Spurs or Heat fan, I doubt a lot of people saw a 4-1 series coming. In arguably the most anticipated Finals matchup since Boston-LA in 2010, the Spurs managed to take two in Miami in convincing fashion after splitting at home the first two games. The Heat came out in Game 5 looking like a team that could be the first ones to come back from a 3-1 NBA Finals series deficit. The Spurs rallied from their slow start and took the lead before halftime. They never looked back as they buried the Heat in the second half, avenging their heartbreaking 4-3 loss to Miami last year. Now is as good a time as any to reflect on these two teams, as well as what the future holds for both of them.
Heat's Legacy
Four trips in a row to the NBA Finals is nothing to sneeze at. There are a lot of teams out there that would love to be able to make four straight NBA Finals. While the Big Three of LeBron James, Dwayne Wade, and Chris Bosh were the obvious stars of the bunch, they were able to find role players that played crucial roles during each of their runs to the Finals (Mike Miller, Ray Allen, Shane Battier). During this four year run, they have played against the likes of Dirk Nowitzki, Kevin Durant, Russell Westbrook, Tim Duncan, Tony Parker, and Manu Ginobili, all of whom may one day end up in the Hall of Fame (Duncan and Nowitzki are sure bets to get in).
While the dreams they had of winning three straight titles have been halted by these Spurs, they still drew attention to the NBA and changed the way we think about how teams are assembled. Because of the intense hatred that people had towards the Heat because of the way the team was brought together, people flocked to games and television sets just to see their demise. Television ratings for the Finals had taken a nose dive and was struggling mightily after the Jordan Era ended. Jordan's last series in 1998 against the Jazz drew an 18.7 Nielsen Rating. LeBron James' first NBA Finals when his Cavs played the Spurs? A record low 6.2. In fact, from 2003 to 2009, every NBA Finals series had single digit ratings except for 2004 when the Pistons beat the Lakers in 5. Starting with the Lakers-Celtics series of 2010 and carrying into the Heat Big Three Era, the ratings went back into the double digits as you had the classic matchup in 2010, then the hope that the Heat would fail from 2011-2014. If the Pacers beat the Heat and were playing the Spurs in the Finals, would the ratings have been as high? I doubt it.
The attention surrounding this team and what they accomplished is something that won't be forgotten, even though the time they've been together has just been a flash in the pan. For as great as the San Antonio Spurs are, even they have never won back to back titles. Certainly, it's too soon to predict what will happen with this team going forward, so perhaps their legacy isn't finished yet. As it stands right now though, they will probably be more remembered for the circus it took to bring them together and the disdain people had for them, rather than the back to back titles and success they had on the court.
What's Next For The Heat?
While it might be too soon to predict what will happen, it's certainly fun to guess. There have been a lot of prospects thrown out there, most of them revolving around what James ultimately decides he wants to do. The first, and most interesting prospect, is having Carmelo Anthony come down to South Beach to play with the Heat. The most significant barrier to this, however, is financially. While the NBA has the softest salary cap of the major sports, there are still limits. To pull this move off, Bosh, Wade, and James would all have to opt out of their current contracts to take pay cuts to allow Anthony to join the team.
While this would, once again, be great for the league, I think this would be devastating to all four's legacies, except for Wade because he won a title without the Big Three in 2006 (although Shaq might count as two people). It would be a toss up between Anthony and James to determine whose legacy it hurts more. Anthony would be accused of riding James' coat tails and proving that he can't win a title as the best player on the team. If they don't win a title, Anthony still gets ripped, and possibly blamed, for messing up the Heat's chemistry and proving that he can't get it done when it matters. James would be ripped for needing even more help to win multiple NBA Titles after failing to do so in Cleveland, and going 2-2 in the Finals with the current Big Three. Anthony still does not address their need for a big banger down low, and this would really put a squeeze on them financially to find role players. They could still do it, but if they miss on one or two of them, it will leave their bench in a terrible position.
The other, also interesting option, is for James to opt out and go somewhere else. Should he go back to Cleveland where the Cavs have a great, young core as well as the number one draft pick this year? Should he go to LA and play with Kobe and resurrect the Lakers? Is there another team he has in the back of his mind that is off the radar? Lots of questions to consider for James. Similar to when James decided to go to Miami, there are a couple enticing players that might be looking for a new team as well. Anthony is one, with the other being Minnesota Timberwolves forward Kevin Love. Unlike Anthony, Love won't be a free agent until 2015. Love, however, has voiced his frustration about playing for the Timberwolves and some believe that the T-Wolves would rather trade him for some value now, rather than simply lose him next year and receive nothing in return.
Love is arguably the best forward in the game right now, but he just doesn't get the love (pun intended) because he plays in Minnesota. Dwight Howard is still a quality big man, but the attention he got went down significantly once he left LA. If Love had been playing in LA or New York, more people would realize how good this guy is. I think a LeBron-Love duo could wreak havoc in the NBA. Pair them with another superstar and you could have the start of a new dynasty.
The last, and most boring, option would be for the Heat to do nothing. They would once again replace and find new role players to fill their bench, but they would trust the core of the Big Three to carry them back to the Finals. Not only is this the most boring option, but it's also the riskiest. Wade has clearly lost a step and is no longer the player of 2006. Bosh won't be getting any better and, in my opinion, is one of the more overrated big men in the game. James is still the best player in the league, but, as we saw in Cleveland, even he cannot carry a team to a title on his own. If they are able to find a diamond in the rough with every single one of their free agent signings and find the rookie of the year with one of their two draft picks, then it will work out. That's not likely to happen though so something, whether it's adding to the team or blowing it up, needs to happen this offseason.
Spurs Legacy
Since 1999, when the Spurs won their first NBA titles on the backs of Tim Duncan and David Robinson, they have been a model of efficiency in the NBA. Their own Big Three of Duncan, Tony Parker, and Manu Ginobili were all drafted by the Spurs. Also, although he wasn't officially drafted by the Spurs, Finals MVP Kawhi Leonard has played all his NBA games with the Spurs as he was traded to them by the Indiana Pacers shortly after he was drafted by the Pacers. It's a somewhat risky strategy in holding off on signing big name free agents, especially if one of your drafts picks turns out to be a bust. The Spurs stuck to their system as all four of them have flourished under Gregg Popovich and now sit on top of the NBA world.
While they cannot boast back to back titles like the Heat, their run of five titles since 1999, and four with their Big Three intact has been quite amazing. Despite their record and success, they also manage to go through the season and playoffs almost undetected. The focus almost always seems to be in Miami or Chicago or New York or LA. I think they enjoy this lack of attention as they just keep building momentum during the season, then unleash all their hard work on their opponents during the playoffs. This lack of attention also has the negative side effect of their greatness sometimes getting overlooked. Everyone wants to matchup the Heat against legendary teams from the past, but what about these Spurs?
They have a dominant big man (Duncan), skilled point guard (Parker), and a very deep bench (Manu Ginobili, Boris Diaw, Patty Mills, Marco Belinelli). I could see them being able to hold their own against the likes of Jordan's Bulls, Magic's Lakers, and Bird's Celtics. I could not say the same about this year's Heat. Popovich is the brains behind the whole thing as he has gotten his players to buy into true team basketball and to play within his system to maximize their potential. That is why guys like Parker and Ginobili have become so successful. While Duncan was drafted first overall and was a superstar in the making, Parker was drafted at the end of the first round and Ginobili wasn't taken until the end of the second round with neither having played college ball in the US. Most players with that story don't work out, but the Spurs found a way to get the best out of them. That's not to say they would not have been successful elsewhere, but I doubt they would have been embraced and trusted the way they were in San Antonio.
The best part going forward with this team is that the 22 year old Leonard won the Finals MVP and looks poised to become a star in this league. He will have to carry the torch as guys like Duncan (38 years old), Ginobili (36), and Parker (32) are all chasing father time at this point. Duncan might even call it quits after winning this last championship. Either way, Leonard could soon become the face of this franchise and be counted on to compete in a brutal Western Conference. If the Spurs keep drafting and signing the right guys to fit their system, I have no doubt that they will continue to contend.
Give Coaches A Chance
In today's day and age, the most common question for coaches is, "What have you done for me lately?" While this can be a good thing if the coach has overstayed his welcome or simply isn't that good, it can also be a bad thing in that it kicks coaches to the curb far too quickly. If a team is performing poorly, one solution that front offices are quick to jump to is to fire the coach just to "shake things up." The problem is you can shake yourself back about three or four years if you do that. I think that more coaches should get more time to not only implement their system, but gain the trust of the players to give 100%.
If a coach truly doesn't connect to the players in any way, or has been chosen simply as an interim head coach, then yes, pull the plug when you need to. Some teams however, feel like pulling the plug on coaches that simply need more time. The most recent example I can think of is with the LA Lakers. You might think I'm talking about Mike D'Antoni, but I'm actually talking about the guy who preceded him, Mike Brown.
Brown was coming off a successful, but title-less, run with LeBron and the Cavs leading them to at least the Conference Semifinals every year he was there, and one year to the NBA Finals, where they were swept by the Spurs. If Erik Spoelstra gets credit for taking this Heat team to the Finals and losing, then Brown should get two spots in the Hall of Fame for taking a far inferior Cavs team to the Finals and failing to win just one more game than the Heat did in the final series. Then he comes to LA in 2011 and leads the Lakers to third place in the West, while getting the best year out of perennial bust Andrew Bynum. The Lakers lost in the Conference Semifinals to a Thunder team that wound up in the NBA Finals. Not a bad year. The very next year, Brown wants to use a Princeton offense as the team acquires Steve Nash and Dwight Howard. The Lakers start off badly, going 1-4, and Brown is fired after five games. FIVE! This happened while Nash, Kobe, and Dwight were all at less than 100%
Now, I'm not saying Brown would have led them to multiple straight titles. We'll never really know the answer to that. What I am saying is that giving a coach one year and five games to fully implement their system while acquiring new starters in the process is not the easiest of challenges. Imagine if we gave every President one year and five days as their term. No one would get reelected because that is an extremely short amount of time to implement anything worthwhile and to get an entire organization, or nation, to buy into it. It is the resistance to this knee jerk method of replacing coaches that has allowed Popovich to have his system grow and to truly create a culture of winning.
Popovich didn't win a NBA title until his third year with the Spurs. Does Brown win a title with the Lakers if he stays three years? Hmmm. In fact, Pop went an abysmal 17-47 in his first partial season of coaching. In his second year, he made the playoffs but, like Brown, lost in the Conference Semifinals. Now, 16 seasons later, he has a NBA championship for each finger on his hand. I'm not sure if the five titles or his tenure as coach for 17 full seasons is more amazing. The point is that I think players, coaches, owners, and GMs need more stability throughout the organization. While it may be tempting to fire a coach or GM, or trade a player, keeping the right one can give you sustained success and multiple trips to the top of your sport.
Depth vs Star Power
Even though the NBA has a soft salary cap, there is only so much money to go around. Even in a no cap environment like baseball, teams cannot simply buy the best players at each position. Miguel Cabrera is the best first baseman in baseball, but he's still on the Tigers, not on the Yankees. This means that, eventually, you'll need role players that cost less money to fill the void behind your superstars. The problem is that if you have too many star players demanding higher salaries, you're much more restricted in the quality of role players you can get. Since all role players are not created equal, the way a team is assembled will have a great impact in how well they do during the season and into the playoffs.
To me, the Spurs represent the depth in this scenario while the Heat represent star power. LeBron James is asked to play so many minutes in part because of his athleticism, but also because their bench is so shallow. Certainly Ray Allen and Mario Chalmers have helped the Heat out in the past, and Birdman and Battier can give Bosh some rest, but I don't think anyone is looking for the Sixth Man of the Year award on the Heat.
Switching sides to the Spurs and you have a wealth of "role players." That's in quotes for the Spurs because while some of them come off the bench, they're actually good enough to start for a lot of teams in this league. Ginobili comes off the bench most games. Danny Green, a streaky but good shooter, is considered a role player and will sometimes come off the bench. Boris Diaw, one of the best passing big men in the game and an actual starter for the Phoenix Suns and Charlotte Bobcats, had been used off the bench but worked his way into the starting lineup for the Spurs. When Duncan or Parker come off, the drop off is not nearly as severe as when James steps off the floor for the Heat (see Game 1 of this series).
I've always thought that a deep team is better than a top heavy one. If there was a way, like in video games, to turn injuries off, then a star loaded team wins every time. Unfortunately, that's not reality and if something happens to just one of those star players, on or off the playing field, then the integrity of the system is in trouble. In this series, it was Wade who showed the world that father time catches up to even the best athletes. His shooting percentage was atrocious as he tried to play like 2006 Wade, which resulted in 2014 Wade results. Bosh actually turned in a solid playoffs and series, but it really was like the Big Three turned into the Big Two. Without that third star to go along with, the Heat turned into an only slightly better version of LeBron's Cavs that were swept by the Spurs. Without the depth to compensate for this loss, the Heat folded as the Spurs and their bench trampled them down the stretch in every game except Game 2.
Greatness In Perspective
I can't speak for the great teams prior to the 90s because I didn't get a chance to see them play. What I can speak for is the Jordan Era Bulls that took the NBA by storm during the 90s. Since Jordan is widely considered the greatest of all time, James is constantly being compared to him and, consequently, his Heat teams are compared to Jordan's Bulls teams. I don't think that any of the Big Three teams could have beat Jordan's Bulls, particularly the 1995-96 version. They went a ridiculous 72-10 during the regular season and lost three times during the entire playoffs. Also, for anyone suggesting that the competition was easier back then, just look at the joke that was the Eastern Conference this year. The team with the best record, Indiana, didn't even come close to the 72-10 mark as the Pacers finished 56-26.
Even if you take a look at the Spurs and their accomplishments, it still comes up short to what Jordan and the Bulls did. Two three peats, although you could very easily argue that the Bulls would have won eight straight had Jordan not gone to play baseball. In the 1993-94 season, the Bulls made it to the Conference Semifinals and pushed the Knicks to seven games. In the 1994-95 season, the Bulls made it to the Conference Semifinals and pushed the Magic to six games. If James, the best player in the game, can take a last place Cavs team to the NBA Finals, then I would think that Jordan would have been able to get a Conference Semifinals losing Bulls team to two more NBA titles.
The Spurs are still working for six, and have had everyone from their core group the entire time (exception: David Robinson when he retired). The team of Parker, Ginobili, and Duncan have even lost in the first round...twice! I don't think the Spurs or the Heat can match the greatness that the Bulls presented. I think the only recent team that comes close was the Kobe-Shaq Lakers of the early 2000s. Had they not had their personal differences, I think that combination and the players they had around them, could have challenged six straight, not just two separate three peats. A title next year would certainly help the Spurs' argument in this debate, but considering how hard it is to repeat, I still have my doubts.
Matty O
No comments:
Post a Comment