Pacers will be the Biggest Underdogs to win the NBA Finals if they win over the Thunder

[cupcakesnake]

I don't think they are 2 small details. Experience is a factor that can bridge a 50-to-68 win gap. Not saying it will but I give Pacers a 1 in 4 chance of winning and the odds have them at 1 in 7.

I think Pacers speed on offense will give them chances to get by OKC touch defense. Not letting them get set or organised.

I think Pacers will score 110 minimum every game. Both teams like to win the turnover battle.

I'd maybe buy the experience angle as being relevant if these Thunder were taking on some established veteran team, like if Boston had made the finals or Golden State had ended up being healthy and proved dangerous. These Pacers aren't that. What's their experience advantage? Siakam by now has a pretty nice playoff resume, but he's an outlier veteran on this young Pacers team. Myles Turner never made it out of the first round until last year. Shai has played more playoff games than Tyrese. Caruso is the only other relevant veteran and guy who's won a championship. This doesn't scream "bridging an 18 win gap".

On the turnover battle, OKC was #1 in forcing turnovers and #1 in turnover rate. Indiana also protects the ball really well (3rd), but closer to average at forcing them (though they completely destroyed the Knicks in this regard.) It would be a massive win for Indiana to win the turnover battle, but we have to go into this series assuming OKC has the advantage with their vastly more disruptive defense. OKC has been the best transition offense in the playoffs, while the Pacers have been 3rd.

I like the Pacers halfcourt offense more. By the numbers, OKC's is the better one, but I don't think it holds up great under high leverage, as they too quickly get conservatively Shai-ccentric. Indiana's has held up way better in the playoffs, because their offense is built around the whole team finding an advantage as quickly as possible and exploiting it. The most interesting part of this series for me, will be seeing if Indiana is able to consistently find those advantages against such an insane defense.

The big thing about OKC is that they don't have to play good offense to win. They can be completely clunky and ice cold for multiple games, but it doesn't matter because they can absolutely wreck the other team's offense to a greater degree.

So are you think a sweep?

I respect Indiana a lot. I respect Carlisle a lot. They've been beating the odds and defying expectations this whole playoffs so I'm down for them to keep going. They beat a 64-win team, so why not a 68-win one?

I struggle with Indiana a bit because I don't understand their defense very well. Their offensive success I get, but I'm not sure why they aren't getting torn to shreds more often playing some serious offensive teams (Cleveland was #1, New York was #5.)

Just because OKC has more advantages doesn't mean I don't think Indiana can win some games. I think I'm going OKC in 5.

[cupcakesnake]

I don't think they are 2 small details. Experience is a factor that can bridge a 50-to-68 win gap. Not saying it will but I give Pacers a 1 in 4 chance of winning and the odds have them at 1 in 7.

I think Pacers speed on offense will give them chances to get by OKC touch defense. Not letting them get set or organised.

I think Pacers will score 110 minimum every game. Both teams like to win the turnover battle.

I'd maybe buy the experience angle as being relevant if these Thunder were taking on some established veteran team, like if Boston had made the finals or Golden State had ended up being healthy and proved dangerous. These Pacers aren't that. What's their experience advantage? Siakam by now has a pretty nice playoff resume, but he's an outlier veteran on this young Pacers team. Myles Turner never made it out of the first round until last year. Shai has played more playoff games than Tyrese. Caruso is the only other relevant veteran and guy who's won a championship. This doesn't scream "bridging an 18 win gap".

On the turnover battle, OKC was #1 in forcing turnovers and #1 in turnover rate. Indiana also protects the ball really well (3rd), but closer to average at forcing them (though they completely destroyed the Knicks in this regard.) It would be a massive win for Indiana to win the turnover battle, but we have to go into this series assuming OKC has the advantage with their vastly more disruptive defense. OKC has been the best transition offense in the playoffs, while the Pacers have been 3rd.

I like the Pacers halfcourt offense more. By the numbers, OKC's is the better one, but I don't think it holds up great under high leverage, as they too quickly get conservatively Shai-ccentric. Indiana's has held up way better in the playoffs, because their offense is built around the whole team finding an advantage as quickly as possible and exploiting it. The most interesting part of this series for me, will be seeing if Indiana is able to consistently find those advantages against such an insane defense.

The big thing about OKC is that they don't have to play good offense to win. They can be completely clunky and ice cold for multiple games, but it doesn't matter because they can absolutely wreck the other team's offense to a greater degree.

Another element to the series

playoffs 3 pt shooting

Pacers-40%
Thunder-33%

Okc started shooting a bit better through the minnesota series and suffice to say, a return to the mean or anythingh that bridges this 7% gap would be a killer for indiana

True, though neither team takes a ton of them. OKC really only likes to shoot them off kick outs, and in Indiana most of stuff is to get guys the ball when they're moving towards the rim. Both of them shot more in the regular season.

[3ddman23]

This is were I'm at. I'm going with history.

No team in the modern NBA has won a championship built like Indiana. Closes things are 04 pistons & 2011 Mavs and even then it's not super comparable cause those teams you could look at and say well dirk can take over, well the pistons have 4 all stars and big Ben down low.

The pacers are good but they have no advantages vs this OKC team in my eyes. It's gonna take immensely hot shooting and mental mistakes by OKC for them to have a chance to win this series.

[Lalouie]

it speaks more to lack of respect and confidence than to okc's being good


i think okc might sweep to be honest, but they have done anything YET

[Lalouie]

This is were I'm at. I'm going with history.

No team in the modern NBA has won a championship built like Indiana. Closes things are 04 pistons & 2011 Mavs and even then it's not super comparable cause those teams you could look at and say well dirk can take over, well the pistons have 4 all stars and big Ben down low.

The pacers are good but they have no advantages vs this OKC team in my eyes. It's gonna take immensely hot shooting and mental mistakes by OKC for them to have a chance to win this series.

theres been no parity like this since the 70s

this is why the indy team structure worked this year

[HMFFL]

I think the odds are too extreme because both teams are making their first finals run. Pacers arguably got deeper experience last season and have Siakam who is the only one to be a star player in a finals series. Carlisle is also the more experienced coach.

I agree.

OKC -707 to win the series is what my book has.

$100 on -707 pays $14.14

[HMFFL]

Pistons over the Lakers in 2004?

What did the odds say there?

Pistons +500 / Lakers -700
As you know, Pistons won 4-1

[Luke]

One sided NBA Finals, on paper and in Vegas. Currently, the Thunder are at around -700 to win the championship. This is the tallest odds since the Warriors (2018 vs the Cavs) which were favored by -1100. (The Warriors went on to win that series via sweep)

Other "mismatched" NBA Finals were the first three-peat Lakers;

2000 vs the Pacers, Lakers favored -800, won 4-2
2001 vs the Sixers, Lakers favored -2000, won 4-1
2002 vs the Nets, Lakers favored -740, won 4-0

For more Vegas context, here are the other sort of one-sided match-ups (but not as big as this year's Thunder) with the favored team eventually beating the underdogs in the NBA Finals;

2023 Nuggets (-430) vs the Heat, won 4-1
2021 Lakers (-350) vs the Heat, won 4-2

On the flipside, here are the underdogs (though not as big as this year's Pacers) that eventually pulled off the upsets in the NBA Finals;

2019 Raptors (+230) vs the Warriors, won 4-2

The Cavaliers (+180) and the Bucks (+160) against the Warriors and Suns won in 2016 and 2021, respectively, but not really that much of a big underdog. You'd have to go way back to the 2004 Pistons (vs Lakers) as +500 underdogs for that big NBA Finals upset-- which was the biggest one (via Vegas odds) the last 20 or even 30 years).

Badly want to bet on the Pacers and for them to pull off the upset. but this is just not going against the Thunder-- it's going against history and Vegas too!

Wasn't 2011 one of the biggest upset ?

[cgf]

Yeah, people under-rate the Pacers like crazy.

[cupcakesnake]

Yeah, people under-rate the Pacers like crazy.

I think because there's a number of factors going into this:
- People don't understand how good their offense is. They were only 9th ranked during the regular season and they struggled to start the year (the time when people are paying the most attention and the Pacers went 10-15 over the first 25). The possibility that this is maybe the best offense in the league is confusing.
- The Pacers were perceived as not having a top 20 player. Haliburton was injured last year, over the summer, and to start the year. He looked bad (again when everyone was paying more attention to the Pacers). Siakam, despite being 2x All-NBA, often gets written off by fans since he's always been more about versatility than raw scoring power.
- Their defense isn't that good. This should be a bigger problem, but the Pacers have simply found ways to compete with the right amount of turnover creation, rim protection, the brilliance of Nembhard, and just being pretty deep with helpful defenders (Siakam, Nesmith, Turner, Walker).

I rooted for the Pacers a fair amount this year, but I didn't have them beating the Cavs. I predicted a perfect playoff bracket in the West, and might have had that in the East if not for these pesky Pacers. I even picked the Knicks in 7 before the series started. I've picked against them in every round after the 1st.

[makubesu]

One sided NBA Finals, on paper and in Vegas. Currently, the Thunder are at around -700 to win the championship. This is the tallest odds since the Warriors (2018 vs the Cavs) which were favored by -1100. (The Warriors went on to win that series via sweep)

Other "mismatched" NBA Finals were the first three-peat Lakers;

2000 vs the Pacers, Lakers favored -800, won 4-2
2001 vs the Sixers, Lakers favored -2000, won 4-1
2002 vs the Nets, Lakers favored -740, won 4-0

For more Vegas context, here are the other sort of one-sided match-ups (but not as big as this year's Thunder) with the favored team eventually beating the underdogs in the NBA Finals;

2023 Nuggets (-430) vs the Heat, won 4-1
2021 Lakers (-350) vs the Heat, won 4-2

On the flipside, here are the underdogs (though not as big as this year's Pacers) that eventually pulled off the upsets in the NBA Finals;

2019 Raptors (+230) vs the Warriors, won 4-2

The Cavaliers (+180) and the Bucks (+160) against the Warriors and Suns won in 2016 and 2021, respectively, but not really that much of a big underdog. You'd have to go way back to the 2004 Pistons (vs Lakers) as +500 underdogs for that big NBA Finals upset-- which was the biggest one (via Vegas odds) the last 20 or even 30 years).

Badly want to bet on the Pacers and for them to pull off the upset. but this is just not going against the Thunder-- it's going against history and Vegas too!

Wasn't 2011 one of the biggest upset ?

Apparently this is revisionist history and actually at the time Vegas knew you had to respect what Dirk was doing.

[3ddman23]

This is were I'm at. I'm going with history.

No team in the modern NBA has won a championship built like Indiana. Closes things are 04 pistons & 2011 Mavs and even then it's not super comparable cause those teams you could look at and say well dirk can take over, well the pistons have 4 all stars and big Ben down low.

The pacers are good but they have no advantages vs this OKC team in my eyes. It's gonna take immensely hot shooting and mental mistakes by OKC for them to have a chance to win this series.

theres been no parity like this since the 70s

this is why the indy team structure worked this year

I mean sure it worked to get to the finals?? Does it work for actually winning a championship though? Plenty of teams make it to the finals and don't win and then nobody really remembers them. 5,10,15 years later.

[Lalouie]

This is were I'm at. I'm going with history.

No team in the modern NBA has won a championship built like Indiana. Closes things are 04 pistons & 2011 Mavs and even then it's not super comparable cause those teams you could look at and say well dirk can take over, well the pistons have 4 all stars and big Ben down low.

The pacers are good but they have no advantages vs this OKC team in my eyes. It's gonna take immensely hot shooting and mental mistakes by OKC for them to have a chance to win this series.

theres been no parity like this since the 70s

this is why the indy team structure worked this year

I mean sure it worked to get to the finals?? Does it work for actually winning a championship though? Plenty of teams make it to the finals and don't win and then nobody really remembers them. 5,10,15 years later.

several years ago in the teens, BOTH finals teams would need their stars. since then the bucks had giannis+great support, denver had jokic+ great support, and the celts...it's not like lebron hunting for stars @heat and @cavs, or gsw grabbing kd.

this year, indy has none and okc has ONE+ a deep good supporting cast. essentially both team are operating in the same environment. it's been parity gradually creeping up and all the old superstars getting old

[durden_tyler]

One sided NBA Finals, on paper and in Vegas. Currently, the Thunder are at around -700 to win the championship. This is the tallest odds since the Warriors (2018 vs the Cavs) which were favored by -1100. (The Warriors went on to win that series via sweep)

Other "mismatched" NBA Finals were the first three-peat Lakers;

2000 vs the Pacers, Lakers favored -800, won 4-2
2001 vs the Sixers, Lakers favored -2000, won 4-1
2002 vs the Nets, Lakers favored -740, won 4-0

For more Vegas context, here are the other sort of one-sided match-ups (but not as big as this year's Thunder) with the favored team eventually beating the underdogs in the NBA Finals;

2023 Nuggets (-430) vs the Heat, won 4-1
2021 Lakers (-350) vs the Heat, won 4-2

On the flipside, here are the underdogs (though not as big as this year's Pacers) that eventually pulled off the upsets in the NBA Finals;

2019 Raptors (+230) vs the Warriors, won 4-2

The Cavaliers (+180) and the Bucks (+160) against the Warriors and Suns won in 2016 and 2021, respectively, but not really that much of a big underdog. You'd have to go way back to the 2004 Pistons (vs Lakers) as +500 underdogs for that big NBA Finals upset-- which was the biggest one (via Vegas odds) the last 20 or even 30 years).

Badly want to bet on the Pacers and for them to pull off the upset. but this is just not going against the Thunder-- it's going against history and Vegas too!

Wasn't 2011 one of the biggest upset ?

Dallas was at +155 entering the NBA Finals series vs Miami. However, they were +2000 in the preseason, so yeah one of the tops IF we consider odds BEFORE the season rather than before the championship round.

Other underdog teams that won it with tall odds (only listed below, +1000 or higher) during presesason (and not pre-NBA Finals);

Nuggets (2023) +1800 but were -430 in Finals vs. Heat
Raptors (2019) +1850 but were +230 in Finals vs. Warriors
Warriors (2015) +2800 but were -220 in Finals vs Cavs
Spurs (2014) +1200 but were -155 in Finals vs Heat
Mavericks (2011) +2000 but were +155 in Finals vs Heat
Celtics (2008) +1000 but were +160 in Finals vs Lakers
PIstons (2004) +1500 but were +500 in Finals vs Lakers
Spurs (2003) +1100 but were -330 in Finals vs Nets
Rockets (1994) +1200 but weree -220 in Finals vs Knicks

[3ddman23]

theres been no parity like this since the 70s

this is why the indy team structure worked this year

I mean sure it worked to get to the finals?? Does it work for actually winning a championship though? Plenty of teams make it to the finals and don't win and then nobody really remembers them. 5,10,15 years later.

several years ago in the teens, BOTH finals teams would need their stars. since then the bucks had giannis+great support, denver had jokic+ great support, and the celts...it's not like lebron hunting for stars @heat and @cavs, or gsw grabbing kd.

this year, indy has none and okc has ONE+ a deep good supporting cast. essentially both team are operating in the same environment. it's been parity gradually creeping up and all the old superstars getting old

I mean your naming all time greats leading these teams in giannis, jokic, and a guy in Tatum who has been all NBA first team what 2-3 times already now at 27...sga mvp...I get parity is creeping up but at the same time OKC is poised to be a dynasty in the making...

I'm just not seeing it with this current Indy team winning a championship. Cool story, fun run, will continue to make deep playoff runs (especially with the east being wide open now) but I don't see an actual championship coming out of this.

[Capn'O]

2011 Mavs

[Capn'O]

I think Nesmith might be playing through injury now which is a big factor for the Pacers

On that note, is there any news on Walker?

[LAvision]

Yeah, people under-rate the Pacers like crazy.

No they don't. You can argue this pacer team made the finals without a top 10 player in the league, that's basically unheard of.

[Mean_Streets]

Most lopsided odds in NBA Finals history

1. 2001 Lakers vs Sixers: -2000
2. 2018 Warriors vs Cavs: -1075
3. 1996 Bulls vs Sonics: -950
4. 1999 Spurs vs Knicks: -900
5. 2000 Lakers vs Pacers: -800
6. 2002 Lakers vs Nets: -750
7T. 2025 Thunder vs Pacers: -700
7T. 2004 Lakers vs Pistons: -700
7T. 1986 Celtics vs Rockets: -700

Can the Pacers pull off what the '04 Pistons did?

Also surprised the 2000 Lakers were that big of favorites vs Indiana. I know they were coming off a 67 win season, but they were just coming out of a brutal 7 game series vs Portland and were going up against a battle tested 56 win Indiana team.

[WestbrookGOATed]

Pretty wild considering how young this team is.