RE: Iverson Wants Out?

["John Lyell" <Jlyell@concentric.net>]

-----Original Message-----
From: Alex Wang [mailto:awang@mit.edu]
Sent: Sunday, December 19, 1999 8:27 PM
To: John Lyell; celtics@igtc.com
Subject: Re: Iverson Wants Out?


> Maybe both just need a change of scenery.  Since IMO Walker does not fit
at
> the 3, and has not proven he has the toughness to play the 4, I would make
> this move, but use with the following lineups:
>
> Anderson
> Iverson
> Pierce/Griffin
> Fortson/Battie
> VP

Who defends shooting guards in this lineup? I think Philadelphia has
problems with this even when they use a larger point guard that defends
shooting guards. We'd definitely have the smallest team in the league
with this lienup. Teams that play multiple point guards usually have
at least one "oversized" one.


Who defends today ?  It is not like PP is the next Dennis Johnson on D, yes
he is probably a better than defender than Iverson but Walker is a horrible
defender ask Kelvin Cato and Carlos Rogers , so it is at the worst a wash
defensively.  When you give me 25 a night I will take some defensive
liability. Although defense is important, you won get it at every  position,
and if you can't but the ball in the basket, defense does not help much.

> But could Pierce & Iverson coexist ? If we are winning yes, if we are
losing
> no ?  At the worst we would probably have a more marketable asset.  If
their
> are teams willing to trade a Steve Smith for JR Ryder who knows what
Iverson
> could bring if it did not work out ? Grant Hill ?

Maybe, but wouldn't Philly rather just trade for Grant Hill instead then?

 I am sure anyone would take Hill over Walker with the exception of possibly
a few on this list.