12-28-2019, 09:26 AM
(12-28-2019, 08:14 AM)ThisIStheYear Wrote: Always interesting to read a debate between people who understand math and people who don’t. I see a lot of confusion, special pleading, and muddled logic in this thread. 1) Post scoring isn’t the same as paint scoring. High shooting percentages inside of four feet are in spite of not because of post play. 2) Regardless of whether the Mavs should run more back to the basket plays, Zinger just isn’t very good at it relative to average efficiency across all shots. He’s turnover prone in those situations and doesn’t seem to have the physical ability to turn his long frame and shoot with balance (maybe he should develop a skyhook). He’s certainly not as good at post play as he is at creating space for other players to operate in the paint. 3) I’m not even certain losing leads quickly is a Mav’s specialty. Mavs fans just haven’t had a team to watch in this modern era that had leads to blow in the first place, so they’re just not used to the new normal NBA game flow. The NBA is played at a faster pace now, and the shot clock resets to 14 not 24 seconds. Faster possessions means it just takes less time to overcome a lead for all teams. I’d need to see some real data to know if the Mavs really do struggle to hold leads relative to other teams. No one has shown any. 4) Mostly though, this focus on the offense as the reason for blown leads, particularly the Toronto game, is misguided. The Mavs need defense. They gave up 47 points in the 4th quarter at Toronto, an absurd number, even by today’s standards. That’s why they lost. Time to go get a defensive player (like Iggy) to add to the rotation. That would help much more than any kind of tweak you could make to the league’s best offense.
I think the reliance on 3-point shooting definitely plays a role and an alternative scoring option would help. Again...not saying that KP in the post is the solution. The high volume 3-point shooting can lead to big runs for any team but it can also lead to scoring droughts. That´s what we are seeing with the Mavs. Overall the scheme works because the Mavs are having the league leading offense but in a smaller sample size (for example a single quarter) bricking 3s might be a reason why the Mavs struggle to close out games.
Against the Raptors the Mavs went 1-10 from 3 in the 4th quarter. 4-8 from 2. They had 7 tov in the 4th quarter. Offensive execution was just as big of a problem as the lack of defense.
Missed shots and turnover lead to easy transition offense. I wouldn´t blame everything on the defense because a good defense starts with an efficient offense.