2010 NBA Playoffs: Cavaliers Need To Start Upping Their Intensity

Ever since being eliminated in last year's ECF, the Cavs seemed tranquilly focused this year, not getting themselves worked up over meaningless regular season games, and keeping just one goal in mind: Win in the playoffs, when it matters.

Sure, there were regular season games when their intensity and focused were kicked up a notch—both games against the Lakers, the home game against Orlando in February, and an early home matchup against the Mavericks come to mind. In those games, the Cavs were disciplined, focused, and played at the same level for 48 minutes (or as close to it as they could).

When the playoffs rolled around, that was the Cavs team you expected to see.

And it was...for the first 27 minutes of the first-round series. They came out and set the tone.

They ran when they wanted to.

They got the ball into Shaq when they wanted to.

They took the Bulls' bigs out of the game.

They kept Derrick Rose out of the paint.

And when they led by 22, all seemed right in the world. Eerily similar to when they had a 15-point halftime lead in Game One of last year's conference finals against Orlando and it seemed like the team was destined for greatness.

But since that third quarter of Game One (which seems like it was about three weeks ago, doesn't it?), Cleveland's biggest flaw has shown itself. One that (perhaps) could be fatal if they don't find a way to correct it soon enough: complacency.

You saw it for the last half of Game One.

You saw it for three quarters in Game Two.

And you saw it last night for three quarters in Game Three.

Cleveland Plain-Dealer beat writer Brian Windhorst touched on it a bit last night in his postgame blog. He hit the nail on the head and I couldn't have summed it up any better.

The Cavs came out last night and played like it was a regular season game; the Bulls played like the series was on the line. And it many ways, it was.

Last night was incredibly disappointing for numerous reasons. Not just that the Cavs lost, but the way it happened.

All season long, we (and by we I mean me) put up with the way they would half-ass their way through games, turn up the intensity in the fourth quarter, and hope that would be enough to win. I would wager to say that half of their losses came from playing this way.

Now, I realize that I'm a perfectionist and wouldn't be satisfied unless they played the full 48 minutes of every single regular season and playoff game. Obviously, that's not going to happen. It's human nature to let up a bit, either against weaker opponents or in situations when you have a big lead, and also, it's not possible to be perfect every night.

But they did what they had to do—they won enough to give themselves home court advantage throughout the playoffs.

However, it was under the pretense that those so-called "outlier" games, the ones where the Cavs lacked intensity and passion, would be gone in the playoffs. And the last two games clearly indicated that these games were not abnormalities, but serious chinks in the Cavs armor.

So how do you correct this? How can the Cavs make sure that this doesn't happen again?

This is tough because in many ways, it's not about X's and O's, but about a mindset. It's a lot easier to fix if the problem was something like, "Well, we lost because we let Derrick Rose get wherever he wanted on the court...if we stop him, we'll win," than if it's something to the extent of, "We lost because we treated this game like a meaningless January game instead of a playoff game."

Mike Brown, this is on you. I think you've made vast improvements as a coach over the last three years since the Cavs made the Finals. But now, you need to be a motivator. Put on your best Phil Jackson impersonation and find a way to motivate your team psychologically.

That's the best answer I can come up with.

For now, let's turn to Game Four and look at some of the actual basketball strategies the Cavs should try to utilize against the Bulls (for more in-depth coverage, see B/R Tom Delamater's analysis ...he offers some great suggestions. I know Mike Brown reads my articles, so Mike, click over to Tom's as well).

Defense, Defense, Defense

I still don't know if I should be encouraged or discouraged by the Bulls suddenly turning into the Warriors and putting up over 100 points the last two games.

In the last two games, Chicago has 94 points in the paint, Rose, Kirk Hinrich, and Luol Deng have combined for 126 points, Joakim Noah is dominating in the middle, and they have just 12 turnovers.

Offensively, they can't ask for more. And it all starts with one man: Derrick Rose.

It took about three possessions last night for me to be disgusted with Mo Williams' defense. It's never been his strong suit, but Rose was just embarrassing him. It begs the question...why isn't LeBron on Rose?

Sure, he was for the last four minutes. But you don't let a player get in a rhythm, dominate a game for 44 minutes, then throw a guy like James on him.

Since Rose isn't a deep threat, LeBron can play off of him. If Rose attacks him off the dribble, he's going into the chest of a 6'9" defender instead of someone like Mo or Delonte, both of whom he has a size advantage on.

And over the course of the game, the physicality of James will wear Rose down. There's only so many times he can attack 'Bron off the dribble before he grows wary of going inside. Then, he'll start settling for jumpers, which is exactly what you want.

James on Rose, Anthony Parker on Deng, and Mo on Hinrich. Remind me why this wouldn't work? What's the problem with this? I don't understand.

And even if there are mismatches at other places, if you're the Cavs, who do you want to beat you: Deng, Hinrich, or Rose. Hell, I'll give you a hint: it's anybody but Rose. Make someone else beat you.

Earlier this year, I wrote that LeBron James should be the NBA's Defensive Player of the Year . He didn't win, but he got a lot of attention in the voting process. And now, he needs to show why.

I realize he's a better defender when he gets to basically play free safety, but against Rose, he'll still get a few of those opportunities. And it's not as physically daunting as guarding someone like Carmelo Anthony or Paul Pierce every possession.

Where Is Antawn Jamison?

I'm not trying to hammer this point down your throats, and maybe the first three games are evidence to the contrary, but I don't see why Antawn Jamison can't be a more dominant presence in this series.

Do you really think Taj Gibson can consistently guard him? He's not quick enough off the dribble to stay in front of Jamison, nor can he keep up if the Cavs run Antawn off screens.

The Cavs have freelanced Jamison since he was acquired in February. They never really run plays for him, meaning most of the points he gets are off pick-and-rolls or one-on-one takes.

Why not run a play or two for him? Last night, when the Cavs went small, he was great. He moved to open spots under the hoop where LeBron could find him, and he made his free throws when he was fouled (one of the only guys who did).

I want to see more Antawn. There's no reason he shouldn't be getting 20 a game in this series. He scored 19 last night, but his only impact points came down the stretch. The Cavs need more of that, especially early. If he gets going in the first half, it's just another dynamic Chicago has to worry about.

And speaking of the small ball lineup...

Play Small Ball!

In Shaq's first game back, he looked great—slim, active, and ran the floor fairly well for someone who just missed seven weeks.

But it looks like that was more adrenaline-based, as O'Neal hasn't been a factor since Game One. It's not his fault; you don't just jump back into the lineup after missing a substantial amount of time, let alone when you're 38 and have logged the second-most minutes of any active player.

That's why I clamored for so long to get him back in the regular season, to try and work a bit of rust off his game. The playoffs aren't the time to be working players into the rotation, which is exactly what the Cavs are doing now.

So when Shaq's out, the Cavs need to go small, with either Jamison or Anderson Varejao at the center position. It's risky with Noah out there, because he's so active, but it's a risk you have to take for a few reasons.

First, the Bulls can't shoot from outside. Other than Rose (and maybe Deng), they have no one-on-one scorers. So they rely on driving to the hoop and getting to the paint to make the defense collapse.

If you have athletes on the floor, it's more difficult for them to pull that off. Conversely, you'll probably get them to take more jump shots, which isn't their forte.

Second, when you spread them out defensively, it opens up the middle for LeBron to attack the paint. You can spot up Mo, Antawn, Delonte/Parker/Jamario Moon on the perimeter, and Varejao is there to attack the offensive boards (which should be easy for him, because the Bulls will probably play off him).

I'm not saying the Cavs should play this lineup the entire game, but it's a good change-of-pace lineup, and one that changes the flow of the game quickly.

Intangibles

Free throws—feel free to make some. If you miss 11 free throws in a two-point loss, that's not good.

Joakim Noah—feel free to put a body on this guy. Seriously. Because if I have to see him chase down a rebound one more time and scream like a serial killer after every big play, I might just snap.

Offensive rebounds—feel free to box out. The Cavs did better in the second-half of Game Three, giving up just three second chance points, but they still gave up 10 in the first half and 21 in Game Two. Way too much.

Intensity—just play tough for 48 minutes on Sunday. If that would have happened last night, I wouldn't have been as disappointed in the result. But the fact that the Cavs basically tried for one quarter in a playoff game doesn't sit well with me. And it shouldn't with you either.