Reply With Quote
Where's ElNono at I think he has insider.
http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/story...-nba-best-team
le:
Should Spurs be le favorites?
Where's ElNono at I think he has insider.
All I know is that the Heat sucker Haberstroh doesn't think the Spurs can win it while the other guy Pelton thinks we can and should be the favorites. I got that from twitter but haven't read the actual article.
not me...
though you could probably get as much insight by starting a thread with the same topic here...
lmao paying for some alleged "insider" opinion pieces
Kevin Pelton is at least good enough to offer insight and has done a lot of quality work on advanced stats over the years.
Basketball Prospectus that he used to be the man behind was great and now he has replaced Hollinger for ESPN as the "stats insider guy".
I'm glad it's him arguing the Spurs case (which I'm defnitely interested in) and not the other guy.
But would I pay for ESPN Insider? No.
Although I usually don't agree with Haberstroth, but I often like or understand his reasoning. There is a few relatively new guys on ESPN that are far better than some of the old ones (Ford, Sheridan, Broussard, Adande to name a few). Most of these new people are TH network guys. Of course there are others that flat suck, for instance, the "Spurs' guy" Shea Serrano and Israel Gutierrez. Serrano doesn't seem to know a thing about them and has awful reasons for most of his arguments.
Should Spurs be le favorites?
Per Diem columnists debate San Antonio's greatness
Updated: March 25, 2014, 11:09 AM ET
By Kevin Pelton and Tom Haberstroh | ESPN Insider
The San Antonio Spurs have the league's best record and sit atop the Hollinger Power Rankings. Yet there's still skepticism toward the Spurs being considered the favorite to win the championship after falling just short in last year's NBA Finals. Per Diem co-authors Tom Haberstroh and Kevin Pelton debate San Antonio's case as the favorite.
Kevin Pelton: The Spurs were my pick (and SCHOENE's) to win the championship in the preseason. Since then, they have overcome injuries and self-imposed minutes restrictions to post the NBA's best point differential. Thanks to a 14-game winning streak, they are a heavy favorite to claim home-court advantage throughout the postseason. And lest we forget, they were a rebound away from a championship in June despite having to start the NBA Finals on the road.
So why exactly should I pick anyone but the Spurs to raise the banner this time around?
Tom Haberstroh: I hear you. Their 14 consecutive wins are the longest streak of the season for any team, and they're sitting atop the league standings with a two-game cushion over Oklahoma City. This is pretty horrible timing on my part and it feels almost un-American to say this, but I'm not sold that the Spurs should be the clear-cut favorite.
Here's why: I think this plays out like 2011 and 2012 for the Spurs, not 2013. Are the Spurs going to catch another break with Russell Westbrook missing the postseason? I feel like San Antonio's improbable 2013 run is being used as a "Never Doubt The Spurs!" card, but there was a reason why we were skeptical about them before the Westbrook injury. They burned us for two straight postseasons!
My, we have short memories. That 2012 team went 50-16 in the lockout-shortened season, which is the equivalent of a 62-win season in any normal year. They carried a 20-game win streak into Game 3 of the Western Conference finals, and then boom -- the baby Thunder won four straight and sent them packing. The season before that, in 2011, they won 61 games and got upset in the first round by the eighth-seeded Memphis Grizzlies. For two years, they dominated the regular season and came up short. And we're wondering how they sneaked up on us in 2013. Well, there it is.
Here are the ages of their three best players in June: 38 (Tim Duncan), 36 (Manu Ginobili) and 32 (Tony Parker). I get that their minutes-weighted average is not that high thanks to Kawhi Leonard and suddenly-Jamal-Crawford-like Patty Mills, but shouldn't we be a little skeptical that the Duncan-Ginobili-Parker trinity has enough left in the tank to make back-to-back Finals runs? I picked the Heat over the Clippers this preseason, and I'm still feeling better about that pick or a Heat-OKC Finals than a Spurs encore. You're saying 2013 is more for real than a fluke. Talk me out of this. It feels wrong to be in this corner.
Pelton: Fair points, Tom, but I think there's a strong case to be made that this is the best San Antonio team we've seen since the 2007 champs. As the chart shows, the Spurs' differential is the best it's been in the past four seasons. The 2011 team wasn't exactly an obvious candidate for a first-round upset, but it was nowhere near as dominant as the other recent San Antonio incarnations. And this season's Spurs have been even better, by point differential, than the 2012 team that had the West's best record in the regular season.
Spurs better with age
Year
Point Differential
2014 +7.8
2013 +6.4
2012 +7.2
2011 +5.7
Here's the amazing thing: San Antonio has a better differential, per NBA.com/Stats, with Duncan and Parker on the bench. That speaks to the incredible depth the Spurs have amassed and developed. Leonard is now a Finals-tested veteran, as opposed to the rookie who couldn't make plays off the dribble in 2012 when Oklahoma City ran him off the free throw line. Tiago Splitter has more experience playing with Duncan, giving Gregg Popovich a bigger frontcourt option. And the bench, with Mills making the leap and the addition of Marco Belinelli, is far and away the best in the league.
Won't that make a difference in May and June?
Haberstroh: Yeah, see, that's the rub. The depth has been a revelation this season, and you didn't even mention that Boris Diaw is having his best PER season since he won Most Improved in 2005-06. Pretty sure Pop could turn you and me into NBA players. Everyone's having a career year on that team, it seems.
But I still can't fight the feeling that OKC has their number. We both know that the regular-season series is a pretty handy fortune teller, and Oklahoma City has won all three games against the Spurs this season. One of those wins came without Westbrook. Given that, and the fact that OKC bounced the Spurs in 2012 but never got a chance to spank them again in 2013, you still have no problem picking San Antonio to come out of the West?
OKC could end up playing the Clips in the playoffs, a potentially big stumbling block.
Pelton: Hey, I know the Spurs are far from a sure thing. I'm playing the probability, not the certainty. And here's part of that: the possibility the Thunder don't make it to a possible 2012 Western Conference finals rematch. If things go to form, Oklahoma City faces a brutal second-round matchup with the surging Los Angeles Clippers. San Antonio won't have any easy path to the conference finals either with the Houston Rockets potentially lurking, but avoiding the Clippers is an advantage of claiming the No. 1 seed.
Beyond that, I'm not sure the Thunder match up with the Spurs as well as in 2012. (Note that Leonard missed one of Oklahoma City's wins in San Antonio due to injury and left early with an injury in the other.) The Thunder's success was predicated on throwing five incredible young athletes at the Spurs' offense. Well, James Harden isn't around to play that fifth spot anymore, and Scott Brooks is giving heavy minutes to Caron Butler and Derek Fisher -- not exactly disruptive, rangy defenders. Oklahoma City has struggled to defend since the All-Star break, and while the return of Kendrick Perkins and Thabo Sefolosha might turn things around, are you willing to put your faith in that?
Haberstroh: The Fisher-Butler threat is real and terrifying. It's probably not a big enough story that Butler is shooting 36 percent in OKC and can't really guard anyone at his age. But so much Veteran Leadership™! There's definitely potential that Brooks may screw this up by leaning on the guys with championship pedigree.
Counterpoint: Kevin Durant and Russell Westbrook. The Thunder are scoring an off-the-charts 117 points per 100 possessions with those two guys on the floor since February. It seems that Westbrook didn't play Monday as a precaution to get ready for Tuesday's matchup against the Mavs. Westbrook still needs to prove he's healthy, but if those two guys are on the floor, I don't think the Fisher-Butler-Perkins potential matters all that much. I'm still going with OKC because Durant and Westbrook are that good.
And like you said, the Clippers have been torching everybody lately. They have a plus-11.3 point differential since the All-Star break, which is indistinguishable from the Spurs (plus-11.6). And that's without J.J. Re , who's their best shooter and should be coming back before the end of the season.
Look, I love the Spurs. What they're doing is the stuff of legend. Grandkids on the lap-type stuff. But the West is just too good right now. I could realistically see any of six teams (for the record: San Antonio, Houston, Los Angeles Clippers, Houston, Golden State and Memphis) coming out of that dogpile alive. The Spurs are great, but I'm not willing to put them a notch above OKC and the Clippers. The West is too wild.
Thanks for posting, but we have better discussions here, and those are free.
"The Fisher-Butler threat is real and terrifying"
no. no it is not.
Thanks for posting!
Both sides make good points. My fear is injury. It's simple: older players are more injury prone and recover from injuries slower. Pop limiting minutes helps a lot, but that's still our biggest hurtle. Second is Kevin Durant. Other than that, I don't fear anyone.
it's such bull , might be one of the tiest aspects of espn which is saying something.though you could probably get as much insight by starting a thread with the same topic here...
lmao paying for some alleged "insider" opinion pieces
I was on the NFL page the other day and it was literally like: "find out which free agents got picked up by new teams" and it was an insider article. i mean wtf? what's next? find out tonight's final score on espn insider?
If the Fisher-Butler threat is real and terrifying, why isn't the Duncan, Manu Parker threat terrifying. Sounds like he was arguing against veterans with age against us but thinks it's OK with OK>
"The Fisher-Butler threat is real and terrifying"
He meant terrifying to Thunder fans not Thunder opponents. Read it in context.
Yeah, they were talking about how the Fisher-Butler threat isn't very effective. As Mel said, look at the context. Earlier they brought up how Butler was shooting a horrid 36% from the field since he's been in OKC.
thanks!
If we're healthy, not worried about OKC.
Just like Stephen Jackson said "opinions are like peoples butt hole" everybody has one. I think Haberstroh was speaking on his own butt hole....
The Clippers
Any Spurfan would want to play the Clippers over Houston imo. Either team will lose to SAS but the Spurs own the Clippers.
I don't give a what any writer says. The ONLY team in the West that can beat SA in a 7 games series in OKC.
Thanks for posting
tbh OKC doesn't scare me as much without the spur killer in harden. I'm glad tey broke that trio up.
And even OKC I'm not sure can take us. The Spurs played them tough in 2012 and had it not been for James Harden hitting some ridiculous shots over Leonard in crunch time, Spurs move on to face Miami. Thank that Sam Presti is a cheap dumbass and traded Harden to another team for peanuts.
Then again that midnight looking mother er Reggie Jackson seems to be stepping into that Harden role against us
Spurs better with Duncan and Parker off the court. As I say, slow footed C's and small PG's don't make sense in today's NBA. You need a lineup of Manu Green Kawhi Daye Diaw/Splitter.
at least they finally decided to talk about spurs basketball.
Why didn't the one dissenter mention that Manu Ginobili messed up his shoulder right before the 2011 Memphis series. Kinda a big issue in why they lost in round 1.
As for 2012, a ridiculously fluke shooting by Perkins/Ibaka combined with shoddy 2006 level officiating in game 6 attributed to that ouster.
In other words there's a reason a health 2013 Spurs team was one rebound away from the ring.
The clippers are not a threat to the spurs. I think L.A. will beat OKC, however.
Exactly!
And why doesn't anyone ever mention that OKC got destroyed by Miami in 2012? Or mention how every other team that didn't win the Championship are playoff busts? Or throw out that regular season success against the spurs should be disregarded whenever they brush off the Spurs regular season success? Because people just like to diss the Spurs and it's cool to root for more popular teams.
Somehow teams that have proven less than the Spurs and accomplished less in recent years are still getting more credibility or leeway.
Almost every opinion I read about someones doubts about the Spurs are usually hypocritical.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
