Mavs-Timberwolves Game Two Thread - Dallas-Mavs.com Forums

MFFL · 04-24-2002, 06:57 AM

This is a VERY important game in the series. The Mavs can either put the series out of reach for the Wolves or they can give away home court. The Mavs need to come out firing on all cyclinders tonight.

On a personal note - I'M GOING TO THE GAME (thanks grbh!)

MavKikiNYC · 04-24-2002, 07:01 AM

All the other series are 1-1 splits so far.

Drbio · 04-24-2002, 07:21 AM

The Mavs go up 2-0 IMHO.

Mavs - 111
twolves - 102

#41 · 04-24-2002, 10:08 AM

You lucky SOB watch the game 2night and I can just look at the stats and reports 2morrow...

I hope the Mavs can take this one, too, and kill the Wolves in 3 (of course...)

I pretty sure about the Mavs winning 2night with the 3rd best playoff scorer and rebounder in their team [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/img]

Mavs 106 - Wolves 101

Dooby · 04-24-2002, 10:12 AM

Remember guys, the game is on 21 locally and not Turner.

I predict the ole victory as well.

I think it is funny that local media is calling this a must-win for the T-wolves when we were down 0-2 just a year ago.

grbh · 04-24-2002, 10:57 AM

Your welcome MFFL.

I think this game will be decided early. Garnnet has been called out by everyone in the media, and likely by his team as well. He will come out of the gates strong. If the Mavs can hit shots early and take an 8-10 point lead by the second quarter I think the T-Wolves pack it up.

DTL · 04-24-2002, 11:15 AM

I think the new Defense Mavs will hold the Wolves to below 100 again. And Dirk, Fin, Nash, and NVE will provide enough points to carry us to a second win. No Chalupas tonight though.

Mavs 96
Wolves 91

Dooby · 04-24-2002, 02:39 PM

I am a little concerned with the Mavs' playoff defense. The T-wolves' losing score was good enough to win half of the playoff games played so far.

Hoopsmeister · 04-24-2002, 02:53 PM

<< I am a little concerned with the Mavs' playoff defense. The T-wolves' losing score was good enough to win half of the playoff games played so far. >>

And the Mavs winning score was good enough to blow out half the playoff games so far. The basic measure of a defence is not fg%, points against, or whatever. Its 'does the defense keep the opponent's score lower than yours'. The Mavs succeeded in that.

Murphy3 · 04-24-2002, 02:58 PM

an interesting thing about basketball..if two teams shoot with alot of time left on the shot clock and shoot 45%..
they'll probably score more than a team that shoots with little time on the shot clock left but also shoots around 45%

one reason mavs give up alot of points is because of this...
much like the first game of the playoffs

nekked · 04-24-2002, 03:47 PM

i agree, murph. i pointed out in a previous thread that, although the mavs pts. against is bad, alot of their team defensive stats - such as opp. fg%, steals, etc. - are middle-of-the-road. are they good defensively, nope. but i don't think they're terrible - probably average. i think that with the right lineup combo out there and the right motivation (which the playoffs should be), this team can be pretty good defensively. the question has to be - is it worth sacraficing the offensive scheme to step up the defense with lineup changes. i say, overall, no, but in certain situations, putting different combos of griff, najera, newman, buck, etc. out there to get a big stop in late game situations should be considered.

by the way, i can't get a feel for this game at all, except that if the mavs get up by double-digits in the first half, it should be over.

Dooby · 04-24-2002, 04:16 PM

Sigh.

For the sake of argument, let us say that some people believe that there is a difference between playoff basketball and regular season basketball, including, inter alia, a difference in defensive intensity.

Now let us also say that such differences may show up in game statistics, including, but not limited to, points scored and points allowed.

So, if the scores in the playoffs were lower than they are in a traditional regular season game, that might evidence a difference in defensive intensity, which in turn, would show that there may be a difference between playoff basketball and regular season basketball.

My concern is that a high losing score by a mavericks opponent in a playoff game may indicate that the Mavs still need to improve defensively. My actual concern is that there are teams that will be able to dictate the pace of a game rather than allow the Mavs to do so. In which case, my concern is valid. I seem to recall a Miami-Dallas game where they played very physical defense and the Mavericks lost.

I don't understand why some of you seem to be so sensitive about that.

Oh, and you cannot judge defense solely by the ability to score more points than your opponent. There is a difference between being "good enough" and "good". I don't think you can win an NBA championship without being "good" defensively.

kg_veteran · 04-24-2002, 04:31 PM

<< I think it is funny that local media is calling this a must-win for the T-wolves when we were down 0-2 just a year ago. >>

I agree that it does seem odd, but I think they're right from the standpoint that teams down 0-2 have only come back a few times in NBA history, so in reality, it probably is must-win. Beating the Mavs 3 times in a row doesn't seem like a realistic prospect for the Wolves...

Murphy3 · 04-24-2002, 04:45 PM

a question dooby

didn't the mavs just hold the t-wolves below what they held their average regular season opponent?

could this be an indicator of better defense in the post season?

Hoopsmeister · 04-24-2002, 05:02 PM

<<

<< I think it is funny that local media is calling this a must-win for the T-wolves when we were down 0-2 just a year ago. >>

I agree that it does seem odd, but I think they're right from the standpoint that teams down 0-2 have only come back a few times in NBA history, so in reality, it probably is must-win. Beating the Mavs 3 times in a row doesn't seem like a realistic prospect for the Wolves... >>

Well, the Mavs coming back 3 times in a row over Utah wasn't a very realistic prospect either.

But you also have to factor in the teams. Last year, it was the first time these Mavs had ever been to playoffs. Everyone from the owner down to the fan was just happy to be there. The season had already been a big success and no one expected the Mavs to get out of the first round. So there was no pressure. Even 2 down, our guys could just go play.

The T-Wolves, on the other hand, are now in their 6th first round in 6 years. Not many people expect them to get out of it, but if they don't no one, from the owner down to the fan, will consider this season a success. The pressure on all their team is immense. Which means that if they lose tonight then their best case scenario is playing 3 games with that 6 hanging over their heads.

Hoopsmeister · 04-24-2002, 05:17 PM

Dooby, if you are saying that you don't think the Mavs defense is good enough to win the championship, I'm not sensitive about that. I personally question the 'defense wins championships' canard, but I understand why so many people believe it. And if that's the case, the Mavs defense is certainly not good enough to win a championship.

My objection to what you were saying was to the scale. The Mavs defense at the end of the season and in Game 1 were clearly an improvement over what came before. Is it improved enough to win a championship? Maybe not. But then the odds against a team out of the playoffs for a decade winning a championship in their 2nd year back in are already extremely long. As a realistic fan, I'm happy to see the defensive improvement and am willing to give them at least until their 3rd year in the playoffs before I start worrying about whether the defense is 'good enough to win a championship' instead of simply 'improving.'

As to the other point, I do disagree strongly with "Oh, and you cannot judge defense solely by the ability to score more points than your opponent. There is a difference between being "good enough" and "good". I don't think you can win an NBA championship without being "good" defensively. "

If your defense is 'good enough' to hold the 4 teams you play in a full championship run to fewer points than you score yourself, then it is good enough to a championship. Whether it is 'good' by some objective standard or not. If I score 100 in every game, my defense only needs to be good enough to hold you to 99 in every game and I will get the championship.

Dooby · 04-24-2002, 05:34 PM

Hoops and Murph, point made. And of course you are right. Does anybody know what our points-against average is post all-star break?

My original point was lost in that my actual fear is that "playoff" basketball clashes with "Mavericks" basketball and that there are teams that will dictate the flow of the game and force the Mavs to slow it down.

One reason I like the 4 seed is that I am confident the Wolves and Kings will allow the Mavs to dictate the pace. The Lakers and Surs and any east team, on the other hand, will try to dictate the flow and slow it down. If we have to play Laker ball, with our defense, we will lose.

Regardless, I hope the Mavs will beat the tar out of the T-wolves.

Hoopsmeister · 04-24-2002, 06:20 PM

I'm not sure about since the all-star break (and I'm not sure how useful that would be given that we have to factor in the Denver acquisitions' adjustment period) but over the last 10 games of the season, the Mavs allowed opponents only 94.7 a game, good for 11th in the NBA.

Given that the Mavs maintained a 102.1 scoring average for the same period and had the second best point differential, that's damn good defense. And for the same period, they held opponents to a .436 shooting percentage, good for the 5th in the league.

I may need to revise my earlier statement. That kind of defense is good enough to win a championship if the Mavs maintain anything that even vaguely resembles their offensive ability.

Dooby · 04-24-2002, 06:33 PM

99.5 points allowed per game with Raef and NVE in the lineup-28th in the league, exactly where they are now.

Hoopsmeister · 04-24-2002, 06:40 PM

<< 99.5 points allowed per game with Raef and NVE in the lineup-28th in the league, exactly where they are now. >>

But as I asked above Dooby, how meaningful is that? That includes all the games where Raef and Van Exel were getting integrated with the team. And given the nature of the systems, it took them longer to get integrated on defense than offense. So the defensive numbers for the first 5 games tell me nothing about what to expect *now*, yet they are in their affecting your averages.

scooterj5 · 04-24-2002, 06:40 PM

Dallas 112
Minne 111

room one twelve where the players dwell

scooterj5 · 04-24-2002, 06:42 PM

I don't see how our style conflicts with playoffs basketball?

As long as we score more than the oponents. we could give up 120 points a game, but who cares if we can get 121. It's just a fresh style of offence... I remember the Lakers won with a similar style.

Plus we have Buckner, Griffin, Najera as our defensive specialists (cough Kobe)

Drbio · 04-24-2002, 07:55 PM

I think that players concentrate more intensely during the playoffs as compared to the regular season since so much more is on the line per game. That translates into better defense (for those who can handle the stress). Not an unreasonable idea.

Remember guys, the game is on 21 locally and not Turner.

It's on Turner in Waco....FYI. Channel 29 on your cable.

nekked · 04-24-2002, 08:08 PM

imo, the more the mavs score in the playoffs, the better. if they're playing 91-88 games (even if they win some), they're gonna end up losing in the long run. that's just not the way the mavs play, nor should it be. of course, they should try to play good defensively, but, if by emphasizing that, they slow the pace down to a 90 pt. per game level, then the mavs have done what each opponent is trying to do to them - keep the scoring down and the pace of the game slower.

they have a better chance of winning a 115-113 game than they do a 95-93 game, no matter the defensive intensity.

Bayliss · 04-24-2002, 08:25 PM

I'm here. Let the fun begin.

Bayliss · 04-24-2002, 08:29 PM

Who wants to listen to Stackhouse?

Put on the Mavs.

Rod1975 · 04-24-2002, 08:30 PM

The Pistons just went up 2-0....The Mavs will do the same.

On a side note: I pay 50 bucks a month to watch digital quality TV on my DSS reciever, blackouts suck.
Now I'm forced to watch the lame local coverage.

Bayliss · 04-24-2002, 08:31 PM

3 posts in a row...

and I really wanted Hubie Brown to call our series and NOT John Thompson.

MavKikiNYC · 04-24-2002, 08:40 PM

It would look too fishy if all the series were 1-1 splits.

Drbio · 04-24-2002, 08:41 PM

It's on!!!!!!

Bayliss · 04-24-2002, 08:41 PM

Goes immediately to Dirk on the blocks. Nice.

Drbio · 04-24-2002, 08:42 PM

Nash got hacked with no call....I hope that isn't a sign of things to come!

Nice follow Finley! Great play Raef....The Mavs look ready to play.

Drbio · 04-24-2002, 08:43 PM

Nesterovic spent 9 seconds in the lane...I counted slowly...that sucks.

Murphy3 · 04-24-2002, 08:44 PM

nash with the first three ball of the game

Bayliss · 04-24-2002, 08:44 PM

Is Thompson an idiot?

Says we don't have a shotblocker... **rolls eyes**

Bayliss · 04-24-2002, 08:45 PM

We are crashing the boards a lot better tonight.

Murphy3 · 04-24-2002, 08:46 PM

damn dirk...bad shot

MavKikiNYC · 04-24-2002, 08:46 PM

Dirk's coldish.

Drbio · 04-24-2002, 08:46 PM

This pace will favor the Mavs eventually.

Murphy3 · 04-24-2002, 08:47 PM

great..dirk's limping