Their offense was shytty because of Kidd, not because they had shytty players. And if I'm not mistaken, isn't one of the biggest talking points surrounding Kidd, that he makes players better? Why didn't he turn those "shytty" players into players that weren't shytty? And his "shytty" teammates still doesn't explain his less than stellar individual scoring #s?He played with shytty players
They actually weren't that bad, the problem was, Kidd would control the ball too much in halfcourt sets (not in halfbreak situations) and teams would hardly ever double him knowing his 9/10 pass tendency - shrinking the space his teammates had to play with - compounding already somewhat-average offensive players into looking worse than they actually were (which really throws cold water on the fact 'he made his teammates better').
There's no doubting he did know his team's strengths, his BBIQ has always been off the charts, but he didn't exactly always play to them because of his limited scoring/shooting ability. The defense really covered up a lot of his flaws, I mean the offense was going through its nine lives during that 2001-2007 period (not to mention the pace nearly grinding to a halt) and the defense continued to stand the test of time. Other than the Spurs, I don't think a franchise had a more formidable defense than NJ for the better half of the 2000s.
It was a perfect all-around scenario for Kidd. If he stayed in Phoenix, he would've been washed out to sea every single season in the playoffs. There'd be no romanticizing of this 'great floor general', that makes teammates better, because he would've remained the poster boy for first round exits.
