Reply With Quote
Glad to see you back. I think the Spurs won with defense and poise -- it reminded me a lot of the games between the Spurs and Lakers in 2001 and 2002 particularly. The Spurs had a habit of running out and getting ahead of the Lakers in those games, but when it mattered, the Lakers would turn up the defensive pressure and rely on their championship mettle to put the Spurs away. I think the Mavs got a taste of that.
I'd argue that they aren't the same old Spurs when Duncan plays like that. In past years, if Duncan struggled like he did last night, the Spurs had little to no chance. If two of their three best players were struggling, the Spurs were blown out. Now, however, the Spurs are less Duncan-reliant and have found ways to exploit the advantages that they gain by Duncan's mere presence. Ultimately, I think that's what makes this team different in the last couple of seasons from the earlier versions of the Duncan Spurs.
The Spurs bench might not have the athleticism and explosion that the Mavs bench seems to have, but it does have a ton of savvy and lots of experience, which tends to even the playing field in playoff-type games.
I think you're right about the Spurs team defense. I still think that the Pistons are as good or better defensively because they are such great man-to-man defenders across the board. The Spurs rely on help to clean up mistakes in man defense; the Pistons rarely make those mistakes and don't need as much help (though Ben Wallace might be the best help defender in basketball -- certainly the best among bigs).
But, you've recognized the thing that has made the Spurs contenders year-in-and-year-out during the Popovich era. I looked at this number a couple of years ago and haven't done it since, but at that point, the number of times the Spurs had been blown out (losses by 15 or more) under Pop was miniscule. In real terms, that stat means that the Spurs are in virtually every game that they lose and give themselves a chance to win those games. That happens because defense rarely takes nights off. If you can defend, you can stay in almost every game, and that's what the Spurs have managed to do for the last 10 years or so.
Which is precisely why I think the Spurs accomplished something important last night. The win was important for seeding purposes, but the placement of some doubt in the minds of the Mavericks is part of the growth process towards the playoffs. The Spurs did that last year with Phoenix (particularly coming from 17 down in the 4th at Phoenix to win in OT). I don't think the Mavericks are a defeated group, but I do think there have to be some doubts.
True, in a sense, but most of his scoring came against guys not named Bowen. He had 23 points, but 7 of those came on free throws he got in drawing fouls on Ginobili (twice) and on Parker (behind the arc). Dirk also got a jumper in a scramble situation and had an uncontested put-back of an offensive rebound. I haven't broken down a tape or anything, but my math says that he got no more than 12 against Bowen, which is a remarkable effort by Bruce -- remarkable except that it's the second time this season that he's done that.
I thought both Parker and Bowen played better all-around games than Dirk.
In other words, officials shouldn't let Bowen play any defense because, after all, he's Dirk -- he's reinventing basketball. Dirk could have changed that. He could have tried to post Bowen up; he could have tried to attack Bowen off the dribble. Dirk played passively and passive players don't get calls in big games.
That sounds like a lot of whining to me. Dirk got plenty of respect on the two consecutive calls he drew on Manu, but mentioning that would hurt your argument. What would be satisfactory -- should Dirk shoot 20 free throws a night as a demonstration that he is respected? If he chooses to hang out on the perimeter and shoot jumpers all night long, he's not going to get to the line, particularly when a defender like Bowen doesn't buy the upfake and maintains his defensive position.
Besides, I had two Mavericks fans tell me last night that Dirk gets questionable calls because he's an elite player, and in the same breath tell me that Duncan doesn't get the same calls because he's not an elite player. Curious statement, I thought.
If Bowen was dirty, you might have a point. He's physical and he's a great positional defender. Both of those things muck up finesse shooters who seek to find rhythm and space to score. Bowen affords them neither, which is why he's the best perimeter defender in the league. If Dirk attacked Bowen, he might get some calls; but he'd also risk being called for charges. And I'm not sure that AJ can teach Dirk that, when Dirk seemingly hasn't learned that yet in his career. If AJ can do in one month what no coach has been able to do in 7 or 8 years, I'd think AJ would be better served to devote that gift to teaching Dirk to play better man defense or teaching Dirk how to aggressively post smaller players to take advantage of a mismatch. Those would be far better uses of that skill.
And besides, it's not as if Dirk never throws an elbow out to create space for himself; it's not as if Dirk never swipes through defenders to gain position; and it's not as if Dirk never flops in an effort to draw calls. Dirk is hardly some airy angel.
If Stackhouse is worried about retribution against Horry, the Spurs have won that battle already.
I think Dallas was fortunate to be up big in the 1st quarter, given the number of layups and dunks that the Spurs missed early. The Mavs shot well for most of the first half, while the Spurs hovered around 30%, largely because of the missed bunnies and point-blank shots. The Spurs were able to get to the rim and make things happen, but couldn't convert. I didn't see that as evidence of great defensive effort by the Mavericks -- it was more a laxness on the part of the Spurs. As the margin narrowed, I had the sense that the Spurs would make a run at some point and create some distance, and figured it would then be a matter of maintaining the gap. They started to convert the good looks they were getting and then hit some tougher shots in the 4th to seal the deal. The Spurs (Nazr Mohammed, in particular) were able to take advantage of some doubles on Tim to get scores, and Parker played a great 3rd quarter. Finley found some motivation in the 4th and kept the Spurs comfortable for the rest of the night.
I don't think the Spurs needed that game to gain momentum; I think it was more important to cast some doubt into the Mavericks' minds and to clinch no worse than a tie in the head-to-head series. If the 2nd tiebreaker is still conference record, the Spurs are now 5 up in that category, which makes them very hard to catch for the #1 seed. That part was big. The Spurs, however, have been playing noticably more inspired ball since the All-Star break, as is their annual custom under Popovich, so the notion of gaining some momentum from this particular win is somewhat fanciful.
Still, I thought the game was a pretty good barometer of where these teams are and there is enough there to suggest that each has some room for improvement. I'd argue that the Spurs ceiling is still higher, given the relatively poor performances turned in by both Ginobili and Duncan, but time will tell.
Please don't be shy to come around between now and 4/7, though.
