Jason Kidd is one of the most overrated players ever

[Shadow King]

They very much could have taken that series. Kidd was 2-8 from the field in the second half of game 5 and 4-14 overall in a game they lost by 7. Missed a pair of free throws in the 4th quarter with 11 seconds left with the nets up 2 which gave Detroit the chance to send the game to overtime. He missed a 15 footer with 36 seconds left in regulation with the nets up 1. If he executes that’s 15 fewer minutes they have to play instead of triple overtime. Then maybe he’s got something left in the tank for games 6 & 7. They lost game 6 at home with a chance to close it out but he had 2 points, 2 assists, 2 fouls, & 2 turnovers in the 4th quarter. Went 1-5 with no assists or steals in the 2nd quarter where the nets got outscored 27-11

No guard you listed is winning that series either. The best of them failed with a superteam because he played into their hands with chucking, like almost all of them would do. The couple that wouldn't, don't bring the combination of floor generalship and defense that made the series competitive even without their best player volume scoring. So "he missed this shot, he missed that shot" doesn't cut it.

And you still can't show me which guards were monster shooters and chose to harp on the Detroit series instead.

 

[Mantis Toboggan M.D.]

No guard you listed is winning that series either. The best of them failed with a superteam because he played into their hands with chucking, like almost all of them would do. The couple that wouldn't, don't bring the combination of floor generalship and defense that made the series competitive even without their best player volume scoring. So "he missed this shot, he missed that shot" doesn't cut it.

And you still can't show me which guards were monster shooters and chose to harp on the Detroit series instead.

Healthy Sam cassell & mike Bibby were both better that year too. Steve Nash had a slight down year but was coming off back to back all nba teams and was one of the best shooters ever at his position basically his entire career who could shoot the lights out at any distance. I see no reason any of those guards couldn’t have pushed the nets over the top. Detroit was not some unbeatable powerhouse. 54 wins is the very bottom of “might be contenders” status and they’d lost 3 in a row going into game 6.

 

[Shadow King]

Healthy Sam cassell & mike Bibby were both better that year too. Steve Nash had a slight down year but was coming off back to back all nba teams and was one of the best shooters ever at his position basically his entire career who could shoot the lights out at any distance. I see no reason any of those guards couldn’t have pushed the nets over the top. Detroit was not some unbeatable powerhouse. 54 wins is the very bottom of “might be contenders” status and they’d lost 3 in a row going into game 6.

Neither one of those players were better than Kidd.

None of them are beating the Pistons simply being better jumpshooters. Again, they took the greatest scorer of the bunch of let him chuck a superteam away from the championship.

Nobody said anything about Detroit being unbeatable. No guard with the 2004 Nets team as constructed was beating them. They were also 19-6 after the All-Star Game and Rasheed trade, meaning the 54-win record you're citing doesn't speak to the team they were when entering the playoffs. A .760 version of any team (62.3 win pace) is dominant period.

 

[Mantis Toboggan M.D.]

Neither one of those players were better than Kidd.

None of them are beating the Pistons simply being better jumpshooters. Again, they took the greatest scorer of the bunch of let him chuck a superteam away from the championship.

Nobody said anything about Detroit being unbeatable. No guard with the 2004 Nets team as constructed was beating them. They were also 19-6 after the All-Star Game and Rasheed trade, meaning the 54-win record you're citing doesn't speak to the team they were when entering the playoffs. A .760 version of any team (62.3 win pace) is dominant period.

That same team went 54-28 the next year though with all the same starters coming back. That hot streak was just that. A really hot streak. They started the 2004-05 season 12-12 & then had to go 17-5 down the stretch just to match that same 54-28 record. It’s also not a good comparison to being up their game plan for Kobe in the finals because they specifically drew up that game plan to bait him into chucking the lakers out of games. You wouldn’t plan for another guard that way because odds are they’d have kept feeding Shaq in the post until Detroit was forced to double him instead of breaking the offense to chase their own scoring.

 

[murksiderock]

Nash and Billups weren't better. Neither one of them was a better defender or rebounder than J. Kidd. Offensively they were better but they didn't dominate games like Kidd did without scoring.

Not even gonna debate the Nash point. He was so clearly a better player than Kidd I'm not entertaining an assertion otherwise...

Billups is more of a toss up vs Kidd, and had a better team around him that buoyed his team success; its fair to point out he had the better team...

That said Billups was the face of those great defensive Detroit teams, the same way Kidd was the face of his strong Nets defensive teams. Billups was also the face of a 2x Finalist, just like Kidd. The '04 Lakers self-destructed in a way the '02 Lakers didn't, but the Pistons were still heavy underdogs, and Billups simply played better than Kidd did vs a team that still had two Top 6 MVP finalists, the same two that were Top 5 in '02 when Kidd had his crack at em...

Billups was the face of a mini-dynasty in Detroit, 6 consecutive ECFs, 2 Finals, a championship. The Pistons fell from 59 to 39 wins the moment Chauncey left, and he immediately went to the tougher conference and led a WCF run for a superstar who played a decade beyond that and never got that far again. These are points that were brought up for Kidd in this thread, that he instantly made teams better and they fell apart when he left, and these same characteristics apply to Billups...

Their primes didn't really line up, as Kidd was exiting his when Billups entered his own, so we never saw a series where both were in their primes. For the record the two they did face off in NJ/Detroit, Kidd thoroughly outplayed Billups in '03 and I'm '04 neither were all that, maybe a slight edge to Chauncey...

As far as skill for skill, look. Chauncey wasn't near the dynamic passer Kidd was, nor had Kidd's level of vision and ball control. Chauncey could hit a jumper much more consistently though, and was a textbook, "set the table" point guard without the flash and pizazz. Chauncey was a really good defensive player, great fundamentals, strong, high defensive IQ, I don't think there's a huge gap here. I'll grant Kidd was the more skillful player by a hair but results always matter to me more than skill, and one guy just gave you greater results. That Detroit team was built really well but were short of becoming an actual dynasty because they certainly were flawed---->but they were a more sustained elite basketball squad than the Nets...

It means something to me that you were the point guard on a 2x Finalist. It also means something to me that you were the point for another 2x Finalist that won a title, beating the team you lost to, and had a more sustained run than you had...

 

[Shadow King]

That same team went 54-28 the next year though with all the same starters coming back. That hot streak was just that. A really hot streak. They started the 2004-05 season 12-12 & then had to go 17-5 down the stretch just to match that same 54-28 record. It’s also not a good comparison to being up their game plan for Kobe in the finals because they specifically drew up that game plan to bait him into chucking the lakers out of games. You wouldn’t plan for another guard that way because odds are they’d have kept feeding Shaq in the post until Detroit was forced to double him instead of breaking the offense to chase their own scoring.

That same team going 54-28 next year in spite of starting 12-12 means they were 42-16 the remainder of the year, a 59.4 win pace.

So through 1.5 years, we have a .500 stretch of 24 games vs a 61-22 stretch over what equates to a full season. Dominant teams have lulls also, and with this lull, they were still 73-34 since getting Sheed.

Bringing up their game plan for Kobe is a great comparison, because the Nets did not have Shaq, or any starting quality center period. And one good wing. Again, no guard is beating the 04 Pistons as constructed, with the 04 Nets as constructed. Any perimeter oriented star listed will be allowed to play 1 on 5 with no big to force any adaptation.

Sharpshooter Michael Redd was held to 18 PPG on 41/30 from 3. No floor generalship or defense to accommodate.

The best perimeter player on Indiana, Artest, 14.5 PPG on 29.8%/19.4. GOAT shooter Reggie, 38.6%/33.3% on low volume. No playmaking from either player to help set up their All-Star big man, JO, who was held to 17 PPG on 40% from the field.

And of course Kobe's performance, 22.6 on 38.1% and 17.4% from 3. This was the one team Detroit faced that should have beat them.

So this shows a clear pattern that swapping out Kidd for any given star guard/perimeter player does not put the Nets over the top because the Pistons were rendering any of them inefficient, especially since none of them had another dynamic player to compliment them other than the Lakers.

 

[Greenhornet]

Only read through 5 pages so far


Nash is my favorite player after Jordan and then Rasheed Wallace ... I watched so many Dallas games and then almost all of the Suns games

Dont compare Kidd to Nash because simply, Nash wouldnt exist without Kidd ... he was his mentor and guide. They had opposite ends of the spectrum games but Nash learned very heavily and early because of KIDD. Their careers dont have anything in common besides that

you could realistically take KIDD or NASH depending on the style of team you already had... you arent going to go wrong with either answer

saying KIDD is trash or overrated is nonsense really... he had an amazing career. I always say winning matters only, and the most of anything... but people get clouded by only winning. Thats where this generation went wrong... you dont have to win to be remembered. We still talk about all these dudes that never won and people in here are even easily saying Nash >>> Kidd

Kidd held it down on every team he was ever on and is money on both sides of the ball... he was a huge part in winning a ring in Dallas on both ends of the court, and he was an underrated coach after. You cant say "Kidd is trash and overrated." then give props to all the people he beat for his entire career
some shyt just doesnt work out, like all the teams coming out of the East getting steamrolled by the West thats just the way it is... it doesnt mean those teams are terrible. They just arent ready for the same type of back to back to back grind as the West, with a more rigorous schedule and bracket
Its easy to say Kidd is all around and not explosive or the best shooter at a glance... but like people said... he was in the top at the time, and he did everything to win... not just 1 thing amazing. He was the leader and heart of the teams he played for... his IQ and playstyle/defense helped bring teams to the top of the glass


The Lowry shyt is good too, thats a whole nother thread.... you cant compare Lowry to anyone... he had a wild fukking career that's underrated on his own. Its weird to even compare Lowry to Kidd or Nash to Kidd. Lowry was deep bench on Houston and grinded his way through Toronto. He's just an amazing story and result of hard work and love of the game. Kidd was such a general, that he was Nash's first general as well. Giannis even has some of Jason Kidd's DNA on him (pause) You cant teach hard work and otherworldly IQ, the ability to manage personalities and take chances when you are the leader of a team... and Jason Kidd took that challenge everytime and was 80% successful his entire career. You named down years, but never named any teams where Jason Kidd ate complete shyt and failed miserably
and if you post "well this 1 or 2 years was down" ... you can name those for every single NBA player in history. Its a testament to how consistent and high IQ Kidd was to continue to be amazing and on top of his game. Even with controversy and alcoholism. Not saying names, but he had a better career than alot of guards that we call superhero's and top players.... when they peaked and fell off in half the amount of time.

 

[Ed MOTHERFUCKING G]

Mr Big Shot

 

[GoFlipAPack]

Nash won 2 mvp awards and billups led Detroit to the championship as their best player. Kidd on the other hand only got out of the second round twice in his career until he was a role player and those 2 years happened to be the 2 worst years in the history of the eastern conference, back when half the conference couldn’t crack 90 points per game, 1-2 teams were scoring 100 per game, & 50-32 could get you the top seed in the east. This fixation this board has with propping up a point guard who couldn’t post up, couldn’t cut off ball, couldn’t spot up, couldn’t come off screens, couldn’t finish at the rim, and couldn’t shoot from any spot on the floor or distance for the majority of his career will never make sense to me.

So basically he didn't know how to play basketball is what you're saying. Nikka didn't know how to do any of that and still made all NBA teams and the NBA 75 team

 

[Street Knowledge]

Not an argument

This thread is dumb and doesn't deserve a reasonable response. It blows my mind that this is 6 fukking pages.

 

[Street Knowledge]

Why do y'all keep trying to make this a talking point?

The East was trash back then. The best team in the East would've been lucky to even make the playoffs in the West, let alone win a series. There's a reason why he didn't make it out of the 1st round when he was in the West for the first seven years of his career, regularly outplayed by the opposing PG in nearly every series.

How do you think he managed to make the Finals in the East when he couldn't even make it out of the 1st round in the West for years?

They don’t think that it’s weird that someone who was irrelevant in the west for 8 years comes to the east and immediately goes to the finals

Then when that conference goes from all time bad to just regular bad(2004) he immediately becomes irrelevant the next 4 seasons

 

[Street Knowledge]

Nash (Phoenix) was better. Billups wasn't.

I’d absolutely take chauncey over Kidd. Much better overall offensive player

You like your PG’s being useless in a half court offense

 

[Street Knowledge]

Mr Big Shot

I remember Mavs fans trying to get Kidd the fukk outta there when chauncey shyt on him in 2009

 

[Shadow King]

I’d absolutely take chauncey over Kidd. Much better overall offensive player

You like your PG’s being useless in a half court offense

That's why I said Nash was better right?

 

[Gil Scott-Heroin]

Why am I not surprised nobody has given an explanation as to why Kidd didn't do shyt in the West for the first seven years of his career, and only went on a deep playoff run when he moved to the East.

I wonder what could've possibly been the difference.