Spurs best bang for the buck

[tdunk21]

http://projectspurs.com/2011-article...-the-buck.html

According to Forbes, the San Antonio Spurs are the NBA's best bang for the buck team:

We looked at the last five completed seasons to determine which teams were the best when it comes to performance versus pay. Playoff wins counted twice as heavily as regular-season ones. For player costs we included spending on player benefits, but not luxury tax payments. We compared each team’s annual performance and spending to the league median and averaged those five years of numbers. The Spurs fared the best at 47% above the NBA average.

The Spurs have averaged 56 regular-season wins (second best in the NBA) and an NBA-high 10.6 playoff wins over the past five years. They have done that with player costs that average $73 million annually, only ninth highest in the NBA. Credit coach Gregg Popovich and general manager R.C. Buford, who have been with the team since before Duncan arrived. It’s the kind of stability rarely seen in a league where only seven coaches have been on the sidelines for four full seasons with their current teams. Owner Peter Holt has seen the value of his team soar from $122 million to $404 million since Duncan arrived as the consistent winning helped get AT&T Center built mostly with public money.

Coming in second place was the Phoenix Suns and third was the Cleveland Cavaliers. Failing to make the list was the Dallas Mavericks.

This is just another reason why Spurs fans should appreciate this team and the winning culture it has brought to the city of San Antonio. Be proud Spurs fan.

[Kori Ellis]

Here's the full Forbes article about it...

http://blogs.forbes.com/kurtbadenhau...ms-for-buck-2/

[ALVAREZ6]

Doesn't surprise anyone here, very very very obvious.

We all know Manu, Tim, and Tony all could have made millions more at inferior clubs. And yes, they have won a fair amount during the last decade...

[tdunk21]

Here's the full Forbes article about it...

http://blogs.forbes.com/kurtbadenhau...ms-for-buck-2/

[ALVAREZ6]

Note that while Forbes listed some statistics, it doesn't appear that they used any real ratios or anything meaningful to construct this list, did they?


It doesn't look like they did to me, and from what I already know about Forbes, I would be completely surprised if they did. Forbes is notorious for assigning 1 journalist the task of ranking the top ___ # of any given _____ things and requiring that no mathematical analysis or research be used.


So, the point of me bringing this up is that the Spurs, without doing any research, are definitely the best bang for the buck of the NBA's recent history. So they got #1 right. But really, everything else from there is arbitrary. They likely bull ted the remaining 9.

[SequSpur]

yeah...those little elementary school kids dancing at halftime really makes my dollars stretch....are you kidding me?