Back from Vacation; Anything Exciting Happen?

After our early playoff exit, I took a much needed (though maybe not well deserved) break. I continued to follow the playoffs and track all things Spurs related. I just chose not to write about it. But the Spurs decided to kick off the 'offseason' (which, for many teams, is much more exciting than the regular season) in high fashion, so I have no choice but to write about it.

But first things first: congrats, LA Lakers. I know it's not considered good form for a Spurs fan to acknowledge or appreciate the Lakers. They are arguably our biggest rival, and the team that has caused us the most pain these last 12 years. But for me, my fan 'hatred' is reserved for the Dallas Mavericks and the Phoenix Suns of the worlds, the pretenders to the throne. I view the Lakers as our truest 'rivals', the only team that can really compare to us equally these last 12 years (with the same number of titles to boot), and, as such, give them the respect a true rival deserves. I want nothing more than to beat them senseless every time we play them, but credit is due to them for winning a championship. Enjoy your 4th ring, Kobe; we'll battle for #5 next year.

But enough with this talk of basketball. Let's talk about what's really exciting; basketball related transactions. The Spurs made a big splash today, trading for Richard Jefferson of the Bucks. Timothy over at 48 Minutes of Hell has a great take on the deal. (Sidebar: I recommend, no, demand that you read 48MoH regularly, as it's the best place to stay current with all the machinations of the Spurs; just come back here as well. Please.) I more or less agree with his assessment, though have a little more reservation.

Richard Jefferson is no doubt an enormous upgrade for us at the wing. He gives us more than Bruce Bowen, Michael Finley, and Ime Udoka (our wing players last year) combined. He is athletic, smart, works hard, can score, and even defends. We know all of these things. He'll be a potent 4th option (making Mason, Jr. a deadly 5th option) behind our big 3, and will allow a tremendous amount of pressure to come off of Tim's knees and Manu's ankles. Before, we were always a little dead in the water with 2 of the Big 3 out; now, we should never suffer the offensive droughts we're so known for.

My reservation is not in Richard Jefferson, the player; it's in Richard Jefferson, the contract. He is owed a great deal of money, and by signing him, we are more or less maxing out our salary for next year (with a little wiggle room still left), and more or less taking ourselves out of the 2010 free agent frenzy. So the question is, is Jefferson worth that?

At first, I wasn't sure. But more and more, I'm coming around to the idea that he is. Tons of teams are saving up for 2010, when LeBron, DWade, Bosh, Amare, and many other high profile players hit the market. The Spurs had been very carefully cultivating their salary to have beau coup amounts of money available in that summer to offer. But the truth is, it was always an outside shot to land a big name. LeBron's not coming to SA. Neither is DWade. Bosh might because of his Texas roots, but that's a big bet to place. What do you do if none of the top 2010 free agents pan out? Where do you spend your money then? A lot of teams are going to be forced to answer this question in a year.

I think our best shot at another title is next year. And I think the Spurs FO agrees. Look at this year's playoffs. The two best teams going in--the Lakers and the Cavs--we're underwhelming. The Magic clearly exposed the Cavs lack of anything substantive besides LeBron. And the Lakers, despite winning the title, looked uninspiring for most of the playoffs, unable to finish off a depleted Rockets team on the road, and being taken to task by an undisciplined Nuggets team. By adding Jefferson, I think we've risen back to the top of the league, and have a great chance of winning the West next year, especially given the Lakers free agent situation.

Also, it's possible that the entire landscape of the NBA changes after 2010. And Duncan will be a year older. As will Ginobili, who may not even be with the Spurs at that time. For the Spurs, the future is now. And while the rest of the league is busy preparing for 2010, there's still a title to be won next season. Like it or not, we're in the countdown of our title window, and it would be silly to give up a year at an outside chance of something great happening. I'd rather take a known commodity and try to win now.

The other side of this story is what we gave up to get Jefferson. In terms of on the court production, we gave up very little. I'll miss Oberto, but his best days seem to be behind him. I'll miss Thomas, as he was a personal favorite. But Spurs fans will miss Bowen the most. He was an integral cog of 3 of our championships. Like any great championship role player, you love him when he's on your team and hate him when he's on the other. And boy is Bruce hated. And loved. He is Spurs family, and he always will be. If his jersey is not retired one day, it will be a shame. It's true that he had lost his ability to defend at a high level for an entire game, but I still loved using him as a cooler, or a change of pace. I still think he has some good basketball in him, and I wish him all the luck in the world. There are reports that he may be bought out and sign again with the Spurs. That would be great, but we won't comment on that until we know it's true.

We also gave up a big chunk of our front line to get Jefferson. So now our focus must be on shoring up the front line. Bonner is still a good fit for us as he spreads the floor, and Gooden could be back. And of course Mahinmi is on the roster, and hopefully will give us something this year. But there's still too many unknowns up front, and we need to get some more big bodies to truly be an elite team. I have no doubt that the FO is diligently working on this.

All in all, a very big day for the Spurs. Let's welcome Richard Jefferson to the Spurs, and bid farewell to three great players and great people.

Dunks Don't Win Titles

The 2009 NBA Finals between the Los Angeles Lakers and Orlando Magic start tonight. If there is any correlation between the outcome of the series and how often each team dunks, the Magic should feel pretty good about their chances of winning.

Matthew Futterman writes in today's Wall Street Journal ("The Return of 'Chocolate Thunder'"):

During the past five seasons, Dwight Howard has amassed 1,062 dunks, 248 more than his closest competitor, according to Stats.

Mr. Howard's emergence is laced with irony, since he plays for a team that finished just 13th in the league in dunks this season. Without him, they would have had the second-lowest total in the NBA.

A review of dunking statistics from the past six seasons shows that dunks aren't a leading indicator of who wins and who loses in the NBA Finals. The 2002-03 New Jersey Nets, 2003-04 Lakers, 2004-05 Detroit Pistons, 2006-07 Cleveland Cavaliers and 2007-08 Lakers all had significant dunking advantages over their opponents in the finals, and they all lost.

The Lakers this season had 428 dunks, fourth-highest in the league, largely because defenders must chase Mr. Bryant on the outside, leaving his teammates open under the basket.

The lone exception is the 2005-06 Miami Heat, led by the nearly unstoppable, 325-pound center Shaquille O'Neal and the acrobatic Dwyane Wade. The Heat, who bested the Dallas Mavericks in the finals, led the NBA in dunks during the season with 499, tied for the highest total since 2002-03. Dunks accounted for 16.4% of the team's points, also tied for the highest in the past six seasons.

But the accomplishments of those one-season wonders are more than overshadowed by the Spurs, the most successful franchise of the past decade.

The Spurs won the title in 2003 despite converting just 322 dunks during the regular season, 10th in the NBA and 167 behind the Lakers' league-leading 489. Two years later, San Antonio won again with just 187 dunks, second-lowest in the league. In 2007, the Spurs won their fourth championship since 1999 with just 128 dunks, last in the NBA.

"You look at the Spurs and how they play with Tim Duncan, it's a very fundamental style," said Hall of Fame center Kareem Abdul-Jabbar. "They didn't dunk a lot, but they got the ring."

What might have been

In just minutes, the Denver Nuggets tip-off against the Los Angeles Lakers in this year’s Western Conference Finals. Were it not for an unfortunate twist of fate, the Spurs would likely be facing the Lakers right now.

I look at the Nuggets-Lakers series and imagine what might have been, had Manu not re-injured his ankle last month, and going back further, had he not played in the 2008 Olympics. With Ginobili, the Spurs were 32-12 (.727) this year. Without him, they were just 22-16 (.579), which would have kept them out of the playoffs had it been their record for the season. In other words, one player was the difference between the Spurs being the second best team in the Western Conference and being a lottery team.

Maybe the Spurs would have gained more this year with a lottery pick instead of a first round elimination against the Mavericks.

Ok, I don’t really mean that. I guess sometimes I forget how good we've had it as Spurs fans. I expect our team to win, game after game, year after year. And they have -- four titles since Tim Duncan arrived in 1997. In fact, the Spurs have the best record of ANY professional sports franchise in the Duncan era. And yet, I always want more wins, more rings, more glory. I'm sure that the players wanted more this season, too.

As much as I hate to think it, let alone say it, the Tim Duncan era will come to an end. Maybe not next year, or the year after, but eventually Duncan will hang up his high tops.

Timmy turned 32 last month. How many players get rings when they’re older than he is now? Not many. The Houston Rockets won their second title in 1995 when Olajuwon was 32. The Chicago Bulls won their sixth and final title in 1998 when Jordan was 34. The San Antonio Spurs won their second title in 2003 when David Robinson was 37.

Tim's minutes played per game this season was 33.6, and they've gone down every season for the past three. Only in 2004-2005 did he play less. Next year we can expect him to play a little bit less.

As for Ginobili, he turned 31 and his body is in worse shape than Duncan’s, having gone through surgery twice in the past year. It's unlikely that he'll ever be as great as he was the previous two seasons.

I’ll watch this year’s Western Finals and I’m sure I won’t be disappointed. It promises to be exciting, matching great players against great coaches. If sports gambling were my thing, I’d bet on the Nuggets to beat the Lakers. Why? No team, except for the Cavaliers, has played better team basketball in these playoffs. The Nuggets are healthy and deep while the Lakers have looked vulnerable and unsure of themselves, struggling to beat an injury-riddled Rockets team in seven games.

All the same, while watching this series and cheering for the Nuggets, I’ll wonder about what might have been.

So This is What a Vacation in May Feels Like

And thus the season ends, not with a bang, but with a whimper. Giving little resistance to inevitability, fatigue, and the Mavs, we quietly walked away from the playoff stage.

There's little need to give analysis of last night's game. The writing was on the wall; we all knew we were outmanned and outplayed this series. Credit the Mavs. They are playing brilliantly right now, and are coalescing in a way that no other Mavs team of the past ever has. They whooped us, and they earned every win.

Pop searched in vain to find combinations of players that would give us a spark. He went very defense heavy last night, playing Udoka, Hill, and Thomas beau coup minutes, while giving Mason, Jr., Bonner, and Gooden (DNP-CD) precious few. But the team (save Parker and Duncan, who played brilliantly and refused to go without a fight) was resigned to its fate, and played without the proper aggression or passion needed in a close out game.

It's very clear what was lacking for the Spurs this postseason (besides the obvious "a healthy Manu Ginobili")--role players stepping up, those unsung heroes of playoff lore.

To achieve success in the postseason, you need superstars playing as superstars do. Only the Detroit Pistons of 2004 can say they've won a title without a superstar (and, in retrospect, they seemed more the beneficiary of a Lakers team falling apart at every seam). You have to have an otherworldly player on your roster.

But you need role players stepping into the spotlight, if only for a series or a game or just a solitary moment. You need those games that make people wonder "who is this guy?" The Mavs had plenty of those this series. JJ Barea is the most obvious. But Erick Dampier played well; Ryan Hollins may have been the difference in pivotal Game 4. And even Josh Howard was able to sustain continued excellence, something he's been unable to do in the past.

The Spurs, contrarily, had nothing. We had no other player step up in the slightest for us, save Bowen. All of our shooters lost their touch simultaneously. Even the reliable Thomas was shaky. Udoka played solid D, but could add nothing for us on offense, ultimately making him a liability. Hill seemed to be the only player ready to step up, but was given precious time to do so.

It's particularly hard to witness this lack of production from the role players, as Spurs' past is littered with just such players. Steve Kerr, Robert Horry, Michael Finley have all given us big, career-defining moments in the cauldron of the playoffs.

Where do we turn now? As the Spurs embark on their longest vacation in almost 10 years, they have a lot of questions looming into next season and beyond. Many are writing the team off, pronouncing the King to be dead. But I say there's still some fight in this team; long live the King.

From Bruce to George

Buck Harvey has an excellent article in today's Express News about Bruce Bowen, and the sobering realization that today may be Bruce's last game as a Spur.

Many argue that Bruce is just a step below Manu, Tim, and Tony in relevance to our last 3 championships. I might argue he belongs in the conversation as the 4th musketeer. Bowen took on the dirty work night in and night out for 3 championship runs with nary a complaint. His stats were never impressive and all his hard work has relegated him to being one of the most reviled players in the league.

But to Spurs fans, his value can not be measured. He will always have a home as a Spur, and his jersey should be retired someday.

There's been a lot of talk this year about George Hill, and his emergence as a defensive stopper, a la Bowen. The potential is certainly there, and I think every Spurs fan has fallen in love with our prized rookie.

What I find particularly amazing, though, is that Bowen has taken the young player under his wing and tutored him in the ways of being an elite defender, even as Hill was usurping Bowen's playing time and role as defensive stopper. This speaks volumes to Bowen's professionalism and team first attitude, and to Hill's willingness to take on the unglamorous aspects of the game and excel where he is needed.

Tonight may be Bowen's last game as a Spur. I hope not, for a variety of reasons. But tonight might also mark the first game of the George Hill era, and his run as a valued member of Spurs championship teams.

And the beat goes on....

Tony Parker and Tim Duncan Take on Mavs by Themselves; Rest of Spurs Take "Personal" Day

That about sums it up. Not much more to say about yesterday's game, but let's try regardless.

Pop made one major adjustment, starting Bowen in Place of Mason, Jr., hoping to have a defensive answer for Barea. I was actually in favor of this move and was happy with the results. Bowen has proven himself time and again in the playoffs, and if we're going to go down, let's go down with the people we know we can trust. And he has played quite well in this series on the defensive end, one of the few bright spots of our bench.

But there's one problem with this move: for whatever reason, Mason, Jr. has a difficult time coming off the bench. He seems to drift into the background, displaying neither the shooting touch nor the killer instinct that were so vital to us early in the season. And he was atrocious as our backup PG last night. By my unofficial tally, we were -12 with Parker on the bench (to be fair, some of that back-up time went to Hill). The answer here seems obvious: start Bowen and Mason, Jr.; bench Michael Finley. Finley plays hard, and he's a reliable vet and a professional, but he can't guard young slashers...and just about every team in the league has a young slasher on the wings. Howard is abusing us, and is probably the most important factor in the series right now. We're doing a great job stopping Dirk and Terry and daring the rest of the Mavs to beat us. But the rest of the Mavs are accepting the challenge and killing us.

To start the game we put Parker and Duncan in pick and roll and let them play. And it was working beautifully. Tony was getting into the lane and either finishing or dishing to Duncan for the easy lay in. This is exactly what I wanted to see as I think it's our most effective offense at the moment. Parker was an absolute beast in the first half, going off for 31 points. Duncan had a solid first half also, scoring 15.

But herein lies the problem. 31 plus 15 is 46. We had 55 points at half. That means everyone else accounted for 9 points. 9 points in 24 minutes from 7 other players. I can't even think of a word strong enough to describe that ineptitude.

We can dissect the numbers any way we want. 6 made shots from somebody other than Parker or Duncan stands out in particular. As does our putrid 3 point shooting (6 for 23, with 2 each from Hill and Parker, not our usual long range shooting specialists). But you don't need to look at the numbers to know that we're a two man team right now. We're getting nothing offensively from anybody else. Sure, we're getting some strong D from Bowen and Udoka. But we can't expect two people to outscore a deep and talented professional basketball team. Parker made some uncharacteristic mistakes at the end; but I'm not going to kill him for it. He was out of gas, completely expended from willing the Spurs to victory. And he came up short. That's no knock on him. Everybody needs help.

At the beginning of the series I thought that we had the stronger bench. I think we can safely say now that that is not true. Gooden, Thomas, Udoka, Mason, Jr., and everyone else is giving us nothing, while the Mavs are getting sparks from everywhere on their bench. Barea has been a huge spark plug for this team. Hollins? He outplayed Duncan down the stretch of last night's game, energizing the team and the crowd enough to get them over the hump. Right now, Dallas is the more balanced, effective, and better team.

I was also very displeased with our end of game offense. Down just 3, we started jacking up wild, contested 3s. And missing. And missing. And missing. We panicked, and we lost the game because of it. There was plenty of game left, and it was very uncharacteristic of our team. The book on the Spurs is that we outexecute the other team and don't beat ourselves. Last night, we did neither. We didn't play within our offense, we didn't trust in our teammates, we didn't play with poise, and we beat ourselves.

After 4 games, Dallas is dominating all of the keys I mentioned at the beginning of the series. Although we're getting a better, fresher, Duncan, he's still not 100% healthy, and he can't dominate a game wire to wire like we've seen in playoffs past. Josh Howard is playing inspired basketball, and we have no answer for him. Dallas has the far better bench. Our 3-point shooting has fallen off a cliff the last 2 games. We're getting nothing from the combo of Finley and Mason, Jr. And our defense, while good (especially on Dirk) hasn't been strong enough to account for our faltering offense. And we're still getting manhandled on the glass.

So yes, things look bleak now. But this is a lot like 2006. We came home down 3-1, and still pushed it to Game 7, which we almost won. All Dallas did was hold serve (to borrow a tennis analogy). We just need to win one game in Dallas, and now that has to be Game 6. We can win Game 5 and then go in to Dallas and hope to do what we couldn't do these last two games. But it's still possible, and there's no reason to give up hope yet. Game 5 is our first elimination game of the season; let's see how we respond. Even if we lose this series, we need to know what we have for next year. Is Gooden a keeper? What can we expect from Hill? Can Mason, Jr. be a playoff performer? Can Bonner be counted on? There is still a lot and stake, and plenty to play for.

Personally, I can't wait for Game 5.

Go Spurs Go.

At Least it Wasn't Joey Crawford's Fault

There's really not much you can say after a loss like that. Pop pulled his starters midway through the third and ceded victory. Pop gets a lot of criticism for giving up on games too early, but it was pretty obvious last night that we didn't have it, and Dallas did. With the quick turnaround before Game 4, it was the prudent choice.

But I also think that he was sending a message to the starters: proper execution requires proper effort. Execution is the only way we can win this series, as we have a talent deficit with Ginobili out. So we have to work harder. Last night Dallas overwhelmed us with talent and effort. We all saw the results.

In my last post I said that Dallas has yet to show that their defense can stop us. And while only scoring 67 points (and 42 through 3 quarters!!) would seem to emphatically state that their defense did indeed shut us down, a lot of it to me seemed like we just couldn't hit any shots. They definitely protected the paint and the rim much better, blocking shot after shot at the rim. But we were getting some good open looks that we just couldn't hit. I tip my hat to Dallas and their defensive effort, but I'm not willing to cede that last night was an indicator of them figuring out our offense.

Dallas made two key adjustments to start the game. They started JJ Barea; and they had Kidd guard Parker. Both seemed to work in their favor, as Barea torched us in the first quarter and Kidd seemed to have Parker figured out. I don't know what the counter to Barea is. Starting Bowen on him and bringing Mason, Jr. off the bench?

But I do know what the answer to Kidd on Parker is: run the offense through Parker. Last night we started the game running the offense partly through Parker, but mostly through Duncan in the post. Normally I would be fine with this. But Duncan, hampered with his knee problems, is clearly struggling against the size and bulk of Dampier, unable to get to the rim from the low post. Parker has proven that he can be our offensive load and shred the Mavs to pieces. But we didn't even try to get Tony going. Tony needs to feel involved with the offense from the opening tip, or he loses focus and concentration and usually has an average (for him) game. But if he's involved and active and gets off to a hot 1st quarter start, you can usually count on him to continue his dominating ways.

Why did we go away from him? Were we worried about Dampier's comments? I have a hard time believing that. We're we playing a bit of psychological warfare? Was it strategy? You've keyed your defense in on Parker and now we're going to completely change our offense. I just don't understand. Hopefully in Game 4 we'll go back to running the offense through Parker, using him in high screen-rolls with Duncan. I still believe that Dallas can not stop that.

One other thing I'd like to point out from last night's game. Late in the 3rd quarter, George Hill was on a fastbreak. He drove in for the layup and was blocked by Josh Howard. After the block, as Howard was running back downcourt and Hill was sprawled out under the basket, he turned and started talking trash to Hill. In a game that they were winning by 30. You stay classy, Josh Howard.

This is why I despise the Mavs. Can it be seen as a sign of strength and courage to trash talk someone you just knocked to the ground in a 30 point win? Is it a sign of mental resolve to start criticizing the other team (without provocation) after a tough loss? Is it a mark of composure to announce that you're going to try and physically harm the other team's best player?

They are poor losers; they are poor winners. They get up by 3o and they're world beaters, Jordan and Gary Payton in their prime. They get down by 20, and they start dropping their shoulder into players driving through the lane and complaining about dirty tactics or bad officiating.

And this is precisely why I love the Spurs. They are proffesionals, and conduct themselves as such on and off the court. They do not trash talk nor gloat over fallen opponents. They hold themselves accountable, and don't make excuses for losses. They are mentally tough, and they don't worry about anything that they can't control, like bad officiating.

There's an underlying theme here: each team has taken on the personality of their most important figure. For the Mavs, it's Mark Cuban; for the Spurs, it's Gregg Popovich. Look, I like Cuban. I think he's good for basketball, and I like owners to be passionate and willing to make basketball decisions, not financial decisions. But he is outspoken and reactionary. He looks for others to blame when things go wrong, and complains to whomever will listen. And we all know how Pop is. He is not like Mark Cuban, in any way. And that is why, when things started going wrong in the 2006 Finals, the Mavs fell apart and let all of these perceived slights ruin their best chance at a title. And that is why, in 2005, after the Spurs got their asses handed to them in Games 3 and 4 in Detroit, we had the mental and emotional resolve to eke out one of the greatest wins in Spurs history in Game 5 and go on to win our 3rd championship.

OK. Enough ranting about the Mavs.

Graydon Gordian at 48 Minutes of Hell thinks that getting blown out in Game 3 is better than losing a squeaker. I tend to agree. I think we'll come out in Game 4 sharper and more energetic, and that Dallas will come out a little complacent after their great, great performance in Game 3. If we can get the jump on them early and keep the game close, I like our chances coming down the stretch.

Go Spurs Go.

I'll Take Tony Parker, Thank You Very Much

I said that this game was a referendum on our team and our season as a whole, and we responded in resounding fashion. Tony Parker continued his ascent to rarefied air. He has been unbelievable this season. His play should give all of us hope that as Duncan and Ginobili slowly decline in advancing years, we can still compete for a championship by relying on Parker to be our main offensive impetus. Dingo already touched on this in an earlier post, so I won't say too much about Parker's game. But I did write that Parker's "improvement in subsequent games is more important than any adjustment that Pop can make. As Tony goes, so do the Spurs go." I think Game 2 was validation of that statement.

But let's take a look at some of the key elements of Game 1, and how we adjusted in Game 2.

"Bonner puts out effort, but if he's not hitting his 3s, he serves very little purpose to us in this series."

I wrote that in the Game 1 recap. Luckily, Bonner hit 3 of his 4 3-point attempts. Nabbing 7 rebounds was nice, too. Getting production out of our starting "center" is critical.

"Keep an eye on Bowen, and who he guards, and if we use him to slow down somebody else at the expense of leaving Terry open."

As I thought might happen, Bowen was used as our cooler. I've had this theory about Bowen all year. He clearly can't compete for 35 minutes a night guarding the other team's elite scorer any more. Age has finally beaten him. But he still has the ability and the knowledge to work great defense in spurts. And part of Bowen's defensive brilliance is that he can guard just about every position effectively. We've seen him give Steve Nash fits. We've seen him take Okur out of games. I think Pop's use of him this year has been brilliant. He's our cooler. Someone on the other team gets hot, here comes Bowen to cool him off.

Bowen guarded Barea last night, and pretty much took him out of the game. Barea was trying to recapture the glory from Game 1, and really forced the issue. Bowen gave him no room and forced him into some bad decisions and turnovers. Sure, he hit a few shots. But he tried to do too much and Bowen shut him down.

But we also saw Bowen on Nowitzki, on Terry, and even a little on Howard. He can guard whoever is currently our biggest threat. That's a very versatile weapon to have.

"Keep an eye on our bench, and if we can get any more output from them."

Obviously, we got another great game from Bowen. But we also got a solid game from Udoka (7 boards, 1 stl, and plenty of disruption) and Gooden. Gooden especially played with a lot of energy and passion. It was great to see him own the Mavs on the low block and be our go to scorer with the second unit, especially when Mason, Jr. was running the point. In fact, in the first half, we were a +5 when Parker was out of the game. If we can extend or hold our lead when Parker goes to the bench in the first half, then we can afford to rest him longer and keep him fresher for the closing kick.

"Keep an eye on our defensive rebounding, and if we can limit the Mavs and their second chance point opportunities."

We crushed the Mavs on the boards, 44-28. We only allowed 5 offensive boards for a total of 8 second chance points. That is fantastic. Consequently, we got 9 offensive boards of our own, a category in which we usually suffer mightily. It was clear that rebounds were a primary focus of our team going into the game; let's hope we keep up the intensity.

"Keep an eye on if we change our overall Defensive schemes, especially on Dirk."

There was an overwhelming feeling after Game 1 that we didn't have bad schemes, just that we didn't execute them well enough. I didn't see too many changes defensively; just more effort, both mentally and physically. We finally looked like the Spurs of playoff runs past. The numbers speak for themselves.

I want to touch on one more thought about this game. By the numbers, Duncan had a more impressive night on Saturday. But I think last night's game was a much stronger performance from Duncan, and the Duncan we need going forward. Parker has proven time and again that he can carry the offense, most off of pick-and-roll and penetration. This means much less of Duncan in the low block. Which means two things: less physical pounding on Duncan's body; and more energy and effort from Duncan on the defensive end.

And the defensive end is where we need him the most, and probably for the rest of his career. We all know Duncan is the immovable object at the heart (literally) of our stifling D. He is probably the most clutch shot blocker of the last 15-20 years. He always seems to come up with a big block in the last 2 minutes of close games. But he can't afford to carry both the offensive load (like he did Saturday) and the defensive load. When we rely on him too much offensively, we suffer defensively, as in the opening game. But when Parker can run the offense, Tim can run the defense. And when that happens, we are an efficient, scary team, deadly on both ends of the court. Like last night.

And we need both. Defense wins championships. But to win championships, you need to win games along the way; and Parker's offense can win us games, just as a Duncan-anchored defense can win us championships.

Looking Ahead:

In the playoffs, too much can often be made of one game. After the first game, the Spurs were too old and too injured and our 12 year playoff run was at an end. Now we're the tested playoff veterans that know how to win in the postseason. We needed Game 2, and Dallas didn't. They wanted to win, sure; but in the face of our effort and energy, they more or less ceded the game to us.

Now we head to Dallas, where, much like the Mavs, we need to win at least one. I'm very confident that we can return to San Antonio for game 5 with a 2-2 tie in the series (though I would be ok with a 3-1 lead). Let's see what adjustments the Mavs make and how they feed off the home crowd. The Spurs aren't intimidated playing on the road, but the Mavs were a superlative home team this year.

I won't make a list of things to watch for. The key match-ups and questions still stand. But there's one thought I keep going back to that I'll leave you with: Dallas has proven that they can score on us; but we've also proven that we can stop Dallas when our defense is right. However, Dallas has not shown that it can stop our offense at all. Even in the first game, we put up nearly 100 points. If we keep our defense keyed in the rest of the series, can Dallas match our defensive intensity and slow down Parker and our effecient offense? We've proven our offense; it's time for Dallas to prove their defense.

Go Spurs Go.

Tony Parker's Team

The statline read 38 points, 4 rebounds and 8 assists in 33 minutes of game play. What it didn't say, but seemed perfectly clear last night, is that the 2008-2009 San Antonio Spurs are Tony Parker's team.

Forget all those cliches about winning as a team. Yes, there are five players on the court and 13 on the roster. But just as certain as we are that the Cavaliers are LeBron's team and the Lakers are Kobe's, so the Spurs are Tony's team.


"Trust me."
(AP Photo/Eric Gay)
We suspected as much back in November, when Parker scored a career-high 55 points against the Timberwolves. We knew almost for certain in March, when Parker dropped 42 against the Hawks, even with Manu Ginobili back in the lineup.

Parker said then:

"In San Antonio there are high expectations. Nobody cares if Manu is out for 30 games and Timmy is in and out. They want to see us in the top and that’s what we’re trying to do."

After witnessing Parker's stellar playing from the court that night, instead of the bench, Ginobili said that Parker, "managed the game from the opening tip to the last whistle."

Parker managed the game last night, too, starting by scoring the first five points for the Spurs, a four-foot jumper And-1 against Antoine Wright, followed by a layup. By the end of the first quarter, Parker had scored 19 and the Spurs led by 11. With 5 minutes left in the fourth, Parker left the game to a standing ovation and the Spurs leading 95-73.

If Parker believes I shouldn't care whether Manu is out or Timmy is playing well, then I trust him. All he cares about is winning, and I trust he'll do whatever it takes to win. I trust that Tony Parker's team will reclaim its home court advantage this Thursday in Dallas.

(Editor's notes: It looks like AP writer Jaime Aron stole some of my notes ("Parker’s evolution becoming obvious for Spurs")).

Someone Interviewed Dampier...

And he said some things that are perplexing.

If I considered myself the second best center in the league, perhaps I would call my shots a little differently. I'd say: "Next time Parker comes into the lane I'm swatting his shiznit to the border. That ball will be all up in the drug wars."

But no, Dampier threatens dirty play.

* * * * * * *
Game 2 was a joy to watch. I don't need the drama of a close game, thanks.

One thought on this quick post: Jason Terry's shoulder check was every bit the same or worse than Robert Horry's check two years ago. Yet because Parker didn't flop around like a bled-out trout causing a riot, nothing will happen. Horry was suspended, but Terry will be in the next game seeking out his next target to get all Rocky 3 on. His special move: the speedbag.