Peak- Jkidd Vs Jay Tatum

[GSP]

I believe most of us in Pc Board realize Tatum isnt like most other superstars which is why alot of ppl have had a tough time seeing us win the chip w/ Jayson as our best player but how would a title team w/ Kidd as your teams best player look?



This graphic inspired this thread. Kidd was a perennial 1st team All Nba player in the early 00s much like Jayson has been in the early 20s so far and peak Jkidd was battling Timmy D for Mvp in 02 even tho he obviously wasnt anywhere close to Timmy as a [player but he was 2nd in votes and got alot of 1st place ones voting was actually close overall

so what say you who is better at peak?

[migya]

Kidd made it to two straight finals in 2002 and 03 in the weak east but young low talent team. It's different eras but Kidd was a master playmaker and defender, that could score and shoot enough. Think he made his team substantially better, which is key.

[GSP]

Kidd made it to two straight finals in 2002 and 03 in the weak east but young low talent team. It's different eras but Kidd was a master playmaker and defender, that could score and shoot enough. Think he made his team substantially better, which is key.

East was def historically weak but as you said he didnt have a talented roster or anything

As annoying as the criticism against our comp has been it is true we went through a Heat team w/o Jimmy, Cavs w/o Mitchell and Jarrett and Haliburton missing half the series so we didnt exactly go through a gauntlet either

[jalengreen]

Shouldnt Luka be in that graphic

[One_and_Done]

Kidd's lack of shooting would hold him back in today's game. I'll take Tatum.

[homecourtloss]

Shouldnt Luka be in that graphic

I think so. Luka also leads the team in steals.

[Woodsanity]

I don't rate prime Kidd that high. He anchored midling offenses on the Nets. He was too limited as a scorer and shooter.

This is the same issue Rondo also had.

[sp6r=underrated]

I don't rate prime Kidd that high. He anchored midling offenses on the Nets. He was too limited as a scorer and shooter.

This is the same issue Rondo also had.

Peak Tatum is better than peak Kidd but implying Kidd was the rich man's Rondo is beyond insane.

[sp6r=underrated]

Kidd's lack of shooting would hold him back in today's game. I'll take Tatum.

From 2008 to 2011 Kidd was a 40% 3 Point-shooter(averaging 4.5 3pa per game)/82% ft shooter. Based on that I'm super confident if he had been born in 2000 when coaches drilled into players the importance of shooting he have a decent 3 point shot.

If you're comparing players from prior eras to present eras you have to think about how they would have done if they had developed in the current era. Otherwise you're putting a massive finger on the scale for current players.

[One_and_Done]

Kidd's lack of shooting would hold him back in today's game. I'll take Tatum.

From 2008 to 2011 Kidd was a 40% 3 Point-shooter(averaging 4.5 3pa per game)/82% ft shooter. Based on that I'm super confident if he had been born in 2000 when coaches drilled into players the importance of shooting he have a decent 3 point shot.

If you're comparing players from prior eras to present eras you have to think about how they would have done if they had developed in the current era. Otherwise you're putting a massive finger on the scale for current players.

He only learned to shoot after his prime. We have to judge what he actually did, not what he might have done in a parallel timeline.

[trex_8063]

Kidd's lack of shooting would hold him back in today's game. I'll take Tatum.

From 2008 to 2011 Kidd was a 40% 3 Point-shooter(averaging 4.5 3pa per game)/82% ft shooter. Based on that I'm super confident if he had been born in 2000 when coaches drilled into players the importance of shooting he have a decent 3 point shot.

If you're comparing players from prior eras to present eras you have to think about how they would have done if they had developed in the current era. Otherwise you're putting a massive finger on the scale for current players.

He only learned to shoot after his prime. We have to judge what he actually did, not what he might have done in a parallel timeline.

You are literally the one who advocated grading him based on what you speculate he would be today, while telling others to grade him based on what he actually did.
And you further based your speculation upon the assumption of a missing skill.......a skill that he clearly showed he was capable of developing (because [as you yourself noted] he actually DID develop it, even while no longer being in his prime).

[sp6r=underrated]

Kidd's lack of shooting would hold him back in today's game. I'll take Tatum.

From 2008 to 2011 Kidd was a 40% 3 Point-shooter(averaging 4.5 3pa per game)/82% ft shooter. Based on that I'm super confident if he had been born in 2000 when coaches drilled into players the importance of shooting he have a decent 3 point shot.

If you're comparing players from prior eras to present eras you have to think about how they would have done if they had developed in the current era. Otherwise you're putting a massive finger on the scale for current players.

He only learned to shoot after his prime. We have to judge what he actually did, not what he might have done in a parallel timeline.

The fact he could develop the shot post-prime tells me he would have had it in his prime if he had been born later. He didn't have a unique genetic disability that prevented him from shooting 3s then. It was just coaches didn't emphasize it enough.

Look I don't get why you compare old players to new players. You think all the old players suck so just say so.

[sp6r=underrated]

If Giannis or Harden played in 1990 they wouldn't be allowed on the court because they'd be whistle for traveling/carrying every time they dribbled.

We have to judge them by what they actually did. And what they actually did was travel based on 1990 rules. There is no possibility Giannis/Harden would dribble differently if they had been earlier.

I am smart. I am wise.

[sp6r=underrated]

You are literally the one who advocated grading him based on what you speculate he would be today, while telling others to grade him based on what he actually did.

Great catch. Table Kidd vs Tatum.

Kidd's lack of shooting would hold him back in today's game. . . We have to judge what he actually did

This is completely contradictory. If we have to judge him based on what he did we can't do any cross generational comparisons. And that would be a much more reasonable stance than One and Done's stance which is that we should do cross generational comparisons and always assume the older player is worse.

[One_and_Done]

From 2008 to 2011 Kidd was a 40% 3 Point-shooter(averaging 4.5 3pa per game)/82% ft shooter. Based on that I'm super confident if he had been born in 2000 when coaches drilled into players the importance of shooting he have a decent 3 point shot.

If you're comparing players from prior eras to present eras you have to think about how they would have done if they had developed in the current era. Otherwise you're putting a massive finger on the scale for current players.

He only learned to shoot after his prime. We have to judge what he actually did, not what he might have done in a parallel timeline.

You are literally the one who advocated grading him based on what you speculate he would be today, while telling others to grade him based on what he actually did.
And you further based your speculation upon the assumption of a missing skill.......a skill that he clearly showed he was capable of developing (because [as you yourself noted] he actually DID develop it, even while no longer being in his prime).

I advocate, and have always advocated, that we can only rate guys on the skillset they actually had. Consistency is a skill too.

To illustrate; Shaq Waa a guy who did not always try his hardest. His peak in 00 was far and away his best year. We can't turn around and ask 'we'll, hey, what if Shaq got into shape and tried harder, so every prime year was like 00?' That's not what happened though. We can only give him credit for what he actually did. It's the same for Hakeem seeming to play much better from 93-95, or AD really nailing his 3s in the 2020 season. We can't be sure why AD stopped hitting 3s later, and we don't know for sure why Kidd suddenly started hitting them. All I know is we can't given either of them credit for being good 3pt shooters every year.

Every comparison is speculative to a degree, but I only compare the actual player who existed and ask how that player would do today (not that Tatum wouldn't kill it in 2002 btw). Asking how a player who only exists in my imagination would do today is too speculative. That's a distinction of my own making, but it's based on logic. The poster above is literally asking us to imagine if Kidd was born decades later, what would he look like. Maybe we would get hit by a car, or not pursue basketball, who knows.

We should stick to porting something defined into different eras, rather than imagining something that didn't exist, because if we do the latter I can just imagine Shaq with a 3pt shot who wasn't lazy, or Len Bias who never did coke, or Sheed if he had a better attitude. They couldn't do those things when they.played, that's all that matters. I'm not really interested in whether that's 'fair' (though I think it is), I'm only interested in which players were most impactful based on the skillsets they actually had.

I'll just add as an aside, for all we know Kidd could only develop a 3 because his overall responsibilities decreased and he was using up less energy on D. Maybe it would have been impossible for him to play with the intensity he did early in his career and still shoot 3s. I have no idea if that is true, but for all we know it could be, which is another problem with this kind of speculation.

[trex_8063]

To illustrate; Shaq Waa a guy who did not always try his hardest. His peak in 00 was far and away his best year. We can't turn around and ask 'we'll, hey, what if Shaq got into shape and tried harder, so every prime year was like 00?' That's not what happened though. We can only give him credit for what he actually did. It's the same for Hakeem seeming to play much better from 93-95, or AD really nailing his 3s in the 2020 season. We can't be sure why AD stopped hitting 3s later, and we don't know for sure why Kidd suddenly started hitting them. All I know is we can't given either of them credit for being good 3pt shooters every year.

I think it's safe to assume that Kidd saw a rising 3pt usage during that time period, while at the same time he seeing his athleticism (speed, explosiveness, etc) fading with age, and thus determined that a way to keep himself relevant and useful into the twilight of his career......was to finally make serious effort to develop this skill (it being something that would persist even as his athleticism faded still further).

At any rate, imo it's a pretty big stretch to say that:
*a sample of >2200 3pters (1988 in rs, 246 in ps).....
**taken over span of SIX years....
***wherein we see the five highest 3PAr's of his 18-year career all take place in his final five seasons [two years with 3PAr more than double his career average]......
****and while making 37.7% of them over that [6-year] span.......

....is some sort of flukey occurrence, the cause of which will never be known.


I further think it's rather outlandish to assume the influences [coaching, mentors, visual references one models his game after], rules, and game dynamics of an era would have NO effect on how a player develops.

Shaq would never make the league of the 1960s.
He'd be the most epic failure of a supreme athlete because all he would do is quickly foul out [while committing multiple turnovers] due to offensive fouls, each time he tries to go thru the defensive to attack the rim. Just wasn't allowed by the officiating of the time period, as in all such instances of forceful moves---MOVING the defender out of the way---the officiating favoured the defense and would not allow these moves.
But hey: we can only judge him based on what he did/was. Cannot assume he'd adjust to new circumstances and influences.

[One_and_Done]

As I said, it's too speculative. Sometimes players get better or worse for reasons that are a mystery, even to the player themselves. Just to humour you for the sake of argument though; training is a zero-sum game, there are only so many hours in a day. Perhaps if Kidd devoted more time in practise to shooting 3s, he would have failed to develop other skills he had as well as he did. Perhaps he only had the time to learn 3pt shooting later in his career because he now had those other skills down and didn't need to hone them as much. Who knows. I know what he actually did, and that's the actual skillset we should rate.

The Shaq example misses the point entirely, and not just because it's easier for more skilled players to play down to the level of grade schoolers. If Shaq were in the 60s, all he has to adjust is the way he deploys the skillset he has; nobody is giving him a different skillset. I have never, NEVER, said Bill Russell would fail today due to his not knowing the rules and getting ejected every other game for elbowing people. You're free to project how we could deploy Russell's skillset in today's game. It's his skillset that you can't change.

[Cavsfansince84]

I feel like this thread is asking two pretty different questions. On one hand its asking which player was better at their peak and on the other sort of asking whether Kidd could be the best player on a title team today without elaborating at all if he's being born in the year 2000 or just being magically time traveled forward 20 years from 2002 then joining a team. I just wish people would be a lot more specific in terms of what they are asking to be debated sometimes.

[migya]

If Giannis or Harden played in 1990 they wouldn't be allowed on the court because they'd be whistle for traveling/carrying every time they dribbled.

We have to judge them by what they actually did. And what they actually did was travel based on 1990 rules. There is no possibility Giannis/Harden would dribble differently if they had been earlier.

I am smart. I am wise.

That point is the only relevant one when talking about current nba - Original rules aren't being followed. It makes it look easier and is easier to play, like any other sport or game.

[JimmyFromNz]

For me its Jason Kidd kind of easily. The poll shows that but the comments are interesting.

Has it really been that long that we need to rehash just how influential of a player Jason was?