The most lopsided stat in NBA history?

[Note: for those who don't like to read long posts, I will summarize. Since the All-Star break, the Spurs have averaged 17.3 Free Throw Attempts Per Game. I'm pretty sure that is the lowest of any team in the last 20 years, if not longer. With such a historical discrepancy, it's amazing that they still have one of the league's best records.]

I was looking at the Spurs' stats earlier, and noticed that they are dead last in Free Throw Attempts Per Game. (That's a little hard to believe, given that there are some really piss-poor teams in the league.) But then I realized that their average of 19.8 FTA/G is the lowest that I can ever remember seeing. To give you some idea of how bad that is, the Toronto Raptors are averaging 22.8 FTA/G this season. The Spurs are shooting about 75% from the FT line, so that means that the are giving up 2.25 points per game, right off the top, to the worst teams in the league.

But then I noticed that, since the All-Star break, the Spurs have been getting only 17.3 FTA/G. That's so damned low, I had to check some other sources, to be sure it wasn't a mistake. It isn't a mistake. It may be the lowest FTA average in the shot-clock era. I've only been able to look back as far as the 2001-2002 season so far, but it is the lowest total I've found. Think about all the dreadfully awful lottery teams in the last 8 years... none of them went to the line as infrequently as this Spurs team.

Let me try to put it into perspective: since the All-Star Break, the Spurs have been giving up 6 points per game to the Wizards, Clippers, and Kings - on the basis of FTA alone. Those 3 teams have a combined winning percentage of under .300, and they are absolutely fucking terrible. And they have gone to the line over 8 times per game more than the Spurs. With the Spurs FT% of about .750, they are giving up 6 PPG to the three worst teams in the league.

If you look at stats very much, particularly point differential (Points For minus Points Against), you know that is a ridiculously big margin. The Spurs have a point differential of +3.97 PPG, which is 5th best in the league. But they are playing at a disadvantage of 2-8 PPG, against every other team in the league! I admit that the other teams get fewer FTA when playing against the Spurs, so the numbers are a little misleading. But when you are looking at season averages, it still means that the Spurs are having to work a hell of a lot harder to put points on the board.

The main point (as I said above) is that the Spurs' FTA/G since the break are the lowest that any team has had in the last 8 years. And a cursory check suggests that it is the lowest in the last 20 years, at least. That includes teams like OKC, whose starting 5 have a total of 8 years prior NBA experience. That includes the 04-05 Atlanta Hawks, who went 13-69. Hell, the 88-89 Miami Heat (whose best two players were Kevin Edwards and Rory Sparrow, and went 15-67) went to the line about 8 times per game more than the Spurs have since the All-Star break.

I know that Manu has been out, and Tim has been less than 100%. But isn't it a little bit hard to believe that this year's Spurs are the worst team in the last 20 years in getting to the line? Keep in mind that during that time, Tony Parker has been taking it to the rack an an incredible pace. Either this is a .500 team that is seriously over-achieving, or the officiating is totally broken.

I guess I don't need to tell you which answer I pick.:sick

.

I'm pretty sure the Spurs have one of the best records since the All-Star break. I think you're just looking too much into it. Manu and Tim have been out, and they get to the line a lot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Leetonidas

I'm pretty sure the Spurs have one of the best records since the All-Star break. I think you're just looking too much into it. Manu and Tim have been out, and they get to the line a lot.

---

Did you read the whole post? The lowest FTA/Game in modern history? Lower than the worst lottery teams of the last 20 years? Are all the other players on the team, other than Tim and Manu, really the worst scrubs of the last couple of decades?

I don't think most people will agree with you.

[Edit: Before you answer, look at the 88-89 Heat team. They got 8 more FTA/game than this Spur team? Eight attempts per game... +6 PPG difference? http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/MIA/1989.html

These Spurs aren't built to get to the line. The only players who get to the line at all are the Big Three and George Hill. With Manu out, Duncan slowed and Hill no longer playing point guard, that leaves just Parker.

Earlier in the season, Bonner was on pace to shoot less free throw attempts per minute than anyone in NBA history. Players like Mason, Finley, Thomas, Udoka and Bowen all hardly get to the line. Add in a slower than usual pace and the fact that the team relies so heavily on three-point shooting ... and it's not too surprising.

The lack of free throw attempts was a problem last season and with Bonner and Mason added to the rotation, the problem was bound to get worse.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by timvp

Add in a slower than usual pace and the fact that the team relies so heavily on three-point shooting ... and it's not too surprising.

---

Slower than usual pace and depending a lot more on 3P shooting? We're putting up 79.7 FGA per game, and 19.9 3P attempts. The last time we won a championship? We put up 77.2 FGA per game, and 19.0 3P attempts. Slower pace in the championship year, and almost as many field goal attempts. But that team went to the line about 6 times per game more than this one.

I know this team isn't built to get to the line. But are they really the worst team in the last 20 years, in that department? Damn.

One less than obvious advantage of adding Gooden is that he's also an 86% FT shooter. Once he gets up to speed, he should be able to get to the line quite a bit.

Free throw shooting percentage doesn't do any good if the refs don't blow their whistles. Look at the Nets since the All-Star break:

Nets FGA - 79.4 Spurs FGA - 79.9
Nets FG% - 46.2 Spurs FG% - 46.3
Nets 3PA - 23.1 Spurs 3PA - 18.8
Nets 3P% - 38.0 Spurs 3P% - 39.9
Nets RBs - 7.7/27.8 Spurs RBs - 8.8/34.1
Nets TO - 12.1 Spurs TO - 10.9

So why are the Nets putting up more points than the Spurs? It has a lot to do with 6.3 more FTA per game.

The Spurs numbers aren't just low... they are lower than anybody in the last 20 years... by a good margin. It's not their FT shooting percentage, it's the fact that the aren't getting the calls. TP should have gotten enough additional attempts during this stretch to keep their total attempts higher than 17 per game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GSH

Free throw shooting percentage doesn't do any good if the refs don't blow their whistles. Look at the Nets since the All-Star break:

Nets FGA - 79.4 Spurs FGA - 79.9
Nets FG% - 46.2 Spurs FG% - 46.3
Nets 3PA - 23.1 Spurs 3PA - 18.8
Nets 3P% - 38.0 Spurs 3P% - 39.9
Nets RBs - 7.7/27.8 Spurs RBs - 8.8/34.1
Nets TO - 12.1 Spurs TO - 10.9

So why are the Nets putting up more points than the Spurs? It has a lot to do with 6.3 more FTA per game.

The Spurs numbers aren't just low... they are lower than anybody in the last 20 years... by a good margin. It's not their FT shooting percentage, it's the fact that the aren't getting the calls. TP should have gotten enough additional attempts during this stretch to keep their total attempts higher than 17 per game.

---

It probably doesn't help that TP falls to the ground every damn time he drives.

GSH,

A couple of things:

• You need to compensate for the game's pace. The number of opportunities per game to go to the charity line diminishes if you use less possessions per game, and the Spurs are a slow pace team.
  
• The top 2 players getting to the FT line have been Manu and Tim for quite some time now. The former is not playing, the latter has knee problems that may hamper his mobility and aggressiveness. It is no surprising that the Spurs do not go to the line that often.

Cheers,
-R

This was why the Spurs chased after Corey Maggette during the off-season.

Spurs currently rank 29th in the NBA for points in the paint at 33.9; which is down from last years average of 35.2 but at the same rank of 29th. Spurs therefore currently scoring 34.9% of their points in the paint, versus 42.5% as recently as January. Maybe contributing to low FTA/game. Detroit, Dallas, and New Orleans also clustered at the bottom in both categories.

Points in the Paint
FTA

Also, the Spurs apparently ranked dead last in FTA last season as well.

Another nice post from GSH, by the way.

... and I'm over a hundred.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chieflion

This was why the Spurs chased after Corey Maggette during the off-season.

---

That seems so far away.

I see this as a weakness for our current roster honestly. We are too dependent on the 3ball. If our outside shooters are hot, we are good. otherwise, we only really have tony and manu that can slash. Hill needs to learn because his aggressiveness in getting to the rim has diminished.

Low pace team who is relying on open treys, nothing surprising here.
As timvp stated, we have tony and manu who get some form slashing and tim from working the low post. On top of that, usually opponents try not to foul manu and tony to avoid and 1s.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by timvp

These Spurs aren't built to get to the line. The only players who get to the line at all are the Big Three and George Hill. With Manu out, Duncan slowed and Hill no longer playing point guard, that leaves just Parker.

Earlier in the season, Bonner was on pace to shoot less free throw attempts per minute than anyone in NBA history. Players like Mason, Finley, Thomas, Udoka and Bowen all hardly get to the line. Add in a slower than usual pace and the fact that the team relies so heavily on three-point shooting ... and it's not too surprising.

The lack of free throw attempts was a problem last season and with Bonner and Mason added to the rotation, the problem was bound to get worse.

---

But the point is, teams that are under 30 wins a season REALLY had players who should get to the line more than Duncan and Parker? Even WITH Manu out, the Spurs should not be seeing the lowest # of FT attempts in the past TWENTY YEARS. Consider that for a second. It's insane.

Of course, the fact that Duncan gets hacked on every single possession with rarely a beneficial call probably has a lot to do with this.

the only interesting stat is free throws attempted against free throws allowed per game.

and guess what, it's 19.8 against 19.8, and we shoot these FT at exactly the same % than our opponent against us (77 %).

Which means we're not winning nor giving up a SINGLE ONE POINT in the FT area compared to our opponents.


though, it would be interesting to look at this stat in the matchup against the TOP teams to see if we have a disadvantage here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kace

the only interesting stat is free throws attempted against free throw allowed.

and guess what, it's 19.8 against 19.8, and we shoot these FT at exactly the same % than our opponent against us (77 %).

Which means we're not winning nor giving up a single one point in the FT area compared to our opponents.

---

I was about to say that.
People tend to forget only direct confrontation matters.
I don't see the problem if Devin Harris average 9.3 FTA/game

Against the Spurs he only had 12 in 2 games... guess what, in these two games Parker also had 12 FTA.

now the interesting part would be to know why there are so few FT in the spurs game (19.8 +19.8 = 39.6, which should be by a wide margin the lowest FT total per game).

Pace is an obvious part of the equation but there should be others explanations.

well, let's look at these FTattempted against FT allowed against the TOP teams.

i choose boston, cleveland, orlando, LA, houston, utah, NOH and denver.

in 20 games we have a deficit of ten total FT attempted against these team which is 0.5 less FT attempted per game against them. not huge.

but if we look at it, Denver has a huge advanatge against us in FTA. without denver, in 17 games played against the 7 others top teams i choose, we're having 21 more FTA than our opponent, which is 1.24 more FTA per game.

so, we're really not so bad in the FTA area, even against the TOP teams this year, Denver being the exception.


Team by team, difference between FT attempted per game against FT allowed per game, if i didn't do any mistake (i looked at it quickly, don't hesitate to verify these numbers):


Boston: +10 (1 game)
Cleveland: +1.5 (2 games)
Orlando: -1 (2 games)
LA: -1.7 (3 games)
Houston: +1.75 (4 games)
Utah: +3 (2 games)
NOH: + 0.7 (3 games)
Denver: -10.3 (3 games)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kace

the only interesting stat is free throws attempted against free throws allowed per game.

and guess what, it's 19.8 against 19.8, and we shoot these FT at exactly the same % than our opponent against us (77 %).

Which means we're not winning nor giving up a SINGLE ONE POINT in the FT area compared to our opponents.


though, it would be interesting to look at this stat in the matchup against the TOP teams to see if we have a disadvantage here.

---

If you assume that the other teams in the league play defense as well as we do, then there is some merit to that. (But not much.) Otherwise, it's completely fucking ridiculous. One thing you're not considering is that since the break, our defense has improved. But our opponents FT attempts have risen significantly, while our FT attempts have dropped significantly.

It's late, but I'll post some more direct numbers later. For now, consider a couple of things:

1. If the Spurs have so few free throw attempts because of pace, then shouldn't their assists and rebounds reflect the same thing? If you pace-adjust those numbers, the Spurs are off the charts.

2. Since the break, the Spurs' 3-point attempts have dropped significantly. They have been taking about the same number of 3's they took in their last championship season. They haven't been "living by the 3" nearly as much as they did early in the season. You may not have noticed the shift, but the numbers don't lie.

3. The Spurs have also been taking a much bigger percentage of their 2-point attempts in the paint than you might guess. I'll try and pull some exact numbers - but you might want to have a look at some of the game play-by-plays and notice how many of their shots (made and missed) are in the paint. All I'm saying is that they aren't drawing enough whistles on those plays.

4. The Spurs' 2-point FG% has been much higher than the Lakers', Celtics', Cavs', or Magic's. If you still believe that they are taking more than their share of jump shots, then you have to conclude that they are the best-shooting team in the league. You can't have it both ways. If they are shooting a much higher percentage, from much farther away, they are better shooters. Does it feel like they are the best-shooting team in the league? I'm telling you, they are taking a lot more shots near the rim than you think. Especially since the break.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GSH

One thing you're not considering is that since the break, our defense has improved. But our opponents FT attempts have risen significantly, while our FT attempts have dropped significantly.

---

I don't see your problem with that.
It is not that simple, but an improved defense probably means that you are playing more physical. So it is not really surprising that our opponents FT attempts have risen.

We also have only 3 players shooting at least 4 FT/game. One is out.
No surprise to see a drop in our FTA.


And from your original post:

Quote:

---

But when you are looking at season averages, it still means that the Spurs are having to work a hell of a lot harder to put points on the board.

---

I have to disagree with that.
In the top 10 in FTA/game, you have Kevin Martin, Wade, Maggette, Bosh, Stoudemire, Carmelo Anthony. A list of players who have missed a number of games through their career because of injuries.
I can't believe it is a coincidence. IMO, you have to work hard to shoot a lot of FT.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mathbzh

In the top 10 in FTA/game, you have Kevin Martin

---

You invalidate any argument you have with this.

Kevin Martin shoots more FTA than Tim Duncan and Tony Parker.

Consider that for just a second.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cry Havoc

You invalidate any argument you have with this.

Kevin Martin shoots more FTA than Tim Duncan and Tony Parker.

Consider that for just a second.

---

So what?

I never said it is a good or bad thing to shoot a lot of FT.
All I say is that you need to work hard to obtain FT...

I wonder what argument you are talking about.

I suspect you have found something; and I suspect it is because SA's superstars (Tim and Tony, this season; Manu is not included because he hasn't played enough) don't get the level of "respect" that other stars get. You could confirm this by FTA's/g for each team and subtracting the top 2 generators of FTA from each team...

Consider that TD gets 6.7 fta/36 and tony gets 5.1. (on a per game basis, TD gets 6.4 and tony gets 4.8 fta/g). According to 82games.com Duncan is 22nd (17%) (in the league in % of fouls drawn per shot attempt. While TP, is 98th (10%)... Duncan is 8th in the league at and 1's drawn, and Parker is 58th. If I could figure out a way to sort the data for big men, I might find that TD gets his fair share, but I strongly suspect that TP gets a lot less calls than he "should".

PS to continue the comparison to NJ you started. Their top 2 are Harris and Carter. Harris is 3ed in the league at and 1's, carter is 36th. Harris is 3ed (21%) in the league at % of fouls per shot attempt, and Carter is 96th (10%). FTA/36 is 9.2 for Harris and 5.0 for Carter (9.3 and 5.1 per game respectively). The top 2 stars generate 3.2 fta/game more for NJ, which is half of your observed 6.3 FTA/game (spread over less than 30% of the minutes available TP MPG = 33.9, TD MPG = 34.6, combined = 68.5 of 240 MPG = 28.5%. For Carter and Harris, the equivalent percentage is 30.6%).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mathbzh

So what?

I never said it is a good or bad thing to shoot a lot of FT.
All I say is that you need to work hard to obtain FT...

I wonder what argument you are talking about.

---

What are you talking about?

It's always, always, always a good thing to shoot a lot of FT.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cry Havoc

What are you talking about?

It's always, always, always a good thing to shoot a lot of FT.

---

But it does not means you don't have to work to have them.

Look at my posts in that thread.
The only things I said are:
1) it is useless to compare FT shooting in distinct games. Spurs are shooting the same numbers of FT than their opponents.
2) You don't shoot FT when you are waiting on the 3pt line. You need to work for them.
3) The post ASG FT shooting trend is not so surprising with an improved defense and Ginobili out.


And I will quote you one last time

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cry Havoc

It's always, always, always a good thing to shoot a lot of FT.

---

Say that to Shaq

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mathbzh

But it does not means you don't have to work to have them.

Look at my posts in that thread.
The only things I said are:
1) it is useless to compare FT shooting in distinct games. Spurs are shooting the same numbers of FT than their opponents.
2) You don't shoot FT when you are waiting on the 3pt line. You need to work for them.
3) The post ASG FT shooting trend is not so surprising with an improved defense and Ginobili out.

---

This isn't just a post ASG FT shooting trend. The Spurs are shooting FTs at a HISTORICALLY low rate with the best post player since Abdul-Jabbar and one of the top 3 point guards in the NBA? With maybe the best penetrating player in the NBA? Not to mention perhaps the top finisher at the rim?

THIS. DOESN'T. MAKE. SENSE.

Quote:

---

And I will quote you one last time

Say that to Shaq

---

Okay. Since you're attempting to say it's a BAD thing when Shaq shoots a free throw, would you be willing to bet that if Shaq shot 70 free throws in a single game for the Suns this year that they'd lose the game? Because you're stating it's a bad thing and that's absolutely devoid of any kind of rationale. Free throws are ALWAYS good. They're free shots at the hoop even if you miss them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GSH

3. The Spurs have also been taking a much bigger percentage of their 2-point attempts in the paint than you might guess. I'll try and pull some exact numbers - but you might want to have a look at some of the game play-by-plays and notice how many of their shots (made and missed) are in the paint.

---

see above: "Spurs therefore currently scoring 34.9% of their points in the paint, versus 42.5% as recently as January."

I hate free throws.

They take so damn long, especially Tim.


When I record a game on my DVR, I fast-fwd through that crap.

Manu's out. That's a lot of fouls right there.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Agloco

Manu's out. That's a lot of fouls right there.....

---

So a Spurs team without Manu should draw less fouls than some of the worst teams in NBA history? There is no logic to this.

It is just pace, and the Spurs shoot many threes too. We have no slashers outside of the big three and even if the Spurs get near the basket, they can't get the ball into the hoop anyway. The refs also seem to swallow their whistles when they see the Spurs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by timvp

These Spurs aren't built to get to the line. The only players who get to the line at all are the Big Three and George Hill. With Manu out, Duncan slowed and Hill no longer playing point guard, that leaves just Parker.

Earlier in the season, Bonner was on pace to shoot less free throw attempts per minute than anyone in NBA history. Players like Mason, Finley, Thomas, Udoka and Bowen all hardly get to the line. Add in a slower than usual pace and the fact that the team relies so heavily on three-point shooting ... and it's not too surprising.

The lack of free throw attempts was a problem last season and with Bonner and Mason added to the rotation, the problem was bound to get worse.

---

I really get tired of this company line. There have been a ton of non calls and it has nothing to do with Bonner or Mason.

well, talking about amazing stats, what about the spurs being the best team in the league since 2006 in second game of back-to-back, at 68 % of wins in those games ??? :wow

everyone keep saying we suck in those games though. very unexpected stat for me.

people are saying we shoot a lot of threes, but do we really shoot more threes than teams like orlando? the pacers? kings?

yes, i realize orlando has howard inside with nelson and turkoglu driving. but are you really going to tell me they match the presence of our big 3?

obviously manu being out is a factor, but it shouldnt be a historical one

kevin martin gets 10 fta/g? I like him as a player, but dude barely drives- i checked his hot spots site on nba.com and he's shot 430 shots outside the paint, vs 260 inside.

Tony has 364 outside, and 637 inside. 637. yet he averages almost half the number of FTA per game? thats just absurd. how does kevin martin work harder for his FT, just because he gets injured more? its certainly not because hes driving more.

Im not going to cry conspiracy, but there's not a doubt in mind that tony gets no respect. and for the guy saying FTA arent necessarily good, of course they are. one, you are getting the other teams players in foul trouble. two, you are getting them over the penalty. that means that when the game is tight, they dont have fouls to give. it means they have to go deeper into their rotation and change the way they defend you. and all of those benefits are independent of whether you sink the FTs.

Spurs are just an old soft team

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by diego

and for the guy saying FTA arent necessarily good, of course they are.

---

I am this guy... and I never said that (but for a sarcastic comment about Shaq).
All I said is that it is not a problem if you shoot only 18 FT as long as your opponent don't shoot more than you.

For the comment about Shaq shooting 70 FT (I guess it would put the Suns at shooting 80-85 FT)... I would be very comfortable with this if the Spurs are also shooting 85 FT.

I don't like to capitalize my post but here I need to say it.
I AGREE WITH YOU... SHOOTING FT IS A GOOD THING (high%, foul trouble...).
BUT, IT IS FALSE TO BELIEVE YOU DON'T HAVE TO WORK FOR THEM

All I say is that the situation is not as bad as some of you make it sound.

Even if you disagree, I hope you will understand what I am trying to say (sorry I french, and sometime I have a hard time to express clearly my feelings about the game).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kace

well, talking about amazing stats, what about the spurs being the best team in the league since 2006 in second game of back-to-back, at 68 % of wins in those games ??? :wow

everyone keep saying we suck in those games though. very unexpected stat for me.

---

That is amazing.

Wasn't it like 03-04 where we couldn't win a B2B to save our life?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dbestpro

I really get tired of this company line. There have been a ton of non calls and it has nothing to do with Bonner or Mason.

---

Fine, but the stats cited by kace earlier suggest that while the Spurs deal with a lot of non-calls, their opponents have to do the same thing on most nights.

To me, the numbers indicate that officials call fewer free throw fouls in games involving the Spurs than any other team in the association. The Spurs shoot 19.7 FTA/gm, Spurs' opponents shoot 19.8 FTA/gm. So, in any given Spurs game, the total on FTA is likely to hover around 40; the next closest combination appears to be Toronto, whose games average right around 44.

I think what the numbers suggest isn't that the Spurs are getting hosed in particular games -- I think they suggest that officials "let them play" a lot more in games involving the Spurs, which is something of a nod to the Spurs' pedigree and to their desire to play physical defense.

The conspiratorial bent of this thread would make much, much more sense if the numbers showed that the Spurs FTA/gm were low and that teams playing games against the Spurs were getting to the line substantially more often. They're not. Again, I think all of this goes to show that officials allow much more physical play in Spurs games -- on both ends -- and that strikes me as being fairly beneficial to the Spurs, given their need to play tough defense, their inability to attack the basket frequently, and their reliance on shooting the three (25% of all Spurs FGA in 2008-09 are 3's).

I also don't buy that superstars are entitled to calls or that stars get calls because they're stars. I think certain kinds of plays in the NBA get calls -- usually, hard and athletic drives -- and I think it just so happens that superstars are best able to make those kinds of plays and, therefore, get the calls that follow them. Corey Maggette and Kevin Martin aren't superstars, but they get calls because they constantly attack the basket.

It frustrates me sometimes to see how much opponents can get away with against Tim on the box, but the numbers we're talking about would certainly seem to suggest that if I watched the other end without my Spurs-colored glasses on, I'd see that the Spurs bigs are getting away with the same sorts of contact on the same sorts of plays. I don't think, however, that Tim is entitled to calls just because he's Tim Duncan.

+1 FromWayDowntown
You said it better than me

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FromWayDowntown

Fine, but the stats cited by kace earlier suggest that while the Spurs deal with a lot of non-calls, their opponents have to do the same thing on most nights.

To me, the numbers indicate that officials call fewer free throw fouls in games involving the Spurs than any other team in the association. The Spurs shoot 19.7 FTA/gm, Spurs' opponents shoot 19.8 FTA/gm. So, in any given Spurs game, the total on FTA is likely to hover around 40; the next closest combination appears to be Toronto, whose games average right around 44.

I think what the numbers suggest isn't that the Spurs are getting hosed in particular games -- I think they suggest that officials "let them play" a lot more in games involving the Spurs, which is something of a nod to the Spurs' pedigree and to their desire to play physical defense.

The conspiratorial bent of this thread would make much, much more sense if the numbers showed that the Spurs FTA/gm were low and that teams playing games against the Spurs were getting to the line substantially more often. They're not. Again, I think all of this goes to show that officials allow much more physical play in Spurs games -- on both ends -- and that strikes me as being fairly beneficial to the Spurs, given their need to play tough defense, their inability to attack the basket frequently, and their reliance on shooting the three (25% of all Spurs FGA in 2008-09 are 3's).

I also don't buy that superstars are entitled to calls or that stars get calls because they're stars. I think certain kinds of plays in the NBA get calls -- usually, hard and athletic drives -- and I think it just so happens that superstars are best able to make those kinds of plays and, therefore, get the calls that follow them. Corey Maggette and Kevin Martin aren't superstars, but they get calls because they constantly attack the basket.

It frustrates me sometimes to see how much opponents can get away with against Tim on the box, but the numbers we're talking about would certainly seem to suggest that if I watched the other end without my Spurs-colored glasses on, I'd see that the Spurs bigs are getting away with the same sorts of contact on the same sorts of plays. I don't think, however, that Tim is entitled to calls just because he's Tim Duncan.

---

When the Spurs have a defense that's built around great defenders NOT sending the opponent to the line, yet the opponents on average STILL go to the line more than the Spurs do, that seems more damning, not less.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by timvp

These Spurs aren't built to get to the line. The only players who get to the line at all are the Big Three and George Hill. With Manu out, Duncan slowed and Hill no longer playing point guard, that leaves just Parker.

Earlier in the season, Bonner was on pace to shoot less free throw attempts per minute than anyone in NBA history. Players like Mason, Finley, Thomas, Udoka and Bowen all hardly get to the line. Add in a slower than usual pace and the fact that the team relies so heavily on three-point shooting ... and it's not too surprising.

The lack of free throw attempts was a problem last season and with Bonner and Mason added to the rotation, the problem was bound to get worse.

---

with players like manu, tony and tim inside.....how can this possibly be?


NBA is rigged......thats my final answer.

We need to make this a local, national topic on TV or radio. these are cold hard facts. interpret them as you wish..........we all come to the same conclusion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Phila_Chamberlain

The nets also have no dominate big man, thus they slash into the lane more leading to more and ones/ two shot free throws. It is simple when you attack the basket with guards more fouls are called. The Spurs don't slash as much as the nets, again, plain and simple.

---

Dominant big men have always shot tons and tons of free throws throughout the history of the game. The fact that you don't have one should lower your free throw totals.

Okay, so it's all a gigantic conspiracy, I guess.

Of course, against Boston, the Spurs got the benefit of many 4th quarter whistles -- we saw how that turned out.