# OT: Iverson traded to Denver for Miller, Smith, two 07 1st round picks



## sa1177 (Feb 18, 2005)

Andre Miller, Joe Smith, two 2007 first round picks. 

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=2702501


----------



## alext42083 (Nov 7, 2003)

Great deal for Denver IF the team can adjust to Iverson AND IF Carmelo can adjust having another superstar who demands the ball.

Deals like these always seem to favor the teams who get the superstar in return.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

Good trade for Philly.

Wait I thought it was JR Smith, not Joe. Bad trade for Philly, great trade for Denver.


----------



## GOD (Jun 22, 2003)

Denver just got really good on offense. Once melo is back, the two of them will be crazy. 

For the 6ers, they will have three first round picks in a great draft, with one of those picks being a likely top five.


----------



## yakbladder (Sep 13, 2003)

Denver is going to be extremely tough now.

You can't double team both guys without leaving half of their team open.

I think the only advantage to Philly is they might be able to trade those two low picks and a marginal player for a high 2007 draft pick. That may not bode well for Portland if we try and do the same thing (trade up....)


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

Hey, weren't the Blazers suppose to get one of those first round picks for Big Cat. :curse:


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

Two of the top scorers in the league, neither one being a big man . . . should be intersting to watch. 

Are there enough shots to go around?


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

Am I the only one that wonders how Iverson is going to like it in Denver? Iverson is kind of a city gangsta type. Denver is almost Salt Lake City. My guess is that in a few years, Kiki will be considered the next Trader Bob as this team self destructs because of attitude issues as well as issues on and off the court. Every year Karl get these two to play well together and stay out of trouble he should automatically get coach of the year.


----------



## kaydow (Apr 6, 2004)

On Paper - great move for Denver. They want to play a Phoenix like tempo and Iverson is still faster/quicker pushing the ball up-court than anybody. If they are able to run, there SHOULD be enough shots for Melo AND AI. I mean, the Suns make it work with Stoudamire, The Matrix, Nash, Bell, etc. The thing that scares you a little is that Canby and Nene (coming off sergery) aren't exactly gazelles - they may get frustrated playing at a frenetic pace.


----------



## Foulzilla (Jan 11, 2005)

Kiss_My_Darius said:


> Two of the top scorers in the league, neither one being a big man . . . should be intersting to watch.
> 
> Are there enough shots to go around?


That's the real question. We've seen him distribute well in all star games and the Olympics. However, is he willing to do so on a long term basis now that he has a legitimate scoring threat with him (one who actually was outscoring him so far this year)? I think AI genuinely wants to win so will probably be willing to do it (Karl also seems to be pretty good at dealing with egos in the short term). However, it's far from a sure thing. I'll say one thing though, I'm very interested in watching some Denver games once Melo comes back from the suspension.


----------



## drexlersdad (Jun 3, 2006)

not a bad trade all around. Miller is deserving of his salary at 9.1 assists per game, and Joe smith frees up thier salary cap problems a little. If the sixers add two good players in the draft, they should be poised for a return to the playoffs in the feeble east.


----------



## BBert (Dec 30, 2004)

Kiss_My_Darius said:


> Two of the top scorers in the league, neither one being a big man . . . should be intersting to watch.
> 
> Are there enough shots to go around?


No. And not enough "head room" on the court, either. And that has been my thinking since I first heard the notion of pairing Carmello and AI. Even if they figure out how to play together, the other guys may as well just go sit down. I guess we'll see soon enough....or make that later.


----------



## BBert (Dec 30, 2004)

I like this trade for Philly. They got rid of a player who essentially refused to play another minute for them; and in return they get Andre Miller, an expiring contract, and they will have three 1st round picks in this year's draft, one of them being a high lotto pick. Even a blind monkey, heck, even Isaiah Thomas, could come away from the draft with a good player with those odds.


----------



## SodaPopinski (Aug 10, 2004)

Gonna be fun to watch the collapse in the Mile High City now. Two of the biggest ballhogs in the league on the same team? Good luck with that, George. Good luck.

:lol:

-Pop


----------



## Talkhard (May 13, 2003)

Philly made out like bandits. Andre Miller is a great point guard, and those two first round picks, plus their own, could be very good. The beauty of this trade is that the 76ers are still going to suck this year, so they have a great chance at getting the best player in the draft. Considering how good this draft is going to be, Philly has rebuilt itself practically overnight.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

Kiss_My_Darius said:


> Two of the top scorers in the league, neither one being a big man . . . should be intersting to watch.
> 
> Are there enough shots to go around?


While Melo isn't a big man, he's capable of playing a power game. I can envision the Nuggets spending a lot of time with Ivy on the perimeter and Melo in the post. That could create nightmares for the opposition. Do you send a help defender to corrale Iverson or a help defender to prevent Melo from overpowering his defender down low?

Obviously, for them to do well together it requires a buy-in from both guys. Melo hasn't ever seemed to me the sort who would begrudge sharing the ball for the greater good, and Iverson has generally played well with other stars in the All-Star game and Olympics. So, I can see it working.


----------



## deanwoof (Mar 10, 2003)

oh geesus. billy king should be kicked out of the league for this. 

they didnt even get *any *young players in return. 

anybody like the portland twist to it? 

portland got brian skinner for ruben patterson who got swapped for joe smith, who got swapped for iverson ish.


----------



## dudleysghost (Mar 24, 2006)

Talkhard said:


> Philly made out like bandits. Andre Miller is a great point guard, and those two first round picks, plus their own, could be very good. The beauty of this trade is that the 76ers are still going to suck this year, so they have a great chance at getting the best player in the draft. Considering how good this draft is going to be, Philly has rebuilt itself practically overnight.


It's still going to take them some time. Those 1st round draft picks they just got are going to be in the 20s somewhere, so they aren't that special. Their own pick will be top 5, just becaue their team is that bad. I agree with the main point though, they got a great start on a full rebuild. With Miller, Igoudala, Korver, Carney and Green they have a nice stack of young players. Dalembert is ok too, if grossly overpaid. Adding 3 draft picks next year, including one great one, plus another probably very good one in 2008 along with whatever free agent they can get with all their 2008 cap space gives them a nice opportunity to rebuild with a solid foundation. They will still take a lot of time waiting for all that youth to develop, but that's the way to do it.


----------



## deanwoof (Mar 10, 2003)

so what IS it?

hoopshype says andre miller is expiring. espn and realgm both say 2 more years.


----------



## dudleysghost (Mar 24, 2006)

Minstrel said:


> Iverson has generally played well with other stars in the All-Star game and Olympics.


Didn't Iverson basically get uninvited from Team USA? He wasn't playing that well.


----------



## Oldmangrouch (Feb 11, 2003)

In the short-term, this will be great for Denver.

AI will play the rest of this season for revenge. He will do *whatever* it takes to prove everyone wrong - and that includes getting along with Melo.

What happens down the road, is another question.


----------



## dudleysghost (Mar 24, 2006)

deanwoof said:


> so what IS it?
> 
> hoopshype says andre miller is expiring. espn and realgm both say 2 more years.


I'm pretty sure it's 2 more years. Miller isn't expiring, but his contract is decent. If Philly wants to trade him for an expiring contract, I bet they could, but they would be wise to keep him or hold out for more.


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

Both Iverson and Melo are averaging 24 shots a game. That is 48 shots a game for the two. 

That leaves about 25 shots per game for the remaining 8 players (assuming 10 man rotation). Camby, Boykins, Smith, Najera and Hilario can't be too happy about that. 

In fact, I'm guessing it is Smith who is the odd man out . . . 2nd leading scorer averaging 30 mins and 10 shots a game (17 pts a game) on 45% shooting . . . Ouch


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

Reep said:


> Am I the only one that wonders how Iverson is going to like it in Denver? Iverson is kind of a city gangsta type. Denver is almost Salt Lake City. My guess is that in a few years, Kiki will be considered the next Trader Bob as this team self destructs because of attitude issues as well as issues on and off the court. Every year Karl get these two to play well together and stay out of trouble he should automatically get coach of the year.



Kiki is gone now...

Mark Warkentin, former Blazer employee is the GM of Denver


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

dudleysghost said:


> Didn't Iverson basically get uninvited from Team USA? He wasn't playing that well.


In the 2004 Olympics, many considered him the best performer on the team. I don't know what's happened since then.


----------



## SheedSoNasty (Dec 31, 2002)

Now it's time for fantasy owners to trade away Carmello 'cause you know he isn't going to be scoring at the same clip anymore.


----------



## JuniorNoboa (Jan 27, 2003)

Kiss_My_Darius said:


> Both Iverson and Melo are averaging 24 shots a game. That is 48 shots a game for the two.
> 
> That leaves about 25 shots per game for the remaining 8 players (assuming 10 man rotation). Camby, Boykins, Smith, Najera and Hilario can't be too happy about that.
> 
> In fact, I'm guessing it is Smith who is the odd man out . . . 2nd leading scorer averaging 30 mins and 10 shots a game (17 pts a game) on 45% shooting . . . Ouch


Here's where you get an extra 13 shots for JR Smith and others... you do correct math.

Denver is getting 86 FGA's a game not 73 - and there attempts might only go up with AI.


----------



## ryanjend22 (Jan 23, 2004)

management did not **** this trade up. a positive for philly, at least, as positive as it could have turned out. denver still made out better, but who knows with such a rich draft.

denver is a title contender now. straight up. maybe not this year because of the time it takes to gel and the suspensions, but they still could take the west this year. if not this year, they certainly have a great shot next year.

im happy for AI. he deserves this.



SheedSoNasty said:


> Now it's time for fantasy owners to trade away Carmello 'cause you know he isn't going to be scoring at the same clip anymore.


definately. there goes the scoring title. not like he was going to get it with the suspension anyway, but yeah...it will be very interesting to watch two CERTIFIED superstars try and coexist in the scoring dept.



dudleysghost said:


> Didn't Iverson basically get uninvited from Team USA? He wasn't playing that well.


this was political and you know it...iverson was a HUGE reason why we were able to escape with bronze that year. he gave 100% every game and writers saw him as a bright spot on that squad. it was a gotdamn shame the coaches left him off this team.


----------



## dudleysghost (Mar 24, 2006)

Minstrel said:


> In the 2004 Olympics, many considered him the best performer on the team. I don't know what's happened since then.


From what I remember, nearly everyone considered Tim Duncan to be the best performer on that team. Iverson was considered a prime example of what was wrong with that team, that the selection committee put stats and star power ahead of team play.

And since you weren't aware, the next selection committee didn't even invite Iverson to try out, instead favoring true point guards like Chauncy Billups, Chris Paul and even Luke Ridnour. They clearly weren't among those who considered Iverson's Olympic performance to be that valuable.


----------



## dudleysghost (Mar 24, 2006)

ryanjend22 said:


> this was political and you know it...iverson was a HUGE reason why we were able to escape with bronze that year. he gave 100% every game and writers saw him as a bright spot on that squad. it was a gotdamn shame the coaches left him off this team.


The old selection process was the political one, trying to use fame to select players rather than assembling an actual team. The NBA treated the Olympic team as a marketing opportunity, and the team got creamed. The new committee was charged with emphasizing team play over those kinds of "political" populist concerns, so they left Iverson at home. Team USA isn't supposed to "escape with bronze", they are supposed to win it all, and I think when they have their actual Olympic team assembled with guys who play together, they are going to crush everyone in Beijing.


----------



## HispanicCausinPanic (Jul 2, 2005)

JANUARY 2ND!!!! Philly @ Denver...............A.I. scores 100 pts.!!!!!!!! Watch out!


----------



## dudleysghost (Mar 24, 2006)

JuniorNoboa said:


> Here's where you get an extra 13 shots for JR Smith and others... you do correct math.
> 
> Denver is getting 86 FGA's a game not 73 - and there attempts might only go up with AI.


It's 85.2, but while it leaves a lot more than 25 FGA for the rest of the team, it's still not many, and they can't go much higher than that. They already lead the league in FGA, ahead of Golden State and Phoenix, and it would be pretty tough to speed up the game any more than that.

Fortunately for Denver, they don't have too many more guys who really demand the ball. Guys like Najera, Evans, Nene et al. probably would be ok being garbagemen. Camby needs to get a few touches to use his jumper to spread the floor and keep defenses honest, but it wouldn't take a lot. Boykings needs to shoot to be effective, but he might get fewer minutes now. JR Smith will definitely still need touches. The FGA available will definitely be tight, but Denver can make it work if those guys accept that they need to defer for the sake of the team.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

dudleysghost said:


> From what I remember, nearly everyone considered Tim Duncan to be the best performer on that team.


That wasn't my perception at all. Duncan was suprisingly ineffective in the Olympics, even though most people thought "The Big Fundamental" would be perfectly suited to international play. Iverson drew quite a bit of praise both for his play and his unselfish attitude.

Lamar Odom and Stephon Marbury were the two who I remembered bearing the brunt of criticism.



> They clearly weren't among those who considered Iverson's Olympic performance to be that valuable.


Fair enough. They also are considered extremely political in their selections and have built some pretty poorly-performing teams.


----------



## crandc (Sep 15, 2004)

Philly did get picks, that's about it. The team was centered around Iverson and will have to remake on the fly. Webber's salary leaves them with no cap room for years.
Reminds me of the Barkley trade; Philly got an all star (Hornacek) and two serviceable players and they were terrible. Until they got a #1 pick, drafted Iverson and started to improve. 
A "great" point guard? Miller is a good point guard but a point guard has to have someone to pass the ball to. Who?

Admins, may I pay $10 so I can update my avatar?


----------



## RedHot&Rolling (Jun 26, 2004)

Philly took on an additional 3 years in Miller's contract, got some low 1st rd draft choices and an expiring (only $6.8M)??? That's not great in my book. Miller, although a assist machine, isn't all that of a player. He's the yin to someone like Marbury's yang - and can't shoot if his life depended on it.

Denver took a good offer. Philly will be a doormat for the next 5 years at least. Oden anyone??


----------



## dudleysghost (Mar 24, 2006)

Minstrel said:


> That wasn't my perception at all. Duncan was suprisingly ineffective in the Olympics, even though most people thought "The Big Fundamental" would be perfectly suited to international play. Iverson drew quite a bit of praise both for his play and his unselfish attitude.
> 
> Lamar Odom and Stephon Marbury were the two who I remembered bearing the brunt of criticism.


I honestly don't know how you could have gotten the impression Duncan didn't play well. He was the teams best and most consistent guy on both ends. Iverson didn't play selfishly, because Marbury was too busy dominating the ball, but AI also didn't score or do much of anything. I couldn't find any compiled stats, but I did find box scores for the losses against Lithuania and Argentina (the biggest games), and Iverson's a no-show.

Lithuania 94, USA 90
Iverson shoots 4-12 for 11 pts, 2 asts, while Duncan shoots 6-7 16 pts, 12 rebs and is second leading scorer behind Richard Jefferson.

Argentina 89, USA 81
Iverson shoots 3-12, 10 pts, 3 assists while not guarding Manu Ginobili as he goes off for 29. Duncan scores 10 pts, 6 rbs in 20 minutes.



Minstrel said:


> Fair enough. They also are considered extremely political in their selections and have built some pretty poorly-performing teams.


This is what I've been talking about. The previous selection committee of NBA ad execs is the one that picked Iverson, because he's a big star. The new one, headed by Jerry Colangelo (of the Phoenix Suns), was selected to replace the old and build a team using players that play within a team concept. They didn't invite Iverson, because they were tired of letting politics force them into putting together poor teams.


----------



## dudleysghost (Mar 24, 2006)

RedHot&Rolling said:


> Philly took on an additional 3 years in Miller's contract, got some low 1st rd draft choices and an expiring (only $6.8M)??? That's not great in my book. Miller, although a assist machine, isn't all that of a player. He's the yin to someone like Marbury's yang - and can't shoot if his life depended on it.
> 
> Denver took a good offer. Philly will be a doormat for the next 5 years at least. Oden anyone??


It isn't the size of the expiring contract, it's how much they reduced their future salary obligation that's important. Joe Smith only makes 6.8 mil, but Philly saved $10 mil next year with this trade, minus whatever they pay the draft picks they got in trade. Andre Miller is a good but not great point guard, but this trade was meant to start a rebuilding project in Philly. They are supposed to be bad this year to get a chance at Oden or someone else good. Then they will take Miller, Igoudala, Green, Korver, Dalembert and Carney along with their picks from this year and go with a full-on youth movement. It will be bad at first, and as they go that will mean more talent from the draft, until it finally comes together, at which time they invest in some free agents. It takes time, but it works. The Bulls and the Blazers both are following this path now.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

dudleysghost said:


> I honestly don't know how you could have gotten the impression Duncan didn't play well. He was the teams best and most consistent guy on both ends. *Iverson didn't play selfishly, because Marbury was too busy dominating the ball, but AI also didn't score or do much of anything. I couldn't find any compiled stats, but I did find box scores for the losses against Lithuania and Argentina (the biggest games), and Iverson's a no-show.*


*

In two games (both losses, in which players are more likely to have played poorly), Iverson was ineffective for 2 and Duncan was ineffective for 1. That hardly illustrates anything.




This is what I've been talking about. The previous selection committee of NBA ad execs is the one that picked Iverson, because he's a big star. The new one, headed by Jerry Colangelo (of the Phoenix Suns), was selected to replace the old and build a team using players that play within a team concept. They didn't invite Iverson, because they were tired of letting politics force them into putting together poor teams.

Click to expand...

And yet, they managed to put together another poor one, that lost in the quarter-finals in the 2006 FIBA World Championships (and the team that beat the US, Greece, was absolutely crushed by Spain in the semi-finals).

This seems more like your spin on the failings and motivations of the old and new selection committees.*


----------



## dudleysghost (Mar 24, 2006)

Minstrel said:


> In two games (both losses, in which players are more likely to have played poorly), Iverson was ineffective for 2 and Duncan was ineffective for 1. That hardly illustrates anything.


Those were the games against 2 of the 3 best teams. Duncan was effective for the half he played in one, and dominated one. Iverson played badly in both. Since that's not enough, here's the stats page for Team USA. Iverson was our leading scorer with 13.8 ppg, on 38% shooting. Duncan was second with 12.9 on 58% shooting with 9 rpg. Those numbers also don't show that Duncan was our only real big man and our best defender. Now which one was our "best performer" and which one was "surprisingly ineffective"?

http://www.usabasketball.com/seniormen/2004/04_moly_stats.html

It's ok if you don't actually remember. The main problem with that team was that it didn't have a true point guard. Iverson and Marbury couldn't fill that role, even with Iverson's old coach Larry Brown there. They also didn't have any shooters, so they were completely inept against international zone defenses. Other than having JR Smith there to hit some 3s, Denver looks to have some of the very same problems.



Minstrel said:


> And yet, they managed to put together another poor one, that lost in the quarter-finals in the 2006 FIBA World Championships (and the team that beat the US, Greece, was absolutely crushed by Spain in the semi-finals).
> 
> This seems more like your spin on the failings and motivations of the old and new selection committees.


The team did play poorly in Greece, but that was only half of the actual projected Olympic team and had only played together a couple months, and they still only lost 1 game, to the home team, and followed with a win over the Olympic champion Argentines.

It's common knowledge USA Basketball wanted to change directions, so they appointed Colangelo and Kryzewski to head a new committee that was freed of the prior constraints to pick marketable stars for the new team, and allowed to pick who they thought would make the most cohesive unit. It's also common knowledge they declined to invite Iverson, despite the fact that he publicly lobbied to be invited. You call the selection process political, but fail to recognize that the decision to eschew popularity aspects of the selection process is exactly how Iverson ended up off the team. You can bark about my spinning it if you want, but to anyone who followed the international team this is all pretty widely known.


----------



## Talkhard (May 13, 2003)

RedHot&Rolling said:


> Philly will be a doormat for the next 5 years at least. Oden anyone??


Philly was already a doormat before the trade, and had lost something like 8 in a row. Now they have a lot of hope for the future. It's a very good trade for them.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

dudleysghost said:


> Those were the games against 2 of the 3 best teams. Duncan was effective for the half he played in one, and dominated one. Iverson played badly in both. Since that's not enough, here's the stats page for Team USA. Iverson was our leading scorer with 13.8 ppg, on 38% shooting. Duncan was second with 12.9 on 58% shooting with 9 rpg. Those numbers also don't show that Duncan was our only real big man and our best defender. Now which one was our "best performer" and which one was "surprisingly ineffective"?


I didn't levy an opinion as to which was the better performer. I was responding to your contention that Iverson was seen as all that was wrong with US basketball. Iverson was, at the time, highly praised for his efforts, and many people (fans and media) considered him the team's best performer in that Olympics.



> It's common knowledge USA Basketball wanted to change directions, so they appointed Colangelo and Kryzewski to head a new committee that was freed of the prior constraints to pick marketable stars for the new team, and allowed to pick who they thought would make the most cohesive unit. It's also common knowledge they declined to invite Iverson, despite the fact that he publicly lobbied to be invited. You call the selection process political, but fail to recognize that the decision to eschew popularity aspects of the selection process is exactly how Iverson ended up off the team. You can bark about my spinning it if you want, but to anyone who followed the international team this is all pretty widely known.


It's common knowledge that USA basketball wanted to change directions, but it's also common knowledge that they've "wanted to change directions" the last few selection processes, as perception that US basketball has been underperforming internationally has been going for a while.

I've said that the selection processes have been political and continue to be so. The new selection committee has a different idea about how to effect change than the previous one did. There's no evidence that they have better or worse ideas.

The idea that this is the first selection committee that has no politics involved and is all about creating the best team, and the idea that those are the reasons Iverson was left off the last team is your chosen spin and interpretation. Calling your opinions fact or common knowledge isn't particularly compelling.


----------



## ryanjend22 (Jan 23, 2004)

HispanicCausinPanic said:


> JANUARY 2ND!!!! Philly @ Denver...............A.I. scores 100 pts.!!!!!!!! Watch out!


*marks calendar...*


----------



## 2k (Dec 30, 2005)

Minstrel said:


> In the 2004 Olympics, many considered him the best performer on the team. I don't know what's happened since then.




I was going to say the same thing. I watched all of those games and Iverson and Anthony were the best players.


----------



## crandc (Sep 15, 2004)

Philly lost 8 in a row because they had suspended Iverson and their whole offense revolved around him. Can Miller and Smith take that over? It would be a first if they did.

This is the 3rd time Philly has traded their superstar. Moses Malone, Wilt Chamberlin, Charles Barkley. Now Iverson. What is it about that team? The first 3 went on to have HOF careers elsewhere while the 76ers proceeded to stink for years.

I do believe Talkhard thinks it's a good deal for Philly because he considers Iverson too hip hop with tatoos and foul language. 

Admins, may I pay my $10 so I can update my avatar?


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

i wouldnt mind buying on of those picks


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

> This is the 3rd time Philly has traded their superstar. Moses Malone, Wilt Chamberlin, Charles Barkley. Now Iverson. What is it about that team? The first 3 went on to have HOF careers elsewhere while the 76ers proceeded to stink for years.


this is a disaster for Philly, and it's a disaster that's the culmination of years of incompetence. 

the two draft picks are probably going to be in the 20's. we've BOUGHT picks like that (Rodriguez and Monia) for $3 mil a piece, and so could the Sixers if they really wanted them. 

so they basically traded the superstar who has been responsible for countless sold out arenas, an MVP, and a trip to the finals for a decent but unmemorable 30 year old point guard with no jump shot, Joe Smith, and some picks they probably could've bought anyway. ugh. 

the level of incompetence of that team's management is astonishing. the best players Iverson's ever been paired with were Theo Ratliff, Dikembe Mutombo and a young Eric Snow. 9 years of having a future Hall of Famer on your team, and that's the best you can do for teammates? ugh. 

it astounds me anyone could call this a "very good" trade for Philly. a very good trade would've been to deal Iverson 3 years ago when you were pretty much in the exact same spot you are now, but instead you get a ton more value because Iverson's younger, more recently an MVP, and not demanding a trade. 

imagine a doctor neglecting to perform a minor surgery. because of his incompetence, three years goes by and he has to amputate an arm. do you say "Nice job!" and pat him on the back with your one remaining arm because he was able to save some of the shoulder? 

the best trades happen long before a team is forced to make them. this debacle is nothing more than triage. as triage goes, it's not too bad. but no Sixers fan should be thrilled that it had to come to this.


----------



## Iwatas (Aug 3, 2003)

I don't think Philly loses, because I have never considered Iverson to be that fine a player. He is, IMO, a tough gunner, along the lines of a more aggressive Dixon. Iverson is a 42% shooter (78% FT). When was the last time a team won a championship with a leading scorer with such a lousy percentage? Jordan was 50%, Isiah Thomas was 45%, so is Kobe...

Unless there is a front line that *utterly* dominates the glass, any team with Allen Iverson on it will fail to win it all. 

IMO

iWatas


----------



## crandc (Sep 15, 2004)

mook said:


> this is a disaster for Philly, and it's a disaster that's the culmination of years of incompetence.
> 
> imagine a doctor neglecting to perform a minor surgery. because of his incompetence, three years goes by and he has to amputate an arm. do you say "Nice job!" and pat him on the back with your one remaining arm because he was able to save some of the shoulder?


Sounds like a certain "I'm the Decider"...

Mook is right, Denver will not have a high pick and you know Dallas won't (the other 1st rounder is Dallas' pick). 

No one thinks Philly will win a championship with Iverson, but that is not because of Iverson but because of what is around him. They did go to the finals with Iverson but have had one winning season in the last 3 years with 4 different coaches. That is a franchise in shambles. 

Iverson whatever else you can say always played hard. Even if he had tattoos.

Reminds me of when Golden State drafted Joe Smith #1 and pushed him as a real good guy who calls his coach Sir and does not have tattoos or a shaved head and made good grades etc etc. True, but it did not make him worthy of a #1 pick.

I mean, time will tell. See how well the two teams do the rest of this year and next year. Then judge.

Admins, may I pay $10 so I can update my avatar?


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

finally, a franchise has supplanted us in the "what in the hell are you doing?" department.

btw, I'm getting the feeling that crandc wants to pay 10 bucks to the site so she can change her avatar.

It's just a weird vibe I'm getting..is anyone else getting that?


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

yes.. me think she does too

does anyone else think her avatar is Barry Manillow in tights? :rofl:


----------



## GOD (Jun 22, 2003)

The 6ers really got short end of the stick in this trade. I think this may be a symptom of Terrell Owens being from the same town. The city has gotten so tired of putting up with talented malcontents that they would instead ship out the talent for whatever. AI is worth tons more then 2 late picks.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

Nate McVillain said:


> The 6ers really got short end of the stick in this trade. I think this may be a symptom of Terrell Owens being from the same town. The city has gotten so tired of putting up with talented malcontents that they would instead ship out the talent for whatever. AI is worth tons more then 2 late picks.


I think thats true to some degree T-lo. But also, Iversons contract limited what they could get back, much like if the Twolves traded Garnett, they'd be limited by the players they got back BECAUSE no one is going to trade their best player (in his price range) for him.

I do think that there is a backlash happening when it comes to "superstars" acting like douche bags. I'm not sure if Iverson is one as much as his reputation implies though, but I think he's had 11 years of having all world talent, and still not getting "it". Sure, it might be unfair, and sure some of it might have racial over-tones in it, but thats glossing over the issue (and taking the easy way out).

I know you're not saying this, but I remember someone saying "If a white player did XYZ, no one would care". Well, so far a 'white player' hasn't done that (at least, in the NBA). 

And if it was (wide spread) racism, it would seem to suggest that the players that DON'T "act thuggish" would get labled that way if they adopt some of "that lifestyle" (such as those big *** diamond ear-rings that players wear now-a-days).

If you act disrespectful towards the game and other people, fans won't approve of you..regardless of the players race, or the fans race. It's why fans dislike players, and like other players. Well, not front-running "win at all costs" fans (and no, thats not a shot at anyone here). 

Fans don't want to hear their best player whine about practices not being important, or find out they were chasing their wife through town when she was naked (allegedly), or being in a video where people are talking about killing cops, or sucker punching a player, or flipping the bird to fans or a player.

it's about having respect and decency and despite the fact this will come off corny sounding, those traits are colour blind. It's not just for one race and not for the other.


----------



## crandc (Sep 15, 2004)

Trader Bob said:


> yes.. me think she does too
> 
> does anyone else think her avatar is Barry Manillow in tights? :rofl:


My avatar is Tiit Helimets, Estonian-born principal dancer with San Francisco Ballet.

In case you are wondering, straight, married to principal dancer Molly Smolen.

But I don't want to keep him up forever!

Admins, may I pay $10 so I can update my avatar?


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

crandc said:


> But I don't want to keep him up forever!


There are so many jokes I could make from this, but alas, I don't want to suspend myself.

Also, I asked an admin to PM you. Please let me know if one has not.


----------



## GOD (Jun 22, 2003)

crandc said:


> But I don't want to keep him up forever!


I have decided to help your campaign for change. I welcome others to copy my sig until you get to pay.:cheers:


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

Tiit Helimets?


----------



## Oldmangrouch (Feb 11, 2003)

mook said:


> Tiit Helimets?


Sure....he used to moonlight as costume designer for Maddona! :whistling:


----------



## crandc (Sep 15, 2004)

mook said:


> Tiit Helimets?


Yes, a good Estonian name.
But I'd like some cultural variety.

Admins, may I pay $10 so I can update my avatar?


----------

