Would the NBA Continue to Thrive if More Teams Played Like the Spurs?

I thought that the answer would be an obvious yes, but some callers to sports talk radio in Philadelphia disagreed.  And that got me to thinking of a comment that Temple's Hall of Fame coach John Chaney once said about the NBA, "it's not about basketball anymore, it's about entertainment."

One caller said he wouldn't watch, because he goes to watch the superstars do their thing and that the Spurs' offense doesn't allow for that.  Initially, I scoffed at the point -- who wants to watch Allen Iverson go one on three and shoot seven for twenty one to get his twenty points and have his team be in the middle of the pack at best?  I didn't and wouldn't, but apparently many do (witness the hero's welcome Iverson received when the 76ers retired his number earlier this year).  And that gets to Chaney's point about the NBA's being about entertainment.

And that got me to thinking -- could LeBron James play in the Spurs' offense?  Could he win?  The answer -- given the construct of the verb "could" is an obvious yes, but that's not the right question.  The right question is, "would he?"

And there the answer gets difficult.  Because it raises other questions, such as, "do the Spurs do what they do because they don't have superstars, and what they do is a way to counteract that fact?"  Or, "would LeBron really want to or need to do that if he had a reasonable supporting cast, because he is so hard to guard?"

My answers to those three questions are as follows:

1.  Perhaps.
2.  Not really.
3.  Perhaps again.

LeBron might do it if it would guarantee him more rings.  But whether he's capable depends on whether he'd be as coachable as the three future Hall of Famers (Duncan, Ginobli and Parker) let themselves be (they also signed for less than the max).  My view is that James would let himself be coach if he respected the coach (and he'd respect Gregg Popovich) and if he had a reasonable supporting cast (and this year, in Miami, the spare parts that the Heat assembled wore out before the main engine ever did).  As for the second question, well, Duncan and Parker are stars, Duncan was a superstar and Kawhi Leonard's last two post-seasons suggest that he will be.  There are stars on the Spurs, but there are different stars every night.  And, yes, if Lebron were in the right situation he'd run the Spurs' offense.  And he'd enjoy it very much.

As for the overall question, I find it hard to understand fans who want to watch sequences where the superstar does a clear out and his four teammates stand to one side so he can go one-on-one with his defender.  Once I saw the 76ers run a three-man half-court weave consisting of Iverson, Andre Iguodala and Chris Webber, while two other teammates stood in the corner and watched.  What was so hard about that?  What was so innovative?  The key to the Spurs is that they play the "beautiful game" the way Barcelona and many other international football teams do.  They look for that extra pass to get a good luck, as opposed to having a superstar cough up the ball by trying to play Superman and dribble effectively between two defenders (lotsa luck with that in the NBA).  I, for one, would watch, even if this style might define a different kind of superstar.

One who wins games consistently.

That, by the way, is by no means a criticism of LeBron James.  He's a great player, perhaps the best in the game.  But what this series proved is that you can be the best in the game, but if you don't get consistent support, you still will not win.

Because involving five players each offensive series is smart basketball.

It's just funny that what Gregg Popovich has achieved is being lauded as so novel and innovative.

Whatever the case, it is a lot of fun to watch.