Some of you have noticed the error in the LaMarcus Aldridge table. He and Carmelo should both be just over 25 points, not the 30+ they are listed at. Sorry about that!
Whilst we're making some corrections in post; there's one play early on where you mention Ty Lue gets beaten on the play - in the footage that was Steve Nash 😔
Whatever you think of AI, to be 6 feet tall and about 165 lbs and to accomplish what he accomplished in the NBA without having a stacked team is super human.
01 was a stacked defensive team he had the dpoy 6moty and the coach of the year top 5 rebounding team a top 3 defensive team in the league and was in the worst eastern conference ever
I know these are just clips, but the amount of times Iverson would throw an absolute dime but his teammates would just airball a hook shot, or brick an open 3 is actually insane. I know his teammates were very good on defense, but imagine if he had help on offense in Phil 👀
Did you even listen to the analysis. On a better offensive team he would be relatively worse because of his tendency to take tough shots instead of finding teammates for better looks. His impact was huge on Philly precisely because his teammates were bad on offense!
@fenr1r999 it kinda seems like maybe you didn't listen to the analysis. A.I was forced into tougher shots because he had no spacing, and his teammates were below average at best at creating shot opportunities. He can clearly pass the ball well, he just isn't getting assists because his teammates are missing
My favorite player of all time. There are so many old heads that talk down their peers and the younger guys. But you will never hear AI saying that. He changed the culture, he changed the game, and I hope he continues to inspire people.
Because they see how spoiled & entitled the current players are, with the league being less competitive than in previous eras. It also doesn't help that the league has gradually made it easier on offense throughout the years, with it being significantly easier to score today than it ever has in league history. Couple that with _load management _ & you'll understand why many former (and even current) players don't like today's players/game.
@@atlien1988 you can dislike how the game is played now but saying it's less competitive is objectively wrong. the talent pool is way deeper than ever bc of how popular the game is worldwide, which in a league with few players is just gonna lead to better play. and for the record , while it's continually happened over time, the most major changes to make scoring easier and defending harder were in the mid 2000s. bc the era of brickaholic iso wing scoring but no illegal defense led to the lowest scoring efficiency in league history. that was also almost all after the hand checking ban btw. offense didn't explode until 6-7 years ago bc of coaching changes, not rule changes. Ben has made a good argument that they need to make defending easier bc offenses are so crazy good, it's not that the offenses are suddenly so good bc defending is impossible. they've reigned in the grifting for fouls and other stuff the past few years and offensive efficiency keeps going up year after year.
also worth noting that Iverson is one of the biggest beneficiaries of rule changes of all time. he would have been called for a carry on every single possession even 5 years earlier. not saying it isn't a good thing the ball handling rules changed, but the point is things change over time and the old heads have been complaining about how this is the worst and most spoiled generation ever for the entirety of recorded history (and probably before that, we just don't have records of it)
@@QGfk1don't lie. They took out hand checking and zone defense and scoring increase so yeah, nowadays is more offensive cause they changed the rules. It s easy to drop 30pts in nba compared with 2000s which was the best era of nba by far. Offense is not good, they can't make midrange shoots and american players are awful with no fundamentals, thats why europeans are stars and better nowadays
Iverson was the first player I seen play live. Didn't know anything about the NBA outside of Jordan. I remember asking my dad when I was around 8 years old "why is number 3 the only guy scoring on the court". Watching him play in person was something else
I grew up watching Iverson. He was was entertaining player to watch. Years later I see all these highlights, he still is. Creating off the dribble, extremely fast, bouncing around the hoop, making tough shots. That’s why he is a fan favourite!
@kanajingly8957 The other half of the problem is that people who bring this up can't really figure out the kind of team Iverson needs to be champion. Because neither those Sixers and the Nuggets teams were built for championship aspirations, let alone get Iverson involved seamlessly in the offense. Looking back to now, Iverson may be one of the recent cases of these well known offensive players who played in the wrong era. He wasn't like a Nash with his gameplay which had an offensive mind build upon his playmaking for 7SOL which would also be the foundation for how teams in the future build their teams based on skillsets.
The iconic play @3:10 illustrates Iverson's most unique attribute. Persistence. They said "you are not going to the middle" and iverson went with the Thomas the engine "I think I can, I think I can."
But he's also extremely bias toward how they play the game today and basis his entire comps on analytics inspired bball of today. Analytics did just as much harm to the game as it did help and Ben is all about analytics and spacing alone has given rise to assists and open shots and those resulting numbers despite rules favoring the game and it's players give him belief that is better vs another era in which the numbers tell him that player is worse. Numbers are no longer comparable era to era due to so many changes. Anyone who is examining numbers across the board is already doing it with bias toward today as the baseline. Someone today just passing it to open shooters or lobs for 10 easy assists + 10 rebounds as guard with maybe 8 of them coming completely uncontested and some high volume 3s does not automatically = better than say Magic getting rebounds among bruising f's and C's and passing through extremely tight windows in league with no spacing. Everything is completely different now. it's just not comparable anymore and just b/c you prefer the style and it provides pretty numbers does not mean it's better basketball played by better players. The result stopped being most important. The numbers became more important than the actual W. The night i watched my boring ass Rockets and MoreyBall brick 3 after 3 after 3 and lose the series vs the Warriors all for a refusal to not see 2's as inefficient shots is the day i knew this analytics era would easily lose against balanced old era teams that would attack and slow it to a grind.
@HailKingCeezer I see yer point but the whole game is easier with great spacing. And the rockets vs warriors, that is a coaching error. It has nothing to do with Ben. He had an interview with Dantoni and he asked very good questions about that kinda thing
No, they weren't, but they were clearly marked as pre merger and modern era was post merger and post merger to 2ks was highly comparable. Everyone knew looking at Shaqs stats that his were the post merge NBA and not comparable to Wilt likewise with Jordan. The NBA today is more comparable in pace to the 60s and pre merger 70s with inflated and ballooned stats than the post merger to 2ks era @@MokeAnit
Yeah, and also Cp3, Harden, Westbrook, Charles Barkley, Karl Malone and Stockton, Dame (Even if he is still in his prime) .. Basically every super offensive players who never won a ring, or even guys who can’t be the 1st option on a championship team, who aren’t elite floor raiser but elite ceilling raiser like Tony Parker, Paul Pierce, J.Kidd, Ray Allen, Kyrie, Klay, AD, Murray ect
Really like the point you make about volume shooting leading to volume PLAY MAKING too! It’s also worth thinking about how poor offensively the vast majority of his offensive running mates were, forcing him into taking tougher shots therefore having lower efficiencies
not to mention that those lesser offensive running mates were prevalent in his formative years as an nba player, so you build bad habits, etc.by the time he was with melo, he's over a decade into the league, it's rare that you find all-nba/mvp-level guys who can switch their entire style up after that long
The quality of these videos is simply outstanding. So much detail and every clip gives us information. For students of the game this channel is a goldmine
I’m very surprised you didn’t mention how the defensive zone rules that were implemented after his mvp season impacted his scoring efficiency as well. Post 01 his scoring around the rim took a significant dip new rules definitely impacted that part
His fg%'s would have been much higher had they not banned his dribble, the dude nearly put up 47 percent in the heavy defense second half of the 90s, there is tons of context left out of Iverson's percentages, people dont understand how many shots he was shooting, ofcourse you are going to miss alot if you are shooting that much, he couldnt switch up to put up other types of shots as his taller counterparts, posting up was a no go and dunking as a primary offense was out of the question; that stat alone in fg% lacks alot of context most of the time.
correct! also the 2000's by stats was the toughest defense era in the NBA. most of the top 10 defensive teams happened during this stretch. If Iverson played with the old illegal defense rules like Jordan he would average 40+ easily
I think if AI played in today's spaced out game, where you can't touch guys on the drive, he'd be a much more efficient player. He would draw more fouls, and he would be almost impossible to keep away from the hoop with shooters all around the floor. He would be coached to kick the ball to shooters, and he'd take fewer bad twos himself. And I never thought about how his stamina and low turnovers contributed to his value, but when you're best offensive player can play at full speed for the whole game, it's a big plus.
I’ve always said this. He would be an incredibly valuable player in this more offensive slanted league. The spacing that some teams could provide would allow him to be the highest caliber of star twenty years after his prime. But that could be my love for AI coming out, despite the reality that he’s just overall a little overrated with hindsight and the numbers being taken into account.
He carried a lot back then and it was not fair since no one else was allowed that until maybe mid 00’s or later. It’s common now. He would sure be a better fit today
@@defiantlytrill if he learned to be an elite playmaker he would rack up the assists, but have basketball players all become so much worse that a player who wasnt even the best of the previous era could outscore the current best scorers by 25%? michael jordan didn't outscore the other best players of his era that much. you can be an old head 'game sucks now all these dudes are trash' but think about it, you're saying he would be the greatest offensive player ever if he played now. Iverson wasn't actually that great of a shooter, if he became a great 3 point shooter and playmaker he would be insane. and everybody is a product of their era, so he may have developed his game in a different way. but he also famously hated practice and learning plays which will get you out of the league now. no doubt he'd be better suited to this era than the one he played in
I'm glad Iverson's ball security was talked about, but it should really be highlighted, especially when you talk about overall best dribblers in the league. For the calls of Steph and Kyrie being the best, they often miss that those guys do get sloppy and will lose the ball while being aggressive. It's something Iverson didn't do much all while handling an increased offensive load night in and night out. Iverson's teammate quality was highlighted nicely, these weren't the typical 3 and D guys you see so valued in the league, the only thing any of these players could do was defend, they were completely offensively inept and Iverson dragged them along to the promised land. You give him a team with a Caruso at the point, Klay Thompson, Lopez, etc... guys who can defend but are also dangerous shooters and that team is a dynasty. He's the slashing Steph Curry, but not as injury prone.
Except he was given better offensive players in Denver than in Philadelphia and kept playing the same iso ball. Chauncey Billups was a better fit for Nuggets because AI failed to adjust his playstyle with better offensive players.
@@sas_quatchFALSE...Yall teams need time to gell he was never given that in Denver..And still some of his teammates had their best statistics playing with him
The one video i was waiting on when you finished the peaks series. I knew you would put more context on AI because normal offensive benchmarks couldn't tell the whole story. Best channel on UA-cam. Not just basketball UA-cam but UA-cam as a whole.
You would be disappointed lol, Ben has talked about him many times on his podcast and says he is one of the most inefficient and overrated players in history.
If the videos are released in chronological order, does this mean no Penny Hardaway???Thinking Basketball said a Hardaway profile was coming "soon" in his Top 75 podcast series and spoke of him as a top 20 offensive player ever, I was really hoping we'd see Ben's take on Penny in this series.
I loved this video so much. As a 11 year old in LA watching the 2001 playoffs, AI became one of my favorite players, the way he walked into Staples center and stole a game from those Lakers. Dude was tough AF, and one of the most fun players to ever watch
Ben’s sidekick on the podcast is a big bucks fan and would love to see such a video. Me too, I’ve been hearing a lot more about him lately as I look up past defensive stars
@@icesan44ify yeah he was never a scoring champ or anything like that but Id love to see an analysis of his all around game, he could definitely score at will, but youre right his defense is what set him apart
Imagine Iverson with today's space and the gather step... One of my favorite players of all time modeled my game after him to my detriment lol his athleticism was unparalleled..
Flashback to your NBA75 podcast, you said Penny Hardaway was one of the best offensive engines ever. Given the chronological order of the greatest peaks series we're probably not getting that episode this time, but could you sum up what made Penny so special to a younger fan such as myself?
He was huge (legitimately 6'7") with a lightening fast first step (not quite MJ but better than Kobe), a tight handle, and very good athleticism so he could get to the basket at a high rate and finish at a high rate once he got there. And he had excellent court vision and decision making so he could punish help. It's the same combination of traits that makes guys like Magic, LeBron, MJ and Jokic great offensive engines. Size + rim pressure + efficiency + playmaking If you take SGA, make him 6'7" and more athletic and give him Haliburton's passing that's basically Penny Hardaway.
I think there’s a version of those Sixers teams that found a better balance of offense/defense to suit AI’s high usage style. For instance, Iverson’s 830 possessions in 2001 with Toni Kukoc and without Snow and Ollie: 29.3 pts +4.3 rTS 110.7 offrtg, +10.7 netrtg 68.2 Rim FG% (10.3 FTA) More than anything, I think he’s an example of what heliocentric stars look like without the proper infrastructure to support that style.
*Iverson’s Per/75, 2001-05* 27.1 pts 5.6 asts -2.2 rTS 55.5 Rim FG% Eric Snow + Kevin Ollie off, and at least one spacing big on: 27.7 pts 6.9 ast +4.3 rTS 63.8 rim FG% Snow + Ollie off, and at least one spacing big and wing on: 28.2 pts 7.7 ast +7 rTS 68.5 Rim FG%
yea, this is the thing ppl miss when trying to compare him to guys of this era...the better teams are so much more analytically inclined and understand what to put around their best players, not to mention that the rank-and-file guys are just better 3pt shooters than they were in his era.
Motor was crazy I don’t think any other player especially at that height can run around the court and jump around the basket like he did, it takes so much energy out of you when you constantly leap like that. He was also active on defence
In my view, he’s the shining example that you can’t win a championship building around ONE guy. But he can carry you all the way to the dance. I think he’s accurately rated as the pound for pound GOAT. He literally was the offence for that Sixers team during his peak. You cannot judge AI on his efficiency alone when his team relied on him putting up 30 shots a night to win. You can critique his practice habits, that he should’ve lifted some weights and taken better care of his body, but his efficiency was a product of how much his team relied on him. And the respect of his peers is a strong case. A 5’11, 160lb guard was the most feared player in the league in the early 2000s.
I’m just here for the comment section because I know it’s going to be divided. I can’t think of one other player maybe before Westbrook who has fans and players more divided
This idea that AI was the only player on the team is totally ridiculous. It just seems that way because AI was crazy selfish and threw up 30 shots a night no matter what (missing far more than he made). He played with Mutombo who was routinely the second best center in the league after shaq (won DPOY with Iverson), played with 6th man of the year Erin Mckie, played for coach of the year/hall of fame coach Larry Brown. AI was not the sole talent on a weak team, he was the weight around the neck dragging down an otherwise championship caliber team.
Injuries are part of the game of course, but for what it's worth, I think that 2001 Sixers team had a good chance to win the championship if Theo Ratliff didn't have a season-ending injury. That necessitated the trade of Kukoc+Ratliff for Mutombo. And though Mutombo was good that year, it changed their playstyle, hurt the amazing team chemistry they had, and limited their depth.
@@BR-re7oz*Aaron Mckie. Someone didn’t just run to the internet to find stats that support his “AI wasn’t that great” narrative because he’s too young to have witnessed the man play. So instead of listening to the opinions of Iverson’s all time great peers who consistently revere him as the leagues toughest opponent for a decade you decided that because of an old ass non-offensive center in Mutumbo and a guy who averaged a whopping 8.2 ppg in his years with philly (McKie) as your reasoning to how Iverson actually was the one keeping this team from a chip??! Yall suck.
This is a great series! I feel like some interesting next picks would be guys like Steve Nash, Dwyane wade, James harden and Russell westbrook. And some great offensive bigs like dirk
Allen Iverson is an interesting Litmus test for analysing NBA players and, more specifically, scoring. When looking purely at his basic counting stats, he looks pretty damn amazing. Truly elite in fact. However, when looking through his advanced stats, and other metrics, all of a sudden Allen looks much less impressive, especially in regards to his shooting efficiency. When analyzed even further, Allen flips back around a bit, where it seems that despite his ineffciency, his volume scoring and playmaking can be at a truly elite level, especially in the playoffs. Whereas some fans (and especially former players) seem to heavily overrate AI, lauding his scoring prowess and 'bag', as well as conflating his impact on the league with his abilities and for some reason giving him a boost simply for being small; others still *under-rate* him, citing his poor scoring efficiency and writing off his game entirely. It seems that the truth of Allen Iverson lies, as it often does, somewhere in the middle.
While talented, I remember watching him on his prime Philly days and just seeing clank, clank, clank. You look at a basic box score and that efficiency/shooting percentage was sickening. He was so catlike and so many time he got off some of the smoothest plays both dribbling and pulling up and firing away. But I said it THEN and I say it now, he was trash efficiency. There is something to be said when he played with other stars but he also wasn’t the same animal by that point. AI had taken a beating by the time he got to Denver, he was so tough he played through so many injuries (which frankly may have impacted the efficiency tho I never factored that when I watched him)
crazy how you literally mention in your comment people wrongly underrating him by dismissing his game entirely due to his inefficiency and on que there’s two people doing exactly that in your replies lmao
Iverson was definitely not a player for geeks and box score viewers. Especially when people miss the point of him being in the ideal situation in that late 90s/early 2000s Sixers team to raise their floor. His traits along with his very good handles mesmerizing and his ability to tack on tough shot after tough shot (when its going in at least) seemed like a spectacle. One of the things Gilbert Arenas in an interview about Iverson stuck out to me best. Iverson was like that dude in rec ball who was on 4 cans of red bull. But he can play at that intensity for 40+ minutes. That is just unheard of for even some of the greats who had to conserve energy or find ways to coast in quarters.
Allen Iverson's greatness can't be encapsulated on a stat sheet. You had to live through it to understand. What matters most is the respect he got from his PEERS.
@johndavis9321 stop, his best offensive teammate was most likely oladipo who -is nice- but was more up and coming. His key teammates were mainly the likes of Roberson and Adams.
@@CBall97CEP he also had sabonis and both those guys really couldn't show what they could do because russ chose to ball hog and shot jack his way to an impressive but ultimately meaningless triple double season
@@johndavis9321 homie was a fuckin rookie who shot bad like most rookies. And even then sabonis needed a couple more years to become relevant. So no, russ didn't hold him back
Please do a mani ginobli breakdown. One of the most selfless players ever and his impact was through the roof but people miss it so much because he doesn’t have the eye candy like sum players like iverson
The absolute best 6th man of all time. He sacrificed in order to fill that role for San Antonio because he was more than capable to be a starter and an all star .
@@isaactesfaye9760don’t get me wrong Ginobli definitely was the prototype for Harden and should get a lot of credit for what the modern game is…but that don’t mean he could have done the same thing as what Harden did on the Rockets. Harden without a doubt was still more athletic, better ball handler, far far better passer (which is extremely important for how he ran his offense), better finisher, just overall a more talented player. I don’t think people understand how hard it is to keep Harden’s level of efficiency while accounting for such a high amount of his team’s offense. Harden’s insane passing ability is really what unlocked his offense, and is the reason Ginobli was always better as a 6th man
@@LoganNagol ginobli had elite vision as well but his role was not a primary on ball instead it was more of a connective type player. His vision showed just didn’t have the volume due to opportunity. He clearly had the talent to be a number 1 offensive option but just fit into a championship team. If a team built around him, he has the same craft vision and shooting harden does but harden had the volume and a team that went all out to build around him. And manu competed like hell on defense
love to see one on what made the Stockton/Malone pick and roll so good, one on those early 2000 Nets teams (who as a Celtic fan I absolutely hated) and how Jason Kidd's genius made that team, the Steve Nash mid to late 2000s Suns, the T-Mac Magic, Mark Price and those Cav teams in the early 90s, etc
I'm glad AI is getting recognized! I always love and appreciate his game. Its good TB differentiate b/w shoot-first vs. ball-hog, 'cause The Truth has always been a shot-creator and playmaker.
In my book, Iverson was way more efficient than analytics are ABLE to show, for 2 reasons. First his low fg% is skewed because his "made" FGs were replaced by free throws. Because he was primarily a slasher, he got intentionally fouled A LOT. Grabbed from behind 5-6 times a night, so instead of easy layup, got 8 made free throws. Still makes him efficient, because he got points on board. Add just 3 made shots a game and that boosts him from 42.5 fg% to nearly 50%. Second is quality of shots he was FORCED to take. Never saw him as selfish. He WANTED to be a playmaker, but he wanted to WIN more. Dude had zero scoring help! A wild, off balance shot while triple teamed, was a "better shot" than another 76er shooting. Starting 5 was: Eric Snow, Aaron McKie, Tyrone Hill, Dikembe? Between all 4 of them, they averaged 32pt/gm for career. That's a 17-win team without Iverson. *Proof @3:30 - look how BAAAD Eric Snow misses a 10 footer. Straightaway off the glass so hard it almost misses rim?? *Proof again @10:35 - Double teamed, passes to Eric Snow on right wing. Nearest defender is 15ft away. Eric Snow no shot but passes back to double teamed Iverson??
Agreed, this is an interesting criteria, despite not being very analytical. AI was "fun to watch", that's very important for showbusiness, sports spectacle. We like to watch fun players, not just good boring ones. He brought along thousands if not millions of people to become fans of the NBA (outside of the US). He made you believe it was possible for people with a regular Joe's height to challenge the Goliaths of the world. An inspirational David figure, a beacon of hope for shorties. Fun and bold, beyond the analytical limitations. Maybe not the best player for championships, but the best for a fun and spectacular game. Reminds me of Romario or Ronaldinho in soccer, for whom the show was as important as the effectiveness
Great video! AI is truly one of a kind! This explains why Westbrook didn't work with the Lakers or as well with the Rockets but does work with the injured Clippers or the KD-less Thunder.
Is there a stat like baseball’s DRS? A stat like that would show how many shots are made above expected or a player’s EFG% above expected? Something like that would probably do guys like Iverson, Bryant, and Thomas justice. While shot selection and the ability to get open is important, sometimes some players just face higher quality defense and different looks.
Regarding the last sentence you wrote, I think volume and shot difficulty making (through film) is the only real indicator. Which is why I wrote somewhere above that Iverson is not a player for nerds or box score analysts. Because difficulty in shot making also went hand in hand with shot volume which happened more in the playoffs. In Iverson's situation he got the extreme end of volume like Harden did for the Rockets. Because he was the only best shot creator and on ball playmaker for his team. But that strategy was ideal for the 01 Sixers then because they got a bunch of one dimensional defenders around Iverson's ability to make tough shots with low pace. Which also didn't make for a dominant run for the regular season. Whereas with Harden the volume on offense translated to some strong runs in the regular season. But Harden's lack of shot making difficulty didn't diversify and enhance the teams offense in the playoffs.
Every year AI had a co star(old webber or Melo) he was on positive efficiency. 2004-05: 55.5% TS in 21 games with Webber( league average 52.9%TS). 2005-06: 54.3% TS( league average 53.6%) 2006-07 Denver : 54.5% TS( league average 54.1% TS) 2007-08: 56.7% TS (Tied with Lebron; League average: 54.0% TS).
True but those still aren't great numbers. You would expect an all time player to elevate to all-time numbers when he doesn't have to carry the same load. That was his point in bringing up the shooting percentages in his Denver vs Sixers years. For my money Iverson is closer to like a Russle Westbrook than a Steph Curry. Good for your team when you suck, not great when your good. Also your 07-08 calling out Lebron doesn't work because he was not on a team with any other allstars in 07-08 and still had the same efficiency as Iverson with Stars
@@charliestallbaumer1362 The Thunder went to 4 consecutive WCF & a Finals berth when KD & Russ were healthy. KD hasn't been able to reach the Conference Finals or Finals on any other team except the Warriors. Granted, injuries & shenanigans have derailed seasons, but the point stands.
@@atlien1988 I think he's referring to the Russ without KD as the primary option, and I completely agree that AI is closer to Russ than to Steph in terms of their overall impact as a floor raiser. However, even AI has some off-ball game and value (just because he runs around and across so many screens) whereas Russ's off-ball game just never materialized, but they definitely need to be the 1st option to be the most effective.
Iversons efficiency went up immediately when he went to Denver and paired with Melo. His Philly years were out of neccessity. The level of difficulty on his shots was insane. What he did at 5'11 in a league of giants is amazing.
Still undercredited, his fg% went down also after they took his original crossover away, he isnt credited enough for re building his bag after they took away a dribble he had patterned his game after for so long, dude was putting up nearly 47 percent on that, but his fg% actually levels out compared to everyone when you look at his volume, dude was shooting ALOT of shots, not dunks, but actual SHOTS.
In Philly, it was necessity and the reason it worked is he had the athleticism and endurance to keep trying to score iso all game and he was a fantastic great player that teams could not not guard or focus their defenses on him, because AI would score at a very high percentage.
What people today don't get about AI's popularity is that his play style while being inefficient was also aesthetically pleasing. He always made the highlight plays. He was also seen as this undersized but stout-hearted player who constantly challenged seven footers at the rim and took a beating while he did it.
This is the real argument. The appreciation of AI is in how you feel watching him play, not anything on the stat sheet. Ben proves you have to massage the numbers hard to prove he was great statistically. But the people who loved to watch him couldn't care less about the numbers. They saw he was tireless, relentless, and fearless.
@@VinceLyle2161Ben didn't 'massage' Iverson's numbers, he simply explained why & what Iverson so effective at doing, which was strong Regular Season floor raising despite being so inefficient scoring the basketball.
@@blacknetsmed Lol, unless you can pull up another player putting up 22.9 fgas per game outside of Jordan and Elgin Baylor and having a higher fg% for their career, he wasnt "so inefficient scoring the basketball" compared to Jordan and Elgin Baylor, maybe, Elgin Baylor was maybe .06 percent higher than AI in percentage and Jordan about 7 percent, context even then is needed to compare these players though.
AI wouldve been interesting to see with a strong team built around him in the modern day. His ability to get to the rim and draw defenders would help so much more today with a decent big and 3 scoring threats along side him.
He had very strong teams around him, DPOY and 2nd best center in the league (after shaq) Mutombo, 6th man of the year McKie, Coach of the year/hall of fame coach Larry Brown. You could put Jordan and Lebron on the same team as AI and they'd still lose cuz AI would refuse to pass the ball, just run around ballhogging and throwing up 30 garbage shots a game, 60% of which he misses. Great players can't produce if you don't pass them the ball, something AI refuses to do.
@@BR-re7oz I don't put the blame on Iverson for not winning in 2001, at least no more than I credit Shaq for completely dominating that series. When Theo Ratliff (who led the NBA in blocks/game that year) got hurt, they traded him for Mutombo understanding any title run would go through the Lakers and they needed a strong interior defender. But even with that trade, Shaq still put up a 33p/16r/5a/3b/57% statline. If Mutombo couldn't slow down Shaq, no man was going to. It just wasn't meant to be for PHI. Iverson played his game, the same game that got them 57 wins and to the Finals, but PHI had no good answer for Shaq.
@@mrmacross I don't blame AI for not beating that lakers team either. That lakers team swept the playoffs except for one loss to the sixers in game 1 of the finals. That 3-peat lakers team wasn't going to be beaten by anyone they had not just the two best players in the league but one of the top 3 bigs and top 3 guards in league history both in their primes. I blame AI for taking 30 shots per game with 40% efficiency. I dunno if the sixers or frankly any eastern team could've won a finals against the far superior west in the early 2000's, I'm just saying AI specifically dragged teams down with his garbage play style.
@@BR-re7oz I think it's fair to critique Iverson's style, but it's also the style that got them to the Finals in the first place. Can you reasonably expect him to change the way he played after the regular season and three rounds of playoffs? Larry Brown has to own some of the blame, too.
@@mrmacross What got them to the finals is Larry Brown's characteristic tough defensive style. It's why Brown was able to win a chip against the shaq-kobe-payton-malone lakers with the pistons in 2004 despite the pistons having 0 all-stars that year. The pistons had 0 all stars but one of the best defenses in NBA history. Every team Brown coached had a brutal defense and that comes from coaching not talented all star players. Brown was constantly at odds with AI during their time together, and the second Brown leaves for detroit (because he was sick of AI's garbage) they become the new monsters of the eastern conference, beating the 3-peat lakers for a title, and the sixers with a still-prime AI slumped out of contention.
One of the best takes on Iverson I've ever seen. Context matters. Guys comparing him to curry and that's fine. Curry has played with some of the greatest players of all time and coaches without having the bulk of the load on his shoulders for the majority of his career. All of that contributes to his success and greatness even though his is still individually great. Iverson never had that luxury on top of being a small player. He did more with less and it's great that fans like us can look at everything in its totality and see how great he actually was
If he played in this era with the spacing and the lack of bigs, I truly believe his efficiency would have been greater, he was literally impossible to guard when I was a kid. Nightmare matchup
3:24 phenomenal! The greatest pound for pound IMO. Swapping places: If he is 6'5, he's possibly the GOAT. If LeBron, MJ or Kobe are 5'11, we possibly wouldn't have heard of them. Excellent, underrated passer as well. Good analysis.
AI would benefit in the 2000s if his teammates are a little better shooting 3s. Three 3 and D starter and a defensive rimrunning center. Then a deep bench would be nice too to lessen his offensive load when he's on the bench
A defensive rim running center like DPOY Mutombo maybe? A deep bench like 6th man of the year Erin McKie? AI wasn't good. He was "good considering he was 5'11 160 pounds" which makes him a slightly above average player who dragged down his team by ballhogging and taking dozens upon dozens upon dozens of garbage shots every single game.
@advancedapathy1531 you do realize that the nuggets with melo and AI has 2 ball dominant players that doesn't really defend that much? While in Detroit, his athleticism declined which in his height is detrimental? I'm not really an AI fanboy but if Philly did have better shooters around him, the spacing will open up easier shots in the midrange or better shooters to drop the corner 3 kinda like Harden-Dantoni offense, only difference is it's more on iverson cuts than isos
@advancedapathy1531 that's the thing, AI is not a point guard. If you put capable shooters around him, his efficiency will rise a little bit imo, he's still a shot chucker but they'll be a better contender than the one time they went to the finals. Will they win a ring? Most likely not but a better roster would definitely give them the edge in the east
It was also bullsh1t. Bucks should have won that series the refs rigged it for Iverson and sixers to reach finals instead of small market Bucks. That series was disgusting with the flagarant calls and it happened again the next year when they rigged the Lakers to beat the Kings. I hated the NBA for years after that.
He didn't really _drag_ that team to the Finals though. The Sixers had an elite defense, with the best defensive player in the league (one of the best ever) & the 6th man of the year. Yeah, Iverson did most of the heavy lifting on offense, but that's because they did most of the heavy lifting on defense & it was to Iverson's strengths. There's no coincidence why 2001 is the single greatest season of his career.
@@atlien1988 I think the 'dragging' is in context with the offense. Yes Larry Brown squads are very strong defensive teams (his chip in 04 with the Pistons was evidence of that) but that Sixers team in 01 didn't have another dynamic shot maker/ball handler besides Iverson. And you need something like that to really pressure the Lakers then who had the shot makers and were an absolute buzz saw in the West getting to the Finals.
@@atlien1988 All the other guys on that team definitely needed AI to get going though or they were gonna struggle. I don’t really see any of it as a negative tbh and I hope people don’t see it like that either but that’s just how teams work.
This summers series has me perhaps even more excited than the original greatest peaks. And this episode makes me really excited to see if we'll get to see a video on Gary Payton from 97-03 or Mark Price in the late 80s and early 00s. Or Tim Hardaway or KJ or even Rod Strickland in the 90s. So many amazing legends I'd love to see get the thinking basketball treatment. Farfetched after he already did Reggie but Dale Ellis would be fun too.
that's what we tend to forget, guys like mj, ai, kobe, or benard king got almost half their buckets off ball. They didnt just take difficult shots all the time. guys like harden and westbrook never cared to develop that
@MindfulAttraction2.0 There has to be a case study of how a great shooter is determine. Yes Stephen Curry’s shooting form & the % he shoots shows that he’s a good shooter but what if Curry is surrounded by a bunch of Draymond’s & Andre Roberson’s on the court. Will Curry shooting be affected negatively by poor spacing? Would Curry shoot a lower % from 3 or possibly shoot a bad % from 3 if he’s surrounded by bad shooter or non-shooters? Will Curry’s shooting mechanics be negatively affected by taking more off-balence shots with the whole opposing team loading up on him & he doesn’t have anybody to relieve the pressure? I feel it’s not fair to say Iverson was a bad shooter like that when he had awful spacing for most of his career. Man look at the clips Ben Taylor was showing, A.I’s teammates are bricking C&S middies, that’s just awful man & makes me 🤮 with how bad that spacing was
Difficult shot making is an inherent skill IMO. Its what made Kobe fearsome in the playoffs when the game gets super sloppy and jumpers aren't going in. Conversely with someone super efficient like Curry, it is scary that he can drop 40+ point solo in a playoff game. Because it usually involves showing off his absurd touch via a 40 foot pull up jumper. Or keeping his handles in traffic then putting up a crazy circus shot that still goes in with a FT.
The variability in shooting form comes about because he plays on feel rather than much repetitions/drills. I’ve been there, I know that feeling. You feel like the ring is very close, and you’re gently placing it in even though you’re off balance and the defender is in your face. Remember… We’re talking about practice…practice man!
Great video, and thanks for coming up with a succinct case against the stat geek Allen Iverson critiques. One key error they make is that they underrate the ability to create offense. Not anyone can create offense if force-fed the basketball, but the stat geeks think otherwise. And thanks for using WOWY. I think that stat doesn't get used enough.
@@redwarrior118 Nice for past his prime less than 2 years he even got to play there, and alot of time he and Melo didnt get to play together for injuries and whatnot.
I think that Allen Iverson is interesting because he’s so often thrown into the “high volume, low efficiency, good player on bad team” category with guys like Russel Westbrook, TMAC, etc. However, he is different from these other players because of the baffling fact that he managed to actually make this play style work to some degree. Look at the records and playoff achievements of other players who fit this bill. It’s full of teams that range from far below .500 to barely scraping into the playoffs and losing in the first round. Allen got his team the 1 seed, lead his team to the finals past the Reggie Miller Pacers, Vince Carter Raptors, and Ray Allen Bucks, and then give the Lakers their only loss of the post season. Just like think about how crazy that would be in the context of today’s NBA. Imagine for a second that Bradley Beal didn’t get traded to the Suns, and single-handedly willed the Washington Wizards to a finals appearance. That’s essentially what AI did, and yet people talk about him like he never got out of the second round.
That 2001 team had DPOY Mutombo, 6th man of the year Erin McKie, and coach of the year Larry Brown. AI played with excellent talent around him, he just refused to utilize it in favor of throwing up dozens of garbage shots
@@BR-re7oz Those are good DEFENDERS. Those are bad to mediocre SCORERS , SPACERS and CREATORS at best. Theo Ratliff was the 2nd leasing scorer at 12.4 ppg and if you’re wondering if AI was taking shots way from him, he never scored that high on other teams.
@@BR-re7oz You a big AI hater lmao. Weak. Aaron McKie was 6th man of the year the same year they went to the Finals because AI made that team what it was. Mutombo was an offensive cripple. McKie was literally the only other capable option, but he was not All-Star level or a big time scorer like Lou Williams, Jamal Crawford, Ginobili or other renowned 6th men. You are just hating.
Those people shouldn’t even be payed attention too. They stare at a stat sheet and they think they accurately know what players like AI and Kobe are about. I think it’s just ridiculous really.
Bro I just was wondering how good Ai was after I answered who'd win in 1v 1, Kyrie or AI. And started deep diving into how good was AI. You the GOAT, what a coincidence.
Iverson would have been a HOF corner and kick returner if he was able to play his best sport. He did pretty damn good playing his second best sport, though.
Doesn't matter what style of offense you put AI on. He's gonna ballhog, refuse to pass, and take 30 shots a game and make 12 of them. That will cause the defense to focus 2,3,4 defenders on AI, and AI will still refuse to pass and continue to take garbage inefficient shots. That will cause friction with his coach and teammates who want him to utilize a more mechanical offense that would benefit the team, but AI won't do it cuz that doesn't benefit AI's chase for the scoring title.
His play style was born out of necessity . I'm sure if he got paired with an all timer like Shaq he wouldn't have needed to be as ball dominate. No one else on them sixer teams could create offense
@@fatilz7269he was a PG by then and it was later in his career, Funny cause people love bashing melo and saying he overrated and not top 75 but will artificially boost him to bash Iverson z
Best video on iverson ive ever seen.. no fanboy-ism just the straight facts. love that you spoke about his offball play as well because that gets lost in a lot of iverson breakdowns. I never made the connection that larry brown had just come from indiana. that was an awesome point and a great segue from the last reggie miller episode. I think Allen Iverson is overrated as a basketball player but i definitely can appreciate the nuances and value he brought to the game. Hope you do a video on Chauncey billups because i think he is one of the most UNDERATED players in that 2000s era
Great data, but also a great take and an eloquent delivery. He's a great story. His enshrinement speech might be the worst manuscript but if you listen to the soul behind the words, man that thing will cut you to the bone.
I'm disappointed at whoever wrote the script. They missed the easiest pun in the game with less than 20 secs into the video. You guys should have used ( 0:03): "Some consider him one of the best ever. Others think his style of play was selfish and inefficient. So where is the ANSWER?"
Aye im glad you did this one Iverson was the reason I started playing basketball I feel like with the analytics they do a disservice at telling the story of Iversons game thanks for the breakdown even touched on some things I wasn’t aware of 🤘🏾
i think if Iverson had a team like the 2018 Rockets, same intense defenders with better shooting, he wouldve won a lot more and not have built those bad habits he did in Philly
I think players like AI, Tmac, and Kobe for example could’ve done really great in that system. All with different varying results but that 2018 team was really so well built and had great pieces.
He will always be my favourite player of all time! Being a short player myself when he broke through, gave me so much to learn and be aspired from, to add to my game.
Ironically, Bob Cousy shot a 37.5% from the field, and yet he doesn't have the reputation of being a bad shooter. All that said, I can confidently say this is the most objective analysis of AI I've ever seen on youtube.
AI really was the great lost potential of his generation. If he'd grown up a bit faster, and been willing to buy into the team earlier, he could have been so much more.
@@GetBackRy3x Is it, though? He could have been immortal. And lacking a championship is no small hole to leave in a legacy. When you think of that insane '96 draft class, in terms of legacy there's Kobe standing above, and then a cluster of other stars who never reached his level: Ray Allen, Stephon Marbury, Steve Nash and, of course, Alan Iverson. It's not a stretch to wonder: had he led the 76ers to a championship he'd have been immortal. Probably seen as the greatest of them ever, since neither Moses Malone nor Dr J played much of their primes there. And had AI won twice in Philly we'd be seriously pitting him against Shaq in terms of legacy.
I was born in 2001 and didn’t really get into the nba until around 2011. if I had been born 10 years earlier, AI would’ve easily been my favorite player ever and the Sixers probably would’ve been my favorite team too. somehow, everything he accomplished at just 6’0 and 165 is still under appreciated
The great things about Allen Iverson, were ironically his physical/athletic abilities (Motor & Instinct) his elite stamina allowed him to keep his high level of play all game with minimal drop off. His instinct allowed him to be effective not only offensively but defensively as well despite his stature. 1. MOTOR (stamina is a highly underrated trait 10 straight seasons of 40+ min per game) 2. INSTINCT (led the league in steals 3 times!) 3. BALL HANDLING ( added pressure on defenders)
He's definitely an all time great, but he was never going to win a championship. He's a guy that never needed to practice and could do it day in and day out. But a team of regular guys needs practice to know what's going on and a leader has to practice with them so they are all on the same page. As a Philly fan, it all ends for me in game 1 of the '01 finals. He got within 3 games of doing it.
Iverson is one of my favorites, and yes, he was inefficient because he was playing with bums. But he had heart, and you cannot measure that with stats.
Some of you have noticed the error in the LaMarcus Aldridge table. He and Carmelo should both be just over 25 points, not the 30+ they are listed at. Sorry about that!
i want to see acomparison between irving and ai
Please just make a Charles Barkley video man, that’d make my week
We still love you
I hope u do video on penny Hardaway or tracy McGrady
Whilst we're making some corrections in post; there's one play early on where you mention Ty Lue gets beaten on the play - in the footage that was Steve Nash 😔
“He was so much more than just his FG percentage…” is probably the best summation of A.I’s career I’ve ever heard,
@kanajingly8957 he said both, he said fg percentage at the end but TS% earlier in the vid :)
Whatever you think of AI, to be 6 feet tall and about 165 lbs and to accomplish what he accomplished in the NBA without having a stacked team is super human.
Never been an AI fan, but mad respect for what he was able to do.
I’ve seen him before, frfr he’s more like 5’10” - 5’11. Made me have even more respect for him. I’m 6’3” and he was at my neck.
He also carried the ball far more than what was allowed at that time but they let him do it. He’s the reason so much carrying is allowed today.
Iverson also played in one of the weakest conference eras of all time
01 was a stacked defensive team he had the dpoy 6moty and the coach of the year top 5 rebounding team a top 3 defensive team in the league and was in the worst eastern conference ever
I know these are just clips, but the amount of times Iverson would throw an absolute dime but his teammates would just airball a hook shot, or brick an open 3 is actually insane. I know his teammates were very good on defense, but imagine if he had help on offense in Phil 👀
facts
Bro that airballed hook shot was horrendous
Not only could they not make a shot or lay up to save their lives, they did not know how to screen, move off ball, and cut to try to get open either.
Did you even listen to the analysis. On a better offensive team he would be relatively worse because of his tendency to take tough shots instead of finding teammates for better looks. His impact was huge on Philly precisely because his teammates were bad on offense!
@fenr1r999 it kinda seems like maybe you didn't listen to the analysis. A.I was forced into tougher shots because he had no spacing, and his teammates were below average at best at creating shot opportunities. He can clearly pass the ball well, he just isn't getting assists because his teammates are missing
My favorite player of all time. There are so many old heads that talk down their peers and the younger guys. But you will never hear AI saying that. He changed the culture, he changed the game, and I hope he continues to inspire people.
Because they see how spoiled & entitled the current players are, with the league being less competitive than in previous eras.
It also doesn't help that the league has gradually made it easier on offense throughout the years, with it being significantly easier to score today than it ever has in league history. Couple that with _load management _ & you'll understand why many former (and even current) players don't like today's players/game.
@@atlien1988 you can dislike how the game is played now but saying it's less competitive is objectively wrong. the talent pool is way deeper than ever bc of how popular the game is worldwide, which in a league with few players is just gonna lead to better play. and for the record , while it's continually happened over time, the most major changes to make scoring easier and defending harder were in the mid 2000s. bc the era of brickaholic iso wing scoring but no illegal defense led to the lowest scoring efficiency in league history. that was also almost all after the hand checking ban btw. offense didn't explode until 6-7 years ago bc of coaching changes, not rule changes. Ben has made a good argument that they need to make defending easier bc offenses are so crazy good, it's not that the offenses are suddenly so good bc defending is impossible. they've reigned in the grifting for fouls and other stuff the past few years and offensive efficiency keeps going up year after year.
also worth noting that Iverson is one of the biggest beneficiaries of rule changes of all time. he would have been called for a carry on every single possession even 5 years earlier. not saying it isn't a good thing the ball handling rules changed, but the point is things change over time and the old heads have been complaining about how this is the worst and most spoiled generation ever for the entirety of recorded history (and probably before that, we just don't have records of it)
Changed the culture to make it acceptable to beat your wife, pull guns on people, and generally be a criminal POS
@@QGfk1don't lie. They took out hand checking and zone defense and scoring increase so yeah, nowadays is more offensive cause they changed the rules. It s easy to drop 30pts in nba compared with 2000s which was the best era of nba by far. Offense is not good, they can't make midrange shoots and american players are awful with no fundamentals, thats why europeans are stars and better nowadays
Iverson was the first player I seen play live. Didn't know anything about the NBA outside of Jordan. I remember asking my dad when I was around 8 years old "why is number 3 the only guy scoring on the court".
Watching him play in person was something else
yep
Wish I was able to see him live
I grew up watching Iverson.
He was was entertaining player to watch.
Years later I see all these highlights, he still is. Creating off the dribble, extremely fast, bouncing around the hoop, making tough shots.
That’s why he is a fan favourite!
yep
@kanajingly8957 The other half of the problem is that people who bring this up can't really figure out the kind of team Iverson needs to be champion. Because neither those Sixers and the Nuggets teams were built for championship aspirations, let alone get Iverson involved seamlessly in the offense. Looking back to now, Iverson may be one of the recent cases of these well known offensive players who played in the wrong era. He wasn't like a Nash with his gameplay which had an offensive mind build upon his playmaking for 7SOL which would also be the foundation for how teams in the future build their teams based on skillsets.
The iconic play @3:10 illustrates Iverson's most unique attribute. Persistence. They said "you are not going to the middle" and iverson went with the Thomas the engine "I think I can, I think I can."
Little engine that could* not Thomas
There's multiple famous trains? Interesting. Appreciate the update.@@Bankai2169
Ben is so good at analyzing these players, best basketball UA-camr out there!
He's my absolute favorite content in the world. Rather watch his stuff then any movie or TV show.
But he's also extremely bias toward how they play the game today and basis his entire comps on analytics inspired bball of today. Analytics did just as much harm to the game as it did help and Ben is all about analytics and spacing alone has given rise to assists and open shots and those resulting numbers despite rules favoring the game and it's players give him belief that is better vs another era in which the numbers tell him that player is worse. Numbers are no longer comparable era to era due to so many changes. Anyone who is examining numbers across the board is already doing it with bias toward today as the baseline.
Someone today just passing it to open shooters or lobs for 10 easy assists + 10 rebounds as guard with maybe 8 of them coming completely uncontested and some high volume 3s does not automatically = better than say Magic getting rebounds among bruising f's and C's and passing through extremely tight windows in league with no spacing.
Everything is completely different now. it's just not comparable anymore and just b/c you prefer the style and it provides pretty numbers does not mean it's better basketball played by better players.
The result stopped being most important. The numbers became more important than the actual W. The night i watched my boring ass Rockets and MoreyBall brick 3 after 3 after 3 and lose the series vs the Warriors all for a refusal to not see 2's as inefficient shots is the day i knew this analytics era would easily lose against balanced old era teams that would attack and slow it to a grind.
@HailKingCeezer I see yer point but the whole game is easier with great spacing. And the rockets vs warriors, that is a coaching error. It has nothing to do with Ben. He had an interview with Dantoni and he asked very good questions about that kinda thing
@@HailKingCeezereras weren't comparable pre-analytics either. Stop rewriting history.
No, they weren't, but they were clearly marked as pre merger and modern era was post merger and post merger to 2ks was highly comparable. Everyone knew looking at Shaqs stats that his were the post merge NBA and not comparable to Wilt likewise with Jordan. The NBA today is more comparable in pace to the 60s and pre merger 70s with inflated and ballooned stats than the post merger to 2ks era @@MokeAnit
really hoping for nash and dirk videos in this series
Yeah, and also Cp3, Harden, Westbrook, Charles Barkley, Karl Malone and Stockton, Dame (Even if he is still in his prime) .. Basically every super offensive players who never won a ring, or even guys who can’t be the 1st option on a championship team, who aren’t elite floor raiser but elite ceilling raiser like Tony Parker, Paul Pierce, J.Kidd, Ray Allen, Kyrie, Klay, AD, Murray ect
@@Anthonydu01630Gilbert Arenas, Vince Carter, Chris Webber
Charles Barkley.
@@EGarrett01mandatory
@@Anthonydu01630tony Parker was completely underrated
Really like the point you make about volume shooting leading to volume PLAY MAKING too! It’s also worth thinking about how poor offensively the vast majority of his offensive running mates were, forcing him into taking tougher shots therefore having lower efficiencies
not to mention that those lesser offensive running mates were prevalent in his formative years as an nba player, so you build bad habits, etc.by the time he was with melo, he's over a decade into the league, it's rare that you find all-nba/mvp-level guys who can switch their entire style up after that long
The quality of these videos is simply outstanding. So much detail and every clip gives us information. For students of the game this channel is a goldmine
I’m very surprised you didn’t mention how the defensive zone rules that were implemented after his mvp season impacted his scoring efficiency as well. Post 01 his scoring around the rim took a significant dip new rules definitely impacted that part
His fg%'s would have been much higher had they not banned his dribble, the dude nearly put up 47 percent in the heavy defense second half of the 90s, there is tons of context left out of Iverson's percentages, people dont understand how many shots he was shooting, ofcourse you are going to miss alot if you are shooting that much, he couldnt switch up to put up other types of shots as his taller counterparts, posting up was a no go and dunking as a primary offense was out of the question; that stat alone in fg% lacks alot of context most of the time.
correct! also the 2000's by stats was the toughest defense era in the NBA. most of the top 10 defensive teams happened during this stretch. If Iverson played with the old illegal defense rules like Jordan he would average 40+ easily
Hoping for a TMac one, love your channel and Iverson my favorite player ever so looking forward to what you have to say
Vote for TMac as well. One of those all time talents, but right before the social media era.
If u do TMac, you gotta do Derrick Rose too
Imo Orlando Magic era T Mac was just as if not more exciting to watch than AI and a better talent
@@stevemattero1471Why? Rose is no where near Tmac lmao
I think he's gonna do Penny next.
I think if AI played in today's spaced out game, where you can't touch guys on the drive, he'd be a much more efficient player. He would draw more fouls, and he would be almost impossible to keep away from the hoop with shooters all around the floor. He would be coached to kick the ball to shooters, and he'd take fewer bad twos himself.
And I never thought about how his stamina and low turnovers contributed to his value, but when you're best offensive player can play at full speed for the whole game, it's a big plus.
I’ve always said this. He would be an incredibly valuable player in this more offensive slanted league. The spacing that some teams could provide would allow him to be the highest caliber of star twenty years after his prime. But that could be my love for AI coming out, despite the reality that he’s just overall a little overrated with hindsight and the numbers being taken into account.
He carried a lot back then and it was not fair since no one else was allowed that until maybe mid 00’s or later. It’s common now. He would sure be a better fit today
@@defiantlytrill if he learned to be an elite playmaker he would rack up the assists, but have basketball players all become so much worse that a player who wasnt even the best of the previous era could outscore the current best scorers by 25%? michael jordan didn't outscore the other best players of his era that much. you can be an old head 'game sucks now all these dudes are trash' but think about it, you're saying he would be the greatest offensive player ever if he played now. Iverson wasn't actually that great of a shooter, if he became a great 3 point shooter and playmaker he would be insane. and everybody is a product of their era, so he may have developed his game in a different way. but he also famously hated practice and learning plays which will get you out of the league now. no doubt he'd be better suited to this era than the one he played in
@@defiantlytrillProbably like 33/4/7 in today's game and at least 7% more efficient.
My point exactly. Big part of him taking tough shots is the spacing being one of the worst I've ever seen. He'd be at least 5% more efficient today.
I'm glad Iverson's ball security was talked about, but it should really be highlighted, especially when you talk about overall best dribblers in the league. For the calls of Steph and Kyrie being the best, they often miss that those guys do get sloppy and will lose the ball while being aggressive. It's something Iverson didn't do much all while handling an increased offensive load night in and night out.
Iverson's teammate quality was highlighted nicely, these weren't the typical 3 and D guys you see so valued in the league, the only thing any of these players could do was defend, they were completely offensively inept and Iverson dragged them along to the promised land. You give him a team with a Caruso at the point, Klay Thompson, Lopez, etc... guys who can defend but are also dangerous shooters and that team is a dynasty. He's the slashing Steph Curry, but not as injury prone.
facts
Except he was given better offensive players in Denver than in Philadelphia and kept playing the same iso ball. Chauncey Billups was a better fit for Nuggets because AI failed to adjust his playstyle with better offensive players.
@@sas_quatchFALSE...Yall teams need time to gell he was never given that in Denver..And still some of his teammates had their best statistics playing with him
The one video i was waiting on when you finished the peaks series. I knew you would put more context on AI because normal offensive benchmarks couldn't tell the whole story. Best channel on UA-cam. Not just basketball UA-cam but UA-cam as a whole.
I think a Pistol Pete episode would be cool. Definitely an offensive legend
You would be disappointed lol, Ben has talked about him many times on his podcast and says he is one of the most inefficient and overrated players in history.
If the videos are released in chronological order, does this mean no Penny Hardaway???Thinking Basketball said a Hardaway profile was coming "soon" in his Top 75 podcast series and spoke of him as a top 20 offensive player ever, I was really hoping we'd see Ben's take on Penny in this series.
I hope for Penny as well
I loved this video so much. As a 11 year old in LA watching the 2001 playoffs, AI became one of my favorite players, the way he walked into Staples center and stole a game from those Lakers. Dude was tough AF, and one of the most fun players to ever watch
A Sidney Moncrief analysis would be awesome!
Ben’s sidekick on the podcast is a big bucks fan and would love to see such a video. Me too, I’ve been hearing a lot more about him lately as I look up past defensive stars
Maybe for a defensive series!
@@icesan44ify yeah he was never a scoring champ or anything like that but Id love to see an analysis of his all around game, he could definitely score at will, but youre right his defense is what set him apart
Imagine Iverson with today's space and the gather step... One of my favorite players of all time modeled my game after him to my detriment lol his athleticism was unparalleled..
Flashback to your NBA75 podcast, you said Penny Hardaway was one of the best offensive engines ever. Given the chronological order of the greatest peaks series we're probably not getting that episode this time, but could you sum up what made Penny so special to a younger fan such as myself?
He was huge (legitimately 6'7") with a lightening fast first step (not quite MJ but better than Kobe), a tight handle, and very good athleticism so he could get to the basket at a high rate and finish at a high rate once he got there. And he had excellent court vision and decision making so he could punish help. It's the same combination of traits that makes guys like Magic, LeBron, MJ and Jokic great offensive engines. Size + rim pressure + efficiency + playmaking
If you take SGA, make him 6'7" and more athletic and give him Haliburton's passing that's basically Penny Hardaway.
Iverson changed the way ballers ball. Entire league would be worse today if not for his contributions.
To me, he's immortal.
He changed it for the worse. Iso ball is inferior. Also, he brought carrying into the league
I think there’s a version of those Sixers teams that found a better balance of offense/defense to suit AI’s high usage style.
For instance, Iverson’s 830 possessions in 2001 with Toni Kukoc and without Snow and Ollie:
29.3 pts
+4.3 rTS
110.7 offrtg, +10.7 netrtg
68.2 Rim FG% (10.3 FTA)
More than anything, I think he’s an example of what heliocentric stars look like without the proper infrastructure to support that style.
*Iverson’s Per/75, 2001-05*
27.1 pts
5.6 asts
-2.2 rTS
55.5 Rim FG%
Eric Snow + Kevin Ollie off, and at least one spacing big on:
27.7 pts
6.9 ast
+4.3 rTS
63.8 rim FG%
Snow + Ollie off, and at least one spacing big and wing on:
28.2 pts
7.7 ast
+7 rTS
68.5 Rim FG%
yea, this is the thing ppl miss when trying to compare him to guys of this era...the better teams are so much more analytically inclined and understand what to put around their best players, not to mention that the rank-and-file guys are just better 3pt shooters than they were in his era.
The last line sums it up so great. I never thought about it like this. Great observation @OpenYourEyes16
Iverson was one of the Greatest Offensive Floor Raisers in NBA History. His Motor & Athleticism for 5'11" Guard was insane.
its easier for short guys : )
Chill lol
Motor was crazy I don’t think any other player especially at that height can run around the court and jump around the basket like he did, it takes so much energy out of you when you constantly leap like that. He was also active on defence
0:11 missed opportunity to drop "the answer" nickname
Another awesome video, Ben. At the end, you mentioned merch being below the video, but I am not seeing it -- thanks!
Iverson is living proof that you can be overrated and a great player at the same time. I've heard people say he's better than Steph curry
How old are you?
@@BobsDPOYhe isn't wrong AI can be considerably overrated at times
@@BobsDPOYAre you implying that AI is better than Steph?
@@austingreen1274yes
@@BobsDPOYnah iverson doesn’t touch curry no disrespect
In my view, he’s the shining example that you can’t win a championship building around ONE guy. But he can carry you all the way to the dance. I think he’s accurately rated as the pound for pound GOAT.
He literally was the offence for that Sixers team during his peak. You cannot judge AI on his efficiency alone when his team relied on him putting up 30 shots a night to win. You can critique his practice habits, that he should’ve lifted some weights and taken better care of his body, but his efficiency was a product of how much his team relied on him.
And the respect of his peers is a strong case. A 5’11, 160lb guard was the most feared player in the league in the early 2000s.
I’m just here for the comment section because I know it’s going to be divided. I can’t think of one other player maybe before Westbrook who has fans and players more divided
This idea that AI was the only player on the team is totally ridiculous. It just seems that way because AI was crazy selfish and threw up 30 shots a night no matter what (missing far more than he made). He played with Mutombo who was routinely the second best center in the league after shaq (won DPOY with Iverson), played with 6th man of the year Erin Mckie, played for coach of the year/hall of fame coach Larry Brown. AI was not the sole talent on a weak team, he was the weight around the neck dragging down an otherwise championship caliber team.
Injuries are part of the game of course, but for what it's worth, I think that 2001 Sixers team had a good chance to win the championship if Theo Ratliff didn't have a season-ending injury. That necessitated the trade of Kukoc+Ratliff for Mutombo. And though Mutombo was good that year, it changed their playstyle, hurt the amazing team chemistry they had, and limited their depth.
@@BR-re7oz so he played with the 2000s equivalent of Rudy Gobert and Malcolm Brogdon - pretty stacked team lol
@@BR-re7oz*Aaron Mckie. Someone didn’t just run to the internet to find stats that support his “AI wasn’t that great” narrative because he’s too young to have witnessed the man play. So instead of listening to the opinions of Iverson’s all time great peers who consistently revere him as the leagues toughest opponent for a decade you decided that because of an old ass non-offensive center in Mutumbo and a guy who averaged a whopping 8.2 ppg in his years with philly (McKie) as your reasoning to how Iverson actually was the one keeping this team from a chip??! Yall suck.
This is a great series! I feel like some interesting next picks would be guys like Steve Nash, Dwyane wade, James harden and Russell westbrook. And some great offensive bigs like dirk
Allen Iverson is an interesting Litmus test for analysing NBA players and, more specifically, scoring.
When looking purely at his basic counting stats, he looks pretty damn amazing. Truly elite in fact. However, when looking through his advanced stats, and other metrics, all of a sudden Allen looks much less impressive, especially in regards to his shooting efficiency. When analyzed even further, Allen flips back around a bit, where it seems that despite his ineffciency, his volume scoring and playmaking can be at a truly elite level, especially in the playoffs. Whereas some fans (and especially former players) seem to heavily overrate AI, lauding his scoring prowess and 'bag', as well as conflating his impact on the league with his abilities and for some reason giving him a boost simply for being small; others still *under-rate* him, citing his poor scoring efficiency and writing off his game entirely. It seems that the truth of Allen Iverson lies, as it often does, somewhere in the middle.
Allen Iverson was a inefficient volume shooter, but we credit him for his resemblance to kids in the inner cities.
While talented, I remember watching him on his prime Philly days and just seeing clank, clank, clank. You look at a basic box score and that efficiency/shooting percentage was sickening.
He was so catlike and so many time he got off some of the smoothest plays both dribbling and pulling up and firing away. But I said it THEN and I say it now, he was trash efficiency.
There is something to be said when he played with other stars but he also wasn’t the same animal by that point. AI had taken a beating by the time he got to Denver, he was so tough he played through so many injuries (which frankly may have impacted the efficiency tho I never factored that when I watched him)
He played in the dead ball era where efficiency was down league wide.
crazy how you literally mention in your comment people wrongly underrating him by dismissing his game entirely due to his inefficiency and on que there’s two people doing exactly that in your replies lmao
Iverson was definitely not a player for geeks and box score viewers. Especially when people miss the point of him being in the ideal situation in that late 90s/early 2000s Sixers team to raise their floor. His traits along with his very good handles mesmerizing and his ability to tack on tough shot after tough shot (when its going in at least) seemed like a spectacle. One of the things Gilbert Arenas in an interview about Iverson stuck out to me best. Iverson was like that dude in rec ball who was on 4 cans of red bull. But he can play at that intensity for 40+ minutes. That is just unheard of for even some of the greats who had to conserve energy or find ways to coast in quarters.
Great content as usual . Iverson is was an offensive gem 💎
Allen Iverson's greatness can't be encapsulated on a stat sheet. You had to live through it to understand. What matters most is the respect he got from his PEERS.
your content is always some of my favorite to watch, so thoughtful and meaningful
Seems similar to Westbrook's MVP OKC team. Stacked with defenders and he did everything on O
Unlike ai westbrook has offensively capable guys he just refused to utilize cause he'd rather ball hog and shot jack
@johndavis9321 stop, his best offensive teammate was most likely oladipo who -is nice- but was more up and coming. His key teammates were mainly the likes of Roberson and Adams.
@@CBall97CEP he also had sabonis and both those guys really couldn't show what they could do because russ chose to ball hog and shot jack his way to an impressive but ultimately meaningless triple double season
@@johndavis9321 homie was a fuckin rookie who shot bad like most rookies. And even then sabonis needed a couple more years to become relevant. So no, russ didn't hold him back
@@CBall97CEP sabonis damn near averaged a triple double the season he left okc what are you talkin bout
Please do a mani ginobli breakdown. One of the most selfless players ever and his impact was through the roof but people miss it so much because he doesn’t have the eye candy like sum players like iverson
Please do it!!!!!!!!!!!!
The absolute best 6th man of all time. He sacrificed in order to fill that role for San Antonio because he was more than capable to be a starter and an all star .
@@Spider-Complexion he could’ve been what James harden is on offense if a team built around him
@@isaactesfaye9760don’t get me wrong Ginobli definitely was the prototype for Harden and should get a lot of credit for what the modern game is…but that don’t mean he could have done the same thing as what Harden did on the Rockets. Harden without a doubt was still more athletic, better ball handler, far far better passer (which is extremely important for how he ran his offense), better finisher, just overall a more talented player. I don’t think people understand how hard it is to keep Harden’s level of efficiency while accounting for such a high amount of his team’s offense. Harden’s insane passing ability is really what unlocked his offense, and is the reason Ginobli was always better as a 6th man
@@LoganNagol ginobli had elite vision as well but his role was not a primary on ball instead it was more of a connective type player. His vision showed just didn’t have the volume due to opportunity. He clearly had the talent to be a number 1 offensive option but just fit into a championship team. If a team built around him, he has the same craft vision and shooting harden does but harden had the volume and a team that went all out to build around him. And manu competed like hell on defense
love to see one on what made the Stockton/Malone pick and roll so good, one on those early 2000 Nets teams (who as a Celtic fan I absolutely hated) and how Jason Kidd's genius made that team, the Steve Nash mid to late 2000s Suns, the T-Mac Magic, Mark Price and those Cav teams in the early 90s, etc
I'm glad AI is getting recognized! I always love and appreciate his game. Its good TB differentiate b/w shoot-first vs. ball-hog, 'cause The Truth has always been a shot-creator and playmaker.
yep
In my book, Iverson was way more efficient than analytics are ABLE to show, for 2 reasons.
First his low fg% is skewed because his "made" FGs were replaced by free throws. Because he was primarily a slasher, he got intentionally fouled A LOT. Grabbed from behind 5-6 times a night, so instead of easy layup, got 8 made free throws. Still makes him efficient, because he got points on board. Add just 3 made shots a game and that boosts him from 42.5 fg% to nearly 50%.
Second is quality of shots he was FORCED to take. Never saw him as selfish. He WANTED to be a playmaker, but he wanted to WIN more. Dude had zero scoring help! A wild, off balance shot while triple teamed, was a "better shot" than another 76er shooting. Starting 5 was: Eric Snow, Aaron McKie, Tyrone Hill, Dikembe? Between all 4 of them, they averaged 32pt/gm for career. That's a 17-win team without Iverson.
*Proof @3:30 - look how BAAAD Eric Snow misses a 10 footer. Straightaway off the glass so hard it almost misses rim??
*Proof again @10:35 - Double teamed, passes to Eric Snow on right wing. Nearest defender is 15ft away. Eric Snow no shot but passes back to double teamed Iverson??
WOULD LUV 2 SEE U DO A VIDEO ON "JERRY WEST"😮💨1 OF MY FAVE PLAYERS OF ALL TIME FR💯
this was a pleasant surprise. Perfect timing with the joint in hand
I watch these videos high as shit too 😂
Please do a Charles Barkley breakdown, I really want to know how a 6'4-6'6" PF dominate the league.
Yes Id love to see that
This is such a well put together video.
Iverson was so fun to watch
Agreed, this is an interesting criteria, despite not being very analytical. AI was "fun to watch", that's very important for showbusiness, sports spectacle. We like to watch fun players, not just good boring ones. He brought along thousands if not millions of people to become fans of the NBA (outside of the US). He made you believe it was possible for people with a regular Joe's height to challenge the Goliaths of the world. An inspirational David figure, a beacon of hope for shorties. Fun and bold, beyond the analytical limitations. Maybe not the best player for championships, but the best for a fun and spectacular game. Reminds me of Romario or Ronaldinho in soccer, for whom the show was as important as the effectiveness
Great video! AI is truly one of a kind! This explains why Westbrook didn't work with the Lakers or as well with the Rockets but does work with the injured Clippers or the KD-less Thunder.
Is there a stat like baseball’s DRS? A stat like that would show how many shots are made above expected or a player’s EFG% above expected? Something like that would probably do guys like Iverson, Bryant, and Thomas justice. While shot selection and the ability to get open is important, sometimes some players just face higher quality defense and different looks.
Bryant wasn't inefficient by any stretch of the imagination. FG% has NOTHING to do with Efficiency.
Regarding the last sentence you wrote, I think volume and shot difficulty making (through film) is the only real indicator. Which is why I wrote somewhere above that Iverson is not a player for nerds or box score analysts. Because difficulty in shot making also went hand in hand with shot volume which happened more in the playoffs. In Iverson's situation he got the extreme end of volume like Harden did for the Rockets. Because he was the only best shot creator and on ball playmaker for his team. But that strategy was ideal for the 01 Sixers then because they got a bunch of one dimensional defenders around Iverson's ability to make tough shots with low pace. Which also didn't make for a dominant run for the regular season. Whereas with Harden the volume on offense translated to some strong runs in the regular season. But Harden's lack of shot making difficulty didn't diversify and enhance the teams offense in the playoffs.
DUDE I AM SO HAPPY YOU SAID “AMONG THE TREES”!!! Lol you must’ve watched a ton of Zu & Mix broadcasts. Thank you for that.
Every year AI had a co star(old webber or Melo) he was on positive efficiency.
2004-05: 55.5% TS in 21 games with Webber( league average 52.9%TS).
2005-06: 54.3% TS( league average 53.6%)
2006-07 Denver : 54.5% TS( league average 54.1% TS)
2007-08: 56.7% TS (Tied with Lebron; League average: 54.0% TS).
He mentions that in the video and keep in mind that his scoring volume also goes way down
He still was inefficient scoring in the 2007 & 2008 Playoffs. Vs Spurs -7% rTS Defense Adjusted. Vs Lakers -2.5% rTS Defense Adjusted.
True but those still aren't great numbers. You would expect an all time player to elevate to all-time numbers when he doesn't have to carry the same load. That was his point in bringing up the shooting percentages in his Denver vs Sixers years. For my money Iverson is closer to like a Russle Westbrook than a Steph Curry. Good for your team when you suck, not great when your good. Also your 07-08 calling out Lebron doesn't work because he was not on a team with any other allstars in 07-08 and still had the same efficiency as Iverson with Stars
@@charliestallbaumer1362 The Thunder went to 4 consecutive WCF & a Finals berth when KD & Russ were healthy.
KD hasn't been able to reach the Conference Finals or Finals on any other team except the Warriors. Granted, injuries & shenanigans have derailed seasons, but the point stands.
@@atlien1988 I think he's referring to the Russ without KD as the primary option, and I completely agree that AI is closer to Russ than to Steph in terms of their overall impact as a floor raiser. However, even AI has some off-ball game and value (just because he runs around and across so many screens) whereas Russ's off-ball game just never materialized, but they definitely need to be the 1st option to be the most effective.
i stumbled across this channel, you have earned yourself a subscibe!
Well done! Very indepth and enjoyable to watch. thank you.
Iversons efficiency went up immediately when he went to Denver and paired with Melo. His Philly years were out of neccessity. The level of difficulty on his shots was insane. What he did at 5'11 in a league of giants is amazing.
Still undercredited, his fg% went down also after they took his original crossover away, he isnt credited enough for re building his bag after they took away a dribble he had patterned his game after for so long, dude was putting up nearly 47 percent on that, but his fg% actually levels out compared to everyone when you look at his volume, dude was shooting ALOT of shots, not dunks, but actual SHOTS.
In Philly, it was necessity and the reason it worked is he had the athleticism and endurance to keep trying to score iso all game and he was a fantastic great player that teams could not not guard or focus their defenses on him, because AI would score at a very high percentage.
2:50 GENIUS timing 😂😂😂😂😂
3:08 Beautiful
3:06 THATS AMAZING!!!!! What a subtle way to stop someone and make the trip!!! How did i never think that???
What people today don't get about AI's popularity is that his play style while being inefficient was also aesthetically pleasing. He always made the highlight plays. He was also seen as this undersized but stout-hearted player who constantly challenged seven footers at the rim and took a beating while he did it.
This is the real argument. The appreciation of AI is in how you feel watching him play, not anything on the stat sheet. Ben proves you have to massage the numbers hard to prove he was great statistically. But the people who loved to watch him couldn't care less about the numbers. They saw he was tireless, relentless, and fearless.
technically everyone is inefficient, as no one is shooting 100%
@@VinceLyle2161Ben didn't 'massage' Iverson's numbers, he simply explained why & what Iverson so effective at doing, which was strong Regular Season floor raising despite being so inefficient scoring the basketball.
@@blacknetsmed Well, you really set me straight. Congratulations.
@@blacknetsmed Lol, unless you can pull up another player putting up 22.9 fgas per game outside of Jordan and Elgin Baylor and having a higher fg% for their career, he wasnt "so inefficient scoring the basketball" compared to Jordan and Elgin Baylor, maybe, Elgin Baylor was maybe .06 percent higher than AI in percentage and Jordan about 7 percent, context even then is needed to compare these players though.
Awesome video as always Ben! AI is my favorite player of all time.
Loving this series a Clyde Drexler one would be great.
Thanks for the video Ben and team :)
AI wouldve been interesting to see with a strong team built around him in the modern day. His ability to get to the rim and draw defenders would help so much more today with a decent big and 3 scoring threats along side him.
He had very strong teams around him, DPOY and 2nd best center in the league (after shaq) Mutombo, 6th man of the year McKie, Coach of the year/hall of fame coach Larry Brown. You could put Jordan and Lebron on the same team as AI and they'd still lose cuz AI would refuse to pass the ball, just run around ballhogging and throwing up 30 garbage shots a game, 60% of which he misses. Great players can't produce if you don't pass them the ball, something AI refuses to do.
@@BR-re7oz I don't put the blame on Iverson for not winning in 2001, at least no more than I credit Shaq for completely dominating that series. When Theo Ratliff (who led the NBA in blocks/game that year) got hurt, they traded him for Mutombo understanding any title run would go through the Lakers and they needed a strong interior defender. But even with that trade, Shaq still put up a 33p/16r/5a/3b/57% statline. If Mutombo couldn't slow down Shaq, no man was going to. It just wasn't meant to be for PHI. Iverson played his game, the same game that got them 57 wins and to the Finals, but PHI had no good answer for Shaq.
@@mrmacross I don't blame AI for not beating that lakers team either. That lakers team swept the playoffs except for one loss to the sixers in game 1 of the finals. That 3-peat lakers team wasn't going to be beaten by anyone they had not just the two best players in the league but one of the top 3 bigs and top 3 guards in league history both in their primes. I blame AI for taking 30 shots per game with 40% efficiency. I dunno if the sixers or frankly any eastern team could've won a finals against the far superior west in the early 2000's, I'm just saying AI specifically dragged teams down with his garbage play style.
@@BR-re7oz I think it's fair to critique Iverson's style, but it's also the style that got them to the Finals in the first place. Can you reasonably expect him to change the way he played after the regular season and three rounds of playoffs? Larry Brown has to own some of the blame, too.
@@mrmacross What got them to the finals is Larry Brown's characteristic tough defensive style. It's why Brown was able to win a chip against the shaq-kobe-payton-malone lakers with the pistons in 2004 despite the pistons having 0 all-stars that year. The pistons had 0 all stars but one of the best defenses in NBA history. Every team Brown coached had a brutal defense and that comes from coaching not talented all star players. Brown was constantly at odds with AI during their time together, and the second Brown leaves for detroit (because he was sick of AI's garbage) they become the new monsters of the eastern conference, beating the 3-peat lakers for a title, and the sixers with a still-prime AI slumped out of contention.
One of the best takes on Iverson I've ever seen. Context matters. Guys comparing him to curry and that's fine. Curry has played with some of the greatest players of all time and coaches without having the bulk of the load on his shoulders for the majority of his career. All of that contributes to his success and greatness even though his is still individually great. Iverson never had that luxury on top of being a small player. He did more with less and it's great that fans like us can look at everything in its totality and see how great he actually was
If he played in this era with the spacing and the lack of bigs, I truly believe his efficiency would have been greater, he was literally impossible to guard when I was a kid. Nightmare matchup
3:24 phenomenal!
The greatest pound for pound IMO.
Swapping places: If he is 6'5, he's possibly the GOAT. If LeBron, MJ or Kobe are 5'11, we possibly wouldn't have heard of them.
Excellent, underrated passer as well. Good analysis.
AI would benefit in the 2000s if his teammates are a little better shooting 3s. Three 3 and D starter and a defensive rimrunning center. Then a deep bench would be nice too to lessen his offensive load when he's on the bench
A defensive rim running center like DPOY Mutombo maybe? A deep bench like 6th man of the year Erin McKie? AI wasn't good. He was "good considering he was 5'11 160 pounds" which makes him a slightly above average player who dragged down his team by ballhogging and taking dozens upon dozens upon dozens of garbage shots every single game.
@advancedapathy1531 you do realize that the nuggets with melo and AI has 2 ball dominant players that doesn't really defend that much? While in Detroit, his athleticism declined which in his height is detrimental? I'm not really an AI fanboy but if Philly did have better shooters around him, the spacing will open up easier shots in the midrange or better shooters to drop the corner 3 kinda like Harden-Dantoni offense, only difference is it's more on iverson cuts than isos
@@BR-re7oz did they have better shooters around to space the floor? Deep bench with only Aaron Mckie around? Ok
@advancedapathy1531 that's the thing, AI is not a point guard. If you put capable shooters around him, his efficiency will rise a little bit imo, he's still a shot chucker but they'll be a better contender than the one time they went to the finals. Will they win a ring? Most likely not but a better roster would definitely give them the edge in the east
Yeah give Ai an elite off ball scorer and he will raise there Ceiling even more
Once again the #1 NBA UA-cam channel delivers!
I know the East was weak and they had no shot against LA, but a guy under 6' dragging that 02 team to the Finals was incredible.
It was also bullsh1t. Bucks should have won that series the refs rigged it for Iverson and sixers to reach finals instead of small market Bucks. That series was disgusting with the flagarant calls and it happened again the next year when they rigged the Lakers to beat the Kings. I hated the NBA for years after that.
He didn't really _drag_ that team to the Finals though. The Sixers had an elite defense, with the best defensive player in the league (one of the best ever) & the 6th man of the year.
Yeah, Iverson did most of the heavy lifting on offense, but that's because they did most of the heavy lifting on defense & it was to Iverson's strengths.
There's no coincidence why 2001 is the single greatest season of his career.
@@atlien1988 I think the 'dragging' is in context with the offense. Yes Larry Brown squads are very strong defensive teams (his chip in 04 with the Pistons was evidence of that) but that Sixers team in 01 didn't have another dynamic shot maker/ball handler besides Iverson. And you need something like that to really pressure the Lakers then who had the shot makers and were an absolute buzz saw in the West getting to the Finals.
@@atlien1988 All the other guys on that team definitely needed AI to get going though or they were gonna struggle.
I don’t really see any of it as a negative tbh and I hope people don’t see it like that either but that’s just how teams work.
This summers series has me perhaps even more excited than the original greatest peaks. And this episode makes me really excited to see if we'll get to see a video on Gary Payton from 97-03 or Mark Price in the late 80s and early 00s. Or Tim Hardaway or KJ or even Rod Strickland in the 90s. So many amazing legends I'd love to see get the thinking basketball treatment. Farfetched after he already did Reggie but Dale Ellis would be fun too.
that's what we tend to forget, guys like mj, ai, kobe, or benard king got almost half their buckets off ball. They didnt just take difficult shots all the time. guys like harden and westbrook never cared to develop that
AI off-ball doesn't mean that much because Iverson unlike the rest of those, wasn't a good shooter.
@@blacknetsmed it still adds value to have an off ball game, even if you're not a good shooter. It keeps the ball moving
@MindfulAttraction2.0 There has to be a case study of how a great shooter is determine. Yes Stephen Curry’s shooting form & the % he shoots shows that he’s a good shooter but what if Curry is surrounded by a bunch of Draymond’s & Andre Roberson’s on the court.
Will Curry shooting be affected negatively by poor spacing? Would Curry shoot a lower % from 3 or possibly shoot a bad % from 3 if he’s surrounded by bad shooter or non-shooters?
Will Curry’s shooting mechanics be negatively affected by taking more off-balence shots with the whole opposing team loading up on him & he doesn’t have anybody to relieve the pressure?
I feel it’s not fair to say Iverson was a bad shooter like that when he had awful spacing for most of his career. Man look at the clips Ben Taylor was showing, A.I’s teammates are bricking C&S middies, that’s just awful man & makes me 🤮 with how bad that spacing was
Difficult shot making is an inherent skill IMO. Its what made Kobe fearsome in the playoffs when the game gets super sloppy and jumpers aren't going in. Conversely with someone super efficient like Curry, it is scary that he can drop 40+ point solo in a playoff game. Because it usually involves showing off his absurd touch via a 40 foot pull up jumper. Or keeping his handles in traffic then putting up a crazy circus shot that still goes in with a FT.
HARDEN RAN AROUND SCREENS THAT WHOLE TIME IN OKC!!
Yes, I’m having a great day 🎉 Thanks for the education, and the memories. AI was such a beast, it was almost unreal.
The variability in shooting form comes about because he plays on feel rather than much repetitions/drills. I’ve been there, I know that feeling. You feel like the ring is very close, and you’re gently placing it in even though you’re off balance and the defender is in your face. Remember…
We’re talking about practice…practice man!
Great video, and thanks for coming up with a succinct case against the stat geek Allen Iverson critiques. One key error they make is that they underrate the ability to create offense. Not anyone can create offense if force-fed the basketball, but the stat geeks think otherwise. And thanks for using WOWY. I think that stat doesn't get used enough.
It sucks that players like AI had go play in an era with a bunch of players around him who couldn't shoot or score
Denver
@@redwarrior118 true, but those 76ers teams were nasty
@@redwarrior118 Nice for past his prime less than 2 years he even got to play there, and alot of time he and Melo didnt get to play together for injuries and whatnot.
Absolutely love the content. Looking forward to a possible Tony Parker or Manu Ginobili video in this series
I think that Allen Iverson is interesting because he’s so often thrown into the “high volume, low efficiency, good player on bad team” category with guys like Russel Westbrook, TMAC, etc. However, he is different from these other players because of the baffling fact that he managed to actually make this play style work to some degree. Look at the records and playoff achievements of other players who fit this bill. It’s full of teams that range from far below .500 to barely scraping into the playoffs and losing in the first round. Allen got his team the 1 seed, lead his team to the finals past the Reggie Miller Pacers, Vince Carter Raptors, and Ray Allen Bucks, and then give the Lakers their only loss of the post season. Just like think about how crazy that would be in the context of today’s NBA. Imagine for a second that Bradley Beal didn’t get traded to the Suns, and single-handedly willed the Washington Wizards to a finals appearance. That’s essentially what AI did, and yet people talk about him like he never got out of the second round.
That 2001 team had DPOY Mutombo, 6th man of the year Erin McKie, and coach of the year Larry Brown. AI played with excellent talent around him, he just refused to utilize it in favor of throwing up dozens of garbage shots
@@BR-re7oz Those are good DEFENDERS. Those are bad to mediocre SCORERS , SPACERS and CREATORS at best. Theo Ratliff was the 2nd leasing scorer at 12.4 ppg and if you’re wondering if AI was taking shots way from him, he never scored that high on other teams.
Tmac is efficient fam
@@BR-re7oz You a big AI hater lmao. Weak. Aaron McKie was 6th man of the year the same year they went to the Finals because AI made that team what it was. Mutombo was an offensive cripple. McKie was literally the only other capable option, but he was not All-Star level or a big time scorer like Lou Williams, Jamal Crawford, Ginobili or other renowned 6th men. You are just hating.
Those people shouldn’t even be payed attention too. They stare at a stat sheet and they think they accurately know what players like AI and Kobe are about. I think it’s just ridiculous really.
Bro I just was wondering how good Ai was after I answered who'd win in 1v 1, Kyrie or AI. And started deep diving into how good was AI. You the GOAT, what a coincidence.
Iverson would have been a HOF corner and kick returner if he was able to play his best sport. He did pretty damn good playing his second best sport, though.
He would have made a fantastic professional cyclist with the relentless motor that he had. Or a middle distance track athlete.
Great video. You wonder too if he would have developed a different approach to the game had he been drafted into an environment like Denver's
For me, if AI played today, he’d be a smaller quicker version of James Harden. Could you imagine AI in a 5 out D’antoni type offense?
AI isn’t in the same universe as Harden offensively, Harden is so much more efficient
Closest one to AI I see today is Ja Morant. Ja is AI with a insane vertical
Doesn't matter what style of offense you put AI on. He's gonna ballhog, refuse to pass, and take 30 shots a game and make 12 of them. That will cause the defense to focus 2,3,4 defenders on AI, and AI will still refuse to pass and continue to take garbage inefficient shots. That will cause friction with his coach and teammates who want him to utilize a more mechanical offense that would benefit the team, but AI won't do it cuz that doesn't benefit AI's chase for the scoring title.
@@BR-re7oz correct
@@BR-re7ozin this era without centers and no hand checking, he is dropping 30
Fantastic as always. When are we getting a breakdown of JKidd's two-way wizardry?
His play style was born out of necessity . I'm sure if he got paired with an all timer like Shaq he wouldn't have needed to be as ball dominate. No one else on them sixer teams could create offense
he wasnt the biggest passer on the nuggets with melo either
@@fatilz7269he was a PG by then and it was later in his career, Funny cause people love bashing melo and saying he overrated and not top 75 but will artificially boost him to bash Iverson z
@@radien239 facts
Best video on iverson ive ever seen.. no fanboy-ism just the straight facts. love that you spoke about his offball play as well because that gets lost in a lot of iverson breakdowns. I never made the connection that larry brown had just come from indiana. that was an awesome point and a great segue from the last reggie miller episode. I think Allen Iverson is overrated as a basketball player but i definitely can appreciate the nuances and value he brought to the game. Hope you do a video on Chauncey billups because i think he is one of the most UNDERATED players in that 2000s era
Sound like a weirdo overrated yea u don’t know basketball show me a 6”1 guard that carried a team
To the finals embiid still haven’t gone
can we get a penny hardaway video?
Great data, but also a great take and an eloquent delivery. He's a great story. His enshrinement speech might be the worst manuscript but if you listen to the soul behind the words, man that thing will cut you to the bone.
I'm disappointed at whoever wrote the script. They missed the easiest pun in the game with less than 20 secs into the video. You guys should have used ( 0:03): "Some consider him one of the best ever. Others think his style of play was selfish and inefficient. So where is the ANSWER?"
Here since under 100k subs and i knew it you would reach great heights.
Aye im glad you did this one Iverson was the reason I started playing basketball I feel like with the analytics they do a disservice at telling the story of Iversons game thanks for the breakdown even touched on some things I wasn’t aware of 🤘🏾
Great video
I’m really hoping Dirk is going to be in this series. If you drop a 30 minute video on Dirk’s offensive game I will cry
i think if Iverson had a team like the 2018 Rockets, same intense defenders with better shooting, he wouldve won a lot more and not have built those bad habits he did in Philly
I think players like AI, Tmac, and Kobe for example could’ve done really great in that system. All with different varying results but that 2018 team was really so well built and had great pieces.
New series what a time to be alive!
He will always be my favourite player of all time! Being a short player myself when he broke through, gave me so much to learn and be aspired from, to add to my game.
I want an episode exping to people who good VC actually was and how deep and layered his game was during his prime
For me, the best comp for Iverson is post-Durant, but still OKC Westbrook, particularly his MVP season. Still a hell of a player and floor raiser.
Ironically, Bob Cousy shot a 37.5% from the field, and yet he doesn't have the reputation of being a bad shooter.
All that said, I can confidently say this is the most objective analysis of AI I've ever seen on youtube.
To be fair to Cousy, everybody shot poorly back then
Jason Kidd shot bad from the field too
@@anthonycelestin3559 yeah but nobody thinks of Kidd as scorer he's praised for his playmaking + defense
AI is my favorite player all time. Pound for pound he was the greatest player ever. He was the Barry Sanders of the NBA.
yerp
20:17 there it is. Iverson is an archetypal floor-raiser on offense.
AI really was the great lost potential of his generation. If he'd grown up a bit faster, and been willing to buy into the team earlier, he could have been so much more.
🙄
“Been so much more” literally the only thing missing from his resume is championships..
@@GetBackRy3x Is it, though? He could have been immortal.
And lacking a championship is no small hole to leave in a legacy.
When you think of that insane '96 draft class, in terms of legacy there's Kobe standing above, and then a cluster of other stars who never reached his level: Ray Allen, Stephon Marbury, Steve Nash and, of course, Alan Iverson.
It's not a stretch to wonder: had he led the 76ers to a championship he'd have been immortal. Probably seen as the greatest of them ever, since neither Moses Malone nor Dr J played much of their primes there. And had AI won twice in Philly we'd be seriously pitting him against Shaq in terms of legacy.
I was born in 2001 and didn’t really get into the nba until around 2011. if I had been born 10 years earlier, AI would’ve easily been my favorite player ever and the Sixers probably would’ve been my favorite team too. somehow, everything he accomplished at just 6’0 and 165 is still under appreciated
facts
He was carrying. Inefficient. But he was fun to watch lol.
Ok so why wasn’t y’all saying this years ago?
The great things about Allen Iverson, were ironically his physical/athletic abilities (Motor & Instinct) his elite stamina allowed him to keep his high level of play all game with minimal drop off. His instinct allowed him to be effective not only offensively but defensively as well despite his stature.
1. MOTOR (stamina is a highly underrated trait 10 straight seasons of 40+ min per game)
2. INSTINCT (led the league in steals 3 times!)
3. BALL HANDLING ( added pressure on defenders)
He's definitely an all time great, but he was never going to win a championship.
He's a guy that never needed to practice and could do it day in and day out. But a team of regular guys needs practice to know what's going on and a leader has to practice with them so they are all on the same page.
As a Philly fan, it all ends for me in game 1 of the '01 finals. He got within 3 games of doing it.
Been waiting this for ages
Iverson is one of my favorites, and yes, he was inefficient because he was playing with bums. But he had heart, and you cannot measure that with stats.
he was inefficient even when playing with better teamates in denver.
@@garysalazar5279cut it out. You clowns love to hype up melo when it fits your argument but bash him any other time.. just stfu..
Man, I can not wait for the Manu Ginobili EPISODE!!!!!