mavs vs. blazer - Page 6 - Dallas-Mavs.com Forums

seelenjaeger · 01-26-2003, 04:56 PM

well, didn´t get to see the game, but didn´t nellie use both small and tall ball (bradley, raef, dirk?) for quite some time? i can see him going this way since we still don´t have many options on the biggies ...

LRB · 01-26-2003, 04:59 PM

<< LRB, don't get me started on you again

<< That argument is BS NYMavsFan. Dirk didn't get the ball in scoring positions. When he was in scoring positions, he wasn't passed the ball. >>

He got the ball several times in the high post. That's the best position the blazers would ALLOW him. If he's a superstar, he should create with what the defense gives him. You think the coaching staff TOLD Dirk to stand that far away from the basket? Is that what you're blaming them for?

<< We he could have taken some lame ass shots like Nash and NVE with guys all over him. But he passed the ball like he should have. When a guys does that and goes and gets in scoring position he should get the ball back. Dirk didn't get the ball back for pratically the whole 2nd half. The team has to make an effort to get its best player involved. Anything else is pure idiocy.
>>

Dirk DID take some lame ass shots. And missed them. Regardless of whether or not Dirk took a high number of shots, it was OBVIOUS from anyone watching the game that the game plan WAS to get dirk involved. THAT is what they were TRYING to do, but the Blazers wouldn't allow it. To tell the story any other way is pure idiocy. >>

NYMavsFan what you do is purely up to you. I don't control you nor do I wish to.

But that said, your argument is still full of wholes. Dirk ONLY got the ball in the high post where there was not much to do. Yes the Blazers played some good defense. But he also got some good position down low only to see the team swing the ball to the other side and do a perimeter isolation for a guard. That is just plain stupid basket ball. And if that is a good effort to get Dirk involved, I sure don't want to see a bad effort.

And as I've said in numerous posts, Dirk had a bad game. Still the team needed to go to him when he was available down low. And yes Dirk could have gotten position down there more. Still doesn't excuse freezing him out.

BrianJ · 01-26-2003, 05:00 PM

whining or not is such a small thing it does not really matter to me. But if nellie continues to play that crappy smallball line-up then I am ready to jump on the murph can nellie bandwagon. Nellie u might be a great judge of talent and u might be fooling me by trying to accomplish something bigger then my mind can grasp. But if your idea is to have Nash and NVE on the floor to win the big one then u got to go.

Bayliss · 01-26-2003, 05:01 PM

He used semi taqll ball. He had Raef, Dirk, Bradley, Nick and Nash on the court together. And of course Nick and Nash negates the other 3 defensively.

kg_veteran · 01-26-2003, 05:01 PM

<< He got the ball several times in the high post. That's the best position the blazers would ALLOW him. If he's a superstar, he should create with what the defense gives him. You think the coaching staff TOLD Dirk to stand that far away from the basket? Is that what you're blaming them for? >>

Wait, are you saying that the Dallas offensive plan (if you can call it that) never calls for Dirk to stand far away from the basket? If so, you don't watch very many Mavs games.

Nellie doesn't put Dirk close to the basket nearly enough. And I don't buy that Dirk simply could not physically get closer to the basket. That's just not true.

DTL · 01-26-2003, 05:02 PM

<< well, didn´t get to see the game, but didn´t nellie use both small and tall ball (bradley, raef, dirk?) for quite some time? >>

not really so much in the second half. it was mostly Nash, NVE, Fin out there down the stretch.

mavs_afroman · 01-26-2003, 05:02 PM

The weird thing tonight is that they all started off with alot of energy then lost it, except Finley of course. I still don't understand how you can go for two whole quarters and never get your best player the ball in scoring position Even though his effort on the boards was really pathetic, especially today when we eally needed him, Dirk really didn't look completely disinterested until somewhere in the middle of the third quarter when he hadn't even touched the ball in a while. I still don't think that's an excuse for just mentally checking out of the game. Even if he's not getting the ball as much as he should, I would like so him start moving better without the ball, trying to get easy open shots around the goal. This one thing that all the greats have in common. Also, he should put more energy into rebounding on both ends and get second shots for his teamates and himself.

LRB · 01-26-2003, 05:03 PM

<< He used semi taqll ball. He had Raef, Dirk, Bradley, Nick and Nash on the court together. And of course Nick and Nash negates the other 3 defensively. >>

Or rather you need 3 7 footers to handle all the penetration let through by Nick and Nash.

NYMavFan · 01-26-2003, 05:05 PM

<< the thing that bugs me is we cannot seem to shift gear quick enough to turn up the defensive intensity when our offense's shut down.

could Nellie's trying to force our "start" players to understand that they, too, have to become better defenders for us to be able to win? >>

Every game has it's ups and downs, but what bothers me most is that the Mavs seem to have a huge problem stopping runs by the other team. When the Mavs are on, their momentum is nearly unstoppable, but likewise when the other team has huge momentum, the Mavs NEVER seem able to stop the bleeding.

The reason for this? Exactly what DTL was saying... a complete inability to turn up the defensive intensity when it's needed. It's like they have a pre-programmed way they're supposed to win, and if things don't go according to script, they can't adjust and everything goes to hell.

DTL · 01-26-2003, 05:05 PM

another observation: Nash's just not getting the rest that's supposed to come with Nick on the roster. so he's going to get worn out and fatigued down the stretch. that's just not smart.

BrianJ · 01-26-2003, 05:06 PM

Bayliss that semi small ball is not the worst idea out there. That is not what I was whining about. Its just that anytime Nash and Nve are on the court it sucks. Still I like the semi small over the other retarded small ball ideas.

DTL · 01-26-2003, 05:09 PM

<< Every game has it's ups and downs, but what bothers me most is that the Mavs seem to have a huge problem stopping runs by the other team. When the Mavs are on, their momentum is nearly unstoppable, but likewise when the other team has huge momentum, the Mavs NEVER seem able to stop the bleeding.

The reason for this? Exactly what DTL was saying... a complete inability to turn up the defensive intensity when it's needed. It's like they have a pre-programmed way they're supposed to win, and if things don't go according to script, they can't adjust and everything goes to hell. >>

we all know a lot of it has to do with Nellie preferring to put our most potent offensive team out there instead of making immediate adjustments and put some hustle defenders in. still, our great scorers just need to recognize the fact that THEY have to play hard-nose defense, too. can't just rely on the reserves to turn up the defensive energy.

NYMavFan · 01-26-2003, 05:10 PM

<< But that said, your argument is still full of wholes. Dirk ONLY got the ball in the high post where there was not much to do. Yes the Blazers played some good defense. But he also got some good position down low only to see the team swing the ball to the other side and do a perimeter isolation for a guard. That is just plain stupid basket ball. And if that is a good effort to get Dirk involved, I sure don't want to see a bad effort. >>

OH! So the team decided to throw the ball to Dirk ONLY when he couldn't do anything with it, and everytime he had good position they suddently went dumb and couldn't get the ball to him.

C'mon.

It was obvious enough they were trying to get the ball to Dirk. There was bad play all around and maybe on a few occasions they overlooked him. But back to the original argument. NO WAY IN HELL were they not trying to get Dirk involved. He had a bad game. That's that.

NYMavFan · 01-26-2003, 05:13 PM

<< Wait, are you saying that the Dallas offensive plan (if you can call it that) never calls for Dirk to stand far away from the basket? If so, you don't watch very many Mavs games. >>

No, and I have no freaking idea why you'd get that idea from what I posted. And I watch just as many Mavs games as any of you do. It's called NBA League Pass.

My point was simply that there was a SIGNIFICANT effort to get Dirk the ball. He got it mostly in the high post and then chose to pass it out or was doubled. Got that?

mavs_afroman · 01-26-2003, 05:16 PM

<<

<< the thing that bugs me is we cannot seem to shift gear quick enough to turn up the defensive intensity when our offense's shut down.

could Nellie's trying to force our "start" players to understand that they, too, have to become better defenders for us to be able to win? >>

Every game has it's ups and downs, but what bothers me most is that the Mavs seem to have a huge problem stopping runs by the other team. When the Mavs are on, their momentum is nearly unstoppable, but likewise when the other team has huge momentum, the Mavs NEVER seem able to stop the bleeding.

The reason for this? Exactly what DTL was saying... a complete inability to turn up the defensive intensity when it's needed. It's like they have a pre-programmed way they're supposed to win, and if things don't go according to script, they can't adjust and everything goes to hell. >>

It's hard to slow a team down once you've let them get confidence in their shots and Nellie's lineups allow this every game. As soon as we get any kind of decent lead, Nellie immediately goes small with Walt or evn Griff at the pf, a very very very poor defensive group that has also been an ineffective offensive group lately as well. With this small group in, the opponent gets easy basket upon easy basket letting them get in a serious offensive flow. Then instead trying to slow them down again with our best perimeter defenders (Raje, Griff) and someone to protect the goal (a combination of 2 ot the 3 Raef, Bradley, Dirk) he usually stays small or goes for more offense with the Nick/Nash/Fin combo which allows way to musch penetration.

MavsFanFinley · 01-26-2003, 05:22 PM

When Nelson uses the tall ball, he has to have only one pg in there.

Bradley, Raef, Dirk with either Finley/Griffin and Nash/NVE.

If Finley's playing well, use him, if he's playing poorly put in Griffin. Same thing with Nash and NVE.

Like today, I'd have had Finley and NVE in there.

Also, NO EXCUSE for not having Bell in there for the 2nd half. However, he wasn't contributing offensively so Nelson yanks him. I was impressed with Bell's defense today, hell, I've been impressed with him all year. But, Nelson will yank him or Griffin every time if they are not contributing offensively.

mavs_afroman · 01-26-2003, 05:23 PM

<<

<< Wait, are you saying that the Dallas offensive plan (if you can call it that) never calls for Dirk to stand far away from the basket? If so, you don't watch very many Mavs games. >>

No, and I have no freaking idea why you'd get that idea from what I posted. And I watch just as many Mavs games as any of you do. It's called NBA League Pass.

My point was simply that there was a SIGNIFICANT effort to get Dirk the ball. He got it mostly in the high post and then chose to pass it out or was doubled. Got that? >>

<< He got the ball several times in the high post. That's the best position the blazers would ALLOW him. If he's a superstar, he should create with what the defense gives him. You think the coaching staff TOLD Dirk to stand that far away from the basket? Is that what you're blaming them for? >>

I think that's where he got that idea from.

I really didn't see the same effort to get the ball to Dirk as you did, most of the time when he did get it he was around the 3pt. line, but with the Blazers having smaller quicker defenders, the high post is really a dumb place to get him the ball anyway. He can't drive around them because of their quickness but in the low post he can just shoot right over them.

LRB · 01-26-2003, 05:28 PM

<<

<< But that said, your argument is still full of wholes. Dirk ONLY got the ball in the high post where there was not much to do. Yes the Blazers played some good defense. But he also got some good position down low only to see the team swing the ball to the other side and do a perimeter isolation for a guard. That is just plain stupid basket ball. And if that is a good effort to get Dirk involved, I sure don't want to see a bad effort. >>

OH! So the team decided to throw the ball to Dirk ONLY when he couldn't do anything with it, and everytime he had good position they suddently went dumb and couldn't get the ball to him.

C'mon.

It was obvious enough they were trying to get the ball to Dirk. There was bad play all around and maybe on a few occasions they overlooked him. But back to the original argument. NO WAY IN HELL were they not trying to get Dirk involved. He had a bad game. That's that. >>

Dirk's bad game doesn't excuse the bad effort by his team to get him the ball. Whether they froze him out consciously or subconsciously, they didn't make the effort needed to get him the ball.

Or let me put it another way. I could have gotten the ball to Dirk today more than they did. I'm a decent passer in pickup games, but I suck big time at any higher level. If an effort was made, it wasn't much of one.

But that was the whole story of the Mavs loss. Not much of an effort.

And yes, Dirk did have a bad game. He would have had a bad game probably even if his team had gotten him the ball down low. But he probably would have had a better game than he did, and his team would have had a better game than they did. Did that lose the game for the Mavs? Not by itself, but its indicative of the poor effort and team play by the Mavs.

Lvubun1 · 01-26-2003, 05:29 PM

Seems like small ball is the default thing to blame when the mavs lose. This game I don't think so today. The reason why Nellie went small is because the blaers cut a doule digit lead at the beginning of the 3rd quarter with the starters in. I'm not a big fan of small ball either but you can't always use it as a excuse. The reason why they lost is because they couldn't rebound and Dirk and Steve once again folded against tough phyiscal teams. That Dirk got froze out thing is bs, who froze him out? Nash keep giving him the ball and he did nothing with it, NVE touched the ball less then he did and he only had 4 shots in the 2nd half, and if he did its his fault. You think Shaq or Tim Duncan get freezed out? No they get open or demand the all he had looks he just didn't take them.

Bayliss · 01-26-2003, 05:36 PM

<< Seems like small ball is the default thing to blame when the mavs lose. This game I don't think so today. The reason why Nellie went small is because the blaers cut a doule digit lead at the beginning of the 3rd quarter with the starters in. I'm not a big fan of small ball either but you can't always use it as a excuse. >>

So NVE and Nash together had nothing to do with us losing in the second half? They didn't play hardly at all in the first half and we had a 12 point lead. Coincidence?

-q]The reason why they lost is because they couldn't rebound and Dirk and Steve once again folded against tough phyiscal teams. That Dirk got froze out thing is bs, who froze him out? Nash keep giving him the ball and he did nothing with it, NVE touched the ball less then he did and he only had 4 shots in the 2nd half, and if he did its his fault. You think Shaq or Tim Duncan get freezed out? No they get open or demand the all he had looks he just didn't take them.[/i] >>

Giving Dirk the ball 30 feet away against Ruben Patterson is not giving him a touch. He had 5 shots in the first quarter... He had 9 shots the rest of the game (2 of those came in the last minute.)

Dirk did not lose this game for us.

LRB · 01-26-2003, 05:41 PM

<< You think Shaq or Tim Duncan get freezed out? No they get open or demand the all he had looks he just didn't take them. >>

Yeah I do think that they get froze out at times. I guess you've been out of communication with the media for the last few years or you would have heard of the Shaq and Kobe feuds about Kobe hogging the ball or freezing Shaq out. And when we played the Spurs we got a big lead because TD was getting froze out by his team taking wild ass jumpers. Pop stopped the jumpers and got the ball to Tim and the Spurs came back to win. It was the COACH not Duncan that forced the change. That argument about Shaq and Duncan is total BS.

Bad thing about the Mavs is not only does Dirk get froze out at times, but the hot guy often gets froze out until he cools off. Happens way too much for my tastes.

sturm und drang · 01-26-2003, 05:47 PM

From CNNSI.com at the time of last year's Denver trade:

Nelson expects Van Exel to assume Hardaway's role, but play more than the 24 minutes per game Hardaway was playing. Van Exel, who at 30 is five years younger than his predecessor, will play alongside Nash at times.

What happened to "at times"? If I recall, the Nash-NVE tandem was supposed to be a secondary or tertiary option, according to Nelson at the time of the trade. Now, it seems like it's the line-up Nellie relies on, especially in the 2nd half or when we fall behind... Wasn't the purpose of acquiring Van Exel to provide relief for Steve? Part of the reason I hate smallball so much is that the line-up, in my opinion, brings out the worst from both Nash and NVE. Neither of them excel when the other is on the court-- with the two of them out there together, there's way too much dribbling, way too many shots off the dribble, too little offensive rebounding and not enough passing.

Just compare the way we moved the ball at the beginning of the game to the 2nd half. Pitiful.

seelenjaeger · 01-26-2003, 05:48 PM

maybe it´s just me, but i´d like to see dirk win this kind of games vs. us ... you can debate if he lost it for us, but he definately wasn´t able to win it tonight, and that´s what strikes me most - he has to elevate to another level to get past this physical defense

FilthyFinMavs · 01-26-2003, 05:49 PM

Didn't even know Mavs played today. Oh well I am looking at the box score and it looks as if Finley was going to the hoop and hitting his jumpers. These last couple of games I don't know if he has been coming to this board or not but something has gotten into him. Looks like some vintage Fin. I'm gonna guess Nash didn't distribute well but he did have 9 assist I just see those coming in the first half. Raef looks as if he had a great game hit his jumpers which is always a plus. For a guy coming off the bench Nick looked like he had a great game but by this thread looks like he didnt distribute to well. Did Nick start? Anyway it's always to see a great game by Fin but it isn't so great when Nash and Dirk don't play well.

LRB · 01-26-2003, 05:52 PM

<< maybe it´s just me, but i´d like to see dirk win this kind of games vs. us ... you can debate if he lost it for us, but he definately wasn´t able to win it tonight, and that´s what strikes me most - he has to elevate to another level to get past this physical defense >>

SJ: you make a good point. To get to the next level Dirk has to learn to elevate his game to help his team in these type of games. Even the best couldn't do it every night, but they did it more than Dirk has. He does need to improve in this area.

dude1394 · 01-26-2003, 11:01 PM

<< He used semi taqll ball. He had Raef, Dirk, Bradley, Nick and Nash on the court together. And of course Nick and Nash negates the other 3 defensively. >>

come on bayliss. .. Thats' a cop-out... Raef, Dirk, Braedly SHOULD be able to control the boards but couldn't. No one did.

I did want walt to be in there however, he DOES board and forces finley to the two where we are bigger on the boards and can score. Bradley can be a real show-stopper on offense.

dude1394 · 01-26-2003, 11:05 PM

<< When Nelson uses the tall ball, he has to have only one pg in there.

Bradley, Raef, Dirk with either Finley/Griffin and Nash/NVE.

If Finley's playing well, use him, if he's playing poorly put in Griffin. Same thing with Nash and NVE.

Like today, I'd have had Finley and NVE in there.

Also, NO EXCUSE for not having Bell in there for the 2nd half. However, he wasn't contributing offensively so Nelson yanks him. I was impressed with Bell's defense today, hell, I've been impressed with him all year. But, Nelson will yank him or Griffin every time if they are not contributing offensively. >>

I unfortunatley have to agree with you on when nellie yanks folks. I seldom see folks get yanked for not playing defense, but boy oh boy miss a shot or two and he's on it like a duck on a junebug. Very unfortunate. Somehow he is going to have to begin to think defense first offense second, but i don't know.

All that being said however, the mavericks PLAYERS today just let the blazers punk 'em. They beat 'em up in the second half and the mavs were not up to the challenge. They slunk away like dogs with their tails between their legs. Getting rebounded 61-43 is getting your rear kicked. You could tell it too in the second half, not a lot of heart there.

dude1394 · 01-26-2003, 11:09 PM

<< Seems like small ball is the default thing to blame when the mavs lose. This game I don't think so today. The reason why Nellie went small is because the blaers cut a doule digit lead at the beginning of the 3rd quarter with the starters in. I'm not a big fan of small ball either but you can't always use it as a excuse. The reason why they lost is because they couldn't rebound and Dirk and Steve once again folded against tough phyiscal teams. That Dirk got froze out thing is bs, who froze him out? Nash keep giving him the ball and he did nothing with it, NVE touched the ball less then he did and he only had 4 shots in the 2nd half, and if he did its his fault. You think Shaq or Tim Duncan get freezed out? No they get open or demand the all he had looks he just didn't take them. >>

Lvubun1... great point. they started the regulare line-up in the 3rd and it got smoked. No small ball there, raja in, big ball in, they got their heads handed to them. so nellie DOES try something else and we bang him for small ball losing the game, wrong tonight anyway. I do think nellie yanks guys for offensive woes way too much, but the big line-up was NOT getting it done tonight.

Bayliss · 01-26-2003, 11:18 PM

<< Lvubun1... great point. they started the regulare line-up in the 3rd and it got smoked. No small ball there, raja in, big ball in, they got their heads handed to them. so nellie DOES try something else and we bang him for small ball losing the game, wrong tonight anyway. I do think nellie yanks guys for offensive woes way too much, but the big line-up was NOT getting it done tonight. >>

Out of the 3rd quarter Bell I believe got 2 minutes. So the Mavs built a 12 point lead in the first half without playing small ball, yet 2 minutes in Nellie decides that it isn't working and goes small?

Now I would wait just a few more minutes than that... wouldn't you? And the flipside to that.. did smallball work? Nope. He played small the entire 4th quarter. Yet, he never decided to change.

Nellie will never win a championship. Because he wants scorers. He has and never will have use for role players. Especially defensive role players.

MavKikiNYC · 01-27-2003, 12:20 AM

<< Out of the 3rd quarter Bell I believe got 2 minutes. So the Mavs built a 12 point lead in the first half without playing small ball, yet 2 minutes in Nellie decides that it isn't working and goes small? >>

Your point is on-target, if the details are slightly off. Bell got the first 3:50 of the Q3, and went out with the Mavs up 9. So what wasn't working? Not sure I'd call a 9-point lead 'getting smoked'.

Nellie substituted LaFrentz and Griffin for Bradley and Bell at about the same point in the game. Bell didn't get back into the game until :23 left in the game.

I kind of like Bell as a starter. He looks like a high-energy defender who can cover players from Iverson to Houston/Sprewell ..maybe even Kobe. He's a good alternative to Nájera as the fifth starter, when the opponent has a high-scoring player at the 2.

Again, the observation/complaint is going to be that Nelson prefers going with a small lineup of offensive players to going with a defensive-oriented lineup that can contain the opponent. Add to that that teams seem to've figured out how to attack the zone more effectively, and that the zone makes the Mavs even more vulnerable to opponents' offensive rebounds.

As long as the preferred approach is to try to win with a small lineup shooting the long-ball, instead of combining some kind of low-post attack for Dirk with a more defensive-oriented lineup, I'll continue to have growing doubts and lowered expectations for success.

MavsFanFinley · 01-27-2003, 01:06 AM

It's not small ball, it's Walton that's killing us against the big teams in the West.

Lakers, Spurs, Kings and todays Blazer game was all commentated by Walton. [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-mad.gif[/img]

Chiwas · 01-27-2003, 01:43 AM

<< It's not small ball, it's Walton that's killing us against the big teams in the West.

Lakers, Spurs, Kings and todays Blazer game was all commentated by Walton. [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-mad.gif[/img] >>

Nellie said something about Mavs performing bad in national broadcasted games, but maybe he is missing the complete picture: Walton's jinx. Good one, MFF.

OutletPass · 01-27-2003, 01:51 AM

As long as the preferred approach is to try to win with a small lineup shooting the long-ball, instead of combining some kind of low-post attack for Dirk with a more defensive-oriented lineup, I'll continue to have growing doubts and lowered expectations for success.
--From MavsKiki

the mavericks PLAYERS today just let the blazers punk 'em. They beat 'em up in the second half and the mavs were not up to the challenge. They slunk away like dogs with their tails between their legs. Getting rebounded 61-43 is getting your rear kicked. You could tell it too in the second half, not a lot of heart there.
--From DUDE

<< the worst thing is, other teams seem to never worry about being down against us. they can just keep hustling and know Nellie'll eventually put in the small lineup to give them all the rebounds and scoring chances to make a comeback run. >>
--From DTL

To be honest, I think this is the most dangerous thing of all. Sure this loss hurts, and it would've been nice to pick up an unexpected gift from Sacto-- losing to the Raptors? wha ha ha ha-- but I'm more concerned that we are increasingly viewed as a soft team against which comebacks are all-too-possible.Unpleasant, still-lingering ramification of the Lakers game, and we've done nothing whatsoever since then to give opposing teams any reason to think differently. Scary.
--From Sturm

I've combined these posts to provide what, I think, is the most cogent analysis I've seen.

It's interesting to me that, just in the past few days, the press ran some articles about Nellie's days with the Knicks; the point of which being that the players there, for their own reasons, weren't on board with Nellie's thinking. Given that many people on this board are having continued difficulties with Nellie's philosophies vis'a vis' our current roster, is it unreasonable to speculate that some of the current Mavs share the same doubts and concerns ?

To end my post, I'll go off point for a second to say that I am fairly disheartened to see the recent increase in personal attacks on this board. I hope that the recent posts about Finley fans vs. Dirk fans don't get out of hand. Each and every one of us here, trolls excluded, should be Mavs Fans FIRST. It is my hope that we can end the bickering between so-called factions; debate and discussion is certainly a thing to be encouraged, name calling is not.

dude1394 · 01-27-2003, 08:04 AM

<<
Nellie substituted LaFrentz and Griffin for Bradley and Bell at about the same point in the game. Bell didn't get back into the game until :23 left in the game. >>

But that's not small ball? Griffin is actually bigger than raja.

<< I kind of like Bell as a starter. >>

I like him as a starter over griffin as well. What I can't really see is what the coaches are seeing and is he making some mistakes out there for example. Griffin doesn't seem to be as good atheletically as bell but I think he's pretty savy.

MFFL · 01-27-2003, 08:10 AM

<< Dirk did not lose this game for us. >>

He did nothing to win the game for us.

MFFL · 01-27-2003, 08:10 AM

<< I hope that the recent posts about Finley fans vs. Dirk fans don't get out of hand. >>

I'm saving this quote to use the next time someone rips on Finley.

LRB · 01-27-2003, 10:19 AM

<< I like him as a starter over griffin as well. What I can't really see is what the coaches are seeing and is he making some mistakes out there for example. Griffin doesn't seem to be as good atheletically as bell but I think he's pretty savy. >>

Dude: Excellent observation and point. I love Bell. He plays with lots of heart which is really good. But sometimes he lets his hear overwhelm is head which isn't as good. But I still like him. Griff is a much more wilely player. Not necessarily the best athelete, but far from the worst athelete. Griff uses his head and outthinks opponents many times. He does have those great hands though.

kg_veteran · 01-27-2003, 10:52 AM

<<

<< Wait, are you saying that the Dallas offensive plan (if you can call it that) never calls for Dirk to stand far away from the basket? If so, you don't watch very many Mavs games. >>

No, and I have no freaking idea why you'd get that idea from what I posted. And I watch just as many Mavs games as any of you do. It's called NBA League Pass. >>

I got that from the fact that you were arguing in your prior post that Dirk simply couldn't establish low post position because of the Blazers defense, and that the Mavericks coaches would NOT have told Dirk to stand that far from the basket. Clearly the Mavericks coaches DO ask Dirk to stand far away from the basket for long stretches of the game. Again, whether you have season tickets or never watch a game, you aren't paying attention if you don't know that.

<< My point was simply that there was a SIGNIFICANT effort to get Dirk the ball. He got it mostly in the high post and then chose to pass it out or was doubled. Got that? >>

You think the Mavs did enough to try and get Dirk the ball. I don't. Fair enough. I can't quantify the number of times Dirk touched the ball (maybe I should start counting), but throwing the ball to Dirk at 20 feet and saying, "Go get 'em, big fella!" still doesn't qualify as getting the ball to Dirk in scoring position, unless he's standing outside wide open.

MavsFanFinley · 01-27-2003, 11:03 AM

Outlet, I don't think this is the typical who's better, Finley or Dirk argument? Who would you trade first, who should take more shots, blah, blah, blah, that we've had in the past.

I certainly don't see it as something that is going to get out of hand either. And while I do skim some posts to get the jist of what the poster is saying, I haven't noticed as many personal attacks between the fans. Maybe I need to look better next time.

What we are arguing, in this game paticularly, is that Dirk is always aloud the off night. Or it's always something to do with what's around him, than him directly when he isn't scoring 20+ points and grabbing 10+ rebounds in a game, when he isn't getting X amount of shots/touches.

I'd say Nelson gets the most criticism, but he doesn't count, imo, with the argument we're trying to make.

I'd say Finley gets the most criticism as a player, even moreso than Bradley. And until the last month--maybe a bit longer--Nash is in 2nd for drawing criticism from posters here.

If Finley even has a mediocre game, there are threads created with what's wrong with Fin, can we trade him? And until this season, we hadn't seen any for Nash.

Dirk got touches and some post up in the Portland game. I taped it, skimmed through it again to make sure I wasn't just arguing to argue. He was 4-5 in the first half. He had to sit the last 5 1/2 minutes of the 2nd quarter due to foul trouble. He was 2-9 in the 2nd half.

And I don't know if I've seen Dirk as lazy than I did on the play with a couple minutes left when Nash threw him the ball and Patterson ran right in front to intercept and get the break away dunk. Dirk didn't even try for the ball, he just had his hands out.

MFFL created another thread about Nelson needing to calm the players down. Dirk looks like Bradley last year. Complaining about this call or that and while Dirk isn't getting the respect like Duncan or Shaq, he's complaining way too much. And, most importantly, he's let it take him out of some games even.

There have been games where Dirk has only taken 14-16 shots, but he's also gotten to the line 8-10 times. And it wasn't cause we posted him up. It's because Dirk was aggressive, he did his little up and under moves, ran from the 3 point line did a spin move and got the dunk/layup/foul. He did NONE of that in the 2nd half. He got the ball, he shot wherever he was. He looked horrible.

Could we have ran some plays for him, could we have posted him up more, could we have forced the ball onto him more? Yeah, we probably could have. But, how many times have we made that argument for Finley to get him going and it's always let him concentrate on other aspects of the game. Rebounding, assisting, defense, steals, whatever.

We didn't lose cause Nelson didn't post Dirk up enough. We can win a game with Dirk not scoring 30 points. All we needed was to toughen up, suck it up, REBOUND, and have either Nash and/or Dirk hit more of their shots.