After the Dallas Mavericks’ disappointing Game 3 loss to the Boston Cardinals, Celtics On Wednesday, players and coaches uttered the usual platitudes and clichés, and the theme was universal: The series isn’t over, so let’s take it one game at a time.
That’s nothing shocking, and it’s a semi-clichéd sentiment and state of mind shared by most professional athletes faced with such a situation: History has dictated that Wednesday’s loss would likely mean the end of the series for Dallas, but they still have a job to do and they’re getting paid, and they’re going to keep doing it.
But despite all the rumors, and even knowing that Boston might have been feeling a little optimistic at 3-0, no one expected the Mavericks to completely dominate in Game 4 of the NBA Finals in Dallas.
They beat Boston 122-84. Dallas has performed so well across such a wide area that they actually have the lead in the overall series, being +6 after four games and outshooting Boston 408-402. It’s not uncommon in any playoff series for a team that’s down 3-0 to win Game 4, but the way the Mavericks won it in such a dominant fashion is certainly unusual, especially considering how great the Celtics have been historically.
So typically a win in this scenario wouldn’t garner much attention or change your mind about the series as a whole. NormallyBut while the Celtics remain the overwhelming favorites to win the NBA title, a win of this magnitude invites the question, “what if?” If the Mavericks can beat the Celtics this badly in a consolation match, are the teams really as far apart as most people think?
We’ll know the answers soon, but these questions, which hadn’t previously come up, are suddenly relevant now: Here’s how Game 3 can be the blueprint for how the Mavericks can shock the world, beat the Celtics, win the NBA Finals, and go down in history as the first NBA team to overcome a three-game losing streak.
Continue to trust your big men defensively
The Mavericks’ biggest strength going into the Finals was their rim defense, backed by the lethal duo of trade-deadline acquisition Daniel Gafford and star rookie Derek Lively II. That advantage was barely felt in the first three games of the Finals, as the Celtics rolled out and sliced the Mavericks’ defense and nullified their size advantage.
Through the first three games, it all looked like a system shock for both Gafford and Lively. Dallas had solid options for those two to roam free for the first three rounds, but the Celtics aren’t going to give the defense any easy outs. Not only does Boston play five-and-out, but the other four perimeter players in the starting lineup are all comfortable driving and passing. Lively, in particular, finally seemed to hit his rookie wall in the first two games, which is to be expected for a 20-year-old rookie who was already so impressive. That changed a bit in Game 3, then completely flipped in Game 4.
The duo’s performance in this win was their best of the series. It was clear that Dallas wanted their two big men to stay as close to the rim as possible, as the pair struggled to contain drives on switches early in the series. In Game 3, Lively and Gafford were sometimes stuck in the paint as the Celtics turned the ball over to their corner shooters. To make matters worse, Boston was still shooting better at the rim, despite the extra care they took to protect the paint. Entering Game 4, the Celtics were shooting an astounding 81.7% in the restricted area and averaging 14.7 corner 3-point attempts per game. The two best shots in basketball are layups and corner 3-pointers, and Boston was making both, leaving Dallas’ center often in empty spaces, trying to cover areas they never had to cover before.
In Game 4, both players were noticeably more comfortable. Boston attempted just seven corner 3-pointers, a series-low, and shot just 58.8 percent from the restricted area, which gave both big men a little more freedom to shine. Gafford and Lively tried again outside the paint, and this time they had better results. The pair produced a highlight reel of closeouts, quick feet and strong contests on Friday night.
With Lively and Gafford able to defend in space, the Mavericks defense looks different. The continued absence of Kristaps Porzingis is obvious, with Al Horford managing just one 3-pointer in 23 minutes and benched Xavier Tillman managing just two total. The floor terrain is very different with Horford’s slow trigger and Tillman’s lack of threat. Lively and Gafford can be aggressive knowing they won’t have a 7-foot unicorn waiting behind them to hurt them from the perimeter. With Porzingis on the bench, the closeouts are a little easier.
It also helps if the big men have support, as Luka Doncic repeatedly demonstrated in Game 4.
Doncic played his best defense on Friday. Fouled out in Game 3Dallas’ big men are better suited to being aggressive and not having to correct their mistakes as much. If mistakes continue, it’s because these two are reacting and compensating instead of dominating situations. Dallas can’t completely solve the math problem the Celtics have (Boston took 41 total 3-pointers on Friday), but they can do a better job of dictating where the 3-pointers are coming from. Corner 3-pointers are very valuable because of their short distance, but that works both ways, meaning there’s less distance to cover on closeouts. Lively and Gafford are big, tall guys. They have the size and athleticism to close out to the corners and get back to the rim. As long as their teammates continue to back them up and coach Jason Kidd trusts them, the Mavericks will have a chance defensively.
Green and Exum put pressure on the defense
The Celtics rarely run double plays on defense or blitz on pick-and-rolls. They like to drop their big men and switch up the other four positions. This makes a lot of sense, as they have a lot of talented individual and team defenders in their rotation. It makes even more sense against this Mavericks team, which has a lot of players who have to rely on Doncic and Kyrie Irving to get the points.
Boston made the right bet that without wide space for Lively, Gafford, P.J. Washington and Derrick Jones Jr., their offensive effectiveness would be limited. They are not the kind of players who beat one-on-one defenses or really benefit from closeouts. Lively and Gafford survive on lobs, while Washington and Jones do damage on corner 3-pointers and spot-up attempts. The Celtics took those, and the Mavericks’ corner 3-pointers plummeted. Doncic and Irving’s usage rates have skyrocketed in the Finals, and the Celtics are going to beat those two with tough 2-pointers against shaded coverage. It’s not that Boston isn’t helping at all, they’re just not aggressively double-passing to get the ball out of Doncic or Irving’s hands. They invite long 2-pointers and shade help toward the paint without blatantly double-passing.
That defense has rendered most of Dallas’ role players ineffective. Not only are they not making shots, but the shots they are making have dropped substantially in the Finals. Game 4 made that well by giving backups Josh Green and Dante Exum more playing time. Exum and Green haven’t had great playoff numbers, but this matchup and style might suit them. For better or worse, the two have the most live dribbling prowess of any Mavericks player outside of Doncic and Irving. The aggressive drive and pass ability shared by Exum and Green gives the Mavericks a counter against the Celtics defense. If they are going to challenge their role players to beat the one-on-one coverage, they need role players who can attack and pass. They don’t necessarily have to be playmakers, just guys who can make simple straight-line drives and make the right reads.
While Green and Exum’s numbers didn’t really stand out on the scoreboard (they combined for 13 points and one assist), there’s no denying that their presence loosened up the Celtics defense a bit because, unlike Washington and Jones, they had the ability to get past players off the dribble and make the right play.
On this layup by Exum in the second quarter, you can see how tight Exum’s defenders are playing on him.
Even as he dribbles toward the logo with Doncic guarding his face, Exum is hit by a defender. Boston is scared of Mavericks role players getting through that kind of defense, and Exum’s ability to slip and score is a counter. Ditto Green’s great assist on a jam by Lively in the third quarter. Brown makes a tight catch on Green, who slips past the overplay and into the paint.
Those are plays the Mavericks’ other stars can’t make, so kudos to Kidd and his coaching staff for making the right adjustments, even though it may have taken longer than Mavericks fans would have liked.
Luka Doncic’s Paint Efficiency
After Game 3, Irving noted that the Celtics were giving him and Doncic one-on-one opportunities in the paint and around the rim, so it was up to Irving to be efficient enough to force the Celtics into coverage again. That certainly was the case Friday with both of those guys, especially Doncic.
Doncic missed every 3-pointer he took in Game 4, but he shot 11-for-16 in the paint and 5-for-6 in the restricted area. Irving had the highest success rate in the paint, shooting 9-for-12 on 2-pointers. Dallas scored 60 points in the paint as a team, and you could see their control in the paint tilting the Celtics’ defense a little, as the Mavericks finally made 3-pointers from the corners (4-for-7 from the corners compared to 2-for-5 in Game 3). The third quarter was a trap for the Celtics to let the game get out of hand, but the Mavericks will have to do that to force Boston to try something different. Dallas also didn’t have a lot of assists on Friday, totaling just 21, with Doncic finishing with 6. There’s still room to experiment and deal with Irving’s gravity off the ball, but none of this means anything if Doncic doesn’t score in the paint. Doncic scored in Game 4.
Scoring in the paint also benefits when stops are made. It’s no coincidence that Dallas was able to score in transition because the Mavericks played their best defense of the series. The Mavericks only managed to score 11 fast break points after 12 in Game 3, which followed single-digit fast breaks in Games 1 and 2. It’s no surprise that Lively and Gafford combined for a series-high 18 points, as the duo raced the court and created much-needed space before Boston’s half-court defense could lock down.
Boston is that strong. But the Mavericks showed off their formula in Game 4. That formula really started to develop in Game 3 on Wednesday. The Mavericks put together that blueprint for Friday’s game and executed it. Their chance to make history is still a long way off… teeth Just enough to make you start thinking about this series in a new light.
