Well that is your problem right there, we're not talking about winning (reliant on two sides of the ball)... Duncan is a decent passer but does turn the ball over more too. JON was never as dominant as Amare, and it's not like Parker is a bum either. Manu had better pace-adjusted numbers than anyone the Suns have at Guard and is a fine passer in his own right. His teammates are just fine.
Your right, we can look at the numbers without Nash to determine Amare's scoring without a dominant playmaker next to him. There was a four game stretch in 2007 when Nash was out. It was a somewhat extended period of time without Nash, and he averaged 27 points per game on 46% shooting and the team finished 1-3 over those four games that Nash was out. Without Nash he shot 10% worse over that stretch, than what he did on the season when Nash was there. Helps to prove that just because he is scoring, does not mean that the team is doing enough scoring. It also shows that he is MUCH less efficient of a scorer without Nash on the court. The team simply didn't have the playmaker that could get everyone else involved without Nash, and everyone, including Amare felt it. So it's not a misconception at all that he is not as good without Nash spoon feeding him open shots. Duncan is simply the better offensive option period, because he can do it from so many differnet area's. He isn't limited because he can't score off the post up like Duncan, and he doesn't limit his offense because he isn't a reliable passing threat. He doesn't need someone else to set him up on 70% of his shots like Amare does. All around Duncan is better for an offense because he brings many more different aspects to an offense than Amare does. Duncan does turn the ball over more, but often times your guys that pass the ball more will have a higher turnover rate. Just the same as the guys that the offense is ran through, will have more turnovers per game. Plus, Duncan averaged more assists per game than turnovers per game. Meanwhile, Amare averages an entire turnover more per game, than he averages assists per game. He is a much much better passer than Amare, it's not even close. Manu is a decent passer, but he's not Steve Nash who initiates a pick and roll better than any other point guard in the league. He isn't Nash who can handle ball pressure really well, when teams pressure Manu he starts to turn the ball over much more and play much worse, as evidenced by the Lakers series. Manu might have better pace adjusted numbers, which is a dumb stat to use because they don't play at the Suns pace and if they did things would most assuredly change. Duncan's teamates are fine, but his offensive teamates are not nearly as good as the offensive teamates that Amare has around him. Duncan has to have a much heavier load in his offense than Amare has to.
Durvasa collects a bunch of stats with Excel or something (I've always thought that was pretty cool, I'm a bit too lazy for that though, haha), I think he might have been referring to Amare's production during a game when Nash is resting. I'm not sure though Any sources for your stats? Just to be safe. :] I don't know if it matters too much, considering Duncan is not a "great" passer either. I do think it somewhat closes the gap but Amare is just so much more dominant in certain categories. Well on a per 40 SPURS pace he still averages 5.8 APG (even more at a normal NBA pace, the Spurs are at the bottom of the league). I'd say the Spurs have a better backcourt, Raja Bell can't create jack and isn't nearly the player Manu is.
I put the box scores below, you can just add stuff and divide and it all works. http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/200702060POR.html http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/200702090PHO.html http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/200702090PHO.html http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/200702110PHO.html Using how he scores while Nash is resting on the bench is not an accurate way of determining how good he is without Nash. You have to use when he isn't there for entire games, not for a minute or two while the other guy is on the bench. When Nash has been out for consecutive games in a row, Amare's production from an effeciency standpoint has indeed dropped off quite a bit. Duncan isn't a great passer if you compare him to like, Steve Nash or Chris Paul. He is a great low post passer though, right up there with Shaq, Hakeem and these kind of big men that used their back to the basket game to set up their offenses. That is what has made the Spurs offense great, has been his great passing ability from the low post. Saying that Amare is so much more dominant in other area's is true, but Duncan is much more dominant in the most important area's for championship level offensive big men. He is much much better on the post up, he is a much better passer. Amare is better off the dribble on the face up, and a better jump shooter from the mid-range. Put it together and the type of big man offensively that Duncan is wins championships. Shaq was exactly the same, a post up and passer.
But four games is indeed a good sample size? That's not enough to prove a correlation either then. And Nash played in 81 games this year... The Amare this year was superior to the one coming back from surgery in these game logs. Well I wouldn't inject championships at all into this discussion given how that depends on so many factors. For all the good Duncan does in the post, he hurts his game to a large degree with that pitiful J which composes more than 50% of his total shots.
What's your reasoning behind this? I don't think a 4 game stretch against 4 teams is a particularly good sample to get an idea of how Amare would play without Nash over an entire season. If instead you look at the nearly 1000 minutes Amare has played the last few years with Nash off the court, against a wide variety of opposing lineups, I think that would be more predictive. I didn't say Nash doesn't make it easier for him. Of course that's what a great PG does. But if you actually look at how Amare scores, it's wrong to characterize it as him getting spoonfed by Nash. That's like saying Karl Malone wasn't an awesome offensive player, just because he happened to play with John Stockton most of his career. Malone would have been a great scorer, regardless, just based on his combination of skills and physical abilities. I'd say the same thing for Amare. No big man in the game has his combination of skills -- runs the court and finishes like a small forward, scores around the basket with an array of dunks while also demonstrating a remarkably soft touch, that explosive first step when facing up, the consistent and reliable mid-range jumper, and makes free throws at a high percentage. Yeah, Duncan has a superior post up game with his back to the basket. And Amare has a vastly superior face up game. They've run a different offense in Phoenix than they do in San Antonio, and they play different roles in their respective offense. So, you can't just compare what they do and decide one is better than the other. You have to compare how they play their roles, and how effective they are in those roles. Yes, Duncan makes more plays with the pass because of how he's used in San Antonio's offense, but I still think when you take everything Duncan does on the offensive end, Amare's superior ability to score buckets and do so with far greater efficiency makes him the better offensive player. To a degree, it's comparing apples and oranges because they do different things. But if I had one possession left in a game, I needed to score two points, and I can choose between Duncan and Amare -- I'm taking Amare, with or without Nash. I'll take the PnR or mid-post ISO with Amare over a PnR or post up with Duncan.
I know Yao Ming hasn't played even close to 82 games for 3 seasons now, but how close do you think he is to the top? His rebounding and blocks could be better, but his advanced offensive game extends from the paint all the way out to 20 feet.
I think he's a top 15 player. Arguably the best center, but that's a relatively weak position these days. I think people overstate his total floor game. He's been overrated as a passer, and he's not a significant scoring threat outside of 12 feet from the basket. But he is immense, and he's gotten much better at establishing himself close to the basket, catching the pass in traffic, and finishing or getting fouled. And when he's fouled, it's virtually 2 points every time. He has a very well developed post game, and he shows excellent foot work for a man his size. He'll struggle catching the entry pass at times when the defender is fronting him, though. But if he's able to seal his defender behind him, the opposing team is at his mercy. He's a solid rebounder and an underrated defensive player at the basket. His biggest weakness is defending away from the basket, but he works hard at it and has improved.
Howard is the future.. at the present, he gets dominated by good competition. Solid examples are the Pistons series and the olympics. Amare can't defend to save his life. He doesn't hold position and chases weak side blocks like a turd. His offensive game isn't nearly as advanced as Duncan's. As someone mentioned, he's a virtual black hole on offense. His face up game is dependent solely on his athleticism right now. His jumper is not as good as Duncan's, and his back to the basket game is light years behind. The best big men today are Yao and Duncan. When Yao is healthy, he's simply a dominating presence, all the time. Duncan's still the standard by which every big man is measured. KG is still great, but he's getting a lot of credit for doing what Duncan has been doing for a decade. Duncan's still #1.
That's just totally wrong. Note that Duncan's efficiency is only above average around the basket. Again, Duncan's a better post up player, but all-around Amare is a more effective scorer.
