Who had the better NBA career, Steve Nash or Jason Kidd?

[Street Hunger]

Who had the better NBA career, Steve Nash or Jason Kidd?

[fourkicks44]

Kidd, Nash had two outstanding seasons when the league was the weakest it has been since the 1950's.

Nash has the highest individual decorations. But Kidd's career was far far better.

[1987_Lakers]

I like both, but I'd give to to Nash

Nash is probably the best passer ever who is not named Magic, Kidd IMO is the best defensive PG ever, I feel Nash's 2 MVPs is a big reason why I would rank him ahead of Kidd. At his peak, he transformed offenses into all-time great level. I feel people today who just started watching basketball in the last 8 years or so don't realize how good Steve Nash was.

Look at the top 20 offenses of all time in terms of teams with the highest ORTG compared to league average... if that makes since. A handful of Nash's teams are on that list.

[Axe]

Kidd had accomplished better with his teams (3 finals and a ring) while nash had better individual accolades.

[John8204]

Nash's MVP's were always shady to me 37 year old Jason Kidd beat peak Dwyane Wade for a ring

[iamgine]

Depends how highly one view MVPs.

Basically 2 MVPs + 4 Conference Finals vs 1 Chip + 3 Finals + Longevity

[Hey Yo]

Nash's MVP's were always shady to me 37 year old Jason Kidd beat peak Dwyane Wade for a ring

I think voters got it right in 2006. Once Amare went down the 3rd game of the season, many thought the Suns were going to be toast. Still won 54gms (only 8 less than the season prior) and the 3rd best record in the West.

[dankok8]

Kidd gets no credit for his role player ring in 2011, at least to me.

This is Nash by a comfortable margin. In their primes, there is no question Nash was the better player. Kidd played with lots of talent over his career and throughout his prime never led even one good offense while Nash led not just good but historically great offenses. Defense doesn't matter much for PG to close this kind of offensive gap. Nash's combination of court vision (with Magic/Bird in the conversation) plus shooting ability (on the short list of best shooters ever) made him just impossible to deal with.

[WhiteKyrie]

I think CP3 is better than both but doesn’t have an MVP. Now what?

I think Stockton, Nash, Kidd, GP (actual best defensive PG ever), Westbrick, hell I’d personally throw Baron Davis and Mark Price on that same tier level. Very good to great scale.

[BigShotBob]

Kidd gets no credit for his role player ring in 2011, at least to me.

This is Nash by a comfortable margin. In their primes, there is no question Nash was the better player. Kidd played with lots of talent over his career and throughout his prime never led even one good offense while Nash led not just good but historically great offenses. Defense doesn't matter much for PG to close this kind of offensive gap. Nash's combination of court vision (with Magic/Bird in the conversation) plus shooting ability (on the short list of best shooters ever) made him just impossible to deal with.

Very asinine take. Kidd was very integral to that Mavs championship.

Nash was in an entirely different system than Kidd was. Not comparable. Nash was also a product of D'Antoni, it's not like he lead historical offenses on the Mavs with Dirk or on the Suns post Joe Johnson and others. He rotted away until he was traded to the Lakers.

Edit: Lol at acting like Nash didn't play with a plethora of talented players. I don't know why you tried to sneak that in. The need to downplay teammates has been taken too far.

[BigShotBob]

I think CP3 is better than both but doesn’t have an MVP. Now what?

I think Stockton, Nash, Kidd, GP (actual best defensive PG ever), Westbrick, hell I’d personally throw Baron Davis and Mark Price on that same tier level. Very good to great scale.

CP3 is not better than both.

Mark Price is criminally underrated but he's not quite there. Neither was Baron Davis by any stretch of the imagination unless you like scoring combo guards for some reason.

[WhiteKyrie]

Very asinine take. Kidd was very integral to that Mavs championship.

Nash was in an entirely different system than Kidd was. Not comparable. Nash was also a product of D'Antoni, it's not like he lead historical offenses on the Mavs with Dirk or on the Suns post Joe Johnson and others. He rotted away until he was traded to the Lakers.

He was still an all star level point guard. Which is what I think he was. Not an MVP caliber PG. Real opinion, the only MVP caliber point guards I’ve ever seen, have been Chris Paul, D-Rose and Stephen Curry. And before those two, Magic Johnson and Isaiah Thomas. Take over the game and carry a team level PGs.

[BigShotBob]

He was still an all star level point guard. Which is what I think he was. Not an MVP caliber PG. Real opinion, the only MVP caliber point guards I’ve ever seen, I’ve been Chris Paul and Stephen Curry. And before those two, Magic Johnson and Isaiah Thomas.

I don't know why you keep sneaking Chris Paul into the mix. He's not on that level.

Kidd Nash Zeke Magic Stockton Oscar are at the top

CP3 is a half a step below

[WhiteKyrie]

CP3 is not better than both.

Mark Price is criminally underrated but he's not quite there. Neither was Baron Davis by any stretch of the imagination unless you like scoring combo guards for some reason.

Mark Price is basically Nash before Nash. And I’m not saying that because both are Caucasian. Very similar play styles and skill sets.

And I wouldn’t under rate Baron Davis brother, I think you forgetting how dominant of a point guard he could be at times, even after his athleticism started to diminish.

He molly whopped prime MVP Dirk. And then out played prime / peak Deron Williams the very next round. 16 ppg and 7 apg. Should’ve been an all star in 05, 06, 07 and 08.

[WhiteKyrie]

I don't know why you keep sneaking Chris Paul into the mix. He's not on that level.

Kidd Nash Zeke Magic Stockton Oscar are at the top

CP3 is a half a step below

Hell no. He’s the best all-around point guard of the entire bunch, to be honest. Every bit as good of a defender as any of them, with the exception of Gary Payton. His 2008 season is a higher peak then either Nash or Kidd’s MVP seasons. He’s the 4th best PG ever.

[HoopsNY]

Very asinine take. Kidd was very integral to that Mavs championship.

Nash was in an entirely different system than Kidd was. Not comparable. Nash was also a product of D'Antoni, it's not like he lead historical offenses on the Mavs with Dirk or on the Suns post Joe Johnson and others. He rotted away until he was traded to the Lakers.

Edit: Lol at acting like Nash didn't play with a plethora of talented players. I don't know why you tried to sneak that in. The need to downplay teammates has been taken too far.

You're really underrating Nash. Nash became the starter in 1999. By 2001, the Mavs were an elite offense.

'01 Mavs: 4th in ORTG
'02 Mavs: 1st in ORTG
'03 Mavs: 1st in ORTG
'04 Mavs: 1st in ORTG

But somehow he's only a product of the D'Antoni system?

[MavAlbert]

You're really underrating Nash. Nash became the starter in 1999. By 2001, the Mavs were an elite offense.

'01 Mavs: 4th in ORTG
'02 Mavs: 1st in ORTG
'03 Mavs: 1st in ORTG
'04 Mavs: 1st in ORTG

But somehow he's only a product of the D'Antoni system?


Mavs win in 03 if Dirk doesnt go down. Those teams were a lot of fun to watch.

[iamgine]

You're really underrating Nash. Nash became the starter in 1999. By 2001, the Mavs were an elite offense.

'01 Mavs: 4th in ORTG
'02 Mavs: 1st in ORTG
'03 Mavs: 1st in ORTG
'04 Mavs: 1st in ORTG

But somehow he's only a product of the D'Antoni system?

Well Mavs were also 1st in ORTG with Jason Terry. Somehow I think it's more Dirk than Nash.

MVP Nash was a product of D'antoni system and the rule change. That's not an insult because it only means he mastered that system. He went from all-NBA 3rd to legit MVP level. Basically turned from Paul George level to Durant level.

[HoopsNY]

Well Mavs were also 1st in ORTG with Jason Terry. Somehow I think it's more Dirk than Nash.

MVP Nash was a product of D'antoni system and the rule change. That's not an insult because it only means he mastered that system. He went from all-NBA 3rd to legit MVP level. Basically turned from Paul George level to Durant level.

Yea, but surely being an elite offense four years in a row means something, especially when it's on an entirely different team. Furthermore, how did the Mavs do with and without Nash in those years?

'00 w/Nash: 107.8 ORTG
'00 w/o Nash: 106.0 ORTG (26 games)

'01 w/Nash: 108.8 ORTG
'01 w/o Nash: 102.9 ORTG (12 games)

'04 w/Nash: 113.2 ORTG
'04 w/o Nash: 105.7 ORTG (4 games)

In 2000, they would have ranked 3rd in ORTG with Nash and 9th without him.

In 2001, they would have finished tied-1st in ORTG with Nash and 14th without him.

In 2004, the sample is small but the gap in ORTG is pretty wide, so it's not even necessary to see where the rankings would be with/without him.

Both 2002 and 2003, Nash played 82 games.

BigShotBob is also implying that Nash's success was merely because of talent. Clearly this wasn't the case just looking at the data above. In addition, look at 2005 and 2006:

'05 PHO: 1st in ORTG
'05 Amar'e: 26 PPG on an insane 56%

'06 PHO: 2nd in ORTG
'06 Amar'e: Misses 79 games

In addition, they had traded Joe johnson. So how does any of this even make sense? D'Antoni took over in 2004 and in his 61 games, PHO was 19th in ORTG.

Nash's impact can't be ignored.

[dankok8]

Very asinine take. Kidd was very integral to that Mavs championship.

Nash was in an entirely different system than Kidd was. Not comparable. Nash was also a product of D'Antoni, it's not like he lead historical offenses on the Mavs with Dirk or on the Suns post Joe Johnson and others. He rotted away until he was traded to the Lakers.

Edit: Lol at acting like Nash didn't play with a plethora of talented players. I don't know why you tried to sneak that in. The need to downplay teammates has been taken too far.

The Mavs' offense in 2002, 2003 and 2004 was best in the league and they kept it up in the playoffs as well. Nash offenses hit historic heights in both Dallas and Phoenix. Never did I say that Nash didn't play with talented players.

Kidd was a role player in 2011.

EDIT: The 2004 Mavs were +9.2 rORtg which is one of the highest in NBA history. In 2002 they were +7.7 and in 2003 were +7.2. The highest they did without Nash was +5.6 in 2006. The 2003 Mavs might have won a ring if Dirk didn't go down.

[tontoz]

Nash was an elite shooter from everywhere and an elite playmaker. Kidd basically had no jumper (he did learn a decent set shot from 3) and struggled to finish inside.

Kidd was a better rebounder and defender but i have to give this comparison to Nash. The shooting gap was just too big.

[RachlNicholsazz]

Jason Kidd could only equal Nash's career with a chip as a 1a/1b tandem. Dirk was clearly the alpha on the team with no equal. MVP's are rare air. Takes a lot to overcome a player's solid career topped off with an MVP. Kidd can't measure up to Nash. Perhaps Derrick Rose who was injured most of his career but that's about it.

[HoopsNY]

The Mavs' offense in 2002, 2003 and 2004 was best in the league and they kept it up in the playoffs as well. Nash offenses hit historic heights in both Dallas and Phoenix. Never did I say that Nash didn't play with talented players.

Kidd was a role player in 2011.

EDIT: The 2004 Mavs were +9.2 rORtg which is one of the highest in NBA history. In 2002 they were +7.7 and in 2003 were +7.2. The highest they did without Nash was +5.6 in 2006. The 2003 Mavs might have won a ring if Dirk didn't go down.

Bingo

[NBA 90s]

Kidd wasn't nearly as efficient as a shooter but he was a much better defender and actually led his team to a Finals in his prime while Nash never played in a Finals.

Kidd also didn't need rule changes to become relevant.

[WhiteKyrie]

Kidd wasn't nearly as efficient as a shooter but he was a much better defender and actually led his team to a Finals in his prime while Nash never played in a Finals.

Kidd also didn't need rule changes to become relevant.
Thought it was obvious Nash should’ve had the suns in the finals in 2007 if it wasn’t for that asinine suspension in the series against the Spurs

[NBA 90s]

Thought it was obvious Nash should’ve had the suns in the finals in 2007 if it wasn’t for that asinine suspension in the series against the Spurs

You could also blame D'Antoni for not utilizing more of his bench during those years. With that type of strategy, one suspension or injury and you're screwed.

[plowking]

I think CP3 is better than both but doesn’t have an MVP. Now what?

I think Stockton, Nash, Kidd, GP (actual best defensive PG ever), Westbrick, hell I’d personally throw Baron Davis and Mark Price on that same tier level. Very good to great scale.


CP3 seems to get a lot more love than other PG's that never won a ring, and I always wonder why... Like, he legitimately always gets put ahead of Nash as if it is a lock.

If you break down their games, is he really better at any of the important things a PG does? I'd argue Nash is, and on top of that, a better playoff performer.

[iamgine]

Yea, but surely being an elite offense four years in a row means something, especially when it's on an entirely different team. Furthermore, how did the Mavs do with and without Nash in those years?

'00 w/Nash: 107.8 ORTG
'00 w/o Nash: 106.0 ORTG (26 games)

'01 w/Nash: 108.8 ORTG
'01 w/o Nash: 102.9 ORTG (12 games)

'04 w/Nash: 113.2 ORTG
'04 w/o Nash: 105.7 ORTG (4 games)

In 2000, they would have ranked 3rd in ORTG with Nash and 9th without him.

In 2001, they would have finished tied-1st in ORTG with Nash and 14th without him.

In 2004, the sample is small but the gap in ORTG is pretty wide, so it's not even necessary to see where the rankings would be with/without him.

Both 2002 and 2003, Nash played 82 games.

BigShotBob is also implying that Nash's success was merely because of talent. Clearly this wasn't the case just looking at the data above. In addition, look at 2005 and 2006:

'05 PHO: 1st in ORTG
'05 Amar'e: 26 PPG on an insane 56%

'06 PHO: 2nd in ORTG
'06 Amar'e: Misses 79 games

In addition, they had traded Joe johnson. So how does any of this even make sense? D'Antoni took over in 2004 and in his 61 games, PHO was 19th in ORTG.

Nash's impact can't be ignored.

Dallas when replaced by Jason Terry were also #1 in ORTG. Even went to the finals.

Nash's rise from 3rd All-NBA level to MVP level was because of rule change and D'Antoni system. Those 2 factors maximize his talent. Not sure what's so controversial about it.

[dankok8]

Dallas when replaced by Jason Terry were also #1 in ORTG. Even went to the finals.

Nash's rise from 3rd All-NBA level to MVP level was because of rule change and D'Antoni system. Those 2 factors maximize his talent. Not sure what's so controversial about it.

Because it's wrong. Nash simply got MVP love because of the system where he ran the show but his deadly mix of shooting and playmaking was already moving the needle pretty heavily for Dallas. People just didn't notice it much because his box score stats were less impressive. The Mavs peaked offensively in 2004 with +9.2 rORtg and posted +7.7 in 2002 and +7.2 in 2003. Their best post-Nash was +5.6 in 2006. To pretend like the offense reached the same heights without Nash has no basis in reality.

[dankok8]

2002-2004 Dallas with Nash: +8.0 rORtg
2005-2007 Dallas without Nash: +4.9 rORtg

2002-2004 Phoenix without Nash: -0.9 rORtg
2005-2007 Phoenix with Nash: +7.0 rORtg

Nash is clearly on the very short list of the greatest offensive engines ever.

[HoopsNY]

Because it's wrong. Nash simply got MVP love because of the system where he ran the show but his deadly mix of shooting and playmaking was already moving the needle pretty heavily for Dallas. People just didn't notice it much because his box score stats were less impressive. The Mavs peaked offensively in 2004 with +9.2 rORtg and posted +7.7 in 2002 and +7.2 in 2003. Their best post-Nash was +5.6 in 2006. To pretend like the offense reached the same heights without Nash has no basis in reality.


2002-2004 Dallas with Nash: +8.0 rORtg
2005-2007 Dallas without Nash: +4.9 rORtg

2002-2004 Phoenix without Nash: -0.9 rORtg
2005-2007 Phoenix with Nash: +7.0 rORtg

Nash is clearly on the very short list of the greatest offensive engines ever.

This is why you're one of the best posters. It's far fetched to simply say that Nash was a product of rule changes and the D'Antoni system. We clearly mentioned what he did in Dallas before 2005.

Also, it's interesting how some are ignoring the fact that peak Amar'e and Joe Johnson weren't on the team in 2006, yet Nash still led that offense to being #2 in ORTG.

Nash was just that guy and his impact was remarkable.

[getting_old]

Kidd.... got to see a lot of his games, sadly it was in that pocket of the worst NBA era for me going back to 1973, them and the Spurs was BORING!!!!!

Nash... he was on the west coast and did little in the playoffs so I honestly guess I only saw him play a dozen times... (i watch 1-2 hoops games a night for decades..)

best memory of Nash was getting trucked into the scorer's table by Big Shot Bob, and he sure didn't deserve that second MVP trophy...

so... it's a draw for me

[pandiani17]

I think Kidd had a more constant career, and Nash a higher peak. Also, he wasn't as good as people claim him to be on his Mavs days, yes, they could have won in 2003, but remember the team to beat that year were the Kings and they also lost C-Webb. Without any star player getting injuries, the Kings would have won in 2003. The rest of the seasons, the Mavs were very far from the title.

[Xiao Yao You]

Mark Price is basically Nash before Nash. And I’m not saying that because both are Caucasian. Very similar play styles and skill sets.

And I wouldn’t under rate Baron Davis brother, I think you forgetting how dominant of a point guard he could be at times, even after his athleticism started to diminish.

He molly whopped prime MVP Dirk. And then out played prime / peak Deron Williams the very next round. 16 ppg and 7 apg. Should’ve been an all star in 05, 06, 07 and 08.

Baron Davis was an inefficient gunner. He's not an all time great. Out played Deron in a loss!

[pandiani17]

Baron Davis was an inefficient gunner. He's not an all time great. Out played Deron in a loss!

Baron Davis was a great player, but he is not in the top PGs group by any stretch. D-Rose, Walt Frazier, Gary Payton and some others I am missing are above him without a doubt. Loved watching him though, had some crazy highlights.

[Xiao Yao You]

Baron Davis was a great player, but he is not in the top PGs group by any stretch. D-Rose, Walt Frazier, Gary Payton and some others I am missing are above him without a doubt. Loved watching him though, had some crazy highlights.

he wasn't in the great pg's of his era. Shooting under 40% is easy to do

[SATAN]

They still have NBA careers...

[iamgine]

Because it's wrong. Nash simply got MVP love because of the system where he ran the show but his deadly mix of shooting and playmaking was already moving the needle pretty heavily for Dallas. People just didn't notice it much because his box score stats were less impressive. The Mavs peaked offensively in 2004 with +9.2 rORtg and posted +7.7 in 2002 and +7.2 in 2003. Their best post-Nash was +5.6 in 2006. To pretend like the offense reached the same heights without Nash has no basis in reality.
After Nash, Dallas still had the #1 offense and reached the finals. With Jason Terry. Not even an all star.

Look, no one said Nash was a bad player or something. He just was not MVP level before Phoenix. On Phoenix though, he was legit MVP. There's a huge difference. And the reason was simply rule change and D'Antoni system maximize his talents. It's no different than saying having lots of shooters maximize Lebron's talents. Or triangle maximize 90's Bulls talents.