The Critic Posted February 9, 2005 Share Posted February 9, 2005 QUOTE(YASNY @ Feb 9, 2005 -> 06:54 AM) Is this a consistant flaw the Mav have, or was it because the Bulls defense forced them to rush their shots? From what I've seen of them ( and I am NO basketball expert ), the Mavericks seem to do that quite a bit. They also don't seem particularly interested in playing defense. Last night, they seemed to panic a bit when they fell behind, and they were throwing up 3's with 5 minutes plus left in the game. They looked stupid, to tell the truth... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoodAsGould Posted February 9, 2005 Share Posted February 9, 2005 well i know a lot about the mavericks and they have 2 consistent defenders in Howard and Dampier. Nowitzski uses all his energy on offense as you can see and Finley and Terry just arent great defenders. They do have a rookie guard though who is apposed to be pretty good but i dont know how his defense is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted February 9, 2005 Share Posted February 9, 2005 QUOTE(YASNY @ Feb 9, 2005 -> 06:54 AM) Is this a consistant flaw the Mav have, or was it because the Bulls defense forced them to rush their shots? They are a shoot first team, passing is secondary. Dirk had to of shot three fast break three pointers and two of them i would not consider wide open. I don't know of many team that do that besides the mavericks. They are such good shooters though they can get away with it alot of the time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalapse Posted February 9, 2005 Share Posted February 9, 2005 QUOTE(qwerty @ Feb 9, 2005 -> 02:55 PM) They are a shoot first team, passing is secondary. Dirk had to of shot three fast break three pointers and two of them i would not consider wide open. I don't know of many team that do that besides the mavericks. They are such good shooters though they can get away with it alot of the time. The Mavs pretty much run a Div. III college offense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted February 9, 2005 Author Share Posted February 9, 2005 QUOTE(qwerty @ Feb 8, 2005 -> 09:39 PM) Just you. He needs to take the most shots per game if not curry. No more of this hinrich bulls***. He is not a shooting guard yet he thinks he is. He shoots a highers percentage than... iverson, bryant, mcgrady, allen, arenas, pierce, etc. Gordon is a hell of a shooter. As far as Hinrich goes I think you have to note that he takes some of the most difficult shots on the team, mainly because he's forced into them, especially when Gordon is out of the lineup and then Hinrich is the only shooter on the court. I have no doubt Hinrich is going to be a good shooter in this league. He already has great form and depsite hitting a bit of a wall the past 5 games or so, he's a good shooter, just needs to improve on his shot off the dribble as well as his float shot when he drives into the lane. I'm a huge Hinrich fan though so I may be biased but I like him because he plays the game right. Gordon plays the game good so far, but I want to see him improve on his passing as well as draw more fouls (he seems to be driving more as of late though). I also think as he grows he'll be able to drive and create easy shots for the big men as well or even Hinrich by kicking, but thats yet to come. Main thing Gordon needs to work on is his defense cause he's a major liability out there. I was going nuts late last game when Gordon was on Terry despite the fact the Bulls were up 8-10 late in the game and Terry kept scoring at will. Duhon is a superior defender and should be out there. I should also add that I think Duhon is gonna be a lot like Eric Snow and I think he'll turn into a decent spot up jumper as he progresses in the pro's. Already runs the offense well and is a superior defender, especially for a rookie. If you can't tell I'm a BIG BIG fan of defense because while offense can stray from game to game, defense is an energy thing and is one of those things that stays constant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted February 9, 2005 Author Share Posted February 9, 2005 QUOTE(lvjeremylv @ Feb 9, 2005 -> 02:40 AM) Because both teams suck? I'd guess there is a shot that game gets nationally televised. Then again there are a ton of games on Sunday so who knows. I'm hoping that NBA league pass will pick up the Minny feed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hammerhead johnson Posted February 10, 2005 Share Posted February 10, 2005 QUOTE(SoxFan101 @ Feb 9, 2005 -> 08:25 PM) well i know a lot about the mavericks and they have 2 consistent defenders in Howard and Dampier. Nowitzski uses all his energy on offense as you can see and Finley and Terry just arent great defenders. They do have a rookie guard though who is apposed to be pretty good but i dont know how his defense is. Dampier is a consistent defensive player? Well, just from watching one game against the Bulls, you can see Dampier not knowing the distance between himself and the baseline (Curry facial), or his inability to get back on help defense (Deng facial). And that's just one game, so, you know.... More often than not, Dampier completely disappears. That was the major knock on him in Golden State. And that rookie you speak of is the 5th overall pick in the draft -- Devin Harris. He'll be an exceptional defensive player in the long run. He made some noise in the first month of the season when he was awarded the Rookie Of The Month award. Since then, he's hit a wall, and then some. Josh Howard is like the guy in the pool hall who scratches as he knocks in the 8 ball. Too many rookie mistakes, which is to be expected, I guess. The last thing that I would call him at this point is consistent (on offense or defense). What the Mavs get by on is their superior depth. As qwerty stated, this is a shoot-first team that asks questions later. They could wreck shop during the regular season, but come playoff time, they're a disgrace. What do Dirk, Terry, Finley, and Stackhouse all have in common? They're all ball hogs without rings. I mean, think about it. You have four of these guys on the same team. Sounds like a nightmare to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted February 10, 2005 Share Posted February 10, 2005 QUOTE(hammerhead johnson @ Feb 9, 2005 -> 11:41 PM) Dampier is a consistent defensive player? Well, just from watching one game against the Bulls, you can see Dampier not knowing the distance between himself and the baseline (Curry facial), or his inability to get back on help defense (Deng facial). And that's just one game, so, you know.... More often than not, Dampier completely disappears. That was the major knock on him in Golden State. And that rookie you speak of is the 5th overall pick in the draft -- Devin Harris. He'll be an exceptional defensive player in the long run. He made some noise in the first month of the season when he was awarded the Rookie Of The Month award. Since then, he's hit a wall, and then some. Josh Howard is like the guy in the pool hall who scratches as he knocks in the 8 ball. Too many rookie mistakes, which is to be expected, I guess. The last thing that I would call him at this point is consistent (on offense or defense). What the Mavs get by on is their superior depth. As qwerty stated, this is a shoot-first team that asks questions later. They could wreck shop during the regular season, but come playoff time, they're a disgrace. What do Dirk, Terry, Finley, and Stackhouse all have in common? They're all ball hogs without rings. I mean, think about it. You have four of these guys on the same team. Sounds like a nightmare to me. Howard is in his second year. Also, i would not really consider dirk a ball hog. He is the first scoring option. You put him on any team he is the first scoring option out side of about two teams maybe three. The only teams he would not be the first scoring option on for sure is the sixers and lakers. I have said it alot before but i would kill to have him. He can get a wide open shot any time he wants and he has vastly improved on defense. That has always been the knock on him, even though in all reality he was not that bad. His scoring just out weighs his defense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hammerhead johnson Posted February 10, 2005 Share Posted February 10, 2005 QUOTE(qwerty @ Feb 10, 2005 -> 06:17 AM) Howard is in his second year. Also, i would not really consider dirk a ball hog. He is the first scoring option. You put him on any team he is the first scoring option out side of about two teams maybe three. The only teams he would not be the first scoring option on for sure is the sixers and lakers. I have said it alot before but i would kill to have him. He can get a wide open shot any time he wants and he has vastly improved on defense. That has always been the knock on him, even though in all reality he was not that bad. His scoring just out weighs his defense. Howard is in his second year, but he makes a lot of rookie mistakes. I'd consider Dirk a ball hog, which could be a good thing based on the team that you surround him with. Every team needs that one guy who wants the ball when the shot clock is winding down. But in the Mavs case, they have four of those guys. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted February 10, 2005 Share Posted February 10, 2005 One thing that was over shadowed by the loss tonight was chandler. Twenty rebounds, nine f***ing offensive reounds, three blocks, twelve points, and is arguably a top five intimidator in the paint in the nba. I don't care what anyone says, if we have to make a decision i take tyson over curry. He changes the entire game when he is in there, You cannot say the same for curry. If you give chandler 35 minutes a game watch the f*** out. He will be ben wallace redux. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hammerhead johnson Posted February 10, 2005 Share Posted February 10, 2005 QUOTE(qwerty @ Feb 10, 2005 -> 06:27 AM) One thing that was over shadowed by the loss tonight was chandler. Twenty rebounds, nine f***ing offensive reounds, three blocks, twelve points, and is arguably a top five intimidator in the paint. I don't care what anyone says, if we have to make a decision i take tyson over curry. He changes the entire game when he is in there, You cannot say the same for curry. If you give chandler 35 minutes a game watch the f*** out. He will be ben wallace redux. I'll take Chandler over anyone on this team in a heartbeat. I remember back when we had a poll to determine the most important Bull. Gordon got over 20 votes. Deng got a s***load of votes. Chandler got like 3 votes, maybe 4. I'm still in shock. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hammerhead johnson Posted February 10, 2005 Share Posted February 10, 2005 Here it is, perhaps the saddest poll that I've seen here on soxtalk. Chandler with a whopping two votes I know I voted for him, but I dunno who else did. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted February 10, 2005 Share Posted February 10, 2005 QUOTE(hammerhead johnson @ Feb 10, 2005 -> 12:36 AM) Here it is, perhaps the saddest poll that I've seen here on soxtalk. Chandler with a whopping two votes I know I voted for him, but I dunno who else did. I never even voted. But chandler is my pick with deng and gordon as close second and third picks. Gordon is the lowest out of the three because he is very far from being an all around player. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hammerhead johnson Posted February 10, 2005 Share Posted February 10, 2005 QUOTE(qwerty @ Feb 10, 2005 -> 06:39 AM) I never even voted. But chandler is my pick with deng and gordon as close second and third picks. Gordon is the lowest out of the three because he is very far from being an all around player. I hear that. I'd have to put Hinrich behind Chandler, though. When he peaks, he's gonna be something else. He does all of the little things so well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted February 10, 2005 Author Share Posted February 10, 2005 Hinrich gets my first vote, with Deng 2nd, and then Chandler/Curry. I agree with Chandler and he played furocious defense today plus I love his intensity and attitude, but I also like Curry. I'd put Gordon behind them simply because he's still an awful defensive player and I don't accept that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted February 10, 2005 Share Posted February 10, 2005 QUOTE(hammerhead johnson @ Feb 10, 2005 -> 12:44 AM) I hear that. I'd have to put Hinrich behind Chandler, though. When he peaks, he's gonna be something else. He does all of the little things so well. He is still way to sloppy with some of his passes. Whatever what happened to the shooter he was at kansas? I don't know about you. But i am not a fan of having two starters shooting under .40 % from the field ( duhon and hinrich). Also whoever said he is a triple double threat every night in that other thread you posted is f***ing nuts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted February 10, 2005 Author Share Posted February 10, 2005 QUOTE(qwerty @ Feb 9, 2005 -> 10:47 PM) He is still way to sloppy with some of his passes. Whatever what happened to the shooter he was at kansas? I don't know about you. But i am not a fan of having two starters shooting under .40 % from the field ( duhon and hinrich). Also whoever said he is a triple double threat every night in that other thread you posted is f***ing nuts. I agree with that at this point in time, but no doubt in my mind that he has the potential to be that type of ballplayer. He's a good rebounder, good passer, great defender (especially for his size) and a good shooter (percentages be damned, he's gonna be a good shooter in this league). Hinrich is legit. I woudln't call him a star, but at worse he'll be like Mike Bibby (but better defensively) and at best he could be more like John Stockton (f*** that idea, no one is gonna be like Stockton, but Hinrich is a very very smart ballplayer). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted February 10, 2005 Share Posted February 10, 2005 QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Feb 10, 2005 -> 12:49 AM) and at best he could be more like John Stockton (f*** that idea, no one is gonna be like Stockton, but Hinrich is a very very smart ballplayer). I saw that on bbb and nearly cried with laughter. The guy was serious as all hell too. I was just shaking my head. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hammerhead johnson Posted February 10, 2005 Share Posted February 10, 2005 QUOTE(qwerty @ Feb 10, 2005 -> 06:47 AM) He is still way to sloppy with some of his passes. Whatever what happened to the shooter he was at kansas? I don't know about you. But i am not a fan of having two starters shooting under .40 % from the field ( duhon and hinrich). Also whoever said he is a triple double threat every night in that other thread you posted is f***ing nuts. Triple double threat every night Oh man, my insides hurt after laughing so hard at that one. The less Hinrich shoots, the better. I definitely agree. He needs a few more summers in the gym so that he could develop some confidence. Right now, he's an offensive liability. But he has the basketball smarts, work ethic, and the physical ability to be a damn good point guard within the next couple of years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted February 10, 2005 Author Share Posted February 10, 2005 QUOTE(qwerty @ Feb 9, 2005 -> 10:52 PM) I saw that on bbb and nearly cried with laughter. The guy was serious as all hell too. I was just shaking my head. I know when he came in and first took off with the Bulls (after his early woes in his rookie year) you would hear people mentioning his name. If I recall didn't Jerry Sloan mention something like that as well? Not that he can be serious. But I'm super high on Hinrich. I also feel the team is better with Duhon starting then Gordon starting just because Gordon is a freaking turn-style defensively. That and I don't really like the way the offense is ran with Gordon in the lineup at times. I don't blame it when he's coming off the bench cause its his job to shoot like hell (he's by far the best shooter on this team), but as a starter its a bit different in the sense that he'd have to roll with the offense and I think he still kind of struggles with that, of course part of the reason is because he's such a damn good scorer. He'll learn though since it seems he has the work ethic the Bulls desire out of their players. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted February 10, 2005 Share Posted February 10, 2005 QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Feb 10, 2005 -> 01:00 AM) If I recall didn't Jerry Sloan mention something like that as well? Not that he can be serious. But I'm super high on Hinrich. I also feel the team is better with Duhon starting then Gordon starting just because Gordon is a freaking turn-style defensively. I remember seeing that quote by sloan and i believe it said he was chuckling while saying it. But he was giving him some props. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.