Style without substance

[DTL]

Style Without Substance
By: Maven, bskball.com
May 12 2002

The difference between the Sacramento Kings and the Dallas Mavericks became even clearer in the last two games at the AAC. The Mavericks, while immensely talented, could not and did not make defensive stops when they mattered most. The Kings did. And now, with Sacramento up 3-1 in the series, the Mavericks are left pondering what happened and why they couldn’t take advantage just when they had the Kings down and almost out.

Game 3 at Dallas: Tied at halftime in a competitive game, the Kings had lost Doug Christie to injury and he did not return to start the third quarter. Then Stojakovic goes down, carried off the court with an ankle injury. With two of Sacramento’s best players out (Peja for offense, and Christie for defense), the Mavericks could not capitalize. Mike Bibby continued to burn the Mavericks in the third. Christie miraculously comes back after learning his teammate cannot return, and the Mavericks and Kings are tied going into the final period. About midway through the fourth, the Kings look wiped, tired and walking slowly up the court after chasing the Mavericks for nearly 42 minutes. Yet the Mavericks can’t find a way to put them away. They couldn’t stop Christie (who finished perfect from the field), they couldn’t stop Bibby, and they couldn’t slow down Webber. The Mavericks give one away at home.

Game 4 at Dallas: It gets worse. With Peja Stojakovic still out with the ankle injury, the Mavericks come out strong and hold on for a 7-point lead going into the fourth quarter. Chris Webber fouls out with 4:45 remaining, and Vlade Divac follows. With the Kings inside scoring threat eliminated, and three of their top scorers out of the game, the Mavericks STILL cannot hold off Sacramento. Bobby Jackson ignites after a slow start, and no one on the Mavericks seems to understand how perilously close they are to losing the game. Bibby makes the big play to send the game to overtime, and then the game winner. In the end, it’s the guards (Jackson and Bibby), going in for uncontested layups, who the Mavericks don’t stop. Steve Nash has a nightmare game (forget the good shooting – 9 turnovers?!) and the Mavericks lack of D and the Kings fine defense on Nash and Nowitzki make all the difference.

Here is the problem for the Mavericks in those three losses. Their successes on the defensive end during the season have come courtesy of Najera, Griffin and Buckner. And injury has zapped the effectiveness of two of them. Newmann, while having some decent defensive outings earlier in the season, had been a non-factor for so long, rust was evident. Especially in a 38 year-old body, sitting out games does not a sharp player make. Eduardo Najera has been obviously hampered by a broken thumb, unable to snag rebounds and loose balls he would normally get. The hustle was still there, but the adroitness was not. Adrian Griffin, bothered by lingering back problems, also showed rust in his game. He was not as quick, not as in rhythm, and in the end, not on the court much. Greg Buckner, for his part, did a decent job in the first three games, but could not fulfill the defensive assignment asked from him. Buckner’s size and limited quickness makes him less effective against guards, yet he was being asked to cover Bibby and Jackson for stretches. Griffin, at full strength, could have. Buck can’t.

Second-guessing the coaching. Should Nellie have played Griffin and Buckner more? In retrospect, it is easy to say yes, not knowing whether it would have affected the outcome. But Nelson was more worried about Dallas’ ability to put the ball in the hoop, than with defense. He’s bought into the concept that the Mavericks could outrun and outscore any team, including the Kings. While that has held true much of the time during the regular season, the stats showed otherwise. In my last column, I broke down the numbers in the Mavericks wins versus losses. When the opponent grabbed more rebounds and shot a better field goal percentage than the Mavs, Dallas was only 3-16. In three of the four games this series, Sacramento both outrebounded the Mavericks and connected on a higher percentage of shots. Can you guess which three games those were?

IS IT OVER? The Mavericks are faced with having to win three consecutive games (and two at Arco) to win this series. Their defensive aces are hurting, Nowitzki continues to struggle (despite a more aggressive outing in Game 4), and the Kings have been successful in limiting Nash in three of the four games. The Kings, meanwhile, go back home for game 5 full of confidence, and looking to get guys some healing time before facing the winner of the Spurs-Lakers series. Everything is stacked against Dallas. That being said, these Mavericks have shown an amazing amount of heart and resiliency over the last two years, so look for the underdog to take the next game. But the bottom line is this: the Mavericks may have provided an entertaining postseason, but without their core of defensive aces at full strength, they are more style than substance.

[Drbio]

But the bottom line is this: the Mavericks may have provided an entertaining postseason, but without their core of defensive aces at full strength, they are more style than substance.

Bah! If the Mavs are only style, then explain Finley, Dirk, and Nash. Three style guys who every team in the league would die for. This is overreaction to a poor series. it's one freaking series. The Mavs wer esubstance all damn season long and now because they go down 3-1 they suck all of a sudden? No way. This is a solid core of people who will be consistent winners for many years. I agree that Buck et al being 100% healthy would have been nice, but to categorize the Mavs as nothing but style is pure crapola.

[MavKikiNYC]

At the start of the season, I e-mailed several sportswriters at Dallas newspapers for their take on the Mavericks' prospects for this season. The general view was that a successful season for the Mavericks would be to get back to the second round and play more comepetitively than they did last year against the Spurs. They've done that, whether they go out of the 2nd round 1-4, 2-4, or if by chance they manage to extend the series to 7 games.

Certainly the next thing to think about is what the team has to do to improve enough to legitimately challenge for a Western Conference championship--not just be competitive, but to actually have a realistic chance to win.

Part of the improvement the Mavs are addressing this year, by having Fin, Nash and Dirk play together and experience playoff basketball and playoff failure. This kind of experience is unavoidable--only Magic was able to step right in and win a championship; Bird didn't; MJ didn't.

Beyond experience, the Mavs have some personnel issues to address. They have to get a bigger, stronger inside presence who can both defend and attack the basket down low. LaFrentz is NOT that player. In order for Dirk to be fully effective offensively as an outside/inside player, the Mavs have to have someone who represents a credible threat inside the paint--not someone who can hit the 15-18 footer or the occcasional 3-pointer, but someone who can force play down low, who represents a threat to stuff the ball or draw a foul. LaFrentz simply isn't athletic or skilled enough.

Finally, Nellie has to change the Mavs' style of play . I respect Nellie's basketball smarts and experience, and I can only give him the benefit of the doubt about his use of gimmicks. It's pretty widely acknowledged that his basketball genius lies in getting more production out of a lesser collection of talent, and I agree with the popular analysis that his obsession with gimmmicks or unconventional tactics comes from having played from a position of lesser talent. But with Fin, Nash and Dirk, the Mavs are at the point of being equal to all but a couple of teams in terms of talent, and in the future, the best chance to win is going to be versatile, disciplined, intelligent basketball, not the one-dimensional, all-out, all-offense/no defense style of play that we've come to know and love as "Scatterfuck".

Style over substance? The Mavs wide-open play has been both their style AND their substance this year, representing both the team's identity AND the best way for them to win against most teams. Healthy or not (Nájera, Buck, Grif), the Mavs weren't going to dominate anyone defensively this season. The best they could've hoped for was to slow the other teams' stars down enough to make it easier to outscore them. Obviously this worked well enough against most teams on most nights--well enough for a team-record 57 wins.

But winning in the playoffs, which is where they are on the learning curve, is a different proposition. The Mavs' fundamental weakenesess are being exposed to the harsh glare of playoff klieg lights. The Mavs HAVE been entertaining this season, and have played at a high level for pretty much the entire season. Whether or not they move closer toward challenging for a championship depends on how they address personnel issues and style of play. I'm less inclined to criticize Nellie's coaching decisions in this Kings series than to question the mid-season personnel acquisitions. (From my POV, the Mavs were playing at a disadvantage to the Kings going in to this series.) If Nellie persists in playing small, fast and loose when he has the opportunity to remold the team, then he'll be fair game for criticism. For now, I'm willing to say that he was doing pretty much the best he could with the talent he had.

Tonight's game presents the team with a chance to 'exceed expectations'. They've done what they were realistically expected to do. The pressure is off. Like Dirk stepped up last year in the famous Tooth Game, when the series was lost but he refused to lie down and just take it--will the team collectively pull together and refuse to concede for one more game? Whether they win or not, will they play hard and leave everything on the floor? That's what people who've followed the team this year can look for. The learning curve is much steeper here and progress will come in much smaller increments.

[Bayliss]

<< But with Fin, Nash and Dirk, the Mavs are at the point of being equal to all but a couple of teams in terms of talent, and in the future, the best chance to win is going to be versatile, disciplined, intelligent basketball, not the one-dimensional, all-out, all-offense/no defense style of play that we've come to know and love as &quot;Scatterfuck&quot;. >>



I think I coined that phrase. If not then I use clusterfuck. Either way I hate it when the Mavs play that.