Prime Nash vs Prime Kidd?

[canada_dry]

Who was better?

Who would you rather have running pg for your team?

I'd personally go Nash.

Sent from my SM-G960W using RealGM mobile app

[SHAQ32]

Different eras and circumstances, but Nash made more noise in Phoenix than Kidd did, for sure.

[Matt15]

Kidd led his team to the Finals twice and Nash none but I feel the Nets were never really a legitimate threat to win. The Suns I believe would’ve won had they reached the Finals in ’07.

[Goudelock]

Kidd led his team to the Finals twice and Nash none but I feel the Nets were never really a legitimate threat to win. The Suns I believe would’ve won had they reached the Finals in ’07.

I hate to play the what-if game, but I'd imagine that if you replaced Kidd with Nash on those Nets teams, they probably would've made the finals still. Those Eastern Conferences were wretched compared to the West at the time.

Probably wouldn't have stopped the Lakers or Spurs from winning it all though.

[canada_dry]

Kidd led his team to the Finals twice and Nash none but I feel the Nets were never really a legitimate threat to win. The Suns I believe would’ve won had they reached the Finals in ’07.

Eh. East was all time bad those years. The nets were 49 wins and favourites in the conference lol.

Sent from my SM-G960W using RealGM mobile app

[penbeast0]

I'm sure there are teams which would need Kidd's defense and rebounding more than Nash's superior playmaking and far superior shooting, but for most squads, I would imagine
Nash is the better player. His teams were consistently good offensive squads, Kidd's weren't, and from looking at the surrounding players, I would deduce that the big difference maker was that Nash was just a far more effective playmaker than Kidd. Kidd is my lead candidate for GOAT defensive point especially when defensive rebounding is taken into account and probably one of the top 10 PGs of all time, but his offensive skills tend to be overrated from what I have seen.

[Texas Chuck]

for their 5-6 best seasons you should probably go with Nash. For career I would go with Kidd. I know Doc is convinced its not at all Nash's fault he wasn't good until year 5 and not great until he was 30. In fact he makes the bold claim that Nash was better than Kidd when they were teammates..... But Kidd is significantly impacting his teams to the positive right out the gate. And everywhere he goes the teams improve drastically despite trading win now value for him. Just a massively underrated player because he wasn't an efficient scorer and doesn't fit how we see PG's in the modern NBA.

But if the goal is to win, Kidd helps teams do that for a really, really long time.

But at his best Nash is simply a better player. His offensive gifts from 30-35 are breathtakingly good and he's pretty solid before that as well.

[TheBomb81]

Jason Kidd for both.