« Debasing the dead | Main | Score one more for my city! »

why? despite his off-court antics I feel without him Philly would get pasted in regular season. when someone like K-Mart can demand $55 million maximum extension when he is hardly 3 years into the league, Iverson is a lot more qualified for this.

btw, what is his age got to do with all this?

Just because K-Mart is demanding a huge salary and there is an owner dumb enough to pay it, doesn’t in any way justify AI’s salary. Damon Stoudamire makes more than double of what Nash is making right now - that doesn’t mean just to keep parity, Cuban should pay Nash anymore than he deserves.

As for age, it is a very important factor when you are figuring out salaries because a young player who is playing at a high level is always worth more than an older player playing at a high level. With the younger player, there is always a chance that he might improve - if not, he will comtinue playing at a higher level for a lot longer than an older player.

I am not seeing your argument. Exactly what is it about a player that according to you determines how much should he be paid? I agree though owners are smart enough not to play beat-me-to-it game with player salaries. To move off-tangent, K-Mart definitely does not deserve the kind of money he is demanding and I don’t think he has been paid that much either.

In any case statistically AI seems to be big money material. 2-time league scoring leader (1998, 2001), 2001 most no. of steals (in the last season he led the NBA in steals/game), 2001 All-star MVP, 2000 League MVP, 1998 NBA Rookie of the Year (most no. of Rookie points — 1,787). In all he has a career record of 30 PPG. What more do you need?

1. Funny how everything you cite is from 2 years ago.

2. 2002-2003 season was the only time in his entire career Iverson played all 82 games (injury-prone).

3. Ranks #19 in the NBA in Efficiency Ranking(20.85)
Ranks #18 in the NBA in Turnovers Per 48 Minutes(3.94)
Ranks #15 in the NBA in Total Efficiency Points(1710.0)
Not really worthy of that kind of a salary - it is not that big a deal to be putting up 30 points pergame when you are jacking up 23 shots per game and are the primary offensive option on the team.

If you look at his lines for the past two seasons, you actually see a decline in them. He is a flashy player with not much substance.

Funny how everything you cite is from 2 years ago

Naturally. A player’s past record often determines how much he might be worth in the future as opposed to dumping money on a “young” player with some divine potential that might or might not live up to expectations. The LeBron James episode will definitely teach us something.

2002-2003 season was the only time in his entire career Iverson played all 82 games (injury-prone)

excuse me? He leads the NBA in Minutes per Game — that is 42.5. Naturally when you are expected to shoulder majority of the team’s burden its a big deal he has even played 82 games the last season.

Instead of refuting your 3 negative points let me for the sake of completeness print out his entire record in all aspects of the game:
Ranks #3 in the NBA in Points Per Game(27.6)
Ranks #1 in the NBA in Steals Per Game(2.74)
Ranks #1 in the NBA in Minutes Per Game(42.5)
Ranks #1 in the NBA in Minutes Played(3485.0)
Ranks #3 in the NBA in Field Goals Made(804.0)
Ranks #1 in the NBA in Field Goal Attempts(1940.0)
Ranks #4 in the NBA in Free Throws(570.0)
Ranks #2 in the NBA in Free Throw Attempts(736.0)
Ranks #1 in the NBA in Steals(225.0)
Ranks #3 in the NBA in Points(2262.0)
Ranks #5 in the NBA in Field Goals Per 48 Minutes(11.07)
Ranks #3 in the NBA in Field-Goal Attempts Per 48 Minutes(26.72)
Ranks #8 in the NBA in Free Throws Per 48 Minutes(7.85)
Ranks #5 in the NBA in Free Throw Attempts Per 48 Minutes(10.14)
Ranks #4 in the NBA in Steals Per 48 Minutes(3.1)
Ranks #5 in the NBA in Points Per 48 Minutes(31.2)
Ranks #6 in the NBA in Total Turnovers(286.0)

Within the top 8 in all the majority aspects. Turnover is still a problem though but the league’s most famous turnover machine, Jason Kidd, has just been paid $95 million. Wise heads seem to think that its not a insurmountable problem

If you look at his lines for the past two seasons, you actually see a decline in them

The list I posted was from his 2002-03 season statistics. Is this what you call “decline”?

is not that big a deal to be putting up 30 points pergame when you are jacking up 23 shots per game and are the primary offensive option on the team

thats 30 points per game in his entire 7 year career. The kobe-bryant style shoot-the-ball-if-you-have-it mentality sort of creeped up when he started playing all 52 minutes. You know when your team mates decide to pass the ball every 2 seconds its better to shoot anyway.

This is weird. Here we are arguing about whether some nutto who has nothing to with either me or you is worth a few million dollars. I mean who cares… I hereby respectfully withdraw from this torrid discussion ;-)

I too don’t care. He gets paid 76.7 million more than me. So what ?

I picked the wrong profession. I barely make enough to buy a ticket to go to a game to watch the multi-millionaire sports stars.

Guys, I don’t wanna rekindle the argument. But I think the salaries are not only determined by statistics. I think the team and the league earns a lot of money through apparel sales. I have seen many people wearing 76ers and especially Iversons than any other (Lakers come close too). No matter what you say, I think he is still extremely popular. I don’t have any statistics to back this up! It’s just a theory …

L.

I think you do have a point there, L - I heard that Reebok couldn’t keep the AI shoes on their shelves after he got convicted.

Oh, and no biggie about the arguing (not that I mind the truce, of course) :)

Basketball shasketball hai rabba :mad:

F1 Shaslik anyone?

Methinks Coulthard is overpaid.

Hey I don’t watch that - how does it work?

So I’d just like to jump in and note that the 76ers did make a major offseason move and picked up Glenn Robinson.

Chris, I knew you couldn’t resist the b-ball talk ;) Welcome back - what do you think of the off-season moves in the West?

Heh, bball is my life :~ Or something like that…

Anyway…

Spurs: I’m not sold on Rasho, but he’s big, at least. Solid move getting Turkoglu. Less solid getting Carter, Horry, and Mercer.

Mavs: I’m really not sold on getting Jamison, who played basically as Dirk-esque swing forward at GS. Giving up Van Exel might hurt a lot, since the stepdown from Nash to Best is a lot sharper.

Lakers: $6M -> 2 Allstars and probably HOFers…Who sold their soul to the Devil?

Kings: Losing Turkoglu hurts. Losing Clark hurts a little. Getting Miller helps. I’d say they’re decent, but didn’t help themselves.

Blazers: Err? Well, the collapse was bound to happen

TWolves: Rasho -> Kandi strikes me as a null deal. Adding Cassell…good. Adding Spree… Looks like Wally is the odd man out, though.

Suns: No major moves

Jazz: Lost Malone. Look very weak at PG. Magette and Clark help somewhat.

Rockets: No real moves, but most growth has to come from Yao/Francis/Mobley getting better together

So overall, I’d say Spurs and Lakers did the best. Then the Mavs and Kings. Then the Twolves. Depends on how Jamison fits, though. It really looks like the Mavs haven’t helped their frontcourt all that much.

ok, that :~ was supposed to be a :confused:

The more I think about Van Exel for Jamison, the less sense it makes.

I agree with you about the Spurs and the Lakers - I think if the Lakers can avoid chemistry issues, they are the clear favorites.

With the Mavs though, I think they improved quite a bit with the trade, since they got a young and solid player in Jamison and a very promising PG in Jiri. I definitely hated the fact that we had to lose Van Exel for that, but I think Cuban sold him high, since I am not so sure that Van Exel could have repeated this kind of a run again in the coming season.

As for the Kings, I would put them about 5th in the West now, after the Mavs and the Wolves. I think they lost much of their vaunted depth and Webber’s being out till January and losing Clark, Pollard, Hedo and possibly Jim Jackson might hurt them quite a bit.

I really can’t wait for the season to start :)

Jamison is a solid young player in the exact same position as Dirk. As it stands, they traded a solid backup PG/SG for a young PG and a good swing forward. Great, except that they Mavs already HAVE a great starting swing forward (Dirk) and solid backup swing forward (Najera). Jamison is going to want to start, but that slots him as the starting PF, where he’s never impressed me. Again, it’s a decent deal, but it doesn’t address the Mav’s biggest hole.

I agree that we failed to get the “mythical” big man we have always wanted to get since the end of the playoffs - I am glad we didn’t get Mourning. I am also glad that even though we still have a glaring hole in the middle, we atleast have a few more pieces to patch it with. I also think that a healthy and willing Danny Fortson (still a big IF) shows up for the season, we might not be that bad after all.

Another thing - even if Best cannot match NVE’s offensive firepower, I think defensively he makes the backcourt much better than it was when Nash and Nick were playing together.

Fortson would be a hole plugger, but that means benching Jamison, since he’s far too small to play center :beam:

Err, I didn’t watch many Miami games last year, but I don’t see any significant improvements vs major opponents. Kobe, Payton, Bibby, Jackson, Francis, Mobley, Marbury, and Parker should all still burn him. There may be a marginal improvement vs 2’s, but a LOT of 2’s would have 3-4” on him.

Hey, Fortson played for Golden State too (I think you are confusing him with Brian Grant(?)) - he also played in Denver with Raef, when they were both putting together some phenomenal numbers. I kinda like the fact that he has played in the West a lot. (Keeping fingers crossed :))

Jamison played the 3 a lot at GS. Fortson and Murphy played the 4. Raef played the 5 at Denver, with fortson at the 4.

Oh, I just realized what you mean. Best played for Miami last year, iirc, and I was discussing how his defensive improvement isn’t significant. For the most part it’s like saying breaking 1 leg is better than breaking both. The top guards in the West will still burn him badly and he can’t gun back the other way like Van Exel.

For that matter, since he can’t fire back, it lets the bigger 2 guards roam and double on Dirk or Nash.

Actually, NVE was a really bad liability defensivley and Best has got to be better than him. Another nice thing about the trade is that Nellie loved playing Nash and Nick together for long periods of time with Fin at SF and occasionally Dirk at the C. His small ball was awful rebounding-wise and rebound-differential seemed to be one of those things that hurt the Mavs a lot in the last season. Jamison and Fortson should be able to help on that front and boy, are we glad that there will not be any small ball!!! :)

:mad: Poo