Why did the Thunder come out of the West, and what can the Spurs learn from them?
Marilyn Dubinski: The Thunder came out of the West because they’re the most well-rounded, versatile team. They finished the season 4th in offensive rating and 1st on defense for the best net rating (so it goes without saying that they can both score and defend). They addressed their weaknesses from last season by adding a perimeter stopper in Alex Caruso and a defensive-minded big man in Isaiah Hartenstein to take some pressure off Chet Holmgren. Finally, they have the MVP to lead the way. If all of this sounds familiar, it’s because it’s exactly what we’ve been saying the Spurs need to do and what we’re hearing they will this offseason: get an upgrade at the wing, and add reliable depth and versatility at center to build out around an MVP candidate in Victor Wembanyama.
Mark Barrington: There’s not a lot of mystery here. They’re loaded with talent, they have the MVP, and an innovative young coach. They’re deep, versatile and just damn good. The only thing that could keep them from becoming a long-term dynasty is the CBA and the fact that they are going to have to pay a lot to keep their roster intact as the rookie contracts roll off. But they can keep their core and keep replenishing it with the dozens of draft picks that they have stockpiled, so maybe the Spurs are just going to need to get a LOT better instead of waiting for the Thunder to fade.
Jacob Douglas: Defense wins championships... and having the MVP helps too. The Thunder were 1st in defensive rating and 3rd in opponents’ points per game this year. They have lockdown defenders like Lu Dort, Alex Caruso, Jalen Williams, and Chet Holmgren to back up SGA’s scoring. The key here is that those defensive studs can also knock down shots. San Antonio has some good defenders like Jeremy Sochan and Stephon Castle, but they can’t shoot. Adding more two-way players who can create an elite defense around Wembanyama will be key to building a contending roster.
Jesus Gomez: The combination of top-end talent and depth is hard to beat. They have one of the best scorers the league has seen in recent years and plenty of complementary two-way pieces that not only support but enhance what SGA does on offense. And their disruptive defense makes it hard for opponents to develop any sort of rhythm. But experience is probably what put them over the top. Last season OKC finished first in the West but had a young core that was still finding its identity and got bounced by Luka Doncic and the Mavericks. After that failure, they made the right acquisitions and tweaked their style to become the juggernaut they are today. The Spurs need to do the same. If everything goes well, they should make the playoffs next season and use that experience to find out how good they are and what it would take to get better.
Why did the Pacers come out of the East, and what can the Spurs learn from them?
Dubinski: The entire answer is similar to the Thunder. The Pacers are 2nd on offense and 8th on defense, so again, the makings of a championship team. They’re strong at every position and have depth, which is what allowed them to outlast the New York Knicks, and once again, fair or not, Tom Thibodeau's lack of rotations and heavy minutes for his starters are being blamed for his team failing to reach the finals. (That being said, I never thought they’d fire him.) Back to the Pacers, it also wouldn’t be an overstatement to say that Tyrese Haliburton was motivated by that dumb players poll calling him the most overrated player in the league. Playing with a chip on your shoulder and harnessing it the correct way is almost always a recipe for success.
Barrington: Rick Carlisle is an all-time great coach, and he built the Pacers’ system to maximize doing the things that match their talents. They’re not just fast, they’re always prepared to advance the ball to the frontcourt before the defense is set. They score a ton of fastbreak baskets off of made buckets for the other team. There is never a wasted possession, and they wear opponents down with their depth and relentless defensive pressure. Haliburton is their star, but every player knows their role and excels in it. This preparation is especially important in crunch time, as it makes them capable of stealing any game where the score is close with time running out. The Spurs need to copy their intensity and execution and learn how to win close games.
Douglas: Can we say it’s because the Celtics choked against the Knicks? Kidding, of course. Indiana is another solid defensive team that has players all over the court who can knock down shots. I particularly like how they have multiple ball-handlers who can create plays or knock down threes. Maybe San Antonio can have something similar with Dylan Harper and De’Aaron Fox down the line?
Gomez: The Pacers know who they are. They are extremely well-coached, they have a distinct identity, and everyone knows what is expected of them. As far as one-two punches go, Haliburton and Siakam wouldn’t rank highly on paper, but there’s synergy between them and the entire team. The pieces fit. That’s what the Spurs should take away from their run: the whole has to be greater than the sum of its parts. Finding underappreciated talent is hard but necessary due to the new CBA, and names are less important than cohesion.
Who do you think will win the NBA Finals and why?
Dubinski: I think it will be the Thunder simply because their best players are slightly better than the Pacers’, but I think it will be closer than many think. I see most polls saying Thunder in 4 or 5, but if you think the Pacers will fold that easily, you haven’t been watching. They have the strength on both sides to keep up, so I think they get it to 6 or 7, but ultimately the Thunder will have too much firepower and discipline to overcome.
Barrington: The Thunder has the edge in talent, but the Pacers have the better scheme and are better-coached. I think Daigneault is a good coach, but Carlisle is an all-time great, and he will find and dissect any flaws in the opponent’s game plan. I think this series will be a lot like the 2014 Mavericks-Spurs first-round playoff series, where a less-talented Dallas team almost pulled off an upset on the loaded Spurs, who were on a revenge tour after losing to the Heat in the Finals the previous year. I think the Thunder will win, but it will be a very close and entertaining series. I wouldn’t be surprised if the series goes to seven games and is decided by the final shot. I’d find it hard to bet against Haliburton in that scenario.
Douglas: OKC is a juggernaut. I don’t think the Pacers will be able to contend with all of the different lineups they can throw out, particularly the smaller lineup with Holmgren at the 5. If Indiana has any hope, it’s that the team that doesn’t turn the ball over much has typically won in these playoffs. The Pacers are excellent at taking care of the basketball, but the Thunder are great at taking it away. I don’t think it’ll be a sweep, but give me the Thunder in 6.
Gomez: The Pacers are talented, tough, and fun, but the Thunder seem to be on another level. It’s going to be interesting to see who wins the turnover battle, as Jacob pointed out, because it could be the difference between close games Indiana can win and potential blowouts. I can see things going well for Rick Carlisle’s guys a couple of times, especially if Jalen Williams struggles, but not more than that. OKC simply has too many good defenders and has shown they can score against top-tier teams at a high enough rate. I think we’ll get five or six entertaining games before the Thunder win their first title.