In a surprising turn of events, the Indiana Pacers staged a remarkable comeback in Game 1 against the New York Knicks, raising eyebrows about the higher seed's dominance. Following a 114-109 defeat in Game 2, the Knicks are now facing significant challenges as they prepare to hit the road. Historically, no team has managed to lose the first two games of a conference finals at home and overcome the odds to win the series, but the Knicks remain hopeful of defying history as they attempt to secure four victories against the Pacers.

Although the Knicks have managed to slow down the Pacers' pace compared to the regular season, they still need to tighten their control. Indiana excels when they transition quickly, passing the ball rather than dribbling and getting behind the opposing defense. They successfully executed this strategy in both Games 1 and 2, leading to their favorable performance. Mitchell Robinson has shown strength in offensive rebounding, yet prioritizing transition defense may prove essential. The Knicks must demonstrate urgency in returning to their defensive positions after both makes and misses to mitigate the Pacers' fast-paced offense. Additionally, adopting a more methodical approach on offense could help New York generate longer possessions that tire Indiana’s defense and allow for potential scoring opportunities.

The Knicks have struggled with their assists throughout the series, recording only 18 in Game 2, with over half of their baskets coming unassisted. This indicates a reliance on individual efforts, particularly highlighted by Jalen Brunson's high number of field-goal attempts. The Pacers’ offensive threat is amplified by their multiple scoring options, requiring consistent vigilance from New York’s defenders. While defending players like Brunson poses challenges, predicating an offense on isolations or predictable plays can give defenders a breather, ultimately leading to missed opportunities. Although adapting a game plan in the midst of a series is intricate, the Knicks need to leverage their ability to pass efficiently and diversify their offensive strategies, as they averaged 27.5 assists during the regular season.

The three-point differential in the series, although down by six overall, signifies a clearer gap than the total point spread, warranting attention. The Knicks' perimeter defense faltered at critical moments, notably when Aaron Nesmith found rhythm beyond the arc in Game 1. Improved scrambling efforts to guard shooters must be prioritized, potentially involving a more flexible approach in switching defensive schemes. While Myles Turner does not present a significant post threat, attempting to switch screens might diminish the opportunities for the Pacers to exploit open shots. The need for effective in-game adjustments has become prevalent, especially regarding perimeter defense.

Recognizing the Pacers' array of scoring threats is vital, with Pascal Siakam emerging as a key player. Averaging 20.2 points in the regular season, Siakam's performance in Game 2, where he scored 39 points, underscores his potential to dominate. New York faces the challenge of containing such prolific scorers, and while double-teaming may not always be feasible given Siakam's ability to score off cuts and in transition, occasionally applying extra defensive pressure could deter his impact. A more dynamic switch between zone and man-to-man defenses might generate confusion, paradoxically yielding favorable outcomes against an adept shooting team like the Pacers.

The disparity in bench scoring has been stark, with the Pacers outpacing the Knicks 52-28 over the first two games. High minute counts for starters like OG Anunoby and Jalen Brunson may lead to fatigue as the series progresses, particularly against Indiana's fast pace. While increasing bench contributions may be difficult, even modest performances from players like Miles McBride or Cameron Payne can relieve pressure on the starters and inject energy into the roster. A brief, well-timed substitution could prove beneficial, demonstrating that slight variances in contributions might ultimately influence the series outcome.