I
have wanted to write a column on my favorite franchise in sports for a long while now. I
consider them the best team, the most accomplished, the one I respect, the one
I would love to be responsible for. Their unparalleled success over the last 15
years (coincidentally my sports watching life) is something to behold. They have
won a handful of titles and were close to several more.
I
look at things in roughly three ways in terms of value in my favorite sports
team: titles, sustained competitiveness, and statistical excellence. Markets,
superstars, flashy play, Sportscenter ratings....these things don’t really
matter to me like they do to many sports fans in this country. To me, in terms
of rings, longevity, and sabermetric excellence, the supreme franchise is clear.....
Er, the San Antonio Patriots?
See, I get confused with these two teams. I mean, what’s the difference? Okay, one plays in the West, one in the East. One has 13 players on the team, the other 53. One team’s owner is well known, for the other the GM is much better known comparatively. Oh yeah, one plays basketball and the other team plays football.
But see, the fact of the matter is it is hard to draw a distinguishable line between the New England Patriots and San Antonio Spurs (got it right that time, nice). They look nearly identical to me.
Look
at it this way: The Patriots system is said to be based on these principles
(see article at end for source):
a.
Self critical, perfectionist, militaristic approach
b.
Emphasis on team, equality among players, and lack of individual ego
c.
Strong work ethic, intelligence, and high level of focus and preparation for
each individual game
d.
Versatile players, able to play multiple positions
e.
Multiple schemes intended to take advantage of their opponent’s weaknesses
Um,
sound familiar San Antonio?
Let’s
break it down in depth:
1.
Both teams hired a somewhat misanthropic, angry, sarcastic, caustic, but
brilliant coach in the late 90’s/early 00’s. Popovich and Belichick are similar
in so many aspects it is scary. Both have names constantly misspelled. Both
have been simultaneous coach/GMs. Both have family connections to military
traditions that clearly influence their style and bearing. Bill and Pop both avoid
media obligations like the plague, but in the time they are forced to give
interviews, they can give some gems, many times without really trying. Both
coaches are known for being defensive wizards that now lead offensive teams.
More on that later.
2. Neither team location is a big market, but they are within one. Foxboro is not even close to what you would call a
metropolitan center. Without the Pats, one would be hard pressed to find it on
a map. I know, I grew up near there. But in the larger context, NE is one of
the nation’s biggest sports nations. It has a unique attitude, a vast regional
service network, and sports history both long term and lately. Similarly, San
Antonio is not exactly a large market. But they love their Spurs, and the larger
Texas area has a dozen well attended teams and regional pride. They likewise
support success, and the state of Texas has 7 of the last 18 NBA titles, and
many more conference titles and appearances. Speaking of that kind of success…
3. Both teams have won multiple titles, with the Pats’ titles being a little more concentrated than the Spurs, but the Spurs having more (‘02, ‘04, ‘05 for the Pats, ‘99, ‘03, ‘05, ‘07 for the Spurs). Both have been in the title game or the conference title game on many more occasions. And both teams started their run with a solo title with an
unusual circumstance in the year leading up to it (lockout for the Spurs, 9-11
and Brady’s random emergence for the Pats) and then after a few more years ran
off a truly dominant period before settling into where they are now. More on
that at the end.
4. Both teams are riding impressive longevity streaks. The Spurs run of winning 50+ games is legendary (13 straight now, one of those was within a 66 game season, and it would be 15 if not for a 50 total game season where they were above the percentage needed for 50+ wins in a normal season). The Pats’ run of 10+ win seasons (10 and counting, 11 of the last 12, including a year Tom Brady didn’t play) is also fairly unworldly. They have had 12+ wins in 7 of the last 10, which is mind boggling. The teams’ winning percentage during the era of Duncan/Brady are .695 and .777 respectively. That makes Duncan the third highest winner active in the NBA. Number 1 and 2? Tony Parker and Manu Ginobili, his teammates. Brady’s ridiculous .777 is 25 points higher than Staubach and 66 points higher than Montana, and Brady has far lapped them in total regular season wins. I mean, the guy directly ahead of Brady in career wins, Marino, has 93 losses. The guy behind Brady in wins, Tarkenton, has 109 losses. Brady, with roughly the same amount of wins (124), has only 39 losses. That’s insane. 39 losses…in 12 years. I have no words.
Speaking
of Duncan and Brady…
5. Both teams have an unassuming superstar, though in different ways. Duncan was a first overall pick, but doesn’t act much like it. He is quiet, and no one seems him as a standout. But he is a top 10 player all time, one of the best winners ever, and probably the best player ever at his position (depending on what you call his position that is). His offensive efficiency is amazing to watch, especially statistically. We’ll get to stats later with the Spurs and Pats.
Brady himself is unassuming in that he was a 6th round pick. 200 people were thought to be better than him, and he was 4th on the Pats depth chart at his position for a year and a half. It took an injury to get him even on the field. Rather like it took David Robinson’s foot injury to give the Spurs the requisite pingpong balls to get Duncan. Is there some similarity in Bledsoe and Robinson needing the new guys to come in to give them a chance to get them a ring? I know Robinson still played WITH Duncan while Brady replaced Bledsoe, but the comparison and sequence of events still works.
Both guys also overcame being thought of as system guys, attributing their first major wins to someone else (Robinson/lockout, Pats defense/tuck rule). While both arguments have merit, clearly these guys were big parts of those wins and the start to the teams’ prolonged success.
Tim
and Tom have some funny comparable quirks too, the names for one. Forgetting
even the one letter difference, both never go by their full names, Timothy and
Thomas. Funny enough, both have teammates call them by something else entirely,
Timmy and Tommy. They wear flipped numbers, 21 and 12. I could go on and use
the word "fundamental", but I won’t.
6. Part of the reason I enjoy following both the Spurs and Pats is that they have a talent with money, and free agents. I would immediately hire either to run my personal finances. They are brilliant, principled, and great talent evaluators. You don’t hear about their cap problems, and if anything you consistently hear about their stars taking less money to stay and allow the team to be competitive. Duncan and Brady both did it recently. They make so few mistakes with contracts (Richard Jefferson and Roosevelt Covlin are probably the biggest, and the teams got out of both of those). They pay their handful of stars, never pay people over 30, and pull random people off of the scrap heap who do a specific thing well (Danny Green, Danny Woodhead, Tiago Splitter, Sebastian Volmer, Matt Bonner, Teddy Bruschi) and pay them little to nothing to do it. And guys that leave for “greener pastures” (Deion Branch, Stephen Jackson), end up coming back, begging to be let back in. Both teams also took players whose talent was undeniable,
but whose chemistry just didn’t fit and with whom the financial picture wasn’t
right, and sent them packing (Luis Scola, Richard Seymour). It is amazing as
well how both teams just plug and play so many guys for single nights or weeks
at a time. Need Gary Neal to hit 3s for a week? Go for it. Donte Stallworth
needed for a 60 yard touchdown? Do it. Parker/Brady hurt? George Hill and Matt
Cassel can do a veritable imitation.
7. There is a similarity between the teams in that both the Spurs and Pats transitioned. Both won titles with defensive first. This included some rough tactics at time. Both employed players not many other teams particularly liked, like Rodney Harrison, and Bruce Bowen as examples. The Spurs embraced the Hack-A-Shaq, didn’t mind grinding it out, fouling before an inbounds pass, and finding any edge to win. Likewise to the rule changes in the NBA following the Spurs reign, the Pats also incurred the attention of the league office. They held and slammed their way to 3 titles in 4 years. A particularly tough playoff game versus the Colts where Pats’ DBs held Harrison and Wayne so badly they weren’t moving 3 seconds into the play caused the NFL to change those rules. Both teams took advantage of their defensive eras and abilities, and won titles out of it, unapologetically. There was also that Spygate
thing. I mean, things happen, right?
8. Both teams also saw a new era dawning. For the Pats, it was the changing defense rules mixed with Brady’s knee injury in 2008. For the Spurs, Bowen’s retirement and Duncan’s own knee issues gave them two straight early round losses in the playoffs.
Instead
of accepting the changes quietly and giving up on the hope of future successes,
they innovated. Pop and Bill observed the evolving rules and culture and
changed their rosters accordingly. Duncan gave way to Ginobili and Parker,
taking advantage of the handcheck rules and fouling principles. Instead of
winning with physicality, Pop recentered his offense AND defense on the
principles of ball movement and precision. This team went from winning with David
Robinson and Rasho Nesterovich at center to playing Matt Bonner and Boris Diaw
there.
Brady
remained the Pats centerpiece, but first Moss and then Welker became their way
to exploit the new league. Ginobili and Moss were these teams’ way of being
successful in the 06-09 years. They used a unique player with a strange style
that was devastatingly effective. Welker and Parker show how now in big tough
sports the Spurs and Pats are acknowledging that little fast guys with
precision play are the valuable and exploitable commodity. And both teams have
another guy coming up (Leonard and Gronk) that they think will be the next
unstoppable thing, an evolution of multiple abilities. And I think it will work
out for both teams there, with Gronk already pretty much having proven it.
9. The original thing that inspired this column was their efficiency and advanced metrics. I love their offenses just a little too much. I stare at FootballOutsiders for hours on end. I
marveled at all the advanced metrics of the 2011-2012 Spurs during their second
half run and first ten games of the playoffs.
The ’12
Pats finished at 30.8% DVOA offensive efficiency last year. The next highest
were Denver and Green Bay, at 22.1% and 19.5%. It wasn’t close. In fact, the
2012 Pats had one of top ten ever recorded. The top two ever? The ’07 Pats at
43.5% and ’10 Pats with 42.2%. Both were record setting seasons by regular
stats too if that is more your thing, setting the overall points record with 589.
The Spurs
rock the plus/minus and assist rates, but it is really their 3 point shooting
which is amazing. They don’t have rock stars shooting the three (Danny Green
everyone!), but make it work. In ‘11-’12, they lapped the field in 3s (552 to
next highest 524 and 514) and 3% (.393 to next nearest .359 and .358). They
also led in total buckets, strangely a stat not enough people look at,
especially impressive while leading the league in overall shooting percentage
(.478). That’s while being near the league stragglers in minutes played (IE,
among the fewest overtimes thus less opportunities to score). Oh, and they were
third lowest in turnovers. The efficiency is off the charts.
You
can go back years to find more and more examples, but these numbers, especially
lately, make the analytical part of my brain whirl. These teams are machines,
just ruthless automatons that many people hate to watch. I have always been
fascinated, and cannot look away. Both teams epitomize the concept of
PRODUCTION.
10. Point ten, my final one, is the most interesting but most disturbing similarity to me. Both teams have produced better and better regular seasons, but worse post seasons as time has gone on. It may be due to talent disparity, the offensive style not working as well as the defensive one in the playoffs, the coaches and stars getting older, or just luck. However, these two teams, as successful as they are, are getting knocked out in the second or third rounds and not winning titles. I am inclined to say at least one of these teams will win another title (with the Pats window a hair longer than the Spurs, but the Spurs being a better lock THIS year) before they are done. I would put the over under of combined conference title appearances from here on out for the Spurs and Pats at 2.5 and gladly pound the over.
So
despite these teams I love coming to the end of their eras sooner rather than
later, I will still watch with hope and support. They are impressive. We should
cherish and respect their accomplishments, even if you don’t like them (and
believe me, I hated the Spurs for a long time). We will look back on them as
impactful teams of this era. And Brady/Duncan are too close to 1 more title
that firmly plants them in immortality to let up now. I am not betting
against Duncan, Brady, Pop, or Bill for as long as they continue to walk onto
their respective fields of contest. No way, I’m not dumb. They’ve only been
proving people wrong for a combined 30 years.
MIKE BLISS
PS. For
more reading, I highly suggest these two sites on these two teams’ strategy and
style:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_England_Patriots_strategy
http://hoops-nation.com/community/topic/62910-an-introduction-to-the-spur%E2%80%99s-offence/
