I just want to start out by saying this is NOT my opinion, I just wanted your guys thoughts on the situation. Since Iverson sat out Webber and Iguodala have both been playing much better, Iverson has had plenty of second options and NONE of them have worked out. Is it a coincidence or is Iverson the problem? When I say cancer, I'm not talking about having a bad attitude and being a problem in the locker room. I'm talking about his style of play, and the way he plays the game.Over the years he has had Tim Thomas, Chris Webber, Keith Van Horn, Larry Hughes, Glenn Robinson, Derrick Coleman. All those guys are viable second options, however with Iverson it didn't seem to work out.He also had his share of solid role players as well:Aaron McKieGeorge LynchRaja BellKenny ThomasBruce BowenSpeedy ClaxtonEric SnowMatt HarpringJumaine JonesTyrone HillTheo RatliffMatt GeigerBrian SkinnerRodney RogersDikembe MutomboI know I am forgetting some but this is off the top of my head and I am too lazy to go look it up. Are you guys sure its not Iverson you should be blaming?
no hes nothes had alright players but never anybody that is on his level on talenthe's had to carry the loads of most of his teamsaaron mckie was the 2nd leading scorer on the finals team..enough saidif hes on the team as kevin garnett or paul pierce or that kind of player..he'll be less of a "cancer" because he'll have confidence in his teammates
He knows how to score but he doesn't know how to get players involved. Not that they're better without him but they get many more opportunities now which could be good or bad.
I don't think he's a cancer. I think the problem was that he was sick of Philly. A guy who's a superstar but on a total crap team with one of the worst managements in the NBA isn't going to be going to functions and stuff unless he has to.
No, Iverson is a Gemini. But close, if he was born 17 days later he would have been.<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>He knows how to score but he doesn't know how to get players involved. Not that they're better without him but they get many more opportunities now which could be good or bad.</div>I agree, you have to admit Iverson is someone who does look for his shot moreso then others. You could argue he never had great players but then Tony's list would disagree. Yes their not big names, but not many teams are able to pair up 2 superstars. I'm not saying Iverson is a cancer, but he definately deserves some blame. He's the one who likes to put everything on his shoulders and when you do that. You deserve blame when your team does bad.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BALLAHOLLIC? @ Dec 13 2006, 03:48 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I just want to start out by saying this is NOT my opinion, I just wanted your guys thoughts on the situation. Since Iverson sat out Webber and Iguodala have both been playing much better games. Iverson has had plenty of second options and NONE of them have worked out. Is it a coincidence or is Iverson the problem?Over the years he has had Tim Thomas, Chris Webber, Keith Van Horn, Larry Hughes, Glenn Robinson, Derrick Coleman. All those guys are viable second options. However with Iverson it didn't seem to work.He also had his share of solid role players as well:Aaron McKieGeorge LynchRaja BellKenny ThomasBruce BowenSpeedy ClaxtonEric SnowMatt HarpringJumaine JonesTyrone HillTheo RatliffMatt GeigerBrian SkinnerRodney RogersDikembe MutomboI know I am forgetting some but this is off the top of my head and I am too lazy to go look it up.Are you guys sure its not Iverson you should be blaming?</div> Solid role players? He's had as many decent players as any other star. Raja Bell and Bruce Bowen were not good players when they were in Philadelphia and never played. Tyrone Hill, Dikembe Mutombo and George Lynch were solid when I watched them...but they were all past their prime. Would I want Allen Iverson on my team? No. In my opinion he's not a kind of guy I want around a young team...Do I think he's amazing and fun to watch? Hell yes.
He's not a saint, but he's also not a cancer. He's actually never had a viable second option to play with.Tim Thomas - Since when is he a viable second option? He's a roll player, not a #2 scorer.Chris Webber - WAY past his prime. A shell of the player he once was. Keith Van Horn - Another role player, and a soft one at that. There's no way KVH could ever carry a serious load on a contending team. Larry Hughes - He played for Philly a year and a half when he first got into the league and wasn't anything special. Right now he's failing as Lebron's #2, and The King definitely gets everyone involved.Glenn Robinson - Like Webber, this guy was on his last legs when he got to Philadelphia. He simply couldn't get it done at the same level anymore. Derrick Coleman - The first few years he was there Iverson was an inexperienced young guy on a horrible team, and the last three years DC was an often injured fat man doing his best not to blow out a knee carrying all that weight up and down the court. The best way to win with Allen Iverson would be to surround him with tough defensive players that can bang on the inside, some nice outside shooters he can dish to, and one other player that can carry the load once and a while when AI gets a little banged up. Unfortunately AI has never had that last piece, and he only had the first two for a short period of time.
He may have some attitude problems, but his presence isnt going to hurt the team. He loves to win, he plays hard every night, and he is one of the best scorers in the League. He is definately not a cancer to a team..
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (CB4AllStar @ Dec 13 2006, 05:41 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>He may have some attitude problems, but his presence isnt going to hurt the team. He loves to win, he plays hard every night, and he is one of the best scorers in the League. He is definately not a cancer to a team..</div>Is this coming from the same person that said Allen Iverson didnt care about winning, and he just cared about his stats and own well being? I think it is...But of course he isnt a cancer. He hasnt had the talent to get him any further than he has gotten. Even when he made it to the finals in 2000 or 2001 (cant remember), his team wanst that sold. I cancer wouldnt do that for you....His second best player was Dikembe Mutumbo who was past his prime and wasnt an offensive threat what so ever. He had his role players, but not a team that should ever be in the finals. Allen Iverson took that team to the finals by himself. The sixers havent made the playoffs in a couple of years, but do you honestly think that they should have made it last year? I dont think so....I think he just needs a new start with a new organization.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Rok @ Dec 13 2006, 04:00 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>No, Iverson is a Gemini. But close, if he was born 17 days later he would have been.</div> I might have been the only one who caught that.But I don't think that Iverson is a cancer. Look at the guys he's had with him. He's had to carry the load forever, and even since he has gotten a few decent players with him he wasn't used to having any confidence (as previously stated by someone) to give them the ball.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ballerman2112 @ Dec 13 2006, 06:17 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Is this coming from the same person that said Allen Iverson didnt care about winning, and he just cared about his stats and own well being? I think it is...But of course he isnt a cancer. He hasnt had the talent to get him any further than he has gotten. Even when he made it to the finals in 2000 or 2001 (cant remember), his team wanst that sold. I cancer wouldnt do that for you....His second best player was Dikembe Mutumbo who was past his prime and wasnt an offensive threat what so ever. He had his role players, but not a team that should ever be in the finals. Allen Iverson took that team to the finals by himself. The sixers havent made the playoffs in a couple of years, but do you honestly think that they should have made it last year? I dont think so....I think he just needs a new start with a new organization.</div>Yeah, I admit that I was totally wrong in saying that. That was back in June anyway. Why are you even bringing that up? I said that 6 months ago...<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Rok @ Dec 13 2006, 05:00 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>No, Iverson is a Gemini. But close, if he was born 17 days later he would have been.I agree, you have to admit Iverson is someone who does look for his shot moreso then others. You could argue he never had great players but then Tony's list would disagree. Yes their not big names, but not many teams are able to pair up 2 superstars. I'm not saying Iverson is a cancer, but he definately deserves some blame. He's the one who likes to put everything on his shoulders and when you do that. You deserve blame when your team does bad.</div>:HAHAHA: Clever man..
It can go either way to me, besides Larry Brown no other coach has been able to discipline him as well as Larry and even then, Larry had hard times. Stuff like the practice incident, not showing up to fan appreciation night and other things are a real negative on the team. On the other hand, hes a complete warrior on the court, countless amount of injuries which he plays through and still manages to score a ton. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>No. In my opinion he's not a kind of guy I want around a young team...Do I think he's amazing and fun to watch? Hell yes.</div>Completely agree, nothing against AI but I would prefer someone who can try the get the ball around more, not that Iverson doesn't try to but hes more of a shoot-first guard.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BALLAHOLLIC? @ Dec 13 2006, 02:48 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Over the years he has had Tim Thomas, Chris Webber, Keith Van Horn, Larry Hughes, Glenn Robinson, Derrick Coleman. All those guys are viable second options. However with Iverson it didn't seem to work.Matt Geiger</div>Those viable second options aren't as viable as you say they are. Living Legend posted reasons, but I'm going to add that Iverson didn't have a lot of time to get used to playing with each of them. He didn't have a Pippen who played with him for more than four seasons.Man Matt Geiger rocked. I remember him :rock:
- The Sixers have been on fire since the Iverson trade, they are playing great basketball.- Chris Webber has been playing amazing since he split with AI.- The Nuggets have been struggling since the trade.I just thought I would bring this up...
These are all signs leading up to him being a cancer, and you cant ignore them....BUT, considering what he did earlier on in his career, I am going to say no. He took a very sub par team to the NBA finals. He put that team on his back and put so much work and effort in to making that team good. He for sure wasnt a cancer back then....But once again, as of late, he hasnt had the best of luck with his teams. Denver was doing pretty good before he came over, and you would think adding talent such as himself would help, but it has done everything but that. So, as of late, I think you could consider him a cancer....The Sixers have been playing really well since he left...
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BALLAHOLLIC? @ Mar 13 2007, 11:49 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I'm on the fence with him, a good argument can be made from either side.</div>From the way he's been in Denver, the guy has proven to me he is not a cancer... he may hinder some of his teammates ability to an extent, but he also enhances it just as equally.He is not a cancer. He has just gotten a bad rap over his career... obviously some of it is/was justified, but overall the man is not a cancer, in my opinion. He has straightened up considerably since coming into the league, and has grown up a lot.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Living_Legend33 @ Dec 13 2006, 05:12 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Larry Hughes - He played for Philly a year and a half when he first got into the league and wasn't anything special. Right now he's failing as Lebron's #2, and The King definitely gets everyone involved.</div>Hughes played, what? 50 games? And they traded him off to Golden State. He didn't do terrible in GS, but he didn't raise any eyebrows. With the Wizards he made his mark pretty much because he was able to play there for 3 years and get to know the system. He isn't failing as LBJ's #2 guy. He played like 80 games with James, and he needs more time. Matter fact he is doing very well as of late at the point guard spot and making Cleveland look awesome on their 6 game winning streak.Anyway, on to Iverson.He isn't a cancer, IMO. You can't judge Melo and A.I yet, they seem to be pretty close with each other and I think it will just take some time. You just don't put the 2 top scorers in the NBA on the same team and expect them to just click in a matter of 10-15 games. They are also dealing with people getting hurt this season. I don't know if it will work out between the two, but A.I and Carmelo really like each other and they want it to work badly. Just gonna take time to fully know if it will work, or wont it.All well, JMO.
