Re: Iverson Wants Out?

[Alex Wang <awang@mit.edu>]

> 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.

There's a difference between defense at different positions. You can't
put five solid defensive point guards on the floor at the same time
and get a good defensive team, for instance. Now you may not think that
Pierce is the best defensive shooting guard, but he at least has the
size to not get posted up to a ridiculous degree. If you play your
proposed Anderson/Iverson backcourt, you're just asking the other team
to post up their shooting guard and take the 6 inch height advantage. 
Remember when Mercer, who is not a post up guard by any stretch, was
covered by Cory Alexander in the Denver game and scored 30+? That is
what this backcourt would give up every night. Can you imagine Anderson
or Iverson covering JR Rider all night? I agree that getting great 
defenders at every position is probably not possible but you are talking
about putting small point guards who aren't renowned defenders on 
shooting guards that are going to be 6 inches taller and 60 pounds
heavier. It just doesn't work.

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

Yep, that's my point. You were saying that we could trade Walker for Iverson
and then trade Iverson for Hill if he didn't work out. If that is true,
the whole trade doesn't make sense because Philly would prefer to make
the Iverson for Hill trade themselves. As you say, who wouldn't take Hill
over Walker?

Alex