June 7, 2025 • 44 mins
Mort and Dan discuss Game 1 of the NBA Finals.
Odds via FanDuel Sportsbook
https://www.fanduel.com/research/nba
Odds via FanDuel Sportsbook
https://www.fanduel.com/research/nba
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:01):
What is up, Fellowsiko's I am Dan Favallei, your host
of Destiny, kind of like the Indiana Pacers might be
the team of Destiny. I am joined by the only
fans content creator of Destiny, Mort Jensen, who is also
famous for his work at the NBA podcast, Yahoo Sports
as well as Forbes. We are here to talk about
(00:22):
You've listened to the game recaps.
Speaker 2 (00:23):
You've done that by now We're here to talk big
picture stuff.
Speaker 1 (00:26):
We have one overarching question we're going to talk with
about this series, thunder Pacers, that Mort and I are
going to get into each of our biggest single takeaways
from game one and then either our biggest question or
suggested adjustments moving forward into game two and beyond. But
before we belly fop in, Mort, how the heck are you?
Speaker 3 (00:44):
You know what?
Speaker 4 (00:45):
I was doing pretty well? And then I realized moments
ago that the last time you and I recorded, we
recorded two episodes, not one. So you sent me over
two files. And for some reason, because I am very
sleep deprived and because it's very late in the season,
I was like, did I record once or twice with Dan?
Speaker 3 (01:07):
Oh?
Speaker 4 (01:07):
I'm sure it was just one, and so I only
uploaded one of the two and the one I didn't
upload was the freaking NBA Finals preview. That's the one
I forgot about to upload. So Dan, I'm doing you well,
but I'm also in the idiow.
Speaker 1 (01:22):
Yeah you might, or you're trying to get a job
at ESPN. You you went right to the offseason rumor
stuff and just skipped skipped right over the basketball.
Speaker 4 (01:30):
It's all about Tom Tippondaw apparently. God So no doing well.
I'm just I'm tired, sir, And like I will say this,
I love what we've seen from Game one. I want
this to go as far as we can. But that
light at the end of the tunnel that says offseason,
it's starting to look big, and man, here I'm coming.
Speaker 1 (01:53):
I would I love the finals because of the breaks
we get in between games. And I know at the
end of this, like my life during the draft and
free agency slash trade season is just like it's a
dead What we do is entirely a dead sprint. Like
I just want to make that clear. It takes a
lot of time, very little sleep, and we're not doing
anything noble, So don't feel bad for us. We're covering
(02:14):
a fucking game, but people care about this game a ton.
You have to work hard, but that around the trade
deadline and then immediately after the NBA Finals are like
just the two most and maybe like when the season
first kicks off are just like the most trenetic times
in my life. And so I kind of bask in
the finals while also going through the existential dread of
(02:34):
shifting into full on offseason mode.
Speaker 4 (02:36):
Yeah. Yeah, And the thing is our job. They don't
really end by the end of the finals, because then
we have to do draft stuff, then we have to
do free agency. And I've honestly, I've stayed out of
summer league coverage, and that's been intentional for the most part,
because I just can't like there's a limit, there's a
limits to how many months out of the year I
can just sort of get myself up to that level.
Speaker 3 (03:00):
Summer league, you're on your own.
Speaker 1 (03:02):
I try to take it easy for a couple of
weeks in August, but then after that it's like right
back into like we're trying to do our team by team,
look at it's here, and then like as soon as
September rolls around, like even if you were just to
really go by the NBA calendar, it's August and like
a little bit of July is like one.
Speaker 2 (03:17):
September rolls around.
Speaker 1 (03:18):
It's like, oh, like we're gonna start talking about training
camp soon, and I'm going into all the previews and
then oh, is there going to be a trade like
three seconds before training camp opens that no one saw coming.
Speaker 4 (03:27):
So I'll actually tell you something. I'll tell you something
that because I felt the same way. But I've broken
the pattern this year. We've actually booked a trip to
Malta in September and that was that was actually part
because I want to break that pattern. I want to
use September as a month off as well. I really do.
Speaker 1 (03:50):
Yeah, you're so yeah, get that Yannis to the Knicks
trade done before September for my sake for sure. What
we're saying here, let's dive in here. So I want
to start with just this question that I think it's been.
It's we've referenced it a couple times throughout our playoff coverage,
you and I, Grant and I as well, and people
(04:11):
started to talk about but I really kind of wanted
to dig in to where after Game one of the Finals,
we saw the thunder go eleven players deep and the
Pacers go ten players deep. And it wasn't I think
Kendrick Williams played like or wasn't an aging like They
played these small spurts, but there were on both sides
at least seven players who logged fifteen or more minutes.
Speaker 2 (04:31):
And it used to be the thought process was and
still is.
Speaker 1 (04:36):
I'm saying used to that you need to shorten your
rotations during the playoffs to limit the amount of weaknesses.
And then it's just what you want to rely on
your best players. I am wondering, So I'm gonna frame
the question like this or what we're seeing is what
we're seeing from Indiana in Oklahoma City the start of
kind of that next trend. Remember when the Warriors had
Draymond Green at the five, it was a small ball
(04:57):
or like going with five out? Or is this just
a function of these two teams play fast. Their style
is so demanding and so you don't necessarily want anyone
playing a crap ton of minutes, So you had to
build your team this way. And the final thing before
I throw it to you, Shake Gibs Alexander played I
think it was like thirty nine minutes and thirty four
seconds in game one. That's like a lot of minutes
(05:17):
on its face. But for us to exit game one
that was determined by one point and say that no
one logged forty minutes in that game, I'm not even
sure if Tom Thabodau is still alive.
Speaker 2 (05:28):
Here's that little factoid.
Speaker 4 (05:31):
So here's the thing I don't. I don't think it's
just you know, for teams that run a lot. I
think it's I think the NBA has finally cut up
to the fact that defense is so more labor intensive
now than it.
Speaker 3 (05:44):
Used to be.
Speaker 4 (05:44):
And look, this is it's also why the biggest pet
peeve for my oh what.
Speaker 1 (05:51):
It's just funny that you're saying that when the discourse
is is that no one plays defense.
Speaker 3 (05:55):
That's see, that's the thing.
Speaker 4 (05:56):
That's what I wanted to attack here because I hate
when people say that. It's bold shit, Like people look
back and say, oh, they really played defense in the eighties.
Now they play defense from twenty feet in. Now you
start your defense from forty to forty five feet out.
The I mean, the labor intensity of defense has just
gone up like sky high, and it seems like the
(06:17):
NBA seems are finally embracing you know, let's dial it
down in terms of giving our guys thirty five, forty six,
forty seven minutes per game. You know, Kenny Atkinson is
a guy who I think is a brilliant example of
embracing that culture as well in Cleveland and having dept
resolves that issue a great deal. Now, I will say
(06:38):
to answer the question, is depth the next NPA trend?
Good debt is the next NBA trend? Because I mean,
you can are we really sure the Charlotte Hornets are like,
is there their depth good enough to like make anything noteworthy?
Probably not.
Speaker 1 (06:54):
Yeah, I've grown to call it functional depth to where
it's something that will translate into the playoffs. Is kind
of the lens that I'm looking at this question three exactly.
Speaker 4 (07:02):
And yeah, to answer that question, yeah, it's absolutely a
new trend. It's kind of weird when we think back
on it. Why it's never really been a trend if
you catch my drift, because it always kind of made
sense to have more guys come off the bench and
make plays, Like it's common logic if you kind of
squeeze everything together and you play five or six guys
(07:24):
while not five, but like six or seven guys at
the most, they are going to get absolutely knackered at
the end and you need someone to come in and
absorb minutes. And we've often thought about, you know, finals
and even championship winning team where we've looked at certain
guys and gone, why didn't that guy play? And everyone's
(07:45):
kind of said, oh, well, they shortened their rotation, and
we kind of just embraced that and like bought that
on the surface of it and said, okay, cool, as
if that was just a valid argument. So I love
that we're seeing this. It just it makes sense again
to me that we kind of look at this and go, oh,
more players are a good thing.
Speaker 3 (08:05):
Yeah. Absolutely.
Speaker 1 (08:07):
I have three quick points I want to make on it.
Yes that I think just dovetail nice with what you said,
because I totally agree. One of the points is I
think that something like an inflection point with the Jason
Tatum injury and just other injuries we've seen that you're
never gonna necessarily know the root cause of these things.
But Jason Tatum has been one of the most durable
and available players in the league since he entered it.
(08:29):
And you see something like that, you see just what
feels like these influx of soft tissue injuries, and I
think it's gonna become more of a priority of even
if you want to look at it through the regular
season lens. It's not just having bodies on the roster
you could throw out there, but that can be effective
innings zeters, some of which will translate into the postseason.
The second point that I think is a big deal.
(08:51):
I'm also wondering if the way that the collective bargaining
agreement in the era of aprons is now structured where
you know that you're going to have that the best
way to build a team is, well, we can have
like two really top heavy salary guys, but it now
increases the necessity for whether you have a bunch of
top end salary guys or not, of we need to
(09:11):
try and find these flyers or guys that could contribute.
Speaker 2 (09:14):
And maybe we're gonna give out more role player contracts.
Speaker 1 (09:16):
And I think that could be maybe an unintended consequence
that's actually not so bad relative to what we've seen
where I think a lot of this stuff, the unintended
consequences have been not so great. And I think the
other thing here why I think it's gonna become a trend.
Speaker 2 (09:30):
And this is something.
Speaker 1 (09:31):
That I think is really cool is that once you
get to the playoffs, if you just have more buttons
to push, more styles that you're able to adapt to
and play within. One, it makes for a more entertaining
product to me, and two, it just increases your chances
of winning. And I think what we're seeing with the
Pacers and the Thunder, to bring it back to them,
(09:53):
are two teams that have been able to adapt at
every single turn. And we thought it from right out
of the gate. And we'll eventually talk about whether some
these were the right calls, but it's oh, like this
might be a Benanic maathroom series now and Mark.
Speaker 2 (10:04):
Dagnolt is going to change.
Speaker 1 (10:05):
He changed up his starting lineup for Game one, and
that's you try stuff, maybe it doesn't work, but the
other team is able to counter and your countering back.
And I think depth is an important part of that
because if you get too pigeonholed into one way of playing,
and we saw that with just because they were the
most recent one of the most recent teams eliminated, like
Minnesota was pretty like they had really like meaty depth,
(10:26):
like top heavy like going seven or eight reliable guys deep.
The Knicks didn't go that deep, and like everyone was
calling for these changes, but there was really a limited
number of changes they could make. If you think that
more of Delawn Wright or Landry Shamitt was going to
be the difference between them winning the title and not
winning the title, I would respectfully disagree, and so I'm
very interested to see one. I guess maybe we could
(10:48):
see front offices and ownership uses as an excuse not
to pay really good players as much or stars as much,
where it's like, no, we got to spread out the
wealth across the rest of the roster to make it
more manageable, especially when it comes to trades for them.
Speaker 2 (11:01):
But I think overall, what.
Speaker 1 (11:02):
We're kind of seeing is and I feel like we've
seen elements with other teams. You mentioned Kenny Atkinson, what
Cleveland did this year. Yeah, they ended up injured anyway,
so you can't sit here and say, oh, that's the
best way to protect your players. But even Houston and
like they were pretty I think what was it Fred
van Fleet played forty minutes a game in that first
round series, Like they had eight guys that were around
twenty minutes per game, and when you watched them and
(11:24):
you could argue this is also a bug, not just
a feature. There wasn't ever one player you thought they.
Speaker 2 (11:30):
Couldn't live without. And I don't think that's the future.
I think that's more of a bug.
Speaker 1 (11:34):
That's why Fred VanVleet has to play so much, because
their offense was so dependent on him. But I think
we've started to see the breadcrumbs laid elsewhere of that.
These teams are you know, okay, see they didn't stumble
into this. They're like a very special case study. But
like the Pacers, meticulously built and preserved this team. And
I think that, you know, the NBA is still a
(11:55):
copycat league. For all the changes we've seen, you know,
maybe that miming doesn't last as long because they're everything
feels like it's changing so fast. But I really think
we're gonna see kind of a throwback. We're not a
throwback in emphasis, just on depth in general, and finally
would just be I think we might even see it
when we're talking about these trades in the offseason. You know,
if the Knicks interested in Kevin Durant, unless you're gonna
(12:17):
be able to get him for Karl Anthony Towns plus
a minimum contract. You gotta think we were shallow this year.
Speaker 2 (12:23):
We're gonna give.
Speaker 1 (12:24):
Up, like like Ognanobi and Mitchell Robbinson. We're just gonna
make ourselves even shallower to get a thirty seven year old.
I think that might also be why you see teams
like the Nuggets aren't gonna be as aggressive and turning
multiple contracts into one even if those contracts aren't unplayable.
Speaker 3 (12:38):
Good bad.
Speaker 1 (12:38):
I don't know, but I do think depth overall is
becoming more in vogue, and I think that we're gonna
see more teams lean into it. And it's to your point,
it's not just names on the roster that you've heard of,
its depth, playable bodies that teams want to translate into
the postseason.
Speaker 4 (12:55):
I agree with everything you just said, and I want
to add to it by saying to fans listening in, yes,
like we are probably not gonna see a lot of
these consolidation traits when unless it's a star. When it's
a star, I think we can throw all of that
out of the window, because then you trade multiple players
to get like a major difference maker in there, and
(13:17):
you figure something out later, but you're absolutely right. You're
no longer going, oh, let's get rid of two top
ten players on our team to get a top seven
guy in which we've seen before. Like no, I definitely
think that is something that's even more of a discussion
now before you.
Speaker 3 (13:36):
Pull the trigger.
Speaker 4 (13:38):
And it's certainly a more interesting way to build build
out a roster to me as well, does this mean
the Bulls are actually on?
Speaker 3 (13:47):
Were they? Were? They right? We just want eight, eight
to ten good players.
Speaker 2 (13:54):
But you still need, as I think the.
Speaker 3 (13:56):
Pacer kidding, right, Dan, you need great.
Speaker 1 (14:00):
Players, and the Bulls have two great players in Nikolovuvich
and modist bouzelis like they've decided.
Speaker 2 (14:06):
Yeah, so the.
Speaker 1 (14:08):
Bulls are like the Bulls are in that horn like
I feel like they aspire to be the good version
of the Hornets from like ten or so years ago
to whereas like the Kemba Walker Al Jefferson team that
was pretty deep, but like you knew it wasn't really
gonna go anywhere, And I think that's what.
Speaker 2 (14:23):
The Bulls aspired to me. Yeah, poor Bulls fans like
mort who is genuine.
Speaker 3 (14:27):
No no, no, no, no, I'm god.
Speaker 4 (14:29):
I just I thought That was funny though, because I
actually saw some people like make that connection.
Speaker 3 (14:35):
I was just like, you're.
Speaker 4 (14:35):
Kind of forgetting the most important thing, Like you still
need the MVP caliber players, just still need the All
NBA ors and uh Josh Kinner thined it.
Speaker 2 (14:47):
Portland's a perfect example.
Speaker 1 (14:48):
We caught a lot of shit last summer because we
said they were secretly stacked, and we noted not with
like great players that are gonna get them to the playoffs,
but this team is deep and like they can find
an identity or do some damage. Behold, they did exactly that,
like their mid season turnaround, having a top five defense
for basically.
Speaker 3 (15:04):
Half the year.
Speaker 1 (15:05):
But you still need I would argue, you need like
not that I don't want to call the Pacers the
bare minimum, but like you need even the thunder. I
guess you could say, like, because j dub and Chet
Holmgren seemed to Wax and Wayne, you need one transcending
guy that could be second team All NBA at minimum
in any given year, but preferably.
Speaker 2 (15:23):
You need two of those guys.
Speaker 3 (15:24):
Yeah, yep.
Speaker 1 (15:26):
Now I've randomized the order in which who's gonna go
first with their takeaway? So let's see who's coming up first.
I believe this is you more. Yeah, what are you
thinking about the most coming out of game one?
Speaker 4 (15:36):
I mean, look, Indiana is known for taking care of
the basketball.
Speaker 3 (15:40):
We know this. They even lowered their turnover rate in
the playoffs.
Speaker 4 (15:45):
They still yeah, right, let's let's let's kind of update
that after game one. But it was such an interesting
point that you actually raised in the episode we recorded.
Speaker 3 (15:58):
That you won't find in my well finding wars. Damn
that was so dumb.
Speaker 4 (16:08):
Well because you did raise the point of, look, this
is a a team that protects the ball a great
deal going up against the team that's best that just
forcing turnovers?
Speaker 3 (16:18):
How is that going to look like?
Speaker 4 (16:20):
And what's interesting to me in game one was just
how lax of days ago they were with the ball,
which is just very much not Indiana. And some of
it I think was just nerves like this is these
are the finals after all, And like OPI top and
I think had was it three turnovers in the first
half or like within.
Speaker 1 (16:41):
Two of which were like passes to the stands basically.
Speaker 3 (16:44):
Right, and they were like was it back to back possessions?
Maybe not, but like very close to it.
Speaker 1 (16:48):
May think we're like three minutes apart and he just
like threw it. It ended up like in the back court.
Speaker 4 (16:52):
Yeah right, and like, look, that's just not normal of
them to make those type of mental mistakes.
Speaker 3 (16:59):
So, like my my takeaways.
Speaker 4 (17:00):
They won this game and they threw the ball away
twenty four times, which is very unlike them.
Speaker 3 (17:07):
So what does that mean going forward?
Speaker 4 (17:10):
Like, I know that's kind of leaning into your second
question there, but like that to me is a major thing.
Like the Pacers are can they still keep on winning
if they're gonna turn the ball over to this extent
or are they just gonna low the pants off? Okay,
see if they start just not turning it over they
as they used to not doing. I mean, if anything,
(17:32):
just just this makes the series even more intriguing to me.
Speaker 2 (17:36):
Yeah, for sure.
Speaker 1 (17:37):
And I think you're right about the nerves thing. There's
not really a way to quantify it. But I went
back and watched every single turnover that the Pacers had,
and there was just like, yeah, there's some things where
it's okay, Oklahoma City's hands are in there. I don't
know how much I want to see Aaronie Smith ribble
in this series as an example, but just like Miles
Turner having just a couple, like just tacky offensive fouls.
(18:00):
He also though, like his some of his early turnovers,
and I think most of his came in the first half.
Those felt like, okay, those are certainly controllable. So I
think even Obi Toppins, the ones you met, like the
two specifically where he's just like the balls like ends
up in the back court. I would like to probably
see against this defense, the thunder defense. You probably can't
throw as many bounce passes, I feel like, especially to
your bigs, but that all kind of feels controllable. Okaysee
(18:23):
is going to force turnovers. And if you sat here
and told me though that the Pacers end up having
the highest turnover rate of like any team in NBA
Finals history, which I think is twenty one point eight
when I looked it up on stathead during Game one,
I wouldn't be shocked. But like, this is a team
where you go back and you watch those turnovers. Okase
caused a bunch of them with their pressure, but like
(18:45):
there was at least and look to the Pacers' credit,
they cleaned it up in the second half.
Speaker 2 (18:49):
They had five turnovers.
Speaker 1 (18:50):
So when you could say well, the thunder defense kind
of faded at that point. Sure, but like I think
a lot of what happened with the Pacers in the
first half, those feel like more more controllables than oh,
okay see, his defense is just inevitably going to do this.
That's not to say, though, you know, you got that
game then when it was oh okay SE's defense, let's
(19:11):
say they were responsible, Like you really couldn't avoid half
those turnovers. There's gonna be a game where you might
have like eighteen to twenty turnovers that are also unavoidable
because okay Se locks in for a full forty eight minutes.
So it's good that you won that game, but I
think that it's I don't think you can count on
doing that again, would be my point, right.
Speaker 3 (19:31):
Right, So no go ahead, no, no go ahead.
Speaker 4 (19:35):
I was just going to echo whatever what you said
just said here. Basically, it's it's the unpredictability going into
game two that I find in exciting, because we also
saw a poor shooting performance from Okasey, So like things
are going to balance out, and what's going to be
interesting in seeing is like how do the scales match
(19:58):
up when things start to to balance.
Speaker 1 (20:00):
In yeah, and I think, look, I think you could
argue that favors the Pacers a little bit, like even
the was OKC in transition outscored them eleven to ten
in Game one and that's with the Pacers committing twenty
four turnovers.
Speaker 3 (20:12):
That's insane.
Speaker 1 (20:15):
So coming out of this more of Game one, I
have to know, is Miles Turner just like better than
chet Holmgren or what's the story here?
Speaker 2 (20:25):
Man?
Speaker 1 (20:25):
So doesn't monster? Miles Turner did not have the cleanest
offensive performance. We already mentioned the turnovers. He ended up
shooting five to ten from the floor to a five
from three. But man, more that dude feasted on defense.
The Oklahoma City was a minus eight during his minutes.
(20:46):
And listen to this, they shot thirty three point three
percent on twos with Miles Turner on the court more
on twos, yep, and he chet Holmgren. I'm to be
mostly tongue in cheek. I think Chet Holmgren's a fantastic player.
He's gotta go up to the basket or take the
ball with more force going like, I don't know who
(21:07):
did he just I know he didn't play against the
Pacers this year during the regular season, but this is
not the first time he's heard of Myles Turner. I
gotta give Miles Turner all the credit in the world
on the like the defensive job he did for most
of Game one, that is like equal parts deterrent and
then like just possession swallower And he was great on
(21:28):
the defensive end of the floor. And I'm just like,
I don't expect the thunder to struggle that much from
inside the arc, but he was when you were watching
their drives or where they were pulling up from on
their shots, like he was actively changing the way that
they were thinking.
Speaker 2 (21:44):
And that's huge for the Pacers.
Speaker 4 (21:46):
Even offensively, you couldn't really move off of him or
move him off the block. You really couldn't move him
at all, because you know, we remember the days when
he came into the league and he was a skinny,
you know, twenty year old. Now he's you know, he's
approaching thirty's. He's really added muscle. And I know people
will laugh at this, but I think four or five
(22:08):
years ago, oh wow, that might it might not be
that long. Three or four years ago, he started doing
yoga and started like his flexibility and his core work
got so much better. He's very difficult to move offensively too,
so like when he goes into the dunker spot for example,
good luck trying to get him out or move him.
That physicality is going to be a huge element for them,
(22:32):
especially against homegrown who I like to a great deal.
But like, he's still so skinny. Again, He's always going
to be a finesse guy. He really is, and that's
there's no issue with that whatsoever. Kevin Durant is a
finness player. Wait, so when Panama is a finess player.
(22:52):
So like, there isn't anything inherently wrong with that, But
it does mean that if you have an advantage and
you can abuse that Matt as currently Miles Turner seems
to be capable of doing, you totally should the.
Speaker 1 (23:07):
Other number one to throw out there is the Thunder
as a team generated point six to four points per
possession when Miles Turner registered as a defender on chet Holmgren.
That is not good point six four points per possession
for anyone wondering. I did went pack and I was
watching too to see like how many of chet Holmgren's
own shots that Turner actually changed. I think the matchup
(23:28):
data has him shooting one of seven against Turner.
Speaker 2 (23:31):
Especially like pretty accurate.
Speaker 1 (23:32):
There's probably one or two shots whereas eh, but like
around the basket, he just didn't.
Speaker 2 (23:37):
I don't.
Speaker 1 (23:37):
I know you mentioned that Chet will probably always be
a finesse player. I think that's probably just some extent true.
But like you can go up with more, like be
smarter about going up too, Like some of the angles
he was using felt weird, but you can go up
stronger and the.
Speaker 3 (23:51):
Yeah, finness players can dunk Dan.
Speaker 1 (23:53):
I'm not saying Kevin Durant, Yeah, like proan Kevin Durant.
For sure, he doesn't get to the room anymore, but
like that's something he had some.
Speaker 3 (23:58):
Power can still.
Speaker 1 (24:00):
Yes, that's no, I'm not saying I'm dunk. I'm saying
he had more pop during.
Speaker 3 (24:03):
His prom No.
Speaker 2 (24:04):
If that's controversial, I don't. I don't know what's not controversial.
Speaker 1 (24:07):
So that's I'm that's a matchup I'm gonna be watching
moving forward. And it like kind of bleeds into what
I wanted to talk about when we're looking at like
what are our questions? What are our adjustments? But I
don't know who gets to go first, because like I said,
I randomized it looks like it's gonna be me. So
here are my questions more, I actually have two. This
leads into the turn like it kind of steps on
(24:28):
the toes. What we're talking about with turn versus home
grin does okay, see need to go back. We'll start
here to duel big just because the other thing that
you have to look at, Indiana in the fourth quarter
grabbed fifty percent of its missus and we didn't see
Hartenstein or Holmgren for a single second together. And I'm
just sort of wondering, now, Okay, see didn't get blasted
(24:48):
When you're looking at the second chance points battle, I
want to be clear. I think it was they They
lost twelve to eleven again one point margin, but like
you're gonna go into his second half and like even
a little bit during the third quarter and let Indiana
of all teams, which is not I know they have
Turner and Siakam, but they're not like this incredible offensive
rebounding team and you're gonna let them grab over forty
(25:10):
percent of their own misses for the entire half. That's
how you win the possession battle but lose the game.
And I would probably like to see them I personally
think again, I think Mark Dagneld has forgotten more about
basketball in the past five seconds than I will ever know.
Speaker 2 (25:25):
But I'm wondering if we should see them.
Speaker 1 (25:26):
Go back to that look, just because if the offense
is at times gonna be a slog getting your own
misses never I mean, like also just grabbing defensive boards,
that matters too, But if you can open up some
offensive rebounding opportunities for yourself, like that's a way to
kind of drum up then your possession average, which was
just not up to snuff, especially in the second half.
Speaker 4 (25:45):
Yeah, look, everyone came into this series basically asking the
big question always just a nice a Hardenstein series at all,
And when it was announced they wouldn't start, there was
be the lineup change. Everyone was like kind of saying, oh, yeah,
that makes sense. This is a hard, hard and sign
series nine to nine. In seventeen minutes, he played pretty well.
(26:07):
I think it's way too premature to kind of say, oh, yeah,
he can't blame in this Yeries.
Speaker 3 (26:11):
He absolutely can.
Speaker 4 (26:13):
He absolutely needs to be the one to be the
primary on Miles Turner, because again, Miles Turner is no
longer six eleven two ten. He is six eleven, two fifty,
and he knows how to use every damnage of his
body now unlike what he did when he was a youngster.
So you need veteran leadership and veteran, honestly veteran physicality upfront.
(26:39):
That's not a term I think I ever used before,
but I think it applies here, like someone who just
knows how to move people around, someone who's a big
body who could match up like I love Chet. He's
not there, not quite yet, at least harden sign is.
So whether he starts or not, that may not matter
to me all that much. He just needs to play
(27:00):
more than seventeen minutes.
Speaker 1 (27:03):
I agree, and I think it's probably gonna happen. And
I also think, because this was my second note, that
kind of again bleeds into what we were just talking about.
I'm wondering if offensively they can do more to get
Shay some more separation earlier on in possessions, especially if
you're gonna have games where all right, Chet doesn't have
it tonight or j Dubb is not going mo was
(27:25):
he six of nineteen and one of four to three,
and where the thunders seem to have the most success
on offense was Isaiah Hartenstein set in those really hard,
pancakey screens high like against that Indiana pressure, and so
at that point, Shay's either gonna have that runway head
of steam or he's just And I'd like to think
I've watched Shay Gildas Alexander play basketball once or twice,
(27:47):
but I I guess I forget, like what type of
on ball thrust he could have, because he's so good
at like using the thattaclectic part of his game, like
changing his pace so much. When you're about someone being
able to split defenders and just like right through them,
Like that's the other thing that those high like. Okay,
so Indiana's pressure is still there and he just still
gets through. He just needs a sliver of daylight. And
(28:08):
rather than having a guard come up and screen for him,
even rather than having Check come up and screen for him,
Isaiah Hartenstein is gonna get you some separation and even
if it's not a lot, it's gonna be enough for Shay.
And I think that that might be Doe Dan of course,
but I just feel like when you look at the
offensive game that this Thunder team had, and if you're
gonna have nights like you did. For I mean, Shay
wasn't by his own standards. It took him thirty shots
(28:32):
to get thirty eight. Like that's not a typical like
efficient Shae game. Like he's been more efficient. So I
think that that speaks to the importance of Hartenstein too,
is that he can help shake kills Alexander a lot
offensively in this series, with the types of screens he's setting. Again,
especially if you're not getting sort of this one of
those detonations from a J dub or a chet.
Speaker 3 (28:53):
Holmgrin, I agree, Are you waiting for me to.
Speaker 2 (29:01):
Just while you're staring at me blankly?
Speaker 4 (29:04):
I was, because look that that is a sign of respect,
because I had nothing to add.
Speaker 2 (29:10):
You're up, what do you got?
Speaker 3 (29:13):
Look?
Speaker 4 (29:13):
So shooting variants? Will that determine who wins the series
and thus the chip? And I'm asking because the thunder.
You know, we've talked about them as this very near
perfect team all year long. The one thing that bothered
me coming into the season somewhat like honestly still realizing
that they are a juggernaut and was do they have
(29:37):
enough high volume three point shooting? Be that on the bench,
be that in the starting lineup whatever. I felt like
they needed a shooter or maybe even a couple more
shooters to get that. Not just the percentageop but the
volume up. The volume was very important here. They took
just thirty three pointers in game one. Indiana took nine more,
(30:00):
which isn't a ton, but they made more.
Speaker 3 (30:02):
They're more.
Speaker 4 (30:03):
I feel as though they move the ball better, they
find shooters better, They're more what's the word I'm looking for,
volatile from a spacing perspective, Whereas I think, okay, see,
like they're consistent, but they're never that team to just
break out and go completely nuts from behind the arc.
So my question is what the hell happens here? Like
(30:25):
if the Pacers are going to keep hitting like eighteen
threes per game at forty six percent and the thunder
don't really respond and they're like in the mid thirties
taking low volume three pointers, like, they will have to
just grind their way to the free throw line at
ton or convert at a ridiculous rate at their twos.
Their defense has to be in tune, they have to
(30:46):
win the rebound back, like everything has to go right
for them to sort of even the scales here, So
are we looking at something as potentially simplistic as shooting variants?
Is this going to be the main thing?
Speaker 1 (31:01):
I don't think it's unfair to boil a lot of
this series down to that, especially if I mean, again,
I don't expect OKC to shoot like where were they
twelve of twenty one at the rim or whatever? It
only was all series, But like if Miles Turner is
going to be out there and cause those types of
problems for you, and if you're also not going to
have like these picture perfect games from your most important
(31:25):
supporting cast members, three point shooting is a way to
make up a lot of that gap. And you know,
I mean, like sitting here and I know he's been
he's become a better shooter. He's definitely a more willing
shooter than he was a half decade ago. But you
don't want to waste a game where you get five
made threes from lou Dort And that's kind of what
the thunderfittered away, And so that's I think, you know,
Also why I think it's more important is I don't
(31:46):
know that people appreciate just like how good of a
shooting team that Indiana can be. I know that they're
not going to take the most threes in the league.
But when you look at their lineup, who is their
their core five? Like that started, like, who is their
shooter that you trust the least on that and then
if the answer is Nemhard or Siakam or Turner, like
if that's your weak outside threat, you're in pretty damn
(32:09):
good shape. And then you go to the bench and
it's all right. Ben Sheppard can be a little rocky,
but Obi Toppin can get him up.
Speaker 3 (32:15):
We've seen Benni five threes.
Speaker 1 (32:17):
Yeah, absolutely, Benne mcmathrin can like like he'll go through
heaters as well. So they do have more bankability when
it comes to shooting, I think than the thunder Dude,
who I think still have just the better collection of talent.
But that's probably something that didn't get talked about enough,
is that the Pacers, I think a lot of attention
has been paid to their defensive improvement, as it should be,
(32:39):
and then just like, oh, look at how fast they
play on offense, and Tyre's Halliburton's the engine that drives
it all, and Aeronie Smith's been fun and Pascal Siakam
is able to operate in the muck, but also on
the break. And it's not like this team like they
will they can kill you if they need to from.
Speaker 4 (32:53):
All Yeah, oh yeah they can. And the thing is
they can do it in half court situations too. This
isn't a seamless jacking threes in transition too. They can
set them up within their half court schemes. This is
something you and I we talked about way back in
I want to say December.
Speaker 3 (33:10):
Or January maybe where we were.
Speaker 4 (33:12):
We were talking about the Pacers as this team that
was capable of slowing it down, just as they were
able to just kind of hit the you know, hit
the brakes and like or so not hit the breakes,
just speed things up for them to be able to
manufacture shots. The way that they're doing be that when
the game is slowed down or when it's high paced,
(33:34):
like how do you guard that?
Speaker 3 (33:35):
How do you think?
Speaker 4 (33:36):
Okay, you can go up, you can go up and
say let's let's slow this game down, let's let's force
them into a half court half court game.
Speaker 3 (33:43):
They'll still manufacture the living fuck out of those situations.
Speaker 1 (33:48):
Yeah, they're like their offense is so dynamic and I
just don't sometimes I don't think I even fully appreciate it, right,
And so that's and that's to say that about going
up like the Thunder defense is the tenth circle of hell.
Speaker 2 (34:02):
I want to make that clear, and I think they
made that clear, like early on in Game one.
Speaker 1 (34:07):
But if when you were looking at the Eastern Conference
Finals specifically, or even look, I'll say this, going up
against this Thunder defense, the stretches were a full that
a full strength Boston squad was prone to going into.
For the series, you might have preferred to see full
strength Boston versus Okasee.
Speaker 2 (34:23):
But offensively, the.
Speaker 1 (34:25):
Pacers are probably it would have been the Pacers or
maybe the Caves for me would have been the offense
is best equipped to give this Thunder defense a real
run for their money. And I just I mean, you
don't want to see them have to get like down
fifteen points in the fourth quarter and it's oh, another
ninety nine percent win probability for their opponent.
Speaker 2 (34:43):
They gotta come back and do it.
Speaker 1 (34:44):
At some point you would assume they're gonna run out
of magic, but they haven't yet, and and their just
ability to adjust, and it's death by like a thousand cuts.
But I'm not talking about like necessarily the actual off
ball movement or though there's plenty of that. It's just
what do you need from them on off and they'll
most likely find a way to give it to you
on it like, they will figure it out. Maybe not
(35:04):
right away, maybe not for the entire game, but as
the game and the series goes on, they will figure
it out.
Speaker 3 (35:09):
Yeah, you know, it kind of dawned on me.
Speaker 4 (35:11):
We had this thing back in Phoenix when you said
seven seconds or Shack, like you could get this the
quick Steve Nash shot. If that didn't materialize, you could
go to Shack in the half court setting. There's no
one pacer you can say that about. You can't go
seven seconds or Sam like, yeah you can, but you
can also go in every other direction. So they have
(35:35):
this uncanny appeal to go seven seconds or well we'll
figure it out, and it might be like, is it.
Speaker 2 (35:41):
More like four seconds?
Speaker 4 (35:43):
Four seconds, or we'll figure it out. And that is
that is such a daunting thing to go up against,
regardless of who you are. I mean, look and side note,
we're talking about like schematics and we're talking about all
the adjustments and whatnot. This could not from an entertainment perspective,
be a better start to a series. This has this.
(36:06):
This Game one had fucking everything everything. It was a
gorgeously executed game, Like, yeah, I know the Thunder missed
a bunch of shots, I know the Pacers turned the
ball over sixteen million times, and yet that didn't take
away from the factor of enjoyment that we all had
watching this game. We all in unison were like, oh,
(36:28):
this is basketball porn. This was great and for us
to talk about all the Avenue hues they can still
approve upon. Just suggest to me even further, this series
could go long and we'd all be better for it.
Speaker 1 (36:45):
I hope it as has Game one done, I had
Thunder and five, you had Pacers and six as Game
one nod.
Speaker 2 (36:52):
And Thunder and six.
Speaker 1 (36:54):
Excuse me, I think I had to write something immediately after,
and I said this series it was bold predictions for
the rest of the series. I just said, this series
is going seven because we deserve it to go seven
after seeing two five game finals. But I do think
this doesn't change my opinion that I really do think
the Thunder are inevitable this year and maybe moving forward.
Speaker 2 (37:12):
I really do believe that.
Speaker 1 (37:13):
But I continue to have Even when I think that
I fully appreciate relative to consensus, the Pacers enough, they
continue to show.
Speaker 2 (37:21):
Me that I do not.
Speaker 1 (37:22):
And that was probably my biggest takeaway from Game one
is that you can say there's a lot of things,
Okac you can clean up, and you will be right.
There are things that Indiana can still clean up as
well too.
Speaker 3 (37:32):
Yeah.
Speaker 4 (37:33):
Yeah, Look, look, I'm an old grouch who can't wait
for the season to end just because I'm tired personally,
but I want this series to go as long as
humanly possible because.
Speaker 2 (37:46):
Give me eight more games of it somehow, right, I'm
here for it.
Speaker 4 (37:49):
I don't care, like, just extend it if you want to, like,
let's go best to fifteen. It's fine. It's this because
these are the kind of games where the seague in
like a long seed season, all that goes out the
window when you actually watch the game and when you're
sitting there late at night. For me at least, I'm
just sitting there going, oh yeah, this is special, and
(38:11):
that's the feeling you want.
Speaker 1 (38:14):
And the final thing I'll say is what I think
is making me a little giddy, not just gonna be confused.
Speaker 2 (38:18):
With Josh Giddy.
Speaker 1 (38:20):
The two coaches that we have in this series in
Mark that Rick Carlisle, they're true sickos that will hashtag
try shit yep. And they have this extended break in
between games to figure out what they're gonna try. And
so like, now that we're not in this every other
day pattern, I'm sort of like like that meme, like
coming around the tree and wiping my hands together. For
(38:40):
anyone who's watching on YouTube, I'm just like, what are
we gonna see? Is it we're telling the thunder to
go bigger? Do they just bench Chet Holmgred and Isaiah
Hartenstein and have j Doub play center again?
Speaker 3 (38:50):
Wallace at center? Sure? Right? Not.
Speaker 1 (38:52):
Everyone's like Casey Wallis plainly needs to play least and
Mark Daniel's like, fuck you, he's playing forty five minutes
in game two.
Speaker 4 (38:57):
Yeah, Alex rust point guard, let's go nuts.
Speaker 3 (39:01):
Absolutely, bring off the bench. Yeah, he's going for six.
Speaker 2 (39:06):
He got MVP, now needs to get some six here.
Speaker 4 (39:09):
No. But you're right though, And that's the thing because
one of them is probably going to overcorrect on something
as well, and then they're gonna be oh shit, and
then they're gonna go back to the drawing board afterwards.
It's like, this is why I also always prefer to
watch players who think the game out. That's why I'm
I'm such a big Luka guy, Jokic guy, like the
(39:30):
guys who just on the fly reads stuff and goes, oh, yeah,
I'm supposed to do A, but I have to do
B because that's the best option I can read, you know,
at my own capability here for me, I have to
go this route instead. So when you combine that with
coaches who are, as you said, true sikos Man, you
just get the best fucking product out of it. And
(39:52):
I realized it sounds like I'm fillatioing d NBA right now.
But look it's I I genuine I believe this is
great for the product, It's great for the interest. Yeah,
it's two small markets teams. I don't give a fuck.
It's great basketball. Isn't that the whole point?
Speaker 1 (40:10):
Honestly, I haven't seen anything since we leading into the series.
I saw something about the market stuff, and I don't
know if I guess I'm pleasantly surprised. I didn't think
of it, But like, I haven't seen a whole like,
oh is this like that? Game one, you said it
was a perfect start to the series. That's actually part
of why. Even if you want to dismiss the people
that talk about the market stuff, it gets talked about,
there probably is some impact on the bottom line or viewership.
Speaker 5 (40:33):
I don't know.
Speaker 2 (40:33):
I don't really care.
Speaker 1 (40:35):
But like if you were just sort of choppering in
and haven't watched any of the NBA playoffs or didn't
have an allegiance or any interest in either of these
two teams, and you sat through most or all of
Game one, as long as you sat through, like I'm
sure a bunch of people turned it off when okayse
he went up fifteen in the fourth quarter, They're like, oh,
sweep or something is coming. That was a perfect opening
(40:55):
game because it disproved so many preconceived notions, including some
of our own, but including that larger one of just
like there was the one about the lack of star
power in this series, which is just like, yeah, Tyrus
Aliburton is built different, He's he's a psychopath, and the.
Speaker 3 (41:12):
Pacers remember Tyrus Alibert is.
Speaker 2 (41:15):
Can I pour some cold water on that? Though?
Speaker 1 (41:17):
I like it as a like a having a chip
on his shoulder or for us to make jokes and
talk about when you do the math, it was like
less than twelve players I called him.
Speaker 3 (41:27):
I know it.
Speaker 4 (41:27):
I've said this before and it's it's totally valid. I
just love throwing that out there because it's just seems
so preposterous now and it's just it's gotten a whole
lot of attention. And look, if he needs that to
feed all of that, am I to judge? That's fine
if you need that to give us that type of
performance like laden games go.
Speaker 2 (41:48):
I think the Ringer ranked him. I don't know if
they were doing there.
Speaker 1 (41:50):
I didn't actually look at the list, but the Ringer
had him like the fifth best player in the league
or the seventh best player in the league right now.
So I think the overrated conversation is actually gonna get
more widespread because of it. So that's he'll have plenty
of motivation then, because I'm sure that stuff is fluttering
around out there, but he is having this might be
captive of the moment type deal. I don't know that
(42:13):
I've ever seen just like a more clutch postseason run.
Speaker 2 (42:16):
We've seen clutcher.
Speaker 1 (42:17):
Shots, although not many at this but just made one
in the finals, but like this is a generational clutch
performance from him across the entire postseason.
Speaker 4 (42:29):
Yeah, Like I'm I'm thinking back to Mike and even
Mike didn't have this many moments in the same year.
Like collectively, Okay, Mike is like far ahead, but in
the same year, I don't think so, Like I'm am
I forgetting someone, Like, is there anyone who was that clutch?
(42:51):
Like Jamal Murray had major performances, but that was a
clutch right like that.
Speaker 1 (42:55):
Rest Damian Lillard's had like two series winners. Yeah, which
is kind of crazy.
Speaker 3 (42:59):
That's that's up there for sure.
Speaker 4 (43:02):
But those who are so different years, which okay, yeah,
that's like you said, that's you said it serious enders though,
that's that's fair. That's a difference than just a game ender.
Speaker 1 (43:11):
Honestly, they proved to be like era ending for those teams.
Remember what happened to the Rockets and the Thunder after Litt.
Speaker 4 (43:18):
Yeah, now the Thunder it's taking taking it all back.
Just got a trade Paul George. Man, that's the recipe.
So next year if that's just that's the the Sixers mission.
Now get off the Paul George contract. You'll be in
the finals in about twelve months.
Speaker 5 (43:31):
It's fine, Mark, Do you have anything else to add
or would you like to tell our subscribers or are
non subscribers who are gonna get on YouTube, Spotify, Apple
the whole night and subscribe already and rock with us
forever and ever and ever and always where they can
find you and all the fantastic work that you do.
Speaker 4 (43:48):
Yes, So when I remember to upload, you can find
my stuff from at the NBA podcast I always do.
I also do a Danish podcast called Buster Peter, and
I write for Forbes and Yahoo Sports and you can
just type my name into Google and those things will
pop up, or you can find me a blue sky
(44:09):
at MSJ NBA. I'm not that super active anymore on
social media, which frankly feels pretty nice. Honestly, that's a
bad way to I'm just gonna sit.
Speaker 2 (44:20):
Let you know. That's a terrible way to promote your
social media.
Speaker 4 (44:23):
I know I'm sorry about that, but like I'm still
I'm still there occasionally, and when I am, it's always
with enthusiasm, even though I say dumb shit once and one.
Speaker 2 (44:33):
I am on social media like a true superhero. So
you can come follow me wherever you're
Speaker 1 (44:38):
On social media until next time and as always, leave
with the one shout out to the one, the only,
the player who might be signed and then rolled out
in game two of the finals by one of these
teams who knows mister frank Nila Kina
What is up, Fellowsiko's I am Dan Favallei, your host
of Destiny, kind of like the Indiana Pacers might be
the team of Destiny. I am joined by the only
fans content creator of Destiny, Mort Jensen, who is also
famous for his work at the NBA podcast, Yahoo Sports
as well as Forbes. We are here to talk about
(00:22):
You've listened to the game recaps.
Speaker 2 (00:23):
You've done that by now We're here to talk big
picture stuff.
Speaker 1 (00:26):
We have one overarching question we're going to talk with
about this series, thunder Pacers, that Mort and I are
going to get into each of our biggest single takeaways
from game one and then either our biggest question or
suggested adjustments moving forward into game two and beyond. But
before we belly fop in, Mort, how the heck are you?
Speaker 3 (00:44):
You know what?
Speaker 4 (00:45):
I was doing pretty well? And then I realized moments
ago that the last time you and I recorded, we
recorded two episodes, not one. So you sent me over
two files. And for some reason, because I am very
sleep deprived and because it's very late in the season,
I was like, did I record once or twice with Dan?
Speaker 3 (01:07):
Oh?
Speaker 4 (01:07):
I'm sure it was just one, and so I only
uploaded one of the two and the one I didn't
upload was the freaking NBA Finals preview. That's the one
I forgot about to upload. So Dan, I'm doing you well,
but I'm also in the idiow.
Speaker 1 (01:22):
Yeah you might, or you're trying to get a job
at ESPN. You you went right to the offseason rumor
stuff and just skipped skipped right over the basketball.
Speaker 4 (01:30):
It's all about Tom Tippondaw apparently. God So no doing well.
I'm just I'm tired, sir, And like I will say this,
I love what we've seen from Game one. I want
this to go as far as we can. But that
light at the end of the tunnel that says offseason,
it's starting to look big, and man, here I'm coming.
Speaker 1 (01:53):
I would I love the finals because of the breaks
we get in between games. And I know at the
end of this, like my life during the draft and
free agency slash trade season is just like it's a
dead What we do is entirely a dead sprint. Like
I just want to make that clear. It takes a
lot of time, very little sleep, and we're not doing
anything noble, So don't feel bad for us. We're covering
(02:14):
a fucking game, but people care about this game a ton.
You have to work hard, but that around the trade
deadline and then immediately after the NBA Finals are like
just the two most and maybe like when the season
first kicks off are just like the most trenetic times
in my life. And so I kind of bask in
the finals while also going through the existential dread of
(02:34):
shifting into full on offseason mode.
Speaker 4 (02:36):
Yeah. Yeah, And the thing is our job. They don't
really end by the end of the finals, because then
we have to do draft stuff, then we have to
do free agency. And I've honestly, I've stayed out of
summer league coverage, and that's been intentional for the most part,
because I just can't like there's a limit, there's a
limits to how many months out of the year I
can just sort of get myself up to that level.
Speaker 3 (03:00):
Summer league, you're on your own.
Speaker 1 (03:02):
I try to take it easy for a couple of
weeks in August, but then after that it's like right
back into like we're trying to do our team by team,
look at it's here, and then like as soon as
September rolls around, like even if you were just to
really go by the NBA calendar, it's August and like
a little bit of July is like one.
Speaker 2 (03:17):
September rolls around.
Speaker 1 (03:18):
It's like, oh, like we're gonna start talking about training
camp soon, and I'm going into all the previews and
then oh, is there going to be a trade like
three seconds before training camp opens that no one saw coming.
Speaker 4 (03:27):
So I'll actually tell you something. I'll tell you something
that because I felt the same way. But I've broken
the pattern this year. We've actually booked a trip to
Malta in September and that was that was actually part
because I want to break that pattern. I want to
use September as a month off as well. I really do.
Speaker 1 (03:50):
Yeah, you're so yeah, get that Yannis to the Knicks
trade done before September for my sake for sure. What
we're saying here, let's dive in here. So I want
to start with just this question that I think it's been.
It's we've referenced it a couple times throughout our playoff coverage,
you and I, Grant and I as well, and people
(04:11):
started to talk about but I really kind of wanted
to dig in to where after Game one of the Finals,
we saw the thunder go eleven players deep and the
Pacers go ten players deep. And it wasn't I think
Kendrick Williams played like or wasn't an aging like They
played these small spurts, but there were on both sides
at least seven players who logged fifteen or more minutes.
Speaker 2 (04:31):
And it used to be the thought process was and
still is.
Speaker 1 (04:36):
I'm saying used to that you need to shorten your
rotations during the playoffs to limit the amount of weaknesses.
And then it's just what you want to rely on
your best players. I am wondering, So I'm gonna frame
the question like this or what we're seeing is what
we're seeing from Indiana in Oklahoma City the start of
kind of that next trend. Remember when the Warriors had
Draymond Green at the five, it was a small ball
(04:57):
or like going with five out? Or is this just
a function of these two teams play fast. Their style
is so demanding and so you don't necessarily want anyone
playing a crap ton of minutes, So you had to
build your team this way. And the final thing before
I throw it to you, Shake Gibs Alexander played I
think it was like thirty nine minutes and thirty four
seconds in game one. That's like a lot of minutes
(05:17):
on its face. But for us to exit game one
that was determined by one point and say that no
one logged forty minutes in that game, I'm not even
sure if Tom Thabodau is still alive.
Speaker 2 (05:28):
Here's that little factoid.
Speaker 4 (05:31):
So here's the thing I don't. I don't think it's
just you know, for teams that run a lot. I
think it's I think the NBA has finally cut up
to the fact that defense is so more labor intensive
now than it.
Speaker 3 (05:44):
Used to be.
Speaker 4 (05:44):
And look, this is it's also why the biggest pet
peeve for my oh what.
Speaker 1 (05:51):
It's just funny that you're saying that when the discourse
is is that no one plays defense.
Speaker 3 (05:55):
That's see, that's the thing.
Speaker 4 (05:56):
That's what I wanted to attack here because I hate
when people say that. It's bold shit, Like people look
back and say, oh, they really played defense in the eighties.
Now they play defense from twenty feet in. Now you
start your defense from forty to forty five feet out.
The I mean, the labor intensity of defense has just
gone up like sky high, and it seems like the
(06:17):
NBA seems are finally embracing you know, let's dial it
down in terms of giving our guys thirty five, forty six,
forty seven minutes per game. You know, Kenny Atkinson is
a guy who I think is a brilliant example of
embracing that culture as well in Cleveland and having dept
resolves that issue a great deal. Now, I will say
(06:38):
to answer the question, is depth the next NPA trend?
Good debt is the next NBA trend? Because I mean,
you can are we really sure the Charlotte Hornets are like,
is there their depth good enough to like make anything noteworthy?
Probably not.
Speaker 1 (06:54):
Yeah, I've grown to call it functional depth to where
it's something that will translate into the playoffs. Is kind
of the lens that I'm looking at this question three exactly.
Speaker 4 (07:02):
And yeah, to answer that question, yeah, it's absolutely a
new trend. It's kind of weird when we think back
on it. Why it's never really been a trend if
you catch my drift, because it always kind of made
sense to have more guys come off the bench and
make plays, Like it's common logic if you kind of
squeeze everything together and you play five or six guys
(07:24):
while not five, but like six or seven guys at
the most, they are going to get absolutely knackered at
the end and you need someone to come in and
absorb minutes. And we've often thought about, you know, finals
and even championship winning team where we've looked at certain
guys and gone, why didn't that guy play? And everyone's
(07:45):
kind of said, oh, well, they shortened their rotation, and
we kind of just embraced that and like bought that
on the surface of it and said, okay, cool, as
if that was just a valid argument. So I love
that we're seeing this. It just it makes sense again
to me that we kind of look at this and go, oh,
more players are a good thing.
Speaker 3 (08:05):
Yeah. Absolutely.
Speaker 1 (08:07):
I have three quick points I want to make on it.
Yes that I think just dovetail nice with what you said,
because I totally agree. One of the points is I
think that something like an inflection point with the Jason
Tatum injury and just other injuries we've seen that you're
never gonna necessarily know the root cause of these things.
But Jason Tatum has been one of the most durable
and available players in the league since he entered it.
(08:29):
And you see something like that, you see just what
feels like these influx of soft tissue injuries, and I
think it's gonna become more of a priority of even
if you want to look at it through the regular
season lens. It's not just having bodies on the roster
you could throw out there, but that can be effective
innings zeters, some of which will translate into the postseason.
The second point that I think is a big deal.
(08:51):
I'm also wondering if the way that the collective bargaining
agreement in the era of aprons is now structured where
you know that you're going to have that the best
way to build a team is, well, we can have
like two really top heavy salary guys, but it now
increases the necessity for whether you have a bunch of
top end salary guys or not, of we need to
(09:11):
try and find these flyers or guys that could contribute.
Speaker 2 (09:14):
And maybe we're gonna give out more role player contracts.
Speaker 1 (09:16):
And I think that could be maybe an unintended consequence
that's actually not so bad relative to what we've seen
where I think a lot of this stuff, the unintended
consequences have been not so great. And I think the
other thing here why I think it's gonna become a trend.
Speaker 2 (09:30):
And this is something.
Speaker 1 (09:31):
That I think is really cool is that once you
get to the playoffs, if you just have more buttons
to push, more styles that you're able to adapt to
and play within. One, it makes for a more entertaining
product to me, and two, it just increases your chances
of winning. And I think what we're seeing with the
Pacers and the Thunder, to bring it back to them,
(09:53):
are two teams that have been able to adapt at
every single turn. And we thought it from right out
of the gate. And we'll eventually talk about whether some
these were the right calls, but it's oh, like this
might be a Benanic maathroom series now and Mark.
Speaker 2 (10:04):
Dagnolt is going to change.
Speaker 1 (10:05):
He changed up his starting lineup for Game one, and
that's you try stuff, maybe it doesn't work, but the
other team is able to counter and your countering back.
And I think depth is an important part of that
because if you get too pigeonholed into one way of playing,
and we saw that with just because they were the
most recent one of the most recent teams eliminated, like
Minnesota was pretty like they had really like meaty depth,
(10:26):
like top heavy like going seven or eight reliable guys deep.
The Knicks didn't go that deep, and like everyone was
calling for these changes, but there was really a limited
number of changes they could make. If you think that
more of Delawn Wright or Landry Shamitt was going to
be the difference between them winning the title and not
winning the title, I would respectfully disagree, and so I'm
very interested to see one. I guess maybe we could
(10:48):
see front offices and ownership uses as an excuse not
to pay really good players as much or stars as much,
where it's like, no, we got to spread out the
wealth across the rest of the roster to make it
more manageable, especially when it comes to trades for them.
Speaker 2 (11:01):
But I think overall, what.
Speaker 1 (11:02):
We're kind of seeing is and I feel like we've
seen elements with other teams. You mentioned Kenny Atkinson, what
Cleveland did this year. Yeah, they ended up injured anyway,
so you can't sit here and say, oh, that's the
best way to protect your players. But even Houston and
like they were pretty I think what was it Fred
van Fleet played forty minutes a game in that first
round series, Like they had eight guys that were around
twenty minutes per game, and when you watched them and
(11:24):
you could argue this is also a bug, not just
a feature. There wasn't ever one player you thought they.
Speaker 2 (11:30):
Couldn't live without. And I don't think that's the future.
I think that's more of a bug.
Speaker 1 (11:34):
That's why Fred VanVleet has to play so much, because
their offense was so dependent on him. But I think
we've started to see the breadcrumbs laid elsewhere of that.
These teams are you know, okay, see they didn't stumble
into this. They're like a very special case study. But
like the Pacers, meticulously built and preserved this team. And
I think that, you know, the NBA is still a
(11:55):
copycat league. For all the changes we've seen, you know,
maybe that miming doesn't last as long because they're everything
feels like it's changing so fast. But I really think
we're gonna see kind of a throwback. We're not a
throwback in emphasis, just on depth in general, and finally
would just be I think we might even see it
when we're talking about these trades in the offseason. You know,
if the Knicks interested in Kevin Durant, unless you're gonna
(12:17):
be able to get him for Karl Anthony Towns plus
a minimum contract. You gotta think we were shallow this year.
Speaker 2 (12:23):
We're gonna give.
Speaker 1 (12:24):
Up, like like Ognanobi and Mitchell Robbinson. We're just gonna
make ourselves even shallower to get a thirty seven year old.
I think that might also be why you see teams
like the Nuggets aren't gonna be as aggressive and turning
multiple contracts into one even if those contracts aren't unplayable.
Speaker 3 (12:38):
Good bad.
Speaker 1 (12:38):
I don't know, but I do think depth overall is
becoming more in vogue, and I think that we're gonna
see more teams lean into it. And it's to your point,
it's not just names on the roster that you've heard of,
its depth, playable bodies that teams want to translate into
the postseason.
Speaker 4 (12:55):
I agree with everything you just said, and I want
to add to it by saying to fans listening in, yes,
like we are probably not gonna see a lot of
these consolidation traits when unless it's a star. When it's
a star, I think we can throw all of that
out of the window, because then you trade multiple players
to get like a major difference maker in there, and
(13:17):
you figure something out later, but you're absolutely right. You're
no longer going, oh, let's get rid of two top
ten players on our team to get a top seven
guy in which we've seen before. Like no, I definitely
think that is something that's even more of a discussion
now before you.
Speaker 3 (13:36):
Pull the trigger.
Speaker 4 (13:38):
And it's certainly a more interesting way to build build
out a roster to me as well, does this mean
the Bulls are actually on?
Speaker 3 (13:47):
Were they? Were? They right? We just want eight, eight
to ten good players.
Speaker 2 (13:54):
But you still need, as I think the.
Speaker 3 (13:56):
Pacer kidding, right, Dan, you need great.
Speaker 1 (14:00):
Players, and the Bulls have two great players in Nikolovuvich
and modist bouzelis like they've decided.
Speaker 2 (14:06):
Yeah, so the.
Speaker 1 (14:08):
Bulls are like the Bulls are in that horn like
I feel like they aspire to be the good version
of the Hornets from like ten or so years ago
to whereas like the Kemba Walker Al Jefferson team that
was pretty deep, but like you knew it wasn't really
gonna go anywhere, And I think that's what.
Speaker 2 (14:23):
The Bulls aspired to me. Yeah, poor Bulls fans like
mort who is genuine.
Speaker 3 (14:27):
No no, no, no, no, I'm god.
Speaker 4 (14:29):
I just I thought That was funny though, because I
actually saw some people like make that connection.
Speaker 3 (14:35):
I was just like, you're.
Speaker 4 (14:35):
Kind of forgetting the most important thing, Like you still
need the MVP caliber players, just still need the All
NBA ors and uh Josh Kinner thined it.
Speaker 2 (14:47):
Portland's a perfect example.
Speaker 1 (14:48):
We caught a lot of shit last summer because we
said they were secretly stacked, and we noted not with
like great players that are gonna get them to the playoffs,
but this team is deep and like they can find
an identity or do some damage. Behold, they did exactly that,
like their mid season turnaround, having a top five defense
for basically.
Speaker 3 (15:04):
Half the year.
Speaker 1 (15:05):
But you still need I would argue, you need like
not that I don't want to call the Pacers the
bare minimum, but like you need even the thunder. I
guess you could say, like, because j dub and Chet
Holmgren seemed to Wax and Wayne, you need one transcending
guy that could be second team All NBA at minimum
in any given year, but preferably.
Speaker 2 (15:23):
You need two of those guys.
Speaker 3 (15:24):
Yeah, yep.
Speaker 1 (15:26):
Now I've randomized the order in which who's gonna go
first with their takeaway? So let's see who's coming up first.
I believe this is you more. Yeah, what are you
thinking about the most coming out of game one?
Speaker 4 (15:36):
I mean, look, Indiana is known for taking care of
the basketball.
Speaker 3 (15:40):
We know this. They even lowered their turnover rate in
the playoffs.
Speaker 4 (15:45):
They still yeah, right, let's let's let's kind of update
that after game one. But it was such an interesting
point that you actually raised in the episode we recorded.
Speaker 3 (15:58):
That you won't find in my well finding wars. Damn
that was so dumb.
Speaker 4 (16:08):
Well because you did raise the point of, look, this
is a a team that protects the ball a great
deal going up against the team that's best that just
forcing turnovers?
Speaker 3 (16:18):
How is that going to look like?
Speaker 4 (16:20):
And what's interesting to me in game one was just
how lax of days ago they were with the ball,
which is just very much not Indiana. And some of
it I think was just nerves like this is these
are the finals after all, And like OPI top and
I think had was it three turnovers in the first
half or like within.
Speaker 1 (16:41):
Two of which were like passes to the stands basically.
Speaker 3 (16:44):
Right, and they were like was it back to back possessions?
Maybe not, but like very close to it.
Speaker 1 (16:48):
May think we're like three minutes apart and he just
like threw it. It ended up like in the back court.
Speaker 4 (16:52):
Yeah right, and like, look, that's just not normal of
them to make those type of mental mistakes.
Speaker 3 (16:59):
So, like my my takeaways.
Speaker 4 (17:00):
They won this game and they threw the ball away
twenty four times, which is very unlike them.
Speaker 3 (17:07):
So what does that mean going forward?
Speaker 4 (17:10):
Like, I know that's kind of leaning into your second
question there, but like that to me is a major thing.
Like the Pacers are can they still keep on winning
if they're gonna turn the ball over to this extent
or are they just gonna low the pants off? Okay,
see if they start just not turning it over they
as they used to not doing. I mean, if anything,
(17:32):
just just this makes the series even more intriguing to me.
Speaker 2 (17:36):
Yeah, for sure.
Speaker 1 (17:37):
And I think you're right about the nerves thing. There's
not really a way to quantify it. But I went
back and watched every single turnover that the Pacers had,
and there was just like, yeah, there's some things where
it's okay, Oklahoma City's hands are in there. I don't
know how much I want to see Aaronie Smith ribble
in this series as an example, but just like Miles
Turner having just a couple, like just tacky offensive fouls.
(18:00):
He also though, like his some of his early turnovers,
and I think most of his came in the first half.
Those felt like, okay, those are certainly controllable. So I
think even Obi Toppins, the ones you met, like the
two specifically where he's just like the balls like ends
up in the back court. I would like to probably
see against this defense, the thunder defense. You probably can't
throw as many bounce passes, I feel like, especially to
your bigs, but that all kind of feels controllable. Okaysee
(18:23):
is going to force turnovers. And if you sat here
and told me though that the Pacers end up having
the highest turnover rate of like any team in NBA
Finals history, which I think is twenty one point eight
when I looked it up on stathead during Game one,
I wouldn't be shocked. But like, this is a team
where you go back and you watch those turnovers. Okase
caused a bunch of them with their pressure, but like
(18:45):
there was at least and look to the Pacers' credit,
they cleaned it up in the second half.
Speaker 2 (18:49):
They had five turnovers.
Speaker 1 (18:50):
So when you could say well, the thunder defense kind
of faded at that point. Sure, but like I think
a lot of what happened with the Pacers in the
first half, those feel like more more controllables than oh,
okay see, his defense is just inevitably going to do this.
That's not to say, though, you know, you got that
game then when it was oh okay SE's defense, let's
(19:11):
say they were responsible, Like you really couldn't avoid half
those turnovers. There's gonna be a game where you might
have like eighteen to twenty turnovers that are also unavoidable
because okay Se locks in for a full forty eight minutes.
So it's good that you won that game, but I
think that it's I don't think you can count on
doing that again, would be my point, right.
Speaker 3 (19:31):
Right, So no go ahead, no, no go ahead.
Speaker 4 (19:35):
I was just going to echo whatever what you said
just said here. Basically, it's it's the unpredictability going into
game two that I find in exciting, because we also
saw a poor shooting performance from Okasey, So like things
are going to balance out, and what's going to be
interesting in seeing is like how do the scales match
(19:58):
up when things start to to balance.
Speaker 1 (20:00):
In yeah, and I think, look, I think you could
argue that favors the Pacers a little bit, like even
the was OKC in transition outscored them eleven to ten
in Game one and that's with the Pacers committing twenty
four turnovers.
Speaker 3 (20:12):
That's insane.
Speaker 1 (20:15):
So coming out of this more of Game one, I
have to know, is Miles Turner just like better than
chet Holmgren or what's the story here?
Speaker 2 (20:25):
Man?
Speaker 1 (20:25):
So doesn't monster? Miles Turner did not have the cleanest
offensive performance. We already mentioned the turnovers. He ended up
shooting five to ten from the floor to a five
from three. But man, more that dude feasted on defense.
The Oklahoma City was a minus eight during his minutes.
(20:46):
And listen to this, they shot thirty three point three
percent on twos with Miles Turner on the court more
on twos, yep, and he chet Holmgren. I'm to be
mostly tongue in cheek. I think Chet Holmgren's a fantastic player.
He's gotta go up to the basket or take the
ball with more force going like, I don't know who
(21:07):
did he just I know he didn't play against the
Pacers this year during the regular season, but this is
not the first time he's heard of Myles Turner. I
gotta give Miles Turner all the credit in the world
on the like the defensive job he did for most
of Game one, that is like equal parts deterrent and
then like just possession swallower And he was great on
(21:28):
the defensive end of the floor. And I'm just like,
I don't expect the thunder to struggle that much from
inside the arc, but he was when you were watching
their drives or where they were pulling up from on
their shots, like he was actively changing the way that
they were thinking.
Speaker 2 (21:44):
And that's huge for the Pacers.
Speaker 4 (21:46):
Even offensively, you couldn't really move off of him or
move him off the block. You really couldn't move him
at all, because you know, we remember the days when
he came into the league and he was a skinny,
you know, twenty year old. Now he's you know, he's
approaching thirty's. He's really added muscle. And I know people
will laugh at this, but I think four or five
(22:08):
years ago, oh wow, that might it might not be
that long. Three or four years ago, he started doing
yoga and started like his flexibility and his core work
got so much better. He's very difficult to move offensively too,
so like when he goes into the dunker spot for example,
good luck trying to get him out or move him.
That physicality is going to be a huge element for them,
(22:32):
especially against homegrown who I like to a great deal.
But like, he's still so skinny. Again, He's always going
to be a finesse guy. He really is, and that's
there's no issue with that whatsoever. Kevin Durant is a
finness player. Wait, so when Panama is a finess player.
(22:52):
So like, there isn't anything inherently wrong with that, But
it does mean that if you have an advantage and
you can abuse that Matt as currently Miles Turner seems
to be capable of doing, you totally should the.
Speaker 1 (23:07):
Other number one to throw out there is the Thunder
as a team generated point six to four points per
possession when Miles Turner registered as a defender on chet Holmgren.
That is not good point six four points per possession
for anyone wondering. I did went pack and I was
watching too to see like how many of chet Holmgren's
own shots that Turner actually changed. I think the matchup
(23:28):
data has him shooting one of seven against Turner.
Speaker 2 (23:31):
Especially like pretty accurate.
Speaker 1 (23:32):
There's probably one or two shots whereas eh, but like
around the basket, he just didn't.
Speaker 2 (23:37):
I don't.
Speaker 1 (23:37):
I know you mentioned that Chet will probably always be
a finesse player. I think that's probably just some extent true.
But like you can go up with more, like be
smarter about going up too, Like some of the angles
he was using felt weird, but you can go up
stronger and the.
Speaker 3 (23:51):
Yeah, finness players can dunk Dan.
Speaker 1 (23:53):
I'm not saying Kevin Durant, Yeah, like proan Kevin Durant.
For sure, he doesn't get to the room anymore, but
like that's something he had some.
Speaker 3 (23:58):
Power can still.
Speaker 1 (24:00):
Yes, that's no, I'm not saying I'm dunk. I'm saying
he had more pop during.
Speaker 3 (24:03):
His prom No.
Speaker 2 (24:04):
If that's controversial, I don't. I don't know what's not controversial.
Speaker 1 (24:07):
So that's I'm that's a matchup I'm gonna be watching
moving forward. And it like kind of bleeds into what
I wanted to talk about when we're looking at like
what are our questions? What are our adjustments? But I
don't know who gets to go first, because like I said,
I randomized it looks like it's gonna be me. So
here are my questions more, I actually have two. This
leads into the turn like it kind of steps on
(24:28):
the toes. What we're talking about with turn versus home
grin does okay, see need to go back. We'll start
here to duel big just because the other thing that
you have to look at, Indiana in the fourth quarter
grabbed fifty percent of its missus and we didn't see
Hartenstein or Holmgren for a single second together. And I'm
just sort of wondering, now, Okay, see didn't get blasted
(24:48):
When you're looking at the second chance points battle, I
want to be clear. I think it was they They
lost twelve to eleven again one point margin, but like
you're gonna go into his second half and like even
a little bit during the third quarter and let Indiana
of all teams, which is not I know they have
Turner and Siakam, but they're not like this incredible offensive
rebounding team and you're gonna let them grab over forty
(25:10):
percent of their own misses for the entire half. That's
how you win the possession battle but lose the game.
And I would probably like to see them I personally
think again, I think Mark Dagneld has forgotten more about
basketball in the past five seconds than I will ever know.
Speaker 2 (25:25):
But I'm wondering if we should see them.
Speaker 1 (25:26):
Go back to that look, just because if the offense
is at times gonna be a slog getting your own
misses never I mean, like also just grabbing defensive boards,
that matters too, But if you can open up some
offensive rebounding opportunities for yourself, like that's a way to
kind of drum up then your possession average, which was
just not up to snuff, especially in the second half.
Speaker 4 (25:45):
Yeah, look, everyone came into this series basically asking the
big question always just a nice a Hardenstein series at all,
And when it was announced they wouldn't start, there was
be the lineup change. Everyone was like kind of saying, oh, yeah,
that makes sense. This is a hard, hard and sign
series nine to nine. In seventeen minutes, he played pretty well.
(26:07):
I think it's way too premature to kind of say, oh, yeah,
he can't blame in this Yeries.
Speaker 3 (26:11):
He absolutely can.
Speaker 4 (26:13):
He absolutely needs to be the one to be the
primary on Miles Turner, because again, Miles Turner is no
longer six eleven two ten. He is six eleven, two fifty,
and he knows how to use every damnage of his
body now unlike what he did when he was a youngster.
So you need veteran leadership and veteran, honestly veteran physicality upfront.
(26:39):
That's not a term I think I ever used before,
but I think it applies here, like someone who just
knows how to move people around, someone who's a big
body who could match up like I love Chet. He's
not there, not quite yet, at least harden sign is.
So whether he starts or not, that may not matter
to me all that much. He just needs to play
(27:00):
more than seventeen minutes.
Speaker 1 (27:03):
I agree, and I think it's probably gonna happen. And
I also think, because this was my second note, that
kind of again bleeds into what we were just talking about.
I'm wondering if offensively they can do more to get
Shay some more separation earlier on in possessions, especially if
you're gonna have games where all right, Chet doesn't have
it tonight or j Dubb is not going mo was
(27:25):
he six of nineteen and one of four to three,
and where the thunders seem to have the most success
on offense was Isaiah Hartenstein set in those really hard,
pancakey screens high like against that Indiana pressure, and so
at that point, Shay's either gonna have that runway head
of steam or he's just And I'd like to think
I've watched Shay Gildas Alexander play basketball once or twice,
(27:47):
but I I guess I forget, like what type of
on ball thrust he could have, because he's so good
at like using the thattaclectic part of his game, like
changing his pace so much. When you're about someone being
able to split defenders and just like right through them,
Like that's the other thing that those high like. Okay,
so Indiana's pressure is still there and he just still
gets through. He just needs a sliver of daylight. And
(28:08):
rather than having a guard come up and screen for him,
even rather than having Check come up and screen for him,
Isaiah Hartenstein is gonna get you some separation and even
if it's not a lot, it's gonna be enough for Shay.
And I think that that might be Doe Dan of course,
but I just feel like when you look at the
offensive game that this Thunder team had, and if you're
gonna have nights like you did. For I mean, Shay
wasn't by his own standards. It took him thirty shots
(28:32):
to get thirty eight. Like that's not a typical like
efficient Shae game. Like he's been more efficient. So I
think that that speaks to the importance of Hartenstein too,
is that he can help shake kills Alexander a lot
offensively in this series, with the types of screens he's setting. Again,
especially if you're not getting sort of this one of
those detonations from a J dub or a chet.
Speaker 3 (28:53):
Holmgrin, I agree, Are you waiting for me to.
Speaker 2 (29:01):
Just while you're staring at me blankly?
Speaker 4 (29:04):
I was, because look that that is a sign of respect,
because I had nothing to add.
Speaker 2 (29:10):
You're up, what do you got?
Speaker 3 (29:13):
Look?
Speaker 4 (29:13):
So shooting variants? Will that determine who wins the series
and thus the chip? And I'm asking because the thunder.
You know, we've talked about them as this very near
perfect team all year long. The one thing that bothered
me coming into the season somewhat like honestly still realizing
that they are a juggernaut and was do they have
(29:37):
enough high volume three point shooting? Be that on the bench,
be that in the starting lineup whatever. I felt like
they needed a shooter or maybe even a couple more
shooters to get that. Not just the percentageop but the
volume up. The volume was very important here. They took
just thirty three pointers in game one. Indiana took nine more,
(30:00):
which isn't a ton, but they made more.
Speaker 3 (30:02):
They're more.
Speaker 4 (30:03):
I feel as though they move the ball better, they
find shooters better, They're more what's the word I'm looking for,
volatile from a spacing perspective, Whereas I think, okay, see,
like they're consistent, but they're never that team to just
break out and go completely nuts from behind the arc.
So my question is what the hell happens here? Like
(30:25):
if the Pacers are going to keep hitting like eighteen
threes per game at forty six percent and the thunder
don't really respond and they're like in the mid thirties
taking low volume three pointers, like, they will have to
just grind their way to the free throw line at
ton or convert at a ridiculous rate at their twos.
Their defense has to be in tune, they have to
(30:46):
win the rebound back, like everything has to go right
for them to sort of even the scales here, So
are we looking at something as potentially simplistic as shooting variants?
Is this going to be the main thing?
Speaker 1 (31:01):
I don't think it's unfair to boil a lot of
this series down to that, especially if I mean, again,
I don't expect OKC to shoot like where were they
twelve of twenty one at the rim or whatever? It
only was all series, But like if Miles Turner is
going to be out there and cause those types of
problems for you, and if you're also not going to
have like these picture perfect games from your most important
(31:25):
supporting cast members, three point shooting is a way to
make up a lot of that gap. And you know,
I mean, like sitting here and I know he's been
he's become a better shooter. He's definitely a more willing
shooter than he was a half decade ago. But you
don't want to waste a game where you get five
made threes from lou Dort And that's kind of what
the thunderfittered away, And so that's I think, you know,
Also why I think it's more important is I don't
(31:46):
know that people appreciate just like how good of a
shooting team that Indiana can be. I know that they're
not going to take the most threes in the league.
But when you look at their lineup, who is their
their core five? Like that started, like, who is their
shooter that you trust the least on that and then
if the answer is Nemhard or Siakam or Turner, like
if that's your weak outside threat, you're in pretty damn
(32:09):
good shape. And then you go to the bench and
it's all right. Ben Sheppard can be a little rocky,
but Obi Toppin can get him up.
Speaker 3 (32:15):
We've seen Benni five threes.
Speaker 1 (32:17):
Yeah, absolutely, Benne mcmathrin can like like he'll go through
heaters as well. So they do have more bankability when
it comes to shooting, I think than the thunder Dude,
who I think still have just the better collection of talent.
But that's probably something that didn't get talked about enough,
is that the Pacers, I think a lot of attention
has been paid to their defensive improvement, as it should be,
(32:39):
and then just like, oh, look at how fast they
play on offense, and Tyre's Halliburton's the engine that drives
it all, and Aeronie Smith's been fun and Pascal Siakam
is able to operate in the muck, but also on
the break. And it's not like this team like they
will they can kill you if they need to from.
Speaker 4 (32:53):
All Yeah, oh yeah they can. And the thing is
they can do it in half court situations too. This
isn't a seamless jacking threes in transition too. They can
set them up within their half court schemes. This is
something you and I we talked about way back in
I want to say December.
Speaker 3 (33:10):
Or January maybe where we were.
Speaker 4 (33:12):
We were talking about the Pacers as this team that
was capable of slowing it down, just as they were
able to just kind of hit the you know, hit
the brakes and like or so not hit the breakes,
just speed things up for them to be able to
manufacture shots. The way that they're doing be that when
the game is slowed down or when it's high paced,
(33:34):
like how do you guard that?
Speaker 3 (33:35):
How do you think?
Speaker 4 (33:36):
Okay, you can go up, you can go up and
say let's let's slow this game down, let's let's force
them into a half court half court game.
Speaker 3 (33:43):
They'll still manufacture the living fuck out of those situations.
Speaker 1 (33:48):
Yeah, they're like their offense is so dynamic and I
just don't sometimes I don't think I even fully appreciate it, right,
And so that's and that's to say that about going
up like the Thunder defense is the tenth circle of hell.
Speaker 2 (34:02):
I want to make that clear, and I think they
made that clear, like early on in Game one.
Speaker 1 (34:07):
But if when you were looking at the Eastern Conference
Finals specifically, or even look, I'll say this, going up
against this Thunder defense, the stretches were a full that
a full strength Boston squad was prone to going into.
For the series, you might have preferred to see full
strength Boston versus Okasee.
Speaker 2 (34:23):
But offensively, the.
Speaker 1 (34:25):
Pacers are probably it would have been the Pacers or
maybe the Caves for me would have been the offense
is best equipped to give this Thunder defense a real
run for their money. And I just I mean, you
don't want to see them have to get like down
fifteen points in the fourth quarter and it's oh, another
ninety nine percent win probability for their opponent.
Speaker 2 (34:43):
They gotta come back and do it.
Speaker 1 (34:44):
At some point you would assume they're gonna run out
of magic, but they haven't yet, and and their just
ability to adjust, and it's death by like a thousand cuts.
But I'm not talking about like necessarily the actual off
ball movement or though there's plenty of that. It's just
what do you need from them on off and they'll
most likely find a way to give it to you
on it like, they will figure it out. Maybe not
(35:04):
right away, maybe not for the entire game, but as
the game and the series goes on, they will figure
it out.
Speaker 3 (35:09):
Yeah, you know, it kind of dawned on me.
Speaker 4 (35:11):
We had this thing back in Phoenix when you said
seven seconds or Shack, like you could get this the
quick Steve Nash shot. If that didn't materialize, you could
go to Shack in the half court setting. There's no
one pacer you can say that about. You can't go
seven seconds or Sam like, yeah you can, but you
can also go in every other direction. So they have
(35:35):
this uncanny appeal to go seven seconds or well we'll
figure it out, and it might be like, is it.
Speaker 2 (35:41):
More like four seconds?
Speaker 4 (35:43):
Four seconds, or we'll figure it out. And that is
that is such a daunting thing to go up against,
regardless of who you are. I mean, look and side note,
we're talking about like schematics and we're talking about all
the adjustments and whatnot. This could not from an entertainment perspective,
be a better start to a series. This has this.
(36:06):
This Game one had fucking everything everything. It was a
gorgeously executed game, Like, yeah, I know the Thunder missed
a bunch of shots, I know the Pacers turned the
ball over sixteen million times, and yet that didn't take
away from the factor of enjoyment that we all had
watching this game. We all in unison were like, oh,
(36:28):
this is basketball porn. This was great and for us
to talk about all the Avenue hues they can still
approve upon. Just suggest to me even further, this series
could go long and we'd all be better for it.
Speaker 1 (36:45):
I hope it as has Game one done, I had
Thunder and five, you had Pacers and six as Game
one nod.
Speaker 2 (36:52):
And Thunder and six.
Speaker 1 (36:54):
Excuse me, I think I had to write something immediately after,
and I said this series it was bold predictions for
the rest of the series. I just said, this series
is going seven because we deserve it to go seven
after seeing two five game finals. But I do think
this doesn't change my opinion that I really do think
the Thunder are inevitable this year and maybe moving forward.
Speaker 2 (37:12):
I really do believe that.
Speaker 1 (37:13):
But I continue to have Even when I think that
I fully appreciate relative to consensus, the Pacers enough, they
continue to show.
Speaker 2 (37:21):
Me that I do not.
Speaker 1 (37:22):
And that was probably my biggest takeaway from Game one
is that you can say there's a lot of things,
Okac you can clean up, and you will be right.
There are things that Indiana can still clean up as
well too.
Speaker 3 (37:32):
Yeah.
Speaker 4 (37:33):
Yeah, Look, look, I'm an old grouch who can't wait
for the season to end just because I'm tired personally,
but I want this series to go as long as
humanly possible because.
Speaker 2 (37:46):
Give me eight more games of it somehow, right, I'm
here for it.
Speaker 4 (37:49):
I don't care, like, just extend it if you want to, like,
let's go best to fifteen. It's fine. It's this because
these are the kind of games where the seague in
like a long seed season, all that goes out the
window when you actually watch the game and when you're
sitting there late at night. For me at least, I'm
just sitting there going, oh yeah, this is special, and
(38:11):
that's the feeling you want.
Speaker 1 (38:14):
And the final thing I'll say is what I think
is making me a little giddy, not just gonna be confused.
Speaker 2 (38:18):
With Josh Giddy.
Speaker 1 (38:20):
The two coaches that we have in this series in
Mark that Rick Carlisle, they're true sickos that will hashtag
try shit yep. And they have this extended break in
between games to figure out what they're gonna try. And
so like, now that we're not in this every other
day pattern, I'm sort of like like that meme, like
coming around the tree and wiping my hands together. For
(38:40):
anyone who's watching on YouTube, I'm just like, what are
we gonna see? Is it we're telling the thunder to
go bigger? Do they just bench Chet Holmgred and Isaiah
Hartenstein and have j Doub play center again?
Speaker 3 (38:50):
Wallace at center? Sure? Right? Not.
Speaker 1 (38:52):
Everyone's like Casey Wallis plainly needs to play least and
Mark Daniel's like, fuck you, he's playing forty five minutes
in game two.
Speaker 4 (38:57):
Yeah, Alex rust point guard, let's go nuts.
Speaker 3 (39:01):
Absolutely, bring off the bench. Yeah, he's going for six.
Speaker 2 (39:06):
He got MVP, now needs to get some six here.
Speaker 4 (39:09):
No. But you're right though, And that's the thing because
one of them is probably going to overcorrect on something
as well, and then they're gonna be oh shit, and
then they're gonna go back to the drawing board afterwards.
It's like, this is why I also always prefer to
watch players who think the game out. That's why I'm
I'm such a big Luka guy, Jokic guy, like the
(39:30):
guys who just on the fly reads stuff and goes, oh, yeah,
I'm supposed to do A, but I have to do
B because that's the best option I can read, you know,
at my own capability here for me, I have to
go this route instead. So when you combine that with
coaches who are, as you said, true sikos Man, you
just get the best fucking product out of it. And
(39:52):
I realized it sounds like I'm fillatioing d NBA right now.
But look it's I I genuine I believe this is
great for the product, It's great for the interest. Yeah,
it's two small markets teams. I don't give a fuck.
It's great basketball. Isn't that the whole point?
Speaker 1 (40:10):
Honestly, I haven't seen anything since we leading into the series.
I saw something about the market stuff, and I don't
know if I guess I'm pleasantly surprised. I didn't think
of it, But like, I haven't seen a whole like,
oh is this like that? Game one, you said it
was a perfect start to the series. That's actually part
of why. Even if you want to dismiss the people
that talk about the market stuff, it gets talked about,
there probably is some impact on the bottom line or viewership.
Speaker 5 (40:33):
I don't know.
Speaker 2 (40:33):
I don't really care.
Speaker 1 (40:35):
But like if you were just sort of choppering in
and haven't watched any of the NBA playoffs or didn't
have an allegiance or any interest in either of these
two teams, and you sat through most or all of
Game one, as long as you sat through, like I'm
sure a bunch of people turned it off when okayse
he went up fifteen in the fourth quarter, They're like, oh,
sweep or something is coming. That was a perfect opening
(40:55):
game because it disproved so many preconceived notions, including some
of our own, but including that larger one of just
like there was the one about the lack of star
power in this series, which is just like, yeah, Tyrus
Aliburton is built different, He's he's a psychopath, and the.
Speaker 3 (41:12):
Pacers remember Tyrus Alibert is.
Speaker 2 (41:15):
Can I pour some cold water on that? Though?
Speaker 1 (41:17):
I like it as a like a having a chip
on his shoulder or for us to make jokes and
talk about when you do the math, it was like
less than twelve players I called him.
Speaker 3 (41:27):
I know it.
Speaker 4 (41:27):
I've said this before and it's it's totally valid. I
just love throwing that out there because it's just seems
so preposterous now and it's just it's gotten a whole
lot of attention. And look, if he needs that to
feed all of that, am I to judge? That's fine
if you need that to give us that type of
performance like laden games go.
Speaker 2 (41:48):
I think the Ringer ranked him. I don't know if
they were doing there.
Speaker 1 (41:50):
I didn't actually look at the list, but the Ringer
had him like the fifth best player in the league
or the seventh best player in the league right now.
So I think the overrated conversation is actually gonna get
more widespread because of it. So that's he'll have plenty
of motivation then, because I'm sure that stuff is fluttering
around out there, but he is having this might be
captive of the moment type deal. I don't know that
(42:13):
I've ever seen just like a more clutch postseason run.
Speaker 2 (42:16):
We've seen clutcher.
Speaker 1 (42:17):
Shots, although not many at this but just made one
in the finals, but like this is a generational clutch
performance from him across the entire postseason.
Speaker 4 (42:29):
Yeah, Like I'm I'm thinking back to Mike and even
Mike didn't have this many moments in the same year.
Like collectively, Okay, Mike is like far ahead, but in
the same year, I don't think so, Like I'm am
I forgetting someone, Like, is there anyone who was that clutch?
(42:51):
Like Jamal Murray had major performances, but that was a
clutch right like that.
Speaker 1 (42:55):
Rest Damian Lillard's had like two series winners. Yeah, which
is kind of crazy.
Speaker 3 (42:59):
That's that's up there for sure.
Speaker 4 (43:02):
But those who are so different years, which okay, yeah,
that's like you said, that's you said it serious enders though,
that's that's fair. That's a difference than just a game ender.
Speaker 1 (43:11):
Honestly, they proved to be like era ending for those teams.
Remember what happened to the Rockets and the Thunder after Litt.
Speaker 4 (43:18):
Yeah, now the Thunder it's taking taking it all back.
Just got a trade Paul George. Man, that's the recipe.
So next year if that's just that's the the Sixers mission.
Now get off the Paul George contract. You'll be in
the finals in about twelve months.
Speaker 5 (43:31):
It's fine, Mark, Do you have anything else to add
or would you like to tell our subscribers or are
non subscribers who are gonna get on YouTube, Spotify, Apple
the whole night and subscribe already and rock with us
forever and ever and ever and always where they can
find you and all the fantastic work that you do.
Speaker 4 (43:48):
Yes, So when I remember to upload, you can find
my stuff from at the NBA podcast I always do.
I also do a Danish podcast called Buster Peter, and
I write for Forbes and Yahoo Sports and you can
just type my name into Google and those things will
pop up, or you can find me a blue sky
(44:09):
at MSJ NBA. I'm not that super active anymore on
social media, which frankly feels pretty nice. Honestly, that's a
bad way to I'm just gonna sit.
Speaker 2 (44:20):
Let you know. That's a terrible way to promote your
social media.
Speaker 4 (44:23):
I know I'm sorry about that, but like I'm still
I'm still there occasionally, and when I am, it's always
with enthusiasm, even though I say dumb shit once and one.
Speaker 2 (44:33):
I am on social media like a true superhero. So
you can come follow me wherever you're
Speaker 1 (44:38):
On social media until next time and as always, leave
with the one shout out to the one, the only,
the player who might be signed and then rolled out
in game two of the finals by one of these
teams who knows mister frank Nila Kina
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
The Burden
The Burden is a documentary series that takes listeners into the hidden places where justice is done (and undone). It dives deep into the lives of heroes and villains. And it focuses a spotlight on those who triumph even when the odds are against them. Season 5 - The Burden: Death & Deceit in Alliance On April Fools Day 1999, 26-year-old Yvonne Layne was found murdered in her Alliance, Ohio home. David Thorne, her ex-boyfriend and father of one of her children, was instantly a suspect. Another young man admitted to the murder, and David breathed a sigh of relief, until the confessed murderer fingered David; “He paid me to do it.” David was sentenced to life without parole. Two decades later, Pulitzer winner and podcast host, Maggie Freleng (Bone Valley Season 3: Graves County, Wrongful Conviction, Suave) launched a “live” investigation into David's conviction alongside Jason Baldwin (himself wrongfully convicted as a member of the West Memphis Three). Maggie had come to believe that the entire investigation of David was botched by the tiny local police department, or worse, covered up the real killer. Was Maggie correct? Was David’s claim of innocence credible? In Death and Deceit in Alliance, Maggie recounts the case that launched her career, and ultimately, “broke” her.” The results will shock the listener and reduce Maggie to tears and self-doubt. This is not your typical wrongful conviction story. In fact, it turns the genre on its head. It asks the question: What if our champions are foolish? Season 4 - The Burden: Get the Money and Run “Trying to murder my father, this was the thing that put me on the path.” That’s Joe Loya and that path was bank robbery. Bank, bank, bank, bank, bank. In season 4 of The Burden: Get the Money and Run, we hear from Joe who was once the most prolific bank robber in Southern California, and beyond. He used disguises, body doubles, proxies. He leaped over counters, grabbed the money and ran. Even as the FBI was closing in. It was a showdown between a daring bank robber, and a patient FBI agent. Joe was no ordinary bank robber. He was bright, articulate, charismatic, and driven by a dark rage that he summoned up at will. In seven episodes, Joe tells all: the what, the how… and the why. Including why he tried to murder his father. Season 3 - The Burden: Avenger Miriam Lewin is one of Argentina’s leading journalists today. At 19 years old, she was kidnapped off the streets of Buenos Aires for her political activism and thrown into a concentration camp. Thousands of her fellow inmates were executed, tossed alive from a cargo plane into the ocean. Miriam, along with a handful of others, will survive the camp. Then as a journalist, she will wage a decades long campaign to bring her tormentors to justice. Avenger is about one woman’s triumphant battle against unbelievable odds to survive torture, claim justice for the crimes done against her and others like her, and change the future of her country. Season 2 - The Burden: Empire on Blood Empire on Blood is set in the Bronx, NY, in the early 90s, when two young drug dealers ruled an intersection known as “The Corner on Blood.” The boss, Calvin Buari, lived large. He and a protege swore they would build an empire on blood. Then the relationship frayed and the protege accused Calvin of a double homicide which he claimed he didn’t do. But did he? Award-winning journalist Steve Fishman spent seven years to answer that question. This is the story of one man’s last chance to overturn his life sentence. He may prevail, but someone’s gotta pay. The Burden: Empire on Blood is the director’s cut of the true crime classic which reached #1 on the charts when it was first released half a dozen years ago. Season 1 - The Burden In the 1990s, Detective Louis N. Scarcella was legendary. In a city overrun by violent crime, he cracked the toughest cases and put away the worst criminals. “The Hulk” was his nickname. Then the story changed. Scarcella ran into a group of convicted murderers who all say they are innocent. They turned themselves into jailhouse-lawyers and in prison founded a lway firm. When they realized Scarcella helped put many of them away, they set their sights on taking him down. And with the help of a NY Times reporter they have a chance. For years, Scarcella insisted he did nothing wrong. But that’s all he’d say. Until we tracked Scarcella to a sauna in a Russian bathhouse, where he started to talk..and talk and talk. “The guilty have gone free,” he whispered. And then agreed to take us into the belly of the beast. Welcome to The Burden.