Season Report--CBF Style--Mouse--

[awktalk]

5 bigs that will have matchup problems against the mavs' length.

that aside, name the 5 bigs and name the teams they could be starting for.

Duncan: Spurs
Blair: Spurs
McDyess: Toronto
Bonner: Golden State
Splitter: Toros (maybe)

[Blackjack]

Solid with the goods, and some quality takes overall.

I'm not a huge stat guy, but I found this to be a somewhat interesting:

The Spurs have an SRS (takes into account point differential and strength of schedule) of 8.77 to the Mavs 5.48, a difference of 3.29.

Now looking to the Eastern Conference's SRS leader, Miami, they have an 8.62 compared to the Celtics second place of 7.55, a 1.07 difference.

What stands out to me about that is, the Spurs and Mavs have played 23 and 19 games against the West respectively, the Spurs going 20-3 to Dallas' 15-4 -- the teams also happen to boast the 2 best records against .500+ teams, SA at 15-3 to the Mavs 15-4.

Conversely, Boston and Miami have played 25 and 20 games against the East respectively, the Celtics posting a 21-4 to the Heat's 16-4.

In conjunction with what Bruno astutely pointed out:

When you look at these stats, the 4 best defensive teams are in the eastern conference. At the same time 8 of the 10 best offensive teams are in the western conference.

So:
Are EC teams better defensively or are they just facing weak offensive teams in their conference?

It's likely a little of the both but WC teams are 102-78 this year against EC teams. It could lead to think that a huge reason why these EC teams have such good defensive stats is the low level of their conference.

When you compare Spurs defensive stats only to WC teams, they look way better.

One can't help but come away more and more impressed, even if the unchartered territory this team is navigating tends to allow for skepticism.

Considering the expectations and state of the Spurs entering the year and given the fact that this team has still yet to see its individual talent completely fulfilled or come to fruition, combined with the fact that the team isn't running their players into the ground in an effort to rack up wins, ain't nothing to be uneasy about.

This team will or won't get it done, it's as simple as that -- and there's nothing foreboding or ominous on the horizon because of anything that's transpired thus far.

Enjoy the ride.

[Solid D]

The scariest teams to me at this point in the season are Miami and Orlando. Orlando has a perimeter that is just as scary as the Spurs, in many ways, and radiating around a dominant Center.

[Spurs Brazil]

this thread

[Phenomanul]

My only concern is still the continued health of the Spurs...

Mentally... they have it; and neither Pop, Ginobili or Duncan will allow the team to take a mental slump of epic proportions...

Depth... they have that too... especially with Anderson coming back. The young core seems to be teeming with confidence. And the right mixture of dependable savvy veterans (McDyess, Quinn, and Jefferson) is a luxury.

Chemistry and Experience... the league doesn't have a more experienced core than that of Duncan-Ginobili-Parker-Popovich. And both Parker and Ginobili are playing lights out as playmakers...

Clutchness... Ginobili-Duncan... others like Jefferson and Neal (so far) have joined the ranks...

The plus side of reaching 70 wins [not going to happen with Pop at the helm] and not having to overwork the big-3 to attain such a feat is that it may finally cement the greatness of Tim Duncan in such a convincing manner that the naysayers won't have an out. IF, of course the season culminates with another Larry O'Brien.

[mazerrackham]

Lots of good info in this thread. Good points, Blackjack, and I gotta agree with your sentiments to enjoy the ride

[TD 21]

Why do so many think it's necessary to apologize for the good fortune the Spurs have had this season? I don't see the Lakers apologizing for their good fortune, which is unprecedented in the history of professional sports. Yet every time things are going well for this team, people are looking for a reason not to buy in.

Not only was their record and point differential excellent in 2010 and not only did they steadily improve throughout the year, but they were excellent against good - elite teams. So that begs the question: What will it take to get people to buy in?

I've given the Lakers the benefit of the doubt for the longest time and I'm not going to be a fool and dismiss them at any point (short of a significant injury), but at this point the Spurs should be regarded as co-favorites. They're 7 games better in the loss column, even though the Lakers have played one of the easiest schedules in the league. On top of that, what the Lakers are going through can no longer be termed as a typical slump or health related. This is no longer the same team anymore, it's obvious. Their air of invincibility is gone. You'd have to be in denial or flat out delusional to term it as boredom related (funny how people always give them that, but rarely gave the Spurs that when they were on top). Their antennas were clearly up against the Spurs and they were still beaten handily.

If the Spurs were the Lakers and the Lakers were the Spurs, weeks ago people would proclaimed the Lakers the favorites. In '08, they did it almost instantly after they acquired Gasol.

[Brazil]

This should be a high-scoring game, by all rights. Lots of early offense.

In order to stop the screen/roll with Amare, the Spurs will mix it up, varying the looks, using Hill a little more on Felton, and switching the screens while bringing help for Hill from the weakside. Another look would be for Parker or Hill to play over the top of Amare's screens and force Felton baseline while dropping everyone else (to the lane's edges).

Amare usually does well, but then again, so does Timmy in this matchup. If the Spurs don't have energy to close out to the perimeter shooters, the Knicks will eat that up. They shoot well from the arc.

BTW Danilo will be out for the game (apparently 2 to 3 weeks due sprained ankle I think) which will ease the spurs work a litle to defend the 3s especially from a tall guy like Danilo.

[TampaDude]

Spurs will get #5 this year. Book it. Done deal.

[RuffnReadyOzStyle]

I'll add my opinion to CBFs thread. The reason this team mystifies so many people is that the Spurs are still getting 50 ppg from their 3 core players. Their new players, Neal, Splitter and Anderson have made their contributions but only Neal has played significant minutes. Why is this year's team so much better?

I would submit that it is because of the little things like FT improvement, 3-PT shooting accuracy, turnover differential and their 3rd and 4th quarter execution.

People talk about the high-octane offense the Spurs have this season, but the Spurs are only taking 1 more shot/game (82.18) than last season (81.21). They are only making 0.32 more FG/game.

2009-10 FGM 38.41 FGA 81.21
2010-11 FGM 38.73 FGA 82.18

So why are the Spurs averaging 105.6 ppg versus last season's 101.4?
The answer is:
1. FTs - The Spurs near the top 10 in FT accuracy? Really? The Spurs are answering the age-old question: How good could the Spurs be if they would just make their FTs? Last season, the Spurs shot .740 from the charity stripe averaging 17.78 makes/game. So far in 2010-11, San Antonio is shooting .773, 19.24 FTM/game. That's an additional 1 1/2 ppg this season.

2. 3-Pt Accuracy - At this writing, the Spurs are averaging .400 from the arc. That is .042 better than last season (.358). That equates to 2 more 3s made/game. That adds 2 points/game to the old scoring average.

3. Creating turnovers and TO +/- - When was the last time we have seen the Spurs lead the league in TO differential? The Spurs are averaging 8.46 steals/game...almost 2 more steals/game than 2009-10 and they rank 1st in TO +/- at +1.82. Those steals are often resulting in fouls and easier scoring chances.

4. 2nd half efficiency - the Spurs are winning close games. We all see that. Games like PHX, Houston, Charlotte, Minnesota a couple of times, Denver, Orlando...and who can forget the win against Chicago and the 2nd half turn-around in that one? Part of that difference, I would contend, is defensive execution. The Spurs seem to be trapping more (and better) than last year, in order to make up for their size limitations. RJ is staying with his assigment much, much better. Sometimes, Richard looks like he is employing some of Bruce Bowens' techniques in playing over the screen while keeping a hand in contact with his opponent. George has shown similar defensive acuity. The defensive trust as a team is at a level unseen since 2007. When the Spurs can trap their way to wins with smaller lineups, extra effort and trust, that is a dfference maker.

So there you have it. Sometimes, it's the little things that make a difference.

Excellent post. Thanks.

Responding to CBF, personally I m not worried about this team at all. Unlike last year's injury-disjointed, incomplete squad, this year's team has depth, flexibility, and above all, elite-level chemistry.

Last year the team would go through long scoring droughts every game (particularly 3rd Qs IIRC) and failed to show that they were capable of the lift in intensity demonstrated by truly elite teams. This year, the team has already shown multiple times that they have a 4th and 5th gear, and I have a feeling they'll develop a 6th as the year goes on. They are nowhere near their ceiling yet, and have a lot of room for improvement at the defensive end particularly.

A healthy Big 3, an extra year of seasoning for players like Grizzly and George, and some nice role player additions, has made a huge difference to the team this year, and I'm failing to see why they'd go downhill from here for any other reason than serious injuries.

Sit back and enjoy the ride, I say.

PS Sign up here: https://www.sportsbet.com.au/sports/...65/MenuLevel/C
and you can get 12-1 on the Spurs winning the trophy! Don't these guys actually follow the NBA!? We're no lock, but we're a lot shorter than a 12-1 shot!

[Blake]

The scariest teams to me at this point in the season are Miami and Orlando. Orlando has a perimeter that is just as scary as the Spurs, in many ways, and radiating around a dominant Center.

Luckily for the Spurs, if they get that far in the playoffs, they'd only have to play one of those two.

[Blake]

The plus side of reaching 70 wins [not going to happen with Pop at the helm] and not having to overwork the big-3 to attain such a feat is that it may finally cement the greatness of Tim Duncan in such a convincing manner that the naysayers won't have an out. IF, of course the season culminates with another Larry O'Brien.

what naysayers? what is the "out" they currently use to naysay?

you think Tim would finally be cemented in greatness being a complimentary piece on this year's team?

[Manu'sMagicalLeftHand]

Agree with many posts here about why the Spurs are better. I think one of the overlooked items is defensive rebounding. The Spurs have improved as a team in this category since the last two seasons. Back then, they would lock down the perimeter shots but only to leave an easy uncontested rebound in the hands of an opponent. That's really frustrating, to play great D only to give an easy basket after the missed shot.

Now, they hardly give those, and if they do, it's not an easy look, even when they use a zone. Everyone is doing their share in boxing out and helping in rebounds. Guys like Neal or Hill have had more than a few games near double figures in this category. The team has found improved replacements for Bogans, Mason, Finley, etc, but not exclusively in scoring.

Anyway, back to the OP point. I think it's to early to tell. It's a very long season, many things can happen. Hopefully they stay healthy, keep improving on D and Tiago and Anderson can get into the mix.

[100%duncan]

One thing that helps also is that there wasn't a lot of significant roster changes from last year's team. And only 3 of the new additions are playing or will have to play significant minutes to help us. That helps a lot with the chemistry that we've seen so far. Outside of garbage time, they have really looked more comfortable with each other this year.

[mazerrackham]

Agree with many posts here about why the Spurs are better. I think one of the overlooked items is defensive rebounding. The Spurs have improved as a team in this category since the last two seasons. Back then, they would lock down the perimeter shots but only to leave an easy uncontested rebound in the hands of an opponent. That's really frustrating, to play great D only to give an easy basket after the missed shot.

Now, they hardly give those, and if they do, it's not an easy look, even when they use a zone. Everyone is doing their share in boxing out and helping in rebounds. Guys like Neal or Hill have had more than a few games near double figures in this category. The team has found improved replacements for Bogans, Mason, Finley, etc, but not exclusively in scoring.

Anyway, back to the OP point. I think it's to early to tell. It's a very long season, many things can happen. Hopefully they stay healthy, keep improving on D and Tiago and Anderson can get into the mix.

The Spurs have actually regressed in defensive rebounding since last year, but that's simply because they're pushing the break at more opportunities...