Re: The Boston Celtics Mailing List Digest V9 #115

[GuyClinch@AOL.com]

Hello all,


> 
> The other aspects of Kidd's game are solid and he has had a supreme impact
> on the success of the Nets.  But I do not see how his impact on that team 
> is
> any more measureable than what Pierce has given us.
> 

Well I have to admit I am biased against Kidd.
I don't like how he shoots free throws.
I don't like how he jacks up his assist totals by throwing risky passes.
I don't like how he jacks up bricks.
I don't like how he plays defense.
I don't like how he chokes in the playoffs.

I live in the NYC area..and for years watched quite a bit of the Nets games.
I think the media likes a good story...and the idea that Kidd is solely 
responsible
for the Nets turn around is really that.. a story.

Where folks see a greatly improved team...
I see a Nets team that SHOULD have been winning the last couple of years.
Health...not talent was one big reason why they weren't last year.. They have 
Kittles, Van Horn, and Martin...Mcullough..and Jefferson. The  Center 
position really is quite upgraded with Mcullough...and Martin and Kittles 
have come back from injury.

I think that if you exclude Pierce and Kidd ...the Nets have more talent then 
the Celts. The Nets have a deeper bench..and a better center. The Nets 
winning only
26 games last year was one of the biggest underachievements in NBA history.

I will admit Kidd was the catalyst to help them get winning...
But much like the quaterback of a winning football team he is getting to much 
credit.
The Nets have the talent for 40 wins without Kidd. Without Pierce I don' t 
think the
Celts could muster 20 wins.

I think Shaq or Duncan are much better choices...
If your idea of an MVP is a player who makes something out of nothing..
Pierce and Gary Payton are good choices.

The Nets are loaded...not a sorry team that was saved by Kidd.

Pete