Reggie Miller > Allen Iverson

[3ball]

.
Reggie led his team to the Finals as a #1 option and alpha leader of his team just like Iverson did.

Except Reggie's offense fit with any teammates and in any offensive system, so he wasn't a 1-trick pony like Iverson... Reggie led his team to championship contention in 1998 too, against Jordan's Bulls, and had a much longer record of playoff success as his team's #1 option than Iverson ever had.

And Reggie has better stats - his WS/48 is 0.176.. much higher than Iverson's 0.126... when the gap is that big, it means something.

Between 1990 and 2001 (12 seasons), Reggie Miller's offensive win share (OWS) was ranged from 8.0 to 12.0, and was always among the league leaders... Iverson only has 3 seasons where his OWS was higher than 6.0 - it's because of his embarrassing inefficiency - Iverson's has a career 51% TS and 105 ORtg to Miller's 61% and 121 ORtg.

Back to the stats - Reggie's prior-informed RAPM in 1998 has him 12th in the league at 4.90, compared to Iverson's 139th and 0.08.... http://ascreamingcomesacrossthecourt.blogspot.com/2013/12/1997-98-rapm-non-prior-informed.html?m=1

And his total RAPM scores for 1997-2014 has Reggie Miller in 101st place among all players and Iverson is at 180th... https://sites.google.com/site/rapmstats/97-14-rapm-2

That's why he was able to make the Finals in 2000... Reggie averaged 24 PPG heads-up with Kobe, and held Kobe to 19 PPG on 36% shooting... Whereas Kobe got 25 PPG on 41% in the 2001 Finals against Iverson and McKie, who were both big size mismatches for him.

If both guys play on different teams for 20 years, Reggie has the greater chance of leading a team to a championship - he proved it.
.

[AI09]

.
Reggie led his team to the Finals as a #1 option and alpha leader of his team just like Iverson did.

Except Reggie's offense fit with any teammates and in any offensive system, so he wasn't a 1-trick pony like Iverson... Reggie led his team to championship contention in 1998 too, against Jordan's Bulls, and had a much longer record of playoff success as his team's #1 option than Iverson ever had.

And Reggie has better stats - his WS/48 is 0.176.. much higher than Iverson's 0.126... when the gap is that big, it means something.

Between 1990 and 2001 (12 seasons), Reggie Miller's offensive win share (OWS) was ranged from 8.0 to 12.0, and was always among the league leaders... Iverson only has 3 seasons where his OWS was higher than 6.0 - it's because of his embarrassing inefficiency - Iverson's has a career 51% TS and 105 ORtg to Miller's 61% and 121 ORtg.

Back to the stats - Reggie's prior-informed RAPM in 1998 has him 12th in the league at 4.90, compared to Iverson's 139th and 0.08.... http://ascreamingcomesacrossthecourt.blogspot.com/2013/12/1997-98-rapm-non-prior-informed.html?m=1

And his total RAPM scores for 1997-2014 has Reggie Miller in 101st place among all players and Iverson is at 180th... https://sites.google.com/site/rapmstats/97-14-rapm-2

That's why he was able to make the Finals in 2000... Reggie averaged 24 PPG heads-up with Kobe, and held Kobe to 19 PPG on 36% shooting... Whereas Kobe got 25 PPG on 41% in the 2001 Finals against Iverson and McKie, who were both big size mismatches for him.

If both guys play on different teams for 20 years, Reggie has the greater chance of leading a team to a championship - he proved it.
.

Nice try but no Reggie isn't better than Iverson. Neither one won a championship and Reggie was around for a long time. Put Reggie on the sixer in 01 and see how far they get. Not hating on Reggie I just think Iverson was better. When Reggie retired my middle school was tagged up with Reggie Miller 31 all over the place almost got suspended for it too

[mehyaM24]

true. allen was a very skilled player, but his points came at a price.. your team was going to be inefficient as hell.

only thing i will say, though, is that iverson needed way more help on offense. upper philly management did a terrible job building around him, and as a result, guy was literally forced to be THE offense. we saw him in denver with carmelo and he was actually distributing. playing all around efficient basketball - so its not like it was beneath him to play smart. better offensive players for the tenure of his prime would've paid huge dividends for his career and legacy.

[TheMarkMadsen]

You are wrong again

[Dro]

No, Reggie is not better than Iverson, at anything other than clutch moments and shooting......

[QuebecBaller]

as individual player, AI is by far better than Miller

as team player, it's Miller Time

[Prometheus]

I agree with OP. I have always believed that there is no possible way to construct a championship-caliber team around Iverson. His stats are misleading - the guy just played in a way that was NOT CONDUCIVE TO SUCCESS. It's a shame, because he had such heart and passion...

Everything that OP usually says about LeBron is actually true about Iverson.

[Marchesk]

I agree with OP. I have always believed that there is no possible way to construct a championship-caliber team around Iverson. His stats are misleading - the guy just played in a way that was NOT CONDUCIVE TO SUCCESS. It's a shame, because he had such heart and passion...

Everything that OP usually says about LeBron is actually true about Iverson.

But that 76er squad that went to the finals was a contender. They just had the misfortune of playing Shaq at his peak.

[triangleoffense]

true. allen was a very skilled player, but his points came at a price.. your team was going to be inefficient as hell.

only thing i will say, though, is that iverson needed way more help on offense. upper philly management did a terrible job building around him, and as a result, guy was literally forced to be THE offense. we saw him in denver with carmelo and he was actually distributing. playing all around efficient basketball - so its not like it was beneath him to play smart. better offensive players for the tenure of his prime would've paid huge dividends for his career and legacy.
They surrounded him with players that complimented him such as defensive rebounding big men and still they got nowhere.

[artificial]

http://slamonline.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/allen_iverson_mvp.jpg

















Btw, it doesn't matter if you nor me like it or not, fact is...






















http://slamonline.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/allen_iverson_mvp.jpg

"Kiss my stats"

[VIP2000]

They surrounded him with players that complimented him such as defensive rebounding big men and still they got nowhere.

Management also tried pairing him up with Stackhouse, Larry Hughes, Keith Van Horn, Derrick Coleman, and Glenn Robinson. Granted, they're all flawed players but they could at least score. All of them pretty much got ran out of town because they couldn't co-exist with Iverson.

[TheMarkMadsen]

Management also tried pairing him up with Stackhouse, Larry Hughes, Keith Van Horn, Derrick Coleman, and Glenn Robinson. Granted, they're all flawed players but they could at least score. All of them pretty much got ran out of town because they couldn't co-exist with Iverson.

You serious with this post?

Stackhouse played with AI for one full season during Iverson's rookie year, put up 20 on 40%..

Hughes played with AI during Hughes rookie year in 99, which was a lock out season and Hughes came off the bench. He was gone the next year..

Keith Van Horn? Lol played with the 76ers in 04 for a season.


Coleman was 34 when he joined the 76ers and was never anything that special even in his prime, what's AI supposed to do with an ancient Derrick Coleman..

[JohnnySic]

LOL, just no.

[supernova5912]

K
They surrounded him with players that complimented him such as defensive rebounding big men and still they got nowhere.

Um, they got to the Finals and won a game against the Lakers who, at that time, were 12-0 in the postseason. If that's getting nowhere, I'm guessing you think that you're only going somewhere if you win a championship. Plus the only Eastern Conference teams that won championships in the 2000s before the Miami Heat, were the 04 Pistons, and 08 Celtics.

[They Won]

Reggie does fit better on more teams, but that doesn't make him better.

[Lebron23]

Iverson was the better player.

[pauk]

:lebronamazed: :applause:

[dunksby]

3ball is the jlauber of Jordan stans.

[Shih508]

.
Reggie led his team to the Finals as a #1 option and alpha leader of his team just like Iverson did.

Except Reggie's offense fit with any teammates and in any offensive system, so he wasn't a 1-trick pony like Iverson... Reggie led his team to championship contention in 1998 too, against Jordan's Bulls, and had a much longer record of playoff success as his team's #1 option than Iverson ever had.

And Reggie has better stats - his WS/48 is 0.176.. much higher than Iverson's 0.126... when the gap is that big, it means something.

Between 1990 and 2001 (12 seasons), Reggie Miller's offensive win share (OWS) was ranged from 8.0 to 12.0, and was always among the league leaders... Iverson only has 3 seasons where his OWS was higher than 6.0 - it's because of his embarrassing inefficiency - Iverson's has a career 51% TS and 105 ORtg to Miller's 61% and 121 ORtg.

Back to the stats - Reggie's prior-informed RAPM in 1998 has him 12th in the league at 4.90, compared to Iverson's 139th and 0.08.... http://ascreamingcomesacrossthecourt.blogspot.com/2013/12/1997-98-rapm-non-prior-informed.html?m=1

And his total RAPM scores for 1997-2014 has Reggie Miller in 101st place among all players and Iverson is at 180th... https://sites.google.com/site/rapmstats/97-14-rapm-2

That's why he was able to make the Finals in 2000... Reggie averaged 24 PPG heads-up with Kobe, and held Kobe to 19 PPG on 36% shooting... Whereas Kobe got 25 PPG on 41% in the 2001 Finals against Iverson and McKie, who were both big size mismatches for him.

If both guys play on different teams for 20 years, Reggie has the greater chance of leading a team to a championship - he proved it.
.

Ask the coach who has coached both players, Larry Brown. I bet his answer would be different from yours

[VIP2000]

You serious with this post?

Stackhouse played with AI for one full season during Iverson's rookie year, put up 20 on 40%..

Hughes played with AI during Hughes rookie year in 99, which was a lock out season and Hughes came off the bench. He was gone the next year..

Keith Van Horn? Lol played with the 76ers in 04 for a season.


Coleman was 34 when he joined the 76ers and was never anything that special even in his prime, what's AI supposed to do with an ancient Derrick Coleman..

Like I said, none of those guys panned out. You forgot to mention Glenn Robinson when he was still a capable scorer. It's a Catch-22. He can't co-exist with other big-time scorers, so the best 76ers team he was a part of was the one that was filled with mainly defensive players. And then his fanboys complain that he never had enough help on the offensive end.

[Kungfro]

.
Reggie led his team to the Finals as a #1 option and alpha leader of his team just like Iverson did.

Except Reggie's offense fit with any teammates and in any offensive system, so he wasn't a 1-trick pony like Iverson... Reggie led his team to championship contention in 1998 too, against Jordan's Bulls, and had a much longer record of playoff success as his team's #1 option than Iverson ever had.

And Reggie has better stats - his WS/48 is 0.176.. much higher than Iverson's 0.126... when the gap is that big, it means something.

Between 1990 and 2001 (12 seasons), Reggie Miller's offensive win share (OWS) was ranged from 8.0 to 12.0, and was always among the league leaders... Iverson only has 3 seasons where his OWS was higher than 6.0 - it's because of his embarrassing inefficiency - Iverson's has a career 51% TS and 105 ORtg to Miller's 61% and 121 ORtg.

Back to the stats - Reggie's prior-informed RAPM in 1998 has him 12th in the league at 4.90, compared to Iverson's 139th and 0.08.... http://ascreamingcomesacrossthecourt.blogspot.com/2013/12/1997-98-rapm-non-prior-informed.html?m=1

And his total RAPM scores for 1997-2014 has Reggie Miller in 101st place among all players and Iverson is at 180th... https://sites.google.com/site/rapmstats/97-14-rapm-2

That's why he was able to make the Finals in 2000... Reggie averaged 24 PPG heads-up with Kobe, and held Kobe to 19 PPG on 36% shooting... Whereas Kobe got 25 PPG on 41% in the 2001 Finals against Iverson and McKie, who were both big size mismatches for him.

If both guys play on different teams for 20 years, Reggie has the greater chance of leading a team to a championship - he proved it.
.
By not leading his team to a championship? :confusedshrug:

[knicksman]

But that 76er squad that went to the finals was a contender. They just had the misfortune of playing Shaq at his peak.

No. Just like every other east team except for miami that went into the finals. Detroit was just lucky that kobe wants the finals MVP so bad.

[knicksman]

Like I said, none of those guys panned out. You forgot to mention Glenn Robinson when he was still a capable scorer. It's a Catch-22. He can't co-exist with other big-time scorers, so the best 76ers team he was a part of was the one that was filled with mainly defensive players. And then his fanboys complain that he never had enough help on the offensive end.

this. The guy was being called a cancer but fanboys just think its teammates.:lol

[Angel Face]

He is more efficient and more clutch, but AI was the better player.

[Moonbeam]

Yeah, I think Reggie's better, too. He's a far superior offensive weapon, in my view, and despite the steals, Iverson wasn't that good of a defender. I admire the heck out of AI for the abuse he put his body through driving to the hole like he did, and despite his issues with efficiency, his teammates DID benefit from his presence on the court in Philadelphia, but I think Miller had a higher impact.

[game3524]

Iverson and by a decent margin.

He is a better shot-creater, playmaker and more impactful defender. The only edge Reggie has is shooting and off-ball movement and AI was not that far behind in the latter

And :oldlol: at the notion that the way AI played wasn't conductive to winning a championship, it goes to show who actually watched AI play during the LB era and who is reading the boxscores.

[DetroitPistonFan]

Allen Iverson was one of the greatest scorers of all time who was also a MVP and Eastern Conference Champion > Reggie Mililer

[Hamtaro CP3KDKG]

Cmon.....Reggie would be Korver level at best in todays league. AI would be the best SG

[knicksman]

if you want to be entertained, AI but give me miller if I need to win. multiple 50+ win teams compared to 1 for AI.

[3ball]

go ahead and take iverson over miller, and lose lose lose lose lose lose lose lose lose

iverson's style is a losing style of play.. he'd win a 1-on-1 contest though, but not NBA basketball games.

[Real14]

https://sportsjourneyradio.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/ai.jpg

[3ball]

basketball is weird - reggie miller doesn't make the Finals with that sixers team in 2001, but neither does iverson with the Pacers in 2000.

in 2001, the sixers needed someone to carry them, and that guy wasn't miller.

in 2000, the pacers needed an off-ball player that could get 20-25 PPG in the playoffs and not disrupt the perfect chemistry that team had - that guy wasn't iverson.

it just depends what a team needs - it's easy to deduce that miller has more use to more teams than iverson... miller can help any team win... iverson could literally only help that one sixer team win.

[ai9]

Like I said, none of those guys panned out. You forgot to mention Glenn Robinson when he was still a capable scorer. It's a Catch-22. He can't co-exist with other big-time scorers, so the best 76ers team he was a part of was the one that was filled with mainly defensive players. And then his fanboys complain that he never had enough help on the offensive end.

Glenn Robinson was old/washed up/injured for most of the 1 or 2 years he spent in Philly.

[game3524]

Glenn Robinson was old/washed up/injured for most of the 1 or 2 years he spent in Philly.

Yup. Big Dog and AI were barely on the court together in 2004. It is a mute point to bring up all these "sidekicks" anyhow since Iverson proved in Denver that he mesh his game with another high volume scorer.

[warriorfan]

basketball is weird - reggie miller doesn't make the Finals with that sixers team in 2001, but neither does iverson with the Pacers in 2000.

in 2001, the sixers needed someone to carry them, and that guy wasn't miller.

in 2000, the pacers needed an off-ball player that could get 20-25 PPG in the playoffs and not disrupt the perfect chemistry that team had - that guy wasn't iverson.

it just depends what a team needs - it's easy to deduce that miller has more use to more teams than iverson... miller can help any team win... iverson could literally only help that one sixer team win.


Yeah, this is a no brainer. Don't get me wrong I loved AI's narrative and overall game but Reggie is the better overall basketball player.

[knicksman]

Yup. Big Dog and AI were barely on the court together in 2004. It is a mute point to bring up all these "sidekicks" anyhow since Iverson proved in Denver that he mesh his game with another high volume scorer.

yap thats why he was replaced by billups and denver became much better while detroit lottery

[SaltyMeatballs]

Iverson is better, but some people seem to forget how inefficient he was.

[game3524]

basketball is weird - reggie miller doesn't make the Finals with that sixers team in 2001, but neither does iverson with the Pacers in 2000.

in 2001, the sixers needed someone to carry them, and that guy wasn't miller.

in 2000, the pacers needed an off-ball player that could get 20-25 PPG in the playoffs and not disrupt the perfect chemistry that team had - that guy wasn't iverson.

it just depends what a team needs - it's easy to deduce that miller has more use to more teams than iverson... miller can help any team win... iverson could literally only help that one sixer team win.

Did you watch Iverson when he played under Larry Brown? The vast majority of his scoring was done off-ball(He was assisted on over 40% of his points in 2001).

Reggie Miller and Ray Allen were the only guys better playing off-ball then Allen Iverson in the early 2000's. Seriously, where did this stupid myth that he couldn't play off-ball start from?

[game3524]

yap thats why he was replaced by billups and denver became much better while detroit lottery

They got better for two reasons.

1. Nene was healthy in 2009, which improved their front-court.

2. The entire WC in general was at it's lowest point in the three years between 2008 and 2011. It is no surprise that that same Denver team got bounced in the first round the following year.