2020 Historical Draft: FINALS: Celtics Win!!! Congrats to Who!!!

[action781]

I think that Action is right to point out that the Gasol brothers are “lane cloggers” themselves.  I don’t think this point has been adequately addressed.

Now, my argument is that spacing is a wildly overstated argument when you’re talking about great players, but that doesn’t seem to be the prevailing wisdom.  Why is Boston immune?  If we apply a fair standard, shouldn’t the Gasol brothers be greatly diminished offensively, and Durant confined exclusively to shooting jumpers?

I'm taking in good faith that Marc Gasol would not be a 1/12 3-point shooter, but would have sooner developed to be the eventual 35-36% 3-point shooter he became in today's NBA.  Just as Who previously said in this game that he genuinely believes Kidd would have developed his eventual 3 point shot earlier if played in today's NBA.

Pau has shot very similar to Marc over his career from outside.  (Somewhere between 42-49% on long 2s, about 36% on 3s)  That's what I expect from them and I'd say the same for Rasheed too.  They are all solid outside shooters for their position.

But when Boston has so many poisons to pick from, this is what we will yield to them, because we can't have Shaq playing out on the perimeter.  That's a recipe for disaster.

[action781]

Action781, you are working hard for this win. I credit you with that.

But I think you made a mistake subbing in Tucker. He's a great guy to rotate in a make Durant's life miserable, but I don't think you have enough offense out there with him at small forward.

Shaq is great. but I have a serious question. How much better is that starting lineup than the closing lineup for the Lakers in 2000? They had Bryant, Horry, Robinson, and Harper/fisher. No doubt that Bryant is better than Miller. Is Robinson a better player at that point that Horford? Is Horry is a better player than Tucker? Probably not to both those questions, but I think its not a ridiculous question.

I think I would have zagged and went small with great shooting around Shaq. I think I would have done a Miller-Peja-Mashburn lineup with Kidd and Shaq and force Pau to chase shooters around the court.

Thank you DWC.

It's not uncommon for very successful teams to bring some of their better players off the bench, even their 3rd best player.  Manu Ginobili for example was only a starter for 1 of his 4 championships with the Spurs.  Why?  Because it was a winning recipe those seasons to start guys who could play better D on the opposing teams starters.   Manu still played more minutes than the starting SGs of Michael Finley and Danny Green.

You don't have to dig that deep to find lots of other teams who bring their #3 (or even better) options off the bench to help team success.  Peja isn't being ignored or unutilized here.  Peja will still get a good amount of playing time off the bench to provide buckets and floor spacing this series.  And he'll still be playing with an elite passing point guard whenever he's on the floor which helps him be the best he can be.

---

Mashburn is a slightly better floor spacer than Horford, but Horford does provides that himself too.  Kidd-Reggie-Peja-Mash-Shaq is a great spacing/offense lineup I could absolutely go with at times when Tucker is sitting.  Can play it when Durant is sitting, or when Durant's at the 4 and Mashburn will guard him.  I love it.  I don't think it matters too much if that's the starting lineup or a mid-game lineup though.

[Moranis]

Action781, you are working hard for this win. I credit you with that.

But I think you made a mistake subbing in Tucker. He's a great guy to rotate in a make Durant's life miserable, but I don't think you have enough offense out there with him at small forward.

Shaq is great. but I have a serious question. How much better is that starting lineup than the closing lineup for the Lakers in 2000? They had Bryant, Horry, Robinson, and Harper/fisher. No doubt that Bryant is better than Miller. Is Robinson a better player at that point that Horford? Is Horry is a better player than Tucker? Probably not to both those questions, but I think its not a ridiculous question.

I think I would have zagged and went small with great shooting around Shaq. I think I would have done a Miller-Peja-Mashburn lineup with Kidd and Shaq and force Pau to chase shooters around the court.

Thank you DWC.

It's not uncommon for very successful teams to bring some of their better players off the bench, even their 3rd best player.  Manu Ginobili for example was only a starter for 1 of his 4 championships with the Spurs.  Why?  Because it was a winning recipe those seasons to start guys who could play better D on the opposing teams starters.   Manu still played more minutes than the starting SGs of Michael Finley and Danny Green.

You don't have to dig that deep to find lots of other teams who bring their #3 (or even better) options off the bench to help team success.  Peja isn't being ignored or unutilized here.  Peja will still get a good amount of playing time off the bench to provide buckets and floor spacing this series.  And he'll still be playing with an elite passing point guard whenever he's on the floor which helps him be the best he can be.

---

Mashburn is a slightly better floor spacer than Horford, but Horford does provides that himself too.  Kidd-Reggie-Peja-Mash-Shaq is a great spacing/offense lineup I could absolutely go with at times when Tucker is sitting.  Can play it when Durant is sitting, or when Durant's at the 4 and Mashburn will guard him.  I love it.  I don't think it matters too much if that's the starting lineup or a mid-game lineup though.

regular basketball is not this type of team though.  Every team is stacked 1-5, when you start a significantly inferior player because you are trying to play the match-up game it often backfires very quickly.  And Tucker is a vastly inferior player to Peja and frankly I don't think he gives you enough of what you are trying to do with the substitution to make it worthwhile.  Your best bet is to make Durant work defensively.  Body him up and wear him down.  You limit Durant, you greatly increase your chances of winning.

[Roy H.]

Action781, you are working hard for this win. I credit you with that.

But I think you made a mistake subbing in Tucker. He's a great guy to rotate in a make Durant's life miserable, but I don't think you have enough offense out there with him at small forward.

Shaq is great. but I have a serious question. How much better is that starting lineup than the closing lineup for the Lakers in 2000? They had Bryant, Horry, Robinson, and Harper/fisher. No doubt that Bryant is better than Miller. Is Robinson a better player at that point that Horford? Is Horry is a better player than Tucker? Probably not to both those questions, but I think its not a ridiculous question.

I think I would have zagged and went small with great shooting around Shaq. I think I would have done a Miller-Peja-Mashburn lineup with Kidd and Shaq and force Pau to chase shooters around the court.

Thank you DWC.

It's not uncommon for very successful teams to bring some of their better players off the bench, even their 3rd best player.  Manu Ginobili for example was only a starter for 1 of his 4 championships with the Spurs.  Why?  Because it was a winning recipe those seasons to start guys who could play better D on the opposing teams starters.   Manu still played more minutes than the starting SGs of Michael Finley and Danny Green.

You don't have to dig that deep to find lots of other teams who bring their #3 (or even better) options off the bench to help team success.  Peja isn't being ignored or unutilized here.  Peja will still get a good amount of playing time off the bench to provide buckets and floor spacing this series.  And he'll still be playing with an elite passing point guard whenever he's on the floor which helps him be the best he can be.

---

Mashburn is a slightly better floor spacer than Horford, but Horford does provides that himself too.  Kidd-Reggie-Peja-Mash-Shaq is a great spacing/offense lineup I could absolutely go with at times when Tucker is sitting.  Can play it when Durant is sitting, or when Durant's at the 4 and Mashburn will guard him.  I love it.  I don't think it matters too much if that's the starting lineup or a mid-game lineup though.

regular basketball is not this type of team though.  Every team is stacked 1-5, when you start a significantly inferior player because you are trying to play the match-up game it often backfires very quickly.  And Tucker is a vastly inferior player to Peja and frankly I don't think he gives you enough of what you are trying to do with the substitution to make it worthwhile.  Your best bet is to make Durant work defensively.  Body him up and wear him down.  You limit Durant, you greatly increase your chances of winning.

If a team full of All-NBA defenders, highlighted by Giannis and Alonzo Mourning, couldn’t wear down Durant, I’m not sure that Peja can.

But I do agree, playing 4-on-5 against an offensive powerhouse probably hurts more than it helps.

[action781]

I'd disagree with the idea that PJ Tucker on the floor equates to us having to play 4 on 5.

PJ Tucker can't be completely ignored on the offensive end of the floor.  He's a 37% 3 point shooter.  He's been a starter for the NBA team that had the either #1 or #2 offensive rating in the NBA for the past three seasons.  He's certainly one-dimensional, but his man can't just sag off and be an extra help defender.  He's not Tony Allen.

Don't forget, we've got multiple threats of attack already in our starting lineup -- Shaq, Kidd defended by Nash, and Reggie running Allan Houston off triple screens.

[action781]

regular basketball is not this type of team though.  Every team is stacked 1-5, when you start a significantly inferior player because you are trying to play the match-up game it often backfires very quickly.  And Tucker is a vastly inferior player to Peja and frankly I don't think he gives you enough of what you are trying to do with the substitution to make it worthwhile.  Your best bet is to make Durant work defensively.  Body him up and wear him down.  You limit Durant, you greatly increase your chances of winning.

We both agree that wearing down Durant is a good strategy to winning the series, we just disagree how to do it.  I think the way to do body him up and wear him down is with

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tvyjYxetZHI

and

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwYw3CfvUks

I think either way could wear him down, but you can't deny that the guy in those videos right there, the guy that Durant credits as the best 1-1 defender in the game, won't wear him down at all.  So this is just the way that I think will wear him down more.

And I hope you don't think that Peja is not playing this series.  He'll still play ~24 minutes, which is maybe 6-8 minutes less than normal.  Just in different situations, a good chunk of those minutes when Durant is on the bench and/or when Shaq is on the bench.

[nickagneta]

I, too, am not buying putting Tucker in the starting lineup as being a good move. And I think your point of emphasis should have been that you can outscore Boston in a game that is at a pace most beneficial to your team, not that Tucker will be able to slow down Durant making the Boston offense less effective.

I thought from the beginning the best argument to make to beat Boston was to slow the pace considerably, limit the amount of possessions Boston gets and try to outscore them by pounding it inside and play an inside out offense.

With Shaq, Horford Kidd, Peja and Reggie you could do that real well. Horford is a very good 3 point shooter so can give space to Shaq and Shaq a good enough passer to pass out of double teams if he doesn't have the easy one on one basket. When Shaq sits, Horford is an amazing passing center in a more smallish lineup that can continue this.

I would have dictated a strategy of walk it up, slow it down, force Boston into a half court slugfest where Utah has the biggest, toughest guy in the fight and stress everyone but your center getting immediately back and ignoring offensive rebounds so you slow Boston down right after they cross half court, preventing those quick open threes on the break by Boston's elite three point shooters.

I think adding Tucker to the starting lineup limits the overall effectiveness of Utah's half court offense and doesn't appreciably help in slowing down the fast paced Boston offense any more than Peja could just by getting back and preventing the fast break and easy threes before the defense has a chance to set.

Just my two cents. Gotta say, I was on the fence, but I think the Tucker move is swaying me to Boston in 7.

[Roy H.]

regular basketball is not this type of team though.  Every team is stacked 1-5, when you start a significantly inferior player because you are trying to play the match-up game it often backfires very quickly.  And Tucker is a vastly inferior player to Peja and frankly I don't think he gives you enough of what you are trying to do with the substitution to make it worthwhile.  Your best bet is to make Durant work defensively.  Body him up and wear him down.  You limit Durant, you greatly increase your chances of winning.

We both agree that wearing down Durant is a good strategy to winning the series, we just disagree how to do it.  I think the way to do body him up and wear him down is with

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tvyjYxetZHI

and

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwYw3CfvUks

I think either way could wear him down, but you can't deny that the guy in those videos right there, the guy that Durant credits as the best 1-1 defender in the game, won't wear him down at all.  So this is just the way that I think will wear him down more.

And I hope you don't think that Peja is not playing this series.  He'll still play ~24 minutes, which is maybe 6-8 minutes less than normal.  Just in different situations, a good chunk of those minutes when Durant is on the bench and/or when Shaq is on the bench.

Here’s the thing about Tucker: he is already left wide open. 58% of his shots come with nobody within 6 feet of him. Despite that, he is only averaging something like seven or eight points per game. He is basically a Bruce Bowen type of a threat.

Teams are going to gladly give up eight or 10 points to Tucker to be able to double your other scorers.

https://stats.nba.com/player/200782/shots-dash/

[Roy H.]

I, too, am not buying putting Tucker in the starting lineup as being a good move. And I think your point of emphasis should have been that you can outscore Boston in a game that is at a pace most beneficial to your team, not that Tucker will be able to slow down Durant making the Boston offense less effective.

I thought from the beginning the best argument to make to beat Boston was to slow the pace considerably, limit the amount of possessions Boston gets and try to outscore them by pounding it inside and play an inside out offense.

With Shaq, Horford Kidd, Peja and Reggie you could do that real well. Horford is a very good 3 point shooter so can give space to Shaq and Shaq a good enough passer to pass out of double teams if he doesn't have the easy one on one basket. When Shaq sits, Horford is an amazing passing center in a more smallish lineup that can continue this.

I would have dictated a strategy of walk it up, slow it down, force Boston into a half court slugfest where Utah has the biggest, toughest guy in the fight and stress everyone but your center getting immediately back and ignoring offensive rebounds so you slow Boston down right after they cross half court, preventing those quick open threes on the break by Boston's elite three point shooters.

I think adding Tucker to the starting lineup limits the overall effectiveness of Utah's half court offense and doesn't appreciably help in slowing down the fast paced Boston offense any more than Peja could just by getting back and preventing the fast break and easy threes before the defense has a chance to set.

Just my two cents. Gotta say, I was on the fence, but I think the Tucker move is swaying me to Boston in 7.

So, Utah should do the same thing that Milwaukee did to no effect? 

Honestly, I don’t think there’s a winning strategy against Boston this year.  Voters just aren’t going to buy anything.

[nickagneta]

I, too, am not buying putting Tucker in the starting lineup as being a good move. And I think your point of emphasis should have been that you can outscore Boston in a game that is at a pace most beneficial to your team, not that Tucker will be able to slow down Durant making the Boston offense less effective.

I thought from the beginning the best argument to make to beat Boston was to slow the pace considerably, limit the amount of possessions Boston gets and try to outscore them by pounding it inside and play an inside out offense.

With Shaq, Horford Kidd, Peja and Reggie you could do that real well. Horford is a very good 3 point shooter so can give space to Shaq and Shaq a good enough passer to pass out of double teams if he doesn't have the easy one on one basket. When Shaq sits, Horford is an amazing passing center in a more smallish lineup that can continue this.

I would have dictated a strategy of walk it up, slow it down, force Boston into a half court slugfest where Utah has the biggest, toughest guy in the fight and stress everyone but your center getting immediately back and ignoring offensive rebounds so you slow Boston down right after they cross half court, preventing those quick open threes on the break by Boston's elite three point shooters.

I think adding Tucker to the starting lineup limits the overall effectiveness of Utah's half court offense and doesn't appreciably help in slowing down the fast paced Boston offense any more than Peja could just by getting back and preventing the fast break and easy threes before the defense has a chance to set.

Just my two cents. Gotta say, I was on the fence, but I think the Tucker move is swaying me to Boston in 7.

So, Utah should do the same thing that Milwaukee did to no effect? 

Honestly, I don’t think there’s a winning strategy against Boston this year.  Voters just aren’t going to buy anything.

They have Shaq. You didn't. They have three point shooters at the 3 and 4. You didn't.

You may have had the right strategy, but you lacked the right parts.

Utah has the right parts but isn't using the right strategy and is misusing one part.

[Roy H.]

My two cents:

Start Shaq, Peja, Mashburn, Brown, Kidd

Miller should not be starting in the series. He is a taller J.J. Redick.

Brown brings more versatile offense, and much better defense. He can cover Durant one on one.  Brown and Kidd can manhandle the Boston backcourt.

Yes, Peja will get beat up somewhat by Pau, but Boston will get punished much worse on the other side.  There have been plenty of stretch-fours that Pau hadn’t dominated.  Meanwhile, Shaq is going one on one against Marc, or is passing out to wide open shooters.

[nickagneta]

regular basketball is not this type of team though.  Every team is stacked 1-5, when you start a significantly inferior player because you are trying to play the match-up game it often backfires very quickly.  And Tucker is a vastly inferior player to Peja and frankly I don't think he gives you enough of what you are trying to do with the substitution to make it worthwhile.  Your best bet is to make Durant work defensively.  Body him up and wear him down.  You limit Durant, you greatly increase your chances of winning.

We both agree that wearing down Durant is a good strategy to winning the series, we just disagree how to do it.  I think the way to do body him up and wear him down is with

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tvyjYxetZHI

and

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwYw3CfvUks

I think either way could wear him down, but you can't deny that the guy in those videos right there, the guy that Durant credits as the best 1-1 defender in the game, won't wear him down at all.  So this is just the way that I think will wear him down more.

And I hope you don't think that Peja is not playing this series.  He'll still play ~24 minutes, which is maybe 6-8 minutes less than normal.  Just in different situations, a good chunk of those minutes when Durant is on the bench and/or when Shaq is on the bench.

Here’s the thing about Tucker: he is already left wide open. 58% of his shots come with nobody within 6 feet of him. Despite that, he is only averaging something like seven or eight points per game. He is basically a Bruce Bowen type of a threat.

Teams are going to gladly give up eight or 10 points to Tucker to be able to double your other scorers.

https://stats.nba.com/player/200782/shots-dash/

This is spot on about Tucker and why it's the wrong move. It will really hurt Utah's half court offense which I think is vital to win this.

[Roy H.]

My two cents:

Start Shaq, Peja, Mashburn, Brown, Kidd

Miller should not be starting in the series. He is a taller J.J. Redick.

Brown brings more versatile offense, and much better defense. He can cover Durant one on one.  Brown and Kidd can manhandle the Boston backcourt.

Yes, Peja will get beat up somewhat by Pau, but Boston will get punished much worse on the other side.  There have been plenty of stretch-fours that Pau hadn’t dominated.  Meanwhile, Shaq is going one on one against Marc, or is passing out to wide open shooters.

To add to this, Utah’s job is to outscore Boston

Shaq vs Marc
Peja vs Pau
Mashburn vs Durant
Brown vs Houston
Kidd vs Nash

I think that defensively, Utah can slow down Boston more than Boston can slow down Utah.

Boston is starting three subpar to terrible defenders.  People act like that doesn’t matter, as if “team defense” is effective with slow dudes with poor defensive instincts.  I can’t even imagine the wide open looks that Peja would be getting, regardless of whether Pau is leaving him open to double O’Neal or if he is trying to defend Peja on the perimeter.

[action781]

Utah's closing argument on its way

[action781]

Utah's Closing Argument

Boston was the #1 overall seed in the league.  They earned that because despite having a porous defense, Boston has overwhelmingly the best offense in the league.  Trying to win this series by going blow for blow against them on offense is a losing strategy, IMO, even with Shaq.

I've always believed that defense wins championships (Hi, DWC!) and that's our strategy here.  If you guys believe differently, that offense wins championships, then I can't change your mind on that.  Boston has two offensive engines that make this team go -- Nash and Durant.  Utah is going to trot out, according to Who, the single best point guard defender in the league on Nash and the defender on Durant that Durant himself has proclaimed the league's best 1-1 defender on him.  We have no mismatches on our other 3 matchups.  We have a strategy to defend the 1-5 pick and roll.  Utah wasn't the best team defense in the league, but this starting lineup could be the best team defense against Boston in the league.

With this starting lineup, Utah IS going to slow the game down.  We're going to be physical with Durant.  PJ will play about 24 minutes on him.  Mashburn and Jaylen Brown will defend him for his other minutes.  We have an army of 14-year-olds ready to tweet bad things about him, keeping him up at all hours of the night defending himself. 

Utah's offense will be as good or better than usual.  Shaq operated very effectively with less space in his prime.  Kidd is being defended by Steve Nash.  We have Reggie Miller and Al Horford.  Boston is among the worst defenses in the league.  This Boston defense is absolutely worse than the 2001 76ers defense that Shaq destroyed with less spacing.  And Shaq has better spacing on this team, yes even with PJ Tucker on the floor.  Utah's offense is going to be fine.  Peja is still playing plenty of minutes, just in different lineup variations.  Some that will allow him to get more usage than he would with the normal starting 5.

Boston was the better team coming into this series.  But Utah has two excellent defensive options to put on Boston's two offensive engines.  How much this will limit them is up for debate, but there is no doubt that it will limit them to some level.  Does Boston have the same defenders in place to limit Utah's offensive engines of Shaq and Kidd?

Lastly, I've heard a few ideas of variations from other posters of starting lineups that could work.  Lineups that you think could be the Finals-winning recipe.  I too am sure they could work.  And they WILL work... as lineups during segments of the game that don't immediately follow the first quarter tipoff.  Games are not won or lost in the first 6 minutes.  Think about that assumption for a minute.  And that 6 minutes is how much PJ will play before he subs out and Peja and Mashburn and/or Jaylen sub in.  Peja is still going to play, even with the starters at times.  We just want to make sure Tucker get minutes in when Durant is in the game to make the game miserable for him.  Because he is the league's best 1-1 Durant defender.

And I think defense wins championships.

-----

Thank you all for reading and for participating.  This has been a lot of fun.  Even if I lose, I've heard your arguments but I am 100% sold on PJ Tucker as a starter on Durant being the right move for the reasons I described above and I will have no regrets at all with that choice.  I'll certainly be reading people's comments that follow, but this will probably be my last post until after voting closes.  Time to feed my daughter.  With this game coming to a close, she's going to be happy to have me back (although not as much as my wife will)