Never said opinion on him hasn't shifted in the last 10 years, but he was overrated at his peak and benefited from playing in what was clearly the weaker conference. Also, he did a lot as he was closing out his career to earn some of the "hate".
It's either Dwayne Wade or Allen Iverson; it just depends on your style of player. I would take Wade, not necessarily because he was better than Iverson but because he was better teammate around whom to build a team.
Moses Malone wore No. 2 for only nine seasons out of a 20-year career, and for roughly half of that time he was past his prime.
You may want to consider opening up that competition, considering fellow hall of famer Alex English wore No. 2 for 12 seasons and was the leading scorer in the '80s wearing that number. Also, Mitch Richmond wore No. 2 for the bulk of his career, including his All-Star seasons in Sacramento.
Allen Iverson's "influence" was that he was emblematic of the NBA backlash in the post-Michael Jordan era. He was one of the people (along with Latrell Sprewell for the P.J. Carlesimo choking incident) mostly associated with the league being perceived as becoming too "street" to appeal to mainstream audiences.
maybe but I dont suppose that's what he meant - and someone else said the same thing about his influence earlier in the thread without specifics and I dont want to be dense but I dont get what either of them mean
When I hear other people try to make a statement about Allen Iverson's "influence" on the NBA and pop culture, I get the same general, unfounded response that you got with no explanation.
The reality is closer to what I said -- his influence was really the backlash people had about the NBA being perceived as becoming "too street" for mainstream appeal.
Eh, it depends on where you were and how old you were during Iverson's apex. I was in high school in a small city during the early part of last decade, and Iverson and McGrady were by far the two most popular NBA players among people my age. I get where he's coming from with the cultural impact part of the argument.
I saw Allen Iverson's entire career, from high school into the NBA (and as an adult, no less). No one is saying Iverson was not a prominent NBA player. But that is totally different from trying to claim he had a cultural impact on the sport in terms of increased viewership from multiple demographics, elevated brand awareness and perceived excellence and dominance across the board to the point of being seen as a universal influence and reference point (see Michael Jordan).
The point is you can make a more credible argument by citing concrete facts than citing unfounded hyperbole based on the fact he was a popular player with certain segments (not to mention it wasn't like Iverson was universally considered the best player in the NBA, unless we're now acting like people such as Shaquille O'Neal and Kobe Bryant didn't play in that period).
Even if you're going by the argument that Allen Iverson's game and persona somehow translated well with streetball-type players, he wasn't the first by any means.
I mean, unless you were 10 years old in the mid-1990s and didn't associate that style with Julius Erving, Tiny Archibald, Earl "The Pearl" Monroe and numerous others who actually played in that environment. And yes, those guys had the swagger (albeit in a much more positive fashion than Iverson).
Just say Iverson "was the first NBA I can recall in my life who looked like the hoodrat on the corner" and leave it at that. But let's not try to make him out to be some sort of revolutionary in that respect.
Allen Iverson, Adrian Dantley and Alex English were more than "just scorers" -- they were scorers at a level few players in NBA history could match. In Iverson's case, he did it for an exceptionally long period (he averaged at least 24.8 points per game for 12 straight years) in addition to the volume. Again, you're talking fairly rare area in a major category.
Iverson wasn't totally one-dimensional. He played the passing lanes well (he led the NBA in steals for three straight seasons and averaged 2.2 steals per game for his career). He got to the free-throw line at an incredibly high clip for a guy his size (he averaged 8.9 free throw attempts per game for his career). Despite his style of play, he did average 6.2 assists per game for his career. He was an all-NBA player for seven seasons. Again, we're talking about a perennial top-level player during his run.
The problem is in this comparison, where he is going up against a player who can be considered his equal in Dwayne Wade but with far less baggage. With all things being equal, I'm choosing Wade because he can bring the productivity Iverson could but with more efficiency and you're not resorting to building a team of role players around him because of his style of play/ego.
Wade at his peak was just a better player - just as explosive an offensive player, just as capable of getting to the line, much better defender, much better teammate
I was under the impression these guys were talking about his influence on the game, which was absolutely negative. It runs along the same tracks as the "any press is good press" theory. After his emergence, PG-sized combo-guards who wanted to score above all sprang up by the dozen. It has hurt the league, but you can say it was "influential." I think we're seeing a turn toward valuing efficiency and positive team play again now.
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
Professional and College Basketball Forums
8M posts
37.4K members
Since 2002
A forum community dedicated to Competitive Basketball players and enthusiasts. Talk about everything from the NBA to college basketball to even everything but basketball. It's all here!