To compare Nash's assists to Stockton's, I tried to estimate the percentage of their teammates field goals that they assisted on while on the court. Just used the following formula: Assist% ~= Ast / [ (Min/TmMin)*TmFGM - FGM ] In 1990, when Stockton averaged 14.5 assists per game, this turned out to be an unbelieable 57.4%. So, he assisted on nearly 3 out of 5 of his teammate's made field goals that year while on the court. I also calculated this number for his last season in the league, when he was 40 years old and averaged 7.7 assists per game (in far fewer minutes). Even at the end of his career, he was assisting on about 46.4% of his teammate's made field goals. By comparison, for Nash this season it's at 43.3%. So in terms of controlling an offense via the assist, Stockton, even at the end of his career, appeared to be ahead of Nash. I thought that was interesting.
<div class="quote_poster">durvasa Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">To compare Nash's assists to Stockton's, I tried to estimate the percentage of their teammates field goals that they assisted on while on the court. Just used the following formula: Assist% ~= Ast / [ (Min/TmMin)*TmFGM - FGM ] In 1990, when Stockton averaged 14.5 assists per game, this turned out to be an unbelieable 57.4%. So, he assisted on nearly 3 out of 5 of his teammate's made field goals that year while on the court. I also calculated this number for his last season in the league, when he was 40 years old and averaged 7.7 assists per game (in far fewer minutes). Even at the end of his career, he was assisting on about 46.4% of his teammate's made field goals. By comparison, for Nash this season it's at 43.3%. So in terms of controlling an offense via the assist, Stockton, even at the end of his career, appeared to be ahead of Nash. I thought that was interesting.</div> Did you factor in per 100 possessions? The pace the Suns play at probably attributes to Nash having a lower % of assisted baskets. The Suns simply shoot more with their style of play, than Utah did with Stockton. I'm not surprised by Stockton's numbers ahead of Nash. He was one of the more underrated superstars in the NBA. However, when you start comparing what he did versus other guards, Stockton tends to dominate. Stockton was the heart and soul of Utah's offense and defense. Nash has a lot more creativity and flare to his game than Stockton, but they managed the game in complete contrast of one another. Could Nash manage a team running halfcourt sets and playing deep into the shot clock? Could Stockton run the Phoenix Suns open court offense? For me, I can see Stockton stepping right in and playing in Phoenix's offense, but I can't see Nash being as effective in the role Stockton played with Utah.
<div class="quote_poster">shapecity Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Did you factor in per 100 possessions? The pace the Suns play at probably attributes to Nash having a lower % of assisted baskets. The Suns simply shoot more with their style of play, than Utah did with Stockton.</div> I don't know if that impacts this particular stat any. Actually, Utah in 1990 played at a slightly faster pace than the current Suns (back then, of course, that put them 21st out of 27 teams). If a team plays at a faster pace, both the FGA and the assist opportunities increase.
I also think if you're going to compare players of the PG position, you have to mention Nash as an inferior defender. There is more to basketball than just offense. Nash this season is definitely up there with the best in terms of playmaking; however, what makes certain players GREAT is the fact they had multiple dimensions to their game and defense should not be overlooked, even if Nash is a stud on offense. A PG has duties on defense too!
<div class="quote_poster">MrJ Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">I also think if you're going to compare players of the PG position, you have to mention Nash as an inferior defender. There is more to basketball than just offense. Nash this season is definitely up there with the best in terms of playmaking; however, what makes certain players GREAT is the fact they had multiple dimensions to their game and defense should not be overlooked, even if Nash is a stud on offense. A PG has duties on defense too!</div> I think this notion that Nash is a defensive liability is somewhat overrated. In fact, I believe he's one of the league leaders in charges taken.
<div class="quote_poster">durvasa Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">I think this notion that Nash is a defensive liability is somewhat overrated. In fact, I believe he's one of the league leaders in charges taken.</div> I believe Maurice Taylor was up there too afew years ago, does that make him any less of a liability? His defense is definitely something not something to ignore, especially if we're going to compare him to the likes of great PG's such as Stockton, Magic, who were great defenders.
<div class="quote_poster">durvasa Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">I think this notion that Nash is a defensive liability is somewhat overrated. In fact, I believe he's one of the league leaders in charges taken.</div> Agree, Nash is a bad defender but how often do you see him get burned? He finds a way to avoid being matched up with guys who will light him up so its not noticeable that much. Granted hes still not a good defender but not much of a liability and its not like he gives no effort on that end, with his athleticism there isn't much he can do except take charges and matchup with guys who can't score.
<div class="quote_poster">MrJ Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">I believe Maurice Taylor was up there too a few years ago, does that make him any less of a liability? His defense is definitely something not something to ignore, especially if we're going to compare him to the likes of great PG's such as Stockton, Magic, who were great defenders.</div> Stockton and Magic were great defenders? Not really. Neither were good individual defenders, and that's what people point to when criticizing Nash. As for Mo Taylor, he was a decent defender when he was with us (JVG's first year).
2 years ago, Nash was horrible defensively, but yoy can tell he's improved since then to the point where he isn't a liability anymore.
<div class="quote_poster">durvasa Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Stockton and Magic were great defenders? Not really. Neither were good individual defenders, and that's what people point to when criticizing Nash. As for Mo Taylor, he was a decent defender when he was with us (JVG's first year).</div> If you're going to use charges drawn as a reason to support your argument, then steals could also be a reasonable way to assess a player's defensive ability. John Stockton is #1 all-time in total steals and 8th all-time in steals per game. Contrary to someone like Iverson for example, he didn't gamble to get his steals - he was just has quick hands and smarts defensively. Stockton was a good indiviual defender, how do you figure he wasn't? I'm not as familiar with Magic as I am Stockton, but he also was a pretty solid defender - much better than Nash. Even if you acknowledge Nash as a decent defender, these two were much better defenseively and played in a era with better basketball players. And Mo' Taylor was never a good defender. I'm sure there were some spurts during the season where he played solid D, (JVG had the same thing happen with Allan Houston) but overall his defense was subpar.
<div class="quote_poster">MrJ Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">If you're going to use charges drawn as a reason to support your argument, then steals could also be a reasonable way to assess a player's defensive ability. John Stockton is #1 all-time in total steals and 8th all-time in steals per game. Contrary to someone like Iverson for example, he didn't gamble to get his steals - he was just has quick hands and smarts defensively. Stockton was a good indiviual defender, how do you figure he wasn't? I'm not as familiar with Magic as I am Stockton, but he also was a pretty solid defender - much better than Nash. </div> Like I said, neither were considered good individual defenders. Stockton forced a bunch of turnovers, generally by trapping unsuspecting big men, but I don't think he was ever considered a good one on one defender. As for Magic, he was a borderline defensive liability because he couldn't guard the quicker guards effectively. The Lakers dealt with it fine because they had Byron Scott who could cover PGs and Michael Cooper who could defend pretty much any perimeter player. But you're right, Stockton and Magic were better defenders than Nash -- Stockton because he just forced so many turnovers and Magic because he was a good defensive rebounder. I just don't think it's that big of a difference. It's not like those guys were stoppers and Nash is a sieve.
