How did John Stockton get so many assists?5

[Ancalagon]

Feels like the “home cooking from scorekeepers” theory has been sufficiently debunked. He is well within the standard margin for all PGs of his era and other eras in terms of home-road splits. It’s a pernicious myth that originated with a former player (Mark Jackson?). Not sure I remember exactly.

Then, as it relates to the videos above of Steve Nash and John Stockton, I personally didn’t see a significant difference in assist quality between the two videos. Certainly the play style and era was different.

Well considering what was specifically counted...

Looking at Stockton's first 10 assists, only 3 lead to an open shot. And only 2 have stockton taking more than 1 defender out of the play. 3 of these involve the player Stockton passes to dealing with multiple defenders to score, and all of these reads seem pretty simple by the standards of a modern helio.

...

Of Nash's first 10 assists, 9 have him take multiple defenders out of the play, 5 lead to a wide-open shot.

This leaves us with a few possibilities

A. The counting was not accurate

B. Less defenders in a play does not make it easier to score AND open looks are easier

C. There is something Stockton is doing which Nash isn't that makes up the gap in terms of defenders taken out and the quality of the looks generated

I can't think of an option D but maybe I'm missing something. Since evidently you thought the "assists" were comparable, I wonder which one it is.

For the record, I think it’s Option A. I think the way “open shot” and “taking defenders out of the play” is being applied is slanted.

I also think we’re underrating factors like hitting people in rhythm/stride in the right position to shoot or make a quick move with a crisp and accurate pass that hits at the right time.

Anyone who has played the game knows the difference between catching a pass that’s whipped to your off shooting hand when you aren’t ready to score as opposed to the ball that seemingly just lands in your pocket in scoring position.

I’m not saying Nash is the former and Stockton is the latter. They are both incredibly gifted passers. I’m just saying that Stockton dropping it right in the pocket in the rhythm of the offense or the fast break shouldn’t be underrated.

[Warspite]

A serious factor and one that impresses me the most is that he played 82 games almost every year.

John Stockton was a man among men. Dirtiest player but took as good as he gave out.

[OhayoKD]

Well considering what was specifically counted...


This leaves us with a few possibilities

A. The counting was not accurate

B. Less defenders in a play does not make it easier to score AND open looks are easier

C. There is something Stockton is doing which Nash isn't that makes up the gap in terms of defenders taken out and the quality of the looks generated

I can't think of an option D but maybe I'm missing something. Since evidently you thought the "assists" were comparable, I wonder which one it is.

For the record, I think it’s Option A. I think the way “open shot” and “taking defenders out of the play” is being applied is slanted.

So you're saying I'm calling plays for Nash differently than i am for Stockton? Care to give an example?

I also think we’re underrating factors like hitting people in rhythm/stride in the right position to shoot or make a quick move with a crisp and accurate pass that hits at the right time.

Are we? Or are we just acknowledging that those plays

A. generate less value than plays where multiple defenders are taken out(assuming similar accuracy)
B. that "hitting people in rythym in stride" is something the players stockton is being compared to all do very well

Anyone who has played the game knows the difference between catching a pass that’s whipped to your off shooting hand when you aren’t ready to score as opposed to the ball that seemingly just lands in your pocket in scoring position.

Sure.

I’m not saying Nash is the former and Stockton is the latter. They are both incredibly gifted passers. I’m just saying that Stockton dropping it right in the pocket in the rhythm of the offense or the fast break shouldn’t be underrated.

[/quote]
Sure, it doesn't really matter for the matter of this comparison if Nash can do it just as well.

But Nash's scoring demands more scoring attention and is a much better ball-handler which translates to being able to leverage that "gifted passing" into creation much better. We can talk about how much value Stockton gains over a mark jackson or a rondo with quicker reads. But in the context of a comparison to the best playmakers ever, what does that prove?

[pancakes3]

i for one think it's more impressive that Stockton can make assists as a pedestrian scoring threat, to players who aren't "defender-out-of-frame" levels of wide open, and the recipient is still able to rise up and score without making any additional basketball moves.

whipping in those entry passes in traffic, and having the big men sneakily wide open is freaking demoralizing, and more difficult to scheme for. the defender was there - but was maybe half a step out of position? or hitting a cutter in stride that it takes 0 more dribbles to get to the basket?

it's what makes Jokic, TD, Webber, and Larry's assists so aesthetically pleasing, and Lebron's drive-and-kicks less so.

to borrow a simile used to describe Kyler Murray, Nash was running out there like a toddler who stole their parents' phone. Regularly doing full 360's on his drives to the basket, just to end up back on top of the key. it's impressive. it's just different than what Stockton did, but at the end of the day, an assist is an assist. call me a mouthbreathing box-score gazer if you want, i don't really care. i'm past my billy beane cosplay phase.

[penbeast0]

I don't really agree that all assists are equal but I will say that with that many assists, some are going to be great and some pedestrian for both players. Nash drew more defensive attention, Stockton was a bit more accurate (as it is harder to be accurate when you are driving through a crowded lane and spinning out the other side so no surprise). I will say that watching them, I didn't get the feeling that Stockton's assists were just system assists or stat padding but were genuinely putting pressure on the defense, particularly the way he ran the PnR.

I also don't want to take anything away from Nash, Magic, Oscar, or Paul who I consider (with Stockton) the 5 greatest passers in NBA history. I think they were a level above next tier guys like Harden, Westbrook, Kidd, Jackson, or Cousy despite those players also having tremendously high assist totals.

[ShotCreator]

He was obviously very skilled with both hands and had really good anticipation, but one unique thing about his playmaking style was that he was really quick and could dart in at different angles to create a pass. He was above average on quickness until the day he retired. He never really lost his first step.

I don't know that I'd associate quickness with Stockton. Leastwise not in terms of footspeed. I think he had phenomenal decision-making and reaction time, though, and that because he was able to use either hand and operate from a wide variety of different angles, he had the ability to initiate a pace from basically wherever. Dude was a monster at pocket passes and could clearly put the ball where and when he wanted to with precision.

I’ll just say this, Chris Paul at 35, when he was still an all-star was clearly not as quick as Stockton at 35. That’s the scale I’m gauging it from.

Stockton didn’t have a down defensive year up to age 40. Where again, Chris Paul stop being good on defense consistently by 34. His footspeed was shot.


I think it’s easy to overlook highly skilled guys athleticism. Reggie Miller was quick into old age as well, otherwise these guys are simply not competing against young athletes on a regular basis.

[penbeast0]

Stockton also had more of a stop/start, change of speed type of quickness like a Ricky Rubio rather than an end to end blow by type of speed like a (healthy) John Wall.

[tsherkin]

I’ll just say this, Chris Paul at 35, when he was still an all-star was clearly not as quick as Stockton at 35. That’s the scale I’m gauging it from.

Yeah, but Paul has also had more injury problems, so I don't know that comparing those two makes any kind of meaningful examination, you know? Paul has more seasons < 70 GP than he does 70+.

I think it’s easy to overlook highly skilled guys athleticism. Reggie Miller was quick into old age as well, otherwise these guys are simply not competing against young athletes on a regular basis.

Mmm. Reggie had a motor, length and was extremely good at using screens. I never really saw him as particularly quick in his 30s to begin with, let alone after 2000. Dude was a gangly 6'7, but he was SMART and he had a quick release. He certainly didn't move like he was 60, and not carrying around a lot of weight also helped with that, but he certainly couldn't move laterally like a lot of his peers and his first step had never been particularly special to begin with. What he DID do well was use momentum. He cut intelligently, he knew how to use bodies around him and he had fantastic timing.

[ShotCreator]

I’ll just say this, Chris Paul at 35, when he was still an all-star was clearly not as quick as Stockton at 35. That’s the scale I’m gauging it from.

Yeah, but Paul has also had more injury problems, so I don't know that comparing those two makes any kind of meaningful examination, you know? Paul has more seasons < 70 GP than he does 70+.

I think it’s easy to overlook highly skilled guys athleticism. Reggie Miller was quick into old age as well, otherwise these guys are simply not competing against young athletes on a regular basis.

Mmm. Reggie had a motor, length and was extremely good at using screens. I never really saw him as particularly quick in his 30s to begin with, let alone after 2000. Dude was a gangly 6'7, but he was SMART and he had a quick release. He certainly didn't move like he was 60, and not carrying around a lot of weight also helped with that, but he certainly couldn't move laterally like a lot of his peers and his first step had never been particularly special to begin with. What he DID do well was use momentum. He cut intelligently, he knew how to use bodies around him and he had fantastic timing.

Point is, Stockton could’ve been much slower and still been effective. This is not a slow guy here. Stockton is gonna have the quickest or second quickest feet on the court 90% of the time he’s on the floor.

Stockton could turn the corner on anybody and get into the middle of the lane and create high level disruption. If you watch the 97 finals, note how much Pippen, Harper and Jordan would sag off him.

Kerr was the only one with the footspeed to crowd him and guard him close.

And as far as Reggie: https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=8&v=pVq7P4x02Hs&embeds_referring_euri=https%3A%2F%2Fthinkingbasketball.net%2F&source_ve_path=MjM4NTE&feature=emb_title

That’s at age 35. That is not a regular first step for anybody at any position. Again, it’s easy to overlook. But creating separation on or off ball is highly athleticism based.

[Joao Saraiva]

Because he saw everything that was happening in every pick even away from the ball and he threw the ball even it seemed difficult to the middle of the pack and fed the guys where they'd like to shoot.

Because in PnR situations he could put the ball trough difficult angles and very fast. And guys expected it: it was Stockton.

Because if you ran the correct lanes in break away situations he would definitely find you.

Stockton was a great passer and I don't know what people are trying to imply in so many threads...
oh it's Malone, it's Jerry Sloan... blah blah.

Stockton had to assist a bunch of meh scorers for a good portion of his career and he did it very well. He was special in that regard.

[tsherkin]

Point is, Stockton could’ve been much slower and still been effective. This is not a slow guy here. Stockton is gonna have the quickest or second quickest feet on the court 90% of the time he’s on the floor.

"Much slower" is major exaggeration. Regardless, this isn't salient to my point. I specifically went out of my way to note that he wasn't UNathletic. But if you think he had elite quickness, we have nothing further to discuss, because that was obviously untrue, most especially in his late 30s.

And as far as Reggie: https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=8&v=pVq7P4x02Hs&embeds_referring_euri=https%3A%2F%2Fthinkingbasketball.net%2F&source_ve_path=MjM4NTE&feature=emb_title

That’s at age 35. That is not a regular first step for anybody at any position. Again, it’s easy to overlook. But creating separation on or off ball is highly athleticism based.

That... was not an impressive first step by any stretch of the imagination. That wasn't bad, but it was mostly the defender worrying about the shot and getting suckered in as a result, which is also something Stockton exploited.

[konr0167]

No, if every point guard is getting the great majority of their assists from basic passes including Magic, Nash, and Paul, then you shouldn't be allowed to ding Stockton for doing the same thing.

Sure.

Let's apply the same process with Nash. Luckily, his biggest critic offered us a game to use:

Of Nash's first 10 assists, 9 have him take multiple defenders out of the play, 5 lead to a wide-open shot. A major difference here is that Nash is taking out defenders pre-pass via dribbling/penetration but even if(for whatever reason), we only looked at the final pass, then Nash bypasses multiple defenders 6 times. None of the assists involve the recipient dealing with multiple defenders to score.

For comparison:

Looking at Stockton's first 10 assists, only 3 lead to an open shot. And only 2 have stockton taking more than 1 defender out of the play. 3 of these involve the player Stockton passes to dealing with multiple defenders to score, and all of these reads seem pretty simple by the standards of a modern helio.

Again, if you have questions about the sample, I invite someone to bring me any Stockton game(or highlights for a game) where they think Stockton took out multiple defenders on half of his assists. Links to both games have posted so you can vet yourself if you want and you're free to do tracking yourself if you only trust your own eyes.

It might also be worthwhile counting creations which didn't lead to scores but since that wasn't in the first clip for stockton i avoided doing it with Nash

TLDR though:

all-time great playmaker

Doubt

low key this was kinda what was happening with Jordan in the triangle i wonder if that explains mj's impact not looking that impressive over larger full-game or full-season samples