Current Curry vs Peak AI vs Peak Nash

[Ca$H]

1. Curry
2. Nash
3. AI

How would you rank them?

[Haymaker]

AI as inefficient as he was, had the better peak. He was just an offensive juggernaut. Could score from anywhere at will.

[Jlamb47]

A.!
Nash
Curry

Allen Iverson was just a beast in his prime, he took a sh1tty squad to the finals
Nash and Curry coule be more arguable but Nash was just a smarter player

[masonanddixon]

1. Nash-best facilitator by far of the 3, equal shooter to Curry, got to rim at will
2. Curry-playing out of his mind right now but still suspect in the postseason

HUGE GAP

3. Iverson-essentially a worthless player

[JonatanRey]

1. Nash-best facilitator by far of the 3, equal shooter to Curry, got to rim at will
2. Curry-playing out of his mind right now but still suspect in the postseason

HUGE GAP

3. Iverson-essentially a worthless player

1) Curry is slightly a better shooter than Nash was.

2) If you say Iverson was a worthless player, you didn't watch him play.

[chocolatethunder]

1. Curry
2. Nash
3. AI

How would you rank them?
Why would you compare three players who didn't play alike and one (Iverson) who wasn't a PG. They are all great and all were asked to do different things. There's no comparison to be made.

[chocolatethunder]

A.!
Nash
Curry

Allen Iverson was just a beast in his prime, he took a sh1tty squad to the finals
Nash and Curry coule be more arguable but Nash was just a smarter player
There was nothing shitty about that squad that went to the finals. That team was built aroind him perfectly. They were an awesome defensive team and offensively it was geared to get him the ball. This was the best way to use him. That team had DPOY and SMOY and coach of the year. No, that team wasn't shitty at all it's just part of some myth.

[Jlamb47]

There was nothing shitty about that squad that went to the finals. That team was built aroind him perfectly. They were an awesome defensive team and offensively it was geared to get him the ball. This was the best way to use him. That team had DPOY and SMOY and coach of the year. No, that team wasn't shitty at all it's just part of some myth.

Well defense was the only good thing, and if Iverson wasnt hitting his shots, he would be forcing and his teamates coudlnt bail him out. Teams that knew how to play Iverson would beat them, Mutumbo was old and the supporting cast wasnt enough.
Iverson needed another creator

[chocolatethunder]

1) Curry is slightly a better shooter than Nash was.

2) If you say Iverson was a worthless player, you didn't watch him play.
Curry is not a slightly better shooter, if anything, Nash is. Nash had seven seasons shooting over 50% from the field and Curry has yet to have one. Nash is a career 49/42.8/90. That's for an 18 (really 17) year career. After all is said and done they will be equal and they essentially are however if you were going to give the nod to anyone it would be Nash not curry. Nash's career shooting % has to be close to the best if not the best ever for a PG. And to have done it for so long is pretty incredible.

[Human Error]

1. Current Curry
2. Prime Nash
3. Prime Iverson

[Clyde]

lol @ people living in the moment

[chocolatethunder]

Well defense was the only good thing, and if Iverson wasnt hitting his shots, he would be forcing and his teamates coudlnt bail him out. Teams that knew how to play Iverson would beat them, Mutumbo was old and the supporting cast wasnt enough.
Iverson needed another creator
That's just it, he didnt work well with anyone else they brought in there. McKie was awesome off the bench and Mutimbo was only there for the latter part of the season. He was 34 averaging a double double witth 12 boards and 2.5 blocks. Maybe you weren't old enough to be watching but McKie hit several game winners and even Snow did that year. Also, Ratliff was there starting C most of the year until he was hurt and got traded for Mutombo. Iversons teammates did exactly what they were supposed to do and bailed him out plenty. The problem was was that they faced Shaq and Kobe. They won game one and were very close to winning game two. No one was going to beat the Lakers. You can make all the excuses you want but there's no reason for them. He was awesome and the team was awesome but no team was going to beat the Lakers that's just how it was. Theres this myth that exists about Iverson that just isn't true. He had no help and all this bullshit. He had plenty of help. He had an awesome team built around him and it worked great. They got unlucky with injuries that year. McKie and Snow were only halfway healthy for the finals but it wouldn't have mattered. The Lakers were too damn good. Iverson was awesome and the team was awesome. No shame in losing and no excuses needed.

And btw, Iverson was rarely hitting his shots and he was always forcing but that's how he played and I'm fine with it. He was a poor shooter but he was a hustler and got his points. Actually he was a good shooter he just took a lot of bad shots because that's how he played. It worked for him.

[G0ATbe]

1. AI
2.Curry
3. Nash

[JonatanRey]

Curry is not a slightly better shooter, if anything, Nash is. Nash had seven seasons shooting over 50% from the field and Curry has yet to have one. Nash is a career 49/42.8/90. That's for an 18 (really 17) year career. After all is said and done they will be equal and they essentially are however if you were going to give the nod to anyone it would be Nash not curry. Nash's career shooting % has to be close to the best if not the best ever for a PG. And to have done it for so long is pretty incredible.

We were talking about peaks, not a single year. Of course Nash would beat Curry in consistency. But, in 3point shooting, Curry shoots 45% while shooting almost 8 3-pointers per game. Nash shot 47% shooting much lesser than Curry. Purely shooting, Curry is slightly better.

[Human Error]

Allen Iverson was just a beast in his prime, he took a sh1tty squad to the finals
This may be giving Iverson way too much credit. The team was almost hand built to fit Iverson. Mutombo and Tyrone Hill were by far the best defensive 4-5 tandem in the league and the entire roster was full of top caliber defenders outside of Iverson. Iverson, though very good, was still a flawed player who could only thrive under particular circumstances.

[chocolatethunder]

We were talking about peaks, not a single year. Of course Nash would beat Curry in consistency. But, in 3point shooting, Curry shoots 45% while shooting almost 8 3-pointers per game. Nash shot 47% shooting much lesser than Curry. Purely shooting, Curry is slightly better.
Well Nash's FG% was better overall too. So you're saying that a guy who shoots worse is a better shooter? It's silly. Like I said before, you can't compare any of the three. They were all asked to do different things. It's great that Curry shot worse shooting more and apparently you think that means he's a slightly better shooter. So going by percentages, purely shooting, Nash is slightly better. But as I said, they are the same. Nash shoots better but shot less. Ok so to me that makes them even or Nash having the slightest edge because he actually shot a better % but to you that makes Curry better. When it's all said and done, they will be thought of as the same caliber shooters. I'm not sure that Curry will do it for as long and as well as Nash but who knows.

[Jailblazers7]

AI is the most consistently under appreciated player on ISH.

[Ca$H]

Curry is not a slightly better shooter, if anything, Nash is. Nash had seven seasons shooting over 50% from the field and Curry has yet to have one. Nash is a career 49/42.8/90. That's for an 18 (really 17) year career. After all is said and done they will be equal and they essentially are however if you were going to give the nod to anyone it would be Nash not curry. Nash's career shooting % has to be close to the best if not the best ever for a PG. And to have done it for so long is pretty incredible.

Curry is the much better defender. Curry is currently #1 in steals. Nash was a huge liability on D.

[chocolatethunder]

AI is the most consistently under appreciated player on ISH.
I think that more than anything most people didn't see him play and didn't understand his game and instead believe a myth that never happened. Why can't people appreciate him for what he was? I don't get it. There's nothing wrong with losing to the Lakers and who's to say that if he had a scoring wing or big on his team that they would have been as good defensively and been able to get the stops that they did? That's not how basketball works just look at Cleveland now. Three players who can average more than 20ppg but can't get stops. There's nothing wrong with Iverson's career/peak but to say he never had help isn't factual. He had the help that he needed to maximize is strengths. Larry Brown and Billy King realized this after a failed attempt in his early years to have him be a PG or pair him w/Stack etc. He was a poor defender who gambled and got steals and that was fine but they knew this and surrounded him with a lockdown D kind of team. I don't care that they won ugly, they won. Just like the Knicks under Riley. Those teams played ugly basketball but they made it to the finals. Again, they faced a team that no one was going to beat. That's just the way it happens. Only one team can win. As a Sixer fan I feel lucky that they made it to the finals because it's hard to get there and even harder to win.

[Jailblazers7]

Yeah, I do think AI could have been a great defensive player but he was too undisciplined and he wasn't held accountable for it. The guy was amazing at Georgetown and won DPOY in the Big East. The team construction was a nice strategy to build around him and it work pretty well. It definitely hurt his efficiency without another legit offensive threat and that is a big reason why people are willing to dismiss him.

[Jlamb47]

Curry is the much better defender. Curry is currently #1 in steals. Nash was a huge liability on D.

Steals has nothing to do with perimeter defense, well maybe a little
Curry just gambles so he gets steals, but is better then Nash

[Nash-tastic]

People seem to forget how good AI actually was

[chocolatethunder]

Yeah, I do think AI could have been a great defensive player but he was too undisciplined and he wasn't held accountable for it. The guy was amazing at Georgetown and won DPOY in the Big East. The team construction was a nice strategy to build around him and it work pretty well. It definitely hurt his efficiency without another legit offensive threat and that is a big reason why people are willing to dismiss him.
The thing is, that's how he played best and you just had to be ok with it. He wasn't a great decision maker so he was going to take bad shots no matter what but that's ok. He wasn't a hard worker at all but it didn't matter. He rarely practiced and he didn't workout or lift weights. None of that mattered because he hustled and got his shit in. It wasn't pretty all the time but that's who he was. The not working out and practicing are part of the reason his drop off was so quick but that's who he was. He only played one way but Larry Brown knew how to make it work and it did. Iverson is a guy that you have to appreciate for who he was. You can't say "if he had only practiced or worked out he could have been this or that". He was what he was and you had to embrace it and not try to change it. That's not the kind of player it was. It eventually came to a head with him when he pretty much just stopped practicing all together ( which lasted for more than one season) but that's what he was. The only bad thing about his practice habits is that it was bad for the team and morale. It causes resentment between him and his teammates. Lots of old guys skip practices in order to rest but they'll show up and be present and participate or they'll get treatment or whatever. That wasn't the case with Iverson, he just refused to come haha. It was interesting, Billy King came on 610 after he left the Sixers and had a very candid conversation about it. It was way worse than anyone thought haha.

[Pointguard]

Wow, AI gets dogged. There are very few players that can carry a team, with little help offensively and have them as contenders. Shaq couldn't do it and he's the most dominant player I ever saw. I saw Jordan go 30/8/8 and 35 ppg and he wasn't close. But, I'm sure he could have done it in his prime. Obviously Curry and Nash aren't on that list.

The better question is Curry/Westbrook/CP3 as they are similar to your comparison and are direct contemporaries.

[Cali Syndicate]

Steals has nothing to do with perimeter defense, well maybe a little
Curry just gambles so he gets steals, but is better then Nash

Curry doesn't gamble like lane hawks do. Curry has very good hands and strips people left and right.

[FatComputerNerd]

AI :bowdown:


I think it's still too soon to rank Curry vs. all-time greats.

Also, the three are all very different types of players, with different strengths and weaknesses.


I suppose Curry though. He is probably the most complete overall player between the 3.

[alexd]

ai
nash
curry

[Practice?]

Give me Iverson.

[Dro]

1. Nash-best facilitator by far of the 3, equal shooter to Curry, got to rim at will
2. Curry-playing out of his mind right now but still suspect in the postseason

HUGE GAP

3. Iverson-essentially a worthless player
:facepalm

[Dro]

AI is the most consistently under appreciated player on ISH.
He definitely is and it always be that way...I can't name one legit/reliable scorer that he played with on those Sixer teams....Mckie and those guys CAN score but they are not reliable scoring options.....He played with a bunch of 3rd, 4th, and 5th options basically......

Curry and Nash both have played with numerous other scorers on their team...Basically both of their teams are much better all around than his Sixer teams....

[They Won]

3. Iverson-essentially a worthless player

I believe you are the one I saw posting the other day about how Rondo is terrible and Monta Ellis is a God.

[KNOW1EDGE]

AI
Nash
Curry

I think if you were born before 1990 you will agree

[SugarHill]

Nash > Curry

Iverson is too different but he definitely peaked higher than either

[TheMarkMadsen]

You can't discuss Iverson on ISH. People are too ignorant about him

[G0ATbe]

Nash is so overrated:facepalm .

[FKAri]

AI either gets underrated or overrated.

There is no middle ground. AI in his prime wasn't a cancer. He was literally the only scoring option on his Philly team. Aside from McKie, no one on that team could create or even hit open jumpers. Peak Eric Snow wouldn't be a starting PG in today's league. However AI's playstyle was unsustainable. You can't be an undersized SG who purposely draws as many fouls and last long in the league. As AI's inevitably got worn down he was unable to accept a lesser role. This is the AI many on ISH seem to remember.

So how good was peak AI? Peak AI was on a team that perfectly fit him to put up monster numbers but at the same time his quickness made it impossible to stay in front of him. He would weave his way into the lane and draw a foul consistently. He also had a respectable jumper which gave him even more flexibility in getting in the lane. He was a matchup nightmare and highly skilled. Once again this brand of ball is short lived. Once the nagging injuries became too much and he slowed down a bit he fell off. AI isn't the player one can see being a star past the age of 30.

[chocolatethunder]

AI either gets underrated or overrated.

There is no middle ground. AI in his prime wasn't a cancer. He was literally the only scoring option on his Philly team. Aside from McKie, no one on that team could create or even hit open jumpers. Peak Eric Snow wouldn't be a starting PG in today's league. However AI's playstyle was unsustainable. You can't be an undersized SG who purposely draws as many fouls and last long in the league. As AI's inevitably got worn down he was unable to accept a lesser role. This is the AI many on ISH seem to remember.

So how good was peak AI? Peak AI was on a team that perfectly fit him to put up monster numbers but at the same time his quickness made it impossible to stay in front of him. He would weave his way into the lane and draw a foul consistently. He also had a respectable jumper which gave him even more flexibility in getting in the lane. He was a matchup nightmare and highly skilled. Once again this brand of ball is short lived. Once the nagging injuries became too much and he slowed down a bit he fell off. AI isn't the player one can see being a star past the age of 30.

Actually Snow was terrified to shoot but the year they made the finals he made some huge shots. He was also an excellent defender. Iverson had a good jumper he just took bad shots. He was a very good FT shooter. I have a realistic view of Iverson, I'm not underrating nor overrating him. The negative things I was saying about him were said not to complain about him be to be realistic. The thing is, you had to accept those things and realize that every time the jump ball went up you were going to get a hustling hard nosed guy. He was short sighted and didn't do anything to extend his career but he was electrifying and unique. He was somewhat like Barkley in that he was totally undersized and yet still managed to dominate.

[TheMarkMadsen]

Iverson at 32 was playing 42 minutes per game, played 82 games and put up 26/7 on 46%..

AI would have lasted alot longer playing in today's leage. He used to get beat up on a nightly basis, played in the hand check era, led the league in minutes nearly every year.

If AI was playing with another scoring threat/all star his for his prime like almost every star of today has he wouldn't need to play 44 minutes per game. His most efficent season came at 32 playing alongside pre prime Melo.

If AI was getting the calls that guys like Harden do today can you imagine how many free throws he would get, I'm guessing 12 per game pretty easily. AI was a beast and would feast in today's league, the game today caters to his playing style, unlike the league during his time.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Knowing how their careers panned out, you gotta go with Nash. 2 MVPs and more success in the postseason. The better player; however, is Iverson. As many alluded to, he was the only viable scoring threat on those Philly teams and yet still had them ~15-20 in offensive rating.

Under the right circumstances (help offensively) he would flourish, imo.

[chocolatethunder]

Iverson at 32 was playing 42 minutes per game, played 82 games and put up 26/7 on 46%..

AI would have lasted alot longer playing in today's leage. He used to get beat up on a nightly basis, played in the hand check era, led the league in minutes nearly every year.

If AI was playing with another scoring threat/all star his for his prime like almost every star of today has he wouldn't need to play 44 minutes per game. His most efficent season came at 32 playing alongside pre prime Melo.

If AI was getting the calls that guys like Harden do today can you imagine how many free throws he would get, I'm guessing 12 per game pretty easily. AI was a beast and would feast in today's league, the game today caters to his playing style, unlike the league during his time.
Why does it have to be "if this, if that"? Can't anyone just appreciate his career for what it was? It was awesome and he did it his way for better or for worse. Who's to say that if he was playing with another scoring threat that it would have been good. I'm not sure if you remember but Stackhouse Philly was a good player and that didn't work out. Van Horn was a totally legit player and that didn't work out but it did work somewhat with Melo for one season. I like to deal with what actually happened. He was the most exciting undersized guard to play in the league. There's no shame in his career. He did what he wanted to for better or for worse and has a whole generation who worship him as a result.

[Droid101]

Nash led like... 5 of the top ten offenses in the history of the NBA. You can't ignore that.

[chocolatethunder]

Nash led like... 5 of the top ten offenses in the history of the NBA. You can't ignore that.
It's ok. Everyone will continue to ignore it.

[They Won]

Nash is so overrated:facepalm .

Agreed.

[They Won]

Nash led like... 5 of the top ten offenses in the history of the NBA. You can't ignore that.

Can't ignore his horrible D either though.

[lilteapot]

Can't ignore his horrible D either though.
It isn't like the other two players are defensive monsters.

[Droid101]

It's ok. Everyone will continue to ignore it.
I won't let it!!

https://turnernbahangtime.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/20141024_nash.gif

Best offenses in history, by a neat little offense per 100 possession formula. (http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=6205)

The Greatest Offenses in NBA History

1. 2007 Phoenix Suns
2. 2005 Phoenix Suns
3. 1971 Milwaukee Bucks
4. 2010 Phoenix Suns
5. 1982 Denver Nuggets
6. 2004 Dallas Mavericks
7. 1975 Houston Rockets
8. 1987 Los Angeles Lakers
9. 2004 Sacremento Kings
10. 2006 Phoenix Suns
11. 2009 Phoenix Suns

[chocolatethunder]

Can't ignore his horrible D either though.
Foreal. Iverson was awful. He got steals and gambled in the passing lanes but he was a very poor defender and you can't really argue that. He had a great defensive team around him so it made up for it.

[chocolatethunder]

I won't let it!!

https://turnernbahangtime.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/20141024_nash.gif?w=437&h=339

Best offenses in history, by a neat little offense per 100 possession formula. (http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=6205)

The Greatest Offenses in NBA History

1. 2007 Phoenix Suns
2. 2005 Phoenix Suns
3. 1971 Milwaukee Bucks
4. 2010 Phoenix Suns
5. 1982 Denver Nuggets
6. 2004 Dallas Mavericks
7. 1975 Houston Rockets
8. 1987 Los Angeles Lakers
9. 2004 Sacremento Kings
10. 2006 Phoenix Suns
11. 2009 Phoenix Suns
Loved those 2004 Kings too. Those Nuggets teams were kind of ridiculous haha. I was only 10 then so i didn't know shit about basketball.

[knicksman]

why is ai mentioned in the same sentence as those 2. All he has are stats but thats because hes selfish not playing the right way. Therese a reason why he was a loser.

[TheMarkMadsen]

why is ai mentioned in the same sentence as those 2. All he has are stats but thats because hes selfish not playing the right way. Therese a reason why he was a loser.

A loser that got further than the other two ever have

:roll: :roll:

[knicksman]

A loser that got further than the other two ever have

:roll: :roll:


LOL Kidd made it twice in that pathetic conference:oldlol:

[TheMarkMadsen]

LOL Kidd made it twice in that pathetic conference:oldlol:

Who is taking about Kidd?

Take the loss

[SugarHill]

LOL Kidd made it twice in that pathetic conference:oldlol:
:kobe:

[Dro]

why is ai mentioned in the same sentence as those 2. All he has are stats but thats because hes selfish not playing the right way. Therese a reason why he was a loser.
Admit it, you never saw prime AI cause if you did you would realize how stupid this comment was.......

So does Westbrook play the right way? How about Lowry? How about Rose? Are they all losers too?

[knicksman]

Who is taking about Kidd?

Take the loss

"Nash is the player i want to be". -j.kidd

If kidd who is poor mans nash could do it, then so is nash. But of course a dumbass like you wont be getting my logic.:lol

[knicksman]

Admit it, you never saw prime AI cause if you did you would realize how stupid this comment was.......

So does Westbrook play the right way? How about Lowry? How about Rose? Are they all losers too?


Lol westbrook. Did you see what he did to the no.1 team last season. They couldve been ousted in the 1st round if not for the refs.

[Burgz V2]

1. AI
2. Nash
3. Curry

[SillyRabbit]

1) Nash
2) AI
3) Curry

Whether you have Nash or AI first, i'm pretty sure everyone can agree that Curry is 3rd.

Not a knock against Curry, but Nash and AI were just that good.

[Shih508]

There was nothing shitty about that squad that went to the finals. That team was built aroind him perfectly. They were an awesome defensive team and offensively it was geared to get him the ball. This was the best way to use him. That team had DPOY and SMOY and coach of the year. No, that team wasn't shitty at all it's just part of some myth.

You definitely didn't watch them lol. They hit home run on all rewards for that year was only because no one thought the team would be so good. Exceeding expectations!

[Shih508]

Nash led like... 5 of the top ten offenses in the history of the NBA. You can't ignore that.

AI had 4 scoring champs in a 5-11 frame. Once a century thing tbh

[Shih508]

why is ai mentioned in the same sentence as those 2. All he has are stats but thats because hes selfish not playing the right way. Therese a reason why he was a loser.

In the past 25 years, only time sixers was relevant was when AI's there. Idk how can u call that a career loser?

[bizil]

Three different kind of guards. But AI and Nash are two of the top ten players ever under 6'4. Curry has a great chance to join that group. If I had to choose, I think Iverson was the best player of the bunch narrowly over Curry. Nash is the best floor general of the bunch and is one of those PG's who was truly pass first BUT had alpha dog takeover ability. So AI the best scorer, Nash the best passer, and Curry the best shooter and has the best scoring skillset.

[Droid101]

AI had 4 scoring champs in a 5-11 frame. Once a century thing tbh
Scoring championships mean practically nothing.

Nash led the best offenses in the history of the league. History of the league.

Get it through your thick skull.

[IGOTGAME]

why is ai mentioned in the same sentence as those 2. All he has are stats but thats because hes selfish not playing the right way. Therese a reason why he was a loser.

why was nash a loser?

[Shih508]

Scoring championships mean practically nothing.

Nash led the best offenses in the history of the league. History of the league.

Get it through your thick skull.

D'antonio system led the best offense in league history while playing one of worst defense in league history.

Scoring champ is everything if you are under 6 feet tall. Most of players with that kind of size would die on the court scoring that much a season let alone doing it for so long

[chocolatethunder]

You definitely didn't watch them lol. They hit home run on all rewards for that year was only because no one thought the team would be so good. Exceeding expectations!
Rewards?


I watched every one of their games and went to the playoff games. You're a fool if you think that team wasn't good. That team was an awesome defensive team and was a perfect fit for Iverson. Billy King and LB designed that team around him and it worked. That team didn't come out they made it to the second round of the playoffs the year before.

[Shih508]

Rewards?


I watched every one of their games and went to the playoff games. You're a fool if you think that team wasn't good. That team was an awesome defensive team and was a perfect fit for Iverson. Billy King and LB designed that team around him and it worked. That team didn't come out they made it to the second round of the playoffs the year before.

Awards, a typo.

The core players were same as previous two yrs where they got swept by Pacers twice in a row in 2nd round.

Before the season started that year, no one thought Sixers was going to win the East, but they did it.

[Droid101]

D'antonio system led the best offense in league history while playing one of worst defense in league history.

D'antonio didn't coach the Mavericks.

Your opinions are now moot because you've proven yourself a brainless moron.

[chocolatethunder]

D'antonio system led the best offense in league history while playing one of worst defense in league history.
And Nash carried those teams while Amare was hurt. Those teams won a lot of games. You can't pin all their shortcomings/losing on Nash. He was big in the playoffs too. The won 62, 54 and 61 games and lost in the conference finals twice. This wasn't some case of T Mac not getting out of the first round. They were winning 60 games in the west and the west was good.

[Shih508]

D'antonio didn't coach the Mavericks.

Your opinions are now moot because you've proven yourself a brainless moron.

They had one of best 7 foot scorer of all time, it has more to do with Dirk than Nash for the Maverick. Nash couldn't even get a contract from Maverick, tell me how important Nash was to that squad.

[Shih508]

Rewards?


I watched every one of their games and went to the playoff games. You're a fool if you think that team wasn't good. That team was an awesome defensive team and was a perfect fit for Iverson. Billy King and LB designed that team around him and it worked. That team didn't come out they made it to the second round of the playoffs the year before.

LB was great. Billy King was prolly one of worst GM of all time who still has his job as today because of that one year success with AI

[Dro]

Lol westbrook. Did you see what he did to the no.1 team last season. They couldve been ousted in the 1st round if not for the refs.
My point is he is a shoot first SG who plays the PG...Kinda just like AI when he broke into a league......

You've got people calling him a chucker........

[ArbitraryWater]

1. Curry
2. Nash


HUGE GAP


























































































3. Iverson

[IGOTGAME]

Iverson was better than both of them.

Iverson
Nash






Curry

[sd3035]

Curry

Nash

Iverson

[chocolatethunder]

LB was great. Billy King was prolly one of worst GM of all time who still has his job as today because of that one year success with AI
They were both awful. LB wanted Dalembert and Larry Hughes. He's awful at drafting. Billy King was horrendous too but not at drafting. Billy King wanted Paul Pierce and Tony DiLeo wanted Dirk. LB made that shitty pick. King was actually good at drafting but really poor otherwise. He's handed out a lot of bad and I mean awful contracts. King has a really good eye for drafting and LB was awful with that. But he's probably the worst at giving out contracts. He snagged Korver (via trade) late in the second round, Todd Mac, Lou Williams, Iggy, Thad, Willie Green in the second rd, Salmons at 26, Jumaine Jones late in the first and others. He's really good at drafting but without a doubt the worst at contracts and not that good at trading.

[PsychoBe]

please stop overrating curry :facepalm

[sd3035]

Curry

Nash

Iverson

















Kobe

[emaugust]

All I know is that when it came to Peak on the court fashion

IVERSON >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>NASH/CURRY

:pimp: :pimp: :pimp: :pimp: :pimp: :pimp: