I don't like writing about the Spurs possibly losing. First of all, I think the Spurs are going to win this series. Secondly, I don't enjoy doubting a team that has played so well for so long. And, simply, it's not fun.
This isn't about having the appropriate fear or anything like that because this Spurs team is as locked in as humanly possible. They know what's at stake; they know this is probably their last legit chance.
But the Thunder have real shot at winning the series. How much of a shot? After looking at this matchup at every angle I know possible, I give OKC somewhere between a 40 and 45 percent chance of advancing to the 2012 NBA Finals.
The Spurs face some generic potential pitfalls that could derail the team at any time. Injuries, of course, remain a chief concern for a team that is relatively brittle. An ill-timed slump by a key player or two could make it much more difficult to score and ultimately prove fatal. A team-wide shooting slump is another way this could all end badly.
However, those pitfalls aren't what concern me about this series. What concerns me is that Oklahoma City plays in such a manner that is perfectly suited to sidestep San Antonio's strengths on defense.
On defense, if you boil down all their philosophies, the Spurs basically have three tenets:
1. The Spurs never rotate off of a strong-side three-point shooter in the corner. If the Spurs send a double-team, it's almost always from the weak-side. As a result, they are able to limit the number of three-pointers their opponents shoot -- especially threes from the corners.
2. The Spurs position and rotate their defenders with the goal of eliminating easy passes. By playing stellar transition defense, the Spurs limit easy passes even further. San Antonio will give you lanes to dribble with the ball or allow you to isolate on the perimeter, however the number of catch-and-shoot opportunities are severely limited. As a result, San Antonio has been fantastic over the years at limiting assists.
3. The Spurs make it a point to avoid fouls. The coaches teach the players to keep their hands up and to limit contact away from the ball. As a result, the Spurs are always among the best in the NBA at keeping opposing teams off of the free throw line.
With those tenets in mind, if your goal is to construct a team to defeat the Spurs, you'd want a team that doesn't rely on three-pointers, doesn't rely on assists and is able to get to the free throw line regardless of opponent.
That blueprint was exactly what the Mavericks followed to overcome the Spurs back in 2006. Those Mavs didn't need three-pointers or assists to score and they were great at getting to the free throw line against any and all teams. And their strategy worked; the 2006 Spurs were the last great Spurs team that didn't win a championship.
Fast forward to the 2012 Western Conference Finals. Which Spurs playoff opponent of the past do these Thunder most play like? Unfortunately, it's the 2006 Mavericks.
The Thunder are only slightly above average in three-pointers attempted and three-point percentage. OKC doesn't need threes to put a lot of points on the board. To compare, the Spurs have hit 23 more three-pointers than the Thunder in the playoffs even though they've played one less game.
When it comes to assists, or the lack thereof, the Thunder are in a league of their own. During the regular season, Oklahoma City was the only team in the NBA that recorded an assist on less than half their made field goals. Only 49.7% of their field goals required an assist.
This season, the Spurs once again led the league in limiting assists. But, even though the Spurs were far and away the league leader in this category, the number (51.4%) is still higher than the Thunder's rate. In other words, the Thunder already play the way the Spurs try to force their opponents to play.
(Back in 2006, there was only one team that recorded an assist on less than half of their baskets: yes, those Mavs.)
During the regular season, the Thunder were the best team in the league at getting to the free throw line. They averaged .333 free throw attempts per field goal attempts. The Spurs, conversely, were the second best team at keeping opponents off the line by allowing only .221 FTA/FGA.
At first glance, this could be considered an area that majorly favors the Spurs. San Antonio keeps teams off the line and will thus nullify OKC's strength of getting to the line, right?
I hope that ends up being the case ... but it's far from a certainty.
There was one team better at keeping teams off the free throw line this season: the Lakers, who allowed only .213 FTA/FGA. When the Lakers faced the Thunder in the second round, it was a battle of the best at the getting to the line versus the best at keeping others off the line.
Unfortunately, OKC's free throw rate proved to be virtually impervious. Against the Lakers, the Thunder's FTA/FGA was a very healthy .306. While that number was down slightly from the Thunder's regular season rate, it would have still been in the top five in the NBA in that category this year.
It's a bit worrisome that the Lakers failed at keeping the Thunder off the line, especially since they were about 4% better at doing so than the Spurs were during the regular season.
How important is it for the Thunder to get to the line? Extremely important. In the playoffs, the Spurs are shooting 49.1% from the field to the Thunder's mark of 46.5%. If you give a bonus for three-pointers (eFG%), the disparity grows: 54.8% for SA, 50.6% for OKC. But because the Thunder get to the line so often (24.3 FTA per game) and shoot such a high percentage (84%), OKC's offensive efficiency has been even higher than the Spurs in the playoffs (112.4 vs. 112.0). And it's even more impressive once you consider that Oklahoma City has faced much better defenses in these playoffs than the Spurs.
The hope for San Antonio is that their defense -- compared to the Lakers in the second round -- proves to be more disciplined under duress. Maybe because Pop has been at it so long and has instilled his directives so consistently over the years, the Spurs will be different. The fear, obviously, is that the Thunder are a team (like the 2006 Mavs) that are capable at getting to the line regardless of the opposing gameplan.
As for the Thunder's lack of assists, that's a byproduct of having three superstar offensive threats who can create their own shots. As well as Pop can scheme and how well the Spurs are at reading and blowing up plays, it basically comes down to hoping the Thunder aren't scorching hot from the field. If Kevin Durant, Russell Westbrook and James Harden are at the very top of their game and able to produce in isolations, there's simply nothing you can do. There's no defensive strategy to combat that, as we ultimately saw in 2006 against Dirk Nowitzki. You just tip your hat, pack up your locker and wish the Thunder luck in the Finals.
Thankfully, I don't think that will happen. It might … but I don't see it. As I detailed in why I believe the Spurs will win, I think San Antonio has some distinct advantages. And even if the aforementioned traits make life difficult for the Spurs, this team is well-rounded enough to win in a variety of ways.
As for my final prediction, it may come as a surprise after what I laid out above but I'm going to predict the Spurs advancing in five games. While many are forecasting this to be an epic battle that will go the distance, I don't see it that way. These two teams are so different that I just don't anticipate a long, drawn out battle.
If the Thunder's offensive superstars prove to be indefensible and the Spurs can't stop their parade to the free throw line, Oklahoma City will probably make short work of the Spurs. If San Antonio is going down, I think it'd be in flames.
Conversely, if things begin to roll in the Spurs direction, I believe this recent dominance will continue. As long as the Spurs can slow OKC's big three -- even a little bit -- while limiting fouls, that will create the needed fast break opportunities that will kickstart the offense that will commence the avalanche.
The Spurs are Thunder are so similar yet so different. Rather quickly, we'll see one team emerge with a notable advantage. I believe that team will be the Spurs.
Believe.
Good thoughts as always. I worry about the refs giving OKC too many calls.
Do you think Pop might be looking into some reverse-Pop manuevers? If the Thunder's offense plays against the Spurs' defensive strengths, might the Spurs think about trying to switch things up, giving them what they normally try to take away?
Wow. Sobering post. But seriously great stuff -- thanks for posting it.
I agree on this series not going to seven games. I think it will be a hard-fought, intense playoff battle, but I don't think it will go the long distance. Let's hope the Spurs take it in five or six.
if Pop plays Bonner
Great writeup, thanks. I feel better about small ball against the '12 Thunder than the '06 Mavs tbh esp with Kawhi/Jack at the 4 rather than Fin.
Great read as always, thanks LJ!
I hope that Spurs can win it 6, I'm planning my San Antonio for the NBA Finals :p
The 2006 mavs were great at getting to the free throw line? or the 2006 wcsf mavs were great at getting to the line? Cause I remember about half of the fouls called in the favor of the mavs that series were absolute utter bull . (ok half is embellishing but you feel me)
Last edited by thispego; 05-26-2012 at 09:21 PM.
not sure how you count it as anything but 50-50. after rereading the post you mentioned, the items you point out as being in the spurs' favor seem pretty neutralized by the items you mention here. how do you think the spurs might limit the fouls, that's my big worry after reading this. sigh. i'm a lot less optimistic about the spurs advancing than you.
I've always thought that the Mavs gave the Spurs so much trouble because they're a great jump shooting team which played right into Spurs' defensive philosophy of contested 2s (no 3s and protect the paint - no layups). Same with OKC - Durant and Westbrook have great jump shots. So, if they're on, there's not much Spurs can do. Seems contrary to guard against the very thing that they spend the whole season trying to get other teams to do.
I pretty much agree with this. The main concern from my perspective was that limiting OKC's free throws would be the top priority. If we can play our normal defense and not foul, I don't see OKC's offensive efficiency being all that good.
While the Thunder did play two of the better defensive teams in the west in the playoffs so far, here's the problem: Those teams weren't great perimeter defenders. When you have players like Jason Kidd, Vince Carter, Kobe Bryant (very undeserving of his defensive team selection yet again imo), and Ramon Sessions shoring up your perimeter defense, somebody's going to be getting off at all times if you have multiple perimeter threats which OKC has.
OKC's top three offensive players are: A PG, a SG, and a SF.
The Spurs' best defensive positions right now are: SG, SF, and whatever we're calling Duncan nowadays. While I don't think our collective PGs are great defenders (Neal is below average), Parker has been able to contain Westbrook throughout their meetings in the last three seasons, forcing him to shoot 37% and only average 16 PPG. Westbrook's last two games against us have been quite good though, so perhaps the loss of George Hill to stop Westbrook when Parker's resting is going to be a problem. But against Tony, I haven't really seen Westbrook go off on him very frequently.
Mainly I'm hoping the refs don't continuously call ticky tack fouls on us throughout the series, or when the game's close and the Thunder are struggling from the field. Nothing handcuffs your defense like a few quick ticky tack foul calls.
Anyway. . .the good news is, their frontcourt really isn't that impressive. They can't really attack our alleged defensive weakness, so that's a nice plus.
i agree
If things start to go the wrong way, Pop will probably try things he usually doesn't do (like double perimeter players, trap the pick-and-roll, etc.) but it'd be too late to try to completely overhaul the defense. Much better defensive Spurs teams tried to change their spots on the fly and failed.
Yeah, like 2006 Mavs, this series could feature a lot of small ball. But a few things should help change the outcome:
1. The Thunder will also play small. In 2006, it was usually Small Spurs vs. Big Mavs.
2. The Spurs have a lot of experience playing small since 2006.
3. Those Mavs dominated the Spurs on the boards (IIRC, they outrebounded the Spurs in 6 of those 7 games). This Thunder team isn't as good of a rebounding team as those Mavs.
The 2006 Mavs were really good at getting the line. Top three in the league.
But yeah, some of those calls . . .
I agree with TimMVP....Spurs in 5 games.
I don't think this is going to be as tough or as long of a series as many others think, OKC has been living a charmed life of lucky bounces and very favorable officiating and that is due to end.
Kobe gifting them two games also didn't hurt, tbh.
just realized the comparing the 12 Thunder to the 06 Mavs is the ultimate wet blanket to SpurFan bravado.
Can't be a coincidence that 06 was the last time Spurs fans felt so good about their team only to have it end in ultimate heartbreak.
Well played
It's probably close to 50-50 before you factor in the Spurs having homecourt advantage and Pop > Brooks.
Good point. That's another similarity (although it kinda piggybacks with the fact that neither team needs assists). For the record, as you suggest, the Thunder are the best shooting team in the NBA on long two-pointers.
HE REALLY DID TOO! This is a true statement.Nah the 04 team killed me worst, they almost did not lose for two months and were on A ROLL up 2-0 ON LA looking unbeatable after sweeping round one... THEN
Can't be a coincidence that 06 was the last time Spurs fans felt so good about their team only to have it end in ultimate heartbreak.
Well played
I really didn't want to make the comparison but, tbh, the similarities jump out of the page . . .
Can't be a coincidence that 06 was the last time Spurs fans felt so good about their team only to have it end in ultimate heartbreak.
Well played
The FTs are the only reason I fear the thuder
I just dont see how the Thunder are going to compensate for our ball movement... Matchups aside, I seriously doubt they can stay THAT focused on defense. If this was purely based on matchups I'd agree that the Thunder have the edge.... But its not.
Spurs are playing an alien brand of basketball in the NBA. TEAM basketball. The Thunder may well have the better 3 or 4 top players when compared to the Spurs top players, but they dont have the system the Spurs do and they dont have the pieces to defend that Spurs system.
I've said it before and I'll say it again.... The Thunder are going to get exposed. They just dont have the defense to compete with the Spurs offense of making the extra pass.... No team does.
and our defense isnt exactly ty either.
this reason is why the mavericks 06 comparison is a stretch to me.
Those mavericks were forced into countless bad shots that they just rebounded and tipped back in.
1) the lineup we throw at thunder will be better rebounding than the small lineup we threw out against the mavs in 06
2) like you said thunder aren't that great st rebounding
Rebounding is just as key as anything else, and from what we have seen this season, spurs should control the boards this round.
You are right about that, those ending were hard to watch for Laker fans and the "officiating" didn't help either.
That honestly would be my biggest concern if I was a Spurs fan, the NBA may rig errrrrrr "officiate" OKC into a longer series than they earn.
You're making me nerrrrvous.
I'm not as worried about the Thunder getting an absurd number of FT attempts for a couple of reasons.
1) Westbrook got 6.6 FTA against the Lakers, but that was with Sessions and Blake, two of the worst defensive point guards in the league, checking him. Parker and Green are both far superior defenders than those guys and should be able to do better about keeping Westbrook in front of them. And they won't take as many foolish fouls as the Lakers guys did.
I also think big man fatigue played a part in some of the fouls Westbrook drew, as the Lakers had to play Bynum and Gasol to death. The Spurs bigs won't be as tired.
2. Durant averaged 6.8 FTA against the Lakers, where he had a significant quickness and length advantage against Artest. Indiana Ron averaged 2.1 fouls per game in the regular season but 3.2 against OKC. Leonard averaged only 1.4 fouls during the regular season and hasn't seen his foul rate increase that much in the playoffs. He's at 1.8, despite playing more minutes per game.
In 104 regular season minutes against the Thunder, Leonard had five fouls. That's five fouls in 3.25 games, or 1.54 a game, if you figure Leonard playing 32 minutes per game. He's much younger, quicker and lengthier than Artest, and I think just a smarter guy overall when it comes to avoiding fouls.
Finally, I think the fact that we play with a stretch four actually will help us as far as not drawing fouls against the drives of Westbrook and Harden. The Lakers had two big bangers, so that's two guys for one of those guards to bump against and draw fouls. The Spurs will have their PF on the perimeter guarding against Ibaka's jumpers and won't be in the lane as much. Diaw and Bonner are both far more comfortable playing defense outside of the paint than a guy like Gasol is.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
