Iverson will always be the most maverick in the league, with a hip-hop culture that is different from everyone else, a flamboyant personality on the court, and a breakthrough that no one can defend.
For many post-80s and post-90s, Iverson is his first understanding of basketball. And his self-confidence and publicity are also deeply imprinted in the minds of many people.
It's hard to imagine that a small player without any height advantage, or even a body advantage, could get four scoring kings in an era when the interior is king. In fact, Iverson's physical condition, just looking at static talent, in the small-ball era to get the scoring champion is not so easy.
This is also why there is Kobe's sentence: People today have no idea how strong Iverson was back then.
Some people say that Iverson is actually not very strong, and most fans are impression streams. Underpinning this view is Iverson's shooting percentage and true shooting percentage. In that year, Iverson relied on a large number of shots to get good basic data. Combined with modern standard true hit percentage metrics, Iverson is not qualified at all.
Why? Quite simply, because Iverson's numbers are much worse than most of the mainstream scorers today. On average, Iverson's true shooting percentage level is 8-10 percentage points lower than that of players like Curry, Harden, and Durant. So there are many people who say that this is actually an inefficient scorer, not worthy of so many people's praise.
In fact, everyone has forgotten how unfriendly it was to players like Iverson in that era. He entered the league in '96, so Iverson's active time should be in the 96-06 period. And this period, for outside offensive players who have no physical advantage, especially small scorers who are mainly breakthroughs, there is an extreme lack of justice. For most of this phase, joint defense has limited the emergence of breakthroughs. And this stage of handcheck is still retained, in such a rule environment, you use efficiency to ask Iverson, is not very appropriate.
If you feel that the external environment is the same for everyone and cannot be directed at individuals, then we can say a few more points. For example, magic ball theory was not yet prevalent at that time, which meant that space was not the first choice for most teams. There is no need for space because the interior players are the main scorers. That means Iverson needs to collide with the big guys on the inside as much as possible, or he won't have a chance to score. Singles is the main theme. Inefficient singles, lower rounds, are more uncomfortable options. At that time, in addition to the muscle collision that would surprise the fans, what the league could promote was the so-called one-person-one-city culture. As for the look and feel of the game, under the influence of these conditions, it is basically unlikely to be activated.
That's what the times demanded, and in this context, the answer that Iverson handed over was definitely top-notch in that era. You can't measure the players of that year in terms of the current spatial scope and the results of the rules, which is unrealistic and unreasonable. At that time, all the number two players were playing in the same way. Use your own singles, with an unlimited number of shots, to digest some of the ball that the inside players can't digest. As for efficiency? A shooter who exists at a point in space? Sorry, coaches don't need to think about this stuff.
So when we evaluate Iverson, we need to consider another factor, what kind of level he is in the same stage of the player's production and quality, and the actual influence on the field. It is no exaggeration to say that in these years, Iverson is basically in the first echelon. Iverson has maintained this level since entering the league. Since 1999, Iverson has maintained a 30% or more round share. No matter what team, it needs him to prioritize digestion.
Of course, you can also take a closer look. Iverson had a few seasons where the true level was not so ideal. For example, in season 00, Iverson's personal true shooting rate is actually much lower than other stars in the same level, and even lower than the league average! Personally, I think this also has room for consideration, because Iverson did not fit well with the atmosphere in the team during this period. In other words, the configuration of the team, as well as the chemistry on the field, indirectly led to this result.
So why is the team still willing to give Iverson a chance? Could it be that there are no other players on the team to use? In fact, it is not, there is a problem involved, most teams at that time if there is a scorer, the policy of building the team is not to rely on the integrity of the team, but the individual output of the arrow players. At that time, the number of rounds was not high, and the offensive time after getting the rebound was not limited to such a short time now. So players can handle the ball more calmly and are not easily injured. The overall idea of the team is to use other players to give the arrow players a bottom, and the arrow players only need to ensure a medium level of efficiency output, with a ridiculously high variety of shot data, you can get a good result. One might say, aren't there other teams that break this rule with better, more perfect teams? Seriously, in that ethos, there really isn't. That's how everyone plays, so everyone thinks it's a more correct way of thinking. It was only after Xiao Hua changed a series of rules in order to reform and improve ratings that there was now a series of changes.
Seeing this, you should understand that Iverson is still the most maverick in everyone's mind. If it were a different era, I believe Iverson would have had better results. Because from every angle, Iverson is almost perfectly suited to modern basketball tactics. The rotation speed is fast, good at playing offensive and defensive conversions, able to tear space, able to maintain stability under the impact of the inside line, and can ensure a certain scoring efficiency. If you put Iverson in a more open offensive environment, the results will definitely be the best in history. So in a way, Iverson may have been born in the wrong era. Because he must have better results in this era, rather than having defects of one kind or another like his original career.
Iverson is definitely a big mark in NBA history, and he means that poor black people who are not recognized, black players from the streets, can also gain a foothold here. His abilities are the foundation of his success, and the universal significance of his success is more than other achievements in his career!