In these comments, do not look for the usual huge amount of detail and proof that you see in the ordinary releases here at Nuggets 1. Some of this is more like everyday conversation than like top quality sports writing. On the other hand, some of the comments do include some detailed reasoning and proof that I pride myself on in the primary reports I release.
______________________________________
EARLY MAY 2008 FORUM COMMENTARY ON THE NUGGETS, ESPECIALLY ABOUT THEIR MISTAKES
Maybe if he said "Play better you worthless scubs" they would listen.
______________________________________
I don't know what's worse anymore, what GK coaches in the first place, or the fact that he doesn't consistently make sure that his coaching is implemented for the entire season.
The Nuggets must have just been one of the worst spread the court teams in the playoffs in history. That started I think with a lack of respect for how important the 3-point shot is in modern basketball. In the playoffs the paint becomes like Fort Knox; it is better defended than in the regular season. So between drives and perimeter shots you need both, not just one or the other.
I don't know whether Karl thinks the Nuggets are hopeless in 3-point shooting or whether he doesn't agree that 3-point shooting is important. About the only time he ever says anything about the 3-point shot is when he is discussing how a player or players beat the Nuggets with their 3-point shot.
_________________________________________
Outstanding lineup if and only if AI takes running the point seriously, if JR is given real minutes consistently, if Nene is available for the season for a change, and if GK understands what you are talking about.
These are too many ifs for me to be very hopeful.
___________________________________________
Well alright then, see, there is stuff we agree on.
And just so you know, I'm not saying that I know as a 100% certainty that the Nuggets would have won a playoff series if Iverson had been designated PG. We wouldn't know for sure unless it was done. I am confident that the odds were at least 65% that it would have worked, and probably around 75-80%.
I did know that if the Nuggets did not try it, they would be slammed in the playoffs if they made the playoffs. So they needed to try it if they didn't want to be chumps.
But the Nuggets obtained Iverson after many years of him straying from his historical root position, and to what extent he could return to his roots is of course a question. The Nuggets did NOT need him to play just like CP3. They just needed him to play more like CP3 and less like Iverson not fully dedicated to either backcourt position, and trying to play both positions at once in many games.
It was very, very interesting and important that Iverson himself in his news conference the other day invited the Nuggets to think about solving the Nuggets offensive inconsistency by having himself be less responsible for scoring and more responsible for keeping the ball moving. Anyone who implies Iverson is a maniac who cares only about his own shooting was proved wrong once again during that news conference.
_______________________________________________
The poster says AI is not a PG and makes for a horrible PG yet points out numerous things that AI does or that AI is that good point guards do or are and/or that bad 2-guards do or are.
AI is a combo guard and always has been. To say he is a horrible PG is going way to far, unless you have proof that Larry Brown destroyed his ability to run the point effectively. No one has proof of that, because a player of AI's calibur can not have his abilities to play a position destroyed completely by coaching errors. Negatively affected? Maybe. Destroyed? No.
(Sorry for me being stuck on this subject, but this particular poster drives me up the wall.)
_______________________________________________
He's been shifted back and forth between the two guard positions since he started playing basketball and there are at least 3 ways you could instruct him to play:
(A) Play 2-guard only; make only the obvious passes and get only the easiest assists; score at will.
(B) Play any way you want, or any way you think is most appropriate. In practice, AI has generally been designated at SG under this mode. In this situation, Iverson plays both positions during games, varying the breakdown between the two from game to game for reasons that are not definitely known. There are many problems with this, including the offense being inconsistent and easy to shut down by a good defense.
(C) Play 1-guard (PG) only; work to make sure the passing game stays alve and try to maximize assists; limit scoring attempts to mostly uncontested shots.
Larry Brown changed Iverson's career by choosing A. Iverson played as a combo guard assigned usually to PG in all high school years all college years, and in his rookie NBA year, and Brown's idea could not and did not ever fully come into reality. Iverson in effect played according to (B) in the Brown years. The 76'ers never truly succeeded with him playing in that mode, although they once got to the NBA finals in the year when AI was at his all-time peak and playing at an insane level.
George Karl chose (B) because he chose to not change anything whatsoever from how AI played in Philly to how he would play in Denver. The results have been, as you would expect, about the same as what transpired in Philly. The results have been dismal and disappointing to the biggest Nuggets fans.
A possible argument that can be made is that Iverson's career was in fact damaged by Brown to the point where it is too late to choose either (A) or (C). If this is correct, then the Iverson trade was at least as bad for the Nuggets as the Shaquille O'Neal trade was for the Suns.
The upshot is simple: if the Nuggets are dumb enough to continue with (B), then they will never succeed, and it would be better to trade AI. Even more to the point, they never should have traded for AI if their intention was to not change a single thing about his role.
______________________________________________
This article to me is weird and not very realistic.
______________________________________________
Here is a crucial comment made by ANOTHER forum participant:
Fact: Karl wanted AI to be a scorer and to be aggressive at it. He was, its not what we needed. Karl was wrong. He's also our primary ball handler with the totally ineffective AC out there and we have to be a one on one team with no system.
There's no evidence that Karl has wanted AI to look to set up people in our offense, and if he has he surely hasn't made it any easier for him. There's no CALLED movement in our "system", no screens,etc.
Im not gonna lie and say AI can become a jason Kidd type point guard, but he has shown at times through his career that he can play pg in a system when asked, and he certainly has the skills to be a good Chris Paul/Baron Davis styled pg where he's looking to run the offense much of the time and pick his spots, and asked to just take over when he's feeling it or its needed. Right about now he's score, score, score and pass when its obvious or to bail himself out
There's a lot of things about AIs game i don't like, but he's unbearable if he's in an unstructured system. And I think he absolutely has to be the pg on a team, as he creates all types of mismatches defensively if we stick another pg out there unless its a Kirk Hinrich type
I don't mind getting rid of AI, but i don't want to blame everything on him because he was used incorrectly by his coach.
My response to this extremely valuable commentary was:
Absolutely 100% correct, on point, and imo a key part of reason #1 why the Nuggets underachieved this year.
_____________________________________________
And another all time memorable and totally accurate commentary made by that same guy from the one just previous:
Its not so much as defending him as I am saying he's never gotten a fair shot at it. His team had to have his offense in Philly and he couldn't play a deferring pg. Here Karl automatically wanted the offensive AI. He has the skills to be a pg, but he's not smart enough or unselfish enough to do it without a system and we don't have one and he's the 2 guard here anyhow.
And he does do a pretty decent job of getting the ball to our shooters when they're wide open for 3s. I don't think that's some huge compliment or anything, thats as easy a pass as you can make and he still doesn't make it everytime its available, but he makes it a decent enough clip.
My response to thes outstanding commentary was:
At least 100% correct, maybe more.
___________________________________________
Lol at this hoopsworld writer who is about the last basketball fan/writer left who hasn't criticized GK and who fails to understand that GK and AI run the team now and Melo gets whatever they and Anthony Carter decide he will get in terms of offensive opportunities, which is not a whole lot compared to what he used to get and is less than what he should get.
Since point guards bring the ball up the court and since coaches get to tell their point guards what if any plays they want run, forwards are going to be subject to and limited by what the point guards and what the coaches decide.
The stats clearly show that this was C Anthony's best year ever, but he was limited to some extent by the decisions of Iverson, Carter, and Karl.
