Summer 2012: State of the Spurs

[wildbill2u]

Here's a nit pick comment.

I don't think the last Boston championship was due to one dominant superstar player. They had three previous All-star caliber players who played great, but probably were never dominant superstars in their careers prior to that season. KG may have been the closest to that designation, but he never proved it before with his previous team.

I agree with Bruno that a great-to-good PF is the main need here. Give us a PF who plays good defense and can play on the perimeter on offense would be great.

[cheguevara]

2011 - manu broken arm. out 1st round

2012 - 100% healthy. backdoor swept after a 20+ win streak.

you make the call which is more pathetic

[baseline bum]

One thing I expect is for some teams in the West to play much better next season. Don't forget this was a shortened season, with basically no training camp, and I think that hurt certain teams with new coaches (ie: Lakers) or teams that added/swapped new important pieces (ie: Clippers, Dallas). I thought the Spurs benefitted from the fact that most of their guys were already part of the program going into the season, so there was some continuity there.

I don't expect Mike Brown nor Vinny Del Negro to be doing anything positive for their teams next season. Dallas? They should be able to add a decent free agent, so they should be better. The team in the West I expect to be much better next season is Oklahoma City though. Durant has taken a huge step forward this playoffs and Westbrook has at times looked like a real point guard for once. Plus they're going to be pissed about blowing the Finals so badly in such an even matchup.

[ElNono]

And due to dumping Jefferson. I never figured they'd get out of that contract and it was a huge part of why I wanted to completely blow the team up last summer.

Agreed. It looked like we would never get some talent to fill that huge hole in the wing, especially with that albatross contract. Plus Hill looked like he reached his ceiling. Spurs really lucked out with that Kawhi swap.

[baseline bum]

2011 - manu broken arm. out 1st round

2012 - 100% healthy. backdoor swept after a 20+ win streak.

you make the call which is more pathetic

I did - 2011. The team was completely out of gas and even with Manu healthy wouldn't have won a series vs anyone in the West other than New Orleans.

[timvp]

The Spurs have lead the offensive metrics and it hasn't meant much when other teams score just as easily. We've got to get back to defending.

In a perfect world where Duncan and Ginobili get to trim a decade of wear and tear off the bodies, I'd agree. With the hand that is dealt, it's just not possible to became an elite defensive team, unfortunately. "Very good" is just about the ceiling.

If you want to focus on offense then you want to trade Splitter. Right?

No, not necessarily. When Splitter is rolling right (pun slightly intended), he's a major asset on offense -- especially in a pick-and-roll heavy offense. I realize that his minutes will always be limited with Duncan also on the roster but Splitter is so valuable in those minutes that I want him kept around if at all possible.

Whottt about our mvp candidate Tony Parker??? I thought he was soooo good?

It looks like he failed to meet your personal expectations. That sounds like a personal problem, IMO.

If the Spurs had won the championship this year, TP would been the best player on a team that won the championship with a mediocre defense. The only other players who can say that are all-time greats like I listed in the initial post. Parker is pretty damn good but it's unfair to say he was a failure for not reaching that level.

Think of it this way, what current player could have switched places with Parker and led the Spurs to a championship? LeBron? Anyone else? By the OKC series, Parker was asked to be the main scorer, the main playmaker and the lead defender. Not exactly the easiest proposition.

I'm hoping Duncan retires

NASFs

[timvp]

If they continue doing that next year I predict more doom. plain and simple.

Wow. Really going out on a limb with that prediction. Only >97% chance you'll be right.

That's almost as sure of a bet as that time you predicted Bonner to choke in the playoffs.

Here's a nit pick comment.

I don't think the last Boston championship was due to one dominant superstar player.

Not a nitpick, tbh, since I agreed with that sentiment in the initial post in the thread.

I agree with Bruno that a great-to-good PF is the main need here. Give us a PF who plays good defense and can play on the perimeter on offense would be great.

Great-to-good PFs who play well on both sides of the ball are rare ... and none of them are obtainable by the Spurs this summer. The PF that is selected will be a limited player in at least a couple aspects.

[ElNono]

I don't know that the Spurs cannot become a top 5 defensive team with Gino and Tim in the fray. I agree they might be below average individually for spurts, but overall, I think they can be at least serviceable. If the focus is going to be there, the main area of concern is Gary Neal and Matty. I also think Green, Kawhi and Tiago would need to make some major steps forward in that department.

[DesignatedT]

Spurs need to find that fine line between great offense and good defense. There are players out there that are just as good offensively as green/neal etc but better defensively. Problem that arises there is the "corporate knowledge" type of argument. Keep the guys who have been here and are only going to get better defensively since they have a full years worth of playing in the system or keep switching out the role players for better defensive players. If you look at what Kawhi was able to do this year I think you keep swapping them out if you find a player that is better defensively and just as good offensively as Green,Neal, etc.

[cheguevara]

Wow. Really going out on a limb with that prediction. Only >97% chance you'll be right.

That's almost as sure of a bet as that time you predicted Bonner to choke in the playoffs.

and yet you still BELEIVEd in those same Spurs

[ElNono]

tbh, the Knicks ranked #5 in defensive efficiency last season, and it was largely Chandler's doing. Not saying the Spurs will land a Chandler, but you don't necessarily need exceptional defensive talent on all 5 positions.

[Dr. John R. Brinkley]

Let's face reality. 2012 was a miserable failure for the Spurs. calling a team with Bonner memorable. if the 2005 Suns were not able to win it wall, there was no way in the 2012 Spurs were going to. Yet, spurs office and coach still tried to cram their offense first strategy.

If they continue doing that next year I predict more doom. plain and simple.

If getting to the WCF is doom, then you are out of touch with reality.

[DesignatedT]

tbh, the Knicks ranked #5 in defensive efficiency last season, and it was largely Chandler's doing. Not saying the Spurs will land a Chandler, but you don't necessarily need exceptional defensive talent on all 5 positions.

Very true. Although they're very few Chandler/Bowens out there. I think the Spurs are hoping Kawhi can turn into that type of player and have that type of impact on a defense.

[CaptainLate]

If Tim is really a "Spur for life", then sign a two year deal with year two a minimum contract to enable the Spurs to sign a superstar to get le #5. Unless there is a superstar we can sign this year. Then take the minimum this year and next to get le #5. Spurs Mgmt should strike some kind of ownership deal with Tim to compensate him for taking less $$ in order to keep the team a legit contender.

I honestly think Tim should sign a 1 year deal and retire at the end of it. Spurs will have another good reg season and sadly lose in the playoffs again.

[cheguevara]

If getting to the WCF is doom, then you are out of touch with reality.

if you don't think getting backdoor swept after winning 20+ is doom, you need to wake up

[baseline bum]

If Tim is really a "Spur for life", then sign a two year deal with year two a minimum contract to enable the Spurs to sign a superstar to get le #5. Unless there is a superstar we can sign this year. Then take the minimum this year and next to get le #5. Spurs Mgmt should strike some kind of ownership deal with time to repay him for taking less $$ in order to keep the team a contender.

Tim has been grossly underpaid most of his career due to not coming out his sop re or junior year when there was a favorable collective bargaining agreement. He can ask $20 million per for all I care next season, and the Spurs should give it to him.

[RodNIc91]

Great post as always timvp! I've got 2 questions. First, how realistic is to expect next year's team to be even greater offensively? Second, do you think Manu can still ride the bench? Those games in the OKC series started to ring the alarm for me. If so, how important you see seeking this offseason for a new sixth man (And I do not mean shipping him away)

[anonoftheinternets]

Jesus, what a huge load of man-on-man fellatio. I'll make this quick so you all can get back on your knees in no time.

I agree

the only useful part of your post. Ironic.

[ace3g]

tbh, the Knicks ranked #5 in defensive efficiency last season, and it was largely Chandler's doing. Not saying the Spurs will land a Chandler, but you don't necessarily need exceptional defensive talent on all 5 positions.

That is why the Spurs need versatile players like Kawhi that can defend multiple positions (also whose game isn't totally centered around shooting).

Dominic McGuire is high on my list for that very reason, can defend the 2,3,4 spots. Fills the stat sheet with rebounds/blocks/steals.

He is quick enough for the Durants of the NBA and the new age PFs

[CaptainLate]

Tim has been grossly underpaid most of his career due to not coming out his sop re or junior year when there was a favorable collective bargaining agreement. He can ask $20 million per for all I care next season, and the Spurs should give it to him.

Sure, pay him $20mil if you'd like to see another 1 and done like 2011.

Grossly underpaid? That is a ridiculous statement coming from a typical sheeple that believes paying someone millions of dollars to play a game should be the norm. Oh, but don't worry, you have plenty of company as about 95% of human beings are lemmings who are, sadly, pied pipered to their damnation.

Grossly OVERPAID, along with 100% of the rest of "professional" sports athletes, is what an intelligent mind would say.

The problem with "superstars" who claim to be a "(fill in the blank) for life" are that they pander to the fans opinions...yes, the fans who help pay their ludicrous salaries that have helped destroy societal economics. Can anyone name five current superstars that have really meant what they said. Manu and TP came close during their last contract negotiations when they signed for "less millions" that they could have at the time.

I was hoping the owners (i.e., employers) would have jettisoned the 2012 season. But they are as as the players (i.e., their employees). As well as the owners and players of other "professional" sports team.

Their greed is b/c the "fans" are . So stupid in fact that it is too much to hope for these lemmings to and boycott "professional" sports until salaries are in line with other occupations.

What this year's Spurs team taught me -- with their 20 game winning streak and all the inane opinions and predictions of a championship that went along with it -- is that it is better to trust in God than men.

God answered my prayers, and I thank Him for waking me up. So now it is time for me to for a long, long, time.

[Dr. John R. Brinkley]

if you don't think getting backdoor swept after winning 20+ is doom, you need to wake up

I think doom is more like having Michael Jordan as an owner and being a fan of a team that never ever wins. You sound spoiled. Losing the way the Spurs did sucks, but it's still way better than the 2008-2011.

[baseline bum]

I don't like the team cuz dey don't win les no more

[polandprzem]

The spurs are set plays team, and that's why they can get punished by teams that figure it out.

No matter how all you can slice it - 2012 was the golden opportunity. THE CHANCE.


Blowing it in all those cir stances makes it no hope for 2013. No matter how Gino, Tim, Tony Splitt and Kwhai gonna play.

[SpursFaninMS]

The 2011-12 San Antonio Spurs, while they were ultimately unable to win a championship, go down in history as a memorable bunch. On three separate occasions, they posted double-digit winning streaks – including the franchise record 20-game run that extended into the postseason. Although the Oklahoma City Thunder ended San Antonio's torrid push to win the franchise's fifth le, the Spurs come away from the season having learned a number of lessons.

First of all, no matter how well a team is playing, the favorites to win the championship are always the teams with the best players. It's no coincidence that LeBron James and Kevin Durant, the two most unstoppable forces in the basketball world today, are battling in the 2012 Finals. Teamwork, creativity, chemistry and cohesion are all fantastic traits; unfortunately for today's Spurs, dominant players at the top of their craft still reign supreme.

Of the last 32 champions, 27 of those teams featured one of following first ballot Hall of Famers playing at a dominant level: Tim Duncan, David Robinson, Dirk Nowitzki, Kobe Bryant, Shaquille O'Neal, Dwyane Wade, Michael Jordan, Hakeem Olajuwon, Magic Johnson, Larry Bird, Moses Malone and Kareem Abdul-Jabbar. In other words, after this year's Finals, 84.8 percent of the past 33 championship teams will have featured an all-time great at or near his prime.

The other five championship teams in the last 33 year also share a specific attribute: they were dominant defensive teams. The 1979 Sonics and the 2008 Celtics were the best defensive teams in their respective leagues, while the three championship Pistons squads (1989, 1990 and 2004) were the third, second and first best on defense, chronologically.

Thus, the second lesson is that unless you have a transcendent superstar, history tells us your team needs a top three defense to have a legitimate chance to win a championship. For these Spurs, that probably became painfully obvious when the Thunder seemingly scored on every possession in fourth quarters that didn't feature some sort of mistake by Russell Westbrook.

The 2012 Spurs were a fantastic offensive team with a defense that could generously be described as above average. And while Tony Parker, Tim Duncan and Manu Ginobili were great at points in time during the regular season and the playoffs, none of the three are at the high level of the aforementioned legends. The Spurs weren't just trying to win a championship, they were attempting to shatter the mold that has held true for more than three decades.

WHERE TO GO FROM HERE

A transcendent superstar in peak form isn't galloping into town to the rescue the Spurs anytime soon. There's no prime version of Tim Duncan, David Robinson or George Gervin coming through that door. For at least this summer, there's no draft pick or salary cap space to even dream of such a miracle.

Without the all-time great, history says to concentrate all efforts on becoming an elite defensive team. Last summer, that's the path I thought the Spurs should take. But after watching the 2012 Spurs, I've actually changed my mind.

Even though there is no precedence in the last 33 seasons, I believe the Spurs need to continue down their current path. I believe the Spurs need to try to win it all with an offense-first approach.

Personnel-wise, the Spurs simply don't have any other choice. Parker might have been a top ten defensive point guard in the NBA but he's far from the type of defender you can build around. Father Time has been harsh to Ginobili's D. During the championship years, he was very good at team-defense and at least average individually. Unfortunately, Ginobili is now average at team-defense and usually subpar individually.

The largest change, however, is Duncan's defense. First of all, his defensive ability has eroded over the years. At 36, he's still capable at defending the low block and challenging shots at the rim. But when it comes to aspects that require mobility -- such as defending pick-and-rolls or switching out on the perimeter -- Duncan is below average.

Additionally, the current rules in the NBA and the influx of lethal perimeter scorers blessed with otherworldly athleticism make it very difficult to build an elite defense around a center who isn't exceptionally quick. Duncan is a lot of things but no one would describe his quickness as exceptional. In today's NBA, great defenses are built by complementing star perimeter defenders with bigmen who can seamlessly switch onto smaller players when needed. The Spurs, with Duncan in the middle, can't do that. Add Ginobili's declining defense to the fact that Parker doesn't have the size or strength to improve much past his current level at that end and we arrive an unfortunate truth: there's no pathway to make this Spurs team a great defensive unit.

If the Spurs won't have the transcendent superstar or the elite defense to attempt to win a championship via a traditional route, the Spurs are left with the chore of paving their own road. That road must consist of the best offense in the NBA combined with a defense that, at the very least, is decidedly above average.

CAN IT BE DONE?

After San Antonio's demise, a lot of absolute terms were used when describing their downfall. Teams that rely on offense can't win championships, they said. You can't hitch your wagon to a small, playmaking point guards and expect to be taken to the promised land, they said. They said the core was too old, the role players were bound to fail and the style of play wouldn't hold up during the rigors of the NBA playoffs.

To that I say they were right. Those reasons are all justifiable by the evidence of history. However, I just don't think those declarations are necessarily absolute. Sooner or later, there will come a time when a team shatters the mold on the way to a championship. For proof, just look at the 2012 Spurs. Add a few Ifs to the equation (If multiple role players didn't shrivel under pressure; If Parker caught on fire from the perimeter; If a replacement ref wasn't needed in Game 6 of the WCF; If Duncan and/or Ginobili were able to turn back the clock for two weeks; If the opposition missed a few outside shots) and can anyone absolutely declare that the Spurs had no chance at all to win the championship this season? I don't believe so. Though it was always an uphill battle, a championship was within the realm of possibilities.

Going into next season, the Spurs will once again begin the campaign as a longshot to win a championship. They will need to mesh perfectly, avoid wear, steer clear of injuries, have the playoff matchups break impeccably in their favor, see a couple other contenders fall off the rail and hope to peak at the right time. Or, to put it more simply, have what happened this year happen again next year, with the added difficultly of Duncan and Ginobili potentially falling off a cliff at any second due to their age.

As it stands, even saying the Spurs have a 5 percent chance of winning the 2013 championship is optimistic. Their true odds are probably somewhere between 1 and 3 percent.

REBUILDING IS NOT AN OPTION

Despite the dim outlook, rebuilding right now makes no sense (well, unless Duncan shocks the sporting world and decides to retire). In the NBA, there are only a handful of teams each season that have a chance to win the championship. Right now, the Spurs are in that conversation -- and that isn't something to be thrown away. One day San Antonio will have to take the first step toward a long and painful rebuild. Thankfully, that time has not arrived.

Sentimental and business reasons aside (which there are many), basketball remains the biggest reason why the Spurs need to keep trucking. Many teams, particularly small market teams, would love to switch places with the Spurs right now. A legitimate, though slim, shot a championship with a clean salary cap outlook for the eventual rebuilding project? That's nothing to be upset about.

HOW TO REFUEL

As previously stated, the Spurs need to try to win with offense. With that in mind, I believe that all moves made during this offseason should be decided by offensive fit. For the Spurs to be the best offensive team in the league, they can't afford to have any weak links. It's true that hypothetically an athletic, shotblocking bigman would be a fit defensively, as would a perimeter stopper. However, unless the hypothetical player is also able to play on the offensive end at a high level, it'd be the wrong move.

Defensively, I think the Spurs should rely on growth and tweaks. Kawhi Leonard, Danny Green (if re-signed) and Tiago Splitter should be much better defensively in their second full year in the rotation. Finding a backup point guard better than Gary Neal would be difficult not to accomplish. Plus, even veterans like Stephen Jackson and Boris Diaw (again, if re-signed) will be better on that end following a training camp.

I don't believe that wholesale changes are needed at this point. Instead, the Spurs should build off of this season's success and hope beyond hope that they can become the exception to who usually rules the NBA.

Agree with 90 percent of it. The part about offense-oriented vs. defense-oriented is dead on. We just can't be a defensive team. Our bigs don't have the speed off the rolls. We don't have the speed and athleticism to get help-side blocks. That is the reason that why our defensive focus is the paint and we give up a lot of open jumpers.

That leaves Kawhi or Jax typically on an island with an elite 2 or 3. Kawhi can be that lockdown defender in the future, but is still learning. TP is a good defender, but not great. Manu has lost a couple steps. Gary Neal..ha. But can we change defensive strategy? I don't think. Our bigs aren't capable of holding down the paint from their man and dribble penetration and rebounding.

In terms of offense vs. defense emphasis, what you see is going to stay the same. it has to.

My question is on offense. I'm in the minority here for believing offense cost us the series against the Thunder. I don't care what the stats say, our offense is too relient on Tony Parker to get past elite teams. To me, the difference was that no one else was a concern off the bounce (other than Manu's fourth in Game 1 and Game 4). It could be a slashing 2/3 or a big posting up, but someone else has to be able to create a shot or set up a teammate.

This offense will hum in the regular season, no doubt. I'd guarantee the same numbers, maybe better next year, with this system and roster. But the Thunder realized if you cut the head off the snake, the rest dies with it. Shut down the facilitator and the system will break down, forcing a bunch of role players and past their prime guys to go one-on-one. To make matters worse, they could fly out to the three point line, too. Obviously, only a handful of teams will have the one-on-one defender and team speed to stop Tony without leaving shooters wide open. You can bet we'll run into one of those teams when it counts, though.

Kawhi is the one I'm wanting to see next year. He worked on his three-point shooting before this season. Do we start to see him mature in other areas and take on an extended role on offense? That would mean working on his handle. Who else will get to the rim on their own?

Disagreements: Splitter...his stock is at its peak. Obviously, I wouldn't trade him for nothing, but I would certainly be shopping him.

[TD 21]

As previously stated, the Spurs need to try to win with offense. With that in mind, I believe that all moves made during this offseason should be decided by offensive fit. For the Spurs to be the best offensive team in the league, they can't afford to have any weak links. It's true that hypothetically an athletic, shotblocking bigman would be a fit defensively, as would a perimeter stopper. However, unless the hypothetical player is also able to play on the offensive end at a high level, it'd be the wrong move.

Agreed. And it starts with finding a true backup PG; one who's an adept play maker. I liked what Ford brought to the table before he suc bed to injury. Underwhelming as he's been to this point, I think pursuing Flynn is worthwhile. My thoughts as to why: http://spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=199589

The days of just having Parker and Ginobili as play makers are over (or at least, they should be). Especially coming off of playing into June and playing in the Olympics. This team desperately needs another guard who can create.

As previously stated, the Spurs need to try to win with offense. With that in mind, I believe that all moves made during this offseason should be decided by offensive fit. For the Spurs to be the best offensive team in the league, they can't afford to have any weak links. It's true that hypothetically an athletic, shotblocking bigman would be a fit defensively, as would a perimeter stopper. However, unless the hypothetical player is also able to play on the offensive end at a high level, it'd be the wrong move.

Defensively, I think the Spurs should rely on growth and tweaks. Kawhi Leonard, Danny Green (if re-signed) and Tiago Splitter should be much better defensively in their second full year in the rotation. Finding a backup point guard better than Gary Neal would be difficult not to accomplish. Plus, even veterans like Stephen Jackson and Boris Diaw (again, if re-signed) will be better on that end following a training camp.

If they want to take a significant step forward defensively, then they need an athletic, shot blocking big man. There's no other way around it. I agree that said play can't be an offensively liability though. That's why they need to make a major offer for Smith, long shot or not. My thoughts as to why: http://spurstalk.com/forums/showthre...=190683&page=4

They can and probably will make incremental improvement, I just don't buy that they'll be marked improvement. You can blame lack of practice time all you want. I know it takes more than a few practices here and there to get used to the Spurs rotations, but they had a few days before the playoffs and long layoffs between rounds and for as improved defensively as they appeared the first two rounds, if you look at the end results, they were about the same defensive team they were the entire season and last season. And it's not because of lack or practice time, it's because they flat out don't have the personnel to be much better than that.

There's got to be more athleticism, mobility, speed and quickness. As much as we all liked the Diaw and Jackson pickups, they were a step backward on those fronts (not saying I wouldn't have done them though). They've got four rotation players in their athletic primes, but only one has above average athleticism (Leonard). Two have average athleticism (Green and Splitter) and one has well below average athleticism (Neal). That's not good enough.