TRIPLE DOUBLE. When all is said and done, JKidd will go down as one of the greatest point guards ever. He was NASTY in high school, unreal at Cal, a lottery pick in ’94, co-ROY, and a 10x NBA All Star…. and counting. While an NBA Championship has evaded him to this point, he is still competing at a high level in Dallas and putting up great numbers. He has career averages of 13.6 pts, 9.2 asts, 6.6 rbs, and 2 stls. Kidd is second on the All-Time Assists list behind John Stockton and the only player in NBA history with 15,000 points, 10,000 assists and 7,000 rebounds. He is currently 3rd all time in triple-doubles with 105 (Behind the Big O and Magic). Shout out to Matt for sending in another fresh Yinka Dare mix.
-Schneezy
For more old school videos, check out SLAMtv in the Media section.
Have a video you want to see in FOTS? Send the video link to slamteam@harris-pub.com
LATEST NEWS & RUMORS
View all »
- Videos: Thursday’s Top 20 Plays
- Report: Clippers to Sign Kenyon Martin
- No. 10 Murray State Rallies to Improve to 22-0
- Adidas Unveils All-Star Uniforms
- Blake Griffin’s Dunks Remind George Karl of Shawn Kemp
- LeBron James: Shane Battier the Smartest Player and Person in Basketball
- Jerry West on Unhappy NBA Superstars: ‘Call Their Bluff’
- Report: China Doesn’t Want Kenyon Martin to Leave Yet
- Dwyane Wade ‘Hates’ Playing With Big Leads on the Road
- View All »
No doubt Jkidd is top 5, hes just unbelievable, and dseserves more respect than hes got for turning himself in2 a 3 point threat late in his career
Magic, Oscar, Isiah, Stockton and Frazier. And Frazier might be better than Stockton. That’s the top five right there.
2. Oscar
3. Isiah
4. Cousy
5. Stockton
You don’t think Cousy deserves to be docked for his horrid shooting percentage, and his lack of defense?
The biggest thing that intrigues me about Cousy was how he ushered in a new style of play.
Revolutionary.
Revolutionary to the point where most every great point guard since Cousy… has a little Cousy in him.
Even if in the slightest.
As for the Frazier v JKidd argument… that’s a real toughie. Frazier obviously achieved more, but he sort of faded very quickly as the league got stronger, while JKidd has ludicrous longevity. Damn, that’s tough.
And, so would every other decent point guard with no jump shot.
Let’s be honest, neither of us has seen Walt Frazier play many games. I know I haven’t.
But, I also know that dude put up 36 and 19 in a Game Seven against a stacked Lakers team, a feat I don’t think Jason Kidd has ever, EVER been capable of achieving.
Hell, to be honest, I think Gary Payton was better than Jason Kidd, triple doubles be damned.
Frazier and Payton were both Kidd’s superiors as defenders, and they were much more consistent threats on offense, and could excel outside of fast breaking offenses.
If your team runs a lot, Jason Kidd is the man. If you play half court offense, his value decreases quite a bit.
Now, you make your argument.
cousy and frazier? yeah right… JKidd is the definition of a point gaurd he leads his team and they follow him. And he should have at least 1 MVP but they gave it to Tim Duncan for PR of the league.
Frazier’s first five seasons in the league, they didn’t keep stats on assists. When they finally started keeping them, he averaged 2 steals a game for two years, then dropped to about 1.5.
His assist totals early in his career were in the 7-8 assist range, and he was scoring more than 20 points a game (Something Kidd has never done.) Not only was he scoring, but his field goal percentage was always in the 48-49 percent range, and topped 50 percent several times. We all know Kidd has never even gotten close to those numbers, even in his prime.
As for rebounds, Frazier averaged 5.9 for his career, while Kidd has averaged 6.6. When you consider that Frazier played with dominant rebounders for most of his career, while Kidd’s best numbers came on teams that were light in rebounding, well that makes even more sense.
Like I said, Frazier put up impressive stats in a Knicks offense predicated on team ball movement, not point guard dominance. His scoring numbers and efficiency completely dwarf Kidd’s, his assist numbers are more than respectable consider the assist rules of the time, and the rebounding is about the same. I think Frazier was likely a better defender than Kidd given his reputation. And don’t forget he shared the backcourt for a while with Earl Monroe, which took the ball out of his hands even more.
Frazier was more versatile, and I think a better all-around player, while Kidd was amazing on the fast break, but struggled outside of that style. Still a great, top ten point guard, but not top five.
I say it again, Frazier and Payton were better all around point guards than Kidd.
I’ve argued with Jukai numerous times about whether Kidd is better than Nash, which I contend he is. Jukai always points to Kidd’s shooting percentages, and I always point to Nash’s horrible defense.
But, in the case of Payton and Frazier, you have to players who are arguably Kidd’s superior as defenders, his inferiors as passers, but completely dominate him when the discussion turns to putting the ball in the bucket. To me, the rebounding numbers, which Kidd wins, are impressive, but not that impressive.
Nash is a master at drawing the offensive foul.
Among the best in NBA History.
An offensive foul is almost as good as a steal in many cases.
it’s true that he’s the definition of dominating without scoring, but that’s because he really can’t score. i think we are all surprised by his career 3 points made (ranked 5th all time at 1,662), but when you are at the end of the game, he can’t really go get buckets himself, which is without a doubt his achilles’ heel.
Payton was the number 1 defensive point in his days, but Kidd was no slouch himself either. I remember reading an article about the opposite team’s point guards always have terrible offensive outputs when played against Kidd. GP is definitely better scorer (kidd’s highest ave for the season was 20.1 PPG), but i think it’s safe to argue that kidd gives bigger impact for the team as evidence of the two trips to Finals with the effing Nets. (Kemp was at least three times the player Kenyon Martin is/was). i can’t comment on Frazier because I don’t know anything about him.
And @ JTaylor: Walt Frazier was THE first true thief of the league. He turned steals into an art.
Steals and charges are overrated ways to determine defensive prowess.
Arguable, but I beg to differ.
For, a many an outcome to a game, even Championship games were determined on a steal or an offensive foul.
Now, when one has a player like a Danny Fortson, who would abuse the technique, then yes, I can agree with it overrating a player’s defensive prowess.
As far as steals… arguable as well.
But, creating offensive opportunities via steals requires a great level of anticipation, and guile.
That does nothing but help the player, and the team.
A steal helps, but what if the player’s actions to get the steal involve gambling on almost every play to the point where he throws of the team’s defensive rotations and help? Iverson.
Or, what about players who routinely flop with the hope of drawing a charge instead of playing physical defense, and only get one charge for every four flops?
Nash.
I think both stats can be positives for a team, but just like scoring, it all depends on what you do to get your numbers.
But, at the same time, many players gamble on offense, as well. Nash on the other hand, doesn’t gamble as much on offense as some other point guards.
If he does gamble on offense, many times it doesn’t seem like it, for, he is that good.
It almost evens itself out.
Iverson is a whole different story.
Nash will get more calls in his favor than guys who don’t have the stature of Nash.
That is big.
I strongly disagree that Nash’s defensive positives outweigh his negatives and I think that is a product of media spin.
Any time your small forward has to regularly guard opposing point guards because your point guard is completely overmatched, there is a problem. Moreover, Nash regularly is a specatator on defense, watch him closely over the course of the game. Nash and Amare are on the same level defensively, but while Nash gets credit for charges, Amare rarely gets credit for the shots he occassionally blocks because people notice just how often he fails on defense. That’s a byproduct of the fact that there are far fewer places for Amare to hid on defense, and Amare is nowhere near as popular as Nash.
I don’t think it is the media.
I could be wrong.
I tend to think it is strategy, BECAUSE Nash is adept at drawing offensive fouls.
One can argue that a coach can put Nash on a bigger guard TO get calls to go in his favor.
And, then one has to wonder, why would a coach put Nash on a bigger guy if he was so defensively deficient? You know?
He is a smart, cagey defender.
Laterally, well…
Stockton couldn’t stay in front of his man, either, contrary to popular opinion.
Only someone grossly underinformed would think that the fact that Kidd has shot sub-40 PERCENT on numerous times during his career is not proof that he is a bad shooter. Hell, Kidd has never even cracked 45 percent as a shooter. He’s a career 35 percent shooter from three, and that’s thanks to some amazing improvement since he’s come to dallas.
Look at his shooting numbers, they tell the true story of what type of shooter he is, not his cumulative three point numbers. The fact that has NEVER averaged 20 points per game, and has regularly shot less than 40 percent is all the proof I need abotu what he can do as a scorer.
In that category he doesn’t compare to Frazier, and you’ve yet to provid any proof for why he’s the better defender besides overrated steals numbers which do not even account for the fact that the League didn’t keep stats on steals for hte first five years of Frazier’s career.
Also, while it’s true that the Nets had a talent deficiency, it’s also true that Kidd shot poorly in the Finals. According to Basketball Reference, he scored 19 a game on 36 percent shooting from the floor and 27 percent from 3.
And while Kenyon Martin got killed by Duncan and played poorly himself, Kidd didn’t exactly shutdown Tony Parker and he only made 44 of 121 shots! WTH
Nah, you can keep pretending that horrendous shooting from your point guard is acceptable if he puts up high assist numbers if you want, but I know better.
Bowen too, no?
If they were putting Nash on the weakest offensive player, then he should be guarding some centers, no?
It’s Bryan who argues that Nash is better than Jason Kidd, and that’s more because Bryan dislikes Jason Kidd than he likes Steve Nash.
NOW I will disagree about the Payton stuff… I think Payton’s more on the level of Nash than he is Kidd. Payton was a LOCKDOWN defender, ridiculously so, but I always thought his scoring and passing was overrated. He chucked a lot of shots (his percentages were not great) and he always had mental lapses where he just missed hitting people. He was great finding the cutters, but I don’t think he really CREATED offense well enough.
I don’t think I’ve ever been a great Payton fan though.
I was just attempting to stress a point about Steve Nash’s defensive prowess based on what Allenp said.
Now, of course Nash isn’t going to guard centers, but if he is going to guard a bigger player who tends to be slower than an average point guard, Nash’s defensive acumen is highlighted more because of his anticipation of where to be when guarding said player hence, drawing charges. This is a reason why he was guarding Fisher instead of Kobe in The Playoffs. Fisher would give him less problems than other point guards, normally.
His lateral inadequacies are less obvious in those situations.
To put Payton and Nash in the same sentence is LUDACRIS and just PLAIN STUPID. Nash can’t even hold Payton jock strap. Can you please compare whole careers and not Nash 3 good years in Phx. The only reason you try to put him with Payton is because of those bogus MVP’s. After that crap I and I know other folks almost stop watching the NBA, because that was crap. Payton played defensed could get 20 points a game and people forget. Seattle gave the Bulls a run for the money that year in the Finals, I feel they should have won Finals, but some breaks didn’t go that way. Payton is ten times better than the overrated Nash, and I would take PAYTON over KIDD anyday. Don’t ever put Nash and Payton name in a sentence again or you lose your creditablitiy as one of the intelligent commenters.
As I’ve told someone else before, stats do not tell the entire story in many instances.
Wait a minute…
Feces thief???
Are you The Legendary…
TARZAN “Turdburglar” COOPER???
Tell me you are.
A charge once every 5 possessions is more accurate.
I’ll debate anyone else toe to toe, but not you. I don’t even know why you’re still here.
you for repeatedly giving love to Souls of
Mischief and the whole hieroglyphics crew.
The only other players who could guarantee a stop were Pippen, and Bill Russell.
Now, I’m not saying that Nash is a great defender
Not even a very good defender.
He is just smart, cagey, and underrated in that category.
and Nash is pretty sucky on D. It’s excuseable because he carries so much of an offensive load. But, he’s always been indifferent on that end (unless he was in position to draw a charge)
Most of the block shot leaders have foul trouble issues. Instead if just contesting a shot, they’ll put themselves in a position to foul.
And whoever started keeping track of charges needs to be shot. Flopping is a pu$$y move.
On Frazier and Kidd.
Kidd has not raised the level of play in Dallas in his second go around, and his first time in D-Town was also a flameout. Phoenix actually did just fine without Kidd, who regularly flamed out in the playoffs while with the Suns. New Jersey is the place where he really shined and no one can deny that, but when he lost his fast breaking running mates, the team’s play declined tremendously even with talent around him.
Kidd is a great point, top ten, but Frazier was a great passer in a time when assist numbers were not inflated, and on a team that stressed everyone touching the ball and making cuts and passes. He was a superior defender, a far superior scorer and roughly equal as a rebounder. No, he didn’t have Kidd’s longevity, but in his prime, I think he was better than Kidd, period. But, I can see that argument isn’t going to change many more minds, so thanks for the discussion.
Appreciate it.
I really do.
You’ve explained it so eloquently.
I’ve always found that fascinating about him.
Comments