Spurning The Spurs: San Antonio Got Lucky

Warning: Look at the title before deciding to go furthur!

http://www.covers.com/articles/artic...Art=140475&t=0

Spurning the Spurs: San Antonio got lucky
Thu, May 31, 2007By Julian Dickinson

Should we hand the NBA Championship to the San Antonio Spurs right now?

Based on what I’ve been reading in newspapers and seeing on TV, the NBA Finals are a mere technicality and regardless of what happens in the East, Tim Duncan and the boys will breeze through the Finals like they were strolling down the River Walk.

Even oddsmakers aren’t giving the eventual Eastern Conference champion much of a chance against San Antonio, whether it's the Cleveland Cavaliers or the Detroit Pistons. An oddsmaker from Bowmans.com told me that the Spurs would probably be around -200 to win the series against Cleveland and -170 if the Pistons get through.

I suppose that sounds about right, considering the Spurs have won two of the last four NBA titles. But wait a minute. Isn’t this the blue-collar, small-market, low-gear squad that packs about as much star power as the cast of the Surreal World? Isn’t this the team that has proven as attractive to national basketball audiences as a shirts-and-skins game between Meatloaf and Rosie O’Donnell?

In spite of their success, the Spurs have historically been anything but public darlings. Greg Sindall, an oddsmaker with SportsInteraction.com, says bettors still shy away from San Antonio because “they're boring and people don't like boring.”

He's got a point. You know you're not exactly showtime when your star player’s nickname is “The Big Fundamental.”

But all that seems to have changed, at least if you believe what you hear from the media. Slam Magazine said of the consistency of the Spurs, “New teams come, new teams go, but the San Antonio Spurs — like The Dude — abide.” ESPN’s Mark Stein called this year's incarnation, “the best Spurs team they’ve ever had down here.”

Suddenly, everybody wants to sing the praises of this team that had until now gone relatively unheralded. Does that mean that bettors will also have to give a few more points if they want to back the Spurs in the Finals?

Probably.

Is that a bad thing?

Definitely.

Good bettors must have long memories and even though San Antonio has gone 11-4-1 against the spread (ATS) in the playoffs, they barely came out of the regular season with a winning pointspread record, finishing 42-39-1. The reason for that is the same as why the Spurs don’t have a huge fan base – they’re just not flashy enough to run up the score on many teams.

“San Antonio is a great team,” Sindall said when asked about their ability to cover the spread, “but they don't exactly blow teams out regularly. They just seem to do what it takes to win. If they have to score 110 points to beat you a la Phoenix, they will. Or if they have to play a defensive game and beat you with 86 points, they will.”

I know what everyone is probably thinking: “didn’t you see them blow the Jazz out of the water on Wednesday night?”

The answer is, yes, I did. It was an impressive win and a commendable effort to maintain that lead through the entire game, but let’s not forget that that win – and a number of other important Spurs victories during their playoff run – came with a little help from the basketball gods.

Deron Williams had been the catalyst of almost all of the Jazz’s best performances this spring and in a do-or-die Game 5, he was hobbling around the court with a sprained ankle that had been in an air cast before the game.

The Spurs also benefited from lucky breaks when the Mavericks were eliminated in a shocking first-round upset and, if you remember the controversial ending to the second-round series against Phoenix, the Suns were put behind the 8-ball in a crucial Game 6 when Amare Stoudamire and Boris Diaw were suspended.

Sometimes all the bounces just go your way, and that’s what has been happening to the Spurs for the last five weeks. However, if oddsmakers are going to continue to spot their opponents five or six points a game, bettors can’t depend on that luck to hold out forever.

During the regular season, the Spurs were 0-2 ATS when they faced the Cavaliers and 1-1 ATS versus the Pistons.

Keep that in mind as we get closer to the beginning of the NBA Finals, especially if the hype machine keeps building up the Spurs and oddsmakers inflate the pointspreads. If that’s the case, the value might be with the underdogs – as unlikely as that might seem.

Didn't the Spurs have the largest point differential this year?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by duncan228

The Spurs also benefited from lucky breaks when the Mavericks were eliminated in a shocking first-round upset and, if you remember the controversial ending to the second-round series against Phoenix, the Suns were put behind the 8-ball in a crucial Game 6 when Amare Stoudamire and Boris Diaw were suspended.

---

You would think that someone who was a journalist would know the importance of accurate data...

Quote:

---

He's got a point. You know you're not exactly showtime when your star player’s nickname is “The Big Fundamental.”

---

ok so what other nicknames does he want Tim to have, lets think of some very violent ones ok, cause thats the only thing that works.

Tim "stick it up your butt" Duncan

Tim "the assassin" Duncan

Tim "I'll fucking kill you with my glare" Duncan??

To be successful, you've got to be good & LUCKY, period.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 101A

Didn't the Spurs have the largest point differential this year?

---

My first thoughts, as well.

He's just a young pup trying to make a mark in life at a sports betting site. Here are some of his credentials...

http://www.covers.com/articles/colar...?topID=122&t=0

http://images.covers.com/covers/edit..._dickinson.jpg
Julian Dickinson eats, sleeps and breathes sports – that probably explains why he’s always so hungry, tired and frequently lightheaded. He’s been dishing the goods on college and pro sports for two years at Covers.com, but he still maintains his lifelong dream of playing on the Professional Candlepin Bowlers Tour.

So WE got lucky b/c Dallas sucks? :wtf

Oh and we don't blow people out huh? Well if I had no life I'd go thru the regular season schedule and take note of all the games we won by 10 or more. I guarantee this deadbeat writer that we took more then 10 games with 10+ pts

Solid D- You're great!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sandman

You would think that someone who was a journalist would know the importance of accurate data...

---

I picked up on that as well. Let's get all the history as well: How many championships have Spurs won when they were the regular season #1 seed?

Obviously has been writing too much to watch any games, and hasn't been writing long enough to know what he's talking about.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by twentyone

I picked up on that as well.

---

As much controversy as it generated, one would think that GAME 5 would be indelibly imprinted in the gray matter of all sports fans, much less those who make a profession out of writing about sports. :rolleyes

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by duncan228

Solid D- You're great!

---

Thank you. What'd I do? :lol

Just for what it's worth, the Spurs have won 39 games (36 regular season and 3 playoffs) by more than 10 points.

Um.. gambling 101... It's harder for the Spurs to cover the spread than other teams because A) They're the favorite in 95% of their games when no team can win that %, and B) Often when they are the favorite, they are so with a huge number to cover.

Almost any team in the NBA can win a game by 6 points and cover the spread. In many cases winning by that number won't cover for the Spurs.

Judging by our scoring differential I'd say we probably had as many blowouts as anyone, but it's also worth noting that we play our starters less minutes than any good team in the league to keep them fresh for the playoffs. I don't think Pop gives two shits about gamblers, and he shouldn't.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Solid D

Thank you. What'd I do? :lol

---

You always back things up with facts.
It makes your arguements, or your point of view so much easier to understand.

I guess I just find your posts informational.

In this case I knew the guy was bs but I didn't take it furthur to see who he was.
Thanks for doing so. :toast

The only two things that can be considered lucky about our playoff run are the suspensions and Nash's nose incident, which neither were our fault at all. What dumbass thinks that a "healthy" Deron Williams would have made a difference in Game 5? He was still hitting tough shots, and plus, with the way the Spurs came out, his health wouldn't have mattered. The Mavs getting out has nothing to do with luck. Better teams always win seven game series, and as far as I'm concerned, Utah was the best possible team out of that bracket. We have earned our spot in the Finals. We have won huge games on the road and executed so well in fourth quarters. Do you really think any Spurs teams from past years would have fought the way they did in Game 4 in Utah? They weren't getting much calls, and they STILL kept driving and driving and attacking until they forced the refs to call fouls. That's killer instinct. How about stealing HC advantage from the Suns? That's a damn hard task too. Winning Game 5 of that series was tough, even without Stoudemire and Diaw. I think we deserve to be here :fro.

Getting the draft rights to Tim Duncan was good fortune, if not good luck.

Who here is complaining? :smokin

WTF? Who reads covers.com anyway?

Come on! we all knew jackasses like this moron would come out with the proverbial * talk because of Williams and Fisher. Losers whine, winners win, period.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MaNuMaNiAc

Loser whine, winners win, period.

---

I don't ever remember the Spurs whining even when they've lost!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gospursgooo

WTF? Who reads covers.com anyway?

---

i do... it is real helpful in betting with sports.

but like all sites, sometimes there are bad and good articles.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by duncan228

I don't ever remember the Spurs whining even when they've lost!

---

that's because they're not losers

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by judaspriestess

ok so what other nicknames does he want Tim to have, lets think of some very violent ones ok, cause thats the only thing that works.

Tim "stick it up your butt" Duncan

Tim "the assassin" Duncan

Tim "I'll fucking kill you with my glare" Duncan??

---

Tim "that's retarded" Duncan?

Tim "the Wizard" Duncan?

Tim "Brisket Man" Duncan?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mrs.Tlong

Tim "that's retarded" Duncan?

Tim "the Wizard" Duncan?

Tim "Brisket Man" Duncan?

---

Brisket Man is good :lol

As an aside...Dallas was only 41-37 ATS. As the poster above correctly stated, the elite of the league (Dal, SA, Phx) are or were pretty much the fav in every game this season with the exceptions being when the played one another and who had home court.

SA during their championship years have been money in the bank...

11-4 ATS this year

15-8 in '05
15-9 in '03
12-5 in '99

Believe it or not, Toronto (48-33-1) and NO (47-33-2) and Denver (45-36-1) had the best records ATS this year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by degenerate_gambler

As an aside...Dallas was only 41-37 ATS. As the poster above correctly stated, the elite of the league (Dal, SA, Phx) are or were pretty much the fav in every game this season with the exceptions being when the played one another and who had home court.

SA during their championship years have been money in the bank...

11-4 ATS this year

15-8 in '05
15-9 in '03
12-5 in '99

Believe it or not, Toronto (48-33-1) and NO (47-33-2) and Denver (45-36-1) had the best records ATS this year.

---

What's ATS? Sorry, brain lapse.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by td4mvp21

What's ATS? Sorry, brain lapse.

---

against the spread

Lucky we're not matched up against the spread in the finals.

Moron...oh well. I knew haters would come out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 101A

Didn't the Spurs have the largest point differential this year?

---

I saw something on that very thing, it seems that the team with the largest point differential has won the title something like 80% of the time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vito Corleone

I saw something on that very thing, it seems that the team with the largest point differential has won the title something like 80% of the time.

---

SA had a pt diff of +8.4
Phx was +7.3
Dal was +7.2


http://www.covers.com/pageLoader/pag...s_regular.html

Don't belie da hype!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sandman

You would think that someone who was a journalist would know the importance of accurate data...

---

Why be accurate when you can sell papers and magazines?

you would think that somebody writing for a sports betting website might know that the spread has as much to do with beating expectations as it has with running up the score. if everybody thinks you'll win by 44, you lose ats if you win by 43.

he was also ignorant about the spurs point spread, as well as who played on may 18th.

http://www.covers.com/articles/colar...?topID=122&t=0

http://images.covers.com/covers/edit..._dickinson.jpg
Julian Dickinson eats, sleeps and breathes sports – that probably explains why he’s always so hungry, tired and frequently lightheaded. He’s been dishing the goods on college and pro sports for two years at Covers.com, but he still maintains his lifelong dream of playing on the Professional Candlepin Bowlers Tour.


:lol Well, "Julian" and "Professional Candlepin Bowlers Tour" is enough to completely disregard this butt pirate.

I don't think it was a "lucky break" for the Spurs to avoid Dallas. Given how shitty Dallas played the last three weeks of the season, is it really so safe to assume they'd have beaten the Spurs when they couldn't beat the Warriors?

I think the Mavs played the entire season in fifth gear and didn't leave enough in the tank for the playoffs. Spurs probably would've paid them back this year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Findog

I don't think it was a "lucky break" for the Spurs to avoid Dallas. Given how shitty Dallas played the last three weeks of the season, is it really so safe to assume they'd have beaten the Spurs when they couldn't beat the Warriors?

I think the Mavs played the entire season in fifth gear and didn't leave enough in the tank for the playoffs. Spurs probably would've paid them back this year.

---

Couldn't agree more.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by duncan228

Couldn't agree more.

---

Given the examples of Detroit and Miami last year, as well as Dallas and Cleveland this year, the regular season couldn't be more irrelevant. I remember watching the two games Dallas took in San Antonio earlier this year and thinking that it was a total continuation of the playoff series -- the Mavs just looked a little bit stronger, quicker and more athletic. The real story is that the Spurs are a veteran team that knows how to pace themselves and get ready for late April.

I think Dallas did the commendable thing in deciding to not take the regular season off like all the "good" teams in the East, but there's a balance between coasting and burning yourselves out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Findog

The real story is that the Spurs are a veteran team that knows how to pace themselves and get ready for late April.

---

The Spurs have done this for years, usually to their advantage.

I don't think the regular season is irrevelant, I think it's a tune-up. A chance to work out kinks and get people working together. Pop is always "not in a hurry to win." The season is 82 games, each game is 48 minutes. Play it all smart and you're peaking when it matters. I think Pop is one of the best at understanding this. It's a marathon, not a sprint.

There is always luck in winning, but luck alone won't do it. It takes talent, hard work with a strong work ethic, and strong leadership. The Spurs have been fortunate to have it all for a lot of years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 101A

Didn't the Spurs have the largest point differential this year?

---

Yes they did, and since the TD era, they have had the best point differential 6 times, so his point about not covering the spread does not mean anything. The Spurs were favored by over 10 pts more than any team and were also road favs more than any team except Dallas, so just because they do not cover the spread that does not mean that they are barely beating the opponents. Championship teams have a harder time covering spreads because they are usually favored by a larger point spread than most teams....

This guy does not know jackshit.

Hollinger swore up and down all year long that point differential, along with offensive and defensive efficiency per 100 possessions, is the better gauge of a team than W-L record....i.e., the Mavs were beating everybody by 5 points, their efficiency ratings projected them at 58 wins but they got 67. Well, they were going all out when a lot of teams weren't.

Whereas with San Antonio, a home loss to Charlotte and Boston doesn't mean anything in the grand scheme of things, because they were beating everybody by 12 points. I think Dallas lost maybe one or two games all year long to lottery teams. The Spurs had much more than that, but those kinds of games tell you nothing about playoff potential.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by duncan228

Sometimes all the bounces just go your way, and that’s what has been happening to the Spurs for the last five weeks.

---

It is an ODD year , Spurs win in odd years. It is written in the stars. Book it. You don't beat againts the spurs in odd years. Now cover spread I have no idea. BUT we are going to win and that is all that matters for spur fans. :clap

I would like to add we got "luckY" and in a ODD year "1997" we got tim duncan.

the Spurs aren't boring, were just odd!