Dallas Mavericks 103, San Antonio Spurs 81: Brendan Haywood stomps

by

The score says the Mavericks beat the Spurs by 22 points, but it was worse than that. And Gregg Popovich knew it. The Spurs’ starters didn’t see action in the 4th quarter. Pop put out the white flag towards the end of the third, and now it’s San Antonio’s turn to regroup.

The Mavericks jumped out on the Spurs early, taking an 8-6 lead with 8:25 remaining in the first. And from there the Mavericks just pulled away behind the force of Brendan Haywood and Caron Butler.

From the Spurs’ perspective, fouls and turnovers were their undoing. Manu Ginobili and DeJuan Blair each struggled with foul trouble in the first half-Blair picked up 4 personals in the space of a few minutes. Ginobili went to the bench early because of fouls, too. But his team-high 4 turnovers help fuel the Mavericks dominance. Ginobili played a mere 18 minutes before Popovich retired his starters for the evening.

From the Mavericks’ perspective, this game was about one crucial adjustment and the incredible play of Caron Butler.

After Game 1, we posted Wayne Winston’s thoughts on the Spurs-Mavericks series. His main contention for the Mavericks was that they should play Brendan Haywood more. It took the Mavericks a full four games to figure this out, but Haywood finally started for the Mavericks last night. Haywood was too much for the Spurs, finishing with 8 points, 8 rebounds, 4 blocks and a game-high plus/minus of +22. Erick Dampier, the Mavericks starting center for the first 4 games of this series, went from starting to DNP-CDing.

Haywood is a major concern for the Spurs. Quoting from Winston’s Spurs-Mavs Game 5 recap,

As we have reported throughout this great series, the Spurs starting lineup has torched the Mavs starting lineup. We also have noted that the Mavs are much better with Haywood on the court than with Dampier on the court. (Haywood has an Adjusted +/- rating of +22 for series and Dampier -10.)

The Mavs brain trust finally figured this out and inserted Haywood on the court and Dampier received a DNP. The results were a delight for Mavs fans. The Mavs new starting lineup (Haywirk, Kidd and Marion) was +17 points last night and the Spurs starting lineup (Hill, Manu, Duncan, McDyess, and Jefferson) was -17 points. Now it is the Spurs turn to adjust.

Rick Carlisle explained his decision this way, indicating that the Mavs plan to use Haywood in the same capacity going forward.

It just seemed like the right time to make this move. It is a little bit different kind of player. Damp has been giving us great defense and rebounding and stuff. Brendan is just a little bit different type of player and I thought he responded well. When I talked to Damp about the decision, he was great. He is going to be ready. I thought long and hard about it. Damp has been such an important part here and we are going to continue to need him. He just said hey I am ready. So it was great. I thought Haywood responded well to the opportunity. Hey, going back down there. The environment is going to be a lot different. We have our work cut out for us, but we have to build on tonight.

But perhaps the best summation of Haywood’s contribution comes from Rob Mahoney of the Two Man Game:

Haywood responded wonderfully, and though he failed to reach double-digits in points, his impact was profound. Brendan emerged from series invisibility to grab six offensive boards in 30 minutes, and went to the free throw line 12 times as a result. The Mavs fed Haywood down low early, and his focus and intensity never lagged. He was a force defensively, held Tim Duncan to 3-of-9 shooting and just 11 points.

Caron Butler’s line was more impressive, but Brendan Haywood is of greater concern to San Antonio.

But Butler’s 35 points, 11 boards and zero turnovers were concerning. He simply dominated the game, and there is very little to say other than the Spurs need to do a better job of accounting for Butler.

There is another major concern for the Spurs, and it doesn’t have an easy solution. The Spurs are playing 7 and 8 man rotations in the playoffs. The end of their bench-Roger Mason Jr, Keith Bogans, Garrett Temple-shouldn’t be on the court. And, as a result of their lack of depth, the Spurs’ starters are already giving indications of postseason fatigue. Tim Duncan followed the worst game of his playoff career (Game 4) with, perhaps, the second worst game of his playoff career.

Tim Duncan looks tired, and Brendan Haywood is one the league’s better interior defenders. That’s a bad mix.

The Spurs will continue to roll with a short rotation-only Ian Mahinmi has made an, admittedly meager, case for additional minutes. Trying Mahinmi against Haywood might make some sense if DeJuan Blair, who is struggling badly against Haywood, gets into early foul trouble. But for the Spurs, this series is about finding solutions from their already established 8-man rotation.

All eyes on Popovich. It’s the Spurs’ turn to adjust.

← Older Comments
  • Kevin

    @BALLHOG

    Wait, are you for or against Pop? Do you think he should be questioned?

    I’m just not entirely convinced either way, maybe you could post again and explain whether or not you think Pop is the greatest man who ever walked the Earth?

    What about Ian? Should he get more PT? Is he still working harder than everyone? Is his playing time somehow related to how terrible Pop is?

    I’m sorry, I just haven’t gotten it yet.

    Also, LOL… you use the Parker haters as an example, but you sound just as ridiculous as they do. At least they have some sort of arguement to go with their post, not just the same repeated unfounded BS.

    “Ian works so hard! Don’t believe the guys who coach him [Spurs and French nat'l team], or the guys who interview coaches and players and watch practice… believe me! I can see it!”

  • Kevin

    Seriously though, the Mavs are a good team. That’s what is scary about not putting them away in Game 5. Both of these teams are unlucky to have drawn each other in round 1, because they might just be the best 2 right now.

    Beating them will not be easy. That’s why tonight is so important, because the home court probably gives us better odds than going back to Dallas for game 7.

  • Trade TP

    Great response Henderson! pull out some antiquated bs from 3-4 years ago. Living in the past.

  • Tanjavur

    Clearly Pop has outcoached Carlisle in this series. The entire basketball world knows that.

    Game 5 was a number of things that did not work well for us and it was a desparation home game for the mavs. In fact, I actually think Pop was smart by not giving too much away. It would have been way worse if all our starters played heavy minuets and still lost…not only would our morale be low we’d also be low on energy.

    Clearly the entire team as evidenced by what they say or more importantly do not say in the media shows us their attention to detail and to me that is completely a Pop thing. A game ago we saw how fractured the Mavs were after losing…you will never see that in SA. One thing is for sure, we had our troubles much of the season but the last 6-8 weeks this team has shown it can play. I expect they will tonight! Go Spurs!!!!

    We are indeed blessed to be Spurs fans!

  • doggydogworld

    @Jim - you and others blame RJ for not scoring. Little known fact — you can’t shoot without the ball. You know how many times RJ touched the ball in the 1st quarter? Three. That’s one touch every four minutes. In fact, he got zero touches the first four minutes. Think about that. The other four players all had at least two scoring opportunities each and RJ had not TOUCHED THE BALL one time.

  • http://spursunderground.blogspot.com/ b.diddy

    It’s rare that you see the Spurs as a team play two bad games in a row, and even more rare to see Tim duncan play three bad games in a row…whether Los Spurs win tonight or not, I expect the game to be played with far better execution by the Silver and Black

  • Dr. Who

    @Ballhog
    not that it matters but that’s a fair post. Beleive it or not, I follow the logic and the points are valid. Critique of Pop is all good with logic. RMJ playing with Blair and keeping him into long after he got 3 fouls was a problem. But it didn’t lose the game. Not attaching Haywood to get him in foul trouble and make him work. Yep that was a problem, not attacking… Yep it was a problem. All valid points. IMO it didn’t lose the game for us since the energy level was beyond low for everyone not named Parker. As well as TP looked he did a lot of 1 on 1 and didn’t distribute to get the other guys involved. The previous poster did hit on RJ not shooting because he didn’t touch the ball. Very true, playmaker Manu was out with foul trouble and TP was a scorer not a distributed. So here’s to a better game 6! I’ve had issues with some if ur biased posts in the past. But I can’t really rag Ballhog too much for that previous post. It’s what every university English teacher says in regards to literature, any interpretation is valid as long as there is logic behind it. It’s better than reading Pop blows!

  • BALLHOG

    @ Dr Who

    Truth is truth and it doesnt really matter who tells it.

    A person can post factual interpretations or just simple opinion. Opinions dont require facts, just fingers and a keyboard.

    Besides, Im realistic enough to know that Pop is not going anywhere and demanding his head is a wate of a good complaint.

    Also, as for grading Pop as a coach or having an opinion on how effective or ineffective he is…It is what it is. However,

    Since we seem to crave facts over opinion, here is a fact 4 ya….

    If Pop goes into next season and spends an entire season trying to set starting line ups and rotations, the heat will indeed be on! Our core players dont have years to waste. They arent exactly spring chickens.

    If anybody struggles to admit that this was Pops worst season as a head coach, its simply denial.

    I understand supporting a coach, but that support cannot be blind. Unless your screen name is JIMJIM.

  • Pingback: The San Antonio Spurs look to finish off Dallas in Game 6 | 48 Minutes of Hell

  • Jim Henderson

    Trade TP
    April 29th, 2010 at 7:02 am

    “Great response Henderson! pull out some antiquated bs from 3-4 years ago. Living in the past.”

    Do you know any other coaches not named Jackson that win a title with their team every 3-4 years, over a period of more than a decade? Everyone knows the answer to that question, NO. But for you, the team that you happen to be a fan of apparently needs to win a title EVERY YEAR, or their coach must suck. LOL! If I’m living in the past, you’re living in Fantasyland.

    doggydogworld
    April 29th, 2010 at 7:45 am

    “@Jim – you and others blame RJ for not scoring. Little known fact — you can’t shoot without the ball. You know how many times RJ touched the ball in the 1st quarter? Three. That’s one touch every four minutes. In fact, he got zero touches the first four minutes. Think about that. The other four players all had at least two scoring opportunities each and RJ had not TOUCHED THE BALL one time.”

    Oh, so you count touches for each player in the first quarter of every game? And look, did I ever say RJ’s lack of production was ENTIRELY his fault. No. The fact is though, if you’re somebody with RJ’s ability & past success (including in BIG playoff games), and you are still in your prime years, you don’t sit there and blame your lack of “touches” or “production” on someone else, for the WHOLE game. No, not at all. You demand MORE touches, and RJ obviously didn’t do that. And it’s certainly not the first time. Instead, he disappears into the woodwork, voluntarily. You can’t tell me that Pop and the big three deliberately keep the ball from him the WHOLE game. They know he has a tendency to struggle if he’s not involved EARLY in the game, and that he’s an important link to their success. By the same token, they’re not going to worry about spoon-feeding the guy. Let’s be real, he’s not Kareem Abdul Jabbar, and this is a playoff game. But good players for the most part produce when they’re aggressive, by doing other things on the court when not given the ball on a silver platter, like get rebounds, scrap, and get easy put-backs underneath, etc. But how many rebounds did RJ get in game five? How many loose-balls did you find him involved in? One, and None. Who does he blame for that?!

    Look, it’s a team game, but RJ’s a key player for us if we want to have the BEST CHANCE against elite competition. He needs to come out EARLY playing AGGRESSIVELY on both ends. If his teammates (not known to be selfish) need to do a little better job encouraging him, so be it. But top players don’t RELY on encouragement; they motivate themselves to be valuable out there on the court, BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY.

    Dr. Who
    April 29th, 2010 at 8:32 am

    “The previous poster did hit on RJ not shooting because he didn’t touch the ball.”

    The whole thing started because I said RJ was NOT PRODUCTIVE or AGGRESSIVE. That’s not just shooting.

    For a reminder, here’s the key excerpt from my post:

    “I’m sure you guys have noticed, but throughout the season, if RJ starts off slow (e.g., not aggressive, foul trouble, etc.), he REALLY struggles to get himself back INTO the game the rest of the way. In game five, for example, he did not take his first shot until there was two minutes left in the half! He ended the game with four shot attempts, four points, zero free throw attempts, and one rebound in 24 minutes of play. We simply can’t afford to have these kind of games from RJ at this crucial point in the season. ”

    And who’s at fault for that? You can’t pin it ENTIRELY on the guards, can you? Look, if a talented SF WANTS the ball, he’s going to get it, especially on the notoriously unselfish, share-the-ball-type-of-team like the Spurs. It’s not that I don’t fault the guards to some extent, but the main reason RJ did not get touches was because HE WAS TOO TIMID. And as I said earlier on this thread, RJ’s lack of aggression is born out by his ZERO free throws, ONE rebound, and ZERO knee burns. I can tell you one thing: Pop is not TRYING to keep the ball from RJ! So enough with the RJ excuses. We NEED him to step up and ASSERT himself. We’re not paying him 15 mil./yr. to whine about not getting touches!

    BALLHOG
    April 29th, 2010 at 10:10 am

    “If anybody struggles to admit that this was Pops worst season as a head coach, its simply denial.

    I understand supporting a coach, but that support cannot be blind. Unless your screen name is JIMJIM.”

    Sorry, but I respectfully disagree. We simply can not say whether this was a “successful” year in coaching this team or not UNTIL THE SEASON IS OVER. After all, the PRINCIPAL way one assesses whether a coach was successful or not is how close he comes to winning a championship, with the talent he has. Granted, it has been an unusual, and at times frustrating year for Pop, the team, and the fan base, for a variety of reasons. But to suggest that this his WORST season as a coach is clearly stretching it at this point. That said, it is of course difficult to “appear” better this year, after having THIRTEEN STRAIGHT SEASONS with more than our wins for this season, 50. Which, by the way, that consecutive 50-win streak* may be an NBA record (*1998-99 was a strike shortened 37-13 record: pro-rated, it would have been 61-21 - thus, it’s VERY likely we would have hit at least 50 wins during a full season, which, as you know, was our first title year).

    And of course, for those that have read my numerous posts with an objective eye, my support for Pop has in no way been “blind”. That my friend, is patently absurd.

    On the other hand, your critique of Pop has been incessant, and has typically consisted of old fashioned rants mixed in with the occasional valid point. You appear to simply have a natural affinity for latching onto scapegoats when things don’t go your way. And of course, the coach is inherently the easiest target.

    And please don’t take it personally. I generally don’t get incensed by your posts, like some on this blog appear to. In fact, some of your posts are quite entertaining, even if I disagree (which is often). So, keep those posts coming!

  • Bushka

    Ballhog why is every post you make about pop?

    It’s the worst kind of tunnel vision.

  • Trade Tp

    Jim Henderson: Yes I expect us to win every year. I dont just follow the team and think “since I know nothing about basketball I will just agree with everything POP does and says to seem like I know more than I do.”

    You’re comments are extremely absurd. You’re a yes man with no opinions of your own.

  • Trade Tp

    Bonner is barely over 30% FG and 3pt for the series. 16mpg is too many.

    Hill shot 50% FG and 3pt this series.

    McDyess played better than I expected. I hate the fact that he never takes it to the rim. 0 FT attepts this series…ODD….

    Tim= Horrible series. less than 50% FG less than 50% FT. Almost 3Tos a game. Yikes.

    Jefferson= Shot over 54% from the field, yet only took 37 shots.

    Manu= Shot poorly from three 30%. Aggressive play saved us.

    TP= Great comeback. Dont like him taking all the jumpers. 62% FT…..

    Players of series= Hill/Manu
    Leave a Reply

  • Jim Henderson

    Trade Tp
    April 29th, 2010 at 5:31 pm

    You’re an idiot!!!

  • Trade Tp

    Jim, Ive owned you from day one. Thanks.

  • Pingback: San Antonio Spurs 97, Dallas Mavericks 87: George Hill and Manu Ginobili close out the Mavericks | 48 Minutes of Hell

  • Jim Henderson

    Trade Tp
    April 29th, 2010 at 8:05 pm

    You own nothing, are nothing, and never will be anything. You’re bankrupt of mind & purse. Good luck. You’ll need it.

  • Trade Tp

    Great point Henderson. Your analysis of people are much like your ignorance of the game.

  • Jim Henderson

    Trade Tp
    April 29th, 2010 at 8:05 pm

    “Jim, Ive owned you from day one. Thanks.”

    Yeah, this comment was pretty insightful as well. About as delusional and tactful as your understanding of the Spurs. Keep it up, Trade Tp. I don’t know what the “48″ would do without you.

  • Pingback: The San Antonio Spurs look to finish off Dallas in Game 6

← Older Comments