OFFICIAL GDT: GAME 2 - MAVS V. NUGGETS - 9:30pm TNT

[Usually Lurkin]

Originally Posted by NYMAVGUY

If Bass can't come in for 2 mins and Mavs not go down -10 points, we are not good enough to be there, Dirk or not.

without Josh, guess what. We're not. We had to try to steal the game knowing we were short handed. Giving them the first few minutes of the 4th quarter was a bad, bad way of doing that. And if Carlisle couldn't see that that lineup would do just that, he needs a kick in the balls.

It would have been much better to put the pressure on them to start the 4th, and hope that they got skittish if the game came to the wire. THey'd already shown that they could blow open a game by taking advantage of a few possessions of sloppy ball.

[LonghornDub]

Originally Posted by Usually Lurkin

I personally would rather have seen Dirk produce for the first few minutes of the quarter, then completely disappear from exhaustion than to watch him come back in after the scrubs completely lose control of the game, only to do pretty much nothing anyway.

Would I have much rather seen Dampier pick up his final foul 2 minutes into the 4th by busting Nene in the chops? Yeah. But we watched 12 minutes of Dirk's basketball life get flushed down the toilet rather than watching 6 minutes.

Sure, but that's hindsight bias. At the time, Rick's decision wasn't, "Do I rest Dirk for two minutes and face the certainty of being down 15+ by the time he comes back (and it won't matter anymore), or do I keep him out there despite his request?" He didn't know for certain we'd get down big, he just knew there was a chance. So, the decision was, "Do I rest Dirk for two minutes and risk us getting down 15+ or do I keep him out there despite his request?" He gambled and decided the risk was worth giving his star the rest.

Now clearly some people think the risk of leaving Dirk out for 2 minutes was too great to even chance it, and that's fine. I obviously don't agree. But the point it wasn't a certainty at the time, so Rick's decision can't be evaluated in that way. You may still think it was the wrong decision, given the risk, but that's all it was at the time--a risk.

[NYMAVGUY]

Originally Posted by Usually Lurkin

without Josh, guess what. We're not. We had to try to steal the game knowing we were short handed. Giving them the first few minutes of the 4th quarter was a bad, bad way of doing that. And if Carlisle couldn't see that that lineup would do just that, he needs a kick in the balls.

Yeah, but this has been the squad all year. Dirk takes a break usually. sometimes we do wel when Dirk is on the Bench, allowing him to get even more rest. Sometimes they tank. 2nite, they tanked.

[Usually Lurkin]

Originally Posted by LonghornDub

Sure, but that's hindsight bias. .

"hindsight" might also be called "review" and plenty of people on this board had a better bead on the game than Carlisle.

[rakesh.s]

Originally Posted by kg_veteran

The team missed Josh. No question about that. But the bottom line is, they were within 3 at the end of 3. Carlisle should have put this team in better position to succeed.

That, and I suppose the guys that were out on the court to start the 4th shouldn't have bent over and asked for it.

Even with Josh Howard, this team isn't going to do diddly..

Look at the lineups, and look at the bench. What we're feeling now, is what the spurs felt in round 1 - two guys have to do all the scoring (dirk, jet) with a bunch of LLE players as their supporting cast.

Billups > Kidd
Anthony > Howard
JR Smith > Terry
Nene (in this series) ~ Dirk
Andersen >>>>>>>> Dampier and Hollins combined, and Andersen comes off the BENCH.

The mavs don't have an advantage anywhere on the floor. The nuggets are faster, more athletic and get easy baskets, while the mavs take ugly fadeaway jumpers and contested threes. When those shots fall, they look good -- it's merely fools' gold, just like being within 3 points....mavs don't have the depth to get that extra push when they need it, and the starters just end up getting tired.

It's time to go shopping for offense in the offseason -- LEGITIMATE offense..not antoine wright and matt carroll.

[Usually Lurkin]

Originally Posted by rakesh.s

Even with Josh Howard, this team isn't going to do diddly..

This team does much better *as a team* when Howard plays well. And "Nene ~ Dirk (this series)" is dumb.

[LonghornDub]

Originally Posted by Usually Lurkin

"hindsight" might also be called "review" and plenty of people on this board had a better bead on the game than Carlisle.

But they're not the same thing. Review (at least a fair review) is evaluating a person's actions in light of the information available to him at the time. Hindsight is evaluating a person's actions with the benefit of information he didn't have at the time.

The information available to Rick at the time was that the bench had played VERY well tonight, amassing over 30 points by halftime. You still may think it wasn't worth the risk of losing the lead, and that wouldn't be unreasonable. I disagree, because I think that's outweighed by the need to agree to a request by your superstar for two minutes of rest, but your point is still a reasonable one. All I'm saying is that Rick's decision wasn't to let Dirk sit with any certain knowledge that it wouldn't even matter by the time he came back in.

[tremaine]

Originally Posted by Usually Lurkin

THey'd already shown that they could blow open a game by taking advantage of a few possessions of sloppy ball.

I've lost count of how many games the Nuggets have won this way. Sloppy or even just casual = automatic free points for them.

To defeat the Nuggets, you have to have the same kind of intensity on offense that is usually reserved for playoff defending. No casual and no sloppy. In other words, the first priority is to contain the Nuggets' defense, strange as that may sound.

[CadBane]

Originally Posted by LonghornDub

Mavs Bench: 47 points (not including Gerald Green's 5)
Nuggets Bench: 37 points

Now, could you please stop interrupting me? This Brian Greene book is too good to put down.

Think JHO being hurt and Terry starting the 2nd half had anything to do with that?

Fact: During the reg. season, Denver bench had more rebounds, assists, blocks, steals and three pointers than the Mavs. But hey, the Mavs averaged 4 more points.

And if you seriously still think our bench is better than ours, then you have no credibility left.

[rakesh.s]

Originally Posted by Usually Lurkin

This team does much better *as a team* when Howard plays well. And "Nene ~ Dirk (this series)" is dumb.

Nene is averaging 25,8 on 65%+ shooting..and most of these points are dunks.

Howard's presence didn't seem to do a whole lot in game 1

[tremaine]

Originally Posted by rakesh.s

Billups > Kidd
Anthony > Howard
JR Smith > Terry
Nene (in this series) ~ Dirk
Andersen >>>>>>>> Dampier and Hollins combined, and Andersen comes off the BENCH.

Kidd > Billups (but some of Kidd's passes have been horrible in this series)
Anthony > Howard but Howard is good and the Mavs can not possibly win this series without him.
Terry > JR Smith, almost >>
Dirk > Nene; but don't ever be without even for a minute a quality defensive big guarding him.
Dirk >> Kenyon Martin normally and >>+ in this game. This alone tells you the Mavs are guaranteed one win in Dallas and can easily get both of the next two games.
Nene > Dampier

Andersen seems to be from another planet, so why bother comparing him to Earthlings? Why was Andersen not being paid by another team at the time the Nuggets with no money came looking for roster fillers? Why did no one know how good Andersen could be? Why? How could so many GMs have left Andersen unemployed as of the summer of 2008, allowing the Nuggets to get him for next to nothing.

[ray_sir_6]

Originally Posted by tremaine

All very true.

The refs were horrible in game 1 and merely bad in game 2. In game 2 they were better than game 1, but don't be fooled, they were still bad in game 2. Deserving special mention is that the touch fouls against Dallas have been out of control in this series.

Yes, I noticed how the Mavs will have their arms stretched straight up, and maybe get a little body and get called for the foul. Yet the Nuggets will plow into our players going for a block or steal and almost never get the whistle. I did see the lesser evil today with the officials, until the 4th, where I still haven't finished the game, it's still on pause, so I don't put something thru the screen. Gotta cool off sometimes when watching the game get taken away from us by the refs. Notice that when the officiating was being fair(er) we were within 2-3pts, but then the refs came alive in the 4th and killed us. This is the only reason I think we have a chance, cause we are playing right with them when they actually let us play, even without Howard, and with Jet and Kidd playing horrid. If Howard comes back, Kidd remembers how to play, and Jet finds his shot, we might actually be able to compete against the Nuggets even with the refs playing bias-ball.

[ray_sir_6]

Originally Posted by SlimBig

Some Carmelo Anthony does the exact move that Wright does and gets the foul. Wright makes a circus shot...no call.

Ok.

I just watched that play, and, conveniently, they did a replay immediately before Melo attempted the same shot. The similarities are uncanny, and how Wright didn't get a foul from the Birdman making contact is BS. SAME EXACT SHOT, SAME EXACT CONTACT...yet only one whistle. Even behind 15 they can't drop the bias.

[NugsFan]

Originally Posted by tremaine

Andersen seems to be from another planet, so why bother comparing him to Earthlings? Why was Andersen not being paid by another team at the time the Nuggets with no money came looking for roster fillers? Why did no one know how good Andersen could be? Why? How could so many GMs have left Andersen unemployed as of the summer of 2008, allowing the Nuggets to get him for next to nothing.

Well Andersen was coming off a 2 year ban from drugs, so not a lot of teams, including the Nuggets, really thought he was going to do anything this year. Plus Andersen lives here in Denver, and had several minimum salary offers from teams, but chose Denver because of a few factors. Playing time, familiar with the front office, and loyalty to the city.

[ray_sir_6]

Originally Posted by ray_sir_6

I just watched that play, and, conveniently, they did a replay immediately before Melo attempted the same shot. The similarities are uncanny, and how Wright didn't get a foul from the Birdman making contact is BS. SAME EXACT SHOT, SAME EXACT CONTACT...yet only one whistle. Even behind 15 they can't drop the bias.

I just made the wife watch the vid as well. She wasn't too keen on it, as she hates basketball. I asked her to watch the first one (Wright) closely, and then to watch the 2d one (Melo) closely and tell me what was different.

Her answer:
"The guy in white didn't go in."

I asked her if she thought the guy in white was fouled, or if the guy in blue was fouled? Try not to laugh too hard on her answer:

"Is a foul when the ball doesn't go in?"

So an outside view from someone with ZERO basketball knowledge didn't see any difference in the 2 shots, and that (after I explained what a foul was) both were fouled.

Yes, the game was over, it didn't matter, but it shows VERY WELL how the Mavs aren't getting the same calls the Nuggets are getting.

[CadBane]

Your wife sounds hot.

[NugsFan]

Pics of wife?

[LonghornDub]

Originally Posted by CadBane

Think JHO being hurt and Terry starting the 2nd half had anything to do with that?

Fact: During the reg. season, Denver bench had more rebounds, assists, blocks, steals and three pointers than the Mavs. But hey, the Mavs averaged 4 more points.

And if you seriously still think our bench is better than ours, then you have no credibility left.

I've got an idea--why don't you make a poll about it?

Oh, wait.

[CadBane]

Originally Posted by LonghornDub

I've got an idea--why don't you make a poll about it?

Oh, wait.

The results of said poll sure do disagree with you...but I guess you're used to that.

[Usually Lurkin]

Originally Posted by LonghornDub

But they're not the same thing. Review (at least a fair review) is evaluating a person's actions in light of the information available to him at the time. Hindsight is evaluating a person's actions with the benefit of information he didn't have at the time.

The information available to Rick at the time was that the bench had played VERY well tonight, amassing over 30 points by halftime. You still may think it wasn't worth the risk of losing the lead, and that wouldn't be unreasonable. I disagree, because I think that's outweighed by the need to agree to a request by your superstar for two minutes of rest, but your point is still a reasonable one. All I'm saying is that Rick's decision wasn't to let Dirk sit with any certain knowledge that it wouldn't even matter by the time he came back in.

If a bunch of yahoos on a message board can see something bad that's about to happen before the coach does, then the coach is making a mistake.

[dude1394]

Originally Posted by NYMAVGUY

Yeah, but this has been the squad all year. Dirk takes a break usually. sometimes we do wel when Dirk is on the Bench, allowing him to get even more rest. Sometimes they tank. 2nite, they tanked.

When JJB can't finish and bass is getting his rear-end handed to him rebounding wise....it's sorta tough allright. JJB has been our "extra" bench guy and he's just not effective in this series...Way too many shotblockers. I think he's going to have to go to a teardrop a little more..

He needs to be able to score some.

[92bDad]

So...when is the Draft?

[nuggetsbrick]

Originally Posted by NugsFan

Well Andersen was coming off a 2 year ban from drugs, so not a lot of teams, including the Nuggets, really thought he was going to do anything this year. Plus Andersen lives here in Denver, and had several minimum salary offers from teams, but chose Denver because of a few factors. Playing time, familiar with the front office, and loyalty to the city.

Besides that he's really playing out of his mind right now.

He's really feeding off the excitement of the playoffs and I'd bet that it's more of an aberration than what you would normally expect from him.

[Blackspider972]

Originally Posted by 92bDad

So...when is the Draft?

Do we even have any draft picks?

Even if we do, we'll just draft guys like Nick Fazekas or some Euro spare.

[LonghornDub]

Originally Posted by Usually Lurkin

If a bunch of yahoos on a message board can see something bad that's about to happen before the coach does, then the coach is making a mistake.

What was that "something bad," exactly? The Nuggets scored exactly 5 points while that lineup was out there. Their lead expanded from 3 to 8. It wasn't until Dirk, Kidd, and Terry were brought back in that the lead reached double digits and beyond.

I'm sorry, but an 8 point deficit with 11 minutes left is nothing. Yeah, the lineup gave up a 5-0 run (one of which was a FT for a technical on Carlisle). Sure, that wasn't ideal, but let's not act like everyone foresaw this disastrous sequence with the questionable lineup out there, and then such a backbreaking sequence actually came to pass. It was a 5-0 run. That's two possessions. That sort of run happens 20+ times in the course of a normal game, regardless of what lineup is out there.

The game was lost after the starters were brought back in and the deficit ballooned to 15+. Not before.

[Whatever]

Originally Posted by tremaine

I'll be dangerously honest and admit my primary objective in this game besides rooting for the Mavs was to decide once and for all whether the Nuggets pose any serious threat to the Lakers.

Note: I am NOT a fan of the Lakers, I'm not really a fan of any one team anymore. I'm just a fan of basketball, and of basketball being different from football, that is it.

The Nuggets are winning on the cheap and they are winning without any offensive scheme other than easy, cheap points off fast breaks. This is exactly like a football team relying on it's defense to get some stops (yielding better field position) and a turover or two or three. Then the offense of that football team has very little to do to win the game. Many, many games in football are won this way, maybe as many as 1/3 of them.

Although everyone knows defending is more intense and more important in the playoffs than it is in the regular season, it is not true that Championships or Conference finals have been won to any extent at all by teams doing what the Nuggets are doing. Were the Nuggets to beat both the Mavs and the Lakers, it would truly be a science fiction type of event.

So all the Lakers (or the Mavs, still) have to do is to man up and take care of the ball. This is not as difficult for a team to do as it may seem from watching the Nuggets games lately. The Nuggets have temporarily created an alternate universe here, where basketball is different than in our universe.

So I am confident that even if the Mavs keep turning it over, even if the Mavs keep being heavily victimized by the free points of the fast break, and even if the Mavs keep being hammered by the referees, so they lose this series 4-1 or whatever, that the Lakers will defeat the Nuggets and restore my faith in basketball.

Go Mavs, you have a good, quality team regardless of what happens in this series. Your team looked great for three quarters (again) and then the 4th turned goofy and didn't seem like basketball anymore.

The Lakers are a tough matchup for anyone, but it has very little to do with scheme. They are a focused, athletic team that plays together and has a great closer in KB who can keep his team in the game when things aren't going well and take over a close game late.

If you were watching either of these games you would know that:

a) fast break points are NOT cheap gimmicks. They come from forcing turnovers, playing defense, and having 5 guys on the court athletic enough to run out at the drop of a hat.

b) no set plays? How many pick and rolls or pick and slips has Nene flushed over the past couple days? How many times has Melo curled off a back pick in the key for a layup?

c) fast break points and getting to the rim are a hell of a lot less fool's gold than Nowitzki banking fadeaways off of one foot, or Terry hitting contested 3s over Nene to stay in the game. When one team is shooting jumpers and the other is dunking, which method is going to win out ultimately?

No one in the league ever doubted that Denver had a lot of talent on their ballclub. The knock has always been the consistent effort and the resolve to make the right play on offense and the scrappy play on defense. Somehow and some way, this team has put it all together and is playing very focused basketball. They will not be an easy out for any team in the league if they continue to play together.

[Usually Lurkin]

Originally Posted by LonghornDub

What was that "something bad," exactly? The Nuggets scored exactly 5 points while that lineup was out there. Their lead expanded from 3 to 8. It wasn't until Dirk, Kidd, and Terry were brought back in that the lead reached double digits and beyond.

I'm sorry, but an 8 point deficit with 11 minutes left is nothing. Yeah, the lineup gave up a 5-0 run (one of which was a FT for a technical on Carlisle). Sure, that wasn't ideal, but let's not act like everyone foresaw this disastrous sequence with the questionable lineup out there, and then such a backbreaking sequence actually came to pass. It was a 5-0 run. That's two possessions. That sort of run happens 20+ times in the course of a normal game, regardless of what lineup is out there.

The game was lost after the starters were brought back in and the deficit ballooned to 15+. Not before.

it sounds like you are not defending Carlisles dumb lineup by saying it wasn't a dumb lineup. There was a total momentum shift in those minutes. To ignore that is to treat the game of basketball as if it is nothing but a changing box score.

[LonghornDub]

Originally Posted by Usually Lurkin

it sounds like you are not defending Carlisles dumb lineup by saying it wasn't a dumb lineup. There was a total momentum shift in those minutes. To ignore that is to treat the game of basketball as if it is nothing but a changing box score.

I don't buy the "momentum shift" of five points in a 1.5 minute span with over 10 minutes left in the game. The Mavs could have EASILY turned it around after that. That sequence was far from back-breaking. But the starters came back in and played like garbage.

Also, I thought I made this fairly clear, but I'm not even defending "the lineup." I would have preferred to see a center out there myself, even with the foul issues. I'm defending only the decision to sit Dirk.

[SMC0007]

Originally Posted by LonghornDub

I don't buy the "momentum shift" of five points in a 1.5 minute span with over 10 minutes left in the game. The Mavs could have EASILY turned it around after that. That sequence was far from back-breaking. But the starters came back in and played like garbage.

Also, I thought I made this fairly clear, but I'm not even defending "the lineup." I would have preferred to see a center out there myself, even with the foul issues. I'm defending only the decision to sit Dirk.

Yah, our stars didn't come in and play smart basketball in the 4th quarter though they did seem to have the sense of urgency needed to make a run.

I do not like Bass at the 5 much against this team. Maybe he proves us wrong at home or going forward but I doubt it. I would have rather had Hollins and DAmp foul out and then go to him as a last resort. Bass has nothing this series thus far.

[ray_sir_6]

Originally Posted by Usually Lurkin

it sounds like you are not defending Carlisles dumb lineup by saying it wasn't a dumb lineup. There was a total momentum shift in those minutes. To ignore that is to treat the game of basketball as if it is nothing but a changing box score.

The momentum shift was brought on by lowsy calls:

Terry getting fouled in a steal that was an easy 2 for Denver ("You could hear the foul from here" - announcers)

Wright getting a no call when Melo plowed him over, pushing him into the seats under the goal, and then Carlisles getting a T for screaming about it.

When the ball obviously went off Denver, and it was called out on Dallas. Dirk complained about it, and the replay even confirmed it was an easy call for the refs, but they just blew it.


Bitch all you want about the small line-up, but even with all the starters in there, getting those same calls would have had the same outcome on the momentum swing.

[Usually Lurkin]

Originally Posted by LonghornDub

I don't buy the "momentum shift" of five points in a 1.5 minute span with over 10 minutes left in the game.

well, the Mavs pretty much bought it that quickly.

Also, I thought I made this fairly clear, but I'm not even defending "the lineup." I would have preferred to see a center out there myself, even with the foul issues. I'm defending only the decision to sit Dirk.

If what you mean is, "Carlisle's an idiot for not putting a center in for the first half of the quarter," then why don't you say that instead of saying things like, "The game was lost after the starters were brought back in and the deficit ballooned to 15+. Not before."

[Usually Lurkin]

Originally Posted by ray_sir_6

The momentum shift was brought on by lowsy calls:

They had lousy calls all game. When they had a center in there and/or Dirk was in there producing, then they overcame the calls, and they stopped the mad runs that grab more momentum than the Mavs could take back.

[ray_sir_6]

Originally Posted by Usually Lurkin

They had lousy calls all game. When they had a center in there and/or Dirk was in there producing, then they overcame the calls, and they stopped the mad runs that grab more momentum than the Mavs could take back.

I thought the game was called decently until the 4th. Yes, they were missing some, but it wasn't something that jumped out at me. It was still close, and I think that was because the Mavs were getting fair calls more often than not. Then the 4th started, and even the announcers were pointing out the bad calls. These are the same guys who didn't acknowldege the fouls from "pulling the chair out" routine. So if they saw an obvious foul and made mention of it, it should be pretty easy for most people to see how the refs had decided to change up the game in favor of Denver.

As far as having a center in at the beginning of the 4th, I don't think it mattered. Consider this:

If Terry had gotten the foul called when he got stripped (2:20 left, 3d qtr) ("I could hear the foul from here") and they had retained the ball, that would have given the Mavs the possibility of getting at least a 2pt, and as much as a 4pt or 5pt swing. That could have given them the lead going into the 4th qtr.

If the refs had called the offensive foul on Melo for driving his shoulder into Wright (11:04 left, 4th qtr), that could have had the same results, with a minimum of 3pts (for the "running jump shot" that Carmelo made uncontested, since Wright was now sitting with the cameramen, and the T that Carlisle got hit with for screaming about it) swing, and possibly a 6pt swing if the Mavs went down and scored after getting the ball. They were behind by 5 at the time.

If the refs had called the SUPER OBVIOUS RIGHT IN THEIR FACE THEY JUST CALLED IT WRONG out-of-bounds correctly, it could have headed off Denver's run to a 15pt lead.

In a close game, the calls need to be correct, especially in the final quarter when teams are fighting to stay in the game. The refs were, in my opinion, blatantly manupulating the game in the 4th quarter, and assisted the Denver run that put the game away.

Is Denver good? Yes, they were hitting alot of difficult shots, they were driving the basket, they were running on all cylinders. The Mavs were doing mediocre, at best. How can you expect the Mavs to be able to get a win when they would barely be able to if the refs weren't making the calls against them? The game was close before the most obvious missed calls happened. Maybe the refs thought it was too close and thus had to goto more extreme methods to cripple the Mavs and give the Nuggets the chance they needed to blow it wide open? That is how I saw it. Too anyone who says refs don't do that, go watch the '06 Finals.

I also like the Lakers, the Cavs, and the Bulls. I try to watch their games as much as possible, but I haven't seen anything near this in their games. Some big mistakes, but not disproportionally for one team vs the other. I saw a few calls in the closing minutes of the Bulls-Celtics game that were iffy, but they had been calling them all game, on both teams. Consistency is what is lacking from the refs in this series. Well, they are consistently making calls that favor the Nuggets, but other than that, nothing.

[ray_sir_6]

Originally Posted by ray_sir_6

I just watched that play, and, conveniently, they did a replay immediately before Melo attempted the same shot. The similarities are uncanny, and how Wright didn't get a foul from the Birdman making contact is BS. SAME EXACT SHOT, SAME EXACT CONTACT...yet only one whistle. Even behind 15 they can't drop the bias.

Originally Posted by ray_sir_6

If the refs had called the offensive foul on Melo for driving his shoulder into Wright (11:04 left, 4th qtr), that could have had the same results, with a minimum of 3pts (for the "running jump shot" that Carmelo made uncontested, since Wright was now sitting with the cameramen, and the T that Carlisle got hit with for screaming about it) swing, and possibly a 6pt swing if the Mavs went down and scored after getting the ball. They were behind by 5 at the time.

Hmmm....seems a Nuggets fan isn't so blind that they could see the issue as well:

Y'all have to admit, we are really getting some calls at really important moments

Melo could've easily been called for two offensive fouls early in the quarter which would've been a big swing, instead one is a defensive foul and the other is where Carlisle gets T'd

That shot by Wright where Birdman hit him in midair was exactly the same as Melo's shot where Hollins got whistled, but no call on Birdman

I mean, we really are playing well int he 4th, but I feel a little dirty

http://nuggets.proboards.com/index.c...=14773&page=11

They seem to have a serious hard-on for tremaine as well.

http://nuggets.proboards.com/index.c...=14751&page=12

Oh well, was bored so I decided to see what was going on over on the Nuggets forums. They seem pretty laid back, basicly just glad they won, and lots of praise for Dirk.

[SleepyT]

tremaine is a bitter AI fan. He takes his agression out on Denver because they sent AI packing.

The thing is, AI was ok with the trade. tremaine is not for some reason. Don't get sucked into his spewage.

[esoteric562]

hopes that josh's ankle is ready for game 3

[dNG]

Originally Posted by tremaine

I'll be dangerously honest and admit my primary objective in this game besides rooting for the Mavs was to decide once and for all whether the Nuggets pose any serious threat to the Lakers.

Note: I am NOT a fan of the Lakers, I'm not really a fan of any one team anymore. I'm just a fan of basketball, and of basketball being different from football, that is it.

The Nuggets are winning on the cheap and they are winning without any offensive scheme other than easy, cheap points off fast breaks. This is exactly like a football team relying on it's defense to get some stops (yielding better field position) and a turover or two or three. Then the offense of that football team has very little to do to win the game. Many, many games in football are won this way, maybe as many as 1/3 of them.

Although everyone knows defending is more intense and more important in the playoffs than it is in the regular season, it is not true that Championships or Conference finals have been won to any extent at all by teams doing what the Nuggets are doing. Were the Nuggets to beat both the Mavs and the Lakers, it would truly be a science fiction type of event.

So all the Lakers (or the Mavs, still) have to do is to man up and take care of the ball. This is not as difficult for a team to do as it may seem from watching the Nuggets games lately. The Nuggets have temporarily created an alternate universe here, where basketball is different than in our universe.

So I am confident that even if the Mavs keep turning it over, even if the Mavs keep being heavily victimized by the free points of the fast break, and even if the Mavs keep being hammered by the referees, so they lose this series 4-1 or whatever, that the Lakers will defeat the Nuggets and restore my faith in basketball.

Go Mavs, you have a good, quality team regardless of what happens in this series. Your team looked great for three quarters (again) and then the 4th turned goofy and didn't seem like basketball anymore.

I'm not sure, but I think even Mavs Fans agree that this is bullshit.

1) If you think that fast breaks are cheap, then my friend, you do not know basketball. Don't tell me that you don't know that fast breaks take a lot of qualities, such as speed n' hustle, offensive awareness, passing, team work, athleticism, and defense to begin with.

2) WTF are you talking about? There's nothing such as teams winning by "what the Nuggets are doing", you want a championship, you go out there and win games, instead of whining around like a queer. The Nuggets are utilizing their strengths, and exploiting the other teams' weakness inorder to win. That's not cheap, that's how you win games. If they force a turnover, what are they supposed to do? Wait for their opponent to get back on defense or try to score while the other team is still out of complete orientation? If you choose the former over the latter, then again my friend, you don't know basketball.

3) Yeah, the Mavs were just giving the ball to the Nuggets, I mean why would they want to take care of the ball? It's just the second round of the playoffs... Dude, "taking care of the ball" is nothing easy at all, under a defense like Denver's. It's easier said than done to "Man up and take care of the ball".. and lol, a "an alternate universe", what's your problem? Most retarded statement I've heard in a while, made it hard for me to continue taking you seriously.

4) "Even"?, there is no "even" here, fast breaks and free throws are a constant part of basketball.. and to the referees part, stop whining. And if the Nuggets win 4-1, and lose to the Lakers, what does that have to do with your faith in basketball? Can someone tell what this guy's problem is?

5) Let's take a look at game 2, first quarter: 30-22 Nuggets, second quarter: 33-28 Mavericks, third quarter: 28-28. Nuggets win even if you put out the 4th, failure. Also, the 4th quarter is a normal part of the game.

[mavs777]

Tremaine is a troll not worth anyones time