Better career - Iverson or Kidd?

[BRHornet45]

you have offense vs defense.

i agree that kidd vs nash is more appropriate. pound for pound, AI was the toughest little man to ever play, but kidd is far more valuable.

son even Nash blows Kidd out the water .... Jason Kidd is arguably the most overrated "star" player of all time. easily in the top 5 most overrated players out there.

[JamStone]

Maybe Iverson will be remembered more by the SportsCenter set for the style of his game, but I think the question is who had a better career? What matters in the NBA in my opinion is who maximized their talents and contributed to winning, and I think Kidd has Iverson beat by a mile. Coaches, players, scouts and front-office execs will conclude that Kidd had the better career.

What matters in the NBA like in all pro sports is winning championships. Neither player did that. And, maximizing talents doesn't matter in the NBA. Jerome Williams maximized his talents more than Tracy McGrady. Did JYD have a better career than T-Mac?

Your opinion that Kidd beats Iverson by a mile is just that, an opinion. Just like my opinion differs from that. Kidd throughout his career was on better teams. One could easily argue Iverson did more with much less, for most of his career.

If you ask coaches, players, scouts, and front office execs, I believe most would conclude that Iverson had the better career. There will be some that would say Kidd, but I think most would say Iverson.

Iverson has made a career out of shooting 9-26 every night for mediocre Philly squads. Kidd will be remembered mostly for turning around a terrible franchise.

Bill Russell shot 44% from the field as a center. It's about winning, right? Iverson 42.5% as a 6 foot guard. Shooting 9-for-26 is what Iverson had to do on most of those Philly teams because his teammates couldn't help him out. He shot close to 46% from the field while at Denver when he had teammates who could also score. However, Detroit was admittedly an unmitigated disaster. It's not about his shooting. He was a 28 PPG performer throughout his career. Jason Kidd is a 40.2% FG shooter, you know. Allen shot a lot because that was required of him most of his career.

If the East was such a joke in 2002 and 2003, how come the Sixers couldn't duplicate their 2001 success? Especially since AI should get credit for lifting a bunch of "scrubs" to the Finals in 2001? Since the East was weaker, why should we be more impressed by the Sixers going fishing early while the Nets were runner-ups both years?

Because the Sixers weren't that good to begin with. Remember, their second best player was Aaron McKie. Kidd had Kenyon Martin and Richard Jefferson on those Finals Nets squads. The only reason the Sixers were ever even remotely a contender in the early 2000s was because of Iverson.

It was more impressive for Philly because that Philly team relied so much on Iverson, especially offensively. Jason Kidd was the best player on those Nets teams, but he did have much better help in K-Mart, Van Horn, RJ, and Kerry Kittles. If Kerry Kittles was the second best player on those Nets teams, then it would have been more impressive than Iverson carrying the Sixers to the Finals in 2001.

[sonic21]

Jamstone, why do you think Iverson had the better career? He went far in the playoffs only 1 time. He scores a lot but for a guy who attacks the paint so much he should have a better FG%.

He's more talented but that's about it.

[JamStone]

career FG 42%

and he's basically a scorer

He's a scorer who has a career 27 PPG, which is like 6th all time in the history of the league.

That's like remarking how Jason Kidd is one of the best play-making point guards of all time, but criticizing the fact that he is in the top 15 in NBA history in turnovers per game.

[JamStone]

Jamstone, why do you think Iverson had the better career? He went far in the playoffs only 1 time. He scores a lot but for a guy who attacks the paint so much he should have a better FG%.

He's more talented but that's about it.

Better talent. In my opinion, better statistics. When he did go far in the playoffs, he took a team of scrubs. Kidd actually had good teammates and decent teams when he went to the NBA Finals. Iverson didn't. Iverson did more with less. He was the more dominant player, in my opinion.

That's why I believe he had the better career.

[BRHornet45]

anyone with a brain who understands the game of basketball will tell you that Kidd is absolutely nowhere near as good as Iverson. Kidd is a God awful shooter and is barely averaging 13 points per game over his career. Kidd is not and never was a difference maker for a team. at one point in his career he was an EXCELLENT role player, but those days are LONG gone.

Kidd needs to be thankful this holiday season for all of the great scorers he has had around him to make him look better than he really is.

[Findog]

What matters in the NBA like in all pro sports is winning championships. Neither player did that. And, maximizing talents doesn't matter in the NBA. Jerome Williams maximized his talents more than Tracy McGrady. Did JYD have a better career than T-Mac?

We're not comparing Jerome Williams to T-Mac, are we? Or any other role player to a superstar? We're talking about two guys that were franchise players (Nets and Sixers respectively), with their primes roughly coinciding, and I'm more impressed with Kidd's resume than Iverson's.

Kidd throughout his career was on better teams. One could easily argue Iverson did more with much less, for most of his career.

He also made his teammates better by his unselfishness and the way he got them the ball where they wanted. Iverson dominated the ball and played 1-on-5. You tell me what is more conducive to winning.

f you ask coaches, players, scouts, and front office execs, I believe most would conclude that Iverson had the better career. There will be some that would say Kidd, but I think most would say Iverson.

What is your criteria for "better career?"

Bill Russell shot 44% from the field as a center. It's about winning, right?

He's also arguably the greatest defensive player of all-time, and he shot 44% from the field in an era where that didn't stand out as a low fg %. Tell me what Iverson contributed on the defensive end of the floor.

He shot close to 46% from the field while at Denver when he had teammates who could also score.

And the Nuggets struggled to make the playoffs. With Billups in his place, they actually run an offense and made it to the conference finals. They put up a much better fight against the Lakers than they did with Iverson.

Jason Kidd is a 40.2% FG shooter, you know

He was also a triple-double machine that was a of a defender in his prime.

Because the Sixers weren't that good to begin with. Remember, their second best player was Aaron McKie. Kidd had Kenyon Martin and Richard Jefferson on those Finals Nets squads. The only reason the Sixers were ever even remotely a contender in the early 2000s was because of Iverson.

But by your own criteria, the East was even weaker the next two years, even with the Nets in the picture.

It was more impressive for Philly because that Philly team relied so much on Iverson, especially offensively. Jason Kidd was the best player on those Nets teams, but he did have much better help in K-Mart, Van Horn, RJ, and Kerry Kittles. If Kerry Kittles was the second best player on those Nets teams, then it would have been more impressive than Iverson carrying the Sixers to the Finals in 2001

I think two Finals trips is more impressive than one, especially since there would be no sneaking up on teams the second time around.

[Findog]

He's a scorer who has a career 27 PPG, which is like 6th all time in the history of the league.

And how efficient was he at scoring? If a guy scores 40 points on 40 shot attempts, did he have a good game?

[BRHornet45]

And how efficient was he at scoring? If a guy scores 40 points on 40 shot attempts, did he have a good game?

dude Iverson put up 14 more points per game over his career than Kidd has. Its even more impressive that Iverson still shot the ball better than Kidd did on 10 more shot attempts! (Iverson 425%, Kidd 400%)

[Findog]

anyone with a brain who understands the game of basketball will tell you that Kidd is absolutely nowhere near as good as Iverson.

Kidd is a God awful shooter and is barely averaging 13 points per game over his career.

Way more to basketball than just scoring.

Kidd is not and never was a difference maker for a team.

Tell that to the Nets. They seemed to have a remarkable turnaround after getting an "excellent role player."

[Findog]

dude Iverson put up 14 more points per game over his career than Kidd has. Its even more impressive that Iverson still shot the ball better than Kidd did on 10 more shot attempts! (Iverson 425%, Kidd 400%)

Kidd's job wasn't to go 9-26 from the floor while his teammates stood around and watched, then do nothing on defense except for recklessly play the passing lanes for steals and hope his teammates covered for him. Kidd's job was to run an offense by getting everybody involved and then check his man defensively on the other end.

[BRHornet45]

Way more to basketball than just scoring.





Tell that to the Nets. They seemed to have a remarkable turnaround after getting an "excellent role player."

LOL idiot I'm not even a Republican. I just think Sarah Palin is sexy hence the sig ...

oh and son you're right. there is a lot more to basketball than scoring, but Kidd absolutely sucks at scoring and he deserves to be criticized for it. Stop being a fan boy for one damn day and open your eyes to see the truth.

[Findog]

LOL idiot I'm not even a Republican. I just think Sarah Palin is sexy hence the sig ...

Your arguments make about as much sense are your typical Palinite teabagger.

oh and son you're right. there is a lot more to basketball than scoring, but Kidd absolutely sucks at scoring and he deserves to be criticized for it.

Of course he does. He never developed a mid-range game that would've taken his game to another level. But the question is was he a better player and did he have a better career than Iverson, and I think it's pretty clear cut that he did.

[BRHornet45]

Your arguments make about as much sense are your typical Palinite teabagger.



Of course he does. He never developed a mid-range game that would've taken his game to another level. But the question is was he a better player and did he have a better career than Iverson, and I think it's pretty clear cut that he did.

LMAO!!! WOW, JUST WOW! ... son your shameless and downright ignorant favoritism towards Kidd is embarrassing. stop now for your own sake.

I GUARANTEE you if Allen Iverson was wearing a Maverick's uniform instead of Kidd, you would be singing a different tune.

[Findog]

LMAO!!! WOW, JUST WOW! ... son your shameless and downright ignorant favoritism towards Kidd is embarrassing. stop now for your own sake.

Favoritism towards Kidd?

I GUARANTEE you if Allen Iverson was wearing a Maverick's uniform instead of Kidd, you would be singing a different tune

I'm glad he didn't, because Dirk would've never been able to develop into the player he is with Iverson hogging all the shots. And you'd be arguing Kidd > Iverson if you didn't have such a stick up your ass when it comes to all things Mavs and their fans.

[BRHornet45]

Favoritism towards Kidd?



I'm glad he didn't, because Dirk would've never been able to develop into the player he is with Iverson hogging all the shots. And you'd be arguing Kidd > Iverson if you didn't have such a stick up your ass when it comes to all things Mavs and their fans.

son Dirk gets damn near half his points GIVEN to him from the free throw line so he would have been just fine.

[Findog]

son Dirk gets damn near half his points GIVEN to him from the free throw line so he would have been just fine.

Do you have any good points to make? Jamstone is just as wrong as you are, but I can at least intellectually respect what he is trying to say.

[BRHornet45]

Do you have any good points to make? Jamstone is just as wrong as you are, but I can at least intellectually respect what he is trying to say.

lol son you're too much of a homer to see past the FACTS. now bow down, you just got owned.

[Findog]

lol son you're too much of a homer to see past the FACTS. now bow down, you just got owned.

[baseline bum]

Kidd easily. People forget how good he was before screwing his knee.

[monosylab1k]

At the height of their primes, Iverson was a better talent and player than Kidd.

Over the course of their entire careers, however, I think you've gotta go with Kidd. Kidd is ending his career pretty gracefully, still being a very effective player. Iverson's career is ending about as well as the anic's.

[mavs>spurs2]

anyone with a brain who understands the game of basketball will tell you that Kidd is absolutely nowhere near as good as Iverson. Kidd is a God awful shooter and is barely averaging 13 points per game over his career. Kidd is not and never was a difference maker for a team. at one point in his career he was an EXCELLENT role player, but those days are LONG gone.

Kidd needs to be thankful this holiday season for all of the great scorers he has had around him to make him look better than he really is.

Of course you would feel that way, Jason Kidd is half white

[Basketballgirl25]

son even Nash blows Kidd out the water .... Jason Kidd is arguably the most overrated "star" player of all time. easily in the top 5 most overrated players out there.

I agree I found Kidd overrated even when he was on the Nets, when he first went to them I didn't like him

[monosylab1k]

20 years from now, we'll still be talking about AI. Kidd may get a mention here and there, but he hasn't had the same impact on the league like Iverson has.

I agree that AI has had a bigger impact, but not on the basketball court. Absolutely not on the basketball court.

AI, fairly or not, will be remembered much more for ushering in the "tatted up thug" era of basketball than anything he did on the court.

[mavs>spurs2]

Jason Kidd had a MAJOR impact on his teams overall during his prime years, in a way that didn't show up on ESPN's top 10 dunks highlights. That's why he's underappreciated by the dumbasses.