NBA Finals Best Bets for June 8: Expect a High-Scoring Affair

The Point Total

Game 1 finished with a total of 221 points. For the “over” to hit tonight, we’ll need about ten more points.

I find it extremely reasonable to expect ten more points to be scored tonight because of the sustainability of adjustments that Indiana’s offense made in the second half of Game 1 and because of how effective Chet Holmgren and Jalen Williams, Oklahoma City’s second- and third-leading scorers, normally are on offense.

Chet Holmgren

In Game 1, Holmgren scored six points. For the game to see 230 points, all he had to do was reach his postseason scoring average this year, which is 15.8 points per game. He struggled in Game 1 because he spent too much time trying to score inside, where he had to contend with Myles Turner.

One adjustment that OKC will emphasize tonight is having Holmgren operate more frequently along the perimeter. We’ve seen him do this a lot in the postseason, and we saw a bit of it in Game 1.

His handles as a versatile big and his strong three-point conversion rate — he converted 37.9 percent of his three-point attempts this season but attempted one three in Game 1 — make it reasonable to have him spend less time inside, especially with Turner primarily being a shot-blocker who is physically stronger than Holmgren and would prefer him to stay inside.

Indiana’s defense would be hurt by Holmgren’s increased presence along the perimeter because it would help Holmgren score more, plus it would create more spacing for the Thunder offense.

Jalen Williams

The Thunder would have likewise scored several more points in Game 1 if Jalen Williams had played at his usual level.

Williams attempted a lot of shots, which was unfortunate for the Thunder, given his ongoing tendency to struggle in Game 1 of a given series. Too much time off is evidently a bad thing for him.

But he reliably bounces back in Game 2, as he did in the last round, where his field goal conversion rate was 60 percent in Game 2 after it was 38.9 percent in Game 1, and in the penultimate round where his field goal conversion rate was nearly 30 percent higher in Game 2 than it was in Game 1.

In Game 1 of this round, he did accumulate good shooting opportunities. He simply didn’t play well. I like the “over” tonight because the solution for Holmgren is easy and Williams just needs to keep at it.

Indiana’s Improved Offense

I also like the “over” tonight because the Pacers’ offense showed tremendous improvements in the second half of Game 1 that one must expect to continue.

In the first half, they turned the ball over a lot. Some of these turnovers were simple errors resulting from miscommunication. But, to further explain why Indiana’s improved offensive play is sustainable, different players learned things that they won’t forget.

Obi Toppin learned that he lacks the handling ability to drive into the teeth of the Thunder defense. He has plenty of teammates who do possess this ability, though, so there is no need for him to keep trying and to keep neglecting his spot-up abilities as an efficient shooter whose height makes it hard for a rather small OKC lineup to contest his three-point attempts — he made five of his eight three-point attempts in Game 1.

Myles Turner, moreover, learned to keep the ball high when he possesses it. Furthermore, the team avoided attempting soft bounce passes.

Indiana will score more points tonight in Game 2 than it did in Game 1 because it will remember these lessons. Having learned them already, they scored 66 second-half points in Game 1. With sharper play and more-or-less simple adjustments, Indiana drastically reduced its turnover total in the second half. This shouldn’t be a surprise: The Pacers’ offense all year has been one of the best at avoiding turnovers. Fewer turnovers means more scoring opportunities and more scoring.

Escaping the Swarm

Indiana’s offensive improvement in the second half of Game 1 reflects the comfort that it acquired against OKC’s unique swarming defense.

The Thunder like to swarm in the middle. Hence, they normally allow a lot of corner threes — in the regular season, they allowed more of them per game than any other team.

Indiana is regularly very efficient in the corners and thrived there in Game 1. The Pacers are the fourth-most efficient three-point shooting team, so one can only expect them to continue to succeed from deep in line with their season-long success.

More than any other team, they love to pass a lot and to pass to open teammates. They have ample playmaking talent with quick-off-the-dribble and pass-first guys like their offensive centerpiece Tyrese Haliburton, whose elite assist-to-turnover ratio suggests that he is someone who can handle and really take advantage of a swarm-heavy defense.

Inside the arc, Pascal Siakam has an easy time against OKC’s smaller defense. The Thunder still struggle, given the way they defend, to contain Indiana’s shooters without Isaiah Hartenstein. Indiana’s offense has thrived even against the two strongly-reputed bigs of Cleveland, making an increase in playing time for Hartenstein, who crucially lacks the pace to run out to and contest Indiana’s three-point shooters, seem less likely.

The reduction of playing time for Hartenstein gives Siakam more mismatches to take advantage of inside, helping the Pacers complement their efficient three-point shooting with strong scoring at the basket, which they will continue to supplement with second-chance scoring opportunities via the rebounds that their size advantage enables them to amass.

Shai Gilgeous-Alexander

Oklahoma City’s star point guard underperformed, in Game 1, as a distributor. He accumulated 5.2 fewer assists than he did per game in the last round. He will rewatch Game 1 and see how often he could have taken advantage of Indiana’s defense.

The Pacers helped on over three quarters of his drives. Their head coach has been explicit: they recognize his scoring talent and want to limit it.

Of course, the league MVP still amassed 38 points. But, aided by stronger shooting from his teammates, he will help increase OKC’s point total tonight by accumulating more assists. With the ongoing help-heavy character of Indiana’s defense, sundry opportunities will be there for guys like Holmgren, Luguentz Dort with his regularly solid shooting at home, and other teammates.

The Spread

While I like both teams to score a lot, this game provides a uniquely good opportunity to play both the spread and the total because of how wild the spread is.

We’ve seen this play out repeatedly: the Pacers surprised everybody by upsetting Cleveland in Game 1. In Game 2, the Cavaliers were favored very strongly and lost straight-up.

More recently, the Knicks were strongly favored in Game 2 after they lost Game 1 — oddsmakers factor in the expectation that the team that lost Game 1 will play with increased desperation in Game 2 — and yet the Knicks lost Game 2 by more points than they lost Game 1.

Indiana is not going to be content to split its first two games in Oklahoma City. Moreover, the Pacers are much deeper and in other ways, too, altogether very different from the Denver team that the Thunder blew out in Game 2. OKC’s Game 2 victory over Denver is completely irrelevant right now, and yet bettors seem to think that it justifies a play on the Thunder tonight.

Indiana has, after its slow start to the season, been one of the best teams all year. It was undefeated in the postseason in Cleveland, which has been one of the winningest teams at home. The Pacers are a uniquely solid road team who do not deserve to be such heavy underdogs.

NBA Picks:

• Pacers +11  (-115) at BetOnline

Pacers +11 (-115)

Visit Site

• Over 228.5 (-110) at BetOnline

Over 228.5 (-110)

Visit Site

*The line and/or odds on picks in this article might have moved since the content was commissioned. For updated line movements, visit BMR’s free betting odds product.