Today, John Canzano, a sports writer for the Oregonian wrote an article suggesting that the Blazers should trade for Allen Iverson. I think this is, to say the least, a terrible idea. So, I wrote to Canzano about it. Below is the email I sent him. I will post any response I get here.
Good morning John. I'm a long-time Blazer fan and NBA junkie. I read and listen to you fairly regularly, but today you got my attention a little bit more than usual.
Maybe, that was the only intent. Maybe, you noticed how much run stories on possible AI trades get on line and thought you would toss it out there to get people talking and, of course, talking about your article. I couldn't fault you for that, but in case you actually meant what you said, let me throw a few things at you in response.
I'm sure you get a lot of emails, but if you can find the time to respond, I would appreciate it.
First, Philly would not do this deal. John Hollinger on ESPN threw out 5 scenarios that work better for Philly than this one and I bet there would be more. I know you didn't name an exact trade, but if Zach is the centerpiece, it ain't happening unless you add Roy and Aldridge, which the Blazers would and should never do.
Second, here are only some of the reasons the Blazers should absolutely not trade for Iverson.
1. A starting 5 of Iverson, Webster (or Roy), Outlaw (or, gasp, Miles), Magloire and Przybilla is not a playoff team in the West. And even if by some miracle, and it would take a miracle, they all played together and reached past their potential and made the playoffs, they would be bounced quickly. AI has maybe 2 more years at his all-star level and this group could not be in the top 8, much less the top 4 in the West by the end of next year. So why give away or otherwise stop development of the new guys for a team that is still lottery bound?
2. AI is a selfish cancer. He fights with coaches, teammates and the media and stunts the growth and game of his fellow players. He is a scoring machine and no one loves to compete as much as he does and I love him for that, but his assist numbers are an illusion to anyone thinking he is anything but selfish. Every player who was supposed to be the "other" player to be teamed with AI has played his worst basketball with Iverson. Why would you want to bring that sort of destructive force onto a team with this many young impressionable players? How do Martel and Roy and Aldridge learn the importance of practice when their leader believes he doesn't need to?
3. He would run Nate out of town. With Roy a close second, Nate is the most important Blazer right now. The difference in how his teams play compared to Portland's recent coaches has been amazing. Nate is the key to Portland's success. We need to give him players he can work with. Iverson wouldn't put up with Nate's discipline and then Nate would no longer have credibility and then he would be gone.
4. Portland doesn't want another thug and Iverson is a thug. It's not about the police record, it's about the hyper selfish, overly macho attitude that we suffered through with Sheed and Bonzi and Rider and now Miles. The money in Portland, the money that buys the tickets, would not embrace Iverson. Maybe that's wrong or racist or ignorant, or whatever, but it is true. So the end result of bringing in Iverson would be even further alienation of the fans.
5. Portland's young guys won't develop. How do Roy and Webster and Jack or even Aldridge develop when Iverson takes a 3rd of the team's shots every night and totally dominates the ball? That guy does not make his teammates better. Even his assists are, as I mentioned, an illusion. He gets assists because he draws so much attention some other guys get open looks. That's all great, but you need more than just a couple open looks to get into the flow of a game. That's why Chris Paul's assists are 10 time more important than Iverson's because Paul is getting guys the ball where they need it and like it and Iverson is just tossing the ball to whoever is open out of his triple team. There is a huge difference. Name one player who has really developed and flourished playing with Iverson. Just one.
Look, the real disaster of the "jail blazer" era was that we had too many guys whose attitudes were bigger than their games who in turn corrupted every good young player that came after them. Now we have a bunch of good young talent and really only one guy (Miles) there to corrupt and I suspect he has ever lessening credibility with the younger players. Bringing in Iverson would not only not help Portland become a contender, but it would likely ruin the good young talent it has just in time to watch AI limp along for 60 games a year at the end of his career.
I like the idea of taking a risk and brining in a veteran, but not one with Iverson's baggage. Some baggage is ok, it comes with today's NBA, but not that much. I would have been down with getting someone like Pierce who would shoot a lot (but also help win now) but seems to be a good teammate. Or, let's try to get involved in the talks to get KG even if it costs us some of our new young talent. I agree that the next trade is huge, but the next trade needs to be the one that finally kicks Miles out the door. If that also lands us some talent that will actually provide some positives for the newbies, great. If not, let's see what we've got.
Thanks for listening.
Good morning John. I'm a long-time Blazer fan and NBA junkie. I read and listen to you fairly regularly, but today you got my attention a little bit more than usual.
Maybe, that was the only intent. Maybe, you noticed how much run stories on possible AI trades get on line and thought you would toss it out there to get people talking and, of course, talking about your article. I couldn't fault you for that, but in case you actually meant what you said, let me throw a few things at you in response.
I'm sure you get a lot of emails, but if you can find the time to respond, I would appreciate it.
First, Philly would not do this deal. John Hollinger on ESPN threw out 5 scenarios that work better for Philly than this one and I bet there would be more. I know you didn't name an exact trade, but if Zach is the centerpiece, it ain't happening unless you add Roy and Aldridge, which the Blazers would and should never do.
Second, here are only some of the reasons the Blazers should absolutely not trade for Iverson.
1. A starting 5 of Iverson, Webster (or Roy), Outlaw (or, gasp, Miles), Magloire and Przybilla is not a playoff team in the West. And even if by some miracle, and it would take a miracle, they all played together and reached past their potential and made the playoffs, they would be bounced quickly. AI has maybe 2 more years at his all-star level and this group could not be in the top 8, much less the top 4 in the West by the end of next year. So why give away or otherwise stop development of the new guys for a team that is still lottery bound?
2. AI is a selfish cancer. He fights with coaches, teammates and the media and stunts the growth and game of his fellow players. He is a scoring machine and no one loves to compete as much as he does and I love him for that, but his assist numbers are an illusion to anyone thinking he is anything but selfish. Every player who was supposed to be the "other" player to be teamed with AI has played his worst basketball with Iverson. Why would you want to bring that sort of destructive force onto a team with this many young impressionable players? How do Martel and Roy and Aldridge learn the importance of practice when their leader believes he doesn't need to?
3. He would run Nate out of town. With Roy a close second, Nate is the most important Blazer right now. The difference in how his teams play compared to Portland's recent coaches has been amazing. Nate is the key to Portland's success. We need to give him players he can work with. Iverson wouldn't put up with Nate's discipline and then Nate would no longer have credibility and then he would be gone.
4. Portland doesn't want another thug and Iverson is a thug. It's not about the police record, it's about the hyper selfish, overly macho attitude that we suffered through with Sheed and Bonzi and Rider and now Miles. The money in Portland, the money that buys the tickets, would not embrace Iverson. Maybe that's wrong or racist or ignorant, or whatever, but it is true. So the end result of bringing in Iverson would be even further alienation of the fans.
5. Portland's young guys won't develop. How do Roy and Webster and Jack or even Aldridge develop when Iverson takes a 3rd of the team's shots every night and totally dominates the ball? That guy does not make his teammates better. Even his assists are, as I mentioned, an illusion. He gets assists because he draws so much attention some other guys get open looks. That's all great, but you need more than just a couple open looks to get into the flow of a game. That's why Chris Paul's assists are 10 time more important than Iverson's because Paul is getting guys the ball where they need it and like it and Iverson is just tossing the ball to whoever is open out of his triple team. There is a huge difference. Name one player who has really developed and flourished playing with Iverson. Just one.
Look, the real disaster of the "jail blazer" era was that we had too many guys whose attitudes were bigger than their games who in turn corrupted every good young player that came after them. Now we have a bunch of good young talent and really only one guy (Miles) there to corrupt and I suspect he has ever lessening credibility with the younger players. Bringing in Iverson would not only not help Portland become a contender, but it would likely ruin the good young talent it has just in time to watch AI limp along for 60 games a year at the end of his career.
I like the idea of taking a risk and brining in a veteran, but not one with Iverson's baggage. Some baggage is ok, it comes with today's NBA, but not that much. I would have been down with getting someone like Pierce who would shoot a lot (but also help win now) but seems to be a good teammate. Or, let's try to get involved in the talks to get KG even if it costs us some of our new young talent. I agree that the next trade is huge, but the next trade needs to be the one that finally kicks Miles out the door. If that also lands us some talent that will actually provide some positives for the newbies, great. If not, let's see what we've got.
Thanks for listening.
Comments