We hit on his under in Game 3 because the line was 47.5 but now that the line has adjusted down this much due to 4 straight unders (36, 38, 43 and 27 PRA), we will jump on this over. This season, SGA has averaged 44.5 at home (+2.5 more than on the road) and his over 43.5 rate is 56.6% (+22% higher than on the road). He is projected for 46.1 PRA off of 33.6 points (o32.5 -112), 5.7 rebounds (o4.5 -146) and 6.8 assists (o5.5 -148)... slight value across the board. SGA has averaged nearly 40 min per game prior to sitting the 4th quarter of the Game 6 blowout and he went over this line 20-12 when playing 38+ minutes this season.

The model has virtually the same projection for Indiana as their 102.5 to 103.5 team total, so the value we have on OKC vs the spread is entirely based on OKC going over their team total (projected score OKC 117, IND 103). The road/home splits offensively for the Thunder were significant during the regular season (OKC averaged +6 more at home and shot +3% better from 3pt range) but they have gotten ridiculously pronounced in the playoffs with OKC averaging 122 at home (vs just 107 on the road) and shooting 38% from 3pt range at home (vs 30% on the road). We have over 100 regular season and playoff games 'proving' OKC is a great bet to go over this total at home.

Before that horrific performance in Game 6, the model favored OKC by -17.5 at home vs IND, but that stinker took them down 3 full points. But even with 'just' an OKC -14.5 projection the Thunder are a good value to cover. The Thunder showed their youth in Game 6 and played as poorly as they can possibly play shooting under 10% from 3pt range most of the game and turning it over more than 2x what they forced from Indiana. OKC should be able to flip the turnover margin and 3pt shooting script at home in Game 7 the same way they did vs Denver.

Lou Dort is projected for over 14 PRA. Even though his season average is considerably lower on the road (13.6) than at home (16.4) he is still a solid 23-19, 54.8% over 12.5 PRA on the road (36-15, 70.6% at home). In his last 9 games vs the Pacers he is averaging 18.4 (7-2 over 12.5). His average is high because he consistently plays over 30 minutes vs the Pacers and this season when he plays >30 minutes the over 12.5 is 32-8. The Thunder needs his defense vs the Pacers which leads to his solid rebounding and assist numbers in these matchups. He is also shooting the three with confidence, going 14-of- 24 in the Finals.

Both teams are projected to come below their team total. OKC is projected for 112 (TT is 114.5) and the Pacers are projected for 108 (TT 109.5). The reason why OKC is coming a little short of expectations is their under 34% 3pt shooting. This season the Thunder have shot just 35% on the road (vs 38% at home) and this split has been in full force in the Finals with them shooting 39.8% from three at home vs just 34.2% in two games combined at Indiana. The Pacers are coming under their TT because of their struggles with turnovers vs the Thunder, Tyrese Haliburton's injury and likely shooting regression from Pascal Siakam, T.J. McConnell and Obi Toppin who combined for 22/40 from the field.

Back in December, this line would have been at least 11.5 and as high as 14.5 at some points during the season for Isaiah Hartenstein. Despite his 5-2 under stretch in his last 7 games, he has crushed this over of 7.5 with a 13.8 average and ridiculous 71-7 (91%) over rate this season. Our projection of 6.2 points and 2.1 assists reflects his reduced output recently but that's still solid over value at this point in the season where lines are sharp.

The main reason why OKC was such a prohibitive favorite heading into this series was the Pacers were not an elite defense. But the Pacers have played like an elite defense in the series holding OKC to well under this line in 3 of the 4 games (110 in G1, 107 in G3, 111 in G4). I feel like OKC will figure out how to attack Indiana's defense, especially at home where the referee's whistle should be kinder. The Thunder averaged 111 in their first 3 games vs MIN before figuring them out and popping for 128 and 124 the final 2 games. The Thunder should also double their 3-point shooting percentage in Game 5 after Game 4's pathetic display.

The Thunder cover in 67% of simulations, winning this one by an average score of 118 to 103. Unlike the games in Indiana where turnover margin was relatively close, we do not expect it to be close at OKC with a projection of 16+ turnovers for IND and just 10 for OKC. We also project a +5% shooting advantage for OKC from 2-point range. The Thunder by -9.5 line is based on their turnover and 2-point shooting advantage. The value our model has on the Thunder is from a projected +9 rebounding advantage that the oddsmakers and betting markets aren't properly accounting for with OKC.

The model projects Shai Gilgeous-Alexander for 'just' 44 PRA. This season he averages 42.5 on the road and the over was just 10-34, 22.7% on the road. Even when he started the Finals with record breaking scoring production for a player in his first two Finals games he still came in under 47.5 PRA. The narrative that he gets too many friendly foul calls seems to be impacting his ability to get to the line. In 3 of his last 4 games he has just 6, 8 and 4 free throw attempts. His FTAs and FT% are noticeably down in the playoffs and his 3-point percentage is down from over 37% in the regular season to under 32% in the playoffs.

The Thunder are favored more in Game 4 despite losing Game 3 because the expectation is Indiana's Ben Mathurin will not come close to having another game like the 27 pts in 22 min he had in Game 3. While he may put up half as many points in Game 4, do not expect Mathurin to shrivel away. More importantly, the trio of Mathurin, T.J. McConnell and Obi Toppin can actually provide Indiana with better bench production than OKC, especially at home. The massive turnover advantage that OKC has virtually vs every other team has not materialized since the first half of this series. In our model OKC is committing more turnovers than Indiana, which is why the Pacers are the side to cover.

We are projecting Tyrese Haliburton for 20.5 points. Haliburton is only 22-24 over this line on the road (just 14 and 17 in Games 1 and 2) but he is a very solid 26-19 at home with a 19.8 average. Haliburton has been passive offensively (except for the game winner) until he started letting the shots fly in the 2nd half of Game 2 when it was too late. The coaching staff will surely point out that he has ZERO FREE THROW ATTEMPTS in the Finals so far. There is nothing scarier for opponents at this point than seeing Haliburton get hot and it's clear that to beat OKC you need to get hot from 3pt range

The model leans Indiana to cover for two surprising reasons: Indiana is projected to shoot +2.5% better from 3pt range and commit slightly fewer turnovers than the Thunder. The Thunder only shot 35% from 3 on the road which was well under their home 38%. Indiana had a +3% 3pt differential at home (OKC just +1%) and Indiana shot 52% and 41% from 3pt range their last 2 games at home vs the Knicks. After the first half of Game 1 where Indiana turned it over 20 times the Pacers have actually committed fewer turnovers than the Thunder. Indiana has clearly done a better job, not only limiting their own turnovers, but forcing more from the Thunder than expected.

The model leans slightly under for both teams vs their team totals resulting in a 60% chance of the under. We expect OKC, especially their bench who shot a combined 10-21 from 3pt range) to not be so sharp on the road. The Pacers are coming under their TT because they are projected for just 7 offensive rebounds, which was the same number they had in Game 2 when they scored just 107. Without a lot of second chance looks expect Indiana to score under their 111.5 odds implied total. Game 1 came in under and Game 2 was pacing strongly under for most of the game until both teams let up defensively when it was clearly out of hand.

I am giving Chet Holmgren a chance to make up for his Game 1 dud. The key to OKC rebounding from the tough Game 1 loss is literally rebounding. Isaiah Hartenstein is not playing as much so the team really needs Chet to step up and be the double digit rebounder he was vs Denver. Like in Game 1 of the Denver series, Chet only had 6 boards in Game 1, but responded with double digits in 5 of the other 6 games. I see him responding very similarly in Game 2 on Sunday.

Maybe if I hadn't seen the Denver series, I would have lost some faith in OKC, but Game 1 had sooo much in common with Game 1 vs Denver. OKC responded with a resounding Game 2 win over the Nuggets thanks to taking care of boards while maintaining a big turnover differential. Tyrese Halliburton is mythologically clutch but the Pacers shouldn't have been within 10 late and even had a chance of winning the game had OKC done the bare minimum on the boards. We also should see positive regression to the mean in OKC 2pt shooting after their 41% in Game 1.