Was Jason Kidd ever really a DOMINANT player?

[KB2clutch]

we know he put up good stats and crap on the nets teams that made the finals but can we really say that he was dominant player? were other teams game planning to stop him? would he ever recieve constant double teams? I would like to say no, this is why i would put steve nash over him all time because he wasnt a dominant force like nash was on offensive, if were being completely honest here, i think point guards were happy to guard kidd cuz they didnt have to work that hard on the defensive end

[PurpleChuck]

other than in his Nets days, he's irrelevant.

[Ancient Legend]

For once I agree with a Kobe fan.

Kidd's best years were in the weakest Eastern conference ever. While a great passer and defender, he never could shoot to save his life, and led the league in assists while playing against weak teams and PGs, while is Nash only one year younger and is still playing like an MVP, still holding his own against D-Will, CP3, Westbrook, can't say the same about Kidd.

[Disaprine]

no, but he still a top 5 point guard of all time.

[Mirjalovic]

we know he put up good stats and crap on the nets teams that made the finals but can we really say that he was dominant player? were other teams game planning to stop him? would he ever recieve constant double teams? I would like to say no, this is why i would put steve nash over him all time because he wasnt a dominant force like nash was on offensive, if were being completely honest here, i think point guards were happy to guard kidd cuz they didnt have to work that hard on the defensive end

Kidd used to be one of the faster PG in NBA. The current Jason Kidd isn't the prime Kidd (if you dont understand about aging, however). Also, when you think its easy task to guard him, Kidd would kill you with his outstanding court vision.

[Ikill]

For once I agree with a Kobe fan.

Kidd's best years were in the weakest Eastern conference ever. While a great passer and defender, he never could shoot to save his life, and led the league in assists while playing against weak teams and PGs, while is Nash only one year younger and is still playing like an MVP, still holding his own against D-Will, CP3, Westbrook, can't say the same about Kidd.
This is why age doesn't matter Kidd has played 2 more seasons and in those seasons Kidd played more games and minutes.

[Crown&Coke]

yes he was a dominant player. He carried teams, that is dominating basketball.

please don't confuse today Kidd against Prime Kidd with the Suns or Nets, kid just killed it.

He was the fastest dude I had ever seen with the ball, that includes anyone today. He was faster with the ball than without it. He did it with getting to the bucket, setting up his guys, playing lockdown defense. Only think was his shot was nonexhistent, yet in a league where you can handcheck, he still got to the rim with ease.

[The Iron Fist]

Kidd>>>>>>>>>>nash

[PurpleChuck]

Kidd>>>>>>>>>>nash
You truly are a dumb piece of fvck.:facepalm

Nash > Kidd and it ain't even remotely close.

[8BeastlyXOIAD]

yes he was a dominant player. He carried teams, that is dominating basketball.

please don't confuse today Kidd against Prime Kidd with the Suns or Nets, kid just killed it.

He was the fastest dude I had ever seen with the ball, that includes anyone today. He was faster with the ball than without it. He did it with getting to the bucket, setting up his guys, playing lockdown defense. Only think was his shot was nonexhistent, yet in a league where you can handcheck, he still got to the rim with ease.

no way prime Kidd is quicker than current Rose

[DuMa]

i remember the days when kidd got teh long rebound, it would be an automatic 2 points on the other end. he was so quick

[wang4three]

Hell yes he was.

[The Iron Fist]

You truly are a dumb piece of fvck.:facepalm

Nash > Kidd and it ain't even remotely close.


When was the last time Nash led a team to two finals in a row?

Is it about the last time Nash played d?

[Noob Saibot]

Jason Kidd was one of those few guards who could play equally well on both ends. The Nets players surrounding Kidd complimented his game very well because they could run the floor along with him. guys like Keynon Martin, Kerry Kittles, Richard Jefferson to name a few.

A master of triple doubles in his prime. so in his peak, he was playing amongst the fastest team in the league back in the early 00s which made them so dangerous with Kidd at centerpiece of it all. Kidd was an elite guard for a short time mainly for his hustle and court vision. I believe Nash's prime lasted longer however and he has accolades.

Nash and Kidd are about even in terms of point guard greatness.

[Crown&Coke]

You truly are a dumb piece of fvck.:facepalm

Nash > Kidd and it ain't even remotely close.

it aint even close??? wow is all I can say.

It is arguable either way, but you are forgetting how insanely good JKidd was

[pauk]

not really
but he was damn good..... triple double machine

[Crown&Coke]

no way prime Kidd is quicker than current Rose

he was, got the rebound and got to halfcourt before some defenders even turned around to run back on defense

Rose is fast, but Kidd was faster with the ball pushing to tempo

[I'm Seriously]

Kidd>>>>>>>>>>nash

LOLNO.


When was the last time Nash led a team to two finals in a row?

Is it about the last time Nash played d?

That's an idiotic reason to put Kidd over Nash.

Do you honestly believe that if Kidd faced the competition that Nash did he would have made it the finals? hell he probably doesn't even make the playoffs out West.

Nash not playing defense doesn't really have any relevance in this comparison, considering the gap in there offense is just as big as the gap in there defense, if not bigger.

Nash>Kidd rather easily.

[ThaSwagg3r]

I never really liked or was impressed by Jason Kidd. But that is just me though. His stats show you that he was a triple-double machine, but I never thought it was that impressive since his team would lose anyways.

[KevinNYC]

yes he was a dominant player. He carried teams, that is dominating basketball.

please don't confuse today Kidd against Prime Kidd with the Suns or Nets, kid just killed it.

He was the fastest dude I had ever seen with the ball, that includes anyone today. He was faster with the ball than without it. He did it with getting to the bucket, setting up his guys, playing lockdown defense. Only think was his shot was nonexhistent, yet in a league where you can handcheck, he still got to the rim with ease.

He absolutely was a dominant player because if you didn't game plan against him you lost.

He was a guy who raised the whole level of his team. Those Net teams look real weak without him. He also dominant all around

How many guys in the league have ever averaged at least 16ppg 6 rpg 8 apg and 2 spg ?

Three. Their names are Jason Kidd, Michael Jordan and Magic Johnson. (http://bkref.com/tiny/LG1PL)

Jordan did it once, Kidd and Magic did it 4 times. I suspect Oscar Robertson probably did it multiple times, but they didn't keep the stats for steals back then.

[get these NETS]

we know he put up good stats and crap on the nets teams that made the finals but can we really say that he was dominant player? were other teams game planning to stop him? would he ever recieve constant double teams? I would like to say no, this is why i would put steve nash over him all time because he wasnt a dominant force like nash was on offensive, if were being completely honest here, i think point guards were happy to guard kidd cuz they didnt have to work that hard on the defensive end


do you have an older brother, uncle or pops that can educate about basketball before you make foolish posts?


Kidd is/was the BEST passer in league history...yes..the same way Carter is (truth be told) a better dunker than MJ, Kidd had even better court vision than his idol Magic Johnson, not a better player....but a better passer.


Kidd was rookie of the year

made multiple all nba 1,2 or 3...and all defense.....


lost MVP race to Duncan one year(more politics than anything)




best argument for Kidd being a dominant player is this...

Name another player who went to perennial loser and almost overnight and by himself(with no other name, star or all star players) took that team to the NBA finals 2 out of 3 years.

[Dripac]

LOLNO.



That's an idiotic reason to put Kidd over Nash.

Do you honestly believe that if Kidd faced the competition that Nash did he would have made it the finals? hell he probably doesn't even make the playoffs out West.

Nash not playing defense doesn't really have any relevance in this comparison, considering the gap in there offense is just as big as the gap in there defense, if not bigger.

Nash>Kidd rather easily.

But defense wins championships :pimp:

[pauk]

He absolutely was a dominant player because if you didn't game plan against him you lost.

He was a guy who raised the whole level of his team. Those Net teams look real weak without him. He also dominant all around

How many guys in the league have ever averaged at least 16ppg 6 rpg 8 apg and 2 spg ?

Three. Their names are Jason Kidd, Michael Jordan and Magic Johnson. (http://bkref.com/tiny/LG1PL)

Jordan did it once, Kidd and Magic did it 4 times. I suspect Oscar Robertson probably did it multiple times, but they didn't keep the stats for steals back then.

forgot lebron? :P

[Nastradamus]

Nash may have a better overall career due to staying good longer(though it took him longer to get good too), but in their primes you take Kidd probably. Great passer, amazingly fast with the ball, pushing the tempo, great rebounder, great defender, great post up guard. The fact that he has added a 3 point ball to his game as he got older is a good credit to him as well. Nothing against Nash, but Kidd was more likely to make your team a winner IMO due to his defense.

[Papaya Petee]

forgot lebron? :P
2 steals.....

[I'm Seriously]

But defense wins championships :pimp:

If a PG's defense is so important to winning a title how the hell did the Spurs win multiple championships with Tony Parker as there PG?

And how the hell did the Lakers win multiple titles with Fisher as there PG?

What team has ever won a title where there PG was there best defender?

But teams have won titles were there PG was there best offensive player.

PG offense> PG defense.

[DetroitPiston]

Yes. People see the current Jason Kidd and don't see the hype, but if you watched him at his best, he was something else. He improved teams, as evidenced with the Nets. Dallas got better when they drafted him, Phoenix made the playoffs when Kidd played there and they were lottery bound when he left.

You take a team that has Kenyon Martin as one of your best players to the NBA finals, you're a pretty damn good player.

Nash is a good player, but he's not going to improve your team. He might make it more entertaining, but like I said, he's not going to make your team better.

[LA_Showtime]

Wow; I love how people see the current version and assume that's sort of what he was like in his prime. Kidd was a nightmare to defend.

[I'm Seriously]

Nash may have a better overall career due to staying good longer(though it took him longer to get good too), but in their primes you take Kidd probably. Great passer, amazingly fast with the ball, pushing the tempo, great rebounder, great defender, great post up guard. The fact that he has added a 3 point ball to his game as he got older is a good credit to him as well. Nothing against Nash, but Kidd was more likely to make your team a winner IMO due to his defense.

Nash was a better passer(though this is arguable) a massively better shooter, a much better scorer, a better handle, much better at running an offense, and a much better finisher.

Nash was a far, far, far, better offensive player than Kidd, an i'd much rather have an all time great offensive player at the PG position than a great defender and rebounder at the PG position.

[KevinNYC]

forgot lebron? :P
Nope. That link is from the basketball reference site. I didn't forget anyone I ran a search on their database.

Lebron didn't have >= 2.0 steals.

If you lower steals to 1.5, (http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/psl_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=0&type=per_game&per_minute_base=36&lg_id=NBA&is_playoffs=N&year_min=&year_max=&franch_id=&season_start=1&season_end=-1&age_min=0&age_max=99&height_min=0&height_max=99&birth_country_is=Y&birth_country=&is_active=&is_hof=&pos=&qual=&c1stat=stl_per_g&c1comp=gt&c1val=1.5&c2stat=ast_per_g&c2comp=gt&c2val=8&c3stat=trb_per_g&c3comp=gt&c3val=6&c4stat=pts_per_g&c4comp=gt&c4val=16&c5stat=&c5comp=gt&c6mult=1.0&c6stat=&order_by=season) he turns up.

[I'm Seriously]

Yes. People see the current Jason Kidd and don't see the hype, but if you watched him at his best, he was something else. He improved teams, as evidenced with the Nets. Dallas got better when they drafted him, Phoenix made the playoffs when Kidd played there and they were lottery bound when he left.

You take a team that has Kenyon Martin as one of your best players to the NBA finals, you're a pretty damn good player.

Nash is a good player, but he's not going to improve your team. He might make it more entertaining, but like I said, he's not going to make your team better.

I'm pretty sure having an elite offense makes you a better team.

[ThaSwagg3r]

Wow; I love how people see the current version and assume that's sort of what he was like in his prime. Kidd was a nightmare to defend.
Never averaging 20 ppg or more and shooting in the 35-40% range is definitely a nightmare to defend.

[get these NETS]

Never averaging 20 ppg or more and shooting in the 35-40% range is definitely a nightmare to defend.


who else could dominate a game and the FINAL score without scoring a single point?


besides Magic?



Jason Kidd turned his weaknesses into strengths..

ok....call him Ason Kidd, because he doesn't have a J?

He'll just fall back behind the arc and shoot(and make) timely threes...

sag off him on defense?

he'll just penetrate the paint and dish for an easier bucket or a dagger three


he was in attack mode so often and had such ball control and vision that he'd destroy your defense....time and time and time again....

[Crown&Coke]

Never averaging 20 ppg or more and shooting in the 35-40% range is definitely a nightmare to defend.

people who tried to check him thought so, because aint no body ever put Jason Kidd on lockdown

[KevinNYC]

Never averaging 20 ppg or more and shooting in the 35-40% range is definitely a nightmare to defend.

Sigh. It's a team game remember?
When Kidd was in his prime, he ran a fast-breaking team that as a whole was a nightmare to defend.

Put a great center on those Nets teams and they would remind people of the Showtime Lakers. Doesn't have to be Kareem either, but a guy who could run the court and defend.

The Nets took the Spurs to 6 games with Jason Collins as their center.

[XxSMSxX]

If a PG's defense is so important to winning a title how the hell did the Spurs win multiple championships with Tony Parker as there PG?

And how the hell did the Lakers win multiple titles with Fisher as there PG?

What team has ever won a title where there PG was there best defender?

But teams have won titles were there PG was there best offensive player.

PG offense> PG defense.

No one said the PG has to be the best defensive player on the team but when your PG is absolute ASS on defense that has a huge effect on team D

[TootsieRoll]

no way prime Kidd is quicker than current Rose

Your dumber than a homeless man. stupid retard. get off ish asshole

[I'm Seriously]

No one said the PG has to be the best defensive player on the team but when your PG is absolute ASS on defense that has a huge effect on team D

Then how did the Spurs and the Lakers when multiple titles last decade?

And btw when Nash had a good defensive big who could cover up his defense the Suns were a great defensive team. So clearly he's not costing them much defensively. But his oh so great owner thought it was a good idea to trade that player for cash.

[rodman91]

Kidd was much better defender, can playmaking from post,much better rebounder.Lack of shooting.

Nash is one of the best shooters of all time.Lack of defense.

I prefer nash as point guard because if you block passing lines he can still be effective with scoring.Also rebounding is quite overrated for guards when there are big guys.Nash's shooting ability is can open up the game.

Kidd was dominant player.Both on offense and defense.

[KevinNYC]

Also rebounding is quite overrated for guards when there are big guys.

With Kidd though, if he got a rebound, he was in attack mode, and your whole team is scrambling to get back.

I like Nash better in the half court than Kidd more dangerous off the pick and roll, but on defense and the transition from defense to offense I like Kidd.

Two of my all time favorite players though, because I like unselfish play, ball movement and fast break offense and guys with great court vision.

[Nets fan 93]

Kidd was much better defender, can playmaking from post,much better rebounder.Lack of shooting.

Nash is one of the best shooters of all time.Lack of defense.

I prefer nash as point guard because if you block passing lines he can still be effective with scoring.Also rebounding is quite overrated for guards when there are big guys.Nash's shooting ability is can open up the game.

Kidd was dominant player.Both on offense and defense.
Rebounding may seem overrated.. The amount kidd pulled down was very very impressive though. He was something else man. He has one of the best intangibles of all time. He was great coz of his IQ and court vision. Not to mention elite defense.

[KevinNYC]

Kidd with the rebound and the break (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6eKfwaZLtYs)

[miles berg]

Saw both Kidd & Nash extensively in Dallas and without a doubt Jason Kidd was a better player. Nash was a damn good player, no doubt, but Jason Kidd is one of the great's in the history of the game. He controlled the entire 94' of the basketball court whereas Nash controlled 47'. Pretty simple. People also underrate Kidd's ability to keep defense's honest through his three point shooting. The guy will go down top 5 in history in made 3 pointers.

He was better defensively than Nash, a better passer, a better rebounder, better at controlling an offense, while Nash was a better scorer in the halfcourt and a better shooter.

That is literally it. Nash was better at half court scoring and shooting whereas Kidd was equal to/better than Nash in every other aspect of the game.

Both are great players, no doubt, but Nash had the luxury of playing with Dirk Nowitzki & Amare Stoudemire. The best player prime Kidd played with was Antonio McDyess. Good player, no doubt, but not in the same universe as a Nowitzki or Amare.

[tpols]

Kidd was a dominant player in his prime.

Shit.. he was a better basketball player than nash.. he just never had the talent nash had in pheonix. Are we really going to compare kenyon martin, RJ, and kerry Kittles to Joe Johnson, Shawn Marion and Amare Stoudemire? Nash had a MASSIVE advantage in team strength and this easily makes up for any difference in opponent strength. Just look at the suns now that all of those guys have left.. they're not even in the playoffs anymore with nash still playing at a level close to what he played at in 06.

Kidd was a much, much better defender and rebounder than nash. And for those of you who think point guard defense and rebounding don't matter think about fast break play.. Kidd was a master of the fastbreak whether he jumpstarted it with a long rebound or a steal, he consistently got the nets running and his court vision and passing abilities in transition are the best in league history. He wasn't as good offensively in the half court as nash but he was better in transition, and overall a better passer where as nash was a better shooter and scorer.

Personally, I'd rather have a point guard who is a great on ball and help defender(especially since, in Kidd's case, he was a master at converting his defense into offense), and a point guard that is a great, great passer.. two areas kidd pretty much destroys nash in and the two categories that pretty much define a point guard. Nash may have been close to kidd as a player(although I still think kidd was better overall because his game was more balanced) but he sure as hell wasn't a better point guard.

[get these NETS]

Kidd could also defend 1,2,3s

so on switches, and pick rolls you're team isn't automatically at a disadvantage...


part of the reason why he made so many all defense teams...

[I'm Seriously]

Saw both Kidd & Nash extensively in Dallas and without a doubt Jason Kidd was a better player. Nash was a damn good player, no doubt, but Jason Kidd is one of the great's in the history of the game. He controlled the entire 94' of the basketball court whereas Nash controlled 47'. Pretty simple. People also underrate Kidd's ability to keep defense's honest through his three point shooting. The guy will go down top 5 in history in made 3 pointers.

He was better defensively than Nash, a better passer, a better rebounder, better at controlling an offense, while Nash was a better scorer in the halfcourt and a better shooter.

That is literally it. Nash was better at half court scoring and shooting whereas Kidd was equal to/better than Nash in every other aspect of the game.

Both are great players, no doubt, but Nash had the luxury of playing with Dirk Nowitzki & Amare Stoudemire. The best player prime Kidd played with was Antonio McDyess. Good player, no doubt, but not in the same universe as a Nowitzki or Amare.

Nash was a massively better shooter, a much better scorer, a better handle, a much better finisher, and much better at running an offense, while passing is arguable. Kidd did two two thing clearly better than Nash, defend and rebound, while Nash did three things clearly better than Kidd, score, shoot, and run an offense.

I would much rather have my PG do the things Nash could do, than the things Kidd could do.

[Bigsmoke]

The East was HORRIBLE back then. He only faced 1 team that won atleast 50 games in his 2 Finals run


i dont think Jason Kidd reputation would have been this if he would have stayed in Phoenix

[Bigsmoke]

Nash was a massively better shooter, a much better scorer, a better handle, a much better finisher, and much better at running an offense, while passing is arguable. Kidd did two two thing clearly better than Nash, defend and rebound, while Nash did three things clearly better than Kidd, score, shoot, and run an offense.

I would much rather have my PG do the things Nash could do, than the things Kidd could do.

there u go dickriding Nash again.

[I'm Seriously]

there u go dickriding Nash again.

It's my job.

[tpols]

Nash was a massively better shooter, a much better scorer, a better handle, a much better finisher, and much better at running an offense, while passing is arguable. Kidd did two two thing clearly better than Nash, defend and rebound, while Nash did three things clearly better than Kidd, score, shoot, and run an offense.

I would much rather have my PG do the things Nash could do, than the things Kidd could do.
Nash was a better shooter and half court orchestrator(mainly because of the pick and roll). Handler? Depends where you're talking about.. kidd was much better at handling the ball in transition and getting into the lane where as nash was a craftier dribbler in the half court.

Kidd was a better passer and transition player. He was also twice the defensive player and he exceled at turning long rebounds and defensive plays into offensive opportunities.. LOL at nash being a better finisher than kidd. Kidd was much better at getting to the rack and he did it in the hand checking era.. not to mention kidd's post game down low was very effective and nash has zero post game.. bottom line kidd was better at scoring close to the basket and nash was better at scoring away from it.

Kidd was better because he was a better passer and defender.. he had a more balanced game and had an overall higher impact on his team.

[Bigsmoke]

It's my job.

that was pretty ****ing gay

[KevinNYC]

He controlled the entire 94' of the basketball court whereas Nash controlled 47'.

I think that's a great way of putting it. Kidd just felt like he was everywhere on the court.



The best player prime Kidd played with was Antonio McDyess.

Wouldn't you say Kidd's prime was in NJ? That leaves, Martin, Kittles, Van Horn or Jefferson as possible best players.

[KevinNYC]

A couple of years ago ESPN had Kidd at number 7 and Nash at number 9 all time point guards.

Kidd:

The player: A brilliant passer -- his 9.2 assists per game average trail only Magic, Stockton and Oscar.

He's a terrific leader and intelligent competitor. Can beat an opponent in so many ways without scoring a point. J-Kidd is able to do precisely the right thing at the right time at the right place.

Nash

His performance over the last two years in Phoenix has put him in this elite category. He's the only point guard other than Magic to win back-to-back MVPs.

Takes the "makes players around him better" tag to a whole new level. Has the ability to make entire teams adjust to his style of play.

They also had Walt Frazier as the best defensive point guard ever.

[I'm Seriously]

Nash was a better shooter and half court orchestrator(mainly because of the pick and roll). Handler? Depends where you're talking about.. kidd was much better at handling the ball in transition and getting into the lane where as nash was a craftier dribbler in the half court.

Kidd was a better passer and transition player. He was also twice the defensive player and he exceled at turning long rebounds and defensive plays into offensive opportunities.. LOL at nash being a better finisher than kidd. Kidd was much better at getting to the rack and he did it in the hand checking era.. not to mention kidd's post game down low was very effective and nash has zero post game.. bottom line kidd was better at scoring close to the basket and nash was better at scoring away from it.

Kidd was better because he was a better passer and defender.. he had a more balanced game and had an overall higher impact on his team.

:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

Nash was a far better finisher than Kidd.

Nash was a better scorer than Kidd in everyway besides posting up.

And you are aware that Nash also played in the handchecking era? And was a far better scorer than Kidd.

Nash is better than Kidd because PG's impact the game offensively much more than they do defensively, and Nash sh*ts all over Kidd offensively.

[Nick Young]

Yes, thats how he lead shit teammates to 2 straight finals appearances even if it was in the shitty east thats still an accomplishment

[tpols]

Nash was a far better finisher than Kidd.

Uh.. kidd was easily a better finisher than nash. Nash may be good at making acrobatic layups and off balance close range shots, but kidd was much bigger, stronger, and faster.. he was very good at getting to the rim both off the dribble and out of the post.. and he was a much stronger finisher than nash.


And you are aware that Nash also played in the handchecking era? And was a far better scorer than Kidd.
And why did nash break out RIGHT after hand checking was abolished? :oldlol:

Nash is better than Kidd because PG's impact the game offensively much more than they do defensively, and Nash sh*ts all over Kidd offensively.
Just because defense is less important for pgs than say.. centers.. doesn't mean that it isn't important at all. Kidd could lock down any perimeter player. He was bigger, stronger, and faster than nash. Defense for a point guard is at least 1/3 of their overall arsenal and for kidd it was probably worth even more because of how good he was at it. The whole reason jason kidd's defense is consistently brought up is because he was great at turning that defense(long rebounds/steals/blocks) into offense.. he was much better in transition than nash because of it.

And offensively they were close. LOL at you acting like it isn't a comparison. Kidd was a much better overall passer than nash and he didn't need a pick and roll every time to get a pass off. Literally the only areas nash beats kidd in are shooting and scoring. Thats it.

[Bigsmoke]

Yes, thats how he lead shit teammates to 2 straight finals appearances even if it was in the shitty east thats still an accomplishment
The Kings would have had like 4 straight Finals appearances

[tpols]

Yes, thats how he lead shit teammates to 2 straight finals appearances even if it was in the shitty east thats still an accomplishment
Yup.. nash may have had to face better competition, but he also had much, much better supporting casts. Two of his former players have MAX contracts and are the main options on two different teams right now(JJ and amare), and he had prime shawn marion. Easily counteracts any disparity in competition..

Look at nash now. He's still playing at the same level as he always has in pheaonix, but now that all of those great players are gone the suns suck. They went from competing in the WCF last year to not even making the playoffs once amare left.. And there's no coincidence there.

[Nick Young]

The Kings would have had like 4 straight Finals appearances
Kings, Blazers, probably even the dieing days of Stockton/Malone Jazz would have had a chance to come out of the east back then:roll:

[ginobli2311]

Nash was a better shooter and half court orchestrator(mainly because of the pick and roll). Handler? Depends where you're talking about.. kidd was much better at handling the ball in transition and getting into the lane where as nash was a craftier dribbler in the half court.

Kidd was a better passer and transition player. He was also twice the defensive player and he exceled at turning long rebounds and defensive plays into offensive opportunities.. LOL at nash being a better finisher than kidd. Kidd was much better at getting to the rack and he did it in the hand checking era.. not to mention kidd's post game down low was very effective and nash has zero post game.. bottom line kidd was better at scoring close to the basket and nash was better at scoring away from it.

Kidd was better because he was a better passer and defender.. he had a more balanced game and had an overall higher impact on his team.

This.

Too often when comparing players we just ignore the defensive end. Kidd was a great defender in his prime. One of the best in the league ever from the guard position when you combine defense and rebounding. Nash is one of the worst guards ever when you combine defense and rebounding. That matters a lot in a comparison between Kidd and Nash.

Nash is great, but I'll take Kidd every time.

[I'm Seriously]

Uh.. kidd was easily a better finisher than nash. Nash may be good at making acrobatic layups and off balance close range shots, but kidd was much bigger, stronger, and faster.. he was very good at getting to the rim both off the dribble and out of the post.. and he was a much stronger finisher than nash.

Finishing ability is how good you are at the rim, it doesn't matter how you try to finish whether it be powering your through defenders or finessing them with circus shots. Nash converted his "at the rim" shots alot more than Kidd did as such he was a better finisher.

Though if you do have prime Kidd's "at the rim" stats a would like to see them, the site i use doesn't carry stats before 07.


And why didn't nash break out RIGHT after hand checking was abolished?

I assume you mean "why did Nash breakout right after hand checking was abolished? Imo it was because his role on Pheonix was alot greater than his role in Dallas.

And even besides that, Nash posted multiple scoring seasons better than Kidds best scoring season in Dallas.

02- 17.9 PPG on 60.2 TS%
03- 17.7 PPG on 57.6 TS%


Just because defense is less important for pgs than say.. centers.. doesn't mean that it isn't important at all. Kidd could lock down any perimeter player. He was bigger, stronger, and faster than nash. Defense for a point guard is at least 1/3 of their overall arsenal and for kidd it was probably worth even more because of how good he was at it. The whole reason jason kidd's defense is consistently brought up is because he was great at turning that defense(long rebounds/steals/blocks) into offense.. he was much better in transition than nash because of it.

Kidd could not lock down any perimeter player, his defense was valuable on bigger guards, but he got abused when defending smaller, quicker guards. Which is alot of todays PG's

[magnax1]

Realistically, he was never a superstar in the way I think of the term. Great player, and he made his team better because he was an athlete, and because he was good at getting the ball out on the break and making good decisions. He was never as good of a passer as Nash, and never was really that good at playing in the half court, which is really the vast majority of the game. Also, he was just poor at getting his team the best shot in the halfcourt. In theory he was an okay scorer, he was pretty good at getting inside the lane and was a fairly good finisher. However, he never really made use of it, and was terribly inefficient, and just shot to much for how bad of a scorer he was.
Comparing Kidd to Nash, Nash is the obvious choice to me. Nash sucked on D, but he was the best offensive player in the league for quite a while. He did the opposite of Kidd in that he always got the best shot for his team, whether it be him or someone else in the halfcourt. Actually he's probably the best offensive player in the league right now.

['Toine=MVP]

the most dominant pure PG ever.

[I'm Seriously]

Look at nash now. He's still playing at the same level as he always has in pheaonix, but now that all of those great players are gone the suns suck. They went from competing in the WCF last year to not even making the playoffs once amare left.. And there's no coincidence there.

Nash is not playing on the same level as he was in his peak, the most notible difference is take-over ability. The Suns have lost alot of games this year because they don't have the guy they can say "score" if this was 05-07 Nash he would be that guy. But this year he hasn't been able to whether that be because of injury or age.

The Suns don't suck, there 35-34 and 35-30 when Nash plays. Thats not bad at all.

What does Amare give you? Offense, Nash has the Suns at 9th in the league in offense despite having little offensive talent around him.

And despite the fact that the Amare has two guys massively better than anyone not Nash on the Suns, he has the Knicks at .500

It's clear who was more important for the Suns success last year.


This.

Too often when comparing players we just ignore the defensive end. Kidd was a great defender in his prime. One of the best in the league ever from the guard position when you combine defense and rebounding. Nash is one of the worst guards ever when you combine defense and rebounding. That matters a lot in a comparison between Kidd and Nash.

Nash is great, but I'll take Kidd every time.

Do you also want to ignore the offensive side? Because Nash is massively better than Kidd offensively.

How is Nash a bad rebounder? he's routinely around 3.0-3.5 RPG and peaked at 4.2, I don't see how that's bad for a PG.

[Crown&Coke]

Kidd could not lock down any perimeter player, his defense was valuable on bigger guards, but he got abused when defending smaller, quicker guards. Which is alot of todays PG's

yes, yes he could. Back in Kidds prime he went up against anyone and did a hell of a job. Today he sucks at guarding the smaller guys, but back in his heyday he did a great job on anyone not a legit pf or center. Not many can say that.

And what they hell is all this I see "defense and rebounding is overrated for a guard" are you fking kidding me? We always preach how defense and rebounding wins but when comparing Kidd and Nashty is irrelevant? Ditch that logic, because its softer than ice cream on a hot day.

Prime Kidd=beast, no bs no flattery, dude killed all. For a guy who didn't score to keep his team winning, that is an accomplishment only a handful of dudes can even boast. And to say Jersey Kidd had no opposition as a negative :no: It aint his fault the east couldn't hold a jockstrap to the west. Don't diminish his beasting of everyone

[boxclever]

You can tell the ages of the posters on here by those sleeping on prime Kidd. He was such a beast and a trend setter in his prime. He and Nash are/were both great players and I'm not even going to follow this pathetic obsession of ranking one against the other but in short, YES, Kidd was hella dominant. He made everyone around him better, no cliche, back to back finals don't happen by chance

[I'm Seriously]

yes, yes he could. Back in Kidds prime he went up against anyone and did a hell of a job. Today he sucks at guarding the smaller guys, but back in his heyday he did a great job on anyone not a legit pf or center. Not many can say that

Even when Kidd was in his prime he had difficulty guarding the smaller quicker guards, and he would have even more difficulty guarding them in todays league because of the no hand checking rules.


And what they hell is all this I see "defense and rebounding is overrated for a guard" are you fking kidding me? We always preach how defense and rebounding wins but when comparing Kidd and Nashty is irrelevant? Ditch that logic, because its softer than ice cream on a hot day.

For the PG position yes defense is overrated, PG's simply don't have the impact the other positions have, especially bigs.


Prime Kidd=beast, no bs no flattery, dude killed all. For a guy who didn't score to keep his team winning, that is an accomplishment only a handful of dudes can even boast. And to say Jersey Kidd had no opposition as a negative It aint his fault the east couldn't hold a jockstrap to the west. Don't diminish his beasting of everyone

Kidd did score it's just that he was way too inefficient. And thats why I dont like his offense much, despite the great passing ability.

[Kingwillball]

You truly are a dumb piece of fvck.:facepalm

Nash > Kidd and it ain't even remotely close.


LOl..Son Nash was Kidds backup for a reason..Watch basketball past the last 5 yrs before spouting your stupidity..

[I'm Seriously]

LOl..Son Nash was Kidds backup for a reason..Watch basketball past the last 5 yrs before spouting your stupidity..

Are you serious?

[Bigsmoke]

Realistically, he was never a superstar in the way I think of the term. Great player, and he made his team better because he was an athlete, and because he was good at getting the ball out on the break and making good decisions. He was never as good of a passer as Nash, and never was really that good at playing in the half court, which is really the vast majority of the game. Also, he was just poor at getting his team the best shot in the halfcourt. In theory he was an okay scorer, he was pretty good at getting inside the lane and was a fairly good finisher. However, he never really made use of it, and was terribly inefficient, and just shot to much for how bad of a scorer he was.
Comparing Kidd to Nash, Nash is the obvious choice to me. Nash sucked on D, but he was the best offensive player in the league for quite a while. He did the opposite of Kidd in that he always got the best shot for his team, whether it be him or someone else in the halfcourt. Actually he's probably the best offensive player in the league right now.

that would be Lebron James

[Kingsfans818]

You truly are a dumb piece of fvck.:facepalm

Nash > Kidd and it ain't even remotely close.

sure if you don't care about defense and rebounding..

[Kingwillball]

Are you serious?


R U serious..Kidd was easily better.. Let me put it this way Nash was a great player for around 5 or 6 yrs..Kidd was a Great Player for at least 10 yrs..

[TryToBeUnbias]

and prime has been slowly forgotten. wow.

[LEFT4DEAD]

I don't know who here has not watched prime Kidd, but I surelly have.
Kidd was one of my favourite players in his prime. Guy has had no weaknesses in his game. Yeah, he was not very good shooter throughout his career, but he could knock every three he took. He is top 5 all time if I remember correctly in 3ptFGs.

Nash has had one of most talented teams in his prime in the league. Players like Amare, Marion, JJ, Barbosa, Diaw etc were more than enough to be leaded to the finals by one great PG.

Nets after Marbury/Kidd trade were automatically considered as contenders. He was best leader that my eyes have ever seen. That man had heart, he was playing with passion.

Leading team with 2-3 decent players to back2back finals is incredible. Nash will be remembered as a great PG, but in my eyes he will always be underachiever, who have just benefited from offense that his teams were playing.

He could not change the tempo of the game. He could not help on defense and rebounding so he has to compensate it on the offense.
Offense will not win anything in NBA, he knew that, and he was still playing same bball style with no D.

No offense kidos, but give me Kidd 24/7, 365 days in the year over Nash.

[Bigsmoke]

I don't know who here has not watched prime Kidd, but I surelly have.
Kidd was one of my favourite players in his prime. Guy has had no weaknesses in his game. Yeah, he was not very good shooter throughout his career, but he could knock every three he took. He is top 5 all time if I remember correctly in 3ptFGs.

Nash has had one of most talented teams in his prime in the league. Players like Amare, Marion, JJ, Barbosa, Diaw etc were more than enough to be leaded to the finals by one great PG.

Nets after Marbury/Kidd trade were automatically considered as contenders. He was best leader that my eyes have ever seen. That man had heart, he was playing with passion.

Leading team with 2-3 decent players to back2back finals is incredible. Nash will be remembered as a great PG, but in my eyes he will always be underachiever, who have just benefited from offense that his teams were playing.

He could not change the tempo of the game. He could not help on defense and rebounding so he has to compensate it on the offense.
Offense will not win anything in NBA, he knew that, and he was still playing same bball style with no D.

No offense kidos, but give me Kidd 24/7, 365 days in the year over Nash.

Nash in 2006 was better than any year i remembered from Kidd. I mean Amare went down, Joe Johnson left, Quentin Richardson left, and there were question-marks on Diaw and Barbosa at the time and yet Nash was still able to led them to the WCFs. Was he better than Kobe? no. But he was damn good. he even increase his scoring to almost 19 a game.

To me, it goes like this.

Gary Payton > Nash > Kidd

[LEFT4DEAD]

Nash in 2006 was better than any year i remembered from Kidd. I mean Amare went down, Joe Johnson left, Quentin Richardson left, and there were question-marks on Diaw and Barbosa at the time and yet Nash was still able to led them to the WCFs. Was he better than Kobe? no. But he was damn good. he even increase his scoring to almost 19 a game.

To me, it goes like this.

Gary Payton > Nash > Kidd
I would take first 3 years of Kidd in Jersey over any Nash version.
He took shitty team to 2 finals. It's almost comparable to 2007' Cavs and James. Kidd would lead Nash' Suns to at least 2 finals if he had a chance.

On other hand, in 2006 Nash has advanced to the conference finals just because he played poor Lakers team and decent Clippers team.

[ballup]

Nash in 2006 was better than any year i remembered from Kidd. I mean Amare went down, Joe Johnson left, Quentin Richardson left, and there were question-marks on Diaw and Barbosa at the time and yet Nash was still able to led them to the WCFs. Was he better than Kobe? no. But he was damn good. he even increase his scoring to almost 19 a game.

To me, it goes like this.

Gary Payton > Nash > Kidd
I think anyone can agree that leading the Nets to two straight Finals is much harder. :roll:

[I'm Seriously]

R U serious..Kidd was easily better.. Let me put it this way Nash was a great player for around 5 or 6 yrs..Kidd was a Great Player for at least 10 yrs..

Nash All NBA teams : 7

Kidd All NBA teams : 6

Nash the past 7 years has averaged : 16.8/10.9/3.5/ on 62.5 TS%

Nash the past 11 years has averaged 16.6/9.8/3.3/ on 61.3 TS%

Hardly any longevity.

[Norcaliblunt]

I think anyone can agree that leading the Nets to two straight Finals is much harder. :roll:

In the Eastern conference's weakest era ever. :roll: :roll: :roll:

The JKidd Suns were arguably just as talented or more than the JKidd Nets, but Kidd wasn't leading the Suns to shit in the western conference.

[Kingwillball]

Nash All NBA teams : 7

Kidd All NBA teams : 6

Nash the past 7 years has averaged : 16.8/10.9/3.5/ on 62.5 TS%

Nash the past 11 years has averaged 16.6/9.8/3.3/ on 61.3 TS%

Hardly any longevity.


Here we Go.. Kidd for his Career has Averaged 9.2 Assists to Nash's 8.5..Nash a point more Scoring but Rebounds and Steals Kidd Dwarfs nash..As U can see the More Complete PG was Kidd OVER HIS CAREER. Nash has also played in a Run and Gun System for years Where Kidd has not...

Score another Win for the King..booyah

[Eat Like A Bosh]

Possibly back then in the early 2001 in his New Jersey Net years.
But he was never really a dominant scorer, and he seems disinterested in scoring. He was kinda like a better version of Rondo right now.

Great Playmaker, Great Rebounding for a guard, played decent on both ends, but his offensive is mediocre at best, and he shoots at a career 40.2%...

He's not exactly Dominant, but he helps his team in other ways.

[LEFT4DEAD]

In the Eastern conference's weakest era ever. :roll: :roll: :roll:

The JKidd Suns were arguably just as talented or more than the JKidd Nets, but Kidd wasn't leading the Suns to shit in the western conference.
Nash' teammates in those 2 years >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kidd's teammates
So it automatically cancel your argument.

[I'm Seriously]

Nash has had one of most talented teams in his prime in the league. Players like Amare, Marion, JJ, Barbosa, Diaw etc were more than enough to be leaded to the finals by one great PG.

Nash only had Amare, Marion and JJ on season and JJ got injured that year in the playoffs.

The Suns were so great because of offense, when he would get injured that offense droped off the face of the planet. The only PG I could say would lead that team to the finals would be Magic, because he's the only PG who was definitely better than Nash offensively.


Nash will be remembered as a great PG, but in my eyes he will always be underachiever, who have just benefited from offense that his teams were playing.

How is Nash an underachiever ? The only time he's ever lost to a team with a worse record than him was in 05 against the Spurs.

What an underachiever, losing to prime Tim Duncan.

Benefited from the offense that his team was playing? And what would that be run the pick and roll and create for everyone?

[I'm Seriously]

Here we Go.. Kidd for his Career has Averaged 9.2 Assists to Nash's 8.5..Nash a point more Scoring but Rebounds and Steals Kidd Dwarfs nash..As U can see the More Complete PG was Kidd OVER HIS CAREER. Nash has also played in a Run and Gun System for years Where Kidd has not...

Score another Win for the King..booyah

Why are you forgetting one of the most important things in basketball.....efficiency.

Nash's career TS% 60.6

Kidds career TS% 50.6

The gap is massive.

And Kidd also plays alot more minutes than Nash.

Nash : 31.4 MPG

Kidd : 36.9 MPG

Get Mad.

[LEFT4DEAD]

Nash only had Amare, Marion and JJ on season and JJ got injured that year in the playoffs.

The Suns were so great because of offense, when he would get injured that offense droped off the face of the planet. The only PG I could say would lead that team to the finals would be Magic, because he's the only PG who was definitely better than Nash offensively.
:facepalm :facepalm :confusedshrug: that team needed someone like gary payton or isiah thomas. that team needed defense, and that's something Nash could not provided




How is Nash an underachiever ? The only time he's ever lost to a team with a worse record than him was in 05 against the Spurs.

What an underachiever, losing to prime Tim Duncan.

Benefited from the offense that his team was playing? And what would that be run the pick and roll and create for everyone?

Because he had such a great team and could not lead them to even one finals.
So what if he had to face Duncan.
Duncan had to face prime Shaq and very good Kobe together. He still won on his own. Nash could not do shit with great team and that's why he is underachiver. He has nothing on Kidd except shooting. NOTHING

[LEFT4DEAD]

Why are you forgetting one of the most important things in basketball.....efficiency.

Nash's career TS% 60.6

Kidds career TS% 50.6

The gap is massive.

And Kidd also plays alot more minutes than Nash.

Nash : 31.4 MPG

Kidd : 36.9 MPG

Get Mad.
lol at stats nerds today. have you even watched prime Kidd or you are basing your thougts on basketball reference, 82games etc

[Ikill]

can someone explain why Kidd was so bad at scoring

[I'm Seriously]

that team needed someone like gary payton or isiah thomas. that team needed defense, and that's something Nash could not provided

Yes, that's the PG's job, to anchor your defense. You sir are so very knowledgeable

When Gary Payton lost Shawn Kemp all he did was anchor below average defenses.

So the Suns would get a bit better defensively, but they would get alot worse offensively.


Because he had such a great team and could not lead them to even one finals.
So what if he had to face Duncan.
Duncan had to face prime Shaq and very good Kobe together. He still won on his own. Nash could not do shit with great team and that's why he is underachiver. He has nothing on Kidd except shooting. NOTHING

Yes Nash had a great team and couldn't beat Prime Duncan.

All that proves is that Duncan>>Nash. Because no expected Nash to beat prime Duncan, he can't be an underachiver.

I've stated multiple times in this thread what Nash has on Kidd.

Which is almost everything on offense.

[DetroitPiston]

To add to my point about Kidd improving teams:

When Dallas drafted him, they won only 13 games at the time. When Kidd joined them, they went to 30+ wins.

When he joined the Nets, they won 50+ games. In his first season.

Kidd is that kind of a player, no doubt about it. I like Nash, but if I want a PG that can improve my team, Nash isn't going to be it. It's going to be Kidd. If I want my team to be entertaining, I'll go with Nash.

[I'm Seriously]

lol at stats nerds today. have you even watched prime Kidd or you are basing your thougts on basketball reference, 82games etc

I did see prime Kidd play and he was an inefficient scorer. I don't need advanced stats to back this up.

Nash FG% 49.0

Kidd FG% 40.2

No matter how you look at it Kidd wasn't close to Nash in efficiency.

[get these NETS]

can someone explain why Kidd was so bad at scoring

he was a classic pass first point guard....

he could score.......he just wasn't a very good "shooter"...

if he needed to get points, he could post up...or drive and get AND 1s... but outside shooting was the biggest knock on his game...



he was dominant because his team would beat yours with kidd running the offense...and getting stops and when you look at the box scores..he has 8-9 points

[stephanieg]

Kidd was a dominant player. He passed both the eyeball test and metric tests. His only weakness was a lack of shooting, but that doesn't matter because there's a lot more to basketball than scoring (ask the Knicks about this). He's what people hope Rondo turns into.

[magnax1]

that would be Lebron James
Lebron's the best player, but I'd rather have Nash then him on offense. It's too bad Nash is such a bad defender. If he was as good as Kidd was on defense, he'd be top 10 all time. Easily.

[LEFT4DEAD]

Yes, that's the PG's job, to anchor your defense. You sir are so very knowledgeable

When Gary Payton lost Shawn Kemp all he did was anchor below average defenses.

So the Suns would get a bit better defensively, but they would get alot worse offensively.

PG's job is to pass first, defend good pick and roles with frontcourt teammate, to stop penetration and to play passing lanes. After that comes scoring.

Suns team had scoring, too much I would say. Barbosa, Amare, JJ, Diaw, Marion could take care of scoring. Now imagine Kidd there. You have player who can play lock down defense on most PG's at the time, you have leader who know how to dictate the game, and who is not in hurry on offense. Great sense for steal, and could gave you triple double every night.

And as a bonus on that, you get passing first PG, who can pass similiar or even better than Nash.

You get me now.
Nash was not scoring 30 ppg. He was scoring couple of points more than Kidd per game. You see, scoring is not that important now. But in reality, he should have scored 30 ppg to compensate his defensive liability. He could not do that. Every other elite PG could have play defense and that's what sepparate them: Thomas, Payton, Kidd, Paul, etc etc. And one more thing, Magic is point forward, not a pure point guard.



Yes Nash had a great team and couldn't beat Prime Duncan.

All that proves is that Duncan>>Nash. Because no expected Nash to beat prime Duncan, he can't be an underachiver.

I've stated multiple times in this thread what Nash has on Kidd.

Which is almost everything on offense.
He has just shooting on him. Nothing else.
In those two mvp years most of the league have excepted the finals or ring for Suns. Not just to beat Spurs, but to win it all.
So, by your logic, we should have retired Duncan, Nowitzki, Kobe and all other superstars and then Nash would stand a chance to win it. I'm still not sure he could.

[LEFT4DEAD]

I did see prime Kidd play and he was an inefficient scorer. I don't need advanced stats to back this up.

Nash FG% 49.0

Kidd FG% 40.2

No matter how you look at it Kidd wasn't close to Nash in efficiency.
Do you know what this even mean? Kidd is at about 11 fga in his career. Nash is at 11 too.
That 40.2% means Kidd has hit about 5 shots of those 11 he took, and Nash about 5.5 on every 11 taken. So thats about 1-1.5 points difference. You really think that matters so much? Learn some basketball kid. Stop fooling yourself.

[I'm Seriously]

Suns team had scoring, too much I would say. Barbosa, Amare, JJ, Diaw, Marion could take care of scoring. Now imagine Kidd there. You have player who can play lock down defense on most PG's at the time, you have leader who know how to dictate the game, and who is not in hurry on offense. Great sense for steal, and could gave you triple double every night.

And as a bonus on that, you get passing first PG, who can pass similiar or even better than Nash.

If all those guys could handle the scoring load why is that they didnt?

Because the Suns halfcourt offense has always been about Nash creating for others, namely through the PNR. And while Kidd may be close to Nash at passing he's not as a PNR player.

The reason is because you can sag off of Jason Kidd, with Nash you can't. If you go over the screen with Nash he'll torch you with his pin pointing passing, if you go under the screen he torches you with his shooting ability.

That's one of the main reasons the Suns offenses have been so good. And Kidd simply can't replucate that, regardless of what scorers are on the team.
You replace Nash with Kidd they have a huge dropoff ofensively, while getting a bit better defensively. overall there not nearly as good.

And that's just in 05, in 06 were Nash was the number 1 scoring option, you replace him with Jason Kidd it's a disaster.


You get me now.
Nash was not scoring 30 ppg. He was scoring couple of points more than Kidd per game. You see, scoring is not that important now. But in reality, he should have scored 30 ppg to compensate his defensive liability. He could not do that. Every other elite PG could have done it: Thomas, Payton, Kidd, Paul, etc etc. And one more thing, Magic is point forward, not a pure point guard

Nash was massively more efficient than Kidd on more volume, there is a big scoring gap between the two.

"He should have scored 30 to compensate for his defensive liability and any other elite PG could have done it"?

That is one of the most ridiculous things i have ever read.

First of all how much of a liabilty was he? when the Suns got a good defensive big they became a great defensive team. This defensive big wasn't prime Hakeem it was Kurt Thomas. If his defense can be covered up so easily he's not much of a liability.

Your second response is only deserving of a :facepalm


He has just shooting on him. Nothing else.
In those two mvp years most of the league have excepted the finals or ring for Suns. Not just to beat Spurs, but to win it all.
So, by your logic, we should have retired Duncan, Nowitzki, Kobe and all other superstars and then Nash would stand a chance to win it. I'm still not sure he could

Scoring, running an offense, half court player. that's more than one thing.

The Suns were expected to be a 6-7 seed in 05 and some thought they would miss the playoffs entirely in 06.

In no way did they underachieve.

The only time Nash has ever lost to Dirk, Kobe, or Duncan's team was when he was the underdog, when he was picked to win he won. So how is he an underachiever.


Do you know what this even mean? Kidd is at about 11 fga in his career. Nash is at 11 too.
That 40.2% means Kidd has hit about 5 shots of those 11 he took, and Nash about 5.5 on every 11 taken. So thats about 1-1.5 points difference. You really think that matters so much? Learn some basketball kid. Stop fooling yourself.

Those stats are almost entirely wrong, but yes it does matter.

[D.J.]

no, but he still a top 5 point guard of all time.


Magic, Oscar, Isiah, Stockton, Frazier, Payton. That puts him to 7th at best and some would rank Nash above him.

To answe the question, yes he was dominant. He took a team where the best players after him were Kenyon Martin, Keith Van Horn, and Richard Jefferson and made the Finals in two consecutive seasons. He always made teams better. Dallas was no longer the joke of the league when he played for them. Phoenix became a relevant team when he joined them and even upset the Spurs one year. The Nets as I mentioned earlier made the Finals twice. Kidd had the rare ability to have an impact on games without scoring a single point. From the PG position, the only ones I've seen that could do that were Magic, Stockton, and Payton.

[Bandito]

can someone explain why Kidd was so bad at scoring
Can you explain why Shaq missed so many free throws? No? The STFU...:lol

Also Kidd>Nash in everything except shooting.

[I'm Seriously]

Can you explain why Shaq missed so many free throws? No? The STFU...:lol

Also Kidd>Nash in everything except shooting.

What about scoring? running an offense? as a halfcourt player? He did all three of those things plus shooting worse than Nash.

[get these NETS]

What about scoring? running an offense? as a halfcourt player? He did all three of those things plus shooting worse than Nash.

what's your basis for saying that nash runs halfcourt offense better than kidd did?


nash gets the shooting edge over kidd..and that's clear to anybody who watches basketball but do you think pick & rolls to Stat = running an offense better than jason kidd?

[I'm Seriously]

what's your basis for saying that nash runs halfcourt offense better than kidd did?

Because he's far better at running the PNR, and a much better shooter.


nash gets the shooting edge over kidd..and that's clear to anybody who watches basketball but do you think pick & rolls to Stat = running an offense better than jason kidd?

Amare missed the entire season in 06 but they were still second in the league in offense.

And this year where he has little offensive talent around him he is anchoring the 9th best offense in the league.

Much better than anything Kidd has ever anchored.

[get these NETS]

Because he's far better at running the PNR, and a much better shooter.



Amare missed the entire season in 06 but they were still second in the league in offense.

And this year where he has little offensive talent around him he is anchoring the 9th best offense in the league.

Much better than anything Kidd has ever anchored.
these numbers/stats are about most points scored?


suns continue to play updated version of what the 80s nuggets ran..... run and gun offense... scores a lot of point and gives up a lot of points...got worse under d'antoni but they've generally played up and down the court wide open style

if you would be so kind as to look up kidd's /team's offensive stats when he played point for the suns...sir .....and kj's



I thought you meant stats more indicative of running halfcourt offense like field goal %....team turnovers and the like.

[kentatm]

As a Mavs fan I have watched them both quite a bit and I am sorry but those who say Nash is better than Kidd without question are showing that you are young and didn't watch much ball. The fools who say he didn't dominate.... :facepalm:

[I'm Seriously]

these numbers/stats are about most points scored?


suns continue to play updated version of what the 80s nuggets ran..... run and gun offense... scores a lot of point and gives up a lot of points...got worse under d'antoni but they've generally played up and down the court wide open style

if you would be so kind as to look up kidd's /team's offensive stats when he played point for the suns...sir .....and kj's



I thought you meant stats more indicative of running halfcourt offense like field goal %....team turnovers and the like.

It's ORTG(offensive rating) it's points per 100 possesions.

Nash

Dallas 00-01: 107.1- 4th in the league
Dallas 01-02: 112.2- Best in the league
Dallas 02-03: 110.7- Best in the league
Dallas 03-04: 112.1- Best in the league
Suns 04-05: 114.5- Best in the league
Suns 05-06: 111.5- 2nd in the league
Suns 06-07: 113.9- Best in the league
Suns 07-08: 113.3- 2nd in the league
Suns 08-09: 113.6- 2nd in the league
Suns 09-10: 115.3- Best in the league
Suns 10-11: 109.6- 9th in the league

Kidd

Suns 97-98: 107.4- 12th in the league
Suns 98-99: 105.8- 3rd in the league
Suns 99-00: 104.6- 16th in the league
Suns 00-01: 100.3- 23rd in the league
Nets 01-02: 104.0- 17th in the league
Nets 02-03: 103.8- 18th in the league
Nets 03-04: 100.8- 25th in the league
Nets 04-05: 101.4- 26th in the league
Nets 05-06: 103.9- 25th in the league
Nets: 06-07: 105.7- 17th in the league

[Bandito]

What about scoring? running an offense? as a halfcourt player? He did all three of those things plus shooting worse than Nash.
Are you seriously saying Kidd runs an offense worse than Nash? He's a worse halfcourt player than Nash? What the hell are you smoking dog!?

[tpols]

What about scoring? running an offense? as a halfcourt player? He did all three of those things plus shooting worse than Nash.
Shooting and scoring for nash are the same thing.. he scores on shooting lol. Thats how he scores. Stop breaking it into two separate categories. Prime kidd was a better scorer down low and a better finisher. Nash is a better shooter. Thats it.

Running an offense and halfcourt player are the same thing too. Nash was good at running an offense in the half court. It's one category. Not two. Kidd was actually much better at running a fastbreak offense and he was still a great half court passer /knew how to set up an offense/etc., he just wasn't as much of a threat putting the ball in the hoop himself.

Of the things that point guards are responsible for~running an offense(includes halfcourt and transition), defense, and passing kidd was better at two out of the three of them with his advantage on defense being higher than any of Nash's advantage over him. Simply put, Kidd was better than Nash defensively than Nash was better than kidd offensively.. by a lot. He was the better point guard.

[I'm Seriously]

Are you seriously saying Kidd runs an offense worse than Nash? He's a worse halfcourt player than Nash? What the hell are you smoking dog!?

How does Kidd run an offense better than Nash? because statistics sure don't back this up.

I would love to know what your smoking if you think Kidd is remotely close to Nash in the half court.

[whoartthou]

give me nash over kidd, any day of th eweek

[FKAri]

Nash is better than Kidd at setting up a halfcourt offense. Don't think any LOGICAL person out there disputes that.

[Bigsmoke]

Lebron's the best player, but I'd rather have Nash then him on offense. It's too bad Nash is such a bad defender. If he was as good as Kidd was on defense, he'd be top 10 all time. Easily.

lol u would have Nash on offense but Lebron is the one who's better on offense. How many guys in the league that can give you 30ppg and 8 assist a game with 50% shooting. Look at the Cavs in 2009 and tell me how that offense would be like without Lebron?

Lebron is one of those dude that can carry an entire teams offense by himself. This is just my opinion, i dont find that comparison debatable.

[tpols]

lol u would have Nash on offense but Lebron is the one who's better on offense. How many guys in the league that can give you 30ppg and 8 assist a game with 50% shooting.

Lebron is one of those dude that can carry an entire teams offense by himself. This is just my opinion, i dont find that comparison debatable.
It's not.:oldlol:

Lebron blows nash out of the water in every possible way offensively.

[Mirjalovic]

Nets after Marbury/Kidd trade were automatically considered as contenders. He was best leader that my eyes have ever seen. That man had heart, he was playing with passion.

Yep, he undefeated when play for Team USA.


How does Kidd run an offense better than Nash? because statistics sure don't back this up.

I would love to know what your smoking if you think Kidd is remotely close to Nash in the half court.
c'mon seriously, did you watch the game ?

[get these NETS]

It's ORTG(offensive rating) it's points per 100 possesions.

Nash

Dallas 00-01: 107.1- 4th in the league
Dallas 01-02: 112.2- Best in the league
Dallas 02-03: 110.7- Best in the league
Dallas 03-04: 112.1- Best in the league
Suns 04-05: 114.5- Best in the league
Suns 05-06: 111.5- 2nd in the league
Suns 06-07: 113.9- Best in the league
Suns 07-08: 113.3- 2nd in the league
Suns 08-09: 113.6- 2nd in the league
Suns 09-10: 115.3- Best in the league
Suns 10-11: 109.6- 9th in the league

Kidd

Suns 97-98: 107.4- 12th in the league
Suns 98-99: 105.8- 3rd in the league
Suns 99-00: 104.6- 16th in the league
Suns 00-01: 100.3- 23rd in the league
Nets 01-02: 104.0- 17th in the league
Nets 02-03: 103.8- 18th in the league
Nets 03-04: 100.8- 25th in the league
Nets 04-05: 101.4- 26th in the league
Nets 05-06: 103.9- 25th in the league
Nets: 06-07: 105.7- 17th in the league

ok..it's a stat about most points scored..

and Nash's suns numbers indicate a higher scoring offense than kidd's years there...


ok...

now kj's numbers?

and is there a wy to check for the stats that I mentioned...team shooting %
and number of turnovers or %.?

[Bandito]

How does Kidd run an offense better than Nash? because statistics sure don't back this up.

I would love to know what your smoking if you think Kidd is remotely close to Nash in the half court.
http://images.clipartof.com/small/443520-Cartoon-Dog-Sniffing-In-Circles-Poster-Art-Print.jpgI smell a Nash stan...


Dude how old are you? If you just started watching the Nba> then you obviously didn't see how Kidd put the Nets on the map again after a lot of years of nothingness. Nash stats can be atributted to him having way better teammates on his teams that Kidd did. Nash had Amare, JJ, Matrix, Shaq...who the hell Kidd had? Kenyon, Vince(Nash have him too but he has the old Vince :lol) and prime Jefferson?

[Bigsmoke]

It's not.:oldlohttp://www.insidehoops.com/forum/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=5691427l:

Lebron blows nash out of the water in every possible way offensively.

pretty much. :oldlol:

[I'm Seriously]

Shooting and scoring for nash are the same thing.. he scores on shooting lol. Thats how he scores. Stop breaking it into two separate categories. Prime kidd was a better scorer down low and a better finisher. Nash is a better shooter. Thats it.

Kidd was not a better finisher.


Running an offense and halfcourt player are the same thing too. Nash was good at running an offense in the half court. It's one category. Not two. Kidd was actually much better at running a fastbreak offense and he was still a great half court passer /knew how to set up an offense/etc., he just wasn't as much of a threat putting the ball in the hoop himself.

Nash wasn't just "good" at running the halfcourt offense he's one of the greatest ever. And Kidd wasn't much better at running the fastbreak, i might give him a slight edge but he wasn't "much" better at running the fastbreak.

Nash was way better at running an offense.


Of the things that point guards are responsible for~running an offense(includes halfcourt and transition), defense, and passing kidd was better at two out of the three of them with his advantage on defense being higher than any of Nash's advantage over him. Simply put, Kidd was better than Nash defensively than Nash was better than kidd offensively.. by a lot. He was the better point guard.

By the criteria you set Nash is actually better at two out of the three things.

Passing and running an offense.

And i personally don't believe PG defense is that important, I'd much rather have a great scoring PG than a great defensive PG.

The gap in there defense is probably bigger than the gap in there offense, but as i've said multiple time in the past, I care alot more about PG offense than PG defense.

And Nash offensively>>Kidd defensively.

Nash>Kidd overall.

[FKAri]

It's not.:oldlol:

Lebron blows nash out of the water in every possible way offensively.

Fine Print:
Except 3pt shooting, FT shooting, jumpshooting in general, on the ball decision making, executing the pick n roll, playmaking, overall passing and hell just about anything to do with making teammates better.

[Bandito]

The gap in there defense is probably bigger than the gap in there offense, but as i've said multiple time in the past, I care alot more about PG offense than PG defense.

And Nash offensively>>Kidd defensively.

Nash>Kidd overall.
I see...it is easy to see why you like Nash better. :lol

[Bigsmoke]

Fine Print:
Except 3pt shooting, FT shooting, executing the pick n roll, playmaking, overall passing and hell just about anything to do with making teammates better.

so pretty much. shooting threes, shooting FTs, and passing.

Lebron is a SF. PGs suppose to be better passers.

if that makes a player better offensively then Mark Price offense is more effective than Michael Jordan's.

[Bandito]

so pretty much. shooting threes, shooting FTs, and passing.

if that makes a player better offensively then Mark Price offense is more effective than Michael Jordan.
But MJ did made teammates better.:(

[I'm Seriously]

http://images.clipartof.com/small/443520-Cartoon-Dog-Sniffing-In-Circles-Poster-Art-Print.jpgI smell a Nash stan...


Dude how old are you? If you just started watching the Nba> then you obviously didn't see how Kidd put the Nets on the map again after a lot of years of nothingness. Nash stats can be atributted to him having way better teammates on his teams that Kidd did. Nash had Amare, JJ, Matrix, Shaq...who the hell Kidd had? Kenyon, Vince(Nash have him too but he has the old Vince :lol) and prime Jefferson?

Nash's stats can be atributted to teamates?

I suppose that's why he's putting 15.8/11.5/3.6 on 61.8 TS% with garbage around him.

Nash has comparible(if not worse) offensive talent than prime Kidd had in NJ, yet all Kidd did was anchor below average offense's, while Nash anchors top 10 offenses.

[Bandito]

Nash's stats can be atributted to teamates?

I suppose that's why he's putting 15.8/11.5/3.6 on 61.8 TS% with garbage around him.

Nash has comparible(if not worse) offensive talent than prime Kidd had in NJ, yet all Kidd did was anchor below average offense's, while Nash anchors top 10 offenses.
Dude his teamsucks because of defense not offense. He has a 7 footer that can hit threes, Old Vince, Old Grant Hill(who's still awesome btw) and some scrubs that can hit from the outside. Plus Kidd put his Nets on the finals and his teams were way better defensively than the best Nash Suns team. When Nash does that call me:facepalm

[I'm Seriously]

It's not.:oldlol:

Lebron blows nash out of the water in every possible way offensively.

I'd probably take Lebron over Nash offensively, but how does he blow him out of the water in every possible way?

[ginobli2311]

Shooting and scoring for nash are the same thing.. he scores on shooting lol. Thats how he scores. Stop breaking it into two separate categories. Prime kidd was a better scorer down low and a better finisher. Nash is a better shooter. Thats it.

Running an offense and halfcourt player are the same thing too. Nash was good at running an offense in the half court. It's one category. Not two. Kidd was actually much better at running a fastbreak offense and he was still a great half court passer /knew how to set up an offense/etc., he just wasn't as much of a threat putting the ball in the hoop himself.

Of the things that point guards are responsible for~running an offense(includes halfcourt and transition), defense, and passing kidd was better at two out of the three of them with his advantage on defense being higher than any of Nash's advantage over him. Simply put, Kidd was better than Nash defensively than Nash was better than kidd offensively.. by a lot. He was the better point guard.

really good post.

[Bigsmoke]

But MJ did made teammates better.:(

we are talking about offense in general. Its funny how horrible some of those Cavs players are not.

If you gonna bring up that then i cant easily just say the Cavs are horrible without Lebron and the Bulls were still 55 win team without MJ in 1994.

[FKAri]

so pretty much. shooting threes, shooting FTs, and passing.

Lebron is a SF. PGs suppose to be better passers.

if that makes a player better offensively then Mark Price offense is more effective than Michael Jordan's.

Thats why different players have different abilities and it's stupid to say something like "Lebron blows nash out of the water in every possible way offensively". But the media likes to create this illusion of "superstar" players that are superheroes.


...He has a 7 footer that can hit threes, Old Vince, Old Grant Hill(who's still awesome btw) and some scrubs that can hit from the outside...

Just ask any Portland fan what Channing Frye was doing for em before he was shipped to Phx. Nash turned a 12th man into an amazing starter.

[Bigsmoke]

Thats why different players have different abilities and it's stupid to say something like "Lebron blows nash out of the water in every possible way offensively". But the media likes to create this illusion of "superstar" players that are superheroes.

and Lebron's abilities are far better. :oldlol:

[Bandito]

we are talking about offense in general. Its funny how horrible some of those Cavs players are not.

If you gonna bring up that then i cant easily just say the Cavs are horrible without Lebron and the Bulls were still 55 win team without MJ in 1994.
If you're talking this year Cavs then you are not watching the games but watching the stats. Most of the team were injured most of the year. That's why they suck.

[tpols]

Nash's stats can be atributted to teamates?

I suppose that's why he's putting 15.8/11.5/3.6 on 61.8 TS% with garbage around him.

Nash has comparible(if not worse) offensive talent than prime Kidd had in NJ, yet all Kidd did was anchor below average offense's, while Nash anchors top 10 offenses.
He anchors offenses at the expense of his team's defense.. Nash's playstyle is literally negatively correlated with how well his team can perform on defense. He pushes the ball and tries to outscore every team he plays. Personally, I think that's a bad basketball strategy. Kidd focused his energy on both sides of the ball and positively contributed to offense and defense. That is balanced, winning basketball. You'll rarely ever see a run and gun team like the ones nash has anchored ever win anything. Defense wins in the end and it is the reason kidd has dragged teams farther than nash ever has.

[Bandito]

He anchors offenses at the expense of his team's defense.. Nash's playstyle is literally negatively correlated with how well his team can perform on defense. He pushes the ball and tries to outscore every team he plays. Personally, I think that's a bad basketball strategy. Kidd focused his energy on both sides of the ball and positively contributed to offense and defense. That is balanced, winning basketball. You'll rarely ever see a run and gun team like the ones nash has anchored ever win anything. Defense wins in the end and it is the reason kidd has dragged teams farther than nash ever has.
Buuurn:applause: [/thread]

[I'm Seriously]

Dude his teamsucks because of defense not offense. He has a 7 footer that can hit threes, Old Vince, Old Grant Hill(who's still awesome btw) and some scrubs that can hit from the outside. Plus Kidd put his Nets on the finals. When Nash does that call me:facepalm

Yes Nash has some pretty good 3pt shooters on his team. But these 3pt shooter can only go sit on the 3pt line, they can't create for themselves at all. Hell they cant even come off screens, if Nash isn't creating for them there useless offensively.

Old Vince is putting 14.3 PPG on 51.4 TS%(just horrible)

Old Grant Hill is putting up 13.4 PPG on 56.1 TS%

Nither of those guys should even be a 3rd option.

[Bandito]

Yes Nash has some pretty good 3pt shooters on his team. But these 3pt shooter can only go sit on the 3pt line, they can't create for themselves at all. Hell they cant even come off screens, if Nash isn't creating for them there useless offensively.

Old Vince is putting 14.3 PPG on 51.4 TS%(just horrible)

Old Grant Hill is putting up 13.4 PPG on 56.1 TS%

Nither of those guys should even be a 3rd option.
That's not the point. The point is he has good enough teammates that can play on offense.:facepalm

Kidd had the same problems with his Nets team and carried them to the Finals.

[ginobli2311]

He anchors offenses at the expense of his team's defense.. Nash's playstyle is literally negatively correlated with how well his team can perform on defense. He pushes the ball and tries to outscore every team he plays. Personally, I think that's a bad basketball strategy. Kidd focused his energy on both sides of the ball and positively contributed to offense and defense. That is balanced, winning basketball. You'll rarely ever see a run and gun team like the ones nash has anchored ever win anything. Defense wins in the end and it is the reason kidd has dragged teams farther than nash ever has.

Exactly.

[Bigsmoke]

If you're talking this year Cavs then you are not watching the games but watching the stats. Most of the team were injured most of the year. That's why they suck.

u think i'm stupid?

they were sucking when they were healthy too. Hell, they were dealing with a lot of injuries last year and the were still able to win 61 game.

i wonder why.:rolleyes:

the Cavs were 1-5 without Lebron BTW

Lebron is better than Nash offensively and defensively. Now shut up.

[I'm Seriously]

He anchors offenses at the expense of his team's defense.. Nash's playstyle is literally negatively correlated with how well his team can perform on defense. He pushes the ball and tries to outscore every team he plays. Personally, I think that's a bad basketball strategy. Kidd focused his energy on both sides of the ball and positively contributed to offense and defense. That is balanced, winning basketball. You'll rarely ever see a run and gun team like the ones nash has anchored ever win anything. Defense wins in the end and it is the reason kidd has dragged teams farther than nash ever has.

Nash's RNG teams were routinely average-to below average defensively, they never just threw out defense all together.

And the Suns don't RNG anymore, almost all of there offense comes directly in the half court.

And if the reason the Suns were so bad defensively because of there style of play, why is it when they got a legit defensive anchor they became a great defense while RNGing?

[tpols]

Nash's RNG teams were routinely average-to below average defensively, they never just threw out defense all together.

And the Suns don't RNG anymore, almost all of there offense comes directly in the half court.

And if the reason the Suns were so bad defensively because of there style of play, why is it when they got a legit defensive anchor they became a great defense while RNGing?
Who is the suns anchor? Gortat? I don't know what you're talking about because not only are the suns still a average defensive team at best, but they are having a pretty bad season while playing this current style.

[Bandito]

u think i'm stupid?

they were sucking when they were healthy too. Hell, they were dealing with a lot of injuries last year and the were still able to win 61 game.

i wonder why.:rolleyes:

the Cavs were 1-5 without Lebron BTW

Lebron is better than Nash offensively and defensively. Now shut up.Dude Nash is a playmaker. Lebron is a chuckmaker. There is a difference, want me to spell it for you?:facepalm

[Bandito]

Nash's RNG teams were routinely average-to below average defensively, they never just threw out defense all together.

And the Suns don't RNG anymore, almost all of there offense comes directly in the half court.

And if the reason the Suns were so bad defensively because of there style of play, why is it when they got a legit defensive anchor they became a great defense while RNGing?
Now the Suns were good on defense? Since when? What year? This one? OMG you are a blind stan:lol

[I'm Seriously]

Who is the suns anchor? Gortat? I don't know what you're talking about because not only are the suns still a average defensive team at best, but they are having a pretty bad season while playing this current style.

I'm not talking about now, I'm talking about in 06 when the Suns had Kurt Thomas. They were a great defensive team before he got injured.

[I'm Seriously]

Now the Suns were good on defense? Since when? What year? This one? OMG you are a blind stan:lol

In 06 with Kurt Thomas they were.

[Bigsmoke]

Dude Nash is a playmaker. Lebron is a chuckmaker. There is a difference, want me to spell it for you?:facepalm

Lebron is giving you 30ppg on 50% shooting.

dont u want him to score more when he has that capability?

whats the point of calling him a chucker when he's shooting a high FG% and dishing out around 8 assist per game?

[tpols]

I'm not talking about now, I'm talking about in 06 when the Suns had Kurt Thomas. They were a great defensive team before he got injured.
I don't know.. I don't remember this time period but overall nash plays offense exclusively. I just would rather have a guy that focuses his team on both aspects of the game. Point guard defense may not be as important as big man defense, but point guards can set the defensive and offensive tones of their teams. Kidd set both tones extremely well while nash for all of his prime chose to focus on one of them.

[I'm Seriously]

I don't know.. I don't remember this time period but overall nash plays offense exclusively. I just would rather have a guy that focuses his team on both aspects of the game. Point guard defense may not be as important as big man defense, but point guards can set the defensive and offensive tones of their teams. Kidd set both tones extremely well while nash for all of his prime chose to focus on one of them.

I can understand that, I perfer my PG to be a ridiculous offensive player who can get you a great offense regardless of whose around him.

[Bigsmoke]

I can understand that, I perfer my PG to be a ridiculous offensive player who can get you a great offense regardless of whose around him.

people have their own opinions u know.

if they think Kidd is better than Nash then let them think that. Dont just try to shove your thoughts down their throats.

[Bandito]

Lebron is giving you 30ppg on 50% shooting.

dont u want him to score more when he has that capability?

whats the point of calling him a chucker when he's shooting a high FG% and dishing out around 8 assist per game?
He stops ball movement so he's a ballhog. He always has the ball in his hands and the only thing he does is run down the shot clock. If he get 30 ppg he should be shooting something like 25 to 30 shots per game. How is that not chuking?



In 06 with Kurt Thomas they were.
Are you crazy. The SUns were never a good defensively team since Nash came to the team. If you think they were you haven't watch a REAL good defensively team on TV. Either that or you smoke.:lol

[Bigsmoke]

He stops ball movement so he's a ballhog. If he get 30 ppg he should be shooting something like 25 to 30 shots per game. How is that not chuking?


he's not. Lebron averaged 20 shots a game when he averaged nearly 30 a game last year and that very efficient.

Nash took over 13 shots to get like 19 points so whats your point?

[RecSpecs110]

hahaha unbelievable. people are trying to find any possible way to bash this team. and now it has gone as far as questioning whether or not jason kidd got double teams.

unreal.

[Bandito]

he's not. Lebron averaged 20 shots a game when he averaged nearly 30 a game last year and that very efficient.

Nash took over 13 shots to get like 19 points so whats your point?
So he went 15 on 20 shots almost every game while averaging 50%? Can you please explain to me how that math works. I said 15 of 30 because that is 50%. You know what that means? Lechuck.

Also even though I am not taking 3 point shots accountable he couldn't have made more than 1 per game anyways.

[ChuckOakley]

This post, and some of the posters in here is a prime example of why I barely frequent this site anymore.

I mean seriously?

Unless you started following the NBA about 3 or 4 years ago you know the answer to this question. There is a reason Kidd was an MVP candidate with the Nets (and got robbed IMO). There was a reason the Nets had late leads in games 5 (a large one) and game 6 against SAS. There's a reason they were bounced by the eventual champion 4 out of 5 years (LAL, SAS, Miami, Detroit).

There was not a more dominant PG in the game those years.
A defensive ace (that only had trouble against quicker guards post surgery, 2004 IIRC). Kidd was arguably the strongest player on the Nets, and there were stories he could bench press more than anyone on the team.
A rebounding/fast break machine
An amazing passer who could play transition or half court ball

Yes, Nash has aged well and is an amazing player, but I like Kidd's chances on some of the teams Nash had to win the title. Kidd would have killed to have that level of talent around him in NJ. Look at how hard so many players fell off post Kidd.. VC, RJ, K-Mart, Mikki Moore, etc. etc. Kidd has to work with Jason Colllins as his starting center for most of his time in NJ. He didn't have Amare, Marion, JJ, Bell, Diaw most in their primes.

[olddangerfield]

You truly are a dumb piece of fvck.:facepalm

Nash > Kidd and it ain't even remotely close.
rofl this kid has gone off the deep end. He's becoming the new ashbelly.

['Toine=MVP]

Even if people think Payton and Nash had clearly better careers, or better peaks, neither was close to as DOMINANT! When you watched a game with Kidd in his prime (which was quite a long period of time), he changed the way the team played more than the other 4 members of the team.

[Rake2204]

I'm not terribly interested in a player-to-player debate in this case, but I do feel that Jason Kidd was dominant in his prime. He wasn't necessarily dominant in the traditional "Oh my god he's going to score on us no matter what we do" sense. Rather, his dominance spread throughout the entire game. Whichever team he played for, he ran and fueled that squad, controlling all aspects. It was undeniably his team at all times. One could say, he dominated things.

[Reggie43]

How can you be considered a dominant player if the defense constantly sagged against you daring you to shoot the jumper?

[ChuckOakley]

How can you be considered a dominant player if the defense constantly sagged against you daring you to shoot the jumper?
That never really happened.

Who was the defense going to sag to? Jason Collins? There was no point in packing the paint on those Nets teams. Even K-Mart was not a half court- double him kind of guy.

The defense was much better off being in Jason's face not letting him see the court and work the offense. That would be a PG's dream to not have to worry about a defender in front of you and having open vision of the court.

Meanwhile,how smart is it to dare someone #3 all time in 3 pointers?

[Calabis]

it aint even close??? wow is all I can say.

It is arguable either way, but you are forgetting how insanely good JKidd was

I agree, hell do people not even give credit to Kidd with the Mavs, the first time, guy was sick and if not for the drama between him, Jackson and Mashburn, they could have built something special.....hold up, my phone is ringing........................................... ..Ok sorry, that was Richard Jefferson ,he said yes Kidd was a dominant point, who made people better.

[Reggie43]

That never really happened.

Who was the defense going to sag to? Jason Collins? There was no point in packing the paint on those Nets teams. Even K-Mart was not a half court- double him kind of guy.

The defense was much better off being in Jason's face not letting him see the court and work the offense. That would be a PG's dream to not have to worry about a defender in front of you and having open vision of the court.

Meanwhile,how smart is it to dare someone #3 all time in 3 pointers?

They sagged against him to prevent penetration with an extra defender much like kobe on rondo. I would rather let him shoot the 3 at around 33% than crowd him and let him drive to create for others or finish himself.

[ChuckOakley]

They sagged against him to prevent penetration with an extra defender much like kobe on rondo. I would rather let him shoot the 3 at around 33% than crowd him and let him drive to create for others or finish himself.
33% on 3's = 50% on 2's.

And yes sometimes hey did sag on him.. guess what?
It didn't work.
His teams won as much as they could and from 2001-2005 there were few teams with better overall success.

[Reggie43]

33% on 3's = 50% on 2's.

And yes sometimes hey did sag on him.. guess what?
It didn't work.
His teams won as much as they could and from 2001-2005 there were few teams with better overall success.

How did you come up with those numbers?
It did work because it forced him to shoot lower percentage shots.
Did his teams even average 50 wins between 2001-2005?

[Pointguard]

So he went 15 on 20 shots almost every game while averaging 50%? Can you please explain to me how that math works. I said 15 of 30 because that is 50%. You know what that means? Lechuck.

Also even though I am not taking 3 point shots accountable he couldn't have made more than 1 per game anyways.
LOL, Bandito, You are not factoring in foul shots. He's getting 10 a game.

[ChuckOakley]

How did you come up with those numbers?
It did work because it forced him to shoot lower percentage shots.
Did his teams even average 50 wins between 2001-2005?
If you take 100 3 pointers and make 33% you have made 33, for 99 points.
If you take 100 2 pointers and make 50% you have made 50 for 100 points.

Not sure the average number, but no, I was talking playoff success.

Finals vs. LAL
Finals vs. SAS (double digit lead in Game 5, late lead in Game 6)
(two very very strong teams)
Lost to Detroit the year Detroit won it all, despite a 3-2 lead and an injured Kidd
Lost to Miami the year Miami won it all.

[Reggie43]

If you take 100 3 pointers and make 33% you have made 33, for 99 points.
If you take 100 2 pointers and make 50% you have made 50 for 100 points.

Not sure the average number, but no, I was talking playoff success.

Finals vs. LAL
Finals vs. SAS (double digit lead in Game 5, late lead in Game 6)
(two very very strong teams)
Lost to Detroit the year Detroit won it all, despite a 3-2 lead and an injured Kidd
Lost to Miami the year Miami won it all.

Those nets teams really overachieved those years plus having no one to contend with in the east. Your numbers dont account for the possessions that the opponents will likely gain for all those missed shots.

[ChuckOakley]

Those nets teams really overachieved those years plus having no one to contend with in the east. Your numbers dont account for the possessions that the opponents will likely gain for all those missed shots.
Yes, they did.. thanks to Kidd.
What did you want them to do?
Lose, to make the East look better?

[The_Yearning]

If you think Nash > J-Kidd you just don't know basketball and started watching the NBA in 2005.

[Reggie43]

Yes, they did.. thanks to Kidd.
What did you want them to do?
Lose, to make the East look better?

I agree with what you said, its not their fault that the east was at its worst.
Those nets teams were unique and somewhat entertaining to watch.
I wonder how they would stack up to the teams in todays eastern conference.
Bulls Nets and Rose vs Kidd would have been a hell of a playoff series :rockon:

[MavsPoke]

I know this is about prime kidd, but I just thought I would post this link to give you an idea of how cunning this guy is on the court.

Off the court I don't think he's a rocket scientist, but on the court he can make you look like a fool if you aint paying attention.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kquAEihYS0M&feature=related

[Crown&Coke]

Just ask any Portland fan what Channing Frye was doing for em before he was shipped to Phx. Nash turned a 12th man into an amazing starter.

Channing Frye got not time in Portland, just like Jared Bayless, just like Rudy before this year, just like a lot of young guys in Portland, you can't use that logic

That doesn't mean he couldn't play. He got put into a system where he doesn't have to play in the paint, and he excelled at it. Nash made him better yes, but it isn't like without Nash Frye forgets how to shoot. Same thing was said about Amare before he started killing it in NY.

when did this become a Nash vs Kidd battle? Lets enjoy both guys because they play the right way and not pit them against one another.

[Rockets(T-mac)]

Jason Kidd made a lot of players money. Kenyon Martin owes half his pay cheque to him, so did Mikki Moore when he got that big deal. Kidd made players look so much better. Other than Magic I haven't seen a PG control a fast break like Kidd.

[O BaByShaQ]

I guess as dominant as a pg can get around 2000. He ended games in the first three quarters and could hit game winners if needed.

[gasolina]

Just my 2 cents.

One of my favorite moves of all time was Kidd's fast break crossover to the left hand at the freethrow line and then finish with a right hand layup. Always gets 2 points or an and 1.

People speak a lot about Nash's longevity but fail to mention that Nash was'nt MVP good until he went back to Phoenix. In Dallas, a lot of people had Nick Van Exel better than Nash in the playoffs. In fact, Nash was pretty terrible during his first years in Dallas too.

[KevinNYC]

So the consensus answer is YES, Jason Kidd was a dominant point guard.

Whether you think he's better than Nash can be debatd, but that doesn't mean Kidd wasn't dominant.

Who was the second best player on the Nets when Kidd was there?

Van Horn,
Kittles,
Jefferson,
Martin

[MasterDurant24]

You truly are a dumb piece of fvck.:facepalm

Nash > Kidd and it ain't even remotely close.
Kidd>Nash.

All Nash really has over Kidd is shooting.

[ChuckOakley]

So the consensus answer is YES, Jason Kidd was a dominant point guard.

Whether you think he's better than Nash can be debatd, but that doesn't mean Kidd wasn't dominant.

Who was the second best player on the Nets when Kidd was there?

Van Horn,
Kittles,
Jefferson,
Martin
It varied.
Kidd's 1st year I say Kittles
His 2nd, I say Martin
RJ one season
VC another

[Crown&Coke]

rofl this kid has gone off the deep end. He's becoming the new ashbelly.

please no name calling, that was just brutal. just call him a dickhead or something, don't ether the dude

[Bigsmoke]

Jason Kidd made a lot of players money. Kenyon Martin owes half his pay cheque to him, so did Mikki Moore when he got that big deal. Kidd made players look so much better. Other than Magic I haven't seen a PG control a fast break like Kidd.

steve nash

[D.J.]

Even if people think Payton and Nash had clearly better careers, or better peaks, neither was close to as DOMINANT!


You never watched Payton in the mid 90s-early 2000s. Only guard since '89 to win DPOY. I didn't see Payton or the Sonics struggle when they unloaded Kemp.