The deeper we go into the NBA Playoffs, the more one truth gets hammered home: If you’ve got a guy on the floor who can’t shoot or defend, he’s getting exposed and you’re probably getting sent home. But the 3-and-D archetype with the guy who just stands in the corner isn’t quite enough anymore. All players on the floor must ideally be able to dribble and make quick decisions.
That’s why the Boston Celtics won the title last year. Sure, they had stars in Jayson Tatum and Jaylen Brown. But they also surrounded them with well-rounded pieces. When Tatum and Brown were sharing the floor with Derrick White, Jrue Holiday, and Al Horford, everyone could shoot and make a read, and nobody was a defensive liability. Even with bench units, there was no obvious weak link.
Advertisement
The same blueprint is playing out this season with the Oklahoma City Thunder and Indiana Pacers facing off in the NBA Finals.
Shai Gilgeous-Alexander, Jalen Williams, and at least one of Lu Dort, Alex Caruso, or Cason Wallace have shared the floor for 88% of Oklahoma City’s playoff minutes. In 176 of those minutes, at least four of them have played together and, during that time, the Thunder have outscored opponents by a staggering 18.1 points per 100 possessions. Every single one of those guys can defend, process the game fast, and create offense either for themselves or someone else.
SGA is the hub, but OKC’s success hinges on the fact that nobody else gums up the system. Dort cuts. Wallace connects. Caruso makes instant reads. There’s no ball-stopper, no spacer who can’t dribble, no defender the Thunder can’t trust to ferociously execute a game plan. Even OKC’s bigs fit the mold: Chet Holmgren can shoot, pass, and handle. And while Isaiah Hartenstein doesn’t shoot 3s, he plays with elite feel as a finisher and facilitator.
(Henry Russell/Yahoo Sports Illustration)
Indiana functions similarly. Tyrese Haliburton is their engine, but the pieces around him — Andrew Nembhard, Aaron Nesmith, Pascal Siakam, and Myles Turner — are all skilled enough to play with tempo, precision, and relentless energy. And they all shoot the hell out of the ball: Nembhard, Nesmith, Siakam, and Turner are all shooting over 40% from 3 on over three attempts per game in the playoffs. Everyone can eat in this system. Nesmith of course had his all-time hot streak to fuel a historic Pacers comeback in Game 1. Siakam went off for 39 in Game 2 and 31 in Game 6 against the Knicks, winning himself East Finals MVP. Nembhard has had separate games with over 20 points and over 10 assists while playing lockdown defense. Even with bench units featuring T.J. McConnell and Thomas Bryant, the Pacers can go on a scoring flurry like they did to close out New York.
Advertisement
Their historic comebacks break the mold too. The Pacers don’t turn to clear-out, hero-ball isolations. They stick with their flow: pace, movement, and speed. In the moments that most teams tighten up, Indiana just keeps running its offense.
The throughline with both teams is clear: there are no dead zones, everyone is a threat. It’s a roster with continuity and a system built on interchangeable skill sets, rapid processing, and nonstop effort. And two excellent coaching staffs led by Mark Daigneault and Rick Carlisle who constructed these systems and devised game plans to unleash their players’ strengths.
We’ve seen prototypes before, like the Beautiful Game Spurs, and the Warriors dynasty. But today’s shift is a product of how the game has evolved.
Pace is at an all-time high. So is spacing. A record-high 42.1% of shots were taken from 3 this season, and they were launched from farther than ever before: 26.2 feet on average above the break.
Advertisement
Screens are also being set farther from the hoop: the average on-ball screen came 25.7 feet from the rim, another all-time high. Defenses are switching more than ever: 24.6% of the time this year, up from just 7.7% a decade ago and 15.8% a half-decade ago.
All of that means defenders have to cover more ground and do it faster than ever. Every offensive possession stretches the floor horizontally and vertically.
On top of that, playoff officiating has made the game more physical than it’s been in decades. Players have to be tough enough to absorb contact and relentless enough to fight through every screen, closeout, and rotation. That’s part of why the Thunder and Pacers have made it this far. Both teams are deep with guys who meet those demands. Teams with shorter benches run out of answers fast. They either put a target on the floor or ask key players to dial it back to avoid fouling out.
As always, when a blueprint starts working, everyone else tries to replicate it. But copying the trend and executing it are two very different things. And this year’s playoff exits made that brutally clear.
OKC is the model franchise. (AP Photo/Nate Billings)
(ASSOCIATED PRESS)
The Knicks and Timberwolves both made the conference finals, but neither felt like they belonged by the end of it. New York has a ton of guys who can generate shots and offer lengthy defense. But it’s hard to win when your two best players are the weakest links on defense. Karl-Anthony Towns is an aloof liability at every spot on the floor. And Jalen Brunson is both tiny and unaware with poor technique fighting through screens. Until one of them is replaced, it’s hard to take the Knicks seriously as a team that’ll still be playing in June.
Advertisement
Minnesota looked like a team from another era against OKC. Julius Randle is a ball-stopper and Anthony Edwards dazzled on-ball but disappeared off it. At just 6-foot-3, Edwards has to evolve through movement: cuts, catch-and-shoot 3s, relocations, connective passing. And Minnesota’s offense must change to best promote the development of its 23-year-old star.
Coaches can only do with what they have though. The Pacers and Thunder were built from the top down by their front offices to play this way with rosters that can go deep into the bench. But the lead tacticians do have a choice in the matter. Daigneault spent all season experimenting with lineup combinations, playing everyone on his roster, creating a culture where everyone contributes to the greater good. The system Carlisle installed naturally promotes these habits on top of continuing to go deeper into his rotation as the playoffs advanced.
One of the challenges for teams looking to take the next step will be navigating the new collective bargaining agreement with rules that make it nearly impossible to have three stars on max contracts and survive with one-dimensional role players on minimum deals. The Heatles approach is no longer a realistic option. We’ve exited the superteam era. And given the way the best teams are playing and the way they’re constructed, and given the restrictions of the new CBA, this likely isn’t a temporary trend. It’s more of a structural shift where the teams that last are built around four pillars: shooting ability, quick decision-making, offensive adaptability, and defensive versatility. That foundation is necessary to support at least one superstar, who also must embrace those qualities.
Some teams like the Cavaliers need to add more toughness. Others need shooting, like the Magic and Pistons. And some teams like the Rockets also need a star.
Advertisement
Even veteran teams will start to feel the pressure. If OKC levels up again next year, Denver will have to ask hard questions. Nikola Jokić checks every box the Nuggets could possibly want in a star. But do they have enough shooting around him? And can Michael Porter Jr. thrive in this era with his limited creation and defensive shortcomings?
Golden State went out and got Jimmy Butler to support Steph Curry, but that isn’t enough when the roster is littered with players who can’t shoot or playmake. Has the contention window already shut on the Warriors and they just don’t know it?
And in Los Angeles, Luka Dončić’s slow-it-down style may not get him quite as far as it did in Dallas given the way the NBA is evolving. The Lakers may need to rethink what it looks like to build around Luka. And Luka needs to rethink how much of the ball he really needs to dominate. Maybe being a top-five player isn’t enough in this era. Maybe you can’t be the system, but you have to thrive within one.
So here we are: Thunder vs. Pacers for all the marbles. Two small-market franchises, built from the ground up, now defining what winning looks like in the modern NBA. They didn’t do it with an aging max-contract trio. They did it with deep and versatile rosters that can throw out lineup after lineup of five guys who can all shoot, dribble, guard, and make decisions in half a second.
Advertisement
And none of this works without stars who buy in. SGA did. Haliburton did. When your best players excel within the system, the ceiling gets higher.
The Thunder and Pacers are not just the Finals teams; they’re the blueprint.
