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

[Eightnineborn]

We need to win game 2, damn that was a gut punch.

[xxSnEaKyPxx]

I think that overrated poll really motivated Haliburton

Na, he’s been doing this all season since he’s been healthy.

Started slow with injury from Olympics, but has been on fire for 4+ months now.

[xxSnEaKyPxx]

Saw this tweet and thought it was pretty funny as we’ve seen it here too:

Read on Twitter

While everyone else calls us overrated and so on, Celtic fans by and large have always shown this Pacers team respect, even when no one else does.

[yoadknux]

Saw this tweet and thought it was pretty funny as we’ve seen it here too:

Read on Twitter

While everyone else calls us overrated and so on, Celtic fans by and large have always shown this Pacers team respect, even when no one else does.

It's easy to "respect" a team when you sweep them & win a championship...
For them, 2024 ECF was the ultimate series, all games were within 1-2 possessions, but they've won them all. Had the Pacers won that series, they'd hate us just like the Bucks and Knicks fans
I'm guessing in 03-04 and 04-05, in which we eliminiated the Celtics from the playoffs back-to-back, they were not as supportive

[Chuck Everett]

I had to work and missed most of the game, but seems like every time the Cavs were getting momentum, Haliburton made a play. Is that how it unfolded?

I thought Haliburton and Nembhard were terrific, but to me, the guy who swung the game late (considering he was in foul trouble) was Nesmith. He was also the primary defender on Mitchell. Nesmith would be my player of the game.

[MMyhre]

I voted Pacers in 7 earlier, good start.

[Astaluego]

Nembhard is a great player, incredible glue, he seems to be one of those players who also raises his game in the Playoffs (or so I suppose, since I only see the Pacers in the Playoffs and last year he was already great, if he played like that in the regular season would he have more recognition? Or is it because he plays in Indiana?) He looks like a role player, has the impact of a star.

[yoadknux]

I had to work and missed most of the game, but seems like every time the Cavs were getting momentum, Haliburton made a play. Is that how it unfolded?

I thought Haliburton and Nembhard were terrific, but to me, the guy who swung the game late (considering he was in foul trouble) was Nesmith. He was also the primary defender on Mitchell. Nesmith would be my player of the game.

I totally agree with that... He had a sequence where he blocked Mitchell's three point attempt, than on that follow-up transition scored a three of his own... That's a six point play.

[Pacers_Freak]

Pacers punched the Cavs in the mouth. Didn't get to watch the game tonight, but from what I can see they beat them with outside shooting and spreading the ball around. That's the Cavs thing, but the Pacers did it better. Hopefully this puts the bed the narrative of the Cavs being better without him. It was simply not true. We'll see what adjustments they make for game two. Impressed with Indy (from what I can see in the box score at least)

Given your analytical posts earlier in this thread, I'm looking forward to you watching the replay and giving your assessment. Your basketball judgement seems on point.

Also, what is this "Cavs are better without Garland" that some Cavs fans are talking about? Based on your guys' posts, it looks like it was a thing that was claimed and it just sounds so utterly silly. Why would anyone claim that?

Well according to the last series the Bucks chances were unchanged by Lillards injury or absence in game 1. Just going off of what some Pacers fans said. So ofc Garland being out would also be a net neutral

That would obviously be a silly thing to say. I don’t know the context or who said it because I just pop in and out when I can. But obviously Lillard missing would make a difference just like Garland sitting makes a difference. But also…. The series has been over a week, maybe just let it go?

[cgf]

Luckily the pacers pose no threat to Cleveland

[cgf]

Given your analytical posts earlier in this thread, I'm looking forward to you watching the replay and giving your assessment. Your basketball judgement seems on point.

Also, what is this "Cavs are better without Garland" that some Cavs fans are talking about? Based on your guys' posts, it looks like it was a thing that was claimed and it just sounds so utterly silly. Why would anyone claim that?

Well according to the last series the Bucks chances were unchanged by Lillards injury or absence in game 1. Just going off of what some Pacers fans said. So ofc Garland being out would also be a net neutral

That would obviously be a silly thing to say. I don’t know the context or who said it because I just pop in and out when I can. But obviously Lillard missing would make a difference just like Garland sitting makes a difference. But also…. The series has been over a week, maybe just let it go?

He may be thinking of me, though I’m not a pacers fan. I said the bucks didn’t have a chance whether dame played or not.

[GiannisAnte34]

Well according to the last series the Bucks chances were unchanged by Lillards injury or absence in game 1. Just going off of what some Pacers fans said. So ofc Garland being out would also be a net neutral

That would obviously be a silly thing to say. I don’t know the context or who said it because I just pop in and out when I can. But obviously Lillard missing would make a difference just like Garland sitting makes a difference. But also…. The series has been over a week, maybe just let it go?

He may be thinking of me, though I’m not a pacers fan. I said the bucks didn’t have a chance whether dame played or not.

nah I understand you're a Knicks fan

[cgf]

That would obviously be a silly thing to say. I don’t know the context or who said it because I just pop in and out when I can. But obviously Lillard missing would make a difference just like Garland sitting makes a difference. But also…. The series has been over a week, maybe just let it go?

He may be thinking of me, though I’m not a pacers fan. I said the bucks didn’t have a chance whether dame played or not.

nah I understand you're a Knicks fan

Gotcha gotcha, I just didn’t remember the Indy fans talking too much trash and felt like a lot of times I was more cocky about them than they were

[LethalRangee]

Indy is deep and the Cavs are insanely overrated for what they are. I smell an upset incoming.

Well, get in on those odds. Puts some money on that confidence and get a nice haul.

Easy money.

[shi-woo]

I only watched the 2nd half, bu what stood out to me was how easily the Pacers were able to switch action and still feel comfortable with the match up. That's what makes the Celtics D so good, and why Pacers did better than expected. It was certainly noticeable at times on pnr when the Cavs would screen to get Nembhart off of a guy, and having a 6'5 Hali or Nesmith to step up in turn, wasn't much better.

There were many plays in that 2nd half where shots were rushed, altered, or smothered simply because Cavs couldn't beat the guards of Indy, and if they did, Turner was right behind them waiting to alter any shot. It's what led to a lot of rushed 3s, at least in the 1st half.

My other observation, and they kind of mentioned in in the final 2 minutes, and Pacers are a team that will continue to run it, where as most teams just slow it down to kill clock. It's what always gets the Celtics in trouble and any team without a Luka type player but Pacers keep going with the gameplan. I bring that up to highlight how much this team lives in transition, so obviously if Cavs are going to miss almost 30 threes, that is going to be a recipe for disaster. Cavs need to make more shots for the sole reason that they can't allow this team to get out in transition like they did, they kept getting some easy baskets because of it. There was that one play where Pascal got the easiest 2 points of the playoffs in a close game just by leaking out, and Turner a few moments later almost had an easy on too on the offensive foul, but was still a good action.

In line with the last part, the fact that rebounding was dead even was also telling. Cavs had more offensive boards, but Allen was not effective last night, and a lot of that can be explained by all those 3's which are easier to get Offboards from. Cavs have to put a better effort in on the glass, and need to play much bigger than they did, because they are.

All is all solid game, I see many adjustments the Cavs can make and think they will. For starters, Kenny got too cute and starting Merrill was a joke. Hunter or Ty needed to get that nod and play with the starters. Idk if Cavs expected Mobley to be more of a factor on offense, but giving Mitch the greenlight on offense def backfired this game as he wasn't feeling it. They need another creator in their, not another shooter.

CLE should feel good, but it still is kind of concerning that they lose a game where the other team took 15 less shots, the same amount of FT's, and turned the ball over 16 to you 7 times. That can be a boon that shows how this series is really going to go once the Cavs start hitting shots, but it also shows how Indy can continue stealing games if Cavs aren't careful. If the Pacers take care of the ball, and do a better job gang rebounding, they will def. keep this series close.

[xBulletproof]

Given your analytical posts earlier in this thread, I'm looking forward to you watching the replay and giving your assessment. Your basketball judgement seems on point.

Also, what is this "Cavs are better without Garland" that some Cavs fans are talking about? Based on your guys' posts, it looks like it was a thing that was claimed and it just sounds so utterly silly. Why would anyone claim that?

Well according to the last series the Bucks chances were unchanged by Lillards injury or absence in game 1. Just going off of what some Pacers fans said. So ofc Garland being out would also be a net neutral

That would obviously be a silly thing to say. I don’t know the context or who said it because I just pop in and out when I can. But obviously Lillard missing would make a difference just like Garland sitting makes a difference. But also…. The series has been over a week, maybe just let it go?

He's talking about me. The Bucks weren't going to be much of a threat to the Pacers either way. They were 32-26 with Dame and similar without. 35 year old Dame isn't changing much at this point in his career. People still treat his name like he's his 25 year old self. He's clearly offended I said it, it's like the 10th time he's brought it up where it doesn't belong

Then when I say he believes Dame would have changed the series, he says I'm saying something he never said I compared it to saying Haliburton would have made a difference against the Celtics last year, when he wouldn't have. The Celtics were just that much better.

[basketballRob]

Neither team will be able to stop the other one. It should be fun. The first team to 120 wins.

Add the two halftime scores and reduce total to next lower multiple of ten and that's the first two number for the game.

I think the Pacers will score over 130 in some of these games. Nembhard and Haliburton will just shoot over Garland if he comes back. I'm not sure if Mitchell can hold up in a track meet for 7 games.

Sent from my SM-G781U using RealGM mobile app

[JujitsuFlip]

Neither team will be able to stop the other one. It should be fun. The first team to 120 wins.

Add the two halftime scores and reduce total to next lower multiple of ten and that's the first two number for the game.

I think the Pacers will score over 130 in some of these games. Nembhard and Haliburton will just shoot over Garland if he comes back. I'm not sure if Mitchell can hold up in a track meet for 7 games.

Sent from my SM-G781U using RealGM mobile app

Mitch 100% cannot, guy clutched at that left ankle 2 or 3 times after being fouled last night. Garland obviously missed his 3rd playoff game in a row.

This is the Cavs 4th post season appearance in a row and health has been an issue every single time. If they're not healthy when it counts who cares if you win 44, 51, 48, or 64 regular season games.

[Mr. Perfect]

I had confidence in the Pacers this series just because I know how good Rick Carlisle is as a coach. Don't be surprised if the Pacers pull this series out, Carlisle teams always are always greater than the sum of it's parts.

[Sikk_Handlez]

Saw this tweet and thought it was pretty funny as we’ve seen it here too:

Read on Twitter

While everyone else calls us overrated and so on, Celtic fans by and large have always shown this Pacers team respect, even when no one else does.

as a C's fan I have strong memory of 2 recent games. The pacers knocked us out of the play-in semifinals 2 years ago, and of course this game they stole with help from the refs:

they overturn the foul on JB with 3 seconds left, then call the foul against the C's and put pacers on the FT line with no time. one of the most rigged things I've ever seen:

Watch on YouTube

I don't know if I'd call it respect, but we've been on the receiving end of a couple heart-breakers