D'Antoni gives you more offensive freedom, and the line of utilizing the spread and executing within the first third of the shot clock. Basically Kidd had the same freedom and will to do the same in NJ, yet because he couldn't score on efficient volume and would often not look to score - it crippled their offense. So far all you've done is type out one/two line responses without any notable reference or #s to back up your stance - what exactly is your end game?
Couldn't score but had more team success over the years than Nash and took a team to two Finals. Don't need references or numbers when I watched both play in their prime. That's you new age cats problems. Worrying about numbers and talking points instead of looking at the actual game.
Nash won two MVPs, had considerably better team records, win percentages and played better competition during his prime. Kidd went to the Finals in the East during its worst ever period. Those Suns squads would stroll into the Finals season after season after season in the East. Those Nets squads would be lucky to make it out of the first round in the West. Nash led multiple all-time great offenses with all types of different skillsets and talent; Kidd could barely orchestrate a league average offense.
You clearly didn't, else you wouldn't have brought up all these casual fan talking points in this thread with little to no context.
The irony.
Act like Nash didn't play on stacked team with Hall of Fame caliber players pretty much his whole career. You are worried about who led a better offense. I am worried about who was the better player. And again other then shooting the basketball there is nothing that Steve Nash does better on the court then Kidd. Not saying that's not a hell of a skill but Steph is a better shooter then Jordan ever could dream of. Doesn't mean I am taking him over MJ when prime Jordan just like Kidd did so many other things on the court. We can to back and forth all day but you are one of the few that believe that Nash is better. More power to you for that.
Act like Nash didn't lead a top-10 offense of the modern era with Raja Bell, Marion, Diaw and Kurt Thomas brehs. Act like Nash wasn't the main reason those Suns squads had all-time great offenses brehs. Act like Nash's offensive impact didn't outweigh Kidd's 'overall' impact brehs.
He ran a better offense, better scorer, more efficient and pretty much did everything better on offense, by a significant margin.
The problem with this is, Jordan has similar offensive impact to Curry - Kidd does not have similar offensive impact to Nash, by any stretch of the imagination.
Again, Kidd's rebounding ability had minimal impact on the game. Yeah he grabbed more defensive rebounds than Nash, so what? A large majority of them were uncontested weakside boards, and it wasn't like he was doing anything with the ball to a higher degree than Nash was either. Nash didn't need to grab the rebound to position himself to get the ball and run down the floor and execute the offense in the first third of the shotclock.
The were basically equals as passers, but Nash knew and had the ability to run a fluid, effective offense. Kidd did not.
He was, by a decent margin too. But again, you can only have so much impact on the defensive end from the PG position. A margin that he didn't make up for on the offensive end.
What the hell does this even mean?
If you put prime Dirk Finley Van Exel on the Mavs with Kidd you don't think he leads an elite offense without having to score a point at all. Not to mention those Suns teams with Amare Marion Bell etc. Come on now. Those Nets teams weren't Juggernauts cause they didn't have great scorers like Nash's team did. You keep harping on his offense when his numbers overall are just as good as Nash's. True he didn't have the greatest jumper or field goal percentage but to say he didn't impact the offensive end is a farce. You acting like he is Rubio out there. Maybe his first couple of years he was. But prime Kidd was a threat and more then adequate on the offensive end.
Depends on what his role is. If he's dominating the ball like he did in NJ and during his prime - no he wouldn't. If you anchor the offense, you need to be able to score in order to have an elite offense. Half the reason Rondo still can't, even despite playing with Cousins and Gay; while playing at the fastest pace in the league. Put any good PG who can score efficiently (and be a threat of one) on that Kings squad with that offensive pacing and they'd have an elite offense.
Did you seriously just mention Raja Bell, as if he was some great offensive player?
All the great offensive teams that Nash led, didn't all have great scorers on them either. Nash had to pick up his scoring output on those teams. Which again you're not acknowledging that Nash was by far the better scorer.
He averaged 14 ppg on 39%/40% during his prime on low volume - he was not a threat on the offensive end. Sure he was a gifted passer and had great vision, but he didn't have the scoring ability to go along with it, which you need to have if you're going to anchor the offense. Prime example is Rondo, for all his assists and "points he creates", don't mean shyt at the end of the day because they don't make the offense better.
