The NBA playoffs are here. The games are tighter, the lights are brighter, and the narratives are getting thick. It can be a lot to keep up with but don’t worry we’re here to help. Throughout the NBA postseason, FanSided will be gathering together some of the most talented writers from our network for a daily recap of our favorite stories from the night before.
Welcome to the Rotation.
The method to the madness
Nathan Heck | @NathanHeck22 | Pelican Debrief
As the league trends more and more towards rapid ball movement on the perimeter, Russell Westbrook and the Oklahoma City Thunder stand as a sort of protest to the waves of change, a symbolic extended finger to modernity. The entire offense seems to be predicated on getting the superhuman guard in isolation as much as possible, not frantically swinging the ball between all five players, and it worked wonders against the San Antonio Spurs in the second game of their series on Tuesday night.
For the Oklahoma City Thunder, Russell Westbrook was the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end. Nearly every possession in the halfcourt began with Westbrook probing the defense. Sometimes he did so off a screen, but most of the time it was off his dribble. Common sense would say that having a lead guard do nothing except hold the ball and poke and prod the defense for the entirety of the game would almost certainly lead to defeat, but with Russell Westbrook, common sense does not apply.
Off of his simple dribble probes, the Thunder were able to string together stretches of extremely effective offensive possessions that only seemed to end when Westbrook was forced to take a break (forced is the correct word, he seemed to want to play all 48 minutes). The options granted to the Thunder off of these probes were plentiful as a result of the unique skill sets of Westbrook and Durant.
For starters, Westbrook created numerous different looks for himself via the isolation sets the Thunder ran for him, and the defender was forced to consider all of them a possibility each and every possession. With the ball in his hands, Westbrook can conceivably break his man down off the dribble and shoot an easy pull up jump shot from the mid-range (which he did to poor Boris Diaw), blow by the defender for an explosive finish at the rim or step back for an attempt at a three-point basket to keep the defense honest, and he did all of those things to great effect.
In regards to creating for his teammates, Westbrook was equally effective off of his drives from the perimeter. With Durant on the floor, the threat is always there for a kick out jumper, and the Thunder looked to generate that look multiple times throughout the contest off an attacking action from Russell Westbrook. In addition, Westbrook was able to find Serge Ibaka on the break and Adams at the rim with frequency. In total, the “selfish” guard racked up 10 assists in Game 2.
Of course, everything fails sometimes, but the Thunder had a not-so-secret ace in the hole when the drive from Westbrook didn’t work: Russell simply passed the ball to Kevin Durant and let him initiate the offense. The Thunder did not do it extensively against the Spurs, but it was effective in its limited uses.
It’s difficult to argue with results, and while it may not be as aesthetically pleasing as some of the more motion oriented offenses in the NBA, the raw explosions of power from Russell Westbrook win basketball games. At the end of the day, that’s kind of the point, right?
___ things to argue about today
Ian Levy | @HickoryHigh | FanSided
The San Antonio Spurs have lost just two games at home this season. This last one will probably stick with them for awhile. After thrashing the Oklahoma City Thunder in Game 1, the Spurs were played much more closely, actually trailing for much of the fourth quarter. As things wound down, LaMarcus Aldridge was fouled on a three-pointer, making all three free throws, leaving the Thunder with the ball and a one-point lead and just 13 seconds left on the clock. The play-by-play feed doesn’t begin to capture the chaos that followed.
Even video of that 13 seconds doesn’t do it justice.
A fart in a hurricane. Sound and fury, signifying nothing. Ten grown men chasing a terrified, greased-up pig. There are a lot of ways to frame that final possession. Because this is sports and we’re all experts most of us are probably going to use passionate debate (petty argument) as a way of trying to make sense of it. So as you watch (and re-watch) the video, here are a few things you should be prepared to have a strong opinion about:
Should Manu Ginobili have been called for stepping on the baseline when defending Dion Waiters? If so, it would have been a delay of game warning and reset the clock.
Should Waiters have been called for a foul for elbowing Ginobili in the throat to clear space? If so, it would have transferred possession to the Spurs.
Should Waiters have been called for a violation for jumping to pass? This is technically a violation as well and if whistled, would have transferred possession to the Spurs.
Should Danny Green has been called for a foul for tackling Kevin Durant in pursuit of the ball?
Should the Spurs have called timeout as soon as Green had possession?
Should Green have passed it to Ginobili immediately instead of Patty Mills?
Should Ginobili have taken the floater in the lane instead of passing it out to Mills?
What would have happened if Steven Adams being held by a fan (bottom right corner at the end of the video) had somehow impacted the final outcome?
The referees concluded that they missed the call and that Waiters should have been whistled for the offensive foul. But even with that change of possession, it’s tough to imagine them getting a more advantageous offensive situation than the 3-on-1 they ended up with. So, what should have happened? You’re the expert. You make the call.
What is old is new again?
Philip Rossman-Reich | @omagicdaily | Orlando Magic Daily, Hardwood Paroxysm
The NBA is a copycat league. Be successful in one area or think outside the box successfully and pretty soon everyone will try to copy.
Start hoisting three-pointers and pushing the pace at some incredible pace? Everyone will start following your Seven Seconds or Less to its ultimate conclusion — what we now call the Golden State Warriors. This is the inevitable march of time. The formula that will deliver championships.
Until someone new or unique comes around and puts a new twist on it. Until another team does something to counteract what seems to be “the way” everyone will seek to copy that advantage. Having arguably the best player in the world — certainly of a generation — helps in bucking the trend. The Cleveland Cavaliers perhaps ran at a slower pace than even they wanted, but they also have something that is different. And LeBron James can still make it all work.
More and more, frontcourts are getting smaller and smaller. The Cavaliers are small compared to the teams of the early 2000s, but they do something different. Tristan Thompson is a bull in the post. Not in the rim-protecting way of the modern NBA. Instead, he is earthbound, positioned well and attacking the offensive glass.With Kevin Love spreading the floor, Thompson is often on a one-on-five war to get to the glass before anyone else. And there are more than a few occasions he succeeds.
In Game 1 against the Atlanta Hawks, the Cavaliers grabbed 10 offensive rebounds for 14 second-chance points. Thompson had seven of those offensive rebounds. Cleveland had a 23.3 offensive rebound rate (Atlanta beat them there with a 30.3 percent rate) but Thompson had a startling 17.9 percent offensive rebound rate.
This was not something isolated to this game. The Cavaliers are not one of those teams that seemingly forsakes the offensive glass. The prevailing wisdom thought on defenses around the league is to give up the offensive glass to get back on defense and get the defense set. The Cavaliers finished ninth in the league with a 25.1 offensive rebound rate. Of teams in the top 10 during the regular season, seven finished in the top 10 in win percentage but only three are still alive in the playoffs.
There is plenty of question as to whether keeping someone to go for the offensive glass can work when the Golden State Warriors are pushing to the other end of the court. But everyone is looking for an advantage. Perhaps Cleveland’s advantage is that it has one of the best offensive rebounders in the league. In a Playoff game where every possession matters, Thompson could save and win them games.
He certainly did in Game 1 on Monday. Keeping possessions alive and making the Hawks defend for another 24 seconds helped unleash LeBron James in the end. James will continue to be a presence. Rumors of his demise are greatly exaggerated.
The league has changed dramatically as many people like to remind us — whether for good or for worse. There are those that will lament how little focus offensive rebounds get anymore.
For Cleveland this works perfectly as the team displayed in building up a large first half lead. In the half court, the Cavaliers can be devastating with their quick passing and ample shooting, opened up as defenses collapse around LeBron James and Kyrie Irving’s driving ability. And if the Cavaliers can get one extra possession? That only increases the chance they will score.
Perhaps that is the next turn that will take. Having a designated rebounder to prevent fast breaks by saving possessions.
The Atlanta Hawks’ Dr. Dennis and Mr. Schroder problem
Gerald Bourguet | @GeraldBourguet | HoopsHabit
In a Game 2 Eastern Conference semifinals matchup featuring LeBron James, Kyrie Irving, Kevin Love, Paul Millsap and Al Horford, it was Dennis Schroder who somehow finished with a game-high 27 points. And yet, never had the dichotomous play of the Atlanta Hawks’ backup point guard been more noticeable than in the 104-93 defeat.
The Hawks wound up losing a road game against the Cleveland Cavaliers that was entirely winnable, and the fluctuation between Good Dennis Schroder and Bad Dennis Schroder was all too emblematic of the result.
It wasn’t Schroder’s fault that Jeff Teague had eight points on 2-of-9 shooting. It wasn’t his fault that Kyle Korver missed his only shot in 37 minutes or action, or that Millsap and Horford went a combined 10-for-32 from the floor. But as we’ve seen too many times in this year’s playoffs and last year’s run to the Eastern Conference Finals, head coach Mike Budenholzer rode Schroder’s flows until his inevitable ebbs drained the Hawks of their momentum.
That was the case again in Game 2, even with Schroder dropping a playoff career high of 27 points on 10-of-20 shooting, including 5-of-10 shooting from three-point range to go with a team-high six assists.
On the one hand, the Hawks wouldn’t have even been close without Schroder’s scoring production, including his perimeter shooting that was a vast outlier for a guy who shot 32.2 percent from three-point range this season.
When Atlanta went on a 16-3 run to close the third quarter and cut Cleveland’s 18-point lead to five entering the final frame, Schroder was the catalyst. In that four-minute span, Schroder led the charge with eight points, two three-pointers and one assist that led to a Mike Scott three-pointer.
In the final five minutes of the third quarter when Schroder checked in for Teague, the German backup posted a plus-minus of +10. He was probing the defense, hitting open cutters and finding ways to make Cleveland pay even when he wasn’t scoring.
Unfortunately, Bud stuck with Schroder’s hot streak just a tad too long. Schroder added another seven points and an assist in the first half of the fourth quarter, subbing Teague back into the game at the 6:24 mark.
After riding Schroder since the 5:01 mark of the third quarter, Bud didn’t give his streaking backup enough of a breather. Despite playing for 10 and a half straight minutes, Schroder checked back into the game after only a minute and two seconds of fourth quarter rest. The move was somewhat defensible with Teague visibly struggling, but over that final 5:22, a tired Schroder went 0-for-3 from the field and committed two of his game-high five turnovers. The Hawks were also outscored 18-7 from that point to close out the game.
Some nights, Dennis Schroder flashes undeniable potential that makes good on the Rajon Rondo comparisons, only if Rondo had actually shown promise as a shooter once upon a time. Some nights, Schroder’s late-game execution, missed layups and costly turnovers ruin the idea that he’s ready to be an NBA starting point guard.
Most nights though, those things are happening at the exact same time and Game 1 was no exception. Welcome to the dichotomy of Good Dennis Schroder and Bad Dennis Schroder.