Two Jason Kidd questions that ask essentially the same thing.

[Kblaze8855]

Assuming all parties are healthy and free of legal restrictions….



Would todays Suns be better with Suns Kidd instead of Chris Paul? Would last years team have won?



Would todays Nets be better with Nets Kidd instead of Kyrie? Would they win this year?

[SouBeachTalents]

I think the Suns are better off with CP3 instead of Kidd, though it's obviously a close comparison.

I do think the Nets would be better off with Kidd instead of Kyrie. Kidd was averaging 20 ppg on those Nets teams that made the Finals, a number that even with Kidd having to give up some of those shot opportunities to KD, I don't think would be unreasonable for him to attain in this era. So you're sacrificing roughly 5-7 points a game for substantially better defense, playmaking and rebounding. Plus Kidd is significantly more durable than Kyrie.

[Real Men Wear Green]

Suns would be worse because although Kidd is bigger the most important difference between Paul and Kidd is that Paul can shoot. Kidd was a great defender but so is Paul.

Nets would be worse. The most important reason will be one that you would hate for the debate to revolve around but its true: Kidd would have taken the vaccine so with just him and KD the Nets are solid playoff team and avoid play-in. The Irving/Mandate clash hasn't completely killed the Nets but they have been hurt by it.

But ignore that and assume they will make the playoffs and home court doesn't matter (it does a little) Kidd is a far better leader and defender but far worse shooter. Almost every team is better off with Kidd. If Brooklyn has Simmons playing they would be the exception because he is a great defender and their shooting makes Kidd and Simmons incompatible. But it's looking like Simmons won't be coming back any time we can predict so Kidd would be better.

[tpols]

The Nets have the 22nd ranked defense so there's no doubt they need defensive help more than offensive. Kidd used to lead #1 ranked defenses and was tough as nails in the playoffs.

And I think it goes without saying prime Jason Kidd is > old Chris Paul.

With how badly Chris shit the bed last year in the Finals and how close the Suns were to going up 3-1 I think they win with prime Kidd as well. The Nets didn't have anybody as good as Booker or Ayton. They may have not had anyone as good as that bridges guy either. And Kidd took them to B2B Finals when they were a 20 win team before he got there.

[Kblaze8855]

I’m….not too sure what we saw out of suns Kidd in the playoffs is a lock to get them over the hump if it replaced what Paul did in the finals. And it’s kinda weird to have an efficiency type say it would. Especially when it’s a guy like Paul who does a lot of the same things Kidd did to make up for his occasional 1940s level inefficient scoring. I won’t post the numbers from Kidds last playoffs in Phoenix vs Paul’s in the finals but feel free to look it up yourself if you care and be shocked by the difference. People would absolutely go in on Kidd today for some of his playoff performances. And I know that because when I first got here people were doing it. Kidd was like the James Harden guy almost. It turned around in New Jersey but he was pretty routinely clowned in the earliest ISH days.

[tontoz]

Hard for me to take anyone over Paul, especially a guy who can't shoot. Paul has fit the Suns so perfectly i think Kidd would definitely be a downgrade. Paul is old and injury prone but when healthy he does so many things well.

With the Nets pre Harden trade i would definitely take Kidd. With Harden gone it is a lot harder to take a guy who can't shoot over Kyrie who is a head case but can really shoot and has elite handles.

[tpols]

I know Kidds efficiency was terrible. In his last year with the Suns the highest scoring player on the team was Clifford Robinson at 15ppg in the playoffs losing to a loaded Kings team in 2001. Are we going to compare that to Paul's help last year with Devin Bookers 28 a game vs the Bucks on top of Ayton and Bridges? They weren't exactly working with the same deck of cards. The Suns look amazing right now even with Chris Paul out.

[Kblaze8855]

I don’t Personally care that much about Jason kids efficiency. It’s just funny to see your selective use of shooting numbers and things like offensive rating then clown a guy who did 22/8 on like 50/50 shooting and talk about his shitting the bed in favor of a guy who shot like 30/25 in his last series with the team in question. Both of those numbers can get the **** out of my face in a real evaluation I just like to see people selectively dance around their own standards. I’d take Jason Kidd shooting 35 percent. That’s not why he’s there.

[tpols]

I'm not sure exactly who you're referencing but I'd assume the comparison is contextually way off the same way a comparison between the suns offensive talent of last year and the suns offensive talent of 2001 was.

[Kawhi_Why_Not]

It's hard to compare prime Kidd to current Paul. I think this version of Paul is closer to 2011 Kidd (veteran still really good but clearly 2nd fiddle to booker\dirk). I would say current chris paul is better then 2011 Kidd though.

Prime Kidd replaced with Irving makes them better though no question. Durant would benefit from Kidd's massively better playmaking skills then Irving. With Irving it's like having a shooting guard on your team, that's why he fit so well with Lebron.

[Kblaze8855]

Paul in the finals. 22/8 on 55 overall 52 from 3. I underestimated it actually. Kidd by contrast did 14/13 on 32/24(both rounded up). And it was arguably not even Kidd worst series as a Sun. Wasn’t the most critiqued at least. I don’t personally remember him being that bad but tossing out efficiency numbers like it settles the argument? That’s usually something you’re into.

[tpols]

I watched last years Finals and Paul was literally being picked on in iso mismatches. He's too small. Jason Kidd was an elite big defensive point guard perhaps the best ever at his position. Led #1 rank defenses. And was a genius passer on top of it who had little offensive talent to work with most of the time in his prime.

I tend to overlook efficiency when a guy takes a 20 win team to back to back Finals. Including stomping out the pistons who would go on to be champs.

It shows he has an intangible presence. Paul has one too but it shouldnt be up for debate that old Chris Paul wasn't as good as prime Kidd. And with how close the suns were to winning that should have gotten them over the hump.

[tontoz]

i didn't even look at Kidds numbers. I remember looking at his shooting numbers a long time ago and was surprised how bad they were considering he became a legit set shooter from 3 in the second half of his career. He actually had back to back seasons shooting 40% from 3 on 4-5 attempts per game.

He was just awful on 2s. He didn't finish well inside and completely sucked from 3 feet to 3 pt range.

[tontoz]

I watched last years Finals and Paul was literally being picked on in iso mismatches. He's too small. Jason Kidd was an elite big defensive point guard perhaps the best ever at his position. Led #1 rank defenses. And was a genius passer on top of it who had little offensive talent to work with most of the time in his prime.

I tend to overlook efficiency when a guy takes a 20 win team to back to back Finals. Including stomping out the pistons who would go on to be champs.

It shows he has an intangible presence. Paul has one too but it shouldnt be up for debate that old Chris Paul wasn't as good as prime Kidd. And with how close the suns were to winning that should have gotten them over the hump.



The Bucks were a bad matchup for him. Not many backcourts as big as Holiday/Middleton.

[Norcaliblunt]

I’d take prime Kidd over old man Chris Paul. But I’d take prime Chris Paul over Prime Kidd.

[HylianNightmare]

If the nets had kidd. They could have kept harden

[iamgine]

In the make believe land where a 36 years old can have equal health with a 26 years old, I'd pick Chris Paul 100%.