Spurs are a Top 6 Team

[Galileo]

POINT DIFFERENTIAL

Cleveland Cavaliers +7.1
Orlando Magic +6.9
Los Angeles Lakers +6.0
Utah Jazz +5.3
Denver Nuggets +5.2
San Antonio Spurs +5.0

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/stats/byteam?cat1=Total&cat2=diff&conference=NBA&year=season_2009

The Spurs are two points away from being the best team in the NBA. That's it. Two points. In top of that, we have been experimenting all season with new lineups. All the death knell gloom & doomers need to understand that point differential is the best predictor of playoff sucess.

:flag:

[Will Hunting]

Is this the point differential conspiracy now?

[Galileo]

Is this the point differential conspiracy now?

No, its the Tim Duncan conspiracy. The Spurs have the best player in NBA history, so they have the best chance to win.

:lmao

[DesignatedT]

i wouldnt count us out like most people seem to be doing. thats all i would say.

[HarlemHeat37]

The Spurs have been the best team in the NBA against shitty teams this season, which is why they have good rankings in advanced stats..

The team has been underwhelming against good teams..with the schedule getting more difficult and packed with good teams, expect the stats rankings to even out, unless the Spurs miraculously shape up..

[honestfool84]

too bad point differences don't win championships.

[Dr. Gonzo]

Imagine how great they would be if Ian Mahinmi was playing.

[honestfool84]

or imagine how great they would be if they only had to play crappy teams.

[Johnny RIngo]

POINT DIFFERENTIAL

Cleveland Cavaliers +7.1
Orlando Magic +6.9
Los Angeles Lakers +6.0
Utah Jazz +5.3
Denver Nuggets +5.2
San Antonio Spurs +5.0

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/stats/byteam?cat1=Total&cat2=diff&conference=NBA&year=season_2009

The Spurs are two points away from being the best team in the NBA. That's it. Two points. In top of that, we have been experimenting all season with new lineups. All the death knell gloom & doomers need to understand that point differential is the best predictor of playoff sucess.

:flag:

We're 14-20 vs .500 teams. If you go by efficiency differential, we're ranked 8th in the league. If you filter the efficiency differential to vs .500 teams we're ranked 11th in the league:

http://www.hoopsstats.com/basketball/fantasy/nba/teamstats/10/1/diffeff/13-1

The Spurs have, historically, been a top 3 team(in the efficency differential category) for most of Duncan's prime(2000-2007). Most of those years they were ranked first. The first noticeable drop came in the 2007-2008 season when Spurs dropped to 9th in the league. I still maintain that the FO fucked up by not reloading in the 2007 summer.

[alchemist]

only Mavfan and Sunfan get off from these stats, Spurfan has bigger fish to fry :toast :downspin:

[alchemist]

We're 14-20 vs .500 teams. If you go by efficiency differential, we're ranked 8th in the league. If you filter the efficiency differential to vs .500 teams we're ranked 11th in the league:

http://www.hoopsstats.com/basketball/fantasy/nba/teamstats/10/1/diffeff/13-1

The Spurs have, historically, been a top 3 team(in the efficency differential category) for most of Duncan's prime(2000-2007). Most of those years they were ranked first. The first noticeable drop came in the 2007-2008 season when Spurs dropped to 9th in the league. I still maintain that the FO fucked up by not reloading in the 2007 summer.
Reloading wouldn't have meant a damn thing if things with Tim/Manu/Parker played out the way they have.

[Galileo]

Here are some more indicators:

* Blair and Hill;

Both are young improving players. Hill is touted as the most improved by CIA Pop, while Blair is a rookie who has had a whole season to learn Pop's system. Both have future all-star talent.

These two players make the Spurs a better team in the playoffs than they were during the season.

* Dice, Jefferson, and Bogans

These are new players learning the system. Pop has a very complicated system, unlike other teams. We just read what Finley said, he said the Celtics just send him out to play.

Dice & Jefferson will be good players in the playoffs even though they sucked in the regular season. Bogans will be better in the playoffs as well.

* Tim Duncan

Duncan is pacing himself for the playoffs. He is not injured. He makes the Spurs instantly better in the playoffs by playing 37 minutes instead of 32 minutes.

* Lebron James

James is playing 40 minutes a game and is not pacing himself for the playoffs. He does not make his team better in the playoffs because he is shooting his wad in the regular season. If he ups his minutes to 45 a game, he will get tired and become a ballhog.

* Kobe Bryant

Kobe is also playing an insane 40 minutes per game. This is great news for Spurs fans.

* Bonner

Bonner sucks as a starter, but is great off the bench, which is what he will do in the playoffs.

* Mason

Mson sucks in the playoffs. He can still hit a key three, but his minutes will be way down from last year's playoffs.

* Parker

Our only injury, Parker will be back for the playoffs. We are lucky that we have the best backup point guard in thre NBA, so his injury is not as significant. If Parker comes off the bench in the playoffs, he will be deadly.

* Manu

Manu didn't even play last year in the playoffs, and he's been really good and really healthy lately.

So if you are a Doubting Thomas, go away.

[SpursRulez4eVeR]

RJ: http://www.hoopsstats.com/basketball/fantasy/nba/san-antonio-spurs/players/richard-jefferson/profile/10/27/384 (http://www.hoopsstats.com/basketball/fantasy/nba/san-antonio-spurs/players/richard-jefferson/profile/10/27/384)

ghill : http://www.hoopsstats.com/basketball/fantasy/nba/san-antonio-spurs/players/george-hill/profile/10/27/383

[honestfool84]

Galileo...

you're clutching at straws man.

[Dr. Gonzo]

Here are some more indicators:

* Blair and Hill;

Both are young improving players. Hill is touted as the most improved by CIA Pop, while Blair is a rookie who has had a whole season to learn Pop's system. Both have future all-star talent.


Pop is an idiot.

Mahinmi >> Blair

[taps]

Imagine how great they would be if Ian Mahinmi was playing.

If Ian could help he would be playing minutes. Do you question GOD?

Besides, Ian has only had *3 good games like Malik, except Malik is better in practice, and since the SANews Pop-proxy now spoonfeed us pre-approved Hairston tidbits: That means we are allowed to get excited about him now.

*(IMO more like 4 or 5 )

[Dr. Gonzo]

If Ian could help he would be playing minutes. Do you question GOD?

Besides, Ian has only had *3 good games like Malik, except Malik is better in practice, and since the SANews Pop-proxy now spoonfeed us pre-approved Hairston tidbits: That means we are allowed to get excited about him now.

*(IMO more like 4 or 5 )

What?

[Galileo]

We're 14-20 vs .500 teams. If you go by efficiency differential, we're ranked 8th in the league. If you filter the efficiency differential to vs .500 teams we're ranked 11th in the league:

http://www.hoopsstats.com/basketball/fantasy/nba/teamstats/10/1/diffeff/13-1

The Spurs have, historically, been a top 3 team(in the efficency differential category) for most of Duncan's prime(2000-2007). Most of those years they were ranked first. The first noticeable drop came in the 2007-2008 season when Spurs dropped to 9th in the league. I still maintain that the FO fucked up by not reloading in the 2007 summer.

You can prove anything with stats.

The fact is, the Spurs will be battle tested by playing a lot of good teams from now until season end. This effect is more often noted in college basketball, but it will come into play for the Spurs this year.

[sa_kid20]

This probably has something to do with the fact that we haven't really had any blowout losses this year. Out of our 25 losses only 6 have been by double-digits with the worst one being a 16 point loss the the Bobcats.

[SequSpur]

omg...there are 8 teams in the nba that the spurs couldn't beat in a 7 game series...why do I need stats to show how good the spurs are?

they are terrible...you will see this next coming week.

[duhoh]

come on man. one hollinger is enough retardation for the sports world.

[Obstructed_View]

POINT DIFFERENTIAL

Cleveland Cavaliers +7.1
Orlando Magic +6.9
Los Angeles Lakers +6.0
Utah Jazz +5.3
Denver Nuggets +5.2
San Antonio Spurs +5.0

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/stats/byteam?cat1=Total&cat2=diff&conference=NBA&year=season_2009

The Spurs are two points away from being the best team in the NBA. That's it. Two points. In top of that, we have been experimenting all season with new lineups. All the death knell gloom & doomers need to understand that point differential is the best predictor of playoff sucess.

:flag:

I actually agree with this. The problems the Spurs have had this season are mostly of their own design and are easily fixable. As someone else mentioned, they've been in most games this season but have just found some way to give it away in the end against some of the tougher teams, generally by running some gimmick lineup or by giving heavy minutes to guys who can't play their position. Most of those self-inflicted problems are going away and we've seen some better play as a result.

The stats don't really mean anything if the team doesn't step up, but all the indicators are there that this team can be dangerous if they get their shit together.

[timtonymanu]

so i see we have spurs fans still trying to find excuses to call this team a title contender.

[Obstructed_View]

so i see we have spurs fans still trying to find excuses to call this team a title contender.

Far better than finding excuses to fail. As much as this team has shot themselves in the foot this season, they still find themselves four games in the loss column out of second place in an extremely tough conference, and only three games behind a Mavs team that just won 13 in a row.

The one big question mark early in the season was Parker's plantar fasciitis, and the conventional wisdom suggested that a few weeks off would do him a world of good. Wish granted.

I know you married yourself to the doom and gloom "tank the season" strategy some time ago, but today's a new day. Ready to admit your mistake? Everyone else is ready to forgive you.

[timtonymanu]

Far better than finding excuses to fail. As much as this team has shot themselves in the foot this season, they still find themselves four games in the loss column out of second place in an extremely tough conference, and only three games behind a Mavs team that just won 13 in a row.

The one big question mark early in the season was Parker's plantar fasciitis, and the conventional wisdom suggested that a few weeks off would do him a world of good. Wish granted.

I know you married yourself to the doom and gloom "tank the season" strategy some time ago, but today's a new day. Ready to admit your mistake? Everyone else is ready to forgive you.

no fuck the "tank the season" belief. Spurs are still a playoff team so why should they tank? I just dont think they're a title contender at this point so it's pointless to be finding ways to see if they can still contend for a title. But thats my opinion and I'm sticking to it. If im wrong, then im wrong.

[TJastal]

Agree w/ most of your points Galileo except:

I think RMJ will come up big in the playoffs and the centerpiece will prove to be the more unreliable of the two and hopefully see the bench in favor of Hairston

I also think this team can go places if Jefferson keeps up the good play.

[romain.star]

This probably has something to do with the fact that we haven't really had any blowout losses this year. Out of our 25 losses only 6 have been by double-digits with the worst one being a 16 point loss the the Bobcats.

spot on

at the end of the day, the only stat that matters is the win/loss column

[silverblackfan]

I am optimistic on this team and think the next couple of weeks will get a lot of the fans excited. Bring on the tough schedule. I think this team is ready to be forged!

[fyatuk]

Agree w/ most of your points Galileo except:

I think RMJ will come up big in the playoffs and the centerpiece will prove to be the more unreliable of the two and hopefully see the bench in favor of Hairston

I also think this team can go places if Jefferson keeps up the good play.

As long as Jefferson doesn't play alongside Parker a lot, he'll keep up the good play. Most of his truly bad games has been when he was paired with Parker, and almost all of his good games have been without him. The Hill-Manu-Jeff-Blair-whoever lineup has been pretty effective all season.


I am optimistic on this team and think the next couple of weeks will get a lot of the fans excited. Bring on the tough schedule. I think this team is ready to be forged!

Me too. I think the Spurs are going to finish strong and up their playoff position by season's end.

[Supreme_Being]

spot on

at the end of the day, the only stat that matters is the win/loss column

I'd like to think otherwise. (http://lmgtfy.com/?q=2007+warriors+vs+mavs)

[TDMVPDPOY]

we are underperforming, on paper we could beat any team on any given night...

when pop finally works out teh correct rotation for the playoffs, we fear nobody

[Agloco]

You can prove anything with stats.

The fact is, the Spurs will be battle tested by playing a lot of good teams from now until season end. This effect is more often noted in college basketball, but it will come into play for the Spurs this year.

If there's one thing I've learned during my PhD studies: This is true........and then some.

My thought? Yes they're only 2 points out of the Point Diff lead. I don't think that will be true once they're done with this stretch of games though. We will see them slide to 9 or 10 probably. That's more indicative of where the Spurs are. Being 14-20 against +.500 teams is the most telling stat for this crew.

[in2deep]

omg...there are 8 teams in the nba that the spurs couldn't beat in a 7 game series...why do I need stats to show how good the spurs are?

they are terrible...you will see this next coming week.

partly agree. Spurs about to lose 4-5 games real quick.

Spurs can't beat:
cavs
magic
lakers
mavs
nugz

[Chubby_Love]

When the majority of your wins are against crappy teams, that's something to be concerned about. That's winning every fist fight against a woman, but getting your ass kicked all the time by men. :downspin:

[FromWayDowntown]

They're not 2 points out of the point differential lead -- they're two points per game out of the points differential lead. Over the course of 64 games, that's 128 points -- not 2.

And that point differential is, as several others have noted, a bit misleading. I figure the Spurs' point differential against the current top 9 in the West to be -1.8 (-41 over 23 games) and their point differential against the top 9 in both conferences to be +0.5 (+17 points over 35 games).

I'm pretty sure they won't be 6th best in the league in those categories.

[Mel_13]

There are 10 teams in the NBA which have won fewer than 40% of their games. The Spurs are 20-2 vs. the bottom 10 and 19-23 against the rest. The Spurs have only 4 games remaining with these bottom feeders.

They have 11 games remaining, 8 of which are on the road, against the top 11 teams in the NBA (the top 4 in the East and the other 7 playoff teams in the West). To this point in the season the Spurs are 6-16 against the top teams. The silver lining to these black clouds is that the Spurs started 1-11 against these teams and are 5-5 in their most recent 10 games.

5-6 against the top teams and 6-1 against the rest will result in a 50-win season. Combined with the return of a healthy Parker, there would be cause for optimism. They still wouldn't be a top 6 team in the NBA, but they will be a tough out and a respectable finish will give them something positive to build on for next season.

[rascal]

There are 10 teams in the NBA which have won fewer than 40% of their games. The Spurs are 20-2 vs. the bottom 10 and 19-23 against the rest. The Spurs have only 4 games remaining with these bottom feeders.

They have 11 games remaining, 8 of which are on the road, against the top 11 teams in the NBA (the top 4 in the East and the other 7 playoff teams in the West). To this point in the season the Spurs are 6-16 against the top teams. The silver lining to these black clouds is that the Spurs started 1-11 against these teams and are 5-5 in their most recent 10 games.

5-6 against the top teams and 6-1 against the rest will result in a 50-win season. Combined with the return of a healthy Parker, there would be cause for optimism. They still wouldn't be a top 6 team in the NBA, but they will be a tough out and a respectable finish will give them something positive to build on for next season.

Not only that but the spurs have been fortunate to play the best teams all year with injuries and still often can't take advantage of it.

The Spurs will not win a title with a weak frontline interior defense. And thats it, so forget about looking for reasons why they have a shot to win, it is not happening this year.

I would rather see a top draft pick and some good offseason moves to shore up the frontline and come back with a roster that has a real chance next year.

[Mel_13]

Not only that but the spurs have been fortunate to play the best teams all year with injuries and still often can't take advantage of it.

The Spurs will not win a title with a weak frontline interior defense. And thats it, so forget about looking for reasons why they have a shot to win, it is not happening this year.

I would rather see a top draft pick and some good offseason moves to shore up the frontline and come back with a roster that has a real chance next year.

Thanks, Debbie Downer:toast

[rascal]

we are underperforming, on paper we could beat any team on any given night...

when pop finally works out teh correct rotation for the playoffs, we fear nobody

On paper they are poor matchups for the bigger teams in the league especially the Lakers.

Playoff series are not won by winning one game.

[Galileo]

If there's one thing I've learned during my PhD studies: This is true........and then some.

My thought? Yes they're only 2 points out of the Point Diff lead. I don't think that will be true once they're done with this stretch of games though. We will see them slide to 9 or 10 probably. That's more indicative of where the Spurs are. Being 14-20 against +.500 teams is the most telling stat for this crew.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/SAS/2010.html

According to the Simple Rating System on basketball Reference, which facotrs in strength iof schedule, we are the 6th best NBA team.

[dirk4mvp]

So where's the Spurs' 6 best point differential banner?

[HORNSWOGGLE]

same place as the mavs championship banner:lol

[dirk4mvp]

lmao 6th best point differential championship.

[Galileo]

Agree w/ most of your points Galileo except:

I think RMJ will come up big in the playoffs and the centerpiece will prove to be the more unreliable of the two and hopefully see the bench in favor of Hairston

I also think this team can go places if Jefferson keeps up the good play.

I agree that RJ will step up in the playoffs. He will have breakout games. If he is guarded one-on-one, he can be pretty good. i don;t buy the fact that a great player for all these years suddenly sucks. It all has to do with Pop's complicated system.

[Galileo]

They're not 2 points out of the point differential lead -- they're two points per game out of the points differential lead. Over the course of 64 games, that's 128 points -- not 2.



Yea, but that's only 2 points per game. If a team comes into a game as a 2 point underdog, the game is basically a tossup.

[Obstructed_View]

no fuck the "tank the season" belief. Spurs are still a playoff team so why should they tank? I just dont think they're a title contender at this point so it's pointless to be finding ways to see if they can still contend for a title. But thats my opinion and I'm sticking to it. If im wrong, then im wrong.

There's ample evidence that they can play with anyone so long as they show up and play. Sticking to your opinion despite evidence to the contrary is just silly. I'm not going to agree with foilhat that the Spurs "are a top 6 team" but it's not too much show the various measuring tools out there that suggest the Spurs aren't nearly as bad as those of us close to the situation might think. They don't need giant changes to suddenly become an elite team again, they simply need a number of small things to fall into place.

[FromWayDowntown]

Yea, but that's only 2 points per game. If a team comes into a game as a 2 point underdog, the game is basically a tossup.

Okay, but they're not going to play the Clippers, Knicks, Nets, or Warriors in the playoffs.

As noted, the Spurs point differential against the 8 best other records in the West-- the field of potential playoff adversaries -- is a negative by almost 2 (-1.8). And they're 8-15 against those teams this season; if you remove Memphis from the equation, the Spurs are 6-14.

By the way, here are the point differentials for the Top 8 in the West against the other teams in the Top 8:

LAL +4.71 (21 games, 14-7)
DEN +3.90 (21 games, 13-8)
UTH +0.22 (23 games, 13-10)
PRT -1.33 (18 games, 10-8)
OKC -1.42 (19 games, 8-11)
PNX -1.83 (18 games, 6-12)
DAL -2.50 (20 games, 10-10)
SAS -2.60 (20 games, 6-14)

There's no doubt that the Spurs have played pretty well against bad teams, but the evidence is overwhelming to show that they've played poorly (to an extreme) against teams that will qualify for the West playoffs. About as poorly as any team in that group.

Against LA, they start out more than 7 points in the hole, by Galileo logic; against Denver, they're 6.5 points in the hole -- not 2 points down. And, curiously, those appear to be the Spurs' most likely playoff opponents.

[Obstructed_View]

Yea, but that's only 2 points per game. If a team comes into a game as a 2 point underdog, the game is basically a tossup.

Actually, the stats don't work that way. You're missing how significant two points is over the course of an entire NBA season, because it's far more than a made basket here or a stray bounce there.

The only thing the numbers show is that the Spurs aren't as bad as some people think they are.

[Galileo]

Okay, but they're not going to play the Clippers, Knicks, Nets, or Warriors in the playoffs.

As noted, the Spurs point differential against the 8 best other records in the West-- the field of potential playoff adversaries -- is a negative by almost 2 (-1.8). And they're 8-15 against those teams this season; if you remove Memphis from the equation, the Spurs are 6-14.

By the way, here are the point differentials for the Top 8 in the West against the other teams in the Top 8:

LAL +4.71 (21 games, 14-7)
DEN +3.90 (21 games, 13-8)
UTH +0.22 (23 games, 13-10)
PRT -1.33 (18 games, 10-8)
OKC -1.42 (19 games, 8-11)
PNX -1.83 (18 games, 6-12)
DAL -2.50 (20 games, 10-10)
SAS -2.60 (20 games, 6-14)

There's no doubt that the Spurs have played pretty well against bad teams, but the evidence is overwhelming to show that they've played poorly (to an extreme) against teams that will qualify for the West playoffs. About as poorly as any team in that group.

Against LA, they start out more than 7 points in the hole, by Galileo logic; against Denver, they're 6.5 points in the hole -- not 2 points down. And, curiously, those appear to be the Spurs' most likely playoff opponents.

These stats mean nothing. For one thing, you are using less data than my analysis did.

Another BIG problem - the Spurs lose most of their games on national TV during the regular season because other teams try harder in those games.

If you take the Spurs point differential in non-TV games, they are the best team in the league probably.

In the playoffs, the Spurs play better on TV, as their 4 rings prove.

The Spurs are +6.3 on non-TV games this season, making them a TOP 3 team.

[FromWayDowntown]

These stats mean nothing. For one thing, you are using less data than my analysis did.

Another BIG problem - the Spurs lose most of their games on national TV during the regular season because other teams try harder in those games.

If you take the Spurs point differential in non-TV games, they are the best team in the league probably.

In the playoffs, the Spurs play better on TV, as their 4 rings prove.

The Spurs are +6.3 on non-TV games this season, making them a TOP 3 team.

So, wait -- "point differential is the best predictor of playoff success," unless you don't like what the relevant point differentials actually are.

I'm using less data because the playoffs use less teams, and curiously, I'm only including those teams who will happen to be in the playoffs. Now, I'm not saying, by any means, that the point differentials in my analysis or in yours are going to determine who wins any particular playoff series. But, if I'm going to use point differentials to make that call, I'd be far more inclined to use the relative point differentials among playoff teams than to use the relative point differentials against the whole league.

Nice on the Spurs' point differential in non-TV games. I'd be curious about who the Spurs have played in those games -- it seems fairly likely to be a boatload of teams that will be done with their seasons by mid-April and not too many teams who will be in the tournament at season's end.

And -- really? "Other teams try harder in those games." Really?

[Galileo]

So, wait -- "point differential is the best predictor of playoff success," unless you don't like what the relevant point differentials actually are.

I'm using less data because the playoffs use less teams, and curiously, I'm only including those teams who will happen to be in the playoffs. Now, I'm not saying, by any means, that the point differentials in my analysis or in yours are going to determine who wins any particular playoff series. But, if I'm going to use point differentials to make that call, I'd be far more inclined to use the relative point differentials among playoff teams than to use the relative point differentials against the whole league.

Nice on the Spurs' point differential in non-TV games. I'd be curious about who the Spurs have played in those games -- it seems fairly likely to be a boatload of teams that will be done with their seasons by mid-April and not too many teams who will be in the tournament at season's end.

And -- really? "Other teams try harder in those games." Really?

your logic might work for other teams, but not the Spurs. I've been watching the Spurs for many years.

[Galileo]

And -- really? "Other teams try harder in those games." Really?

They do. Haven't you noticed when you watch the games? A lot of these kids on other teams just want to act cool on TV. But the Spurs are focused on the playoffs.

[G-Dawgg]

As Rudy Tomjanovich said it best "Never underestimate the heart of a Champion.." I'm not delusional and I'm not dreaming of a championship this season, but crazier things have happened... like Rudy T's Houston rockets run to the nba final from the 8th seed and overcoming a 3-0 first round deficit to beat the Phoenix suns 4-3 on route to their 2nd championship in 2 years back in 95...

[HarlemHeat37]

I really hope Galileo isn't serious with most of the commets he's made in this thread..

[murpjf88]

As Rudy Tomjanovich said it best "Never underestimate the heart of a Champion.." I'm not delusional and I'm not dreaming of a championship this season, but crazier things have happened... like Rudy T's Houston rockets run to the nba final from the 8th seed and overcoming a 3-0 first round deficit to beat the Phoenix suns 4-3 on route to their 2nd championship in 2 years back in 95...
To my recolection, I believe the rockets came in as the sixth seed. No nba team has won squat coming in as the eighth seed except for the nuggets over the sonics in the first round.

[TD 21]

partly agree. Spurs about to lose 4-5 games real quick.

Spurs can't beat:
cavs
magic
lakers
mavs
nugz

I wouldn't put the Mavs into that category and if Martin either can't go or is playing in a greatly diminished state, then the Nuggets, already thin on the front line, instantly become vulnerable.

I'm not buying into this Mavs nonsense. The just came off the most unimpressive extended winning streak in recent memory and yet oodles of people have anointed them legit contenders. If Martin were healthy, I'd put the Nuggets right there with the Cavs, Magic and Lakers, as one of the four teams capable of winning the championship. As it is, at this writing I've demoted them to the head of the next tier with: Mavs, Jazz, Thunder, Spurs and Suns. I don't think the Trail Blazers aren't necessarily not in this group, but they're on a collision course to face the Lakers, so you can rule them out in terms of being able to win a round. The way I see it, the others are all capable of beating each other. I expect the Mavs to advance, but I wouldn't be absolutely stunned if, say, the Suns beat them in a series. Don't get me wrong, they're good, but they're not that good.

[phxspurfan]

Absolutely not.

[G-Dawgg]

To my recolection, I believe the rockets came in as the sixth seed. No nba team has won squat coming in as the eighth seed except for the nuggets over the sonics in the first round.

Actually you may be correct..but either way, it was an amazing run through all the way to the championship...something that i doubt anybody expected to happen that season..

[Russ]

They don't need giant changes to suddenly become an elite team again, they simply need a number of small things to fall into place.

Small things? Like TP's 4th metacarpel? :)

[poop]

As Rudy Tomjanovich said it best "Never underestimate the heart of a Champion.." I'm not delusional and I'm not dreaming of a championship this season, but crazier things have happened... like Rudy T's Houston rockets run to the nba final from the 8th seed and overcoming a 3-0 first round deficit to beat the Phoenix suns 4-3 on route to their 2nd championship in 2 years back in 95...

they were the 6th seed, won only 47-48 games. BUT, they were defending champs, purposely took it easy during the regular season, and had more Heart than any other 2 teams combined. they had 5-6 players who were absolutely, consistently lethal come crunch time.

that said, almost any other coach starting out with the roster we started out with, and this spurs team would have been top 3 in the NBA right now.

we still have the massive potential, something last years team did not have. if everything comes together, this team can beat anyone (except dallas who has the cosmos aligned when they play us) in a 7-game series

[jimo2305]

did john hollinger put you up to this!?!?

[Agloco]

This probably has something to do with the fact that we haven't really had any blowout losses this year. Out of our 25 losses only 6 have been by double-digits with the worst one being a 16 point loss the the Bobcats.


spot on

at the end of the day, the only stat that matters is the win/loss column

You don't think that having only 6 double digit losses all year says something about the Spurs staying power? This team isn't a bad team at all, it's simply not a championship contender.

Spur fans are so spoiled now that "No Championship = Bad Team". :nope

Ask New Jersey fans about bad teams......


http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/SAS/2010.html

According to the Simple Rating System on basketball Reference, which facotrs in strength if schedule, we are the 6th best NBA team.

As I said, there's a derived statistic for just about anything under the sun......... 70% of people know that. :lol

[rascal]

they were the 6th seed, won only 47-48 games. BUT, they were defending champs, purposely took it easy during the regular season, and had more Heart than any other 2 teams combined. they had 5-6 players who were absolutely, consistently lethal come crunch time.

that said, almost any other coach starting out with the roster we started out with, and this spurs team would have been top 3 in the NBA right now.

we still have the massive potential, something last years team did not have. if everything comes together, this team can beat anyone (except dallas who has the cosmos aligned when they play us) in a 7-game series

I don't know why people still think the spurs can beat LA. Since the Gasol trade the Spurs have a wide margin losing record against LA when Gasol plays including playoffs.

[Obstructed_View]

Small things? Like TP's 4th metacarpel? :)

TP's 4th metacarpal isn't as big a concern as his planter fascia. Add finals MVP level Tony Parker to last night's team and they're probably going to be able to hold their own with anyone, and they haven't reached their ceiling yet.

[Galileo]

Did anyone notice that we just kicked the shit out of Miami on the road? And yes Wade was playing.

Galileo was right.

[Galileo]

I don't know why people still think the spurs can beat LA. Since the Gasol trade the Spurs have a wide margin losing record against LA when Gasol plays including playoffs.

Have you seen the movie War of the World starring Tom Cruise?

That's what LA is like right now. They are old and have ossified into dinosaurs. SA beats them straight up in a 7 game series that goes maybe 6 games.

[nkdlunch]

Did anyone notice that we just kicked the shit out of Miami on the road? And yes Wade was the only one playing.


fixed :toast

[FromWayDowntown]

SA beats them straight up in a 7 game series that goes maybe 6 games.

That's going to be hell on your conspiracy theories.

[Galileo]

That's going to be hell on your conspiracy theories.

Not really. The vast NBA conspiracy has been exposed. Hence, Stern will have to play by the rules for a few years, until the sheeple forget about the Truth.

:flag:

[Supergirl]

Honestly the team most likely to beat a healthy Spurs team in a 7 game series is the Mavs, and that's because of their length and versatility. if they remain healthy they are a serious, underrated threat.

Nuggets still don't play defense consistently enough to win in the playoffs, and if they haven't started by now they won't come playoffs. Magic don't have enough talent. Celtics are too old. No one else in the west is a real competitor.

Lakers and Cavs are wearing themselves out and already seeing signs up that wear and tear. If they magically get healthy I think they are still the two best in the league, but I don't think they're pacing themselves for the long haul well. We'll see if I'm right.

[TheSullyMonster]

To my recolection, I believe the rockets came in as the sixth seed. No nba team has won squat coming in as the eighth seed except for the nuggets over the sonics in the first round.

The Knicks in 99 were the 8th seed.

[Galileo]

I really hope Galileo isn't serious with most of the commets he's made in this thread..

Galileo is dead serious and is a basketball expert.

:ihit

[Galileo]

Tonight is a huge game. As 7 point dogs on TV, this is the type of game we usually lose. Galileo smells something in the air; a Spurs win.

[timtonymanu]

so we finally challenge a legit team and dont even show up.

rename this thread to we're delusional m'fers.

[TheSullyMonster]

Damn, this is embarrassing. This must be what it felt like to heat fans last night.

Although in the time it took for me to forget to post this, we went on a 10-2 run, so I guess I'm somewhat happy.

[Galileo]

don't give up so quickly.

[TheSullyMonster]

There is a difference between embarrassment and defeat.

[DubMcDub]

The Spurs are two points away from being the best team in the NBA. That's it. Two points. In top of that, we have been experimenting all season with new lineups. All the death knell gloom & doomers need to understand that point differential is the best predictor of playoff sucess.

:flag:

Over the past 10 years, point differential has not been any better a predictor of playoff success than season record. Just FYI.

[DubMcDub]

only Mavfan and Sunfan get off from these stats, Spurfan has bigger fish to fry :toast :downspin:

Like scrapping to secure homecourt advantage for the first round (only)? :lol:toast

[timtonymanu]

good call.

So are we still a contender?

[rascal]

Tonight is a huge game. As 7 point dogs on TV, this is the type of game we usually lose. Galileo smells something in the air; a Spurs win.

Galileo is a delusional fool.

[alchemist]

Like scrapping to secure homecourt advantage for the first round (only)? :lol:toast
Sadly Mavfan is satisfied with that. :wakeup

[senorglory]

Rockets won a championship from the 6th seed in 94-95, after struggling the first half of the season.

It can be done.

[timtonymanu]

Rockets won a championship from the 6th seed in 94-95, after struggling the first half of the season.

It can be done.

yeah but majority of low seed teams havent won a championship. so what's your point?

[Agloco]

Over the past 10 years, point differential has not been any better a predictor of playoff success than season record. Just FYI.

That's quite incorrect. There's nothing more accurate than point diff if taken as a univariate indicator of potential playoff success (read: there's a stronger positive correlation between point diff and championship success).

[Agloco]

Rockets won a championship from the 6th seed in 94-95, after struggling the first half of the season.

It can be done.


yeah but majority of low seed teams havent won a championship. so what's your point?


It can be done.

[DubMcDub]

Sadly Mavfan is satisfied with that. :wakeup

Nice blimp.

[DubMcDub]

That's quite incorrect. There's nothing more accurate than point diff if taken as a univariate indicator of potential playoff success (read: there's a stronger positive correlation between point diff and championship success).

No, it's actually quite correct:


Results:

Winning Percentage correctly predicted the playoff series winner 77.6% of the time.
Point Margin correctly predicted the playoff series winner 78.2% of the time.

This includes data from 120 playoff series dating back to the 2001-2002 season.

Analysis:
There were only 4 out of 120 series in which a team had a significantly better record than their point margin would indicate.

**Cleveland in 2007-2008 had a point margin of -0.4 yet won 45 games. They beat Washington in the first round despite poor scoring margin.
**NJ Nets in 2005-2006 had a point margin of just +1.4 yet won 49 games. They beat the Pacers in the first round despite poor scoring margin.
**Minnesota in 2002-2003 had a point margin of just +2.1 yet won 51 games. They lost to the Lakers in the first round. The Lakers had a point margin of +2.3.
**Detroit in 2001-2002 had a point margin of just +2.1 yet won 51 games. They lost in the second round to Boston. Boston had a point margin of +2.2.

In almost every case the team with the higher scoring margin also had a better record.

Conclusions:
Point margin is a very good predictor of winning percentage for the regular season.
In the playoffs, point margin and winning percentage are equal predictors of series victor at 78% success rate.

Thanks for reading.



This is not to say that point differential is not a very strong indicator of future success, but again, it's only marginally better than season record. When point differential is useful is when two teams with very similar records have disparate point differentials--then, one would be wise to look to the point differential.

[timtonymanu]

You guys just need to give up the contender talk. This team is going nowhere this year other than a first round exit. Yeah I sound like a douche saying it but it's true. The Spurs arent gonna miraculously click. There's too many negative signs at this point.

[jimo2305]

You guys just need to give up the contender talk. This team is going nowhere this year other than a first round exit. Yeah I sound like a douche saying it but it's true. The Spurs arent gonna miraculously click. There's too many negative signs at this point.

lol we like to dream :sleep

[Galileo]

The Spurs are +5.1 points per game. The Lakers are + 6.0 points per game.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/stats/byteam?cat1=Total&cat2=diff&conference=NBA&year=season_2009

Let's say the home court is worth 4 points per game.

In a 7 game series, the Lakers are only up on us by a total of 10.3 points over 7 games.

That means the Lakers are only 1.4 points better than us per game on the average. In other words, each game is basically a toss up, it comes down to less than one shot.

We can make the finals, folks.

Think CIA Pop. Think Tim "the Wizard" Duncan. Believe in Galileo.

[timtonymanu]

The Spurs are +5.1 points per game. The Lakers are + 6.0 points per game.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/stats/byteam?cat1=Total&cat2=diff&conference=NBA&year=season_2009

Let's say the home court is worth 4 points per game.

In a 7 game series, the Lakers are only up on us by a total of 10.3 points over 7 games.

That means the Lakers are only 1.4 points better than us per game on the average. In other words, each game is basically a toss up, it comes down to less than one shot.

We can make the finals, folks.

Think CIA Pop. Think Tim "the Wizard" Duncan. Believe in Galileo.


I thought you said we were gonna beat the Magic?

[BillMc]

It's all very interesting and I do think we'll be dangerous.

But in about a week we'll have a much better picture of if we will be a contender or not.

[Galileo]

I thought you said we were gonna beat the Magic?

we've got another game with them soon.

[Chomag]

As Rudy Tomjanovich said it best "Never underestimate the heart of a Champion.." I'm not delusional and I'm not dreaming of a championship this season, but crazier things have happened... like Rudy T's Houston rockets run to the nba final from the 8th seed and overcoming a 3-0 first round deficit to beat the Phoenix suns 4-3 on route to their 2nd championship in 2 years back in 95...

And only if the Spurs played the clippers all year they would be nuber 1!

I keep seeing people say this about the Rockets winning in 95. Do any of you realize that this is not that year. This is a totally new game. The competition that year the Rockets made won the championship pales in comparison to today's competition, and it's not even close.

Spurs were about the only roadblock that year and that was still with a 1 man show with D-Rob. Teams at that area could win with 1 or 2 main guys, and thats not a luxury anymore.

[tlongII]

Tonight should be a good indication of where the Spurs are in the playoff hierarchy.

[timtonymanu]

This thread continues to fail.

[Galileo]

The Spurs ended the season as the # 1 or # 2 team in the West in point differential. Given how close they were the Cleveland and Orlando (who play in a weak conference), and the fact that the Spurs improved as the season went on, while Utah lost Okur, the Spurs are now the favorites to win # 5 for Mr. Duncan.

bump.

[Spurfan]

HOW THE HELL IS THE TEAM WITH THE BIGGER POINT DIFFERENTIAL LOSING?!?!?! :madrun:madrun:madrun:madrun:madrun

Here's my only logical explanation, I can never come up with theories as accurate and smart as the Galileo's theories, but here goes:

David Stern has a contract with the Free Masons to create an optical allusion that makes all fans, coaches, players and journalists think that the are going to U.S. Airways Center when they are actually going to the studio where Apollo 11 was filmed, this is where the games are played. This arena uses magnetic rims and instead of an actual basketball, just uses a very large magnet. The Illuminati send electric current through one rim throughout the game to increase magnetic attraction based on who Stern wants to win. Does anyone wonder why Amare can jump so much higher than Tim Duncan? It's because in this controlled environment the Knights Templar suspend gravity for Amare Stoudemire and increase the gravitational force on Tim Duncan anchoring him to the ground.