Tyrese Haliburton Injury Scare: Pacers Star Spotted Limping Raises Concerns After Game 2 Of NBA Finals
Tyrese Haliburton Injury Scare: Pacers Star Spotted Limping Raises Concerns After Game 2 Of NBA Finals originally appeared on Fadeaway World.
Tyrese Haliburton and the Pacers could not pull off another miracle as the Thunder bounced back from the Game 1 loss with an emphatic win in Game 2. They beat the Pacers 123-107 after leading for almost the entire game.
Advertisement
Following the game, Tyrese Haliburton spoke to the media in his post-game press conference. In a concerning sighting after the conference, Haliburton was seen limping off the podium and heading towards the locker room.
Haliburton, despite leading all scorers for the Pacers with 17 points, had a rather forgettable game. He recorded five turnovers in the game today, which was unlike his usual performance. However, this limp will be a much bigger concern for the Pacers if it in any way impacts his performance and availability for Game 3.
While no official sources have confirmed anything on the potential injury, fans are already having a roller coaster of reactions. Some were very worried about the Pacers' star guard, while some thought he was making an excuse. They took to social media and expressed their opinions.
Advertisement
"I'm sick," wrote a frustrated Pacers fan on X.
"Hope our guy is okay #YesCers," wrote a concerned Pacers fan.
"He'll be fine," wrote an NBA fan who was clearly in denial of the Pacers star's potential injury.
"Sacrificing a pint of blood for his leg health rn," wrote a fan hilariously in reference to the black magic jokes among the NBA fans after the Pacers' recent form of comebacks down the stretch in the Playoffs. This started mainly after Haliburton's dagger to settle Game 1 of the NBA Finals.
"Pretending to create an excuse for his embarrassing performance," wrote a skeptical NBA fan on X who felt that Haliburton is not really injured.
Advertisement
"You gotta be kidding," wrote a Pacers fan in dismay on X.
"When will the pain end," wrote a distraught Pacers fan on X.
"Lu Dort prolly did this", accused a fan on X, looking at the Thunder player's history of gritty plays prone to causing injury.
What Does This Mean For Haliburton And The Pacers?
Headed into Game 3 at home, the Pacers got a reality check in Game 2 for why the Thunder were widely the favorites to bag this series. Shai Gilgeous-Alexander balled out for the Thunder with 34 points, but it was the offense generated by the bench with Aaron Wiggins and Alex Caruso that became the backbreaker for the Pacers.
Advertisement
The Pacers will hope that this limp does not turn into a serious cause of concern for Haliburton's availability in the next game. Haliburton has averaged 18.4 points, 9.3 assists, and 5.8 rebounds in 18 games in the 2025 playoffs so far.
Rick Carlisle's style of offense for the Pacers makes it clear that it is not overtly dependent on a single player to generate offense. But rather, it's a team effort from the Pacers. Haliburton had 17 points to lead all scorers, but seven players scored in double digits for the Pacers.
If Haliburton does sit out the next game or two, it will be the next man up approach for the Pacers. But if it were to happen, could the Pacers manage to beat the Thunder without Haliburton? Let us know what you think in the comments section.
Related: Shai Gilgeous-Alexander Joins Michael Jordan, Shaquille O'Neal, Wilt Chamberlain, And Others On Top-Tier NBA List
This story was originally reported by Fadeaway World on Jun 9, 2025, where it first appeared.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
40 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Pacers Plan for Myles Turner Reportedly Revealed
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. The Indiana Pacers are just two wins away from winning an NBA title. Myles Turner is one of the big reasons why they are in the NBA Finals in the first place. Turner is someone who has had his name in trade rumors for each of the last few years. It seems like for each of the last five years or so that he has been in rumors. It's clear that Turner is someone who is valued across the NBA. If so many other teams want him, maybe the Pacers should try to keep him long-term. Read more: Lakers Legend Magic Johnson Delivers Powerful Message to Luka Doncic Myles Turner #33 of the Indiana Pacers reacts against the New York Knicks during the fourth quarter in Game Three of the Eastern Conference Finals. Turner will be a free agent for the first time... Myles Turner #33 of the Indiana Pacers reacts against the New York Knicks during the fourth quarter in Game Three of the Eastern Conference Finals. Turner will be a free agent for the first time this offseason. More Photo byTurner is going to be a free agent for the first time in his career this summer. He is likely going to be the top free-agent center available this summer, and the Pacers know it. In order to keep him, the Pacers will need to pay into the luxury tax for the first time in 20 years. It sounds like that is the plan once the offseason hits. "The Indiana Pacers know they need to have Myles Turner back. They can't afford to lose him."@ShamsCharania says the Pacers are "prepared and expecting to pay the luxury tax" to keep Myles Turner 💰 — NBA on ESPN (@ESPNNBA) June 12, 2025 Turner is the longest-tenured Pacers player on the roster. He has been there for ten years and has seen a lot of iterations of this team. This is the first time that he is playing in the NBA Finals. While his offensive production hasn't been great so far, his defense has been solid. Pacers coach Rick Carlisle has said that Turner is dealing with an illness, which could explain why he hasn't been able to hit the number of shots that he normally does. Keeping Turner for the foreseeable future is a priority for the Pacers. He fits how the team plays perfectly because of his ability to hit threes and block shots in the paint. The Pacers have already proven that this current core can compete for a championship. Keeping them together for as long as possible is what the organization should do, even if paying the luxury tax is the only way to do it. Turner is going to command a decent amount of money, as he should. He is the best center on the market and is hitting the market at the perfect time. The rest of the starting lineup is locked up for quite a few years, so they just need to do the same for Turner. If they do that, they will be a hard team to beat. More NBA on Newsweek: Knicks' Coaching Search Receives Harsh Criticism From NBA Insider
USA Today
41 minutes ago
- USA Today
Chet Holmgren after Game 3 loss to Pacers: 'A lot of areas we can clean up'
Chet Holmgren after Game 3 loss to Pacers: 'A lot of areas we can clean up' Backpedaling beyond the perimeter, Chet Holmgren received Jalen Williams' drive-and-kick. As he wound up to take an outside attempt, Myles Turner closed out fast enough to block the look. That exemplified how everything went for the Oklahoma City Thunder in the final moments. Holmgren finished with 20 points on 6-of-15 shooting, 10 rebounds and two assists. He shot 0-of-6 from 3 and went 8-of-9 on free throws. He also had one steal. The Thunder fell apart late in a 116-107 Game 3 loss to the Indiana Pacers. They're back to trailing in the 2025 NBA Finals in a 2-1 series hole. Everything looked promising at the start. Holmgren was featured often. He swished in a mid-range jumper that forced the Pacers to call the first timeout. It was one of the seven-footer's best scoring stretches in the playoffs. He had 13 points after the first quarter. Then Holmgren faded into the background. He only had seven points the rest of the way. The outside shot never fell for him. Meanwhile, Indiana was a buzzsaw on the other end with an active night inside the paint. Everything that could've gone wrong for OKC did. "I think I was playing aggressive. I kinda got more to two feet when I got in the painted area. The plays that didn't go my way, I felt like I got a little sped up at times. I got a little bit out of control in the paint, which is again another one of the areas I need to clean up and be better for the next game," Holmgren said. "I think there's more than just that. I got to watch the film and improve." They almost got away with it, but the Thunder looked out of sorts for even-numbered quarters. You can't expect yourself to win an NBA Finals game with such high ups and downs. Holmgren was the perfect example of that type of erratic flow. "There's a lot of areas we can clean up. Myself personally, everybody down the roster that got in tonight, can look in the mirror and see where they can be better," Holmgren said. "Everybody who stepped out there could be better. Starts with me. I got to be better."
Yahoo
44 minutes ago
- Yahoo
NCAA Fights Tennessee Hooper's Request to Play a Fifth Season
The NCAA on Monday motioned a federal judge to deny Zakai Zeigler's motion for an injunction in his antitrust lawsuit to keep playing playing Division I basketball as a college graduate who already played four D-1 seasons. The NCAA's motion sends a warning that Zeigler's lawsuit could open the door to numerous players staying on teams for years after they graduate—and taking spots away from incoming freshmen. Zeigler, 22, graduated from the University of Tennessee last month. The 5-foot-9 native of Long Island, N.Y. is a two-time SEC Defensive Player of the Year and set several team records. He played all four seasons at Tennessee, where he also received recognition for academic achievement. Advertisement More from Zeigler would like to play a fifth season as a graduate student, but the NCAA only allows four seasons of intercollegiate competition within a five-year window. Zeigler contends the four-seasons rule violates antitrust law by depriving him and similarly situated players of athletic skill development and NIL opportunities—Zeigler contends he'd earn as much as $4 million in NIL in 2025-26 since he's a well-known and successful college player from a prominent program. He argues there's a less restrictive approach where the NCAA could allow for an additional season if a player completed their undergraduate degree in four years, meaning they did not red shirt and their academic advancement followed the typical path for college students. The NCAA repudiates Zeigler's arguments in a brief authored by Taylor J. Askew and Rakesh Kilaru and colleagues from Holland & Knight and Wilkinson Stekloff. Among the points raised in the NCAA's brief is that Zeigler is not an NBA prospect and thus an additional season is unlikely to make him a candidate for the NBA. 'All publicly available evidence indicates that Plaintiff, respectfully, has a difficult path to the NBA, at this juncture,' the brief states. The brief acknowledges that Zeigler is a terrific college player—he's the all-time leading scorer and assist leader in Tennessee history—but pivots from that point to assert, 'presumably, if [Zeigler] had a viable path to the NBA, given his resume, he would already be a viable prospect. After all, NBA scouts would have seen him play in 138 collegiate contests.' The brief also bluntly mentions, 'there is no proof in the record that Plaintiff was even invited to either the NBA Combine or G-League Combine this year.' Advertisement Similarly, the NCAA highlights how 'there is no evidence that one more season of participation in college basketball is necessary' for Zeigler to play pro hoops. To that point, Zeigler could have tried to join the NBA, G League or a foreign league years ago. He met their minimum age and experience requirements but chose to remain in college and advance toward a degree. Zeigler is also depicted as selfish. As the NCAA spins it, Zeigler is asking a court to make him the first college athlete 'in history' to obtain a judicial decree to play a fifth season 'as a matter of right.' If Zeigler is granted that chance, there would be a loser: a roster spot for a graduating high school senior would otherwise join the Volunteers would be 'reapportioned' to Zeigler. In fact, the NCAA estimates that if college seniors who played four seasons could play another season and chose to do so, somewhere between 20% and 25% of roster spots that would have gone to incoming freshmen would be lost. 'While Plaintiff focuses only on what that means for himself,' the NCAA writes, 'he does so to the detriment of the entering student-athletes who dream of being the next Zakai Zeigler.' In that same spirit, the NCAA defends the four seasons rule as reflecting 'the lifecycle of a collegiate athlete.' Stated differently, NCAA sports are intended to be a career. A college student plays a sport and their college athletic career time ordinarily ends when they graduate. This 'lifecycle,' the NCAA argues, ensures a 'steady stream of opportunities' for graduating high school players to gain a college education and play sports. Advertisement 'College athletics,' the NCAA asserts, 'is a means to a better end for student-athletes—not the end itself.' The NCAA also maintains that Zeigler, like other athletes who have sued the NCAA in recent months to extend their eligibility, has 'misapprehended' the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in NCAA v. Alston (2021) for legal principles that the Court rejected. Although Alston is sometimes linked to NIL, the case had nothing to do with NIL. The NCAA stresses that Alston only addressed compensation rules for athletes' education-related expenses, which are subject to antitrust scrutiny since they involve commercial activity. However, Alston does 'not touch' eligibility rules, which the NCAA asserts fall outside the scope of antitrust scrutiny. As the NCAA tells it, eligibility rules are not about commercial transactions and instead concern who counts as a college athlete—a 'necessary' ingredient 'to create the product of collegiate sports.' Even Justice Brett Kavanaugh's oft-cited concurring opinion, in which lambasted the NCAA and amateurism, explicitly stated that Alston 'involves only a narrow subset of the NCAA's compensation rules.' The NCAA further asserts that relevant precedent in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, which governs the Tennessee federal court where Zeigler sued, also instructs that eligibility rules fall outside the scope of antitrust scrutiny. As the NCAA recently cited in an appellate brief in Vanderbilt quarterback Diego Pavia's case against the NCAA regarding eligibility rules, the Sixth Circuit held in Claude Bassett v. NCAA (2008) that enforcement of NCAA rules 'is not within the purview of antitrust law' since those rules are not related to commercial or business activities. Advertisement Another alleged defect in Zeigler's lawsuit is that it has 'no limiting principle,' meaning if a player has a legal right to play a fifth season so they can earn more NIL and further refine athletic skills, the same player could raise the same argument for a sixth season and so on. Universities have no shortage of graduate programs in which an athlete could remain enrolled for, at least in theory, many years. The NCAA also contends that a core premise of Zeigler's lawsuit, which argues that removing experienced college players harms the labor market, is erroneous. While Zeigler suggests NIL deals are most lucrative for seniors, the NCAA says 'non-seniors, on average, have higher NIL valuations than seniors.' The NCAA's expert witness, Cal Berkeley economics professor Matthew Backus, provided a declaration referencing that individual NIL valuations for college basketball players shows that non-seniors' have a higher average NIL valuation than seniors, $1.2 million compared to $1.07 million. The issuance of a preliminary injunction for Zeigler, the NCAA argues, is also misplaced because any harm he suffers from not playing can be quantified. A core element to a preliminary injunction is that denial of one by a judge would likely cause the plaintiff irreparable harm, meaning a harm that money damages can't remedy. The NCAA maintains there are several problems with Zeigler claiming irreparable harm. One is that he 'has known since his first day on campus that he had five years to complete four seasons' and yet waited until after he graduated college to sue. The NCAA believes that Zeigler manufactured an emergency when in reality, he could have sued years ago, giving the court time to review the case's merits. Advertisement Also, the NCAA asserts, any injury Zeigler suffers by a denial to keep playing would be calculable. The NCAA notes that Zeigler didn't enter the transfer portal, 'unlike 100+ other collegiate basketball players who have exhausted their eligibility but are either contemplating suing for more or hoping for an NCAA rule change.' If Zeigler plays another season, 'he will assuredly play for the University of Tennessee,' the NCAA points out. Zeigler submitted a supporting exhibit of data from Spyre Sports Group, which has an NIL collective for Tennessee athletics and estimates Zeigler's NIL value in another season would be worth $2 million to $4 million. That is important, the NCAA maintains, because it shows Zeigler's potential legal injury could be resolved by monetary damages if he eventually wins a trial. U.S. District Judge Katherine A. Crytzer will hold a hearing on Zeigler's motion for a preliminary injunction on Friday at 1:45 pm local time in a Knoxville (Tenn.) federal courthouse. Best of Sign up for Sportico's Newsletter. For the latest news, follow us on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram.
