119.7.
That’s the Pacers’ offensive rating in Game 1, the number of points they scored per 100 possessions in their opening game win of the Eastern Conference Finals. For some context, in the regular season the Clippers had the best offensive rating in the NBA at 109.4. The best in the playoffs has been Miami at 112.4. Indiana blew those numbers out of the water — in their 28 minutes together on the court the Pacers five starters averaged 141.7 points per 100 possessions.
That was the stunning aspect of Game 1. It was always likely the Pacers could make things tight because they had a defense built to slow the Miami offense. The question was always “where would the points come from?”
They came from wherever the Pacers wanted — Paul George had 24 points to lead six Pacers in double figures. What was shocking was the quality of looks the Pacers got and where they got them Indiana had 27 shots in the restricted area (basically lay-ups and dunks) and another 10 in the paint (that’s 47.4 percent of their shots in the paint) — and Indiana shot 73 percent on those. That doesn’t even account for the 37 free throw attempts the Pacers got, mostly because they were aggressive and went to the rim.
For one game, the Pacers were an offensive juggernaut and the Heat were a mess defensively. It’s fair to question, after watching them for the last few months, if the Pacers can replicate that kind of offensive performance. Based on their history you can expect a better Heat team in Game 2, one with more defensive energy.
But the Pacers set an offensive tone that gives them a chance in this series.
“We were just being aggressive off the bounce,” Pacers coach Frank Vogel said in his post-game press conference broadcast on NBA TV. “We’re trying to be attack, force help and then share it. It’s a pretty simple plan but it’s not always the easiest to execute.”
Heat coach Eric Spoelstra may not want to eat before watching the game film.
“That’s probably just us at our worst defensively…” Eric Spoelstra said in his post game press conference. “If you had said coming into the game we had scored 96 and had more than 50 in the paint, I’d say we’d be in the drivers seat for a win if we do our normal, even anywhere close to our normal defense. That wasn’t the case….
“Our overall disposition needs to be much stronger, much tougher.”
From the opening tip the Pacers were able to get into their preferred sets, get to their preferred spots on the floor with entirely too little resistance from Miami. If David West catches the ball with one foot in the paint you have already lost, and that happened repeatedly. Roy Hibbert had 19 points and was able to get the ball in very deep position, then often three defenders would collapse on him and Hibbert would kick it out to an open shooter. Who knocked it down. As Vogel said it sounds simple but the Pacers haven’t been doing simple well of late.
Miami’s pick-and-roll defense also was a mess — they tried to be aggressive on hedges but the ball handler split the pick-and-roll (that happened a lot all game, especially by George) or the Pacers moved the ball to the weakside with a couple quick passes for a good look. Throughout their slump the Pacers had seemingly no movement on the weakside of their offense, it’s like they were spectators. In Game 1 on Sunday that movement was back and it opened things up. The Pacers ran a lot of 1-4 pick-and-roll with West popping out and Hibbert moving to the basket off the ball, that action slowed the Heat rotations (defenders were afraid to leave Hibbert and West) and the result was easy open buckets at the rim.
Usually you say here the ball is in Miami’s court to adjust, and it is. But a lot of that adjustment is just getting back to being their aggressive selves and disrupting the flow of Indiana’s offense. Don’t let the Pacers get to their spots. Don’t let them run the offense the way they want.
Indiana can exploit that with the kind of ball movement we saw on Sunday. The question is will they bring that again.
