cp3 vs kidd vs payton

[QUOTE=kuniva_dAMiGhTy]I'd take CP3 over both.

Better overall player than either Payton or Kidd, and still has room to add to/improve his legacy.



Not quite wienerschnitzel. :no:

[B]The B squad also faced casts that were injured (Bulls), played in a historically weak conference, and beat mediocre teams on their way to the finals. [/B]

I do agree with something you said though; and that's Miami winning a title proved they were the BEST team, no matter the conference.

If Jersey were to do the same, the "weak conference" stuff would've been water under the bridge, although weak [I]is[/I] weak.[/QUOTE]

Yeah I know, I just added the rest, Bulls being injured to me isn't really an excuse... they're always banged up, primarily Rose. You can't really say Rose isn't healthy when he's never really been healthy since 2011 until last year, and he still sucks. And the one year they were healthy LeBron's team won the series in 5. Their [I]REAL[/I] opponent were the Pacers, who were healthy, unlike the Net's [I]REAL[/I] opponent.

[QUOTE=Young X]So the 2012 Clippers had a better chance at beating the Spurs (who won 62 games and 20 straight at one point) than the 2002 Nets had at beating the Jamal Mashburn led 44 win Hornets?

You can't be serious, that's completely ridiculous. If the Nets were a mediocre team than what were the Hornets?[/QUOTE]

The Clippers had the two best players in the damn series.:oldlol:

Generally speaking when you have the two best players, you should win the series. I mean we saw this happen the very next round with OKC vs SA. SA got backdoor swept because OKC two best players played like superstars, unlike the Clippers, who's best player played like shit.

[QUOTE=ArbitraryWater]Yeah I know, I just added the rest, Bulls being injured to me isn't really an excuse... they're always banged up, primarily Rose. You can't really say Rose isn't healthy when he's never really been healthy since 2011 until last year, and he still sucks. And the one year they were healthy LeBron's team won the series in 5. Their [I]REAL[/I] opponent were the Pacers, who were healthy, unlike the Net's [I]REAL[/I] opponent.[/QUOTE]

The pistons of the early-mid 00s are > pacers of early 10's though.. Those piston teams beat a loaded Laker team- made them implode, and then came within an eyelash of beating a loaded Spurs team the next year.

Jason Kidd's Nets routinely punked those Piston teams and were even up 3-2 on the 2004 Detroit team that everyone remembers before losing.. with, ironic to your point, Kidd being the one battling injury. So it's not like the Nets never had to beat anyone. Those Detroit teams were all world teams once they rounded out.


The 10s Pacers are a footnote.. and a very cheap imitation at best. Comparing a Roy Hibbert led defense to Ben Wallace led one gives me a good laugh.

[QUOTE=GrapeApe]Kidd turned around one of the worst organiztions in the league and took them to back to back finals. Prime Kidd is one of the few players in history who could dominate a game without scoring a point.[/QUOTE]

True, especially at the guard position.




.

[QUOTE=game3524]The Clippers had the two best players in damn series.:oldlol:

Generally speaking when you have the two best players, you should win the series. I mean we saw this happen the very next round with OKC vs SA. SA got backdoor swept because OKC two best players played like superstars, unlike the Clippers, who's best player played like shit.[/QUOTE]lol the Clippers were nowhere near the Spurs that season and both of their 2 best players were injured.

Only on ISH does a decimated 50 win team have a better chance at beating a 62 win Spurs team than the Nets had at beating the Hornets who won 44 f*cking games.

[QUOTE=ArbitraryWater]Yeah I know, I just added the rest, Bulls being injured to me isn't really an excuse... they're always banged up, primarily Rose. You can't really say Rose isn't healthy when he's never really been healthy since 2011 until last year, and he still sucks. And the one year they were healthy LeBron's team won the series in 5. Their [I]REAL[/I] opponent were the Pacers, who were healthy, unlike the Net's [I]REAL[/I] opponent.[/QUOTE]

That's a fair point, but they're only NOW known for that.

Everyone patiently waited for Rose to make his return before the postseason, and dude just decided to sit out while eating candy on the bench.

[QUOTE=tpols]The pistons of the early-mid 00s are > pacers of early 10's though.. Those piston teams beat a loaded Laker team- made them implode, and then came within an eyelash of beating a loaded Spurs team the next year.

Jason Kidd's Nets routinely punked those Piston teams and were even up 3-2 on the 2004 Detroit team that everyone remembers before losing.. with, ironic to your point, Kidd being the one battling injury. So it's not like the Nets never had to beat anyone. Those Detroit teams were all world teams once they rounded out.


The 10s Pacers are a footnote.. and a very cheap imitation at best. Comparing a Roy Hibbert led defense to Ben Wallace led one gives me a good laugh.[/QUOTE]
The 37 win Hawks took the 66 win (and eventual champs) to 7 games. As did the 45 win Cav's. The '12 Celtics nearly eliminated the '12 Heat. The Jazz beat the 67 win Mavs in the first round. Etc..

Kobe just sucked ass in that series. He wasn't even Kobe. If he actually was himself, the Lakers would've WRECKED the Pistons. The Pistons were damn good, but Kobe's ego cost them that series. IMO.

[QUOTE=tpols][B]The pistons of the early-mid 00s are > pacers of early 10's though[/B].. Those piston teams beat a loaded Laker team- made them implode, and then came within an eyelash of beating a loaded Spurs team the next year.

Jason Kidd's Nets routinely punked those Piston teams and were even up 3-2 on the 2004 Detroit team that everyone remembers before losing.. with, ironic to your point, Kidd being the one battling injury. So it's not like the Nets never had to beat anyone. Those Detroit teams were all world teams once they rounded out.


The 10s Pacers are a footnote.. and a very cheap imitation at best. Comparing a Roy Hibbert led defense to Ben Wallace led one gives me a good laugh.[/QUOTE]

right, not the injury riddled 2003 team of the post-season, though.

[QUOTE=Young X][B]lol the Clippers were nowhere near the Spurs that season and both of their 2 best players were injured.[/B]

Only on ISH does a decimated 50 win team have a better chance at beating a 62 win Spurs team than the Nets had at beating the Hornets who won 44 f*cking games.[/QUOTE]

Give me a break, Paul had a hip flexor...not exactly the world most series injury. I mean Blake's injury was worst and he still played much better then Paul.

[QUOTE=aj1987]The 37 win Hawks took the 66 win (and eventual champs) to 7 games. As did the 45 win Cav's. The '12 Celtics nearly eliminated the '12 Heat. The Jazz beat the 67 win Mavs in the first round. Etc..

Kobe just sucked ass in that series. He wasn't even Kobe. If he actually was himself, the Lakers would've WRECKED the Pistons. The Pistons were damn good, but Kobe's ego cost them that series. IMO.[/QUOTE]

Warriors...not Jazz.

Have to disagree with you on the 04 and 05 Pistons...once they got Rasheed...they were able to play even better defense and they could generate points well enough playing as slow as possible.

If you looked solely at 04...you could maybe have an argument, but then 05 happened...and it saw the same Pistons team almost beat probably the best Spurs team ever or at least on the short list...in a series.

[QUOTE=DMAVS41]Warriors...not Jazz.[/quote]
I don't even know why I said the Jazz beat the Mav's. :facepalm :facepalm :facepalm

[QUOTE=DMAVS41]Have to disagree with you on the 04 and 05 Pistons...once they got Rasheed...they were able to play even better defense and they could generate points well enough playing as slow as possible.

If you looked solely at 04...you could maybe have an argument, but then 05 happened...and it saw the same Pistons team almost beat probably the best Spurs team ever or at least on the short list...in a series.[/QUOTE]
The '05 Pistons would've lost in the ECF, if it wasn't for Wade's injury. Dude was murdering them until his injury in G5. Shaq and UD played well in that series as well.

[QUOTE=aj1987]I don't even know why I said the Jazz beat the Mav's. :facepalm :facepalm :facepalm


The '05 Pistons would've lost in the ECF, if it wasn't for Wade's injury. Dude was murdering them until his injury in G5. Shaq and UD played well in that series as well.[/QUOTE]

So what? I agree they probably would have, but the 05 Heat were an elite championship level team.

You had 4 legit championship level teams that year. I don't see how the Pistons maybe not beating a Wade/Shaq championship caliber Heat team means much here.

[QUOTE=game3524]Give me a break, Paul had a hip flexor...not exactly the world most series injury. I mean Blake's injury was worst and he still played much better then Paul.[/QUOTE]The point is both of the Clippers best players were playing injured. The Spurs were on a completely different level as a team. To say otherwise is revisionist history. They won 20 games straight at one point.

Those Nets teams even despite not being as talented as the Clippers still had much more of a chance at getting to the finals than the Clippers did.

You don't need talent when you're facing 44 win teams with negative point differentials in the 2nd round.

Those Nets teams and all the other teams in their conference wouldn't even make the playoffs in the 2014 west. To ignore shit like this when comparing Kidd and Paul's team success in the playoffs is idiotic.

[QUOTE=Young X]The point is both of the Clippers best players were playing injured. The Spurs were on a completely different level as a team. To say otherwise is revisionist history. They won 20 games straight at one point.

Those Nets teams even despite not being as talented as the Clippers still had much more of a chance at getting to the finals than the Clippers did.

You don't need talent when you're facing 44 win teams with negative point differentials in the 2nd round.

Those Nets teams and all the other teams in their conference wouldn't even make the playoffs in the 2014 west. To ignore shit like this when comparing Kidd and Paul's team success in the playoffs is idiotic.[/QUOTE]


The Spurs were a great team, but they weren't some unbeatable juggernaut. They didn't have a true superstar, so their potential was maxed out at a certain level. They were very similar to some of those late 2000s Pistons teams.

Hell, CP3 didn't even need to play like 2008 post-season CP3. If he was even 80-85% of what he normally was, they have a great chance of winning that series.

Also Charlotte didn't have a negative point differential. In fact, they were a slightly better offensive team then New Jersey and were still a top ten defensive team.

[QUOTE=DMAVS41]So what? I agree they probably would have, but the 05 Heat were an elite championship level team.

You had 4 legit championship level teams that year. I don't see how the Pistons maybe not beating a Wade/Shaq championship caliber Heat team means much here.[/QUOTE]
I was saying originally that the '04 Pistons would've lost to the Lakers, if it wasn't for Kobe's ego. Also, the '04 Lakers would've actually beat the '05 Heat. Those teams weren't anything special (as in an ATG championship team). Great defense? Yep, not gonna disagree, but they were actually lucky to win in '04 (thanks to Kobe) and make the Finals in '05 (Wade's injury).

Done for the day. Will check this thread tomorrow.