Stress Reaction and Right Quad Tendonisis

I really feel that the Spurs are inventing injuries so that they can give Manu and Tim some much needed rest. The Spurs know that there is only one team in the West that can give them trouble, the Lakers. They also know that if they are missing one of their big three due to injury, they will not have a chance at winning the title. The Spurs are currently 8 games behind the Lakers, so home court advantage is an impossibility at this point. So what is the motivation to win games right now? The honest answer is that there really is no motivation, and the Gregg Popovich knows this. So the Spurs are diagnosing Tim and Manu with these extremely vague injuries so that they can rest up and be 100% come playoff time. Whether the Spurs finish second in the West or fifth, it really does not matter. Eventually they will have to beat LA without home court advantage, and having Manu and Tim at 100% when this match up occurs is, and should be, their number one priority.

My Email to a Houston Rockets Fan

So, your point guard situation now consists of Luther Head, Aaron Brooks and Kyle Lowry. And Tracy decided to tell ESPN about his season ending injury before his coach. And Yao is Yao and Ron Artest is a thug. Ladies and Gentlemen, Your 2009 Houston Rockets!

Vince Carter to the Spurs?

Rumor has it that the Spurs have been in contact with the New Jersey Nets concerning a trade that would send Vince to San Antonio for George Hill, Roger Mason, Fab Oberto, and Bruce Bowen. The thought is that the Nets would waive Fab and Bowen, and that they would resign with the Spurs after the mandatory 30 days. So in actuality, the Spurs would trade George Hill and Roger Mason for Vince Carter.

I think this is a horrible idea. As is, most would give the Spurs about a 20% chance of winning the championship. Quickly, the final four will most likely include the Spurs, Lakers, Celtics and Cavs. The Spurs, Lakers series will be very close, if both squads are fully healthy. If the Spurs can win that coin flip, I think they match up very well with the Cavs, and the Celtics would cause some problems. But again, I think it would be a coin flip scenario against the Celtics. So basically, the Spurs are right there with their current roster. Losing Roger Mason and George Hill would devastate the Spurs, long and short term, even if they get Vince in return. Enough cannot be said about Roger Mason’s confidence down the stretch. I have written about this previously, he is the ‘Big Shot’ guy that they Spurs sorely lacked last season. And George Hill is a huge upgrade over Jacque Vaughn. Hill does not just waste minutes to give Tony a rest, he hits critical shots and sustains the Spurs’ leads. If the Spurs trade Hill leaving Jacque to backup Tony, the Spurs will lose during those minutes.

All that being said, I cannot stand Vince Carter. He is one of the more notorious players in the league. Remember when he gave up on the Toronto Raptors? He admitted to quitting on his team. He admitted that he faked injuries and purposefully did not play hard when he was in the game. This guy should be banned from the NBA. So, why would the Spurs want to roll the dice on this nut job?

Well, the Spurs are in a position in which they could buy the championship this year, at the expense of the future. If the Spurs add one more piece, it is very conceivable that they will reach a level of play that cannot be matched by the Cavs, Celtics or Lakers. And that has to be extremely tempting. However, to lose Roger Mason and George Hill just as the Spurs are beginning to tap their potential would be criminal. Trading away Mason and Hill would be very comparable to what the Miami Heat did when they put together their team of washed up all stars that won in ’06, but have been miserable ever since. Basically, the deal with the devil consists of selling the Spurs' future for an immediate championship. Short term it’s great, long term I do not even want to think about it.

It seems that Houston is also speaking with the Nets. Please, let Houston trade for him. Apparently the Nets rejected an offer that included Tracy McGrady, good for them, but have come back with a proposal in which the Nets would acquire Ron Artest, Shane Battier, Luther Head and Carl Landry. Their counter seems a little steep, but as a Spurs fan, I really hope they take Vince off the trading block.

Kobe, Shaq….AWKWARD

Something very intriguing materialized during the All Star Weekend. The Shaq, Kobe dynamic was as entertaining as it was painful. It was like watching an early Office episode when Michael Scott made your skin crawl with his inappropriate behavior. You just felt uncomfortable with the whole situation, but you could not look away. You felt awkward and tense for Michael, just as you did for Shaq Sunday night.

TNT kept pairing the two together for interviews, which made it all the more painful. They kept prodding the open wound. During the third quarter, ridiculously dressed Craig Sager went down to the West’s bench and interviewed Shaq and Kobe. Kobe had a look on his face like he’d rather be anywhere else in the world. He seemed to be asking himself, “Why am I sitting next to Shaq?” over and over again. At one point, Shaq claimed there had never been bad blood between the two of them, to which I swear you can see Kobe roll his eyes.

Kobe and Shaq ended up winning the MVP award for the game, and so had to be interviewed together once again. This was truly spectacular. Kobe was asked if he could envision him and Shaq playing for the same team, and quicker than I can type the word, he responded with “No.” If you watch Shaq, the look on his face is priceless. It really sums up the night for Shaq. The whole game he seemed to be doing his best to impress Kobe, and Kobe continuously seemed to be saying, “No.”

I liken it to Elementary school kids that had a tree house. Shaq and Kobe were the two leaders of the group, and it worked well for a while. But then they got older and their personalities grew too strong for one tree house. So Kobe gets support from the club and kicks Shaq out. Well, years later in middle school, Shaq gets tired of his new friends and wants to go back to his old crew. So he starts trying to impress Kobe, jokes around with him, sucks up, smokes some cigs, but it’s not working. Kobe will not let Shaq back into the crew. And when this all plays out on national television, it’s as entertaining as any reality TV show airing.

San Antonio Spurs Statistics; Winning Trends

The question I was asked most on the 12th was, “What happened last night?” My response was, “The refs hurt us, the wrong guy took the last shot, but overall, sometimes you just don’t shoot well and you lose because of it.” I felt like people were looking for insight, and I handed them a John Madden quote. “If your team doesn’t score points, they are going to lose more often than not.” But I really felt like it was the best summary of the game. The Raptors did not play great defense. The Spurs got every shot they wanted, they just missed. And sometimes that happens. Anyway, this got me thinking about other stats that might be key to a game, other than FG%. I am a senior analyst for a food distribution company, so identifying trends is big part of what I do. I created an analytical spreadsheet that contains 2,993 cells in order to dissect the Spurs’ season thus far and to create a barometer for a Spurs game. Below are the trends that I have identified along with my thoughts. I will also note whether Wednesday's game against the Raptors followed the identified trend or broke it.

Field Goals

1. When the Spurs shoot less than 44.4% from the field, they are 5-12. When they shoot better than 44.4%, they are 30-4. When they shoot less than 39.4%, they are 0-8.

This basically was my response to the game. The Spurs shot 41.9% against the Raptors and lost. The cutoff for the Spurs is 40%. If the Spurs do not shoot better than 40%, it’s not looking good.
Trend: Followed

2. If the Spurs shoot worse than their opponent, 12-11.

This is noteworthy because I would expect this to be a worse record. So, if the Spurs shoot a worse field goal percentage, it’s basically a coin flip as to whether they win or not. Those are not bad odds considering.
Trend: Followed

3. Hold opponent to less than 44.7% FG, 18-4
Trend: Followed (The Raptors shot 44.9% from the field.)

4. The Spurs score more than 90 points, 32-5.

The stat that Spurs’ commentators love to bring up is that when the Spurs score 100 or more points, they are 32-0 dating back to last season. However, the more telling stat is what happens when the Spurs manage to score 90 or more; they are 32-5 this season. And 90 points is far more feasible for the Spurs than 100.

This is interesting in that last night, if the Spurs score 91 or more, the game either goes into overtime or is a win, just as the identified trend suggests.
Trend: Followed (Spurs 89, Raptors 91)

5. Opponents score fewer than 90 points, 16-2
Opponents score fewer than 100 points, 25-9
Opponents score more than 100 points, 10-7

Again, the most relevant stat is the one least talked about. 100 points is what should be in focus. It’s not difficult to keep a team from scoring fewer than 100 points, whereas 90 can be extremely challenging and does not happen with great frequency.
Trend: Broken

3 Point Shooting

1. When the Spurs shoot 40% or better from the three point line, they are 20-4. When they shoot less than 40%, they are 15-13.

If the Spurs are making their three pointers with consistency, they are a very difficult team to beat. If the opponent chooses to double Tim Duncan, he will find the open man for a three. And if they do not, Duncan will go to work on the block. It’s a conundrum for the opposing team. However, if the Spurs are missing their three pointers, the opposition is able to pack the paint with defenders. The lanes that Tony Parker and Manu Ginobili thrive on disappear and Tim Duncan will be double teamed constantly.
Trend: Followed

2. When opponents shoot 16 or more threes, 11-9

If an opponent shoots a lot of threes, it implies that the Spurs are struggling defensively. Most likely, opposing players are wreaking havoc in the paint, which forces the Spurs to play help defense and leave players open for three pointers.
Trend: Broken (But not by much. The Raptors took 15 threes, an ominous sign.

3. When the Spurs take between 18 and 23 threes, they are 18-5, else 17-11.

The Spurs seem to have a range for three point attempts. If they are not taking enough threes, their ball movement is probably struggling. And if they are taking too many threes, they probably are being too satisfied with the three pointer, and should drive to the basket more often. Against the Raptors, I thought our ball movement was poor. The Spurs only took 13 threes last night.
Trend: Followed

4. 13-11 when the opponent has a better 3 pt % than the Spurs. If the opponent makes more 3 pointers, 5-8

Clearly, three pointers are vital to the Spurs’ winning recipe. The Spurs are second in the league in 3 point shooting percentage. Matt Bonner is 2nd at 49% and Roger Mason is 7th at 45%. The Spurs rely on the three pointer to keep their opposition’s defense honest. When the Spurs have a bad shooting night from beyond the arc, they really have to work hard for every point.
Trend: Followed (Spurs shot 38.5%, Raptors shot 40%.)

Free Throws Matter

1. When the Spurs take 21 or more free throws, they are 21-3.

Free throws indicate aggression. If the Spurs are shooting a good number of free throws, it means that they were attacking the rim. While the Spurs rely on the three pointer, it is also important that they establish a presence in the paint. The Spurs are at their best when they are attacking the rim, as the 21-3 record indicates.
Trend: Followed (Spurs had 15 free throw attempts.)

Rebounds

1. When the Spurs have 33 or more defensive rebounds, they are 19-1.

Defensive rebounding is very important to the Spurs. They rebound 77.9% of their opposition’s missed shots; this ranks first in the NBA. When the Spurs are focused on the boards, they are 19-1.
Trend: Broken (Spurs had 37 rebounds; this was the one loss.)

2. If the Spurs tie or out rebound their opponent, 21-4
Trend: Broken (Spurs had 7 more boards than the Raptors.)

Assists

1. When the Spurs have 25 or more assists, 11-2.

Assists are the product of good ball movement. Good ball movement is the product of aggressive offensive play.
Trend: Followed (Spurs had 21 assists.)

2. When the opposition has more assists, 8-8
When the Spurs have more, 26-7
Trend: Broken

Steals and Blocks

1. Between 5 and 9 steals, 26-6. More than 9 steals, 1-3.

This surprised me. Steals and blocks, while they seem more lucky and random than anything, very much add up in victories and are lacking in defeats. Steals seem to have a range, just as three point attempts did. If the Spurs have a good amount of steals, it implies that the Spurs were playing sound, aggressive defense. However, when they have too many steals, it probably means that the Spurs were gambling on the defensive end too much, which is why their record is 1-3 when they have 9 or more steals.
Trend: Broken (The Spurs had 8 steals so this one was close. They did gamble a good amount, so that part of the analysis holds up. When the Spurs gamble, they force a good number of turnovers, but also give up easy baskets. This can be very dangerous against a sub-par team such as the Raptors. Every easy basket that the Raptors receive builds their confidence and allows them to establish a rhythm.)

2. When the Spurs have more than 5 team blocks, 15-3
When the Spurs have more blocks than their opposition, 19-4
When the opposition has more, 11-10

The blocks make sense. When the Spurs control the paint, and their help defense is on point, the result are team blocks. If Tim Duncan is blocking with regularity, opposing players will think twice before driving and if they do, will alter their shots to avoid getting blocked, reducing their FG%.
Trend: Followed

Personal Fouls and Turnovers

1. When the Spurs commit 18 or less fouls, 20-4.
When their opponents have 20 or more fouls, 20-4
When the Spurs commit more fouls than their opponents, 11-9
When the Spurs commit fewer fouls than their opponents, 22-5
Trend: Followed

2. When the opponent has more turnovers than the Spurs, 22-6
When the Spurs commit more turnovers than their opponents, 9-8
Trend: Broken (But close, Spurs 11, Raptors 12)

The fouls’ trend is interesting. If the Spurs foul a lot, they tend to lose the game. Fouling is a symptom of bad defense. Players tend to foul when they are in bad defensive position. If the help defense arrives late, the defender is still moving and a foul is called. If a wing defender closes out poorly, they reach to slow the offensive player and a foul is called. If a defensive player is out of position for a rebound, an over the back foul is called. When the Spurs play poor defensively, they lose.

I think the most interesting trends are ones that imply offensive aggressiveness and defensive soundness. When the Spurs draw fouls, shoot more threes, and shoot more free throws, they tend to win. When the Spurs out-rebound, out-block, and out-steal their opponent, they win. Three point shooting is also critical to the Spurs. The stats show that when our three point percentage is high, and we take a good amount of threes, we win the vast majority of the games. Next time the Spurs play, compare these bench marks with the halftime stats and you should get a good indication of how the Spurs are playing on both ends of the floor, and whether or not the Spurs have a good chance of winning.

Against the Raptors, 11 of the trends I identified were consistent with defeat, while 6 were not. It’s interesting because it was such a close game if you just look at the score, 89-91. However, once the stats are broken down, 11-6 is not very close. The Spurs were lucky to only lose by 2 points.

Hold'em at the Wynn

3:15am; The Wynn
I find the poker room and sit down at a $1, $2 No Limit Table, $300 buyin. At this point, I’m definitely feeling the buzz but not tired or miserable. So I convince myself that I’m not breaking Bill Simmons rule of “No DTM gambling (any gambling after 2am when you’re Drunk, Tired, and Miserable.)” I end up playing from 3:15am till 10:00am without a break. I’d say around 9:15am, I entered the DTM range. But I kept playing till I lost all of my chips. The seven hours of gambling really came down to 4 crucial hands. The first doubled my stack from $400 to $800. The last three had me lose my $800 and the $200 I had re-bought in for.

4:45am
The Big Hand I won: My Stack = $400
In position, I received a AD 10C and called the big blind. The small blind with a $200 stack called and the big blind with a $400 stack checked. The flop came up AH 5C 4C. I led with an aggressive bet of $20, given the pot was only $6. The small blind immediately folds and the big blind sits for a minute to think it over. As soon as I see him hesitate, I immediately put him on a draw, as in he either is looking for the third club or has a straight possibility. He ends up calling and the turn is a JD. The pot now has $46 and I think he missed his flush/straight. I want to either win the pot right now or make him seriously pay for the river card. I bet $75. He immediately calls. The fact that he quickly called tells me that he does not think he has this hand won. The call, as opposed to a raise, implies that he wants to see the river card, so it further confirms my thought that he is on the draw. The river comes and it’s a blank, 9D. I’m convinced that he missed his draw, but my fear is that if I do not bet enough, he may come over the top of me in an attempt to bluff me off the pot. The pot is now a respectable $196, which leaves me with about $300. I bet $100, which means that if he wants to bluff me he’ll have to go all in. Because if he raises by $100, pot odds will force me to call. If he missed his draw there’s no way he goes all in.

Well, he goes all in. Now I have a fairly difficult decision. The pot is $600, and I have $200 to call. I’m getting 3-1 odds on my money, but throw the math out, this is about feel. I was pretty sure this entire time that he was on a draw. His bets and hesitations all signaled a draw. The only thing that didn’t was his last bet, which means it has high bluff potential. However, what if he was sitting on pocket 9’s? Would he have bet them any differently? The hesitation on the initial bet would make sense, because the ace is a scary card and he would have to decide whether I have an ace or not. The second bet is suspect. The Jack hits, which is yet another card that could beat him. He did not hesitate to call my second bet, so the Jack didn’t scare him. Hmm, I make my decision and push all in. Immediately, his calm face changes into a pained expression and I know the pot is mine. He turns over 6D 7C, which made me feel great. He was on the draw. The affable fat guy next to me yells, “Holy sh*t! My balls are definitely not that big!” The dealer gives him a dirty look and the affable fat guy says, “What? Balls isn’t a swear word.” “I think you said sh*t.” “F*** it.” I really wanted to bust out the Sam Cassel ball dance, but self-control got the better of me.
Well unfortunately, this was my high point. I end up losing three big hands after, two of which I had three of a kind with a weaker kicker than my opponent, and the final big hand I lost I called an all-in bet with JJ, he had 10 10, Of course, a 10 hit the flop.

Spurs Beat the Best, Spurring Recent Confidence Surge

The Spurs are playing their best basketball of the season, and it’s because of their two convincing wins against the Lakers and the Celtics. Beating these two teams that are constantly referred to as the best in the league proved to the Spurs that they are capable of going all the way this year. Popovich has been quoted saying that the Spurs are one or two pieces away from the Laker’s level. Popovich always puts his team down, in order to fire them up. These recent two wins filled the Spurs with confidence, which overflowed onto the New Jersey Nets last night.

ESPN analysts have made excuses for the Lakers and Celtics. For the Lakers, they were on the second game of a back to back and were missing several bench players. For the Celtics, they were emotionally distraught from the loss to the Lakers two games before the Spurs beat them. Forget about these excuses for a moment as we examine these games. I will attempt to prove that both teams played as close to perfect in these games as possible, and the Spurs still beat them. I wrote about the Spurs winning the vast majority of close games this season. If the Spurs can keep a game close, they win most of the time. The Spurs are adept to getting stops in the closing minutes, and executing flawlessly for critical scores.

First, let us take a look at the Spurs 112-111 victory over the Lakers. The Lakers shot 57% from the field and 56% from three point land while committing only 11 turnovers. Because their bench was unavailable, the Lakers were forced to play their starters playoff minutes. This is greatly responsible for their absurd shooting percentages. Kobe played 42 minutes, Fisher 36, Bynum 35, Gasol 32, and Odom 29. One could argue that the Lakers must have been fatigued in the fourth, and that is why they came up short. However, I was present at this game and let me tell you, the Lakers did not slow down at all. They were playing top notch all the way down the stretch. Basically, two of the NBA’s top teams played at an extremely elite level for 48 minutes, and the Spurs came out on top due to their superior play in the closing minutes.

Now for the recent 105-99 victory over the Defending Champion Boston Celtics in the Garden. In this game, the Celtics shot 51% from the field with 11 turnovers. The Celtics made 3 three pointers, but only took 11 so the 27% shooting looks worse than it was. The Spurs did a fantastic job of chasing the Celtics off the three point line. The Celtics clearly wanted to win this game, as was shown by Doc River’s choice to not play the bench. Tony Allen, at 18 minutes, was the only bench player to play more than 13 minutes. The five Boston starters all played 34 minutes or more. The Spurs matched the Celtics’ elite play and the game came down to the wire. The Spurs are great at finishing close games and came out victorious with a key shot by Roger Mason and a great defensive play by Bruce Bowen and Manu Ginobili.

Two of the best teams in the NBA played arguably as well as possible and the Spurs took the punches and won in the closing minutes. These two games have injected the Spurs with confidence and look for them to build a decent win streak in the coming weeks. The only upcoming game that makes me nervous is the game against Cleveland on the 27th. However, the Spurs match up very well with Cleveland and if the Spurs recent play is any indication, Cleveland better show up ready for a battle.