Allen Iverson's 2001 playoff run is so overrated

[D.J.]

First, we'll start with his scoring numbers:


1st round vs Indiana
Game 1(loss)- 16/7/5 on 7/19 shooting
Game 2(win)- 45/9/3 on 15/27 shooting
Game 3(win)- 32/7/6 on 11/28 shooting
Game 4(win)- 33/4/1 on 10/31 shooting

4 game average- 31.5 PPG(26.3 FGA) on 40.9% shooting


2nd round vs Toronto
Game 1(loss)- 36/8/4/7 on 11/34 shooting
Game 2(win)- 54/5/4 on 21/39 shooting
Game 3(loss)- 23/8/4/4 on 7/22 shooting
Game 4(win)- 30/5/4/4 on 10/30 shooting
Game 5(win)- 52/7/2/4 on 21/32 shooting
Game 6(loss)- 20/4/4 on 6/24 shooting
Game 7(win)- 21/16/4/2 on 8/27 shooting

7 game average- 33.7 PPG(29.7 FGA) on 40.9% shooting


3rd round vs Milwaukee
Game 1(win)- 34/6/4 on 13/35 shooting
Game 2(loss)- 16/9/3/3 on 5/26 shooting
Game 4(win)- 28/8/5/2 on 10/32 shooting
Game 5(win)- 15/9/8/4 on 5/27 shooting
Game 6(loss)- 46/3/2 on 14/33 shooting
Game 7(win)- 44/7/6/2 on 17/33 shooting

6 game average- 30.5 PPG(31 FGA) on 34.4% shooting


Finals vs Los Angeles
Game 1(win)- 48/6/5/5 on 18/41 shooting
Game 2(loss)- 23/4/3 on 10/29 shooting
Game 3(loss)- 35/12/4 on 12/30 shooting
Game 4(loss)- 35/4/4 on 12/30 shooting
Game 5(loss)- 37/3/2/2 on 14/32 shooting

5 game average- 35.6 PPG(32.4 FGA) on 40.7% shooting
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now let's look at the factor(s) in each series:


Indiana- Mutombo(14.8 RPG and 4.5 BPG), McKie(17.3 PPG/4.5 APG/4 RPG/1.3 SPG), Hill(7 RPG), Snow(11.8 PPG/5.8 RPG/5.0 APG/1.0 SPG)

Toronto- Mutombo(12.4 RPG and 3.4 BPG), McKie(16.1 PPG/3.7 APG/5.6 RPG), Hill(7 RPG/1 SPG), Lynch(2 SPG)

Milwaukee- Mutombo(15.6 RPG and 2.7 BPG), McKie(16.3 PPG/6.7 APG/5.3 RPG/2.4 SPG), Hill(8.3 RPG)

Los Angeles- Mutombo(12.2 RPG and 2.2 BPG)


Basically, a lot of people look at Iverson's statline and think he was this god like player on the 2001 76ers. What the casual fan doesn't realize, is how 1)Iverson jacked up shots like it was going out of style, 2)Was so inconsistent, 3)Actually hurt his team with his poor shooting and poor decisions with the ball, and 4)Had teammates that put up solid numbers as well as intangibles.

In 22 games, these are some facts:


-Shot sub 40% from the field, 13 times
-Shot sub 30% from the field, 4 times
-Scored less than 30 points, 8 times
-Scored less than 20 points, 3 times
-The 76ers were 4-0 in games Iverson shot 50%+ from the field
-The 76ers were 7-11 in games Iverson shot under 50% from the field
-The 76ers were 7-6 in games Iveson shot under 40% from the field
-The 76ers were 2-2 in games Iverson shot under 30% from the field


Even if Iverson was scoring over 30 a night, he hurt his team by taking so many shots, shooting low percentages, and making poor decisions with the basketball. The real reason the 76ers succeeded was their defense, the surrounding cast providing intangibles, and the surrounding cast making SMART plays at the defensive end.

One more point; the surrounding cast wasn't nearly as bad on offense as some make them out to be. The 76ers still averaged over 96 PPG during the playoffs.

[Sampsonsimpson]

Idc what anyone says he carried that team. You cant look at FG% all you wan and overanalyze every little thing but you had to watch the games to see it. He was the main scorer and facilitator on that team and he came up big in the clutch. When your 2nd option is Aaron Mckie (Who was a solid player) your going to have to take a lot of shots. And the only time the Lakers lost in those whole 2001 playoffs was the game Iverson had 48.

[Kblaze8855]

Even if Iverson was scoring over 30 a night, he hurt his team by taking so many shots, shooting low percentages, and making poor decisions with the basketball.

People who think shooting worse than teammates who cant create a shot and pass to you in every situation they can....means you hurt the team...

Really...its just...

You cant watch the 01 76ers and conclude that Iverson made them worse...

Its just impossible to defend.

Its the kind of thing that shows that a person cares more about numbers than....common sense.

Not a person alive watching those games thinks AI made them worse than they would be without him....but 10 years later numbers say he hurt the team? The game he went 8 of 27 in game 7 and had 16 assists..people were gushing with praise over it. coaches, teammates, commentators, and fans. But now...because of shooting percentage he was hurting his team?

Yesterday a guy was saying he didnt see what was impressive about Tmac in Orlando because he took so many shots and his true shooting percentage was...whatever.

This shit has gone way too far.

[ThaSwagg3r]

Well Allen Iverson has always been overrated so I don't know why it is a surprise to see his 2001 playoff run become overrated. Iverson has never won and accomplished big things in the post-season other than that season. Allen Iverson has never made the conference finals other than that 2001 season and he has only made the 2nd round four times in his career (counting the 2001 run).

That 2001 Sixers team was pretty much like the Cavs that LeBron James played with in 2009 and 2010.....except a lot better.

Iverson had the 6th man of the year that season in Aaron McKie, he had the Defensive Player of the Year that season with Dikembe Mutombo, and he had the coach of the year with Larry Brown on his team. People love to act like Iverson was nothing more than a one man army on that team and that he had no help what so ever when that is the furthest thing from the truth.

I guess you could say he was a one man army as far as the team's offense is concerned, but it's not like he won games single handily and everybody on his team was a liability like most people suggest.

People who think shooting worse than teammates who cant create a shot and pass to you in every situation they can....means you hurt the team...

Funny, because isn't that what LeBron did in the 2011 NBA finals? But I do agree and that is pretty much the reason why I say Dwyane Wade played better in the ECF than LeBron did in the NBA Finals, yeah I'm looking at you PowerGlove.

[D.J.]

And people compare Iverson to guys like LeBron, Wade, Kobe, and McGrady. LeBron and Wade put up 30 PPG or near it, and 50% from the field or near it. Kobe and McGrady, even if they weren't as efficient as LeBron and Wade, were still in the mid 40s. Iverson struggled to crack 40%. He had more than one season shooting under 40%.

Having to take 25-30 shots a night does not excuse him from shooting 40% from the field when other players had equally bad supporting casts, and still managed to shoot at least 45%.

[Kblaze8855]

Iverson had the 6th man of the year that season in Aaron McKie

Award is 28 years old. Name a worse player to win it than Mckie.

he had the Defensive Player of the Year that season with Dikembe Mutombo

They had a better record before mutombo was traded there. They traded for him because Brown loved his performance in the ASG. the game Brown was coaching because they had the best record in the east(perhaps the NBA).

and he had the coach of the year with Larry Brown on his team.

He had the coach of the year because they won so many games. Thats...usually how that works. Teams without much talent wins many games..hes the coach of the year. Larry and his defense played a major role but lets not act like he was on the court.

When you have to mention the worst 6th man winner ever...who was out of the league in like 3 years, a guy the team had a better record without(not to say he was irrelevant...but its just the truth), then go right t othe coach to avoid mentioning a gang of role players most of them not even being...at their lowly peaks?

That team played well. chemistry. defense. But they won because of AI far more than anyone else. Keep the D and lose AI...that team isnt mentioned again ever. That team minus AI..would have gone into the ASG with an injured theo Ratliff as its best player.

People love to act like Iverson was nothing more than a one man army on that team and that he had no help what so ever when that is the furthest thing from the truth.

Its the closest thing to the truth that can be said of anyone to do what he did. Wasnt a one man army by lottery tea mstandards.

Its a one man army by the standards of teams to do what they did.

[magnax1]

I think he's up there with guys like Rick Barry and Hakeem in terms of having to carry a massive % of the teams offensive load to get to the finals. He did have a great D, but he was the offense. As in basically all of it.

[Sampsonsimpson]

And people compare Iverson to guys like LeBron, Wade, Kobe, and McGrady. LeBron and Wade put up 30 PPG or near it, and 50% from the field or near it. Kobe and McGrady, even if they weren't as efficient as LeBron and Wade, were still in the mid 40s. Iverson struggled to crack 40%. He had more than one season shooting under 40%.

Having to take 25-30 shots a night does not excuse him from shooting 40% from the field when other players had equally bad supporting casts, and still managed to shoot at least 45%.

People love to hate on AI man. Who was the best player AI played with prior to his trade to the Nuggets? An over the hill Chris Webber?

Then Iverson gets traded to Denver, a solid team with a good group of players and magically his FG% goes from low 40s suddenly to 45-46 range. Comparable to Tmac and Kobe.

[Kblaze8855]

Having to take 25-30 shots a night does not excuse him from shooting 40% from the field when other players had equally bad supporting casts, and still managed to shoot at least 45%.

He only needs a excuse to people on the internet complaining. Like 14 people cared at the time. Its only a real issue to the few people who come online to complain using numbers the rest of the sports world doesnt care about and are largely unaware of.

He wasnt a 3-4 time all nba first teamer, 11-12 time all star, and MVP off people caring about him shooting poorly. He has coaches heaping on praise and legends showing love.....

People like you think he needs an excuse. Most people see him for what he was. One of the greatest players of all time.

[Collie]

I find it sad that kids will look at AI's career years from now and see only stuff like FG%, and not realize that the guy was the toughest player of his era, averaged 40+ mpg despite playing injured majority of the time he was on court, and willed that offensively challenged Sixers teams to fair amounts of success.

What do you think happens if he didn't have to take those shots? Who would have put up the points in his place? McKee? Snow? For all his "great" play, Aaron McKee was shooting 41% during the playoffs, pretty much the same as AI.

Take a look at this roster: http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/PHI/2001.html

Do you truthfully think that a team of Eric Snow, Aaron McKee, Tyrone Hill, Mutombo and George Lynch would have won a game in the playoffs? They probably wouldn't have won 30 games.

[Kblaze8855]

Then Iverson gets traded to Denver, a solid team with a good group of players and magically his FG% goes from low 40s suddenly to 45-46 range. Comparable to Tmac and Kobe.

AI had a season in denver doing over 26 a game on .458 shooting. Better than Kobes career number or what he has shot in the last 2 years, better than Tmac ever shot, better than Piercei n all but one pre Big 3 season...

And people still hated. It was never his shooting percentage really getting him hated on.

I remember in like 02 on here saying if he shot 45 or 46% people wouldnt actually consider him better...even if they were saying they would. Then he does it...and hes ranked even lower than before....

[NugzHeat3]

That playoff run only borders on extremes.

It's underrated if you think Iverson was an inefficient, ball dominant chucker. That team had poor spacing for a guy that relied a lot on dribble penetration so it's not like they were perfectly built. They also ran Iverson off-ball so it's not like he was pounding the ball on every possession. They were a terrible offensive team forced to rely heavily on AI.

Iverson also had a bunch of nagging injuries in those playoffs which I am sure impacted his performance and shooting percent.

However, it's overrated once you act like it's up there as one of the great playoff runs ever. The 76ers were the first seed and they benefitted from Zo and Hill's injuries which severely weakened the East. In that sense, AI didn't carry scrubs to the finals because you didn't need a lot of star power to get to the finals.

Iverson was also wildly inconsistent in those playoffs and it's probably the reason some of those series were really close and could have gone either way. Carter could have won it at the buzzer and so could Glenn Robinson in game 4 or 5.

When people act like other stars couldn't do what Iverson accomplished, it gets a little annoying. And they would definitely perform better individually than Iverson did. Once you get to a certain point, probably 25+ ppg for me, I'll take consistent scoring over explosive.

Even back then, I'd say you put Vince, TMac and Kobe on Iverson's team and they make the finals.

[mr beast]

over rated ? maybe

but he did what had to be done which is score and jack up shots

who was their second option, Mutumbo? McKie?

still pretty amazing they got into finals

[NugzHeat3]

over rated ? maybe

but he did what had to be done which is score and jack up shots

who was their second option, Mutumbo? McKie?

still pretty amazing they got into finals

This is the thing that I never understood. They were the best team in the East. I expected them to get there and even when they did, they barely made it.

The Bucks were probably more talented and had more firepower but they were a terrible defensive team. That series was pretty close too. Iverson had a huge 40 point game in game 7 to pull out. But Milwaukee could have probably sealed it with a Glenn Robinson jumpshot in game 5 and there was a lot of talk of that series being rigged. I think the Bucks complaining about fouls is stupid since they were a soft team while the Sixers drew a lot of fouls but there were some questionable techs in that series IIRC.

[NuggetsFan]

This is a perfect example of somebody who's simply using numbers and nothing else. That entire offense was built around A.I. If you give him a capable 2nd offensive option and teams right of the bat can't use as much defensive attention with him. When a player is scoring 30+ points and shooting that many attempts it's going to make the game ALOT easier for your teammates.

His volume alone was pretty wild that run. 76ers won with defense + Iverson being a wrecking ball. Similar to this year's Bulls with less talent on the offensive end.