[jokeaward]

- First in points
- First in rebounds
- 5 APG, 2.5 TPG
- Leader in efficiency by 6.33 points, the difference from #2 Duncan to #19 Jason Kidd
- 82 Games (13 missed in 9 seasons)
- First-team All Defense

Yeah, Charlotte couldn't use that guy. With a choice of anyone, they'd pick him after Shaq, Kidd, and Kobe. lol

"Superstar" is idiotic if those four are "superstars" and KG isn't. Would Minnesota get a steal by trading KG for Kobe or Kidd?

I think you're really overrating Shaq in his current state, especially for Charlotte. He'd probably sit out the season, but even if he didn't they might only get 21-11-3 (okay maybe more PPG), 65 games, and missed FTs like last year. He can go for 40 still, but he isn't 99-00 Shaq.

[Minstrel]

Originally posted by cpawfan!


If you want to do that, please be accurate. RJ was a rookie and played 24.3 MPG. The starting lineup was Todd Mac (who almost everyone though was another over paid center signing), KVH (coming off an injury filled season), Kenyon (coming off another broken leg), Kittles (coming off of several knee problems) and Kidd.

The Media was laughing when Kidd predicted 42 to 44 wins.

So you're saying, because "the Media" was wrong, Jason Kidd did it all by himself?

Todd McCullough was a decent center. Jefferson and Martin were major additions. Van Horn was fine. Kittles was decent. Kidd was obviously a great player.

None of that adds up to Kidd single-handedly turning things around. Rod Thorn turned things around with some smart moves, one of them being acquiring Kidd.

[Minstrel]

Originally posted by cpawfan!

If you trade KG for another top player, does the Timberwolves record really drop that much? Does KG improve the record of that other team?

Minnesota drops by the amount that the new player is worse than Garnett and the new team rises by the amount that Garnett is better than the departing player. There's no magical ability that some players have that Garnett lacks.

Some great players are just great players and some great players make those around them better (what I will call Elevator players) and I'm not convinced that KG is an Otis man.

No player makes any other player more talented. The only way players can help other players is by getting them superior opportunities than they'd get without that player. This is done by being able to draw double-teams, having good passing and decision-making skills, and having a willingness to set teammates up.

All the top five players (Garnett, Duncan, S. O'Neal, McGrady and Bryant) have those qualities, so they are all what you call "elevator men."

[Johnny Mac]

Even if you wanted to be picky, theres no way Garnett isnt in the top eschalon of players in the league. Theres only two players who are arguably better imo, and you could make a case for KG over both guys.

[cpawfan]

Originally posted by Minstrel!
So you're saying, because "the Media" was wrong, Jason Kidd did it all by himself?

Todd McCullough was a decent center. Jefferson and Martin were major additions. Van Horn was fine. Kittles was decent. Kidd was obviously a great player.

None of that adds up to Kidd single-handedly turning things around. Rod Thorn turned things around with some smart moves, one of them being acquiring Kidd.

No, I'm saying the reason it all worked well was because of Kidd. If the Kidd trade doesn't happen and Marbury is the point with those other 5, the Nets don't win the division and are borderline for the playoffs.

Because the prevailing thought was that the Nets would be a bad team, Kidd does get and does deserve a lot of credit for that squad gelling together and learning how to win.

[ChristopherJ]

Its pretty obvious he is.

[rainman]

to me some guy who has to resort to suckerpunching some guy(rick rickert) because he cant cover him doesnt warrant the superstar label.

[cpawfan]

Originally posted by Minstrel!
Minnesota drops by the amount that the new player is worse than Garnett and the new team rises by the amount that Garnett is better than the departing player. There's no magical ability that some players have that Garnett lacks.

No player makes any other player more talented. The only way players can help other players is by getting them superior opportunities than they'd get without that player. This is done by being able to draw double-teams, having good passing and decision-making skills, and having a willingness to set teammates up.

All the top five players (Garnett, Duncan, S. O'Neal, McGrady and Bryant) have those qualities, so they are all what you call "elevator men."

I don't think you understand team dynamics. Why did the Pistons win last year? It was because as a team they performed better than as a collection of individual parts. A player make not be able to make someone else more talented, but they can certainly make them a better player. Yes opportunities are part of it, but so is the mental side. Players are not robots and the mental side of the equation has to be factored in.

Why did the Timberwolves improve by 7 games? Was it because KG made Spree and Cassell better (their PPG don't support that) or was it that there were finally other good players to support the stat line that KG is capable of getting?

[cpawfan]

Originally posted by John The Cool Kid!
Even if you wanted to be picky, theres no way Garnett isnt in the top eschalon of players in the league. Theres only two players who are arguably better imo, and you could make a case for KG over both guys.

I'm not talking about the stats KG can put up, but the impact he has on a team. Yes, because he is so good, a team should win more with him, but is he the type that can make all of his teammates better?

Why was Peeler suddenly a better shooter?

[Spriggan]

So are you saying you'd rather have Kidd than KG?

[Minstrel]

Originally posted by cpawfan!


No, I'm saying the reason it all worked well was because of Kidd.

Completely unprovable. Kidd wasn't considered any particularly incredible winner in his first two stops.

Because the prevailing thought was that the Nets would be a bad team, Kidd does get and does deserve a lot of credit for that squad gelling together and learning how to win.