Spurs Insider Podcast, 2026-03-25 06:27:00
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) 讨论了马刺队的又一波连胜，以及维克托·文班亚马 (Victor Wembanyama) 竞逐 NBA 最有价值球员 (MVP) 奖项的话题，并对德阿隆·福克斯 (De’Aaron Fox) 表示了赞赏。
推荐阅读：
以下是播客的文字记录：
迈克·芬格 (Mike Finger)：这里是来自北美各地高度安全、绝密且可能被录像的地点为您带来的《马刺内幕：连胜不止版》。我是迈克·芬格，和我在一起的依然是《圣安东尼奥新闻快报》的马刺随队记者杰夫·麦克唐纳 (Jeff McDonald) 和汤姆·奥斯本 (Tom Orsborn)。汤姆目前正在全美各地奔波，报道马刺最近的客场之旅。尽管马刺在轮休球员，尽管他们有些伤病困扰，但他们依然在延续连胜。我用了“连胜（streaking，亦有裸奔之意）”这个词，得小心点，因为这又是一个可能被录像的播客。杰夫，这次通话的成员们没有在“裸奔”吧？
杰夫·麦克唐纳 (Jeff McDonald)：现在这一秒还没有。挂断电话后，我不能保证会发生什么，但在目前，我相信我们都是衣冠楚楚的。
迈克·芬格：当我们——在播客开始前的交谈中，我们讨论了圣安东尼奥的轰动效应，你观察到无论你走到哪里，比如 Circle K 便利店，你都会被围堵，因为人们从播客里认出了你？
杰夫·麦克唐纳：求求大家了，放过我吧。我非常感谢大家的厚爱和认可，但我得过自己的生活。我有孩子，我试着在 HEB 超市购物，但连冷冻食品区都过不去，因为到处都有人围着我。所以，我只是请圣安东尼奥的乡亲们稍微冷静一点。我不是披头士。我知道很接近了，但我还不是披头士。你们不必撕掉我的衣服。
迈克·芬格：你确实得过自己的生活。你正在应对一些逆境，这比马刺队强多了。他们的逆境似乎永远不会到来。你一直在等着逆境降临，而他们却在轮休球员，正如我所说。有几个人缺席了一场比赛。维克托·文班亚马 (Victor Wembanyama) 自从我们上次播客以来，职业生涯第一次投中了终场哨响时的压哨绝杀。没问题。汤姆，昨晚在迈阿密，又是一场大胜，对你们当地的球员来说是一场轻松的胜利。
汤姆·奥斯本 (Tom Orsborn)：是的，他们恢复了全员齐整。斯蒂芬·卡斯尔 (Stephon Castle) 提到——他基本上是说，“我其实没受伤，我只是需要休息。”但他们全员回归，轻松取得了六连胜。
昨晚的大新闻是自林肯-道格拉斯辩论以来最激烈的辩论。我这个典故引用得够久远的。但文班非常有力、清晰地陈述了他竞选 MVP 的理由。他的三个核心论点：防守、几乎横扫俄克拉荷马城雷霆队，以及他在进攻端的影响力远不止得分。他把这些都摆了出来。他说他欢迎健康的辩论，但到赛季结束时，他希望用自己在剩余比赛中的表现来终结这场辩论。所以，这是迈阿密这边的头条新闻。
迈克·芬格：我想起最近的一次竞选，一位德州人在全国舞台上试图陈述自己的理由时也有三个要点，结果他忘了第三个。但文班全都记住了，对吧？
汤姆·奥斯本：他记住了。完全没有“哎呀（oops）”的时刻。他的要点是防守、击败俄克拉荷马城，还有教育部。哎呀。总之，这是一场一边倒的辩论。我是说，没人反驳。但我认为评委们可能会有不同意见，汤姆。
杰夫·麦克唐纳：文班的观点很好，我也都同意，但他们还是会把奖项给谢伊·吉尔杰斯-亚历山大 (Shai Gilgeous-Alexander)，他可能确实实至名归。当然，我是说，确实如此。
疯狂的是，杰夫和我讨论过这件事，对于我们这些经历过格雷格·波波维奇 (Gregg Popovich) 时代的人来说，现在这种不停讨论奖项的氛围简直令人震惊。我不是说这事对还是错，我只是说这很不一样。这对这支球队来说非常不同。
迈克·芬格：正如播客的好友唐·哈里斯 (Don Harris) 在 Twitter 上指出的，文班有大约 5100 万个理由想要赢得 MVP，因为如果他在未来两年内赢得该奖项，他下一份合同的起薪将会增加。所以，如果能多赚 5100 万美元，我也会为自己拉票。但是，杰夫，如果我错了请纠正我，即使他未来两年没拿到 MVP，他也有无数种方式拿到同样的数字。如果他明年入选最佳阵容一阵，或者入选最佳阵容，他就能拿超级顶薪。如果他明年赢得年度最佳防守球员，他也能拿超级顶薪。我记错了吗？
杰夫·麦克唐纳：那没问题，但这家伙就是想要 MVP。他想成为 MVP。
迈克·芬格：他非常渴望。我想林肯-道格拉斯辩论——我们是不是在播客的第一期就聊过这个？就像第一集，我们就在剖析林肯-道格拉斯辩论。那个来自伊利诺伊州的后起之秀，他的作为。像文班这样的高个子。我想看看文班戴着高筒大礼帽的样子。那会很有气势。
回到汤姆提到的——这不仅仅是当地球队文化的改变，我认为这也是代际差异。正如这盘“录像带”的观众可以作证的那样，我们都不是年轻绅士了。但现在的代际似乎觉得，自吹自擂、为自己陈述理由不再像以前那样是禁忌了。你觉得这公平吗？现在没人会对文班陈述自己的 MVP 理由感到惊讶，但如果蒂姆·邓肯 (Tim Duncan) 在 20 年前这么做，肯定会招来不少侧目，不是吗？
杰夫·麦克唐纳：我们在——不点名了——但我们在自己的行业里也能看到。人们觉得必须自吹自擂，搞点宣传，把自己的东西推出去，为自己拉票。我想——我代表我自己说，但也可能代表你——我们这一代人会觉得这有点令人不安。如果我们顺其自然，这绝不是我们会做的事。我觉得也许正如你所说，这是代际问题。
但正如人们常说的，“别恨球员，要恨就恨这游戏规则”。现在的孩子是这么说的吗？我想他们很久以前可能就这么说了。事实就是这样。你必须为自己拉票，维克托现在就在这么做。我不认为这会奏效。他打出了一个伟大的赛季。他配得上 MVP。说清楚，他绝对配得上 MVP。他只是遇到了一个非常、非常、非常难击败的对手。对方拥有所有的进攻数据，而且防守也并不差。亚历山大虽然不是年度最佳防守球员，但他攻防兼备，而且他的球队赢球比维克托多。我认为维克托挤进这场讨论的唯一方式——尽管我认为希望依然渺茫——就是马刺在排名上超越雷霆。但我不会去揣测评委的想法。
我想对于关注这类事情的人来说，文班将是下个赛季赢得 MVP 的头号热门。我认为他会是博彩公司最看好的人选。
汤姆·奥斯本：凯尔登昨晚在更衣室里率先挑起了话头，谈到了他自己想要成为年度最佳第六人的抱负。然后这引导文班在赛后也谈到了奖项。但是，是的，这确实值得一看。这很不一样。在波波维奇时代，我们一次又一次地询问球员关于奖项的问题，得到的回答总是非常一致——要么沉默，要么说“我们没考虑那个”，或者“那不重要，赢球才是关键”，然后他们会尽快结束话题。但我不是说这好还是坏，只是不同。这真的是时代的巨变。
迈克·芬格：杰夫，你能想象在那个年代，你等到深夜，当时还要赶报纸的截稿时间——这是一个为了明天的报纸而写作的古老概念。你等着当家球星邓肯的评论，你站在更衣室后面，那个通往淋浴间的门口，他经常呆在那儿，然后他出来，站在那儿尽职尽责地接受 90 秒到两分钟的媒体采访。你能想象如果在 2008 赛季或 2009 赛季的第 71 场比赛后，有人问：“你赢得 MVP 的理由是什么？”站在淋浴间旁的邓肯会有什么反应？
杰夫·麦克唐纳：死亡凝视。那种凝视。他会转过身，采访结束，直接走人。人们以为你在开玩笑。不，那绝对是他会做的事。他会盯着你，然后转身离开。是的，就像杰夫突然长了两个脑袋一样，他会盯着你，然后迅速转身。那是不可想象的。首先，杰夫不会问这种问题，但假设某个从 2026 年穿越回去的人在更衣室采访中问蒂姆：“嘿，还剩六场比赛。你为什么觉得你应该赢得 MVP？”100%——我毫不怀疑——他会盯着那个人，然后转身走出去。因为他偶尔也会对其他荒谬的问题这么做，不是吗？他和波波维奇经常用这种方式结束采访。
迈克·芬格：当他们不想聊了，就真的结束了，而问一个荒唐的问题正是结束采访的好方法。没错。
但要说明的是，现在不只是马刺在拉票。我认为全联盟都在这么做。每支球队都会为他们的球员造势。只是马刺在某种程度上是最后的莫希干人——作为评委，我经常收到亚特兰大老鹰队寄到我家的东西，希望我投给谁谁谁，或者明尼苏达森林狼队希望我投给谁。我还收到过萨克拉门托国王队的一个午餐盒，希望我投票给福克斯入选最佳阵容之类的。我是说，这就是球队为球员拉票的方式。
我记得人们总是问波波维奇这件事。他会说：“噢，顺其自然吧。我们不会寄出化学实验套装”之类的，我觉得——我从来没收到过化学实验套装。那其实挺酷的。但也许他有为球员准备竞选材料的想法，因为他们有很好的化学反应（Chemistry）。也许这正是他的想法。也许他一直想这么做，但又不敢让公关团队去执行。那总是他的例子。“我们不会寄出……”如果给马努·吉诺比利 (Manu Ginobili) 搞一个就太棒了。当然，一个马努风格的烧杯、一个试管、一个厄伦迈尔烧瓶。或者是大卫·罗宾逊 (David Robinson) 的“如何拆解晶体管收音机并重新组装”。
但要说明的是，马刺并不是在主动拉票。他们是在回答问题。再引用一个披头士的典故，保罗·麦卡特尼——什么来着，他被问到是否服用过 LSD，他如实回答了，然后遭到了抨击，他说：“嘿，有人问我问题，我只是回答了。”这是什么播客？我们得打上 TV-MA（成人级）标签了。不能让孩子们听到这些。
迈克·芬格：我以为汤姆要提披头士的另一个竞选梗，就是约翰·列侬说他比某个大人物还要出名。是的，我不认为文班应该走那么远。但他正在陈述自己的理由。
汤姆，你顺便提到了大卫·罗宾逊。我发现——你这周还发了另一条消息——每次维克托提到大卫，我都觉得很值得注意。这让我着迷。维克托在迈阿密提到了大卫，对吧？
汤姆·奥斯本：是的，昨晚很有趣。我问他，他在 175 场比赛后达到了得分和盖帽的里程碑，这个纪录只有他和“海军上将”共享。他说：“是的，是的，我非常了解罗宾逊。”最重要的事情是四双。他说他被罗宾逊始终保持的伟大竞技状态所激励，被他在球场上来回奔跑的样子所激励。他说罗宾逊是当今时代最接近赫拉克勒斯（大力神）的人。所以，这是一个很酷的引用。现场引起了一阵笑声。
迈克·芬格：大卫在 03 年夺冠后就退役了，对吧？文班现在 22 岁。所以，他基本上错过了大卫的整个职业生涯。好吧，就像赫拉克勒斯一样，你知道，那是神话，就在那里。他看过录像剪辑。
正如我在节目开头所说，马刺继续赢球，尽管，你知道，我不认为我们预料到——我们不会每周都预测 3 胜 0 负。我不认为我们上周预测了 3 胜 0 负。回想那场对阵菲尼克斯太阳队的比赛，差点就不是 3 胜 0 负了。但他们继续处理好了眼前的挑战。这些是重大的声明吗？不。它们能洞察四五月份的七场系列赛将如何发展吗？可能不会。但杰夫，我想赢下这些比赛总比输掉好，接下来该往哪走？在之前的一波 10 连胜和更早的连胜之后，你从这次 6 连胜中能读出什么？你认为这些事情有什么重要性？
杰夫·麦克唐纳：你可以给很多场胜利打上小星号或标记。比如，“噢，菲尼克斯阵容不整，他们必须投进压哨球”，“迈阿密阵容不整”，几乎每一场他们赢下的比赛你都可以这么说。但归根结底，他们可能会赢得 60 场胜利。你不可能靠意外做到这一点，也不可能靠运气做到这一点。你可能是通过在运气出现时利用它来做到这一点的。但我觉得说一支威胁到 60 胜的球队非常、非常出色，这并不是什么激进的观点。这是唯一的逻辑解释。
他们接下来要做的——我们现在处于这种等待模式，等着季后赛的对阵情况，等着看他们会打谁。并不是说这些比赛没有意义，但确实有点那个意思。所以，你不能从中得出太多结论。但你可以说他们就是一支非常出色的球队。也许季后赛对他们来说是另一种挑战。也许那是他们还没准备好迈出的一步，无法在季后赛走得很远。也许他们准备好了。我开始相信，我们整个赛季对这些家伙的看法，可能都低估了他们，直到现在也是如此。
所以，我们将拭目以待。但对于那些想要审视他们赢下的比赛并说“但是这支球队很烂”或“这支球队没派主力”或“他们必须靠压哨球才能击败残阵太阳”的人，你可以随心所欲。你不可能意外赢得 60 场比赛。你一定长期以来做对了一些事情。
另一件事是，他们真正拥有自己想要使用的首发阵容，也就是他们现在正在使用的这套，全员健康并能同时上场的第一时间是 1 月 31 日。从那以后，我相信他们的战绩是 22 胜 3 负。所以，有理由相信他们现在也正处于巅峰状态。
汤姆·奥斯本：他们阵容太深厚了。我是说，这是最让我惊讶的一点。正如福克斯几场比赛前所说，“太深厚了”。他们就像潮水一样向你涌来。我是说，这是最突出的特点。
迈克·芬格：当你谈论星号或——我不认为星号是正确的符号，只是某种——当你记笔记时，我们中有些人确实在比赛期间用笔和纸记笔记，你会在一个回合旁边画上小星星。比如如果你记下了稍后想看的内容，你在这些比赛中画在回合旁边的一些星星，就是对阵菲尼克斯的最后 30 秒。是的，菲尼克斯当时阵容不整；是的，他们控制了大部分比赛；是的，他们可能只是西部第七或第八种子，不是冠军争夺者。
但马刺在关键时刻在攻防两端都清楚地知道自己想要什么，没有被场面吓倒。我认为这些就是你在这种时刻旁边画的小星星。你会觉得，也许这支球队在季后赛遇到类似时刻时也会知道如何处理。这很微妙。我们在霜银中心看那场比赛，马刺落后一分，当菲尼克斯控球时，计时器还剩大约 26.2 秒。这几乎是计时器上最难规划的时间，因为马刺还有一个暂停。所以你可以说让他们耗完时间，在 24 秒时投篮，然后抢篮板，但那样你就只剩下一秒钟了。你可能必须在那儿犯规。他们对正确的人犯规了。
杰夫·麦克唐纳：你必须在那儿犯规。我只是插句话，抱歉。
迈克·芬格：在 28 秒或 29 秒时，也许你不必犯规，但你必须在那儿犯规，而且不知何故，他们诱使菲尼克斯把球传给了他们想要传给的那个人。你执行了犯规，布置了战术。赛后我和米奇·约翰逊 (Mitch Johnson) 开玩笑说，你画的那个战术真复杂，他看起来差点被冒犯了。就像在说，“我们必须设置一个双人掩护！”你看那个回合，有朱利安·尚帕尼 (Julian Champagnie) 和迪伦·哈珀 (Dylan Harper) 的双人掩护来让文班跑出空位，德文·瓦塞尔 (Devin Vassell) 在低位牵制一名防守者，福克斯传球后闪向底角。顺便说一句，福克斯当时完全空了。但这一切都拆解开了。一旦你把球传给那个 7 英尺 4 英寸的家伙，他站在罚球线延长线，距离篮筐 17 英尺，耗掉了 9 秒钟，然后投篮命中。
在那一刻，就像米奇所说，天赋就是高光。文班说这很简单。不是什么难理解的事。但要取得那样的胜利，需要很多细节。这不仅仅是文班在最后打英雄球。我认为如果你是一个寻找鼓舞理由的马刺球迷，你一定会被他们每晚都在做的那些小事所鼓舞。
杰夫·麦克唐纳：是的，在那场菲尼克斯比赛的关键时刻，最伟大的教练工作是米奇·约翰逊诱使约迪·费尔南德斯 (Jordi Fernández) 把里思留在场上。在这种情况下，你不能让一个罚球命中率只有 52% 的球员留在场上。我认为那是一个疏忽。但一旦马刺意识到这一点，他们就确保球传到那里并立即对他犯规。所以，不管怎么说，这是出色的执教。他的命中率更接近 49%。他表现得太糟糕了。他在那场比赛中做了一些很酷的事情。他是一个优秀的年轻球员。但是，是的，这就是一支球队在关键时刻没做好小事，而另一支球队做好了。
马刺一直是一支能做好这些小事的球队。他们以前没有过那样的压哨绝杀。他们这种球不多，但根据 NBA 的统计定义，他们打了很多关键时刻的比赛，而且他们在这些关键时刻的战绩非常、非常出色。所以，再次强调，这些都是积极的事情。常规赛在这些方面表现出色总比表现糟糕要好。就是这样。
迈克·芬格：我不知道该如何处理这个播客里这么多正能量。我不知道该怎么办。我迷失了。唯一的紧张时刻发生在播客开始前，汤姆·奥斯本出于好意，试图把大海拍进镜头里。汤姆，你想给这个视频播客增加一个维度，但我们看不清汤姆的脸了。他变成了一个影子。所以，现在他的背景里有一些艺术品，我觉得挺不错的。
汤姆·奥斯本：比斯坎湾，美丽的比斯坎湾。通往南海滩的大桥。本来会是完美的画面。
迈克·芬格：你能把摄像头转过去闪一下吗？
汤姆·奥斯本：我们做得太多了。你对这个男人要求太多了。噢，看——我们能看到了！那是水面。干得好，汤姆。我是说，看看吧。NBA 还有更好的背景吗？我不这么认为。好吧，你要去孟菲斯了。孟菲斯的庭院，那里可能有一个不错的背景。或者是密尔沃基。那些都是很棒的背景。但我们感谢你的努力，汤姆。
说到关键时刻，昨晚赛前我问了埃里克·斯波尔斯特拉 (Erik Spoelstra) 关于经验的问题，对于像马刺这样渴望在季后赛走得很远的球队来说，经验有多重要。他说：“嘿，这不是我该评论的。”但接着他说：“我确实想表扬一下德阿隆·福克斯。我是说，这家伙在过去三四个赛季场均能拿 25 分。来到马刺后，他现在降到 19 分了。”他说 NBA 有多少人会做出这样的牺牲，心甘情愿地让场均得分下降 7 分，仅仅是为了赢球？所以，我是说，肯定还有其他人，当然有，但他能专门提到德阿隆，这很不错。这很酷。他和凯尔登在牺牲方面定下了基调。我是说，当这些家伙愿意退居次席时，这种精神会渗透到全队，其他人也会效仿。迪伦·哈珀，你知道，他一直很棒。在另一支球队他可能场均能拿很多分，但在这里，一切都为了团队凝聚在一起。
杰夫·麦克唐纳：福克斯这件事——牺牲是这支球队的秘密武器。名单上的几乎每个人在其他地方或不同的情况下都可能比现在得分更多，包括文班。我认为当人们谈论 MVP 辩论时会说，“他场均只有 24 分，你不能在 2026 年场均只拿 24 分就赢得 MVP。”但你有没有看过这支球队是怎么打球的？他们不会只把球给一个人，即使是文班，然后让他自己去解决。这不是这里的打法。文班的大部分投篮都来自于进攻的流转，有时是顺下冲向篮筐——也就是那些轻松的得分。仅仅因为他不必在每一次控球时都单挑对手，并不意味着他的得分能力有所下降。他可以要求那样。他可以要求更多的出手。但他不会那么做，因为他更想赢。
同样的事情我们也聊过福克斯。迪伦·哈珀如果是在其他任何地方，作为榜眼秀，他都会是首发。但他来到了一支不需要他首发的球队。他似乎对此完全没意见，并且在替补角色中打得风生水起。凯尔登和德文·瓦塞尔——这些在这个联盟里场均能拿 20 分的家伙，现在被要求扮演可能被视为次要的角色。正是所有这些人接受了这些角色，接受了数据表里得分栏那个数字对他们来说可能是最不重要的事情。一群人都在这么做，这可能就是为什么马刺在我看来超出了预期，因为由于球员们牺牲并接受角色，他们变得大于部分之和。
汤姆·奥斯本：我把那段话给德阿隆看，他只是耸耸肩说：“我知道我签约是为了什么”，然后就走开了。但是，还有前面提到的大卫·罗宾逊——我要说的是——他们有这种传统。罗宾逊为邓肯退居次席。吉诺比利成为了第六人。这是这支球队的传统。邓肯为帕克和吉诺比利退居次席。他们三人在某些时刻都曾为彼此牺牲，然后在时机成熟时将火炬传递给了莱昂纳德。所以，是的，随着时间的推移，这已经成了一件非常“马刺风”的事情。
迈克·芬格：而且这种精神来自于那些你可能认为不会这么做的人。我记得回到托尼·帕克 (Tony Parker) 的早期，每个人都以为，“噢，他要去好莱坞了。”他有一个好莱坞女朋友，他想成为明星，这个法国孩子会厌倦圣安东尼奥，他会想要自己的球队。结果他成了最教科书式的马刺球员之一。
这有点像“鸡生蛋还是蛋生鸡”的问题。是马刺的体系在人们心中创造了这种精神，还是他们只是挑选了合适的人来融入这个体系？我认为可能两者兼而有之。一旦你身处其中，你就会沉浸其中，你会了解到如果你只顾自己，你在圣安东尼奥是待不长的。但回到 90 年代，汤姆，他们也有过这样的球员。也许不是丹尼斯·罗德曼 (Dennis Rodman)，但大卫·罗宾逊，那整个团队，他们都很合群。99 年的那支冠军球队也有这样的球员。
汤姆·奥斯本：就像这个播客的主持人一样。本来可以在别的地方。
迈克·芬格：我觉得你在针对我。我觉得你在针对我。这就是为什么这个播客永远赢不了冠军，因为有太多的不安全感。不够真诚。杰夫，我们前几天讨论的维克托用的那个词是什么？他说“精确性 (preciseness)”，然后他问，“有这个词吗？”我们告诉他应该是“precision”。他非常感激。他喜欢扩大自己的词汇量。
总之，感谢汤姆参加节目。总是会有辩论，就像关于奥克兰运动家队的老梗，球员们分坐不同的出租车。25 名球员，25 辆出租车。没错。天赋最终会胜出。天赋就是高光。
汤姆正从比斯坎湾出发——汤姆，你的摄像头滑落了。我们只能看到你的头顶。你给我们看了海湾，那很棒，现在你房间里有那件美丽的艺术品。这就是为什么你是业内最棒的。你正从迈阿密穿过全美各地的机场。祝你好运。我们再也见不到汤姆了。穿过全美各地的机场去孟菲斯，穿过全美各地的机场去密尔沃基，然后在下周一我们再次录制播客前回到德克萨斯南部对阵芝加哥公牛队。所以，那是孟菲斯、密尔沃基、芝加哥。我们这周还费劲做预测吗？做吧。杰夫说他们会全胜，这应该让马刺球迷和球队感到担心。巨大的红旗。汤姆，你怎么看？
汤姆·奥斯本：是的，在赛季最后一次客场之旅——金州、快船和丹佛——之前，他们应该拿到 57 胜。届时杰夫将穿过全美各地的机场。
杰夫·麦克唐纳：不，我打算开车去。
迈克·芬格：应该会很有趣。感谢大家对我们幽默长相的幽默观察。感谢继续收看。如果你不想看视频，也不必勉强。你可以继续在你的车里、在你的空中客车里收听。我不签签名。我现在也要把这话放出来。当你在 Valero、在 HEB，在杰夫出没的所有地方见到他时，请放过他。他不是比尔·拉塞尔 (Bill Russell)。但直到下次见，照顾好彼此，保持真实。
[音乐渐弱]
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：Wemby makes his MVP case
Wemby makes his MVP case
Columnist Mike Finger and beat writers Jeff McDonald and Tom Orsborn discuss yet another Spurs’ winning streak, along with Victor Wembanyama’s campaign for the NBA Most Valuable Player award and a compliment for De’Aaron Fox.
Suggested reading:
Victor Wembanyama states his case for MVP
Why Victor Wembanyama’s dominance is simple but Spurs’ plan isn’t
Stephon Castle delivers all-around performance after getting rest
Here is the transcript of the podcast:
Mike Finger: From a highly secure network of top-secret and possibly videotaped locations across North America, this is the Spurs Insider: Still Streaking Edition. I’m Mike Finger, joined as always by San Antonio Express-News Spurs beat writers Jeff McDonald and Tom Orsborn, who is out in America covering this latest Spurs road trip where the Spurs continue to win, even though they’re resting guys, even though they’re a bit banged up. They’re still streaking. I use the word streaking, I’ve got to be careful because this is once again a possibly videotaped podcast. The members of this call, Jeff, are not streaking. Is that correct?
Jeff McDonald: Not right this second, no. When we hang up, I can’t promise what’s going to happen after that, after we log off, but right now we’re all going to be fully clothed, I believe.
Mike Finger: When you—we were discussing the buzz in San Antonio during our pre-podcast conversation here, and you were making an observation about how everywhere you go, what is it? The Circle K? The places out in San Antonio where you’re just getting mobbed now because people recognize you from the podcast?
Jeff McDonald: Please, people, you’ve got to leave me alone. You’ve got to leave me alone. I mean, I appreciate it. I appreciate the love and the recognition, but you know, I’ve got to live my life. I have children. I’m trying to shop at HEB, and I can’t even get through the frozen foods aisle because I’m just being mobbed everywhere I go. So, I’m just asking San Antonio to just calm down a little. Just calm down a little on me. I’m not a Beetle. I know it’s close, but I’m not quite a Beetle. You don’t have to tear my clothes off.
Mike Finger: Not a shell beetle? You’re not quite that either, I don’t think. You do have to live your life. You are dealing with some adversity, which is more than the Spurs can say. The adversity just never comes. You keep waiting for it to come, and they’re sitting guys, like I said. A couple of guys missed a game. Victor Wembanyama, since we last met on this podcast, had to hit a game-winning, last-second, buzzer-beating shot for the first time in his career. No problem. And Tom, last night in Miami, another blowout victory, easy victory for your local cagers.
Tom Orsborn: Yeah, they were back at full strength and Stephon Castle mentioned that—he basically said, “I wasn’t—it wasn’t an injury really, I just needed the rest.” But they were back at full strength and cruised to their sixth straight win.
The big story last night was the biggest debate, I guess, since Lincoln-Douglas. I’m going way back with that reference. But Wemby stating his case for the MVP award very forcefully, clearly. His three bullet points: defense, nearly sweeping OKC, and then that offensive impact is more than just scoring. So, he laid it out. He said he welcomes a healthy debate, but by the end of the season, he wants to end that debate with his play in these remaining games. So, that was the big story out here in Miami.
Mike Finger: I’m thinking of a more recent campaign where a Texan had three bullet points on a national stage where he was trying to state his case and he forgot the third one. But Wemby remembered all three, huh?
Tom Orsborn: He did. He did. I think there was no “oops.” It’s defense, I beat Oklahoma City, and the Department of Education. Oops. Anyway, it was a one-sided debate. I mean, no one was arguing against it. So, I think that the voters probably will though, Tom.
Jeff McDonald: Wemby makes some good points, and I agree with all of them, and they’re still going to give this thing to SGA, who probably deserved it. Sure, I mean, sure.
What’s crazy, and Jeff and I talked about this, it’s so stunning for those of us who lived through the Gregg Popovich years that it’s nonstop award talk. It’s just—I’m not saying it’s right or wrong, but I’m just saying it’s different. It’s very different for this franchise.
Mike Finger: As friend of the podcast Don Harris pointed out on Twitter, Wemby has about 51 million reasons to want to win MVP because it increases his max on his next contract if he wins it one of these next two years. So, I’d be stumping for myself to make 51 million more dollars, too. But, and Jeff you can correct me if I’m wrong on this, there are myriad ways for him to get that same number even if he doesn’t win MVP the next two years. If he’s first-team All-NBA next year, or if he’s All-NBA next year, he can Supermax. If he wins Defensive Player of the Year next year, he’s Supermax. Am I wrong there?
Jeff McDonald: That’s fine, but the dude wants MVP. He wants to be MVP.
Mike Finger: He wants it badly. I think Lincoln-Douglas—did we talk about that on like the very first edition of this podcast? Like the very first episode, I think we were breaking down the Lincoln-Douglas debate. This upstart out of Illinois, what he’s got going on. A tall guy like Wemby. I want to see Wemby in a stovepipe hat. That’d be a lot of strength.
Is it—to go back to something that Tom was mentioning—it’s not just a change in culture around the local cagers, I think it’s sort of generational, too. And as the viewers of this VHS tape can attest, we are not young gentlemen. But it just seems generational now that tooting your own horn and making your own case is less verboten than it used to be. Do you think that’s fair? No one kind of bats an eye at Wemby setting out his case for MVP these days, whereas if Tim Duncan would have done it 20 years ago, there would have been some side-eye there, wouldn’t there?
Jeff McDonald: We see it in—without mentioning names—but we see it in our own business. Like people feel like they have to toot their own horn, get their own pub, get their own stuff out there, stump for themselves. And I think—I’ll speak for me, but I think I probably speak for you too as well—people of our generation find that a little disconcerting. It’s not something we would do, get put left to our own devices. And I think maybe to your point, it’s generational.
But don’t hate the player, hate the game, as they say. Is that what the kids these days say? I think they might have said it a long time ago. That’s what it is. You’ve got to stump for yourself and that’s what Victor’s doing. I don’t think it’s going to work out. He’s had a great year. He’s MVP-worthy. To be clear, he’s MVP-worthy. He’s just up against a guy who is going to be really, really, really hard to beat. Has all the offensive numbers, and it’s not like he’s a slouch defensively. SGA’s not the Defensive Player of the Year, but he’s really good at both ends of the floor, and his team has won more than Victor’s. And I think the only way Victor sneaks into this conversation—and I think it would still be a long shot—is if the Spurs were to pass the Thunder in the standings. But I’m not going to speak to the minds of the voters.
I guess for people who are into this sort of thing, I think Victor will be the odds-on favorite going into next season to win the MVP. I think he’ll be the betting favorite.
Tom Orsborn: Keldon got the ball rolling last night in the locker room holding court, talking about his own aspirations to be the Sixth Man of the Year. And then it kind of led to Wemby talking about it after the game. But yeah, it’s just something to see. It’s different. Time and again during the Gregg Popovich era, we would ask guys about awards and it would be so consistent—either silence, or “we’re not thinking about that,” or “that’s not important, it’s all about winning,” and they would move on as quickly as possible. But it’s—I’m not saying it’s good or bad, it’s just different. It’s really just a sea change these days.
Mike Finger: Can you imagine, Jeff, in those days when you’d kind of wait for—it’d be late in the evening and you were on newspaper deadline at the time, which was a novel concept to be able to write for the next day’s newspaper. And you’re waiting for a comment from franchise player Tim Duncan and you stand back there in the locker room, that doorway to the showers where he would hang out, and then he’d come out and he’d do his—he’d stand and diligently do his 90 seconds, two minutes of media. Can you imagine if after game 71 of the 2008 season, 2009 season, somebody would have asked, “What’s your case for winning MVP?” What’s Tim Duncan standing there by the showers, what’s his reaction to that question?
Jeff McDonald: The stare. The stare. He turns around and the interview is over and he leaves. You—people think that you are joking. No, but that is 100% what he would have done. He would have stared at you, he would have turned around and left. Yeah, like Jeff had suddenly sprouted two heads, he’d stare and pivot quickly. That would be unthinkable. First of all, for Jeff to ask it, but let’s just say some time-traveler from the year 2026 went back to that locker room interview and asked Tim, “Hey, there’s six games left. Why do you think you should win the MVP?” 100%—there is no doubt in my mind—he would have stared at him and turned around and walked out. Because he would do that for other ridiculous questions, wouldn’t he every now and then? He and Pop would kind of have that ender of an interview conclusion.
Mike Finger: When they were done, they were done, and that would be a good way to make them done. Right, is to ask something preposterous. Yes.
But it’s not just—to be clear, it’s not just the Spurs who are campaigning these days. I think everybody does it across the league. Every team does it for their players. It’s just the Spurs were kind of the last of the Mohicans in terms of—you and I, as a voter, I get stuff sent to my house all the time from the Atlanta Hawks wanting me to vote for this guy for that, or the Minnesota Timberwolves wanting me to vote this guy for that. I’ve got a like a lunchbox from the Sacramento Kings wanting me to vote for De’Aaron Fox for All-NBA or something. And I mean, that’s just what teams do to stump for their players.
And I remember people would always ask Pop about that. He would be like, “Oh, you know, whatever happens. We’re not going to send out chemistry sets” or whatever, which I thought—I’ve never gotten a chemistry set. It’d be kind of cool. But maybe he had that idea for the campaign materials for his players because they had good chemistry. Maybe that was in his mind. Maybe he always was tempted to do it and was too afraid to pull the trigger with the PR staff. That was always his example. “We’re not going to send out…” That would have been a great Manu one, though. Sure, a Manu-like beaker and a test tube, Erlenmeyer flask. A David Robinson “how to break down a transistor radio and put it back together again.”
But to be clear, the Spurs aren’t campaigning. They’re answering questions. And for our umpteenth Beatles reference, Paul McCartney—what, he was asked about taking LSD and he answered it truthfully, and then got the blowback and he said, “Hey, I was asked the question, I answered it.” What kind of podcast is this? We’re going to have to put like a TV-MA on this. We can’t let the kids hear this.
Mike Finger: I thought Tom was going to go to the other Beatles campaign thing where John Lennon said he was bigger than a certain figure. Yes, I don’t think Wemby should go that far. But he’s making his case.
You mentioned in passing there David Robinson, Tom. I find—you had another tidbit out there this week—every time Victor mentions Dave, it’s notable to me. It’s fascinating to me. And Victor mentioned Dave in Miami, is that right?
Tom Orsborn: Yeah, last night was a fun one. I asked him, you know, he hit a milestone for points and blocks that only he and the Admiral share after 175 games. And he said, “Yeah, yeah, I knew all about Robinson.” The biggest thing was the quadruple-double. And he said he’s inspired by the great condition, shape that Robinson was always in, the running that he did up and down the court. And he said he’s the closest thing to Hercules we have in this day and age. So, that was kind of a cool reference. He got a pretty good laugh there in the room.
Mike Finger: And Big Dave retired after the '03 title, right? And Victor Wembanyama is 22 years old. So, he basically missed David’s whole career. Well, like Hercules, you know, it’s mythological, it’s out there. He’s seen the clips.
Like I said at the top of the show, the Spurs continue to win even though, you know, I don’t think we expect—we don’t pick 3-0 every week. I don’t think we picked 3-0 last week. We can go back to that Phoenix game, it almost wasn’t 3-0. But they continue to just handle what’s in front of them. Are these huge statements? No. Do they lend any kind of insight into how the seven-game series are going to go in April and May? Probably not. But Jeff, I suppose it’s better to be winning these games than losing them, and I don’t know where do you go from there? What do you take from a six-game winning streak after a 10-game winning streak before that and before that a winning streak? What importance do you place on any of this stuff?
Jeff McDonald: You can put little asterisks or tick marks by a lot of these wins. Like, “Oh, Phoenix was shorthanded and they had to hit one at the buzzer,” and “Miami was shorthanded,” you can do that with almost any game that they’re winning. But at the end of the day, they probably could win 60 games. And you don’t do that by accident, and you don’t do that by luck. You maybe do that by taking advantage of some luck when it presents itself. But I feel like it’s not a hot take to say that a team that is threatening 60 wins is just really, really good. That’s the only logical explanation.
And what they’re going to do—we’re kind of in this holding pattern now where we’re waiting for the playoff matchup and who they’re going to play. Not to say these games are meaningless, but they kind of are. So, you can’t draw much from them. But you can say that they’re just a really good team. And maybe the playoffs are a different animal for them. Maybe that’s just a step they’re not ready to take to make a deep playoff run. Maybe they are. I’m starting to believe that everything we believed about these guys all season, we might have undersold them up to and including right now.
So, we’ll see how it goes. But for people that want to look at the games that they’re winning and say, “Well, they—but this team is bad” or “this team is not playing anybody” or “they had to get a buzzer-beater to beat a shorthanded Suns team,” you can do that if you want. You don’t win 60 games by accident. You’ve been doing something right for a long time.
And the other thing, they really only had their starting lineup that they want to use, that they’re using, the first time that that lineup was able to be deployed where everybody’s healthy at the same time was January the 31st. Since then they are, I believe, 22 and 3. So, there’s reason to believe that they’re also peaking at this time too.
Tom Orsborn: They’re so damn deep. I mean, that’s the thing that jumps out to me. Just as De’Aaron Fox said a couple of games ago, “Just so deep.” They just come at you in waves. I mean, that’s the thing that stands out to me.
Mike Finger: When you talk about asterisks or—and I don’t think asterisk is the right character here, but just a kind of—when you’re taking notes, and some of us actually take notes with pen and paper during games, and you put the little stars next to a play. Like if you note what you want to look at later, some of the stars that you put next to plays during these games are just the last 30 seconds against Phoenix. Who yes, was shorthanded, who yes, controlled much of that game, and who yes, is probably going to be a seven or eight seed in the Western Conference and is not a championship contender.
But the way that the Spurs knew exactly what they wanted down the stretch at both ends of the floor, did not get rattled by the situation. I think those are the little stars that you put next to moments like that. And think that maybe this team will know how to handle those similar moments in the playoffs. It’s a tricky deal. We were watching that game at the Frost Bank Center and the Spurs are down one point and there’s like 26.2 on the clock when Phoenix has the ball. And that’s almost the toughest time on the clock to plan for because the Spurs did have a timeout left. And so you could say let them go all the way down and shoot it at 24 seconds and then grab the rebound, but then you have what, one second left to deal with? You probably have to foul there. They fouled the right guy.
Jeff McDonald: You have to foul there. I was just chiming in, sorry.
Mike Finger: At 28, at 29, maybe you don’t have to foul, but you have to foul there and somehow they baited Phoenix into passing the ball to the guy they wanted them to pass the ball to. You commit that foul, you set up your play. Mitch Johnson after the game, I joked with him about how that was a really complicated play you drew up there and he seemed borderline offended. Like, “We had to set a double screen!” And you watch that play and there’s Julian Champagnie, Dylan Harper double screen to get Victor open, and you have Devin Vassell down there on the block occupying a defender, and you have De’Aaron Fox making the pass and then flashing to the corner. De’Aaron Fox was wide open, by the way. But it all breaks down. Once you pass the ball to the 7’4” guy, he stands there at the elbow, 17 feet from the basket, lets nine seconds go off the clock, and hits the shot.
And at that moment, it’s just, like Mitch said, the talent is the highlight. And Victor said it’s straightforward. Not a difficult thing to figure out. But there are little things that go into pulling off victories like that. It’s not just Victor Wembanyama hero-ball at the end. And I think if you’re a Spurs fan looking for reasons to be encouraged, you have to be encouraged by all those little things they keep doing night after night after night.
Jeff McDonald: Yeah, the greatest coaching job of the down the stretch of that Phoenix game was Mitch Johnson tricking Jordi Fernández into keeping Reath—flaming on the floor. In that situation, you can’t have a 52% foul shooter on the floor. I think that was an oversight. But once the Spurs recognized that, they made sure the ball got there and fouled him immediately. So, it was good coaching one way or another, I guess. He’s closer to 49%. He was just terrible. And he’d done some cool stuff in that game. He’s a good young player. But yeah, that’s an example of one team not doing the little things down the stretch and the other team doing it.
And the Spurs have consistently been the team that does those little things. They haven’t had a last-second game-winner like that. They haven’t had many of those, but they’ve had a lot of crunch-time games, as defined by NBA stats, and their record is pretty, pretty good in those crunch-time games. So, again, positive stuff. Better to be doing well in those in the regular season than doing poorly in them. So, there you go.
Mike Finger: I don’t know how to deal with all this positivity on this podcast. I don’t know what to do. I don’t know, I’m lost here. The one moment of tension came before the podcast when Tom Orsborn, who was well-intentioned, was trying to get the ocean in the shot. Tom, you had this idea to really bring an extra dimension to the video VHS podcast, but you couldn’t see Tom’s face. He became a shadow. So, now he has some art in his background, which I think is pretty nice.
Tom Orsborn: Biscayne Bay, beautiful Biscayne Bay. The bridge to South Beach. It would have been picture-perfect.
Mike Finger: Can you flash the camera over there?
Tom Orsborn: We’re doing too much. You’re asking this man to do too much. Oh, look at—we can see it! There’s the water. Good job, Tom. I mean, look at it. Is there a better backdrop in the NBA? I don’t think so. Well, you’re going to Memphis. That Memphis courtyard, like there’s probably a good background there, you know. Or that Milwaukee. Those are some great backdrops. But we appreciate the effort, Tom.
Speaking of crunch time, I asked Erik Spoelstra about the experience question last night before the game, how much it matters for a team like the Spurs with aspirations for a deep postseason run. He said, “Hey, it’s not my place to say.” But then he said, “I do want to commend De’Aaron Fox. I mean, here’s a guy averaging 25 points a game last three, four seasons. Comes to the Spurs, he’s down to 19 now.” Says how many guys in the NBA would sacrifice like that and willingly go down seven points on your average and do it just to win? So, I mean, I’m sure there’s other guys, of course there are, but it was neat that he singled out De’Aaron about that. That’s pretty cool. Him and Keldon setting the tone as far as sacrifice goes. I mean, it just permeates the whole team when those guys are taking a little bit of a back seat, everyone else is going to follow suit. Dylan Harper, you know, he’s been great. Could be averaging so many points for another team, but it’s all coming together for these guys.
Jeff McDonald: The Fox thing is—it’s the secret sauce of this team, is this sacrifice. Almost everybody on the roster is probably scoring less than they could be somewhere else or in a different situation, up to and including Victor Wembanyama. I think when people talk about the MVP debate and say, “He’s only averaging 24 points a game, you can’t average 24 points a game in 2026 and win the MVP.” But have you watched this team play and how they play? They’re not just going to give the ball to one guy, even Victor Wembanyama, and just let him cook. That’s not how this works. Victor’s getting most of his shots in the flow of the offense with momentum coming downhill sometimes at the rim—like, the easy stuff. Just because he doesn’t have to take a guy one-on-one on every possession doesn’t make him any less of a scorer. And he could demand that. He could demand shots. He’s not going to do that because he’d rather win.
Same thing we talked about with Fox. Dylan Harper would be starting almost anywhere else he was drafted at number two in the NBA Draft. Came to a team where that’s not needed. He seems fine with that and is thriving in the bench role. Keldon and Devin Vassell—guys who have scored 20 points a game in this league, now being asked to fill what might be seen as a lesser role. And it’s all those people accepting those roles, accepting the fact that the number in the points column next to my box score is probably the least important thing to me. And it’s a bunch of guys doing that, and that’s probably why the Spurs are, to me, exceeding expectations because they’re more than the sum of their parts because guys are sacrificing to accept roles.
Tom Orsborn: I showed that quote to De’Aaron and he kind of shrugged and said, “I knew what I was signing up for” and moved on. But also, the aforementioned David Robinson—where I’m going with this—they have a tradition of this. Robinson took a back seat to Duncan. Ginobili became a sixth man. It’s a tradition in this franchise. Duncan took a back seat to Parker and Ginobili. Those three all took back seats to each other at some points and then they all passed the torch to Kawhi when that time came. So, yeah, that is a “Spursy” thing over time.
Mike Finger: And it comes from guys who you might not think are going to do it. I remember it going back to the early days of Tony when everyone assumed, “Oh, he’s going to go Hollywood.” He had a Hollywood girlfriend and he’s going to want to be a star and he’s this French kid who is going to grow weary of San Antonio and he’s going to want his own franchise. He became one of the most textbook Spurs type guys there was.
It’s kind of a “chicken and the egg” question. Does the Spurs’ system create this in people, or do they just pick the right guys to fit into that system? I think it’s probably a little bit of both. Once you’re around it, you kind of get immersed in it and you learn that if you’re about yourself, you’re not going to make it very long in San Antonio. But you go back to the '90s, Tom, they’ve had guys who have done that. Maybe not Dennis Rodman, but David Robinson, that whole crew, they fit in. That '99 championship team had guys like that.
Tom Orsborn: Like the host of this podcast. Could be somewhere else.
Mike Finger: I feel like that’s a shot. I feel like that’s a shot. This is why this podcast will never win championships, because there’s too much insecurity. There’s not enough genuineness. What was the Victor word that we talked the other day, Jeff? He said “preciseness,” and he said, “is that a word?” And we told him that it’s “precision.” He was very appreciative of that. He enjoys expanding his vocabulary.
But anyway, thank you Tom for the show. Always a debate too, the old line about the Oakland A’s taking separate cabs. 25 players, 25 cabs. Exactly. Talent wins out. Talent is the highlight.
Tom is on his way from Biscayne Bay—Tom, your camera’s slipping. We’re seeing only the top of your head. You showed us the bay, that was great, and now you have that beautiful art in the room. That’s why you’re the best in the biz. You’re going from Miami through the airports of America. Good luck with that. We’ll never see Tom again. Through the airports of America to Memphis, through the airports of America to Milwaukee and back to South Texas for the Chicago Bulls next Monday before we podcast again. So, that is Memphis, Milwaukee, Chicago. Do we even bother with predictions this week? Let’s do it. They’re going to win them all. Jeff says they’re going to win them all, which should be a concern to Spurs fans and to the team. Big red flag. Tom, what do you think?
Tom Orsborn: Yeah, they should be at 57 wins going on that last road trip of the season: Golden State, Clippers, and Denver. Where Jeff will be going through the airports of America.
Jeff McDonald: No, I’m just going to drive.
Mike Finger: Should be interesting. Thanks to everyone for their humorous observations about our humorous faces. Thanks for continuing to tune in. You don’t have to watch us on video if you don’t want to. You can continue to listen in your cars, in your airbus. I don’t sign autographs. I want to put that out there right now, too. Please leave Jeff alone when you see him out there at Valero, at HEB, at all the places where he goes. He’s not Bill Russell. But until next time, take care of each other and keep it real.
[Music fades out]