Saturday, July 14, 2007

San Antonio Model -- Is really the ......

Obviously we are hearing a lot about the San Antonio model. What if ....... Jason Kidd had accepted the offer to be the point guard and they had moved Tony Parker ...... would they still have won the titles (i think yes) ..... would the model be thought of differently? Would the model be get two max players and then surround them which is no different than what it was during the mid 90's?

Not to over simplify I think the San Antonio model is Tim Duncan. The way the Chicago model was MJ and the Celtics model was Bird. Duncan truly may be one of the top 5 to 10 players to ever play in the NBA. The guy has been all league 10 straight years and all defense 10 straight years and has won over 70% of the games he has played. He ranks awfully high.

The model most impressive to me has never won a championship. Utah was able to re-load after Stockton-Malone era with only one bad season and that was crippled by injuries. Every other franchise that was winning in the mid 90's is still in recovery or yet to win more than one playoff series. (see Boston, Houston, Seattle, Indiana, New York, Chicago, etc)

Thoughts?

10 comments:

myELFboy said...

I agree. The San Antonio model is having Tim Duncan in the middle and building around him with solid role players who know their place on the team. Not to mention Tim Duncan is a one of a kind superstar who prefers not to put himself out their in a flashy, stereotypical "bling-bling" way, something I appreciate as a fan. I'm not sure if Kevin Durant can fill those shoes or not as I do not believe the San Antonio model is a "one size fits all" rather a "once in a lifetime" model.

Kenny0873 said...

I would have to agree to a point with you, David. It seems to me that the three most prominent teams you mentioned (SA, CHI, UTA) all had unique offensive and defensive principles and happened to have a franchise-transforming player (or two in UTA) and a great second option that were absolutely perfect for what they were trying to do. So, I would give as much credit to the GM's that put the puzzles together and the coaches that stuck to their principles as I do the players that executed them on the floor.
Your long-standing point that the best player on the floor wins close games lends a lot to your thought process, but it's usually style of play that produces a lot of those games that are often decided in the last few minutes of a game. I think you should give the architects of these teams a bigger slice of the "credit pie".
The question in my mind is whether Presti can get Durant a sidekick worthy of his talent level and whether the overall change to a more defensive philosophy will actually fit with this team. I hear other fans mention that they don't want a mirror image of San Antonio's style and I don't get that. All the Spurs do is win. How is winning boring?

marinerman said...

I like the Chicago model more....mj23=kd35 JG22=SP33

RJ said...

If you have a 8 point differential in regular season you are probably the best in the league as Spurs were this past season. Between the 5 starters and bench, offense and defense can you create an 8 edge, that is the task. Actually you also have to cover for any areas where you slip and give up points. Very hard to divid that net +8 among the Spurs. Maybe Duncan gets +5, Parker +2, Ginobli +3, Bowen +2, rest of team -4. ??

How would/will Donics get to +8? Durant is a scorer but will he be above average on anything else? Just for hypothesis sake say he can become a +3. Say Green becomes a +1. I know is sounds small but getting a consistent edge in nba is hard. +4 would be halfway there- if the rest of the team was right at nba average. To get to +8 would probably take 2 more above average players or require Durant or someone to be greater than this. In playoffs point differential against playoff teams can get cut. Vets who can win close games are a key feature in championships. Still early but new era Sonics need a defensive stopper somewhere. A strong PG on both offense / defense is always helpful. Lego pieces. Get the right core 4 and then add 4-6 side pieces and hope your construction is better than 29 others.

RJ said...

A +2 team differential and you have decent chance toi get to second round depending on seed and desirability of that matchup for you. A +4 differential and you should get to conference finals.

If Durant become a +3 and Green a +1 then if rest of Sonics were even that might be good enough someday for conference finals. If rest of team is -2 you twist between first and second round. If rest of team is -4 you might barely make playoffs and likely will be one and out. If rest of team is marvelous and +2-4 you are a title contender.

RJ said...

Average in west last season was 8th seed Warriors. To be champions you need to be 7-8 points better than that. B Davis was maybe a +3 (regular season) and rest of team was about -3.
So Durant has to be better than B Davis and all else equal or Durant gets to B Davis level of impact and rest of Sonics have to be better than rest of Warriors to get to 8th seed or beyond.

B.P. said...

David- Nice work on the blog! Meant to comment on the legoland posting...Live it up! Even with the current situation, right now you have the best job in the world. More and more people will start coming to this site for info and good analysis and well thought-out opinions. Keep it up. Must be a weird transition, but remember the job you have is awesome and you love what you do, so it will work out. Don't mean to intrude on the personal side of things, just want to encourage you to keep the same compass you seem to have had since I started listening to you at KJR. You're great at what you do, you obviously love it, and lots of people get great benefit from it .

I'll be dropping some actual sports comments to your blog (such great insight from other readers to discuss!), and I'll start directing my sports/NBA-junkie friends here starting now.

Thanks again, David, and keep throwing yourself into it.

(Next comments will be NBA-related, I promise.)

DORK said...

Locke!!!

Can you post your Stud Dud for SG and PG. I wanted to look at Delonte West's numbers. The Celtics were so bad last year it's hard to look at his +/- at 82games.com and get a good sense of his individual numbers.

CHAD FORD SUCKS!!!!

Anonymous said...

West was 29th on the earlier PG list.

DORK said...

Ouch, thanks I think.