lipoli390 wrote:Some writer on ESPN wrote a column entitled "Is Donovan Mitchell the Next Allen Iverson?" Wow. Mitchell came to the NBA known for his defense and was a terrific defender his rookie season. By his own admission, Allen Iverson was a terrible defender. Are there similarities on the offensive side of the ball? I guess so. But Mitchell is quite a bit bigger than Iverson and not nearly the prolific scorer Iverson was. There are certainly better comparisons.
It's this kind of idiocy among supposedly professional writers on ESPN and other sites that makes me thankful for this Board. Even while I might disagree with various posts, the level of analysis on this Board is so much better than just about anything you'll find among the professional pundits.
lipoli390 wrote:Some writer on ESPN wrote a column entitled "Is Donovan Mitchell the Next Allen Iverson?" Wow. Mitchell came to the NBA known for his defense and was a terrific defender his rookie season. By his own admission, Allen Iverson was a terrible defender. Are there similarities on the offensive side of the ball? I guess so. But Mitchell is quite a bit bigger than Iverson and not nearly the prolific scorer Iverson was. There are certainly better comparisons.
It's this kind of idiocy among supposedly professional writers on ESPN and other sites that makes me thankful for this Board. Even while I might disagree with various posts, the level of analysis on this Board is so much better than just about anything you'll find among the professional pundits.
It's pretty bad. But anything beats Doogie.
Lol. Yet another thing we agree on today, Doper. :)
lipoli390 wrote:Some writer on ESPN wrote a column entitled "Is Donovan Mitchell the Next Allen Iverson?" Wow. Mitchell came to the NBA known for his defense and was a terrific defender his rookie season. By his own admission, Allen Iverson was a terrible defender. Are there similarities on the offensive side of the ball? I guess so. But Mitchell is quite a bit bigger than Iverson and not nearly the prolific scorer Iverson was. There are certainly better comparisons.
It's this kind of idiocy among supposedly professional writers on ESPN and other sites that makes me thankful for this Board. Even while I might disagree with various posts, the level of analysis on this Board is so much better than just about anything you'll find among the professional pundits.
It's pretty bad. But anything beats Doogie.
Lol. Yet another thing we agree on today, Doper. :)
Did anyone read actually read the article or just jump to a conclusion based on a headline (I have a strong dislike for leading headlines)?
lipoli390 wrote:Some writer on ESPN wrote a column entitled "Is Donovan Mitchell the Next Allen Iverson?" Wow. Mitchell came to the NBA known for his defense and was a terrific defender his rookie season. By his own admission, Allen Iverson was a terrible defender. Are there similarities on the offensive side of the ball? I guess so. But Mitchell is quite a bit bigger than Iverson and not nearly the prolific scorer Iverson was. There are certainly better comparisons.
It's this kind of idiocy among supposedly professional writers on ESPN and other sites that makes me thankful for this Board. Even while I might disagree with various posts, the level of analysis on this Board is so much better than just about anything you'll find among the professional pundits.
It's pretty bad. But anything beats Doogie.
Lol. Yet another thing we agree on today, Doper. :)
Did anyone read actually read the article or just jump to a conclusion based on a headline (I have a strong dislike for leading headlines)?
The problem with misleading headlines is that the writer rarely writes them.
Hence, why there's often a disconnect with the actual article.
lipoli390 wrote:Wiggins for DeRozan would be a horrible deal for the Wolves. DeRozan would give us another mid-range jump shooter who will be 29 years old before next season starts. I'll take my chances with the 23-year old Wiggins who has already put up numbers in his first 3 seasons comparable to what DeRozan didn't start putting up until his 5th season. Moreover, Wiggins clearly has a lot more potential, will peak at the same time as KAT and is young enough to have upside.
I view DeRozan as the exception, not the rule, in terms of player development. So we should by no means assume Wiggins will reach his level of production by Year 5 or 6. But it certainly COULD happen and I actually agree that DeRozan doesn't really do much for us. I'd rather trade Wiggins for a top notch role player that can hit 3's and defend than another volume scorer that doesn't space the floor or play great defense.
lipoli390 wrote:Some writer on ESPN wrote a column entitled "Is Donovan Mitchell the Next Allen Iverson?" Wow. Mitchell came to the NBA known for his defense and was a terrific defender his rookie season. By his own admission, Allen Iverson was a terrible defender. Are there similarities on the offensive side of the ball? I guess so. But Mitchell is quite a bit bigger than Iverson and not nearly the prolific scorer Iverson was. There are certainly better comparisons.
It's this kind of idiocy among supposedly professional writers on ESPN and other sites that makes me thankful for this Board. Even while I might disagree with various posts, the level of analysis on this Board is so much better than just about anything you'll find among the professional pundits.
It's pretty bad. But anything beats Doogie.
Lol. Yet another thing we agree on today, Doper. :)
Did anyone read actually read the article or just jump to a conclusion based on a headline (I have a strong dislike for leading headlines)?
The problem with misleading headlines is that the writer rarely writes them.
Hence, why there's often a disconnect with the actual article.
Yep, well put. I ended up reading a chunk of the article this morning. It actually seemed pretty solid to me. It was pointing out some stats comparing what Mitchell has been doing offeneively to what Iverson did. I think the comparison of their roles offensively is worth considering. Without knowing it the Jazz kinda ended up with a team built a team around Mitchell. A team of basically good role players and a defensive team that plays hard. Sounds a bit familiar doesn't it? They had some good thoughts it was basically really trying to put some context into what Mitchell has been doing this season including the playoffs.
I'll also add that while Iverson was not a guy I was really a big fan of the sixers defensive abilities utilized a couple of his strengths to their advantage. Teams had to worry about him coming out of nowhere and taking the ball away on a pass. The Sixers strength as a team and individually allowed Iverson basically to roam free and therefore get some easy steals which his physical gifts and anticipation were assets. He wasn't a good defender overall but he had some ability to use as an asset on that end.
lipoli390 wrote:Some writer on ESPN wrote a column entitled "Is Donovan Mitchell the Next Allen Iverson?" Wow. Mitchell came to the NBA known for his defense and was a terrific defender his rookie season. By his own admission, Allen Iverson was a terrible defender. Are there similarities on the offensive side of the ball? I guess so. But Mitchell is quite a bit bigger than Iverson and not nearly the prolific scorer Iverson was. There are certainly better comparisons.
It's this kind of idiocy among supposedly professional writers on ESPN and other sites that makes me thankful for this Board. Even while I might disagree with various posts, the level of analysis on this Board is so much better than just about anything you'll find among the professional pundits.
It's pretty bad. But anything beats Doogie.
Lol. Yet another thing we agree on today, Doper. :)
Did anyone read actually read the article or just jump to a conclusion based on a headline (I have a strong dislike for leading headlines)?
The problem with misleading headlines is that the writer rarely writes them.
Hence, why there's often a disconnect with the actual article.
Yep, well put. I ended up reading a chunk of the article this morning. It actually seemed pretty solid to me. It was pointing out some stats comparing what Mitchell has been doing offeneively to what Iverson did. I think the comparison of their roles offensively is worth considering. Without knowing it the Jazz kinda ended up with a team built a team around Mitchell. A team of basically good role players and a defensive team that plays hard. Sounds a bit familiar doesn't it? They had some good thoughts it was basically really trying to put some context into what Mitchell has been doing this season including the playoffs.
I'll also add that while Iverson was not a guy I was really a big fan of the sixers defensive abilities utilized a couple of his strengths to their advantage. Teams had to worry about him coming out of nowhere and taking the ball away on a pass. The Sixers strength as a team and individually allowed Iverson basically to roam free and therefore get some easy steals which his physical gifts and anticipation were assets. He wasn't a good defender overall but he had some ability to use as an asset on that end.
The article wasn't as bad as the headline. But I still think the article's use of Iverson for context was pretty lame. I was a huge Iverson fan. He's my second favorite player of all time after Michael Jordan. I really like Mitchell, but Iverson is one of the last guys I'd use to provide context for what Mitchell did this season. I get what the author was attempting to convey, but I still think the comparison was silly.
BizarroJerry wrote:Boston wears GE patches now on their jerseys? Are we moving to NASCAR? Will wolves wear a rotation of best buy, target and General mills next year?
