Last season, the Spurs got swept by the Suns, the series could have gone both ways just as easily as it could have been a sweep. The Lakers would have lost to the Suns if it were not for Jason Richardson not knowing how to box out Ron Artest, same thing for the Thunder series and could have lost to the Celtics when the Celtics were up going into the 4th quarter. The lucky Los Angles Lakers and their y Laker fans were then able to celebrate the 2010 NBA championship.
While I don't buy that the Spurs are necessarily contenders, statistical measures last season have shown that they are contenders. If anyone believes that the Lakers are championship contenders, one must admit that statistically, the Spurs are also one of the best in the NBA. One must also recognize that the NBA playoffs are all about matchups and sometimes good fortune and it is no wonder the Spurs lost to the Suns because we were not fast and quick enough and the Suns were hot from 3 the entire series.
The Spurs were rated a 5.07 via the SRS, Simple Rating System, good for 4th in the NBA. The Lakers were a 4.78 via the SRS, good for 5th in the NBA. Both teams had injury concerns throughout the season, so injuries are just an excuse for the Lakers having a lower SRS than the Spurs. For a simpler translation to team records, the Lakers' 57-25 record in the 2009-2010 season would be 54-28 through the Pythagorean Wins formula. The Spurs' 50-32 record would be a 55-27 through that same formula because of point differential. Obviously, no one can argue against facts. So, lets move on.
In the West, the Spurs were also the only team to be top 10 in both offensive (higher the better) and defensive (lower the better) ratings, with 110 and 104.5 respectively for offensive and defensive ratings. The Lakers were 108.8 and 103.7 for offensive and defensive ratings. The Spurs, via this ratings which were converted through points scored per 100 possessions and points against per 100 possessions have a higher point differential in 2010 than the Los Angeles Lakers.
Although you can't argue about pace now, the Lakers are a 92.8 possessions per game team, which is 14th fastest in the league, compared to the Spurs, which were a 91.7, which is 20th in the league. Both teams have only a differential of about 1.1 possessions a game, so don't come complain about math here.
Throughout draft and free agency, both the Spurs and Lakers made key additions to their lineups. The Spurs drafted James Anderson, big 12 player of the year and signed draft pick of 2007 best big man in Europe in Tiago Splitter. The Spurs also signed free agents, Gary Neal and Bobby Simmons, both excellent shooters from beyond that 3 point line.
The Lakers have done a few things themselves too, signing Steve Blake and Matt Barnes, both good 3 point shooters themselves and drafted 2nd round picks, Devin Ebanks and Derrick Caracter.
Now, if you want to call Devin Ebanks and Derrick Caracter, both 2nd rounders, mega-talented, it would be an absolute joke. While Ebanks was touted to be a late 1st round pick, while Caracter a 2nd rounder, both do not have the accolades that James Anderson has. The average 43rd pick in the NBA would have a 60% chance of being a non-contributer to an NBA team, the pick number of Ebanks. The average 58th pick, which is Derrick Caracter's pick position, has a 0% chance of not contributing to any NBA team, so Caracter, for now, is useless to any NBA team, absolutely useless at least . To sum it up using the rating system in 82games, the average 43rd pick, has a rating of 7.8 while the average 58th pick has a rating of 1.3, which is the worst out of the whole rating system, which is based on basic stats.
Let's take a look at the average 20th pick, which has a 50% chance of contributing to the NBA and has a 10.2 rating, higher than both the 43rd and 58th pick combined. Enough said, the Spurs lone draft pick has a higher success rate than both the 43rd and 58th pick combined. Of course, you can't argue facts so kindly just get out of the Spurs forum if you can't come up with constructive criticism if you can't come up with facts to support your argument.
Reply With Quote
Laker troll.
