Game 1 was a (literal) fever dream

Scattered thoughts from another incredible game

Let me make this clear right off the bat: This won’t be my finest piece of work. I had to pack and move to a new home this week while burning up from fever, and I couldn’t make it through all of last night’s game (watched the rest this morning). It’s been a rough week. I’m only 80% sure I didn’t hallucinate yet another Haliburton buzzer-beater.

So I simply don’t have the capacity for the length or polish of a typical Poetry post. I hope to return to full strength for an article after the next match.

That said, I owed you guys something after an incredible Game 1, so here are some overheated thoughts. Now, I’m returning to bed to take my second nap of the day (and — unpopular opinion alert! — I hate naps).

1) The Pacers’ physicality

We’ve all heard so much about OKC’s physicality, and rightfully so. You only have to watch Lu Dort murder an Aaron Nesmith drive to understand the hype:

(I thought that Dort-block-to-SGA-layup sequence might’ve saved the game for the Thunder, only for Pascal Siakam to turn around and have his own block-putback sequence directly after!)

But the Pacers haven’t seemed to earn the same hype, and I’m not sure why. Guys like Nemsith, Andrew Nembhard, and Pascal Siakam have no problem bodying opponents up. Nembhard, in particular, relishes the contact — he even got Olympics teammate Shai Gilgeous-Alexander frustrated with his handsiness. Like an old-school fullback, Nembhard isn’t afraid to dish it out with the ball, either:

Indiana is willing to go blow for blow with OKC. This will be more of a boxing match than people expected.

2) The Thunder’s inability to capitalize on power plays