Jason Kidd

[mavs777]

Originally Posted by mavsfan1000

No matter how good your vision is. If you can't get to the basket, you are a liability to the team.

Aaron brooks laughs at you as well as Jose Calderon

[JimProfit]

Originally Posted by StackAttack

It's a matter of opinion, but in my eyes, Magic is #1 and #2 is up for grabs among Stockton, Isiah, and Kidd.

I wouldn't put Kidd near either of those guys.

They were both killers. Clutch players that the other team feared.

Who would you rather have taking the last shot in a playoff game, Stockton or Kidd?

On every statistical measure, Stockton murders Kidd. Well, excepting rebounds.

And Isiah is possibly the best undersized scoring PG to ever play.

Further, both Stockton and Isiah could control pace.

Stockton was arguably the greatest pace-control PG to ever play.

Kidd? This guy can only run. Just like Nash. A major strike, as we again saw.

[Mavericks Rockets Fan]

Originally Posted by JimProfit

I wouldn't put Kidd near either of those guys.

They were both killers. Clutch players that the other team feared.

Who would you rather have taking the last shot in a playoff game, Stockton or Kidd?

On every statistical measure, Stockton murders Kidd. Well, excepting rebounds.

And Isiah is possibly the best undersized scoring PG to ever play.

Further, both Stockton and Isiah could control pace.

Stockton was arguably the greatest pace-control PG to ever play.

Kidd? This guy can only run. Just like Nash. A major strike, as we again saw.

Stockton doesn't "murder" Kidd in every statistical category. Here are the career numbers (pts/reb/ast):

Kidd 13.6/6.6/9.2
Stockton 13.1/2.7/10.5

[JimProfit]

Originally Posted by Mavericks Rockets Fan

Stockton doesn't "murder" Kidd in every statistical category. Here are the career numbers (pts/reb/ast):

Kidd 13.6/6.6/9.2
Stockton 13.1/2.7/10.5

First, that's with Stockton coming off the bench his first two and a half years, and playing about 30 mpg the last 5+.

Look at Stockton's peak.

13-14.5 assists per game. Kidd's best season? 10.8.

Stockton's career average is only .3 off that!

Kidd only surpassed Stockon's CAREER AVERAGE on assists in one season in his career, and has only posted over ten assists a game three times.

Stockton, on the other hand, is the only player in history to have multiple seasons averaging over 13 assists a game, doing it five times.

There are only three players in history that had over a thousand assists in a season: Kevin Porter, Isiah Thomas and Stockon.

The other two did it once. Stockton did it seven difference times.

In his prime, he averaged between 11.2 assists and 14.5 a game.

Kidd's only surpassed Stockon's career average on assists one time.

And efficiency? Kidd's destroyed on it. A/TO ratio, shooting percentage, etc.

As an example, Stockton averaged 13.8 assists and 3.2 turnovers per game in 1988, while Kidd averaged 9.8 assists versus 3.7 turnovers in 2001. Meaning that Stockon averaged 4.3 assists for every turnover, while Kidd averaged 2.64 assists for every turnover; and just aggregately, Stockton averaged .5 fewer turnovers with three more assists per game.

That's a blowout. And it's not a great outlier.

For their careers Stockton averaged 3.75 assists for every turnover, while Kidd averages 2.9 assists for every turnover. Almost a full assist less.

As well, he averages fewer assists with more turnovers per game on his career versus Stockton.

Not good.

Shooting? Stockton's worst season is better than Kidd's best.

Stockton was one of the best backcourt shooters in history at over 50%. Kidd's one of the worst shooters in history, particularly to be noted as a great player.

Kidd's best season on shooting is 44.4 percent. Stockton's worst is 47.1.

His best? 57.4 percent, better than some of Shaq's seasons.

Kidd's career average is hovering around 40%. Not bad, if it's the fifties and Cousy's your only competition.

Right now Kidd plays about 36 minutes a game at 37 putting up 10 points and 9 assists. Stockton played 31 at 40 and put up 13 and 8.5!

Kidd's an albatross for this franchise, and no way is as good as Stockton was.

Again, who would you rather taking the last shot in a tight game? Running your offense in the halfcourt?

What does Kidd do as well as Stockton, let alone better?

Oh. Right. He rebounds all those bricks he throws up.

[jthig32]

Arguing the merits of two all time greats at a position is pretty boring in my estimation. But I'll just take a minute to say that any discussion regarding Kidd vs Stockton that doesn't mention defense is a complete waste of time. And don't just cite steals and try and make the case that Stockton was an asset defensively.

Kidd's one of the elite defenders at the guard position in the history of the NBA. And he's the best rebounding PG in the history of the NBA. If you're discounting those two facts then you're not having a realistic discussion.

Acting like it's a clear case between either one of them is ridiculous. They were both great in their own ways. The main difference as far as I'm concerned is that Stockton spent his entire career playing with one of the best PF's to ever play. Not mentioning that fact when discussing their offensive merits is intentionally twisting the argument.

[JimProfit]

Originally Posted by jthig32

Arguing the merits of two all time greats at a position is pretty boring in my estimation.

Especially when you don't like the direction the stats point.

Key point, if it's so boring, then why rank them at all?

Why assert that Kidd's number 2 in the first place?

But I'll just take a minute to say that any discussion regarding Kidd vs Stockton that doesn't mention defense is a complete waste of time. And don't just cite steals and try and make the case that Stockton was an asset defensively.

Since when is Stockton a lacking defender?

Did you watch him play? At his peak?

He was one of the best roamers in the league, and was very tough positionally.

His ability to disrupt an offense, like a Jordan or Pippen, does show up through the steals stats. Really.

And he's the best rebounding PG in the history of the NBA. If you're discounting those two facts then you're not having a realistic discussion.

So Kidd rebounds well for a guard. And Mark Jackson posted up extremely well for a PG.

Does that mean he's in the running as well?

And how did you arrive at this conclusion, anyway? Oh. Right. Kidd's statistical proficiency at rebounding.

I guess stats count after all?

Acting like it's a clear case between either one of them is ridiculous.

What a ridiculous statement.

Stockton clearly was the better PG. The stats back this up. As does tape.

They were both great in their own ways. The main difference as far as I'm concerned is that Stockton spent his entire career playing with one of the best PF's to ever play.

By that logic, is Kidd in the conversation with Magic, since the latter played with Kareem, Scott, Worthy and on some of the most talent-laden teams in history?

Not mentioning that fact when discussing their offensive merits is intentionally twisting the argument.

So Kidd's one of the best shooters of all time if he just plays with Malone?

Yeah. Right.

Utah's halfcourt offense would have been in trouble, even with Malone's greatness, if Kidd had been running it. Because he can't control pace.

And imagine that pick and roll. They would cover Malone every time, daring Kidd to shoot.

Point remains, you're down 1, game on the line, who do you want taking the shot, Kidd or Stockton?

Stockton was also the best halfcourt point guard I've seen, and at least equal to Kidd in the open court.

In the end, the Kidd homers love to ignore reality. So, evidence be damned, he's as good or better than Stockton and his miserable stats don't tell the story of how good he's been for the Mavs in the playoffs.

What. Ever.

[jthig32]

Originally Posted by JimProfit

Especially when you don't like the direction the stats point.

Key point, if it's so boring, then why rank them at all?

Why assert that Kidd's number 2 in the first place?

I didn't.

Since when is Stockton a lacking defender?

Did you watch him play? At his peak?

He was one of the best roamers in the league, and was very tough positionally.

His ability to disrupt an offense, like a Jordan or Pippen, does show up through the steals stats. Really.

Very tough positionally? Come on. He's not in the same conversation as Kidd as far as man-on defense. Not even remotely close. He made up for some of that by ball hawking, but Kidd has that as well.

By that logic, is Kidd in the conversation with Magic, since the latter played with Kareem, Scott, Worthy and on some of the most talent-laden teams in history?

So Kidd's one of the best shooters of all time if he just plays with Malone?

Yeah. Right.

Beautiful execution of two straw men in succession. I'm simply saying that playing with someone on the level of Malone must be taken into account. Kidd certainly never had that luxury during his prime.

Point remains, you're down 1, game on the line, who do you want taking the shot, Kidd or Stockton?

Neither? Why is this even part of the discussion? Is being a dead eye shooter a requirement for being a great point guard? No one's arguing who's a better shooter.

In the end, the Kidd homers love to ignore reality. So, evidence be damned, he's as good or better than Stockton and his miserable stats don't tell the story of how good he's been for the Mavs in the playoffs.

He was darn good last year. He was terrible this year. And he absolutely is in the conversation WITH Stockton as one of the handful of best PG's of all time. Anyone not willing to admit that is being ridiculous.

[mavsfan1000]

The final product is we are 1-3 in the playoffs with Kidd as a starter. No matter what he did during the regular season, the playoffs are where you make your mark and define how valuable you are. Kidd fell short as well as many other players.

[Bathouse Bear]

Interesting fact about Jason Kidd.

This years Mavs team is only the second 55 win team he has ever been on.

The best team he has ever been on record wise was the 1997-98 Phoenix Suns who went 56-26 and then lost in the 1st round.

[Bathouse Bear]

Kidd is the most overrated player of our generation. Get this: His CAREER percentage from the field is .4001...he is nearly a guarantee to finish his career with a FG% below 40%.

That's nice that he can rebound, although that's a better job for a non-PG. Michael Vick can run...doesn't make him a great QB...better job for a non-QB in the NFL.

Great PGs should be a legit threat to score...especially being able to create his own shot. He's neither. Kidd is fun to watch and entertaining...and he's good, not great.

[Bathouse Bear]

Guys, basketball is a team game & you have to realize that only part of the story is played on the court in front of mesmerized fans.

Jason Kidd carries burdens that most people do not understand. Everywhere he has gone he proven to be an expert at destroying relationships and alienating teamates and management. Since good teams take a while to gel, a logical move is bring in Jason Kidd with all his tools and build around him or have him provide the "spark".

That methodology has been tried and it failed, and it failed, and it failed.
There are reasons that Billups, Nash, Stockton, Thomas, Paul, and other great true point guards are not on the auction block every 3 or 4 years. There is a reason that Kidd is always on the auction block and it has little to do with his on the court skill set.

Anyone recall a quarterback named Jeff George?


Kudos to Kidd...he can lay bricks, fail to lead a team to elite level, beat his wife, demand trades and cause organizational strife...and still be praised by talking heads. How, I do not know. I suppose, in a twisted way, that's an accomplishment.

[Budapest Maverick]

Stockton was freakishly strong for his physique, and he was a very, very good defender, not to mention a badass, and clutch as hell. While Kidd did a few things better in his prime, i think (though it's not easy to measure) Stockton's overall impact was greater. I'm not sure i agree that you can't build a true contender around the 37 years old Kidd, but it looks like that's not gonna be an easy thing to do.

Unfortunately, today's NBA rewards the quick, penetrating scoring players, (guards, point guards) and Kidd not only not this kind of player, but he has to defend them, and at this point in his career, it's often not pretty. But hey, that's exactly the reason why Roddy can be a special player in this league, a much better player than he could have been in Europe.

[Budapest Maverick]

Originally Posted by mavs777

Aaron brooks laughs at you as well as Jose Calderon

Brooks can get in the paint though, and has a really good mid range game, not to mention, he's the best three point shooter (statistically) in the NBA. JC is pure garbage, impact-wise, i'm not sure he's a good example either. Agree with you though, even in today's NBA you don't neccesserely need a penetrating PG, if you have a slasher SG, and a traditional low post presence at PF, or C. Unfortunately, we have neither of those...

But it's not on Kidd in my opinion. It's the whole team, maybe you can give a pass to Haywood and Damp, because they don't have the touch, and the ability to score down low. Marion is the same, he can't have the handles to face up and penetrate. But Butler can drive. Terry can drive, Barea can drive, and they were struggling all series long with their shot, still, they settled for jumpers. I know, the Spurs' D had a lot to do with it... But still, they should have been more agressive. The whole team should have been more agressive.

[Mavericks Rockets Fan]

Originally Posted by JimProfit

First, that's with Stockton coming off the bench his first two and a half years, and playing about 30 mpg the last 5+.

Look at Stockton's peak.

13-14.5 assists per game. Kidd's best season? 10.8.

Stockton's career average is only .3 off that!

Kidd only surpassed Stockon's CAREER AVERAGE on assists in one season in his career, and has only posted over ten assists a game three times.

Stockton, on the other hand, is the only player in history to have multiple seasons averaging over 13 assists a game, doing it five times.

There are only three players in history that had over a thousand assists in a season: Kevin Porter, Isiah Thomas and Stockon.

The other two did it once. Stockton did it seven difference times.

In his prime, he averaged between 11.2 assists and 14.5 a game.

Kidd's only surpassed Stockon's career average on assists one time.

And efficiency? Kidd's destroyed on it. A/TO ratio, shooting percentage, etc.

As an example, Stockton averaged 13.8 assists and 3.2 turnovers per game in 1988, while Kidd averaged 9.8 assists versus 3.7 turnovers in 2001. Meaning that Stockon averaged 4.3 assists for every turnover, while Kidd averaged 2.64 assists for every turnover; and just aggregately, Stockton averaged .5 fewer turnovers with three more assists per game.

That's a blowout. And it's not a great outlier.

For their careers Stockton averaged 3.75 assists for every turnover, while Kidd averages 2.9 assists for every turnover. Almost a full assist less.

As well, he averages fewer assists with more turnovers per game on his career versus Stockton.

Not good.

Shooting? Stockton's worst season is better than Kidd's best.

Stockton was one of the best backcourt shooters in history at over 50%. Kidd's one of the worst shooters in history, particularly to be noted as a great player.

Kidd's best season on shooting is 44.4 percent. Stockton's worst is 47.1.

His best? 57.4 percent, better than some of Shaq's seasons.

Kidd's career average is hovering around 40%. Not bad, if it's the fifties and Cousy's your only competition.

Right now Kidd plays about 36 minutes a game at 37 putting up 10 points and 9 assists. Stockton played 31 at 40 and put up 13 and 8.5!

Kidd's an albatross for this franchise, and no way is as good as Stockton was.

Again, who would you rather taking the last shot in a tight game? Running your offense in the halfcourt?

What does Kidd do as well as Stockton, let alone better?

Oh. Right. He rebounds all those bricks he throws up.

1. Like tcat mentioned, Kidd is a better one on one defender.

2. Yes Stockton was a great passer, but I believe his assist number are inflated by Utah's pick and roll offence. In terms of court vision and passing ability I would put Kidd right up there with Stockton.

3. I'll agree that Stockton was a better shooter. But to say Kidd isn't as good a shooter as Stockton is hardly a knock on Kidd.

4. You did take into account that Stockton had better teammates, right? Oh wait, you didn't.

5. Kidd is an "albatross"? I would disagree. Kidd is an elite passer in this league. Kidd's problem is that he was overworked in the playoffs by Rick Carlisle when he could have been rested while giving minutes to Roddy (kill two birds with one stone).

All in all, I am not arguing that Kidd is as good an offensive player as Stockton - because Stockton was better in that respect. But I still believe that Kidd is a better defender, rebounder, and is as good a passer.

[tcat075]

Originally Posted by Bathouse Bear

Kidd is the most overrated player of our generation. Get this: His CAREER percentage from the field is .4001...he is nearly a guarantee to finish his career with a FG% below 40%.

That's nice that he can rebound, although that's a better job for a non-PG. Michael Vick can run...doesn't make him a great QB...better job for a non-QB in the NFL.

Great PGs should be a legit threat to score...especially being able to create his own shot. He's neither. Kidd is fun to watch and entertaining...and he's good, not great.

What's your point? That he can't be a great point guard because he only scores around 10 ppg during the latter stages of his career?

He has been a threat to score. Most of his career. Pass first, yes. But he could score. 5 seasons he scored over 15 points per game, and for 9 straight years he scored over 13 a game, and how do you think he did this? By shooting a lot of threes? No. By finishing on drives, something you've been complaining about. And many of the times he was scoring off a drive, he was throwing a lob or a wrap around to another player to score.

No, his assist numbers were never as high as Stockton, but nor did he had a Malone to throw it to so he could rack up easy assists. Jason Kidd has had to make the likes Richard Jefferson and Kenyon Martin look good...and he has. Have you seen their contracts per their performance?

[Mavericks Rockets Fan]

Originally Posted by Budapest Maverick

Stockton was freakishly strong for his physique, and he was a very, very good defender, not to mention a badass, and clutch as hell.

This must be why he would always flop all the time...

[Murphy3]

I would without a doubt take Stockton over Kidd.

[tcat075]

Originally Posted by Budapest Maverick

Stockton was freakishly strong for his physique, and he was a very, very good defender, not to mention a badass, and clutch as hell.

You can keep saying that all you want, but I'd love to see some proof. I respect Jthig 1000x more than you, and if Jthig says he was mediocre, then I'm going to believe he's mediocre. If you can prove he was a good defender, then that's one thing. But right now, all you've proven is that your entire purpose on this board is to vilify and degrade Jason Kidd as much as you possibly can, claiming he's terrible, using illogical reasoning and vague claims you can't prove.

[LonghornDub]

Originally Posted by Bathouse Bear

That methodology has been tried and it failed, and it failed, and it failed.
There are reasons that Billups, Nash, Stockton, Thomas, Paul, and other great true point guards are not on the auction block every 3 or 4 years. There is a reason that Kidd is always on the auction block and it has little to do with his on the court skill set.

Kidd has changed teams 2 times since 1998. Nash has also changed teams 2 times since 1998. Billups has changed teams 5 times since 1998.

Yeah, good point there, bro.

Originally Posted by Bathouse Bear

That's nice that he can rebound, although that's a better job for a non-PG. Michael Vick can run...doesn't make him a great QB...better job for a non-QB in the NFL.

This is such a horrible analogy, it's not even worth commenting on, other than simply to note that it is a horrible, horrible analogy.

Horrible.

[Budapest Maverick]

Originally Posted by tcat075

You can keep saying that all you want, but I'd love to see some proof. I respect Jthig 1000x more than you, and if Jthig says he was mediocre, then I'm going to believe he's mediocre. If you can prove he was a good defender, then that's one thing. But right now, all you've proven is that your entire purpose on this board is to vilify and degrade Jason Kidd as much as you possibly can, claiming he's terrible, using illogical reasoning and vague claims you can't prove.

I believe you wanted to quote somebody else, i'm a fan of the old magician, and never claimed he's terrible.

[Budapest Maverick]

Originally Posted by Mavericks Rockets Fan

This must be why he would always flop all the time...

He flopped because he was one the dirtiest players ever, and because flopping is efficient.

[mac222b]

stockton>kidd

[jthig32]

It's funny how many different conversations are going on in this thread. I have no issue with someone saying Stockton was better than Kidd. I think people forget what a defensive force Kidd was in his prime, but whatever, saying Stockton was better than Kidd is no slight.

But some people just can't help themselves and take the point way too far. Saying that the only thing Kidd did as well as Stockton was rebound is idiotic.

And to continue the point further, saying Kidd was not a great player negates any other basketball opinions you will ever have, and should probably land you on the ignore list of every poster on this board.

[CadBane]

Stockton was a great defender. Calling him "mediocre" removes the little credibility you had.

[LonghornDub]

Originally Posted by CadBane

Stockton was a great defender. Calling him "mediocre" removes the little credibility you had.

Dude's got 1000x more credibility than you. Just letting you know.

[tcat075]

Originally Posted by Budapest Maverick

I believe you wanted to quote somebody else, i'm a fan of the old magician, and never claimed he's terrible.

I did think I was quoting Bathouse Bear. Apoligies for that. As for the other, I'm just saying that I'm going to take Jthig's word that Stockton's D was mediocre over yours that he's good. If you're a "fan" of his, I'm sure you'll understand why.

And yes, I know you didn't say he was terrible, it was an intended exaggeration just to get my point across. If I said, "claiming he's an OK point guard whose not as good as Stockton because he doesn't shoot as well and can't finish on drives," it just doesn't have the same ring as "claiming he's terrible." Much more dramatic that way.

[jthig32]

Originally Posted by CadBane

Stockton was a great defender. Calling him "mediocre" removes the little credibility you had.

I guess it's a good thing I didn't then.

There is absolutely zero argument to be made that Stockton was a better defender than Kidd. None. That was my main point. I may have gone slightly overboard in saying he wasn't an asset, but I still think his defensive reputation was over rated based on his steal numbers. The dude was under sized in just about every matchup he ever had.

[sike]

I see no reason to belittle Stockton if the goal is praising Kidd. In their primes, they were both great defenders.

Stock benefited from playing in the era he did and the good favor of the refs...but so does every other star.

[jthig32]

I don't think I'm belittling him. He's in the conversation as the best PG of all time. I just think his defensive reputation is based a lot on his ability to get steals and the way he played (tough, scrappy, etc.). I just don't think he was a "great" defender. He was too small.

[sike]

Originally Posted by jthig32

I don't think I'm belittling him. He's in the conversation as the best PG of all time. I just think his defensive reputation is based a lot on his ability to get steals and the way he played (tough, scrappy, etc.). I just don't think he was a "great" defender. He was too small.

I'm not sure what "too small"...I know you mean it as justification of your claim...but shouldn't a defender's reputation be based on something entirely different from height or weight? I certainly think so.

To your point though, I wonder how much smaller he was than the average pg of his era...they've grown a lot in the past 15 yrs.

[jthig32]

Originally Posted by sike

I'm not sure what "too small"...I know you mean it as justification of your claim...but shouldn't a defender's reputation be based on something entirely different from height or weight? I certainly think so.

To your point though, I wonder how much smaller he was than the average pg of his era...they've grown a lot in the past 15 yrs.

Well yes, it is based on other things. I just think that his overall size put him at a disadvantage in a lot of matchups. Although you make a good point on the eras. It may be that a lot of those matchups didn't start happening until the latter part of his career. And I think people often mistake being a ball hawk for being a great man-on defender.

Bottom line for me is that Kidd was unquestionably a better defender, and able to defend multiple positions to boot.

[sike]

Originally Posted by jthig32

Bottom line for me is that Kidd was unquestionably a better defender, and able to defend multiple positions to boot.

The better athlete unquestionably....more versatile? unquestionably. Its just a sticky situation comparing guys from differing eras.

None of this means I disagree on Kidd's potential superiority...I'm just not certain of it.

[Budapest Maverick]

Originally Posted by tcat075

I did think I was quoting Bathouse Bear. Apoligies for that. As for the other, I'm just saying that I'm going to take Jthig's word that Stockton's D was mediocre over yours that he's good. If you're a "fan" of his, I'm sure you'll understand why.

And yes, I know you didn't say he was terrible, it was an intended exaggeration just to get my point across. If I said, "claiming he's an OK point guard whose not as good as Stockton because he doesn't shoot as well and can't finish on drives," it just doesn't have the same ring as "claiming he's terrible." Much more dramatic that way.

I get it. Should have explain myself further about their defense. I also think Kidd, in his prime, was a better, more impactful defender, he was obviously stronger (though as i said, Stockton was strong for his phisyque) and Jason could shut down PG's, SG's, and sometimes even SF's, and i bet even some PF's had a hard time backing him off to the basket after a switch.

I just don't agree that Stockton was a mediocre defender. He wasn't "great", using your word, but he was very, very good on defense. Overall, i think he had greater impact, because of his superb shooting, and because his passing was on pair with J-Kidd (probably a little worst on the fastbreak, but definitely better in half-court offense). I may very well be wrong obviously, as those two should be pretty close in terms of impact, and it's not an easy debate.

[mcsluggo]

Originally Posted by rabbitproof

Screw it. Let him play 60 games a year. That's it, hombre.

We sold him out for the second seed and got one series to show for it.

He gave us so little in the playoffs. His ability to run is already hampered in the playoffs. Fatigue will rob your shot and your defense. Way to manage the 37 year old.

amen!

does anyone remember Stockton in the "twilight of his career"....?

Sloan had his minutes reduced to a managable level, and a strict schedule... AND HE STUCK TO IT NO MATTER WHAT. Even when 37 year old Stockton was playing out of his jock, he would get sent to the bench when the egg-timer flipped. Period. Kidd needs the same treatment. leaning hard on him during Kidd's "hot stretch" 30-60 days ago was idiotic. the dude needs to be playing JUST ENOUGH minutes during the regular season to keep in game shape and to keep his timing down with his team-mates... NOTHING MORE.

[kg_veteran]

Originally Posted by mcsluggo

amen!

does anyone remember Stockton in the "twilight of his career"....?

Sloan had his minutes reduced to a managable level, and a strict schedule... AND HE STUCK TO IT NO MATTER WHAT. Even when 37 year old Stockton was playing out of his jock, he would get sent to the bench when the egg-timer flipped. Period. Kidd needs the same treatment. leaning hard on him during Kidd's "hot stretch" 30-60 days ago was idiotic. the dude needs to be playing JUST ENOUGH minutes during the regular season to keep in game shape and to keep his timing down with his team-mates... NOTHING MORE.

I'll second this. Popovich does the same thing with his vets. Duncan plays fewer and fewer minutes during the regular season as the years go by, and he looked pretty good to me when it counted (4 point game notwithstanding).

[SMC0007]

Ideal situation is Kidd backing up Roddy next year.

[Usually Lurkin]

Carlisle will not change. He didn't learn from how he misused Prince years ago, and didn't learn from how he misused Robo earlier this year. It'll be the same thing for how he manages minutes for his old guys. He'll just keep making the same mistakes till he gets fired.

[sike]

Originally Posted by Usually Lurkin

Carlisle will not change. He didn't learn from how he misused Prince years ago, and didn't learn from how he misused Robo earlier this year. It'll be the same thing for how he manages minutes for his old guys. He'll just keep making the same mistakes till he gets fired.

I hope you're wrong, but tend to agree...old dogs and new tricks often don't mesh well.

[Underdog]

Originally Posted by sike

I hope you're wrong, but tend to agree...old dogs and new tricks often don't mesh well.

wisdom = old dog learning new tricks

(hopefully Carlisle's ego doesn't keep him from gaining some after that SA series...)

[Usually Lurkin]

Originally Posted by sike

I hope you're wrong, but tend to agree...old dogs and new tricks often don't mesh well.

I think it means that if you (I assume you are Mark Cuban) are not going to fire him, you have to make those decisions for him. Get rid of Terry. Get rid of Damp (and don't bring him back). And, as much as it sucks because he'd be great for us if managed properly, get rid of Kidd. Hopefully between Booby and the franchise-player that we get in return for all that loss, we'll be able to cover the PG position.