NBA Legacy Thread, Update Resumes

[bigmike23]

Originally Posted by Osh Kosh Bosh

Whoooooo now let the overrating of Jason Kidd's career begin.

I kind always felt Jason Kidd was always slightly overrated but now that he won his chip you guys are taking it to a whole new level. Jason Kidd is a great defensive player, all timer and you usual someone players who's elite skills are defense and rebounding often go under appreciated but for some reason not in Kidd's case.

I find it blasphemous to suggest Jason Kidd is better than John Stockton because for as good of a passer Kidd was he simply was not good enough to offsett his terrible shooting. Shooting from the point guard position is so integral in basketball it opens up the whole court, the numbers bear this out...unless you are a 6'8 PG who can see over the defense like magic bad shooting PG= Bad offense.

Go look it up: when Jason Kidd was the main cogg of a team that team never had an above average offense no matter how good of a "QB" he was his shooting still dragged down the offense and he was never that enough of a passer in the half court to offset that. John Stockton while not as good defensively is still great but on offense no question you would be crazy not to take prime Stockton over Ason Kidd.

If you have John Stockton on you team you are almost guaranteed to have a good offense, put Magic on the court with any five stiffs and he will get you to the playoffs with a great offense, put Nash on the court with any one and watch em get buckets. You can't say the same for Kidd and thus why for me he stays in the, Payton, Nash catagory rather than the Stockton, Magic.

 

never thought i would agree with OKB but i do here

 

[bigmike23]

Originally Posted by Osh Kosh Bosh

Whoooooo now let the overrating of Jason Kidd's career begin.

I kind always felt Jason Kidd was always slightly overrated but now that he won his chip you guys are taking it to a whole new level. Jason Kidd is a great defensive player, all timer and you usual someone players who's elite skills are defense and rebounding often go under appreciated but for some reason not in Kidd's case.

I find it blasphemous to suggest Jason Kidd is better than John Stockton because for as good of a passer Kidd was he simply was not good enough to offsett his terrible shooting. Shooting from the point guard position is so integral in basketball it opens up the whole court, the numbers bear this out...unless you are a 6'8 PG who can see over the defense like magic bad shooting PG= Bad offense.

Go look it up: when Jason Kidd was the main cogg of a team that team never had an above average offense no matter how good of a "QB" he was his shooting still dragged down the offense and he was never that enough of a passer in the half court to offset that. John Stockton while not as good defensively is still great but on offense no question you would be crazy not to take prime Stockton over Ason Kidd.

If you have John Stockton on you team you are almost guaranteed to have a good offense, put Magic on the court with any five stiffs and he will get you to the playoffs with a great offense, put Nash on the court with any one and watch em get buckets. You can't say the same for Kidd and thus why for me he stays in the, Payton, Nash catagory rather than the Stockton, Magic.

 

never thought i would agree with OKB but i do here

 

[IATT]

^ at least you can name a couple of guys to replace kobe with for those 3 titles (not saying any/every SG could have done it.. but at least a couple of guys could have)

how many can you name for duncan.. hence the use of the word EASIER

 

[IATT]

^ at least you can name a couple of guys to replace kobe with for those 3 titles (not saying any/every SG could have done it.. but at least a couple of guys could have)

how many can you name for duncan.. hence the use of the word EASIER

 

[darthska]

Oh, I definitely think it's easier to replace Kobe on the Lakers than it is Duncan on the Spurs.

I haven't disagreed with you on that.

Were you thinking I was or something?

I clearly said that the Spurs don't win if you replace Duncan with another star PF, but the Lakers could definitely win with another star SG.

 

[darthska]

Oh, I definitely think it's easier to replace Kobe on the Lakers than it is Duncan on the Spurs.

I haven't disagreed with you on that.

Were you thinking I was or something?

I clearly said that the Spurs don't win if you replace Duncan with another star PF, but the Lakers could definitely win with another star SG.

 

[mgrand15]

Originally Posted by Osh Kosh Bosh

Whoooooo now let the overrating of Jason Kidd's career begin.

I kind always felt Jason Kidd was always slightly overrated but now that he won his chip you guys are taking it to a whole new level. Jason Kidd is a great defensive player, all timer and you usual someone players who's elite skills are defense and rebounding often go under appreciated but for some reason not in Kidd's case.

I find it blasphemous to suggest Jason Kidd is better than John Stockton because for as good of a passer Kidd was he simply was not good enough to offsett his terrible shooting. Shooting from the point guard position is so integral in basketball it opens up the whole court, the numbers bear this out...unless you are a 6'8 PG who can see over the defense like magic bad shooting PG= Bad offense.

Go look it up: when Jason Kidd was the main cogg of a team that team never had an above average offense no matter how good of a "QB" he was his shooting still dragged down the offense and he was never that enough of a passer in the half court to offset that. John Stockton while not as good defensively is still great but on offense no question you would be crazy not to take prime Stockton over Ason Kidd.

If you have John Stockton on you team you are almost guaranteed to have a good offense, put Magic on the court with any five stiffs and he will get you to the playoffs with a great offense, put Nash on the court with any one and watch em get buckets. You can't say the same for Kidd and thus why for me he stays in the, Payton, Nash catagory rather than the Stockton, Magic.

 

I can't disagree with this any more. It's unfair to look at Kidd's offenses and put it on him. In his prime, Kidd never had a 2nd option anywhere NEAR the caliber that Stockton, Nash, or Magic had. Magic had multiple HOFers, Nash had Amare or Dirk, Stockton had Malone. Kidd had no one like that in PHX, Richard Jefferson with the Nets. The best guy he had was VC (who turned into a monster playing with Kidd) but he was surrounded by horrible players. 
His low FG% are inexcusable but it probably didn't help that he was forced to shoot more than he should've. As a spot up shooter, he was never terrible. Even now, you force him to shoot off the dribble or even mid-range, it goes down hill. I know its hard for someone to call Kidd the greatest PG of all time (I think he's 2 personally) with such a glaring weakness but considering he was incredible at everything else, I'm willing to give him a pass. 

FWIW: I'm a Net fan + a huge Kidd fan. 

 

[mgrand15]

Originally Posted by Osh Kosh Bosh

Whoooooo now let the overrating of Jason Kidd's career begin.

I kind always felt Jason Kidd was always slightly overrated but now that he won his chip you guys are taking it to a whole new level. Jason Kidd is a great defensive player, all timer and you usual someone players who's elite skills are defense and rebounding often go under appreciated but for some reason not in Kidd's case.

I find it blasphemous to suggest Jason Kidd is better than John Stockton because for as good of a passer Kidd was he simply was not good enough to offsett his terrible shooting. Shooting from the point guard position is so integral in basketball it opens up the whole court, the numbers bear this out...unless you are a 6'8 PG who can see over the defense like magic bad shooting PG= Bad offense.

Go look it up: when Jason Kidd was the main cogg of a team that team never had an above average offense no matter how good of a "QB" he was his shooting still dragged down the offense and he was never that enough of a passer in the half court to offset that. John Stockton while not as good defensively is still great but on offense no question you would be crazy not to take prime Stockton over Ason Kidd.

If you have John Stockton on you team you are almost guaranteed to have a good offense, put Magic on the court with any five stiffs and he will get you to the playoffs with a great offense, put Nash on the court with any one and watch em get buckets. You can't say the same for Kidd and thus why for me he stays in the, Payton, Nash catagory rather than the Stockton, Magic.

 

I can't disagree with this any more. It's unfair to look at Kidd's offenses and put it on him. In his prime, Kidd never had a 2nd option anywhere NEAR the caliber that Stockton, Nash, or Magic had. Magic had multiple HOFers, Nash had Amare or Dirk, Stockton had Malone. Kidd had no one like that in PHX, Richard Jefferson with the Nets. The best guy he had was VC (who turned into a monster playing with Kidd) but he was surrounded by horrible players. 
His low FG% are inexcusable but it probably didn't help that he was forced to shoot more than he should've. As a spot up shooter, he was never terrible. Even now, you force him to shoot off the dribble or even mid-range, it goes down hill. I know its hard for someone to call Kidd the greatest PG of all time (I think he's 2 personally) with such a glaring weakness but considering he was incredible at everything else, I'm willing to give him a pass. 

FWIW: I'm a Net fan + a huge Kidd fan. 

 

[bigmike23]

but the Lakers could definitely win with another star SG
i never have and never will buy this. but im not sure if this is the place to address it

 

[bigmike23]

but the Lakers could definitely win with another star SG
i never have and never will buy this. but im not sure if this is the place to address it

 

[gangsta207therevolution]

Duncan over Shaq?
Im going to attempt to demonstrate more facts to be debated in this argument.
My Biases
Per is not effective at calculating a players effectiveness within a team concept.
A guy giving up posessions or not taking as many as his statistics warrent when it results in wins is what ultimately builds winning teams

When I look at Duncan and Shaq they are the 2 best players of this post Bulls Jordan era, Kobe is a distinctive, but not clear cut 3rd and Wade is 4th.
2 more year of even what we just got out of Duncan and he will finish ahead of Shaq in win shares.
At his position he was a great defender.
On a more what if level. What if Duncan and Shaq were switched, and Duncan was on the Lakers, and Shaq was on the Spurs?
They still get the 1999 win, and they might get the 2003 title
Kobe and Duncan get the 3peat with a servicable guy ( Lets say Elden Campbell) They prob get 2003 too at least in my opinion. They might even get 2004 if Kobe doesnt go crazy in those finals. 2005 might be a year they get tired . They are back for 2007. And with decent drafts they get 2009 and 2010 too
Thats mostly a numbers based argument but they prob get 9 titles with Duncan and when you look at how dominant each guy was + factor in the chemistry Duncan teams have always had - the chemistry issues Kobe teams have had and thats what your looking at. Shaq never gets 4 titles without Kobe imo, but Duncan might get at bare minimum 6 with Kobe.
Thats attributed to the issues Kobe and Shaq had + Shaq's age.
Im maybe reaching, but I think Kobe could have won titles with Chris Webber and Kevin Garnett ( maybe not 5 but 3 imo) Shaq might not get 1 with the proposed Kidd Marion tandom, or Parker Ginobli, Robinson or even Wade if Kobe and Duncan are together. Heck he MIGHT not get 1999 if Nick, Eddie, Kobe and Duncan + Elden Campbell are together even with Del Harris.
Look I think as it stands Shaq and Duncan are as close as these discussions come, but where does attitude factor in to the Shaq discussion?
I always see it factored in to Kobe discussions.
As it stands from a development aspect only Vince and maybe Iverson or Pierce could have 3 peated.
Tmac wasnt in the discussion development wise yet, and Allan Houston is a distinct no, But MAYBE Spree wins a title or 2.
And I still think that If its Vince or Pierce instead of Kobe for 2000 then maybe you get an extra year of a Decent Glen Rice in LA
I still dont think that all 3 are going to LA if Kobe is elsewhere though.
But you got an argument for 2

 

[gangsta207therevolution]

Duncan over Shaq?
Im going to attempt to demonstrate more facts to be debated in this argument.
My Biases
Per is not effective at calculating a players effectiveness within a team concept.
A guy giving up posessions or not taking as many as his statistics warrent when it results in wins is what ultimately builds winning teams

When I look at Duncan and Shaq they are the 2 best players of this post Bulls Jordan era, Kobe is a distinctive, but not clear cut 3rd and Wade is 4th.
2 more year of even what we just got out of Duncan and he will finish ahead of Shaq in win shares.
At his position he was a great defender.
On a more what if level. What if Duncan and Shaq were switched, and Duncan was on the Lakers, and Shaq was on the Spurs?
They still get the 1999 win, and they might get the 2003 title
Kobe and Duncan get the 3peat with a servicable guy ( Lets say Elden Campbell) They prob get 2003 too at least in my opinion. They might even get 2004 if Kobe doesnt go crazy in those finals. 2005 might be a year they get tired . They are back for 2007. And with decent drafts they get 2009 and 2010 too
Thats mostly a numbers based argument but they prob get 9 titles with Duncan and when you look at how dominant each guy was + factor in the chemistry Duncan teams have always had - the chemistry issues Kobe teams have had and thats what your looking at. Shaq never gets 4 titles without Kobe imo, but Duncan might get at bare minimum 6 with Kobe.
Thats attributed to the issues Kobe and Shaq had + Shaq's age.
Im maybe reaching, but I think Kobe could have won titles with Chris Webber and Kevin Garnett ( maybe not 5 but 3 imo) Shaq might not get 1 with the proposed Kidd Marion tandom, or Parker Ginobli, Robinson or even Wade if Kobe and Duncan are together. Heck he MIGHT not get 1999 if Nick, Eddie, Kobe and Duncan + Elden Campbell are together even with Del Harris.
Look I think as it stands Shaq and Duncan are as close as these discussions come, but where does attitude factor in to the Shaq discussion?
I always see it factored in to Kobe discussions.
As it stands from a development aspect only Vince and maybe Iverson or Pierce could have 3 peated.
Tmac wasnt in the discussion development wise yet, and Allan Houston is a distinct no, But MAYBE Spree wins a title or 2.
And I still think that If its Vince or Pierce instead of Kobe for 2000 then maybe you get an extra year of a Decent Glen Rice in LA
I still dont think that all 3 are going to LA if Kobe is elsewhere though.
But you got an argument for 2

 

[IATT]

Originally Posted by 23ska909red02


Were you thinking I was or something?

I clearly said that the Spurs don't win if you replace Duncan with another star PF, but the Lakers could definitely win with another star SG.

not you, was responding to essential1

- also, have to factor in that horry made a ton of those clutch shots for those teams (fisher had the .04 shot against the spurs too)
  

 

[IATT]

Originally Posted by 23ska909red02


Were you thinking I was or something?

I clearly said that the Spurs don't win if you replace Duncan with another star PF, but the Lakers could definitely win with another star SG.

not you, was responding to essential1

- also, have to factor in that horry made a ton of those clutch shots for those teams (fisher had the .04 shot against the spurs too)
  

 

[IATT]

Originally Posted by gangsta207therevolution

As it stands from a development aspect only Vince and maybe Iverson or Pierce could have 3 peated.
Tmac wasnt in the discussion development wise yet, and Allan Houston is a distinct no, But MAYBE Spree wins a title or 2.
And I still think that If its Vince or Pierce instead of Kobe for 2000 then maybe you get an extra year of a Decent Glen Rice in LA
I still dont think that all 3 are going to LA if Kobe is elsewhere though.
But you got an argument for 2

i think ray allen would have been the best replacement for those 00-03 teams.. imagine the damage he would have done with all those open shots

  

 

[IATT]

Originally Posted by gangsta207therevolution

As it stands from a development aspect only Vince and maybe Iverson or Pierce could have 3 peated.
Tmac wasnt in the discussion development wise yet, and Allan Houston is a distinct no, But MAYBE Spree wins a title or 2.
And I still think that If its Vince or Pierce instead of Kobe for 2000 then maybe you get an extra year of a Decent Glen Rice in LA
I still dont think that all 3 are going to LA if Kobe is elsewhere though.
But you got an argument for 2

i think ray allen would have been the best replacement for those 00-03 teams.. imagine the damage he would have done with all those open shots

  

 

[CP1708]

Oh, so Vince Carter was just gonna walk in the gym in Indiana in game 4 in OT without Shaq and just put down 4 shots straight to ice the game, with a sore ankle........
Cuz, ya know, Vince is known for that. 

  Have any of you even seen that gif of him, as a grown @#$ man, about to shoot free throws, lookin like a scared child at supper when mommy just called daddy a cheater?  Someone drop that in here for me, then let's talk switchin Kobe out for Vince like it's nothing. 

Ray Allen and Allan Houston I would have LOVED to have seen play off Shaq.  I think it would have been awesome with their shooting.  But ball handling, running the point sometimes, defense?  We don't need those anymore?  And when Shaq was off the court, they could create for other players on their own? 

  One of these guys could have guarded AI for stretches?  Not full time of course, not sayin that, but any single minutes they would have spent on AI would have resulted in either a layup, or a foul on Shaq.  So, uh, yeah they were great shooters to put around Shaq, sure. 

Iverson, come on.  COME ON.  In the triangle, next to Derek Fisher, and Shaq needs touches.  Really? 


TMac, yes, I can agree that he would have won titles with Shaq.  I have no problem there, just as KG could have won in San Antonio in his prime. 


You guys are trying to sell me that replacing one of the 10 best players of all time is/woulda been, easy.  Like it's nothing.  Just any other SG, sure.  You really just did that.  Yeesh. 

At worst, the KG/Duncan part is another guy that is top 25ish all time, you all came at me with dudes in the 70 or 80 range, and Ray Allen a top 60 player. 

 

[CP1708]

Oh, so Vince Carter was just gonna walk in the gym in Indiana in game 4 in OT without Shaq and just put down 4 shots straight to ice the game, with a sore ankle........
Cuz, ya know, Vince is known for that. 

  Have any of you even seen that gif of him, as a grown @#$ man, about to shoot free throws, lookin like a scared child at supper when mommy just called daddy a cheater?  Someone drop that in here for me, then let's talk switchin Kobe out for Vince like it's nothing. 

Ray Allen and Allan Houston I would have LOVED to have seen play off Shaq.  I think it would have been awesome with their shooting.  But ball handling, running the point sometimes, defense?  We don't need those anymore?  And when Shaq was off the court, they could create for other players on their own? 

  One of these guys could have guarded AI for stretches?  Not full time of course, not sayin that, but any single minutes they would have spent on AI would have resulted in either a layup, or a foul on Shaq.  So, uh, yeah they were great shooters to put around Shaq, sure. 

Iverson, come on.  COME ON.  In the triangle, next to Derek Fisher, and Shaq needs touches.  Really? 


TMac, yes, I can agree that he would have won titles with Shaq.  I have no problem there, just as KG could have won in San Antonio in his prime. 


You guys are trying to sell me that replacing one of the 10 best players of all time is/woulda been, easy.  Like it's nothing.  Just any other SG, sure.  You really just did that.  Yeesh. 

At worst, the KG/Duncan part is another guy that is top 25ish all time, you all came at me with dudes in the 70 or 80 range, and Ray Allen a top 60 player. 

 

[darthska]

KNOWING how Vince and Iverson are outside of a system like the triangle and away from a prolific big, it's easy to do that and laugh at the notion of them being Lakers back then.

But how about doing the same for Kobe? Imagine Kobe outside of a triangle, away from Shaq.

Remember?

You take THAT selfish, insulting ballhog and imagine him 3-peating while you laugh at the notion of Iverson sharing. Looking at Kobe immediately after Phil/Shaq, it's tough to look at that ALONE and ask yourself if that guy would 3-peat. You'd laugh at that notion just like you're laughing about it w/ Vince.

It's silly to imagine that, because of course that Kobe came AFTER already 3-peating.

You put THAT Kobe on different teams throughout his career, and he's the butt of some of your jokes, too, w/ maybe a ring or 2.

Vince, Iverson, H20, T-Mac, Pierce... I don't care who... their game would have been adjusted by playing in Phil's system and playing w/ the best center of our generation.

 

[darthska]

KNOWING how Vince and Iverson are outside of a system like the triangle and away from a prolific big, it's easy to do that and laugh at the notion of them being Lakers back then.

But how about doing the same for Kobe? Imagine Kobe outside of a triangle, away from Shaq.

Remember?

You take THAT selfish, insulting ballhog and imagine him 3-peating while you laugh at the notion of Iverson sharing. Looking at Kobe immediately after Phil/Shaq, it's tough to look at that ALONE and ask yourself if that guy would 3-peat. You'd laugh at that notion just like you're laughing about it w/ Vince.

It's silly to imagine that, because of course that Kobe came AFTER already 3-peating.

You put THAT Kobe on different teams throughout his career, and he's the butt of some of your jokes, too, w/ maybe a ring or 2.

Vince, Iverson, H20, T-Mac, Pierce... I don't care who... their game would have been adjusted by playing in Phil's system and playing w/ the best center of our generation.

 

[IATT]

Originally Posted by CP1708

You guys are trying to sell me that replacing one of the 10 best players of all time is/woulda been, easy.  Like it's nothing.  Just any other SG, sure.  You really just did that.  Yeesh. 

At worst, the KG/Duncan part is another guy that is top 25ish all time, you all came at me with dudes in the 70 or 80 range, and Ray Allen a top 60 player. 

kobe was top 10 in 00-03?

 

[IATT]

Originally Posted by CP1708

You guys are trying to sell me that replacing one of the 10 best players of all time is/woulda been, easy.  Like it's nothing.  Just any other SG, sure.  You really just did that.  Yeesh. 

At worst, the KG/Duncan part is another guy that is top 25ish all time, you all came at me with dudes in the 70 or 80 range, and Ray Allen a top 60 player. 

kobe was top 10 in 00-03?

 

[bigmike23]

come on now sprewell? ya @+#!*!@ right

Ray allen and Allen hoston couldn't guard anyone or play point guard and create for others like kobe did.

Vince carter? ya right dude would fold so bad in some of the big games shaq needed kobe to carry them.

shaq and AI? 2 players that dont work out in the offseason? Phil would kill himself.



with comments shaq has said over the years you can pretty much tell he would have faith in only kobe helping him get those 3 rings

 

[bigmike23]

come on now sprewell? ya @+#!*!@ right

Ray allen and Allen hoston couldn't guard anyone or play point guard and create for others like kobe did.

Vince carter? ya right dude would fold so bad in some of the big games shaq needed kobe to carry them.

shaq and AI? 2 players that dont work out in the offseason? Phil would kill himself.



with comments shaq has said over the years you can pretty much tell he would have faith in only kobe helping him get those 3 rings

 

[darthska]

Ray and Houston are inferior defenders to Kobe, yeah, but there were definitely stretches where they carried their teams on their backs (I remember your time w/ the Bucks, Ray-Ray).

And don't act like Shaq never made comments against Kobe while they were both Lakers.

Let's not forget how they parted ways.

Most of those pro-Kobe comments were undoubtedly made with the understanding "Kobe's my teammate. That's not going to change. Here are my comments in support of my teammate."