Re: It's only a matter of time before Iverson departs

["Josh Ozersky" <jozersky@xxxxxxxxxx>]

p.s.  when I think about the talent in the NBA, I see the
cutoff at three:  Shaq, Kobe, Duncan.  Kobe is in a world
of his own, talent-wise, on both ends of the court.  Those
three are hall of fame players right now.  Then is a group
of supertalents who have never proved anything in the
playoffs, which is all that really matters.  McGrady, KG,
James.  Then there are a bunch of great players who are
less gifted who have produced, like Kidd, Pierce, et al.
Then there are elite specialists, like Allen, Peja, Ben Wallace,
and so on.  And then at the bottom of the elite are the up-and-coming
talents who don't even dominate in the regular season:
O'Neil, Ming, and others.  That's the way I tier them.

Josh

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Josh Ozersky" <jozersky@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: "Berry, Mark S" <berrym@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, March 15, 2004 11:33 AM
Subject: Re: It's only a matter of time before Iverson departs


> Mark, since we agree on practically everything, I don't
> mind taking this up.  I think you underrate Pierce.  He
> has played poorly this year, but as a talent, he's far above
> the one-dimensional and unreliable Peja, the still-timid Yao, and the
> soft and spotty Jermaine O'Neal.  Pierce and Iverson have been
> the Man on playoff teams, and beaten other playoff teams
> by themselves when the pressure was on.  (Which is more than
> KG can say.)  Iverson is a former MVP who carried his team all the way to
> the finals, for pete's sake.  I think you could make a lot better argument
> for Brand, Francis, and a couple of others than the wimps
> you nominate as being better than PP and AI.
>
> Josh
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Berry, Mark S" <berrym@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: <celtics@xxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Monday, March 15, 2004 11:11 AM
> Subject: Re: It's only a matter of time before Iverson departs
>
>
> > Josh wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > he's a top ten NBA talent.  (Shaq, Duncan,
> >
> > Kobe, KG, McGrady, Kidd, Nowitski, Pierce, Iverson, James)
> >
> >
> >
> > --- --- ---
> >
> >
> >
> > Josh, are you openly challenging me? This is a test, isn't it? Well,
> > I'll throw my two cents in (surprise, surprise ... )
> >
> >
> >
> > Top 10:
> >
> >
> >
> > Shaq
> >
> > Duncan
> >
> > Kobe
> >
> > Garnett
> >
> > T-Mac
> >
> > Kidd
> >
> > Nowitzki
> >
> > James (if not now, certainly within a year or two)
> >
> > Yao Ming (if we're projecting for LeBron, we have to do the same for
> > Yao)
> >
> > Jermaine O'Neal
> >
> > Peja Stojakovic
> >
> >
> >
> > OK, that's 11, but those are the guys I'd consider clear upgrades on
> > Pierce and Iverson, who I lump in the next group along with guys like
> > Ray Allen, Michael Finley, Carmello Anthony, Baron Davis, Steve Francis,
> > Steve Nash, Mike Bibby, Elton Brand, Pau Gasol, Kenyon Martin, and a few
> > others. I'm not so sure I'm rating the point guards high enough. Steve
> > Nash probably is the most valuable Maverick. Bibby is terribly
> > underrated (not underpaid).
> >
> >
> >
> > Anyway, Pierce is out of the elite group until he returns to 2001-02
> > form. In that top 11, by the way, there's a clear cutoff in my mind.
> > Shaq, Duncan, Kobe, Garnett, T-Mac and Kidd are the truly elite players,
> > with LeBron and Yao well on their way to joining that list. Nowitzki,
> > Jermaine O'Neal and Peja are a notch below because they don't make
> > everyone better -- the others do.
> >
> >
> >
> > As for the original point about Iverson, no thanks, and it has nothing
> > to do with his tattoos. He doesn't practice (only Bill Russell ever
> > earned that right), is completely uncoachable, plays a style that will
> > never result in a championship and has seen his best years. No way. Not
> > at the price it would cost to get him (think Pierce).
> >
> >
> >
> > Speaking of Pierce, it was nice to see him play better Saturday night.
> > If he can continue to do that, the Celts are in good shape for the
> > playoffs and the future. If those games continue to be the exception
> > rather than the rule, they're in trouble. By the way, the difference
> > between the lottery pick that comes with missing the playoffs and the
> > pick as the last playoff team is shrinking. Right now it would be three
> > spots 11-14. With that difference, it's better to make the playoffs. But
> > a pick as high as seven still is within reach. In my opinion, the
> > worst-case scenario is what we see now - just missing the playoffs, but
> > playing well enough to miss out on a top-eight pick. I want them either
> > to make the playoffs, or go in the tank and get that high pick. One or
> > the other. No in between.
> >
> >
> >
> > Mark