Iverson had to carry that 2000 team to the finals almost entirely on his back. He was never a true point guard, and Eric Snow (as bad a shooter as Ben Simmons but with a ton more heart and a better defender) made a good support system. Dikembe proved to be a good center but up against Shaq they had no chance.

CP is a truer point guard.

No doubt. Iverson was not really a point.

But I still take Iverson as the guy I want over Paul. And Paul is really really good.

_________________
"He is a loathsome, offensive brute
--yet I can't look away."

That’s because Iverson would throw himself all over the court to win. The guy had no fear.

CP3 has made every team that he has ever played on decidedly better while Iverson has not. That's why give CP3 the decisive edge. Aside from scoring (,which he can do whenever he puts his mind to it) he is better at every other single aspect of the game than Iverson.

_________________

That’s the difference: iverson WAS the team. When he got old, he was no use to anybody. But when he was the pivotal icon of the Sixers he was pretty much the only reason to watch. When he finally got a decent group of role players, they went up against the Lakers who would’ve laid waste to any team in the East at the time. Even the Bucks Big Three wouldn’t have won more than 2 games against them.

Chris Paul does make a team better but he isn’t the icon. He’s just a great all-round player.

But that has to do with hype more than anything. As a basketball player it's not even close honestly.

The Eastern Conf. Was the weakest that it had ever been the year Iverson took Philly to the Finals. In most other years his teams had either a losing record or barely reached .500 his career also was shot by the time he reached 30.

Paul is still going strong at 35

_________________

the advanced stats nerds would laugh at even comparing AI to CP3. According to the nerds CP3 is easily a top 5 PG of all time and maybe as high as #2.

_________________

I wouldn’t compare the two as players, personally; I’d say similar players to AI would be Carmelo or Vince Carter. AI was a true scorer but he didn’t have size. He just had presence. I can’t argue about the hype, it was furious. But had the Sixers played the Jazz or something then Iverson would have a ring. Maybe could have even taken the Kings.

That year I don't think they make the playoffs if they were in the West. Barely scratched 50 wins as I remember. May have even been 48.

They were extremely lucky to have played in the garbage ass East. Bucks had better talent but Philly was better coached. They were the only team in the East that could seriously challenge them.

I was pulling like hell for Charlotte and Baron Davis/Mashburn to pop Milwaukee in the Semis that year. They were my darkhorse team to come out the East.

_________________

The idea that T Mac and Kobe were equals is still hilarious two years later.

Iverson's one of my favorite players ever and I was never a big CP fan but CP is the answer between the two imo.

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul

Great example of why advanced stats are not the end all of things.

_________________
"He is a loathsome, offensive brute
--yet I can't look away."

what about +/- tho

_________________

See what I mean?

_________________

Nah. Philly actually got better simply by trading him straight up for Andre Miller and Denver became contenders simply by trading him for Billups.

Iverson may be the most overrated player of his era.

_________________

COme on man, that is just silly. As I said the first time around if you want to argue Paul is better then that is fine. He is really good. But if you are going to say Iverson was overrated that is just ridiculous.

_________________
"He is a loathsome, offensive brute
--yet I can't look away."

Nah it's silly to think he was an "all time great". Anyone who thinks that is overrating what he was as a player. He had one year of elevating his team and that had more to do with the weakness of the other teams in the Conference than anything he did.

I'm almost certain that he had a career losing record as a player. And as far as weak supporting cast goes that is even a misnomer. Philly's coaching staff realized that he couldn't play with other high scoring players so they decided to surround him with hustle hard, ball fetching, defensive minded players in order to try and win.

Great players are able to play with other great players and be successful. They knew he'd never be able to accept that and that is why they decided to surround him with role players.

_________________

AI

_________________