What's new

The Non-Jazz NBA Thread in the Jazz Section

Something has been bugging me this playoffs, never more apparent than last night. And the people most qualified to answer my question are people who can properly appreciate Gobert's impact, and smart NBA people in general. So here it goes:

Why does the Boston defense look so much different/better against the Mavs than Minnesota did? I know Boston has a great team of defenders, but Minnesota has a lot too, and a generational DPOY.

So to be more specific, why can Luka do whatever he wants against the Wolves? Why is it either easily beating his guy to the basket, or getting an easy lob against that Gobert defense, but no lobs were there whatsoever last night against Boston, while he gets hounded relentlessly going to the hoop? What is different? Is it all about beating his guy on the perimeter first? Okay, so you're saying those Wolves defenders were constantly getting beat? How? Why? McDaniels and Edwards are on the level of Brown, Tatum White, etc. is Porzingis better than Gobert at defense? That makes no sense, even though he looked far more impactful to me last night than Gobert ever did against this Mavs team.

So literally, what gives? Why does it seem like every single Gobert led defense needs to have this Achilles heel where a great scorer and passer can just destroy his teams, whether he has a ton of perimeter help, or not, apparently. Gobert is also versatile, so it should be 'fixable' but it never has been.

Please someone help me out with this.
 
Something has been bugging me this playoffs, never more apparent than last night. And the people most qualified to answer my question are people who can properly appreciate Gobert's impact, and smart NBA people in general. So here it goes:

Why does the Boston defense look so much different/better against the Mavs than Minnesota did? I know Boston has a great team of defenders, but Minnesota has a lot too, and a generational DPOY.

So to be more specific, why can Luka do whatever he wants against the Wolves? Why is it either easily beating his guy to the basket, or getting an easy lob against that Gobert defense, but no lobs were there whatsoever last night against Boston, while he gets hounded relentlessly going to the hoop? What is different? Is it all about beating his guy on the perimeter first? Okay, so you're saying those Wolves defenders were constantly getting beat? How? Why? McDaniels and Edwards are on the level of Brown, Tatum White, etc. is Porzingis better than Gobert at defense? That makes no sense, even though he looked far more impactful to me last night than Gobert ever did against this Mavs team.

So literally, what gives? Why does it seem like every single Gobert led defense needs to have this Achilles heel where a great scorer and passer can just destroy his teams, whether he has a ton of perimeter help, or not, apparently. Gobert is also versatile, so it should be 'fixable' but it never has been.

Please someone help me out with this.
Honestly I think the main thing is Bostons offense puts a ton of pressure on Dallas. Luka and Kyrie can't rest as much on defense and they have to pressure to score a ton to keep up with Boston .

Minny played good D on Minnesota for 3/5 games. But Dallas was always in it because they knew Minnys offense would go through droughts.
 
Honestly I think the main thing is Bostons offense puts a ton of pressure on Dallas. Luka and Kyrie can't rest as much on defense and they have to pressure to score a ton to keep up with Boston .

Minny played good D on Minnesota for 3/5 games. But Dallas was always in it because they knew Minnys offense would go through droughts.
It's also just a ton easier to score off a missed basket/live turnover.

1717788986797.png

This is from 2018, but still shows just how much bad offense can disadvantage your defense.
 
Honestly I think the main thing is Bostons offense puts a ton of pressure on Dallas. Luka and Kyrie can't rest as much on defense and they have to pressure to score a ton to keep up with Boston .

Minny played good D on Minnesota for 3/5 games. But Dallas was always in it because they knew Minnys offense would go through droughts.
I get that over the course of a game. But it's so weird how in one isolated play Luka can just toy with Gobert at will until throwing a perfect lob the second he comes to help. And it just looked absolutely nothing like that last night. I guess I'm just not smart enough to know what I'm looking at.
 
I get that over the course of a game. But it's so weird how in one isolated play Luka can just toy with Gobert at will until throwing a perfect lob the second he comes to help. And it just looked absolutely nothing like that last night. I guess I'm just not smart enough to know what I'm looking at.
I think Boston matches up way better. Boston also seemedike they were ok leaving role players open and they missed shots and when Minny did that they hit shots.

Wasn't a very interesting game tho so I wasn't watching super close.
 
Honestly I think the main thing is Bostons offense puts a ton of pressure on Dallas. Luka and Kyrie can't rest as much on defense and they have to pressure to score a ton to keep up with Boston .

Minny played good D on Minnesota for 3/5 games. But Dallas was always in it because they knew Minnys offense would go through droughts.
Agreed. And Jaylen Brown and Jrue Holiday were terrific defensively last night. They been the best Boston players throughout the playoffs.
 
Watching these playoffs make me think only lauri and hendricks can adapt to this modern game. Others would be brutally exposed.
 
Something has been bugging me this playoffs, never more apparent than last night. And the people most qualified to answer my question are people who can properly appreciate Gobert's impact, and smart NBA people in general. So here it goes:

Why does the Boston defense look so much different/better against the Mavs than Minnesota did? I know Boston has a great team of defenders, but Minnesota has a lot too, and a generational DPOY.

So to be more specific, why can Luka do whatever he wants against the Wolves? Why is it either easily beating his guy to the basket, or getting an easy lob against that Gobert defense, but no lobs were there whatsoever last night against Boston, while he gets hounded relentlessly going to the hoop? What is different? Is it all about beating his guy on the perimeter first? Okay, so you're saying those Wolves defenders were constantly getting beat? How? Why? McDaniels and Edwards are on the level of Brown, Tatum White, etc. is Porzingis better than Gobert at defense? That makes no sense, even though he looked far more impactful to me last night than Gobert ever did against this Mavs team.

So literally, what gives? Why does it seem like every single Gobert led defense needs to have this Achilles heel where a great scorer and passer can just destroy his teams, whether he has a ton of perimeter help, or not, apparently. Gobert is also versatile, so it should be 'fixable' but it never has been.

Please someone help me out with this.
Dont know if its more coaching or player tendency related, but it looked like Zinger stayed back to guard the lobs/rim more while Gobert came up to close out Luka and Kyrie when they got into floater range.

Jaylen Brown also bullied Luka on a level that none of the Wolves great defenders could. So looked like JB was a better matchup to Luka than anything Wolves could throw at him. Experience matters especially 1on1 against superstars, and Celtics got plenty on the perimeter with JB and Jrue.
 
Dont know if its more coaching or player tendency related, but it looked like Zinger stayed back to guard the lobs/rim more while Gobert came up to close out Luka and Kyrie when they got into floater range.

Jaylen Brown also bullied Luka on a level that none of the Wolves great defenders could. So looked like JB was a better matchup to Luka than anything Wolves could throw at him. Experience matters especially 1on1 against superstars, and Celtics got plenty on the perimeter with JB and Jrue.
Also, it was one game. And Luka played really well. Luka had 30 points on 12-26 shooting and 10 rebounds. The entire rest of the Mavs roster gave him no help at all.

Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk
 
Also, it was one game. And Luka played really well. Luka had 30 points on 12-26 shooting and 10 rebounds. The entire rest of the Mavs roster gave him no help at all.

Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk
Yeah the one game overreaction is definitely in effect here. Mavs shot poorly and Celtics shot well, but there were tactical elements to Cs defense that was designed to hurt the Mavs PnR which they did accomplish.

Minny didnt really manage to even slow their PnR down in their entire series, which I criticized at the time.
 
Something has been bugging me this playoffs, never more apparent than last night. And the people most qualified to answer my question are people who can properly appreciate Gobert's impact, and smart NBA people in general. So here it goes:

Why does the Boston defense look so much different/better against the Mavs than Minnesota did? I know Boston has a great team of defenders, but Minnesota has a lot too, and a generational DPOY.

So to be more specific, why can Luka do whatever he wants against the Wolves? Why is it either easily beating his guy to the basket, or getting an easy lob against that Gobert defense, but no lobs were there whatsoever last night against Boston, while he gets hounded relentlessly going to the hoop? What is different? Is it all about beating his guy on the perimeter first? Okay, so you're saying those Wolves defenders were constantly getting beat? How? Why? McDaniels and Edwards are on the level of Brown, Tatum White, etc. is Porzingis better than Gobert at defense? That makes no sense, even though he looked far more impactful to me last night than Gobert ever did against this Mavs team.

So literally, what gives? Why does it seem like every single Gobert led defense needs to have this Achilles heel where a great scorer and passer can just destroy his teams, whether he has a ton of perimeter help, or not, apparently. Gobert is also versatile, so it should be 'fixable' but it never has been.

Please someone help me out with this.

Minnesota tried to guard Luka with McDaniels, but it didn’t work. The Twolves starting doubling and that led to situations where the Twolves had to get in rotation or Kyrie was able to score in isolation.

The Celtics are often doubling Luka up high as well, but they’re doing a better job stopping Kyrie.
 
Keyonte is as big as Jrue. He'll need to boogie a bit to get past Jrue though.

To my memory jrue is 6’5” with a significantly plus wingspan. I haven’t seen official measurements for Keyonte. To my eyes Keyonte is 6’4” with an average wingspan. Also Jrue has 20+ pounds on Keyonte.

Does anyone have an official measurement for Keyonte?
 
To my memory jrue is 6’5” with a significantly plus wingspan. I haven’t seen official measurements for Keyonte. To my eyes Keyonte is 6’4” with an average wingspan. Also Jrue has 20+ pounds on Keyonte.

Does anyone have an official measurement for Keyonte?
Jrue: 6-3.25 (w/out shoes), 6-7 wingspan (https://craftednba.com/player-traits/length). Nothing all that spectacular.

Keyonte: 6-4 and 6-6. (same website). I doubt these measurements are official though, unlike Jrue's. I've always thought as him as about 6-4 with shoes. Until proven otherwise, I'm thinking he's slightly shorter or at best the same height as Jrue.
 
Last edited:
To my memory jrue is 6’5” with a significantly plus wingspan. I haven’t seen official measurements for Keyonte. To my eyes Keyonte is 6’4” with an average wingspan. Also Jrue has 20+ pounds on Keyonte.

Does anyone have an official measurement for Keyonte?

Derrick White is another -- 6'4" / 190 lbs.
 
Top