What was Kidd like in prime?

[FKAri]

Rondo-like with less statpadding and actual impact.

[Rake2204]

I feel that Kidd gets vastly overrated as a player by his two finals appearances in the early 2000s.

Dont get me wrong going to two straight finals is pretty impressive but when the only good teams you have to go through in those 2 years are the 50 win Pre-Rasheed Wallace Pistons and the 49 win Celtics led by Pierce and Walker it certainly puts the accomplishment in perspective.

In their last Finals appearance the Nets record in the nba leaguewide placed them at 8th place but was lucky enough to play in the eastern conference thus giving them the 2nd seed in the east playoffs. Place that Nets team in the west and they would merely be the 7th seed in the playoffs facing the 59 win Sacramento Kings led by Webber/Peja/ Bibby and they would be hardpressed to win that matchup to advance in the 2nd round.

To be fair it wasnt the Nets fault that the east was at its weakest and they took advantage of the situation and took care of business.

I agree with your general notion that the New Jersey Nets benefited from being in the Eastern Conference. The paths to their Finals appearances did not include slaying dragon after dragon (as opposed to, say, Houston's '95 run through Phoenix, Utah, San Antonio, and Orlando). However, I do not believe that notion means Jason Kidd was any less of a great player.

That said, I suppose if there's people out there whose base statement on Kidd's greatness was, "Dude, he took the Nets to the Finals in back to back years so he must have been great" then I agree such a statement would have to be followed with at least a debate on the strength of his own conference at that time. However, I think most of the kudos Kidd tends to receive has to do with how he played the game and what he did while he was on the floor. That is, I think he would have been great anywhere he chose to play.

Moreover, to go back to team success for a moment, even with the Eastern Conference being weak, I still believe there's something to be said about turning the Nets (a 26 win team the year prior) into instant championship contenders upon his arrival. Yes, New Jersey added very solid vet Kerry Kittles and a rookie Richard Jefferson in '02, but I don't feel they impacted the team's culture and on-court product as drastically as Kidd was able to do. And I think that's why his rating tends to usually be accurate. Any team he played for, he changed things. He made every player on his team better, and that's tough to quantify.

[bagelred]

What was Kidd like in his prime? He was much darker....he looked very black. But over time, lost some of the pigmentation....and here we are.


Weird question, though.....

[Pointguard]

I feel that Kidd gets vastly overrated as a player by his two finals appearances in the early 2000s.

Dont get me wrong going to two straight finals is pretty impressive but when the only good teams you have to go through in those 2 years are the 50 win Pre-Rasheed Wallace Pistons and the 49 win Celtics led by Pierce and Walker it certainly puts the accomplishment in perspective.

In their last Finals appearance the Nets record in the nba leaguewide placed them at 8th place but was lucky enough to play in the eastern conference thus giving them the 2nd seed in the east playoffs. Place that Nets team in the west and they would merely be the 7th seed in the playoffs facing the 59 win Sacramento Kings led by Webber/Peja/ Bibby and they would be hardpressed to win that matchup to advance in the 2nd round.

To be fair it wasnt the Nets fault that the east was at its weakest and they took advantage of the situation and took care of business.

Kidd got hurt in the second game against the championship Pistons and played hobbled the rest of the way, and hobbled Kidd still took that series to seven games. They also beat the Spurs twice in that championship run which was equivalent to what anybody in the West did. And the officiating wouldn't let Kenyon go near Tim Duncan (pretty sure its the most free throw shooting he ever did). The Spurs were a better team, much taller and more talented, with more grit players and scorers, but it wasn't like this great West had put up a better effort than the Nets.

Lastly nobody in the league could have taken that team that far.

[bizil]

I think u have three kinds of PG's who qualify as great players. You have dominant scoring PG's like Rose, Parker, Westbrook, Arenas, etc. who are very good passers, but actually are kinda of slanted to a SG or combo guard mentality. U have your PG's like Magic, Isiah, CP3, Big O, Payton, prime Nash, Tiny, etc. who are the perfect blend of dominant passing-floor generalship and dominant scoring. Then u have PG's like Kidd, Stockton, Rondo, Cousy, Mo Cheeks, Mark Jackson, etc. who are your dominant passer-floor general guys but not dominant scorers. Kidd in my book is the best PG of all time for his style of play at PG. He's really the only one outta the group I would take over many guys in the other two categories I named. Kidd was a walking triple double at PG, great defender capable of defending PG, SG, and SF, and was one of the greatest as well as flashiest passers of all time. And in his younger days he's arguably the best combo of power and speed I've ever seen at PG. If Kidd had devolped his threeball when he was at his peak of play, u are talking shit that is even more scary. Put it like this, Magic, Big O,and Isiah are the only PG's FOR SURE I would take over J Kidd.

[Bandito]

I never saw him on those Nets teams that made the finals.

I imagine a better/faster/less fat version of Deron Williams.

Could he shoot the J?
Or was he drive n' kick / go for the lay-up?

How young are you?

[Reggie43]

I agree with your general notion that the New Jersey Nets benefited from being in the Eastern Conference. The paths to their Finals appearances did not include slaying dragon after dragon (as opposed to, say, Houston's '95 run through Phoenix, Utah, San Antonio, and Orlando). However, I do not believe that notion means Jason Kidd was any less of a great player.

That said, I suppose if there's people out there whose base statement on Kidd's greatness was, "Dude, he took the Nets to the Finals in back to back years so he must have been great" then I agree such a statement would have to be followed with at least a debate on the strength of his own conference at that time. However, I think most of the kudos Kidd tends to receive has to do with how he played the game and what he did while he was on the floor. That is, I think he would have been great anywhere he chose to play.

Moreover, to go back to team success for a moment, even with the Eastern Conference being weak, I still believe there's something to be said about turning the Nets (a 26 win team the year prior) into instant championship contenders upon his arrival. Yes, New Jersey added very solid vet Kerry Kittles and a rookie Richard Jefferson in '02, but I don't feel they impacted the team's culture and on-court product as drastically as Kidd was able to do. And I think that's why his rating tends to usually be accurate. Any team he played for, he changed things. He made every player on his team better, and that's tough to quantify.

Nice post and I agree with most of it and he certainly was a great player but was not that much better or better at all than the likes of Gary Payton, Kevin Johnson, Tim Hardaway, Price, Archibald, Frazier etc. and thats not including some of the top point guards still playing today. He gets ahead of them on all time lists on the strength of those two finals appearances which seems a bit unfair for me given the aforementioned quality of opposition.

[Glide2keva]

Good defender, pretty good 3 point shooter (though not as good mid-range), fantastic at transition offense. Him + Kenyon Martin + Richard Jefferson in the open court was fun to watch.

One of my favorite teams to play with on 2K.

[Reggie43]

Kidd got hurt in the second game against the championship Pistons and played hobbled the rest of the way, and hobbled Kidd still took that series to seven games. They also beat the Spurs twice in that championship run which was equivalent to what anybody in the West did. And the officiating wouldn't let Kenyon go near Tim Duncan (pretty sure its the most free throw shooting he ever did). The Spurs were a better team, much taller and more talented, with more grit players and scorers, but it wasn't like this great West had put up a better effort than the Nets.

Lastly nobody in the league could have taken that team that far.

All of those are very true except the last statement. You really think the likes of Shaq, Duncan, Garnett, Webber, Kobe and maybe even Mcgrady would have a hard time facing the Pre-Rasheed Pistons and Pierce/Walker Celtics given the same Nets team replacing Kidd?

[Whoah10115]

All of those are very true except the last statement. You really think the likes of Shaq, Duncan, Garnett, Webber, Kobe and maybe even Mcgrady would have a hard time facing the Pre-Rasheed Pistons and Pierce/Walker Celtics given the same Nets team replacing Kidd?

McGrady flat out had no chance. I know T-Mac fans get upset with that but his Orlando team was hardly worse than the Nets without Kidd. And they couldn't get out of the first round. Webber, if he took the initiative he took when he first got to Sacramento, could maybe have done something. As far as talent...he's as talented as any PF who's played. And he played the right way, but he lacked conditioning, didn't play hard enough on D (so I guess not completely the right way), and had some issues he never got over. Duncan would have a shot, but Duncan didn't make people better anywhere near what Kidd did. His best advantage would be that he would play C (where they sucked) and a big man is always a difference maker. KG would be right between Duncan and Kidd...a big guy (tho he wouldn't play C) and a guy who excelled at making others better. Shaq would dominate the people he went up against but he wouldn't beat the other team by himself, and he wouldn't make the guys around him better like that.

[Xiao Yao You]

Webber, if he took the initiative he took when he first got to Sacramento, could maybe have done something. As far as talent...he's as talented as any PF who's played. And he played the right way, but he lacked conditioning, didn't play hard enough on D (so I guess not completely the right way), and had some issues he never got over. Duncan would have a shot, but Duncan didn't make people better anywhere near what Kidd did. His best advantage would be that he would play C (where they sucked) and a big man is always a difference maker. KG would be right between Duncan and Kidd...a big guy (tho he wouldn't play C) and a guy who excelled at making others better. Shaq would dominate the people he went up against but he wouldn't beat the other team by himself, and he wouldn't make the guys around him better like that.

Webber and KG's biggest problems like Stockton was that they were too unselfish. As much as Kidd gets credited with being a pass first pg he shot the ball way too much.

[Whoah10115]

Webber and KG's biggest problems like Stockton was that they were too unselfish. As much as Kidd gets credited with being a pass first pg he shot the ball way too much.

I don't think he shot too much. He just never played on very good teams. If you put him on those Celtic teams or if he ended up traded to the Lakers earlier on, then I can bet that he wouldn't have shot as much...or maybe he would have worked on his jumpshot and hit some more open shots.

[Xiao Yao You]

When you shoot under 40% and you are shooting as much as he did it's way too much.

[Pointguard]

All of those are very true except the last statement. You really think the likes of Shaq, Duncan, Garnett, Webber, Kobe and maybe even Mcgrady would have a hard time facing the Pre-Rasheed Pistons and Pierce/Walker Celtics given the same Nets team replacing Kidd?

They definitely beat post Rasheed Pistons that won the title if Kidd didn't get hurt early in that series. And Shaq and Kobe had experienced championship players around them most of their careers. The Pistons with Sheed would not have beaten the Pacers if their two main players, center and point guard, didn't get hurt as well. That year the Pistons were the third best team out East. The next year they were better.

But the Lakers win one game against them. Shaq, Webber and McGrady never flourished out East and had better teams than Kidd did, so they are out of the question. That Nets team was among the worse team in the league the year before with one of the games best PG playing the position. Kidd only had K Mart as a finisher but he had a bad touch, Nets had very inconsistent shooting that was wasn't dependable in the playoffs. No rebounders or rim protectors. He had no other creators on those teams. Remarkably his teams were even worse in the half court. No body making all defensive team but the same team went from 22nd to 5th in defense when Kidd arrived. They weren't big, very talented or great shot makers. And its very different if four or five players played better than they every did with Kidd those years. Kenyon Martain and Richard Jefferson despite being very young rarely, ever had years like that again.

On the reverse side of the coin I can't imagine what Kidd would have done with a team of Anfernee Hardaway, Anderson, Scott, Horace Grant, Koncak, Bowie and Shaw. Or Kobe, Rice, Harper, Fox, Fisher, Horry, AC Green and Shaw. I've always maintained that Duncan was a unique great winner but I am beginning to doubt how much I gave him credit for. Pop just has a great winning way about him. But no, that Nets team needed an engine not players like you named so they definitely don't succeed two years in a row like that. I think every very good player had a much better team than those Nets teams.

[bdreason]

I like the Rondo comparison. I think Kidd did everything(a little better than Rondo though.

Kidd's biggest asset was his floor leadership. Even playing in an uptempo, open-court style like those Nets teams did... it still felt like Kidd always had the game under control. Guys like Martin and Jefferson owe half their paychecks to J. Kidd.