J. Kidd or S. Nash?

[Drewski]

Re: J. Kidd or S. Nash?

That's a great question. My answer is probaby not. You can't have two liabilities on defense, like Nash and Dirk. Nash would make a good offense even better though.

Don't think they can play Nash on Bron like they did with Kidd, but then again I never thought Kidd was the Bron stopper. The Zone covers alot of liablities, therefore Barea got some burn in the finals as well. Tough to say.

[Playmakers]

Re: J. Kidd or S. Nash?

Ignoring the fact that there are 11 other players playing on the team, lol. You're right. Nash hasn't been to 3 NBA Finals like Kidd has. He's just been to 4 WCFs. No big deal. Obviously Nash can't get it done and is just a stat-filler.

Hey look man i love them both but the bottom line is IMO Kidd brings more things to table in the rugged playoff games and that is why he's been able to advance beyond conference finals

When i look at Kidd i see a PG that over of his career was able to contribute defensively and rebound better than most PG's in the history of the game those are two traits Nash lacks and those are two huge traits you need in NBA playoff games.

Those are things that at 6'4 Kidd gives your team great flexibility in the way you can use him during games

I think Kidd is by far the more versatile of the two players and if I take their entire career into effect he's simply accomplishged more than Nash and no one can debate that fact.

[jeebs9]

Re: J. Kidd or S. Nash?

2002 and 2003.

I think saying head and shoulders is a bit much though. Personally I'd go with J. Kidd.

It's all about the defense for me. Like someone brought up. Your not going to get Nash to shut down or straight in front of a LeBron. It's just that big of a difference in my opinion. Your talking about a players that could guard any position from Point to small forward. (he even guarded Bosh a few possession in the finals if anyone remembers) Nash just doesn't bring to defense to the floor. And now that teams must respect Kidd's 3 point shooting. He is even more dangerous.

edit: To me defense is the difference between a lot of players in the league. You either got it or you don't.

[wwharton]

Re: J. Kidd or S. Nash?

It's all about the defense for me. Like someone brought up. Your not going to get Nash to shut down or straight in front of a LeBron. It's just that big of a difference in my opinion. Your talking about a players that could guard any position from Point to small forward. (he even guarded Bosh a few possession in the finals if anyone remembers) Nash just doesn't bring to defense to the floor. And now that teams must respect Kidd's 3 point shooting. He is even more dangerous.

edit: To me defense is the difference between a lot of players in the league. You either got it or you don't.

And honestly, the difference in shooting is THAT big too. Kidd turned into a really good spot up 3 point shooter, but that's it... and originally his shot was HORRIBLE. He deserves all the credit in the world for his defense, but Nash's shot has always been THAT much better. On a team with few offensive options, or where the options aren't putting it in the hole, Kidd isn't going to do much to help there while Nash will.

I think they're about even so I'm staying out of the discussion for the most part, but I see people talking up Kidd's D more now while just saying "Nash wins in shooting" but you can't really just write that off... the difference is probably as big as the difference on D over the course of their careers.

[24]

Re: J. Kidd or S. Nash?

I take Jason Kidd. He was the main reason why the nets were able to make 2 finals appearances he really put them back on the map. Kidd is great both offensively and defensively

[jeebs9]

Re: J. Kidd or S. Nash?

And honestly, the difference in shooting is THAT big too. Kidd turned into a really good spot up 3 point shooter, but that's it... and originally his shot was HORRIBLE. He deserves all the credit in the world for his defense, but Nash's shot has always been THAT much better. On a team with few offensive options, or where the options aren't putting it in the hole, Kidd isn't going to do much to help there while Nash will.

I think they're about even so I'm staying out of the discussion for the most part, but I see people talking up Kidd's D more now while just saying "Nash wins in shooting" but you can't really just write that off... the difference is probably as big as the difference on D over the course of their careers.

So you believe that Steve can win a ring as a starting point guard for a team?

[wwharton]

Re: J. Kidd or S. Nash?

So you believe that Steve can win a ring as a starting point guard for a team?

Really? You don't? Come on man, he's been to multiple WCFs, won multiple MVPs and will be in the HOF without winning a ring. And when we're talking about Kidd, I'm talking about Kidd in his prime... the one who couldn't win a ring as a starting point guard either if that's how we're going to look at it. The Kidd that just won a championship is a shell of his former self. His team won mostly bc of Dirk, partly bc of Terry and partly bc of Chandler. Kidd played his role but what he did in the playoffs this year, let alone the finals, was far from a performance that will get him into the HOF. He'll get in based on the years when he had no rings.

[The15thunter]

Re: J. Kidd or S. Nash?

if we agree that kidd's defense = nash's shooting, and we agree that kidd's passing = nash's passing, then kidd wins because he rebounds better and is a harder match-up due to size, while also being more athletic (bigger, stronger, faster).

[jeebs9]

Re: J. Kidd or S. Nash?

Even before Kidd won the ring I held Kidd as a better point guard.

[Drewski]

Re: J. Kidd or S. Nash?

So you believe that Steve can win a ring as a starting point guard for a team?

Not to interject, but I definitely think Steve Nash can win a ring as a starting PG for a team. He's been one of the best PG's in the league for the majority of his career, and while his defense leaves MUCH to be desired, his offense is nothing to disregard. I don't think Nash could have done what Kidd did to Lebron, but Kidd wouldn't be able to do what Nash could do against any of their throw away PGs.

[Playmakers]

Re: J. Kidd or S. Nash?

This is 38 year old J.Kidd laying it all out on the floor defensively vs some of the best scorer's in the NBA during these playoffs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O7LsbQXj4IM

I think even at 38 what this proves is you don't have to be the biggest, strongest or fastest player on the floor....defense is about desire and determination aswell

I've just never thought Nash cared about expending any energy on the defensive end of the floor....look at Barea he's not a great defender but he gave effort and that is what i never understood about Nash.

Look at Stockton was he really that much different from Nash defensively?

I think the only difference between Stockton and Nash was the effort and determination by Stockton to compete on the defensive end of the floor

[jeebs9]

Re: J. Kidd or S. Nash?

I don't know... I just feel as though Kidd bring more to the table. Compared to Nash.

[Drewski]

Re: J. Kidd or S. Nash?

I don't know... I just feel as though Kidd bring more to the table. Compared to Nash.

I think it's really close, splitting hairs close, but in the end I guess you fall back on "defense wins championships" and call it a day. It's arguable, but not an easy argument to be had by any means. Two of the best PGs of the last 15 years, I'm content with em both.

[Playmakers]

Re: J. Kidd or S. Nash?

also i will say this some of Nash flaws defensively i think were instilled in him by Don Nelson and Mike D'Antoni

They really didn't care about defense and they stressed the importance to play it

[wwharton]

Re: J. Kidd or S. Nash?

if we agree that kidd's defense = nash's shooting, and we agree that kidd's passing = nash's passing, then kidd wins because he rebounds better and is a harder match-up due to size, while also being more athletic (bigger, stronger, faster).

I can see this.

Even before Kidd won the ring I held Kidd as a better point guard.

And that's fine. I'm really torn on this one. I just don't think it's fair to just say Kidd's defense is so much better so he wins bc Nash's shooting ability has been that much better as well.

I think it's really close, splitting hairs close, but in the end I guess you fall back on "defense wins championships" and call it a day. It's arguable, but not an easy argument to be had by any means. Two of the best PGs of the last 15 years, I'm content with em both.

I don't even like the "defense wins championships" line in this one, bc Kidd didn't win a championship until this year, waaaaay past his prime. At the height of his game he won as many rings as Nash. Kidd does own rebounding hands down.