# Jason Kidd or Steve Nash?



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

Who is the better point guard? Now that Jason has rebounded from the microfracture surgery, I think he's caught back up to Nash. He, unlike Nash, plays defense. The difference seems to be that one can shoot better, the other defends, and then one is a coach killing locker room cancer, and the other is the darling of the entire NBA.

If anything is a worthwhile debate, it's the debate between these two players.
Do you think that Nash is really Two MVP awards better than Kidd? Which is the better for the course of their career?


----------



## Avalanche (Nov 17, 2005)

career wise i take kidd, every single time without question.

for one season right now it would depend on the system really, nash will win this pretty clearly though i would think


----------



## Jizzy (Aug 24, 2005)

Jason Kidd.

Give me the PG that plays both ends, rebounds, defends and can still make plays. He outthinks other PGs and can step up and defend other positions. Imagine Nash on Kobe, Lamar Odom, Lebron James? And now, Nash is on the brink of being eliminated by the Spurs while garnering 2 MVP awards, the second one he was not deserving of.

Career wise, no comparison. What Steve Nash is doing now, Kidd has been doing for years. He's been farther then Nash in the playoffs and should have won MVP his first year in NJ when he took a former joke of a team to the NBA Finals. Nash won MVP his first season in Phoenix for taking his team to the Conference Finals?


----------



## bronx43 (Dec 9, 2005)

Kidd. Even at 34, he never ceases to amaze me with his sheer basketball intelligence and playmaking abilities.


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

Career? Kidd and it isn't close... Right now? Nash...


----------



## Theonee (Dec 5, 2006)

Jason Kidd 100 times out of 100 for me. The only advantage Nash has on Kidd is shooting %, but as a PG, that is one of the least important skills for a point guard. Shooting higher % is the job of forwards and centers. PG's job is to set up team mates and defend your man and rebound if you can.


----------



## LameR (Jan 4, 2004)

Theonee said:


> Jason Kidd 100 times out of 100 for me. The only advantage Nash has on Kidd is shooting %, but as a PG, that is one of the least important skills for a point guard. Shooting higher % is the job of forwards and centers. PG's job is to set up team mates and defend your man and rebound if you can.


QFT


----------



## Air Fly (Apr 19, 2005)

Nash without a shadow of doubt.


----------



## Air Fly (Apr 19, 2005)

Hibachi! said:


> Career? Kidd and it isn't close... Right now? Nash...


Nash 2 mvps, Kidd 0. How it's not close? please


----------



## g-dog-rice#2 (Jan 29, 2006)

Depends what you value more: or defense?

Kidd is cleary the better defender (Nash can't defend a parked car) while Nash has a much better shot.

Right now, I would say Nash is better. But Kidd has been great for several years.


----------



## Saint Baller (May 3, 2006)

Give me Kidd

Plays defense better than Nashty and is at 34 and is still pulling down those triple doubles.

And anyone who brings in the Nash 2 MVP's, Kidd 0 is dumb, because Kidd was robbed of MVP before.


----------



## Jizzy (Aug 24, 2005)

Air Fly said:


> Nash 2 mvps, Kidd 0. How it's not close? please



<strike> Air Fly, Vince Carter sucks.</strike>


----------



## Jizzy (Aug 24, 2005)

Oh yeah, Jason kidd - 48% from 3 in the playoffs while Nash shoots an amazing 44% from the field.


----------



## Kuskid (Aug 18, 2004)

Jizzy said:


> Oh yeah, Jason kidd - 48% from 3 in the playoffs while Nash shoots an amazing 44% from the field.


I STRONGLY recommend not bringing shooting percentages into the argument if you're going to be pushing the pro-Kidd agenda.


----------



## Hyperion (Dec 5, 2006)

Theonee said:


> Jason Kidd 100 times out of 100 for me. The only advantage Nash has on Kidd is shooting %, but as a PG, that is one of the least important skills for a point guard. Shooting higher % is the job of forwards and centers. PG's job is to set up team mates and defend your man and rebound if you can.


No. While passing/court vision is the MOST important aspect of a great PG, you have to be able to make the opposing team pay for sagging back. Nash can shoot as well as anyone in the league. Kidd is a very good defender, but isn't the best PG defender in the league while Nash is probably the best shooter at his posistion in the league (I would venture to say the best shooter period) They are both winners and I would love to have either on my team. You can trust them to make the right decision 99% of the time. They can both run the open court, have insanely great court-vision, and are great locker-room presences (from what I've read about them).

I agree that Kidd would be a better choice if you don't have a legit rebounding big(s) on your team (I reference NJ). However, when he was on the Suns, his shooting deficiencies outweighed his rebounding. That's one of the reasons why the Suns traded him to NJ for Marbury. (that and he beat the snot out of his wife and Colangelo won't stand for any legal trouble by his players) 

I think that Nash is the best PG in the league but Kidd is a great hybrid of a player. Kidd needs a perimeter shot to be the best. Baron Davis is much like Kidd but with a jumpshot but can't stay healthy long enough to be a superstar.


----------



## ChristopherJ (Aug 10, 2004)

Jizzy said:


> Oh yeah, Jason kidd - 48% from 3 in the playoffs while Nash shoots an amazing 44% from the field.


It's very easy to selectively choose stats, but if you honestly believe those are representive of _anything_ then I'm speechless.

Here's the difference between Nash's and Kidd's offensive efficiency:

Nash's TS% this year: 65.4(1st in the league)
Kidd's TS% this year: 51.6(152nd in the league)


Not even close.


----------



## Air Fly (Apr 19, 2005)

Jizzy said:


> Air Fly, Vince Carter sucks.


Grow the **** up.


----------



## Jizzy (Aug 24, 2005)

Kuskid said:


> I STRONGLY recommend not bringing shooting percentages into the argument if you're going to be pushing the pro-Kidd agenda.



I know but for the 2007 playoffs so far, it's fair enough. Nash has had better seasons ever since he joined Phoenix however. If you look at it career wise, Nash is nowhere close to Kidd.

As for the 2007 playoffs, Nash is the third best PG behind Kidd and Davis.


----------



## ChristopherJ (Aug 10, 2004)

futuristxen said:


> Who is the better point guard? Now that Jason has rebounded from the microfracture surgery, I think he's caught back up to Nash. He, unlike Nash, plays defense. The difference seems to be that one can shoot better, the other defends, and then one is a coach killing locker room cancer, and the other is the darling of the entire NBA.


Showing your complete ignorance once again, and proving that you don't even watch the Suns play.

Nash has played solid defense all postseason while Jason Kidd was consistently burned all series by the Raptors PG's. Not to say Nash is as good a defender as Kidd, not at all, but to say one plays defense while the other does not is a moronic oversimplification that isn't remotely true. This whole notion that Nash doesn't play defense is dead wrong, and Kidd isn't nearly as good a defender as he used to be. At this point I'd say Nash is an underrated defender, whereas Kidd is probably overrated defensively at this point.


----------



## ChristopherJ (Aug 10, 2004)

Jizzy said:


> Jason Kidd.
> 
> He's been farther then Nash in the playoffs and should have won MVP his first year in NJ when he took a former joke of a team to the NBA Finals. Nash won MVP his first season in Phoenix for taking his team to the Conference Finals?


MVP is a regular season award, and you and I both know that taking a team to the WCF is a much greater accomplishment than taking a team through the east to the finals.

West and East are like night and day.


----------



## Jizzy (Aug 24, 2005)

KidCanada said:


> MVP is a regular season award, and you and I know both know that taking a team to the WCF is a much greater accomplishment than taking a team through the east to the finals.
> 
> West and East are like night and day.



Actually, Kidd took a team that won 27 games to 52 back in 02 and led them to the NBA Finals and still did not get MVP honors.


----------



## Air Fly (Apr 19, 2005)

Kidd is better than Nash devensively but that ain't saying much. Kidd has been lit up many times by oppossing PGs this season. His defense is non-existent this season and in the playoffs, so it's kinda funny that some people bring that up and conclude THIS IS WHY KIDD IS BETTER. Nash has him beat offensively by a large margin and is the better PG overall. Don't bring up rebounding because it's irrelevent in a discussion like this. We are not comparing Centers and PFs here.


----------



## Jizzy (Aug 24, 2005)

Air Fly said:


> Grow the **** up.



In all honestly, he has. He had like what, 2 good games out of of 9 and both were in the first round.


----------



## jefferyball (May 13, 2007)

that is a tough one but i would have to give the edge to Jason Kidd because he is a better rebounder he plays better defense and plus he gets way more triple doubles than steve nash.


----------



## Jizzy (Aug 24, 2005)

Air Fly said:


> Kidd is better than Nash devensively but that ain't saying much. Kidd has been lit up many times by oppossing PGs this season. His defense is non-existent this season and in the playoffs, so it's kinda funny that some people bring that up and conclude THIS IS WHY KIDD IS BETTER. Nash has him beat offensively by a large margin and is the better PG overall. Don't bring up rebounding because it's irrelevent in a discussion like this. We are not comparing Centers and PFs here.



How is Nash a better PG OVERRALL? You said rebounding is irrelevant yet you say Nash is a better PG overrall?


----------



## Air Fly (Apr 19, 2005)

Jizzy said:


> In all honestly, he has. He had like what, 2 good games out of of 9 and both were in the first round.


What is Carter doing here though? You just brought him up because I dont' agree with you that Kidd is better than Steve Nash?

Being little immature there, don't you think? Stay on topic.


----------



## ChristopherJ (Aug 10, 2004)

Jizzy said:


> Actually, Kidd took a team that won 27 games to 52 back in 02 and led them to the NBA Finals and still did not get MVP honors.


Check who won in that year. He had tough competition and didn't deserve it. Too bad.


----------



## Jizzy (Aug 24, 2005)

KidCanada said:


> Check who won in that year. He had tough competition and didn't deserve it. Too bad.


So what was Nash doing winning a second MVP award? He hasn't reached the NBA Finals yet.


----------



## ChristopherJ (Aug 10, 2004)

Jizzy said:


> How is Nash a better PG OVERRALL? You said rebounding is irrelevant yet you say Nash is a better PG overrall?


Because Nash's team runs a face tempo game where Nash wants his big men to rebound so he can get ready to push the ball up the floor. His rebounding has no effect on the game one way or the other. He doesn't try and get rebounds because that isn't his job.


----------



## Air Fly (Apr 19, 2005)

Jizzy said:


> How is Nash a better PG OVERRALL? You said rebounding is irrelevant yet you say Nash is a better PG overrall?


Better offensively, better playmaker, passer and in every other aspect of a PG that you can think of. His vision is also better than Kidd's. When i watch Nash I shake my head in amazement. Can't say the same about Kidd, i'm honest here.


----------



## Aurelino (Jul 25, 2003)

Kidd is the better leader and is able to impose his will on the game more than Nash can. Kidd also has the gift of being a step or two ahead of everyone else in terms of anticipating plays before they happen. This is why he is able beat other players to the spot for rebounds or loose balls and is able to turn broken plays to his team's advantage on both ends. It is this gift that makes him a slightly better playmaker than Nash as well. Nash is obviously the better shooter and scorer, but Kidd can postup almost every PG in the league (with the possible exception of Billups and Davis) and it is something Nash cannot do on offense. 

Kidd is also one of the best rebounding guards to ever play the game so people should stop saying that he only rebounds well because the Nets don't have a big who can do so. Once again, it is Kidd's basketball IQ and vision that enables him to see the floor and all the angles before everyone else that allows him to grab those rebounds, especially on the offensive end. 

Nash is a terrific PG and some might say he is currently better than Kidd, but he certainly isn't two-MVPs better.


----------



## Carbo04 (Apr 15, 2005)

Nash.

Nash is the better passer, and by far the better shooter/scorer. Kidd is better at defense but Kidd has been lit up plenty of times.


----------



## ChristopherJ (Aug 10, 2004)

Jizzy said:


> So what was Nash doing winning a second MVP award? He hasn't reached the NBA Finals yet.


OK. The MVP is a *regular season award*. Try and remember that.

Also, Nash led a team that most thought would miss the playoffs to a 54 win season. That team also reached the WCF, where they were barely beat out by Dallas. That in itself is a much greater accomplishment than reaching the finals in an extremely weak Eastern conference.

But once again, the MVP is a *regular season award*.


----------



## Air Fly (Apr 19, 2005)

KidCanada said:


> Because Nash's team runs a face tempo game where Nash wants his big men to rebound so he can get ready to push the ball up the floor. His rebounding has no effect on the game one way or the other. He doesn't try and get rebounds because that isn't his job.


Pretty much.


----------



## Air Fly (Apr 19, 2005)

Nash also plays in the West....Enough said.


----------



## ChristopherJ (Aug 10, 2004)

By the way, what a surprise that all Nets fans are saying Kidd. Is there one Nets fan, other than Air Fly, with an ounce of objectivity?


----------



## Aurelino (Jul 25, 2003)

Air Fly said:


> Nash also plays in the West....Enough said.


So? Tracy McGrady plays in the west too. Is he better than Wade and VC?


----------



## Air Fly (Apr 19, 2005)

Carbo04 said:


> Nash.
> 
> Nash is the better passer, and by far the better shooter/scorer. Kidd is better at defense but Kidd has been lit up plenty of times.


Yup, Nash can turn from being a pass-first-pg to a deadly scorer in a blink of an eye when his team fails to deliver offensively. That's another thing that make Nash the better PG than Kidd. The most versatile PG in the nba today.


----------



## Air Fly (Apr 19, 2005)

Aurelino said:


> So? Tracy McGrady plays in the west too. Is he better than Wade and VC?


What are you trying to say there? Nas has/had success in the West, Tmac? tsk, tsk, tsk.


----------



## Aurelino (Jul 25, 2003)

KidCanada said:


> By the way, what a surprise that all Nets fans are saying Kidd. Is there one Nets fan, other than Air Fly, with an ounce of objectivity?



Air Fly is a VC fan not a Nets fan and you make it sound like choose Kidd is completely ridiculous, which it isn't. It is all a matter of opinion.


----------



## BlakeJesus (Feb 1, 2006)

Air Fly said:


> Yup, Nash can turn from being a pass-first-pg to a deadly scorer in a blink of an eye when his team fails to deliver offensively. That's another thing that make Nash the better PG than Kidd. The most versatile PG in the nba today.


Are you trying to imply that Kidd isn't a phenomenal passing pg? Because if that's what you're trying to argue, I wish you the best of luck because that's not something you're going to win.

Kidd IS a better passer than Nash, and he plays better defense.

I'm picking Kidd here by a long shot IMO.


----------



## Aurelino (Jul 25, 2003)

Air Fly said:


> What are you trying to say there? Nas has/had success in the West, Tmac? tsk, tsk, tsk.


We're talking individual players here. Much like Chris Paul is considered one of the top 5 PGs in the league despite his team not having success like the other PGs have had.


----------



## ChristopherJ (Aug 10, 2004)

Aurelino said:


> Air Fly is a VC fan not a Nets fan and you make it sound like choose Kidd is completely ridiculous, which it isn't. It is all a matter of opinion.


I think it is if we are talking about this year. People have short memories though, so I'm not surprised by all the Kidd hoopla.. but lets get real.. THIS year Nash has been better than Kidd. In fact, the last 3 years Nash has been better than Kidd.

I get the feeling people are judging this question based on their careers as a whole, but that isn't what the thread starter is asking.


----------



## Air Fly (Apr 19, 2005)

Aurelino said:


> Air Fly is a VC fan not a Nets fan and you make it sound like choose Kidd is completely ridiculous, which it isn't. It is all a matter of opinion.


It's not. Nash has been the best PG in the nba the past 3 season. If Kidd's fans stop with the overrating of his triple doubles then they'll be able to see the big picture, that he has nothing on Nash. 

I don't know why i'm arguing this. Nash back-to-back mvps. First NBA Team this season, Kidd? You tell me.


----------



## 77AJ (Feb 16, 2005)

Nash get's eaten alive to much on defense to be considered the best PG in the game. Once people open their eyes and realize that defense = half of the game we love called basketball. They will realize the greater impact Jason Kidd has on an entire game versus just half the game. Nash is great on offense, but loses his impact on defense. Where with Kidd (whose shooting isn't as bad as people make it out to be) still gives you great impact with his play making/passing/vision skills as a PG on the offensive end, where as Nash gives you nothing on the defensive end. People said Kidd would get burned and would look old against two of the fastest PG's in the playoff series against Toronto. Yet Kidd held his own against T.J. Ford, and Jose Calderon, and in some instances dominated them with great great games. Then you see in this Nets vs. Cavs series that Jason Kidd has the ability to defend LeBron James, and actually make James work for his shots by shooting his quick hands at James Dribble, and having the over all strength to guard him. Could you see Nash having this kind of impact on the defensive end ? Of course not. Once pro Nash, and Suns fans realize that defense = half the game of basketball they will then soon realize that Nash isn't the best PG in the game. More importantly the Suns will never win anything, and at best be second or 3rd best because they can't play a lick of defense to get stops when it counts the most. It all starts at the top with their PG.

Oh yeah and Jason Kidd just did average a triple double in the 1st round. Pretty amazing don't you think ? And Kidd is having quite the series against the defensive Cavs as well.


----------



## Aurelino (Jul 25, 2003)

Air Fly said:


> It's not. Nash has been the best PG in the nba the past 3 season. If Kidd's fans stop with the overrating of his triple doubles then they'll be able to see the big picture, that he has nothing on Nash.
> 
> I don't know why i'm arguing this. Nash back-to-back mvps. First NBA Team this season, Kidd? You tell me.


You can't defend your own argument and are going all over the place. I just wanted to point out that the statement "he plays in the West, enough said" is quite ridiculous. You can see that non-Nets fans have picked Kidd in this thread too. Anyway, MVP is selected based on the majority *opinion* of journalists like Stephen A. Smith and Charley Rosen. Many fans would say that LeBron, Kobe and Dirk were worthy of winning the award in the previous two years as well.


----------



## Air Fly (Apr 19, 2005)

Jameh said:


> Are you trying to imply that Kidd isn't a phenomenal passing pg? Because if that's what you're trying to argue, I wish you the best of luck because that's not something you're going to win.
> 
> Kidd IS a better passer than Nash, and he plays better defense.
> 
> I'm picking Kidd here by a long shot IMO.


Nash - 11.6 APG
Kidd - 9.2

What the hell are you talking about? And what Kidd defense are you speaking of?


----------



## BlakeJesus (Feb 1, 2006)

Air Fly said:


> It's not. Nash has been the best PG in the nba the past 3 season. If Kidd's fans stop with the overrating of his triple doubles then they'll be able to see the big picture, that he has nothing on Nash.
> 
> I don't know why i'm arguing this. Nash back-to-back mvps. First NBA Team this season, Kidd? You tell me.


It's highly unfair to use awards as the comparison of which player is better.

Kidd could have the same exact stats as Nash at the end of the season, but because the Suns win 15+ more games he'll automatically win the award. Kobe's stats FAR surpassed Nash's (last season) but he won the award because his team won more games.

And I really don't see how you can overrate a triple double. It's highly impressive, and shows the versatility of said player.


----------



## Air Fly (Apr 19, 2005)

Aurelino said:


> You can't defend your own argument and are going all over the place. I just wanted to point out that the statement "he plays in the West, enough said" is quite ridiculous. You can see that non-Nets fans have picked Kidd in this thread too. Anyway, MVP is selected based on the majority *opinion* of journalists like Stephen A. Smith and Charley Rosen. Many fans would say that LeBron, Kobe and Dirk were worthy of winning the award in the previous two years as well.


I can't help it if you fail to grasp what I was trying to say there. Nash plays in the West, yes! but has been successful there. Turned a dull Phoenix franchise into contenders since his arrival. As a VC fan who watched the NETS plenty of time, I can't tell you how many times I concede them losing to the Spurs by a blowout nontheless even with the 'great' Kidd being there. With Nash though, it's a completely different story because he's just THAT GOOD and makes everyone around him better.


----------



## Vuchato (Jan 14, 2006)

KidCanada said:


> By the way, what a surprise that all Nets fans are saying Kidd. Is there one Nets fan, other than Air Fly, with an ounce of objectivity?


nice that you mention that, but don't notice that all of the Suns fans have said Kidd.


----------



## BlakeJesus (Feb 1, 2006)

Air Fly said:


> Nash - 11.6 APG
> Kidd - 9.2
> 
> What the hell are you talking about? And what Kidd defense are you speaking of?


Nash's system allows him to get more assists.

Kidd - 1.59 SPG
Nash - .75 

k?


----------



## Aurelino (Jul 25, 2003)

Air Fly said:


> Nash - 11.6 APG
> Kidd - 9.2
> 
> What the hell are you talking about? And what Kidd defense are you speaking of?


You are exposing yourself as someone who doesn't know much about the game if you are using APG as a measure of who is the better passer.


----------



## Vuchato (Jan 14, 2006)

Air Fly said:


> Nash - 11.6 APG
> Kidd - 9.2
> 
> What the hell are you talking about? And what Kidd defense are you speaking of?


you do realize Nash plays on a team that fastbreaks, and Kidd plays on a team that plays halfcourt, with a player who handles the ball just as much as Kidd (unfortunately).


----------



## Air Fly (Apr 19, 2005)

Aurelino said:


> You are exposing yourself as someone who doesn't know much about the game if you are using APG as a measure of who is the better passer.


Dude, seriously...I don't even need those stats to support my arguement that Nash is the better passer. Any objective basketball fan would tell you that. The stats I showed was in response to jemh who made a bold statement that Kidd is the better passer. Get it? Plus, the margin was big enough to convince Kidd's apologist that he ain't a better passer than Nash.


----------



## 77AJ (Feb 16, 2005)

Let's put it this way. Parker was eating Nash up so much that the Suns coach had to put Marion on Parker. Nash is really bad at defense. Let alone watching Nash trying to guard anyone over 6'4" in the NBA is pure comedy at it's finest.


----------



## BlakeJesus (Feb 1, 2006)

Air Fly said:


> Dude, seriously...I don't even need those stats to support my arguement that Nash is the better passer. Any objective basketball fan would tell you that. The stats I showed was in response to jemh who made a bold statement that Kidd is the better passer. Get it? *Plus, the margin was big enough to convince Kidd's apologist that he ain't a better passer than Nash.*


Please tell me you're not talking about me?

Kidd is still a FAR (imo) superior passer than Nash. As I said earlier, Nash plays in a system that allows him to get more assists, so his stats are inflated in comparison to his skill.


----------



## Air Fly (Apr 19, 2005)

Jameh said:


> Please tell me you're not talking about me?
> 
> Kidd is still a FAR (imo) superior passer than Nash. As I said earlier, Nash plays in a system that allows him to get more assists, so his stats are inflated in comparison to his skill.


Your opinion doesn't mean much when it's not supported by anything.


----------



## Aurelino (Jul 25, 2003)

Air Fly said:


> Dude, seriously...I don't even need those stats to support my arguement that Nash is the better passer. Any objective basketball fan would tell you that. The stats I showed was in response to jemh who made a bold statement that Kidd is the better passer. Get it? Plus, the margin was big enough to convince Kidd's apologist that he ain't a better passer than Nash.


Hahaha. So you did manage to expose yourself afterall. I won't even bother telling you about Usg-r, possessions per game, total FGA and all those things. 

Jamaal Tinsley is a better passer than LeBron James since he averaged more assists this season. Also, Kidd is averaging 12.2 apg in the postseason (Nash 13.1 apg), so I guess Kidd has suddenly become a better passer.


----------



## AIFAN3 (Sep 17, 2005)

Kidd is better.. It's not even much of a debate.. Nash is a product of the system he plays in.. He has much more talent around him and the way the Suns offense is set up, his assists and stats get inflated.. Is it a coincidence that Nash was no where near kidd's level while in Dallas but all of a sudden has burst on to the scene while having talented players built around his game?

Kidd's been doing it for years.. And his talent doesn't really mesh well with his star counterpart (Carter).. Yet he still finds a way to make it work, whie putting up massive numbers and completely dictating the style the Nets play..

Nash didn't even deserve the 2 MVP's he got and only plays on one side of the ball in which he has supremely talented players that cater to his talents perfectly..


----------



## fruitcake (Mar 20, 2005)

they're both pretty much the same.

it would be interesting if you switch them tho--have nash on NJ and Kidd on Phoenix.

I would think that their respective new teams would be better. Carter has an unbelievable shooter to play with. Nash would also take the pressure of Carter in the clutch. Its well known in the 4th quarter that the ball is in Vince's hands and in Vince's hands only. Nash's numbers would go down but I think the Nets would be 1st or 2nd in the East with Nash.

Kidd brings defense to Phoenix without losing any passing abilities. Kidd averages a whole turnover less than Nash a game. The fact that fast-break teams dont need guards to rebound is ridiculous. If you're a fast break team, you want the ball in your PGs hands at all times, and that would make Phoenix's running game even better. Also, can you imagine Kidd posting up on PGs passing to guys like Marion, Bell, Barbosa, etc and then throwing up alley-oops to Amare, Diaw, Marion? man that would be an absolute dream for Kidd.


----------



## BlakeJesus (Feb 1, 2006)

Air Fly said:


> Your opinion doesn't mean much when it's not supported by anything.


If you honestly think Nash is a better passer simply because he plays in a fast break system, and averaged 2 more assists a game because of it than Kidd than please feel free to continue to think that. You're only fooling yourself big guy.

Maybe you just hold some personal vendeda against Kidd because he outshines VC game in and game out.


----------



## Aurelino (Jul 25, 2003)

Jameh said:


> Maybe you just hold some personal vendeda against Kidd because he outshines VC game in and game out.


Bingo.


----------



## AIFAN3 (Sep 17, 2005)

Aurelino said:


> Bingo.


Great.. Just what this thread needs.. An opportunity to turn this into a Kidd vs. VC thread..


----------



## Red Dino (Apr 22, 2007)

Career wise Jason Kidd but if you look Steve's past three years, he has been better than Kidd in his best year. Steve Nash in the past three years have been as good as any PG in their prime. When its all said and done, they will both end up being HOF... only difference is, Nash will have 2 MVPs and probably a better chance to win a NBA title.


----------



## Aurelino (Jul 25, 2003)

AIFAN3 said:


> Great.. Just what this thread needs.. An opportunity to turn this into a Kidd vs. VC thread..


My bad. But it is what it is and I think everyone else realizes that too.


----------



## hobojoe (Jun 20, 2003)

Absolutely Steve Nash for me. Honestly, one of the most underrated parts of Nash's game is his ability to take over a game *scoring* the ball if he needs to, or if that's what the defense is giving him. He's so much better at scoring and creating his own offense than Kidd it's not even funny. That, and the impact Kidd's rebounding and those damned triple doubles are the most overrated part of this debate.


----------



## Air Fly (Apr 19, 2005)

Aurelino said:


> Hahaha. So you did manage to expose yourself afterall. I won't even bother telling you about Usg-r, possessions per game, total FGA and all those things.
> 
> Jamaal Tinsley is a better passer than LeBron James since he averaged more assists this season. Also, Kidd is averaging 12.2 apg in the postseason (Nash 13.1 apg), so I guess Kidd has suddenly become a better passer.


You do that. Nash remain the better passer. Try to argue otherwise instead of "I wouldn't bother" excuse.

Jamaal is a beter passer than James. Your last sentence doesn't even make sense.


----------



## Air Fly (Apr 19, 2005)

Jameh said:


> If you honestly think Nash is a better passer simply because he plays in a fast break system, and averaged 2 more assists a game because of it than Kidd than please feel free to continue to think that. You're only fooling yourself big guy.
> 
> Maybe you just hold some personal vendeda against Kidd because he outshines VC game in and game out.


The system excuse is the most ridiculous thing i've read in a while. If you can't support your claim that Kidd is better passer without bringing up the "system" excuse, then there's no much debate here. 

Nash is the system. And the NETS do play fastbreak basketball. As for your last comment, i advise you to read my other posts that sing praises to Kidd. And for the record i been saying Nash is better ever since VC was outshining Kidd in his first season with the NETS. So your point?


----------



## BlakeJesus (Feb 1, 2006)

hobojoe said:


> Absolutely Steve Nash for me. Honestly, one of the most underrated parts of Nash's game is his ability to take over a game *scoring* the ball if he needs to, or if that's what the defense is giving him. He's so much better at scoring and creating his own offense than Kidd it's not even funny. That, and the impact Kidd's rebounding and those damned triple doubles are the most overrated part of this debate.


I honestly don't think one person in this entire thread even once hinted anything near Kidd being a better scorer than Nash. The question is, at the PG is scoring really the focal point of that position? Obviously your answer shouldn't be yes.


----------



## Air Fly (Apr 19, 2005)

Aurelino said:


> My bad. But it is what it is and I think everyone else realizes that too.


If that's what you like to believe, then there ain't much i can do. Continue on.

Steve Nash is the best PG in the nba. Many fans would agree with me not to mention nba players and the media. Wake me up when Kidd wins back-to-back MVPS. BTW, why isn't kidd in the all-nba team this year and Nash was unanimously voted FIRST TEAM? I thought so too.


----------



## Air Fly (Apr 19, 2005)

Jameh said:


> I honestly don't think one person in this entire thread even once hinted anything near Kidd being a better scorer than Nash. The question is, at the PG is scoring really the focal point of that position? Obviously your answer shouldn't be yes.


There we go as I predicted. So why are marvelling about Kidd's rebounds then?

P.S. When you have a PG that can lit it up anytime it helps your team in many ways. That's what Nash does for Phoenix. Honestly, when VC and RJ struggle NETS lose most of the time because Kidd is a liability offensively...can't take game over like Stevey Nashty.


----------



## BlakeJesus (Feb 1, 2006)

Air Fly said:


> You do that. Nash remain the better passer. Try to argue otherwise instead of "I wouldn't bother" excuse.
> 
> Jamaal is a beter passer than James. Your last sentence doesn't even make sense.


That was the point of his post. Stats dong equal talent level. Obviously you can't understand that if 100% of your argument is based off of stats. Please watch the games instead of www.nba.com every time.


----------



## BlakeJesus (Feb 1, 2006)

Air Fly said:


> There we go as I predicted. So why are marvelling about Kidd's rebounds then?


Can you point out one instance where I made an overly big deal, or a deal at all about Kidds rebounding ability? Yes, it is far better than Nash's, however it's not really what the position is about.

It's about finding the open man, and running your teams offense. I've already put it out there I believe Kidd is the better passer, and IMO Nash runs his Suns offense very well HOWEVER I believe there are QUITE a few guys that you could sub into that spot and we'd be talking about them vs Kidd.


----------



## Air Fly (Apr 19, 2005)

Jameh said:


> Can you point out one instance where I made an overly big deal, or a deal at all about Kidds rebounding ability? Yes, it is far better than Nash's, however it's not really what the position is about.
> 
> It's about finding the open man, and running your teams offense. I've already put it out there I believe Kidd is the better passer, and IMO Nash runs his Suns offense very well HOWEVER I believe there are QUITE a few guys that you could sub into that spot and we'd be talking about them vs Kidd.


Unbelievable. 

Who are those QUITE A FEW GUYS? Please, lets not downplay Nash's achievements with Phoenix. 

You believe so, I believe otherwise and I watch the game as well. My point is you keep posting your opinion without anything that supports it.


----------



## IbizaXL (Sep 21, 2005)

Air Fly said:


> Nash 2 mvps, Kidd 0. How it's not close? please


Kidd-took team to the Finals twice.

Nash- never.

so what?

ill take Kidd anyday. hes a much more complete player. always a triple double threat. hes been a great PG his whole career. Nash only got "elite"
PG status since hes been in Phoenix, meaning the Suns system has helped him in some way.

both are great PGs nonetheless and i dont want to take anything away from either of them. but i have to go with Kidd on this one


----------



## 77AJ (Feb 16, 2005)

hobojoe said:


> Absolutely Steve Nash for me. Honestly, one of the most underrated parts of Nash's game is his ability to take over a game *scoring* the ball if he needs to, or if that's what the defense is giving him. He's so much better at scoring and creating his own offense than Kidd it's not even funny. That, and the impact Kidd's rebounding and those damned triple doubles are the most overrated part of this debate.


Nash isn't beter at creating his own offense. Nash is just a better jump shooter. Simple as that. Rebounding if you ask any coach is one of the biggest keys to winning. Yet you call it overrated? And those damned triple doubles as you call it...Hmmm you're coming across as more of a Nash homer versus an objective basketball fan. I mean triple doubles are production in a positive way by any meassure. However to you it = overrated.


----------



## BlakeJesus (Feb 1, 2006)

Air Fly said:


> Unbelievable.
> 
> Who are those QUITE A FEW GUYS? Please, lets not downplay Nash's achievements with Phoenix.
> 
> You believe so, I believe otherwise and I watch the game as well. My point is you keep posting your opinion without anything that supports it.


Let me put it like this, I'm not in any way shape or form trying to say that Nash ISN'T a great player. However I do believe 100% that he wouldn't have won those 2 MVP awards if he played in a different system. Even if they won just as many games, his number wouldn't be as inflated as they are.

I can't honestly see how you can sit there and say the system he plays in has no affect on anything.


----------



## carlos710 (Jun 13, 2002)

Like others said, right now Nash, carrer wise Kidd, by far.


----------



## Air Fly (Apr 19, 2005)

Gio305 said:


> Kidd-took team to the Finals twice.
> 
> Nash- never.
> 
> ...


In the weak East and got swept in the finales by the Lakers. So what?

Most complete player? His offense stinks. Nash is the most complete PG though.


----------



## Air Fly (Apr 19, 2005)

23AJ said:


> *Nash isn't beter at creating his own offense.* Nash is just a better jump shooter. Simple as that. Rebounding if you ask any coach is one of the biggest keys to winning. Yet you call it overrated? And those damned triple doubles as you call it...Hmmm you're coming across as more of a Nash homer versus an objective basketball fan. I mean triple doubles are production in a positive way by any meassure. However to you it = overrated.


You are wrong. Watch Phoenix more often. Heck, did you even watch last night game when Nash lit it up in the second half when his team couldn't find a bucket?

It's overrated when comparing it to another PG who has good enough of a frontcourt that can grab rebounds with authority.


----------



## Aurelino (Jul 25, 2003)

Air Fly said:


> You do that. Nash remain the better passer. Try to argue otherwise instead of "I wouldn't bother" excuse.
> 
> Jamaal is a beter passer than James. Your last sentence doesn't even make sense.


Well, if you believe that apg is the absolute measure of passing ability, wouldn't you agree that Kidd has become a better passer in the postseason since he's averaging a whopping 3 extra assists per game and he's as good a passer as Nash in the playoffs? 

Arguing otherwise doesn't seem useful but here you go.

1) Phoenix as a team had *6 FG attempts per game more than the Nets* this past season. 

2) Usg-R (Usage Rate) is a statistic that measures the number of possessions a player user per 40 minutes. Nash's Usg-R was 23.8 and Kidd's was 20.1. The reason? The differences in the offensive systems of the two teams. While Nash has the highest usg-r on his team, Kidd has a teammate (VC) who has a usg-r of 28.3.


So it is no surprise that Nash averages more assists than Kidd.


----------



## 77AJ (Feb 16, 2005)

Air Fly said:


> In the weak East and got swept in the finales by the Lakers. So what?
> 
> Most complete player? His offense stinks. Nash is the most complete PG though.


Be honest though Air Fly, as the playoffs are showing us right now. Kidds offense is miles better then Nashs defense. I'm not against you, but I'm definitely pro Kidd in this debate, because my opinion is formed, shaped, and reasoned by all the years I've been watching Kidd, and Nash play basketball. I've been watching Nash since his surfer looking days at Santa Clara, and Kidd since High School. Who else remembers the show Kidd put on in the All Mcdonalds High School game ? Kidd was already great from day one, and to me is by far the best PG in the game still.


----------



## 77AJ (Feb 16, 2005)

Air Fly said:


> You are wrong. Watch Phoenix more often. Heck, did you even watch last night game when Nash lit it up in the second half when his team couldn't find a bucket?
> 
> It's overrated when comparing it to another PG who has good enough of a frontcourt that can grab rebounds with authority.


Let me put it this way for you. If Nash wasn't a great jump shooter (ala Kidd to a degree) Nash finding seams in the defense for offense, would just be the same thing Kidd does. Its the fact that Nash is in general a graet shooter. However in the playoffs Kidd has been shooting the ball great. Where as with Nash is getting his backside carried by Marion on defense. And defense is what will put a team in championship mode. This Suns team wont get there with Nash at the helm. Because Nash cant stay in front of PG's and can't guard slower bigs, becasue they just post him up, and abuse him all game.


----------



## BlakeJesus (Feb 1, 2006)

Air Fly said:


> In the weak East and got swept in the finales by the Lakers. So what?
> 
> Most complete player? His offense stinks. Nash is the most complete PG though.


Wrong, defense IS part of the PG position. He is SEVERELY lacking in that department.


----------



## IbizaXL (Sep 21, 2005)

Air Fly said:


> In the weak East and got swept in the finales by the Lakers. So what?
> 
> Most complete player? His offense stinks. Nash is the most complete PG though.


when i said "so what?" i meant like, 'so what' if Nash won 2 MVPs. im sure any player would trade those mvp awards to have a chance to play in the Finals and possibly win it all. 

and how could you possibly say a player the scores along with many assists is a more complete than a player that can also score, have as many assists and rebounds


----------



## Aurelino (Jul 25, 2003)

Kidd's help defense on Bosh was huge for the Nets in the first round, and he's taken turns guarding LeBron (with RJ) and done a decent job. Kidd could have a poor shooting/passing night and still have a huge impact on the game.


----------



## 77AJ (Feb 16, 2005)

I must say I do respect Air Flys position regarding Nash. However to me there is just to much evidence in favor of Kidd from his whole career to this playoffs. However A-FLY we can agree to disagree. You make a strong case for Nash. Good job in the debate. I'm out now though, and go Nets!


----------



## Air Fly (Apr 19, 2005)

Jameh said:


> Let me put it like this, I'm not in any way shape or form trying to say that Nash ISN'T a great player. However I do believe 100% that he wouldn't have won those 2 MVP awards if he played in a different system. Even if they won just as many games, his number wouldn't be as inflated as they are.
> 
> I can't honestly see how you can sit there and say the system he plays in has no affect on anything.


Agreed on playing in a different system. But that doesn't take away from Nash the basketball player.

Nash has become the system in Phoenix. He rejuvanated that franchise ever since he arrived. They are this good because of him. The only thing that was holding him back from flourshing and winning an MVP was Dirk. The Mavs were so dumb to think of him as a franchise player instead of Nash. They let Nash be a spot up shooter instead of displaying his playmaking ability.

So who are you to take all of his achievements and throw it out of the window because of the "system" excuse. Kidd played with Phoenix but many of their fans would tell ya he wasn't as good as Nash. 

Where is Amereca when you need him? :biggrin:


----------



## IbizaXL (Sep 21, 2005)

Nash edges Kidd in the scoring dept by 4 points. wow.

with the circus sytem the Suns play, Nash avgs 11.6 assists. yet Kidd avgs 12.2--very close

and then theres rebounding. Kidd with 10.3, Nash? 3.5

again. how can you say Nash is a more complete player?


----------



## IbizaXL (Sep 21, 2005)

Air Fly said:


> *So who are you to take all of his achievements and throw it out of the window because of the "system" excuse. Kidd played with Phoenix *but many of their fans would tell ya he wasn't as good as Nash.


that was like 8 years ago. that PHX was alot different


----------



## BlakeJesus (Feb 1, 2006)

Air Fly said:


> Agreed on playing in a different system. But that doesn't take away from Nash the basketball player.
> 
> Nash has become the system in Phoenix. He rejuvanated that franchise ever since he arrived. They are this good because of him. The only thing that was holding him back from flourshing and winning an MVP was Dirk. The Mavs were so dumb to think of him as a franchise player instead of Nash. They let Nash be a spot up shooter instead of displaying his playmaking ability.
> 
> ...


You can't compare Nash's run with Phoenix to Kidd's run with Phoenix. Two completely different teams with only one thing in common: The team name.

From reading what you just wrote up there, you seem to be a Nash homer 110%.

You can't say things like "Nash has become the system", or any of the other HIGHLY opinionated quotes from your last post and expect me to take that as fact.

What rejuvenated that franchise was Mike D'Antoni and his system.


----------



## Air Fly (Apr 19, 2005)

Jameh said:


> Wrong, defense IS part of the PG position. He is SEVERELY lacking in that department.


Yup, but what i'm trying to say is Nash's offense and PG ability overshadows Kidd's defense especially when the latter isn't all that defensively. Last year's playoffs he got burned by anthony and this year by TJ ford and Calderon. That's the harsh truth that Kidd fans don't wanna admit.


----------



## Air Fly (Apr 19, 2005)

Gio305 said:


> Nash edges Kidd in the scoring dept by 4 points. wow.
> 
> with the circus sytem the Suns play, Nash avgs 11.6 assists. yet Kidd avgs 12.2--very close
> 
> ...


Hahahahaha! I'm just gonna point out that Kidd avereged 9.2 assists in the regualr season not 12.2.


----------



## Air Fly (Apr 19, 2005)

23AJ said:


> I must say I do respect Air Flys position regarding Nash. However to me there is just to much evidence in favor of Kidd from his whole career to this playoffs. However A-FLY we can agree to disagree. You make a strong case for Nash. Good job in the debate. I'm out now though, and go Nets!


This thread though is not talking about CAREER rather who's the better PG right now. The answer is clear, Steve Nash. And if you still take Kidd then yes we can agree to disagree.


----------



## Red Dino (Apr 22, 2007)

23AJ said:


> Be honest though Air Fly, as the playoffs are showing us right now. Kidds offense is miles better then Nashs defense. I'm not against you, but I'm definitely pro Kidd in this debate, because my opinion is formed, shaped, and reasoned by all the years I've been watching Kidd, and Nash play basketball. I've been watching Nash since his surfer looking days at Santa Clara, and Kidd since High School. Who else remembers the show Kidd put on in the All Mcdonalds High School game ? Kidd was already great from day one, and to me is by far the best PG in the game still.


Excatly. Kidd has been playing basketball all his life. He was suppose to be the best PG before he was even drated. On the other hand, Nash played soccer when he was young. He started playing basketball in high school. That too in country where hockey is no.1 sport. Heck even MLB has more canadians than NBA. Who would have thought that little canadian kid will even be a bench warmer in NBA? No college showed any interest in him beside Santa Clara (defently not one of the top schools). He worked his butt off to get to the level of Jason Kidd, while all these years Kidd still cant make shot. 

Defence and triple doubles? What about Nash's offence? Nash has the skills to take over the game as good as Wades and Kobes. Don't take my words out context. I am not comparing him to Kobe or Lebron etc, I am just saying he is as clutch as it gets. That being said, he still a first pass point guard. How good is that? Your point guard is your best offence yet he is still a first pass pg! As for as team succes goes, correct me if I am wrong but Nash's team has had better record in every year since 2000 than Kidd's team. Kidd made it the finals twice in a era where East was probably at its all time low. Those Nets of that era will get sweep by these Suns 10/10 times if they meet in finals. Heck even Mavs of that era would have beaten those Nets if they had met in finals!

Dont get me wrong, I love and have tramendeous amount respect for Jason Kidd! He is probably one of the greatest pg of all time. But I dont see why we shouldnt give Nash the credit for being as good he is just because he cant average triple double!


----------



## AIFAN3 (Sep 17, 2005)

Air Fly said:


> Agreed on playing in a different system. But that doesn't take away from Nash the basketball player.
> 
> Nash has become the system in Phoenix. He rejuvanated that franchise ever since he arrived. They are this good because of him. The only thing that was holding him back from flourshing and winning an MVP was Dirk. The Mavs were so dumb to think of him as a franchise player instead of Nash. They let Nash be a spot up shooter instead of displaying his playmaking ability.
> 
> ...


Look at the damn talent that surrounds Steve Nash and tell me if it compares to the Kidd lead Phoenix teams..


----------



## IbizaXL (Sep 21, 2005)

Air Fly said:


> Hahahahaha! I'm just gonna point out that Kidd avereged 9.2 assists in the regualr season not 12.2.


thats what i saw in NBA.com

maybe its including playoffs. anyway hes still doing slightly better in that dept


----------



## Air Fly (Apr 19, 2005)

Jameh said:


> You can't compare Nash's run with Phoenix to Kidd's run with Phoenix. Two completely different teams with only one thing in common: The team name.
> 
> From reading what you just wrote up there, you seem to be a Nash homer 110%.
> 
> ...


Not really....those are mostly facts.

1. Phoenix became contenders with the arrival of Nash.
2. With Dallas, Nash was played as a spot up shooter or to be more clear second fiddle to Dirk. Dirk would post up then kick it out to an open man. I know this because Dallas were one my favorite team back then.
3. Mike created the system but Nash perfected it. He was the right player for this system.


----------



## BlakeJesus (Feb 1, 2006)

Air Fly said:


> Yup, but what i'm trying to say is Nash's offense and PG ability overshadows Kidd's defense especially when the latter isn't all that defensively. Last year's playoffs he got burned by anthony and this year by TJ ford and Calderon. That's the harsh truth that Kidd fans don't wanna admit.


Sure you can name off times where Kidd has gotten burnt. Of course you can. I could name off times where Ben Wallace has gotten burnt, but does that make him a bad defensive player? 

And PLEASE don't force me to bring up the NUMEROUS times Nash has been literally embarrassed on the defensive end. People don't say he plays poor defense to try to exaggerate their point, they say it because it's 100% factual.


----------



## Aurelino (Jul 25, 2003)

Air Fly said:


> Yup, but what i'm trying to say is Nash's offense and PG ability overshadows Kidd's defense especially when the latter isn't all that defensively. Last year's playoffs he got burned by anthony and this year by TJ ford and Calderon. That's the harsh truth that Kidd fans don't wanna admit.


Wow. I even mentioned Kidd's help D on Bosh earlier in the thread. 
In both those series (last yr vs Pacers and this yr vs Raptors) the Nets defensive stretegy was to give the PGs open shots if they wanted to, while Kidd shadowed the big men (O'Neil and Bosh respectively) and was sitting in their lap all game. The result? Jermaine didn't get as many touches as he should have. Neither did Bosh. The Nets were able to keep both the guys under control. That's what they wanted. To a casual observer or boxscore reader, it would seem that Kidd got killed by the PGs, but in effect he was simply following the gameplan laid out by Frank, and it worked just fine.


----------



## BlakeJesus (Feb 1, 2006)

Air Fly said:


> Not really....those are mostly facts.
> 
> 1. Phoenix became contenders with the arrival of Nash.
> 2. With Dallas, Nash was played as a spot up shooter or to be more clear second fiddle to Dirk. Dirk would post up then kick it out to an open man. I know this because Dallas were one my favorite team back then.
> 3. Mike created the system but Nash perfected it. *He was the right player for this system.*


EXACTLY! He is literally the PERFECT player for that system, because 1) that system requires minimum defense, and 2) requires great shooters. It works 100% in Nash's favor, and caters perfectly to his weaknesses.

You honestly just proved my point that Nash is Nash because of his system not because he's a superior player.


----------



## IbizaXL (Sep 21, 2005)

Red Dino said:


> As for as team succes goes, correct me if I am wrong but Nash's team has had better record in every year since 2000 than Kidd's team. Kidd made it the finals twice in a era where East was probably at its all time low. Those Nets of that era will get sweep by these Suns 10/10 times if they meet in finals. Heck even Mavs of that era would have beaten those Nets if they had met in finals!


were not comparing teams, were comparing players. i could also mention alot more teams that have had better records then the Nets since 2000, and yes, better records than the Nash lead teams.

the point is, Kidd is by far a much all around player. he can also take over games, and is also a first pass pg. and why would you completely ignore the defensive aspect of the game is beyond me.


----------



## Air Fly (Apr 19, 2005)

Gio305 said:


> thats what i saw in NBA.com
> 
> maybe its including playoffs. anyway hes still doing slightly better in that dept


Yup, that's kidd numbers in the playoffs but you were wrong about Nash. Nash's playoffs assist number is 13.1.


----------



## AIFAN3 (Sep 17, 2005)

Jameh said:


> EXACTLY! He is literally the PERFECT player for that system, because 1) that system requires minimum defense, and 2) requires great shooters. It works 100% in Nash's favor, and caters perfectly to his weaknesses.
> 
> You honestly just proved my point that Nash is Nash because of his system not because he's a superior player.


:worthy:


----------



## Air Fly (Apr 19, 2005)

Jameh said:


> EXACTLY! He is literally the PERFECT player for that system, because 1) that system requires minimum defense, and 2) requires great shooters. It works 100% in Nash's favor, and caters perfectly to his weaknesses.
> 
> You honestly just proved my point that Nash is Nash because of his system not because he's a superior player.


Nash would still be Nash if Dallas exploited his great playmaking ability. Like I said, he still the great player it was a blessing that he got out of Texas now the whole world got to witness this amazing talent.


----------



## IbizaXL (Sep 21, 2005)

Air Fly said:


> Yup, that's kidd numbers in the playoffs but you were wrong about Nash. Nash's playoffs assist number is 13.1.


i have noone to blame but NBA.com. false information!

but like i said before, the assists columns is very close


----------



## BlakeJesus (Feb 1, 2006)

Air Fly said:


> Nash would still be Nash if Dallas exploited his great playmaking ability. Like I said, he still the great player it was a blessing that he got out of Texas now the whole world got to witness this amazing talent.


Ok. There's nothing really else to say because obviously you aren't going to see any body's point but your own. You are oblivious to Nash's weaknesses and refuse to admit the obvious. I'm done.


----------



## Air Fly (Apr 19, 2005)

Aurelino said:


> Wow. I even mentioned Kidd's help D on Bosh earlier in the thread.
> In both those series (last yr vs Pacers and this yr vs Raptors) the Nets defensive stretegy was to give the PGs open shots if they wanted to, while Kidd shadowed the big men (O'Neil and Bosh respectively) and was sitting in their lap all game. The result? Jermaine didn't get as many touches as he should have. Neither did Bosh. The Nets were able to keep both the guys under control. That's what they wanted. To a casual observer or boxscore reader, it would seem that Kidd got killed by the PGs, but in effect he was simply following the gameplan laid out by Frank, and it worked just fine.


Enough with the excuses Kidd fans.

Kidd got burned by those PG's plain and simple. he wasn't fast enough to stay in front of TJ Ford. You talk about NETS defensive strategy like you are their coach or something. And lets be honest here, Collins of all people was the reason for Bosh's and Jermaine Oneal ineffectiveness.


----------



## Air Fly (Apr 19, 2005)

Jameh said:


> Ok. There's nothing really else to say because obviously you aren't going to see any body's point but your own. You are oblivious to Nash's weaknesses and refuse to admit the obvious. I'm done.


If it helps you sleep at night knowing that Nash has won two mvps the past 3 season and was voted first in All NBA Team while his team has done great in the playoffs so far, but you still take Kidd over him then there ain't much to debate here and it's fine by me.

Good night. Agree to disagree.


----------



## BlakeJesus (Feb 1, 2006)

Air Fly said:


> Enough with the excuses Kidd fans.
> 
> Kidd got burned by those PG's plain and simple. he wasn't fast enough to stay in front of TJ Ford. You talk about NETS defensive strategy like you are their coach or something. And lets be honest here, Collins of all people was the reason for Bosh's and Jermaine Oneal ineffectiveness.


He did say "shadow" not "solo" the big guys. And you don't need to be the coach to see a strategy, you just have to have an ounce of basketball knowledge and a pair of eyes.

I love how your counterargument to Nash's pathetic defense is a couple instances where Kidd got beat. 

I'm pretty sure anybody on this board could remember several of times Nash got dominated by not only a PG, but a below average PG.


----------



## BlakeJesus (Feb 1, 2006)

Air Fly said:


> If it helps you sleep at night knowing that Nash has won two mvps the past 3 season and was voted first in All NBA Team while his team has done great in the playoffs so far, but you still take Kidd over him then there ain't much to debate here and it's fine by me.
> 
> Good night. Agree to disagree.


I don't think anybody is debating that Suns > Nets. However that's not the topic here. 

Nash has a much better surrounding cast in the starting lineup, including two all stars and an all defensive player who can pop threes. Not to mention a deep bench.

Not trying to say Kidd has a *miserable* supporting cast, but you cannot argue that the Nets have more talent on their roster than the Suns. You can't. However, that's completely off topic.


----------



## Red Dino (Apr 22, 2007)

Gio305 said:


> and why would you completely ignore the defensive aspect of the game is beyond me.


and why would every single Kidd fan in this topic ignore Nash's ability on offence is beyond me as well...


----------



## BlakeJesus (Feb 1, 2006)

Red Dino said:


> and why would every single Kidd fan in this topic ignore Nash's ability on offence is beyond me as well...


NOT ONE PERSON HAS SAID NASH CAN'T HIT A SHOT. Everybody pro-Kidd has admitted Nash's superior offensive skills. EVERY SINGLE ONE.

However, PG's aren't the first offensive option. They FIND the first option, and Kidd is better at that.


----------



## IbizaXL (Sep 21, 2005)

Red Dino said:


> and why would every single Kidd fan in this topic ignore Nash's ability on offence is beyond me as well...


im not going to speak for everybody here, but me personally, i never ignored Nashs ability on offense. hes an excellent shooter, better FG%. but Kidd isnt too far behind.


----------



## Aurelino (Jul 25, 2003)

Air Fly said:


> Enough with the excuses Kidd fans.
> 
> Kidd got burned by those PG's plain and simple. he wasn't fast enough to stay in front of TJ Ford. You talk about NETS defensive strategy like you are their coach or something. And lets be honest here, Collins of all people was the reason for Bosh's and Jermaine Oneal ineffectiveness.


Nobody is fast enough to stay in front of TJ Ford. Besides, you are blinded by your own beliefs and you can't see the truth. Read Bosh, Mitchell and everyone else's comments and you will know that daring the PGs to shoot was deliberate. It was the most talked-about move of that series. You couldn't have missed it if you were paying attention.
Besides, 67% of Ford's FG attempts in the series were jumpshots, so it wasn't like he was beating Kidd off the dribble for every single FG that he made. 

I agree that Collins did a great job on D but Kidd's presence made it very difficult for Bosh to get high % shots. I have given you all the stats and evidence to support my argument, while all you have is your opinion. I don't want to argue with you anymore since it is obvious that you are going to call everything as "excuses". The funny thing is that I like Nash and think that he's a great PG. It is your manner of arguing that I have a problem with. Notice how other people in the thread are acknowledging the points made by those whose views they might not agree with.


----------



## BlakeJesus (Feb 1, 2006)

Gio305 said:


> im not going to speak for everybody here, but me personally, i never ignored Nashs ability on offense. hes an excellent shooter, better FG%. but Kidd isnt too far behind.


Yes Kidd IS far behind. That's not to say Kidd is a poor offensive player in the least bit, that's simply saying Nash is an above average offensive player.

In my opinion there's only one form of offensive scoring Kidd has the advantage on, and that's post play. But honestly, post play isn't a huge part of the PG's role. Hence, it's not THAT big of a deal IMO.


----------



## IbizaXL (Sep 21, 2005)

Jameh said:


> Yes Kidd IS far behind. That's not to say Kidd is a poor offensive player in the least bit, that's simply saying Nash is an above average offensive player.
> 
> In my opinion there's only one form of offensive scoring Kidd has the advantage on, and that's post play. But honestly, post play isn't a huge part of the PG's role. Hence, it's not THAT big of a deal IMO.


i was going by stats. career wise, both players are avg 14 points. (got it from NBA.com) this season, including playoffs, Nash edges out Kidd by 4 points. 

Nash is definetly better at offense, but Kidd is a capable scorer as well, along with his defense and rebounding (heck, he rebounds better then most bigs in the L). with that i find Kidd more valuable as a player


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

KidCanada said:


> I get the feeling people are judging this question based on their careers as a whole, but that isn't what the thread starter is asking.



Reading is fundamental



futuristxen said:


> Which is the better for the course of their career?


----------



## Real (Aug 3, 2005)

I can't believe this thread. Alot of people are actually saying Kidd. This time last year it would be Nash and not even close. 

Kidd's regular season and playoff has really turned things around has it not?

I have a question. I am curious, how would the Suns be with Jason Kidd as their point gaurd and not Steve Nash? And how would Nash be as the Nets' point gaurd and not Kidd?


----------



## BlakeJesus (Feb 1, 2006)

Real said:


> I can't believe this thread. Alot of people are actually saying Kidd. This time last year it would be Nash and not even close.
> 
> Kidd's regular season and playoff has really turned things around has it not?
> 
> I have a question. I am curious, how would the Suns be with Jason Kidd as their point gaurd and not Steve Nash? And how would Nash be as the Nets' point gaurd and not Kidd?


Suns system would be tweaked a bit, and wouldn't really rely on Nash's (in this case Kidd, just saying the PG) shot as often. However, it would let Kidd post up a bit more. Kidd's ppg would be the same, assists would be higher, rebounds down.

Nash's stats would pretty much be the same, except he'd be widely recognized as a horrible defender (more so than he is now), his ppg IMO would stay steady, his assists would drop a BIT, he wouldn't have won either 2 of his mvp's. 

Team wise, I think the Suns would lose a couple more games a season, but be better in the playoffs. And the Nets would more than likely lose a couple more games than they did this season. 7-8 seed team.


----------



## sonicFLAME6 (Dec 19, 2006)

Kidd. This was too easy.


----------



## sonicFLAME6 (Dec 19, 2006)

Way too too easy


----------



## MarionBarberThe4th (Jul 7, 2005)

Nash is a much more consistent shooter. 

But really, who does Kidd have to throw the ball to who just finishes over the top of people?(Amare)

And besdies Boki sometimes, doesnt have a great 3 point shooter. Half of Nash assists he just throws it up and Amare goes and gets it


----------



## MarionBarberThe4th (Jul 7, 2005)

I feel like people get an inflated opinion of Nash bc every run of the mill pass he makes most announcers go nuts and wont stop talking about for 3 minutes.


"look at that, an underhanded pass, look at little stevie" -Bill Walton


Thats another thing. Just bc hes disturbing looking I think people want to root for him


----------



## ChristopherJ (Aug 10, 2004)

cpawfan said:


> Reading is fundamental


I admit I didn't read that part, but he/she started off the thread by posing the question, "Who is the better point guard?", so in reality we are both right.

I don't know why you have to have such a snobbish tone. It's really annoying..


----------



## ChristopherJ (Aug 10, 2004)

The worst part of this thread is everyones main/only argument for Kidd is that he plays defense and Nash doesn't.

Unfortunately in reality Nash does play defense, and is relatively decent, while Kidd is a very good defender, but not as near as good as people make him out to be.

Basically: Nash's offense is far superior to Kidd's offense. And even though Kidd is a better defender, the difference is marginal compared to their offensive skills.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

KidCanada said:


> The worst part of this thread is everyones main/only argument for Kidd is that he plays defense and Nash doesn't.
> 
> Unfortunately in reality Nash does play defense, and is relatively decent, while Kidd is a very good defender, but not as near as good as people make him out to be.
> 
> Basically: Nash's offense is far superior to Kidd's offense. And even though Kidd is a better defender, the difference is marginal compared to their offensive skills.


You do know getting rebounds is also an aspect of defense? Steve Nash is in no way, shape or form a decent defender. His defense is abysmal. Kidd is a decent 3pt shooter, heck scouting reports will tell you that he is dangerous from the 3pt line. Nash might be the more efficient shooter, but his offense isnt worlds better than Kidd. Its not like Nash can score whenever he wants to.


----------



## BlakeJesus (Feb 1, 2006)

KidCanada said:


> The worst part of this thread is everyones main/only argument for Kidd is that he plays defense and Nash doesn't.
> 
> Unfortunately in reality Nash does play defense, and is relatively decent, while Kidd is a very good defender, but not as near as good as people make him out to be.
> 
> Basically: Nash's offense is far superior to Kidd's offense. And even though Kidd is a better defender, the difference is marginal compared to their offensive skills.


Nash is a miserable defender, and I disagree 110% with you saying that he's even a relatively decent defender.


----------



## hobojoe (Jun 20, 2003)

23AJ said:


> Nash isn't beter at creating his own offense. Nash is just a better jump shooter. Simple as that. Rebounding if you ask any coach is one of the biggest keys to winning. Yet you call it overrated? And those damned triple doubles as you call it...Hmmm you're coming across as more of a Nash homer versus an objective basketball fan. I mean triple doubles are production in a positive way by any meassure. However to you it = overrated.


This really is a poor thread, it's almost not even worth responding. But this post is just flat out horrific, I have to. Nash is better at creating his own offense than Kidd, it's not even close. If you can't see that, it's not worth the time to explain. No **** rebounding is important, but you're talking about rebounding from the point guard position. Come on, let's be serious. And yes, triple doubles are great, big deal. They're for stat geeks. And please try to make sense when you post, how the hell am I a Steve Nash homer? I don't have any interest in Steve Nash or the Suns outside of those as a fan of the NBA. A Steve Nash homer, what's next? I'm a Manu Ginobili homer? :laugh:


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

hobojoe said:


> This really is a poor thread, it's almost not even worth responding. But this post is just flat out horrific, I have to. Nash is better at creating his own offense than Kidd, it's not even close. If you can't see that, it's not worth the time to explain. No **** rebounding is important, but you're talking about rebounding from the point guard position. Come on, let's be serious. And yes, triple doubles are great, big deal. They're for stat geeks. And please try to make sense when you post, how the hell am I a Steve Nash homer? I don't have any interest in Steve Nash or the Suns outside of those as a fan of the NBA. A Steve Nash homer, what's next? I'm a Manu Ginobili homer? :laugh:


In regards to the Nets, those triple doubles actually mean SOMETHING. Theres a stat on the Nets board where the Nets are 65-22 whenever Kidd averages a triple double. Watch a game or something, when the man is doing everything out on the court, it usually bodes well for the team


----------



## mjm1 (Aug 22, 2005)

hobojoe said:


> This really is a poor thread, it's almost not even worth responding. But this post is just flat out horrific, I have to. Nash is better at creating his own offense than Kidd, it's not even close. If you can't see that, it's not worth the time to explain. No **** rebounding is important, but you're talking about rebounding from the point guard position. Come on, let's be serious. And yes, triple doubles are great, big deal. They're for stat geeks. And please try to make sense when you post, how the hell am I a Steve Nash homer? I don't have any interest in Steve Nash or the Suns outside of those as a fan of the NBA. A Steve Nash homer, what's next? I'm a Manu Ginobili homer? :laugh:


Triple doubles....big deal? The nets are 65-22 all-time when Jason Kidd records one. I'd say calling them overrated is an egregious mistake. Furthermore, rebounding from the point isnt a problem or less important than from the center position. If you watch any Net game, you will understand that their system is setup on the premise that the bigs box out to allow the guards to grab the rebounds and initiate the fastbreak.


----------



## BlakeJesus (Feb 1, 2006)

hobojoe said:


> This really is a poor thread, it's almost not even worth responding. But this post is just flat out horrific, I have to. Nash is better at creating his own offense than Kidd, it's not even close. If you can't see that, it's not worth the time to explain. No **** rebounding is important, but you're talking about rebounding from the point guard position. Come on, let's be serious. And yes, triple doubles are great, big deal. They're for stat geeks. And please try to make sense when you post, how the hell am I a Steve Nash homer? I don't have any interest in Steve Nash or the Suns outside of those as a fan of the NBA. A Steve Nash homer, what's next? I'm a Manu Ginobili homer? :laugh:


I'll give you a LITTLE slack, and go with the fact that rebounding from the PG position isn't priority however it's not something to be blown off. A rebound is still a rebound, weather it's the C pulling it down or the PG.

And I honestly don't get how you guys continue to put down triple doubles and blow them off as if they were insignificant. Why? Because they don't bode well for your argument? Getting a triple double means you are (for that game at least) playing pretty much an all around good game. You honestly can't have a triple double and not affect your team in a positive way. It's impossible.


----------



## Gilgamesh (Dec 23, 2005)

I'm getting real sick of all the Nash is the product of a system BS.

You know what then? Magic was the product of the Showtime system. Do you think Magic would have as many dimes if he did not have studs like Kareem, Worthy, Scott, and etc. to pass to and a system which preached the league's most exciting fast break? Pfffft Magic's stats must be inflated *rolls eyes*. 

Nash was already a great passer before he rejoined the Suns. Did y'all forget he averaged close to 9 APG with a turnover to assist ratio of 3.29 in his last year as a Mav? If you look at his per 40 that year he woulda had 10.5 APG. Kidd's highest per 40 is 10.6.

Nash is the best PG in the league right now. Kidd is 2nd. Career Kidd > Nash. 

Kidd's D is solid but some of you act like he is Payton. Did y'all forget that Nash pumped 42 points on him earlier this season?


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

How many finals have the best point guard in the league been to?


----------



## Gilgamesh (Dec 23, 2005)

HB said:


> How many finals have the best point guard in the league been to?


How many finals has Kobe gone to minus Shaq?

How many finals has Lebron gone to? So he must not be a top 5 player.

How many finals has MJ gone to minus Pippen? It must mean he is nothing without Pippen.

Teams win championships. Not individuals. Nobody can blame Nash for the Suns' shortcomings these past two postseasons. It's not like he didn't elevated his game. He didn't pull no Dirk.


----------



## fruitcake (Mar 20, 2005)

Gilgamesh said:


> Kidd's D is solid but some of you act like he is Payton. *Did y'all forget that Nash pumped 42 points on him earlier this season?*


Kidd defended every position that game. he was basically the CENTER in the 2nd overtime.

the nets lineup was

Kidd, House, Williams, Wright, Jefferson...

Diaw scored two straight times on kidd on post-ups to seal the game in the 2nd overtime.

The suns lineup was like Nash, Marion, Diaw, Jones, Barbosa..

everybody else fouled out that game.


----------



## Real (Aug 3, 2005)

KidCanada said:


> The worst part of this thread is everyones main/only argument for Kidd is that he plays defense and Nash doesn't.
> 
> Unfortunately in reality Nash does play defense, and is relatively decent, while Kidd is a very good defender, but not as near as good as people make him out to be.
> 
> Basically: Nash's offense is far superior to Kidd's offense. And even though Kidd is a better defender, the difference is marginal compared to their offensive skills.


I'm sorry, but that's just plain ridiclious. Kidd is a nine time All-NBA defensive team selection. Nash has never been selected all-NBA defense. 

There is a very large gap between the two defensively, much larger than the supposed "offensive gap" between the two.

And I don't want to hear the crap that Kidd got voted on their 9 times because of "reputation." The coaches that go against the people voted on these teams on a nightly basis, vote for these players, not media pundits.


----------



## Aurelino (Jul 25, 2003)

HB said:


> In regards to the Nets, those triple doubles actually mean SOMETHING. Theres a stat on the Nets board where the Nets are 65-22 whenever Kidd averages a triple double. Watch a game or something, when the man is doing everything out on the court, it usually bodes well for the team


But the triple double doesn't mean anything. Who cares if Kidd's teams have won 75% of the games in which he has had a triple-double. You must be a stat geek.


----------



## Gilgamesh (Dec 23, 2005)

fruitcake said:


> Kidd defended every position that game. he was basically the CENTER in the 2nd overtime.
> 
> the nets lineup was
> 
> ...


What's your point? Did Kidd not guard Nash? Did Nash not score on Kidd?

Kidd is a solid defender but he is no Payton.


----------



## Real (Aug 3, 2005)

Gilgamesh said:


> Kidd's D is solid but some of you act like he is Payton. Did y'all forget that Nash pumped 42 points on him earlier this season?


No, I didn't forget. In fact I was there.

You also forget to mention that the score was 161-157, went into triple-overtime, and Kidd "punped" 38 points, 14 rebounds, and 14 assists on Nash.

Matter fact, here's the boxscore, http://www.nba.com/games/20061207/PHXNJN/boxscore.html 

So was Nash not gaurding Kidd? Was Nash gaurding Vince Carter who had 31? What's the deal? :lol:


----------



## Aurelino (Jul 25, 2003)

Gilgamesh said:


> What's your point? Did Kidd not guard Nash? Did Nash not score on Kidd?
> 
> Kidd is a solid defender but he is no Payton.


His point is that Nash did not score all those 42 points on Kidd. And anyway, I can find games in which Bowen has been lit up too, so one example is not saying much. Moreover, it wasn't a regular 48-minute game.


----------



## fruitcake (Mar 20, 2005)

Gilgamesh said:


> What's your point? Did Kidd not guard Nash? Did Nash not score on Kidd?
> 
> Kidd is a solid defender but he is no Payton.


jeez i wasn't making a point.

i dont care who is better, i just wanted to talk about one of the greatest games i've ever seen and one of the greatest point guard duels ever.

and as i said the two are basically the same in terms of impact on their team. switch them around and they'll prolly make their respective teams even better.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Gilgamesh said:


> How many finals has Kobe gone to minus Shaq?
> 
> How many finals has Lebron gone to? So he must not be a top 5 player.
> 
> ...


Nice to see you completely avoided the question. 

Lets throw more questions out. How many MVP's do Kobe and Bron have?

Nash was crowned MVP based on his team's success and voters thinking he is the best player in the league. Heck you say he is the best point in the league right now. So you are telling me a 2 time MVP cannot get his team past the second round. Ridiculous. As far as I am concerned, he is in exactly the same boat as Dirk, he cant get his team past the hump.


----------



## ChristopherJ (Aug 10, 2004)

Jameh said:


> Nash is a miserable defender, and I disagree 110% with you saying that he's even a relatively decent defender.


He isn't a miserable defender. Man-to-man he isn't very good because he isn't laterally quick, but he's excellent at angling his check and anticipating where his check is going to go. Along with that he is also a great help defender.

There's a reason he draws so many charges. Nash was 6th in the league in offensive charges drawn this year. A miserable defender or an abysmal defender wouldn't have the defensive capabilties of doing what he does.


----------



## ChristopherJ (Aug 10, 2004)

HB said:


> Nice to see you completely avoided the question.
> 
> Lets throw more questions out. How many MVP's do Kobe and Bron have?
> 
> Nash was crowned MVP based on his team's success and voters thinking he is the best player in the league. Heck you say he is the best point in the league right now. *So you are telling me a 2 time MVP cannot get his team past the second round. *Ridiculous. As far as I am concerned, he is in exactly the same boat as Dirk, he cant get his team past the hump.


If you want any credibility in this thread then ATLEAST get the simplest of facts straight. Nash has led his team past the 2nd round to the WCF the last two years. 

That isn't the proverbial hump, but it's pretty damn impressive considering the injuries the Suns have faced the last two postseasons.


----------



## Gilgamesh (Dec 23, 2005)

HB said:


> Nice to see you completely avoided the question.
> 
> Lets throw more questions out. How many MVP's do Kobe and Bron have?
> 
> Nash was crowned MVP based on his team's success and voters thinking he is the best player in the league. Heck you say he is the best point in the league right now. So you are telling me a 2 time MVP cannot get his team past the second round. Ridiculous. As far as I am concerned, he is in exactly the same boat as Dirk, he cant get his team past the hump.


How did I avoid the question? I was merely showing how dumb your argument was.

MVP is a regular season award. Voters vote based on regular season success yes? 

Nash has already been past the 2nd round in his career. He is no TMac. If the Suns lose against the Spurs it is not like losing against the Warriors. So what does that say about Dirk? Are you gonna trash Dirk as well?

How about this? Let's trash David Robinson too cause before Duncan what did he accomplish in the playoffs? What about MJ's MVP in 88? 

Answer me this bro. Did Nash not elevate his game in the playoffs? So how can you blame him for the Suns' shortcomings?


----------



## Gilgamesh (Dec 23, 2005)

Aurelino said:


> His point is that Nash did not score all those 42 points on Kidd. And anyway, I can find games in which Bowen has been lit up too, so one example is not saying much. Moreover, it wasn't a regular 48-minute game.


Nash might not have scored all the 42 points on Kidd but I was responding to people who act like Kidd has Payton level defense.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Gilgamesh said:


> How did I avoid the question? I was merely showing how dumb your argument was.
> 
> MVP is a regular season award. Voters vote based on regular season success yes?
> 
> ...


You know why I brought it up, because that was the same dumb arguement Nash and some Suns fans used against Dirk when the Warriors beat them. It was how could a 67 win team fall to a lowly 41 win team. A lot of them questioned why he should win MVP and still do to this day. Well I am asking what exactly has Nash done to justify his MVP. He hasn't made the finals, hasnt won a championship, yet he is regarded the best player in the league. 

I dont know about elevating his game, do the Suns play any differently in the regular season than they do in the playoffs? After all the team is built around Nash. BTW can you honestly say Nash has stepped his game up this playoffs


----------



## ChristopherJ (Aug 10, 2004)

Real said:


> I'm sorry, but that's just plain ridiclious. Kidd is a nine time All-NBA defensive team selection. Nash has never been selected all-NBA defense.
> 
> There is a very large gap between the two defensively, much larger than the supposed "offensive gap" between the two.
> 
> And I don't want to hear the crap that Kidd got voted on their 9 times because of "reputation." The coaches that go against the people voted on these teams on a nightly basis, vote for these players, not media pundits.


OKAY well I think the offensive gap is greater than the defensive gap.

Not to mention Nash is involved in 90% of the Suns offensive, but perhaps only 20% of their defense.

So this whole defense is half the game is complete rubbish when talking about the value of Nash.

Take a look at every single game of the Suns this postseason. Nash's defense has been just fine, and his so called "poor" defense hasn't impacted the Suns in the slightest. 

Just because defense is half the game, doesn't mean it's half the game of each individual player. That should be common sense, but seems to go over most people's heads including yourself.


----------



## ChristopherJ (Aug 10, 2004)

HB said:


> BTW can you honestly say Nash has stepped his game up this playoffs


He has in the past two years, and is still stepping up big time when the team needs him this year.

So yes, he has.


----------



## Gilgamesh (Dec 23, 2005)

Real said:


> No, I didn't forget. In fact I was there.
> 
> You also forget to mention that the score was 161-157, went into triple-overtime, and Kidd "punped" 38 points, 14 rebounds, and 14 assists on Nash.
> 
> ...


Wow you were there congrats? Not like I didn't watch it on TV. Fact I burned it on DVD.

I never said Nash has superior defense I was merely pointing out that Kidd's defense is not god like.


----------



## ChristopherJ (Aug 10, 2004)

I think what it comes down to is an East coast bias.

All these Kidd fanatics are all in bed by the time the Suns games are played. What are the chances that they even get the chance to watch Nash play... They check the box score and think that's good enough to form an opinion. They hear Nash is a bad defender so they hop on to that bandwagon without actually analyzing for themselves.

Rather unfortunate, but obviously true based on a lot of the posts in this thread.


----------



## Gilgamesh (Dec 23, 2005)

fruitcake said:


> jeez i wasn't making a point.
> 
> i dont care who is better, i just wanted to talk about one of the greatest games i've ever seen and one of the greatest point guard duels ever.
> 
> and as i said the two are basically the same in terms of impact on their team. switch them around and they'll prolly make their respective teams even better.


Fair enough. That was a great game and a terrific duel. Both players put forth a terrific effort.

I think Kidd is one hell of a PG but Nash is the best PG in the NBA right now. This board is amusing. One great game and suddenly that player gets elevated. One bad game and the player gets demoted. It's like ADD fandom. 

But Kidd is clearly greater career wise. 2 MVPs or not.


----------



## Real (Aug 3, 2005)

Gilgamesh said:


> Wow you were there congrats? Not like I didn't watch it on TV. Fact I burned it on DVD.
> 
> I never said Nash has superior defense I was merely pointing out that Kidd's defense is not god like.


I'm just pointing out that Nash dropping 42 points is not a good example, because of the fact that that game was not a defensive chess match. I apologize for slight hostility.


----------



## Real (Aug 3, 2005)

KidCanada said:


> I think what it comes down to is an East coast bias.
> 
> All these Kidd fanatics are all in bed by the time the Suns games are played. What are the chances that they even get the chance to watch Nash play... They check the box score and think that's good enough to form an opinion. They hear Nash is a bad defender so they hop on to that bandwagon without actually analyzing for themselves.
> 
> Rather unfortunate, but obviously true based on a lot of the posts in this thread.


Oh please...


----------



## Gilgamesh (Dec 23, 2005)

KidCanada said:


> I think what it comes down to is an East coast bias.
> 
> All these Kidd fanatics are all in bed by the time the Suns games are played. What are the chances that they even get the chance to watch Nash play... They check the box score and think that's good enough to form an opinion. They hear Nash is a bad defender so they hop on to that bandwagon without actually analyzing for themselves.
> 
> Rather unfortunate, but obviously true based on a lot of the posts in this thread.


I don't think it is East Coast bias. I think it is just bias against Nash because of his 2 MVPs. I don't even care about Nash's MVPs cause I though Shaq shoulda won it in 05 and Lebron last year. What I'm trying to get at is
even minus his 2 MVPs Nash has been the best PG the last 3 years.


----------



## Gilgamesh (Dec 23, 2005)

Real said:


> I'm just pointing out that Nash dropping 42 points is not a good example, because of the fact that that game was not a defensive chess match. I apologize for slight hostility.


NP bro I was a bit hostile too. Truth is it has become a pet peeve of mine to see people giving the credit of all of Nash's success to the "system". I really hate that argument. I won't argue that Nash and D'Antoni fit together well and the system maximizes Nash's abilities. Just like under Phil's system, MJ turned into a winner or under the Showtime system which maximized Magic's passing ability and creativity.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

KidCanada said:


> I think what it comes down to is an East coast bias.
> 
> All these Kidd fanatics are all in bed by the time the Suns games are played. What are the chances that they even get the chance to watch Nash play... They check the box score and think that's good enough to form an opinion. They hear Nash is a bad defender so they hop on to that bandwagon without actually analyzing for themselves.
> 
> Rather unfortunate, but obviously true based on a lot of the posts in this thread.


Interesting, what time zone is Vancouver again?


----------



## Aurelino (Jul 25, 2003)

KidCanada said:


> I think what it comes down to is an East coast bias.
> 
> All these Kidd fanatics are all in bed by the time the Suns games are played. What are the chances that they even get the chance to watch Nash play... They check the box score and think that's good enough to form an opinion. They hear Nash is a bad defender so they hop on to that bandwagon without actually analyzing for themselves.
> 
> Rather unfortunate, but obviously true based on a lot of the posts in this thread.


LOL. On the contrary, non-Phoenix fans get to watch more Phoenix games than non-Nets fans get to watch Nets games, since the Suns are always on national tv.


----------



## NeoSamurai (Jan 16, 2003)

Kidd

How can you be the best player in the league when you only play half the game?...

To be considered amongst the best, you need to play defense and although Nash has improved slightly over the past couple of years, he is far from being at least a good defensive player...

and to those who point at Nash's MVP awards, dont base a player's career on regular season achievements handed out by sports writers...the true measure of a player's success is what you do in the post-season, making it to the finals, and winning championships...Kidd took the Nets to back to back finals appearances, Nash hasnt...


----------



## Gilgamesh (Dec 23, 2005)

HB said:


> *You know why I brought it up, because that was the same dumb arguement Nash and some Suns fans used against Dirk when the Warriors beat them. It was how could a 67 win team fall to a lowly 41 win team. A lot of them questioned why he should win MVP and still do to this day. Well I am asking what exactly has Nash done to justify his MVP. He hasn't made the finals, hasnt won a championship, yet he is regarded the best player in the league.
> *
> I dont know about elevating his game, do the Suns play any differently in the regular season than they do in the playoffs? After all the team is built around Nash. BTW can you honestly say Nash has stepped his game up this playoffs


Hm I am not one of those peeps. Dirk deserves the MVP. MVP is a regular season award. I'm not gonna hate on Dirk for his regular season efforts. Plus I always said Duncan was the best player in the game anyways.

Are you kidding me? Nash has stepped up his game in this playoffs the last 3 years. In 05' he averaged 24 and 11 including a 48 point effort against the Mavs. Last year he went 20 and 10. The Suns lost against Mavs who were a better team and minus Amare. There is no shame in that. 

Nash is also playing great this year. The guy is putting up 18 and 13 and playing only 36 mpg. If he didn't have to sit out because of his nose who knows how many more points he would have scored. I think he had what 31 when that collision happened. Even with his poor first half start last game the guy is putting up 22 and 12 against the Spurs. Parker is 20 and 5. Even if the Suns lose against the Spurs is there really shame in that? Didn't Hollinger have the Spurs ranked #1 with his "formula"? The guy looks like a genius now. Is it Nash's fault Amare was in foul trouble last game? If he wasn't who knows what woulda happened. The Spurs are no joke and they have Duncan aka the best player in the game.


----------



## NeoSamurai (Jan 16, 2003)

KidCanada said:


> I think what it comes down to is an East coast bias.
> 
> All these Kidd fanatics are all in bed by the time the Suns games are played. What are the chances that they even get the chance to watch Nash play... They check the box score and think that's good enough to form an opinion. They hear Nash is a bad defender so they hop on to that bandwagon without actually analyzing for themselves.
> 
> Rather unfortunate, but obviously true based on a lot of the posts in this thread.


his help defense is average at best since he often times tries to step in for the charge and flop...and as MVP of the league, he seems to be getting more of those calls going for him...and as much as a hate floppers, it is a part of today's NBA defense...

But as a one-on-one defender he is absoloutely poor at keeping his man in front of him...


----------



## ChristopherJ (Aug 10, 2004)

HB said:


> Interesting, what time zone is Vancouver again?


Pacific, meaning all Nets game are on at 4PM on weekdays.

What time does a Suns game start in NJ? 9.. maybe 10 o'clock. I'm sure you guys watch plenty of Nash's "abysmal" defense..


----------



## Air Fly (Apr 19, 2005)

Kidd has been a terrible defender this season, I don't wanna hear about his so called great defense.

It was non-existent during the regular season and in the playoffs. Career-wise, i'll still go with Nash 2 MVPS and a championship in the making. Kidd at his best never dominated the PG position the way Nash is doing.


----------



## Gilgamesh (Dec 23, 2005)

NeoSamurai said:


> How can you be the best player in the league when you only play half the game?...


In other words Barkley's MVP and status as one of the best in the game was farce then? What about Magic's rep? 

What I'm tryin to say is if we are gonna evaluate players 50/50 then we got some major re-evaluation to do with many of the all-time "greats".


----------



## ChristopherJ (Aug 10, 2004)

NeoSamurai said:


> his help defense is average at best since he often times tries to step in for the charge and flop...and as MVP of the league, he seems to be getting more of those calls going for him...and as much as a hate floppers, it is a part of today's NBA defense...


How do you define flop? Stepping infront of men much larger than you and taking the brunt of the contact is not a flop. It's a smart play, one in which Nash excels at. I don't see why you call his help defense average at best...


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

KidCanada said:


> Pacific, meaning all Nets game are on at 4PM on weekdays.
> 
> What time does a Suns game start in NJ? 9.. maybe 10 o'clock. I'm sure you guys watch plenty of Nash's "abysmal" defense..


Sadly the Suns are on my TV all the time, couple that with the fact that I have league pass and I can pretty much watch them whenever I want. So no your point is moot against me, cause I watch them just as much as you do.


----------



## Air Fly (Apr 19, 2005)

KidCanada is right. Nash has been a decent defender all season long and made the big plays on the defensive end in crunch time. This board turned anti-Nash so quickly...that's when you know you're one of the greats.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Gilgamesh said:


> Hm I am not one of those peeps. Dirk deserves the MVP. MVP is a regular season award. I'm not gonna hate on Dirk for his regular season efforts. Plus I always said Duncan was the best player in the game anyways.
> 
> Are you kidding me? Nash has stepped up his game in this playoffs the last 3 years. In 05' he averaged 24 and 11 including a 48 point effort against the Mavs. Last year he went 20 and 10. The Suns lost against Mavs who were a better team and minus Amare. There is no shame in that.
> 
> Nash is also playing great this year. The guy is putting up 18 and 13 and playing only 36 mpg. If he didn't have to sit out because of his nose who knows how many more points he would have scored. I think he had what 31 when that collision happened. Even with his poor first half start last game the guy is putting up 22 and 12 against the Spurs. Parker is 20 and 5. Even if the Suns lose against the Spurs is there really shame in that? Didn't Hollinger have the Spurs ranked #1 with his "formula"? The guy looks like a genius now. Is it Nash's fault Amare was in foul trouble last game? If he wasn't who knows what woulda happened. The Spurs are no joke and they have Duncan aka the best player in the game.


I dont even know how to argue against this. You are right the Spurs are one heck of a team, but they are beatable


----------



## Air Fly (Apr 19, 2005)

KidCanada said:


> Pacific, meaning all Nets game are on at 4PM on weekdays.
> 
> What time does a Suns game start in NJ? 9.. maybe 10 o'clock. I'm sure you guys watch plenty of Nash's "abysmal" defense..


They watch him play with their mind already set that Kidd is bettter and find every little defensive mistake by Nash and tell themselves "see, he can't play defense". On the other hand, kidd gets burned by oppossing PG? "It's all part of the coaching staff plan". 

Keep it up...


----------



## ChristopherJ (Aug 10, 2004)

NeoSamurai said:


> Kidd
> 
> How can you be the best player in the league when you only play half the game?...



I really don't see any logic in this argument.

Like I've said, just because defense is half the game doesn't mean Nash's defense impacts half the game.

Nash is a perimeter defender who often guards the least skilled players on the opposition. His defense doesn't have a great impact on the Suns defense as a whole. Just look at the playoffs this year as an example. Nash has been guarding Bowen and Laker scrubs and hasn't been a liability whatsoever. Does his value decrease 50% just because he can't play great defense? No.. because he isn't overly involved in the Suns defense.

Offensively however Nash is involved in approximately 80-90% of the Suns offense. His impact on the Suns offense is huge. His success and his struggles have a great impact on the Suns offense. That's where he should be judged for the majority of his value.


----------



## Aurelino (Jul 25, 2003)

Air Fly said:


> Kidd has been a terrible defender this season, *I don't wanna hear about his so called great defense.*
> 
> It was non-existent during the regular season and in the playoffs. Career-wise, i'll still go with Nash 2 MVPS *and a championship in the making*. Kidd at his best never dominated the PG position the way Nash is doing.


You can say whatever you want, of course. Even if it has no connection whatsoever with the reality. I know now why you got banned from the Nets forum.


----------



## Gilgamesh (Dec 23, 2005)

HB said:


> I dont even know how to argue against this. You are right the Spurs are one heck of a team, but they are beatable


The Spurs are beatable. Last game was close and who knows what woulda happened if Amare was not in foul trouble. It has been a great series. IMO this series is the "real" championship series. Duncan has been monster though and the Spurs have high pedigree. I said in the playoff forums before the series started that the only way the Suns would beat the Spurs was if they force them to play their style like what the Mavs did to the Spurs last year when Duncan also played like a monster. But it looks like the Spurs are keeping pace with the Suns and credit goes to Pop.


----------



## Air Fly (Apr 19, 2005)

Aurelino said:


> You can say whatever you want, of course. Even if it has no connection whatsoever with the reality. I know now why you got banned from the Nets forum.


So the reality to you is that Kidd is a great defender and Phoenix have no shot at a championship. Is that what you're implying there?

[strike] You don't know anything...stick with the Kidd homerism, please. [/strike]


----------



## NeoSamurai (Jan 16, 2003)

Gilgamesh said:


> In other words Barkley's MVP and status as one of the best in the game was farce then? What about Magic's rep?
> 
> What I'm tryin to say is if we are gonna evaluate players 50/50 then we got some major re-evaluation to do with many of the all-time "greats".


Magic is 16th on the all-time list for steals...led the league twice in steals...the Lakers were able to run the fast-break so effectively because they played tough defense which caused TOs...the Lakers were a strong defensive squad with Kareem, Magic and Michael Cooper...

Charles - great character and everyone agrees that they love seeing how he attacked the rim and went for rebounds in his prime, he had great numbers, but you wouldnt place him ahead of some of the other greats to come from his era who did play defense like Malone, David Robinson, Hakeem, and MJ...


----------



## NeoSamurai (Jan 16, 2003)

KidCanada said:


> I really don't see any logic in this argument.
> 
> Like I've said, just because defense is half the game doesn't mean Nash's defense impacts half the game.
> 
> ...


no question that the Suns run a predominantly offensive-minded system and Nash is a cornerstone to their success, but to think he is the best player in the league i cannot agree with...the system that Nash finds himself in caters towards the offensive game that the team wants to play - getting up and down the court and scoring as much as possible while just doing enough on defense to win games...

however, if your argument is to consider the offensive side of the Suns and Nash's impact on that end, then why didnt Ben Wallace ever win an MVP award during his stint in Detroit when that team won an NBA title, holding the opposition to 85 pts per night?...if Nash can be considered an MVP-calibre player with his outstanding offense, what stops a Ben Wallace from being an MVP when he leads or is in the top 10 in blocks, rebounds and steals from becoming one as well?...i consider Ben a great player, but MVP?...same has to be asked of Nash imo...


----------



## kflo (Jun 28, 2002)

individual offense generally IS more important than individual defense. for perimeter players, typically even moreso. nash is a FAR better offensive player than kidd right now, so the question is whether kidd's defense and rebounding, and his defense isn't what it was, make up for that offensive disparity. i just don't see it. if he was playing prime gary payton defense, maybe.


----------



## Petey (Aug 23, 2002)

KidCanada said:


> Showing your complete ignorance once again, and proving that you don't even watch the Suns play.
> 
> Nash has played solid defense all postseason while Jason Kidd was consistently burned all series by the Raptors PG's. Not to say Nash is as good a defender as Kidd, not at all, but to say one plays defense while the other does not is a moronic oversimplification that isn't remotely true. This whole notion that Nash doesn't play defense is dead wrong, and Kidd isn't nearly as good a defender as he used to be. At this point I'd say Nash is an underrated defender, whereas Kidd is probably overrated defensively at this point.


I don't watch much of Nash to make a comment, but I agree Kidd has become overrated defensively.

I thought you watched some of the Nets-Raptors series. Was Kidd burned by the Raptors' PGs? Or was he playing off them and helping to double Bosh, and forcing the Raptors PGs to become scorers instead of distributors?

-Petey


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

Lets take a look at the pace the Suns play the game and the Nets play the game. Over the last 3 seasons, the Suns have averaged almost 96 (95.8) possessions per 48 minutes while the Nets have averaged almost 90 (90.1) possessions per 48 minutes. As an example, 5.7 possessions per game at a 40% conversion rate is 2.3 extra baskets a game. So the pace of the game certainly gives Nash more assist opportunities. The highest pace the Nets have ever played at under Kidd was 91.8 which was still slower than the Mavs teams Nash PG'd.

That said, Nash has clearly been better than Kidd these last 3 seasons because he has given it his all when he has played. Kidd has gone through periods were he has played like crap because he has been disinterested in being in Jersey, although even when he plays like that, he still is able to rack up the assists and rebounds. Kidd has also been forced to play in an offense that takes the ball out of his hands several times per game when it becomes the Vince show (thanks for that Frank).


----------



## Mateo (Sep 23, 2006)

Both players are bad defensively, so let's just throw that out of the conversation. Offensively they are similar (though Nash is the better passer), but the gaping difference is obviously their shooting ability. Nash is a better player.


----------



## BlakeJesus (Feb 1, 2006)

Petey said:


> I don't watch much of Nash to make a comment, but I agree Kidd has become overrated defensively.
> 
> I thought you watched some of the Nets-Raptors series. Was Kidd burned by the Raptors' PGs? Or was he playing off them and helping to double Bosh, and forcing the Raptors PGs to become scorers instead of distributors?
> 
> -Petey


He was playing off to help the double team on the bigs. Who would you rather leave open, Bosh or TJ Ford?


----------



## scooter (Oct 22, 2003)

Right now its clearly Nash. His defense has improved and his offense is simply amazing. With his passing wizadry, people tend to overlook the fact he's also the best shooting point guard in the league. Combine those two things, and he is simply miles ahead of the next point on the offensive end. He used to be terrible defensively but now he's at least average.

Overall, there's no serious debate that Nash is the best point guard the last few years.

I'm not sure whether I'd pick Kidd or Nash if I have to look at their entire career. I think we'll have to wait 'til their careers are over to decide that.


----------



## hobojoe (Jun 20, 2003)

Aurelino said:


> But the triple double doesn't mean anything. Who cares if Kidd's teams have won 75% of the games in which he has had a triple-double. You must be a stat geek.


Nice, does the condescending tone make you feel important or superior to me? You could at least trying using it when you fully understand the argument you're mocking, which you clearly do not. The triple double is overrated, the actual triple double. Not the production by Kidd when he puts up a triple double. Still with me? The Nets have a 75% winning percentage when he puts up a triple double. Well no ****, that's shocking! If you can find me a statistic that shows a significant difference in the winning percentage of Kidd's team when he gets a triple double versus when he finishes 1 rebound/assist or even point away from a triple double, I'll concede that the triple double is not overrated. Until then, it's just a stat. Is there something magical about hitting the 10 point or rebound mark in the flow of a game? No, like I said it's nice for stat geeks. I guarantee Kidd's team wins just about as much when he puts up a 15-9-11 game or something similar to that as when he gets a triple double. Understand?


----------



## BlakeJesus (Feb 1, 2006)

Career you HAVE to pick Kidd it's not even close.

Your post was full of a lot of bias opinions, and not a lot of fact. There are better scoring PG's in the league. Baron Davis (when healthy) is one off the top of my head.

And honestly saying Nash's defense is 'average' is being very kind. He's a miserable defender.


----------



## hobojoe (Jun 20, 2003)

Jameh said:


> Career you HAVE to pick Kidd it's not even close.


Career based on what? Achievements/accolades? Consistency? Overall statistics? If you're going to judge a career, to me the Hall of Fame would be the best measure. Both are getting in for sure, but Nash is definitely more of a lock and would be given the spot if it came down to him and Kidd. The MVPs are the deal breaker. You don't have to like it, you don't have to agree with it, but these are the *facts* -- Nash has 2 MVPs, Kidd has none. An MVP award is a ticket to the Hall of Fame, two puts you in select company with the all-time greats. For some perspective, John Stockton never finished higher than 7th in the MVP voting in his great career, considered by many to be the best or at least one of the best PG's ever. Do you realize that in his entire career, his *entire* brilliant career he received exactly ONE first place MVP vote, total. Not once did even finish first on his team in MVP voting on his team. Steve Nash is the only PG other than Magic Johnson to win multiple MVPs in his career. The MVP award defines careers, Steve Nash has two. Jason Kidd has come close, but it's what differentiates their careers. 



> Your post was full of a lot of bias opinions, and not a lot of fact. There are better scoring PG's in the league. Baron Davis (when healthy) is one off the top of my head.
> 
> And honestly saying Nash's defense is 'average' is being very kind. He's a miserable defender.


Honestly, please try to make sense. Please. My opinion isn't bias*ed* just because you disagree. My opinion is as objective as you can find, I watch a lot of basketball and a lot of both these guys and I'm neither a fan nor hater of either player or their teams. Right, there are better scoring point guards in the NBA than Nash, but Kidd isn't one of them so what's your point? I never addressed the defense either, so don't make things up.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

hobojoe said:


> *Career based on what? Achievements/accolades? Consistency? Overall statistics? If you're going to judge a career, to me the Hall of Fame would be the best measure. Both are getting in for sure, but Nash is definitely more of a lock and would be given the spot if it came down to him and Kidd.* The MVPs are the deal breaker. You don't have to like it, you don't have to agree with it, but these are the *facts* -- Nash has 2 MVPs, Kidd has none. An MVP award is a ticket to the Hall of Fame, two puts you in select company with the all-time greats. For some perspective, John Stockton never finished higher than 7th in the MVP voting in his great career, considered by many to be the best or at least one of the best PG's ever. Do you realize that in his entire career, his *entire* brilliant career he received exactly ONE first place MVP vote, total. Not once did even finish first on his team in MVP voting on his team. Steve Nash is the only PG other than Magic Johnson to win multiple MVPs in his career. The MVP award defines careers, Steve Nash has two. Jason Kidd has come close, but it's what differentiates their careers.
> 
> 
> 
> Honestly, please try to make sense. Please. My opinion isn't bias*ed* just because you disagree. My opinion is as objective as you can find, I watch a lot of basketball and a lot of both these guys and I'm neither a fan nor hater of either player or their teams. Right, there are better scoring point guards in the NBA than Nash, but Kidd isn't one of them so what's your point? I never addressed the defense either, so don't make things up.


Yeah you definitely dont know what you are talking about. I dont know if you have been following the NBA closely, but Kidd has been called a HOFer for about 3 or 4 years now. He is as much a lock as Payton is. Up till last year, some were even debating if Nash would be the first MVP that would miss out on the HOF. Jason Kidd has also been to two finals and changed the outlook of a team considered the laughing stock of the league into elite status in the East. Do you know how many All NBA teams and All defensive teams he has made? How about All star games? Nash's career pales in comparison to Kidd's. He is lucky he has those two MVP's, heck if he were still on Dallas this conversation wouldn't exist. I didnt even mention all the individual records that Kidd has been stockpiling, there is no doubt in my mind he is a lock for the HOF. Moreso than Nash


----------



## hobojoe (Jun 20, 2003)

HB said:


> Yeah you definitely dont know what you are talking about. I dont know if you have been following the NBA closely, but Kidd has been called a HOFer for about 3 or 4 years now. He is as much a lock as Payton is. Up till last year, some were even debating if Nash would be the first MVP that would miss out on the HOF. Jason Kidd has also been to two finals and changed the outlook of a team considered the laughing stock of the league into elite status in the East. Do you know how many All NBA teams and All defensive teams he has made? How about All star games? Nash's career pales in comparison to Kidd's. He is lucky he has those two MVP's, heck if he were still on Dallas this conversation wouldn't exist. I didnt even mention all the individual records that Kidd has been stockpiling, there is no doubt in my mind he is a lock for the HOF. Moreso than Nash


Wait, wait -- let me make sure I have this right. You're outraged about me short changing Jason Kidd's career when I *clearly* stated that he is a lock to get in? 

How long ago he was a lock before Nash has nothing to do with it. Nash is more of a lock now and has the better resume because of the MVPs. I know how many all-NBA teams Kidd's been on, six. Nash has been on five, big deal. I don't know the defensive teams or the all-stars, but Kidd has more. It doesn't matter, Nash's peak (if we've even seen it yet) is higher than Kidd's statistically and in terms of accolades (back to back MVPs, three straight Top 2 MVP finishes, three straight All-NBA 1st team selections and counting). Your point about Nash still being on Dallas is pointless. You don't know that first of all, he could be a 3-time NBA champion for all you know. And if your best argument is a hypothetical situation, you're done. I can easily make up some scenarios in which Kidd would not be successful, but it doesn't mean anything because it's not what happened. And for the last time, I said Kidd is a lock for the HOF, but not over Nash.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

hobojoe said:


> Wait, wait -- let me make sure I have this right. You're outraged about me short changing Jason Kidd's career when I *clearly* stated that he is a lock to get in?
> *
> How long ago he was a lock before Nash has nothing to do with it. Nash is more of a lock now and has the better resume because of the MVPs*. I know how many all-NBA teams Kidd's been on, six. Nash has been on five, big deal. I don't know the defensive teams or the all-stars, but Kidd has more. It doesn't matter, Nash's peak (if we've even seen it yet) is higher than Kidd's statistically and in terms of accolades (back to back MVPs, three straight Top 2 MVP finishes, three straight All-NBA 1st team selections and counting). Your point about Nash still being on Dallas is pointless. You don't know that first of all, he could be a 3-time NBA champion for all you know. And if your best argument is a hypothetical situation, you're done. I can easily make up some scenarios in which Kidd would not be successful, but it doesn't mean anything because it's not what happened. And for the last time, I said Kidd is a lock for the HOF, but not over Nash.


And I am saying this simply isnt true. Jason Kidd is more of a lock to get in than Nash, regardless of the fact that Nash has two MVPs'. Question do you think Nash is more of a lock to get in right now than Payton? And you are right about the hypotheticals, what I do know is Nash is a two time MVP that has zero championships and hasnt even made the finals.


----------



## Ras (Jul 25, 2005)

HB said:


> And I am saying this simply isnt true. Jason Kidd is more of a lock to get in than Nash, regardless of the fact that Nash has two MVPs'. Question do you think Nash is more of a lock to get in right now than Payton? And you are right about the hypotheticals, what I do know is Nash is a two time MVP that has zero championships and hasnt even made the finals.


I think part of his point is that there has never been a two time MVP left out of the Hall of Fame. Nash is a lock because of his MVPS, and those MVPs probably have more weight then anything else Kidd has done.


----------



## hobojoe (Jun 20, 2003)

Ras said:


> I think part of his point is that there has never been a two time MVP left out of the Hall of Fame. Nash is a lock because of his MVPS, and those MVPs probably have more weight then anything else Kidd has done.


Not only that, a ONE time MVP has never been left out of the Hall of Fame let alone a two time winner.


----------



## hobojoe (Jun 20, 2003)

HB said:


> And I am saying this simply isnt true. Jason Kidd is more of a lock to get in than Nash, regardless of the fact that Nash has two MVPs'. Question do you think Nash is more of a lock to get in right now than Payton? And you are right about the hypotheticals, what I do know is Nash is a two time MVP that has zero championships and hasnt even made the finals.


Yes I do think Nash is more of a lock, but again this is basically the same argument as with Kidd -- they're both locks, but Nash is in before Payton. Gary Payton doesn't get any credit or a bonus for being the only one of the three with a championship, that's not quite as bad as giving Darko credit for winning a championship, but it might as well be. Again, no MVPs for the Glove (Top 5 ONCE in his career, most first place votes he ever received in a year was 3), only two All-NBA 1st team selections for GP, as I've established Nash has 3 in a row and counting. Honestly, it's the MVPs though. Not once has Gary Payton been a legitimate MVP candidate in his career. Not once did a significant amount of the voters feel he was the MVP of the league, or even close to it. THREE years in a row a great amount of voters have felt that Steve Nash has been the most valuable player in the league. Again, this peak of his career is one of the best of any point guard the league has seen in terms of awards and accolades. Payton is in the HOF, Nash is too. Payton played at an elite level for longer than Nash has but Nash has reached a higher level than Payton and sustained for three years and counting. It's enough for him to go down as having a better career than Payton.


----------



## Basel (Mar 31, 2005)

I'd take Kidd when comparing their overall careers, and I'd take Kidd now.


----------



## kbird (Dec 7, 2006)

Is this a joke question.

Jason Kidd sucks people, guy shoots 40% or under, his assist numbers are at best about the same as any decent guard's and the only thing he gets more of are rebounds, which is irrelevant since his catastrophic shooting allows teams to leave him alone and pay more attention to his teammates, that is why he never did, and never will win anything despite playing with some pretty good teammates ( for this era anyway ). You think Steve Nash would lose to a crap team like the heat with a team NJersey had last season. NEVER!!!!

Jason KIdd = the most overrated guard that ever steped onto the court.


----------



## BlakeJesus (Feb 1, 2006)

hobojoe said:


> Career based on what? Achievements/accolades? Consistency? Overall statistics? If you're going to judge a career, to me the Hall of Fame would be the best measure. Both are getting in for sure, but Nash is definitely more of a lock and would be given the spot if it came down to him and Kidd. The MVPs are the deal breaker. You don't have to like it, you don't have to agree with it, but these are the *facts* -- Nash has 2 MVPs, Kidd has none. An MVP award is a ticket to the Hall of Fame, two puts you in select company with the all-time greats. For some perspective, John Stockton never finished higher than 7th in the MVP voting in his great career, considered by many to be the best or at least one of the best PG's ever. Do you realize that in his entire career, his *entire* brilliant career he received exactly ONE first place MVP vote, total. Not once did even finish first on his team in MVP voting on his team. Steve Nash is the only PG other than Magic Johnson to win multiple MVPs in his career. The MVP award defines careers, Steve Nash has two. Jason Kidd has come close, but it's what differentiates their careers.
> 
> 
> 
> Honestly, please try to make sense. Please. My opinion isn't bias*ed* just because you disagree. My opinion is as objective as you can find, I watch a lot of basketball and a lot of both these guys and I'm neither a fan nor hater of either player or their teams. *Right, there are better scoring point guards in the NBA than Nash, but Kidd isn't one of them so what's your point? I never addressed the defense either, so don't make things up.*


I wasn't addressing you in my post, you posted a couple minutes before I did and I was too lazy to quote.

But since you're not addressing me, I'd like to comment on the fact you decided to bring up the MVP's. You can't honestly say Steve Nash would have won even one of those MVP awards outside of Phoenix. You put Nash on the Nets and he wouldn't have even gotten a first place vote, let alone the award itself.


----------



## hobojoe (Jun 20, 2003)

Jameh said:


> I wasn't addressing you in my post, you posted a couple minutes before I did and I was too lazy to quote.
> 
> But since you're not addressing me, I'd like to comment on the fact you decided to bring up the MVP's. You can't honestly say Steve Nash would have won even one of those MVP awards outside of Phoenix. You put Nash on the Nets and he wouldn't have even gotten a first place vote, let alone the award itself.


Again with the hypothetical, imaginary world where Nash is in a system that doesn't use his abilities. Your argument for bringing Nash down is to say that he plays for a team that actually understands their personnel and allows them to play in a system that best uses their abilities? What a concept! Newsflash: This is the real world, we make judgments based on what has happened not what could've happened had Steve Nash chose to stay in Dallas or play somewhere else. What if Steve Nash had picked soccer over basketball? LeBron James would've won MVP and been the youngest ever last season! Kobe would've made it the 2nd round, maybe even further without Shaq!


----------



## kflo (Jun 28, 2002)

can we at least agree that nash is the much better offensive player, kidd the much better rebounder, and kidd better defensively although not a great defender anymore?


----------



## Basel (Mar 31, 2005)

kbird said:


> Is this a joke question.
> 
> Jason Kidd sucks people, guy shoots 40% or under, his assist numbers are at best about the same as any decent guard's and the only thing he gets more of are rebounds, which is irrelevant since his catastrophic shooting allows teams to leave him alone and pay more attention to his teammates, that is why he never did, and never will win anything despite playing with some pretty good teammates ( for this era anyway ). You think Steve Nash would lose to a crap team like the heat with a team NJersey had last season. NEVER!!!!
> 
> Jason KIdd = the most overrated guard that ever steped onto the court.


No personal attacks


----------



## Aurelino (Jul 25, 2003)

hobojoe said:


> Nice, does the condescending tone make you feel important or superior to me? You could at least trying using it when you fully understand the argument you're mocking, which you clearly do not. The triple double is overrated, the actual triple double. Not the production by Kidd when he puts up a triple double. Still with me? The Nets have a 75% winning percentage when he puts up a triple double. Well no ****, that's shocking! If you can find me a statistic that shows a significant difference in the winning percentage of Kidd's team when he gets a triple double versus when he finishes 1 rebound/assist or even point away from a triple double, I'll concede that the triple double is not overrated. Until then, it's just a stat. Is there something magical about hitting the 10 point or rebound mark in the flow of a game? No, like I said it's nice for stat geeks. I guarantee Kidd's team wins just about as much when he puts up a 15-9-11 game or something similar to that as when he gets a triple double. Understand?



I have no desire to get into these petty little games of oneupsmanship on a message board. I just dislike arguments being propagated without being backed up by any kind of evidence. At least HB provided some statistic that supports his argument. Where is your evidence? On what basis do you say that Kidd's teams must have had similar success in games where he missed a TD by a single point/rebound/assist ? On what basis do you "guarantee" what you said? Isn't it just what you _think_? 

I did some research for you, ok. 

Overall winning % of teams with Kidd is 57% (537/946)
% of wins when Kidd misses a TD by 1 is 63% (27/43)
% of wins when Kidd gets a TD is 75% (65/87).

Happy now? I will let you interpret it any way you want. You are welcome.


----------



## BlakeJesus (Feb 1, 2006)

hobojoe said:


> Again with the hypothetical, imaginary world where Nash is in a system that doesn't use his abilities. Your argument for bringing Nash down is to say that he plays for a team that actually understands their personnel and allows them to play in a system that best uses their abilities? What a concept! Newsflash: This is the real world, we make judgments based on what has happened not what could've happened had Steve Nash chose to stay in Dallas or play somewhere else. What if Steve Nash had picked soccer over basketball? LeBron James would've won MVP and been the youngest ever last season! Kobe would've made it the 2nd round, maybe even further without Shaq!


It's not imaginary world to say a players inflated stats gets over hyped because they play in a fast break system that focus's almost solely on scoring, and doesn't expose his weak defense. This post is about Kidd vs Nash. Who would you rather have. If I'm the Sun's I'll take Steve Nash. If I'm the other 29 teams I'm picking Kidd. Is that easier for you to understand? Kidd is the better all around player, Nash is simply a perfect fit for his team.

You decided to attack my post with sarcasm instead of fact. Your post wasn't much better than my "imaginary world" scenario.


----------



## emaleo (May 14, 2007)

For me, Jason Kidd without a question.
At least, all you guys have to agree that he is better offensive player, without a doubt.


----------



## BlakeJesus (Feb 1, 2006)

emaleo said:


> For me, Jason Kidd without a question.
> At least, all you guys have to agree that he is better offensive player, without a doubt.



:lol: :lol: 

Did you mean offensive POST player? Because Nash is a much more all around potent offensive threat than Kidd. that's never been in question.


----------



## Basel (Mar 31, 2005)

Maybe he meant defensive player, without a doubt.


----------



## BlakeJesus (Feb 1, 2006)

Basel57 said:


> Maybe he meant defensive player, without a doubt.


lets hope


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

Jason Kidd doesn't have to score to take over a game. He can score zero points, but still impact the game. Assists, rebounds, steals. Probably the best point guard after the Magic-Stockton era.


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

Alright, from a PG afficionado...

Jason Kidd is The ****. Ask anyone you know about a guy getting the New Jersey freaking Nets for 2 Finals appearences and they will say you are nuts. Jason Kidd did that. If we are even talking about the New Jersey Nets, it's Kidd's fault. the guy is a great, great player. 

Steve Nash is another breed. He doesn't rebound like Kidd, and he doesn't defend like Kedd. He doesn't amass triple-doubles every off game. Still, he is a great passer and shooter,and the heart and soul of a powerhouse Suns unit.

How can we compare both players? 

Let's imagine both players traded places. What do you think would happen?


----------



## BlakeJesus (Feb 1, 2006)

PauloCatarino said:


> Alright, from a PG afficionado...
> 
> Jason Kidd is The ****. Ask anyone you know about a guy getting the New Jersey freaking Nets for 2 Finals appearences and they will say you are nuts. Jason Kidd did that. If we are even talking about the New Jersey Nets, it's Kidd's fault. the guy is a great, great player.
> 
> ...


That has already been discussed at least by myself more than once in this thread.


----------



## emaleo (May 14, 2007)

Do you guys think that offensive means just to score and nothing else?
I'll cite news just 2 days ago:
"Kidd had his 11th postseason triple-double, breaking a tie with Larry Bird for second place on the career list..."
Inform yourself if you want:
http://www.nba.com/games/20070512/CLENJN/recap.html?rss=true


----------



## Gilgamesh (Dec 23, 2005)

NeoSamurai said:


> Magic is 16th on the all-time list for steals...led the league twice in steals...the Lakers were able to run the fast-break so effectively because they played tough defense which caused TOs...the Lakers were a strong defensive squad with Kareem, Magic and Michael Cooper...
> 
> Charles - great character and everyone agrees that they love seeing how he attacked the rim and went for rebounds in his prime, he had great numbers, but you wouldnt place him ahead of some of the other greats to come from his era who did play defense like Malone, David Robinson, Hakeem, and MJ...


Magic was not a great defender despite his steal stats. It's the same as saying AI is a great defender because of his steal stats. 

You say defense is half of the game therefore we have to go 50/50 when evaluating right? Chuck was a horrible defender. Mutombo was a great defender. Therefore under the 50/50 rule they are about equal right? What about Pippen? I guess he is better than Bird right? What about Payton? Under the 50/50 rule he must surely be better than Magic.

I hate this 50/50 rule. Nash is a great offensive player. Better than Kidd. Kidd is a better defender. He isn't a great defender anymore and he was never on Payton's level in defense. The separation between Nash and Kidd on offense is about the same as Kidd's defense (today) on Nash. 

Today Nash > Kidd. Career Kidd > Nash.


----------



## Gilgamesh (Dec 23, 2005)

kflo said:


> can we at least agree that nash is the much better offensive player, kidd the much better rebounder, and kidd better defensively although not a great defender anymore?


I can agree with this. Anybody who watches the game should agree with this.


----------



## Gilgamesh (Dec 23, 2005)

emaleo said:


> Do you guys think that offensive means just to score and nothing else?
> I'll cite news just 2 days ago:
> "Kidd had his 11th postseason triple-double, breaking a tie with Larry Bird for second place on the career list..."
> Inform yourself if you want:
> http://www.nba.com/games/20070512/CLENJN/recap.html?rss=true


Speaking of triple doubles I was just havin a debate with a bud the other day.

Who is better in their prime? Fat or Kidd?


----------



## JCB (Aug 9, 2005)

I know I'm quite late with this, but ... 


KidCanada said:


> I get the feeling people are judging this question based on their careers as a whole, but that isn't what the thread starter is asking.





Air fly said:


> This thread though is not talking about CAREER rather who's the better PG right now.


...



futuristxen said:


> If anything is a worthwhile debate, it's the debate between these two players.
> Do you think that Nash is really Two MVP awards better than Kidd? _Which is the better for the course of their career_?


Reading comprehension is a beautiful thing. 



Career wise, Kidd wins hands down. It's not close. Not even remotely so. 

Right now, I'd give the slight edge to Nash. 

And for those who argue Nash is the better complete player, yet disregard Kidd's rebounding numbers as if they are nothing, need to stop being so hypocritical. Don't say something once, yet do a complete 180 when the subject arises concerning the opposite player.


----------



## Gilgamesh (Dec 23, 2005)

JCB said:


> Career wise, Kidd wins hands down. It's not close. Not even remotely so.
> 
> Right now, I'd give the slight edge to Nash.


I agree 100% with this. 2 MVPs or not I don't see how anybody can say Nash > Kidd. Today and the last several years, Nash > Kidd but I take Payton career and prime wise over Kidd and Nash right now.


----------



## hobojoe (Jun 20, 2003)

Aurelino said:


> I have no desire to get into these petty little games of oneupsmanship on a message board.


Right, you just want to make posts that mock others and not be called out for it. Sorry, try someone else if thats what you really want to do.



> I just dislike arguments being propagated without being backed up by any kind of evidence. At least HB provided some statistic that supports his argument. Where is your evidence? On what basis do you say that Kidd's teams must have had similar success in games where he missed a TD by a single point/rebound/assist ?


Reading comprehension. I didn't say that, and it's merely logical to assume that in the long run games in which an individual finishes with 1 or 2 rebounds or assists short of the magical double digit mark will be no different or only slightly different than when he does reach double figures in all three categories. 

On what basis do you "guarantee" what you said? Isn't it just what you _think_? 



> I did some research for you, ok.
> 
> Overall winning % of teams with Kidd is 57% (537/946)
> % of wins when Kidd misses a TD by 1 is 63% (27/43)
> ...


You went through his entire career and looked at every game log to come up with that stat? Props if you did, but it still doesn't prove anything. The sample size for those games is too small, not to mention it doesn't take into account how good the teams were when he had the triple doubles vs. when he had the 1 assist/rebound short of triple double games. Also not to mention that you're not including games where he's two rebounds short, or an assist and a rebound, or two assists, or three points short, etc. The list could go on and on, the fact of the matter is that you're trying to tell me that hitting double digits in points, rebounds and assists magically has a significant and great effect on the outcome of a game as opposed to finishing a mere rebound/assist or two away. It's so ridiculous I can't even believe I'm arguing it. 




Jameh said:


> It's not imaginary world to say a players inflated stats gets over hyped because they play in a fast break system that focus's almost solely on scoring, and doesn't expose his weak defense.


No, it isn't but that isn't what you said. It is pointless however to dwell on what the world would be like if Nash wasn't on the Suns because he is. 



> This post is about Kidd vs Nash. Who would you rather have. If I'm the Sun's I'll take Steve Nash. If I'm the other 29 teams I'm picking Kidd. Is that easier for you to understand? Kidd is the better all around player, Nash is simply a perfect fit for his team.


That's plenty easy for me to understand in the conceptual sense, but extremely difficult for me to understand in terms of basketball and why you would think that. I had no problems understanding your previous posts either, you just weren't posting these same ideas which is why you were being torn apart. But thank you for that, I appreciate you creating a misunderstanding of the English language for me in your mind to have something to insult me with. Next time try something that makes sense.



> You decided to attack my post with sarcasm instead of fact. Your post wasn't much better than my "imaginary world" scenario.


I attacked it with logic and reason, which is why it was torn apart. The sarcasm is just there for effect, and my post was in fact a lot better than yours FYI.


----------



## BlakeJesus (Feb 1, 2006)

hobojoe said:


> Right, you just want to make posts that mock others and not be called out for it. Sorry, try someone else if thats what you really want to do.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Believe what you need to.


----------



## BlakeJesus (Feb 1, 2006)

You know, I could bring out the stats to show how inflated Nash's numbers are because of his system by comparing them to before he got there but I just don't feel it would effect any of you. You obviously don't want to see it. But I will for my own sake.

Year Team G GS MPG FG% 3P% FT% OFF DEF RPG APG SPG BPG TO PF PPG
96-97 PHO 65 2 10.5 .423 .418 .824 0.2 0.7 1.0 2.1 0.3 0.0 0.97 1.40 3.3
97-98 PHO 76 9 21.9 .459 .415 .860 0.4 1.7 2.1 3.4 0.8 0.0 1.29 1.90 9.1
98-99 DAL 40 40 31.7 .363 .374 .826 0.8 2.1 2.9 5.5 0.9 0.0 2.08 2.50 7.9
99-00 DAL 56 27 27.4 .477 .403 .882 0.6 1.6 2.2 4.9 0.7 0.0 1.82 2.20 8.6
00-01 DAL 70 70 34.1 .487 .406 .895 0.7 2.5 3.2 7.3 1.0 0.1 2.93 2.30 15.6
01-02 DAL 82 82 34.6 .483 .455 .887 0.6 2.5 3.1 7.7 0.6 0.0 2.79 2.00 17.9
02-03 DAL 82 82 33.1 .465 .413 .909 0.8 2.1 2.9 7.3 1.0 0.1 2.34 1.60 17.7
03-04 DAL 78 78 33.5 .470 .405 .916 0.8 2.2 3.0 8.8 0.9 0.1 2.68 1.80 14.5
04-05 PHO 75 75 34.3 .502 .431 .887 0.8 2.6 3.3 11.5 1.0 0.1 3.27 1.80 15.5
05-06 PHX 79 79 35.4 .512 .439 .921 0.6 3.6 4.2 10.5 0.8 0.2 3.49 1.50 18.8
06-07 PHX 76 76 35.3 .532 .455 .899 0.4 3.1 3.5 11.6 0.8 0.1 3.78 1.50 18.6

So was it pure luck that by changing system his assists went up 3-4 more a season? That his ppg went up? One could argue stat inflation as a serious possibility here...oh wait, I've already been doing that.


----------



## hobojoe (Jun 20, 2003)

Jameh said:


> You know, I could bring out the stats to show how inflated Nash's numbers are because of his system by comparing them to before he got there but I just don't feel it would effect any of you. You obviously don't want to see it. But I will for my own sake.
> 
> Year Team G GS MPG FG% 3P% FT% OFF DEF RPG APG SPG BPG TO PF PPG
> 96-97 PHO 65 2 10.5 .423 .418 .824 0.2 0.7 1.0 2.1 0.3 0.0 0.97 1.40 3.3
> ...


What are you trying to prove, that Phoenix' offense suits him more than Dallas' or that Phoenix plays a faster pace? My response to both is no ****, I didn't need stats to tell me that. But again, that means nothing unless you're going to start bringing up hypothetical situations again. This is an endless cycle and you just don't get it. Steve Nash plays for the Phoenix Suns. He didn't re-sign with Dallas, he plays for Phoenix. The Suns' system fits him perfectly. What that matters in terms of their career achievements or HOF credentials, who knows. But you seem hellbent on establishing that, so there it is.


----------



## ChristopherJ (Aug 10, 2004)

Jameh said:


> You know, I could bring out the stats to show how inflated Nash's numbers are because of his system by comparing them to before he got there but I just don't feel it would effect any of you. You obviously don't want to see it. But I will for my own sake.
> 
> Year Team G GS MPG FG% 3P% FT% OFF DEF RPG APG SPG BPG TO PF PPG
> 96-97 PHO 65 2 10.5 .423 .418 .824 0.2 0.7 1.0 2.1 0.3 0.0 0.97 1.40 3.3
> ...


Crazy man. Nash becomes the go-to guy in Phoenix and his stats go up! No way!


----------



## BlakeJesus (Feb 1, 2006)

I'm trying to prove that his stats are inflated because he plays in a fastbreak system. Looking at his stats you should be able to see that.

If he played for a different team (ala Dallas) he's just a good player, not a HOF player. My point is, if he wouldn't have gone to the Suns we wouldn't be having this conversation. He flourishs and overachievs in the Sun's system, not because he's overly talented but because he's an overly perfect fit.

This thread is Kidd vs Nash. That means if you take both of them off of their teams to put them on yours, which one are you going to take. Nash isn't the player you all love away from the Suns. His game doesn't translate as well to other systems.


----------



## Yao Mania (Aug 4, 2003)

Comparing Nash and Kidd is like comparing KG and Duncan. Yah they both play the same position, but they play it so differently, with both having their strengths and weaknesses. 

JKidd is a more gifted basketball player than Nash, that's why he was drafted 2nd overall while Nash was 15th overall. People would say that Kidd's career < Nash's career because Kidd has had many more all-star calibre seasons than Nash, but at their peak I would say that Nash > Kidd (barely). Kidd is a great all-around player and can make his team THAT much better, but Nash can single-handedly destroy defenses and make all his teammates look like all-stars. 

People who think Nash is a liability on D, consider this: during recent years, has Nash ever been flamed about not showing up on D? NO. He's not a great defender due to physical limitations, but he's a helluva team defender, and defends with his brains to make up for physical skills (ie. using his help defense, taking charges, denying posessions). Kidd is a team player and can make things happen on both ends of the court, but when it comes to taking over games, Nash has the edge.


----------



## hobojoe (Jun 20, 2003)

Jameh said:


> I'm trying to prove that his stats are inflated because he plays in a fastbreak system. Looking at his stats you should be able to see that.
> 
> If he played for a different team (ala Dallas) he's just a good player, not a HOF player. My point is, if he wouldn't have gone to the Suns we wouldn't be having this conversation. He flourishs and overachievs in the Sun's system, not because he's overly talented but because he's an overly perfect fit.


You already know the response to this, why post it? If, if, if...Everything with you is an alternate, hypothetical universe where Nash isn't in Phoenix so that Jason Kidd can be better than him. Nash is in Phoenix, and Nash is better than Kidd.


----------



## Aurelino (Jul 25, 2003)

hobojoe said:


> Right, you just want to make posts that mock others and not be called out for it. Sorry, try someone else if thats what you really want to do.


Once again, I am above such pettiness. I do mock posts when I have reason to, but I provide justification as to why I am doing it.



> Reading comprehension. I didn't say that, and it's merely logical to assume that in the long run games in which an individual finishes with 1 or 2 rebounds or assists short of the magical double digit mark will be no different or only slightly different than when he does reach double figures in all three categories.


This is what you said:


> If you can find me a statistic that shows a significant difference in the winning percentage of Kidd's team when he gets a triple double versus when he finishes 1 rebound/assist or even point away from a triple double, I'll concede that the triple double is not overrated. Until then, it's just a stat. Is there something magical about hitting the 10 point or rebound mark in the flow of a game? No, like I said it's nice for stat geeks. I guarantee Kidd's team wins just about as much when he puts up a 15-9-11 game or something similar to that as when he gets a triple double. Understand?


I gave you the stat you were looking for.



> You went through his entire career and looked at every game log to come up with that stat? Props if you did, but it still doesn't prove anything. The sample size for those games is too small, not to mention it doesn't take into account how good the teams were when he had the triple doubles vs. when he had the 1 assist/rebound short of triple double games.


The stats show that there's a +18% increase in winning % when Kidd gets a TD. It is 12% more than when he misses it by 1. The sample size is big enough (4.5% of total games played by Kidd considering how difficult it is to achieve such stats). Should I show you the year-by-year breakdown of the games where Kidd has gotten a TD, or missed it by 1 and the corresponding winning %? As for the strength of the team, it doesn't matter because Kidd's TDs and misses by 1 are fairly evenly distributed throughout his career.


----------



## lessthanjake (Jul 4, 2005)

Just some food for thought:

If Jason Kidd shot at Nash's .654 True Shooting % this year instead of his .516 TS%, the Nets would have scored 3.476 more points per game. That actually equates to roughly almost 10 extra wins (9.95 more to be exact) for the Nets (when plugged into the Expected Win/Loss record formula from basketballreference.com). Shooting percentage matters. A LOT. Nash is probably the best shooter in the league. Kidd is one of the worst.


----------



## BlakeJesus (Feb 1, 2006)

hobojoe said:


> You already know the response to this, why post it? If, if, if...Everything with you is an alternate, hypothetical universe where Nash isn't in Phoenix so that Jason Kidd can be better than him. Nash is in Phoenix, and Nash is better than Kidd.


This thread is about which player is the more talented PG is it not? Kidd wins that battle because he's physically a better player than Nash. 

Admit this, you take Nash off the Suns put him somewhere else he isn't going to be the player everybody sees him as now. Sure, you don't have to worry about that because he IS on the Suns. Got it. Look at the scenario objectively and tell me that Nash would be the same player if put in a different system. I don't think you can make a legitimate case for that. However if you take Kidd out of New Jersey, he'd put up the same numbers wherever else he went.

Maybe you aren't understanding this in basketball terms, I'll try football. Look at Mike Anderson, former running back for the Broncos. He put up 1000+ yards in the Denver running system. Is he a 1000 yard back, talent wise? No, the system he was in simply enabled him to do far better than he would otherwise be capable of. Does that make him a good player? No, it makes him a good fit for the system.


----------



## hobojoe (Jun 20, 2003)

Jameh said:


> This thread is about which player is the more talented PG is it not? Kidd wins that battle because he's physically a better player than Nash.
> 
> Admit this, you take Nash off the Suns put him somewhere else he isn't going to be the player everybody sees him as now. Sure, you don't have to worry about that because he IS on the Suns. Got it. Look at the scenario objectively and tell me that Nash would be the same player if put in a different system. I don't think you can make a legitimate case for that. However if you take Kidd out of New Jersey, he'd put up the same numbers wherever else he went.
> 
> Maybe you aren't understanding this in basketball terms, I'll try football. Look at Mike Anderson, former running back for the Broncos. He put up 1000+ yards in the Denver running system. Is he a 1000 yard back, talent wise? No, the system he was in simply enabled him to do far better than he would otherwise be capable of. Does that make him a good player? No, it makes him a good fit for the system.


Mike Anderson comparison to Steve Nash? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think Mike Anderson was an MVP caliber player, even with the Broncos offensive line. That's why when he left the Broncos he had to find a new role, and he was no longer the player he was in Denver. Bottom line, if Steve Nash left the Suns this offseason the team he went to would change their system to fit him. We're talking about a two-time MVP, no team would be dumb enough to limit his abilities by playing a system where they're not utilized. Do you think the Washington Wizards would still run up and down the court playing one of the fastest paces in the league if they were to acquire Tim Duncan? Of course not, they would run a new offense that revolves around dumping the ball down low to him and having him make plays.


----------



## hobojoe (Jun 20, 2003)

Aurelino said:


> Once again, I am above such pettiness. I do mock posts when I have reason to, but I provide justification as to why I am doing it.


Right, I'm not sure why someone would mock a post if they didn't have a reason to, but thanks for the clarification.




> The stats show that there's a +18% increase in winning % when Kidd gets a TD. It is 12% more than when he misses it by 1. The sample size is big enough (4.5% of total games played by Kidd considering how difficult it is to achieve such stats). Should I show you the year-by-year breakdown of the games where Kidd has gotten a TD, or missed it by 1 and the corresponding winning %? As for the strength of the team, it doesn't matter because Kidd's TDs and misses by 1 are fairly evenly distributed throughout his career.


The sample size is not big enough to draw such conclusions with any reasonable level of certainty. If you wish to argue that simple fact with a statistics major, just ask.


----------



## ChristopherJ (Aug 10, 2004)

Jameh said:


> I'm trying to prove that his stats are inflated because he plays in a fastbreak system. Looking at his stats you should be able to see that.
> 
> If he played for a different team (ala Dallas) he's just a good player, not a HOF player. My point is, if he wouldn't have gone to the Suns we wouldn't be having this conversation. He flourishs and overachievs in the Sun's system, not because he's overly talented but because he's an overly perfect fit.
> 
> This thread is Kidd vs Nash. That means if you take both of them off of their teams to put them on yours, which one are you going to take. Nash isn't the player you all love away from the Suns. His game doesn't translate as well to other systems.


Who gives a ****?

The system that you speak of is *Nash* constantly maintaining the ball, *Nash* making the decisions, *Nash* setting up teammates, and *Nash* scoring the ball. Everything is controlled by Nash.

He isn't a product, but more the producer of the system. Vaguely saying he benefits from the system is complete BS when he does all the input himself. Everything he does he earns. He doesn't leach off this so called special system that inflates the man to MVP status.

He's being given a chance to lead a team, and he's doing it. It isn't his fault he was underutilized in Dallas.

Please watch a Suns game and tell me how Nash is a product of the system. I really an interested in how you will go about explaining it.


----------



## ChristopherJ (Aug 10, 2004)

Aurelino said:


> The stats show that there's a +18% increase in winning % when Kidd gets a TD. It is 12% more than when he misses it by 1. The sample size is big enough (4.5% of total games played by Kidd considering how difficult it is to achieve such stats). Should I show you the year-by-year breakdown of the games where Kidd has gotten a TD, or missed it by 1 and the corresponding winning %? As for the strength of the team, it doesn't matter because Kidd's TDs and misses by 1 are fairly evenly distributed throughout his career.


First of all, basically what you're saying is when Kidd has a good game his team's chances of winning increase. That should be obvious.

Second, an 18% increase in nothing to rave about. It's fairly signifcant, but certainly not that astonishing.

I'd like to see what the Suns record is when Nash has a game of 25/10. I'm sure like Kidd with his TD's, the Suns winning% goes up. That isn't extraordinary.. Usually when you're best player has a great game the team's chances of winning increase.


----------



## hobojoe (Jun 20, 2003)

KidCanada said:


> First of all, basically what you're saying is when Kidd has a good game his team's chances of winning increase. That should be obvious.
> 
> Second, an 18% increase in nothing to rave about. It's fairly signifcant, but certainly not that astonishing.
> 
> I'd like to see what the Suns record is when Nash has a game of 25/10. I'm sure like Kidd with his TD's, the Suns winning% goes up. That isn't extraordinary.. Usually when you're best player has a great game the team's chances of winning increase.


It's not even that so much as the fact he's is actually arguing that one more assist or rebound to bring him up to a triple double magically will drastically increase his team's winning percentage. As ridiculous as it sounds, he's actually arguing that.


----------



## BlakeJesus (Feb 1, 2006)

KidCanada said:


> Who gives a ****?
> 
> The system that you speak of is *Nash* constantly maintaining the ball, *Nash* making the decisions, *Nash* setting up teammates, and *Nash* scoring the ball. Everything is controlled by Nash.
> 
> ...


I GET it that he's got the ball in his hands, but when all you're doing is playing in 2 on 1 fast break situations it's not THAT hard to get a bucket.

Typical Nash *Edit - cant use that word* making it sound like the Suns are full of scrubs who are incapable of succeeding without their savior Stevie Nash. Obviously it's all Nash scoring the ball. Couldn't be any of the number of sharp shooters they have on that team. Right. Obviously it's only Steve Nash handling the ball every minute of the game, the system doesn't work when Barbosa gets in. OH WAIT. 

Not trying to take away from what Steve Nash brings to the Suns or anything, but I think you guys have it in your head that the Suns wouldn't be anything without Steve Nash. I'd be willing to bet you could place a number of players in Steve Nash's spot, and they could arguably put up better numbers.


----------



## ChristopherJ (Aug 10, 2004)

Jameh said:


> I GET it that he's got the ball in his hands, but when all you're doing is playing in 2 on 1 fast break situations it's not THAT hard to get a bucket.


This isn't the case whatsoever. Have you watched the Suns/Spurs series AT all? I only need one hand to count how many times the Suns have gotten odd man rushes. This series has been for the most part a half court series with very few fast breaks.

Nash's stats: *23 PPG, 12.5 APG, 50% 3P shooting and 50% FG shooting.*

Well above his season average. You're notion of why Nash has so much success doesn't correlate with what Nash actually does and how he does it.

No offense, but you should really try watching Nash play before you jump to oversimplified conclusions that aren't even true.




Jameh said:


> Typical Nash homer making it sound like the Suns are full of scrubs who are incapable of succeeding without their savior Stevie Nash. Obviously it's all Nash scoring the ball. Couldn't be any of the number of sharp shooters they have on that team.


You totally misunderstood what I said.

When Nash scores he usually scores off creating his own offense. His increase in points isn't because of the system(which you can't even elaborate on).



Jameh said:


> Right. Obviously it's only Steve Nash handling the ball every minute of the game, the system doesn't work when Barbosa gets in. OH WAIT.


Huh?



Jameh said:


> Not trying to take away from what Steve Nash brings to the Suns or anything, but I think you guys have it in your head that the Suns wouldn't be anything without Steve Nash. I'd be willing to bet you could place a number of players in Steve Nash's spot, and they could arguably put up better numbers.


Typical argument for posters such as yourself. ALL your arguments against Nash are hypothetical. Sorry, but that just isn't good enough.


----------



## BlakeJesus (Feb 1, 2006)

KidCanada said:


> This isn't the case whatsoever. Have you watched the Suns/Spurs series AT all? I only need one hand to count how many times the Suns have gotten odd man rushes. This series has been for the most part a half court series with very few fast breaks.
> 
> Nash's stats: *23 PPG, 12.5 APG, 50% 3P shooting and 50% FG shooting.*
> 
> ...


I call it objective thinking, you call it hypothetical. Guess we'll have to agree to disagree until he moves on to a different system (maybe?) and we see the truth.


----------



## ChristopherJ (Aug 10, 2004)

I'd respect your "objective" opinion more if you didn't credit Nash's success to the system, which you can't even elaborate on.

So far your only attempt at explaining the system is calling the Suns a fastbreak team, one in which Nash benfits from because they have an odd man rush every second play. Of course this is dead wrong.

Even worse, when I point out Nash's stats in a halfcourt style series(better than the regular season) you conveniently ignore them.

It's hard to classify anything you say as objective when it's pretty obvious you don't watch Nash and the Suns play.

Im done.

Later.


----------



## hobojoe (Jun 20, 2003)

Any response to my post to you, Jameh?


----------



## BlakeJesus (Feb 1, 2006)

hobojoe said:


> Mike Anderson comparison to Steve Nash? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think Mike Anderson was an MVP caliber player, even with the Broncos offensive line. That's why when he left the Broncos he had to find a new role, and he was no longer the player he was in Denver. Bottom line, if Steve Nash left the Suns this offseason the team he went to would change their system to fit him. We're talking about a two-time MVP, no team would be dumb enough to limit his abilities by playing a system where they're not utilized. Do you think the Washington Wizards would still run up and down the court playing one of the fastest paces in the league if they were to acquire Tim Duncan? Of course not, they would run a new offense that revolves around dumping the ball down low to him and having him make plays.


Not saying Mike Anderson was MVP caliber, just using him for an example of the system outweighing the talent.

So if you agree that the team would change systems to match up close to Phoenix's, how can you not say he's a product of that particular system if any other team would change their entire strategy to fit him? It makes sense to, not disagreeing there. He is brilliant in that system. However, he his game isn't going to translate like that to a different system. Call it Dallas under utilizing him if you'd like, that's simply the way you decided to spin the stats.

This thread all comes back to Kidd vs Nash. Does it not? I did say, in a run and gun system (ala Phoenix) I WOULD choose Nash. Outside of that particular system, I'll take Kidd. Do you disagree with that?

(btw, I didn't page back so I didn't see this response my bad :biggrin: )


----------



## 23isback (Mar 15, 2006)

Jameh said:


> Typical Nash homer making it sound like the Suns are full of scrubs who are incapable of succeeding without their savior Stevie Nash. Obviously it's all Nash scoring the ball. Couldn't be any of the number of sharp shooters they have on that team. Right. Obviously it's only Steve Nash handling the ball every minute of the game, the system doesn't work when Barbosa gets in. OH WAIT.


Typical Nash hater. Still upset the Lakers got demolished in the first round? Maybe the Suns aren't full of scrubs, but before Nash went to Pheonix, they were a joke of a team. Even with a core of Amare, Marion, and Starbury, these guys didn't even make the playoffs. They won 40+ more games the first year Nash came. If you watch the Suns at all, the team they are when Nash is running the show, and the type of team they are when he's out are very different. Sure, he has sharpshooters on his team, but who gets them open looks? Who sets up Amare for the easy dunk, or finds a cutting Marion? Your kidding yourself if you think Barbosa or anyone else on that team can run their system. Barbosa is more of an individual scorer. Why do you think the Suns lost that game in Pheonix? They had the momentum, then as soon as Nash gets out they collapsed and lost the game. Your post is a result of pure ignorance and lack of watching the Suns play. Stick to watching your Lakers. OH WAIT.


----------



## BlakeJesus (Feb 1, 2006)

23isback said:


> Typical Nash hater. Still upset the Lakers got demolished in the first round? Maybe the Suns aren't full of scrubs, but before Nash went to Pheonix, they were a joke of a team. Even with a core of Amare, Marion, and Starbury, these guys didn't even make the playoffs. They won 40+ more games the first year Nash came. If you watch the Suns at all, the team they are when Nash is running the show, and the type of team they are when he's out are very different. Sure, he has sharpshooters on his team, but who gets them open looks? Who sets up Amare for the easy dunk, or finds a cutting Marion? Your kidding yourself if you think Barbosa or anyone else on that team can run their system. Barbosa is more of an individual scorer. Why do you think the Suns lost that game in Pheonix? They had the momentum, then as soon as Nash gets out they collapsed and lost the game. Your post is a result of pure ignorance and lack of watching the Suns play. Stick to watching your Lakers. OH WAIT.


One you can't honestly count Amare as a core player at that time, he hadn't nearly developed into the player he is now.

Great Nash can find the open guy, along with every other PG in the league. Are you trying to argue that Kidd doesn't posses those same abilities? Kidd doesn't ever find Carter slashing to the hoop? Never sees Richard Jefferson for an open jumper? Never dumps it to Collins in the post? You make it seem like Nash invited the assist or something.

I didn't say Barbosa in particular could run that system all the time, but he does come in and TYPICALLY plays very well. Does he not? Great you can point out bad games to make it fit your opinion, but on average he'll do just fine in the system. Not trying to say Barbosa is on the same level as Nash, just saying the system works in players favor.

Way 2 personal attack.


----------



## RX (May 24, 2006)

Jameh said:


> This thread all comes back to Kidd vs Nash. Does it not? I did say, in a run and gun system (ala Phoenix) I WOULD choose Nash. Outside of that particular system, I'll take Kidd. Do you disagree with that?
> 
> (btw, I didn't page back so I didn't see this response my bad :biggrin: )


All of your posts indicate you obviously haven't watched either Nash or Kidd much....JKidd is a FASTBREAK point guard, he thrives in utilizing his rebounding to start the fast break and getting his teammates EASY buckets...I think he's actually better then Nash in this regard...

I think Nash is better at creating for his teammates overall, not just because of his passing ability but because of his ability to score (shooting and driving) so he can break down the D and get open looks for his teammates.

And you have to be absolutely JOKING if you think the Suns are even remotely the same when Nash is out..seriously have you even watched 1 Suns game at all this season? Barbosa doesn't create, hardly passes and just drives to the lane looking to create his own offense.


----------



## BlakeJesus (Feb 1, 2006)

RX said:


> *All of your posts indicate you obviously haven't watched either Nash or Kidd much....JKidd is a FASTBREAK point guard, he thrives in utilizing his rebounding to start the fast break and getting his teammates EASY buckets...I think he's actually better then Nash in this regard...
> *
> I think Nash is better at creating for his teammates overall, not just because of his passing ability but because of his ability to score (shooting and driving) so he can break down the D and get open looks for his teammates.
> 
> And you have to be absolutely JOKING if you think the Suns are even remotely the same when Nash is out..seriously have you even watched 1 Suns game at all this season? Barbosa doesn't create, hardly passes and just drives to the lane looking to create his own offense.


I never once said Kidd WASN'T a fast break point guard, Captain Assumption. I simply was giving props to Nash for being a great fast break PG.

Like I said AGAIN, I'm not trying to say Barbosa is on the same level as Nash. I've clearly pointed that out, by saying literally those exact words. HOWEVER, it's not like the Suns turn into an NBDL team when he gets on the court either. They'd still win a good chunk of games with Barbosa at the helm, even though he isn't half of Steve Nash. Not saying they'd be a 2 seed, but they'd be a good team still. And if Barbosa started, it's safe to say he'd average more assists in the Suns system than if he started for a different team running a different system, is it not? The same (though to a lesser degree) applies to Nash.

By the way, I'm curious how he doesn't create, yet all he does is drive to the lane creating his own offense? Contradict much?


----------



## RX (May 24, 2006)

Jameh said:


> By the way, I'm curious how he doesn't create, yet all he does is drive to the lane creating his own offense? Contradict much?


Barbosa could be good if he created for others, but when he drives, 9 times out of 10 he will jack up something irregardless if someone is wide open or if its a terrible shot...he just doesn't have the same mentallity/vision of a Nash/JKidd


----------



## kflo (Jun 28, 2002)

again, we should be able to agree that in ANY system, nash is simply a far superior offensive player. the question is then whether kidd's rebounding and diminished defensive capabilities make up for the big difference on offense. again, can the kidd people at least agree with this?


----------



## BlakeJesus (Feb 1, 2006)

kflo said:


> again, we should be able to agree that in ANY system, nash is simply a far superior offensive player. the question is then whether kidd's rebounding and diminished defensive capabilities make up for the big difference on offense. again, can the kidd people at least agree with this?


His "diminished defensive capabilities" are still far superior to Nash's best defensive days.

I can agree that Nash is a better offensive weapon, however that's only been stated by pro-Nash and admitted by pro-Kid a hundred times this thread.


----------



## kflo (Jun 28, 2002)

Jameh said:


> His "diminished defensive capabilities" are still far superior to Nash's best defensive days.
> 
> I can agree that Nash is a better offensive weapon, however that's only been stated by pro-Nash and admitted by pro-Kid a hundred times this thread.



but then you credit the system. nash is superior offensively, by a wide margin, in any system. he scores more, widely more efficient, puts far more pressure on a defense and improves spacing and options for his team. on just shooting alone, he scores about 3 more points per 10 shots a game. add the other offensive impacts and the gap widens. so, does kidd's value on the other side of the ball make up for that? it's a pretty wide gap to close.


----------



## JuniorNoboa (Jan 27, 2003)

Theonee said:


> Jason Kidd 100 times out of 100 for me. The only advantage Nash has on Kidd is shooting %, but as a PG, that is one of the least important skills for a point guard. Shooting higher % is the job of forwards and centers. PG's job is to set up team mates and defend your man *and rebound * if you can.


Outstanding. Let's set up the characteristics to whatever fits your bias. 

rebounding is more important for a pg then being able to score efficieintly. Brilliant.


----------



## DuMa (Dec 25, 2004)

if Nash leads the suns over the spurs to a victory tonight without diaw and amare, you can clearly make teh case for Nash.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

****, why did I miss this, I wanted to start this. I think with Kidd's recent performances, he's proven he's not as far off from Nash as people think. But Nash still gets the edge as a far more superior/efficient scorer. All in all, he's the better offensive player, and defensively neither has anything to say, so Nash still has the edge.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

futuristxen said:


> Jason Kidd doesn't have to score to take over a game. He can score zero points, but still impact the game. Assists, rebounds, steals. Probably the best point guard after the Magic-Stockton era.[/ESPNANALYSIS]


Bleh. Nash doesn't have to score either these days. And Kidd can't take over a game rebounding when his anemic offense can rarely convert. Nash isn't the better rebounder, but there's a much higher chance his rebounding leads to points, which renders him a major factor in the outcome of the game.

And noone takes over games with steals. You can decide the game with a steal, but noone's picking the ball play after play, so that's worthless. 

Nash and Kidd are on the same tier, I'll say that much. I never thought Nash was that much better than Kidd.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

_Dre_ said:


> and defensively neither has anything to say, so Nash still has the edge.


Jason Kidd is a fantastic defender. What are you talking about? He's the Nets go-to-guy on defense against Lebron at the end of games, which I think says everything that needs to be said. When is the last time Nash was put on someone to stop them?


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

futuristxen said:


> Jason Kidd is a fantastic defender. What are you talking about? He's the Nets go-to-guy on defense against Lebron at the end of games, which I think says everything that needs to be said. When is the last time Nash was put on someone to stop them?


Nope, Kidd gambles too much to be much more than average nowadays. He has the capabilities to be a good man defender but he doesn't utilize them often enough because he's too focused on getting the break started. 

And Kidd getting put on Lebron isn't because he's an inpenetrable force, it's because he's the best fit to guard Lebron at the end of games. If he was all that, he'd always be guarding Lebron. The way you manipulated that though made it looked like I said Nash was better, which I wasn't saying. "The edge" goes to Nash as the better player, which was what I was saying.


----------



## Aurelino (Jul 25, 2003)

_Dre_ said:


> And Kidd getting put on Lebron isn't because he's an inpenetrable force, it's because he's the best fit to guard Lebron at the end of games. *If he was all that, he'd always be guarding Lebron.* The way you manipulated that though made it looked like I said Nash was better, which I wasn't saying. "The edge" goes to Nash as the better player, which was what I was saying.


Guarding LeBron for the whole game is a tough ask physically, no matter who is guarding him. LeBron has about 4 inches and 30 lbs on Kidd, and considering how much energy Kidd expends running, rebounding and making plays, it wouldn't be reasonable to ask him to guard LBJ all game. Besides, LeBron is a smart player and if they had only one defender on him all game, he'd quickly figure out a way to score on him. That's why the Nets have given him different looks by throwing Kidd, RJ, Wright and Vince at times. That's the way to defend any premier scorer.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

Aurelino said:


> Guarding LeBron for the whole game is a tough ask physically, no matter who is guarding him. LeBron has about 4 inches and 30 lbs on Kidd, and considering how much energy Kidd expends running, rebounding and making plays, it wouldn't be reasonable to ask him to guard LBJ all game. Besides, LeBron is a smart player and if they had only one defender on him all game, he'd quickly figure out a way to score on him. That's why the Nets have given him different looks by throwing Kidd, RJ, Wright and Vince at times. That's the way to defend any premier scorer.


Alright, but that doesn't combat my main point. What do you think of him as a defender?


----------



## compsciguy78 (Dec 16, 2002)

My 2 cents...


As much as I hate Jason Kidd I can't deny what he has done in this playoffs and his career. 

IF you are talking pure offense, Nash might be one of the best PG's of all-time. 
When you think of Nash you think offense because that is where all his skills and abilities lie. 

Now you have Jason Kidd, who just by being somebody who can attempt to guard Lebron James brings more value to his team on the defensive end. 

Nash has no defense. He could be put in the bottom tier of PG defenders in the whole league. Nash rarely gets steals in the lane and that is considered poor man's PG defense by many. Nash is actually a liability on defense if teams would exploit this weakness. Kidd on the other hand can guard bigger players and players his own size with better then average ability and Kidd can get steals in the lane. When all is said an done, Nash doesn't bring any of those things to the table. 


Overall, as much as I hate Jason Kidd, he is the better PG on both ends.

Who would I rather have as my PG? Nash, because I like his style of play and I believe team basketball can cover up his weaknesses, kind of how the Suns have done. D'Antoni has done a great job of playing to his strentghs. This is what make him such a good coach, the ability to recogize every players strengths and weaknesses and use them in a team concept. This is basically what coaching is in a nutshell. 

It all depends on the team concept. Do you think Kidd would flourish in Phoenix? Probably so! Would roleplayers like Barbosa, Diaw, and Bell be as effective? Thats debatable, but I would say no. 
Nash to me is the superior offensive PG and the old adage goes.........

THE BEST DEFENSE IS A GOOD OFFENSE

Think about it...


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

compsciguy78 said:


> THE BEST DEFENSE IS A GOOD OFFENSE
> 
> Think about it...



And how many teams with that mindset have won anything?


----------



## Aurelino (Jul 25, 2003)

_Dre_ said:


> Alright, but that doesn't combat my main point. What do you think of him as a defender?


Ok, let me break down the various aspects of his defense:

1) He is not able to keep up with quick guards on the perimeter, so he gives up penetration, especially when his man is making a move from the top of the circle. To counter that, he many times leads his man into a trap along the baseline to get the ball out of his hands or force him to make a bad decision. 

2) He has the strength and the stamina to fight through screens and chase his man around. He's guarded players like Rip Hamilton, Micheal Redd and Ben Gordon successfully in the recent past. 

3) He is one of the best in the league at his position at denying his man the ball. We have seen it time and time again, when such a situation comes, he makes it extremely hard for his man to catch a pass from his teammates by constantly hounding him around. He did that to Ben Gordon a couple of times this season. Gordon ended up with very few touches in those games.

4) He is a terrific post-defender for his size. His strength enables him to guard SGs or even SFs in the post effectively. He has shown that he can guard 3s/4s on a switch as well. 

5) Kidd's strength over the years has always been in playing the passing lanes and disrupting the offense through interceptions and deflections. He's always been amongst the top 10-20 in steals per game. 

6) Kidd is a great team defender. He used to be one of the top help/recovery defenders in the league. He still does a very good job, but he doesn't recover as well as he used to, resulting in open shots on the perimeter. I think part of it has to do with Kidd's and the team's mindset. Many a times you see him playing a one-man zone, so he dares his man to hit the outside jumpers.

7) Finally, good defensive possessions are useless if defensive boards are not secured. Not only does Kidd grab them, he also often converts them into fastbreak baskets at the other end. 

In conclusion, I would say that not being able to contain quick guard penetration, and not recovering fast enough after providing help defense are Kidd's two weaknesses on D, but his strengths still outweigh them. So overall he is still a very good defender.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

Ok, I can't argue with an analysis like that, good post. I don't see how a poor penetration stopper is apt to guard Lebron though, especially not in the last minutes.


----------



## Aurelino (Jul 25, 2003)

_Dre_ said:


> Ok, I can't argue with an analysis like that, good post. I don't see how a poor penetration stopper is apt to guard Lebron though, especially not in the last minutes.


He has more trouble with quicker, smaller guards like Parker and Ford, and especially in the middle of the floor. In the final minutes, the Nets went with RJ initially, but when they switched, Kidd was on LeBron on the wing, where he is more comfortable. Plus, a big part of containing penetration is help D from the bigs. They have to step in as well.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

I think Kidd is at least a poor man's Eric Snow defensively at this time of his career.


----------



## BlakeJesus (Feb 1, 2006)

_Dre_ said:


> Bleh. Nash doesn't have to score either these days. And Kidd can't take over a game rebounding when his anemic offense can rarely convert. Nash isn't the better rebounder, but there's a much higher chance his rebounding leads to points, which renders him a major factor in the outcome of the game.
> 
> And noone takes over games with steals. You can decide the game with a steal, but noone's picking the ball play after play, so that's worthless.
> 
> *Nash and Kidd are on the same tier, I'll say that much. I never thought Nash was that much better than Kidd.*


I agree 100% except in reverse order/ I don't really think Kidd is that much better than Nash. However I still believe he is. It's possible to go either way with it, but I knew everybody would be pro-Nash and though I understand their points I'm still pro-Kidd.

By the way, that was a perfect analysis on Kidd's D. Couldn't have said any of it better myself.


----------



## jericho (Jul 12, 2002)

This thread contains healthy doses of both excellent analysis/argumentation, and blazing homerism.

I'll take Nash right now at this point in their respective careers, and to me it isn't even close unless you want to start making specific assumptions about teammates' strengths and coaching strategies. (That is, under certain circumstances I might be inclined toward Kidd.)

I gotta give props to Kidd, though. He's been close to vintage Jason in this postseason. And while this isn't the highest priority part of a PG's game, I haven't seen a guard rebounding like this since the days of Fat Lever (God bless him, wherever he is).


----------



## jericho (Jul 12, 2002)

A more interesting question to me that Nash vs. Kidd at the moment is whether anyone here is ready to put Baron (again?) on the same tier.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

jericho said:


> A more interesting question to me that Nash vs. Kidd at the moment is whether anyone here is ready to put Baron (again?) on the same tier.


No. Too erratic, not in the same tier as far as passing, intelligence, hence overrall playmaking. Not as team oriented. No knock on him though. Deron might have a better argument.


----------



## MarionBarberThe4th (Jul 7, 2005)

What would happen if Nash tried to guard Lebron in the 4th quarter?


----------



## L (Sep 20, 2005)

MarionBarberThe4th said:


> What would happen if Nash tried to guard Lebron in the 4th quarter?


Well, its easier for Kidd because he is stronger than Nash and takes more gambles defensively.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

_Dre_ said:


> No. Too erratic, not in the same tier as far as passing, intelligence, hence overrall playmaking. Not as team oriented. No knock on him though. Deron might have a better argument.


What do you mean not in the same tier as far as passing and intelligence? The Golden State system does now warrant the pg stacking up assists


----------



## BlakeJesus (Feb 1, 2006)

MarionBarberThe4th said:


> What would happen if Nash tried to guard Lebron in the 4th quarter?


LeBron would twist his ankle because he would be laughing too hard.

Similar to this ---> :lol:


----------



## BlakeJesus (Feb 1, 2006)

Astral Dragon said:


> Well, its easier for Kidd because he is stronger than Nash and takes more gambles defensively.


So pretty much, you're saying it's easier for Kidd because he's a better defender. Weird.


----------



## L (Sep 20, 2005)

Jameh said:


> So pretty much, you're saying it's easier for Kidd because he's a better defender. Weird.


Yes, I have a way with teh words.

I am, after all, 2dumb2live.


----------



## BlakeJesus (Feb 1, 2006)

Astral Dragon said:


> Yes, I have a way with teh words.
> 
> I am, after all, 2dumb2live.


Sounded like you were making an excuse for Nash not being able to guard Bron Bron besides the fact he's a poor defender.


----------



## Aurelino (Jul 25, 2003)

jericho said:


> A more interesting question to me that Nash vs. Kidd at the moment is whether anyone here is ready to put Baron (again?) on the same tier.


I think of Davis as a more athletic but less controlled version of Chauncey Billups. Both are strong guards who are primarily scoring PGs who are also pretty good playmakers.


----------



## jericho (Jul 12, 2002)

Aurelino said:


> I think of Davis as a more athletic but less controlled version of Chauncey Billups. Both are strong guards who are primarily scoring PGs who are also pretty good playmakers.


I'd say that's a nice comparison. I'd call Billups a better defender and Davis a more explosive scorer. Davis has been a better playmaker throughout most of his career, but Billups has improved quite a bit over the past 3 seasons.


----------



## L (Sep 20, 2005)

Jameh said:


> Sounded like you were making an excuse for Nash not being able to guard Bron Bron besides the fact he's a poor defender.


Nah, Kidd is the better defender.


----------



## hobojoe (Jun 20, 2003)

Jameh said:


> Not saying Mike Anderson was MVP caliber, just using him for an example of the system outweighing the talent.
> 
> So if you agree that the team would change systems to match up close to Phoenix's, how can you not say he's a product of that particular system if any other team would change their entire strategy to fit him? It makes sense to, not disagreeing there. He is brilliant in that system. However, he his game isn't going to translate like that to a different system. Call it Dallas under utilizing him if you'd like, that's simply the way you decided to spin the stats.
> 
> ...


Well it seems to me we're finally on the same page, or at least we're on the same chapter. We can agree that Nash is the MVP Nash that we've come to know only in the current system he is in. In your words, he is brilliant in that system. Indeed his game will not translate into a different system. If this thread comes down to Kidd vs. Nash and you agree that any team with Nash would be stupid not to run the system that suits him best, the question now becomes is there any system in which Jason Kidd is more effective than Nash is in the Suns' system? I say no, there's no system you can run where Kidd will be better or more effective than Nash is in his current system in Phoenix.


----------



## kflo (Jun 28, 2002)

kidd has the ability to guard bigger players because he's big and strong for a pg. there's some value in this versatility, but for the 95% of the time he has to guard his position, it's not that much of an asset. and his advantage in guarding his position is not nearly as large, imo, as nash's large offensive advantage, in terms of overall impact. kidd's rebounding lessens the gap further, but kidd's not having the same overall impact on the off-def efficiency differential as nash. again, nash scores about 3 pts more for every 10 shot attempts, and the impact on the overall offense is even greater as he requires more attention and provides better spacing. to have that kind of defensive impact would be enormous.


----------



## SeaNet (Nov 18, 2004)

KidCanada said:


> Showing your complete ignorance once again, and proving that you don't even watch the Suns play.
> 
> Nash has played solid defense all postseason while Jason Kidd was consistently burned all series by the Raptors PG's. Not to say Nash is as good a defender as Kidd, not at all, but to say one plays defense while the other does not is a moronic oversimplification that isn't remotely true. This whole notion that Nash doesn't play defense is dead wrong, and Kidd isn't nearly as good a defender as he used to be. At this point I'd say Nash is an underrated defender, whereas Kidd is probably overrated defensively at this point.


lol, I love that you are criticizing someone for not knowing how the Suns play and then you jump in w/ something that demonstrates your complete and total ignorance of how the Nets were playing. The whole defensive plan for the Nets in the Raptors series was to let the PGs shoot, and have Kidd go under all the screens to in fact encourage them to do so. As a result, the PGs put up good numbers, and the Nets won the series. Additionally Kidd's role defensively in general is all about team defense, not one on one defense. The plan for the team is for Kidd to roam all over the court helping out, doubling and looking to make plays, not sticking to his man.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

HB said:


> What do you mean not in the same tier as far as passing and intelligence? The Golden State system does now warrant the pg stacking up assists


Well he didn't do it in New Orleans, and like I said, you can tell he just doesn't have the passing or IQ they have, because he would've exhibited it at some point in 6-7 years, trust me. 

Believe me, if he was capable of being Steve Nash or Jason Kidd, Nelson or Scott would've conformed their systems to concur. I mean even with the Hornets, he did what he wanted with the ball, and he never consistently touched Kidd or Nash's production. But he's not, and you don't need to be in a certain system to see that. 

Intelligence and passing has nothing to do with your system, you have your skill level and that's it.


----------



## JuX (Oct 11, 2005)

Overall, Jason Kidd.

Right now, Steve Nash.


----------



## BlakeJesus (Feb 1, 2006)

hobojoe said:


> Well it seems to me we're finally on the same page, or at least we're on the same chapter. We can agree that Nash is the MVP Nash that we've come to know only in the current system he is in. In your words, he is brilliant in that system. Indeed his game will not translate into a different system. If this thread comes down to Kidd vs. Nash and you agree that any team with Nash would be stupid not to run the system that suits him best, the question now becomes is there any system in which Jason Kidd is more effective than Nash is in the Suns' system? I say no, there's no system you can run where Kidd will be better or more effective than Nash is in his current system in Phoenix.


Hmm. That is a true thinker, sadly I'm not in the thinker mood.

It's tough because I can sit here and say Kidd's half court game > Nash's fast break but I can't honestly make a case for that because Suns > Nets. 

To me that would come down more to what kind of players they're surrounded by. Put Kidd on the Spurs instead of Tony Parker, then I'd say Kidd > Nash. But that's pretty simple to counter argue.

That's honestly a tough thing to make a case for, because there are a lot of outside aspects beyond simply just Kidd's skill set versus Nash's skill set know what I mean?


----------



## hobojoe (Jun 20, 2003)

Jameh said:


> Hmm. That is a true thinker, sadly I'm not in the thinker mood.
> 
> It's tough because I can sit here and say Kidd's half court game > Nash's fast break but I can't honestly make a case for that because Suns > Nets.
> 
> ...


I know what you mean, and I agree with the Kidd on Spurs example. But like you've been saying this thread is about Kidd vs. Nash, and in almost every case I'd say that Nash would be my pick because I know that I can implement the fast pace Phoenix Sun offense and have an MVP caliber PG and a 60+ win team. I wouldn't take my chances with needing to have the right players around Kidd.


----------



## hobojoe (Jun 20, 2003)

_Dre_ said:


> Well he didn't do it in New Orleans, and like I said, you can tell he just doesn't have the passing or IQ they have, because he would've exhibited it at some point in 6-7 years, trust me.
> 
> Believe me, if he was capable of being Steve Nash or Jason Kidd, Nelson or Scott would've conformed their systems to concur.


Right. Just like if Steve Nash was capable of being an MVP caliber player, a coach like Nelson certainly would've conformed his system in Dallas to...oh wait


----------



## ChristopherJ (Aug 10, 2004)

SeaNet said:


> lol, I love that you are criticizing someone for not knowing how the Suns play and then you jump in w/ something that demonstrates your complete and total ignorance of how the Nets were playing. The whole defensive plan for the Nets in the Raptors series was to let the PGs shoot, and have Kidd go under all the screens to in fact encourage them to do so. As a result, the PGs put up good numbers, and the Nets won the series. Additionally Kidd's role defensively in general is all about team defense, not one on one defense. The plan for the team is for Kidd to roam all over the court helping out, doubling and looking to make plays, not sticking to his man.


So me saying Kidd was consistently burned by Ford and Calderon shows total ignorance to how the Nets were playing? How does that work?

All I've said is that Kidd isn't as good at defense as he used to be, ESPECIALLY on the perimeter. Since Kidd was letting Calderon/Ford shoot, then the fact that they STILL penetrated quite easily only furthers my point.

Nothing I've said has shown ignorance to the NJ system... If you think Kidd is still as good a defender as he used to be then I'd say you're in the minority.


----------



## BlakeJesus (Feb 1, 2006)

KidCanada said:


> So me saying Kidd was consistently burned by Ford and Calderon shows total ignorance to how the Nets were playing? How does that work?
> 
> All I've said is that Kidd isn't as good at defense as he used to be, ESPECIALLY on the perimeter. Since Kidd was letting Calderon/Ford shoot, then the fact that they STILL penetrated quite easily only furthers my point.
> 
> Nothing I've said has shown ignorance to the NJ system... If you think Kidd is still as good a defender as he used to be then I'd say you're in the minority.


I don't think anybody is arguing that he's as good as he was earlier in his career. They're simply pointing out that you are just looking at box scores, because the system was DESIGNED to let those guys take the open jumpers. Maybe that doesn't seem logical to you, but would you rather have Bosh open for a bucket near the basket, or let Ford/Calderon out shoot you?


----------



## ChristopherJ (Aug 10, 2004)

Jameh said:


> I don't think anybody is arguing that he's as good as he was earlier in his career. They're simply pointing out that you are just looking at box scores, because the system was DESIGNED to let those guys take the open jumpers. Maybe that doesn't seem logical to you, but would you rather have Bosh open for a bucket near the basket, or let Ford/Calderon out shoot you?


Where have I ever mentioned Ford's or Calderon's stats or how many open jumpers they got? What I keep reiterating is that Kidd isn't as good a perimeter defender as he used to be. The fact that Calderon and Ford seemed to penetrate relatively easily on Kidd even though he was giving them the jumper most of the time only proves MY point.

READING COMPREHENSION PLEASE!


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

_Dre_ said:


> Well he didn't do it in New Orleans, and like I said, you can tell he just doesn't have the passing or IQ they have, because he would've exhibited it at some point in 6-7 years, trust me.
> 
> Believe me, if he was capable of being Steve Nash or Jason Kidd, Nelson or Scott would've conformed their systems to concur. I mean even with the Hornets, he did what he wanted with the ball, and he never consistently touched Kidd or Nash's production. But he's not, and you don't need to be in a certain system to see that.
> 
> Intelligence and passing has nothing to do with your system, you have your skill level and that's it.


You know that year that Jamal Magloire made the all star game, he benefitted A LOT from playing with Baron. Baron is definitely one of the best passers in the game. And yes to a certain extent he did have some successful seasons in NO, its not like he is T-mac that never made it out of the first round. Lets not forget he played with Jamal Mashburn who was a pretty effective scorer and demanded the ball a lot in his own right. Also check out the Games played numbers, the guy has never been blessed with the healthy seasons that Nash and Kidd have. His minutes are constantly flunctuating


----------



## BlakeJesus (Feb 1, 2006)

KidCanada said:


> Where have I ever mentioned Ford's or Calderon's stats or how many open jumpers they got? What I keep reiterating is that Kidd isn't as good a perimeter defender as he used to be. The fact that Calderon and Ford seemed to penetrate relatively easily on Kidd even though he was giving them the jumper most of the time only proves MY point.
> 
> READING COMPREHENSION PLEASE!


Do you think it's overly hard to penetrate when you have position on your guy? Kidd's hustling back from doubling Bosh, that leaves Ford/Calderon ample time to find the easiest penetration point. Curse Kidd for not catching that every time. Sure maybe a couple years ago Kidd WOULD have stopped that. I really don't understand who you're fighting with here, nobody is claiming Kidd is as good of a defender as he once was.


----------



## Aurelino (Jul 25, 2003)

Ford and Caledron are the kind of guards who will trouble most teams with their penetration. However, both of them shot a worse % in the first round on shots near the basket compared to the regular season.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

hobojoe said:


> Right. Just like if Steve Nash was capable of being an MVP caliber player, a coach like Nelson certainly would've conformed his system in Dallas to...oh wait



He's made improvements on his game, but as a whole, he played the same game here he does in Phoenix, but like I always say, the system inflates his production. 

Nash didn't change his skillset any from Dallas to Phoenix, so yeah, my point remains true.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

HB said:


> You know that year that Jamal Magloire made the all star game, he benefitted A LOT from playing with Baron. Baron is definitely one of the best passers in the game. And yes to a certain extent he did have some successful seasons in NO, its not like he is T-mac that never made it out of the first round. Lets not forget he played with Jamal Mashburn who was a pretty effective scorer and demanded the ball a lot in his own right. Also check out the Games played numbers, the guy has never been blessed with the healthy seasons that Nash and Kidd have. His minutes are constantly flunctuating


I'm not arguing that he's not great, he is...but he's not Kidd or Nash. Either of them could have an argument for one of the greatest PGs ever, Baron is great, but those two are historically above him. Baron helped make Magloire an all-star, but how good was that team? A middling eastern conference team. Kidd took a team with a similarly weak roster to the finals twice...they've been doing what Baron did in these playoffs all their careers, and injuries to Baron aren't the only reason. 

He's great, yes, but he's more selfish than either Nash or Kidd, which separates them. I can't remember that last 7 point, 13 assist type night Baron's had. I think he looks for his own offense first, something neither Kidd nor Nash do. This wouldn't even be an argument if it weren't for Davis' playoff run, don't let emotions sway you into overreacting.

He's on a tier with Iverson, Arenas, Williams and the like. Second tier.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

_Dre_ said:


> I'm not arguing that he's not great, he is...but he's not Kidd or Nash. Either of them could have an argument for one of the greatest PGs ever, Baron is great, but those two are historically above him. Baron helped make Magloire an all-star, but how good was that team? A middling eastern conference team. Kidd took a team with a similarly weak roster to the finals twice...they've been doing what Baron did in these playoffs all their careers, and injuries to Baron aren't the only reason.
> 
> He's great, yes, but he's more selfish than either Nash or Kidd, which separates them. I can't remember that last 7 point, 13 assist type night Baron's had. I think he looks for his own offense first, something neither Kidd nor Nash do. This wouldn't even be an argument if it weren't for Davis' playoff run, don't let emotions sway you into overreacting.
> 
> He's on a tier with Iverson, Arenas, Williams and the like. Second tier.


I have always said he is a notch below those two. I just didnt agree with you saying he isnt as good of a playmaker. This opinion has nothing to do with the Warriors run this season. Baron has always been one of my favorite players.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

HB said:


> I have always said he is a notch below those two. I just didnt agree with you saying he isnt as good of a playmaker. This opinion has nothing to do with the Warriors run this season. Baron has always been one of my favorite players.


Mine as well...but the fact of the matter IMO is that if he was as good a playmaker as them he'd probably be better than both, seeing as how he's a superior scorer to either. The gap between the guys is in regards to playmaking, or more aptly, their mentalities towards playmaking.


----------



## SoCalfan21 (Jul 19, 2004)

Jizzy said:


> Jason Kidd.
> 
> Give me the PG that plays both ends, rebounds, defends and can still make plays. He outthinks other PGs and can step up and defend other positions. Imagine Nash on Kobe, Lamar Odom, Lebron James? And now, Nash is on the brink of being eliminated by the Spurs while garnering 2 MVP awards, the second one he was not deserving of.
> 
> Career wise, no comparison. What Steve Nash is doing now, Kidd has been doing for years. He's been farther then Nash in the playoffs and should have won MVP his first year in NJ when he took a former joke of a team to the NBA Finals. Nash won MVP his first season in Phoenix for taking his team to the Conference Finals?


I agree with everything you said for once. Good Work!


----------



## kflo (Jun 28, 2002)

personally, i think sa would be easily better with nash than kidd. they'd still be a great rebounding and defensive team with nash instead of parker, but they'd have even better spacing offensively with nash spreading the floor for duncan. the offensive differential again would be greater than the additional defense and rebounding kidd would provide. ironically, dallas could be a team that benefits most with kidd instead of nash. the nets, as situated, also need kidd's rebounding and toughness.


----------



## Jizzy (Aug 24, 2005)

Kidd holds LeBron to 20 pts. while scoring 20 himself, 8 boards and 6 assists.

As Charles Barkely said "If you don't love Jason Kidd, you don't love NBA basketball"


----------



## Futurama_Fanatic (Jul 21, 2005)

Jizzy said:


> As Charles Barkely said "If you don't love Jason Kidd, you don't love NBA basketball"


nobody speaks more eloquently than Charles Barkley [/sarcasm]


----------



## Jizzy (Aug 24, 2005)

ClippersRuleLA said:


> nobody speaks more eloquently than Charles Barkley [/sarcasm]



Yeah, I doubt he's the only one who believes that.


----------



## hobojoe (Jun 20, 2003)

_Dre_ said:


> He's made improvements on his game, but as a whole, he played the same game here he does in Phoenix, but like I always say, the system inflates his production.
> 
> Nash didn't change his skillset any from Dallas to Phoenix, so yeah, my point remains true.


This post is one giant contradiction. Nash's skillset didn't change from Dallas to Phoenix, which is exactly why your point isn't true. He didn't change his skillset or add anything to his game, he was just utilized better in D'Antoni's system. 

You don't seem to realize that every fast pace offense is not the same. There aren't just two offensive systems as your posting seems to indicate you believe, there are many different styles of play and systems, not just fast or slow. Dallas didn't play the same system or really even close to the same as Phoenix does. Bottom line, Nash is much more effective in Phoenix' system than Dallas', meaning he was not properly used in Dallas. No matter how you slice it, a mere borderline all-star who is turned into an MVP once he goes into a new system was being underutilized on his previous team.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

hobojoe said:


> This post is one giant contradiction. Nash's skillset didn't change from Dallas to Phoenix, which is exactly why your point isn't true. He didn't change his skillset or add anything to his game, he was just utilized better in D'Antoni's system.
> 
> You don't seem to realize that every fast pace offense is not the same. There aren't just two offensive systems as your posting seems to indicate you believe, there are many different styles of play and systems, not just fast or slow. Dallas didn't play the same system or really even close to the same as Phoenix does. Bottom line, Nash is much more effective in Phoenix' system than Dallas', meaning he was not properly used in Dallas. No matter how you slice it, a mere borderline all-star who is turned into an MVP once he goes into a new system was being underutilized on his previous team.


I never said they had the same system, in fact I've been telling people all year their offenses are predicated on different methods.

And like I said, his basic skillset and talent was the same..his game, and the way he ran things in Dallas isn't all that much different from the way he runs things in Phoenix, and even though they don't run the same system, his qualities as a Maverick are more amplified then changed from place to place. You may call it underutilization, but I disagree, it's hard to believe with the way Nash controlled things in Dallas he was underutilized, the difference is that in Dallas there were two guys considered on his tier, so he had to basically share more than he did in Phoenix. 

I wouldn't say he was any _less_ effective, or efficient as a Maverick, he just didn't get the same oppurtunities, and rightfully so considering the people he played with. Nash plays in a system where people feed off of him, whereas in Dallas, a lot of the guys were capable of scoring without being spoonfed, and that's not to necessarily demean Phoenix's players.

And even still, this was an almost irrelevant part of my argument. Baron was never underutilized, therefore there's no excuse for him not displaying Kiddesque playmaking ability.


----------



## eymang (Dec 15, 2006)

Didn't read through the enitre thread, just early on,

but find it funny that age is mentioned, Kidd is a whopping 1 year older.

While we're talking, let's throw Chris Paul into the conversation. About to get to 'Steve Nash' type numbers faster than Nash


----------



## eymang (Dec 15, 2006)

lessthanjake said:


> Just some food for thought:
> 
> If Jason Kidd shot at Nash's .654 True Shooting % this year instead of his .516 TS%, the Nets would have scored 3.476 more points per game. That actually equates to roughly almost 10 extra wins (9.95 more to be exact) for the Nets (when plugged into the Expected Win/Loss record formula from basketballreference.com). Shooting percentage matters. A LOT. Nash is probably the best shooter in the league. Kidd is one of the worst.


Do the same thing for me for points given up


----------



## eymang (Dec 15, 2006)

KidCanada said:


> Pacific, meaning all Nets game are on at 4PM on weekdays.
> 
> What time does a Suns game start in NJ? 9.. maybe 10 o'clock. I'm sure you guys watch plenty of Nash's "abysmal" defense..


We're not 60 year olds, I think we can stay up, especially when it's going to be a good matchup, plus they're on national tv all the time, and don't act like they never play on the east coast


----------



## 23isback (Mar 15, 2006)

_Dre_ said:


> And how many teams with that mindset have won anything?


Well Pheonix has made it to the WCF 2 years in a row and they've also won 60+ games 2 out of the last 3 years.

The Warriors beat Dallas in the first round.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

23isback said:


> Well Pheonix has made it to the WCF 2 years in a row and they've also won 60+ games 2 out of the last 3 years.
> 
> The Warriors beat Dallas in the first round.


Won as in titles.


----------



## jerkstore (Nov 3, 2006)

the thing is that both of these guys are up there with Pistol Pete and Bob Cousy. gotta go with Kidd though.


----------



## Jizzy (Aug 24, 2005)

23isback said:


> Well Pheonix has made it to the WCF 2 years in a row and they've also won 60+ games 2 out of the last 3 years.
> 
> The Warriors beat Dallas in the first round.



Really? And how many Finals appearances have the Suns had? Dallas was a better defensive team last season, they beat them in 6. San Antonio was the better defensive team two years ago and closed them out in 5 and could close them out in 6 today. 

BTW, GS lost to the better DEFENSIVE team Utah.


----------



## Theonee (Dec 5, 2006)

Kidd went down fighting and Nash went down quitting.


----------



## Clayton_Bigsby (Jan 30, 2004)

Anyone dropping the Finals argument is full of ****. Kidd could'nt get out of the first round whenhe was in Phoenix, but he goes to the East and all of a sudden is an MVP canidate and goes to the Finals in the single worst era in the history of the division and all of a sudden he's GOD. How duid the Nets do in those two Finals apearances? what something like 1-8

This Phoenix team would have destroyed Kidd's finals teams easily. Im sorry does anyone really even question that? Like Kidd could have beat SA this year, come on now, did anyone actually watch that Cavs/Nets series? it set Basketball back 50 years.


As someone who has watch both Kidd and Nash play for years up close I will tell you its really not a contest between the two. Nash is hands down the better player. Both are feakish passers thats a given, Kidd is naturally bigger and a better rebounder, please dont come at me with defense cause Kidd's D is highly overrated, but he is still better than Nash, Nash is by far the better scorer and shooter.

However where Nash wins is his unquestioned leadership. He is always there to call out a teamate if he feels he's not holding up his end, Or there with words of encouragemnet when someone is down and he is the guy to take that big shot at the end of the game thats where Nash wins this.


----------



## Jizzy (Aug 24, 2005)

> Anyone dropping the Finals argument is full of ****. Kidd could'nt get out of the first round whenhe was in Phoenix, but he goes to the East and all of a sudden is an MVP canidate and goes to the Finals in the single worst era in the history of the division and all of a sudden he's GOD. How duid the Nets do in those two Finals apearances? what something like 1-8


They took the Spurs to 6 games and if Byron Scott hadn't have blown the series by refusing to play Mutombo, the Nets could have been champs.



> This Phoenix team would have destroyed Kidd's finals teams easily. Im sorry does anyone really even question that? Like Kidd could have beat SA this year, come on now, did anyone actually watch that Cavs/Nets series? it set Basketball back 50 years.


Your argument is flawed. That Finals team was a completely different team then this one so there was no point in your bringing up the Nets-Cavs series. As for the Finals team vs. phoenix, we'll never know so I have full rights to question it.



> As someone who has watch both Kidd and Nash play for years up close I will tell you its really not a contest between the two. Nash is hands down the better player. Both are feakish passers thats a given, Kidd is naturally bigger and a better rebounder, please dont come at me with defense cause Kidd's D is highly overrated, but he is still better than Nash, Nash is by far the better scorer and shooter.


You're right Nash is the better scorer and shooter but Kidd by far is the better rebounder, and defender.



> However where Nash wins is his unquestioned leadership. He is always there to call out a teamate if he feels he's not holding up his end, Or there with words of encouragemnet when someone is down and he is the guy to take that big shot at the end of the game thats where Nash wins this.


Nash wins the unquestioned leadership, huh. Honestly, if you're doubting Kidd's leadership, I don't think we need to keep arguing this. We both know where you stand.


----------



## Clayton_Bigsby (Jan 30, 2004)

Jizzy said:


> They took the Spurs to 6 games and if Byron Scott hadn't have blown the series by refusing to play Mutombo, the Nets could have been champs.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The Nets could have been champs? come on now guy.

Yes I doubt it since I watched Kidd here in Phoenix get thrown out in the first round year after year


----------



## TheTruth34 (Jul 22, 2006)

jerkstore said:


> the thing is that both of these guys are up there with Pistol Pete and Bob Cousy. gotta go with Kidd though.


ok so heres the thing, MAGIC was the best player to ever play the point guard position, but was he the best pure point guard ever, sure he scored and could play all five positions, and yes he is a better overall player than kidd and nash hands down, but this is where i stretch it, and honestly i believe that Steve Nash is the best ''pure'' point guard of all time. He makes everyone better and with his uncanny courtvision, and super hero like passes. Nash will be remembered forever. yes Jason Kidd is the better overall player along with Bob Cousy and John Stockton, they are all better than Nash overall, but Lil Stevie is the best pure point guard to play the game of basketball, he got cheated out of a third MVP, kuz Dirk's team won 67 games.


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

TheTruth34 said:


> ok so heres the thing, MAGIC was the best player to ever play the point guard position, but was he the best pure point guard ever, sure he scored and could play all five positions, and yes he is a better overall player than kidd and nash hands down, but this is where i stretch it, and honestly i believe that Steve Nash is the best ''pure'' point guard of all time. He makes everyone better and with his uncanny courtvision, and super hero like passes. Nash will be remembered forever. yes Jason Kidd is the better overall player along with Bob Cousy and John Stockton, they are all better than Nash overall, but Lil Stevie is the best pure point guard to play the game of basketball, he got cheated out of a third MVP, kuz Dirk's team won 67 games.


That's just flat out bull.The best point guard in history can't just be another guy for the first eight years of his career.Nash has played three seasons at a pretty high level,Stockton did the same stuff for about fifteen years.15>>>3 as best I can figure.In fact from his third season own every season in Stockton's career was as good or better than anything Nash has done.If Nash played at his current level until he was 45 then you can start talking about him and Stockton in the same sentence.Until then he's not even top ten because the first eight years of his career are quite forgettable by any such standards.


----------



## Aurelino (Jul 25, 2003)

TheTruth34 said:


> ok so heres the thing, MAGIC was the best player to ever play the point guard position, but was he the best pure point guard ever, sure he scored and could play all five positions, and yes he is a better overall player than kidd and nash hands down, but this is where i stretch it, and honestly i believe that Steve Nash is the best ''pure'' point guard of all time. He makes everyone better and with his uncanny courtvision, and super hero like passes. Nash will be remembered forever. yes Jason Kidd is the better overall player along with Bob Cousy and John Stockton, they are all better than Nash overall, but Lil Stevie is the best pure point guard to play the game of basketball, he got cheated out of a third MVP, kuz Dirk's team won 67 games.


LOL. Steve Nash is the best pure PG to ever play the game (for the Phoenix Suns in the last 5 years).


----------



## 77AJ (Feb 16, 2005)

Today during the game at the half. Eric Snow picked Jason Kidd as one of the top 5 point guards ever, and guess who was missing from his list, that would be Steve Nash.


----------



## Real (Aug 3, 2005)

23AJ said:


> Today during the game at the half. Eric Snow picked Jason Kidd as one of the top 5 point guards ever, and guess who was missing from his list, that would be Steve Nash.


LeBron also called Kidd the best point gaurd in the league.


----------



## Coatesvillain (Jul 17, 2002)

MarionBarberThe4th said:


> What would happen if Nash tried to guard Lebron in the 4th quarter?


Lebron would hold the ball until there's 7 seconds left on the shot clock drive in the lane taking four steps, gets fouled by Amare and goes to the line. Bucket and the foul.


----------



## yuyuza1 (May 24, 2006)

Theonee said:


> Kidd went down fighting and Nash went down quitting.



Anyone else feel like shredding this post to pieces? Maybe tomorrow....

I'm surprised no one else has replied.


----------

