Kidd, Iverson, Nash

by **scrub** on Fri May 12, 2006 10:29 pm

who would u want in his prime?

by **Jugs** on Fri May 12, 2006 10:38 pm

Nash because he makes his teammates better :roll:

by **debiler** on Fri May 12, 2006 10:50 pm

Kidd cause he's dangerous in all aspects of his game. But Nash is a very, very close second. Iverson is not a point guard IMO.

by **Fenix** on Fri May 12, 2006 10:56 pm

Kidd, logically. He was excellent both in transition and in halfcourt offense, he could post up or penetrate, make all kind of passes and he is now proving that he can play with two star perimeter players and still be effective without having ball in his hands all the time. He's also by far the best defender of the three and the best rebounder. Kidd in his prime is a first team All-NBA on any team, while that is doubtfull with AI and very, VERY unlikely with Nash.

1. Kidd
2. Nash
3. AI

by **dinocarlo** on Fri May 12, 2006 11:28 pm

VanK wrote:Kidd, logically. He was excellent both in transition and in halfcourt offense, he could post up or penetrate, make all kind of passes and he is now proving that he can play with two star perimeter players and still be effective without having ball in his hands all the time. He's also by far the best defender of the three and the best rebounder. Kidd in his prime is a first team All-NBA on any team, while that is doubtfull with AI and very, VERY unlikely with Nash.

1. Kidd
2. Nash
3. AI

I agree

Too bad Kidd was overshadowed by the likes of Shaq, Duncan and KG when he took the Nets to the finals in 2002 & 2003. I think Kidd deserved the MVP back then as Nash did right now.

by **Matthew** on Sat May 13, 2006 12:02 am

Vank, I hope your joking when you say Kidd was "very good" in the halfcourt offense when comparing him to Iverson (who carried his 76ers to the finals with their next best scorer was Mutumbo).

Too bad Kidd was overshadowed by the likes of Shaq, Duncan and KG when he took the Nets to the finals in 2002 & 2003. I think Kidd deserved the MVP back then as Nash did right now.

I think you're an idiot, does that make me right too?

by **Its_asdf** on Sat May 13, 2006 12:07 am

I'd take a triple double monster that can play ddefence and get every teamate involved over those other two anyday.

by **Fenix** on Sat May 13, 2006 12:08 am

Matthew wrote:Vank, I hope your joking when you say Kidd was "very good" in the halfcourt offense when comparing him to Iverson (who carried his 76ers to the finals with their next best scorer was Mutumbo).

You're forgetting that AI has been playing PG only for the past two years, which is supposedly his prime. Sure, numbers prove that he is a good scorer and he has quite a few assists, but from a playmaking standpoint, he isn't exactly in the same league as Nash, Kidd and other pure PGs. That's why I rate Nash above AI when it comes to playing PG.

Bluesky · by **Andrew** on Sat May 13, 2006 12:22 am

I've got two answers since the poll and post pose two different questions. I voted for Kidd in the poll as I believe out of the three, he's the best point guard of the three.

However, I'd take Iverson in his prime. I believe that if Iverson had the right team around him since 2000, the Sixers would be perennial contenders. That said I don't think he's past he's prime yet and in theory the Sixers can still build around him because I don't believe he'll be out of his prime for another couple of years...and even then the decline won't be immediate. It's easier said than done though because in practice it's not always easy to wheel and deal and build the team you want.

Iverson reminds me of Isiah Thomas in some ways. Thomas was closer to being a true point guard in that he was a better distributor but he was still capable of being a big time scorer, had tremendous heart and stood tall despite being one of the shortest men on the court. Give AI some of the muscle Thomas had in the form of the bruising frontcourt players the Bad Boy Pistons had at their disposal with some present day equivalents, support him with a couple of capable scorers and I think the Sixers will have a lot more success. It's something they should have done before but as I said I don't think it's too late.

That's not to say they'd be as good as Thomas' Pistons and Thomas was a better shooter but I still see some similarities between the two players.

by **Fenix** on Sat May 13, 2006 12:45 am

True, AI is probably the best individual talent of the three, but - as you mentioned - needs a specific team surrounding him - a tall PG to relieve him of ballhandling duties to enable him to play SG full time and bunch of perimeter/post defenders, shot blocker and offensive rebounders. He is good enough to carry scoring load all by himself, but is simply to tough to find the players he needs to exceed. The AI of the last two years was terrific, but he barely made the playoffs two years ago and not at all this season. Do you really believe that Kidd in his prime wouldn't lead a team with C-Webb, Iggy, Korver, Dalembert and bunch of scrubs to the playoffs? He carried Kenyon Martin, adoloscent Richard Jefferson and Kerry Kittles to the Finals - twice.

by **zmac** on Sat May 13, 2006 1:04 am

True that. Iverson definitely the most gifted talent wise, he can play D as well as fill it up on offense at will.
But when it comes down to pure PG, easily Jason Kidd. He is by far the smartest basketballer of the 3, the best defender of the 3 and in his prime, could score efficiently.

Bluesky · by **Andrew** on Sat May 13, 2006 1:05 am

Do you really believe that Kidd in his prime wouldn't lead a team with C-Webb, Iggy, Korver, Dalembert and bunch of scrubs to the playoffs? He carried Kenyon Martin, adoloscent Richard Jefferson and Kerry Kittles to the Finals - twice.

He probably could have, but I'd still pick AI because he's the best individual talent and to that end was just speculating on what kind of situation would benefit him the most. He may have entered his 30s and in a couple of years will be leaving his prime behind him but I don't think he should be given up on just yet as fans and sportswriters alike have suggested.

by **Matt** on Sat May 13, 2006 2:24 am

Kidd is still the best PG in the league. I'd take him anyday.

by **Donatello** on Sat May 13, 2006 2:54 am

Nash got my vote, but I've seen him play (not on TV) twice, never seen the other two. So my vote might be different if I saw Kidd.

But I'm sure that Nash and/or Kidd > Iverson, in the PG department.

by **j.23** on Sat May 13, 2006 4:13 am

kidd, hands down. he might not beat you with his scoring, but he'll sure as hell find other ways to.

by **Anthony15** on Sat May 13, 2006 4:38 am

Kidd, of course.

by **Mayerhendrix** on Sat May 13, 2006 5:32 am

Andrew wrote:
Do you really believe that Kidd in his prime wouldn't lead a team with C-Webb, Iggy, Korver, Dalembert and bunch of scrubs to the playoffs? He carried Kenyon Martin, adoloscent Richard Jefferson and Kerry Kittles to the Finals - twice.

He probably could have, but I'd still pick AI because he's the best individual talent and to that end was just speculating on what kind of situation would benefit him the most. He may have entered his 30s and in a couple of years will be leaving his prime behind him but I don't think he should be given up on just yet as fans and sportswriters alike have suggested.

Sure Iverson's got individual talent but it barely helps his team improve.
Kidd makes everyone participate while putting up a somewhat decent amount of points on a good night. It's no surprise that Iverson's team kept hanging around .500 all season while the Nets went on 2 double digit win streaks.

by **Axel** on Sat May 13, 2006 6:04 am

Iverson is the best of the three because he has the highest overall score on Live. So I picked him.

.. not. :lol:

everyone here knows who I picked.

by **EGarrett** on Sat May 13, 2006 6:13 am

Matthew wrote:Vank, I hope your joking when you say Kidd was "very good" in the halfcourt offense when comparing him to Iverson (who carried his 76ers to the finals with their next best scorer was Mutumbo).

The team was built around Iverson. He had scorers and they all wanted to leave.

Too bad Kidd was overshadowed by the likes of Shaq, Duncan and KG when he took the Nets to the finals in 2002 & 2003. I think Kidd deserved the MVP back then as Nash did right now.

I think you're an idiot, does that make me right too?

No. He at least has a point. You haven't made one, other than trying to insult him. Go find out what an "ad hominem attack" is.

Andrew wrote:However, I'd take Iverson in his prime. I believe that if Iverson had the right team around him since 2000, the Sixers would be perennial contenders. That said I don't think he's past he's prime yet and in theory the Sixers can still build around him because I don't believe he'll be out of his prime for another couple of years...and even then the decline won't be immediate. It's easier said than done though because in practice it's not always easy to wheel and deal and build the team you want.

What would you consider the right team for Iverson?

He had scorers around him, they all had to leave because they didn't like him hogging the ball. At that point, he couldn't play point guard, and wouldn't run a normal offense because he wouldn't pass to start a possession.

2001 was the best year for him with the only team they could get around him. A bunch of defensive stoppers who couldn't shoot and didn't want to.

who would u want in his prime?

It's between Nash and Kidd. And then the question is, which do you want more, a jump shot, or defense and rebounding?

I'd take Kidd, simply because I'd prefer the latter two.

by **fgrep15** on Sat May 13, 2006 6:14 am

Well when you add "in his prime", then yes, Kidd. He's by far the best defender, even now he still is, is just as good a passer as Nash especially considering he's had similar APG numbers on FARR slower paced teams, and he does about everything. He's a weak scorer, but he's not a liability by any means, and in his prime he could post up, get to the rim and score on the break very well (not that he can't anymore, but not as well).

by **twolvesguy** on Sat May 13, 2006 6:41 am

A.I. because I've heard A.I. to Minny rumors :mrgreen:

Although they won't happen. We have McFail

by **Scorer--20** on Sat May 13, 2006 7:41 am

i think its.... kidd because he still playing like when he was more young

HE ASIST

HE SCORE

HE SHOOTS

he dunks ... lol --- joke.....kidd can dunk ??

by **Silas** on Sat May 13, 2006 8:18 am

Kidd was one of the greatest point guards all time in all the situations he was in. He turned the Nets around, he was awesome with the Suns, but Steve, who was very good with the Mav's, didnt really become who he was until he got into that great open court running system he loves. You put Ray Allen on the Suns he'd average 30 points a game, you put Luke Ridnour on the Suns and he'd be the next Steve Nash minus the scoring abilities, and of course it'd take him several years.

by **dada** on Sat May 13, 2006 8:27 am

I'd go with Iverson based in individual talent but I wouldnt necessarily group him in the pg category. Maybe a ps (point-shoot

).

Why Iverson? Besides obvious reasons (scoring, assists, steals) I think with a gifted complementary player he would have had a few rings already. Just one more guy to shoulder the load (who isnt named Cris Webber). Just look at how he plays in the allstar game. He isnt burdened with carrying the offensive load and what you get is a guy setting up plays well and able to salvage a possession whenever it breaks down (you have to remember this guy can fill up buckets). His speed is definitely a plus.

As far as natural pgs go I would say Kidd but if you look at it you wonder what exactly Kidd has over Iverson? A few more assists and rebounds I'll give him that. Kidd isnt really the most effective scorer either. As far rebounding, I couldnt care less since thats the Cs and PFs job so I wouldnt bring Iverson down for that reason.

by **Scotty** on Sat May 13, 2006 9:52 am

i say Nash-he's really stepped up and lifted his team to the playoffs without Amare, Iverson as it has been said-should be playing SG instead. Kidd comes 2nd as he had a good season, especially with his defensive team award.
i now Arenas isn't there but i like him as a PG too, equal with Kidd.

Kidd, Iverson, Nash

Who is the best point guard?

Kidd, Iverson, Nash

Who is online