i'll be honest
I'll be a shade under stunned if SA pulls the upset over detroit
i think there is that muchof a gap between the 2 teams
SA isn't playing with a sense of urgency. their whole "we've won 58 games so whatevs yo whatevs" nonchalant at ude is gonna bite them in the ass hard. as will their injuries and pop still not being able to find a solid rotation. I would love nothing more than to repeat but detroit got better this year and i believe if you for the 2005 spurs to play the 2006 spurs, the 2005 spurs would win AKA we got slightly worse despite our fools gold record this year which is impressive considering everything
"Don't know. Where would I find that?"
The 04/05 boxes shows MPG, but NBA.com has already taken the boxes scores from the Spurs 04/05 schedule results:
http://www.nba.com/spurs/schedule/results_2004.html
nor do they have player-game stats for any but the current year:
http://www.nba.com/playerfile/tim_du...ame_stats.html
... but you know they have all those stats right there on their data storage. How hard is to allow us to bring up a page to display per-game/players/year stats?
Last edited by boutons_; 04-10-2006 at 07:43 PM.
"So I don't think he's holding anything back at this point"
Agreed, but then why is he so poor on defense?
This an inane.
As an epidemiologist (medical trained in stats) giving the Spurs who beat the Pistons (with a HOF coach) with basically the same team + Finley etc as 5% is sublime. The reality is that the figure should be at least 35-45% +/- at most 5-10%.
This same writer by the way predicted the Nuggets would beat the Spurs easily last year.
Spurs are a very good road team and if they went into Detroit and took even 1 of 2 the whole complexion of the season and series would shift overnight and they are fully capable of doing so. We are talking about two teams with 60+ wins squaring off, and both are heavyweights worthy of much more respect than this lopsided analysis.
In fact, recall last year when the Pistons manhandled the Spurs in 3-4 and many thought the Spurs would fold. This year the team has had the time to build from two early lopsided defeats, has Nazr back in the rotation, and Manu will be back.
Spurs healthy and motivated after getting through a tougher WC would stand a very good chance against the Pistons.
In fact, go to Nevada and see who the "smart" money is still on talking to many bookies - its sits in Southern TX, not MI.
Last edited by Rummpd; 04-10-2006 at 07:44 PM.
I may have overstated my case a bit, BUT:
Last year SA outrebounded opponents by 2.2 RPG. This year, by 0.8.
Last year SA +0.3 on steals. This year, -0.7.
Last year SA +4.7 on assists. This year, +4.5.
Last year +1.5 on blocks. This year, +1.4.
Last year -0.2 on turnovers, this year -1.5 (this is goodness).
Last year +2.0 FT's per game, this year -0.1.
Last year +7.8 ppg, this year +6.7.
Last year allowed 42.6% FG, this year 43.3%.
Source: various ESPN.com team statistics pages
Lose big/win small - here are SA's losses:
by 19 @DAL
by 15 @WAS
by 07 vs. CHI
by 10 @ATL !!!
by 13 @OKC
by 2 @MIL (OT)
by 15 @DET
by 5 @PHO
by 15 vs DET
by 4 vs DEN
by 14 @CLE
by 3 @PHI (OT)
by 13 @LAC
by 08 vs LAL
by 12 @DEN
by 4 @SEA !!!
by 10 vs SAC
by 6 vs Dallas
I think a game is "close" if it's within two threes, so of the 18 losses:
- 6 were close, 12 were not, and 9 were by 10 points or more
- average margin of defeat in the 18 losses was 9.7 points
- 2/3rds were on the road, so tell me again why losing HCA is unimportant?
- and three of the last five losses were at home ?? Grrr ...
Last edited by CubanMustGo; 04-10-2006 at 08:31 PM.
I don't see a huge gap between the teams. Nevertheless, the Spurs are going to be hard-pressed to take 2 of 4 in the Palace, because there's no way they're sweeping at home even with a 100% Tim Duncan.
Hey folks. I am the writer at Pounding the Rock. I appreciate the comments, including the ones from people who think I’m a raging moron. I just wanted to clarify that I did not predict the Nuggets would beat the Spurs last year. Here’s an excerpt from my series preview, in response to the media members who thought DEN had a chance against the Spurs (from http://nbaspurs.blogspot.com/2005_04...s_archive.html):
*****
Here's another thing to think about. Let's look at how Duncan led Spurs teams have done in the playoffs:
97-98 -- Lost in WC semis to UTA (who lost to CHI in the Finals)
98-99 -- World Champs
99-00 -- Duncan doesn't play in playoffs due to injury
00-01 -- Lost in WC finals to LAL (eventual World Champs)
01-02 -- Lost in WC semis to LAL (eventual World Champs)
02-03 -- World Champs
03-04 -- Lost in WC semis to LAL (who lost to DET in the Finals)
Take a closer look at that. Think about the teams that eliminated Duncan's Spurs. All of those teams had either Malone and Stockton (Duncan's rookie year) or Kobe and Shaq. <em>No other team even took the Spurs to a decisive seventh game</em>. Let that sink in. Kobe <em>and</em> Shaq. Winners of 3 consecutive les. The duo that took a ridiculously bad supporting cast to the finals.
And I'm supposed to worry about ing Carmelo Anthony and Kenyon Martin? When Bowen owns Carmelo and Martin got embarassed by Duncan in the 2003 NBA Finals? When the schedule favors the Spurs? When the Spurs have home court? Are you serious?
Spurs in 5.
*****
Look folks, I hope I am wrong about DET. Don't think I won't be rooting my balls off for the Spurs.
The problem with quoting stats is that the Spurs, coming off a championship, were coasting this year. The coach has admitted that he didn't want to get on them too early and have them tune him out. The Spurs nonetheless managed to win more games and have been much more consistent than they've ever been in my memory. That 62 win Spurs team won a ton of close games. I don't remember them losing more than one or two all that year, and this year's team is better. The Spurs have played gutless basketball on back to backs all year, and that comprises the vast majority of their losses. I don't know how to explain that, but since it appears to be the single most irrelevant stat due to the scheduling of the playoffs, I don't know how every Spurs fan can't go into the postseason feeling pretty good.
The Spurs and Pistons have each lost six games since the beginning of March, and Dallas has lost eight. The Spurs aren't playing terrible basketball at this point, they are just playing rather uninspired basketball. There isn't anyone really making a strong push going into the playoffs except New Jersey and Cleveland. Do we see either of those teams getting out of the second round?
Do you honestly think that the gaming capital of the world would not do their research when developing the odds? You are ready to take the word of a blogger who has more time on his hands than technology?
I hope Kori is keeping a log of all the doubters so that WHEN the Spurs win this year, she can have them eat crow.
If anyone has watched the Spurs play year in and year out, you know that the effort, desire, determination and tenaciousness WILL shine through come playoff time. Don't forget, Detroit isn't the only team on a "mission" this year.
Tim started to show his old self a few weeks ago, putting on pretty good performances (except on b2b). If Tim had not been sick as a dog and lost 15 pounds to this flu, he would have continued to show his "old" self and the need for these type of threads would not exist.
I think that this season, Tim has not overextended himself during the regular season. But if you have been watching, he is showing good signs, he is rebounding his own misses, diving on the floor for loose balls and getting steals and assists. He may still be in pain, but he is biting that bullet for the team. The least we can do is support his dogged and determined at ude.
I am not saying that that the Spurs will "flip a switch" as many do not like that sort of terminology. I am saying that the focus and effort will be there once playoffs start. Tims actions do a of a lot to motivate the team. They will follow suit.
The playoffs will not be a cakewalk. That has to be a given. More and more teams are learning to play defense, the Spurs have had a target on their back all year long and Tim will still have PF affecting his foot. But I can bet, even if Manu has to be taped up like a mummy, he will play and give 200%. So will Tim.
So I would rather go with the odds that Vegas has for the Spurs than some fan who happens to have a blog and an inane opinion about the Spurs chances.
GO SPURS GO
ummm vegas also had the lakers in 2004 when the finals started
5788906905896786978697896789 to .5
but you know, go to vegas, everyone comes back a richer man
I see your glass is almost empty
And by the way, thanks for the intelligent and thought provoking discussion. It reveals so much about you.
I think he meant 55%
While I'm not nearly as pessimistic as Matt is (I give us a 33% chance. 5% is way too low IMO, even the Pistons making it to the finals isn't 100%) I will say a few things:
1. If you read more of his blog than that just one post, you realize what a ridiculously good writer he is. Funny too. I already like him more than the Sports Guy when it comes to hoops.
2. He seriously knows his basketball. I mean, you can bother arguing with him, but the dude is an engineer and everything he says comes with considerable mathematical evidence. He doesn't just pull random comments out of his ass, unlike most people here. And I don't argue with numbers.
3. He's an unabashed Gino nut. So right away he's on my good side. After breaking down the numbers, he's pretty much figured out Manu had the best playoffs of any player since Wilt last season. Well maybe best isn't the right word, since when it's all said and done, Jordan was still going off for 40 a night most years... but efficient. Manu had the most efficient playoffs of any player since Wilt. How's that?
So, by all means, check out his blog, and you'll all become an instant devotee, just like I did. Props to Nocioni for giving the link.
You can visit Basketball-Reference.com, where you have historic statistics for every team (Spurs here) and every season (Spurs' 2004-2005 season here). By checking the team's game log and comparing to Tim Duncan's game log, you can see that he missed a total of 13 games from 3/20/05 to 4/13/05 (games 66-78. Actually he only played 2' in game 66).
At 82games. Here are the Spurs' season stats for 2004-2005 and 2005-2006. There you have several links to different team stats, one of which (In-Depth Team Stats) has team rebounding stats broken down into offense and defense.Don't know. Where would I find that?
The site you're looking for is Basketball-Reference.com. Here you have every game played by the Spurs in the 2004-2005 season.
Those two are excellent sites, and as far as statistics go, they're as good as it gets. No stat junkie can not know them. Check them out.
betting lines are to encourage betting, not a true indication of how teams match up. vegas is all about making money for vegas.
They are 10th in the league.
Detroit ironically is 16th in this category!
Reb %
1 Utah 0.528
2 Miami 0.528
3 Dallas 0.525
4 New York 0.520
5 L.A. Clippers 0.516
6 Cleveland 0.516
7 Orlando 0.513
8 L.A. Lakers 0.511
9 Milwaukee 0.507
10 San Antonio 0.506
11 Houston 0.505
12 Chicago 0.505
13 Indiana 0.503
14 Atlanta 0.500
15 New Jersey 0.500
16 Detroit 0.499
17 Seattle 0.498
18 Boston 0.497
19 Denver 0.496
20 Washington 0.494
21 NO/Okla. City 0.494
22 Memphis 0.491
23 Minnesota 0.491
24 Sacramento 0.489
25 Philadelphia 0.485
26 Golden State 0.484
27 Toronto 0.483
28 Phoenix 0.475
29 Portland 0.474
30 Charlotte 0.472
Why do the Spurs have so much trouble rebounding against Detroit? Does it have to do with their defensive scheme? Or lack of adapting or changing the way they play specifically the Pistons on defense, thus giving up position consistently for Detroit to grab extra rebounds etc...?
Last edited by Nikos; 04-12-2006 at 12:25 PM.
I think its because Detroit can outrebound any team when they want to. They just dont choose to some nights which is very annoying. But when they lock it in, they can handle any glass presence in the league.
So they chose not to rebound against other teams, and yet they still win? Why against the Spurs they are +20, but on average are basically rebounding just as much as their opponent? I doubt it is because they just feel like rebounding versus SA.
As a team, Detroit has been consistently poor at rebounding this season.
I think for the most part, it's a combination of a few things:
1) when the Pistons have had tough stretches in the schedule where they play back-to-backs or something like five games in seven nights, those games towards the end of those stretches often produce very poor rebounding games or pretty lopsided rebounding games in favor of the other team. That has happened several times this season, and it's most noticeable when Ben Wallace has tired legs.
2) Quite a few subpar teams have rebounded well against the Pistons because those teams have really gotten up to play the Pistons and have come with great energy. And, those games have been especially poor for the Pistons with respect to rebounding.
3) The Pistons have coasted during some of the middle parts of the season in which they have not played their best basketball, and sometimes they have coasted in the first halves of games, so the opposing teams have taken advantage at the rebounding end.
4) Flip Saunder's offensive schemes have also led to poor rebounding. He has Rip Hamilton and Tayshaun Prince often leak out to get into transition more quickly, and that has resulted in a lot of long rebounds going to the opposing team.
But, as I've seen almost every Pistons game this season, it does appear when the Pistons are focused and really locked in on defense and playing hard, they can and should be a very good rebounding team. The only teams that really give the Pistons problems are ones that have both ATHLETIC and LONG players on their frontcourt, teams like Utah and Toronto and Denver come to mind. But, even with the rebounding disadvantage, the Pistons are often in position to win the game anyway.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
