The More Things Change...

San Antonio beat Dallas 97-94 last week. Same as usual (except for 2006). Tim Duncan scored the crucial points while Dirk Nowitzki fell short at crunch time. Each team demonstrated how the keys to success lie in the details.

During the penultimate play, Bruce Bowen blocked Jason Terry’s shot. Duncan immediately took the ball out of bounds because he is the Spurs’ worst free throw shooter. He inbounded as soon as possible and since the Mavericks were ill-prepared, more time elapsed and San Antonio had the best chance for points from the line.

Bowen deliberately missed the second shot with 0.4 seconds remaining and Duncan tipped the ball towards midcourt. This action started the clock and increased the time it would take to recover the ball so the concept could have been just as effective had more time been on the clock.

Not all was well-executed by the defending champions. Michael Finley overran a hot closeout, permitting Josh Howard to drive by him and dunk before help arrived. Duncan changed his pivot foot in the paint but a foul was called due to his reputation. Bowen climbed all over Terry but the official passed.

Dallas still shows many of the same flaws. When Tony Parker guard Nowitzki on a switch, Dallas’ star forward did not back down San Antonio’s point guard and post him up. Instead, Nowitzki shot a contested a fade-away jumper with a low chance of success. Dallas still lacks crunch-time shooters and needed to bench newly-acquired Jason Kidd in order to put more scorers on the court.

I don’t blame Avery Johnson for this game but it is clear that he still stands in Pop’s shadow. San Antonio knew exactly what they wanted to do and executed each play fairly well. On the other side, it seems like nobody on the Dallas team wants to take responsibility for making plays in critical situation. Despite ostensibly improving their team, the Mavericks have fallen from first overall to a fifth or sixth place team and can look forward to another long off-season.

Rising to the Occasion

Criticisms abound regarding Bob Delaney’s pass on the contact between LeBron James and Bruce Bowen during Cleveland’s last three-pointer Wednesday. Whilst Bowen’s physical defence straddles a fine line between fair and foul and his persistence on the perimeter is certainly a challenge that his opponent must overcome, the play in question was not particularly relevant to the outcome of Game 3.

• The Cavaliers’ poor execution throughout the encounter, including the three and a half minute scoreless stretch between 5:28 and 1:54 of the fourth quarter, is mostly responsible for their loss. The Spurs provided countless chances but the home team was neither calm nor composed enough to take advantage.
• James could have redeemed his teammates down the stretch but missed a number of shots (“It’s a make or miss league,” said Jeff Van Gundy). The game’s penultimate shot was unlikely to succeed irrespective of any contact. Beyond the arc, James shot 31.1% during the year, including 31.8% at home and 27.9% in the playoffs. Cleveland had converted 3/18 three point shots to that point, buzzer beaters tend to fail three quarters of the time, and - thanks to the end-out Mike Brown diagramed which called for an outside shot off the dribble - James had a lot of momentum going to his left. All things considered, James had less than a fifteen percent chance to make that shot before the intentional attempt to foul.

The previous play, when James passed out of a double-team to Anderson Varejao, who missed a lay-up, was the Cavaliers’ last chance to win the game. James could have attacked the trap, drawn a foul, or received a return pass from Varejao and taken a mid-range step-back jumpshot. Teams must seize opportunities when they occur, a task that Cleveland was not ready to achieve.

On the Subject of the Association, Generally

Rules Are Affecting My Enjoyment of the Game: Beyond the suspensions of Stoudemire and Diaw, which were preposterous. Bill Simmons wrote a great column and I share a number of the views that he expressed. Irrespective of flagrant fouls (if they were enforced correctly, Bowen would have about a dozen points in 2007), consistent application of the rules is becoming a huge problem.

1. Offensive Fouls: it’s too easy to draw a foul on contact that is chiefly incidental and should be a pass (see the call Bell drew against Ginobli for the push off). The responsibility should fall on the defender to show that the ballhandler has gained a clear advantage as a result of the contact. The offence should have the benefit of the doubt on close calls; I feel it’s slid too far the other way.
2. Illegal Screens: when one team is penalized for an illegal screen, it seems like there is a forty percent chance that their opponents will be nailed for the same thing on the following possession. The referees can turn their shirts inside-out if I’m wrong, but I feel they should be monitored more closely to avoid tit-for-tat situations. I think that the standards for screens could be clarified. It seems like crashing into players and going flying is an art form for certain players. I think the Association could adapt a more FIBA interpretation and permit more creative offensive plays.
3. Hand-Checking: is not applied consistently. If it impedes the ballhandler, it should be called. Some possessions this post-season have been curtailed because the dribbler was assaulted and everyone looked the other way. If offensive fouls will be tightly called, hand-checking rules should be just a stringent.

Association Rules Are for Entertainment Purposes Only: The Sports Guy thinks the league is trying to prevent another Kermit Washington-Rudy Tomjanovich incident, which was a nearly deadly fluke among a decade of constant in both the Association and the A.B.A.. As a result of the crackdown on fighting, I don’t think one player will almost kill another on the court again.

Nevertheless, David Stern is missing the big picture by not enforcing rules consistently. If the mantra is “rules are rules”, then all rules must be treated as such. Rules have three components: a definition, a set of interpretations, and a penalty. These should be clear and understood by players, coaches, and spectators. Currently, this is not the case.

One of the few positives with the way the Association has handled this series is that is now widely know that Bruce Bowen is a dirty player and will eventually hurt someone seriously. But since most of his crimes go unpunished, they are copied by both professional and recreational basketball players. The level of play will continue to plummet until the rules are rebooted and treated consistently - during the game and afterwards - and this will hurt the sport worldwide.

On the subject of Phoenix and San Antonio’s Game 5, Specifically

Bruce Bowen Drills Baseline Threes: So do Morris Peterson, Joe Johnson, and Donyell Marshall. Given how awkward Bowen is from the wing or the top of the key, he must shoot very well from corner in order to maintain his 38% overall three point percentage. In fact, the baseline three Bowen attempted in the last minute of Game 5 provided the Spurs with a higher expected point value (1.26) than had any of the other four players on the court attempted a two-point field goal (1.04).

Mike D’Antoni Occasionally Mismanages His Rotation: The Suns largely played six players, in light of the suspensions to Amare Stoudemire and Boris Diaw. Defensively, Phoenix conceded some open looks or fouled unnecessarily. Offensively, there were some atrocious possessions were Steve Nash dribbled endlessly into the defence while shooters and cutters stood still. At both ends of the court, it seems like fatigue contributed to questionable decisions.

The go-ahead three-pointer succeeded because San Antonio moved the ball away from the defence and Nash could not get to Bowen in time. I propose that if the Suns had played a deeper rotation, using Marcus Banks to spell the guards briefly and Jalen Rose to carry some of the scoring load, they would have had more energy for defence during the Spurs decisive run

The Suns Work Very Hard on Defence but their Execution Is Sometimes Lacking: Phoenix should have doubled the post entry to Tim Duncan and left Tony Parker open outside the arc, as they did. Parker was the best option out of a set of bad choices for the Suns: Manu Ginobli was en fuego, Michael Finley was draining shots from the line of 45º - when he passed on his shot, he was swinging it swiftly to Bowen in the corner - and Duncan and Parker were consistent as usual.

Why did Leandro Barbosa make such a looping turn after the ball left the double-team? The fastest guy on the court could only recover to Parker and box him out in the Russian Spot during the shot. Maybe he could have reached Bowen if he had more energy. How did James Jones, guarding Finley, get awkwardly tangled up in the strong-side with Barbosa? If Raja Bell and Nash had not played 47 and 46 minutes respectively, could they have run and jumped Parker’s penetration better? Could Nash have closed out Bowen effectively with fresher legs?

It will never be known whether the Suns too tired to close out correctly down the stretch or if they were unaware of where the San Antonio threats were positioned during the critical play.

It’s Important to Mentally Prepare for End-Game Situations: D’Antoni should have given more thought to the rotation after the initial double. It was highly probable that Parker would penetrate after receiving the pass. Had Bell plugged the foul line, Nash quickly stepped up to Ginobli, and Barbosa switched to Bowen, I think they could have prevented Parker from getting to the rim, Ginobli and Finley from shooting, and gotten to Bowen in time to change his shot, Barbosa’s physical limitations aside.

Many complicated issues would have arisen. Shawn Marion would have probably bared the onus of stopping Duncan one-on-one in a low shot clock situation. Duncan tough to stop on the block and may have gone to the line. All five Suns would have to box out. All things considered, I think that that scenario yields an expected point value of 1.02, although that figure is more art than science.