05-24-2024, 01:50 PM
(05-24-2024, 01:40 PM)The Jom Wrote: Game 1 lead official Mark Davis, known for calling it fair, right? I’m a whiner. Always complain about the reffing. But not in game 1. Game 2????? You know it’s coming. Instead of 49 threes they’re gonna shoot 49 FTs.
Mavs still might have a chance if our shooters get hot. Minny has now lost 4 of last 6 games, including 3 of last 4 at home. That’s after winning their first 6 playoff games. Pretty amazing collapse. But still, this is the most likely game for them to win. If they lose it, we’re talking a likely sweep.
I agree, the perception is that Edwards is going to come back with a much better game (even among officials, who are human). It's reasonable to expect a little confirmation bias on that from the whistles.
But, one of Minnesota's biggest weaknesses is that they WILL commit some dumb, unnecessary fouls, so I'm hoping a change in allowed physicality might also benefit the Mavs.
The thing that's not clear to me yet is this: The Wolves played drop for two reasons. 1) because that keeps Gobert in a role he's much more comfortable playing, and 2) because it allows them to play 2-on-2 in the pick and roll, which takes away all of those corner threes Dallas loves to create (I think PJ's and Green's big hits late might have been the only ones they got off, but might be forgetting 1-2). We know that Luka/Kyrie are both going to eat in the midrange against deep drop (or even a medium drop), but in game 1, the Wolves ALSO gave up lobs and wraparounds to the centers. The Mavs KILLED them in paint points, which was surprising. Can the wolves take ONE of those two sources of offense (probably the paint points) away WITHOUT changing their strategy enough to give up the corner 3's? In other words, can they improve upon their plan by simply executing it better, or are we about to see them completely abandon it one game into the series? This is the fascinating question, at least for me.