First to 50 in the West

[Randy]

Nice homer response.

Okay, I'll give you an objective response. Let's compare Stockton and Kidd fairly, by what both did up to this point in their careers. Here are the numbers for the first fifteen years of their careers. Brace yourself . . .

Minutes per game
Stockton: 32.4
Kidd: 37.7
Kidd plays more minutes--good for him, but remember this number in the context of the following stats and you may not think of this as an advantage for Kidd.

Points per game
Stockton: 13.4
Kidd: 14.3
Kidd shot over 2000 more FG attempts to acheive this 1-point per game advantage.

Assists per game
Stockton: 11.1
Kidd: 9.3
Stockton averaged more than 10 assists 10 straight years in the 15-year span. Kidd accomplished the feat three times. Stockton averaged more than 14 twice, 13 three times, 12 three times, 11 once. Kidd never surpassed 10.8.

Steals per game
Stockton: 2.3
Kidd: 2.0
Pretty close here, but a little context. Stockton got over 230 steals four times, 200 five times, 199 twice. Kidd never surpassed 175.

Turnovers per game
Stockton: 3.0
Kidd: 3.2
Pretty close here. But overall assist-to-turnover ratio is more revealing.

Assist-to-turnover ratio
Stockton: 3.8
Kidd: 2.9

Rebounds per game
Stockton: 2.7
Kidd: 6.7
Kidd is clearly better here, no question. Of course, it's easier to rebound when you miss so much. 

Field goal percentage
Stockton: 51.9
Kidd: 40.1
Kidd is atrocious here; 40.1 percent is just plain awful.

3-point percentage
Stockton: 38.4
Kidd: 33.6
Stockton became known as a feared long-range shooter. Kidd has become known as a below average at best.

Free throw percentage
Stockton: 82.3
Kidd: 78.0
Not a huge difference here, but another advantage to Stockton.

Stockton's team came out of a tough Western Conference and went to the finals twice and pushed the best team of the era harder than anyone else ever did. Kidd's team came out of a pathetically weak Eastern Conference once, and got absolutely murdered.

All of Stockton's percentages were superior to Kidd's. He also notched superior accumulation statistics in all but one category, while playing 5 minutes per game less than Kidd. Measured against each other or against the other great players, Kidd does not stack up with John Stockton. Don't come back at me with weak shite like "Kidd is a better defensive player than Stockton was, IMO."

One last stat:

Games missed over first 15 years
Stockton: 22
Kidd: 170

DFWMB

You forgot a couple of other facts, Kidd was a better defender.  Also, Stockton had the advantage of working with one of the best PF's in the history of the game -- Kidd hasn't worked with a big man -- ever!  Kenyon Martin was as good as he has ever gotten and he made Martin look far better than he has ever looked in Denver.  I think he still sends Kidd a present for the fat contract that Kidd earned for him.

[Ted]

You forgot a couple of other facts, Kidd was a better defender. 

Same thing you said last time except you took out the "IMO." And it's still weak subjective shite, which I asked you not to return with. Show me something other than your "O" that says Kidd was a better defender.

[Laker Fan]

Ouch Ted!! You provided waaay more than I did to defend your boy, probably because I HATED him while he was playing due to the Laker rivalry, although like MSC, I am glad I was able to watch him play, underrated and underappreciated don't come close to describing him. Only Magic was better, period.

So Randy, are you in deep enough or are you going to go get a bigger shovel?

I hereby pronounce you, OWNED! 

[JoMal]

Nice homer response.

Okay, I'll give you an objective response. Let's compare Stockton and Kidd fairly, by what both did up to this point in their careers. Here are the numbers for the first fifteen years of their careers. Brace yourself . . .

Now THAT is a nice homer response!

[Skandery]

I hereby pronounce you, OWNED!

No Fair!  I was going to until I remembered that it wasn't allowed. 


I haven't really weighed in other than an "Amen, brotha" . . . so just that its known.  I'm placed squarely in the "Feel privileged to have watched John Stockton play during my lifetime" category.  Stocton was a paragon, a living text book definition, of exactly what a PG is and does.

[Laker Fan]

I hereby pronounce you, OWNED!

No Fair!  I was going to until I remembered that it wasn't allowed. 

Ted lifted the ban, I had to jump on it

[Lurker]

I'm with Randy on this one.     



Right.  Stockton was a nemisis to the Spurs for years.  The little bugger set nasty picks, could flop with the best of them, thread a pass, run the pick & roll to perfection and played enough pestering defense that the Jazz teams were always rated high in scoring differential.  And usually in the top 1/3rd in defensive FG%.  Stockton made Malone what he was.  Without Stockton's mastery of the pick & roll Malone would have scored at least 10 less points a game.  Only Magic would rate higher in my eyes.

[Randy]

You forgot a couple of other facts, Kidd was a better defender. 

Same thing you said last time except you took out the "IMO." And it's still weak subjective shite, which I asked you not to return with. Show me something other than your "O" that says Kidd was a better defender.

Hmm, I think I did mention one -- Stockton was placed on the All NBA 1st Team 2x while Kidd was given that honor 4x.  Isn't it interesting that the 3rd best pg the league as ever seen (according to you) was only placed on the All NBA 1st Team twice?  Kidd's defense is part of that equation.  I guess that's subjective though, huh?

Right.  Stockton was a nemisis to the Spurs for years.  The little bugger set nasty picks, could flop with the best of them, thread a pass, run the pick & roll to perfection and played enough pestering defense that the Jazz teams were always rated high in scoring differential.  And usually in the top 1/3rd in defensive FG%.  Stockton made Malone what he was.  Without Stockton's mastery of the pick & roll Malone would have scored at least 10 less points a game.  Only Magic would rate higher in my eyes.

Stockton made Malone?  Please!  I guess you forgot what Malone did in the series that year against the Spurs (lol, I'm SURE you didn't forget!).  Malone, even in the twilight stage of his career still showed that Stockton didn't make him the player that he was.  Karl Malone redefined the PF position in the NBA -- and he would have done it with or without Stockton.  I'd say that Stockton benefitted more from Malone than the other way around.

[Lurker]

You forgot a couple of other facts, Kidd was a better defender. 

Same thing you said last time except you took out the "IMO." And it's still weak subjective shite, which I asked you not to return with. Show me something other than your "O" that says Kidd was a better defender.

Hmm, I think I did mention one -- Stockton was placed on the All NBA 1st Team 2x while Kidd was given that honor 4x.  Isn't it interesting that the 3rd best pg the league as ever seen (according to you) was only placed on the All NBA 1st Team twice?  Kidd's defense is part of that equation.  I guess that's subjective though, huh?

Maybe part of the reason Stockton was 1st team NBA only twice was that he consistantly was beat out by the best backcourt the world has ever seen:  Magic & Jordan.  Much tougher to be first team when those two make it every year so maybe you should also look at his 6 second team appearances.

Who exactly has been Kidd's competition for all those 1st team awards?

[Ted]

Hmm, I think I did mention one -- Stockton was placed on the All NBA 1st Team 2x while Kidd was given that honor 4x.  Isn't it interesting that the 3rd best pg the league as ever seen (according to you) was only placed on the All NBA 1st Team twice?  Kidd's defense is part of that equation.  I guess that's subjective though, huh?

Um . . .  . . . Yes, Randy, that is "very" subjective. For example, one year, Mark Price was All-NBA First team while Stockton was 2nd. Who the hell is Mark Price?

For most of his career, John Stockton was placed behind guys like Magic and Isiah in these popularity contest awards. That's pretty good company, and they were certainly more popular than Stockton. You know who else has been in the First Team in his career? Latrell Sprewell. First Team?!

Somehow Steve Nash doesn't make any of the three teams in 2003-2004, and then vaults to the first team in 2004-2005; and all he had to do was raise his assists by 2.5 per game. Everything else pretty much stayed the same, especially his piss-poor defense. And yet, he wins the MVP twice as a one-dimensional player.

You keep coming at me with this weak stuff . . . <Ted assumes William F. Buckley voice> and I tire of this tedious contretemps.

Look, Kidd is great. In fact, I'll take Kidd over Nash any day. Put him on Phoenix and I don't think that offense skips a beat; and they may even be able to stop Tony Parker from getting into the lane once or twice a game. Gee, that sure would be nice in the playoffs.

[JoMal]

I have a hard time following an arguement about which all time top five point guard is better then another, but by all means, have at it, guys.

[westkoast]

I have a hard time following an arguement about which all time top five point guard is better then another, but by all means, have at it, guys.

You have more pressing and important issues to discuss around here like the Kings playoff hopes?

I personally find the debate entertaining.  To each their own.

[Reality]

Did any of you want to see Stockton go another year, since he was still very effective?  Talk of either staying on the Jazz another year, altho lets face it, they were on the downturn.

Or getting on a contending team.  Or are you perfectly happy the way he ended his career?  As a Jazz and while still ballin.

[Ted]

I have a hard time following an arguement about which all time top five point guard is better then another, but by all means, have at it, guys.

JoMal, I fully understand your position. I, in fact, felt the same way about the distintegrating slide into blithering pointlessness that was the "My grades of the trades" thread, but I didn't feel the narcissistic need to insert my opinion about a conversation of which I was not part.

At least Randy and I are talking about something real like the comparitive skills of two point guards.

[JoMal]

I have a hard time following an arguement about which all time top five point guard is better then another, but by all means, have at it, guys.

JoMal, I fully understand your position. I, in fact, felt the same way about the distintegrating slide into blithering pointlessness that was the "My grades of the trades" thread, but I didn't feel the narcissistic need to insert my opinion about a conversation of which I was not part.

At least Randy and I are talking about something real like the comparitive skills of two point guards.

You have more pressing and important issues to discuss around here like the Kings playoff hopes?

I personally find the debate entertaining.  To each their own.

Well, then, let me apologize for the diversion.