Reply With Quote
My name is SynicFan...
and I approve that message!
QFT. I think AJ wasn't the problem, so a big turnaround for them is going to be required to convince me.
Not surprised that Kerr didn't hire AJ. There were a lot of Spurs that didn't like David and AJ always trying to turn everything into a prayer meeting.
My name is SynicFan...
and I approve that message!
Kidd is one of the best defensive PGs and the best rebounding PG in the league.
Why would the Bulls hire Skiles 2.0 after all the reports of the players tuning him out and wanting a more free-flowing guy like D'Antoni? I don't get the Vinny hire but I can see why they didn't hire Avery.
Avery was on ESPN the other day, making sure to tell the world that it is HIS CHOICE he wants a year or two off. Even though he was very interested in the Bulls job after they got the first pick. According to him, he didn't really pursue anything. Translation: no one wanted him.
I think Avery is a horribly overrated coach and Carlisle was a great pick up. I don't think dumping Avery makes the Mavs better b/c their roster sucks but it is a move in the right direction.
The quote reads "People are fixated on my age and my jump shot...I swear – if you don’t put my name in an article and you just put '35 and inconsistent shooter,’ somebody’s going to say, 'That’s Jason."
his rebounding and defensive skills were not in question...
his AGE and SHOOTING were.
im aware. but for his lack in shooting (which Nash does extremely well), he plays defense and rebounds (which Nash does not do well). id say it balances. besides, what wins championships? shooting? or defense and rebounding?
stfu
A better analogy would be would you rather have: a person with bad credit, or a person who doesn't even know how credit works.
I gotcha.
Hey, no center alignment or larger size.
I wouldn't expect it to be a common occurrence if I were you.Hey, no center alignment or larger size.
They both do have good b-ball left in them, but there are certain aspects of their games that their age affects (positively and negatively):
-Nash has the back problem
-Kidd has lost a small step due to his microfracture surgery and age;
-Kidd can't take people off the dribble like he could earlier in his career, so his inconsistent jumper becomes more of a liability;
-Nash is obviously the better shooter, but has trouble with bigger, more physical defenders and he's also lost some of his quickness due to age so he settles for jumpers more
-Both are craftier as a result of their experience in the league and their passing skills remain high
-Nash is a liability on the defensive end, while Kidd can defend bigger or smaller guards and is a much better rebounder
I haven't read many stories that say Kidd is broken down and done and nothing in his games last year led me to believe he was.
"They can’t blame that one on me. When I got there, the players all thought he was crazy. And he was."
When you got there, everyone thought you were a piece of and you are Jason.
When Avery took over he was exactly what the Mavs needed. Nelson we all know is a softer coach who does not preach Defense. He got them further than Nelson ever did and you guys did have an epic 67 win season. Problem with the Mavs was and still is, they have very little leadership on the team. Dirk is not a great player because he can't lead.
So "inconsistent shot" doesn't apply to Nash. Thanks for agreeing.
The only thing defensive about Kidd is his at ude.
Dirk is not a great player? Seriously?
Take your lips off Avery's ass.
The biggest problem I saw with the Mavs is that they abandoned the defensive philosophy over the last 18 months to the point that they were the same chuck it up and allow a layup team that they were before AJ took over. Doesn't take much searching to come to a conclusion why the team didn't feel the need to tow the line with the coach.
And the sentence should be, "Dirk is not a winner because he can't lead." He's a great player, but he's a terrible leader. He doesn't even do it by example.
After the New Orleans series, this is definitely a myth, IMHO. Maybe earlier in his career, when he could run with the fastest guys out there, but not these days.
I couldn't agree more. Used to be a great defender, but today he's more like a decent defender, maybe above average.
Kidd is what he is, a great passer and rebounder but poor shooter and starting to lose his speed/quickness.
while he has obviously slowed down some, his defense is not bad at all. at the same time, what PG's in the league can stop Chris Paul? In fact, what individual players in the entire league can stop Chris Paul, other than himself? Thats an unfair way to judge Kidd.
how about answer this... how many great defensive PGs are in the league? how many PGs are better defenders than Kidd? i guarantee you wont be able to name very many at all. thats sometimes what bothers me about people bagging on PGs for defense. virtually NO point guards in the league are great defenders by any means. some of the better ones consist of Billups, Kidd, and Harris. but i mean Nash is obviously a poor defender. so is Parker. Deron and CP3 arent any better than Kidd. in fact CP3 pretty much relies solely on steals. AI is the same. Baron CAN play defense, but isnt consistent. but there really isnt any great defensive PGs, and the last one that we could really consider a great defensive PG is Jason Kidd.
your opinion is garbage anyways you have some of the worst takes on stuff like saying paul pierce is a finals mvp thus pierce >>> dirk, which anyone that knows what the they are talking about knows that is the worst reasoning ever. dirk almost singlehandedly won the le, with no other stars on his team. david stern had to stop him. not to mention he had much better compe ion than the celtics had (hawks, cavs, pistons, lakers). the spurs that year were better than all those teams combined. the suns would have beat all those teams as well. the grizzlies and heat werent exactly bad teams at all either, better than the hawks for sure. you clearly put minimal thought into your basketball takes.
Since you just said that Parker is a poor defender, it makes sense that you consider Kidd a great defender.
I mostly agree with you. I think Billups is the superior defender these days. I can't consider JKidd a 'great defensive PG' simply because he isn't anymore, regardless of wether any of the other PGs in the league are any good on D.
At least any of the other PGs will make you pay on the other end. If Kidd is not running a fast break, he just isn't really useful at all.
I think Parker & Kidd are both very similar defensively - subpar individual defenders but excellent at "team defense". But Parker has the obvious advantage of having Tim Duncan protecting the paint while Kidd has Dirk & Dampier which is basically no help at all.
Last edited by monosylab1k; 06-30-2008 at 09:44 PM.
Anyone who thinks Avery wasn't a problem for the Mavs did not watch much Mavs basketball this year. Obviously basketball is complex and he isn't the ONLY problem, they still have voids in low post scoring, shooting guards, and an athletic player on the wing that can slash and pass (J-Ho is a ballstopper, and can't do either), but it's definitely an upgrade now that Avery is gone.
What does "leadership" even mean when it comes to criticizing Dirk? the Golden State series aside, Dirk is a player whose productivity actually goes up in the playoffs. He averaged 26.8/12 on 48% shooting in the NO series, and is one of the most clutch players in the game.
The criticism of Dirk is nitpicking and jealousy. He's one of the 5-8 best players in the league, and gets criticized for not being one of the 2-3 best. He is who he is, one of the greatest PF's of all time albeit in an unconventional fashion.
If I recall correctly, PP's finals MVP wasn't the sole reason, but one of many reasons, why I said he's better than Dirk. Dirk never singlehandedly won a le, the MAVERICKS got screwed that year. Not the Dirk's, the MAVERICKS. That year, the pothead was an all star and didn't think he was too good to do the dirty work like playing D and grabbing boards. Terry was a borderline all star that year and a solid 3rd option. Stackhouse was one of the best 6th men in the league. Avery's iso offense worked because of all the offensive threats and slashers (Harris, All Star form Howard, Terry of 2 years ago, Daniels, 6th man of the year Stackhouse, etc.) and it was when he was fresh and the players hadn't started to tune him out yet. 2006 was a totally different ball game, and was far from being "The Dirk Show" as you remember it. Now you might not agree PP>Dirk, and that's fine, it's really a pretty close call, but don't stay butthurt 2 weeks later and hold a grudge and call my opinions "garbage" over it.
I say Kidd isn't a great defender but an "above average" one because of the way Paul, Parker, Williams, among others torch his ass the past 2 years. You can call that stupid if you want, but I'm not willing to stick my head in the sand and pretend all is well in Mav Land and our Knight in Shining Armor(Dirk) is going to come and rescue us.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions