Oh come on, elindholm, you had me all excited. We were taking off the gloves, getting a good heated arguement going, and then you come with your last post? I know your team lost, but you could do something better than that! Basically all you just did is agree with me on everything I said, and then add in some last-second quib about some unprovable statement that you try and use as the basis of your arguement.
Yes, and Marbury is a better shooter. I think most people agree on that. My point is that there isn't as much difference between their games as the terms "pass-first" and "shoot-first" convey. I'm happy to praise Jason Kidd, but not in terms that put him in a different category from other point guards.
I'm not trying to argue the real definition of "pass-first" or "shoot-first". If you're thinking that Websters doesn't have the phrases listed, than you're probably correct. Yet anybody would agree with me that Jason Kidd looks to pass the ball more than Stephon Marbury does. It's just the truth. Did I complain when Stephon had 26 of his 43 points in the fourth quarter of a Spurs game this past season? No. Did I say that he should've given Amare Stoudemire a second chance to be a hero in game 1 of the Spurs series instead of hitting the game-winning 3 point shot in OT? Of course not. Nevertheless, Marbury is a "scoring" point guard and Kidd is a "passing" point guard. It does not by any stretch of the imagination mean that either of them can't do both, but their first option when they are looking to attack is different for the two players.
We'll never know, will we? It isn't as though the rest of his team was much less effective than he was. The Nets' big run in the second quarter came with Kidd on the bench. I think he definitely could have done his team a favor by trying to involve some other players during the last few minutes. His decision to "take over" nearly cost the Nets the game. My point is that even "unselfish" players can have lapses in judgement where they think they're the only one who can get it done.
Exactly, we'll never know. Luckily for New Jersey fans across the country, you don't have to worry about it either. The Nets won the game and not realizing Kidd's hand in such an outcome is mindboggling. Really elindholm, if you want anybody to see you as an unbiased basketball fan, you have to stop turning a completely blind eye to what actually transpires on the court. If you want to say Jason Kidd cost the Nets the game, you should've done it right after game 1 - you had plenty an opportunity. But to say that Jason Kidd nearly cost the Nets game 2 is (and no offense to Chaplin), quite frankly, just stupid.
Both the Lakers and the Mavericks were more successful offensively than New Jersey has been.
The Mavericks have the most potent offense in the league. Is it really a surprise that their offense faired better than New Jersey's in their respective Spurs series? Compare apples to apples here. New Jersey and Dallas have completely different styles of play. Dallas relies solely on their offensive abilities. When they struggle on offense, they rarely have won this year. I'd be delighted to see how many games they've won when they've scored in the 80s this season. Far less than New Jersey, I'm sure.
When you talk about Jason Kidd, it's easy to talk about his play-making abilities. But you should not forget his presence on the defensive end of the court as well. He's an annual member of all-NBA defense for a reason. Not because he's overrated, not because he's a media darling - because he is one of the best help-defenders in the league. And that's just Jason Kidd. With Kenyon Martin and the recent addition of Dikembe Mutombo anchoring the Nets' defense, they become a very defensive-minded ballclub. Of course Dallas is going to have a better time on offense. That's how they win games. That does not, however, make them a better team because they score more points. That's so elemantary it's almost disturbing.
And don't even talk about the Lakers. They lost that series 4-2 and had their fair-share of offensive struggles. Of course, when you have the two most dominant offensive players on the planet at the 2 and 5 spots, you'd expect them to be successful. The very fact that they weren't only adds to the defensive spectable about which I've been arguing.
They were ineffective offensively in that series, yes. The Suns' offense was terrible in that series. And yes, of course the Spurs' defense gets a lot of credit. But we aren't talking about the Suns, a #8 seed that beat everyone's expectations this year. We're talking about the Nets, a team that the media has made out to be the second coming of the "Showtime" Lakers.
You're right, we're not talking about the Suns, a #8 seed that beat everyone's expectations this year. At least I know I'm not, because I watched the Suns play 88 games this season and I noticed that, despite what everyone else said or thought, the Suns weren't a normal 8th seed. And it doesn't even matter what the Suns as a whole can do. I wasn't talking about the Phoenix Suns, with a lineup rounded out by the likes of Casey Jacobsen, Jake Voshkul, Randy Brown, Scott Williams, and Jake Tsakalidis. I was talking about the Suns four guards, all of whom shot better than 40% from the field during the course of the season. The Spurs locked those guys up something fierce. Bruce Bowen's job on Shawn Marion was next to incredible. I was really down on Shawn during that series, but Bowen did the same thing to Kobe Bryant. Also, relatively talented players such as Stephon Marbury and Penny Hardaway struggled mightily through those 6 games as well. Like it or not, the Spurs defense is probably tops in the league. That's why they won 60 games this year, and that's why they're still playing when 27 other teams are watching the Finals from their carribean vacation spots. This is the last time I'm going to say it - of course the Nets offense has struggled, and will for the most part continue to struggle.
Luckily for them, basketball is about more than simply outscoring your opponent. And luckily for me, I took off my gloves, and you've all but embarrassed yourself in attempting to take off yours.
