Small-Ball Antidote???

[The Jom]

You fellas seem to know what you’re talking about, so I’m feeling a bit sheepish about disagreeing. But here I go anyway.

If playing without a center was Ty Lue’s plan A or B, wouldn’t we have seen more than 6 minutes of it by now? Sure, if his team is getting killed by game 5, he’ll try anything and everything. But that’s not the point. Right now at least, his actions say he thinks they match up better with Zubac and even Plumlee on the court rather than off. Even when we’re playing Maxi at the 5.

[KillerLeft]

You fellas seem to know what you’re talking about, so I’m feeling a bit sheepish about disagreeing. But here I go anyway.

If playing without a center was Ty Lue’s plan A or B, wouldn’t we have seen more than 6 minutes of it by now? 

It's obviously not his plan A. 

What we're saying (based on two other playoff series between these two teams, btw) is that WHEN the Kleber/Washington lineup (if Kidd is smart enough to lean on it more) continues to shred the Clippers (which it already has proven it will - it's how the Mavs won the last game), Lue is going to make an adjustment. He's a GREAT coach - one of the best in the NBA. 

The questions are: can that adjustment force Dallas into an adjustment of their own? (I'm not sure it can, provided Kleber is hitting his catch and shoot opportunities), and...

Is Kidd smart enough to see what that adjustment to the adjustment should be?

[MarkAguirreWrathofGod]

I don’t think either team is going to rush into small ball. It’s wear and tear on the small ball bigs with rotations already shortened. I actually appreciate Kidd’s judicious use of the Maxi/PJ frontline to this point. We were lucky PJ didn’t pick up his third foul after two quick ones last game. I fully expect Gafford especially to look energized, injury not withstanding, at home and Lively too for that matter.

[KillerLeft]

I don’t think either team is going to rush into small ball. It’s wear and tear on the small ball bigs with rotations already shortened. I actually appreciate Kidd’s judicious use of the Maxi/PJ frontline to this point. We were lucky PJ didn’t pick up his third foul after two quick ones last game. I fully expect Gafford especially to look energized, injury not withstanding, at home and Lively too for that matter.

I don't think this is a series in which Gafford works at all. Hope I'm wrong, but in three series against the Clippers, he's the only one who has managed to make Zubac look like anything other than a liability for the opponent, and that's including Dwight Powell. 

If it were me, Lively would be jumping center court to start game 3, and 100% of Kleber's minutes would be at the 5. I'd use Gafford only in situations that called for it (assuming he's healthy).

Now, against OKC? Different story, entirely. We've seen what he can do in the paint against Chet. But, they have to get past LAC first, obviously.

[dirkfansince1998]

I don't think this is a series in which Gafford works at all. Hope I'm wrong, but in three series against the Clippers, he's the only one who has managed to make Zubac look like anything other than a liability for the opponent, and that's including Dwight Powell. 

If it were me, Lively would be jumping center court to start game 3, and 100% of Kleber's minutes would be at the 5. I'd use Gafford only in situations that called for it (assuming he's healthy).

Now, against OKC? Different story, entirely. We've seen what he can do in the paint against Chet. But, they have to get past LAC first, obviously.

In game one Lively was in over his head but he bounced back and looked really good in game two. Difference between him and Gafford is the mobility. Lively's defense after switches was super impressive. At least 3-4 possessions where he was on his own against Harden and didn't give up the drive.

[The Jom]

In game one Lively was in over his head but he bounced back and looked really good in game two. Difference between him and Gafford is the mobility. Lively's defense after switches was super impressive. At least 3-4 possessions where he was on his own against Harden and didn't give up the drive.

I don’t think mobility is the difference in this matchup. Lively’s frame is so much bigger than Gafford’s. Bigger than Zubac’s even. I think that’s the real difference. (Now, I do agree that Lively’s mobility is a huge plus in general, so I’m not really arguing with you.)

[The Jom]

I don't think this is a series in which Gafford works at all. Hope I'm wrong, but in three series against the Clippers, he's the only one who has managed to make Zubac look like anything other than a liability for the opponent, and that's including Dwight Powell. 

If it were me, Lively would be jumping center court to start game 3, and 100% of Kleber's minutes would be at the 5. I'd use Gafford only in situations that called for it (assuming he's healthy).

Now, against OKC? Different story, entirely. We've seen what he can do in the paint against Chet. But, they have to get past LAC first, obviously.

Except for the minutes when Zubac sits, no? That’s when I’d like to see Gaff play.

[fifteenth]

I won't be surprised if Killer is correct about Gafford. He's been right about everything about this series so far. And he's been my basketball daddy since 2012 when I was initially holding out hope that Cuban wasn't being a complete idiot.

But now I'm holding out hope about something else. The playoffs are a bit crazy in that some trends settle in through a series and get cemented more and more the farther along the series progresses. But then, sometimes items that we think may trend through the series just change in an instant. Sometimes we can tell why the change took place because it's based on a coaching change, a change in the emphasis by the refs, a player finding some success and gaining some confidence, and sometimes it's difficult to pinpoint. Often teams' tactics and strategies create the change but for us fans it just looks like "player 'A' just "finally started playing good."

So, regarding Gafford, and related to Gafford, the vertical game, I still have some hope that Gafford (with maybe some strategic help from the coaches) will become useful and somewhat productive in this series.

[fifteenth]

I won't be surprised if Killer is correct... 

Regarding my post above, I'll go ahead and guess the tactical change that takes place that loosens up the inside of Clippers defense and opens up Gafford and the vertical game. 

The Mavs lean in to punishing the Clippers inside focus by making threes (home cooking), which takes the Clippers focus off of contesting everything inside, which gets Gafford and the vertical game going. Gafford's success helps him to settle down, and a more relaxed Gafford starts to block some shots, getting things righted on the defensive end. 

Of course, I could be wrong, and the Clippers are just terrible matchup for Gafford.

[The Jom]

Hope you’re right. What I’m seeing is that the physicality is really hard on Gaff’s game. It’s hard to shoot 70% from the field. It’s exponentially harder when you’re getting hit. It’s hard to play good post defense on a traditional center. It’s even harder when he has 2 inches and what I’m guessing is 40 pounds on you.

[The Jom]

After 2 games, the preliminary answer to this question is Ty Lue wants no part of small ball vs. these Mavs. 90 of 96 minutes so far have featured Zubac or Plumlee in the lineup at center.

Game 3 saw the Clips go small for a total of 6 minutes, making it 12 mins for the series so far, during which they’ve been outscored by 11 points. Zubac, meanwhile, boasts a 

+15 in a 12-point win,
+4 in a 3-point loss, and 
-5 in a 11-point loss. 

Don’t think small ball is gonna be an answer for em.

[KillerLeft]

Game 3 saw the Clips go small for a total of 6 minutes, making it 12 mins for the series so far, during which they’ve been outscored by 11 points. Zubac, meanwhile, boasts a 

+15 in a 12-point win,
+4 in a 3-point loss, and 
-5 in a 11-point loss. 

Don’t think small ball is gonna be an answer for em.

And they’re losing. 

Honestly, I’m not sure what you’re on about here. If Kawhi was healthy they’d have gone small already. We have loads of past evidence. 

What is it that keeps bringing you back to this argument?

[The Jom]

And they’re losing. 

Honestly, I’m not sure what you’re on about here. If Kawhi was healthy they’d have gone small already. We have loads of past evidence. 

What is it that keeps bringing you back to this argument?

Dude! It’s what this thread is. What did you expect to find here? And if I agreed with you on what they “would” do, I never woulda started the thread in the first place.

[KillerLeft]

Dude! It’s what this thread is. What did you expect to find here? And if I agreed with you on what they “would” do, I never woulda started the thread in the first place.

I guess I just don’t understand what you are trying to argue.

It is not my opinion, but rather factual, that the clippers were designed to be played in such a way where all of the players are roughly the same size. There are years and years of articles and Podcasts and evidence about that, not to mention two previous series against our team. That’s not even a conversation worth having. And yet you keep coming here every time Zubac plays, as if that wasn’t the BEGINNING plan of all the series.

I don’t understand the point you are trying to make. Can you restate it simply?

[Scott41theMavs]

I guess I just don’t understand what you are trying to argue.

It is not my opinion, but rather factual, that the clippers were designed to be played in such a way where all of the players are roughly the same size. There are years and years of articles and Podcasts and evidence about that, not to mention two previous series against our team. That’s not even a conversation worth having. And yet you keep coming here every time Zubac plays, as if that wasn’t the BEGINNING plan of all the series.

I don’t understand the point you are trying to make. Can you restate it simply?

His original post kicking off the thread was basically bragging about how good the Mavs' small ball lineup was, and that teams generally wouldn't try to match them because they couldn't, not even the Clippers. What he was just saying is that the Clippers have played Zubac (and the hapless Plumlee when Zubac sat) quite a bit, which indicates that he's right from where he's sitting. What I hear you saying in rebuttal is that the Clippers' strategy isn't serving them and they'll have to change.

I would tend to agree with Jom in this instance and say that if the Clippers attempt more regular small ball lineups, the Mavs will beat them. However, if I understand where each of you is coming from, I would seem to disagree with both of you, in that I believe that, as good as the PJ-Kleber lineup is, the Mavs are even better with Lively on the court. I believe he's like an elongated version of Bam, or at the very least very soon will be. He's too athletic and long despite his size to be able truly to be played off the floor, and he's going to grow into that. That + the coaching staff giving him the green light on the three point shot he already objectively has but isn't allowed to use, and we'll have our third bona fide star. And furthermore, if Gaff plays like he did in Game 3 and most of the post-deadline regular season, he's not that much of a liability either.

[KillerLeft]

His original post kicking off the thread was basically bragging about how good the Mavs' small ball lineup was, and that teams generally wouldn't try to match them because they couldn't, not even the Clippers. What he was just saying is that the Clippers have played Zubac (and the hapless Plumlee when Zubac sat) quite a bit, which indicates that he's right from where he's sitting. What I hear you saying in rebuttal is that the Clippers' strategy isn't serving them and they'll have to change.

Oh, no, if that is his point, then you have my rebuttal way wrong.

I agree that PJ Washington makes the Mavericks‘ non-center lineup (sorta, Kleber is a center, imo) BETTER THAN EVER. But, it is essentially still the same thing they have been running out there for the last several years, just maybe a better version of it. If the idea of this thread is that this is somehow scaring the clippers away from small ball, I vehemently disagree.

For starters, that Kleber/Washington lineup is probably best used not as a counter to a small lineup by the opponent, but as a counter to a big lineup by the opponent. If anything, this series (so far) has proven more about Kidd’s wishes than Lue’s. Although I sincerely hope that Kidd is just trying to hold onto it as long as possible (which would be smart), he’s the one who seems reluctant to commit to the gear we’re discussing. The Kleber/Washington front court is rather obviously the very best weapon the Mavs have, and by saying that, I am in no way meaning to discount the luxury of having Gafford and Lively on the roster. There’s just something special about having Kleber/Washington out there together.

Also, after watching two games of Kawhi, I’d say it’s wayyyy obvious why Lue isn’t playing the way he wants to - the way the roster is designed to be played - and I don’t know that it has much, if anything, to do with Dallas. The most important component of that strategy is simply not healthy.

[The Jom]

This place is brutal.

[KillerLeft]

This place is brutal.

Sorry, dude. Just trying to participate in the conversation you started. I will show myself out now.

[F Gump]

I think you guys are arguing over the effect as if it's the cause.

That is to say, I think LAC has indeed gone big in this series - but that it has less to do with their own personnel, and more to do with Lue thinking they can't win if they give away the middle to Gafford/Lively and a procession of dunks, because it's too lethal.

We're not used to it, but I think that's what we are seeing - a Mavs strength is being reacted to, changing the opponents choices, rather than the Mavs having to be the ones reacting.

And I find it impressive that despite the attempts to slow them, Gafford/Lively are finding ways to still be a problem to LAC, and more so as the series is going along. It can all change in a game - or even a bad quarter - but right now the Mavs bigs are out-bigging LAC's bigs.

I'm thinking that is where LUE began - we have to play big, not small, or else we're toast - as his baseline path to winning. But the Mavs have figured out that they are simply better at BIG ball in this series, and now LAC seems to be between a rock and a hard place because they are getting bullied no matter what.

I'm not sure that LAC can win with small ball (unless the Mavs play it too), because LAC lacks the shooting (Mavs are able to defend it), and then the lack of size means DAL gets easy shots, putbacks, and stops drives to the basket.

Bully ball. To me these games feel like a MIA Heat approach in a lot of ways.