[Dre™]

Originally Posted by Pimped Out

if you are playing or working in basketball at the highest level and you cant make things work with jason kidd, you need to reevaluate your position. i agree with all of what jamel said.

i dont understand attacking kidd's shooting in one breath then praising andre miller the next. they guy has no three point range. if you are looking for a guy to spread the floor while kobe and odom run the triangle, maybe miller aint the best guy

The point is Miller isn't going to dominate the ball.

[Jamel Irief]

Originally Posted by _Dre_

The point is Miller isn't going to dominate the ball.

How so? Miller doesn't push the tempo as much as Kidd, Miller looks to drive and finish more than Kidd.

[Dre™]

Originally Posted by Jamel Irief

Nick Van Exel.

Not in the triangle, and could score just as well if not better than he could pass.

But it always had that one player. Pippen in Chicago, Kobe in LA.

Exactly, Kobe's still in LA.

Because Kobe was the ball handler in LA, Pippen in Chicago. Jackson just happened to have his best ball handlers, passers, and playmakers be players that weren't his point guard. The only PG he had handling the ball a lot was Payton.

No, I think it's become more by design than anything. Ron Harper, Derek Fisher, Brian Shaw. Veteran guards who can shoot and hold their own as ballhandlers. Plus they've always deferred to the 'big 2'. Kidd would be part of the big 2. I think stylistically that was the goal of the triangle.

What is a main distributor? You mean passers? Having a lot of good passers is like having a lot of good defenders. The more the merrier.

Yes, you can have a lot of players that pass, but you can't have two players that dominate the ball. Kidd and Kobe are both used to being the main bananas as far as ballhandling.

I want Kobe off the ball. He's improved a lot, but still scares me with his decision making. you're second point is absurd. It's like if this was Kobe's best defensive season it would be an ego hit to bring in Bruce Bowen. Should we trade Walton for some chucker that can't read the court in a sign of faith for Kobe?


Defense isn't an apt example at all, mainly because Offense is about 10 times more complex than choosing zone or man. Come on.

Again, absurd, having too many great passers doesn't hurt your team, unless you are trading a superior finisher for one, and none of the Lakers rumored to be traded are better finishers than Kidd. And if it does hurt Kobe's ego, Kobe needs to check himself because he is hurting the franchise with that type of thinking.


Great passers don't hurt, but too many hands on the ball will.

Huge Dre fan here, and would love to have him because of his age and CPT roots, but he doesn't do anything better than Kidd.

But he's a better fit because he won't change the face of your offense. If you get Kidd, the move is for next year, even if it works, because you're going to be the Nuggets, adjusting half the year. Miller is a more modest pickup who will know his role a lot sooner than Kidd. Kobe and Odom won't have to sacrifice as much with Miller in there.

The Lakers will still in the triangle with Kidd. They might move Odom back to the backcourt like last year and move Kobe up front and bench Walton. If that's what you mean by philosophy change than yeah, but outside of that, nothing will change.

But then who do you have in the post? And even still, I don't think Kidd is a triangle point guard.

....

[Dre™]

Originally Posted by Jamel Irief

How so? Miller doesn't push the tempo as much as Kidd, Miller looks to drive and finish more than Kidd.

Exactly, Kidd likes to drive and kick 24/7. That's not going to work.

[SeaNet]

Originally Posted by _Dre_

Exactly, Kidd likes to drive and kick 24/7. That's not going to work.

Um, that's not true. At all. In fact, as someone who watches all of Kidd's games, I would say that driving and kicking is a very small part of his offensive game. In the half court, what Kidd does is move the ball, and get the ball to the open man where he can do something with it.

[Mateo]

I'm not crazy about the Andre Miller / Mike Bibby ideas either. If the Lakers really think they need to add a PG at the deadline, I'd go after someone like Jarrett Jack. If Portland asks for too much they could probably get Antonio Daniels without giving up much. Either would be an easier fit into the current system.

[Dre™]

Originally Posted by SeaNet

Um, that's not true. At all. In fact, as someone who watches all of Kidd's games, I would say that driving and kicking is a very small part of his offensive game. In the half court, what Kidd does is move the ball, and get the ball to the open man where he can do something with it.

What can I say to the "when I watch I see.." argument. I don't know, when I see Kidd I see what I see.

[cpawfan]

Originally Posted by Mateo

Yes, ok, his jump shot is "better" in the same way it was "better" from 1997-1999. Now that you've "beaten" me in this trivial argument that has nothing to do with the way Kidd might perform in LA, I'm going to try and talk about that, I suspect you'll likely duck out of the thread entirely, as is typical in internet debate.

If it didn't have anything to do with it, you shouldn't have given erroneous information.

I don't care if Kidd will help the Lakers. My preference is that Kidd and Vince get traded and the teams they go to do worse thereby improving the draft picks the Nets pick up.

However, I do believe Kidd would help the Lakers and agree with JI's points.

[Aurelino]

Originally Posted by _Dre_

What can I say to the "when I watch I see.." argument. I don't know, when I see Kidd I see what I see.

But don't you think someone who has seen every single game Kidd has played in the last 6-7 years knows something about how he plays?