View Full Version : Sixers-Celtics Game 4

05-01-2002, 09:25 PM
79-77 Sixers by two, 54 sec to go. Looks like there's going to be another first round Game 5 in the East.

05-01-2002, 09:30 PM
AI gives the Sixers the lead, Walker misses a three, Sixers gets the ball back. Sixer 81-79, 2.3 to go. Sounds like a good game.

05-01-2002, 09:31 PM
AI has scored the last seven points for the Sixers. That's clutch.

05-01-2002, 09:37 PM
if you take enough shots, you're bound to hit a clutch shot or two
this is often the case with AI
he may take 9-10 shots down the stretch and hit 3-4..and get called a clutch player

05-01-2002, 11:59 PM
Yeah, the same thing goes for Walker. That dude throws up more ducks than anyone I've ever seen. I think he's got the Tim Hardaway disease or something. Someone, somewhere must have told him he was a good perimeter shooter.

05-02-2002, 08:35 AM
Murph are you kidding me?? It's obvious you don't like Allen because you make it seem like anyone could go out there and get those shots off down the stretch. He scored the teams LAST 8 points of the game, that is clutch. McKie took three shots in the last four minutes and hit one of them and missed a free throw. Snow missed a free throw down the stretch. The man gets a rebound on a missed free throw drives to the basket and hits an unbelievable shot, then he comes down on the break hits a reverse lay up, then he comes and hits another jumpshot with a defender in his face, then he hits two free throws. Not to mention before all that transpired he hit two shots before that. The man hit the LAST FOUR shots he took and hit two IMPORTANT free throws to seal the victory. Then you make it seem like the man didn't do anything, I know if that was Dirk, you would be talking about how great he is.

05-02-2002, 12:44 PM
thekid, i know he had a good game in the clutch.
however, i don't think he belongs among the elite.. any of the elite would put up at least the same or better numbers than AI.
i have no doubt of that.

yes, he had a good game in the clutch last night.. but like i said.. you take all the shots in that situation in pretty much every game, you're going to come out looking good sometimes

05-02-2002, 12:56 PM
now, i'll never be confused with an ai lover, but, i think he's earned his place in the nba. no, he's not a shooter, he's a scorer. the thing that people forget is that defensively he is getting the same treatment as other stars that are their teams main weapon - duncan, t-mac, kg, abdur-rahim, jordan, etc. - but he's 6-0 (if that), so his %% are gonna suck because he's not a great jumpshooter. he may have to work for his points harder than anyone in the league. he can't take 20 footers all day - he has to penetrate and then he gets killed. its almost as if you asked nash to take the same game he plays here and do that in philly with that supporting cast. he'd shoot a better %%, but when he drives the lane, 3 6-10 guys are gonna clobber him cause you don't have to guard their shooters.

05-02-2002, 12:59 PM
Iverson is far from perfect, but he is a joy to watch. He can single-handedly win any given ball game on any given night.

05-02-2002, 01:19 PM
nekked you stole my thunder. I was saying on another thread that no player really has ever just taken a team on their back and taken them anywhere with the exception of Jordan, but Iverson did last year.

I've said a number of times, take Iverson off that team and that team is pretty bad. Well they showed that this year. That little guy is a beast. You're right he takes a LOT of shots, that's why when I see him scoring 40 points a game, I don't even bother to look at how many shots he's taken because he probably took 50 to get that many points. However Antoine Walker showed the difference between just throwing a shot up compared to someone whose clutch. When it counted, DERRICK FREAKIN COLEMAN forced this man into a terrible shot. I'd be willing to bet, if you gave Walker (who is an all-star) that situation 50 times he wouldn't win it 10% of the times. Iverson on the other hand could be shooting 1 for 50 and when it counts, he comes through. Not everytime but MORE times than not. That's what makes him special.

That's why I seperate players who hit big shots from players who take games over when it counts. Iverson can take a game over when it counts and that makes him an elite player in my eyes.

05-02-2002, 01:49 PM
iverson can take over a game..no one said he couldn't.. but he often plays so poorly that he runs his team out of games..throwing up 30 shots and hitting 10.
he does this consistently

that's what separates AI from the elite players in the nba.. he puts his team in a bad situation often with his repeated poor shot selection.

05-02-2002, 01:56 PM
here's the question...would you rather have iverson drive the lane and take a difficult shot with 2 guys comin' at him...or would you rather he dish it out to aaron mckie to clank an open 18 footer off the front rim.

his %% does suck, but he takes difficult - and sometimes illadvised - shots because he has to carry that team. basically, if he doesn't do it, nobody will.

look at fin...when he was THE MAN, his %% was 2-3 pts. lower cause he had to take so many turnaround fadeaways with two guys on him. iverson's doing that now, but he's at least 7 inches shorter - and still playing sg.

05-02-2002, 02:19 PM
Murph you're right, there are games he takes them right out of it, but for all those games he takes them there are the same amount of games that he has them RIGHT IN it because he's taking over them. Also, that's what they ask him to do. They say, Allen, if we're going to lose, we're going to lose with you going 4 for 50, because they know, the majority of the time, when they need him, he's there.

Put it this way, he won enough of them last year to get them to the FINALS last year. That's something that out of the top 10 players that you would rank above him this year can't say and may not ever have a chance to say, with the exception of Duncan, Shaq and Kobe.

05-02-2002, 03:19 PM
i know they ask him to do that thekid.. but quite frankly, you put any of the top 5 players on the nba on that team and ask them to take as many shots and they are simply more effective than AI at it.

05-02-2002, 03:20 PM
i know he has to be the man on that team..i have no problem with that.. however, there's a number of guys out there that would be better at being "the man" on that team than AI

05-02-2002, 03:26 PM
<< i know they ask him to do that thekid.. but quite frankly, you put any of the top 5 players on the nba on that team and ask them to take as many shots and they are simply more effective than AI at it. >>

<< i know he has to be the man on that team..i have no problem with that.. however, there's a number of guys out there that would be better at being &quot;the man&quot; on that team than AI >>

i'm willing to concede that there are players who are more effective at carrying a team on their backs than iverson if you'll concede that one of the reasons he has more difficulty doing so is the physical advantage the other star players hold over him.

if that takes him out of your top ten..then i can see that.

05-02-2002, 06:02 PM
of course part of it has to do with his size..
but it's part of the game..
spud webb was perhaps the best pound for pound player when he played.. but was he one of the better players in the league?..no

AI's probably is the best pound for pound player in the NBA, but is he one of the top players in the NBA? yes..just not a top 5 guy..maybe not top 10

05-02-2002, 10:02 PM