Dallas Mavericks vs. Boston Celtics: Analyzing the Key Factors in the NBA Finals
The NBA Finals 2024 series between the Dallas Mavericks and the Boston Celtics has been a showcase of strategic depth and player performance. In Game 3, P.J. Washington’s contributions highlighted a critical turning point. He made two pivotal 3-pointers and scored eight points, propelling the Mavericks on a 22-2 run in the fourth quarter, which nearly erased a 21-point deficit against the Celtics. Although these numbers might not initially seem significant, they underscore a larger narrative about Dallas’s struggles and Boston’s defensive prowess.
Mavericks’ Dependence on Star Power
In the first three quarters of Game 3, the Mavericks’ scoring was heavily reliant on their stars, Kyrie Irving and Luka Doncic. Excluding these two, the rest of the Mavericks managed only 19 points. Washington’s 3-pointer with 1:04 left in the third quarter was the first by any Maverick other than Irving or Doncic, highlighting the team’s urgent need for secondary scorers to step up. This moment nearly turned the tide in favor of Dallas.
Celtics’ Defensive Strategy
Throughout the series, the Celtics have displayed their depth and defensive acumen. Boston’s ability to rotate leading scorers—Jaylen Brown in Game 1, Jrue Holiday in Game 2, and Jayson Tatum in Game 3—illustrates their versatility. Conversely, the Mavericks have consistently depended on Doncic to lead their scoring efforts. This disparity emphasizes Boston’s superior depth and their effective strategy to neutralize Dallas’s offensive options.
Mavericks’ Path to the Finals
Dallas’s journey to the Finals was marked by overcoming the Oklahoma City Thunder, who employed a defensive strategy focused on trapping Doncic and Irving. This forced other Mavericks players to step up, leading to a high volume of corner 3-point attempts. Despite a modest 36.1% success rate, this approach overwhelmed the Thunder. Players like Washington and Derrick Jones Jr. thrived from deep, while Dereck Lively II and Daniel Gafford capitalized on lob opportunities, averaging nearly 11 restricted area field goal attempts per game.
Boston’s Counter-Strategy
In stark contrast, the Celtics have largely avoided doubling Doncic. This strategy has effectively eliminated high-value shots for Dallas, reducing their corner 3-point attempts from over 16 per game against the Thunder to just 4.7 against Boston. Additionally, Lively and Gafford’s restricted area shots have dropped to 7.4 per game. By limiting these high-percentage opportunities, the Celtics have effectively disarmed every Maverick except for Doncic and Irving.
Challenges for Dallas’ Supporting Cast
Dallas’s offensive scheme relies on its star ball-handlers to create opportunities for their role players. These role players, acquired for their defensive prowess, struggle to create their own shots. Without the defense in rotation, players like Washington and Jones are no longer finding open shots. The lack of a third reliable shot-creator has exacerbated this issue. Tim Hardaway Jr., expected to fill this role, saw his performance decline significantly mid-season, averaging only 9.2 points on 35.7% shooting post-January.
Potential Solutions and Limitations
Dallas attempted to compensate for Hardaway’s decline by increasing Jaden Hardy’s minutes. However, relying on a 21-year-old in a championship run is a significant gamble. Historically, only a handful of players under 21 have averaged double-digit points on championship teams, making it an unreasonable expectation for Hardy at this stage.
Celtics’ Team Dynamics
The Boston Celtics’ success in this series can be attributed to their team-oriented approach. Boston’s depth allows them to distribute responsibilities evenly, reducing the pressure on individual players. This balanced strategy has enabled their bench players to thrive. For example, Sam Hauser has outperformed the entire Dallas Mavericks reserve in 3-point shooting. Even without key players like Kristaps Porzingis, Boston has managed to maintain their performance, showcasing their resilience and depth.
The Impact of Star Players
The Mavericks’ over-reliance on Doncic was starkly evident when he fouled out with 4:12 remaining in Game 3. Dallas, trailing by three points at the time, lost the final minutes by an additional four points, underscoring their inability to cope without Doncic. In contrast, the Celtics have built a system that doesn’t overly depend on any single player, allowing them to perform consistently even in the absence of stars like Porzingis.
Conclusion: Depth vs. Star Power
The Celtics’ strategic depth and balanced team dynamics have given them the upper hand in the series against the Mavericks. Boston’s ability to neutralize Dallas’s role players by focusing on containing Doncic and Irving has been a decisive factor. Meanwhile, the Mavericks’ failure to develop reliable secondary scoring options has left them vulnerable. As the series progresses, Dallas must find ways to adapt and involve their supporting cast more effectively if they hope to turn the tide against Boston’s well-rounded and resilient team.
