The Portland Trail Blazers need to become more like the San Antonio Spurs

The San Antonio Spurs have been the gold standard in the NBA for almost 20 years. Which ingredients from the Spurs’ winning recipe should the Blazers try to steal?

When Blazers fans think of the San Antonio Spurs, what’s the first thing that likely comes to mind?

It might be championships, considering the Spurs have accumulated five Larry O’Brien trophies since 1999.

Or is it Gregg Popovich — who’s responsible for establishing the winning, unselfish culture that’s defined the Spurs since he became head coach in 1996?

Or maybe — for the more hard-core fans — you think of the Spurs’ beautifully synchronized and relentlessly unselfish style of play, personified by passing, defense and constant movement.

The Spurs have a clear identity: championships and unselfishness.

Spurs vs. Trail Blazers

Now try the same exercise with the Portland Trail Blazers.

What’s the first thing that comes to mind?

It’s probably Damian Lillard — the team’s star point guard and face of the franchise.

But what else?

It’s not the head coach, general manager or ownership. It’s not a certain style of play. And it’s not winning or losing.

As an organization, the Blazers don’t really have an established identity.

On Sunday night, the Blazers and Spurs will face off in a seemingly meaningless January basketball game. The Blazers — with a slightly disappointing record of 20-18 — will be fighting for a playoff spot in the Western Conference for the rest of the season.

The Spurs, on the other hand, are up to their usual winning shtick; they’re 14 games over .500 at 27-13. This despite the fact that Kawhi Leonard, their best player, has missed 31 of the team’s first 39 games. San Antonio’s winning identity remains unflappable.

But the Spurs’ model of success can be replicated by another organization.

And if any applicant fits the mold, it’s the Portland Trail Blazers. (More on this later.)

Model of Success

Despite being the gold standard for the modern-day NBA for the last 20 years, the Spurs were an undesirable, chaotic organization in the early 1990s. From 1990 to 1996, San Antonio hired six different head coaches before Popovich — the general manager at the time —named himself coach in December 1996.

The Spurs went to the playoffs every season from 1990 to 1995, but only advanced past the second round once. They were a franchise with a superstar talent in David Robinson, but ultimately lacked an identity.

Popovich established a winning culture and an unselfish brand of basketball when he became head coach in 1996. But the real turning point was drafting Tim Duncan first overall in 1997. He stepped into the league and was immediately an MVP candidate.

Greatness

Thanks to the stable leadership of Popovich and the Spurs’ front office, as well as a talented roster, San Antonio would go on to win a championship after the 1998-1999 season.

And then three more in the 15 years following.

Thus, San Antonio has become an attractive destination for free agents. And the team continues to draft well, despite selecting at the end of rounds.

The Trail Blazers — a fellow mid-market, Western Conference organization — can use the Spurs’ organizational template to establish a winning identity.

There are three foundational ingredients to the Spurs’ success, and Portland is fully capable of replicating each of them.

Ingredient No. 1: Organizational Stability

The Spurs have had the same head coach, general manager and ownership group since 1999, when R.C. Buford was promoted to vice president/assistant general manager.

Nearly 20 years of stable management has allowed the franchise to create a sustainable system in which no one player has the ability to make or break the team.

The Spurs are masters at plugging players into their system and maximizing value. When you have a cohesive front office that supports the head coach, creating a winning culture becomes much easier.

Talented players want to play not just for a winning franchise, but also for a stable franchise.

San Antonio, Texas, isn’t exactly paradise for a 20-something-year-old NBA millionaire. And yet the Spurs have convinced the likes of LaMarcus Aldridge, Pau Gasol and Rudy Gay to be part of a winning franchise in a small market.

Can the Blazers Do the Same?

The Trail Blazers don’t have to do much to emulate the Spurs in this regard.

Paul Allen has owned the Blazers for 29 years, and Neil Olshey and Terry Stotts have been the general manager and head coach for five years, respectively. Both Olshey and Stotts are highly thought of by the NBA media, and the Blazers employ a data-driven approach to running the organization.

There are two areas where you could justifiably criticize the Blazers’ basketball operations: player development and an inability to acquire big-name free agents.

Several young players haven’t developed as quickly as Blazers’ fans might hope (Read: Meyers Leonard, Noah Vonleh and Maurice Harkless.) Also, the Blazers haven’t been able to land a star in free agency in the last 25 years.

Is that due to a lack of playoff success or because young millionaires don’t want to live in Portland? Given San Antonio’s success with free agents, it’s safe to conclude the former.

Of the three ingredients to the Spurs’ success, organization stability would be the easiest for Portland to replicate.

Ingredient No. 2: Drafting Players With One Great Skill

Despite drafting between the 25th and 30th picks seemingly every season, the Spurs manage to steal productive prospects year after year. And because they draft so late, the Spurs are forced to gamble on draft picks who are fundamentally flawed.

If you look back at the Spurs’ draft picks, they almost always select players who do one thing exceptionally well or have a particularly advantageous trait.

For example, Kawhi Leonard (defense), Dejounte Murray (length), Kyle Anderson (passing, vision) and former Spurs player Cory Joseph (three-point shooting).

The Spurs then plug their unpolished science project into the player-development factory that is the Spurs organization and find ways to improve their weaknesses.

What About the Blazers?

The Blazers, on the other hand, have not been as effective at finding and developing draft picks in the mid-to-late rounds.

Instead of employing the Spurs’ method of drafting players who appear to do one thing very well, they select prospects who are average at lots of different things.

For example, Caleb Swanigan, Jake Layman, Dani Diez and Meyers Leonard. None of those prospects have an A-plus skill, meaning Portland isn’t able to play them big minutes until they’re developed.

Zach Collins earns playing time because he is already a great rim protector. While he develops his three-point shooting, rebounding and passing, he will still have a place on the court because he defends the interior at a high level.

This is an area where the Blazers have a big opportunity to close the gap with the Spurs. For a team that doesn’t acquire star free agents, drafting is critical.

Ingredient No. 3: Passing and Off-ball Movement

The Spurs’ culture of unselfishness is best reflected in the way they play the game. The Greg Popovich School of Basketball is rooted in skip passes, off-ball movement and aggressiveness.

It’s a beautiful thing to watch.

Since 2013, the Spurs consistently rank among the league leaders in passes made per game. The Trail Blazers have typically been in the bottom half of the NBA in that category.

(Less passing doesn’t necessarily correlate to losing. For example, the Houston Rockets and Cleveland Cavaliers rank 29^th and 25^th, respectively, in passes made per game this season. This just tells us that San Antonio’s offensive strategy is to move the ball, and it works for them.)

The beauty of a collaborative offense is it’s less predictable, and therefore, harder to game plan for. Portland’s lack of passing can most likely be attributed to Lillard and CJ McCollum’s proficiency as isolation weapons.

But too many Blazers’ possessions this season have culminated with Lillard coming off a pick-and-roll and taking a tough three, or McCollum settling for a long two. More ball movement might be a worthwhile venture.

Not only do the Spurs pass often, they also create offense by moving off the ball. Since 2013, the Spurs have ranked in the top three each year for distance traveled by offensive players.

Watch this possession; there is no sustainable defensive strategy that stops this:

The Road Ahead for the Blazers

Going forward, do the Blazers have the personnel to facilitate a similarly pass-heavy, motion offense? It requires shooters to spread the floor, gifted passers and athletic big men. Lillard, McCollum, Collins and Pat Connaughton fit that mold; Evan Turner, Jusuf Nurkic and Swanigan do not.

This year has been moderately disappointing for the Blazers. There hasn’t been an improvement, or even a continuation, from the strong ending to last season. Blogs and local media outlets will point to firing the coach, replacing the general manager or trading away players.

Next: Beast or Least? Nurkic’s inconsistency plagues the Blazers

But maybe the problem — and the resolution — runs much deeper than roster changes. Organizational structure and strong leadership are powerful assets in sports, and there isn’t an owner’s manual with instructions on how to build a winning culture.

But what if the answer can be found on the visitor’s bench on Sunday night?