# Reasons why Jason Kidd is overrated



## Kmasonbx (Apr 7, 2003)

I have felt strongly for 2 seasons now that Kidd is overrated, there are plenty of reasons why I feel this way. The biggest reason is he is one of the most turnover prone players in the NBA, he actually led the league in turnovers per game this year (Steve Francis led in total turnovers) with 3.7 a game, while other top PGs like, Payton, Jason Williams, Steve Nash, John Stockton, Sam Cassell and Tony Parker all average under 2.5 turnovers a game. Kidd was actually 36th in the league in assist to turover ratio. The once erratic Jason Williams led the league in a/to ratio (technically Ollie lead the league, but he's a reserve so I'm not counting him), Payton, Stockton and Nash were all in the top 10. Kidd also shot just 41.4 percent from the field, and people are claiming he is a better shooter now, NO he isn't he just took more shots this year, he is a career 40.4 percent shooter. He took 15.6 shots a game this year for his career he takes 13.1 shots a game. His 3 point % was 34.1 this year which is his 3rd best of his career, and he is a career 32% 3 point shooter. 

Look at the #s Gary Payton and Stockton are putting up their age, now can you really see Kidd doing the same as these two when he is their age? Kidd can't put up the #s Payton puts up now and Payton is about to be 35. Stockton is 41 and was still one of the 7 or 8 best PGs in the league. I don't want to hear that Kidd is a winner, he wasn't considered a winner until he went to New Jersey, and then people started saying look at what he did with Phoenix, Kidd is no more a winner than Payton was in his prime. Don't forget Payton was in the finals, and Stockton got to the finals twice. Both played in conferences that were much stronger then the current East. 

Don't get me wrong I think Kidd is a great player, easily one of the 15 best players in the league, but he is not top 10, and definitely not top 5. He is considered hands down the best PG in the NBA, and it isn't that clear cut, I don't feel he is better than Marbury. Marbury is a much, much better scorer, a better shooter, just as strong if not stronger, and his passing ability is only slightly lower than Kidd, don't let the experts opinions fool you. Kidd is a better defender although Marbury is an excellent defender as well. I'm probably one of the few in my opinion so I expect many people to disagree with me.


----------



## walkon4 (Mar 28, 2003)

*Yeah*

Good Facts.

But still, If I had to pick a PG running My show, He'd be hands down the man to pick.

I love the man's unselfishness. Floor General. I dont like his shot, but everything else is butter!


----------



## Bball_Doctor (Dec 29, 2002)

I have to disagree with you on this one. Kidd's contributions are much greater than what he does statistically. He is one of those special players that when you put out there truly make others better. Young PGs like Marbury and Francis who put up allworld numbers do not have that same intangible as Kidd. Kidd is flat out the best PG in the league today...no other PG is even close. The only other PG for the last 6 years who could give Kidd a run for his money is Payton. Kidd is not top 5 player in the league...he is easily arguable to be top 10. But don't look at Kidd that way instead list the top 10 most valuable players to their team...Kidd is arguably easily top 5 in that department.


----------



## The Cat (Jul 14, 2002)

well, the assist/turnover ratio isn't a fair comparison. Kidd's more of a "quarterback" than any of the other point guards, even Stockton and Payton in their primes. In the Nets system, he handles the ball more than any other point guard in any system that I've ever seen. because he has more touches, he's prone to more mistakes.

also, because the Nets are such a fast break team, they naturally take more gambles than the average team, and thus there are more turnovers than someone like Stockton that's running most things in the halfcourt.

That being said, I would still take Marbury over Kidd if I were building a team, but not for anything related to assist/turnover ratio. Kidd has court vision like only two or three other players in the world. It's just that to win a *championship*, you have to take out dominant defensive teams (Lakers last season, Spurs this season), and those kind of teams are usually going to force you to play in the halfcourt. In those situations, there's a much greater emphasis on a player who dominates the ball so much to be able to stick the open jumper and score.

Kidd's an underrated shooter too... but he's not in Marbury's league in that area. Marbury's terrific, and while he doesn't have the "Jason Kidd vision", I think his shooting more than makes up for the gap there. It might not be that important in the regular season, but it is when you have to go through dominant defensive teams in the playoffs that take away the fast break...


----------



## "Matt!" (Jul 24, 2002)

How many times do I have to say this?

Let me put it in big type...

<h2>YOU CAN'T JUDGE ALL PLAYERS BY NUMBERS!</h2>

Look at the important stuff though, since being traded to Phoenix, Kidd has proven he is a winner. He may turn the ball over more than anyone else, but without a doubt he handles the ball more than anyone else. He leads the league in assists, too, just so you know. 

He's a floor leader, and makes everyone around him better. The Nets have reached the Finals twice since he's arrived, and he hasn't missed the playoffs since he got traded to Phoenix. 

Can't argue with results.


----------



## Kmasonbx (Apr 7, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Bball_Doctor</b>!
> But don't look at Kidd that way instead list the top 10 most valuable players to their team...Kidd is arguably easily top 5 in that department.


I somewhat agree with that but I don't think he is top 5, I say, Iverson, Duncan, Garnett, T Mac and Paul Pierce are actually more valuable to their team's than Kidd is. Just imagine those teams without those player, would the sixers score 70 points ever? How many open 3's would Bowen get, and who would open up the lane for Parker and Ginobili to drive? Who would do anything for the T Wolves? Would the Celtics ever take a free throw? The value thing is different, I think you can say Kidd is a top 5 valuable player in the league, I would rank him in the 6-9 range, with guys like T Mac, Kobe and Shaq. The reason I don't put Kidd up there is there are other players who can score on the team besides him, for his highlight dunks, Jefferson is also a pretty good shooter, Martin has been scoring a lot in the halfcourt lately. Tne Nets would stink without him, but not as much as these other teams would without their stars. 

The fact that he handles the ball more than anyone else doesn't really disprove my point about the fact that he is overrated, the reason he handles the ball more than anybody else, is there aren't any other great ball handlers on his team, and because of this Kidd looks better. Also he is guilty of holding on to the ball too long, he doesn't do it a bucnh of times a game but he will do it a few times. The other top PGs in the league all have other players that can handle the ball, Payton had Cassell and Brent Barry, Marbury has Penny, Nash has Dirk, and Van Exel, Davis has Mashburn, Francis has Mobley.

I never said Kidd wasn't a winner, and if it came off like that, that's not what I meant, I was merely saying he is no more of a winner than Payton and Stockton were in their primes. Since when does 52 wins and 49 wins in back to back seasons make you a great winner?


----------



## Bball_Doctor (Dec 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Kmasonbx</b>!
> 
> 
> I somewhat agree with that but I don't think he is top 5, I say, Iverson, Duncan, Garnett, T Mac and Paul Pierce are actually more valuable to their team's than Kidd is. Just imagine those teams without those player, would the sixers score 70 points ever? How many open 3's would Bowen get, and who would open up the lane for Parker and Ginobili to drive? Who would do anything for the T Wolves? Would the Celtics ever take a free throw? The value thing is different, I think you can say Kidd is a top 5 valuable player in the league, I would rank him in the 6-9 range, with guys like T Mac, Kobe and Shaq. The reason I don't put Kidd up there is there are other players who can score on the team besides him, for his highlight dunks, Jefferson is also a pretty good shooter, Martin has been scoring a lot in the halfcourt lately. Tne Nets would stink without him, but not as much as these other teams would without their stars.
> ...


I definitely understand your points. Kidd has always been a winner and I mean a turnaround franchise player. When he go to Dallas they improved from 13 wins to 36. When he got traded to Phoenix they went on that incredible run to end up in the playoffs. When he left and Marbury took over the team went from 51 wins to 36. When he got to NJ they went from 26 to 52 and he led that team to 2 Finals appearences and possibly a championship. Kidd is top 5 most valuable FOR SURE. If he was on the Magic they would probably win more games than with TMac IMO...seriously. The Nets are not as good as you think...Kidd just makes them that much better. Ask any Nets fan and they will tell you that. KMart really benefits from Kidd as do Jefferson and basically all their wing players. Kidd is a legit turnaround guy. You have to ask yourself where was NJ before Kidd even when they had Coleman and Kenny Anderson or the Keith Van Horn failed experiment? Kidd's value to his team is incredible and his track record of turning around a team shows that. IMO Kidd is more valuable to his team than TMac, Pierce or Kobe. Only players ahead of him are Duncan, KG, and Shaq. However if I was to list the top 10 players those players I mentioned would probably be ahead of him. That is why I have always said don't rate Kidd on his stats but his value as a player to his team. Kidd however is no question the #1 ranked PG of today.


----------



## W1Z0C0Z (Jun 18, 2002)

Jason Kidd is hands down the best point guard in the NBA today. Like others have said, the stats don't truely show what he does.

Marbury and Francis have both been named and they are not in Kidd's class. Francis isn't even comparable. Marbury had an amazing season, but the thing that immediately takes these players out is that they both shoot too much. We've all heard comments about these players and their shooting while we've never heard that about Kidd.

You also named John Stockton. Stockton is a great point guard, but he can't do what Kidd is doing. Put Kidd on the Jazz and he can do what Stockton is doing, but Stockton can't do what Kidd does for the Nets. Kidd could be a pick and role player. Stockton can't do the first step of what's needed for the Nets offense, rebound the ball. 

The Nets are able to leak Jefferson and Kittles earlier cause Martin will get most rebounds and Kidd can get enough of the others, Stockton couldn't. Then on the break Stockton can't run it and keep up like Kidd. Jefferson and Martin would be so much farther ahead of Stockton.


----------



## Kmasonbx (Apr 7, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>W1Z0C0Z</b>!
> Jason Kidd is hands down the best point guard in the NBA today. Like others have said, the stats don't truely show what he does.
> 
> Marbury and Francis have both been named and they are not in Kidd's class. Francis isn't even comparable. Marbury had an amazing season, but the thing that immediately takes these players out is that they both shoot too much. We've all heard comments about these players and their shooting while we've never heard that about Kidd.
> ...


I think your misunderstand what I was saying about Stockton, I'm not for 1 second saying Stockton is on the level of Kidd now, I was just saying in his prime he was just as big of winner as Kidd and I used him to illustrate Kidd's turnover problem. Personally I feel Kidd is a close second behind Marbury as far as best PGs go. Francis isn't in Kidd's or Marbury's league, Francis is a SG playing PG out of necessity. 

Bball Doctor you pointed out the Nets problems before Kidd got there, and the Suns problems last year, but you failed to mention the injury problems the Nets had before Kidd got there, and the injury problems the Suns had last year. Look at the Nets Marbury's last year, Kerry Kittles missed the entire season, Van Horn missed the first half of the season, and Martin missed the second half. So it is no wonder they won just 26 games. I'm not saying if these two players were 100% they would've won 50 games, they probably would've won about 40 games. While the Suns didn't have the same injury problems they still had them, Penny played I think every game but he wore down in the second half of the season because constant injuries kept him from playing well for an entire 82 game series. The Suns were hoping Jake Tsakalidis would give them a contribution but he missed a lot of games, so did Gugliotta. But this year, they weren't worried about Jake, and Gugliotta wasn't important to their success, and the Suns did very well, if it wasn't for Penny missing 24 games the Suns win 50+ games. 

What I'm saying is Kidd isn't hands down the best PG in the league. I said the same thing about Shaq not being the best player in the league, and people thought I was nuts, but then Duncan completely outplays him in the Conference Semis and all of sudden everybody sees what I'm saying. Same way Shaq is a top 5 player in the league but not the best, I see Kidd as the 2nd best PG and one of the 15 best players but not the best PG or one of the 10 and certainly not one of the 5 best.


----------



## Pinball (Aug 3, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Matt85163</b>!
> Look at the important stuff though, since being traded to Phoenix, Kidd has proven he is a winner. He may turn the ball over more than anyone else, but without a doubt he handles the ball more than anyone else. He leads the league in assists, too, just so you know.
> 
> He's a floor leader, and makes everyone around him better. The Nets have reached the Finals twice since he's arrived, and he hasn't missed the playoffs since he got traded to Phoenix.
> ...


Not trying to devalue Jason Kidd but I noticed you said "since being traded" alot. Everyone knows how much stronger the West has been than the East over the past 3-4 years and I don't think it's ironic that Kidd was only able to make the Finals after coming to the East. He never even sniffed the Finals out West as he was never able to make it out of the 2nd round. I'm not trying to knock him as a player or anything. He's the best PG in the league, no doubt about it. I just don't think he's quite as good as some people make him out to be, or even a top 5 player for that matter. I don't even think he's that much better than Marbury. People always point to NJ's success as validation for that point but that just isn't fair. Please keep in mind just how bad NJ was during the 2000-2001 season. Kerry Kittles missed the entire year. KVH was in and out of the lineup with an assortment of injuries. Kenyon Martin was recovering from a broken leg early in the year and broke his leg again down the stretch. Also, there was no Jefferson, McCullough, or Collins on the team. When Steph wrote "all alone" on his sneakers he wasn't kidding. He had nowhere near the amount of talent that Kidd has had the past 2 years. It's not even close. Now do I think that Marbury is better than Kidd? No. I just don't think that Phoenix got robbed blind like some people do. I don't think that Jason Kidd is god either like the sportswriters in NJ do. He is a great player but he's surrounded by great talent and is playing in an inferior conference. Beating the Bucks, Celtics, and Pistons just isn't the same as beating the Lakers, Spurs, and Kings.


----------



## Bball_Doctor (Dec 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Kmasonbx</b>!
> 
> 
> I think your misunderstand what I was saying about Stockton, I'm not for 1 second saying Stockton is on the level of Kidd now, I was just saying in his prime he was just as big of winner as Kidd and I used him to illustrate Kidd's turnover problem. Personally I feel Kidd is a close second behind Marbury as far as best PGs go. Francis isn't in Kidd's or Marbury's league, Francis is a SG playing PG out of necessity.
> ...


Once again I understand your point but even if you count the injuries Kidd has always won more than Marbury. Marion's development and Amare are big reasons why the Suns improved. Until this season Marbury was always seen as a "Reef" type of player. Minus Amare and that team I really do think will still be in the lottery. They are not better than the Rockets minus Amare. Of course Marbury has to be given credit for changing his style of play.

Kidd is hands down the bes PG as far as what he brings to the table as a PG...that is leadership and the ability to control a game. Marbury might score more but he does not do as well as Kidd in those departments. If there is a debate with Marbury it should really be Marbury vs. Francis.

As for New Nersey being injured. There is no question that injuries took a toll on that orgainzation but honestly minus Kidd and that team would not be Finals bound for the last 2 years. Heck a Marbury Nets never even reached close to that or the postseason for that matter. Claiming that they would win 50 games is a no-no honestly. KMart really truly benefits playing beside Kidd. Kidd makes him look better offensively. Imagine without Kidd and those fast breaks the NJ team would probably be a half court offense. Imagine KMart dribbling out the clock. Jefferson is another player that has also benefited. Kittles comeback was just a great addition. A NJ team without Kidd would be 35-37 wins max. Those injuries also don't discount what Kidd was able to do to the Suns or Dallas however. 

Don't get me wrong Marbury is a great player but he still has ALOT to prove and he has the time to do it. He is nowhere near Kidd's ability to win. Kidd is proven. I don't know how many Nets games you watch but just imagine that team minus Kidd. Their whole offense and direction would be changed. Kidd is much better than Marbury...Marbury just has more "star" quality becuz of the way he plays not the way he wins. Kidd is by far more effective and valuable as a PG. 

As for the Stockton comparisons that is hard. Stockton has never proved he could win with his own system like Kidd. It has always been Stockton and Malone. I really doubt Stockton would have been as succesful as he has been without Malone and vice versa. But Malone would probably be more successful without Stockton then Stockton without Malone but that is completely a different argument. To me Stockton as great as he is and was, was never really the top PG in his era. In the 80's it was Magic and Isiah. Early 90s many people considered Price the best PG and early mid to early late 90s was Payton and for the last 3-4 years it has been Kidd. 

I don't think turnover is a good way to judge Kidd. If what you say is true then Magic is a horrendous PG. Magic averaged over 4 tpg. Kidd might have a lot of turnovers but his presence, decision making, and court direction makes his team and teammates better much like Magic did. If you rate with the TO thing...Mugsy would be the greatest PG of all time. Don't get me wrong...tpg is a good way to measure passing efficiency but I don't think it is a fair way to judge a PG's contribution.

Anyways I understand your points but Kidd's contributions go way beyond stats. No PG is near his level right now or for the last 2-3 years. Payton was once there but his age is beginning to show not to mention his lack of winning. Marbury and Francis are light years far from Kidd as far as what they bring as a PG goes.


----------



## JerryWest (Jun 24, 2002)

I laugh at everyone who considers Kidd so much of a winner. You do realize he was a loser with mashburn and a very good younger Jackson in Dallas. He was traded, and in the west which was weaker at the time, he wasn't able to do anything with the suns.

He's a winner in the east. As for your arguments about Amare, I don't know if you watched the suns playoff series but it was Stephon who was carrying the team in the rough moments when no one could get a shot down.

Also about Kidd In NJ. Everyone has a selective memory it seems about NJ w/ Marbury on it. The team was plauged w/ injuries. KVH was injured, Kittles was injured. Martin was injured.

The last 2 seasons are the only one when the whole team was healthy.

Additionally the nets didn't have Jefferson when stephon was playing and Martin was a rookie while the rest of team was cursed w/ injuries and jokes about New Jersey's radioactive dumps.

Kidd is a good PG. But he wasn't even considered a top 2 PG(at every point Payton and stockton were ahead) in the 90's, let alone THE TOP guard. At certain points Penny was better, pre injury, among other PGs.

He has only emerged w/in the last 2 years in a weak east, I think he's the 2nd best guard after Marbury at the moment, but he is overrated IMO, especially when people talk about him being the best guard in the past decade. He wasn't, not even close. You can make a claim about best PG now, sure, but anymore is overdoing it. Like I said, look how far he "carried the Suns or the Mavs"


----------



## rwj333 (Aug 10, 2002)

Kidd has made that New Jersey team a winner. He does everything for that team. If it were any other point guard on that team, they would be nowhere near 50 wins. Marbury would not be able to take them there, I guarantee it. 
You say that everyone overrates Kidd, but I say that everyone overrates New Jersey's talent. Martin and Jefferson are good, but not all stars (although Martin -might- make it next year). Kittles is overpaid and hasnt been the same since the leg injury, and Collins is still developing. 
I realize Kidd has had better talent in NJ than Marbury's tenure there. However, the "33 all alone" incident just highlights Marbury's poor leadership and teamwork skills. It displays selfishness and poor judgement, which are obviously not desired PG attributes. Everyone says that Marbury has been "reborn" in Phoenix... something that I laugh at. He has just been surrounded by better talent, and thus has started winning again. Is there any doubt that Joe Johnson, Marion, Stoudemire, are _significantly_ better than Kittles, Jefferson, and Martin??? Some of them wouldnt even average double digits if not for Kidd and his playmaking.

In Dallas, Jim Cleamons made Kidd play the triangle... THE TRIANGLE. In other works, Cleamons had the best pure point guard in the game and made him play a halfcourt offense. I'll admit that Kidd's poor shooting is the only flaw in his game and its a biggie, and has probably contributed to his lack of effectiveness in the halfcourt game. If you've read David Aldridge's article from ESPN, it detailed how the three Js did not get along, actually hated eachother, which was probably why Dallas did not win. 

As I recall in Phoenix, when Kidd came, they were the only team in league history to have a double digit losing streak (before he came) and a double digit winning streak (after he came) in the same season. And obviously, they didnt make it very far in the playoffs, but he wasnt surrounded by the same talent that Marbury is right now. And at least they made the playoffs.

I know for sure that Kidd prolly wasnt the best point guard of the past decade... I would say Gary Payton. But, he is head and shoulders above Marbury, who still has a long way to go. And, he is a proven winner, even though it came in the weaker east... that still counts.


----------



## 7M3 (Aug 5, 2002)

Jason Kidd is, arguably, the best defensive guard in the league.

Jason Kidd is easily the best passing guard in the league, both in the half-court set and on the break.

Jason Kidd is the best rebounding guard in the league.

Jason Kidd is the best ball-handling guard in the league.

Jason Kidd is, arguably, the clutchest guard in the league.

Jason Kidd does more for his team than any PLAYER in the league.

Anywhere Jason Kidd has gone, he has improved that team greatly. From High School to College to the NBA.

This thread is a ****ing joke and anyone who watches basketball knows it.


----------



## Pinball (Aug 3, 2002)

Jason Kidd is, arguably, the best defensive guard in the league.

*Very much debatable* 

Jason Kidd is easily the best passing guard in the league, both in the half-court set and on the break.

*Jason Williams gives him a run for his money* 

Jason Kidd is the best rebounding guard in the league.

*Kobe, McGrady, and Pierce might have something to say about that* 

Jason Kidd is the best ball-handling guard in the league.

*I think AI, Marbury, and Jason Williams are everybit as good, if not better than Kidd here* 

Jason Kidd is, arguably, the clutchest guard in the league.

*Very debatable here as well* 

Jason Kidd does more for his team than any PLAYER in the league.

*Yet he's never won a ring. Tell me how he does more for his team than a guy like KG. Also, if Duncan wins his SECOND ring this year how can Kidd do more for his team than Duncan?* 

Anywhere Jason Kidd has gone, he has improved that team greatly. From High School to College to the NBA.

*Can't you say that about almost any great player? Shaq, KG, Duncan...etc?* 

This thread is a ****ing joke and anyone who watches basketball knows it. 


*I watch basketball so please tell me why it is a joke again? I agree that Kidd is the best PG in the NBA but you still can't convince me that he's the best by a huge margin. I don't even think he's a top 5 player although that is certainly up for debate.*


----------



## pharcyde (Jun 22, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Bball_Doctor</b>!
> 
> 
> Once again I understand your point but even if you count the injuries Kidd has always won more than Marbury. Marion's development and Amare are big reasons why the Suns improved. Until this season Marbury was always seen as a "Reef" type of player. Minus Amare and that team I really do think will still be in the lottery. They are not better than the Rockets minus Amare. Of course Marbury has to be given credit for changing his style of play.
> ...


So when you say New Jersey minus Kidd do you mean just without him or with Marbury instead? Because I have a hard time believing that exact team with Marbury instead of Kidd would still be winning less than 40 games a year. That team, other than it's depth, isn't really all that different (other than Kidd vs. Marbury) than the Suns right now. Amare, Marion and Penny are pretty comparable to KMart, Jefferson and Kittles. But NJ has a lot more than Kidd plus those three. The Suns don't. Kidd has been in better situations to win right away than Marbury has so far, but next year the Suns should be able to do well with a year of experience for Amare and another draft pick. If they were in the East I think they'd easily get a top four seed. Their big three compares to any big three in the East very well.


----------



## pharcyde (Jun 22, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Pinball</b>!
> Jason Kidd is, arguably, the best defensive guard in the league.
> 
> *Very much debatable*
> ...


You brought up Jason Williams for the first time in this thread, but he might actually be worth talking about. He seems to have his head on straight and he's now focused on playing team basketball. He's not surrounded by much talent at all, but he still seems to do quite well. He's not the best point guard, obviously, but he's probably top five.

Also, although it doesn't really matter because the refs never call it anyway, Kidd and Nash travel more than any point guard I've seen in a long time. I can't stand stuff like Kidd taking three steps on his way to the basket as the announcers praise him for splitting two defenders (it's not that hard when you pick up your dribble and skip around them like he does).


----------



## RangerC (Sep 25, 2002)

Kidd is mildly overrated, but he's a great player, so I can live with that. What's actually extremely overrated are Kidd's accomplishments with the Nets. He had better teams with Phoenix (won 56 and 51 games in the tougher conference), and his best season BY FAR was 98-99 (he shot 44% from the floor (career best), 37% from 3 (career best), and dished out 10.8 assists (career best) with a 3.6 AST/TO ratio (2nd best in his career) and he carried a CRAPPY team to the playoffs in the WC. He didn't win the MVP that year (only finished 5th) - so why should he deserve the MVP last season when he didn't get it in 98-99? 

People make far too big a deal out of winning the EC - in their 2 year EC run, the Kidd Nets have beaten 1 50 win team. In the WC, a team with a record like the Kidd Nets (49-52 wins) would have to play a 50+ win team in the 1st round (last year, a 58 win team (Dallas), this year, a 59 win team (Sacramento). It's often a greater accomplishment to make it out of the 1st round in the WC than it is to win the EC 2 years in a row.


----------



## Pinball (Aug 3, 2002)

I guess I'm just really annoyed of hearing about Kidd 24-7 out here in Jersey. I also hate how the other players, including the coach, get no credit for wins but are blamed for every loss. They have a star system that goes from * to **** for bad games to great games. When Kidd plays well he gets ****, as he should. However, when he plays poorly they don't even bother to rate him for fear of giving him less than ****. However, guys like Kittles and Byron Scott are blamed for every loss as Keith Van Horn was last year.


----------



## JerryWest (Jun 24, 2002)

"Is there any doubt that Joe Johnson, Marion, Stoudemire, are significantly better than Kittles, Jefferson, and Martin"

Kittles is better than Johnson, Kittles is overpaid though.

Marion is better than Jefferson, I agree, not significantly though, Marion has better hops but he doesn't take full advantage of it. Jefferson is a very hard worker and his offensive improvement can be noted due to his offseason effort towards improvement(IE playing in summer league even though he knew he was going to be the starter).

Martin is alot better than amare right now. I admit Amare has more VALUE, due to his youth. But at the moment, he has only one offensive move and if you keep him out of the paint he can't score. Amare is a great blocker, but he is still young while Martin can guard anyone from a SG to a PF and do it very well, shut down style. Martin is better, Amare has more potential but as of right now, if I needed to win one game, I'd much prefer to have Martin.

As for the rest of the team, I think the Net are much better in terms of depth and role players the past two years.

Kidd is a great player, but don't push it too much.

Shaq, KG, duncan, Kobe, Tmac are all better right now IMO overall.


----------



## Bball_Doctor (Dec 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>pharcyde</b>!
> 
> 
> So when you say New Jersey minus Kidd do you mean just without him or with Marbury instead? Because I have a hard time believing that exact team with Marbury instead of Kidd would still be winning less than 40 games a year. That team, other than it's depth, isn't really all that different (other than Kidd vs. Marbury) than the Suns right now. Amare, Marion and Penny are pretty comparable to KMart, Jefferson and Kittles. But NJ has a lot more than Kidd plus those three. The Suns don't. Kidd has been in better situations to win right away than Marbury has so far, but next year the Suns should be able to do well with a year of experience for Amare and another draft pick. If they were in the East I think they'd easily get a top four seed. Their big three compares to any big three in the East very well.


Without Marbury. Just a healthy NJ without Kidd nor Marbury.


----------



## Bball_Doctor (Dec 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>KennethTo</b>!
> I laugh at everyone who considers Kidd so much of a winner. You do realize he was a loser with mashburn and a very good younger Jackson in Dallas. He was traded, and in the west which was weaker at the time, he wasn't able to do anything with the suns.
> 
> He's a winner in the east. As for your arguments about Amare, I don't know if you watched the suns playoff series but it was Stephon who was carrying the team in the rough moments when no one could get a shot down.
> ...


After 93-94 Dallas unfortunately was ruined was injuries and self egos. Jackson never became the same after he suffered those injuries and Mash only played 18 games the next season. The 3 Js were suppose to lead Dallas into a bright future unfortunately due to those circumstances it never happened. 

I fail to understand how the West was weak when Kidd was in Phoenix. Shaq was already in the West. Ever since after 96-97 the West was always stronger than the East. Kidd led Phoenix to 3 50 win seasons including a 56 win season in 97-98 when there were 3 60 win teams in the West. San Antonio, Utah, LA, Sacramento, Portland, and Seattle were all winning 50+ games. When Kidd joined the Suns in 1997 mid season, Phoenix was 18-32...that was the same team that lost 13 consecutive games from the season...and with Kidd Phoenix went 22-10 and got into the playoffs. Phoenix was a mess before Kidd got there. They were no longer the powerhouse (finished 41-41 in 96) when Kidd got there. 

There is NO question that Marbury played his heart out in the Spurs series. But when I mention Amare I mean the piece of the puzzle he solves. The addition to Amare on the Suns was intergral to them winning. Nobody had Phoenix winning 44 games less 35 this season. But nobody had Amare winning ROY either. I am not saying that Marbury did not contribute to the Sun's success but I will argue that without Amare the Suns team would still be in disarray. The Suns actually lost more after Marbury asked his coach to let him score more. For a time he reverted back to the old style Marbury play and that was when the Suns really dropped down in the standings. They were fortunate to make the playoffs but during those 4 consecutive wins that pushed them into the postseason...Marbury actually had his worst scoring run since that conversation with his Frank Johnson. All in all there is no question that Marbury had a big hand in Phoenix this season but without Amare I cannot see this team winning 40 games or be in the postseason. If that was the case Marbury would still be an enigma much like Reef. Marbury still has a lot to prove in terms of carrying a team to success. He is a great talent no question.

Honestly for the NJ injuries thing I did some research and the NJ WAS NOT as injured as most people believe. 

http://www.basketballreference.com/teams/teamyear.htm?tm=NJN&lg=n&yr=1999

This Marbury led NJ team only won 31 games. The next season they were plagued with injuries...even Marbury only played 67 games...a big reason why they only won 26 games but even when Marbury, Van Horn, and KMart were healthy on the court together they still never won most of the time.

Honestly, Jefferson benefits from playing beside Kidd. Jefferson is good but Kidd made him better with those alleyoop and pin point passes not to mention fast break opportunities. Seriously...Jefferson and KMart benefit a lot playing beside Kidd. Kidd creates fastbreak opportunites which NJ thrives on. They are built on that with their speed and athleticism. 

Kidd was not in his prime in mid to late early 90s. His prime really started in from 98-99. For the last 3-4 years Kidd is no question the NBA's best PG...I think every GM would tell you that. Kidd was traded from Phoenix for reasons other than his play. I have NEVER heard ANYBODY call Kidd the PG in the 90s. Payton was by far the best PG for the majority of the 90s. It is unfair to judge Kidd on the basis of before his prime. That is like comparing a rookie Shaq or Kobe 4 years ago.

Kidd carried the Suns very much so. The Suns were:

22-10
56-26
27-23
53-29
51-31

during Kidd's reign.


----------



## Bball_Doctor (Dec 29, 2002)

As for this whole Penny being injured thing. In Kidd's last season with the Suns, Penny only played 4 games...yet they managed to win 51 games with a young Marion and an old Clifford Robinson. With a completely healthy Penny and a more refine Marion they only won 36 games in Marbury's inaugural Phoenix season. As for Pinball I think some of your grudge against Kidd might be because you are a Knicks fan:grinning: . But even you said it yourself in one of your replies. 

"Can't you say that for just about ever GREAT player?" and then look at the names you mentioned. You could have said Marbury but he is not there.


----------



## pharcyde (Jun 22, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Bball_Doctor</b>!
> 
> 
> Without Marbury. Just a healthy NJ without Kidd nor Marbury.


Ok, take the best player off of just about any team and they'll win a lot less games. I don't get what your point is.


----------



## pharcyde (Jun 22, 2002)

No one has mentioned that Kidd is four years older and has two years of NBA experience on Marbury. If you're not going to judge Kidd by his whole career then wait a few years to make the comparison. Right now Kidd's probably better, but Marbury is just hitting his prime.


----------



## dawicked (Aug 13, 2002)

Poster: Have you ever seen him play? The guy is not afraid of being a PG at all. The guy will make that dish through traffic and get you the ball. The guy throws amazingly accurate 20 foot bounce passes right to his man. It's just amazing. Some other pgs are so tentative in making those tough passes like Tinsley, at least from what I've seen. No man is as fearless as Kidd when dishing out the assists. The man has the ultimate confidence in his passing game. This is what makes him the BEST pg.


----------



## Bball_Doctor (Dec 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>pharcyde</b>!
> 
> 
> Ok, take the best player off of just about any team and they'll win a lot less games. I don't get what your point is.


Actually this is my bad I originally thought that Kmas said that a NJ team without Kidd would win at least 40 games. I misread his point on that one. 

As reference to my other posts...I am not trying to say that Marbury is a bad player becuz he is not but he is clearly not what Kidd is and you made a point that Kidd is 4 years more experienced. That is why in one of my post I said that Marbury has a lot of time to prove himself but until then Kidd is by far the best PG in the league. And when people say that I don't find it overrating him a all (going back to original argument). I have never heard anyone say that Kidd is the best player in the league or the best PG in history. He is simply the best PG now....and that is almost by consensus.


----------



## kcchiefs-fan (Oct 28, 2002)

I agree with you on this. I've always thought he's overrated as well. Is he the best PG in the league today? Probably. But I think GP has been the best PG the last few years, IMO this is Kidd's first year as the predominant PG in the league. But what I hate is when people put him in the class of Stockton, Thomas, and Magic. These guys were spectacular PG's, hell Stockton averaged 14.5 APG one year. There is no way that Kidd should be mentioned in the same breathe as these guys.


----------



## Pinball (Aug 3, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>kcchiefs-fan</b>!
> I agree with you on this. I've always thought he's overrated as well. Is he the best PG in the league today? Probably. But I think GP has been the best PG the last few years, IMO this is Kidd's first year as the predominant PG in the league. But what I hate is when people put him in the class of Stockton, Thomas, and Magic. These guys were spectacular PG's, hell Stockton averaged 14.5 APG one year. There is no way that Kidd should be mentioned in the same breathe as these guys.


I agree 100%. Payton has been the best PG in the league for much of the last decade. In his prime he could do everything that Kidd could and more. He was a much better shooter than Kidd ever was and a better overall defender as well. For the last 2 years Kidd has been the best but I think GP in his prime was still better. Also, historically Kidd has NOTHING on guys like Magic and Thomas. If he isn't even as good as GP how is he as good as Magic, Stockton, and Thomas?


----------



## digital jello (Jan 10, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Pinball</b>!
> If he isn't even as good as GP how is he as good as Magic, Stockton, and Thomas?


I don't know what playoffs you were watching, but I saw Jason Kidd hand Gary Payton his own as<b></b>s in about 5 of those 6 games, if not all of them.


----------



## kcchiefs-fan (Oct 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>digital jello</b>!
> 
> 
> I don't know what playoffs you were watching, but I saw Jason Kidd hand Gary Payton his own as<b></b>s in about 5 of those 6 games, if not all of them.


Did you read his whole post? Because if you had, he conceded that Kidd is the better player now. But who was better throughout the decade of the 90's? Kidd is a very good PG but a far cry from what some would have you believe.


----------



## numb555 (May 25, 2003)

I agree, with u that he is overrated. but he is still the best guard in the league. *Numbers Do Not say Everything* , thats y there was a big debate about Nash somewhere on this board. I feel Nash is the second best gaurd in the league(best in my eyes) because of the intangibles he possesses just like kidd. Running a team is more than putting up the best numbers ie. Francis, Marbury, AI. 

There are guards with better PPG average, RPG, or APG..but its about running the show. Kidd is the best, follow by Nash eventhough there number doesn't say it. Kidd is somewhat overrated because of the competition in the East, and Nash is underrated because there are 3 other valuable player on the Mavs(even the leagues GM beleive he is, so not my opinion). 

If u want to see how valuable a guard is, just look at Portland. They had, and have all the stars in the world who can put up 20+ on any given day. but since they don't have a floor general it all comes to not.


----------



## MightyReds2020 (Jul 19, 2002)

I agree Kidd is overrated, but not by much. Kidd is a great player. Great players usually get overhyped to some extent. That is especially true in this era, where you can spread a rumor ten times more effective and faster than, say, 10 years ago.

I tend to compare what Kidd's impact in this league last couple seasons to what MJ was during early 90s. Not as great, but similar. MJ did not have superior statistical numbers to Dominique Wilkins or Clyde Drexler, like Kidd to Payton or Marbury, yet he was widely considered a better player than his companions because he brought success to respective teams.

One thing many people failed to realize is how much Kidd grew as a leader after he got traded from Phoenix. Kidd was never a great leader in Dallas, due to his youth and inexperience; he also was never really a 'true' leader in Phoenix, in part because that team was built around Kidd AND Penny, in part because Kidd didn't know how to step up when they needed him most. 

He did flash his true leadership ability in his last season with Phoenix but it was not until he came to New Jersey had he became the leader he is now, which is 10 times better than he was in Phoenix and 100 times better than he was in Dallas.

Bringing up his track record in Dallas and Phoenix isn't really a bright idea if you want to discuss how great he is now. REMEMBER: People do change! In addition, that Dallas team was a 3-men team (Kidd, Mashburn, Jackson); that Suns team was, supposingly, a 2-men team (Kidd, Penny); and this New Jersey team is totally built around Kidd.


----------



## digital jello (Jan 10, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>kcchiefs-fan</b>!
> Did you read his whole post? Because if you had, he conceded that Kidd is the better player now. But who was better throughout the decade of the 90's? Kidd is a very good PG but a far cry from what some would have you believe.


If you've been around since January you should know that I don't read people's posts thoroughly. Everyone knows this.


----------



## Bball_Doctor (Dec 29, 2002)

I have never heard anybody call Jason Kidd the best PG in the 90s or top 5 alltime. I was wondering where some of you heard this from....oh yeah...if it is from Walton...it means very little:grinning: . 

If there are people calling Kidd the best PG in the 90s or one of the top 5 PGs of alltime then he IS overrated. But he is NOT overrated when people say he is the best now or for the last 3-4 years for that matter. He should be top 10 PG of alltime IMO when all is said and done.


----------



## TMOD (Oct 12, 2002)

Jason Kidd isn't a winner. Why do people think that? Of course, when a well put together team gets a high caliber floor leader, they win more. A winner is someone that goes somewhere consistently in the playoffs, and wins even without anything to work with. Jason Kidd is a good guy, an excellent point guard, but a winner he is not. Does Glenn Robinson become a 'winner' when he goes to a team desperately needing a scorer and fits in well? Kidd was the sixth best player last season, and he dropped this season.


----------



## "Matt!" (Jul 24, 2002)

I don't think anyone will say Jason Kidd was the best PG of the 90's. That belongs to Stockton or Payton, I think. But I think in 2010, you'll hear a lot of people saying that Kidd was the best point guard from the 2000's (decade, not millenium).


----------



## Bball_Doctor (Dec 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>TMOD</b>!
> Jason Kidd isn't a winner. Why do people think that? Of course, when a well put together team gets a high caliber floor leader, they win more. A winner is someone that goes somewhere consistently in the playoffs, and wins even without anything to work with. Jason Kidd is a good guy, an excellent point guard, but a winner he is not. Does Glenn Robinson become a 'winner' when he goes to a team desperately needing a scorer and fits in well? Kidd was the sixth best player last season, and he dropped this season.


Kidd is a winner as far as the success he brings to a team. He turns around teams. Look at his history or my long reply post in the previous page. Kidd is very successful at winning. As far as the playoffs go...before these last two years his postseason success was not very good but the point is that it is now.

No player has EVER won with nothing to work with. Jordan had Pippen, Shaq has Kobe, Magic had Kareem...etc...perhaps Duncan would be the first to do it but honestly his supporting cast is excellent and very much underrated.


----------



## kcchiefs-fan (Oct 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Bball_Doctor</b>!
> I have never heard anybody call Jason Kidd the best PG in the 90s or top 5 alltime. I was wondering where some of you heard this from....oh yeah...if it is from Walton...it means very little:grinning: .
> 
> If there are people calling Kidd the best PG in the 90s or one of the top 5 PGs of alltime then he IS overrated. But he is NOT overrated when people say he is the best now or for the last 3-4 years for that matter. He should be top 10 PG of alltime IMO when all is said and done.


I hear it all the time. Announcers are always mentioning him along with Stockton and Magic. And on this board I'm constantly hearing he's a 6'4'' version of Magic. He's not in those guys' class, but I hear him mentioned along side them all the time. I do agree he'll proabably be a Top 10 PG when he retires, but I'm afraid his rep will be inflated and many people will consider him top 3-5.


----------



## Bball_Doctor (Dec 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>kcchiefs-fan</b>!
> 
> 
> I hear it all the time. Announcers are always mentioning him along with Stockton and Magic. And on this board I'm constantly hearing he's a 6'4'' version of Magic. He's not in those guys' class, but I hear him mentioned along side them all the time. I do agree he'll proabably be a Top 10 PG when he retires, but I'm afraid his rep will be inflated and many people will consider him top 3-5.


Really? I do somewhat agree that he is a 6'4 Magic...just look at their games. But I think when media is mentioning Kidd in the same breath as Magic is when all is said and done...there is also exaggeration by media. They do it to sound more interesting. Kidd will definitely be top 10 PG of alltime especially now that his shooting has improved and he scores more....statistically wise he is more complete.


----------



## Kmasonbx (Apr 7, 2003)

For the most part people do see my point, but some don't. I am not saying Kidd isn't a good player, I think he is a great player, and is a sure hall of famer. But I do not think it is as clear cut as people make it seem about him being the best PG in the league, he has just been furtunate to go to teams who fit his style. Certain players can play anyway, Kidd is not one of those, if he was on a halfcourt team, nobody would consider him the best PG in the league, the true greats would be considered great in any setting. Magic and Thomas were players who would be succesful extremely succesful in any setting. Gary Payton has been succesful in the fast break and the halfcourt setting. All players have the preferences, clearly Magic was a better open court player, but I really don't feel he would've been considered any less of a player if he played in a halfcourt style. Kidd would be foolish to go to the Spurs, and the Spurs would equally as foolish to go after him, he just doesn't fit their style. Imagine Duncan getting it in the post from Kidd, getting doubled team and kicking it back, would any Spur fan have the confidence that he will knock the jumper down? The Spurs would not change their style to accomodate Kidd, that team is built around Duncan. 

Kidd is considered far and away the best PG in the league, I would say he is by far and away the best PG as far as running the break, but there are a few PGs who are better in the halfcourt. I guarantee Kidd gets exposed in the Finals, because the Spurs will force the Nets into a slow down game and once again people will see what I'm saying about a player being overrated. 

Somebody said something about Nash being the 2nd best PG in the league, that I just can't even see. I look at him as the 6th best, he is a great offensive player, but he wouldn't be nearly as good if he didn't have players like Dirk, Van Exel and Finley to take the pressure off him. If Nash was the biggest star on his team, like so many of the great PGs are he wouldn't do as well as say, Kidd, Payton, Marbury, Davis and Francis. And the defense thing is a major weakness, Nash couldn't guard me let alone any of the top PGs. This is what seperates Kidd from most PGs in the league he is an unbelievable defender (just ask Chauncey Billups).


----------



## Amareca (Oct 21, 2002)

Jason Kidd is overrated because he is just average if a team makes him play in the halfcourt and not fastbreaks exclusively.

He NEVER won a playoff series against a western conference team. The only time was ironically when he was injured for the first 4 games in the first round and Penny and KJ lead the suns.

To say Kidd's turnovers are so high because he handles the ball so much is untrue. Stephon Marbury handles the ball WAY more because he creates a lot more in the halfcourt, dribbles more, attacks the basket all the time and is in the top5 in terms of how many points he contributes to the team's total.

You would be nuts to think that Jason Kidd could take Phoenix to the finals in the West. He would likely win 5-10 games more in the regular season but that's it. I rather take Steph since he just turned 26.

PS: Jason Kidd the few couple of FGA that Marbury takes more than Kidd. I don't care, he is a better shooter and scorer and would be stupid if he didn't take more shots than somebody who can't shoot.
Gary Payton regularly averaged more than 20FGA over his career. Isn't he a true PG?


----------



## LionOfJudah (May 27, 2003)

If everyone thinks he is overrated, Name a team that couldn't use him.

Mind you that Franchise and Davis would be better off at 2 and Kidd at 1.

The Suns might be the only team who really do not need Kidd because Starbury is a better fit (IMO).


----------



## Amareca (Oct 21, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Bball_Doctor</b>!
> 
> 
> Really? I do somewhat agree that he is a 6'4 Magic...just look at their games. But I think when media is mentioning Kidd in the same breath as Magic is when all is said and done...there is also exaggeration by media. They do it to sound more interesting. Kidd will definitely be top 10 PG of alltime especially now that his shooting has improved and he scores more....statistically wise he is more complete.


Jason Kidd has improved his shooting? No he didn't. He had his best career shooting in 98-99.

Jason Kidd isn't in the Magic, Robertson, Stockton class.

I wouldn't take him over Isiah Thomas either and probably not even a healthy Kevin Johnson who was 10 times the offensive player.


----------



## Amareca (Oct 21, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>stevemc</b>!
> If everyone thinks he is overrated, Name a team that couldn't use him.
> 
> Mind you that Franchise and Davis would be better off at 2 and Kidd at 1.
> ...



San Antonio

He would be a horrible fit in San Antonio and I don't see how he will improve their team AT ALL.
He doesn't have the players who run with him on the fastbreaks and he can't shoot well enough to fit into San Antonio's offense.


----------



## Bball_Doctor (Dec 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BigAmare</b>!
> 
> 
> Jason Kidd has improved his shooting? No he didn't. He had his best career shooting in 98-99.
> ...


Didn't you read my other posts. I said Kidd was not in Magic or Robertson's class but when all is said and done he is top 10.

As for shooting...Kidd's percentage isn't as high as 98-99 but he has become more confident with his shot and his range is much more consistent. He is a better shooter now than before although in 98-99 his .444 FG% was his highest but like I said he is more confident in his shooting and his range is much better.


----------



## TMOD (Oct 12, 2002)

> Kidd is a winner as far as the success he brings to a team. He turns around teams. Look at his history or my long reply post in the previous page. Kidd is very successful at winning. As far as the playoffs go...before these last two years his postseason success was not very good but the point is that it is now.
> 
> No player has EVER won with nothing to work with. Jordan had Pippen, Shaq has Kobe, Magic had Kareem...etc...perhaps Duncan would be the first to do it but honestly his supporting cast is excellent and very much underrated.


Five straight first or second round exits with a very good team isn't a winner to me. All the teams he has won with have had very good players...he was just the piece that made them work together. I meant nothing to work with as in when nobody else is playing good, they push their team to victory, or when players are hurt, they step it up. Kidd is a winner statistically, but that's about it.


----------



## Bball_Doctor (Dec 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>TMOD</b>!
> Five straight first or second round exits with a very good team isn't a winner to me. All the teams he has won with have had very good players...he was just the piece that made them work together. I meant nothing to work with as in when nobody else is playing good, they push their team to victory, or when players are hurt, they step it up. Kidd is a winner statistically, but that's about it.


A good team is what makes a team win...when I mean win I mean win consistently. Kidd was the leader in all those teams he played in and WON. Kidd is a winner and results don't lie. Playoffs is a different story but would you fault MJ for not escaping the first round. Point is that MJ did manage to stumble pass it much like Kidd has. The only win that Kidd has not managed to get is the BIG WIN. But then would Malone and Stockton be considered non-winners? Would Ewing...he played on a good team...would Barkley??? They all won they just never won the BIG ONE. But just because u don't win a ring does not mean you are not a winner. Kidd has won a lot. He has lead the Suns and NJ to 5 50 win seasons and NJ to the Finals the last 2 seasons.


----------



## Bball_Doctor (Dec 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>TMOD</b>!
> Five straight first or second round exits with a very good team isn't a winner to me. All the teams he has won with have had very good players...he was just the piece that made them work together. I meant nothing to work with as in when nobody else is playing good, they push their team to victory, or when players are hurt, they step it up. Kidd is a winner statistically, but that's about it.


In addition to my last point....a great example of the difference Kidd makes is when he joined Phoenix. They were 18-32 before the trade and 22-10 after and got into the playoffs. Kidd makes a difference and that difference often shows in the standings.


----------



## LionOfJudah (May 27, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>BigAmare</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Kidd and Timmy D in a half court offense would be great basketball. Kidd runs well but he can run the half court offense just as good as anyone else IMO.


----------



## utahjazz85 (May 2, 2003)

I'm not reading 50 posts from this thread but Kidd IS overrated.

MVP for 01-02?

LOL

He short 39%
Averaged around 10 assists
17 ppg maybe?
and some boards
And 40 minutes per game

My man Stockton averaged 8 assists, 13 ppg, shot 50%, and some boards in 28 minutes per game.

And Kidd is not CLUTCH! Who said that on the commercial? Tiny? Most of the time Kidd will miss the clutch shot.


----------



## ThereisnoIinteam3 (Apr 19, 2003)

Count me in as another person who thinks Jason Kidd is overated. Not denying he is a great player but he plays in the East. When he played in the West he didn't stand out as much because the competition is much harder in the West.


----------



## Bball_Doctor (Dec 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>utahjazz85</b>!
> I'm not reading 50 posts from this thread but Kidd IS overrated.
> 
> MVP for 01-02?
> ...


Kidd IMO was the MVP last year...Duncan clearly this year. The thing that made Kidd such an MVP consideration was the difference he made for the Nets. MVP is most valuable not most outstanding. As for shooting percentage...Cousy won the MVP shooting .378. AI won it shooting .420. Wes Unseld won it averaging 13.8 ppg. It is not neccesarily stats that make you win the MVP. That is always why I have thought the NBA should implement a new award alongside the MVP...the MOP.


----------



## digital jello (Jan 10, 2003)

Kidd not a winner? :laugh:

He's still playing, right? Thought so.

I like it that Celtics fans of all people criticize a point guard. I guess Kidd's no Tony Delk, eh?


----------



## digital jello (Jan 10, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Bball_Doctor</b>!
> Kidd IMO was the MVP last year...Duncan clearly this year. The thing that made Kidd such an MVP consideration was the difference he made for the Nets. MVP is most valuable not most outstanding. As for shooting percentage...Cousy won the MVP shooting .378. AI won it shooting .420. Wes Unseld won it averaging 13.8 ppg. It is not neccesarily stats that make you win the MVP. That is always why I have thought the NBA should implement a new award alongside the MVP...the MOP.


Thank you for this post! Some people just don't get it.


----------



## TheRifleman (May 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Kmasonbx</b>!
> I have felt strongly for 2 seasons now that Kidd is overrated, there are plenty of reasons why I feel this way. The biggest reason is he is one of the most turnover prone players in the NBA, he actually led the league in turnovers per game this year (Steve Francis led in total turnovers) with 3.7 a game, while other top PGs like, Payton, Jason Williams, Steve Nash, John Stockton, Sam Cassell and Tony Parker all average under 2.5 turnovers a game. Kidd was actually 36th in the league in assist to turover ratio. The once erratic Jason Williams led the league in a/to ratio (technically Ollie lead the league, but he's a reserve so I'm not counting him), Payton, Stockton and Nash were all in the top 10. Kidd also shot just 41.4 percent from the field, and people are claiming he is a better shooter now, NO he isn't he just took more shots this year, he is a career 40.4 percent shooter. He took 15.6 shots a game this year for his career he takes 13.1 shots a game. His 3 point % was 34.1 this year which is his 3rd best of his career, and he is a career 32% 3 point shooter.
> 
> Look at the #s Gary Payton and Stockton are putting up their age, now can you really see Kidd doing the same as these two when he is their age? Kidd can't put up the #s Payton puts up now and Payton is about to be 35. Stockton is 41 and was still one of the 7 or 8 best PGs in the league. I don't want to hear that Kidd is a winner, he wasn't considered a winner until he went to New Jersey, and then people started saying look at what he did with Phoenix, Kidd is no more a winner than Payton was in his prime. Don't forget Payton was in the finals, and Stockton got to the finals twice. Both played in conferences that were much stronger then the current East.
> ...



Yes - I disagree with your opinion. Turnovers are high for Kidd, but then look at <b>Magic Johnson- who AVERAGED just about 4 a game......</b> Was that REALLY so important? 

Sometimes one has to look at the total picture and not just one aspect of their games. Personally, Kidd is head and shoulders above Steph in the defense department & his<b> relentless rebounding</b> is a factor, as well. Marbury sometimes gets himself in so deep in the paint and just hoists the ball to anybody - even a bad shooter, who might be near the 3 - point line. His <b>decision making process</b> is that of a great #2 guard with awesome Point guard skills - BUT nevertheless - still a #2 guard (That is the opinion of Cousy and I happen to agree with his opinion of Steph).


----------



## Bball_Doctor (Dec 29, 2002)

*Re: Re: Reasons why Jason Kidd is overrated*



> Originally posted by <b>TheRifleman</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


AGREED 100%. Marbury might have high apg but his mentality is a SG. It was clearly exploited last season when he went in and asked the coach to involve him in the offense more....meaning let me SHOOT and SCORE. The team went downhill from there in the standings. He quickly reverted back to how he played in the beginning of the season later on. It is no coincidence that in those 4 consecutive wins that basically put Phoenix in the postseason was Marbury's worst stretch of 4 games in terms of scoring as far as after the conversation he had with Frank Johnson. As far as peopl who will argue..well Penny was injured. That is why I provided an argument earlier in this thread that Kidd won over 51 games with a Penny playing 4 games and an old Cliff Robinson and a second year Marion who is not as developed offensively as he is today. Marbury is still far from Kidd. The closest PG to Kidd today is Payton but his effectiveness is getting lower with his age. Payton WAS better than Kidd 4 years ago.


----------



## TheRifleman (May 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Bball_Doctor</b>!
> 
> 
> In addition to my last point....a great example of the difference Kidd makes is when he joined Phoenix. They were 18-32 before the trade and 22-10 after and got into the playoffs. Kidd makes a difference and that difference often shows in the standings.


AND - they are the ONLY team in history to start out 0/13 and make the playoffs AND take the defending WC champs to the limit. Their Center was OLD Hot Rod Williams, their Power forward was Wayman Tisdale, their small forward was 6'4" Rex Chapman(had to play out of position), the (shooting) BIG guard was the 6'2' Kevin Johnson (also playing out of his normal position). 

Not exactly a GREAT team - nonetheless, they accomplished something when Kidd came there in December of '96 - preserving the LONG playoff appearances that the Suns held intact. Making the playoffs after going 0/13!!!!

Kidd is awesome!


----------



## Bball_Doctor (Dec 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>TheRifleman</b>!
> 
> 
> AND - they are the ONLY team in history to start out 0/13 and make the playoffs AND take the defending WC champs to the limit. Their Center was OLD Hot Rod Williams, their Power forward was Wayman Tisdale, their small forward was 6'4" Rex Chapman(had to play out of position), the (shooting) BIG guard was the 6'2' Kevin Johnson (also playing out of his normal position).
> ...


EXACTLY...Phoenix was no longer a powerhouse after Barkley left. They were 41-41 the season before and 18-32 before Kidd joined the team. They went:

22-10
56-26
27-23
53-29
51-31

Until Kidd got traded...AND LETS NOT KID OURSELVES...Kidd was traded for OTHER REASONS than his play. I provided so much proof about how Kidd is a winner in other posts on this thread I still don't understand why anybody would think not...makes me wonder if people read my posts...and I spent quite some time making them too:grinning: .


----------



## ThereisnoIinteam3 (Apr 19, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>digital jello</b>!
> Kidd not a winner? :laugh:
> 
> He's still playing, right? Thought so.
> ...


You certainly are not talking about me lol.
Jason Kidd was average in the talented West and is above average in the weaker East. This is just a fact. He didn't do anything remotely close in Pheonix to what he did in NJ and the reason is...

How old are you?:sigh:


----------



## Bball_Doctor (Dec 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ThereisnoIinteam3</b>!
> 
> 
> You certainly are not talking about me lol.
> ...


I don't understand how Kidd was just average when he was in the West???? Kiddwas the best PG in the West for a year before moving to the East. He was second to Payton for a couple. He led Phoenix to a 56 win season and 3 50 win seasons and one of the most remarkable team comebacks when he joined the Suns. Average???? Above average definitely...he just never brought his team to playoff success like he does now. But Kidd was very much above AVERAGE. Average would be that would be in the middle of the pack as far as PGs when he was in Phoenix and that Phoenix won an average of 41 games.


----------



## ThereisnoIinteam3 (Apr 19, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Bball_Doctor</b>!
> 
> 
> I don't understand how Kidd was just average when he was in the West???? Kiddwas the best PG in the West for a year before moving to the East. He was second to Payton for a couple. He led Phoenix to a 56 win season and 3 50 win seasons and one of the most remarkable team comebacks when he joined the Suns. Average???? Above average definitely...he just never brought his team to playoff success like he does now. But Kidd was very much above AVERAGE. Average would be that would be in the middle of the pack as far as PGs when he was in Phoenix and that Phoenix won an average of 41 games.


When Kidd played in Pheonix his team got no where. He wasn't considered a God like he is now. 
When he played in the West he was average because the talent was that much better. He improved his team but they never got close to the NBA finals two years in a row.
What NJ did was take the same Jason Kidd and place him in the East which made him look better then he was. He stands out in the East because the talent isn't there copmpared to the West.

If Kidd was still in the West and had never gone to the East he would not be considered as great as he is now.

It's like taking the worst NBA player and putting him on the Junior High basketball team. Of course he will stand out.


----------



## Bball_Doctor (Dec 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ThereisnoIinteam3</b>!
> 
> 
> When Kidd played in Pheonix his team got no where. He wasn't considered a God like he is now.
> ...


Your argument was that Kidd was average in the West yet he lead his team to 3 50+ win seasons and he was top 2 PG since 98-99....that includes 3 years in Phoenix...how is that AVERAGE? If that is the case KG is average ALSO.


----------



## ThereisnoIinteam3 (Apr 19, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Bball_Doctor</b>!
> 
> 
> Your argument was that Kidd was average in the West yet he lead his team to 3 50+ win seasons and he was top 2 PG since 98-99....that includes 3 years in Phoenix...how is that AVERAGE? If that is the case KG is average ALSO.


No my point was no one thought Jason Kidd was anything special( They thought he was great but he didn't stand out this much) till he came to the weak East.

Take any of the top 8 or 9 teams in the West and they would rule the East. Right now people think Utah is old and Pheonix is nothing special but if they played in the East they would be ruling it.


----------



## Bball_Doctor (Dec 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ThereisnoIinteam3</b>!
> 
> 
> No my point was no one thought Jason Kidd was anything special( They thought he was great but he didn't stand out this much) till he came to the weak East.
> ...


Then you should not have used to word "average". If you basically said that Kidd gets more EXPOSURE now because he is in the Finals I would AGREE with 100%. Because according to your wording...KG would also just be average. I took that average as you meant average player.


----------



## BizzyRipsta (May 25, 2002)

the nets have made it to the nba finals 2 years in a row (and every year since kidd has been on the team). although kidd does have a supporting cast that deserves recognition, kidd is a big reason why the nets are succeeding (let's not forget that many of the nets's players are developing thanks to kidd). i guarantee that the nets don't think that kidd is overrated and that's all that really matters.


----------



## UKfan4Life (Mar 5, 2003)

Kidd overrated? Please...

Statement of the month: YOU CAN'T JUDGE PLAYERS BY STATS/NUMBERS!!!

Kidd is a great PG. Without him the Nets, although still a very good, and possibly the best, team in the East, would be weak at the PG spot. Kidd has possibly the greatest court vision of any player/PG in the NBA today. He knows where everybody on the floor is without actually having to look at them.


----------



## Pinball (Aug 3, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BizzyRipsta</b>!
> the nets have made it to the nba finals 2 years in a row (and every year since kidd has been on the team). although kidd does have a supporting cast that deserves recognition, kidd is a big reason why the nets are succeeding (let's not forget that many of the nets's players are developing thanks to kidd). i guarantee that the nets don't think that kidd is overrated and that's all that really matters.


Finally she speaks. I was wondering when you were going to join in Bizzy.


----------



## NorthSideHatrik (Mar 11, 2003)

Your nuts if you thought kidd average in the west. He's been a top 5 PG his entire career.


----------



## kcchiefs-fan (Oct 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>NorthSideHatrik</b>!
> Your nuts if you thought kidd average in the west. He's been a top 5 PG his entire career.


Yes, but not the best PG his entire career, he's only been the best for 1, maybe 2 years. He wasn't in GP's league when he was with the Suns. He's never going to be in the same class as Stockton, Zeke, or Magic, or even close to it for that matter. However many people would have you believe he is.


----------



## Excel (Aug 5, 2002)

This thread is sad. :no:


----------



## BizzyRipsta (May 25, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Pinball</b>!
> 
> 
> Finally she speaks. I was wondering when you were going to join in Bizzy.


lol....yeah, i was on a short hiatus and returned to see this thread. of course i had to say something!


----------



## digital jello (Jan 10, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>ThereisnoIinteam3</b>!
> You certainly are not talking about me lol.


Yes I am.



> Jason Kidd was average in the talented West and is above average in the weaker East.


Yeah, "average." An All-Star PG is now "average" according to you. Check the records on his team before and after he joined them. Check the improvements his teammates made.



> This is just a fact. He didn't do anything remotely close in Pheonix to what he did in NJ and the reason is...


The West had Shaq, Tim Duncan, and Kevin Garnett. He had Shawn Marion and a brittle Penny Hardaway.



> How old are you?:sigh:


I'm 17, but it's pretty clear that I have a better understanding of the game than you. 

How old are you? :laugh:


----------



## mysterio (May 20, 2003)

I'm working on it as I'm typing this (if Kidd is in the top 5). 1. shaq is better 2. kobe is better 3. Duncan is better 4. Garnett is better 5... he just might fit here, but so might T-mac or Nowitzki. If anything, Kidd is barely a top 5 player, and marginally the best PG. A little overhyped, but not really. As many have already said, its not just about numbers. Kidd is very aggressive and indimidating for a guard. He's got the best intangibles of all PGs today.


----------



## Amareca (Oct 21, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>digital jello</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That Penny Hardaway lead the Suns out of the first round for the only time while Kidd was in Phoenix and Kidd was injured that series.

Jason Kidd got outplayed by the likes of Jason Williams, Avery Johnson, Gary Payton, Derek Fisher and Damon Stoudamire in the playoffs. That's the sad truth.
He passed around the ball like a hot potatoe when it counted and usually ended up missing.

Jason Kidd also had Antonio McDyess when he was in Phoenix, 6th man of the year Rodney Rogers, Cliff Robinson, Tom Gugliotta pre-injury, Rex Chapman, Kevin Johnson, Steve Nash....

Antonio McDyess bolted the Suns even with the great ''recruiter'' Jason Kidd who everyone wants to play with but never recruited a quality FA other than Penny Hardaway who was one of the worst signings in franchise history maybe.

Kidd has never won a series against a western conference team not even come close to it. Now he is beating up on weak, soft, undersized Eastern Conference competition who can't force the Nets into a halfcourt game and is the King... OVERRATED


----------



## NorthSideHatrik (Mar 11, 2003)

Thats pure garbage....

Kevin Johnson, Steve Nash???? first of all Those two play the same position as Kidd. That makes it pretty hard for them to be effective together.... Second, that was before Nash had a clue what the NBA was about. It took nash Several years to become the player he is now. Even when he left Phoenix, it took him a year or two in dallas to really become good. And for KJ that was the end of his career... He was no where near as effective as he was when he played in the NBA finals. I'll give you Pre-Injury McDyess and Pre-Injury Googs, but three players don't make a team in the western conference. (unless its shaq and kobe and any other player) After the McDyess, Googs team it became Matrix and Penny. Still not good enough. Don't blame that on kidd.


----------



## John (Jun 9, 2002)

1) How do we define what overrated is? You mean a guy gets respect by his play on the floor and not like some losers relie on espn's front page every singkle nite to get hs name all hyped up?

2) One guy asked if we did watch the Spurs series Vs Suns? Yes I did, infact I do have all the games taped thanks to the Admin? Aside that flukey shot Marbury blanked the 3 point shot win, what have the Suns won? I am not hoping for any kind of injuries but the other game the Suns won late in the games was when Marbury was injured so Penny got the ball in his hands. Penny won the game in the last 3 plays.

a) Penny went pick and roll with Little Jake and he Penny delievered the ball at the right time so the scrub Little Jake made the basket.

b) Marbury, Marion and Joe Johnson all guys were killing the shot clock because of the Zone defense, Penny was trying to force the issue and drew a foul. I will admit that it was a baited out call but at least Penny did the right thing to slash to the hoop at the right time to draw a foul.

c) Who was it again for the assist? Penny Hardaway, I am sorry he delievered the ball at the right time to Jake for the game winner?

Now back to the topic? Some guy mentioned Kidd will never be able to win a championship, I tend to agree I mean at least not to form some kind of a dynasty here, but how on earth with marbury's lmited scoring reiptore can win a thing as a guard?

Kobe, Carter, and Iverson were the ones that are able to win one if u are talking about a guard that can lead the team to a championship when given the right players around them!

So, yes BIGAMARE, Kidd is much better than Mabury, hands down.!


----------



## IV (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>John</b>!
> 1) How do we define what overrated is? You mean a guy gets respect by his play on the floor and not like some losers relie on espn's front page every singkle nite to get hs name all hyped up?


Isn't that somewhat the same thing? Don't the guys who get respect by their play on the floor also get their name centered all over Espn's front page?

I'll skip the Marbury bashing because I dont even know where to begin.



> Now back to the topic? Some guy mentioned Kidd will never be able to win a championship, I tend to agree I mean at least not to form some kind of a dynasty here, but how on earth with marbury's lmited scoring reiptore can win a thing as a guard?


I believe Kidd will win a championship; he's got a damn good chance this year. He's the kind of player that makes everything come together. There really should not be anything bad said about Jason Kidd. He's as good as it gets.



> Kobe, Carter, and Iverson were the ones that are able to win one if u are talking about a guard that can lead the team to a championship when given the right players around them!


Kobe, he's already done it, but most hate because he did it with teammates. This guy would have to go 1 V 12 to get the respect of some around here.

Carter, He's iffy, leaning more towards no. THe injury is a con, and his tenetive rep holds him down.

Iverson, He may be one of those great players that couldn't win because guys like Kobe and Shaq play together. I think the team is falling apart in Philly, AI may have missed his chance, but who knows what the future hold for him.



> So, yes BIGAMARE, Kidd is much better than Mabury, hands down.!


True that!


----------



## Pinball (Aug 3, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>mysterio</b>!
> I'm working on it as I'm typing this (if Kidd is in the top 5). 1. shaq is better 2. kobe is better 3. Duncan is better 4. Garnett is better 5... he just might fit here, but so might T-mac or Nowitzki. If anything, Kidd is barely a top 5 player, and marginally the best PG. A little overhyped, but not really. As many have already said, its not just about numbers. Kidd is very aggressive and indimidating for a guard. He's got the best intangibles of all PGs today.


Exactly. He's the best PG in the league but he might not even be a top 5 player. You can go either way with TMac or Kidd. You can say that Kidd has lead his team to the Finals 2 years in a row while TMac has yet to be able to lead his team out of the first round. However, if I'm starting a team I'm still taking TMac. Kidd is great, just a little overrated. Maybe he isn't overrated where you guys are but he is in NJ. There are actually people in the media questioning whether Duncan or Kidd is the best player in this series! I'm sorry but to me that is just asinine.


----------



## John (Jun 9, 2002)

IV, it was sad that the zone defense has tremendously killed Iverson's effectiveness in the game since there arent 3 point shooters in Philly and he is too small to get away with the zone now. 

Kobe, I mean he will have a chance to win one as a first option later on in his career. He has proven he is clutch but he hasnt proven he can win without Shaq.

Carter, maybe you arent a rap fan so I dont balme youy, Lenny Wilkens was the guy who held Vince down for the past few seasons. Now, a zone defense is applied, with the bad periemeter shooters they have in Toronto, look for Vince to suffered a bit even he is given the ball like he was when Butch Carter was here 4-5 seasons ago.


----------



## John (Jun 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>IV</b>!
> 
> 
> Isn't that somewhat the same thing? Don't the guys who get respect by their play on the floor also get their name centered all over Espn's front page?
> ...



Why are some fans dont go the way some wants then be considered a basher?

I mean not directing at you but in general? Marbury has flaws, and indeed his flaws never get cured, so who cant I speak his fault? why cant I name out overpaid players like Marion??

Who can argue Penny wasnt overpaid if it wasnt for his injuries.

The Marion signings was defintely overpaid, because u know you get a little b4 u sign him.


----------



## IV (Jul 16, 2002)

While I'm not a Raptors fan, I do have luv for VC. He's a great player, but the past two years have not been enough for me to say he can go on to win a title. He could change my mind this year.

I agree with you about Iverson, maybe the new coach will get him the players he needs to win, but I'm doubtful.

I dont know what the big deal is about Kobe. No one has to prove they can win without their counterpart, that's riddiculous. To me, the first option bit is overhyped. Kobe is the guy running the offensive and his producing better numbers than Shaq, whether he is the first option or not he's still doing more. Just like Magic and Kareem. Eventually the youth surpasses the old!


----------



## Truth34 (May 28, 2003)

*My 2 cents*

Jason Kidd is the best player in the Eastern Conference. I don't believe you can even have a discussion about whether he is the best point guard. Watch a game. :yes:


----------



## IV (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>John</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I couldnt exactly make out what your saying in your post. Its not written clearly so I may have misintrepreted what you point is. Its seems a little like Marbury bashing.... that's all, or maybe your just displeased with Marbury getting the majority of the credit while players like Penny go unnoticed?


----------



## John (Jun 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>IV</b>!
> While I'm not a Raptors fan, I do have luv for VC. He's a great player, but the past two years have not been enough for me to say he can go on to win a title. He could change my mind this year.
> 
> I agree with you about Iverson, maybe the new coach will get him the players he needs to win, but I'm doubtful.
> ...


No one say he needs to prove something, but to my standard of "A gaurd that can win a championship as a first option" he still hasnt done it yet.. What 's the worry here? I mean I did included Kobe has the ability to win one? It's not like BigAmare 's Marbury will never be able to win a championship here?


----------



## IV (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>John</b>!
> Kobe, I mean he will have a chance to win one as a first option later on in his career. *He has proven he is clutch but he hasnt proven he can win without Shaq.*
> 
> 
> ...


Yes you did.


----------



## digital jello (Jan 10, 2003)

Hey BigAmare, you wanna talk overrated? Let's talk about a big, strong PF with one post move. I think you know who I'm talking about.

That out of the way, I'm curious to see one thing. Who would you, BigAmare, pick first? Jason Kidd or Amare Stoudemire? 

Just a question.


----------



## John (Jun 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>digital jello</b>!
> Hey BigAmare, you wanna talk overrated? Let's talk about a big, strong PF with one post move. I think you know who I'm talking about.
> 
> That out of the way, I'm curious to see one thing. Who would you, BigAmare, pick first? Jason Kidd or Amare Stoudemire?
> ...



Please elaborate here, who that hell you are talking about?

Amare with the one lowpost post?

With the sucess with the teams drafting the highschoolers like t-mac, Kobe and Garnett, teams would have drafted Amare if they see something special in him. But just a reaminder, he is a 20 years old kid, he is not the typical 18 years old highschooler straight went to the NBA.


----------



## digital jello (Jan 10, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>John</b>!
> With the sucess with the teams drafting the highschoolers like t-mac, Kobe and Garnett, teams would have drafted Amare if they see something special in him. But just a reaminder, he is a 20 years old kid, he is not the typical 18 years old highschooler straight went to the NBA.


Yes, Amare.

I agree with your point, but I think he's overrated. I think Yao or Caron could have easily taken ROY, too. 

But this is a Jason Kidd thread, I'm sorry for even bringing this up.


----------



## Amareca (Oct 21, 2002)

Amare Stoudemire of course.

Wouldn't you pick Kevin Garnett over Stephon Marbury?

Big players are always more important and more valueable. Amare Stoudemire has the potential to be one of the top3 PFs ever maybe best ever.

I would also take Stoudemire over Marbury for that matter and Marbury over Kidd since he is much younger and better than Kidd was at the same stage.

Saying Amare Stoudemire has only 1 post move tells me you ain't watching enough. And even if it was true it seems to be working doesn't it? :yes: 

Amare Stoudemire was 19 years old at the beginning of the season. Kevin Garnett was also 19 years old at the beginning of his rookie season.


----------



## John (Jun 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>digital jello</b>!
> 
> 
> Yes, Amare.
> ...


Dont worry about going off as long as it is a good topic.

Sorry have I misslead you, I mean teams could have drafted Amare EARLIER if those teams saw he is something special. But with the No.9 the Suns got. they got they got a steal but I think he is only a athletic finisher like Camby? Or few others?


----------



## digital jello (Jan 10, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>John</b>!
> Sorry have I misslead you, I mean teams could have drafted Amare EARLIER if those teams saw he is something special. But with the No.9 the Suns got. they got they got a steal but I think he is only a athletic finisher like Camby? Or few others?


I think if he really works, he can be something special. He has to dedicate himself to learning a decent jumpshot, post moves, and defense. A dunk can only get a person so far, ask Darvin Ham.


----------



## Amareca (Oct 21, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>NorthSideHatrik</b>!
> Thats pure garbage....
> 
> Kevin Johnson, Steve Nash???? first of all Those two play the same position as Kidd. That makes it pretty hard for them to be effective together.... Second, that was before Nash had a clue what the NBA was about. It took nash Several years to become the player he is now. Even when he left Phoenix, it took him a year or two in dallas to really become good. And for KJ that was the end of his career... He was no where near as effective as he was when he played in the NBA finals. I'll give you Pre-Injury McDyess and Pre-Injury Googs, but three players don't make a team in the western conference. (unless its shaq and kobe and any other player) After the McDyess, Googs team it became Matrix and Penny. Still not good enough. Don't blame that on kidd.


Why not blame Kidd?
He DISSAPEARED in the playoffs and got outplayed by scrubs like Derek Fisher and Avery Johnson.

When KJ, Kidd and Nash were on the Suns they were playing 4 guard lineups. KJ said that Nash was often the best PG in practice.

Cliff Robinson was a very good player at that time and an awesome defender which is one of the main reasons the Suns didn't make the playoffs in Marbury's first year. They lost their best big man.

Isn't it ironic that Kevin Johnson out of retirement and Penny Hardaway playing with the knee injury that kept him out the complete next season could get in the second round when Jason Kidd was watching from the sidelines and when he came back he absolutely disappeared once again and got outplayed by Derek FISHER??


----------



## IV (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BigAmare</b>!
> Amare Stoudemire of course.
> 
> Wouldn't you pick Kevin Garnett over Stephon Marbury?
> ...


Yeah but Jason Kidd is arguably already one of the top 3 PGs ever! 

and give me a break about big players being more important than guards. In this case, that is the silliest thing I've heard all day.
You must of just said that for shock value. You can't be serious.


----------



## Amareca (Oct 21, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>digital jello</b>!
> 
> 
> I think if he really works, he can be something special. He has to dedicate himself to learning a decent jumpshot, post moves, and defense. A dunk can only get a person so far, ask Darvin Ham.


A dunk is not a post move. A post move is a move that leads to a dunk and that's something Amare has plenty of.

It is not like his defender is running away from him so he can dunk. He is getting double teamed but has enough moves and natural instincts to consistantly get to the rim and finish which is EXACTLY what your big players are supposed to do.


----------



## Pinball (Aug 3, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>IV</b>!
> 
> 
> Yeah but Jason Kidd is arguably already one of the top 3 PGs ever!


Here you go again. Please tell me which one of these guys that Jason Kidd is better than: Magic Johnson, John Stockton, Isiah Thomas, and Gary Payton? Top 5 of all time, maybe, but he isn't top 3. Gary Payton in his prime was better than Kidd and even he isn't top 3.


----------



## John (Jun 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BigAmare</b>!
> 
> 
> A dunk is not a post move. A post move is a move that leads to a dunk and that's something Amare has plenty of.
> ...


If that was the case, the Suns wouldnt need to pick and rolls with Amare using penny or Step to get him some wide open layups, hooks and dunks in the playoff series?


----------



## Amareca (Oct 21, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>IV</b>!
> 
> 
> Yeah but Jason Kidd is arguably already one of the top 3 PGs ever!
> ...


You don't believe that big players are more important? How many teams have won a championship without a strong inside presence?

The best teams in the league are those that have elite big men. That's why the West is so much stronger than the East. Kareem, Hakeem, Shaq, Wilt, Russel, Duncan etc

Kobe won rings because of Shaq not the other way around. Shaq is the main reason , Kareem was the main reason for their success before.

Inside game > Perimeter game


----------



## Pinball (Aug 3, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BigAmare</b>!
> Amare Stoudemire of course.
> 
> Wouldn't you pick Kevin Garnett over Stephon Marbury?
> ...


Yes but RIGHT NOW Amare is not KG and Kidd is better than Marbury. I don't care about potential in this case. Right now Kidd is 10x better than Amare.


----------



## Pinball (Aug 3, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BigAmare</b>!
> You don't believe that big players are more important? How many teams have won a championship without a strong inside presence?
> 
> Inside game > Perimeter game


The Detroit Pistons and Chicago Bulls come to mind.


----------



## Amareca (Oct 21, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>John</b>!
> 
> 
> If that was the case, the Suns wouldnt need to pick and rolls with Amare using penny or Step to get him some wide open layups, hooks and dunks in the playoff series?


Umm the Suns would be stupid not to run pick and rolls to get open layups because they are very dangerous pick and roll team.

But what the hell does that have to with anything?

If you could get Tim Duncan consistantly open layups you would rather run that play instead of having him work for a shot in the post.

And then again, what the hell are you watching? Most of the pick and rolls the play ends with a layup for Marbury. Amare took Tim Duncan very often 1on1 in the post in that series.


----------



## Amareca (Oct 21, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Pinball</b>!
> 
> 
> The Detroit Pistons and Chicago Bulls come to mind.


The Pistons didn't have a strong inside presence???? :laugh:


----------



## IV (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BigAmare</b>!
> 
> 
> Why not blame Kidd?
> He DISSAPEARED in the playoffs and got outplayed by scrubs like Derek Fisher


C'mon Dawg just because the Lakers beat the Nets it doesn't mean Kidd was out played by Fisher. Do you remember how hard Kidd fought? His team was just outmatched. Here's the numbers from that series.

Kidd: 21-10-7; he had a double double in 3 of the 4 games and a triple double in game 1

Fisher: 13-4-4; it doesn't even add up!



> When KJ, Kidd and Nash were on the Suns they were playing 4 guard lineups. KJ said that Nash was often the best PG in practice.


NBA history says otherwise. Neither one of them can hold a Kidd jock.



> Cliff Robinson was a very good player at that time and an awesome defender which is one of the main reasons the Suns didn't make the playoffs in Marbury's first year. They lost their best big man.


They didn't make the playoffs because they lost Jason Kidd. Its really nothing more to it than that.



> Isn't it ironic that Kevin Johnson out of retirement and Penny Hardaway playing with the knee injury that kept him out the complete next season could get in the second round when Jason Kidd was watching from the sidelines and when he came back he absolutely disappeared once again and got outplayed by Derek FISHER??


While Penny and KJ made it to the second round, Kidd left them both behond and when on to the Finals. 
Derek Fisher has never outplayed Kidd, not even for one game!


----------



## John (Jun 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BigAmare</b>!
> 
> 
> Umm the Suns would be stupid not to run pick and rolls to get open layups because they are very dangerous pick and roll team.
> ...


I am not saying you woldnt want a wide open shot, but if he was able to draw double team like the way you said it. The team was supposed to run through Amare and it never happneded!

Amare took tim duncan? Lmao! The guy is so easy to defend at this stage, all u need to do is give him a bit of room and he does no ****!


95% of his points are coming from pick and roll plays and a broken plays dunks!

Maybe he creatd once or twice for the entire series on his own to score on Duncan?

But hey, some scrubs sometimes surprised superstars because they dont know the scrub's game yet!


----------



## IV (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Pinball</b>!
> 
> 
> Here you go again. Please tell me which one of these guys that Jason Kidd is better than: Magic Johnson, John Stockton, Isiah Thomas, and Gary Payton? Top 5 of all time, maybe, but he isn't top 3. Gary Payton in his prime was better than Kidd and even he isn't top 3.


I put him right in the mix behind Magic and Stockton.


----------



## IV (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BigAmare</b>!
> 
> 
> You don't believe that big players are more important? How many teams have won a championship without a strong inside presence?


That's a small way of looking at things. You are right that big men are more important but to take and average big man, not even an allstar, and put him up against the best player at the PG position? That's ridiculous.



> The best teams in the league are those that have elite big men. That's why the West is so much stronger than the East. Kareem, Hakeem, Shaq, Wilt, Russel, Duncan etc


True, but you would go and trade the starting center for the Chicago bulls during the 90's, Luc Longley, for one of the best guards in the league just because Luc is a big man and he plays on the championship team.



> Kobe won rings because of Shaq not the other way around. Shaq is the main reason , Kareem was the main reason for their success before.


Enough of the foolishness, man. Please spare us all.


----------



## Amareca (Oct 21, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>John</b>!
> 
> 
> I am not saying you woldnt want a wide open shot, but if he was able to draw double team like the way you said it. The team was supposed to run through Amare and it never happneded!
> ...


John you are living somewhere in China and your idiotic comments have me thinking you didn't watch more than maybe 5 games at best.

Or you don't know what the hell a double team is because when Amare receives the ball in the post he is always getting double teamed.

Why doesn't the offense run through him? BECAUSE HE IS A ROOKIE STRAIGHT OUT OF HIGHSCHOOL AND PLAYED ONLY 2 YEARS OF HIGHSCHOOL BALL?

Does the Rockets offense run through Yao Ming?

When Amare dumped 38/14 on KG and Kendall Gill admitted their double teams didn't get it done, did the scrub surprise KG? Please get a clue.

You are such a friggin dumbass, it is a shame you are allowed to be the mod of the Suns board, which is dead anyway.


----------



## NorthSideHatrik (Mar 11, 2003)

Your kidding yourself if you think that Steve on the Suns was as good as he is on the Mavs right now.... Not even close....

1996-97 3.3ppg 2.1 apg phoenix
97-98 9.1ppg 3.4 apg phoenix
98-99 7.9ppg 5.5apg dallas
99-00 8.6ppg 4.9apg dallas

those stats don't even come close to steve nash today, he didn't do a damn thing in phoenix.


----------



## Kmasonbx (Apr 7, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Pinball</b>!
> 
> 
> Maybe he isn't overrated where you guys are but he is in NJ. There are actually people in the media questioning whether Duncan or Kidd is the best player in this series! I'm sorry but to me that is just asinine.


After reading this post that's when I realized why I find him overrated, I am from NYC, and I know a lot of people from Jersey, and I always hear the greatness of Kidd, so it gets annoying. If your from Michigan, or Chicago you don't hear the stuff I hear about Kidd, come on it's not even close to debatable who is better between Duncan and Kidd, and yet you have the Jersey media debating it. You can be a great player and be overrated, its not hard, a lot of great players are overrated, even Jordan was overrated. How many people do you know would say if the Bulls just had Jordan and didn't have Pippen they still would have won titles? Kidd will never win a championship unless he gets fortunate enough to go to the Spurs next year, but I doubt they will sign him. Kidd will go through his whole career being called a great winner and yet he will never have a championship, while players like Barkley, Ewing, Malone and Stockton are questioned winners because they never won the big one, and all are greater players than Kidd.


----------



## Pinball (Aug 3, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BigAmare</b>!
> 
> 
> The Pistons didn't have a strong inside presence???? :laugh:


As good as Rodman was he wasn't Shaq or Hakeem down low. He was a specialist much like Ben Wallace, though not the shot blocker. Salley was a solid player down low. Laimbeer operated on the perimeter as much as he did down low. As good as Rodman was the team was still oriented around Thomas, Dumars, and Aguirre. They were perimeter players and that is why I think Detroit was more of a perimeter team.


----------



## Kmasonbx (Apr 7, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>IV</b>!
> 
> 
> I put him right in the mix behind Magic and Stockton.


Your joking, right? Kidd the 3rd best PG ever, see this is the exact reason why I say he is overrated, he is 30 years old and has never won anything, yea he got to the NBA finals twice, don't forget the Nets got swept last year, they were at best the 6th best team in the NBA last year. They won 52 games last year 49 this year, come on that is not impressive, and don't forget how weak the East is. I remember last year people thinking the Nets would win a couple of games, and I thought they would get swept, and looked what happened, if Kidd is so great, and he is in his prime, why can't he lead his team to at least 1 win the Finals? Especially when his PF had the best game of his career in game 4. 

This year, people are so fooled by Kidd's supposed greatness that they are picking the Nets to win the series, or at least take it to 6 games. This series is over in 5, Spurs win the first 2 at home, split the first 2 in Jersey and then finish the Nets off in Jersey. The Nets have won 101 games the last two years, the Trail Blazers have won 100, but since they play in the West haven't been able to get out the first round, if Kidd was in the West he probably would have suffered the same fate, but because he is in the East, Kidd is one of greatest players, while Portland is a team in turmoil. If Portland was in the East they would have been in the finals for the last 5 years. 

Bottom line Kidd is receiving all this hype because he is in the East, but the thing is, if the Hornets didn't have such injury problems, the Nets would have not seen the Finals the last two years.


----------



## BizzyRipsta (May 25, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Kmasonbx</b>!
> if Kidd is so great, and he is in his prime, why can't he lead his team to at least 1 win the Finals? Especially when his PF had the best game of his career in game 4.


wow! so one nba final series tells all...



> This year, people are so fooled by Kidd's supposed greatness that they are picking the Nets to win the series, or at least take it to 6 games. This series is over in 5, Spurs win the first 2 at home, split the first 2 in Jersey and then finish the Nets off in Jersey.


is that what your crystal ball says? you're not a psychic. anything can happen, and you can't rule anything out.



> Bottom line Kidd is receiving all this hype because he is in the East, but the thing is, if the Hornets didn't have such injury problems, the Nets would have not seen the Finals the last two years.


if if's and but's were candy and nuts, well, you know how the saying goes...


----------



## IV (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Kmasonbx</b>!
> 
> 
> Your joking, right? Kidd the 3rd best PG ever, see this is the exact reason why I say he is overrated, he is 30 years old and has never won anything, yea he got to the NBA finals twice, don't forget the Nets got swept last year, they were at best the 6th best team in the NBA last year. They won 52 games last year 49 this year, come on that is not impressive, and don't forget how weak the East is. I remember last year people thinking the Nets would win a couple of games, and I thought they would get swept, and looked what happened, if Kidd is so great, and he is in his prime, why can't he lead his team to at least 1 win the Finals? Especially when his PF had the best game of his career in game 4.


You seem to be more concerned with what his team accomplishes as opposed to Kidd as a player. As far as all around skill, and how good he makes the players around him, Kidd is top notch. BTW, Stockton is 41 and didn't win jack, but I still thinks he's the greatest PG of all time.



> This year, people are so fooled by Kidd's supposed greatness that they are picking the Nets to win the series, or at least take it to 6 games. This series is over in 5, Spurs win the first 2 at home, split the first 2 in Jersey and then finish the Nets off in Jersey. The Nets have won 101 games the last two years, the Trail Blazers have won 100, but since they play in the West haven't been able to get out the first round, if Kidd was in the West he probably would have suffered the same fate, but because he is in the East, Kidd is one of greatest players, while Portland is a team in turmoil. If Portland was in the East they would have been in the finals for the last 5 years.


There is nothing supposed about Jason Kidds greatness. He just is. He's been a top teir player since back in high school, how can you deny his greatness?

Read the profile:

*Named First Team All-NBA four consecutive seasons (1998-99, 1999-2000, 2000-01and 2001-02). 
*Named First Team All-Defensive three times (1998-99, 2000-01, 2001-02) and to the second team in 1999-2000. 
*Five-time NBA All-Star selection, including four times (2002, 2001, 2000, 1998 and 1996) 
*Became only the fourth player in NBA history to lead the league in assists three-straight seasons - 1999-01 (John Stockton, 1988-96; Oscar Robertson, 1964-66; Bob Cousy, 1953-60) 
*Won a gold medal in the 2000 Sydney Olympics. 
First Maverick to start an All-Star Game (1996). 
*Became the sixth fastest NBA player to record 5000 career assists (531 games), as he finished with three points, 15 assists and eight rebounds in 44 minutes at Dallas on 1/21/2002 
*Tied a career-high with 16 rebounds while scoring 16 points, dishing off seven assists and collecting a team-high three steals in 43 minutes of action at Orlando on 4/11/2002 
*Set the Nets all-time single season triple-double mark (8), and in doing so, became the Nets all-time leader in triple-doubles 
*Set the Nets all-time single season assist mark by recording 808 assists 
*Became first Nets player ever to win “Eastern Conference Player of the Month” for November by averaging 13.3 points, 9.6 assists, 7.6 rebounds and 1.8 steals in leading the Nets to a 10-5 record and their best start in franchise history 
*Ranked 2nd in the NBA in assists (9.9 apg), 3rd in steals (2.13 spg) and ranked 4th in double-doubles (44) in 2001-02 
*Recorded first career playoff triple-double with 22 points, 10 rebounds and personal playoff-high 16 assists in Game 4 against the Lakers in the 2000 Western Conference Semifinals 
*Named NBA Player of the Week (7th career, 5th as Sun) on 4/2/01 after he averaged 31.0 points, 7.0 rebounds, 8.8 assists and 4.3 steals and shot .513 from the field during a 4-0 week with wins over the Lakers, Cleveland, Houston and Milwaukee 
*Exploded for career-high 43 points at Houston on 3/29/01 
*Named NBA Player of the Month for April 1999, averaging 20.1 pointes, 10.4 assists, 6.7 rebounds and 2.38 steals per game and logging two triple-doubles, for the 10-6 Suns 
*Topped 700 assists and 500 rebounds in the same season for the second time in 1997-98, joining Robertson and Magic Johnson (six times each) as the only players in NBA history to do so more than once 
*Established a Mavericks' single-game franchise record with a career-high 25 assists against the Jazz on 2/8/96 and notched a Mavericks' single-season franchise record 783 assists in 1995-96 
*Was named 1994-95 NBA co-Rookie of the Year (with Grant Hill) and was a unanimous selection to the 1994-95 NBA All-Rookie First Team 
*Named Schick NBA Rookie of the Month for March 1995 
*Participated in the Schick Rookie Game during the 1995 NBA All-Star Weekend in Phoenix 
*Won Naismith Award as nation's top high school player after senior season at St. Joseph of Notre Dame (Alameda, CA), averaging 25.0 points, 10.0 assists, 7.0 rebounds and 7.0 steals 
*Parade and USA Today High School Player of the Year 
*Played in the McDonald's High School All-American Game 



> Bottom line Kidd is receiving all this hype because he is in the East, but the thing is, if the Hornets didn't have such injury problems, the Nets would have not seen the Finals the last two years.


:nonono: Kidd is the glue that ever coach looks for to make his team stick together. He the perfect chemistry guy. Kidd has never played with another great player yet he manages to get to the finals twice, and acheive all those others goals.

I think you need to take a breather and back away from the haterade!


----------



## Kmasonbx (Apr 7, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>BizzyRipsta</b>!
> 
> 
> wow! so one nba final series tells all...
> ...


Your a Jason Kidd fan so you'll never consider him overrated. Everybody used the last 2 seasons to justify Kidd's ability to be a winner, why can't I use the biggest stage in basketball to refute that? 11 or 12 wins the Easter Conference playoffs means nothing, it's what you do once you get to the finals, and the Nets didn't win a game. The Nets dominated the Celtics this year because of Kenyon Martin's ability to manhandle Antoine Walker. They beat the Pistons because of Billups injury, and in reality neither team would be in the playoffs out west.

[QUOUTE] You seem to be more concerned with what his team accomplishes as opposed to Kidd as a player. As far as all around skill, and how good he makes the players around him, Kidd is top notch. BTW, Stockton is 41 and didn't win jack, but I still thinks he's the greatest PG of all time. [/QUOTE]

So now team accomplishments have nothing to do with an individuals greatness. Before this everybodies argument was Kidd was a winner, thats why he is so great, my how fast we change our tone. And please at 41 and your last season, there is no way your greatness can be stripped, Stockton won his whole career 19 out of 19 for playoffs. Kidd is 30, if he doesn't win soon he never will. And if you want to talk about individual skills, Kidd is not as skilled as many players, he isn't as skilled of a player as Marbury, Francis, Baron Davis or Gary Payton, but I think he is better than all except Marbury. 



> Kidd is the glue that ever coach looks for to make his team stick together. He the perfect chemistry guy. Kidd has never played with another great player yet he manages to get to the finals twice, and acheive all those others goals.
> 
> I think you need to take a breather and back away from the haterade!


So McDyess before the injury problems wasn't a great player? 20 and 10, that's a mark big man shoot for, and McDyess did it with Kidd. Jim Jackson and Mashburn were both top 10 in scoring and they didn't win. Oh yea do you forget that team had terrible chemistry. Kidd is a great player, but he is not 1 of the 3 greatest PGs ever, that is a joke. 

Like I said before the truly great plaers can be succesful in any setting, Kidd can only be succesful on a fast break team, he can't play in the half court set. Which is why if he went to the Spurs instead of Brand, the Spurs would take a step back, Kidd won't make the shots Parker makes, and that offense runs through Duncan, Kidd wouldn't have the ball near as much as he likes. The finals start tonight, if Kidd leads his team to the championship I'll take back everything I said, but if the Spurs win in 4 or 5 like I said they will, I hope everybody will realize that Kidd isn't the winner people think he is.


----------



## kcchiefs-fan (Oct 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>IV</b>!
> 
> 
> You seem to be more concerned with what his team accomplishes as opposed to Kidd as a player. As far as all around skill, and how good he makes the players around him, Kidd is top notch. BTW, Stockton is 41 and didn't win jack, but I still thinks he's the greatest PG of all time.
> ...


So you're putting Kidd ahead of Zeke? What about Oscar and West, seeing as these guys are sometimes considered PG's. Archibald? I wouldn't even put him ahead of The Glove yet. This is why I say he's horrendously overrated, he gets mentioned with guys like Thomas, Stockton, and Magic so often. I just don't see anyway that Kidd will ever come anywhere close to these guys.


----------



## IV (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Kmasonbx</b>!
> So now team accomplishments have nothing to do with an individuals greatness.


I never said that.



> Before this everybodies argument was Kidd was a winner, thats why he is so great, my how fast we change our tone.


Am I a part of everybody else because I never said that.



> And please at 41 and your last season, there is no way your greatness can be stripped


Please stop making up things you think I've said.
Stockton to me is the greatest point guard ever, and he never won a title.



> Stockton won his whole career 19 out of 19 for playoffs. Kidd is 30, if he doesn't win soon he never will.


What do you mean by "win?" 
If your talking about making it to the playoffs, Kidds done that
If your talking about making it to the finals, he's done that too.
What are you getting at?



> And if you want to talk about individual skills, Kidd is not as skilled as many players, he isn't as skilled of a player as Marbury, Francis, Baron Davis or Gary Payton, but I think he is better than all except Marbury.


Kidd range of skills are better than everyone of that list.



> So McDyess before the injury problems wasn't a great player? 20 and 10, that's a mark big man shoot for, and McDyess did it with Kidd. Jim Jackson and Mashburn were both top 10 in scoring and they didn't win. Oh yea do you forget that team had terrible chemistry. Kidd is a great player, but he is not 1 of the 3 greatest PGs ever, that is a joke.


Its fine if you disagree with me, but McDyess a great player? 
Now that's a joke. I dont even know where you got 20 & 10 from he's really a 16 and 8 guy. I can't even belief you brought him up, he played on season with Kidd. Jim Jackson deserves no comment, and Mashburn is a very good players the best of the bunch but not a great player. He barely made his first allstar appearance this year. 



> Like I said before the truly great plaers can be succesful in any setting, Kidd can only be succesful on a fast break team, he can't play in the half court set.


What great players are truly great because they were successful in any setting? I bet I can name 2 for every 1 you think of.


----------



## IV (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>kcchiefs-fan</b>!
> 
> 
> So you're putting Kidd ahead of Zeke? What about Oscar and West, seeing as these guys are sometimes considered PG's. Archibald? I wouldn't even put him ahead of The Glove yet. This is why I say he's horrendously overrated, he gets mentioned with guys like Thomas, Stockton, and Magic so often. I just don't see anyway that Kidd will ever come anywhere close to these guys.


I dont think of Oscar or West as Point Guards. Yes ahead of Zeke. Call it over rated if you want, I call it having an opinion. Jason Kidd is a fantastic poitn guard truly the best of this era. His career is far from over, and yes my opinion may be prestated but I still stand by my word. He is arguably top 3.


----------



## IV (Jul 16, 2002)

*Kidd vs. Zeke*

Zeke was all NBA first team 3 times, all NBA second team 2 times, and a 9 time allstar. He never made any all defensive teams

Kidd is all NBA first team 4 times, second team 1 time, and a 6 time allstar. He's also 3 times first team all NBA defenders and has been on the second team twice. Kidd has got more than a few years left in him, so his stock is rising.

To me, Kidd is a better all around point guard.


----------



## kcchiefs-fan (Oct 28, 2002)

*Re: Kidd vs. Zeke*



> Originally posted by <b>IV</b>!
> Zeke was all NBA first team 3 times, all NBA second team 2 times, and a 9 time allstar. He never made any all defensive teams
> 
> Kidd is all NBA first team 4 times, second team 1 time, and a 6 time allstar. He's also 3 times first team all NBA defenders and has been on the second team twice. Kidd has got more than a few years left in him, so his stock is rising.
> ...


Don't forget Zeke played in an era with Magic and Stockton. Also, don't foget Zeke had far better statistics and won 2 championships in an incredibly competitive era. To me, Zeke is a far better player than Kidd will most likely ever be. I personally don't think Kidd will ever enter into the top 5 PG, I have quite a few players I don't think he'll ever eclipse. I also don't think he's definitively the best of this era. I think this is really the first year of him being the best PG in the league, maybe the second. But whatever, we can have differing opinions.


----------



## Kmasonbx (Apr 7, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>IV</b>!
> Zeke was all NBA first team 3 times, all NBA second team 2 times, and a 9 time allstar. He never made any all defensive teams
> 
> Kidd is all NBA first team 4 times, second team 1 time, and a 6 time allstar. He's also 3 times first team all NBA defenders and has been on the second team twice. Kidd has got more than a few years left in him, so his stock is rising.
> ...


The fact that Zeke made first team 3 times is saying a lot, played in an era when Magic and Jordan were making the All-NBA first team every year. Zeke made it over Magic once and Jordan twice, please don't even entertain the thought that Kidd would have made even once over either of those players. Kidd will not make any more All-NBA first teams, because Kobe and T Mac have that on lock, not even my current favorite player, Allen Iverson will make it again.
Zeke also has 2 NBA titles, something that Kidd doesn't have. Thomas played a whole 4th quarter with a broken leg. This is what seperates Thomas from Kidd, once against I think Bernard King and the Sixers, Thomas scored 16 points in the final 90 seconds to bring his team back to win the game. That is something that Kidd couldn't even consider doing. No matter how much of a pass first PG you are, you have to have the ability to takeover when the time calls for it, and sorry Kidd doesn't have that ability. Oscar Robertson was a PG, you don't average 10 assists in 3 or 4 different seasons and not be a PG. 

That was my mistake, McDyess didn't average 20 and 10 with Kidd, he did that in 2 seperate seasons with the Nuggets, so your 16 and 8 theory is totally wrong. , for his career he averages 17.6 and 8.7. That year McDyess was on the Suns they had an unbelievable team, they had 7 players that averaged double figures, and two others who averaged 9+, that team would win at least 50 games even without Kidd. He was not the key to their success, their depth was the key.

Like I said before Kidd isn't one of the 3 best PGs ever, he isn't even one of 5 best and top 10 could be even pushing it. Any reasonable basketball fan knows Kidd isn't close to one of the 3 best PGs ever, which is my exact reasoning for him being overrated.

And IV, winning is directly tied to somebodies overall greatness. Why do you think all the true greats have won championships, not only because they were good enough to carry their teams to championships, but without them they wouldn't be considered as great. Look at a player like George Gervin, he was a dominate scorer his best year he averaged 33 a game, but he never won a championship, so he will never be considered one of the 20 maybe even 30 greatest players. By the way saying Kidd is one of the 3 best PGs ever says you think he is one of the 20 greatest players ever, and that is very far from the truth


----------



## kcchiefs-fan (Oct 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Kmasonbx</b>!
> 
> 
> The fact that Zeke made first team 3 times is saying a lot, played in an era when Magic and Jordan were making the All-NBA first team every year. Zeke made it over Magic once and Jordan twice, please don't even entertain the thought that Kidd would have made even once over either of those players. Kidd will not make any more All-NBA first teams, because Kobe and T Mac have that on lock, not even my current favorite player, Allen Iverson will make it again.
> ...


I agree with this 100%. Isiah had years with 20+ppg 2+spg 13+apg and 4+rpg. Those are off the top of my head, but I know he had years like that, which is something Kidd never has, and never will do. I don't understand how Kidd could be better. And if Oscar is being considered a PG he's obviously a much better player. I agree with you, Top 10- maybe, but not Top 5 and certainly not Top 3.


----------



## Kmasonbx (Apr 7, 2003)

Watching this game is just showing why he is overrated, everything Kidd does is magnified, by Bill Walton, well maybe it's just Walton. But Kenyon Martin has Duncan beat by a step down court, instead of throwing it over his head, Kidd tries to put it out in front of Martin and have it spin back, so Duncan steals it, but according to Walton it was a great pass. Then Kidd is on the break, he gets Duncan to turn around (good move) but he missed the layup, but all Walton talks about is the move no mention of the missed layup. Then Kidd tries get an outlet pass between people, pass is stolen, but Walton again says thats a good pass. Then David Robinson makes a good play to deflect a pass, and Kidd end up getting to the ball, but instead of saying a nice defensive play by Robinson, he says what a play by Kidd to get the ball back, and all he did was run to the ball, not like he dove or anything.


----------



## Amareca (Oct 21, 2002)

I hope all of you are watching this game because it is absolutely what I said would happen.

San Antonio makes Kidd play in the halfcourt and he is average at BEST. Tony Parker is even taking him to school on the offensive end.


----------



## ThereisnoIinteam3 (Apr 19, 2003)

I would like to thank Tony Parker and the San Antonio Spurs for proving my point. The West is a whole different ball game.


----------



## Pinball (Aug 3, 2002)

My respect for the Star Ledger will increase monumentally if they judge Kidd fairly in game 1. He deserves * or ** instead of the usual ****. Typically when he has a bad game they don't even bother to rate him for fear of dissing him. Guys like Kittles, Van Horn (in the past), and Byron Scott are blamed for every Nets loss. I sure hope they grow some *****.


----------



## FatDaddy (Nov 13, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Pinball</b>!
> My respect for the Star Ledger will increase monumentally if they judge Kidd fairly in game 1. He deserves * or ** instead of the usual ****. Typically when he has a bad game they don't even bother to rate him for fear of dissing him. Guys like Kittles, Van Horn (in the past), and Byron Scott are blamed for every Nets loss. I sure hope they grow some *****.


not true. post something that is true. All your words go down the toilets.


----------



## JerryWest (Jun 24, 2002)

Game 1 is a perfect example of how Kidd is overrated, they keep overhyping Kidd even when he shoots horribly and makes careless turnovers.


----------



## Truth34 (May 28, 2003)

*Kidd's Horrible Game 1*

Well, Kidd having a 4-17 (which he used to do all the time) is kind of like George Bush saying "strategery" in a press conference; it gives the critics and naysayers great joy. I must admit this was the first game in a long time that I actually thought Kidd was beaten by his mirror (Tony Parker), and may have hurt his team. 
I think we should point out, though, that this is only one game.


----------



## numb555 (May 25, 2003)

Kidd is a great point Guard, but his inconsistency in shooting should not land him in the top 3 of all time, top 15 yes!


----------



## 33 (Nov 18, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>numb555</b>!
> Kidd is a great point Guard, but his inconsistency in shooting should not land him in the top 3 of all time, top 15 yes!


If you can name 14 PG better than Kidd than I will come to work Butt naked. That is impossible. There is no way you can name 14 better PGs.


----------



## numb555 (May 25, 2003)

Relax, i was exagerating...kidd is top 10. I don't think he's that great cuz of his shooting, but his intangible qualities makes him the guard to have. If i was objective and was a GM i would take kidd over any PG in the league right now. but since i'm a bias a-hole i take Nash, because he one of my favourites and he can shoot, and share the ball and has good floor leading skills. 

I don't think kidd is better than these guys

Magic
Stockton
Isaih
GP (prime)

i didn't watch bball back when archibald, cousy, pistol pete, robertson played so i can't comment on them. But watching the above 4 i believe they are better. those 4 can put fear into opponents with their shooting, Kidd doesn't! bottom line!


----------



## TheRifleman (May 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>KennethTo</b>!
> Game 1 is a perfect example of how Kidd is overrated, they keep overhyping Kidd even when he shoots horribly and makes <b>careless turnovers.</b>



<b>ALL turnovers are careless</b>- that is why they are called "turnovers". Kidd had 3 of them and still had a good ratio of assists to turnovers in game #1.


----------



## 33 (Nov 18, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>numb555</b>!
> Relax, i was exagerating...kidd is top 10. I don't think he's that great cuz of his shooting, but his intangible qualities makes him the guard to have. If i was objective and was a GM i would take kidd over any PG in the league right now. but since i'm a bias a-hole i take Nash, because he one of my favourites and he can shoot, and share the ball and has good floor leading skills.
> 
> I don't think kidd is better than these guys
> ...


I can agree with you there (except for the Nash statement). Plus Magic was not a great shooter, but he did put fear in hearts when he had the ball in crunch time.


----------



## Bball_Doctor (Dec 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>TheRifleman</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> <b>ALL turnovers are careless</b>- that is why they are called "turnovers". Kidd had 3 of them and still had a good ratio of assists to turnovers in game #1.


EXACTLY...Kidd had 10 assists and 3 turnovers. That is more than 3 assists per turnover. Parker had 5 assists and 2 turnovers.


----------



## TheRifleman (May 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>33</b>!
> 
> 
> I can agree with you there (except for the Nash statement). Plus <b><u>Magic was not a great shooter</u></b>, but he did put fear in hearts when he had the ball in crunch time.



Magic Johnson - NOT a great shooter? 

He didn't do many dunks, so his lifetime AVERAGE of 52+ FG% says he was a GREAT shooter - so you're right magic was NOT a good shooter - but a GREAT shooter.


----------



## 33 (Nov 18, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>TheRifleman</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Slow your roll.......I meant jump shooter. Yes his FG% was high, hugey b/c he was 4 to 5 inches taller than his defender.


----------



## Bball_Doctor (Dec 29, 2002)

I am going to interject in this argument between 33 and Rifleman since you two are talking about my favorite player of alltime. Magic was a very good midrange shooter...the best post guard I have seen other than Jordan. But Magic did not possess tremendous range but the three was not as popular then as it is now. Magic could have clearly been an average 3 point shooter. He made 106 3s in 89-90 at a 38% clip. Remember just because a player does not use range in his shot does not mean they are bad shooters. If that is the case MJ is a bad shooter. Shooting should be judged on consistency unless if it is layups of dunks. With that said Magic was a terrific midrange shooter not as good as MJ (nobody is - greatest midrange shooter ever) but very good.


----------



## TheRifleman (May 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>33</b>!
> 
> 
> Slow your roll.......I meant jump shooter. Yes his FG% was high, hugey b/c he was 4 to 5 inches taller than his defender.


For some reason that so-called height advantage doesn't help all taller players, does it? We can name a whole lot of TALLER than Magic players who do not even come close to shooting over 52%.

I bet if I took the time to list some players today and some players in the 80s, I wouldn't see many Taller than Magic who shoot and shot better than 52fg%.

I bet Dirk and Raef don't shoot 52fg%....


----------



## Tailback (Aug 5, 2002)

bottom line, nets are overrated not kidd. any team out west (who made the playoffs) would take them in the finals except utah. u will see when the spurs kick their butts.


----------



## BizzyRipsta (May 25, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Tailback</b>!
> bottom line, nets are overrated not kidd. any team out west (who made the playoffs) would take them in the finals except utah. u will see when the spurs kick their butts.


the nets aren't overrated. they're the best in the east. it would be a whole other story if they were on the bottom of the east.


----------



## John (Jun 9, 2002)

What - guys?

Can someone with a legitimate english skill to teach me what an "overarted" is?

Please, the team made it to the NBA finals but still an overrated team?

What - guys!

An overrated to me is a team or a player isnt as good as what people thought them to be, like Kobe, Tracy ????


----------



## NYKRule (May 26, 2002)

Yes, and Jason's 30 points go unnoticed, including his damn good FT shooting down the stretch with EVERYTHING on the line (let's face it, if Kidd didn't come through, the Nets were done). That's something Tim Duncan cannot do for his team, and he was exposed. Let's criticize him after that game....


Jason Kidd is the best PG in the league right now. There is no doubt to this. Stephon Marbury is not in Kidd's league. He simply cannot do what Jason can do on the court. I can't really elaborate on this because he is better in every facet of the game but shooting. I watched that POS Stephon for years in NJ. He would not have done this even with the supporting cast that Kidd has....he isn't the player Kidd is. You are exposing yourself as a fraud if you think Marbury is better than Kidd.


----------



## Pay Ton (Apr 18, 2003)

I aint sayin Kidd is overrated or underrated, all I'm saying is all you kidd fans remember who's Jason kidd's idol...

THE GLOVE!!


----------



## Kmasonbx (Apr 7, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>NYKRule</b>!
> Yes, and Jason's 30 points go unnoticed, including his damn good FT shooting down the stretch with EVERYTHING on the line (let's face it, if Kidd didn't come through, the Nets were done). That's something Tim Duncan cannot do for his team, and he was exposed. Let's criticize him after that game....
> 
> 
> Jason Kidd is the best PG in the league right now. There is no doubt to this. Stephon Marbury is not in Kidd's league. He simply cannot do what Jason can do on the court. I can't really elaborate on this because he is better in every facet of the game but shooting. I watched that POS Stephon for years in NJ. He would not have done this even with the supporting cast that Kidd has....he isn't the player Kidd is. You are exposing yourself as a fraud if you think Marbury is better than Kidd.


Your comparing Marbury at ages 22-24, to a 30 year old Kidd. Marbury now at 26, is twice as good as he was in Jersey, he hated being in Jersey, so he really didn't care about the team's success he just wanted to put up big numbers. Now winning is his number one goal, and he still puts up great numbers. Steph is a great player now, and is every bit as good as Kidd is. 

Kidd's had a great scoring game on Friday, he surprised me, I didn't think he could do that against the Spurs, but don't get it twisted, he won't do that again. But he also only had 3 assists, the Nets will have no chance of winning with Kidd getting 3 assists. Personally I think Kidd is a great player, but not nearly as great as so many in the Metropolitan area think.


----------



## IV (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Kmasonbx</b>!
> 
> 
> The fact that Zeke made first team 3 times is saying a lot, played in an era when Magic and Jordan were making the All-NBA first team every year. Zeke made it over Magic once and Jordan twice, please don't even entertain the thought that Kidd would have made even once over either of those players.


You have to admit that those are irrelavant points; after all, Kidd does play in an era competing for first team NBA slots with guys like Kobe Bryant, Gary Payton, Allen Iverson, and now Tmac.



> Kidd will not make any more All-NBA first teams, because Kobe and T Mac have that on lock, not even my current favorite player, Allen Iverson will make it again.


Who knows? :whoknows:



> Zeke also has 2 NBA titles, something that Kidd doesn't have. Thomas played a whole 4th quarter with a broken leg. This is what seperates Thomas from Kidd, once against I think Bernard King and the Sixers, Thomas scored 16 points in the final 90 seconds to bring his team back to win the game. That is something that Kidd couldn't even consider doing. No matter how much of a pass first PG you are, you have to have the ability to takeover when the time calls for it, and sorry Kidd doesn't have that ability.


I thought Kidd did a great job of taking over against San An in game 2. He controlled the tempo and poored in 30 points to lead his team to the victory. And that's not his game. You can brag about Zeke's scoring, but what about all the other aspects of the game that Kidd is better, rebounding, triple doubles, defense, passing, taking a losing franchise and putting them in the finals. There's a lot more Kidd can do as a player compared to Isiah. :twocents:



> Oscar Robertson was a PG, you don't average 10 assists in 3 or 4 different seasons and not be a PG.


Just like one could never lead the league in assist not playing the point guard position, yet Wilt Chamberlain managed to do that playing Center?
We can argue back and forth on Oscars position but it would be pointless. He played both PG, & SG; basically, he was a guard. Just like years from now people might argue about which position KG plays, SF or PF? He's a forward, Oscars a guard. 



> That was my mistake, McDyess didn't average 20 and 10 with Kidd, he did that in 2 seperate seasons with the Nuggets, so your 16 and 8 theory is totally wrong. , for his career he averages 17.6 and 8.7. That year McDyess was on the Suns they had an unbelievable team, they had 7 players that averaged double figures, and two others who averaged 9+, that team would win at least 50 games even without Kidd. He was not the key to their success, their depth was the key.


Jason Kidd is the key to success on any team he plays for, from high school, to college, and now in Jersey. As far as Mcdyess, he career stats are far from great . I'm not even sure if he's ever been an allstar? You can't serious think of him as a great player do you? 



> Like I said before Kidd isn't one of the 3 best PGs ever, he isn't even one of 5 best and top 10 could be even pushing it. Any reasonable basketball fan knows Kidd isn't close to one of the 3 best PGs ever, which is my exact reasoning for him being overrated.


Too each is own. But Kidd barely being top 10 as any reasonable basketball fan would know is far from accurate.



> And IV, winning is directly tied to somebodies overall greatness. Why do you think all the true greats have won championships, not only because they were good enough to carry their teams to championships, but without them they wouldn't be considered as great. Look at a player like George Gervin, he was a dominate scorer his best year he averaged 33 a game, but he never won a championship, so he will never be considered one of the 20 maybe even 30 greatest players.


Winning championships will only better a players greatness, not winning will never take away from there greatness the way you make it seem. Players like Stockton is easily a top two point guard of all time with no rings, and his teammate Karl Malone is arguably the greatest PF of all time with no rings. And dont count Kidd out so soon. He's got a few years left in him, and he is focused on winning a title. 




> By the way saying Kidd is one of the 3 best PGs ever says you think he is one of the 20 greatest players ever, and that is very far from the truth


That makes no sense what so ever. Maybe you can reitterate.


----------



## IV (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>kcchiefs-fan</b>!
> 
> 
> I agree with this 100%. Isiah had years with *20+ppg 2+spg 13+apg and 4+rpg.* Those are off the top of my head, but I know he had years like that, which is something Kidd never has, and never will do. I don't understand how Kidd could be better. And if Oscar is being considered a PG he's obviously a much better player. I agree with you, Top 10- maybe, but not Top 5 and certainly not Top 3.


"Year*s*" with those stats?
Those numbers are from Thomas's best season he never did any better. He's overall was a 19-9-3-2 PG, which isn't bad at all. From Kidds best season he was 19-10-7-2, but forget the stats for a minute. What about creativity, vision, and defense. Kidd is the better in those areas. I'm not a big stat guy, not saying they dont matter, but there's more to the game.


----------



## IV (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>TheRifleman</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I dont think of Magic as a great shooter either. Just because his FG% was high doesn't mean he was a great shooter. When I think great shooters, I think of Reggie Miller, MJ, Ray Allen guys like that, and there FG% are alll below what Magic's was. Magic was crafty and able to get to the rim or get the short look for an easy two. He never shot the ball as well as the aforementioned. 
BTW, Eddie Curry lead the league in FG% this year. He's not the best shooter in the league is he? :uhoh:


----------



## IV (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>John</b>!
> What - guys?
> 
> Can someone with a legitimate english skill to teach me what an "overarted" is?
> ...


An overated player is one that most consider to be better than he really is. I dont think Kobe or Tmac are overated at all.

Those who think Jason Kidd is overated, think he is not as good as everyone says he is. Which amazes me because where would New Jersey be without him? You see what happened to the Suns when he left,..... they did even make the playoffs, and a team that was nearly the worst in the league added him to the roster and they find themselves in the NBA finals.
How can anyone underestimate this mans worth?


----------



## BizzyRipsta (May 25, 2002)

iv, you deserve a round of aplause. :clap:


----------



## IV (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Kmasonbx</b>!
> 
> 
> Your comparing Marbury at ages 22-24, to a 30 year old Kidd. Marbury now at 26, is twice as good as he was in Jersey, he hated being in Jersey, so he really didn't care about the team's success he just wanted to put up big numbers. Now winning is his number one goal, and he still puts up great numbers. Steph is a great player now, and is every bit as good as Kidd is.


Stephon Marbury now, then, and never will be as good as Kidd. Then, Kidd as a rookie was ROY, was Stephon even on the all rookie team? Now, they swapped place a year ago. Kidd took Stephon team from winning 30- games to challenging for the title. Stephon took a playoff team and made them not a playoffs team.


----------



## IV (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BizzyRipsta</b>!
> iv, you deserve a round of aplause. :clap:


Gotta get credit where credit is due.
BTW, check me out in the EBB forum. I've got an announcement to make.


----------



## Kmasonbx (Apr 7, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>IV</b>!
> 
> 
> You have to admit that those are irrelavant points; after all, Kidd does play in an era competing for first team NBA slots with guys like Kobe Bryant, Gary Payton, Allen Iverson, and now Tmac.
> ...


I see your point about Oscar, being a guard, but he primarily played point. Wilt led the league in assists to prove a point, Oscar averaged 10 assists those seasons because it was in his nature to pass. Were the Pistons a great franchise before Zeke got there, no they weren't he made them into a great team. Zeke played in his prime, while Magic and Mike were both in their primes, you can't compare that to, Kobe and T Mac at 23 and younger, a now past his prime Gary Payton, Iverson is the only player you can really say was at the top of his game, at the same time as Kidd, but none of these players are considered the greatest player to play their position, as Magic and Mike are.

What I was saying was the #3 PG would have to be considered one of the 20 best players ever, so do you consider Kidd one of the 20 greatest to ever play the game.


----------



## IV (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Kmasonbx</b>!
> 
> 
> I see your point about Oscar, being a guard, but he primarily played point. Wilt led the league in assists to prove a point, Oscar averaged 10 assists those seasons because it was in his nature to pass. Were the Pistons a great franchise before Zeke got there, no they weren't he made them into a great team. Zeke played in his prime, while Magic and Mike were both in their primes, you can't compare that to, Kobe and T Mac at 23 and younger, a now past his prime Gary Payton, Iverson is the only player you can really say was at the top of his game, at the same time as Kidd, but none of these players are considered the greatest player to play their position, as Magic and Mike are.


Good points. Zeke did his thang, and is one of the greatest PG to ever play. He is also arguably top 3. Its all a matter of opinion. IMO, Kidd is extraordinary because he has a wide range of skills for a PG. I refer to him as a miny Magic, with much better D. 



> What I was saying was the #3 PG would have to be considered one of the 20 best players ever, so do you consider Kidd one of the 20 greatest to ever play the game.


Its sounds like what you're saying is the top 3 at each position the make up the top 15 players in NBA history. I dont agree with that. The Center position is stacked with great players to out number other positions. In other words, Wilt, Russell, Kareem, Akeem, Oneal, Moses all are top 15, IMO. PG Magic, Stockton. SG MJ, West, Oscar. SF Bird, Dr. J, Baylor. PF Karl Malone. Off the top of my head, that would be my top 15 all time. I'm sure I left someone out.


----------



## Kmasonbx (Apr 7, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>IV</b>!
> 
> 
> Stephon Marbury now, then, and never will be as good as Kidd. Then, Kidd as a rookie was ROY, was Stephon even on the all rookie team? Now, they swapped place a year ago. Kidd took Stephon team from winning 30- games to challenging for the title. Stephon took a playoff team and made them not a playoffs team.


Steph did make the all-rookie team, alongside Iverson, Camby, Walker and Abdur-Rahim. Your point about taking Steph's 30 win team and taking them to the finals isn't a very good one. Remember how many games K Mart, Van Horn, and Kittles missed, Richard Jefferson and MacCullough weren't on the team. Even Steph missed I think 18 games. And Martin was getting over a broken leg before he broke it again, he was never fully 100% until the following season.

Kidd's last year in Phoenix they had Cliff Robinson, Tony Delk and Rodney Rodgers all putting up double figures for them, all 3 were gone the next year, leaving Marbury with just 1 other scorer to play with. Only Marbury, Marion and Penny averaged double figures for that team, and Joe Johnson was the 4th leading scorer and he averaged just 7.5. When you look at the win differential look at other things besides just that, look at the reasons behind the differential. This year Marbury had a very good supporting cast, and before Penny got hurt they were in the running for the 3rd seed (before the Spurs got hot). If Penny doesn't get hurt the Suns win 50 games. 

I'm not saying the 3 best players at each position should be top 15, I said the 3rd best PG would have to be considered one of the 20 greatest players ever, and if not you would have to say he is very close, so with that said do you think Kidd is a top 25 player ever? 

We'll never agree about Kidd's greatness, so let's just agree to disagree.


----------



## IV (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Kmasonbx</b>!
> 
> 
> Steph did make the all-rookie team, alongside Iverson, Camby, Walker and Abdur-Rahim. Your point about taking Steph's 30 win team and taking them to the finals isn't a very good one. Remember how many games K Mart, Van Horn, and Kittles missed, Richard Jefferson and MacCullough weren't on the team. Even Steph missed I think 18 games. And Martin was getting over a broken leg before he broke it again, he was never fully 100% until the following season.
> ...


We can agree to disagree. Just know that you can make a world of excuses why your guy isn't as good as the next. Jersey had injuries? Whatever. Kidd had players with better numbers? That's not by accident, Jason is the reason why all these players were better then and why the players in NJ are better now. And its not an accident that the Suns were a perennial playoffs team with Kidd, and not a playoff team with Steph. Marbury is a good player. Great? Not yet, but maybe one day. Kidd....... he's been great for a while now, and already has a place in the history of the NBA as one of the greatest PG to ever play. Clearly the greatest of this era of basketball. :yes:


----------



## Kmasonbx (Apr 7, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>IV</b>!
> 
> 
> We can agree to disagree. Just know that you can make a world of excuses why your guy isn't as good as the next. Jersey had injuries? Whatever. Kidd had players with better numbers? That's not by accident, Jason is the reason why all these players were better then and why the players in NJ are better now. And its not an accident that the Suns were a perennial playoffs team with Kidd, and not a playoff team with Steph. Marbury is a good player. Great? Not yet, but maybe one day. Kidd....... he's been great for a while now, and already has a place in the history of the NBA as one of the greatest PG to ever play. Clearly the greatest of this era of basketball. :yes:


You can't really be serious, saying injuries weren't a factor as to why the Nets were terrible the year before Kidd came? Van Horn missed 33 games, Martin missed 14 games, Steph missed 15 games, Kittles missed 82, Jefferson was at Arizona, MacCullough was on Philly. The startin 5 the year Kidd came to the team was Kidd, Kittles, Van Horn, Martin and MaCullough, combined they played a total of 117 games with the Nets the previous season. There was a big difference between the Nets in the 00-01 season and the 01-02 team and it was much more than Kidd and Marbury. Cliff Robinson, Tony Delk and Rodney Rogers scored about 42% of the Suns points and all 3 were gone, so thats 42% of your offense gone from 1 year to the next, that is hard to make up. You can ignore the facts if you want, but they are staring you in the face.


----------



## IV (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Kmasonbx</b>!
> 
> 
> You can't really be serious, saying injuries weren't a factor as to why the Nets were terrible the year before Kidd came? Van Horn missed 33 games, Martin missed 14 games, Steph missed 15 games, Kittles missed 82, Jefferson was at Arizona, MacCullough was on Philly. The startin 5 the year Kidd came to the team was Kidd, Kittles, Van Horn, Martin and MaCullough, combined they played a total of 117 games with the Nets the previous season. There was a big difference between the Nets in the 00-01 season and the 01-02 team and it was much more than Kidd and Marbury. Cliff Robinson, Tony Delk and Rodney Rogers scored about 42% of the Suns points and all 3 were gone, so thats 42% of your offense gone from 1 year to the next, that is hard to make up. You can ignore the facts if you want, but they are staring you in the face.


I thought you wanted to agree to disagree?

Those are facts, but the conclusions you are drawing seem bias to me. You seem to think had Stephon played the exact same team Kidd had they would have been just as good or better. I can't imagine why anyone would think that? :whoknows:


----------



## Kmasonbx (Apr 7, 2003)

Nah I don't think that, I said earlier in this thread, that if Marbury was on the Nets last year they probably would have only won about 40 games. I didn't think Marbury was better than Kidd last year, I do this year. But I'm just showing there was more to the Nets being so much better with Kidd right away, and the Suns being so much worse with Marbury, than just those 2. There were plenty of personel changes. Thats the point I'm trying to make. But now I think Marbury is better, and will only continue to get better, he is only one of 2 players to average 20 points and 8 assists a game for their career, the other is Oscar. You feel Kidd is light years ahead of Marbury, which is far from the truth, I can understand people considering Kidd better but it's not a landslide. 
As far as you considering Kidd one of the 3 or 4 best PGs ever, I agreed to disagree on that, but I just wanted to point out the differences in the two teams from year to year.


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>IV</b>!
> 
> 
> I thought you wanted to agree to disagree?
> ...


Dude, Kidd is getting his butt handed to him by the same PG Marbury dominated. Kidd is overrated.


----------



## IV (Jul 16, 2002)

IMO, Kidd would of had that Phoenix team right back in the playoffs. He's the quintessential PG, teammate, and professional. Steph is none of those things. Your boy had a very good year. The best of his career, but he's no Jason Kidd. Do you think he should have been on the all second NBA team instead of Kidd? And what about defense? Does that not matter as much? You wouldn't say he's as good a defender would you?


----------



## kcchiefs-fan (Oct 28, 2002)

IV, no offense, but I still don't get how you can place Kidd 3rd all-time PG :no:


----------



## IV (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>MemphisX</b>!
> 
> 
> Dude, Kidd is getting his butt handed to him by the same PG Marbury dominated. Kidd is overrated.


Kidd is all NBA on both sides of the ball, Parker and Marbury are not. Step is good, but he's no Jason Kidd. Parker had a good game tonight, he out played Jason Kidd. But lets not go as far as to say he's better after a game or a series. Kidd's overated? No Mike Bibby syndrone is overated.


----------



## IV (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>kcchiefs-fan</b>!
> IV, no offense, but I still don't get how you can place Kidd 3rd all-time PG :no:


No offense taken. I've made my arguement to why Kidd is arguably top 3 all time.


----------



## HBK826 (Jun 1, 2003)

There is just no way either Kidd or Stock are better than Zeke. In an era where the league had its best talent pool ever Zeke led his team to back to back champoinships. He held of the likes of Jordan's Bulls, Bird's Celtics, Nique's Hawks, and Ewing's Knicks, as well as Clyde's Blazers and Magic's Lakers in the Finals. You can't argue with that kind of success.


----------



## IV (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>HBK826</b>!
> There is just no way either Kidd or Stock are better than Zeke. In an era where the league had its best talent pool ever Zeke led his team to back to back champoinships. He held of the likes of Jordan's Bulls, Bird's Celtics, Nique's Hawks, and Ewing's Knicks, as well as Clyde's Blazers and Magic's Lakers in the Finals. You can't argue with that kind of success.


Zeke's pistons took advantage of the down time between the Larry/Magic era of basketball, and the rise of the "MJ" era of basketball. Yes they won the titles, "They" won. You can't overlook the worth of his teammates. Isiah was the man, but give Dumar his props(Finals MVP!), and what about the greatest rebounding ever, Denny Rodman, the tough guys Laimbeer and ....... What about the microwave Vinny Johnson, and Mark Aguire... two of the great players to ever come of the bench. You mind if I show Chuck Daly some luv too, he is one of the greatest coaches ever. The pistons were great, and so was Isiah, but to me it takes more than one outstanding player to win a title. You've gotta credit the Pistons as much as you credit Zeke.

As far as John, take a look at the numbers!


----------



## Kmasonbx (Apr 7, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>IV</b>!
> IMO, Kidd would of had that Phoenix team right back in the playoffs. He's the quintessential PG, teammate, and professional. Steph is none of those things. Your boy had a very good year. The best of his career, but he's no Jason Kidd. Do you think he should have been on the all second NBA team instead of Kidd? And what about defense? Does that not matter as much? You wouldn't say he's as good a defender would you?


Maybe Kidd would have brought the Suns to the playoffs last year, but I also didn't think Steph was better than Kidd this year. This year there were no complaints about Steph as a teammate, they've all said he has matured a lot as a person and a player. The coaches and player say he is one of the leaders of the team. He is a much different person than the Marbury who was on the Nets. I definitely feel Kidd is a better defender, but the same way Kidd is better on defense, Marbury is much better in the halfcourt. I also feel the gap between Marbury and Kidd in the halfcourt offense is bigger than the gap between Kidd and Marbury on the defensive end. I do feel he should have been second team over Kidd, well not really, I think they should just have the 5 best players, because Ben Wallace wasn't one of the 10 best players this year. 

To understand how much better Marbury is than Kidd is in the halfcourt just watch this series carefully. Kidd has struggled in two of the games, and had 1 great game. Marbury was dominating the series until he hurt his shoulder, and he still played well after that. Marbury also shut Parker down so badly that Speedy Claxton was in the game in the final minutes until Marbury got hurt, than Parker started to fare better.

You think Kidd is better, I think Marbury is, but you can't make the argument that Kidd is better in the halfcourt.


----------



## HBK826 (Jun 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>IV</b>!
> 
> 
> Zeke's pistons took advantage of the down time between the Larry/Magic era of basketball, and the rise of the "MJ" era of basketball. Yes they won the titles, "They" won. You can't overlook the worth of his teammates. Isiah was the man, but give Dumar his props(Finals MVP!), and what about the greatest rebounding ever, Denny Rodman, the tough guys Laimbeer and ....... What about the microwave Vinny Johnson, and Mark Aguire... two of the great players to ever come of the bench. You mind if I show Chuck Daly some luv too, he is one of the greatest coaches ever. The pistons were great, and so was Isiah, but to me it takes more than one outstanding player to win a title. You've gotta credit the Pistons as much as you credit Zeke.
> ...


Back then John had a team that had as much as or more talent than Isaiah's Pistons and didnt win the title. Malone is a top 10 player ever at any position, Zeke had no one of that talent level. Jeff Malone averaged 23 a game back then as well. Rod was not the best rebounder at that point in his career, and hell, he still isn't the best ever (See Russell, Bill). Yes the Pistons had an amazingly deep team, but at the time so did alot more of the league since it was the pre-expansion era. And also it was the end of the Celtic era because the Pistons took it from them, and the Lakers were still the team to beat goin for the three peat and Detroit still took em out. Mike's Bulls would have been goin at it with the Celts and Nique's Hawks far sooner had it not been fr Zeke's bunch. Hell of a team certainly, but Zeke was their star. He out assisted Stockton at times without an ideal guy to pass to most times like John had and his prime was much shorter. Also Zeke was a better scorer and rebounder. Defensively its arguable but Zeke was also much more clutch and much tougher. Playing on a broken leg anyone?


----------



## Amareca (Oct 21, 2002)

More reasons for Jason Kidd being overrated.

How about a 8.2apg to 4.24topg ratio in the playoffs?
35%FG against a team that doesn't give him 2-3 easy fastbreak layups every game to get his FG% up to his average 40%.


----------



## JerryWest (Jun 24, 2002)

"Jason Kidd is, arguably, the best defensive guard in the league."
Then what does this make Parker, who is completely raping Kidd, scoring at will on him. Either Parker is a godly offensively player or Kidd's D is overhyped.

"Jason Kidd is easily the best passing guard in the league, both in the half-court set and on the break."
Fast break yes i agree, half court I'm not so sure, he handles the ball a lot, so he gets a lot of assists due amt of time he handles the ball, he's a great passer though, but sometimes I think people overrate his passing because he can't shoot.

"Jason Kidd is the best rebounding guard in the league."
Kidd also hovers around the rim area a lot more than other guards.
Besides this, Francis is a better rebounder from the PG position alone, not to mention a few SG's.

"Jason Kidd is the best ball-handling guard in the league."
He is a great ball handling guard, one of the tops, but this is arguable. He's among the top though, but you can't say for certain he's the best.

"Jason Kidd is, arguably, the clutchest guard in the league."
Hell no. There are about 4 SG I can think off the top of my head.

"Jason Kidd does more for his team than any PLAYER in the league."
I think Duncan has something to say about that, also Tmac, etc.

"Anywhere Jason Kidd has gone, he has improved that team greatly. From High School to College to the NBA."
Improving a team doesn't mean you can't be overrated, a lot of players improve their teams, but some get more credit then they should.

"This thread is a ****ing joke and anyone who watches basketball knows it."
No, no, and no.


----------



## Pinball (Aug 3, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>KennethTo</b>!
> "Jason Kidd does more for his team than any PLAYER in the league."
> I think Duncan has something to say about that, also Tmac, etc.


Exactly KT. "Jason Kidd does more for his team than any other player in the league" and yet he has no titles? If his team isn't winning rings is he really all that different from any other superstar? Tim Duncan already has 2 MVPs and 2 rings and he isn't even close to 30 yet. He has a solid supporting cast but it isn't any better than what Kidd has to work with. Hell, the 99 Spurs team was probably even worse than this team and Duncan still won the ring. Face it people, Kidd was KG in the Western Conference. The only difference now is that he's playing in JV.


----------



## City Wide All-Star (May 24, 2003)

Anyone who thinks Jason Kidd is overrated is an idiot of the game of basketball.


----------



## Amareca (Oct 21, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>KennethTo</b>!
> "Jason Kidd is, arguably, the best defensive guard in the league."
> Then what does this make Parker, who is completely raping Kidd, scoring at will on him. Either Parker is a godly offensively player or Kidd's D is overhyped.
> 
> ...


Great post

Jason Kidd isn't clutch at all and his ballhandling is among tops in turnovers per game.

Every season every playoff series against the West Kidd's game was exposed both offensively and defensively.


----------



## KillaCross11 (May 25, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>City Wide All-Star</b>!
> Anyone who thinks Jason Kidd is overrated is an idiot of the game of basketball.


About time some one said it... bravo i totally agree, :clap:


----------



## 33 (Nov 18, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>KillaCross11</b>!
> 
> 
> About time some one said it... bravo i totally agree, :clap:





I agree. Jason Kidd is hands down the best in the league right now, and one of the best passers ever. His passes are up there with Magic and Pistol Pete!! Don't


----------



## digital jello (Jan 10, 2003)

OK, this thread is officially polluted with Suns/Marbury fans.

I'm a JKidd fan and a Marbury fan. I have seen both at work in NJ and Phoenix. Jason Kidd is a better player than Stephon Marbury. He has accomplished more in his career, circumstances or not. Who's in the Finals? Who is an MVP candidate? Who has more All-NBA team nods? Please.

Everyone realizes he's not a great shooter - he showed all of us that during games 1 and 3 of the Finals. As for being clutch, every main player on every team takes the big shots, so every team has an arguably clutch shooter, hit or miss. Turnovers - show me a point guard who runs the break like Kidd does and doesn't have a high turnover count. Don't forget that some of his teammates can't handle his passes because they are sometimes not expecting it to even get to them. Kidd's defense is not overrated. Tony Parker's just super fast. Kidd's an all-league defender. That's not overrated. He is one of the best rebounding guards in the league. Yeah, he hangs out around the rim - he gets the ball as quickly as possible in order to start the break. Nothing wrong with that. Ever see the Nets without Kidd on the floor? It's ugly. Agreed though, Duncan and T-Mac are more important to their teams than Kidd is. Not by much at all, but they are. 

I'm saying that Kidd is not overrated. Why is he considered overrated? Because of the media coverage? Do you know why he gets that media coverage? Because he wins. Because he is a great player. Not because he whines when on a losing team. He's in the East. Oh damn well. He's also in the NBA Finals fighting for a championship. 



> Improving a team doesn't mean you can't be overrated, a lot of players improve their teams, but some get more credit then they should.


Please. If a player goes to a team and it changes their record by 26 wins, puts them in the top seed of a conference, and puts them in the NBA Finals for the first time in franchise history, he deserves all the credit in the world. This is a horrible argument.

This whole thread seems like some sour Suns fans lashing out. 

This thread is a joke. Anyone who thinks Stephon Marbury is a better basketball player than Jason Kidd should get his head checked.


----------



## Kmasonbx (Apr 7, 2003)

I'm not a Stephon Marbury fan nor a Suns fan, I just feel Marbury is better. Kidd has a lot of pros, he is a great defender, probably the best defensive guard in the league, best rebounder from the guard position, he's great in the open court, and gets the ball ahead faster than anyone else. But there are cons as well, he sometimes tries to get it ahead when there is nothing there, like there are times when his teammate is double teamed and he'll try and lob it between the defense, and these are unnecessary turnovers, he is only average in the halcourt, and he is a terrible jump shooter. While Marbury may not be as good as Kidd in the open court, or on defense, he is good in both areas. Marbury has no big weakness, while Kidd has a huge weakness, which allows teams who are great on defense to neutralize him. 

Kidd is overrated, because of the media hype he gets, and the fact that some people consider him a top 5 player in the league. He didn't receive any of these accolades before he went to the weak east, and he is no better a player now than he was in Phoenix 2 years ago. I think there are 3 people who are definitely more important to their team than Kidd, Duncan, Garnett, and Iverson. While you can make the argument that T Mac and Pierce are more valuable than Kidd.


----------



## Marbury 4 Life (Apr 9, 2003)

jason kidd is the worst shooting point guard in the NBA.....period



i would take marbury in a second over kidd....i would take payton over kidd in a second



kidd is overrated and all you new jersey fans need to realize that


----------



## digital jello (Jan 10, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Marbury 4 Life</b>!
> jason kidd is the worst shooting point guard in the NBA.....period
> 
> 
> ...


I'd just like to point out this poster's screen name. Enough said. :laugh:


----------



## BizzyRipsta (May 25, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>digital jello</b>!
> OK, this thread is officially polluted with Suns/Marbury fans.
> 
> I'm a JKidd fan and a Marbury fan. I have seen both at work in NJ and Phoenix. Jason Kidd is a better player than Stephon Marbury. He has accomplished more in his career, circumstances or not. Who's in the Finals? Who is an MVP candidate? Who has more All-NBA team nods? Please.
> ...


digital jello, you deserve a round of applause :clap:

and a thumb up! :greatjob:


----------



## JerryWest (Jun 24, 2002)

"Turnovers - show me a point guard who runs the break like Kidd does and doesn't have a high turnover count. Don't forget that some of his teammates can't handle his passes because they are sometimes not expecting it to even get to them. Kidd's defense is not overrated. Tony Parker's just super fast. "

If Kidd was supposedly such a great passer, wouldn't he be better then? Wouldn't he have a assist/turnover ratio better than 2:1 in the playoffs?

You claim he is a better passer yet at the same time you claim it's only normal that players that run get lots of turnovers. So what is it: Is he a better passer, who just happens to be average when it comes to accuracy and turnovers? 
Or is he just an above average passer who gets more credit for his passing ability because he can't shoot?

Part of passing is to pass when your teammates expect it, I could throw a behind the back pass hitting my teammates head when he's looking at the rim, boxing out, doesn't mean it's a great pass.

The funniest phrase is about Kidd's D not being overrated and how Parker is just fast.

Well you know what, part of being a good defensive PG is keeping up with the guy your supposed to defend.

Derek Fisher puts lots of effort into defending but gets burned by faster PG, do we say he is a great defender? No. We say he isn't quick enough and make fun of him. Fundamentally, Fisher would be a great defender, if only he were quicker. yet, we don't consider him a great defender when he gets burned.

Why is there a different standard for Kidd, he get's burned again and again, and you say "Tony Parker is just super fast"

You state Kidd's horrible shooting nonchalantly as if it doesn't change how we should perceive Kidd. Well it does, when other players shoot horribly, they get "rated lower." Why is there an exception for Kidd. He's one of, if not the worse shooting PG in the league, and you state it as if it doesn't matter.

Kidd is a great player, but when judged by the SAME STANDARDS as other players, he is vastly overrated. His faults are just ignored, while his strengths are over accentuated. He might be the best PG in the league, but is FAR from clear cut unless you give him bonus points for his strengths, while completely ignoring his faults as a player.


----------



## Kmasonbx (Apr 7, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>KennethTo</b>!
> 
> Kidd is a great player, but when judged by the SAME STANDARDS as other players, he is vastly overrated. His faults are just ignored, while his strengths are over accentuated. He might be the best PG in the league, but is FAR from clear cut unless you give him bonus points for his strengths, while completely ignoring his faults as a player.


This is absolute fact, people just ignore Kidd's faults, and only look at his positives, and judge him solely on that.


----------



## Amareca (Oct 21, 2002)

lol

This time it is Speedy Claxton driving by Jason Kidd as if he was a 400 pounder.

While Jason Kidd is blowing even layups on offense.

This reminds me of old times when Jason Kidd with Phoenix blew the biggest leads regularly against WC teams.


----------



## digital jello (Jan 10, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>BizzyRipsta</b>!
> digital jello, you deserve a round of applause :clap:
> 
> and a thumb up! :greatjob:


Thanks Bizzy, you know I have to keep it real and set it down straight for these haters.


----------



## TheRifleman (May 20, 2002)

I don't know why the Spurs shot such a low percentage - again. I suppose some of it is due to the defense by the Nets. They are a good defensive team this year. 

All even again. Makes for a GREAT series, doesn't it? :yes:


----------



## Pinball (Aug 3, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>TheRifleman</b>!
> I don't know why the Spurs shot such a low percentage - again. I suppose some of it is due to the defense by the Nets. They are a good defensive team this year.
> 
> All even again. Makes for a GREAT series, doesn't it? :yes:


Great series but pathetic basketball. Both teams are shooting a horrendous % and turning the ball over way too much.


----------



## Kmasonbx (Apr 7, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Pinball</b>!
> 
> 
> Great series but pathetic basketball. Both teams are shooting a horrendous % and turning the ball over way too much.


You said it, I hope these two teams never meet in the Finals again. This is just pathetic. You can't have two great defensive teams, it makes for ugly basketball. I think for the Spurs to dominate in the future they need either Jackson or Ginobili to become a 17 ppg scorer, so they can have 3 big threats on offense.


----------



## 33 (Nov 18, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Kmasonbx</b>!
> 
> 
> You said it, I hope these two teams never meet in the Finals again. This is just pathetic. You can't have two great defensive teams, it makes for ugly basketball. I think for the Spurs to dominate in the future they need either Jackson or Ginobili to become a 17 ppg scorer, so they can have 3 big threats on offense.


Who is the second big threat on offense for the Spurs, I hope you are not talking about Parker.


----------



## Kmasonbx (Apr 7, 2003)

I'm talking about the future, Parker could become a threat, but mainly I'm talking about either Brand and Jermaine O'neal.


----------



## twothree (May 29, 2003)

I agree. Kidd is very good but he has as much overhype as any one. Even his bad passes in the finals they are complimenting. He is terrible in the half court game. His shot is terrible.Last night they cleared it out for kidd at the end of the game. Parker was guarding him. He could break him down. I can think of ten pgs who would blow by him. Marbury would have gone past him 2x and then scored. You switch Kidd and put iverson on the Nets and they easily win it all.


----------



## MightyReds2020 (Jul 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>twothree</b>!
> I agree. Kidd is very good but he has as much overhype as any one. Even his bad passes in the finals they are complimenting. He is terrible in the half court game. His shot is terrible.Last night they cleared it out for kidd at the end of the game. Parker was guarding him. He could break him down. I can think of ten pgs who would blow by him. Marbury would have gone past him 2x and then scored. You switch Kidd and put iverson on the Nets and they easily win it all.


Do you guys NOT realized that Kidd's job is to set teammates up, not getting all the points himself??? It's not Kidd's fault if his teammates can't hit a wide-open shot. Do you guys also NOT realized that Kidd was never a great one-on-one player, and his impact extent to every other aspect of the game, not like some other PGs when you take their scoring out, they have nothing else to offer (sorry Tony!).

Do you guys NOT know that even Kidd is a horrendous shooter, Spurs were still double-teamming him everytime he post-up on Tony or Speedy???

Like I said before Kidd could be overrated to some extent but every star gets same hypes. It is not his fault that if someone overhyped him. He is THE best PG in the league at this moment hands down!


----------



## 33 (Nov 18, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>MightyReds2020</b>!
> 
> 
> Do you guys NOT realized that Kidd's job is to set teammates up, not getting all the points himself??? It's not Kidd's fault if his teammates can't hit a wide-open shot. Do you guys also NOT realized that Kidd was never a great one-on-one player, and his impact extent to every other aspect of the game, not like some other PGs when you take their scoring out, they have nothing else to offer (sorry Tony!).
> ...




I believe this sums it up:

"I would still go after (Jason) Kidd, no matter how well Tony (Parker) is playing. This has nothing to do with Tony; if you have a chance to get the best player in the league at his position, you do it. The Lakers have dominated because they have the best center and the best shooting guard in the game. If the Spurs get Kidd, they'll have the best point and the best power forward. You have to do it."
—ESPN's David Aldridge
:yes:


----------



## rwj333 (Aug 10, 2002)

> You switch Kidd and put iverson on the Nets and they easily win it all.


doubtful.


----------



## Rodzilla (Mar 11, 2003)

twothree, while you are correct on guys being able to score better than kidd, you are wrong when you say kidd is overhyped. Kidd turned the nj nets franchise around single handedly. While he may not be the best shooter or scorer, he is the best true pg in at least the last 10 years. YOu need to think before you type twothree.


----------



## Kmasonbx (Apr 7, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Rodzilla</b>!
> Kidd turned the nj nets franchise around single handedly. While he may not be the best shooter or scorer, he is the best true pg in at least the last 10 years.


So players like Richard Jefferson and Kenyon Martin had nothing to do with it? Just remember, Jefferson wasn't on the team the year before Kidd came. Also Van Horn missed 33 games the season before and their starting center Todd MacCullough was on the Sixers. This is another example of why I say he is overrated, people give him too much credit. Sure he was the biggest reason for the Nets turn around but he was far from the only reason.

I think Stockton would have something to say about being the best pure point over the last 10 years.


----------



## BizzyRipsta (May 25, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Kmasonbx</b>!
> 
> 
> So players like Richard Jefferson and Kenyon Martin had nothing to do with it?


do you ever stop and wonder what kind of players they'd be if they had never played with kidd?


----------



## Kmasonbx (Apr 7, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>BizzyRipsta</b>!
> 
> 
> do you ever stop and wonder what kind of players they'd be if they had never played with kidd?


I think the same way about Keith Van Horn, considering the worst year of his career was with Kidd at the point. I knew somebody would eventually say they wouldn't be the same players without him, please that is nonsense. They only benefit from Kidd in the open court, Richard Jefferson is solely an open court player. Kenyon Martin is developing into one of the premier players in the league, and that would have happened with or without Kidd, but as all Kidd fans will say, nobody knows for sure how good K Mart would be now if he didn't play with Kidd. Just remember Kidd has nothing to do with his improved post moves, and his vast improvement on the glass. 

If Kidd makes players so much better why has Shawn Marion become a better player over the last 2 seasons? The fact is Kidd makes players better in the open court but not in the half court.


----------



## Amareca (Oct 21, 2002)

Keith Van Horn had his best years playing with Marbury with Kidd he got worse.

And people should stop about calling PGs like Marbury and others shoot first while Payton and Kidd are true PGs.

Jason Kidd in the first half today took twice as many shots as any other Net and has only 2 assists 2 turnovers.


----------

