Seven Takes: Are the NBA Finals Over?
Plus five takes from NBA Substack on Game 2 and what it tells us
We asked a dozen leading NBA voices on Substack a pair of questions:
1. Are the NBA Finals essentially over?
Check out their answers and subscribe!
|
Over is a strong word, but the Celtics have sure made it a valid question by fixing one of their most significant issues in recent seasons: They've suddenly won five in a row at home after going 15-15 in their previous 30 playoff games at TD Garden. And they just survived 10-for-39 (25.6%) shooting on 3-pointers — precisely the sort of Boston comedown from deep that Dallas was counting on to spark a series-tying road victory — to avoid a third Game 2 loss in these playoffs. So, yeah, it's looking rather bleak for the Western Conference champs.
|
The history certainly isn't good if you are Dallas. In the NBA Finals all-time, teams who’ve won the first two games of the series at home have gone on to win the title 84.8% of the time (they're 28-5 under that scenario).
The Mavs improved their margin from -18 in Game 1 to -7 in Game 2, and they actually struck fear into Boston's heart for a split-second with under two minutes to go, but they also got a 30-point triple-double out of Luka Dončić and still lost. (It was the first time all playoffs that happened.)
Never say never, though. The same sample that produced the 28-5 record for teams that go up 2-0 at home also saw those teams go just 12-21 (36.4%) in Game 3 on the road. So there's a good chance we see Dallas steal one back on Wednesday night, and then we're right back to these Celtics having to answer questions about closing out a 2-1 lead in the Finals again.
|
This series isn’t over, and I refuse to let Neil Paine tell me otherwise!
All jokes aside, the rest of this series hinges on whether or not Kyrie Irving can find himself again. Due to both his 7-of-18 shooting performance in Game 2 and overall lack of trademark Kyrie craftiness in the lane, the Mavericks' ability to move the ball and score has become nonexistent.
While it's unlikely he plays this poorly the rest of the way, anything close to it would send Dallas right back down to (according to Kyrie, flat) Earth.
|
I don't necessarily think the Finals are over, no. Boston held serve at home. That's what they were supposed to do, right? On to Dallas.
The problem is that the Mavericks don't look very threatening right now. One of the obvious talking points from tonight was the horrific 3-point shooting from Boston, but Dallas shot even worse, albeit on fewer shots.
For a half tonight, Luka put the cape on. He can win a game by himself, and I expect he will. But I'm less and less convinced he can win the series by himself. Let's find out.
|
The Finals aren’t over. Not to be clichéd, but the whole “Until someone wins on the road” deal applies here. The Mavericks’ role players should be better at home.
That being said … the Celtics won the bad-shooting game. When Boston lost this year, it was usually on a bad-shooting night. That doesn’t bode well for Dallas. And if Jayson Tatum can find his shot, then the series really is over.
Ray LeBov |
Coming back to win after trailing 2-0 is a monumentally difficult task; it has happened only five times out of 36 in the NBA Finals. The closeness in Game 2 of each of Dean Oliver's "Four Factors" gives some hope (and a half-court prayer that banked in played a role). As always, a major injury (how healthy is Kristaps Porziņģis?) could turn the series around.
The Mavs need far better play from Irving to have a chance; their roster after the top two stars is much weaker. But that’s easier said than done due to the Celtics’ stifling defense. Can strategic counters play enough of a role, given the likely impact of counters to the counters?
|
A series being 2-0 doesn’t mean it’s over. But this series being 2-0 means it’s over.
Boston’s ability to beat teams off the dribble with (literally) five different guys was always going to be overwhelming for the Mavs. Jayson Tatum, Jaylen Brown, Derrick White, Kristaps Porziņģis, Jrue Holiday — each can be trusted with the ball in his hands, and when that’s the case, there’s often no answer. Dallas should be proud of its run — but it doesn’t have the offensive horses (nice) to beat Boston four out of five times. This is a wrap.
2. What does Game 2 tell us about the Finals going forward?
|
Game 2 reveals more to us about Dallas than I'm sure the Mavs would like. Luka Dončić looked gassed, Derrick Jones Jr. and P.J. Washington were flustered and misread some crucial moments, and Kyrie Irving, for all his ability to bend the speed of a game at will, looked out of step. The Celtics didn't have to deploy any wild new schemes to stay ahead because Dallas had only just adjusted to what they saw in Game 1.
Game 2 also revealed a potentially short series, if the Mavs don't figure out some remedies for their in-game staying power.
|
What Game 2 told me about this series is that elite depth beats top-line talent. Dallas doesn't have the players to step up when Kyrie Irving's water is being shut off by Jrue Holiday (and sometimes Derrick White).
Jayson Tatum has had some awful shooting luck through two games, but Jaylen Brown, Kristaps Porziņģis (in Game 1), Holiday (in Game 2) and White have helped overcome that.
Luka Dončić is amazing, even against a top-flight defense. But there's no offensive backup plan for Dallas without Kyrie performing at a high level.
|
Game 2 showed just how much better Boston is defensively. Dallas has been incapable of rattling the Celtics, as Boston had no issue identifying whom to attack on drives and exploiting the Mavs' inability to stay in front of them.
Boston, on the other hand, is using its depth on the perimeter and trusting its switches to stymie anything Dallas wants to do off the dribble, putting Kyrie in prison in the process.
|
Game 2 tells us that superteams aren’t about superstars anymore. As teams hyper-optimize their strategies, weaknesses (or lack thereof) become far more important than strengths.
Watch Luka Dončić slump so hard his fingers kiss the ground after every wide-open 3 his nervous teammates brick. Watch Boston hungrily feast on Dončić and Kyrie Irving on the other end.
The Celtics’ weakest defensive link might be Jayson Tatum, a giant gazelle with wings, and their weakest offensive link might be Jrue Holiday, who led the team in scoring and played like the best big man in the game despite standing 6’4”.
What is Dallas supposed to do? What could anyone do? Even Superman had a weakness; good luck finding Boston’s.
|
Game 2 is a reminder that the size of the blunder Milwaukee made when it traded away Jrue Holiday cannot be overstated. It was clear he'd go to a contender and potentially push that team into dynasty territory.
Now we have a worst-case scenario for the rest of the league: adding an Iguodala-type impact player to an already good team. We might be witnessing the beginning of three straight Boston titles.