14-2 to reach 50 wins

[Spurtacus]

Spurs have a brutal stretch of games in late April. 16 games in 24 days in April. No doubt the big 3 will be rested. But are the Spurs deep enough to reach another 50 win season?

[chazley]

Very slim chance, but possible. I don't think anyone can come in and say yes or no definitively.

[jestersmash]

Pro-rated for the 66 game season, we only need to hit 40 wins to match an equivalent 50 win season "winning percentage."

50 wins in a 66 game season is equivalent to winning 62 games in an 82 game season.

[Arcadian]

That's not the right comparison to be making. It wouldn't really be "another" 50 win season because typically that means 50/82 = 61% wins. So to achieve that goal this season, we would need 61% x 66 games = 40 wins. So we only need 4 more wins to achieve that goal.

[JRHernandez88]

Didnt think about that but I think they can. That would be awesome maybe catch no. 1 seed on the way too.

[Splits]

Spurs have won 7 straight with 16 remaining. I wouldn't normally say this, but with the bench so deep and 13 guys able to contribute, I could see us closing out the year with a 23 game win streak. It's probably not going to happen, but it is possible. Especially since 3 of those games are against one of the worst teams in the league, the Fakers.

[xellos88330]

14-2. Man that would be sweet. No asterisk behind the 50 win season streak.

[Kuestmaster]

possible, but not really important. I prefer to have everyone healthy and ready for the playoffs

[mudyez]

It will also depend on the possible playoff-matchups leading into the last few games.

I dont think any Spur really cares and if we have the chance to avoid a team like Memphis, while resting some starplayers, they wont hesitate.

[Rapper]

Yes this is what i want

[heyheymymy]

pffft, forget preparing for a championship run, health be damned, i WANT 50 wins!

[Wild Cobra Kai]

Very slim chance, but possible. I don't think anyone can come in and say yes or no definitively.

I'll go ahead and say no. That stretch is brutal, but Pop is also going to SHUT IT DOWN the minute it becomes impossible to move downwards from the two slot. That could be with as many as 3-4 games left.

[Dex]

Not going to happen.

[Seventyniner]

Even 10-6 all but guarantees the 2 seed, so I can't see Pop trying to pile up wins at all costs.

[LoneStarState'sPride]

Won't happen, and I'd be pissed at any Spurs player who gives even the slightest bit of a shit about that streak. Just stay healthy and play solid basketball going into the postseason.

[Robz4000]

health in the postseason > meaningless regular-season records

[BoricuaCJA]

Too brutal of a schedule left even though we have a deep team. We have to play LA 3 times.

[lmbebo]

could happen if Pop and team really wanted it, but they won't risk injuries, exhaustion, etc.

I think team goes for 10 or 12 wins out of the remaining 16 games.

50 win season is irrelevant. Especially in a lock out shortened season.

[phxspurfan]

I think given our latest win streak it is possible. We can win games with just our bench, even though with games against teams like LAL, Pop will likely not try and reveal too much about our team before the playoffs. But our bench is so damn good, and Stern will throw a fit if Pop benches the big 3 for 5 games straight. So 12 minutes from each of the big 3 = 40 points, + 60 points form our bench = 100 points. We can win games like that in the regular season.

[Bill_Brasky]

Not even worth trying....though with our depth each game should be competitive, esp with teams fighting for seeding to end the season.

[stnick2261]

Pro-rated for the 66 game season, we only need to hit 40 wins to match an equivalent 50 win season "winning percentage."

50 wins in a 66 game season is equivalent to winning 62 games in an 82 game season.


That's not the right comparison to be making. It wouldn't really be "another" 50 win season because typically that means 50/82 = 61% wins. So to achieve that goal this season, we would need 61% x 66 games = 40 wins. So we only need 4 more wins to achieve that goal.

in '99 we went 37-13 for a 74% winning percentage... and that was still not considered a "50-win" season. Otherwise, they'd be saying that we accomplished that 14 years in a row, instead of 12 years in a row.

I definitely don't think we should go for 50 wins, but we're not going to be counted for making 50 wins without actually winning 50 games.

[maverick1948]

11-5 would do it for me. Resting the big 3 for the most part would be fine too. Manu, Jax and Diaw are the 3 players who need playing time to get back to top shape. The next 5 games are all winnable and should we get them, the season becomes win 4 and it is ours. So lets just get Cleveland and Boston on the road this week and come back home and dominate New Orleans.

[boutons_deux]

Tue, Apr 3 @ Cleveland

Wed, Apr 4 @ Boston PO

Fri, Apr 6 vs New Orleans

Sun, Apr 8 vs Utah

Mon, Apr 9 @ Utah

Wed, Apr 11 vs Los Angeles PO

Thu, Apr 12 vs Memphis PO

Sat, Apr 14 vs Phoenix

Mon, Apr 16 @ Golden State

Tue, Apr 17 @ Los Angeles PO

Wed, Apr 18 @ Sacramento

Fri, Apr 20 vs Los Angeles PO

Sun, Apr 22 vs Cleveland

Mon, Apr 23 vs Portland

Wed, Apr 25 @ Phoenix

Thu, Apr 26 @ Golden State

============

5 games VS playoff teams, including 3 against Lakers (2 of them @SA).

[Spurtacus]

12-2

8 home, 6 road

[Darkwaters]

It's going to be hard to win 12 of the next 14 - but who knows? Losing tonight in Boston would have doomed us. Yet we survive to fight another day.

[Arcadian]

in '99 we went 37-13 for a 74% winning percentage... and that was still not considered a "50-win" season. Otherwise, they'd be saying that we accomplished that 14 years in a row, instead of 12 years in a row.

I definitely don't think we should go for 50 wins, but we're not going to be counted for making 50 wins without actually winning 50 games.

Then 99 should be left out of the equation. So in reality, we won 50 games for 13 years in a row.*

*Year = standard 82 game season

The reasoning is quite simple. We did not "fail" to win 50 games in 99 because that implies that we performed worse than other years. You are inherently making that comparison, but it's a fallacy.

So this really comes down to one thing: winning percentage is more meaningful than "total number of wins," which is confounded by the number of games in a season.

[DMC]

They will win every game they can, but Pop isn't going to coach playoff level ball with a clinched seed and risk injury. He's going to rest his starters except Manu who he has to play in the last game of the season for old times sake.

[stnick2261]

Then 99 should be left out of the equation. So in reality, we won 50 games for 13 years in a row.*

*Year = standard 82 game season

The reasoning is quite simple. We did not "fail" to win 50 games in 99 because that implies that we performed worse than other years. You are inherently making that comparison, but it's a fallacy.

So this really comes down to one thing: winning percentage is more meaningful than "total number of wins," which is confounded by the number of games in a season.

The reasoning is quite simple. We failed to win 50 games in 99, not because we performed worse, but because there were less games played.

Hey, I'm not the one who is keeping the NBA stats, so don't blame me. The fact of the matter is that, when talking about winning percentage, we did really well 14 years in a row (and continuing)... but when you talk about 50-win seasons, then YES we failed to win 50 wins in '99.

And please don't asterisk the season, saying it doesn't count... when we had enough trouble with asterisks, saying the championship counted.

[Cow Eye]

I believe we're 2 or 3 games away from clinching a playoff spot. I'd be surprised after that if Pop was actively trying to win the rest of the games.

[JR3]

Pop will definitely sit guys at the end of the season.

[Borosai]

The bench will get those 50 wins.

[Venti Quattro]

The bench will get those 50 wins.

You want to sig bet they're not reaching 50 wins?

[Borosai]

You want to sig bet they're not reaching 50 wins?

:nope

[Seventyniner]

The streak should be a .600 win percent, not 50 wins. 49 wins in a regular season gets a .598, so .600 is a good cutoff.

[Venti Quattro]

:nope

What? Don't give icon answers; don't keep me guessing. Are you in or out?

[Borosai]

What? Don't give icon answers; don't keep me guessing. Are you in or out?

As exciting as it sounds, the odds aren't good enough to risk not representing for Matty.

Out. :bike:

[sventhedog]

unlikely, considering the fact that pop will rest his players.

[sanman53]

I asked Hollinger on his chat session today about the 50W season for the Spurs. His thoughts:

Me:
Do you see the Spurs going 12-2 the remainder continuing the 50 win season streak?

John Hollinger (2:32 PM)
No, they have some tough national TV games and several back to backs, and they are going to blatantly tank a couple of games to get guys rest.

[Spurtacus]

I asked Hollinger on his chat session today about the 50W season for the Spurs. His thoughts:

Me:
Do you see the Spurs going 12-2 the remainder continuing the 50 win season streak?

John Hollinger (2:32 PM)
No, they have some tough national TV games and several back to backs, and they are going to blatantly tank a couple of games to get guys rest.

Tank games? :lmao

[Wild Cobra Kai]

Tank games? :lmao

You didn't watch the Portland game earlier this year? Manu was out injured, and Pop sat both Tim and Tony because of the schedule. We lost by like 30.

Once we wrap up spot #2, I'm pretty sure Pop will pop in in neutral.

[TJastal]

You didn't watch the Portland game earlier this year? Manu was out injured, and Pop sat both Tim and Tony because of the schedule. We lost by like 30.

Once we wrap up spot #2, I'm pretty sure Pop will pop in in neutral.

That would be supremely stupid to let off the gas pedal completely, especially considering all the new acquisitions that need time to develop chemistry with the team.

[Spurtacus]

You didn't watch the Portland game earlier this year? Manu was out injured, and Pop sat both Tim and Tony because of the schedule. We lost by like 30.

Once we wrap up spot #2, I'm pretty sure Pop will pop in in neutral.

I've watched just about every game this year. But that isn't tanking. Spurs aren't playing for the lottery or purposely losing games to play a different playoff opponent. Resting players when you have a seed locked up is the smart thing to do.

[Obstructed_View]

That would be supremely stupid to let off the gas pedal completely, especially considering all the new acquisitions that need time to develop chemistry with the team.

Was playing Manu against Phoenix more or less stupid in your opinion?

[TJastal]

Was playing Manu against Phoenix more or less stupid in your opinion?

Well for starters Manu should be considered a special case and evaluated on an individual basis. But since the spurs had nothing to gain from winning that game vs the suns (in the standings), and also had no new acquisitions to work into the mix, I'll say it was just extremely dumb for him to play.

I really don't think anyone (players included) had an understanding of what Pop was trying to accomplish heading into the final weeks of the season last year. I just re-watched a replay of that injury he got by swiping at the ball of a driving Anthony Tolliver, and it seemed very unnecessary given the circumstances of the game, like one of those plays you would only think about doing in a hotly contested playoff game with big ramifications.
I think if the players had a better understanding of what was going on and what Pop was trying to do these types of unfortunate incidents would be mitigated somewhat.

Ultimately, nobody can really say for sure what Manu was thinking in that game, or whether he was just being typical "Manu" because that's just how he is, but if I was a betting man I would say had he a better understanding of what the plan was her perhaps doesn't make a hard risky slap at the ball like he did.

Now fast forward to this year, I think guys still need to play out the season to develop chemistry with Diaw, Jackson, & Mills and yes that includes Manu. The risk / reward in Manu's case is close but I'd still rather develop the chemistry. But also it's extremely helpful that guys understand this. Which means the coach should thoroughly explain what the main mission directives are heading into each game so guys aren't confused and unnecessarily putting themselves in harm's way.

[Wild Cobra Kai]

Ultimately, nobody can really say for sure what Manu was thinking in that game, or whether he was just being typical "Manu" because that's just how he is, but if I was a betting man I would say had he a better understanding of what the plan was her perhaps doesn't make a hard risky slap at the ball like he did.



?? Manu didn't slap at the ball against Phoenix. That was this year when he broke his hand against Minny. The play against Phoenix was one that happens every game like 30-40 times. When you run the P'n'R, the ballhandler throws out an arm bar with his off arm between himself and the pick to prevent the defender from shooting the gap. Hill tried anyway and broke Manu's elbow. That's the random senseless risk you take playing players in games YOU DON'T ABSOLUTELY NEED.

[TJastal]

?? Manu didn't slap at the ball against Phoenix. That was this year when he broke his hand against Minny. The play against Phoenix was one that happens every game like 30-40 times. When you run the P'n'R, the ballhandler throws out an arm bar with his off arm between himself and the pick to prevent the defender from shooting the gap. Hill tried anyway and broke Manu's elbow. That's the random senseless risk you take playing players in games YOU DON'T ABSOLUTELY NEED.

Okay, thanks for the correction WCK, Manu's had so many injuries I get em all confused sometimes. :drunk

The point still stands however. Maybe Manu doesn't throw that armbar with such force (or at all) if it is understood the game is a throwaway and absolutely meaningless.

What I'd like to know ---- has anyone yet figured out what Pop's plan was in that final regular season week last year? I remember reading dozens of speculation threads and no real conclusion ever drawn.

[Obstructed_View]

One would think that he was trying to get HCA over Chicago, since that's the only thing there was to gain from it.

I'm sort of on board with what you're suggesting, TJ, but I'd really rather see Diaw worked in sooner rather than later if that's indeed the plan. His lack of PT is starting to make him look like either insurance or incentive for some folks ahead of him to step up their game.

[Splits]

The problem with comparisons to last year's closing out the season is that we had peaked too early and were not playing well. We were 4-8 the last 3 weeks of the season. It started when Tim sprained his ankle against Golden State, which prompted a 6 game losing streak. Pop was trying to re-establish rhythm and consistency in the rotation going into the playoffs. We closed the season with a b2b against LA and PHO with 3 days off until the playoffs started. We threw the Laker game by sitting the big 3 and the PHO game was to get everyone some burn.

This year we're riding high, playing the best ball possible, and I'm sure it will be a much different approach to closing out the final 3 weeks. Seeding is probably the last thing on the coaching staff's mind, so I wouldn't be surprised to see the big 3 not playing both games of a b2b and the game in LAL in the middle of a b2b2b is probably a throwaway.

[TJastal]

The problem with comparisons to last year's closing out the season is that we had peaked too early and were not playing well. We were 4-8 the last 3 weeks of the season. It started when Tim sprained his ankle against Golden State, which prompted a 6 game losing streak. Pop was trying to re-establish rhythm and consistency in the rotation going into the playoffs.

So how is it "different" this year since we have 3 newly acquired players plus 2 rookies all trying to adjust and fit in? I would think that would make it even more of a priority tbh.


We closed the season with a b2b against LA and PHO with 3 days off until the playoffs started. We threw the Laker game by sitting the big 3 and the PHO game was to get everyone some burn.

This year we're riding high, playing the best ball possible, and I'm sure it will be a much different approach to closing out the final 3 weeks. Seeding is probably the last thing on the coaching staff's mind, so I wouldn't be surprised to see the big 3 not playing both games of a b2b and the game in LAL in the middle of a b2b2b is probably a throwaway.

I think a push to get home court advantage over the thunder is well worth the exta effort. Especially for a team not only as deep as the spurs but also because for the spurs court has so much impact.

[Splits]

So how is it "different" this year since we have 3 newly acquired players plus 2 rookies all trying to adjust and fit in? I would think that would make it even more of a priority tbh.

Make what more of a priority? There isn't much to "re-establish" since we haven't lost a game since Diaw and Mills joined the team. Like I said, the difference is that we're peaking and basically look unbeatable regardless of who is lacing it up, home or away. So the chemistry is there, the rotations are there, it is a matter of keeping everyone healthy and not regressing. Last year there was a lot to improve in the final 3 weeks, this year not so much.

Pop also hasn't changed the starting lineup by pulling Blair like he did near the end of the season last year. Now, one could argue he should, but he won't with two and half weeks left and after what happened last year.

[TJastal]

Make what more of a priority? There isn't much to "re-establish" since we haven't lost a game since Diaw and Mills joined the team. Like I said, the difference is that we're peaking and basically look unbeatable regardless of who is lacing it up, home or away. So the chemistry is there, the rotations are there, it is a matter of keeping everyone healthy and not regressing. Last year there was a lot to improve in the final 3 weeks, this year not so much.

Pop also hasn't changed the starting lineup by pulling Blair like he did near the end of the season last year. Now, one could argue he should, but he won't with two and half weeks left and after what happened last year.

Meh, call me a pessimist but I'm not at all convinced Pop has this team on the right track, despite the win streak. I'm not convinced Blair is the answer as a starter. I'm not convinced that Bonner won't choke in the playoffs. I'm not convinced that having Neal playing point guard is a wise move. And I sure don't have faith in Pop to make the right changes should they become necessary before it's much too late in the game (like what happened last year).

[TJastal]

They will win every game they can, but Pop isn't going to coach playoff level ball with a clinched seed and risk injury. He's going to rest his starters except Manu who he has to play in the last game of the season for old times sake.

:lmao

[therealtruth]

Meh, call me a pessimist but I'm not at all convinced Pop has this team on the right track, despite the win streak. I'm not convinced Blair is the answer as a starter. I'm not convinced that Bonner won't choke in the playoffs. I'm not convinced that having Neal playing point guard is a wise move. And I sure don't have faith in Pop to make the right changes should they become necessary before it's much too late in the game (like what happened last year).

Maybe dealing with injuries all year will make him more flexible in the playoffs.

[therealtruth]

Was playing Manu against Phoenix more or less stupid in your opinion?

I don't get why people don't get Pop's reasoning on this. Whether you accept that reason is a different thing. Pop wasn't playing that last game to beat the Bulls in the standings. He said he played the starters in the game so the team wouldn't be rusty for the playoffs. That was the whole purpose of him not playing the starters in the Lakers game and playing them in the Suns game. He felt the Suns game was closer to the playoffs so it kept the team more sharp.

[Obstructed_View]

I don't get why people don't get Pop's reasoning on this. Whether you accept that reason is a different thing. Pop wasn't playing that last game to beat the Bulls in the standings. He said he played the starters in the game so the team wouldn't be rusty for the playoffs. That was the whole purpose of him not playing the starters in the Lakers game and playing them in the Suns game. He felt the Suns game was closer to the playoffs so it kept the team more sharp.

Not sure what the difference is between "getting" his reasoning and "accepting" his reason. It basically boils down to whether or not you buy his story. I don't, because it makes no fucking sense. They had three days off before the Laker game, and the Spurs had gotten pasted by LA a few weeks before. Pop just got cute ducking those big TNT matchups and it bit them in the ass.

[Spurtacus]

bump cause I can bitches

[Venti Quattro]

You want to sig bet they're not reaching 50 wins?

:lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao

I would have lost. :lmao

:lmao wrong bout dem Spurs

[Venti Quattro]

:nope

You should have taken my bet. You'd have totally made an ass out of my shit prediction. :lmao

[Borosai]

You should have taken my bet. You'd have totally made an ass out of my shit prediction. :lmao

:lol I doubt anyone honestly thought they'd get fifty with the schedule and Pop sitting guys.

However, when Ed Harris is sitting at the end of the bench, you know it's deep.

[Spurtacular]

Damn, going 14-2 to hit 50 in the strike-shortened season was money. Too bad Stern fucked us over in the WCF.