Do you think the best teams made it to the conference finals, or did injuries and bad luck play a big part in determining who advanced?
Marilyn Dubinski: I think a little of both. There is little doubt that the Thunder have been the best team in the West all season, but they are also still very young, and there were times that Denver looked like a team that had “been there” against them. At the same time, while injuries across the board certainly hurt the Nuggets, they have been inconsistent all season. Minnesota may have underachieved in the regular season, but when they can be one of the best two-way teams in the league when focused, so they don’t feel out of place in the WCF. In the East, injuries certainly played a role for Boston and Cleveland, but the Knicks and Pacers are no pushovers. (Who knew the Randal-for-KAT trade would work out so well for both sides?) If anything, the field may have been more level than ever this season, which is good for the league.
Mark Barrington: The teams in the Conference Finals are the best teams. Injuries did play a role in several of the series, but didn’t decide the series. The Warriors could have made the series much more interesting with the Timberwolves with Curry playing, but they just didn’t have any answer to Minnesota’s size and dominance in the paint. The Nuggets vs Thunder had an epic seven-game series, but OKC’s home arena advantage was the deciding factor. In the East, the Cavs didn’t have an answer for the Pacers’ flawless play when the game was on the line. It was sad when Jayson Tatum went down in game 4 of the Celtics/Knicks matchup, but the series was already tilted in favor of New York before his unfortunate injury. The remaining four teams are the league’s best, even if they weren’t the top seeds in the regular season.
Bill Huan: The remaining teams are all deserving conference finalists. I picked the Wolves and Thunder to make it prior to the start of those series and only slightly favored the Cavs in their matchup against Indiana. After watching the Pacers dissect Cleveland, though, it’s evident that they would’ve won regardless of health.
New York’s the only team that gave me a bit of pause since Boston was still the better team on a per-minute basis, and if any series was going to feature a multi-game comeback, it would’ve happened in this one. However, the Knicks were going up 3-1 even if Tatum remained healthy, and you have to give them credit for not giving up in any game when they were down 20.
Jesus Gomez: I think injuries had a part to play in the West semis, but ultimately, the better teams advanced. The Timberwolves were more talented and deeper than the aging Warriors, and while the Nuggets put up a fantastic fight and could have made it through, the Thunder are a deserving finalist. The East is different. It’s possible the Pacers and Knicks beat the Cavaliers and Celtics, respectively, even if they were healthy. They performed admirably. But I feel like if you replay those series with everyone available and at 100 percent of their abilities, Boston and Cleveland win eight or nine out of 10 times. Alas, injuries are part of the NBA, and they have derailed plenty of title runs in the past.
Devon Birdsong: I’m inclined to say that the Knicks are the least deserving of the conference finalists, as the Tatum injury all but clinched that series for them, and that series would have gone the distance, with Boston’s home court advantage likely being a major factor. However, they’ve also been playing smart, gritty basketball, which feels weird to write about a modern Knicks team. I do think the officiating of the Denver-OKC series was grotesque, but those teams were pretty evenly matched. The teams that are left are the best in a de facto sort of way, and that’s really all that matters. I will say that I think that this specific combination of teams is definitely a surprise. It’s not a final four I would/could have predicted.
What do you think is the X-factor for either team in the Eastern Conference, and who do you think will advance?
Dubinski: The Knicks have the better top end talent in Jalen Brunson and Karl-Anthony Towns, but the Pacers have more well-rounded depth. Ultimately, fair or not, all eyes will be on Tom Thibodeau, his minutes-heavy rotations, and whether his players stay healthy or tire out. If anything goes wrong, he will take the blame, but if the Knicks make it through, his doubters will be proven wrong, and the curse will be broken. Still, my gut says the Pacers’ depth wins out.
Barrington: Does X-Factor mean best player and leader of the team? Because that’s clearly Brunson on the Knicks and Haliburton on the Pacers. If you mean a player who can provide an unexpected boost to their team in this particular matchup, then it would probably be Josh Hart or Mitchell Robinson for the Knicks and Andrew Nembhard for the Pacers. Josh Hart is the beating heart of the Knicks and always provides energy and consistent effort. I rated Hart as tied with Mitchell Robinson, just because of this play where Robinson defended all five of the Cavs players and caused a turnover. Nembhard for the Pacers will get a ton of looks because the defense will be focused on stopping Haliburton, and he will take advantage of the opportunity.
Huan: My X-Factors are all role players, as I expect the stars to show up and largely cancel each other out. That leaves the supporting cast to make the ultimate difference, and specifically, Andrew Nembhard and Josh Hart. Notice similarities? They’re both rugged defenders with an inconsistent stroke, so whoever can hit the most shots could swing the outcome of a series.
Ultimately, I expect the Pacers to advance. New York will have trouble containing Indiana’s pace and unorthodox system, and the Knicks are in more danger of being hit by the injury bug. Carlisle is a better coach than Thibs too, but this will definitely be a long series that goes 6 or 7 games.
Gomez: The team that limits its opponent’s offensive engine should win the series. It’s impossible to fully shut down guys like Haliburton or Brunson, but both New York and Indiana have great perimeter defenders who can make them work. It might come down to which big does the better job on switches, and who can get easy buckets before the defense is set. It feels like the Pacers should have the edge in those areas, so if they can play with pace, I think they should advance.
Birdsong: I almost always consider injuries to be the biggest x-factor in the postseason, and I’m sticking to that notion. Lost in the conversation about Ray Allen’s infinitely looped Finals shot is that Tony Parker sustained a hamstring injury in Game 3 that limited him for the rest of the series. That shot might never have mattered with a fully healthy Parker in games 4 and 5. Injuries can happen at any phase of the postseason, and they almost always matter. However, all four teams are fairly healthy thus far, so I’ll go with coaching adjustments for the Eastern Finals. Thibs and Rick Carlisle represent the only title-winning coaches in the mix, and I expect it to be an absolute chess match between maestros of grit and fundamental play. Carlise’s always been a little more versatile though, so I expect him to get the better of a more rigid Thibodeau and a Knicks team that’s played such an abbreviated rotation for most of the season that they may finally run out of gas. I’m going with the Pacers in 6 games.
What do you think is the X-factor for either team in the Western Conference, and who do you think will advance?
Dubinski: The X-factor for both teams will be their bigs. Shai Gilgeous-Alexander and Anthony Edwards will do their thing, but a big part of Minnesota’s postseason success has been Julius Randall finding his groove. He, Rudy Gobert, Isaiah Hartenstein and Chet Holmgren can all do damage on both ends, so whichever team can own the paint and boards will have the overall advantage because it will take heat off their star swingmen. Ultimately, I think homecourt advantage (which may have been the key against Denver) will see the Thunder through.
Barrington: The best players of the teams in the Western Conference Finals are Shai Gilgeous-Alexander for the Thunder, and Anthony Edwards for the Timberwolves. The emotional leader of the Thunder is Alex Caruso, who leads not by being the best athlete on the court, but by being the toughest and hardest-working guy out there. He provides the leadership and toughness that a young team like OKC needs to become a finals contender. I think the X-Factor for the Timberwolves is probably Julius Randle, who lets his play speak for itself, and his strength and power will be tough for OKC to counteract. Donte DeVincenzo, a role player, is probably more fitting in the role of a true X-Factor, and he’s on track to play a critical role for the Wolves.
Huan: To continue with my theme of role players with inconsistent shots, the X-Factors in the West will be McDaniels and Caruso. Minnesota is virtually unbeatable when McDaniels has a good offensive game and scores an efficient 20, but he’s just as likely to lay a complete egg. Meanwhile, we saw the defensive versatility of Caruso when he was Jokic’s primary defender in game 7, but will he also have the energy to make shots if he’s matched up with the Wolves’ bigs?
OKC struggled mightily at certain points against Denver, but they’re an easy pick for me, not just to make the finals, but also to win the whole thing. The entire team exorcised some demons in game 7 and will have more confidence moving forward, and I see OKC winning in 6.
Gomez: Can Chet Holgrem play the five and hit enough shots to force the Wolves to go small? That’s a question that looms large. OKC loves pairing their young big with Isaiah Hartenstein, but could have some issues dealing with Minnesota’s frontcourt. Holgrem at center presents all sorts of trouble for Rudy Gobert on defense, but the Wolves could absolutely feast on offense. The stars in this one are perimeter players, but the frontcourts might decide who advances. And if Chris Finch is to be believed, how the game is officiated could play a big part too.
Chris Finch on playing OKC:
"It's so frustrating to play this team because they foul a ton... they foul all the time. And then you can't really touch Shai. It's a very frustrating thing, and it takes a lot of mental toughness to play through it." pic.twitter.com/ZUAGlubcoa
— Wolves Lead (@TWolvesLead) February 25, 2025
Birdsong: I’m inclined to say Anthony Edwards, but this is his team now and the expectations for him are much higher than that of an X-factor. He absolutely has to deliver on both ends for this to be a series. Julius Randle also fits the bill when considering some of his past postseason disappearing acts. However, I think it’s Rudy Gobert who is most likely to swing this series. In the past, teams have been able to expose his movement with the right combination of pressure and three-point shooting, and the Thunder are certainly equipped to do that. Gobert will have to alternate between neutralizing both Chet Holmgren and Isaiah Hartenstein, be aggressive and effective enough in the post that the Thunder can’t hide players on him, and limit SGA’s forays to the hoop as much as possible. It’s a series that probably sets his post-season legacy in stone, one way or another, which is a lot of pressure. If he can only manage one (or less) the Wolves have little hope. But if he manages to do all three, he’ll reach hero status in Minnesota. My guess is the series goes 6 or 7 games. OKC is 6 seems most likely. Minnesota in 7 is my hope.