As much as Tmac frustrated me on the Rockets, if you transplant Tmac onto AI's Finals Philly team in his prime he'd be even better. AI had a lot of solid defensive players who were willing to let him shoot (Eric Snow, Deke, Tyrone Hill). Tmac wasted his prime with worthless players like Pat Garrity because most of their cap space was filled by Ghill. Had Grant Hill not fallen apart, that combination would've won at least 1 title and this wouldn't have even been a debate.
what's up with all these Tmac vs players who accomplished more than Tmac threads? I told them, if they really want, they can use photoshop and cut and paste Tmac's face onto Kobe or AI or Jordan or LeBron's picture with the MVP trophy. Then they can cut and paste Tmac's face onto Bill Russell's body so have can 13 championships. They can cut and paste Tmac's face on Emmit Smith's body so Tmac can win Dancing with the Stars too. This will help with the Tmac fans inferiority complex.
Derrick Rose is very young and he's already a better leader than McGrady ever was. Also, unlike the 2002-2003 Tracy McGrady I expect him to keep improving over the next several years. So he hasn't yet hit his prime.
beats me Maybe Rose is a better leader. If I could have any of those players in their prime it would be McGrady.
As a fan of the Rockets living in Philly, I feel like I can bring a fairly informed perspective to this topic, though I'll admit that my own biases are probably going to come into play. I'll start by reminding everyone that the question is simply which player you'd rather have on your team in their respective primes. In other words, who was the more effective basketball player in his prime, not who accomplished more in that span (though I agree the two are related, I don't think it's as direct as some posters might have you believe). We'll start by defining what was each player's prime. For AI, I'll say 1998-99 to 2005-06 (ages 23 to 30). For McGrady we'll go with 2000-01 to 2007-08 (ages 21 to 28). It's an 8-year period for both players. For Iverson it spans the first year he became a starting shooting guard (Eric Snow became the starting PG that year) to his last full year as a 76er. For T-Mac it's his first year in Orlando, to his last healthy year as a Rocket. I think this is a fair for both players. We'll start with the statistical matchup: Code: <table border="1"> <tr>[b]Allen Iverson, 1998-99 to 2005-06[/b]</tr> <tr><td>G</td><td>MIN</td><td>ORB</td><td>DRB</td><td>TRB</td><td>AST</td><td>STL</td><td>BLK</td><td>TOV</td><td>PF</td><td>PTS</td><td>FGM</td><td>FGA</td><td>3PM</td><td>3PA</td><td>FTM</td><td>FTA</td><td>FG%</td><td>3P%</td><td>FT%</td></tr> <tr><td>66</td><td>42.3</td><td>0.81</td><td>3.17</td><td>3.99</td><td>5.92</td><td>2.40</td><td>.16</td><td>3.72</td><td>1.91</td><td>29.6</td><td>10.3</td><td>24.7</td><td>1.22</td><td>3.99</td><td>7.79</td><td>9.89</td><td>.417</td><td>.305</td><td>.787</td></tr> </table> Code: <table border="1"> <tr>[b]Tracy McGrady, 2000-01 to 2007-08[/b]</tr> <tr><td>G</td><td>MIN</td><td>ORB</td><td>DRB</td><td>TRB</td><td>AST</td><td>STL</td><td>BLK</td><td>TOV</td><td>PF</td><td>PTS</td><td>FGM</td><td>FGA</td><td>3PM</td><td>3PA</td><td>FTM</td><td>FTA</td><td>FG%</td><td>3P%</td><td>FT%</td></tr> <tr><td>70</td><td>38.7</td><td>1.39</td><td>5.03</td><td>6.42</td><td>5.48</td><td>1.45</td><td>0.81</td><td>2.61</td><td>1.91</td><td>26.0</td><td>9.40</td><td>21.8</td><td>1.68</td><td>4.77</td><td>5.55</td><td>7.38</td><td>.431</td><td>.353</td><td>.753</td></tr> </table> Statistically, they're fairly close. Iverson possessed a higher scoring average, as he took more shots, but their efficiency is more or less the same. AI made up for his lower shooting percentages across the board by getting to the FT line at a Jordan-esque rate. T-Mac's size gave him a rebounding edge, while Iverson, who often ran the point for Philly (especially after Eric Snow left) racked up slightly more assists. One of the major differences is turnovers, which makes you look into their respective playing styles. Iverson was a ball stopper. There would be long stretches of possessions for the Sixers when it would be AI dribbling, dribbling, dribbling, then shooting or driving to the basket. That said, he was brilliant at it. Terrific crossover, perhaps the quickest player to ever play the game, and fearless going to the basket. He could find the open man when help came, but he never had a great (or really even a good) sense of how to run an offense. Still, in the Larry Brown years the team and the offense were built around him, so it worked to an extent. But I think if one player is going to have the ball for 80-90% of the possession, you'd prefer it to be a better decision maker and a pass-first guy like Steve Nash. T-Mac had far greater court vision, a better J, was less selfish, and could post up. He gets a lot of flack here for not going to the rim more, which was justified to an extent, but he still had a very FT rate for most of his time here and in Orlando. It should be noted that because Iverson generally never played with a true post presence, he generally had a less obstructed path to the basket. Defensively, AI could attack the passing lanes, but generally lacked the size and focus to be much of a presence outside of collecting steals. T-Mac had all the tools to be a world-class defender, and was one at times. Unlike Iverson, who needed to play with big PGs who could guard the 2, Tracy could guard multiple positions effectively. Energy was always an issue, but I personally don't think he was any worse than Kobe Bryant defensively (11-times All-Defense? REALLY?), who nevertheless gets a pass because "he expends his effort on the offensive side of the ball," as if other great players don't. I suppose I'd give T-Mac an edge over Iverson on D because he was very good on that side of the ball at times, and though he usually didn't give his best, when he was healthy he wasn't a liability. At times, AI was simply to small to guard his man. Both guys admitted that they were poor practice players. In terms of their mentality and approach to the game, it's sort of tough to judge. AI was very, very selfish. A ballhog and a gunner. Worse than Kobe. But he was a tough little b*stard who always played hard and always wanted to win. McGrady was worlds more talented, and had the perfect size for his style of play, and was generally a better teammate and more coachable. But you always questioned his effort. When it comes down to it, I'm really going back and forth on this one. If you're building a team around a player, generally you want it to be a guy with the physical tools and the basketball IQ of a player like T-Mac. You can just do so much more with him. But at the same time, you didn't know what you were going to get from him. You always knew that AI would give you his all, sacrifice his body and lay it all out there... But that's assuming you gave him his way and let him dominate the ball. I guess I'll take T-Mac. I have more respect for Iverson and the way he plays the game, but I simply cannot stand to watch the type of iso-ball that you need to run to make him happy. McGrady, conceptually, understood what you needed to do to win, but I think he was simply unwilling to make the sacrifices necessary to get there. But at least he bought into the team concept, and in my opinions was a more entertaining player to watch.
AI led his team to the finals and gave the Shaq/Kobe lakers their only playoff loss that year. He was a ballhog but he always gave it his all and then some. never took plays off.
