Are the Spurs about to end "hero ball" ?

[Dr.J4ever]

Wow

[Dr.J4ever]

Nothing punctuates my point more than this championship clincher. Parker starts cold in the 1st half, but his backup, Mills, goes berserk.

Team ball SA are WORLD CHAMPIONS AGAIN!!!!

[NBASTATMAN]

From Jordan, to Kobe, to Lebron, and now to KD, the era of "hero ball" reigns in the NBA. You need multiple superstars to win a title.

If the Spurs win the title this year, a whole generation of young NBA fans will know that a great team will always endure over a team of great individuals. Yes, the Spurs have 1 superstar in Parker(does anyone still consider Duncan or Manu superstars), but they are defined by their depth and team play more than anything else.

There have been exceptions in NBA history, perhaps when Dirk led a good Mavs team over the "hero ball" offense of the Heat. So a resounding Spurs win this year will solidify team ball over "hero ball" once again. Remember also the Spurs should have won the title last year, if not for a a fluke play by the Heat.

Is the NBA about to make another key turn in it's history?

Now that sTERN has left I hope no more SuperStars getting preferential treatment...

[Dr.J4ever]

From ESPN's Insider:

Hyper-efficient offense

We start where the Spurs' victory began: at the offensive end of the floor. With its ball movement and outside shooting, San Antonio put on a clinic at times, particularly in the first half of Game 3. The Spurs ended up with a 124.0 offensive rating for the series, the best by any team in a Finals dating back to 1978 (the first year for which Basketball-Reference.com has turnovers by series).

San Antonio's .528 shooting percentage was an NBA Finals record, but that doesn't tell the whole story of how well the Spurs shot the ball. They made 55 3-pointers -- more than any team has ever made in a Finals of fewer than seven games -- and shot them at a 46.6 percent clip.

Effective field goal percentage, which accounts for the additional value of 3s by treating them as 1.5 field goals, does a better job of capturing San Antonio's efficient shooting. The Spurs' 60.4 percent mark blew away the previous record (55.5 percent by the 2002 Lakers).

My take:

It is undeniable. This SA team in the Finals is the best offensive team I've ever seen, and I've been watching the NBA since 1980. Lots of good offensive teams in 80s too, but many of those offenses would struggle against today's defensive rule changes. Different times, different eras.

Let's focus on the Spurs. Have the Spurs blazed the trail and shown the light that 5 MAN TEAM BASKETBALL on OFFENSE can work? For years, NBA teams have always believed you need 2 or 3 guys to score and do most of the work on offense. You make a couple of passes or no passes, and you're main guy takes the shot. It doesn't matter if it's contested, as long as you're "hero" takes the shot. The "alpha guy" should take the shot, no matter what.

The Spurs have shown teams that rely on "hero ball", or superstar oriented team basketball, will be less efficient than a team that plays 5 man offense.
After all, the Spurs have shown that an open shot by Danny Greeen or Patty Mills will be a more efficient shot than a contested 3 by James or a contested drive by Wade. It is counter intuitive to most NBA fans, but Coach Pop has adjusted and has kept the Spurs relevant by having an international oriented offensive game plan.

The Spurs passing game is the best I've ever seen also. It's not just total assist, but the number of passes per possession, "hockey assists" or passes that lead to assist passes that really tell the tale when it comes to team basketball.

I believe there are many NBA teams that can duplicate the Spurs system, contrary to what others might think. I've always believed that most NBA players can play good basketball if given the right opportunity in the right system. When people say, "we don't have a bench" or "our players surrounding our superstar suck", it's because these players aren't given the right opportunity to shine. I mean, Diaw was trash until Pop signed him and discovered what he can do.

In sports. whether it's the NFL or the NBA, people are looking for trends. Have the Spurs set the latest trend? Real team basketball where 5 players on offense can each take the best shot possible at anytime?

We will still need the superstars, but hopefully our collective basketball IQs get better and recognize that a real team working in concert will always beat a team of talented individuals who aren't as harmonious.

[Dr.J4ever]

From ESPN's Insider:

Hyper-efficient offense

We start where the Spurs' victory began: at the offensive end of the floor. With its ball movement and outside shooting, San Antonio put on a clinic at times, particularly in the first half of Game 3. The Spurs ended up with a 124.0 offensive rating for the series, the best by any team in a Finals dating back to 1978 (the first year for which Basketball-Reference.com has turnovers by series).

San Antonio's .528 shooting percentage was an NBA Finals record, but that doesn't tell the whole story of how well the Spurs shot the ball. They made 55 3-pointers -- more than any team has ever made in a Finals of fewer than seven games -- and shot them at a 46.6 percent clip.

Effective field goal percentage, which accounts for the additional value of 3s by treating them as 1.5 field goals, does a better job of capturing San Antonio's efficient shooting. The Spurs' 60.4 percent mark blew away the previous record (55.5 percent by the 2002 Lakers).

My take:

It is undeniable. This SA team in the Finals is the best offensive team I've ever seen, and I've been watching the NBA since 1980. Lots of good offensive teams in 80s too, but many of those offenses would struggle against today's defensive rule changes. Different times, different eras.

Let's focus on the Spurs. Have the Spurs blazed the trail and shown the light that 5 MAN TEAM BASKETBALL on OFFENSE can work? For years, NBA teams have always believed you need 2 or 3 guys to score and do most of the work on offense. You make a couple of passes or no passes, and you're main guy takes the shot. It doesn't matter if it's contested, as long as you're "hero" takes the shot. The "alpha guy" should take the shot, no matter what.

The Spurs have shown teams that rely on "hero ball", or superstar oriented team basketball, will be less efficient than a team that plays 5 man offense.
After all, the Spurs have shown that an open shot by Danny Greeen or Patty Mills will be a more efficient shot than a contested 3 by James or a contested drive by Wade. It is counter intuitive to most NBA fans, but Coach Pop has adjusted and has kept the Spurs relevant by having an international oriented offensive game plan.

The Spurs passing game is the best I've ever seen also. It's not just total assist, but the number of passes per possession, "hockey assists" or passes that lead to assist passes that really tell the tale when it comes to team basketball.

I believe there are many NBA teams that can duplicate the Spurs system, contrary to what others might think. I've always believed that most NBA players can play good basketball if given the right opportunity in the right system. When people say, "we don't have a bench" or "our players surrounding our superstar suck", it's because these players aren't given the right opportunity to shine. I mean, Diaw was trash until Pop signed him and discovered what he can do.

In sports. whether it's the NFL or the NBA, people are looking for trends. Have the Spurs set the latest trend? Real team basketball where 5 players on offense can each take the best shot possible at anytime?

We will still need the superstars, but hopefully our collective basketball IQs get better and recognize that a real team working in concert will always beat a team of talented individuals who aren't as harmonious.

Other writers like the SI.com's Michael Rosenberg has an article very similar to what I am saying in this thread:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/nba...le-whats-next/

For years, people talk about "fundamental basketball", and then do the exact opposite on the court. People like to give it lip service, but deep down no one really believed that a team playing in a "democratic" system, not the superstar oriented "hero ball" concept, could really win an NBA Title.

Sure, equal opportunity offenses could win in the NCAA or highschool, but not in the pros. We all believed that. Along with Detroit in 2004, and now the Spurs, basically in back to back years(they really won last year save a lucky play by Miami), the Spurs have proven that 5 man team basketball beats superstar oriented ball led by the Heat.

Some posts here mistakenly think it's about assists or just passing. Superstar oriented teams pass it too, but "hero ball" or "alpha beta" mentality is deeply ingrained in their offenses, in reality. That is not real team ball. We now know what real team ball looks like, if you watched the Finals.

The Spurs have just dominated maybe the greatest superstar oriented team of our generation. I submit, in sports, we know league's copy what works best. You will start to see more and more teams use the Spurs formula.

I will be watching for it.

[DonDadda59]

The Atlanta Hawks.

[Dr.J4ever]

The Atlanta Hawks.

Almost forgot about this thread ...Anyway what a performance by James tonight. We are witnessing one of the great players in history and if you aren't impressed, then you're not a true fan.

Yep, watching these playoffs will show that "hero ball" is not dead, but it's evolving, to be sure. You're right about the Hawks, and Magic just mentioned on Twitter that Atlanta is the only team left standing without a superstar, and it showed.

We are actually having this debate in Philly right now. As you know, Hinkie is rebuilding, and we are hoping to build around what our CEO recently mentioned, on "Ferraris in our garage" right now. Embiid, Noel, Saric, and our #3 pick(Russel or Mudiay). I fully support this.

However, others have commented that our tanking wasn't really worth it pointing to teams like Atlanta that has just won 60 games. After all, the Hawks have assembled a team with borderline stars/average but smart players/scrubs and good coaching. The "pro-plan" people like me have countered that Atlanta isn't likely to win a title without a superstar.

So yes, I see the NBA evolving, but I do still see the necessity of stars or superstar players to win a title. I realize it's easy to sit back and analyze that "hero ball" is completely dead, but push comes to shove and if it's my team we're talking about, I want those superstars on my team.

[DonDadda59]

Well, it was a fun hero-less era while it lasted.