By Jeje Gomez | Pounding The Rock (PtR), 2026-06-02 00:32:10
马刺保持了冷静并赢下了抢七大战。他们在分区决赛中展现出的沉着冷静，是否应该彻底平息外界对其缺乏经验的担忧？
**玛丽琳·杜宾斯基 (Marilyn Dubinski)：**他们会犯错，但其他人也一样，他们已经让这种论调不攻自破了。他们证明了所谓的“缺乏经验”可以通过成熟、团结、化学反应、优秀的执教，当然还有天赋来克服。我脑海中一直有一个理论：去年是“积累经验”的一年（即赢球、输球、学习和成长），如果维克托·文班亚马 (Victor Wembanyama) 没有患上深静脉血栓，他们本可以获得季后赛经验。当然，那个进程被打断了，他们带着缺乏“季后赛”经验的标签进入了本赛季，但他们确实知道输球是什么滋味，而且他们也有很多在其他层级拥有丰富经验的球员，无论是文班在欧洲或奥运会的经历，还是卡斯尔在康涅狄格大学（UConn）的经历等。甚至NBA杯决赛可能就是他们所需要的“失败经验”。至少，这是我的理论。
**马克·巴林顿 (Mark Barrington)：**银黑军团在抢七大战的最后阶段犯了大量关键错误，哈珀和卡斯尔的失误让雷霆在最后几分钟里数次有机会将分差缩小到两次球权以内。但部分得益于卢克·科内特 (Luke Kornet) 关键时刻的盖帽，以及一些不可思议的前场篮板和补篮，他们用极其出色的表现弥补了糟糕的失误。因此，我认为缺乏经验仍然是一个很大的隐忧，但事实是，这支球队非常有天赋且办法很多，他们能够通过不纠结于错误、用更多积极的表现盖过消极的表现来克服这一点，并在卢克一次老将般的拼抢协助下坚持到了最后。我仍然有些担忧，但我对球队的精神韧性充满信心，相信他们能够足够努力、足够聪明地去赢下比赛，即便一路上不可避免地会犯错。
**杰科布·道格拉斯 (Jacob Douglas)：**我建议任何仍在纠结于这种论调的人去看看米奇·约翰逊 (Mitch Johnson) 在抢七大战后的更衣室演讲。它能让人客观地看待这支球队在过去7到8个月里所经历的一切。这是一支远比其实际年龄成熟的球队。正如其他一些作者所指出的，他们仍然会犯一些愚蠢、不成熟的错误。然而，正是球队的强韧和韧性克服了他们的年轻。这是一支不畏惧任何人、也不畏惧大场面的球队。那种精神意志力克服了他们许多“缺乏经验”的隐患。
**比尔·桓 (Bill Huan)：**马刺已经证明了他们足够优秀，足以弥补经验上的不足，即使他们在总决赛中失利，我认为也不会是因为缺乏经验。在我看来，他们的年轻既是福也是祸：福在于他们的运动能力和在漫长的季后赛征程中保持所需能量的能力；祸则在于他们会做出一些愚蠢的选择，尤其是在关键时刻。例如，即使在抢七大战中，卡斯尔在最后一次边线发球时吊给文班的球也被多尔特抢断，而在这之前的一次进攻中他刚刚出现了失误。在最后阶段本该由福克斯来掌控球权，他展现了老将的睿智，通过犯规让防守落位，这绝对是整个季后赛征程中最被低估的防守回合之一。不过，鉴于他们刚刚击败了卫冕冠军，我认为“经验不足”这个借口再也站不住脚了。
**德文·博德桑 (Devon Birdsong)：**我想这取决于我们目前如何定义“经验”。如果经验仅仅意味着以前没有打过季后赛，那么我认为这忽略了本届季后赛的价值——这次季后赛的艰难程度，对某些球队来说足以抵得上好几次季后赛了。他们在当家球星受伤的情况下挺了过来。他们击败了最近的一支西部决赛球队。他们掀翻了卫冕冠军。在这一点上，他们几乎颠覆了所有质疑。可能会有一两场比赛因为状态起伏而溜走，但很难说这仅仅是因为年轻，因为有太多“更有经验”的球队由于比这些年轻人更不稳定而未能走到这里。我在季后赛早些时候就说过，这是一支由刺客、匪帮和冷血杀手组成的球队。目前，我最大的担忧是他们会开始背上思想包袱。
**杰杰·戈麦斯 (Jeje Gomez)：**我认为在这一点上，担忧应该彻底平息了。如果他们不幸输掉总决赛，那绝对不会是因为他们年轻且缺乏经验。即使他们在晋级之路上受益于对手的关键伤病，他们也击败了两支经验丰富的球队，取得了令人瞩目、充满斗志的胜利，同时他们自己偶尔也面临着人员缺阵的情况。逆境并没有阻挡他们，没有人显得畏惧大场面。他们已经准备好了。
文班亚马荣膺分区决赛MVP。谁是马刺阵中第二重要的球员？
**杜宾斯基：**后卫三人组中的任何一个都有可能，因为他们都有过起伏，这也证明了他们的重要性。卡斯尔是他们在本轮系列赛中的第二得分手，防守出色且表现全面稳定，但在没有福克斯的前两场比赛中，他作为持球者的局限性暴露无遗，一共出现了20次失误。反过来，这使得福克斯仅仅是登场就对于掌控比赛和减少失误显得至关重要，哪怕他有时因为脚踝伤势在得分上挣扎。话虽如此，我还是要另辟蹊径（可能会和大家的看法不同），选择哈珀，因为他是这组人马中最大的X因素。除了文班之外，每场比赛最大的决定性因素或许就是当他下场休息时，马刺的替补席能否顶住。当哈珀在第二场大部分时间缺阵，或者在第三到五场因内收肌酸痛而表现不佳时，马刺要克服的困难就大得多。而当他在第一场（他确实首发了）、第六场和第七场状态在线时，马刺几乎全程占据上风。
**巴林顿：**卡斯尔在攻防两端的强韧和不懈努力使他成为球队的引擎；而哈珀流畅的球风和耐心的态度让他只要不被包夹，就能随时撕裂禁区防线。此外，他还做出了全场最具队友爱的一幕：在卡斯尔一次快攻反击中被卡鲁索危险地拉倒（令人费解的是，这球居然只被判了普通犯规）后，哈珀及时拉住了卡斯尔，没让他去找卡鲁索理论。斯蒂芬在空中被从背后击落，这看起来像是个脏动作，他理所当然很愤怒，但如果他进行报复，对马刺将非常不利。迪伦及时介入，阻止了他领到代价高昂的技术犯规甚至更糟的处罚。我很难在这两个人之间做出选择，因为他们都给球队带来了好的一面，而且他们的技能是互补的。
**道格拉斯：**我很难在卡斯尔和瓦塞尔之间做出选择。由于攻防两端的影响力和整体的强韧性，卡斯尔略占上风，但我更兴奋能聊聊瓦塞尔。这感觉是我们第一次看到瓦塞尔潜力兑现的系列赛。一个名副其实的攻防一体侧翼，在需要时能够通过运球自主创造投篮机会。他接下了防守切特·霍姆格伦 (Chet Holmgren) 的艰巨任务并表现出色。他也花时间防守过SGA并成功限制了对手。他在进攻端命中关键球，在防守端完成了改变比赛走势的抢断和盖帽。他的赛场活力达到了前所未有的高度。这正是你对球队第四或第五得分点所期望的那种表现。
**比尔·桓：**卡斯尔。他有三场比赛失误较多，还有两晚手感不佳，但他的组织能力、防守强度和整体的强韧性一直都在。在福克斯和哈珀要么饱受伤病困扰、要么缺阵的系列赛中，卡斯尔肩负着巨大的重任，并且表现得无可挑剔。除了文班之外，他是亚历山大打得如此挣扎的首要原因，而且即使在失误频频的比赛中，我也从未觉得他有过一丝慌乱。瓦塞尔也值得称赞，他命中了及时的进球，也是外线防守如此令人窒息的关键原因。
**博德桑：**在那轮系列赛中，我认为必须是哈珀。卡斯尔因为防守任务繁重而紧随其后，但当马刺的替补席得分无法压过雷霆替补席时，马刺就会输球。尽管凯尔登非常重要，但大多数时候是哈珀在撑起替补席，马刺在他表现出色的比赛中获胜绝非巧合。不过，卡斯尔是一个非常接近（且完全站得住脚）的第二选择。他在队友的协助下真正锁死了SGA，在我看来这是另一个巨大的决定性因素。
**戈麦斯：**我很想说是瓦塞尔，因为他完成了很多关键回合，以及更多至关重要的细节，但我还是会倾向于选择卡斯尔。即使他犯了错（系列赛初期确实犯了很多错），他依然保持着侵略性，这对于为球队奠定基调至关重要。他在攻防两端也都有所输出。这是一次团队的胜利，但文班亚马和卡斯尔在许多方面都起到了带头作用。
如果你必须用一个词来形容马刺获胜的原因，那会是哪个词？为什么？
**杜宾斯基：**决心（Determination）。我们已经谈过马刺是如何克服所谓的“缺乏经验”问题的，而这是另一种方式：他们纯粹是更渴望胜利。（这并不是说雷霆不想赢，他们当然想，但不可否认的是，在看最后两场比赛时，马刺球员的眼神中充满了更多的斗志。）我们在三巨头时代就见过这一点，当时我们知道蒂姆、托尼和马努都完美地结合了意志力和天赋，去做好他们能控制的事情，而在这支年轻队伍身上也能看到同样程度的决心。
**巴林顿：**韧性（Resilience）。雷霆给马刺制造了太多不同的麻烦，迫使马刺必须一场接一场地调整和改变应对方式，以适应并克服俄克拉荷马城（OKC）的各种策略。戴格诺特 (Daigneault) 在轮换阵容和防守策略的切换上做得非常出色（部分是由于伤病所致），让马刺防不胜防。虽然这些策略往往能奏效一时，但马刺总能在下一场比赛中做出有效的反击。这至少在抢七大战之前是一场教练间的博弈，直到抢七大战中教练们都弹尽粮绝，最终由天赋更胜一筹的球队赢下了胜利。
**道格拉斯：**策略（Strategy）。感觉米奇·约翰逊一直在微调比赛计划，以给球队带来优势。一旦雷霆的角色球员开始命中投篮，马刺就停止了过早包夹SGA。在第六场比赛中，他们采用了空侧挡拆战术，在比赛初期创造了多次极佳的机会，让进攻运转流畅。在第七场比赛中，当SGA持球时，他们重兵囤积强侧，试图打乱他的节奏并破坏雷霆的进攻。比赛计划在不断演变，以给马刺带来优势。是的，雷霆伤兵满营、人手短缺，所以马克·戴格诺特 (Mark Daignault) 面临着更艰难的执教任务。但我认为约翰逊在这轮系列赛中的执教表现更胜一筹。
**比尔·桓：**沉着（Poise）。我们谈到了这支球队的经验不足，但不知何故，大场面的聚光灯似乎从未让他们感到怯场。在近期记忆中最重要的一场比赛中，深入卫冕冠军的主场并彻底击碎他们，证明了马刺球员坚韧不拔的意志，这对于他们即将踏入或许是整个体育界最喧嚣的球馆来说是个好兆头。
**博德桑：**态度（Attitude）。在卫冕冠军的主场将他们淘汰是一回事。而用一个示威性的扣篮来结束比赛，而不是仅仅耗尽时间，则是另一回事。沉着、韧性以及所有其他因素，都极其依赖于这些马刺球员认为自己能做到什么。他们宣称“不在乎”并不是冷漠的表现，更像是对“必须拥有经验”这一陈旧观念的宣战。我想我从未见过哪支马刺队拥有如此霸气。他们不仅想击败你，还想在你打盹时羞辱你，他们绝对会让你难堪，并在击败你的同时大肆作秀。到头来，这总有可能会成为他们的软肋，但我也愿意认为，这正是他们能走到今天这一步的唯一原因。这支球队拥有这份狂妄与胆识。现在，我们要看看他们能否将其转化为更具实质性的成果。
**戈麦斯：**天赋（Talent）。说他们赢球是因为更有天赋，似乎有些贬低教练组的努力或球员的品格，但事实并非如此。天赋较弱的球队胜出是常有的事。赢球需要更多因素，马刺也拥有那些无形资产。但不应忽视的是，圣安东尼奥那些获得上场时间的球员有多么优秀，而这种优势是他们晋级的主要原因之一。平心而论，雷霆缺少了一位最佳阵容级别的球员，但马刺的轮换阵容中拥有更多的顶尖天赋，这是管理层的一项了不起的成就。
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：The Spurs proved talent, preparation are more important than experience
The Spurs proved talent, preparation are more important than experience
The Spurs kept their composure and closed out Game 7. Should their poise in the Conference Finals finally put to rest the concerns about their inexperience?
Marilyn Dubinski: They’re going to make mistakes, but so is everybody else, and they’ve put this narrative to rest. They showed that an alleged “lack of experience” can be overcome with maturity, togetherness, chemistry, good coaching, and of course talent. A theory that has been building in my head is that last year was the “experience” year (i.e. win, lose, learn and grow), and they would have gotten that playoff experience had Victor Wembanyama not gotten deep vein thrombosis. Sure, it got cut short and they came into this season with a lack of “playoff” experience, but they do know what losing feels like, and they also have a lot of guys who have that experience at other levels, whether it’s Wemby in Europe or the Olympics, Castle at UConn, etc. Maybe even the NBA Cup Finals was that “losing experience” they needed. That’s my theory, at least.
Mark Barrington: The Silver and Black made a ton of critical mistakes headed down the stretch of Game 7, with turnovers from Harper and Castle giving the Thunder chances to bring the margin down to two scores several times in the last couple of minutes. But partially thanks to Luke Kornet’s timely block and some incredible rebounding and putbacks, they overcame their poor plays with some really good ones. So, I think the inexperience is still a big concern, but the fact is that the team is so talented and resourceful that they were able to overcome it by not dwelling on the mistakes and making more positive plays than the negative ones, assisted by one veteran hustle play from Luke to make it to the end. I still have concerns, but I also have confidence in the team’s mental toughness to work hard and smart enough to win, even with inevitable mistakes along the way.
Jacob Douglas: I’d encourage anyone still considering this narrative to go watch Mitch Johnson’s locker room speech after Game Seven. It puts into perspective everything this team has been through in the last 7-8 months. This is a team that is much more mature than its age. As some of the other writers have pointed out, they are still making some silly, immature mistakes. However, it’s the team’s toughness and resilience that overcome their youth. This is a team that is not afraid of anyone, nor of the moment. That kind of mental willpower overcomes a lot of their “inexperience”.
Bill Huan: The Spurs have proven that they’re good enough to overcome the experience deficiency, and even if they lose in the finals, I don’t think it will be because of their inexperience. I see their youth as both a blessing and a curse: a blessing because of their athleticism and ability to maintain the energy needed for a long postseason run, but also a curse when they make some boneheaded plays, especially in crunch time. For example, even in game 7, Castle’s lob to Wemby was stolen by Dort on that final inbounds play, which came on the heels of him turning it over on the previous possession. Fox should’ve had the ball down the stretch, and he showed his veteran savviness by fouling to get their defense set, which will go down as one of the most underappreciated plays of this entire run. Still, given that they just beat the defending champs, I don’t think the inexperience card can be played anymore.
Devon Birdsong: I suppose that depends on what we’re terming experience at this point. If experience just means no previous postseasons, I’d say I think that ignores the value of the current postseason, which has been challenging enough to count for multiple postseasons for some teams. They survived injuries to their superstar. They’ve taken down a recent Western Conference finalist. They took down the defending champions. They’ve pretty much subverted the entire idea of concerns at this point. A game or two will likely slip away because of inconsistency, but it’ll be hard to argue that that’s because of youth alone, because there are plenty of ‘more experienced’ teams who didn’t make it here because they were more inconsistent than these youngsters. I expressed earlier in the postseason that this is a team of assassins, of gangsters, of silent killers. At this point, my biggest concern is that they’ll start taking themselves too seriously.
Jeje Gomez: I think at this point the concern should be put to rest. If they happen to lose the Finals, it won’t be because they are young and inexperienced. Even if they benefited from key injuries to opponents on their way there, they took down two seasoned teams with impressive, gutsy wins while occasionally dealing with absences of their own. Adversity didn’t deter them, and no one looked afraid of the moment. They are ready.
Wembanyama won MVP of the Conference Finals. Who was the second most important Spur?
Dubinski: It could be any one of the guard trio, as they all had their highs and lows that showed how important they are. Castle was their second-best scorer in the series, played great defense and was steady across the board, but his limitations as a ball-handler were exposed with 20 TO’s in Games 1 and 2 without Fox. In turn, that made Fox’s mere presence super important for managing the game and limiting turnovers, even if he struggled to score at times due to his ankle injury. That being said, I’m going to go out on a limb (and probably differ from everyone else) and say Harper because he is the biggest wildcard of the group. Outside of Wemby, perhaps the biggest deciding factor in each game was if the Spurs’ bench would hold on when he sat, and when Harper was out for most of Game 2 or ineffective from games 3-5 with the sore adductor, it was a much bigger hurdle for them to overcome. When he was on point in games 1 (which he admittedly started), 6 and 7, the Spurs had the upper hand almost the entire time.
Barrington: Castle’s toughness and relentless effort on both ends of the court makes him the engine of the team, while Harper’s smoothness and patient demeanor allowed him to break down the defense in the paint anytime he wasn’t double teamed, and he made the good teammate play of the game by making sure that Castle didn’t go after Caruso after his dangerous takedown on a breakaway fast break that was puzzlingly ruled to be just a common foul. Stephon was rightfully mad at being knocked out of the air from behind in what looked like a dirty play, but if he had retaliated, it would have been bad for the Spurs, and Dylan stepped in to keep him from getting a costly technical foul or worse. It’s hard for me to choose between those two guys, because they both bring good things to the team, and they have complementary skills.
Douglas: It’s hard for me to pick between Castle and Vassell. The edge goes to Castle because of his two-way impact and overall toughness, but I am more excited to talk about Vassell. This felt like the first series where we saw the realization of Vassell’s potential. A legit two-way wing who can create his shot off the bounce when needed. He took on a pretty tough defensive challenge in Chet Holmgren and thrived. He spent time guarding SGA and survived. He hit big shots on offense and made game-breaking steals and blocks on the other end. His motor was running at an all-time high. It’s exactly the type of performance that you hope for from your 4th or 5th option.
Huan: Castle. He had three rough turnover games and two bad shooting nights, but his playmaking, defensive intensity, and overall toughness were always present. In a series where Fox and Harper were either banged up or sidelined, Castle had a huge burden on his shoulders and stepped up as well as one could hope. Outside of Wemby, he’s the primary reason why Shai struggled so much, and there was not a single moment where I thought he was rattled, even during the high turnover games. Vassell deserves a shoutout too, as he made timely buckets and was also a huge reason why the perimeter defense was so suffocating.
Birdsong: In that series, I think it has to be Harper. Castle is close due to his defensive assignment, but the Spurs were losing when their bench couldn’t outscore the Thunder bench. As important as Keldon is, it was Harper who was keeping the bench afloat most of the time, and it’s no coincidence that the Spurs won when he had great games. Castle is a very close (and highly defensible) second choice, though. He really put SGA in the dungeon (with help) and that was the other gigantic factor in my mind.
Gomez: I’m tempted to say Vassell, because he made a lot of big plays and even more smaller ones that mattered a lot, but I’ll give Castle the nod. Even when he made mistakes, and there were a lot of them early in the series, he was being aggressive, which is hugely important to set the tone for this team. The two-way production was there, too. It was a team effort, but Wembanyama and Castle led the way in many ways.
If you had to describe why the Spurs won in one word, what would that word be and why?
Dubinski: Determination. We already talked about how the Spurs overcame the supposed “lack of experience” problem, and this was another way: they just flat-out wanted it more. (This is not to say the Thunder didn’t want it, of course they did, but there’s no denying that in watching those last two games, the Spurs just had more fire in their eyes.) We saw it in the Big Three era, when we knew that Tim, Tony and Manu all had the right combination of willpower and talent to make what was in their control happen, and that same level of determination can be seen in this group.
Barrington: Resilience. The Thunder threw so many different things at the Spurs and made the Spurs have to adjust and change their approach from game to game to adapt and overcome the different types of OKC strategies. Daigneault did a great job at switching up lineups and defenses (partly necessitated by injuries) to keep the Spurs off balance, and while these strategies often worked as a one-shot, the Spurs would always respond with effective counters the next game. It was a coaching duel until Game 7, at least, where the coaches ran out of ammo and the most talented team took the win.
Douglas: Strategy. It felt like Mitch Johnson was constantly tweaking the game plan to give his team an edge. Once the Thunder’s role players started to hit shots, the Spurs stopped doubling SGA so early. In Game Six, they went to an empty-side pick-and-roll play that got them multiple good looks early in the game to get their offense in a flow. In Game Seven, they flooded the strong side when SGA had the ball to try to throw off his rhythm and disrupt OKC’s offense. The game plan was constantly evolving to give the Spurs an edge. Yes, OKC was beat up and shorthanded, so Mark Daignault had a more difficult coaching task. But I thought Johnson outcoached him in this series.
Huan: Poise. We talked about this team’s inexperience, yet somehow the lights never seemed too bright for them. To go into the defending champ’s arena and snatch their soul in one of the most consequential games in recent memory proved that the Spurs are tough as nails, which will bode well now that they’ll be entering the most raucous stadium in perhaps all of sports.
Birdsong: Attitude. It was one thing to put the defending champions away on their home court. It was another to end it with a statement dunk instead of just running out the clock. Poise, and resilience, and all those other factors are so reliant/dependent on what these Spurs think they’re capable of. Their declaration about ‘not caring’ wasn’t a declaration of apathy so much as a mission statement about their animosity for the very concept of needed experience. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a Spurs team with swagger like this. They’re not just looking to beat you, they’re looking to punk you if they catch you sleeping, and they will absolutely embarrass you and put on a display while they do it. In the end, there’s always a possibility that will be their downfall, but I’d also be willing to argue that that’s the only reason that they got where they are in the first place. This team has the audacity. Now we’re going to see if they can turn that into something more substantial.
Gomez: Talent. It might seem like saying they won because they had more talent is somehow shortchanging the coaching staff or the character of the players, but it isn’t. Less talented teams prevail all the time. It takes more to win and the Spurs also had the intangibles. But it shouldn’t be overlooked how good the guys getting minutes for San Antonio were, and that edge was one of the main reasons they advanced. To be fair, the Thunder were missing an All-NBA performer, but the Spurs had more top-end talent in their rotation, which is an impressive feat from the front office.
By Jeje Gomez, via Pounding The Rock