2014-15 Dallas Mavericks

Post #1 » by **Texas Chuck** » Thu Jul 30, 2020 6:31 pm

Mods, this thread may not be appropriate for this forum and if so feel free to lock and I apologize.

But I was looking into Al-Farouq Aminu today and in doing so looked back at his one year in Dallas. And it got me thinking--how in the world did that team win 50 games? And we know about the 03-04 Mavs having one of most efficient offenses ever, and I think we all know the current Mavs have the most efficient offense ever(not relative to league, just raw), but how many of us remember that prior to the Rondo trade, that Mavs team had the most efficient offense ever?

So how did they do that? How did they win 50 games and have such a strong offense? I can't figure it out.

Dirk was still a good offensive player, but far removed from his best days. Monta Ellis led the team in usage and was his typical inefficient self. Jameer Nelson was near the end and was inefficient and turnover prone. Parsons was okay, but nothing special. Chandler and Wright terrific rim runners, but that can't explain it.

I had completely forgotten this team won 50 games. Is this Rick Carlisle wizardry? Would love any insight on this.

Homer38 · Post #2 » by **Homer38** » Thu Jul 30, 2020 6:50 pm

I don't know,but the Mavs had a offensive rating of 112.2 without Rondo per sports-reference(It would been good for the second place ahead of the warriors and the cavs and only behind the clippers)but with Rondo on the court,it was even worst that the 21-61 Lakers!

I don't know the answer why the mavs were so good in offense without Rondo (they were also 3rd in offense in 2014) but crazy how Rondo's trade ruined their chemistry.

Post #3 » by **bondom34** » Thu Jul 30, 2020 7:02 pm

I'm not totally sure but looking back at that roster and thinking a few possible ideas for them, given a 50 win team that bowed out in the first round against a good Houston team.

First you just listed in the OP a lot of guys who were good but not great. But also nobody really of note who was just flat out bad. Looking at their minutes, they had really 1 guy over 1000 minutes on the season who was notably just a bad player (Rondo, who wasn't there until sometime a bit before the trade deadline iirc). They also had 2 guys in Wright and Chandler who were older but smart/solid defenders who never missed around the rim.

I think it's a Danny Leroux anecdote but there's a lot of regular season value to just having players who aren't actively harmful and having 48 minutes of quality point guard play. The Mavs for the most part had both until Rondo got there.

And to add to the general not badness of the roster they did 2 things, they were 3rd in TO rate and 4th in TO rate forced, as well as being really good against sub .500 teams and sub .500 against teams .500 or better. Beating bad teams is a good way to rack up wins.

Edit: Oh and yes Carlisle is a magician too.

RCM88x · Post #4 » by **RCM88x** » Thu Jul 30, 2020 7:04 pm

They had pretty epic depth for one thing, 12 guys played more than 16mpg at one point in the season for them, 9 guys had more than 1200 minutes played. If you look at the splits they were only -3.7 net ORTG with Dirk sitting which is pretty good (107.1 ortg).

Donnie and Carlisle are a pretty good combo when it comes to filling the roster with perimeter talent and getting the most out of them. They always seem to have these random guys come in and play great for them. Offense is only a -4.7 net ORTG without Doncic this year (114.3 ortg). Again, they have great depth and don't really dropoff a ton without their stars.

No-more-rings · Post #5 » by **No-more-rings** » Thu Jul 30, 2020 7:48 pm

I agree with the other responses, it's just one of those situations where they have a bunch of "good guys" but no single superstar and sometimes that's enough to get you 50+ wins. Especially a team that has a lot of veterans and a top 5 coach in the league at that time in Carlisle. The Hawks that same year may be an example of that on steroids, generally a team with your best player as either Al Horford or Paul Millsap isn't going to win 60 games. No one on that team scored a ton, highest was Millsap at 16.7ppg, and no one aside from Korver really had eye popping efficiency.

I do think when the playoffs roll around, you generally find out these types of teams aren't as good as their record though.

Owly · Post #6 » by **Owly** » Thu Jul 30, 2020 7:56 pm

4 factors says efg% and turnover % for the season. On 19th of December (circa the trade) they were also solid on the offensive glass

Spoiler:

Wright especially and Chandler have been noted as the finishers. Wright was pretty crazy efficient and had good on/off in Dallas too.

Dr Positivity · Post #7 » by **Dr Positivity** » Thu Jul 30, 2020 8:03 pm

Personally I think pre Rondo, the Mavs have a better supporting cast and better coach this year than 05-07. It's just Dirk is worse.

RCM88x · Post #8 » by **RCM88x** » Thu Jul 30, 2020 8:25 pm

Dr Positivity wrote:Personally I think pre Rondo, the Mavs have a better supporting cast and better coach this year than 05-07. It's just Dirk is worse.

I'd probably agree, lot becomes possible when you're paying your "best player" like %13 of the salary cap instead of %26-29.

Also Carlisle >> Johnson

Mr B · Post #9 » by **Mr B** » Fri Jul 31, 2020 3:29 am

Texas Chuck wrote:Mods, this thread may not be appropriate for this forum and if so feel free to lock and I apologize.

But I was looking into Al-Farouq Aminu today and in doing so looked back at his one year in Dallas. And it got me thinking--how in the world did that team win 50 games? And we know about the 03-04 Mavs having one of most efficient offenses ever, and I think we all know the current Mavs have the most efficient offense ever(not relative to league, just raw), but how many of us remember that prior to the Rondo trade, that Mavs team had the most efficient offense ever?

So how did they do that? How did they win 50 games and have such a strong offense? I can't figure it out.

Dirk was still a good offensive player, but far removed from his best days. Monta Ellis led the team in usage and was his typical inefficient self. Jameer Nelson was near the end and was inefficient and turnover prone. Parsons was okay, but nothing special. Chandler and Wright terrific rim runners, but that can't explain it.

I had completely forgotten this team won 50 games. Is this Rick Carlisle wizardry? Would love any insight on this.

Carlisle is exactly why that team won 50 games. I’ve seen some here call him overrated but that just shows how little they know about basketball. He’s proven that when he has talent he can win big but that season proves that he can also win when he doesn’t have a lot of talent.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Post #10 » by **Texas Chuck** » Fri Jul 31, 2020 5:45 pm

Thanks everyone!

Roddy B for 3 · Post #11 » by **Roddy B for 3** » Sat Aug 1, 2020 8:34 am

Dirk was the key that unlocked everyone else's offense.

Then they played together, not selfishly. And scored a crap ton of points. Ellis, Parsons and Nelson were all good secondary ball handlers as well.

+ They had the ultimate 1v1 closer

feyki · Post #12 » by **feyki** » Tue Aug 4, 2020 2:19 pm

Dirk is the goat offensive player. He was still one of the best offensive players in the league. And also Monta had a incredible couple years at Mavs. To be fair Parsons can shoot the ball well, too

.

Ron Swanson · Post #13 » by **Ron Swanson** » Wed Aug 5, 2020 3:18 pm

All you have to do is look at what those guys did immediately after (and some before) that 2014-15 season to know that Dirk's impact has always been real beyond the numbers. Parsons obviously got hurt, but Ellis went from leading that team in scoring to out of the league in less than two years, Chandler immediately was done as a high minutes starter, and guys like Felton and Jameer Nelson were barely end-of-roster caliber players even at that point. Carlisle deserves a lot of credit of course, but the hard regression of those Mavericks immediately following Dirk's last two productive seasons (2015-16) isn't a coincidence.

Mr B · Post #14 » by **Mr B** » Wed Aug 5, 2020 3:48 pm

Ron Swanson wrote:All you have to do is look at what those guys did immediately after (and some before) that 2014-15 season to know that Dirk's impact has always been real beyond the numbers. Parsons obviously got hurt, but Ellis went from leading that team in scoring to out of the league in less than two years, Chandler immediately was done as a high minutes starter, and guys like Felton and Jameer Nelson were barely end-of-roster caliber players even at that point. Carlisle deserves a lot of credit of course, but the hard regression of those Mavericks immediately following Dirk's last two productive seasons (2015-16) isn't a coincidence.

The funny thing is that Tyson Chandler was never a high minutes guy in Dallas. Carlisle talked about this when they traded for him that Tyson was at his best when he was held to 25 min a game max. Rarely did Carlisle play him more than that.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk