The one thing the Boks still lack...

...is the killer instinct. You could see our game plan changing once we went 24-13 up. Suddenly the box kick was back in business and we generally started kicking more and stopped spreading the ball wide. Fatigue could have played a role, but I still think we need to learn to ruthlessly pursue our advantage and close games out aggressively instead of defending a lead.

 Fatique played a huge role in the decline of the Boks in the second half, I don't believe they're as fit as the AB's. Also, the bench did not show a similar impact as the previous week against Oz.

 Pakie
Im essemse I agree with you - but it seems to me that our gforwards ran out of gas to an extent and the quality of ball they provided was just not good enough and in th right places to use it prperly.   There were also some tactical errors made.
Take for instance the breakaway started by Strauss in the Sppringboks 22 - t he passing between various players was very good - but inthe end we got penalized - \Pieterse entering the resultant maul the side.   But the situation is there were infact ample AB defenders immediately in front of the passers - but not enough to cover further back - a grubber kick by any of the passers - would have had the AB's in serious trouble.   
That kid of play indicates a bit of deficient strategic thinking and instead of a dangerous attack continuation - we ended up under pressure.    Maybe there is too much emphasis on passing and not enough of reading of the game and using kicking opportunities correctly.  Even Meyer said that our kicking game is deficient - so there was an opporuniy where he kick - especially an accurate grubber kick -  would have worked wonders.     The problem was that if a strategic thinkingplayer - like Lambie or Pollardwasinvolved in that move - it wouldhave happened nd I wondered why Le Roux - normally a very good user of kicks did not use it under those circumstances did not kick the ball that time.   Too muchemphsis on the pssing game?    

 Duplication

 I have not seen a player with more stamina than Schalk burger. he always get stronger as they game goes on. Therefore you start with him and change another tiring loosie.
I think there could be a stamina problem with Jannie and Beast. matfiled is not too bad stamina wise. Given you can change 5 forards you only need three who can go the distance. Coetzee and Burger are two. Etzebeth and Bissie are others.
It will not be a problem when players come back from injury.Think of the guys who could make the Bok match 23. Malherbe (Very soon DU Toit) Kitshof, Steph, Willemse, Loodt, Louw, Du Plessis, Labuschagne,Backs Reinach, Lambie,  Allende,  JP etc etc.
We should not drop in quality at all with our replacements apart from Pollard who should in any case be able to go 80 minutes if needs be. Pollard looks t obe the complete deal. Huge boot on him, strong on defence, breaks a line and vision re passing etc.
I am not convinced at about this so called fade out. In Nz we dominated the closing 20 minutes and we also came back once nz moved ahead at Ellis Park. Did the side relax a bit?  There was a change immediately after the second half began. You cant be spent at that stage.

 Yep they did indeed run out of steam.
Old legs can only go so far and then they seize up.
I know....I have been there.

 I watched the same game as you.
Unfortunately, you cannot see past the All Blacks.

There is zero evidence Matfield, Schalk, Habana or Jean ran out of steam. As Pakie said, we started defending a lead, which eventually gets you into trouble.  

There is zero evidence Matfield, Schalk, Habana or Jean ran out of steam. As Pakie said, we started defending a lead, which eventually gets you into trouble.  

 Mozart
You are being illogical - Burger could not fade out - he only came on at roundabout minute 50.   Matfield two line out losses late in th game was telling - he did fade out and so did Jannie and to a lesser extent Beast.   
Noboody ever said that Jean or Habana faded out.   The problem was up front,  especially amongst the Tight 5.  We did not get good balls to play with outside of our 22  and was constantly on defense.   When the ball was kicked out - the All Blacks got the ball and keep attacking.
My point is that the Springboks did not get the good balls they got in the first half to play with.    They constantly were on the defense and even when they got the ball from scrums and line outs,   it generally was not good enpugh or outside of the Boks 22 to launch any kind of attack.  
Our forwards dominated play in the first half- they did not do so in the second half and the question is what happened to allow for that change.   

 The Boks lack nothing at all.
World class hookers and props/locks/loosies/9/10/centres/wings.
World class set piece, defense and variation in gameplan instead of just the old up and under.
Actually looking foward to see them tour.