Chris Paul or Jason Kidd?

[Fire Colangelo]

Who would you take to start a franchise?

With Paul you get a 20/10 type of guy who's just as good a floor general as Kidd, with good defense.

With Kidd you get a walking triple double with great defense, and great leadership/intangibles/etc, but inferior in scoring.

[Proctor]

Nothing wrong with CP3 but I'll take Kidd.

[Fire Colangelo]

I actually can't even decide lol, leaning towards CP3 but Kidd was just a beast

[JohnFreeman]

How is this a question? I will take the guy who averaged a triple double in a playoff series..

[Heavincent]

Kidd. I know the stat nerds don't like hearing it, but his impact goes way beyond the box score.

[Angel Face]

Kidd, better point guard.

[Heavincent]

Kidd vs Miller playoff duel

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q51UYp0fRjs

:bowdown:

[Draz]

I'll take the one with the ring. Jason!

[bballnoob1192]

i'll take the non career playoff choker/loser

[215Philly]

I'll take the one with the ring. Jason!
:biggums: :facepalm

[ZMonkey11]

I'd take Kidd. Two straight finals appearances, even if you bring up the weak Eastern Conference at the time, is a pretty good feat. I think his vision and passing ability was better than CP3's. Just higher bball IQ in general, and that's saying a lot because CP3 has superior basketball intelligence.

But Kidd, he just had that 'it' factor.

[TheMarkMadsen]

Kidd took less talented teams further. Kidd for many reasons

[atljonesbro]

Chris Paul. Better scorer, passer, and just as good of a defender.

[Fire Colangelo]

I think it's pretty close. I do think CP3 is a superior offensive player while Kidd is a better defensive player and a better intangibles.

Yeah Kidd averaged a triple double for a playoff run, so did Rondo.

[ABfor3]

Chris Paul. Better scorer, passer, and just as good of a defender.
:biggums:
CP3 is not a better defender than Kidd, CP3 is generously listed at 6'0 where as Jkidd is a legit 6'3 1/2, 6'4. He was known for his versatility on defense, being able to guard the one and two, sometimes even the 3 position. He played some of the best defense I ever seen on Kobe when he was already old. Kidd had a stronger base, which allowed him to guard stronger guys while still being able to keep up with them on the court. JKidd was also a slightly better passer, he put the ball on the best spot possible for his teammate to score easier most of the time. You're only right about Paul being a better scorer but Paul < Kidd

[sammichoffate]

Jason Kidd is the best PG since Stockton and Magic :confusedshrug:

[Fire Colangelo]

Jason Kidd is the best PG since Stockton and Magic :confusedshrug:

Depends whether or not you consider Robertson a PG. I'd take Isiah over anyone not named Oscar and Magic for my PG.

[MiseryCityTexas]

Kidd

[JohnFreeman]

http://stream1.gifsoup.com/view6/2654635/jason-kidd-filthy-pass-o.gif
http://theknickswall.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/JASON-KIDD.gif
http://stream1.gifsoup.com/view1/1387222/jason-kidd-talking-heads-o.gif

[houston]

kidd of course

[Fire Colangelo]

CP3's mini run in 08 is underrated. Watch the games and tell me he wouldn't do the same with those nets in the shitty eastern conference.

[TheMarkMadsen]

Jason Kidd is the best PG since Stockton and Magic :confusedshrug:

Isiah >>>>> Stockton

[steve]

Here are Jason Kidd's playoff numbers before he turned 28 (keep in mind that at this point in his career his team had won a single playoff series, one that he only played a single game in): 12.6 points per game, 9.9 assists 3.1 turnovers on 38% shooting from the floor and 29% from three (while taking nearly 4 threes a game) and a playoff record of 6-17.

[k0kakw0rld]

Kidd was a triple double threat every night.

Better player
better defender
better offensive player
better passer
better vision
better floor general
better rebounder
better at almost everything except maybe 3 pt shooting? :confusedshrug:

Kidd is the GOAT PG.\

Magic was a point forward.
Stockton is a close 2nd

[Fire Colangelo]

Kidd was a triple double threat every night.

Better player
better defender
better offensive player
better passer
better vision
better floor general
better rebounder
better at almost everything except maybe 3 pt shooting? :confusedshrug:

Kidd is the GOAT PG.\

Magic was a point forward.
Stockton is a close 2nd

What in the world :biggums:

Kidd is not a better offensive player, Paul is a better scorer. Passing/vision/floor General is a wash, slight edge to Kidd. But Paul's scoring give him the edge offensively.

[Milbuck]

Honestly, I'd take CP3 from 2007-2009 over Kidd.

[k0kakw0rld]

What in the world :biggums:

Kidd is not a better offensive player, Paul is a better scorer. Passing/vision/floor General is a wash, slight edge to Kidd. But Paul's scoring give him the edge offensively.
Offense is not always about scoring my friend. Give prime Kidd the roster Paul has right now he will be averaging at least 16-18 APG. Kidd's biggest weakness was his shooting ability, especially the three. He amazingly improved in that area throughout his entire career. He was for me the perfect Point guard. 6'4 could guard 3 positions. He could control the tempo of a game like no other. He led a 2002 Nets to a ECF championship but lost to the finals vs Lakers.

Something CP3 will never do.

[ZMonkey11]

Isiah >>>>> Stockton

Ah thank you.

[JohnFreeman]

http://d1warraxuf7xh1.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/116687_Rj9EWqAXDpaRdrs.jpg

[Fire Colangelo]

Offense is not always about scoring my friend. Give prime Kidd the roster Paul has right now he will be averaging at least 16-18 APG. Kidd's biggest weakness was his shooting ability, especially the three. He amazingly improved in that area throughout his entire career. He was for me the perfect Point guard. 6'4 could guard 3 positions. He could control the tempo of a game like no other. He led a 2002 Nets to a ECF championship but lost to the finals vs Lakers.

Something CP3 will never do.

Scoring is a big part of offense, CP3 makes the defense respect him because he can drop 30 any night, that's a big part of offense.

Kidd would not average 16-18APG, that's absurd.

He's a great defender, I've acknowledged that.

Actually Kidd's worst weakness was his inability to score in general.

Rewatch the 2008 playoffs, you don't think 08 Paul can do the same with the Nets in a much weaker conference?

[Draz]

:biggums: :facepalm
Did I say something stupid?

[Ronaldinho]

Kidd. I know the stat nerds don't like hearing it, but his impact goes way beyond the box score.
This. Kidd. I like CP3, but Kidd is just better.

[Thechosen1]

cp3 before injury was the best point guard ever without a ring

[Nikola_]

CP3 after injury

[KyrieTheFuture]

Kidd, I feel he's easier to build around. CP3 presents you with the problem of him running the entire show, and PGs just aren't that important. Kidd I personally feel could accept a second option role much easier.

[JohnFreeman]

I would take Kidd now, over CP0

[Mass Debator]

I like CP3's shooting and fiery mentality, but Kidd's versatility in guarding 1s, 2s, and sometimes 3s is what gives him the edge to me.

Honestly, leading a franchise, I pick J Kidd...but as a second option, I'm going with CP3.

[swagga]

Chris Paul. Better scorer, passer, and just as good of a defender.

kidd regularly checked WINGS... even at 40 he checked lebron in the finals in 2011 ... their defensive impact is not even in the same league

[Xiao Yao You]

Paul

[tmacattack33]

Chris Paul before his injury in 2009 > Jason Kidd in the early 2000's > Current Chris Paul

[Crown&Coke]

JKidd was a different animal, he was the reason I wanted to be a 6'4 point guard. I just couldn't learn how to grow in height

[navy]

Kidd took less talented teams further. Kidd for many reasons
In the Eastern Conference....

[Leroy Jetson]

Kidd, better all around especially on defense. Much more successful in the playoffs when it counted.

[J Shuttlesworth]

I'll take Kidd, but it's pretty damn close

[r0drig0lac]

:facepalm

[FKAri]

2007 Chris Paul

[k0kakw0rld]

Chris Paul before his injury in 2009 > Jason Kidd in the early 2000's > Current Chris Paul
Loool

[Real14]

Jason kidd when he was an all star:applause:

[Pointguard]

What in the world :biggums:

Kidd is not a better offensive player, Paul is a better scorer. Passing/vision/floor General is a wash, slight edge to Kidd. But Paul's scoring give him the edge offensively.
That's what I was telling you in the other thread. Better offensively for a point guard is about how the team operates with what it has. Paul is a great point guard but his team for several years now has had the best post player player in the game/the second best all around athlete in the game, the best athletic 7 footer, sharp shooters (Crawford, Reddick), great finishers, guys that can move without the ball and who were versatile. This is a PG's dream. Yet, the Clippers haven't converted when needed the previous two years.

Kidd had a team with none of that but had five more rounds in the playoffs in two years. But the Nets scored when they had too. I think it was in 2007 and 2008 when I thought Paul was very complete for a PG. The ability to get a lot out of another player wasn't really tested. I think he did nothing for BG until this year. But he's in the optimum situation for a point guard.

Hats off to the many people here telling you its not about the personal stats. The PG position doesn't make much about that to be more effective.

[SwishSquared]

That's what I was telling you in the other thread. Better offensively for a point guard is about how the team operates with what it has. Paul is a great point guard but his team for several years now has had the best post player player in the game/the second best all around athlete in the game, the best athletic 7 footer, sharp shooters (Crawford, Reddick), great finishers, guys that can move without the ball and who were versatile. This is a PG's dream. Yet, the Clippers haven't converted when needed the previous two years.

Kidd had a team with none of that but had five more rounds in the playoffs in two years. But the Nets scored when they had too. I think it was in 2007 and 2008 when I thought Paul was very complete for a PG. The ability to get a lot out of another player wasn't really tested. I think he did nothing for BG until this year. But he's in the optimum situation for a point guard.

Hats off to the many people here telling you its not about the personal stats. The PG position doesn't make much about that to be more effective.

This is the first season where LAC really has a shot to go deep in the playoffs. BG was not on this level last year (took a MAJOR leap forward), Jordan played ~22 mpg last season and was constantly out of place defensively (he's likely most athletic C in game but in past was far from "best" at anything requiring BBIQ/skill), this is Crawford's 2nd season a Clipper (brought in to reduce CP3's ball-handling duties), this is JJ's first year as a Clipper, CP3's first season with a legit top coach, and they still have dubious frontcourt depth.

They should get to 2nd round and if they really play well, can make the WCF. If you're referring to CP3's Hornets years, the Paul-West-Chandler core did not have many years together to make several deep runs. That team was broken down little by little due to stingy ownership.

So CP3 has not had all those things you mentioned "for years" and done nothing in playoffs. The man played great against Memphis the past 2 postseasons, played injured vs. Spurs in 2012 (thus big production dropoff and terrible sweep), and had little help from an injured BG last postseason.

Going back to original question- I personally prefer 2007-2009 CP3 (essentially peak Paul). Harassed PGs on both ends, put up ~22/12, shot efficiently, and was relentless. Shame that meniscus injury (and his rushed comeback) diminished his quickness.

Peak Kidd was amazing and played a different style. His defensive versatility is something few PGs historically can match. The same can be said about his ability to make an impact offensively sans elite scoring ability. The early 2000s Nets faced fairly weaker competition though compared to what CP3 has dealt with in the West his entire career. That squad was also pretty darn talented/athletic with VC, K-Mart, etc.

Good question OP :cheers:

[Fire Colangelo]

That's what I was telling you in the other thread. Better offensively for a point guard is about how the team operates with what it has. Paul is a great point guard but his team for several years now has had the best post player player in the game/the second best all around athlete in the game, the best athletic 7 footer, sharp shooters (Crawford, Reddick), great finishers, guys that can move without the ball and who were versatile. This is a PG's dream. Yet, the Clippers haven't converted when needed the previous two years.

Kidd had a team with none of that but had five more rounds in the playoffs in two years. But the Nets scored when they had too. I think it was in 2007 and 2008 when I thought Paul was very complete for a PG. The ability to get a lot out of another player wasn't really tested. I think he did nothing for BG until this year. But he's in the optimum situation for a point guard.

Hats off to the many people here telling you its not about the personal stats. The PG position doesn't make much about that to be more effective.

And I see your point in the other thread. I do agree with you that Kidd > Marbury offensive, defensively, and just about everything possible. I just thought that it was more so the Net's defense that got them that far instead of their offense. But let's just agree to disagree that it was a combination of both better offense and better defense.

Anyways, enough about that.

Kidd is a superior floor general, better vision, better playmaker. But lets not act like gap is huge, it's not. Paul is a better scorer, he knows when to take over and has the ability to take over when he needs to. That's what whats him a better offensive player than Kidd IMO, the gap between their playmaking ability isn't as big as the gap between their scoring abilities.

Griffin and Jordan are far from "the best post players in the game". In fact, Griffin was often criticized for his inability to score from the post in his earlier years, along with his defense. It's kind of like how Kidd never really got anywhere with Vince Carter.

But yeah, I do see people arguing how Kidd has done more with less. But they're ignoring context. The 02 and 03 Nets played one team with more than 50 wins in their playoff runs. Paul has never played a team that had below 50 wins in the playoffs in his career. That's got to count for something right? The only two teams above 50 wins Kidd beat before he went to Dallas and teamed up with Dirk? The Spurs in 00 when Tim Duncan got injured, and the Pistons in 03 who had exactly 50 wins.

You credit Kidd for playoff success, yes, he was amazing in 02 and 03, but the teams he faced were utter crap.

Kidd got the best out of Kenyon Martin and Richard Jefferson, but he definitely didn't get the best out of Vince Carter.

I can argue that Chris Paul got the best out of David West and Tyson Chandler, and made the Clippers relevant just like Kidd did with NJ. I also believe that 08 Paul on the Nets team would produce similar success in Kidd's place.

Off topic question, but would you consider Nash a better offensive player than Kidd?

[MC Gusto]

Kidd. More impactful player when it matters.

[smoovegittar]

As much as I detest him as a person and a dirty player, I'd have to take Kidd. He really has just about the best court vision I've ever seen from a PG.

[SamuraiSWISH]

Chris Paul better peak.

Jason Kidd better career.

Thus far.

[LoneyROY7]

Paul is the more dynamic player. Plain and simple.

[Pointguard]

This is the first season where LAC really has a shot to go deep in the playoffs. BG was not on this level last year (took a MAJOR leap forward), Jordan played ~22 mpg last season and was constantly out of place defensively (he's likely most athletic C in game but in past was far from "best" at anything requiring BBIQ/skill), this is Crawford's 2nd season a Clipper (brought in to reduce CP3's ball-handling duties), this is JJ's first year as a Clipper, CP3's first season with a legit top coach, and they still have dubious frontcourt depth.

BG had a more offensively productive rookie year than and any modern day PF without exception. I never heard anybody talk about DJ's IQ before CP3 joined the team. Those are two real bad negatives on CP3's part. Kidd's coach won 32% of his games before Kidd got to him. Most of the Net's rotation players were brand new.


They should get to 2nd round and if they really play well, can make the WCF. If you're referring to CP3's Hornets years, the Paul-West-Chandler core did not have many years together to make several deep runs. That team was broken down little by little due to stingy ownership.

So CP3 has not had all those things you mentioned "for years" and done nothing in playoffs. The man played great against Memphis the past 2 postseasons, played injured vs. Spurs in 2012 (thus big production dropoff and terrible sweep), and had little help from an injured BG last postseason.

Going back to original question- I personally prefer 2007-2009 CP3 (essentially peak Paul). Harassed PGs on both ends, put up ~22/12, shot efficiently, and was relentless. Shame that meniscus injury (and his rushed comeback) diminished his quickness.

Peak Kidd was amazing and played a different style. His defensive versatility is something few PGs historically can match. The same can be said about his ability to make an impact offensively sans elite scoring ability. The early 2000s Nets faced fairly weaker competition though compared to what CP3 has dealt with in the West his entire career. That squad was also pretty darn talented/athletic with VC, K-Mart, etc.

Good question OP :cheers:

The West always played a more wide open type of game. The East a more convoluted grind type of style. Without talent, you always have to grind. It wasn't easier. Playoff games are harder than regular season games because they are a grind. Their might have less talented teams out East, but Kidd had way responsibility on his shoulder and definitely upped the talent around him. There was not one series in which they underachieved in two years.

The Clippers have under-achieved. They have the best center power forward duo in the league. And they are the most athletic at their positions. In fact they are the only team with a duo at those positions. Crawford is the 6th man of the year every year. Collison is one of the best PG backups, Reddick is a sharpshooter, Matt Barnes, C Butler the right fit at SF. Most of the time if you have the best PG and best PF and one of the best frontcourt players period, you are automatically a contender.

[SwishSquared]

BG had a more offensively productive rookie year than and any modern day PF without exception. I never heard anybody talk about DJ's IQ before CP3 joined the team. Those are two real bad negatives on CP3's part. Kidd's coach won 32% of his games before Kidd got to him. Most of the Net's rotation players were brand new.


The West always played a more wide open type of game. The East a more convoluted grind type of style. Without talent, you always have to grind. It wasn't easier. Playoff games are harder than regular season games because they are a grind. Their might have less talented teams out East, but Kidd had way responsibility on his shoulder and definitely upped the talent around him. There was not one series in which they underachieved in two years.

The Clippers have under-achieved. They have the best center power forward duo in the league. And they are the most athletic at their positions. In fact they are the only team with a duo at those positions. Crawford is the 6th man of the year every year. Collison is one of the best PG backups, Reddick is a sharpshooter, Matt Barnes, C Butler the right fit at SF. Most of the time if you have the best PG and best PF and one of the best frontcourt players period, you are automatically a contender.

We may have to agree to disagree on some things, but you are certainly entitled to your own opinion. I am curious though- how closely do you watch the Clippers? I noticed some things that made it seem like you're familiar with things on the surface, but maybe do not know some of the details (no offense meant, honestly).

Blake's rookie year stats were phenomenal and showed his great promise. The biggest reason why CP3 was open to a trade to the Clippers was BG's potential. I still don't see how that "is a negative on CP3's part." He was raw and the majority of his eye-popping stats were due to his insane athleticism and hops. He was not very skilled his rookie season.

DJ had BBIQ issues coming out of Texas A&M pre-draft. People realized how he was NBA ready from a physical standpoint (size, length, hops, wingspan, etc.) but he had next to no basketball skills or intuition. This was a guy with zero offense apart from dunks and didn't know how to anchor a defense. He still at times refuses to rotate defensively because, as Doc has said, DJ tells him "Coach, I couldn't rotate to help because I couldn't leave my man." Doc's ENTIRE defense is helping the helper. DJ at times this season would not do the essential component of the entire scheme.

Byron Scott's greatest successes have come from coaching Kidd & CP3, so they've both helped his career. Cleveland hired him simply because they saw his work with the CP3-Chandler-West Hornets (Cleveland wanted a coach to deveop Kyrie). Scott has had little success coaching against Phil Jackson & Pop, the coaches he lost to in the Finals. Teams in the West in the 2000s had to deal with those squads and coaches simply to get to the Finals. I really doubt Kidd's Nets teams could beat 2002 Kings, Shaq's Lakers, or Duncan's Spurs to win the West and advance to the Finals.

I disagree that the Clips have the best PF/C duo in the league. Memphis has that and it shows in their record when both those guys play. There's a reason why the Grizz always give the Clips issues and it starts with Z-Bo & Big Spain. Just cuz BJ/DJ are more athletic does not make them better.

I also disagree with your statement that because the East played a different style that the stylistic "grind" made it more difficult (I think you implied the games resembled slowed-down playoff games). The teams those Nets squads faced were less talented and thus it was easier to get to the Finals. The teams in the West were elite offensively and at least good defensively, which IMO is harder to beat than bad offensive teams that play tough D.

You mentioned JJ & Collison, who are both first year players for the Clips. How did they underachieve if they've yet to finish their postseason? Last year, the Clips had a bad exit. They only won 2 games because of CP3. Griffin suffered a high ankle sprain before Game 5 in a scrimmage in practice. He was less skilled last season, and had no real impact the rest of the series. Del Negro gave his minutes to Lamar Odom, who has yet to do anything remotely positive basketball-wise since that series ended. Del Negro also only played Jordan 22 mpg last season and gave his fourth quarter minutes to Odom. DJ couldn't impact games because the coaching did not allow him to do so.

If you want to judge the Clips after this postseason, that is unquestionably fair. This is the most stacked squad CP3 has had (including both personnel and coaching). He previously only had one or the other.

Edit: Re the Nets' personnel- If Kidd went to a team with new rotation players and a coach that previously did not have success, can you really attribute all credit to Kidd when the coach did not have chance to show he could not successfully coach the other new rotation players?

Re: Crawford- he's a 6MOY contender annually and was robbed last season IMO (only won once). He's done his job thus far.
Collison- has only had his best seasons when backing up CP3 (previously backed him up in NO). He was gladly shown the door in Indiana & Carlisle could not wait to dump him last season. He's a back up PG. A good one at that, but do majority of title teams say "Thank goodness we have a great back up PG"?

Butler was shipped off last offseason because he's not a starting caliber SF anymore. He once was, but his D started slipping and couldn't reliably knock down 3s. Blake was not a Top 5 PF last season and DJ was not a DPOY caliber player last season. They were not a great team last season or the year before. They were simply good, with a great starting PG.

[TheMarkMadsen]

Kidd actually got te most out of his teams while Paul doesn't.

Kidd maximizes the talents of what's around him while Paul just dribbles around hesitating not wanting to pass unless its an assist waaaay to often

[fos]

As a Mavs fan, Kidd a million times over. He really was much better than his numbers. His leadership was infectious and you just felt comfortable when he was out on the floor come crunch time.

[Im Still Ballin]

Chris Kidd.

[20Four]

http://d1warraxuf7xh1.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/116687_Rj9EWqAXDpaRdrs.jpg
LMAO :roll: :roll:

[Done_And_Done]

Kidd.

Took me a full second to deduce that...

[Fire Colangelo]

We may have to agree to disagree on some things, but you are certainly entitled to your own opinion. I am curious though- how closely do you watch the Clippers? I noticed some things that made it seem like you're familiar with things on the surface, but maybe do not know some of the details (no offense meant, honestly).

Blake's rookie year stats were phenomenal and showed his great promise. The biggest reason why CP3 was open to a trade to the Clippers was BG's potential. I still don't see how that "is a negative on CP3's part." He was raw and the majority of his eye-popping stats were due to his insane athleticism and hops. He was not very skilled his rookie season.

DJ had BBIQ issues coming out of Texas A&M pre-draft. People realized how he was NBA ready from a physical standpoint (size, length, hops, wingspan, etc.) but he had next to no basketball skills or intuition. This was a guy with zero offense apart from dunks and didn't know how to anchor a defense. He still at times refuses to rotate defensively because, as Doc has said, DJ tells him "Coach, I couldn't rotate to help because I couldn't leave my man." Doc's ENTIRE defense is helping the helper. DJ at times this season would not do the essential component of the entire scheme.

Byron Scott's greatest successes have come from coaching Kidd & CP3, so they've both helped his career. Cleveland hired him simply because they saw his work with the CP3-Chandler-West Hornets (Cleveland wanted a coach to deveop Kyrie). Scott has had little success coaching against Phil Jackson & Pop, the coaches he lost to in the Finals. Teams in the West in the 2000s had to deal with those squads and coaches simply to get to the Finals. I really doubt Kidd's Nets teams could beat 2002 Kings, Shaq's Lakers, or Duncan's Spurs to win the West and advance to the Finals.

I disagree that the Clips have the best PF/C duo in the league. Memphis has that and it shows in their record when both those guys play. There's a reason why the Grizz always give the Clips issues and it starts with Z-Bo & Big Spain. Just cuz BJ/DJ are more athletic does not make them better.

I also disagree with your statement that because the East played a different style that the stylistic "grind" made it more difficult (I think you implied the games resembled slowed-down playoff games). The teams those Nets squads faced were less talented and thus it was easier to get to the Finals. The teams in the West were elite offensively and at least good defensively, which IMO is harder to beat than bad offensive teams that play tough D.

You mentioned JJ & Collison, who are both first year players for the Clips. How did they underachieve if they've yet to finish their postseason? Last year, the Clips had a bad exit. They only won 2 games because of CP3. Griffin suffered a high ankle sprain before Game 5 in a scrimmage in practice. He was less skilled last season, and had no real impact the rest of the series. Del Negro gave his minutes to Lamar Odom, who has yet to do anything remotely positive basketball-wise since that series ended. Del Negro also only played Jordan 22 mpg last season and gave his fourth quarter minutes to Odom. DJ couldn't impact games because the coaching did not allow him to do so.

If you want to judge the Clips after this postseason, that is unquestionably fair. This is the most stacked squad CP3 has had (including both personnel and coaching). He previously only had one or the other.

Edit: Re the Nets' personnel- If Kidd went to a team with new rotation players and a coach that previously did not have success, can you really attribute all credit to Kidd when the coach did not have chance to show he could not successfully coach the other new rotation players?

Re: Crawford- he's a 6MOY contender annually and was robbed last season IMO (only won once). He's done his job thus far.
Collison- has only had his best seasons when backing up CP3 (previously backed him up in NO). He was gladly shown the door in Indiana & Carlisle could not wait to dump him last season. He's a back up PG. A good one at that, but do majority of title teams say "Thank goodness we have a great back up PG"?

Butler was shipped off last offseason because he's not a starting caliber SF anymore. He once was, but his D started slipping and couldn't reliably knock down 3s. Blake was not a Top 5 PF last season and DJ was not a DPOY caliber player last season. They were not a great team last season or the year before. They were simply good, with a great starting PG.

Well said.

I feel that people overrate Kidd's run in 02 and 03. If he was in the Western conference, his team would've been first round exits in both years.

It's like someone getting really good grades in a shitty college being compared to someone getting average grades at Harvard. It's much harder to get average grades at Harvard than getting good grades in a shitty college. That's how this is right now. It's much harder to obtain playoff success in the west than it was in the east. It always makes me cringe when people bring up Kidd's 02 and 03 run as some godly run. It really wasn't, it was a good run and they got crushed in the finals. They were never contenders, nobody had the Nets winning the chip in 02 and 03. Not that I remember of anyways.

I just lol'd at Griffin and DJ being the best forward and center duo. Not even gonna respond to that part, PointGuard is either confused, or just making up nonesense to suit his agenda.

[Draz]

As a Mavs fan, Kidd a million times over. He really was much better than his numbers. His leadership was infectious and you just felt comfortable when he was out on the floor come crunch time.
When he was on the knicks I felt safe knowing he was in control. And he was dead as a rock.

[Pointguard]

We may have to agree to disagree on some things, but you are certainly entitled to your own opinion. I am curious though- how closely do you watch the Clippers? I noticed some things that made it seem like you're familiar with things on the surface, but maybe do not know some of the details (no offense meant, honestly).

Blake's rookie year stats were phenomenal and showed his great promise. The biggest reason why CP3 was open to a trade to the Clippers was BG's potential. I still don't see how that "is a negative on CP3's part." He was raw and the majority of his eye-popping stats were due to his insane athleticism and hops. He was not very skilled his rookie season.

He was waaay more skilled than Kenyan Martin. Not even close. Not even in the same universe. KMart became twice as effective with Kidd his second year. While I won't say BG became half as effective, people everywhere questioned what was happening with him. Even wondering why he was on the allstar team despite being easily one of the most exciting players in the game.


DJ had BBIQ issues coming out of Texas A&M pre-draft. People realized how he was NBA ready from a physical standpoint (size, length, hops, wingspan, etc.) but he had next to no basketball skills or intuition. This was a guy with zero offense apart from dunks and didn't know how to anchor a defense. He still at times refuses to rotate defensively because, as Doc has said, DJ tells him "Coach, I couldn't rotate to help because I couldn't leave my man." Doc's ENTIRE defense is helping the helper. DJ at times this season would not do the essential component of the entire scheme.
Below are articles and these boards interpretations of Deandre before CP3 came over. I don't see any low IQ type of references.
http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=250325
http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=204821
http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/DeAndre-Jordan-1072/



Byron Scott's greatest successes have come from coaching Kidd & CP3, so they've both helped his career. Cleveland hired him simply because they saw his work with the CP3-Chandler-West Hornets (Cleveland wanted a coach to deveop Kyrie). Scott has had little success coaching against Phil Jackson & Pop, the coaches he lost to in the Finals. Teams in the West in the 2000s had to deal with those squads and coaches simply to get to the Finals. I really doubt Kidd's Nets teams could beat 2002 Kings, Shaq's Lakers, or Duncan's Spurs to win the West and advance to the Finals. At some point you do need talent.


I disagree that the Clips have the best PF/C duo in the league. Memphis has that and it shows in their record when both those guys play. There's a reason why the Grizz always give the Clips issues and it starts with Z-Bo & Big Spain. Just cuz BJ/DJ are more athletic does not make them better.

You would really take Zbo and Gasol over DJ and BG. Really. Remind you both of them have already peaked and are on their way down. ZBo will never be on the level of BG offensively. While I have Gasol slightly better than Deandre because of help defense, Gasol could never come close to rebounding (lead the league) or blocking shots like DJ. Its just a matter of time before DJ learns rotations better. But both Clipper players experienced arrested development with CP3 and would be far better than their Memphis counterparts if they naturally progressed since their rookie years.


I also disagree with your statement that because the East played a different style that the stylistic "grind" made it more difficult (I think you implied the games resembled slowed-down playoff games). The teams those Nets squads faced were less talented and thus it was easier to get to the Finals. The teams in the West were elite offensively and at least good defensively, which IMO is harder to beat than bad offensive teams that play tough D.
If you don't know the stylistic differences in the conferences I can't help you. If you haven't noticed that the West plays a more wide open game that is an amazing feat on your behalf. If you think its easier to win without star talent, finishers, shooters, scorers, athletes then it is with these qualities that's even more impressive. The team that CP3 has is a point guard's dream. That Nets team was a nightmare. Of course you are going to tell me that I am over-rating nightmares. But I will say, Paul is great but lately has shown somethings that I don't think were there before.



If you want to judge the Clips after this postseason, that is unquestionably fair. This is the most stacked squad CP3 has had (including both personnel and coaching). He previously only had one or the other.
For every excuse you have for CP3 the last two years. I could have four for Kidd along with the excuse you are giving.


Edit: Re the Nets' personnel- If Kidd went to a team with new rotation players and a coach that previously did not have success, can you really attribute all credit to Kidd when the coach did not have chance to show he could not successfully coach the other new rotation players?
The rotation players never had success elsewhere and weren't that good. And the coach never had a reputation of working in new talent afterwards.

Butler was shipped off last offseason because he's not a starting caliber SF anymore. He once was, but his D started slipping and couldn't reliably knock down 3s. Blake was not a Top 5 PF last season and DJ was not a DPOY caliber player last season. They were not a great team last season or the year before. They were simply good, with a great starting PG.

BG was a star his rookie year. Defense couldn't stop him. Some of that is on CP3. If you run and feed DJ he's an allstar. Few centers can keep up with him. He has good instincts, a good motor, and soars when he's inspired. Richard Jefferson and KMart played as good as BG and DJ two years ago and they were far inferior talents. And it was largely because of point guard play.

Re: Crawford- he's a 6MOY contender annually and was robbed last season IMO (only won once). He's done his job thus far.
Collison- has only had his best seasons when backing up CP3 (previously backed him up in NO). He was gladly shown the door in Indiana & Carlisle could not wait to dump him last season. He's a back up PG. A good one at that, but do majority of title teams say "Thank goodness we have a great back up PG"?
:lol Hell yeah. Did you see when CP3 got injured how the team realized they had a star in Blake Griffin. Do you watch the Clippers? I can't believe you said that.

Watch how Lillard lays back and gets a ton out of LMA whom nobody would have had as a superior talent to Blake before the arrival of the star point guards. LMA has been off the charts. Its a skill that Lillard has and we are still wondering if CP3 has. And you have to be crazy to think that they are equal in that ability. Blake became a star when CP3 got injured.

[Pointguard]

Well said.

I feel that people overrate Kidd's run in 02 and 03. If he was in the Western conference, his team would've been first round exits in both years.

It's like someone getting really good grades in a shitty college being compared to someone getting average grades at Harvard. It's much harder to get average grades at Harvard than getting good grades in a shitty college. That's how this is right now. It's much harder to obtain playoff success in the west than it was in the east. It always makes me cringe when people bring up Kidd's 02 and 03 run as some godly run. It really wasn't, it was a good run and they got crushed in the finals. They were never contenders, nobody had the Nets winning the chip in 02 and 03. Not that I remember of anyways.

I just lol'd at Griffin and DJ being the best forward and center duo. Not even gonna respond to that part, PointGuard is either confused, or just making up nonesense to suit his agenda.
:lol I know who you are. Good try. You even talk like him.

If you know absolutely nothing about basketball, which is indeed possible, the playoffs require a lot of adjustments at the highest level. In '03 they beat San Antonio as much as any other team did despite and crazy number of fouls called against their defensive stopper in the first half of games. In '04 they beat the world champions if Kidd is healthy. Btw, the East slaughtered the West that year. What excuse are you going to say now?

[Young X]

^ Why are you arguing about offense when Kidd isn't even close to the offensive player that CP is?

You're talking about the Clippers underachieving when they were the #1 offense in the league.

Kidd never led good offensive teams in his prime, all his teams were below average offensive teams.

Kidd was a clearly inferior offensive player to CP by ANY measure.

Why aren't you talking about the defensive and rebounding edge Kidd has on him and the impact it has on their teams? That's the advantage that Kidd has not only on Paul but most other PG's, arguing about offense is stupid.

[DMAVS41]

^ Why are you arguing about offense when Kidd isn't even close to the offensive player that CP is?

You're talking about the Clippers underachieving when they were the #1 offense in the league.

Kidd never led good offensive teams in his prime, all his teams were below average offensive teams.

Kidd was a clearly inferior offensive player to CP by ANY measure.

Why aren't you talking about the defensive and rebounding edge Kidd has on him and the impact it has on their teams? That's the advantage that Kidd has not only on Paul but most other PG's, arguing about offense is stupid.


Good post.

He doesn't really know much about Kidd...we had a debate recently and he would barely acknowledge Kidd's defense and rebounding.

He's under the impression that getting the 02 Nets to like the 17th best offense in the league is utterly praise worthy.

Don't bother honestly...he just doesn't get it. He doesn't get why Kidd was great....

[GimmeThat]

I would take Chris Paul to start a franchise, just because of his ability to pass AND score at multiple tempos.

With Kidd, you have a passer, the second he touches the ball.


I don't know many teams would say that I want to start a franchise with a player who doesn't have an above average usage rate than the normal players.

[Pointguard]

^ Why are you arguing about offense when Kidd isn't even close to the offensive player that CP is.

You're talking about the Clippers underachieving when they were the #1 offense in the league.

Kidd never led good offensive teams in his prime, all his teams were below average offensive teams.

Kidd was a clearly inferior offensive player to CP by ANY measure.

Why aren't you talking about the defensive and rebounding edge Kidd has on him and the impact it has on their teams? That's the advantage that Kidd has not only on Paul but most other PG's, arguing about offense is stupid.
If you have an offensive star and you stop him from being an offensive star, which is the actual goal of the defense. You can't claim proficiency offensively. If Collison gets more out of star talent offensively then he is doing more for the offense. Offense is a relative term. If you use it when it needs to be effective and get what you need out of it, its more important than scoring a lot without winning. You think Nash would have those great offenses or the offense at the right time? You are hypnotized by quantity rather than quality.

[Bigsmoke]

CP3 a better player and Kidd was lucky to get trades to the East to inflate his achievements. Those Nets weren't going to beat the 2012 Spurs or 2013 Grizzlies

[DMAVS41]

If you have an offensive star and you stop him from being an offensive star, which is the actual goal of the defense. You can't claim proficiency offensively. If Collison gets more out of star talent offensively then he is doing more for the offense. Offense is a relative term. If you use it when it needs to be effective and get what you need out of it, its more important than scoring a lot without winning. You think Nash would have those great offenses or the offense at the right time? You are hypnotized by quantity rather than quality.

Paul >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kidd offensively.

And it's not close...sorry.

You really just don't understand Kidd at all dude...you just have some hang up about him.

[Fire Colangelo]

:lol I know who you are. Good try. You even talk like him.

If you know absolutely nothing about basketball, which is indeed possible, the playoffs require a lot of adjustments at the highest level. In '03 they beat San Antonio as much as any other team did despite and crazy number of fouls called against their defensive stopper in the first half of games. In '04 they beat the world champions if Kidd is healthy. Btw, the East slaughtered the West that year. What excuse are you going to say now?

Oh god, accusing me of having/being an alt :oldlol: this is what you result to.

So you're saying Kidd's Nets would go as far as they did if they played in the West? Now it's the refs rigging it for the Spurs? Duncan had a beast series and Martin couldn't stop him without getting in foul trouble, that's all it was. NJ managed to squeeze in two games, that's it. Against a Spurs team that many consider the weakest of the 4 championships.

Piston got carried away after two wins. The Hawks took the Celtics to 7 games in 08, I guess they almost won? No, just no.

The east was top heavy, after the pacers and pistons (after sheed trade) the east was crap. Just like how it is the past few years, doesn't mean it's harder to play in.

[Pointguard]

Good post.

He doesn't really know much about Kidd...we had a debate recently and he would barely acknowledge Kidd's defense and rebounding.

He's under the impression that getting the 02 Nets to like the 17th best offense in the league is utterly praise worthy.

Don't bother honestly...he just doesn't get it. He doesn't get why Kidd was great....
:lol Barely acknowledge. Why don't you just lie all the way and say I didn't.

Suuure and Kidd was recruited to all those Olympic teams for his defense and rebounding. You still don't know why Kidd was recruited for those teams. Let it go, guy.

I have been taking screen shots of how you and Fire Colangelo switch screennames back and forth. This is really sick. But now I'm including several other scree-names. You lost the argument. Big deal. This madness, WOW. You are going to be on meds soon.

[Pointguard]

Oh god, accusing me of having/being an alt :oldlol: this is what you result to.

So you're saying Kidd's Nets would go as far as they did if they played in the West? Now it's the refs rigging it for the Spurs? Duncan had a beast series and Martin couldn't stop him without getting in foul trouble, that's all it was. NJ managed to squeeze in two games, that's it. Against a Spurs team that many consider the weakest of the 4 championships.
You are definitely Dmavs. And at this late hour the switching should never be as active as I have been recording. I've seen four jumps within the last hour.

Psychologically you get hyped and make illogical leaps the exact same way as well. Its pretty sad.

Of course you have an excuse for everything too.

[Young X]

If you have an offensive star and you stop him from being an offensive star, which is the actual goal of the defense. You can't claim proficiency offensively. If Collison gets more out of star talent offensively then he is doing more for the offense. Offense is a relative term. If you use it when it needs to be effective and get what you need out of it, its more important than scoring a lot without winning. You think Nash would have those great offenses or the offense at the right time? You are hypnotized by quantity rather than quality.Dude, what are you talking about? When did Paul "stop" anyone from being an offensive star?

CP runs offenses better than Kidd, is a better scorer than Kidd, better playmaker than Kidd, way more efficient than Kidd.... There's almost no way you can make a case for Kidd offensively in an objective way, they're not in the same class offensively.

Kidd's edge over Paul is defense and rebounding, he was a great rebounder for a guard and had great impact defensively. Paul is a really good rebounder for his size and a good defender, but he's not as good as good in either area - that's Kidd's advantage over CP, why are you arguing about offense?

[Pointguard]

Dude, what are you talking about? When did Paul "stop" anyone from being an offensive star?

CP runs offenses better than Kidd, is a better scorer than Kidd, better playmaker than Kidd, way more efficient than Kidd.... There's almost no way you can make a case for Kidd offensively in an objective way, they're not in the same class offensively.

Kidd's edge over Paul is defense and rebounding, he was a great rebounder for a guard and had great impact defensively. Paul is a really good rebounder for his size and a good defender, but he's not as good as good in either area - that's Kidd's advantage over CP, why are you arguing about offense?
:lol

[Fire Colangelo]

:lol Barely acknowledge. Why don't you just lie all the way and say I didn't.

Suuure and Kidd was recruited to all those Olympic teams for his defense and rebounding. You still don't know why Kidd was recruited for those teams. Let it go, guy.

I have been taking screen shots of how you and Fire Colangelo switch screennames back and forth. This is really sick. But now I'm including several other scree-names. You lost the argument. Big deal. This madness, WOW. You are going to be on meds soon.

Kidd got recruited to the Olympics team to be the veteran that he is to run the team. He's a good fit because that team doesn't require him to score because they had 4 other superstar options to go to. This is irrelevant because no realistic team is gonna have 4 other superstars for Kidd to pass to.

This is stupid, you're stuck in your own world about Kidd and you think the people that disagree with you is an alt.

[Young X]

:mad:That's your rebuttal?

[DMAVS41]

:lol Barely acknowledge. Why don't you just lie all the way and say I didn't.

Suuure and Kidd was recruited to all those Olympic teams for his defense and rebounding. You still don't know why Kidd was recruited for those teams. Let it go, guy.

I have been taking screen shots of how you and Fire Colangelo switch screennames back and forth. This is really sick. But now I'm including several other scree-names. You lost the argument. Big deal. This madness, WOW. You are going to be on meds soon.

1. I don't have any other accounts that I post on. I used to post under Giniobili, but changed to this one. So sorry, you just look stupid claiming that. Just so you know...

2. Kidd was recruited for the Olympic team because he fits perfectly around a star studded team. He is a great floor general and doesn't need to score be impactful...and yes, his defense and rebounding at the guard position are fantastic and would greatly help any team

3. What you don't get, is that real teams...non Olympic level star studded teams...often need scoring...and that is something Kidd can struggle with at times. He's not a great offensive player individually...and his teams were never great offensively either.

4. Sorry brah

[Pointguard]

Kidd got recruited to the Olympics team to be the veteran that he is to run the team. He's a good fit because that team doesn't require him to score because they had 4 other superstar options to go to. This is irrelevant because no realistic team is gonna have 4 other superstars for Kidd to pass to.

This is stupid, you're stuck in your own world about Kidd and you think the people that disagree with you is an alt.
The should be best post player Blake.
A great shooter in Reddick
The best above the rim finisher in DJ
The best off the dribble shooter/penetrator in the Crawford.

That's a point guard's dream. 4 players for different options at very high levels.

[DMAVS41]

That's your rebuttal?

He doesn't have one.

He is so shook that he thinks we are all the same person.

:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

[Pointguard]

That's your rebuttal?
Sure if you knew how read its on the previous page.

[Young X]

The should be best post player Blake.
A great shooter in Reddick
The best above the rim finisher in DJ
The best off the dribble shooter/penetrator in the Crawford.

That's a point guard's dream. 4 players for different options at very high levels.They're the #1 offense in the league, what's your point?

Even when CP had mediocre offensive help in his last years in NOH, he still led them to above average-good offenses with the best on/off offensive numbers in the league something prime Kidd never did.

[DMAVS41]

The should be best post player Blake.
A great shooter in Reddick
The best above the rim finisher in DJ
The best off the dribble shooter/penetrator in the Crawford.

That's a point guard's dream. 4 players for different options at very high levels.

And the best offense in the league isn't good enough for you?

[Fire Colangelo]

The should be best post player Blake.
A great shooter in Reddick
The best above the rim finisher in DJ
The best off the dribble shooter/penetrator in the Crawford.

That's a point guard's dream. 4 players for different options at very high levels.

Idk what you're trying to say... Despite missing Redick for idk how many games this year, they've looked good.

If they lose, it's gonna be because of their defense, not their offense...

[Pointguard]

1. I don't have any other accounts that I post on. I used to post under Giniobili, but changed to this one. So sorry, you just look stupid claiming that. Just so you know...

You really need help. You think you are fooling other people but you are not. You take this stuff too serious. If you are not on meds, you are not far from it. Its really sad. People can tell similar energies and pathological people. There is an inescapable pattern. You think you have a mask on but people can tell. You can have the argument. Its ok.

[Pointguard]

And the best offense in the league isn't good enough for you?

That well should not run dry.

[DMAVS41]

You really need help. You think you are fooling other people but you are not. You take this stuff too serious. If you are not on meds, you are not far from it. Its really sad. People can tell similar energies and pathological people. There is an inescapable pattern. You think you have a mask on but people can tell. You can have the argument. Its ok.

You do realize that you are coming off like they insane one...right?

You have a bunch of different people saying the same thing to you...and your response, instead of questioning your own opinion and perhaps evaluating your thought process...is to accuse them of all being the same person...LOL

Who sounds insane and who needs meds again?

[Pointguard]

You do realize that you are coming off like they insane one...right?

You have a bunch of different people saying the same thing to you...and your response, instead of questioning your own opinion and perhaps evaluating your thought process...is to accuse them of all being the same person...LOL

Who sounds insane and who needs meds again?

The majority of the people in this thread pretty much agree with me.. The last four don't have a different pattern, language or originality. The odds of that reality are a bit to high for me. I believe that stat. You are trying too hard. Its ok. Really... ok.

[DMAVS41]

The majority of the people in this thread pretty much agree with me.. The last four don't have a different pattern, language or originality. The odds of that reality are a bit to high for me. I believe that stat. You are trying too hard. Its ok. Really... ok.

the majority of the people here agree that Kidd was as good of an offensive player as CP3?

Is that what you believe?

[Random_Guy]

Let's be real here CP3>J Kidd.
Passing is a toss up.
Defensively Kidd>CP3
Scoring CP3>>
IMo

[Fire Colangelo]

The majority of the people in this thread pretty much agree with me.. The last four don't have a different pattern, language or originality. The odds of that reality are a bit to high for me. I believe that stat. You are trying too hard. Its ok. Really... ok.

You are confused. People picked Kidd over Paul because of Kidd's versatility on defense.

Nobody except one person agrees with you. And he thought the only thing Paul was better than Kidd at was 3point shooting.

Wake up, take the loss.

[SwishSquared]

He was waaay more skilled than Kenyan Martin. Not even close. Not even in the same universe. KMart became twice as effective with Kidd his second year. While I won't say BG became half as effective, people everywhere questioned what was happening with him. Even wondering why he was on the allstar team despite being easily one of the most exciting players in the game.

I am comparing current BG to rookie BG. You think he was "skilled" his rookie season compared to now? He was *talented* then, not skilled. He did not bank in 12 footers off the glass, effectively face-up down low to shred interior defense, or initiate the action in semi-transition as he does now.



Below are articles and these boards interpretations of Deandre before CP3 came over. I don't see any low IQ type of references.

From your DraftExpress link, very first thing I read: "immediately called for a moving screen violation right after entering the game...Things mostly went south after that, as he was called for his second offensive foul for hooking...another turnover after being doubled-teamed in the post...was finally benched late in the game after a foolish turnover on a lazy cross-court pass, and two rejections he suffered underneath the rim courtesy of Kevin Love."

That's offensively...here's defensive notes:

"Defensively, things weren

[Pointguard]

Shout out to Fire Colangelo, Young X, and DMAVS41 for keeping the thread sane.

.

If I gave you the benefit of the doubt of being an individual separate from the names above, take this seed of advice. No offense, as a grown man you shouldn't use the same language, style and totally lack originality in your post. I would expect that from a child but never an adult. Adults usually have more pride than that. You also have the sheep mentality to reinforce your self with others to appear bigger. Its just unbecoming and seems desperate. If you seen Kidd play ball, you are a man, by age. Consider the challenge to put the mask down. Nobody 30 or older should seek other mask when behind a computer screen. We are who we are here. Except you.

Put the mask down. Be brave enough to be yourself. You need this illusion of numbers, groups, a sheep herd so you won't feel exposed, because you don't feel comfortable with yourself and only honesty is going to help you. Its a virtual world. Not real. Seriously its ok.

[finchyyy]

I would take CP3 over Kidd, PG defense is overrated.

[RoundMoundOfReb]

It's extremely close. Depends on my team.

[SwishSquared]

If I gave you the benefit of the doubt of being an individual separate from the names above, take this seed of advice. No offense, as a grown man you shouldn't use the same language, style and totally lack originality in your post. I would expect that from a child but never an adult. Adults usually have more pride than that. You also have the sheep mentality to reinforce your self with others to appear bigger. Its just unbecoming and seems desperate. If you seen Kidd play ball, you are a man, by age. Consider the challenge to put the mask down. Nobody 30 or older should seek other mask when behind a computer screen. We are who we are here. Except you.

Put the mask down. Be brave enough to be yourself. You need this illusion of numbers, groups, a sheep herd so you won't feel exposed, because you don't feel comfortable with yourself and only honesty is going to help you. Its a virtual world. Not real. Seriously its ok.

I'm not sure where you're going with this....My first post was very respectful towards your viewpoint and I have said in my posts that you are surely entitled to your own opinion, so please keep in mind others' opinions. I am unsure how I "lack originality" in my posts (especially when actually responded before some of those other posters joined in the thread). My decision to agree with a couple posters and respectfully disagree with you should be respected as my right, which you seem to not comprehend. Disagreeing with you should not automatically make another person wrong. Children share that mindset.

I am comfortable with who I am, hence why I have responded to you instead of abandoning the thread. As a man, do not mask your insecurity with being demeaning in posts. You threw accusations very quickly. I think men can discuss something, especially sports, without losing their cool. Calling somebody a sheep and a child when they only were honest in their posts and only defending themselves seems immature. Good day to your sir. Hopefully you act more your age, but it does not really matter. Take care :cheers:

[ZHAKIDD532]

Chris Paul. Better scorer, passer, and just as good of a defender.
You did not just say Chris Paul is a better passer than Jason Kidd...

Kidd is one of the 3 best passers of all time. He was a great rebounder for a guard, a great defender, and an all time passer. Not the scorer Paul is by any stretch, but he got by.

Kidd really embodies "makes his teammates better" more than almost anyone in the league. He showed up to a Nets team that won 26 games the year before and while I get they also got Kerry Kittles back from an injury and Richard Jefferson that year, he doubled their win total. He created Kenyon Martin and RJ.

I'm quite biased obviously, but I'm taking Kidd.

[Siin]

You did not just say Chris Paul is a better passer than Jason Kidd...

Kidd is one of the 3 best passers of all time. He was a great rebounder for a guard, a great defender, and an all time passer. Not the scorer Paul is by any stretch, but he got by.

Kidd really embodies "makes his teammates better" more than almost anyone in the league. He showed up to a Nets team that won 26 games the year before and while I get they also got Kerry Kittles back from an injury and Richard Jefferson that year, he doubled their win total. He created Kenyon Martin and RJ.

I'm quite biased obviously, but I'm taking Kidd.

Couldn't agree more. With Kidd on the floor, you just got more scoring options. In my opinion Kidd shows more leadership then CP3 does.

[steve]

You did not just say Chris Paul is a better passer than Jason Kidd...

Kidd is one of the 3 best passers of all time. He was a great rebounder for a guard, a great defender, and an all time passer. Not the scorer Paul is by any stretch, but he got by.

This never makes any sense to me. By this definition, you're saying that Kidd is a better passer than Magic Johnson or any other host of point guards because a lot of them could shoot and score better than Kidd could. Pure passing is an aesthetic choice. I like Mike Miller's shot better than Ray Allen but generally the results are about the same, so really what's the point?

But if we go by actual results, Kidd isn't an effective a passer. Paul's assist percentage is noticeably higher and at their respective peaks significantly higher. And not only does Kidd turn the ball over more but the number of bad passes he threw almost doubles what Paul does per season.

To act like it's some travesty someone would consider Paul a better passer than Kidd (this is also despite Kidd's height advantage), is mind boggling at best.

[joeyjoejoe]

Kidd was the better rebounder and defender not that cp lacks in those areas, paul is the better offensive player which includes passing scoring and is much more efficient just look at shooting percentages and turnovers, my picks for cp3

[scm5]

CP3 and Kidd are prime examples of why stats aren't everything.

I'll take Kidd without a second thought. It's not that CP3 isn't great, he's probably the better player of the two. Kidd is just more of a competitor/winner than CP3 is. The way he approaches the game, players follow. A true floor general.

[Pointguard]

I'm not sure where you're going with this....My first post was very respectful towards your viewpoint and I have said in my posts that you are surely entitled to your own opinion, so please keep in mind others' opinions. I am unsure how I "lack originality" in my posts (especially when actually responded before some of those other posters joined in the thread). My decision to agree with a couple posters and respectfully disagree with you should be respected as my right, which you seem to not comprehend. Disagreeing with you should not automatically make another person wrong. Children share that mindset.
Never said you were wrong - like I said you make the same leaps in logic as your main account. I said you were sheep that used the same language, pathology, herd mentality, obsession and weak logic.


I am comfortable with who I am, hence why I have responded to you instead of abandoning the thread.

As a man, do not mask your insecurity with being demeaning in posts. You threw accusations very quickly. I think men can discuss something, especially sports, without losing their cool. Calling somebody a sheep and a child when they only were honest in their posts and only defending themselves seems immature. Good day to your sir.
I never said you were a child but the leaps in logic are remarkably the same pathology in the posters you named. Coincidence? Yeah right.

You didn't abandon the thread because you put in a lot of work in switching screen-names and trying to make it seem like you are some rising tide of common thought. Its pathetic. The more light on you the worse you look. Don't look at me as being demeaning because I'm the only one helping you out. You're too old for this but, if you insist.

[SwishSquared]

Never said you were wrong - like I said you make the same leaps in logic as your main account. I said you were sheep that used the same language, pathology, herd mentality, obsession and weak logic.

I never said you were a child but the leaps in logic are remarkably the same pathology in the posters you named. Coincidence? Yeah right.

You didn't abandon the thread because you put in a lot of work in switching screen-names and trying to make it seem like you are some rising tide of common thought. Its pathetic. The more light on you the worse you look. Don't look at me as being demeaning because I'm the only one helping you out. You're too old for this but, if you insist.

Mate, I have ONE account. I used language that was plain and straight, no "style" I suppose you'd say. Using aesthetic language does not make you correct or validate points.

I do not know the other posters and I do not own those accounts. You think I have time to mess with one person on ISH enough that I would create 4 accounts to troll you? Wow. I now see by "child" you meant I was so insecure as to fake being multiple people to make my post's look more legitimate. You can continue thinking I do this, I don't care, but I don't have that kind of time. Any work I put into the thread was simply backing up my points, which frankly didn't take too long since I know some hoops. Switching accounts is pathetic, like you've said, almost as pathetic as refusing to simply admit one was wrong about certain things once hard evidence was presented (which is a child's mentality).

Not sure what you mean by "leaps in logic" other than making conclusions based on evidence, which is all arguing and debating is. "Weak logic" is saying you can too list reasons or give examples to validate claims without doing so. "Weak logic" is not responding intelligently but rather casting aspersions and making baseless accusations. You did not "help" anything (especially your own points), you simply insulted 4 different posters. You seem to have gotten mad that some people, including me, put Kidd's accomplishments into context, the same way I provided context for CP3's career. Other people in the thread picked CP3, so does that mean I am all of them too? :rolleyes:

[secund2nun]

I'll take CP3 for the spacing advantage alone even though I like Kidd.

[Pointguard]

Mate, I have ONE account. I used language that was plain and straight, no "style" I suppose you'd say. Using aesthetic language does not make you correct or validate points.

I do not know the other posters personally. You think I have time to mess with one person on ISH enough that I would create 4 accounts to troll you? Wow. I now see by "child" you meant I was so insecure as to fake being multiple people to make my post's look more legitimate. You can continue thinking I do this, I don't care, but I don't have that kind of time. Any work I put into the thread was simply backing up my points, which frankly didn't take too long since I know some hoops. Switching accounts is pathetic, like you've said, even more pathetic than refusing to simply admit one was wrong about certain things once hard evidence was presented.
If you aren't him fine. No worries. There are very few long winded posters here. Fewer that have the same mental blocks. Fewer that make the same leaps in logic. Even fewer that are of men age and need to give shoutouts and call out others to legitimize their thoughts with less than 20 post to their name. And fewer that post the same times as Dmavs. The odds aren't in your favor.



Not sure what you mean by "leaps in logic" other than making conclusions based on evidence, which is all arguing and debating is. "Weak logic" is saying you can too list reasons or give examples to validate claims without doing so. "Weak logic" is not responding intelligently but rather casting aspersions and making baseless accusations. You did not "help" anything (especially your own points), you simply insulted 4 different posters.
:lol Are you for hire. This can't be real. Your script sucks. How would you know there were 4 different posters?


You seem to have gotten mad that some people, including me, put Kidd's accomplishments into context, the same way I provided context for CP3's career. Other people in the thread picked CP3, so does that mean I am all of them too? :rolleyes:
How could you put Kidd's accomplishments into context without a concept of understanding point guards??? I haven't gotten mad. I see you and your sceenames like an easy game of "Clue." I described your profile above. Its not hard at all.

[LogicalFan]

Jason Kidd, at age 38, guarded Lebron James in the NBA Finals and won. It wasn't every possession, but I couldn't believe it as it was happening. And he was effective.

Kidd, without a shadow of a doubt.

[DMAVS41]

There he goes again.

Man PG, you are looking really crazy right now.

I don't have an alt. I'm not any of these posters.

It's the same shit with Kidd...you can't see reality. What is more likely...that someone is taking the time to post on all these multiple accounts...or you suck as a detective?

What is more likely with Kidd? That all the data is wrong and he's a great offensive player? Or that you are wrong and have some hang up on Kidd and can't see why he was actually a great player?

[SwishSquared]

If you aren't him fine. No worries.
I'm not anybody else. I have few posts b/c I lurked on here for a while, then decided to get an account. You can act like you know everything, but truly, I have NO alts.


Even fewer that are of men age and need to give shoutouts and call out others to legitimize their thoughts with less than 20 post to their name.
Agreeing with others seems to be unfavorable to you.


Are you for hire. This can't be real. Your script sucks. How would you know there were 4 different posters?
I read the thread, Pointguard. You expect me not read I thread in which I actively posted and continue to respond to somebody? Don't you think I will continue being thorough in my responses (based on my previous responses in this thread)...


How could you put Kidd's accomplishments into context without a concept of understanding point guards??? I haven't gotten mad.
It is your opinion I do not understand PGs, with which I disagree. I outlined why I'll take CP3, gave props to Kidd's uniqueness and greatness, and contextualized their careers. If you do not consider providing details about competition, teammates, and abilities as providing context, that is not my problem. You seem to not understand the Clippers' players & coaching abilities the past 3 years, who was on the squad, how Kidd's Nets teams would fare in the West, etc. You resorted to playing a detective instead of talking hoops, man.


I haven't gotten mad. I see you and your sceenames like an easy game of "Clue."
:roll:
Wow, please think you're cracking a case like a child's board game, Inspector Clouseau
:rolleyes:

[Pointguard]

:lol Sad just SAD.

[Iverson3]

I have to go with Chris Paul. Kidd in his prime only advanced in the 2nd round of the playoffs in the Western Conference when the Suns beat the Spurs without Tim Duncan in the 2000 NBA Playoffs.