Kidd or Miller

[RickyRubio]

Who would you rather have? Assuming NO TRADE is involved and just sign them as a FA to our current team.

I would rather have Kidd. I like them both a lot. They are both great PGs. But here is my main reason.

Miller is younger, would want to stay around longer (I assume) and would hinder Bayless.

Kidd is older, more experienced and I think would be a better teacher. Then by the time he is ready to retire or go to another team (a year or two I presume) then Bayless would be ready to go, with a better PG PHd.

Again, I would be happy with either, but I think Kidd is the better choice.

What do you think?

 

[Ed O]

Miller. He's three years younger and has a superior PER. I expect Kidd to drop off more quickly, but even if Miller did he'd have a year or two of decline before his PER is where Kidd's has been the last couple of years.

Ed O.

 

[hasoos]

Miller. He's three years younger and has a superior PER. I expect Kidd to drop off more quickly, but even if Miller did he'd have a year or two of decline before his PER is where Kidd's has been the last couple of years.

Ed O.

At the same time, you have a young player, that will probably be coming around about the time 2 years pass. Kidd leaves for retirement land, Bayless steps in and takes over. Whereas if Miller is still here, Miller gets pissed his playing time is being cut, and creates a situation.

 

[Mediocre Man]

I picked Kidd, but I agree with Ed o that Miller is the better player.

I think with his experience and skill set, Kidd might help Portland more.

 

[hasoos]

Just remember. Andre Miller always plays well in a contract year. Learn from history.

 

[andalusian]

Don't like either of these guys - but if I had to choose - Kidd as option #3 after Hinrich and Sessions.

 

[Ed O]

Just remember. Andre Miller always plays well in a contract year. Learn from history.

If he ONLY played well in a contract year, then that would be relevant.

He actually plays pretty well every year. He had 18.4 PER in 07-08 and 18.6 last year. His career-low in a season is 16.1, which was when he split time between Philly and Denver, and that's pretty comparable to Kidd's last two seasons of 16.7 and 16.9.

Ed O.

 

[oldmangrouch]

Miller.

We can worry about the feelings of our "PG of the future", once we actually acquire one!

 

[Crimson the Cat]

Miller. Younger and better. Experience only gets you so far.

 

[Mediocre Man]

Miller. Younger and better. Experience only gets you so far.

The championship usually. Do we need to go farther?

 

[Pinwheel1]

I would take the future hall of famer, even though neither has an outside shot.

 

[Draco]

I would take the future hall of famer, even though neither has an outside shot.

Kidd led the Mavs in 3pt %.

 

[Crimson the Cat]

The championship usually. Do we need to go farther?

Is that where he took the Mavs last year?

 

[hasoos]

Miller. Younger and better. Experience only gets you so far.

How far does experience get you with the NBA favoritism refs?

 

[Mediocre Man]

Is that where he took the Mavs last year?

Well they did make it farther than us....without HCA

 

[hasoos]

For me this is a hard issue, while I do see both of them as upgrades to Blake, I am hardly a fan of either one of them. The only reason I would choose Kidd is because he has been to the finals a few times. He has played in tight eastern conference title series. I also believe that with hit feet set (A complete condition for this statement) that Kidd is a better 3 point shooter.

 

[RickyRubio]

If he ONLY played well in a contract year, then that would be relevant.

He actually plays pretty well every year. He had 18.4 PER in 07-08 and 18.6 last year. His career-low in a season is 16.1, which was when he split time between Philly and Denver, and that's pretty comparable to Kidd's last two seasons of 16.7 and 16.9.

Ed O.

But wouldn't factoring in that Kidd is not much of a scorer anymore (and Miller is for his team) make the PER for Kidd seem not so bad? PER considers scoring quite a bit, doesn't it?

Just wondering.

 

[Ed O]

But wouldn't factoring in that Kidd is not much of a scorer anymore (and Miller is for his team) make the PER for Kidd seem not so bad? PER considers scoring quite a bit, doesn't it?

Just wondering.

You are correct, scoring is definitely factored in.

It would be interesting to see a "scoring-neutral" PER, so we could see their non-scoring contributions and how they've increased/decreased over time and relative to one another...

Ed O.

 

[BlazerWookee]

I want neither.

I'll be pissed with either.

 

[NJNetz]

If Portland doesn't overpay for Kidd, I expect them to be quite happy with him. Portland only gets better with Jason.

 

[Ed O]

I want neither.

I'll be pissed with either.

Really?

What PG(s) would not piss you off?

Sessions? Hinrich?

Ed O.

 

[RickyRubio]

I want neither.

I'll be pissed with either.

You would be pissed if we got either of these guys?! Why?

 

[RoyToy]

Give me Miller over Kidd.

Kidd's pts/rebs/ast have all dropped the last 3 or so years in a row. He's declining and he will continue to decline. Miller still has some left in the tank.

Miller easily imo.

 

[Mediocre Man]

I want neither.

I'll be pissed with either.

Who are you hoping to land my furry friend?

 

[hasoos]

If he ONLY played well in a contract year, then that would be relevant.

He actually plays pretty well every year. He had 18.4 PER in 07-08 and 18.6 last year. His career-low in a season is 16.1, which was when he split time between Philly and Denver, and that's pretty comparable to Kidd's last two seasons of 16.7 and 16.9.

Ed O.

Here comes the "Yea but" to bring up some questions.

He was in Denver with a lot of the same faces that are there now. Why did he not enjoy success there at that time, where Billups does?

In his 3rd year in the league, which happened to be a free agent year, he averaged over 10 assist per game. He had one year since where he reached 9, but mostly, averaged about 6 to 7. Why is the the disparaging difference from year to year on the same team with the same personnel? This means IMO that he has to fit your system. You will note, that Philadelphia played most successfully in an up tempo style this year, and when they did not, they struggled. That is not Portland. The reason Andre Miller struggles with half court teams is that teams just lay off of him and say "shoot from the outside". When he is in a running team he can get to the rim easier and be comfortable.

I look at Jason Kidd, and I can say a lot of the same things except for one fact. Jason Kidd has been to the promised land of the finals before twice. He has played in tight eastern conference series. Jason Kidd with his feet set, is also a decent 3 point shooter. If they are not set, he is screwed. At least he isn't screwed all the time, like Miller, where it doesn't matter, if the shot is behind the line you are in deep shit.

The facts are, if the game is on the line, and you need a 3, Andre Miller will not get it for you. I will guarantee you that the playoff series the Blazers play in the future, there will be times where they need a bucket from deep in crunch time. I have seen Kidd hit those shots all through his career, including last year. Andre Miller will not hit that shot.

 

[TradeNurkicNow]

i want nash

 

[LittleAlex]

I voted for Jason Kidd.

I haven't ever really Andre Miller. Kidd has more playoff experience by far then Miller.

Kidd actually shot 45% from 3-point land this last season, so his shooting is better.

Kidd was once a great defender and still has the smarts. Miller wasn't ever known as a defender.

They are both a pipe dream, though. Portland isn't going to be able to sign either guy.

 

[Minstrel]

Miller over Kidd.

Sessions, Miller, Hinrich, Kidd. That's the order of preference for me.

 

[Nikolokolus]

I've been vacillating back and forth on Kidd, Miller and Hinrich lately. I think Miller would likely have the most drastic impact on the roster top to bottom which could be a mixed bag of good and bad things, I really like Hinrich's defense, but I think Kidd's is of a comparable nature (both are more predicated on smarts and funneling into help defense than lock-down man defense) but I give Kidd the edge because of his play-making ability and the fact that he now actually has a high percentage set-shot 3-pointer. I guess I'd give the nod to Kidd ... ask me tomorrow and I might have a different answer ... give me any one of the above and I'll be a happy camper.

 

[andalusian]

I really like Hinrich's defense, but I think Kidd's is of a comparable nature (both are more predicated on smarts and funneling into help defense than lock-down man defense) but I give Kidd the edge because of his play-making ability and the fact that he now actually has a high percentage set-shot 3-pointer. I guess I'd give the nod to Kidd ... ask me tomorrow and I might have a different answer ... give me any one of the above and I'll be a happy camper.

For a year, maybe two - there is a good chance that Kidd would be a slight upgrade over Kirk - if we assume that Kirk has permanently declined from his all-NBA defensive team years. However, if there is a chance that Kirk, playing his natural position and not wounded will regain his defensive acumen - he will be a better player than Kidd. Add the fact that if the new PG experiment actually works - Kirk would be a long-term solution - and I would go with Kirk over Kidd.