Pacers Rout Thunder 108-91 to Force a Seventh Game in Oklahoma City
The Indiana Pacers fell behind 10-2 to the Oklahoma City Thunder at home in game six before outscoring the Thunder 62-32 the rest of the first half en route to a dominant 108-91 victory to tie the series at 3-3. The game was not as close as the final score may suggest; the Pacers led by as much as 31 points in the second half, were ahead by 25-plus points for substantial portions of the second half, and their fourth quarter lead did not drop below 20 points until the final 1:18. The Pacers outrebounded the Thunder 46-41, and forced 21 turnovers that they converted into 19 points while only committing 11 turnovers that the Thunder converted into 13 points. Those extra possessions were a major factor in a game during which both teams shot worse than .420 from the field. Another significant factor was that the Pacers shot 15-42 (.357) from three point range while holding the Thunder to 8-30 (.267) three point shooting; the Pacers did not shoot great, but the Thunder's terrible long range shooting was too much to overcome when the Thunder also lost the possession game by a wide margin.
The Pacers shot 0-8 from the field to start the game, and they shot just 8-25 (.320) from the field in the first quarter, but they already led 28-25 after the first 12 minutes because they launched four more field goal attempts than the Thunder while making five first quarter three pointers and holding the Thunder to just one first quarter three pointer. As is often the case in the NBA, the first quarter set the tone for the game: the Pacers were the aggressors, the Pacers attempted more field goals, and the Pacers made timely three pointers while the Thunder misfired from beyond the arc.
In today's NBA featuring volume three point shooting and fast-paced play, a 22 point halftime lead is not insurmountable, but what killed the Thunder is that they did not score from the 1:46 mark of the second quarter until 6:57 remained in the third quarter, a nearly seven minute drought during which the Pacers expanded their advantage from 58-42 to 70-42; the Pacers were not burning up the nets by scoring 12 points in seven minutes, but failing to score at all while already trailing by double digits signaled that this was just not the Thunder's night.
The Pacers are a better and tougher team than I realized. It would have been easy to fold after losing game five in convincing fashion versus a team that is justifiably considered the favorite, but the Pacers showed resolve not seen from some teams that are more highly touted. The balanced Pacers attack featured six double figure scorers who each had between 10 and 20 points. Obi Toppin, the pride of the University of Dayton, led the Pacers with 20 points in 23 minutes off of the bench. He also had six rebounds, a game-high four treys, and two steals. Andrew Nembhard added 17 points, four assists, and three steals. Pascal Siakam had 16 points, a game-high 13 rebounds, and three assists. Tyrese Haliburton did not seem to be unduly hampered by his much-discussed calf injury, finishing with 14 points, five assists, two steals, and just one turnover; he had a game-high +25 plus/minus number, and he made those who suggested that he should be benched look quite foolish. T.J. McConnell provided an important spark off of the bench with 12 points, nine rebounds, a game-high six assists, and a game-high four steals that matched the entire Thunder team's output in a category that they are used to dominating.
Shai Gilgeous-Alexander led the Thunder with 21 points on 7-15 field goal shooting. He had four rebounds, two assists, and no steals or blocked shots, a marked contrast with his 31 points, 10 assists, four blocked shots, and two steals in the Thunder's game five win. In game six, Gilgeous-Alexander logged a "Harden" with more turnovers (game-high eight) than field goals made (seven). Jalen Williams followed up his 40 point game five masterpiece with just 16 points in game six. Chet Holmgren had four points on 2-9 field goal shooting, plus six rebounds, no assists, no steals, and no blocked shots.
If the Thunder lose this series, they will rue falling behind 2-1 after inexplicably putting Cason Wallace in the starting lineup in place of Isaiah Hartenstein during the first three games. The Thunder went 45-8 during the regular season when Hartenstein started, and they went 12-4 in the playoffs with Hartenstein as a starter prior to the NBA Finals; the Thunder are now 2-1 in the NBA Finals with Hartenstein as a starter, and 1-2 when he did not start. The lineup change did not have a discernible impact on game six, but the larger point is that if the Thunder had deployed their regular starting lineup in each of the first five games they may have won the series at home in game five instead of being pushed to a seventh game.
The Thunder's effort level and efficiency from opening tip until final buzzer indicated that their players had the attitude that this was not a must win game because they will have game seven at home. The Thunder are 18-2 after a loss during the regular season and playoffs, so they have good reason to be confident, but Tex Winter often said, "Everything turns on a trifle": in game seven, a turned ankle, a bad call, or a funny bounce of the ball could change the game, the series, and the way that both teams are remembered. Game to game momentum in a series does not exist, because the next game is played in a different arena under different circumstances beginning with a 0-0 score, not a double digit lead for the winner of the previous game--but momentum within a game can exist, and can decide a series in game seven.
However, even though the underdog has a puncher's chance once a series reaches a seventh game, the reality is that the home team wins NBA game sevens over 74% of the time. The Thunder are in control of this series until proven otherwise, and the Thunder have demonstrated that blowout losses do not impact their confidence or their level of play. In the second round, the Thunder lost to the Denver Nuggets 119-107 in game six, and then the Thunder won game seven, 125-93. After taking a 2-0 lead in the Western Conference Finals, the Thunder lost to the Minnesota Timberwolves 143-101, and then the Thunder won the next two games to close out the series.
The Pacers' dominant win will almost certainly inspire a lot of overreaction, which is a staple of NBA coverage (and sports coverage in general). Regardless of any hype to the contrary, a blowout Thunder win is the most likely game seven outcome, followed by a close Thunder win; a blowout Thunder win may seem unimaginable now in the immediate wake of the Pacers' dominant game six performance, but game six will be a distant memory when the comfortable and confident Thunder race out to an early game seven lead. A close Pacers win is possible but unlikely, and a blowout Pacers win at Oklahoma City is very unlikely barring unusual circumstance (injuries, foul trouble, or early ejections).
Labels: Indiana Pacers, Jalen Williams, Oklahoma City Thunder, Pascal Siakam, Shai Gilgeous-Alexander, T.J. McConnell, Tyrese Haliburton
posted by David Friedman @ 2:05 AM
8 Comments:
"The Pacers are a better and tougher team than I realized. ..." Yet a Pacer win in G7 is "unlikely". Yes, I know, these 2 statements are not inherently logically inconsistent; both can be true. Nonetheless, have you fully corrected for the reasons that you underestimated the Pacers up until now?
Anonymous:
After game seven, we will know for sure if I "fully corrected for the reasons that [I] underestimated the Pacers..." I did not expect the Pacers to defend as tenaciously as they have, particularly at home, where they held the Thunder to 111 points or less in all three games.
The Thunder have scored at least 110 points in each of their three home games in this series, and the Pacers have only scored 110 points in a game twice in this series (once at home, and once with the game one buzzer beater). During this series, the Thunder have had a pronounced advantage at home versus the Pacers, losing game one at the buzzer after leading for almost the entire game, and then winning games two and five.
Throughout NBA history, home teams win game seven nearly three fourths of the time. So, as you said, it is not logically inconsistent for me to admit that I underestimated the Pacers while also stating that I expect the Thunder to win game seven at home.
My position now is that the Thunder are a better team than the Pacers, but they are not better by quite the margin that I thought before the series.
same Anon:
I too have underestimated Indy too many times this postseason already; so now fool me once shame on you, etc. I realize I don't get it and so I'm not picking against them any more ... I wouldn't be at all surprised by a very close G7 ... (if the refs don't intervene for OKC) a pick-em game
If the Pacers were to win, do you consider them an example of a team that wins without having a true superstar, or do you consider Tyrese Haliburton a superstar?
I picked OKC winning the series, but didn't think the Pacers would put up this kind of a fight.
Either way, the outcome of game seven will be historically great. If the Thunder win they will have completed one of the greatest single seasons in professional basketball history and if the Pacers win they will have completed arguably the greatest upset in professional basketball history. Anything less than a Finals appearance would have been devastating for the Thunder while the Pacers weren’t supposed to advance past the second round. I was looking to see if there has been an NBA Finals matchup where there was at least an 18 game discrepancy between the regular season records of both teams and you have to go all the way back to the 1981 NBA Finals that featured the 62-20 Celtics and the 40-42 Rockets. I also looked at the 1999 Finals to see if there was an equivalent of an 18 game discrepancy but the winning percentage of the 1999 Knicks was slightly higher compared to the 1999 Spurs than the percentage of the Pacers to the Thunder is. It would be in the best interest of the Thunder to not become the newest version of the 73-9 Warriors.
Aw, Haliburton wasn't even an AS this year. Siakim has been the Pacers best player overall throughout the entire season/playoffs. Haliburton is clearly not a superstar and not really close unless you think there's 20-30 superstars in the league. Haliburton's averaging 15,5,7 in the Finals, which isn't even playing at an AS level. The difference between him and SGA is astronomical, and even huge between him and Williams. The Pacers have 8 guys averaging double figures in the Finals. What we're seeing or potentially seeing is something extremely rare in the NBA: a true team effort situation. No single players on the Pacers is playing at a level higher than very low AS level. But even with all of this happening, OKC is playing very subpar for their standards. If OKC was playing like they should, this series would've went 5 at most. While they had an amazing regular season, their postseason is far from it. The strongest team they've faced in the playoffs only won 50 games. 3 of their 4 main competitors lost before the CFs, and none made the Finals.
I think you jinxed it. The Pacers will win it and it might be one of those years, where the clearly best player (SGA) of the finals is on the loosing team. It might be even preferable for the future development of SGA. The all time great‘s more often then not had / needed challenging times to reach there full potential. However both teams have earned it.
Probably better for basketball moving forward if Indy wins. OKC built their team by tanking (arguably twice, given how much of their current team came indirectly from trading the assets they got the first time they tanked), exploiting dumb teams in trades, and SGA's flop-happy style. The second one is fair enough but I'd hate to see the rest of the league conclude they need to imitate the other two... but you know they're gonna.
That's not to say SGA is Harden or Young, he's a much more well-rounded player overall and not quite as flop-reliant as they are, but if they're 100/100 on the flop scale he's probably still an 85 and I just hate to see that rewarded, even if the rest of his game is worthy of praise.
Post a Comment
<< Home