2024 Playoffs- 4th Round: Boston Celtics - Dallas Mavericks

[mvossman]

https://x.com/ClutchPoints/status/179763...wcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fhoopshype.com%2Frumors%2F


Is Tatum not a top 5 player in the league? Zach Lowe doesn't think so.

Totally agree.  There is some separation between those 5 and the rest.  There are a lot of guys you could put after those 5 and Tatum does not really separate from that pack.

[RGP1981]

Iztok Franko
@iztok_franko
·
There were 7 teams in the regular season that won 50 games or more: BOS, OKC, DEN, MIN, LAC, NYK, DAL.

OKC had best 13-6 (68.4%) record against 50+ win teams. MIN and MIL were 12-7 (63.1%), BOS 9-6 (60.0%).

DAL is 12-5 (70.5%) in the playoffs, playing just 50+ win teams.

This is nice information to pass time with... but in the Finals it is really meaningless. It all depends on matchups and who can win more of them. The advantage is with the Celtics because they have more two-way power... but we can hope it plays out differently. Two-way power, as in, more defensive pieces to stop the Mavericks' scorers, and more scorers than the Mavericks can hope to fully contain. The Mavs can contain Tatum and Brown with PJW and DJJ, but any one (or two) of White, Jrue or Porky could still go off for 20-30, in addition to what the Jays provide.

[RGP1981]

https://x.com/ClutchPoints/status/179763...wcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fhoopshype.com%2Frumors%2F


Is Tatum not a top 5 player in the league? Zach Lowe doesn't think so.

I don't think Tatum is Top 5 either.

He's really good, like a jack of all trades, and with the physique + athleticism to prosper... but he is not a master of any trades.

[windjc]

This thread sucks. None of you gave the Mavs a chance in 2011. Just go be Celtics fans already.

If the Mavs win I demand each of you that think Boston is all time great come back and proclaim this Mavs team an all-time great.

You won’t though because you are wussies.

[HoosierDaddyKidd]

https://www.nba.com/news/nba-finals-film...kqhh3ln9gd&cid=


How will the C's guard Doncic?

[dirkfansince1998]

https://x.com/TheDunkCentral/status/1797718036184535283

Chandler Parsons says no one likes Kristaps Porzingis in Dallas “They do not like Porzingis in Dallas… Luka did not like playing with him, there is an actual beef there” 

Parsons as a Mavs insider...I guess Rondo wasn't available.

[KillerLeft]

This thread sucks. None of you gave the Mavs a chance in 2011. Just go be Celtics fans already.

If the Mavs win I demand each of you that think Boston is all time great come back and proclaim this Mavs team an all-time great.

You won’t though because you are wussies.

Written by a guy with no time for the Mavs until they're in the WCF. You're addressing fans who are far, far more into the team than you. 

I picked the Mavs in 6, and yes, I do think the realization of that would make them extremely special. I think that BECAUSE I have respect for their finals opponent, and for the opponents they've faced in rounds 1-3. You must not think very much of the Mavs, since you seem to believe what they're accomplishing is easy. 

If they win, we'll all be here, reveling in their accomplishment. If they lose, we won't see you again until a year from now, at the earliest. The people here, even those I disagree with often, are the real Mavs fans.

If all you want to read/hear/surround yourself with is unbridled, non-stop praise for the team you're bandwagoning for, my advice is to stick to college sports. In the pros, every team pays their players. They're ALL good. (lol, I forgot that college players are getting paid now, too...maybe stick to HS sports?)

[fifteenth]

This thread sucks. None of you gave the Mavs a chance in 2011. Just go be Celtics fans already.

If the Mavs win I demand each of you that think Boston is all time great come back and proclaim this Mavs team an all-time great.

You won’t though because you are wussies.

What tha

This has been one of the most interesting threads I've read in a long time. 

Kudos to all you guys providing good, smart bball talk! I haven't even been able to make it through the whole thread yet. Really great stuff. 

And, hey wind, I don't think you have any idea what we all thought in 2011.

[MaxiThreeba]

Been catching up on this thread.  Some great points made and questions posed throughout.  A few of my scatterbrained thoughts, with SERIOUS small sample size alerts on some of this stuff.

- Regarding trying to draw anything from the one game vs Celtics post deadline moves:

That 6 game stretch was a defensive mess from the Mavs.  During that 1-5 stretch, the Mavs defensive rating was 127.3!  The worst defensive team rating for the season was 119.6 by the Jazz.  The Mavs allowed opponents to shoot 97/230 (42.17%) from three during that stretch.  That goes up to 86/193 (44.56%) if you remove the 76ers 11/37 effort.  Again, the Jazz were the worst in the league here, allowing opponents to shoot 39.5% from three on the season.  For those 6 games, the Mavs looked like not just the worst defense in the NBA this season but maybe the worst defense of all time.  That's my take away from that game.  It was part of a horrific 6 game stretch that was needed for this team to figure things out.  As we all know, they responded with an NBA best 106 defensive rating during their 16-2 run from March 7 to April 10!

- Regarding KP and Horford as shooters:

Someone already mentioned the big man shooters Chet and KAT and what they did (or didn't do) against the Mavs.  Chet went from a 37% 3pt shooter to a 22% 3pt shooter.  KAT went from a 42% 3pt shooter to a 24% 3pt shooter.  These two guys were the biggest drivers of both teams (and their fans) comments about them just missing shots they normally make.  Sure they missed some shots but they also had to deal with PJ quite a bit, especially KAT.  The biggest difference with chasing shooters this series is that PJ is surely going to spend most of his time on Tatum/Brown, and there isn't a true non-shooter on the floor.  Gafford/Lively/Maxi have to be big time on the defensive end and getting to the glass.  This is a really tough draw for Gafford defensively but I think you just have to feel out every game and see if Horford/KP are hitting from deep.  Horford is 21-63 from deep in the last two series where his volume of 3PA per game has gone from 3 to 7.  He has exploded in two games (Cavs Game 5, Pacers Game 3) and gone a combined 13-25 in those two games.  In the other 7 games of rounds 2 and 3 Horford is 8-38, good for 21% from 3.  

Horford is the one I'm focusing on here because he plays like a straight up stretch big.  In the regular season, 61.5% of his FGAs were 3's.  That's climbed even higher in the postseason with 69% of his FGAs from 3.  KP took 39% of his FGAs from 3 during the regular season.  Hard to look at the 4 games he played against Miami and draw anything, but just for fun he took 55.5% of his FGAs from deep in those 4 games.  KP doesn't want to just stand in the corner and hoist 3's...RICK!

The KP/Horford vs Lively/Gafford/Maxi matchup is one of the most intriguing to me.  I am also interested to see if Kidd sees the value of making KP work against PJ some and the hell that can be.  This would have to come from a PJ/Maxi front court with Maxi taking some Tatum duty to free up PJ.

Regarding the Celtics having 4 guys that can check Luka:

Lu Dort shot 44% from the field and 40% from 3 during the regular season.  Lu Dort shot 47% from the field and 52% from 3 during the first round.  Then Lu Dort had to defend a hobbled Luka for 6 games.  Lu Dort shot 31% from the field and 32% from 3 while dealing with Luka on the other end.  You damn well better give multiple guys the Luka assignment, because if you task one dude with it you are going to feel it on the other end. 

The thing about Luka is he is eventually going to figure our whoever and whatever you throw at him.  It was actually Kyle Anderson in Game 4 that made Luka look the most uncomfortable.  Of course he had that all figured out by Game 5 and went Luklear before they could get to Anderson anyway.

I don't think the Celtics want Tatum on Luka for any extended period of time.  I don't think White is strong enough, but he could definitely be effective in spurts.  I think it comes down to Jrue and Brown.  The Celtics would love to stick White on Kyrie and Jrue on Luka and have that work well enough.  That's the first battle to win.

[Winter]

Jason and Hoops Tonight

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xb-zbEw6NrU

How Jayson Tatum & Celtics offense can ATTACK Luka Doncic & Mavericks

[RasheedsBigWhiteSpot]

I just think its refreshing for the Mavs to not only be in the Finals against a team other than the Heat, but to be going against a storied team like the Celtics.

And Luka gets to play where half off his genetic material came from (Larry Bird's loins. The other half from Magic Johnson's, which were deeply scrubbed.)

But I cannot think of a more apt comparison of Luka's game than Magic and Bird's.

Magic: PG, charismatic, full-court court vision, triple-double machine, overall play style.

Bird: Ridiculous shot making and range, low-post game, underrated defense, TRASH TALKER. White.

[HoosierDaddyKid]

I just think its refreshing for the Mavs to not only be in the Finals against a team other than the Heat, but to be going against a storied team like the Celtics.

And Luka gets to play where half off his genetic material came from (Larry Bird's loins.  The other half from Magic Johnson's, which were deeply scrubbed.)

But I cannot think of a more apt comparison of Luka's game than Magic and Bird's.

Magic: PG, charismatic, full-court court vision, triple-double machine, overall play style.

Bird: Ridiculous shot making and range, low-post game, underrated defense, TRASH TALKER. White.

We all know Bird was white, a shit talker, great passer, and un-athletic. Just like Luka, so I don't know why that point had to be made. Luka is a much better deep shooter than Bird though IMO. Bird is probably his best comp. Now he has to win titles like him.

[windjc]

3-point shooting is going to decide it from a Celtics perspective. If they reach their regular season averages (16.5 made 3s. Shooting 38.8%) the Mavs are in a rough spot.
But they are down to 14.6 made 3s on 36.8% shooting in the playoffs. Celtics had a losing record when they made less than 13 threes in the regular season.

Written by a guy with no time for the Mavs until they're in the WCF. You're addressing fans who are far, far more into the team than you. 

I picked the Mavs in 6, and yes, I do think the realization of that would make them extremely special. I think that BECAUSE I have respect for their finals opponent, and for the opponents they've faced in rounds 1-3. You must not think very much of the Mavs, since you seem to believe what they're accomplishing is easy. 

If they win, we'll all be here, reveling in their accomplishment. If they lose, we won't see you again until a year from now, at the earliest. The people here, even those I disagree with often, are the real Mavs fans.

If all you want to read/hear/surround yourself with is unbridled, non-stop praise for the team you're bandwagoning for, my advice is to stick to college sports. In the pros, every team pays their players. They're ALL good. (lol, I forgot that college players are getting paid now, too...maybe stick to HS sports?)

Last time I looked being a good fan didn’t mean overrating your opponent at any cost.  Not you, but several others on here are acting like this Boston team is some all time great. This Boston team most likely would not have won the West.

Boston can win but it’s not because they are great. 

Dallas can win too. But it’s not because sometimes upsets happen or “matchups”. 

The best team will win this series but won’t be an all time great.

[SleepingHero]

Last time I looked being a good fan didn’t mean overrating your opponent at any cost.  Not you, but several others on here are acting like this Boston team is some all time great. This Boston team most likely would not have won the West.

Boston can win but it’s not because they are great. 

Dallas can win too. But it’s not because sometimes upsets happen or “matchups”. 

The best team will win this series but won’t be an all time great.

Boston is 76-20 so far including regular season and playoffs. Since the merger only 6 teams have reached those marks. 83' 76ers,  86' Celtics, 16' and 17' Warriors, and the 96', and 97' Bulls. That alone puts them in elite conversation. Especially because save the 2016 Warriors, all those teams won the championship.

Boston is as elite as they come statistically. They are great. You are severely underrating them as an opponent. Blind homerism is endearing but doesn't really reflect reality. Nor does it mean you are a bigger Mavs fan. I'd argue surface level fandom usually falls into being blind homerism because those are the fans that can't really add much to the conversation.
 
Moving on.....

I've been so busy this last week at work its been tough to read the whole thread so my apologies if I repeat the same talking points. 

So far in my stat crunching I've been trying to look for trends. Boston did not lose a whole lot but when they did, the one thing that stood out was their 3pt shooting. If they shot 40% from 3, they were 38-1 in the regular season. If they shot below 33% from 3, they were 6-11 (make it 9-12 if you include the playoffs so far). 

Prong #1: Keeping them off the 3pt line and forcing them into tough shots is a huge key. Boston won 3 grueling games that qualified for that below ~33ish% 3pt stat in Indiana, but truthfully Indiana didn't have the right closers. They had the right gameplan, and that's why every game of theirs was close. If the Mavs can force Boston into tough 3s, I trust Kyrie and Luka to finish the game better than Andrew Nembhard and Tyrese Haliburton. But that's a very tall task to ask. The only other game they won shooting that badly was agains the Skeleton Miami Heat with no Jimmy and Roizer. They shot 29% and they still won by 10. The lone loss came from 25 point blowout by the Cavs.


Prong #2: Celtics statistically were better overall when KP was off the court, although their defense was slightly better with him on. When he's on the court the Celtics almost play exclusively in a drop coverage. We're used to watching KP play in such a coverage. It has benefits shrinking the paint but it falls apart when elite offensive players get to their spots with little resistance. Luka's health and ability to attack this should tell us pretty quickly how many minutes KP can play. I was so confident against Zubac that Luka would eat him alive like he did the first 2 times against the Clippers. This year not so much. If Luka can play KP off the court by relentlessly attacking him, Boston will be forced to run with Horford way more. That is huge. Celtics have been very cagey on KP's health too. I don't see why he wouldn't be good to go after having almost 2 months off from a calf strain, but it is Porzingis we're talking about here. If KP isn't ready to go then the Celtics have to rely on Horford to deal with Gafford+Lively for 48 minutes and that is a very tall order. 


Prong #3: Boston had the least amount of doubles on opponents so far this post season. Only have doubled 1% of their defensive possessions. Could be argued that they haven't had to double, but something to keep in mind. If Boston chooses to play Luka and Kyrie straight up then all the pressure really falls onto PJ and DJJ. I assume that Boston are going to key in on Luka's late passes to the corner. Staying attached and not doubling basically takes away that look. It forces Luka to be an iso scorer even more than usual and stagnates the offense. If DJJ and PJ are hitting their shots then Boston will be punished quite quickly and will all but make them send extra help.  Again that's a rough thing to ask for these dudes to do given the environment and situation. If they can't score then the Mavs will have to start forcing the tempo and get into transition as much as possible. 


Prong #4: Unfortunately Boston enjoys that style of play. They are very much like Minnesota where their defense allows them to get easy transition buckets. Limiting turnovers and making sure possessions end on a single attempt will signficantly hurt Boston's momentum. It is key that Lively+Gafford+Maxi+PJ  are ready to box out and make sure Boston can't get rhythm shots off of long rebounds. Luka and Kyrie will have to do everything they can to limit turnovers. 


So far this is my read. I need to listen to more Celtic podcasts to see what they are thinking. Overall this is the toughest test yet for the Mavs. Boston is basically all the terrifying aspects of Minnesota but more talented 1-5. 

As always though I'm biased. If Luka does Luka things and Kyrie catches fire, Boston is in trouble. Mavs in 6.

[RasheedsBigWhiteSpot]

We all know Bird was white, 

We did? Hell, most people didn't know Hartenstein was black until last week.

[BoredAssistant]

Speaking of people that never add anything to the conversation, I found this:

https://youtu.be/R_b9T-wyQW0?si=_D8t_uHRMvC1_302

Mannix says "The Celtics have been privately optimistic about what they have seen from Porzingis over the last few days to a week" (@ 1:30), which I'm sure many here anticipated anyway after his long layoff.

[windjc]

Boston is 76-20 so far including regular season and playoffs. Since the merger only 6 teams have reached those marks. 83' 76ers,  86' Celtics, 16' and 17' Warriors, and the 96', and 97' Bulls. That alone puts them in elite conversation. Especially because save the 2016 Warriors, all those teams won the championship.

Boston is as elite as they come statistically. They are great. You are severely underrating them as an opponent. Blind homerism is endearing but doesn't really reflect reality. Nor does it mean you are a bigger Mavs fan. I'd argue surface level fandom usually falls into being blind homerism because those are the fans that can't really add much to the conversation.
 
Moving on.....

I've been so busy this last week at work its been tough to read the whole thread so my apologies if I repeat the same talking points. 

So far in my stat crunching I've been trying to look for trends. Boston did not lose a whole lot but when they did, the one thing that stood out was their 3pt shooting. If they shot 40% from 3, they were 38-1 in the regular season. If they shot below 33% from 3, they were 6-11 (make it 9-12 if you include the playoffs so far). 

Prong #1: Keeping them off the 3pt line and forcing them into tough shots is a huge key. Boston won 3 grueling games that qualified for that below ~33ish% 3pt stat in Indiana, but truthfully Indiana didn't have the right closers. They had the right gameplan, and that's why every game of theirs was close. If the Mavs can force Boston into tough 3s, I trust Kyrie and Luka to finish the game better than Andrew Nembhard and Tyrese Haliburton. But that's a very tall task to ask. The only other game they won shooting that badly was agains the Skeleton Miami Heat with no Jimmy and Roizer. They shot 29% and they still won by 10. The lone loss came from 25 point blowout by the Cavs.


Prong #2: Celtics statistically were better overall when KP was off the court, although their defense was slightly better with him on. When he's on the court the Celtics almost play exclusively in a drop coverage. We're used to watching KP play in such a coverage. It has benefits shrinking the paint but it falls apart when elite offensive players get to their spots with little resistance. Luka's health and ability to attack this should tell us pretty quickly how many minutes KP can play. I was so confident against Zubac that Luka would eat him alive like he did the first 2 times against the Clippers. This year not so much. If Luka can play KP off the court by relentlessly attacking him, Boston will be forced to run with Horford way more. That is huge. Celtics have been very cagey on KP's health too. I don't see why he wouldn't be good to go after having almost 2 months off from a calf strain, but it is Porzingis we're talking about here. If KP isn't ready to go then the Celtics have to rely on Horford to deal with Gafford+Lively for 48 minutes and that is a very tall order. 


Prong #3: Boston had the least amount of doubles on opponents so far this post season. Only have doubled 1% of their defensive possessions. Could be argued that they haven't had to double, but something to keep in mind. If Boston chooses to play Luka and Kyrie straight up then all the pressure really falls onto PJ and DJJ. I assume that Boston are going to key in on Luka's late passes to the corner. Staying attached and not doubling basically takes away that look. It forces Luka to be an iso scorer even more than usual and stagnates the offense. If DJJ and PJ are hitting their shots then Boston will be punished quite quickly and will all but make them send extra help.  Again that's a rough thing to ask for these dudes to do given the environment and situation. If they can't score then the Mavs will have to start forcing the tempo and get into transition as much as possible. 


Prong #4: Unfortunately Boston enjoys that style of play. They are very much like Minnesota where their defense allows them to get easy transition buckets. Limiting turnovers and making sure possessions end on a single attempt will signficantly hurt Boston's momentum. It is key that Lively+Gafford+Maxi+PJ  are ready to box out and make sure Boston can't get rhythm shots off of long rebounds. Luka and Kyrie will have to do everything they can to limit turnovers. 


So far this is my read. I need to listen to more Celtic podcasts to see what they are thinking. Overall this is the toughest test yet for the Mavs. Boston is basically all the terrifying aspects of Minnesota but more talented 1-5. 

As always though I'm biased. If Luka does Luka things and Kyrie catches fire, Boston is in trouble. Mavs in 6.

You are wrong.  Boston was statistically terrible against the top four in the west. They would never have won it. You are being myopic. You also conveniently lump in their playoff record when it was the easiest playoff run in history. IN HISTORY!

You know another team that was statistically great? The 2007 Mavs.

[KillerLeft]

You know another team that was statistically great? The 2007 Mavs.

Yep, and they had the bad luck of running into the only playoff team that could beat them in the first round, even though that opponent might not have been able to beat any of the other teams. Horrible luck.

Styles make fights.

[SleepingHero]

You are wrong.  Boston was statistically terrible against the top four in the west. They would never have won it. You are being myopic. You also conveniently lump in their playoff record when it was the easiest playoff run in history. IN HISTORY!

You know another team that was statistically great? The 2007 Mavs.

LOL

I admire your gumption. Glad you're on our side because if you were a fan for another team I know I'd find you the most infuriating person ever.

[audiosway]

I'm sticking to my Mavs in 6 prediction. During the Clippers series I told a friend of mine they were going to the finals. I have a breakdown of why I think they will win. I'll put it up here tomorrow. Tested positive for Covid so I finally have some free time. lol.