Jason Kidd Retires

[therealbig3]

Love Jason Kidd, except for his last year with the Knicks, haha. I became a fan of the Nets because of him.

Don't know if I'd go quite as far as saying he's a top 3 all time PG, but I have him firmly in my top 5 all time.

[NyCeEvO]

Love Jason Kidd, except for his last year with the Knicks, haha. I became a fan of the Nets because of him.

Don't know if I'd go quite as far as saying he's a top 3 all time PG, but I have him firmly in my top 5 all time.

I have him in my top 5 as well.

There were some jokers on the GB that were talking about he's in the 10-15 range and nowhere near top 5. Either they never watched us during those years or they are just trolling and a good part of me thinks it's both.

[PetroNet]

Kidd was just flat out amazing in ways its hard to quantify. You watch Deron Williams and you see that Kidd doesn't touch him talent wise. But then you look at the games and far too many games, Deron Williams plays and at the end of the game you look at the boxscore and go "WTF? He dropped 26/9?!?!?".

And then you have Kidd who you see the impact he makes, only to look at the box score later and go "WTF? He only had 10/7/6/2?!?!" just because of how impactful he is to the game and how he controls the tempo of it.

For a player who was really hyped because of his numbers and his triple-double, Kidd's biggest impact often is not shown by the numbers he logs.

yeah, there are players who have great games. there are plays who put up great stats. but few guys can set the tone of a game from start to finish and dictate how it is played. in his first 3 years here kidd was absolutely a guy who dominated and dictated how the game was going to be played. reminded me alot of barkley in his mvp season. that kind of stuff doesnt come along often.

[enetric]

I have followed the nets since DC's rookie year. I have come to learn that you never take anything for granted... But such was the priviledge of having JKidd on our roster, I look back now and think WTF? did he really play for us??? Watching that hi-light reel, really made me remember those days.... I still think F you Ratner... But I also understand the Brooklyn project..

its easy to blame ratner, but really, what moves do we make that change much? i dont think signing kmart to the deal denver did would have gotten us a championship or back to the finals, and the move to brooklyn may end up being the best thing that ever happens to this franchise

I would argue that doing the sign and trade of Kmart to Denver was one of the better moves Rod Thorn ever made. People never saw it fairly because Kmart was and is still a fan favorite. But he never became a star player in this league. He was a hard nose tough guy with short coming to his game who missed an awful lot of games with Denver and never justified that contract. That trade help set up getting Vince Carter. The Vince years with the Nets destroyed the Kmart Denver years. Not close. Not close between those two players at any stage of their career in all honesty.

I have said it many times. Ratner was blamed for way to much. He allowed payroll to be maintained at cap level every year despite the financial drain of getting Brooklyn done through all the battles he faced and despite dwindling ticket sales of a lame duck franchise changing states.

We went as far as we could go...and being mad at the Kmart move or selling a draft pick here and there? Big whoop.

[enetric]

Love Jason Kidd, except for his last year with the Knicks, haha. I became a fan of the Nets because of him.

Don't know if I'd go quite as far as saying he's a top 3 all time PG, but I have him firmly in my top 5 all time.

I have him in my top 5 as well.

There were some jokers on the GB that were talking about he's in the 10-15 range and nowhere near top 5. Either they never watched us during those years or they are just trolling and a good part of me thinks it's both.

I am fine with someone telling me they rank him 5 so long as they do not follow that up with Nash ahead of him. Today's generation overrated Nash to such an absurd extreme.

Take away the SSOL offense in year EIGHT of Nash's career does he become an MVP? An HOF guy? Nash's assist totals wee heavily padded as a result of that offense. Yes...still a great passer. And absolutely one of the best pure shooters I have ever seen, and an elite ft shooter. But even if we ignore the great rebounding intangible of guys like Kidd or Magic...there is no ignoring his complete and utter lack of D as people are ranking him too high. I will tell you what. Look at any season of Nash's career that you would rank him among the league's top 50 players. Then look at the other 49 guys on the list. I defy anyone to find a worse defender on that list in ANY of those seasons.

Anyway...if you want to put one or two other HOF legends on the list ahead of Kidd...at least that is debateabe. I get the love some have for Zeke for example. And, if you consider Oscar a PG...no argument there. Oscar is a better all time NBA player than J.Kidd. I am sure some old timers will try for Cousy as well.

Anyway, its a short list. Kidd was a very special all time NBA player. His career stats and his on court intangibles cement his place in history.

[SpeedyG]

Kidd was just flat out amazing in ways its hard to quantify. You watch Deron Williams and you see that Kidd doesn't touch him talent wise. But then you look at the games and far too many games, Deron Williams plays and at the end of the game you look at the boxscore and go "WTF? He dropped 26/9?!?!?".

And then you have Kidd who you see the impact he makes, only to look at the box score later and go "WTF? He only had 10/7/6/2?!?!" just because of how impactful he is to the game and how he controls the tempo of it.

For a player who was really hyped because of his numbers and his triple-double, Kidd's biggest impact often is not shown by the numbers he logs.

I will take Jason Kidd talent wise over Deron in every single skill set EXCEPT for self creating his shot.

Well honestly, I think Deron's talent is off the charts. He can blow by you. He can pull up. Change direction. Sick SICK handles. Finish. Shoot. Now, is Kidd a better passer? Yes, but because of those other things that Deron does well offensively...it opens it up for him more.

This is why when I talk to people about passing ability, I always say...Kidd is up there...and I mean UP there. Forget the numbers. The vision, the feel for the ball, the angles, the time...it's one of a kind. You look at any of the elite PGs...all of them you have to defend their offense. When a defense has to do that, it opens up avenues offensively.

Kidd racked up assists despite defenses backing off of him due to his offensive inefficiencies compared to his counterparts. But man, I finally found that play that I've been looking for. And it's a shame that today's fans love the no-look passes and alley-oop, as seen by how this pass is only ranked #10 in this video (i know, personal opinion but whatever).

But look at this pass rated #10. That pass is not there for 99.999% of players in the NBA. For Kidd? It's an assist.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=__cNop3BY4s[/youtube]

[therealbig3]

I guess I'm one of those people that overrates Nash to an absurd degree then, because I do have him over Kidd all time.

I look at it quite simply: Kidd's better defensively, Nash's better offensively. The advantages for both of them are pretty significantly in their favor...Nash doesn't touch Kidd as a defender, and Kidd doesn't touch Nash as an offensive player (fine if you disagree here, but Nash has all of Kidd's IQ and vision and passing ability in addition to the ability to score off the dribble, light it up from outside, and even finish better around the basket...this opens things up for him more than for Kidd...this is why I think Nash is far superior offensively, and why I think the offenses Nash has been a part of are generally GOAT-type stuff, while Kidd-led offenses have a ceiling if he's the best player, because he's easier to defend).

Personally, I think it's easier to hide Nash's limitations on defense than it is to hide Kidd's limitations on offense. The PG handles the ball, sets up the offense, and is the primary decision-maker. In short, he's the driving force of the offense. It's a pretty big disadvantage right off the bat when he has limitations that prevent him from running an offense at the highest level.

I have no problem with people choosing Kidd over Nash, but I don't see why it's so ridiculous to think very highly of Nash. MDA has been a failure everywhere BUT Phoenix, with a prime Nash. And Nash played like an MVP with or without SSOL. He wasn't system-dependent, he WAS the system.

[enetric]

I guess I'm one of those people that overrates Nash to an absurd degree then, because I do have him over Kidd all time.

I look at it quite simply: Kidd's better defensively, Nash's better offensively. The advantages for both of them are pretty significantly in their favor...Nash doesn't touch Kidd as a defender, and Kidd doesn't touch Nash as an offensive player (fine if you disagree here, but Nash has all of Kidd's IQ and vision and passing ability in addition to the ability to score off the dribble, light it up from outside, and even finish better around the basket...this opens things up for him more than for Kidd...this is why I think Nash is far superior offensively, and why I think the offenses Nash has been a part of are generally GOAT-type stuff, while Kidd-led offenses have a ceiling if he's the best player, because he's easier to defend).

Personally, I think it's easier to hide Nash's limitations on defense than it is to hide Kidd's limitations on offense. The PG handles the ball, sets up the offense, and is the primary decision-maker. In short, he's the driving force of the offense. It's a pretty big disadvantage right off the bat when he has limitations that prevent him from running an offense at the highest level.

I have no problem with people choosing Kidd over Nash, but I don't see why it's so ridiculous to think very highly of Nash. MDA has been a failure everywhere BUT Phoenix, with a prime Nash. And Nash played like an MVP with or without SSOL. He wasn't system-dependent, he WAS the system.

I find I agree with a lot of things you say. But yes...this was about the most I have ever disagreed with you. Nash is NOT much better offensively. He is a better shooter. Nash was not ever an elite offensive scorer...and he is NOT close to being the play maker or passer Kidd is or was despite having more impressive scorers around him. I dont know how anyone can say Nash wasnt system dependent. Pull the stats. Nash before Phoenix through YEAR EIGHT of his career was most comparable with Rod Strickland.

A very very good player...but not an all time legend. Nash had Q setting records for 3's JJ up and coming and a pair of young all star big men in his year as a FREE AGENT signing with that Suns team. Kidd was traded for our best player Marbury to a team that was a deep lottery team and took them to the NBA finals with virtually nothing around him. People thought it was a fluke. He followed it up by doing it again. THAT my friend is being the system. And the point about year 8 is that only in the SSOL have we ever seen a playmaker become something so miraculously better than he was previously so late into his career. Seriously...UNHEARD OF to jump that much so late in a career. And the most obvious X factor was the SSOL. Have we ever seen anyone else look like a superstarr in the SSOL? Cough...Jeremy Lin says what? Nash of course is far better than Lin...but it clearly proved what that system does for a penetrating guard off the dribble. Exaggerated stats that can make the world fall in love with your game.

Sorry...But without SSOL...Nash would not be in the conversation for HOF. Yes, very good player. I always liked him. But he isnt better than Kidd in any single facet of the game beyond shooting the ball. Kidd was the better rebounder, passer, playmaker, visionary, defender and he did it on many teams for many systems. He didnt have to cry when his team changed its system like Nash did after Dantoni that one year...Kidd adapted and made every team he joined better. He MADE other people's careers. HE made those players better constantly.

While titles and finals appearances are team accomplishments and cant all be pinned to players...Nash actually played with better players than Kidd did for most of his career yet Kidd accomplished more with less around him. One other thing about Nash leaving Dallas as a free agent? They got BETTER without him. You say you can make up more for Nash's defensive deficiencies? Devin Harris with no experience replaced him and they became a better team. That is a glaring knock on Nash IMO. And scoring off the dribble from the point in all honesty is of LESS importance than any other facet of the job.

Honestly...in addition to the 5 names I mentioned already, I cant put Nash over Paul, Cousy, Payton...and probably a few others if I thought about it.

Its OK. You are not alone among those who jock Nash or overrate him. But I dont think there has been a guy more glaring of system making the player. The facts poke giant holes in what you said. I dont think its debatable. I think one is a dominant all time legend. 100+ triple doubles of all around dominance and his numbers were consistent from team to team coach to coach. 3rd all time in 3's, second in steals and second in assists. EVER. A guy who made offenses and defenses hum.

And the other if we were to be honest...was comparable to Mark Price. A damn fine player. All star good. But he was in the right place at the right time and it made him. He won MVP's he shouldnt have received...one robbed from Shaq and the other from Dirk thus supporting my thinking that sports writers should not have control over these awards. And as a result...Nash will be a HOF player. Good for him. But its a distorted reality.

[enetric]

Kidd was just flat out amazing in ways its hard to quantify. You watch Deron Williams and you see that Kidd doesn't touch him talent wise. But then you look at the games and far too many games, Deron Williams plays and at the end of the game you look at the boxscore and go "WTF? He dropped 26/9?!?!?".

And then you have Kidd who you see the impact he makes, only to look at the box score later and go "WTF? He only had 10/7/6/2?!?!" just because of how impactful he is to the game and how he controls the tempo of it.

For a player who was really hyped because of his numbers and his triple-double, Kidd's biggest impact often is not shown by the numbers he logs.

I will take Jason Kidd talent wise over Deron in every single skill set EXCEPT for self creating his shot.

Well honestly, I think Deron's talent is off the charts. He can blow by you. He can pull up. Change direction. Sick SICK handles. Finish. Shoot. Now, is Kidd a better passer? Yes, but because of those other things that Deron does well offensively...it opens it up for him more.

This is why when I talk to people about passing ability, I always say...Kidd is up there...and I mean UP there. Forget the numbers. The vision, the feel for the ball, the angles, the time...it's one of a kind. You look at any of the elite PGs...all of them you have to defend their offense. When a defense has to do that, it opens up avenues offensively.

Kidd racked up assists despite defenses backing off of him due to his offensive inefficiencies compared to his counterparts. But man, I finally found that play that I've been looking for. And it's a shame that today's fans love the no-look passes and alley-oop, as seen by how this pass is only ranked #10 in this video (i know, personal opinion but whatever).

But look at this pass rated #10. That pass is not there for 99.999% of players in the NBA. For Kidd? It's an assist.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=__cNop3BY4s[/youtube]

Deron is much better scorer off the dribble. That sums up changing direction, blowing by you, pulling up and his handles are school yard. Not about protecting the ball or moving the ball but more about blowing by you for self creating. So yeah...much much better at self creating. But...his decisions for WHEN to do that? Poor. Seeing the best shot on the floor be it his or getting his teammate open? Reading the D and forcing them to change their game plan as the game goes on? Not close to Kidd. And Kidd made his presence felt as a set shooter at those key moments when you did try to play off him. Which kept the D honest.

You mentioned playing off him because of his poor scoring off the dribble and how he got assists anyway? Actually, Kidd was never better than when you gave him room. He was flat out deadly. In fact...It was Popovich that pointed that out during the NBA finals. He said it plainly. Despite him not being a great shooter off the dribble...it it imperative that you play him as tightly as possible. If not he will find ways to destroy you. His ability to see the angles to think the game several plays ahead cant be taught.

I can think of 3 guys I saw (ever) before Kidd that read an opposing team to that great an instinctive level. Magic, Bird and Stockton. While I can think of a handful of other great play makers...not just passers but PLAY MAKERS...that I have seen I cant think of anyone else with that much vision for the game.

[therealbig3]

E, you're calling him a system player, but I think it's a case of Nash finally getting the chance to be THE guy. He was a 2nd option in Dallas (and he was still considered a top 5, elite PG in his last few years in Dallas too, he wasn't a scrub...made the AS team twice), playing behind Dirk. In Phoenix, he finally got the chance to have the ball in his hands the whole time and call the shots, and he dominated.

D'Antoni left Phoenix after 2008...Nash combined from 05-08 averaged 18/11. Nash combined in 09 and 10 (the last 2 years of his prime, imo) averaged 16/10. Incredibly efficient scoring throughout. And even in his post-prime years in 11 and 12, he averaged a combined 14/11...again, incredible efficiency, and top 10 offenses, despite playing with garbage in both of those years.

So I'm not seeing his Phoenix years as being system-dependent...I'm seeing him finally having a system built around him, as opposed to Dallas, when he was part of a system built around Dirk.

Sure, I think the Phoenix supporting cast was tailor made to be an offensive juggernaut at the expense of defense, when you look at the shooters on the team, and the fact that they moved Marion and Stat one position higher than they typically played. But look at the NBA now. What Nash did in Phoenix revolutionized offense around the NBA...now, small ball lineups and stacking rosters with shooters are incredibly common. The Heat are in the Finals using this strategy. Instead of Stoudemire, if Nash were to have a defensive minded center that could effectively be the roll man on that PnR, I absolutely think Nash could have led a team to a title.

I'm sure you know that an easy rebuttal to Kidd leading a worse supporting cast to the Finals is the fact that the East was pretty much a cakewalk at the time, while the West when Nash was in Phoenix was brutal.

And where is the clear gap that you're seeing between the two as passers? What kind of passes could Kidd see and do that Nash couldn't? As someone that has seen both of them extensively over the years, I really don't see where Nash falls short as far as seeing the court, knowing where his guys are, knowing where they're going to be, and being able to thread the needle and find them...and I think it was easier for Nash to do this on a more consistent basis, because of his ability to shoot and the defense needing to worry about his threat to score at all times. He wasn't a big time scorer, as you said, over the course of a regular season, but if you look up his playoff stats, when the situation called for it, he had many playoff games where he would absolutely explode as a scorer. The important difference to me between the two is that Nash COULD score in bunches, on a consistent basis, if the defense played him for the pass. Kidd COULDN'T, at least, not consistently.

Please don't take me for a Kidd-hater...I love the guy, and as I said, he's the reason I became a Nets fan in the first place, and I totally agree with you that he's a legendary player and one of the all-time great PGs. I really just disagree with you regarding Nash, because I think Nash is a legendary player and one of the all-time great PGs as well.

[NyCeEvO]

I actually agree with E on this one.

Alvin Gentry still ran much of the SSOL offense even after D'Antoni was gone.

When they brought in Terry Porter to replace D'Antoni, they went 28-23 (.549%) before he was fired. They brought in Terry because they wanted to develop a slower paced offense and focus on defense. Unfortunately, that wasn't working for them so they fired Porter and when Alvin Gentry was promoted, he brought back the fast-paced offense and still maintained the SSOL.

Porter, who played in the NBA for 17 seasons, was an assistant with the Detroit Pistons when he was hired by the Suns, and the intention was for him to bring the Pistons' defense-oriented, slower playing style with him.

That plan was jettisoned after it became apparent the Suns' personnel was not suited to the slowdown game.

The promotion of Gentry means the Suns will be even more committed to a fast-paced game.
via http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=3909711

I remember this like it was yesterday, because all of the players were excited to start playing fast-paced again.

They finished the season 18-13 (.5806%) under Gentry that season.

Under Porter, they averaged 104.4ppg (49.4 FG%) and outscored their opponents by 0.9ppg.
Under Gentry, they averaged 117.7ppg (51.8 FG%) and outscored their opponents by 3.5ppg.

Under Porter, Nash averaged 13.8ppg/9.8apg/3.8topg with 46.8 FG% (41.8 3PT%) in 33.8mpg.
Under Gentry, Nash averaged 18.7ppg/9.6apg/2.6topg with 54.8 FG% (47.3 3PT%) in 33.2mpg

STAT played all 51 games under Porter and only 2 games under Gentry and yet they won more due to the system change.

[therealbig3]

The system change also included not focusing the offense around a 100 year old Shaq and putting the ball back in Nash's hands, which was the obvious thing to do for any decent head coach, which Porter wasn't (not to say Gentry was any good, but at least he realized this). And yes, an offense centered around Nash does play fast.

But they never played at an outlier pace. Outside of 05 and 06, they were never the fastest team in the league, and they never again played at the extreme SSOL-rate of jacking up shots either.

By saying he's a product of SSOL, it's basically saying that Nash can't succeed running an offense in the half court. But that's just not true, because Nash is excellent at running half court sets as well, because of how deadly he is in the PnR. He was basically like Steph Curry without the scoring aggression, but with a much more experienced and intelligent outlook on the game, and a better understanding of when to score and when to pass, accompanied by better court vision and passing ability.

This will be my last post about Nash though...not that I'm not enjoying the debate, but this thread is meant to commemorate Kidd, not rehash a Kidd vs Nash debate, which is unfair to the intent of the thread.

[enetric]

E, you're calling him a system player, but I think it's a case of Nash finally getting the chance to be THE guy. He was a 2nd option in Dallas (and he was still considered a top 5, elite PG in his last few years in Dallas too, he wasn't a scrub...made the AS team twice), playing behind Dirk. In Phoenix, he finally got the chance to have the ball in his hands the whole time and call the shots, and he dominated.

D'Antoni left Phoenix after 2008...Nash combined from 05-08 averaged 18/11. Nash combined in 09 and 10 (the last 2 years of his prime, imo) averaged 16/10. Incredibly efficient scoring throughout. And even in his post-prime years in 11 and 12, he averaged a combined 14/11...again, incredible efficiency, and top 10 offenses, despite playing with garbage in both of those years.

So I'm not seeing his Phoenix years as being system-dependent...I'm seeing him finally having a system built around him, as opposed to Dallas, when he was part of a system built around Dirk.

Sure, I think the Phoenix supporting cast was tailor made to be an offensive juggernaut at the expense of defense, when you look at the shooters on the team, and the fact that they moved Marion and Stat one position higher than they typically played. But look at the NBA now. What Nash did in Phoenix revolutionized offense around the NBA...now, small ball lineups and stacking rosters with shooters are incredibly common. The Heat are in the Finals using this strategy. Instead of Stoudemire, if Nash were to have a defensive minded center that could effectively be the roll man on that PnR, I absolutely think Nash could have led a team to a title.

I'm sure you know that an easy rebuttal to Kidd leading a worse supporting cast to the Finals is the fact that the East was pretty much a cakewalk at the time, while the West when Nash was in Phoenix was brutal.

And where is the clear gap that you're seeing between the two as passers? What kind of passes could Kidd see and do that Nash couldn't? As someone that has seen both of them extensively over the years, I really don't see where Nash falls short as far as seeing the court, knowing where his guys are, knowing where they're going to be, and being able to thread the needle and find them...and I think it was easier for Nash to do this on a more consistent basis, because of his ability to shoot and the defense needing to worry about his threat to score at all times. He wasn't a big time scorer, as you said, over the course of a regular season, but if you look up his playoff stats, when the situation called for it, he had many playoff games where he would absolutely explode as a scorer. The important difference to me between the two is that Nash COULD score in bunches, on a consistent basis, if the defense played him for the pass. Kidd COULDN'T, at least, not consistently.

Please don't take me for a Kidd-hater...I love the guy, and as I said, he's the reason I became a Nets fan in the first place, and I totally agree with you that he's a legendary player and one of the all-time great PGs. I really just disagree with you regarding Nash, because I think Nash is a legendary player and one of the all-time great PGs as well.

Nash was the THIRD best player on Dallas...not second. The most forgotten player ever...Finley was a better player on that roster and why Dallas was OK with Nash leaving out of the 3. His poor D was felt to be not worth the things he did well and the other two were regarded as better players.

The clear gap in the two as passers to me is transition. They were comparable in the half court. But Kidd's transition playmaking is second all time to only Magic. Kidd saw things that no one in the building saw. And for me that is the clear difference. As I said...Magic and Bird are the only other players I have watched who appear to be seeing the floor in the way Bobby Fisher saw a chess board.


As for the Kidd in the east comment...its a cheap debate. You beat who is in front of you He took bad teams and beat better ones. I say switch Kidd with Nash for the years Nash was on the Suns...and Kidd wins a title with that team. Nash on that Nets team struggles to get to the playoffs in those two years we went to the finals. He wouldnt have translated as well in the Princeton offense and his gaudy stats wouldnt have been anywhere close to what they were in the SSOL.

And that's the point. That offense creates so many more shots and creates plays specifically designed for quick assists that it exaggerates reality. Lin isnt an all time great. And not saying he would have been. But it took a no one and made him look like one of the 15 best players in the NBA and got him off his brother's coach and loaded him up with millions of dollars. Nash was all star caliber good and that system made him look like he was legendary good.

And I say again...WORST defender. Not bad...not oh well...WORST defender of anyone in the league of any season you would rank him top 50 in the game. So realize in any of those seasons you had him a top 10 NBA guy...he was FIFTY on D out of 50. And if we go lower...you could argue one of the most non existennt efforts on D in the entire league.

Additionally...any time they tried to slow that offense down to accomodate player changes like when Shaq came...Nash lost his mind. Nash NEEDED that offense to be run that way for him to get those stats. And that was my point. We saw Kidd play with every type of player in his career and make all of them look better. Either they learned to play, they got a second chance...or they found a way to contribute more. Chandler owes his second chance to him. Dirk owes his ring to him. Those poor nets teams that got HUGE contracts for decent not great players. Carter's second career. In every offense...in every system....he was abl to step in and thrive.

en this year playing the 2 guard. Did you see him early this year on the Nix before he ran out of gas? Every Nix fan I know would call me and say...I get it now. Even a shell of himself...not running the offense...he finds all these ways to come up big when you have to have it.

That was Kidd. That wasnt Nash.

And one last thing. When teams played Kidd for the pass as you said? In his prime he feasted on teams like that. Not by scoring off the dribble....but by driving further into the teeth of the D. Kidd would exploit that mentality better than anyone I have seen. He was so fast moving forward with the ball that the extra room just helped him. Once he was in the paint and you had to adjust...he would make that little shovel pass or he would would find the base line cuter and go OVER the D.

I mentioned this before. Popovich pointed it out in the finals and played him accordingly. He realized that despite not being a creator off the dribble, he was so deadly with the ball in his hands that you still had to bother him as much as possible.

[enetric]

The system change also included not focusing the offense around a 100 year old Shaq and putting the ball back in Nash's hands, which was the obvious thing to do for any decent head coach, which Porter wasn't (not to say Gentry was any good, but at least he realized this). And yes, an offense centered around Nash does play fast.

But they never played at an outlier pace. Outside of 05 and 06, they were never the fastest team in the league, and they never again played at the extreme SSOL-rate of jacking up shots either.

By saying he's a product of SSOL, it's basically saying that Nash can't succeed running an offense in the half court. But that's just not true, because Nash is excellent at running half court sets as well, because of how deadly he is in the PnR. He was basically like Steph Curry without the scoring aggression, but with a much more experienced and intelligent outlook on the game, and a better understanding of when to score and when to pass, accompanied by better court vision and passing ability.

This will be my last post about Nash though...not that I'm not enjoying the debate, but this thread is meant to commemorate Kidd, not rehash a Kidd vs Nash debate, which is unfair to the intent of the thread.

My point about SSOL is that it creates vastly more fga's and vastly more assist opportunities. Nash was all star good. He wouldnt have have the career stats in any other NBA offense to be HOF GOOD. And that is hard to argue after 8 NBA seasons of Rod Strickland esque stats.

You ignore the lack of D like it was nothing. Nash wasnt bad..he was detrimental bad at every point of his career. He was NEVER a dominant scorer. And he was not a rebound threat whatsoever. That added weapon for Kidd was no small thing. It was a HUGE part of what made him so special. His D and his rebounding CREATED offense. And that is what I meant by linear thinking of offense in the other thread. How many high % baskets and ft's did we get because of Kidd's grabbing the rebound and taking off before the D was set? How many off help D forcing TO'? Kidd's hands were on eveything. You could feel his presence in every play on both ends of the floor. Nash was this black hole on D you had to survive and to get his career insane assist numbers he played in an offense designed to take the most shots possible and ran everything through him.

As for the Shaq comment! Shaq was older...but Shaq was still capable of being effective. Running the offense through Shaq at any age should not have been a problem. Running the offense of rather STARTING a half court set through a big man who draws double teams and knows how to pass is never a bad thing in this league. That's an advantage. Shaq didnt need to shoot as much...but having him touch it early and often for most NBA perimeter players should mean easy money shots. He didnt lose the IQ and the size as he got older. He lost stamina and speed. But when he was on the floor at that stage he could still be a major pain in the ass for an opposing team. And he was still impossible to post up against on the other end.

Nash simply couldnt function with it. and that was the point I was making and NYC backed up. You never saw that from Kidd. Any offense...any type of teammates...he still made his impact.

I am surprised that seeing Lin last season doesnt at least make you "consider" that Nash's stats might have been great helped in that offense. Not comparing the two as players that's a joke. But it should be very telling if you look past being a fan of Nash and just think about what that system does for your stats.

[enetric]

Oh and one other thing. The SSOL didnt necessarily make more transition plays for Nash,as in mismatches of breaks. Nash's value was in the half court. Set up quick, drive, good control of tempo find the quick shot or quick pass. It wasnt an offense designed for a lot of ball movement. Nash was the ball movement of the offense and that is what helped to "exaggerate" his stats during those years.

And if you dont want to give the system any credit...can you name me ANYONE in NBA history who was a starter as long as he was to have their stats increase THAT much that late in their careers?

Nash would have been very good anywhere. ANYWHERE. I just dont think he would have had legendary stats anywhere else but an offense like that. Hell...he played under Don Nelson before that!

At least consider that there was some impact to the stats.