The Spurs made a surprising change to their starting lineup on Thursday, but it shouldn’t be much of a surprise: Popovich’s signature style is not one tangible thing, but is instead adaptability. He’s flexible and has vastly changed his defensive and offensive philosophies over the years based on his personnel and the trends and strengths of the league.
After leading the first team in NBA history with no one over 30 minutes, the Spurs are a tested group and Popovich has already experimented with different lineups.
However, with the 2012 loss still looming, the basketball world is still wondering if the full strength Ibaka-Thunder are too much for the Spurs. Was the Ibaka problem solved or was this a one game blip? And what was the Ibaka problem?
The Ibaka Problem
While Oklahoma City has multiple plus defenders in the frontcourt, Ibaka is a singular talent in blocking shots and with his athleticism. But does he make an appreciable difference in how the Spurs shoot?
Using NBAWOWY.com to query shots by distances, San Antonio’s proportion of shots don’t change – they have slightly more shots inside but less in the corners. However, their accuracy plummets by nearly 8 percentage points. That is Ibaka’s presence around the rim, which mostly explains why San Antonio’s offensive rating is 106.5 points per 100 possessions when Ibaka is on the court and 108.0 when he’s off.
Note: if you’re worried the stats have too much garbage time, this only includes possessions when both Westbrook and Durant are on the court. I also checked the statistics overall without regard to Westborok and Durant, and they’re roughly the same. Additionally, this is with both the regular season and playoffs for a greater sample size.
San Antonio’s offense is predicated on pinpointing the most important areas to score: the basket and beyond the arc. They rely on skill and execution, not brute athleticism, and Ibaka’s terrorizing, shot-blocking defense is a good counter. He’s fast enough to race ahead of Popovich’s offense. But that’s not why Oklahoma City has found so much success with Ibaka back.
The Secret to Oklahoma’s Success with Ibaka: the Offense
Even coming off a loss, Oklahoma has been much better with Serge Ibaka back, and it’s been their brilliant offense.
In their first two games of the series, their offensive rating has been 97.2, which is outright dreadful. Since then, it’s been 107.8 – versus a good defense like the Spurs, that’s not decent but still not spectacular. But the difference is what’s important. The Thunder’s offense stalled without him; it wasn’t just the rim protection.
When you query the results for lineups with and without Ibaka all year, regular season and playoffs versus the Spurs, it’s the same (Durant and Westbrook are in every lineup for a fair comparison): a rating of 113.7 versus 108.5.
No one expected the Thunder to whither offensively without Ibaka, but one can build a solid theory about his importance.
The minutes are mostly replaced by Steven Adams and Perry Jones. Adams is a pest, but he has no range. The Ibaka at center lineups are devastating; they missed those. Perry Jones is all athletic promise and limbs – and he clogs their offense. Nick Collison, oddly enough, didn’t have an increase in playing time. But Collison as the replacement isn’t ideal in their starting lineup because the team is being obstinate with two of their other starters. Perkins is one of the worst offensive players who regularly starts in modern league history, and Sefolosha without a three-point shot is pretty much useless, which is death for a shooting guard. Collison’s a great role player, but he shouldn’t be next to two non-entities on offense.
Ibaka is going through the Bosh-transformation becoming a three-point shooter, and this is more valuable than most people think. The rarity of this skill is compounded with his shot-blocking prowess.
The list of people who hit both those marks is very short – if you’re strict about the stats, it’s basically just Raef LaFrentz and Eddie Griffin. Westbrook’s dangerous drives to the basket are less valuable when he has no shooters to pass it to, and Durant is crowded with non-threats around him. Ibaka’s a safety valve and one of the best power forward shooters. He’s needed, especially when they insist on starting Perkins and Sefolosha.
Was Bonner the Solution?
Per research I’ve done, NBA lineups are much more successful when one of the big men has an outside shot.
Mechanically, what this does is draw out the more valuable interior defenders out to the perimeter. So when Bonner plays with Duncan, it leaves Ibaka no choice but to defend Bonner because his post defense on Duncan is mediocre and Perkins (or Adams) is too slow-footed to guard the outside line.
What’s funny about Bonner starting is that although they won the game, he didn’t play well. He missed both of his three-pointers; meanwhile, Diaw made both of his and the Spurs blew them away when he was on the court.
More accurately, the key was Splitter not sharing any time with Duncan on the court, as instead they always had four three-point shooters on the court. The Spurs have worked hard to integrate Splitter into their starting lineup, but Popovich emphasized flexibility this season after narrowly losing a title to a Miami team with smallball.
The larger factor here is probably a bit of regression to the mean after two big Thunder wins. You can label this psychology if you want.
Ibaka excited and inspired his teammates, and given they were at home the adrenaline was peaking. They were not going to continue to corral San Antonio’s offense like they were a high lottery team.
The question now isn’t will Bonner start again. Rather, the question is will Splitter share no time with Duncan. The Spurs may have found their edge in this wild series, carefully planning against Ibaka. An outsider would ask if Oklahoma City will respond with a move of their own, but basketball fans know how inflexible the team is with its lineup.
For Popovich, this state of flux is his identity.
