This is paraphrased from Spursreport, but I would like to see this board's take on the subject. From a perception (and possibly objective) standpoint, the Spurs have less talent than any other playoff level team in the West (and possibly East). They have a coach who never gets mentioned as "great" or even "good". They have no household names on the bench, and almost no player that makes the ESPN highlight real with any consistency whatsoever. In fact, on the night of the Sun's game, the Suns put a full 4 plays on the "top 10" - the Spurs had one. And yet....the Spurs win games. They have won for years, consistently 55-60 per. Before every game, on every other teams board, I read the position breakdown - and invariably the fans of the opposing team come to the conclusion that they will defeat the Spurs - and it's hard to argue with these knowledgable fan's breakdowns - usually. So what is it? Is Duncan that damn good? Remember many people equate him with Garnett (who has another all-star on his team & even a center who is putting up better numbers than Robinson). Is the rest of the team under-rated. Is the coach under-rated. Are they just lucky? Year after year??? Some enlightened comments would be appreciated.
They aren't lucky. They have a good coach. They have the oldest team. They're just good. AND DUNCAN IS THAT GOOD. He is the MVP. They aren't dominant anymore. But they win because they have Tim Duncan. 38 points, 16 rebounds, 9 assists, 4 blocked shots, and 1 steal on 64% shooting sounds good to me.
I don't think their coach is all that, but like LittleY said, Tim Duncan is that good. He calls for multiple coverage on defense which opens up other players, and David Robinson was and can be on occasion as good or better than any opposing center. He's a force on defense as well so the Spurs are doubly blessed in that respect.
They're a consistent defensive team, that has a superstar power forward in Duncan, and quality roleplayers that when they step up, usually equate to a win for the Spurs.
What?? You don't think the Laker's would have the Spurs record without Kobe, yet an uninjured Shaq. The #1 and #2 best players in the league can win without another star. How hard is that to understand? Defense and low post play wins the easiest. That's why the teams like the Kings and Mavs need gobs and gobs of talent and sophisticated offenses to do anything (and please don't mention East coast teams...blah). The Kings and Mavs don't have the simple strategy basics at the level of the Lakers and Spurs.
Last year, the Lakers DID have the Spurs record (58 Wins) WITH Kobe. So, no, I don't think w/o him the Lakers would have the Spurs record. Also, in many circles, Garnett is considered the equal, or even the superior, of Duncan; yet the Pups don't have nearly the success the Spurs have. The Spurs are 3rd in the West right now, and Spurs fans consider this year pretty much a bust thus far! There starting lineup is Duncan, an old center with a bad back, a small forward with no offense, a 20 year old Euro point guard, and Stephen Jackson (who?) at the 2! Other than Duncan, none of those players would start on the Rockets, the Suns or even the Grizzlies, Clippers or Sonics (alright Robinson would get some play, but you get my point) and only Robinson & Parker would see any kind of minutes off the bench...and these are the STARTERS!!
I think they have a good coach and good front office. They have built a team around Duncan that plays to his strengths and complements him well. They play good defense, maximize Duncan's low post play and punish teams that overcommit on defense. I think it is just a team with great architecture and chemistry.
Garnett doesn't possess the low post skills of a Duncan or Shaq. Garnett is probably a better overall players then both of them. However, like heypee mentions, low post bangers can vastly improve the entire team. And the Spurs win because Duncan is easily the best player in the game now.
The Lakers won the title, too, and toyed with the Spurs to a 4-1 victory on 4th Q defense of Duncan. So what's your point? Shaq missed 15 games last year, so you can't really compare regular season records. Afterall, he won 67 games with a 21-yr old Kobe in 99-00 in a year Kobe missed 16 games. Yes, I believe an eager and healthy Shaq can win 58 games without Kobe. Maybe I should have added that Duncan/Robinson also never miss games as a reason they can continue winning on league best defense and post play. Like I say, what is so surprising about that? Defense and post play is the most efficient way to win, and that is what the Spurs and Lakers share in common.
1. Great defense night in and night out. Spurs are usually in the top 5 in FG% held against opposing teams. 2. Interior presense. The twin towers eliminate a lot of penetration by the opposing teams, and they provide instant offense in the key that allows the sharpshooters to shoot open 3s. One of their players (Steve Smith?) ranked in the top 5 in 3pt-ers made. 3. Fundamental and unselfish play. These guys are friendly to each other off the court. There's no drama here. This is one of the most stable teams in sports (and probably most sportsmanlike if not for Danny Fairy). Popovich is like a general and he gets the way he wants it to be done. With or without a zone, the twin towers literally guarantees them wins. With above average guards, they're dangerous. But I still think they lack the kiler instinct to win a series against the other powers.
Totally agree with Invis Fan especially on #3. The spurs are excretingly consistent and stable. There are few mood swings, shifts in tempo... they just keep pounding at the same level (not necessarily a very high one) on both the offensive and defensive end. Stability is getting rarer in the NBA. Talented teams like the Clippers lose all the time because of a lack of it.
i know it sounds like a heypee recording, but 1. low post play of duncan creates easier shots for his teammates; and 2. interior defense. and 3. yes, shaq COULD win 58 by himself. and 4. kevin garnett is NOT a post presence.
exactly!! this is why people value postmen more than guards...the spurs aren't even a bit flashy...but they have reliable scorers and rebounders down low...and they commit to playing defense. that simple, really.
