The Western Conference finals haven’t been close. Not through two games, at least.
The Thunder outclassed the Timberwolves in Games 1 and 2 in Oklahoma City, but now the series heads north to Minneapolis. Will the Wolves show more bite in Game 3 on Saturday? What adjustments can Minnesota make to get back in the series?
That’s one of the questions we’re answering in today’s Thunder roundtable.
What’s the adjustment for Timberwolves, if there is one, to get back in this series?
Jenni Carlson: So far in this series, all anyone remembers of Jaden McDaniels is his hot start to Game 1 and his hand-to-the-back shove of Shai Gilgeous-Alexander in Game 2. But go back and watch the fourth quarter from Thursday night, and there were stretches when McDaniels was a defender possessed. His length and tenacity made life hard on SGA. How long could McDaniels keep that sort of thing up? I have no idea, but show him video of those late possessions and tell him to go do that some more.
Justin Martinez: Minnesota has to make faster decisions on offense. The Timberwolves ranked first in the NBA during the regular season in frequency of shots taken with 7-15 seconds left on the shot clock (51.3%), and it’s at 51.8% so far this series. But the longer Minnesota holds onto the ball, the more time OKC’s defense has to settle in and make a play. The Thunder forced an average of 16.5 turnovers throughout the first two games and converted them into an average of 26.5 points.
Joe Mussatto: More Jaylen Clark? Only half-kidding. I really don’t know. After Game 1, I thought the obvious adjustment for Minnesota was to swallow its pride and play more zone defense a la Denver. But the Wolves’ zone has been a disaster in the possessions they’ve gone to it. Minnesota is a way better defensive team than Denver with way better defensive personnel, yet the Nuggets made things way tougher on the Thunder than the Wolves have. OKC has scored 120.2 points per 100 possessions against Minnesota. That’s a better offensive rating than the Thunder had in Round 1 against the Grizzlies (117.4), much less against the Nuggets (113.8). And now here I am suggesting the Wolves turn to Clark, a rookie who played in 40 regular-season games. He did show glimpses of good defense against SGA, though! Clark logged a DNP in Game 2 after playing six minutes in Game 1.
What was your series prediction before Game 1 of Western Conference finals? Would you change it now?
Joe Mussatto: Thunder in seven. And yes, I would like a redo. This feels like Thunder in five. OKC will get a split in Minnesota before finishing off the Wolves on Wednesday in Oklahoma City. I picked Thunder to beat the Nuggets in five — it went seven. So of course I’d pick seven in this series only for it to go five.
Jenni Carlson: I had the Thunder winning in seven games, and yes, that seems about two games too long. Frankly, it feels like this series is way more likely to end in four games than six. I truly did not see the Thunder dominating the first couple of games like it did, especially when it hasn’t played great. The primary sin: the 3-point shooting has been a mess. But the defense is so, so good, it’s hasn’t seemed to matter how chipped the rim is getting by all those clanked threes.
Justin Martinez: I picked OKC to win this series in six games. Now, I’m leaning toward the Thunder in five games. Minnesota can’t keep Shai Gilgeous-Alexander and OKC out of the paint. And its best rim protector, Rudy Gobert, is getting played off the court. The Timberwolves also have to play a near-perfect game on offense. But the Thunder showed it can contain Julius Randle by matching his physicality and blitzing him with help defenders, and every lazy pass by the Timberwolves has been punished with steals. I think OKC will win one of the next two games on the road and close it out at home in Game 5.
Looking ahead to a possible NBA Finals berth, what would be the better matchup: Thunder-Knicks or Thunder-Pacers?
Jenni Carlson: Better for the Thunder, or better for entertainment purposes? If we’re talking about the former, the Knicks look like the more beatable team. The Pacers have been extremely hot and virtually unsinkable throughout these playoffs, so if you’re trying to win a title — and I get the feeling the Thunder would like that — avoiding buzzsaws is always a good idea. Now, if you’re talking entertainment, Thunder-Pacers would be grand theater. Two teams that love getting after it going after each other for a couple weeks? Sign me up for that. Of course, Thunder-Knicks would have its own entertainment value. Just seeing “New York vs Oklahoma City” is quite the charge, and what if the Thunder could say it won its first NBA title in Madison Square Garden? I mean, that’d be pretty top shelf, too.
Justin Martinez: The NBA Finals in Madison Square Garden would be cinematic, but the better series would be OKC versus Indiana. The Thunder has the best defense in the NBA, while the Pacers have the hottest offense. And both teams have depth for days. That’d make for some great basketball.
Joe Mussatto: From a general NBA perspective? Thunder-Knicks. But TV ratings aside, give me Thunder-Pacers. New York has the best player (Jalen Brunson), but Indiana has more depth. The Pacers also play a more fun brand of basketball, and there’d be something charming about a small-market OKC vs. Indiana series. There isn’t a wrong answer, though. Either series would make for terrific theater.