Which team is the best team in the Western Conference? If you guessed the team is in LA, you would be right. On Wednesday night, the LA Clippers defeated the San Antonio Spurs. And since the Spurs currently lead the Western Conference in efficiency differential (offensive efficiency minus defensive efficiency), and the Clippers just beat the Spurs, the best team must be the Clippers.
Okay, that’s not right. What is right is that the Spurs – after 18 games in 2010-11 – appear to be approaching the same level of team quality we saw in 2007 (or the last time the Spurs won the title).
That the Spurs are a good team is not surprising. After four consecutive losing seasons from 1985-85 to 1988-89, the Spurs have had only one losing season since (in 1996-97). Much of this streak can be tied to the drafting of David Robinson in 1987 and Tim Duncan ten years later. But unlike other teams that have added amazing talents (see New Orleans with Chris Paul and Minnesota with Kevin Garnett), the Spurs have also been able to find productive players to surround their main star.
To see this point, let’s go back to the last Spurs team to win the NBA title. The San Antonio Spurs in 2006-07 posted a 9.1 efficiency differential, the best mark in franchise history. Of the team’s 63.1 Wins Produced (the team only won 58 games), 43.9 could be traced to the play of Tim Duncan, Manu Ginobili, and Tony Parker. That means everyone else on this title team produced 19.2 wins.
Across the next three seasons, the Spurs appeared to decline. This can be seen when we consider the team’s efficiency differential from 2007-08 to 2009-10:
- 2007-08: 5.2 differential
- 2008-09: 4.1 differential
- 2009-10: 5.4 differential
It can also be seen when we look at the Wins Produced of Duncan-Ginobili-Parker; as well as the Wins Produced of “everyone else”.
- 2007-08: Duncan-Ginobili-Parker (41.2 Wins Produced), Everyone Else (12.4 Wins Produced)
- 2008-09: Duncan-Ginobili-Parker (30.7 Wins Produced), Everyone Else (20.4 Wins Produced)
- 2009-10: Duncan-Ginobili-Parker (31.7 Wins Produced), Everyone Else (22.8 Wins Produced)
The story in 2007-08 is about “everyone else”. The team’s trio maintained their production. But with Brent Barry hurt (the leader of “everyone else”) the production from the supporting cast declined.
The next season the Spurs once again found a quality supporting cast (led by the play of Matt Bonner and Kurt Thomas). But with Ginobili hurt, the production from the top three fell.
Last year the team’s supporting cast – led by DeJuan Blair – was even better. And Ginobili was generally healthy. But with Tony Parker hurt, the team was again unable to return to what we saw in 2006-07.
Entering this season, people looked at the age and injury history of this team and generally concluded that the Spurs had been passed by the Lakers and Heat (not saying everyone thought this, but certainly some people thought this). But after about 20% of the season has been played, we now see the following:
The team’s Big Three are currently on pace to produce 40.3 wins, or a total similar to what we have seen in the past when this trio is healthy. The team’s supporting cast – led by Richard Jefferson, George Hill, and Antonio McDyess – are currently on pace to produce 22.8 wins. So “everyone else” appears to be back. As a consequence, it appears the championship contending Spurs have once again appeared.
When we look at the individual players we do see some additional stories to note. First, Tony Parker is offering a career high in per-minute production. Back in 2006-07, Parker posted a 0.185 WP48 [Wins Produced per 48 minutes]. This year – after 18 games – he is posting a 0.191 mark. So he is better (although not much better than his previous career high).
Richard Jefferson is also offering more. The last time Jefferson was above average was 2005-06. An injury the next season appeared to permanently reduce the level of production Jefferson offered. Although he is not back to what we saw in 2005-06 (Jefferson posted a 0.241 WP48 that season), his above average production after 18 games is a good sign for the Spurs.
For those looking for dark clouds, Tim Duncan’s WP48 mark of 0.221 is a career low. Duncan is now 34 years old and at some point he has to offer less. Is this the season “less” makes an appearance? Again, only 18 games have been played. But those games are not a good sign.
And then there is the play of DeJuan Blair, the rookie who posted the highest WP48 mark last season. This year – again, after 18 games – Blair has been only slightly above average.
When we look at the individual stats, we see that Blair has had trouble hitting shots this season. In the last two games, though, Blair has taken 20 shots and hit 11 (for a 55% field goal percentage). Unfortunately, Blair only hit 4 of the first 20 shots he took this season (across his first three games). In other words, Blair started the season playing very badly (lately, though, he got better).
What does all that mean? Well, the Spurs have only played 18 games. At this point, I think we should focus on who is producing and who is not. When we start talking about why a player is posting the numbers we see we then run into the problem of small sample sizes. In other words, the issues we generally focus upon to explain changes in performance — such as injury (the factor I tend to think matters the most), coaching (sometimes matters), diminishing returns (small impact on per-minute performance), age (matters, but mostly for older players), or less empirical factors (team chemistry or other such stories) — can be seen (or not seen) in larger samples of data. In small samples of data… well, it is too easy to confuse random fluctuations in the data for something real.
So let me close by simply noting that there is some evidence that the Spurs we have seen in the past (a past where we had an abundance of data) have returned. The Big Three on this team are offering the level of production we saw in the past. And it appears the Spurs have once again found a productive supporting cast. Now if DeJuan Blair starts hitting shots… well 2011 is an odd-number year and we “know” the Spurs like winning titles in odd-number years (okay, we don’t “know” that because, once again, it is a small sample).
– DJ
Wages of Wins Journal 
Jeff
December 3, 2010
As a Spurs fan, thanks for posting this. I am still worried that injury and/or age will derail the current teams performance but so far i have been ecstatic about the Spurs.
R-Jeff is playing very well, which makes me wonder if there is truth to the theory that players play better the second year under Popovich.
I also find it pretty amazing that Pop is giving the most minutes to the most productive players according WP48. It’s not very often that happens. But that could be an artifact of the big three all being healthy and playing well.
Alvy
December 3, 2010
It would be funny if LeBron loses yet again to the Spurs in the Finals.
Tommy_Grand
December 3, 2010
Good article, Professor.
Alex
December 3, 2010
What a good blog post. well-researched, somewhat humorous, links from the specific to more general issues. Goes down smooth. I like it.
arturogalletti
December 3, 2010
Alex,
I agree. Cool and under-reported story.
todd2
December 4, 2010
Blair is taking the same amount of shots as last year. I can’t locate a current shot chart to see if his shot selection has changed. Most of his shots came in the paint last year. Duncan is playing less than 30 mpg, amazing. The Spurs have 27 fta’s/game and 22 3pa’s/game, making 40%! I can’t find team/league comparisons anymore for stats. Maybe someone can help? There’s still some upside if Gary Neal and Splitter improve.
Daniel
December 4, 2010
One thing of note– Duncan’s per minute blocks, steals, rebounds, turnovers, fouls, and assists are all equal to or better than his career averages.
His drop in WP/48 is ENTIRELY due to the drop in the number of shots he is taking combined with his minor drop in shooting efficiency. Since pretty much all his teammates are scoring more efficiently than he is right now, isn’t it the Wages of Wins Way to take fewer shots and do more things that lead to wins?
Daniel
December 4, 2010
Also, (if I remember correctly) Blair had a WP/48 of worse than -.150 for the first 10 or so games of the season– he was one of the worst players in the league. To get his season average to .111 in fewer than 10 more games means he’s been playing like a superstar recently.
kevin
December 4, 2010
Ginobili is going to be 34 in July. I’ll be shocked if he continues to sustain this production pace.
Nintendo_Jones
December 4, 2010
todd2- according to hoopdata.com, Blair is taking about 1 less shot a game at the rim compared to last year and 1 more shot <10, where he is only connecting on 30.6% of his attempts. That looks like a pretty good place to look at in his drop in scoring efficiency which is very very bad this year. He's also getting to the line less.
dberri
December 4, 2010
Across the first six games, Blair shot 11 for 40. Since then, he has hit 50% of his shots.
Tommy_Grand
December 6, 2010
Based on games played trhough Dec. 5. I think the Spurs are the best team in the NBA. That was probably true in 2007-2008 as well. But Kobe, Pau, and the Lakers won the west.
Daniel
December 6, 2010
Manu’s only a year older than Kobe, and Kobe’s also continued his per-minute production. Though Manu’s always been a much better per-minute player than Kobe. Kobe’s WP48 over his career looks to be around .230. Manu’s is close to .300.
kevin
December 6, 2010
“Based on games played trhough Dec. 5. I think the Spurs are the best team in the NBA. That was probably true in 2007-2008 as well. But Kobe, Pau, and the Lakers won the west.”
You think so? After losing to the Clippers and nearly losing to the Wolves twice recently?
Adam C. Morrison
December 6, 2010
“You think so? After losing to the Clippers and nearly losing to the Wolves twice recently?”
Tony Parker played 18 minutes — and I believe none in the second half — in the Clipper game. It was also the second night of a back-to-back.
I am not really sure what “almost” losing means. They won by four on the road against the Wolves on the 24th and won by six at home on the 3rd. What was your point again?
“Manu’s only a year older than Kobe, and Kobe’s also continued his per-minute production. ”
Kobe may also be the best-conditioned athlete in the NBA.
kevin
December 6, 2010
“They won by four on the road against the Wolves on the 24th”
The game on the 24th went into OT. And the game on the 3rd, they were losing by 15 going into the final quarter.
Adam C. Morrison
December 6, 2010
It’s a matter of subjectivity, imo, as to whether those are good or bad things. Are they showing “championship resolve” by coming back from down 15, or is it a warning side that they were down 15 to the Wolves in the first place? (Both!)
I just thought it was a bit disingenuous to not mention that they were without Parker. Watching that game, it had a huge impact — they just couldn’t create enough offense. And Matt Bonner missed a ton of open 3-pointers, quite the rarity. (Then again he was also “due” for a bad night! See what I mean?)