2025 NBA Finals Game 3 Observations

Game 3 is in the books, and the Indiana Pacers won an exciting game 116-107 which was back and forth all game.  These are my observations from the game.

 

It was an exciting game where no team appeared to dominate

In general, people love close games (which is why Game 5 of the 2024 WNBA Finals was so hyped despite it being one of the worst offensive showings I have seen), but it’s so much fun to watch when there are exciting plays and good execution.  There was never a lead that reached double digits in the game (the biggest lead for both teams was 9), and there were moments when both teams executed well.  Even when one team was on a run, I didn’t feel like either team was dominating in that moment.  When the lead was 9 for either team, I was surprised to see it had gotten that big.  This is the type of game you want to see in the Finals, when you hope to see the best basketball of the season.

 

Indiana finally played their style of basketball

Over the first two games, Indiana was not pushing the pace, as they weren’t getting many turnovers and weren’t forcing the pace after baskets.  Suddenly, in the second quarter, they started playing their frenetic pace when they had some of their bench players out there, particularly T.J. McConnell.  I think McConnell’s presence totally shifted their offensive game, which they were able to maintain when Haliburton was out there.  A big part of this is that they didn’t commit any turnovers and also forced several turnovers.

 

Tyrese Haliburton was finally amazing

While Haliburton wasn’t horrible during the first two games (he scored 31 points on a combined 13-26 with 12 assists and 8 turnovers), he was far from himself.  This game, while he “only” took 17 shots (some people act like he needs to take 20 shots, but they don’t understand what he plays like in his prime), he had 22 points while going 4-8 from 3 (something he struggled with in the first two games), 11 assists, and 4 turnovers (still not great by his standard, but better).  While the easy answer to the difference is to city aggressiveness, I think the answer comes from a strange change in defense by OKC.  After having so much success doubling him as soon as he turned the corner with the weak defender, OKC decided to put him in single coverage after a few minutes in the first quarter.  As soon as Haliburton got comfortable with the coverage, he torched them and was able to drive, which he is usually able to create offense with.

 

OKC appeared to overthink things

Most people will discuss how OKC was sloppy with the ball or made silly decisions that resulted in turnovers, but I think OKC overthought a lot of things.  As soon as SGA committed an offensive foul around 7 seconds into the game, it seemed like he was uncertain about what he was doing.  Additionally, after each time McConnell had a sneak steal, OKC seemed a bit rattled and appeared to be so careful to not turn the ball over in the back court that they didn’t think about what the best offensive play was.  When Indiana did strange things with switches, their stars appeared to think it was some sort of ploy and tried to force a shot in the double team without looking for an open guy.  Jalen Williams missed several free throws, Holmgren struggled with jumpers, SGA was trying to force anything, and their supporting cast seemed hesitant.

 

Indiana did something weird with defending screens

On almost every time Chet Holmgren set a screen, both defenders chased the ball handler and left Holmgren open.  During the first quarter, Holmgren was incredible and aggressively scoring at will.  After Holmgren had 15 pretty quick points, OKC suddenly stopped passing it to an open Holmgren; in particular, SGA and Jalen Williams got tunnel vision and tried scoring in double team, which almost never worked.  I think this relates to the last observation that I made.

 

OKC is at a disadvantage when their stars struggle scoring

As I note in a future post, OKC’s stars (SGA, Jalen Williams, and Chet Holmgren) didn’t shoot poorly overall, as they each shot between 40-50% from the field.  The bigger issue was that they really struggled mightily as the game went on, especially in the fourth quarter.  In the 4^th, SGA went 1-3, Williams went 2-5, and Holmgren went 1-5, while the three also went 0-3 from deep.  On top of that, while Williams shot 50% from the field (9-18), he only shot 7-11 from the line, including missing multiple as the game went on.  They seemed tired and frustrated as the game went on, but they each didn’t want to pass the ball out as well, which wasn’t helped by the fact that they also turned the ball over 11 times between the 3 of them.  It isn’t rocket science that a team usually struggles when their stars do, but sometimes the obvious observations are the most prominent.

 

Indiana’s bench made me look like a fool after my last blog post (and I’m glad they did)

In my last blog post, I discussed liking OKC’s bench more than Indiana’s.  It’s safe to say that I am eating my words, especially with how Benedict Mathurin and T.J. McConnell played.  Mathurin had one of the best games I have ever seen him play, as he scored 27 points on 9-12 shooting while looking confident and aggressive on both ends.  While a good scorer and shooter, he is talented enough to have games where he goes off, but I was blown away with how well he played.  While McConnell wasn’t the most efficient, he was such a pesky player on both ends like he often is.  He had some great plays on both ends, especially with forcing 3 steals within seconds of OKC having possession.  Even while Obi Toppin was more of a supporting cast member, he had 8 points, 6 rebounds, and 2 blocks with a +18 while playing aggressively on both ends.  Even Ben Sheppard played good defense on multiple defenders.  Reserves often play better at home, but Indiana’s showcased just how good they are.

 

OKC’s supporting cast didn’t get enough chances

When OKC is at their best, they have multiple role players who are contributing to scoring, making it easier for their stars to create looks.  The issue is that they didn’t in Game 3; combined, their non-big 3 (SGA, Williams, and Holmgren) went 13-26 and had 37 points, which is a good percentage, but not anywhere enough attempts.  The only role player who had more than 5 attempts was Lu Dort, who went 4-8 from the field and 4-5 from 3 (as a coincidence, OKC’s two losses were also the two games where Dort shot well, though that isn’t anything to focus on with this sample size).  On the other hand, SGA, Williams, and Holmgren combined for 70 points, but shot 24-53 (not a horrible percentage, but not efficient enough) and had 11 turnovers; combined with overthinking things, I think that their stars were a bit overworked, resulting in not the best decisions.  It also didn’t help that Holmgren went 0-6 for deep.

 

I’m not sure how much we’ll see Thomas Bryant in the rest of the series

Bryant only played 20 minutes between the first two games of the series and wasn’t particularly effective.  In Game 3, he played only 3 minutes and didn’t play particularly well.  Instantly, SGA targeted him and Bryant looked totally lost.  This is all dependent on how Obi Toppin plays as the small ball 5, which was okay in Game 1 but not good in Game 2.

 

I need to get some sleep before Game 4

I recently got a new pillow since my prior one was flat and I was dealing with neck pain, but I’m still not used to just how thick my new pillow is.  As such, I am not sleeping great and am exhausted.  It reached the point where I wondered by Haliburton was defending SGA, but it was Ben Sheppard guarding him; they look nothing alike.  Later, I needed the broadcasters to confirm each player because I was going strictly by height, which is tough when players are close to the same height.  I also almost fell asleep between the 3^rd and 4^th quarters.  On the plus side, at least there isn’t a west coast game so they end earlier; I wouldn’t be able to do games starting at 9 PM EDT (or later).

 

What did you think of this game?  Let me know in the comments!