Reply With Quote
Well Nash can't play a lick of defense. Plus we traded some contracts for Kidd. Kidd only has a year and a half on his contract so Dallas will get a lot of money than to bring more to the team and possibly sign Kidd for much cheaper.
I find it hilarious that Cuban thought Nash was too injury prone and old for the up-and-coming mavericks, but now he arranges a trade sending his youngest and best PG prospect away for what?
an injury prone and old point guard. whats the point? cubes didnt think about this one much did he? funny how much two let downs like the mavericks had can change one's mindset.
whats the difference? now hes chosen an even older point guard in hopes it will lead them to a championship. I look forward to seeing parker blaze past Kidd on defense.
Well Nash can't play a lick of defense. Plus we traded some contracts for Kidd. Kidd only has a year and a half on his contract so Dallas will get a lot of money than to bring more to the team and possibly sign Kidd for much cheaper.
Let's ask Kevin Johnson...
"He [Nash] was the third guard behind Jason Kidd and I when he broke in with the Suns in 1996. I said time and time again, he was by far the best point guard of the three of us, even then. In practice every day, he would drill us."
It continues to amuse me how overrated Harris has suddenly become on this board due to this trade and how underrated Kidd has become.
Trade is great for TP and Spurs.
But c'mon Kidd>>>>>>Harris.
His dumb ass signed contract year Dampier is what happened. He finally realized letting go of Nash was a bad idea so he went out and got the next best thing several years later. Kidd can still play some D but he couldn't even throw a pea in the ocean sitting in a boat if he tried. That being said he still has tons more balls and heart than Skirt Nowitski has. Good trade for the Mavs I guess.
Cuban chose the wrong time to be cheap. It's hindsight now but obviously Cuban would not have let Nash walk if he had a time machine. You know he's kicking himself for that one.
Probably one of the worst moves the Mavs organization ever made. With Nash, they probably would have had a ring or two by now.
The major difference is FG shooting, FT shooting and rebounding. Nash is way way better than Kidd as a shooter and scorer...and we all know what a brilliant rebounder Kidd is.
I think they are pretty similar passers but I do believe Nash is the better passer if I have to pick one...
Defensively, I'd go with Kidd, but believe it or not, Kidd is not that much better of a defensive player than Nash. Kidd makes all NBA D teams but it's not because of his man D...it's because he gets lots of steals and is a pretty smart team defender...but Nash might be the best PG in the NBA at drawing offensive fouls though. IOW, Kidd isn't as good as everyone says he is on D(and he wasn't even 5 years ago)....and Nash is actually better than he gets credit for. Kidd does get the edge because he actually does attempt to play D consistently.
But I've seen Nash flat out light Kidd up before...I've never seen Kidd really light Nash up...in fact Kidd has had some pretty lousy performances going up against Nash.
Overall, I say Nash is better.
I agree on most points, but I think you're oversimplifying just how much better Kidd is on defense and overstating how much worse he is on offense. let me explain.
I've never heard of an all-nba help defensive team. People who get voted in are usually pretty good at one on one coverage, too - something Nash simply cannot do. Drawing charges is all fine and dandy, but when it comes down to the fourth quarter and you need a stop, you can rely on Kidd still -- you could never rely on Nash.Defensively, I'd go with Kidd, but believe it or not, Kidd is not that much better of a defensive player than Nash. Kidd makes all NBA D teams but it's not because of his man D...it's because he gets lots of steals and is a pretty smart team defender...
On offense, Nash of course is a much better shooter. But Kidd CAN drain them, and I honestly think hes a better leader offensively when hes on the court than Nash. let's face it: nash has never been to the finals, while Kidd took an okay Jersey club and turned it into a contender. You can attribute some of that Kmart and the like, but cmon, that was Kidd's doing.
Can you see Nash taking a team to consecutive Finals appearances, even in the east?
All this said, they still are two aging pointguards with their last hopes of a championship dwindling as their last successful years fly by. Indeed, I think cuban should have thought twice about Nash and even moreso about Kidd. Hes just admitting that sending Nash away was idiotic now.
I didnt say anything about Harris being better than Kidd, just the fact if given more time to grow he could be a parker-like All-star talent. Now it'll have to be somewhere else, and I think in just a few short years the Mavericks are going to be wondering about this move and its impact on the future of their franchise - especially if they do not win a championship during that timespan.
Overall, I honestly feel glad being a spurs fan. Devin harris could be a spur killer at times and I dont see kidd doing to us what devin harris did.
If spurs played mavs right now, I'd say spurs in 6
No he really can't...in fact Nash does a better job of stopping him than he does of stopping Nash....check some of their matchups.
And Kidd begged off of Tony Parker in the 03 Finals...begged off of him, because 20 years Parker was whipping his ass. No Kidd is not a good man defender...not against other PG's. He's too slow for them. His defense is severely over-rated...severely.
Drain what, threes? Nash might be the best shooter in the NBA...he shoots @50% from the field, 40% from 3, 90% from the FT line...Nash is annually among the league leaders in every one of those catergories...especially for PG's. They are nowhere close to one another as shooters...not even close.On offense, Nash of course is a much better shooter. But Kidd CAN drain them,
I can attribute a great deal of it to the fact that Kidd played in the East. Since he was beaten both times he went to the finals by teams in the West...it's pretty easy to conclude that had the Nets been in the West, they wouldn't have made the finals either year...for they would have lost to the teams that beat them in the finals before making the finals...that would be LA in 02 and the Spurs in 03. In fact...I think they would have lost to quite a few teams in the West.and I honestly think hes a better leader offensively when hes on the court than Nash. let's face it: nash has never been to the finals, while Kidd took an okay Jersey club and turned it into a contender. You can attribute some of that Kmart and the like, but cmon, that was Kidd's doing.
At best, that argument is a push...and in fact, the Nash lead Mavs were much tougher than the Kidd lead Nets in 03...and that's not even taking into account that Dirk was injured for part of that series.
Actually I can....you drop these past few Suns teams in the EC of that era...and I could easily see them making the finals. ...I could see them making a run at 70 wins.Can you see Nash taking a team to consecutive Finals appearances, even in the east?
All this said, they still are two aging pointguards with their last hopes of a championship dwindling as their last successful years fly by. Indeed, I think cuban should have thought twice about Nash and even moreso about Kidd. Hes just admitting that sending Nash away was idiotic now.
I'll agree with that to an extent...but both of them are proving to have unusually long primes for PGs. I sure didn't think either one of them would still be playing at this level in their mid 30's...I damn sure didn't expect Nash to have his best seasons.
Personally? I'll enjoy Kidd having to defend Parker much more than I enjoyed Devin Harris doing it...Parker will smoke Kidd's ass and have Kidd begging for help...just like he did when Parker was the age of 20.
Last edited by whottt; 02-19-2008 at 06:17 AM.
First and only matchup: Kidd with 9pts, 4rebs, 8 assists, 6 TO
Nash with 13pts, 3 rebs, 9 assists, 3 TO
Nash plays an overall better game due to less turnovers, but I dont see how Nash "stopped" him (neither one of them had a steal, so you cant say he was causing turnovers on defense). Its actually pretty even.
Its severely overrated because he cant guard parker? Even back then, no one could keep up with him. His speed is something unique and its not just Kidd who cant guard him.And Kidd begged off of Tony Parker in the 03 Finals...begged off of him, because 20 years Parker was whipping his ass. No Kidd is not a good man defender...not against other PG's. He's too slow for them. His defense is severely over-rated...severely.
I can attribute a great deal of it to the fact that Kidd played in the East. Since he was beaten both times he went to the finals by teams in the West...it's pretty easy to conclude that had the Nets been in the West, they wouldn't have made the finals either year...for they would have lost to the teams that beat them in the finals before making the finals...that would be LA in 02 and the Spurs in 03. In fact...I think they would have lost to quite a few teams in the West.I knew this was coming, it's got to be the most cliche argument when comparing players in different conferences. It seriously enrages me because you cant just change around history in your head because you dont think it should have happened that way. Hey, what was Kidd supposed to do? Say "Hey, I'm in the east, lets not even have a finals? lets just give it to the west?" He competed with the seven other best teams in his conference and ended up on top -- are you just going to ignore that happening on back to back years?At best, that argument is a push...and in fact, the Nash lead Mavs were much tougher than the Kidd lead Nets in 03...and that's not even taking into account that Dirk was injured for part of that series.
This is a weak point in your argument. The fact is, Kidd had back to back finals appearances and managed to win two on our very own SPURS for s sake. You cant just write that off. Nash's Mavericks might have been more deserving or mentally stronger or physically more talented or whatever, but they didnt make the Finals. Kidd did not once but twice -- and consecutively. I doubt Nash inspires a run like that if you switch him and Kidd out in Jersey.
Additionally, I bolded the part where you say 'in fact.' This is because what you are saying in that sentence is not a fact, but your own opinion, which is much different than fact. You shouldn't mix the two. I find this particularly funny that you're saying Nash, who hasnt even been able to get to the Finals, was a tougher leader. The mavericks a tougher team, maybe, but Nash a tougher leader? Cmon.
Okay... you just lost me. Last I checked were talking about Kidd vs Nash, not the suns and all their players being moved to the eastern conference.Actually I can....you drop these past few Suns teams in the EC of that era...and I could easily see them making the finals. ...I could see them making a run at 70 wins.
All agreed on this last part.I'll agree with that to an extent...but both of them are proving to have unusually long primes for PGs. I sure didn't think either one of them would still be playing at this level in their mid 30's...I damn sure didn't expect Nash to have his best seasons.
Personally? I'll enjoy Kidd having to defend Parker much more than I enjoyed Devin Harris doing it...Parker will smoke Kidd's ass and have Kidd begging for help...just like he did when Parker was the age of 20.
Kidd made those all-D teams because he can guard bigger guards and snare rebounds. When he was in Phx he'd guard Kobe when they played LA. Nash gets manhandled both by bigger guards and by quicker ones.
That said, Kidd being able to guard bigger guards won't help the Mavs when TP is healthy. Harris shadowing Parker and Diop waiting in the paint were the 2 big reasons why TP couldn't get into the lane at will against the Mavs. Dallas is giving up both of them for Kidd. It should be fun if we meet the Mavs in the post-season.
But the defense is never why the Mavs lost games to the Spurs. It was always a problem with our offense becoming predictable and stagnant. With a more uptempo and efficient offense, I think it will more than make up for losing the speed to match up with Parker. Don't forget, that there were plenty of times that Parker still would shoot 80% and score 25 points against Dallas, but Dallas would still win. The reason was not because of our defense. The defense would always be good enough, but it was because no one could stop Dirk, Howard, Terry, or Stack. The fact is, the Mavs don't have to find a way to match up with the Spurs. The Spurs have to match up with the Mavs, because the Mavs present more matchup problems than the Spurs do. We already know what Parker, Ginobili, and Duncan are going to do. We just can't let other pieces of like Barry, Bowen, and Finley chip in.
I think there will be plenty of instances late in games where Jason Terry is on the court with Kidd and Terry guards the smaller, quicker point guards and Kidd will guard the bigger 2-guards. Kidd does get overrated on defense but his size and still relatively quickness even at his age helps him guard most 2-guards fairly effectively. He's also strong enough to guard several small forwards.
There are plenty of differences between the two, most already mentioned. Nash is by far the better and more efficient scorer. Kidd is the better rebounder. They both push the ball up well, but Nash often pushes the ball up with long court passes in transition, while Kidd still likes to push up the ball with the dribble. Kidd is the better finisher at the rim, but Nash is more creative in breaking down defenses even if it leads more so to shots for teammates.
While the criticism has some merit as to why Cuban let Nash go and got an older, also injury prone player in Kidd now, perhaps that truly points to an acknowledgment that letting Steve Nash go was a mistake. But, no, I don't think had the Mavs kept Nash that they'd have won a ring by now.
What was Nash asking? 5 yrs/65 million?
. Cuban just paid about half of that to get Van Horn to sign into this deal.
Kidd is injury prone? It's been a while since he missed any significant time due to injury (and fake migraines don't count).
Fair play, good statistical evidence. I can't argue that. Guess it's based on me thinking Kidd could still finish well near the rim like he used to. I will say this though, I think when Nash is is defended well near the rim, I don't think he attempts as many shots and rather tries to pass to a teammate while Kidd will still try to finish at the rim more often even when defended well. But, you're right based on those numbers.
He's played 80 games the past 2 seasons, had a couple 67 game seasons, and then more 75+ game seasons. For the most part he's been pretty durable, I have no clue where this "injury-prone" tag came from.
If Jason Kidd is so damn awful, why does just about every player in the league want him to be by their side? They guy can't shoot, he's old, he can't lead an effective offense and can't defend anyone under the age of 30. It's a ing miracle he's even in the league! I know guys at the gym that can play better than him! Mavs would have been better off signing Steve Logan off the streets.
/ s pants
If Kidd is "injury prone", then Devin Harris is made of balsa wood and Legos.
Jason Kidd sucks so bad he got invited to play on the Olympic team and stole PT from Deron Williams.
Um, neither can Kidd.
SIX years, 65 million with the sixth year being a team option.
That would mean Nash would have only been guaranteed money for this year and next year.
What a bonehead.
And neither can Parker.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
