And if you still don't know, the thread is not about Kidd and Carter. But hey, at least their on 1 team. The Nets are going to have an exciting season. So ANSWER_AI03, where's your team headed?
<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Just one more thing, this is not true. Marion was compared to Scottie Pippen with a weaker jumpshot by a lot of people. Some thought he was actually a capable 1st option at SF/SG, he was expected to produce right away, and was praised for his athleticism, finishing, and defensive abilities. He wasn't really considered raw outside of needing to improve his jumper, which he did, and which wasn't even considered bad. He was hurt by a knee injury his first season, and the team actually hurt a lot when he got injured.</div> He only played two years at UNLV. Not many players out of their sophomore year is considered polished and ready to contribute. The last underclassman that was a real impact player was Carmelo, and before that I can't really remember. However, I decided to look up some pre-draft analysis and found this: <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">While he has the size to see the entire floor, Marion does not yet know the game and does not make good decisions all the time. Marion is big and strong for a small forward, and needs to add ball skills and shooting consistency to his tremendous athletic potential." -- ESPN's Jay Bilas</div> Either way, not having a jump shot and mediocre dribbling skills is my definition of raw. Pretty much his rookie year he was catching lobs from Jason or getting easy open dunks. Much like Jefferson his rookie year, and many considered RJ to be raw coming out of Arizona as well. Also, being compared to Scottie Pippen doesn't mean anything to me. They compare Adam Morrison to Larry Bird when he's more of a Allan Houston. Keith Van Horn too. They said Iguodala was Pippen-like, how close is he to that going into his third year? He's still raw and unpolished. Anyone can be compared to anyone. People say I play like Ray Allen on the basketball court. Ain't like I am.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting nextlevelgame:</div><div class="quote_post">He only played two years at UNLV. Not many players out of their sophomore year is considered polished and ready to contribute. The last underclassman that was a real impact player was Carmelo, and before that I can't really remember. However, I decided to look up some pre-draft analysis and found this: Either way, not having a jump shot and mediocre dribbling skills is my definition of raw. Pretty much his rookie year he was catching lobs from Jason or getting easy open dunks. Much like Jefferson his rookie year, and many considered RJ to be raw coming out of Arizona as well. Also, being compared to Scottie Pippen doesn't mean anything to me. They compare Adam Morrison to Larry Bird when he's more of a Allan Houston. Keith Van Horn too. They said Iguodala was Pippen-like, how close is he to that going into his third year? He's still raw and unpolished. Anyone can be compared to anyone. People say I play like Ray Allen on the basketball court. Ain't like I am.</div> He's never been a consitent jumpshooter, and still isn't, but truly he had an underatted jumpshot coming out of, and while he was in college. Just because of how it looked, people underestimated it, but he could hit shots quite well. He wasn't raw in terms of what we consider raw. We call guys who just have the athleticism and need to improve many areas of their game raw. Marion had great offensive IQ in terms of moving off the ball, was an excellent rebounder at SF, and had a knack for the ball, was a solid defender on and off the ball, was a good FT shooter (was actually poor in college), and had a mediocre jumpshot. I don't know if I consider that raw anyways. Marion must've worked a lot in the summer before his rookie year though because when he came in the NBA, he did not look like a raw player, and when I say raw, I mean a guy like Travis Outlaw. His mid-range jumpshot was as consistent as it is now, all he did in his first two seasons was expand his range on his jumpshot. Offensively he's still the same player who makes fastbreak oppurtunities out of nothing, and is one of the best at moving without the ball and finding open lanes. I truly don't think that quote proves anything in this argument. Marion still does not have "ball skills" and consistent shooting, but would you say he's raw now? He stil isn't a guy who you put the ball in his hands as a playmaker, and decision maker, but would we say he's raw? No. I just don't agree with that assesment that it was because of Kidd that he did good as a rookie. Marion individually would've done quite well as a rookie with whatever PG the team had. Having Kidd obviously helped him more than if he had Milt Palacio. Kidd would find him in spots a bad PG wouldn't be able to, but Kidd didn't make a difference in whether he was good or not, he was good either way. Even if you look at his rookie year, Kidd missed the whole of April due to injury, and Marion averaged 10.8 PPG on 51.6% FG (a high for a month that season). It's the same way people raved about how Kidd made Kmart which really wasn't true. Kidd made Kmarts team win, but Kmart is no different offensively with Andre Miller than he was with Kidd. He's actually been slightly more efficient from the field.
how do you know whats gonna happen with any of the teams this season? pretty easy to talk trash before the season starts huh?
Stop with the Shawn Marion talk in this thread guys, it's completely off topic. Especially you og15 *Waves finger*
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Franchise4Ever:</div><div class="quote_post">Stop with the Shawn Marion talk in this thread guys, it's completely off topic. Especially you og15 *Waves finger*</div>
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting og15:</div><div class="quote_post">He's never been a consitent jumpshooter, and still isn't, but truly he had an underatted jumpshot coming out of, and while he was in college. Just because of how it looked, people underestimated it, but he could hit shots quite well. He wasn't raw in terms of what we consider raw. We call guys who just have the athleticism and need to improve many areas of their game raw. Marion had great offensive IQ in terms of moving off the ball, was an excellent rebounder at SF, and had a knack for the ball, was a solid defender on and off the ball, was a good FT shooter (was actually poor in college), and had a mediocre jumpshot. I don't know if I consider that raw anyways.</div> I don't agree with that at all. He was scared to shoot his rookie year. They gave him all day to pop a shot, but rarely he made them pay. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Marion must've worked a lot in the summer before his rookie year though because when he came in the NBA, </div> Who doesn't work hard the summer before their rookie year? <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">he did not look like a raw player, and when I say raw, I mean a guy like Travis Outlaw. </div> And when I say raw I mean Andre Iguodala when he came to the league. Richard Jefferson when he first started. Hasaan Adams right now. Etc. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">His mid-range jumpshot was as consistent as it is now, all he did in his first two seasons was expand his range on his jumpshot. Offensively he's still the same player who makes fastbreak oppurtunities out of nothing, and is one of the best at moving without the ball and finding open lanes. </div> I think otherwise. If anything he worked out the kinks in that awkward shotoing format he has. He had once said that at first he couldn't get his jumper right because he didn't know how to time his jump and release till later in his career. He cited that he jumped too high on his shot so it would go long. However, if he didn't release at a certain time it wouldn't arc and be flat. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">I truly don't think that quote proves anything in this argument. Marion still does not have "ball skills" and consistent shooting, but would you say he's raw now? He stil isn't a guy who you put the ball in his hands as a playmaker, and decision maker, but would we say he's raw? No. </div> Decision making is not a trait that only playmakers have. It could be simple as running to an open spot. Setting a screen then screening away. Or as simple as running the pick and roll right. Skills Marion did not get as well coming into the league and reasons why he never looked fluid in his game. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">I just don't agree with that assesment that it was because of Kidd that he did good as a rookie. Marion individually would've done quite well as a rookie with whatever PG the team had. Having Kidd obviously helped him more than if he had Milt Palacio. Kidd would find him in spots a bad PG wouldn't be able to, but Kidd didn't make a difference in whether he was good or not, he was good either way. </div> This is the arguement all Jason Kidd-doubters propose. Not to call you one, but at the same time, people who don't watch Jason assume that players are already good and all Jason does is throw them a lob or two. No, it's beyond that. Sure Vince was a great player before the Nets, however, I doubt entirely his motivation is because he wanted to prove a point that he still was elite. When the we were inconsistent the first month or two in the league, Vince was playing horrible. Only RJ was consistent and Jason stepped in demanding Vince to play at a higher level and more seriously, which resulted in our first 10 game winning streak. I mean, something as simple as knowing that your leader is demanding and expecting something of you makes you a better player. This is what seperates him from a Stephon Marbury, Steve Francis, Baron Davis---all players that many argue to be better than Jason at one point of their careers. Respect. So do I think that Shawn Marion was just bad coming into the league? No. Do I think that he played extra-motivated after knowing the level Kidd demnands? Yes, certainly. And that makes a world of difference. I'm not saying like it's like bumping you from a B to an A+ in personal player level, but significant enough to realize what you're capable of in the future where you could be unsure to begin with. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Even if you look at his rookie year, Kidd missed the whole of April due to injury, and Marion averaged 10.8 PPG on 51.6% FG (a high for a month that season).</div> And RJ averaged like 26/7/4 when Kidd, Kittles, and Martin were out in '04. And like 25/8/3 after the deconstruction at the start of the '05 season where our second best player was Rodney Buford. However, it is easy to play at a high level for a short amount of time. Given the entire season, 82 games and going in every night knowing you don't have a Kidd coming back. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">It's the same way people raved about how Kidd made Kmart which really wasn't true. Kidd made Kmarts team win, but Kmart is no different offensively with Andre Miller than he was with Kidd. He's actually been slightly more efficient from the field.</div> That's assumption you make off of stats, not by play. He averages a bit more, but he doesn't make the Nuggets that much better. Before Kmart came they were a first and out playoff team. Things haven't changed. So I don't think he's been that much more efficient given a better statistical output.
Is there really any other way to judge efficiancy, besides statistical output? i wouldnt count winning as judging efficiancy because thats more of a team thing. All the "Kidd Lovers" have this arguement that he makes players better. NO HE DOESNT!!! carter was already one of the best SGs in the league without kidd. Yes he gets some sick passes from kidd and open looks, but carter is carter no matter what. Same with Marrion, and Same with K-mart, he doesnt need kidd to get the same numbers. Pretty soon you guys are gonna be saying that Nenad is a progressing as a player because of kidd. If a player wants to play better or be more active on the court, he will. it has nothing to do with another player. Kidd brings leadership to the table, and great passing, and some D, and thats about it.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Answer_AI03:</div><div class="quote_post">Is there really any other way to judge efficiancy, besides statistical output? i wouldnt count winning as judging efficiancy because thats more of a team thing. All the "Kidd Lovers" have this arguement that he makes players better. NO HE DOESNT!!! carter was already one of the best SGs in the league without kidd. Yes he gets some sick passes from kidd and open looks, but carter is carter no matter what. Same with Marrion, and Same with K-mart, he doesnt need kidd to get the same numbers. Pretty soon you guys are gonna be saying that Nenad is a progressing as a player because of kidd. If a player wants to play better or be more active on the court, he will. it has nothing to do with another player. Kidd brings leadership to the table, and great passing, and some D, and thats about it.</div> Please leave. If you can't agree that Kidd makes players better, than I don't know what to tell you. My question is why couldn't the Nets get into the playoffs or getting an winning record with Marbury. If Kidd doesn't make players better, then Mabury and him are pretty much the same. Yet.....with Kidd the Nets made the playoffs. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">some D</div> Some Defense? Then what kind of defense does Nash have?
Kidd is a better overall player than maurbury. Kidd definately knows how to run an offense and hes a team player, and he knows how to play team defense. But you guys make him out to be one of the best players in the league, which he is not. He helps guys score and gets them high percentage shots, but he does not add to the ability or talent level of another player. There is no way that hes making carter better, or K-mart, or kittles when he played. They all were talented players and played well with kidd, but didnt NEED him to be good. If kittles had another point gaurd, he still would have been the same player. He could knock down the open 3 and was an eceptional defender. Kidd might have passed him the ball, but kidd didnt make the shot for him.
<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Kidd is a better overall player than maurbury. Kidd definately knows how to run an offense and hes a team player, and he knows how to play team defense. But you guys make him out to be one of the best players in the league, which he is not.</div> Kidd may not be a top 10-15 player, but he is definitely in the top 20. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">He helps guys score and gets them high percentage shots, but he does not add to the ability or talent level of another player. There is no way that hes making carter better, or K-mart, or kittles when he played. They all were talented players and played well with kidd, but didnt NEED him to be good. If kittles had another point gaurd, he still would have been the same player. He could knock down the open 3 and was an eceptional defender. Kidd might have passed him the ball, but kidd didnt make the shot for him.</div> Carter wouldn't be at this high of a level if it weren't for Kidd, Martin would still be unknown if it weren't for Kidd, and Kittles would be NO WHERE if it wasn't for Kidd. You may hate Kidd, but don't deny the fact that he makes players much better. Martins averages before Kidd came to Jersey: 12 points and 7 rebounds a game. Martins averages after Kidd came to Jersey: Averaging around 15 pints and 8 rebounds a game. Martins averages when he left New Jersey and went to Denver <u>(No Jason Kidd)</u>: About 13 points and 6 rebounds a game. Kidd made K-Mart much better and an all-star. He made Kittles play better and made VC one step closer to the top 5 players in the league. Vince was an all-star in Toronto, but a superstar in New Jersey, when he played along side <u>Jason Kidd.</u>
<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">They all were talented players and played well with kidd, but didnt NEED him to be good.</div> But they needed him to win. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Martins averages before Kidd came to Jersey: 12 points and 7 rebounds a game.</div> It was his rookie season in 2000, so you can't really count that.
werent ther numerous posts earlier about how Kidd had no effect on Martin's stats? BTW, i am not a Kidd hater. Its just my opinion that his time is almost over as being a great player in the NBA. There are easily 20 players better than him RIGHT NOW.
<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">But they needed him to win. </div> ....ok, agreed. but i would say that kidd needed them too. Kidd is able to get alot of his assists because he has 2 of the most athletic players in basketball.I think the nets have an above average team because they have a pretty good team. Not just because of kidd.
<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Kidd is able to get alot of his assists because he has 2 of the most athletic players in basketball.</div> His assists are irrevelent because he wants win instead of great stats. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">I think the nets have an above average team because they have a pretty good team. Not just because of kidd.</div> I believe that the Nets will crumble, and be a totally different team. He brings leadership to the team and and that can't be measured like a stat.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Answer_AI03:</div><div class="quote_post">Kidd is a better overall player than maurbury. Kidd definately knows how to run an offense and hes a team player, and he knows how to play team defense. But you guys make him out to be one of the best players in the league, which he is not. </div> Are you F@#$!N kidding me? Jason Kidd will be in the Hall of Fame. And he is regarded by many as one of the best point guards ever to play the game along with Magic Johnson and John Stockton. Kidd is among the best of the best. You just said it, he can control the tempo of the team both on offense and defense. How many players can do that? You may not be a Kidd hater but you may not even know a lot about basketball. From Dallas to Phoenix to the New Jersey, Kidd made his mark. Your knowledge about the game is scoring. Well there's a hell lot more to it than what you know.
With all of AI's, Nash' and Marbury's scoring. And the way (answer_ai03 says) that they help their teams in more ways than one than Kidd does for his team due to his "weak offense". Here's my question. How far has these "GREAT SCORERS" brought their respective teams?
To be fare, AI is not even suppose to be in the discussion as he is not a PG. Believe it or not ANSWER_AI03... He is not a point guard. Just because he's small does not make him a "point guard". Magic Johnson is 6"9 but he is a "point guard".
