| | NBA : Teaser Line Matchup |
| |
INDIANA WASHINGTON |
|
| 180 | 95 Final 92 |
|
|
| | |
|
Eastern Conference - Semifinals - Best of 7 - Game 4 - IND Leads 2-1 | | | | |
727 | INDIANA | +8.5 | Over 176.5 | 728 | WASHINGTON | -0.5 | Under 184.5 |
|
|
| | |
|
| | | |
|
|
All Games | 62-30 | -8.9 | 43-48 | 38-52 | 96.2 | 45.5 | 44.8% | 52.8 | 92.0 | 46.4 | 41.7% | 49.7 | Road Games | 24-21 | -6.7 | 20-25 | 19-24 | 94.4 | 43.1 | 43.6% | 51.8 | 95.5 | 46.2 | 42.9% | 50.6 | Last 5 Games | 4-1 | +2.8 | 3-2 | 1-4 | 90.8 | 42.2 | 43.3% | 51.6 | 83.0 | 41.8 | 37.1% | 53.4 | Playoff Games | 6-4 | -3.4 | 5-5 | 3-7 | 92.1 | 42.9 | 44.2% | 51.1 | 89.4 | 45.9 | 39.0% | 50.6 |
|
| |
|
|
Team Stats (All Games) | 96.2 | 45.5 | 36-80 | 44.8% | 7-19 | 35.9% | 18-23 | 77.7% | 53 | 10 | 20 | 21 | 7 | 14 | 5 | vs opponents surrendering | 100.9 | 50.5 | 38-82 | 45.7% | 8-22 | 36.1% | 18-24 | 75.6% | 51 | 11 | 22 | 21 | 8 | 14 | 5 | Team Stats (Road Games) | 94.4 | 43.1 | 35-80 | 43.6% | 7-19 | 36.8% | 17-23 | 76.7% | 52 | 10 | 19 | 21 | 7 | 14 | 5 | Stats Against (All Games) | 92.0 | 46.4 | 34-82 | 41.7% | 7-20 | 34.5% | 16-22 | 75.6% | 50 | 10 | 18 | 22 | 7 | 13 | 5 | vs opponents averaging | 100.2 | 50.2 | 37-83 | 45.2% | 8-22 | 35.8% | 18-23 | 75.6% | 50 | 11 | 22 | 21 | 8 | 14 | 5 | Stats Against (Road Games) | 95.5 | 46.2 | 35-82 | 42.9% | 7-20 | 34.9% | 18-23 | 78.1% | 51 | 10 | 20 | 21 | 7 | 13 | 4 |
|
|
| |
|
|
All Games | 49-41 | -7.8 | 48-40 | 47-43 | 99.7 | 50.8 | 45.6% | 50.4 | 98.5 | 49.8 | 45.5% | 50.4 | Home Games | 23-21 | -21.9 | 17-25 | 20-24 | 99.4 | 51.0 | 45.9% | 49.4 | 97.8 | 49.6 | 45.7% | 49.7 | Last 5 Games | 3-2 | +1.1 | 4-1 | 2-3 | 84.0 | 46.0 | 40.3% | 55.0 | 85.0 | 40.2 | 41.1% | 48.4 | Playoff Games | 5-3 | +3.1 | 6-2 | 5-3 | 90.0 | 48.1 | 42.5% | 53.6 | 89.6 | 44.0 | 42.3% | 50.0 |
|
| |
|
|
Team Stats (All Games) | 99.7 | 50.8 | 38-84 | 45.6% | 8-20 | 37.9% | 15-21 | 72.4% | 50 | 11 | 23 | 21 | 8 | 14 | 5 | vs opponents surrendering | 100.2 | 50.2 | 37-83 | 45.3% | 8-21 | 36.1% | 18-23 | 75.6% | 51 | 11 | 22 | 21 | 8 | 14 | 5 | Team Stats (Home Games) | 99.4 | 51.0 | 38-83 | 45.9% | 7-20 | 36.1% | 16-21 | 74.8% | 49 | 10 | 23 | 20 | 8 | 14 | 5 | Stats Against (All Games) | 98.5 | 49.8 | 37-81 | 45.5% | 7-21 | 34.8% | 18-23 | 76.6% | 50 | 10 | 22 | 20 | 8 | 15 | 4 | vs opponents averaging | 99.7 | 49.8 | 37-82 | 45.1% | 8-21 | 35.6% | 18-24 | 75.7% | 51 | 11 | 22 | 21 | 8 | 14 | 5 | Stats Against (Home Games) | 97.8 | 49.6 | 37-80 | 45.7% | 7-21 | 35.1% | 17-22 | 76.9% | 50 | 9 | 21 | 20 | 8 | 15 | 4 |
|
| Average power rating of opponents played: INDIANA 94.7, WASHINGTON 95.2 |
| | |
|
|
4/2/2014 | DETROIT | 101-94 | W | -10.5 | L | 191 | O | 39-79 | 49.4% | 55 | 10 | 34-93 | 36.6% | 59 | 5 | 4/4/2014 | @ TORONTO | 94-102 | L | -1.5 | L | 178.5 | O | 33-78 | 42.3% | 50 | 10 | 40-84 | 47.6% | 49 | 11 | 4/6/2014 | ATLANTA | 88-107 | L | -8 | L | 186 | O | 32-78 | 41.0% | 46 | 11 | 41-73 | 56.2% | 47 | 15 | 4/9/2014 | @ MILWAUKEE | 104-102 | W | -1 | W | 186 | O | 41-85 | 48.2% | 51 | 11 | 38-87 | 43.7% | 57 | 11 | 4/11/2014 | @ MIAMI | 86-98 | L | 5.5 | L | 181 | O | 31-65 | 47.7% | 35 | 16 | 35-75 | 46.7% | 48 | 9 | 4/13/2014 | OKLAHOMA CITY | 102-97 | W | -1 | W | 192 | O | 38-72 | 52.8% | 53 | 21 | 36-84 | 42.9% | 36 | 9 | 4/16/2014 | @ ORLANDO | 101-86 | W | 4 | W | 187 | P | 41-88 | 46.6% | 57 | 12 | 32-79 | 40.5% | 47 | 10 | 4/19/2014 | ATLANTA | 93-101 | L | -8.5 | L | 185.5 | O | 34-81 | 42.0% | 54 | 15 | 33-76 | 43.4% | 48 | 12 | 4/22/2014 | ATLANTA | 101-85 | W | -7.5 | W | 186.5 | U | 36-68 | 52.9% | 51 | 16 | 31-79 | 39.2% | 40 | 13 | 4/24/2014 | @ ATLANTA | 85-98 | L | -2 | L | 187 | U | 32-85 | 37.6% | 56 | 13 | 28-73 | 38.4% | 54 | 14 | 4/26/2014 | @ ATLANTA | 91-88 | W | -2.5 | W | 189 | U | 37-77 | 48.1% | 49 | 10 | 30-84 | 35.7% | 51 | 12 | 4/28/2014 | ATLANTA | 97-107 | L | -7 | L | 186.5 | O | 36-78 | 46.2% | 43 | 12 | 33-66 | 50.0% | 46 | 16 | 5/1/2014 | @ ATLANTA | 95-88 | W | 2 | W | 188 | U | 33-77 | 42.9% | 53 | 13 | 29-81 | 35.8% | 50 | 13 | 5/3/2014 | ATLANTA | 92-80 | W | -6.5 | W | 184 | U | 33-70 | 47.1% | 64 | 17 | 28-92 | 30.4% | 46 | 10 | 5/5/2014 | WASHINGTON | 96-102 | L | -4.5 | L | 183.5 | O | 33-81 | 40.7% | 46 | 13 | 35-84 | 41.7% | 65 | 15 | 5/7/2014 | WASHINGTON | 86-82 | W | -5 | L | 186.5 | U | 32-72 | 44.4% | 44 | 7 | 36-80 | 45.0% | 50 | 9 | 5/9/2014 | @ WASHINGTON | 85-63 | W | 5 | W | 183.5 | U | 31-74 | 41.9% | 51 | 9 | 24-73 | 32.9% | 56 | 17 | 5/11/2014 | @ WASHINGTON | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 5/13/2014 | WASHINGTON | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
|
| |
|
|
4/2/2014 | BOSTON | 118-92 | W | -8 | W | 200 | O | 45-72 | 62.5% | 47 | 21 | 32-81 | 39.5% | 37 | 14 | 4/4/2014 | @ NEW YORK | 90-89 | W | 5.5 | W | 195.5 | U | 38-78 | 48.7% | 49 | 15 | 34-76 | 44.7% | 40 | 16 | 4/5/2014 | CHICAGO | 78-96 | L | -2 | L | 183.5 | U | 34-86 | 39.5% | 48 | 11 | 35-79 | 44.3% | 57 | 10 | 4/9/2014 | CHARLOTTE | 88-94 | L | -5.5 | L | 190 | U | 37-82 | 45.1% | 53 | 12 | 35-92 | 38.0% | 58 | 12 | 4/11/2014 | @ ORLANDO | 96-86 | W | -7 | W | 194 | U | 35-82 | 42.7% | 57 | 12 | 32-77 | 41.6% | 50 | 16 | 4/12/2014 | MILWAUKEE | 104-91 | W | -11 | W | 204 | U | 40-84 | 47.6% | 44 | 9 | 32-68 | 47.1% | 51 | 20 | 4/14/2014 | MIAMI | 114-93 | W | -5.5 | W | 190 | O | 46-78 | 59.0% | 49 | 17 | 36-80 | 45.0% | 36 | 12 | 4/16/2014 | @ BOSTON | 118-102 | W | -8 | W | 198 | O | 50-88 | 56.8% | 49 | 12 | 39-84 | 46.4% | 45 | 13 | 4/20/2014 | @ CHICAGO | 102-93 | W | 4.5 | W | 177.5 | O | 36-74 | 48.6% | 54 | 10 | 34-81 | 42.0% | 46 | 8 | 4/22/2014 | @ CHICAGO | 101-99 | W | 5 | W | 180 | O | 38-80 | 47.5% | 53 | 12 | 38-88 | 43.2% | 57 | 12 | 4/25/2014 | CHICAGO | 97-100 | L | -2.5 | L | 180.5 | O | 37-86 | 43.0% | 47 | 11 | 34-71 | 47.9% | 55 | 16 | 4/27/2014 | CHICAGO | 98-89 | W | -2.5 | W | 183.5 | O | 35-86 | 40.7% | 48 | 6 | 35-78 | 44.9% | 53 | 16 | 4/29/2014 | @ CHICAGO | 75-69 | W | 3.5 | W | 183.5 | U | 30-74 | 40.5% | 56 | 12 | 25-75 | 33.3% | 48 | 11 | 5/5/2014 | @ INDIANA | 102-96 | W | 4.5 | W | 183.5 | O | 35-84 | 41.7% | 65 | 15 | 33-81 | 40.7% | 46 | 13 | 5/7/2014 | @ INDIANA | 82-86 | L | 5 | W | 186.5 | U | 36-80 | 45.0% | 50 | 9 | 32-72 | 44.4% | 44 | 7 | 5/9/2014 | INDIANA | 63-85 | L | -5 | L | 183.5 | U | 24-73 | 32.9% | 56 | 17 | 31-74 | 41.9% | 51 | 9 | 5/11/2014 | INDIANA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 5/13/2014 | @ INDIANA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
| | | INDIANA: GUARDS: GEORGE HILL is less of a creator and more of a game-manager/scorer, which fits fine in this starting five . . . LANCE STEPHENSON continues to be an enigma. His speed pushing the ball in transition is an asset, but his terrible shooting and bizarre decision-making often makes him a liability in the half court . . . C.J. WATSON has proven to be a capable second-unit point guard, but he's on his third team in three years because he's managed to give away two playoff games with monumentally bad moments . . . ORLANDO JOHNSON is unlikely to see meaningful minutes, but his role should grow slightly now that Gerald Green is gone. FORWARDS: This is PAUL GEORGE'S team. Once a do-it-all role player, he's now polished enough to create his own offense . . . As expected, DAVID WEST bounced back in his second season off a torn ACL. He's still deadly as a mid-range shooter, a savvy passer and a strong rebounder . . . LUIS SCOLA slides into Tyler Hansbrough's old role as a second-unit banger, and insurance for West and Roy Hibbert . . . DANNY GRANGER is in no-man's land. He's not better than Paul George, and probably no longer an upgrade over Lance Stephenson. His best asset may be his expiring deal . . . CHRIS COPELAND can't defend, but gives the Pacers a three-point threat . . . SOLOMON HILL doesn't figure to contribute this season. CENTERS: ROY HIBBERT proved capable of handling more minutes last season, but Indy will likely still be cautious with their asthmatic 7-foot-2 center during the regular season . . . IAN MAHINMI is back to give his six fouls and move some bodies out of the paint. | | WASHINGTON: GUARDS: Late last year, JOHN WALL finally started to fulfill his promising talent. He got wherever he wanted on the court, and the Wizards were very tough to guard with all the shooters surrounding him . . . BRADLEY BEAL and Wall should mesh beautifully. Beal is a potentially elite shooter, and he rebounds very well for a guard . . . ERIC MAYNOR is fully healthy again after tearing his ACL two seasons ago. He can play some alongside Wall, but mostly he'll be the league's best back-up point guard again . . . GLEN RICE JR. doesn't shoot it nearly as well as his father, but he's an athlete who could break into the rotation down the line . . . GARRETT TEMPLE is insurance in case Wall or Maynor goes down. FORWARDS: The Wizards need NENÊ’S low post offense. It seems inevitable that they'll have to cap his minutes . . . OTTO PORTER is likely to step into the starting lineup early on. They need his defense, as he can guard twos through fours . . . MARTELL WEBSTER will platoon with Porter, providing another outstanding shooter for Wall to feed . . . TREVOR ARIZA is playing out the string on an untradeable deal . . . TREVOR BOOKER has some use as a screener and low-post banger, but not much else . . . AL HARRINGTON may be inefficient, but he can score points in a hurry and is a decent defender'JAN VESELY is still trying to figure out the NBA, though it's too early to give up on his athleticism . . . CHRIS SINGLETON can defend, but he's no more than a garbage-time player due to his atrocious offense. CENTERS: EMEKA OKAFOR may be absurdly overpaid, but he's settled in as a passable starter who helps defensively and doesn't hurt on offense. He'll also miss the beginning of the season with a herniated disc . . . With Okafor's deal expiring at the end of the year, KEVIN SERAPHIN is auditioning to be Washington's center of the future. After showing promise two seasons ago, he was a disaster last season. |
| | Follow Howard Fendrich on Twitter at http://twitter.com/HowardFendrich
|
| Last Updated: 9/28/2024 7:23:58 AM EST. |
|
|
| |
|