Top 50 All-Time List - Shot Clock Era = #37

[dankok8]

List

#1 - Michael Jordan
#2 - Lebron James
#3 - Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
#4 - Bill Russell
#5 - Wilt Chamberlain
#6 - Magic Johnson
#7 - Shaquille O'Neal
#8 - Tim Duncan
#9 - Larry Bird
#10 - Hakeem Olajuwon
#11 - Kobe Bryant
#12 - Stephen Curry
#13 - Oscar Robertson
#14 - Jerry West
#15 - Moses Malone
#16 - Julius Erving
#17 - Kevin Durant
#18 - Kevin Garnett
#19 - Karl Malone
#20 - Dirk Nowitzki
#21 - Charles Barkley
#22 - David Robinson
#23 - Dwyane Wade
#24 - Elgin Baylor
#25 - Scottie Pippen
#26 - Giannis Antetokounmpo
#27 - John Havlicek
#28 - Isiah Thomas
#29 - Bob Pettit
#30 - Chris Paul
#31 - Kawhi Leonard
#32 - Rick Barry
#33 - James Harden
#34 - Patrick Ewing
#35 - Bob Cousy
#36 - John Stockton
#37 - VOTING NOW

Top 50 Player Pool

For an updated player pool and vote breakdowns see the link (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ARaI3VCNauULLYL1Yu24HIRY768FYQdip56sp6uRFGk/edit?usp=sharing).

Everyone may post in this thread but only votes from serious contributors will be considered. Not everyone has to write an essay but there should be some justification or explanation and some coherent arguments being presented. I encourage people to be open-minded and willing to adjust their rankings in response to strong evidence. Debate and discussion is encouraged.

Opening Vote Tally

Jason Kidd - 9 (gonzaldo, DevBooker'sMask, TheCorporation, ELITEpower23, LBJ, NIke D'Antoni, Honor Boost, Lebron_James, Magic is Magic)
Willis Reed - 1 (jlip)
Kevin McHale - 1 (Round Mound)
Steve Nash - 1 (1987_Lakers)

[dankok8]

I'll go with Nash who I really can't see below Kidd. Not with their team impact... At least Stockton had records and longevity.

[Phoenix]

Put up Kidd a few threads ago, I'll go Kidd here.

[Airupthere]

I have Nash above Kidd. I go with Nash.

[L.Kizzle]

Nash and Kidd played in the same era. One made 2 Finals (in their prime) and the other took home 2 MVPs. So, it depends on how you look at such accomplishments.

[Airupthere]

A few names to consider down the line: Drexler, Dominique Wilkins, Hayes, Paul Pierce, Ray Allen, George Gervin, Willis Reed, McHale

[RRR3]

Nash.

[Phoenix]

Nash and Kidd played in the same era. One made 2 Finals (in their prime) and the other took home 2 MVPs. So, it depends on how you look at such accomplishments.

Weaker conference( Kidd) vs reached MVP level via perimeter friendly rule changes(Nash). My thing is, before the rule change, Nash and Kidd had 8 seasons in the NBA. Nobody thought Nash was better.

Anyways, Kidd already has 10 votes so this baby is already in the bag.

[Airupthere]

Weaker conference( Kidd) vs reached MVP level via perimeter friendly rule changes(Nash). My thing is, before the rule change, Nash and Kidd had 8 seasons in the NBA. Nobody thought Nash was better.

Anyways, Kidd already has 10 votes so this baby is already in the bag.

Kidd did have a headstart over Nash. Nash didnt really get his minutes in Dallas until the early 2000s. Kidd was out there as early as his rookie season. Anyway, this is a matter of preference. Both had great court vision and understanding of the game. I personally just enjoyed Nash's game better and put more value on his 2 mvps.

[dankok8]

Nash and Kidd played in the same era. One made 2 Finals (in their prime) and the other took home 2 MVPs. So, it depends on how you look at such accomplishments.

What I mostly look at is the impact they had on their teams. Kidd in his prime mostly led average and below average offenses despite having talent. On the other hand Nash led historic offenses that were top 2 in ORtg for nine straight seasons, three in Dallas and six in Phoenix. Offense is way more important for guards and Nash is way better than Kidd offensively both individually and even more in team impact.

Kidd's 2 finals have a lot to do with a weak conference. He never made it out of the 1st round with the Phoenix Suns.

Anyways I had this debate with Phoenix in the other thread. His arguments didn't convince me at all but it is what it is. :cheers:

[Phoenix]

Kidd did have a headstart over Nash. Nash didnt really get his minutes in Dallas until the early 2000s. Kidd was out there as early as his rookie season. Anyway, this is a matter of preference. Both had great court vision and understanding of the game. I personally just enjoyed Nash's game better and put more value on his 2 mvps.

Yes, he started 2 years earlier and was better right away( Co-rookie of the year) than Nash was. If you want to take a snap shot of when they were both in their primes? Let's start at 2000 and go to 2004. Kidd was still better and an MVP level player( 2nd to Duncan in 2002). Nash was not....until 2004 when the rules changed when he was 31 and usually when most guard slowly decline, not peak. I also think prime Kidd would replicate what Nash did in Phoenix in terms of quarterbacking Amare/Marion/JJ to the conference finals. I don't think Nash is taking the Nets to the finals in 2002 and 2003, if we could hypothetically swap the two. And considering a two time MVP is still on the board, I suspect enough people here feel his MVPs do come with 'some' kind of caveat, or else he should have been voted in already.

It does come down to preference and there are valid reasons for voting one over the other. I prefer Kidd.

[Phoenix]

What I mostly look at is the impact they had on their teams. Kidd in his prime mostly led average and below average offenses despite having talent. On the other hand Nash led historic offenses that were top 2 in ORtg for nine straight seasons, three in Dallas and six in Phoenix. Offense is way more important for guards and Nash is way better than Kidd offensively both individually and even more in team impact.

Kidd's 2 finals have a lot to do with a weak conference. He never made it out of the 1st round with the Phoenix Suns.

Anyways I had this debate with Phoenix in the other thread. His arguments didn't convince me at all but it is what it is. :cheers:

I don't argue to convince, only to validate my reasons. One doesn't have to agree. I wasn't convinced by your arguments either, but that wasn't your job to.

[Manny98]

Nash

[dankok8]

Yes, he started 2 years earlier and was better right away( Co-rookie of the year) than Nash was. If you want to take a snap shot of when they were both in their primes? Let's start at 2000 and go to 2004. Kidd was still better and an MVP level player( 2nd to Duncan in 2002). Nash was not....until 2004 when the rules changed when he was 31 and usually when most guard slowly decline, not peak. I also think prime Kidd would replicate what Nash did in Phoenix in terms of quarterbacking Amare/Marion/JJ to the conference finals. I don't think Nash is taking the Nets to the finals in 2002 and 2003, if we could hypothetically swap the two.

It does come down to preference and there are valid reasons for voting one over the other. I prefer Kidd.

Kidd was a serious MVP candidate exactly one year when he finished 2nd to Duncan in 2002. He finished 9th in 2003. He only has one other top 5 finish and that was 5th in 1999.


I don't argue to convince, only to validate my reasons. One doesn't have to agree. I wasn't convinced by your arguments either, but that wasn't your job to.

Fair enough.

[Phoenix]

Kidd was a serious MVP candidate exactly one year when he finished 2nd to Duncan in 2002. He finished 9th in 2003. He only has one other top 5 finish and that was 5th in 1999.



Point is, he was an MVP candidate and didn't need rules tailored to be one even if it was one year. When Kidd was first team All-nba in the early 2000s, Nash was third team. And not only was Kidd first team all-nba, he was also first team all-defense. He, simply, was better before the rules changed that enhanced Nash's impact. Nobody was looking at Nash as anything but a lower top ten PG before. The defensive rules in 2002 were much tougher for a guard to win MVP than it was from 2004 onwards. The fact that Iverson even managed to sneak one in warrants him receiving several votes by now, but I digress.

But again that's my validation for my view, not to change anyone else's. The latter would be wasted time and effort.

[TheCorporation]

Nash is a liability on defense while Kidd has 9 ALL defensive selections.

Nash couldn't get anywhere even when paired up with a young Dirk. Kidd never played with a player as good as near prime Dirk.

Kidd also led the Nets to their 1st ever Finals appearance.

[dankok8]

Nash is a liability on defense while Kidd has 9 ALL defensive selections.

Nash couldn't get anywhere even when paired up with a young Dirk. Kidd never played with a player as good as near prime Dirk.

Kidd also led the Nets to their 1st ever Finals appearance.

Dirk got hurt in the 2003 WCF's with the series tied 1-1 and didn't play the rest of the way. If he didn't get hurt there is a good chance the Mavs win a title that year.

[L.Kizzle]

Nash is a liability on defense while Kidd has 9 ALL defensive selections.

Nash couldn't get anywhere even when paired up with a young Dirk. Kidd never played with a player as good as near prime Dirk.

Kidd also led the Nets to their 1st ever Finals appearance.
Does Dirk count for being as good as Dirk?

[Phoenix]

Does Dirk count for being as good as Dirk?

Lol. I think the better way of making that argument, PRIME Kidd didn't get to play with prime Dirk. 2003 Mavs with a Dirk/Finley/Kidd core would have been interesting.

[L.Kizzle]

Lol. I think the better way of making that argument, PRIME Kidd didn't get to play with prime Dirk. 2003 Mavs with a Dirk/Finley/Kidd core would have been interesting.
I get ya, just messing around.

[Phoenix]

Kidd has won this if we're still doing the 'first to 10 by two' thing.

[Airupthere]

Nash is a liability on defense while Kidd has 9 ALL defensive selections.

Nash couldn't get anywhere even when paired up with a young Dirk. Kidd never played with a player as good as near prime Dirk.

Kidd also led the Nets to their 1st ever Finals appearance.

Prime Kidd would have been a better fit with prime Dirk/Finley, etc in the early 2000s. However, conversely I dont think that mid 2000s Kidd would have turned around the Suns franchise as Nash has done and have won 2 MVPs back to back.

[colts19]

Nash

[000]

Anthony Davis

[ELITEpower23]

Anthony Davis

Ban

[Phoenix]

This thread should have been called already.

[francesco totti]

Jason Kidd

[dankok8]

Final Vote Tally

Jason Kidd - 11 (gonzaldo, DevBooker'sMask, TheCorporation, ELITEpower23, LBJ, NIke D'Antoni, Honor Boost, Lebron_James, Magic is Magic, Phoenix, francesco totti)
Steve Nash - 6 (1987_Lakers, dankok8, Airupthere, RRR3, Manny98, colts19)
Willis Reed - 1 (jlip)
Kevin McHale - 1 (Round Mound)

Kidd wins.