Are you freakin kidding me?
So today's ESPN 5-on-5 roundtable is on the T-Wolves. The first question is, Fact or Fiction: Ricky Rubio will be a star. The second to comment is Bret LaGree of Hoopinion. Here's what he had to say:
Bret LaGree, Hoopinion: Fiction. Star is subjective. Best I can tell, Rubio's upside is Jason Kidd and it's a fair question if Kidd was ever truly a star. I'd love for Rubio to be a fascinating addition to the NBA but the vast majority of great passing, poor shooting point guards don't turn out to be Jason Kidd.
The problem here is not what he says about Rubio, but "It's a fair question if Kidd was ever truly a star."
No, it's not a fair question. Are you &$#%#&@! kidding me?
Best player on 2 Finals teams and now a champion, 2nd all time in assists, 3rd in steals and threes, 5x All-NBA First Team (but never a star...), 4x All-Defensive First Team (5x 2nd Team), 10x All-Star (but probably not a star, right?), and 3rd all time in triple doubles after Oscar Robertson and Magic Johnson.
Starting with winning ROY in '94-95 through finishing in the top 10 assists and steals and guiding the Mavs title team in 2011, Kidd has arguably been a star every year for the past 17 years, and there's no doubting that he was an absolute superstar from 1999-2004, as his All-NBA first team selections will attest to. Pick out any year and you can prove this guy wrong. My personal favorite:
2001-02: 14.7 points, 9.9 assists, 7.3 rebounds, 2.1 steals, 2nd in MVP voting, All-NBA 1st Team, All-Defensive First Team, Nets improve by 26 games and make the Finals.
Not a star.
Fire this guy.
OMG! This guy's memory must only go back about five years if he thinks Kidd was never a "star" (and even then considering how much credit Kidd got for the Mavs championship even NBA fans in highschool should know Kidd as a very good baller). Maybe his definition of star means something other than being a great basketball player. In either case, this guy is an idiot.
Question: Was Jason Kidd ever one of the top five players in the NBA for a single season? Maybe this guy should've said superstar instead of star, but I'm guessing he means one of those guys whose name is plastered everywhere, like Kobe, LeBron, even Dwight Howard.
Yes, I understand Jason Kidd's team won the title by beating Kobe and LeBron's teams, but a "star" has more to do with name recognition than on-court results. For example, the 50-something-year-old secretary at my office knows who Kobe and LeBron are, but I guarantee she does not know who Jason Kidd is.
well, thats relative. you have athletes that are super/mega stars and their names ring bells to the person who is not even a casual fan. some people may know of LBJ, Kobe, Oscar De La Hoya, Tom Brady, etc but dont know which one bounces the ball, which one throws it, or that the other doesnt use a ball at all. thats superstardom that trancends the respective sport.
Outside of the casual fan, nobody probably knows who J-Kidd is.
To the avid fan and maybe even the casual fan earlier in his career Kidd was absolutely a star. The guy was a star beginning in his rookie season. THIS guy is supposed to know something about basketball...so for him to even ask a question like that in regards to a 10-time All Star (much less a 5x All NBA 1st Teamer) is utterly ridiculous.
"Question: Was Jason Kidd ever one of the top five players in the NBA for a single season?"
are you the one asking that question? because if you are then shame on you. Kidd finished top 5 in MVP voting 2 years...and in 2002 he finished in 2nd place.
to answer your question, if indeed it is yours...Abso-&$#%#&@!in-lootly
Players I'd have taken over Jason Kidd in the 2002 season:
Tim Duncan, Kobe Bryant, Shaquille O'Neal, Tracy McGrady, Allen Iverson (who averaged 31 points that year)
Wow, that was easy.
Oh, and that Garnett guy was pretty good that year too. So was Chris Webber (24 and 10).
I've got to hit this issue again, because it is really pi$$ing me off. Look I agree that Rubio probably won't be a star because he probably won't be anywhere near as good as J. Kidd. But if he is and if Bret LaGree thinks that some floppy haired Spanish guy is going to show up in the NBA and lead the league in assists, make All-Star teams, maybe even make first team NBA and at the same time not become an international freaking superstar then he must think that all the ad men on Madison Avenue are seriously off their game. If Rubio garners half the accolades of Jason Kidd, then he will at very least be on billboards across the world pushing Fanta sodas and the like for the next decade at the very least.
Saying your upside is Jason Kidd and suggesting that is some sort of limit on your skills is just ridiculous. Dude, Chris Paul and Derrik Rose are hoping they have a career as good as J. Kidd.
Yeah, they tend to shoot the $hit on that, probably have a pretty short deadline to think of much or do research (atleast I hope that is the case). There are some awesome people on it (Henry Abbott, this guy for 8 points 9 seconds is pretty good :) ), but there are some out there opinions and, frankly, stupid questions. I would take those with a grain of salt.
If Jason Kidd was not a "star", than odds are that you have REALLY high standards for what you consider a "star". In my Hoopinion, his saying Jason Kidd was not a star is incredibly off base, and I do not even like Jason Kidd (respect him, though). The guy was definitely the top PG in the league at a time, one of the better defensive PG's of All-Time.
He is one of the better floor generals in league history, and while it could be argued that he was maybe never a top 5 player in the league (argued does not necessarily mean true), he had two seasons where he was top 5 in MVP voting, not to meantion runner-up in 2001-02. Throw in all of his other accomplishments, IF Rubio is anywhere close he will be a star, in my Hoopinion. Using Jason Kidd as an example was an awful way to answer the question, maybe he should have used a guy like, say, Rod Strickland rather than a first ballot Hall-of-Famer. Atleast than, we would be able to debate as to whether Rod would be considered a star.
Fact: Any team in any year of Jason Kidds career would like to have him on their team. He may not be a superstar but Jason Kidd is a STAR
Kidd was absolutely robbed of the MVP in 01-02. He did everything that Nash did in his 2 MVP season's except he made it to the finals. To hear someone say that Kidd was questionably a star is ignorant and sickening. We're talking about a top 5 pointguard of ALL TIME. Fire this moron ASAP! Rubio is NO Jason Kidd. Kidd could iso, run p&r, post up, create for himself or others, lockdown the other teams best player all while making the ball glow(made Mikki Moore look like an NBA player to the tune of 10 million $ contract over the next two years and an average of 15.3 ppg and 5rpg between january 27 and the end of the season). Kidd TO ME is the second best all-around TRUE pg behind Magic.
Yeah, that 5-on-5 stuff has been pretty terrible. On the OKC one, one guy said it was impossible to win a championship with Kendick Perkins as your starting center. Really?
It always seemed like Kidd was a top 2 or 3 point guard every year. And, stylistically he was better than Iverson or Nash if you value TRUE point guard skills and if Kidd's defense and two Finals appearances trumped Nash's flash and his great shooting.
Kidd is a Hall of Famer and basically a super star throughout his career. In the early 2000's he went to two Finals and got plenty of MVP votes. So, after Shaq, Kobe, and Tim Duncan, you could put Kidd in fifth place as the top guy in that era in the company of KG and Iverson with Chris Webber, T-Mac, Vince Carter, and Paul Pierce being just behind those guys.
Kidd has been a perennial star with some "superstar" seasons in his career. Kidd was a super star for more years than most guys last in the league. Heck, he was a "star" in the playoffs this year with some very solid defense on Kobe and some other guys and he also hit some dagger 3's and other big shots. Robert Horry was considered a "star" by some (I think he was a great role player, he won 7 titles, and obviously a "star" although not a stats-oriented all-star) with his clutch shooting, smarts, defense, and titles. Well, Kidd played that role this year for the Mavs.
Kidd is easily top 5 pg of all time. I'd take Stockton and obviously Magic over him but that might be all. A true floor general. Had no flaws except his shooting, funny thing is he is 3rd all time in 3 pointers made. Over the years, I think you can even say he is a respectable shooter. It will be a long time until another TRUE floor general like that comes around, if ever. He was a prodigy from the get-go. In his freshman year at Cal, he nearly averaged 4 steals per game. He was a great defender, but that doesn't even come close to the degree of excellence in which he can run an offense. There might be players who can score better, but there are no players who are the true versatile floor general like Jason Kidd was in his prime. And I do not even like the guy.
In that era, it is interesting as to where you would rank him v.s. the other greats. Iverson, Shaq, Kobe, T-Mac, KG, and Duncan were just as good if not better. Shaq, Kobe, and Duncan are possibly in the ten best ever, with Shaq definitley being in there. Iverson and T-Mac were dropping 32 a game. I would take Kidd over Iverson because although I respect Iverson, I believed he shot way too much. The sad part is that Iverson had amazing PG skills. In his rookie year he showed this. But then he kind of just focused on scoring and only scoring. T-Mac was very versatile and along with his 32 points, would give you 7 boards, 5 assists , 1 or 2 steals, and a block. He hadn't even begun to show the world how great he was and then he was suddenly injured and we never really got to see the REAL T-Mac again. I'll be honest in that 01-02 time frame, I would have rather McGrady then Bryant on my team, he was that good. But I think the most underrated might be KG. He was honestly a BEAST. I remember he would bring you 23 points and 14 or 15 boards ever game, along with a block or two and a steal. But the craziest thing is, I remember he would give you 5 or 6 assists every game. That was just crazy for someone to be pulling down 15 boards and dishing 6 assists. I think he was in a bad situation, and if he was on a team that one a few championships before he went to Boston, he would be thought of as a top ten of all time talent. I thought he should have won at least 3 MVP's in the early 2000's.
I remember a few years ago,when the Nets played the Spurs for the title....The Ratings for that series were bad,compared to previous series...I heard some writers said even though the series featured 2 future Hall of Famers in Kidd and Duncan..Neither 1 of the guys were the type to draw the casual fans....The writers said they dont think they had the Crossover Appeal of guys like a Kobe,Lebron or Shaq...
But basketball fans knew they were among the greatest to ever play their position...
But there's no way, Kidd wasnt a star..I think Kidd is among the 5 best point guards ever....
yeah some of the 5 on 5 round table responses are pretty pathetic
that's a problem of how you see bball...
is bball only a game of crossover and one and one skills or is it a collective game ?
what is a good bball player ?
my personnal opinion is that kidd was a true great player, A STAR, because he has always made people around him better and made his team win. stats, even very good, can't tell the whole story.
just curious as to why you would want all those players over Kidd that year? he did take his team to the finals.
once again, I know why Kidd never was a "superstar" and why he never seemed to get his due sometimes...its because of his scoring. In that aspect of the game, he was NOT Magic Johnson. When it comes to court vision, the only person better was Magic. When it comes to rebounding from the PG spot, not many outside of Magic and Kidd did it better.
Yeah, in 2002 he avg 14ppg, maybe thats your reasoning why? But add in those 10apg and 7rpg and you are talking about an absolutely dominant player. Only few guys put up all-around stat lines like this guy. Pippen, Grant Hill, LBJ come to mind. He has over 100 triple doubles, lol...are you freakin serious? Some think triple doubles are overrated...but 100 of them?
like someone said above, if Rubio has half the career Kidd has, he will be a Superstar, but thats just the way it goes. Rubio having upside, HOF career, and accomplishments of Kidd...well, that WILL NOT be the case.
Some of you guys need a reality check. So let me school you. Kidd has as good of IQ and court vision as any pg to play the game yes even Magic. Kidd is the best rebounding pg outside of Magic to play the game, but Magic was 6'9. You can put Oscar in there if you call him a pg. Kidd led a historically terrible Nets team to Two NBA finals and made them a respectable team. Kidd is one of the greatest defensive guards ever pg or sg. In my opinion he is a top 3 pg. Nobody paid attention to the Nets before Kidd, he made people watched. Nobody plays harder than Kidd, this guys willed his team to wins.
Kidd does what a pg is suppose to do, make players better. He made K Martin an all-star, He got Mikki Moore a big contract, He made Richard Jefferson into an allstar caliber player, he extended Kerry Kittles career, Mcdyess and Marion were on top of their game with Kidd. Mashburn and Jackson were 20pts scorers with Kidd. OH Yeah he helped Dirk get his Ring. Kidd should have a mvp to go with his ring, but he was robbed, he is a everything a pg should be. Everybody harps on his scoring, but Kidd is one of the few pgs ever that can dominate a guy without scoring. As good as Rose or Parker, or Jennings is, what impact do they have on the game if they are not scoring??? Kidd could do it all.
Are you KIDDing me?
Beautiful use of pun.
I saw this too, and thought I had bleacher report open instead of espn.
david kahn is a moron
Magic Johnson, John Stockton, Jason Kidd....
LMAO @ M-Dymes, pun always make me laugh for some reason.
Yeah whoever this guy that said Kidd isn't a star is NUTS! Jason Kidd is a triple double threat and wasn't he the second leading rebounder on the Dallas Mavericks in his first season with them? And for a PG that is pretty amazing!
so the simple answer is he was an all star but not a superstar. was he one of the best point guards of his generation? absolutely. was his peak higher than steve nash's? no. was he a guy, even in his prime you could build a championship team around? yes. but he needed the most help out of any consistent all-star you could say that about. he's not derrick rose, where you could surround him with a bunch of pretty good players and win the 'ship. he's better than chauncey billups, tho', who did that exact same thing (and c-bill will end up having a pretty good tho' borderline hall-of-fame career.)
the fact is jason kidd was kinda a funny player. his game was flashy but he was alway team first and it's simply hard for anyone but the most ardent basketball fans to wrap their heads around the fact that a guy who couldn't average 20 points a game could have that kind of impact on the game (see rodman, dennis, who was even better than j. kidd. and if you look at rodman's career stats, even his rebounding ones, and his overall resume, tell me that he gets the respect he deserves... and how many guys do you having writing articles about how a 7 time rebounding champ and 2 time all-star wil five freakin' rings and who was the single best defender of his generation got his due?)
"was his peak higher than steve nash's? no."
how do you figure? because he didnt win MVP? he was always a better player than Nash. and dont confuse MVP with best player. D-Rose is not the best player in the league for example.
"but he needed the most help out of any consistent all-star you could say that about."
that is soooooooo far off. do you know that Kidd was the leading scorer on that Finals team that year and he only avg 14.7ppg? lol. Kidd NEEDED more scoring help is a better way to say it because he was not a scorer. if he had a couple of guys to score more points than him that year, maybe they couldve won it....doubt it, but thats just because the Lakers were so good. That year, no one on the Nets avg more than 15ppg. When Nash won MVP the first time, Stoudemire avg 26ppg and 9rpg and Marion avg 20ppg and 11rpg. Talk about help??? Then throw this in...Joe Johnson...3rd leading scorer on the Suns that year avg 17ppg. Thats 3 more points than the highest avg on the Nets. Yet the Nets went to the finals and the Suns didnt. I think all of the above easily disproves that Kidd needed more help than ANYONE, much less Nash.
Nash may have higher scoring and assist totals, but he dominates the ball far more often, runs a far more fast paced offense, and had 3 terrific scorers beside of him(not to mention Quentin Richardson who was a knockdown 3pt shooter who added 15 himself). Kidd always had FAR better rebounding numbers, was even better at making teammates better, played lockdown D(not that girly D that Nash plays), and all the while made it to the finalsTWICE!!!. Kidd made players around him better than Nash.
BTw, you take rose's scoring away and you're left with almost nothing(see ECF this year). Put scorers around Kidd and you're talking at LEAST 1 title with NJN, perhaps even 2(doubtful because like @surve said Shaq-Kobe were just that good). Nash is a terrific PG, don't get mke wrong, but you saw what happend when they took his high octain offense away and put him in a half court slow down offense with Shaq he came away with 9.7 apg(good but nothing up to his usual PHX level).
Imagine if Kidd had ever been put on a team like Showtime. Couldn't you 15,7,13?
Are you freakin "Kidd"-ing me?
I agree. He may not have been a "star". Very few point guards are stars because its a position of unselfishism. Steve Nash, I love the guy and he has two MVP's, but Im not sure even he is a star. And Im not being racist, cause Dirk Nowitzki is a bona fide star. Magic, Cousy, and Stockton, maybe Arenas in his best year, Iverson in his best few years, were star PG's.
kidd in his prime vs nash in his prime, i would give nash the slight edge. He put a little more pressure on defenses cause he could score from all over the court and was always a threat to shoot it. You could always play off kidd up until recently where he is no longer in his prime. Its a tough arugment, but im going with nash as the guy who scared me more as an opponent. I have watched my lakers play vs prime kidd with NJ and prime nash in pho, and no question nash is the guy i prefer not to go against.
give me Kidd everytime in a heartbeat. one thing that is rare and unique to find in any player and PG in particular is, the ability to dominate a game without having to score. how many times has Kidd scored 12 points or less and still had a dominant impression on a game. This is why Kendall Marshall is getting the J-Kidd comparisons I believe, not that he is in that catagory talent wise but because next year, Marshall may not avg in double figures in scoring, in fact, he may very well avg double figure assists and less in points. Who cares how many points Marshall will score next year? He will be a dominant player at PG though. In the NBA now, you have Rondo. Cant shoot a lick, but can flat out take over a game with his defense, passing, and rebounding. Guys like that, if you put the right players around them, they stand a much better chance at winning than they do losing.
Jason Kidd in my opinion is the best player never to have been voted MVP still playing in the NBA. Before people start saying that it is Dwight, KD, STAT,Melo,CP3 etc, I'm judging this on their chances of being voted MVP. A lot of the players that I have mentioned will have more chances whilst I doubt that Kidd can ever be an MVP contender again so we may be saying the same thing about Melo for example in say 5 or 6 years time.
Kidd is an HOF lock never mind a star and one of the top 5 PG's of all time.