2021-22 RealGM All-Season Awards - Discussion Thread

[tsherkin]

- As weak of a DPOY as Smart is, to me he strengthened his case in the Bucks series. The idea that you'd specifically want your point guard guarding Giannis is freaking insane. It's easy to see how Bam or Dray could surpass Smart with their play the rest of the way, but I don't think I'll be putting anyone already eliminated ahead of Smart.
.

Conceptually reminds me of 6'7 wings on Dirk pre-2008, right?

Sorry my brain is just breakking thinking about teams defending Dirk and Giannis similarly.

And yes, I know that's not at all what you are saying. Just what first popped into my head lol.

Of course. They couldnt be more stylistically different. Giannis' physical tools and shot differ so dramatically from Dirk's that it's hard to process, heh.

[Doctor MJ]

Some other thoughts:

- I think Monty falls from #1 on my COY ballot to off my ballot now. Really something how quickly things can shift. Major candidates for me are likely to be Udoka, Kerr, Kidd & Jenkins, with Bud clearly deserving at least a spot in the conversation.

- As weak of a DPOY as Smart is, to me he strengthened his case in the Bucks series. The idea that you'd specifically want your point guard guarding Giannis is freaking insane. It's easy to see how Bam or Dray could surpass Smart with their play the rest of the way, but I don't think I'll be putting anyone already eliminated ahead of Smart.

- Luka now seriously emerging as an OPOY candidate (as well as POY).

- I find myself realizing that Grant Williams makes sense as a 6MOY candidate.

Why is Spo not being considered but Jenkins and Kerr are?

Just forgot to type Spo. Definitely a strong candidate.

[Colbinii]

Some other thoughts:

- I think Monty falls from #1 on my COY ballot to off my ballot now. Really something how quickly things can shift. Major candidates for me are likely to be Udoka, Kerr, Kidd & Jenkins, with Bud clearly deserving at least a spot in the conversation.

- As weak of a DPOY as Smart is, to me he strengthened his case in the Bucks series. The idea that you'd specifically want your point guard guarding Giannis is freaking insane. It's easy to see how Bam or Dray could surpass Smart with their play the rest of the way, but I don't think I'll be putting anyone already eliminated ahead of Smart.

- Luka now seriously emerging as an OPOY candidate (as well as POY).

- I find myself realizing that Grant Williams makes sense as a 6MOY candidate.

Why is Spo not being considered but Jenkins and Kerr are?

Just forgot to type Spo. Definitely a strong candidate.

I'm intrigued by Spo because the Heat aren't overly talented--do they even have more talent than Memphis?

I agree with the Monty Williams removal, which is a shame because he was doing a tremendous job but when your team comes out flat and looks like they don't care in the most important game of the season, the coach needs to be held accountable.

[Doctor MJ]

Why is Spo not being considered but Jenkins and Kerr are?

Just forgot to type Spo. Definitely a strong candidate.

I'm intrigued by Spo because the Heat aren't overly talented--do they even have more talent than Memphis?

I agree with the Monty Williams removal, which is a shame because he was doing a tremendous job but when your team comes out flat and looks like they don't care in the most important game of the season, the coach needs to be held accountable.

Well, I was saying all year that so long as the Suns kept it up all through the post-season he'd be the easy choice, but any stumble would hurt him in part because to me they did the heavy lifting in the year's prior to this one. He was my COY last year, and in retrospect deserved way more respect for the '19-20 campaign.

So when you come into '21-22 and the expectation is that you have to show us something new this year, the bar is exceptionally high.

And when you don't just get upset in the playoffs, but upset by a drastically inferior regular season team in such a way that leaves no doubt that the right team won the series - and gives the impression that in a re-match it might go more like 4-1 in favor of Dallas - you're not taking a leap forward, you're showing that you gaps you never closed and you weren't able to respond effectively once they got exploited.

I still think highly of what Monty has done in Phoenix, but if you're going to single out 3 coaches for this year, I don't know how he makes your list unless you're trying to make up for deluding yourself into voting for Thibs the prior year.

[Texas Chuck]

[
And when you don't just get upset in the playoffs, but upset by a drastically inferior regular season team .

I think we always have to be careful with this. Right? Take the ultimate example of this when the 67 Mavs lost to the 8th seeded We Believe team. Except that 8th seeded team was playing better basketball for months going into the playoffs than all but a handful of teams. They had made a major trade that totally changed the team, and they had gone 4-0 against Dallas in the RS. It was still a bad loss for Dallas, but it wasn't just hur dur 67 win team lost to a 8th seed.

The Mavs, Suns, and Celtics since 1/1 were the 3 dominant teams in the league. The final 50+ games Dallas was a top 3 record team. So sure they had a drastically inferior record because they started so poorly and the Suns shot out of a cannon, but by the time they met, this was not some huge upset. An upset to be sure, but not a huge one.

And this was a series of blowouts. Suns ultimately were the victims of the last one and the biggest and most embarrassing one, but I don't see how Monty gets eliminated and Kidd gets elevated based on this series. Doesn't make sense to me unless we only look at 64 wins, what 8 clear of the field?, and conclude this was a horrific series loss. It wasn't. Best players win series and Dallas had the best player.

I still have Monty high on my list and honestly I have the Memphis coach with a worse round 2 performance. That team is too deep to let Brooks shoot you out of multiple games. If he isn't going to stop, you have to take him out. Jenkins wouldn't and his team exited. They were still in that series even after Ja departed.

[Doctor MJ]

[
And when you don't just get upset in the playoffs, but upset by a drastically inferior regular season team .

I think we always have to be careful with this. Right? Take the ultimate example of this when the 67 Mavs lost to the 8th seeded We Believe team. Except that 8th seeded team was playing better basketball for months going into the playoffs than all but a handful of teams. They had made a major trade that totally changed the team, and they had gone 4-0 against Dallas in the RS. It was still a bad loss for Dallas, but it wasn't just hur dur 67 win team lost to a 8th seed.

The Mavs, Suns, and Celtics since 1/1 were the 3 dominant teams in the league. The final 50+ games Dallas was a top 3 record team. So sure they had a drastically inferior record because they started so poorly and the Suns shot out of a cannon, but by the time they met, this was not some huge upset. An upset to be sure, but not a huge one.

And this was a series of blowouts. Suns ultimately were the victims of the last one and the biggest and most embarrassing one, but I don't see how Monty gets eliminated and Kidd gets elevated based on this series. Doesn't make sense to me unless we only look at 64 wins, what 8 clear of the field?, and conclude this was a horrific series loss. It wasn't. Best players win series and Dallas had the best player.

I still have Monty high on my list and honestly I have the Memphis coach with a worse round 2 performance. That team is too deep to let Brooks shoot you out of multiple games. If he isn't going to stop, you have to take him out. Jenkins wouldn't and his team exited. They were still in that series even after Ja departed.

So let me first say:

You've got a great point about the Mavs being a better team late in the year than they work early in the year, and I need to remember that as I try to draw conclusions about what we're seeing in the post-season.

With that said, I can't help recalling one series ago speculating that the Mavs could beat the Suns, and one Mavs expert - I think his named was Chexas Tuck, but I might be mistaken - explaining in great deal why this could not possibly happen. If I could find him, maybe I could call him as a witness for why this was a big upset. Of course, that would just be one man's opinion.

In all earnestness, it's reasonable to point out that there have been bigger upsets, and that the Mavs are not the most embarrassing team to get upset by.

I'd actually take a bigger issue with you characterizing it was a super-close series where teams just happened to win in blowouts. The Mavs dictated terms over the last 5 games of the series - winning 4 of 5, and winning the final 2 games by a combined 60 points, grabbing a 30 point lead in the first half of the Game 7 alone in Phoenix. Any Suns fan would be foolish to suggest that a second series wouldn't be likely to go even more easily to the Mavs, and I'd suggest a Mavs fan doing the same is being, shall we say, admirably modest.

It's damn impressive what the Mavs have done and now we get to see what they can do against other elite opponents going forward (knock on wood for health on all sides). I'm picking against the Mavs against the Warriors and at present picking the Celtics to win the whole thing, so to me they have a lot more to prove before summer comes, but it's not hard to imagine a scenario where Luka conquers all.

But when you lose the last two games by 60 in a situation where you know this is likely your best chance to ever win a title, it's a disappointment beyond any "the other team was good!" explanation.

Re: Jenkins tactics. Okay, but he deserves credit for coaching the team up to the point where they performed THAT good without their star, right? And he deserves credit this year for the breakthrough happening this year, right? And he deserves some credit for not getting blown out by 60 points in the final two games, right?

Dunno if Jenkins is going to make my top 3, but yeah, good chance he'll be ahead of Monty for me. To change my mind, I'd probably need to see Dallas not just win the title, but make every team from hear on out seem like a J.V. team to finish the series like they did with Suns, and let's just say I doubt any of the other teams left - should they play and lose to the Mavs - will get broken the way the Suns got broken.

[falcolombardi]

i honestly would keep monty in the ballot cause regular season still counts, but at the last spot of it

kinda like how draymomd probably deserved to be in dpoy ballot (but not at the top) in 2021 for his regular season

if a player or coach who is mediocre in regular seasom but the best in playoffs can win poy or coty, the reverse situation probably merits, if not winning it, at least a honorable mention

[Texas Chuck]

With that said, I can't help recalling one series ago speculating that the Mavs could beat the Suns, and one Mavs expert - I think his named was Chexas Tuck, but I might be mistaken - explaining in great deal why this could not possibly happen. If I could find him, maybe I could call him as a witness for why this was a big upset. Of course, that would just be one man's opinion.

Damn, Doc, you didn't have to do me that dirty.

I definitely did not think Dallas would win that series. And was very afraid of how ugly it could get. And for two games, it looked exactly as I expected. But yeah, I underestimated Dallas for sure. Probably in part in that sort of self-preservation thing a fan does to not get his hopes up.

But I'm done with that now. I accept Dallas is a dog against the Warriors and would be a dog against the East champ if they were to advance, but I'm a believer now. This team can beat anyone.

As to Jenkins, I'm not trying to discredit the job he did at all this year. He's done a fantastic job with that team his entire time there including this year.

I was just saying that for me if I was going to penalize a coach based on just the 2nd round series I find more fault with Jenkins than with Monty. I mean what else could Monty go to? His bench was giving him almost nothing, something went terribly wrong with his star PG, Ayton clearly was going through some issues, and Booker in his efforts to make this about he and Luka poked the bear and didn't remotely stack up to the guy he kept trying to antagonize.

Is a coach supposed to be able to fix all of that? And stop a rising generational player? Meanwhile Jenkins had attractive options to go to. He was playing a team that while battle tested, wasn't actually playing that great offensively. But he didn't. He just kept riding Brooks despite Brooks never being that player ever and certainly being in terrible form.


And finally I didn't say it was a super close series. I said it was a super volatile one and it absolutely was. Sure Dallas won 4 of 5 and if we look at it like that, then it looks like they took total control. But its unfair imo to remove two home games from the Suns which they dominated to paint it that way.

The point I was trying to make is neither coach figured something out really. Neither team could compete on the road until suddenly game 7 happened. But I can't put that on Monty. So if someone is going to eliminate Monty on that series, fine. But I don't see the consistency in elevating Kidd based on that same series. Essentially one aberration game is being used to dismiss one and elevate the other. I just can't get behind that.

[MyUniBroDavis]

With that said, I can't help recalling one series ago speculating that the Mavs could beat the Suns, and one Mavs expert - I think his named was Chexas Tuck, but I might be mistaken - explaining in great deal why this could not possibly happen. If I could find him, maybe I could call him as a witness for why this was a big upset. Of course, that would just be one man's opinion.

Damn, Doc, you didn't have to do me that dirty.

I definitely did not think Dallas would win that series. And was very afraid of how ugly it could get. And for two games, it looked exactly as I expected. But yeah, I underestimated Dallas for sure. Probably in part in that sort of self-preservation thing a fan does to not get his hopes up.

But I'm done with that now. I accept Dallas is a dog against the Warriors and would be a dog against the East champ if they were to advance, but I'm a believer now. This team can beat anyone.

As to Jenkins, I'm not trying to discredit the job he did at all this year. He's done a fantastic job with that team his entire time there including this year.

I was just saying that for me if I was going to penalize a coach based on just the 2nd round series I find more fault with Jenkins than with Monty. I mean what else could Monty go to? His bench was giving him almost nothing, something went terribly wrong with his star PG, Ayton clearly was going through some issues, and Booker in his efforts to make this about he and Luka poked the bear and didn't remotely stack up to the guy he kept trying to antagonize.

Is a coach supposed to be able to fix all of that? And stop a rising generational player? Meanwhile Jenkins had attractive options to go to. He was playing a team that while battle tested, wasn't actually playing that great offensively. But he didn't. He just kept riding Brooks despite Brooks never being that player ever and certainly being in terrible form.


And finally I didn't say it was a super close series. I said it was a super volatile one and it absolutely was. Sure Dallas won 4 of 5 and if we look at it like that, then it looks like they took total control. But its unfair imo to remove two home games from the Suns which they dominated to paint it that way.

The point I was trying to make is neither coach figured something out really. Neither team could compete on the road until suddenly game 7 happened. But I can't put that on Monty. So if someone is going to eliminate Monty on that series, fine. But I don't see the consistency in elevating Kidd based on that same series. Essentially one aberration game is being used to dismiss one and elevate the other. I just can't get behind that.

Tbf the mavs kinda switched up their p and r coverage vs dropping more in games one and two, they still did it but they mixed in more hedging/trapping

The suns were running Spain p and r to great effect in general but they mainly do that against drop coverage, whereas it doesn’t work as well in other situations

The suns are methodical in their p and r game in that it’s very much “you do this we run this” but when “you do this” isn’t so set in stone, it’s not as effective.

I think Kidd deserves credit for making that adjustment at least

[Texas Chuck]

[
Tbf the mavs kinda switched up their p and r coverage vs dropping more in games one and two, they still did it but they mixed in more hedging/trapping

The suns were running Spain p and r to great effect in general but they mainly do that against drop coverage, whereas it doesn’t work as well in other situations

The suns are methodical in their p and r game in that it’s very much “you do this we run this” but when “you do this” isn’t so set in stone, it’s not as effective.

I think Kidd deserves credit for making that adjustment at least

No question Kidd tried something different. He switched Bullock and DFS assignments. He benched Green for Ntilikina, he basically completely abandoned Dwight Powell. He should get credit for some adjustments.

But they only really worked at home. Game 5 Phoenix was quite effective offensively.

Game 7 being what it was really skews perception of that series. And I think we here have a responsibility to fight the urge to read too much into that game.

[Doctor MJ]

With that said, I can't help recalling one series ago speculating that the Mavs could beat the Suns, and one Mavs expert - I think his named was Chexas Tuck, but I might be mistaken - explaining in great deal why this could not possibly happen. If I could find him, maybe I could call him as a witness for why this was a big upset. Of course, that would just be one man's opinion.

Damn, Doc, you didn't have to do me that dirty.

Sometimes I can't help myself.

And for two games, it looked exactly as I expected.
...

Sure Dallas won 4 of 5 and if we look at it like that, then it looks like they took total control. But its unfair imo to remove two home games from the Suns which they dominated to paint it that way.

The point I was trying to make is neither coach figured something out really. Neither team could compete on the road until suddenly game 7 happened. But I can't put that on Monty. So if someone is going to eliminate Monty on that series, fine. But I don't see the consistency in elevating Kidd based on that same series. Essentially one aberration game is being used to dismiss one and elevate the other. I just can't get behind that.

So wanted to address this point.

You seem to acknowledge that things seemed very different after the first two games, but then don't say what you think caused the change other than to say that it wasn't about coaching.

I certainly don't want to make out like it wasn't about the players - it's always about the players, but let's look at some numbers.

In the first two games, Phoenix outscored Dallas by 13.5 points per game.
In the final five games, Dallas outscored Phoenix by 9.8 points per game.

That's a major swing that makes us ask at least how we can better pinpoint what changed.

Was it the Mav offense?

Well, if we do a coarse analysis - simply averaging game ORtg because that's easy for me to do at the moment -

In the first two games, Dallas had an ORtg of 118.35.
In the last five games, Dallas had an ORtg of 116.18.

So, certainly no massive improvement on that end - superficial analysis suggests the Suns' D got better over time at stopping'em.

Well, then, what about the other side?

In the first two games, Phoenix had an ORtg of 132.70.
In the last five games, Dallas had an ORtg of 105.38.

A fall off in more than 27 points per 100 possessions for the Suns' offense? Yeah, I'd say that's a trend.

If you'd like to suggest this fall off had nothing to do with Dallas figuring out better ways to defend Phoenix, you can, but I don't think that's realistic.

If you'd like to suggest the Mav improvement was simply about individual Mavs figuring out how to better play the exact same way they were trying to do previously, you can, but doesn't seem realistic to me either. That was part of the equation, just like the Suns playing worse was, but massive changes in DRtg of the course of the series imho generally have something to do with strategic adaptation on the team level.

[Texas Chuck]

Doc,

I'm saying this was about home/road with an aberration game 7 rather than adding in game 7 and suggesting Dallas figured out Phoenix offensively. Again, not to discredit Dallas. They defended great at home and in game 7. But game 7 being what it is is skewing your numbers and cutting off the first two games Phoenix earned at home isn't a good way to analyze the series.

I mean let's just pretend 3 and 4 were played first and then 1 and 2. Probably quite similar results but now it looks like what it was--home teams dominating not one team "Solving" the other. Because why did Phoenix go right back to really good offense in game 5?

[Doctor MJ]

Doc,

I'm saying this was about home/road with an aberration game 7 rather than adding in game 7 and suggesting Dallas figured out Phoenix offensively. Again, not to discredit Dallas. They defended great at home and in game 7. But game 7 being what it is is skewing your numbers and cutting off the first two games Phoenix earned at home isn't a good way to analyze the series.

I mean let's just pretend 3 and 4 were played first and then 1 and 2. Probably quite similar results but now it looks like what it was--home teams dominating not one team "Solving" the other. Because why did Phoenix go right back to really good offense in game 5?

To answer your question, let's drill down into Game 5.

For the Suns' offense, the outlier was the 3rd Quarter where they scored 33 points (while the Mavs scored 14).

How did this occur? Big stat: The Mavs turned the ball over 12 times in that quarter.

I'd submit that that's what broke open the game, not the Suns just randomly doing better on offense again.

Moreover, while the Suns' Game 5 ORtg was a 119.6, which was the best of their last 5 games, it was a far cry from the numbers they were posting in Game 1 & Game 2 where the majority of their quarter were 30+ point quarters.

And I'll note that the more dramatic thing going on in Game 5 in these sort of stats was the Mavs being held to an ORtg of 87.0, which 25 points below what they did in every other game.

So to me the question to ask to explain Game 5 is whether it had to do with a temporary tactical advantage the Suns found through adaptation in that game (only to be outmaneuvered again the following game), or whether the Mavs just went walkabout and blew it.

I'm open to the former, but I also think that Luka-centric teams may be particularly prone to this. It's frankly not necessarily an awful attribute because we only call it "walkabout" because most of the time, when it really counts, they perform much better, but yeah, I think the Mavs probably just fell on their face in that game, and if they hadn't, then the Mavs may well have completed the 0-2 to 4-2 victory the Bucks did to the Suns last year.

[GSP]

With that said, I can't help recalling one series ago speculating that the Mavs could beat the Suns, and one Mavs expert - I think his named was Chexas Tuck, but I might be mistaken - explaining in great deal why this could not possibly happen. If I could find him, maybe I could call him as a witness for why this was a big upset. Of course, that would just be one man's opinion.

Damn, Doc, you didn't have to do me that dirty.

Sometimes I can't help myself.

And for two games, it looked exactly as I expected.
...

Sure Dallas won 4 of 5 and if we look at it like that, then it looks like they took total control. But its unfair imo to remove two home games from the Suns which they dominated to paint it that way.

The point I was trying to make is neither coach figured something out really. Neither team could compete on the road until suddenly game 7 happened. But I can't put that on Monty. So if someone is going to eliminate Monty on that series, fine. But I don't see the consistency in elevating Kidd based on that same series. Essentially one aberration game is being used to dismiss one and elevate the other. I just can't get behind that.

So wanted to address this point.

You seem to acknowledge that things seemed very different after the first two games, but then don't say what you think caused the change other than to say that it wasn't about coaching.

I certainly don't want to make out like it wasn't about the players - it's always about the players, but let's look at some numbers.

In the first two games, Phoenix outscored Dallas by 13.5 points per game.
In the final five games, Dallas outscored Phoenix by 9.8 points per game.

That's a major swing that makes us ask at least how we can better pinpoint what changed.

Was it the Mav offense?

Well, if we do a coarse analysis - simply averaging game ORtg because that's easy for me to do at the moment -

In the first two games, Dallas had an ORtg of 118.35.
In the last five games, Dallas had an ORtg of 116.18.

So, certainly no massive improvement on that end - superficial analysis suggests the Suns' D got better over time at stopping'em.

Well, then, what about the other side?

In the first two games, Phoenix had an ORtg of 132.70.
In the last five games, Dallas had an ORtg of 105.38.

A fall off in more than 27 points per 100 possessions for the Suns' offense? Yeah, I'd say that's a trend.

If you'd like to suggest this fall off had nothing to do with Dallas figuring out better ways to defend Phoenix, you can, but I don't think that's realistic.

If you'd like to suggest the Mav improvement was simply about individual Mavs figuring out how to better play the exact same way they were trying to do previously, you can, but doesn't seem realistic to me either. That was part of the equation, just like the Suns playing worse was, but massive changes in DRtg of the course of the series imho generally have something to do with strategic adaptation on the team level.

Watch on YouTube

[MyUniBroDavis]

[
Tbf the mavs kinda switched up their p and r coverage vs dropping more in games one and two, they still did it but they mixed in more hedging/trapping

The suns were running Spain p and r to great effect in general but they mainly do that against drop coverage, whereas it doesn’t work as well in other situations

The suns are methodical in their p and r game in that it’s very much “you do this we run this” but when “you do this” isn’t so set in stone, it’s not as effective.

I think Kidd deserves credit for making that adjustment at least

No question Kidd tried something different. He switched Bullock and DFS assignments. He benched Green for Ntilikina, he basically completely abandoned Dwight Powell. He should get credit for some adjustments.

But they only really worked at home. Game 5 Phoenix was quite effective offensively.

Game 7 being what it was really skews perception of that series. And I think we here have a responsibility to fight the urge to read too much into that game.

Tbf, on an offensive rtg basis game 5 was good but still way better than the first two games, and was a bit lower than the average as in the series against the pels

They scored 13 in the last 4 minutes when the starters left, take that out (I’m just using pace so it’s not super right) their offensive rtg was 115 in bball ref which would be their 6th lowest of the postseason

It was 105.4 for the last 5 games, after being in the 130 range for the first two. It would rank 14th lowest for their regular season

It’s not an issue with game 7 bringing it down either, 4/5 of the games were above 110 in offensive rtg, and in their 4 losses it was below 110.

It’s not as if it was a 3 point thing either, they shot 38% from three over those 5 games, (37.5% in game 5) above their season average. They shot 32% against the pels.

It wasn’t the ball not bouncing their way either in terms of getting lucky boards at least too, they averaged 12.2 offensive boards over those 5 games vs 9.8 for the season. An offensive rebound rate of 28.3% in those 5 games vs 22.2% in the rs

So I don’t think it was a luck thing for their offense going wrong, the Dallas offense was great against them over those 5 games outside of game 5 but I do think those adjustments were crucial in stopping the suns Offense, I don’t think it was just a coincidence, 4/5 games would be the bottom 22 offensice effeciency games in the RS, and 3/5 Would be in the bottom 12, 2 in the bottom 10, game 7 would be 7th worst and game 6 would be the worst, and game 7 was the worst outside the 4th that didn’t matter

Them basically having 4/5 horrible offensive games, and 1 that’s in line with their season average, including 2 of the worst of the year

Obv it matters whats like, the story of the game, when evaluating the offense but I think the struggles weren’t just a things not falling their way, since 2/4 of the things that I feel are more luck based when comparing a teams game by game to their season average (three point percentage and offensive rebounding) actually were better than their season average

[MyUniBroDavis]

Damn, Doc, you didn't have to do me that dirty.

Sometimes I can't help myself.

And for two games, it looked exactly as I expected.
...

Sure Dallas won 4 of 5 and if we look at it like that, then it looks like they took total control. But its unfair imo to remove two home games from the Suns which they dominated to paint it that way.

The point I was trying to make is neither coach figured something out really. Neither team could compete on the road until suddenly game 7 happened. But I can't put that on Monty. So if someone is going to eliminate Monty on that series, fine. But I don't see the consistency in elevating Kidd based on that same series. Essentially one aberration game is being used to dismiss one and elevate the other. I just can't get behind that.

So wanted to address this point.

You seem to acknowledge that things seemed very different after the first two games, but then don't say what you think caused the change other than to say that it wasn't about coaching.

I certainly don't want to make out like it wasn't about the players - it's always about the players, but let's look at some numbers.

In the first two games, Phoenix outscored Dallas by 13.5 points per game.
In the final five games, Dallas outscored Phoenix by 9.8 points per game.

That's a major swing that makes us ask at least how we can better pinpoint what changed.

Was it the Mav offense?

Well, if we do a coarse analysis - simply averaging game ORtg because that's easy for me to do at the moment -

In the first two games, Dallas had an ORtg of 118.35.
In the last five games, Dallas had an ORtg of 116.18.

So, certainly no massive improvement on that end - superficial analysis suggests the Suns' D got better over time at stopping'em.

Well, then, what about the other side?

In the first two games, Phoenix had an ORtg of 132.70.
In the last five games, Dallas had an ORtg of 105.38.

A fall off in more than 27 points per 100 possessions for the Suns' offense? Yeah, I'd say that's a trend.

If you'd like to suggest this fall off had nothing to do with Dallas figuring out better ways to defend Phoenix, you can, but I don't think that's realistic.

If you'd like to suggest the Mav improvement was simply about individual Mavs figuring out how to better play the exact same way they were trying to do previously, you can, but doesn't seem realistic to me either. That was part of the equation, just like the Suns playing worse was, but massive changes in DRtg of the course of the series imho generally have something to do with strategic adaptation on the team level.

Watch on YouTube

GET THIS FRAUD OFF MY WEBPAGE

The suns run Spain p and r in response to drop coverage, the mavs didn’t run it as much and mixed it up vs it being by far their main coverage, if they just ran it onto matter what it wouldn’t change anything lol

[MyUniBroDavis]

Doc,

I'm saying this was about home/road with an aberration game 7 rather than adding in game 7 and suggesting Dallas figured out Phoenix offensively. Again, not to discredit Dallas. They defended great at home and in game 7. But game 7 being what it is is skewing your numbers and cutting off the first two games Phoenix earned at home isn't a good way to analyze the series.

I mean let's just pretend 3 and 4 were played first and then 1 and 2. Probably quite similar results but now it looks like what it was--home teams dominating not one team "Solving" the other. Because why did Phoenix go right back to really good offense in game 5?

To answer your question, let's drill down into Game 5.

For the Suns' offense, the outlier was the 3rd Quarter where they scored 33 points (while the Mavs scored 14).

How did this occur? Big stat: The Mavs turned the ball over 12 times in that quarter.

I'd submit that that's what broke open the game, not the Suns just randomly doing better on offense again.

Moreover, while the Suns' Game 5 ORtg was a 119.6, which was the best of their last 5 games, it was a far cry from the numbers they were posting in Game 1 & Game 2 where the majority of their quarter were 30+ point quarters.

And I'll note that the more dramatic thing going on in Game 5 in these sort of stats was the Mavs being held to an ORtg of 87.0, which 25 points below what they did in every other game.

So to me the question to ask to explain Game 5 is whether it had to do with a temporary tactical advantage the Suns found through adaptation in that game (only to be outmaneuvered again the following game), or whether the Mavs just went walkabout and blew it.

I'm open to the former, but I also think that Luka-centric teams may be particularly prone to this. It's frankly not necessarily an awful attribute because we only call it "walkabout" because most of the time, when it really counts, they perform much better, but yeah, I think the Mavs probably just fell on their face in that game, and if they hadn't, then the Mavs may well have completed the 0-2 to 4-2 victory the Bucks did to the Suns last year.

Tbf on the mavs offense, I’m in support of the defense helping but offensive rtg wise it’s 123.5 taking out a sub 90 game 5

[Doctor MJ]

Doc,

I'm saying this was about home/road with an aberration game 7 rather than adding in game 7 and suggesting Dallas figured out Phoenix offensively. Again, not to discredit Dallas. They defended great at home and in game 7. But game 7 being what it is is skewing your numbers and cutting off the first two games Phoenix earned at home isn't a good way to analyze the series.

I mean let's just pretend 3 and 4 were played first and then 1 and 2. Probably quite similar results but now it looks like what it was--home teams dominating not one team "Solving" the other. Because why did Phoenix go right back to really good offense in game 5?

To answer your question, let's drill down into Game 5.

For the Suns' offense, the outlier was the 3rd Quarter where they scored 33 points (while the Mavs scored 14).

How did this occur? Big stat: The Mavs turned the ball over 12 times in that quarter.

I'd submit that that's what broke open the game, not the Suns just randomly doing better on offense again.

Moreover, while the Suns' Game 5 ORtg was a 119.6, which was the best of their last 5 games, it was a far cry from the numbers they were posting in Game 1 & Game 2 where the majority of their quarter were 30+ point quarters.

And I'll note that the more dramatic thing going on in Game 5 in these sort of stats was the Mavs being held to an ORtg of 87.0, which 25 points below what they did in every other game.

So to me the question to ask to explain Game 5 is whether it had to do with a temporary tactical advantage the Suns found through adaptation in that game (only to be outmaneuvered again the following game), or whether the Mavs just went walkabout and blew it.

I'm open to the former, but I also think that Luka-centric teams may be particularly prone to this. It's frankly not necessarily an awful attribute because we only call it "walkabout" because most of the time, when it really counts, they perform much better, but yeah, I think the Mavs probably just fell on their face in that game, and if they hadn't, then the Mavs may well have completed the 0-2 to 4-2 victory the Bucks did to the Suns last year.

Tbf on the mavs offense, I’m in support of the defense helping but offensive rtg wise it’s 123.5 taking out a sub 90 game 5

Okay, so I think what you're saying is "You can't just credit the Mavs defense because their offense was generally doing great!", while what I'm saying is "What changed in the series was that the Suns offense became drastically less effective beginning in Game 3". You're making a point about the overall brownie points the sides deserve, while I'm focusing on what shifted.

This to say, I don't think we're in disagreement.

[MyUniBroDavis]

To answer your question, let's drill down into Game 5.

For the Suns' offense, the outlier was the 3rd Quarter where they scored 33 points (while the Mavs scored 14).

How did this occur? Big stat: The Mavs turned the ball over 12 times in that quarter.

I'd submit that that's what broke open the game, not the Suns just randomly doing better on offense again.

Moreover, while the Suns' Game 5 ORtg was a 119.6, which was the best of their last 5 games, it was a far cry from the numbers they were posting in Game 1 & Game 2 where the majority of their quarter were 30+ point quarters.

And I'll note that the more dramatic thing going on in Game 5 in these sort of stats was the Mavs being held to an ORtg of 87.0, which 25 points below what they did in every other game.

So to me the question to ask to explain Game 5 is whether it had to do with a temporary tactical advantage the Suns found through adaptation in that game (only to be outmaneuvered again the following game), or whether the Mavs just went walkabout and blew it.

I'm open to the former, but I also think that Luka-centric teams may be particularly prone to this. It's frankly not necessarily an awful attribute because we only call it "walkabout" because most of the time, when it really counts, they perform much better, but yeah, I think the Mavs probably just fell on their face in that game, and if they hadn't, then the Mavs may well have completed the 0-2 to 4-2 victory the Bucks did to the Suns last year.

Tbf on the mavs offense, I’m in support of the defense helping but offensive rtg wise it’s 123.5 taking out a sub 90 game 5

Okay, so I think what you're saying is "You can't just credit the Mavs defense because their offense was generally doing great!", while what I'm saying is "What changed in the series was that the Suns offense became drastically less effective beginning in Game 3". You're making a point about the overall brownie points the sides deserve, while I'm focusing on what shifted.

This to say, I don't think we're in disagreement.

Oh nah that’s not what I’m saying lol, I replied to texaschuck about how I think the main thing probably was their defensive adjustments and how the suns offense fell off a cliff in a way that probably wasn’t just cold shooting nights or the ball bouncing the wrong way (esp when looking at those games individually)

Even game 5, was more so an average offensive game for them if you erase the points they scored when the starters came out (and the possessions, I just did that manually from subtracting it from pace)

I think their offense was also very good after game 2 outside of a blip which was all I was saying, since it skews the average in a way that’s not representative of how they did

I’ll admit I didn’t have time to read the full post when I responded to it because I was watching one piece lol sorreh

[Dutchball97]

Butler is going to make it really hard for people to leave him off their ballots if he keeps playing like this. Between the top 3 MVP candidates and the 4 remaining best players on the conference finals teams there will be 2 very hard cuts to make.