Who was the better 20 year old, Booker or Stoudemire?

[bwgood77]

I am guessing recency bias might play into people's thoughts, but I wonder who most thought was better. Amare was actually 20 as a rookie, easily winning rookie of the year, and also didn't have the benefit of having one year in the league under his belt. Of course this was pre Nash as well, so he didn't get any extra benefit playing in any sort of SSOL offense or having a great PG pass him the ball, though one could argue Booker doesn't either.

Booker has more points, assist and turnovers, while Amare had more rebounds and blocks. However, Booker did take 80% more shots, while scoring only 60% more points. Their TS% is pretty equal though.

Most of b-refs advanced metrics say Amare was the superior 20 year old. What do you think?

http://bkref.com/tiny/1w8tv

[Blackification]

I will go with Booker based on his polished offensive game at such a young age. Amare relied on his freak athleticism for pretty much all of his game at 20 years old. It's a hard comparison to make since they play such different roles, but I go with Booker for his leadership, clutchness, killer instinct, and strong fundamentals and skill.

[darealjuice]

That's a tough call. Kind of comparing apples to oranges because they contributed in different ways. As far as offense goes, I think Booker has a more refined game than Amare did his rookie year, but you saw flashes of dominance with Amare's athleticism and physicality. You can say the same thing about Book and his scoring though, the dude dropped 70/8/6 at the Garden as a 20 year old... Neither were very good defenders, Amare was probably the more impactful of the two on that end though. I'd think I'd say Booker is more skilled basketball player at 20, but Amare showed that he had the potential to be flat out dominant if not for injuries.

I'm more excited to see how Quese and Amare's 20 year old seasons compare. Their rookie seasons statlines aren't all that different when you adjust for playing time, although Amare was definitely the superior rebounder.

[Waylay13]

As far as skills go Booker clearly is a more skillful player than Amare; now that doesnt mean that Amare didnt have more impact on the court than Booker.

[itlnsunsfan]

As others have said, Booker is more refined. STAT was a physically dominant beast. At 20 years old, STAT was the more effective player, but in the long run, it's Booker.

[kennydorglas]

Young Amaré was raw as ****... I'd go with Booker easily.

[Zelaznyrules]

I went with Booker but it's a tough call. Amare was more physically mature but I think Booker has a more polished game. They both had big holes though so I guess it's what you value more.

[DirtyDez]

Booker is better at 20 but he won't be the caliber player Amare was at 22. I remember the look on the faces of KG and Duncan in their prime going against him. They wanted no part of pre-microfracture Amare Stoudemire. Nobody did.

[ATTL]

Amare turned 20 his rookie year, I'd take 20 year old booker over amares first year.

I maintain that if amare didnt have the knee issue he would have had at least 1 30/10 season and I think we win the title in 06.

[bwgood77]

Booker is better at 20 but he won't be the caliber player Amare was at 22. I remember the look on the faces of KG and Duncan in their prime going against him. They wanted no part of pre-microfracture Amare Stoudemire. Nobody did.

Yeah, if Booker has anywhere near the impact Amare did in 04-05 in 2 years, I'll certainly be happy.

[Frank Lee]

The Booker love is strong

But Stat was DOMINATING everyone with his explosive power. I dont remember his rook season that vividly, but it was nothing but excitement during his first years. There was no answer to his ferocity near the hoop. Does that make him better? I dont know, but he was unstoppable. literally, no one could stop him. In his first run of dominance, I remember NBA.com started keeping track of Dunks. It was Stat and Shac .... then the rest of the field was 40-50 dunks behind.

Booker isn't there yet. He shoots, he scores, but he still looks like a streaky chucker at times.

This is an apple and orange question though. No slight on Booker. Half his playing time, the team was down 20.

[lilfishi22]

Great question

We have the benefit of seeing how Amare's career panned out which I think does skew some opinions while we only have 1.5 seasons with Booker. That being said, as great as Booker has been for us, Amare was a legit 15/10 threat by Dec of his rookie year and by his 2nd season (at 21), he was one of the most feared offensive big men in the game not just because he put up 21ppg while getting to the line 8 times a game, he straight up embarrassed legends with his explosiveness and serious dunks. In my eyes, it wasn't just his numbers or the wins and losses that I remember but the dominating nature of his game.

Booker had his 70, he's got his tricky moves and silky smooth and ultra wet J but like Frank said, he's still streaky and outside of his scoring, the rest of his game is clearly lagging behind. Not to say Amare wasn't without his flaws. Booker was a lot more skilled and nuanced on the offensive end whereas Amare still heavily relying on his athleticism to score but we'd be comparing apples to oranges if we're comparing their offensive skillset because it's such a guard oriented game and guards in general develop faster than big men do. But if we're comparing their development as a 20 year old, I'd say it's pretty close. Both guys were exceptionally talented; more so than they should be at their age.

I'm going to give the nod to Amare on this one. Perhaps its the bias from nostalgia but very few players in the last 20 years have put more fear in the hearts of opposing players as Amare did from day 1.

[PackSuns]

Amare

[Frank Lee]

May be ask Marbury

Watch on YouTube

[NTB]

Booker's post ASB numbers (22 games)

24.6 points 4.2 rebounds 4.1 assists 7.1 FTA

[bwgood77]

Great question

We have the benefit of seeing how Amare's career panned out which I think does skew some opinions while we only have 1.5 seasons with Booker. That being said, as great as Booker has been for us, Amare was a legit 15/10 threat by Dec of his rookie year and by his 2nd season (at 21), he was one of the most feared offensive big men in the game not just because he put up 21ppg while getting to the line 8 times a game, he straight up embarrassed legends with his explosiveness and serious dunks. In my eyes, it wasn't just his numbers or the wins and losses that I remember but the dominating nature of his game.

Booker had his 70, he's got his tricky moves and silky smooth and ultra wet J but like Frank said, he's still streaky and outside of his scoring, the rest of his game is clearly lagging behind. Not to say Amare wasn't without his flaws. Booker was a lot more skilled and nuanced on the offensive end whereas Amare still heavily relying on his athleticism to score but we'd be comparing apples to oranges if we're comparing their offensive skillset because it's such a guard oriented game and guards in general develop faster than big men do. But if we're comparing their development as a 20 year old, I'd say it's pretty close. Both guys were exceptionally talented; more so than they should be at their age.

I'm going to give the nod to Amare on this one. Perhaps its the bias from nostalgia but very few players in the last 20 years have put more fear in the hearts of opposing players as Amare did from day 1.

I think it's Amare too. He won rookie of the year, beating out Yao and was unstoppable.

[ATTL]

Watch on YouTube

He didnt have a post game.
Couldn't shoot.
Couldn't go right with his face up game.
Couldn't stop after he started his drive.

His hands let him palm the ball and do some thing's I dont think chriss can.

He was still my favorite sun. Its a shame his knees failed him so early.

[bwgood77]

Watch on YouTube

He didnt have a post game.
Couldn't shoot.
Couldn't go right with his face up game.
Couldn't stop after he started his drive.

His hands let him palm the ball and do some thing's I dont think chriss can.

He was still my favorite sun. Its a shame his knees failed him so early.

So dominant though. 38 points as a rookie out of hs. 21 rebounds - a Suns rookie record. Just being out of hs without 1 year of college and 1 year of pro experience like Booker has makes it more impressive, though of course they were still both 20, but just no real good quality prior experience and to adapt that quickly to being dominant in the NBA against premier competition, helping get our lottery team to the playoffs and take the Spurs to 6 who ended up winning the championship (and all their other rounds) also in 6.

[Zelaznyrules]

Watch on YouTube

He didnt have a post game.
Couldn't shoot.
Couldn't go right with his face up game.
Couldn't stop after he started his drive.

His hands let him palm the ball and do some thing's I dont think chriss can.

He was still my favorite sun. Its a shame his knees failed him so early.

So dominant though. 38 points as a rookie out of hs. 21 rebounds - a Suns rookie record. Just being out of hs without 1 year of college and 1 year of pro experience like Booker has makes it more impressive, though of course they were still both 20, but just no real good quality prior experience and to adapt that quickly to being dominant in the NBA against premier competition, helping get our lottery team to the playoffs and take the Spurs to 6 who ended up winning the championship (and all their other rounds) also in 6.

Or, being more than a year older when he entered the league versus Booker's 800 minutes of college basketball? I think what they both did was impressive.

[bwgood77]

Watch on YouTube

He didnt have a post game.
Couldn't shoot.
Couldn't go right with his face up game.
Couldn't stop after he started his drive.

His hands let him palm the ball and do some thing's I dont think chriss can.

He was still my favorite sun. Its a shame his knees failed him so early.

So dominant though. 38 points as a rookie out of hs. 21 rebounds - a Suns rookie record. Just being out of hs without 1 year of college and 1 year of pro experience like Booker has makes it more impressive, though of course they were still both 20, but just no real good quality prior experience and to adapt that quickly to being dominant in the NBA against premier competition, helping get our lottery team to the playoffs and take the Spurs to 6 who ended up winning the championship (and all their other rounds) also in 6.

Or, being more than a year older when he entered the league versus Booker's 800 minutes of college basketball? I think what they both did was impressive.

Playing in a program like UK under Calipari with a lot of great players and going through premier college coaching and playing in a NCAA tournament atmosphere does a lot more than anything you learn by getting a year older while in hs. But he also got 1 year of coaching at the professional level along with 2,108 minutes before his 20 year old season. Those two years are a much better experience than whatever experince he got in the multiple high schools he attended. I'm betting Booker had a lot better coaching/training in high school as well and was in a solid program.