Spurs UNDER 45.5.
Been waiting for the number to creep up to this level, I was obviously wouldn't be as confident at the line posted here.
Ask yourself why not make the opening line 46, 47 or 48. They won 47 last year and by all accounts 80 potential games is more valuable than 9 games of Kawhi Leonard. They would definitely get even two way action with an opening line of 45.5 to 47.5.
The short answer is algorithms. The super computers don't think Derozan adds wins to their roster because he doesn't address their key needs. He doesn't defend well, and he will be part of a tandum that is the worst 3PT shooting backcourt in the league.
Replacing a high volume of mid range jumpers from the wing position and getting rid of two of the best long range shooters in the NBA (Leonard and Danny Green) hurts on multiple fronts.
They don't have shooters on their team - even Patty Mills, their longtime gunner, is coming off career lows in outside shooting. Marco Belinelli can't still shoot - but not nearly as well as his opposing player will be able to tee off on him on the other end.
A lot of analytical minded people are faced with a conundrum when predicting this season for the Spurs. They love Pop, but several players they have identified as overrated according to counting statistics has ended up on his team.
Kevin Pelton of ESPN for example has a NBA wins model that spits out 38. He says the model predicts from last season because Danny Green and Kyle Anderson were net positive players and Demar Derozan was a net negative player, because of his shot selection and below average defense for his position.
Now, I think the best wing on any team can and should absorb a higher number of "bad shots" because at the end of the shot clock somebody has to put something for team to have any chance of salvaging the possession. So I think it's unfair to look at Demar Derozan has a net negative player, because he can carry an offense when there is no option that's working. That said, the Spurs fast moving offense isn't in need of players to bail them out with jumpers. They need players to create seams and advantages so that teams are giving up lay-ups to prevent open threes. I am skeptical of his ability to score in isolation enough on a team without shooters and a staple in the paint.
The defensive criticism is real - he doesn't excel there, requiring his teams to employ to other often worse-offensive players to guard the other team's best wing.
It's notable that even though Kevin Pelton and Nate Duncan (analytically minded people) come to the conclusion that the Spurs are overrated in terms of talent, neither of them are strong advocates for the under. "I wouldn't bet against Popp!" is the montra.
While it is true Pop has won 50 games or more since Tim Duncan was a rookie (except for last year) he also had multiple HOFers that bought into his system and could execute in every phase of the game (except for last year). The institutional knowledge doesn't soak into the hardwood. It's embodied by the players that have gone war together. They're all gone.
Only LaMarcus Aldridge on this team has significant playoff experience with the Spurs. DeJuante Murray will be looked to be a leader on this team, and he is a point guard that can't shoot and has never averaged even 15 points per 36 minutes. That could work if you had a James Harden on your team that can soak up a lot of the guard offense, like Patrick Beverely. In todays NBA its better (like Paul and Harden, & Thompson and Curry) to have both your guard positions be able to launch. Neither of the starting Spurs can.
Derozan and LaMarcus Aldrige are both rated 89 respectively in NBA2K, making them tied for being the 15th best player in the NBA. ESPN's and SI's rankings (which I find to be far more inaccurate) have them in a similiar range. I think they are more like 84s, closer to Jonas Vallencuins and CJ Mccollum than to Klay Thompson and Joel Embiid. Ask every GM in the league and 29 to 30 teams take Thompson without thinking over Derozan. One guy can defend and shoot, the other guy one a dunk contest once.
DeMar Derozan will make Aldrige's life harder because he does not create space. And will often lay it off to Aldridge after pick and roll action, late in the clock - where Aldridge does not excel at scoring quickly and efficiently.
I've been an Aldridge defender for years - and wondered how he could be so lambasted for having a "bad" season the same year the Spurs won a record 67 games and had one of the best point differentials in league history. Every year after that Aldridge's role - and pundit approval rating - has increased, while the team has played worse. A longtime fan of his, I worry that he will be looked to lead a team with not a lot else going on offensively, and his numbers will go up and the team will correspondingly terrible. It's a Rajon Rondo situation. When he was a rookie and he was a defensive specialist they won the championship. When he was their whole team averaging 12 assists per game, they were very one dimensional and extremely beatable.
One more roster thing: Pau Gasol is still the starting center on his team. Another player where counting statics will make him seem decent, when he's really far below league average. For example Pau had a career high rebounding rate last year. But was it cause he was at his his physical peak...or because he didn't do anything else besides by the stand up and collect misses. He wasn't good enough to play defense more, so he played tall.
Even given their legendary coach, (A lot of numbers people will argue coaching has hardly ever been proven to matter, though hard to know for sure), I can't make them higher than my 14th highest ranked team coming into the season, sandwiched between the Milwaukee Bucks and the Washington Wizards. .5 points better than an average team.
My power rankings applied to spread and win % of the Spurs season for every game has them starting 5-4 and finishing 41-41, slightly better for the Spurs than Kevin Pelton's models. Still not close to the number. Take 45.5, UNDER, if either of their 30 year-old+ stars gets hurt, it's going to be an easy win.