How do the San Antonio Spurs do it?

[Fafnir]

Over the past six years we've basically had the same results as them in the post season.

Yeah, but they've done that after a previous decade in which they won three titles and were a legitimate contender every year.

We had to stink for ten years in order to get a shot at being good again.

The amazing thing about them is not success over any five year period, it's the sustained success over what is twenty years now, as a small market team.

Getting Tim Duncan is pretty awesome.

You can still screw it up, see Timberwolves with KG, but it makes it all possible.

[bdm860]

3) Financial discipline ~~ they don't overpay role guys. If Jeff Green had gotten his current deal in an offer from the Kings or the Blazers or the Bobcats, they'd have said -- good for you. Good luck. Better to lose you than to be handcuffed bu you. Yes, sometimes they trade for overpaid guys who have a couple of years left, but they always get attached talent back in return that fits the plan in #2 above.

Actually they did just that.  When Richard Jefferson opted out of a his $15m final year of his contract everybody thought he was crazy because he played terrible for the Spurs.  Then a lot of people thought the Spurs were crazy when they gave him a $39m/4year deal.  Basically they gave an older version of Jeff Green, with less upside, more money.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=0&p1=greenje02&y1=2013&p2=jefferi01&y2=2011

They also didn't re-sign 3rd leading scorer Stephen Jackson after their 2003 championship.  Instead he signed with the Hawks for $1m//1yr.  (A little more complicated though because they did offer $10m/3years but took it off the table).  I'm sure a lot of fans in San Antonio thought they messed up after getting knocked out of the 2nd round of the playoffs in 2004, and Jackson went on to average 18ppg (and 22ppg over the last 41 games) for the Hawks. 

Though I agree the Spurs have a great front office, they make some of mistakes too.  But if you followed them closely you might be questioning some of their moves and why they haven't been able to win a championship or even get to the Finals since 2007.

Nitpicking. Yes, we all make mistakes, but they're widely considered to have the wisest front office in the league.

Nitpicking, No.  Not when you SPECIFICALLY mentioned how they wouldn't have a Jeff Green situation, yet they had an identical, if not worse situation with Richard Jefferson just a couple of seasons ago.

Is it nitpicking to say Danny messed up with Jeff Green when he had the financial discipline with James Posey, Tony Allen, and Glen Davis? (Not saying you're actually saying that, but some people definitely blame Danny for moves like that, while other teams, like the Spurs, get praised for similar transactions).

[Boris Badenov]

Over the past six years we've basically had the same results as them in the post season.

Yeah, but they've done that after a previous decade in which they won three titles and were a legitimate contender every year.

We had to stink for ten years in order to get a shot at being good again.

The amazing thing about them is not success over any five year period, it's the sustained success over what is twenty years now, as a small market team.

Getting Tim Duncan is pretty awesome.

You can still screw it up, see Timberwolves with KG, but it makes it all possible.

Or Cleveland with Lebron, or Orlando with...everyone they've had.

The Duncan argument is valid, but the Spurs still stand out.

[BballTim]

Over the past six years we've basically had the same results as them in the post season.

Yeah, but they've done that after a previous decade in which they won three titles and were a legitimate contender every year.

We had to stink for ten years in order to get a shot at being good again.

The amazing thing about them is not success over any five year period, it's the sustained success over what is twenty years now, as a small market team.

Getting Tim Duncan is pretty awesome.

You can still screw it up, see Timberwolves with KG, but it makes it all possible.

  It's even more awesome when you already have Robinson on your team and you're just tanking the season.

[TitleMaster]

The reason why the Spurs haven't made it to the finals since '07 was that Ginobili, the Q4 closer, their *Paul Pierce*, was injured. And that was a consistent trend, which continued on, postseason, after postseason, since that year.

And now, he's in the declining phase of his career. Thus, the Spurs do not have an all star, who can take over in those key situations. Duncan is no longer the man for that job; his job is pure defense and using that to generate some offense.

In contrast, the Celts have never had a truly injured Paul Pierce during a playoff run. Replace Doc with Pops and we win in 2008, 4-1 against the Lakers, in 2010, 4-2 against the Lakers, and finally in 2012, 4-2 against the Heat in the ECF and 4-1 against OKC in the finals.

[ssspence]

3) Financial discipline ~~ they don't overpay role guys. If Jeff Green had gotten his current deal in an offer from the Kings or the Blazers or the Bobcats, they'd have said -- good for you. Good luck. Better to lose you than to be handcuffed bu you. Yes, sometimes they trade for overpaid guys who have a couple of years left, but they always get attached talent back in return that fits the plan in #2 above.

Actually they did just that.  When Richard Jefferson opted out of a his $15m final year of his contract everybody thought he was crazy because he played terrible for the Spurs.  Then a lot of people thought the Spurs were crazy when they gave him a $39m/4year deal.  Basically they gave an older version of Jeff Green, with less upside, more money.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=0&p1=greenje02&y1=2013&p2=jefferi01&y2=2011

They also didn't re-sign 3rd leading scorer Stephen Jackson after their 2003 championship.  Instead he signed with the Hawks for $1m//1yr.  (A little more complicated though because they did offer $10m/3years but took it off the table).  I'm sure a lot of fans in San Antonio thought they messed up after getting knocked out of the 2nd round of the playoffs in 2004, and Jackson went on to average 18ppg (and 22ppg over the last 41 games) for the Hawks. 

Though I agree the Spurs have a great front office, they make some of mistakes too.  But if you followed them closely you might be questioning some of their moves and why they haven't been able to win a championship or even get to the Finals since 2007.

Nitpicking. Yes, we all make mistakes, but they're widely considered to have the wisest front office in the league.

Nitpicking, No.  Not when you SPECIFICALLY mentioned how they wouldn't have a Jeff Green situation, yet they had an identical, if not worse situation with Richard Jefferson just a couple of seasons ago.

Is it nitpicking to say Danny messed up with Jeff Green when he had the financial discipline with James Posey, Tony Allen, and Glen Davis? (Not saying you're actually saying that, but some people definitely blame Danny for moves like that, while other teams, like the Spurs, get praised for similar transactions).

OK, they overpaid Richard Jefferson, who they soon traded for a better player on a better contract. Can you give me some others examples since Pop got there? 

And more importantly, are you arguing that they aren't one of the best run orgs in the NBA, and that doesn't contribute to their ability to compete year after year? If not -- you're nitpicking.

[ssspence]

Over the past six years we've basically had the same results as them in the post season.

Yeah, but they've done that after a previous decade in which they won three titles and were a legitimate contender every year.

We had to stink for ten years in order to get a shot at being good again.

The amazing thing about them is not success over any five year period, it's the sustained success over what is twenty years now, as a small market team.

Getting Tim Duncan is pretty awesome.

You can still screw it up, see Timberwolves with KG, but it makes it all possible.

  It's even more awesome when you already have Robinson on your team and you're just tanking the season.

I think the day of that lottery was my nadir as a Cs fan. I just can't recall feeling any lower.

[BballTim]

The reason why the Spurs haven't made it to the finals since '07 was that Ginobili, the Q4 closer, their *Paul Pierce*, was injured. And that was a consistent trend, which continued on, postseason, after postseason, since that year.

And now, he's in the declining phase of his career. Thus, the Spurs do not have an all star, who can take over in those key situations. Duncan is no longer the man for that job; his job is pure defense and using that to generate some offense.

In contrast, the Celts have never had a truly injured Paul Pierce during a playoff run. Replace Doc with Pops and we win in 2008, 4-1 against the Lakers, in 2010, 4-2 against the Lakers, and finally in 2012, 4-2 against the Heat in the ECF and 4-1 against OKC in the finals.

  I think you're wildly overrating Pops. The problems we had those years were health related, and the Spurs don't seem to be able to magically overcome injuries (like Manu) any more than we do.

[GreenEnvy]

Over the past six years we've basically had the same results as them in the post season.

Its not that black and white tho. The spurs play in a much tougher conference. The year the celtics won it all the toughest team they had to beat was the cavs.........enough said.

What are you talking about?

The Pistons had the second-best record in the league that year. They were a great team, maybe even better than LA. They were the only team to beat us at home those playoffs. They were experienced and played elite defense.

I think these conference battles get a little exaggerated sometimes. Like a 55-win team in the East will become a .500 team out West. You see good teams like Miami lose to crud teams just like OKC has.

[TitleMaster]

The reason why the Spurs haven't made it to the finals since '07 was that Ginobili, the Q4 closer, their *Paul Pierce*, was injured. And that was a consistent trend, which continued on, postseason, after postseason, since that year.

And now, he's in the declining phase of his career. Thus, the Spurs do not have an all star, who can take over in those key situations. Duncan is no longer the man for that job; his job is pure defense and using that to generate some offense.

In contrast, the Celts have never had a truly injured Paul Pierce during a playoff run. Replace Doc with Pops and we win in 2008, 4-1 against the Lakers, in 2010, 4-2 against the Lakers, and finally in 2012, 4-2 against the Heat in the ECF and 4-1 against OKC in the finals.

  I think you're wildly overrating Pops. The problems we had those years were health related, and the Spurs don't seem to be able to magically overcome injuries (like Manu) any more than we do.

As far as the injury bug goes, Pierce never had it during the postseason. Our big downer year was '09, when KG went down with the knee bone spur. And thus, if Pierce were to go down, a type of hypothetical role reversal with the Spurs, I doubt that we'd do any better in the postseason than the Spurs w/o Ray Ray reverting back to his youthful Seattle days. And just like that, the Spurs were also underpowered for their playoff runs, since their last title.

[Lightskinsmurf]

Over the past six years we've basically had the same results as them in the post season.

Its not that black and white tho. The spurs play in a much tougher conference. The year the celtics won it all the toughest team they had to beat was the cavs.........enough said.

What are you talking about?

The Pistons had the second-best record in the league that year. They were a great team, maybe even better than LA. They were the only team to beat us at home those playoffs. They were experienced and played elite defense.

I think these conference battles get a little exaggerated sometimes. Like a 55-win team in the East will become a .500 team out West. You see good teams like Miami lose to crud teams just like OKC has.

The pistons might have been the better overall team but no team pushed us harder than the cavs and they had the best player in the world on their team hence why I said they were the toughest team we had to face. We were just mins away from losing that series and could have easily lost. Heres an example of what I mean. We were the toughest team miami faced in the playoffs last year but we weren't the best team, OKC was.

[BballTim]

The reason why the Spurs haven't made it to the finals since '07 was that Ginobili, the Q4 closer, their *Paul Pierce*, was injured. And that was a consistent trend, which continued on, postseason, after postseason, since that year.

And now, he's in the declining phase of his career. Thus, the Spurs do not have an all star, who can take over in those key situations. Duncan is no longer the man for that job; his job is pure defense and using that to generate some offense.

In contrast, the Celts have never had a truly injured Paul Pierce during a playoff run. Replace Doc with Pops and we win in 2008, 4-1 against the Lakers, in 2010, 4-2 against the Lakers, and finally in 2012, 4-2 against the Heat in the ECF and 4-1 against OKC in the finals.

  I think you're wildly overrating Pops. The problems we had those years were health related, and the Spurs don't seem to be able to magically overcome injuries (like Manu) any more than we do.

As far as the injury bug goes, Pierce never had it during the postseason. Our big downer year was '09, when KG went down with the knee bone spur. And thus, if Pierce were to go down, a type of hypothetical role reversal with the Spurs, I doubt that we'd do any better in the postseason than the Spurs w/o Ray Ray reverting back to his youthful Seattle days. And just like that, the Spurs were also underpowered for their playoff runs, since their last title.

  Rondo's had health issues in multiple playoffs and he's been (when healthy) more valuable than PP in the playoffs for a while. You're just choosing specific players to support your argument.

[TitleMaster]

As far as the injury bug goes, Pierce never had it during the postseason. Our big downer year was '09, when KG went down with the knee bone spur. And thus, if Pierce were to go down, a type of hypothetical role reversal with the Spurs, I doubt that we'd do any better in the postseason than the Spurs w/o Ray Ray reverting back to his youthful Seattle days. And just like that, the Spurs were also underpowered for their playoff runs, since their last title.

  Rondo's had health issues in multiple playoffs and he's been (when healthy) more valuable than PP in the playoffs for a while. You're just choosing specific players to support your argument.

Rondo's role for the C's is the same as Tony Parker's for the Spurs, and that's being the main facilitator with a few scoring moves. And Rondo's offensive game is still the drive to the hoop. Both Pierce and Ginobili, however, could create their own shots while working within a team system. Thus, the C's have in proportion to the Spurs, a similar PG-Big Man-SF combo, Rondo-Garnett-Pierce to Parker-Duncan-Ginobili, the difference being is that the Cs had in addition, Ray Ray.

[KGs Knee]

Over the past six years we've basically had the same results as them in the post season.

Yeah, but they've done that after a previous decade in which they won three titles and were a legitimate contender every year.

We had to stink for ten years in order to get a shot at being good again.

The amazing thing about them is not success over any five year period, it's the sustained success over what is twenty years now, as a small market team.

Getting Tim Duncan is pretty awesome.

You can still screw it up, see Timberwolves with KG, but it makes it all possible.

And it wasn't just "getting" Duncan.

First they drafted David Robinson, a rather nobody at the time.  He wasn't even eligible to play at first, due to his comittment to the Navy.  Then he had some crazy growth spurt making him unable to be in the Navy (too tall).  Now all of a sudden, instead of having an average player, they have a 7 foot skilled center.

After all the moderate success they had in the 90's, which wasn't anything special, Robinson then got hurt and missed an entire season.  The Spurs stunk so bad they lucked into the 1st pick.  Which of course just so happened to be Duncan.

So yeah, luck plays a role too.

[RebusRankin]

KG's Knee, Robinson was the first overall pick in 1987.