Re: Vecsey says Pacers offering everyone except JO and Grange for AI
I've at times put up numbers this year just because now is what people are trying to fix, not last year or apparently 3 years from now (when did protecting the future become a bad thing?).
But AI has ALWAYS been a 40-42% type of shooter and ALWAYS been a 3 times a game 30% 3 ball shooter. It's not just this year while frustrated. Even you admit it with
for 44% shooting. BEST. ONLY 3.4 TOs.
In his MVP season he shot 42%, 32% from 3 (306 attempts/4.3 3PA per game), 3.8 reb, and 4.6 assists, 3.3 TOs. Look long and hard at those numbers. Now pretend those are Jackson's numbers, or Tinsley's. Acceptable?
Last year Jackson was 41%, 34.5% (4.2 per), 3.9 reb, 2.8 assists, 2.5 TO. So the worse 3pt shooting and the extra 2 assists made AI an MVP and Jackson a worthless bum? I'll admit that the extra 1.5 steals was an impact, but he also gave the ball up 1 time less per game.
He's been spun into folk lore at this point. I watch him play, he is able to burn guys all night long, but his SHOT SELECTION SUCKS. With his talent he should be able to score as efficiently as Ray Ray, Redd, Payton in his prime, etc. But he doesn't and hasn't.
Compare his MVP season with Gary Payton THE SAME YEAR
45.6%, 37.5% from 3 (3.4 per), 4.6 reb, 8.1 ast, 1.6 stl, 2.65 TOs
Until last season Payton had shot UNDER 44.8% 1 freaking time. Iverson has only gone OVER 44.8 1 time, and that was only 46%. His 2nd best year was the 44% last year and other than that it's ALL 42% or worse.
And you pair his outbursts with his on-court results. He fueded with Brown but that was the only coach to get him to the Finals. He rants and complains and refuses to practice or follow lots of team directives, and pairs this with a history of criminal activity that excedes Jack.
Look, I'm not totally anti-AI. I understand the desire. But I also have to listen to the day to day complaining about Tinsley, Jackson and JO. The REASONS that people don't like those players also apply to what AI does.
Could I get people to buy into Jack having intangibles that don't show up on the court? How about Tinsley? Nope, only when it's AI. Yeah, that doesn't sound reasonable to me.
The grass isn't greener. We've measured it. And the response to that shouldn't be "you can't trust the numbers, you just have to realize that it has some undefinable greeness to it". That is not rational thought. That's the kind of thinking that scam artists use.
As for the offensive rebounding with AI joining the team...you think that had to do with him (especially all his missed shots) OR with all-star caliber rebounders like Ratliff, Mutumbo, Coleman (still pulling down 9 a night when he got to Philly), and Webber (also consistantly a 9-10 rpg guy even away from AI)?
Coleman was injured the year before AI joined, but came back to put up a 10.1 that was in-line (slightly worse than) his NJ numbers.
Weatherspoon also pulled down 8.3 a night in AI's first year. That's actually 2 rebounds WORSE once AI joined the team.
Ratliff joined these 2 the next season and grabbed 7.3, again directly in line with his entire career.
Coleman and W'spoon left and Geiger came in and pulled 7.2, similar to what he'd been doing in Charlotte.
Tyrone Hill also was brought in and pulled 7.3, down for him. He had 10 rebound seasons before and after playing with AI, but only a pair of 9's to go with that first year 7.3.
George Lynch also joined the team around then and saw his rebounding rate go down, but he still was getting 6.5-7.5 a night.
Mutumbo joined these guys (Ratliff out) and saw his 2nd worst rebounding rate year ever in his 1 full season with AI, and even in the trade season his rate dropped from 22 to 20 (17 the next year) after he got to Philly.
What does this mean? AI has had TONS of established, quality rebounders, some of them specialists even, his entire career. None of them suddenly got better playing with him, most were the same or slightly worse. The team made a point to be a rebounding roster, that's the type of player they brought in.
Why would Philly need all those rebounders? My guess, 42% 25 times a night.
Originally posted by JayRedd
View Post
But AI has ALWAYS been a 40-42% type of shooter and ALWAYS been a 3 times a game 30% 3 ball shooter. It's not just this year while frustrated. Even you admit it with
These were all close to career bests
In his MVP season he shot 42%, 32% from 3 (306 attempts/4.3 3PA per game), 3.8 reb, and 4.6 assists, 3.3 TOs. Look long and hard at those numbers. Now pretend those are Jackson's numbers, or Tinsley's. Acceptable?
Last year Jackson was 41%, 34.5% (4.2 per), 3.9 reb, 2.8 assists, 2.5 TO. So the worse 3pt shooting and the extra 2 assists made AI an MVP and Jackson a worthless bum? I'll admit that the extra 1.5 steals was an impact, but he also gave the ball up 1 time less per game.
He's been spun into folk lore at this point. I watch him play, he is able to burn guys all night long, but his SHOT SELECTION SUCKS. With his talent he should be able to score as efficiently as Ray Ray, Redd, Payton in his prime, etc. But he doesn't and hasn't.
Compare his MVP season with Gary Payton THE SAME YEAR
45.6%, 37.5% from 3 (3.4 per), 4.6 reb, 8.1 ast, 1.6 stl, 2.65 TOs
Until last season Payton had shot UNDER 44.8% 1 freaking time. Iverson has only gone OVER 44.8 1 time, and that was only 46%. His 2nd best year was the 44% last year and other than that it's ALL 42% or worse.
And you pair his outbursts with his on-court results. He fueded with Brown but that was the only coach to get him to the Finals. He rants and complains and refuses to practice or follow lots of team directives, and pairs this with a history of criminal activity that excedes Jack.
Look, I'm not totally anti-AI. I understand the desire. But I also have to listen to the day to day complaining about Tinsley, Jackson and JO. The REASONS that people don't like those players also apply to what AI does.
Could I get people to buy into Jack having intangibles that don't show up on the court? How about Tinsley? Nope, only when it's AI. Yeah, that doesn't sound reasonable to me.
The grass isn't greener. We've measured it. And the response to that shouldn't be "you can't trust the numbers, you just have to realize that it has some undefinable greeness to it". That is not rational thought. That's the kind of thinking that scam artists use.
As for the offensive rebounding with AI joining the team...you think that had to do with him (especially all his missed shots) OR with all-star caliber rebounders like Ratliff, Mutumbo, Coleman (still pulling down 9 a night when he got to Philly), and Webber (also consistantly a 9-10 rpg guy even away from AI)?
Coleman was injured the year before AI joined, but came back to put up a 10.1 that was in-line (slightly worse than) his NJ numbers.
Weatherspoon also pulled down 8.3 a night in AI's first year. That's actually 2 rebounds WORSE once AI joined the team.
Ratliff joined these 2 the next season and grabbed 7.3, again directly in line with his entire career.
Coleman and W'spoon left and Geiger came in and pulled 7.2, similar to what he'd been doing in Charlotte.
Tyrone Hill also was brought in and pulled 7.3, down for him. He had 10 rebound seasons before and after playing with AI, but only a pair of 9's to go with that first year 7.3.
George Lynch also joined the team around then and saw his rebounding rate go down, but he still was getting 6.5-7.5 a night.
Mutumbo joined these guys (Ratliff out) and saw his 2nd worst rebounding rate year ever in his 1 full season with AI, and even in the trade season his rate dropped from 22 to 20 (17 the next year) after he got to Philly.
What does this mean? AI has had TONS of established, quality rebounders, some of them specialists even, his entire career. None of them suddenly got better playing with him, most were the same or slightly worse. The team made a point to be a rebounding roster, that's the type of player they brought in.
Why would Philly need all those rebounders? My guess, 42% 25 times a night.
Comment