Printable View
Wade because defense matters. Iverson was bad defensively and compounded the problem because of his positional size forcing his team into awkward lineups.
He only used his quickness to rack up steals, but otherwise at like 170 soaking wet he didn't have the strength or height to stop anyone.
Wade by a mile.
[QUOTE=RRR3;15013576]Wade by a mile.[/QUOTE]
I agree. Iverson was pound for pound the greatest scorer ever and had a higher peek offensively than Wade, but Wade was a more complete basketball player if you factor in both sides of the court. And he was the best player leading his team to a championship. If Iverson won a ring in Philly he would definitely have an argument in my eyes.
[QUOTE=Meticode;15013626]I agree. Iverson was pound for pound the greatest scorer ever and had a higher peek offensively than Wade, but Wade was a more complete basketball player if you factor in both sides of the court. And he was the best player leading his team to a championship. If Iverson won a ring in Philly he would definitely have an argument in my eyes.[/QUOTE]
# of Steals Titles:
------------------
Wade 0
AI 3
# of Scoring Titles
--------------------
Wade 1
AI 4
# of MVPs
----------------
Wade 1
AI 1
AI: 1997 NBA Rookie Of The Year
Wade: Lost ROTY title to LBJ.
AI: 2000 NBA Season MVP + 2000 NBA Scoring Champ + 2000 NBA Steals Champ.
"wade by a mile" my foot.
enough of the BS.
[QUOTE=RRR3;15013576][b]Wade by a mile.[/b][/QUOTE]
Eff off phakkit!
# of Steals Titles:
------------------
Wade 0
AI 3
# of Scoring Titles
--------------------
Wade 1
AI 4
# of MVPs
----------------
Wade 1
AI 1
AI: 1997 NBA Rookie Of The Year
Wade: Lost ROTY title to LBJ.
AI: 2001 NBA Season MVP + 2001 NBA Scoring Champ + 2001 NBA Steals Champ.
5'11" AI equalled 6'6" MJ winning MVP + Scoring title + Steals title all in same year.
fk that overrated Wade and DeadBe.
AI have both of them beat at 5'11".
[QUOTE=Meticode;15013626]I agree. Iverson was pound for pound the greatest scorer ever and had a higher peek offensively than Wade, but Wade was a more complete basketball player if you factor in both sides of the court. And he was the best player leading his team to a championship. If Iverson won a ring in Philly he would definitely have an argument in my eyes.[/QUOTE]
Disagree with higher peak offensively, Wade in 2009 put up 30.2 PPG on +5 rTS%, Iverson's best is 33.0 PPG on +1 rTS%, he scored more but on a good deal less efficiency. I'd take Wade, he picked his spots well.
[QUOTE=RRR3;15013634]Disagree with higher peak offensively, Wade in 2009 put up 30.2 PPG on +5 rTS%, Iverson's best is 33.0 PPG on +1 rTS%, he scored more but on a good deal less efficiency. I'd take Wade, he picked his spots well.[/QUOTE]
I don't care about efficiency in this case. Iverson was the engine to that Philly offense and option number two on those teams was no one. There was no option number two. Wade got to play with Shaq as a legit second option and had semi-warm years until LeBron and Bosh showed up where he played second fiddle. Iverson averaged over 30 four times in his career while Wade did it once.
To me Wade was more complete offensively and polished, but Iverson had a higher peak in terms of just scoring the ball and being the only offense those Philly teams had.
[QUOTE=Meticode;15013626]I agree. Iverson was pound for pound the greatest scorer ever and had a higher peek offensively than Wade, but Wade was a more complete basketball player if you factor in both sides of the court. And he was the best player leading his team to a championship. If Iverson won a ring in Philly he would definitely have an argument in my eyes.[/QUOTE]
So winning a ring does that for Iverson? Even tho how he and Wade played remains the same.
Iverson wasn't as good as Wade.
Iverson had better raw fundamentals but Wade was too quick, too athletic, too crafty. Plus he was taller and bigger.
Both were fearless killers on the court, so I have to give the edge to Wade.
[QUOTE=Meticode;15013626]I agree. Iverson was pound for pound the greatest scorer ever and had a higher peek offensively than Wade, but Wade was a more complete basketball player if you factor in both sides of the court. And he was the best player leading his team to a championship. If Iverson won a ring in Philly he would definitely have an argument in my eyes.[/QUOTE]
I feel like everybody says that but its not necessarily true the pound for pound stuff. Seems like a title they just give to small guy but I'd rather have somebody like say Curry who was only like 10 lbs heavier but ridiculously better at scoring ~ efficiently shooting and generating GOAT team offense.
[QUOTE=Baller234;15013678]Iverson wasn't as good as Wade.
Iverson had better raw fundamentals but Wade was too quick, too athletic, too crafty. Plus he was taller and bigger.
Both were fearless killers on the court, so I have to give the edge to Wade.[/QUOTE]
not the point!
AI had a better career than Wade.
AI accomplished more than Wade at 5'11"
AI inspired a generation.
Who did Wade inspire?
[QUOTE=tpols;15013679]I feel like everybody says that but its not necessarily true the pound for pound stuff. Seems like a title they just give to small guy but I'd rather have somebody like say Curry who was only like 10 lbs heavier but ridiculously better at scoring ~ efficiently shooting and generating GOAT team offense.[/QUOTE]
Curry will never been considered a scorer. He's a shooter. The same reason LeBron will never been considered a scorer even though he leads in the NBA in all-time points by a mile. And their size differences is more like 20 pounds in their primes, but also it's the fact Curry has 2-3 inches on Iverson. Iverson was roughly 6 feet in shoes, Curry is 6'2". Iverson was 165 in his prime.
[IMG]https://www.si.com/.image/c_fill,w_1440,ar_16:9,f_auto,q_auto,g_auto/MTg3NTg1MzU3MTE2NjE0NTQz/cropped_gettyimages-643002570.jpg[/IMG]
[QUOTE=Meticode;15013648]I don't care about efficiency in this case. Iverson was the engine to that Philly offense and option number two on those teams was no one. There was no option number two. Wade got to play with Shaq as a legit second option and had semi-warm years until LeBron and Bosh showed up where he played second fiddle. Iverson averaged over 30 four times in his career while Wade did it once.
To me Wade was more complete offensively and polished, but Iverson had a higher peak in terms of just scoring the ball and being the only offense those Philly teams had.[/QUOTE]
Philly wasn't winning with their offense. Their offensive rank was trash and they only had one good playoff run that was built off their elite ranked Larry Brown orchestrated and Mutumbo anchored defense. A long with other goons. When Iverson offensive production was trash in the playoffs his team was still winning like in the 2001 ECF. And then the Black Mamba gave him the kiss of death in The Finals.
[QUOTE=Meticode;15013686]Curry will never been considered a scorer. He's a shooter. The same reason LeBron will never been considered a scorer even though he leads in the NBA in all-time points by a mile. And their size differences is more like 20 pounds in their primes, but also it's the fact Curry has 2-3 inches on Iverson. Iverson was roughly 6 feet in shoes, Curry is 6'2". Iverson was 165 in his prime.
[IMG]https://www.si.com/.image/c_fill,w_1440,ar_16:9,f_auto,q_auto,g_auto/MTg3NTg1MzU3MTE2NjE0NTQz/cropped_gettyimages-643002570.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE]
Thats one of the craziest things ever said on this site. Curry is absolutely a scorer. Hes not Steve Novak or Kyle Korver.
[QUOTE=tpols;15013689]Thats one of the craziest things ever said on this site. Curry is absolutely a scorer. Hes not Steve Novak or Kyle Korver.[/QUOTE]
Is LeBron a scorer then?