2025 NBA PLAYOFFS East Semifinals: #1 Cleveland Cavaliers vs #4 Indiana Pacers (IND leads 2-0)

[TinmanZBoy]

Read on Twitter

Overrated!!!

[xxSnEaKyPxx]

I am good with that as long as they call Indiana for a flagrant for swiping at Strus’ face so hard that it actually drew blood from his mouth and nose. While we are at it, can we get a flagrant called on Myles Turner for sliding under the feet of Evan Mobley, knocking him out for game 2 and possibly beyond?

*sigh* whatever man.

Both teams can argue about calls or missed calls during the course of the game. Only one team can complain about a phantom call with 10 seconds left that had a direct impact. Now, had Indiana been called for a phantom foul on Merrill’s last second heave, you would have an argument.

Had Mitchell’s flagrant been called, which isn’t even really debatable by the way, then it could have been a different game before anything else that happened after it. Again, that call is called the same way every single time…Jokic got called for it the night before, hell, every player has been called for that over the last 5 or so years. Mitchell wasn’t. With what, 25 seconds left? Woulda given the Pacers 2 free throws and the ball while down 5.

You had no issues with them not calling that? Why? We both know know the answer as to why you weren’t bothered by that.

But the whole “only my team is allowed to complain” is silly. Especially when you were celebrating all the soft whistles Mitchell got throughout the game.

In your mind, any call that favors the Cavs is a part of the game, any call that goes against them is a disgrace.

[Pacernation]

Cavs were gassed at the end, but still feel like they win this if not for bad officiating. Nesmith should have been called for lane violation on a putback dunk, and then potentially for flagrant on Mitchell afterwards. Mitchell also deserved flagrant for revenge on the ensuing possession, but the worst call was last foul on Haliburton which was non-existant.

Mitchell got to the line 21 times. Really think we're not gonna find one wrong call on him throughout the game?

There were a couple of soft calls, but you don't make that call with less than 10 seconds left, especially when Haliburton was clearly hunting for it.

Mitchel was in the restricted area as a secondary defender and I think it's debatable if he had 100% verticality. I think the call is correct, but I understand that it was a frustrating one from a Cavs perspective..

[Pacers_Freak]

Cavs were gassed at the end, but still feel like they win this if not for bad officiating. Nesmith should have been called for lane violation on a putback dunk, and then potentially for flagrant on Mitchell afterwards. Mitchell also deserved flagrant for revenge on the ensuing possession, but the worst call was last foul on Haliburton which was non-existant.

Mitchell got to the line 21 times. Really think we're not gonna find one wrong call on him throughout the game?

There were a couple of soft calls, but you don't make that call with less than 10 seconds left, especially when Haliburton was clearly hunting for it.

I agree that it was a soft call. I've always disagreed with the notion you officiate differently at the end of the game. 2 points in the last 10 seconds and 2 points in the 2nd quarter count the same. As a competitor I always wanted a consistent whistle the whole game so I would know how to play. If you are going to call it tight all game then I want a tight whistle at the end and if you are going to let us play, let us play the whole way. It was a weak call and as a Pacer fan I can fully admit that. Just don't agree with the 10 seconds left part.

[xBulletproof]

I am good with that as long as they call Indiana for a flagrant for swiping at Strus’ face so hard that it actually drew blood from his mouth and nose. While we are at it, can we get a flagrant called on Myles Turner for sliding under the feet of Evan Mobley, knocking him out for game 2 and possibly beyond?

*sigh* whatever man.

Both teams can argue about calls or missed calls during the course of the game. Only one team can complain about a phantom call with 10 seconds left that had a direct impact. Now, had Indiana been called for a phantom foul on Merrill’s last second heave, you would have an argument.

Are we going to ignore the drive Haliburton has with 30 seconds left he was fouled by Allen? I mean Allen went through Haliburtons back to block it. The flagrant that wasn't? There was plenty the other way too

I hate ref complaints. It balances out almost all the time, and fans rarely want to acknowledge what went their way. Only what didn't.

[Nuntius]

Every fan of the "true PG" likes to tell themselves this when in reality, their "true PG" doesn't have the bag to get a shot whenever they want.

If Hali could drop 25 on 60 TS a game, he would but he can't. It's been 3 years.

He doesn't draw free throws, he doesn't have simple ways to generate offense, he isn't that crafty of a guy.

He's a bread and butter pick and roll PG that shoots 3s and makes the right pass.

Why are you saying this like it is a bad thing? Being elite in the pick and roll, hitting teammates with good passes and being a competent 3 point shooter leading to a high quality offense is literally the idea "true PG". Teams don't need to be constructed around outdated isolation players like it is the late 90s. Your takes reek of someone who lives for instagram reels.

Tbh, against elite teams there will be times where the plan to play the "right way" just won't be available. Unfortunately this Cavs team got decimated with injuries again this year, but at some point you're going to need your guy to be able to take those oppertunities and turn them into a made shot when nothing is working.

Hali is a great player, but I do always wonder that against the Bostons/OKCs/etc if he can be the one to have a 3-5 minute period where he kinda wills the team past a shooting slump until they find their footing again. Every team is going to run into stretches where they can't get a good look, but generally the top tier players can turn that bad shot into a shot that has a reasonable percentage of going in.

We'll see in the next round I guess, barring Boston and NYC losing key players on their side too. I like this Indiana team, but I want them to be tested against the juggernauts before I can call them a true contender.

I don't think that there's any Pacers fans who considers us a true contender like OKC, Boston and a healthy Cleveland. We're not on that level yet.

But again, tiers don't mean everything. You still have to play the games and the one thing we know for sure about this team is that we never give up.

[Profound23]

Good job Indy! From a Bucks fan...you guys are doing well. Beat our a**es and riding the momentum.

[jbk1234]

Mitchell got to the line 21 times. Really think we're not gonna find one wrong call on him throughout the game?

There were a couple of soft calls, but you don't make that call with less than 10 seconds left, especially when Haliburton was clearly hunting for it.

I agree that it was a soft call. I've always disagreed with the notion you officiate differently at the end of the game. 2 points in the last 10 seconds and 2 points in the 2nd quarter count the same. As a competitor I always wanted a consistent whistle the whole game so I would know how to play. If you are going to call it tight all game then I want a tight whistle at the end and if you are going to let us play, let us play the whole way. It was a weak call and as a Pacer fan I can fully admit that. Just don't agree with the 10 seconds left part.

You don't want the game decided on a weak call because a superstar is hunting for it. I feel the same about that if it's Mitchell or Haliburton. Obviously, guys like Haliburton and Mitchell are going to get calls that other players don't, and that's unfortunate. It doesn't follow that they were calling the game tight.

Giving superstars a playoff game on a soft call when they're foul hunting with seconds left isn't supposed to happen anymore.

[Nuntius]

Tony Brothers is known to call playoff games way more tightly than all the other refs. That's why there were 64 total foul shots in Game 2 and only 33 in Game 1. So while I don't think the final foul on Haliburton should normally be called it was 100% being called within the context of this particular game. Mitchell understood this as well as anyone and consequently attacked the rim relentlessly.

If anything, I think calling the games so tightly hurts the Pacers game plan to wear the opponents down by going up-tempo.

Yep. Exactly this. DowJones said in the previous page that the refs were letting both teams play physical and while that was true for game 1 and the start of game 2, it definitely wasn't true for the second half and, especially, the 4th quarter.

The moment this game turned more physical (basically when we started to mount our comeback), the refs started calling the game tight in order to not lose control of it.

As you said, Mitchell understood that shift perfectly. That's why he was driving relentlessly and throwing his body at our defenders. And it worked out for him too. Mitchell shot 11 FTs in the 4th quarter. And, at least in a couple of cases, the contact he got was just like the contact that Haliburton got in that drive.

In fact, FT shooting was so important for the Cavaliers that they got almost half of their total points in the quarter from said FTs. 10 of their 21 points in the 4th quarter came from the FT line since the Cavs shot 5/18 from the field in that quarter. They just weren't able to get it going from the field and, in fact, after that huge 3 by Max Strus, they weren't even able to attempt a field goal the rest of the game.

So, what Haliburton did when we were mounting that last-second run was exactly what Mitchell was doing earlier in the quarter. Recognize that the refs are calling it tight, that they have established a baseline where you will go to the line if you're bumped when you attack the rim so attack the rim is what he did.

[Nuntius]

Read on Twitter

The one time I agree with Stephen A. Garland needs to play last time we seen him he was acting very cocky talking about other player’s defence. Cavs can’t win a championship like this if there players are going to be getting hurt during the playoffs.

The problem is that Darius Garland is a start and stop player. He isn't a full head of steam kind of guard like, say, Westbrook was in his prime. A bad toe is really going to affect his shiftiness with the ball in his hands which is going to limit his overall effectiveness. Would he still help the Cavs out? Of course, no doubt about that.

But whether he can help or not isn't the only thing that the team has to consider. The possibility of an even worse injury due to overcompensation (since, let's be real, if Garland tries to limit pressure on his toe, he is NOT going to be planting his foot properly, he's going to be putting a lot of pressure on the rest of his foot) is something that the team has to take into account as a whole. The Cavs have made a big investment in Garland. They're looking at him as one of the team's cornerstones. The last thing that the Cavs want is for him to return early and get an even worse injury that derails his career.

There's a reason why teams are reticent to allow injured players to go. We have seen way too many examples of players coming back early from injury, only to get an even worse overcompensation injury. Look no further than Lillad's and Durant's achilles injuries.

Garland not playing isn't him "being soft" or any of that crap. It's the Cavaliers making the decision that they do not want to risk an even worse injury.

[Pacers_Freak]

There were a couple of soft calls, but you don't make that call with less than 10 seconds left, especially when Haliburton was clearly hunting for it.

I agree that it was a soft call. I've always disagreed with the notion you officiate differently at the end of the game. 2 points in the last 10 seconds and 2 points in the 2nd quarter count the same. As a competitor I always wanted a consistent whistle the whole game so I would know how to play. If you are going to call it tight all game then I want a tight whistle at the end and if you are going to let us play, let us play the whole way. It was a weak call and as a Pacer fan I can fully admit that. Just don't agree with the 10 seconds left part.

You don't want the game decided on a weak call because a superstar is hunting for it. I feel the same about that if it's Mitchell or Haliburton. Obviously, guys like Haliburton and Mitchell are going to get calls that other players don't, and that's unfortunate. It doesn't follow that they were calling the game tight.

Giving superstars a playoff game on a soft call when they're foul hunting with seconds left isn't supposed to happen anymore.

I'd rather there weren't weak calls period for anyone. Does 2 points in the 2nd quarter not count the same? Let's say in game 3 Siakim gets 3 weak trips to the line in the 1st half. If Mitchell gets one with 10 seconds left the Pacers would still be +4 in weak call FT attempts. That sways the game more than a late call. I'm not really arguing with your main point in that it shouldn't have been a foul call on Mitchell. I just don't think it should have been a foul in the 2nd quarter or if there are 10 seconds left.

[jbk1234]

Read on Twitter

Pretty sure Atkinson has stated publicly that organization won't clear him to play if he's only at 60%. Maybe they bend a little now. Maybe Garland yells at little louder now. But, and you're going to want to sit down for this one, Stephan A doesn't know what he's talking about.

Also, if the past is prologue, the Cavs have a history of publicly downplaying the extent of injuries to keep the opponent unsure of what to prepare for. Allen didn't have a bruised rib last year, it was splintered.

[Nuntius]

And, by the way. Do you want to know why the refs were looking out for the physicality level during last night's game? Do you want to know why they decided to call the game as tight as they did in that second half?

It is because Atkinson and the Cavs publicly complained about it and brought the league's attention to it.

[jbk1234]

I agree that it was a soft call. I've always disagreed with the notion you officiate differently at the end of the game. 2 points in the last 10 seconds and 2 points in the 2nd quarter count the same. As a competitor I always wanted a consistent whistle the whole game so I would know how to play. If you are going to call it tight all game then I want a tight whistle at the end and if you are going to let us play, let us play the whole way. It was a weak call and as a Pacer fan I can fully admit that. Just don't agree with the 10 seconds left part.

You don't want the game decided on a weak call because a superstar is hunting for it. I feel the same about that if it's Mitchell or Haliburton. Obviously, guys like Haliburton and Mitchell are going to get calls that other players don't, and that's unfortunate. It doesn't follow that they were calling the game tight.

Giving superstars a playoff game on a soft call when they're foul hunting with seconds left isn't supposed to happen anymore.

I'd rather there weren't weak calls period for anyone. Does 2 points in the 2nd quarter not count the same? Let's say in game 3 Siakim gets 3 weak trips to the line in the 1st half. If Mitchell gets one with 10 seconds left the Pacers would still be +4 in weak call FT attempts. That sways the game more than a late call. I'm not really arguing with your main point in that it shouldn't have been a foul call on Mitchell. I just don't think it should have been a foul in the 2nd quarter or if there are 10 seconds left.

For obvious reasons, yes it's very different. The Cavs can still come back from a couple of soft calls on Siakim in the first half. The Pacers can't come back from the officials gifting the game to Mitchell at the end. Moreover, the idea that you have to play for the win and not the foul in the last two minutes is hardly new. To do that in a playoff game is pretty egregious.

Now, I don't know that there is anyway the Cavs can win this series without Garland coming back and soon, but if he does, and the Cavs are able to make a series out if it and come up short, I'm going to be angry the refs rewarded Haliburton with free throws in Cleveland. That call doesn't get made in Boston or MSG. Zero chance regardless of what crew is out there.

[Nuntius]

The Pacers can't come back from the officials gifting the game to Mitchell at the end.

But we did come back. Mitchell shot 11 FTs in the 4th quarter. Do you believe that all of them were actually fouls?

The point is, the Pacers never stopped playing. The Cavs stopped after Strus' big 3.

[Tnasty4l]

Has anyone noticed that when the buzzer rang, Strus ran to Hali and pushed him, and to avoid unnecessary crap Turner and Nesmith did a sandwiched celebration

As I was watching the Celebration I did notice that Hali looked like he was going after Strus but I thought it was just my imagination. Didn't catch the push until I re-watched the game. Good looking out from Myles and Aaron.

[BigDan245]

Read on Twitter

Pretty sure Atkinson has stated publicly that organization won't clear him to play if he's only at 60%. Maybe they bend a little now. Maybe Garland yells at little louder now. But, and you're going to want to sit down for this one, Stephan A doesn't know what he's talking about.

Also, if the past is prologue, the Cavs have a history of publicly downplaying the extent of injuries to keep the opponent unsure of what to prepare for. Allen didn't have a bruised rib last year, it was splintered.

If that's the case, all they are doing is making their players look soft.

If the injury is being reported correctly, Garland should come off the bench and test it out. See if how goes. Even if he gives you 20 minutes. If it's clear he can't play, pull the plug.

Mobley is different because we know guys with ankle sprains and we know how badly it goes when they can't move.

[Tim_Hardawayy]

I'm gonna be that guy, but it does feel like this series so far is a little bit of karma for the showboating Cavs were doing in round 1. Although I think you could also just blame the Heat for not getting them ready for the postseason at all, those games were practically scrimmages.

[jbk1234]

The Pacers can't come back from the officials gifting the game to Mitchell at the end.

But we did come back. Mitchell shot 11 FTs in the 4th quarter. Do you believe that all of them were actually fouls?

The point is, the Pacers never stopped playing. The Cavs stopped after Strus' big 3.

There were three calls in the last two minutes. They all went against Mitchell. The Pacers didn't come back from a foul call that put Mitchell on line with under 10 seconds left because no such call was made. You don't let the game get decided by anything less than a clear foul in the final seconds. You can't point to another game in another series where it happened because it hasn't happened. It hasn't happened because it's not supposed to happen.

[youOK]

The Pacers can't come back from the officials gifting the game to Mitchell at the end.

But we did come back. Mitchell shot 11 FTs in the 4th quarter. Do you believe that all of them were actually fouls?

The point is, the Pacers never stopped playing. The Cavs stopped after Strus' big 3.

There were three calls in the last two minutes. They all went against Mitchell. The Pacers didn't come back from a foul call that put Mitchell on line with under 10 seconds left because no such call was made. You don't let the game get decided by anything less than a clear foul in the final seconds. You can't point to another game in another series where it happened because it hasn't happened. It hasn't happened because it's not supposed to happen.

The Pacers were behind because of the Mitchell foul calls. You have to call the game the same way, regardless of what time in the game it is. Points are worth the same if you score them at the beginning of the game or the end.

Time in the game should have zero relevance to whether a foul is called or not. It is either a foul or not, and while some refs call it differently from others, they should strive to use the same subjectivity throughout the entire game. It was a tightly called game the whole time, hence Mitchell's 21 FTs and the overall FTs compared to game 1. Asking the refs to hold their whistles in the final 2 minutes or treat something differently because the game is ending should not be a thing; it should be treated just like the rest of the game.