At their best, who was better? - Jason Kidd, Gary Payton or Steve Nash?

[Shade8780]

Who do you think was better at their peak/prime?

[BuGzBuNNy]

Nash

[hateraid]

Not your fault but I'm not liking where this thread is going to go...
I hate to criticize Nash, and I love Nash followers and how they support and can justify his career accomplishments, I would take Kidd.
I love Kidd's approach to being a PG and his court vision and creativity I would say is the greatest (and I'm on the Magic is GOAT bandwagon)

Having said that Nash would be a better fit on alot of teams due to his shooting range

Half court Nash > Kidd
Fullcourt Kidd > Nash

Overall they are give in take in all areas, but Kidd gets a huge edge in defense

EDIT: Just saw Payton. I'd still take Kidd

Adding Payton was a good call, otherwise this may end up being a Nash bashing thread

[3peated]

all ringless until past their prime, so....equals, am i right?

[Kblaze8855]

All playing at the peak of their ability in head to head matchups I suspect GP would appear to have the best game. Payton couldnt lock up Nash totally but he could prevent some of those casual strolls into the lane he got a lot in Phoenix and Kidd isnt scoring on PAyton in the halfcourt at all.

At Nashs best he still cant guard Gary. He can guard Kidd to an extent unless he takes him into the post but he didnt do that as often as he could.

Head to head matchups Payton would appear to have the edge on a stat sheet I suspect. Doesnt mean hes the best of the 3. That depends on what else you have to work with.

But Payton at the top of his game vs either of them at theirs...GP is gonna have like 26/8/6 and hold Kidd to 4-16 shooting and 9-10 assists on the break and Nash might hang around 16-20 points with more work to get them than hed want....or 12 points and 15-16 assists.

Given equal teams I think GPs would likely win...

But I cant count Nash out. Nash on his 05 playoffs level is at least in contention to outplay any point ever...on a single night. Magic...Oscar...whoever.

One night only....Nash in the form he showed vs the Mavs...hes gonna hold his own.

[Xiao Yao You]

Glove

[chocolatethunder]

It's a difficult question because they were all so different in their games. Nash when he wanted/needed to be was the best scorer and him and Kidd are about even in passing (both being better than Payton). However, Nash is by far the worst defender and Kidd is by far the worst scorer. Payton is the most well rounded and although Kidd was a great defender he's not on Payton's level. I would say Payton at his best is the best of the group. I would also say tho, if it was a big playoff game with a lot on the line, I wouldn't count out Nash to step up and score a ton and dish out a bunch of assists. The stuff he was doing in Phoenix when Amare was out was pretty insane. Also, I don't want it to seem like somehow I dislike Kidd, that's not the case at all.

[kshutts1]

Others have alluded to this point, but it really depends on what you want from your PG.

If the PG is the star of the team, then I want GP first, then Nash.
If the PG is a secondary player, I want Nash then Kidd (love Nash's shooting).

[zoom17]

Payton

[Killbot]

Gary Payton.

Best all around game + Trash talker to get in the heads of players + most physical

[SamuraiSWISH]

GP and Kidd dominated in an era where no touch rules didn't exist. Nash's reputation was significantly boosted with D'Antoni's style of play, and the rule changes after 2004. That's not saying Nash isn't a great PG, but it needs to be kept in mind. Also, Kidd and GP are in another stratosphere defensively, Stockton and Chris Paul as well.

Paul
GP
Stockton
Kidd
Nash

[LAClipsFan33]

GP...no question

[Eric Cartman]

GP and Kidd dominated in an era where no touch rules didn't exist. Nash's reputation was significantly boosted with D'Antoni's style of play, and the rule changes after 2004. That's not saying Nash isn't a great PG, but it needs to be kept in mind. Also, Kidd and GP are in another stratosphere defensively, Stockton and Chris Paul as well.

Paul
GP
Stockton
Kidd
Nash

Nash offensively is the best out of those 5, tho.

[SamuraiSWISH]

Nash offensively is the best out of those 5, tho.
No he isn't. Paul is the best. Paul's a better scorer, equal distributor, and much better defender. Nash is the best shooter of the bunch, that doesn't make him the best offensively. The gap between all these players, particularly Nash is strictly defense related.

[Myth]

Payton > Kidd > Nash

[plowking]

Payton is the best, Kidd the worst out of that lot.

Kidd gets consistently overrated on this board. This is coming from someone who actually watched him, and wasn't amazed by his triple doubles like some. A lot of them were hollow, empty, and meaningless. Not to mention his sub 40% shooting is a detriment to your team anyway you look at it.

[Heavincent]

This is coming from someone who actually watched him, and wasn't amazed by his triple doubles like some. A lot of them were hollow, empty, and meaningless.

I'd like to hear an explanation for this BS. Should be good.

[miller-time]

Nash's reputation was significantly boosted with D'Antoni's style of play, and the rule changes after 2004.

To be fair this is when Nash was coming into his prime. He had already made 2 all-star teams with Dallas in 02 and 03, so it isn't like he was just a random starter before 2004. Also that Suns team the previous season was 29-53 and then with the addition of Nash went to 62-20 (there is a reason he won that MVP award). You could say D'Antoni also benefited from the rule changes, but he has only had one winning season without Nash on his team.

Also just because a player flourishes under a specific coaches style of play doesn't detract from them as a player. Generally every player will play better under one coach than another.

[BuGzBuNNy]

To be fair this is when Nash was coming into his prime. He had already made 2 all-star teams with Dallas in 02 and 03, so it isn't like he was just a random starter before 2004. Also that Suns team the previous season was 29-53 and then with the addition of Nash went to 62-20 (there is a reason he won that MVP award). You could say D'Antoni also benefited from the rule changes, but he has only had one winning season without Nash on his team.

Also just because a player flourishes under a specific coaches style of play doesn't detract from them as a player. Generally every player will play better under one coach than another.
On top of that go look at the stats of guys like Amare, Marion and Joe Johnson in 04 and 05. He made all them a hell of a lot better.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Payton is the best, Kidd the worst out of that lot.

Kidd gets consistently overrated on this board. This is coming from someone who actually watched him, and wasn't amazed by his triple doubles like some. A lot of them were hollow, empty, and meaningless. Not to mention his sub 40% shooting is a detriment to your team anyway you look at it.

Apparently you didn't see what he was working w/ in Jersey? He took an AT BEST decent roster to the finals....twice.

[plowking]

Apparently you didn't see what he was working w/ in Jersey? He took an AT BEST decent roster to the finals....twice.

I knew this would come up.

Its like people that simply think Nash was the reason the Suns went from 20 something wins to 60 odd...
Its just the right cog for the machine, that allows it to run well as a team.

Kidd is a great point guard, but hes just not as good as some people like to make out.

[Hamtaro CP3KDKG]

Payton for sure

[ProfessorMurder]

Kidd can play some defense and orchestrate an offense.
Nash can light it up offensively.

Payton can do some of both, and is more well rounded. I take Payton every time for my team.

[miller-time]

Its like people that simply think Nash was the reason the Suns went from 20 something wins to 60 odd...
Its just the right cog for the machine, that allows it to run well as a team.

Nash may have been the best possible cog for that team, but that doesn't take anything away from him as a player. As I said before, he was already a 2 time all-star before he went to the Suns, it isn't like he magically fit into the Suns roster and he suddenly blew up. He was already moving into his prime before Phoenix and reached it while he was there. Every player is going to (or can) be in circumstances that put them ahead of where they might be on an ordinary team. If Jordan wasn't playing on a team with Scottie and Phil could he have still achieved what he did? Maybe, maybe not. If he didn't would that mean he is a worse player? No, he would still be MJ, just MJ on a team that didn't fit so well for him.

[iamgine]

I used to be one of those people who said those 2 MVPs Nash got was a big mistake. I mean, over Kobe and Duncan? You gotta be joking. Clearly those 2 players must be better right? Then I started to follow Nash over a few games. My view totally change. My goodness, he's totally unstoppable. One of the smartest player I've ever seen stepped on the court. I would put him up there with Magic Johnson. Steve Nash was a combination of one of the most accurate shooter and one of the most elite playmaker in NBA history. He just...wreck the opposing defense again and again.

And he got a somewhat undeserved rep on defense. He does try hard, and while still a liability, he's not as bad as many people make him out to be. He's really bad against certain type of players but otherwise a decent defender. Plus PG position is the least important defense-wise.

I have no doubt in my mind that had the Suns played with a good defensive big back in mid 2000s, they'd have dominated the league. To be fair though, I do think the no handcheck rule helped Nash a lot.

[Sharmer]

MJ better than those puppets.

[miller-time]

And he got a somewhat undeserved rep on defense. He does try hard, and while still a liability, he's not as bad as many people make him out to be. He's really bad against certain type of players but otherwise a decent defender. Plus PG position is the least important defense-wise.

Agreed. He is not a great defender, but people make him out to be a cardboard cut out. He definitely puts in effort on the defensive end. I was watching him with the Lakers this year and he is (nearly) always where he is supposed to be.

[AussieG]

Jason Kidd for who he was as a player, in terms of individual skill and talent.

Steve Nash for the team he had around him and his influence on that team, and the success he had with them.

[dyna]

1) Kidd
2) Payton
3) Nash

[Reggie43]

The clear answer to anyone who watched those players whole careers is Payton. It gets tricky when ranking the other two because it mainly boils down to preference.

[FatComputerNerd]

Kidd can play some defense and orchestrate an offense.
Nash can light it up offensively.

Payton can do some of both, and is more well rounded. I take Payton every time for my team.

Pretty much this

[TheBigVeto]

Nash
Kidd
Payton

in that correct order.

[bizil]

All of these guys are great and bring different things to the table. But I think I would pick GP first. Other than Magic and Big O, I can't say FOR SURE I would take any PG over Payton. He's right there with Isiah, Clyde, and CP3 for me in terms of who I feel are the best players to play PG. What makes GP and Clyde standout is they combine scoring, passing, and defense better than any PG's EVER! And both are 6'4 and could defend PG, SG, and many SF's. That's a hard package to top frankly. If Kidd was a more dominant scorer, I would take him over GP. And due to Kidd's triple double ability, that could possibly supercede what GP brings.

In terms of the fundamentals of shooting, passing, and dribbling as a package, Nash is the PREMIER TECHNICIAN of all time at PG. That's a hell of a feat for the MOST TECHNICAL POSITION in the sport. Nash can do ALL THREE AT THE HIGHEST LEVELS! No other PG's can really say that other than a peak Mark Price. And Steph Curry looks to be getting there. These kinds of PG's can alter a defense big time and make life very easy for teammates. So in a sense, u could argue Payton, Kidd, and Nash for who u would take first. But for me, I just prefer GP.

[aj1987]

Payton
Nash
Kidd

[bdreason]

Payton > Kidd > Nash

[nzahir]

Old bump, but good thread and I was watching nba open court.

Ill take gary, then nash, then kidd.
Here is my reasoning:

Gary could score better than kidd could(kidd developed a good set shot from 3 but mostly because they were open shots) and is the best defender of all 3 and one of the best of all time; that is really why he is here.

Nash was the best passer of all 3 to me, the best playmaker, the best shooter, scorer(he didnt shoot as much as gary but much more efficient and could take over when he had too but phoenix had no problem scoring so he didnt have to over shoot it). Nash was an average defender and rebounder, got a little slower on defense as he got older but he never had a great defensive big so that could have really changed his image. Like how kidd has tyson as he got older to protect the rim. His impact won him 2 rings, best offensive prime by far of any; if he played more when he was younger he would maybe be ranked higher.

Kidd could do it all and play great defense but not a great shooter and teams could guard him easier. A rondo type player(besides the 3) but better at running the offense.

[Pushxx]

GP is the most versatile and the best choice.

Second best is Nash, though he needs a team more catered to his skillset than Kidd and GP.

[Locked_Up_Tonight]

Replace Kidd with Payton, and the Mavs do not win the 2011 Finals. Watch this play from Kidd:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j75f7WQ0xbU

Watch Kidd in the background after Jason Terry gets the offensive rebound. He was literally telling Marion where to throw it to.... he knew he couldn't immediately throw it to Dirk because Dirk wouldn't be in range, and wouldn't be in rhythm on the shot.

And that is just one example of why Carlisle said he had the highest IQ of anyone he has ever coached. The flow offense worked because of Kidd. He was a second coach out there.

[Pushxx]

Replace Kidd with Payton, and the Mavs do not win the 2011 Finals. Watch this play from Kidd:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j75f7WQ0xbU

Watch Kidd in the background after Jason Terry gets the offensive rebound. He was literally telling Marion where to throw it to....

And that is just one example of why Carlisle said he had the highest IQ of anyone he has ever coached. The flow offense worked because of Kidd. He was a second coach out there.

Totally unrelated. We're talking about their primes, where they would be a focal point of the team. That Mavs team was centered around Dirk with a bunch of fearless role players that all helped them win.

[nzahir]

Replace Kidd with Payton, and the Mavs do not win the 2011 Finals. Watch this play from Kidd:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j75f7WQ0xbU

Watch Kidd in the background after Jason Terry gets the offensive rebound. He was literally telling Marion where to throw it to....

And that is just one example of why Carlisle said he had the highest IQ of anyone he has ever coached. The flow offense worked because of Kidd. He was a second coach out there.
8 pts 6 assists on 39% shooting in the finals for kidd, but ya u are right b/c payton would be 42 in 2011 so he probably wouldve been too old.
But seriously what aged payton? A 30 year old payton?
And I am talking really about primes, I dont care that kidd and payton have a ring as role players. Nash got the 2 mvps in his prime

[Locked_Up_Tonight]

8 pts 6 assists on 39% shooting in the finals for kidd, but ya u are right b/c payton would be 42 in 2011 so he probably wouldve been too old.
But seriously what aged payton? A 30 year old payton?
And I am talking really about primes, I dont care that kidd and payton have a ring as role players. Nash got the 2 mvps in his prime

Payton was the worse floor general out of the 3. Throw out assists. Assists are just a by product of a finish. Payton did not and never could "run a team."

[Round Mound]

Patyon > Kidd > Nash

[nzahir]

Payton was the worse floor general out of the 3. Throw out assists. Assists are just a by product of a finish. Payton did not and never could "run a team."
He could run a team but he the worst of the 3. To me nash is the best of them in running the point truly.
Payton could score and defend better than kidd. Kidds big problem is scoring

[Fire Colangelo]

Nash > Kidd > Payton

[FKAri]

I don't think we ever saw Payton at his best (just never found the right situation during his prime imo). Nash and Kidd are on the same level, depending on how much you value shooting over perimeter defense. However since Nash was better in the halfcourt I'll side with Nash.

Nash > Kidd > Payton

[GP_20]

Gary Payton is the best out of the 3. As many said, he had that all-around game. He could help your team win in so many more ways.

And to the guy who said he never ran a team, clearly you were too young to remember the GP-Kemp Sonic teams. They were highly successful squads winning 60+ multiple times while being near the top of the league in offense playing some uptempo, and Payton was often the leading scorer and playmaker of that offense. What more do you need?

[Asukal]

The Glove.

[AintNoSunshine]

Depends on what you want for your team:



Black

White

Half

[bizil]

When it comes to combining scoring, passing, and defense at the PG position, I think GP or Frazier is the best of all time. So when u look at it like that, I gotta roll with GP as the best peak wise. Alpha dog level scoring ability, great passing, AND great defense as a package from a PG is very very rare. Historically, there aren't more than FIVE PG's who can make that claim.

With that said, Kidd is the most versatile and was a walking triple double. Kidd was also the most physically talented. If Kidd had Payton's scoring, he would take this hands down. He was a better rebounder and passer than GP. And wasn't far off in terms of defense. At his peak, one of the top five PG's ever in terms of combining speed and power.

Nash was the most skilled offensive player of the bunch. Until Curry came around, Nash was the best blend of shooting, passing, and handles EVER at the PG position. In the open court, Nash could put the defense on its heels BETTER than Kidd and Payton because of those attributes. Nash was also the superior pick and roll PG as well. Before Nash, Mark Price that kind of shit on lock.

[AintNoSunshine]

When it comes to combining scoring, passing, and defense at the PG position, I think GP or Frazier is the best of all time. So when u look at it like that, I gotta roll with GP as the best peak wise. Alpha dog level scoring ability, great passing, AND great defense as a package from a PG is very very rare. Historically, there aren't more than FIVE PG's who can make that claim.

With that said, Kidd is the most versatile and was a walking triple double. Kidd was also the most physically talented. If Kidd had Payton's scoring, he would take this hands down. He was a better rebounder and passer than GP. And wasn't far off in terms of defense. At his peak, one of the top five PG's ever in terms of combining speed and power.

Nash was the most skilled offensive player of the bunch. Until Curry came around, Nash was the best blend of shooting, passing, and handles EVER at the PG position. In the open court, Nash could put the defense on its heels BETTER than Kidd and Payton because of those attributes. Nash was also the superior pick and roll PG as well. Before Nash, Mark Price that kind of shit on lock.

Nash leagues better than Curry as an "offensive player", Curry was the better scorer probably. Nash ran that Suns team like a Magic Johnson, Curry just happened to play on a great offensive team.

[houston]

Kidd by far no PG done more less than him.

Payton was a choke artist along with Nash.

[senelcoolidge]

Payton the best defender of the group. Kidd could do more like rebounding. Nash was not a good defender, but he would be my choice as my starting point guard. Nash could shoot lights out when he wanted and excellent guy to set others.

[superteamtheory]

good thread question ...

i find myself second guessing with these three ...

my guesstimate ranking is:

Payton > Kidd > Nash

but man is it close with each having their argument..

Payton
one of GOAT defenders with allstar offence, swagger and athleticism < maybe he's not as dominant as other ATG PGs but how can you go wrong?
:bowdown:

Kidd
tripledouble machine, allround game, brilliant passer < criminally underrated, very solid but you'll need very good pieces around him but look what he did with a junkyard Jersey roster
:bowdown:

Nash
leadership and playmaking, dribble penetration and clutchshooting, heart of a champion, no D < compelling but wild, dare I say risky mix b/c of lack of natural athleticism / defensive instinct
:bowdown:

three giants of the game...

[GimmeThat]

if we go by the guideline that not every great players make great coaches, then we already have the answer

hence the whole why athletes only have one career opportunity, in the most technical way


so if we took their best team, and expanded the potential opponents to even outside the NBA. meaning these teams/players only get to play their opponent who have never played against them before.

go by college rule, Kidd would run you out in the second part of the 1st half.
third quarter per NBA rule. as an underrated scorer in his prime, adjustments is what he had strive on. You'd have to out think a chess player, who computes more than your average number of moves by the standards of the regular assistant coaches I woulds say.

Payton would be great at the start, and anytime you make substitutions for not matching his stamina. Meaning after he takes your lunch money, he'll probably just keep those differences right there, and ensure the rest of his teammates can produce enough to beat the other team.

unless you had an all time great team, Nash would probably just frustrate you and beat your team apart. The cruel part of it, is that you just can't just tell yourself to play great and you'll win the game, you actually have to tell yourself that, and live up to that terminology, great.


this probably means nothing, after all.

[wang4three]

Payton is the best, Kidd the worst out of that lot.

Kidd gets consistently overrated on this board. This is coming from someone who actually watched him, and wasn't amazed by his triple doubles like some. A lot of them were hollow, empty, and meaningless. Not to mention his sub 40% shooting is a detriment to your team anyway you look at it.

As a Net fan who watched nearly every one of Kidd's game as a Net, I can tell you that Kidd's triple doubles were hardly "hollow, empty, and meaningless". And this also comes from a guy who's infuriated by how he left the Nets to go to Milwaukee.

He was a poor shooter, but he also shot like he didn't care about his FG%, which is what we needed a lot of time. By no means was he a Payton/Nash level shooter, but he did make a lot of shots when we needed it most.

[Pointguard]

Kidd did the most with the least primarily because he was the best at keeping his team on the same page. Once his game matured he never had an Amare/Kemp, Joe Johnson/Delef Shremp, Hawkins/Bell, instead had Kmart, rookie Jefferson and Kerry Kittles and got more out of them. His role on Dallas was huge. Great utility guy and the best leader of the bunch. Great for balance on a team as well.

Nash would be best on an offensively geared team because of his constant movement and picking apart, high efficiency and longer range. Best of the bunch for shooting, running attack and foul shooting. Can make the most difficult passes of the bunch. Loved his judgement too.

Payton would be great for a team that is good on both sides of the floor. Defensive intensity, psychological deployments and physicality were his trademarks. Had the least amount of faults of the bunch. Scored better than the others as well. Was very durable and was always hyped for big games.

[bizil]

Nash leagues better than Curry as an "offensive player", Curry was the better scorer probably. Nash ran that Suns team like a Magic Johnson, Curry just happened to play on a great offensive team.

Leagues better, HELL NO!! Nash is a better passer and floor general than Curry. I will give him that. But as a TOTAL OFFENSIVE PLAYER HELL NO!! Steph is a more dangerous shooter AND has more dangerous handles. Curry is also a very imaginative passer as well. Its just that Curry thinks like the new age PG. Which in many ways is ACTUALLY more of a combo style guard. Steph KNOWS he's among the best scorers in the world and plays to that strength.

[superteamtheory]

Kidd did the most with the least primarily because he was the best at keeping his team on the same page. Once his game matured he never had an Amare/Kemp, Joe Johnson/Delef Shremp, Hawkins/Bell, instead had Kmart, rookie Jefferson and Kerry Kittles and got more out of them. His role on Dallas was huge. Great utility guy and the best leader of the bunch. Great for balance on a team as well.

Nash would be best on an offensively geared team because of his constant movement and picking apart, high efficiency and longer range. Best of the bunch for shooting, running attack and foul shooting. Can make the most difficult passes of the bunch. Loved his judgement too.

Payton would be great for a team that is good on both sides of the floor. Defensive intensity, psychological deployments and physicality were his trademarks. Had the least amount of faults of the bunch. Scored better than the others as well. Was very durable and was always hyped for big games.

yeah it's Payton.. but i dig your analysis of all three.. think Nash was greatest leader of the three tho, one of the intangibles that makes up for his lack of D.. but I'm glad Kidd is getting a lot of love in this thread because lord knows the media shrugged him off because he wasn't marketable to the masses, had no sellable gimmick besides the kiss-throws...

the thing that always makes me wonder if i should put Nash higher ... is **** like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o9-RaMsKH_Q and this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W6rUEGOSKqE and this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QSzjeA35jwQ and this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aU76A3T9pbE
etc.

[Mass Debator]

I might be a bit biased since I've seen Kidd a lot more than Nash live, but Kidd always seemed to have more control and presence on the court. With or without the ball, the team always flowed the way he wanted it to on both sides of the court.

Nash is clearly the best shooter of the 3 and one of the best in history. He's got that going for him no question. I don't think he's a better passer than Kidd though. Kind of a wash. Nash is more creative with the pick and roll game and the way he passes, but Kidd made the right pass whether it led to assists or not and was a beast in transition.

Didn't watch much Payton but everyone knows he has that dawg in him. The other two can pretty much blend with any players and make it work, but I can't say the same for GP. He was a natural leader but only a pool of players could've handled his way of commanding. Top 3-5 defensive man-to-man guards of all time, but I wouldn't compare him to the other two. He was always more of a combo guard to me.

At his greatest point, I like Nash. To have someone that I'd draft from day 1, Jason Kidd is my man.

[KendrickPerkins]

Leagues better, HELL NO!! Nash is a better passer and floor general than Curry. I will give him that. But as a TOTAL OFFENSIVE PLAYER HELL NO!! Steph is a more dangerous shooter AND has more dangerous handles. Curry is also a very imaginative passer as well. Its just that Curry thinks like the new age PG. Which in many ways is ACTUALLY more of a combo style guard. Steph KNOWS he's among the best scorers in the world and plays to that strength.
Funny because you'll stan LBJ HARD over Durant, for the exact reasons this other guy is stanning Nash over Curry.

Try to be consistent at least.

[Hamtaro CP3KDKG]

Kidd and Glove can go either way
Nash is 3rd

[K Xerxes]

Nash gets underrated in these debates. At his best, Nash has a legitimate argument for the best offensive player ever. The way he could control a game was incredible. Obviously a great shooter and great passer too.

With these three, I think it depends on what you want for your team.You'd draft a different one with different scenarios, team mates and systems. As overall players though, I would give the edge to Kidd because he could do it all so well, Payton a close second and Nash a clear third just because of defensive reasons. But if your team has a dominant defensive inside presence and decent perimeter defenders, you take Nash every time imo.

[Dragonyeuw]

Going off the sum of parts, Payton was the best because of his 2-way prowess. Both Kidd and Nash were better pure passers. I think it's one of those situations where which one you take depends on the team make-up.

[bizil]

Funny because you'll stan LBJ HARD over Durant, for the exact reasons this other guy is stanning Nash over Curry.

Try to be consistent at least.

What the hell are u talking about?? Curry and Nash have many similarities in their games. Even though they apply them differently. Bron and Durant are totally different players.

[penny4president]

Jkidd:rockon:

[bizil]

Going off the sum of parts, Payton was the best because of his 2-way prowess. Both Kidd and Nash were better pure passers. I think it's one of those situations where which one you take depends on the team make-up.

I agree! I think all three are on the same level. It's just a matter of taste and what a team needs.

[andgar923]

Who do you think was better at their peak/prime?
Too easy

GP

[mehyaM24]

they're all interchangeable imo. depends on what your team needs.

[KendrickPerkins]

What the hell are u talking about?? Curry and Nash have many similarities in their games. Even though they apply them differently. Bron and Durant are totally different players.
Huh?

Nash was a million times better than Curry at passing/playmaking

LeBron is only slightly better than Durant but you'll defend Curry before you do Durant.

It's just weird. You're a curry stan and a durant hater.

Durant is the best scorer on the planet. Maybe ever. So why aren't you defending his offensive abilities when comparing him to a slightly better playmaker? Hmmm.

I SMELL HATER

[Lakers Fan]

Payton
one of GOAT defenders with allstar offence, swagger and athleticism < maybe he's not as dominant as other ATG PGs but how can you go wrong?
:bowdown:



Payton was extremely quick, like Stockton, but he wasn't known for his explosive athleticism. None of the three were.

[mehyaM24]

Nash gets underrated in these debates. At his best, Nash has a legitimate argument for the best offensive player ever. The way he could control a game was incredible. Obviously a great shooter and great passer too.

no he doesnt.

magic, jordan, and shaq wipe the floor with him. and that's in the half court, at regularized pace.

people don't want to admit that a lot of nash's play was predicated on dantoni's ssol offense. hell, jeremy lin and that other scrub on the lakers looked like all-star point guards when guy coached briefly for them (remember talks about these players having career highs under their contract years? dantoni specialized in that, and admitted so himself).

[Pointguard]

Kid's impact is not easily seen and he gets underrated for that. Give Nash or Payton his Nets team and they can't win one series in the East with them. Give Kidd, Pheonix or Seattle and they would be a little bit better. I'm sure of this, but the mechanics of why are really hard if possible to explain.

[magnax1]

Steve Nash is a top 5 offensive player ever. So many of his teams were statistically among the top offenses ever, and he was so damn efficient. That's what you really want from your point guard. Low Volume scoring on huge efficiency while setting up your team mates.
Payton was basically the opposite of that on offense. Very inefficient, took way to many shots, was a massive ball hog, and not much of a passer. If you look past his basic stats you'll see he was really not a extraordinary offensive player. There's no denying his defensive value, although it's not like he was Rodman or Russell or something.
Kidd was a very good defender and passer (albeit he doesn't come close to Nash) but it's hard to ignore how awful he was at scoring and how he still forced shots up many years.

[PP34Deuce]

Gary Payton is like a good in between mix of them both.

Gary was 6'3-6'4 and wiry strong
Very quick to get to the basket or stay laterally with people
Could give you 10-12 assists if you needed it with a good A/T ratio.
Could also consistently score 20-23 ppg if the team called for it.

Todays game Payton would benefit the most because of his ability to defend athletic PG's and score points.

[bizil]

Huh?

Nash was a million times better than Curry at passing/playmaking

LeBron is only slightly better than Durant but you'll defend Curry before you do Durant.

It's just weird. You're a curry stan and a durant hater.

Durant is the best scorer on the planet. Maybe ever. So why aren't you defending his offensive abilities when comparing him to a slightly better playmaker? Hmmm.

I SMELL HATER

Bron is by FAR a better passer and defender than Durant. He's also a better rebounder. And is EASILY a more versatile player as well. Durant is a better scorer, BUT Bron can average just as many points. Durant's scoring skillset and approach to scoring is the main difference.

Curry and Nash are VERY SIMILAR in terms of their shooting and ball handling skills. Curry is the evolution to Nash in that regard and is MORE AGGRESSIVE looking to exploit the shooting part. Nash is the better passer while Steph is the better scorer. However, Nash had alpha dog scoring capabilities. While Steph is a very imaginative and skilled passer.

[K Xerxes]

no he doesnt.

magic, jordan, and shaq wipe the floor with him. and that's in the half court, at regularized pace.

people don't want to admit that a lot of nash's play was predicated on dantoni's ssol offense. hell, jeremy lin and that other scrub on the lakers looked like all-star point guards when guy coached briefly for them (remember talks about these players having career highs under their contract years? dantoni specialized in that, and admitted so himself).

You have no clue what you're talking about. He WAS the system. Remind me, what success did D'Antoni have with these other PGs?

You sure you watched Nash play?:oldlol:

[KendrickPerkins]

Bron is by FAR a better passer and defender than Durant. He's also a better rebounder. And is EASILY a more versatile player as well. Durant is a better scorer, BUT Bron can average just as many points. Durant's scoring skillset and approach to scoring is the main difference.

Curry and Nash are VERY SIMILAR in terms of their shooting and ball handling skills. Curry is the evolution to Nash in that regard and is MORE AGGRESSIVE looking to exploit the shooting part. Nash is the better passer while Steph is the better scorer. However, Nash had alpha dog scoring capabilities. While Steph is a very imaginative and skilled passer.
:oldlol:

Thank you for proving my point. KD averaged 32/7/6 with better defensive analytics than Bron.

But its not about KD vs. Bron. Its about your hatred for KD

The gap between Curry and Nashs passing is much larger than KD and Brons. Even a dummy like you knows that.

[mehyaM24]

You have no clue what you're talking about. He WAS the system. Remind me, what success did D'Antoni have with these other PGs?

You sure you watched Nash play?:oldlol:

right. says the guy who just claimed nash was arguably the greatest offensive player ever. :oldlol: listen shit for brains, danonti made kendall fvcking marshall look like an all-star when he coached for the lakers. linsanity got all that hype in new york because.....he played under dantoni.

after danotni's departure in phoenix, that "system" was never as successful and nash was never an mvp candidate again.

[tpols]

right. says the guy who just claimed nash was arguably the greatest offensive player ever. :oldlol: listen shit for brains, danonti made kendall fvcking marshall look like an all-star when he coached for the lakers. linsanity got all that hype in new york because.....he played under dantoni.

after danotni's departure in phoenix, that "system" was never as successful and nash was never an mvp candidate again.

The suns went as far as they ever did with Alvin gentry as coach as compared to Dantoni.. conference finals.. and statistically had a better offense in 2010 than either of nash mvp seasons under dantoni... wtf are you going on about?

[mehyaM24]

The suns went as far as they ever did with Alvin gentry as coach as compared to Dantoni.. conference finals.. and statistically had a better offense in 2010 than either of nash mvp seasons under dantoni... wtf are you going on about?

the suns had a ~118 ortg during the 2005 playoffs. and a ~117 ortg in the 2010 playoffs.

in 2005 nash was an mvp candidate. in 2010 he was not.

what was your point again? :confusedshrug:

[tpols]

the suns had a 118 ortg during the 2005 playoffs. and a 116 ortg in the 2010 playoffs.

in 2005 nash was an mvp candidate. in 2010 he was not.

what was your point again? :confusedshrug:

My point is nash ran the best offense in the league without dantoni and you're sitting here trying to lecture people on how dantonI made him lmao..

[mehyaM24]

My point is nash ran the best offense in the league without dantoni and you're sitting here trying to lecture people on how dantonI made him lmao..
they didn't even make the playoffs in 2009without dantoni and had a stacked team in 2010 where nash wasn't even their best player.

he didn't run shit. where was that 'running the offense' bs in dallas?

[Young X]

they were 12th in the 2008 playoffs (didn't even make the playoffs in 2009) without dantoni and had a stacked team in 2010 where nash wasn't even their best player.

he didn't run shit. where was that 'running the offense' bs in dallas?They didn't make the playoffs in '09 because of defense. They were 26th overall on that end. On offense they were 2nd in the league even without D'antoni.

And Dallas was #1 offensively in each of Nash's last 3 seasons there...

[mehyaM24]

They didn't make the playoffs in '09 because of defense. They were 26th overall on that end. On offense they were 2nd in the league even without D'antoni.

And Dallas was #1 offensively in each of Nash's last 3 seasons there...

nash wasn't running the offense there either, though. dirk was their best player and clearly their best offensive player. clearly.

nelly also left the team, and coached the warriors who had the #1 offensive rating in the 2007 playoffs. nash is getting overrated af in here.

[tpols]

They didn't make the playoffs in '09 because of defense. They were 26th overall on that end. On offense they were 2nd in the league even without D'antoni.

And Dallas was #1 offensively in each of Nash's last 3 seasons there...

Everywhere nash goes the offense is number one ranked in the league.. and everywhere it was a different persons fault. :oldlol:

[mehyaM24]

Everywhere nash goes the offense is number one ranked in the league.. and everywhere it was a different persons fault. :oldlol:
who the was the best offensive player in dallas? dirk or nash? :confusedshrug:

the 2006 & 2007 mavs still had the #1 and #2 best ortg's in the league BTW

[ShawkFactory]

Gary Payton is like a good in between mix of them both.

Gary was 6'3-6'4 and wiry strong
Very quick to get to the basket or stay laterally with people
Could give you 10-12 assists if you needed it with a good A/T ratio.
Could also consistently score 20-23 ppg if the team called for it.

Todays game Payton would benefit the most because of his ability to defend athletic PG's and score points.
That's what I was gonna say. If you need toughness and leadership you pick Kidd. A true floor general. If you need half court offense you pick Nash. GP is a mix. I'd probably go with him but it's very very close between all 3.

[bizil]

:oldlol:

Thank you for proving my point. KD averaged 32/7/6 with better defensive analytics than Bron.

But its not about KD vs. Bron. Its about your hatred for KD

The gap between Curry and Nashs passing is much larger than KD and Brons. Even a dummy like you knows that.

You're a clown!! Its fitting that u chose Kendrick Perkins as an alias on this site. He aint shit but a goon! And u aint shit but a troll!

[MEB2kDeez]

GP

[KNOW1EDGE]

Jason Kidd.

[triangleoffense]

GP
Kidd


Nash

in that order.. I think it's telling that both Kidd and GP carried their teams to the finals but Nash wasn't able to because of him being a defensive liability

[kamil]

Payton had the best defence of all them.

[GimmeThat]

right. says the guy who just claimed nash was arguably the greatest offensive player ever. :oldlol: listen shit for brains, danonti made kendall fvcking marshall look like an all-star when he coached for the lakers. linsanity got all that hype in new york because.....he played under dantoni.

after danotni's departure in phoenix, that "system" was never as successful and nash was never an mvp candidate again.

I figure we can just talk about the Shaq trade. The best center that would have complimented Nash probably would have been the Nikola Vucevic, Kris Humphries type center. Since I will go ahead and continue the hype about Steve Nash here. It's why they later on drafted Robin Lopez after watching what the Spurs were doing and signed channing frye. Because after the Amare injury, and his eventual departure, Nash probably could have made those type of Center look like Horace Grant.

I would even say that there are many different power forwards you could put right next to Marion／Grant Hill. They could certainly had played Kendrick Perkins like what the poster above mentioned, if they have Lamarcus Aldridge, at the 4, I can't say I am as convinced about Rasheed Wallace, because I might argue that's the player right between LA and Dirk.



As for the whole D'antoni thing. His system works, and benefits point guards as most stated. But just like any good or great coaches will tell you, when it comes to the 4th quarter, your best player and talent means more than anything else, you can lay out the scenarios, get the perfect line up ready for play, call out something that freezes what the opposing team had been doing beyond a time out, but the ball has to go in, or the bucket stopped.


Even I myself tend to forget how bad the Knicks records were for all the stats inflated with Jeremy Lin, and D'antoni Was eventually canned for how bad anyone wants to point out the over hype about Steve Nash.


How did this guy even won consecutive 1st and 2nd round playoff series as the 1st option. I guess that's beyond all of us.

Edit: I forget that Amare was utilized as a Center on the Sun's team. Rashard Lewis probably could have made them a finals contender.

[TonyMontana]

Steve Nash, is this a joke? Why do people constantly underrate him? Defense hardly matters at the point guard position and Nash is the best offensive point guard of all-time. This guy was a multiple time MVP.

Nash is better than Payton at everything except defense and posting up(which guards really have no use for in todays NBA). It's really hilarious how people could even attempt to argue Payton is/was better.

With Kidd he could never shoot until he got old and had to compensate for the fall in all his other abilities. If he had the shot in his prime, then maybe we'd talk.

Nash had a stretch in the mid 00s where his team was arguably the best team in the league. Unfortuantely caught some tough breaks. The Mavericks and Spurs also had Dirk and Duncan in their prime who were superior players. Amare required microfracture surgery missing an entire year and he was never really the same. And then the Horry hipcheck fiasco.

[tpols]

Steve Nash, is this a joke? Why do people constantly underrate him? Defense hardly matters at the point guard position and Nash is the best offensive point guard of all-time. This guy was a multiple time MVP.

Nash is better than Payton at everything except defense and posting up(which guards really have no use for in todays NBA). It's really hilarious how people could even attempt to argue Payton is/was better.

With Kidd he could never shoot until he got old and had to compensate for the fall in all his other abilities. If he had the shot in his prime, then maybe we'd talk.

Nash had a stretch in the mid 00s where his team was arguably the best team in the league. Unfortuantely caught some tough breaks. The Mavericks and Spurs also had Dirk and Duncan in their prime who were superior players. Amare required microfracture surgery missing an entire year and he was never really the same. And then the Horry hipcheck fiasco.

Yup.. Nash and kidd are like perfect inverses.. kidd can drag whoever to be a gritty top ranked defensive team.. Nash can orchestrate most any offense to top rank. Payton is a mix mildly less dominant imo..

[Young X]

GP
Kidd


Nash

in that order.. I think it's telling that both Kidd and GP carried their teams to the finals but Nash wasn't able to because of him being a defensive liabilityOr maybe it's because he faced the Spurs instead of the sub 50 win Celtics.

[TheCorporation]

I gotta go Steve Nash

2 MVPs and

Regular season peak:
19/12/4 on 53% FG, 46% 3P

Playoff peak in 05
24/11/5 on 52% FG, 39% 3P

Gary Payton and Jason Kidd never had a peak quite as good as Nash's (and mainly because it was no where near as efficient).

[Fudge]

44 rebounds per game?!?!?!! Nash da gawd!!! :bowdown: :bowdown:
:party: :party: :party: :party: :party: :party: :party:

[Fire Colangelo]

People overrate PG defense so much.... it's so easy to hide someone on defense nowadays. 3&D guys aren't that hard to find.... Raja Bell for example fit perfectly next to Nash.

[JoshCoward]

People overrate PG defense so much.... it's so easy to hide someone on defense nowadays. 3&D guys aren't that hard to find.... Raja Bell for example fit perfectly next to Nash.

Please go back and watch Kidd during his Nets run. His defense on Reggie, Davis, Pierce etc. had a great impact on the way they won and how Nets ran their defensive scheme.

[TheCorporation]

44 rebounds per game?!?!?!! Nash da gawd!!! :bowdown: :bowdown:

Wilt Nash :rockon:

[jstern]

I like Nash. I used to play with him in NBA Live 96 because I felt he was going to be really good. But I have to go with Gary Payton.

Steve Nash never shot 50% until age 30, when the rules were changed. Gary Payton never had that luxury in his prime.

[embersyc]

Jason Kidd and it's not very close.

Lock down defense.

Best court vision and decision making of any of them

Made a superstar out of Kenyon Martin and Richard Jefferson.

[Fire Colangelo]

Please go back and watch Kidd during his Nets run. His defense on Reggie, Davis, Pierce etc. had a great impact on the way they won and how Nets ran their defensive scheme.

He's great defensively, and deserves a ton of credit. But sliding in someone like Tony Allen, Thabo Sefolosha, etc will give you similar results.

It's easier to hide Nash's defensive flaws than it is to hide Kidd's inability to score imo.

[embersyc]

He's great defensively, and deserves a ton of credit. But sliding in someone like Tony Allen, Thabo Sefolosha, etc will give you similar results.

It's easier to hide Nash's defensive flaws than it is to hide Kidd's inability to score imo.

If it's so easy to hide Nash's defensive flaws why were his Dallas and Phoenix always so bad defensively?

Defense starts at the point guard position, since you are usually guarding the player with the ball.

[Real14]

Gary Payton to me.

[JoshCoward]

He's great defensively, and deserves a ton of credit. But sliding in someone like Tony Allen, Thabo Sefolosha, etc will give you similar results.

It's easier to hide Nash's defensive flaws than it is to hide Kidd's inability to score imo.

The difference is, it is much harder to guard the opposing best players (and to guard multiple positions) + be the go-to-guy in offense like he did with the Nets. Yes, he couldn't shoot but Kidd made the right plays, he controlled the tempo, he scored when Nets needed him to score (18.7pg is very similar to what Nash averaged at best).

Ask any Mavs fans and they will tell you Kidd's defense played big role in winning that Championships in 2011.

[comerb]

Payton. Best 2 way player by a long shot. Kidd and Nash both had major flaws in their game.

[tpols]

He's great defensively, and deserves a ton of credit. But sliding in someone like Tony Allen, Thabo Sefolosha, etc will give you similar results.

It's easier to hide Nash's defensive flaws than it is to hide Kidd's inability to score imo.

I mean Tony Allen and Thabo only do one thing well.. Kidd wasnot only a elite defender, but a brilliant passers and rebounder and tons of unseen impact in between.

[Fire Colangelo]

If it's so easy to hide Nash's defensive flaws why were his Dallas and Phoenix always so bad defensively?

Defense starts at the point guard position, since you are usually guarding the player with the ball.

Except they weren't that bad...

They were an okay defensive team with godly offense.

Just like how Kidd's Nets teams were okay offensively, but godly defensively.

[TheBigVeto]

Nash and it's not even close.

Nash >>>>> Kidd >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Payton

[Fire Colangelo]

The difference is, it is much harder to guard the opposing best players (and to guard multiple positions) + be the go-to-guy in offense like he did with the Nets. Yes, he couldn't shoot but Kidd made the right plays, he controlled the tempo, he scored when Nets needed him to score (18.7pg is very similar to what Nash averaged at best).

Ask any Mavs fans and they will tell you Kidd's defense played big role in winning that Championships in 2011.

Don't know what 2011 has to do with this, we're comparing two players at there best. Which is 2005-2007 for Nash, and early 2000s for Kidd.

If we're trying to compare them as 2nd fiddles to a player like Dirk for example (since both Nash and Kidd played with him), I'd choose Kidd because I wouldn't need Kidd to be the to go guy in offense.

If I'm building my team around Kidd and Nash, I'd take Nash because he was just so much more dominant offensively.

[nzahir]

If it's so easy to hide Nash's defensive flaws why were his Dallas and Phoenix always so bad defensively?

Defense starts at the point guard position, since you are usually guarding the player with the ball.
What defensive bigs did those 2 teams have again? Bradley wasnt as good as he got older and dirk wasnt a great defensive player either.

Suns had amare, diaw, thomas...
Marion was a good wing defender Ill give you that but no inside protector

Depends on your team and preference; I take kidd over nash though.

[Fire Colangelo]

And you guys are acting like Nash is a telephone pole on defense. He's a shitty man defender but a very decent help defender. And you guys are going really overboard on this, you act like every scrub PG was blowing by him or something.

Dude tries hard on defense and took a ton of charges in his career as well. Not to mention he never really played with great defensive players other than Marion.

[TripleA]

Nash than Payton than Kidd. I know Kidd was a amazing passer and great defender and rebounder but his scoring was terrible compared to Nash and Payton who were offensive juggernaughts in their primes while Kidd was always a bad scorer even at his best.

[WorldWarriors]

The Glove.

[superteamtheory]

Steve Nash, is this a joke? Why do people constantly underrate him? Defense hardly matters at the point guard position and Nash is the best offensive point guard of all-time. This guy was a multiple time MVP.

Nash is better than Payton at everything except defense and posting up(which guards really have no use for in todays NBA). It's really hilarious how people could even attempt to argue Payton is/was better.

With Kidd he could never shoot until he got old and had to compensate for the fall in all his other abilities. If he had the shot in his prime, then maybe we'd talk.

Nash had a stretch in the mid 00s where his team was arguably the best team in the league. Unfortuantely caught some tough breaks. The Mavericks and Spurs also had Dirk and Duncan in their prime who were superior players. Amare required microfracture surgery missing an entire year and he was never really the same. And then the Horry hipcheck fiasco.

You've got me second guessing like I always do with these three... Nash did get bad breaks in 03 (swept under rug Dirk injury), 06, 07..

but didn't Kidd have some bad luck too coming up against the ShaqKobe Lakers? (it's considered his most meaningless accomplishment, making those Finals, only b/c of the sweep..) and I think the Nets rosters were never very good and as he got older post-2004 had bigs & depth issues (without VC trade they may not even make playoffs 2005-2007) ...

and what do you think happens with 96 Sonics if you trade Nash for Payton? (sincere question.) with Kemp as an Amare-like sidekick?
I feel like they may have still made Finals but the outcome in Finals would be a 5-1 or a sweep b/c it was the defence on Jordan that was keeping this thing a contest.. true Nash would move the ball better than Payton but average a comparable ppg (not sure why shooter Nash is considered a better scorer than athletic/crafty Payton).. Payton's defence on the motivated GOAT or Nash's 4-5more apg? it's a close call but I'd go with Payton.

Payton didn't break through in other years because there were other great teams to battle (Stockton-Malone Jazz, MVP Barkley Suns, Hakeem-Drexler-Barkley Rockets, Shaq Lakers, none of those 4 years seem like underachievement to me, just good work by the other squad) and the Sonics rosters weren't always quite good enough.. Nash prolly would have had same problem in 90's West, had better timing in his era (because of Lakers collapse / depth of Suns roster, a playoff team even w/o Nash) than Payton in his... granted, there were a couple bad years, the Nuggets and Lakers losses don't look good but 6bpg Mutombo Nuggets just barely made upset (by 4 points in deciding game of a 3-2 5 gamer).. Lakers had peak Van Exel and a decent allround roster tho I won't make excuses, that was a just plain bad one.. and those are about his lowest moments (he responded by getting Sonics to Finals)... later Sonics failures weren't his shortcomings, 2004 collapse was years in the making, 2006 he hits a clutch shot to win a ring, still doing something in old age just like his childhood friend Kidd in 2011..

it's close but Payton's O was all-star enough and his D (40-50% of the game) was bigtime... Kidd's allround game isn't empty stats, his rebounding definitely prevented teams from having extra possessions and got fast breaks started, his shooting in prime was better than given credit for or Nets never would have made it (also wouldn't have been much use in old age to Mavs, instead he was considered one of their shooters) and his passing is comparable to Nash's...
Nash was the best passer and shooter of three tho and had a lot of heart.

And the Horry hipcheck Fiasco's Politically Correct outcome was the worst **** ever in the history of league, far worse than the brawl..

[superteamtheory]

Nash himself thought Suns problem was they never had an athletic (running) defensive center -- a la Tyson Chandler who transformed the Mavs.. (or Dwight Howard but let's be real here..)

I think he's correct. give up a prime Marion for a prime Chandler, would have been worth it for Suns, might have been a difference maker protecting the rim from, say, Ginobili in 2005, maybe they can win it that year.. but Chandler wasn't in his prime yet then, so this option in the real world wasn't available..

and giving up Marion would have hurt their perimeter D, rebounding, a little bit of offence, so the difference with a Chandler type wouldn't have been dramatic.. it'd be a 7 gamer with Spurs.. but maybe a crucial difference..

(and Dirk has both guys plus oldwise Kidd and other depth in 2011.. but I digress.. everybody knows there's no explanation why Kobe and Bron couldn't beat those Mavs and it was all just Dirk..)

[smoovegittar]

Payton was a beast. Nash and Kidd never frightened me, as good as they were.

[Pointguard]

Kidd could run a starless team (Nets) better than either of them. The only argument would be was he one level or two levels better than those two in that regards. He also ran Olympic and all star teams better. He won a championship with the 1 all star team makeup while leading the team in steals and three pointers with a great defensive job on Kobe, Wade. And Westbrook.

He's just better at running teams. And he could run a variety of teams better than them.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Kidd, Nash and then Payton. We're splitting hairs though.

[smoovegittar]

Kidd could run a starless team (Nets) better than either of them. The only argument would be was he one level or two levels better than those two in that regards. He also ran Olympic and all star teams better. He won a championship with the 1 all star team makeup while leading the team in steals and three pointers with a great defensive job on Kobe, Wade. And Westbrook.

He's just better at running teams. And he could run a variety of teams better than them.
Kenyon Martin was an all-star, and Van Horn and Kittles were no slouches either. Not stacked, but certainly not starless -

[inclinerator]

chris paul

[NBAplayoffs2001]

Kidd and Payton are neck and neck. Nash, lolz:oldlol:. Whoever offense on Nash.:lol

[Pointguard]

Kenyon Martin was an all-star, and Van Horn and Kittles were no slouches either. Not stacked, but certainly not starless -
KMart was never an allstar - he got a max contract because of Kidd and it was an embarrassment. Kittles was consistently a 13ppg scorer before and during Kidds tenure.?. That beast Luscious Harris played more minutes than him the second year and averaged practically the same on a per minute bases. Van Horn was a slouch and let go after the first year along with shooting only like 43%. About three years before that they did look good for a minute there but both had fallen off before Kidd got there.

[Reggie43]

Might as well remove Payton from this conversation because the vote for him by posters as the best in this matchup is pretty overwhelming.

[GimmeThat]

Kidd could run a starless team (Nets) better than either of them. The only argument would be was he one level or two levels better than those two in that regards. He also ran Olympic and all star teams better. He won a championship with the 1 all star team makeup while leading the team in steals and three pointers with a great defensive job on Kobe, Wade. And Westbrook.

He's just better at running teams. And he could run a variety of teams better than them.

Kidd with three front court players were the best way to eliminate the opposing two guards who could read and defend.

As for Nash not being intimidating, that's where true shooting percentage comes in to play. His buckets doesn't scream louder, but in a variety of sets, he just buys you the bucket so you can get back and defend, and as painful as it may sound, even at the price of controlling the shot clock.

D'antoni pretty much designed everything around hiding that with Phoenix Suns, and was probably more eager to do so with the Lakers than anything else. If you were to ask him, I wonder if he was more frustrated about the Robert Horry play, or how timeouts and inbounds, and the pace being undesirable to his team because the refs could just be staring at the opposing team running around like headless chickens, but may not have given D'antoni's team the benefit.


Besides this being the type of issue Mark Cuban would raise concern with the league.
I can tell you that at the college level, refs wouldn't even give a crap about it, because they have seen it too often.


This just also made me wondered how much of a factor of the utilization of TV timeouts, goes into the success of tournament plays.

[305Baller]

I will take Payton. At his peak he had it all: offense, defense, passing. He was very much like prime D Wade.

[305Baller]

http://s3.amazonaws.com/rapgenius/GaryPayton_display_image.jpg

[TheBigVeto]

Nash. Before he joined the Lakers he was GOAT PG, after that he's 2nd GOAT.

[You Cant Ban Me]

Payton > Kid > Nash

[Jasper]

Glove was a notch above both of them , and if he had to play one on one against either of them , KIdd would give hime a run for his money.

Please remember when Kidd was in his prime , he played for the Nets.
His outside shoot was not there.
He was always a triple double threat in a game because of his layups and weakside rebound prowls.

Nash was a weak defender, and nothing against him / but he was short compared to the other 2 players.

Glove I remind you used to fast break dunk. Those same legs allowed a sweet jumper, and great defender.

[feyki]

Defensively ;

Payton
Kidd



Nash


Offensively ;

Nash





Kidd
Payton


..


Nash was on the goat level offensive force in his peak . He had around nearly 14-15 plus minus margin and only Shaq,Lebron and Dirk have this level after millenium .

Kidd was the best all around point guard of all time . He could battle Lebron on all around race . And he also had playmaking nearly as good as Nash .

Payton was the third best perimeter defender and best defensive point guard ever . He had good scoring and playmaking effect .

Nash was probably one of the worst defender ever . And too much turnovers by him .

Kidd was worst shooter of those three . And scoring wise too .

Payton was worst playmaker of that group .

[stalkerforlife]

Offensively...Nash.

Defensively...Payton.

Combined...Kidd.

[houston]

kidd was better nash and gary were choke artist

[Fallen Angel]

Jason Kidd

[CuterThanRubio]

Nash.

Never lost a series his team was favored in and had the misfortune of going head to head with the best players and coaches of his generation (Dirk, Duncan, Kobe, Pop, PJ)