Kyle Lowry HOF worthy?

[rats60]

Originally Posted by BuffiBlowout

Every meaningful stat out there shows Allen Iverson being a very inefficient, high usage player who contributes almost no positives to winning basketball games outside of individual scoring. Literally his only positive attribute is taken away by his inefficiency.

Kyle Lowry is the exact opposite. A very efficient player who contributes at an elite or near elite level of every single aspect of the game.

It's really not much of a debate despite how popular and highly regarded Iverson is.

-Buffi
Blowout Cards

Iverson has a career PER of 20.9. Lowry has a career PER of 18.4. If Iverson is inefficient, then Lowry is really inefficient. By the was Iverson is 58th all time in PER, Lowry 142nd.

[OJMayo32]

Iverson is globally known compare to Lowry.

Plus if you were to get a Raptors' jersey who would you get???

Carter
McGrady
Derozan
Stoudamire

[regularp]

Lowry has NEVER been in the top five PG discussion. No way he should be a HOFer. Kevin Johnson, Tim Hardaway and Mark Price were all far superior players and none is in the Hall.

Lowry was trash in the playoffs until the last three seasons so it's not like anyone can hang their hat on the postseason performer part either. Dude was shooting 38% in his first four playoff appearances.

[ninjacookies]

The biggest problem with Lowry is that he never excelled at anything. Thus, he never stood out from the pack. I could be wrong as I haven't checked the numbers, but I doubt he has high placement on any of the all-time lists, either.

Was he that solid, dependable guy that always came in and gave his all without complaint? Absolutely.

His first 6 seasons were rather forgettable.

Was never the definitive best player on his own team.

I honestly don't think he makes it. Far too many talents in that tier still waiting to get in. Lowry isn't more memorable than any of them.

[gomiamigo]

Originally Posted by BuffiBlowout

Nevermind.... I don't want to argue with you guys.

The classic 'I'm wrong but won't acknowledge it' rejoinder.

So you can't admit you were utterly and completely wrong when you said ALL the advance stats favored Lowry? That's childish.

Or do you just not understand what you are talking about? Because it sure seems that way. VORP is fairly well known and understood.

And then you start talking about a TEAM instead of the player....

Just be a grown man and admit you're wrong [or woman]. People will respect you more.

[smalltown]

Originally Posted by OJMayo32

Plus if you were to get a Raptors' jersey who would you get???

Carter
McGrady
Derozan
Stoudamire

Um... what does that have to do with anything?

[dennythedinosau]

Originally Posted by regularp

No way he should be a HOFer. Kevin Johnson, Tim Hardaway and Mark Price were all far superior players and none is in the Hall

You're really underestimating how much a championship ring helps someone's HOF case, and also the fact that the basketball HOF is not that difficult to get into.

Tim Hardaway might get in eventually. And it's not like he had any postseason success. His Heat teams always lost to lower-seeded Knicks teams in the playoffs.

And all those guys don't have a championship ring or any type of longevity. Hardaway, Price, KJ had about 6 good seasons, and then were injury-plagued for the rest of their careers.

[regularp]

Originally Posted by dennythedinosau

You're really underestimating how much a championship ring helps someone's HOF case, and also the fact that the basketball HOF is not that difficult to get into.

Tim Hardaway might get in eventually. And it's not like he had any postseason success. His Heat teams always lost to lower-seeded Knicks teams in the playoffs.

And all those guys don't have a championship ring or any type of longevity. Hardaway, Price, KJ had about 6 good seasons, and then were injury-plagued for the rest of their careers.

Like Lowry? Their peaks were much better than Lowry's too. Those guys weren't getting All-Star nods with 14/9 and 16/7 seasons on 41% shooting.

[Orangejello727]

Originally Posted by rats60

Iverson has a career PER of 20.9. Lowry has a career PER of 18.4. If Iverson is inefficient, then Lowry is really inefficient. By the was Iverson is 58th all time in PER, Lowry 142nd.

PER might be the worst stat of all time to use for anything. It favours some players while demolishing others. Demarus Cousins is ranked way higher than Iverson.

To everyone out there, It doesn't matter if you think he will make it or not. Thank the gods none of you are voting for who get in the hall and doesn't. If that were the case, it would be a HOF filled the guys you bought jerseys of sitting in your closet!!

[dennythedinosau]

Originally Posted by regularp

Like Lowry? Their peaks were much better than Lowry's too. Those guys weren't getting All-Star nods with 14/9 and 16/7 seasons on 41% shooting.

So they're generally around the same tier then? If so, Lowry's ring and Gold Medal puts him over the top.

Lowry has had 7 All-Star caliber seasons, with the potential of 1 or 2 more. And he was at least an above average player in Houston. He's still making All-Star games at age 33 while those other guys (except Hardaway) were pretty much DONE at age 31 due to injury.

I mean, I don't like LaMarcus Aldridge, but he most likely will go the Hall of Fame too.

As I mentioned in a previous post, look at some of the guys inducted in 2019. Charlie Scott, Jack Sikma, Maurice Cheeks. Guys who were career 3rd fiddles.

[BuffiBlowout]

Originally Posted by gomiamigo

The classic 'I'm wrong but won't acknowledge it' rejoinder.

So you can't admit you were utterly and completely wrong when you said ALL the advance stats favored Lowry? That's childish.

Or do you just not understand what you are talking about? Because it sure seems that way. VORP is fairly well known and understood.

And then you start talking about a TEAM instead of the player....

Just be a grown man and admit you're wrong [or woman]. People will respect you more.

No. The classic it’s obvious to me you don’t know what you are talking about and no matter what I say you’re not going to change your mind.

I’ve had this discussion 100 times and it’s obvious how to tell people who are willing to be open minded towards something they never considered opposed to people who aren’t willing to have a discussion.

And Iverson has played over 10,000 more minutes then Lowry. Of course he’s going to have a higher career VORP - it’s a cumulative stat that gets higher with the amount of counting stats you accumulate.

-Buffi
Blowout Cards

[cardmole]

Don't know if actual facts belong in this thread, but Lowry cards are HOT.

[ninjacookies]

6x All Star (guys like Kemba Walker will most likely end up with more...dudes like Lillard and Westbrook WAY more)

1x all-nba

and 1x nba champ with Kawhi being the alpha dog

Not saying he didn't contribute mightily to that championship and it will definitely stay in the minds of potential voters, but again...his accolades don't jump off the page for a 15 year vet.

He is a career 15/4/6. Plays good defense. Efficiency isn't a terribly moving argument when you're not prolific in any major category. You should be efficient.


I look at him and I see a heavily stripped down version of CP3, who, outside of a championship (til this point), has absolutely trounced Lowry in terms of career decorations and numbers.


Lowry may get in eventually, but if he ever does happen it'll be much further down the line after his eligibility. There's simply too many more memorable and just overall better pg's from this era that are ahead of him.

[regularp]

Originally Posted by dennythedinosau

So they're generally around the same tier then? If so, Lowry's ring and Gold Medal puts him over the top.

Lowry has had 7 All-Star caliber seasons, with the potential of 1 or 2 more. And he was at least an above average player in Houston. He's still making All-Star games at age 33 while those other guys (except Hardaway) were pretty much DONE at age 31 due to injury.

I mean, I don't like LaMarcus Aldridge, but he most likely will go the Hall of Fame too.

As I mentioned in a previous post, look at some of the guys inducted in 2019. Charlie Scott, Jack Sikma, Maurice Cheeks. Guys who were career 3rd fiddles.

They are not in the same tier. Those guys were MUCH better players at their peak. It's not even close.

Should Glen Rice's ring as the third option on the Lakers put him in the Hall like Lowry being the third option on the Raptors? What a ridiculous argument. Let's get Jason Terry and Antoine Walker in there too.

Again, Lowry has never been in the top five PG discussion at any point in his career. Besides the obvious Curry, Paul, Lillard and Westbrook group, John Wall, Isiah Thomas, Kemba, Dragic and Kyrie have been better in any given season.

Lowry is in the Mike Conley tier and would have the same amount of AS appearances if he spent his entire career in the west.

[BuffiBlowout]

Originally Posted by gomiamigo

The classic 'I'm wrong but won't acknowledge it' rejoinder.

So you can't admit you were utterly and completely wrong when you said ALL the advance stats favored Lowry? That's childish.

Or do you just not understand what you are talking about? Because it sure seems that way. VORP is fairly well known and understood.

And then you start talking about a TEAM instead of the player....

Just be a grown man and admit you're wrong [or woman]. People will respect you more.

And just because you're being so condescending, let's go to stat school...

Keep in mind the following (all of which heavily favor Iverson):
- Allen Iverson is a high-usage, counting stat accumulator
- Kyle Lowry is an average usage player who excels at "unquantifiable" stats
- Allen Iverson's usage rate is 50% higher than Lowry's. So for every 2 possessions Lowry uses offensively, Iverson uses 3.
- Allen Iverson has played 10,002 more NBA Minutes (40% more then Lowry)



Lowry:
2PT %, 3PT%, FT%, OReb, DReb, Total Reb, AST, TO, AST/TO %, BLK, ORTG, TS%, eFG%, OReb %, DReb %, Total Reb %, AST %, BLK %, Off WS, WS/48, DBPM, BPM


Iverson:
PTS, FG%, STL, DRTG, FT Rate, STL %, TO %, Def WS, Total WS, OBPM, VORP


So Lowry wins in almost every category despite being at a significant disadvantage from the inputs the formulas use, the amount of times he has the ball, and the amount of NBA minutes he has played.

The only meaningful categories that don't go to Lowry are PTS (hello 50% higher usage rate) and some of the "counting stats" of advanced stats (Def WS, Total WS and VORP). Again, Iverson has played 10,002 more minutes then Lowry - thats an additional 40% of Lowry's career minutes. Despite that, he only has a 23.1% higher vorp, and a 5.1% higher WS total (and is already losing in some of the other advanced counting stats).

Seeing as how Lowry is still playing at an all-star caliber level, It is easy to deduce that he will end his career with a significant lead in WS and possibly VORP.

More so, when you adjust for the era (Lowry playing in the highest scoring offensive time NBA history), he has a better adjusted DRTG while still have a better ORTG.

To summarize, just from an individual statistical comparison, Lowry is better than Iverson at basically everything (a lot better in most stats) as is and takes almost everything else once you adjust for the era and the fact that Lowry is still playing.

Projecting forward, this is what the above lists will look like...


Lowry:
2PT %, 3PT%, FT%, OReb, DReb, Total Reb, AST, TO, AST/TO %, BLK, ORTG, DRTG, TS%, eFG% OReb %, DReb %, Total Reb %, AST %, BLK %, Off WS, Def WS, Total WS, WS/48, DBPM, BPM

Iverson:
PTS, STL, FT Rate, STL%, TO%

With these categories going either way depending on how Kyle finishes out his career:
FG%, OBPM, VORP



AND remember, these numbers only reflect box score stats and +/- outcomes which cater to Iverson's biggest strength and ignore Lowry's biggest strength.



Now we get to add in all the other things where Lowry is clearly superior to Iverson that aren't reflected in any of those individual stats above (except having an effect on +/-) - charges drawn, offensive fouls drawn, deflections, defensive switch ability, secondary assists, screen setting, BBIQ, and on and on and on...


Then we get to add in the success he has led his team to being the best player on it for the past 7 years sans one year of Kawhi. 2nd most regular season wins, 3rd most playoff wins (will be 2nd after this year), 7 straight division titles, and an NBA Championship.

And lets throw that Olympic Gold Medal in there too (Iverson has a Bronze)


If you want to make a case for Iverson go ahead. I'm all ears. But if your case is built around total this or counting stat that, I think I've clearly shown there is no leg to stand on there....


All of ^^^^^^ is why I posted "nevermind". Because I didn't want to have to type this out. Not because you are right. It's because you are SO wrong, it's almost unfathomable to think that you can actually believe what you are saying while rolling your eyes at me in the process. In my experience, people like that are unpersuadable and closed minded to any thought outside of their existing ones. And if you want to go ahead and apologize because you are wrong, maybe I'll respect you.

That is all.

-Buffi
Blowout Cards

[ninjacookies]

Lowry a better player than AI?


Definitely a time to be alive.

[drobfan8]

Some horrendous takes in here..

Ouch my eyes.

[Justin7]

I don't agree with this guys conclusion that A.I. is the GOAT but he makes excellent points. Obviously, AI is not in the convo with Lowry who is in the convo with Billups but is in the convo with guys like Dwayne Wade and Kobe as one of the all time greats. The fact is if you polled the NBA 300/300 of them would vote AI over Lowry, Lowry included. Lebron and Durant have both stated AI is the pound for pound goat. There's no debate to be had here. The type of person to state something that insane is psychotic and not open to the full story but if we talking about AI's legacy let's do it right, since everyone has already laughed at that concept I thought I'd post a more valuable analysis. This is more in talking about the comparison with actual all time greats not Lowry, since AI is the greatest pound for pound player of all time. Once again, don't agree with all of this guys conclusions but his analysis is spot on:


'Not as inefficient as you'd think...'

• Detractors to Iverson's legacy have a decent amount of ammunition, if I had to say so myself. One could point to his inefficiency, but it's important to remember the circumstances of Iverson's era. For starters, Iverson starred in an era based on 'hero ball'. The notion at this time was to put the ball in the hands of your top guy night-in, night-out, and no matter what the stats said, as long as your club got the win, that's what mattered.

• And to be clear, Iverson's team got wins. In just his third season, "The Answer" was able to guide the 76ers past the first round for three straight seasons, culminating in a trip to the NBA Finals in 2001. And to talk more about his efficiency: during the pre-hand check era prior to 2004-05, Iverson shot the ball at a 41.6% clip (5,104-of-12,247), whereas his percentages increased massively almost immediately.
user uploaded image

• It's not a coincidence that Iverson's shooting numbers began to pick up as soon as defenses lost a bit of their edge. Iverson jumped to a 44.2% shooting percentage once defenses weren't given incredible advantages. This was highlighted by what I believe to be Iverson's finest season in 2005-06, when Iverson averaged 33.0 PPG, 7.4 APG, and 1.9 SPG on a solid 44.7% FG. The year prior, just 30.7 PPG, 7.9 APG, 4.0 RPG, and 2.4 SPG. These are right on par with his 2001 MVP season. All he was missing was the solid supporting cast needed, for if there were off-nights.

• Additionally, Iverson's inefficiency is overrated for a few reasons. When comparing Iverson to other elite SGs such as Kobe Bryant (who shot just 2% better than Iverson), Dwyane Wade, or even Michael Jordan, it's important to consider the circumstances.

• On a night-to-night basis, each of the aforemented SGs could count on the offensive pressures being alleviated in the case of an off-night. Iverson's impact goes completely beyond the box score, but fans who: either 1) are too young to have watched him play, 2) too lazy to sit back and study film on him, check a few box scores, and base judgments off that. I can almost assure you, the vast majority of teens who say that Jordan, Wilt, or Kareem have not gone back to study seasons in-depth. With all due respect to those guys - they own rightful arguments as "greatest player of all-time," but when confronted on why, fans will recycle someone else's information, disregard the eye test, or some unprepared to explain why.
user uploaded image

• While we're on the topic of Iverson's so-called inefficiency, let us name some of the players he's either right on par with,or flat out more efficient than. Allen Iverson shoots one percentage lower than Tracy McGrady (43.5% to 42.5%). Iverson shoots two percentages lower than Kobe Bryant and Paul Pierce (44.7% and 44.5%.) If two percentage points are enough to disqualify Iverson from such honors, it speaks volumes to the hypocrisy of NBA fans. Vince Carter shoots 41.6% in the postseason, in comparison to 40.1% Iverson.

But how often do you hear about guys such as Carter, Pierce, and Bryant being called inefficient?

Again, all due respect to these players. But at 6-foot, 165lbs, Iverson played every game like it was his last, laid it all on the line, and shot well for his era and circumstances. Heart is one of those things that you simply can't measure on a box score, and Iverson ranks second to none where it counts.

Let's get another thing clear while we're here.

• Fans and "experts" generally look to stats for the full spectrum of Iverson's legacy, and that's grotesquely unrealistic. For starters, do stats measure the type of team Iverson had offensively? When your playing scheme includes you shooting 30+ shots per night, do we ever think about the fatigue that comes along with it? There are realistically only 5-10 players in a generation that can shoot 40+ percent on 30 shots a night, and actually come out with victories. Iverson is coming off cuts, screens, flares, pin downs, exerting immense energy into getting open. We never think about that, though.

• Instead of listing stat-after-stat, watch the game next time. Expectations were for Iverson to create on just about every possession, with little regard for his fatigue, pain tolerance, etc. More nights than not, he delivered. Find a stat that compares to that.
user uploaded image

"The Most Important Player Ever..." (Part 1)

• As spectacular as Kobe Bryant was, he played hand-in-hand with the most dominant center of this generation in Shaquille O'Neal. Should he have an off-night (which he a good amount of in the Finals), he could rely on Shaquille O'Neal and Pau Gasol on a nightly basis to help. This isn't to throw Iverson's off-nights under the rug, for he had a number of them as well. But notice the help that Iverson got, in comparison to Kobe Bryant, or say Dwyane Wade. To go further into detail with that, take a look at the 2014 NBA Finals. To be clear, I am not stating this in a knock to either of Wade or Bryant, two of the game's most fierce competitors, but this is made to combat the debates of who is better between Wade, Bryant, or Iverson.

2014 NBA Finals

• Dwyane Wade - 15.2 PPG, 3.8 RPG, 2.6 APG on 43% FG shooting.

• LeBron James - 28.2 PPG, 7.8 RPG, 4.0 APG on 57% FG shooting.

• If Iverson had partook in a series and averaged a measly 15-3-3 line in the NBA Finals, he'd have been crucified. Remember, the media went after Iverson, even after winning the MVP. In his situation, he consistently had to take over games each and every night, knowing the negatives that'd come along with an off-night. One thing that I don't believe that Iverson gets credit for is his ability to impact games in other ways, which you'll see below. For his 6'0 stature, he was a strong rebounder, an underrated passer, and a decent defender.

Wade is often pegged as the third-best SG, but Iverson separates himself in a vast array of categories. Longevity is the first worth pointing out.

By age 32, Iverson was averaging 26.4 PPG, 7.1 APG, and 46% FG on a top-tier Western Conference Team, even as injuries had begun to mount.

By age 32, Wade was averaging 19.0 PPG and 4.7 APG on a top-tier Eastern Conference Team.
user uploaded image

• Both had caved into "Robin" roles with respective "Batmans" in LeBron James and Carmelo Anthony, but the difference was this. Wade was regarded as on the verge of "washed up", injury prone, and a borderline elite SG. Iverson was still at the tail end of dominance after just as gruesome injuries, and while Wade was a sensational talent, he stacks up a tier below "The Answer." Sports analysts and fans swear up-and-down that "rings don't matter", yet they often retreat to that argument when comparing Wade and Iverson. It's similar to that of Duncan and Malone, Russell and Wilt, and LeBron and Kobe. The whole "who has more rings" argument is only used when convenient to the cause. Here's what they often say next:

"Wade carried his team to a ring in '06. Iverson couldn't do it in '01!"

• Realize that you just compared the 2006 Dallas Mavericks to the 2001 Los Angeles Lakers. One is a team who blew a 2-0 lead, and lost to an 8th-seed the very next year. With a single All-Star. The other is the second most dominant team in NBA Playoff history with a handful of Hall of Famers, arguably the greatest coach of all-time, and the game's greatest role players.
user uploaded image

• The fact that Iverson single handedly took that team to the laddertop of a title when players like Tim Duncan, David Robinson, and Chris Webber (players who lost to the '01 Lakers) couldn't win the single game, that should tell you something.

• Another incredulous belief among the NBA world is that Wade is a better passer than Iverson, and that couldn't be further from the truth. Take a look at the following sample, in which each player is in their prime in 8-year windows.

☆ 29.1 PPG, 6.3 APG, 3.7 RPG, 2.3 SPG, 42.4% FG

☆ 28.7 PPG, 5.8 APG, 5.3 RPG, 1.7 SPG, 45.6% FG

☆ 30.8 PPG, 5.1 APG, 6.3 RPG, 2.3 SPG, 50.1% FG

☆ 25.2 PPG, 6.0 APG, 5.1 RPG, 1.8 SPG, 49.6% FG

☆ 22.8 PPG, 6.2 APG, 6.6 RPG, 2.2 SPG, 48.0% FG

*Iverson, Bryant, Jordan, Wade, and Drexler

•Let's see here. Wade had LeBron James in his peak, along with an MVP version of Shaq for some points, Chris Bosh, and even Lamar Odom (better than nearly any player from Iverson's prime). Kobe had peak Shaq, Pau Gasol, Lamar Odom, and some of the game's greatest role players. Jordan had Pippen, Rodman, Kukoc, and some of the game's greatest role players. Drexler had Hakeem Olajuwon, Terry Porter, Clifford Robinson, and a slew of other amazing players.

• In comparison, Iverson rolled with the likes Aaron McKie, Eric Snow, and Matt Geiger for the long haul. These guys are insanely underrated to their contributions, something only the eye-test does them justice for, but they simply don't stack up to the other casts, especially as injured as they were in say, 2001.

• All things considered, though Iverson was a much more effective passer. All of these guys have similar usage rates, but when you consider the Hall of Famers these guys got to pass to, it's apples to oranges. Women lie, men lie, common sense doesn't. Now, let's take a look at that 2004 series with Bryant, as part of the inevitable Iverson vs. Kobe debate.
user uploaded image

★ 2004 NBA Finals

• Kobe Bryant - 22.6 PPG, 2.8 RPG, 4.4 APG on 38% FG.

• Shaquille O'Neal - 26.6 PPG, 10.8 RPG, 63% FG.

★ 2000 NBA Finals

• Shaquille O'Neal - 38.0 PPG, 16.7 RPG, 2.7 BPG on 61% FG.

• Kobe Bryant - 15.6 PPG, 4.6 RPG, 4.2 APG on 37% FG

• Now, I'm not one to say that Kobe was carried by Shaquille O'Neal, but let me clear the air. If you have a Hall of Fame teammate averaging 38 points and 17 rebounds in the Finals, you have to work EXTREMELY hard to not get plenty of assits. People love to point at the fortunes of Bryant's career, which guided him towards five championships. The help provided to Kobe and Wade, in comparison to Iverson's aren't even close. I despise the lack of respect Iverson's core gets, but if you put Iverson and Shaq on the same team --- I don't think I really have to finish that sentence for you to understand in terms of assists.

• Two things to point out here - in the midst of his prime, Iverson never had series as poorly played as the one Bryant had in the 2004 Finals. Certainly, I'll give Bryant the benefit of the doubt - the chaotic atmosphere that surrounded Bryant, be it the criminal case and the teammate chemistry (or lack thereof), it's understandable. The thing is, Iverson isn't given the benefit of the doubt, for whatever reason. He's never had a player that could provide a 26-10 series at his side. If he did, I'm almost certain that Iverson would be a multi-time NBA champion.


"The Most Important Player Ever" (Part 2)

• Now onto the newest facts added to the blog here. Just how important was Iverson to his team? Take a look at how Iverson's teams have performed without him, in comparison to other great players in our games' history.

• Iverson's teams without Iverson:

- 73-135 (35.0% wins); 46-127 in Philadelphia/Denver

• What exactly does this mean? The chances of the teams winning games without Iverson were extremely slim. For reference, over a 82-game season, that 35% chance of winning equates to a 28-win season. A number of instances throughout his career drive this point home. Remember that 2001 Eastern Conference Finals? Without Iverson, the 76ers fought hard, but mustered little to no offense. In Game 5, his impact was felt right away, helping the 76ers edge the Bucks to take a 3-2 lead.

• Perhaps the best example one could consider is that 2002 season. With Allen Iverson hampered with elbow surgery, the 76ers jumped out to a whopping 0-5 start to the season, failing to hit 80+ points in 4 of 5 games. The second Iverson returns? The team runs off seven straight games to open the season, returning to championship form right away. How the Sixers performed with or without Iverson was night-and-day, and as you'll see, few teams had the connection that they did. Now, take another look at the team records without Iverson, in comparison to others.

• Iverson's teams without Iverson:

- 73-135 (35.0% wins); 46-127 in Philadelphia/Denver.

• Teams' records without Kareem (LAL/MIL)

- 43-35 (55.1% wins); 45-win season in 82 game season.

• Teams' records without Jordan (CHI/WAS)

- 118-122 (49.1% wins); 40-wins in 82 game season.

• Teams' records without Wilt (PHI/GSW/PHW)

- 44-41 (51.7% wins); 42-wins in 82 game season.

• Teams' records without Kobe (LAL)

- 109-143, but 69-44 minus 2014-2017; (43.2% wins); 35-wins in 82 game season.

• Teams' records without Wade (MIA/CHI)

- 114-106 (51.8% wins); 42-wins in 82 game season.

• Teams' records without LeBron (MIA/CLE)

- 23-46 (33.3% wins); 27-wins in 82 game season.

• What exactly does all this prove? Well, in games that Kareem Abdul-Jabbar missed, the Bucks and Lakers still performed at perennial Playoff team like paces. In fact, I can recall the Lakers winning a title in 1980 with a rookie Magic Johnson, and a stacked squad against Julius Erving and the 76ers. Kareem is a top-5 players ever, but it speaks volumes to just how important he was. After all, he played alongside two of the game's top 5 PGs ever (Robertson and Magic). Taking Iverson off the 76ers or so, proved to be much more detrimental than resting Kareem, showing how Iverson takes an edge with importance.

• Also note how successful teams have been, even wirhout the presence of Bryant and Chamberlain. At one point around 2002, the Lakers owned an impressive 36-10 record without Bryant. Obviously these guys were the tipping point for postseason success, but it goes without saying that they aren't as important as Iverson.

• The big one here is Michael Jordan. The Bulls powerhouse was a borderline .500 team without Jordan, and the bulk of it stems from the 1994 season. Recall, Jordan announced his retirement in early October, leaving very little time for the Bulls to prepare to defend the title. What do they do? To 55-27 with Scottie Pippen paving the way as an MVP candidate, and come a possession or two short of the Eastern Conference Finals. Jordan is the second greatest player ever, but it shows that he wasn't as irreplaceable as advertised.

• For reference, take a look at how the 76ers have fared without Iverson. Since his departure in 2006, the 76ers have YET to compile a winning season, and have a grand total of ONE series victory. If not for that Derrick Rose injury in the 2012 Playoffs, the Bulls would not have a single series win since the days of Iverson. If that isn't impact on a franchise, I'm not sure what is. You take any player aside from LeBron and Iverson off a team, and you're certain to lose.

Allen Iverson is the most important player of all-time. I rest my case.
user uploaded image

'Dominance Against The Greats...'

• Anyways, this was what Iverson took to the 2001 Finals. To the cusp of knocking off Kobe and Shaq. A team with a presumed third-option that averaged 8.0 PPG on 31.3% shooting. On the other hand, Iverson thoroughly outplayed Kobe Bryant, averaging a 36-6-4 line on 40% compared to 24-8-6 on 41% shooting. To add to that comparison, let's take a look at head-to-head games between Iverson (Philadelphia and Denver) and Bryant from 1996 to 2008, when both players were at their apex.

- Bryant: 24.0 PPG, 5.8 APG, 5.4 RPG, 0.9 SPG; 45% FG, 32% 3PT, 85% FT (14-12)

- Iverson: 27.1 PPG, 7.8 APG, 3.8 RPG, 2.6 SPG; 39% FG, 30% 3PT, 75% FT (12-14)

• Compare Iverson to Jordan throughout their careers - it's almost unfair to compare the two from 1999 and beyond, as Jordan was past his prime in Washington. Still, it's worth noting that Iverson efficiently dropped 30+ on Jordan routinely. For the sake of fairness, let's compare from 1996 to 1998, in which Jordan was still, give-or-take, in his prime and won three straight titles.

- Iverson: 27.1 PPG, 3.0 APG, 3.0 APG, 1.8 SPG; 47% FG, 44% 3PT, 79% FT (1-6)

- Jordan: 24.4 PPG, 5.4 RPG, 3.0 APG, 2.7 SPG; 45% FG, 38% 3PT, 74% FT (6-1)

• Two more things worth considering here - it's funny how that efficiency came back here, in my opinion. Against a prime Jordan - a team that managed three straight titles, Iverson arguably outplayed Jordan, and an inferior team is the only reason for the record. Iverson went on to win the last five in this series once his team had more help.

• Finally, let's take a look at Iverson vs. Wade, given that Wade is one of the greatest of all-time, and plays the same position as Iverson. It wouldn't be fair to base this in 2003, Wade's rookie year. Therefore, the following sample comes from 2004 to 2008, during both players respective peaks (although Wade's went until 2011).

- Iverson: 31.1 PPG, 7.0 APG, 3.3 RPG, 2.3 SPG, 43% FG, 38% 3PT, 80% FT (5-6)

- Wade: 27.1 PPG, 8.2 APG, 5.3 RPG, 1.5 SPG, 50% FG, 31% 3PT, 79% FT (6-5)

• I must admit, Wade's stats are in some cases better than Iverson's. He facilitated the ball better than Iverson, outrebounded him, and shot more efficiently. This is definitely the closest of the three, and hardest to argue. Recall that this was in the midst of Wade's 2005 (ECF run) and 2006 (NBA Title) campaign, so he had more to work with. That being said, with what I mentioned above, this decision isn't too hard to make.

• For what it's worth, let's take a look at AI's production against other notable units:

Gregg Popovich's defense vs. the Spurs:

- 28.2 PPG, 5.1 APG, 3.8 RPG on 45.1% FG

Facing Gary Payton, an elite, HOF defender:

- 28.4 PPG, 5.9 APG, 2.3 SPG on 44.2% FG

Facing LeBron James' led teams:

- 28.7 PPG, 8.6 APG, 3.9 APG (excluding Memphis games)
user uploaded image

Big-Time Performer...

It goes without saying how big Iverson is in big games. Let's take a look at just a few of the games from AI:

☆ 44 points, 7 assists, 6 rebounds, and 2 steals on 52% shooting during a 108-91, Game 7 win in the 2001 Eastern Conference Finals.

☆ 52 points, 7 assists, 8 three-pointers, and 4 steals on 66% shooting during a 121-88, Game 5 win in the 2001 East Semi-Finals.

☆ 54 points, 5 rebounds, and 4 assists on 54% shooting during a 97-92, Game 2 win in the 2001 Eastern Conference Semi-Finals.

☆ 48 points, 5 rebounds, 6 assists, and 5 steals on 44% shooting during a 107-101 win in the 2001 NBA Finals.

☆ 30 points, 7 assists, and 5 rebounds in NBA Playoff debut during 1999.

☆ 55 points, 4 rebounds, and 8 assists on 65% shooting in Game 1 victory over Hornets in 2003 East First Round.

☆ 36 points, 11 rebounds, 5 assists, and 5 steals during a season-saving Game 4 win against the Detroit Pistons in the 2003 East Semi-Finals.

☆ 38 points, 16 assists, 6 rebounds, and 3 steals to clinch a final Playoff spot against Miami in 2005.

• Now this is a list that could go on all day long. To add to that, he's second all-time in PPG in the Playoffs with 29.7 PPG, and owns a top-five average in elimination games with 29.8 PPG. Quite simply, Iverson has a prime that almost no players can compare to. From his third season in 1998-99 to his Denver days in 2007-08, Iverson averaged 29.7 PPG, 5.9 APG, 4.0 RPG, and 2.4 SPG per game. Did I mention that of the top 20 single season usage rates, Iverson owns four of them, higher than any player on the list? With consistently underwhelming supporting casts, Iverson was forced to deliver every night, and he certainly did. As a four-time scoring champion, 3-time steals leader, and the overall face of the NBA, Iverson left little to no stones unturned during his legendary career.

user uploaded image

Off-Court Legacy..

•Check the resume. No one played with more heart and desire than Iverson (except maybe Westbrook), and you'd be hard-pressed to find a better scorer. At 6'0, in the land of giants, AI always stood tall. And for that, I'm willing to say that Allen Iverson is the greatest player of all time.

• In the case of Michael Jordan, there's always a player comparable. Kobe Bryant and LeBron James typically garner some strong ties to "His Airness", the 2nd greatest player of all-time, but what really can you fully compare to Allen Iverson? On and off the court, Iverson took the wounds for what we see today. The dress code you see implemented today, the reason for that is Iverson's rebellion to David Stern and his attempt at conformity.

Iverson was his own man, first and foremost. He was never down to change himself for anyone. He did it his way, and if you didn't like it, buckets were coming at you.

• Even off the court, his legacy is only matched by Michael Jordan and LeBron James. He made it cool to do things your way. To say what you want to say, and go against the norm. The cornrows and unique hairstyles of today's NBA - here's the reason. He made things that were seemingly frowned upon. From the cornrows to the gold chains, Iverson was a different breed.

• The mixture of the hip-hop and basketball really came into play with Iverson as well. Recall, Iverson was heavily scrutinized for his insensitive rap lyrics toward homosexuals and women. He knew the hate was coming, but took it on headstrong. It was a brand of hip-hop built for those who related, and it made Iverson the most misunderstood player of all-tims as well.

Unlike how fans pick their 'greatest player of all-time' choice, Iverson didn't fear the dislikes or opposition to his thoughts. There was no fear in Iverson's heart, and that's an inspiration for all.

• The most iconic moment of Iverson's career is easily the step over of Tyronn Lue during the 2001 NBA Finals. Consider this the step over of all the all-time greats. Even at a generous 6-foot, Iverson stands tall over any player to grace the Hardwood in my book.

And just like Iverson would probably consider it, I'm not worried about your book. Allen Iverson is the greatest player to ever lace 'em up, and that's how I feel on it. Simple as that. There's nothing more to be said."

Also gonna link this to give the original author credit though this website is clunky af: https://aminoapps.com/c/nba/page/blo...E2lJr6Plw54WN2

[Cavaliercards]

Originally Posted by OJMayo32

Iverson is globally known compare to Lowry.

Plus if you were to get a Raptors' jersey who would you get???

Carter
McGrady
Derozan
Stoudamire

Globally you would have to throw Marc Gasol in that group

[cowboyzqna]

Come come to check out others opinions on a borderline topic and I see....


Young Buffy has absolutely lost his mind. Better than AI? Let's don't be silly. That is just crazy talk and for someone... anyone to actually believe that is just scary. I can appreciate the "homerism" but come on now.


And again I think he does get in so I am not saying he isn't on the lower level of great.



Jordan > AI
AI > Lowery


These are things we know.

[BRob1]

Originally Posted by BuffiBlowout

Every meaningful stat out there shows Allen Iverson being a very inefficient, high usage player who contributes almost no positives to winning basketball games outside of individual scoring. Literally his only positive attribute is taken away by his inefficiency.

Kyle Lowry is the exact opposite. A very efficient player who contributes at an elite or near elite level of every single aspect of the game.

It's really not much of a debate despite how popular and highly regarded Iverson is.

-Buffi
Blowout Cards

Pump, pump pump it up!

[rats60]

Originally Posted by dennythedinosau

You're really underestimating how much a championship ring helps someone's HOF case, and also the fact that the basketball HOF is not that difficult to get into.

Tim Hardaway might get in eventually. And it's not like he had any postseason success. His Heat teams always lost to lower-seeded Knicks teams in the playoffs.

And all those guys don't have a championship ring or any type of longevity. Hardaway, Price, KJ had about 6 good seasons, and then were injury-plagued for the rest of their careers.

So being lucky to be on a team with Kawhi Leonard carrying the team to a championship with a 27.9 PER and hitting a game winning shot to save the season makes Lowry a Hofer? Lowry wasn't very good on that run, PER 15.4 where the league average is 15. His career playoff PER is 15.7. Do you really think voters are going to go by emotion instead of on court performance and vote him in?

[rats60]

Originally Posted by Orangejello727

PER might be the worst stat of all time to use for anything. It favours some players while demolishing others. Demarus Cousins is ranked way higher than Iverson.

To everyone out there, It doesn't matter if you think he will make it or not. Thank the gods none of you are voting for who get in the hall and doesn't. If that were the case, it would be a HOF filled the guys you bought jerseys of sitting in your closet!!

It measures efficiency. It isn't good to compare a big man to a guard because of the different factors, but comparing players at the same position it is the perfect stat to use.

All guards above Iverson are in the HoF. Guards better than Lowry, Gus Williams, Tim Hardaway, Stephen Marbury, World B Free, Walter Davis and Chauncy Billups. This doesn't mean Lowry has no chance at HoF. Just that he isn't the lock that Raptor fans claim and he isn't better than Iverson.

If you want intangibles, Iverson carried a bunch of mediocre players to the NBA Finals. Let's see Lowry do that now that Kawhi is gone and LeBron is in the west. Until then, just being a complimentary player on good teams doesn't make him better than AI.

[dennythedinosau]

Originally Posted by rats60

So being lucky to be on a team with Kawhi Leonard carrying the team to a championship with a 27.9 PER and hitting a game winning shot to save the season makes Lowry a Hofer? Lowry wasn't very good on that run, PER 15.4 where the league average is 15. His career playoff PER is 15.7. Do you really think voters are going to go by emotion instead of on court performance and vote him in?

It's not like he's gonna be first-ballot or anything. Lowry will make HOF 20-25 years after he retires. A good case to look at is Chauncey Billups since their career arcs are similar.

Lowry has 1 All-NBA team (which hurts him here the most), 6 All-Star selections (with potential for more), 1 Olympic Gold Medal, and 1 championship ring as the 2nd best player.

If he retired TODAY, he might not make it. But he still has 3 or 4 years to add to his counting stats. And then his career will be in line with some of the lower-level HOF guys who recently made it.

[BuffiBlowout]

Originally Posted by Justin7

Cut this message because it was so long

I appreciate you posting something insightful but the author of that is trying to claim Allen Iverson is the GOAT. That alone should be a red flag that the article is going to be filled with....

.... the ultimate cherry-picking to support a narrative. The author simply takes tiny sample sizes and arbitrarily compares them to "insert star player name" who Iverson had better numbers or comparable numbers to during that specific situation. You go from Jordan, to Wade, to Ray Allen, To Kareem, to playing against the LeBron but not while he was in Memphis, to a 5 game stretch Iverson missed due to injury, to being guarded by the spurs, to listing a handful of good playoff games, and on and on and on. Cherry-picking all the way through.

Doubling down, the author uses these "stats" to create blanket conclusions to prop up his argument.

I'm not telling you Iverson wasn't a great offensive player player capable of putting up 50 on any given night. All I'm telling you is winning basketball games has so much more to it then being able to score one-on-one.

When you look at the totality of their careers, Lowry is still better then Iverson at almost everything quantifiable outside of a few counting stats due to AI's massive advantages in usage and minutes played. Lowry is also better at all the non-quantifiable / hard to quantify parts of the game. Lowry also has more team success.

None of that article makes a case for Allen Iverson being better then Lowry to me. If I wanted to, I could cherry pick Lowry's career and create the same exact article for him. Really, you could do it for almost anyone...

-Buffi
Blowout Cards