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.

We painfully missed on the IND Under 110.5 TT in Game 1. Despite the IND win, they still only shot 49% on twos and turned the ball over at a ridiculous pace, especially in the first half. Assuming the rebounding evens out and maybe some negative regression from the 3pt line (Obi Toppin went 5 for 8) the Pacers should do their "fair share" to help this game come under. I also have been waiting for the OKC 3 ball to start falling but it looks like I may have to wait a lot longer, especially with the role players not shooting well from three. The moment may be too big for the non-Alex Carusos of the world.

We're projecting Chet Holmgren for 17 points, 9.2 rebounds, and 2 assists, which is a slight lean in all three lines. While he's only 8-18 over this line this season, it's 100% attributable to the number of blowouts OKC played at home. He finished the Minnesota series going 3-2 to the over, playing 30+ minutes in the the three wins. Given Indiana's historically amazing and mathematically impossible number of comebacks in the playoffs this season, we doubt OKC will take their foot of the gas, even up 20 in the early 4th quarter unless Indiana sits their starters. Chet should be able to get double digit boards vs. the poor rebounding Pacers, shoot over top shorter defenders, or take their taller defenders off the dribble.

The Thunder won by 16 points per game at home this season, so we would argue that picking them to win by 15 is actually a sign of respect to the Pacers. We are getting a single digit spread because of how great Indiana has been on the road in the playoffs but that trend may have ended in Game 5 vs New York. The model has OKC covering in 67% of simulations because of a +5 percentage point differential in 2pt shooting, a +7 rebounding advantage, and a +5 turnover advantage. The Thunder were +6% on twos at home this season while Indiana was just +1% on the road, so the +5% projected edge fits with the overall trends.

Oddsmakers have set his PTS line higher at 20.5 in most spots because of his up and down offense this series and he's coming off a down. But we still wanted to ride the 'Siakam Wave' and the value is now on REB+AST with over 11 projected. We are getting buy low because the Pacers front court is getting outrebounded consistently by the Knicks and Siakam had 3 straight unders before game 5 where he had 6 rebounds and 5 assists. This season he is 54-39, 58.1% over this line on a 10.1 average so all we are banking on is a normal output in a game where he should be on the floor as much as possible.

We have a full game line of Indiana -4 and just a 55% lean on them to cover the full game -3.5 spread. Rather than pay -132 on their first quarter money line we'll take the 'risk' of it not being tied after one. The MSG crowd clearly came out and inspired the Knicks in Game 5. Indiana is just as crazy for basketball as anyone in the world and I'm thinking the Pacers will come out inspired. While getting easily beaten in Game 5 doesn't feel good, it is encouraging that the Pacers have revived Ben Mathurin, who has put up back to back 20+ games and gives them a second version of Aaron Nesmith, just as Nesmith has gone cold.

With a projection of 16 and 7 we are closer to Myles Turner's season average of 22 (52-34, 60.5% over 19.5) and are buying low on his 19 average (3-1 Under) in this series. Mitchell Robinson starting and playing more minutes has helped NY build big rebounding advantages but in Game 4 his +/- was -20 so maybe that leads Thibs to go back to his 'beloved' strategy of running the Villanova players into the ground. If Robinson is not on the floor more than 18 minutes then that gives Turner some opportunity to operate down low more than usual (shooting 18/24, 75% on twos vs just 4/17, 23.5% on threes) vs a hurting Karl-Anthony Towns.

The recipe for success for Indiana has been the same: fewer turnovers and shoot well from three point range (41, 43, 41% in wins). These factors have overcome their often significant rebounding disadvantage (-11, -6, -7 in their wins). So the big coaching adjustment by Thibs of starting Mitchell Robinson in an effort to really dominate the boards has resulted in dominating the boards but not the scoreboard. The model projects IND to hit 37% of 35 3pt attempts (13 makes) and NY to hit just 34% of 33 attempts and this +6 points offsets the +5 rebounding advantage we project for the Knicks. Six points is worth more than the roughly 3 points that NY gets from their rebounding advantage.

Naz Reid is projected for 11 points. He averaged over 13.5 this season and while he averages less on the road, the over 9.5 rate was still a solid 29-17, 63% (over 77% at home). We never pass up +$$$ value on a line under both a player's projection and average when that player's minutes and usage are 100% predictable. We are getting buy low value because he is averaging around 8 pts per game his last 7 but he does come in with 3 straight double digit games. If anything, he could play an even larger role than usual because Julius Randle, as skilled as he is, is a turnover waiting to happen vs OKC's defense.