Well, I ain't seen the bucket list but if it really was done, Pop Manu and Parker would have retired. This in a sense is markedly different to their other post championship runs because its essentially their last chance to cement a dynasty and I'm sure they sense that. Given what they were able to come back from I wouldn't doubt their hunger in the face of that.
I don't doubt their drive to repeat, but I do doubt the feat of replicating the mental state they reached last season; fighting figuratively for their lives after being anorexic for seven years.
You can't quote age and tell me that automatically reflects a players prime. All you have to do is compare a 37yo KG and a 37yo Duncan to see what I mean. Players ascend stay at their primes and drop off at vastly different rates, and moreover the Spurs aren't reliant on Duncan and Manu to the extent the C's were on KG and Pierce that so there's definitely reasonable grounds for comparison.
There's no reasonable grounds for comparison. The 08-10 Celtics had less mileage on their bodies and played in a weaker conference.
Ok, now look at all the teams in history that won chips without a superstar and ask yourself which of them looked like they might be capable of a repeat. Were any of them better than this current Spurs squad? Any of them have the same coaching pedigree? Any of them have the same championship winning experience within the squad? That's the problem with received wisdom. It creates a confirmation bias thats blind to anything that doesn't reflect it.
You mean just like the lieu commun placement I'm talking about in the OP?
The fact a team without a superstar hasn't repeated is only one string of the bow - where the arrow lands won't be because this conventional wisdom you speak of is a cause as to why they'll fail - it's just to add to the fact that the same probability of luck isn't likely to strike two seasons in a row. This is only scratching the surface as to what they'll need to go their way this season:
Secure #1 seed
Largely remain injury-free
All three of Parker, Duncan and Ginobili to maintain their games (relative to what their bodies can cope with)
Role players step up another level and at the right times
Kawhi to develop his game and grow into a star
Maintain the gap on the competition or at least keep them out of team difference
Injuries (e.g. Ibaka last season) to other other squads
Have 50/50 calls go their way in every series and at certain turning/momentum points in games
Ability to stay fresh enough to counter balance the youth of other teams throughout the playoffs
The reliance on other teams' stars not having career performances
The reliance on other teams' role players not outplaying theirs
I could go on and on but you get the point - if any one of these fails to reoccur, it'll break the foundation and cracks will emerge, and when cracks emerge, their % of repeating drops according to the relevancy of each one to where a team can take an advantage of power.
How good this Spurs team is has no bearing whatsoever on any past team that's tried to repeat. Same goes for coaching and same goes for championship winning experience. None of those variables come close to connecting, let alone overlap to suggest that this team might have more of a chance. There's no plausible way you can even measure where they stand against teams that have been in the similar situation, and vice versa.
No, because the season is yet to play out. Like how people's estimations of the Thunder's chances went down when Russ got hurt. None of this is written in stone The facts evolve, as do our estimations of them. These indicators you're pointing to don't stand on much because 'seeing is believing' is hardly a dilemma. We defer to potentialities and indicators when there isn't enough existing evidence to support a position, but it makes no sense to put them on a pedestal when available evidence is sufficient for us to reach a reasonable conclusion.
There's no existing evidence, because the season hasn't resulted yet. What else do we have go on besides judging by a forecast? I see that you and many others are interpreting the evidence differently to what I am, which I personally don't see as being ambiguous, just failure to see when a team's time has expired. And let's be honest a lot of dudes don't even bother to watch other teams besides their own, so we can't work on this idea that they all reached this position through the same reasoning.
I mean it didn't take long for dudes in this thread to spout empty tautologies about the Spurs now did it?
The narrative people used to justify writing the Spurs off last year is exactly the same one you're pushing right now.
That's funny because, other than Spurs fans, I was one of a few that had them coming out of the West for the last three seasons. And I highly doubt my 'narrative' and reasoning behind it even resembles what agenda rival supporters were pushing before.
Nobody was saying "ooh they're gonna over-rest Wade and Lebron will be fatigued by the playoffs" and "hmm Chalmers and Cole are passable but they'll probably get worse for no definable reason".
You can read when a team peaks, and read the situation of how other teams are faring. That's what's similar.
To me OKC aren't better than the Spurs until after the fact. You're projecting this when they've done nothing to their squad to back that up. They don't defend as well, the don't move the ball as well, the aren't deeper, they aren't more experienced, they don't shoot as well from anywhere on the court. The things that sway in their favour haven't enabled teams to go the distance in the past. They beat the Spurs in 012 because they had that extra piece so we're not just gonna slide past the fact that last time they made it to the finals they had Harden and still haven't replaced him.
As I said above, it's just matter of reading the situation.
It hurts their chances. There's no way around that. Injuries have repercussions beyond time out for a single player and while its likely that he comes back and it'll be business as usual, there's always that chance that its not. Its devastating but we've seen it happen before and there's no point even calling them projections if you're not gonna factor that in.
Oh believe me, I've factored their injuries into my projections.
No matter how much you keep saying it it won't automatically become true. The Spurs aren't weaker. You call it a band aid because there's no precedent for it but band aids don't win titles. You need to tell me exactly why it can't carry over from one season to another. Tell me which role players lose themselves. Tell me how Pop fails to redress imbalances that develop in the squad. Tell me how being better rested and healthier come the post-season hurts then Cause I can't see it..
We're are seeing right now why this resting system isn't carrying over to this season. The Spurs are weaker and teams are stronger. They won't be able to take the same approach they did last season and expect to get the #1 seed, another advantage they won't have in the postseason. The size of the snowball they were able to create in the playoffs last season won't be as large this time around.
There's a reason why i refer to per 36 numbers. From this year to last there was no real change in production per minute on the court. Up until the finals they played exactly the same amount of games last year as they did this year so if they found the road more of a breeze it doesn't really show. Either way It's hardly as if they played bad teams and its not a given that good opposition automatically means decresed production from roleplayers..
2012/2013 postseason:
Parker: 36.5 minutes per game
Duncan: 35 minutes per game
Ginboli: 26.7 minutes per game
2013/2014 postseason:
Duncan: 32.7 minutes per game
Parker: 31.3 minutes per game
Ginobili: 25.5 minutes per game
Like I said the role players played more minutes, and played more of a role in the Championship run last season. It only makes sense that they'll need to step it up another level this postseason, given the above curve. Plus they encountered better teams (Mavs, T'Blazers and Thunder) playing 17 games in 13/14, than they did in 12/13 (Lakers, Warriors, Grizzlies) playing 14 games.
You're talking as if this isn't exactly what the Spurs intend, as if it hasn't been proven successful over a season and post-season and isn't reflected in the spread of minutes across the team.
What makes it work is that their stars play more efficiently in reduced minutes and increases in minutes don't result in any kind of drop-off for what are the most well drilled role players in the league. You talk as if they're teetering on the edge as if over 100 odd games their role players haven't proven equal to the task so why do they drop off now?
You're basing that off last season, it's not going to be the same again, their responsibility and load will be larger again n the playoffs. Not only because history indicates that, and not only because of the the core's age but just about every team in the playoff picture is considerably stronger this season. We can already see that their dependence on role players through this
rest system, won't land them the #1 seed again.
2012/2013 regular season: started off 13-1
2013/2014 regular season: starting off 2-3
I was only referring to one aspect of their game in relation to one player. There's no way you're telling me the Spurs aren't the most difficult team to gameplan for.
They aren't. OKC, GS and Dallas either are harder to gameplan for or will eventually be by the time the playoffs arrive.
The fact that they've won more games than anybody else these past 3 years is evidence enough of that.
Well, that won't meet their regular season win average this season.
And here's the dirty secret. the Finals MVP played like a role player. They didn't call plays for him, they just asked him to be more aggressive. On paper he has all the makings of a solid number one option aside from ego and temperament but funnily enough you could say the same about Duncan.
If he does have the makings of a solid number option, he certainly won't grow into one this season
9.5 ppg, 30% shooting, 8.0 rpg, 2.8 apg - it's hardly unlikely his stats will deviate much from that, his shooting percentage will rise but that's about it. Is he going to be able to match another teams' wing scoring throughout an entire playoffs to the level that's needed? Well it doesn't look like it.
I don't think there's room for him to put up all star numbers within the current setup and they know better than to upset the balance of the team by trying to force the issue. whichever the case, his growth will go a long way to making up for any regression with Manu and Timmy.
He won't put up All-Star numbers, but the duties of 1a/1b option will be required of him in the regular season and postseason. The fact that the load is so spread around won't allow him to have the proper preparation he'll need for the playoffs too.
.
Holla at us in June
