Around the quarter-season mark, we took a look at the numbers that explained the Spurs’ then-surprising success. The goal was to look at stats that showed what the Silver and Black were doing well early, but some readers suggested a follow-up article near the halfway mark of the season to see if the trends held.
While going back to the same four stats from the original post, it was somewhat surprising to see that they still reflect some of the Spurs’ biggest strengths. It seems like it wasn’t a coincidence or an anomaly that they did well in those areas to start the season, but the first signs of the identity they were building. So let’s look at the numbers that explain the type of team San Antonio has built.
51.5 - Total rebound percentage
(Previously, 52.3 Total Rebound Percentage)
The Spurs have been an elite rebounding team all season long. Back in late November, they ranked fourth in the league in total rebound percentage, and in late January, they rank fifth, behind the Rockets, Hornets, Pistons, and Knicks. Cleaning the glass seems to be a priority, and San Antonio is among the best in the league at it.
As mentioned in the previous article, the good Spurs teams of the past have generally been great at defensive rebounding, and that’s a tradition Mitch Johnson has continued. The Silver and Black rank second behind only the Hornets in getting opponent misses in the entire league. Victor Wembanyama is a major reason why. He’s not the best at boxouts, but Wemby ranks third in the league in defensive rebounds per game and is first in defensive rebound percentage among players who have suited up for at least 20 games. His rebounding range is huge, and the team makes sure others put bodies on potential offensive rebounders.
Where the Spurs have not been as effective is in offensive rebounding. They ranked 12th in the league back in late January and now rank 15th. The drop is explained by their ranking 19th in offensive rebounding since Thanksgiving. They were seventh in second-chance points then and have ranked 15th since. There are several reasons for it. Some Luke Kornet absences have hurt them. Part of it is Keldon Johnson not being as shockingly prolific on the offensive glass lately as he was earlier. There’s also the fact that opponents now expect the Spurs to crash the glass and protect against it.
While being elite on both would be great, as long as the Spurs remain elite at preventing offensive boards from opponents, they should have a shot at controlling the possession game, which is all that matters.
11.1 - Opponent attempts from midrange per game
(Previously, 11.5 opponent attempts from midrange per game)
Another trend that continues from the past great Spurs teams is their proclivity to allow midrange jumpers as a way to protect the paint and the three-point line. San Antonio is still forcing opponents to take the most midrange shots in the league. The field goal percentage allowed on those looks is still fairly high, but not prohibitively so, at 41.9 percent.
The strategy has worked when it comes to preventing shots at the rim. The Spurs allow the 11th fewest shots in the restricted area and rank sixth in opponent field goal percentage allowed in that range despite missing Victor Wembanyama and Luke Kornet at times. That said, those absences have affected them, as they have significantly fallen down the ranks since Thanksgiving, which shouldn’t be surprising to anyone who has seen some of the lineups they have trotted out recently. Still, the Silver and Black have been among the best at not sending opponents to the free-throw line throughout the year, which is related to making them jump shooters.
Where things have not been progressing well is in the opponent’s three-point shooting department. The Spurs were allowing a lot of corner threes in their first month and continue to allow a ton of them now. The scheme, which places Wemby as the low man guarding a corner shooter, often results in open looks for his guy. It’s not all bad, though. The Thunder, the best defense in the league, allows the most corner threes, so it’s clearly not a death sentence to give up those looks, as long as the right shooters are taking them. The Spurs’ opponents rank in the bottom five in the NBA in corner three-point percentage, which might mean the Silver and Black are getting lucky, but also that they know who to leave open.
As long as the Spurs force their opponents to be jump shooters, which should not be hard considering the quality of their rim protectors, they should be fine, even if they allow corner shots that occasionally hurt them. Still, cleaning up their rotations would make them an even more formidable defensive team.
3.0 - Fastbreak points differential
(Previously, 6.6 Fastbreak point differential)
Although not by as many points, the Spurs are still getting more transition buckets than their opponents. They do it despite playing at an average pace and ranking in the bottom half of the league in steals, which normally lead to live-ball turnovers that turn into fastbreak opportunities.
The positive number is a good sign, but there have been some notable changes in where the Spurs rank in several related categories. San Antonio has played at a significantly higher pace since the last check-in. At Thanksgiving, they ranked 26th in possessions per game. Since then, they’ve ranked 12th. Playing faster is not necessarily a bad thing, and it seems to be encouraged by the coaching staff, but it hasn’t resulted in more fastbreak points. The good news is that turnover percentage has also decreased significantly lately, even with the increased pace, so while pushing the ball up court has not gotten San Antonio more fastbreak points, it has not turned them into a sloppy team either.
That said, the number of opponent fastbreak points has climbed. The Spurs don’t allow that many, with only eight other teams allowing fewer, but they ranked first in the league at Thanksgiving despite having a much higher turnover percentage. Curiously, San Antonio still allows few points coming directly off steals, according to PBPstats.com. They also defend the break well after made shots, which is not surprising. The issue seems to come from a combination of opponent buckets after missed threes and shots at the rim, plus a few more points allowed off live-ball turnovers.
San Antonio is still winning the battle in transition, which is great news. But this might be an area to monitor going forward, because they don’t have as big an edge as they used to.
66.6% - Win percentage in clutch games
(Previously, 70 percent win percentage in clutch games)
Despite a couple of painful close losses, often preceded by a comeback, the Spurs remain one of the best clutch teams in the league, tying the Thunder at fourth with a 66.6 percent win percentage in games that come down to the wire. It’s an impressive season-long achievement for a young team that has seen its closers sidelined at times due to injury.
The exciting news is that San Antonio hasn’t been coasting on its early success. Since Thanksgiving, the Silver and Black are 9-5 on games in which the lead is five points or fewer in the last five minutes of the game, the fourth-best mark in the league, trailing only the Lakers, Magic, and Nuggets. In that stretch, they have shot surprisingly well on threes (39.5 percent) and have barely turned it over. Their numbers have not been as tidy in the last two minutes of games when they are ahead or behind by three points or fewer, but they are still 8-4 in those situations, the fourth-best mark in the league in the stretch.
The Spurs don’t often run interesting plays in close games, relying on the scoring ability of their stars Victor Wembanyama and De’Aaron Fox, who both rank in the top 20 in clutch points per game. It doesn’t make for the most exciting viewing experience, especially for those who remember the set pieces the Beautiful Game Spurs used to run late in games, but it’s hard to argue against the results. Hopefully, as time passes, Mitch Johnson will add more variety to his clutch offense, but for now, it seems that giving the ball to his closers is a good strategy that reduces turnovers and gets more wins than losses.