Completely biased and unbalanced coverage of the Dallas Mavericks.
Posted by Rob Mahoney on August 14, 2010 under Previews, xOther | 
View Comments
Tyson Chandler, with one of the weirdest game-winning dunks in the history of weird game-winning dunks. It was more surreal than clutch, as the fine people running Team USA’s scrimmage at the World Basketball festival decided to use a bizarre, sudden-death overtime system. Regardless, Tyson Chandler had a free look at an alley-oop thanks to JaVale McGee, and won it for the Blue team.
Posted by Rob Mahoney on July 3, 2010 under Commentary, News, Previews, Roster Moves | View Comments
Photo from Mavs.com.
Someday, I’ll be forced to sit down at my keyboard and articulate exactly what Dirk Nowitzki has meant to the Dallas Mavericks. It will be painful and absolutely futile. I’ll haphazardly throw thoughts into this virtual space with the hope that some of it means something, and yet be forced to face the realization that none of it could possibly do Dirk and his career justice. What this man has done for this franchise and basketball in general is beyond words, words, words, and I pity the future me that’s forced to write such a basketball epitaph.
Instead, I couldn’t be happier to say that the Mavericks will continue with business as usual. Dirk Nowitzki and the Mavs have agree to terms on a four-year, $80 million contract, in which Nowitzki will leave some $16.2 million on the table to benefit the only franchise he’s ever known. It’s a touching gesture from the most important figure in Dallas Mavericks history, and fuels the hope of a substantial upgrade this off-season. Nowitzki’s unselfishness has given Mark Cuban the liberty to chase stars, and even if he ends up grasping at the biggest and brightest with little to show for it, Dirk’s sacrifice means plenty.
Though Nowitzki can’t officially ink the deal until July 8th, the agreement between him and the Mavs signals the beginning of the next stage of Dallas’ off-season. Brendan Haywood should now become the team’s top priority, and beyond that, the proper and optimal utilization of Erick Dampier’s instantly expiring contract. There are all kind of targets and options available to Dallas, and with Nowitzki locked up until 2014, only now can they become more than mere possibilities.
Dirk is also the proud new owner of a no-trade clause, one of two such clauses to currently exist in the NBA. In actuality, it means very little; it’s extremely unlikely that Cuban and Nelson would ever trade Dirk without his consent anyway, which means that the clause is merely a literal version of an established principle. It’s just something to keep everyone sleeping a bit more soundly at night, and if that’s what Mark and Donnie afforded Dirk to compensate for his considerable financial concessions, then good on all them.
It should be a busy summer, but take a moment to celebrate: the Mavs have just agreed to the best deal of free agency thus far.
Posted by Rob Mahoney on April 18, 2010 under Previews | View Comments
As a convenience, I’ve assembled a number of predictions on Mavs-Spurs from writers here, there, and everywhere, with choice excerpts from some. Enjoy:
Mavs Media:
Eddie Sefko, Dallas Morning News: Mavs in 7
Unsolicited, two Mavericks who are going to have to deal with the P-n-R said that will be the key to everything. “It’s not really about matchups, it’s about stopping the pick and roll,” Eddie Najera said. “They’re really good at doing that. And then after that it’s individual defense. They like to get to the rim, so we got to try to build that wall early on and get a little physical. That’s what playoff basketball is about.”
Tim Cowlishaw, Dallas Morning News: Mavs in 7
Brad Townsend, Dallas Morning News: Mavs in 6
Jean-Jacques Taylor, Dallas Morning News: Mavs in 6
Angry Trey: Mavs in 6
Spurs Media:
Mike Monroe, San Antonio Express-News: Spurs in 6
Richard Oliver, San Antonio Express-News: Spurs in 6
Graydon Gordian, 48 Minutes of Hell: Spurs in 7
Michael De Leon, Project Spurs: Spurs in 7
Jeff Garcia, Project Spurs: Mavs in 6
TrueHoop’s Stat Geek Smackdown:
Dave Berri, Wages of Wins: Spurs in 7
This is a very tough series to call. Dallas has home court. But San Antonio was the better team — in terms of differential — the entire season. I am going to give the edge to San Antonio, although my call requires that the Spurs win the last game of the series in Dallas.
John Hollinger, ESPN.com: Spurs in 6
I’ve been cynical about Dallas’ contender status (“Really?” Mavs nation says, “You don’t say?”), but the Mavs played much better over the final 10 days of the season and ended up with a respectable point differential over the final quarter of the season. The Mavs also are 23-7 since trading for Caron Butler and Brendan Haywood, which is superior to San Antonio’s 20-11 mark in that time.
The difference is that San Antonio played one of the league’s most difficult schedules over the final quarter of the season, while…Dallas played the league’s second-easiest schedule over the final quarter. Of the Mavs’ final 21 games, 12 were against lottery teams, two others were against the lottery-esque Bulls and one was against San Antonio’s scrubs — plus, 12 of the 21 games were at home. So only six of 21 were against playoff-caliber competition, and they lost four of those games (and two others).
Meanwhile, San Antonio faced a murderer’s row over the final month. Eleven of the Spurs’ final 17 opponents won 50 games, and two others (Memphis and Houston) were respectable, plus 10 of the 17 were on the road. In that time, the Spurs beat Cleveland, L.A., Orlando, Denver, Boston and Oklahoma City, and posted a better scoring margin against the brutal schedule than Dallas did against its parade of softies.
What I’m saying is that the records deceive — by most advanced measures, San Antonio appears to be the better team.
Steve Ilardi, APM expert and quantitative team consultant: Spurs in 6
Dallas is not nearly as good as its record might suggest, as indicated by its rather mediocre team efficiency (only +2.72 points per game). In contrast, the Spurs have been outscoring opponents by over seven points per game down the stretch with a healthy Manu leading the way. They should be strong enough to overcome the Mavs’ home-court edge.
Jeff Ma, former whiz kid and quantitative consultant to the Blazers: Spurs in 6
I think this is the matchup the Spurs wanted. The good news for the Mavs: They drew the second seed and have home-court advantage versus any West team not named the Lakers. The bad news? They face one of the top three teams in the conference in the first round. I think most would agree that the Spurs are one of the hotter teams in the West at this point. This series should be a good example of why the NBA is a matchup league and not a power-ranking league. Dallas’ strengths match up pretty closely with the Spurs’ weaknesses.
Neil Paine, Basketball-Reference: Spurs in 7
Kevin Pelton, Basketball Prospectus: Mavs in 7
The question then becomes, how much better is Dallas with the addition of Butler and Haywood? Since the All-Star break, the Mavericks’ point differential adjusted for schedule is +3.1 points per game. San Antonio is +4.4 in that span. That’s still a big difference for a playoff matchup, but not an overwhelming one. This series should be tremendously close and filled with ups and downs, but ultimately I see Dallas as the slight favorite.
Haralabos Voulgaris, Former Professional Gambler: Mavs in 7
Assorted writers:
Kelly Dwyer, Ball Don’t Lie: Spurs in 7
Here’s what will happen - possibly the best series you’ll see all year. This could be epic, especially if the shooting is on. The Spurs (ninth in offense, eighth in defense) seem to have the slight edge on paper while the Mavericks have the slight edge in getting to wear their white uniforms four out of seven games. I can’t give you any significant reason why either team will pull ahead. Just pull up a chair.
Trey Kerby, Ball Don’t Lie: Spurs in 7
No George Hill means Tony Parker and his kind-of-healed hand need to be a lot better than the Spurs were hoping when “Baguette” went down earlier this year. Without Hill, and with Parker still recovering, the Spurs might have trouble putting up enough points to hang with the Mavericks.
However, as any scholar of French history will tell you, a Frenchman’s hand heals faster than any other hand on Earth. It has something to do with Napoleon and the way he stuck his hand in his vest. Probably. I might have just made it up, but it sounds right.
Dan Devine, Ball Don’t Lie: Mavs in 7
Matt Moore, Hardwood Paroxysm: Mavs in 6
Oh, sure, they met last year. But no one really seems to remember it, like it was just wiped from our memories like Sun’s English. But throw out the season finale’s Manu-Duncan-Parker-less game, and the Mavs are still 9-2 against the Spurs lately. That’s pretty damn good. The Spurs have been so brilliant over the last decade it’s easy to forget that only three teams have eliminated them from postseason play in that timespan. The Los Angeles Lakers, the Phoenix Suns, WAY back in 99-00, and the Dallas Mavericks. The reason for this is the simple truth that Dallas’ core causes San Antonio fits.
Zach Harper, Hardwood Paroxysm: Mavs in 7
Jared Wade, Hardwood Paroxysm: Mavs in 7
Noam Schiller, Both Teams Played Hard: Spurs in 7
Literally anything can happen for with these teams. The Mavs look much more talented on paper – they have multiple scorers, they have a (still) elite floor general, they have the size to guard Duncan and they have two of the best closers in the league – and yet the Spurs have regained that Spurs aura in the past two months. Sure, Parker’s health is a concern, but when Manu is this good, the only way the Spurs lose is if they don’t get their production from Duncan. And if the difference between winning or losing is Tim Duncan, my bet is that you’re going to win.
Maurice Bobb, SLAM Online: Mavs in 6
Henry Abbott, ESPN TrueHoop: Spurs in 6
Chris Broussard, ESPN.com: Mavs in 7
J.A. Adande, ESPN.com: Mavs in 7
Chad Ford, ESPN.com: Mavs in 6
Tim Legler, ESPN.com: Mavs in 7
Jalen Rose, ESPN.com: Mavs in 6
Chris Sheridan, ESPN.com: Mavs in 7
Marc Stein, ESPN.com: Mavs in 6
David Thorpe, ESPN.com: Spurs in 7
Posted by Rob Mahoney on April 17, 2010 under Previews | View Comments
You’ve already read my thoughts on the Mavs’ series against the Spurs, and if not I implore you to do so. However, the beauty of the internet lies in the multitude of perspectives that are readily available just a click or two away, and I’ve brought a few of those perspectives here to The Two Man Game for a media roundtable of sorts. Zac Crain (FrontBurner/D Magazine), Mark Followill (TXA 21/Fox Sports Southwest), Jeff ‘Skin’ Wade (103.3 FM ESPN Radio, TXA 21/Fox Sports Southwest, ESPN Dallas), Tim MacMahon and Jeff Caplan (ESPN Dallas), Art Garcia (NBA.com), Mike Fisher and David Lord (DallasBasketball.com), and Gina Miller (TXA 21) were kind enough to join me for a discussion of the upcoming series.
——————-
Rob Mahoney: Tim Duncan, Manu Ginobili, and Tony Parker are pretty good at the whole basketball thing, but the Spurs are notorious for consistently boasting a capable crop of role players. This year’s supporting cast may not be as daunting as in years’ past, but which of the non-’Big Three’ Spurs do you anticipate giving the Mavs the most trouble?
Zac Crain: Even though he hasn’t fully clicked this season, I’ll say Richard Jefferson. Roger Mason is a feast or famine shooter, and George Hill is, at times, worrisome. But with Manu back being, seemingly, a fully operational Death Star, I think the defensive attention the Mavs will have to pay him might open things up for Jefferson a bit. Remember: his best game as a Spur came against the Mavs. If nothing else, it will likely mean Caron Butler expends more energy on that side of the court.
Mark Followill: I gotta go with George Hill, assuming (of course) he is healthy. Hill was great while Tony Parker recently missed 16 games, averaging 15.5 points and shooting 50% as the Spurs went 11-5. Hill can drive, shoot 3’s and defend, and even if he returns to a role coming off the bench he will probably be on the floor at the end of games. If crusty old Gregg Popovich says you’re his favorite player, then that’s good enough for me in terms of judging whether or not this kid has the heart and toughness to be a player under the intense playoff spotlight.
Jeff ‘Skin’ Wade: I was pretty worried about George Hill and without knowing the extent of his ankle injury, I’d have to say I’m still worried about him. As best as I could tell, he didn’t look to be in too bad of shape when he left the floor Wednesday night, but that doesn’t really tell you anything. I’ll assume he’ll be ready and my worries begin there. That guy does everything well. And I know people like to goof on Matt Bonner ’cause he doesn’t look like a baller and he has quite possibly the worst nickname in the history of pro sports (can’t even bring myself to type it here), but he burns you on pick and pops and in the minimum possession game that we anticipate the Spurs will want, those threes are painful. If the refs let San Antonio get really physical, then I’ve seen him frustrate Dirk before (the 93-76 Mavs loss in San Antonio last season comes to mind). But hey, he’s no Ryan Bowen, and I’m sure Dirk’s happy about that.
Tim MacMahon: Can I get an injury report on George Hill before giving my answer? He might actually have pushed past Tony Parker to become the Spurs’ third-best player. Richard Jefferson has been a bust, but he’ s still a scoring threat. But if not Hill, DeJuan Blair is the Spur that worries me most. Not sure if Pop will trust the rookie enough to give him significant playoff burn, but he’s a wide-body beast who showed in the regular-season finale that he can give Erick Dampier and Brendan Haywood fits.
David Lord: In my crystal ball, no one. Any or all of the SA role players will make some plays (if I have to predict, probably someone will hit a big 3 here or there), but from what I’ve seen, with Parker still feeling his way, the Spurs chances will rest almost entirely on the ability of Duncan and/or Ginobili to have one of those sustained all-world caliber series they have had before and carry the Spurs on their back.
Art Garcia: It starts with George Hill. At this time last year, Popovich didn’t trust rookie. Hill didn’t get off the bench in the Dallas series until it was too late. Now he’s vital. He’s long, athletic, gets to the rim and defends. And don’t sleep on DeJuan Blair, though I’m not sure how much time Pop finds for this year’s rookie.
Mike Fisher: I’m sure the Spurs would like to unleash George Hill and/or DeJuan Blair, but there are some problems there: The more minutes those guys get, the more it means Parker and Duncan, respectively, must be sitting due to rest (or ineffectiveness). It’s one of the issues with teams’ ballyhooed “depth’’ (and an issue the Mavs have, too): Once we get to this point, that ninth guy in the rotation is a minute factor compared to the front-of-the-rotation heavy-lifters.
Hill is twice the player, statistically, that he was a year ago as a rookie. And next year, DeJuan might be twice the player he is now.
But they are still supplementary at best.
And that’s not even counting the facts that if you play Hill, you might be asking him to do it on one ankle … and if you play DeJuan, he’s more likely to collect fouls as he is to go 20/20 again.
Gina Miller: McDyess for what he can do against Dirk defensively. Popovich because he’s such a smart coach and so good at making adjustments. Richard Jefferson was good against Dallas this year (put up 16 a game) but I have heard from some San Antonio sources that he just doesn’t fit in well.
Jeff Caplan: The first guy I’m sure is on the tip of everyone’s tongue is George Hill, and we’ll just have to wait and see if he’s available and if he is, how well he can move on that bum right ankle. It’s too bad really. Hill’s had a heckuva year and it’s a shame to see the young guy not at full strength. However, my key role guy is none other than Richard Jefferson. He’s had a tough, tough year. Every time I flipped on a Spurs game, Jefferson was getting the mother lode from Popovich. But Jefferson has played better the last month of the season. He’s really excelled playing with Manu Ginobili, who’s probably the closest thing to a Jason Kidd who helped Jefferson thrive in Jersey. Jefferson is rebounding better, he has good size, and can shoot the 3-ball. If he gets hot, and he can, he can be trouble.
—
RM: In a perfect world, Rodrigue Beaubous’ cup would overfloweth with minutes and shot attempts, and he’d have all the opportunities in the world. Life’s not only a bit less perfect, but far more complicated; despite all of Beaubois’ strengths, he’s still a rookie with zero playoff experience. J.J. Barea, on the other hand, made a killing last year against the Spurs in the playoffs, and his ability to irritate Tony Parker defensively and penetrate against the Spurs’ D was a big reason why Dallas won decisively. How should Rick Carlisle make sense of the dilemma between a proven pest to the Spurs and the seemingly bottomless scoring potential of the rook?
Zac Crain: As much as I love Roddy, I think Carlisle would be smart to stick with the proven formula. In other words: JJ gets the backup minutes and Beaubois gets spot duty. That said, I think Carlisle needs to have the guts to pull the trigger with Roddy if 1) the Mavs need an energy boost and/or 2) Barea isn’t getting it done. He’ll make mistakes, but I think the positives outweigh the negatives. Plus, he’s one of the few Mavs Pop hasn’t (completely) gameplanned for.
Mark Followill: Great question and more than anything should give us all a taste of the challenges of the job of NBA head coach. When Roddy had a chance to play backup point recently after his 40 point explosion he didnt play like the dynamic scorer we have seen some nights this year. In terms of being able to run the team for the minutes that Kidd is out I’d have to initially give the nod to Barea and turn to Roddy if JJ struggles. I still maintain Roddy’s greatest success this year has been as a scoring 2 next to Kidd. If coaching is all about putting players in the best spot to be successful then Roddy’s likely role is the x-factor guy who can play next to Kidd and ignite the team and crowd with his ability to score.
Jeff ‘Skin’ Wade: Is this where I’m supposed to employ the “x-factor” cliché? I think Rick Carlisle took the most unnecessary beating from the fan base in his handling of Beaubois. I thought he put him in situations where he thought he’d be successful and he was. I thought he was more careful in situations that were a little more “perilous” because so much was on the line for a veteran team. Looking back, not a lot of wriggle room, was there? Barea isn’t even sniffing Roddy’s talents, but he’s a veteran who has performed well in several clutch situations last season when he earned Rick’s confidence, and then as you noted Rob, against San Antone in the playoffs. In a playoff series, execution is so critical and every possession is at a premium. I think that was one of the reasons Pop tightened the reins on Hill at the end of last season – he was learning the point after playing off the ball in college and he was rookie on top of that. There are plenty of Spurs fans who’ll argue that it was a bad decision. Maybe it was, or maybe it was just residue from his naked pics – who knows? I think that If Rick throws Roddy out there it’ll be with J-Kidd and I think Roddy will have an impact. If it was my team, I’d be willing to go down that particular road if JET or Caron are struggling. I fear that if Roddy gets playoff point minutes, it’ll resemble more of his performance in the home game against the Lakers than the road game at Golden State. I think their sets with Roddy at the one would be too limited to be effective in a playoff series and it’d put enormous pressure on your offense to come from transition opportunities created by stops. And keep in mind that a long first round means Kidd will log heavy minutes, so the minutes may be so limited here that it won’t really matter.
Tim MacMahon: I’d like to see Roddy B. get a stint in the second quarter of each game. If he’s feeling it, let him roll. If not, let him ride the bench. But, since Rick Carlisle refuses to ask for my advice, I expect him to ride pine for the playoffs.
David Lord: Ride the hot hand. Both should (and will) get their chances.
Art Garcia: You roll with what you know, at least at first. Barea has been on this stage and performed well, so if I’m Rick, I’m going with J.J. to in the three-guard look and to back up Kidd. But if Barea struggles, I think we’ve all seen enough from Roddy B to throw him out there. The rookie appears fearless and, if given the chance, could make a big play … for either team.
Mike Fisher: Many Mavs-watchers have given up trying to predict Rick’s handling of Roddy B. Many Mavs-watchers have also gone nuts trying to understand it. The end result is obviously positive; Beaubois came from nowhere (oh, OK, Pointe-à-Pitre) to a place where he is statistically the greatest rookie perimeter shooter in NBA history. (Yes, really: at 51.8 FG percent, 40.9 3-pointers percent and 80.8 FT percent, he’s the only rookie guard ever to enter “The 50/40/80 Club.’’
My argument is that represents evidence that this isn’t the normal rookie. My argument continues: Roddy B is literally the only person in that locker room who hasn’t been through these sort of basketball wars – and therefore can be “hammocked’’ by so many teammates, coaches and staffers who have.
If JJB pestered Parker last year (and he did) … think what Roddy B might do?
And then there is this, and it goes beyond record-breaking stats or historical precedents: Other teams cannot guard Roddy B. If I’m Rick, I damn sure give Beaubois a taste of the postseason … and if he holds up in his first minute of play, I’d given him a second minute … and then a third.
Gina Miller: I think we’ll see Beaubois get very little time. The mistakes he could make are much more costly now.
Jeff Caplan: You’re right, J.J. was very good last year against the Spurs, averaging 10.0 points and 4.6 points. Kidd averaged 10.0 and 5.6 (of course Kidd outrebounded Barea 30-10 and out-stealed - is that a word? - him 12-2). Barea told me today (Saturday) actually that he doesn’t think the Spurs guard the pick and roll well, especially up top with Dirk setting the pick. He said he picked apart the Spurs that way and got to the rim, which he did. Look, Barea is going to play. He’s a fourth-year guy and has earned the right. As exciting as Beaubois is — and he is exciting — I don’t look for him to have much run. Of course, you say something like that and the unpredictable Rick Carlisle will have him in during crunch time. You never know. I also think back to last season’s series and I wonder if Popovich regrets not letting George Hill off the leash sooner than he did.
—
RM: Which is more important to the Mavs’ success in this series: Shawn Marion’s (and perhaps DeShawn Stevenson’s) defense against Manu Ginobili, or Brendan Haywood and Erick Dampier’s defense against Tim Duncan?
Zac Crain: Whomever defends Manu. His points (and overall court game) is way more important to the Spurs’ confidence. They feed off him. The fans feed off of him. And the reverse is true: he can get right inside the heads of the Mavs and their fans.
Mark Followill: Again, great question. Winning basketball is best played from the inside out leading me to want to answer Dampier/Haywood vs. Duncan. However I’ve heard Rick Carlisle say the worst thing that can to happen to your defense is to be beaten by dribble penetration. So since Ginobili can do that among his myriad of other skills and the intangibles he brings to the floor as a wily veteran I’ll say it’s Marion et al against Ginobili.
Jeff ‘Skin’ Wade: Slowing down Manu ten times out of ten. He’s been unbelievable. He’s also far and away the single biggest reason why I seem to fear the Spurs more than anyone else I’ve talked to about it. If Matrix can keep Ginobili from going nuts then I think he’ll be the MVP of the series. But as Marion will tell you, a dude will get his if he gets enough shot attempts. If Ginobil needs a bunch of shot attempts to get his, that’ll be counter-productive to what SA wants to do and I’m sure Marion will have been a big part of that.
Tim MacMahon: Matrix vs. Manu. Duncan had three 25-point games in last season’s series, all of which came in losing efforts. The Spurs took off down the stretch this season when Ginobili got in a groove.
David Lord: I think Ginobili can turn the series, so give the biggest pep pills to Marion and Stevenson, don’t overlook Butler, and don’t be surprised if Kidd gets the assignment on some key possessions. I don’t think the Spurs have the ability to grind out victories in this series but instead will have to win with flashes of greatness, and these days I think Ginobili has more potential to do the unexpected.
Art Garcia: Matrix hands down. Manu is balling, so the Mavs need Marion’s length and savvy. Remember, Manu didn’t play in the series last year, so the Mavs didn’t have this issue. I expect El Contusion to be the focus of Dallas’ D.
Mike Fisher: The Mavs are in many ways built to contend with the Spurs – which means, “build to contend with Duncan.’’ They’ve done it with Damp/Diop and they ought to be able to do it with Damp/Big Wood. (“Contend with’’ being different than “being superior to,’’ of course.)
Duncan really labors up and down the floor these days, that requisite knee brace a tell-tale sign.
But Manu? He’s the guy who can go off with consistency, he’s the only guy on the Spurs right now who can effectively create his own show, and he’s Job One for Marion … in a sense, Marion’s acquisition was “built to contend with the Spurs,’’ too – or, at least, one Spur.
Gina Miller: The defense on Ginobili. Duncan is still Duncan, despite what I feel, is in a bit of a decline. He can drop 20 & 10 but that’s almost a given. Ginobili has been so strong from San Antonio recently and such a part of their late-season surge this year that he’s the one the Mavs need to focus on containing.
Jeff Caplan: Manu, Manu, Manu. Duncan is going to get his. We know that. But, Manu is dynamic. He can get to the rim and the free throw line, he’s draining the 3 and making everyone around him better. There are few guys that can twist and turn and contort and do the things he does with his body and convert at the bucket. The guy is totally confident and ridiculously dangerous. Shawn Marion has his work cut out for him on the defensive end, but Marion also makes a good point: you’ve got to make Ginobili sweat on the defensive end. That responsibility likely falls with Caron Butler.
—
RM: San Antonio has never really been able to match up with Dirk, and this season has, more or less, been the same (28.8 PPG and 8.5 RPG in four games vs. SA this season). Which Spur defender has the best chance of making Nowitzki’s life difficult?
Zac Crain: No one. It’s true. He can only stop himself. Bruce Bowen had a decent run, but even he fell off. Maybe, maybe, Antonio McDyess, but I only see that working for short stretches, if at all. Best bet? Making Dirk work on D.
Mark Followill: The best defenders historically against Dirk has been the tall, mobile defenders like Lamar Odom or back in the day Sheed. The other style of defense that has had some success against him is to use a SG/SF type who is quick and can crowd Dirk and get up under his arms. Since the Spurs definitely don’t have the former, the closest player the Spurs have to the latter and who has a rep as a defender would be someone like Keith Bogans so perhaps Pop could try to use him in a Bowen like capacity. While you noted the number of points per game that Dirk scored against the Spurs this year he only shot 40.4% against them. The more likely way to replicate that is not by the play of a single defender but by running multiple defenders at him as the Spurs have often done recently.
Jeff ‘Skin’ Wade: They don’t have the type of rangy athlete most known for giving Dirk fits, though some of that has been debunked over the years by the way Dallas moves him around depending on the match-up. The best example I can give you within the course of one game is how differently they utilize Dirk when he’s checked by Mehmet Okur versus when he’s covered by Andrei Kirilenko. For all the credit Stephen Jackson has received for “stopping” Dirk, nobody seems to recall that in every time he’s defended Dirk since that dreadful series, #41 has just murdered him in the post. Problem is Dirk doesn’t pass that well out of the post on double teams. I’d say it depends on how the game is officiated. If it’s “no autopsy, no foul” vibe, then I think it’s Bonner. If they’re going to call actual fouls they way they’re supposed to, then I’d say McDyess is best-equipped and Bonner will foul out in short order. But I’d say Dirk is far and away San Antonio’s biggest worry as they don’t have the right guys to slow him.
Tim MacMahon: Can I go with Gregg Popovich? The Spurs will need some X’s and O’s wizardry to keep Dirk down. If I have to pick a player, it’s Tim Duncan, but that’s asking a lot of an aging star who has had knee problems
David Lord: Frankly, none whatsoever. The Spurs simply have no defender that can do much to match up with Dirk. If I’m Pop, I’m resigned to the fact that Dirk will get his no matter what I do, and instead try to focus on keeping players like Butler, Marion, Terry and Kidd held completely in check.
Art Garcia: Not sure if that guys exists with Bruce Bowen gone. McDyess may be the early call since he’s clearly more comfortable away from the basket than Duncan. The Spurs’ plan may be to double Dirk and force someone else to beat them.
Mike Fisher: Pop has tried to double-team The UberMan at times in the past, and as a reward, the other weapons – and they are substantial – has jumped up to beat him … while Dirk still gets his 30 points. Last year that meant J-Ho and Barea; this year it can mean Caron, Jet, Kidd, Marion … weapons!
San Antonio will change it up, but I think there is logic to assigning one guy to Dirk (it’s often been that Bonner Character) and conceding him his points … and then hoping that Dallas’ other weaponry is contained.
Gina Miller: Dirk will see a combination of defenders but McDyess and Bonner will give him the most hell, in my opinion.
Jeff Caplan: None. It will take a gang effort and Popovich will probably bring it. Dirk is preparing for it (he calls Popovich a defensive genius). The one stat not listed next to his 28.8 ppg is his 40.4 percent shooting against the Spurs this season, Dirk’s worst perecentage against Western Conference teams. Antonio McDyess and Matt Bonner get the official tag as Dirk defenders, but the Spurs will bring double teams. The big key for the Mavs is how well Jason Kidd shoots the 3-ball now (and I still have to wipe my eyes every time he hits one, which is like every time). If Dirk can pass out of the double team effectively and Kidd continues his 40 percent thing from the arc, the Mavs are in good shape.
—
RM: Describe this series in one word.
Zac Crain: Inevitable.
Mark Followill: Bitterness.
Jeff ‘Skin’ Wade: Draining.
Tim MacMahon: Again.
David Lord: Desperation.
Art Garcia: Familiar.
Mike Fisher: “Two-seed.’’ This is why they played 82. To establish an advantage. Dallas has done that by achieving the No. 2 seed – which I argue is the third-greatest team accomplishment in the NBA this year.
Gina Miller: Rugged.
Jeff Caplan: Unpredictable.
—
RM: Prediction time: who ya got?
Zac Crain: Mavs in six. Duncan can’t turn it on like he used to for a full series, Parker is still out of sync, and Manu can win a game or two by himself, but not a series.
Mark Followill: Mavs in 7.
Jeff ‘Skin’ Wade: I think Dallas in six and I think all the games will be close.
Tim MacMahon: Mavs in six.
David Lord: Dallas in 6.
Art Garcia: As I wrote in my NBA.com series preview, I’m expecting a return to the rivalry’s bitter roots … and the Mavs in six.
Mike Fisher: Mavs in six. Last year, the Mavs were a No. 6 seed and the Spurs were a No. 3 … and the Mavs cruised. This year, San Antonio is calling itself “improved’’ yet drops to a No. 7 seed, while the 10X50 Mavs move up to No. 2.
Dallas has moved up … and in six games, will move on.
Gina Miller: Mavs in 6. They clinch in San Antonio for the 2nd straight postseason.
Jeff Caplan: Mavs in 7.
——————–
A huge thank you to everyone for being kind enough to participate, and be sure to visit their respective sites and Twitter feeds for more of their thoughts on the Mavs.
Posted by Rob Mahoney on April 16, 2010 under Commentary, Previews | View Comments
It’s a date: the Mavs savor the thought of playing the Spurs, and the Spurs apparently aren’t too intimidated by the Mavs. That much was certain based on how each coach chose to play the regular season’s final game, and now everyone gets what they want.
Photo by Danny Bollinger/NBAE via Getty Images.
This series is going to be excellent. I’m talking 2006 Western Conference semifinals excellent. It’s anyone’s guess as to whether or not this series is going to go the distance, but based on how Dallas and San Antonio match up, I’d honestly be shocked if there was a single blowout. We’re looking at at least six games of stellar, well-executed, well-coached, and entertaining basketball.
Let me get this out of the way early: if you’re a Mavs fan and you think this series is going to be a cakewalk, you’re sadly mistaken. Many a MFFL fancied this match-up over a series with the Thunder, (healthy) Blazers, or Suns, but a lot of that is familiarity. The Spurs are so familiar to Mavs fans because of their status in the Southwest division, their location, and their frequent playoff battles with Dallas. So in this case, I think the fans (and possibly the Mavs) prefer the devil they know…even if they don’t know him all that well.
The Spurs that we’ve saw in last season’s playoffs barely resembles this model, largely because a healthy Manu Ginobili is capable of making an MVP-level impact. He’s certainly one of the top shooting guards in the game, and not only has he been out of his element a bit over the last few seasons, but he skipped last year’s playoff series with Dallas entirely due to injury. As a result, the Mavs won in 5 and the games honestly weren’t as competitive as precedent would have predicted. Dallas’ 2006 win over San Antonio was a huge step in the evolution of the rivalry, but the 2009 series between the two teams had a completely different dynamic. Even though both series fell well short of the Spurs usual title aspirations, the 2009 playoffs brought something new to San Antonio: shame. They can excuse away the loss with Manu’s absence, but never before had the Spurs been so thoroughly embarrassed by the Mavs.
Photo by Barry Gossage/NBAE via Getty Images.
The storylines from San Antonio are primarily concerning those two elements: Manu’s renaissance and the Spurs’ revenge. Understandably so, as Ginobili should be both feared and respected, and the same should go for this entire San Antonio team. They’re quite formidable. If the Mavs’ offensive and defensive ratings for the season are a bit misleading due to the trade and — Dallas hopes — a legitimate mini-surge to close the regular season, the the Spurs’ are even more so. Tony Parker missed 26 games this season due to injury, and while he isn’t quite up to his 2008-2009 scoring level, he looked more than capable against the Mavs in the regular season finale.
That’s significant. If Parker is as ready as he seems, he could end up causing a lot of match-up problems for the Mavs alongside Ginobili. If it’s just Manu doing considerable damage, then the Mavs are well-equipped to contain him. Shawn Marion’s perimeter defense has been superb this year, particularly against elite opponents. Ginobili certainly qualifies. Caron Butler also has shown himself to be an aggressive defensive alternative for highly productive wings as well, with perhaps his keynote performance coming just five games ago against Brandon Roy. Like Ginobili, Roy is an atypical cover; he’s not a 2 that’s reliant on incredible athleticism, and his strength lies in his ability to change speeds and confuse defenders. I wouldn’t say that Ginobili is an extremely similar player, but he and Roy are similar in their deviance from the 2-guard norm. That doesn’t prove that Butler is a great option for defending Manu, but it does at least show that Caron can defend unconventional off guards. Beyond that, Jason Kidd is terrific defender at the two, and DeShawn Stevenson has done fine defensive work over the last two weeks.
Unfortunately, it’s never quite as simple as locking in one defender on one opposing player and calling it a day. The Mavs’ general defensive strategy against teams such as the Spurs is to overload on the initiator of the offense, which in this case would be Manu. Even if Ginobili has technically been listed at the two, the team is in his hands when he shares the floor with George Hill. It’s not an issue of who plays what position but who takes on what roles, and Ginobili’s spot in the Parker-less Spurs’ offense is to initiate. He’s the one triggering plays and he’s the one making entry passes. As a response, not only does Dallas typically cover such a threat with a long-armed, athletic wing defender, but they throw all kinds of pressure at them. You’ll see the Mavs completely blitz the ball-handler on the pick-and-roll. You’ll see them trap the initiator as soon as he crosses half-court with the ball. You’ll see double teams coming from all over the place at various times, just to throw a stud like Manu off his game. The price of that is leaving Brendan Haywood or Erick Dampier to their own devices against Tim Duncan, but Rick Carlisle and the Mavs’ coaching staff have deemed that an acceptable risk.
Photo by Barry Gossage/NBAE via Getty Images.
That strategy works pretty well, but if Tony Parker is as healthy and dominant as he’s capable of being? Trouble. Big trouble. Parker is the one player on the Spurs that the Mavs don’t have a good match-up for. Should Tony start feeling like his former self, it’s likely that Dallas would be forced to go with speed without considerable defensive skill (J.J. Barea, Rodrigue Beaubois) or size without considerable speed (Butler, Marion, Stevenson). Both could work, as J.J. showed in spots in last season’s playoffs, but if you’re Rick Carlisle, do you feel particularly great about those players trying to handcuff a fully-effective Tony Parker?
Brendan Haywood and Erick Dampier are thus far more useful than simply acting as the large bodies between Tim Duncan and the basket. Don’t get me wrong, their post defense is still important. Really important. But should Parker start revving up, Haywood and Damp’s ability to protect the rim will be fairly essential. Neither has to be Dwight Howard, but having some kind of deterrent in the middle will be Dallas’ best shot at curtailing Tony’s production.
Then again, Tony Parker hasn’t been himself this season. He isn’t playing like the player that torched the Mavs a year ago, and even if he is, Dallas is a better team than they were then. The Mavs aren’t a great team, don’t get me wrong. I still stand firmly committed to the fact that this team has, on the whole, played mediocre basketball, regardless of whether you want to look at their season-long or simply post-deadline performance. But Dallas knows and matches-up with San Antonio so well, that the only thing putting the Spurs way over the top is a suddenly resurgent Parker.
Photo by Danny Bollinger/NBAE via Getty Images.
Otherwise, we’ve pretty much got a coin flip on our hands. No one on the Spurs’ roster can really cover Dirk, and he’s not going to be flummoxed by Popovich’s defensive pressure. Tim Duncan will likely be prevented from completely dominating, though he’ll still be very productive. Jason Kidd will hit big spot-up threes and run the offense expertly, but the Spurs defense will be ready and waiting. Jason Terry and Caron Butler can combine to eclipse Manu Ginobili’s scoring, Shawn Marion can cancel out Richard Jefferson’s production, and the Mavs’ bench offers more versatility than the Spurs’. Rick Carlisle is an excellent coach, but Gregg Popovich is an all-time great coach. It’s point-counterpoint all the way up and down the rosters, and while that’s not likely to let MFFLs sleep easy over the next few weeks, it’s absolutely brilliant for this series’ entertainment value.
The only conclusive fact that anyone should have to say about this series is that it’s going to be close. If you’re resolved that either team should win outright, you’re probably wrong. Every game will be a battle, but I’ll take Dallas in seven. I’m picking the Mavs because I think Dirk Nowitzki and Jason Terry are in a great offensive rhythm right now, and I trust in the Mavs’ ability to contain Manu Ginobili. I think home court advantage matters, and a playoff atmosphere should remedy Dallas’ woes at home. I don’t trust Tony Parker’s ability to dominate the series like he did a year ago, but I do trust the balance of the Mavs’ offense. As good as George Hill and DeJuan Blair are, I don’t think they’re going to step out of themselves to become x-factors. This Dallas team is in a good place right now, is brimming with confidence, and knows they can beat the Spurs.
All that’s left is for them to go out and do it.
Posted by Rob Mahoney on March 3, 2010 under Previews | View Comments
The Minnesota Timberwolves are a very, very bad basketball team…albeit one that completely embarrassed the Mavs right before the All-Star break.
But despite how limited Minny’s roster is, things don’t have to be quite so bleak. Ryan Hollins (or in tonight’s case, Darko Milicic) doesn’t have to start at center, general manager David Kahn doesn’t have to do what David Kahn does, and perhaps most importantly, the team’s two best players shouldn’t be forced into a system that needlessly keeps them from producing and evolving. Kurt Rambis is a disciple of Phil Jackson and Tex Winter, and as such, is installing the famed triangle offense. The only problem is that the triangle buster — the player in the vein of Michael Jordan and Kobe Bryant that holds the liberty to work around the system — is Jonny Flynn, the best players on the team don’t fit with the triangle or its objectives, and the rest of the roster isn’t talented enough to make up for it. Gee whiz.
In theory, they should be one of the most fearsome pairs of bigs in the league. But they’re not. They’re nice and fluffy. They’re a cute distraction, but hardly a team. They don’t reinforce each other’s strengths, but counter them while magnifying each other’s weaknesses. They are Kevin Love and Al Jefferson, and despite the fact that they’re both immensely talented and incredibly productive, they will never, ever work as a pairing.
Okay, they might. In fact, they probably will at some point, provided they’re kept together. But at this point in their careers, it seems like they’re both forces that while unstoppable, are slowing and hindering one another, despite their best efforts not to.
It’s one of those cases that has oh so little to do with personality, and everything to do with style and system. Despite the particular strengths and versatility of Love and Jefferson’s games, the overlap is such that they haven’t quite figured out how to best play alongside one another. Or rather, Kurt Rambis hasn’t best figured out how his two best players can be effective on the court at the same time, which is not a good thing. The triangle is an effective system if given the right personnel with the right mindset. But when the squad has such strength in its low post game, is the triple post really necessary? Especially when you just drafted Jonny Flynn and Ricky Rubio? Is that the type of core that you construct the triangle offense around? Really? Really, Kahn?
You can read my full piece on the problems between the Wolves personnel and coaching/management at HP.
The Minnesota Timberwolves visit the Dallas Mavericks:
7:30 CST
FSN SW
Posted by Rob Mahoney on March 1, 2010 under Previews | View Comments
From a perch near the top of the Western Conference standings, the Bobcats’ current home at 8th in the East may not be all that impressive. After all, the Mavs have rattled off 50-win season after 50-win season, they’ve been to the depths of the playoffs and back again, and they’ve battled some of the greatest teams the Western Conference has ever seen for supremacy for an entire decade. The Charlotte Bobcats, needless to say, haven’t been so lucky. They’ve had ownership troubles, coaching troubles, roster troubles, arena troubles, broadcast troubles, and fan troubles in the franchise’s six-year existence, and only now are they on the brink of a legitimate breakthrough. After much delay, the Bobcats may make the playoffs for the first time in franchise history this year, just months after Gerald Wallace became the first All-Star in franchise history.
Charlotte has come a long way since 2004, and now with Michael Jordan in a more central ownership position, the team may be ready to make one final, superficial change: a departure from the ‘Bobcats’ name, one of the worst team names in the NBA:
Maybe all that’s needed to really complete the metamorphosis from struggling, small market upstart caterpillar into playoff-bound butterfly is not only a new man at every post save point guard and small forward, but a moniker change to accompany the face lift. ‘Bobcats,’ like the miserable threads that once bore the name, has to go. It’s not even a D-League-esque team name, like Moore mentioned. It’s the name of a seven-year-old’s soccer team, and one that probably couldn’t even make the playoffs at that. Bobcats aren’t just about as unferocious and unintimidating as ferocious cats get, but naming a team after an animal just isn’t NBA practice. It’s amateur. If you’re going to name an entire franchise after an animal, at least disguise it; not the Milwaukee Deer, but the Milwaukee Bucks. Not the Detroit Flaming Horses, but the Detroit Pistons. There are enough teams named after animals, I admit, but most have enough tradition that they no longer seem out of place. The two obvious exceptions are the Toronto Raptors and the Memphis Grizzlies, but dinosaurs are awesome and hilarious and Memphis Grizzlies still reads and sounds infinitely better than the Memphis Bears.
For the most part in professional basketball, we go inanimate (Nets, Nuggets, Spurs), confounding (Celtics, Lakers), or nonsensical (Pacers). It’s time that Charlotte buys into the tradition, and there is no better time than now. Regardless of what happens in the rest of this season, the Bobcats have been reborn. They’ve constructed hope without much potential, and they’ve created a culture and a family where there was nothing but confusion. I’m not saying anyone should buy into MJ and Larry Brown’s world like they buy into Pop and Buford’s, or Phil Jackson and Jerry Buss’, or Sam Presti and Scotty Brooks’. But there’s something going on in Charlotte that’s worthy of your attention, and it’s worthy of a far better name than the Bobcats.
You can read my full piece on the Bobcats at HP.
The Dallas Mavericks visit the Charlotte Bobcats:
6:00 CST
FSN SW
Posted by Rob Mahoney on February 26, 2010 under Previews | View Comments
The Atlanta Hawks are one of the most watchable teams in the league not because of one must-watch player (a la LeBron or Wade), but precisely because they don’t have such a player. They’re a quality team on the verge of true contention (and share that standing with the Mavs, in some regard), and they’ve done so with a team-wide embrace of on-court versatility. Mike Bibby may be penciled in as the point guard, but I’m not sure he’s a point guard. Joe Johnson may be penciled in as the shooting guard, but I’m not sure he’s the shooting guard (although the guy certainly does love to shoot). Josh Smith may be penciled in as the power forward, but I’m not entirely unconvinced that Smith isn’t a futuristic warrior from the year 2183 to prove to us how futile the notion of gravity really is. The personnel in Atlanta allows for such a system to thrive, and the best Hawks team of all time is not a product of individual dominance, but of incredible parity:
With just about every competitive squad in the league, you can isolate a player that stands at the heart of everything the team hopes to accomplish. More often than not, that player is simply the team’s most talented (Chris Paul, LeBron James, Brandon Roy), but in some cases, it’s a secondary star who compensates for shear production with massive on-court influence (Chauncey Billups, Brandon Jennings, one of the Boston Celtics).
Or, in slightly less frequent and more bizarre circumstances, a team is left with no focus at all, depending on a balance of power, production, and personality to turn what could be a tornado into a whirling dervish neatly dressed in a tuxedo and a bow tie. The Atlanta Hawks are a team without a singular focus, without an anchor. That type of situation could be a cause of trouble for any number of rosters throughout the league, but somehow, someway, Atlanta makes parity look easy.
You can read my full piece on the Hawks here at HP.
The Dallas Mavericks visit the Atlanta Hawks:
7:00 CST
ESPN (or online at ESPN 360)
Posted by Rob Mahoney on February 24, 2010 under Previews | View Comments
The idea that Kobe Bryant is an NBA person of interest is hardly novel or revolutionary. But how about the idea that he’s become of such interest that he’s doomed to be the subject of debate from now until the end of time? In a way, Bryant could become the victim of his own overexposure, and his desire to be a definitive great may very well be the thing that obscures any definition in his legacy:
This isn’t in any way an indictment of Bryant’s game, other than to say that his advocates and critics are so distant in their opinions of all things Kobe that there can be no consensus. Supposing that’s somehow an indictment. Kobe is an incredibly driven player who has always wanted nothing more than to be conclusively better than Jordan…and it’s Bryant’s curse that he’ll forever walk through life in a position of uncertainty. We can debate all day and night about Kobe’s relative place in history, but at the end of the day, we’ll still be miles away from any kind of resolution. That’s not because he’s borderline in any regard or even because his career is the farthest thing from over. It’s just because he’s Kobe. We care too much about the way he’s evaluated and perceived to let anything rest, and any conclusions that are drawn about Kobe’s legacy will be predicated on an endless string of praise and backlash against that praise, both from others and from within ourselves. I don’t think it’s impossible that even in Bryant’s 14th year in the league, we’re still not entirely sure what to make of him.
Read my full piece on Kobe Bryant, present and future, at Hardwood Paroxysm.
The Los Angeles Lakers visit the Dallas Mavericks:
8:00 CST
ESPN (or online at ESPN 360)
Posted by Rob Mahoney on February 22, 2010 under Previews | View Comments
No Game Is an Island has taken a brief break, but it’s back. Check back on game days for a more detailed look on the Mavs’ opponent du jour. No match-up breakdowns here; No Game Is an Island focuses on the macro or the micro to an extreme, giving you a bit of perspective on just about anything but the individual game itself.
The trade deadline has come and gone, and the Washington Wizards as we knew them have been completely destroyed. Caron Butler, Brendan Haywood, and DeShawn Stevenson, as you well know, are in Dallas, and former Mav Antawn Jamison is now a Cleveland Cavalier. But while those former Wizards are at least happy to have some separation from the mess in D.C., other talented players from around the league weren’t so fortunate. Enter Troy Murphy:
Antawn has the bigger name and the bigger game, but does that really make him so much more of a sympathetic figure than Murphy? The Arenas-Crittenton debacle was an obvious embarrassment for every member of the Wizards organization, but at the very least, it presented a scapegoat. Washington’s plan won’t work, and it’s all Gilbert’s fault. The team won’t make the playoffs again as presently constructed, and it’s all Gilbert’s fault. Grunfeld has to trade away all of the team’s best players immediately to plan for the future, and it’s all Gilbert’s fault. But in a lot of ways, Gil is the red herring; the Wizards were already 10-20 before the gun story ran wild, and that’s not only on Arenas, but also Grunfeld, Flip, Antawn, Caron, Brendan, et al. But Washington has Gil as the goat of all goats, which doesn’t make the situation any less tragic but does make the excuses all kinds of convenient.
Murphy has no one to hide behind. After all, whose fault is it that the Pacers are an awful 19-36, a full game behind the Wizards? Is it Danny Granger’s fault for refusing to diversify his game and regressing in his most valuable attribute? Is it Jim O’Brien’s fault for coaching a horrid offense? Is it Larry Bird for piecing together a mismatched, underwhelming roster? Or Mike Dunleavy for the way his body refuses to cooperate? Washington at least had the blessing (or maybe just the illusion) of certainty, whereas things in Indiana are so muddled they’re almost indistinguishable. With over $60 million in guaranteed salary for next season, little in the way of trade bait, and no prospects waiting to take the leap, Murphy is stuck in his own private hell.
Read my full piece on Murphy over at Hardwood Paroxysm.
Indiana Pacers visit the Dallas Mavericks
7:30 CST
Fox Sports SW