For Pop, Restgate about players, not politics

 

On November 29, 2012, the controversy that has come to be known as “Restgate” was born when Coach Gregg Popovich of the San Antonio Spurs chose not to play four of his starters (Tim Duncan, Tony Parker, Manu Ginobili, an Danny Green) in a nationally televised game against the defending champion Miami Heat.  Popovich elected to rest those players, whose average is 32 years old, because the Spurs were at the time slogging through one of the roughest stretches of schedule they will face this season (the Heat game was the last of a six game road trip, and fourth game in five nights for the Spurs).  The logic being that if he rests those aging star players now, they will be fresher for the stretch runs of the regular season and the playoffs.  This is not the first time Popovich has employed this strategy.  In fact, he has become notorious for it. 

Late last season, with his team trying to hold off the Oklahoma City Thunder in a battle for the top seed in the Western Conference, Coach Popovich left his big three of Parker, Duncan, and Ginobili out of a game against Utah.  In the final game of the regular season last year against Golden State, not only where the aforementioned big three nowhere to be found, but Popovich didn’t bother showing up either.  There are countless other examples through the years of this strategy being employed by the Spurs (and other teams, as well). 

And the league has never punished anyone for these “transgressions”.  In fact, just last season NBA deputy commissioner (and eventual successor to current commissioner Davis Stern) Adam Silver commented, "The strategic resting of particular players on particular nights is within the discretion of the teams…and Gregg Popovich in particular is probably the last coach that I would second-guess."  Nonetheless, an apparently enraged David Stern, after referring to the November incident as “unacceptable” and a “disservice to the league and the fans”, threatened the Spurs with “substantial sanctions”, which ended up being a $250,000 fine. 

Nearly a month removed from “Restgate”, a lot has been written about what happened from nearly every angle.  Everyone seems to have an opinion about who was “right” or who was “wrong”.  Some people think that David Stern is power-hungry or vindictive, and overreached his bounds in fining the Spurs.  Others say that the NBA is a business, and Popovich was rightfully fined for potentially costing the league money.  Certainly, a substantial case can be made for both sides.  I personally think that neither individual was truly “wrong” in this debacle.  Both were simply acting in the best interests of the organization that they represent (the San Antonio Spurs for Popovich, and the NBA for David Stern).

The real injustice of Restgate in my opinion, though, is the way it was portrayed in the media.  To hear many tell it, the entire affair was little more than a Popvich-Stern pissing contest played out on a national scale.  In his well-circulated (and very interesting) article for Yahoo about the subject, Adrian Wojnarowski depicts Restgate as the culmination of a long-running cold war raging between Stern and Popvovich; one that has been escalated over the years by numerous perceived slights on the part of both sides.  Howard Beck takes a similar slant in his piece for the New York Times: he describes Restgate as a “clash of strong-willed men with stubborn priorities” and, on the part of Popovich, a “challenge to Stern…more than a decade in the making”.   

This depiction of Restgate as the clever disguising of a one-on-one battle  between Stern and Popovich is taken even further by Scoop Jackson writing for ESPN.  He describes the situation like this:  “Popovich vs. Stern. More epic than Pacquiao vs. Marquez 4, more compelling than Susan Rice vs. Lindsey Graham. Two of the most powerful men in their respective arenas in the NBA battling to see who has the right to exercise power without pushback or question. One protecting his team, the other protecting the League. A battle to see who has the most juice.”

Maybe all those writers are right.  Maybe the entirety of Restgate amounts to little more than a highly intentional slap to the face of David Stern by Gregg Popovich.  But the quotes Popovich has made in the media paint a different story: the story of a coach whose only interest was protecting his players.  What exactly has Coach Pop had to say about all this controversy?  Only quotes like this: “It has nothing to do with the Miami Heat or TV, or anything…you deal with the schedule as best you can and do the wisest thing for your particular team.”  And this: “My priority is — the basketball team and what’s best for it.” 

Sure, maybe those comments are just lip service. Coach Pop telling the media what he knows they want to hear while inwardly flipping off the Commissioner with a sneer.  But I don’t think that’s the case.  Popovich is a US Air Force Veteran, and two-time NBA Coach of the Year.  He’s renowned around the league as a low-maintenance, hard-working, and honest coach.  To give you an example of the type of guy we’re talking about: when the Heat pulled off their free agent coup of 2010, signing LeBron James and Chris Bosh, Gregg Popovich was the only head coach who personally contacted Pat Riley to congratulate.  The rest of the head coaches and GMs in the league were apparently too busy fuming. 

In other words, Popovich isn’t the type to get carried away by petty grudges. The worst thing about the media handling of Restgate is that he has been portrayed as exactly that type of person. The focus shouldn’t be entirely on the Pop-Stern War and Popovich “getting one over” on the Commissioner. How about the special relationship that Popovich has with his players, and how selfless decisions like the one he made on November 29th have contributed to that? Gary Neal said it best himself after that Heat game: “Coach Pop is the coach of the San Antonio Spurs, and he did what’s best for us.”

Popovich’s resume certainly bears out that confidence.  Not many other coaches could have convinced a player as talented as future hall of famer Manu Ginobili to spend their prime years coming off the bench.  A perennial malcontent like Stephen Jackson whined himself out of Golden State, Charlotte and Milwaukee, but has had nothing but glowing praise for his coach since landing in San Antonio.  Even typically overweight and unmotivated Boris Diaw has thrived under Popovich. 

The success of the Spurs is no secret.  Four championships, and many more finals and conference finals appearances tell the tale.  But the statistic most relevant to this story is this one: sixteen years.  That’s how long Gregg Popovich has been in charge of the Spurs, and that makes him the longest tenured head coach not just in the NBA, but across all major North American sports leagues.  You don’t get to sixteen years without the respect and admiration of your players.  Decisions like the one Popovich made that led to Restgate are a big part of that.  To imply that his motivation in making that decision was simply to piss off the commissioner of the NBA is asinine.  Whatever else Popovich  may have had in mind, his primary motivation was the same one it has always been: he was looking out for his team.  And the goodwill he earned from that action will prove just as instrumental in the future success of the Spurs as any rest his star players may have gotten that night.