Iverson to Clippers?

by justinleagueheroes on Jul 14, 2009 1:51 PM PDT

Just a short post, Can anyone imagine seeing Allen Iverson in a Clippers uni? Just from an outside look. You don't have to be a Clippers fan or what not, but just your own opinion. Do you think Iverson would be a good fit for the Clippers?

It was reported this morning that a close source to Allen Iverson that the LA Clippers are very serious about signing FA Allen Iverson. In my opinion, Iverson would not be a good fit in the Clippers Organization, perioid. They already have their starting backcourt which is Davis and Gordon. They drafted an exciting PF/SF Blake Griffin to their starting lineup. While you have Camby or Kaman and Al Thornton to be in their front court. The Clippers is building a team for the future, why would they sign a player who had multiple conteroversies in the past about playing time? But the problem is, IF the Clippers do decide to sign him, who will they start. Iverson has made it clear last season playing in Detroit that he doesn't like playing off the bench.

Poll

IF the Clippers do sign Iverson, Who do you think should be their backcourt tandem?

Baron Davis & Eric Gordon

65 votes

Allen Iverson & Baron Davis

126 votes

Eric Gordon & Allen Iverson

16 votes

207 votes | Poll has closed

This FanPost is a submission from a member of the mighty Golden State of Mind community. While we're all here to throw up that W, these words do not necessarily reflect the views of the GSoM Crew. Still, chances are the preceding post is Unstoppable Baby!

Tweet Comment 46 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Around SB Nation

Practice: Day Twelve

Aug 2009 from Barking Carnival - 29 comments

Practices: Days Thirteen and Fourteen

Aug 2009 from Barking Carnival - 20 comments

30 For 30 - No Crossover: The Trial of Allen Iverson

Apr 2010 from Barking Carnival - 30 comments

2012 NBA All-Star Roster: Brandon Jennings Not Among Eastern Conference Reserves, But Here's What Really Matters Now

Feb 2012 from Brew Hoop - 26 comments

Game Preview: San Antonio Spurs @ Philadelphia 76ers

Feb 2012 from Pounding The Rock - 27 comments

Comments

AI + Baron would be hilarious

explosion!!!!!!!!!

by tafkasam on Jul 14, 2009 1:54 PM PDT reply actions

I would sit AI on the bench.

I wonder how the two of them would get along on and off the court. For some reason, I think their personalities would clash.

by Hatalles on Jul 14, 2009 4:59 PM PDT up reply actions

um...

Shouldn’t this be a Clips Nation post? I’m not sure we can too much who Clips starting backcourt is so long as it makes them worst than the Warriors.

A Sonics fan without a team... but 6 season now of GS Warriors ticket have convinced me to adopt the boys from Oakland.

by mcwalter44 on Jul 14, 2009 2:11 PM PDT reply actions

i dont really care

Stop.......... Hammertime!!!!!

by MR. Bigshot 123 on Jul 14, 2009 2:20 PM PDT reply actions

They already have their starting backcourt which is Davis and Gordon

Those two can’t play all game. Seems like splitting the guard time among those three could be a winning formula? I don’t see it as any worse than Montay, Curr-bury and squat.

Now wheres the rubbers? Whose got the rubbers?
I noticed there's so many of them
and there's really not that many of us.

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jul 14, 2009 2:26 PM PDT reply actions

“Squat” = Morrow, Azubuike, Jackson, and Belinelli.

So their backcourt would consist two former stars in serious decline, a guy who profiles like Curry but with fewer rebounds, assists and steals (Gordon), Mardy Collins, Mike Taylor, and Ricky Davis? Blech. I’d take our six guys in a second. I’d take our frontcourt over theirs, too, though I’m already a pretty huge Blake Griffin fanboy. I think the question for the next few years for both Clippers North and Clippers South is whether Griffin and Randolph can be elite enough stars to make winners out of their loserly franchises. Guys like Baron and AI are fast becoming irrelevant to the equation (though BD’s albatross contract will make him relevant…)

I’ve probably seen worse uses of the MLE than 34 year-old declining Iverson, but it’s hardly something for Clippers fans to get excited about.

There will be no extra point!

by Sleepy Freud on Jul 14, 2009 3:28 PM PDT up reply actions

On the other hand, it’s rather exciting if you’re a Warrior fan. Iverson has always been an exciting player who can put up some amazing 40+ poing games, doing things that no one else in the world can do, all in a losing cause. Hey, it’s a chance to see something really special with far less chance of a Warriors loss than the electrifying hype Iverson generates suggests.

by jae on Jul 14, 2009 3:57 PM PDT up reply actions

bingo

that just about sums it up. The only reason why the clippers would sign iverson is for the money he might earn them from an entertainment perspective. as far as winning games goes he won’t be any help, just a hinderance. he dominates the ball too much to fit with baron davis, and he will take shots away from the young guys and hurt the development of eric gordon.

by bigbenny777 on Jul 14, 2009 4:04 PM PDT up reply actions

Of course, he probably won’t earn them any money. Stars are draws on the road. Fans may buy tickets when he comes to town as a visiting player, but since gate revenue isn’t really shared, this doesn’t help the Clippers. The best evidence indicates that “stars” don’t really have much impact on ticket sales for the team that they play for.

by jae on Jul 14, 2009 4:06 PM PDT up reply actions

hm

What you’re saying makes sense, but what about season ticket sales and memorabilia?
Surely more fans will come to the games to see Iverson in los angeles?

by bigbenny777 on Jul 14, 2009 4:22 PM PDT up reply actions

Season ticket sales are driven by wins, not by stars. This has been reasonably well studied and published on. If stars bring wins, they sell tickets. If they don’t, they won’t. Other things affect who goes to games, but ‘star draw’ is low on the list for the home team. It’s unlikely that the excitement he would generate would result in significant long term (e.g. season) ticket sales. The short lived excitement draws for a few games, usually in individual game sales which is not where teams generate the bulk of their revenue.

Iverson’s jersey is among the best selling, but the revenue for jerseys isn’t something the specific team gets the a mega share of. The “officially licensed NBA apparel” logos indicate that the NBA gets the biggest cut. While teams get a cut, especially if sold at their concession stands, the pie is pretty well sliced by the time it comes to drawing revenue from popular players in jersey sales.

by jae on Jul 14, 2009 6:21 PM PDT up reply actions

Isn’t Iverson’s jersey still among the best selling in the league? I don’t know what kind of impact that can have on a team’s finances (probably not much) but its something I guess.

Thing A

by sam23 on Jul 14, 2009 6:11 PM PDT up reply actions

The only reason why the clippers would sign iverson is for the money he might earn them from an entertainment perspective.

that’s what yahoo sports is reporting. that it’s to get more ticket sales, rather than to help the team.

Azubuike? More like Azucutie!

by goldenstatelove on Jul 14, 2009 9:26 PM PDT up reply actions

the clippers are a mess

so much talent in recent years and yet it just isn’t working. i personally blame dunleavy and injuries. but mostly dunleavy.

by HOLDEMUPwuzzBANNED on Jul 14, 2009 2:26 PM PDT reply actions

agreed. Nellie haters can say what they want

But he’d get double the wins with that squad last year and probably make that a playoff contender this season. No reason BD, Gordon, Thorton, Griffin, Camby shouldnt be around .500. If Griffin develops faster even more

by tafkasam on Jul 14, 2009 8:39 PM PDT up reply actions

Camby is a good player who is aging and has never had a history of staying healthy. Baron has had issues staying healthy and performed terribly last year. His play was part of the reason they were as bad as they were. Thornton was rather unimpressive as well, neither a good rebounder nor an efficient scorer, though he got enough floor time to look superficially adequate because he took enough shots to score some points. Gordon was better than I expected him to be. The team gets to .500 only if Griffin plays well from the get go, but otherwise, there are plenty of reasons why they shouldn’t be a .500 team.

by jae on Jul 14, 2009 9:45 PM PDT up reply actions

how does Dunleavy still have a job?

the clibs have been garbage for so long, even when they have decent players. Why do they still pay him?

by jimmycaps on Jul 15, 2009 11:06 AM PDT up reply actions

uh the warriors have bveen just as bad as far as i can tell.

i mean both teams have 1 playoff team in a decade, and both made the 2nd round.

by hans007 on Jul 16, 2009 1:36 AM PDT up reply actions

We should care

Actually this is more scary than we think, I haven’t seen Eric Gordon play and don’t know much about how good he is but I don’t see why Baron and AI wouldn’t be the perfect backcourt for them. After all, Iverson is just an older version of Monta and Baron/Monta backcourt was working out great so I think Baron/Iverson will be as good as we were last year, then you add Griffin to that lineup who looks great and a solid center, whether they go with randolph, camby or kaman. I think the Clipps become an immediate playoff contender and reduce our chances to make it there

by ARandolph on Jul 14, 2009 2:27 PM PDT reply actions

Randolph is with the Grizzlies now

WARRIORS BASKETBALL!!! Patiently waiting for a title...I may be waiting for a long time...

by JustSomeName on Jul 14, 2009 2:52 PM PDT up reply actions

but I don’t see why Baron and AI wouldn’t be the perfect backcourt for them.

Because both are in their decline, shells of what they both once were. Baron might surprise. It would be tough for him to do much worse, but I wouldn’t count on regular top performances from either. Neither have been particularly efficient scorers.

Iverson is not just an older version of Monta. That’s a simplification (fast guards who can score!) that ignores the real significant differences between them. Monta has hit over 50% from the floor for a season, something Iverson never did. Iverson is not afraid of firing up many shots from behind the arc and has showed more playmaking abilities early in his career than Monta has.

by jae on Jul 14, 2009 4:05 PM PDT up reply actions

Iverson is better than Ellis

I’m one of the biggest fans of Ellis game. However, I don’t think 50% from the field is indicative enough, or strong enough argument, but comparing TS% they are very close with Iverson at 56.7 and ellis @ 58. However Iverson PER is @ 21 and Ellis @~19. Considering that last season for both was not very telling about their production next year, I think Iverson is better. Better passing, better defense, stronger more versatile rounded game etc.
If Iverson would not mind coming of the bench he could be a perfect fit with Clippers. They might also be getting ready to trade Baron, then Iverson will be The Man.

by farid on Jul 14, 2009 7:45 PM PDT up reply actions

PER as a measurement to compare two players is flawed. It rewards lower percentage shooters for shooting more often, even when doing so does not actually increase the team’s chance of winning. A measure should relate as close as possible to how a player’s play improves his team’s chances of winning. In this regard, other measures are better than PER. PER corresponds better with popular opinion, but if a measure only tells me what everyone believes with or without rationale, it does me no good.

by jae on Jul 14, 2009 7:58 PM PDT up reply actions

If you want to ignore last season for both players (which is flawed IMO since you are doing it for 2 different reasons—Monta actually had an injury, whereas Iverson was just terrible, possibly due to advancing age), you should at least recognize that 2007-08 was an outlier for Iverson. He had never had a TS% higher than 54.3% in any of his previous seasons, and I would think he’s a long bet to even reach that mark ever again.

Thing C

by markdash on Jul 14, 2009 8:30 PM PDT up reply actions

Iverson's TS%

Dropped to .504 last season. (Not sure why you’re cherrypicking his .567 from Denver two years ago, which is clearly an outlier in a .519 career). He also dipped to a 5-year low 4.9 assists/36. And unlike Monta, he doesn’t have a serious ankle injury as an excuse for the drop-off. He does have old age as an excuse, something which is significantly more difficult to recover from.

Monta was slightly more productive at their respective peaks (not as good a distributor, but a better rebounder and much more efficient scorer); but more importantly he’s 24 while Iverson is 34. I think people tend to underestimate what an important age difference that is for a hoopster. Check out Webber age 24 v. age 34 if you don’t believe me. Or check out Jordan, or Drexler, or Barkley, etc. Very few NBA players are quite as good at 34 than 24, and a lot are significantly worse. Given that Iverson is an “old 34” — a small, tough guy who’s logged tons of minutes, is entering his 14th NBA season, and is already showing clear signs of decline — putting your money on Iverson to outperform Monta seems like a pretty bad bet to me.

There will be no extra point!

by Sleepy Freud on Jul 14, 2009 8:36 PM PDT up reply actions

age

certainly plays a big part in basketball, however i didn’t see any sign of drop-off in athletic ability in Iverson’s game last year. I attribute his overall production drop-off last year to him not being a good fit in Detroit and issues with a coach and team chemistry. I don’t think it was indicative of his game overall.
Iverson’s game grew a lot over last couple of years in Denver, hence the increase in TS% and assists. Monta just does not have same sense yet and was never #1 scoring option on the team like Iverson was in Philadelphia.
So, going forward, Monta might be better, but at this stage Iverson’s game is superior to Monta.

by farid on Jul 14, 2009 9:08 PM PDT up reply actions

at this stage Iverson’s game is superior to Monta.

and he’s never fallen off a moped.

Now wheres the rubbers? Whose got the rubbers?
I noticed there's so many of them
and there's really not that many of us.

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jul 14, 2009 9:59 PM PDT up reply actions

At this point in his career (and for most of his career, actually), I don’t really see Iverson fitting in anywhere and really contributing to a competitive franchise.

I think he’d be most effective going to a team like Memphis or Charlotte, a team that needs more star-power and more scoring to help sell more tickets.

"We Deserve"

by YaHeard on Jul 14, 2009 2:53 PM PDT reply actions

asdf

I don’t understand why every time something basketball related gets put up on ESPN people feel a need to make a post on GSoM for it.

by JRich4MVP on Jul 14, 2009 3:12 PM PDT reply actions

b/c

we have nothing else to talk about right now. Summer league? wow, it’s basically college mixed with nba rookies/vets that plays. t’s basically useless. I don’t believe nor watch the summer league. I’d rather wait for the actual season to start.

by justinleagueheroes on Jul 14, 2009 4:03 PM PDT up reply actions

Post it on another forum then...come on you're going to post Clipper's news on a GSW forum?!

Its time for a change...

by RunNdGun on Jul 14, 2009 4:37 PM PDT up reply actions

this probably wouldve been better suited as a fanshot, yes, but what’s wrong with posting news about a division rival that looks like they will be competing with us for one of the last couple of playoff spots?

Thing A

by sam23 on Jul 14, 2009 6:16 PM PDT up reply actions

I don’t understand why, feeling the way you do, you would still open the thread and comment on it.

Thing A

by sam23 on Jul 14, 2009 6:14 PM PDT up reply actions

I actually have no problem with it,I just naturally hate any team from L.A.

its all good if it was a fanshot though.

Its time for a change...

by RunNdGun on Jul 14, 2009 9:55 PM PDT up reply actions

I actually have no problem with it,I just naturally hate any team from L.A.

maybe you should get therapy to get over your fear of winners?

Now wheres the rubbers? Whose got the rubbers?
I noticed there's so many of them
and there's really not that many of us.

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jul 14, 2009 10:00 PM PDT up reply actions

Clippers are winners?

Its time for a change...

by RunNdGun on Jul 14, 2009 10:03 PM PDT up reply actions

Clippers are winners?

Lakers are from LA too

Now wheres the rubbers? Whose got the rubbers?
I noticed there's so many of them
and there's really not that many of us.

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jul 15, 2009 11:16 AM PDT up reply actions

Well Warriors fan are born with a natural grudge for LA,or it's just the fact I hate the city LA itself...

Its time for a change...

by RunNdGun on Jul 15, 2009 2:52 PM PDT up reply actions

If Eric Gordon doesn’t start, the Clippers are dumber than I thought. The guy is a really good young player and he shouldn’t have to ride the pine when they’re building towards the future.

The Ultimate Opportunist

by Rated-R Superstar on Jul 14, 2009 5:12 PM PDT reply actions

Seeing as that Iverson isn't, actually, any good ...

… I fail to see how this move makes much of a difference for the Clippers either way.

But reports are now indicating that they need to talk to him to make sure he’s comfortable being a backup before they sign him, which is only smart.

by Ronaldinho on Jul 14, 2009 7:06 PM PDT reply actions

I don't see this helping them

I see this as purely a move to sell seats, not win games. It would just take Gordon’s playing time away.

by dubzfan on Jul 14, 2009 9:50 PM PDT reply actions

Too bad that it’s unlikely to sell all that many seats.

by jae on Jul 14, 2009 10:28 PM PDT up reply actions

I don't see this helping them, I see this as purely a move to sell seats

Well that helps them in the log run cause they get more revenue to invest in new players. In fact if the warriors got Iverson I’d be tempted to buy season tickets just to watch him play out his career so I can see their point.

Now wheres the rubbers? Whose got the rubbers?
I noticed there's so many of them
and there's really not that many of us.

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jul 14, 2009 10:04 PM PDT reply actions

this would be a great move if AI is dedicated to being a 6th man

Imagine having AI and BD and Blake Griffin in the game together, score tied, 10 seconds on the clock.

AI would be a huge boost to that squad as long as his ego is in check with the reality of the situation.

Of course there will be crazy conflicts all year between him, Dunleavy, and BD, but it’s the Clippers after all. What fun would it be if they became an actual team?

by warriorsvictim on Jul 15, 2009 10:15 AM PDT reply actions

The problem is that the number of games where they found themselves tied with 10 seconds left would be smaller than the number where they were down by 12 at the same point because it’s difficult to stay close when you’ve shot yourself out the game.

by jae on Jul 15, 2009 10:34 AM PDT up reply actions