Chandler's Dunk Rallys Mavericks to 2nd Straight Win (DAL 112-105) (With Video)
Tyson Chandler had the dunk of the night in the NBA last night in a win over the Clippers. The Mavericks beat Los Angeles 112-105 in a hard-fought contest. Blake Griffin left the game in the fourth quarter with elbow problems but shook off any serious injury concerns as the X-rays were negative.
With 8:13 to go in the third quarter and the Mavericks down nine at home, Deshawn Stevenson lobbed it up for Tyson Chandler and he did the rest, throwing it down emphatically. This got the crowd on their feet and changed the momentum of the game. Randy Foye of the Clippers contested Chandler to no avail.
Blake Griffin had 22 points but shot only 2-of-8 in the second half. He went down with 42.5 seconds to go in the third quarter but played 4:09 minutes in the fourth before leaving with 4:31 to go in the game. He managed 1 point in that time span.
He also had 11 rebounds to make it his 34th double double of the year. In regards to his injury, Blake said, "We'll see how it is tomorrow."
The Mavericks had 34 points off of 22 Clippers turnovers and their defense was essential in this game. Overall, they did a pretty sound job on Blake Griffin, holding him to 22 points. It was also made known yesterday that Eric Gordon will be out injured for three to four weeks.
But Chandler's dunk was definitely the highlight of the night.
Chandler had a sound game overall with 21 points and 2 rebounds as he was one of four Dallas players to score at least 20 points. Barea had 25, Terry had 28 and Nowitzki added 20. Barea thought the energy the Mavericks had really changed the tempo of the game.
"We started the game a little slow, and all the bench guys were talking that we had to come out with a lot of energy tonight and change the tempo," he said. "We did that and it worked out for us."
Chandler is eighth in the league in dunks this year at 61. He is averaging 9.3 points and 9.2 rebounds for the year.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?