Here's advice for the Spurs and Mavs before their big game
Posted: Thursday May 29, 2003 1:10 PM
So how did you analyze Tuesday night's unfathomable Game 5 of the Western Conference finals? Was it a crime against basketball by the San Antonio Spurs, a team good enough to know how not to blow a double-digit lead at home in a series-clincher? Or was it a legendarily heroic effort by the Dallas Mavericks, a band of gutsy scrappers who are playing without their big dog?
My take is that it was a bit of both, though I lean toward the latter. Many others definitively chose the former and spoke harshly of Spurs coach Gregg Popovich, particularly ESPN commentator Tim Legler, who -- I didn't get the memo on this -- has suddenly morphed into a man with the keenest basketball mind since the peach baskets came down. Legler even suggested that Pop should "give back" his Coach of the Year trophy for failing to do anything to stem the Mavericks stampede.
Look, this obviously wasn't Pop's finest moment, although short of running out on the court and rotating the arms and shoulders of his reluctant shooters into a forward motion, I'm not sure what he could've done. What the Mavs' 103-91 comeback victory proved more than anything is a basic tenet of sports: a team in true desperation sometimes has a built-in advantage over a team that seemingly has everything going for it. While the desperate team knows it has to do something radical, the team in control is afraid to change because a) the ain't-broke-don't-fix-it maxim is in play, and b) modifying your game plan when you're on top smacks of fear.
With their series lead down to 3-2 and tonight's Game 6 looming in noisy Dallas, the Spurs obviously need to break out a different blueprint. On the other hand, can Dallas coach Don Nelson, the master of improvisation, afford to come into Thursday's game with a strategy similar to the one he used in Game 5 against a coach as smart as Popovich?
Well, given the caveat that I can't be nearly as perceptive as The Legster, this is how I'd approach Game 6 if -- heaven forbid -- I had clipboard in hand.
If I were Nelson and the Mavs ...
I would do anything to come out of the gate on fire -- something Dallas has generally not been able to do -- and put San Antonio in a hole quick. The Spurs are a formidable team when they're rolling, but they are prone to self-doubt, primarily because some of their backcourt decision-makers (Tony Parker, Stephen Jackson, Manu Ginobili, Speedy Claxton) are inexperienced in big games.
Even if Dirk Nowitzki's sprained knee has sufficiently healed to allow him to play (my guess is that he will, giving fuller throat to the American Airlines Center crowd), the Mavs should continue their game of endless cutting and passing, playing the most frenetic motion offense since Doug Moe's never-stop-moving Denver Nuggets of the '80s. The thought that the Mavs are better without Nowitzki, their best player, is ridiculous; however, they are different. Nowitzki is (among other things) a post-up guy, and post-up guys can slow down the offense. Dallas beat the Spurs in Game 5 partly because its endless movement played havoc with San Antonio's double-teams and kept the Spurs' big men endlessly moving and guessing.
On defense, I would start out in a man-to-man, albeit one that still gangs up on Tim Duncan. Going to a zone would be tempting since it worked so well Tuesday night, but if the Spurs start missing outside shots against a man defense, doubt is really going to creep into their collective minds.
Whenever possible, I'd keep Eduardo Najera off Duncan. True, Najera is Dallas' best (only?) inside defender, but it's more crucial that he be available for rebounding, and checking T.D. takes too much effort.
If I were Popovich and the Spurs ...
I would start out with intense defensive pressure. That sounds wrong since an up-tempo game seems to favor the Mavs, but I think it could work for San Antonio. First, though Duncan's brilliance on the blocks stamps the Spurs (correctly) as a halfcourt team, they are better in the open court than many believe. Three other factors are tied to San Antonio stepping up its D: A frenzied defensive pace would go a long way to get certain players (read: Bruce Bowen) immediately into the game. The Spurs are deeper than the Mavs and can afford to expend the energy. And while the Mavs love to shuck and jive, they can get too caught up in a track meet and start making bad decisions.
I'd move Duncan out on the floor, at least to foul line extended, where he a) has more operating room, b) can't be multi-teamed as easily, and c) might be able to play a little high-low with David Robinson, who's been next to an offensive nullity in this series.
I'd get as many minutes as possible out of Ginobili. He's the X-factor (he gets steals and rebounds; he takes gambles; he has the height to guard Steve Nash and Nick Van Exel; he's a streaky, but seemingly immune-to-pressure, shooter) for which Dallas doesn't seem to have an answer.
Though it's not San Antonio's favorite way to play, I'd show the Mavs a lot of zone. Dallas rarely passes up an open jumper and, though Nash, Van Exel and Nowitzki are capable of hitting shots in bunches, it's better to have them firing from the perimeter than driving in the paint and making Duncan come out to challenge them.
Sports Illustrated senior writer Jack McCallum covers the NBA for the magazine and is a regular contributor to SI.com.
