can you explain why? i specifically said in my post im talking about peak play, meaning how good a player was when they were at their best. kidd obviously has had a better career than cp3 so far, but not a better peak. cp3 is on another level as a scorer when compared to jkidd. more volume on much greater efficiency. he isn't the same defender, but paul isn't bad in that regard..and they are comparable as playmakers. what cp3 does in terms of taking care of the ball is remarkable. did you expect the hornets to be better than they were? or the clips to go past the 2nd round last year? this year they lost in the first which was disappointing, but it was no fault of cp3's. he put up an insane ortg, 23 ppg, with 6 apg and only 1 tov on 63% ts, with a 29 PER. the clips lost cuz their bigs got dominated, and a normally decent clips defense gave up a 114 ortg to the grizzlies. their defense was bad. are we to blame cp3 for his big men being inept defensively (and blake also getting hurt)? c'mon man, it's a team game. are you giving credit to jkidd for leading the nets to the finals as that much an edge over what cp3 or nash has done? i mean cp3 has led 50 win teams too. why does jkidd get more credit for scoring less on worse efficiency, while not having a remarkable edge in playmaking because he played in the weak EC. it's not an excuse, but to say kidd accomplished more because of circumstances during his peak is a bit of looking at it without context. in 2002 the nets didn't face ONE 50 win team until the finals. why is nash or cp3 penalized when they both lost to superior teams, just like kidd did when he reached the finals? nash has achored among the greatest offenses of all time, and made it to the wcf twice, and multiple 60 win teams. he's a much beter offensive player (can take over much like cp3), and he's also a better playmaker. nash anchoring a top 10 offense of all time in 05 and going to the wcf only to lose the spurs isn't really less impressive than what kidd was able to do. then the next year, nash was able to anchor an elite offense even without amare. then again. hell even last year, an obvious declined nash led the suns to a .500 record and a top 10 offense in the league. nash is on the shortlist as one of the absolute elite offensive players of all time. anybody denying that doesn't realize the sort of impact he had on the suns. btw, for a great playmaking guard, kidd has anchored pretty poor offenses. 17th in orating in 02 18th in orating in 03 25th in orating in 04 26th in orating in 05 25th in orating in 06 16th in orating in 07 25th in orating in 08 only once in phx did he anchor a top 5 offense. otherwise his entire nets career, he wasn't the anchor to even an average offensive team. heck, those teams are among the worst in the league offensively. is it a fault of kidd's? no, but i'd expect a reason why the nets were inept offensively was because kidd just wasn't that potent a scorer. i guarantee those nets teams are better offensively with nash/cp3. and that the gap offensively is bigger than what they lose defensively (especially in cp3's case). nash and cp3 are on other levels as scorers. they are much more efficient, and can take over games. they are comparable as playmakers as well, and year in and year out anchor much better offenses (cp3 and nash are usually on top 5 offensive teams every year). unless we're crediting the nets defensive success all to jkidd as the anchor (which is hard to justify, since pg defense has never proven to anchor a defense), then what exactly is kidd's argument? kidd is a better rebounder. and he's a better defender. but the offensive gap is so huge, i'd take nash and cp3 over him. and looking at the context, i don't know if what kidd did leading those teams to the finals is more impressive than nash's wcf losses, or what cp3 has done individually. and didn't cp3 torch kidd in the 08 playoffs? cp3 did 25/6/12 on 50% for the SERIES beating the mavs in 5. kidd did 8.6/6/7. and before you try to discredit it as past kidd's prime...then we should also discredit him winning a championship as that was past his prime too...which leads exactly into my point comparing PEAKS only. im real curious for your response.
Any list that doesn't have Walt Frazier in the top five means you never saw him play or your clueless. He could do it all, pass, score (36 pts and 19 assists in gm 7 against the Lakers in the NBA finals without Willis Reed), rebound, and on top of that he was/is one of the greatest defensive players ever.
1. Magic Johnson 2. John Stockton 3. Jason Kidd 4. Isiah Thomas 5. Steve Nash Notable mention: Matthew "Matt" Maloney!
In terms of greatness of career: Stockton Robertson Johnson Payton Kidd/Nash (I know I'm cheating) In terms of peak level aka "Who would I want to play PG for me if he was in his absolute prime right now?" '09 Chris Paul (greatest statistical season ever by a PG) '87 Johnson '64 Robertson (20 win shares!) '07 Nash '97 Stockton I fully suspect Chris Paul to bypass Payton by the end of his career and finish top 3 career-wise if he stays healthy. If not, his current six year stretch is statistically the best stretch by any PG ever.
First three are obvious IMO: 1. Magic 2. Oscar 3. Chris Paul Then you can argue between 3-5 for Gary Payton, Isiah, Stockton, Nash and Kidd.
Magic is probably the best but if I was building a team from scratch I'd take Stockton for his shooting. And I'm not sure Magic could guard a modern day PG.
Magic Johnson Oscar Robertson Isiah Thomas John Stockton Steve Nash Tiny Archibald Bob Cousy Pete Maravich Jason Kidd Walt Frazier Mark Jackson Gary Payton Dennis Johnson Mo Cheeks Earl Monroe
Kidd is VERY high in the playmaking-through-passing "true point guard" measure. Top 3 best COURT VISION of point guards ever. Kidd is one of my favorite players, probably the first "still in high school" players I ever cared about. It was a great time for hyping in college classes and players then, with the Fab Five, all the other blue chippers and "NY prep star" legends like Kenny Anderson, Hoop Dreams movie, Michael Jordan in the league of course... (ah, sorry for getting to reminiscing there. Hey I don't blame "tinman" for boosting up the period lol) Though as a Kidd fan, I wouldnt put him top 5 all time. He's up there in legacy career stats, other players got more out their primes. Ranking: Magic Johnson John Stockton Oscar Robertson (I don't think he's a pure point guard, but it gets him his highest position on all-time lists) Isiah Thomas Steve Nash (yep) Best of Rest: Walt Frazier, Chris Paul (yep), Kidd, Bob Cousy, Gary Payton. (Most underrated): Kevin Johnson Notes: If you're a fan of a team, would you choose Steve Nash's 2 MVPs as a higher "in prime" or Jason Kidd's 2 Finals appearances in-prime? I think Chris Paul got robbed of an MVP and is better than Kidd and Nash. But he needs that conclusive postseason run to get himself in the true high ranks. Thats why as of now Steve Nash is top 5 cuz of better hardware and statistically credible effect on offenses, though Paul is almost as good on offenses and MUCH better on the defensive end. Kidd will be in the "next 5" but nothing wrong with that.
People seem to forget that Jason Kidd was a stud on the defensive side of the ball...too much focus on his FG%. All Defensive 1st Team 4 times in his career. All Defensive 2nd Team 5 times in his career. Other notable rankings... Ranked 6th in NBA history in games played (Durability is part of greatness). Ranked 3rd in NBA history in minutes played. Ranked 3rd in NBA history in 3 pointers made. Ranked 50th in NBA history in rebounds (He's a point guard who has outrebounded the likes of Elton Brand, Antawn Jamison, Chris Webber, Oscar Robertson, etc...) Ranked 23rd in NBA history in defensive rebounds. Ranked 2nd in NBA history in steals. Ranked 2nd in NBA history in assists. Ranked 26th in NBA history in win shares. And if we are talking all time greats, CP3 has a looooong way to go to even be in the discussion. Anyone who doesnt include Kidd in the top 7 or so has either not watched closely or is delusional. And I dont even like the guy.
