2025 NBA FINALS: #1 Oklahoma City Thunder vs #4 Indiana Pacers (IND leads 2-1)

[Chuck Everett]

It hali scores 30 points the pacers win - true or false?

False. 22 and 12 assists would be better. Siakam having 30 is better for them than Haliburton.

Nice call here on Hali

I didn't have Mathurin on my bingo card, however, his performance these playoffs do make me wonder how they would have done against Boston last year now. Nesmith was basically giving them nothing in this series for the most part and Math has 41 points in his last two games on elite efficiency. Credit where credit is due.

[azcatz11]

OKC remains a pretty decent favorite at -245

Pacers you’re getting close to 2-1

That’s enticing

[tmorgan]

13 steals, 11 blocks. If the Pacers defense can do that twice more, they are champs.

That was wild. Out-defensive-statting the Thunder and winning with less at the line and getting out-rebounded.

THIS is the first game that makes me think Indy can actually get this done. Doesn’t mean they will. But they’ve shown that they can.

[jokeboy86]

3rd behind Pistons and Mavericks.

This would top it to me because that Pistons defense was the NBA version of the Baltimore Ravens and Wallace was monster defensively. The Mavericks also had Dirk who was still a top 10ish player and a lot of veterans who in their prime were consistent all stars.

The Pacers have no one on their roster imo who at the moment is trending towards a surefire HOFer. Even with another ring Siakam probably isnt getting in and Haliburton would have to still stay healthy and be consistent for a couple more years especially since even with a ring I wouldnt put him as top 10 player in the league.

Lakers 2004 and the Heatles were loaded with not only HOF players but 3 top 10 All time players and the arguable GOAT. Multiple MVP level players on each team. OKC doesn’t even compare.

Yeah but the Lakers and Heatles teams didnt have any depth. Malone going down shouldnt have torpedoed the Lakers in the Finals like it did but it did. That first Heat team wasnt really constructed well the first time and they just thought the big 3 would overpower everyone which is why they revamped it in both of the next two years. But again I keep going back to who the Pacers dont have and who the Pistons and Mavericks did. Pistons had several players who may not have been the best at their position but were in the top 5 at the time. The Mavericks veteran roster was incredibly solid too.

[jym85]

probably best for the league if OKC wins, keeps their team together, and squanders all those picks on players that never get into the rotation

[wang000hk]

Indiana has the type of team that can mitigate some of the Thunder’s significant advantages they have against most teams. They have a deep bench and lots of ball handlers, and can score points in a hurry. They also know they are never out of a game because of their offense, and Carlisle is good at making adjustments.

The Thunder have done a good job of turning Indiana over more than any other team could, and they are still down 2-1.

Pacers might be the worst matchup for Thunder this entire playoffs
They have answers to OKC's biggest advantages

[Hoop Hunter]

So did Indy just not try in the regular season? What explains their mediocre 50 win total?

Nesmith and Nembhard missed a ton of time and Hali was playing injured to start the season. Even Shepard was out for a while, the same time. We had some G-League guys and Rookie Furphy playing a lot minutes. We've had one of the top 3 records starting around the Jan 1.

People didn't believe Pacers fans talking about how much Nembhard and Nesmith meant to the team. If people have watched the playoffs they get it now. Individual stats don't tell the whole story.

[Wingy]

Daigneault's random experiment of starting Cason Wallace in the finals has been a disaster.

I don't think Daignault's wrong, but maybe time to change back to 2 bigs for a change of pace.

He was absolutely dead wrong.

The mind and confidence is obviously an enormous part of the game. He showed their team, his own team, and everyone else he was scared before a single second ticked off the clock. He conceded well before he had to.

[jokeboy86]

He’s too predictable at times. He tried to attack Turner at the end and got blocked on a 3. Then drove to the basket and needed to just pump fake and he would have probably had a layup and he tried to use his body instead.

He’s so weak that he has to be smarter instead of just thinking his height is enough.

KD despite being skinny is quite strong and has put on muscle since he started so doesn’t have the same issues.

Also the thing about KD unlike some of the other skinny frame guys like Ingram and Chet who try to emulate him is he has godlike footwork and is so smooth. With Chet and Ingram they look clunky and not as smooth and a guy like Wemby doesnt have the speed

KD also has such a high release that not many can really bother him.

Chet’s got a slow lower release that bigs can definitely block.

Its real herky jerky too. He shoots with one foot forward at times like when he's shooting threes.

[Nuntius]

Indiana has the type of team that can mitigate some of the Thunder’s significant advantages they have against most teams. They have a deep bench and lots of ball handlers, and can score points in a hurry. They also know they are never out of a game because of their offense, and Carlisle is good at making adjustments.

The Thunder have done a good job of turning Indiana over more than any other team could, and they are still down 2-1.

Pacers might be the worst matchup for Thunder this entire playoffs
They have answers to OKC's biggest advantages

The Thunder are also probably the worst matchup for Indiana this entire playoffs as well.

It really goes to show how both teams really earned the right to be here.

[Jta444]

Winning game 3 was expected, winning game 4 is the challenge. If Pacers wing game 4 they will be champs.. actually whoever wins game 4 will win the series.

I’m so tired of this “whoever wins game x wins the series” lol

It seems like everyone says that for every game, even boring analysts like Barkley and Shaq who just say anything without thought

I just chuckle everytime i see it, such a lazy and uncreative response. Well of course winning a game is very important in a 7 game series.

But no, winning one game doesn't win you a series. OKC can win the next and still lose game 5 or 6 and 7. Ask Denver last year, they won game 5 yet still lost 6 and 7.

It’s simple, first to win 4 wins. No need to say whoever wins x game wins the series. Whoever wins their 4th win wins the series. That’s it.

[Mk0]

Winning game 3 was expected, winning game 4 is the challenge. If Pacers wing game 4 they will be champs.. actually whoever wins game 4 will win the series.

I’m so tired of this “whoever wins game x wins the series” lol

It seems like everyone says that for every game, even boring analysts like Barkley and Shaq who just say anything without thought

I just chuckle everytime i see it, such a lazy and uncreative response. Well of course winning a game is very important in a 7 game series.

But no, winning one game doesn't win you a series. OKC can win the next and still lose game 5 or 6 and 7. It’s simple, first to win 4 wins.

Totally agreed. The winner of game 5 is the winner of this series.

[ball_takes23]

I feel like the Pacers have to win every home game to have a shot at winning this series.

Correct. OKC's only lost 2 games at home this entire playoffs and both of them were fluke 1-2 pt losses where they dominated the entire game, and they have an average margin of 25 points in their home wins. I dont see them losing another game at home.

[Nuntius]

Daigneault's random experiment of starting Cason Wallace in the finals has been a disaster.

I don't think Daignault's wrong, but maybe time to change back to 2 bigs for a change of pace.

He was absolutely dead wrong.

The mind and confidence is obviously an enormous part of the game. He showed their team, his own team, and everyone else he was scared before a single second ticked off the clock. He conceded well before he had to.

I understand the psychological factors that you're talking about but, again, the fact is that OKC has won every 1st quarter. The quarter that is affected the most by who starts has been consistently won by the Thunder. So, I really don't think that the results on the court prove that this change hasn't worked. If anything, they indicate that it has been working.

[azcatz11]

Read on Twitter

?s=46

[Wallace_Wallace]

Crazy thing is, Haliburton, Nesmith nor Nembhard hasn’t had that nuclear game yet. Assuming that happens, they’re bound to win at least another game (or two).

[Marvin Martian]

Mathurin has no business being a bench player when he can easily be a number #1 for a bottom 10 team and develop his game.

Yeah, that’s what I’m saying. He’s simply too good to be a bench player. This isn’t a fluke. His ability to draw fouls even as a rookie jumped out to me, and he’s only going to get better.

If he can make basic reads out of a PnR, I don't see why he can't be on the same level as Spida.

[CelticSooner]

Winning game 3 was expected, winning game 4 is the challenge. If Pacers wing game 4 they will be champs.. actually whoever wins game 4 will win the series.

I’m so tired of this “whoever wins game x wins the series” lol

It seems like everyone says that for every game, even boring analysts like Barkley and Shaq who just say anything without thought

I just chuckle everytime i see it, such a lazy and uncreative response. Well of course winning a game is very important in a 7 game series.

But no, winning one game doesn't win you a series. OKC can win the next and still lose game 5 or 6 and 7.

It’s simple, first to win 4 wins. No need to say whoever wins x game wins the series. Whoever wins their 4th win wins the series. That’s it.

If only series were made in a vacuum. Momentum and player psychology are real things. Whomever wins Game 4 wins the series. 1 team has come back from being down 3-1 in the Finals. Plenty of teams have tied the series up 2-2 and still won it.

[Wallace_Wallace]

Winning game 3 was expected, winning game 4 is the challenge. If Pacers wing game 4 they will be champs.. actually whoever wins game 4 will win the series.

I’m so tired of this “whoever wins game x wins the series” lol

It seems like everyone says that for every game, even boring analysts like Barkley and Shaq who just say anything without thought

I just chuckle everytime i see it, such a lazy and uncreative response. Well of course winning a game is very important in a 7 game series.

But no, winning one game doesn't win you a series. OKC can win the next and still lose game 5 or 6 and 7.

It’s simple, first to win 4 wins. No need to say whoever wins x game wins the series. Whoever wins their 4th win wins the series. That’s it.

If only series were made in a vacuum. Momentum and player psychology are real things. Whomever wins Game 4 wins the series. 1 team has come back from being down 3-1 in the Finals. Plenty of teams have tied the series up 2-2 and still won it.

If the Pacers were to be up 3-1, OKC only need SGA and JDub to be LeBron James and Kyrie Irving at their absolute best…..no pressure

[durden_tyler]

I feel like the Pacers have to win every home game to have a shot at winning this series.

Thanks, Captain Obvious.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk