In another thread I read some interesting comments about the relative value of the ICC in comparison with the AYB. This is not surprising since these two commentaries would probably appeal to the same market, and both are expensive. Some of us can't afford either, and fewer would probably buy both. It was pointed out that the AYB is cited by many other resources, and many of the older ICC volumes are available in free pdf. True.
I thought I would express my thoughts about it, but since the original thread was about another topic, it seemed best to do so in a new thread.
Of course, it is a personal preference, and we all have our own preferences.
But I would much, much prefer the ICC over the AYB. The ICC is not nearly so dated as it was just a decade or so ago. Newer volumes by noted scholars I. Howard Marshall, C. E. B. Cranfield, W. D. Davies, and numerous others indicate that the ICC will maintain its place as one of the premiere commentaries. There is a 6 volume upgrade coming out in Logos very soon. The newer volumes are not available in free pdf. And many those older volumes are still very good.
And the ICC is cited by many other resources as well - I suspect even more than AYB. What volumes in the AYB have anything like the broad critical acclaim as Cranfield's Romans?
Both AYB are left of center theologically (well, left of me, but who isn't?), and both are widely respected for scholarly excellence. But, for me, I would chose ICC every time.
I know many folks would disagree, but those are my thoughts about it.