Anybody have any good NBA podcasts that provide decently intellectual insight or analysis into the finals matchup?

Lowe Post and Old Man and the Three are best for analysis. The former new one should be released today. The latter was released yesterday for the finals.

Followill and Dameris just released a Take Dat Wit You yesterday if you want analysis from a pro Mavs perspective.

I haven't watched any episodes, but I keep getting videos pushed to me of Tim Legler's pod, All NBA. That may be a good one to listen to since he's one of the best basketball guys in national media and he really likes this Mavs team.

So I'm reading a lot of discourse about Boston and their vaunted 3 pt shooting during the regular season. Is that just ignoring the fact that team regular 3pt shooting for regular season was 1.) OKC 2.) Boston, 3.) Minnesota, all within 0.2% of each other.

I know the statement is that Boston has the ability to put out a lineup where all 5 players can shoot, but its not like our defense has been facing teams that can't shoot.
The other issue with I stated initially in regards to what the basic stats have, is not all 3 pt shots are created equal and just flat shooting % doesn't cover that at all. So hopefully someone puts out an article discussing that aspect of it.

Goldie Wilson said:

---

Anybody have any good NBA podcasts that provide decently intellectual insight or analysis into the finals matchup?

---

Old man and the three, JJ Reddick's podcast

PatAg said:

---

So I'm reading a lot of discourse about Boston and their vaunted 3 pt shooting during the regular season. Is that just ignoring the fact that team regular 3pt shooting for regular season was 1.) OKC 2.) Boston, 3.) Minnesota, all within 0.2% of each other.

I know the statement is that Boston has the ability to put out a lineup where all 5 players can shoot, but its not like our defense has been facing teams that can't shoot.
The other issue with I stated initially in regards to what the basic stats have, is not all 3 pt shots are created equal and just flat shooting % doesn't cover that at all. So hopefully someone puts out an article discussing that aspect of it.

---

Difference is volume, Boston hit threes at that percentage while also taking BY FAR the most threes. They took 3 more threes per game than anyone else and made two more than anyone else. They made more threes per game this year than all but two other teams in history, WHILE shooting a top 3 percentage league wide.

If you look at the list of most threes made in a single quarter by a team in league history, this year's Celtics team holds 7 of the top 30 spots.

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

PatAg said:

---

So I'm reading a lot of discourse about Boston and their vaunted 3 pt shooting during the regular season. Is that just ignoring the fact that team regular 3pt shooting for regular season was 1.) OKC 2.) Boston, 3.) Minnesota, all within 0.2% of each other.

I know the statement is that Boston has the ability to put out a lineup where all 5 players can shoot, but its not like our defense has been facing teams that can't shoot.
The other issue with I stated initially in regards to what the basic stats have, is not all 3 pt shots are created equal and just flat shooting % doesn't cover that at all. So hopefully someone puts out an article discussing that aspect of it.

---

Difference is volume, Boston hit threes at that percentage while also taking BY FAR the most threes. They took 3 more threes per game than anyone else and made two more than anyone else. They made more threes per game this year than all but two other teams in history, WHILE shooting a top 3 percentage league wide.

If you look at the list of most threes made in a single quarter by a team in league history, this year's Celtics team holds 7 of the top 30 spots.

---

So high volume, high accuracy, and the ability to have a lineup on the floor that ALL shoots high percentage.
So we will have to win other aspects of the game decisively to counter the games they are on fire
(obviously oversimplification)

Boston is just a much more complete team than OKC or Minnesota.

I think Dallas has the two best players by talent on the court, but then Boston has the next 5 best players. Then you are getting into the Hortford/Gafford/Lively area.

Minnesota is a very different type of defense, and one that has traditionally been worked by ball dominant distributors who can manipulate their big defenders. Boston is made up of a bunch of elite wing defenders, all who can switch the pick and roll without getting dragged like Gobert and KAT.

And as mentioned previously, don't let the percentages fool you. Boston made four more threes per game than OKC this year. It's a whole different level in terms of volume.

I was going off of offensive efficiency, not shooting %.

PatAg said:

---

So I'm reading a lot of discourse about Boston and their vaunted 3 pt shooting during the regular season. Is that just ignoring the fact that team regular 3pt shooting for regular season was 1.) OKC 2.) Boston, 3.) Minnesota, all within 0.2% of each other.

I know the statement is that Boston has the ability to put out a lineup where all 5 players can shoot, but its not like our defense has been facing teams that can't shoot.
The other issue with I stated initially in regards to what the basic stats have, is not all 3 pt shots are created equal and just flat shooting % doesn't cover that at all. So hopefully someone puts out an article discussing that aspect of it.

---

I think Boston took about 10 more 3s per game than OKC and Minnesota. They shoot a lot and make at the same efficiency. They also have all above average shooters. OKC and Minnesota had some elite shooters that may have buoyed their percentage to cover for guys that shot below league average like Giddey or McDaniels.

Their 5 out style allows for open driving lanes. There is nobody that allows the defensive center to just hang around the rim and block shots. So you either have to rotate down to protect against a layup and leave shooters wide open or allow for the layup. So the looks they generate are mostly pretty good looks.

Boston will spam drive and kicks until the cows come home. Something you don't want to see is Boston starting their sets early in the shot clock. The earlier they start their set, the more times they can drive and kick and keep the defense in rotation on that possession until they eventually end up with a good shot. If they are walking the ball up and content to not start their set until 10 seconds left on the shot clock then that is a good sign for the Mavs.

ramblin_ag02 said:

---

If Dallas was specifically training to beat the Celtics, they couldn't have had a better choice of opponents on the way. Oklahoma also plays 5 out and hits 3s at an elite rate, so the Mavericks are really going to be surprised by that style. Minnesota had a vaunted defenses that the Mavs just shredded, and their defense efficiency was better than Boston against better competition in the West. So I don't think Boston is anything on a different level than what we've seen. They're slightly better than OKC on defense and slightly worse on offense while playing a similar style, and Dallas beat OKC in 6. Every series is different, but I don't understand the massive underdog, just make it a series outlook.

---

OKC is the only team even slightly comparable to the Celtics and the Celtics do what OKC does way better. Remember how we were making fun of Giddey in the middle of the OKC series because he was bricking wide open 3s as the Mavs just let him do it? There is not anybody like that on the Celtics. I could see the Mavs maybe doing softer closes on KP to start the series, but they better be able to adjust quickly if (when) he makes the shots.

Defensively, Boston will be stylistically pretty similar to OKC, though obviously Dort may be the best guy to guard Luka in the league. OKC usually had a couple guys on the court though who weren't really strong defenders. I was surprised at how poor SGA was defensively. He had a lot of steals this year, but I guess it's just because they let him roam and play generally terrible team defense. Then guys like Giddey or Joe or Wiggins weren't anything special on defense. All of Boston's guys are plus defenders. Tatum and Brown are both good wing defenders and Jrue and White are all-defense level defenders. KP is a good rim protector. I believe Boston led the league in block this year and they get a lot of rim protection help from White and Jrue, surprisingly.

We cannot match going small with the celtics and if the celtics find a way to play Lively/gafford off the court, we are in major trouble.

Our only real advantage is rebounding. Have to punish them for playing small

rsf0626 said:

---

We cannot match going small with the celtics and if the celtics find a way to play Lively/gafford off the court, we are in major trouble.

Our only real advantage is rebounding. Have to punish them for playing small

---

I have said it before, but I think Gafford will be played off the floor. I would not be surprised if Lively is starting games later in the series. Lively won't get played off the floor because he is mobile enough to guard Boston on the perimeter. He just needs to continue to be himself and keep making good decisions on offense in the short roll. We will need 30+ minutes a game from him. The good news is that this won't be nearly as physical a series for him as the Minnesota series was.

I agree with you that we can't get in a bomb's away match with Boston. If we are playing long minutes with Maxi at the 5 then things have gone terribly wrong.

shack009 said:

---

rsf0626 said:

---

We cannot match going small with the celtics and if the celtics find a way to play Lively/gafford off the court, we are in major trouble.

Our only real advantage is rebounding. Have to punish them for playing small

---

I have said it before, but I think Gafford will be played off the floor. I would not be surprised if Lively is starting games later in the series. Lively won't get played off the floor because he is mobile enough to guard Boston on the perimeter. He just needs to continue to be himself and keep making good decisions on offense in the short roll. We will need 30+ minutes a game from him. The good news is that this won't be nearly as physical a series for him as the Minnesota series was.

I agree with you that we can't get in a bomb's away match with Boston. If we are playing long minutes with Maxi at the 5 then things have gone terribly wrong.

---

Agreed. Lively is so important to this series. He has to find a way to stay on the floor

Some of those possessions he had guarding Ant on the perimeter were so awesome to watch. Obviously knew he was a good rim defender but what he did to Ant was all-defense level stuff. It was so exciting.

Mavs-Celtics Finals Preview👇

If you got this far...you know this is gonna be a loooong thread.

I'll do it in 5 parts: 1-Intro, 2-About the juggernaut Celtics, 3-Dallas on Offense, 4-Dallas on Defense and 5-Closing thoughts

So, Mavs & basketball sickos hop on board.

— Iztok Franko (@iztok_franko) June 4, 2024

Great thread, and he has been very accurate in previewing our prior series . What I like about his format Is it gives you some things to look for in the game

Kevin O'Connor, who is a Celtics fan, is picking the Mavs in 6. The number of people who really know ball that are picking the Mavs is really shocking to me.

shack009 said:

---

Kevin O'Connor, who is a Celtics fan, is picking the Mavs in 6. The number of people who really know ball that are picking the Mavs is really shocking to me.

---

Sounds like emotional hedge to me. I do it all the time with A&M football (although in those instances I usually end up being right)

shack009 said:

---

Kevin O'Connor, who is a Celtics fan, is picking the Mavs in 6. The number of people who really know ball that are picking the Mavs is really shocking to me.

---

To be fair, Boston fans are super jaded with this core. The average Boston fan talks about Tatum/Brown like Cowboys fans talk about Dak. They expect the choke at this point.

M.C. Swag said:

---

Great deal for the Mavs and Kyrie. Should open up the full MLE and BAE. Time for Nico to get to work.

---

Nostradamus over here back on 6/30!

'96 Bulls needed 6 games to beat Seattle. In Chicago's Game 2 win (at home), it was a 3pt game with under 10 seconds left (and Seattle botched a defensive rebound which would have given them a chance to tie).
'97 Bulls needed 6 games to beat Utah. 3 of those wins were 2 possession games or less with under 2 minues to go.
'98 Bulls needed 6 games to beat Utah. 3 of those wins were 2 possession games or less with under 2 minutes to go. (additionally they needed 7 games to win the ECF).


That's to say, even one of the greatest dynasties of all time were beatable.

M.C. Swag said:

---

That corgi has picked against the Mavs every series...until this one. NOOOOO

---

Has there been a ball that didnt go in on the prior series?

PatAg said:

---

M.C. Swag said:

---

That corgi has picked against the Mavs every series...until this one. NOOOOO

---

Has there been a ball that didnt go in on the prior series?

---

I would imagine there are tons of balls that don't go in. They probably showed that one that didn't go in on this video just because it was so close to going in but didn't.

The odds that dog got a ball in one of the baskets on 7 out of 8 shots is not high.

PatAg said:

---

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

PatAg said:

---

So I'm reading a lot of discourse about Boston and their vaunted 3 pt shooting during the regular season. Is that just ignoring the fact that team regular 3pt shooting for regular season was 1.) OKC 2.) Boston, 3.) Minnesota, all within 0.2% of each other.

I know the statement is that Boston has the ability to put out a lineup where all 5 players can shoot, but its not like our defense has been facing teams that can't shoot.
The other issue with I stated initially in regards to what the basic stats have, is not all 3 pt shots are created equal and just flat shooting % doesn't cover that at all. So hopefully someone puts out an article discussing that aspect of it.

---

Difference is volume, Boston hit threes at that percentage while also taking BY FAR the most threes. They took 3 more threes per game than anyone else and made two more than anyone else. They made more threes per game this year than all but two other teams in history, WHILE shooting a top 3 percentage league wide.

If you look at the list of most threes made in a single quarter by a team in league history, this year's Celtics team holds 7 of the top 30 spots.

---

So high volume, high accuracy, and the ability to have a lineup on the floor that ALL shoots high percentage.
So we will have to win other aspects of the game decisively to counter the games they are on fire
(obviously oversimplification)

---

I think that is right. Boston is very good and a deserving favorite. Having said that I have some optimism (hopium?) that Boston's record is a bit misleading playing in the East. It does give me pause that they were 3-5 against the best teams in the West (OKC, Denver, Minnesota) during the regular season. Would Boston still be a 60+ win team with all-time great metrics on a Western conference schedule? It is impossible to answer a hypothetical like that of course, but I'm hoping that they are "just" a very good team.

I've been rewatching a lot of Boston games. Today I'm watching Boston/Cleveland game 2 to try to see them play a semi good opponent.

Thoughts:
Boston is playing defensive sets that we would absolutely destroy in the paint but Cleveland just doesn't have the playmaking to do it on our level.

Obviously it will be different with KP but he can't play all game. The Luke Kornet/Horford and Tatum frontcourt paint protection is Swiss cheese. If KP isn't right I think we have a legit shot at the series.

They shoot way worse from 3 when they're defended close. Obviously that can change drastically each game

Jru takes way more mid range shots than I thought he's not good at them.

They're really good at switching, it's very fluid and contest close and robotic however once you make a good pass in a hard screen or cut it breaks down enough to get a good look.

Prichard is good at getting to the basket, better than anyone on the roster that I've seen so we have to bully him off the floor.

Tatum has no sauce to dribble past a defender or get separation, he doesn't really call for picks. They just don't have the same creativity offensively but they're deadly in transition. But they're going to look totally different with KP.

Double drag screens are super effective against this Boston backcourt. They get swallowed up and can't recover. We should use those to get Kyrie open looks.

They better not let White guard Luka, he's getting pushed around. His footwork and hands are amazing but he just doesn't have the strength. LeVert is bodying him on the way to the rim over and over.

Man, Tutum has been really good but in this game he's been Trash, he struggles against strength. I think PJ will be a good defender on him. Maxi too. Maybe I'm crazy, but I want to see Kyrie on Brown instead of DJJ because Brown really struggles against handsy quick defenders due to his poor handles.

Carlo4 said:

---

M.C. Swag said:

---

Great deal for the Mavs and Kyrie. Should open up the full MLE and BAE. Time for Nico to get to work.

---

Nostradamus over here back on 6/30!

---

Yeah but did you see what he said about Lively?

Tough, but fair. Hey but go see my stuff about Bane!!

There are some really funny comments back in the 22-23 Mavs thread, especially on Kyrie.

I remember not wanting Luka on draft night. The thought of giving up a future first rounder for another Euro guy. We all have our moments.

M.C. Swag said:

---

Tough, but fair. Hey but go see my stuff about Bane!!

---

I mean it was so obvious to all of us that Lively could be the third most important player on a finals team. No idea how you couldn't see it.

Lol absolutely. He's been beyond anything I could have imagined. Never been happier to be so wrong lol.