NBA Finals: OKC v Indiana | Page 8 | The Boneyard

NBA Finals: OKC v Indiana

Indiana pushed the pace (no pun intended) all night offensively and defensively. 8 turnovers from SGA and -40 from JDub..ouch! No killer instinct from OKC tonight. They clearly played knowing they have the “luxury” of a game 7 at their place. Definitely a risky strategy against a team who can get you out of sorts quickly with their front court physicality, backcourt matchup problems (TJ, Nembhart) , and now has confidence that Hali can give them something. Should be a fun game 7!
 
aceboon said:
You gotta wear full body armor to defend SGA, guys probably gotta get an ice bath after dealing with shoulder/elbow bumps and off-hand push-offs all night
Expand ...
I thought this guy was one of my favotie players in the league because he's all about the midrange and just a pure scorer. I clearly didn't watch enough regular season or his whole career. Has he been doing this all along and getting away with it?

I said the series was done when Indy fell apart in game 4 at home. I stand by that and it bums me out. The way SGA plays the game spoils so much of it for me. It's a different way/style but this is James Harden all over again. The guy is kicking butt but he's maniuputed the rules/refs and they've let him get away with it.
 
TroyHall98 said:
Indiana pushed the pace (no pun intended) all night offensively and defensively. 8 turnovers from SGA and -40 from JDub..ouch! No killer instinct from OKC tonight. They clearly played knowing they have the “luxury” of a game 7 at their place. Definitely a risky strategy against a team who can get you out of sorts quickly with their front court physicality, backcourt matchup problems (TJ, Nembhart) , and now has confidence that Hali can give them something. Should be a fun game 7!
Expand ...
I gave up my fandom for any specific teams in the NBA years ago. I reserve my insanity for Uconn only. It allows me to fall in love with whatever good, fun basketball I'm seeing. Recently its been the Celtics, Knicks, Pacers, OKC, Denver and the Spurs. This years playoffs and these two teams in the finals have been incredible. Hopefully they usher in a new era of NBA basketball of team first, high energy, all out basketball. Like the concept in Soccer, Total Football, - Total Basketball.
 
Pressure is on Daigneault. OKC is really good and Indiana is just ok and has injuries. This would be a really bad loss for him.

What are the biggest upsets in NBA finals history? Detroit 2004 was a legitimate upset although the teams were close in the regular season. I don’t count the 2006 Heat or Cavaliers as significant upsets because both teams were very good and had generational superstars. Mavericks win was kind of an upset, although much of that turned out to be sandbagging by Carlisle, Dirk and Kidd in interviews.

OKC won 18 more games than Indiana, and it wasn’t like Indiana was missing a star for extended stretches or didn’t care about the regular season like Shaq or Hakeem used to do in their prime. Indiana needed every win it got. Its 50-32 regular season record is reflective of the above average, but nothing more, team that Indiana is. Indiana is only in the finals because Cleveland and Boston were gutted by injuries and Milwaukee has a lousy coach and was gutted by injuries.

There is no close comparable in NBA history for the level of upset this would be if Indiana wins.
 
Mr. French said:
I can't get with this take. He maybe "pushes off" to score 2-3x game without it being called, if we're being honest. A guy who averages over 30 a game and is as smooth as SGA and was the clear MVP being reduced to "this guy cheats the game and I can't watch it" is super weird. It's like Stephen A. multiplied his hot takeability by 1000.

It's not that serious - he scores like some of the best 2 guards of all time - he uses his body to score in a way that isn't getting called ... much like Jordan, Wade, Kobe, yes Harden (who despite the annoyance, is good at drawing fouls) and dozens of other guys in the history of the sport.

Also, it's funny to start a post saying "I thought this guy was one of my favorite players, but that's beacuse I barely watch him play."

Not really trying to go at you, superjohn, but this take is a strange one.
Expand ...
You're not wrong. But I really get annoyed when the NBA refs decide what is or isn't a foul or a travel is too often based on the name on the back of the jersey. It's a giant popularity contest. Yes, Jordan committed thousands of uncalled offensive fouls, many of which were called defensive fouls. Harden runs people over, so does Giannis. LeBron travels like crazy. At the moment, SGA is in that rare star category that gets the calls, calls even other stars like Halliburton don't get.

If the NBA really wants to fix the ratings, it has to stop all the favoritism. Indiana has pushed this to 7 despite the league working against them.
 
.-.
nelsonmuntz said:
Pressure is on Daigneault. OKC is really good and Indiana is just ok and has injuries. This would be a really bad loss for him.

What are the biggest upsets in NBA finals history? Detroit 2004 was a legitimate upset although the teams were close in the regular season. I don’t count the 2006 Heat or Cavaliers as significant upsets because both teams were very good and had generational superstars. Mavericks win was kind of an upset, although much of that turned out to be sandbagging by Carlisle, Dirk and Kidd in interviews.

OKC won 18 more games than Indiana, and it wasn’t like Indiana was missing a star for extended stretches or didn’t care about the regular season like Shaq or Hakeem used to do in their prime. Indiana needed every win it got. Its 50-32 regular season record is reflective of the above average, but nothing more, team that Indiana is. Indiana is only in the finals because Cleveland and Boston were gutted by injuries and Milwaukee has a lousy coach and was gutted by injuries.

There is no close comparable in NBA history for the level of upset this would be if Indiana wins.
Expand ...
No, Indiana is not just “ok”.
 
Mr. French said:
HALIIIIIIII

This Pacers team is awesome. I knew Haliburton was a great pure PG, but man this whole team has just gelled and continued to go go go at their opponents. I love it
Expand ...
They may also have the best coach in the NBA. I put a lot of faith in that guy to make really good reads and adjustments.
 
SGA takes are so weird. He gets fouled all the time because no one can stop him. He does make contact on offense but the idea he pushes off on every play is absurd. The Harden stuff was about jumping into defenders on threes, something they had to rewrite the rulebook to stop. We really think the refs are in the tank for a guy from OKC?
 
.-.
gtcam said:
Nelson - look at what they have done in the 2nd half of the season,
Saying the Pacers are only OK is a head scratcher
Expand ...

A team is what its record says it is. There is no way that the Pacers win the East if Cavaliers, Celtics and Bucks stay healthy and fresh. They barely got by an average Knicks team. The Pacers got some breaks in this playoff.

Breaks happen in tournaments. This is a UConn board, so we know that better than anyone. Tyus Edny takes one step left or right in his coast to coast drive against Missouri in 1995, or Donyell hits either free throw against Florida in 1994, and Calhoun wins his first title one or both of those years. Brimah doesn’t make a 3 point play against St. Joe’s in 2014, or the AZ 3 attempt in the 2011 Regional Final is 2 inches more on target, or Coach K manages his front court better against us in 2004, and any or all of those championships go away.

The 2004 Pistons are the closest comparable, but that team was really strong in the regular season. Siakam is the only likely Hall of Famer on this team, and he is not a lock. There are no generational superstars like other upset teams have had, like the 1995 Rockets.
 
nelsonmuntz said:
Pressure is on Daigneault. OKC is really good and Indiana is just ok and has injuries. This would be a really bad loss for him.

What are the biggest upsets in NBA finals history? Detroit 2004 was a legitimate upset although the teams were close in the regular season. I don’t count the 2006 Heat or Cavaliers as significant upsets because both teams were very good and had generational superstars. Mavericks win was kind of an upset, although much of that turned out to be sandbagging by Carlisle, Dirk and Kidd in interviews.

OKC won 18 more games than Indiana, and it wasn’t like Indiana was missing a star for extended stretches or didn’t care about the regular season like Shaq or Hakeem used to do in their prime. Indiana needed every win it got. Its 50-32 regular season record is reflective of the above average, but nothing more, team that Indiana is. Indiana is only in the finals because Cleveland and Boston were gutted by injuries and Milwaukee has a lousy coach and was gutted by injuries.

There is no close comparable in NBA history for the level of upset this would be if Indiana wins.
Expand ...

I think you’re selling Indiana a bit short with your “ok” evaluation. They may have been during the regular season but they’re playing better than ok now. Nice mix of talent. They’re not one of the great finals teams but ok isn’t fair.
 
nelsonmuntz said:
A team is what its record says it is. There is no way that the Pacers win the East if Cavaliers, Celtics and Bucks stay healthy and fresh. They barely got by an average Knicks team. The Pacers got some breaks in this playoff.

Breaks happen in tournaments. This is a UConn board, so we know that better than anyone. Tyus Edny takes one step left or right in his coast to coast drive against Missouri in 1995, or Donyell hits either free throw against Florida in 1994, and Calhoun wins his first title one or both of those years. Brimah doesn’t make a 3 point play against St. Joe’s in 2014, or the AZ 3 attempt in the 2011 Regional Final is 2 inches more on target, or Coach K manages his front court better against us in 2004, and any or all of those championships go away.

The 2004 Pistons are the closest comparable, but that team was really strong in the regular season. Siakam is the only likely Hall of Famer on this team, and he is not a lock. There are no generational superstars like other upset teams have had, like the 1995 Rockets.
Expand ...
They developed later in the year and even during the playoffs but they are very very good. Their defense went from average to excellent in the finals and they are so hard to guard.
 
nelsonmuntz said:
A team is what its record says it is. There is no way that the Pacers win the East if Cavaliers, Celtics and Bucks stay healthy and fresh. They barely got by an average Knicks team. The Pacers got some breaks in this playoff.

Breaks happen in tournaments. This is a UConn board, so we know that better than anyone. Tyus Edny takes one step left or right in his coast to coast drive against Missouri in 1995, or Donyell hits either free throw against Florida in 1994, and Calhoun wins his first title one or both of those years. Brimah doesn’t make a 3 point play against St. Joe’s in 2014, or the AZ 3 attempt in the 2011 Regional Final is 2 inches more on target, or Coach K manages his front court better against us in 2004, and any or all of those championships go away.

The 2004 Pistons are the closest comparable, but that team was really strong in the regular season. Siakam is the only likely Hall of Famer on this team, and he is not a lock. There are no generational superstars like other upset teams have had, like the 1995 Rockets.
Expand ...
You keep talking about the Bucks, a team with one great player and an entire roster of below-average talent. That team was going nowhere.
The Celtics had some injuries, but that's not why they lost. Cleveland was hurt, too, but the Pacers ran them out of that series.
I know you've planted your flag on "the Pacers are just ok" and will stick with it no matter what, but we have many months of basketball that prove otherwise.
 
HuskyHawk said:
If the NBA really wants to fix the ratings, it has to stop all the favoritism. Indiana has pushed this to 7 despite the league working against them.
Expand ...
People on this board have said that this Finals match-up would have never happened under David Stern's watch. Pretty much everyone nodded. How do you think he would have made that happen? Or better, how did he influence the outcomes in the past? And what's wrong with the ratings? Has it affected the purchase price of franchises? The amount the NBA gets from the massive new TV rights deal?
 
mauconnfan said:
I think you’re selling Indiana a bit short with your “ok” evaluation. They may have been during the regular season but they’re playing better than ok now. Nice mix of talent. They’re not one of the great finals teams but ok isn’t fair.
Expand ...
I'm not sure I buy it either. Teams do have peaks and valleys. I thought they looked great in last seasons NBA Cup. Then they fell off my radar. But the last few months they've been totally legit. That means more than the dog days of a long season, imo.
 
.-.
Inyatkin said:
You keep talking about the Bucks, a team with one great player and an entire roster of below-average talent. That team was going nowhere.
The Celtics had some injuries, but that's not why they lost. Cleveland was hurt, too, but the Pacers ran them out of that series.
I know you've planted your flag on "the Pacers are just ok" and will stick with it no matter what, but we have many months of basketball that prove otherwise.
Expand ...

If the Pacers were so obviously good, someone on this board must have predicted them to make and be a game from winning the NBA finals in October. Or January. Or March. Anyone have a link to such a prediction?

This board could hold a clinic in after-the-fact “I told you so” when no one told anyone so.

If the 50 win Pacers beat a 68 win team in the NBA Finals, they will be one of the, if not the most, improbable NBA champions in 45+ years. That is not a controversial statement.
 
Drame said:
I gave up my fandom for any specific teams in the NBA years ago. I reserve my insanity for Uconn only. It allows me to fall in love with whatever good, fun basketball I'm seeing. Recently its been the Celtics, Knicks, Pacers, OKC, Denver and the Spurs. This years playoffs and these two teams in the finals have been incredible. Hopefully they usher in a new era of NBA basketball of team first, high energy, all out basketball. Like the concept in Soccer, Total Football, - Total Basketball.
Expand ...
That is how I am, too. I don't really have a favorite NBA team. I guess if I had to choose it would be the NY Knicks, Brooklyn Nets, and Boston Celtics. The Knicks and Nets because I was born in Brooklyn and my roots and family origins are from NYC and the Celtics because I live here in Boston. Also, the Knicks being a consistent perennial playoff team and possible threat to win it all is great for basketball and the NBA. MSG being loud and raucous makes for great entertainment.

My fandom and insanity is reserved for UConn.
 
nelsonmuntz said:
If the Pacers were so obviously good, someone on this board must have predicted them to make and be a game from winning the NBA finals in October. Or January. Or March. Anyone have a link to such a prediction?

This board could hold a clinic in after-the-fact “I told you so” when no one told anyone so.

If the 50 win Pacers beat a 68 win team in the NBA Finals, they will be one of the, if not the most, improbable NBA champions in 45+ years. That is not a controversial statement.
Expand ...
This is genuinely such a stupid argument. “If they were so good someone would have predicted this”. That has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that they are, CURRENTLY, very good. Yes it would be a huge upset, that doesn’t lead into your silly opinion that they are “just okay”.

Stop dying on stupid hills.
 
nelsonmuntz said:
Pressure is on Daigneault. OKC is really good and Indiana is just ok and has injuries. This would be a really bad loss for him.

What are the biggest upsets in NBA finals history? Detroit 2004 was a legitimate upset although the teams were close in the regular season. I don’t count the 2006 Heat or Cavaliers as significant upsets because both teams were very good and had generational superstars. Mavericks win was kind of an upset, although much of that turned out to be sandbagging by Carlisle, Dirk and Kidd in interviews.

OKC won 18 more games than Indiana, and it wasn’t like Indiana was missing a star for extended stretches or didn’t care about the regular season like Shaq or Hakeem used to do in their prime. Indiana needed every win it got. Its 50-32 regular season record is reflective of the above average, but nothing more, team that Indiana is. Indiana is only in the finals because Cleveland and Boston were gutted by injuries and Milwaukee has a lousy coach and was gutted by injuries.

There is no close comparable in NBA history for the level of upset this would be if Indiana wins.
Expand ...
to be fair, Nelson, even though Haliburton played 73 out of 82 regular season games, he was injured in the first few months of the season with hamstring and leg issues and it was affecting his play. The Pacers started the season poorly, but since January 1st, 2025, the Pacers and Thunder have the best regular season record in the NBA.

But, yes, you are correct in that if the Pacers win game 7, this would be considered to be among the greater upsets in sports history. Where it would rank among them, I don't know.
 
Last edited:
Inyatkin said:
SGA takes are so weird. He gets fouled all the time because no one can stop him. He does make contact on offense but the idea he pushes off on every play is absurd. The Harden stuff was about jumping into defenders on threes, something they had to rewrite the rulebook to stop. We really think the refs are in the tank for a guy from OKC?
Expand ...
The Harden stuff was also about hooking defenders arms and then going up for a shot and flailing to get the calls and go to the FT line. Harden is a very good player with great skills, but I did not always find him to be an entertaining watch.
 
.-.
nelsonmuntz said:
CardiacAndre: I agree this would be a huge upset.
Also CardiacAndre: You are stupid for saying this would be a huge upset.

Posters like you have turned "dying on a hill" into a cliche with your gross misuse and overuse of the phrase.
Expand ...
Waylon flops even more than Gilgeous-Alexander.
 
nelsonmuntz said:
CardiacAndre: I agree this would be a huge upset.
Also CardiacAndre: You are stupid for saying this would be a huge upset.

Posters like you have turned "dying on a hill" into a cliche with your gross misuse and overuse of the phrase.
Expand ...
Nobody is disagreeing that it would be a huge upset, the disagreement is with you acting like the Pacers are just some ok team that is lucky to be there. They literally have the 2nd best record in the league after January 1st, they've been a very good team for awhile now after a rough start.
 
aceboon said:
Nobody is disagreeing that it would be a huge upset, the disagreement is with you acting like the Pacers are just some ok team that is lucky to be there. They literally have the 2nd best record in the league after January 1st, they've been a very good team for awhile now after a rough start.
Expand ...
Nobody tries to defend and hold on forever to a bad take like nelsonmuntz. Not even worth arguing with him.
 
Mr. French said:
Agreed. Harden manipulating calls is still ok, but was far more obnoxious and boring than anything SGA does. He’s just really crafty. I am not sure why that gets HIM vitriol.
Expand ...
SGA does some foul baiting nonsense that’s frustrating to watch but a) it’s nowhere near as bad as prime Harden, and b) the criticism is largely misplaced at him rather than NBA officials continuing to give him those calls.

If the refs simply stopped making those calls, the players would adjust within weeks.
 
aceboon said:
Nobody is disagreeing that it would be a huge upset, the disagreement is with you acting like the Pacers are just some ok team that is lucky to be there. They literally have the 2nd best record in the league after January 1st, they've been a very good team for awhile now after a rough start.
Expand ...

OMG, you are RIGHT!!!! And they are 50-0 if you look at all the dates where they won!!!

Why pick Jan 1? Because Indiana lost 3 of 4 right before that against OKC, Boston x2, Milwaukee (i.e. "good teams")

Have you looked at the late run where they went 7-1?

Sacramento
Charlotte
Utah
Denver (no Murray)
Washington
Cleveland (no Garland, starters on reduced minutes)
Loss to Orlando
Cleveland (no Garland, starters barely played)

Between Jan 1 and March 29, Pacers went 27-13, which is pretty good, with a whole 11 wins over teams with winning records. In other words, the Pacers played the easy part of their schedule and did fairly well, like an above average team.
 
I
UConn990411 said:
SGA does some foul baiting nonsense that’s frustrating to watch but a) it’s nowhere near as bad as prime Harden, and b) the criticism is largely misplaced at him rather than NBA officials continuing to give him those calls.

If the refs simply stopped making those calls, the players would adjust within weeks.
Expand ...
I’ve always said this. Fix the way the refs call it, every great player, literally ever, has taken advantage of loopholes or bad rules. Blaming the player for putting his team in better positions to win is pretty hilarious.
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,154
Messages
4,555,007
Members
10,438
Latest member
UConnheart


Top Bottom