WaltFrazier wrote:HiJiNX wrote:djsunyc wrote:there is no way for a gm/coach to know which guys will hit shots in the clutch and which won't. this is the type of luck and randomness that goes unappreciated. you just get good players and hope they perform. this is the same indy team that kept choking vs the celtics last ecf's.
It’s funny you bring up last year’s ECF. I’ve referenced that series many times this playoffs to say that Indiana is better than folks think. They got swept by Boston but had effectively won 3 out of those 4 games before choking down the stretch. Nembhard turnovers, Haliburton dribbling off his leg, Siakam rushing shots. When that happens it’s easy to walk away and say they’re not built for the moment. But they were young and it was their first time going that far. Often teams that lose like that come back more composed if they get that far again. And that appears to be what’s happening with the Pacers now.
Furthermore, the Pacers have been a strong comeback team since around the all-star break. They’re doing this to everybody. They’ve been this incredibly mentally tough team that’s deep with effective role players, an ability to just turn up the D late, filled with guys like Nembhard and Turner and Nesmith (especially Nesmith) who have been making big shots late in games all season. Siakam is better than ever. And Haliburton bounced back from a subpar season last year. Oh and Carlisle has been magical at making half time adjustments this year.
The Pacers are better than people think. They’ve been showing signs for awhile, I just think the lack of a big name player prior to Hali becoming one this offseason, really had people betting against them. But man do they ever get contributions from everybody and they just keep coming at you. They tire you out. And by the 4th Q they’ve got you on the ropes. This is how they have been stealing games. All season.
Or, they could lose the next four straight if Chet and Williams shoot better.
The Thunder have all the same qualities of depth, pace, wearing you down, only better. But we'll see.
This is why I never bet.
Both of them have shown to be incredibly inconsistent though. Not to mention the Pacers won game 1 despite turning the ball over 25 times. Pacers likely won’t commit that number of turnovers again in the series.
What’s bizarre is Daigneault having no faith in having two bigs out there. They won 68 games this year and are making adjustments to match up better with the Pacers. Chet and Hartenstein played 24 and 17 minutes respectively. I was blown away by that.
I think Thunder take game 2 but it’s risky blowing games you should win against a team like the Pacers.
Thunder had 6 turnovers last game and forced 25 turnovers. They also got a very efficient 38 points from Shai. And they lost. They didn’t even shoot poorly from three. I’d imagine right around their averages for the year.
Pacers need to take care of the ball and try to target Chet and Hartenstein. They also need to try and turn the Thunder over a bit more.
Thunder need to limit corner threes. They were willing to give up that shot all year but I’m not sure if that’s a good strategy against this Pacers team. All of these guys can shoot. They also need to score more off turnovers. Pacers had great transition defense, all of them hustled back. But OKC still blew a couple of easy shots.
Can’t wait for game 2.
