Peak only: Jermaine O'Neal v. Amare Stoudemire

[penbeast0]

Was thinking about this in the JO v. Brand thread. Do you go offense or defense because neither player was really a two way star?

Amare (05 or 08) got more career accolades because offensive stars generally get more than defensive ones but then again . . . 2006. O'Neal gets more accolades in 04 but better numbers in 03.

[tsherkin]

Fun one to think about.

Amare was a DISASTER on defense. JO wasn't a disaster on offense, he was just poorly suited to use as a volume scorer.

Amare was an excellent play finisher who benefited visibly from Steve Nash's presence, and tailed off when he went to the Knicks. He was still decent, but considerably less dominant, which has to factor into any examination of his raw value relative to another player. I imagine JO would have looked better in a faster-paced environment with a high-end playmaker feeding him shots all day as well. The Pacers after Rick Carlisle took over from Isiah Thomas were a very slow team until 07, which did JO no favors.

Between the two, I think it depends heavily on your roster. Amare was a rancid waste on defense, and a large problem for his team as a result. But if he was deployed correctly, which his athleticism and his J, he was a nightmare in isolation, in transition and out of the PnR. If you had the personnel to help the overall team D, he's very interesting. JO, on the other hand, was probably best-served in the high teens as a scorer, but was a very effective defender who could work well around other primary offensive players floating volume.

[AStark1991]

I'm going with O'Neal quite comfortably. When comparing their respective weaknesses on a peak-for-peak basis, I think JO's offense was considerably stronger than Amare's defense. Despite his low efficiency rates, O'Neal possessed good post moves, nice touch around the basket, and a semi respectable spot up jumper that he could make all the way out to 18-20 feet. Although the NBA has definitely become much more offensive oriented, the Thunder just proved that the old adage of "defense wins championships" is still very applicable when talking about the current league. Therefore, I would much rather have peak O'Neal as the centerpiece of my franchise. In good faith, I just cannot consider a post player who is a total turnstile on defense to be a #1 franchise player.

[tsherkin]

Despite his low efficiency rates, O'Neal possessed good post moves, nice touch around the basket,

Eh. He had one season north of 100 TS+ before he hit Miami... in a pretty low-efficiency era. Running to him for volume the way Indy did was definitely not an optimal strategy outside of 2003. But as you say, his O was definitely better than Amare's D.

Amare wasn't really a franchise player; he was an excellent playfinisher for Nash, which is why he was relevant. He had other skills beyond that, of course, all scoring-centric, but definitely his value was specifically dependent upon a PnR PG with spacing.

[trex_8063]

I again find myself agreeing with tsherkin (this is disorienting: didn't we always disagree in the past ).

Amare was really an outstanding scorer.....but that's all he was (and a bit of a floor spacer in a pnp setting).

Jermaine had definite deficiencies on offense, but stuff that could largely be curtailed by NOT making him the focal point of your offense (if at all possible).

Defensively, holy moley.......J.O. was an All-D team level defender, while Amare was probably one of the worst defensive bigs I've ever seen. Enes Kanter is the only other one who comes to mind for being equally bad on that end. It's why Amare's box-based metrics looked downright gaudy, while his impact signals were always rather pedestrian. His two best PI RAPM seasons coincide with the two seasons that look the best in box-based figures, too: '05 and '08. But they're still not at all eye-popping: +1.6 in '05 (barely top 40-ish, and actually behind non-peak O'Neal in the same year [JO was +1.8]), and only +1.2 in '08

tsherkin likely has a point that it depends somewhat on supporting cast: if you have good spacing, a strong pnr/pnp ball-handler, and some guys who can pick up/erase some of Amare's defensive lapses......I could see him being a more valuable fit in that particular setting.
I feel like J.O.'s value is more portable though (that is: would be the bigger impact player in a greater variety of settings).

A number of years ago I would have picked Amar'e for this comp. But I think I was over-valuing volume scoring at the time (and/or undercrediting just how bad he was on defense). These days I'd have to lean toward O'Neal (though I've not yet voted in poll).

[SHAQ32]

Jermaine O'Neal was a disaster on offense. His most recognized season, he shot 43% from the field. That might be okay if the majority of his shot attempts were 3s. And his defense, although good, was not quite dominant, and not enough to make up for his shot selection.

Amare on the other hand is all-time level offensively at his position. I don't care how bad his defense is in this matchup. There's no way I'm not taking him over JO.

[homecourtloss]

Jermaine O'Neal was a disaster on offense. His most recognized season, he shot 43% from the field. That might be okay if the majority of his shot attempts were 3s. And his defense, although good, was not quite dominant, and not enough to make up for his shot selection.

Amare on the other hand is all-time level offensively at his position. I don't care how bad his defense is in this matchup. There's no way I'm not taking him over JO.

O’Neal wasn’t a disaster on offense for a 4-5 stretch year when he was either neutral or slightly positive. STAT, on the higher hand, was always either really bad or horrific on defense.

Amare isn’t any where near “all-time level offensively at his position” lol. He paired well with Nash just like everyone else. With the Knicks, his efficiency dropped and he put up low impact points without creating much of a positive offense.

[SHAQ32]

Besides Barkley and Amare, how many PF/Cs have led the league in TS% while also averaging 25+? I'll wait.

[SHAQ32]

And Stat's DBPM was a net positive in 2008. And we're talking about peaks here, which was his peak season.

There's no comparison here. In peaks, AS wins easily.

[penbeast0]

Besides Barkley and Amare, how many PF/Cs have led the league in TS% while also averaging 25+? I'll wait.

Wilt and Jokic don't count as PF/C I gather. My first thought was Pettit, but his peak statistical year he was only 2nd in TS% while scoring 29.2 ppg. McAdoo led the league in TS% in 74 while averaging over 30 ppg. In the early ABA, Connie Hawkins did it in 68 and played a lot of center, Barry did it in 69 and 70 for the Oaks/Caps with some spot minutes at center I believe. Those are the first quick cut I can add to your list.

[tsherkin]

Besides Barkley and Amare, how many PF/Cs have led the league in TS% while also averaging 25+? I'll wait.

How many times did he do that without a former MVP PG setting the table, though?

Durability aside, he looked a lot different with Steph (granted, as a rookie and 2nd-year guy) and then later in New York. Nash made a biiiiig difference for him. The second of the two times Amare averaged 25+ ppg, he was like a +2% rTS guy, far less efficient and dominant than he'd been in Phoenix (indeed, he didn't even reach 57% TS that year, a far cry from the league-high 65.6% he posted in 08).