Sonics/Mavs, mmm hmm

In a season with many notable highlights, from keeping their collective foot on the Suns' throat to asserting that it is also appropriately on the same Spurs body part, from Josh Howard's ascendance to the fact that every player has made marked improvements from last year, last night claims it's place amongst such highlights. After all, what does it say about your team when the 10th-11th guy on the bench can come on and put up 34, go 7 of 10 from beyond the arc and still pass up the 11th and 12th such shots when a lane to the basket opens up? And, oh yeah, throw in 7 boards.

Mavs/Bulls, oh well.

Not that they won't lose a few highly competitive, non-stinker games, but I hope that was they only real stinker we see from the Mavs for a while. Pew! It started out somewhat ominously when Josh missed his first 3 jumpers. OK, there weren't all that highly contested, but no biggie. When he started missing those little push shots he always seems to make from the paint, that's when I started to think this game might indeed prove to be the one that would prevent a 14-game win streak (the Kings, Sonics, Grizzlies [2] and Wolves are next, with the only road game being in Memphis). Oh yeah, the Bulls, particularly Ben Gordon, seemed to be hitting every shot the Mavs were missing. All that combined is probably why the game started out 23-6 with barely two minutes to go in the 1st quarter.

Josh never really found his rhythm, going 0-10 and not hitting his first shot until his 13-14th attempt. Stack provided some lift off the bench, helping Dirk keep it as close as possible, within 6 at half. Defense and a couple Dirk 3s got them as close as 79-76, but after that, it was almost as if the defense just gave out under what the offense was doing, or not doing, at the other end.

I saw four things contribute to the loss last night, the least of which was the Bulls defense, which was only marginally better than the Mavs', which itself gave up too many uncontested 3s. Not too much credit can be given to the Bulls D when the Mavs just couldn't hit the broad side of a barn, as my Dad used to say. That contributing factor should have prevented the third; poor shot selection. I was conflicted. As open as they were, my knee-jerk reaction was 'Take it'. It just wasn't their night. The last reason they lost, which was only slightly more relevant than the Bulls D, was some of the shots the Bulls hit. A couple by P.J. Brown stand out. Dirk seemed to be playing good D on him, it's just that a couple of his shots seemed meant to go in.

Just like most of the Mavs shots seemed destined not to.

It's That Time Again

(Originally posted: 11/01/06)
My basketball-sounding-board coworker George told me yesterday he doesn't think the Heat will repeat as N.B.A. Champs this year. If they can't get any more motivated to play than they did last night, when they received their rings, I'd have to agree.

This is what I said to him in response:

They (the Heat) remind me of the 91 redskins. I guess it's the age, and at that I can only think of Mark Rypien. But I agree. I just hate (strong word) that it can't be said anymore that multiple All-Stars on one team (after seeing it tried in Houston and in L.A.) don't work. Damn. Then, who wins the east?

Detroit? Doubt it, not after Wallace's departure. Even though Nazr is a bit better on offense (if only by default), the drop off in defense, while not precipitous, overwhelms that aspect.Cleveland? Maybe, but I wouldn't’t put money on it. If Varejao continues to improve, and Hughes and Ilgauskas can stay healthy, they'll be up there.Chicago? I'd put them at least up with the previous three.New Jersey? See last remark. Kristc should get better. Probably depends on Kidd's health, age.Orlando might be a sleeper.

The West:It's kinda funny when I remember McGrady has never made it out of the first round. I'm not sure I would include them amongst the top four: Dallas, S.A., Phoenix and L.A.C. McGrady's health problems seem to have been the non-contact variety, and that doesn't sound promising.The Mavs are hearing, and will no doubt continue to hear, how few have lost in the finals and then gone back to win. True, but 3 of the most recent examples had to face the Shaq/Kobe Lakers (the Nets) and the Michael Jordan Bulls (the Jazz and TrailBlazers). Is there any team out there that compares to either of those three teams? They improved over the summer just how a team in their position should, with tweaks. I would bet on them winning 60+ games this year. I wouldn't be surprised if they started the season like Detroit started last year. Only, the Mavs would not have dragging them down the same thing i.e. new coach, a philosophical shift and some consequential conflict.
The Spurs are healthier if only counting Duncan (save for Frenchie's recently sprained ankle). I just hope they don't have to rely too much on their bench. As Horry said, they're "an old athletic".
Will there be as many balls to go around in Phoenix as there have been $$s? No wonder there was talk about trading Marion. I have a gut feeling they are bloated. I think in a rematch, they lose a playoff series to…The Clippers. If Livingston is as good as I read (I don’t remember seeing too much of him last year), they could wind up in the conference finals.

Uptime for Downtime

(Originally posted: 12/06/06)
A couple thoughts after watching last night's Mavs/Nets game.

One, are the refs calling traveling particularly tight this year? It seems tightest when a player fakes, either with the ball or his body (or both), one way and goes the other. It has gotten to the point that, even though I'm skeptical the player took an extra step, I know he's going to get called. It just does not look like the pivot foot has been lifted. I need to check the rules (heh, yeah right, whenever I do everything else I need to do).

Two, as entertaining as it is when the Mavs are smoking and raining in shots from all over the place, whether beyond the arc or in the paint, and just befuddling their opponent, I'm more impressed when the get a double-digit win the way they did last night. At first, I didn't think their defense was all that bad (nor the Wizard's all that good) the previous night in D.C. 'The Wizards just can't miss,' I thought. But last night, they looked more aggressive defensively. And Dirk seemed to get more aggressive on the defensive end, particularly on the boards, the more his shots missed. Then, almost as if in payoff, his shots started dropping toward the end of the game, to put the Nets away. In sum, Dirk took over.

Mavs/Pacers, ugh!

That was the kind of game last night that (a) soured me on the NBA and (b) made me feel embarrassed the Mavs won.
Stepping back, it wasn't all that bad of a game. The Mavs stayed in it, although behind, similar to the way they did against the Spurs last Friday. I told my wife that if they could just take the lead, things might fall into place from there and they could bag the game. Well, they did, but didn't. The Pacers did not allow the game to devolve into more than a teeter-totter game of lead changes and ties. That was good.
What was hard to watch was the officiating. Four plays stick out. I'm not sure if it was the play he fouled out on, but when the refs whistled Dampier for pushing O'Neal when they were fighting for a loose ball, I saw little contact. The ref made a bench-press-like signal, I suppose for pushing. Damp's hands appeared to be nowhere around, nor did I see much contact. The second one was that horrible no-call on Stack just below the free throw line. One of the Pacers clearly stopped his follow through. It was obvious in live action. No call.
On the other side, I saw nary a touch on Dirk from O'Neal on that call near the 3-point line. He might have grazed his jersey. Foul. The worst was the call that sent Jason Terry to the line for three free throws. It actually did look like a foul, but what the hell kind of maneuver was that Terry pulled off to sell the call? Like Quinn Buckner, who was the Pacers color commentator and former Mavs coach, said, "Where was he shooting that ball?" He ended up turned completely around as if he was shooting it into the crowd. Regrettably, it reminded me of Schnozz Ginobili.
That's what soured me, the way Dirk and Terry tried to sell those calls. Dirk got a lot of questionable calls and trips to the free throw line, but that phantom foul by O'Neal was the worst.

What Game Were They Watching?? (The Inaugural Post)

Add Bill Raftery to the list that includes Charley Rosen as those whose word I cannot put 100% stock into when it comes to basketball. Yeah, they probably know more than I, but last night's Mavs/Jazz game was no more "great" as the former claimed in the post game show, than Adrian Griffin is a 3-point threat, as latter claimed last year.

Ugh! It was a tough game, I will concede. A good kind to win. But it was sloppy and over-officiated. There were 42 turnovers combined (almost evenly split) and 75 free throws (35 for the Mavs; 40 for the Jazz). There were questionable calls on both sides. Derek Fisher was whistled for two charges that might not otherwise have been cited, particularly the last one against Jason Terry. And the technical and second flagrant on Jerry Stackhouse were laughable. Despite what the two homer Utah announcers said, Jerry Sloan was jawing as much as Stack as Stack was at him. Double-T, at worst. And Stack has an unfortunate habit of being hit with unwarranted flagrants. His foul that took Joe Johnson out of Game 1, and the rest of the playoff series a couple years ago against the Suns comes to mind. Last night, it was his foul on Matt Harpring under the basket. Even the aforementioned homers (who aren't as big homers as Joel Myers and Stu Lantz, who were oblivious to the contact Smush Parker made on Terry's last second drive the other night [That said, I believe it was an acceptable no-call]) saw that one correctly. That first T, and the flagrant from which it resulted, when Stack was trying to clear room between he and Harpring (after which he quickly offered to help Harpring up from the floor), stopped the momentum the Mavs had in building a 7-point 1st quarter lead.

The Mavs continue to impress. They had no business winning here in San Antonio the other night, what with (a) them trying to extend to a 13-game winning streak (b) against a team like the Spurs, (c) on the road, (d) who were trying to avoid a 3-game losing streak themselves. I believe they put their foot on the Spurs throat, if only psychologically. And they darn near pulled out the game in L.A. While their rotations out double teams to 3-point shooters seemed a little slow, said shooters were on that night. There's only so much a team can do faced with a team that's on from the outside. Many Mavs opponents can attest to that. Last night, however, I thought the Mavs had to win so as not to give the Jazz any reason to think they had the Mavs number. They are building a reputation as a team that is never out of a game regardless of the in-game (officiating, quality of the other team) or out-game (streaks on the line, season series records, psychological aspects) circumstances. I was seriously thinking about going to bed mid-game due to my work hours lately and the way the game was going. If anything, they made it hard for me to consider doing so in the future.

While a 3-0 road-trip would have been the best outcome, a 2-1 record, with the wins and loss falling as they did, was the next best thing.

UPDATE: I forgot to mention that I think the reasons the Mavs are winning such games is largely due to Avery's influence. In other words, I think it's mostly coaching. Not in-game, specific-game coaching, but the psyche he has imposed on this team.