Who was the better point guard? Kidd vs. Payton

[MavsSuperFan]

Jason Kidd or Gary Payton?

Both failed to win the title as the main guy, managed to win a ring as a support player.

Both had great defense, thought payton was the better offensive player though.

[waseem780]

Jason Kidd or Gary Payton?

Both failed to win the title as the main guy, managed to win a ring as a support player.

Both had great defense, thought payton was the better offensive player though.
Payton by a little he just had the charisma and passion that made him "IT" a true superstar that guys looked up to , he made defense look sexy and his trash talk gave us all a good laugh or two along the way. Jkidd was great too probably a better pass , His leadership is great and the respect he earns from his peers is amazing he's a pro's pro. but still Payton > Jkidd

[Bigsmoke]

I would rather have Payton but that's just me

[Ancient Legend]

Gary Payton. Elite defense and much better offense (scoring wise) than Kidd. Only thing Kidd has over him is court vision but not enough to make him better.
Payton gave MJ fits.

[SamuraiSWISH]

Kidd is a very good defender, Payton was all-time ELITE. Difficult choice. Kidd has longevity, but Payton might have the better peak ... even though Kidd got more MVP talks during his peak due to the state of the league (specifically the eastern conference) ... both won a ring as role playing, ring chasers late in their career. IDK, hard ranking one over the other.

[wakencdukest]

Kidd. Played great defense, maybe not quite as good as Payton, but still great, Was a better passer by miles, was a way better rebounder, Payton gets the edge on outside shooting. Kidd also dragged a mediocre team to the finals 2 years in a row when he was in NJ, and won a title with dallas and actually contributed, whereas Payton won his ring riding the bench.

[Qwyjibo]

If both are at their best, I'll take Payton.

[NBASTATMAN]

Jason Kidd or Gary Payton?

Both failed to win the title as the main guy, managed to win a ring as a support player.

Both had great defense, thought payton was the better offensive player though.


Payton was better

[get these NETS]

Payton

underneath the bravado and talk..just a very sound player with no weaknesses

[andgar923]

Kidd is the better PG
GP better player

[TheBigVeto]

Kidd easy. Payton is overrated.

[I.R.Beast]

Payton... no brainer.... payon was a 20+ and 8 beast with elite defense and he was a better halfcourt PG than kidd.

[bizil]

This is tough as hell, but the scoring aspects of Payton swing it his way. GP had alpha dog level scoring capabilities. Kidd however really makes it close with his triple-double ability. And Kidd was still a very good scorer for a PG capable of getting u 18 PPG. I wouldn't argue one taking Kidd over GP at all though. However, GP and Clyde Frazier are the BEST EVER at PG in terms of being able to dominate a game scoring, passing, and defending. And on top of it could defend PG, SG, and even many SF's.

[JoHnNyBoXeR]

I would take Kidd.. Both are HOF caliber players.. I give Kidd the edge because he was the smarter player.. thats why he became a head coach so quickly.. He was well-respected as a basketball mind throughout the league years before he even retired..

I give Kidd the edge just because of his basketball IQ.. Payton was physically and atheletically more talented.. But not enough people give players elevated status because of their IQ of the game.. Being a smart player is under appreciated by fans and media

[Nashty]

Kidd easily. Payton never had the impact Kidd had on his teams.

[Harison]

Kidd was better at distributing the ball, but Payton was better as a player.

[To4]

I prefer Kidd, but hey,, it can go either way.. choose either both of them and its still a win.. both are great players..

[fiddy]

Kidd was better at distributing the ball, but Payton was better as a scorer.
Fixed

[Xiao Yao You]

Glove

[DKLaker]

GP and it's not even close!!!

[Mr Exlax]

If I want my point guard to actually be a point guard then I'll take Kidd. He's the better point guard to me. If we're talking player then I'll say Payton.

[get these NETS]

This is tough as hell, but the scoring aspects of Payton swing it his way. GP had alpha dog level scoring capabilities. Kidd however really makes it close with his triple-double ability. And Kidd was still a very good scorer for a PG capable of getting u 18 PPG. I wouldn't argue one taking Kidd over GP at all though. However, GP and Clyde Frazier are the BEST EVER at PG in terms of being able to dominate a game scoring, passing, and defending. And on top of it could defend PG, SG, and even many SF's.


good comparison

clyde is who I think of when GP's name comes up....
solid players at EVERY facet of the game....true blue point guards

neither particularly athletic but so fundamentally sound and competitive that like you said......could lock down bigger stronger longer players

got a son/daughter who wants to play point?

get game footage of either of these players

[joeyjoejoe]

Kidd had better court vision and was a beast on the boards but was so inefficient being a turnover machine and it spins me out ppl call him a great scorer coz he just wasn't so I pick the glove

[NumberSix]

Glove. Not close.

[Xiao Yao You]

Gary

[Bucket_Nakedz]

the one from oakland

[scm5]

I would choose GP, and it's a fairly big gap for me.

Payton is one of my all time favorite players and for good reason. He was one of the few players who didn't have any real weaknesses in his game during his prime.

[HylianNightmare]

payton if my team needs a star and kidd if my team needs a PG

[Mass Debator]

Kidd. My favorite non-shooting guard player to watch live of all time.
Court general and highly respected. He's just a leader amongst men.

[SilkkTheShocker]

Kidd.

[Pointguard]

Close, but I have Kidd clearly ahead.

Put Payton on those Net teams and I wonder if they even have a winning record, much less making it to the finals both years. That was really impressive. What Kidd did offensively in those three years was one of the most impressive runs ever. I think KMart got a max contract out of that and Richard Jefferson got a boat load of star money out of it as well. RJ even duped the best scouting team in the history of the game (San Antonio) because Kidd fooled the league about him as well. Kidd also got career years out of like three other key players those years. Scalabrini, Jason Collins and RJ likely don't have five year careers, much less ten if Kidd didn't make them look good in those playoff runs.

While Payton was among the greatest one on one defenders, Kidd had the most impressive playoff defense run ever for a front court player - the super explosives Westbrook, Wade, Kobe were all non-factors. While he wasn't the best player on Dallas, he definitely has an argument for being the most important player in that playoff run.

If you can take a last place team that had the most productive point guard (Starbury) and then take Keith Van Horn, Kerry Kittles, KMart and Richard Jefferson with a bench of Luscious Harris and Todd McCollough to the finals in one year, the ring argument is just flat out stupid. I will argue most of the top ten GOAT has no chance of taking that team to the finals in two straight years. Outside of Kidd, Kmart was the only player with a real strength, and it was defense.

And this was when Payton had all those very good all around, very smart players in Pierce, Derrick McKey, Nate McMillan, Perkins and the super talented Kemp. Later on add Deleft Shremp, Gill and Hersey Hawkins.

[CanYouDigIt]

1. Lebron
2. Kidd or Payton


2 > 1 = 1

[joeyjoejoe]

Lets be real if Kidd's team was in the west he doesn't sniff the finals

[Young X]

Payton easy. Much better offensively and better defensively. I'll take at least 10 PG's over Kidd.

[La Frescobaldi]

Payton easy. Much better offensively and better defensively. I'll take at least 10 PG's over Kidd.
what 10 are you taking over Kidd?

[TheReal Kendall]

I would take Payton.

Kidd was like a slower Rondo

[Young X]

what 10 are you taking over Kidd?
Magic
Oscar
CP
Payton
Nash
KJ
Stockton
Thomas
Frazier
Hardaway x 2
etc...

[Pointguard]

Lets be real if Kidd's team was in the west he doesn't sniff the finals
In '03 they beat SA twice which was as good as any Western conference team did - despite the fact that they didn't allow Kenyon Martin to breath on Tim Duncan. That team of nobodies also had two sweeps as well. That team overachieved like crazy for three years one way or the other. What was really amazing is that Kidd was in a new system, new coach and bad players. He almost did the ultimate with very, very little. No excuses.

[305Baller]

Kidd better all-around in cluding rebounding.
Payton better defense and offense... if that makes any sense....

[L.Kizzle]

Not a hard question at all, pretty easy actually.

Jason Kidd, is who you want to run your show. Not sure it's too many at PG you'd take over Kidd. Magic and, who else really.

Now as a player, all-around talent, you take Payton.GP was better at every single thing else on the basketball court besides passing/running a team.

[Young X]

In '03 they beat SA twice which was as good as any Western conference team did - despite the fact that they didn't allow Kenyon Martin to breath on Tim Duncan. That team of nobodies also had two sweeps as well. That team overachieved like crazy for three years one way or the other. What was really amazing is that Kidd was in a new system, new coach and bad players. He almost did the ultimate with very, very little. No excuses.His team went from either missing the playoffs or losing in the first round for 7 straight seasons in the west to instantly making the finals as soon as he went to the east. The 00's east: where 49 win teams make the finals.

[FatComputerNerd]

This topic has been debated so many times...

All other factors aside, Payton was a much better and more efficient scorer, who could take over games and be the #1 go-to alpha dog when needed.

Kidd never really had that quality, and IMO that is what gives Payton the slight edge overall.

Was Kidd the better traditional PG though? Probably.

[tpols]

His team went from either missing the playoffs or losing in the first round for 7 straight seasons in the west to instantly making the finals as soon as he went to the east. The 00's east: where 49 win teams make the finals.
A 49 win team from this years east made the ECF and took the eventual champions to 7 games.

The Nets back then were battling it out with and sweeping the Detroit Pistons that would go on to clobber the 04 laker super team and take a loaded 05 spurs team down to the last quarter of a Finals game 7.

In fact the 04 Nets had a 3-2 lead on the now renowned 04 pistons before they blew it.. acting like they couldnt hang with the big boys:oldlol:

[Pointguard]

His team went from either missing the playoffs or losing in the first round for 7 straight seasons in the west to instantly making the finals as soon as he went to the east. The 00's east: where 49 win teams make the finals.
He was too young the first couple of years which were the only years he didn't make it to the playoffs. So dismiss that. The third year...

When a player is younger new systems really affect a young point guard - see Chris Paul, Deron Williams who are in their prime. Or Gary Payton when he was a very seasoned vet and totally looked lost 90 games deep in all seasons on three different teams (lost is an extremely kind word, cause as a point guard is never supposed to be a follower and he wasn't in control) when his career was winding down. Nonetheless lets talk about Kidd's third year in the league just the same.

In '98 Kidd takes a team where no scorer averages above 16 ppg and their leading rebounder is at 7.6 per game to the playoffs and Kidd is the second best rebounder at 6.2. Rex Chapman is their leading scorer. In his first full year with the team. This team is possibly is worse than the Nets team. This team has no strength whatsoever outside of Kidd who is in his third year.

'99 its almost the exact same thing but Gugs does go for 17 and 9 to lead the team. Kidd is first or second in nearly every category. They make the playoffs again. In '00 they lose in the second round to a steam rolling Laker team that is on a mission. But amazingly Kidd leads the team in rebounding, assist and steals. You can't beat the MDE if your point guard leads the team in assist. And perhaps you can tell us what was the strength of this team. Anfernee Hardaway comes to the team and its apparent that Scott Skiles role is to turn the team over to him as Hardaway is favored by the GM.

In '01 a control freak point guard coach Scott Skiles, strips Kidd of free reign style and it really messes up the flow. They finish 51 and 31 and finally bring in a guy who can rebound 10 a game and Shawn Marion is Kidd's best scorer in three years. Yeah imagine that for a team that made it to the second round the year before. Kidd leaves and Pheonix doesn't make it to the playoffs since Kidd had first arrived.

Amazingly Kidd made it to the playoffs for five years straight without a real scorer or rebounder. In fact he made it the finals twice, and the second round once in the West, with his leading scorers averaging about 16ppg and his leading rebounder at around 7 per game minus himself??? All teams without a real strength in individual talent without Kidd. That's amazing.

[robert de niro]

payton every single time

[Pointguard]

A 49 win team from this years east made the ECF and took the eventual champions to 7 games.

The Nets back then were battling it out with and sweeping the Detroit Pistons that would go on to clobber the 04 laker super team and take a loaded 05 spurs team down to the last quarter of a Finals game 7.

In fact the 04 Nets had a 3-2 lead on the now renowned 04 pistons before they blew it.. acting like they couldnt hang with the big boys:oldlol:

Kidd got hurt early in the Detroit series or else they definitely beat them. But would have had some trouble with Indiana in the next series but they ended up with some injuries as well.

[Pointguard]

Magic
Oscar
CP
Payton
Nash
KJ
Stockton
Thomas
Frazier
Hardaway x 2
etc...
As far as doing the most with the least, Kidd totally destroys your list. Magic, Oscar are the only ones I have over Kidd. All of those guys have had great teams that didn't deliver a bit too much. The Hardaways and KJ are not really in the discussion - that's just you trolling.

[Young X]

How am I trolling if those guys were flat out better, more productive players than Kidd?

"Doing more with less"? Why didn't he "do more" when he played in the west?

Why aren't you factoring competition at all? Am I supposed to believe their teams wouldn't get to the finals in the '03 EC?

You're the one trolling if you don't think KJ and Penny Hardaway were comparable to Kidd as players. Those guys are BETTER than Kidd.

[tpols]

How am I trolling if those guys were flat out better, more productive players than Kidd?

"Doing more with less"? Why didn't he "do more" when he played in the west?

Why aren't you factoring competition at all? Am I supposed to believe their teams wouldn't get to the finals in the '03 EC?

You're the one trolling if you don't think KJ and Penny Hardaway were comparable to Kidd as players. Those guys are BETTER than Kidd.
Because Kidds greatest attributes have nothing to do with his own individual numbers. They have to do with how he elevated all of his teammates games, and how he anchored his team defensively to be on par defensively with Detroit Piston teams anchored by all time great big man defenders.. and he did it as a PG no less..

His value is in elevating a whole teams performance on both sides of the floor and making the whole much greater than the sum of all individual parts.. leadership and defense.

He didnt have the offensive efficiency of many players post 2006 but look at the era he was in. The east from 02-05 was a defensive dog fight between the elite teams. It wasnt pretty basketball.. very physical and bogged down.



KJ and Penny could never lead teams like Kidd did.. they would fare the same as stephon marbury.. individually brilliant players who could get their own and put up impressive offensive numbers, but dont have 1/10 the ability to make others better and anchor a defense.

[Round Mound]

Payton Was The Better Total Player, Kidd The Better PG. Payton Was Better By Hair and I Pick Him Being a Realist Despite the Fact that Kidd Was My Favorite Player to Watch in the Late Mid-Late 90s.

[Young X]

KJ and Penny could never lead teams like Kidd did.. they would fare the same as stephon marbury.. individually brilliant players who could get their own and put up impressive offensive numbers, but dont have 1/10 the ability to make others better and anchor a defense.You mean like Kidd when he played in the west? The '90 Suns led by KJ beat a #1 seeded Laker team led by Magic in his prime and went to 7 against the 2nd seed Blazers in the WCF (much better competition than any team the Nets faced in the east). He did this while averaging 21/10. How is that like Marbury at all?

[Reggie43]

Payton quite easily. As good as Kidd was there is a glaring weakness in his game that you wouldnt want a point guard to have.

[secund2nun]

Kidd was either very good/elite in nearly every single aspect of the game except the one aspect that is the 2nd most important factor for a PG- ability to space the floor. He was an awful shooter. Even so, his perfection in other aspects of the game made him a truly great player, but enough to get the nod over Payton? Not quite sure. I have Payton over Kidd. If Kidd was a great shooter he easily would have been a lock behind Magic as 2nd greatest PG ever.

[tpols]

You mean like Kidd when he played in the west? The '90 Suns led by KJ beat a #1 seeded Laker team led by Magic in his prime and went to 7 against the 2nd seed Blazers in the WCF (much better competition than any team the Nets faced in the east). He did this while averaging 21/10. How is that like Marbury at all?
You mean the team w/ Tom Chambers averaging 27/7/6? Hornacek averaging 18/5/4? 6 guys on that team in double figures...

compared to Kidd in 02 playoffs leading his team in points, assists, rebounds, and steals while being the defensive anchor and only offensive creator?


Its not even close.. did way more with way less while impacting the game in every way imaginable.

[Kurosawa0]

If I was creating an all-time team, Kidd might be my point guard. I'll take him.

[tpols]

Kidd was either very good/elite in nearly every single aspect of the game except the one aspect that is the 2nd most important factor for a PG- ability to space the floor. He was an awful shooter. Even so, his perfection in other aspects of the game made him a truly great player, but enough to get the nod over Payton? Not quite sure. I have Payton over Kidd. If Kidd was a great shooter he easily would have been a lock behind Magic as 2nd greatest PG ever.
Kidd is a good spot up shooter.. poor pull up shooter. Problem was Nets didnt have any other offensive option to create for the team.. it was literally all Kidd. If he was paired with another dominant player who could draw the defense in his shooting percentages wouldve been much higher.

[Reggie43]

Kidd is a good spot up shooter.. poor pull up shooter. Problem was Nets didnt have any other offensive option to create for the team.. it was literally all Kidd. If he was paired with another dominant player who could draw the defense in his shooting percentages wouldve been much higher.

Like he was paired with Carter?

[iamgine]

Depends on the team really. Because they have different strength, Kidd would be better than Payton on certain teams, and worse on other teams.

[ChuckOakley]

Payton was never a serious MVP candidate, Kidd was.
Kidd takes this.

[tpols]

Like he was paired with Carter?
Kidd shot signifigantly higher from 3 pt land with Vince Carter on the team than without him.. His general career arc is as his teams got stronger he shot better because he had to bear less of the load

[Reggie43]

Kidd shot signifigantly higher from 3 pt land with Vince Carter on the team than without him.. His general career arc is as his teams got stronger he shot better because he had to bear less of the load

yet he still was a sub 40% shooter overall

[tpols]

yet he still was a sub 40% shooter overall
You responded to me after I said Kidd was a better spot up shooter than pull up.. after I replied to someone calling him a bad shooter.

FG percentage takes much more than shooting into account.

[joeyjoejoe]

Yes the nets beat Detroit in 03 but that was pre sheed, in 04 they lost to Detroit the eventual champs in 7 but no way would nets have gotten past spurs or Lakers if they were in west so prob 2nd round exit, the idea that Detroit beat l.a so nets would have a chance is flawed coz if Malone didn't get injured and Kobe didn't go well u know in the finals Lakers win just look at what happened in those 2 finals a total of 2 wins and 8 losses

[dyna]

Kidd for me..

[Reggie43]

You responded to me after I said Kidd was a better spot up shooter than pull up.. after I replied to someone calling him a bad shooter.

FG percentage takes much more than shooting into account.

I guess you are implying that he was much worse going closer to the rim than shooting a spot up jumpshot because his fg% is much worse than his 3p% in those years?

[Young X]

You mean the team w/ Tom Chambers averaging 27/7/6? Hornacek averaging 18/5/4? 6 guys on that team in double figures...

compared to Kidd in 02 playoffs leading his team in points, assists, rebounds, and steals while being the defensive anchor and only offensive creator?


Its not even close.. did way more with way less while impacting the game in every way imaginable.Once again you're ignoring the huge competition difference, those Nets teams would barely be a 6th seed in the '90 WC. Also, impacting the game in more ways doesn't mean more impact, KJ being an elite offensive PG is more important than Kidd's defense/rebounding.


Once again, why didn't Kidd "do more with less" when he played in the west?

[La Frescobaldi]

As far as doing the most with the least, Kidd totally destroys your list. Magic, Oscar are the only ones I have over Kidd. All of those guys have had great teams that didn't deliver a bit too much. The Hardaways and KJ are not really in the discussion - that's just you trolling.

Nash, Stockton, & Frazier are some good names right there tho you must admit

[Doctor K]

Payton all day. He could score, pass, and defend. He would be a better fit for most teams. Only time I take Kidd is when team really needs a pure playmaker

[To4]

You can't go wrong with both players, both were beasts... but for me. ill pick Kidd.. but as i said, you can't go wrong either one

[Doctor K]

Kidd is a good spot up shooter.. poor pull up shooter. Problem was Nets didnt have any other offensive option to create for the team.. it was literally all Kidd. If he was paired with another dominant player who could draw the defense in his shooting percentages wouldve been much higher.

you have obviously never seen prime Kidd play. Teams DARED him to shoot and not having a reliable jump shot was a problem his entire prime, only late in his career did his jump shot become more reliable. But before that it was always a knock on him.

[tpols]

you have obviously never seen prime Kidd play. Teams DARED him to shoot and not having a reliable jump shot was a problem his entire prime, only late in his career did his jump shot become more reliable. But before that it was always a knock on him.
I watched Kidd play his entire prime.:oldlol:

Kidd was a poor pull up shooter.. he frequently posted up smaller guards and used his body and strength to muscle his way in for layups.. a lot of mid range bank shots too. His stroke off the dribble was poor. His spot up shooting was decent and got better and better as he took on less responsibility creating offense.


Once again you're ignoring the huge competition difference, those Nets teams would barely be a 6th seed in the '90 WC. Also, impacting the game in more ways doesn't mean more impact, KJ being an elite offensive PG is more important than Kidd's defense/rebounding.


Once again, why didn't Kidd "do more with less" when he played in the west?

Those Net teams were also far weaker than the suns outside of KJ. Give Kidd a 25+ppg scorer, another 20ish ppg scorer, and two others in double figures and it would be a wrap. The difference in teammate strength is gigantic and cancels out the relatively smaller gap in competition(once again he led the Nets to wins against detroit when they were an all time great team.. and led them to as competitive a series as SAS had all throughout their 03 playoff run.. comp was proven)

[Xiao Yao You]

The biggest problem I had with him wasn't that he couldn't shoot but he shot a lot.

[joeyjoejoe]

I'd take Frazier, Isiah, cp3, Nash, stock, magic, Oscar, Payton over Kidd

[Doctor K]

You mean the team w/ Tom Chambers averaging 27/7/6? Hornacek averaging 18/5/4? 6 guys on that team in double figures...

compared to Kidd in 02 playoffs leading his team in points, assists, rebounds, and steals while being the defensive anchor and only offensive creator?


Its not even close.. did way more with way less while impacting the game in every way imaginable.

You do realize if the Nets were in the West they would probably never get out of the 1st round? Well at least they would never have HCA in the 1st round looking at their overall record and record vs. West. Bottom-line, the Nets suck and Kidd all his prime struggled greatly against "good" teams in the playoffs.

[Doctor K]

I watched Kidd play his entire prime.:oldlol:

Kidd was a poor pull up shooter.. he frequently posted up smaller guards and used his body and strength to muscle his way in for layups.. a lot of mid range bank shots too. His stroke off the dribble was poor. His spot up shooting was decent and got better and better as he took on less responsibility creating offense.



Those Net teams were also far weaker than the suns outside of KJ. Give Kidd a 25+ppg scorer, another 20ish ppg scorer, and two others in double figures and it would be a wrap. The difference in teammate strength is gigantic and cancels out the gap in competition(once again he led them up Nets to wins against detroit when they were an all time great team.. and led them to as competitive a series as SAS had all throughout their 03 playoff run.. comp was proven)

"Competetive" series or "wins and then a series loss" don't mean anything. Even the 8th seed 37-45 Hawks took the 2008 champion Celtics to 7 games.


If you saw Kidd play in his prime then you must also know the key to stopping him was making it a half court game. Kidd was as good as they ever come full court, but as soon as you make him a half court PG, he would struggle. That was the biggest reason they went after Vince Carter.

Gary Payton on the other hand, half court hands down he was a better PG on offense. Because he could create his own shot effectively and score in a variety of ways or pass. Payton also has shown in his career he could run the up-tempo teams like the 90s sonics.

[Pointguard]

How am I trolling if those guys were flat out better, more productive players than Kidd?
Kidd was the one player that many of his peers said could dominate a game without stats. That's the biggest difference between him and the productive PG's mentioned.



"Doing more with less"? Why didn't he "do more" when he played in the west?

I just showed you that Kidd was on a series of teams where his top scorer and rebounder were like 16 and 7 and you are asking me why didn't he do more???? He still managed to take those Western coast teams to the playoffs every year. Teams where the frontcourt was rebounding like Hornacek. Kidd lead a west coast team in rebounding that made it to the second round loss to the champions.


You're the one trolling if you don't think KJ and Penny Hardaway were comparable to Kidd as players. Those guys are BETTER than Kidd.
Penny Hardaway in his best years had a team in the East where he had Shaq average twice as much as Kidd's highest scorer and Rebound twice as much as his highest rebounding player. Twice as much in addition to having one of the premier SF (Nick Anderson), a top ten SG (Dennis Scott), the best point guard to come off the bench (Scott Skiles). The most dominant big man ever. For three years and he didn't do better than Kidd with, before prime Kmart, Richard Jefferson, Kerry Kittles and Kieth Van Horne.

As for KJ his first 7 years, SEVEN, he has at least four players average more than Kidd's best scorer in his '02 finals run. FOUR!!! General rule is if I have four players, once FIVE averaging higher than your highest scoring player guess who has the advantage? And yet Kidd has five more assist titles than KJ during this span!!! How does that happen? But you still want him to do better than everybody out West where the teams were stacked. Like I said in the post before Kidd's '03 run the highest scorer was only a point more a game than in '02. When he was on Pheonix, Kidd's scoring beast was Shawn Marion and Gugs one year.

Barkley, Ceballos, Manning, Finley, MaJerle and AC Green along with Kemp, the highly skilled McKey, Shrempf, Pierce, Perkins and Hawkins vs Gugs and Shawn Marion. You figure it out. Yet Kidd was a better assist man.

[Doctor K]

I just showed you that Kidd was on a series of teams where his top scorer and rebounder were like 16 and 7 and you are asking me why didn't he do more???? He still managed to take those Western coast teams to the playoffs every year. Teams where the frontcourt was rebounding like Hornacek. Kidd lead a west coast team in rebounding that made it to the second round loss to the champions.

But they lost right? Kidd lost ALL his series against western opponents. You know why? Because Kidd was not effective in the half court. In the playoffs teams play harder and you need to execute in the half court to win. If you watched Kidd in his prime then you know that was always his weakness. Full court he was as good as anyone that has ever played the game, but half court? He would get exposed. And why was he not as good half court? Because he did not have the ability to score like other great PGs did. Payton, and even KJ and Penny were far more productive in the half court on offense because they had the dual threat. The Nets went after VC solely because he could get it done in the half court.

[tpols]

"Competetive" series or "wins and then a series loss" don't mean anything. Even the 8th seed 37-45 Hawks took the 2008 champion Celtics to 7 games.


If you saw Kidd play in his prime then you must also know the key to stopping him was making it a half court game. Kidd was as good as they ever come full court, but as soon as you make him a half court PG, he would struggle. That was the biggest reason they went after Vince Carter.
.
And ironically they had more success before they got vince carter than after they got him. Because basketball isnt just about halfcourt offense.


Their defense with Kidd at his absolute peak was worth more than the additional value vince carter provided their offense in the halfcourt. They were one of the most dominant defensive teams and their goal was to grind the game out on both ends..

if you look at the Detroit Pistons, Chauncey shot 39% from the field in their great 04 run.. RIP shot 44%.. Sheed shot 41%.. Prince shot 41%..Ever wonder why so many players on the pistons and nets shot so low from the field?

Because the name of the game was defense and a slow pace.. nobody was scoring buckets on those guys. That was their gameplan. It wasnt about offensive effieicny.. it was about defensive efficiency and rebounding.. two areas Kidd was an absolute terror in combined with his floor game.

Your comment about series being competitive not materring makes little sense.. Nets were in control 3-2 and looked to be every bit as good as peak detroit who fared very well against the West when they made the finals with a record of 7-5. Nets swept detroit in years prior when kidd was at his peak.

[Pointguard]

"Competetive" series or "wins and then a series loss" don't mean anything. Even the 8th seed 37-45 Hawks took the 2008 champion Celtics to 7 games.

If you saw Kidd play in his prime then you must also know the key to stopping him was making it a half court game. Kidd was as good as they ever come full court, but as soon as you make him a half court PG, he would struggle. That was the biggest reason they went after Vince Carter.

Gary Payton on the other hand, half court hands down he was a better PG on offense. Because he could create his own shot effectively and score in a variety of ways or pass. Payton also has shown in his career he could run the up-tempo teams like the 90s sonics.

I think you are confused. The East played a slow down grind it type of game. Kidd was easily the best at mixing the styles up. The West played way more uptempo than the East did. The Nets hardly ran in the playoffs and swept teams. Kmart was the only Net that could run with Kidd and he had to rebound and defend cause he was almost good at rebounding and was a great defender.

[Pointguard]

But they lost right? Kidd lost ALL his series against western opponents. You know why? Because Kidd was not effective in the half court. In the playoffs teams play harder and you need to execute in the half court to win. If you watched Kidd in his prime then you know that was always his weakness. Full court he was as good as anyone that has ever played the game, but half court? He would get exposed. And why was he not as good half court? Because he did not have the ability to score like other great PGs did. Payton, and even KJ and Penny were far more productive in the half court on offense because they had the dual threat. The Nets went after VC solely because he could get it done in the half court.
No he lost because Shaq/Kobe and Duncan/Robinson/Bowen were a lot better than KMart and Richard Jefferson. HOFers against Kidd made men. That's not hard to understand.

Vince Carter was simply a talent. Kmart and Jefferson are limited not skilled or super talented players.

[joeyjoejoe]

If Malone didn't get injured and Kobe didn't sabotage his own team in 04 Lakers win, nets were successful coz of being in the east ah iverson and the sixers anyone lol

[Reggie43]

A quick question to those Kidd fans here. If those Nets finals teams were transferred to the West those years how far do they go? I wont be surprised if they dont get past the first round to be honest.

[Lebron23]

If Malone didn't get injured and Kobe didn't sabotage his own team in 04 Lakers win, nets were successful coz of being in the east ah iverson and the sixers anyone lol


The east was so terrible in the early to mid 2000's. Nash was a superior playoffs performer than Kidd.

[joeyjoejoe]

The east was so terrible in the early to mid 2000's. Nash was a superior playoffs performer than Kidd.

Spot on

[kshutts1]

Coming super late to the party, like normal.

Kidd is the better PG, but Payton is the better player.

[Harison]

Kidd better passer, Payton better player.

[Pointguard]

A quick question to those Kidd fans here. If those Nets finals teams were transferred to the West those years how far do they go? I wont be surprised if they dont get past the first round to be honest.

That doesn't bother me at all. Payton on those Nets' teams doesn't get a winning record in the East. No team gets a free pass to the finals one way or the other. The Nets definitely beat the world champions if Kidd is healthy in the third run and Detroit demolished the Lakers that year. Indiana also beats the Pistons if they don't get key injuries as well. That year the Pistons were the third best team in the East. No matter what you think about the East, you still have to beat a variety of teams and the Nets inexplicably did. From last place to the finals two years straight with nobodies is, what it is.

[Pointguard]

If Malone didn't get injured and Kobe didn't sabotage his own team in 04 Lakers win, nets were successful coz of being in the east ah iverson and the sixers anyone lol
You can make an excuse every year - just like you did without exception. If you didn't see a Piston's team decapitate a much more talented team you will never be able to appreciate good team ball. Name me players that have done it two years in a row without much individual talent??? A player with a real solid strengths. No rebounders. No scorers.

Rookie Richard Jefferson as the best offensive player?

The East was a grind, that's why Shaq said AI is a top five GOAT - he played out there - he knows. Its much harder to do things in a grind.

[Pointguard]

The east was so terrible in the early to mid 2000's. Nash was a superior playoffs performer than Kidd.

Funny, yeah lets put Nash on a team that has no offensive weapons. Now that's a complete joke.

[Reggie43]

That doesn't bother me at all. Payton on those Nets' teams doesn't get a winning record in the East. No team gets a free pass to the finals one way or the other. The Nets definitely beat the world champions if Kidd is healthy in the third run and Detroit demolished the Lakers that year. Indiana also beats the Pistons if they don't get key injuries as well. That year the Pistons were the third best team in the East. No matter what you think about the East, you still have to beat a variety of teams and the Nets inexplicably did. From last place to the finals two years straight with nobodies is, what it is.

Payton has led arguably weaker teams to a winning record in the stronger west and youre telling me he cant do it in east at its all time weakest?

While it is impressive what the Nets did those years atleast you seem to agree that there is no chance in hell they do those in the west especially with no homecourt advantage both years because of their inferior records

[Dragonyeuw]

Kidd is the better PG
GP better player

This.

[Pointguard]

Payton has led arguably weaker teams to a winning record in the stronger west and youre telling me he cant do it in east at its all time weakest?

While it is impressive what the Nets did those years atleast you seem to agree that there is no chance in hell they do those in the west especially with no homecourt advantage both years because of their inferior records
Oh no I don't agree with you.

First Payton was never on an worse team. His first eight years were a very solid core of
X man
Ricky
Derrick Mckey
Kemp
Dale Ellis

Two years later Perkins is added
Three years later Shremp and Gill

Four years later core is
Shrempf
Kemp
Perkins
Hawkins
This group went to the finals.

That entire core, both cores, is basically on level with Kidds best teammate Kenyon Martin and much better than any other Kidd teammate. Kidd barely knew the players he was taking to the finals and not one of them was a scorer or rebounder. Payton knew his players as good as you can get to know them as he had guys for years.

The second core feel off and stopped making the playoffs.

Payton most impressive year of doing a lot with a little is when he takes a team of Vin Baker, Rueben Pattersen, Brent Barry, Vernon Maxwell, Horace Grant and Rashard Lewis to the playoffs which was impressive in '00. But no way am I saying that they are the level of players Kidd had the next two years.

And then Kidd had one of the best perimeter defensive stands ever in '11. Kidd could affect teams in ways indescribable with great decision making, timing, control of tempo, overachieving teams, adapting, imposing the team will, keeping players confidence up, getting the ball when needed, etc where Kidd was superior to all except Magic. He hit the 3 ball noticeably better than Payton as well. If we are going by scoring and assist then AI and Marbury just blow everybody else out the window.

[Da KO King]

Jason Kidd. I think Gary Payton is extremely overrated.

[joeyjoejoe]

Ai top 5 now I've heard it all, fact is east was weak around that time you put those nets or sixers in the west and 2nd round exit at best just look at how those teams got steamrolled kidd being such a grind it player that's why he's so inefficient with league leading turnovers and horrible shooting % you say that's how it was in the east, news flash he was the same turnover prone 40% shooter while averaging a whopping 14 or so points for his first 5 or 6 years in the west while being constant first round exit except beating a duncanless spurs once

[FatComputerNerd]

Ai top 5 now I've heard it all, fact is east was weak around that time you put those nets or sixers in the west and 2nd round exit at best just look at how those teams got steamrolled kidd being such a grind it player that's why he's so inefficient with league leading turnovers and horrible shooting % you say that's how it was in the east, news flash he was the same turnover prone 40% shooter while averaging a whopping 14 or so points for his first 5 or 6 years in the west while being constant first round exit except beating a duncanless spurs once

In fairness, ball-dominant pointguards tend to average more turnovers than other players. The reasons for this should be obvious.

Steve Nash has led the league in turnovers per game during some of his prime years. What you need to look at for a PG is not turnovers per game but assist to turnover ratio.

[joeyjoejoe]

Nowitzki was awesome in 11 but there were other players that had more impact then Kidd on Dallas like Marion and chandler

[joeyjoejoe]

I see your point but there are exceptions cp is ball dominant with very good assist numbers and not many turnovers

[FatComputerNerd]

I see your point but there are exceptions cp is ball dominant with very good assist numbers and not many turnovers

There are exceptions to every rule, but yeah...often the flashiest passing PG's who average a ton of assists are going to be among the league-leaders in turnovers as well. Not always, but frequently. Interestingly, J. Kidd was 3rd best in the league last year in assist to turnover ratio. CP3 was # 1 =)

[GP_20]

That doesn't bother me at all. Payton on those Nets' teams doesn't get a winning record in the East. No team gets a free pass to the finals one way or the other. The Nets definitely beat the world champions if Kidd is healthy in the third run and Detroit demolished the Lakers that year. Indiana also beats the Pistons if they don't get key injuries as well. That year the Pistons were the third best team in the East. No matter what you think about the East, you still have to beat a variety of teams and the Nets inexplicably did. From last place to the finals two years straight with nobodies is, what it is.

Payton on those teams doesn't get a winning record in the East?

Look I'm not really joining this discussion because it's been discussed so many times and the overall advantage goes to Payton. However, some of the comments posted are so stupid I have to point them out.


Payton on those teams doesn't get a winning record on the East? Gary Payton never had a losing record in the substantially tougher western conference with worse teammates than Jason Kidd has ever had in the Nets. Yet he doesn't get a winning record in the east with better teammates and easier schedule?

Are you f*ucking stupid? If this guy is the one lobbying for Jason Kidd then I feel bad for Kidd supporters.

In 2000 Payton's 3 best players were:

-Out of prime out of shape Baker coming off a 14/6 season
- Sophomore Ruben Patterson averaging 2ppg in his rookie season
- And 27 year old Barry coming off a 11/3/4 season

His supporting cast was worse than Kobe's 2006 cast. Yet he took them to the playoffs (with one of the worst coaches) and won 45 games in the mighty west.

The pattern continued for Payton on his final few seasons in Seattle. Yet he still never had a losing season fighting the tough competition in the West. Jason Kidd with substantially better teammates, easier schedule, better coach, won what 4-5 more games on average per season than Payton in 2000?


Just stop :facepalm

[TheBigVeto]

Kidd easy. Not even close.

[Reggie43]

Oh no I don't agree with you.

First Payton was never on an worse team. His first eight years were a very solid core of
X man
Ricky
Derrick Mckey
Kemp
Dale Ellis

Two years later Perkins is added
Three years later Shremp and Gill

Four years later core is
Shrempf
Kemp
Perkins
Hawkins
This group went to the finals.

That entire core, both cores, is basically on level with Kidds best teammate Kenyon Martin and much better than any other Kidd teammate. Kidd barely knew the players he was taking to the finals and not one of them was a scorer or rebounder. Payton knew his players as good as you can get to know them as he had guys for years.

The second core feel off and stopped making the playoffs.

Payton most impressive year of doing a lot with a little is when he takes a team of Vin Baker, Rueben Pattersen, Brent Barry, Vernon Maxwell, Horace Grant and Rashard Lewis to the playoffs which was impressive in '00. But no way am I saying that they are the level of players Kidd had the next two years.

And then Kidd had one of the best perimeter defensive stands ever in '11. Kidd could affect teams in ways indescribable with great decision making, timing, control of tempo, overachieving teams, adapting, imposing the team will, keeping players confidence up, getting the ball when needed, etc where Kidd was superior to all except Magic. He hit the 3 ball noticeably better than Payton as well. If we are going by scoring and assist then AI and Marbury just blow everybody else out the window.

I guess in your mind they still make the finals going thru all those west teams?

[Reggie43]

Payton on those teams doesn't get a winning record in the East?

Look I'm not really joining this discussion because it's been discussed so many times and the overall advantage goes to Payton. However, some of the comments posted are so stupid I have to point them out.


Payton on those teams doesn't get a winning record on the East? Gary Payton never had a losing record in the substantially tougher western conference with worse teammates than Jason Kidd has ever had in the Nets. Yet he doesn't get a winning record in the east with better teammates and easier schedule?

Are you f*ucking stupid? If this guy is the one lobbying for Jason Kidd then I feel bad for Kidd supporters.

In 2000 Payton's 3 best players were:

-Out of prime out of shape Baker coming off a 14/6 season
- Sophomore Ruben Patterson averaging 2ppg in his rookie season
- And 27 year old Barry coming off a 11/3/4 season

His supporting cast was worse than Kobe's 2006 cast. Yet he took them to the playoffs (with one of the worst coaches) and won 45 games in the mighty west.

The pattern continued for Payton on his final few seasons in Seattle. Yet he still never had a losing season fighting the tough competition in the West. Jason Kidd with substantially better teammates, easier schedule, better coach, won what 4-5 more games on average per season than Payton in 2000?


Just stop :facepalm

Exactly this

[TheBigVeto]

Jason Kidd. I think Gary Payton is extremely overrated.

This is the honest truth.

[ChuckOakley]

I can only imagine the field day Kidd would have had with Payton's supporting cast.

Kidd
Hawkins
Schremph
Kemp
Perkins

Kidd to Kemp would have been amazing.
Schremph was better than any player on the Finals Nets (as was Kemp obviously)
Perkins with his spacing would have changed the game.

[joeyjoejoe]

Kidds nets wouldn't get past Lakers spurs or kings in the west, first round exit

[tpols]

Kidds nets wouldn't get past Lakers spurs or kings in the west, first round exit
You could put prime Magic Johnson on those nets teams and the same can be said. So you aren't saying much..

So kidd/Kenyon couldn't even beat shaq/Kobe? :eek: What a scrub kidd must be..

[Pointguard]

Payton on those teams doesn't get a winning record in the East?

Look I'm not really joining this discussion because it's been discussed so many times and the overall advantage goes to Payton. However, some of the comments posted are so stupid I have to point them out.
:roll: Howdy :oldlol:

I haven't seen the discussion a lot and most list I see Kidd is in front of Payton.



Are you f*ucking stupid? If this guy is the one lobbying for Jason Kidd then I feel bad for Kidd supporters.

In 2000 Payton's 3 best players were:

-Out of prime out of shape Baker coming off a 14/6 season
- Sophomore Ruben Patterson averaging 2ppg in his rookie season
- And 27 year old Barry coming off a 11/3/4 season

OK, you can tell a guy isn't too swift when he uses your example to make a point. I already said this:

Payton most impressive year of doing a lot with a little is when he takes a team of Vin Baker, Rueben Pattersen, Brent Barry, Vernon Maxwell, Horace Grant and Rashard Lewis to the playoffs which was impressive in '00. But no way am I saying that they are the level of players Kidd had the next two years.

In fact I used it to trap a fool. And you can't use the exception and say its a rule.

Sorry nutcase but we are comparing even that Seattle team to the Kidd's first finals team. That Seattle team had two seasoned champions, a post player, and a sharp shooter, and lost in the first round. Kidds team had no winning vets, no consistent shooters, no scorer, no rebounders, not built for the halfcourt, not built for the running game, was a losing franchise with a brand new coach but won three rounds in the playoffs. And to prove it wasn't a fluke they are contenders the next three years. Kidd won six of eight series with that team of young Kenyon and rookie Richard Jefferson. Payton didn't win a series with his better constructed team. Only a fool makes the comparison.


The pattern continued for Payton on his final few seasons in Seattle. Yet he still never had a losing season fighting the tough competition in the West. Jason Kidd with substantially better teammates, easier schedule, better coach, won what 4-5 more games on average per season than Payton in 2000?
Just stop :facepalm Payton did have losing seasons. There are exceptions in everybodies career so I won't count that. Winning in the playoffs is hard no matter what. Shaq didn't consistently win out East in the playoffs so that mighty west talk sounds good, but it can't be used against Kidd. That Nets team is the worse to ever make it to the finals.

Payton's first 8 years he always had four more players that scored more than Kidd's finals team highest scorer and amazingly Kidd was getting way more assist titles even with Payton having big tenure with his superior scorers, superior talent, same core players, star players, smart versatile players, and much better shooters. And you are face palming?

No there isn't enough humility in Payton fans to say hey what Kidd did was amazing.

One year after Payton leaves the Sonics are 52 and 30 and in the second round of the playoffs losing to the champions but putting up their best fight in like 7 years with Ray Allen, Rashard Lewis and Radmonavic as the third highest scorer. :lol - the mighty West has spoken!!! It took the Nets eight years to recuperate after Kidd left. And he brought them up from the ashes.

Please continue.

[Legends66NBA7]

I haven't seen the discussion a lot and most list I see Kidd is in front of Payton.

Which are these lists ? I see the opposite.

[ChuckOakley]

Kidds nets wouldn't get past Lakers spurs or kings in the west, first round exit
Really?
They took the Spurs to 6 and should have taken game 5 (up 10 in the 4ht) and been up 3-2 going home.

[Pointguard]

Which are these lists ? I see the opposite.
http://mikelucassports.com/2013/01/09/top-10-point-guards-of-all-time/

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/dailydime?page=dailydime-greatestpointguards

http://basketballbicker.com/2013/08/29/top-5-point-guards-in-nba-history/

Please share yours.

[Reggie43]

:roll: Howdy :oldlol:

I haven't seen the discussion a lot and most list I see Kidd is in front of Payton.



OK, you can tell a guy isn't too swift when he uses your example to make a point. I already said this:

Payton most impressive year of doing a lot with a little is when he takes a team of Vin Baker, Rueben Pattersen, Brent Barry, Vernon Maxwell, Horace Grant and Rashard Lewis to the playoffs which was impressive in '00. But no way am I saying that they are the level of players Kidd had the next two years.

In fact I used it to trap a fool. And you can't use the exception and say its a rule.

Sorry nutcase but we are comparing even that Seattle team to the Kidd's first finals team. That Seattle team had two seasoned champions, a post player, and a sharp shooter, and lost in the first round. Kidds team had no winning vets, no consistent shooters, no scorer, no rebounders, not built for the halfcourt, not built for the running game, was a losing franchise with a brand new coach but won three rounds in the playoffs. And to prove it wasn't a fluke they are contenders the next three years. Kidd won six of eight series with that team of young Kenyon and rookie Richard Jefferson. Payton didn't win a series with his better constructed team. Only a fool makes the comparison.
Payton did have losing seasons. There are exceptions in everybodies career so I won't count that. Winning in the playoffs is hard no matter what. Shaq didn't consistently win out East in the playoffs so that mighty west talk sounds good, but it can't be used against Kidd. That Nets team is the worse to ever make it to the finals.

Payton's first 8 years he always had four more players that scored more than Kidd's finals team highest scorer and amazingly Kidd was getting way more assist titles even with Payton having big tenure with his superior scorers, superior talent, same core players, star players, smart versatile players, and much better shooters. And you are face palming?

No there isn't enough humility in Payton fans to say hey what Kidd did was amazing.

One year after Payton leaves the Sonics are 52 and 30 and in the second round of the playoffs losing to the champions but putting up their best fight in like 7 years with Ray Allen, Rashard Lewis and Radmonavic as the third highest scorer. :lol - the mighty West has spoken!!! It took the Nets eight years to recuperate after Kidd left. And he brought them up from the ashes.

Please continue.

Your posts contain too many errors even Nets/Kidd fans would disown you. You really think those teams were not built for the running game when the trio of Kenyon Martin, Richard Jefferson and Kerry Kittles where at their best running the break?

[Legends66NBA7]

http://mikelucassports.com/2013/01/09/top-10-point-guards-of-all-time/

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/dailydime?page=dailydime-greatestpointguards

http://basketballbicker.com/2013/08/29/top-5-point-guards-in-nba-history/

Please share yours.

Thanks for the links.

To be clear, I'm talking about the Insidehoops consensus. I see posters positioning Payton over Kidd more than Kidd over Payton.

[Pointguard]

I guess in your mind they still make the finals going thru all those west teams?
Wow, one more guy that just doesn't get it. Kidd won three playoff rounds with a team with no offensive strengths. Shaq and Webber didn't dominate out East like they did out West. Could it be the grind makes it really hard? The playoffs are the playoffs. There are adjustments and hard play regardless.

[Reggie43]

Wow, one more guy that just doesn't get it. Kidd won three playoff rounds with a team with no offensive strengths. Shaq and Webber didn't dominate out East like they did out West. Could it be the grind makes it really hard? The playoffs are the playoffs. There are adjustments and hard play regardless.

Yeah I get it, you grew up watching Jason Kidd dominate the weak east thus making him incomparable in your eyes. I would guess that you have him as the 2nd best pg of all time or do you have him ahead of Magic :D

[Legends66NBA7]

The more I read about this debate, it's actual pretty open. Really makes the ranking on whoever's list a moot point. It's probably something I shouldn't have bothered with, since outside the Top 2 or 3 of all-time PG's, it's a ranking of any order. Sorta off like the all-time PF rankings after Duncan.

It's a really a preference choice the way I look at it.

[Pointguard]

Your posts contain too many errors even Nets/Kidd fans would disown you. You really think those teams were not built for the running game when the trio of Kenyon Martin, Richard Jefferson and Kerry Kittles where at their best running the break?

Call out the errors. Obviously, you can't speak for Nets fans or Kidd's fans both of which I'm good with. Not to upset your already weird ways but I don't seek out fellowship on each post. Speaking of errors:

Richard Jefferson was never considered hot for running teams. Where did you get that from?

Kerry Kittles had knee surgery the year before Kidd came and was on his last legs literally by '02.

Now Martin could run but he always had the toughest defensive assignment in the frontcourt.

You need rebounders to run.

You called out people as stupid but you really don't have your act together at all. Good try but you ain't fooling anybody but GP20, your other screen-name.

[Legends66NBA7]

Good try but you ain't fooling anybody but GP20, your other screen-name.

They post nothing alike.

GP 20 used to be another account on there, though.

[Reggie43]

Call out the errors. Obviously, you can't speak for Nets fans or Kidd's fans both of which I'm good with. Not to upset your already weird ways but I don't seek out fellowship on each post. Speaking of errors:

Richard Jefferson was never considered hot for running teams. Where did you get that from?

Kerry Kittles had knee surgery the year before Kidd came and was on his last legs literally by '02.

Now Martin could run but he always had the toughest defensive assignment in the frontcourt.

You need rebounders to run.

You called out people as stupid but you really don't have your act together at all. Good try but you ain't fooling anybody but GP20, your other screen-name.

Just because another poster is calling you out and I agree with him doesnt mean I am an alt.

I was never one to resort to name calling to prove a point.

Find me a decent Nets fan who would support your claim that the trio of Martin/Jefferson/Kittles were not good fast break players then I wont bother with this thread again

[tpols]

Just because another poster is calling you out and I agree with him doesnt mean I am an alt.

I was never one to resort to name calling to prove a point.

Find me a decent Nets fan who would support your claim that the trio of Martin/Jefferson/Kittles were not good fast break players then I wont bother with this thread again
They were only 'fastbreak players' because they followed Kidds lead and Kidds combination of grabbing long rebounds and jumpstarting a break was better than any other PG to play besides magic.

[Reggie43]

They were only 'fastbreak players' because they followed Kidds lead and Kidds combination of grabbing long rebounds and jumpstarting a break was better than any other PG to play besides magic.

All very true but another poster claimed that they were not built for the running game which I disagreed with among other things. They wont start the break on their own ala barkley or lebron but give them a decent point guard to run with and they will be good at it albeit not as effective with Jason Kidd leading them

[tpols]

All very true but another poster claimed that they were not built for the running game which I disagreed with among other things. They wont start the break on their own ala barkley or lebron but give them a decent point guard to run with and they will be good at it albeit not as effective with Jason Kidd leading them
Yea they were runners to an extent.. RJ was awesome athlete

[GP_20]

Sorry nutcase but we are comparing even that Seattle team to the Kidd's first finals team. That Seattle team had two seasoned champions, a post player, and a sharp shooter, and lost in the first round. Kidds team had no winning vets, no consistent shooters, no scorer, no rebounders, not built for the halfcourt, not built for the running game, was a losing franchise with a brand new coach but won three rounds in the playoffs. And to prove it wasn't a fluke they are contenders the next three years. Kidd won six of eight series with that team of young Kenyon and rookie Richard Jefferson. Payton didn't win a series with his better constructed team. Only a fool makes the comparison.

Okay forget Payton vs. Kidd, but if you think Payton's 2000 supporting cast was better than Kidd's in 2002 this debate is over. . What did Seattle have? 2 seasoned champions? Out of their prime? I guess we should consider it a big edge the Knicks had players like Kidd and Camby last year? A post player? Just A POST PLAYER? Wow this is huge. :roll:


Let me break it down for you, tell me what part of you doesn't understand:

Kenyon Martin >>> Vin Baker
Keith Van Horn >>> Ruben Paterson
Kerry Kittles = Brent Barry

And I could go on. But you know what, all this doesn't even matter. Your original claim we are arguing was Payton could not even get a winning season in the East with the teams Kidd was playing on. :roll:


Let me ask you this, was Payton's 2000 cast at least COMPARABLE to Jason Kidd's Nets cast? Or was Jason Kidds cast so much worse. And ok if they are so much worse, how about the schedule? Was facing Eastern conference teams also tougher?



Gary Payton never finished with a losing season and he played in the west all his years. Unless you think Payton's 1999, 2000, 2001, and 2002 supporting casts were WAY better than what Kidd had with K-Mart, R.Jefferson, Kittles, etc.

How can you possibly say Payton would not finish with a winning record in the east?



I don't get it, do you realize how stupid you sound?

[GP_20]

And once again, it was the East, Kidd was playing against teams that would most likely not make it out of the Western Conference 1st round (based on record).

How did Kidd do against this WCF while in his prime?

95: Missed Playoffs
96: Missed Playoffs
97: 1st round exit
98: 1st round exit
99: 1st round exit
00: Suns get out of the 1st round...Duncan misses the series and so does Kidd. As soon as Kidd comes back in the 2nd round? Out haha
01: 1st round exit (both Kidd and Duncan play this time)

:applause:

2 Missed Playoffs and 0-5 series record
(where Kidd plays at least most the series)



Kidd led teams could not and never did beat any tough competition. I mean what good team has Kidd ever beat in a series in his prime. I don't mean "almost" beat or "took them to ___ games", the 2008 37-45 Hawks took the champion 2008 Celtics to 7 games. Kidd never beat any good team in his prime. 2003 Pistons? Please that team changed as soon as Rasheed Wallace entered in 2004 and we all know who won that series.

[joeyjoejoe]

I still haven't heard why Kidd's horrible shooting % also occurred in his many years in the west, also the argument that Kidd was top 5 mvp candidate twice so he's better then Payton so you are also saying cp3 is much better then Kidd as he has 4 or 5 top mvp votes and he maybe halfway through his career