GSH
01-21-2009, 05:07 AM
There is a lot of talk about how this Spurs team is not as good as past teams, and that they can't win a title without getting a player or two before the trade deadline. Midway through the season is a good time to look at some of those comments, and see if they hold water:
The Spurs have lost a lot of games already. No team with this kind of record is going anywhere in the playoffs.
The Spurs record at the midway point of this season is 28-13. Last season they made it to the Western Conference Finals, and their record at the midway point was 28-13. The previous season, they won the NBA Championship, and their record at the midway point was... yep, 28-13. And in 2002, when they won the Championship, their record at the midway point was "only" 26-15. Their record this season puts them right on track with their previous successful seasons.
Yes, but the Cavs, Lakers, Celtics, and Magic have much better records.
Two seasons ago, the Mavs had a record of 33-8 at this point, and lost in the first round. Last season the Celtics had a record of 34-7, and got pushed to 7 games twice by teams with much worse records. In fact, they were very fortunate not to have gone out in the first or second rounds. The Spurs are better right now than those Atlanta and Cleveland teams that took Boston to 7 games. And they are showing the toughness to find ways to win close games.
The only reason the Spurs' record is this good is that they have had a soft schedule. But they have been losing to the good teams.
Since 2000, the overwhelming majority of the Spurs' losses have been to the teams that were playoff contenders that year: Lakers, Suns, Mavs, Jazz, Nuggets, Celtics, Cavs, etc. (And for some strange reason, the Bucks.) And a lot of their winning streaks centered around "soft spots" in their schedule, with a few wins against good teams thrown in. In other words - a lot like this year.
But that's not limited to the Spurs. Take last year's Lakers for instance - almost all of their losses were to the Spurs, Hornets, Rockets, Pistons, Celtics, etc. In other words, they cleaned up on the easier teams, and struggled with the playoff teams. You didn't hear anyone talking about how they weren't able to beat the better teams. (Here's a good link that shows color-coded wins and losses that makes it easier to see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007%E2%80%9308_Los_Angeles_Lakers_season There are links at the bottom to every team in the league.)
The Spurs will need to beat some of the good teams in the second half. But so far this season, their success against playoff teams isn't terribly different from any other year. You may not believe that, but if you check you will see that it is true.
What about that blowout loss to Philadelphia, and the Detroit game where they only scored 77 points?
In every season since 2000, the Spurs have had at least one game where they scored 75 or fewer points, and a couple of blowout losses. In the '04 Championship season, they were held to 67 points one game and lost 68-104 in another. Last season they lost 64-90 to Utah, and 75-100 to New Orleans. Once again, there is nothing out of the ordinary so far this season.
-------
The truth is, if you could throw out that dreadful 1-4 start, when Tony and Manu were both out of the lineup, this has been one of their better starts in the Tim Duncan era. No matter how badly you think they have played, their record says otherwise. They still have plenty of room for improvement, but that's a good thing. Because if this squad improves over what they have done in the first half of the season (and stays healthy), history says they will be right in the mix for another title.
Still not convinced? Look at it another way, then. If those other Spurs teams were so much better, why did they lose just as many games as this year's team? The overall talent level in the league certainly hasn't gone down. The answer is that a lot of Spurs fans are so spoiled they think the sky is falling if the team has an off night.
The Spurs have lost a lot of games already. No team with this kind of record is going anywhere in the playoffs.
The Spurs record at the midway point of this season is 28-13. Last season they made it to the Western Conference Finals, and their record at the midway point was 28-13. The previous season, they won the NBA Championship, and their record at the midway point was... yep, 28-13. And in 2002, when they won the Championship, their record at the midway point was "only" 26-15. Their record this season puts them right on track with their previous successful seasons.
Yes, but the Cavs, Lakers, Celtics, and Magic have much better records.
Two seasons ago, the Mavs had a record of 33-8 at this point, and lost in the first round. Last season the Celtics had a record of 34-7, and got pushed to 7 games twice by teams with much worse records. In fact, they were very fortunate not to have gone out in the first or second rounds. The Spurs are better right now than those Atlanta and Cleveland teams that took Boston to 7 games. And they are showing the toughness to find ways to win close games.
The only reason the Spurs' record is this good is that they have had a soft schedule. But they have been losing to the good teams.
Since 2000, the overwhelming majority of the Spurs' losses have been to the teams that were playoff contenders that year: Lakers, Suns, Mavs, Jazz, Nuggets, Celtics, Cavs, etc. (And for some strange reason, the Bucks.) And a lot of their winning streaks centered around "soft spots" in their schedule, with a few wins against good teams thrown in. In other words - a lot like this year.
But that's not limited to the Spurs. Take last year's Lakers for instance - almost all of their losses were to the Spurs, Hornets, Rockets, Pistons, Celtics, etc. In other words, they cleaned up on the easier teams, and struggled with the playoff teams. You didn't hear anyone talking about how they weren't able to beat the better teams. (Here's a good link that shows color-coded wins and losses that makes it easier to see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007%E2%80%9308_Los_Angeles_Lakers_season There are links at the bottom to every team in the league.)
The Spurs will need to beat some of the good teams in the second half. But so far this season, their success against playoff teams isn't terribly different from any other year. You may not believe that, but if you check you will see that it is true.
What about that blowout loss to Philadelphia, and the Detroit game where they only scored 77 points?
In every season since 2000, the Spurs have had at least one game where they scored 75 or fewer points, and a couple of blowout losses. In the '04 Championship season, they were held to 67 points one game and lost 68-104 in another. Last season they lost 64-90 to Utah, and 75-100 to New Orleans. Once again, there is nothing out of the ordinary so far this season.
-------
The truth is, if you could throw out that dreadful 1-4 start, when Tony and Manu were both out of the lineup, this has been one of their better starts in the Tim Duncan era. No matter how badly you think they have played, their record says otherwise. They still have plenty of room for improvement, but that's a good thing. Because if this squad improves over what they have done in the first half of the season (and stays healthy), history says they will be right in the mix for another title.
Still not convinced? Look at it another way, then. If those other Spurs teams were so much better, why did they lose just as many games as this year's team? The overall talent level in the league certainly hasn't gone down. The answer is that a lot of Spurs fans are so spoiled they think the sky is falling if the team has an off night.