Allen Iverson vs Steph Curry

[PullupJay]

Who you got?

http://img15.deviantart.net/0a55/i/2013/020/0/2/allen_iverson_wallpaper_by_lisong24kobe-d5s6zp9.jpg

VS

https://blog-blogmediainc.netdna-ssl.com/upload/SportsBlogcom/1461355/0628991001429476740_filepicker.jpg

[Fallen Angel]

The one with a ring.

[Foster5k]

Curry.

[Real14]

Iverson.

[KevinNYC]

Any version of Curry over Iverson on his best day.

[livingby3's]

The one who practise his shooting

[HenryGarfunkle]

Iverson

[Smoke117]

Curry, Obviously...but that isn't saying much.

[SHAQisGOAT]

10-23-2015: http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=387829

06-01-2015: http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=378007

05-30-2015: http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=377893

:confusedshrug:

Same goes for Curry vs CP3...

[Foster5k]

I'm picking Curry purely on his shooting ability.

The Curry has a ring and Iverson doesn't argument is pretty pointless to me.

Iverson got beat in the Finals by one of the most dominate teams in NBA history, the 2001 Lakers with Kobe and Shaq.

2015 Warriors would not beat the 2001 Lakers.

So, it comes down to Curry's shooting ability for me. It's close, but in my opinion I'm taking Curry over Iverson.

[inclinerator]

put iverson on a stacked team, but curry on a weak ass team then we can compare

[DaOldLion]

put iverson on a stacked team, but curry on a weak ass team then we can compare

Iverson had the DPOY, COTY, 6 MOTY.. he had a bunch of defensive role players just like Curry

Klay was obviously better than AI's 2nd option but still

[Spurs5Rings2014]

Iverson had the DPOY, COTY, 6 MOTY.. he had a bunch of defensive role players just like Curry

Klay was obviously better than AI's 2nd option but still

Curry has a team of playmakers where he can play off the ball a lot. I don't see that on Iverson's squad.

[Ai2death]

Iverson had the DPOY, COTY, 6 MOTY.. he had a bunch of defensive role players just like Curry

Klay was obviously better than AI's 2nd option but still

This right here, you still need to score to win

[Spurs5Rings2014]

Curry's second option scored 37 in a quarter.

:oldlol:

To be trill, doe, I think the playmaking of the Warriors is the real difference maker, though.

[LakersForlife]

amc . iverson was really entertaining though

[Bankaii]

It's pretty known that Curry has little impact on teams that aren't stacked. The Warriors didn't win shit until Klay, Draymond, Iggy, and Barnes all stepped up along with Kerr's offensive system.

Put Curry on the 76ers and the get bounced in the 2nd round. Give me AI, impact on a good or bad team.

[bigkingsfan]

Three points > Two points, next.

[Bankaii]

Iverson had the DPOY, COTY, 6 MOTY.. he had a bunch of defensive role players just like Curry

Klay was obviously better than AI's 2nd option but still
The Warriors defense both starting and bench is better than the 76ers.

That DPOY looked like a toddler again Shaq in the Finals.
That 6MOTY averaged 8 points on 31% shooting in the Finals.
That COTY could implement any offensive system aside from AI iso and fast breaks. It's hard to win when you're the only offensive threat whatsoever.

Quit talking out your ass. Curry has the 2nd most stacked team in the league behind the Clippers and AI had one of worst Finals supporting casts in history. But you're a Kobetard, it's expected you don't know anything.

[FKAri]

Curry can play in a system. I don't think prime Iverson can.

Iverson if I want to carry a bunch of scrubs.
Curry if I want to put a good team over the top.

[DoctorP]

Curry.


3 is more than 2.

[Lakers Fan]

This has to be some kind of joke. Unless your talking jersey sales.

Curry > The Cancer

In almost practically everything and every scenario.

[knicksman]

Curry has a team of playmakers where he can play off the ball a lot. I don't see that on Iverson's squad.

nah more like he doesnt want to coz he loves stats so much just like bran. Thats what really separates winners and losers. willing to sacrifice stats for rings.

[PickernRoller]

Is this a trick question?

Give me Iverson every day of the week. The NBA today is weak as hell and Curry is a soft ass 3-pt specialist. Cavs exposed the clown last year. If that type of defense shook him down, imagine early 2000's defenses - the type that Iverson sliced up for breakfast. Iverson could break a defense like Curry only dreams of doing. Sure Curry is the better pure shooter but a solid defense and defender can keep him in check.

The art of getting to the rim and FINISHING is valuable folks.

[Spurs5Rings2014]

Put Curry on the 76ers and the get bounced in the 2nd round.

Prime Carter vs. Curry would be quite a fun match up.

:eek:

[SyRyanYang]

Curry has a team of playmakers where he can play off the ball a lot. I don't see that on Iverson's squad.

It's hard to playmake when someone constantly hogs the ball

[Tking714]

Three points > Two points, next.


31 ppg > 24 ppg

[Dragonyeuw]

31 ppg > 24 ppg

60+ TS on 17 shots > 50+ TS on 27 shots.

I mean, I think Iverson was a more prolific talent, but that's just dumb reasoning above.

[f0und]

curry in a landslide

ai is the most overrated player ever. yeah he was a cultural icon. yeah he played with alot of heart. but on the court, dude was the epitome of team cancer.

[Giaodollo]

Curry has a team of playmakers where he can play off the ball a lot. I don't see that on Iverson's squad.

Why for the love of god would you even want Iverson off the ball? Would he even be able to play? What about him makes him a better off the ball player than the ball hog he was for most of his career?

Sixers built around him and his strengths. Warriors built around Curry's strengths.

[Tking714]

60+ TS on 17 shots > 50+ TS on 27 shots.

I mean, I think Iverson was a more prolific talent, but that's just dumb reasoning above.

not any dumber than 3points > 2points

because u know basketball is played in a vacuum and is purely math

[90sgoat]

Iverson.

One is a 5'11' WARRIOR who never backed down and drove to the basket, ran the break and shot (ill advised) mid range shots. The other is 6'3'' soft 3 point chucker - though a very good one.

Iverson was so good even his extremely inefficient playing style could not stop him and his team.

The only reason I rag on AI is because I think he could have been a top 3 point guard of all time had he played more like Isaiah Thomas than trying to be MJ. Had Iverson played all 4 quarters like he usually played the first then he'd be unstoppable. Instead he always seemed to go full hero ball in second half.

Even this era's chuckers are a shadow of the former era's chuckers.

Anyway, if Iverson actually played head to head with Curry, you'd see the difference clearly.

[plowking]

How exactly is Curry soft?

[Dragonyeuw]

not any dumber than 3points > 2points



Yes, both arguments are pretty lame, unless you were saying 31>24 as simply a troll counter to 3>2.

[TheImmortal]

The one who practise his shooting
This.

[kshutts1]

Always funny to me to see a thread like this, and the vast majority of people fall back on efficiency and shooting, as if those were also commonplace during AIs prime.

I know only 14 years separate peak years, but the league is vastly different now.

I read somewhere that the defensive changes were made specifically to discourage the one on one play with which AI made his living. So Curry in a 1v1 atmosphere is not as good as AI, but AI in a team atmosphere is not as good as Curry. Depends entirely on era.

Edit: All time, like a lot of comparison threads? And considering the differences in play style of the league? I'd choose AI. But it's not an unreasonable comparison in terms of peak performance.