The NBA Finals are tied 1-1, and I don’t feel like we’ve learned much about these two teams.
OKC has dominated most of this series, even most of game 1. Indiana only led that game for .3 seconds, which is the amount of time remaining after Tyrese Haliburton hit ANOTHER dagger to shock the Thunder.
Besides that, OKC controls the game every step of the way. Indiana is having trouble getting their offense going and getting into transition.
OKC is a team of defensive superstars creating havoc for Indiana. If Haliburton isn’t going, they will struggle offensively, and outside of the big shot, he’s had a rough go of it.
Meanwhile, SGA is having no issues at all.
He is doing what he usually does, and in game 2, the bench supported him. Caruso and Wallace both had huge games, and defensively,y they never let Indiana find a rhythm or get out into transition.
Returning to Indiana, tied at 1, we haven’t learned much. We knew OKC could dominate this series, and they have. But we also knew Indiana was hard to put out, and they showed their championship-level resiliency by staying the course in game 1.
What will game 3 bring? Will the Indiana home crowd boosts the supporting cast,t allowing the Pacers to have their first good offensive game of the series? OKC is a different team on the road than at home.
Or did Indiana peak in game 1? Did OKC lose on a fluke at home (where they usually dominate), and it ends up just being a blip in their championship journey?
The first two games of the NBA Finals didn’t teach us much. Now, Indiana has a home court advantage but is clearly the less talented team. Will their elite effort make a difference at home, or is OKC just too damn good?
Wednesday night can’t get here soon enough.