My opinion on Amare and Nash

[Chaplin]

I've got to disagree, mostly because Malone was SUCH a better player than Amare. He was a superior rebounder, much superior passer and an All-Defense player... all areas where Amare is poor to just plan bad. It's the discrepency between these two players which is what made that combo a lot better than ours IMO, because with Stockton and Nash, like you said, it's probably a wash, with Nash's offense being superior to Nash, but Stockton makes up for that with his incredibly stout D (5 time 2nd Team All-Defense) versus Nash's absolutely horrific D.

Totally understand what you're saying. I just don't think the gap is as large as you do, that's all.

And therein lies the problem in comparing the two sets of superstars is our combo was really one-dimensional - ALL OFFENSE, while the Jazz two superstars were All-EVERYTHING. They could both pass, they could both play offense, they could both play defense and ultimately, they both propelled their team to at least an NBA Finals... or two, whereas our guys never even sniffed a Game 7 in the WCF.

Again, there are several factors against comparing the two sets of stars. One is the state of the NBA. Both Malone and Stockton were incredibly dirty players. I loved Stockton, thought he was terrific, but he was dirty. Not Bruce Bowen dirty, but dirty enough. Both of them wouldn't get away with most of the stuff they did back then that made then good defensive players. Could Malone be a good defender without throwing his elbows all the time? Could Stockton without tripping people? Tough to know. Two, the potency of their two-man game is VERY close. Nash and Amare can't play defense, sure, but their two-man game is just as good as Malone and Stockton's was. Is that enough to make a valid comparison? Maybe not, and in the end, is it worth comparing the two sets? Probably not also.

IMO there is such a huge gap between the NBA in the early- to mid-nineties and the NBA of today. It's quite interesting, and I think in all the major sports, the NBA showed the biggest change in a 15-year span. Chris Bosh wouldn't have done well against Malone either. The only player in the entire league right now that could have held is own with Malone is probably Dwight Howard. Most big men in the league are pretty soft, including Amare. David Lee is incredibly soft and yet he's considered a power forward many people covet (especially on this board). Malone didn't have to worry about foul trouble because nobody called him for anything.

 

[JCSunsfan]

Totally understand what you're saying. I just don't think the gap is as large as you do, that's all.



Again, there are several factors against comparing the two sets of stars. One is the state of the NBA. Both Malone and Stockton were incredibly dirty players. I loved Stockton, thought he was terrific, but he was dirty. Not Bruce Bowen dirty, but dirty enough. Both of them wouldn't get away with most of the stuff they did back then that made then good defensive players. Could Malone be a good defender without throwing his elbows all the time? Could Stockton without tripping people? Tough to know. Two, the potency of their two-man game is VERY close. Nash and Amare can't play defense, sure, but their two-man game is just as good as Malone and Stockton's was. Is that enough to make a valid comparison? Maybe not, and in the end, is it worth comparing the two sets? Probably not also.

IMO there is such a huge gap between the NBA in the early- to mid-nineties and the NBA of today. It's quite interesting, and I think in all the major sports, the NBA showed the biggest change in a 15-year span. Chris Bosh wouldn't have done well against Malone either. The only player in the entire league right now that could have held is own with Malone is probably Dwight Howard. Most big men in the league are pretty soft, including Amare. David Lee is incredibly soft and yet he's considered a power forward many people covet (especially on this board). Malone didn't have to worry about foul trouble because nobody called him for anything.

They had a two man offense. Stockton had a pick and role play Malone that was very difficult to defend. He was not nearly as good as Nash at running a break, getting the rest of the team involved in the offense. Nash is a better shooter and more dangerous at clutch time. I will grant that Stockton was a better defender. He had a knack for poking the ball away on defense. But the game was called much differently then.

 

[SirStefan32]

Nash and Amare can't play defense, sure, but their two-man game is just as good as Malone and Stockton's was.

I have to disagree with that. While Nash/Stoudemire pick and roll is outstanding, it is NOT as good as Stockton/Malone pick and roll was.

 

[SactownSunsFan]

I have to disagree with that. While Nash/Stoudemire pick and roll is outstanding, it is NOT as good as Stockton/Malone pick and roll was.

Looking at the Suns incredible offensive efficiency over the past 5 years, I find it hard to agree with your statement.

 

[devilalum]

another opinion

Underrated: Steve Nash at 35
Steve Nash at 30 was a Big Story. Steve Nash at 35 isn't. But what Steve Nash is doing at 35 is way, way, way more amazing than what Steve Nash did at 30.

For starters, you'd have a hard time proving that the 35-year-old Nash is any worse than the 30-year-old Nash. Compared to his first MVP season in 2004-05, Nash is averaging three more points a game, providing just as many assists and rebounds per minute, and shooting better on 2s, 3s and free throws. He has a good shot at establishing a new career high in PER, not to mention becoming the first player in history to set a career high in scoring at age 35 or older.

Now that we've got that out of the way, go through the archives and find a point guard who did anywhere near as well at Nash's age. I'll just wait here for you to get back to me. ... Still waiting. ... Anything? No?

Truth is, no point guard in history can touch Nash's performance this season. In fact, only one guard prior to Nash has had a PER of 20 or more at the age of 35 or later: John Stockton.

Granted, Stockton did it six times, but the post-35 Stockton never had a year like Nash has put together this season. For starters, Utah managed Stockton's minutes carefully, but Nash is playing 33.5 minutes per game. Moreover, they're hard, active minutes as the engine for a Suns' offense lacking other players who can create their own shot. Second, he's doing it for one of the league's fastest-paced teams. Despite those added requirements, he has the best PER in history for a guard aged 35 or above.

About the only other historic parallel is Lenny Wilkens, who came to Cleveland at age 35 and helped an awful Cavs team become slightly less awful by averaging 20.5 points and 8.4 assists and making the All-Star team. But that was on a 50-game loser; Nash's team might win 50, and he's been their best player. It's unprecedented, and considering all the fawning over him in 2005 and 2006 -- when he wasn't playing any better than he is now -- it's getting shockingly little attention.

 

[Suns_fan69]

I have to disagree with that. While Nash/Stoudemire pick and roll is outstanding, it is NOT as good as Stockton/Malone pick and roll was.

I think where Nash is better on the pick and roll was finding the 3rd and 4th options off of it. I also think he was a lot more punishing if the defender went underneath.

Still, I think both Chap and Stefan are right in that Stockton/Malone was probably a little bit better (they also had a lot more repetition over the years) and that it's so hard to compare the 2 eras.

 

[mojorizen7]

Awesome

Not awesome

Equally awesome


John Stockton= 5 time All Defensive 2nd team
Karl Malone= 3 time All Defensive 1st team
1 time All Defensive 2nd team

 

[nashman]

I think many severely underestimate Nash, he is amazing, his shooting, passing and assist game are one of the best all time at PG. This team will miss him when he decides to hang em' up, and I truly believe he is the key to this teams success since he returned to Phoenix. For all the bashers you will see how badly we miss him at that time and it probably won't be pretty!

 

[mojorizen7]

Why is it that when a few SUNS fans approach a subject with objectivity that they become "bashers?"
Is it just the fanboy mentality?

 

[nashman]

You don't have to agree mojo but don't act like their are not people on here that bash Nash. They twist things and find ways to blame the lack of Suns success on Nash, when in fact he is the main reason they have been successful since he came back to Phoenix. I never said everyone was a Nash basher, I simply stated that their are some on here, if you can't see that...not sure what to tell you.

 

[cly2tw]

Why is it that when a few SUNS fans approach a subject with objectivity that they become "bashers?"
Is it just the fanboy mentality?

For this guy, the coaching staff are the biggest bashers, now they have recognize that "less Nash ball control on offense is better for the team as a whole", just as I and some others have pointed out for quite a while by now.

 

[BC867]

Stockton fed Power Forward Malone who played alongside a legitimate Center.

Nash fed Power Forward Amar'e who, for most of his time until recently, had to be the de facto Center.

And neither team, along with the Mavs, has ever risen above 50-and-fade. That's a fact.

Bad business in metropolitan areas such as Phoenix and Dallas-Ft. Worth.

Good enough in Salt Lake City.

 

[SteveJoke]

Whenever Amare Aimed For A Tittle, He Should Never Resign With Suns.
Saver Is Too Cheap And Overlook Amare.

 

[nashman]

What are you 5? Can you even form a sentence that makes sense?

 

[mojorizen7]

Aim for the tittle?
I'm getting aroused.

 

[Ronin]

 

[krazyasiankid]

dont diss him. he might not speak perfect english okay? but yeah, get your facts right yeh?

 

[SteveJoke]

what will you guys say now?

 

[cly2tw]

what will you guys say now?

I have been right throughout all: Amare/Nash can be a better version of Malone/Stockton if they are used properly.

Shame on those who doubted my judgment, er their skills!

 

[SunsStatFan]

so stupid to let amare go.

 

[leclerc]

Nash rrrrrules.

 

[AzStevenCal]

so stupid to let amare go.

I'm an Amare fan, always have been, but I don't think it was "stupid" to let him go. I think it was stupid to let him go and then try and replace him with Hedo and Warrick. If you're not going to rebuild why not keep arguably the best PF in the game paired with arguably the best playmaker in the game.

Personally, solely because of his long-term health risks, I would have let him go and ushered in the beginning of the next era. It would have been a very depressing few years but we could have had a little hope for the future. Now, we have the depression without the future hope. And it will get even worse once we lose Nash and we'll still be no closer to a turnaround.

Steve

 

[elindholm]

Now, we have the depression without the future hope. And it will get even worse once we lose Nash and we'll still be no closer to a turnaround.

I really wish I could understand why you, typically a rational person, are clinging to this comic pessimism. Rebuilding processes are slow, unless one lucks out in the FA market. The last time a rookie sparked an instant turnaround was back in the Bird/Johnson era. It takes time. If the Suns had started a full, from-scratch rebuild this summer, it would still be several years down the road before they were relevant again. Having Turkoglu around through 2014 (if the Suns pick up his option) won't impair the rebuilding process at all. Four years is but a blink of an eye when you're trying to build up an NBA franchise from the bottom.

A single bad contract or two hurts a contending teams much more than a rebuilding one. The next Suns team to go deep in the playoffs will look nothing like this one. There probably won't be a single roster player carried over, with Frye probably the best chance.

Edit: The Thunder are a great case in point. Do you know who their highest-paid player is? Nick Collison. He's making more than $13 million this season, in the last year of a terrible extension he signed years ago. In the meantime, the Thunder have drafted Green, Durant, and Westbrook. Now they are starting to look relevant again. How much has Collison hurt their rebuilding effort? Zilch.

 

[Manu4five]

I really wish I could understand why you, typically a rational person, are clinging to this comic pessimism. Rebuilding processes are slow, unless one lucks out in the FA market. The last time a rookie sparked an instant turnaround was back in the Bird/Johnson era. It takes time.

Tim Duncan says hello.

On this season's Spurs team Duncan, Manu, Parker, Hill, Blair, Anderson, and Splitter are all draft picks. I know this is an exception. Just saying there is more than one way to build a championship caliber team. Having a good FO helps but it's not all about free agents.

 

[AzStevenCal]

I really wish I could understand why you, typically a rational person, are clinging to this comic pessimism. Rebuilding processes are slow, unless one lucks out in the FA market. The last time a rookie sparked an instant turnaround was back in the Bird/Johnson era. It takes time. If the Suns had started a full, from-scratch rebuild this summer, it would still be several years down the road before they were relevant again. Having Turkoglu around through 2014 (if the Suns pick up his option) won't impair the rebuilding process at all. Four years is but a blink of an eye when you're trying to build up an NBA franchise from the bottom.

Rebuilding processes ARE slow but I don't think they go any faster by delaying the inevitable. We're going to do it piecemeal and in 3 or 4 years we'll reach the point where we'll have no choice but to do so. We'll have sucked for 3 of the next 4 years, reveling in the one year lockout recess from sucking, and then we'll finally start the rebuilding process. If it takes us 6 years to become relevant from that point, that will be 10 years in people terms.

A single bad contract or two hurts a contending teams much more than a rebuilding one. The next Suns team to go deep in the playoffs will look nothing like this one. There probably won't be a single roster player carried over, with Frye probably the best chance.

I think that's a good point about bad contracts but I'd still rather have acquired pieces that could have helped the future either on the court or in the trade market. Hedo is nothing but a drain on our meager resources. I wouldn't rule Dragic and Lopez out of being part of our future core despite the way each has played this season. I think injuries are involved in both cases.

I'm not suggesting the rebuild process will be easy. I keep looking at the lockout year and I can't help but think that however long it takes to rebuild, it would be less painful if one of those years was lost to the lockout. As it stands now, we'll struggle through a mediocre year, then we'll survive the wasted year of a lockout, and sometime following those two years we'll begin the long process that could have begun 2 or more years earlier.

Steve