RealGM

acrossthecourt wrote:NBA WOWY.com ....

Thanks for pointing me to this -- it's allowed me to answer a query I haven't had time to run but I know in the past the numbers were astounding. It's really a query about Gregg Popovich...how have the Spurs played without any of the "Big 3" in the last 2 years? (WOWY.com doesn't go back to 2012 yet.)

In the last 2 years, the Spurs have played 3534 pos or 1,798 minutes without any of Parker, Duncan or Ginobili on the court. This is 38 full games worth of data (and if you're worried about highly selective lineup pairing like garbage time, it still comes out to 11 mpg).

The Spurs ORtg in the time is 105.7 and Drtg 106.4. In 2014 alone, they outscored opponents without any of these 3 on the court.

Some of you may be scratching your head right now as to why that's so impressive. Look at the team:



That was a .500 team! And they generated an offense around league average...This team is superstar-less. It is void of isolation scorers. It is void of players who individually pressure the defense to create shots for others.

It is, however, replete with shooters. (30% of their shots were 3-pointers converted at 38%, 25% at the rim)) It has a few guards who are competent pick and roll players. And...that's about it. Diaw is the lone player with a post game. He's also the best passer. Leonard has developed some individualism. The rest is just the "system" -- constant moving, smart, relentless screens, constant on-ball PnR action and good passing, spacing and extra passing (i.e. smart shot selection) with the ball never stopping.

To me, almost all of that comes from Pop. (Warning: Small samples.) The prior 2 years Bells was around 13-14 pts/36 and 51% TS. We have to jump a year back to Mills last team -- Portland, 2011 -- where he posted 16/36 at 51% TS. Diaw's scoring stats don't really change -- perhaps his passing value is just amplified in the system. Neal was 18/36 at 53% TS this year elsewhere. Blair had similar numbers in Dallas -- 15 and 56% TS. Kawhi is 15/36 and 60% overall the last two years, so his scoring goes up without the big with no drop in efficiency.

To me, these last few years from Pop have been the most impactful coaching in NBA history. If I told you that

Mills
Green
Belinelli
Diaw
Splitter

With some Bonner off the bench and some Leonard and Neal sprinkled in would outperform the Nets and Knicks this year, would you lose all respect for me as an analyst? Because that's what happened...

Pop's a great coach, but you are going to have to prove that enough of this is non-garbage times for me to put too much stock in this. This is a combo of mostly garbage time, some very small stretches in games in doubt, and the games where Pop simply sits guys. And the Spurs tend to lose those games.

Look Pop is great, the system is great, and they have very smart role players, but if you are attempting to suggest the Spurs are a .500 team over the past 2 years if Duncan, Parker, and Manu don't play a single game, Im not buying.

That's really interesting stuff. Would be cool to look at other teams as well without certain key players. We could look at Pierce, KG, and Rondo in Boston in 2013, and see what the data says about them. Interesting to see if the idea that the Celtics were more dependent on Pierce and KG rather than Rondo is true.

The 2013 Celtics with Kevin Garnett off the court, but Paul Pierce and Rajon Rondo on the court:

789 possessions, 399 minutes (~8 games)

104.7 ORating, 108.0 DRating (-3.3)


The 2013 Celtics with Paul Pierce off the court, but Kevin Garnett and Rajon Rondo on the court (please note that this is a VERY small sample size):

177 possessions, 95 minutes (~2 games)

102.3 ORating, 93.8 DRating (+8.5)


The 2013 Celtics with Rajon Rondo off the court, but Kevin Garnett and Paul Pierce on the court:

1630 possessions, 880 minutes (~18 games)

104.2 ORating, 98.5 DRating (+5.7)


If we control for the other 2 players being OFF the court...

The 2013 Celtics with Rajon Rondo and Paul Pierce off the court, but Kevin Garnett on the court:

876 possessions, 491 minutes (~10 games)

98.4 ORating, 99.3 DRating (-0.9)


The 2013 Celtics with Rajon Rondo and Kevin Garnett off the court, but Paul Pierce on the court:

1486 possessions, 773 minutes (~16 games)

109.8 ORating, 107.8 DRating (+2.0)


The 2013 Celtics with Kevin Garnett and Paul Pierce off the court, but Rajon Rondo on the court (please note that this is a VERY small sample size):

303 possessions, 159 minutes (~3 games)

95.1 ORating, 108.3 DRating (-13.2)

Chuck Texas wrote:Pop's a great coach, but you are going to have to prove that enough of this is non-garbage times for me to put too much stock in this. This is a combo of mostly garbage time, some very small stretches in games in doubt, and the games where Pop simply sits guys. And the Spurs tend to lose those games.

Look Pop is great, the system is great, and they have very smart role players, but if you are attempting to suggest the Spurs are a .500 team over the past 2 years if Duncan, Parker, and Manu don't play a single game, Im not buying.

Oh, I actually started looking into this because I thought they were so impressive (by performing around league average) when they had those games where he sat the stars. Compare to last 2 years:

Clippers w/out Paul/Griffin: 2082 min | 103.9 ORtg | 103.2 Drtg | +0.7
OKC w/out Durant/Westbrook: 1512 min | 100.6 oRtg | 102.6 Drtg | -2.0
Heat w/out Wade/James (give them Bosh): 1170 min | 100 Ortg, 107.1 DRtg | -7.1
Blazers w/out Aldridge/Lillard: 833 min 97.6 | 106.0 | -9.4
Warriors w/out Curry/Thompson: 1209 min 94.5 oRtg | 103.8 DRtg | - 9.3

The Clippers players:
Crawford (1600 MP)
Barnes (1300 MP)
Bledsoe (1000 MP)
Odom (900 MP)
Collison (700 MP)
Jordan (500 MP)

OKC players
R. Jackson (1000 MP)
Collison (1000 MP)
Lamb (900 MP)
Fisher (800 MP)
Martin (400 MP)
Sefolosha (400 MP)
Ibaka (300 MP)

You don't need to believe that if they played a full year w/out Manu, Tim or Parker they would win 41 games to see something absolutely crazy is going on here outside of garbage time. And we KNOW there is garbage time built in to those samples, so the numbers are likely to be inflated, but that certainly isn't a large enough chunk to minimize how competitively that team has played in the last 2 seasons. (I would estimate somewhere between 5-10% of the team's minutes are garbage-time minutes, or about 400-800 minutes of the sample for the Spurs.) Of course, RAPM attempts to make that adjustment...

The Spurs ORtg in the time is 105.7 and Drtg 106.4. In 2014 alone, they outscored opponents without any of these 3 on the court.

Elgee this is a minor point but am I mis-reading that sentence. Shouldn't it say the Spurs were outscored by .7? This is a minor point but I just want clarification.

sp6r=underrated wrote:

The Spurs ORtg in the time is 105.7 and Drtg 106.4. In 2014 alone, they outscored opponents without any of these 3 on the court.

Elgee this is a minor point but am I mis-reading that sentence. Shouldn't it say the Spurs were outscored by .7? This is a minor point but I just want clarification.

I think he means that in 2013+2014, they were outscored.

But in just 2014, they outscored opponents.

sp6r=underrated wrote:

The Spurs ORtg in the time is 105.7 and Drtg 106.4. In 2014 alone, they outscored opponents without any of these 3 on the court.

Elgee this is a minor point but am I mis-reading that sentence. Shouldn't it say the Spurs were outscored by .7? This is a minor point but I just want clarification.

The sample is 2013 AND 2014. I'm noting that in 2014 alone, they outscored opponents...

therealbig3 wrote:

sp6r=underrated wrote:

The Spurs ORtg in the time is 105.7 and Drtg 106.4. In 2014 alone, they outscored opponents without any of these 3 on the court.

Elgee this is a minor point but am I mis-reading that sentence. Shouldn't it say the Spurs were outscored by .7? This is a minor point but I just want clarification.

I think he means that in 2013+2014, they were outscored.

But in just 2014, they outscored opponents.

oh okay sorry for the misunderstanding

From a 2012 ElGee post:

Not controlling for opponent strength, we can see in the 2012 RS Miami played 481 minutes without Wade or James:

No Wade or James: -3.5 points per 48 minutes with a 97 ORtg. (418 minutes)

Ah, but Chris Bosh, an all-nba caliber player who carried teams in the unipolar act quite respectively in Toronto was on the court for about half of those minutes. What did the Miami team look like without ANY of the big 3?

No Wade, James or Bosh: -15.9 per 48 minutes with an 86 ORtg. (214 minutes)

For comparison, of the remaining teams:

The Spurs played 615 min without Parker, Ginobili or Duncan and were -0.2 per 48 minutes with an offensive rating of 108.
The Celtics played 283 min without Garnett, Pierce or Rondo and were -4.8 per 48 minutes with a 91 ORtg (95 DRtg).
The Thunder played just 116 min without Durant, Harden or Westbrook and were -13.6 per 48 minutes with an 89 ORtg.

(As an aside, the Thunder have some similar issues to Miami, although at least they have a better frontcourt.)

Yeah, it's amazing.

I think even before you get to this data, there's just the matter of how little the Big 3 actually plays. Simply put, if this were a club dependent on outlier star talent, they would not be able to rest that talent like they do and still end up with an SRS north of 8.

So yeah, to me this is the GOAT coaching performance we're seeing, and even more noteworthy than that it's the first time in the history of the NBA where the balance of power has shifted so that a coach is the story of the league over any player. This will end up having serious ramifications to the legacy of the GOAT contenders of this time period (LeBron and possibly Durant), and it's very possible that future eras will be the same because as huge of an accomplishment this is for Pop as a coach, it's not an accomplishment that should be accompanied by the addendum "we'll never seen anything like that again".

Pop has provided the blueprint now, and there will be others.

Awesome stuff, thanks man. Contextualizes an impact that's been pretty visible for some time now. I never thought the great Phil Jackson ever had the kind of impact guys like Thibs/Pop have been able to have recently. They're the only coaches I've ever seen approximate the value of an all-star caliber player solely on vision. It's astounding.

Oh, and in a past life he was a perennial top 3 NBA coach (on the basis of his defensive accum). Boss.

In my opinion the Spurs have been the model franchise for several years now, but the recent success just like the past is a tough blueprint to follow, and it's a major reason why everyone hires from the Spurs coaching tree:

-No player averaging more than 30 mins per game ala futbol.

-Outstanding player development and scouting (Manu, Green, Mills, Leonard, and relatively drama free).

-Big 3 that's willing to be benched and has Parker's speed, Duncan's interior presence, Manu's x-factor.

-International heavy roster including scouting and coaching - AAU and NCAA doesn't cut it without significant development.

-Ownership that stays out of the way even through first round exits

-Coach Pop's accountability of all players.

-Family-like environment; Robert Horry said the Spurs were most like a family especially compared to the Rockets and Lakers

-Etc

Not even the Spurs Big 3 liked being benched when it happened to them (Parker vs the Suns in their last playoffs, Duncan in the 2013 Finals for a key rebound, Manu at first etc). You need to hire the right individuals (ie no Stephen Jackson who was waived before the 2013 playoffs began which to me remains as an underrated WHAT THE HELL kind of coaching move) and so much more to fill in that blueprint.

I think people are afraid to admit that coaches have a massive impact on the game. Even if it isn't so much on the "star" players themselves, but more so for the other guys.

Too much has always been attributed to the star players "opening the game up" for non-star players, and not nearly has been said of good coaches maximizing the strengths of flawed players, and hiding the flaws just as well.

It's clear to the eye, and in the stats, that even when the entire big 3 is off the floor, the Spurs role players just play far above their own collective talent level. The coaching staff is absolutely phenomenal. It might not be the BEST system, the best environment, the best motivation, the best in terms of accountability, but the Spurs have to be VERY high in every single one of those individual things in an all time sense, and they are almost certainly the best combination of all time.

Even if you look at the constant (Tim Duncan) look how much Tim has changed as a player, and look how much the Spurs changed around him. They've always been able to pick up the slack elsewhere when one aspect has some fall off.

It's really incredible. Imagine if they had ever been able to snag another top 10-15 player to put next to Duncan for a majority of his career. Frightening thought.

colts18 wrote:From a 2012 ElGee post:

Not controlling for opponent strength, we can see in the 2012 RS Miami played 481 minutes without Wade or James:

No Wade or James: -3.5 points per 48 minutes with a 97 ORtg. (418 minutes)

Ah, but Chris Bosh, an all-nba caliber player who carried teams in the unipolar act quite respectively in Toronto was on the court for about half of those minutes. What did the Miami team look like without ANY of the big 3?

No Wade, James or Bosh: -15.9 per 48 minutes with an 86 ORtg. (214 minutes)

For comparison, of the remaining teams:

The Spurs played 615 min without Parker, Ginobili or Duncan and were -0.2 per 48 minutes with an offensive rating of 108.
The Celtics played 283 min without Garnett, Pierce or Rondo and were -4.8 per 48 minutes with a 91 ORtg (95 DRtg).
The Thunder played just 116 min without Durant, Harden or Westbrook and were -13.6 per 48 minutes with an 89 ORtg.

(As an aside, the Thunder have some similar issues to Miami, although at least they have a better frontcourt.)

Thanks -- I couldn't find this post! This is when I the Spurs sans Big 3 started to jump off the page at me...

The Spurs probably have a smaller proportion of garbage minutes without their big three because they love trolling the league and resting their starters on national TV days against a good opponent.

For instance:
http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/10168 ... e-warriors

Beating the Warriors without the big three....

Warriors had Curry, Thompson, Iguodala, Lee, and Bogut.

acrossthecourt wrote:The Spurs probably have a smaller proportion of garbage minutes without their big three because they love trolling the league and resting their starters on national TV days against a good opponent.

For instance:
http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/10168 ... e-warriors

Beating the Warriors without the big three....

Warriors had Curry, Thompson, Iguodala, Lee, and Bogut.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/200311060SAS.html

No Duncan or Parker against 4 HOFs, all of whom have very good games. LA wins by 3 in 2OT.

Pop always had it.

ronnymac2 wrote:

acrossthecourt wrote:The Spurs probably have a smaller proportion of garbage minutes without their big three because they love trolling the league and resting their starters on national TV days against a good opponent.

For instance:
http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/10168 ... e-warriors

Beating the Warriors without the big three....

Warriors had Curry, Thompson, Iguodala, Lee, and Bogut.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/200311060SAS.html

No Duncan or Parker against 4 HOFs, all of whom have very good games. LA wins by 3 in 2OT.

Pop always had it.

Early 00s meaning pre-05 Manu is so underrated. Ppl paint him as this sloppy inconsistent player but he was legit since day 1. Prone to inconsistency but he was a very key part in their 03 title he made alot of big shots and defensive plays in the playoffs

Elgee im curious who u thought was the Spurs best player last season?
Do u have 3 or 4 of them on equal levels? I thought it was b/w Manu and Kawhi after he resolved the injury problems

ronnymac2 wrote:

acrossthecourt wrote:The Spurs probably have a smaller proportion of garbage minutes without their big three because they love trolling the league and resting their starters on national TV days against a good opponent.

For instance:
http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/10168 ... e-warriors

Beating the Warriors without the big three....

Warriors had Curry, Thompson, Iguodala, Lee, and Bogut.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/200311060SAS.html

No Duncan or Parker against 4 HOFs, all of whom have very good games. LA wins by 3 in 2OT.

Pop always had it.

Who the F is Jason Hart and why is he playing 50 minutes. The same question can be asked of Shane Heal.

This is really impressive. Imo Phil is still the GOAT coach but Pop might have the best peak lol

You always wonder how they manage to not only stay competitive, but also win games while resting their starters. It's crazy good coaching that we've seen from Pop lately.

However that lineup doesn't sniff .500 in real life. In a vacuum maybe, but that's not how basketball dynamics work.