NBA
- Thread starter ZackM
- Start date
Feels like a small market team without any well known stars needs to win 5 out of 7 to win a series once you get to the conference semis and further. I agree with this approach from the NBA’s perspective. You can’t allow a team this unappealing to casual fans to make a Finals unless they really, really earn it.
Pacers shot 53/37. They also outrebounded the Celtics. The Celtics need Porzingis back desperately.
Trying to think of the worst coaches to win a title in my lifetime. I guess it would be Vogel, Budenholzer, and Doc Rivers? With Rivers probably the worst of the three.
Mazzulla would probably be sandwiched between Budenholzer and Rivers, but maybe that’s not fair to Doc?
I just learned that Isaiah Hartenstein is black. This is his dad, Florian Hartenstein.
Isaiah Hartenstein Confirms He's Part Black: ‘I’m Bright Skin, I’m Above Light Skin’
The New York Knicks center touched on his race during a recent appearance on 'The Roommates Show.'
Some random thoughts about the Minnesota-Dallas matchup.
1) I think Minnesota is a bad matchup for Dallas. Against OKC, Dallas had a big rebounding advantage. That won't be there. Minnesota should also be able to shut off the lob.
2) Minnesota has 3-4 great choices to throw on Luka.
3) I think Dallas's best strategy will be to go at Conley. I'm not so sure how well that will work because you'll still have Gobert camped in the paint behind him. It'll be difficult to pull Gobert out into space without a floor spacing big.
4) If Conley is made a liability, Minnesota will just bring in NAW or Anderson. That may be a win for Dallas though. Those guys are better than Conley defensively, but Conley makes Minnesota's offense was less clunky. Dallas could win a game or two if Minnesota's offense simply falls apart.
5) Minnesota in 5, imo. Ironically, I think OKC would have been the much more difficult matchup for Minnesota.
1) I think Minnesota is a bad matchup for Dallas. Against OKC, Dallas had a big rebounding advantage. That won't be there. Minnesota should also be able to shut off the lob.
2) Minnesota has 3-4 great choices to throw on Luka.
3) I think Dallas's best strategy will be to go at Conley. I'm not so sure how well that will work because you'll still have Gobert camped in the paint behind him. It'll be difficult to pull Gobert out into space without a floor spacing big.
4) If Conley is made a liability, Minnesota will just bring in NAW or Anderson. That may be a win for Dallas though. Those guys are better than Conley defensively, but Conley makes Minnesota's offense was less clunky. Dallas could win a game or two if Minnesota's offense simply falls apart.
5) Minnesota in 5, imo. Ironically, I think OKC would have been the much more difficult matchup for Minnesota.
Random thoughts from Celtics-Pacers:
1) Boston really should try some Tatum at the 5.
2) Since Mazzulla likely won't do that, they have to figure out a way to make Horford less of a target. I think the way to do that is not to give up the switch so easily. I get the value of switching, especially when you're a team with a bunch of long versatile defenders like Boston. But it meant that Indiana was able to just screen with Horford's man over and over. If you have the guard fight through the screen, that helps prevent that. White and Holiday are two of the best screen navigators in the entire NBA. They should be able to manage it. It may get a bit dicier with Tatum or Brown. Maybe do some kind of soft double in those situations to allow the on-ball defender to recover?
3) I know I posted earlier about Indiana not fouling. But I think it would have been risky for Siakam to foul in that situation and understand why he didn't. I think the main issue is the defensive strategy in the first place. What you want to do there is load up on the inbounder and have everyone else out by the 3pt line. You want to encourage the Celtics to take an open layup. Having players guarding inside the arc is stupid in that situation. Brad Stevens actually used to employ this exact strategy to prevent 3pt attempts in late game situations.
1) Boston really should try some Tatum at the 5.
2) Since Mazzulla likely won't do that, they have to figure out a way to make Horford less of a target. I think the way to do that is not to give up the switch so easily. I get the value of switching, especially when you're a team with a bunch of long versatile defenders like Boston. But it meant that Indiana was able to just screen with Horford's man over and over. If you have the guard fight through the screen, that helps prevent that. White and Holiday are two of the best screen navigators in the entire NBA. They should be able to manage it. It may get a bit dicier with Tatum or Brown. Maybe do some kind of soft double in those situations to allow the on-ball defender to recover?
3) I know I posted earlier about Indiana not fouling. But I think it would have been risky for Siakam to foul in that situation and understand why he didn't. I think the main issue is the defensive strategy in the first place. What you want to do there is load up on the inbounder and have everyone else out by the 3pt line. You want to encourage the Celtics to take an open layup. Having players guarding inside the arc is stupid in that situation. Brad Stevens actually used to employ this exact strategy to prevent 3pt attempts in late game situations.
The problem is that future Jaylen Browns will also be making that much. Tier 1 stars will never earn as much as they should relative to Tier 2 and Tier 3 guys.
So Minnesota shot about as well as they possibly could from three. Dallas shot poorly. Minnesota was +36 from behind the arc. Still lost.
My pessimism about Dallas's chances might not have been that well founded.
My pessimism about Dallas's chances might not have been that well founded.
It’s because of this dude
I think you were right in earlier assessments of Minnys offense. If Ant isn't playing close to MJ level, they kind of bog down. If McDaniels doesn't have an out of body experience, they get run out of the gym last night. Mavs defense is much better than Denver's since the trade, and Lively looks like he'll be one of the best defenders in the league for a decade plus.
Mavs also have two alpha scorers who are basically unguardable, unlike the Denver symphony that relies on Jokic the maestro. Disrupting the harmony of the latter is easier than containing two discrete H-bombs (who can both also facilitate). Joker can take over scoring-wise, but that's not really his bag and would detract from all the pieces that need him to facilitate. Murray can be that, but he was ass too often, and despite his peaks seems a bit unreliable overall.
TL:DR - basically Mavs have more dawgs. Always comes down to dawgs.