Stockton Vs Nash vs Kidd

Moderators: trex_8063, penbeast0, PaulieWal, Clyde Frazier, Doctor MJ

trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 12,653
And1: 8,298
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

Re: Stockton Vs Nash vs Kidd 

Post#61 » by trex_8063 » Thu May 29, 2014 6:44 pm

HeartBreakKid wrote:
trex_8063 wrote:
Doctor MJ wrote:Stockton wasn't leading that offense though. Malone was. Malone was the one getting the accolades. Malone was the one playing the minutes. Malone was the one with superior offensive box score stats. Malone we're now seeing is the one the offense lived & died with.


For the first three seasons of #1 rated offense (in Nash's career), Nash wasn't the clear leader with whom the offense lived and died with, either: Dirk was.


Sure, but I think it is strange when people NEVER bring up Nash in Dallas, it's as if the dude didn't do anything there.

I think citing Nash having the #1 rated offense in Dallas is worth pointing out, because it shows consistency. It shows that with multiple teams with different attributes, one thing is usually constant, and that's Nash brings up big time offense.



Fair enough, I was just countering the argument which was (paraphrasing) Stockton's offensive impact can take a discount because he wasn't "the man" in Utah by pointing out that Nash wasn't "the man" in Dallas (where several of those #1 offenses were produced).

It's also worth noting to how the Dallas offense did the few years after Nash left. By ORtg:
2005--4th
2006--1st
2007--2nd

Clearly Nash helps any team offensively (and he helped Phoenix IMMENSELY). But I would say it's equally clear that he was not the essential engine driving the elite offense in Dallas.
"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire
HeartBreakKid
RealGM
Posts: 22,395
And1: 18,828
Joined: Mar 08, 2012
     

Re: Stockton Vs Nash vs Kidd 

Post#62 » by HeartBreakKid » Thu May 29, 2014 7:05 pm

G35 wrote:
Jonny Blaze wrote:
Navas wrote:Kidd
Stockton
Nash

Kidd gets deservedly and undeservedly criticized for his offense, when the other traits get overlooked. People act like he was an average player when he really wasn't. Kidd at his best is a top 5 PG. Consistent triple double threat, great fast break starter, huge threat on the boards, great defender (His defense against LeBron for example) and could guard several positions, and great at setting people up (Kenyon Martin should be thanking Kidd for that contract). Kidd's biggest problem is that he didn't really have any great teams around him for most of his career. A Kidd with a dominant big (Shaq, Hakeem,) would be downright scary. Along with his weak offense but he made up for it with several things.


For most of his career Jason Kidd could not shoot an open jumper. Thats why I have him 3rd.

Kidd came back to Dallas in 2008 and the Mavs could no longer run the Dirk/Nash, Dirk/Jason Terry, Dirk/Devin Harris pick and roll that they had been killing teams with for years.

Why?

Because Jason Kidd could not hit a wide open jumper from the top of the key. He was not good at creating his own shot. Put Nash or Stockton in that same play and its almost an automatic two points because those two are superb shooters.

Kidd intangibles work great on teams that are already deep (see 2011 Mavs) but his lack of scoring ability is a detriment on a team lacking with talent.



I agree, Kidd on a team lacking talent would not win a title but it would be more competitive than Nash leading a team without talent.

Nash on those Nets teams does not go to the finals. Nash doing a pick and roll with say a Kwame Brown or Roy Hibbert is not an automatic two points.

People look at Nash and say, "Look at the great offenses!"....he played with Dirk....Amare, Marion, Joe J, and under coach's Don Nelson and Mike D'Antoni. Coach's known for playing mish mash lineups trying to gain an offensive advantage and not playing any defense.

It's like some black hole when discussing Nash where only offense is discussed and people wonder why his teams lost in the playoff's. It's not that they went up against a lot better teams, but NONE of his teams ever played great defense. I mean not one team was he a part of that was top 5 in defense.

Look at the teams left in the playoff's and their Drtg

MIA 10th
IND 1st
SAS 3rd
OKC 6th

Nash played on 8 teams that were ranked in the 20's. Twice he was a part of a top ten defensive team and one of those were when he was a back up to Jason Kidd. People can stress offense all they want to but that is the #1 reason why those Suns teams (and Maverick teams) underachieved in the playoff's. Your best player cannot be a one way player....just can't....it doesn't happen.....


He also played with

Gortat, Shannon, Jared Dudley, 40 year old Grant Hill and nearly made the playoffs in the West in 2012 and he was past his prime then. As soon as he gets traded to LA that team become doodoo. Yes, Nash dishing to Hibbert would be a safe bet they could score. Nash would carry the Nets just fine, Jason Kidd didn't exactly beat many stellar teams during his Nets runs.
Jonny Blaze
Veteran
Posts: 2,803
And1: 1,414
Joined: Jun 20, 2011

Re: Stockton Vs Nash vs Kidd 

Post#63 » by Jonny Blaze » Thu May 29, 2014 9:31 pm

Texas Chuck wrote:
Jonny Blaze wrote:Kidd came back to Dallas in 2008 and the Mavs could no longer run the Dirk/Nash, Dirk/Jason Terry, Dirk/Devin Harris pick and roll that they had been killing teams with for years.

Why?

Because Jason Kidd could not hit a wide open jumper from the top of the key. .



This is just flat wrong. Dallas still ran tons of Dirk/JET pick and rolls after Kidd arrived and Dallas Kidd could and did hit open jumpers including some absolutely huge 3s. You do realize Kidd has the 3rd most made 3-pointers in the history of the NBA, right? Now that hardly makes him a great shooter, but it also kills your argument that Kidd can't make shots.

Kidd's 3P% in Dallas:

08 46%
09 41%
10 43%
11 34%
12 35%

and Kidd didnt feast on corner 3's either taking well under 20% of his 3's from there and shot a worse percentage when he did. He actually shot extremely well from the top of the key.

Kidd had his offensive flaws in Dallas--mainly finishing at the rim which got so bad that he would sometimes pass up layups to kick it out, but he was absolutely a positive at that end and clearly an upgrade over Devin Harris. And Kidd didn't ever try to do those things he wasnt good at. He played within his own offensive limitations.

And Dallas was still a top 10 offense every year Kidd was there except 12 which obviously had other major issues beyond Kidd. And this with Dallas playing non-offensive players at the 2 and the 5 and Marion, mostly a garbage man at the 3. Dirk is great and obviously the biggest factor, but Kidd deserves some due. This meme that Kidd is a negative offensively is a joke. He's no Nash to be sure, but he's not George Hill either.


To Jason Kidd's credit he became very good at hitting wide open three point jumpers.

These wide open shots were available to him because of the defensive attention paid to Dirk and JET.

When Jason Kidd came to Dallas in 2008 he could not create his own shot.

He could not come off a high screen and roll and consistently hit a 15-20 ft jumper.......shots that are damn near automatic for Nash or Terry, or even a John Stockton.

After a while teams started to cheat and not respect Kidd's offensive game at all. They cheated by putting more defensive pressure on Dirk or Jason Terry.
Dirk is good enough to still get his with the defensive attention. JET is not.

So Jason Terry would get all this criticism for having subpar playoff series, when the reality is that if Kidd was a better scorer it would take a tremendous amount of pressure of everyone else on the Mavs.

Jason Kidd's stats in the 2008, 2009 and 2010 playoffs are horrible. In those same playoffs almost every opposing point guard the Mavs played destroyed us (Chris Paul, Tony Parker, Chauncey Billups, Tony Parker).

To Kidd's credit he became damn good at parking himself behind the three point line and being able to hit some of those wide open threes. This gave the Mavs the ability to spread the court and put their players into better positions to beat their man.

The Mavs were not that talented in 2008 or 2009 (the 2009 Mavs started Antoine Wright at shooting guard and made it to the 2nd round upsetting the Spurs in round 1...and people want to doubt how great Dirk is, but that is another debate).
Kidd's intangibles didn't do a whole lot to help these teams because he was not a great scorer.

Between the 20009 loss to the Denver and the 2011 NBA title the Mavs added Shawn Marion, Caron Butler, Tyson Chandler, Brendan Haywood, DeShawn Stevenson and Peja Stojakovic.

Suddenly Kidd's intangibles were great because he had the luxury of playing on a very deep team that didn't have to rely on him to score.

For most of Kidd's career he was a sub 40% shooter. I think thats garbage for a guard. Its the #1 reason I can't place him over Stockton or Nash.
Jonny Blaze
Veteran
Posts: 2,803
And1: 1,414
Joined: Jun 20, 2011

Re: Stockton Vs Nash vs Kidd 

Post#64 » by Jonny Blaze » Thu May 29, 2014 9:35 pm

G35 wrote:
Jonny Blaze wrote:
Navas wrote:Kidd
Stockton
Nash

Kidd gets deservedly and undeservedly criticized for his offense, when the other traits get overlooked. People act like he was an average player when he really wasn't. Kidd at his best is a top 5 PG. Consistent triple double threat, great fast break starter, huge threat on the boards, great defender (His defense against LeBron for example) and could guard several positions, and great at setting people up (Kenyon Martin should be thanking Kidd for that contract). Kidd's biggest problem is that he didn't really have any great teams around him for most of his career. A Kidd with a dominant big (Shaq, Hakeem,) would be downright scary. Along with his weak offense but he made up for it with several things.


For most of his career Jason Kidd could not shoot an open jumper. Thats why I have him 3rd.

Kidd came back to Dallas in 2008 and the Mavs could no longer run the Dirk/Nash, Dirk/Jason Terry, Dirk/Devin Harris pick and roll that they had been killing teams with for years.

Why?

Because Jason Kidd could not hit a wide open jumper from the top of the key. He was not good at creating his own shot. Put Nash or Stockton in that same play and its almost an automatic two points because those two are superb shooters.

Kidd intangibles work great on teams that are already deep (see 2011 Mavs) but his lack of scoring ability is a detriment on a team lacking with talent.



I agree, Kidd on a team lacking talent would not win a title but it would be more competitive than Nash leading a team without talent.

Nash on those Nets teams does not go to the finals. Nash doing a pick and roll with say a Kwame Brown or Roy Hibbert is not an automatic two points.

People look at Nash and say, "Look at the great offenses!"....he played with Dirk....Amare, Marion, Joe J, and under coach's Don Nelson and Mike D'Antoni. Coach's known for playing mish mash lineups trying to gain an offensive advantage and not playing any defense.

It's like some black hole when discussing Nash where only offense is discussed and people wonder why his teams lost in the playoff's. It's not that they went up against a lot better teams, but NONE of his teams ever played great defense. I mean not one team was he a part of that was top 5 in defense.

Look at the teams left in the playoff's and their Drtg

MIA 10th
IND 1st
SAS 3rd
OKC 6th

Nash played on 8 teams that were ranked in the 20's. Twice he was a part of a top ten defensive team and one of those were when he was a back up to Jason Kidd. People can stress offense all they want to but that is the #1 reason why those Suns teams (and Maverick teams) underachieved in the playoff's. Your best player cannot be a one way player....just can't....it doesn't happen.....


Magic Johnson was never known as a great defensive player.

He won 5 NBA titles and most people consider him to be the greatest point guard of all time.
User avatar
Texas Chuck
Senior Mod - NBA TnT Forum
Senior Mod - NBA TnT Forum
Posts: 92,607
And1: 98,951
Joined: May 19, 2012
Location: Purgatory
   

Re: Stockton Vs Nash vs Kidd 

Post#65 » by Texas Chuck » Thu May 29, 2014 9:37 pm

Thanks Jonny. That's a much more reasonable post. Obviously I disagree with you over Kidd's overall impact on the game at the offensive end, but many of your points are valid.

One thing I will say is JET deserves blame for his own PS failings, not Kidd. JET struggled in the PS in Dallas long before Kidd came to town. I love JET and can forgive him for that as a fan because of how he closed out the 2011 Finals, but that was not Kidd's doing. Kidd had his own playoff struggles to be sure, but don't blame him for JET's.
ThunderBolt wrote:I’m going to let some of you in on a little secret I learned on realgm. If you don’t like a thread, not only do you not have to comment but you don’t even have to open it and read it. You’re welcome.
Winglish
Analyst
Posts: 3,634
And1: 1,303
Joined: Feb 17, 2013
     

Re: Stockton Vs Nash vs Kidd 

Post#66 » by Winglish » Thu May 29, 2014 11:24 pm

Stockton by a lot

Then Nash

Then Kidd





http://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=64&t=1265263



PER Top 10 Appearances
Stockton 10, Nash 1

Top 10 TS% Appearances
Stockton 11, Nash 10

Top 10 FG%
Stockton 6, Nash 0

Top 10 Offensive Rating Appearances
Stockton 12, Nash 8 (Stockton 4th highest of all time, BTW)

Top 10 Offensive Win Shares Appearances
Stockton 12, Nash 9

Top 10 Win Shares Appearances
Stockton 11, Nash 3

Top 10 Win Shares per 48 Minutes Appearances
Stockton 14, Nash 3

Top 10 Defensive Rating Appearances
Stockton 3, Nash 0

Top 10 Defensive Win Shares Appearances
Stockton 4, Nash 0

Top 10 Steals Percentages Appearances
Stockton 14, Nash 0

Top 10 Assists Percentage Appearances
Stockton 18, Nash 11 (Stockton led the league 15 times, Nash 4)

Top 10 Assists Per Game Appearances
Stockton 17, Nash 11

All-NBA Honors
Stockton 11 All-NBA and 5 All-NBA Defensive
Nash 7 All-NBA (zero and not even close to all-defensive)

Nash was a better scorer. He scored 2.9 points per game more than Stockton in the playoffs. Wow. Big difference. Meanwhile, Stockton did everything else better.

NIne times Nash averaged 15 points per game in the regular season. Stockton did it six times and had three more at 14.7. Over 14 points per game?
Nash 11, Stockton 10

Pretty dang close.



Let's compare Nash's MVP year statistics to Stockton's two best years, just for fun.

2004-2005
Nash scored 15.5 and averaged 11.5 assists.

1989-1990
Stockton averaged 17.2 and 14.5. (Magic Johnson MVP)

2005-2006
Nash scored 18.8 and had 10.5 assists.

1990-1991
Stockton scored 17.2 and had 14.2 assists (Michael Jordan got his second MVP that year)

Now go back and look at history. MJ and Magic were at their peaks during Stockton's best seasons. Can you say that Nash was definitively better than Magic or Michael at their peak?

Stockton had 12 MVP Award Shares during his career. Nash had 8. Stockton ran into Magic and Michael.
DirtyDez
Suns Forum College Scout
Posts: 17,177
And1: 6,908
Joined: Jun 25, 2009
Location: the Arizona desert

Re: Stockton Vs Nash vs Kidd 

Post#67 » by DirtyDez » Thu May 29, 2014 11:29 pm

Having seen both Kidd/Nash at their best in PHX I can say without a doubt Steve Nash was the better PG. The only reason we made it out of the first round from 98-02' was because Duncan got hurt in 01' and was out the entire series. In 22 playoff games for the Suns Kidd shot under 38% which I didn't think was possible for a borderline elite player.
fromthetop321 wrote:I got Lebron number 1, he is also leading defensive player of the year. Curry's game still reminds me of Jeremy Lin to much.
Baller2014
Banned User
Posts: 2,049
And1: 519
Joined: May 22, 2014
Location: No further than the thickness of a shadow
     

Re: Stockton Vs Nash vs Kidd 

Post#68 » by Baller2014 » Fri May 30, 2014 12:44 am

It's interesting that the Stockton brigade keeps saying it's easily him, but I don't think I've seen any of the arguments against him addressed. Could his fans please respond to the many posts explaining why Stockton is being overrated here?
User avatar
Texas Chuck
Senior Mod - NBA TnT Forum
Senior Mod - NBA TnT Forum
Posts: 92,607
And1: 98,951
Joined: May 19, 2012
Location: Purgatory
   

Re: Stockton Vs Nash vs Kidd 

Post#69 » by Texas Chuck » Fri May 30, 2014 1:11 am

Baller2014 wrote:It's interesting that the Stockton brigade keeps saying it's easily him, but I don't think I've seen any of the arguments against him addressed. Could his fans please respond to the many posts explaining why Stockton is being overrated here?


Really? First Im not at all sure that's the case so much as you don't like the responses you are getting, but we could say the same things about Nash supporters ignoring the posts especially in regards to Dallas which counter much of the pro-Nash arguments but dont really addressed.

But none of that adds to any meaningful discussion calling out groups like that. Im not really the biggest Stockton guy, but I do think he was a tremendous player and if you would like to address to me some of the arguments against him I will be glad to respond to each and every one of them. I might even agree with you on some of them.
ThunderBolt wrote:I’m going to let some of you in on a little secret I learned on realgm. If you don’t like a thread, not only do you not have to comment but you don’t even have to open it and read it. You’re welcome.
Doctor MJ
Senior Mod
Senior Mod
Posts: 53,558
And1: 22,540
Joined: Mar 10, 2005
Location: Cali
     

Re: Stockton Vs Nash vs Kidd 

Post#70 » by Doctor MJ » Fri May 30, 2014 1:21 am

trex_8063 wrote:
Doctor MJ wrote:Stockton wasn't leading that offense though. Malone was. Malone was the one getting the accolades. Malone was the one playing the minutes. Malone was the one with superior offensive box score stats. Malone we're now seeing is the one the offense lived & died with.


For the first three seasons of #1 rated offense (in Nash's career), Nash wasn't the clear leader with whom the offense lived and died with, either: Dirk was.


Well that's kind of the point:

The thing you're trumpeting about Stockton's offense is analogous to a time in Nash's career that is merely an afterthought compared to his best years.

trex_8063 wrote:
Doctor MJ wrote:The argument for Stockton is that his two-way impact gives him the edge


This is the argument that has some legs, imo. Considering for instance that in 2001 (post-prime, nearly twilight of his career) Stockton's Off/Def combined +/- was 5.6 (3rd in league) by one source I'm looking at, 7.0 (4th in league) by the other source. And in 2002 (twilight era Stockton), I got one source saying combined +/- at 5.7 (8th in league), another source showing RAPM of 2.2 (12th in league)/NPI RAPM at 3.0 (17th in league).........sure makes me wonder if in the late 80's/early 90's he was routinely putting up combined +/- stats that were every bit as impressive as anything Nash did.

And again, Stockton wins the longevity comparison, too. jsia......


I find the data compelling too. I apply caution though:

1. That '90s data seems to have WTF-level variance than the more recent data.
2. We've still yet to see much data from the year's where Stockton played star-level minutes. This is a big deal because there are clearly times where a player in more limited minutes is being put in in circumstances where he is disproportionately likely to be successful both due to matchup and endurance.

To be more specific, Stockton's last big minute year was '96-97, which was also the first year we have +/- data for. In that year his NPI RAPM ranked him barely in the Top 20 overall, and far weaker than Malone on offense. These are not things that would give suggestion that that version of Stockton is superior in up there with Nash.

Again, that's not a proof against Stockton, and I don't begrudge you coming up with your own conclusions from the data, but if you're wondering why I'm not comfortable making a judgment at this point, there it is.

As for whether it's close enough to give Stockton the edge based on longevity, that's a possibility as well. While the former point isn't likely to be resolved before I make my next GOAT list, the latter is something that I ought to be able to do.
Getting ready for the RealGM 100 on the PC Board

Come join the WNBA Board if you're a fan!
Baller2014
Banned User
Posts: 2,049
And1: 519
Joined: May 22, 2014
Location: No further than the thickness of a shadow
     

Re: Stockton Vs Nash vs Kidd 

Post#71 » by Baller2014 » Fri May 30, 2014 1:22 am

Texas Chuck wrote:Really? First Im not at all sure that's the case so much as you don't like the responses you are getting, but we could say the same things about Nash supporters ignoring the posts especially in regards to Dallas which counter much of the pro-Nash arguments but dont really addressed.

But none of that adds to any meaningful discussion calling out groups like that. Im not really the biggest Stockton guy, but I do think he was a tremendous player and if you would like to address to me some of the arguments against him I will be glad to respond to each and every one of them. I might even agree with you on some of them.


The arguments for Stockton just seem to pasting in a list of his career achievements and some advanced stats. But a lot of posters, like myself, Dr MJ, realbig3, etc, went into some depth explaining why Stockton's actual impact was being overrated, and I was hoping to see a response to that (like "ok, it looks bad, but I blame Sloan for totally mismanaging the team", etc).

What's the Dallas argument? He was underutilised there, got traded and had the offense revolve around him, and things got better. It's clear he was used sub-optimally in Dallas. Nor did Dallas "get better" after he left, in fact their record prior to firing Don Nelson was worse without Nash, and their improvement is a result of massive team upgrades that took place following Nash's departure. If the argument is that Stockton was misused by his coach (a problematic one given he never proved it like Nash did) I'd at least like to hear it.
User avatar
Texas Chuck
Senior Mod - NBA TnT Forum
Senior Mod - NBA TnT Forum
Posts: 92,607
And1: 98,951
Joined: May 19, 2012
Location: Purgatory
   

Re: Stockton Vs Nash vs Kidd 

Post#72 » by Texas Chuck » Fri May 30, 2014 1:47 am

so basically your problem is all narrative. Can't help you with that as you have yours and others have theirs. Strange for you to call them out over narrative tho.

And you are really far off base concerning Dallas, but what's new there? It doesnt fit your narrative so you haven't really bothered to look.

1. He left as a FA, not traded. That's an easy one.
2. What massive team improvements? Devin and JET in for Nash? No. Stack in for Jamison? No. Dampier in for Antoine Walker? Yes, though its hard to call Erick Dampier "a massive improvement". No the talent base went down in Dallas starting in 05 without any question. The change was a renewed emphasis on D and turning the offense fully over to Dirk.
3. We've actually covered in some depth in recent threads the myth that Nash was underutilized in Dallas. His usage and FGA in Dallas are right in line with his prime seasons in Phoenix and surely you aren't seriously attempting to suggest Nellie didnt know what to do with a talented offensive PG?
4. Nash did get a lot better in Phoenix, but that's because of Nash's dedication to fitness and reducing his party lifestyle more than being misused in Dallas. Also Dirk didnt so much need Nash as was made clear immediately, but guys like Marion, Amare, and the shooters had a very nice symbiotic relationship.

Now if you'd like to move beyond narrative on Stock Im still willing to address it, but otherwise....
ThunderBolt wrote:I’m going to let some of you in on a little secret I learned on realgm. If you don’t like a thread, not only do you not have to comment but you don’t even have to open it and read it. You’re welcome.
G35
RealGM
Posts: 22,523
And1: 8,071
Joined: Dec 10, 2005
     

Re: Stockton Vs Nash vs Kidd 

Post#73 » by G35 » Fri May 30, 2014 2:17 am

HeartBreakKid wrote:
G35 wrote:
Jonny Blaze wrote:
For most of his career Jason Kidd could not shoot an open jumper. Thats why I have him 3rd.

Kidd came back to Dallas in 2008 and the Mavs could no longer run the Dirk/Nash, Dirk/Jason Terry, Dirk/Devin Harris pick and roll that they had been killing teams with for years.

Why?

Because Jason Kidd could not hit a wide open jumper from the top of the key. He was not good at creating his own shot. Put Nash or Stockton in that same play and its almost an automatic two points because those two are superb shooters.

Kidd intangibles work great on teams that are already deep (see 2011 Mavs) but his lack of scoring ability is a detriment on a team lacking with talent.



I agree, Kidd on a team lacking talent would not win a title but it would be more competitive than Nash leading a team without talent.

Nash on those Nets teams does not go to the finals. Nash doing a pick and roll with say a Kwame Brown or Roy Hibbert is not an automatic two points.

People look at Nash and say, "Look at the great offenses!"....he played with Dirk....Amare, Marion, Joe J, and under coach's Don Nelson and Mike D'Antoni. Coach's known for playing mish mash lineups trying to gain an offensive advantage and not playing any defense.

It's like some black hole when discussing Nash where only offense is discussed and people wonder why his teams lost in the playoff's. It's not that they went up against a lot better teams, but NONE of his teams ever played great defense. I mean not one team was he a part of that was top 5 in defense.

Look at the teams left in the playoff's and their Drtg

MIA 10th
IND 1st
SAS 3rd
OKC 6th

Nash played on 8 teams that were ranked in the 20's. Twice he was a part of a top ten defensive team and one of those were when he was a back up to Jason Kidd. People can stress offense all they want to but that is the #1 reason why those Suns teams (and Maverick teams) underachieved in the playoff's. Your best player cannot be a one way player....just can't....it doesn't happen.....


He also played with

Gortat, Shannon, Jared Dudley, 40 year old Grant Hill and nearly made the playoffs in the West in 2012 and he was past his prime then. As soon as he gets traded to LA that team become doodoo. Yes, Nash dishing to Hibbert would be a safe bet they could score. Nash would carry the Nets just fine, Jason Kidd didn't exactly beat many stellar teams during his Nets runs.


Not a chance in hell that you can put Hibbert at the top of the key or anywhere outside the paint and he can play pick and pop or make any move that required him to dribble at all. He doesn't have that ability.

Nash would have zero chance of leading those Nets teams to #1 Ortgs...that's Nash's claim to fame is top offenses. There is no chance Nash can take those Nets teams to back to back finals appearances. First off the defense would drop considerably, and the offense would only marginally improve. The talent wasn't there to be more than average. Those Nets made their mark through defense and getting out on the break. Kidd was the best defensive player on that team and Nash could not duplicate that. Kidd was also those Nets teams leading scorer. Any team that has Nash as it's leading scorer will not be going far at all in the playoffs.

Gortat is more than a serviceable center and he had this to say when he came to PHX from ORL, and did quite well in Washington. Also Goran Dragic was the best player on the Suns and he had average talent and directed those Suns into the 8th best offense 2 years after Nash left. That doesn't make Dragic, an all time great, it just means that teams can overachieve when put in a good situation.....
I'm so tired of the typical......
Baller2014
Banned User
Posts: 2,049
And1: 519
Joined: May 22, 2014
Location: No further than the thickness of a shadow
     

Re: Stockton Vs Nash vs Kidd 

Post#74 » by Baller2014 » Fri May 30, 2014 2:21 am

Yeh, I know he left as a free agent, that was a typo on my part. It doesn't affect anything I said though.

I think it's misplaced to call the change the Mavericks underwent "a narrative". Their coach when Nash was there was Don Nelson, a once great coach who had kind of let (most of) the game pass him by as the years went by, and who had become obsessed with gimmick offenses. During his time there they were doing hilariously absurd things, like playing Antione Walker as their starting 5. Just ludicrous stuff. It's no secret the team was not playing as well as it could, and it should come as no surprise Nash was not being optimally utilised. Dirk wasn't either. After Nash left the team did not "improve" under Nellie. Under Nellie and Nellie ball they were 42-22. Nellie was then fired, and Avery Johnson started making the team play D and a more conventional offense, and they went 16-2. That's point one.

Secondly, I think it's very clear the Mavs got a bunch of upgrades from 04 to 05. The most important of these upgrades wasn't any one player though, it was getting rid of Nellie so they could actually utilise the players properly. Instead of playing wacky small ball line-ups they brought in guys who could let them play normally. Dampier over Antione Walker at the 5 spot is about as big an improvement as you're likely to see over one season, and Dampier was a good big man at the time I hasten to add. Jason Terry was a borderline all-star player, and a great addition, as was the then very good Devin Harris (come on, he was a good player once, pre-injuries). Josh Howard went from being a rookie to a Kawhi like role player, and vets like Stackhouse were a welcome addition too. Basically the Mavs totally changed the way they played, and got the players to play this new style.

You can attribute Nash's improvement to all manner of things, partying less, better health, whatever. It doesn't affect my argument because I give people credit for the seasons they actually had, not the seasons they might have had if circumstances had been different. Nash was an all-nba player in Dallas, and that's what he gets credit for. In Phoenix he was an MVP type player, and that's what he gets credit for there. Stockton was a top 8-20 player for his whole career basically, and that's what he should get credit for. If you start rating people on how good they would have been in different circumstances, then your lists better start including Len Bias, healthy Bill Walton, positive attitude Elvin Hayes, etc.
HeartBreakKid
RealGM
Posts: 22,395
And1: 18,828
Joined: Mar 08, 2012
     

Re: Stockton Vs Nash vs Kidd 

Post#75 » by HeartBreakKid » Fri May 30, 2014 2:48 am

G35 wrote:
HeartBreakKid wrote:
G35 wrote:

I agree, Kidd on a team lacking talent would not win a title but it would be more competitive than Nash leading a team without talent.

Nash on those Nets teams does not go to the finals. Nash doing a pick and roll with say a Kwame Brown or Roy Hibbert is not an automatic two points.

People look at Nash and say, "Look at the great offenses!"....he played with Dirk....Amare, Marion, Joe J, and under coach's Don Nelson and Mike D'Antoni. Coach's known for playing mish mash lineups trying to gain an offensive advantage and not playing any defense.

It's like some black hole when discussing Nash where only offense is discussed and people wonder why his teams lost in the playoff's. It's not that they went up against a lot better teams, but NONE of his teams ever played great defense. I mean not one team was he a part of that was top 5 in defense.

Look at the teams left in the playoff's and their Drtg

MIA 10th
IND 1st
SAS 3rd
OKC 6th

Nash played on 8 teams that were ranked in the 20's. Twice he was a part of a top ten defensive team and one of those were when he was a back up to Jason Kidd. People can stress offense all they want to but that is the #1 reason why those Suns teams (and Maverick teams) underachieved in the playoff's. Your best player cannot be a one way player....just can't....it doesn't happen.....


He also played with

Gortat, Shannon, Jared Dudley, 40 year old Grant Hill and nearly made the playoffs in the West in 2012 and he was past his prime then. As soon as he gets traded to LA that team become doodoo. Yes, Nash dishing to Hibbert would be a safe bet they could score. Nash would carry the Nets just fine, Jason Kidd didn't exactly beat many stellar teams during his Nets runs.


Not a chance in hell that you can put Hibbert at the top of the key or anywhere outside the paint and he can play pick and pop or make any move that required him to dribble at all. He doesn't have that ability.

Nash would have zero chance of leading those Nets teams to #1 Ortgs...that's Nash's claim to fame is top offenses. There is no chance Nash can take those Nets teams to back to back finals appearances. First off the defense would drop considerably, and the offense would only marginally improve. The talent wasn't there to be more than average. Those Nets made their mark through defense and getting out on the break. Kidd was the best defensive player on that team and Nash could not duplicate that. Kidd was also those Nets teams leading scorer. Any team that has Nash as it's leading scorer will not be going far at all in the playoffs.

Gortat is more than a serviceable center and he had this to say when he came to PHX from ORL, and did quite well in Washington. Also Goran Dragic was the best player on the Suns and he had average talent and directed those Suns into the 8th best offense 2 years after Nash left. That doesn't make Dragic, an all time great, it just means that teams can overachieve when put in a good situation.....



Oh wait, ROY HIBBERT? As in the guy on the Pacers? What on earth does he have to do with anything? Why not replace him with David West? I don't really get your point, Nash has had success with multiple teammates, if we're really gonna pretend like Nash hasn't made guys who don't look that good, look good then I don't know what to tell you. You're right, he's a system PG.
Winglish
Analyst
Posts: 3,634
And1: 1,303
Joined: Feb 17, 2013
     

Re: Stockton Vs Nash vs Kidd 

Post#76 » by Winglish » Fri May 30, 2014 3:35 am

Today 5:44 pm by Baller2014
It's interesting that the Stockton brigade keeps saying it's easily him, but I don't think I've seen any of the arguments against him addressed. Could his fans please respond to the many posts explaining why Stockton is being overrated here?


It's already been pointed out to you in multiple ways why Stockton was better. He simply had better statistics overall, including playoffs success, which you keep referencing as a reason to downgrade Stockton. The bare truth is that Stockton was superior to Nash in nearly EVERY stastistical measure.
Stockton is a significantly better defensive player, as you already noted. Stockton wins the longevity comparison. Stockton has the bigger statistical footprint.
And imo Stockton has the greater playoff presence as far as career wholes-->neither has a title, but Stockton has two finals appearances (that's two more than Nash). Stockton has 182 playoff games played vs. just 120 for Nash. Stockton has 89 playoff wins to his credit, 89-93 playoff record (.489); vs. Nash's 58 playoff wins-->58-65 (.472). And in the playoffs-->Nash 19.8 PER, .133 WS/48 in 35.7 mpg; Stockton 19.8 PER, .160 WS/48 in 35.2 mpg.
Jonny Blaze
Veteran
Posts: 2,803
And1: 1,414
Joined: Jun 20, 2011

Re: Stockton Vs Nash vs Kidd 

Post#77 » by Jonny Blaze » Fri May 30, 2014 3:39 am

Texas Chuck wrote:so basically your problem is all narrative. Can't help you with that as you have yours and others have theirs. Strange for you to call them out over narrative tho.

And you are really far off base concerning Dallas, but what's new there? It doesnt fit your narrative so you haven't really bothered to look.

1. He left as a FA, not traded. That's an easy one.
2. What massive team improvements? Devin and JET in for Nash? No. Stack in for Jamison? No. Dampier in for Antoine Walker? Yes, though its hard to call Erick Dampier "a massive improvement". No the talent base went down in Dallas starting in 05 without any question. The change was a renewed emphasis on D and turning the offense fully over to Dirk.
.


Your second point is completely incorrect. I mean totally incorrect.

The Mavs made MASSIVE improvements to their roster after Nash left.

These massive improvements helped the Mavs go 58-24, 60-22, 67-15 in the three years following Nash's departure. They won the Western Conference in 2006 defeating the San Antonio Spurs on the road. Those three years (along with the 2011 team) are by far the best teams the Mavs have ever put on the court.

They got rid of the soft white boyz. They became way more athletic and became a much better defensive team. The 2004 team played absolutely no defense at all.


The increased athleticism of the roster is what led to their improvements in defense. Not a "renewed focus" on defense.


Jason Terry and Jerry Stackhouse were able to replicate Nash's scoring and shooting ability.
Devin Harris was an elite perimeter defensive player. These three players together are an upgrade over what Nash brought.

Erick Dampier (as crummy as he was) was a massive improvement over any center the Mavs had previously had
in the Dirk/Nash era. The previous centers were Shawn Bradley, Raef LaFrentz and some other spares.

The Dampier/Diop combination at center contributed to the Mavs being one of the top 3 rebounding teams in the NBA during the 2005-06 season.
This feat would have been unimaginable under Don Nelson.


Josh Howard was a better defensive player than any player the Mavs had when Don Nelson was the coach.

That is why the argument of "Look at the Mavs....they got better when Nash left" holds no water with me.

The Mavs were able to replace Nash with some great players.

The became way more athletic. The addition of two serviceable centers allowed them to play much better defense.

The addition of Diop and Dampier gave them the ability to control the defensive boards. Something the Mavs didn't do very well in the Don Nelson era.
Baller2014
Banned User
Posts: 2,049
And1: 519
Joined: May 22, 2014
Location: No further than the thickness of a shadow
     

Re: Stockton Vs Nash vs Kidd 

Post#78 » by Baller2014 » Fri May 30, 2014 3:42 am

Yes, you said he had better stats. And I explained a player's impact is not the same as their stats.
User avatar
Texas Chuck
Senior Mod - NBA TnT Forum
Senior Mod - NBA TnT Forum
Posts: 92,607
And1: 98,951
Joined: May 19, 2012
Location: Purgatory
   

Re: Stockton Vs Nash vs Kidd 

Post#79 » by Texas Chuck » Fri May 30, 2014 4:02 am

Jonny Blaze wrote:
Jason Terry and Jerry Stackhouse were able to replicate Nash's scoring and shooting ability.
Devin Harris was an elite perimeter defensive player. These three players together are an upgrade over what Nash brought.





Im sorry but an intended defense of Steve Nash by stating that JET, terrible Stack, and rookie Devin were an improvement over one of Nash's peak season is simply amazing.

Your defense of Nash is that he worse than JET and a couple of very mediocre role players. OK.

I personally think Steve Nash is a lot better than that.....

Also, the Mavs talent did go down. They became a better team I agree but thats a completely different argument.
ThunderBolt wrote:I’m going to let some of you in on a little secret I learned on realgm. If you don’t like a thread, not only do you not have to comment but you don’t even have to open it and read it. You’re welcome.
User avatar
Texas Chuck
Senior Mod - NBA TnT Forum
Senior Mod - NBA TnT Forum
Posts: 92,607
And1: 98,951
Joined: May 19, 2012
Location: Purgatory
   

Re: Stockton Vs Nash vs Kidd 

Post#80 » by Texas Chuck » Fri May 30, 2014 4:48 am

And in regards to crediting Avery for the uptick in 05, well kinda, but mostly not.

Remember Nellie was angry all year. Mainly at Cuban not paying Nash, but also because he didnt want Dampier but was forced into playing him. He was upset his power and influence was being reduced and given to his son and to Avery(who was instrumental in Damp deal). So removing him removed a giant cloud that had been hanging over the team. Plus that roster had major turnover with 3 of the top 6 guys no longer with the team. So you would expect the team to play better towards the end of the year and they did. Avery should get credit for changing the culture over his tenure, but slow down just a bit.

To further illustrate that Avery wasnt really an improvement over Nellie, 07 happened where Avery with in your words, a massively talented team, got badly outcoached by who? Oh Nellie. Which was on the heels of the 06 Finals where he was badly outcoached as well.

Look I get you are a Nash fan and that's great. Me too. But we have to be careful about how we try and fix the frame to the picture we want to paint. Nash was a great player in Dallas after those first two years where he really struggled. He was. But the Mavs didnt fall apart when he left. Not at all. They were still a really good team, and really good offensively.

Im not saying that to knock Nash because it has nothing to do with him really. He played for the Suns then. But we keep hearing 2 things over and over from Nash supporters:

1. Nash led great team offenses in Dallas thus you cant say anything about MDA, a system, or the offensive talent in Phoenix. That argument loses a little luster when Dallas continued to have great offenses after he left.

2. The Dallas years don't matter because they aren't his best years anyway. If they don't matter then stop bringing up point 1. I think they do matter. I think they show how good Nash was prior to Phoenix. I think Nash's prime has at least 4 Dallas years in it starting with 01 that he rarely gets credited for. I think he gets shortchanged from a longevity standpoint because of it.

Steve Nash is one of the best PGs to ever play which is why he is in a thread like this with Stockton and Kidd. Many people have him #2 behind Magic, most have him as a top 5 guy. I personally have him a little lower, but make no mistake he was an unbelievable player, a ridiculous offensive genius, and one of the most entertaining players of all-time. I just like it when we all step back and look at what actually happened in total and not pick and choose because it comes across as an attempt to prop up a guy who needs absolutely no propping up. He stacks up extremely well with Stockton and Kidd.
ThunderBolt wrote:I’m going to let some of you in on a little secret I learned on realgm. If you don’t like a thread, not only do you not have to comment but you don’t even have to open it and read it. You’re welcome.

Return to Player Comparisons