PDA

View Full Version : Would Amare Stoudemire Start for a 90s Playoff Team?



ChiSox219
05-23-2010, 11:38 PM
It wasn't until 97-98 that the NBA added the arc inside the paint that turns any charge into a blocking foul. I saw Amare called for two (any others I may have missed) charges but he should've been called for about five more.

He plays no defense and the 90s was an era when defense was particularly important to team success.

Speaking of defense, Amare would have been abused when he went to the basket if he was facing a 90s playoff team but we did not see that tonight as the Lakers didn't foul hard when Amare had deep position or an open lane.

Amare rarely passes the ball, of all PFs this season that qualified, only 20-year-old-rookie-from-Africa Serge Ibaka had a lower assist rate. Without the same rules that promote an open lane today, ball movement was key to success in the 90s, just ask Phil Jackson, Michael Jordan, John Paxson, and Steve Kerr.


Maybe I'm just a bitter fan that misses good basketball, maybe I'm sick of Amare getting mostly undeserved praised, or maybe I'm just insane and don't know what the hell I'm talking about.

/rant

mia305king
05-23-2010, 11:39 PM
Yes

heyman321
05-23-2010, 11:40 PM
No he wouldn't. He doesn't play defense.

sargon21
05-23-2010, 11:42 PM
yes he would obv start guy just dropped 42 in the playoffs idc wat the rules were he'd start

/thread

mia305king
05-23-2010, 11:42 PM
No he wouldn't. He doesn't play defense.

Did every single starter on a playoff team from 90 - 99 play excellent defense ?

jetsfan28
05-23-2010, 11:49 PM
LOL, definitely yes. Hell, the Knicks started Larry Johnson in the NBA finals (and Chris Dudley for 2 games).

_KB24_
05-23-2010, 11:49 PM
Yes, he would. He is still a athletic beast. But he would average around less than a rpg considering at times how weak he is on the glass :D

ChiSox219
05-23-2010, 11:52 PM
Did every single starter on a playoff team from 90 - 99 play excellent defense ?

Maybe not, but Amare's lack of defense isn't his only flaw.

ldc62
05-23-2010, 11:53 PM
Sure he would start... but the opposing PF is going to lick his chops. Hes going to get overpaid this summer...

iggypop123
05-23-2010, 11:58 PM
he would but his effectiveness would be cut in half. he cant rely on those touch fouls. he doesnt have a post game so he would be a jumpshoter

Bishnoff
05-24-2010, 12:07 AM
Any of you doubters remember a guy called Shawn Kemp? I think he played as a starter in a few Playoffs games in the 90's...

Duncan = Donkey
05-24-2010, 12:13 AM
LMAO at this thread.

Have you seen some of the PF's that started for playoff teams in the 90's.

To answer the question, Yes he would.

ChiSox219
05-24-2010, 12:16 AM
Any of you doubters remember a guy called Shawn Kemp? I think he played as a starter in a few Playoffs games in the 90's...

Kemp did help a team with a great PG to the NBA finals and during that year he craps on Amare statisically, beating him in scoring efficiency (TS%), rebounding (TRB%), passing (AST%), and he played better defense than Amare.

tredigs
05-24-2010, 12:20 AM
^Kemp was definitely better defensively than Amare in his prime, but he was one of the better PF's in the league.

To answer, yeah I can pick out plenty of playoff teams that he'd start on, but he would get eaten alive by a lot of the elite bigs in that era, as would every big in the league right now. There were about 10 bigs as good, arguably better, or much better than every single one we have now.

ChiSox219
05-24-2010, 12:21 AM
^kemp was definitely better defensively than amare in his prime, but he was one of the better pf's in the league.

To answer, yeah i can pick out plenty of teams that he'd start on, but he would get eaten alive by a lot of the elite bigs in that era, as would every big in the league right now. There were about 10 bigs as good, arguably better, or much better than every single one we have now.

Tim Duncan?

tredigs
05-24-2010, 12:27 AM
Tim Duncan?

He was better 97-2000 than he is now, so even though that's a weird one being that it's the same person, yeah him too. And Shaq and Garnett are in the same boat obviously.

PrettyBoyJ
05-24-2010, 12:27 AM
He still athletic, still powerful, and still cud hit that mid-range jump shot.. which pf in the 90's didnt really do... may not be a good rebounder but you cant deny that he has talent

Bishnoff
05-24-2010, 12:30 AM
Kemp did help a team with a great PG to the NBA finals and during that year he craps on Amare statisically, beating him in scoring efficiency (TS%), rebounding (TRB%), passing (AST%), and he played better defense than Amare.

My point is that they have similar styles to their games. We could sit here all day arguing who has the better statistics (Amar’e has a much better career TS% and more importantly, a much better career defensive rating), or who got further in the Playoffs but that is off-topic. A similar player to Amar’e was a dominant starting PF in the Playoffs during the 90’s. You cannot argue that.

ChiSox219
05-24-2010, 12:33 AM
He was better 97-2000 than he is now, so even though that's a weird one being that it's the same person, yeah him too. And Shaq and Garnett are in the same boat obviously.

I see what your saying.

Only thing I can add is I think there are at least a dozen bigs in the NBA right now (that never played pre-2000) that would fare better than Amare.

juggla53
05-24-2010, 12:33 AM
Any of you doubters remember a guy called Shawn Kemp? I think he played as a starter in a few Playoffs games in the 90's...

You mean the shawn kemp who averaged a double double six straight years in the 90's? Something that amare stoudemire has never done. Kemp was a better rebounder and shot blocker then stat so im not sure why you used him as an example. Although i disagree with anyone who says he would of started for any playoff teams, hes a force offensivley but just isnt good at rebounding or D. there are plenty of teams in the 90's who would have taken his 23-25 ppg and dealt with his deffensive issue's any day of the week

tredigs
05-24-2010, 12:35 AM
My point is that they have similar styles to their games. We could sit here all day arguing who has the better statistics (Amar’e has a much better career TS% and more importantly, a much better career defensive rating), or who got further in the Playoffs but that is off-topic. A similar player to Amar’e was a dominant starting PF in the Playoffs during the 90’s. You cannot argue that.

No he doesn't? Can be a misleading stat sometimes, but Kemp had a lower career D Rating, and quite a bit lower in his prime years. And that's including Kemp's down years later in his career -- and factoring in that he went up against MUCH better bigs on a nightly basis.

Overall, prime Kemp was a better player than Amare is.

ChiSox219
05-24-2010, 12:38 AM
My point is that they have similar styles to their games. We could sit here all day arguing who has the better statistics (Amar’e has a much better career TS% and more importantly, a much better career defensive rating), or who got further in the Playoffs but that is off-topic. A similar player to Amar’e was a dominant starting PF in the Playoffs during the 90’s. You cannot argue that.

Amare should have a better TS%, it's easier now to score in the paint than anytime in the last 20 years.

Defensive rating is a team stat, not a good idea to use at the individual level unless it is adjusted for teammates and opponents.

Amare is a dominant scorer, so was Marbury.

Bishnoff
05-24-2010, 12:40 AM
You mean the shawn kemp who averaged a double double six straight years in the 90's? Something that amare stoudemire has never done. Kemp was a better rebounder and shot blocker then stat so im not sure why you used him as an example. Although i disagree with anyone who says he would of started for any playoff teams, hes a force offensivley but just isnt good at rebounding or D. there are plenty of teams in the 90's who would have taken his 23-25 ppg and dealt with his deffensive issue's any day of the week

Amar'e has averaged virtually over 20 and 9 in 5 of his 8 seasons. The other 3 seasons include his rookie season, and the 2 where he was injured.

tredigs
05-24-2010, 12:41 AM
I see what your saying.

Only thing I can add is I think there are at least a dozen bigs in the NBA right now (that never played pre-2000) that would fare better than Amare.

Dozen is pushing it, but looking at your username, if you're including Joakim Noah in that group, then I'm definitely inclined to agree with you. I think he'll be a 13/13 2+ blks a game player next season who plays great defense. Much more valuable to most playoff teams (scoring is much easier to come by than solid post defense, great rebounding and serious competitive fire) than what Amare offers.

Bishnoff
05-24-2010, 12:42 AM
Deleted

Bishnoff
05-24-2010, 12:45 AM
Deleted

tredigs
05-24-2010, 12:54 AM
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/k/kempsh01.html

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/s/stoudam01.html

Check your facts before speaking ****.

Here's a homework assignment for you:

Click those links you posted and give me Amare Stoudemires career D-Rating, along with his top defensive rating for one season. Then do the same for Kemp. Your answers are due by 10:00 pacific standard time. Late entries will not be accepted.

Here's a fun fact for you that I just realized you probably don't understand. A lower defensive rating is better than a higher one.

Bishnoff
05-24-2010, 12:59 AM
Here's a homework assignment for you:

Click those links you posted and give me Amare Stoudemires career D-Rating, along with his top defensive rating for one season. Then do the same for Kemp. Your answers are due by 10:00 pacific standard time. Late entries will not be accepted.

Here's a fun fact for you that I just realized you probably don't understand. A lower defensive rating is better than a higher one.

I fail :(

My apologies.

tredigs
05-24-2010, 01:02 AM
I fail :(

My apologies.

All good, we all do. I wouldn't have been a dick had you not called me out ; ]

ChiSox219
05-24-2010, 01:04 AM
Dozen is pushing it, but looking at your username, if you're including Joakim Noah in that group, then I'm definitely inclined to agree with you. I think he'll be a 13/13 2+ blks a game player next season who plays great defense. Much more valuable to most playoff teams (scoring is much easier to come by than solid post defense, great rebounding and serious competitive fire) than what Amare offers.

I don't know that I'd include Noah, nor do I consider Joakim a good defensive player, let alone great.

But that said, a dozen was being generous, I have Amare as my 10th best PF and I'll tell you this, Yao, Dwight, and Bogut would all fare better so that's at least 12 in my book.

Bishnoff
05-24-2010, 01:07 AM
All good, we all do. I wouldn't have been a dick had you not called me out ; ]

Yeah, I was the dick. You were right to call me out.

jackdawson
05-24-2010, 01:12 AM
How about a HECK YEAH!!??? I mean come on! What are you talking about? Amare is one of the best PFs in the league and would EASILY start on a playoff team in 90's. Now some people started to little overrate 90's basketball.

tredigs
05-24-2010, 01:16 AM
I don't know that I'd include Noah, nor do I consider Joakim a good defensive player, let alone great.

But that said, a dozen was being generous, I have Amare as my 10th best PF and I'll tell you this, Yao, Dwight, and Bogut would all fare better so that's at least 12 in my book.

I might be a little unusually high on Noah, but I think he's primed for a big time season next year. He was on his way this year until he got debilitated by the planter fasc. I think he's becoming very good defensively, and made some big strides offensively. I'd be pretty excited if I were a Chi fan.

ChiSox219
05-24-2010, 01:22 AM
I might be a little unusually high on Noah, but I think he's primed for a big time season next year. He was on his way this year until he got debilitated by the planter fasc. I think he's becoming very good defensively, and made some big strides offensively. I'd be pretty excited if I were a Chi fan.

Having the benefit of watching all his games this season...

Positives:
-Better offensive player than I ever expected. Already has a couple of good post moves and will finish strong when he feels like it.
-Outstanding passer from his position
-Among the best rebounders in the league by %

Negatives:
-Slow to rotate/help defensive
-Less effective man defender without Tyrus protecting his weakside
-Very high turnover rate
-Loses concentration too often
-Abused by bigger/similar size players


When we drafted Noah I expected him to be a hustle defensive big, similar to what Varejao is, and while the two are similar, Varejao is a great defender while Noah isn't, though I'd take JoNo's offense over Varejao's.

ChiSox219
05-24-2010, 01:25 AM
How about a HECK YEAH!!??? I mean come on! What are you talking about? Amare is one of the best PFs in the league and would EASILY start on a playoff team in 90's. Now some people started to little overrate 90's basketball.

Lol

and

How much 90s basketball did you watch?

*Silver&Black*
05-24-2010, 01:31 AM
Why the hate for Amare after he dropped 42 on the so called team of the NBA? How come this thread wasn't made a couple days ago? Seems like hate to me. If I was in the NBA making millions in a scorers league, I wouldn't care about rebounds either. I would look to drop 42 on the Lakers, but that's just me.

ChiSox219
05-24-2010, 01:32 AM
Why the hate for Amare after he dropped 42 on the so called team of the NBA? How come this thread wasn't made a couple days ago? Seems like hate to me.

Shouldn't it be the opposite?

Easy to kick a guy when he's down, not so much when he's posted a nice line...

In fact, there are already multiple threads knocking Amare's performance the first two games.

*Silver&Black*
05-24-2010, 01:37 AM
Well if nobody wants the guy, including the Suns, find a way to get him on the Hawks, and I will be glad to have him.

abe_froman
05-24-2010, 01:45 AM
yes,run-tmc.he def could

heathonater
05-24-2010, 02:06 AM
yea he would. i think people are beginning to overrate the previous eras basketball too much. yea, he would have had guys like zo guarding him, but he still would be about the same player he is today.

J-Relo
05-24-2010, 04:26 AM
It wasn't until 97-98 that the NBA added the arc inside the paint that turns any charge into a blocking foul. I saw Amare called for two (any others I may have missed) charges but he should've been called for about five more.

He plays no defense and the 90s was an era when defense was particularly important to team success.

Speaking of defense, Amare would have been abused when he went to the basket if he was facing a 90s playoff team but we did not see that tonight as the Lakers didn't foul hard when Amare had deep position or an open lane.

Amare rarely passes the ball, of all PFs this season that qualified, only 20-year-old-rookie-from-Africa Serge Ibaka had a lower assist rate. Without the same rules that promote an open lane today, ball movement was key to success in the 90s, just ask Phil Jackson, Michael Jordan, John Paxson, and Steve Kerr.


Maybe I'm just a bitter fan that misses good basketball, maybe I'm sick of Amare getting mostly undeserved praised, or maybe I'm just insane and don't know what the hell I'm talking about.
/rant

yep, you are...

it's actually hard to compare different situations, because you just can't put any player to old days and say he would play the same as now... anyone would adjust...

gcoll
05-24-2010, 06:02 AM
He would have ****ing dominated the 50s!!!

Who the **** cares how he would fit into a different decade? "He wouldn't have been able to play as well in the 90s!!!" What's your point?

I'll cede you all of your points. My question is, so what?

JasonJohnHorn
05-24-2010, 06:43 AM
There have been power forwards who were liabilities on defence, either because of their size (Barkley) or their speed (Bird), but still brought more than enough to the table to warrant a starting job.

Considering that Amare can play both power forward and center, I'd say there were even championship teams that would have started him. The Rodman era Bulls never had a decent center, and the Bulls first three titles were with Bill Cartwright, so I think he could have started in the middle for any of those teams. Likewise, I'm sure the Jazz would have loved to have him at center, and the Suns could have used him, as could have the Supersonics, if he were playing center. The Rockets could have used him at power forward for the 95 run since they had traded off Thorpe. Barkley's 76ers could have used him (they were starting Mike Gminiski who was not at his best at that time).

So yeah, I think most teams in that era would have been happy to have a player like Amare starting for them.

ChiSox219
05-24-2010, 07:30 AM
yes,run-tmc.he def could

I could go for that, not like Nelson really cares if his guys play defense or pass the rock.


There have been power forwards who were liabilities on defence, either because of their size (Barkley) or their speed (Bird), but still brought more than enough to the table to warrant a starting job.

Considering that Amare can play both power forward and center, I'd say there were even championship teams that would have started him. The Rodman era Bulls never had a decent center, and the Bulls first three titles were with Bill Cartwright, so I think he could have started in the middle for any of those teams. Likewise, I'm sure the Jazz would have loved to have him at center, and the Suns could have used him, as could have the Supersonics, if he were playing center. The Rockets could have used him at power forward for the 95 run since they had traded off Thorpe. Barkley's 76ers could have used him (they were starting Mike Gminiski who was not at his best at that time).

So yeah, I think most teams in that era would have been happy to have a player like Amare starting for them.

No chance Amare could start at Center without getting destroyed nightly. We're talking Hakeem, David Robinson, Shaq, Ewing, Zo, Mutombo, Sabonis, Divac, Smits, Theo Ratliff and then the crafty vets like Laimbeer, Cartwright, and Parish.

Amare's game is that he can score. He does so in a matter than simply would not have been nearly as effective before Stern really opened up the lane with things like defensive 3 seconds, the block/charge arc, even looser traveling regs. Then consider the opposition and it makes you wonder just how much he would be exposed.

As for Barkley, he was still a better defender than Amare is and Chuck was an outstanding rebounder not to mention a better scorer and passer.

Honestly, I can't see how Jerry Sloan would give Amare starter's minutes if he refused to pass and play defense.

I'll take Horry over Amare for that Rockets squad, better defender, better range, more willing to share the ball with the two stars.

gcoll
05-24-2010, 08:17 AM
I'll try again. Let's cede all of your points. Let's say that in the 90's, he simply wouldn't have been as effective. Great.

So what? What does that matter? In today's game, his offensive game is great. He's one of the premiere offensive power forwards in the game of basketball today.

Your point is "He wouldn't have been in the 90's!" and my response is "So ****ing what?"

SunsFanIam
05-24-2010, 08:22 AM
yes
/thread

ChiSox219
05-24-2010, 08:27 AM
I'll try again. Let's cede all of your points. Let's say that in the 90's, he simply wouldn't have been as effective. Great.

So what? What does that matter? In today's game, his offensive game is great. He's one of the premiere offensive power forwards in the game of basketball today.

Your point is "He wouldn't have been in the 90's!" and my response is "So ****ing what?"

Keep trying, I will not take the bait.

gcoll
05-24-2010, 08:29 AM
Keep trying, I will not take the bait.

What bait? I am asking you what your point is.

I cede you all of your arguments. Tell me why it matters. Let's say the answer to "Would Amare start for a 90s playoff team?" is NO. So what?

There's no bait here. I just don't get why it matters if he could play in the 90's.

I'm sure he could have though. Tom Chambers was effective in the 90s, why not Stoudemire? Especially if you let Nash travel back in time with him to keep the pick and roll combo together. Unless you want him to run the pick and roll with KJ, which could work.

ChiSox219
05-24-2010, 08:48 AM
What bait? I am asking you what your point is.

I cede you all of your arguments. Tell me why it matters. Let's say the answer to "Would Amare start for a 90s playoff team?" is NO. So what?

There's no bait here. I just don't get why it matters if he could play in the 90's.

If you have a problem with the premise of this thread, don't read it.

gcoll
05-24-2010, 08:55 AM
If you have a problem with the premise of this thread, don't read it.

Alright. But why just pick on Stoudemire?

Would Gasol be able to start in the 90's for a playoff team? What about Jeff Green? Bosh? David West?

Basically. If you're going to knock Stoudemire for not being able to play in the 90's, I am going to ask you what power forwards in today's game would you take over Stoudemire in the 90's.

MacFitz92
05-24-2010, 08:58 AM
This is a very ridiculous question, and I will leave it at that.

king4day
05-24-2010, 09:44 AM
Is this seriously a thread?
Players can adjust. So yea. And I'm sure he could start for more than half of them, and probably a lot more.

And for someone to say, 'no because he doesn't play D'? So every single PF/C in the 90's was a defensive player of the year candidate?

ChiSox219
05-24-2010, 09:49 AM
Alright. But why just pick on Stoudemire?

Would Gasol be able to start in the 90's for a playoff team? What about Jeff Green? Bosh? David West?

Basically. If you're going to knock Stoudemire for not being able to play in the 90's, I am going to ask you what power forwards in today's game would you take over Stoudemire in the 90's.

Gasol: yes
Bosh: yes
West: Don't know
Green: Heck no

The thread is a commentary first and foremost about Amare and the observation that he is incredibly overrated by fans and the media (and I'm guessing by some GMs as well).

I think I get it, fans like to see flashy scorers and it's the first thing everyone looks at statistically. Amare is athletic and scores a lot, so of course he's going to look good because fans are judging him on a single criterion. Too many people fail to factor in the other attributes that are usually just as important, you know like the other objective in basketball, prevent your opponent from scoring. I mean, even in this thread, people talk about Amare as one of the best offensive PFs in the game but part of offense is ball movement and Amare gets a solid "F" in that category.

Using the 90s premise is more of an attention grabber than "Amare is overrated"

Amare has one strength and that is scoring. His overall impact on the game is often negative year to year because of all the flaws listed earlier.

http://basketballvalue.com/topplayers.php?year=2010%20playoffs&mode=summary&sortnumber=94&sortorder=ASC

I've avoided mentioning how much he is helped by Steve Nash. Their PnR is so lethal because Nash's 3 ball forces defenders over the top of screens allowing Amare to slip down, often times uncontested. There is not another player in the league that can AND distribute like Nash, he is quite simply ideal PnR point guard

Raoul Duke
05-24-2010, 09:49 AM
Yes, he would start. He would also be considered a complete *****.

ChiSox219
05-24-2010, 09:52 AM
And for someone to say, 'no because he doesn't play D'? So every single PF/C in the 90's was a defensive player of the year candidate?

No of course not and to even accuse anyone of thinking so is ridiculous. Amare is among the worst defenders in the league, I'd say it's between him and Bargnani.

The point is, whatever Amare brings to the table offensive is often negated by what he lacks defensively. Scoring 25 while allowing 30 is losing basketball.

Corey
05-24-2010, 10:03 AM
Gasol: yes
Bosh: yes
West: Don't know
Green: Heck no


You say yes to Gasol and Bosh, but no to Amare?

ChiSox219
05-24-2010, 10:05 AM
You say yes to Gasol and Bosh, but no to Amare?

Both are better in just about every facet of the game.

Corey
05-24-2010, 10:17 AM
Career basic stats:
-Bosh: 20 pts, 9.4 rebs

-Amare: 21.4 pts, 9.0 rebs

-Gasol: 18.3 pts, 11.3 rebs


Advanced stats:
-Bosh: dRTG of 107, oRTG of 113

-Amare: dRTG of 105, oRTG of 115

-Gasol: dRTG of 105, oRTG of 114

Playoff averages:
-Bosh: 20.5 pts, 9 rebs, 3 assists

-Amare: 24.3 pts, 9 rebs, 1 assist

-Gasol: 18.7 pts, 9.5 rebs, 3 assists

Furthermore, all win share based stats are awfully similar as well...but the stats don't matter, you saying that Amare sucks compared to them is all we need to know.


Both are better in just about every facet of the game.
...Right.

(In case you didn't know, dRTG and oRTG are defensive and offensive ratings based on points per possession when each player is on the court)

ChiSox219
05-24-2010, 10:42 AM
Career basic stats:
-Bosh: 20 pts, 9.4 rebs

-Amare: 21.4 pts, 9.0 rebs

-Gasol: 18.3 pts, 11.3 rebs


Advanced stats:
-Bosh: dRTG of 107, oRTG of 113

-Amare: dRTG of 105, oRTG of 115

-Gasol: dRTG of 105, oRTG of 114

Playoff averages:
-Bosh: 20.5 pts, 9 rebs, 3 assists

-Amare: 24.3 pts, 9 rebs, 1 assist

-Gasol: 18.7 pts, 9.5 rebs, 3 assists

Furthermore, all win share based stats are awfully similar as well...but the stats don't matter, you saying that Amare sucks compared to them is all we need to know.


...Right.

Regularized APM for the last 4 years equally weighted:
18. Chris Bosh (3.291)
23. Pau Gasol (2.992)
210. Amare Stoudemire (-0.467)

http://hoopnumbers.com/allAnalysisView?analysis=RAPM&discussion=False&leaders=True&year=2010multiYear

This shows the overall impact each player has on his team, it's important to consider role but with all three of the guys we're talking about they have played similar roles as #1/2 scorers. I used four years equally weighted because that's a solid scope of each players prime thus far.


Offensive Rating and Defensive Rating do not adjust for teammates and opponents, they are a team stat, not a basis for an individual comparison.

Amare has the advantage in scoring efficiency, I've already recognized he can score.

From this past season:

Reb%
Bosh: 17.7
Gasol: 17.1
Amare: 14.5

Ast%
Gasol: 15.0
Bosh: 11.5
Amare: 4.8 (only Serge Ibaka had a lower rate at the PF position)


Defensively Amare is one of the worst, Bosh is average even playing on a team where he consistently had to guard three guys because Calderon and Bargnani couldn't stop Betty White. Gasol is above average defensively since he bulked up.

If you are going to use career stats, consider that while Amare has played the majority of his career in a system that gets a lot of good looks for players and he's had Nash to get him the ball.

Gasol was playing for Memphis with Shane Battier as his #2, Bosh stuck in Toronto with a series of poor teammates.

ballpd05
05-24-2010, 10:55 AM
I think Gasol is better than Bosh and Amare. I mean until this game Gasol was working Amare and not even giving up much. And Gasol is just so smooth and one of the best shooting touches (from hooks, jumpers, layups, whatever) that I've seen in a while. He plays with Kobe though so that will always hold down his stats.

Amare will start in the 90's because he is too talented. I agree that sometimes he just lowers his shoulder and rams a player out the way for what would appear to be an offensive foul (same as D12) to get a shot off, and he plays no D. But there have been a number of players over they years who have played PF and not played great D. Usually it is offensive talent that gets you starts and money though. Defense has always been underrated so of course he will start, how well his teams do would be another thing.

David West shouldn't start today so hell no he wouldn't start in the 90s.

RipVW
05-24-2010, 11:12 AM
I think Scola of Houston is kind of a 90s players. That dude knows how to give fouls and he's not great but he can play through contact.

maddBat
05-24-2010, 11:31 AM
He still athletic, still powerful, and still cud hit that mid-range jump shot.. which pf in the 90's didnt really do... may not be a good rebounder but you cant deny that he has talent

pretty much sums it up. and hes quick on his feet. BUT i dont think hed be as dominant without nash. they can pik n roll all day.

BOSTON617
05-24-2010, 11:32 AM
i rather amare then antonie walker just saying

king4day
05-24-2010, 11:45 AM
No of course not and to even accuse anyone of thinking so is ridiculous. Amare is among the worst defenders in the league, I'd say it's between him and Bargnani.

The point is, whatever Amare brings to the table offensive is often negated by what he lacks defensively. Scoring 25 while allowing 30 is losing basketball.

What sucks is, everyone is judging him by this Lakers series. He's been much improved on D almost the entire year.
None the less, if his lack of D is going to help get a team to the conference finals, I'll take it.

king4day
05-24-2010, 11:50 AM
i rather amare then antonie walker just saying

This should be a thread closer. Walker was good in his early days, but not a game changer.

BOSTON617
05-24-2010, 11:59 AM
This should be a thread closer. Walker was good in his early days, but not a game changer.

yea esp when walker took us to the eastern confrence finals..... amare would of brought us to the championship and we could of won :cry:

STAT1
05-24-2010, 01:01 PM
Maybe I'm just a bitter fan that misses good basketball, maybe I'm sick of Amare getting mostly undeserved praised, or maybe I'm just insane and don't know what the hell I'm talking about.

/rant

Enough with the Amare bashing. Ok we get it, hes not the best on D. Hes a lot better this year though. Undeserved praise? Really? 42 points in a playoff game against a "bigger team" doesnt deserve praise? Why is there no "Would Pau Gasol start on a team in the 90's" thread?

JNA17
05-24-2010, 01:13 PM
yes but he would be dead when he's on defense and his effectiveness would decrease dramatically

ChiSox219
05-24-2010, 01:29 PM
What sucks is, everyone is judging him by this Lakers series. He's been much improved on D almost the entire year.
None the less, if his lack of D is going to help get a team to the conference finals, I'll take it.

Not even, I've been posting about Amare's defense well before the season started when people were trying to say he was better than Bosh. His footwork is just awful, he's always late rotating, and for all his athleticism he's slow to react on the defense end.


i rather amare then antonie walker just saying

In my original post I pointed out that the arc inside the paint was instituted during the 97-98 season. Walker only played his rookie season before the arc was added.


Enough with the Amare bashing. Ok we get it, hes not the best on D. Hes a lot better this year though. Undeserved praise? Really? 42 points in a playoff game against a "bigger team" doesnt deserve praise? Why is there no "Would Pau Gasol start on a team in the 90's" thread?

Gasol plays some defense and he's a great passer from the position, in addition to being able to score in more ways than Amare. He also carried a Grizzlies team to three straight playoff births, a franchise that without Gasol, has never finished above .500

KaganRS
05-24-2010, 01:42 PM
this thread sounds like a bitter old man bragging about the glory of the past.

gcoll
05-25-2010, 01:44 AM
The thread is a commentary first and foremost about Amare and the observation that he is incredibly overrated by fans and the media (and I'm guessing by some GMs as well).
"He wouldn't have done well in the 90's" doesn't help make that point though.

It's the same as making a thread about "Would Nash have been as effective prior to the introduction of the 3 point line?" It just doesn't matter.

It's an interesting topic for discussion. Does Amare's weakness defensively and on the glass negate his prowess offensively. But when you make it after he drops 42 in a big win, you come off as bitter.

ChiSox219
05-25-2010, 01:46 AM
"He wouldn't have done well in the 90's" doesn't help make that point though.

It's the same as making a thread about "Would Nash have been as effective prior to the introduction of the 3 point line?" It just doesn't matter.

It's a forum, there's constant speculation on here, none of it matters.

Again, drawing the comparison to the 90s era is a bigger draw then just pointing out all of Amare's current flaws and saying he's not one of the best PFs in the league.

gcoll
05-25-2010, 01:50 AM
It's a forum, there's constant speculation on here, none of it matters.
I meant, it doesn't matter in reference to your larger point.

Amare couldn't have played in the 90's therefore he is overrated/isn't good.

That doesn't follow.

ChiSox219
05-25-2010, 02:05 AM
I meant, it doesn't matter in reference to your larger point.

Amare couldn't have played in the 90's therefore he is overrated/isn't good.

That doesn't follow.

Do you understand what a "hook" is?

thekmp211
05-25-2010, 02:08 AM
good god yes. he might be a bit overrated but for gods sake the man is a beast on offense. someone mentioned kemp...great comparison.

have you heard of charles barkley? he was a 6'4'' pf who dominated during the 90's, and certainly not because of his defense.

sunnydayin'zona
05-25-2010, 02:11 AM
Not even, I've been posting about Amare's defense well before the season started when people were trying to say he was better than Bosh. His footwork is just awful, he's always late rotating, and for all his athleticism he's slow to react on the defense end.

if you've been posting about amare's defense since well before the season started, then you, like everybody else who does not watch amare other than what they've seen against the lakers, failed to recognize the significant improvement he has gained this season on the defensive end.



I meant, it doesn't matter in reference to your larger point.

Amare couldn't have played in the 90's therefore he is overrated/isn't good.

That doesn't follow.

and gcoll wins this thread:)

thekmp211
05-25-2010, 02:16 AM
Not even, I've been posting about Amare's defense well before the season started when people were trying to say he was better than Bosh. His footwork is just awful, he's always late rotating, and for all his athleticism he's slow to react on the defense end.



In my original post I pointed out that the arc inside the paint was instituted during the 97-98 season. Walker only played his rookie season before the arc was added.



Gasol plays some defense and he's a great passer from the position, in addition to being able to score in more ways than Amare. He also carried a Grizzlies team to three straight playoff births, a franchise that without Gasol, has never finished above .500


look, you seem to be a fairly knowledgeable basketball fan and that's great. but late rotations and poor defensive footwork do not mean he is "incredibly overrated".

pau, dirk, bosh, kg. those are names that i would take over amare stoudemire at the 4 and that's really it. considering kg and dirk are aging and pau is not that far behind, he seems to be the #2 pf in terms of talent and age.

the guy has blown out a knee and recovered from a serious eye injury and is still explosive and improving. what is your problem with him? you seem to be trying REALLY hard to prove Amare is overrated and i dont get why. i think his deficiencies as a player are well-documented.

Raph12
05-25-2010, 02:21 AM
Stupid question, he'd definitely start, would he be better than Barkley, Webber, Malone, etc... Hell no, would he be Top 10... Probably.

ChiSox219
05-25-2010, 02:36 AM
if you've been posting about amare's defense since well before the season started, then you, like everybody else who does not watch amare other than what they've seen against the lakers, failed to recognize the significant improvement he has gained this season on the defensive end.


Except he hasn't, the game tape and numbers back that. Please show me some evidence to say Amare wasn't anything other than horrible on defense this season.


look, you seem to be a fairly knowledgeable basketball fan and that's great. but late rotations and poor defensive footwork do not mean he is "incredibly overrated".

pau, dirk, bosh, kg. those are names that i would take over amare stoudemire at the 4 and that's really it. considering kg and dirk are aging and pau is not that far behind, he seems to be the #2 pf in terms of talent and age.

the guy has blown out a knee and recovered from a serious eye injury and is still explosive and improving. what is your problem with him? you seem to be trying REALLY hard to prove Amare is overrated and i dont get why. i think his deficiencies as a player are well-documented.

There's two threads in the comparsion section ranking PFs and a whole bunch of people put Amare over much better players like Duncan, Gasol, and others. I just want to raise awarness that Amare plays losing basketball, his dominant (at times) scoring is outweighed by the holes in the rest of his game.

I don't feel his deficiencies are properly documented or at least understood. Playing in PHX with Nash helps disguise some of the problems but that doesn't mean they disappear. I don't think people realized (at least until this series) just how bad Amare can be defensively, and when you are costing your team 30 points on defense and scoring 25 on offense, that's losing basketball.


good god yes. he might be a bit overrated but for gods sake the man is a beast on offense. someone mentioned kemp...great comparison.

have you heard of charles barkley? he was a 6'4'' pf who dominated during the 90's, and certainly not because of his defense.

Kemp and Barkley were better on both ends of the court. While Amare can score like those two, he's more of a black hole than either and anytime you can force him into a passer/decision maker, he becomes useless.

Neither of those guys had a PnR PG quite like Nash or a league with a wide open lane.

knickfan4life
05-25-2010, 02:52 AM
yes, close thread

DODGERS&LAKERS
05-25-2010, 03:06 AM
Amare should have a better TS%, it's easier now to score in the paint than anytime in the last 20 years.

Defensive rating is a team stat, not a good idea to use at the individual level unless it is adjusted for teammates and opponents.

Amare is a dominant scorer, so was Marbury.

No it has not been easier to score in the paint now than anytime in the past 20 years. Scoring has been tougher in the 2000's than it has over any other decade in the NBA.

Secondly, if your trying to make an argument for Kemp's defense over Amare's, you don’t want to use their teammates as a reason for their respective Defensive ratings. Kemp played with Payton, one of the best defensive point guards ever. Amare plays with Nash. One of the worst defensive point guards ever. Not to mention that Amare played under a coach that did not care about defense one bit. Amare's defensive rating of 105 for his career, is not far off from Kemps 100 defensive rating. Even though Kemp played on one of the best defensive teams in his era, and Amare has played on one of the worst defensive teams of his era.

Also, Amare's PER dwarfs Kemps. Amare has had a higher PER in 4 or the 7 full seasons he has played, over Kemps best statistical year in all 14 years of his career. And Amare is coming off an injury that has ruined other players careers. He still has not gotten back to where he was before the injury.

Amare is the better player. There is no doubt about it. Kemp like most players from the past, is rememberd with to much nostalgia. He was not a very good player. Just because people remember him because he could dunk, and made it to the finals, does not make him a great player.

jackdawson
05-25-2010, 03:08 AM
Is this a trick question?

Hawkeye15
05-25-2010, 01:33 PM
I see the point of this thread. The league is much sissier now, and players don't need to be as tough. That being said, Amare would have no issue being a starter back then, or at any time. He is so athletic and offensively skilled, all he would have had to do is adjust.
An argument can be made for the stars of today on how much better/worse they would have been. But any "star" from today, would have been a very good or great player back then too.