If you didn’t believe it after one win, do you believe it now?
The team that lost Al Horford, the team that staggered down the stretch of the season, the team that lost 14 of 15 in one stretch and had forks sticking out of their foreheads because they were done until making the playoffs with their final spasm across the finish line, can win this series.
The Hawks beat Indiana on Thursday night. Again. That makes two. The score this time was 98-85. The No. 8 seed is outplaying the No. 1 seed. The team pieced together by general manager Danny Ferry, on a conservative budget and with a don’t-worry-about-today/we’ll-win-tomorrow mindset, is outplaying a team that was expected to compete for an NBA title.
They lead the series 2-1. Do you believe now? Or is there such a thing as two aberrations in three games?
One team is playing inspiring defense, moving the ball, getting open shots and exceeding the sum of its parts. That’s the Hawks.
One team is standing around, sometimes looking disinterested, often getting outworked, traveling on the first possession of the game. That’s the Pacers.
One coach is elevating his team to improbable heights: That’s Mike Budenholzer, who’s in his first season.
One coach is the subject of this bet on a sports gambling website: Who will be the coach for the Pacers’ first game next season? Frank Vogel should be only slightly comforted by the fact he is a 2-1 favorite over the field.
I’m not sure if Larry Bird is taking it that bad. The Indiana team president covered his face with his hands at various points of this game.
We’re used to people covering their face at Philips Arena — but it’s usually Hawks fans.
“The defensive effort and defensive activity is the message we’ve been talking about coming down the stretch,” Budenholzer said. “For our group to be that committed on the defensive end and be that committed in a game that was that physical is a credit to our group.”
This is what happens when a great team plays average and an average team plays great. The Hawks are playing together, smarter and tougher than the Pacers, who at times just look lost.
The series’ shift to Atlanta for two games was a test for the Hawks, both for the significance of their home-court advantage and whether this playoff run is registering with the populace.
The answer on the second question: not quite yet. Despite the Game 1 win in Indianapolis — against the backdrop of No. 8 seeds going 63-194 against No. 1’s in the opening round since 1984 — there was no stampede to the ticket window. Philips Arena still showed thousands of empty seats.
Welcome to life at the opposite end of the spectrum of a college football Saturday. But that shouldn’t diminish what the Hawks are doing — making a superior team, one projected as a threat to knock off Miami, scramble for their postseason lives.
The Hawks led at halftime 39-38 despite shooting only 30 percent — including 2-of-16 from 3-point range. Art, it wasn’t. But their defense, particularly DeMarre Carroll’s work against Paul George (who took only two shots and missed both) had to leave them feeling confident.
Then in the third quarter, the shots started to fall. Carroll made a 3. Kyle Korver made a 3. Lou Williams made a 3. The Hawks ran more, moved the ball, got open looks. They led by as many as 10 points, made half their shots (9 of 18, 6 of 12 on treys) and led 67-58 after three quarters.
The lead grew to 12 (72-60). The Pacers showed a pulse and trimmed the lead to four. But eventually they got back to doing what they’ve done much of this series: fizzle against the Hawks’ defense. A George Hill turnover, a Carroll steal, a Teague slam to finish off a fast break, and the lead was soon back to nine points, at 84-75.
The punctuation: With 2:30 left, Teague tight-roped the sideline and tossed up an off-balance, desperation 3-point shot, then held out his hands as if to say, “Where did that come from?”
A better question: Where did all of this come from?
The Pacers were upset at the ruling on Teague’s three-point prayer, which gave the Hawks an 87-78 lead. Replays showed he stepped out of bounds before the shot. But the ruling was that since Teague got back in bounds before the shot, the shot would stand.
Is it a strange rule? Yes. But that’s not why Indiana lost this game. If there are players in the Pacers’ locker room who believe they lost this game on one shot, they’re in denial.
Paul George: 3 for 11. Roy Hibbert: 2 for 9. George Hill: 1 for 11. That’s why the Pacers lost and the Hawks one. Defense is about effort and intensity, and the Hawks are playing with both.
A year ago, the Hawks were smoked in the first two games of their playoff series in Indiana. They rose from the dead to win Games 3 and 4 at home.
But that seemed more like a tease. It was: Indiana won the next two games and closed it out.
This series is different. The Hawks think they’re supposed to be doing this, they’re playing like they’re supposed to be doing this. So maybe they are supposed to be doing this. There’s no reason to believe their level of play is going to change now.
Indiana players, meanwhile, are looking at each other, waiting for somebody to take charge.
Somebody has. It’s the other team.
