The San Antonio Spur Model.

[Diesel]

There are several references to this on the site since the hiring of Bud. Well, I don't believe that there is a model. I doubt the existence of a model because a model has to be portable. Instead, this is what I see:

Tim Duncan - one of the best PFs in the history of the game and First ballot Hall of Famer.

Manu = First ballot hall of famer.

Parker = First ballot hall of famer.

This is the model that you all speak of.

Is Horf a first ballot Hall of famer? Probably not.

If we were to have a "San Antonio Model" it definitely requires us getting Dwight and Chris Paul. Until we can get that, us talking about having the same model is useless.

Years ago, when Jordan was at Chicago and Phil Jackson was coach, they had a string of championships. There was a guy at Chicago who had become Phil Jackson right hand man. His name was Jim Cleamons. Cleamons knew the triangle inside and out. They brought him into Dallas to be their new head coach. He brought the triangle with him. His team had Mashburn, Kidd, and Jim Jackson as its big three. Ran the triangle in Dallas and I believe they may have won 20 games.

What went wrong? Cleamons didn't have Jordan or Kobe. Neither did Rambis.

Systems that are reliant on great players aren't portable.

[macdaddy]

So far i haven't heard spurs model from Bud or Ferry. We all know talent wins championships. Knight and Woody were buddies when they started with the 'pistons model', good defense etc. Ferry had to do something. Everyone predicted last year we would suck and we didn't. If we don't land the free agents we need this year may suck. Still at least there is direction, hope, decisiveness. Should be a fun summer.

[cam1218]

It is unlikely we will have the success that San Antonio had because it is going to be hard to duplicate that talent. I do think there is more to their winning than talent though.I see Miami, the Lakers and even the Celtics in their first big three year have big name talent. The Spurs have never had that big name player that these three teams had. We all know Duncan is amazing, but most casual fans see him as a boring player.You watch certain teams play and assume that 'certain player' will take over the game, with the Spurs you assume "they" will take over the game. I always see a well coached and focused team playing to their strengths, no matter who is on the court.We will need talent to make it work..but have faith in the SAS model.

[Diesel]

It is unlikely we will have the success that San Antonio had because it is going to be hard to duplicate that talent. I do think there is more to their winning than talent though.I see Miami, the Lakers and even the Celtics in their first big three year have big name talent. The Spurs have never had that big name player that these three teams had. We all know Duncan is amazing, but most casual fans see him as a boring player.You watch certain teams play and assume that 'certain player' will take over the game, with the Spurs you assume "they" will take over the game. I always see a well coached and focused team playing to their strengths, no matter who is on the court.We will need talent to make it work..but have faith in the SAS model.

Do you know who it is you're talking about??

Duncan is better than anybody on that Boston Squad.

KG vs. Duncan is a classic comparison. While KG may be more familiar because he is heard, DUNCAN is the beast.

[Ruckus]

You are overlooking the fact that Parker and Ginobli developed into what they are today. On many other teams, they would not have.

[Buzzard]

There is no Spurs model but there is a Spurs way of doing things. Spurs do not waste money on questionable talent and work ethic. I have never heard anyone call a Spurs player lazy. They basically get good attitude players, and you keep your head screwed on right or they ship you out of town.

[cam1218]

KG vs. Duncan is a classic comparison. While KG may be more familiar because he is heard, DUNCAN is the beast.

Duncan has always been better than those three players when you compare them one on one.Looking back to the time of the trade, I would take Duncan over KG because he is still great. The man is flat out amazing. Team wise, Boston has been better though. Basically San Antonio won more games before the BOS big three, wasnt as good during the big three, and is better after that core is gone. San Antonio has stayed very relevant for a long time.The Spurs are a very good organization. They have a good culture that brings and keeps good players around.

[buckeye242424]

There is no Spurs model but there is a Spurs way of doing things. Spurs do not waste money on questionable talent and work ethic. I have never heard anyone call a Spurs player lazy. They basically get good attitude players, and you keep your head screwed on right or they ship you out of town.

I agree. It's a culture change. They're going to bring years of experience under Pop on how to do things right and change the mindset of the francise. I agree, totally, that talent is just as important. But who's to say Manu or Parker would have had the careers they've had without being developed by solid coaches with the right attitude and philosophy?

[KB21]

Also, Manu and Tony are probably not hall of fame players, much less first ballot members. They are good players but have never been the best in the league at their positions.

[Admin]

There is no Spurs model but there is a Spurs way of doing things. Spurs do not waste money on questionable talent and work ethic. I have never heard anyone call a Spurs player lazy. They basically get good attitude players, and you keep your head screwed on right or they ship you out of town.

Bingo! The Spurs have a model for the type of player that they go after and rarely deviate from that. They play a style of basketball that works with less than superstar types of talent and that is portable. We can run the PnR just as any team could. Sure we might not be as successful with it as the Spurs but we can run it. We can get out of the break and play at a fast pace just as the Spurs do. We can play tough, team oriented defense just as the Spurs do. We can have our bigs kick out to open shooters or our PG penetrate and find open shooters just like the Spurs do. That's their style of play and we can play that style here even with inferior players and that's okay, we will work on building the best "team" that we can and go from there.

[JTB]

Bingo! The Spurs have a model for the type of player that they go after and rarely deviate from that. They play a style of basketball that works with less than superstar types of talent and that is portable. We can run the PnR just as any team could. Sure we might not be as successful with it as the Spurs but we can run it. We can get out of the break and play at a fast pace just as the Spurs do. We can play tough, team oriented defense just as the Spurs do. We can have our bigs kick out to open shooters or our PG penetrate and find open shooters just like the Spurs do. That's their style of play and we can play that style here even with inferior players and that's okay, we will work on building the best "team" that we can and go from there.

Exactly! We just need some mentally tough players that know their role and only play within their role! That's all it is! We may not get superstars here but we need that spurs style type of players and organization first!....I believe these two guys can bring that here.

[Diesel]

There is no Spurs model but there is a Spurs way of doing things. Spurs do not waste money on questionable talent and work ethic. I have never heard anyone call a Spurs player lazy. They basically get good attitude players, and you keep your head screwed on right or they ship you out of town.

That's acceptable if you have 3 first ballot hall of famers playing on your team.It's easy to turn down talent when you have 3 first ballot hall of famers on your team.

It's easy to say that there's a Spurs way of doing things when you have 3 first ballot hall of famers suiting up to play.

The problem is what happens if you don't have those things?

Whereas the Spurs can say... "we're not interested in Dwight Howard because he has too many issues." The Hawks can't.

[Diesel]

Also, Manu and Tony are probably not hall of fame players, much less first ballot members. They are good players but have never been the best in the league at their positions.

Why not? Didn't Dennis Rodman and Reggie Miller get into the Hall of Fame?

Manu and Tony are going for their fourth Ring together.

[JTB]

Also, Manu and Tony are probably not hall of fame players, much less first ballot members. They are good players but have never been the best in the league at their positions.

I have to disagree...I think they are sure hall of famers they won't get in first ballot of course but they are sure hall of famers. They do as much for the spurs as Robert Horry did for HOU, LA, Spurs.I have always thought that they were a BIG 3 and to say they have never been the best at their position is pushing it a little. Maybe Manu has never been but you can argue that Parker has been the best pg over a regular season before whether fans, media, whoever has noticed it or not.

[Buzzard]

That's acceptable if you have 3 first ballot hall of famers playing on your team.It's easy to turn down talent when you have 3 first ballot hall of famers on your team.

It's easy to say that there's a Spurs way of doing things when you have 3 first ballot hall of famers suiting up to play.

The problem is what happens if you don't have those things?

Whereas the Spurs can say... "we're not interested in Dwight Howard because he has too many issues." The Hawks can't.

I think the Pacers are close to a Spurs model ( way of doing things ) and it is working for them. Integrity and work ethic go a long way no matter what field of work you are in.

And I have never seen Dwight even close to looking as out of shape as Shaq was in Lakerland at the start of every season. I would say D12 works hard even in the off season.

[Wretch]

I think the points about the Spurs way of doing thing is VERY valid. There is a very straightforward way they build their teams that I really like. It's just a no-nonsense philosophy.... I'd ***LOVE*** to see Josh Smith playing for San Antonio. lol It would be classic, but no way we'd see the same kind of shit he does out there.

On the flipside of that though...don't get it twisted. Talent wins games. You can have all the discipline, coaching, support, hard work....but players like LeBron James will still come in your house, slap you around, kiss your wife, and then use your bathroom without washing his hands before he leaves. You better have a weapon to take him out with. In the NBA, that's called elite/franchise/star talent.

We need the Spurs philosophy and we need talent.

[Bahamut]

I agree. It's a culture change. They're going to bring years of experience under Pop on how to do things right and change the mindset of the francise. I agree, totally, that talent is just as important. But who's to say Manu or Parker would have had the careers they've had without being developed by solid coaches with the right attitude and philosophy?

[benhillboy]

I definately don't see Manu or Parker as HOFs. The Spurs tried to shop Parker numerous times, and Manu maybe had one year where he could seriously be compared to Kobe. I just think the think tank of guys in authority over there are simply ahead of the curve on all things NBA-related. They have never had top-flight talent. Tiago Splitter? Boris Diaw? DeJuan Blair? Gary Neal? Matt Bonner? Danny Green? All these guys play significant roles, all bums who can't create their own shot IMO. It's Pop's Magic and Timmy's character and commitment to consistency that has gotten it done for them, and Bud knows all about it.

Edited May 29, 2013 by benhillboy

[MaceCase]

HOF is not based on just NBA and Manu dominated international ball. Gold medals over Team USA no less, Eurocup MVPs and championships and this is all before we discuss his NBA career. Parker is the only questionable member but he has the rings, Finals MVP, All Star/NBA selections from just the first half of his career so if he continues on the current tear he's been on he can certainly solidify himself.The Spurs don't so much have a model as a culture. They've switched styles on numerous occasions from inside pound em out to wide open shooting to up tempo run and gun, twin towers, small ball, etc. What they've maintained throughout is the need for perfect fits over just collecting talent. You'll notice that they have very little duplication in positions because of this.

[Admin]

Basketball-Reference has a great tool they call "HOF Probability" and they rank players among active players with at least 400 games and among career players with at least 400 games. Here are where the Spurs "Big 3" rank.

Manu

Active Players: 28th

Career Players: 159th

Parker

Active Players: 12th

Career Players: 70th

Timmy

Active Players: 2nd

Career Players: 13th

Based on this I'd say that Timmy is a sure fire lock to make it in and Parker will probably make it in as well but unless something dramatic happens with Manu he's going to struggle to get in and there's no chance in the world he'll make it in 1st ballot.