Why the Sixers Should Sign Iverson
Posted by Johnny Goodtimes on November 19th, 2009
It is time for the Answer to come home. Not because I am a huge Iverson fan, or because I think that he will turn this team into a championship contender. They will be, at best, another first round loser with Iverson. But the Sixers are a moribund franchise, one that doesn’t excite, inspire, or play basketball well. They are 5 guys aimlessly throwing balls at a basket already, what harm could adding another “gun” do? When you throw in the 20 ppg AI would give them, the excitement he would bring back to the city with his play, and the interest he would rekindle in Sixers basketball, the question is no longer “Why?”, it is “Why not?” It’s not like this team is building to a better future this year. They are stuck with the $12 Million Dollar Man Sam Dalembert and Elton “Bad Legs” Brand, whose contracts will keep the team from going after any exciting players in the foreseeable future. And how often will they have a chance to sign a player like Iverson for less than $2 million and instantly go from 8,000 fans a night to 14,000 a night? If Iverson has anything left in the tank, people will pay to see his homecoming, myself included. This team has had no buzz since the day Iverson left the building.
All of AI’s negatives add up to a big “Who cares?” 1) He doesn’t get along with his coaches. Who cares? Eddie Jordan was a terrible signing, as the Sixers have a team that should be running the break and instead they’re running an offense designed for a bunch of nerdy white kids at a university that doesn’t offer scholarships. It’s like getting Paul Westhead to coach at Penn. But I digress. If Iverson runs Eddie Jordan out of town, have we really lost anything? 2) Iverson doesn’t play well with others. Who cares? With the team as it is currently constructed, the best case scenario for this team is a 42-40 finish and a #6 seed in the East and an early playoff exit. Big freaking whoop. With Iverson, the team will probably be about the same. But here’s the catch. The journey there will be a lot more interesting. There will be colorful press conferences, there will be 50 point games, there will be a buzz around the 76ers in a town in which they currently generate about as much excitement as Paoli club curling. 3) He can’t play defense. Who cares? This is the NBA. It’s like complaining because a wrestler is too aggressive going off the top rope. The NBA isn’t sport, it is entertainment. Defense is not entertaining. See the mid-90s Knicks. 4) His attitude could turn off some fans. What fans?
Can someone give me a single reason why a franchise that is paddling with one oar shouldn’t take a flyer on an old legend and let him put a few fannies in the seats? Anyone?
November 19th, 2009 at 11:25 am
No way attendance goes up 75% because of Iverson. You’re out of your mind. He is nowhere near the player he was 2 years ago, much less 8 years ago.
The day he got waived by the Grizzlies, WIP’s midday show did not get a caller discussing Iverson until 4 hours of the show had elapsed.
People don’t really want him back.
November 19th, 2009 at 11:38 am
You’ve got Louis Williams and Jrue Holiday who seem to have some promise and trying to fit in Iverson’s ego will stunt their growth. You know he’s not going to be happy coming off the bench, regardless of what he says about going to a contender (which Philly is not), so you’ll have to start him. Iverson hasn’t been very productive in almost 3 years and he’s 34. I can’t speak to the excitement he would bring to the city, and whether that would increase attendance, but if you are to analyze this from a purely basketball standpoint I don’t see how it would help.
November 19th, 2009 at 11:49 am
I hadn’t really thought about this but it actually seems somewhat reasonable. I’m also not a big Iverson fan but I think that the team needs a bit of a shake up. It may very well increase attendance 50-75% Why not?
November 19th, 2009 at 1:07 pm
You are correct that the Sixers are not built to win..a result of the dreadful Elton Brand signing, but Iverson is not the Answer. By the way, the word on the street is that he will be a member of the NY Knicks by tonight. That is a perfect situation since the Knicks have their entire team on 1 year contracts. They are playing simply for this year before getting under the cap and trying to sign LeBron. Iverson needs a 1 year situation to rebuild himself as a player who deserves to be in the League. The Sixers are loaded with young players on multiyear contracts. Iverson doesn’t work in that scenario.
November 19th, 2009 at 1:53 pm
Here’s the question I have about the probable Knicks signing: if he doesn’t want to play for a terrible Memphis team, why would he want to play for an even worse Knicks team? At least with the Sixers, he is playing for a team that could conceivably make the playoffs. Maybe it wouldn’t increase attendance 75%, but it would certainly improve it, probably dramatically. Iverson is still a legend in this town, and if he can average 20 a game, people will come out and watch. Keep in mind, this will only be a one year and done signing. It would be basically a one year send off for a Philly legend, and I think the city would treat it as such. Would his bad attitude rub off on the young guys? Maybe a little bit, but maybe his guts and heart would rub off on them too.
November 19th, 2009 at 2:01 pm
The Knicks aren’t quite as bad as you think (although they have been terrible so far—Eddie Curry just came back in shape and is much better than Brand), but Iverson makes them better. He doesn’t make the Sixers better, as you think. What do you think is better for AI–playing before sellout crowds at MSG, starting and getting plenty of press or playing before desultory crowds here, coming off the bench and causing problems? He’s not coming here.
November 19th, 2009 at 2:06 pm
Here’s the NY Post article….playing up the former Sixers’ backcourt of AI and Larry Hughes. Love the letters which absolutely kill the proposed signing.
http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/knicks/knicks_answer_man_tTuNrppaRq3gEarQQrhKHK
November 19th, 2009 at 3:49 pm
“The Knicks aren’t quite as bad as you think.” Yeah, they’re probably the best 1-9 team in basketball.
November 19th, 2009 at 4:00 pm
I have to admit, in the years following AI’s departure, my attendance at the games has declined. Although he’s not nearly as electrifying as he once was, I do think his signing would bolster the crowd. I would also love to see Iverson retire as a Sixer. The move wouldn’t make much basketball sense, but I wouldn’t mind seeing it happen anyway.
November 19th, 2009 at 4:09 pm
2-9.
November 19th, 2009 at 4:50 pm
The fact that this thread has generated the most comments of any Sixers story we’ve done is microcosmic evidence of JGT’s point. Even the mention of AI coming back gets people talking on our site. Imagine what his actual presence would do for the empty seats at the Wac.
November 19th, 2009 at 5:00 pm
Sorry, Jon, when scanning the scores this morning I missed the Knicks thrilling win over the Pacers. That’s the type of road victory that can really turn a team’s season around. I thought they’d win 18 games this year. Now I think they might pull off 21. Throw Iverson into the mix, and I don’t think that a 24-58 record is entirely out of reach.
Yes, I realize the point is moot. Thanks to the NBA’s ludicrous salary structure, the best way to get good in the NBA is to be really terrible for a few years, then cheer for ping pong balls. A brilliant business model. I’m surprised the NBA has been struggling the last few years. Crooked refs, insane salary cap, and Me-First players playing one-on-one. What’s not to love?
November 19th, 2009 at 5:08 pm
On that issue, JGT, I agree completely with you. The NBA salary cap is awful…it makes a signing mistake a 5 year death penalty for a team, and because those teams are desperate to give fans a chance to hope, they trade those bad contracts for even worse contracts (See, Thomas, Isaih). The Knicks were in the Finals in 2000 and then traded Patrick Ewing in the last year of his contract to stay competitive as he could no longer play. They took back 2 bad contracts, those guys were traded for even worse contracts and the Knicks were doomed to a decade of terriblenss. What makes this even worse is that the intentions were good—they were trying to put a good product on the floor. Finally, under new management, they drank the poison and 2 years ago, refused to take any contracts past this year. So they have been terrible. But there now is hope. And for this year, why the hell not sign Iverson?
November 19th, 2009 at 5:32 pm
Remember when Aaron McKie got traded like three years after he retired? Because you had to trade his contract, not him. Daniel Stern lucked into Larry, Magic, and Michael. It was they, not Stern, who made the league popular. Now that they are all gone, we see that the man behind the curtain really isn’t all that smart. The games are fixed, the game is brutally boring, and the commish makes weaker teams trade their best players to the league’s meal tickets to make his breadwinners relevant again (see Garnett to Celtics and Ginobili to Lakers.) I am really starting to think that Stern is worse than Selig.
November 19th, 2009 at 10:56 pm
Hold on a second, I almost missed it, but did someone say Eddy Curry is better than Elton Brand??!? I’m going to have to disregard any future comments on the NBA from Jon. Brand was a 20-10-2+block guy for 5 years. Eddy Curry has been asked NOT to play for most of the last 3 years. The Brand contract may look terrible now, but the guy was a really solid player in LA and still has a chance to regain that in Philly. NO chance Eddy Curry becomes useful again on the basketball court.
November 19th, 2009 at 11:04 pm
Elton Brand is not that guy any more. Elton Brand is an OLD NBA player on two bad knees who never again will sniff either 20 ppg or 10 rpg. Eddie Curry is young and in shape. The biggest difference is that Elton Brand is on an $80 million contract. Eddie Curry is not. Brand’s contract kills the Sixers.
November 19th, 2009 at 11:07 pm
And JGT, unless the NBA commissioner suddenly has a role in “Home Alone IV”, his name is David, not Daniel Stern.
November 20th, 2009 at 10:01 am
Yeah, and it was Gasol, not Ginobili, who went to the Lakers. Please disregard pretty much ewverything I said in that last comment.
November 20th, 2009 at 10:43 am
i don’t disagree, but the Sixers will NEVER do it. Probably the least likely team in the league to do it. ps. i HATE this sixers team.
November 20th, 2009 at 10:58 am
Knicks were in the finals in 2000? I think you mean 1999.
November 21st, 2009 at 8:34 am
You are correct—Knicks were in the Finals in ’99. In 2000, they lost in the Eastern Finals to Indiana, then disappeared.
Speaking of disappearing, that was a hell of an effort last night by YOUR PHILADELPHIA 76ers against the feared Griz. For the poster who so loves Elton Brand, enjoy this kind of ball. The Sixers are incapable of getting better as long as they are stuck with his contract.