Game 36: HOU (21-10) @ DAL (12-23)

[DanSchwartzgan]

Hope this ends up in a close loss somehow but if it's a win, easy Max Christie dirkie. didn't know he had all this in him. efficient scoring, posters and quick handles. I don't want to overreact but he just might be the goat.

Seems like there has been a concerted effort by Max to do more since he's gotten back into the starting lineup.  His shot attempts have been 12, 12, 13 and 13 the last four games.  TO's are up and it doesn't always look pretty, but I like trying to let him work on being more than just a corner three shooter.

[cow]

Grimes who?

Quentin

[F Gump]

Had to create this thread just to say how much I hate that the two big lineup and point Flagg are back.

Hate it.

FWIW it can have to do with the opponent, or available players, or player development being prioritized, or all of those, rather than some sort of permanent change in approach. 

I dont think the plan is for Flagg to be a point GUARD, but I do think Kidd believes he can do a LOT of what Giannis does, given the training. IMO thats where this is headed.

[Winter]

FWIW it can have to do with the opponent, or available players, or player development being prioritized, or all of those, rather than some sort of permanent change in approach. 

I dont think the plan is for Flagg to be a point GUARD, but I do think Kidd believes he can do a LOT of what Giannis does, given the training. IMO thats where this is headed.

This.... plus no real concern for the won-loss record. 

Flagg gets some experience (and he had a nice bunch of assists), and AD plays well, that's really a win for us rather than the final score.

[FireNicoHarrison]

Flagg at the point was the Kidd power play to fire Harrison and clear the GM spot for him.

Flagg with ball in his hands is a good development move.

But those are different situations.

[RoyTarpleysGhost]

Flagg is not running any plays though like a PG would.  He dribbles the ball past half court and then stands there confused on who he should pass it to.  He's not running any pick and roll or initiating the offense.

I guess it will improve his ball handling bringing it up to the court but it really just seems performative.

[meistermatze]

Obviously, Coop is not there (yet?) to run an NBA offense. Nothing has changed in this regard since the start of the season. He did have a nice all-around game, though — even if his shot didn’t really fall.

I hope this was just because of the opponent and our desire to play super big. This lineup is not the future. What does concern me is how we are trying to force-feed AD and are ignoring Cooper offensively. Yes, AD had a great game, but I hate his offense — the long twos, the occasional threes. It’s bad offense most of the time and, as I said, even worse: Coop gets fewer touches overall.

On a side note: Did anyone else notice that they changed the pregame video and removed AD? A sign of an incoming trade?

[KillerLeft]

Flagg is not running any plays though like a PG would.  He dribbles the ball past half court and then stands there confused on who he should pass it to.  He's not running any pick and roll or initiating the offense.

I guess it will improve his ball handling bringing it up to the court but it really just seems performative.

Yeah, people keep pointing out that running the offense through Flagg will aid in his development, but that's obvious and has never been the point. Anyone who thought about it for even a second over the summer came to that conclusion. 

The point is that many of those same people (and I worry this group includes Kidd) thought it was going to work right away, and that this team would be competitive. Now, we're all acting like it's something they're doing because of some "stealth tank" that I don't believe is happening yet (but probably will), and the reality is that they're just giving the ball to a 19 year old and saying "do something," basically. I don't see much evidence of productive developmental opportunities for him outside of just general tightening of his handle against real-game NBA defense, and tbh, that's not developing as fast for him as the other parts of his game seem to be when he's put into more natural situations. 

I just don't like some of the implications. I admit I could be misreading them, somewhat, but one thing that in my view has been a consistent factor since Kidd came here, even with Luka, is a steady decline in any sort of organizing principle on offense. I know they tried to change systems this season and that Lively getting hurt put a huge dent in those plans, as has AD being in and out and Kyrie not playing yet. But, we're seeing the ball find Gafford in the post like 5-10 times per game, lately. We're seeing Naji Marshall and PJW drive right at defenders who are 6-8' away from them because everyone on Earth knows they want to avoid shooting 3's if at all humanly possible. It's like the team doesn't know what to do - what their strengths and weaknesses are. They seem extremely poorly coached to me. 

The point is that (imo) not only is Flagg not ready to "run" the offense, I kind of hate the offense they're asking him to run. That's kind of a chicken/egg thing, I suppose. Tough to know for sure what even the offensive plan is some nights. But all I was saying in this, a game thread, is that it's very, very not fun to watch.

[KillerLeft]

I will say that I saw 1-2 really great ATO's last night, resulting in wide open shots. That's progress, I suppose.

[KillerLeft]

I hope this was just because of the opponent and our desire to play super big. This lineup is not the future. What does concern me is how we are trying to force-feed AD and are ignoring Cooper offensively. Yes, AD had a great game, but I hate his offense — the long twos, the occasional threes. It’s bad offense most of the time and, as I said, even worse: Coop gets fewer touches overall.

I think it did have something to do with the opponent, but twice now Kidd has mentioned "Gaff doesn't get enough minutes when AD plays the 5." Interesting, because in the recent game in which AD left with an injury after 10-11 minutes, Gafford STILL only played about 15, but that's coming right from the horse's mouth as far as his thinking, for what it's worth.

I think Kidd feels a little pressure (not sure who from, at this point, maybe just himself or the locker room, even) to play Davis, Gafford, PJW and Marshall enough that they're all satisfied with their roles, and it's tough to do that without putting Flagg out there in an awkward role with an awkward lineup. Obviously, he has to play Flagg, and rightfully so. 

For me, this all leads back to the thought that some of these guys just don't fit anymore. Good players being wasted, out there doing things they can't really do, and it's starting to seem like kind of a selfish basketball team on offense. When everyone has the green light, it's kind of like nobody does, really. One of the main reasons they won last night is that they found a couple of things, offensively, that were working, and for once the team seemed to recognize that and lean into it instead of people taking turns trying to score.

I hope the new front office understands the assignment.

[F Gump]

KL, while I mean no disrespect, I find all this whining to be incredibly shortsighted and unthinking.

There are a lot of ways to put it. It misses the forest for the trees. It makes the perfect the enemy of the good. It complains about missing style points when the hard-to-attain goal was somehow attained. It's finding an excuse to tear down when it's much more suitable to offer praise.

CONSIDER:
The Rox are one of the NBA's best. They are highly talented. They are hard to play against. Meanwhile, the Mavs are playing without two of their key players (Kyrie and Lively) and lost a 3rd early in the game (PJW). They are in the middle of a going-nowhere season.

Yet the Mavs won. The Rox certainly wanted the win and needed the win. And they have enough talent to win against even the very best teams. But the Mavs - with all the things you hate happening - won anyhow.

Because the Mavs need the better pick, I'm not sure I even like the win. But the Mavs won. It was not handed to them. That's the fact, Jack. And THIS is the game you want to use as your example of how the train is off the tracks? Ummm no, they won.

Maybe there's a method in the madness. Maybe, just maybe, Kidd's not as bad or inept as you think. If not, how do you explain the fact that the Mavs won?

As an aside, I find it interesting -- and maybe informative? - that the Mavs inexplicably tend to beat the better teams while also inexplicably losing to the ones below them in the standings (or the blatant tankers). How does THAT keep happening? I'm not convinced it is just random, because it happens too often. Is that what a stealth tank looks like? I dunno.

[DanSchwartzgan]

 
As an aside, I find it interesting -- and maybe informative? - that the Mavs inexplicably tend to beat the better teams while also inexplicably losing to the ones below them in the standings (or the blatant tankers). How does THAT keep happening? I'm not convinced it is just random, because it happens too often. Is that what a stealth tank looks like? I dunno.

Yes.  Many of those wins against good teams also happen at home.  It is exactly how you'd design a stealth tank.  Lose on the road.  Lose to bad teams.  Give the fans hope with occasional wins against the big boys at home.  Stein already told us the goal isn't necessarily top 5 pick as the flat lottery odds give you a shot in slots 6-8.

[mvossman]

KL, while I mean no disrespect, I find all this whining to be incredibly shortsighted and unthinking. 

There are a lot of ways to put it. It misses the forest for the trees. It makes the perfect the enemy of the good. It complains about missing style points when the hard-to-attain goal was somehow attained. It's finding an excuse to tear down when it's much more suitable to offer praise.

CONSIDER:
The Rox are one of the NBA's best. They are highly talented. They are hard to play against. Meanwhile, the Mavs are playing without two of their key players (Kyrie and Lively) and lost a 3rd early in the game (PJW). They are in the middle of a going-nowhere season.

Yet the Mavs won. The Rox certainly wanted the win and needed the win. And they have enough talent to win against even the very best teams. But the Mavs - with all the things you hate happening - won anyhow.

Because the Mavs need the better pick, I'm not sure I even like the win. But the Mavs won. It was not handed to them. That's the fact, Jack. And THIS is the game you want to use as your example of how the train is off the tracks? Ummm no, they won.

Maybe there's a method in the madness. Maybe, just maybe, Kidd's not as bad or inept as you think. If not, how do you explain the fact that the Mavs won?

LOL, no disrespect, but you are whining, shortsighted and unthinking.

The lineups KL is complaining about got crushed in this game.  They won despite those lineups, not because of them.  Defending those lineups because they won the game is lazy analysis (no disrespect).

The biggest reason the Mavs won is because Houston's best player went out in the first minute of the game and they shot 24% from 3.

[KillerLeft]

Yes.  Many of those wins against good teams also happen at home.  It is exactly how you'd design a stealth tank.  Lose on the road.  Lose to bad teams.  Give the fans hope with occasional wins against the big boys at home.  Stein already told us the goal isn't necessarily top 5 pick as the flat lottery odds give you a shot in slots 6-8.

So, you think they were "stealth tanking" from game 1, then? 

Because the things I'm complaining about are the same things I was complaining about all summer, because we could all see them coming. I was told (and essentially convinced, sadly) that it was going to work, not in terms of maximizing the pick, but in being a competitive playoff team. I think you were one of the more optimistic among us at the time from memory, but I don't want to misrepresent your views. 

They haven't done much differently recently, other than their 3 point volume plummeting in recent weeks. Reduced minutes from Thompson and completely burying Russel have had something to do with that, but surely nobody is thinking not playing Russel is a means of tanking, and while I could make a strong argument that Thompson has rebounded from his slow start and should be playing quite a bit more, I can also see an argument that his reduced role has played a part in his resurgence. I think it was clear he was removed from the starting lineup because he was playing poorly (at the time), not because he was making the games too close. 

My point is that the worst combos/approaches/plans they're putting out there are the same ones I was told were going to be the new way the NBA works, and that they were going to force opponents to match up with them...etc, etc. Now we're suggesting that the very same strategies are only being employed because they want to lose? 

Opinions vary, but maybe your stealth tank signs are also just signs of bad teams? To be clear, I think they have to know they're bad enough that making that pick a high one should be a priority, and I expect they'll get to tanking at some point, I just don't think it has happened yet. I think they're wanting to see Kyrie/AD/Flagg together first (thought the record is making it harder for that to matter every day). 

And I agree, they do pop up and beat a good team every now and again. They have talent on this team, and as I've always said, "styles make fights." Some matchups are better than others. The 2007 Warriors weren't a very good team, but to the juggernaut Mavericks they were like kryptonite. 

At the end of all this, you're going to be correct. If they haven't already, they WILL reach a point where they go all in on losing as many games as possible, so that's not really the conversation I find interesting. It's just a matter of "when," at this point.

What worries me, and why it's even worth talking about: Were Kidd/Finley/Ricardi/whomever over there as deluded as some of us were about how this year would go? Because if they really thought this team would be able to compete as currently constructed, that takes my mind to some depressing places.

[DanSchwartzgan]

So, you think they were "stealth tanking" from game 1, then? 
 

Short answer...yes.  But, the goal was probably more about Nico than the W/L record at the very beginning.  I think Kidd gave the fans (and Dumont) the push that was needed for Dumont to do what he wouldn't do over the summer.

My pre-season position was this could be a 6th seed if everything went perfectly.  When AD went down, I talked about optionality...the same optionality that had them make decisions late in two of the last 3 seasons to prioritize picks over playoffs.  My focus was more about picks 10/11 than 6-8 then back then as I knew they'd need a runway to build up AD's value and that would cost us losses.

More recently I've noticed this pattern that seems to be keeping us more in the 6-8 range (plus it really caught my attention when Stein published his bit expose on what draft slots have done what since the flattening of the lottery odds).  

My biggest shift has probably been that I thought they'd go for it and try to make a run with Flagg, AD and Kyrie.  But, when they started running out the garbage lineups early on, it felt like something else was happening.  I just don't see how you can look at home wins against great teams and losses against the worst of the worst and come to a different conclusion.  Adding a top 8 pick this year is so much more important than window dressing wins and a short playoff run that will do nothing for Flagg in the long run.

[Winter]

One of biggest question marks early was the play of Dlo. He almost had to be very good for this team to look good. Not only did he suck bad when he was on the floor, but Kidd wouldn't let him play into form. It really felt like Kidd wanted nothing to do with him.

I'm not sure what to make of the first 10-12 games, Nico getting fired, and playing without a PG. It's hard to know whether it was intent or fate. But it feels like most decisions about the future success of this team were determined early.

[KillerLeft]

One of biggest question marks early was the play of Dlo. He almost had to be very good for this team to look good. Not only did he suck bad when he was on the floor, but Kidd wouldn't let him play into form. It really felt like Kidd wanted nothing to do with him.

I'm not sure what to make of the first 10-12 games, Nico getting fired, and playing without a PG. It's hard to know whether it was intent or fate. But it feels like most decisions about the future success of this team were determined early.

I mean...I have an easier time believing the angle that Kidd was trying to get Harrison fired than thinking he was worried about a pick, honestly. If we find out he's been angling for the GM gig all along (not saying that's the truth, necessarily, but the smoke is gaining traction) then quite a few things will start to make more sense, I suppose. 

I totally agree that Kidd wanted nothing to do with Russell, and that his complete lack of any interest in making that work pretty much sealed the fate of the first 10-12 games. At the very least, it's a sign that he and Harrison weren't on the same page by the end of this summer.

[FireNicoHarrison]

KL, while I mean no disrespect, I find all this whining to be incredibly shortsighted and unthinking. 

There are a lot of ways to put it. It misses the forest for the trees. It makes the perfect the enemy of the good. It complains about missing style points when the hard-to-attain goal was somehow attained. It's finding an excuse to tear down when it's much more suitable to offer praise.

CONSIDER:
The Rox are one of the NBA's best. They are highly talented. They are hard to play against. Meanwhile, the Mavs are playing without two of their key players (Kyrie and Lively) and lost a 3rd early in the game (PJW). They are in the middle of a going-nowhere season.

Yet the Mavs won. The Rox certainly wanted the win and needed the win. And they have enough talent to win against even the very best teams. But the Mavs - with all the things you hate happening - won anyhow.

Because the Mavs need the better pick, I'm not sure I even like the win. But the Mavs won. It was not handed to them. That's the fact, Jack. And THIS is the game you want to use as your example of how the train is off the tracks? Ummm no, they won.

Maybe there's a method in the madness. Maybe, just maybe, Kidd's not as bad or inept as you think. If not, how do you explain the fact that the Mavs won?

As an aside, I find it interesting -- and maybe informative? - that the Mavs inexplicably tend to beat the better teams while also inexplicably losing to the ones below them in the standings (or the blatant tankers). How does THAT keep happening? I'm not convinced it is just random, because it happens too often. Is that what a stealth tank looks like? I dunno.

ALPEREN SENGUN.

[Chicagojk]

I thought AD, max and Williams were excellent.

If Mavs got that type of AD 75% of the rest of the season, the offers this summer would be higher imo.

This has been a nice stretch for Christie. Seems to be fine coming off the bench but has really played well being put back in the starting spot

I prefer Nembhard but Williams has been the better player recently. His speed is something this team desperately needs

[F Gump]

My thought -- maybe the Mavs (wisely) sacrificed something on one end, for parts of the game, and gained it back and more besides on the other. The Rox are big enough to overwhelm other teams. Here, the Mavs lineup overall did manage to shoot 55% (38% on 3s) and hold HOU to 39/24. If it was all a coaching disaster, nevertheless SOMETHING in those coaching choices sure went right. 

If you want to say CF is not (yet) skilled enough to run the offense most of the time, sure, that makes sense. But if you hope that he can get there, you have to accept the learning pains where he is given the task from time to time. And as you do that, what's the overall picture for the game? In this one, it's a win against a top team, and CF was a +4. That doesn't feel like a disaster at all.

Bigger picture for me is, when the team wins, against a top opponent who they should not beat, I don't think style point criticisms are really merited, as they ignore the fact that the sum total was a plus, not a minus. And no, the idea that the loss of Sengun made all the difference isn't persuasive to me at all -- I've watched too many NBA games and know it doesn't work like that.