[PauloCatarino]

Originally Posted by Aurelino

Except for the 98-99 season, Kidd's FG% is better this season than it has been his whole career.

Come on, Aurelino, you don't need to be selling Jason freaking Kidd! His game is tight. All that can be put up agaisnt him is his age and the fact that he can't consistently score. The rest remains intact: good defender, good rebounder, excelent playmaker, smart decision maker, etc., etc..

[Aurelino]

Originally Posted by PauloCatarino

Come on, Aurelino, you don't need to be selling Jason freaking Kidd! His game is tight. All that can be put up agaisnt him is his age and the fact that he can't consistently score. The rest remains intact: good defender, good rebounder, excelent playmaker, smart decision maker, etc., etc..

Of course, Kidd doesn't need any campaigning. Just letting people know the FACTS. As crazy as it might seem, his shooting is much improved this year.

[PauloCatarino]

Originally Posted by Aurelino

Of course, Kidd doesn't need any campaigning. Just letting people know the FACTS. As crazy as it might seem, his shooting is much improved this year.

Are there any health issues to worry about?

[Mateo]

Originally Posted by cpawfan

Tell me, what is Kidd's FG% this season?

Then tell me what Kidd's FG% was his first, second, third, fourth and fifth seasons.

Now tell me which is the largest number

Players have years that are better than others. It doesn't mean they have improved. He had one season in Phoenix where he shot 44%, but what happened? It went right back down the the 39/40% range like always.

Here's Kidd's average fg% for each team:

Dallas: 38%
Phoenix: 42%
New Jersey: 40%

Forgive me if I fail to see the improvement in that.

Regardless of whether Kidd has improved his jump shot or not, we're really splitting hairs over "very very bad" or just "very bad". The important thing is that jump shooting is not his strength, and jump shooting is an important part of being a point guard in the triangle (see: Payton). Given that he's not good at one of the most important parts of the job, at the very least you aren't maximizing his capabilities if you acquire him. You are paying 100% of Kidd's contract and receiving what? Maybe 60-70% of his talent.

[Dre™]

Originally Posted by PauloCatarino

As for the "triangle offense", screw that. A great coach adaptas to the players he has.

The Lakers shouldn't get him in the first place is my point.

And I don't think Kidd will make that offense better. The triangle has precedent over Kidd, it's won 6 titles. It's going to be there regardless. If it wasn't waived for Payton, who coming into that Laker year, was still a top point guard, it shouldn't be for Kidd or anybody.

Kidd would indeed make the Lakers better, but not in the triangle. Jackson isn't about to change the triangle, c'mon, and certainly not in midseason.

[ChiSox]

Kidd has played in the triangle before (Dallas) and he didn't look great in the offense. He had his career low shooting shooting percentage and career high in turnovers when he played in the triangle.

I don't believe Kidd's game is suited for the triangle. He isn't a great shooter and won't be able to run the offense like he does now, with Kobe and Odom on the floor.

[hobojoe]

Originally Posted by Mateo

Well, his fg% hasn't improved since he's been in NJ, so if his jump shot is better, what's gotten worse? His layups?

You don't see how you're logic is perhaps a bit too simplistic?

[cpawfan]

Originally Posted by ChiSox

Kidd has played in the triangle before (Dallas) and he didn't look great in the offense. He had his career low shooting shooting percentage and career high in turnovers when he played in the triangle.

I don't believe Kidd's game is suited for the triangle. He isn't a great shooter and won't be able to run the offense like he does now, with Kobe and Odom on the floor.

Kidd was also new to the NBA which is a far greater factor in his performance than the triangle offense

[Aurelino]

Originally Posted by PauloCatarino

Are there any health issues to worry about?

Not really. He has missed 2 games due to injury since coming back from his knee surgery in 2004--both of them last week due to a lower back strain. Given the level at which he is playing right now, I wouldn't be surprised if he has at least 4-5 good years left in him.

[PauloCatarino]

Originally Posted by _Dre_

The Lakers shouldn't get him in the first place is my point.

And I don't think Kidd will make that offense better. The triangle has precedent over Kidd, it's won 6 titles. It's going to be there regardless. If it wasn't waived for Payton, who coming into that Laker year, was still a top point guard, it shouldn't be for Kidd or anybody.

Kidd would indeed make the Lakers better, but not in the triangle. Jackson isn't about to change the triangle, c'mon, and certainly not in midseason.

Triangle, schmiangle! Do you think we Laker fans care what is the offensive strategy the Lakers use to win games? That's why i mentioned Riles: he was a master of adapting to the roster, instead of making the roster adapt to his offensive and defensive schemes.

Phil and the Lakers have won nothing using the triangle offense in the last years. In fact, Phil never won using that strategy while not having the luxury to play with 2 of the Top-5 players in the NBA.

So (hipothetically) now Phil was playing Kidd and Kobe. He would be a fool not to design some game plan that better suited those players caracteristics...