Jackson admits Kidd to Dallas trade is a big deal
Moderators: Kilroy, Danny Darko, TyCobb
-
alfurd
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 5,706
- And1: 5
- Joined: Mar 13, 2002
- Location: Markham
-
[warm up post]
If crackjack's post didn't help then just focus on the part about Iverson and Fisher and his point is more clear. Fisher isn't a better player but he's a much better fit for the Lakers's system.
...
Kidd and Nash are similar in that they both can push the ball up the court and they're excellent passers, but they're different players (e.g. Nash is a better shooter and scorer, Kidd is a better rebounder, and brings more intangibles). Kidd's more capable of carrying a team without scoring a point (I argue), and for that and other reasons he fits better into Dallas's system.
The comparison between the Mavs then and the Mavs now is also unfair because there have been some fairly drastic changes in their coaching philosophy. Specifically, Dallas emphasizes defense much more so than when Nash was there and they tried to settle everything on the offensive end.
Kidd with the Mavs now would work even if Nash with the Mavs then didn't because the Mavs have changed they way they play and Kidd is a better fit for this different Mavs team. Hell even if Nash went back to the Mavs now they'd probably be a better team than the one he left years ago.
The championship window for Dallas doesn't seem to be getting any wider, so they might as well go with the vets and take a whack at it.
[/warm up post]
SPuL wrote:
That was a terrible analogy.
Shaq also wasn't the second best big on our championship teams
If crackjack's post didn't help then just focus on the part about Iverson and Fisher and his point is more clear. Fisher isn't a better player but he's a much better fit for the Lakers's system.
...
Kidd and Nash are similar in that they both can push the ball up the court and they're excellent passers, but they're different players (e.g. Nash is a better shooter and scorer, Kidd is a better rebounder, and brings more intangibles). Kidd's more capable of carrying a team without scoring a point (I argue), and for that and other reasons he fits better into Dallas's system.
The comparison between the Mavs then and the Mavs now is also unfair because there have been some fairly drastic changes in their coaching philosophy. Specifically, Dallas emphasizes defense much more so than when Nash was there and they tried to settle everything on the offensive end.
Kidd with the Mavs now would work even if Nash with the Mavs then didn't because the Mavs have changed they way they play and Kidd is a better fit for this different Mavs team. Hell even if Nash went back to the Mavs now they'd probably be a better team than the one he left years ago.
The championship window for Dallas doesn't seem to be getting any wider, so they might as well go with the vets and take a whack at it.
[/warm up post]
