Speaker 1: The volume Lakers Tonight is presented by FanDuel Sports Book.
Speaker 1: There's no better place to make every moment more than
Speaker 1: with FanDuel. You get great odds in markets for the
Speaker 1: NBA and HL college and so much more. It's America's
Speaker 1: number one sports book. It's super easy to use. Plus
Speaker 1: you can combine multiple bets from the same game into
Speaker 1: a same game parlay. If you are new, just download
Speaker 1: the FanDuel Sports Book app to get started. Now sign
Speaker 1: up with promo cod json T so they know I
Speaker 1: sent you. Twenty one plus in president Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Indiana, Louisiana,
Speaker 1: Permitted parishes only, Michigan, New Jersey, New York, Tennessee, Virginia
Speaker 1: or West Virginia. First online real money wager only. Refund
Speaker 1: issued as non withdrawalable site credit that expires in fourteen days.
Speaker 1: Restrictions apply see terms at sports book dot FanDuel dot com.
Speaker 1: Gambling problem called one eight hundred, next step or text
Speaker 1: next step to five three three four two in Arizona
Speaker 1: one eight eight eight seven eight nine seven seven seven
Speaker 1: seven or visit CCPG dot org slash chat in Connecticut
Speaker 1: one eight hundred gambler or visit FanDuel dot com slash
Speaker 1: RG in Colorado, Indiana, New Jersey, in Virginia one eight
Speaker 1: seven seven seven seven zero stop in Louisiana one eight
Speaker 1: hundred to seven zero seven one one seven for confidential help.
Speaker 1: In Michigan one eight seven seven eight Hope and why
Speaker 1: or text hope and Why to four six seven three
Speaker 1: six nine in New York. In Tennessee redline dial one
Speaker 1: eight hundred eight eight nine nine seven eight nine in Tennessee,
Speaker 1: visit www one eight dot one eight hundred gambler dot
Speaker 1: net in West Virginia. You guys know how hi I
Speaker 1: am on Boston, And as you can tell from my shirt,
Speaker 1: I have no incentive to be high on Boston. I'm
Speaker 1: not necessarily a Lakers fan. I've just been covering them
Speaker 1: for the last couple of years. A lot of the
Speaker 1: people who follow the show, a lot of the people
Speaker 1: that follow me on Twitter are Lakers fans. Um, just
Speaker 1: from the last couple of years. My uh, my adoption
Speaker 1: so to speak, of this Boston Celtics team has nothing
Speaker 1: to do with, uh, you know, some sort of non
Speaker 1: basketball incentive. It's strictly the fact that, as I said
Speaker 1: last night, and to quote that colonism. I don't care
Speaker 1: about being right. I just want to get things right.
Speaker 1: That's my goal for this show is too as an
Speaker 1: analytical approach in terms of actually looking at evidence, film evidence,
Speaker 1: statistical evidence. I want to give you guys the best
Speaker 1: basketball analysts analysis that I can. And over the course
Speaker 1: of the season, I watched thirty basketball teams play in
Speaker 1: the NBA. UH. The one on my shirt looked like
Speaker 1: a horrific basketball team, and the team that wore green
Speaker 1: and UH called themselves the Boston Celtics, was very clearly
Speaker 1: better than everybody. And that's why I quote unquote adopted
Speaker 1: them as my title favorite. It was strictly a basketball take,
Speaker 1: that's all it is. And what's funny is I'm not
Speaker 1: as high on Boston as some of the evidence would suggest.
Speaker 1: Like I talked about at length over the course the
Speaker 1: last couple of weeks from January on, Boston wasn't just
Speaker 1: the best team in basketball. They were the best team
Speaker 1: in basketball by a country mile. Nobody was close. They
Speaker 1: were way better than everybody on defense, and they were
Speaker 1: better than everybody on offense. And so the question becomes,
Speaker 1: why don't they just blow out everybody? Well, they did
Speaker 1: for a while there towards the end of the regular season,
Speaker 1: but like I've talked about, a lot of the Boston
Speaker 1: offense stuff was fool's gold compared to what happens in
Speaker 1: a playoff environment. They have some very very clear offensive
Speaker 1: weaknesses as it comes to as it pertains to decision making.
Speaker 1: So that's why I call them the jackal and hide
Speaker 1: team of this playoff run. They have some really low lows.
Speaker 1: Their floor is probably lower than any floor in this
Speaker 1: final four teams, but their ceiling is higher than any
Speaker 1: of these four teams because their defense is pretty reliable.
Speaker 1: Game one was a defensive outlier. We're gonna talk about
Speaker 1: that here in just a second. But their defense I've
Speaker 1: never lost faith in. However, their offense can go through
Speaker 1: these extended stretches where they're terrible, which we've talked about
Speaker 1: a lot, but when it clicks, when they do have
Speaker 1: it going on offense, they're literally unbeatable. And they took
Speaker 1: a very good Miami Heat team that is extremely well coached,
Speaker 1: a Miami Heat team that thoroughly understands the stakes of
Speaker 1: that game. Eric Spoelstra, pat Riley, everybody in that locker
Speaker 1: room is thoroughly aware of how important it was for
Speaker 1: them to take a two oh lead on the Boston
Speaker 1: Celtics tonight, and they got their ass kicked. They got
Speaker 1: completely and utterly outclassed because Boston threw their best punch.
Speaker 1: Boston is not always gonna throw their best punch, and
Speaker 1: we're gonna get into that. But this is what that
Speaker 1: looks like, and what you guys saw tonight is exactly
Speaker 1: why I've been so confident in this team. It is again,
Speaker 1: not a take for the sake of a take, it's
Speaker 1: just basketball analysis. If any of you guys have watched
Speaker 1: enough NBA basketball this year and you know if your team,
Speaker 1: in this case, the team I covered, the Lakers, is
Speaker 1: out of the picture, you probably agree with me because
Speaker 1: if you've been watching the tape and you've been paying
Speaker 1: attention to the numbers, they're irrefutable, they're undeniable. Boston has
Speaker 1: been the best team in basketball pretty much since the
Speaker 1: turn of the calendar. And this is what it looks
Speaker 1: like when all those things click. So let's get into
Speaker 1: the weeds of the excess and knows a little bit.
Speaker 1: The video that I made yesterday or today, I suppose
Speaker 1: I released it today but I started making it. Yesterday
Speaker 1: I talked about Boston's defensive scheme and the two different
Speaker 1: schemes that they run, and to be clear, they run
Speaker 1: both schemes for very specific reasons. You know, I ran
Speaker 1: into this a lot when I was dealing with the
Speaker 1: Lakers and Frank Vogel and some of the archaic schemes
Speaker 1: that he would run. There is no such thing as
Speaker 1: a scheme that doesn't work when it's executed properly. Everything
Speaker 1: works well when it's executed properly, right. I mean, even
Speaker 1: a two three zone, when run properly, can be an
Speaker 1: extremely difficult defense to score on. It just so happens
Speaker 1: that different defensive schemes work better in different matchups. So
Speaker 1: you know, for instance, if you're playing against a team
Speaker 1: like Dallas, giving up too many switches can be a
Speaker 1: bad thing because they're so good at it to acting
Speaker 1: switches right, So you're kind of playing into Dallas's strengths
Speaker 1: when you do that. Andrew Wiggins did an amazing job
Speaker 1: trying to avoid switches with Luca as much as possible
Speaker 1: last night. He only did so when he absolutely had to.
Speaker 1: We're gonna dive into that further later, but The point
Speaker 1: is is like against the team like Dallas, you might
Speaker 1: be better off running some different types of coverages, some
Speaker 1: traditional coverages, right, But you know against teams like Phoenix,
Speaker 1: against teams like Phoenix, against teams like Boston, against teams
Speaker 1: like Golden State, against teams like Miami, a different coverage
Speaker 1: might work in each of those instances. Now, what happened
Speaker 1: in Game one was Boston came out and ran a
Speaker 1: drop coverage. We've broken that down a million times on
Speaker 1: the show. I'm not gonna get into it again. The
Speaker 1: gist of it is is the big sits down lower,
Speaker 1: lower than the screen, and so if the guard comes
Speaker 1: off and catches the defender on the screen, he's gonna
Speaker 1: get a clean look. And I showed you guys extensive
Speaker 1: evidence again. Follow me on Twitter at Underscore Jason lt
Speaker 1: and you'll see the video that I released. It's under
Speaker 1: the branding that's his TIMPs tape, and you'll see exactly
Speaker 1: what I'm talking about play by play the way Game
Speaker 1: one turned on Boston giving Miami wide open jump shots
Speaker 1: coming off of these screens, and they did it again
Speaker 1: to start tonight. And the reason why you may Judoka
Speaker 1: does that has to do with Robert Williams. One of
Speaker 1: the things that you know, Boston does a ton of switching,
Speaker 1: and they did a ton of switching for most of
Speaker 1: the last six months. But they do mix and drop,
Speaker 1: and they've almost exclusively done it with Robert Williams and
Speaker 1: Al Horford on the floor. The reason why it's simple,
Speaker 1: they love having Robert Williams on the back line. Now,
Speaker 1: what typically happens with NBA defenses and NBA offenses is
Speaker 1: they drag your big man up to the level of
Speaker 1: the screen by running high, pick and roll with a
Speaker 1: guard that can shoot right. It's a great way to
Speaker 1: get the big out of the paint. The problem is,
Speaker 1: what if you've got two bigs that can do that
Speaker 1: but still thrive on the perimeter the way that Al
Speaker 1: Horford can. Well, what Boston does is they have Al
Speaker 1: Horford defend the screen actions. He's more agile, so he
Speaker 1: can be up at the screen better right, and if
Speaker 1: for whatever reason he has to switch, he's capable of
Speaker 1: guarding in isolation situations. And then if there is a
Speaker 1: roleman or anything going to the basket, there's Robert Williams
Speaker 1: waiting on the back line. That's why they do that
Speaker 1: the problem is is that more often than not, Miami's
Speaker 1: getting the Boston guards caught on that screen. Al Horford
Speaker 1: is just a step too low and they're getting clean
Speaker 1: looks coming off of that. And so again it's not
Speaker 1: that that coverages inherently flawed, it's about the matchup. Miami
Speaker 1: is a very good basketball team on certain facets. They're
Speaker 1: extremely well coached, they have an amazing front office, They're
Speaker 1: very well managed from the top down. Right, they have
Speaker 1: a really good offensive foot crim and Jimmy Butler a superstar,
Speaker 1: and he was pretty damn good again tonight, right, this
Speaker 1: is like one of his lesser playoff games, and he
Speaker 1: was really really good. And then outside of that, they
Speaker 1: have a ton of defensive talent, right, even you know,
Speaker 1: guys like Gay Vincent. They they aren't necessarily freak talents
Speaker 1: in terms of their length and size, but what they
Speaker 1: are is they're sturdy and they compete, and so they're
Speaker 1: difficult to beat off the knock off their spot or
Speaker 1: to beat off the dribble. And then Bamata Bio is
Speaker 1: one of the best defensive players in the NBA. P J.
Speaker 1: Tucker is one of the best defensive wings in the
Speaker 1: NBA and Jimmy Butler is one of the best defensive
Speaker 1: wings in the NBA. So they're great defensive talent, a
Speaker 1: lot of guys who can shoot in great coaching, great
Speaker 1: upper management. What's one thing they do not have. They
Speaker 1: do not have multiple guys that can create their own shot.
Speaker 1: Once upon a time that was Victor Oladipot, not anymore.
Speaker 1: He needs a ball screen now pretty much. Tyler Harrow
Speaker 1: is okay if he gets a really good mismatch, but
Speaker 1: for the most part, he's gonna thrive when he can
Speaker 1: get an advantage coming off of screen. Duncan Robinson almost
Speaker 1: exclusively spotting up and coming off of screens, gave Vincent
Speaker 1: and Max Drew's almost exclusively spotting up and coming off
Speaker 1: of screens. You guys get the point. That's what the
Speaker 1: way that Miami's roster is built. There's specific weakness is
Speaker 1: dribble creation. The advantage of a switching scheme is it
Speaker 1: tests your dribble creation. We literally saw in Game one
Speaker 1: Miami go to it a super aggressive switching help, you know,
Speaker 1: aggressive help, lots of switching, lots of ball pressure, lots
Speaker 1: of playing the passing lanes. In the second half of
Speaker 1: game one in Boston, who has a tendency to go
Speaker 1: through extended stretches where their ball handling is poor. They
Speaker 1: completely fell apart. And what I thought was so interesting
Speaker 1: tonight is they came out in that first quarter and
Speaker 1: started with Robert Williams and Al Horford and came out
Speaker 1: running their drop in. Miami was getting great looks and
Speaker 1: they had a lead early. I think they were up
Speaker 1: seen actually had a bigger leading that at one point,
Speaker 1: I think they're up eighteen to eight. But then right
Speaker 1: around I think it was right around the four three
Speaker 1: or four minute mark of the first quarter, Great Williams
Speaker 1: checks in for Rob Williams. They instantly start switching everything
Speaker 1: and suddenly Miami can't score and Boston immediately goes on
Speaker 1: a seven run. Now to be clear, later in the
Speaker 1: game they had stretches with Robert Williams that went well,
Speaker 1: because again, when they run their drop coverage and they
Speaker 1: do it well, it works. In the video I presented
Speaker 1: to you guys, I showed examples of how early in
Speaker 1: the game they did a good job of blowing up
Speaker 1: those gibl handoffs by staying attached to the offensive player.
Speaker 1: But it's exhausting and they went through an extended stretch
Speaker 1: after that where they kept dying on the screens, and
Speaker 1: that when Miami got going. Obviously, when they do it,
Speaker 1: it works, it's just more difficult and it plays into
Speaker 1: Miami strengths, Whereas when you switch everything, it tests their
Speaker 1: specific weakness. And when you do that to a team
Speaker 1: that has less talent than you, now you're gonna have
Speaker 1: a big advantage. Whereas in Game one, when you play
Speaker 1: directly into their strengths, even though they're less talented than you,
Speaker 1: if they happen to get hot and make shots and
Speaker 1: you happen to have one of your bad offensive nights,
Speaker 1: you get blown out. And I've always thought this was
Speaker 1: super interesting because I think it's stubbornness, I would imagine.
Speaker 1: But for whatever reason, this particular screen scheme, this switching scheme,
Speaker 1: is still way too slow to be adopted in the NBA.
Speaker 1: Almost every NBA team now is switching guard actions or
Speaker 1: switching wing actions, but there's nowhere near enough switching involving bigs.
Speaker 1: And it's just it's just super interesting to me how slow,
Speaker 1: how slow these teams are to adopt that. There are
Speaker 1: a couple of other interesting things that I thought Boston
Speaker 1: weaponized in this game to get going. They got going
Speaker 1: in transition off of turnovers. Again, Miami is a great
Speaker 1: defensive team, and even though Boston played really well tonight
Speaker 1: offensively shot the ball really well, they will have moments
Speaker 1: in this series when they don't and you do want
Speaker 1: to try to avoid Miami's half court defense tonight twenty
Speaker 1: points off of turnovers. Look at my look at Milwaukee
Speaker 1: and how they stayed alive in the last round even
Speaker 1: though they got utterly bludgeoned in the half court by Boston.
Speaker 1: They only scored eighty two points per one possessions in
Speaker 1: the half court last round, but they stole three games
Speaker 1: by staying out of the half court, by getting out
Speaker 1: in transition, and magnifying their possessions in Game five by
Speaker 1: getting a boatload of offensive rebounds. Those swing factors that
Speaker 1: surround the static half court environment are great ways to
Speaker 1: bolster your chances of winning. Then, forcing turnovers and getting
Speaker 1: out of transition is the difference between this being a
Speaker 1: close game that Boston wins and a safe game that
Speaker 1: Boston utterly destroys them. It's what allows you to weather
Speaker 1: yet another strong Jimmy Butler performance. Again, when you do,
Speaker 1: especially when you go to those switching schemes, you expect
Speaker 1: Jimmy to have some success. He's gonna attack Marcus Smart,
Speaker 1: he's gonna attack Al Horford. He's gonna attack Peyton Pritchard.
Speaker 1: When Derrek White gets back, he's gonna attack Derek White.
Speaker 1: And he's gonna have some big scoring nights in this
Speaker 1: series already has I think he's averaging like thirty five
Speaker 1: or something stupid like that through two games, but everyone
Speaker 1: else is gonna struggle. I've shared some clips from this game.
Speaker 1: There's a huge difference between what Tyler Harrow looks like
Speaker 1: trying to beat people off the dribble compared to what
Speaker 1: he looks like when he's coming off his screens and
Speaker 1: he's free to fire. And you know, there's so much
Speaker 1: better than Miami that it might not matter. I expect
Speaker 1: Boston to win the next two games, and then I
Speaker 1: give him a good chance to win Game five. But
Speaker 1: I wouldn't be surprised if Miami one Game five Boston
Speaker 1: didn't play as well. I mean, but like again, if
Speaker 1: you're a Miami fan, and I know there's some of
Speaker 1: you listening, like Boston shot the ship out of the basketball,
Speaker 1: the shot, the laces off the basketball. I get that.
Speaker 1: I get that you're sitting there thinking, man, they made everything,
Speaker 1: and there are gonna be nights where they don't. Like
Speaker 1: if Boston goes into Miami and Game five and loses,
Speaker 1: it'll probably be because they don't shoot well and they
Speaker 1: don't take care of the basketball, and they kind of
Speaker 1: replicate some of the things from Game one. That's why
Speaker 1: I picked Miami to drag this series out to six,
Speaker 1: even though I think Miami is significantly worse in terms
Speaker 1: of talent. But the reality is is there is a
Speaker 1: cumulative ball handling and scoring and passing, an overall offensive
Speaker 1: ability advantage that massively favors Boston on the offensive end.
Speaker 1: There's a cumulative athleticism and strength and ability to cover
Speaker 1: ground and all those things that favors Boston on the
Speaker 1: defensive end. So even if some shooting stuff goes your way,
Speaker 1: they're just gonna win there, just better. You know, the
Speaker 1: cumulative ball handling is so important in these five out concepts,
Speaker 1: you know, because it's not so much about what Tatum
Speaker 1: can do or what Jimmy Butler can do, it's what
Speaker 1: everyone else can do. When Jimmy Butler Tatum draws, the
Speaker 1: second defender, kicks to an open shooter, and the defense
Speaker 1: starts rotating. Really good defenses will never give up the
Speaker 1: driving kick to the single the first shot, or very
Speaker 1: rarely the Utah Jazz Garbage Azz defense. Remember them in
Speaker 1: the first round when like Jalen Brunson would beat one
Speaker 1: guy to the dribble and quick kick to Maxie Cleverer.
Speaker 1: There'll be no no rotation wide open three. Yeah, that
Speaker 1: doesn't happen often against really good defenses. What actually happens
Speaker 1: is you have to break them down in multiple rotations.
Speaker 1: And that is where the cumulative ball handling and the
Speaker 1: cumulative shooting and the cumulative basketball i Q of your
Speaker 1: lineups becomes your advantage. And a small samples eies like
Speaker 1: game one, Miami is gonna have the capability of winning
Speaker 1: in a small sample size bad coverage idea from email.
Speaker 1: You don't get too much drop Marcus Smart being out
Speaker 1: of the game. We're can talk about humages a second.
Speaker 1: Obviously a Horford being out of the game. You then
Speaker 1: a small sample size that can go either way. But
Speaker 1: in any large sample size in a seven game series,
Speaker 1: if a team has a massive advantage on offense in
Speaker 1: ball handling and shooting and passing and size and athleticism,
Speaker 1: and then we go to the other side, and Boston
Speaker 1: is a massive advantage and size and athleticism and commitment
Speaker 1: to the defensive end. Like I mean, Miami is just
Speaker 1: as committed, but Boston just hays better players. So they're
Speaker 1: they're just gonna win in any sort of large sample size,
Speaker 1: barring injury or some sort of you know, crazy circumstance.
Speaker 1: I want to talk about Marcus Smart now Horford for
Speaker 1: a second, because they were vitally important on a bunch
Speaker 1: of different levels. Marcus Smart, I believe he had, like
Speaker 1: I don't have the box gore in front of you,
Speaker 1: but I think he had like twin two and twelve
Speaker 1: assists tonight. That's a huge influx that raises that cumulative
Speaker 1: ball handling and athleticism. That's how valuable he is on
Speaker 1: that front. He is very good at chasing guys over
Speaker 1: the top of screens and can defend and switches, so
Speaker 1: he's a defensive weapon. That's a huge loss from game one.
Speaker 1: Al Horford we talked about extensively, you know, so coming
Speaker 1: into tonight, Boston was averaging eleven point one points more
Speaker 1: per one hundre possessions on offense with Robert Williams off
Speaker 1: the floor. The main reason why is the same concept
Speaker 1: I've talked about a million times on the show. Vertical
Speaker 1: spacing is a real thing, but it's nowhere near as
Speaker 1: effective as perimeter spacing, because perimeter spacing is what gives
Speaker 1: guys comfortable, makes guys comfortable driving to the basket. With
Speaker 1: Robert Williams on the floor they're facing is worse. Bam
Speaker 1: is pretty much consistently around the basket and it just
Speaker 1: makes things harder. Now, their defense is better with Rob Williams.
Speaker 1: He's amazing shot blocker who has a lot of ability
Speaker 1: to cover ground. There about six points better in this
Speaker 1: postseason on defense without Rob william or with Rob Williams
Speaker 1: versus without But when you're eleven points better on offense
Speaker 1: without them, that's when they're at their best. But Al
Speaker 1: Horford is what unlocks that. Because Daniel Tys is the
Speaker 1: guy that can shoot, but no one guards. Al Horford
Speaker 1: gets left open a lot, but like he's deadly out there,
Speaker 1: it's just a critical mistake to leave him open, and
Speaker 1: so having Al Horford back one so they can they
Speaker 1: can run email U Dooka's desire drop coverage with Rob
Speaker 1: Williams on the back line, which again was terrible to
Speaker 1: start the game, had some successful stretches later. It's not
Speaker 1: my favorite strategy for Boston in this series, but it
Speaker 1: does work when it's run properly. Al Horford unlocks that.
Speaker 1: On the other end of the floor, Al Horford unlocks
Speaker 1: your five out attack. Make sure offense better and Marcus
Speaker 1: Smart increases the cumulative ball handling and passing ability on offense,
Speaker 1: and he gives you another offensive weapon or defensive weapon.
Speaker 1: So them coming back obviously was a huge swing factor
Speaker 1: in this as well. You know one thing I wanted
Speaker 1: to touch on really quick because I don't think it's
Speaker 1: a coincidence necessarily that there have been this many blowouts
Speaker 1: in a row. So I have a theory. Now, these theories,
Speaker 1: they're what I don't know what a theory is worth
Speaker 1: to you, guys. I don't have any evidence to back
Speaker 1: this up. Early, it's just when I think I'm seeing.
Speaker 1: But as the game has changed, as we've ditched the
Speaker 1: traditional built like a fridge power forward, as we've ditched
Speaker 1: the traditional back to the basket, traditional center and we've
Speaker 1: replaced that with another super athletic wing that can shoot,
Speaker 1: pass and dribble, and a center that's more mobile, probably
Speaker 1: a perimeter oriented center. Right as we've replaced those two positions,
Speaker 1: the overall foot speed of all of these teams is
Speaker 1: so much faster. The everyone's playing either four out, one
Speaker 1: in or five out as opposed to three out two
Speaker 1: in the way they used to ten years ago. Right
Speaker 1: As a result of that, the job of covering ground
Speaker 1: on defense is much hard, and so I think everyone
Speaker 1: feeding off of their home crowd is helping in that department.
Speaker 1: That's why you're seeing somebody home blowout solthough we saw
Speaker 1: Boston and Dallas rip off some road bloots recently. But
Speaker 1: a huge part of it, and this is what I
Speaker 1: think is the biggest driving force, is rhythm. In traditional basketball,
Speaker 1: the average shot was way closer to the basket, and
Speaker 1: shots that are closer to the basket are notoriously higher percentage.
Speaker 1: They're notoriously shots that rely less on rhythm. In five
Speaker 1: out basketball, it's a lot of dribble jump shots, it's
Speaker 1: a lot of long threes, it's a lot of more
Speaker 1: complicated offensive actions that are very much reliant on rhythm
Speaker 1: and confidence, and so what I think we're seeing is
Speaker 1: all of these teams going through super extended stretches where
Speaker 1: it's like we either have it tonight or we don't.
Speaker 1: Like Boston's offense completely combusted in that second half half
Speaker 1: of Game one and there was no reconciling that, like
Speaker 1: it was like it was like that and the game
Speaker 1: was over. But then they come out tonight and they
Speaker 1: have that confidence, they have that swagger that damned near
Speaker 1: hang seventy they do hang seventy points in the first half,
Speaker 1: and they beat the hell out of you. Right. Dallas'
Speaker 1: offense we saw in Game seven against Phoenix. Luca's gotta
Speaker 1: go and didn't what He's gotta go and Brunson's gotta
Speaker 1: go on, all the shooters gotta go on. We're kicking
Speaker 1: your ass. We're going to Game one and we're gonna
Speaker 1: talk about this in a little bit. Dallas got wide
Speaker 1: open looks and they just couldn't make. And so I
Speaker 1: think that that that oscillating nature between your good side
Speaker 1: as a five out team and your bad side as
Speaker 1: a five out team is way more dramatic than your
Speaker 1: good side and bad side in traditional three out two
Speaker 1: in play out of the post basketball. So that's my
Speaker 1: theory again, take that for whatever that's worth. A couple
Speaker 1: of adjustments from Miami really quick, um, because you're you
Speaker 1: don't you you can't play this team straight up, you
Speaker 1: just don't have enough talent. But your best opportunity to
Speaker 1: stay alive in this series and to compete is to
Speaker 1: give yourself, your offensive players the best chance to succeed
Speaker 1: because your defense it is what it is at this point,
Speaker 1: right Like you trust Eric Spoilsure to figure out a
Speaker 1: way to make Boston struggle more offensively, but when you're
Speaker 1: on offense, it can't just be Jimmy. Everyone has to
Speaker 1: be going for this to work. Email Judoka has demonstrated
Speaker 1: that he will drop under specific circumstances, and so Miami
Speaker 1: needs to find a way two explicitly attack that find out.
Speaker 1: And it appears to me it's like any time Tyson
Speaker 1: is on the floor, which I don't even think he
Speaker 1: played tonight, or not much at least anytime Robert Williams
Speaker 1: is on the floor, because they seem to run it
Speaker 1: with Robert Williams those in those situations, and but they
Speaker 1: did it with Grant Williams too. And they did. They
Speaker 1: did some switching with Grant Williams and At Horford at
Speaker 1: the four five to like again. I shared some of
Speaker 1: these clips on my Twitter feed, like it doesn't. It
Speaker 1: doesn't seem to be much of a rhymer reason too
Speaker 1: when that the Celtics do that, it seems like when
Speaker 1: they feel like it or when they don't feel like it.
Speaker 1: But try to target those situations because that's your best
Speaker 1: opportunity to get looks for Tyler Harrold, Gabe Vincent, Max
Speaker 1: Drew's get their confidence going. Says you're better offensively than
Speaker 1: then trust your defense to carry you on the other end.
Speaker 1: But there's not a lot of great adjustment options for you.
Speaker 1: You did the same aggressive defense, like picking up Tatum
Speaker 1: full court, pressing up into Jalen Brown doing You did
Speaker 1: all the same things you did in the second half
Speaker 1: against Boston in Game one. They just didn't combust this time.
Speaker 1: Like I said, Miami is a really tough team that
Speaker 1: will cause problems for teams that aren't tough. But what
Speaker 1: did I tell you, guys? I said, Boston's tough and
Speaker 1: I expect them to respond and they did. Alright, guys,
Speaker 1: we are going to bring on Carson, and we're going
Speaker 1: to get a little bit further into both of these series.
Speaker 1: Hey Buddy, Hey Jason, we certainly are so obviously you
Speaker 1: broke down all of the keys to the Night's game.
Speaker 1: But let's broaden the scope a little bit here. We
Speaker 1: have FanDuel odds on the series overall, which Boston they
Speaker 1: have at minus to thirty to win. We don't have
Speaker 1: a game three spread. But given those odds and just overall,
Speaker 1: who do you like in game three to go out
Speaker 1: and win? And who do you like in this series
Speaker 1: at this point? So for both series, I had Boston
Speaker 1: in six and Dallas and six, but I expected it
Speaker 1: to take a different path. I figured Boston would steal
Speaker 1: one in Miami, win games three and four, then possibly
Speaker 1: lose Game five in Miami, then close out in six.
Speaker 1: I think Dallas is gonna follow a very similar path
Speaker 1: to the Phoenix series. I expect them to lose again
Speaker 1: tomorrow and then I think they'll win games three and
Speaker 1: four and then and continue along the way that with
Speaker 1: with Boston, I think that they're gonna win big in
Speaker 1: Game three. I think that this is going to be
Speaker 1: the the worst team that they've played in front of
Speaker 1: their home crowd. Yet in this postseason, Um again, I
Speaker 1: we don't, guys, go look at the numbers. Look at
Speaker 1: how successfully Brooklyn scored against this Boston defense. It's kind
Speaker 1: of wild. Now relative to the regular season, it was great.
Speaker 1: Like I told you, guys, like Boston basically dropped Katie
Speaker 1: and Kyrie's regular season offense from about a one three
Speaker 1: offensive rating to like a one fourteen, so about a
Speaker 1: nine point drop. And then they dropped the Bucks from
Speaker 1: about a one oh five offensive rating in the regular
Speaker 1: season without Chris Middleton to about a nine in that
Speaker 1: series without Chris Middleton. Right, so about a ten point
Speaker 1: drop in both series. Right. But again, so much clouded
Speaker 1: our judgment about Brooklyn in that series because we just
Speaker 1: wanted to talk shit, right about Katie and Kyrie and
Speaker 1: all that stuff. So I actually think that Miami going
Speaker 1: into Boston is gonna be a little bit of a
Speaker 1: buzz saw. Like even if it, I think they would
Speaker 1: have to shoot extremely poorly for that game to be close.
Speaker 1: So I would be on Boston, my guests, Carson is
Speaker 1: the spread will be like six and a half or
Speaker 1: seven in Game three, and and I would be on
Speaker 1: Boston there because I think they'd win by fifteen to twenty.
Speaker 1: What do you think the probability is that Boston wins
Speaker 1: out from here and makes it a gentleman sweep, very
Speaker 1: high probability. That's why I like Syrius. I think they
Speaker 1: I think they have serious spreads on fan duels so
Speaker 1: you can get like the smart money there would be
Speaker 1: like if you could get uh Boston minus one and
Speaker 1: a half games, because then if they win and if
Speaker 1: they get perfect, if you if you win in five,
Speaker 1: you're clear, and if they win in six, you're clear.
Speaker 1: That that that would be the way that I would
Speaker 1: bet it. But it's kind of like the way I
Speaker 1: look at it is, Game five in Miami would be
Speaker 1: a coin flip, and Miami very well could win if
Speaker 1: Boston brought their ugly side, and if Boston brought their
Speaker 1: good side, they'd close him out. All right, Well, let's
Speaker 1: move on from that series now and play a staple
Speaker 1: here at Hoops tonight. It's a game called that's what
Speaker 1: he said. We've got a couple of fun oats tonight.
Speaker 1: Both come from Draymond Green and The Draymond Green Show
Speaker 1: here at the volume. The first one, Draymond gave some
Speaker 1: thoughts on the job that Andrew Wiggins has done guarding
Speaker 1: Luca don chet Or did in Game one, a task
Speaker 1: that frankly has seemed impossible for a lot of the
Speaker 1: playoffs in the home stretch of the regular season. Let's
Speaker 1: take a listen to what Draymond had to say about that.
Speaker 1: I know there's been this thing about oh man, Luca
Speaker 1: had his worst shooting game in his postseason career. Andrew
Speaker 1: Wiggins played amazing defense. He picked them up ninet, he
Speaker 1: got into him. He didn't allow him to dictate the
Speaker 1: terms on his home pace. Jason, what do you think
Speaker 1: about that? What did you think of the job that
Speaker 1: Wiggy did on Luca in Game one? So I when
Speaker 1: I watched that video earlier today, which again, all of
Speaker 1: you guys listening, I'm sure all of you are already
Speaker 1: watching Draymond's content, but it's so awesome to get to
Speaker 1: hear directly from him. Um. So I missed this last
Speaker 1: night watching the game. And this is something that I
Speaker 1: encourage all of you guys that are listening to have
Speaker 1: ambitions of working in this business at some point. Rewatch
Speaker 1: the games. It's just impossible to catch anything on the
Speaker 1: first watch. Everything on the first watch, and you know,
Speaker 1: I caught a lot of things live, but one of
Speaker 1: the things I missed and that I caught almost immediately
Speaker 1: on my rewatch today was the effect, the cumulative effect
Speaker 1: that Andrew Wiggins had on Luca Um. Again. You know,
Speaker 1: I talked about before the series that there's nobody on
Speaker 1: Golden State that can guard Luca, and I think I
Speaker 1: think Andrew Wiggins falls into that category as well. But
Speaker 1: one of the things he did, and Draymond mentioned this,
Speaker 1: is he picked up Luca ninety four feet and with
Speaker 1: the exception of a handful possessions were in transition, there
Speaker 1: were cross matches and stuff like that. Like before he
Speaker 1: even got across half court, he's just riding him all
Speaker 1: over the floor. And what all that does is it
Speaker 1: just it just wears you out. Like, don't get me wrong,
Speaker 1: it's gonna wear Andrew Wiggins out too, because lucas big
Speaker 1: and he's gonna bump you all over the place and
Speaker 1: it's tough. But flip side of that is, like Andrew Wiggins,
Speaker 1: you're not depending on him for nearly as much on
Speaker 1: the offensive end of the floor, so you're willing to
Speaker 1: give that up, right, Andrew Wiggins did a phenomenal job
Speaker 1: in that game of just making life difficult for Luca.
Speaker 1: And ironically, one of my biggest adjustments that I have
Speaker 1: for Dallas, and we'll talk a little bit more about
Speaker 1: this in a little bit, is just find a way
Speaker 1: to not have Luca bring the ball up the floor.
Speaker 1: And that's the advantage of all the ball handling that
Speaker 1: Dallas has, and I think they will have the ability
Speaker 1: to counter that. But again, like there's always too Lucas point,
Speaker 1: or to Draymond's point, something that I've always agreed with,
Speaker 1: you know, in any sort of small sample size. Yeah,
Speaker 1: shooting plays a role. We're gonna talk about shooting later.
Speaker 1: We're gonna talk about bad nights and good nights. But
Speaker 1: there's always a reason for why teams don't play well.
Speaker 1: Like I, I I personally think that a good amount of
Speaker 1: why Dallas didn't play well is just unfilm unfamiliarity. You
Speaker 1: grow so accustomed to playing against the team you're playing
Speaker 1: against every night for two weeks, and then you completely
Speaker 1: change and go against an entirely different style. It's just different,
Speaker 1: you know, Like Wiggins is not as long in terms
Speaker 1: of his wingspan as Michael Bridges, but he is a
Speaker 1: little quicker and he's stronger, and so even though Michael
Speaker 1: Bridge has applied a lot of ball pressure to Luka
Speaker 1: dan Chich, it's just different ball pressure. It's very different
Speaker 1: ball pressure, and you could tell that it had an
Speaker 1: impact on him. But again, like I and we're gonna
Speaker 1: get it further into this in just a second, Like,
Speaker 1: there are a lot of reasons why things went the
Speaker 1: way they did, but a huge part of it, I
Speaker 1: thought in Game one was Wiggins just chipping away at
Speaker 1: Luca in the form of fatigue, by just ball pressing
Speaker 1: the hell out of him throughout the entire game, and
Speaker 1: and just the cumulative effect that can have on a player. Well,
Speaker 1: first of all, Jason, it looks like you nailed the
Speaker 1: spread on the head it as it has actually been
Speaker 1: at at plus six and a half for Game three
Speaker 1: of Celtics Heat. So well done on that. Let's talk
Speaker 1: about Wiggins specifically for a second, because he is such
Speaker 1: an interesting player, and it feels like the discourse with
Speaker 1: him is always so voluable, and he was so slandered
Speaker 1: for so long, and then he was so effusively praised
Speaker 1: for adjusting and playing winning basketball, and he was an
Speaker 1: All Star starter, mostly because he's a warrior and because
Speaker 1: of some K Pop stands. But nevertheless, and then because
Speaker 1: of that, it swung back the other way and people
Speaker 1: were overly critical of him, and he had a little
Speaker 1: bit of a rough stretch offensively, but just overall, how
Speaker 1: important do you think he is in this series and
Speaker 1: how highly do you value him overall as a basketball player.
Speaker 1: So in this series he's vitally important because he's lucas
Speaker 1: primary defender. And another huge detail is in Game one.
Speaker 1: I don't know how consistent this will be in the series,
Speaker 1: but in Game one, Andrew Wiggins put a decent amount
Speaker 1: of pressure on Luca trying to score, and like on
Speaker 1: on rewatching film, like there are possessions where Andrew just
Speaker 1: brought the ball up the floor and was like, no
Speaker 1: need to run anything, guys, I'm just going at him
Speaker 1: and scored on Luca and isolation like that. That is
Speaker 1: audacity was one of my new go to words. I
Speaker 1: tend to repeat words a lot, as you guys know
Speaker 1: and like, but that's important as terms of valuing him.
Speaker 1: I value him massively in his current role. Now. The
Speaker 1: reason why he's been so maligned is like he lacks
Speaker 1: audacity in a consistent sense, right, Like if he had,
Speaker 1: if I could take Dylan Brooks's conscience put it into
Speaker 1: Andrew Wiggins's body, the dude be an all star. But
Speaker 1: like Andrew goes from one day feeling like he's capable
Speaker 1: of being the best player on the floor to most
Speaker 1: nights walking in and comfortable being a role player, whereas
Speaker 1: Dylan Brooks will walk into a game being the seventh
Speaker 1: best player on the floor and think it's my time, shine,
Speaker 1: you know what I mean. So, like that's the difference
Speaker 1: in in the psyche between those two guys. And you know, obviously,
Speaker 1: if Wiggins could channel that more frequently in that series
Speaker 1: would be a huge swing. But he is vitally important
Speaker 1: because he's lucas primary defender. And again this is an
Speaker 1: important Again, anytime I talk about these concepts, whether it's
Speaker 1: drop or switching, there's always complications within that with like
Speaker 1: for instance, Carson and a drop. You know, sometimes you
Speaker 1: can drop and go under the screen, sometimes you can
Speaker 1: drop and go over the screen. Sometimes you can run
Speaker 1: a version of a drop where the the guy who's
Speaker 1: the screen defender is up at the level of the screen,
Speaker 1: or even hedging and recovering or or sitting all the
Speaker 1: way back in the paint. Like there's always different variations
Speaker 1: of all these different things. Some teams offer help off
Speaker 1: the ball in screen and roll coverage. Some teams don't,
Speaker 1: you know, switching it's the same thing, like you can run,
Speaker 1: you know, like the Cavaliers, for instance, towards the end
Speaker 1: of the lebron Kyrie era, where what they did a
Speaker 1: ton of switching, but they were lazy with it and
Speaker 1: they would just switch everything without even necessarily needing to.
Speaker 1: And and one of the things that I liked that
Speaker 1: Wiggins did last night is like if he would surrender
Speaker 1: the switch if he had to that he fought like
Speaker 1: hell to not and all it did is just eat
Speaker 1: more shot clock. And one of the things we've consistently
Speaker 1: talked about with Dallas is when you work forced them
Speaker 1: to work late into the shot clock, then Luca is
Speaker 1: making those kickouts with only a handful of seconds on
Speaker 1: the shot clock, and there's not enough time for people
Speaker 1: to make an additional rotation. And part of the advantage
Speaker 1: of fighting through those switches and ball pressuring Luca all
Speaker 1: the way up the floor is by the time he
Speaker 1: gets to where he wants to kind of initiate offense,
Speaker 1: there's like twelve seconds on the clock, right, and so
Speaker 1: by the time he actually makes a move and gets
Speaker 1: by somebody, there's six or seven seconds left and you're there,
Speaker 1: you're out of time. So like that's a huge value
Speaker 1: at and by the way, that's something that doesn't manifest
Speaker 1: in the in the box score. It's something that you
Speaker 1: have to watch the games to see and and it's
Speaker 1: it's just one of those little details, one of the
Speaker 1: many factors that can swing a playoff series. All right,
Speaker 1: we've got another quote from Draymond here. Obviously, it was
Speaker 1: a pretty convincing Game one victory for the Dubs in
Speaker 1: terms of the final score, but Draymond spoke on an
Speaker 1: area in which he thinks the Warriors can do even
Speaker 1: better going forward and improve upon. Let's he already had
Speaker 1: to say, I walked away from that game saying there's
Speaker 1: a lot of things that we could do better. No, granted,
Speaker 1: there's a lot of things that they can do better,
Speaker 1: but I think there are some things that we can
Speaker 1: really do better. And I also don't think we shot
Speaker 1: the ball very well either. And when I look at
Speaker 1: those things that that that really bowled well for US. Um,
Speaker 1: you know, Steph Curry didn't have an incredible shoot at night.
Speaker 1: Clay Thompson was one for four from three, Like, you know,
Speaker 1: we we can shoot a lot better. So, Jason, what
Speaker 1: are your thoughts on that when Draymond talks about that
Speaker 1: potential for shooting improvement from the Warriors. So, first of all,
Speaker 1: like I relate a thousand percent with his thought process there.
Speaker 1: I mean, I remember when I was playing in college.
Speaker 1: All the time, I'd have a monster game and I'd
Speaker 1: be on the ride home thinking about all the shots
Speaker 1: I missed, you know, the truth. The truth, like even
Speaker 1: even recently, like I I don't I I I mean
Speaker 1: two cent Arizona, I don't have much opportunity to play
Speaker 1: against high level basketball players. There was like a month
Speaker 1: ago there was a like a charity game where me
Speaker 1: and a bunch of older guys that are pretty out
Speaker 1: of shape got to play against the local junior college.
Speaker 1: And I was like, I was like just ready for
Speaker 1: that because I was like I finally get to play
Speaker 1: like some real basketball. And and it was so funny
Speaker 1: because I played really well. I had like thirty four points.
Speaker 1: We won the game, and and literally, I'm I was
Speaker 1: irritated for like three days about a possession towards the
Speaker 1: end where I had a chance to ice it, because
Speaker 1: we ended up winning an overtime, and there was a
Speaker 1: possession at the end of regulation where I made a
Speaker 1: misread and didn't thee help defender and turn the ball
Speaker 1: over and we ended up having to win the game
Speaker 1: in ot and I was so pissed about that for
Speaker 1: weeks after. But that's completely irrational. I'm thirty years old.
Speaker 1: I don't even play basketball for a living anymore. Like,
Speaker 1: there's no reason for me to be There's no reason
Speaker 1: for me to feel that way like it just it's
Speaker 1: just like as a competitor, it's just the way you're wired.
Speaker 1: Like there's no such thing as good enough. And so
Speaker 1: I relate with Draymond looking at that situation and saying,
Speaker 1: oh man, we could play so much better. Here's the thing,
Speaker 1: you can't play much better then you. Then you played
Speaker 1: in that game, of Draymond, I hate to break it
Speaker 1: to you. So I watched the film. You guys kicked
Speaker 1: their ass and almost every facet of the game, and
Speaker 1: you actually shot way better than that. And there's metrics
Speaker 1: and video to prove that, so I wanted to break
Speaker 1: that down really quick. So, uh, Golden State generated fourteen
Speaker 1: open threes. That's the defender between four and six ft away.
Speaker 1: They consider that like lightly contested on those, they only
Speaker 1: made three of them. You didn't shoot. Well, here's the thing.
Speaker 1: Dallas also had sixteen open three, so two more than you,
Speaker 1: and they only made three as well, So actually shot
Speaker 1: a little bit worse than you in open threes. On
Speaker 1: wide open threes, Golden State only generated twelve of them
Speaker 1: and they made six, So they got fifty on wide
Speaker 1: open threes last night. Again, that's defender at least six
Speaker 1: ft away, So that's like your butt naked on the
Speaker 1: perimeter all day to think about it. Right, Then, Dallas
Speaker 1: generated twenty eight wide open threes defender at least six
Speaker 1: ft away, and they only made eight. So they generated
Speaker 1: more than twice as many wide open threes as you
Speaker 1: and only made two more. And that was my big
Speaker 1: takeaway last night on the Live. If you guys remember Carson,
Speaker 1: I texted you about it during the game, We talked
Speaker 1: about it during the show. I was like, dude, it
Speaker 1: felt like Dallas was getting wide open shots and they
Speaker 1: were they were getting wide open shots, and I shared
Speaker 1: out the numbers and I've read them off to you.
Speaker 1: Basically every role player for Dallas in this postseason run
Speaker 1: was shooting over a wide open threes except for Reggie Bullock,
Speaker 1: who's arguably their best shooter. And so like, it's an
Speaker 1: anomaly for Dallas to not shoot that well. So like
Speaker 1: I I think the biggest reason why Dallas has an
Speaker 1: opportunity to keep keep things closer and or to turn
Speaker 1: the series around is they did what they were supposed
Speaker 1: to do going into Golden State. They generated high quality shots.
Speaker 1: Now there are a bunch of other things that Dallas
Speaker 1: has to do better, and we're gonna get into that.
Speaker 1: But like to Draymond's point, and again I totally understand
Speaker 1: why he feels the way he feels. I relate to it.
Speaker 1: I understand that's why he's been so damned successful. Nothing
Speaker 1: is good enough for him, and that's the way you
Speaker 1: have to be if you really want to be great
Speaker 1: at something. But you shot a lot better than Dallas,
Speaker 1: like way better than Dallas. So that's just not a
Speaker 1: realistic thing to look forward with. I will say, I
Speaker 1: don't know how much Draymond can relate to the thirty
Speaker 1: four piece and being upset with yourself. Although we did
Speaker 1: have thirty two, fifteen and nine in a Game seven
Speaker 1: of the finals, did you have thirty five in game seven?
Speaker 1: I think it's thirty two. I feel I have that stat,
Speaker 1: all right. I'll check that as you strike me, as
Speaker 1: you strike me as photographic memory, guys, so I would
Speaker 1: I would believe that you're probably right. I can name
Speaker 1: you every Finals MVP ever right now, if you give
Speaker 1: me the year, I do kind of have the photographic memory.
Speaker 1: All right, Um, let's talk about what you just mentioned
Speaker 1: a little bit there. What are some of those key
Speaker 1: adjustments for the MAVs as they try to bounce back
Speaker 1: from that Game one loss? So first and foremost, uh
Speaker 1: And I'm not even to get into the weeds on
Speaker 1: this because there's too many things to talk about. Dallas
Speaker 1: defense was terrible. They we're not staying connected to shooters.
Speaker 1: Their rotations on the back line were awful. Luca pretty
Speaker 1: much mailed in the game Defensively, Dallas just put on
Speaker 1: a defensive clinic in Game seven against Phoenix and let
Speaker 1: go like just to let their foot entirely off the gas.
Speaker 1: So Dallas simply has to be way way better defensively.
Speaker 1: So that's adjustment number one, and I trust Jason Kidd
Speaker 1: to figure that part out. Um adjustment number two, don't
Speaker 1: play into Golden State strategy of ball pressuring Luca the
Speaker 1: length of the floor. Now there's a downside to that,
Speaker 1: because one of the advantages of having Luca bring the
Speaker 1: ball up the floor is he is very much a
Speaker 1: strangle the pace type of player, and he's so methodical
Speaker 1: bringing the ball up the floor deliberately to just suck
Speaker 1: the life out of the arena and out of the
Speaker 1: other team, and to just and to just make it
Speaker 1: feel like you're stuck playing his game. So if you
Speaker 1: take the ball out of his hands, there's downside there.
Speaker 1: But there's no reason why you can't have Jalen Brunson
Speaker 1: or Spencer Dinwood he bring the ball up the floor
Speaker 1: and not have to stress necessarily about having to deal
Speaker 1: with that ball pressure. And you can tell them like, hey,
Speaker 1: once you get the ball to Luca here, you know,
Speaker 1: thirty feet from the rim on the right wing, then
Speaker 1: you could take your time, right, but you know you might.
Speaker 1: Andrew Wiggins is is physically equipped for ball pressure. We
Speaker 1: just talked about how he's quicker, a little bit shorter
Speaker 1: than mchael. I don't actually think he's shorter than mchael.
Speaker 1: Bridge is just not as long. But he's a better athlete.
Speaker 1: He's quicker. You know, he's good at ball pressure. They're
Speaker 1: guys on Golden State that are not create at ball pressure.
Speaker 1: Like they're like, I, you're not gonna waste steps energy
Speaker 1: by having him pick up because you need him for offense.
Speaker 1: So whoever, Steph Carding bring the ball up the floor. Hell, Like,
Speaker 1: there's no reason why you can't have Kivon Looney's man
Speaker 1: bring the ball up the floor when he's on the floor.
Speaker 1: Just find ways to avoid Luca having to deal with
Speaker 1: that ball pressure. No, that's not least like knocked down
Speaker 1: your open shots, man, Like, the goal of your offense
Speaker 1: is to create those shots, step into them confidently, knocked
Speaker 1: them down. Those are my major adjustments for Dallas. Obviously,
Speaker 1: things have gone very well for the MAVs overall to
Speaker 1: this point. They are among the last four teams in
Speaker 1: the NBA. Is still standing. But when you talk about
Speaker 1: the importance of alleviating that pressure from Luca long term
Speaker 1: as they continue to try to build out a championship
Speaker 1: caliber roster as good as Bronson is and as brilliant
Speaker 1: as some of the moments from din Witty are, although
Speaker 1: there are equally horrible moments from him. Often do you
Speaker 1: think that that second true perimeter star initiator, a guy
Speaker 1: who can alleviate that pressure and really you know, attack
Speaker 1: defenses on his own and playmate for others in command
Speaker 1: pressure of the game, is that the biggest need for
Speaker 1: the MAVs alongside Luca, Absolutely, and you know guys like
Speaker 1: it's only gonna get harder, Like if there I I
Speaker 1: think Dallas has a legitimate chance to win the title.
Speaker 1: I expect them if they do get to the finals
Speaker 1: to lose to Boston, but it would they would have
Speaker 1: fighting chance, right. The The thing is is that specifically
Speaker 1: with with the way that the league has become more
Speaker 1: talented at the top. So for instance, like Lebron and
Speaker 1: Anthony Davis are going to be back in this picture
Speaker 1: next year, Kawhile Leonard and Paul George are going to
Speaker 1: be back in this picture next year, Like Jamal Murray
Speaker 1: and Michael Porter Jr. Are gonna be back and bringing
Speaker 1: the league MVP back to a point where he has
Speaker 1: more talent to deal with, you know, even in the
Speaker 1: Eastern Conference, Like Philly went out softly this year, and
Speaker 1: they're gonna have some stuff figured out. Like chances are
Speaker 1: Kevin Durant's gonna have a better basketball team around him
Speaker 1: next year than he did this year. Like and the same,
Speaker 1: the same thing that don't make the mistake that golden
Speaker 1: that Milwaukee made where you won the title and then
Speaker 1: you thought you were good enough and you let go
Speaker 1: with p J Tucker, and then p J Tucker very
Speaker 1: well might have been a swing piece in that Celtics series. Right. So,
Speaker 1: like the way I look at it is like, even
Speaker 1: even if Dallas won the championship, at a certain point,
Speaker 1: you have to understand that the league, even even though
Speaker 1: it seems so top heavy right now, there are still
Speaker 1: teams that would be in this picture, great players that
Speaker 1: would be in this picture that aren't because of things
Speaker 1: that didn't go their way. Even the Chris Middleton think
Speaker 1: it's an injury. Right. So, Like my point is is
Speaker 1: like as good as Dallas has looked, even as a
Speaker 1: bona fide championship contender, even as Luca has ascended into
Speaker 1: true superstardom, you don't have enough talent, and if you
Speaker 1: signed Jalen Brunson to a long term deal, that could
Speaker 1: be an issue in the long run. And so I
Speaker 1: don't know what the answer there is, Like, I don't
Speaker 1: know if it's make moves on the margins two stockpiled
Speaker 1: draft picks so that maybe in the future you can
Speaker 1: flip Brunson and someone else in a bunch of picks
Speaker 1: and stuff for a player, a disgruntled star or what
Speaker 1: the deal is. But eventually, Luca is gonna need a
Speaker 1: real right hand man, a dependent a dependable one, because Brunson,
Speaker 1: who's a little bit more dependable than Spencer Dinwood, he
Speaker 1: is still not dependable on this level. And if you
Speaker 1: consistently surround Luca with guys who are kind of, you know, inconsistent,
Speaker 1: then it's gonna get him beat as things get tougher,
Speaker 1: especially in upcoming seasons. Yeah, I completely agree. And we
Speaker 1: just haven't seen a team win a title in a
Speaker 1: long time with one offensive star caliber player, Like I
Speaker 1: think you would have to go back to Dirk And
Speaker 1: maybe some people would argue the en Raps, but they
Speaker 1: had at least two quasi star offensive caliber guys with
Speaker 1: Lowry and Siakum alongside their supernova talent. So it just
Speaker 1: always seems like a really tall task. As incredible of
Speaker 1: a one man offense as Luca is, it just really
Speaker 1: is not done very often at all. Let's lip the
Speaker 1: Stile Warriors here. What are the key adjustments that they
Speaker 1: need to make? So there's not much because again, contrary
Speaker 1: to what Draymond said, they played pretty damn good in
Speaker 1: game one, um, you know, and there's always a give
Speaker 1: and take with that stuff too. That's the funny thing too,
Speaker 1: Like he was talking about, Oh, Clay Thompson can shoot better,
Speaker 1: Steph Curry can shoot better. Yeah, Like, but typically what
Speaker 1: happens is on the nights that they shoot better than
Speaker 1: Wiggins won't make as many shots, right, or Jordan Pool
Speaker 1: have an off night. Like it's always That's what's so
Speaker 1: great about Golden States cumulative offensive talent is you can
Speaker 1: afford to have guys having poor shooting nights and other
Speaker 1: guys will come have better shooting nights. I thought they
Speaker 1: played a damn near perfect defensive game, but there are
Speaker 1: two things. So Golden State averaged seventeen wide open threes
Speaker 1: allowed through the first two rounds of the playoffs is
Speaker 1: way too many. Forty four open to wide open shots
Speaker 1: allowed for Dallas, that's gonna get you beat in this series.
Speaker 1: So they need to polish up some of their three
Speaker 1: point rotations chasing around shooters off of help. And then
Speaker 1: this is a big one that I that I actually
Speaker 1: I can't remember who I saw make this suggestion. You
Speaker 1: know who might have been was Arali by Vulgaris, but
Speaker 1: it was I thought it was genius. So Dallas plays
Speaker 1: at an extraordinarily slow pace. They were dead last in
Speaker 1: pace this season. When they secure a defensive rebound, they
Speaker 1: throw the ball to Luca and they slowly worked the
Speaker 1: ball up the floor. They very rarely pushed the ball
Speaker 1: in transition. So Golden State has to do, in my opinion,
Speaker 1: is another another way for Golden State to add to
Speaker 1: their you know advantages in this series. Do what you
Speaker 1: did to Memphis throughout that entire series. Crash the offensive
Speaker 1: glass like hell. There's a main you know when when
Speaker 1: when teams are setting up transition defense, there's usually a balance.
Speaker 1: We literally call it floor balance. As coaches, right like,
Speaker 1: you want to have you never want to have too
Speaker 1: many players along the baseline because a missed shot will
Speaker 1: screw you in transition defense. Right, So typically that's why
Speaker 1: you have like kind of like a wheel. Guys will
Speaker 1: rotate around, and even when guys are replacing in spots,
Speaker 1: you always want to god to guards. That's what that's
Speaker 1: why they used to call them guards. It's literally where
Speaker 1: the name came from. But you want two guys that
Speaker 1: are back so that when the shot goes up you
Speaker 1: can begin your transition defense. And then typically you decide
Speaker 1: how many guys you want to crash. Really good transition
Speaker 1: teams that push the ball in transition to like Golden State,
Speaker 1: for instance, like Dallas, can't waste a ton of effort
Speaker 1: chasing offensive rebounds because if they do, they will compromise
Speaker 1: their defense on the back end in transition against a
Speaker 1: really good transition defense or transition team in Golden State.
Speaker 1: But Golden State might be able to get away with
Speaker 1: having their entire front line crash. They might be able
Speaker 1: to have Draymond crash and Auto Port or Junior crash
Speaker 1: and keep On Looney crash and Andrew Wiggins crash and
Speaker 1: just have Stephan Claire Jordan whoever is in the backcourt,
Speaker 1: just have them get back on defense because they just
Speaker 1: simply have way too many. Uh, they have way too
Speaker 1: many opportunities there that they're they're kind of they're too
Speaker 1: concerned with their transition defense right now when they don't
Speaker 1: really need to be. And so another little adjustment for
Speaker 1: Golden State is crashed the hell out of the offensive
Speaker 1: glass with the intention of, um, with understanding that you're
Speaker 1: not going to give up anything in transition on the
Speaker 1: back end. All right, guys, that is all we have
Speaker 1: for tonight. As always, I sincerely appreciate your guys support. Again,
Speaker 1: if you go to my Twitter feed at Underscore, Jason
Speaker 1: lt It did a video breaking down a lot of
Speaker 1: the things that I was talking about with the Celtics heat.
Speaker 1: You can kind of see some visual examples of the
Speaker 1: things that I'm talking about there. At some point in
Speaker 1: this series, I'll do something similar for this Warrior's Maverick series.
Speaker 1: I just typically like to key in on a concept,
Speaker 1: So wait un till I see a concept that I
Speaker 1: find to be particularly interesting. As always, UM, remember like
Speaker 1: this video that goes a long way to helping us.
Speaker 1: I would sincerely appreciate that subscribe to the Volumes YouTube channel. UH.
Speaker 1: Starting tomorrow, UM, we will not be live for the
Speaker 1: next three nights, but I'll still have video breakdowns, still
Speaker 1: will get into the same topics that I've been doing
Speaker 1: in the live show. Just stay tuned for about a
Speaker 1: half hour after the final buzzer of the games and
Speaker 1: come to our YouTube channel there and you will see
Speaker 1: full length clips in their entirety where you can see
Speaker 1: this type of breakdown, and then we'll be back to
Speaker 1: our normal live shows on Money, all right, guys, I
Speaker 1: will see Smart Night Volume