Not So Home Cooking

Daniel Waddleton

May 7, 2025

---

IF YOU THOUGHT the first round was fun and chaotic, I’ve got good news: we’re clearly just getting started.

Heading into the second round, the expectation was that these three 60-win juggernauts would bring some order to the playoffs. Instead, they've added to the madness.

Every single road team won Game 1, the first time this has occurred in NBA history! And thanks to the early schedule, the Indiana Pacers are already up 2–0 in their series against the Cleveland Cavaliers. When a road team steals Game 1, it blows the door wide open for chaos. We live in a world where that has happened in every series remaining.

So how did they pull it off? And more importantly, does it feel sustainable? Let’s take a look at each series and ask the question: can the upset become the outcome?

. . .

Let's Relax For Now - Boston Celtics

Boston just couldn’t make a shot. The Celtics went 15-for-60 from three, breaking an NBA record with 45 missed threes in a playoff game. And while that stat might lead some to say, “They just missed,” it wasn’t that simple. New York played a big role in mucking things up. The Knicks’ help defense was sharp, digging down on mismatches and recovering out to shooters with intensity. Even the “open” threes Boston got were often rushed or out of rhythm.

If the Knicks can keep dragging these games into crunch time, they absolutely have a shot. Jalen Brunson, the NBA’s Clutch Player of the Year, can outduel anyone on the Celtics. As great as Jayson Tatum, Jaylen Brown, and Derrick White are, none of them are that surgical, pick-and-roll operator that’s given New York problems all season. If it comes down to five or six possessions each, the Knicks might actually have the offensive edge.

But here’s why I’m still not concerned about Boston in this series: I’m not sure how many more chances New York will get to be in that position. We forget the Celtics were up 20 in the third quarter. It took a massive comeback just to make it close. Boston completely lost the plot offensively down the stretch, leaning too heavily into the “point-per-shot” analytics mindset with that kind of cushion.

The only real concern here is health. Jrue Holiday and Tatum missed time last series. Brown looks clearly hampered by that knee. Kristaps Porzingis is dealing with a mystery illness that’s lingered for months. If those injuries pile up, the strength of Boston’s core lineups -- five two-way guys who can all dribble, pass, and shoot -- starts to chip away. And while they’ll still have talent on the floor, they become a little more vulnerable.

. . .

We’re Probably Really Lucky Steph Got Hurt - Minnesota Timberwolves

Prior to the Stephen Curry injury, this was scary. Golden State’s defense was absolutely swallowing up Minnesota’s offense, and it wasn’t just about the missed threes. The Timberwolves struggled to generate clean looks. The Warriors’ small-ball unit shrunk the floor, rotated faster than anything Minnesota saw against the Lakers in Round 1, and had stronger on-ball defenders to make life tough for Anthony Edwards at the point of attack. The Wolves posted just a 94.3 offensive rating in Game 1 after putting up a 116.7 mark across five games against Los Angeles.

Defensively, the Wolves also looked shakier than usual. We know how good their individual defenders are, and we know Rudy Gobert can clean things up on the backline. Against the Lakers, that was on full display. L.A.’s attack mostly revolved around Luka Doncic with the ball (37% time of possession), with some Austin Reaves and LeBron James sprinkled in, but everything was in front of the defense. Minnesota could load up, knowing exactly where the attack was coming from, and let their perimeter defenders do what they do best.

The Warriors play nothing like that. This series requires Minnesota to defend less with their bodies and more with their brains. Golden State’s off-ball movement, screening, and cutting demands constant awareness. Guys like Edwards and Julius Randle, who can be strong on-ball defenders, had to stay sharp off the ball, and the Warriors were capitalizing on even the slightest lapse.

That dynamic was a problem... until it wasn’t. Once Curry pulled his hamstring, everything changed. The offense that had been humming orbiting around his gravity hit long dry spells without him. And even though Golden State held on in Game 1, they’re going to struggle to reach 100 points going forward.

As someone who picked Minnesota in this series, those first 16 minutes had me worried. The Warriors looked like they had real advantages. Now though, assuming Curry is out for the rest of the series, there’s not much else to report. Golden State just won’t be able to score enough to keep up.

. . .

They Played a Great Game and We Still Should've Won It's Fine... I Think? - Oklahoma City Thunder

For 55 minutes, this game went exactly how you’d expect. Denver held even in the first quarter, then Oklahoma City ramped up its defense, hit a few threes, and built a double-digit lead. From there, they kept the Nuggets at arm’s length most of the way.

Then in the final minutes, the Thunder’s offense completely stalled. On the other end, it wasn’t easy, but Nikola Jokic was able to generate just enough looks -- for himself and others -- to chip away at this lead late. After a Russell Westbrook missed three off a Jokic kickout with 25 seconds left, it looked like OKC had survived. Shai Gilgeous-Alexander, a near 90% free throw shooter, was heading to the line with a chance to make it a three-point game.

Knowing Mark Daigneault, if they made both, OKC would foul up three and never allow a game-tying shot. But something weird happened: the Thunder fouled so quickly that no time ran off the clock, something Denver actually needed to make a comeback possible. Then Chet Holmgren missed both his free throws. No more fouling. The Nuggets raced in transition, and Aaron Gordon drilled the game-winning three.

It felt like Oklahoma City outplayed Denver for most of the night, and yet they lost. That stings. The question now is whether Denver can do this three more times.

Moving forward, I’d expect OKC to ditch the one-big look. Jokic was just too big and powerful. Whatever offensive advantage the Thunder thought they were getting with that lineup wasn’t enough, especially with Denver sitting in a zone in an attempt to cut of SGA's driving lanes and daring the role players to shoot three's. You can’t stop Jokic, but you can wear him down better with Jaylen Williams or Isaiah Hartenstein on him, while Holmgren roams off the weakest shooter.

Gilgeous-Alexander also needs to lean more into being a decision-maker than a scorer. That doesn’t mean he stops hunting his own shot, but Denver is clearly committed to crowding him and denying isolation. He has to make quicker reads, keep the ball moving, and avoid over dribbling or settling for constant contested threes.

Why am I still confident in the Thunder? Because everything is so much harder for Denver. Even though the Nuggets are more skilled offensively, OKC’s defense is suffocating. Denver couldn’t get to its pet actions -- like the Jamal Murray pindown into a dribble handoff with Jokic -- because of Lu Dort's ability to stay attached the whole time, and allowing the big to stay attached to Jokic and cut off a pocket pass. When nothing comes easy, it just turns into Jokic bully-ball. And if Michael Porter Jr. -- who clearly isn’t 100% -- can’t hit tough shots consistently, I don’t see how Denver scores enough if OKC stays big.

Yes, the Nuggets stole Game 1. And yes, they have a strong defensive plan to slow SGA. But they’re relying on a seven-man rotation, playing aggressive zone, and trying to consistently hit tough shots against a top-tier defense. That’s hard to sustain.

The longer this series goes, the more it tilts towards the deeper and more physical team in Oklahoma City’s in my opinion. And I'm certainly not expecting this series to be wrapped up in five.

. . .

BIG Trouble - Cleveland Cavaliers

Oh boy. The Pacers just flat-out looked better than Cleveland in Game 1. The Cavaliers opened by switching everything defensively, and Indiana picked it apart. Bigger players like Pascal Siakam punished Cleveland’s small guards on the block, while Tyrese Haliburton gave Jarrett Allen -- who’s typically solid in space -- serious problems on the perimeter.

The Cavs didn’t seem to have many good options. If they move away from switching, that’s likely suicide against this Indiana team, which is so well-constructed and loaded with secondary playmakers who can exploit any advantage created by blitzing or drop coverage.

Cleveland was, of course, without Darius Garland. He’ll certainly help on offense, taking pressure off Donovan Mitchell and improving the Cavs’ dismal three-point shooting as Garland hit 40% from deep on high volume this year. But defensively? He’s just another target. The second he's stuck on Siakam or Myles Turner the ball is going there fast.

Then came Game 2. Somehow, despite missing Garland, Defensive Player of the Year finalist Evan Mobley, and Sixth Man of the Year candidate De’Andre Hunter, it looked like Mitchell’s 48-point masterpiece was going to carry Cleveland to a series-tying win and some new life.

Then it happened again. Just like against Milwaukee, Indiana erased a 7-point deficit with under 90 seconds left. Teams in that situation are now 3–384 over the last 20 years. The Pacers own two of those wins… in their last three games.

Now Cleveland -- banged up and maybe out of answers schematically -- needs to win twice at Gainbridge Fieldhouse to take this series.