The series is a blowout. The road team has won the first two games of the NBA Finals, and generally speaking, in the NBA, that’s a death sentence. Teams almost never hang in; they almost never recover.
It’s why, at this stage of the series between the San Antonio Spurs and the New York Knicks, this feels like a blowout — even if the games have been anything but. The results have tilted entirely in one direction, while the process that’s led to the final scores in Game 1 and Game 2 has been much more even-handed.
The question, as this series shifts to New York City, a place ready to devour these finals like a late-night pepperoni slice, centers around what we’ve already seen and whether we’ll see it again.
Will the headlining stars continue to shine and wilt?
Will the little things continue to tilt towards the Knicks?
Are there series-altering strategic shifts that can be made?
We asked a panel of The Athletic’s NBA experts — Dan Woike, Will Guillory, Nick Friedell, Tony Jones and Jay King — to make sense of what’s happened so far in these finals and what we should expect to come next.
Who is the finals MVP as of now, and why?
Woike: It’s Karl-Anthony Towns, and it’s not particularly close. He set the tone in this series by following the top-line scouting report when it comes to playing Victor Wembanyama. You have to attack. It’s easier said than done, of course, and you have to accept the possibility you’ll get embarrassed with a highlight blocked shot, but you cannot be passive against him. Towns, from the start of Game 1, has been in attack mode at the rim, adding the 3-point shot as a complement to the dribble-drives. In two games this series, the Knicks have been 25 points better than the Spurs with Towns on the court.
Guillory: Towns. Jalen Brunson’s shotmaking in the fourth quarter has been essential to New York winning Games 1 and 2 on the road. But the most consistent source of quality offense for the Knicks throughout those two games has been Towns. His passing at the top of the key or in the post when he gets doubled has been superb. He’s been a force in the post when San Antonio tries to put smaller players on him. As good as Brunson has been, I feel like life would’ve been much easier for the Knicks if they leaned even more into Towns when the game slowed down. Then, on the other end, he’s played a huge part in Wemby being pretty ordinary on offense for six of the eight quarters that have been played so far.
Friedell: Towns — and I say that as someone who has followed Towns throughout various points of his career and doubted whether he could ever get to this level. He has played very well, he has taken it right to Wemby and he hasn’t been afraid of the moment. Towns’ game continues to mature, and he continues to produce when the Knicks have needed him most. Brunson has more star power, but Towns is the MVP so far.
Jones: It’s Towns, if only for the simple reasoning that he hasn’t shied away from Wembanyama, unlike Chet Holmgren. That being said, KAT has done so many other things. He’s almost singularly wrecked San Antonio’s defensive scheme, which is wrapped around keeping Wemby close to the basket, to help and protect the rim. Towns has created the ultimate conundrum for the Spurs. If they put Wembanyama on him, he drags him out to the 3-point line. If he’s on the floor at the same time as Luke Kornet, he has cooked in isolation. If they put a smaller player on him, he’s gone to the basket and made plays in the lane. He has won his matchup so far with Wemby. But he has accomplished more than simply winning a matchup.
King: Towns. Outside of a couple of overeager fouls, he has won the matchup against Wembanyama — no small feat. Towns’ perimeter skill set is a must against the Spurs. His passing, poise and outside shooting have allowed the Knicks to solve a great and hyper-athletic San Antonio defense even with Brunson experiencing atypical inefficiency from the field. Towns has been physical, tough and persistent on both ends of the court. He’s shown himself to be ready for this stage and the Wembanyama assignment.
Who has been the X-factor of the series?
Woike: Josh Hart. Every winning play that’s needed, every rebound that’s had to be chased down, every Wembanyama role that needs to be rerouted, Hart has been in the middle of it. Hart is probably a foot shorter than Wembanyama, and he’s got as many rebounds through the first two games of the series. He’s almost too obvious to be an “X-factor,” but no one does more to impact winning without scoring.
Guillory: Jose Alvarado. We’ve seen other good teams in the past completely crater when they have to take their No. 1 option off the floor. Think about the Joel Embiid on/off numbers in previous playoff runs, or how much the Nuggets machine comes to a halt when Nikola Jokić sits. The Knicks have outscored the Spurs by 15 points in the 21 minutes Alvarado has played in the finals. It might not seem like much, but New York’s ability to keep generating good offense even when Brunson sits has made a huge difference.
Friedell: Landry Shamet. When he gets the ball at this point, you’re just expecting it to go in. The Knicks have gotten contributions up and down the roster — but it’s Shamet that continues to give them a huge lift off the bench. He is shooting with incredible confidence and has been an integral piece of the group’s success. He has helped the Knicks in both games of this series and repeatedly throughout the postseason.
Jones: As good as Shamet has been, it’s Alvarado for me. His numbers won’t pop out at you, but he has almost flawlessly handled San Antonio’s ball pressure, which has been a big reason the Knicks have been successful in their minutes without Brunson on the floor. He has gotten them into their offense, he has been solid defensively and he has made the shots that have been there for him to take.
King: Shamet. It would feel disrespectful to call OG Anunoby an “X-factor,” though he sure has come up with some big plays over the first two games. (Still can’t believe the referees initially missed that three-shot foul in the corner.) Shamet’s presence and energy helped win Game 2. When he was on the court, the Knicks zipped around. They cut into openings. They swung the ball immediately to the open man. Even Wembanyama had some trouble against their pace. Shamet has rarely missed throughout the playoffs, and his activity changes the game.
Landry Shamet has been a catalyst off the bench for the Knicks. (Scott Wachter / Imagn Images)
One thing the Knicks are doing right?
Woike: They’ve clogged the paint so well that nothing for the Spurs, minus some Dylan Harper drives, has looked easy. There’s been talk around the NBA for months about how real the Spurs’ shooting actually is. The Knicks seem to have bet that the ball might feel a little heavy for the Spurs on the biggest stage, and whether it’s nerves or tired legs from a seven-game Western Conference finals, the Spurs can’t find the basket from the perimeter right now.
Guillory: Even though Brunson is taking a ton of shots, they’re keeping everyone involved. All of their main guys have been active and are playing with confidence. Mikal Bridges had a huge stretch in the second half of Game 2. Anunoby has been making great decisions and knocking down jump shots when the ball goes his way. Shamet has also been a key ingredient. In previous years, the Knicks got too caught up in standing around and watching the Brunson show. Now, it feels like they take advantage of every bit of space on the floor.
Friedell: They are taking it right to Wemby. They are throwing body after body at him and forcing him to work for everything. On top of their defense on the Spurs’ star, they are making him work for everything all over the floor. Just as importantly, it appears as if the collective group has gotten into his head after the 22-year-old rolled into the series full of confidence after knocking off the Oklahoma City Thunder.
Jones: They aren’t being themselves. What people don’t realize is the Knicks have been one of the best teams in the league since the second half of the regular season. Then, they kicked that up a notch during the playoffs. If you win this many postseason games consecutively, you are a juggernaut. The Knicks recognized that, haven’t listened to the outside noise and have done to the Spurs so far what they were able to do to the Eastern Conference. On the floor, making Wembanyama work on almost every defensive possession has paid dividends. Oklahoma City let Wemby off the hook. The Knicks haven’t.
King: They’re playing with unshakable trust in each other. They are finding San Antonio’s vulnerabilities, then working together to capitalize on them. When the Spurs switch a guard onto Towns, the Knicks don’t hesitate. They throw him the ball down low, then he makes the right play. It’s cliche, but they’re peaking at the right time. They have leveled up from their regular-season performance and clearly have great faith in everything they’re doing.
One thing Wemby and/or the Spurs need to fix?
Woike: More Dylan Harper, even if it means less Stephon Castle. I think getting Harper into the game more and keeping him involved is critical. He’s the most physical around the basket and one of the only players for the Spurs who has gotten to the rim and been able to finish. He deserves more shots, more minutes.
Guillory: Wemby has to play with the same aggression he had in the second half of Game 2 all the time. He has to force New York to react to him. It feels like he’s been allowing the Knicks to dictate the terms too often in these first two games. When he’s determined to play in the paint and overpower defenders, he’s almost unstoppable. When he’s comfortable floating on the perimeter and shooting fadeaways, it makes him much easier to defend. There should not be another half the rest of this series when he attempts only four shots. That won’t get it done.
Friedell: Where did the aggressiveness go? In the Thunder series, the Spurs repeatedly set the pace, backed up everything with strong defense and got Wemby rolling offensively. The Knicks have changed everything up. Aside from the run late in Game 2 that almost stole the game away, the Knicks have largely been the more aggressive — and tougher — team. The Spurs need to find their confidence again and remind themselves how they got to this place.
Jones: My major adjustment, if I were the Spurs: I would try two bigs and play Kornet and Wembanyama together. It can certainly work offensively, with Wemby’s vast skill level. I would try it defensively, with Kornet on Towns, have him take away the jumper, and then try to keep Wembanyama close to the basket for rim protection. Other than that, the Spurs haven’t found Brunson defensively nearly enough, and they haven’t made nearly enough shots. Those are two things that need to be fixed as soon as possible.
King: Their defense was too scattered in Game 2. Until the latter half of the fourth quarter, they spent far too much time in rotation, too slow to catch up to the Knicks’ offense. Wembanyama had some great plays but also got caught looking human on several occasions. New York’s combination of five-out shooting and athleticism has tested San Antonio differently than the Thunder did. Any chance of a comeback would need to start with a more consistent defense.
Jalen Brunson has taken 56 shot attempts in two games against the Spurs, but he’s averaging 25 points per game. (Gregory Shamus / Getty Images)
What was your series prediction before play started, and what is your UPDATED prediction based on how things have gone?
Woike: I took the Knicks in six, and I’ll stick with it. I think the Spurs are better than they’ve shown so far, and I’d guess the Knicks have to eventually lose one of these games. But they’ve looked like the team more ready to hoist the trophy through the first two games, and it seems impossible that they’ll lose four times in this series.
Guillory: I had Knicks in six, and I’m probably leaning Knicks in five now. Although I have to admit, I’m slightly rooting for this series to end in either Game 4 or Game 6 so we can see how hectic the celebration gets inside and outside the Garden.
Friedell: I had the Spurs in seven only because I believed in the superstar power of Wemby, that he would be able to carry them across the finish line. Now, give me the Knicks in five. Brunson is the best closer in the game, and Towns is on the verge of forever changing the narrative about his career.
Jones: I picked the Knicks in seven. I thought this would be a heavyweight series with plenty of twists and turns — and it still might be. The Spurs are really talented and are easily capable of taking one at Madison Square Garden. Even one win, since San Antonio has home-court advantage, is enough to keep this series competitive. In essence, I don’t think the series is over.
King: I picked the Knicks in six before the series. I might not have given them enough respect. Their competition earlier in the playoffs wasn’t elite, but they are playing some inspired hoops.
IF the Knicks sweep, where does this playoff run rank among all-time runs?
Woike: After some light research, I’ve decided this is the greatest NBA playoff run of all time. Sure, there have been teams like the 2017 Golden State Warriors and the 1983 Philadelphia 76ers who went through the playoffs with just a single loss, but those teams were regular-season monsters, too. The 2001 Los Angeles Lakers were the defending champs. This Knicks heater came on the heels of them losing twice to the Atlanta Hawks in the first round after a good (but not great) 53-win regular season. They’ve caught absolute fire. The only thing I can compare it to is a hockey team getting a month of incredible goaltending just in time for the playoffs. They look like a different team at the perfect time. There have been better teams to play in the playoffs, but I don’t think there’s been a hotter one.
Guillory: I have the 2001 Lakers with Shaq and Kobe at No. 1, and I have Kevin Durant’s Super Warriors run in 2017 at No. 2. I would put this year’s Knicks run comfortably at No. 3. Winning 15 consecutive playoff games alone would put them among the best runs we’ve ever seen. I’m not saying these Knicks are as good as that Lakers team or those Warriors. I’m just speaking on the level of dominance that was displayed en route to a title. We can’t ignore a team stacking up all these blowouts and all these wins on the road. It’s all-time stuff we’re witnessing.
Friedell: It doesn’t top the KD/Steph Warriors, at least in recent years. The Knicks have had a heck of a run — but they also played the Atlanta Hawks, Philadelphia 76ers and Cleveland Cavaliers to get to this point. It’s an unbelievable story, and they’re an all-time team — but to me, they’re still a level below some of the other great groups.
Jones: It would put them right at the top. If you win that many playoff games in a row, with the net rating the Knicks have, you simply cannot ignore that level of dominance. Plus, this isn’t a case of the Knicks getting hot at the right time. This is essentially who they have been for the second half of the season. If they finish it off with a sweep, they qualify as one of the all-time great teams. Going 16-2 in a playoff run is incredibly difficult.
King: Let’s not compare them to the all-time great teams, but it would be an all-time run. Imagine how legendary these Knicks would be in New York. Somebody would need to start sculpting the Brunson statue.
