NBA Parlay Picks of the Day
Dallas Mavericks vs. Minnesota Timberwolves
Wednesday, March 24, 2021 at 8 p.m. ET at Target Center in Minneapolis, Minnesota
Dallas’ Ball-Screen Defense
Last year and this year, Dallas has been known for employing conservative ball-screen coverages like drop coverage.
In drop coverage, the screener’s counterpart on defense will keep himself below the level of the screen. The aim here is to protect the paint.
It’s not an unusual strategy as plenty of teams, like the Milwaukee Bucks, have been known for playing drop coverage.
This tactic helps teams like Dallas and Milwaukee limit attempts at the basket by offering more interior protection.
Currently, Dallas allows the seventh-fewest field goal attempts within five feet of the basket.
As you might expect, the Mavericks allow more three-pointers. They rank 24th in limiting three-point attempts.
The Maverick defense gets a bit more complicated because Dallas does try to switch things up with its ball-screen coverages.
It will not simply employ drop coverage against every ball-screen.
Still, Dallas remains devoted primarily to protecting the paint.
Let’s look at a very recent video clip to illustrate what I want to say.
Go to 34 seconds in the following video from Sunday’s contest between Dallas and Portland.
You see Portland set a screen. Maverick center Kristaps Porzingis steps up and appears ready to meet the opposing ball-handler, Damian Lillard.
However, Lillard denies the ball-screen which leaves Porzingis exposed. All he can do is look behind him.
Given all of the empty space behind Porzingis, you may think that the Maverick intent to prevent an easy lay-up is hopeless.
But another Maverick defender has been watching all along. Since Porzingis can’t do anything from his position, this other Maverick defender steps in front of Lillard.
You then have two Maverick defenders positioned at both sides of the paint, effectively forming a wall in the middle, with Porzingis still uninvolved.
This wall forces Lillard backwards and he ends up attempting a long jump shot.
Minnesota Offense vs. Dallas Defense
Offensively, Minnesota is not built to succeed against Dallas’ defense.
Because the Mavericks try to push back opposing ball-handlers, the way to beat them is by knocking down three-pointers.
However, Minnesota ranks 24th in three-point percentage. One of its top three-point shooters by percentage, D’Angelo Russell, is still injured.
Especially without D-Lo, the Timberwolves lack options from behind the arc.
Characteristically, the Timberwolves want to attack inside. They attempt the third-highest rate of field goals within five feet of the basket.
But they won’t easily be able to attack inside given the ways of protection — by forming walls in the paint and by employing conservative ball-screen coverages — that Dallas is comfortable accomplishing.
Minnesota’s Ball-Screen Defense
A couple things that Minnesota likes to do in its ball-screen coverage is switch and go over ball-screens.
With both actions, the Timberwolves ensure that a defender remains positioned behind the arc in front of the opposing ball-handler.
In terms of effect, these ball-screen coverages ensure the opposite of Dallas’ characteristic drop coverage. Here, for Minnesota, the perimeter is protected.
Because the Timberwolves pay closer attention to guarding the perimeter, they allow the second-fewest three-pointers per game.
Minnesota’s Perimeter Defense vs. Dallas Offense
You might look at Minnesota’s opposing three-point percentage and question what I’m saying about its perimeter defense.
But the Timberwolves allow a high opposing three-point conversion rate simply because of luck.
Teams cannot help whether the opposing team converts a wide open three-point attempt because there is no defender around to contest the shot.
The Timberwolves are unlucky because they allow the highest conversion rate on wide open three-pointers.
I consider their perimeter defense to be good, though, because they allow the seventh-lowest rate of wide open three-pointers.
They funnel things inside, such that teams attempt more shots in front of the basket.
So opponents are more likely to try to attempt and then likely to make a wide open three or they try to score inside if a Minnesota defender is around to try to contest his three-point attempt.
This selectivity and the unusually high and unlucky conversion rate on wide open three-point attempts inflate Minnesota’s opposing three-point percentage.
Strong perimeter defense is valuable against a Maverick offense that, this season, grows increasingly reliant on three-pointers.
Though surging upward in this respect, the Mavericks currently attempt the sixth-highest rate of threes.
Side
I think we have an equal match-up here because I like both defenses to limit what the opposing offense likes to do.
This expectation of equal competition already compels us to take the points.
But I also like Minnesota because of how poor the Maverick rim protection is.
They lack reliable shot-blockers and rim protectors with guys like Porzingis justifiably inciting ire and criticism as a result of meriting awful defensive ratings.
Parlay Verdict
Defensively, both defenses are designed to succeed against the kind of offense that it will encounter.
For a side, I give Minnesota an edge with helpless defenders like Porzingis helping to deter the drive with his presence but also struggling to contest field goal attempts near the basket where their opponents are relatively efficient.
Best Bet: Parlay Timberwolves +8 at -108 & Under 229.5 at -108 at +271 with Heritage
Dallas Mavericks vs. Minnesota Timberwolves
Wednesday, March 24, 2021 at 8 p.m. ET at Target Center in Minneapolis, Minnesota
Dallas’ Ball-Screen Defense
Last year and this year, Dallas has been known for employing conservative ball-screen coverages like drop coverage.
In drop coverage, the screener’s counterpart on defense will keep himself below the level of the screen. The aim here is to protect the paint.
It’s not an unusual strategy as plenty of teams, like the Milwaukee Bucks, have been known for playing drop coverage.
This tactic helps teams like Dallas and Milwaukee limit attempts at the basket by offering more interior protection.
Currently, Dallas allows the seventh-fewest field goal attempts within five feet of the basket.
As you might expect, the Mavericks allow more three-pointers. They rank 24th in limiting three-point attempts.
The Maverick defense gets a bit more complicated because Dallas does try to switch things up with its ball-screen coverages.
It will not simply employ drop coverage against every ball-screen.
Still, Dallas remains devoted primarily to protecting the paint.
Let’s look at a very recent video clip to illustrate what I want to say.
Go to 34 seconds in the following video from Sunday’s contest between Dallas and Portland.
You see Portland set a screen. Maverick center Kristaps Porzingis steps up and appears ready to meet the opposing ball-handler, Damian Lillard.
However, Lillard denies the ball-screen which leaves Porzingis exposed. All he can do is look behind him.
Given all of the empty space behind Porzingis, you may think that the Maverick intent to prevent an easy lay-up is hopeless.
But another Maverick defender has been watching all along. Since Porzingis can’t do anything from his position, this other Maverick defender steps in front of Lillard.
You then have two Maverick defenders positioned at both sides of the paint, effectively forming a wall in the middle, with Porzingis still uninvolved.
This wall forces Lillard backwards and he ends up attempting a long jump shot.
Minnesota Offense vs. Dallas Defense
Offensively, Minnesota is not built to succeed against Dallas’ defense.
Because the Mavericks try to push back opposing ball-handlers, the way to beat them is by knocking down three-pointers.
However, Minnesota ranks 24th in three-point percentage. One of its top three-point shooters by percentage, D’Angelo Russell, is still injured.
Especially without D-Lo, the Timberwolves lack options from behind the arc.
Characteristically, the Timberwolves want to attack inside. They attempt the third-highest rate of field goals within five feet of the basket.
But they won’t easily be able to attack inside given the ways of protection — by forming walls in the paint and by employing conservative ball-screen coverages — that Dallas is comfortable accomplishing.
Minnesota’s Ball-Screen Defense
A couple things that Minnesota likes to do in its ball-screen coverage is switch and go over ball-screens.
With both actions, the Timberwolves ensure that a defender remains positioned behind the arc in front of the opposing ball-handler.
In terms of effect, these ball-screen coverages ensure the opposite of Dallas’ characteristic drop coverage. Here, for Minnesota, the perimeter is protected.
Because the Timberwolves pay closer attention to guarding the perimeter, they allow the second-fewest three-pointers per game.
Minnesota’s Perimeter Defense vs. Dallas Offense
You might look at Minnesota’s opposing three-point percentage and question what I’m saying about its perimeter defense.
But the Timberwolves allow a high opposing three-point conversion rate simply because of luck.
Teams cannot help whether the opposing team converts a wide open three-point attempt because there is no defender around to contest the shot.
The Timberwolves are unlucky because they allow the highest conversion rate on wide open three-pointers.
I consider their perimeter defense to be good, though, because they allow the seventh-lowest rate of wide open three-pointers.
They funnel things inside, such that teams attempt more shots in front of the basket.
So opponents are more likely to try to attempt and then likely to make a wide open three or they try to score inside if a Minnesota defender is around to try to contest his three-point attempt.
This selectivity and the unusually high and unlucky conversion rate on wide open three-point attempts inflate Minnesota’s opposing three-point percentage.
Strong perimeter defense is valuable against a Maverick offense that, this season, grows increasingly reliant on three-pointers.
Though surging upward in this respect, the Mavericks currently attempt the sixth-highest rate of threes.
Side
I think we have an equal match-up here because I like both defenses to limit what the opposing offense likes to do.
This expectation of equal competition already compels us to take the points.
But I also like Minnesota because of how poor the Maverick rim protection is.
They lack reliable shot-blockers and rim protectors with guys like Porzingis justifiably inciting ire and criticism as a result of meriting awful defensive ratings.
Parlay Verdict
Defensively, both defenses are designed to succeed against the kind of offense that it will encounter.
For a side, I give Minnesota an edge with helpless defenders like Porzingis helping to deter the drive with his presence but also struggling to contest field goal attempts near the basket where their opponents are relatively efficient.
Best Bet: Parlay Timberwolves +8 at -108 & Under 229.5 at -108 at +271 with Heritage
