The 2nd Season - 2019 Playoff Thread
- Thread starter ElUno20
- Start date
"Following successful contested jump shots over Lillard, Westbrook would occasionally trot back on defense making the “rock the baby” gesture.
For Lillard, it was not warranted, but he didn’t view it as crossing the line.
“He was doing that on jump shots,” Lillard told Yahoo Sports. “That’s not when you’re supposed to rock the baby. You rock the baby after overpowering someone in the post. He had one layup in the post on me. Look it up. I’ll live with his jump shots. He wasn’t rocking no baby on me.”
I love that he's debating the proper application of the baby-rocking celebration. This feels like Buster Bluth getting really upset that "that's not what a chicken sounds like! Chickens don't clap!"
Who am I to question Dame, but I feel like a cross-over into a jumper is the perfect time for the "rock the baby" celebration. If he was flexing or something I could understand that should be reserved for post-play, but "rock the baby" seems more like a perimeter move.
All Russ celebrations/taunts get a pass from me after he trolled Lance Stephenson's guitar strut earlier this season. That summarized the entire Laker season.
Na, Dame is definitely correct about the origins of the rock-the-baby celebration--it's synonymous with "mouse in the house", and is meant to be applied to displays of pure physical strength in the post, rather than displays of perimeter skill (for which there are other celebrations: Harden's shimmy before shooting a 3 after an ankle-breaker comes to mind).
It's just awesome that Dame took offense to the fact that Russ was doing the celebration wrong. So great.
Has there ever been a better "disliked athlete gets KO'd in spectacular fashion" moment than Westbrook last night? I mean, I love Westbrook but also can concede that many people do not like him, and if you are a Westbrook hater, last night must have been so rewarding to watch him meltdown in the fourth and then get knocked-out and then trolled by a more likable rival after talking shit all series. It was kind of like when A-Rod got called out after swiping the ball out of Arroyo's glove.
Lillard dropped the ball here. The correct response would have been, “Whenever those bricks make it through the hoop he should celebrate.” #damefail
I don't get the Westbrook hate. He is an amazing, elite athlete but also spectacularly flawed. That his behavior mirrors his shortcomings makes him even more fascinating. But then again, I have accepted that all of these guys have their quirks - its more of a feature to me.
I love Lillard too but I can see how his wave, mugging for the camera and post game comments might irk people.
As Apisith notes, if you enjoy sports drama of all kinds, its hard to beat the NBA and these guys play right into the whole dynamic.
I love Lillard too but I can see how his wave, mugging for the camera and post game comments might irk people.
As Apisith notes, if you enjoy sports drama of all kinds, its hard to beat the NBA and these guys play right into the whole dynamic.
off the court, aren't Lilliard and Westbrook both considered to be pretty outstanding individuals?
Dame deserves all the praise, but 12 months ago he was licking his wounds after getting swept. And in 4 games he shot 25 for 71 while averaging 4 TOs per game. The book is not closed on Westbrook.
Well, it's obviously not closed -- but as much as anyone don't we know who Westbrook is? Spectacularly talented and committed, but incredibly inefficient, bull-headed/self-involved, and selfish.
That he started deferring to PG this year is a sign, I suppose, that his book could still be open, as you suggest. And Westbrook as a complementary player is definitely better than Westbrook as the center of attention. Either way, though, I don't see the upside: if he accepts a secondary role, he could be very effective in it but he'd be a secondary player, not the 2017 MVP. If he insists on being a star, he's an albatross...can will a team a certain distance, but will always be their downfall. And he definitely wasn't deferring to PG during the Portland series.
Is some alternative utopia I could see salary cap obstacles falling and OKC surrounding RW not just with PG but also 3 point shooters and a better center than Adams. In that context, sure, he could win and all this criticism would be re-visited. But that's dreamland: in the real world where RW has been the centerpiece of a very good post-Durant team 3 years in a row they've crashed and burned in the 1st round. Playoff success isn't the only measure of success (see Charles Barkley), but in this case I think it shows exactly who RW is and his limits -- limits that have a lot to do with his approach and mindset.
That he started deferring to PG this year is a sign, I suppose, that his book could still be open, as you suggest. And Westbrook as a complementary player is definitely better than Westbrook as the center of attention. Either way, though, I don't see the upside: if he accepts a secondary role, he could be very effective in it but he'd be a secondary player, not the 2017 MVP. If he insists on being a star, he's an albatross...can will a team a certain distance, but will always be their downfall. And he definitely wasn't deferring to PG during the Portland series.
Is some alternative utopia I could see salary cap obstacles falling and OKC surrounding RW not just with PG but also 3 point shooters and a better center than Adams. In that context, sure, he could win and all this criticism would be re-visited. But that's dreamland: in the real world where RW has been the centerpiece of a very good post-Durant team 3 years in a row they've crashed and burned in the 1st round. Playoff success isn't the only measure of success (see Charles Barkley), but in this case I think it shows exactly who RW is and his limits -- limits that have a lot to do with his approach and mindset.
Down one, Jazz go Rubio wide open airball, Mitchell turnover, Gobert turnover, and are suddenly down five. Season on the brink.
Another 82 game player (to go along with Westbrook, DeRozan, Aldridge, Gay, Vucevic, et al.): Rudy Gobert. If he was even half decent this series, it could have been seriously competitive. The team was far better with Favors on the floor.
What a complete sh*tshow of a game overall. Some great D from both teams, outweighed by inexcusably terrible offense all around. Can probably count on one hand the number of nice offensive possessions with good ball movement run by either team.
Harden 10-26
Paul 6-16
Mitchell 4-22
Rockets: 17 assists, 17 turnovers.
Gross. Somebody put the Rockets out of their misery in the name of the sanctity of the game? I don't even care (that much) that it be the Warriors.
What a complete sh*tshow of a game overall. Some great D from both teams, outweighed by inexcusably terrible offense all around. Can probably count on one hand the number of nice offensive possessions with good ball movement run by either team.
Harden 10-26
Paul 6-16
Mitchell 4-22
Rockets: 17 assists, 17 turnovers.
Gross. Somebody put the Rockets out of their misery in the name of the sanctity of the game? I don't even care (that much) that it be the Warriors.
I am a tourist Clippers fan this season (suck it Sprtsguy33!) and its because their energy and team play is amazing. Plus Trez and LouWill and Beverley. They aren't going quietly here.
edit: What IF said...great minds and me on rare occasions think alike!
For anyone who's a subscriber, cleaningtheglass had a great article yesterday about how the Jazz went away from their strategy defending Harden in the regular season to go with Milwaukee's more extreme scheme, even though Utah had been one of the best at containing him. It was a really bizarre decision by Snyder that threw his players off a lot, and I'd love to know what his reasoning was on it.
On a team with Durant and Harden he had trouble sharing the ball because what he mostly seems to care about is his own stats. I think if you're OKC it would be hard to argue that you ended up with the third best player out of that trio and I think Westbrook would be part of the reason they all split up. I remember games back in the day where Durant especially just wouldn't get the ball for stretches.. he was the PG on a team with two future almost MVPs and didn't particularly shoot that well, but insisted on always trying to get his regardless..
It would be interesting to try to put together a list of coaches that have completely changed strategy or made a head scratching decision to the detriment of the team going into a major tourney or playoffs. I'm sure there are a number of them in every major sport and with only five players in basketball I'm sure there are more than the others.
Yeah, Snyder is a really good coach, so I'm sure he had his reasons, they're just not readily apparent to me. Possibly he just thought that there was a slight edge/optimization, that his players were smart enough to quickly implement it, and overrated their ability to do that.
The Rockets put up a ton of points against it in the first 2 games, and then Snyder went back to more of their base defense, and the series got a lot more competitive.
Looking just at Harden’s shooting numbers doesn’t tell the whole story: Gobert was stepping up often and leaving the lob man open, or forcing someone to crash down from the corner, opening up the 3. This goes against most of Utah’s base defensive principles, and looked to be a coaching decision in the first 2 games.
These numbers are deceiving in a vacuum as the strategy forces back line rotation which opened up lobs at the rim and kickouts for open 3's whenever the Rockets wished. It wasn't as evident in the last few games but it was mindboggling that Snyder didn't change this up in G2 after being exposed in G1....instead he stayed the course, didn't make any adjustments and helped dig his team a hole.
I’m cautiously hopeful that Milwaukee has similar difficulties if they decide to change up their base scheme, because their base scheme is quite exploitable for the Celtics. It’s not the most likely outcome, but I think it’s their Achilles heel.
Edit: by “similar difficulties” I mean difficulties in implementing a new scheme, not suggesting Milwaukee will give up tons of rim runs.
I didn't watch the series so I don't know but this article says that Snyder didn't change up his defense - it's just that the players got more comfortable with it and in the last 3 games the defense worked well. FWIW. Here's a bit from the article:
Jazz head coach Quin Snyder got a ton of criticism for his defensive strategy early in the series, when the Jazz went down 2-0.
In the regular season, the Rockets had an offensive rating of 114.8. In the playoffs, the Jazz held that to 108.3. And in the last 3 games, as the Jazz got more practice at their defensive scheme, they limited it to just 100.3. That’s pretty incredible, actually.
The defense worked. James Harden was limited to just an 1-11 offensive start again, and though he found his shooting rhythm later in the game, he still finished with 26 points on 26 shots, adding five turnovers. The Jazz will take that all day long.
But in order to stop Harden, they didn’t have to give up a good offensive night to anyone else, either: Chris Paul had 15 points on 16 shots, with three turnovers. Eric Gordon scored 15 on 13 shots, adding three turnovers too. P.J. Tucker only had eight points on 7 shots, he had a turnover too. Clint Capela had a much better game, but you wouldn’t say he killed the Jazz either with his six baskets.
By the time the series ended, everyone on the Jazz was just nailing their spots: Royce O’Neale prevented the stepback and stuck with Harden as he drove left. Jazz perimeter players like Ricky Rubio, Joe Ingles, and Jae Crowder were doing their jobs, preventing Capela from getting to the basket, or zone-defending open shooters. And Rudy Gobert and Derrick Favors were protecting the paint.
And here is one example the article used:In the regular season, the Rockets had an offensive rating of 114.8. In the playoffs, the Jazz held that to 108.3. And in the last 3 games, as the Jazz got more practice at their defensive scheme, they limited it to just 100.3. That’s pretty incredible, actually.
The defense worked. James Harden was limited to just an 1-11 offensive start again, and though he found his shooting rhythm later in the game, he still finished with 26 points on 26 shots, adding five turnovers. The Jazz will take that all day long.
But in order to stop Harden, they didn’t have to give up a good offensive night to anyone else, either: Chris Paul had 15 points on 16 shots, with three turnovers. Eric Gordon scored 15 on 13 shots, adding three turnovers too. P.J. Tucker only had eight points on 7 shots, he had a turnover too. Clint Capela had a much better game, but you wouldn’t say he killed the Jazz either with his six baskets.
By the time the series ended, everyone on the Jazz was just nailing their spots: Royce O’Neale prevented the stepback and stuck with Harden as he drove left. Jazz perimeter players like Ricky Rubio, Joe Ingles, and Jae Crowder were doing their jobs, preventing Capela from getting to the basket, or zone-defending open shooters. And Rudy Gobert and Derrick Favors were protecting the paint.
Exploitable in that they give up a lot of 3's? I addressed this earlier in that this seems to play perfectly into the Bucks hands. Doing quick work they were 11-5 with a +6.3 diff in the games versus the 6 teams with a better 3-ptFG% than the Celtics. That is impressive considering all but Sacramento were playoff teams (Spurs, Clippers, Warriors, Pacers, Raptors, and Kings) and fits with my narrative of them wanting opponents to hoists 3's which does a lot of positive things for the Bucks.…..keeps them out of foul trouble, out of the penalty, and leads to long rebounds/Giannis in secondary transition points. They are among the league leaders in all of these categories and it is by design as it allows them to control multiple aspects of the game to exploit their personnel advantage (primarily Giannis, Bledsoe, Middleton) in certain areas.
Last edited:
So he definitely changed it from the regular season to Games 1 & 2--not sure about Games 3-5. The problem is that by the time his players adjusted, they were down 2-0, couldn't get the breaks to make it 2-1, and then the series was over.
I normally wouldn't fault a coach for trying to squeeze out every edge and go for a higher risk, higher reward strategy in the playoffs. The problem in this case was that the Jazz had already been defending the Rockets about as well as you could in their regular season matchups, so it seems like the actual possible reward wasn't super-high.
With all due respect to the author I'm not sure they watched the series either. The Jazz defended Harden with the Bucks-style almost exclusively in G1 and G2. They still threw that look at him as the series shifted to Utah but at a much lower frequency. I'd go so far as to not even classify this as "opinion" in that we have actual evidence of the strategic change occuring.
3PT% overall and 3 pointers you can get against the Bucks are entirely different things. None of the above teams, except the Raptors in certain lineups, can play 5-out with 5 confident shooters on the floor at once, all of whom are comfortable shooting at a high volume and have good track records. Even the Warriors have Draymond and Iggy, whom the Bucks are fine conceding open 3s to.
The Celtics have that in Kyrie, Horford, Tatum, Morris, Hayward, Brown, and Rozier. If most possessions are ending with one of them getting an open 3, that's a very, very good offense, particularly with the Celtics ability to lock down at the other end when they focus.
The Bucks are generally able to pick a guy or two on those other teams to whom they're happy to concede mildly contested 3s, as long as they can take away the other stuff. This is because it gets them the exact benefits you mentioned. If you concede mostly open 3s to the Celtics top 7 shooters, the expected value per possession is probably around 1.2 points, which is ludicrous in the half-court.
This is how they trick you. They want these guys taking these shots for the above mentioned reasons. It isn’t like we have 5 Steph’s out there and it isn’t like they are conceding open looks to the best shooters.....that isn’t how they defend.
I'm well aware of the Buck's defensive strategy and how effective it is. My point is that there's a substantial difference between Jaylen/Morris/Rozier/Tatum taking a wide-open 3, and Iggy/Draymond/DeRozan/Thad Young/Sabonis/Bagley/Harrell/whomever.
The Celtics' guys are volume shooters, whom the team expects to take open 3s, and hit them at a high enough clip that leaving those open is a losing strategy for the other team. We saw this a lot when the Celtics went 5-out against Indiana in crunch time, and also in the first game against Milwaukee. The Celtics consider a half-court possession a big win if any one of their top 7 shooters gets an open, in-rhythm 3, which is exactly what the Bucks concede.
Is it guaranteed that this will work? No, variance exists, and Milwaukee is also really freaking good. But almost no team in the league has the personnel to exploit that defensive strategy to the degree that the Celtics do, and I would be VERY surprised if they don't try to make it work to the point that the Bucks have to adjust.
BTW, just to be clear, I do not apply the above reasoning to Baynes. He's the exact kind of player the Bucks want shooting: a low volume, slow release guy, without consistent mechanics, who can sort of fool himself into thinking he should be taking those shots, but really is a massive loss for the offense if he's doing so.
All of the Celtics other guys (except Horford) take at least 4 attempts/36 with 3PT% over 34% (except Hayward at 33, and if your gameplan is to give Gordon Hayward tons of open 3s, good luck). The volume is a decent proxy here for attempt difficulty, and it matches the eye test: the standard looks that Celtics shooters get aren't nearly as good as what they'll be getting if the Bucks stay in their Lopez dropback defense, and you'd expect them to shoot significantly better than their percentages against normal defenses, as long as the players are in rhythm and not just insta-jacking.
All of the Celtics other guys (except Horford) take at least 4 attempts/36 with 3PT% over 34% (except Hayward at 33, and if your gameplan is to give Gordon Hayward tons of open 3s, good luck). The volume is a decent proxy here for attempt difficulty, and it matches the eye test: the standard looks that Celtics shooters get aren't nearly as good as what they'll be getting if the Bucks stay in their Lopez dropback defense, and you'd expect them to shoot significantly better than their percentages against normal defenses, as long as the players are in rhythm and not just insta-jacking.
You raise an interesting point and from a strategic POV, I guess it makes sense for MIL to give up the 3P shots because having Lopez on the floor is so important to them and he's not going to guard anyone consistently on the perimeter. The following information is from this Ringer Dec 2018 article on Brook Lopez and it shows how important he is to MIL (I haven't been able to find an update but from what I read, the point still stands).
How Lopez’s Presence Impacts His Teammates
Bucks Starters / Offensive Rating With / Offensive Rating Without
Giannis / 114.0 (582 minutes) / 102.1 (333 minutes)
Middleton / 116.0 (604 minutes) / 102.3 (232 minutes)
Bledsoe / 114.8 (660 minutes) / 103.3 (211 minutes)
Brogdon / 112.1 (470 minutes) / 99.6 (339 minutes)
But at the bottom line, the NBA is a make-or-miss league, particularly from 3P. MIL went 5-9 when teams hit over 35% on 3Ps and MIL shot 34% or less (net 3P% <.10). http://bkref.com/tiny/U0931
Bos was 1-7 under such circumstances.
Tim MacMon: Rockets will travel to the Bay Area on Friday to give themselves the best chance to be prepared for a potential Game 1 vs. Warriors on Sunday. Rockets intend no disrespect to Clippers, but they want to make sure they adjust to Pacific time and will practice Saturday at Oracle.
The Bucks shouldn't expect Aron to "fool himself" into taking more than 1-2 3PA/gm. In 19 playoff games last year he launched 23 3PA (mostly wide open) and hit 11 of them (48%). So he had some success but didn't get baited. He's a high IQ player that knows his role.
If AB's screens don't provide space for Kyrie, Tatum, Al or Brown to launch open shots he isn't doing his job on offense. AND if Giannis is waltzing to the rim for dunks or Lopez is draining 3s he isn't helping enough on defense. Brad will bench him in a heartbeat.
Yet another great game. Denver and the popsicle sticks and twine Spurs are neck and neck heading into the half.