- Blunt Insights
- Posts
- 🏀 Game 3 Was a Data Earthquake — Now Comes the Reckoning in Game 4
🏀 Game 3 Was a Data Earthquake — Now Comes the Reckoning in Game 4
Blunt Insight | June 12, 2025
Samuel Rogers
June 12, 2025
Indiana 116, Oklahoma City 107.
The Pacers flipped the series. Not with stars. Not with flash.
But with bench scoring, fourth-quarter execution, and turnover pressure so elite it looked designed in an MIT lab.
Let’s break down what really happened — and why Game 4 on Friday could decide the 2025 NBA Champion.
🧮 Advanced Stat Recap
Metric | Pacers | Thunder | Margin |
|---|---|---|---|
Bench Points | 49 | 18 | +31 |
Turnovers | 12 | 17 | +5 |
Fourth-Qtr Pts | 32 | 18 | +14 |
Q4 FG% | 54% | 35% | +19% |
Offensive Rebounding % | 29% | 21% | +8% |
Transition Points | 22 | 11 | +11 |
Haliburton +/- | +14 | — | — |
Mathurin (off bench) | 27 PTS | — | — |
🔎 Efficiency swing: Indiana’s effective FG% in the fourth: 63.2%.
Oklahoma City’s: 35.0%.
That’s not shot-making — that’s winning math.
📌 Spotlight: The Pacers’ Bench Isn’t a Subplot — It’s the Plot
Bennedict Mathurin
27 points
9-of-12 FG (75%)
+16 in 22 minutes
Most efficient Finals bench performance since Jason Terry in 2011.
And the Pacers ran their offense through him in Q4.
T.J. McConnell
10 pts, 5 asts, 5 stls
+12 Net Rating on floor
3 steals in final 9 minutes
Indiana’s second unit outscored OKC by 2.5 points per minute.
You read that right. Pure leverage.
🧠 Strategic Pressure Points
1. Turnovers Create Margin
Oklahoma City’s 17 turnovers resulted in 23 Indiana points.
That’s more than the final margin.
OKC’s Turnover Rate (TOR): 21.7%
NBA Finals average: ~13%
That’s catastrophic.
2. Pacers: Post-Loss Perfection
Indiana is 10–0 following a loss since March.
Their adjustments hit fast, and they hit hard.
3. Haliburton’s Distribution Machine
22 pts / 11 asts / 9 rebs
19 potential assists
0 turnovers in 41 minutes
He controls tempo, spacing, and late-game composure like a surgeon.
📉 Oklahoma City: The Cracks Are Showing
🔄 Rotation Fatigue
Cason Wallace: –12 in 11 minutes
Isaiah Joe: 0-for-3 from deep
Thunder bench: –32 Net Rating
😵💫 Late Game Collapse (again)
OKC scored just 18 points in Q4 — 6 field goals total.
They had 5 turnovers in the last 7 minutes.
In Games 2 and 3 combined, OKC has shot 11-of-41 (26.8%) in the 4th quarter.
🔮 Game 4 Preview: Tactical Pressure Cooker
📍 Friday, June 13 | Indianapolis
✅ What Pacers Must Do:
Keep staggering Haliburton + McConnell to maintain spacing
Feed Mathurin early to force OKC help rotations
Defend Shai with verticality and force mid-range contests (SGA was 3/9 from 14–18 ft in Game 3)
❌ What Thunder Must Fix:
Cut TOs to <13
Bench production must jump by +15 pts
Attack Pacers’ drop coverage earlier in the clock
SGA's Usage Rate in Game 3: 34.6%
If he’s going to dominate the ball, OKC must increase 3PA (only 23 attempts) and clean second-chance offense.
🧠 Predictive Models Tilt Toward Indiana
Elo Shift (after Game 3):
Pacers: +62 (now 1740)
Thunder: –62 (now 1696)
Game 4 Win Probabilities:
Indiana: 64%
OKC: 36%
Series win odds (Pacers):
Before Game 3: 41%
Now: 71%
History doesn’t lie: 33 of 41 teams that won Game 3 (when tied 1–1) went on to win the Finals.
🧨 Blunt Insight: Game 4 Is the Leverage Game
If Indiana wins Game 4, the series becomes a 78% lock.
If OKC steals it, it becomes a coin flip again.
Game 4 isn’t just a must-win for the Thunder.
It’s the series pivot — mathematically and mentally.
For the Front Office, Fans & Freaks
Front offices: Study Indiana’s two-unit staggering. It’s a masterclass in maximizing bench value.
Fans: This is high-leverage basketball at its finest. Every Q4 possession is a data story.
Analytics pros: Track fourth-quarter eFG%, TO%, and 3PA rate. These three metrics are predicting the game.
🏁 Final Word
Indiana’s role players didn’t just contribute.
They rewrote the Finals.
Game 4 is coming. The question is simple:
Can the Thunder solve the math? Or will the Pacers bury them in it?