The Indiana Pacers staged a remarkable comeback in Game 1, raising questions about the performance of the New York Knicks. Following a narrow defeat in Game 2, where the Knicks lost 114-109, they now find themselves in a precarious position as they head on the road. Historically, no team in NBA history has managed to win a conference finals series after losing the first two games at home, but the Knicks may still have an opportunity to break that trend.

For the Knicks to secure at least four victories in the next five games, several areas of their performance will need considerable improvement. While they have managed to slow the Pacers down compared to their regular-season pace, it remains insufficient. The Pacers thrive when they transition quickly, utilizing fast breaks and effective ball movement to exploit defensive lapses. In both Game 1 and Game 2, Indiana successfully executed their game plan, putting the Knicks' transition defense under pressure.

Mitchell Robinson's rebounding has been a notable asset, but New York may need to prioritize transition defense more effectively. This includes returning to defensive formation with urgency after both successful and unsuccessful plays. Establishing a slower, more methodical offensive style could benefit the Knicks, as they aim to stretch out possessions and tire out Indiana’s defenders. Furthermore, the Knicks have struggled in the assist department, finishing with just 18 assists in Game 2, where more than half of their baskets were unassisted. This indicates a reliance on isolation plays, primarily through Jalen Brunson, who attempted 52 shots over the two games. Although Brunson is a key player, a more diversified offensive strategy could help New York capitalize on the Pacers’ defensive weaknesses.

The Knicks are slightly trailing in three-point shooting, with Indiana maintaining a six-point advantage in that category. While the gap is not insurmountable, it is notable that the Knicks’ perimeter defense has faltered at crucial moments, particularly in Game 1 when Aaron Nesmith was allowed to shoot freely from beyond the arc. Improving their perimeter defense will require the Knicks to be more proactive in contesting shots and switching defensive assignments, especially given that Myles Turner is not a significant threat in the post. Adjusting their strategy to scramble effectively to shooters could provide more defensive coverage against the Pacers’ varied attack.

One of the key players for the Pacers, Pascal Siakam, presents a significant challenge, having averaged 20.2 points during the regular season and scoring an impressive 39 points in Game 2. While it is difficult to neutralize a player in a scoring zone, implementing occasional double teams may impede Siakam's contributions. Additionally, the Knicks should consider alternating between man-to-man and zone defensive formations to create confusion. Although this strategy comes with risks against a skilled shooting team like Indiana, it could disrupt their offensive flow.

The depth of the Knicks' bench has also been a concern, as the Pacers have outscored them 52-28 in bench points through two games. Key players like OG Anunoby and Jalen Brunson have logged significant minutes, which could lead to fatigue as the series progresses. While it may be challenging to fully capitalize on depth in this matchup, contributions from players like Miles McBride or Cameron Payne could prove invaluable. Even a brief performance from a bench player may allow the starters to alleviate some fatigue down the stretch. Overall, the Knicks will need to make specific adjustments to stay competitive in the series, as every detail matters in these tight matchups.