In their primes, who do you take: Nash or Jkidd

[TheNig]

Kobe

 

[feelosofer]

I think Nash played at a higher level....but for only a very short time.

with that being said, I would take Kidd, as he was able to play at a higher level for a longer time.


Nash's 3-4 best years were just as good or better than Kidds 3-4 best years, but overall Kidd had the better career.

This.

I would take Jason Kidd btw. But with todays new NBA, Nash would be even better than he was in his prime.

 

[No Homo]

To answer this question its pretty important and creates an instant advantage.. First off it gives your team extra possessions and opportunities to score.. Secondly it really stimulates the fast break and can lead to easy transition points down the floor. Because the rebounder is the primary ball handler, so it takes away the need of DeAndre Jordan making an outlet pass that can possibly be a turnover...

Just watch Russell Westbrook for an example..

Kidd was a master of that in NJ..its what made them so dangerous because once he got the ball everyone was down court because they knew he'd make the right pass

 

[yseJ]

Good thing the topic title says IN THEIR PRIMES

I missed that, tru story

 

[MarloStanTrill]

To build a team around

Mike Vick in his prime >>>>>>>>> and i know its a different sport

 

[Reggie]

Don't overvalue rebounding just because it's a traditional stat. Kidd's rebounding ability (he'd often grab uncontested rebounds or rebounds off his teammates) didn't have too much of an impact on the game. He was hardly ever a player that actually crashed the boards/grabbed contested rebounds. In fact he'd sometimes fall guilty of leaving his defensive assignment to go looking for boards.

This is the problem when dudes evaluate talent in basketball. It's not some comparison checklist where you get one point for being a better rebounder, one point for being a better shooter/scorer, one point for being a better passer etc etc. It's how much impact you have on the game based on your strengths (no matter how large or minimal they may be). Nash's ability to run an all-time great offense and score with the best guards in the game on insanely high efficiency had more impact than Kidd's 'defense, rebounding, making players better, scoring an average amount of points on low efficiency and intangibles' overrun narrative.

How can you say that when Kidd pretty much had more success than Nash and you act like Kidd wouldn't have averaged like 15 assists a game in that Suns system. And when your rebounding leads to second chance points and fastbreak points then it cant be overvalued. Kidd was just as impactful on the court as Nash without the jumper so I don't think there's anything wrong with me saying I would take Kidd first. I fukk with Nash hard but he didn't turn into a superstar till he was 30. Kidd shined from day one in any system and with any coach for a longer period of time.

 

[Gil Scott-Heroin]

How can you say that when Kidd pretty much had more success than Nash and you act like Kidd wouldn't have averaged like 15 assists a game in that Suns system.

How did Kidd have more success?

Kidd didn't have the skillset/ability to average anywhere near 15 assists, certainly not in that "Suns system" - which is still one of the biggest misconceptions in basketball when discussing Nash's value and ability as a player. Kidd controlled the ball more than arguably any other player in the league during his time in Phoenix (not to mention playing 38-41 minutes a game), and the most he could average was 10.8, 10.1, 9.1 and 9.8 assists. Nash was out there averaging 11.6, 11.5, 11.4, 11.1 and 11.0 assists while only playing 32-35 minutes.

Nash was playing on average FIVE less minutes than Kidd, and still averaged more assists on roughly the same amount of touches per minute. This is all without mentioning Nash ran some of the greatest offenses this league has ever seen when he was given free rein, when Kidd was given free rein - he was either orchestrating league-average or league-bad offenses.

And when your rebounding leads to second chance points and fastbreak points then it cant be overvalued.

Of course it can be, because you don't need the rebound to initiate transition offense. In the grand scheme of things, his rebounds had no significant impact on the game. Nash was able to generate more points either for himself or for his team on the fast break or within the first third of the shotclock than Kidd could have EVER imagined, yet he didn't need to grab the rebound to do this. Some of y'all need to change your belief systems in basketball and stop overvaluing traditional stats as if they're the basis of impact.

Kidd was just as impactful on the court as Nash without the jumper so I don't think there's anything wrong with me saying I would take Kidd first.

There's nothing wrong with you taking Kidd over Nash - if he's your personal preference. There is something wrong with you when you claim Kidd has just as much impact as Nash did. He simply didn't. Reality tells a completely different story.

I fukk with Nash hard but he didn't turn into a superstar till he was 30.

Age 26 - 15.6 ppg on 48% shooting, 7.3 assists (first season he was the fulltime starter in Dallas)
Age 27 - 17.9 ppg on 48% shooting, 7.7 assists (again, in Dallas)
Age 28 - 17.7 ppg on 46% shooting, 7.3 assists (again, in Dallas)
Age 29 - 14.5 ppg on 47% shooting, 8.8 assists (again, in Dallas)

His rise to superstardom was less about Phoenix's system (he actually was the system, but that's another argument altogether), and more about he was allowed more freedom on offense and his career-arc (being a late bloomer) when he left Dallas.

Kidd shined from day one in any system and with any coach for a longer period of time.

Kidd did not shine in every system he played in. Complete revisionism.

 

[Gil Scott-Heroin]

The glorifying of Kidd's rebounding prowess is funny. I mean, yeah he may have been a great rebounder but how important is a rebounding point guard? I'll take the guard that revolutionized the offensive game over a point guard that can grab rebounds

To answer this question its pretty important and creates an instant advantage.. First off it gives your team extra possessions and opportunities to score.. Secondly it really stimulates the fast break and can lead to easy transition points down the floor. Because the rebounder is the primary ball handler, so it takes away the need of DeAndre Jordan making an outlet pass that can possibly be a turnover...

Just watch Russell Westbrook for an example..

i) Kidd's rarely ever gave his team extra possessions because he'd grab what were initially nondescript rebounds - either uncontested, weakside or he'd grab them off his teammates. He'd also often leave his defensive assignment early to go looking for rebounds, instead of staying on his man.
ii) You don't need to grab the rebound to "stimulate" the fast break - leading to easy transition points. I said in my post above, Nash generated more points for himself and for his team than Kidd could have EVER imagined on the fastbreak or within the first third of the shotclock, yet he only averaged around half the rebounds that Kidd did. I mean what tangible results came from Kidd grabbing rebounds in NJ? For all those extra opportunities to score, his team had average to bad offenses and he was a terribly inefficient scorer.

Using Westbrook as an example is completely disingenuous (despite the fact that he too leaves his defensive assignment early sometimes looking for rebounds instead of staying on his man). Not only does he actually grab contested rebounds and bangs with bigs on the glass, but he's the best fastbreak player in the league - something that Kidd was far from. Westbrook is running down the floor taking it to the rim or attracting multiple defenders due to being a constant threat to score and finding open players. The opposite ran true for Kidd when he'd ran the break. And again, Westbrook still runs the fast break with the same results when he DOESN'T get the rebound; he positions himself to get the pass either in close proximity or down the court (depending on who grabs the rebound) and runs the floor.

Points are not generated from who grabs the rebound, they're generated by what one does on the break. Nash is a prime example of this - positioning himself to get the ball from a teammate and looking to score or finding an open player due to the threat of him attracting players (awareness of shooting ability) when he runs down the floor. He didn't need to grab rebounds to run some of the best [and fast paced] offenses this league has ever seen.

 

[Here Comes the Pain]

Jason kidd could take you to the finals.

 

[Gil Scott-Heroin]

It makes sense that you Stan guards that make 3s and don't guard anyone

I stan new and better ways of how the game is played. I don't allow myself to be overtaken by xenophobia like some people do.

 

[Gil Scott-Heroin]

Jason kidd could take you to the finals.

Would Nash and the Suns be able to make it to the Finals in the East during the early '00s?

 

[Consumed]

I will never understand why Nash's defense or lackthereof gets roasted but never Kidd's shytty finishing or erratic jumpshooting ability. Both were hugely detrimental to the offenses he led in New Jersey, and he's being compared to a guy who produced a shot chart like this while orchestrating some of the GOAT offenses in league history

 

[Here Comes the Pain]

Would Nash and the Suns be able to make it to the Finals in the East during the early '00s?

We'll never know to be honest.

 

[Gil Scott-Heroin]

If "nash was the system" then why wasnt he a superstar in dallas? Why did he have better stats at age 36 than he did at 26?

Because i) he was still growing as a player and didn't have the opportunity to shine - he didn't become a fulltime starter until he was 26 ii) Phoenix allowed him to freelance and push the pace more to his liking. You starting to sound like those dudes who use the "system" narrative against Curry breh.

 

[MrWestGrand]

Jason Kidd is 3rd NBA all time career leader of triple doubles, and at cats actually thinking Nash was even close to his level.