Why isn't Jason Kidd as highly regarded as Steve Nash?

[Go Getter]

J. Kidd is obviously better than Steve Nash in all facets of the game besides shooting and ball handling [which is close].

Kidd led a marginally good team to the NBA Finals twice. He is the best rebounding PG in the modern era. In his prime he was one of the most dynamic PG's ever and in recent years he's added a 3pt shot to his game.

He is very unselfish he doesn't need to score points or shoot to impact a game.

But when people mention the best PG's in the NBA his name never comes up.

Why is that?

I compare Nash to Kidd because they both remind me of that old guy at the rec who played overseas or in college and has such a firm grasp of the game that he doesn't need to put much physicality in it....he beats you with his brain before the game happens.

IMO I think Nash is more highly regarded than Kidd because of his 'pretty' offensive game....people are drawn to shooters/scorers.:confusedshrug:

[plowking]

Because Nash is simply better at his peak and all time...

And no, you'll see most people put Jason Kidd ahead of Nash...

[kmartshopper]

IMO I think Nash is more highly regarded than Kidd because of his 'pretty' offensive game....people are drawn to shooters/scorers.:confusedshrug:

that

[CeoTypeDoe619]

J. Kidd is obviously better than Steve Nash in all facets of the game besides shooting and ball handling [which is close].

Kidd led a marginally good team to the NBA Finals twice. He is the best rebounding PG in the modern era. In his prime he was one of the most dynamic PG's ever and in recent years he's added a 3pt shot to his game.

He is very unselfish he doesn't need to score points or shoot to impact a game.

But when people mention the best PG's in the NBA his name never comes up.

Why is that?

I compare Nash to Kidd because they both remind me of that old guy at the rec who played overseas or in college and has such a firm grasp of the game that he doesn't need to put much physicality in it....he beats you with his brain before the game happens.

IMO I think Nash is more highly regarded than Kidd because of his 'pretty' offensive game....people are drawn to shooters/scorers.:confusedshrug:
ppl consider kidd the better player career wise

[plowking]

What does a point guard need to be able to do?

Pass? Nash is better at it.
Shoot? Nash is better at it.
Score? Nash is better at it.
Run an offense? Equal.
Defense? Kidd.

Nash is just a better player. I'd rather have the guy shooting 50% for his career and 40% and 90% from 3pts and FT's on my team over the guy who shoots 38% and has a season some consider great...

[Ancient Legend]

The years that Kidd let the Nets to the Finals, the East had some of the weakest playoff teams ever.

Also, Nash can take over in 4th quarters if need be. Kidd can't, or at least not anymore, and they're only 1 year apart in age.

To me Nash is better at defense (at least he draws some charges), than Kidd is at offense (the dude is a 40% career shooter).

[dough]

I think they're regarded on equal level. And any smart fan will rank them just under Gary Payton.

[GreatHILL]

kidd never won mvps there is no fuccin way that he is better than nash

[kmartshopper]

Nash has the numbers but I'd take peak Kidd over peak Nash for a championship team. Nash plays only half of the game, and he's likely to get exposed at some point in the playoffs.

[dough]

kidd never won mvps there is no fuccin way that he is better than nash
Nash doesnt have finals games under his belt. Watch games and then speak instead of just going by certain achievements or stats.

[GreatHILL]

Nash has the numbers but I'd take peak Kidd over peak Nash for a championship team. Nash plays only half of the game, and he's likely to get exposed at some point in the playoffs.

lets see the playoffs career high stats

steve nash

PPG 23.9
APG 11.3


jason kidd

PPG 20.1
APG 8.2

[GreatHILL]

Nash doesnt have finals games under his belt. Watch games and then speak instead of just going by certain achievements or stats.

watch games? lmao kidd in the finals was a bust

[dough]

watch games? lmao kidd in the finals was a bust
But he made the finals. Nash did not. Both achievements (MVP, making finals as team leader) can be used as argument.

To back up Kidd not being a 'bust' in the Finals (although they lost in 4 against a great Lakers team):

Averaged more points than he did over prior three rounds. Cut down TO's, tripled his blocks, raised steals, stayed on par with ast and reb, raised fg%, hit almost twice as many 3pts.

So there you go. If you need to go by stats, he did not bust in the Finals. If you go by personal performance, he did not either, he played very well. His team was just not ready for the Lakers. Like Nash' Suns werent ready to beat the team they met to advance to the finals year after year.

Nash and Kidd both have very nice individual credentials, did nice things with pretty good teams, and neither does stand out much from the other when you just look back at their careers.

Most of the times it's not important to discuss who's better. Just enjoy their games, their careers and respect what they did. I do not see what's there to gain discussing who's better: they're both about equal and anybody claiming either one is greater just has a personal preference.

[RaceBannana]

I think they're regarded on equal level

This.

[torontofan]

But he made the finals. Nash did not. Both achievements (MVP, making finals as team leader) can be used as argument.

To back up Kidd not being a 'bust' in the Finals (although they lost in 4 against a great Lakers team):

Averaged more points than he did over prior three rounds. Cut down TO's, tripled his blocks, raised steals, stayed on par with ast and reb, raised fg%, hit almost twice as many 3pts.

So there you go. If you need to go by stats, he did not bust in the Finals. If you go by personal performance, he did not either, he played very well. His team was just not ready for the Lakers. Like Nash' Suns werent ready to beat the team they met to advance to the finals year after year.

Nash and Kidd both have very nice individual credentials, did nice things with pretty good teams, and neither does stand out much from the other when you just look back at their careers.

Most of the times it's not important to discuss who's better. Just enjoy their games, their careers and respect what they did. I do not see what's there to gain discussing who's better: they're both about equal and anybody claiming either one is greater just has a personal preference.

To be fair, if that Nets team was in the western conference, Kidd wouldn't even have gotten past the conference finals. Both Nash and Kidd are great players, and personal preference aside it would depend on what system and players they are surrounded by to make a choice on which player would be a better fit.

[Shepseskaf]

Because Nash is simply better at his peak and all time...
Is this a joke? In their primes, Kidd would crap all over Nash. It wouldn't even be close. Nash is better offensively, but Kidd would be far more capable of shutting him down than vice versa.

I thought that Kidd was a legitimate candidate to win the MVP in 2002, while Nash received an illegitimate MVP in 2995, and a sympathy MVP the next year.

[dough]

To be fair, if that Nets team was in the western conference, Kidd wouldn't even have gotten past the conference finals. Both Nash and Kidd are great players, and personal preference aside it would depend on what system and players they are surrounded by to make a choice on which player would be a better fit.
The Nets wouldnt have made it any other year either. It's just that you can use all kinds of factors and they're all useless.

[plowking]

Is this a joke? In their primes, Kidd would crap all over Nash. It wouldn't even be close. Nash is better offensively, but Kidd would be far more capable of shutting him down than vice versa.

I thought that Kidd was a legitimate candidate to win the MVP in 2002, while Nash received an illegitimate MVP in 2995, and a sympathy MVP the next year.


Yeah... a sympathy MVP for an already accomplished player and previous MVP...

Yep, they're all illegitimate for Nash, while Kidd deserved everything... Fact is Nash was a couple of votes away from winning 3 MVP's in a row. There is no way in hell Kidd sustained that level of play during his prime.

Nash>Kidd.

Who the hell in their right mind wants their point guard shooting under 40%?

[phoenix18]

Yeah... a sympathy MVP for an already accomplished player and previous MVP...

Yep, they're all illegitimate for Nash, while Kidd deserved everything... Fact is Nash was a couple of votes away from winning 3 MVP's in a row. There is no way in hell Kidd sustained that level of play during his prime.

Nash>Kidd.

Who the hell in their right mind wants their point guard shooting under 40%?

Come on man.

I honestly expect better from you.

[plowking]

Come on man.

I honestly expect better from you.

Sorry faja.

[PistonsFan#21]

What does a point guard need to be able to do?

Pass? Nash is better at it.
Shoot? Nash is better at it.
Score? Nash is better at it.
Run an offense? Equal.
Defense? Kidd.

Nash is just a better player. I'd rather have the guy shooting 50% for his career and 40% and 90% from 3pts and FT's on my team over the guy who shoots 38% and has a season some consider great...

LMAO! i like how you left out rebounding out of the equation. And Kidd is a better passer...more assists per game for his career and a better assist to turnover ratio.

So it would go like this:
Pass: Kidd
Defense: Kidd
Rebound: Kidd
Run offense: equal
Shoot: Nash
Score: Nash

[plowking]

LMAO! i like how you left out rebounding out of the equation. And Kidd is a better passer...more assists per game for his career and a better assist to turnover ratio.

So it would go like this:
Pass: Kidd
Defense: Kidd
Rebound: Kidd
Run offense: equal
Shoot: Nash
Score: Nash

Their assist to turnover ratio is identical pretty much, and Nash's peak passing seasons were better than Kidd's. Of course Kidd is going to have a higher career apg average, he was given a team to run from his very first year. Nash only got that in Phoenix, and he clearly showed he's a better passer.
Why would I include rebounding when it comes to PG's? The more rebounds you get as a point guard, the more you're slacking off your man and playing far too deep.
Nash is better at what he supposed to be better at, and that's why he's a better player. Who cares if my PG averages 7rpg, when my big man should be doing it.

[PistonsFan#21]

Their assist to turnover ratio is identical pretty much, and Nash's peak passing seasons were better than Kidd's. Of course Kidd is going to have a higher career apg average, he was given a team to run from his very first year. Nash only got that in Phoenix, and he clearly showed he's a better passer.
Why would I include rebounding when it comes to PG's? The more rebounds you get as a point guard, the more you're slacking off your man and playing far too deep.
Nash is better at what he supposed to be better at, and that's why he's a better player. Who cares if my PG averages 7rpg, when my big man should be doing it.

Then i can use the same logic and say who cares if my point guard can score? Rebounding might not be a task associated to point guards but neither is scoring. And Jason Kidd getting rebounds doesnt mean he slacked off his man. He has 9 all defensive teams after all. A point guard is actually a good thing since it leads to better fastbreak opportunities.

Players also can't be only judged on their peak years. If Kidd has more assists and a better assist to turnover ratio then you can't say Nash is a better passer. You can say they are equal at the most

[greensborohill]

Then i can use the same logic and say who cares if my point guard can score? Rebounding might not be a task associated to point guards but neither is scoring. And Jason Kidd getting rebounds doesnt mean he slacked off his man. He has 9 all defensive teams after all. A point guard is actually a good thing since it leads to better fastbreak opportunities.

Players also can't be only judged on their peak years. If Kidd has more assists and a better assist to turnover ratio then you can't say Nash is a better passer. You can say they are equal at the most

Kidd > Nash

[greensborohill]

Also, in his "peek" years Kidd didn't have Amare & Marion to pass the ball to. He had KVH & a fledgling RJ

[plowking]

Then i can use the same logic and say who cares if my point guard can score? Rebounding might not be a task associated to point guards but neither is scoring. And Jason Kidd getting rebounds doesnt mean he slacked off his man. He has 9 all defensive teams after all. A point guard is actually a good thing since it leads to better fastbreak opportunities.

Players also can't be only judged on their peak years. If Kidd has more assists and a better assist to turnover ratio then you can't say Nash is a better passer. You can say they are equal at the most

Scoring is very much a task associated with a point guard. Look at all the best PG's ever and you'll see they all scored. Payton, Magic, Oscar, Tiny, Monroe, Hardaway, Paul, Isiah... Notice a trend? All of those guys are most likely on everyone's top 10 list. Why? Because they could/can score and pass.

No, I can say Nash is a better passer because it's true. When Nash was given a team to run, he did it better and got more passes. How can you honestly say that Kidd is a better passer because of his career average when Nash was never given an opportunity to do what Kidd did until 6 years ago?

Since you've taken that route, I can say Nash averages more assists per minute over his career, since their totals in minutes aren't equal. Hence, Nash is a better passer.

[plowking]

Also, in his "peek" years Kidd didn't have Amare & Marion to pass the ball to. He had KVH & a fledgling RJ

Keith Van Horn averaged 18ppg in his 5 years at New Jersey, and he also had Kenyon Martin...

[greensborohill]

Keith Van Horn averaged 18ppg in his 5 years at New Jersey, and he also had Kenyon Martin...

What did Amare & Marion average in there years WITH Nash, plus Nash had Joe Johnson for a year. KVH average 19-20 ppg before Kidd got there, then started going down hill.

[PistonsFan#21]

Scoring is very much a task associated with a point guard. Look at all the best PG's ever and you'll see they all scored. Payton, Magic, Oscar, Tiny, Monroe, Hardaway, Paul, Isiah... Notice a trend? All of those guys are most likely on everyone's top 10 list. Why? Because they could/can score and pass.

No, I can say Nash is a better passer because it's true. When Nash was given a team to run, he did it better and got more passes. How can you honestly say that Kidd is a better passer because of his career average when Nash was never given an opportunity to do what Kidd did until 6 years ago?

Since you've taken that route, I can say Nash averages more assists per minute over his career, since their totals in minutes aren't equal. Hence, Nash is a better passer.

If scoring was associated with guards then so was rebounding for guys like Magic Johnson, Oscar Robertson and Gary Payton.

Ok so you wanna compare Richard Jefferson and kenyon Martin to Amare Stoudemire, Marion, Barbosa, etc? Give Jason Kidd that team and see how many points and assists he's gonna get. I know for a fact that Nash wouldnt lead that Nets team to 2 straight finals even if they are in the East.

And you can't predict stats on a linear progression since you can't take into account fatigue, etc. Its like me saying a player will score 80pts at the end of the game because he had 20points at the end of 1 quarter.

[greensborohill]

I think it's funny, when at his prime Kidd's scoring was the equal of Nash 18.7 to 18.8.

The guys are equal offensive players. It's defense where Kidd totally outclasses Nash.

Hence making Kidd the better player historicly.

[Jordandunk23]

to answer the Op's question, it might seem like steve nash is highly regarded AS OF LATE because most people look at Kidd as a player who has lost a step and a shell of his former self (which is true, but he is still a top 10 point guard); while at the same time Nash was getting better and reached his peak late in his career.

As point guards, you could really go either way. But as overall player throughout their careers, Jason Kidd is EASILY the better player. this is the point when people are hypnotized by the offensive game because its the focus on cameras, announcers, etc... defense is never regarded as "important" on a daily basis even though we all know it is. Nash as a defender is mediocre at best and he has and will always be the weak link on the defensive end on the floor. Kidd on the other hand will go down as one of the best defenders at the point guard position.

[Hotlantadude81]

J. Kidd is obviously better than Steve Nash in all facets of the game besides shooting and ball handling [which is close].

Kidd led a marginally good team to the NBA Finals twice. He is the best rebounding PG in the modern era. In his prime he was one of the most dynamic PG's ever and in recent years he's added a 3pt shot to his game.

He is very unselfish he doesn't need to score points or shoot to impact a game.

But when people mention the best PG's in the NBA his name never comes up.

Why is that?

I compare Nash to Kidd because they both remind me of that old guy at the rec who played overseas or in college and has such a firm grasp of the game that he doesn't need to put much physicality in it....he beats you with his brain before the game happens.

IMO I think Nash is more highly regarded than Kidd because of his 'pretty' offensive game....people are drawn to shooters/scorers.:confusedshrug:

Even though Kidd lead the Nets to the finals it was in a weak conference when the league was in fairly bad shape. Those Nets teams wouldn't win 45 games now. Jason Collins was a starting center back on that team. That team wouldn't be talented enough to win 50 games now.

Kidd's name comes up plenty of times. Not now because he is older. That happens with a lot of players.... People are more eager to talk about the players that are still in their prime.

[Hotlantadude81]

Nash doesnt have finals games under his belt. Watch games and then speak instead of just going by certain achievements or stats.

Kidd only has NBA finals under his belt because the league was largely terrible at that time.

[Hotlantadude81]

I think it's funny, when at his prime Kidd's scoring was the equal of Nash 18.7 to 18.8.

The guys are equal offensive players. It's defense where Kidd totally outclasses Nash.

Hence making Kidd the better player historicly.

Nash shoots 51% or so and Kidd shoots 40%.

[PistonsFan#21]

Kidd only has NBA finals under his belt because the league was largely terrible at that time.

Steve Nash wouldnt lead the Nets to the finals twice in a row even in that horrible conference

[greensborohill]

Even though Kidd lead the Nets to the finals it was in a weak conference when the league was in fairly bad shape. Those Nets teams wouldn't win 45 games now. Jason Collins was a starting center back on that team. That team wouldn't be talented enough to win 50 games now.

Kidd's name comes up plenty of times. Not now because he is older. That happens with a lot of players.... People are more eager to talk about the players that are still in their prime.

Give Kidd a team of Joe Johnson, Q Rich, Marion, Amare, w/ Barbosa off the bench, and they make the Finals out of the West

[greensborohill]

Nash shoots 51% or so and Kidd shoots 40%.


We're talking "scoring". . . I know the shooting percentages, but idiots want to base things like passing soley on stats, so I can play that game too.

[greensborohill]

Steve Nash wouldnt lead the Nets to the finals twice in a row even in that horrible conference


TRUTH

[plowking]

Steve Nash wouldnt lead the Nets to the finals twice in a row even in that horrible conference

Cool, hypotheticals are all you have at the moment. Keep going with that.

[plowking]

Give Kidd a team of Joe Johnson, Q Rich, Marion, Amare, w/ Barbosa off the bench, and they make the Finals out of the West

OMG man you are so right!1!1! Let's keep talking about "what ifs" that never happened, it clearly proves who the better player is!

[plowking]

We're talking "scoring". . . I know the shooting percentages, but idiots want to base things like passing soley on stats, so I can play that game too.

Yes... And scoring is based on 4 stats, not one like passing.
It's the not same in terms of a scoring concept averaging 30ppg on 40% as it is 30ppg on 20%...

[PistonsFan#21]

OMG man you are so right!1!1! Let's keep talking about "what ifs" that never happened, it clearly proves who the better player is!

Isnt that what you did when you said Steve Nash would average more assist than Kidd if he played the same amount of minutes?

But if you want to talk about Facts only then
Jason Kidd: 2 finals apperances
Steve Nash: 0 finals apperances

Steve Nash failed to make it to the finals even with his stacked teams

[greensborohill]

OMG man you are so right!1!1! Let's keep talking about "what ifs" that never happened, it clearly proves who the better player is!


Ok then. Let's deal in the real.

Kidd is 2nd all-time in career assists,

Kidd averages 2 spg over his career (Nash has averaged 1 spg just 2 or 3 times in his career),

Kidd has made multiple all-defensive teams & Nash hasn't,

Kidd has led his team to 2 NBA Finals & Nash hasn't led any of his teams pass the confrence finals

Kidd has been a starter in this league since his rookie year & won ROY, Nash started his career as Kidds backup

Nash has two MVP's one of which media types argue of whether he deserves while Kidd was in MVP talks during his Finals runs.

Kidd's best scoring average is 18.7, Nash's best scoring average is 18.8

[plowking]

Isnt that what you did when you said Steve Nash would average more assist than Kidd if he played the same amount of minutes?

But if you want to talk about Facts only then
Jason Kidd: 2 finals apperances
Steve Nash: 0 finals apperances

Steve Nash failed to make it to the finals even with his stacked teams

I never said that he would average more if he played the same amount of minutes, I said he averages more per minute.

If you want to talk about facts, at their peak.
Kidd: 0 MVP's
Nash:2 MVP's

How many of those finals did Kidd win? Exactly.

[greensborohill]

I never said that he would average more if he played the same amount of minutes, I said he averages more per minute.

If you want to talk about facts, at their peak.
Kidd: 0 MVP's
Nash:2 MVP's

How many of those finals did Kidd win? Exactly.


How many Finals has Nash even been to? Exactly

[Go Getter]

The years that Kidd let the Nets to the Finals, the East had some of the weakest playoff teams ever.

Also, Nash can take over in 4th quarters if need be. Kidd can't, or at least not anymore, and they're only 1 year apart in age.

To me Nash is better at defense (at least he draws some charges), than Kidd is at offense (the dude is a 40% career shooter).

Kidd is having a good year and he is leading his team.

I'm not a stat guy but he is the gold standard for PG rebounding.

To is credit he doesn't shoot when his shot isn't on and even then he can be the most effective player on the court that game.

Kidd has 'taken over' many a game there was a time when he could beat everyone down the court for easy shots.

[Hotlantadude81]

Steve Nash wouldnt lead the Nets to the finals twice in a row even in that horrible conference

They would have been a worse defensive team, but they would also be a better offensive team. The best team in the east (record wise) was the Pistons pre-Sheed. I would say Richard Hamilton, Billups and Wallace were the only good players on that team at the time. Nobody else on that team was even above average. Indiana was more talented, but they only had a margin victory of 3PPG and they never really played up to their potential.

[Go Getter]

Ok then. Let's deal in the real.

Kidd is 2nd all-time in career assists,

Kidd averages 2 spg over his career (Nash has averaged 1 spg just 2 or 3 times in his career),

Kidd has made multiple all-defensive teams & Nash hasn't,

Kidd has led his team to 2 NBA Finals & Nash hasn't led any of his teams pass the confrence finals

Kidd has been a starter in this league since his rookie year & won ROY, Nash started his career as Kidds backup

Nash has two MVP's one of which media types argue of whether he deserves while Kidd was in MVP talks during his Finals runs.

Kidd's best scoring average is 18.7, Nash's best scoring average is 18.8


Add to that, Kidd is a far superior rebounder and what do you get?

[greensborohill]

Wow, just found this out

Kidd is a 10 time all-star, actually made 9 all-defensive teams (4 1st, 5 2nd), was All_NBA 1st team five times & 2nd team once.

Nash is only a 7 time all-star, only had 3 NBA first teams, and only 1 second team, he did make two 3rd teams though.

But guess what. . .. he didn't make a single All-NBA defensive team. . . go figure

[plowking]

Ok then. Let's deal in the real.

Kidd is 2nd all-time in career assists,

Kidd averages 2 spg over his career (Nash has averaged 1 spg just 2 or 3 times in his career),

Kidd has made multiple all-defensive teams & Nash hasn't,

Kidd has led his team to 2 NBA Finals & Nash hasn't led any of his teams pass the confrence finals

Kidd has been a starter in this league since his rookie year & won ROY, Nash started his career as Kidds backup

Nash has two MVP's one of which media types argue of whether he deserves while Kidd was in MVP talks during his Finals runs.

Kidd's best scoring average is 18.7, Nash's best scoring average is 18.8

Facts are:

Nash has 2 MVP's, Kidd doesn't, whether disputed or not.

Nash in the last 6 years is passing the ball better than Kidd ever has.

They have the same number of all NBA teams despite Nash being restricted for the majority of his career before Phoenix.

Nash started his career as a backup? Heavens forbid if a rookie starts behind one of the best point guards in the league at the time. :rolleyes:

Nash hasn't shot below 50% in his last 6 years, Kidd hasn't been able to shoot over 43% in a full season ever.

Kidd averages 40/35/78 for his career, Nash 49/43/90.

[PistonsFan#21]

I never said that he would average more if he played the same amount of minutes, I said he averages more per minute.

If you want to talk about facts, at their peak.
Kidd: 0 MVP's
Nash:2 MVP's

How many of those finals did Kidd win? Exactly.

Those 2 MVP trophies were the most controversial in NBA history. Nash also has more MVPs then Shaq and as much as Duncan. Does that mean he was as good or even better than them at their peak?

[plowking]

How many Finals has Nash even been to? Exactly

Yet they've still won equally as much as one another in terms of championships.

[greensborohill]

Add to that, Kidd is a far superior rebounder and what do you get?


man. . . see. . . look at that. . . I left out the rebounding as a freakin' afterthought!


Did Kidd really average a triple double over 12 games during the 06/07 playoffs?


Holy crap!

[PistonsFan#21]

Facts are:

Nash has 2 MVP's, Kidd doesn't, whether disputed or not.

Nash in the last 6 years is passing the ball better than Kidd ever has.

They have the same number of all NBA teams despite Nash being restricted for the majority of his career before Phoenix.

Nash started his career as a backup? Heavens forbid if a rookie starts behind one of the best point guards in the league at the time. :rolleyes:

Nash hasn't shot below 50% in his last 6 years, Kidd hasn't been able to shoot over 43% in a full season ever.

Kidd averages 40/35/78 for his career, Nash 49/43/90.

Nice. You restricted the stats to the last 6 years to help you prove a point and to exclude Kidd's prime. Why dont you show their career stats for everything and not only for shooting percentages?

[greensborohill]

Yet they've still won equally as much as one another in terms of championships.


You actually get a trophy for winning your confrence, as medicore as that sounds it counts for something. Simple question, yes or no, does Steve Nash have one of these?

Did he help hang a Confrence Championship banner for the Mavs or Suns?

Yes or no?

[greensborohill]

Facts are:

Nash has 2 MVP's, Kidd doesn't, whether disputed or not.

Nash in the last 6 years is passing the ball better than Kidd ever has.

They have the same number of all NBA teams despite Nash being restricted for the majority of his career before Phoenix.

Nash started his career as a backup? Heavens forbid if a rookie starts behind one of the best point guards in the league at the time. :rolleyes:

Nash hasn't shot below 50% in his last 6 years, Kidd hasn't been able to shoot over 43% in a full season ever.

Kidd averages 40/35/78 for his career, Nash 49/43/90.

By what measure? Assists? I can tell you by watching the freakin' games that Kidd is just a good a passer now as Steve Nash ever was.

But these are just stats, so we'll stick with the 5 NBA first teams to 3, and 9 total NBA defensive teams to ZERO. Cool with you?

[Hotlantadude81]

Give Kidd a team of Joe Johnson, Q Rich, Marion, Amare, w/ Barbosa off the bench, and they make the Finals out of the West

Probably not. Steve Nash is a better playoff performer. Kidd's uneven shooting would be harmful to those Suns teams in the playoffs.

[greensborohill]

Probably not. Steve Nash is a better playoff performer.


14.6, 10, & 10


and by what measure are you talking about? Nash hasn't even played in the NBA Finals.

[plowking]

You actually get a trophy for winning your confrence, as medicore as that sounds it counts for something. Simple question, yes or no, does Steve Nash have one of these?

Did he help hang a Confrence Championship banner for the Mavs or Suns?

Yes or no?

Does Kidd have two MVP's which are far more prestigious?

[Poodle]

J. Kidd is obviously better than Steve Nash in all facets of the game besides shooting and ball handling [which is close].

Kidd led a marginally good team to the NBA Finals twice. He is the best rebounding PG in the modern era. In his prime he was one of the most dynamic PG's ever and in recent years he's added a 3pt shot to his game.

He is very unselfish he doesn't need to score points or shoot to impact a game.

But when people mention the best PG's in the NBA his name never comes up.

Why is that?

I compare Nash to Kidd because they both remind me of that old guy at the rec who played overseas or in college and has such a firm grasp of the game that he doesn't need to put much physicality in it....he beats you with his brain before the game happens.

IMO I think Nash is more highly regarded than Kidd because of his 'pretty' offensive game....people are drawn to shooters/scorers.:confusedshrug:


kidd isn't on nash's level. watch 5 games from kidd then watch 5 games from nash. kidd can have some amazing games but he's not nearly as consistently amazing as nash is throughout a season. he also doesn't create quite like nash even if kidd gets so much credit for distributing. i just see nash penetrating a LOT more dishing to big men for easier baskets while kidd is more a QB distributor. kidd is a tier below nash but nash is and deserves to be an all time great pg....

[Hotlantadude81]

14.6, 10, & 10


and by what measure are you talking about? Nash hasn't even played in the NBA Finals.

Nash didn't get to play a team starting a 40 year old Cliff Robinson and Corliss Williamson to get to the finals either.

[PistonsFan#21]

Does Kidd have two MVP's which are far more prestigious?

Since when having an MVP became more prestigious than leading his team to the finals? Ask any NBA player if they would rather win an MVP or lead your team to the finals and get a chance to compete on the biggest stage. Most of them would chose the 2nd option.

[plowking]

Since when having an MVP became more prestigious than leading his team to the finals? Ask any NBA player if they would rather win an MVP or lead your team to the finals and get a chance to compete on the biggest stage. Most of them would chose the 2nd option.

Are you joking?
Who's going to be remembered more? Finals MVP winner Joe Dumars, or regular season MVP Dirk Nowitzki?
Who's going to be remembered more, Billups leading his team into the finals, or Steve Nash, an MVP?

[Go Getter]

kidd isn't on nash's level. watch 5 games from kidd then watch 5 games from nash. kidd can have some amazing games but he's not nearly as consistently amazing as nash is throughout a season. he also doesn't create quite like nash even if kidd gets so much credit for distributing. i just see nash penetrating a LOT more dishing to big men for easier baskets while kidd is more a QB distributor. kidd is a tier below nash but nash is and deserves to be an all time great pg....


Do you know the history of both players besides the past two or three seasons?

[Hotlantadude81]

I don't think people were even that interested in the finals back in those years. That NJ/SA series was downright terrible. Now people are trying to act like it's some kind of real honor when it didn't seem folks were thinking that way back then. Yeah, NJ made the finals... But the east sucked, so I say... So What? The east was terrible and SOMEONE had to make it to the finals.

I was here back then. The games were terrible, the TV ratings were terrible, and the complaining was loud and widespread on this board.

[G.O.A.T]

I think Kidd is widely regarded as the better point guard as far as their careers are concerned.

Kidd's major weakness is shooting; he only has to shoot of 5-10 possessions a game.

Nash's major weakness is defense; he has to defend on 45-60 possessions a game.

Otherwise they are very comparable players in terms of play making, leadership and impact on teammates.

Kidd's gone deeper in the playoffs and had more quality years than Nash who was a late bloomer.

[Poodle]

Do you know the history of both players besides the past two or three seasons?


no i've watched them both throughout their careers and its obvious.

fyi the kidd hype is overblown right now, he was overrated in NJ also, but that is not to say he isn't a great PG. just not on nash's level...and his offense is such a glaring weakness in games sometimes i don't think there is much of a comparison here. especially if you all have actually watched them both more than just a few games....

nash is also extremely clutch, while kidd is really an offensive liability if other players are shut down.

[plowking]

Do you know the history of both players besides the past two or three seasons?

Of course not. None of us watched basketball prior to Steve Nash, hence why we make contributions in this thread about both players. Duh!

[greensborohill]

Does Kidd have two MVP's which are far more prestigious?



That's opinion. I thought we were dealing in facts. Now answer my question.

[plowking]

That's opinion. I thought we were dealing in facts. Now answer my question.

LOL, that is in no way opinion. That is fact.

[greensborohill]

LOL, that is in no way opinion. That is fact.

Really?


Ok,

Jason Kidd has had a far more prestigous and decorated career than Steve Nash.

FACT, look the fvcking thread.

[PistonsFan#21]

Are you joking?
Who's going to be remembered more? Finals MVP winner Joe Dumars, or regular season MVP Dirk Nowitzki?
Who's going to be remembered more, Billups leading his team into the finals, or Steve Nash, an MVP?

Who's going to be remembered more? Dwyane Wade finals MVP or Nowitzki's regular season MVP?

Steve Nash's MVP or Shaq's 3 finals MVP?

See i can play that game too.

And you still cant deny that most players would chose having a chance to play and compete on NBA's biggest stage over a regular season MVP.

[plowking]

Who's going to be remembered more? Dwyane Wade finals MVP or Nowitzki's regular season MVP?

Steve Nash's MVP or Shaq's 3 finals MVP?

See i can play that game too.

And you still cant deny that most players would chose having a chance to play and compete on NBA's biggest stage over a regular season MVP.

Wade will only be remembered more for the reason he is a better player and put up arguably the best performance ever in the finals. Kidd did/is neither.

Same with Shaq, who is a better player than Nash and has an MVP of his own.

Players say that to be politically correct. Others have different aspirations to others.

[Poodle]

Who's going to be remembered more? Dwyane Wade finals MVP or Nowitzki's regular season MVP?

Steve Nash's MVP or Shaq's 3 finals MVP?

See i can play that game too.

And you still cant deny that most players would chose having a chance to play and compete on NBA's biggest stage over a regular season MVP.


don't you guys ever appreciate players for their games more than their accomplishments?

its a joke to me how so many of ya'll here talk rings and stats so much and so little attention focused to their style of game and how much of it they have/had, from player to player comparisons. its just wrong how team success equates to an individual stars greatness with the way 3/4's of you argue here. its actually retarded imo.

[Go Getter]

no i've watched them both throughout their careers and its obvious.

fyi the kidd hype is overblown right now, he was overrated in NJ also, but that is not to say he isn't a great PG. just not on nash's level...and his offense is such a glaring weakness in games sometimes i don't think there is much of a comparison here. especially if you all have actually watched them both more than just a few games....

nash is also extremely clutch, while kidd is really an offensive liability if other players are shut down.

his jumpshot was a liablity early in his career not his offense.

Nash's defense is such a glaring weakness why don't you state that?

Nash plays in a system where they have more pssessions than any other team which gives him a greater chance to achieve high numbers than other PG's where is that tidbit of info?

Not to mention that Kidd is as adroit passing as Nash even now you guys are blind.

[Go Getter]

Of course not. None of us watched basketball prior to Steve Nash, hence why we make contributions in this thread about both players. Duh!


I quoted Poodle because I was speaking to him specifically if you did not know.

[Penny37]

Give Kidd a team of Joe Johnson, Q Rich, Marion, Amare, w/ Barbosa off the bench, and they make the Finals out of the West
Wow. I guarantee you that that team does not make it out of the West.
What's their half court offense gonna be?
Isolate Marion in the post? Give Amare an ISO?
Or let's let Q-Rich go to work and jack up contested 3's.
Not saying Nash is better or worse but for that team, Nash is clearly more valuable than Kidd would be.

What about when Amare was out?
The starting line for the Suns was Nash, Bell, Jones, Marion, and Diaw.
Please don't tell me that Kidd has a chance of taking that team to the Finals. Because in all honesty that team was pitiful outside of Nash. Pitiful is a bit harsh. Not certainly, they weren't great.

Did you watch the Mavs-Suns series this past decade? Nash is by far, a country mile, more clutch than Kidd. You've gotta give him that much, at least.

[plowking]

I quoted Poodle because I was speaking to him specifically if you did not know.

I quoted you because I was speaking at you if you did not know.

[Poodle]

his jumpshot was a liablity early in his career not his offense.

Nash's defense is such a glaring weakness why don't you state that?

Nash plays in a system where they have more pssessions than any other team which gives him a greater chance to achieve high numbers than other PG's where is that tidbit of info?

Not to mention that Kidd is as adroit passing as Nash even now you guys are blind.


his jumper is still a liability. how many mav's games have you watched? he is nowhere near having a good shot now, only his 3pt shot but thats partly because teams were completely disrespecting him taking them where he's completely wide open because they're so focused on trying to keep it away from dirk. kidd's offense in all aspects is really shaky to put him over nash, much less an all time great. and yeah its a more regular, crucial aspect of playing the position because if you've watched enough of kidd throughout the years you'd know there have been plenty of situations where he was a liability offensively that really showed and made a huge difference in those games.

where was this thread last year? nowhere because kidd was extremely mediocre for years before this year where he's kind of getting hyped again with the mav's improved and contender. he's just not the play to play difference maker nash is throughout a game and as consistently game to game, and especially in the crunch. kidd will have a great game like 1 out of every 4-5 these days, while nash is like almost every game or every other.

i don't get how people that have actually watched nash play can even criticize him much :confusedshrug: i just don't see anyone in the league doing a lot of the game breaking killer shots nash buries, or just the overall creating threat he is when he's healthy.

[Go Getter]

his jumper is still a liability. how many mav's games have you watched? he is nowhere near having a good shot now, only his 3pt shot but thats partly because teams were completely disrespecting him taking them where he's completely wide open because they're so focused on trying to keep it away from dirk. kidd's offense in all aspects is really shaky to put him over nash, much less an all time great. and yeah its a more regular, crucial aspect of playing the position because if you've watched enough of kidd throughout the years you'd know there have been plenty of situations where he was a liability offensively that really showed and made a huge difference in those games.

where was this thread last year? nowhere because kidd was extremely mediocre for years before this year where he's kind of getting hyped again with the mav's improved and contender. he's just not the play to play difference maker nash is throughout a game and as consistently game to game, and especially in the crunch. kidd will have a great game like 1 out of every 4-5 these days, while nash is like almost every game or every other.

i don't get how people that have actually watched nash play can even criticize him much :confusedshrug: i just don't see anyone in the league doing a lot of the game breaking killer shots nash buries, or just the overall creating threat he is when he's healthy.

But what about his terribly deficient defense? You have not even touched on that.

And you are totally dismissing the fact that Kidd is not a stat payer...he affects every column in the stat book and does the little things that don't show up in the score books.

But if you want to go stats Kidd has the most triple doubles this side of the Big O doesn't he?

Remember, the Mavs got better after Nash left.:oldlol:

[Poodle]

But what about his terribly deficient defense? You have not even touched on that.

And you are totally dismissing the fact that Kidd is not a stat payer...he affects every column in the stat book and does the little things that don't show up in the score books.

But if you want to go stats Kidd has the most triple doubles this side of the Big O doesn't he?

Remember, the Mavs got better after Nash left.:oldlol:


just watch them both. thats really all there is to it. the way a lot of you guys reinvent shit here its just ridiculous to me with so much discussion here, but the 80's reinvention is some of the most absurd crap i read here.

all i ask is you watch 10 games of nash, 10 games of kidd, and then get back to me.

defense is more a team concept, and the way a lot of you harp on it so much when every play or even most aren't going into the same guy every time down the floor, and even then if he's a star teams double, switch, etc. i just think the emphasis on defense here is flawed in a lot of ways. a hot carmello, kobe, lebron, wade will score on anyone no matter how good their D is....and there is a fine liine between their shots being off in a matchup and the defender playing such good D to force their shot to be off. i see a lot of tiimes where someone like mello just isn't burying the shots he buried the game before where he is getting the same look, but after the game people always tend to pretend its great defense. it goes both ways too bad the assumption is always great defense when that happens :ohwell:

[Penny37]

Remember, the Mavs got better after Nash left.:oldlol:
Oh right. That season where the Suns beat the Mavs 4-2 in the Western Semis.
The playoffs where Nash averaged 24 11 and 5 on some sick shooting.

Correct me if I'm wrong but prior to Nash going there, they didn't even make the playoffs.

[Penny37]

But if you want to go stats Kidd has the most triple doubles this side of the Big O doesn't he?
Nash also has more 50-40-90 seasons than anyone in the history of the league.

[Poodle]

Oh right. That season where the Suns beat the Mavs 4-2 in the Western Semis.
The playoffs where Nash averaged 24 11 and 5 on some sick shooting.

Correct me if I'm wrong but prior to Nash going there, they didn't even make the playoffs.


not to mention to imply nash was bad with the mav's is just wrong. its why its such a joke when people act like nash's success was predicated on the sun's system. cuban wanted to keep nash but if i remember right they weren't willing to pay him what the sun's offered, and dev harris up and coming made him more expendable. otherwise him and dirk were an incredible tandem.

[icewill36]

Nash doesnt have finals games under his belt. Watch games and then speak instead of just going by certain achievements or stats.

because nash played in a tough west, not the weakest era of eastern conference basketball ever...

jason kidd was regarded as the best PG in the league most of his career, hes just not looked at that way anymore. nash has been rated higher the last 5 years or so because hes been better. hes a much better scorer and clutch shooter... do u trust j kidd to win a game for you down the stretch ? hell no, hes not that type of player, nash is.

[Pimpdaddy311991]

Nash = 2 MVP's Kidd = 0

Kidds was and still is a great point guard but Nash is just that much better than him.

[PistonsFan#21]

Nash = 2 MVP's Kidd = 0

Kidds was and still is a great point guard but Nash is just that much better than him.

Nash = 2 MVPs
Kobe = 1 MVP
Shaq = 1 MVP

Nash = Shaq + Kobe
Right?

[greensborohill]

Oh right. That season where the Suns beat the Mavs 4-2 in the Western Semis.
The playoffs where Nash averaged 24 11 and 5 on some sick shooting.

Correct me if I'm wrong but prior to Nash going there, they didn't even make the playoffs.


Doesn't matter. The team got better.

Sorry dude, Nash doesn't even sniff Nash's jock as far as all-time rankings go.

[greensborohill]

9 to ZERO

that is all you need to know.

Offense is a wash. Defense is decidely in Kidd's favor. Not sure why this thread even got to 6 pages.

In NBA history Kidd will be regarded as the better player.

[kentatm]

Correct me if I'm wrong but prior to Nash going there, they didn't even make the playoffs.


you are wrong

[lilgodfather1]

9 to ZERO

that is all you need to know.

Offense is a wash. Defense is decidely in Kidd's favor. Not sure why this thread even got to 6 pages.

In NBA history Kidd will be regarded as the better player.
I agree Kidd has always been the better player, but Nash will be regarded as the greater player. 2 MVPs pretty much cement his legacy, in the closing years of his career if Nash can win a championship that makes the comparison even more lopsided. If Kidd wins a championship though I see 1 championship as greater than 2 MVPs and no championships as long as JKidd has that finals MVP as well (likely since he is on the Mavs).

[LAClipsFan33]

All the disrespect for Kidd in here is sickening.

All Nash can do better is shoot. Kidd is the better passer, rebounder, and leader.

I won't even factor in that Kidd could play defense 5 times better than Nash.

Whoever thinks Nash is better only cares about offense.

[swe_suns]

Offense is a wash.

:applause:

[kentatm]

All the disrespect for Kidd in here is sickening.

All Nash can do better is shoot. Kidd is the better passer, rebounder, and leader.

I won't even factor in that Kidd could play defense 5 times better than Nash.

Whoever thinks Nash is better only cares about offense.

you are mainly talking about people who are too dense to even comprehend the value of your point guard being an excellent rebounder.

[LAClipsFan33]

you are mainly talking about people who are too dense to even comprehend the value of your point guard being an excellent rebounder.

Word Up. Nightly triple double threat w/ good D vs. 15 points, 12 assists w/ horrific D

I'm taking the Triple double threat with the great D every time

[Poodle]

Word Up. Nightly triple double threat w/ good D vs. 15 points, 12 assists w/ horrific D

I'm taking the Triple double threat with the great D every time


i wouldn't expect anything different from box score/stat fan analyzers that love to reinvent history here :rolleyes:

[Bigsmoke]

whatever. they both are legends

[Norcaliblunt]

Having watched them for years both are some of my all time favorite players, but I've said it once, and I'll say it again. Nash can create his own offense and get you a bucket when you need it the most way better than Jason Kidd. And this ability has had way more impact, and been way more game changing than Kidd's defense has ever been. Simple, point blank, period. End of discussion.

[greensborohill]

Having watched them for years both are some of my all time favorite players, but I've said it once, and I'll say it again. Nash can create his own offense and get you a bucket when you need it the most way better than Jason Kidd. And this ability has had way more impact, and been way more game changing than Kidd's defense has ever been. Simple, point blank, period. End of discussion.


Nice try but no.

[Norcaliblunt]

Nice try but no.

What? All you can say is no? LMAO.

Kidd's great, but in the half court the guy is a complete liability on offense, and his defense doesn't make up for it. Still an amazing player though.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Kidd is the better player. Kidd is every bit as good, if not better as a passer, he can post up smaller guards, defend either guard position well(while Nash is a liability at that end), he can rebound better than any guard in recent years, he can play better in a slower tempo and doesn't depend as much on a system as Nash does and despite being inferior to Nash as a shooter, Kidd has managed to carry the scoring load at times, averaging 20 ppg in the 2002 playoffs, 19 ppg in the 2003 regular season and 20 ppg in the 2003 playoffs.

Keep in mind when comparing stats that Kidd played at a much slower pace. Look at their peak stats and their team's pace at the time.

Jason Kidd(1999)- 16.9 ppg, 6.8 rpg, 10.8 apg, 2.3 spg, 44.4 FG%, 36.6 3P%, 90.0 pace factor
Jason Kidd(2000)- 14.3 ppg, 7.2 rpg, 10.1 apg, 2.1 spg, 40.9 FG%, 94.0 pace factor
Jason Kidd(2002)- 14.7 ppg, 7.3 rpg, 9.9 apg, 2.1 spg, 39.1 FG%, 1.4 3PM, 91.8 Pace Factor
Jason Kidd(2003)- 18.7 ppg, 6.3 rpg, 8.9 apg, 2.2 spg, 41.4 FG%, 34.1 3P%, 1.6 3PM, 91.6 Pace Factor

Steve Nash(2005)- 15.5 ppg, 3.3 rpg, 11.5 apg, 1 spg, 50.2 FG%, 43.1 3P%, 1.3 3PM, 95.9 Pace Factor
Steve Nash(2006)- 18.8 ppg, 4.2 rpg, 10.5 apg, 0.8 spg, 51.2 FG%, 43.9 3P%, 1.9 3PM, 95.8 Pace Factor
Steve Nash(2007)- 18.6 ppg, 3.5 rpg, 11.6 apg, 0.8 spg, 53.2 FG%, 45.5 3P%, 2.1 3PM, 95.6 Pace Factor

In comparison, look at what Nash did on the Mavs at a faster pace than all of those Jason Kidd teams mentioned except 2000.

Steve Nash(2001)- 15.6 ppg, 3.2 rpg, 7.3 apg, 1.0 spg, 48.7 FG%, 40.6 3P%, 1.3 3PM, 93.2 Pace Factor
Steve Nash(2002)- 17.9 ppg, 3.1 rpg, 7.7 apg, 0.6 spg, 48.3 FG%, 45.5 3P%, 1.9 3PM, 92.8 Pace Factor
Steve Nash(2003)- 17.7 ppg, 2.9 rpg, 7.3 apg, 1.0 spg, 46.5 FG%, 41.3 3P%, 1.4 3PM, 92.5 Pace Factor
Steve Nash(2004)- 14.5 ppg, 3.0 rpg, 8.8 apg, 0.9 spg, 47.0 FG%, 40.5 3P%, 1.3 3PM, 93.2 Pace Factor

In fairness, Nash has become an excellent playmaker in the halfcourt as well, particularly when he runs the pick and roll with Stoudemire or probes and sucks in the defense and kicks out to a 3 point shooter. But his effectiveness did start to go down when the Suns added Shaq and Nash was not a superstar player in Dallas and only one season were his assist numbers particularly impressive and that was with Nowitzki, Michael Finley, Antoine Walker and Antawn Jamison all on the team. And for most of his time in Dallas, Nash was known as the number 3 guy on the team behind Dirk and Finley.

I can't help, but think how much damage Kidd would have done in a system like the Suns run and gun system. Everyone who saw Kidd in his prime remembers him grabbing a rebound and instantly dashing downcourt for a transition oppurtunity which is when those Nets teams were at their best, which is why commentators often pointed out that they should run more.

And don't forget that Kidd has had some monster playoff performances. He averaged 20/8/9 in 20 playoff games with the 2002 Nets and he averaged a triple double in the conference finals. He averaged 20/8/8 again in 20 playoff games the following season. In 2007, he averaged 15/11/11 in 12 playoff games.

Regarding who deserved what MVP's, well Kidd was a legit candidate in 2002, but that was Duncan's award. I really don't see Nash's case over Shaq in 2005, but in 2006 Nash did have a pretty good case with Stoudemire going down, Nash's scoring and rebounding increasing, the Suns still finishing with 54 wins ect. and the fact that there was no real strong MVP candidate.

[greensborohill]

What? All you can say is no? LMAO.

Kidd's great, but in the half court the guy is a complete liability on offense, and his defense doesn't make up for it. Still an amazing player though.


I've already made my case through multiple posts here-in, your little blurb I quoted was weak. See dudes post above me.

[G.O.A.T]

Regarding who deserved what MVP's, well Kidd was a legit candidate in 2002, but that was Duncan's award. I really don't see Nash's case over Shaq in 2005, but in 2006 Nash did have a pretty good case with Stoudemire going down, Nash's scoring and rebounding increasing, the Suns still finishing with 54 wins ect. and the fact that there was no real strong MVP candidate.

Super post overall; I'll focus on this last part.

If Kidd's 2002 season and Nash's '06 season both happen in 2004 and there is no Duncan, KG or Shaq to take the award, who gets it?

Kidd 2002
15-7-10-2
39-32-81
52 Wins - Eastern Conference Championship
1st Team All-Defense

Nash 2006
19-4-11-1
51-44-92
54 Wins - Western Conference Finals

[greensborohill]

Super post overall; I'll focus on this last part.

If Kidd's 2002 season and Nash's '06 season both happen in 2004 and there is no Duncan, KG or Shaq to take the award, who gets it?

Kidd 2002
15-7-10-2
39-32-81
52 Wins - Eastern Conference Championship
1st Team All-Defense

Nash 2006
19-4-11-1
51-44-92
52 Wins - Western Conference Finals


Kidd

[Mrofir]

Kidd just has a more conservative game. The only argument that he is a better PG would center around some philosophical argument that half court bball and defense wins championships mentality. Add to that the fact that prime Kidd has at least a chance of being a "bad matchup" for prime Nash. That's all fine, but every single other variable points to Nash being the better player.

The whole "finals appearance vs 2MVP" thing is a bogus comparison. If we were comparing a middling player with 2 rings to say, Tracy Mcgrady at his prime, does that enter into the discussion? No, because Tmac is the better individual player obviously.. you look at the performance on the court night in night out. Same thing applies here. When you take randomness and luck in to consideration -- (nobody controls who their teammates are, how strong a conference theyre in, who they play in the playoffs..) -- The difference between Kidd making the finals and Nash making the WCF in a much more difficult conference is just negligible. It's a push. If they had switched places, I'd argue the result would be similar. MVP's on the other hand can't be rescinded. And offensive stats, while not everything, are not meaningless either, and there is a gap.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Super post overall; I'll focus on this last part.

If Kidd's 2002 season and Nash's '06 season both happen in 2004 and there is no Duncan, KG or Shaq to take the award, who gets it?

Kidd 2002
15-7-10-2
39-32-81
52 Wins - Eastern Conference Championship
1st Team All-Defense

Nash 2006
19-4-11-1
51-44-92
52 Wins - Western Conference Finals

Thanks, and I'd say Kidd gets the award. Particularly if you compare their supporting casts. Kidd led his team in assists, steals, 3 pointers made and trailed the leaders in ppg and rpg by just 0.2 per game in each category. Kidd was also known as their best defender, though K-Mart and Kittles were solid at that end.

[Mrofir]

Three consecutive year sample taken from "prime" -- the advantage Nash has offensively is massive.

Kidd
14.7 9.9 7.3 39 32 81
18.7 8.9 6.3 41 34 84
15.5 9.2 6.4 38 32 83


Nash
15.5 11.5 3.3 50 43 89
18.8 10.5 4.2 51 44 92
18.6 11.6 3.5 53 46 90


there are 18 different numbers for each player. Nash's number is higher 15 times. That's a pretty crude statistical analysis, but do you need a sophisticated one to see what's happening? Maybe I'll edit this and add team +\- for each year as well.

i'd like to add I'm a suns fan and obviously a Kidd fan. Seen them both play for my team. I think it's very close actually, but pointing out that offensively the difference is just too great to be overcome defensively.

[bdreason]

I'll take prime Kidd over prime Nash because Kidd plays both sides of the ball.

[LAClipsFan33]

Three consecutive year sample taken from "prime" -- the advantage Nash has offensively is massive.

Kidd
14.7 9.9 7.3 39 32 81
18.7 8.9 6.3 41 34 84
15.5 9.2 6.4 38 32 83


Nash
15.5 11.5 3.3 50 43 89
18.8 10.5 4.2 51 44 92
18.6 11.6 3.5 53 46 90


there are 18 different numbers for each player. Nash's number is higher 15 times. That's a pretty crude statistical analysis, but do you need a sophisticated one to see what's happening? Maybe I'll edit this and add team +\- for each year as well.

i'd like to add I'm a suns fan and obviously a Kidd fan. Seen them both play for my team. I think it's very close actually, but pointing out that offensively the difference is just too great to be overcome defensively.

The defensive disparity is bigger than the offensive one.

Jason Kidd was at least 3 times better than Nash on defense. Nash was not 3 times better than him on offense

[G.O.A.T]

Three consecutive year sample taken from "prime" -- the advantage Nash has offensively is massive.

Kidd
14.7 9.9 7.3 39 32 81
18.7 8.9 6.3 41 34 84
15.5 9.2 6.4 38 32 83


Nash
15.5 11.5 3.3 50 43 89
18.8 10.5 4.2 51 44 92
18.6 11.6 3.5 53 46 90


there are 18 different numbers for each player. Nash's number is higher 15 times. That's a pretty crude statistical analysis, but do you need a sophisticated one to see what's happening? Maybe I'll edit this and add team +\- for each year as well.

i'd like to add I'm a suns fan and obviously a Kidd fan. Seen them both play for my team. I think it's very close actually, but pointing out that offensively the difference is just too great to be overcome defensively.

Nash is clearly a more efficient player, but I'd be willing to bet that Kidd scored or assisted on as high or a higher percent of his teams points on offense. I'll give Nash the overall offensive edge, but if it's a boxing match it's a 10-9 round. On the Defensive end, they'd have to stop the fight. Kidd is light years ahead of Nash.

[Cyclone112]

The defensive disparity is bigger than the offensive one.

Jason Kidd was at least 3 times better than Nash on defense. Nash was not 3 times better than him on offense

Can you explain where you pulled this magical number from? So does Nash let the opposing PG score 3 times as many points on him than Kidd does?

[Gifted Mind]

Peak, Nash was better. However, career still goes to Kidd. Thus, Kidd should be ranked higher between the 2 in All-Time lists.

[Rockets(T-mac)]

If it was in their primes and there was another scorer on the team, I'd take Kidd. But if the PG had to be the leading scorer too, then it's Nash. Kidd in his prime was lightning quick and great on defense. We all know about his rebounding. Nash and Kidd are equal in passing, can't really argue in favour of one over the other. Nash is clearly the better scorer and Kidd has defense and rebounds.

[QuebecBaller]

1996 Phoenix Suns

http://i.a.cnn.net/si/2008/writers/paul_forrester/03/12/johnson.mayor/t1-johnson2.jpg
http://www.jasonkidd.com/files/images/jk2/021300_jk_all_star_2000_alleniverson.jpg
http://www.hollywoodcollectibles.com/catalog/images/steve-nash-1997-ud-sp-crd.jpg
:bowdown:

[Ancient Legend]

Which begs the question, was KJ's peak better than Kidd's or Nash's?

[GP_20]

Which begs the question, was KJ's peak better than Kidd's or Nash's?
Yes

[phoenix18]

Yes
:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

For everyone who doesnt think its funny, go look at GOAT's Top 100 thread(which is a great read by the way, should be in bookstores soon:D ).

GP argued for pages about KJ.

[Mrofir]

Which begs the question, was KJ's peak better than Kidd's or Nash's?


Interesting question for a Suns fan. The way I have their peaks ranked is

1. KJ
1.01 Nash
1.42 Kidd

And their overall careers

1 Nash
2 Kidd
2.000001 KJ



Nash has 2 mvps.. He might not be the same athlete he was 4 years ago but his numbers have stayed pretty steady since his prime, which is insane for someone his age. If he keeps it up for another few years, his career stats will start becoming gaudier too.

[LAClipsFan33]

Can you explain where you pulled this magical number from? So does Nash let the opposing PG score 3 times as many points on him than Kidd does?

He gets beat to the basket as least 3 times as often when watching them. Probably more actually...defense isn't about stats for the most part

[Apocalyptic0n3]

Kidd has never won hardware, Nash has. Only reason I can think of. And the fact that Nash is better now, though not since the all star break.

[LAClipsFan33]

Kidd has never won hardware, Nash has. Only reason I can think of. And the fact that Nash is better now, though not since the all star break.

So essentially Nash >> Isiah Thomas ?

[GOBB]

Nash is better today for obvious reasons. All time? Its Kidd. You have Nash over him? I question your bball knowledge.

[Go Getter]

Oh right. That season where the Suns beat the Mavs 4-2 in the Western Semis.
The playoffs where Nash averaged 24 11 and 5 on some sick shooting.

Correct me if I'm wrong but prior to Nash going there, they didn't even make the playoffs.


Shooting and scoring is only one aspect of the game.

What about defense?
Passing?
Rebounding?

[Norcaliblunt]

People keep acting like Kidd is/was some lock down defender. He was good, but not even close to being a game changing top 10 all time great defender. On the other hand Nash's shooting and efficiency is some of the all time best.

Either way they both are great, and whoever you got as the better player doesn't really matter cause it's so close. But to act like it's so black and white one way or the other is wrong IMO. You can't go wrong with either and both bring their own strong attributes to the game.

[Apocalyptic0n3]

So essentially Nash >> Isiah Thomas ?

No. You can't apply public perception of a current figure to a legendary one. If that were the case, you could apply the "Bush took America to an unneeded and highly unpopular war" rule to Lyndon B. Johnson, and say that everyone hates Bush, so everyone hates Johnson. It's a logical fallacy.

The OP asked why people regard Nash as the better player. Nash is a public figure, mainly because of the awards. The NBA markets its MVPs, Nash won two straight a few years back. Kidd never got that publicity and hasn't been a household name, really, in five or six years. He's still playing, despite what some of my friends apparently think, and damn well at that, but Nash GREATLY overshadows him.

[Kingwillball]

Because Nash is simply better at his peak and all time...

And no, you'll see most people put Jason Kidd ahead of Nash...


Nope..Kidd has had the better career..J Kidd better Rebounder and Defender and just as Good as passer..Nash a better Shooter that is all...

[G.O.A.T]

I love it. I haven't seen a GP_20 post in months and then three minutes after KJ's name comes up...bam...there he is.

It's like a sixth sense or something.

[magnax1]

I think that Nash was just plain better. Kidd was an absolutely terrible scorer, however he continued to shoot. at his worst he was shooting 14 shots a game and scoring 15 points. In comparison, Nash is shooting 12 shots for 17 points this year. He was a great passer, and very good defender, but he was never MVP level impact like Nash. I mean, look at some of Kidd's teams like the 00 suns. Extremely talented, but always seemed to under perform. They probably wouldn't have made it out of the 1st round if not for Penny playing like his old self in the playoffs.

[Penny37]

Nash = 2 MVPs
Kobe = 1 MVP
Shaq = 1 MVP

Nash = Shaq + Kobe
Right?
You still haven't explained to me why you think Nash with those Suns teams will make it to the finals.

Where will their half-court offense come from? Yeah their defense will be better but their offense would be pitiful. Who are they gonna go to in the clutch? Certainly won't be Kidd. Not Marion. Not Amare. Not Q-Rich. They have no pick and roll to go to because nobody considers Kidd a serious threat from the outside and everyone can just go under the screens. So how are they gonna make it to the Finals?

Back up your claims with some arguments without just spitting stuff out.

Furthermore, how will Jason Kidd lead a team featuring a starting lineup of Boris Diaw, James Jones, Raja Bell, and Shawn Marion to the finals?

[Nets fan 93]

What does a point guard need to be able to do?

Pass? Nash is better at it.
Shoot? Nash is better at it.
Score? Nash is better at it.
Run an offense? Equal.
Defense? Kidd.

Nash is just a better player. I'd rather have the guy shooting 50% for his career and 40% and 90% from 3pts and FT's on my team over the guy who shoots 38% and has a season some consider great...
Jason and Nash are both Excellent passers. The same imo... Nash is just fancier

[plowking]

Nope..Kidd has had the better career..J Kidd better Rebounder and Defender and just as Good as passer..Nash a better Shooter that is all...

A 0 time MVP winner, 0 time champion, 0 time finals MVP is better than a 2 time MVP.

Okay...

[miller-time]

A 0 time MVP winner, 0 time champion, 0 time finals MVP is better than a 2 time MVP.

Okay...

kidd has made it to the finals. winning the conference finals is something.

[Shepseskaf]

Kidd just has a more conservative game. The only argument that he is a better PG would center around some philosophical argument that half court bball and defense wins championships mentality. Add to that the fact that prime Kidd has at least a chance of being a "bad matchup" for prime Nash. That's all fine, but every single other variable points to Nash being the better player.
Stop me if you've heard this phrase before:

Defense wins championships

JKidd's defense is so much better than Nash's completely non-existent defense that it more than negates Nash's offensive advantage.

A pure offensive team will never win a championship over a defensive-minded squad, for so many obvious reasons. Nash could never have taken that bad Nets squad to two Finals, and JKidd would probably have won a 'Chip already if he had the Suns' core roster.

Nash's defensive liabilities are so great that I truly don't believe that he's a legendary player at all, just an elite one. JKidd is legendary, without question.

[LAClipsFan33]

A 0 time MVP winner, 0 time champion, 0 time finals MVP is better than a 2 time MVP.

Okay...

So what your essentially saying is Nash > Lebron

Nash = 2 MVP

Lebron = 1 time MVP winner, 0 time champion, 0 time finals MVP

I'm basically putting this because this logic is almost as silly as the "He has more rings" argument in many cases

[godofgods]

LOL, Kidd has always been rated higher than Nash, where have you guys been?

[stephanieg]

If Nash is your starting PG going into the playoffs you have to gameplan around the fact the opposing PG is gonna be dropping 30 a game.

[LAClipsFan33]

If Nash is your starting PG going into the playoffs you have to gameplan around the fact the opposing PG is gonna be dropping 30 a game.

LOL this.

[Penny37]

Stop me if you've heard this phrase before:

Defense wins championships

JKidd's defense is so much better than Nash's completely non-existent defense that it more than negates Nash's offensive advantage.

A pure offensive team will never win a championship over a defensive-minded squad, for so many obvious reasons. Nash could never have taken that bad Nets squad to two Finals, and JKidd would probably have won a 'Chip already if he had the Suns' core roster.

Nash's defensive liabilities are so great that I truly don't believe that he's a legendary player at all, just an elite one. JKidd is legendary, without question.
I agree. Defense wins championships. Not individual defense, team defense.
And no, you're wrong.
Kidd WOULD NOT be able to take that team to a Chip.
That team would have absolutely no half court offense whatsoever and Kidd cannot run the pick and roll at all because he is a terrible shooter.

[Penny37]

If Nash is your starting PG going into the playoffs you have to gameplan around the fact the opposing PG is gonna be dropping 30 a game.
If Kidd is your starting PG going into the playoffs you have to gameplan that he won't hit a single shot.

I can make up ridiculous BS, too.

[plowking]

So what your essentially saying is Nash > Lebron

Nash = 2 MVP

Lebron = 1 time MVP winner, 0 time champion, 0 time finals MVP

I'm basically putting this because this logic is almost as silly as the "He has more rings" argument in many cases

Lebron is a better player than Nash. Kidd is not, and as you can see it's debatable. Thus Nash's two MVP's over a 0 time winner put him higher.

[LAClipsFan33]

Lebron is a better player than Nash. Kidd is not, and as you can see it's debatable. Thus Nash's two MVP's over a 0 time winner put him higher.

The only reason why Nash isn't the weakest NBA MVP ever is because Dirk is.

He won his first MVP over a rapidly declining Shaq then won the next year because they didn't want to give it to Lebron because "He was too young and would win on eventually". Which did happen but it was a bullsh*t excuse.

I give Nash credit for winning, but lets not act like both years were down years...same with the following year when Dirk won.

[Go Getter]

If Kidd is your starting PG going into the playoffs you have to gameplan that he won't hit a single shot.

I can make up ridiculous BS, too.


Shooting is a smaller part of the game than rebounding and defense though.

[Penny37]

Shooting is a smaller part of the game than rebounding and defense though.
Agreed but you're still putting it out of context.
Battier is a better defender than Kidd.
Does that make him better or more valuable because defense is "half the game"?
No, ofcourse not.
It seems to me like individual defense is highly over rated on this board.

[Go Getter]

Agreed but you're still putting it out of context.
Battier is a better defender than Kidd.
Does that make him better or more valuable because defense is "half the game"?
No, ofcourse not.
It seems to me like individual defense is highly over rated on this board.

He is a better team and individual defender. Also, Kidd has more assists, triple doubles, double doubles [probably idk], and has blocked more shots.

We are comparing Nash and Kidd 2 players that play the same position just in different ways.

Seems like my first assumption was correct...people over value offense and under value defense.

[Penny37]

He is a better team and individual defender. Also, Kidd has more assists, triple doubles, double doubles [probably idk], and has blocked more shots.

We are comparing Nash and Kidd 2 players that play the same position just in different ways.

Seems like my first assumption was correct...people over value offense and under value defense.
Battier is also a better team and individual defender than Kidd.
Since defense wins championships, does this mean Battier is a better player than Kidd?

People over value defense.
Not saying it's not important cuz it is, but the overall value of a player's defensive abilities is not as important as the overall value of a player's offensive abilities.

[Ja2l]

The only reason why Nash isn't the weakest NBA MVP ever is because Dirk is.

He won his first MVP over a rapidly declining Shaq then won the next year because they didn't want to give it to Lebron because "He was too young and would win on eventually". Which did happen but it was a bullsh*t excuse.

Do you enjoy speaking out of your ass?



JKidd's defense is so much better than Nash's completely non-existent defense that it more than negates Nash's offensive advantage.


Are you joking? How has it come to the point where people think Nash's defense is THIS bad? Does anyone actually have anything factual to back up the claim that Nash is this terrible of a defender? If you can prove it to me without spewing your garbage opinions everywhere maybe I'll start to buy it.

Also, how many of you actually watch the Suns and Nash play often?

[LAClipsFan33]

Do you enjoy speaking out of your ass?



Are you joking? How has it come to the point where people think Nash's defense is THIS bad? Does anyone actually have anything factual to back up the claim that Nash is this terrible of a defender? If you can prove it to me without spewing your garbage opinions everywhere maybe I'll start to buy it.

Also, how many of you actually watch the Suns and Nash play often?

One time I actually saw Nash standing out of bounds waiting for the man he just let go to the basket to make his layup so he could get back on offense. Do you understand how bad this is ?

[Penny37]

Do you enjoy speaking out of your ass?



Are you joking? How has it come to the point where people think Nash's defense is THIS bad? Does anyone actually have anything factual to back up the claim that Nash is this terrible of a defender? If you can prove it to me without spewing your garbage opinions everywhere maybe I'll start to buy it.

Also, how many of you actually watch the Suns and Nash play often?
To be honest, Nash is a pretty bad defender, and I'm the biggest Nash homer there is. That being sad, he's not as bad as many on this board make him out to be. The reason I think he has a bad rep for defense is because he's gotten dunked on quite a few times ie. Ricky Davis, Kobe Bryant.

But the guy has led the league in charges drawn the last season or two and is definitely better than he is given credit for. And I'd rather have my players, especially my leader, in there trying to draw charges, even if it means he gets dunked on occasionally; rather than have them get out of the way.

That's why I really respect guys who aren't afraid to get dunked on. I'd rather them contest it and get posterized rather than just give them an open dunk.

[LA_Showtime]

How can ANYONE take Steve Nash over a prime Jason Kidd? I know the Eastern Conference was weak back in the day, but he took a horrible Nets team to the Finals (twice!). Hell, they played the Spurs pretty straight up and had they had a couple of lucky bounces could have won.

[ILLsmak]

It's true, though, Nash's defensive woes are not exaggerated at all. Any player in with offensive game can burn him for 30. I understand the Suns want to dupe their point guard into scoring, but the problem is... in the playoffs most of the PGs understand when to score and when to pass.

Nash is one of the worst defensive players in NBA history, and that bothers me because nobody has to be that bad on defense. He really just doesn't try. He might take a charge or something... but the fact that he is pathetic on D drops him a bunch. Kidd isn't a great defender, either... he was pretty good at a time, but he never let people just go by him for lay ups. This is even worse because the Suns don't have a legit shot blocker.

-Smak

[plowking]

All this talk about Nash being a worse defender, yet his direct opponent's production is less than that of Kidd's. Add in to that the Suns play a faster paced game, so naturally you'd expect Nash's direct opponent to be higher than Kidd's for that simple fact. Then add into account that Kidd has a defensive presence in Haywood behind him to help, while Nash has Amare, often critisiced for being one of the worst defensive forwards.

So how is it after all this, Nash somehow keeps his opponent to lower production than Kidd can his? Some of you seriously exaggerate how bad Nash is on defense.

[Lakas Fan Yo]

It might have something to do with the fact that he likes to beat up women.

[Mirjalovic]

Jason Kidd is ****ing brilliant PG. Ppl just saw his %FG without understand how much his impact to this game.


I think they're regarded on equal level.

this.


And any smart fan will rank them just under Gary Payton.

disagree.

[Toizumi]

All this talk about Nash being a worse defender, yet his direct opponent's production is less than that of Kidd's. Add in to that the Suns play a faster paced game, so naturally you'd expect Nash's direct opponent to be higher than Kidd's for that simple fact. Then add into account that Kidd has a defensive presence in Haywood behind him to help, while Nash has Amare, often critisiced for being one of the worst defensive forwards.

So how is it after all this, Nash somehow keeps his opponent to lower production than Kidd can his? Some of you seriously exaggerate how bad Nash is on defense.

True. Nash isn't great at defending on- of off the ball, but he works hard on D. Guards in the NBA are quick and it's tough for any PG to stay in front of his man... when the team defense and the defenders behind the PG are bad the PG will be exposed.

That said, anyone who watches games knows that J-Kidd is a tougher defender and has better positioning on defense. I trust that you used good sources plowking, so the stats you are referring to are surprising to me. Careerwise though, you can't state that Nash is anywhere close to the defender J-Kidd was. Kidd made multiple All defensive teams and is one of the better perimeter defenders of all time. With all due respect.. Nash is far from that :confusedshrug:


I have not yet posted in this thread, since I didnt feel the need... everyone has their own opinion on who's better and good arguments to back it up.
My opinion:

Careerwise: J-Kidd was great from day one, while it took Nash some time to become an all-star and MVP. I'd say that J-Kidd had a better career, just because he has been great from the start of his career up until now. Nash has two MVP's but don't forget that J-Kidd came in second in the voting once in a close race with Timmy (IIRC). He also has two finals appaerances as the best player on his team.

Prime: Too close too call but if I have to pick someone it would be Kidd. Nash was a better (more efficient) scorer, but Kidd could do it all... I know some people say rebounding isn't what you need from a PG... But Kidd played on a mediocre team and really did it all for his team: terms of scoring, rebounding, defense, passing and leadership.


Note that this is just my opinion. If anyone thinks Nash was better I respect that. Both are all time great PG's.

[Go Getter]

It's true, though, Nash's defensive woes are not exaggerated at all. Any player in with offensive game can burn him for 30. I understand the Suns want to dupe their point guard into scoring, but the problem is... in the playoffs most of the PGs understand when to score and when to pass.

Nash is one of the worst defensive players in NBA history, and that bothers me because nobody has to be that bad on defense. He really just doesn't try. He might take a charge or something... but the fact that he is pathetic on D drops him a bunch. Kidd isn't a great defender, either... he was pretty good at a time, but he never let people just go by him for lay ups. This is even worse because the Suns don't have a legit shot blocker.

-Smak


Tony Parker routinely dismantles him and shoots a great percentage.

When the Suns needed Nash to step up on D he didn't because he can't.

[Lakas Fan Yo]

Those 2 MVP trophies were the most controversial in NBA history. Nash also has more MVPs then Shaq and as much as Duncan. Does that mean he was as good or even better than them at their peak?
:lol

Keep the racist crap off this forum. The only thing "controversial" about those MVPs is that a white player won them. STFU with that racist crap, it's really getting ridiculous.

[Go Getter]

:lol

Keep the racist crap off this forum. The only thing "controversial" about those MVPs is that a white player won them. STFU with that racist crap, it's really getting ridiculous.


Nothing he said was racist.

Just because ppl believe Nash didn't deserve the titles that means they are racist?

calm down buddy it's not that serious.

[Lakas Fan Yo]

Nothing he said was racist.

Just because ppl believe Nash didn't deserve the titles that means they are racist?

calm down buddy it's not that serious.

What he said pure racist crap. I am sick of all the blatant racism on this forum. He needs to STFU and keep that crap out of here. We are here to discuss basketball. I don't give a damn about what race a player is. What matters is the game itself.

Only a complete moron would not know what he said was racist.

[Go Getter]

What he said pure racist crap. I am sick of all the blatant racism on this forum. He needs to STFU and keep that crap out of here. We are here to discuss basketball. I don't give a damn about what race a player is. What matters is the game itself.

Only a complete moron would not know what he said was racist.


Please show me where someone said that Nash won because he is white...all I saw was the man saying that he didn't deserve his MVP's.

And I don't see you crusading into the plethora of threads where blacks are degraded and crying for us, lol.

But hey, not saying you're racist/hypocritical, just that I haven't noticed it.

[Lakas Fan Yo]

Please show me where someone said that Nash won because he is white...all I saw was the man saying that he didn't deserve his MVP's.

And I don't see you crusading into the plethora of threads where blacks are degraded and crying for us, lol.

But hey, not saying you're racist/hypocritical, just that I haven't noticed it.

Hey man he used the term "controversial". I suggest you educate yourself because you clearly are not very well read.

Blacks being degraded? This forum is full of racist threads on a weekly basis against whites, Europeans, Asians. It's ridiculous and the forum needs to stop it now.

As far as blacks being degraded two of the best friends I ever had in my life were black. I'm no damn racist, but I'm sick of people making racist statements here and of people like you that seem to be xenophobic defending it.

This is a basketball forum, the racism has got to stop already.

[Go Getter]

Hey man he used the term "controversial". I suggest you educate yourself because you clearly are not very well read.

Blacks being degraded? This forum is full of racist threads on a weekly basis against whites, Europeans, Asians. It's ridiculous and the forum needs to stop it now.

As far as blacks being degraded two of the best friends I ever had in my life were black. I'm no damn racist, but I'm sick of people making racist statements here and of people like you that seem to be xenophobic defending it.

This is a basketball forum, the racism has got to stop already.


Controversial does not insinuate anything racial. I suggest you turn your index finger back towards yourself sir because your stance is not very stable.

I never thought you were a racist but you do seem whiny and sensitive. If I saw something racist in this thread I would be right there with you but you've given no proof of said racism.

[dough]

controversial = racist nowadays? :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

yo lakas fan yo yo... :roll:

[Lakas Fan Yo]

controversial = racist nowadays? :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

yo lakas fan yo yo... :roll:

Of course what he said was racist. This forum needs to man up already. I'm out for now, the racism and xenophobia just keeps on endlessly on here.

[jbryan1984]

As far as lifetime, I would put Kidd ahead of Nash. Not this season, but lifetime I would. Jason Kidd, for his age still amazes me how well he plays. Like I couldn't believe Dallas signed him for as many years as they did at first, but he still plays awesome and probably will till he is 40.

[ILLsmak]

All this talk about Nash being a worse defender, yet his direct opponent's production is less than that of Kidd's. Add in to that the Suns play a faster paced game, so naturally you'd expect Nash's direct opponent to be higher than Kidd's for that simple fact. Then add into account that Kidd has a defensive presence in Haywood behind him to help, while Nash has Amare, often critisiced for being one of the worst defensive forwards.

So how is it after all this, Nash somehow keeps his opponent to lower production than Kidd can his? Some of you seriously exaggerate how bad Nash is on defense.

Nowadays I think that they both suck on defense...

I don't really buy that all NBA defense stuff for Kidd, either. Kidd is smart... he understands defense but I don't think he ever had the tools to be a 'stopper.'

But really, Nash is horrible on defense. I don't think there's ever been a player as good as Nash that was as horrible on defense.

He might have some idea in his mind on how to shade a person a certain way or trick them into doing what they aren't best at, but when someone decides they want to do something, Nash can not stop them. He can't keep them from shooting, he can't keep them from getting to a spot, and he definitely can't stop them from getting to the rim.

Look at how low his fouls are. For someone to be playing that many minutes and fouling less than twice a game is amazing! He averages less fouls a game than LeBron and that's amazing. lol.

And most of the fouls I ever see him commit are charge attempts.

Nash is just extremely soft on defense. I think that might be what makes him so weak... the fact that he will never get up on anyone and pressure them. As a point guard, it's important to pressure the ball.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5u48FyhZ8RM

I know that's a highlight reel, and it's AI... and it's old... but it shows what I mean about Nash. Look at the cushion he gives players to shoot... and to make it worse, if they want to they can still just get right by him.

It could be said that Nash rests on defense, and it works for him, but you'd think he could get a key stop sometimes. He never does.

I remember old ass GP playing against Billups in the ECF and Billups was having his way. Well, on one play GP basically ambushed him and took the ball from him ( oh yeah, you're a heat fan, you'd remember that... right?). Nash never does anything like that. On average, these guys might be great athletes... but not many of them are as smart as Steve Nash. You'd think he would be able to predict someone's move by the end of the game. At best, he will just try to take a charge...


-Smak

[Go Getter]

controversial = racist nowadays? :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

yo lakas fan yo yo... :roll:


I didn't get it either.

I guess saying Dennis Rodman was a contraversial figure in basketball is racist too huh?

:roll:

[dallaslonghorn]

All this talk about Nash being a worse defender, yet his direct opponent's production is less than that of Kidd's. Add in to that the Suns play a faster paced game, so naturally you'd expect Nash's direct opponent to be higher than Kidd's for that simple fact. Then add into account that Kidd has a defensive presence in Haywood behind him to help, while Nash has Amare, often critisiced for being one of the worst defensive forwards.

So how is it after all this, Nash somehow keeps his opponent to lower production than Kidd can his? Some of you seriously exaggerate how bad Nash is on defense.

Kidd has the strength to guard 2's and 3's ... that's why the Mavs were able to go through most of last year playing Kidd/Terry/Barea in the back-court.

[Poodle]

All this talk about Nash being a worse defender, yet his direct opponent's production is less than that of Kidd's. Add in to that the Suns play a faster paced game, so naturally you'd expect Nash's direct opponent to be higher than Kidd's for that simple fact. Then add into account that Kidd has a defensive presence in Haywood behind him to help, while Nash has Amare, often critisiced for being one of the worst defensive forwards.

So how is it after all this, Nash somehow keeps his opponent to lower production than Kidd can his? Some of you seriously exaggerate how bad Nash is on defense.


the way most people talk defense here are in extremes. either you're a big name and you're great or you're everyone else, and you suck at it. there can be no in between. just like every play apparently comes down to the same guy scoring every bucket down the floor, opposing teams never pass it around, defenses never switch or double, its always just 1v1 offense vs defense. every shot missed is always accredited to great defense, players can never just be off. thats ISH analyzing... :rolleyes:

reality is a players defense, or lack thereof, is so overblown in relation to consistent scoring down the floor, and ESPECIALLY when people pretend to criticize an individual for the faults of a system everyone knows is offensive based. is it even possible for one player to carry the defense of a whole team? its like the ron artest fans or apologizers. he's been absolutely terrible offensively, and there is no way what he does defensively makes up for him bricking baskets they need in crucial game flow situations, or just as a starter swinging the ball around to the open man where he is that guy. he's a liability offensively, similar to fisher's erratic chucking this year, like kidd dribbling around with the defense daring him to drive or take the jumper, and somehow according to all of these D focused fans those bricks don't matter over the defense he brings, even tho when you watch the games those shots happen way more often than some incredible defensive play by artest/kidd throughout any given game. they are a regularity of being way more crucial. its just dumb how people aren't factoring in nash's penchant for back breaker baskets completely changing game flow and this is with way more regularity than any profound defensive play that kidd does.

its just constantly retarded here. people just don't watch the games and the regularity of what goes on IN the game that makes the difference more than argue stats, chokes in one game or a series where a player is off, etc. kidd would be fine on the dream team, even the current Mav's roster since they're loaded with scoring talent, but if you all are hearkening back to the NJ days Kidd is the LAST one i'd want carrying my offense because they had nobody better back then, where kidd and kenyon, and kittles to a lesser extent were their only real stars. its funny how people try and reinvent them as a contender now too when they were a really terrible team. i mean kidd was one of their main scorers and half his shots are practically prayers.

there is just no comparison here. nash is such a game difference maker game to game its retarded this is an argument. kidd is in a great situation for his talents, and is having a bounce back year, but even then he's nowhere near nash right now.

[plowking]

Exactly. Offense is more important than defense and always has been. If you can't put the ball in the bucket at an effective rate, you're not going to have a good shot at winning the ball game.

BTW, for everyone that has posted, I use to be one of the ones who thought Nash is overrated, he doesn't do this and that, he isn't as good as Kidd. Then I actually bothered to look how much this guy does for the team. There is a reason they were nobody without him, and then a finals favorite with him.

IMO, Payton>Nash>Kidd.

[dallaslonghorn]

Exactly. Offense is more important than defense and always has been. If you can't put the ball in the bucket at an effective rate, you're not going to have a good shot at winning the ball game.

BTW, for everyone that has posted, I use to be one of the ones who thought Nash is overrated, he doesn't do this and that, he isn't as good as Kidd. Then I actually bothered to look how much this guy does for the team. There is a reason they were nobody without him, and then a finals favorite with him.

IMO, Payton>Nash>Kidd.

In what year was a Steve Nash team a "finals favorite" i.e. the best team in their conference?

[beermonsteroo]

Because Jason Kidd is a wifebeater.

[Kiddlovesnets]

'cause Nash is probably the better player now, but Kidd does have a much more impressive career overall.

[PistonsFan#21]

Exactly. Offense is more important than defense and always has been. If you can't put the ball in the bucket at an effective rate, you're not going to have a good shot at winning the ball game.

BTW, for everyone that has posted, I use to be one of the ones who thought Nash is overrated, he doesn't do this and that, he isn't as good as Kidd. Then I actually bothered to look how much this guy does for the team. There is a reason they were nobody without him, and then a finals favorite with him.

IMO, Payton>Nash>Kidd.

Before Kidd went to New Jersey they were a 26-56 team. The year he arrived they went 52-30 and made it to the finals. Then they did the same the following year. I think he had what you can call a pretty good shot at winning the game. If Offense was more important than defense Wilt Chamberlain would be the one with 11 rings instead of Russel, The Lakers would of beaten the Celtics in 2008, Lakers would of beaten Pistons in 2004, etc.

[plowking]

In what year was a Steve Nash team a "finals favorite" i.e. the best team in their conference?

Try 04-05... The year Nash won his first MVP.

[plowking]

Before Kidd went to New Jersey they were a 26-56 team. The year he arrived they went 52-30 and made it to the finals. Then they did the same the following year. I think he had what you can call a pretty good shot at winning the game. If Offense was more important than defense Wilt Chamberlain would be the one with 11 rings instead of Russel, The Lakers would of beaten the Celtics in 2008, Lakers would of beaten Pistons in 2004, etc.

Do you get tired of being lame?
Russel's team was better, Chamberlain was better defensively anyway as a player. All those teams could score and defend. Obviously both are important, though a good offense always beats a good defense.

Yeah and Phoenix won 33 more games the year Nash got there... What's your point?

[Penny37]

Before Kidd went to New Jersey they were a 26-56 team. The year he arrived they went 52-30 and made it to the finals. Then they did the same the following year. I think he had what you can call a pretty good shot at winning the game. If Offense was more important than defense Wilt Chamberlain would be the one with 11 rings instead of Russel, The Lakers would of beaten the Celtics in 2008, Lakers would of beaten Pistons in 2004, etc.
You still haven't answered my question.
How do you expect Kidd to take that Suns team to the Finals with their pitiful halfcourt offense?
Ditto for the next season when Nash was leading a starting lineup of Jones, Diaw, Bell, and Marion?

And that Wilt-Russell analogy is terrible.
Terrible.

[PistonsFan#21]

Do you get tired of being lame?
Russel's team was better, Chamberlain was better defensively anyway as a player. All those teams could score and defend. Obviously both are important, though a good offense always beats a good defense.

Yeah and Phoenix won 33 more games the year Nash got there... What's your point?

Did he make it to the finals? Sure those teams could score and defend but thats a dumb statement. Any team in the NBA can score. My point was that those teams were better because of their defense more than it was because of their offense. And you act as if Kidd could only defend while he was actually a good post up guard which attracted double teams

[plowking]

Did he make it to the finals? Sure those teams could score and defend but thats a dumb statement. Any team in the NBA can score. My point was that those teams were better because of their defense more than it was because of their offense. And you act as if Kidd could only defend while he was actually a good post up guard which attracted double teams

That post up game is useless when you shoot 40% from it. I can't imagine how low his percentages would be if he didn't have that post game.

[Poodle]

Before Kidd went to New Jersey they were a 26-56 team. The year he arrived they went 52-30 and made it to the finals. Then they did the same the following year. I think he had what you can call a pretty good shot at winning the game. If Offense was more important than defense Wilt Chamberlain would be the one with 11 rings instead of Russel, The Lakers would of beaten the Celtics in 2008, Lakers would of beaten Pistons in 2004, etc.


so those player's defense were solely responsible for the rings? or was it the team concepts of defense? what 1 player in any situations makes a defense good/great? i've just never seen an individual make a great defense more than a team in terms of winning stuff. but the way people talk here its always individual star defensive player based.

and when talking about most games theres a lot more said for regularity of making shots, to have the good defense, to even win the game. when people watch games here do you shake your head in the last 2 minutes more at the open shots people miss, or the defense of 1 player on any given play? remember, only 1 person gets the ball to take that shot each time down the floor, where as there are 5 players on defense any team can go at, which is usually based on who is open.

[PistonsFan#21]

You still haven't answered my question.
How do you expect Kidd to take that Suns team to the Finals with their pitiful halfcourt offense?
Ditto for the next season when Nash was leading a starting lineup of Jones, Diaw, Bell, and Marion?

And that Wilt-Russell analogy is terrible.
Terrible.

That Suns team was more of a fastbreak team than the Nets team Kidd took to the finals twice. And they were also a better halfcourt team. Who on that Nets team could create their shot 1v1 other than Richard Jefferson? Stoudemire, Joe Jonshon, barbosa could all create their own shot. Even Diaw and Marion were pretty decent on post ups.

[ChuckOakley]

That post up game is useless when you shoot 40% from it. I can't imagine how low his percentages would be if he didn't have that post game.
You do realize 1/3 of Kidd's shots in his career are 3 pointers?
He did not shoot 40% when he was posting up, nor did the players he was passing to off of his post-ups.

[ErhnamDjinn]

Lolz the bigger question is how many people has Jason Kidd overrated and given fat paychecks over Nash:oldlol:
* RJ
* Kmart
* Jason Collins
* Mikki Moore
* Shawn Marion

he turned borderline stars into borderline all stars gave 2 of them almost Max contracts.

Only thing I think Nash hyped up was Joe Johnson.

Anyway in the end both of them were great PG

[PhxSunsFTW]

Lolz the bigger question is how many people has Jason Kidd overrated and given fat paychecks over Nash:oldlol:
* RJ
* Kmart
* Jason Collins
* Mikki Moore
* Shawn Marion

he turned borderline stars into borderline all stars gave 2 of them almost Max contracts.

Only thing I think Nash hyped up was Joe Johnson.


Quentin Richardson
Joe Johnson
Shawn Marion - maybe...
Tim Thomas
Raja Bell
Boris Diaw

[ChuckOakley]

Quentin Richardson
Joe Johnson
Shawn Marion - maybe...
Tim Thomas
Raja Bell
Boris Diaw

Qirch had his best years in LAC prior to Phoenix
TT was a former #7 pick who had much better years in Mil and NY
Raja Bell was playing as well in Utah right before Phoenix.

Meanwhile none of these guys got overpaid the way RJ, K-Mart or Collins did.

[Poodle]

Qirch had his best years in LAC prior to Phoenix
TT was a former #7 pick who had much better years in Mil and NY
Raja Bell was playing as well in Utah right before Phoenix.

Meanwhile none of these guys got overpaid the way RJ, K-Mart or Collins did.


collin's was never good, nor was it ever based on Kidd. he was the only big man they had, and back then 3/4's of us were scratching our head why he even got a fat contract in the first place.

kmart was a high pick and someone who was highly touted to become someone special. kidd made him better but he made kidd better with his ability to finish on breaks. kmart isn't even bad now, he's just way too injury prone and older.

RJ isn't nearly as bad as people are pretending now either because of him busting with SA. he still did well with or without kidd in NJ....

[PhxSunsFTW]

Qirch had his best years in LAC prior to Phoenix
TT was a former #7 pick who had much better years in Mil and NY
Raja Bell was playing as well in Utah right before Phoenix.

Meanwhile none of these guys got overpaid the way RJ, K-Mart or Collins did.

Qrich - I guess you're right. He did have better numbers with the Clips the year before but has declined ever since.

Tim Thomas - His prime was definitely not in Phx but he was being thrown around the league like a rag and after that 05-06 playoff run where him and Diaw played PF/C with Amare's injury he ended up getting a nice new contract with the Clippers. he hasn't been anything close to what he did in Phx after the contract.

Raja Bell - he was definitely good in Utah before coming to the Suns but you can't deny that he did better with the Suns. I don't know if you can attribute it to Nash or not but he definitely improved his numbers.

[ChuckOakley]

collin's was never good, nor was it ever based on Kidd. he was the only big man they had, and back then 3/4's of us were scratching our head why he even got a fat contract in the first place.

kmart was a high pick and someone who was highly touted to become someone special. kidd made him better but he made kidd better with his ability to finish on breaks. kmart isn't even bad now, he's just way too injury prone and older.

RJ isn't nearly as bad as people are pretending now either because of him busting with SA. he still did well with or without kidd in NJ....

RJ's FG% was much lower w/o Kidd playing, and IMO was the single biggest beneficiary from playing with Kidd.

And with or without injuries K-Martin an undersized, mediocre rebounding PF was never truly a max player and that's what Denver signed him for.

[PhxSunsFTW]

RJ's FG% was much lower w/o Kidd playing, and IMO was the single biggest beneficiary from playing with Kidd.

And with or without injuries K-Martin an undersized, mediocre rebounding PF was never truly a max player and that's what Denver signed him for.

You could make the same argument about Shawn Marion. His FG% increased dramatically with Steve Nash while doing worse when Kidd was in (although those were Marion's first two years in the league).

K-Mart's game was based mainly on athleticism and of course he isn't going to be the same now especially after two microfracture surgeries two years apart.

[kentatm]

Tony Parker routinely dismantles him and shoots a great percentage.

When the Suns needed Nash to step up on D he didn't because he can't.

don't forget Bibby routinely crapping all over him in those Mavs/Kings series.

[DetroitPiston]

Is the OP serious? Anyone who knows their basketball will rate Jason Kidd higher. I like Nash but he's nowhere near Kidd in his prime.

[Poodle]

Is the OP serious? Anyone who knows their basketball will rate Jason Kidd higher. I like Nash but he's nowhere near Kidd in his prime.


the 'anyone who knows bball' angle really should be 'anyone who watched both players play with any regularity' since i don't think most of you all have(nash at least, and not just 1 series/game against your homer team) that are acting like kidd is some no brainer :rolleyes:

its actually retarded anyone can really say something that dumb about kidd being so much better. you all clearly haven't seen nash play with any regularity, and if you have then you're completely blind to the reality of what goes on in a game and matters, to act like kidd is so much better than nash.

[Just2Clutch]

Nash was better at almost everything offensively than Kidd was....That being said this argument is about as close as Magic vs Bird. They are literally clued together just like those guys are/were. Kidd was on another world as far as rebounding and defense went, but in my opinion defense and rebounding is not as important as running an offense and making shots for a Point Guard.....That's just my take on the way Point guard's work.

[jjayfive]

Nash is the better shooter by a mile... But I like Kidds passing ability a little more... He's a great passer but that pick n' roll and run n' gun offense really helps Nash's assist..

[Just2Clutch]

For most of you guys who love stats, you should consider looking at how much worse shooters have gotten when they stopped playing with Nash and how they weren't efficient at all before Nash too....

[Go Getter]

Is the OP serious? Anyone who knows their basketball will rate Jason Kidd higher. I like Nash but he's nowhere near Kidd in his prime.


It is serious and I agree with you about Kidd but if you read the responses you'd see why I posed the question.

[Go Getter]

For most of you guys who love stats, you should consider looking at how much worse shooters have gotten when they stopped playing with Nash and how they weren't efficient at all before Nash too....

You have to credit the system too...nowhere else besides the Suns can you jack up three's and quick shots without fearing being benched.

[Go Getter]

Exactly. Offense is more important than defense and always has been. If you can't put the ball in the bucket at an effective rate, you're not going to have a good shot at winning the ball game.

BTW, for everyone that has posted, I use to be one of the ones who thought Nash is overrated, he doesn't do this and that, he isn't as good as Kidd. Then I actually bothered to look how much this guy does for the team. There is a reason they were nobody without him, and then a finals favorite with him.

IMO, Payton>Nash>Kidd.


1. Offense is NOT more important than defense you have just degraded yourself as far as basketball analysis.

2. The Mavs are playing better than the Suns who are NOT a finals favorite wtf are you talking about?

3. Funny how you rate the best defensive PG GP over Nash. For most of GP's career he was not a good jumpshooter he was a defensive stalwart.

[AirJordan23]

Already discussed this several times before so I'll just copy and paste my previous post.

Regarding their careers, nash has 2 MVPs and because of that and his popularity he will definitely be remembered more than Kidd. However, the consensus is that Nash didn't deserve either of his MVPs and Kidd didn't have a bad career, either. Kidd has more all nba first team selections and 9 all defensive selections compared to 0 for Nash. Kidd also led the league in assists several times, has 2 trips to the finals (albeit in a pathetic conference), 3rd all time in triple doubles and he was great ever since his rookie year. Think he shared the ROY award with Hill. Kidd also has a great Team USA legacy. Won a couple of Olympic medals, couple of FIBA Americas championships and USA never lost with Kidd on the team. Nash was a late bloomer. He had to play behind KJ and Kidd in the first couple of years in Phoenix. He got better in Dallas, though playing alongside Dirk and then maximized his talents in D'Antoni's offense playing at an MVP level. As far as longevity is concerned, I'd say Kidd takes it despite what Nash is doing right now. If Nash maintains this level for a couple of more years, it's gonna be a different story. Career, not sure. I want to say Nash because he'd be remembered more but Kidd has more hardware, overall.

As far as peak is concerned, Kidd takes it but it's pretty close. There isn't a great disparity as some may suggest. Nash was a better offensive player but that isn't enough to overcome the vast amount of advantage Kidd has at the other end of the floor. What makes Nash a better offensive player is his ability to shoot, penetrate and take over games. Kidd never took over a game like Stevie did in the '05-07 playoffs. He was dropping 20/15 on routine. Nash's ability to score was just too good. Clutch as hell and I think he has the most 50/40/90 seasons. Not sure about it; Dirk and Bird have to be on that list as well. Nash is better in the halfcourt setting. As far as playmaking, I'd say it's about even. Kidd in the open court was a joy to watch throwing lobs to KMart/VC. He was innovative as hell. Nash was/is great too. He can get the ball anywhere at any time and his accuracy and his efficiency is great. Kidd was more turnover prone, though and not as good of a ball handler which is the primary reason why he could not penetrate as well as Nash. Defense is where Kidd blows Nash outta the building. Help/on ball/team defense all goes to Kidd and defensive rebounding also has to count for something which is another area Kidd was excellent at. Kidd's man defense does get overrated, though. He was never a lockdown defender and got routinely torched by guys quicker than him. Avery Johnson in the '98 playoffs comes to mind. Nash’s team defense was solid due to his ability to take charges but he got lit up by several mediocre PGs in the league.

Overall, it's pretty close though for both prime and career. And I wouldn't throw a tantrum if anyone picked one over the other.

[Just2Clutch]

You have to credit the system too...nowhere else besides the Suns can you jack up three's and quick shots without fearing being benched.
Given the fact that he's a 50/40/90 % shooting player, I don't think most teams care. If he was a 40% shooter than you would have a point.....Nash has great scoring ability despite being a pass-first point guard.

[Go Getter]

Given the fact that he's a 50/40/90 % shooting player, I don't think most teams care. If he was a 40% shooter than you would have a point.....Nash has great scoring ability despite being a pass-first point guard.


Some coaches would rather have a Rajon Rondo type player than one that cannot guard his own shadow.

btw, rondo is an NBA champion and Nash isn't.

Not saying Nash isn't a better player at this point, just saying that maybe scoring 130 points and giving up 138 might make you want to slow down and concentrate on defense a little more.

[catch24]

You have to credit the system too...nowhere else besides the Suns can you jack up three's and quick shots without fearing being benched.

Mike D`Antoni and the Knicks say Hi.

[Go Getter]

Mike D`Antoni and the Knicks say Hi.


You're right. Good catch.

And for the record I do credit Nash with taking advantage of said system....I mean you can't give the style of play all or even most of the credit.

[LAClipsFan33]

I don't think we can point and laugh at D'Antoni right now. His system obviously needs a ball dominant PG with high IQ in the half court, pick and roll ability, great court vision, and elite passing skills. The Knicks don't have a player on the roster who in any way resembles this.

[Made From Dust]

Because Nash doesn't beat women? :confusedshrug:

[Brandon Roy]

In their primes,

Kidd > Nash.

Oh how people forget how amazing Kidd was.

Both Kidd and Nash were amazing passers, but I'd take Kidd's passing. Nash is undoubtedly a better shooter, but Kidd was every bit as good as a penetrator and a better finisher at the basket than Nash.

Kidd really separates himself on defense. His lateral movement and footspeed were among the best I've ever seen from a guard.

Kidd was also a MUCH better rebounder. Not even close.

Kidd was also every bit as clutch as Nash. Let's not forget his excellent decision making in the clutch and his ability to make shots he didn't usually make when his team needed it.

I really hope that people don't forget about how good Kidd was in his prime.

And Nash is one of my favorite players, if that matters.

[stephanieg]

or was it the team concepts of defense? what 1 player in any situations makes a defense good/great? i've just never seen an individual make a great defense more than a team in terms of winning stuff. but the way people talk here its always individual star defensive player based.

When KG doesn't play Boston's defense is 10 pts worse. Well, maybe not since he blew his knee out, but it was before that.

Basically good big men makes or breaks your defense. They are in very short supply, hence very few good defensive teams. All the stuff happening on the perimeter is marginal unless they're literally all white softies (the Toronto method) or the team philosophy is to give up any pretense of playing defense whatsoever and pretend it's still 1965 (the GS theory).

In the modern era the only player who's as bad at defense as Nash and still widely acclaimed was AI. That'd be a fun thread.

[Penny37]

That Suns team was more of a fastbreak team than the Nets team Kidd took to the finals twice. And they were also a better halfcourt team. Who on that Nets team could create their shot 1v1 other than Richard Jefferson? Stoudemire, Joe Jonshon, barbosa could all create their own shot. Even Diaw and Marion were pretty decent on post ups.
Proof you don't watch the Suns play.
Marion a good post up player? Right....
It doesn't matter in the playoffs if Phoenix was more of a fast break team. It's mostly half court sets anyways.

[Penny37]

In their primes,

Kidd > Nash.

Oh how people forget how amazing Kidd was.

Both Kidd and Nash were amazing passers, but I'd take Kidd's passing. Nash is undoubtedly a better shooter, but Kidd was every bit as good as a penetrator and a better finisher at the basket than Nash.

Kidd really separates himself on defense. His lateral movement and footspeed were among the best I've ever seen from a guard.

Kidd was also a MUCH better rebounder. Not even close.

Kidd was also every bit as clutch as Nash. Let's not forget his excellent decision making in the clutch and his ability to make shots he didn't usually make when his team needed it.

I really hope that people don't forget about how good Kidd was in his prime.

And Nash is one of my favorite players, if that matters.
Let's not kid ourselves. I think everyone here but you agrees that Nash is more clutch.

Even the biggest of Nash haters will admit that.
Passing could go either way.
Shooting, obviously Nash.
Defense/Rebounding, obviously Kidd.

It's close. It could go either way.

[Penny37]

1. Offense is NOT more important than defense you have just degraded yourself as far as basketball analysis.

2. The Mavs are playing better than the Suns who are NOT a finals favorite wtf are you talking about?

3. Funny how you rate the best defensive PG GP over Nash. For most of GP's career he was not a good jumpshooter he was a defensive stalwart.
If you haven't been keeping up, we've been talking about individual defense.
A player's individual offense is more important than their individual defense.
That's why a player like Nash is known to be much better than a player like Battier.

[plowking]

1. Offense is NOT more important than defense you have just degraded yourself as far as basketball analysis.

2. The Mavs are playing better than the Suns who are NOT a finals favorite wtf are you talking about?

3. Funny how you rate the best defensive PG GP over Nash. For most of GP's career he was not a good jumpshooter he was a defensive stalwart.

1. Yes it is. You can try to look knowledgable by saying "defense is the most important thing in basketball", though the fact is a good offense is better than a good defense. Why is someone like Nash at his peak considered better than a prime Ben Wallace or Mutombo? Because, offensive players are better. Same goes with comparing Carmelo and Artest. Carmelo at his peak is better.
Putting the ball in the hoop is the most important thing.

2. I was talking about 04-05, which is what the poster asked me... "When were they amongst finals favorites?" ...

3. GP was far better than Kidd defensively and as good as Nash offensively.

[Go Getter]

If you haven't been keeping up, we've been talking about individual defense.
A player's individual offense is more important than their individual defense.
That's why a player like Nash is known to be much better than a player like Battier.


I really don't care to keep up with that doggerel.

Team defense as well as individual defense is as important if not MORE important than offense.

J. Kidd is a better team defender and individual defender than Nash.

[Penny37]

I really don't care to keep up with that doggerel.

Team defense as well as individual defense is as important if not MORE important than offense.

J. Kidd is a better team defender and individual defender than Nash.
Wow.
You REALLY just DON'T get it, do you.

[Go Getter]

1. Yes it is. You can try to look knowledgable by saying "defense is the most important thing in basketball", though the fact is a good offense is better than a good defense. Why is someone like Nash at his peak considered better than a prime Ben Wallace or Mutombo? Because, offensive players are better. Same goes with comparing Carmelo and Artest. Carmelo at his peak is better.
Putting the ball in the hoop is the most important thing.

2. I was talking about 04-05, which is what the poster asked me... "When were they amongst finals favorites?" ...

3. GP was far better than Kidd defensively and as good as Nash offensively.


Dude I used to have a modicum of respect for your posting until this.

It's pretty clear that you don't know what you're talking about.

[Go Getter]

Wow.
You REALLY just DON'T get it, do you.


No YOU don't get it.

Defense and offense are equally important.

I would argue that since everyone is so enamored with offense because it is FUN, that defense is even more important because ppl [such as you and plowking] don't understand/respect/practice it.

Teams like Chicago, Boston, Detroit, San Antonio won champioships based off of defense.


D Antoni/Nash haven't won shit and they have had some of the best offenses in NBA history.

you fail basketball 101

[Penny37]

No YOU don't get it.

Defense and offense are equally important.

I would argue that since everyone is so enamored with offense because it is FUN, that defense is even more important because ppl [such as you and plowking] don't understand/respect/practice it.
Wrong.
Defense is MORE IMPORTANT THAN OFFENSE.
I've been saying that from the start.
However, for an INDIVIDUAL.
I'd rather have someone who is superb offensively (aka. Nash) rather than someone who is superb defensively (Battier)

No one in their right mind would take Battier over Nash, other than you apparently.
Since Battier has better individual defense and team defense, right?

[Go Getter]

Wrong.
Defense is MORE IMPORTANT THAN OFFENSE.
I've been saying that from the start.
However, for an INDIVIDUAL.
I'd rather have someone who is superb offensively (aka. Nash) rather than someone who is superb defensively (Battier)

No one in their right mind would take Battier over Nash, other than you apparently.
Since Battier has better individual defense and team defense, right?

Comparing Battier and Nash is moronic.

I would rather have Rondo, Dennis Johnson, or Gary Payton over Nash, yes.

The Key is playing BOTH ENDS OF THE COURT.

Two way players are better than one way players.

[Penny37]

Comparing Battier and Nash is moronic.

I would rather have Rondo, Dennis Johnson, or Gary Payton over Nash, yes.

The Key is playing BOTH ENDS OF THE COURT.

Two way players are better than one way players.
Okay, I'm done here.
There's no way I can debate with someone who would rather have Rondo over a 2-Time MVP in Steve Nash.

It's hopeless.
Goodluck Plow.

[Go Getter]

Okay, I'm done here.
There's no way I can debate with someone who would rather have Rondo over a 2-Time MVP in Steve Nash.

It's hopeless.
Goodluck Plow.



2 time MVP<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<NBA Champion.

[Of course I'm talking right now and not in Nash's prime]

[Penny37]

2 time MVP<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<NBA Champion.

[Of course I'm talking right now and not in Nash's prime]
So you'd take a prime Nash over Rondo then?
Did a prime Nash play better defense than present Nash?
If not, then your logic is flawed.

[Go Getter]

So you'd take a prime Nash over Rondo then?
Did a prime Nash play better defense than present Nash?
If not, then your logic is flawed.

Let me clarify.

Rondo is just now peaking and Nash has been declining. Last year in the playoff Rondo shot a sky-high FG percentage while playing tough D.

So I'd take Rondo [now] over Nash but not a couple of seasons ago [when Rondo was still developing].

Sorry for the confusion.

[Penny37]

Let me clarify.

Rondo is just now peaking and Nash has been declining. Last year in the playoff Rondo shot a sky-high FG percentage while playing tough D.

So I'd take Rondo [now] over Nash but not a couple of seasons ago [when Rondo was still developing].

Sorry for the confusion.
Would you rather have Prime Nash or Rondo now?

[Go Getter]

Would you rather have Prime Nash or Rondo now?


Honestly, it depends on the team.

What you guys fail to realize that a big part of the pg's job is to stick on ball defense. If you don't, your bigs are suseptable to picking up fouls trying to cover your ass.

Rondo fit in well with the Celtics....Nash? Idk.

The bottom line is that it doesn't look like Nash is going to ever win a ring and why is that?

He has had good teams. He's a two time MVP and a future HOFer....so why hasn't he won anything? Why can't he lead his team to the finals?

[Penny37]

Honestly, it depends on the team.

What you guys fail to realize that a big part of the pg's job is to stick on ball defense. If you don't, your bigs are suseptable to picking up fouls trying to cover your ass.

Rondo fit in well with the Celtics....Nash? Idk.

The bottom line is that it doesn't look like Nash is going to ever win a ring and why is that?

He has had good teams. He's a two time MVP and a future HOFer....so why hasn't he won anything? Why can't he lead his team to the finals?
Rondo had KG, Perk, Ray, and Pierce.
He was the 4th option.
Nash was the first/second option.
Please, you can't compare the two.
The reason that Suns team didn't win a title was because their defense as a whole sucked. No shot blockers, no defensive presence. You can't blame that solely on Nash.

Give Nash KG and Perk to back him up in the Paint and I guarantee you he looks better on defense. Not saying his defense is good by any means, but just not as bad as people here assume.

And many players have not won and won't win rings. Doesn't take anything away from their impact as a player. ie. John Stockton

Had it not been for that Robert Horry incident a couple years back, who knows? Maybe the Suns do have a title.

[DarkSephiroth]

....... Seeing the amount of idiocy in this thread......

Defense is more important than offense? What's the point of basketball? To get the ball inside the little orange thing known as the hoop. Would you rather have a team of 5 guys who can't make a shot but can all play defense, or a team of 5 guys who don't play D but hit almost every shot? I mean, honestly... EVERY team has to have a good offense to win anything.

I see quotes saying teams like "Chicago, Boston, Detroit, San Antonio" won championships based on defense.... Really? They were all solid defensive teams, but they all had GREAT offenses. Every single one of those teams had stars who could score the ball in bunches. Without that ability, none of those teams would make the finals. Offense > Defense.. but Offense + Defense > Just Offense. I think you guys are not realizing that, although all those teams played great defense, the ability to score is the #1 most important thing in basketball.