Spurs Insider Podcast, 2026-02-25 05:13:00
专栏作家迈克·芬格 (Mike Finger) 与随队记者杰夫·麦克唐纳 (Jeff McDonald) 和汤姆·奥斯本 (Tom Orsborn) 共同探讨了马刺队战胜底特律活塞队以及他们目前取得的九连胜。此外，马刺队和活塞队会在 NBA 总决赛中相遇吗？马刺队会一直留在奥斯汀打球吗？这些话题以及更多内容，尽在本周的《马刺知情人》(Spurs Insider) 播客。
推荐阅读：
德文·瓦塞尔砍下 28 分领衔马刺战胜活塞的 3 点启示
以下是播客的文字记录：
[音乐响起]
迈克·芬格 (Mike Finger)：这里是来自北美各地顶级机密网络的安全广播，欢迎收听《马刺知情人》——“他们还会再输球吗”特辑。我是迈克·芬格，身边依然是《圣安东尼奥快报》的马刺随队记者汤姆·奥斯本 (Tom Orsborn) 和杰夫·麦克唐纳 (Jeff McDonald)。汤姆，我要以本期标题中的问题开始：他们还会再输球吗？圣安东尼奥马刺队，这支本土球队，目前高居西部联盟第二且势头正盛。
汤姆·奥斯本 (Tom Orsborn)：好吧，我对连胜曾持怀疑态度。他们之前打了很多伤兵满营的球队，我以为那是“昙花一现”，但昨晚在底特律，他们确实通过了考验。所以，是的，他们还会再输吗？我们要一直工作到六月（总决赛）吗？这是个问题。我注意到有人写道，这可能是 NBA 总决赛的预演。
迈克·芬格：如果马刺和活塞在总决赛相遇，虽然我还是要公开表示这极度不可能……但汤姆，我们要录一集播客，这只是个预告，会让听众们感到心痒。我想讲讲“大秀”(Big Show) 的故事，讲讲那件 T 恤，讲讲上一次马刺和活塞在总决赛相遇时那篇刊登在 A1 版面的故事。那是《快报》历史上的一段传奇。如果真的发生了，那是值得期待的事情，但概率可能不大。在我们变得愤世嫉俗和消极之前，是时候欢迎杰夫·麦克唐纳 (Jeff McDonald) 加入播客了。
杰夫·麦克唐纳 (Jeff McDonald)：我正想反驳。我刚才正想问你，你说了“极度不可能”吗？我觉得没到那个地步。
迈克·芬格：你是说马刺和活塞在 2026 年 NBA 总决赛相遇？
杰夫·麦克唐纳：我想这取决于我们如何定义这些词，但我不会说“极度不可能”。
迈克·芬格：我会说概率低于 5%。
杰夫·麦克唐纳：我不知道，我没法给每件事都定个百分比，但以目前的表现，我能预见到这两支球队都有进入总决赛的潜力。我不是说这极具可能性，甚至不是说很有可能，但那个形容词“极度”确实让我有点意外。
迈克·芬格：我认为是极度不可能。杰夫，你是个博彩达人，上周在奥斯汀的穆迪中心你就表现出来了。
杰夫·麦克唐纳：我不是博彩达人。
迈克·芬格：你当时一直在研究让分盘，还在赛前询问林迪·沃特斯 (Lindy Waters) 的出场情况，好去安抚 FanDuel（博彩平台）的彩民。所以我得问你，我也不是博彩迷，博彩很糟糕。千万不要赌球，那很可怕。但我说的 5% 的意思是，如果是 19 赔 1，你会赌 1 美元——或者对不起，你会赌 19 美元赢 1 美元吗——不。你会赌 1 美元赢 19 美元马刺和活塞在总决赛相遇吗？
杰夫·麦克唐纳：当然。当然可以。就 1 美元。
迈克·芬格：明白了。不管怎样，我认为马刺表现得很棒。他们在每一期《马刺知情人》中都证明了质疑者是错误的。似乎我们总是低估了他们。活塞队在应对人们对底特律的预期方面也做得很好。这两支球队都提前完成了重建目标。他们正利用当前 NBA 联盟中形成的这种均势局面（除了同样经历过不少挣扎的俄克拉荷马城雷霆之外）。所以也许可以争论的是，如果不是现在，活塞或马刺这样的球队什么时候才能向总决赛发起冲击呢？
但两支球队同时打进总决赛似乎极度不可能。原因正如我们反反复复强调的那样——凯德·坎宁安 (Cade Cunningham) 领衔的活塞总共只打过一次季后赛系列赛。维克托·文班亚马 (Victor Wembanyama) 领衔的圣安东尼奥马刺还没打过季后赛。斯蒂芬·卡斯尔 (Stephon Castle) 从没打过季后赛，凯尔登·约翰逊 (Keldon Johnson) 和德文·瓦塞尔 (Devin Vassell) 从没打过季后赛，达龙·福克斯 (De’Aaron Fox) 也只打过一次。我们一直在重复这些。
但本期的主题是马刺周复一周地证明我们是错误的。我们将拭目以待，看他们是否能将这种势头带到四月、五月和六月。但就目前而言，为什么不欣赏这支球队的所作所为呢？他们已经，杰夫，九连胜了吧？正如杰夫指出的，其中很多比赛是对阵胜率不足 50% 或核心球员缺阵的球队。但在底特律的那场比赛，他们看起来像一支季后赛球队。像一支经验丰富的季后赛球队。令人印象深刻。
杰夫·麦克唐纳：关于进入底特律之前的连胜，如果我们在这场比赛之前录播客，我会说：是的，这些连胜是由战胜伤兵满营或本身就很烂的球队组成的。比如胜率低于 50%，他们在过去八场比赛中遇到的每一个对手，要么缺席了一名及以上全明星球员，要么胜率低于 50%，有的甚至两者兼而有之。
所以我理解对那段连胜的怀疑。但我从中看到的一个好迹象是，他们在那几场比赛中都把对手打爆了。他们不只是——除了对阵俄克拉荷马城那场，他们在面对雷霆残阵时打得有点随性——我的意思是，他们在洛杉矶一度领先了 40 分。我不管对方是谁，如果你领先 40 分，说明你做对了某些事情。而且他们在对阵菲尼克斯和萨克拉门托时都领先了 30 分。在 NBA，无论对方是谁在打球，如果你能领先 30 或 40 分，你就在打高质量的篮球。
所以我认为这就是为什么——我不指望他们去底特律一定能赢，但我对他们在那里的出色表现并不感到惊讶，当你打出那种水平时，你就给了自己赢球的机会。这段九连胜，我知道是从对阵奥兰多开始的。你还记得那场比赛吗？他们当时刚从夏洛特飞回来，差点赶不上比赛。
迈克·芬格：我记得那天下午你说那场比赛“赢不了”。
杰夫·麦克唐纳：在开球前四五个小时才降落在机场，然后他们上场拼搏，以 9 分优势击败了魔术。那是九连胜的开始，也是这段连胜中唯一一场分差在个位数的比赛。其余比赛全是两位数的大胜。所以对我来说，这是一支表现极、极、极、极其出色的球队的象征。即使他们昨晚输给了底特律，我也会说这支球队目前打得非常非常出色。
迈克·芬格：听听看。我不知道该如何处理这些正面评价了。这不符合我们的风格。
杰夫·麦克唐纳：好吧，林迪·沃特斯还没回来，这是个负面消息。他没上场。
迈克·芬格：你喜欢在穆迪中心的那两场比赛吗？
杰夫·麦克唐纳：很棒。它们开始变得——我想对我们来说，新鲜感已经消失了。我不知道对奥斯汀的球迷来说是不是也一样，因为那里依然座无虚席，大家看起来都很兴奋。但我们一直在说，前几次去的时候，马刺还是支 22 胜的球队，而媒体席却挤满了人。去年在奥斯汀的比赛，现场有两组 ESPN 的转播团队，现在感觉在那方面的吸引力不像以前那么大了。但我认为这对奥斯汀人来说依然很有吸引力，而且——圣安东尼奥的球迷可能不同意——我认为这是一件好事。扩大品牌影响力，让奥斯汀的可怜人们有机会在自家门口看到现场直播，这对我来说没问题。我理解圣安东尼奥粉丝的感觉，“那是我们的球队，别来抢我们的地盘”，但很有趣。
迈克·芬格：我上周在《圣安东尼奥快报》上写了一篇关于奥斯汀比赛的文章，引发了一些小讨论。有一些反对声，也有一些赞同声。我的观点是，当这些比赛刚开始时，圣安东尼奥马刺的球迷有一种固有的焦虑，尽管马刺队尽其所能地反驳这种情绪，但仍然存在一种普遍的威胁感。
即马刺在一个已经老化得不行的球馆里打球，虽然它还不到 25 年的历史。它已经跟不上时代了，也没有为周边的社区起到应有的带动作用。大家都知道马刺在寻找新球馆，而通过每年在奥斯汀这个新兴市场——每个人都说这个蓬勃发展的科技区迟早会有除 MLS（美国职业足球大联盟）以外的职业体育项目——打几场比赛，马刺似乎在划定界限，意在：如果我们在圣安东尼奥拿不到新球馆，马刺可能会搬到奥斯汀。
我从没那样想过，但很多马刺球迷那样想，原因也可以理解。我理解当时的焦虑，也理解那种“奥斯汀要抢走我们球队”的怨恨。现在，在贝克萨尔县选民去年 11 月通过了 A 号和 B 号提案后，为圣安东尼奥市中心新球馆的建设铺平了道路。我上周在报纸上写的是，圣安东尼奥球迷现在完全没有理由再为奥斯汀的比赛感到焦虑了，奥斯汀并不是想抢走球队。我还是收到了点反弹，有人说：“我们还是不喜欢他们在那里打球。他们依然是我们的球队。”
但马刺一直这样做的原因是首席执行官 RC·布福德 (RC Buford) 在这些比赛开始之初告诉《快报》的：他们认为自己的市场范围从墨西哥的蒙特雷一直延伸到德克萨斯州中部的奥斯汀。如果把这个市场从南到北连起来，它是全国最赚钱的市场之一，他们想要全面拓展。在奥斯汀培养球迷和合作伙伴在财务上是合理的，每年打几场比赛是很好的方式。我仍然认为这适用。当 2030 年或 2031 年圣安东尼奥市中心的新球馆投入使用时，我不确定他们是否还会继续在奥斯汀打球，但汤姆，如果他们坚持打到那时，我不会感到惊讶。我认为这作为牛仔节客场之旅的一部分非常有效。虽然从球员需要坐大巴和住酒店的角度来看，这些不是严格意义上的主场比赛，但我认为这为每年漫长的牛仔节之旅提供了一个缓冲。
汤姆·奥斯本：是的。那对阵底特律的胜利呢？
迈克·芬格：你不喜欢再聊聊奥斯汀的事吗？
汤姆·奥斯本：不喜欢。
迈克·芬格：听起来汤姆在离开前有话要说，那就让他谈谈昨晚的那场大胜吧。
汤姆·奥斯本：天哪。是的，文班。我的意思是，那真是一场了不起的——21 分，投篮表现不佳，但做了那么多工作，面对这样一支强硬的球队，抢了那么多篮板，还有 6 个盖帽。还有斯蒂芬·卡斯尔 (Stephon Castle) 对坎宁安的防守，瓦塞尔关键时刻的表现。我想这才是今天的话题。
杰夫·麦克唐纳：你继续。
汤姆·奥斯本：哦，我说完了。
杰夫·麦克唐纳：好吧，我也完了。
迈克·芬格：底特律的咖啡怎么样，汤姆？
汤姆·奥斯本：你说什么？
迈克·芬格：底特律的咖啡怎么样？
汤姆·奥斯本：Tim Hortons 非常棒。你知道，那是多伦多的首选，但也流传到底特律了。
迈克·芬格：你更想要 Tim Hortons 的咖啡还是咖啡师调制的美式咖啡？
汤姆·奥斯本：不，我永远选 Tim Hortons。就像你说的，我昨晚给你发了那张照片，Tim Hortons 的杯子，标志性的红色杯子，你说那是打工人的咖啡。而昨晚马刺的胜利就是一场属于打工人的胜利。
杰夫·麦克唐纳：我会带你们回顾我全程观看那场比赛的心路历程。刚开始文班——好吧，他们以 11-0 开局，但一旦两支球队在第一节进入状态，就像是，“哦，活塞队又在对维克托肉搏了，这有点成了他今年的软肋。”这是对付他的套路。如果你推搡他，你就能让他打得有点飘，或者让他躲着打。活塞队在他有球和无球时都在推他，把他撞倒，这在第一节似乎奏效了。我当时想，“又来了，这正是他在季后赛中必须解决的问题，即在人们对他动粗时如何将自己的意志强加于比赛。”不能就此退缩。你不能说，“噢，他们对我太粗暴了，我要去那边站一会儿。”你必须找出应对方法——然后他做到了。
第三节有一段时间，他 12 投仅 3 中，却依然主宰了比赛。主宰了联盟战绩最好的球队。最后，他得到了 21 分，账面上看很棒，但那 17 个篮板和 6 个盖帽，以及整场比赛，尤其是下半场由文班坐镇的防守，才是关键。你提到了卡斯尔；那防守简直是视觉盛宴，那是冠军级别的表现。然后会有人跳出来说，“是啊，我觉得活塞也没那么好，他们投篮不够准，缺乏二次进攻创造力。”这些可能都是事实，但在昨天之前，这些对活塞来说并不是什么大问题。
这就是我为什么说“极度不可能”的原因，其中一部分是因为这两支球队都没有季后赛经验。活塞的打法和马刺截然不同。那是两种不同的性格，两种不同的方式。但他们都面临着同样的问题：没经历过季后赛，没弄明白如何在每场比赛之间做出调整。
昨晚比赛中我有一个疑问，或者说是一个引人注目的细节——也许这纯属胡说——但卡斯尔一直打得很棒，到目前为止远超预期，今年及以后都会是核心，是一个明星球员。但有时他还是会低下头冲向篮框，成败全看裁判吹不吹犯规。我只是在想——这种打法在季后赛可能会更困难。杰夫、汤姆，你们这些年报道过很多季后赛系列赛。我在想这种球是不是他们必须调整的地方，必须意识到季后赛的判罚尺度是不同的，就像底特律昨晚没有很好地适应马刺的表现一样。马刺未来也会面临类似的挑战。
我不是说马刺进总决赛的概率只有 5%，我也不是说活塞进总决赛的概率只有 5%。我是说两者同时发生的概率极度不可能。但这会很有趣，会是一个精彩的系列赛。
杰夫·麦克唐纳：我觉得我们可能只是在一个副词上钻牛角尖。我的意思是，不太可能确实是肯定的，我认为你随便挑联赛中的两支球队，两支都进总决赛都是极度不可能的。每个人都有缺陷。但总得有人打进去。如果你想弄清楚东部和西部谁能突围，我觉得如果你想同时猜对两支球队，那百分比都很小，因为现在对所有人来说竞争都是开放的。
我不认为有谁能稳操胜券——如果你想说服我俄克拉荷马城还是冠军热门，他们以前做到过，显然足够优秀，他们会整合一切并在进入季后赛时保持完全健康，成为西部突围的球队。我完全买账。我仍然会说他们是夺冠热门。但他们已经证明了自己是可以战胜的。他们会被击败。所以我认为对阵表的任何一方都没有所谓的“保送生”。总有人要赢。
迈克·芬格：汤姆没法全程参加了。在你的 Uber 到达之前，你有三分钟时间分享一下见解。
汤姆·奥斯本：嘿，这是一个进步。迈克，就像你之前说的，当我为了那场四分之一决赛去洛杉矶时，我不认为他们能赢。后来在拉斯维加斯对阵俄克拉荷马城，我也不认为他们能赢。所以他们在不断进步。昨晚他们通过了考验。我们要给他们应有的肯定。
迈克·芬格：我正给他们肯定呢。马刺，嘿马刺，凯尔登·约翰逊，维克托·文班亚马。文班，我知道你在听这档播客。维克托，这是给你应有的肯定。你篮球打得很好。我要承认一件事：文班亚马篮球打得很好。马刺也是。你看。这又不是《指环王》播客之类的。他不可能听这个的。
杰夫·麦克唐纳：说得好。如果有什么科幻题材的，或者探索世界奥秘的，或者科学类的播客，他可能会听。如果尼尔·德格拉塞·泰森 (Neil deGrasse Tyson) 有播客，他肯定会听。
迈克·芬格：汤姆，在你走之前快说两句，你对这次客场之旅接下来的多伦多和纽约之战怎么看？他们能延续下去吗？
汤姆·奥斯本：多伦多，我想他们今晚打雷霆？噢，我不确定。总之，我认为他们会延续下去。直到你们在纽约和他们会合对阵尼克斯，那将是另一个考验。布鲁克林是唯一的——你知道，他们这 12 场比赛的赛程，有很多强队，很多种子球队，还有几支附加赛球队。布鲁克林是唯一的软柿子。所以是的，我觉得他们会坚持下去。
迈克·芬格：多伦多今晚确实打雷霆。汤姆，希望当你到达多伦多时，雷霆队还在那里。希望你能挺过东海岸的冬日天气。我知道你得经过纽约。如果你得在播客中途离开，那就祝你好运。杰夫和我将继续闲扯。祝旅途平安，汤姆。
汤姆·奥斯本：好的。谢谢，伙计们。
杰夫·麦克唐纳：他们总会在某个时间点再输一场的。我觉得这是显而易见的。我只是——你只是不知道在哪一场。总会有这么一场。可能在多伦多，可能在布鲁克林。很难说，即使是最强的球队也会失手。但现在越来越难怀疑他们了。是的，他们会失手输掉一些比赛，但所有那些我们早些时候认为他们会输的比赛——“噢，他们不可能去洛杉矶在 NBA 杯击败湖人”——结果他们把湖人打爆了。还有“他们不可能在 NBA 杯半决赛击败雷霆”——结果他们做到了。所以现在很难看到有什么比赛是他们赢不了或不该被看好的。但话虽如此，他们确实会输给某人。他们不会以连赢 34 场来结束赛季——这是我的暴论：他们不会以 34 连胜结束赛季。
迈克·芬格：我认为这是公认的，显然他们不会 34 连胜。但他们证明的是他们可以击败任何人。而且他们多次击败了顶尖球队。今年他们对阵雷霆和活塞的战绩是多少，5 胜 1 负？联盟中最好的两支球队。这中间是有区别的——“能击败任何人”和“能在七场四胜制的系列赛中击败某个特定对手四次”是两回事。那是重大的考验，是每支球队都要经历的考验。
在真正发生之前我们无从得知。就像文班亚马说的，这是一个没用的——是什么来着，去担心缺乏季后赛经验是否会影响他们在季后赛的表现是件没用的事？因为现在担心有什么用呢？正如维克托那天晚上所说，他承认季后赛经验是无可替代的。我认为他知道这点，马刺也知道，但在此期间，为什么不继续像杰夫·麦克唐纳所说的那样把对手打爆呢？
情况往往是这样的——我们讨论过无数次了——你进入一个季后赛系列赛，面对一个经验老到的对手，感觉就像，“噢，一切都升级了，强度上去了，判罚变了，身体对抗增强了，专注力也提高了，”除非身临其境，否则你永远无法体会。大多数没打过季后赛的球队，都要打到系列赛第二场才能回过神来，而那时你已经 0-2 落后并输掉了系列赛。马刺的赛季很可能会在季后赛的某个节点以这种方式结束，即遇到一支真正深谙此道的球队。也许马刺能明白过来，但明白得太晚了，而这些经验将存入电脑，为下个赛季做准备。到那时，也许马刺就是那支对其他球队施压的老道球队。
但周一晚上在底特律的那种夜晚让我们看到他们已经准备得更充分了，因为那场比赛很有季后赛的感觉。那是一个备受瞩目、强度极大的夜晚，而马刺看起来就像以前经历过一样。
奥斯汀那两场比赛（虽然变成了几场大胜）中一个值得注意的进展是，文班亚马第一次证实了我们在一年前关于他血栓诊断的猜测。杰夫，还记得在 2025 年全明星赛前的那些比赛中，维克托看起来很疲惫吗？精疲力竭。我们在知道他身体出问题之前就讨论过，漫长的赛季让他筋疲力尽，他撞到了“新秀墙”。尽管他的数据并不差，但他移动起来很沉重。
由于去年整件事的发展和演变，我们一直无法确认他当时的状态是否与后来的诊断有关，即他肩膀的深静脉血栓，这让他缺席了赛季剩余比赛，一度威胁到他的职业生涯和马刺的未来。最终一切都好转了。但他在奥斯汀提到，当时那根动脉只有 5% 的血流量。正如他所说，这虽然不能解释一切，但解释了很多。我认为这比任何事情都更能说明，他去年看起来撞墙的原因是可以纠正的，不会影响他的职业生涯余下时间。他们想出了一个不应该影响他长期健康的解决方案。我只是觉得这很值得注意，说明他会没事的，去年他状态下滑是有原因的，而今年他没有这种困扰。这不是耐力问题；去年他的疲惫是有病理原因的。你觉得这有意思吗？
杰夫·麦克唐纳：让我触动的是，大家肯定还记得，他去年在报销前打的最后一场球是全明星赛。他在奥斯汀告诉我们，全明星赛是他这辈子在篮球场上感觉最糟糕的一次。我想那是压死骆驼的最后一根稻草，让他们意识到必须解决这个问题，必须采取行动。我确实同意他去年 2 月全明星赛前看起来像撞墙了——疲惫，赛程紧凑。但我刚才看了一下他去年报销前为马刺打的倒数第二场常规赛，当时他也很累：对阵华盛顿，31 分 15 篮板 3 盖帽。即使是对阵波士顿，他也有 17 分 13 篮板 2 盖帽。那个月初是对阵夏洛特，16 分 11 篮板还有 5 盖帽。所以即使在那样的虚弱状态下，他依然在主宰比赛。但确实，他谈到去年全明星赛是他打球感觉最糟的一次，这让我印象很深。
迈克·芬格：展望未来，我的意思是，他在某种程度上正处于巅峰。虽然这段连胜中的对手大多不算顶尖，但他的盖帽数直线上升。我不知道是他盖帽更积极了，还是对手更频繁地挑战他，但他现在每晚能盖 5 个球。周六在奥斯汀对阵国王开场的那波攻势，一分钟内 3 个盖帽——你提到的他在对阵活塞开局阶段的主宰力。奥斯汀那场比赛刚开始时，感觉国王队要被零封 48 分钟。感觉维克托要在对阵国王时投出一场“无安打比赛”。
杰夫·麦克唐纳：国王队前三次进攻都以文班亚马的盖帽告终。太不可思议了。
迈克·芬格：他在奥斯汀那两场比赛后表示，那并不是什么例外；那应该是每晚的标准，是他想带来的东西。他并不是针对那些实力远逊于他的球队才表现特别，那是基准线。那是球迷走进球场观看文班亚马比赛时应该期待的东西，这简直令人震惊，他竟然能这样统治比赛。我们还没提到他的双风车扣篮，还有——还记得文班时代初期的圣安东尼奥，我们讨论过给他传空接是多么困难，看起来比实际更难，需要时间适应？现在从卡斯尔、从达龙·福克斯，甚至从队友大个子那里传出的空接——感觉空接变得越来越容易了。这真的很令人佩服。在他职业生涯的前几年，他曾有过低迷期。我们在 2025-2026 赛季还没见过这种低迷，我不确定以后会不会有。你怎么看？
这是件你讨厌谈论的事情，但如果马刺最终成为西部第一——这并非不可想象，他们只落后雷霆两场——而且文班亚马打满了 65 场比赛，我很难不投他一票，不仅是把他放进我的 MVP 选票，而是把他放在我选票的第一位。
杰夫·麦克唐纳：有趣的是——同样，我不是个大奖项迷——但今年的 MVP 可能赢在——现在大约有五个坚实的候选人。但那一组中可能只有一两个或三个能达标。候选人正在变少。约基奇已经快用完他可以缺席的比赛次数了。卢卡也快用完了。维克托大概只能再缺席五场左右。我认为凯德·坎宁安是安全的。谢伊·吉尔杰斯-亚历山大 (Shai Gilgeous-Alexander) 也不能再缺席了，他现在受了伤。他还有点缓冲，但基本上就是这五大候选人。其中三个可能会出局，然后你可能会在剩下的两个符合条件的人之间看到一场两强争霸。
所以，虽然维克托还没有获得太多 MVP 的呼声，但如果他在余下的赛季里不缺席，或者把缺场次数限制在两三场以内，到头来可能就是他和另外两位顶尖候选人的角逐，那会是一场非常有趣的竞赛。
迈克·芬格：你知道吗？我的意思是，即使所有人都有资格，如果马刺拿到西部第一，我还是会投给他。
杰夫·麦克唐纳：你会投他第一？第一顺位。是的。我是说，这不会是一个糟糕的选票。如果这发生了，而他赢了是因为有三个人缺赛出局，那可能会有点遗憾，因为你不希望这上面有星号：“哦，他赢是因为三个人缺席。”我认为如果所有这些条件都达成，他本来可能就会赢。我的意思是，这都是假设。但这家伙正在统治联盟。我们要把防守也算作篮球的一部分吗？因为他是世界上最好的防守球员，而防守占了比赛的一半。在做到这一点的同时场均 24 分，还能在进攻端做出那些动作，如果马刺在赢球，如果他们在战绩上领先雷霆，领先活塞，很难有理由不选他。
迈克·芬格：我同意。从现在到那时还有很多事情要尘埃落定，但我只是这么说。这也揭示了全年的 MVP 讨论有多荒谬，在圣诞节前的 12 月就开始争论谁更领先，是约基奇、SGA 还是卢卡。这最终取决于你所说的。如果马刺最后成了头号种子（这在几周前看来是不可想象的），他怎么能不是领跑者呢？
我不想把这变成这周 NBA 播客中第 97 场关于 MVP 的辩论。感觉你是在隔空喊话我们那个“好时光提米”(Timmy Good Times) 呢。提米是最棒的。这不是讽刺——谁能比好时光提米人更好呢？他似乎每两周就在 ESPN 做一次 MVP 民调，让大家随时了解 MVP 的最新动态。他是最棒的人。我爱蒂姆·邦唐 (Tim Bontemps)。但这件事要到最后才能决定，在提米前几次做的 MVP 更新里，维克托还没进过前三。他现在正悄悄挤进前五。但如果马刺是西部头号种子，我认为他应该是——我觉得你说得对，杰夫，他应该是公认的领跑者，因为他的进攻数据，比如得分和助攻，可能比不上卢卡那些人，但在攻防两端的影响力方面，我不认为有人能接近他，尤其是如果马刺在积分榜登顶的话。所以这是值得关注的。
杰夫·麦克唐纳：我很庆幸你说的是“攻防两端 (both sides of the floor)”而不是“攻防两侧 (both sides of the ball)”。在篮球里听到后者总让我有点抓狂。
迈克·芬格：我总能想到——我们要结束了，汤姆走了，所以我们要往奇怪的方向扯——当年在拉伯克南平原报道著名的鲍勃·奈特 (Bob Knight) 时，那是他的忌讳之一。有一次他在新闻发布会上痛斥了一个说“both sides of the ball”的家伙。鲍勃·奈特通常不是个好相处的人，但他彻底把那个术语从我的词典里剔除了。我没说过，以后也永远不会再说，因为篮球里不该这么说。所以，向鲍勃·奈特致敬，他提炼了我们的词汇。愿他安息。
杰夫·麦克唐纳：他还——算了，我们不提了。
迈克·芬格：不，说吧，为什么不呢？
杰夫·麦克唐纳：他还曾经管你叫“妓女”，对吧？
迈克·芬格：天哪，杰夫，就是那天晚上。就是那天——这是一个伟大的鲍勃·奈特故事，虽然这是《马刺知情人》播客，但我还是会讲，因为这故事太棒了。那个学生记者——你知道德州理工大学的学生报纸叫什么吗？是叫《斗牛士》(The Matador) 吗？
杰夫·麦克唐纳：听起来像是。可能是。
迈克·芬格：一个学生记者问鲍勃·奈特关于球员在“球的两侧 (both sides of the ball)”表现如何。鲍勃·奈特把他臭骂了一顿，说：“你根本不知道自己在说什么，这不是我们在篮球里讨论的方式，你需要准备得更充分，表现出更多的专业精神，但我对你们这一行的人也没抱更高的指望，”他指的是新闻业。那个小伙子只是个新闻系学生，奈特说：“在你的职业领域里，你们只比妓女高两个台阶。”然后他站起来正要愤而离场。我说：“教练，还有一个问题。”他转过头说：“什么？”我说：“中间那一层是什么？”那是我职业生涯的高光时刻之一。新闻业和妓女中间的那一层是什么？
杰夫·麦克唐纳：结果证明答案是做播客。
迈克·芬格：一点都没错。那天他没给我答案，但 20 多年后，我们找到了答案。答案就是做播客。所以这很好。不，那是一段有趣的往事。别说“球的两侧”。也别说新闻业和妓女一样，因为根据鲍勃·奈特的说法，两者之间至少还有一个台阶。
我们怎么看接下来的纽约之旅？这个转场真绝。但汤姆已经赶去报道周三晚上的多伦多比赛了。在那之后，是纽约的两场比赛，分别对阵篮网和尼克斯，还有一场对阵 76 人，然后牛仔节之旅就结束了。连胜能持续到这次旅程结束吗？
杰夫·麦克唐纳：当然可以。我们之前讨论过。当然可以。但会不会呢？我不知道。我很期待在麦迪逊广场花园的比赛，因为去年圣诞大战我没在那儿。我也没在 NBA 杯决赛现场，那两场都是精彩绝伦的比赛。我很期待在那里的氛围，文班带着一支优秀的马刺队杀进去，那场比赛应该会很有季后赛的感觉，因为两支球队都很出色。我很期待。
迈克·芬格：又一场潜在的总决赛对决。虽然同样是不太可能的总决赛对决，但很有趣。尼克斯就在那里。尼克斯比活塞更有季后赛经验，知道如何应对大场面。所以那会很有趣。
好吧，我们还会见到老朋友杰里米·索汉 (Jeremy Sochan)。我们会见到杰里米·索汉，他最近在尼克斯获得了一些上场时间，虽然不多。观察尼克斯推特上的反馈很有意思（虽然不科学），他们签下了杰里米，正试图说服自己接受这个 22 岁的前前十顺位球员。现在他们正处于“等等，他在进攻端既不会投篮也不会干别的”阶段。就像是，他们已经明白了为什么他不适合马刺。我不知道。我希望他在那里一切顺利。在纽约打球压力很大。所以我希望杰里米能扛得住。
在纽约见到杰里米之后，这档播客过去四年里花在讨论他身上的无数时间可能就要画上句号了。我是说，他打过 NBA，这比我们大多数人做得都多。但到头来，雷声大雨点小。这就是很多球员的职业生涯轨迹。曾经有过希望，后来没了。现在圣安东尼奥在他离开后又有了希望——不是因为他走了，而是既然他走了，马刺将迈向更大更强的目标。也许杰里米在尼克斯也会迈向更大更强的目标。
我们期待那场比赛。我们期待本周的所有比赛以及本赛季剩余的比赛。下次见，照顾好彼此，保持真实。
[音乐响起]
由生成式人工智能翻译，译文内容可能不准确或不完整，以原文为准。
点击查看原文：Will San Antonio ever lose again?
Will San Antonio ever lose again?
Columnist Mike Finger and beat reporters Jeff McDonald and Tom Orsborn discuss the Spurs’ win over Detroit and their nine-game winning streak. Also, could the Spurs and Pistons face each other in the NBA Finals? And will the Spurs always play in Austin? These topics and more on this week’s Spurs Insider podcast.
Suggested reading:
How the Spurs got physical in beating ‘bully ball’ Pistons
How Spurs’ Devin Vassell worked to find his spots against Detroit
Spurs at Raptors: How to watch the game, who’s starting, who’s out
3 takeaways as Devin Vassell’s 28 points lead Spurs past Pistons
Here is the transcript of the podcast:
[music plays]
Mike Finger: From a highly secure network of top secret locations across North America, this is the Spurs Insider, “Will they ever lose again?” edition. I am Mike Finger, joined as always by San Antonio Express-News Spurs beat writers Tom Orsborn and Jeff McDonald. I’m just going to start with the question asked in my title of the episode: Will they ever lose again, Tom? The San Antonio Spurs, the local cagers, the second-best team in the Western Conference and rising.
Tom Orsborn: Well, I was a little skeptical about the winning streak. They played a lot of banged-up teams, thought it might be fool’s gold, but they certainly passed the test in Detroit last night. So yeah, will they ever lose again? Will we be working into June? That’s the question. I noticed some people writing that it was a potential NBA Finals preview.
Mike Finger: If the Spurs and Pistons meet in the Finals, which I will still go on record as saying is extremely unlikely… but we’re going to do a podcast episode, Tom, and this is just a tease, it’s going to frustrate the listeners. But I want to tell the story of the “Big Show,” of the T-shirt, of the Page A1 story way back in the last time the Spurs and the Pistons met in the Finals. That’s a legendary piece of Express-News history. That’s something to look forward to if it does happen, but it probably won’t. As we’re being cynical and negative about things, it’s time to welcome in to the podcast Jeff McDonald.
Jeff McDonald: I was just going the other way. I was about to ask you, did you say extremely unlikely? Like, I don’t know about extremely unlikely.
Mike Finger: That the Spurs and Pistons meet in the 2026 NBA Finals?
Jeff McDonald: I guess it depends on how we define all these terms, but I wouldn’t say extremely unlikely.
Mike Finger: I would say less than five percent.
Jeff McDonald: I don’t know, I can’t put a percent on everything, but I could see both those teams reaching the NBA Finals at this point. I’m not saying it’s probable or even likely, but “extremely,” that little adjective there threw me a little bit.
Mike Finger: I think it’s extremely unlikely. You’re a big betting guy, Jeff, at the Moody Center last week in Austin.
Jeff McDonald: I am not a big betting guy.
Mike Finger: You were all over point spreads and asking pregame questions about Lindy Waters, his availability to assuage the FanDuel people. So I’d ask you, I’m not a betting guy either, betting is terrible. Do not bet on sports; it’s awful. But what I mean by five percent is, if it’s 19 to 1, would you bet one dollar—or I’m sorry, would you bet 19 dollars to win one dollar that the—no. Would you bet one dollar to win 19 dollars that the Spurs and Pistons would meet in the NBA Finals?
Jeff McDonald: Sure. Sure. Just a dollar.
Mike Finger: I see. Anyway, I think the Spurs are playing great. They have proven the doubters wrong every episode of the Spurs Insider. It seems to show we almost always undershoot them. The Pistons are doing the same in regards to the expectations that people have had in Detroit. These are two teams that are ahead of schedule. They are taking advantage of an NBA where a degree of parity has set in across the league, outside of Oklahoma City, who has undergone its share of struggles as well. So maybe the argument could be made that if not now, when would a team like the Pistons or the Spurs make a run to the Finals?
But it just seems extremely unlikely that they both will. And just because of what we’ve said over and over and over again, these teams—I think the Cade Cunningham Pistons have played in a grand total of one playoff series. The Victor Wembanyama San Antonio Spurs have played in zero playoff series. Stephon Castle’s never played in a playoff series, Keldon Johnson and Devin Vassell have never played in a playoff series, De’Aaron Fox has played in one. We’re playing the hits here. We’ve said this over and over and over again.
But the theme of this is the Spurs keep proving us wrong week after week after week. We’ll see if they can take it into April and May and June. But for now, why not appreciate what this team has done? They’ve won, what Jeff, nine games in a row? As Jeff pointed out, a lot of those games were against teams without winning records, without their best players. But that game in Detroit, it looked like a playoff team. It looked like an experienced playoff team. It was impressive.
Jeff McDonald: What I was going to say about the winning streak going into Detroit, if we had done this podcast before that game, is yes, they played some—that the streak was made up of wins against banged-up teams and or teams that were just bad anyway. Like sub-500, every team they played in those eight games was either missing like an All-Star or more than one All-Star, or they were sub-500, and some of them were both.
So I get the skepticism with that winning streak. But the one good sign I saw in it is they were beating the crap out of those teams. They weren’t just—except for the Oklahoma City game where they kind of screwed around against a skeleton crew—I mean, they were up 40 in L.A. And I don’t care who’s on the other team, if you’re up 40, you’re doing something right. And they were up 30 against Phoenix and Sacramento. I don’t care who’s playing for the other team in the NBA, if you’re up 30 or 40 on them, you’re playing good basketball.
And so I thought that was—that’s why I’m not—I didn’t expect them to go to Detroit and win the game, but I’m not surprised they went in there and played well, and when you do that, you give yourself a chance to win the game. This nine-game winning streak, I know it started way back against Orlando. Do you remember that game? They were coming back from Charlotte and couldn’t get there.
Mike Finger: I remember you called that game unwinnable that afternoon.
Jeff McDonald: Landed at the airport like four and a half hours before tip-off, and they go out there and they gut it out and they beat the Magic by nine points. And that’s the—it started a nine-game winning streak, and that’s the only win in that streak that’s single digits. The rest of them were all double digits. So to me, that’s a sign of a team that’s playing really, really, really, really well. Even if they had lost last night against Detroit, I would say this is a team that is playing really, really, really well right now.
Mike Finger: There you go. I don’t know what to do with all this positivity. It’s off-brand.
Jeff McDonald: Well, they didn’t get Lindy Waters back, that was a negative. He didn’t play.
Mike Finger: Did you enjoy the two games at the Moody Center?
Jeff McDonald: They were good. They’re starting to become—I guess the novelty has worn off for us. I don’t know that it’s worn off for Austin fans, like they still pack the place and seem pretty excited about it. But we were talking about how the first couple trips, you’re taking 22-win teams in there and the place is just rife with media. It’s just overrun by media people. I think the game last year we had two ESPNs there at the games last year in Austin, and it just seems to have—it’s not the draw in that sense that it used to be. But I think it is a draw to the people of Austin, and I think it’s—fans in San Antonio will disagree with me, but I do think it’s a good thing. It’s good to expand the brand, give those poor Austinites a chance to see the team live in their own backyard. It’s fine with me. I understand San Antonio fans kind of feel like, “That’s our team, stop horning in on our thing,” but it’s fun.
Mike Finger: I had a small—the conversation about something that I wrote in the San Antonio Express-News last week about the Austin games. There was a little bit of pushback, there was a little bit of agreement. But my point was, when these games started, there was this inherent angst among San Antonio Spurs fans because even though the Spurs said and did all they could to refute this sentiment, there was this overarching sentiment that there was a threat.
That the Spurs were playing in an arena that had not aged well, even though it was less than a quarter-century old. It had not aged well, it had not done what it was supposed to do for the neighborhood around it. Everyone knew the Spurs were looking for a new arena, and by playing a couple of games in Austin per year in this burgeoning market, this booming tech area that everyone says is going to grow and have pro sports beyond MLS at some point, that the Spurs were kind of drawing a line in the sand, saying if we don’t get an arena in San Antonio, the Spurs might move to Austin.
I never took it that way, but a lot of Spurs fans took it that way, and for understandable reasons. I got the angst back then, and I got the sort of budding resentment that “Austin’s going to try to take our team.” Now, after the Bexar County voters approved Prop A and B last November, it paved the way for what looks like is going to be a downtown arena in San Antonio. What I wrote in the paper last week was that there’s no reason at all for San Antonio fans to have angst about games in Austin anymore, like Austin’s not trying to take the team. I got a little pushback from that, saying, “We still don’t like them playing up there. They’re still our team.”
But the reason the Spurs keep doing that is something that CEO RC Buford told the Express-News way back when these games started, is that they see their market as spanning from Monterrey in Mexico all the way up to Austin in Central Texas. And that if you take that market from top to bottom, it’s one of the most lucrative in the country and they want to expand on all of it. It makes financial sense to develop fans and business partners and all of that in Austin, and that playing a couple of games a year is a great way to do that. And I still think that applies. When the building opens in downtown San Antonio in 2030 or 2031 or whatever it is, I’m not sure they’re still going to be playing in Austin, but I would not be surprised, Tom, if they continue to do it until then. And it works as part of the rodeo trip, I think. Those aren’t home games in the sense that the teams had to take a bus to get there and are spending nights in hotels, but I think it provides a bit of a break in that long rodeo road trip every year.
Tom Orsborn: Yes. How about that win over Detroit?
Mike Finger: You don’t enjoy the going over the Austin thing again?
Tom Orsborn: No.
Mike Finger: It sounds like Tom’s got something to say before we get out of here, so let’s let him talk about the big win last night.
Tom Orsborn: Oh my gosh. Yeah, Wemby. I mean, that was a heck of a—21 points, had a poor shooting night, but did so much, against such a rugged team, did so much rebounding, six blocks. You had Castle’s defense against Cunningham, Vassell coming up big. I think that’s the topic today.
Jeff McDonald: Go ahead.
Tom Orsborn: Well, he’s done now.
Jeff McDonald: Yeah, I’m done.
Mike Finger: How was the coffee in Detroit, Tom?
Tom Orsborn: I’m sorry?
Mike Finger: How was the coffee in Detroit?
Tom Orsborn: Tim Hortons is outstanding. You know, that’s the preferred spot in Toronto, but it’s trickled down here to Detroit as well.
Mike Finger: Would you rather have Tim Hortons coffee or a barista-brewed Americano?
Tom Orsborn: No, I’m always going to go Tim Hortons. As you said, I emailed you a shot of that last night, the Tim Hortons cup, the iconic Tim Hortons red cup, and you said it’s a working man’s cup of coffee. And that was a working man’s win last night by the Spurs.
Jeff McDonald: I will take you through my train of thought watching that game from start to finish. At the beginning with Victor—well, they started with that 11-0 run, but once both teams got into the game in the first quarter, it was like, “Oh, the Pistons are being physical with Victor again, and this has kind of been a little bit of the kryptonite against him this year.” That’s the book on him. If you push him around a little bit, you can get him to kind of float or to kind of fade. And the Pistons were pushing him when he had the ball, when he didn’t have the ball, knocking him over, and it seemed to work for about a quarter. And I was thinking, “Here we go again, like this is the thing he’s going to have to figure out for the playoffs is how to impose his will on a game when people are beating him up.” Don’t just go away. You can’t just say, “Oh, they’re being physical with me, I’m just going to go stand over here for a while.” You have to figure out how—and then he did that.
At one point in the third quarter, he was still three of 12 and just dominating the game. Just dominating the best team in the league, record-wise. And then, ended up with 21 points, which looks great on paper, but the 17 rebounds and the six blocks, the defense throughout the game, but especially the second half, anchored by Victor. You mentioned Steph Castle; it was pretty much a sight to behold and that was championship-level stuff right there, the way they defended. And then you have people who will swoop in and say, “Yeah, well, I guess the Pistons aren’t that good, like they don’t have enough shooting, and they don’t have enough secondary creation.” All that’s probably true, but it hadn’t been much of a problem for the Pistons all year until yesterday.
That’s my, to go back to the extremely unlikely, that’s part of it is for both of those teams who have never been through the playoffs before. Because the Pistons are going to—they play very differently than the Spurs do. Those are two different personalities on that team, two different ways they go about it. But they both have issues in terms of not having been there before, not having figured out how to make adjustments game to game.
And one question I had during the game last night, or something that stood out—and maybe this is utter nonsense—but Stephon Castle, been playing great, has exceeded expectations by leaps and bounds so far, is going to be a key this year and beyond, just a star player. There are still times when he puts his head down, goes to the rim. It depends on whether or not he gets a foul call or not. And I just—those are the types of plays in the playoffs that I wonder are going to be more difficult, because Jeff and Tom, you both covered a lot of playoff series over the years. I wonder if those are the types of plays that they’re going to have to adjust to and realize the game gets called differently, like Detroit didn’t adjust well to what the Spurs were doing last night. There are going to be times when the Spurs have similar challenges.
I’m not saying it’s five percent that the Spurs make the Finals, I’m not saying it’s five percent that the Pistons make the Finals. I’m saying that combined, that’s extremely unlikely. It’d be fun though; it would be a good series.
Jeff McDonald: I think we might just be splitting hairs over an adverb there. I mean, unlikely sure, I think you pick any two teams in the league and I think it’s extremely unlikely both teams get to the Finals. Everybody’s got flaws. Somebody’s got to get there. If you want to figure out what the combination is of who comes from the East and who comes from the West, I think it’s all a small percentage then if you want to get both of them right, because it’s just wide open for everybody.
I don’t see anybody that’s just going to—if you want to talk me into Oklahoma City still being the champs, they’ve done it before, they’re good enough clearly, they’re going to get everything together and be completely healthy going into the playoffs and they’re going to be the team that goes out of the West. I would buy that for sure. I’d still say they’re the favorites. But they’ve proven to be vincible, the opposite of invincible. They can get got. So I just don’t think there’s anybody that is just a shoo-in on either side of the bracket. Somebody’s got to do it.
Mike Finger: Tom’s not going to be here all the way. You’ve got three minutes to get in some knowledge before your Uber shows up.
Tom Orsborn: Hey, it was a step. Like you said, Mike, earlier, when I went to L.A. for that quarterfinal cup game, I didn’t think they were going to win there. Then Oklahoma City in Vegas, didn’t think they were going to win there. So they’re taking steps. They passed the test last night. So let’s give them their due.
Mike Finger: I’m giving them their due. Spurs, hey Spurs, Keldon Johnson, Victor Wembanyama. Victor Wembanyama, I know listens to the podcast. Victor, here’s your due. I’m giving it to you. You’re good at basketball. I’m going to make an admission: Victor Wembanyama’s good at basketball. The Spurs are too. There you go. It’s not like this is a Lord of the Rings podcast or something. There’s no way he listens to this.
Jeff McDonald: That’s a good point. Whatever science fiction is out there, or just solving the mysteries of the world, or science period, he might be listening. He’s listening to Neil deGrasse Tyson if that guy has a podcast.
Mike Finger: Real quickly before you go, Tom, what do you think of Toronto and the New York games coming up the rest of this trip? Do they continue it? Do they keep going?
Tom Orsborn: Toronto I think they play—do they play the Thunder tonight? Oh, I’m not sure. No, yeah, but anyway, I think they’ll keep it going. I think until you boys pick them up in New York, playing the Knicks, that’ll be another test. Brooklyn’s the only, you know, they’ve got this 12-game stretch, a lot of good teams, a lot of top-seeded teams, a couple of play-in teams. Brooklyn’s the only soft one. So yeah, I think they keep it going.
Mike Finger: Toronto does play the Thunder tonight. Toronto, the Thunder will be in town when you get to Toronto, hopefully, Tom. You make it through this East Coast winter weather, Northeast winter weather. I know you’ve got to go through New York. Good luck with that if you have to leave us during this podcast. Jeff and I will continue the nonsense. But travel safe, Tom.
Tom Orsborn: Okay. Thank you, guys.
Jeff McDonald: They are going to lose a game again at some point. Like, I think that’s clear. I just—you just don’t know where. It’ll be somewhere. It could be in Toronto, it could be in Brooklyn. It’s hard to say, even the best teams slip up. But it’s getting harder and harder to doubt them at this point. Yes, they’re going to slip up and lose some games, but all those games we thought they were going to lose earlier in the year—“Oh, there’s no way they’re going to go to L.A. and beat the Lakers in the NBA Cup”—of course they beat the crap out of them. And “There’s no way they’re going to beat the Thunder in the NBA Cup semifinals”—sure they are. So it’s just hard to see that there’s a game they can’t win or shouldn’t be favored to win. But that said, they are going to lose to somebody. They’re not going to close the—here’s my hot take: they’re not going to close the season on a 34-game winning streak.
Mike Finger: I think that sort of is given, and obviously they’re not going to win 34 in a row. But what they’re proving is that they can beat anybody. And they’ve beaten the best teams multiple times. Their record against the Thunder and the Pistons this year is what, five and one? The two best teams in the league. It’s just—there’s a difference between “can beat anybody” and “will beat one team in particular four times in seven games.” That’s the big test, and that’s a test that every team goes through.
And we won’t know until it gets there. As Victor Wembanyama said, it’s a useless thing to—what is it, a useless thing to worry about, a useless question to ponder whether or not their lack of playoff experience will affect them in the playoffs? Because why worry about it now? As Victor said the other night, he acknowledged there is no substitute for playoff experience. I think he knows it, the Spurs know it, but in the meantime, why not just keep beating the crap out of people, as Jeff McDonald said?
What happens is—we’ve discussed this a million times—you get into a playoff series against a team that knows what it’s doing and it’s like, “Oh, everything goes up, the intensity goes up, the fouls are called differently, the physicality goes up, the focus goes up,” and you don’t know it until you’re in it. And most teams that have not been in it before, you’ve gone two games into the series before you figure it out, and now you’re down 0-2 and you lose the series. And that’s probably how the Spurs’ season is going to end at some point in the playoffs, is getting to a series against a team that really knows what it’s doing. And maybe the Spurs figure it out, but figure it out too late, and then that’s stuff that goes into the computer for next season. And now maybe they’re the team doing that to other teams.
But nights like Monday night in Detroit kind of show you that they’re more ready, because that was playoff-esque. That was a high-profile, intense night and the Spurs looked like they’d been there before.
One of the more noteworthy developments from those Austin games, which turned into a couple of blowouts, but for the first time, Victor Wembanyama confirmed something that we’d always suspected about a year ago and his blood clot diagnosis. Remember in those games, Jeff, right before the All-Star break in 2025, Victor had looked tired, didn’t he? Just beat down. And we had talked, even before we knew anything was wrong with him, that the season is catching up with him and he’s hitting a wall. And even though his stat lines weren’t terrible, he was just lumbering.
Because of the way everything developed last year, the way it unfolded, we were never able to confirm that the way he looked was related to what ended up being diagnosed for him, which was deep vein thrombosis in his shoulder and a blood clot that kept him out for the rest of the season, temporarily threatened a lot about his career and about the Spurs’ future. Things ended up being okay. But he said in Austin that he had five percent blood flow through that artery, which as he said, doesn’t explain everything but explains a lot. I think more than anything, it just provided more reassurance that the reason he looked like he was hitting a wall last year was something that could be corrected, is not going to affect the rest of his career. They’ve come up with a solution that should not affect his long-term health. I just thought that was kind of worthwhile in terms of noting that he’s going to be okay and that there was a reason why he was hitting a wall last year and why he’s not hitting a wall this year. It’s not endurance stuff; there was a reason why he was worn out last year. Did you find that interesting at all?
Jeff McDonald: What struck me was, as everyone will recall, the last basketball he played last year before going on the shelf was the All-Star Game. And he said, he told us in Austin, that was the worst he’s ever felt on a basketball court, was the All-Star Game. And that was, I guess, the last straw that said we’ve got to figure this out, we’ve got to do something about it. And I do agree, he looked like he was hitting a wall—tired, season catching up with him during that stretch of February before the All-Star break last year. But I just looked at the second-to-last regular season game he played for the Spurs last year when he was tired: Washington, 31 points, 15 rebounds, three blocks. Even the Boston game he had 17, 13, and two blocks. Earlier that month, it’s 27 and 10, 24 and 12. Charlotte was a 16-11 but five blocks. So even in that weakened state, he was dominating things. But yeah, that just really hit my ears was him talking about the All-Star Game last year and how that was the worst he had ever felt playing basketball.
Mike Finger: And to spin it forward, I mean, he is peaking in a way. And it’s been against less than stellar opponents through a lot of this winning streak, but the blocks are way up. I don’t know if he’s been more aggressive in blocking shots or if teams are just challenging him more, but he’s blocking five shots a night these days. That opening flurry against the Kings in Austin on Saturday, three blocks in a minute—you talked about him dominating the early stretches against Detroit. It looked like the Kings were about to be shut out for 48 minutes the way that game started in Austin. It looked like Victor was going to throw a no-hitter against the Kings.
Jeff McDonald: The first three Kings possessions ended in Victor Wembanyama blocks. It was incredible.
Mike Finger: And he said after both of those games in Austin, his reaction was that that’s not exceptional; that should be the standard every night, that that’s what he wants to bring. And it’s not that he is doing anything special at all against teams that are completely overmatched against him, that that should be the baseline. That should be what fans expect when they walk in the door and watch a Victor Wembanyama game, which is just mind-blowing, the way he dominates these games. We’re not even getting into his double windmill dunks and the way that—remember in the early stages of the Wemby era in San Antonio and we talked about the struggles in throwing lob passes to him and how it’s more difficult than it seems and how it’s going to take time? The lobs from Stephon Castle, from De’Aaron Fox, from fellow big men—it seems like the lobs are becoming easier and easier. It’s really impressive. His first couple of years in the league, he has hit these lulls. We have not seen that lull in 2025-2026 yet, and I’m not sure one is coming. What do you think?
Here’s something you hate talking about, but if the Spurs end up with the one seed in the West—which is not unthinkable, they’re only two games behind the Thunder—and Victor Wembanyama has played 65 games, it’s going to be hard for me not to vote for him, not just put him on my MVP ballot, but put him atop my MVP ballot.
Jeff McDonald: What’s interesting there—and again, I’m not a big awards guy—but the MVP this year might win—there are like five solid candidates. There might not be more than one or two or three that qualify of that group. Like you’re running low on candidates. Jokic has almost used up his games that he can miss. Luka’s almost used up the games he can miss. Victor only has five more or something like that. I think Cade Cunningham’s safe. Shai Gilgeous-Alexander can’t miss many; he’s hurt right now. And you know, he’s got some buffer, but those are basically the five big candidates. Three of them might be out and then you might have a two-way race between the two that qualify.
So yeah, like Victor, even though he hasn’t gotten a ton of MVP buzz, it could get to a point where if he doesn’t miss action the rest of the year, if he limits his missed games to two or three, it might be between him and two other top candidates and you could see a really interesting race there.
Mike Finger: You know what? I would be—I mean, what I’m saying is, even if everybody’s eligible, I think I would vote for him if the Spurs end up one in the West.
Jeff McDonald: You’d vote for him first? First. Yeah. I mean, that wouldn’t be a terrible vote. And if that happens and he wins and three guys are out, that would kind of suck because you don’t want there to be an asterisk on that: “Oh, he just won because three guys were out.” I think he might have won anyway if all those things come to pass. I mean, it’s all hypotheticals. But the guy is dominating the league. And are we going to count defense as part of basketball? Because he’s the best defensive player in the world, and that’s half the game. And to do that and average 24 and do some of the things he does on offense, and if the Spurs are winning, and if they’re ahead of the Thunder in the standings, ahead of the Pistons in the standings, it’s hard to see the argument against.
Mike Finger: I would agree with you. There’s a lot to—there’s a lot that has to fall into place between now and then, but I’m just saying. And what this also does is sort of exposes how ridiculous the year-round MVP discourse is, to talk about people having MVP debates in December before Christmas, like who’s ahead, Jokic or SGA or Luka. It comes down to what you’re talking about. If the Spurs end up being the top seed, which isn’t as unthinkable as it was a few weeks ago, how could he not be the leading candidate?
And I don’t want to turn this into the 97th MVP debate on NBA podcasts this week. You feel like you’re sub-tweeting our guy Timmy Good Times here. Timmy Good Times is the best. There’s no—and this is not sarcasm—who is a better guy than Timmy Good Times, who does the ESPN MVP poll it seems like every two weeks throughout the season? Keeps everyone apprised of the MVP update. He’s the best guy. Love Tim Bontemps. But this isn’t decided until the end, and Victor hasn’t been in the top three of Timmy Good Times’ MVP updates the first few times he’s done it. He’s sneaking into the top five now. But if the Spurs are the top seed in the West, I think that he should be—I think you’re right, Jeff, he should be the presumed frontrunner, because he doesn’t match the offensive stats, the points and assists and all that stuff of the Luka guys, but in terms of both sides of the floor impact, I’m not sure anybody comes close, especially if the Spurs are atop the standings. So that’s something to look for.
Jeff McDonald: I’m glad you said both sides of the floor and not both sides of the ball. That one drives me nuts a little bit in basketball.
Mike Finger: I always think of—we’re hitting the end here and Tom’s gone so we have to kind of veer off in strange directions—but covering the famed Bob Knight on the south plains of Lubbock way back in the day, that was one of his pet peeves. He ripped into a guy at a press conference one time for saying “both sides of the ball.” And Bob Knight was not a pleasant person to be around a lot, but he knocked that nomenclature, that verbiage out of me for good. I didn’t say it, but I’ll never say it again because that’s not something you say in basketball. So, hat tip to Bob Knight for refining that vocabulary. R.I.P.
Jeff McDonald: He also—never mind, we won’t go for it.
Mike Finger: No, go for it, why not?
Jeff McDonald: He also basically called you a prostitute once, right?
Mike Finger: Oh man, that was the same night, Jeff. That was the same—this is a great Bob Knight story and this is the Spurs Insider podcast, but I’ll tell it because it’s a really good story. That student reporter—what’s the name of the student paper at Tech, do you know? Is it The Matador?
Jeff McDonald: That sounds right. It might be.
Mike Finger: A student reporter asked Bob Knight about playing on both sides of the ball. And Bob Knight ripped into him, said, “You don’t know what you’re talking about, that’s not something we talk about in basketball and you need to come more prepared and show more professionalism, but I would not expect any more from someone who is in your chosen field,” meaning journalism. This guy’s just a journalism student, and he says, “in your chosen field, which is two steps up from prostitution.” And then he stands up and he’s going to storm out. And I said, “Coach, one more question.” And he turns around and he says, “What?” And I said, “What’s in between?” One of my all-time great moments. What’s the step in between journalism and prostitution?
Jeff McDonald: And it turns out the answer is podcasting.
Mike Finger: That’s exactly right. He did not give me the answer that day, but 20-some-odd years later, we have answered it. The answer is podcasting. So that’s good. No, that was a fun trip down memory lane. Don’t say “both sides of the ball.” Don’t say journalism is the same as prostitution, because there’s at least a step in between, according to Bob Knight.
What do we think about the upcoming New York trip? That was a heck of a segue. But Tom has raced to cover the Toronto game on Wednesday night. After that, it’s two games in New York against the Nets and Knicks, one against the Sixers, and then the rodeo trip is over. Can the winning streak last through the rest of this trip?
Jeff McDonald: Sure it can. We discussed that earlier. Sure it can. Will it? I don’t know. I’m looking forward to the game at Madison Square Garden because I was not at the one last season on Christmas Day. I was not at the NBA Cup Final, and both those were amazing games. I’m looking forward to the atmosphere there with Wemby and a good Spurs team going in there, a game that ought to feel a little playoff-y, I would think, both those teams being pretty good. I’m looking forward to seeing that.
Mike Finger: Another potential Finals matchup. Another unlikely Finals matchup, but those are fun. The Knicks are up there. The Knicks, more than the Pistons, have been through the postseason battles before, know how to navigate the big stage. So that will be a fun one.
Well, and we’re going to see our old friend, Jeremy Sochan. We’re going to see our friend Jeremy Sochan, who has been getting some minutes for the Knicks, not a lot of minutes. It’s been interesting sort of—it’s unscientific, but seeing the feedback on Knicks Twitter, where they signed Jeremy Sochan and they’re talking themselves into a 22-year-old former top-ten pick coming over. And then now they’re at the “Wait a minute, he can’t shoot or do anything on offense” phase. Like, they’ve already learned why he didn’t fit with the Spurs. I don’t know. I hope it goes well for him there. That seems like a very high-pressure situation to play basketball in New York. So I hope Jeremy can handle it.
And then after we see Jeremy in New York, that might be the end of just the countless minutes of this podcast that have been dedicated over the past four years to a guy who—I mean, played NBA basketball, that’s more than most of us have ever done. But much ado about not a whole lot in the end. And that’s the way a lot of careers work. There was hope, there wasn’t. Now there’s hope in San Antonio now that he’s gone—not because he’s gone, but now that he’s gone, the Spurs are going to move on to bigger and better things. Maybe Jeremy will move on to bigger and better things with the Knicks.
We look forward to that game. We look forward to all the games this week and the rest of the season. And until next time, take care of each other and keep it real.
[music plays]