(2) Mavericks Vs. (7) Spurs

[jonthefon]

(which is why pythag. record isn't entirely accurate; the Mavs are pretty lax in garbage time)

lol.

So tell me, what's the difference between a 20-point win and a 50-point win? Seems to me as if pythag. record takes those things out of context.

EDIT: Gotta give the Spurs credit. They let DIrk have his and, well, he got no support. JJ Barea? He's instant offense but there's no way you keep him on for an extended period of time without him seriously hurting your team defense. The Mavs can't afford having the rest of their starting lineup play small, or this series is over in 6.

I'd like to see them work out a new way to handle the Hill/Parker PG tandem. I don't see why Rick Carlisle doesn't try Roddy B for more than a handful of minutes.

And obviously there's no way Manu's going to miss anything, so the Mavs can't counter that. It's up to them to play and work on winning Game 4.

[benji]

A pythag record cannot be anything but accurate, it's taking an input and delivering an output, there's nothing to make it "inaccurate."

The question is on the interpretation. Hollinger's old (current?) method was flawed was it went insane at the extremes, the ^14 method instead curves in manner that shows diminishing returns. Dean Oliver studied "running up the score" and found no reason to think this mattered as even looking at the 1995-96 Bulls showed them winning by 35 mattered no basically more than them winning by 10, so the current equation (which is harder to do instantly than ^14 thus why lots of people use that instead), which basketball-reference.com uses does not have this issue. ^14 is more than good enough however.

In the case of the Mavericks, before the trade, they were 32-21, then they went 23-6. That's 50-32 vs 65-17. In terms of pythag (and using pre and post all-star since it's easier, it just drops the last loss to the second side, and ^14 as it it's easier), they were 46-36 before the break and 53-29 after. Essentially you could say they were a 45-50 team before the trade, and probably a 50-60 win team after. Their overall season pythag reflects this.

The "issue" if there is one is looking at pythag for the entire season when changes happen throughout.

[jonthefon]

But the matter in which the input is achieved is obviously imperfect, right? Like, empirically, I can argue something completely hidden by statistical evidence, and say that the Mavs had the tendency to let big leads in the middle of the third slip to respectable gaps by the end. Though I suppose the ^14 thing would nullify the effects of this (so a 25-point win wouldn't be all that different from a 12-point win?). I'd also say something dodgy like, more often than not, the Mavs executed better than the other team in crunch time, which is why they won so many games by small margins. Though again, I'd probably mumble about how they let mediocre teams stick around at home before blowing it up by the end.

In the end, I really don't want to talk pyth. record for this series. I'd have a better chance of picking the winner by flipping a coin rather than comparing statistics and roster strengths and weaknesses. Maybe next round though...if the Mavs make it.

[NovU]

They let DIrk have his and, well, he got no support.

I didn't think anything came easy for Dirk as well. He just made great shots after shots just like what great players do. McDyess can't guard him efficiently alone, but he was very physical with Dirk. Considering almost every play ran through Dirk, I didn't think there were any rooms for others to get into a rhythm, in exception of little Barea, who kept penetrating and had much ball usage to work with. As for Rick going small with JJ, I thought he went too far. I expected to see Marion, or Butler in the fourth and they need them to play well to win the series. Instead, Barea played the whole fourth quarter, and Hill did a very good job on him on both ends of the court. Individually, like hova said, the Mavericks have more talented players, but Rick just didn't play them. Despite of struggle those sat players were having in the early game, I think Dallas needs them in fourth to match the increased level of intensity on both ends.

[shadowgrin]

I would rather have Barea score than Dirk or the other players and deny a Mavs run or risk letting them get 'hot'.

[jonthefon]

If on every possession, JJ got an open jumper instead of Dirk shooting, Pop would be high-fiving himself endlessly.

[NovU]

I can't wait for this game, but my NBA TV doesn't broadcast this game in Live, but with 2 hour delay, forcing me to stay away from sports channels or basketball related sites in case of a spoiler.

[Lamrock]

Mavs up 11 going into the half. Would be shocked if this didn't go 7 games.

[atlwarrior]

Haha i bet these two teams hate playing each other. No matter what they always seem to be stuck with each other in the playoffs and they always seem to be equally matched.

[Rip32]

am I out of line if I say the Mavericks have become the kings of the choke job in the NBA?

Spurs are a great team, but it's become a theme of the 2000's Mavs to self-destruct in the playoffs and this is just another chapter to that story.

[deihatein]

So the spurs are up 3-1.

If the Mavs are done in the first round. I am done with basketball

[atlwarrior]

no RIP32 you wouldnt be but im not really surprised the series is goin the way it is because you never know what to expect in a San Antonio/Dallas series. Remember Dallas did the exact same to San Antonio last year in the playoffs when they were a sixth seed and san antonio was a three seed and finished them off 4-1. San Antonio is kinda repaying them the favor right now.

[Lamrock]

The series isn't over. Four years ago we saw the #2 seed Suns come back to beat the #7 Lakers. Are the circumstances the same? Absolutely not. However, I still wouldn't count them out. I also didn't quit watching basketball when the Blazers missed five straight post-seasons and the Sonics moved to one of the worst states in the country.

[jonthefon]

am I out of line if I say the Mavericks have become the kings of the choke job in the NBA?

Spurs are a great team, but it's become a theme of the 2000's Mavs to self-destruct in the playoffs and this is just another chapter to that story.

Not exactly. The only series where they did was 07. In 03, they caught a horrific break and 06...well, that path has been beaten. Every other time, they just haven't been good enough (01 was too inexperienced, 02 and 04 was lack of D, 05 was too much Steve Nash, 08 was too much of Chris Paul, 09 was bad matchup and too much Carmelo Anthony).

It's a shame that Dirk has never had the second reliable scorer to carry the load in the playoffs since he became 'the man'. JET is what he is, a streaky shooter who doesn't have a late-game go-to move, Butler is a slightly-better version of 06 Josh Howard, Marion can only score about five feet away from the rim, Kidd's not much more than a spot-up shooter. Dirk's in the same situation as 06 and 07 Kobe, only his teammates are somewhat better (but not by much).

I could see the Mavs turn the series around like the Spurs did in the 06 playoffs and they could force a Game 7 (they weren't too far away from winning tonight). Now I can't understand why Rick Carlisle didn't play Roddy B. George Hill was clearly unguardable with what they had, and he didn't even try seeing what Roddy could bring to the table. Why not have Kidd on Jefferson, Marion on Manu and Roddy on Parker/Hill? It just doesn't make sense.

I guess I'll just have that blind hope that the Cavs lose, LeBron says "fuck this, I want to win a ring but the rest of my team blows nuts", sees he could go to Dallas to play with Dirk and Kidd so tells Cleveland to make it happen with a S&T, then the Mavs offer Damp's non-guaranteed contract and someone like Butler in a package to pay LeBron a max contract.

EDIT: I'd also be fine with Joe Johnson or Dwyade. Yes, I've become desperate enough to swallow my pride and indignity over 06.

Yeah, I'm fantasising. Fuck me dead.

[atlwarrior]

Lamrock, Id like to say the same but in recent yrs I dnt ever remember San Antonio blowing a series when they were one game away from closing the series.

[Rip32]

Not exactly. The only series where they did was 07. In 03, they caught a horrific break and 06...well, that path has been beaten. Every other time, they just haven't been good enough (01 was too inexperienced, 02 and 04 was lack of D, 05 was too much Steve Nash, 08 was too much of Chris Paul, 09 was bad matchup and too much Carmelo Anthony).

Too much of a player on an inferior team isn't a valid excuse at all. By that logic, I could say the Pistons choked away the 2006 ECF when in reality LeBron James just decided to make them his bitch. Pistons were the better team and should have won that series, plain and simple.

I'll excuse 2002-03 because of Dirk's injury. Other than they routinely win a series then hit a roadblock and lose to an inferior team.

[jonthefon]

Inferior teams my ass.

Each season the Mavs had a legitimate wart which got exploited. They were never really favored against any of the teams they lost to: the 01 and 03 Spurs were a million times better in the low post and had experience, the 02 Kings were one of the best teams to never win a championship, the 04 Kings were deeper and better all-round than the Mavs (who rolled with six guys and Shawn Bradley), the 08 Hornets were less experienced but were too fast and the 09 Nuggets had too much offensive firepower. 05 was the only "even" matchup and they got beat, just like how they beat evenly-matched teams such as the Kings in 03 and the Spurs in 06.

This series, if they lose it, will go alongside 2007, as technically, a choke, as they've certainly had the chances to win the games but they just haven;t.

[NovU]

Nothing short of spectacular, as I expected, only better. I thought the game was over twice in the game, when Mavs were up big and when Spurs were up big in 4th. Many momentum shifts, grind out, hustle, hard fouls, just about everything. Tonight, it was Dirk and Tim Duncan that didn't produce, but the teammates from both teams were good. Especially for the Spurs, just about everybody showed the heart. George Hill especially was awesome, knocking down the shots he normally wouldn't. He was almost like prime Tony Parker equipped with 3 point range. This sort of gives me a feeling that the Spurs will let Parker or Manu walk, since Hill comes cheaper.

Watching the game, it sort of reminded me of 90s' days, playing very physical on both ends. Nahera's foul I thought was really fucked up. That could have hurt Manu real bad if came at the wrong moment. On the other hand, I almost saw Karl Malone in Blair with his dirtiness and toughness. He actually got into Nirk Dowitzki's head and that ended up helping the Spurs in the crucial stretch. Dirk couldn't keep calm in the following few plays.

[Lamrock]

This series is not over, but its not a choke either. The Spurs were the better team this season, they've just caught some bad breaks. Un-do the Harris trade and/or have some better subs by Carlisle during that big San Antonio run and this series is tied, if not 3-1 in Dallas's favor.

I predict Dallas loses this one in 6, then continues with their plan of signing washed-up vets by getting Ray Allen at the MLE to start at the 2. They win just over 50 games, and jonthefon continues to be fucking pissed off.

[jonthefon]

Everything is wrong about that post, except from me continuing to be fucking pissed off.

I don't think San Antonio were the clear-cut better team during the season and lost out because of "luck" - I mean, only Parker missed any real time and something tells me Dirk's elbow is muttering about being left out, considering Dirk's so-so play for about two months afterwards. It was an even matchup all the way through, and the Mavs were slightly favoured because of their overall record.

I can't believe you're still questioning the Harris trade. Kidd's been terrific this season (I mean, he has a three point shot now) and he's fitted pretty much exactly into Carlisle's system. If Harris was playing, he'd just be a ball usage guy, which is the last thing the Mavs need, considering how Butler hasn't shown up at all, apart from taking up entire possessions by himself. The only thing he'd offer is manning up on Parker and Hill, and it's not like they don't already have Roddy B's length rotting on the bench.

If Harris is running the point for the Mavs, they wouldn't even be in this situation. They'd be playing as a lower seed, probably getting belted by the Jazz or the Nuggets, or in a tussle with Phoenix, or in an interesting situation against the Lakers. He's not the point guard Kidd is, he's only a better scorer. If it was still Avery Johnson coaching, maybe he'd be more effective than Kidd, but it's Jim Car-Rick Carlisle we're talking about.

Carlisle played JJ Barea over Roddy B: 'nuff said. I'll give that part a tick.

And for the Mavs, I'm pretty sure it's big fish or bust. Unfortunately, nobody is really a good fit outside of JJ, Wade and LeBron and none of those three are probably coming. I don't think Ray Allen would come here for the MLE, though I'd like to see how much he has left before making a decision. If he can do the "come-off-screens" thing in crunch time and keep the D honest on doubling Dirk, I might sign up for it.

[Rip32]

Each season the Mavs had a legitimate wart which got exploited. They were never really favored against any of the teams they lost to: the 01 and 03 Spurs were a million times better in the low post and had experience, the 02 Kings were one of the best teams to never win a championship, the 04 Kings were deeper and better all-round than the Mavs (who rolled with six guys and Shawn Bradley), the 08 Hornets were less experienced but were too fast and the 09 Nuggets had too much offensive firepower. 05 was the only "even" matchup and they got beat, just like how they beat evenly-matched teams such as the Kings in 03 and the Spurs in 06.

You're missing the point. They may have had flaws, most teams do, but they were the favored team, they had more talent, and they had the home court. The top seven on this year's Mavs are better than the top seven on the Spurs. If you won't admit that Jason Kidd (28% FG) and Caron Butler (38% FG) have totally shit the bed this series than you're in denial. That's why the team crumbles, guys pick the most inopportune times to implode and it ALWAYS costs the Mavs the series.

I highly doubt Mavs fans went into series vs. an unproven NOH team or last year's Nuggets and thought, "God, this team is just too good for us, we're done". You go into it thinking they win because they are the better team, better known as the favorite. The fact of the matter is, when the Mavs should win, they don't, and when the Mavs are written off we see a great team. Maybe the under-dog thing just works for them.

EDIT: I just remembered, the 2003 Mavs only beat the Kings because Webber's knee exploded two games into the series. They were probably even before that though.

[jonthefon]

What do you mean? I'm conceding that they choked here. I considered them the better team by a small margin, and they had chances to win, but they didn't.

And regarding other examples. Going into the series, all the Mavs had was experience. New Orleans was widely considered the better team. Meanwhile, the Mavs had barely squeezed into the playoffs after trading for Kidd, their offense was stagnant and they couldn't beat any elite teams. Same for Denver: they were widely tipped by analysts to beat the Mavs. Neither time were the Mavs favourites.

But the underdog thing does work for them. I attribute it to the fact that Dallas isn't as superior as people think when they're high up (except for GS: that was just a clusterfuck of failure across the board), but they're not as overmatched as people think when they're lower down.

I'll break it down for you:

2001: Utah had homecourt, favoured because of their deep playoff experience and defense. Mavs come back from 2-0 down to steal Game 5 in Salt Lake City. San Antonio is basically an upgraded Jazz team, Mavs don't have a chance, lose in 5.

2002: Favoured against Minny, Dallas rolls in 3. Against Sacramento, arguably the best team in the league, the Mavs don't have the defense to run with Sacramento, lose in 5.

2003: Homecourt against Portland, Mavs nearly throw away a 3-game lead but recover in Game 7. Homecourt against Sacramento (who was basically last season's team, only they were injury-crippled throughout, yet still won 58 games in a canter), Mavs scrape out a win against a Webber-less Kings team in an evenly-matched series. Didn't have homecourt against San Antonio, Dirk goes down in Game 3 with the Mavs losing and about to hand back homecourt advantage. Mike Finley forces a miracle comeback in Game 5, then the Mavs inexplicably implode in the fourth quarter of Game 6.

2004: No homecourt against Sacramento, evenly-matched series but Sacramento still considered slightly better because of their depth (even though Webber was depleted). Mavs lose 4-1, three of them are tight ones decided on the last play of the game.

2005: Homecourt against Houston, a see-saw series where the Mavs get bailed out somewhat by reffing, wins a blowout in Game 7. No homecourt against 62-20 Phoenix but considered another 50-50 series, tight until Nash, after having killed the Mavs throughout, knocks down a couple of late daggers at the AAC in Game 6.

2006: Self-explanatory. Mavs got through the West by clinching on the road. The Finals could be considered a choke (blowing a lead in Game 3 and a terrible Game 6 performance), but there's a lot to say here.

2007: There you go, choked on a bitch. FFFFFFFFFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU.

2008 and 2009: Explained them.

From that, I don't see any times where they were really favoured, and failed to succeed, except for 07 and the Finals. Not exactly perennial chokers, just perennial bridesmaids.

[Lamrock]

Everything is wrong about that post, except from me continuing to be fucking pissed off.

Perhaps, but...

I don't think San Antonio were the clear-cut better team during the season and lost out because of "luck" - I mean, only Parker missed any real time and something tells me Dirk's elbow is muttering about being left out, considering Dirk's so-so play for about two months afterwards. It was an even matchup all the way through, and the Mavs were slightly favoured because of their overall record.

Dallas's Pythag record is trumped by San Antonio's. They always seem to either get blown out, or eke out wins. This season, they got lucky by the shots falling when needed. Sure, you can argue that some players are more clutch than others, and I won't deny that. However, when a 50% shooter takes a (decent) shot at the end of the game, its like flipping a coin. Sometimes there will be times where the results are skewed, but they always end up approaching the mean. Hence, Dallas: 55-27 -> 56-30 (49-33 or 53-29); San Antonio: 50-32 -> 53-33 (55-27)

Injury bug affected the two teams about equally, and after Dallas got 3 narrow wins to San Antonio's 1, these two almost equally matched teams are now 4-4 against each other this year. It's all coming together.

I can't believe you're still questioning the Harris trade. Kidd's been terrific this season (I mean, he has a three point shot now) and he's fitted pretty much exactly into Carlisle's system. If Harris was playing, he'd just be a ball usage guy, which is the last thing the Mavs need, considering how Butler hasn't shown up at all, apart from taking up entire possessions by himself. The only thing he'd offer is manning up on Parker and Hill, and it's not like they don't already have Roddy B's length rotting on the bench.

If Harris is running the point for the Mavs, they wouldn't even be in this situation. They'd be playing as a lower seed, probably getting belted by the Jazz or the Nuggets, or in a tussle with Phoenix, or in an interesting situation against the Lakers. He's not the point guard Kidd is, he's only a better scorer. If it was still Avery Johnson coaching, maybe he'd be more effective than Kidd, but it's Jim Car-Rick Carlisle we're talking about.

Don'r let the Nets' lost season or the league's baffling all-star selections fool you, Devin Harris is a better player than Jason Kidd. Based on his last real season, Harris is just as efficient a scorer (Kidd can hit the three now, but he seldom goes to the line), and while his assist/turnover rate pales in comparison, his turnover percentage is lower. I know, it sucks to take shots from offensive dynamos like Caron Butler (51% TS, 14.2 PER, 101 ORtg), but them's the brakes

He's also ten years younger, and they would have Ryan Anderson, a solid backup PF who can shoot the three.

Carlisle played JJ Barea over Roddy B: 'nuff said. I'll give that part a tick.

My post was totally wrong except it was right about a couple things.

And for the Mavs, I'm pretty sure it's big fish or bust. Unfortunately, nobody is really a good fit outside of JJ, Wade and LeBron and none of those three are probably coming. I don't think Ray Allen would come here for the MLE, though I'd like to see how much he has left before making a decision. If he can do the "come-off-screens" thing in crunch time and keep the D honest on doubling Dirk, I might sign up for it.

Coming off their fourth straight disappointing playoff run, the Mavs will definitely buck the trend they've set in the past three offseasons.

[jonthefon]

So that makes them pretty equal right? Neither team is really superior and it's not like that matters anyway come playoff time between these two. Hate really covers any gaps in quality.

But Harris uses possessions, right? The Mavs don't need that when Dirk is your high-efficiency high-usage guy. What they need is Kidd's ast/turnover ratios and ast/turnover rates. And it's not like having Harris for an extra ten years is going to help the Mavs in the future, with the beasts of the West led by two especially young dynamo teams.

Your sarcasm meter is on, right?

[hova-]

Bad, bad Mavs. I've seen this coming. Hopefully they can win the next game at home. I did not watch the game, why did Dirk only take 10 shots? They can't win if he does not try to take his typical difficult shots.

For the Kidd trade, I think Harris has always been a bit overrated. He has his ups and downs in his game, and it would certainly be interesting to see him in this current Dallas lineup. He is constantly attacking the pressure, drawing fouls and has the ability to kick out. On D he at least does not get burned by the quicker guys. But Jason Kidd is not the only problem the Mavs have.
Why can no one right now just be on fire, score like 30 and complement Dirk's regular output?

Offensively, the team just does not play very well. I'd go as far and question Carisle because the Mavs have never been so calculabe. It's either a Dirk iso, Butler iso or Terry running around a ton of screens. But that's also because they Mavs lack of any inside presence. Goddamn, Dirk is a shooter 80% of the time. He can go to the whole, but he does almost never post up near the rim. The Mavs never tried to get a decent scoring big man. They always went with the "big guy who can grab some boards and block some shots" like Dampier. Why not get a guy who can actually create his own shot at the rim?

Poor Dallas, poor Dirk. Still I'm rooting for a comeback, 7 game series!