Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

NBA Finals: Miami Heat vs. Dallas Mavericks


  • Please log in to reply
846 replies to this topic

#841 Mvp2014

Mvp2014

    Phenom

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,766 posts

Posted 15 June 2011 - 02:41 PM

And he did leave Portland to join Hakeem in Houston to get his ring.


exactly, thats why I say that. But he wasnt a punk like LBJ. He reminds me of Dominic Wilkins too, amazing scorer but no killer instinct

#842 X-Clown

X-Clown

    Positive Polly

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,312 posts

Posted 15 June 2011 - 02:44 PM

And if Jordan didn't retire he would have never got a ring. Come on, guys. No need to belittle his accomplishment.



Also Drexler had already spent 11 years in Portland and had appeared in 2 NBA Finals. Unlike LeBron's Cavs, the Trailblazers were not in a position to compete for a championship. Trailblazers finished 44-38 and the Rockets weren't much better finishing 47-35 although they were coming off of a championship season.

A lot of people forget how great Drexler was simply because he paled in comparison to MJ.


I don't begrudge Clyde for leaving Portland for essentially the same reason LeBron left Cleveland, but let's not pretend that he didn't go along for the ride on Hakeem's team. Charles Barkley basically did the same thing the next year, but it didn't work out.

#843 X-Clown

X-Clown

    Positive Polly

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,312 posts

Posted 15 June 2011 - 02:59 PM

And I would still take prime Kidd over prime Nash. I think Kidd brought more to the table. He was a walking triple-double. Stat guys tend to underrate Kidd because he was not an efficient scorer. But who do you think made most of the big shots for the Nets during their Finals runs? It sure as hell wasn't the likes of Kenyon Martin or Keith Van Horn. And when those guys did make a big basket, it was because of Kidd getting them easy looks. More times than not though, Kidd stepped up and made big baskets/plays when his team needed him to. Despite not being a high percentage scorer. People also forget that Kidd at one point was the most feared player in the NBA in the open court. He would grab a rebound and fly down the court before the defense knew what hit them. And he has always been a solid spot up shooter. It just became a bigger part of his game since he can no longer run the fastbreak like he use to.

Those of us who base our opinions of him on what we seen him do, understand the impact he had on both ends of the floor. Not only that, but also his intangibles. He took a group of nobodies to the NBA Finals two years in a row. He carried those teams on his back like few players have carried a team before. There is no way anyone can convince me that Nash could have taken that group to the Finals. I also don't think the Mavs would have won a title this year with Nash instead of Kidd.

With that being said, I was never really a huge fan of Kidd until I saw him play in person back in 2002 in a 2nd round Playoff game against the Hornets. Kidd scored over 20pts and nearly had a triple-double. He didn't shoot great from the field, but every time the Hornets missed a shot you could see the fear in their eyes. They knew what was about to happen and there was nothing they could do. Kidd would grab the rebound or catch an outlet pass and push the ball up court right down the Hornets' throat. It was amazing how fast he was with the ball in his hands. It looked like everyone else was running in sand. And on the defensive end he gave Baron Davis all kinds of fits.

To me, that's what separates Kidd from Nash. His ability to control the game on both ends of the floor. I don't care how efficient Nash is as a scorer. They are point guards and Kidd was just as effective as Nash at controlling the game on the offensive end. And he gave you All-NBA defense to boot.


I agree with your assessment of Kidd's impact on both ends of the floor. I'd argue that Nash's prime was longer than Kidd's and that he was much more effective than Kidd at running the half court offense. His path to the NBA finals was not nearly as tough as Nash who had to go through the Laker and Spur dynasties. Nash also had a revolving door supporting cast during his prime due to having a cheap owner, but never complained or demanded a trade, and never has been a problem behind the scenes. I absolutely think Nash could have been the PG for Dallas this year and helped them win a title with the way that Dallas's bigs stepped up.

Edited by X-Clown, 15 June 2011 - 03:08 PM.


#844 Mvp2014

Mvp2014

    Phenom

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,766 posts

Posted 15 June 2011 - 04:08 PM

I'd take Kidd any day of the week, Nash's game is ugly to me, he's just like a clown running in circles throwing up garbage shots. Kidd had wicked handles and amazing court vision. Even as his body breaks down he can still guard Kobe, Westbrook, and D Wade.

#845 X-Clown

X-Clown

    Positive Polly

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,312 posts

Posted 15 June 2011 - 04:15 PM

I'd take Kidd any day of the week, Nash's game is ugly to me, he's just like a clown running in circles throwing up garbage shots.


Many players wish they could shoot almost 49% for their career taking "garbage shots".


Kidd had wicked handles and amazing court vision.


And Nash didn't? :confused:

#846 Panthers128

Panthers128

    SENIOR HUDDLER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,283 posts

Posted 15 June 2011 - 04:29 PM

Just depends on the kind of player your team needs really. Nash has always been a more efficient offensive player and has an excellent scoring percentage while Kidd has been a superior defensive player, always helping clean up the defensive glass and creating turnovers.

I enjoy watching Nash play more than Kidd, but defense wins championships and Nash never played much defense. I wouldn't call either player a clown, both are great point guards.

#847 X-Clown

X-Clown

    Positive Polly

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,312 posts

Posted 15 June 2011 - 04:56 PM

Just depends on the kind of player your team needs really. Nash has always been a more efficient offensive player and has an excellent scoring percentage while Kidd has been a superior defensive player, always helping clean up the defensive glass and creating turnovers.

I enjoy watching Nash play more than Kidd, but defense wins championships and Nash never played much defense. I wouldn't call either player a clown, both are great point guards.


No doubt about it, both are Hall of Famers and are somewhere around Top 5-7 PGs of all time.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users