The Teams of the Great Centers Study #1 -- The '96 Spurs

If you swapped Boogie and Gay for '96 Admiral and Elliot, how many games would the Spurs have won?


  • Total voters
    8
  • Poll closed .

Bricklayer

Don't Make Me Use The Bat
#1
Welcome to what is going to be an ongoing series of threads in the next few weeks. Originally much of this information was being compiled for what was going to be one mega thread, but it had grown so long and so involved with so many names tossed about that I decided it was almost counterproductive. My own eyes were rolling up in my head reading through it, and I couldn't imagine posters wading through so much material at once. So I decided to break it down into a lengthy series of team by team studies.

Somewhat atypically for this moment in Kings history, these threads are largely optimistic (or at least they might be if management gets a clue and reassesses after this debacle). History can be a great teacher, without it you are adrift. And what the history of The Teams of the Great Centers shows is that we are not as far away as so many signs say we are.

The great difficulty here of course is that we were less far away 4 months ago, and so many management signs point to them ignorantly taking us further away, not closer. But the fact remains, as this ongoing series of studies will show, that rosterwise there is a much smaller gap between these Kings and some very successful big man lead teams of the past than you might think. Its close enough that somebody who knew what they were doing might still turn this.

So as a nod to the pace-fascinated amateurs running our show, I will begin with the paciest big center oriented team I could remember:

Study #1 -- The 1995-96 Spurs
Team Record: 59-23 (Lost in Second Round to Utah)
Coach: Bob Hill
Pace: 8th of 29
Off Rating: 9th of 29
Def Rating: 3rd of 29

A) Roster and Roles
C - David Robinson (#1 option)
PF - random platoon of SF/PF Charles Smith, C Will Perdue, PF JR Reid, SF Chuck Person, C Greg Anderson
SF - Sean Elliot (#2 option)
SG - Vinny Del Negro (shooter/ballhandler/glue)
PG - Avery Johnson (distributor)

B) Frontcourt
During Admiral's final year as The Man before his injury/Duncan drafting, the Spurs frontcourt structure was almost identical to ours. This was the year after they let Rodman go, and so they scrambled randomly at PF with aging and ill fitted roleplayers. Charles Smith was a tweener and started 30 games. Will Perdue a pure rebounding fool of a center and started 22. Person at that point was just an aging fat SF they threw out there as a "stretch 4" for a handful of games (started 16, but 5 of those were at SF when Elliot was out). JR Reid and Cadillac Anderson were the two true PF/Cs, both aging and middling and largely coming off the bench.

Consider these numbers:
'96 Admiral: 36.8min 25.0pts (.589TS%) 12.2reb 3.0ast 1.4stl 3.3blk 2.3TO
'15 Cousins: 33.9min 23.7pts (.551TS%) 12.3reb 3.2ast 1.4stl 1.6blk 4.2TO

'96 Elliot: 37.7min 20.0pts (.585TS%) 5.1reb 2.7ast 0.9stl 0.4blk 2.6TO
'15 RGay: 35.5min 20.7pts (.552TS%) 5.9reb 3.7ast 1.0stl 0.6blk 2.7TO

With the only real gap being efficiency (and Admiral's all time defense/shotblocking). Now note this as far as future prospects:
Cuz in November: .606TS% 3.6TO
Cuz under Karl: .581TS% 3.7TO
Rudy under Karl: .581TS%

Rudy has been around long enough you can't be sure if the efficiency will hold, and as will be noted below a big reason for the "efficiency" gap is simply that Elliot was a 3pt shooter, something we lack. But generally signs point to the possibility that the efficiency gap between those players may close right up, and the production is already substantially equal.

C) Backcourt
The backcourt structure was obviously much different -- the closest comparison with out current roster might be starting a younger Andre Miller and a better Nik Stauskas -- but talentwise there it wasn't much. A second tier pure distributor with a shaky jumpshot, and a second tier offensive greaseman, who could help with the ballhandling/assisting (and indeed run some backup PG) and along with Elliot provide shooting. Neither guy ever averaged 15ppg or was a remote threat to make an All Star game. They played roles. Collison is as good as either guy, but different. Those Spurs wanted lots of passing and ballhandling, and really accurate shooting from their SG/SF. Collison is more scorer, a different style PG for a different time.

Note however, the backup PG was not a rookie or an out of control scorer -- it was Doc Rivers. A near done Doc Rivers, but still, more experience, floor generalship and defense. Going forward, if he has anything left, Miller would be our closest comparison.

D) Main Rotation Roster Comparison
C David Robinson (Age: 30 Exp: 6yrs) = DeMarcus Cousins (Age: 24 Exp: 4yrs)
PF/SF Charles Smith (Age: 30 Exp: 7yrs) = Jason Thompson (Age: 28 Exp: 6yrs)
SF Sean Elliot (Age: 27 Exp: 6yrs) = Rudy Gay (Age: 28 Exp: 8yrs)
SG/PG Vinny Del Negro (Age: 29 Exp: 5yrs) = Ben McLemore (Age: 21 Exp: 1yr)
PG Avery Johnson (Age: 30 Exp: 7yrs) = Darren Collison (Age: 27 Exp: 5yrs)
SF Chuck Person (Age: 31 Exp: 9yrs) = Derrick Williams (Age: 23 Exp: 3yrs)
PF/C JR Reid (Age: 27 Exp: 6yrs) = Carl Landry (Age: 31 Exp: 7yrs)
C Will Perdue (Age: 30 Exp: 7yrs) = Omri Casspi (Age: 26 Exp: 5yrs)
PG Doc Rivers (Age: 34 Exp: 12yrs) = Sessions (Age:28) McCallum(Age:23) Miller (Age:38)

E) 1995-96 Spurs Main Rotation Stats (with highlighted things we lack)
Robinson 82gms 36.8min 25.0pts (,516 .333 .761) 12.2reb 3.0ast 1.4stl 3.3blk 2.3TO
SeanElliot 77gms 37.7min 20.0pts (.466 .411 .771) 5.1reb 2.7ast 0.9stl 0.4blk 2.6TO
Del Negro 82gms 33.7min 14.5pts (.497 .380 .832) 3.3reb 3.8ast 1.0stl 0.1blk 1.2TO
AJohnson 82gms 37.6min 13.1pts (.494 .194 .721) 2.5reb 9.6ast 1.5stl 0.3blk 2.4TO
ChPerson 80gms 26.6min 10.9pts (.437 .410 .644) 5.2reb 1.3ast 0.6stl 0.3blk 1.1TO
ChaSmith 30gms 35.8min 9.6pts (.458 .000 .767) 6.3reb 1.1ast 1.0stl 0.9blk 1.4TO
J.R. Reid 32gms 20.1min 6.5pts (.439 .000 .736) 5.1reb 2.7ast 0.9stl 0.4blk 2.6TO
W Perdue 80gms 17.5min 5.2pts (.523 .000 .536) 6.1reb 0.4ast 0.4stl 0.9blk 1.1TO
DocRivers 78gms 15.8min 4.0pts (.372 .343 .750) 1.8reb 1.6ast 0.9stl 0.3blk 0.7TO

Conclusion: So How Did They Win 59 While We'll Win Sub-30?
1) DEFENSE. DEFENSE! Do you hear me Vivek? D-E-F-E-N-S-E!!! The Spurs were 3rd in the NBA in Defensive Rating that year, anchored of course by a DPOY candidate in Admiral. Nobody else was great, but they had a lot of good defenders, and lots of vets who'd come out of defensive systems and would give you an effort (nearly every player on that roster had at one point learned defense first under Larry Brown, Pat Riley or Phil Jackson). We have no DPOY candidate (although Boogie has come a long way and is Top 10 in DPRAM this season (defensive impact rating)) and thus Boogie will would need more help than Admiral. Instead he has less right now. More kids, fewer vets out of defensive systems. Not a single other consistently strong defender in the rotation. Our Defensive Rating this year is 4th in the NBA...from the bottom (27th overall). And its dead last since Malone was ushered out.

2) Continuity: This was 7 years deep into the Spurs 90s era playoff run. Admiral and elliot had been together from the beginning. Vinny had been there 4 years. This was Avery's 3rd stint with the team. He'd been there on and off since 1989. Winning and plays the Spurs way was deeply ingrained by that point. They hadn't missed the playoffs since the Reagan years.

3) Health: And this was just luck, but that Spurs team played a short rotation, and rode its main very effective guns absolutely as far as they could, Of the starting rotation, only the PF situation was a mess. 7 of the 9 men in its main rotation played 77 or more games. 5 of them played 80 or more games. 3 starters (Admiral, Vinny, and Avery) played in all 82 games. And they all played big minutes. Admiral 36.8min, Avery 37.6min, Elliot 37,7min, Vinny 33.7min. Nor did they simulate a coaching "injury" and turn the season long coaching into a platoon. Bob Hill was there for all 82 games as well.

4) Experience: This will be a very common theme as we go through the various great center teams of the past. The Spurs were an older and more experienced crew than ours -- most playoff teams are. They had no positions turned over to youth. No guys figuring the league out. And more than just playoff veterans, they were almost all deep playoff run veterans, either with the Spurs or with the Bulls, the Knicks, the Pacers. Out of our main rotation guys half of them haven't ever even seen the playoffs. The one who have have mostly seen the first round. nobody has been further than the 2nd. Its a huge gulf in experience/jsut knowing how to play.


When you look at the Spurs roster, the main pieces it was built around, you could conclude they were more talented than we were. But not twice as many wins more talented. The seperators between their 59win team and our 28ish win team are not the necessity of scoring another superstar, or a #1pick. They are smaller things, more practical and doable things.
 

kingsboi

Hall of Famer
#2
that's the thing with the Spurs organization....they value defense and it all starts from the top of the chain down to the players. I still think you should make a thread about teams Karl inherited and let's see what he had to work with compared to this season.
 
#3
I've been bitching about it for YEARS.

The Kings of the past 10 years have completely cheapened out and not paid for veteran talent and experience.
They've thrown out almost all NBA history, and chosen to obsess over OKC's building of a playoff team through the draft.
It takes VETS to win in the playoffs, not inexperienced, unproven youngsters who repeatedly crumble any time the game gets tight (4th quarter of close, hard-fought games).

Until this Kings team gets experienced, proven vets on the roster, they will continue to lose close games.
That Spurs team only had 2 guys under 29 years old (and they were both 27).
When Carl f-ing Landry is our most experienced, most playoff-tested vet, you know how utterly inexperienced we are.

I'm curious how many previous playoff games that Spurs Top 8 roster each had.
 
#5
Again, the big issue with comparing Cuz to these all-time greats is Cuz doesn't hold a candle to these guys defensively. Offensively, he's as close as someone as come in a long-time to matching them, but his play on the other end is a big stopper. And it's hell of a lot easier to have a great defensive team anchored by a legendary defensive big man like a Drob or Ewing.

This isn't a knock on Cuz at all as he's gotten LOADS better the past few years (although the effort on the defensive end isn't always there). But he just isn't going to have the level of impact these C's had on defense, which was the primary caveat for these teams success defensively.
 
#6
If everyone on the roster gave as much effort as Cousins on both ends of the floor, you might find the conversation a little different.

Unless you believe DWill lacks the athletic ability to do so.
 
#8
Actually, yes it does.


You talk about individual defense, yet you neglect everyone else's role in the game. Would Duncan be as great if Bowen simply pulled an Ole every night?



Think about who Cousins has had as supporting cast members.
 
#9
Actually, yes it does.


You talk about individual defense, yet you neglect everyone else's role in the game. Would Duncan be as great if Bowen simply pulled an Ole every night?



Think about who Cousins has had as supporting cast members.


Yes he would. There are maybe 2 players ever who had a bigger defensive impact than Duncan did individually. And even the biggest Duncan doubters wouldn't have him lower than 5. Of course he had help on the perimeter with great defenders like Bowen and top tier coaching/system, but those dominant Spurs defensive squads started with D-Rob and eventually Duncan.

It's not an insult to Cuz to say he doesn't have near the defensive impact that guys like Duncan, Drob, Ewing, Moses had for their teams. He just doesn't. Of course we need better defensive talent, but we can't just ignore the fact that the teams in these comparisons we're heavily carried defensively by the greatness of these C's on that end.

Again, this isn't to say Cuz is a bad defensive player. He's one of the few on this team who are actually decent on that end. He lacks effort SOME of the time, but he's become a pretty dominant man defender the past two seasons. But he's not an anchor and he's often slow on rotations, which is the most important aspect of protecting the paint. And that's why comparing him to all-time great C's falls short.