IMO It's almost impossible to pick one, it's like saying who would you start your franchise with Magic, Bird or MJ.
Even now with both being quality pg's but a little pass there prime..kidd to me has been the smartest PG in the league for a while, but nash can run an offense better then any other pg in the league not name chris paul. no player has shot the ball better(nash) from the perimeter since MJ..
Just curious to know what some of you think
They both can run an offense, but Kidd brought more of an impact on the floor due to his defense and rebounding.
Couldn't go wrong with either, but i would pick Kidd.
Great question...in their prime id take nash...he did win 2 mvps...he could pass and shoot...kidd could defend and pass...so both could pass...just that nash was better on off...id take nash...but barely
Kidd he is the better player. Defense, makes everyone better won a ring just an overall better leader. Nash to me is not a leader great player but will not get a team over the top when it counts the most.
Yeah...its close...i forgot kidd rebounds too...nash is useless on d...kidd did singlehandedly lead his team to the finals wih only kitles van horn and kmart...wow
depends on the supporting cast. Nash took a team minus Amare to the conference finals and had a legit change. That team's frontcourt was Boris Diaw at center, Marion at PF and JAmes Jones at SF.
I would say its a push. Kidd better defender, rebounder by far, but Kidd isnt near the offensive player Nash is, and Nash's superior shooting and scoring has him putting up all star #s at the same advanced age. Its a win win either way
Strange that folks seem to forget... Beside winning one title, Kidd also took the Nets to the finals two years in a row.
Vmart wrote:Kidd he is the better player. Defense, makes everyone better won a ring just an overall better leader. Nash to me is not a leader great player but will not get a team over the top when it counts the most.
Really,kidd got swept twice in they finals in his prime, and really was a 4th option when he won it in dallas. Nash although a pass first PG and not a defensive minded player, still has the most remarkable shooting pct, and can make anybody around him (with marginal talent) into a star. Did he not take the suns one game from he finals minus Amare (out with the eye thing), I mean that roster was suspct as hell.
Funniest shit ever is Pheonix had Kidd, Nash and Kevin Johnson on the same team at one point....
knicks1248 wrote:Vmart wrote:Kidd he is the better player. Defense, makes everyone better won a ring just an overall better leader. Nash to me is not a leader great player but will not get a team over the top when it counts the most.
Really,kidd got swept twice in they finals in his prime, and really was a 4th option when he won it in dallas. Nash although a pass first PG and not a defensive minded player, still has the most remarkable shooting pct, and can make anybody around him (with marginal talent) into a star. Did he not take the suns one game from he finals minus Amare (out with the eye thing), I mean that roster was suspct as hell.
Kidd took the Nets to the finals need I say more. Back to back.
Kidd. He took an nj team without nearly the talent Nash had to two nba finals and he was coached by Byron Scott. Achieving that much success with that level of talent on the team and at the coaching spot was a tremendous achievement.
Has to be Kidd; he was great for nearly his entire career. Nash only achieved greatness after the NBA changed the rules to make it more difficult to play defense, especially on the in the backcourt.
knicks1248 wrote:Vmart wrote:Kidd he is the better player. Defense, makes everyone better won a ring just an overall better leader. Nash to me is not a leader great player but will not get a team over the top when it counts the most.
Really,kidd got swept twice in they finals in his prime, and really was a 4th option when he won it in dallas. Nash although a pass first PG and not a defensive minded player, still has the most remarkable shooting pct, and can make anybody around him (with marginal talent) into a star. Did he not take the suns one game from he finals minus Amare (out with the eye thing), I mean that roster was suspct as hell.
They got swept by the Lakers.Spurs won 4-2
Kidd in a heartbeat. 3 Finals appearances, 1 ring. Should've won a regular season MVP with the Nets when Duncan won it. Was pretty much great from beginning to the end of his career, where as Nash was a late bloomer. One of the best defensive point guards as well, can rebound like a forward, and throws the outlet full court pass better than anyone. 2nd all time in assists to only John Stockton. I give Nash all the credit in the world, he single handedly lifted Suns to contention, and won 2 MVPs along the way. But if you were to ask me Kidd or Nash in their absolute primes, it would definitely be Kidd, and I'm pretty sure history will dictate that once they're both retired.
VCoug wrote:Has to be Kidd; he was great for nearly his entire career. Nash only achieved greatness after the NBA changed the rules to make it more difficult to play defense, especially on the in the backcourt.
Thats a very good point..
knicks1248 wrote:Vmart wrote:Kidd he is the better player. Defense, makes everyone better won a ring just an overall better leader. Nash to me is not a leader great player but will not get a team over the top when it counts the most.
Really,kidd got swept twice in they finals in his prime, and really was a 4th option when he won it in dallas. Nash although a pass first PG and not a defensive minded player, still has the most remarkable shooting pct, and can make anybody around him (with marginal talent) into a star. Did he not take the suns one game from he finals minus Amare (out with the eye thing), I mean that roster was suspct as hell.
got swept twice in the finals?? He was the point guard on two Nets teams which reached the finals, and an aging PG who helped the Mavs win their only title. The star on this present Knicks team got out of the 1st round once.
4th Option?? Kidd has always been more of an opportunistic scorer- he has never even reached the 17 PPG. If asked, he would probably tell you that a team with him a 1st or 2nd option on offense is not going to be a successful team.
We ended up with Kidd because of finances, team location, and because Nash probably thinks he has his best chance of winning a title in LA.
I don't think you could go wrong with either guy leading your team in their respective primes. Dismissing Kidd's Nets years makes little sense. His teams lost to better squads- the Lakers and Spurs.
Kidd's D and rebounding make a big difference in judging the two players. Nash has also played in a system which seems to inflate certain stats. If Nash wins a title it will be because he got a piggyback ride on Kobe's back. I hope he does win a title, but it won't be the same if he won one with the Suns.
I think in their prime, a Kidd led team would beat a Nash led team, assuming the talent levels of their teams were more or less equal.
Kidd was a triple double machine and tremendous defender. He would drive circles around Nash and be able to slow him down a little at the other end of the floor.
Interesting question though.
A series between the in their prime 2002-3 Nets and the in their prime 04-05 Suns would be entertaining as hell.
knickscity wrote:They both can run an offense, but Kidd brought more of an impact on the floor due to his defense and rebounding.Couldn't go wrong with either, but i would pick Kidd.
I'd take Kidd because of his defense. Dude carried the Nets with players whose ceilings we've all seen to the Finals TWICE!
Paladin55 wrote: If Nash wins a title it will be because he got a piggyback ride on Kobe's back. I hope he does win a title, but it won't be the same if he won one with the Suns.
Unfair to say this. This is NOT a Gary Payton on the Heat situation at all. Nash was good enough last season to lead the league in assists and carry a pretty crappy Suns squad to 8th in a very competitive Western Conference. It's not like the Lakers took the Thunder or Heat to game 7 or anything.
Kobe, Pau, and Bynum all need Nash to do anything.
How far do you think Kobe gets with last year's Suns team minus Nash?
How far does LA go with Nash instead of Kobe?
I don't think either team makes or wins the Finals against OKC/Spurs/Heat.
I'd probably go with Kidd, by a hair, because he does it all. But really, you could win the title with the either, if you have the right supporting cast.
GodSaveTheKnicks wrote:knickscity wrote:They both can run an offense, but Kidd brought more of an impact on the floor due to his defense and rebounding.Couldn't go wrong with either, but i would pick Kidd.
I'd take Kidd because of his defense. Dude carried the Nets with players whose ceilings we've all seen to the Finals TWICE!
Probably strong words on my part because I like Nash, who is a great player and may be the funniest guy in the league based on some of the things I've seem from him.
What I was reacting to was the comment about Kidd getting beat in the finals twice during his prime, and looking at the fact that if Nash was to get a title at this point with the Lakers, he would not be the top dog on that team. I thought the poster I was commenting on had dismissed Kidd's accomplishment with the Nets.
