# Jason Kidd is not a top 5 PG?



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

I was doing my year end review of the players and I honestly don't know what to do with Jason Kidd

1. Steve Nash
2. Chauncey Billups
3. Gilbert Arenas
4. Tony Parker
5. Allen Iverson

Am I wrong? Where does Kidd fit in all of this?


----------



## The MAMBA (Jan 6, 2006)

1) Steve Nash
2) Chauncey Billups
3) Jason Kidd
4) Allen Iverson
5) Gilbert Arenas

Ain't no way TP should be listed as one of the top 5 best PG's in the game. Overrated.


----------



## iverson101 (Mar 4, 2006)

I would probably take the above list, might switch Billups and Kidd.


----------



## bronx43 (Dec 9, 2005)

The MAMBA said:


> 1) Steve Nash
> 2) Chauncey Billups
> 3) Jason Kidd
> 4) Allen Iverson
> ...


TP is number six in my mind. There is no way he is overrated. I almost never hear about him from either television analysts or sportswriters. He is the engine of the Spurs with his unstoppable penetration. Especially this year when TD is playing with an injury, the Spurs offense goes through him.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Tony Parker is overrated? How is he overrated? Tony is shooting 54.6% from the field and his team has over 60 wins with Ginobili out much of the year and Duncan playing below normal.

How can TP be overrated? 

19.1 ppg, 5.8 apg, 3.3 rpg, 1.05 spg


----------



## iverson101 (Mar 4, 2006)

HKF said:


> Tony Parker is overrated? How is he overrated? Tony is shooting 54.6% from the field and his team has over 60 wins with Ginobili out much of the year and Duncan playing below normal.
> 
> How can TP be overrated?
> 
> 19.1 ppg, 5.8 apg, 3.3 rpg, 1.05 spg


He's overrated because you say he is a top 4 PG when he is not. Overrated is when people say a player is much better than they actually are. So by you saying he is a top 4 PG, when he isn't that makes him overrated. That's how.


----------



## The MAMBA (Jan 6, 2006)

HKF said:


> Tony Parker is overrated? How is he overrated? Tony is shooting 54.6% from the field and his team has over 60 wins with Ginobili out much of the year and Duncan playing below normal.
> 
> How can TP be overrated?
> 
> 19.1 ppg, 5.8 apg, 3.3 rpg, 1.05 spg


Yes, great stats. I never said he couldn't play. But it has been ONE season. Those other guys have been doing it alot longer and better with the exception of Arenas. Arenas has to shoulder a bigger load than Mr. Parker, who isn't even expected to be the second best player ont he team... In addittion Arenas is just a more talented player all around than Parker. That's why I don't say he is top 5. Is he Top Ten? Sure... not top 5.

As for his team's success... he plays under one of the best coaches in the league, with an experienced, and very talented supporting cast, made up of nothing but proven winners. Michael Finely, Nick Van Excel, Brent Barry, Robert Horry, Bruce Bowen, Manu Ginobili ... etc. It's nothing that special. They should win that many games. That have had roughly the same team, with good chemistry for 4-5 years running now.


----------



## tone wone (Jan 30, 2003)

iverson101 said:


> He's overrated because you say he is a top 4 PG when he is not. Overrated is when people say a player is much better than they actually are. So by you saying he is a top 4 PG, when he isn't that makes him overrated. That's how.


 and there you have it.


----------



## Tragedy (Dec 9, 2002)

The MAMBA said:


> Yes, great stats. I never said he couldn't play. But it has been ONE season. Those other guys have been doing it alot longer and better with the exception of Arenas. Arenas has to shoulder a bigger load than Mr. Parker, who isn't even expected to be the second best player ont he team... In addittion Arenas is just a more talented player all around than Parker. That's why I don't say he is top 5. Is he Top Ten? Sure... not top 5.
> 
> As for his team's success... he plays under one of the best coaches in the league, with an experienced, and very talented supporting cast, made up of nothing but proven winners. Michael Finely, Nick Van Excel, Brent Barry, Robert Horry, Bruce Bowen, Manu Ginobili ... etc. It's nothing that special. They should win that many games. That have had roughly the same team, with good chemistry for 4-5 years running now.


 WHAT? In all reality, this is the only the season Billups has been playing at a high level, and he's been playing solid only two years before that.

Gilbert Arenas has been playing at a higher level for a longer period of time, and Tony Parker has been putting up better numbers than Billups for a longer period as well.

Steve Nash has only played at a High level for 2 seasons now, and has been solid since 00-01, only TWO seasons longer than Tony Parker.

As for the second paragraph, you can say the same exact thing for Billups.


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

Tony Parker is the odd man out. The other four (Billups, Nash, Arenas, Iverson) are just out of his league. I think Jason Kidd and Tony Parker are comparable though, so they can battle for the 5th spot.


----------



## The MAMBA (Jan 6, 2006)

Billups has been playing at this SAME exact level since he got into Detroit. It's just this year they have racked up alot more victories then they have in season's past, mainly due to an opened up offense and even more chemistry and experience with his teammates.


----------



## Aurelino (Jul 25, 2003)

HKF said:


> I was doing my year end review of the players and I honestly don't know what to do with Jason Kidd
> 
> 1. Steve Nash
> 2. Chauncey Billups
> ...


Kidd is 
5th in APG (Only Billups and Nash ahead of him from that list)
4th in A/TO (Only Billups ahead of him; Parker is 55th)
8th in SPG (only Iverson and Arenas ahead of him)
1st in triple-doubles 
There's no point even mentioning rebounding here. 

Plus, the leadership that Kidd provides on the court (and which is an important quality of a PG) is something Parker can only dream about. 
Arenas is a better scorer, not a better PG. Parker is not a better PG.


----------



## The MAMBA (Jan 6, 2006)

Actually, to be honest.... Chris Paul should be up in there as well. To have the ability to take the NO Hornets and actually have them in contension, and be the undisputed leader with is teammates following him as a rookie...I could make a case for him having to be in there too. And I think Chris Paul is already a better PG than TP. Real Talk.


----------



## Tragedy (Dec 9, 2002)

The MAMBA said:


> Billups has been playing at this SAME exact level since he got into Detroit. It's just this year they have racked up alot more victories then they have in season's past, mainly due to an opened up offense and even more chemistry and experience with his teammates.


 No, not the exact same level at all. He is playing at a higher level this season.


----------



## The MAMBA (Jan 6, 2006)

Tragedy said:


> No, not the exact same level at all. He is playing at a higher level this season.


No. If you actually watched the Piston's for the past 3-4 seasons, you would know that he really isn't doing anything different now from when he got the job a few years back. He is only averaging 2 ppg more than he did originally. He's virtually the same player. Which is good, because he is a very good player, that consistently brings it.


----------



## The MAMBA (Jan 6, 2006)

His assists and points have went up since Brown left. Saunders opened the entire offense up for the Pistons, and thats why Billups is putting up slightly better numbers.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Aurelino said:


> Kidd is
> 5th in APG (Only Billups and Nash ahead of him from that list)
> 4th in A/TO (Only Billups ahead of him; Parker is 55th)
> 8th in SPG (only Iverson and Arenas ahead of him)
> ...


Hmmm...

Kidd plays in the East has lead the Nets with Jefferson, Carter and Krstic (to 50 wins), all these guys healthy all year.

Parker has lead San Antonio to over 60 wins, with an injured Duncan, almost nothing from Ginobili all season, no Van Exel and yet he's shooting 54% from the field.

Jason Kidd still shooting 40%.

I don't think Kidd is better than Parker at all. At least not this season.


----------



## Tragedy (Dec 9, 2002)

The MAMBA said:


> His assists and points have went up since Brown left. Saunders opened the entire offense up for the Pistons, and thats why Billups is putting up slightly better numbers.


 He was given the opportunity to do more - therefore he's playing at a higher level now.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

The MAMBA said:


> No. If you actually watched the Piston's for the past 3-4 seasons, you would know that he really isn't doing anything different now from when he got the job a few years back. He is only averaging 2 ppg more than he did originally. He's virtually the same player. Which is good, because he is a very good player, that consistently brings it.


Hmmm... facts are this is the first time Billups was an all-star. Dude is about to turn 30. Not a concidence.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

The MAMBA said:


> Actually, to be honest.... Chris Paul should be up in there as well. To have the ability to take the NO Hornets and actually have them in contension, and be the undisputed leader with is teammates following him as a rookie...I could make a case for him having to be in there too. And I think Chris Paul is already a better PG than TP. Real Talk.


 

Yes, Tony Parker is overrated, but Chris Paul is better than him too. :sigh:


----------



## VCFSO2000 (Apr 10, 2005)

I respect the threadstarter's opinion but a triple double machine has to,somehow,find himself on that list.


----------



## bbasok (Oct 30, 2005)

LoL @ this thread

p.s:Allen Iverson is not a pg


----------



## The MAMBA (Jan 6, 2006)

HKF said:


> Yes, Tony Parker is overrated, but Chris Paul is better than him too. :sigh:


Tony Parker is overrated if you put him as a TOP FIVE PG!!! Not if you said he was 6th or 7th best PG in the league. Then I could work with you. Chris Paul takes a bunch of scrubs in his rookie year, and has them fighting for a playoff spot. Kid is a top five level PG.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

PJ Brown is not a scrub. Neither is David West. Neither is Speedy Claxton.


----------



## Tragedy (Dec 9, 2002)

bbasok said:


> LoL @ this thread
> 
> p.s:Allen Iverson is not a pg


 He is if that's the position he plays.


----------



## AJC NYC (Aug 16, 2005)

HKF said:


> Hmmm...
> 
> Kidd plays in the East has lead the Nets with Jefferson, Carter and Krstic (to 50 wins), all these guys healthy all year.
> 
> ...



Uhm shooting isnt everything buddy
maybe in your basketball mind it is
but to people that know basketball is not
Jason Kidd does things that know other point guard can do and that is rebounding


----------



## bbasok (Oct 30, 2005)

I mean he's not a real pg


----------



## Real (Aug 3, 2005)

Kidd > Arenas. That's easy.


----------



## genghisrex (May 3, 2003)

The MAMBA said:


> Mr. Parker, who isn't even expected to be the second best player ont he team...


I guess you missed the Spurs this year; there's really no question that Parker's been the second best player on his team _at worst_. Duncan's a better player, obviously, but he hasn't played like it for a good chunk of this season and Ginobili's been third in line all year long.


----------



## Aurelino (Jul 25, 2003)

HKF said:


> Hmmm...
> 
> Kidd plays in the East has lead the Nets with Jefferson, Carter and Krstic (to 50 wins), all these guys healthy all year.
> 
> ...


You're giving too much credit to Parker. Compare the Spurs' bench and the Nets' bench. Kidd is shooting 40% but you cannot overlook everything else he's been doing (including playing defense). Also, Kidd is shooting much better from 3 pt arc. You don't dismiss Billups because he's shooting 41.9% because he does so many other things so well. Shooting has been Kidd's weakness all his career, even when he was the unquestionable #1 PG in the league. Talk about 50 wins, the Nets have only won 50+ games once (52 games in 2001-02) when the east was weaker. There's no way Parker is the better PG, IMO.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

AJC NYC said:


> Uhm shooting isnt everything buddy
> maybe in your basketball mind it is
> but to people that know basketball is not
> Jason Kidd does things that know other point guard can do and that is rebounding


Yes, I'm sure you know more basketball then me. What was I thinking?


----------



## Auggie (Mar 7, 2004)

should arenas and iverson be considered "true" point guards? 

jasons still dominating 13.4/8.4/7.3 and 1.87 steals a game, definately top 5, if not higher


----------



## Real (Aug 3, 2005)

Two years ago, Jason Kidd was the undisputed #1 PG in Basketball.

I'm just curious to what happened? What caused the major fall from grace?


----------



## neoxsupreme (Oct 31, 2005)

Gilbert Arenas is not a point guard. He's a combo guard. Really a scoring shooting guard in a point guard's body & posing as a point guard.


----------



## Real (Aug 3, 2005)

HKF said:


> Hmmm...
> 
> Kidd plays in the East has lead the Nets with Jefferson, Carter and Krstic (to 50 wins), all these guys healthy all year.
> 
> ...


Parker: 19.1ppg, 3.3 rpg, 5.8apg, 1.05spg

Kidd: 13.4ppg, 7.3rpg, 8.4apg, 1.9spg.

About the only thing Parker does better than Kidd is score, but Kidd does not need to score to impact the team, as it has been proven before. Kidd is also one of the best underrated defenders in this league.

IMO Kidd > Parker.


----------



## JoeD (Sep 2, 2004)

Make room by moving Nash to 6th.


----------



## AJC NYC (Aug 16, 2005)

HKF said:


> Yes, I'm sure you know more basketball then me. What was I thinking?



Yes I do Im playing for my High school basketball team
and guess what im only 5'3 and im playing basketball at a high level


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

AJC NYC said:


> Yes I do I playing for my High school basketball team


What do you know, I did the same thing from 1997 to 1999. What a coincidence. :banana:


----------



## AJC NYC (Aug 16, 2005)

Jason Kidd is the best Point Guard 
he will prove it in the playoffs


----------



## GM3 (May 5, 2005)

HKF said:


> Yes, Tony Parker is overrated, but Chris Paul is better than him too. :sigh:


Ill take Chris Paul over Tony Parker any day of the week.


----------



## BigMac (Jan 14, 2005)

HKF said:


> I was doing my year end review of the players and I honestly don't know what to do with Jason Kidd
> 
> 1. Steve Nash
> 2. Chauncey Billups
> ...



i woulkd choose Kidd over Iverson


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

AJC NYC said:


> Yes I do Im playing for my High school basketball team
> and guess what im only 5'3 and im playing basketball at a high level


You showed him.


----------



## L (Sep 20, 2005)

if arenas is a combo guard, doesnt that make AI one too? he played sg too.


In this season:
1)Nash
2)Kidd
3)Billups
4)Parker
5)Ai/Arenas?


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

FWIW, these are how these guys stack up with Player Efficiency Ratings (PER). 

1. Allen Iverson (7th)
2a. Chauncey Billups (9th)
2b. Gilbert Arenas (9th)
4. Steve Nash (14th)
5. Chris Paul (17th)
6. Tony Parker (22nd)
7. Mike James (25th)
8. Jason Kidd (30th)
9. Sam Cassell (33rd)

Not saying I agree, but statistically, PER is probably the best overall system. They probably have the top four right though.


----------



## L (Sep 20, 2005)

Sir Patchwork said:


> FWIW, these are how these guys stack up with Player Efficiency Ratings (PER).
> 
> 1. Allen Iverson (7th)
> 2a. Chauncey Billups (9th)
> ...


who is first?


----------



## Air Fly (Apr 19, 2005)

Guys its wrong to put Kidd out of your top 5, thats a shame.


----------



## The MAMBA (Jan 6, 2006)

HKF said:


> PJ Brown is not a scrub. Neither is David West. Neither is Speedy Claxton.


Not scrubs, but certainly not Tim Duncan's, Robert Horry, Manu Ginobili, Michael Finely etc. etc.


----------



## Aurelino (Jul 25, 2003)

Sir Patchwork said:


> FWIW, these are how these guys stack up with Player Efficiency Ratings (PER).
> 
> 1. Allen Iverson (7th)
> 2a. Chauncey Billups (9th)
> ...


PER is not the best stat for comparing point guards, IMO. As I understand, it gives a lot of weightage to scoring, and Kidd scores the least of all those PGs by far.


----------



## Seuss (Aug 19, 2005)

1. Steve Nash
2. Jason Kidd
3. Chauncey Billups
4. Gilbert Arenas
5. Tony Parker


I don't consider Iverson a point guard.


----------



## bandits1 (Mar 26, 2006)

Kidd is old news. Here's my list for next season:

1) Kirk Hinrich
2) Gilbert Arenas
3) Chris Paul
4) Raymond Felton
5) Steve Nash


----------



## Seuss (Aug 19, 2005)

bandits1 said:


> Kidd is old news. Here's my list for next season:
> 
> 1) Kirk Hinrich
> 2) Gilbert Arenas
> ...



Where can I buy a straight-jacket?


----------



## JCB (Aug 9, 2005)

My list for this year. (Not coutning AI and Arenas as _true _ PG's)

1. Nash
2. Kidd
3. Billups
4. Paul
5. Parker


----------



## JCB (Aug 9, 2005)

bandits1 said:


> Kidd is old news. Here's my list for next season:
> 
> 1) Kirk Hinrich
> 2) Gilbert Arenas
> ...


 Hinrich #1 for next year?


----------



## cima (Nov 6, 2003)

bandits1 said:


> Kidd is old news. Here's my list for next season:
> 
> 1) Kirk Hinrich
> 2) Gilbert Arenas
> ...


i'm not sure which is worse, you having Hinrich as #1 or you having Nash as #5.


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

People saying that Tony Parker isn't a top 5 PG are asleep. Tony Parker is for the Spurs what Steve Nash is for the Suns. You have to remember the Spurs offense does not give the PG the opportunity to rack up big assists numbers. I find it funny how people have been saying that Duncan has been 75% plus Manu has been out but Tony Parker has been playing at a high level all year but he gets no credit. I mean seriously, who has had the better season....Duncan or Matrix? Manu or Diaw? Finley or Raja? Should I even go on? This is why people dismissing Tony Parker but trying to prop up Steve Nashas an MVP canidate are nutso.

My Rankings for this season would be:

1. Steve Nash
2. Tony Parker
3. Chauncey Billups
4. Jason Kidd
5. Gilbert Arenas
6. Allen Iverson
7. Chris Paul<=====Wanted to put him #3 but it just didn't feel right.


----------



## jibikao (Nov 14, 2004)

Kidd is easily the top 3 PG.


----------



## Tragedy (Dec 9, 2002)

MemphisX said:


> People saying that Tony Parker isn't a top 5 PG are asleep. Tony Parker is for the Spurs what Steve Nash is for the Suns. You have to remember the Spurs offense does not give the PG the opportunity to rack up big assists numbers. I find it funny how people have been saying that Duncan has been 75% plus Manu has been out but Tony Parker has been playing at a high level all year but he gets no credit. I mean seriously, who has had the better season....Duncan or Matrix? Manu or Diaw? Finley or Raja? Should I even go on? This is why people dismissing Tony Parker but trying to prop up Steve Nashas an MVP canidate are nutso.
> 
> My Rankings for this season would be:
> 
> ...


 This is a hard post.


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

Current advanced stats for Point guards courtesy of Knickerblogger.net.It should be noted that this has been an incredible year for point guards.Any of the top five PG's would have the highest player efficiency rating in for their position in most years.I think it fair to say that many point guards are having career years.As always PER is only a tool and it only measures what can be statistically measured.Defense and so called intangibles are not included





<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=2 width=800 border=0><COLGROUP><COL width=49><COL width=47><COL width=112><COL width=33><COL width=7><COL width=20><COL width=38><COL width=37><COL width=7><COL width=33><COL width=33><COL width=33><COL width=29><COL width=7><COL width=33><COL width=39><COL width=33><COL width=39><COL width=41><COL width=7><COL width=38><TBODY><TR><TD width=254 colSpan=4>PLAYER INFO

</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=103 colSpan=3>GAMES

</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=141 colSpan=4>SHOOTING STATS

</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=254 colSpan=7>HOLLINGER'S STATS (leaders)

</TD></TR><TR><TD width=49>RANK​</TD><TD width=47>TEAM​</TD><TD width=112>NAME​</TD><TD width=33>POS​</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=20>G​</TD><TD width=38>MIN/G​</TD><TD width=37>PTS/40​</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=33>eFG​</TD><TD width=33>FT%​</TD><TD width=33>TS%​</TD><TD width=29>FT/FG​</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=33>PPR​</TD><TD width=39>AST-r​</TD><TD width=33>TO-r​</TD><TD width=39>REB-r​</TD><TD width=41>USG-r​</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=38>PER​</TD></TR><TR><TD width=49>9 ​</TD><TD width=47>DET ​</TD><TD width=112>Chauncey Billups ​</TD><TD width=33>PG ​</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=20>79 

</TD><TD width=38>36.5 

</TD><TD width=37>20.6 

</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=33>51.1 

</TD><TD width=33>90.3 

</TD><TD width=33>60.6 

</TD><TD width=29>47 

</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=33>10.1 

</TD><TD width=39>33.0 

</TD><TD width=33>8.0 

</TD><TD width=39>5.1 

</TD><TD width=41>23.5 

</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=38>23.9 ​</TD></TR><TR><TD width=49>10 ​</TD><TD width=47>WAS ​</TD><TD width=112>Gilbert Arenas ​</TD><TD width=33>PG ​</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=20>77 

</TD><TD width=38>42.3 

</TD><TD width=37>27.6 

</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=33>50.7 

</TD><TD width=33>82.0 

</TD><TD width=33>58.1 

</TD><TD width=29>39 

</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=33>0.7 

</TD><TD width=39>17.4 

</TD><TD width=33>10.7 

</TD><TD width=39>4.9 

</TD><TD width=41>28.5 

</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=38>23.9 ​</TD></TR><TR><TD width=49>14 ​</TD><TD width=47>PHO ​</TD><TD width=112>Steve Nash ​</TD><TD width=33>PG ​</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=20>77 

</TD><TD width=38>35.6 

</TD><TD width=37>21.3 

</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=33>57.9 

</TD><TD width=33>92.4 

</TD><TD width=33>62.8 

</TD><TD width=29>24 

</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=33>9.8 

</TD><TD width=39>36.1 

</TD><TD width=33>12.0 

</TD><TD width=39>6.5 

</TD><TD width=41>23.6 

</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=38>23.4 ​</TD></TR><TR><TD width=49>17 ​</TD><TD width=47>NOR ​</TD><TD width=112>Chris Paul ​</TD><TD width=33>G ​</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=20>75 

</TD><TD width=38>36.4 

</TD><TD width=37>18.0 

</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=33>45.6 

</TD><TD width=33>84.7 

</TD><TD width=33>54.7 

</TD><TD width=29>42 

</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=33>8.0 

</TD><TD width=39>31.3 

</TD><TD width=33>9.3 

</TD><TD width=39>8.6 

</TD><TD width=41>22.2 

</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=38>22.3 ​</TD></TR><TR><TD width=49>22 ​</TD><TD width=47>SAS ​</TD><TD width=112>Tony Parker ​</TD><TD width=33>PG ​</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=20>78 

</TD><TD width=38>34.4 

</TD><TD width=37>22.3 

</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=33>55.1 

</TD><TD width=33>70.8 

</TD><TD width=33>58.2 

</TD><TD width=29>22 

</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=33>2.2 

</TD><TD width=39>23.0 

</TD><TD width=33>12.3 

</TD><TD width=39>5.7 

</TD><TD width=41>25.8 

</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=38>21.2 ​</TD></TR><TR><TD width=49>25 ​</TD><TD width=47>TOR ​</TD><TD width=112>Mike James ​</TD><TD width=33>PG ​</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=20>78 

</TD><TD width=38>37.1 

</TD><TD width=37>22.0 

</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=33>54.0 

</TD><TD width=33>83.6 

</TD><TD width=33>58.4 

</TD><TD width=29>23 

</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=33>3.5 

</TD><TD width=39>22.7 

</TD><TD width=33>10.1 

</TD><TD width=39>5.5 

</TD><TD width=41>23.7 

</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=38>20.2 ​</TD></TR><TR><TD width=49>30 ​</TD><TD width=47>NJN ​</TD><TD width=112>Jason Kidd ​</TD><TD width=33>PG ​</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=20>79 

</TD><TD width=38>37.3 

</TD><TD width=37>14.4 

</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=33>48.2 

</TD><TD width=33>79.5 

</TD><TD width=33>52.7 

</TD><TD width=29>22 

</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=33>8.6 

</TD><TD width=39>35.8 

</TD><TD width=33>10.3 

</TD><TD width=39>11.5 

</TD><TD width=41>19.4 

</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=38>19.4 ​</TD></TR><TR><TD width=49>33 ​</TD><TD width=47>LAC ​</TD><TD width=112>Sam Cassell ​</TD><TD width=33>PG ​</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=20>77 

</TD><TD width=38>34.1 

</TD><TD width=37>20.3 

</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=33>47.6 

</TD><TD width=33>86.1 

</TD><TD width=33>53.5 

</TD><TD width=29>26 

</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=33>5.7 

</TD><TD width=39>25.4 

</TD><TD width=33>9.1 

</TD><TD width=39>6.2 

</TD><TD width=41>23.8 

</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=38>18.6 ​</TD></TR><TR><TD width=49>35 ​</TD><TD width=47>DAL ​</TD><TD width=112>Jason Terry ​</TD><TD width=33>PG ​</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=20>78 

</TD><TD width=38>35.3 

</TD><TD width=37>19.5 

</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=33>54.8 

</TD><TD width=33>80.1 

</TD><TD width=33>57.6 

</TD><TD width=29>15 

</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=33>2.5 

</TD><TD width=39>18.8 

</TD><TD width=33>8.2 

</TD><TD width=39>3.4 

</TD><TD width=41>20.9 

</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=38>18.6 ​</TD></TR><TR><TD width=49>36 ​</TD><TD width=47>GSW ​</TD><TD width=112>Baron Davis ​</TD><TD width=33>PG ​</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=20>54 

</TD><TD width=38>36.5 

</TD><TD width=37>19.6 

</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=33>44.8 

</TD><TD width=33>67.5 

</TD><TD width=33>48.9 

</TD><TD width=29>23 

</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=33>8.2 

</TD><TD width=39>29.5 

</TD><TD width=33>9.8 

</TD><TD width=39>6.7 

</TD><TD width=41>25.7 

</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=38>18.5 ​</TD></TR><TR><TD width=49>41 ​</TD><TD width=47>SAC ​</TD><TD width=112>Mike Bibby ​</TD><TD width=33>PG ​</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=20>79 

</TD><TD width=38>38.9 

</TD><TD width=37>21.6 

</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=33>49.8 

</TD><TD width=33>85.3 

</TD><TD width=33>55.2 

</TD><TD width=29>25 

</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=33>3.1 

</TD><TD width=39>20.2 

</TD><TD width=33>9.0 

</TD><TD width=39>4.5 

</TD><TD width=41>23.5 

</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=38>17.8 ​</TD></TR><TR><TD width=49>49 ​</TD><TD width=47>CHA ​</TD><TD width=112>Brevin Knight ​</TD><TD width=33>PG ​</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=20>69 

</TD><TD width=38>34.1 

</TD><TD width=37>14.8 

</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=33>40.1 

</TD><TD width=33>80.3 

</TD><TD width=33>47.8 

</TD><TD width=29>33 

</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=33>10.3 

</TD><TD width=39>36.2 

</TD><TD width=33>9.7 

</TD><TD width=39>5.5 

</TD><TD width=41>20.9 

</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=38>17.4 ​</TD></TR><TR><TD width=49>57 ​</TD><TD width=47>DEN ​</TD><TD width=112>Andre Miller ​</TD><TD width=33>PG ​</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=20>79 

</TD><TD width=38>36.4 

</TD><TD width=37>15.4 

</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=33>46.7 

</TD><TD width=33>73.9 

</TD><TD width=33>53.3 

</TD><TD width=29>36 

</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=33>6.6 

</TD><TD width=39>33.8 

</TD><TD width=33>12.9 

</TD><TD width=39>7.0 

</TD><TD width=41>20.3 

</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=38>16.6 ​</TD></TR><TR><TD width=49>59 ​</TD><TD width=47>NYK ​</TD><TD width=112>Stephon Marbury ​</TD><TD width=33>PG ​</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=20>60 

</TD><TD width=38>36.6 

</TD><TD width=37>17.8 

</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=33>47.2 

</TD><TD width=33>75.5 

</TD><TD width=33>53.2 

</TD><TD width=29>32 

</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=33>4.5 

</TD><TD width=39>26.2 

</TD><TD width=33>10.8 

</TD><TD width=39>4.8 

</TD><TD width=41>21.7 

</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=38>16.5 ​</TD></TR><TR><TD width=49>62 ​</TD><TD width=47>NOR ​</TD><TD width=112>Speedy Claxton ​</TD><TD width=33>PG ​</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=20>71 

</TD><TD width=38>28.4 

</TD><TD width=37>17.3 

</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=33>42.5 

</TD><TD width=33>76.9 

</TD><TD width=33>49.7 

</TD><TD width=29>33 

</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=33>3.6 

</TD><TD width=39>24.7 

</TD><TD width=33>11.2 

</TD><TD width=39>5.7 

</TD><TD width=41>23.0 

</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=38>16.3 ​</TD></TR><TR><TD width=49>66 ​</TD><TD width=47>ORL ​</TD><TD width=112>Carlos Arroyo (TOT) ​</TD><TD width=33>PG ​</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=20>75 

</TD><TD width=38>15.3 

</TD><TD width=37>14.8 

</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=33>45.2 

</TD><TD width=33>77.2 

</TD><TD width=33>51.4 

</TD><TD width=29>30 

</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=33>6.4 

</TD><TD width=39>31.8 

</TD><TD width=33>11.0 

</TD><TD width=39>6.8 

</TD><TD width=41>20.3 

</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=38>16.1 ​</TD></TR><TR><TD width=49>71 ​</TD><TD width=47>SEA ​</TD><TD width=112>Luke Ridnour ​</TD><TD width=33>PG ​</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=20>76 

</TD><TD width=38>33.3 

</TD><TD width=37>13.7 

</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=33>43.7 

</TD><TD width=33>87.6 

</TD><TD width=33>49.9 

</TD><TD width=29>25 

</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=33>7.6 

</TD><TD width=39>33.8 

</TD><TD width=33>10.0 

</TD><TD width=39>5.4 

</TD><TD width=41>18.5 

</TD><TD width=7> 

</TD><TD width=38>15.7 ​</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>


----------



## ravor44 (Feb 26, 2005)

SunsFan57 said:


> 1. Steve Nash
> 2. Jason Kidd
> 3. Chauncey Billups
> 4. Gilbert Arenas
> ...


Agreed...


----------



## ravor44 (Feb 26, 2005)

bandits1 said:


> Kidd is old news. Here's my list for next season:
> 
> 1) Kirk Hinrich
> 2) Gilbert Arenas
> ...


Did you buy your medicine? :eek8: uke: :kissmy: :whoknows: :krazy: :twocents:


----------



## GNG (Aug 17, 2002)

AJC NYC said:


> Yes I do Im playing for my High school basketball team
> and guess what im only 5'3 and im playing basketball at a high level


:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:


----------



## pmac34 (Feb 10, 2006)

The MAMBA said:


> 1) Steve Nash
> 2) Chauncey Billups
> 3) Jason Kidd
> 4) Allen Iverson
> ...


^^^^^
the right list


----------



## Gilgamesh (Dec 23, 2005)

Sometimes I wonder without Kidd would a "revitalized" VC revert to the "old" VC?


----------



## Real (Aug 3, 2005)

Diable said:


> Current advanced stats for Point guards courtesy of Knickerblogger.net.It should be noted that this has been an incredible year for point guards.Any of the top five PG's would have the highest player efficiency rating in for their position in most years.I think it fair to say that many point guards are having career years.As always PER is only a tool and it only measures what can be statistically measured.Defense and so called intangibles are not included
> 
> 
> 
> ...


So basically, Mike James > Jason Kidd.


----------



## Gilgamesh (Dec 23, 2005)

Exactly why PER is overrated.



Net2 said:


> So basically, Mike James > Jason Kidd.


----------



## ralaw (Feb 24, 2005)

Gilgamesh said:


> Sometimes I wonder without Kidd would a "revitalized" VC revert to the "old" VC?



I've actually thought of the same thing. Then I think about whether playing on a bad Toronto team (which was partly his fault) was the problem, then I wonder if it's more about him not being a good leader when things are going bad similar to his cousin Tracy McGrady. So I've come to the conclusion it is a mix of both, VC is a talented player, but he is not the type of guy I would want leading my team.

The true test of a leader and his character is how they lead when things are going bad.


----------



## Gilgamesh (Dec 23, 2005)

I believe one of Kidd's best strengths which is intangible is his ability to motivate his teammates which is part of being a good leader.

VC might be arguably the best player on the Nets now but Kidd is unquestionably it's leader.

His alleyoop passes and his ability to run the fast break has of course also help to "revitalize" VC.

We didn't have that in Toronto. Nobody dared to push VC. Kidd dares to do that. He is an all-time great player. VC is a perennial all-star player. 



ralaw said:


> I've actually thought of the same thing. Then I think about whether playing on a bad Toronto team (which was partly his fault) was the problem, then I wonder if it's more about him not being a good leader when things are going bad similar to his cousin Tracy McGrady. So I've come to the conclusion it is a mix of both, VC is a talented player, but he is not the type of guy I would want leading my team.
> 
> The true test of a leader and his character is how they lead when things are going bad.


----------



## reHEATed (Jun 29, 2003)

Nash
Billups
Arenas
Iverson
Kidd


----------



## Real (Aug 3, 2005)

wadeshaqeddie said:


> Nash
> Billups
> Arenas
> Iverson
> Kidd


Please explain how in god's name Gilbert Arenas is a better Point Gaurd than Jason Kidd.


----------



## JoeOtter15 (Apr 22, 2005)

bandits1 said:


> Kidd is old news. Here's my list for next season:
> 
> 1) Kirk Hinrich
> 2) Gilbert Arenas
> ...


:rofl:


----------



## Vermillion (Mar 23, 2004)

1. Steve Nash
2. Allen Iverson
3. Jason Kidd
4. Gilbert Arenas
5. Chauncey Billups


----------



## AJC NYC (Aug 16, 2005)

Kidd is the best point gaurd
He is
the 
best


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

It may be heretical to say it,but this season Mike James has been more productive than Jason Kidd.The reasons are obvious and a lot of raptors fans think he has Marbury Syndrome when he should be sharing the ball more willingly.I think he had a game recently when he hit seven treys and scored about 38 points.It's not like Jason Kidd was ever capable of being so effectively selfish,but he's certainly a better point guard within a team first concept.Mike James is a better point guard within a Mike James first concept.


----------



## Intense Enigma (Oct 22, 2005)

OK we are talking about "pure" point guards,right???(pass first,shoot second)

First eliminate AI from the list,he's not a point guard.He's a shooting guard trapped on a point guard body.He has a scorer mentality with a great assist avg.And there is nothing wrong about that,in my opinion.He's just not a "pure" PG

My top 3(not 5)

1.Nash
2.Kidd
3.Billups

You can switch places with Kidd and Nash,depend on who you like more.

Nash has the edge on the offensive end,and is the reigning MVP.I think he's the best PG in the NBA right now.

Kidd,is the better defender by far.Carrer wise no active point guard in the league can touch him period


----------



## Fray (Dec 19, 2005)

HKF said:


> I was doing my year end review of the players and I honestly don't know what to do with Jason Kidd
> 
> 1. Steve Nash
> 2. Chauncey Billups
> ...


That might be the worst list I've ever seen, Billups is the 2nd best PG and Kidd is not even top 5? :laugh: And Iverson isn't as good as Parker? :laugh: Billups/Parker are just good players on great teams.

Also, it's hard to put Arenas/Iverson on a PG list cuz they just don't seem like PG's, but if we are going to do that I will make my list based on who is the best player not the best at being a PG.

1. Nash
2. Iverson
3. Kidd
4. Arenas
5. Billups

But that's just me


----------



## KDOS (Nov 29, 2005)

Net2 said:


> Please explain how in god's name Gilbert Arenas is a better Point Gaurd than Jason Kidd.


I agree, numners are deceivinng. Points especially. Ill still take Jason Kidd over Arenas.


----------



## jmk (Jun 30, 2002)

Diable said:


> It may be heretical to say it,but this season Mike James has been more productive than Jason Kidd.The reasons are obvious and a lot of raptors fans think he has Marbury Syndrome when he should be sharing the ball more willingly.I think he had a game recently when he hit seven treys and scored about 38 points.It's not like Jason Kidd was ever capable of being so effectively selfish,but he's certainly a better point guard within a team first concept.Mike James is a better point guard within a Mike James first concept.


That is ridiculous. Really, really ridiculous.


----------



## pmac34 (Feb 10, 2006)

Net2 said:


> Please explain how in god's name Gilbert Arenas is a better Point Gaurd than Jason Kidd.


especially when Kidd is the only true PG in that sentence


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

HKF is a pretty gutsy guy, I love the smugness.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Diable said:


> It may be heretical to say it,but this season Mike James has been more productive than Jason Kidd.The reasons are obvious and a lot of raptors fans think he has Marbury Syndrome when he should be sharing the ball more willingly.I think he had a game recently when he hit seven treys and scored about 38 points.It's not like Jason Kidd was ever capable of being so effectively selfish,but he's certainly a better point guard within a team first concept.Mike James is a better point guard within a Mike James first concept.


Whoa Nelly! Not only is this untrue, but also Mike James is playing for a contract. He basically his playing for himself right now


----------



## bandits1 (Mar 26, 2006)

ravor44 said:


> Did you buy your medicine? :eek8: uke: :kissmy: :whoknows: :krazy: :twocents:


So I'm the only one who thinks Kirk Hinrich is a very talented point-guard, huh? Not necessarily ever going to be #1, but doesn't anyone agree that he is going to be one of the best in league soon? He's only just finished his 3nd regular season.


----------



## SeaNet (Nov 18, 2004)

HKF said:


> I was doing my year end review of the players and I honestly don't know what to do with Jason Kidd
> 
> 1. Steve Nash
> 2. Chauncey Billups
> ...


You have Gilbert Arenas, Tony Parker, and Allen Iverson ahead of Jason Kidd. And to think, at one point, I thought you knew basketball.


----------



## SeaNet (Nov 18, 2004)

Diable said:


> It may be heretical to say it,but this season Mike James has been more productive than Jason Kidd.The reasons are obvious and a lot of raptors fans think he has Marbury Syndrome when he should be sharing the ball more willingly.I think he had a game recently when he hit seven treys and scored about 38 points.It's not like Jason Kidd was ever capable of being so effectively selfish,but he's certainly a better point guard within a team first concept.Mike James is a better point guard within a Mike James first concept.


I guess if the only thing that mattered to you in the evaluation of a player's productivity was points per game, then yes, you could make an argument that Mike James was the more productive player.


----------



## ravor44 (Feb 26, 2005)

AJC NYC said:


> *Kidd is the best point gaurd
> He is
> the
> best*


Ditto..priceless


----------



## ravor44 (Feb 26, 2005)

bandits1 said:


> So I'm the only one who thinks Kirk Hinrich is a very talented point-guard, huh? Not necessarily ever going to be #1, but doesn't anyone agree that he is going to be one of the best in league soon? He's only just finished his *3nd* regular season.


3rd not 3nd...but anywayz, Hinrich IN #1 is just plain .... nah... with Steve Nash still around you can't put Hinrich in #1...


----------



## ravor44 (Feb 26, 2005)

wadeshaqeddie said:


> Nash
> Billups
> Arenas
> Iverson
> Kidd


HOLY SMOKE! WHAT??? Arenas and Iverson better than Kidd? They are SGs trap in a PG body...


----------



## bandits1 (Mar 26, 2006)

ravor44 said:


> *3rd not 3nd*...but anywayz, Hinrich IN #1 is just plain .... nah... with Steve Nash still around you can't put Hinrich in #1...


Yeah, I know. I started to type _2nd_, but changed the 2 to a 3 and neglected to change the rest. Thanks for the nitpicking. Back to business.


----------



## Intense Enigma (Oct 22, 2005)

bandits1 said:


> Kidd is old news. Here's my list for next season:
> 
> 1) Kirk Hinrich
> 2) Gilbert Arenas
> ...



:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: 

:rotf: :rotf: :rotf: 

:rotf: :rotf: :rotf:


----------



## MJG (Jun 29, 2003)

What I wouldn't give to see swirlies handed out to everyone who knocks Arenas and Iverson out of contention because they're not "true." Hate to burst bubbles, but position is determined by what position you get a majority of your minutes at, not by which position's criteria matches up most closely with a player's skillset.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

MJG said:



> What I wouldn't give to see swirlies handed out to everyone who knocks Arenas and Iverson out of contention because they're not "true." Hate to burst bubbles, but position is determined by what position you get a majority of your minutes at, not by which position's criteria matches up most closely with a player's skillset.


Even if we go by your definition, Arenas is still not a better PG than a guy like Kidd. A better scorer no doubt, everything else is moot.


----------



## ghoti (Jan 30, 2005)

1. Kidd
2. Billups
3. Nash
4. Paul
5. Iverson

I just asked the question, who would I want as my PG if I were coaching a team?

Honestly, I had a very hard time deciding between Paul and Nash, since I wouldn't be building my entire system to hide Nash's weaknesses.


----------



## MJG (Jun 29, 2003)

Hbwoy said:


> Even if we go by your definition, Arenas is still not a better PG than a guy like Kidd. A better scorer no doubt, everything else is moot.


Oh I'm not saying people need to think Arenas or Iverson are better than Kidd or Parker or whoever. I'm just saying that I find it ridiculous that many people don't think they should be ranked as PGs at all.


----------



## L (Sep 20, 2005)

So no one will agree with me on this?
1)Nash
2)Kidd
3)Billups
4)Parker
5)Arenas- i went with arenas > Ai because his team is in the playoffs.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

MJG said:


> Oh I'm not saying people need to think Arenas or Iverson are better than Kidd or Parker or whoever. I'm just saying that I find it ridiculous that many people don't think they should be ranked as PGs at all.


My bad, I see where your coming from now.


----------



## Real (Aug 3, 2005)

MJG said:


> Oh I'm not saying people need to think Arenas or Iverson are better than Kidd or Parker or whoever. I'm just saying that I find it ridiculous that many people don't think they should be ranked as PGs at all.


Yes, however, what bothers me, is when someone looks at Allen Iverson, who plays PG, and thinks that just because he's Allen Iverson, he's won MVP awards, led the league in scoring, assumes that he is a better point gaurd than someone like Jason Kidd. 

Same thing with Gilbert Arenas. I think that some people rank him higher than Jason Kidd, because he scores 30ppg. Not to take anything away from Gilbert Arenas, he is certainly IMO an elite player in this league. 

It also bothers me that people will say that because Steve Nash won the MVP that he's the best PG in the league. I'm not going to lie to you, *I'll take Jason Kidd over Steve Nash anyday of the week. *


----------



## reHEATed (Jun 29, 2003)

Net2 said:


> Yes, however, what bothers me, is when someone looks at Allen Iverson, who plays PG, and thinks that just because he's Allen Iverson, he's won MVP awards, led the league in scoring, assumes that he is a better point gaurd than someone like Jason Kidd.
> 
> Same thing with Gilbert Arenas. I think that some people rank him higher than Jason Kidd, because he scores 30ppg. Not to take anything away from Gilbert Arenas, he is certainly IMO an elite player in this league.


they may not be better pg's (passing and being floor leader), but with being near the league leaders in scoring (while shooting a better percentage) along with the assist and rebounding numbers being very solid, they are better players than Jason Kidd. And since they play the pg position (both are combo guards- everybody knows that), they deserve to be higher on the list. 

I agree with you Kidd is a better natural pg than both of them, but the pg position has evolved. Scoring guards are there now, and deserve to be on the lists since that is where they play


----------



## Fray (Dec 19, 2005)

Sir Patchwork said:


> FWIW, these are how these guys stack up with Player Efficiency Ratings (PER).
> 
> 1. Allen Iverson (7th)
> 2a. Chauncey Billups (9th)
> ...


:laugh:


----------



## reHEATed (Jun 29, 2003)

Net2 said:


> Please explain how in god's name Gilbert Arenas is a better Point Gaurd than Jason Kidd.


better player who plays at the pg spot


----------



## Real (Aug 3, 2005)

wadeshaqeddie said:


> they may not be better pg's (passing and being floor leader), but with being near the league leaders in scoring (while shooting a better percentage) along with the assist and rebounding numbers being very solid, they are better players than Jason Kidd. And since they play the pg position (both are combo guards- everybody knows that), they deserve to be higher on the list.
> 
> I agree with you Kidd is a better natural pg than both of them, but the pg position has evolved. Scoring guards are there now, and deserve to be on the lists since that is where they play


They're numbers are solid I agree, and I don't want to take anything away from these players. But Kidd has higher rebounding and assist numbers than both of them. Plus, if you factor in the intangibles that Kidd brings to this team, the defense (he turned Gilbert Arenas into a passer), and the leadership, Kidd is better.

Plus, Kidd's impact on a team compared to Iverson and Arenas is unparralled. I don't see how you can say that Arenas and Iverson are better PG's than Kidd when their teams are under .500, and the Nets are closing in on 50 wins for the second time in their history.


----------



## Real (Aug 3, 2005)

wadeshaqeddie said:


> better player who plays at the pg spot


I think it all depends on your opinion on what a true PG is.


----------



## reHEATed (Jun 29, 2003)

Net2 said:


> I think it all depends on your opinion on what a true PG is.


this isnt asking for true pg's, it is asking for pg's.

and guess what, Iverson and Arenas start at pg. Shocker, I know.

and since they are better *players*, I put them higher on the list.


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

You know every since cockamamie sports writers started trying to make a case for John Stockton being the greatest PG ever, this narrow definition of "true PG" started to evolve. IMO it is the PGs job to QB the offense and the reason why it is in Kidd's best interest to distribute more is because he can't shoot for **** soi it is in his best interest to give the ball to superior scorer like Vince Carter and Richard Jefferson and he does this as well as anyone in the league. However, Gilbert Arenas *IS* the best scorer on his team and as such should be looking for his offense more.

You can take any of the top 7 PGs in the game now and it is a matter of taste. Some people just do not like PGs scoring 20+ points per game. Why? Who knows. For some reason, you are not a "true PG" if you lead your team in scoring. Some of my favorite PGs were/are very good scorers: Kevin Johnson, Isiah Thomas, Magic Johnson, and Tony Parker so I tend to favor guys that can score in bunches. However, a case can easily be made for Kidd not being a top 5 PG with the talent at the position right now.


----------



## Real (Aug 3, 2005)

wadeshaqeddie said:


> this isnt asking for true pg's, it is asking for pg's.
> 
> and guess what, Iverson and Arenas start at pg. Shocker, I know.
> 
> and since they are better *players*, I put them higher on the list.


Again, that's your definition of a Point Gaurd.


----------



## reHEATed (Jun 29, 2003)

Net2 said:


> Again, that's your definition of a Point Gaurd.


it doesnt matter what your definition is- when a player starts at that position, they deserve to be ranked with the players in that position

I agree with you Arenas and AI arent "true" pg's, but they start at that position so its only fair to rank them with those players.


----------



## GNG (Aug 17, 2002)

This "PG definition" and "true PG" stuff is bull****. Seriously, friggin' stoppit.

Allen Iverson and Gilbert Arenas _start_ at PG. They _play_ point guard. They're point guards.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Rawse said:


> This "PG definition" and "true PG" stuff is bull****. Seriously, friggin' stoppit.
> 
> Allen Iverson and Gilbert Arenas _start_ at PG. They _play_ point guard. They're point guards.


If you were building a team would you be starting any of those guys over Kidd as a 'PG'


----------



## MJG (Jun 29, 2003)

I'm glad there are some who agree with me. Your position isn't determined by your skillset or style of play, it's determined by ... well, your position.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

MJG said:


> I'm glad there are some who agree with me. Your position isn't determined by your skillset or style of play, it's determined by ... well, your position.


And quite frankly thats why the sixers and wiz are mediocre teams.


----------



## MJG (Jun 29, 2003)

Hbwoy said:


> And quite frankly thats why the sixers and wiz are mediocre teams.


 I don't understand. The Wizards and Sixers are mediocre because Arenas and Iverson are point guards?


----------



## AJC NYC (Aug 16, 2005)

How many times do I have to say that Jason Kidd will prove that he is the best point Guard during the 16 wins in the playoffs


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

MJG said:


> I don't understand. The Wizards and Sixers are mediocre because Arenas and Iverson are point guards?


Because they arent utilizing them well. The same guys expected to get their teams involved are the same guys also responsible for most of the scoring. Dont you think this is kinda flawed


----------



## GNG (Aug 17, 2002)

Hbwoy said:


> If you were building a team would you be starting any of those guys over Kidd as a 'PG'


That's not the point I'm making at all because I consider Jason Kidd to be one of the best point guards in the league.

People who say Allen Iverson and Gilbert Arenas _aren't_ point guards since they initiate the offense through looking for their own offense rather than looking for teammates who are worse scorers than they are are full of ****.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Rawse said:


> That's not the point I'm making at all because I consider Jason Kidd to be one of the best point guards in the league.
> 
> *People who say Allen Iverson and Gilbert Arenas aren't point guards since they initiate the offense through looking for their own offense rather than looking for teammates who are worse scorers than they are are full of ****.[/*QUOTE]
> 
> But they arent point guards, they are playing out of position. AI and GA are some of the best scorers in the league, why not play them in a position where they will be more effective. I wonder what goes through their minds everytime they get he ball, do I pass or do I score?


----------



## GNG (Aug 17, 2002)

Hbwoy said:


> But they arent point guards, they are playing out of position. AI and GA are some of the best scorers in the league, *why not play them in a position where they will be more effective. I wonder what goes through their minds everytime they get he ball, do I pass or do I score?*


Because, going along with your narrow definition, Allen Iverson is the best playmaker on the 76ers and Gilbert Arenas is the best playmaker on the Wizards. Who else would you rather see run the point on either of those teams?

Iverson and Arenas have a different mindset than Kidd, but they're only maximizing their strengths just as Kidd maximizes his. That doesn't make them any less "point guards."


----------



## Real (Aug 3, 2005)

I have no problem with Gilbert Arenas and Allen Iverson being considered Point Gaurds. 

I have a problem with Gilbert Arenas and Allen Iverson being ranked ahead of Jason Kidd as point gaurds.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Rawse said:


> Because, going along with your narrow definition, Allen Iverson is the best playmaker on the 76ers and Gilbert Arenas is the best playmaker on the Wizards. Who else would you rather see run the point on either of those teams?
> 
> Iverson and Arenas have a different mindset than Kidd, but they're only maximizing their strengths just as Kidd maximizes his. That doesn't make them any less "point guards."


Last I checked those guys still have guys who can play the point on their teams, and there are tons of guys who arent point guards in the league that have playmaking abilities. I just think it puts the team in a weird situation when your best offensive weapon is also the guy that has to get other players involved.


----------



## L (Sep 20, 2005)

wadeshaqeddie said:


> this isnt asking for true pg's, it is asking for pg's.
> 
> and guess what, Iverson and Arenas start at pg. Shocker, I know.
> 
> and since they are better *players*, I put them higher on the list.


what about marbury?


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Would Kidd be as good with Andre Igoudala and Kyle Korver? If you switched him with Iverson, would the Sixers be better?


----------



## Aurelino (Jul 25, 2003)

HKF said:


> Would Kidd be as good with Andre Igoudala and Kyle Korver? If you switched him with Iverson, would the Sixers be better?


You can ask the same question about Nash, Parker also.


----------



## kg_mvp03-04 (Jul 24, 2003)

HKF said:


> Would Kidd be as good with Andre Igoudala and Kyle Korver? If you switched him with Iverson, would the Sixers be better?


I think the sixers would be much better, Kidd would be able to utilize Korver and Igoudalas talents better than Iverson can. Igoudala is a high flyer, kidd will find him with lobs and they would be a good combo on the fast break. With Korver he is a spot up shooter and kidd is great at finding open shooters. They also have Chris Webber which would be a good compliment to the team. Kidd took a team with less talent to two straight Nba finals. 

Webber>Martin
Jefferson> Igoudala
Kittles Slightly better than Korver
Dalembert>Collinns


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

kg_mvp03-04 said:


> I think the sixers would be much better, Kidd would be able to utilize Korver and Igoudalas talents better than Iverson can. Igoudala is a high flyer, kidd will find him with lobs and they would be a good combo on the fast break. With Korver he is a spot up shooter and kidd is great at finding open shooters. They also have Chris Webber which would be a good compliment to the team. Kidd took a team with less talent to two straight Nba finals.
> 
> Webber>Martin
> Jefferson> Igoudala
> ...


Ah ha, but Jason Kidd isn't playing with that team that went to the Finals. He's playing with Richard Jefferson, Vince Carter and Nenad Krstic.

Would the Sixers be in the playoffs and the Nets out of the playoffs if the roles were reversed?


----------



## Aurelino (Jul 25, 2003)

HKF, you have special criteria to judge Kidd, and that's not a good argument by you, I'm sorry. Would Sixers have made the playoffs and Spurs missed it if Parker replaced Iverson? Arenas and Iverson? Nash and Iverson?


----------



## Real (Aug 3, 2005)

HKF said:


> Ah ha, but Jason Kidd isn't playing with that team that went to the Finals. He's playing with Richard Jefferson, Vince Carter and Nenad Krstic.
> 
> Would the Sixers be in the playoffs and the Nets out of the playoffs if the roles were reversed?


The Sixers would make the playoffs if Kidd was on the team.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Aurelino said:


> HKF, you have special criteria to judge Kidd, and that's not a good argument by you, I'm sorry. Would Sixers have made the playoffs and Spurs missed it if Parker replaced Iverson? Arenas and Iverson? Nash and Iverson?


No I don't. People continue to overrate Kidd, so I have to ask hypotheticals. With Duncan being hurt all year and Ginobili being hurt all year, yes I think San Antonio would be significantly worse with Jason Kidd.


----------



## jmk (Jun 30, 2002)

HKF said:


> No I don't. People continue to overrate Kidd, so I have to ask hypotheticals. With Duncan being hurt all year and Ginobili being hurt all year, yes I think San Antonio would be significantly worse with Jason Kidd.


It's also a known fact that you despise Kidd, though.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Dark Knight said:


> It's also a known fact that you despise Kidd, though.


This is also very true.


----------



## Real (Aug 3, 2005)

HKF said:


> This is also very true.


For reasons I don't know, so why don't you enlighten me.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Net2 said:


> For reasons I don't know, so why don't you enlighten me.


Lol I think one of them would be him being a coach killer


----------



## Real (Aug 3, 2005)

Hbwoy said:


> Lol I think one of them would be him being a coach killer


Who, Scott Skiles?, Lord Bye-ron? 

These guys would have been fired anyway.


----------



## bandits1 (Mar 26, 2006)

Hbwoy said:


> Last I checked those guys still have guys who can play the point on their teams, and there are tons of guys who arent point guards in the league that have playmaking abilities. I just think it puts the team in a weird situation when your best offensive weapon is also the guy that has to get other players involved.


So anybody with a knack for scoring shouldn't play the point? I think it makes the team all the more dangerous if you have a PG who can light it up at any time, as long as that's not all he does. Arenas gets a good amount of assists and knows when to defer shooting to the hot-hand on the team. The problem a lot of people seem to have is that hot-hand is usually his own. Can't hold his awesome offensive ability against him.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

bandits1 said:


> So anybody with a knack for scoring shouldn't play the point? I think it makes the team all the more dangerous if you have a PG who can light it up at any time, as long as that's not all he does. Arenas gets a good amount of assists and knows when to defer shooting to the hot-hand on the team. The problem a lot of people seem to have is that hot-hand is usually his own. Can't hold his awesome offensive ability against him.


Have you watched this guys play? Of course its easy for the two of them to get hot, cause they usually are taking the most amounts of shots on the team. How can other players get into a rhythm when they dont know when the ball is coming their way next


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Net2 said:


> Who, Scott Skiles?, Lord Bye-ron?
> 
> These guys would have been fired anyway.


That would be right


----------



## bandits1 (Mar 26, 2006)

Hbwoy said:


> Have you watched this guys play? Of course its easy for the two of them to get hot, cause they usually are taking the most amounts of shots on the team. How can other players get into a rhythm when they dont know when the ball is coming their way next


...like the Lakers and Kobe, right?


----------



## SeaNet (Nov 18, 2004)

wadeshaqeddie said:


> this isnt asking for true pg's, it is asking for pg's.
> 
> and guess what, Iverson and Arenas start at pg. Shocker, I know.
> 
> and since they are better *players*, I put them higher on the list.


Jason Kidd is a significantly better NBA basketball player than either of Iverson or Arenas. He contributes more to winning. Its that simple. Of course, it takes a mature eye to see what JKidd brings to the table (its not as flashy as shooting alot), so its no big surprise that people on this board are blind to it.


----------



## The_Franchise (Mar 30, 2003)

SeaNet said:


> Jason Kidd is a significantly better NBA basketball player than either of Iverson or Arenas. He contributes more to winning. Its that simple. Of course, it takes a mature eye to see what JKidd brings to the table (its not as flashy as shooting alot), so its no big surprise that people on this board are blind to it.


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

Your position is mostly defined by what position you guard on *defense*, not how you play on offense. Dirk Nowitzki doesn't play like a power forward historically has, but he guards power forwards. That makes him a power forward. You can argue the effectiveness of a great scoring point guard versus a playmaking/passing point guard, but to say a scorer can't be a point guard is wrong. 

Reading through this thread, I'm buying the argument that Kidd couldn't do the same things in San Antonio and Philly that Parker and Iverson do. So with that, Kidd is not a top five point guard. He is on the outside looking in. 

Jason Kidd has always been overrated though. This is the guy that people thought deserved MVP over Tim Duncan in 2002. What a joke.


----------



## kg_mvp03-04 (Jul 24, 2003)

Net2 said:


> The Sixers would make the playoffs if Kidd was on the team.


exactly that is what im tryying to say. Im just saying that switching kidd with AI would make there team about equal to the teams that Kidd took to the finals. That means that Kidd woud definitely take that team to the finals and i think they could go deep in the playoffs losing only to Detorit. If he were on the Sixers. AI in New Jersey would be good, but Iverson, with Carter and Jefferson would be weird though there would not be enough shots to go around.


----------



## kg_mvp03-04 (Jul 24, 2003)

Sir Patchwork said:


> Your position is mostly defined by what position you guard on *defense*, not how you play on offense. Dirk Nowitzki doesn't play like a power forward historically has, but he guards power forwards. That makes him a power forward. You can argue the effectiveness of a great scoring point guard versus a playmaking/passing point guard, but to say a scorer can't be a point guard is wrong.
> 
> Reading through this thread, I'm buying the argument that Kidd couldn't do the same things in San Antonio and Philly that Parker and Iverson do. So with that, Kidd is not a top five point guard. He is on the outside looking in.
> 
> Jason Kidd has always been overrated though. This is the guy that people thought deserved MVP over Tim Duncan in 2002. What a joke.


how is that a joke when he turned a bottom feeder team into a playoff team with one of the top record in the East, that year. They also won 52 games which was the most in team History. (they also went to the finals that year) ???? You do remember how bad the Nets were before Kidd came along.


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

kg_mvp03-04 said:


> how is that a joke when he turned a bottom feeder team into a playoff team with one of the top record in the East, that year. They also won 52 games which was the most in team History. (they also went to the finals that year) ???? You do remember how bad the Nets were before Kidd came along.


How did they do in the finals? A 52 win team in the finals is a joke as well. The east was dreadful during the time the Nets went to the finals. 50 wins could win you the conference. Shaquille O'Neal was the consensus best player that year, and Tim Duncan had hit his prime and reached his level. Those were the only two players who could have walked away with MVP that year and deserved it.


----------



## f22egl (Jun 3, 2004)

Rawse said:


> This "PG definition" and "true PG" stuff is bull****. Seriously, friggin' stoppit.
> 
> Allen Iverson and Gilbert Arenas _start_ at PG. They _play_ point guard. They're point guards.


 Agreed. Who else would you consider the starting point guards on that team. Jarred Jeffries? Andre Iguodala?


----------



## f22egl (Jun 3, 2004)

kg_mvp03-04 said:


> I think the sixers would be much better, Kidd would be able to utilize Korver and Igoudalas talents better than Iverson can. Igoudala is a high flyer, kidd will find him with lobs and they would be a good combo on the fast break. With Korver he is a spot up shooter and kidd is great at finding open shooters. They also have Chris Webber which would be a good compliment to the team. Kidd took a team with less talent to two straight Nba finals.
> 
> Webber>Martin
> Jefferson> Igoudala
> ...


 Kittles? What?


----------



## L (Sep 20, 2005)

f22egl said:


> Kittles? What?


i think he means that kittles was better defensively and on the fastbreak.but i take korver's shooting ability over kittles.


----------



## f22egl (Jun 3, 2004)

FullMetalAlchemist said:


> i think he means that kittles was better defensively and on the fastbreak.but i take korver's shooting ability over kittles.


 Kittles is not on the Nets anymore, he's not even the league last time I checked. Solid player from a solid school though :wink:


----------



## L (Sep 20, 2005)

f22egl said:


> Kittles is not on the Nets anymore, he's not even the league last time I checked. Solid player from a solid school though :wink:


i know that, i meant to compare the kittles from the finals team and kyle korver. :biggrin:


----------



## f22egl (Jun 3, 2004)

My bad didn't read the entire post. Although, Martin is a much better player than Webber mostly because he can actually play defense and jump. Dalembert may be better than Collins but not by much. Plus the East was weaker than it is today. And at least Allen Iverson beat the Lakers in the finals :biggrin:


----------



## AJC NYC (Aug 16, 2005)

Jason Kidd will prove he is the best point guard come playoff time


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

AJC NYC said:


> Jason Kidd will prove he is the best point guard come playoff time


And I'm sure if he and the Nets pull a stinker, you'll be back next year claiming he is the best point guard, along with the usual Vince and Krstic hype.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Sir Patchwork said:


> And I'm sure if he and the Nets pull a stinker, you'll be back next year claiming he is the best point guard, along with the usual Vince and Krstic hype.


Are you on record for that. And what Vince hype are you talking about


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

Hbwoy said:


> Are you on record for that. And what Vince hype are you talking about


Any Vince hype that has him in the same sentence with Kobe or Wade.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Sir Patchwork said:


> Any Vince hype that has him in the same sentence with Kobe or Wade.


Watch a game, there is more to the game than hoisting shots. Anyways you will get to see Vince a lot in a few days, we will have this conversation again


----------



## The_Franchise (Mar 30, 2003)

Kerry Kittles was the man. I would take him in his last 2 seasons at NJ over Korver any day. Really a great role player to have.


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

Hbwoy said:


> Watch a game, there is more to hoisting shots. Anyways you will get to see Vince a lot in a few days, will have this conversation again


Like I said. Hype. 

In any case, you're basically saying you have two top five players (Kidd better than Nash and Vince better than Kobe/Wade), plus Richard Jefferson is an all-star caliber player, and apparently Nenad Krstic is one of the best natural post players in the league. 

I'm expecting them to steamroll to a title with that kind of talent. If (I should say when) they don't, I wonder how your homerism will be excused.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Sir Patchwork said:


> Like I said. Hype.
> 
> In any case, you're basically saying you have two top five players (Kidd better than Nash and Vince better than Kobe/Wade), plus Richard Jefferson is an all-star caliber player, and apparently Nenad Krstic is one of the best natural post players in the league.
> 
> I'm expecting them to steamroll to a title with that kind of talent. If (I should say when) they don't, I wonder how your homerism will be excused.


Umm arent you exaggerating a bit. I havent seen anyone say Vince is better than Kobe/Wade, matter of fact I'd rather people keep underrating Vince and not even put them in this so called rankings. Its all a matter of opinion when it comes to the whole Kidd-Nash thing, Kidd does so much on the court that me personally I wouldnt take Nash over him. Matter of fact your whole post just seems like you have taken the opinions of various posters and turned it into one huge generalization.

The playoffs start in 6 days, watch the Nets and come to your own conclusions.


----------



## jmk (Jun 30, 2002)

Sir Patchwork said:


> Reading through this thread, I'm buying the argument that Kidd couldn't do the same things in San Antonio and Philly that Parker and Iverson do. So with that, Kidd is not a top five point guard. He is on the outside looking in.


And Parker and Iverson couldn't do what Kidd is doing in New Jersey. So what's your point? With your logic, no one is in the top 5. Everyone's on the outside looking in.



> Jason Kidd has always been overrated though. This is the guy that people thought deserved MVP over Tim Duncan in 2002. What a joke.


Oh, my. 

(By the way, Shaq said Jason deserved the MVP that year, too)


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

Dark Knight said:


> (By the way, Shaq said Jason deserved the MVP that year, too)


Jason Kidd wasn't even better than Gary Payton in 2001-2002. Tim Duncan was a much (x20) better player than Jason Kidd. That's why he also won MVP the next year and bullied Kidd's Nets in the finals. 

From 1999 to 2003, it was all Duncan and Shaq. Nobody else compared. Lakers and Spurs, Duncan and Shaq. Nobody beat the Lakers in those five years except the Spurs, and nobody beat the Spurs except the Lakers.


----------



## f22egl (Jun 3, 2004)

Gilbert Arenas shares the ball enough in my opinion to be considered a point guard. Him, Jamison, and Butler are the highest scoring trio in the league. Other than Antonio Daniels, there really aren't that many consistent offensive options on the team.


----------



## jmk (Jun 30, 2002)

Sir Patchwork said:


> Jason Kidd wasn't even better than Gary Payton in 2001-2002. Tim Duncan was a much (x20) better player than Jason Kidd. That's why he also won MVP the next year and bullied Kidd's Nets in the finals.
> 
> From 1999 to 2003, it was all Duncan and Shaq. Nobody else compared. Lakers and Spurs, Duncan and Shaq. Nobody beat the Lakers in those five years except the Spurs, and nobody beat the Spurs except the Lakers.


You're ridiculous. I'm sorry, but that's all I can say.


----------



## Pimped Out (May 4, 2005)

i havent read through this thread, but parker is not better than kidd. im not sure if anyone has mentioned, but i have seen a lot of parker, and he isnt a playmaker like kidd. parker can get the rim and score, but isnt a great passer and will often over penetrate before getting rid of the ball. he has a lot of talented players and scorers around him so he isnt pressured into doing a lot of play making, but if he ever was, i dont expect a lot of success out of that. tony has become a better player this season because his mid-range jumper, not a lot else has changed. im sure come playoff time spurs would rather have manu playing at a high level than tony because manu is a more multidimensional player and a better play maker. not a lot about parker's play making skills have changed, hes just been more a consistent, more dynamic scorer. thats it.

parker is a better scorer. kidd is a better floor general, passer, play maker, defender, rebounder, leader, and has more range.


----------



## Real (Aug 3, 2005)

Pimped Out said:


> parker is a better scorer. kidd is a better floor general, passer, play maker, defender, rebounder, leader, and has more range.


Dtto for Gilbert Arenas.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Sir Patchwork said:


> Jason Kidd wasn't even better than Gary Payton in 2001-2002. Tim Duncan was a much (x20) better player than Jason Kidd. That's why he also won MVP the next year and bullied Kidd's Nets in the finals.
> 
> From 1999 to 2003, it was all Duncan and Shaq. Nobody else compared. Lakers and Spurs, Duncan and Shaq. Nobody beat the Lakers in those five years except the Spurs, and nobody beat the Spurs except the Lakers.


You also said a 52 win team has no business in the finals, nuff said


----------



## f22egl (Jun 3, 2004)

Net2 said:


> Dtto for Gilbert Arenas.



Arenas has better range than Kidd (he was in the 3 point contest after all) and a good post game for a guard and like Parker can get to the basket, gets more steals, faster, a good midrange game, and better first step. Kidd makes better decisions at times during the game, especially on the fast break but Arenas has improved from years past. To the Wizards though, he is valuable since he can hit the big shot come crunch time (see the 2005 Playoffs, game 5 against the Chicago Bulls).


----------



## Aurelino (Jul 25, 2003)

Sir Patchwork said:


> Reading through this thread, I'm buying the argument that Kidd couldn't do the same things in San Antonio and Philly that Parker and Iverson do. So with that, Kidd is not a top five point guard. He is on the outside looking in.


LOL. That has more to do with the system than the player. Can Parker do what Kidd is doing with the Nets? No. Can Nash do what Iverson is doing in Philly? No. That's hardly a good criterion for determining who's better. 



> Jason Kidd has always been overrated though. This is the guy that people thought deserved MVP over Tim Duncan in 2002. What a joke.


Duncan had the better year, and was the better player that year, and his team won more games, but the MVP voting was very close (Duncan 954, Kidd 897), and ultimately, it's the journalists who decide the award, not the fans, and it is a fact that a good number of them thought Kidd should have won it, and to them it was hardly a joke. 

I don't know how he's "always been" overrated. What Kidd has accomplished in his career is there for everyone to see.


----------



## L (Sep 20, 2005)

Aurelino said:


> LOL. That has more to do with the system than the player. Can Parker do what Kidd is doing with the Nets? No. Can Nash do what Iverson is doing in Philly? No. That's hardly a good criterion for determining who'se better.
> 
> 
> Duncan had the better year, and was the better player that year, and his team won more games, but the MVP voting was very close (Duncan 954, Kidd 897), and ultimately, it's the journalists who decide the award, not the fans, and tit is a fact that a good number of them thought Kidd should have won it, and to them it was hardly a joke.
> ...


Most noteworthy are his triple doubles!


----------



## Real (Aug 3, 2005)

f22egl said:


> Arenas has better range than Kidd (he was in the 3 point contest after all) and a good post game for a guard and like Parker can get to the basket, gets more steals, faster, a good midrange game, and better first step. Kidd makes better decisions at times during the game, especially on the fast break but Arenas has improved from years past. To the Wizards though, he is valuable since he can hit the big shot come crunch time (see the 2005 Playoffs, game 5 against the Chicago Bulls).


The only thing Gilbert Arenas can do better is score and get to the rim. That's it. 

Jason Kidd > Gilbert Arenas as far as being a POINT GAURD.


----------



## f22egl (Jun 3, 2004)

Net2 said:


> The only thing Gilbert Arenas can do better is score and get to the rim. That's it.
> 
> Jason Kidd > Gilbert Arenas as far as being a POINT GAURD.


 Why because he gets more assists? Arenas is also better 3 point shooter and getting to he line. Arenas offensive game is superior to Kidds except for passing. Arenas also has more endurance because of his age, and can make up for the weaknesses in Washington's bench. Seriously, do you think that Billy Thomas would make anybody else's rotation?

I don't care about the role of playing the traditional role of the point guard. I thought this thread was about players who play the point guard position and who is the better player. Please explain your resoning again because I do not feel like starting this thread over again.


----------



## JCB (Aug 9, 2005)

f22egl said:


> Why because he gets more assists? Arenas is also better 3 point shooter and getting to he line. Arenas offensive game is superior to Kidds except for passing. Arenas also has more endurance because of his age, and can make up for the weaknesses in Washington's bench. Seriously, do you think that Billy Thomas would make anybody else's rotation?
> 
> I don't care about the role of playing the traditional role of the point guard. I thought this thread was about players who play the point guard position and who is the better player. Please explain your resoning again because I do not feel like starting this thread over again.


 lol. Billy Thomas was in the Nets rotation last year.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

f22egl said:


> Why because he gets more assists? Arenas is also better 3 point shooter and getting to he line. Arenas offensive game is superior to Kidds except for passing. Arenas also has more endurance because of his age, and can make up for the weaknesses in Washington's bench. Seriously, do you think that Billy Thomas would make anybody else's rotation?
> 
> I don't care about the role of playing the traditional role of the point guard. I thought this thread was about players who play the point guard position and who is the better player. Please explain your resoning again because I do not feel like starting this thread over again.


Billy Thomas was on the nets roster last year, and I guess things like rebounding and defense dont matter


----------



## JCB (Aug 9, 2005)

Hbwoy said:


> Billy Thomas was on the nets roster last year, and I guess things like rebounding and defense dont matter


 haha, beat ya to it about Billy


----------



## Real (Aug 3, 2005)

f22egl said:


> Why because he gets more assists? Arenas is also better 3 point shooter and getting to he line. Arenas offensive game is superior to Kidds except for passing. Arenas also has more endurance because of his age, and can make up for the weaknesses in Washington's bench. Seriously, do you think that Billy Thomas would make anybody else's rotation?
> 
> I don't care about the role of playing the traditional role of the point guard. I thought this thread was about players who play the point guard position and who is the better player. Please explain your resoning again because I do not feel like starting this thread over again.


Watch a Net game. Kidd does more than pass the ball. Kidd fills the stat sheet up and his team wins, he's 4th all time in Triple-Doubles. Kidd doesn't need to score for his team to win. The Nets are on the verge of winning 50 games. The Wizards are below .500. Kidd is a better defender, floor leader, playmaker, rebounder than Gilbert Arenas.

Ask any NBA GM or coach who they would rather have running the point, Arenas or Kidd, and take a guess on who most of them would say.


----------



## Spriggan (Mar 23, 2004)

Net2 said:


> Ask any NBA GM or coach who they would rather have running the point, Arenas or Kidd, and take a guess on who most of them would say.


Don't you think that might depend on the type of point guard they need? This idea that "pure" point guards are automatically more suited to that position that scoring points has always been silly. Regardless, pure point guards don't have a very good track record as far as winning championships.


----------



## f22egl (Jun 3, 2004)

Chaser 55 said:


> haha, beat ya to it about Billy


 You do agree that he sucks though... if he was any good, the Nets would have kept him.


----------



## f22egl (Jun 3, 2004)

Net2 said:


> Watch a Net game. Kidd does more than pass the ball. Kidd fills the stat sheet up and his team wins, he's 4th all time in Triple-Doubles.


Referring to the past would be as silly as me referring to the future or the fact that Arenas can get better while Kidd is more likely to decline with his age. 




Net2 said:


> Kidd doesn't need to score for his team to win. The Nets are on the verge of winning 50 games. The Wizards are below .500. Kidd is a better defender, floor leader, playmaker, rebounder than Gilbert Arenas.


Arenas is far better scorer than Kidd. Arenas numbers in rebounding numbers have slipped but that is because the Wizards have a relatively tall shooting guard in Jeffries, Caron Butler gets his 6 rpg, and Jamison gets around 9 boards a game. Point guards are not supposed to rebound so is Jason Kidd not a traditional point guard :wink:



Net2 said:


> Ask any NBA GM or coach who they would rather have running the point, Arenas or Kidd, and take a guess on who most of them would say.


Most GMs would rather have Arenas because of his age, friendly contract, and overall talent level. At the present, Arenas is still a 29 ppg scorer so it would really depend on what team you have, so not as many people would Jason Kidd as you would think. For the Wizards, they need the scoring because of a lack of a bench, and Jamison and Butler's durabilaty. The Nets probably need somebody to defer to Vince Carter. It really all depends on the make up of your team.


----------



## JCB (Aug 9, 2005)

f22egl said:


> You do agree that he sucks though... if he was any good, the Nets would have kept him.


 he wasn't really _that_ bad for us. I don't know what he's been doing for you though.


----------



## Real (Aug 3, 2005)

f22egl said:


> Referring to the past would be as silly as me referring to the future or the fact that Arenas can get better while Kidd is more likely to decline with his age.


That seems to be the sexy pick. Kidd has "lost a step" or is "getting older." 

Look at someone like John Stockton. Boy did he suck when he was 37 and leading the Jazz to the Finals. (sarcasm)



> Arenas is far better scorer than Kidd.


I said that already



> Arenas numbers in rebounding numbers have slipped but that is because the Wizards have a relatively tall shooting guard in Jeffries, Caron Butler gets his 6 rpg, and Jamison gets around 9 boards a game. *Point guards are not supposed to rebound so is **Jason Kidd** not a traditional point guard* :wink:


No ****, no one ever said he was traditional. They just said that he was a better pure point gaurd.



> Most GMs would rather have Arenas because of his age, friendly contract, and overall talent level. At the present, Arenas is still a 29 ppg scorer so it would really depend on what team you have, so not as many people would Jason Kidd as you would think. For the Wizards, they need the scoring because of a lack of a bench, and Jamison and Butler's durabilaty. The Nets probably need somebody to defer to Vince Carter.It really all depends on the make up of your team.


I ask you this, would the Wizards be better or worse with Jason Kidd instead of Gilbert Arenas?


----------



## Gilgamesh (Dec 23, 2005)

Huh?



Net2 said:


> Look at someone like John Stockton. Boy did he suck when *he was 37* and leading the Jazz to the Finals.


----------



## Real (Aug 3, 2005)

Gilgamesh said:


> Huh?


It was sarcasm.


----------



## Gilgamesh (Dec 23, 2005)

I know it was sarcasm but I wasn't sure if you also exaggerated his age as sarcasm as well because you skipped a couple years from his true age when the Jazz went to the finals. Oh well. Kudos. :banana: 



Net2 said:


> It was sarcasm.


----------



## Real (Aug 3, 2005)

Gilgamesh said:


> I know it was sarcasm but I wasn't sure if you also exaggerated his age as sarcasm as well because you skipped a couple years from his true age when the Jazz went to the finals. Oh well. Kudos. :banana:


He was 36 in 1998, when the Jazz went to the finals. 

I was off by a year..


----------



## AJC NYC (Aug 16, 2005)

Jason Kidd will prove that he is the best point guard in the 16 game winning streak during the playoffs


----------



## L (Sep 20, 2005)

AJC NYC said:


> Jason Kidd will prove that he is the best point guard in the 16 game winning streak during the playoffs


Boy, u too positive.


----------



## Dodigago (Jan 13, 2005)

1) Nash
2) Kidd
3) Billups
4) Paul
5) Arenas


----------



## L (Sep 20, 2005)

Dodigago said:


> 1) Nash
> 2) Kidd
> 3) Billups
> 4) Paul
> 5) Arenas


i dont think paul should be up there, at least not yet.Parker deserves the 4 spot a bit more than he does.


----------



## Dodigago (Jan 13, 2005)

FullMetalAlchemist said:


> i dont think paul should be up there, at least not yet.Parker deserves the 4 spot a bit more than he does.


I would totally disagree because Chris Paul is just a huge factor - he changes the whole offensive system of the team - Tony Parker and Mike Bibby(who arguements can be made for) are great spot shooters and score but dont really change a teams style/tempo because there passing ability isnt that great

on that note the same can be said about Arenas


----------



## GNG (Aug 17, 2002)

New Jersey _better_ win the title this year.

Kidd = best point guard in the league
Vince = on Kobe's level
Jefferson = All-Star
Krstic = better than Pau Gasol

Who else can stack up to that?


----------



## Big Mike (Jun 7, 2005)

Iverson and Arenas are the two worst PG's in the NBA because they happen to lead their teams in scoring and that should never happen in the NBA, hell I'll take Steve Blake or Brevin Knight over those guys because they play the "true PG" position better. Philly and Wash should wave those bums already.


----------



## iverson101 (Mar 4, 2006)

f22egl said:


> Why because he gets more assists? Arenas is also better 3 point shooter and getting to he line. Arenas offensive game is superior to Kidds except for passing. Arenas also has more endurance because of his age, and can make up for the weaknesses in Washington's bench. Seriously, do you think that Billy Thomas would make anybody else's rotation?
> 
> I don't care about the role of playing the traditional role of the point guard. I thought this thread was about players who play the point guard position and who is the better player. Please explain your resoning again because I do not feel like starting this thread over again.


It's more than just "passing". Passing itself is not hard, the act of making a pass. What is special is the vision and ability to see things before they happen and get the ball where they need to go. Arenas who I really like doesn't really have that instinct that just makes the offense flow. This ability is every bit as important to a team, and perhaps even more so, than the ability for the player personally to put the ball in the hoop which obviously Arenas is better than Kidd at.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Rawse said:


> New Jersey _better_ win the title this year.
> 
> Kidd = best point guard in the league
> Vince = on Kobe's level
> ...


What do you think? Were should this guys be ranked or how would you rank them


----------



## Aurelino (Jul 25, 2003)

Rawse said:


> New Jersey _better_ win the title this year.
> 
> Kidd = best point guard in the league
> Vince = on Kobe's level
> ...


Can you name 3 or more Nets fans who agree with _all_ of the above? If you are mocking one or two posters, then I am sorry.


----------



## f22egl (Jun 3, 2004)

Big Mike said:


> Iverson and Arenas are the two worst PG's in the NBA because they happen to lead their teams in scoring and that should never happen in the NBA, hell I'll take Steve Blake or Brevin Knight over those guys because they play the "true PG" position better. Philly and Wash should wave those bums already.


 Tony Parker should also be waived; he leads his team in scoring too. He is so damn selfish!!


----------



## ravor44 (Feb 26, 2005)

Rawse said:


> New Jersey _better_ win the title this year.
> 
> Kidd = best point guard in the league
> *Vince = on Kobe's level*
> ...


Woot...even SOME Nets fans are homer..they don't agree with that(bolded words)


----------



## byrondarnell66 (Jul 18, 2004)

f22egl said:


> Tony Parker should also be waived; he leads his team in scoring too. He is so damn selfish!!


TP is exempted because his team has a surperior record with the same level of talent and the same level of coaching ability.

*EDIT* IMO right now Kidd is still the better player than Arenas. Arenas rebounding (even for a guard) and defense is horrible.


----------



## f22egl (Jun 3, 2004)

byrondarnell66 said:


> TP is exempted because his team has a surperior record with the same level of talent and the same level of coaching ability.
> 
> *EDIT* right now Kidd is still the better player than Arenas.


 What are you talking about? Eddie Jordan is a far superior coach to Greg Poppovich :laugh:


----------



## f22egl (Jun 3, 2004)

Just out of curiousity is Jason Kidd still a good lockdown defender? Wade made him look silly last year in the postseason. Maybe Kidd is back to 100% though.


----------



## The MAMBA (Jan 6, 2006)

1) Steve Nash
2) Steve Nash
3) Steve Nash
4) Steve Nash
5) Steve Nash


----------



## byrondarnell66 (Jul 18, 2004)

Well I don't want to contribute into turning this thread from top 5 PG's to Arenas vs Kidd vs Parker or whatever but IMO the top 5 PG' are like this.

Kidd 
Nash
Billups
Paul
Iverson/Arenas


----------



## Aurelino (Jul 25, 2003)

f22egl said:


> Just out of curiousity is Jason Kidd still a good lockdown defender? Wade made him look silly last year in the postseason. Maybe Kidd is back to 100% though.


He's played great defense since the all-star break (shutting down Nash, Billups, Terry and slowing down Arenas, Kobe, Redd etc.), and has been pretty solid all-year. If you watch the Wizards, you must have seen how he defended Arenas this season.


----------



## f22egl (Jun 3, 2004)

I've been going to college in the Philly area, so I did see Iverson put up 40 on the nets. Then again, Iverson does that to just about anyone. 

When I've seen the Wizards play, Arenas' defense has become less suspect than it has before but by no means is he a great defender. Overall, the Wizards don't have good defenders. Jamison may be one of the worst defenders in the league, and Butler was not starting in the beginning of the year because of his lack of defense effort. I bring this up because there is a lack of help defense, such was the case as Ben Gordon his 9 three pointers against Chicago. Some blame also has to go to the coaching.


----------



## GNG (Aug 17, 2002)

Hbwoy said:


> What do you think? Were should this guys be ranked or how would you rank them


Oh, that was just what a flock of little red-and-blue birdies told me, right before one of them said they'd sweep their way to a championship.


----------



## jmk (Jun 30, 2002)

Rawse said:


> Oh, that was just what a flock of little red-and-blue birdies told me, right before one of them said they'd sweep their way to a championship.


C'mon now, Rawse. If you're going to be like that, at least call out AJ NYC instead of berating a whole fanbase, even though a good amount of that fanbase may happen to be delusional.

Also, just for my memory, but did anyone actually say that Krstic is currently better than Gasol?


----------



## jmk (Jun 30, 2002)

f22egl said:


> Just out of curiousity is Jason Kidd still a good lockdown defender? Wade made him look silly last year in the postseason. Maybe Kidd is back to 100% though.


I'm almost positive that Kidd didn't guard Wade last year.


----------



## L (Sep 20, 2005)

Rawse said:


> New Jersey _better_ win the title this year.
> 
> Kidd = best point guard in the league
> Vince = on Kobe's level
> ...


Tell me which nets fans say this: vc=bryant's talent. Jefferson could be a allstar sooner or later,its just that the east is loaded with sfs/pfs. and who said krstic is as good as gasol?

Edit: Nevermind, even though i didnt find any, i believe aj nyc would have said all of the above in your post.


----------



## JCB (Aug 9, 2005)

Dark Knight said:


> I'm almost positive that Kidd didn't guard Wade last year.


 correct


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Rawse said:


> Oh, that was just what a flock of little red-and-blue birdies told me, right before one of them said they'd sweep their way to a championship.


Like I said in the other post to Patchwork's almost similar statements, you have just generalized a whole lot of people with that.


----------



## Prolific Scorer (Dec 16, 2005)

LMAO....how quickly you kids jump off the wagon......Tony Parker over Kidd? EVEN THIS SEASON????

NEVER....hahahahaha

not only is Jason Kidd a top 5 Point Guard this season....but i can go on to say he's a top 5 point guard EVER.


----------



## f22egl (Jun 3, 2004)

Prolific Scorer said:


> LMAO....how quickly you kids jump off the wagon......Tony Parker over Kidd? EVEN THIS SEASON????
> 
> NEVER....hahahahaha
> 
> not only is Jason Kidd a top 5 Point Guard this season....but i can go on to say he's a top 5 point guard EVER.


 Let's see, John Stockton, Magic Johnson, Isiah Thomas, Oscar Robertson, Bob Cousy...

Nope not top 5 ever...yet.


----------



## f22egl (Jun 3, 2004)

Dark Knight said:


> I'm almost positive that Kidd didn't guard Wade last year.


I guess they tried just about everybody, Carter, Jefferson, Kidd, and even Scalabrine.

But I guess you're right, no one was guarding him


----------



## Prolific Scorer (Dec 16, 2005)

f22egl said:


> Let's see, John Stockton, Magic Johnson, Isiah Thomas, Oscar Robertson, Bob Cousy...
> 
> Nope not top 5 ever...yet.


Ha, i'd take Kidd over Cousy any day.....The game didn't have as many dominant PG's then, while Kidd played in the 2nd most Dominant PG ERA (96-, 2nd to the 85-95 era)

Cousy has a Career 37 FG %, and wasn't even close to the Passer Kidd is.


----------



## f22egl (Jun 3, 2004)

Prolific Scorer said:


> Ha, i'd take Kidd over Cousy any day.....The game didn't have as many dominant PG's then, while Kidd played in the 2nd most Dominant PG ERA (96-, 2nd to the 85-95 era)
> 
> Cousy has a Career 37 FG %, and wasn't even close to the Passer Kidd is.


 Cousy revolutionized the game. He was called the "human highlight reel". He is one of the the 50 greatest players all time. Put it this way, if there was no Bob Cousy, there would be no Jason Kidd.


----------



## AJC NYC (Aug 16, 2005)

f22egl said:


> Cousy revolutionized the game. He was called the "human highlight reel". He is one of the the 50 greatest players all time. Put it this way, if there was no Bob Cousy, there would be no Jason Kidd.



I didnt know Cousy gave birth to Jason Kidd


----------



## AJC NYC (Aug 16, 2005)

f22egl said:


> I guess they tried just about everybody, Carter, Jefferson, Kidd, and even Scalabrine.
> 
> But I guess you're right, no one was guarding him



and no one in the heat can gaurd Vince Carter
he has put up better numbers against the heat than wade against the nets


----------



## Pimped Out (May 4, 2005)

f22egl said:


> Cousy revolutionized the game. He was called the "human highlight reel". He is one of the the 50 greatest players all time. Put it this way, if there was no Bob Cousy, there would be no Jason Kidd.


would you take cousy over magic. by your logic, with no cousy, there would be no magic.


----------



## Tragedy (Dec 9, 2002)

Big Mike said:


> Iverson and Arenas are the two worst PG's in the NBA because they happen to lead their teams in scoring and that should never happen in the NBA, hell I'll take Steve Blake or Brevin Knight over those guys because they play the "true PG" position better. Philly and Wash should wave those bums already.


 Maybe because they are both the best scorers and passers on their team?


----------



## f22egl (Jun 3, 2004)

Pimped Out said:


> would you take cousy over magic. by your logic, with no cousy, there would be no magic.


Magic Johnson for the majority of his career was among the top 3 players in the league. The same cannot be same for Jason Kidd.


----------



## jmk (Jun 30, 2002)

f22egl said:


> Magic Johnson for the majority of his career was among the top 3 players in the league. The same cannot be same for Jason Kidd.


Red Herring.


----------



## f22egl (Jun 3, 2004)

Dark Knight said:


> Red Herring.


 I know... but someone said Jason Kidd was a top 5 pg of all time and hence we are still on the topic of Jason Kidd.


----------



## f22egl (Jun 3, 2004)

29 ppg does not get you the respect what it used to, especially when 3 other players average 30 points or more. Kidd probably gets the edge over Arenas because of his rebounding ability (I guess I just wanted to get a rise out of net fans). Still, Arenas will have the chance to prove everyone wrong in the playoffs.


----------



## f22egl (Jun 3, 2004)

Actually, I don't know, it is still a toss up in my mind between Jason Kidd and Arenas. When he shots 45% from the field and gets to the line as much as he does, it's hard to say whether or not the Wizards would be better with Jason Kidd instead of Arenas.


----------



## Charlie Brown (Oct 22, 2002)

I remember having these arguments over Kidd vs Marbury, where the Marbs fans would point out his scoring.

If we are talking about POINT guard, the elite two are Kidd and Nash.


----------



## Real (Aug 3, 2005)

f22egl said:


> *Actually, I don't know, it is still a toss up in my mind between **Jason Kidd** and Arenas*. When he shots 45% from the field and gets to the line as much as he does,* it's hard to say whether or not the Wizards would be better with Jason Kidd instead of Arenas.*


:biggrin: 

Come to your senses my man.


----------



## f22egl (Jun 3, 2004)

Charlie Brown said:


> I remember having these arguments over Kidd vs Marbury, where the Marbs fans would point out his scoring.
> 
> If we are talking about POINT guard, the elite two are Kidd and Nash.


 Arenas is a better scorer than Marbury ever was. And he has already made it past the 1st round. I think it took a while for the Wizards to mesh their new parts together since they brought in 6 new players including Butler and Daniels and lost probably their second best player in Hughes. Unlike Steve Francis, Arenas was able to get it together without his backcourt buddy. 

Plus Arenas scores when the team needs a basket, he scored 31 of his 43 points in the 2nd half including 16 in the 4th in tonight's must win against the Bucks. To those who are watching, he is doing this with a strained back, but he puts it together with his determination and toughness.


----------



## SeaNet (Nov 18, 2004)

Mr. Roger's Cardigan said:


>


What a Homer I must be for thinking a guy who completely controls the flow of a game wo/ shooting, a guy who ranks 4th all time in triple doubles, a PG who leads his team in rebounding, is a year in year out all-defensive team selection, and who leads his team to winning season after winning season no matter who is on the team w/ him, is a better NBA player than a couple of PGs who think nothing of jacking 30 shots in a game while their teams' play .500 basketball year after year (Arenas & Iverson). People here just don't understand what it takes to win in the NBA. Totally surface level understanding on display.


----------



## ravor44 (Feb 26, 2005)

When I was reading the thread...I KEEP LOOKING ON MY SIGNATURE..*LOOKS AT SIGNATURE AGAIN*
Oh..there's the evidence that Kidd is far superior than Nash...


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

f22egl said:


> Arenas is a better scorer than Marbury ever was. And he has already made it past the 1st round. I think it took a while for the Wizards to mesh their new parts together since they brought in 6 new players including Butler and Daniels and lost probably their second best player in Hughes. Unlike Steve Francis, Arenas was able to get it together without his backcourt buddy.
> 
> Plus Arenas scores when the team needs a basket, he scored 31 of his 43 points in the 2nd half including 16 in the 4th in tonight's must win against the Bucks. To those who are watching, he is doing this with a strained back, but he puts it together with his determination and toughness.


Am just curious though, how does Arenas do against Kidd. Cause in the very few games I recall them playing against each other, Kidd has completely taken him out his groove.


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

ravor44 said:


> When I was reading the thread...I KEEP LOOKING ON MY SIGNATURE..*LOOKS AT SIGNATURE AGAIN*
> Oh..there's the evidence that Kidd is far superior than Nash...


Career assist and steals totals aren't exactly the best way to tell who is the better player, especially if we're just looking at one year. John Stockton owns both the assists and steals totals records, but not too many folks would take him over Magic Johnson, for example.


----------



## ralaw (Feb 24, 2005)

Sir Patchwork said:


> Career assist and steals totals aren't exactly the best way to tell who is the better player, especially if we're just looking at one year. John Stockton owns both the assists and steals totals records, but not too many folks would take him over Magic Johnson, for example.


Not to mention Stephon Marbury has better career numbers and totals than Nash, but I think it is pretty clear who is the better player.


----------



## JuniorNoboa (Jan 27, 2003)

ravor44 said:


> When I was reading the thread...I KEEP LOOKING ON MY SIGNATURE..*LOOKS AT SIGNATURE AGAIN*
> Oh..there's the evidence that Kidd is far superior than Nash...


I wish I possessed the same superior logical skills as you.


----------



## f22egl (Jun 3, 2004)

Hbwoy said:


> Am just curious though, how does Arenas do against Kidd. Cause in the very few games I recall them playing against each other, Kidd has completely taken him out his groove.



This is the last game...

G. Arenas 
M 46	
FG 6-17	
FT 12-13 
TR 4	
A 8	
PF 6	
PTS 25



J. Kidd
M 38	
FG 5-9 
FT 4-4 
TR 7 
A 9 
PF 1 
PTS 14

Jefferson and Carter have 27 and 28 respectively and the Wizards lose.


----------



## Real (Aug 3, 2005)

f22egl said:


> This is the last game...
> 
> STARTERS M FG FT TR A PF PTS
> G. Arenas, PG 46 6-17 12-13 4 8 6 25
> ...


What is your point?


----------



## f22egl (Jun 3, 2004)

Net2 said:


> What is your point?





Hbwoy said:


> Am just curious though, how does Arenas do against Kidd. Cause in the very few games I recall them playing against each other, Kidd has completely taken him out his groove.


Forgot the quotes


----------



## SeaNet (Nov 18, 2004)

f22egl said:


> This is the last game...
> 
> G. Arenas
> M 46
> ...


I watched that game. JKidd was by far the superior player and had a far greater impact on the game than Arenas, while forcing Arenas into a terrible shooting night w/ his great D.


----------



## MiamiHeat03 (Mar 28, 2003)

NM AI is far superior and better than Tony Parker.

1.Nash
2.Kidd
3.AI
4.Billups
5.Arenas


----------



## f22egl (Jun 3, 2004)

SeaNet said:


> I watched that game. JKidd was by far the superior player and had a far greater impact on the game than Arenas, while forcing Arenas into a terrible shooting night w/ his great D.


 As long as we are basing things on one game, Chucky Atkins is clearly the superior player to Jason Kidd. In the 94-74 Wizards win over the Nets, he made his team flow so much better with his 12 points, 9 assists, and 4 rebound effort against the Nets' Jason Kidd's 12 points, 5 assists, and 3 rebounds.

Overall, I think it was a great team effort against Arenas. Just look at the fact he got to the line 13 times and Jason Kidd only committed 1 personal foul.

Call me crazy, but I think Kidd has better pieces around him then Arenas

Jefferson>Butler
Carter>Jamison* 
Kristic>Jeffries
Haywood>Collins
NJ bench>Wizards bench

(I know Jamison plays the 4, but seriously Carter plays better defense on 4s then Jamison)


----------



## jmk (Jun 30, 2002)

f22egl said:


> As long as we are basing things on one game, Chucky Atkins is clearly the superior player to Jason Kidd. In the 94-74 Wizards win over the Nets, he made his team flow so much better with his 12 points, 9 assists, and 4 rebound effort against the Nets' Jason Kidd's 12 points, 5 assists, and 3 rebounds.
> 
> Overall, I think it was a great team effort against Arenas. Just look at the fact he got to the line 13 times and Jason Kidd only committed 1 personal foul.
> 
> ...


Not only is that way of judging counterparts ridiculous, but so is the way in which you judged them. Vince *never* guards the 4 spot and there is no possible way the Nets bench is better than the Wizards'.


----------



## f22egl (Jun 3, 2004)

Dark Knight said:


> Not only is that way of judging counterparts ridiculous, but so is the way in which you judged them. Vince *never* guards the 4 spot and there is no possible way the Nets bench is better than the Wizards'.



Ah... but you forget that Jamison is the classic tweener that can be considered either one guards the 3 spots, shoots a ridicuolous amount of 3 pointers, and has a finesse game. I'm also more inclined to believe that Carter has more points in the paint then Jamison. Maybe they don't play the same position, but Carter is a better player in my opinion.

I'll re-do the comparisons
SG- Carter > Jeffries 
SF- Jefferson > Butler
PF- Jamison > Kristic
C- Haywood > Collins

The wings for the Nets are far superior to the Wizards with two all star caliber players. I'm a big fan of Butler but he does not measure up to Jefferson on the defensive end. Carter and Jeffries comparison needs no explanation.

I really like Kristic so I don't think the edge between Jamison and Kristic is all that much, especially since Jamison plays no defense. Haywood shows up about once every 5 games and I imagine Collins is a non factor in most games. 


I guess you make a point about the benches, I've grown accustomed to teams having a better bench than the Wizards. I would say that they are about equal. 

Would you say that Jason Kidd has less talent or even the same talent around him than Arenas?


----------



## SeaNet (Nov 18, 2004)

f22egl said:


> *As long as we are basing things on one game*, Chucky Atkins is clearly the superior player to Jason Kidd. In the 94-74 Wizards win over the Nets, he made his team flow so much better with his 12 points, 9 assists, and 4 rebound effort against the Nets' Jason Kidd's 12 points, 5 assists, and 3 rebounds.
> 
> *Overall, I think it was a great team effort against Arenas. Just look at the fact he got to the line 13 times and Jason Kidd only committed 1 personal foul.*
> Call me crazy, but I think Kidd has better pieces around him then Arenas
> ...


The first bolded portion demonstrates that you don't know how to argue a point. I was basing nothing on one game, I was responding to your post. The second bolded portion goes to show you have no idea what you are talking about. JKidd was all over Arenas in that game. I watched the game. You point to the 1 foul as your evidence? This is supposed to convince me over what I watched w/ my own two eyes? As if it would be impossible for Kidd to have been on Arenas because he only had one foul? Why am I wasting my time w/ you?


----------



## jmk (Jun 30, 2002)

f22egl said:


> Would you say that Jason Kidd has less talent or even the same talent around him than Arenas?


I would say that that has no bearing on who I consider the better player. Gilbert Arenas doesn't even come into my mind if I'm putting together a top 3 PG.


----------



## f22egl (Jun 3, 2004)

SeaNet said:


> The first bolded portion demonstrates that you don't know how to argue a point. I was basing nothing on one game, I was responding to your post. The second bolded portion goes to show you have no idea what you are talking about. JKidd was all over Arenas in that game. I watched the game. You point to the 1 foul as your evidence? This is supposed to convince me over what I watched w/ my own two eyes? As if it would be impossible for Kidd to have been on Arenas because he only had one foul? Why am I wasting my time w/ you?


 I don't know why you are wasting my time on me especially since this argument goes back far beyond when you responded. I forget that I'm argueing against 10 net fans so this argument goes back to the dawns of time where somebody wanted a game by game comparison for Kidd and Arenas. I provided it since somebody wanted it but I think it is irrelavant because of the small sample size. My train of thought goes back like 8 pages ago. 

The general portion of my argument today anyways was discussing how IMO I would not necessarily take Arenas over Kidd and vice versa and would depend on the make up of the team. Certainly, the Nets have far more star power so a Jason Kidd on that team would be preferable. As for the Wizards, their talent level lags behind the Nets and the question arises who will be the go to option in the 4th quarter.

The idea of a pure point guard is pure nonsense to me. I am not evaluating on who best plays the role of a point guard but who is a superior player who plays the point guard position. I for one am sick of people insulting players like Iverson and Arenas since they are considered scoring point guards and do not run with the flow of the offense; when in fact their teams are pretty efficient with their offense. 

Perhaps you can tell me how to argue a point more clearly, I'm sorry you are wasting your time on me instead of saving the world.


----------



## SlamJam (Nov 27, 2004)

Mr. Roger's Cardigan said:


>


 :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:


----------



## Real (Aug 3, 2005)

f22egl said:


> I don't know why you are wasting my time on me especially since this argument goes back far beyond when you responded. I forget that I'm argueing against 10 net fans so this argument goes back to the dawns of time where somebody wanted a game by game comparison for Kidd and Arenas. I provided it since somebody wanted it but I think it is irrelavant because of the small sample size. My train of thought goes back like 8 pages ago.
> 
> The general portion of my argument today anyways was discussing how IMO I would not necessarily take Arenas over Kidd and vice versa and would depend on the make up of the team. Certainly, the Nets have far more star power so a Jason Kidd on that team would be preferable. As for the Wizards, their talent level lags behind the Nets and the question arises who will be the go to option in the 4th quarter.
> 
> ...


If you're worried about Jason's impact on a team, look at the 2002 New Jersey Nets, a team that won 26 games the year before and won 52 that year. Envision what the Nets record would be without Jason Kidd. Odds are they don't even make the playoffs.


----------



## f22egl (Jun 3, 2004)

Net2 said:


> If you're worried about Jason's impact on a team, look at the 2002 New Jersey Nets, a team that won 26 games the year before and won 52 that year. Envision what the Nets record would be without Jason Kidd. Odds are they don't even make the playoffs.


 The Nets were a different team believe it or not from 2001 to 2002. They were relatively healthier (Kittles, Martin, Van Horn all played more games), they drafted well with Richard Jefferson and Jason Collins, and they signed Todd Macculloch. And there are very few teams in the league who can make the playoffs without their best player.


----------



## Real (Aug 3, 2005)

f22egl said:


> The Nets were a different team believe it or not from 2001 to 2002. They were relatively healthier (Kittles, Martin, Van Horn all played more games), they drafted well with Richard Jefferson and Jason Collins, and they signed Todd Macculloch. And there are very few teams in the league who can make the playoffs without their best player.


Even when healthy, Kittles, Martin, and Van Horn didn't win anything, they had little to no playoff experience, and Todd-Mac played little in Philadelphia. Kidd took this team to the NBA Finals,* even with nobody on that team averaging over 15 ppg. *

Oh yeah, ask RJ and Jason Collins if they were going to be the same players wihtout Jason Kidd. He was very intstrumental in both of their development.


----------



## f22egl (Jun 3, 2004)

Net2 said:


> Even when healthy, Kittles, Martin, and Van Horn didn't win anything, they had little to no playoff experience, and Todd-Mac played little in Philadelphia. Kidd took this team to the NBA Finals,* even with nobody on that team averaging over 15 ppg. *
> 
> Oh yeah, ask RJ and Jason Collins if they were going to be the same players wihtout Jason Kidd. He was very intstrumental in both of their development.


 The Nets had a lot of pieces that may have improved the team 10-15 games IMO with Marbury in place of Kidd. There are a lot of hypotheticals but I would prefer to return back to the present since Kidd's career is far better than Arenas's. The question who is currently a top 5 point guard in the NBA. Notice how Gary Payton has not been mention in this thread.

I don't want to discuss how Arenas improved Golden States, Arenas's first year in Washington, the fact that the Wizards made the playoffs for the first time since 1996 last year with a cursed franchise in 2005.


----------



## Real (Aug 3, 2005)

f22egl said:


> The Nets had a lot of pieces that may have improved the team 10-15 games IMO with Marbury in place of Kidd. There are a lot of hypotheticals but I would prefer to return back to the present since Kidd's career is far better than Arenas's. The question who is currently a top 5 point guard in the NBA. Notice how Gary Payton has not been mention in this thread.
> 
> I don't want to discuss how Arenas improved Golden States, Arenas's first year in Washington, the fact that the Wizards made the playoffs for the first time since 1996 last year with a cursed franchise in 2005.


If you want to discuss about who's the top 5 Point Gaurds in the league are, I think everything has been said in this thread that proves that Jason Kidd is in fact a top 5 Point Gaurd in the league, and, depending on your point of view, better than Gilbert Arenas.


----------



## Charlie Brown (Oct 22, 2002)

f22egl said:


> Arenas is a better scorer than Marbury ever was. And he has already made it past the 1st round. I think it took a while for the Wizards to mesh their new parts together since they brought in 6 new players including Butler and Daniels and lost probably their second best player in Hughes. Unlike Steve Francis, Arenas was able to get it together without his backcourt buddy.
> 
> Plus Arenas scores when the team needs a basket, he scored 31 of his 43 points in the 2nd half including 16 in the 4th in tonight's must win against the Bucks. To those who are watching, he is doing this with a strained back, but he puts it together with his determination and toughness.


I view a PG's ability to score in the same way I view a QB's ability to run.

It's nice, but it is not the skill set that defines the position.

With a PG, I want to see how the run the team, set up the other players, control the tempo, etc.


----------



## L (Sep 20, 2005)

Net2 said:


> If you want to discuss about who's the top 5 Point Gaurds in the league are, I think everything has been said in this thread that proves that Jason Kidd is in fact a top 5 Point Gaurd in the league, and, depending on your point of view, better than Gilbert Arenas.


As far as im concerned, the pg is supposed to be an extension of the coach on the floor and direct his teammates and do most of the ballhandling. If u ask me, kidd does at least 2 out of those three things better than arenas throughout the course of the season and his career.


----------



## L (Sep 20, 2005)

Dark Knight said:


> I would say that that has no bearing on who I consider the better player. *Gilbert Arenas doesn't even come into my mind if I'm putting together a top 3 PG*.


My thoughts exactly.


----------



## f22egl (Jun 3, 2004)

FullMetalAlchemist said:


> My thoughts exactly.


 I would not have Arenas or Kidd in my top 2, I'm not sure where Parker and AI fit in this mess

1. Nash
2. Billups


----------



## 1 Penny (Jul 11, 2003)

Jason Kidd's stats is technically better than anyone bar Nash.

But I understand why people say Tony Parker has been better.
Parker has been the main player for the Spurs a lot during the season, he was responsible for a heck of a lot of wins.

Kidd, as good as his stats are and he definitely is still a heck of a player, his stats may be better but have not really catapulted the Nets into elite status in terms of wins. They didnt even get to 50 wins.. in the east.


----------



## jmk (Jun 30, 2002)

1 Penny said:


> Jason Kidd's stats is technically better than anyone bar Nash.
> 
> But I understand why people say Tony Parker has been better.
> Parker has been the main player for the Spurs a lot during the season, he was responsible for a heck of a lot of wins.
> ...


That's a poor argument, though. When is the last time the Spurs didn't reach 50 wins? Buford and Pops always have that team loaded. The Nets are playing with 4 players, for the most part.


----------



## 1 Penny (Jul 11, 2003)

Dark Knight said:


> That's a poor argument, though. When is the last time the Spurs didn't reach 50 wins? Buford and Pops always have that team loaded. The Nets are playing with 4 players, for the most part.



But thats the point, Parker was never ranked top 5 during the past seasons because it was Duncan who was responsible for the team.

No doubt Popovic and the Spurs system is the most balanced in the league, but look at the factors.

-Duncan not putting up as much stats as he use to, not being his typical MVP self.
-Ginobili injured in many games.
-Spurs best record in franchise history.
-Parker best season so far in his career.

I also got to watch a few Spurs games, and Parker has been the main guy giving the other teams trouble.


----------



## jmk (Jun 30, 2002)

I'm not saying Parker isn't a good PG, I'm just saying that he isn't as good as Kidd.


----------



## f22egl (Jun 3, 2004)

It's funny how Arenas and Iverson are considered top 15 players but not Jason Kidd, do Net fans know more than everyone else?


----------



## Real (Aug 3, 2005)

f22egl said:


> It's funny how Arenas and Iverson are considered top 15 players but not Jason Kidd, do Net fans know more than everyone else?


No, YOU are considering Arenas and Iverson top 15 players and not Jason KIdd.


----------



## Gilgamesh (Dec 23, 2005)

When it comes to running an offense few are as good as Kidd now or ever.



Dark Knight said:


> I'm not saying Parker isn't a good PG, I'm just saying that he isn't as good as Kidd.


----------



## f22egl (Jun 3, 2004)

Net2 said:


> No, YOU are considering Arenas and Iverson top 15 players and not Jason KIdd.


 Then how come Jason Kidd has not become a contender for even a 3rd all NBA team while Arenas and Iverson have?


----------



## RedsDrunk (Oct 31, 2005)

AI
PPG 33.0 
RPG 3.2 
APG 7.4 
SPG 1.94 
BPG .14 
FG% .447 
FT% .814 
3P% .323 
MPG 43.1 

JKidd
PPG 13.3 
RPG 7.3 
APG 8.4 
SPG 1.88 
BPG .36 
FG% .404 
FT% .795 
3P% .352 
MPG 37.2 

I'll bite on the better D thing. That is a given. And he is great at getting boards for a Pgaurd. His size really gives him the edge in that category obviously. Outside of these 2 aspects all that great floor management and incredible passing only gets your boy one more assist a game on a lower efficiency rating. "Blah blah blah intangibles" , "ai is a gunner and would rather shoot then have his team win etc. etc. etc." AI shoots constantly b/c thats what he must do in order to gives his team a chance to win. He's stuck with players that would rather sit and watch then be a part of a fluid working offense that the man has every ability to create. Its not his fault and should be a knock on the coaching and the players around him rather then ai himself.You can bet if ai had teamates more interested in making things happening and scoring on somethin other then a jumpshot( a la a carter or jefferson or a carter) he would get his 8 assists. I don't see how you guys dismiss ai as an inferior player to kidd simply because he plays in manner that is best geared to his own playstyle and the system that has been set up for him. You act like 20 more points a game isn't THAT big of a deal saying he's just better at offense output then kidd. Thats like saying the pistons play a LITTLE bit more defense then the 76ers. AI is a prolific scorer which is an asset at any position including the P/g spot despite the fact that everyone here seems to think that it must in fact be played only in a certain cookie cutter fashion.

AI does very well what JKidd does incredibly which is pass and lead while at the same time scoring 30+ a night which is why this homer stands by his statement of AI>Kidd


----------



## Real (Aug 3, 2005)

f22egl said:


> Then how come Jason Kidd has not become a contender for even a 3rd all NBA team while Arenas and Iverson have?


Because Iverson and Arenas light up the league in scoring.


----------



## f22egl (Jun 3, 2004)

RedsDrunk said:


> AI
> PPG 33.0
> RPG 3.2
> APG 7.4
> ...


 Agreed.


----------



## f22egl (Jun 3, 2004)

Net2 said:


> Because Iverson and Arenas light up the league in scoring.


 So you think All NBA honors go to players with higher scoring numbers. How would you explain how Jason Kidd got his all NBA honors? Do you even consider that Jason Kidd's game has declined, Iverson and Arenas' games have improved, or a combination of both?


----------



## jmk (Jun 30, 2002)

f22egl said:


> So you think All NBA honors go to players with higher scoring numbers. How would you explain how Jason Kidd got his all NBA honors? Do you even consider that Jason Kidd's game has declined, Iverson and Arenas' games have improved, or a combination of both?


Well, Jason's game hasn't declined, so why would one consider that?


----------



## SeaNet (Nov 18, 2004)

f22egl said:


> It's funny how Arenas and Iverson are considered top 15 players but not Jason Kidd, do Net fans know more than everyone else?


Its not funny, actually, its sad. JKidd is the ultimate glue guy and intangibles player. Given the sorry state of basketball analysis, most writers and fans aren't impressed unless a guy puts up big scoring numbers. People don't have a clue as to what actually contributes to winning in the NBA. And what JKidd does contributes a hell of a lot more than what guys like AI and Arenas do.

I mean really, how pathetic is it that a guy who puts up triple doubles at a rate that only 4 other people in the history of the NBA have done, and is a year in and year out top defender doesn't make people's top 5 PGs list? Hell, people were arguing that Mike James is more productive. What a joke you all are when it comes to understanding basketball.


----------



## RedsDrunk (Oct 31, 2005)

SeaNet said:


> Its not funny, actually, its sad. JKidd is the ultimate glue guy and intangibles player. Given the sorry state of basketball analysis, most writers and fans aren't impressed unless a guy puts up big scoring numbers. People don't have a clue as to what actually contributes to winning in the NBA. And what JKidd does contributes a hell of a lot more than what guys like AI and Arenas do.
> 
> I mean really, how pathetic is it that a guy who puts up triple doubles at a rate that only 4 other people in the history of the NBA have done, and is a year in and year out top defender doesn't make people's top 5 PGs list? Hell, people were arguing that Mike James is more productive. *What a joke you all are when it comes to understanding basketball*.



Feelin a little sensitive are we?


----------



## SeaNet (Nov 18, 2004)

f22egl said:


> So you think All NBA honors go to players with higher scoring numbers. How would you explain how Jason Kidd got his all NBA honors? Do you even consider that Jason Kidd's game has declined, Iverson and Arenas' games have improved, or a combination of both?


Basketball writers don't know basketball for ****. Its a flavor of the month thing w/ them. JKidd is yesterday's news, and since his knee surgery the national press just writes him off. Why should I respect the opinions of a group of people on the players that I watch 80 times a year when they see them maybe 5 times? I got a little life lesson for you f22egl. Don't trust 'the authorities.' Everyone in this world is either faking it, has a hidden agenda, or both. Make up your own mind about things


----------



## SeaNet (Nov 18, 2004)

RedsDrunk said:


> Feelin a little sensitive are we?


Sensitive about what? How facile the analysis is here? Not sensitive at all. Just calling it like I see it.


----------



## RedsDrunk (Oct 31, 2005)

SeaNet said:


> Sensitive about what? How facile the analysis is here? Not sensitive at all. Just calling it like I see it.


Usually when people start throwing out petty insults like how other peoples opinions are jokes and what not rather then disputing what they say it is a sign of frustration and anger, wouldn't you agree. Maybe its b/c you feel you've argued your opinion enough times already and are upset because there are still others out there that disagree with you. Thats life though man. People are goin to continue to disrespect your favorite player in many of the same ways as they do mine(a cookie for you if you can guess who that is) and no amount "your stupid" or "you don't know anything about basketball" is gong to change that. Just my 02.


----------



## SeaNet (Nov 18, 2004)

RedsDrunk said:


> Usually when people start throwing out petty insults like how other peoples opinions are jokes and what not rather then disputing what they say it is a sign of frustration and anger, wouldn't you agree. Maybe its b/c you feel you've argued your opinion enough times already and are upset because there are still others out there that disagree with you. Thats life though man. People are goin to continue to disrespect your favorite player in many of the same ways as they do mine(a cookie for you if you can guess who that is) and no amount "your stupid" or "you don't know anything about basketball" is gong to change that. Just my 02.


You are welcome to interpret my mental state as you see fit.


----------



## RedsDrunk (Oct 31, 2005)

SeaNet said:


> You are welcome to interpret my mental state as you see fit.



* is doing psych homework as we speak*

^^force of habit my boy.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

SeaNet said:


> Basketball writers don't know basketball for ****. Its a flavor of the month thing w/ them. JKidd is yesterday's news, and since his knee surgery the national press just writes him off. Why should I respect the opinions of a group of people on the players that I watch 80 times a year when they see them maybe 5 times? I got a little life lesson for you f22egl. Don't trust 'the authorities.' Everyone in this world is either faking it, has a hidden agenda, or both. *Make up your own mind about things*


Ooops sorry Seanet, I made a mistake and edited instead of quoting. Anyways I strongly agree with your post, most especially the bolded part


----------



## Pimped Out (May 4, 2005)

f22egl said:


> So you think All NBA honors go to players with higher scoring numbers. How would you explain how Jason Kidd got his all NBA honors? Do you even consider that Jason Kidd's game has declined, Iverson and Arenas' games have improved, or a combination of both?


a lot of all nba teams is hype, a lot of it is stats. 

i still pick kidd over arenas easily, for better player, better point, and who i want on my team.


----------



## f22egl (Jun 3, 2004)

Dark Knight said:


> Well, Jason's game hasn't declined, so why would one consider that?


 Fine, his game hasn't declined, noticed I left that open for interpretation but it certainly hasn't improved either. At the same time, Arenas's game has improved significantly the past 3 years in the league. His scoring has gone from 19.6 ppg in 2003-04, to 25.5 in 2004-05, and to 29.3 ppg. His field goal percentage has increased from 39.7% in 2003-04 to 44.7% in 2005-06. 6.0 assists per game is not bad especially since he's not asked to be the pure point guard in Eddie Jordan's system.

In the meantime, Arenas has shown the ability to share the ball. Jamison gets his 20.5 ppg and Butler gets his 17.6 ppg (and 21 points per game over the past 20 games) and thus you have the highest scoring trio in the NBA. 

Eddie Jordan uses a different offense which does not require a "pure point guard" in the Princeton offense. Certainly, their offensive game has not suffered, since their offense has scored 101 points per game. 

Even though this Wizards team only has 42 wins compared to 45 wins last year, I believe this team is better than last years team, mostly because of Arenas's ability to adapt to a different team. They got off to a slow start with the addition of 6 new players, and were in the process of replacing one of their best players Larry Hughes (who IMO was the 2nd best player on the 2004-05 team). Jarvis Hayes who got double figures went down with an injuries and Jarred Jeffries has an offensive game to be desired, especially for the team's starting two guard. 

The points have to come from somewhere and Arenas has carried the load. His 29 ppg and 44.7% shooting is incredibly efficient for a guard. Even Caron Butler's game has developed with Gilbert Arenas much like it did with Larry Hughes was on the Wizards. Another indication that the ball is moving around is Antawn Jamison's 3 point shooting has improved from 34% to 39.4%. Even Antonio Daniels game has developed throughout the season who has averaged 13.9 pppg and 4.9 apg over the past 20 games.

Gilbert Arenas also has the intangibles in his drive and intensity. Even coming into college, he was not supposed to play any minutes and that's he chose his number 0. He helped his team get to the finals in 2001 against Duke. He was drafted in the 2nd round in the 2001 draft, and he proved that he is one of the top 2 players from that draft. After losing to Miami in the 2nd round last year, he was found to be training in Washington facilities 12 hours later. He works out in the middle of the night taking 400-500 shots. Despite facing tremendous adversity, he is an ultimate competitor and loves proving the doubters wrong.


----------



## Prolific Scorer (Dec 16, 2005)

SeaNet said:


> You are welcome to interpret my mental state as you see fit.


Yeah, i've skimmed over this arguement.....SeaNet is basically owning you, your whole arguement is bogus.


----------



## jmk (Jun 30, 2002)

f22egl said:


> Fine, his game hasn't declined, noticed I left that open for interpretation but it certainly hasn't improved either. At the same time, Arenas's game has improved significantly the past 3 years in the league. His scoring has gone from 19.6 ppg in 2003-04, to 25.5 in 2004-05, and to 29.3 ppg. His field goal percentage has increased from 39.7% in 2003-04 to 44.7% in 2005-06. 6.0 assists per game is not bad especially since he's not asked to be the pure point guard in Eddie Jordan's system.
> 
> In the meantime, Arenas has shown the ability to share the ball. Jamison gets his 20.5 ppg and Butler gets his 17.6 ppg (and 21 points per game over the past 20 games) and thus you have the highest scoring trio in the NBA.
> 
> ...


Listen, no offense or anything, but you didn't need to write all that. It's not like I'm saying I don't think Arenas is good. I think Arenas is very good. If you'd look up a thread from about 2 years ago, I had Arenas as #3 in my preseason PG rankings. I'm a fan of his, but I also believe that he is not on Kidd's level, despite his scoring numbers.


----------



## bballlife (Oct 5, 2003)

HKF said:


> I was doing my year end review of the players and I honestly don't know what to do with Jason Kidd
> 
> 1. Steve Nash
> 2. Chauncey Billups
> ...



I consider Iverson a 2, but even if he is a 1, Kidd takes his spot. More effective player.


----------



## RedsDrunk (Oct 31, 2005)

bballlife said:


> I consider Iverson a 2, but even if he is a 1, Kidd takes his spot. More effective player.


Brilliantly presented argument....encore :biggrin:


----------



## iverson101 (Mar 4, 2006)

Allen Iverson isnt even a top 20 PG


----------



## Nocioni (May 23, 2005)

Larry brown made chauncey billups & iverson become a true pointguards and marbury to be the best pointguard


----------



## f22egl (Jun 3, 2004)

Nocioni said:


> Larry brown made chauncey billups & iverson become a true pointguards and marbury to be the best pointguard


 Didn't Iverson play point guard only when Brown left. Anyways, Marbury is not in the same league as those two players.


----------



## f22egl (Jun 3, 2004)

Dark Knight said:


> Listen, no offense or anything, but you didn't need to write all that. It's not like I'm saying I don't think Arenas is good. I think Arenas is very good. If you'd look up a thread from about 2 years ago, I had Arenas as #3 in my preseason PG rankings. I'm a fan of his, but I also believe that he is not on Kidd's level, despite his scoring numbers.



This was addressing other posters as well. I was too lazy to quote them. :cheers:


----------



## AJC NYC (Aug 16, 2005)

Jason kidd will prove he is the best point gaurd in the Nba come sunday

-self proclaimed biggest nets fan


----------



## ravor44 (Feb 26, 2005)

AJC NYC said:


> Jason kidd will prove he is the best point gaurd in the Nba come sunday
> 
> -self proclaimed biggest nets fan


AGREE!! :cheers: KIDD will EAT THEM ALIVE!


----------



## AJC NYC (Aug 16, 2005)

I cant wait till the playoffs so Kidd will prove everyone wrong


----------



## hollywood476 (Aug 20, 2005)

Stephon Marbury is a good point guard, but I remember when people would call him starbury, back then he was top 5, but Jason Kidd and Steve Nash are miles ahead of everyone else.


----------



## AJC NYC (Aug 16, 2005)

You will see today that Jason Kidd is still the undisputed best point guard in the Nba


----------



## L (Sep 20, 2005)

AJC NYC said:


> You will see today that Jason Kidd is still the undisputed best point guard in the Nba


No offense, but can u please stop. We heard the same message 20x already.


----------



## SlamJam (Nov 27, 2004)

AJC NYC said:


> You will see today that Jason Kidd is still the undisputed best point guard in the Nba


oops


----------



## jmk (Jun 30, 2002)

AJC NYC said:


> You will see today that Jason Kidd is still the undisputed best point guard in the Nba


Kid's a ****ing jinx.


----------



## L (Sep 20, 2005)

Dark Knight said:



> Kid's a ****ing jinx.


AJC is 0 for 1 so far, i dont trust him either.-note, this isnt sarcasm.


----------



## AJC NYC (Aug 16, 2005)

FullMetalAlchemist said:


> AJC is 0 for 1 so far, i dont trust him either.-note, this isnt sarcasm.


I am not a Jynx

I am the number one nets fan


----------



## L (Sep 20, 2005)

AJC NYC said:


> I am not a Jynx
> 
> I am the number one nets fan


im not goin to bother to argue. i dont want to get banned or be responsible for a thread bein closed.


----------



## pmac34 (Feb 10, 2006)

this thread should be closed. its off topic and 20 pages deep


----------



## L (Sep 20, 2005)

pmac34 said:


> this thread should be closed. its off topic and 20 pages deep


U doin 15 posts per page? Im on page 12.


----------



## AJC NYC (Aug 16, 2005)

I am on topic Jason Kidd is the number one point gaurd in the Nba


----------



## Air Fly (Apr 19, 2005)

AJC NYC said:


> I am on topic Jason Kidd is the number one point gaurd in the Nba


That title belongs to Nash.


----------



## Spriggan (Mar 23, 2004)

Nets fans don't even want to admit that there are some situations where Arenas would be a better fit than Kidd. A situation that requires your point guard to score efficiently and in large amounts, for example.


----------



## f22egl (Jun 3, 2004)

pmac34 said:


> this thread should be closed. its off topic and 20 pages deep


 This thread will NEVER DIE... bwhahahahah!


----------



## pmac34 (Feb 10, 2006)

Air Fly said:


> That title belongs to Nash.


put JKidd in Nash's position the suns would be much much better
put Nash in JKidd's position the nets are worse


----------



## L (Sep 20, 2005)

pmac34 said:


> put JKidd in Nash's position the suns would be much much better
> put Nash in JKidd's position the nets are worse


i think nash fits better in the suns system because he is a better shooter still.
kidd is better in the nets system because its more defense oriented.


----------



## AJC NYC (Aug 16, 2005)

Kidd is a top 5 point guard


----------



## bball2223 (Jul 21, 2006)

AJC NYC said:


> Kidd is a top 5 point guard


Wow your really going out on a limb there dude, grab a glass of water and chill lol. He is the # 1A PG in the NBA.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

There's two elite PGs in the league. Kidd and Nash.


----------



## someone (Jul 17, 2007)

I disagree.


----------



## Knick Killer (Jul 16, 2006)

I think Kidd is in the Top 5 but after this season or the next I don't think he will be. Chris Paul is only getting better, Arenas is showing more and more talent every season and Tony Parker proved that he can lead the Spurs. But for now I definately have Kidd in the top 5 but he wont be there for very long thats for sure.


----------



## Basel (Mar 31, 2005)

Kidd isn't only Top 5, he's Top 1.


----------



## TiMVP2 (Jun 19, 2003)

parker is top 5 no matter what.


----------



## bigbabyjesus (Mar 1, 2003)

Kidd not being top 5 is a joke.

Besides Nash, no one is on his level

Billups is close, but he's a notch down I think. Arenas is a great scorer, but has a lot of improvement to do with his PG skills. Parker and Paul will be up there in a couple years.


----------



## NeoSamurai (Jan 16, 2003)

outside of maybe Nash, if you wanted a PG to start for your team in one game/one season today, i think Kidd would be your guy...too basketball savvy not to be in the top 5...there may be more talented, athletic, dynamic PGs in the league right now ahead of Kidd, but Kidd is a winner and a reason why hes still a top 5 PG in the league....


----------



## TiMVP2 (Jun 19, 2003)

parker>billups

arenas and nash are over him

kidd is arguable


----------



## Basel (Mar 31, 2005)

MDIZZ said:


> parker>billups
> 
> arenas and nash are over him
> 
> kidd is arguable


I don't think it's really that arguable. Kidd is better than Parker right now.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

The real gauge of how great a point guard is today is whether he's a franchise PG. That's the hardest position to be a franchise player at, and there's very few in the league today.


----------



## Pimped Out (May 4, 2005)

parker is o-v-e-r-r-a-t-e-d.
even compared to other scoring point guards like arenas and iverson, parker is a poor playmaker


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

I saw the stats Parker had playing for France in the Euros.He averaged about 2 assists a game.San Antonio's system doesn't limit his assist numbers nearly so much as the fact that he's not that great a passer.He's a very good penetrator and a very good finisher so long as Timmy is inside keeping the interior defenders honest.As a point guard he really doesn't compare to the top players at the position.

Parker is better than Billups,who must be the worst playmaker ever to be considered a top point guard.Talking like Billups is even close to the top 3 is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.Look at what he did this summer in Vegas.He's on a team surrounded with finishers.If he's a great point guard that's going to turn into dunks almost every time down the floor.If he's not a good point guard then it doesn't really matter how good those other players when he isn't able to create anything for them.I didn't see Billups create anything for anyone.I have seen him fit in well with a system in Detroit...but that only makes him a good system player


----------



## Jizzy (Aug 24, 2005)

Jason Kidd = Most complete PG in the game today making him the BEST PG in the game today, yes even over Steve Nash.


----------



## Hyperion (Dec 5, 2006)

Jizzy said:


> Jason Kidd = Most complete PG in the game today making him the BEST PG in the game today, yes even over Steve Nash.


he doesn't have a reliable shot. However his passing does outweigh his shooting shortcomings.


----------



## LamarButler (Apr 16, 2005)

In no order

Nash
Kidd
Williams
Iverson
Davis


----------



## Tragedy (Dec 9, 2002)

Jizzy said:


> Jason Kidd = Most complete PG in the game today making him the BEST PG in the game today, yes even over Steve Nash.


YOU. ARE. CRAZY. Jason Kidd's defense is far superior, but Nash's offense offsets that advantage IMO.


----------



## hardcomin (Oct 6, 2007)

I think Kidd shoul be in TOP 5, but can't decide - in Billups or Parker's place..


----------



## quench23 (Mar 26, 2006)

Ill take kids 78 or 80 triple doubles over tony parkers... tear drop... any day of the week.


----------



## TiMVP2 (Jun 19, 2003)

AMAZING teardrop that can score when the team needs it in a critical part of the game.

oh and parker got one of them golden ball hoop thingy trophies.


----------



## quench23 (Mar 26, 2006)

MDIZZ said:


> AMAZING teardrop that can score when the team needs it in a critical part of the game.
> 
> oh and parker got one of them golden ball hoop thingy trophies.




... we're nto talking about the team were talking about individuals. you cant tell me you'd rather have Tony parker than Jason Kidd if you were starting a team from scratch. If you put Jason Kidd on an NBDL team they'd be amazing, can you say the same about tony?


----------



## bluecro (Oct 13, 2006)

MDIZZ said:


> AMAZING teardrop that can score when the team needs it in a critical part of the game.
> 
> oh and parker got one of them golden ball hoop thingy trophies.


Yeah but he also has the one of the best players of all time in Tim Duncan.


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

They are such different players. Neither of them are good enough to lead a team to a championship. Parker is a great 2nd banana because of his explosive scoring ability and great awareness of when to apply it within the team's offense. Kidd has always been the franchise player on his teams, so I don't know how he would perform as a sidekick type player, and I think if we're talking about championships, that's the role both of these guys need to play. Kidd is not going to lead any team to a championship. So mainly it just depends on your team's makeup because they do drastically different things on the basketball court.


----------



## Pioneer10 (Sep 30, 2004)

Sir Patchwork said:


> They are such different players. Neither of them are good enough to lead a team to a championship. Parker is a great 2nd banana because of his explosive scoring ability and great awareness of when to apply it within the team's offense. Kidd has always been the franchise player on his teams, so I don't know how he would perform as a sidekick type player, and I think if we're talking about championships, that's the role both of these guys need to play. Kidd is not going to lead any team to a championship. So mainly it just depends on your team's makeup because they do drastically different things on the basketball court.


 You don't think the Nets would have won a title back in Martin, Kittles, Kidd, RJ days if they would have had say R. Wallace instead of Martin? Kidd really hasn't been blessed with teams that I would say were championship calibre teams in terms of being complete.


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

Pioneer10 said:


> You don't think the Nets would have a title back in Martin, Kittles, Kidd, RJ days if they would have had say R. Wallace instead of Martin? Kidd really hasn't been blessed with teams that I would say were championship calibre teams in terms of being complete.


That and an injury to either Duncan or Shaq in the Western Finals you might have a series.Otherwise those Nets teams are completely outmatched by the Lakers and the Spurs.The Nets were nowhere near as good as either of those teams.They were better than the East at it's absolute worst and not much more.


----------



## Pioneer10 (Sep 30, 2004)

Diable said:


> That and an injury to either Duncan or Shaq in the Western Finals you might have a series.Otherwise those Nets teams are completely outmatched by the Lakers and the Spurs.The Nets were nowhere near as good as either of those teams.They were better than the East at it's absolute worst and not much more.


I think they were outclassed by the Lakers but the Spurs series was a different series Half the games in that finals were decided by 5 points or less and the series was tied 2-2 before the Spurs pulled away. Considering that the Nets didn't have literally any interior scoring presence that was pretty darn good. The point remains a prime Kidd was not bless with by what I would call a complete team. Replace Martin with a true post presence and that is a completely different team. I just don't think it's fair to characterize Kidd as a franchise player who somehow lacked the ability get his team to the promise land as he didn't have the best talent around h im (2 Finals with the limited talent they had was pretty darn good)


----------



## Jizzy (Aug 24, 2005)

Diable said:


> That and an injury to either Duncan or Shaq in the Western Finals you might have a series.Otherwise those Nets teams are completely outmatched by the Lakers and the Spurs.The Nets were nowhere near as good as either of those teams.They were better than the East at it's absolute worst and not much more.


Half right.

THe Nets were dismantled by the Lakers as Kobe and Shaq demolished them BUT the Nets had the Spurs on the ropes after Game 2, which they took in SA. TD went off, and David Robinson was averaging a double-double but the Nets had a chance in that series if it hadn't had been for the horrible coaching of Byron Scott, refusing to play Dikembe Mutombo which led to the firing of Scott.

Kidd was awesome in both series, regardless. You can only do so much at times and turning a joke of a team around and leading them to two Finals apperances is more then what Nash can say.


----------



## HeaVINsent15 (Jul 13, 2007)

HKF said:


> Hmmm...
> 
> Kidd plays in the East has lead the Nets with Jefferson, Carter and Krstic (to 50 wins), all these guys healthy all year.
> 
> ...


You are out of your mind. Why dont we make this argument. Kidd took his team of Martin, Kittles, and RJ to the finals. And went to 6 games with that same SA team. He constantly takes nobodies and J-Kidd does everything. Scoring is what Parker does not much else. J-Kidd is either the 1st or 2nd pg in the league. Not putting him in the top 5 is crazy.


----------



## HeaVINsent15 (Jul 13, 2007)

Anyone wanna point out that Kidd is 34! Who was the last player who people were putting in the top 5 of their position at 34. And this is after micro fracture surgey. And you guys are still doubting Kidd. Arenas is a great scorer nothing else. Same with AI. Billups has done noting without an elite team. He was a loser before that. Parker lives off Duncan and he is always worried about himself. He is close but still not as good as the top 2. Nash and J-kidd are ina different level. They do things those other guys can dream of. They know when Marion or Carter are going for a dunk even if their facing their defender trying to fake them out.


----------



## HeaVINsent15 (Jul 13, 2007)

Sir Patchwork said:


> Your position is mostly defined by what position you guard on *defense*, not how you play on offense. Dirk Nowitzki doesn't play like a power forward historically has, but he guards power forwards. That makes him a power forward. You can argue the effectiveness of a great scoring point guard versus a playmaking/passing point guard, but to say a scorer can't be a point guard is wrong.
> 
> Reading through this thread, I'm buying the argument that Kidd couldn't do the same things in San Antonio and Philly that Parker and Iverson do. So with that, Kidd is not a top five point guard. He is on the outside looking in.
> 
> Jason Kidd has always been overrated though. This is the guy that people thought deserved MVP over Tim Duncan in 2002. What a joke.


are you crazy? J-kidd took a playoff fighting team to 52 wins and the finals. Duncan took an elite team with an amazing coach to a championship. j-Kidd obviously deserved it.


----------



## HeaVINsent15 (Jul 13, 2007)

Rawse said:


> New Jersey _better_ win the title this year.
> 
> Kidd = best point guard in the league
> Vince = on Kobe's level
> ...


1. true besides many people around the league have said it including lets see. Lebron James. People dont understand what Kidd does. You dont see things like when he made a backwards shot to win a game or even the game by himself in the 3rd quarter in the playoffs vs Cleveland.
2. 5 years ago.
3. Possible still.
4. YOU made this up and constantly say it.


----------



## HeaVINsent15 (Jul 13, 2007)

f22egl said:


> Just out of curiousity is Jason Kidd still a good lockdown defender? Wade made him look silly last year in the postseason. Maybe Kidd is back to 100% though.


Please stop. Carter and RJ were on him mostly. when Kidd got on him things got compltcated.


----------



## HeaVINsent15 (Jul 13, 2007)

f22egl said:


> This is the last game...
> 
> G. Arenas
> M 46
> ...


Why did RJ and Carter have 27 and 28?


----------



## HeaVINsent15 (Jul 13, 2007)

1 Penny said:


> Jason Kidd's stats is technically better than anyone bar Nash.
> 
> But I understand why people say Tony Parker has been better.
> Parker has been the main player for the Spurs a lot during the season, he was responsible for a heck of a lot of wins.
> ...


look at 05-06. 06-07 the injury bug bit us hard.


----------



## HeaVINsent15 (Jul 13, 2007)

Spriggan said:


> Nets fans don't even want to admit that there are some situations where Arenas would be a better fit than Kidd. A situation that requires your point guard to score efficiently and in large amounts, for example.


WRONG look at game 6 of the Celveland series look at it and then say that again.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Umm are you going to respond to every post in this thread


----------



## TiMVP2 (Jun 19, 2003)

bluecro said:


> Yeah but he also has the one of the best players of all time in Tim Duncan.


jason kidd had freaking googs on his team and couldnt win a championship.

GOOGS


----------



## TiMVP2 (Jun 19, 2003)

Jizzy said:


> Half right.
> 
> THe Nets were dismantled by the Lakers as Kobe and Shaq demolished them BUT the Nets had the Spurs on the ropes after Game 2, which they took in SA. TD went off, and David Robinson was averaging a double-double but the Nets had a chance in that series if it hadn't had been for the horrible coaching of Byron Scott, refusing to play Dikembe Mutombo which led to the firing of Scott.
> 
> Kidd was awesome in both series, regardless. You can only do so much at times and turning a joke of a team around and leading them to two Finals apperances is more then what Nash can say.



:lol: @ ur sig

i never said that, or i said that a long time ago and was joking, but i doubt that cuz wtf kaled said we do it best? EDIT


----------



## GNG (Aug 17, 2002)

HeaVINsent15 said:


> 1. true besides many people around the league have said it including lets see. Lebron James. People dont understand what Kidd does. You dont see things like when he made a backwards shot to win a game or even the game by himself in the 3rd quarter in the playoffs vs Cleveland.


Why do you think I'm being facetious in other parts of that post and not this part? 



> 4. YOU made this up and constantly say it.


Didn't make it up. One of your fellow Nets buddies said it and made a huge deal out of it before you started running around here.


----------



## HeaVINsent15 (Jul 13, 2007)

Rawse said:


> Why do you think I'm being facetious in other parts of that post and not this part?
> 
> 
> 
> Didn't make it up. One of your fellow Nets buddies said it and made a huge deal out of it before you started running around here.


nobody has said it buddy find me the thread. You keep on saying someone said it when they didnt.


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

Kidd's defense is incredibly overrated.He's a good defender so long as he's not guarding anyone quick...Which coincidentally describes me and the fat kid who got picked last every day in gym class.He's better at guarding two guards than point guards for this very reason.Yes he's a good defender,but describing him as a great defender is living in the past...the distant past for that matter.


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

HeaVINsent15 said:


> are you crazy? J-kidd took a playoff fighting team to 52 wins and the finals. Duncan took an elite team with an amazing coach to a championship. j-Kidd obviously deserved it.


Not to sell anyone short, but Duncan is a huge part of why everyone in the franchise is considered to be so amazing. Kidd never really came close to having the same value as Duncan on either end. It was a Duncan and Shaquille league at that time.


----------



## f22egl (Jun 3, 2004)

HeaVINsent15 said:


> Anyone wanna point out that Kidd is 34! *Who was the last player who people were putting in the top 5 of their position at 34.* And this is after micro fracture surgey. And you guys are still doubting Kidd. Arenas is a great scorer nothing else. Same with AI. Billups has done noting without an elite team. He was a loser before that. Parker lives off Duncan and he is always worried about himself. He is close but still not as good as the top 2. Nash and J-kidd are ina different level. They do things those other guys can dream of. They know when Marion or Carter are going for a dunk even if their facing their defender trying to fake them out.


Stockton
Malone
Jordan
Pippen
Shaq
David Robinson
.........

Yup, not a very long list.


----------



## someone (Jul 17, 2007)

we already have a 20+ page thread on why Nash is better than Kidd, why do we need this one?


----------



## LameR (Jan 4, 2004)

liekomgj4ck said:


> we already have a 20+ page thread on why Nash is better than Kidd, why do we need this one?


Because we're tired of Ben Gordon?


----------



## f22egl (Jun 3, 2004)

Not many answers IMO from last season to this topic especially since Gilbert got injured at the end of the season. Most people would judge Gilbert on how well he and Wizards performed in the postseason. He did play well enough in the regular season to earn 2nd team all NBA honors along with being voted in as an all star starter. But to his critics that is not enough and he will have to prove himself in the postseason.


----------



## HeaVINsent15 (Jul 13, 2007)

f22egl said:


> Stockton
> Malone
> Jordan
> Pippen
> ...


look at whos on the list.


----------



## f22egl (Jun 3, 2004)

HeaVINsent15 said:


> look at whos on the list.


I agree, Jason Kidd has proven to be a great player. That does not mean at this point in time, he's more valuable than Gilbert Arenas. Last time I checked, Jason Kidd could have been had for Andrew freaking Bynum.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

^So why isnt Kidd on the Lakers then. Obviously someone thought he couldnt have been had for Bynum


----------



## GNG (Aug 17, 2002)

HeaVINsent15 said:


> nobody has said it buddy find me the thread. You keep on saying someone said it when they didnt.


Search for it yourself, buddy. I hardly have any time of my own, so I certainly don't have the time to go through ancient threads about Nenad freakin' Krstic so I can prove to some 16-year-old that a homer said something homerly two years ago.

You need clues or help using the search function? 

Clue #1 - Look through the post history of Hugeeug.
Clue #2 - He said it awhile ago, so it probably won't be in his last 500 posts. It's in the NBA General forum, so dig through some of the 50+ post threads that concern the Nets, Grizzlies or Krstic.

There's your treasure map. If you can't find it from there, ask your parents to help.


----------



## The Mad Viking (Jun 12, 2003)

Can someone tell me WHY this thread had to be BUMPED?


----------

