# Is A.I. starting at PG again this year?



## Floods (Oct 25, 2005)

If so, why? Playing a great scorer like Iverson at the point is the stupidest thing i've ever heard. Answers?


----------



## BlueHat (Dec 19, 2003)

David_Ortiz said:


> If so, why? Playing a great scorer like Iverson at the point is the stupidest thing i've ever heard. *Answers*?


The Answer.


----------



## Sliccat (Oct 16, 2004)

David_Ortiz said:


> If so, why? Playing a great scorer like Iverson at the point is the stupidest thing i've ever heard. Answers?


Well, because he can't defend shooting guards, none of the other point guards can either, and they're all injured anyways. Not to mention that he's the best pure passer in the bunch.


----------



## Your Answer (Jul 13, 2005)

David_Ortiz said:


> If so, why? Playing a great scorer like Iverson at the point is the stupidest thing i've ever heard. Answers?


So just dont HEAR about it WATCH it to. If you did you would see it fits the situation better this way.


----------



## RoddneyThaRippa (Jun 28, 2003)

Better than pairing him alonside a short point guard. I still think the guy has skills to be a top five pure point guard in the league, but I'm not sure how it'll work out. Everything still comes back to how Karl utilizes the offense. Needless to say...


----------



## Sliccat (Oct 16, 2004)

RoddneyThaRippa said:


> Better than pairing him alonside a short point guard. I still think the guy has skills to be a top five pure point guard in the league, but I'm not sure how it'll work out. Everything still comes back to how Karl utilizes the offense. Needless to say...


The thing is, its not a question of willingness either. His main problem is utilization and experience. Karl has no idea how he's going to use the guy from game to game, which keeps him inconsistent, and he's only played about 4-5 seasons at pg, and even then he was leading the team in scoring. He's a great passer, but he gets alot of turnovers because he isn't used to this particular role.

Karl needs to clearly define him a role, whatever it is. I'd prefer it to be a 20/10 type thing, but anything consistent.


----------



## RoddneyThaRippa (Jun 28, 2003)

I can't decide if I like what I saw out of Iverson tonight. The turnovers obviously have to go down. Seeing the game live, he had an incredible effect on the game that belies his streaky shooting. Can't really make my mind up. 

There were some spurts where I wondered if he was healthy though. He's still quick, but something seems off. I'd really like to see Karl keep his minutes under 35 this season, if not slightly lower when possible.


----------



## Sliccat (Oct 16, 2004)

RoddneyThaRippa said:


> I can't decide if I like what I saw out of Iverson tonight. The turnovers obviously have to go down. Seeing the game live, he had an incredible effect on the game that belies his streaky shooting. Can't really make my mind up.
> 
> There were some spurts where I wondered if he was healthy though. He's still quick, but something seems off. I'd really like to see Karl keep his minutes under 35 this season, if not slightly lower when possible.


He does have a bruised thigh, but he's been getting slower for a few years now. And the TO's do have to go down. Thankfully, he stopped committing so many in the second half.


----------



## darth-horax (Nov 21, 2005)

It's early. TO's will go down...I just hope his assists stay up.


----------



## Your Answer (Jul 13, 2005)

darth-horax said:


> It's early. TO's will go down...I just hope his assists stay up.


14 was pretty impressive, It'll be interesting to see what his average assists a game is once we start getting more games under our belt.


----------



## RoddneyThaRippa (Jun 28, 2003)

I always forget how great of a passer Iverson is sometimes. The way he gets the ball around the court is more unique than anyone, even Kidd and Nash. Not to say he is as good a passer as those guys.


----------



## Sliccat (Oct 16, 2004)

RoddneyThaRippa said:


> I always forget how great of a passer Iverson is sometimes. The way he gets the ball around the court is more unique than anyone, even Kidd and Nash. Not to say he is as good a passer as those guys.


He's as good but not half as effecient. He tries to make hard passes too much, and it kills him on turnovers. The biggest problem with him at point is that he doesn't make the easy pass enough. When he starts doing that, he can do point full-time.

Also, he doesn't have their full court awareness.


----------



## Mr. Hobbes (Jul 1, 2005)

I don't see how AI is that great of a passer. I don't like those slash-in, twist in mid-air kickouts to call him that good at it. He certainly has the ability to thread the needle sometimes, but he relies on shooters too much instead of cutters to be labeled that good of a passer.

I'd say his passing is about as good as most people think it is.


----------



## darth-horax (Nov 21, 2005)

Chan said:


> I don't see how AI is that great of a passer. I don't like those slash-in, twist in mid-air kickouts to call him that good at it. He certainly has the ability to thread the needle sometimes, but he relies on shooters too much instead of cutters to be labeled that good of a passer.
> 
> I'd say his passing is about as good as most people think it is.



Sounds like you're describing Steve Nash.


----------



## Sliccat (Oct 16, 2004)

darth-horax said:


> Sounds like you're describing Steve Nash.


excellent. They're completely different players, but very similar in the way they pass.


----------



## darth-horax (Nov 21, 2005)

Very, very true.








that's why I said it.


----------



## Floods (Oct 25, 2005)

Iverson's not a point guard. He should be played at shooting guard regardless of his height IMO. AI's a ball hog, and making him the PG on a team full of other good scorers like Anthony and Smith (even Martin) is a big mistake b/c the ball won't get distributed nearly as much as Denver needs it to be.

Just my opinion though.


----------



## darth-horax (Nov 21, 2005)

He had 14 assists on opening night.


----------



## Sliccat (Oct 16, 2004)

David_Ortiz said:


> Iverson's not a point guard. He should be played at shooting guard regardless of his height IMO. AI's a ball hog, and making him the PG on a team full of other good scorers like Anthony and Smith (even Martin) is a big mistake b/c the ball won't get distributed nearly as much as Denver needs it to be.
> 
> Just my opinion though.


There has only been one situation in which you could have called Iverson a ballhog since coming to Denver.


----------



## ballistixxx (Jan 24, 2006)

Sliccat said:


> excellent. They're completely different players, but very similar in the way they pass.


AI also does that "fake-jumpshot-on-the-perimeter-then-pass-to-the-post-while-in-mid-air" thing


----------



## Mr. Hobbes (Jul 1, 2005)

darth-horax said:


> Sounds like you're describing Steve Nash.


Nash relies on cutters and alleyoops a lot more. He doesn't make the mid-air forced pass as much.


----------



## Sliccat (Oct 16, 2004)

ballistixxx said:


> AI also does that "fake-jumpshot-on-the-perimeter-then-pass-to-the-post-while-in-mid-air" thing





> Nash relies on cutters and alleyoops a lot more. He doesn't make the mid-air forced pass as much.


True enough.


----------

