Latest news with #BenRohrbach
Yahoo
8 hours ago
- Sport
- Yahoo
Pacers-Thunder Game 7 predictions! Who will win the 2025 NBA Finals and be crowned champion on Sunday?
It all comes down to this for the Pacers and the Thunder: Game 7 of the NBA Finals on Sunday (8 ET, ABC). Winner will be crowned the 2025 champion. Will the Thunder finish off one of the greatest seasons in NBA history? Or will the Pacers complete one of the most unexpected postseason runs of all time? Our writers weigh in on Game 7 and make their predictions. 1. Use 7 words to describe these NBA Finals. Ben Rohrbach: Highly competitive basketball for two rabid fanbases. This series may not be for everyone, or for anyone who bought into the small-market criticism of it, but for those who love the sport — and, man, do they love basketball in Indiana and Oklahoma City — you cannot help but respect how hard these teams play. Advertisement Tom Haberstroh: Basketball does not get better than this. The level of hooping is a coach's dream as well as a fan's dream. It may not be a TV partner's dream matchup, but these two teams are putting legacies and bodies equally on the line. Dan Devine: A thrilling, exhausting, illuminating showcase for the sport. (That's eight, but if we don't count the articles, it's only six. Devine skirts a word count yet again.) Nineteen days ago, damn near everyone just knew that the Thunder would win this series. Now, after a three-week rollercoaster ride of buzzer-beaters, bounce-backs and beatdowns — of adjustments, adjustments to the adjustments, and adjustments to the adjustments TO the adjustments — all we know for sure is that the Pacers are a hell of a lot better than most people realized, that their all-gas-no-brakes two-way play style is an incredible weapon, and that reaching the pinnacle requires post-graduate real-time problem-solving … even if everyone just knew the chip was yours for the taking. Hours before Game 7, I feel like all I know is that I don't know nothing. And that's fine. Advertisement Vincent Goodwill: A harbinger for the future of basketball. It feels big now, especially if you're in it, but it will feel bigger down the line when the NBA's sea change really takes hold. The breakneck pace, the young stars making a name for themselves. Who knows if either will be back, but it is a signal of the terms these games will be played by in the coming years. 2. What, if anything, have we learned from these Finals so far? Goodwill: That we don't know as much as we thought we did. That coaching matters. That the connective tissue of heartbreak and year-to-year continuity means more than we believed it could. That there could very well be no run-away-and-hide dynasties in the league's future, because the competition is too thick for anyone to truly dominate — and that youth can mature faster than we thought possible. Devine: That, as we recently discussed on The Big Number, the future of the NBA is going to be a spin on pace-and-space — namely, being able to cover as much space as possible, as quickly as possible, for as long as possible. Advertisement The Pacers and Thunder have made the argument for bumping a 'Big 5' league up by at least a couple of contributors — to be able to run 10, 11, 12 deep during the regular season to keep your stars fresher for May and June, and to be able to play a style that applies maximum pressure on opponents for the full 48 minutes, with more players emptying the tank in shorter stints before coming out for a rest. Stars still matter, of course … but so does everyone else. And if you don't have the Everyone Else, you won't survive 82 games and four rounds — especially against teams that do. Haberstroh: Never, ever count out the Indiana Pacers. Their ability to level up and play to their opponent (and often above it) will be the thing that I'll remember most about these Finals. Every inch, every point is being earned on the battlefield. It's as if they think the 13 players who voted Tyrese Haliburton as most overrated are all on the opposing roster. Every game. Rohrbach: We have learned what it takes to build a team in the era of the second apron. Gone is the three-star model, or even the superstar tandem, and in its place are true teams. Both the Thunder and the Pacers are built around one superstar, a complementary fringe All-NBA talent and well-paid, talented depth. 3. What is the biggest key for the Thunder in Game 7? Devine: Take care of the ball. Take care of the ball. And then, after that, take care of the ball. The Thunder are 73-18 this season when they don't commit more turnovers than their opponent. When they do cough it up more than the other team, they're … still 10-3, because they've been an incredible team all season. Two of those three losses, though, have come in this series: in Game 3, when Indiana's full-court pressure conspired to minimize the impact of Shai Gilgeous-Alexander and hamstring the Oklahoma City offense, and in Game 6, which began to shift on a three-turnover stretch early in the second quarter. Conversely: When the Thunder haven't turned the ball over more often than Indiana, they're 3-1 in this series, with the only loss coming on Haliburton's Game 1 buzzer beater. Control the ball, get shots on goal and limit Indiana's transition opportunities, and OKC dramatically improves its odds of hoisting the Larry O'B. Advertisement Goodwill: OKC's offense hasn't been humming the way we all expected, at least not since Game 2. When they've struggled in this series, it's been that reason. When Shai Gilgeous-Alexander can't get to his spots, or when the shooters aren't hitting from the gravity he creates, they get into trouble. He can't have another eight turnover game on Sunday. 27 assists to 23 turnovers? No bueno. [Pacers-Thunder: 7 eye-popping stats that have defined the Finals] Rohrbach: Will the defense show up? A swarming defense is Oklahoma City's calling card, and it is the best thing any team has got going for it in these playoffs. Lean into that, and the Thunder should be fine. In Game 6, though, the Pacers "played harder than us," said SGA. "And when a team plays harder, they turn the other team over." Haberstroh: They better hope the time-honored axiom, 'Role players play better at home,' comes true on Sunday. Lu Dort, Cason Wallace and Alex Caruso combining for five points in Game 6 is not the stuff of champions. They better defend and capitalize on kickouts in ways that were somehow out of reach in Game 6. 4. What is the biggest key for the Pacers in Game 7? Haberstroh: Continue to limit turnovers. Unbelievably, the Thunder didn't snag a steal until midway through the third quarter in Game 6. At the end of the day, that's what sealed their blowout victory, and possibly their ticket to the Larry O'Brien Trophy. If they can keep the OKC Dobermans at bay, they'll be in good position for their franchise's first NBA championship. Advertisement Rohrbach: If defense is key for OKC, then taking care of the ball is key for Indiana. The Pacers are 10-1 in the playoffs when they turn the ball over 13 times or fewer. They have required two buzzer-beaters, including one in Game 1 of this series, to finish 5-6 when they turn it over 14 times or more. I don't think they want Game 7 to require a buzzer-beater. Or maybe they do. I'm out of the prediction business when it comes to Indy. Goodwill: It's almost the same as the Thunder. Take care of the ball. Especially on the road. Avoid the five-minute Looney Tunes calamity of errors that makes winning in this environment damn near impossible. You can't count on rebounding from that disastrous stretch of Game 1 to steal one on the road. You don't steal Game 7s in the NBA Finals on the road. You don't have to play perfect, but you can't give the game away. The defense will be there. The offense has to be passable. Devine: Keep OKC uncomfortable on offense. After showing the Thunder a steady diet of full-court pressure throughout the series, Indiana dialed it way back in Game 6, preferring instead to meet Gilgeous-Alexander and Jalen Williams just inside half court and converge on the ball-handler from there, with hands in the passing lanes, help defenders in the gaps and well-timed double teams sprung from unfamiliar angles. The result was literally Oklahoma City's worst offensive game of the season. Advertisement After a couple of days to digest how the Pacers did it, Oklahoma City will likely come out for Game 7 with some new answers. If an Indiana defense led by assistant coach Jenny Boucek can introduce some new questions, though, the Pacers have a great shot to keep things tight enough to pull off yet another upset. 5. Name an X-factor for Game 7. Rohrbach: 3-point shooting. As Tom mentioned, the old saying goes, "Role players play better at home," and that has been true for the Thunder, whose fans create a true home-court advantage. In the Finals, the Thunder are shooting 39.8% on 32.7 3-point attempts per game at home and 30.9% on 22.7 attempts on the road, a difference of 30 points per game. Seems relevant. [NBA Finals keys and X-factors for Pacers and Thunder] Advertisement Devine: Is T.J. McConnell now too much of a defined, known quantity to be considered an X-factor? If so, let's go with Obi Toppin, an irrepressible live wire on offense whose sprinting in transition and quick trigger from 3-point range fit perfectly with this Pacers team, and whose biggest and best moments of this postseason — 13 points in 14 minutes in Game 4 against Milwaukee, 20 points in 20 minutes in Game 4 against Cleveland, 18 points in 25 minutes in Game 6 against New York, 17 points with five 3-pointers in Game 1 against OKC, 20 points in 23 minutes in Thursday's Game 6 — have all come in massive Pacers wins. In a Game 7, every possession feels magnified, and every make feels like it counts for double. If Toppin can get free and get hot, those makes could be absolute backbreakers for the Thunder — and just the shot of adrenaline the Pacers need to get across the finish line. Goodwill: Maybe Obi Toppin has also been so consistent through this series he no longer qualifies as an X-factor, but that's who could make this game very interesting. He was shaky early in Game 1 with turnovers, but even then he was hitting shots. It doesn't seem like the Thunder have an athlete that can go up with him consistently, especially in those second- and third-quarter stints that have changed the game's complexion. Either he or Nembhard has to make the OKC defense pay with shooting or the paths to winning will be limited. Advertisement Haberstroh: The officiating. If the referees call a tight game, advantage Pacers. If they let 'em play, edge goes to OKC. Statistically, Scott Foster calls the tightest game of any official in the NBA, so we'll see if he returns this series after working Game 4. None of the officials who worked the last Finals Game 7, in 2016, are still in the referee corp. It might be Foster's assignment. 6. Game 7 prediction! Pacers or Thunder — who wins it all? Goodwill: Thunder. Only because you can't change your pick, and because you rarely see Game 7s be won on the road, 2016 notwithstanding. Unless the moment gets too big for them, they've been the best team since October. They must do it now. Devine: Thunder. I've picked them at every step along the way — before the season, before the playoffs, before this series — and they've still got home-court advantage and the MVP. I'll stick with them … and be roughly zero percent surprised if the Pacers, once again, make picking against them look foolish. Advertisement Rohrbach: Thunder. They are the better team, or at least I have been saying that all series long, and rather than admit that the Pacers are just as good as the Thunder, why not try to prove myself right one more time? Haberstroh: I'll go Pacers. I picked OKC in 5, so I clearly underestimated Indiana's fighting spirit. I won't make that mistake again. Rick Carlisle seems to have Mark Daigneault on the ropes as indicated by the Thunder — the No. 1 overall seed that won 68 games! — continuing to change their starting lineups in the series like they're the underdogs. 7. Who will win Finals MVP? Haberstroh: Pascal Siakam. His Raptors closed out on the road in the 2019 Finals and he largely drove that effort with 26 points and 10 rebounds in the clincher in the Bay. Six years later, he seems poised to do it again, with 19.8 points, 8.3 rebounds and four assist averages in the series. He's been as steady as they come. Advertisement Rohrbach: T.J. McConnell. Just kidding. It's Shai Gilgeous-Alexander, and then everyone else. Goodwill: Shai Gilegous-Alexander. There was a path for Jalen Williams, but it seems more unlikely unless he puts up a 40-ball. SGA has to take the lead here, both in action and emotion. Devine: Shai Gilgeous-Alexander. When in doubt, go with the MVP to finish the job.
Yahoo
18-02-2025
- Sport
- Yahoo
Should the NBA consider USA vs. World? Who wins a 1v1 tourney? Debating the best All-Star ideas
This year's NBA All-Star Game has been widely criticized, but perhaps some good ideas will come out of the weekend. Before the regular season resumes on Wednesday, let's break some of them down. Ben Rohrbach: USA vs. World. It was the only idea in San Francisco that jazzed the players. 'I would love to,' said San Antonio Spurs star Victor Wembanyama, one of the few players who tried throughout the All-Star Game. 'It's more purposeful. There's more pride in it. More stakes.' 'I'd love that,' added Milwaukee Bucks star Giannis Antetokounmpo. 'Oh, I'd love that. I think that would be the most interesting and most exciting format. I'd love that. For sure, I'd take pride in that. I always compete, but I think that will give me a little bit more extra juice to compete.' This year's international team could have featured Wembanyama, Antetokounmpo, Nikola Jokić, Shai Gilgeous-Alexander, Pascal Siakam, Alperen Şengün, Karl-Anthony Towns and Kyrie Irving. Luka Dončić, Franz Wagner and Jamal Murray are waiting in the wings. Not bad. Dan Titus: Replace the unserious Skills Challenge with a 1-on-1 King of the Hill tournament with a purse of $1 million. The event should span multiple days and feature whichever rising stars or All-Stars want to participate. Rachel Nichols has already run it by several All-Stars — all with resounding support for the idea. Whether that's smoke remains to be seen, but that would definitely inject some much-needed competition into Saturday's festivities. Vincent Goodwill: Just going back to East vs West. Perhaps I'm a rigid traditionalist, but all these other formats don't do it as much. The USA/International game, I'm more open to than ever, but you'd have a real hard time finding 12 definitive international All-Stars. That's the thing for me beyond the Jokić/Giannis/Luka/Wemby types. It's not long before the pickings get slim. Morten Stig Jensen: One idea that's been floating around for a while is a return to team uniforms, which is something players themselves have an interest in. The aspect of team representation, at least in some capacity, might get players to feel more responsible to live up to the expectations of their respective fan bases, when wearing the actual night-to-night jersey they usually play in. It's easy to hide away in a homogenous, and often plain and boring, uniform that has no shred of individuality. (Oh, and I also like the idea of simply going back to East vs West, with all the fluff of draft, tournaments, and Kevin Hart nonsense off to the wayside.) Goodwill: True, I guess. Only because the players participating are the names you actually know. Like Cade Cunningham isn't the best 3-point shooter on his team, but Malik Beasley wasn't invited (maybe he should've been). It's never about the event itself, it's about the stars participating (Craig Hodges' 1991 showing aside). If more names were in the dunk contest, that would be the crown jewel of this, hands down. Jensen: False? The event is … fine. But it's routinely undermined by the fact that the best shooter literally in the history of the sport rarely participates, and thus whoever wins the event isn't viewed as the best. In fact, not even close. I guess what I'm asking here is, what's really the point of the competition, when we all are keenly aware that the winner isn't even remotely close to being the best shooter in the NBA? Rohrbach: True. It has drama built into it. Golden State Warriors superstar Stephen Curry remains the game's most electrifying player, and he was an incredible ambassador for the sport in the Bay Area. That influence is felt across the league, where we have seen an explosion of highly skilled shooters. Bring them all together, including Curry, add some WNBA talent to the mix, and run it back. You know you will be watching to see if those moneyballs find the net. Titus: That's facts. Although this year wasn't particularly memorable, what event actually was? Each event had a main course with some unappealing sides. The commish needs to get on the horn with the W and get Caitlin Clark and Sabrina Ionescu back in the mix. Plus, bring back the OGs who've won it before with some name notoriety to make it more appealing to casuals and fans alike. Last thought — go back to the standard 30-point scoring system. Too many Starry shots. Titus: Shaedon Sharpe, Anthony Edwards, Zion Williamson and Ja Morant. I don't think Ant or Zion will participate, but those four are the marquee dunkers in the game right now. No shade to Zach LaVine — he's a two-time champ with nothing to prove. It's these young guys that need to infuse some damn creativity and save the dunk contest — without the gimmicks. Goodwill: Zion, if healthy. Anthony Edwards (if he doesn't have a groin injury or illness). Zach LaVine, just to defend his name and honor to the event. And either Ja Morant or Amen Thompson — really intrigued by Thompson's freakish athleticism. Not sure how creative a guy like Ja could be in that setting. He's a better game dunker. Jensen: Zach LaVine, Ja Morant, Zion Williamson and Shaedon Sharpe. No props. No timer. Just let these four guys do whatever they see fit. People come to see stars — and Shaedon Sharpe — dunk with immense power and creativity. Let those guys do just that, without being measured against the weights of history. As for judges, no social media stars. No influencers. Gimme the real legends. Mike. Nique. Vince. J-Rich. Dr. J. I don't want to see anyone on that panel who's never dunked a day in their own life, nor do I want to see former players who weren't known as dunkers. If you want a dunk product, make it an actual dunk product. This ain't hard. Rohrbach: Amen and Ausar Thompson vs. Ja Morant and Anthony Edwards. LeBron James once said this of the Thompson twins: "They ain't like the rest of us. I've been able to go against some dudes in my career, and those two guys, man, they're pure athleticism.' When LeBron freaking James is saying that about you, you know you are an athletic freak. Pit them against Morant and Edwards, the game's two coolest high-fliers, and you've got gold. Goodwill: Victor Wembanyama. Score on your man and stop your man. Nobody does that better than Wembanyama. But we need 1-on-1 rules that we see in NBA practices or USAB practices: Three dribbles or less. Watching someone dribble for 15 seconds, not really entertaining. Get to your move and see where it goes. Rohrbach: Victor Wembanyama. He can score over and around anyone, and maybe by next year he will be able to score through anyone. More importantly, he can stop anything. I might have gone with Kyrie Irving's insane skill set for this honor, but Antetokounmpo made me think better of it. 'Sometimes you forget, to be a good 1-on-1 player, you've got to be able to play both ways,' said Giannis. 'You've got to get a stop to get the ball. You don't get a stop, you're not getting the ball. It's kind of hard, say, if Kyrie Irving is going against Wemby, he's got to get a stop.' Jensen: Kevin Durant. Seven-feet tall, with a release point so high only Wemby can block it? And he's got legitimate 3-point range? KD might be on the older side here, but that dude has every conceivable advantage as a scorer still, and that's what 1v1 is all about. (If 25 or under, I'm giving Anthony Edwards a shot here.) Titus: Victor Wembanyama. He's young, but these old heads probably won't even want to play. Wemby has the unique combination of size, handle, shooting and defense to dominate anyone in this setting. Your best bet is to foul him because he'll score over anyone in a myriad of ways. Jensen: All-Star has always been a time for celebrating the game of basketball, but instead you have former NBA players up way past their bedtime constantly complaining about the state of the game, without adding any nuance as to why the game is somehow bad. (Spoiler alert: The game is fantastic, and it's time for the constant negativity to end from all the old heads, half of whom don't even know the names of half the league.) I'd give the NBA infinity respect points if it begins to bite back and insists on bringing in players and analysts who actually understand the current game, and who can help the league deliver a presentation that also caters to young fans. Because what's currently being offered ... does not. Titus: Restore some competition, dignity and pride to the weekend. I realize that's the challenge with this era of hoopers, but let's get back to basics. Start with reviving the traditional East vs. West matchup for Sunday. Give the winning team a cash prize like the In-Season Tournament, plus home-court advantage in the Finals. At least that adds some motivation. Finally, abolish the Skills Challenge and never invite Kevin Hart to host anything related to All-Star Weekend again. Rohrbach: We need a break from drumming up ideas to fix the All-Star Game. We came up with one last season, and the NBA adopted some of it for this year's format, but the portion they tweaked — adding Rising Stars as their own team — became the worst aspect of the event, other than that bizarre break to honor the TNT crew. The game will not be cool again until both the players take it seriously and the NBA makes it the weekend's focal point. We can come up with as many ideas as we want, but until they take ownership of their responsibility to the game it will be a dud. Maybe once Wemby becomes the face of the league, his effort will be contagious. Goodwill: We keep making this more complicated than it needs to be. Entertain and give the fans something compelling. Not the extra bells and whistles, because the fans know they're being fooled and the players don't need that either. Maybe have the players begin their All-Star obligations on Thursday, so by Saturday all they'll have is practice and media day, then the rest of the day to chill so they're not exhausted by Sunday. The sponsorships and appearances have gotten in the way of the game. It's a big moneymaker for the league, but the NBA has to draw a line somewhere, too.
