Cavs Wear Down Wizards: Cavaliers 102, Wizards 90
The Cleveland Cavaliers needed a quarter to get up for the Washington Wizards and found themselves down 31 to 17 at the end of the first quarter. Cleveland had no answer for Caron Butler and Gilbert Arenas and could not seem to make a shot to gain any momentum. The second quarter brought the defense out of Mike Brown's Cavaliers and started the scoring surge from Shaquille O'Neal. The Cavs outscored the Wizards 22 to 11 in the last 6 minutes of the 2nd quarter to pull within 4 points of the Wizards at the half. Cleveland continued to shoot the ball well in the 2nd half, and the Cavaliers sent the Wizards home from the Q with a 102 to 90 loss.
Hot and Cold - The Cavalier and Wizard offenses were polar opposites in the first quarter. The Cavaliers played the role of cold, and the Wizards were the hot ones. The Wizards shot 55% from the floor on 11 of 20 shooting, and the Cavs went 33% from the floor on 8 of 24 shooting. The Wizards also went to the line 10 times in the first quarter making 7 of their free throws while the Cavs were 1 of 3 from the line int he first quarter.
Butler and Arenas Carve Up the Cavs D - In the first quarter, Caron Butler and Gilbert Arenas combined for 23 points. The Cavaliers had a hard time adjusting to the high screens of the Wizards, and Washington found themselves with many wide open shots to start this game.
No Hustle - The Wizards need no extra motivation to show the Cavaliers they were ready to play. Washington came out of the gate firing and Cleveland seemed like they were still hitting the snooze button. The Wizards out-rebounded The Cavs 15 to 10 in the first quarter and also got to the free throw line 7 more times than the Cavs. Cleveland was a step slow on the defensive and seemed like they were in danger of letting this one get out of control. The Cavs were not doing the little things like boxing out or going after 50/50 balls.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?