Cleveland Cavaliers News

Home

Quizzes

Watch

Newsletter

Donovan Mitchell, Cleveland Cavaliers. Mandatory Credit: Ken Blaze-Imagn Images. Donovan Mitchell, Cleveland Cavaliers. Mandatory Credit: Ken Blaze-Imagn Images.

3 Reasons Why The Cavaliers Can Bounce Back From Their Game 1 Loss

Originally posted on Sportscasting | By Mat Issa | Last updated May 5, 2025 3:04 PM ET

After losing Game 1 of the Eastern Conference Semifinals to the Indiana Pacers, the knee-jerk reaction if you’re affiliated with the Cleveland Cavaliers may be panic. This is Cleveland’s first loss of the postseason, so we have no precedent for how it will respond to the adversity. Also, as the No. 1 seed hosting the No. 4 seed, Cleveland just surrendered home-court advantage by losing Game 1.

When you look at it this way, it’s easy to feel fearful. But take a deeper look at what went down in Game 1, and you’ll see that the Cavaliers are still in a really good spot. Here are three reasons why.

Cleveland Was Missing Its All-Star Point Guard

We’ll start with the easy one. The Cavaliers played Game 1 without their All-Star point guard, Darius Garland, who missed his third straight game with a toe injury.

Along with losing out on 20.6 points and 6.7 assists per game, Garland’s absence made life easier on Tyrese Haliburton. To his credit, Haliburton put together a very good defensive game by his standards. However, he was aided by the fact he spent most of his night guarding off-ball shooters who were struggling from downtown.

When he did need to guard a higher-usage player, it was Ty Jerome. While Jerome has emerged as one of the best bench scorers in the league, his more rough-and-tough creation style is easily countered by Haliburton’s length (he had three blocks in this game). As a result, Haliburton held Jerome to 2-of-7 shooting (per NBA.com).

Garland relies much more on shiftiness and burst, attributes Haliburton’s length can’t as easily negate. So, Garland’s return to the lineup (which could be as soon as Game 2) will force Haliburton to work even harder defensively.

The Pacers Were Red Hot And The Cavaliers Were Ice Cold

Even without Garland, the Cavaliers had a very good chance of winning this game. Unfortunately, the basketball gods were smiling in Indiana’s direction on Sunday. In Game 1, the Pacers hit 52.8 percent of their 36 3-point attempts. Specifically, Andrew Nembhard, Aaron Nesmith and Bennedict Mathurin combined to shoot 70.6 percent (12-of-17) from downtown.

Per Stathead, teams are 53-3 all-time in playoff games where they shoot at least 50% from three and attempt at least 30 3-pointers.

Last night, the Pacers shot 52.8% on 36 3-point attempts. pic.twitter.com/oUhUaiRjnx

— Sportscasting NBA (@SportcastingNBA) May 5, 2025

On the flip side, the Cavaliers — which spent the entire season being one of the best shooting teams in the league (second in 3-point percentage) — shot just 23.7 percent on their 38 attempts beyond the arc. That percentage marks their second-worst output of the season.

Indiana isn’t a bad shooting team by any stretch (ninth in 3-point percent). But if it just missed a few more threes or the usually reliable Cavaliers converted on a few more of their open looks (they had 28), it would be Cleveland currently leading the series 1-0.

Cleveland Dominated In The Paint

While 3-point shooting is a flukey stat often varying greatly from game-to-game, how a team converts around the rim is far more reliable and consistent.

During Game 1, the Cavaliers shot 60.3 percent in the paint. Indiana was right there with them at 59.4 percent, but did it on 26 fewer attempts inside.

Some of this is a byproduct of the Pacers’ defensive philosophy. They tend to send less help on drives to limit their opponent’s 3-point attempts (fifth-lowest opponent 3-point frequency, per Cleaning the Glass). But even when watching the tape, there was a stretch in the third quarter where it seemed less like the Pacers were inviting shots around the rim and more like they had no other choice.

The ease with which Donovan Mitchell was able to get two feet in the paint and Evan Mobley or Jarrett Allen could attack as rollers gives the Cavaliers a high offensive floor, even if their shot isn’t falling. Last night, they became just the 29th team in NBA history to score at least 110 points while shooting less than 30 percent from three (minimum 30 attempts).

This isn’t intended to imply the Pacers’ win last night was all luck or the Cavaliers don’t have anything to work on. Haliburton and Nembhard put together masterful two-way performances, while Indiana’s ability to space things out and ping-pong the ball around will have Cleveland head coach Kenny Atkinson questioning the viability of his double-big lineup all series long.

But the Cavaliers should still be the clear favorites to take this series, and Game 1 proves it.

This article first appeared on Sportscasting and was syndicated with permission.

More must-reads: