re: Why isn't AI more appreciated?

same people who love AI so much as the same people who love Tracy McGrady and Melo and the like.

High volume, prolific scorers who aren't efficient and don't necessarily make their teams better.

not my cup of tea personally

quote:

---

The Sixers went from a 38 win team with Iverson to a 35 win team when he left and then had a 40 win season the following year after that.

---

And the year before his last year, they won 43 games. So in his last 2 years, they won 81 games, and when he left, they won 75 in the next two. Wow. What improvement. Yeah, the Nuggets got better when he left, mainly because AI was essentially done at 33 because of all of his injuries. There are legit knocks on Iverson (his shooting percentage first among them), but the idea teams got remarkably better when he left is not one of them. After he left Detroit, where he played a whopping 50 games anyway, the team went from 39 wins to 27 wins. I'm just saying, the Pistons decline had to do with more than just AI.

Iverson was a selfish, ballhog player. But he also was incredibly intense and played harder than just about anyone, and sacrificed his body to the game (some would say recklessly). As for his "practice" speech, he was right. He was getting criticized because he was injured and he didn't miss a game, but he missed a practice. He's right. So f'n what?