Allen Iverson revolutionized the NBA more than any other player

"I think you hear what I'm saying, but are afraid to admit defeat."Watch yourself Pro, being condescending at the end of a debate could lose you conduct points. "We agree that no player Iverson's height has ever scored even close to how many points he has"Yes, but thats not revolutionary...."how bad his attitude was"Also not revolutionary"how he introduced cornrows"The one thing he actually did do" and shooting sleeves"He busted his elbow and had to wear a shooting sleeve he didnt wear it because he was trying to look like a baller or whatever. "Regarding his magical 2000-2001 season, trust me, if you were old enough to be following in 2000-2001, you would clearly know how good AI was"Oh trust me I wish I were old enough to watch Iverson win only one game in the NBA finals against the lakers...."You make their coach, Larry Brown, sound like he was the one dropping 30 a game. Further, you point out how he had Dikembe, who was a great defensive player, and Aaron Mckie. Dikembe completely got owned by Shaq in the finals, like it wasnt even close, so how is AI to blame for his center?"First off Larry Brown is arguably the best coach the NBA has ever known and was well known for turning losers into winners, "Though he has received criticism for never staying in any one place for very long, Brown is hailed as one of basketball's greatest teachers, and is well known for turning losers into winners."http://en.wikipedia.org...(basketball)Secondly, you claimed that Iverson got to the finals on his own without the help of anyone else, I pointed out how Iverson had the greatest coach of his era leading the team, one of the most powerful centers at defense, and a host of other players who have their qualities. In the finals you yourself said that Mutombo was outmatched and that nobody was of any help, so how can you claim that Iverson led his team to the finals all by himself when in the games that Iverson WAS the only good player on his team he CONSISTENTLY LOST EVERY GAME? Iverson needed his team to get to the finals, when in the finals and the team failed him, All the talent Iverson had couldnt help him win more than 1 game..... And that shows how Iverson was no revolutionary player. Just like most players, Iverson couldnt carry the team on his own (as evident by the a** whipping he received in the finals) so your claim that he led his team to the finals on his own is completely unfounded because when Iverson truly was carrying his team, they lost badly. "So even though he may not have gotten that ring, taking his team to the league's second best record, and to the finals is enough in my books"Then raise the standards of your books because almost winning the finals doesnt make somebody revolutionary, let alone the most revolutionary of anybody else. "You define revolutionary as coming up with something completely "new", so in your opinion Bob Kurland, or the first player to dunk is more revolutionary than AI was."Well since thats literally the definition of revolutionary, then yeah Kurland was more revolutionary than Iverson because Kurland actually changed the NBA....Revolutionary = Constituting or bringing about a major or fundamental changehttp://www.merriam-webster.com..."I think though you would agree with the entire statement I wrote in round one: "I believe Allen Iverson has changed the game, dynamics, and THE WAY PEOPLE VIEW BASKETBALL more than any other player in the history of the Game. He brought A PERSONALITY (not skill) to the game THAT REACHED OUT TO MORE PEOPLE THAN ANYBODY BEFORE HIM."1) Iverson didnt change anything2) He didnt invent any moves or styles of play3) He didnt change how people viewed basketball4) You just said he didnt bring skill to the game5) This is all just your opinion not based on any sources or facts. You claimed that Iverson reached out to more people then anybody before him, but you seem to forget that Michael Jordan did that way more than Iverson did and well before Iverson even rose to fame"he was the FIRST player to have all those traits in one figure"Thats what Im arguing!!!! He didnt change anything he was just a combination of things that already existed! Thats not revolutionary in any sense of the word, revolutionary is when something is changed on the fundamental level, Iverson was simply new, and new =/= revolutionary. ========================================================================================================================================================Let me summarize my points here. I am arguing why Iverson wasnt revolutionary, but if you (the voters) do think he was revolutionary then consider the resolution "Allen Iverson revolutionized the NBA more than any other player"So even a fan of Allen Iverson would have to admit that other players revolutionized (aka actually changed how the game was played) more than Allen Iverson. Ill repost a list of players who (actually) changed the gameDr James Naismith (He invented the game so I think he gets more credit for revolutionizing the game than anyone else)Shaq (Hes the reason why the NBA has reinforced its basketball hoops, because he broke so many)Michael Jordan (For obvious reasons)Wilt Chamberlin (One of the first big centers in the NBA, he was the reason the NBA implemented the 3 second rule and widened free point shooting lanes)Chris Ford (Shot the first 3 pointer in NBA history)Bob Kurland (First player to Dunk)Julius Erving (Stylized the modern Dunk)Drazen Petrovic (First eastern European to enter the NBA which opened the doors for half a continent to chase their NBA aspirations)Magic Johnson (the first large point guard in the game, if you include him and Larry Bird then you have the first great rivalry in basketball)Iverson was a character and mostly a combination of a few traits that made him notable, ill give him that. But he did not change the game more than anybody else like you claim because he didnt really even change the game. Final Points:1) Iverson wasnt the shortest player2) Iverson wasnt the best player3) Iverson didnt have the worst attitude4) Iverson wasnt the only player to encounter racism5) Iverson didnt discover racism or expose it to the public6) Iverson didnt actually change any of the rules of the game7) Iverson didnt actually change how other players played the game8) Iverson is a glorified hipster if anything