Thread Tools

Display Modes

**Talkhard** · 07-31-2006, 11:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blazer Ringbearer

Nevermind the image issues.

I think it would be a great bold move to make if Iverson had a history of making players around him better - like Steve Nash. But the problem is that he has more of a history of dominating the ball and keeping teammates out of the flow of the ballgame. If he continued to play that way, it would hinder the development of our young talent.

For that reason alone, I don't like the move and would rather run with what we have unless something else good comes along.

I couldn't agree more. I hope Blazer management just says no to Iverson.

Masbee · 07-31-2006, 11:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ed O

I would be all for getting Iverson irrespective of what he looked like or how he was perceived if I thought it would make the team appreciably better.

But simply throwing Iverson into the current mix of players is not going to result in a team that's poised to do much other than make the playoffs. By the time our young core is good enough to support an Iverson-type player on a championship run, he's going to be out of his prime.

Plus, he's little and he shoots a tremendous amount with a crappy percentage. I don't like the way he plays and I'd prefer him to remain on any other team than the Blazers.

Ed O.

I concur.

As an interesting side note, as the Blazers were originally being blown up, AI was on the block at that time too. Or so the rumors said. As it turns out, due to offers not intersting Philly, then gave AI a contract extension instead. Anywho, it was a Sheed for AI idea. After the Sheed trade there were other ideas. At that time, I wasn't much interested in trading for AI if it involved significant value, which, of course, Philly required. Now that he is older and his salary slot is even higher than before, and the Blazers are finally close to purging the last remnants of the controversial players - this idea has gone from marginal, maybe yes, maybe no, to stupid, dumb and no thank you.

Nightfly · 07-31-2006, 01:19 PM

I just deleted all the talk of racism.

I don't want to see any more of it in this thread.

This is a thread about AI perhaps being traded to the Blazers. Keep it on the topic.

mediocre man · 07-31-2006, 01:20 PM

LOL my posts were deleted. That's a first. I was just pointing out what an ignorant post and statement was.

ryanjend22 · 07-31-2006, 01:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mediocre man

talent wise it's a great mover for Portland, but image wise it takes the Blazers two steps backwards on what they have done this summer.

ok, i see a few comments like this in this thread...

WHY does AI = a negative image?

ok ok...so i know the majority of this particular board does not like rap music, or tattoos apparently, but iverson is A LEADER who gets in FAR less trouble that zach randolph does.

iverson is one of the most respected people in the league in my eyes, it just upsets me when people cant see past cornrows and some ink.

i dont wanna be the utah jazz. i want a little edge.

...do what it takes to get AI. im on board. although it wont happen.

Nightfly · 07-31-2006, 01:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mediocre man

LOL my posts were deleted. That's a first. I was just pointing out what an ignorant post and statement was.

I removed everything that was related to the initial baiting about being rasict.

It doesn't belong in a thread about AI becoming a Blazer.

**Minstrel** · 07-31-2006, 01:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ed O

Plus, he's little and he shoots a tremendous amount with a crappy percentage.

Little, I'll give ya. But I don't agree with the implication that Iverson is an inefficient scorer. His career TS% is .512 and it was .543 last year.

That's pretty decent for a volume, perimeter scorer.

M3M · 07-31-2006, 01:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cimalee

I would trade for ai only if we get to keep zach , we would prolly have to give up young pieces though.

Give them Zach, he is nothing but trouble and injury prone. That would be a plus if we could deal him in a trade involving AI.

mediocre man · 07-31-2006, 01:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nightfly

I removed everything that was related to the initial baiting about being rasict.

It doesn't belong in a thread about AI becoming a Blazer.

How about AI shouldn't be a Blazer because he doesn't fit in with the current way the Blazers seem to be headed. That being choiresque type boys without a lot of street cred to them.

Nightfly · 07-31-2006, 01:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mediocre man

How about AI shouldn't be a Blazer because he doesn't fit in with the current way the Blazers seem to be headed. That being choiresque type boys without a lot of street cred to them.

That's fine and dandy as far as I'm concerned.

Heh heh heh...

Ed O · 07-31-2006, 02:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Minstrel

Little, I'll give ya. But I don't agree with the implication that Iverson is an inefficient scorer. His career TS% is .512 and it was .543 last year.

That's pretty decent for a volume, perimeter scorer.

*shrug* I would be interested in seeing a WORSE percentage from a volume, perimeter scorer. I would be shocked if there is one.

I suppose it depends on how one defines that category of player...

Ed O.

ThatBlazerGuy · 07-31-2006, 02:38 PM

If we can get him without trading Roy, Jack, Webster, LaMarcus, Pryz and our 2007 1st rounder its a real no-brainer.

Roy would be the perfect compliment to AI. Can play PG at times, but defend the opposing SG's rather than sticking AI on some SG that is 6 or 7 inches taller than him. Webster would benefit greatly from Allen's penetration. I mean, look at how many open looks Korver gets from playing on the same team as Iverson. Mags and Pryz down low, now thats a tough front line.

Thread Tools Display Modes

Thread Tools

Display Modes