No Game Is an Island: Development Arrested

Posted by Rob Mahoney on December 31, 2009 under Previews | 2 Comments to Read

If you had to pick the centerpiece of the Houston Rockets this season, it would probably be Trevor Ariza. Errrr, maybe it would be Aaron Brooks. Or Luis Scola. Or Shane Battier. Or Carl Landry. Or Chuck Hayes. In a vacuum completely devoid of traditional superstars, the redeeming value of the Rockets lies in their disregard for the traditional model. There was no desperation to play Tracy McGrady upon his return, or to make a deal for an overpaid quasi-star. Just a team full of professionals working hard and playing in concert, in part because Trevor Ariza, while good, falls short of great:

You could blame a lot of people for Ariza’s stunted offensive development, but it just seems natural for him to exist in his current state. As a Laker, Ariza’s skill set made him not a Kobe wannabe, but a welcome, unique part of a championship squad. And as a Rocket, Ariza’s physical tools would seemingly allow him to step into Tracy McGrady’s shoes, but his limitations allow him to be something so much more. If you were to pick out the teams of the NBA in the truest sense of the word, the Rockets would certainly be among them. Would that be the case if the divide in traditional statistical production between Ariza and his teammates was more notable? If his high number of shot attempts were a product of anything other than necessity?

Hardly. If Ariza had a more diverse offensive game, it’s probable that the Rockets would be improved as well. But everything we’ve come to know about them this season would be eclipsed by convention. Ariza’s mediocrity (which isn’t meant to be an insult) is part of what makes Houston so unbelievably charming, as if each clanging jumpshot or overambitious drive was only further evidence of Trevor being earnest. The Rockets are only the Rockets because of their delightful limitations, and to expect more of Ariza is to wish death upon the Rox as we know them.

Read my full thoughts on Trevor Ariza, the Houston Rockets, and the beauty of their limitations at Hardwood Paroxysm.

Great Minds

Posted by Rob Mahoney on under xOther | Read the First Comment

Two of my very favorite basketball minds and writers on the planet, Kevin Arnovitz (ClipperBlog, TrueHoop) and John Krolik (Cavs the Blog, SLAM Online), got together to bat around just a few of the compelling topics in today’s NBA. Among them was the status of the Mavs within the season’s greater narrative, and their thoughts are definitely worth a read. Here’s a little tease from Dr. Arnovitz:

Can they compete with the Lakers in late May? I’m not sure anyone in the Western Conference can, but Dallas — with its length, smarts, and perimeter prowess — might just be the toughest competition the Lakers encounter.

Read Arnovitz and Krolik’s full riff at TrueHoop.

Heard It Through the Grapevine

Posted by Rob Mahoney on under The Grapevine | Be the First to Comment

• Your Dallas Mavericks are the biggest underachievers of the decade. Not exactly the kind of accolade you’d like, but the facts speak for themselves in this case: A decade of good teams and opportunities have brought back little in terms of hardware.
• On a similar note, John Hollinger named the Mavs the best team of the decade to not win a championship. Yup. Shawn Marion was also dubbed the second most underrated player of the 2000s.
• Kevin Pelton ranked the 2005-2006 Mavs the 16th best team of the decade, as determined primarily by point differential: “Take away the NBA Finals and this is your best runner-up of the decade. Actually, take away the last three games and one quarter of the Finals and this is one of the best teams of the decade. For that matter, take away Bennett Salvatore and … never mind.”
• Go ahead and add a sore hamstring to Josh Howard’s list of lingering injuries.
• I spend a lot of time defending Erick Dampier, but this time, he’s gone and done something (or rather, said something) so completely nonsensical that I wouldn’t even think to touch it. Carl Landry is all kinds of tough.
• Whoops.
• There’s a popular notion that the ‘feeling out’ process between a team and its coach is critical to establishing a functional relationship. That may be true, but Rick Carlisle is firmly opposed to the next step in the process, in which the players become a bit too comfortable.
• Mavs’ second round pick Nick Calathes talked to HoopsTV about playing in Greece, his college experience at Florida, and of particular interest to us, his future with the Mavs: “I talked to coach Carlisle since I’ve been here and I have talked to Mark Cuban. I was going to play in the summer league (Las Vegas), but FIBA made a rule saying that I couldn’t. So I have stayed in close contact with them throughout the year. I think Dallas could be a great fit for me, maybe in the future, but right now I am focused only on Panathinaikos and hopefully we can win the Euroleague championship again this year and we’ll go from there.”
• ‘Where are they Now?’, featuring Tariq Abdul-Wahad and Mo Ager.
• An unexpected weapon in the offense this season: the Jason Kidd-Erick Dampier pick-and-roll. The two biggest surprises in Erick Dampier’s game have been his hands and his quickness going up with the ball, both of which are absolutely critical to the PnR’s success.
• Just in case you forgot, the Mavs don’t shoot threes all that well, and don’t score at the rim. Two-point jump shots are the bread and butter of the Dallas offense, and while that doesn’t translate to elite offensive efficiency (or hasn’t…YET), it is what it is. The Mavs are some of the best in the biz at what they do. It just so happens that what they do isn’t the most efficient way to but a ball through a hoop.
• Matt Carroll is the master of his domain. Unfortunately, that domain begins and ends with the confines of the practice facility.
• The player of the decade isn’t Dirk Nowitzki, and it’s not Kobe Bryant, Shaquille O’Neal, or Kevin Garnett, either. Tim Duncan is the one true king of the 2000s, and his glory is indisputable. Mavs fans have had the fortune and misfortune to see Duncan go to work on many occasions, and while that’s hardly a good thing for Dallas, it’s a great thing for fans of the game. Hail, hail, Tim Duncan.
• If this year’s All-Stars were determined by advance statistics (adjust plus-minus, and PER, specifically), then…well, Dirk would still be a starter. Some of the other selections may surprise you, though.
  
• Nope.
  

Everything You Never Wanted to Be

Posted by Rob Mahoney on under Commentary | 4 Comments to Read

When J.J. Barea moved into the starting lineup to aid the struggling Maverick offense, there was hardly an air of permanence. He leap-frogged Jason Terry in the natural pecking order if only to preserve the sanctity of the rotation, and it was all but concrete that Barea would retreat back to the bench when Josh Howard’s health allowed for it.

But it’s a bit more complicated than that. Since stepping into the starting lineup 10 games ago, Barea has facilitated the flow of the offense by providing ball-handling and penetration. He’s sparked what had been one of the more lethargic offenses in the league, and it’s no coincidence that Barea’s personal revival has been accompanied by some pretty demonstrative upticks in team-wide production. For all of his flaws (and J.J.’s critics are eager to point out plenty), a player with Barea’s skill set simply makes sense within the context of the starting lineup.  The dual point guard look arms the Mavs with two very different types of playmakers, and while Jason Kidd is still the PG in a traditional sense, Barea’s ability to set up his teammates, attack the basket, and space the floor accommodates the team in a similar capacity.

Barea has done well for himself during his stint as a starter, and has carved out a niche as an offensive crutch. The Mavs look for him to score early and often, and depend on that scoring to establish a first quarter tone. J.J.’s quickness and improvisation create a nice contrast with the plodding, precise offensive rhythms set to Dirk’s jab step. Nowitzki is one of the world’s best weapons in isolation, but players like Barea are certainly useful in their transformative potential. While Barea himself is hardly a noteworthy talent, he’s simultaneously a formulaic offensive asset and a stylistic foil for the Mavs. Or rather, J.J.’s value to the offense lies in his ability to be everything that the rest of the Mavs are not, which, strangely enough, manages to accomplish the original objectives of Dallas’ offensive system. Barea’s ability to get to the basket alleviates the pressure on the Mavs’ shooters, even if his approach is a bit different than Kidd’s. Barea’s quickness forces the defense to make compromises, even if J.J. isn’t considered a match-up problem. And Barea’s much improved jumper gives Dallas another threat from the outside, even if his shots come in a different manner than JET’s.

J.J.’s offensive success of late may be a bit surprising, but that end of the court has always been his strong suit. The real challenge is and has always been to find a way to eliminate Barea’s status as a defensive liability, which is a very real difficulty. How do you hide a point guard that can be posted up by anybody? And to make matters even worse, how do you hide one that has proven time and time again to be completely incapable of defending the pick-and-roll?

There’s no easy formula. You can only hide NBA defenders so much, and less so for six foot point guards with a bull’s eye on their back. While the defensive weaknesses of a raw, athletic wing or an unschooled center may be a bit less obvious, Barea wears his limitations on his sleeve. It’s painfully apparent that J.J. won’t be blocking many shots or even challenging them all that well, and as such, he’s easier to attack.

So when you see that J.J. Barea is a part of three of the top six lineups for the Mavs in terms of adjusted plus/minus (including the starting lineup), I want you to grasp just how impressive that is. In spite of Barea’s defensive woes, he still manages to be part of the Mavs’ most productive lineups, particularly when playing alongside the rest of the starters. Kidd-Barea-Marion-Nowitzki-Dampier is also the second most effective lineup in terms of raw +/-, and by a wide margin.

Given what we know about the Mavs’ propensity for starting slowly, Barea’s fate in the rotation seems to be of particular interest. While Josh Howard still seems like the inevitable starter, one has to ask if that’s really in the team’s best interest. With J.J. starting, we not only know that the Mavs can at least hold court defensively, but also blow the lid off the game offensively. With Howard, are we to see a repeat of his first quarter surges, or merely an extension of his current shot selection? Is it possible that the early offense unravels when it’s forced to rely on a few too many long jumpers? It’s certainly possible, even if the threat of Howard’s offense gives the Mavs a new dimension. I’m not saying that Howard isn’t the starter to be or that he isn’t the best choice, but at this point, Barea has played well enough to qualify as the devil we know. We know the good and bad of what J.J. does over long stretches as a starter, but we have yet to see how Howard meshes with the opening unit.

So while Howard likely will be the starter at some point, Barea has been productive enough as a starter to warrant consideration for the long haul. He’s not only added some food for thought when considering when Howard should make the jump back into the starting five, but also in the conversation over whether Howard should be the eventual starter at all.

Dallas Mavericks 104, Denver Nuggets 96

Posted by Rob Mahoney on December 28, 2009 under Recaps | 8 Comments to Read

Photo by Garrett W. Ellwood/NBAE via Getty Images.

Box Score — Play-By-Play — Shot Chart — GameFlow

“Change is the only constant.”
-Unknown

Everything has changed.

The Mavs were once destined to rely on Dirk to conquer their demons, and in doing so, doomed themselves against more talented foes. But Dirk shot 6 of 15 from the field against the Nuggets last night, and was anything but the Mavs’ offensive centerpiece. He was more a fancy napkin or a nice tablecloth, an appropriate setting and a suitable distraction from the true forces at work. His offensive efforts were largely complementary, and though Nowitzki managed to drop a dagger of a three-pointer with just 50 seconds remaining, he was ultimately but a part of the Maverick machine. Dallas has had its fair share of struggles in making their offense a team affair, but they’ve had seven double-digit scorers in each of the last two games. Nowitzki’s shot attempts have remained down, the rest of the offense has picked up, and for perhaps the first time all season we have reason to believe that the Maverick offense is ‘getting it.’

The Mavs were once fated to be a step slow on the perimeter, and the league’s elite wings licked their chops at the opportunity to tear up the Dallas D. But add Carmelo Anthony (16 points, 5-19 FG, 12 rebounds) as the latest to fall under the constant pressure of the Maverick defense, a mighty juggernaut that has bested the likes of Dwyane Wade, Chris Paul, and Kevin Durant. To call this defensive outfit “for real” is a tad understated and a few months too late, and all the credit in the world for that goes to Shawn Marion and Josh Howard. The two drew the primary defensive responsibilities of covering Anthony, and though the Maverick plan of attack featured frequent and early double teams, it was Marion and Howard’s execution on and individual level that kept Melo’s shooting percentage so dreadfully low. Anthony absolutely torched the Mavs (who at the time depended heavily on the defensive skills of Antoine Wright) in last year’s playoffs, but the addition of Shawn Marion and a healthy Josh Howard proved to be a world of difference. This is the defensive tandem that will largely determine the outcome of games against the Western elite, and they added another line to their already impressive resume with the way they shackled Carmelo Anthony.

The Mavs were slated to be soft inside, as perennial punchline Erick Dampier and non-center Drew Gooden formed the entirety of Dallas’ center rotation. But Dampier nearly notched a double-double (10 points, nine rebounds) in just 21 minutes, and Gooden (19 points, 8-8 FG, 10 rebounds) was completely and utterly dominant against Nene, Chris Andersen, and the Denver bigs. The Nuggets seemed to only have a fleeting interest in playing solid defense, and Dampier and Gooden positioned themselves to best exploit Denver’s lackadaisical attitude. Damp was able to capitalize on the Nuggets’ D in a way he had failed to do in last year’s playoffs, and Gooden showed what is perhaps his most valuable skill as a Maverick: interior shot creation. Creating shots is a crucial part of any offense’s success, and part of the reason why the Mavs have struggled this season is the inability of players (outside of Dirk Nowitzki) to create good shot attempts for themselves. Gooden is certainly capable of that, as his array of hook shots and finishes around the basket demonstrated beautifully. And to drop a cherry on top, Gooden and Damp were instrumental in the Mavs’ shot-challenging and defensive rebounding (to the tune of a 22.6 and 33.2 defensive rebounding rate, respectively). Damp and Drew were nothing if not tough on the interior, and they moved earth, expectation, and Nuggets in search of rebounds and scoring opportunities.

Though supposedly aged and wise, the Mavs were foretold as a team that would inevitably falter in the face of adversity. Not only have the Mavericks completely flipped that theory on its head with their performance in clutch situations this season, but against the Nuggets they played with the poise of a contender while closing out yet another strong opponent. Denver was visibly distracted by the overly and overtly physical play, but Dallas simply executed their sets, got their stops, and scored just enough to keep the Nuggs at bay. It wasn’t the prettiest finale (late turnovers, blown free throws, and missed opportunities can put a blemish on even the most beautiful of wins), but the Mavs pulled together enough scoring and rebounding to secure a victory.

Everything has changed.

Closing thoughts:

• It simply has to be noted that Chauncey Billups missed the game due to injury. He changes the outlook and execution level of this Denver team, and though Carmelo Anthony has elevated his game over the last season or so, he operates much more comfortably with the safety net that Billups provides. When the Mavs really brought the heat against Melo, the rest of the Nuggets were left to sort out the mayhem. That’s the kind of situation in which Billups thrives, whereas his replacements, rookie Ty Lawson or the limited Anthony Carter, falter.
• Arron Afflalo was a nice pick-up for the Nuggets, even if his jumpshot was absolutely erratic last night; he nailed a few of his early looks before throwing up some bricks in the fourth quarter. But as someone who has watched plenty of Nuggets this year, let me simply say that he makes sense as a defensive stopper/offensive contributor when Chauncey Billups is in the game and the Nuggets are on their game. He’s a contributor to the system, and that’s all you should expect from your role players.
• It was a good night for the Shawn Marion hook shot, as the Mavs looked to engage Carmelo Anthony both offensively and defensively. The game plan was obvious: wear him out on both ends and frustrate him with constant pressure and movement. It worked beautifully, and Marion’s work in the low post against Anthony was a carefully executed part of that plan.
• With Carmelo Anthony in and out of the game with foul trouble (he played just 31 minutes on the night), the Maverick defense turned its full attention to J.R. Smith. Rick Carlisle clearly had the utmost respect for Smith’s offensive game, and he wasn’t shy about throwing additional defensive pressure J.R.’s way. The results were often even better than they were against Anthony, as the flustered Smith committed offensive fouls (including one near-flagrant by introducing his elbow to Jason Terry’s head) and jacked up ill-advised three-pointers. In Billups’ absence, Smith is supposed to fill in with ball-handling and scoring, and instead, he stalled the flow of the Denver offense when met with the Mavs’ defensive pressure.
• Again, Shawn Marion was not on the floor to finish the game. That said, the lineup of Kidd-Terry-Howard-Nowitzki-Gooden was entirely deserving and successful.
• DNP-CDs for Tim Thomas and Quinton Ross. Defending Carmelo Anthony was one of the more obvious reasons for adding a player of Ross’ defensive caliber, and though I was thrilled with the Mavs’ coverage of Anthony last night, I’m a bit disappointed that we didn’t get to see Q give it a try. Maybe next time.
• J.J. Barea (13 points, 6-10 FG, four assists) continues to excel in his starting role. Say what you will about the aesthetic of the starting lineup (a 6′0” shooting guard? Wha-wha-what?), but he’s adding a ton offensively while he’s on the floor. The defense may be another story, but for the moment, his time on the floor is certainly a net positive (he was a +4 on the night).
• Dirk Nowitzki really was a virtual non-factor on offense, but he continued to influence the game through his rebounding. As far as defensive efforts go, Dirk’s night was merely so-so, but Nowitzki pulled in tough, contested rebounds at crucial times to help put this thing away.

GOLD STAR OF THE NIGHT: The Gold Star of the Night goes to Drew Gooden, whose perfect night from the field and tough interior D were highlights of the Mavs’ win. Dallas simply doesn’t get the job done without Gooden’s tangible and intangible contributions. This was perhaps Drew’s finest game in a Maverick uniform (his effort against Tim Duncan and San Antonio stands out as a potential equal, in my mind), and as such he gets the gold sticker bling.

Heard It Through the Weekend Grapevine

Posted by Rob Mahoney on December 27, 2009 under The Grapevine | Be the First to Comment

• Over the last four games, the Mavs have leaned more and more on Josh Howard to supply fourth quarter minutes. That often leaves Shawn Marion as the odd man out, but things could be different if Marion’s defensive talents are needed against Carmelo Anthony and the Denver Nuggets.
• Jason Terry, when asked if he needs to make adjustments in his game to accomodate his shooting slump (via Jeff Caplan): “No question, going into the new year, for me personally, I’ve had a situation where I’ve had an adjustment to make…Teams are playing me a little bit different defensively. I’ve watched tons of film, I know what to do now. I don’t want to give it away, but it does involve getting in the paint and loosening them up. It’s just something that I have to do and I have to remain concentrating on it.”
• Per the AP report, yesterday’s game against Memphis was the first all season in which Dirk did not attempt a free throw.
• Is Jason Kidd a possible candidate to participate in All-Star Weekend via the 3-point shootout? On merits alone, probably not. But if the powers that be opt for some local flavor, Kidd may very well see his day in the games…if not as a shooter, than surely in the skills competition.
• The best and worst of a decade in Dallas sports, with plenty of Mavs on both ends.
• Last year, the Mavs stuck it to the Blazers on Christmas day by milking the J.J. Barea/Brandon Bass pick-and-roll for all it was worth, in spite of a huge performance from Brandon Roy. Though the Mavs didn’t play on Christmas this year, the Blazers did, and the loss from a year ago was still very fresh in Roy’s mind.
• A fun scatterplot charting NBA teams by offensive and defensive efficiency. As you can see, the Mavs have some pretty talented neighbors. (link via Ryan Parker of Basketball Geek)
  

Dallas Mavericks 106, Memphis Grizzlies 101: Abridged

Posted by Rob Mahoney on December 26, 2009 under Recaps | Be the First to Comment

Photo by Danny Bollinger/NBAE via Getty Images.

Box Score — Play-By-Play — Shot Chart — GameFlow

“Success is not a place at which one arrives but rather the spirit with which one undertakes and continues the journey.”
-Alex Noble

*A quick programming note. From now on, the four factors values will be precise, empirical calculations rather than estimations. The calculated values are courtesy of HoopData.com’s more detailed box scores, which will also be linked (when available) as the game box score.

• While this afternoon’s game was night a contest of great statistical achievement on the defensive end (the Mavs’ defensive efficiency on the night was 11.4 points/100 possessions lower than their season average), something must be said about the Mavs’ ability to limit Zach Randolph after his early domination. A tandem of Zach Randolph and Marc Gasol is not one that’s easy to counter, due to their high/low post interchangeability and the combination of strength and touch. Both players can show a little range and can certainly get things done on the low block, and though Gasol had merely a productive first half, Randolph was off the charts. Zeebo had 19 points in the first quarter and five early in the second, but over the game’s final 33:40, Randolph managed to score just six points. While it only slowed the Grizzlies enough for the Mavs to scrape out a lead, it took away Memphis’ most dominant offensive weapon at the time. That kind of thing completely changes the flow of the game, and the nine point deficit at the time was reversed into a five point positive margin.
  
• Shawn Marion (10 points, seven rebounds) bounced back from his worst game of the season by playing a very productive 25 minutes. That said, his minutes didn’t necessarily come easy, as Rudy Gay (22 points on 22 shots, 10 rebounds) simply could not be denied. Marion had good defensive positioning time and time again, made a little contact to push Gay away from his shot of choice, and yet Rudy would lean or elevate before finishing possession after possession with a make. What’s a bit odd is that Marion left the game with 3:27 left in the third quarter and never returned, despite throwing down a pair of dunks and creating extra possessions with his hustle.
  
• A lot of the Mavs’ early defensive sequences ended tragically: Dallas would play 10-20 seconds of pretty incredible defense (nice on-ball pressure, ball denial, perfect rotations) before one of the Grizz would force up a shot, only to see Gasol, Gay, or Randolph pull in an offensive rebound for a clear bucket or a fresh shot clock. Considering that the starting lineup features four solid to great rebounders by position, that’s not a result I would expect on a regular basis. Still, this isn’t the first time the Mavs have been shown up on the boards (the final margin was 49-40 in favor of Memphis, who also won the offensive rebounding battle 20-10), and while I’m not quite ready to call it a recurring problem, it’s something to keep under your pillow.
• Drew Gooden missed the game with back spasms, and as a result, Dirk saw some minutes at center and Kris Humphries was pulled out from beneath the couch. Hump can be such a positive force for this team, but the man is simply the master of the anticlimactic possession. I appreciate his efforts on the boards, but it’s a bit disheartening to watch all of his work end in a blown layup attempt. Keep doing what you do, Hump, but hopefully next time you’ll be doing what you do just a little bit better.
• The Mavs looked completely incapable of defending the rim without Erick Dampier in the game. I don’t know if it’s primarily a shift in coverages or just a perceived shift on part of the opposition, but Rudy Gay danced down the lane for slams whenever Damp took a breather on the bench.
• Promising offensive nights from both Jason Terry (23 points, 7-18 FG, five assists) and Josh Howard (11 points, 4-6 FG). JET took every touch as a personal invitation to attack the rim, and Terry and the Mavs reaped the benefits later as a more confident JET made plays of consequence. In addition, Jason looked to expand his on-court contributions beyond the points column, and his playmaking in the two man game or after penetration opened up new wrinkles of the Maverick offense. All of a sudden Shawn Marion was wide open and in position to score, and Dirk Nowitzki was left all alone at the top of the key or out on the wing. Josh’s totals don’t demand your attention, but his 25 minutes were an exercise in minimalism. He didn’t over-dribble, he didn’t hold the ball too long, and he didn’t think too much after receiving the ball. Howard looked completely in the flow of the game without feeling the need to dominate the ball, and while the Mavs should certainly expect more raw production out of Howard, they can still appreciate his discretion.
  
• The Mavs shot and scored at a terrific rate, but they simply did not get to the free throw line. Excluding six late FTAs during the game’s final moments, the Mavs attempted just 14 free throws on the game, less than half of the Grizzlies’ 29. That said, it’s not safe to assume that the discrepancy is attributable to the Mavs’ shot selection; against the Grizz, the Mavs shot 22 attempts at the rim (with 15 makes), which is comparable to their season average of 24.6 attempts (with 14.7 makes).
  
• The Mavericks took care of the ball. 9.9 is a pretty ridiculous turnover rate (As a reminder, TOR is equal to the percentage of a team’s possessions that end in a turnover. Atlanta is the most careful team in the league, and their average is 20.3.), and it’s a testament to the Mavs’ efficient offense that they were able to finish with such a number in spite of Dirk’s abnormal four turnovers.
  
• Dirk Nowitzki (20 points, 10-16 FG, four rebounds, three assists) was as wonderful as you’d expect, even if he was a bit more turnover-prone than usual. But for those of you looking for a storyline, this game wasn’t about what Dirk did, but what he didn’t have to do. Seven Mavericks scored in double figures, and Dirk didn’t score a point over the game’s final 15 minutes. Terry, Howard, and company were ready and willing to take over, and they closed the game beautifully.
  
• Only two teams in the Western Conference have yet to lose ten games. One of them is Los Angeles (23-5), reigning champions and resident “team-to-beat.” The other is Dallas (21-9).

Shot location data courtesy of HoopData.com.

So It’s Been Said, Many Times, Many Ways

Posted by Rob Mahoney on December 25, 2009 under xOther | 3 Comments to Read

Photo by Danny Bollinger.

An old picture, but a great one. Plus, Dirk’s wearing a Santa hat, so I can at least pretend it’s topical.

I won’t even pretend to know or understand exactly what the holidays mean to you and yours, but I wish all of you a wonderful, safe, and festive time with whoever you cherish most. And hey, maybe even a little NBA basketball on the side, too. Dress it up however you’d like and call it whatever you want, but today is a wonderful time for taking a second to look at the little things, taking stock of our lives and ourselves, appreciating everything we’re fortunate enough to have, and really enjoying those that matter in our lives.

In the spirit of boiling all of that down into a single phrase: Merry Christmas.

Ladders Are Made to Fall

Posted by Rob Mahoney on under Commentary | 4 Comments to Read

The ESPNDallas crew put together a list of the top 10 Mavericks of the decade, and here are their rankings:

1. Dirk Nowitzki
2. Steve Nash
3. Michael Finley
4. Jason Terry
5. Josh Howard
6. Nick Van Exel
7. Jason Kidd
8. Devin Harris
9. Jerry Stackhouse
10. Erick Dampier

I’m a bit lost as to the criteria used, though. If it’s the out-and-out best players (talent and production-wise) to play for the Mavs in the 2000s, Jason Kidd seems slighted. If it’s based on production in a Maverick uniform this decade, Jason Terry may not be getting the respect he deserves. And if it’s based on…well, whatever metric puts Nick Van Exel (who make no mistake is one of my personal favorites in team history) ahead of Jason Kidd, Devin Harris, and Erick Dampier, then that explains that. This just seems like an exercise where you need to take talent, production, and Maverick tenure all into account, and with that in mind the order seems a bit scrambled.

It’s not an easy list to compile. We can all agree that Dirk stands at the top of the list, with Steve Nash a perfectly acceptable second fiddle. But where do you go from there? Michael Finley is the best scorer of the bunch, Jason Terry kept the Mavs afloat sans Nash and has a Finals appearance under his belt, and Jason Kidd is probably the best of the remaining crop despite his short tenure. After that, you’ve got some combination of Josh Howard, Devin Harris, and Erick Dampier, three Mavs that were absolutely instrumental to the team’s success during the most successful stretch this decade, and each contributing in unique ways that only sometimes show up on the stat sheet (scoring balance, change-of-pace potential, interior defense). Only then do I get to Jerry Stackhouse and Nick Van Exel, but with DeSagana Diop, Antawn Jamison, and MARQUIS DANIELS getting some consideration.

Sound off in the comments, because I’m curious to hear everyone’s take on this. What’s the best way to go about ranking the decade’s Mavs? And given those criteria, who’veyagot?

Living For Yesterday

Posted by Rob Mahoney on under Commentary | 3 Comments to Read

Or two nights before, if you want to be really specific about it.

As I noted in my recap of the Mavs’ loss to the Blazers, Dallas had a legitimate shot to take the undermanned Blazers into overtime. After a bizarre offensive sequence for Portland ended with Jason Kidd on the ground in pain and Brandon Roy taking a long, off-the-mark jumper, Jason Terry pushed the ball up-court. Plenty of people (Jason Kidd, included) will tell you that taking a timeout is the thing to do in that situation, but I’m still not so sure. Regardless, JET’s layup (and that’s what it was, not a runner, not a floater, but a layup) attempt hit a bit too much rim, and the Blazers go home with a story to tell their kids.

For the record, I don’t think Jason Terry’s logic was faulty. He made a move, missed his shot, and the Mavs lost. But the air certainly needs clearing after a possession like that, and regardless of how much time has past since, I feel compelled.

My biggest problem with the general assessment of Terry’s decision-making is the consequentialism of it all; Jason Terry drove missed a shot and the Mavs lost, so the decision itself was inherently bad. The result, in this case, completely skews JET’s choice. Had he sunk his attempt, a “wild runner” becomes the “savvy move of a crafty vet.” I honestly believe that the entire conversation would be turned upside down, and rather than questioning Terry’s basketball IQ, we’d be lauding his instincts. While that may seem the most convenient way to evaluate decision-making in sporting contexts, it’s deceptive. It’s hard to discredit incredible plays made in spite of logic (i.e. LeBron sinks a long three while pulling up in transition, just to show off his range), but sometimes it’s even harder to give proper credit when the result is negative. The question isn’t whether or not JET’s shot went in, but whether or not the shot was make-able and of equal or superior value to what the Mavs could have had coming out of a timeout. The latter is a bit tricky, but the former? Take a look for yourself:

(Check out the 0:57 mark here, better video hopefully forthcoming.)

And JET himself on the possession (via Eddie Sefko):

“Nine times out of 10, I’m going to make that shot…I’m not second-guessing myself. If we get a timeout, do we score? We don’t know. Maybe next time we’ll call a timeout. But me, I’m sprinting down there and trying to attack the basket. It was an aggressive play. It didn’t go our way tonight. And you feel bad. But it’s one game. Let’s go on to the next one.”

After Terry’s hesitation move, he’s left one-on-one against Steve Blake. The rest of the Blazer defense is scrambling to make sure the rest of their bases are covered, and JET has a chance to drive against a slower defender whose defense has no means of matching Terry’s usual offense. The result wasn’t an off-balance jumper (y’know, the kind that had betrayed him all night long), an attempt to draw a foul, or a wild fling at the rim. Just an honest to goodness attempt to do the right thing at the right time. Terry wanted to tie that game, and based on his night he needed to. But the fact that layup hit all rim and no net was based less on the decision to shoot it and more on the imperfect science of basketball itself.

In principle, Dirk Nowitzki is a better clutch scorer than Jason Terry. So supposing Rick Carlisle could construct the appropriate play to get Dirk the ball in the right position against the right pressure with the right time left on the clock (and by all means, Rick is capable), I’m not opposed to calling a timeout in that situation. But that doesn’t make Terry’s choice any less intelligent and informed. To further complicate things, Dirk had six turnovers on the night and had trouble against Portland’s aggressive double teams. That throws a wrench into any half-court set the Mavs decide to run, as a quick double would likely result in a quick shot or a Kidd 3-pointer. Those are fine opportunities, but not fine enough as to let me dismiss Terry’s shot out-of-hand.

I understand the argument that even a Terry make would have been a double-edged sword, as Jason Kidd would have remained in a heap on the floor if the Blazers were to turn the ball around and attack immediately. That dismissal banks on the notion that Portland wouldn’t call a timeout (Which is the exact line of logic these advocates are pressing for anyway, isn’t it? Terry is a fool for attempting to put pressure on the defense when he has the advantage, but he’s also a fool for allowing the Blazers to do the same. Am I missing something?), and that the Mavs wouldn’t use their foul “to give” and take one of their own. Legitimate possibilities, but when we start getting to the hypothetical result of the hypothetical reaction to a hypothetical action, I start to tune out.

Argue all you want if Terry’s decision was the right play, but I don’t think it’s the wrong one. He didn’t settle, forced the issue against a lesser player (and a subpar defender), and came up a little short. There’s no shame in that, regardless of the result.