RealGM

I don't trust either team's offense so whether it goes 7 to me depends on who can defend in the other teams home gym.

This is a fantastic series because both Pacers and Thunder are playing elite basketball. Thunder are a historic defense, but Pacers have had low key a historically consistent, well rounded offense in terms of not relying on 1 guy’s scoring. No one on their team, especially starting lineup can be ignored, even giving them like a lately contested mid-range shot feels like not good enough. That’s how much of a pain the Pacers are to defend. Rare situation where even the bigs and role players are money from mid range, so no where to ignore them.

Thunder on the other hand, are as good offensively in the aggregate, but more inconsistent, as you saw with their 3pt shooting tonight, so not as reliable from a game to game. However, they are a historic defense, and they got more engaged and more aggressive with their contests as the game went on.

This is a great test of one of the best consistent defenses vs. one of the most well rounded offenses we’ve ever seen. People acting like Pacers are way worse than the Thunder aren’t appreciating that the consistent mid-range/3pt shooting threats the Pacers have right now is more dangerous than the unreliable upside shooting that other teams have. And their defense, esp. point of attack, has been promising enough to cause issues. Pacers could randomly fall off out of thin air, but I expect this to be very very hard series for either to win

Myles Turner's shot needs to return for Indy, that would really help them. Him shooting 40/20 is just not it, so maybe law of averages will play out.

Thunder are overrated.

Pacers are matching them defensively.

Defense in general is overrated.

Elite ball handlers, guys who have the basketball on a string cannot be stopped. In any era. They go wherever they want on the court. "Great defense" just makes them work a little harder to get there.

The better OFFENSE will win this series.

Haliburton would be a significantly better player if he was better going left.

OKC did what I thought they needed to do, which was attack the basket aggressively and go away from the SGA-centric basketball. I think OKC potentially unlocked SGA by running the SGA-Williams pick and roll. SGA absolutely destroyed Nesmith. The other big unlock, imo, was Dort on Haliburton. Dort owned Haliburton. We'll see if that continues in game 5.

The Pacers looked better on offense since their shots were generally falling, but Haliburton and Siakam disappear offensively for large stretches and neither is capable of any meaningful shot creation. That became evident in the 4th when shots stopped falling, Siakam disappeared, and Haliburton was completely ineffective. I don't think the Pacers can win this series if that continues (unless they just shoot the lights out). Sometimes the best defense is a better offense, and the Pacers have got to figure out a way to attack the basket and get OKC players in foul trouble.

Dirk2Doncic wrote:Thunder's defense is overrated, Thunder are overrated.

Pacers are matching them defensively.

Elite ball handlers, guys who have the basketball on a string cannot be stopped. In any era. They go wherever they want on the court. "Great defense" makes them work a little harder to get there, nothing more than that.

Offense wins championships. The better offensive team will win this series.

Haliburton would be a significantly better player if he was better going left.

Is that you Mike D'Antoni?

This looks like it's going to June 22nd

Dirk2Doncic wrote:Thunder's defense is overrated, Thunder are overrated.

Pacers are matching them defensively.

Elite ball handlers, guys who have the basketball on a string cannot be stopped. In any era. They go wherever they want on the court. "Great defense" makes them work a little harder to get there, nothing more than that.

Offense wins championships. The better offensive team will win this series.

Haliburton would be a significantly better player if he was better going left.

Bill Russell was the offensive engine apparently.. Hakeem.. Pippen/MJ perimeter defense.. Rodman, Badboys tough D, Duncan, Garnett, Davis, Heatles swarming defense, Ben Wallace, Kawhi, Draymond, Giannis... list goes on. Defense is usually more of often than not winning rings. The Nash Phoenix Suns didnt really get close despite being an all time offense.

Need some D. Plus OKC has the best scorer and will probably shoot better from 3 than the game they still won..

Iwasawitness wrote:

Dirk2Doncic wrote:Thunder are overrated.

Pacers are matching them defensively.

Elite ball handlers, guys who have the basketball on a string cannot be stopped. In any era. They go wherever they want on the court. "Great defense" just makes them work a little harder to get there.

The better offensive team will win this series.

Haliburton would be a significantly better player if he was better going left.

Is that you Mike D'Antoni?

Mike was ahead of his time.

Obviously, it takes both offense and defense. (I edited my post)

Speaking of Mike... Nash would do his thing vs this Thunder defense. He'd back up, lick his fingers, survey the defense then put his head down and attack and find a way to get into the lane same as when the Spurs had Bruce Bowen guarding him.

As a former Mavericks fan, I'm disgusted by and want to push back on the brain dead "defense wins championships" nonsense.

Dirk2Doncic wrote:

Iwasawitness wrote:

Dirk2Doncic wrote:Thunder are overrated.

Pacers are matching them defensively.

Elite ball handlers, guys who have the basketball on a string cannot be stopped. In any era. They go wherever they want on the court. "Great defense" makes them work a little harder to get there, nothing more than that.

The better offensive team will win this series.

Haliburton would be a significantly better player if he was better going left.

Is that you Mike D'Antoni?

Mike was ahead of his time.

Obviously, it takes both offense and defense.

Speaking of Mike... Nash would do his thing vs this Thunder defense. He'd back up, lick his fingers, survey the defense then put his head down and attack and find a way to get into the lane same as when the Spurs had Bruce Bowen guarding him.

As a former Mavericks fan, I'm disgusted by and want to push back on the brain dead "defense wins championships" nonsense.

Where do you hide Nash on defense? They would force switches on Nash until he dies.

Dirk2Doncic wrote:

Iwasawitness wrote:

Dirk2Doncic wrote:Thunder are overrated.

Pacers are matching them defensively.

Elite ball handlers, guys who have the basketball on a string cannot be stopped. In any era. They go wherever they want on the court. "Great defense" just makes them work a little harder to get there.

The better offensive team will win this series.

Haliburton would be a significantly better player if he was better going left.

Is that you Mike D'Antoni?

Mike was ahead of his time.

Obviously, it takes both offense and defense.

Speaking of Mike... Nash would do his thing vs this Thunder defense. He'd back up, lick his fingers, survey the defense then put his head down and attack and find a way to get into the lane same as when the Spurs had Bruce Bowen guarding him.

As a former Mavericks fan, I'm disgusted by and want to push back on the brain dead "defense wins championships" nonsense.

Ahead of his time and yet he never even made an NBA finals.

Nash would get lit the **** up by this Thunder offense.

Defense does win championships. I would much rather have a top five defense than a top five offense.

MMyhre wrote:

Dirk2Doncic wrote:

Iwasawitness wrote:
Is that you Mike D'Antoni?

Mike was ahead of his time.

Obviously, it takes both offense and defense.

Speaking of Mike... Nash would do his thing vs this Thunder defense. He'd back up, lick his fingers, survey the defense then put his head down and attack and find a way to get into the lane same as when the Spurs had Bruce Bowen guarding him.

As a former Mavericks fan, I'm disgusted by and want to push back on the brain dead "defense wins championships" nonsense.

Where do you hide Nash on defense? They would force switches on Nash until he dies.

My point was only that you don't stop elite ball handlers (and defense in general is overrated today) I mean look at what the Pacers are doing to the Thunder defense this series and they don't have anyone special handling the basketball other than maybe McConnell but he comes off the bench.

The bigger problem for the Suns defensively was Amare. He was a straight line athlete and awful defensively but when they put Kurt Thomas next to him that Suns team was able to get stops in playoff basketball. They had Matrix and Raja Bell on the floor. Matrix was special.

NBA tried so hard to make it an even series

Dirk2Doncic wrote:

MMyhre wrote:

Dirk2Doncic wrote:
Mike was ahead of his time.

Obviously, it takes both offense and defense.

Speaking of Mike... Nash would do his thing vs this Thunder defense. He'd back up, lick his fingers, survey the defense then put his head down and attack and find a way to get into the lane same as when the Spurs had Bruce Bowen guarding him.

As a former Mavericks fan, I'm disgusted by and want to push back on the brain dead "defense wins championships" nonsense.

Where do you hide Nash on defense? They would force switches on Nash until he dies.

My point was only that you don't stop elite ball handlers (and defense in general is overrated today) I mean look at what the Pacers are doing to the Thunder defense this series and they don't have anyone special handling the basketball other than maybe McConnell but he comes off the bench.

The bigger problem for the Suns defensively was Amare. He was a straight line athlete and awful defensively but when they put Kurt Thomas next to him that Suns team was able to get stops in playoff basketball. They had Matrix and Raja Bell on the floor. Matrix as special.

So you're saying we just shouldn't even bother trying to defend elite ball handlers? They're impossible to stop so why bother?

Iwasawitness wrote:

Dirk2Doncic wrote:

MMyhre wrote:Where do you hide Nash on defense? They would force switches on Nash until he dies.

My point was only that you don't stop elite ball handlers (and defense in general is overrated today) I mean look at what the Pacers are doing to the Thunder defense this series and they don't have anyone special handling the basketball other than maybe McConnell but he comes off the bench.

The bigger problem for the Suns defensively was Amare. He was a straight line athlete and awful defensively but when they put Kurt Thomas next to him that Suns team was able to get stops in playoff basketball. They had Matrix and Raja Bell on the floor. Matrix was special.

So you're saying we just shouldn't even bother trying to defend elite ball handlers? They're impossible to stop so why bother?

I'm saying the impact of defense in terms of winning a championship is overrated in today's "culture".

The better offensive team is going to prevail this series. Both teams are bringing it on defense. Thunder executed better offensively down the stretch last night, they had a closer (offense) and the Pacers didn't.

Dirk2Doncic wrote:

Iwasawitness wrote:

Dirk2Doncic wrote:
My point was only that you don't stop elite ball handlers (and defense in general is overrated today) I mean look at what the Pacers are doing to the Thunder defense this series and they don't have anyone special handling the basketball other than maybe McConnell but he comes off the bench.

The bigger problem for the Suns defensively was Amare. He was a straight line athlete and awful defensively but when they put Kurt Thomas next to him that Suns team was able to get stops in playoff basketball. They had Matrix and Raja Bell on the floor. Matrix as special.

So you're saying we just shouldn't even bother trying to defend elite ball handlers? They're impossible to stop so why bother?

I'm saying the impact of defense in terms of winning a championship is overrated in today's "culture".

The better offensive team is going to prevail this series. Both teams are bringing it on defense. Thunder executed better offensively down the stretch last night, they had a closer (offense) and the Pacers didn't.

They have a good enough closer in Siakam but for some reason he's barely getting touches in last quarter
I don't even know what Haliburton was doing hogging the ball

I have seen this same **** in last series against Knicks with Mitchell Robinson guarding him

wang000hk wrote:

Dirk2Doncic wrote:

Iwasawitness wrote:
So you're saying we just shouldn't even bother trying to defend elite ball handlers? They're impossible to stop so why bother?

I'm saying the impact of defense in terms of winning a championship is overrated in today's "culture".

The better offensive team is going to prevail this series. Both teams are bringing it on defense. Thunder executed better offensively down the stretch last night, they had a closer (offense) and the Pacers didn't.

They have a good enough closer in Siakam but for some reason he's barely getting touches in last quarter
I don't even know what Haliburton was doing hogging the ball

I have seen this same **** in last series against Knicks with Mitchell Robinson guarding him

Pacers had them on the ropes!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! It was right there for the taking!!!!!!!!!!!!

A couple calls late hurt them too. Significantly.

And the missed free throws buried them.

Why did haliban not pass the ball to siakim at all in the 4th quarter? Big reason they loss the game along with mathurin choke and lopsided officiating

og15 wrote:Myles Turner's shot needs to return for Indy, that would really help them. Him shooting 40/20 is just not it, so maybe law of averages will play out.

He's still cooling off from shooting 56% from 3 against the Cavs!

It's always fascinating to see what sample size theatre will happen in the playoffs. Over enough games, we expects shooters to shoot around their multi-year average. The playoffs is always less than 30 games, so anything can happen! Ray Allen once barely 30% from 3 during a ECF run. Personally, I think the Pacers have maxed out their 3-point shooting luck for the playoff run, counting on another shooting uptick is like asking for a third serving before other dinner guests have finished their first. Indiana is only contender to shoot well in these playoffs (OKC, Boston, Minnesota, New York, Cleveland all went pretty cold). If the basketball gods balance the scales, it will be OKC players seeing shooting upticks and Indiana continuing their regression to the mean. Or we live in chaos and anything can happen.

Turner got some nice looks flashing to the free throw line. I think the Thunder play up on his 3-point shot heavily, so Carlisle is trying to find ways to punish them for that. It kind of worked, they just didn't go to it a ton. There's been a bit of a cat and mouse game, where Carlisle finds a soft spot in OKC's defense and attacks it relentlessly until Daigneault adjust and closes it. In the first half last night, that spot was the nail. The nail was awfully crowded in the second half though. In general, Indiana relentless attacking these weak spots has had a strong impact on the Thunder. They look less confident in their schemes. They try to stay aggressive on defense, but these guys are used to their defense controlling shot profiles. Not knowing where the Pacers will hit them next is undermining their ability to play defense on a string. The POA defense is still good, but when I look behind that at the backline, it looks way less confident. This is turn affects the POA, because they're not as sure where their help is going to come from.