NBA 2014 Finals Predictions

11.5 months later….it is the Spurs and HEAT again. It wasn’t a wasted year per se, but the expected Final Four teams were the last 4 teams standing. I did pick the Spurs in 5 over the Pacers at the beginning of the year, and still feel good about my thought process. Spurs in 6 seems more logical now, but a similar thought to where I started. Honestly, I feel better about the pick now that when I made it 6 months ago.

Many think that the HEAT had a more impressive run to the Finals this year, but that isn’t true. The HEAT got by Charlotte, Brooklyn, and Indiana. All decent teams, but not elite and not in their best shape. Their adjusted win margin is about +7.1. The Spurs had to beat the Mavs (who would have gone to the ECF were things switched), Blazers, and Thunder (their nemesis and horrid matchup). Their adjusted win margin is +8.2. The HEAT got scored on well in stretches by the inept Pacers. I think the Spurs have a few absolute masterpiece showcases on offense in this series, and can also gut out some other games.

Also, some have pointed out that the Spurs played 3 more games than the HEAT this postseason and may be tired. First, the idea that the rested team wins more is actually wrong. Stats show when there is a 4 games played or less discrepancy in playoff teams for the Finals, the team that played the MOST games won the title just under 73% of the time. It seems the experience, rhythm, and reps mean more than rest. And it will be only a day difference in rest since their last game, which helps Parker’s ankle and pretty much no one else on either team.

Oh, and the HEAT are actually older on average than the Spurs, and only the Spurs have players in the 18-23 age range who play. Sure Duncan and Manu together qualify for retirement benefits, but the whole point is the team plays a deep bench and spreads minutes. They will be ready.

The truth is the Spurs were under a minute from winning a title last year. They probably were better than Miami; Miami just had the best player. The Spurs actually outscored them in that series. It didn’t help that Tony Parker was hurt. Miami was more clutch and a bit more athletic. The Spurs system did beat them, it just didn’t bury them.

So the question of this series is, what’s the difference since last year? Well, the Spurs got better and the HEAT got worse. Wade continues to decline. His lack of shooting actually clogs the lane in pretty bad ways, and the fact he cannot be explosive each and every touch limits his total effectiveness. Battier is a beaten shell of the guy he was. He has already signed on for an announcing gig in college hoops for goodness sake. Allen is perhaps 90% of himself from last year. I have no idea what happened to Cole/Chalmers, they have so little impact. Lebron is about the same and so is Bosh. The HEAT have enough to win, very clearly. Mostly because of Lebron. But I don’t think they pull this one off.

Parker/Manu/Duncan are about the same players they were last year. Scarily, Parker may be HEALTHIER than he was for that series last year. Leonard is better in pretty much every way.  As long as he is aggressive on offense, his impact will be gigantic (darkhorse candidate for Finals MVP). Marco Belinelli should have a great impact, and he wasn’t there last year. Mills was there last year, but he was in no way this involved. He can match Gary Neal’s overall shooting impact, but run the team far more dynamically as a PG. Mills makes me comfortable in a Spurs pick even if Parker was to be sidelined by his ankle issues.

Duncan can do even better than last year on the interior defense of the HEAT. Bosh has gotten worse defensively and Chris Anderson isn’t the same player. I’m pretty sure I could post up Udonis Haslem at this point. The Spurs PG are still good, and the HEAT PGs are declining for some reason. But I believe the main point here is the Spurs will blast the HEAT in the battle of benches, which will swing this series.

So, Spurs in 6. Duncan walks off, and maybe Pop does too. Duncan does it with an MVP.

The Most Successful Franchise in Sports Is...

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.....

The New England Spurs.  

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/