Lost G3 Little Tianwang Mountain: Why is Thunder generally favored but has lost one after another? Four reasons are revealed

In the critical battle of G3 Little Tianwang Mountain, although the outside world generally supports the Thunder, they unexpectedly lost to the widely underestimated Pacers, which is very confusing. The Pacers successfully reversed the situation 116-107 at home, taking a 2-1 lead in the series, avoiding the fate of being swept by the Thunder. Historical data shows that teams that won the G3 and led the score in the finals have as many as 81% chance of winning the championship. The Pacers performed far exceeding expectations in this game, although many US media and basketball analysts were unanimously optimistic about the Thunder before the start of the series. For example, the NBA official predicted that the Thunder would easily win the championship 4-1, but the reality is that they frequently encounter challenges.

Even after losing G3, the Thunder is still favored by big data, and some media even gave their chances of winning the championship as high as 84.5%. The Pacers who are behind have only 15.5% chance of winning. This situation seems understandable - the Thunder have top stars like the new MVP Alexander, and a layout that both offense and defense, while the Pacers are more focused on offense.

However, why did the Thunder lose one after another in the first few games of the series? Here are four main reasons:

First, Alexander's performance was limited. Faced with the Pacers' clear defensive strategy and the referee's loose enforcement standards, Alexander failed to show his due dominance. In G3, he made 6 mistakes, and his performance in the final quarter was quite sluggish, scoring a total of 3 points, 1 rebound and 1 turnover, which is in sharp contrast to Halliburton. The latter efficiently scored 22 points, 9 rebounds and 11 assists in G3. As the core of the team, Alexander needs better performance to take on key roles.

Secondly, the Thunder's defensive efficiency has declined. Although they ranked first in the league in the regular season this season, they were repeatedly defeated by the Pacers in the finals, and the first three games allowed the opponent to score more than 110 points many times. And this score iconic means the Pacers’ victory.

Third, in terms of lineup depth, although the Thunder dominates on paper, it is defeated by the Pacers' overall rotation. The Thunder often reduced the number of rotations in the second half, while the Pacers stabilized the rotation of 9-10 players throughout the game. Substitutes such as McConnell and Mathering all contributed at critical moments. This directly led the Pacers to score a third-highest substitute score of 49 points in G3, which is more stable than the Thunder.

Finally, the gap between the head coaches of the two teams cannot be ignored. As a coach with championship experience, Carlisle's arrangement and on-the-spot response are obviously more exquisite, allowing multiple substitutes of the Pacers to play on the court. On the other hand, Dagenot of the Thunder has certain problems with his tactical arrangement, which has shown clues in the reversal of G1.

To sum up, all kinds of factors have led to the Thunder's failure in G3, although they are generally optimistic. They must adjust their tactics and performance to reverse the decline in the next game.