shaq to the Cavs

[Cannon Shell]

Here is an example of a typical NBA players three point shooting % on a yearly basis

John Salmons
year 1- .323
year 2- .340
year 3- .341
year 4- .299
year 5- .357
year 6- .325
year 7 -.417

See the wide variance? No superstars to account for the rise or dips unless you count his first 4 years with AI which he shot worse than without him the next three.

[horseofcourse]

I present the case of James Posey.

'04 Memphis 290 3s 39 percent
'06 Miami 290 3s 40 percent
'07 Miami 259 3s 38 percent
'08 Boston 279 3s 38 percent
'09 New Orleans 314 3s 37 percent

It appears to me in accordance with Dennis Green he is what he is and always has been. OF course he's played with mega stars his last 3 locales, but who was the mega star in Memphis getting him all those wide open looks?? Gasol?? Is Paul not a star enough to get his percentage to jump?? This is a bench player who takes a bunch of 3s who seems to be what he is regardless of his teammates.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

We area talking about a 3 to 5 percent difference. You really think it is unreasonable that a guy playing with a star who is going to draw double teams is going to get 3 to 5 more wide open looks out of 100 shots? You saw the numbers on Steve Kerr and that was over 5 years with the Bulls and 10 years with other teams so there was plenty of sample size.

Steve Kerr is not a good example because he simply got to play so much more with the Bulls than he did everywhere else. In Cleveland his 2nd year he shot just as well when he played 1600 minutes. His other non Bulls years he never played more than 900 minutes yet with chicago he played 2036, 1839, 1919, 1861 and his final year when hurt 1119 (when he shot his worst % by far)

Over the next three years post bulls he didnt play as many minutes total as he averaged a season with them. Not to mention his first season with Chicago when you figure you would see an uptick based on the superstar theory he actually shot 4 % below his career figure which is pulled down by his last few years as a 36 and 37 year old.

Personally I think for a good number of 3 point shooters it depends on where they get the shot from, and whether they are stepping into the shot or shooting it set, off a ball fake, off a right hand dribble and such. There are clearly spots and rythyms for most players that are comfort threes when open. Teams of course scout the 3 point shooters and attempt to take the comfortable 3 away. Shot charts can be useful for this of course as well as video.

So the variation from year to year might have something to do with where and during what situations guys are getting their 3's, especially with diff. coaches and teammates. Imo there are clearly teammates on some teams that do not recognize or care where and during what situations a good 3 guy is getting three point shot from.

[Cannon Shell]

Kidd to Lakers?

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Kidd to Lakers?

Would be a horrible move.

How about Yao Ming possibly out all season and maybe done for his career?

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

Would be a horrible move.

How about Yao Ming possibly out all season and maybe done for his career?

I think Kidd instead of Fisher would be an improvement especially for what it will take to get him which wont be that much.

That sucks for Yao and Houston. The guy is just so freakin big.

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

I think Kidd instead of Fisher would be an improvement especially for what it will take to get him which wont be that much.

That sucks for Yao and Houston. The guy is just so freakin big.

While Kidd in his prime is a hall of famer, he's way past his prime now. He has never been able to shoot. At least Fisher can knock down a few at times. And if Laker fans were horrified at Fisher's defense on Williams and Brooks in the playoffs, watching Kidd try to guard those guys might make you want to rip out your eyeballs. He can't do it anymore. And the thing with Fisher is that he doesn't need to dominate the ball. Kidd still does. I don't think he fits with what the Lakers have at all.

Kidd is a huge improvement.

No comparison in my mind. None.
Kidd can work in multiple lineups, Fisher cannot.
Kidd can do the majority of the ball handling,
Fisher cannot.

Please say it aint so.

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

I think Kidd instead of Fisher would be an improvement especially for what it will take to get him which wont be that much.

That sucks for Yao and Houston. The guy is just so freakin big.

It was a matter of time.
He has gotten a bit further than I personally expected.

Originally Posted by King Glorious

While Kidd in his prime is a hall of famer, he's way past his prime now. He has never been able to shoot. At least Fisher can knock down a few at times. And if Laker fans were horrified at Fisher's defense on Williams and Brooks in the playoffs, watching Kidd try to guard those guys might make you want to rip out your eyeballs. He can't do it anymore. And the thing with Fisher is that he doesn't need to dominate the ball. Kidd still does. I don't think he fits with what the Lakers have at all.

Not consistently.
But I would like you to take a look at the % for the mavs beyond the arc.
You like stats.

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by pgardn

Not consistently.
But I would like you to take a look at the % for the mavs beyond the arc.
You like stats.

Kidd is still good at getting guys good shots. That's a skill he'll never lose. But the Lakers run an offense that it's not necessary to have a true point guard. They've never had one. None of the Bulls championship teams had one either. Even when they had BJ Armstrong, the offense still went mostly through Pippen and Jordan. Having a guy that needs to dominate the ball at the position takes away from the strengths of that offense. I'm not saying that Kidd isn't still a better player than Fisher. But just because he's a better player doesn't mean he's a better fit for this team. With the Lakers, Bryant and Odom handle the ball more than the point guards do anyway and do more initiating of the offense. Having Kidd doing that will take away from the mismatches that Bryant and Odom create. And again, Kidd on the defensive end against these small, quick guards, makes Fisher look like Kidd used to. I'd love Kidd in a place like Orlando or Golden State. Not so much in LA though.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

Kidd is still good at getting guys good shots. That's a skill he'll never lose. But the Lakers run an offense that it's not necessary to have a true point guard. They've never had one. None of the Bulls championship teams had one either. Even when they had BJ Armstrong, the offense still went mostly through Pippen and Jordan. Having a guy that needs to dominate the ball at the position takes away from the strengths of that offense. I'm not saying that Kidd isn't still a better player than Fisher. But just because he's a better player doesn't mean he's a better fit for this team. With the Lakers, Bryant and Odom handle the ball more than the point guards do anyway and do more initiating of the offense. Having Kidd doing that will take away from the mismatches that Bryant and Odom create. And again, Kidd on the defensive end against these small, quick guards, makes Fisher look like Kidd used to. I'd love Kidd in a place like Orlando or Golden State. Not so much in LA though.

Good points.

[dalakhani]

Kidd shot a higher percentage from three point range than Derek Fisher this past year. As a matter of fact, Kidd shot 40% from three point range and has taken and made more three pointers over the last five years than derek fisher.

The notion that kidd can't shoot is a relic from his younger days. He shoots just fine now. I realize he can't defend smaller guards but he can't be any worse than fisher....no one can be any worse at defending a quick point than fisher.

Kidd has always been an unselfish, cerebral player. Im sure he could and would relinquish his need for the ball to fit in with the lakers.

Actually I was referring to the fact that Kidd
lead the Mavs, by a good margin, in 3 pt percentage.

Kobe does not have Pippen. He will not
reach his goals of passing Jordan in Championships
with Fisher playing point. Kidd would have to be
a short term solution. Still think he is better than
Fisher. I am sure Phil could work Kidd in. The mavs
still found a way to run with Kidd. He did not lead
breaks but he found guys wide open ahead that did.
Nah he passes too well. Gotta take Kidd imo.

There is no doubt that Kobe is better with the
ball dribbling however. So I understand your point.
I just think it is physically draining and could be
done more efficiently.

oops i post and now see the lama has beat me to
the 3 point% thing I was referring to in the first place.
Never mind.

[dalakhani]

I agree with every thing you say here P. Jason Kidd could fit in with any team. This is a guy at the end of his career that wants a ring that is trying to get it on the backs of the defending NBA champions with a 10 time title winning coach and Kobe Bryant. He isnt going to try to make everyone adapt to his game...he will just try to fit in.

He would come relatively cheap and you wouldnt need him for more than 25 minutes a game. Why wouldnt he fit?

Originally Posted by dalakhani

I agree with every thing you say here P. Jason Kidd could fit in with any team. This is a guy at the end of his career that wants a ring that is trying to get it on the backs of the defending NBA champions with a 10 time title winning coach and Kobe Bryant. He isnt going to try to make everyone adapt to his game...he will just try to fit in.

He would come relatively cheap and you wouldnt need him for more than 25 minutes a game. Why wouldnt he fit?

He would not fit because I dont want the Lakers to win.

[King Glorious]

Kidd has improved as a three point shooter over the last two years. This year was his first time over 40%. The year before was his first time over 38% Fisher has shot over 38% eight times and been over 40% a few times. When it comes to needing a clutch shot, I'd take Fisher over Kidd everytime. He's done it at the highest pressure levels. Kidd hasn't. If I needed a point guard to run a team, I'm taking Kidd all day over Fisher. On the majority of teams in the league, I'm taking Kidd. On this team, give me Fisher. There's something to be said for comfort and familiarity. Bryant and Fisher know each other. They know exactly what to expect from each other. Bringing Kidd in would disrupt the rhythm of this team. Much like bringing in Gary Payton did. I also think Kidd is much worse on the defensive end. I felt so bad for him two seasons ago watching Chris Paul eat him alive in the playoffs. I just don't see the point in bringing in a guy who's going to need the ball as much as he would to be successful. By the way, last year, Kidd was at .406 and Fisher was at .397 Kidd made 11 more than Fisher on the year.

I hope the Lakers stand pat with Fisher.

[dalakhani]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

Kidd has improved as a three point shooter over the last two years. This year was his first time over 40%. The year before was his first time over 38% Fisher has shot over 38% eight times and been over 40% a few times. When it comes to needing a clutch shot, I'd take Fisher over Kidd everytime. He's done it at the highest pressure levels. Kidd hasn't. If I needed a point guard to run a team, I'm taking Kidd all day over Fisher. On the majority of teams in the league, I'm taking Kidd. On this team, give me Fisher. There's something to be said for comfort and familiarity. Bryant and Fisher know each other. They know exactly what to expect from each other. Bringing Kidd in would disrupt the rhythm of this team. Much like bringing in Gary Payton did. I also think Kidd is much worse on the defensive end. I felt so bad for him two seasons ago watching Chris Paul eat him alive in the playoffs. I just don't see the point in bringing in a guy who's going to need the ball as much as he would to be successful. By the way, last year, Kidd was at .406 and Fisher was at .397 Kidd made 11 more than Fisher on the year.

My point wasnt that Kidd shoots it so much better than fisher. I was just trying to refute your point that Kidd can't shoot and fisher was the better shooter at this point. That is not the case.

How could you say kidd is much worse on the defensive end than fisher? How can you say that ANYONE is much worse on the defensive end than fisher at this point? At least kidd is big and physical enough to guard a two at times if necessary.

I dont disagree that kidd in his prime would have changed the outlook of this team and quite possibly for th worse. They are just coming off of a championship so it certainly doesnt get much better. However, this isnt that kidd and i think he knows it. Getting a vet like kidd to give you minutes on the cheap can be a really good thing as long as he knows his role. I think that is where the big difference will be between him and payton.