Grades: Spurs @ Blazers - Feb. 7, 2019

[timvp]

https://i.imgur.com/vyRr8Mr.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/XJhfAIm.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/Mcua36x.jpg

The Spurs dropped to 0-3 on the 2019 Rodeo Road Trip after a roller coaster performance in Portland. When the ride stopped, the Blazers had handed the Spurs a 127-118 defeat.

In the first quarter, the offense was clicking and San Antonio was able to lead by three points, 34-31, at the end of the period. Unfortunately, things fell apart in the second quarter. The defense was horrendous, the offense started turning the ball over and the Spurs got outscored 39-23.

The deficit for the Spurs grew to 21 points with 7:45 remaining in the third quarter. That's when the roller coaster headed straight up. In a span of a little over five minutes, San Antonio outscored Portland 25-4 to tie the game, 88-88. During that explosion, the Spurs got 16 points from Rudy Gay on 6-for-6 shooting from the field, including 4-for-4 from three-point range.

That run turned out to be short-lived. The Blazers responded with a 20-9 spurt of their own to go up 108-97 with 7:39 remaining in the fourth quarter. The Spurs never regained any sort of momentum as the home team coasted to victory.

What's most to blame for the third straight Spurs loss? Offensively, the NBA's least turnover prone team turned the ball over too much. But by far the leading cause was the pitiful defense. San Antonio was just terrible in half court defense. Portland got clean look after clean look even when running the most basic of sets. That's a recipe for a road loss, particularly against a team that entered the game with a 22-8 home record.

-------------

LaMarcus Aldridge
https://i.imgur.com/1nluyNF.png
LaMarcus Aldridge didn't follow the gameplan that has been so very successful for him the last couple months. Instead of establishing himself in the low block and then using his fadeaways and jumpers as counter moves, he tried to do it the other way around ... and it was ugly. He was hitting shots from the perimeter early on but when those shots dried up, Aldridge tried to go to the post and had a very difficult time of it. He was turning the ball over, wasn't passing enough and then missed a few chippies. After scoring 13 points in the first quarter on 5-for-8 shooting, he scored four points the rest of the way on 2-for-11 shooting. Defensively, Aldridge was mostly going through the motions and offered little help of any kind.
Grade: C-
Summary: Aldridge played the wrong way.

-------------

DeMar DeRozan
https://i.imgur.com/ZKxGADZ.png
With Derrick White out with injury, DeMar DeRozan was the de facto point guard. He handled the ball a ton and wasn't bashful about calling his own number. Scoring-wise, I can't complain. DeRozan poured in 35 points by hitting half of his 28 field goal attempts and got the line eight times. However, though he scored well, he did nothing else nearly as well. DeRozan's playmaking was iffy at best, as that aspect of his night was marred by five turnover. It would have been helpful if he passed the ball more often and didn't try to single-handedly carry the team to victory. Noble thought; didn't work. Defensively, his intensity was lacking and he was giving up way too much airspace in just about every situation.
Grade: B
Summary: DeRozan put points on the board but didn't do much else.

-------------

Rudy Gay
https://i.imgur.com/vqYr2we.png
Rudy Gay's third quarter burst that saw him score 16 points in five minutes on 4-for-4 shooting on three-pointers got the Spurs back in the game. On the night, he was bright spot offensively. He efficiently put up 25 points, while hitting a season-high (and tying a career-high) five three-pointers. The lone critique I have about his offense was the loose ballhandling that led to four turnovers. Defensively, Gay was bad. He looked really slow on that end -- he couldn't stop anything on the perimeter and, to make matters worse, got pushed around in the paint.
Grade: B+
Summary: Gay got the Spurs back in it was a three-point barrage.

-------------

Bryn Forbes
https://i.imgur.com/yXVIEAs.png
Offensively, I have no complaints with Bryn Forbes. He took smart shots, shot it straight and was a constant threat. Defense was a different story. Forbes, predictably, couldn't deal with the Blazers star backcourt at all ... and his playing time suffered as a result. There was just no way to hide him on this night.
Grade: B-
Summary: Forbes helped on offense but gave it all back on the other end.

-------------

Davis Bertans
https://i.imgur.com/ucY2jSF.png
Davis Bertans, who shifted into the starting lineup with White sidelined, scored only two points in his 24 minutes. Truthfully, his minuscule offensive production wasn't his fault. He was barely getting any touches at all. With DeRozan looking to score and no other playmaker in the starting lineup, Bertans was left to observe from the perimeter. Defensively, his rebounding was better than usual but everything else was lacking. He wasn't physical enough, wasn't picking up his man quickly enough in transition and offered limited help.
Grade: C
Summary: Bertans was a forgotten man.

-------------

Patty Mills
https://i.imgur.com/gTa4B5z.png
Patty Mills' shot-selection from downtown was questionable a couple times but otherwise he was a plus on the offensive end. He was the team's best and most efficient playmaker, as evident by his eight assists and zero turnovers. Defensively, while I thought Mills exhibited good enough effort, the results were lacking -- to put it kindly. The Blazers had no problem shooting over him or getting by him.
Grade: B+
Summary: Mills helped on O, didn't help on D.

-------------

Marco Belinelli
https://i.imgur.com/hP9vIFY.png
Offensively, Marco Belinelli was okay. I liked his aggressiveness, even if he could have passed it better. He was confident on that end and limited his mistakes, which was helpful considering the carelessness of the starting lineup. Defensively, Belinelli was straight up putrid. He got beat every way possible: off the dribble, off back cuts, in transition, dying on screens, not helping, etc. The Spurs found it almost impossible to get a stop when Belinelli was on the court.
Grade: C
Summary: Belinelli's bad defense overshadowed everything else.

-------------

Dante Cunningham
https://i.imgur.com/W3QWUCI.png
Pretty good. I thought Dante Cunningham was the team's best defender tonight. (I don't think I've typed that sentence this season.) He was attentive, didn't back down from physicality and swarmed to the ball to offer timely help. Offensively, he successfully stayed out of the way and knocked down the one open look he had. If Cunningham can play like this, he's a useful depth piece.
Grade: A-
Summary: Cunningham came to play.

-------------

Jakob Poeltl
https://i.imgur.com/FUIlW00.png
The good: Jakob Poeltl cut to the basket hard, finished around the rim and was effective on the offensive glass. His decision-making offensively was swift and accurate. He was better than usual on the defensive glass. The bad: Poeltl protection of the rim was really poor. He failed to rotate a few times and just watched Blazers score at the rim at other times. The Spurs can't afford to have a sieve at backup center with all their other defensive problems.
Grade: B-
Summary: Poeltl was fine everywhere but defending the rim on defense.

-------------

Pop
https://i.imgur.com/x7B1It7.jpg
I can't find much blame for Pop. He stuck with a single backup center, which was an improvement. He played DeRozan and Aldridge reasonable amount of minutes. He pulled the plug on the worst defenders. Perhaps more minutes for Bertans could have helped but he wasn't touching the ball so his value was limited.
Grade: B+
Summary: Pop did just about all he could.

Looking ahead: The Rodeo Road Trip doesn't get any easier, as the Spurs next head to Salt Lake City for a game on Saturday. Beating the Jazz will be difficult but the Spurs should be motivated to put an end to their three-game losing streak. If the Spurs can take the good stretches from tonight and up their defensive intensity and focus about five notches, they have a chance to stop the tailspin.

[phxspurfan]

Bert needs to play a bigger role as he does in the wins. Bert is also very important on this version of the Spurs

[skookumchuck]

Bert needs to play a bigger role as he does in the wins. Bert is also very important on this version of the Spurs

No, you don't get it. Only thing important here is appeasing DD and LMA AND allowing Forbes to chuck and duck.

[dbestpro]

Front office D-, for leaving this team hanging without a true small forward.

[HarlemHeat37]

Belinelli's defensive performance in this game may have been the worst of any Spur this season, it was highlight reel-worthy..

[Blackhaus]

Thanks for the write up, don’t know how anybody gets above a C grade. I stopped watching in the second quarter as they couldn’t stop anything. Not really liking this new NBA where holding teams under 110 is considered good D.

[Slippy]

LA suffered the same as Davis. Didn't get ball in his spots or chance to set up when Demar was running the show. His rythym took a hit. Think amount of shots are inflated because of a few offensive tip ins in the 4th.

Demar missing from midrange and running the offense set the tone particularly in the second half. LA was forced to receive the ball in a crowd or rushed it when he did get rare touch. You could excuse all of Demar teammates with the same reason. Point is LA wasnt allowed to get comfortable. Missed derrick white big-time.

[TDomination]

It is frustrating when you simply can't get a stop when you truly need it.

I applaud the spurs for coming back but man I hate how quickly the game turns. We will be within 3 points and then 30 seconds later will suddenly be down by 11 because of 3 consecutive turnovers and consecutive 3pt makes by the opponent.

I've never seen us fall out of a game so fast as we've done multiple times this year.

We need help and it all starts on the defensive end.

We miss White badly

[monty4329]

This game was the perfect example how one can score 35 points and play like totat shit. Again, DDR was a total failure and extremely detrimental to the team. Stat-chaser sleeping on defense, always dribbling looking for his shot, turnover machine on pathetic passes to nobody.

What a stupid loss, the game was very winnable. I realize that 35 points on 14-28 can't possibly deserve a C, but since the game is played to be won and not to pad stats, well his grade must be a C-.

On the top of it, DDR basically took the ball away from LA when he was playing smartball in the paint. Now ell into the season, we can safely say DDR game doesn't fit at all this team.

[monty4329]

LA suffered the same as Davis. Didn't get ball in his spots or chance to set up when Demar was running the show. His rythym took a hit. Think amount of shots are inflated because of a few offensive tip ins in the 4th.

Demar missing from midrange and running the offense set the tone particularly in the second half. LA was forced to receive the ball in a crowd or rushed it when he did get rare touch. You could excuse all of Demar teammates with the same reason. Point is LA wasnt allowed to get comfortable. Missed derrick white big-time.

[r0drig0lac]

the best moment of this game of shit was when I saw after 200,000 games a modern lineup with Derozan / Bertans / Dante / Gay / Aldridge, while teams like the Nets are evolving and putting faces like Levert (6'5) Dinwidie (6 ' 6) and Russell (6'7) as point guard, Pop continues with this crap of micro ball keeping those dwarves (that regardless of how good they are offensively, will not be positive, because it's too easy to exploit them from the other side unless you're a spur, so in that case, you can not even post CJ Mcollum, the smallest guy on the court) on the court

[Sunmaster14]

Thanks for expeditious grades timvp, always pleasure to check them first thing in the morning here in Latvia.

Regarding Davis, I do not understand his role in the team if DDR is set free to iso as in this game. Bertans' forte is offence, but he can add little there without any touches (and here I mean not only shots, but also passes - he is a quick and willing passer, but this strength is not utilized if DDR ballhogs whole possession). I would like to believe this situation will improve once White/Murray return to the team, but will it really, if DDR is given 30+ mpg for his antics?

I have read some more enlightened posters here at spurstalk discuss how LMA and DDR can potentially work together efficiently on offense, but I just haven't seen it so far. LMA or Poetl + 4 shooters works for obvious reasons, but when both LMA and DDR are near the paint I feel it just makes life too easy for the defenders. Furthermore, I might be wrong, but I have the feeling that it is harder for our defense to recover after DDR's missed long 2's (compared to 3's or LMA's post-ups).

So the thing I cannot understand is if the plan of the POP/FO was to use DDR in such a manner, why they just did not trade Davis away for a 3-and-D wing before the deadline? I believe he is currently a positive asset and with such DDR-centric play-style Belinelli might even be more valuable to the team as he has that uncanny ability to swiftly and efficiently release 3s and long 2s out of balance and when heavily guarded.

[monty4329]

So the thing I cannot understand is if the plan of the POP/FO was to use DDR in such a manner, why they just did not trade Davis away for a 3-and-D wing before the deadline? I believe he is currently a positive asset and with such DDR-centric play-style Belinelli might even be more valuable to the team as he has that uncanny ability to swiftly and efficiently release 3s and long 2s out of balance and when heavily guarded.

Unfortunately there is no solution. If you have DDR on the court, it is going to be '90s basketball and a loss. Nobody in this roster is equipped to play DDR style of slow dribble+shot. None of the good qualities of this team -namely, timely passes and in-rythm 3point shots- are used when DDR gas the ball. I like him but he is a total negative. Unfortunately, unless you cut him, you must play him for several reasons (scoring and crybaby pouting included).

[vavvi]

A deserved loss. I get some of your complaints on shot selection or turnovers but we lost this game on D. We couldn't stop shit. Every opponent has his favorite shots available. Our D is painful to watch and it's a primary reason why we can't defend or build up our leads. If the opponent has the last shot you can basically write down 2 or 3 points automatically.

Also Blazers showed us the power of mid-season acquisitions. Hood just destroyed our bench. That's how today's league works: playoff teams get stronger on trade deadline. Tanking teams tank harder.

[vavvi]

Belinelli's defensive performance in this game may have been the worst of any Spur this season, it was highlight reel-worthy..

any Spur any season tbh

[tbdog]

Unfortunately there is no solution. If you have DDR on the court, it is going to be '90s basketball and a loss. Nobody in this roster is equipped to play DDR style of slow dribble+shot. None of the good qualities of this team -namely, timely passes and in-rythm 3point shots- are used when DDR gas the ball. I like him but he is a total negative. Unfortunately, unless you cut him, you must play him for several reasons (scoring and crybaby pouting included).

Offense was not a problem. And that is with LMA scoring 4 points in 3 quarters. Murray and White would have made a big difference, and that is something we cannot rely upon this season. It is what it is, but we lose to the Blazers in the playoffs because their best 2 players have an easy matchup.

[ceperez]

This game was the perfect example how one can score 35 points and play like totat shit. Again, DDR was a total failure and extremely detrimental to the team. Stat-chaser sleeping on defense, always dribbling looking for his shot, turnover machine on pathetic passes to nobody.

What a stupid loss, the game was very winnable. I realize that 35 points on 14-28 can't possibly deserve a C, but since the game is played to be won and not to pad stats, well his grade must be a C-.

On the top of it, DDR basically took the ball away from LA when he was playing smartball in the paint. Now ell into the season, we can safely say DDR game doesn't fit at all this team.

How the hell was this a winnable game? The opponent was clearly faster , more accurate and had better teamwork. It shows! DDR and LA don't know how to facilitate their other team mates, they aren't complete players.

[monty4329]

How the hell was this a winnable game? The opponent was clearly faster , more accurate and had better teamwork. It shows! DDR and LA don't know how to facilitate their other team mates, they aren't complete players.

Game was even after 34 minutes of play. It is the definition of winnable game. Then DDR got in.

[Slippy]

A deserved loss. I get some of your complaints on shot selection or turnovers but we lost this game on D. We couldn't stop shit. Every opponent has his favorite shots available. Our D is painful to watch and it's a primary reason why we can't defend or build up our leads. If the opponent has the last shot you can basically write down 2 or 3 points automatically.

Also Blazers showed us the power of mid-season acquisitions. Hood just destroyed our bench. That's how today's league works: playoff teams get stronger on trade deadline. Tanking teams tank harder.

The pace of spurs offense helps the team play better team defense so they are related If you got long twos or TO's , it usually leads to transition points where team d cant set up.. Also our guys are not rhe most athletic or high iq on d. They often looked lost running back who to guard. Pace on offense plays its part

[John B]

Thanks Timvp for the grades. You’re too generous with the grades. They don’t deserve better than C or D. Atrocious defense and giving the ball over. Spurs could’ve won this game and very capable of doing so. Spurs were just not taking care of the ball, and I’m talking about all the starters plus Belli. Demar tried to distribute, but to the other team! It was not even forced turnovers. I mean this team needs a lot of practice together, and please practice some more sfter that. Knowing where people at, help defense. True we are very capable and I think we can beat anybody if healthy and if in sync. When is White coming back?

[John B]

Oh I love Poeltl hassles and diving for the ball. Without Pau, the kid has better idea what’s expected of him. Please do not reinsert Pau. It messes with this kid’s development.

[cd98]

Would a line up of DeRozen and Murray work better (assuming Murray has improved his three point shot)? Murray can defend, but he’s not a playmaker. DeRozen can make plays but he can’t defend. I agree if while plays, he makes DeRozen obsolete bc he is a two way player. But for DeRozen, and pairing with Murray seems like it would work.

[monty4329]

Would a line up of DeRozen and Murray work better (assuming Murray has improved his three point shot)? Murray can defend, but he’s not a playmaker. DeRozen can make plays but he can’t defend. I agree if while plays, he makes DeRozen obsolete bc he is a two way player. But for DeRozen, and pairing with Murray seems like it would work.

We haven't really seen Murray and according to the general consensus he should have developed a serviceable jump shot too. Let's say he improved almost as much White improved this year. If that is the case, then DDR has no business being on the floor. We can go super small with Forbes, or load up with Bertans. After that, the rotations are pretty much set with Beli, Poeltl. I can't see how on earth DDR can find minutes if Murray will be able to score 12/game and White keeps performing at recent levels.

[BD24]

Sadly we’re stucj with DDR for the rest of this season. Maybe we can move him in the off-season if anyone is dumb enough to trade for him

[BackHome]

I like DEROZZ as a person but as a player he is not a fit for this team Spurs would be wise to move him this summer. Also Mills and Forbes we’re just terrible on defense exspecially on help defense they are just to small to stop anyone should be replaced or limited in minutes.

[sasaint]

Would a line up of DeRozen and Murray work better (assuming Murray has improved his three point shot)? Murray can defend, but he’s not a playmaker. DeRozen can make plays but he can’t defend. I agree if while plays, he makes DeRozen obsolete bc he is a two way player. But for DeRozen, and pairing with Murray seems like it would work.

And what do you propose to do with our 2nd most important player?

[cd98]

And what do you propose to do with our 2nd most important player?

Manu role. But this is next year.

[cd98]

We haven't really seen Murray and according to the general consensus he should have developed a serviceable jump shot too. Let's say he improved almost as much White improved this year. If that is the case, then DDR has no business being on the floor. We can go super small with Forbes, or load up with Bertans. After that, the rotations are pretty much set with Beli, Poeltl. I can't see how on earth DDR can find minutes if Murray will be able to score 12/game and White keeps performing at recent levels.

Murray isn’t a playmaker. He doesn’t have White’s skill or DeRozen’s skill as a playmaker in the half court.

[ceperez]

Murray isn’t a playmaker. He doesn’t have White’s skill or DeRozen’s skill as a playmaker in the half court.

I agree. Does anyone have a delusion that he was a playmaker last year? At best, he's as good as Derozan as a playmaker. But nowhere close to White's skill.

Murray elite skill was guarding guys like Westbrook.

[sasaint]

Manu role. But this is next year.

Well...!

[Billy Cobham]

I would give CJ an A.

[timtonymanu]

Pop should get an F for standing pat at this trade deadline.

[spurs10]

Thank for the grades! This was another tough loss. I was looking hopeful in the 3rd when Gay went off, but TO's and D killed us. Let's indeed hope SLC sees the team playing with all they got!
:flag:

[Spurs Homer]

Wow!

Absolutely zero mention of Pop pulling Gay out of the game when Gay was scorching red hot?

That was when the game went to shit. It is a cardinal sin to pull a player in the middle of one of his hottest streaks of his career?

WTF?

[Keepin' it real]

Wow!

Absolutely zero mention of Pop pulling Gay out of the game when Gay was scorching red hot?

That was when the game went to shit. It is a cardinal sin to pull a player in the middle of one of his hottest streaks of his career?

WTF?

:pop:

You mustn't mess with MY rotations.

:lobt: X 5

[phxspurfan]

the best moment of this game of shit was when I saw after 200,000 games a modern lineup with Derozan / Bertans / Dante / Gay / Aldridge, while teams like the Nets are evolving and putting faces like Levert (6'5) Dinwidie (6 ' 6) and Russell (6'7) as point guard, Pop continues with this crap of micro ball keeping those dwarves (that regardless of how good they are offensively, will not be positive, because it's too easy to exploit them from the other side unless you're a spur, so in that case, you can not even post CJ Mcollum, the smallest guy on the court) on the court

If Pop had LeVert, Dinwiddie and Russell (plus maybe an LMA), that would be a substantial upgrade over this roster. And if he was coaching the Nets in the lEast, they'd be like the 2 or 3 seed :lol


instead he's equipped with a 50 year old Gasol, Quincy Poindexter some paper clips and a used napkin.

[timvp]

Wow!

Absolutely zero mention of Pop pulling Gay out of the game when Gay was scorching red hot?

That was when the game went to shit. It is a cardinal sin to pull a player in the middle of one of his hottest streaks of his career?

WTF?

I know Reggie Mill:lolr harped on that but it was a pretty dumb point, per usual.

1) Gay had just picked up his fourth foul in the third quarter. That's an automatic sit for most coaches, including Pop.

2) It was already beyond the point he's usually taken out. Gay's not someone to push health- and rest-wise.

3) He twisted his ankle during his explosion. In fact, when Pop took him out, the trainers were working on his ankle until the fourth quarter.

[DPG21920]

This team has no resilience for the most part and I still can’t figure out how this team falls being double digits nearly every other game?

[timvp]

This team has no resilience for the most partPretty resilient last night, tbh.


and I still can’t figure out how this team falls being double digits nearly every other game?Bad defense + explosive offense + higher scoring games = Not surprising or a big deal to fall behind double-digits in today's NBA, IMO.

Falling behind by 10 points these days is like falling behind by five points back in '99.

[wildbill2u]

The problem with grades is that they evaluate individual effort and skill sets on display in a particular game. That's well and good and offers something of a statistical point of view. However, this team has to be rated as how the units or lineups play together to get a really good evaluation of the team. The fact is that with White out due to injury, the team, as currently evolved, has no defensive glue and has to include at least two or more players on the court who have serious defensive liabilities.

Terrible defenders: Gasol, Forbes, Bellinelli, Mills, Walker,
Marginal defenders: Cunningham, DDR, Gay, Poertl

No offense put on the floor with these players can overcome another decent team since collectively they can't defend at a reasonable NBA level.

[DPG21920]

Pretty resilient last night, tbh.

Bad defense + explosive offense + higher scoring games = Not surprising or a big deal to fall behind double-digits in today's NBA, IMO.

Falling behind by 10 points these days is like falling behind by five points back in '99.

I’m not talking about one quarter. I’m talking about the fact that they are like 6-24 in games they fall behind 10+. Is the fact they fall behind so much the issue? Or that they can rarely right the ship other than a few runs now & again.

They have 3+ 30 point losses and routinely fall behind by more than just “10”. They either win or can’t compete. It’s bizarre.

[Down Under]

I’m not talking about one quarter. I’m talking about the fact that they are like 6-24 in games they fall behind 10+. Is the fact they fall behind so much the issue? Or that they can rarely right the ship other than a few runs now & again.

They have 3+ 30 point losses and routinely fall behind by more than just “10”. They either win or can’t compete. It’s bizarre.
I'd like to know what the record is in those game with White or without White/when he's gotten into foul trouble. They just can't stop penetration on the perimeter when he isn't on the floor.

[timvp]

I’m not talking about one quarter. I’m talking about the fact that they are like 6-24 in games they fall behind 10+. Is the fact they fall behind so much the issue? Or that they can rarely right the ship other than a few runs now & again.

Serious questions:

1) Do you know where to find the stats for all teams for how often they fall behind by 10+ and what their records are in those games? I'd be interested to see how the Spurs compare. My instincts tell me the Spurs would be within a normal range for both categories but I could be wrong. I think we just be spoiled from 20+ years of greatness and this is what normal NBA teams deal with. But if you could point out those stats for other teams, that'd be some interesting digging.

I looked but didn't find it. Closest I found was this: http://www.nbaminer.com/leading-and-winning/ ... and the Spurs 20% win percentage when trailing by 10+ (according to you) seems to be in line but it's not comparing apples to apples.

2) Are the Spurs really 26-1 in close games (games they haven't trailed by 10+)? That'd be a pretty damn impressive stat, tbh.


3) If number two is accurate, what was the game they lost?

TIA.

[DPG21920]

Serious questions:

1) Do you know where to find the stats for all teams for how often they fall behind by 10+ and what their records are in those games? I'd be interested to see how the Spurs compare. My instincts tell me the Spurs would be within a normal range for both categories but I could be wrong. I think we just be spoiled from 20+ years of greatness and this is what normal NBA teams deal with. But if you could point out those stats for other teams, that'd be some interesting digging.

I looked but didn't find it. Closest I found was this: http://www.nbaminer.com/leading-and-winning/ ... and the Spurs 20% win percentage when trailing by 10+ (according to you) seems to be in line but it's not comparing apples to apples.

2) Are the Spurs really 26-1 in close games (games they haven't trailed by 10+)? That'd be a pretty damn impressive stat, tbh.


3) If number two is accurate, what was the game they lost?

TIA.

So SA is actually 6-23 in those games (not 6-24) per Paul Garcia. I Don’t know 1, but just from watching spurs seem to be down more than most (especially west playoff teams or the top 4 east teams). I will ask Paul tho.

I believe that would make them 25-2 in the other games one of the losses being Bulls.

[Robz4000]

Serious questions:

1) Do you know where to find the stats for all teams for how often they fall behind by 10+ and what their records are in those games? I'd be interested to see how the Spurs compare. My instincts tell me the Spurs would be within a normal range for both categories but I could be wrong. I think we just be spoiled from 20+ years of greatness and this is what normal NBA teams deal with. But if you could point out those stats for other teams, that'd be some interesting digging.

I looked but didn't find it. Closest I found was this: http://www.nbaminer.com/leading-and-winning/ ... and the Spurs 20% win percentage when trailing by 10+ (according to you) seems to be in line but it's not comparing apples to apples.

2) Are the Spurs really 26-1 in close games (games they haven't trailed by 10+)? That'd be a pretty damn impressive stat, tbh.


3) If number two is accurate, what was the game they lost?

TIA.


So SA is actually 6-23 in those games (not 6-24) per Paul Garcia. I Don’t know 1, but just from watching spurs seem to be down more than most (especially west playoff teams or the top 4 east teams). I will ask Paul tho.

I believe that would make them 25-2 in the other games one of the losses being Bulls.

The other one was the Memphis game at home iirc.

[tlongII]

timvp is right. Dammit.

[DPG21920]

Serious questions:

1) Do you know where to find the stats for all teams for how often they fall behind by 10+ and what their records are in those games? I'd be interested to see how the Spurs compare. My instincts tell me the Spurs would be within a normal range for both categories but I could be wrong. I think we just be spoiled from 20+ years of greatness and this is what normal NBA teams deal with. But if you could point out those stats for other teams, that'd be some interesting digging.

I looked but didn't find it. Closest I found was this: http://www.nbaminer.com/leading-and-winning/ ... and the Spurs 20% win percentage when trailing by 10+ (according to you) seems to be in line but it's not comparing apples to apples.

2) Are the Spurs really 26-1 in close games (games they haven't trailed by 10+)? That'd be a pretty damn impressive stat, tbh.


3) If number two is accurate, what was the game they lost?

TIA.

So unfortunately it’s a manual process and not one done by team

[DPG21920]

Serious questions:

1) Do you know where to find the stats for all teams for how often they fall behind by 10+ and what their records are in those games? I'd be interested to see how the Spurs compare. My instincts tell me the Spurs would be within a normal range for both categories but I could be wrong. I think we just be spoiled from 20+ years of greatness and this is what normal NBA teams deal with. But if you could point out those stats for other teams, that'd be some interesting digging.

I looked but didn't find it. Closest I found was this: http://www.nbaminer.com/leading-and-winning/ ... and the Spurs 20% win percentage when trailing by 10+ (according to you) seems to be in line but it's not comparing apples to apples.

2) Are the Spurs really 26-1 in close games (games they haven't trailed by 10+)? That'd be a pretty damn impressive stat, tbh.


3) If number two is accurate, what was the game they lost?

TIA.

When did it become acceptable to get embarrassed? Not once. Not twice. Not three times. But numerous times?

[timvp]

So SA is actually 6-23 in those games (not 6-24) per Paul Garcia. I Don’t know 1, but just from watching spurs seem to be down more than most (especially west playoff teams or the top 4 east teams). I will ask Paul tho. Tbh, I don't see many teams losing games in which they never trail by double figures these days. With more teams relying on three-pointers and scoring way up, that has naturally made games streakier and naturally increased the odds of going down double figures.

Sure, the Spurs these days get down more often by 10+ ... but it's a product of the era and a product of the fact that it's not one of the historically great Spurs teams of the past 20+ years.


I believe that would make them 25-2 in the other games one of the losses being Bulls.The Spurs being 25-2 in games in which they've never trailed by more than 10 might be more statistically impressive than being 6-24 in games they've trailed by 10+, tbh.


So unfortunately it’s a manual process and not one done by teamToo bad. Good job finding out, though.

My guess is that there's nothing too out of the norm with these stats:

1) That the Spurs have trailed by at least 10 points in 24 of their 26 losses.

2) That the Spurs winning percentage is 20% in games in which they've trailed by 10+ points.

Which of these two stats has you concerned?

A team like the Warriors would have a much higher winning percentage in scenario number two but my guess is that league wide that percentage can't be much higher than 25%.


When did it become acceptable to get embarrassed? Not once. Not twice. Not three times. But numerous times?What does this have to do with the numbers being discussed, tbh?

[DPG21920]

Tbh, I don't see many teams losing games in which they never trail by double figures these days. With more teams relying on three-pointers and scoring way up, that has naturally made games streakier and naturally increased the odds of going down double figures.

Sure, the Spurs these days get down more often by 10+ ... but it's a product of the era and a product of the fact that it's not one of the historically great Spurs teams of the past 20+ years.

The Spurs being 25-2 in games in which they've never trailed by more than 10 might be more statistically impressive than being 6-24 in games they've trailed by 10+, tbh.

Too bad. Good job finding out, though.

My guess is that there's nothing too out of the norm with these stats:

1) That the Spurs have trailed by at least 10 points in 24 of their 26 losses.

2) That the Spurs winning percentage is 20% in games in which they've trailed by 10+ points.

Which of these two stats has you concerned?

A team like the Warriors would have a much higher winning percentage in scenario number two but my guess is that league wide that percentage can't be much higher than 25%.

What does this have to do with the numbers being discussed, tbh?

Everything to do with it? I am not so sure that Spurs are in the norm with how many huge deficits they face and it to me is a symptom of a team with no leadership, resilience and major flaws.

Like, losing on the road is no big deal. But getting your ass whooped and embarrassed on a semi regular basis is something that should make you seriously evaluate what type of team you have built.

What has me concerned is the fact they get down so big, so often. I don’t think many good teams could get out of deficits that big; I also think most good teams dont face them as frequently so that is my concern.

Beyond that, it’s about what does getting down like that mean? I know a loss is a loss, but it has to say something that the team can’t lose competitively.

[DPG21920]

I guess the better way to go about this is; you don’t see a big issue with a team that has lost by 20+ I think 5+ times and beyond that, you are ok with the way the team is playing and the outlook over the next year or two with this core?

[timvp]

Everything to do with it? I am not so sure that Spurs are in the norm with how many huge deficits they face and it to me is a symptom of a team with no leadership, resilience and major flaws.Sounds like you're diagnosing a disease before knowing whether or not anything is wrong in terms of how often a team is down 10+ points and their winning percentage in such games.


What has me concerned is the fact they get down so big, so often. I don’t think many good teams could get out of deficits that big; I also think most good teams dont face them as frequently so that is my concern.Sounds like a good research project, tbh. I think Spurs are probably somewhere in the normal range but I could be wrong.


I guess the better way to go about this is; you don’t see a big issue with a team that has lost by 20+ I think 5+ timesDifferent question, tbh. I agree that the number of blowout losses the Spurs have suffered this season is out of the norm for teams with similar records. But they've probably blown other teams out more often than teams with similar records ... so, I don't know what there is to take from either number. Could be as simple as the Spurs get blown out when their porous defense is figured out and they can blow out other teams when their defense plays better than usual. Maybe something more sinister is afoot but Occam's razor would say otherwise.


and beyond that, you are ok with the way the team is playing and the outlook over the next year or two with this core?Completely different question, tbh. Do I think differently about this team going forward because of the type of losses they are suffering? Not really. If they were blowing close games left and right but their record and point differential were the same, I wouldn't be more optimistic or less optimistic, tbh.

[DPG21920]

Sounds like you're diagnosing a disease before knowing whether or not anything is wrong in terms of how often a team is down 10+ points and their winning percentage in such games.

Sounds like a good research project, tbh. I think Spurs are probably somewhere in the normal range but I could be wrong.

Different question, tbh. I agree that the number of blowout losses the Spurs have suffered this season is out of the norm for teams with similar records. But they've probably blown other teams out more often than teams with similar records ... so, I don't know what there is to take from either number. Could be as simple as the Spurs get blown out when their porous defense is figured out and they can blow out other teams when their defense plays better than usual. Maybe something more sinister is afoot but Occam's razor would say otherwise.

Completely different question, tbh. Do I think differently about this team going forward because of the type of losses they are suffering? Not really. If they were blowing close games left and right but their record and point differential were the same, I wouldn't be more optimistic or less optimistic, tbh.

While different questions, I think they are all adjacent. I definitely dont have any formal numbers to back it up, and you may be right, but my gut tells me that they stand out (if you look at only the 12-14 best teams).

Too me, if it were a matter of seeing a lot of spark and potential, even in losses I would be ok. But to me, the way they are losing and how they are losing causes me to retroactively have way more concern about the flaws in this team and outlook moving forward.

Spurs made their bed by trading Kawhi for DeRozan. Now the question is, since they chose that direction, where do they go from here?