div>Both Parker and Iverson are on the same level defensively if we are talking about one-on-one defense. The reason Parker looks better is because of the great team defense of the Spurs compared to the porous team defense of the Sixers.If a player gets by Parker, there is always somebody there to help him out. If somebody helps out, yes, it leaves somebody open, but that is where defensive rotations come into play. The Spurs make crisp, swift defensive rotations, and that is what makes them a great defensive team (among other things). The same goes for teams like the Pistons.If you believe Parker is an "average" defender, then you must consider Iverson an "average" defender as well. The only reason I've read in this thread supporting that Parker is a better defender than Iverson is that he played solid defense on Bibby in the first two games of the Spurs-Kings series. If that is the sole support for your assertion, well, then, you are crazy.I might have missed any other reasons, and if I did please share them.
