# Jason Kidd or Allen Iverson



## Cam*Ron (Apr 13, 2003)

Who would you start a franchise with. They both led their team to the Finals.

I pick AI because he is a shooting point were he has the same floor vision as Jason Kidd but is a dynamic scorer.


----------



## ltrain99 (Apr 27, 2003)

2 me this is a joke. Ur comparing the least selfish plsyer in the elague to the most selfish. Of course AI is a scorer, but U cant ever forget intangibles.


----------



## digital jello (Jan 10, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>ltrain99</b>!
> 2 me this is a joke. Ur comparing the least selfish plsyer in the elague to the most selfish. Of course AI is a scorer, but U cant ever forget intangibles.


Why is this a joke? That's exactly what he's looking to see - if a person would like to start off with a scorer or a playmaker. Not a joke at all - a good question.

I'd take Kidd, but I think AI has shown that he can carry a team by himself.


----------



## ltrain99 (Apr 27, 2003)

well Im jsut an AI hater. I think he heurts his team more thn he helps it. I jsut do understand how some1 who takes that many shots,a nd shoots that low of a percentage is considered a great player.


----------



## Cam*Ron (Apr 13, 2003)

_That's exactly what he's looking to see - if a person would like to start off with a scorer or a playmaker._ 

That's what I'm trying to find out.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

I take AI. You gotta be able to score first and foremost. And I think he has comparable vision and if need be could be a very good point. So there's more versatility in what he can do.

I think the intangibles go Iverson's way as well. Though both guys are pretty tough.

Iverson's got a bad rap as a selfish player. He is a team guy. His teammates love him. Look at tyrone hill, who spurned the lakers and Mavs to go play on AI's team. I guarantee Van Horn is happier playing with Allen than he was playing with Kenyon Martin.

Iverson may shoot a lot, but that's what his role on the team is. He's a very good passer if you actually watch a sixers game. I don't know how many layups the Sixers big guys miss that Allen gives them.



Truthfully though, I'd be happy to get either player to start my franchise.


----------



## Amareca (Oct 21, 2002)

I like Iverson but he is terribly overrated.

He is no better than Stephon Marbury or Steve Francis who have comparable offensive skills but are a lot more effective and even Francis is a superior playmaker.

Iverson is also over the hill already in my opinion because his body can't take the pounding.

He also hasn't proved that he could play with another star player and is always good for trouble with his coach or team.

If I started a franchise I would take Kidd because he is more durable and would very likely play better with the next guy I pick for my franchise.


----------



## BEEZ (Jun 12, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BigAmare</b>!
> I like Iverson but he is terribly overrated.
> 
> He is no better than Stephon Marbury or Steve Francis who have comparable offensive skills but are a lot more effective and even Francis is a superior playmaker.


Hes much, much better than Marbury and Francis. When Steve Francis gets his team to the playoffs then we can talk. When Marbury is able to play through injuries then we can talk



> Iverson is also over the hill already in my opinion because his body can't take the pounding.


You make no sense here. He played in every single game last season and will play through injuries. The only other players that do that are Kobe and Karl Malone. That statement holds no vaildity.



> He also hasn't proved that he could play with another star player and is always good for trouble with his coach or team.


Ok, please tell me the star players that have been on the Sixers since hes been a sixer.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>BigAmare</b>!
> He also hasn't proved that he could play with another star player and is always good for trouble with his coach or team.


He proved that how? By not fitting in with Jerry Stackhouse and Larry Hughes? In his first few years in the league? By that logic hasn't Kidd proven the same thing by not getting along with Jamal Mashburn and Jimmy Jackson in dallas?

And the only coach Iverson had problems with was Larry Brown. Never heard about problems between him and John Thompson. Or him and Lucas.

I think a lot of the percieved problems of Iverson are just that, problems of perception.

Can someone put up the stats for FGA leaders last year? Did Iverson actually shoot more than Kobe and T-Mac?


----------



## Damian Necronamous (Jun 10, 2002)

Jason Kidd, good SGs are common...PGs like Jason Kidd are very rare.


----------



## Damian Necronamous (Jun 10, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BEEZ</b>!
> Ok, please tell me the star players that have been on the Sixers since hes been a sixer.


Dikembe Mutombo..........:laugh:


----------



## BEEZ (Jun 12, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Damian Necronamous</b>!
> 
> 
> Dikembe Mutombo..........:laugh:


why did you make me *HAVE* to remember that:sigh:


----------



## Kyle (Jul 1, 2003)

If AI had the same floor vision and was the "dynamic scorer" he would be in trade rumors constantly. But all he is, is trouble and no one wants him.


----------



## edyat (Jun 30, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>ltrain99</b>!
> well Im jsut an AI hater. I think he heurts his team more thn he helps it. I jsut do understand how some1 who takes that many shots,a nd shoots that low of a percentage is considered a great player.


are you saying that kidd doesn't shoot a lot of shots? because he shoots the same percentage as AI. anyway, they're both great players and this one is really tough (because of my love for AI) but i'd take Kidd.


----------



## DeezNets (Aug 12, 2002)

Kidd without question. How can you chose AI to lead a franchise if he doesn't even practice and gets in trouble with the law? :no:


----------



## BEEZ (Jun 12, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>DeezNets</b>!
> Kidd without question. How can you chose AI to lead a franchise if he doesn't even practice and gets in trouble with the law? :no:


Because hes done it and continues to do it. Also please dont use the law argument, because Kidd is no saint either.


----------



## Cam*Ron (Apr 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>DeezNets</b>!
> Kidd without question. How can you chose AI to lead a franchise if he doesn't even practice and gets in trouble with the law? :no:


Kidd has had trouble with the law also. And getting in trouble with the law has nothing to do with what you accomplish on the basketball court. So I guess we can say no one should choose Kobe to try and start a franchise.


----------



## mofo202 (Apr 28, 2003)

This should be Jason Kidd, no contest.....
Sure AI can score himself, but Kidd can make his whole team score. Kidd runs the break somethin amazing.


KIDD!!!!


I cant beleive Iverson is winning the poll.....:no:


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>mofo202</b>!
> 
> I cant beleive Iverson is winning the poll.....:no:


It's because Allen Iverson is the people's champion.:yes: 

That's another reason to take him. He's going to put the butts in the seats. At home or on the road, aside from Jordan(Lebron now) there is no bigger draw in the league.


----------



## Coatesvillain (Jul 17, 2002)

I'll take Iverson, every single time.

All I have to say is this, take the Sixers and Nets teams from last season, switch Iverson and Kidd, and what happens? 

Would Kidd lead that Sixer team past the Pistons? Would Iverson lead the Nets past the Spurs?

Truthfully I'll say right here, that the Sixers would lose more by having Kidd instead of Iverson, than the Nets would lose in their scenario. Of course this isn't a fair way to look at it, and maybe I'm looking at it through a biased point of view, but I guess it's the only one I have.

-Tim


----------



## RoddneyThaRippa (Jun 28, 2003)

Iverson. Everyone wants to talk about his selfishness and what not, but look at him in the playoffs this year. He willed that team to where they got and involved his teamates. Kidd is a fine player but you have to start to question his leadership skills. I'll go out on a limb and say if Iverson was manning the point instead of Jason this year, New Jersey wins AT LEAST one more game in the finals. You can't replace heart.


----------



## Kyle (Jul 1, 2003)

Iverson obviously doesn't make the players around him better. And that's what Jason Kidd does.


----------



## Pinball (Aug 3, 2002)

I'm going to defend AI a bit here. I actually rank Kidd a little higher than Iverson but I think AI is in a bad situation. Larry Brown is a great coach but he's implemented so many different systems and changed the personnel so many times that the Sixers have never really had any consistency. AI is now stuck playing with mediocre talent. He played with decent talent in 00-01 when the Sixers went to the Finals but they couldn't have done it w/o AI. Without him they might not have won 20 games. This is my post from an earlier thread. It is mostly a Larry Brown bashing but I do go over some of the horrible roster moves that the Sixers have made during AI's tenure.



> Originally posted by <b>Pinball</b>!
> 
> 
> Exactly. Larry Brown is an excellent X's and O's coach but he can't spot talent for ****. The Sixers have had some very talented players over the years but Brown made sure that didn't last. Over the course of several years Brown transformed the Sixers from a young, talented team to an aging, unathletic, talentless team. He was always complaining about the lack of scorers on the team and yet he's the one who traded away Stackhouse and Hughes. He was also so damn indecisive about the direction he wanted the team to go in. Stackhouse and AI were supposed to be the backcourt of the future but they dealt Stack for Ratliff. In 98' the Sixers drafted Keith Van Horn and then dealt him for Tim Thomas. Then, in typical Larry Brown fashion, they dealt Tim Thomas after only a year with the team. The worst part is they dealt he and Scott Williams for Tyrone over the Hill and Jerald freaking Honeycutt. Then you have the drafting of Larry Hughes. A couple of years after giving up on it Brown tried to do that whole backcourt of the future thing again. However, after only a year and a half (typical Larry Brown) he gives up on Hughes and deals him away for Kukoc. BTW Bruce Bowen was also invloved in that deal. Another win now screw the future move by Brown. Then, in 00-01 when the Sixers are on fire Brown decides to screw around again. He deals Kukoc, Ratliff, and Mohammed for Dikembe Mutombo. The Sixers went on to make the Finals but I think that was happening regardless. Yet another win now move by Brown. Of course, it doesn't end there. The next year Brown decides to deal Mutombo for KVH. Oddly, this was a move to improve the team for the future. However, why the hell didn't he keep KVH the first time he was drafted? I know he didn't want to play with Coleman but who cares? This is Larry Brown the GM for you. Just like his coaching career, he has no patience. He can't wait a year or two to let things develop. He needs movement, constant movement, and the Sixers roster of 03' is the result. They once had talented players like Stackhouse, Hughes, Thomas, and Ratliff but they dealt them all away and today you have a aging, talentless team. You can blame Larry Brown for that. Sure, he was a great head coach but his idiotic personnel moves have probably set the Sixers back for a long time. If I were a Sixers fan I'd be thrilled with his departure. I was sick and tired of seeing this drama queen threatening to retire at the end of every season. He talks about AI not being dedicated enough and yet he's the one who has walked away from every job twice and bolts the second a better situation comes along. What a freaking joke!


----------



## Laker Freak (Jul 1, 2003)

Kidd has turned Kenyon Martin, Richard Jefferson, Jason Collins, Kerry Kittles, and Luscious Harris into stars while Iverson has turned Van Horn, Hill, and Coleman into nobodies. So Kidd helps his team while AI does everything for his team. Its like when a child asks a teacher for help some teachers answer the question for the child (AI) while great teachers help the student and make them better. (J Kid)


----------



## allenive21 (Jul 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ltrain99</b>!
> Of course AI is a scorer, but U cant ever forget intangibles.


Intangibles, you forgot AI's most valuable asset, his heart. AI has the most heart in the league. He's played through so many injuries that would leave guys on the IR for a long team. AI has the advantage in intangibles because he does what it takes to win.


----------



## Kmasonbx (Apr 7, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Laker Freak</b>!
> Kidd has turned Kenyon Martin, Richard Jefferson, Jason Collins, Kerry Kittles, and Luscious Harris into stars while Iverson has turned Van Horn, Hill, and Coleman into nobodies. So Kidd helps his team while AI does everything for his team. Its like when a child asks a teacher for help some teachers answer the question for the child (AI) while great teachers help the student and make them better. (J Kid)


Richard Jefferson has not played in the NBA without Kidd, so who knows how good Jefferson would be without Kidd. Kenyon Martin has played 68 games of his NBA career without Kidd, and if he didn't get hurt his rookie year he would have won the ROY, so I think it's safe to say he would be pretty good right now without Kidd.

Jason Collins, Luscious Harris and Kerry Kittles are stars? Van Horn and Coleman are nobodies? Both of those players had much much better years than those three I mentioned from the Nets. Coleman has been past his prime since the first day he stepped foot in Philly, so it's not his fault Coleman isn't as good as he was when he was in New Jersey. If Harris, Collins and Kittles are stars, then I guess Iverson turned Eric Snow and Aaron McKie into stars. 

Let's compare Van Horn's number his only season with Kidd and this past season with Iverson:
W/Kidd: 14.8ppg, 7.5 rpg, 43.3 FG%
W/Iverson: 15.9ppg, 7.1rpg, 48.2 FG%

Looks to me like he had a better season with Iverson.


----------



## Laker Freak (Jul 1, 2003)

Look at Van Horn's playoff stats.


----------



## rocketeer (Oct 7, 2002)

i would take iverson. they are both great players but iverson can do more than kidd. it depends on what you need, but if i'm picking from these 2 to start a franchise iverson is the pick. he can be a scorer or a distributor. kidd can score sometimes but mainly creates for others. iverson can create just as good as kidd when he focuses on that. but he has never had good enough talent around him to not be the main scoring option. it not his fault his team needs him to take all the shots.


----------



## RoddneyThaRippa (Jun 28, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Kyle</b>!
> Iverson obviously doesn't make the players around him better. And that's what Jason Kidd does.


What? Did you actually watch the playoffs? AI busted his *** out there and involved the team. I agree that this is a strike against his game at times, but to say say Iverson "obviously doesn't make the players around him better" is overkill. Give AI some love.


----------



## BrYaNBaIlEy06 (Jul 15, 2003)

A.I.


----------



## Ben1 (May 20, 2003)

AI, easy choice for me. 

I mean when i look for a franchise player, i expect him to be able to lead the team in offense esp, and i dun think Kidd can do that better than AI. Kidd is obviously a great PG with superb passing ability, but AI is soo much better in terms of scoring and isn't a bad passer either. The thing that get AI the nod here is his heart. The determination and heart that he puts into every single game is remarkable..


----------



## Kyle (Jul 1, 2003)

I'm not hating on anyone. Just stating the facts. Anyone who throws up 30 shots a game and gets 2-3 assists isn't making his team better.


----------



## Cam*Ron (Apr 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Kyle</b>!
> I'm not hating on anyone. Just stating the facts. Anyone who throws up 30 shots a game and gets 2-3 assists isn't making his team better.


You just lost all credibility. For the regular season he averaged 5.5 assists and in the playoffs 7.4 assists.
He only attempted about 23 shots a game.


----------



## rocketeer (Oct 7, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Kyle</b>!
> I'm not hating on anyone. Just stating the facts. Anyone who throws up 30 shots a game and gets 2-3 assists isn't making his team better.


if he only averaged 2-3 assists you might have a point. but he averaged 5.5 last season. and during the playoffs he was 4th best in assists per game with 7.4 which was just .8 behind jason kidd. so iverson can score the points and get the assists.


----------



## Ben1 (May 20, 2003)

In other words, Iverson can dish as good as Kidd but score alot better than Kidd..


----------



## Laker Freak (Jul 1, 2003)

What about Kidd's rebounding and court vision.


----------



## PLAYER H8ER (Jul 17, 2003)

derek fisher is better then kidd and iverson added together
he will average 20 points and 15 assists this season cause he is playing with so many great players and that

fisher = 3 rings soon to be many more

kidd + iverson = no rings and they will never have rings cuz they suck jason kidd beats his wife and has a big pumpkin head son and iverson is a fake thug who will probably be dead in 6 months

fisher = better than kidd and iverson togther


----------



## Amareca (Oct 21, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BEEZ</b>!
> 
> 
> Hes much, much better than Marbury and Francis. When Steve Francis gets his team to the playoffs then we can talk. When Marbury is able to play through injuries then we can talk


You are retarded.
Stephon Marbury played the last 2 seasons on bad ankles and waited for surgery until offseason.
In his first season with Phoenix he also played through a harmstring injury.
In the playoffs this year he played with an injured left shoulder. He didn't even have enough strength when he got injured in game 4 to the point that he couldn't get the ball to the rim on the freethrow and still played through the injury.

Allen Iverson can do nothing offensively that Stephon Marbury can't do and he got schooled by Marbury in the regular season.


----------



## MiamiHeat03 (Mar 28, 2003)

aLLEN iVERSON


----------



## Dathomieyouhate (Jun 21, 2003)

Jason kidd is like the matrix he's THE ONE!! OHH lol


----------



## HEATLUNATIC (May 27, 2002)

Ivy!:yes:


----------



## BEEZ (Jun 12, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BigAmare</b>!
> 
> 
> You are retarded.
> ...


*Firstly I dont pull power trips you call me retarded again and you can take a vacation for a few days. You dont call out posters and you definitley dont call out mods*. 

Now on to your lack of knowledge about the situation. I appluad Marbury for actually being tough and toughing out the last 2 seasons but the truth of the matter is, is that he doesnt play with the heart that AI does and 2 over the course of there careers Marbury has had the mysterious injuries and not played through them. 

LOL that he schooled AI. His first game against AI he scored 12 points on 4-13 shooting and had10 assists and his second game he had 28 pts and 10 assts while AI had 12 pts and 6 assits while the second game he had 22 and 7. Yeah Marbury schooled him


----------



## Dathomieyouhate (Jun 21, 2003)

who's going farther in the play offs? and who made the nets what they are today?? i bet iverson could not do what jason did in new jersey.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Dathomieyouhate</b>!
> who's going farther in the play offs? and who made the nets what they are today?? i bet iverson could not do what jason did in new jersey.


They've both been to the finals.

The nets have more talent around Kidd right now, so this question doesn't have a whole lot to do with the two players.

However. In the playoffs, Iverson could go on a 4 game binge where he puts up 50 and 10 and they would knock NJ out of the playoffs by himself.

When he's on, and especially if he's playing in front of those philly fans that team will not lose.


----------



## JerryWest (Jun 24, 2002)

I picked Iverson, I think he gives the team a better chance of winning.

He is a very capable and willing passer, it's just his team doesn't have the offensive weapons who can make the shots when he passes the ball.


----------



## BizzyRipsta (May 25, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>futuristxen</b>!
> They've both been to the finals.


sixers w/ iverson - once

nets w/ kidd - twice


----------



## stevenash (Nov 11, 2002)

kidd cant shoot as good as ai, and i dont think kidd could do anything with crappy players around him,
so i pick ai because he can carry a team


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>BizzyRipsta</b>!
> 
> 
> sixers w/ iverson - once
> ...


And yet Kidd only has one more win in the nba finals:laugh:

That's the diffrence right there. Kidd's team gets swept by the lakers, and Iverson's team puts up a fight.


----------



## GNG (Aug 17, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>futuristxen</b>!
> 
> 
> And yet Kidd only has one more win in the nba finals:laugh:
> ...


The Sixers went down in 5. The only game they won had to go into overtime.

Sounds like the Nets put up just as good of a fight.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>rawse</b>!
> 
> 
> The Sixers went down in 5. The only game they won had to go into overtime.
> ...


How is that?
My simple mind can't comprehend how no wins against the lakers is the same as 1 win.

Feel free to elaborate.


----------



## mo76 (Jun 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Laker Freak</b>!
> Look at Van Horn's playoff stats.


So you're saying it's Iverson's fault that VanHorn can't hit a shot makes stupid turnovers and played like sh$t?


----------



## mo76 (Jun 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Kyle</b>!
> Iverson obviously doesn't make the players around him better. And that's what Jason Kidd does.


  
You are just saying what everyone has said about Jason Kid since the start of his career, how cliche. AI has proven he can win in the NBA with less of a supporting cast than Kidd. If I were *starting* a franchise like the poster asked I would take AI. If I had an established franchise I would still take AI because I honestly beleive he is a superior player to Jason Kidd. I think the Nets have a nice team and Kidd is a perfect fit for them. I am really glad he stayed. They are a team designed to run, and this is were Jason Kidd flourishes. The nets aren't that great in the half court as they proved in this years finals.  AI can Ignite a half court game just as easily as anyone.


----------



## Amareca (Oct 21, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BEEZ</b>!
> 
> 
> *Firstly I dont pull power trips you call me retarded again and you can take a vacation for a few days. You dont call out posters and you definitley dont call out mods*.
> ...


And you shouldn't post ridiculous stuff like you did if you can't back it up at all. Especially when it is exactly the other way around.

Marbury shut Iverson down in the first game and won the game for his team.
Marbury's team won the 2nd game as well.

Marbury averaged 20ppg 10apg 2.5 47%FG 67%3s against Iverson

Iverson averaged 17ppg 6.5apg 2.0rpg 27%FG 18%3s against Marbury

Marbury's team swept Iverson's. You don't call that schooling someone? 
 

And you are off base once again.

Marbury and Iverson were drafted in the same year and Marbury has played more career games than Iverson. That seems to indicate that you didn't do your research well once again.

Marbury played 163 regular season games the last 2 years for example and missed one due to suspension.

And if you don't think Marbury plays with heart and emotion as well as anyone you obviously don't know anything about him and must have missed the playoffs as well. They were good example.


----------



## BEEZ (Jun 12, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BigAmare</b>!
> 
> 
> And you shouldn't post ridiculous stuff like you did if you can't back it up at all. Especially when it is exactly the other way around.
> ...


Nothing I post is ridiculous and I BACK everything up I say. Even if that was the case that doesnt give you the right to call me or anyone else a name. And its not the other way around. 1st yes the Phoenix Suns swept the Sixers this year and no Marbury didnt school Iverson. 2nd when did anyone say anything about the year they were drafted. I sure didnt. No one in the league has the heart and emotion that AI does PERIOD. Marbury played very well in the Playoffs last year,but where did it get him. A first round exit. AI has been there more times than Marbury has.


----------



## John (Jun 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BigAmare</b>!
> 
> 
> And you shouldn't post ridiculous stuff like you did if you can't back it up at all. Especially when it is exactly the other way around.
> ...


Beez, I am a Sun fan and I understand Iverson was/is better than Marbury by a mile. Some casual fans like Amare dont see what's going on but to yell Marbury can do what Iverson can do offensivly?

U think the stuff u realize the coach doesnt? Why on earth Penny wasnt the true point guard for the team? No, it wasnt Penny but it was Mabury who needs the ball with him to be so called effective.

Some losers here say Iverson put up many shots, but all he puts ARE MOSTLY makable shots. I can bet my life on it if uy ask Mabury to be an off guard and play without the ball but still needs to put up 30 shots, his team will win likely 10 games?

It's okay to be passionate BigAmare, but please respect others, u dont call him a retarded just because his thoughts dont go your way!!! c


----------



## Amareca (Oct 21, 2002)

I refuse to argue with an exclusive Penny-fan who thinks that Penny Hardaway is the Suns most valueble player and that Stephon Marbury sucks.

To Beez:
You said that Marbury has to learn to play through injuries.
Where did you back that up? You can't because it is untrue and every statistical fact and the last seasons prove that Marbury misses fewer games than Iverson while you said that Iverson plays through injuries while Marbury doesn't.

West>East
Phoenix>Philly
Marbury>Iverson


----------



## BEEZ (Jun 12, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BigAmare</b>!
> I refuse to argue with an exclusive Penny-fan who thinks that Penny Hardaway is the Suns most valueble player and that Stephon Marbury sucks.
> 
> To Beez:
> ...


I'm glad you pointed that out because Marbury out of his 7 seasons in the league has been in the west 2 seasons. Nuff said. Iverson=Allstar game MVP, Finals appeareance, regular season MVP. Marbury=0. Ok thats what I thought. Its been fun


----------



## Cam*Ron (Apr 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>BEEZ</b>!
> 
> 
> I'm glad you pointed that out because Marbury out of his 7 seasons in the league has been in the west 2 seasons. Nuff said. Iverson=Allstar game MVP, Finals appeareance, regular season MVP. Marbury=0. Ok thats what I thought. Its been fun


:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:


----------

