In recent weeks on VSiN.com, I have presented some of the best betting systems and trends for the earlier rounds of the NBA playoffs. Now, as the association moves on to the Finals after a pair of conference finals that ended prematurely, so do I in sharing the key information you might need to bet this Finals matchup between Oklahoma City and Indiana. 

For a second straight season, on paper, this matchup is not expected to be all that close, with the Thunder favored by nine points in Game 1 and -700 for the series. That shouldn’t come as a major surprise, considering that OKC is a No. 1 seed that won 68 games in the regular season while Indiana is a No. 4 seed that was just 50-32. However, as the Pacers boast some stars capable of putting a team on their back in Tyrese Haliburton and Pascal Siakam, and they have won some of the league’s highest-profile games over the last couple of seasons, so who knows will happen. Game 1 is slated for Thursday, and should the series go seven games, it will wrap up on Sunday, June 22. As such, you should have plenty of time to digest all of the Finals’ trends I am about to share. 

 

Before getting into the specific trends, you should know that half of the last six Finals series have been seed upsets, ending a streak of five straight prior wins by the better seed. Indiana will attempt to run that to four out of seven. Also note that outright winners in the NBA Finals are 55-3-3 ATS (94.8%) over the last 10 seasons, although one of the ATS ties did come last season in Boston’s Game 2 victory. This ATS record for outright winners beats every similar study I’ve done in a variety of sports and thus stands as an endorsement for money line wagering on underdogs. I’ll get into more of that later. Also, Under the total has converted in the last eight finals games overall, as well as in 12 of the last 13. 

This is the final part of a four-part series. I hope you’ve enjoyed and profited from it. Good luck with your NBA Finals wagering. 

As I reasoned in the first three articles of this package, being able to predict an upset or favorite domination in a series will give you a leg up on a game-by-game wagering basis. Accurately projecting which underdogs will push a series deep, or alternatively, which favorites will end a series quickly, can really boost your wagering profit in this round and all others. Take a look at some of these Finals trends based on won-lost records at various time lengths of the regular season and in the playoffs to date.

• In the last 12 playoff seasons, the better seeds own an 8-3 edge in Finals wins and a 38-23 game wins edge during that span. In 2016, Cleveland and Golden State were both No. 1 seeds.

• This will be just the 10th time in 12 seasons that the West representative had a better regular-season record. In that time, the team with the better regular-season record is 10-2.

•  This will be the 10th time since 2013 that one of the teams won at least 10% more games in the regular season. In those other nine recent series, the series record is 8-1 and the individual game record is 35-16.

• I explained in the conference finals round that there had been a massive advantage of late for the teams that had played fewer games in the first two rounds. That continued this season for Indiana, which moved past the Knicks to advance. Minnesota, however, lost on this trend for a second straight season in the West finals. There is no such advantage for the Finals, as in the 11 series since 2013, in which teams played an uneven number of games in the first three rounds, the finals team that played fewer games is just 6-5 in series wins and 34-28 in individual wins. For 2025, both teams have lost four times in getting to this point. 

104 points is a low benchmark for NBA Finals success: The 2016 Finals series was the first in which totals reached the current levels. Since that time, teams that score 104 points or less in an NBA Finals playoff game have struggled badly, going just 7-34 SU and 7-33-1 ATS (17.5%). 

Success accompanies reaching the 155-point mark: Using the same season noted above as the benchmark, teams scoring 155 points or more boast a record of 43-16 SU and 40-14-5 ATS (74.1%) over the last nine years. 

· Following up on the two scoring trends above, in its 16 playoff games so far, Indiana has scored 104 or less four times and 105 or more 12 times. OKC has scored 104 or less three times and 105 more 13 times. 

Home teams are a slightly lesser wagering option: Hosts in the NBA Finals are 29-22 SU and 25-24-2 ATS (51%) since 2014. This includes an improved 12-9-1 ATS (57.1%) mark in the last 22 games. 

Favorites on a recent surge: NBA Finals favorites are on a surge of 17-6 SU and 14-8-1 ATS (63.6%) in the last 23 Finals games. In the 10 games before that, they were just 1-8-1 ATS. 

Winners cover: Over the last 11 seasons, and 61 games, outright winners have gone 55-3-3 ATS (94.8%) in the NBA Finals. 

Totals leaning Under of late: In the 68 NBA Finals games since 2013, there have been 28 Overs, 38 Unders and two ties, although Under is on a 24-11-1 (68.6%) run in the last 36 games and on an eight-game streak heading into 2025. 

Big home favorites get it done: Since the start of the 2013 playoffs, NBA Finals home favorites of 4.5 points or more are 26-7 SU and 21-10-2 ATS (67.7%). This is a similar trend to that from the conference finals round, if you recall. OKC is already a nine-point home favorite for Game 1 and figures to qualify for this trend in any home game it plays.

Small home favorites have been vulnerable: Again, like the conference finals, the record of the last 17 small home favorites (-4 points or less) in the NBA Finals is just 6-12 SU and ATS (33.3%). There was one play on this between Dallas and Boston a year ago and the Mavericks (-3) lost outright 106-99. 

Home underdogs’ bark is less than their bite: Home underdogs in the NBA Finals have proven to be overmatched recently, going just 2-7 SU and ATS (22.2%) in their last nine opportunities. However, the Mavericks (+1) did salvage a series-saving win in Game 4 last year, 122-84.

Bad shooting games have carried over negative momentum in the Finals: Teams coming off games in which they shot less than 41.5% in an NBA Finals game are just 7-14 SU and ATS (33.3%) outright in their last 21 tries.

Good 3-point shooting games don’t carry momentum: While poor shooting games overall don’t bode well for teams in the next NBA Finals game, neither does hot 3-point shooting, as teams that shoot 47% or better from deep have gone just 6-13 SU and 4-14-1 ATS (22.2%) in the follow-up outing. There were no such games in ’24.

Embarrassing losses have galvanized teams: In the last 11 NBA Finals, four games have been decided by 30 points or more. In all four cases, the team that lost bounced back with an outright and ATS win in the next game, all by double-digit margins. This happened last year as Boston (-6.5) closed out the Mavericks 106-88 in Game 5.

Other double-digit losses have carried over: In the trend above, I noted that the last three teams beaten by 30 or more points bounced back well in recent NBA Finals. That is not the case for all other double-digit defeats, as teams that suffered those have gone just 10-20 SU and 9-18-3 ATS (33.3%) in the follow-up game.

NBA Finals opening games have sided with the home teams/favorites of late: Including the neutral-court game of 2020, home teams/favorites are on a 10-1 SU surge (9-2 ATS, 81.8%) in NBA Finals Game 1s. The average margin of victory in the nine wins has been 13.9 PPG. The sole loss came in 2022 in Boston’s upset win at Golden State. 

Home teams/favorites have also fared well in Game 2s of late: I just showed how well Game 1 home teams/favorites have done lately, well, they are also getting it done in Game 2, going 7-2 SU and 5-2-2 ATS (71.4%) in the last nine seasons, although Boston did push on the point spread last year in Game 2.

Game 3s have been a momentum squelcher: The team that won Game 2 in the last 10 NBA Finals has gone just 4-8 SU and ATS (33.3%) in Game 3. All eight of the losses were by double-digit margins as well. Boston did win last year in Dallas to go up 3-0, however. 

Home teams struggle in Game 4s: Game 4 hosts have gone just 3-8 SU and ATS (27.3%) in the NBA Finals since 2013.

Home team that won Game 3 are bad bets in Game 4: Home teams that won their NBA Finals Game 3 are 1-4 SU and ATS since 2013 in Game 4, losing all three times by double-digits, despite being favored in three of the games.

Defense/fatigue has ruled Game 4: The first three games of the last 10 NBA Finals have produced 210.2 PPG on average. Game 4 has seen a significant drop to 204.3, with 10 of the last 11 going Under the total.

Momentum has been a big factor in Games 5-7: The later a series gets, the more important momentum has become, as teams coming off a double-digit win in an NBA Finals game are 8-5 SU and 8-4-1 ATS (66.7%) in Games 5-7 of a series.

Teams facing elimination in Game 6 have most often bowed out: Seven teams have faced elimination in Game 6 of the NBA Finals since 2013. These teams are 2-5 SU and 1-6 ATS in those games.

(Note that this year’s Finals matches a No. 1 in OKC versus a No. 4 in Indiana) 

Top seeds have not been an auto-cover: The record of No. 1 seeds in the NBA Finals since 2017 is 15-9 SU but 10-11-3 ATS (47.6%). 

Teams seeded 4th or worse have been overmatched: There have been four teams in the NBA Finals since 2018 that were seeded fourth or worse. Their overall record: 4-16 SU and 7-11-2 ATS (39.9%). When coming off wins, they are 0-5 SU and 1-4 ATS. At home, they are just 1-5 SU and ATS.

Teams seeded third or worse have been great late-series options: The last four NBA Finals have featured one of the teams playing as a seed of third or worse. These teams have been gold in Game 3 and later of their respective series, going 10-8 SU and 12-6 ATS (66.7%), although Dallas was 1-2 SU and ATS last June.

Teams seeded 4th or worse have been heavy Under teams: Dating back to ’18, there have been four teams in the NBA Finals since 2018 that were seeded fourth or worse. Their total record: 15-3 Under (83.3%). They are averaging 99.6 PPG offensively in that span, well below league scoring averages.

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR