Why did the Mavericks almost get swept by the Nuggets?

The point guard was almost there. Kidd's passing ability is still good, but his personal attack power is far from Billups.

Then there is a gap between the position of attack guard and small forward, and the gap is not small. The Mavericks' two strongest positions are Terry and Howard, and the Nuggets are Anthony and JR Smith, both of whom are the main players and substitutes. The current strength of these two groups is obviously stronger than that of Nuggets.

Center Dampier's claim to be the second in the West (when O 'Neill was still in the West) is a joke. He is no match for Nene at all.

Nowitzki is the only strong player, but he is only good at attacking. Defensively, he is not as good as Martin+birdman Anderson.

It's better to watch the Mavericks than the Nuggets. The Mavericks used to attack lightly and defend lightly, which made them pay the price in 2006 and 2007. Now the players are older and not as fast as they used to be, but the defense has not improved at all. The tactics have hardly changed for many years, and such a team has no chance to deal with the Nuggets with a new look on Billups. And luck doesn't seem to be on the Mavericks' side.

Before the game, someone here asked the Nuggets or Mavericks who had the better chance. I predict that the Mavericks will win at most two games. As a result, some people retorted that Nowitzki was stronger and Kidd was in his prime. As long as Billups is controlled, the Mavericks' winning percentage is 80%. Unfortunately, that's just wishful thinking.

I can say that as long as James is completely controlled, any team has an 80% winning rate against the Cavaliers. Of course that's true, but the question is, can you do it?