New Ways of Spurs Basketball

The San Antonio Spurs are now averaging over 100 points per game on the season. Just a couple seasons ago, the Spurs were a half court oriented, slow it down type team. Now the Spurs are averaging more than 100, something they haven't done for a season since the 1995-96 season.

Questions:

1) Is this a good thing or could it be fool's gold come playoff time?

2) The NBA has become more high scoring since the low point in 1999. Last season, three teams made the conference finals that averaged over 99 points per game. Is this a new era of basketball in which offense wins championships, or was last year just a fluke?

3) Can the Spurs sustain this level of offensive play or will they come back to previous levels?

:smokin

too many questions, my head's exploding.

defense wins championships, but I think Pop is not emphacizing defense so much as in earlier season, probably because he has more scoring.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by boutons_

defense wins championships

---

That's how the saying goes, but who did Miami stop last year? Who did Dallas stop? Neither team played very well defensively in the playoffs. During the regular season 13 teams gave up less points per game than Miami.

With the new rules enabling offensive players, does defense still win championships?

The Spurs didn't add many big bodies in the off-season. They have adjusted their style. They are re-tooled for movement, especially with Butler sitting behind the bench.

We'll have to see the Spurs play the Rockets with Hayes, or the Pistons and see how they do against those teams to know for sure. I don't think we will see sub .425 Opp. FG% with this bunch. The Spurs don't block enough shots and clog the lane enough to do that.

It's all about the ball movement.

When the Spurs move the ball around the way they can almost no one will beat them. It's when the offense becomes stagnet with either attempt after attempt by Tony or 4-down after 4-down, that's when the Spurs struggle and score less.

I'd rather have ourbench score 50-60 than have Tony and Timmy combine for 70.

New rules. New ways.

With hands-off on the perimeter, it pays to run motion and cycle the offense around. I see it as a good thing.

1) it's a great thing. scoring is never bad and they don't look awful defensively when they're running up and down the court. if they were sacrificing defensive intensity for offensive intensity, i would be worried.

2) you have to have a combination of both, although defense will always and forever be the gateway to the championship.

3) they'll sustain it as long as manu comes off the bench. that second team with him at the helm can beat 80% of the first teams in the nba with the way they're moving the ball. he's the catalyst.

However, in the last three games (the Spurs best games of the season?) the Spurs have held opponents to ~41% shooting and 82.3 ppg.

So even though they are running a high octane offense, they haven't given up the concept of D.

1)It's an extremely good thing if we can keep it up.....

2)Twin Tower defense would still reign supreme in today's league but with centers dissappearing, perimeter defense is the real thing, in long lanky guards and forwards (think tayshaun) but their effectiveness is very random because of the inconsistency in calls game-to-game. I wouldn't say offense wins championships, but mostly because we saw no consistent playoff reffing until the actual finals.

3)It will come back to previous levels when we play teams that are motivated to rebound.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Buddy Holly

It's all about the ball movement.

---

Good teams in the playoffs take away the ability to move the ball. The Mavs' defense against the Spurs was designed to force the Spurs to go one-on-one. If you noticed, they never brought help from the perimeter and specifically never left Bowen open in the corners.

That's why when it comes to the playoff, 4-down has been and always will be the bread and butter of the Spurs as long as Tim Duncan is playing.

what the mavericks have, defensively, on the perimeter is where we need to be i think
but its impossible unless we get ourselves that josh howard type player
i've never thought ginobili was as good at overall D as some say he is

Quote:

---

That's why when it comes to the playoff, 4-down has been and always will be the bread and butter of the Spurs as long as Tim Duncan is playing

---

4 down, won the rings in 03 and 05, and 99.

All the shots off the perimiter in 03 against NJ, who got the assists on kick outs?

05, same thing?

Quote:

---

i've never thought ginobili was as good at overall D as some say he is

---

Ginobili aint no Bowen, but he aint no Keith Van Horn either.

Ginobili's D is good, and in big games, it becomes VERY Good.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Buddy Holly

It's all about the ball movement.

---

that says it all right there for me.

if push comes ot shove in the post-season tho - you bet your panties Pop would pull more defense into the scheme.

Spurs allow the second fewest PPG after Houston. They allow the second fewest assists per game after Houston. They are not keeping opponents to as low a FG% and allowing a higher 3 point FG% than usual but it's still early. If Elson can catch on to the Spurs defense a little better they'll have a solid shutdown D at crunch time.

Quote:

---

Good teams in the playoffs take away the ability to move the ball

---

That fact overlooks alot of people, and its very important.

The ball movement is taken away in a 7 game series due to the high level of play.

4 down, and the movement outside of the pass from Duncan is key.

Rebounding, and guys making their perimiter shots, is what wins in the playoffs.

Not bothered by the latter, the other though, yuckie.

:lmao Spurs trash a few patsies and suddenly everyone's happy. That's just as bad as the bridge-jumpers after a loss.

Let's get some perspective. I want to see what they look like when they play the Hornets and the Rockets.

"Good teams in the playoffs take away the ability to move the ball"

true, but i've been watching the team for a long time and i've never really seen them move the ball like this. we'll see how they place against a good defensive team, something golden state, the clips and charlotte have never been accused of being.

Hornets are getting waxed by an Allenless Sonics.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShoogarBear

:lmao Spurs trash a few patsies and suddenly everyone's happy. That's just as bad as the bridge-jumpers after a loss.

Let's get some perspective. I want to see what they look like when they play the Hornets and the Rockets.

---

Quote:

---

I want to see what they look like when they play the Hornets and the Rockets

---

Spurs played 1 and a half good quarters and spanked the Rockets.

Ok maybe the Hornets :lol


For me, I want to see how they play Denver, Minnesota, Lakers, and the Pistons.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShoogarBear

Let's get some perspective. I want to see what they look like when they play the Hornets and the Rockets.

---

It went 92-84 in favor of the Spurs.

Defense still wins championships.... just need big men that can run the floor.... which, so far, it looks like the Spurs have in Oberto and Elson.

Eh, the Rockets game had as much to do with a Houston choke as the Spurs comeback. A healthy Houston would be a tough series for the Spurs.

The LA B2B may have been a reasonable test, but now it's not clear if Kobe will be playing.

I have no idea what the hell the Hornets are doing in Seattle tonight. :lol

The Houston and Utah games will be the best test of the Spurs "new ways" before the end of the year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kori Ellis

However, in the last three games (the Spurs best games of the season?) the Spurs have held opponents to ~41% shooting and 82.3 ppg.

So even though they are running a high octane offense, they haven't given up the concept of D.

---

And I think thats key.

What will truly make us that 'force' is that when push comes to shove, we can still get a key defensive stop or lock down a particular player or whatever is needed defensively.

Factor that with a potent offense with many weapons and it makes you that much more dynamic and unstoppable.

Ultimately, I think that is what can set us apart from other teams in this league.

Especially if Elson/Oberto are productive enough to score a few points, grab rebounds and get the occassional block.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Buddy Holly

It went 92-84 in favor of the Spurs.

---

You really are the master of the noncontributory statement.

Quote:

---

the Rockets game had as much to do with a Houston choke as the Spurs comeback

---

Spurs had quite a bit to do with it.

I whole heartedly disagree with your statement there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by picnroll

Hornets are getting waxed by an Allenless Sonics.

---

That's because Damien Wilkins is a better player than Ray Allen.

Damn Spurm, you dropped a hot one there :lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by T Park

Spurs had quite a bit to do with it.

I whole heartedly disagree with your statement there.

---

And did I say the Spurs didn't have something do with it? No.

But any knowledgable fan who watched that game knows the Spurs got their asses kicked for 2 and a half quarters, and that it was no fluke.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShoogarBear

:lmao Spurs trash a few patsies and suddenly everyone's happy. That's just as bad as the bridge-jumpers after a loss.

Let's get some perspective. I want to see what they look like when they play the Hornets and the Rockets.

---

:lmao

Where is everyone happy? I'm questioning whether the improved offense is even a good thing.

:lmao X 2 @ listing the Hornets as a team you want judge the Spurs against.

Wait before anyone else posts in this thread, let's see what the Spurs do against the Hornets. Playing a lottery team will tell us exactly where this team stands.

Highly efficient offense is ALWAYS welcome. I feel the team has underachieved in that regard, and they might revert back to it it again -- especially if Manu can't stay healthy.

But the way for this team to win the title is to be excellent on both ends. If Duncan, Parker, and Ginobili are healthy and clicking on offense I think that would be ideal. Their team defense is always going to be good, and I don't see how maximizing their offense is going to somehow hurt them on defense. Each end can help the other. You play well offensively, it becomes a little easier to have energy on D, and vice versa.

All the old Bulls teams were great on BOTH ends. The Lakers actually were pretty good on both ends as well. Same with most championship teams. You need to be close to elite on BOTH ends. The Spurs were pretty good offensively the last two seasons, but they were never elite. Maybe in 2004-05 they could have been elite if everyone was healthy -- but we will never know.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by timvp

Wait before anyone else posts in this thread, let's see what the Spurs do against the Hornets. Playing a lottery team will tell us exactly where this team stands.

---

For some reason that made me laugh outloud. :lol

The Elson avatar makes it even funnier.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by timvp

Wait before anyone else posts in this thread, let's see what the Spurs do against the Hornets. Playing a lottery team will tell us exactly where this team stands.

---

Hornets Defensive PPA: 93.5 (6th in NBA)
Hornets Opp FGP: 0.442 (6th in NBA)

Out of the upcoming stretch over the next couple of weeks, they, Houston, and Minnesota are the only ones that play any defense worth mentioning.

Let me know how else I can help you.

Second lowest points allowed, and the highest differential, not a bad combination..

Well the Hornets are the fourth WORST team in the league on offense. So they aren't exactly a very good team overall. They are about average right now.

http://www.knickerblogger.net/stats/2007/o_oe.htm

The Spurs have only held 5 opponents under .425 from the field this season. Houston, Seattle, Utah, GS, and Charlotte. Many of the games this season, teams have hit in the high 40s percentage-wise. The Spurs interior is weaker thus-far.

When the rodeo comes to town will be the best indicator of how well the Spurs are playing defensively. That is the time this team usually gels in preparing for the playoffs. The good news is that the Spurs point differential has been fantastic...about as good as it was in 2005 for much of that season.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShoogarBear

Hornets Defensive PPA: 93.5 (6th in NBA)
Hornets Opp FGP: 0.442 (6th in NBA)

Out of the upcoming stretch over the next couple of weeks, they, Houston, and Minnesota are the only ones that play any defense worth mentioning.

Let me know how else I can help you.

---

Hornets Record: 9-9
Playoff Seed: N/A

The T'Wolves are the better defensive team ... if you want the Spurs to matchup with a lottery team to see where they stand.

And the Spurs swept the Rockets last year and the Rockets were the best defensive team in the league. So much for lotto teams being a good litmus test.

But anyways, I fail to see how asking whether the Spurs' offense clicking in the regular season is a good thing got shifted to how the Spurs need to play the Hornets.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by picnroll

Spurs allow the second fewest PPG after Houston. They allow the second fewest assists per game after Houston. They are not keeping opponents to as low a FG% and allowing a higher 3 point FG% than usual but it's still early. If Elson can catch on to the Spurs defense a little better they'll have a solid shutdown D at crunch time.

---

I agree. Scoring over 100 is great--but the impressive thing is the point differential in these games.

When you are beating teams by 30-40 points you aren't just outscoring them in a close high-scoring game, you're beating the hell out of them at both ends of the court. :ihit

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShoogarBear

Hornets Defensive PPA: 93.5 (6th in NBA)
Hornets Opp FGP: 0.442 (6th in NBA)

Out of the upcoming stretch over the next couple of weeks, they, Houston, and Minnesota are the only ones that play any defense worth mentioning.

Let me know how else I can help you.

---

Charlotte is 4th in the NBA in Opp FG%.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Solid D

I don't think we will see sub .425 Opp. FG% with this bunch. The Spurs don't block enough shots and clog the lane enough to do that.

---

That was a good point. I want this team to be a great defensive team. Offensively, I don't really care. For some reason, this team will never be a consistently great offensive unit.

I want to see the Spurs be in the top three in FG% defense. However, as Solid D noted, that is going to be tough. The Spurs, who usually lead the league in blocks, are in the middle of the pack. The interior defense is not nearly as good as it was during the 1999 and 2003 championships and Duncan isn't playing defense as well as he did during the 2005 run.

This team still has a loooooong ways to go defensively and I think the fluke offensive output could hurt this team in the long haul because they won't be used to winning games with their defense.

Bottomline is the Spurs might not be battle tested going into the playoffs if they never have to dig deep and get stops during the regular season.

Um, because it still hasn't been definitively established that the Spurs offense is "clicking". It may be that they are just fattening up on the weak sisters.

My point was that I'd rather see how they do against decent defensive teams before annointing the dawn of a new age.

Finally, just looking at PPG is completely meaningless if you don't adjust for the fact that the league as a whole is scoring more. The Spurs are 10th in scoring and 6th in FGP. On a relative basis, that's better than last year, but they could still end up in the lower half of the league in PPG.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShoogarBear

My point was that I'd rather see how they do against decent defensive teams before annointing the dawn of a new age.

---

I guess you are missing that this thread isn't annointing them. It's questioning them.

These are the only teams that we have to talk about .. they are the teams they have played. If we go by your theory, I guess I should just shut down the forum until the Spurs play someone decent defensively because you don't think we should talk about any of it. :lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kori Ellis

Charlotte is 4th in the NBA in Opp FG%.

---

And they're also 15th in PPG allowed at 98.3

And still the Spurs scored less than 98 points against them both times they played them.

:lol

Im shocked the Hornets are even in this discussion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kori Ellis

I guess you are missing that this thread isn't annointing them. It's questioning them.

These are the only teams that we have to talk about .. they are the teams they have played. If we go by your theory, I guess I should just shut down the forum until the Spurs play someone decent defensively because you don't think we should talk about any of it. :lol

---

Yeah, because that's obviously what I said. :rolleyes

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShoogarBear

Yeah, because that's ovbviously what I said. :rolleyes

---

ovbviously :drunk

:lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShoogarBear

Yeah, because that's obviously what I said. :rolleyes

---

I just didn't get the point of this post by you early in the thread when no one before you in the thread was even acting like the Spurs were all that. They were just discussing whether the Spurs were getting away from being a half-court, defensive oriented team and if they were, if that was a good thing or a bad thing.

Quote:

---

Spurs trash a few patsies and suddenly everyone's happy. That's just as bad as the bridge-jumpers after a loss.

Let's get some perspective. I want to see what they look like when they play the Hornets and the Rockets.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShoogarBear

Um, because it still hasn't been definitively established that the Spurs offense is "clicking".

---

Link to where I said it was? I said the Spurs are averaging 100 points per game. Is that untrue?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShoogarBear

It may be that they are just fattening up on the weak sisters.

---

I'm talking about the season in general. I've made no mention of the last three wins in this thread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShoogarBear

My point was that I'd rather see how they do against decent defensive teams before annointing the dawn of a new age.

---

That is not the point of this thread. Re-read the three questions I asked. You are arguing a point that isn't even relevant to this thread.

Answer this:

Could the increased reliance on offense during the regular season cause the Spurs to faulter when it becomes money time?

That's the point of this thread. Not celebrating about how the Spurs are scoring or how they are about to play the legendary Hornets.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by T Park

:lol

---

http://www.edzayas.com/lapdog.JPG

awww hes cute.

I love puppies.

Hey I got a basset hound that needs money donated to help with its sugery, can I forward you the link? :)

Quote:

---

Could the increased reliance on offense during the regular season cause the Spurs to faulter when it becomes money time?

---

Yup.

IE

Mavericks, Dallas playoffs 2006.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShoogarBear

:lmao Spurs trash a few patsies and suddenly everyone's happy. That's just as bad as the bridge-jumpers after a loss.

Let's get some perspective. I want to see what they look like when they play the Hornets.

---

I don't know what is funnier:

A) That the Hornets got mentioned as some sort of defensive juggernaut capable of telling you exactly how a championship caliber team is playing.

B) That the Spurs play the T'Wolves before the Hornets. A team that is a vastly superior defensive team than the Hornets.

C) That MannyIsGod quoted the post in agreement.

D) That the Hornets lost 94-74 tonight to the Sonics without Ray Allen.

:rollin

94 points to that?

Yikes...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by timvp

Link to where I said it was? I said the Spurs are averaging 100 points per game. Is that untrue?

---

http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/show...2&postcount=39

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by timvp's forgotten quote

But anyways, I fail to see how asking whether the Spurs' offense clicking in the regular season is a good thing got shifted to how the Spurs need to play the Hornets.

---

Quote:

---

I'm talking about the season in general. I've made no mention of the last three wins in this thread.

---

Okay, sure. You would have made the same post if the Spurs hadn't just reeled off three striaght big wins. That had nothing to do with it at all.

Quote:

---

That is not the point of this thread. Re-read the three questions I asked. You are arguing a point that isn't even relevant to this thread.

Answer this:

Could the increased reliance on offense during the regular season cause the Spurs to faulter when it becomes money time?

That's the point of this thread. Not celebrating about how the Spurs are scoring or how they are about to play the legendary Hornets.

---

I'm not convinced there's an "increased reliance on the offense". They're scoring more points, but the rules of the league have changed and everybody is scoring more. Nobody who understands statistics would try to draw a straight comparison from 1999 or 2001 stats to today's. It's almost like trying to compare baseball stats across different eras.

When the Spurs beat Phoenix in the 2005 WCF, I don't think that was an "increased reliance on the offense", it was just them adapting to the particular situation. They still won because of their superior defense. It just wasn't reflected in a way that showed itself statistically compared to the rest of the regular season.

What's funny is that you are completely unable to refute any of the stats I've posted. The fact is that the Spurs haven't been playing very good defensive teams, and the only ones in the upcoming weeks that can be considered reasonable defensive teams are the Rockets, Woves, and Hornets.

What's really lame is that your sole point of contention is that I mentioned the Hornets.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by timvp

D) That the Hornets lost 94-74 tonight to the Sonics without Ray Allen.

:rollin

---

Oh, by the way, the Hornets were without Peja, David West, and Bobby Jackson.

Peja and Bobby Jackson out with injuries?

Im so stunned....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShoogarBear

http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/show...2&postcount=39

---

That was a broad question question being asked by me. IF the offense clicks for the whole season and the Spurs lose their reliance on defense, could that come back to hurt them? That's what I'm axing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShoogarBear

Okay, sure. You would have made the same post if the Spurs hadn't just reeled off three striaght big wins. That had nothing to do with it at all.

---

My questions don't even apply to the last three games. The Spurs defense has been very good in that stretch. I didn't know I had to wait until after certain games to question the Spurs' ability to be ready for the playoffs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShoogarBear

I'm not convinced there's an "increased reliance on the offense". They're scoring more points, but the rules of the league have changed and everybody is scoring more. Nobody who understands statistics would try to draw a straight comparison from 1999 or 2001 stats to today's. It's almost like trying to compare baseball stats across different eras.

---

My only point in bringing up offense is in that a potent offense can overshadow a poor and untested defense. I apologize for pointing out the Spurs are averaging over 100 points per game since that really had nothing to do with this thread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShoogarBear

When the Spurs beat Phoenix in the 2005 WCF, I don't think that was an "increased reliance on the offense", it was just them adapting to the particular situation. They still won because of their superior defense. It just wasn't reflected in a way that showed itself statistically compared to the rest of the regular season.

---

That's what I'm asking. Do you see that level of defense?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShoogarBear

What's funny is that you are completely unable to refute any of the stats I've posted.

---

What stats? That the Hornets are a pretty good defensive team? That the league is scoring more this year? I'm not refuting those stats because that has nothing to do with my questions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShoogarBear

The fact is that the Spurs haven't been playing very good defensive teams, and the only ones in the upcoming weeks that can be considered reasonable defensive teams are the Rockets, Woves, and Hornets.

---

So your stance is that the Spurs' offense really isn't that good so no one should worry about not having a battle tested defense heading into the postseason? I assume that is what you are getting to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShoogarBear

Oh, by the way, the Hornets were without Peja, David West, and Bobby Jackson.

---

Okay. I will tell Bob Hill to hold off on planning the championship parade.

:smokin

I quoted Shoog because I don't believe in our new offense yet. I honestly didn't see his listing the Hornets in the group, but I think the overall point is valid. I know you were questioning everything yourself, but I didn't feel Shoog was necessarily addressing you although after following the rest of the thread I may have missed the point there.

Anyhow, I don't think a team has to lead the league in defense in order to win a championship. Defense is obviously a must, but you don't have to be the best in the league if your offense is one of the better offenses in the league. I can't be sold on this offense because of the inconsistencies of some of its players in the past. But when everything clicks, the Spurs are without a doubt very very very potent.

I think the biggest factor in the early season success is none other than Brent Barry. When he's playing well I think he's the smartest offensive player the Spurs have. He does an incredible job getting others involved. Manu does much of this as well and to a lesser degree Beno does as well when he's rolling.

The question remains as to how well Barry will play in the coming months. Even those who think he's capable of playing at this level the entire year (and I do believe he is) have to believe that he will go through a slump at some point. And when he does, its going to be interesting to see how Pop reacts. Will he bench him and limit his play for the rest of the year or will he try to ride it out ala Finley?

You excel so well at putting words in my mouth, perhaps it would be quicker to just have you type my reply for me. (timvp Edit: Good idea.)

I've seen some good offensive stretches this year, I've also seen the Spurs offense in a few games be as stagnant as I've ever seen it. I just don't see any greater relative reliance on the offense as opposed to the defense, after making adjustment for the year-to-year variation in the rules. And I think it would be a mistake for the Spurs or their fans to think they are some kind of offensive juggernaut now.

The Spurs win games this year, just like other years, when their defense clicks in. The difference is, because of the rule changes, what constitutes a good defensive team is different than it was 4-5 years ago. I don't think you're going to see the defense be allowed to dominate huge chunks of games as it used to. But from what I 've seen, the Spurs still emphasize defense more than anyone else (Hosuton may be the one exception).

The one signfiicant difference over the past few years is that they have become a weaker rebounding team, which is concerning.

Finally, the Spurs historically don't really gel on the defense end until late in the year. I believe you even have a saying about that around here.

Quote:

---

Will he bench him and limit his play for the rest of the year or will he try to ride it out ala Finley?

---

He rode it out in 04 05.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MannyIsGod

I know you were questioning everything yourself, but I didn't feel Shoog was necessarily addressing you although after following the rest of the thread I may have missed the point there.

---

I didn't think LJ was necessarily talking about how wonderful the offense was, but he seemed to pick up the banner pretty quickly when I pointed out that people were.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShoogarBear

You excel so well at putting words in my mouth, perhaps it would be quicker to just have you type my reply for me. (timvp Edit: Good idea.)

---

:smokin

Good line. I'll have to use it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShoogarBear

(timvp Edit: Good idea.

---

Bastard. :lol

As a side note, do you guys find yourself far more into the season this year than at the same point last year?

Last year I didn't give a shit about the season till post January, and this year I've been arguing in 30948304983043 threads about the team it seems like.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MannyIsGod

Last year I didn't give a shit about the season till post January, and this year I've been arguing in 30948304983043 threads about the team it seems like.

---

I think it's because this year the Spurs have sucked a lot, even in their wins. (I'm not talking about the last 3 wins)

Shoog, you should argue with LJ if for no other reason than the fact that he has Tony Romo on his fantasy team.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kori Ellis

I think it's because this year the Spurs have sucked a lot, even in their wins.

---

I think thats part of it, but this year I hate to miss a game and last year I didn't mind missing them so much in the early part of the season. I think last year I had championship complacency. Horryitis.

Fuck the Cowboys.

This has been a Public Service Annoucement.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShoogarBear

I've seen some good offensive stretches this year, I've also seen the Spurs offense in a few games be as stagnant as I've ever seen it. I just don't see any greater relative reliance on the offense as opposed to the defense, after making adjustment for the year-to-year variation in the rules. And I think it would be a mistake for the Spurs or their fans to think they are some kind of offensive juggernaut now.

The Spurs win games this year, just like other years, when their defense clicks in. The difference is, because of the rule changes, what constitutes a good defensive team is different than it was 4-5 years ago. I don't think you're going to see the defense be allowed to dominate huge chunks of games as it used to. But from what I 've seen, the Spurs still emphasize defense more than anyone else (Hosuton may be the one exception).

The one signfiicant difference over the past few years is that they have become a weaker rebounding team, which is concerning.

Finally, the Spurs historically don't really gel on the defense end until late in the year. I believe you even have a saying about that around here.

---

Good points. I agree with most of that.

What I'm worried about is that IF the Spurs' offense becomes dominant, that could overshadow chinks in the armor defensively. It's seems to me like the years that the Spurs have it easiest in the regular season, those are the years that they struggle in the playoffs.

In 1999, the team started off poorly and then became perhaps the best defensive team of all-time. In 2003, there was a lot of turmoil in the season, including injuries and changes to the starting lineup. In 2005, Duncan missed a lot of time and that forced the Spurs to come together.

When it's clear sailing in the regular season, the Spurs historically perform poorly in the playoffs. For example, the 2003-04 team was beating teams by 13.5 points per game over the last two months of the regular season ... and then they got bounced at the first sign of adversity.

Gimmick offenses don't win championships. And I classify what the Spurs are doing right now as gimmick offense.

Whats gimmicky about it? I think its a good offense if they're able to excute it, which is where I question them. I'm not sure they can consistently do it.

What do you mean timvp by saying gimmick?



Well this offense might be a fools gold when the playoff time will come, but we have to remember that the NBA is different then it was in the '90. So other teams do not have such possibilietes (rules and squads) playing same defense as it was in previous decade. So in that matter I have no prblem although we've got Mavs and Houston which can force spurs to play 1-1 and stop the so great for now ball movenment, and I'm talking about the half-court offense when Tim is on a low block.

The succes in todays NBA is the pace and spurs are realy good at it righ now. The transmition both ways is not that bad consideraiting their age :)
They could get burned if they start to play run n' gun as they don't have great shooters in team and are not that good of a rebounding team.

I don't see a lot of clear sailing for the time being.

-The rotations aren't set because of Manu's injury. It's hard enough to figure out Pop's rotations when the roster is stable, it's going to be impossible now.

-Pop still hasn't worked out how to optimize Oberto and Elson's splits, which will be most important against Houston and Miami (when Shaq gets back). Still need to find out how much we can depend on Elson for defense.

-Still don't know what to expect from Finley (although, like last year, he seems to be coming around once you start him).

-Still don't know what to expect from Beno.

-Rebounding.

-Even if all these questions get solved, it's still not clear that we have a better team than Dallas.

Should be enough uncertainty to keep Pop (and you) happy. Nothing is insurmountable, and if Tony/Manu/Tim are healthy, they've still got to be the odds-on favorites.

I think there are three important metrics for playoff success.

1. Defensive FG%. Nuff said.
2. Rebounding margin. Doesn't matter if you make them miss shots if you don't secure the rebound.
3. FT attempted margin. Note I didn't say FT% (although that's certainly nice, too). If you attempt a lot more FTs than your opponent is almost always means you were more aggressive, did a better job in the paint, and got the other team into foul trouble.

Last year for the first time in a few years the Spurs were deficient in #2 and #3. This year at least they're back to having the FTA advantage.

A while ago I actually tried to calculate the statistical weight of each of these factors in determining a championship, but it became a much harder problem than I originally thought.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by timvp

That was a good point. I want this team to be a great defensive team. Offensively, I don't really care. For some reason, this team will never be a consistently great offensive unit.

---

This is the part that sort of annoys me. The team has three very good offensive players, an elite perimeter defender, a defensive anchor in Tim Duncan. And yet they can't ever seem to be more than a slightly above average offensive team.

Last season Dallas was the exact opposite of the Spurs. Elite on the offensive side, slightly above average on defense. Actually the Spurs were probably the stronger overall team, but matchups and subpar play caused them to lose the series.

Really, what else is the problem with the team defense besides Duncan not playing as well as before? Considering the matchup defecit vs Dirk, can you really expect interior defense to be the savior for them against the Mavs from players not named Tim Duncan?

Elson will guard Dirk and hopefully he keeps him from going off every single game. Other than that? They will need to play good offense and not allow every single supporting Dallas player to get involved like last year. Part of their difficulty playing Dallas is the tough matchups, but Manu and Tony should be presenting these guys with similiar problems. Manu was easily the best offensive player in the series not named Duncan and Dirk. But I don't really remember Dallas ever saying how much of a problem. The way some posters act on here its as if Josh Howard and Jason Terry were all stars in the series. Neither was better than Tony, and both were playing weaker than Manu on the offensive side. Dirk wasn't even playing better basketball than Tim Duncan either. All that being said Manu and Tony could have played better earlier in the series on offense to help set the tone. The Game 2 loss was pathetic and should never happen to this team.

In the end Dallas simply had more weapons Dirk, Howard, Terry, Harris, and Stackhouse vs Duncan, Manu, and Tony on offense. Not to mention the rebounding edge Dallas had. If somehow the Spurs can get even stronger defense, AND offense from the big three and a few random role players -- that would be ideal.

Of course this is assuming these guys are playing against each other in the playoffs.

But to me in the playoffs, the Spurs will need offense just as much as they need their historically elite defense. Most of the time the Spurs can't play as good of defense in the playoffs against certain teams because of matchup defeciences. Good offense, and solid defense will allow the Spurs the chance to squash teams that have a matchup advantage here and there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShoogarBear

I think there are three important metrics for playoff success.

1. Defensive FG%. Nuff said.
2. Rebounding margin. Doesn't matter if you make them miss shots if you don't secure the rebound.
3. FT attempted margin. Note I didn't say FT% (although that's certainly nice, too). If you attempt a lot more FTs than your opponent is almost always means you were more aggressive, did a better job in the paint, and got the other team into foul trouble.

Last year for the first time in a few years the Spurs were deficient in #2 and #3. This year at least they're back to having the FTA advantage.

A while ago I actually tried to calculate the statistical weight of each of these factors in determining a championship, but it became a much harder problem than I originally thought.

---

Key metrics should be: Offensive Points Per Possesion, Defensive Points Per Possession, Rebounding Margin. (Assuming of course that FTA's count as possesions). I think it is calculated by the stat geeks at around .44 when they use 82 NBA game data season to season. So of course getting to the FT line and hitting at a decent percentage helps a teams offense a lot. Having a high rebounding differential can also help get a team more possesions.

You all disappoint me... how soon you forget the 1980s where fast-breaking teams with tall, yet lean and agile big men dominated the decade. The officiating was just as bad then as it is now, but there were very few players pulling the Dirk-like yelling/flopping/jumping into players to draw attention - they just took their licks and kept on going.

However, defense still won championships, as those teams such as the Celtics and Lakers had that extra gear where they could turn it on and get 9 consecutive stops or so to shift the momentum of a game, and yet still score consistently at the other end. Personally, I don't know if the Spurs can keep up this kind of offensive pace, but I know they have that defensive aspect needed to pull out the big games. That's the one thing I still see the Suns lacking, even though I think the Suns are still the best offensive team in the game right now.

For years, I've been saying that SA and Phoenix should merge together and rattle off 8 championships like the Celtics of the 60s, but I'm starting to think that might not happen, sadly. At least, I want the Suns to watch some game film of the Spurs and look at how they play defense so the Suns can make those key defensive plays when their offense sputters.

Still, back to the Spurs, I think they've shown they can run with the Suns in the 2005 WCF and still keep the defense strong so I think this season of added offensive production can help that cause even more. The only thing that might de-rail them this year is a repeat of Avery Johnson's "bear-hug" bitching and subsequent 900 FTs per game for Dirk.

the thing that sticks out in my mind, I dont think ive seen more than 5 guys foul out against us in the past 3 seasons. you would think with tony, manu, and duncan we would be destroying the other teams frontline (and their rebounding advantage in the process!)

also, i agree with Nikos, the spurs cant be all defense and no offense. they should be good in both areas. I mean what good is it to get the stop, grab the board, then turn it over or brick it like the spurs used to do. I have no doubt in the playoffs we wont assist 70% of our baskets, but that doesnt mean pop cant get better production from a roster that includes the best bigman in the game, 2 good slashers, 2 opportunistic versatile bigs, and a truckload of shooters.

Last 8 games the opponents have scored 86, 95, 78, 111, 83, 98, 89, and 82.

If you throw out the GSW anomaly, these are scores that most any team would love to hold their opponents to. Forget about our high scoring margins if you will, we'd still probably win most of those games with our old grind it out offense.

Remember opposing teams will score higher totals this year just because they get another shot on offense when they take the ball out of the basket when WE score.

Well if you think about it. Once they share the ball, it creates more shots and assists. As long as they keep shooting a consistent precentage, they should keep doing what they're doing. If their shooting drops, they need to go back to half court offense. High scoring can be a good thing. I was always a fan of the transition offense and not the half court. But whatever is working right now, is what they need to stick to. Do not fix something that is not broken.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by timvp

Questions:

1) Is this a good thing or could it be fool's gold come playoff time?

2) The NBA has become more high scoring since the low point in 1999. Last season, three teams made the conference finals that averaged over 99 points per game. Is this a new era of basketball in which offense wins championships, or was last year just a fluke?

3) Can the Spurs sustain this level of offensive play or will they come back to previous levels?

:smokin

---

1: Until we are winning its good.

2: I still think that defense wins championships, so I would say it is was a fluke.

3: No mater how many points we score, just winning counts.

I think the 2003 team was also a good team in transition and could run or slow it down when they had to. I would like this team to be able to do both. Manu coming off the bench really makes a difference. He gets to handle the ball more, be more creative, not rely on Tim or Tony and Manu uses everyone on the floor better than anyone else on the team. I still think that if our guys are healthy and on their games come playoff time they can beat anyone easily. But it's a long season and this team will have some downs and some highs, it's important for them to respond correctly to the down times.

So silly to think your offense has no effect on your defense.
When Spurs play 4 Dumb as opposed to 4 Down with player ball movement,
it allows very little chance for offensive rebound and great chance for opponent to get rebound transition break with most Spurs out of position.

"Defense Alone wins Championships" is a myth.

This crap about the Spurs winning with D only in the champ years. :elephant

82games.com take

The last game that mattered, Ginobili gave it away. Let me know when one of these games in December matter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by picnroll

82games.com take

---

Good enough to copy for the lazybones. :wakeup
YearChampionPPG Diff.FG%Def. FG%PPGAvg. PPG*Diff.*
1990Detroit6.0 (4).478 (15),447 (1)104.3 (19)107.0-2.7
1991Chicago9.0 (1).510 (2).475 (13)110.0 (7)106.33.7
1992Chicago10.4 (1).508 (1).460 (9)109.9 (5)105.34.6
1993Chicago6.3 (4).482 (11).474 (15)105.2 (15)105.3-0.1
1994Houston4.3 (6).475 (10).440 (3)101.1 (13)101.5-0.4
1995Houston2.1 (11).480 (6).453 (2)103.5 (8)101.42.1
1996Chicago12.2 (1).478 (7).448 (8)105.2 (1)99.55.7
1997Chicago10.8 (1).473 (3).436 (5)103.1 (1)96.96.2
1998Chicago7.1 (3).451 (15).431 (3)96.7 (9)95.61.1
1999San Antonio8.1 (1).456 (5).402 (1)92.8 (13)91.61.2
2000L.A. Lakers8.5 (1).459 (7).416 (1)100.8 (6)97.53.3
2001L.A. Lakers3.4 (8).465 (3).438 (12)100.6 (3)94.85.8
2002L.A. Lakers7.1 (2).461 (6).424 (1)101.3 (3)95.55.8
2003San Antonio5.4 (3).462 (4).427 (2)95.8 (12)95.10.7
2004Detroit5.8 (2).435 (19).413 (3)90.1 (24)93.4-3.3
2005San Antonio7.8 (1).453 (10).426 (3)96.2 (18)97.2-1.0
2006Miami3.9 (5).478 (2).440 (8)99.9 (6)97.02.9

Average Rank3.27.45.39.6#17142Top 5147115Top 1016131410

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShoogarBear

:lmao Spurs trash a few patsies and suddenly everyone's happy. That's just as bad as the bridge-jumpers after a loss.

Let's get some perspective. I want to see what they look like when they play the Hornets.

---

Did the Spurs pass their Judgement Day test?



Question.

:smokin

Those were the Hornets?

Eh, I was expecting this to resurface.

If you want to use the evidence from this game as proof that the Hornets aren't a good defensive team, have at it.

MOre LiKe the HorNOTs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShoogarBear

Eh, I was expecting this to resurface.

If you want to use the evidence from this game as proof that the Hornets aren't a good defensive team, have at it.

---

My bad. You're right.

Peja didn't play.

:smokin

:rollin

Last 13 games the opponents have scored 86, 95, 78, 111, 83, 98, 89, 76, 82, 106 (Laker loss), 81, 82, and 77.

Forget about high scoring on the Spurs offense for a moment. Throw out the two losses which were anomalies (111 & 106) and the opponents are averaging 84 points a game. Take the last six games (after throwing out the Fakers) and the opponents are averaging 81 points a game.

We are handcuffing most teams defensively until they simply give up, crying "No mas, No mas" and Pop the Merciful sits our starters for most of the 4th quarter.

Our scoring differential must be through the roof. I'm not worried about our defense at all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wildbill2u

Last 13 games the opponents have scored 86, 95, 78, 111, 83, 98, 89, 76, 82, 106 (Laker loss), 81, 82, and 77.

Forget about high scoring on the Spurs offense for a moment. Throw out the two losses which were anomalies (111 & 106) and the opponents are averaging 84 points a game. Take the last six games (after throwing out the Fakers) and the opponents are averaging 81 points a game.

We are handcuffing most teams defensively until they simply give up, crying "No mas, No mas" and Pop the Merciful sits our starters for most of the 4th quarter.

Our scoring differential must be through the roof. I'm not worried about our defense at all.

---

Opponent's FG% is the stat to look at. When the Spurs win championships, they are always at the top of the league in that category.

On the season, the Spurs are 9th at 44.7%. That's the lowest they've ranked and the highest percentage they've given up in the Tim Duncan era. And it's not really getting better, seeing as the Spurs are allowing 44.8% over their last 10 games.

Way to shit on everyone's afternoon lj

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cant_Be_Faded

Way to shit on everyone's afternoon lj

---

45.2% over the last five games.

Merry Christmas.

:santahat