Iverson isnt horrible defensively. He isnt the defender his steals numbers make him look like but he is above average which when coupled with his O makes him better than artest. Plus he is THE toughest player in the nba. I used to dislike him alot but watching him play and all the contact he takes in that tiny body are just amazing. Looking at spiral's post i agree. A person who is a truly dominant scorer is worth more than a guy who is slightly above average on O and great on D.
BTW the argument of "they sucked defensively before he got there and they didnt afterwards so he must be the reason for the improvement" is one of the basic fallacies. Just because an event happens after another event does not mean that the two are related. Though in this case, yes artest is a source of improvement for their d BUT he isnt the sole or even the main cause of it. SAR and brad miller not playing together is the main cause of it. Since we are mavs fans i will relate it to the mavs. Say the mavs still had jamison and they played a front line of KVH(peja) Jamison(SAR) and Dirk(Miller) together. They would be utterly horrible defensively. Now suppose they put in Josh howard for KVH and Damp for jamison. They would improve exponentially defensively. Now if the mavs could only make one of those changes which helps more defensively? Damp. Bringing in a big that will play like a big and most importantly rebound improves your d more than bringing in a small. Now Dirk is a much better defender than brad miller and artest is a much better defender than jho and these arent perfect comparisons obviously but I am trying to show it in a light mavs fan will understand because it relates to the mavs.
|