The NBA first round again offered very little drama and proved to be quite predictable. In fact, the four higher seeds in the Eastern Conference all won their respective series handily, thus making up the exact same final four that played for last year’s title.

The West was a little more interesting as at least the Houston-Golden State and Denver-LA Clippers series were competitive. We “witnessed” an unceremonious exit for The King, whose team was taken out 4-1 by Minnesota, despite the addition of one of the league’s biggest stars back in February. 

 

From a betting side, it was the usual mix of big favorites covering, blowouts were not uncommon, and totals went from a lot of early Unders to a plethora of Overs late. The Zig-Zag theory, which I pointed out in the first round betting article from a couple of weeks ago also continued to thrive. Many of those key trends and systems continued to excel. With that in mind, I’m now here to present the information you’re going to want to consider as we move on to the second round. 

Thankfully, the competitiveness tends to ramp up in parallel with the stakes, and when the second round tips off this weekend, it should present four fairly intriguing matchups. In fact, three of last year’s second round series wound up being upsets. 

Hopefully, the stuff you’re about to read also pays off handsomely for you. Enjoy the analysis and the action, and be sure to check back in two or three weeks as I will break down the conference championship trends at that time.

Before getting into the specific trends, I mentioned three upsets a year ago, but you should know that the percentage of series upsets in the second round is actually much higher than the first. If you recall, only 19 out of 96 lower-seeded teams, or 19.8% were able to pull off upsets in the first round. In the second round, it has been 16 out of the last 44, or 36.4%, over nearly two times the amount. 

There have been nine teams seeded worse than third to pull off this feat, most recently, the Pacers (over New York) and the Mavericks (over Oklahoma City) last year. It has now happened seven times in the last four years, with four victims being #1 seeds. In all, there have been six #1 seeds to lose a series in this round in the last seven playoff seasons. Does that leave Cleveland or Oklahoma City vulnerable here? In short, yes.

Series Trends

As I reasoned in the first round article from a few weeks back, being able to predict an upset 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 series trends based on won-lost records at various time lengths of the regular season. 

• There have been 13 second round series over the last 10 playoff seasons to last five games or less, only two in upset fashion. In all but one of those 13 series the winning team won at least 50 games in the regular season.

• There have been 20 second round series over the last 10 playoff seasons that involved teams squaring off whose regular-season win totals were within 5 of one another. Those series have been essentially toss-ups, with the higher-seeded team winning 10 times (66 individual wins) and the lower-seeded seed winning 10 times (59 individual wins).

• In the 20 other series where the regular season won-lost total is +6 or higher for the better seed, that team is 14-6 in series wins and 67-44 in individual wins. The most recent of those five series losses occurred in 2024, when Dallas beat OKC 4-2. Ironically, the Mavericks were the prior team to do it as well, in 2022 over Phoenix, 4-3.

• Excluding the results of the 2020 season, which had a shortened regular season and postseason played entirely in Orlando, 53 regular-season wins is a good benchmark for projecting success in the second round. Teams that won 52 games or fewer, when taking on teams that won 53 games or more, are just 9-18 in series and 62-92 in individual games since 2015. However, 2024 may have seen a turning of the tide on this trend, as both Indiana and Dallas won as underdogs in this situation.

• There is an advantage to playing shorter series in the first round. Teams that played two fewer games or more in the first round boast a second round series record of 7-3 since 2015, with an individual game mark of 35-19.

• It has been somewhat of a detriment for a second round team to be pushed to seven games in the first round. These teams are 5-6 in series and 30-33 in individual games since 2015. Heading into this season, only four first round series over the previous four playoff seasons went the distance.

• Don’t overestimate situations when the worse-seeded team had a better second-half regular-season record, since they have only won once in their last eight series, going 16-31 in individual games.

• Similarly, worse-seeded teams that had better ATS records in the regular season haven’t fared that well either. They are on a 4-14 slide in series record with a 36-63 mark in individual games.

Scoring Trends

– It was in the 2016-17 season in which scoring really started to balloon in the NBA. Since then, it’s been proven that 112 points is the benchmark for second round success – Teams that score 112 points or more in a second round playoff game have gone 118-27 SU and 112-32-1 ATS (77.8%).

– Lack of success accompanies failing to reach the 103-point mark – Second round playoff teams scoring 102 points or less own a record of just 23-116 SU and 30-108-1 ATS (21.7%) over the last eight seasons.

Trends by Line/Total Range

  • Laying big points with home teams has not worked out well for bettors in the second round recently, as hosts laying 8.5 points or more have gone 14-6 SU but just 5-15 ATS (25%) since 2016! This is in direct contrast to the first round numbers we saw a couple of weeks ago. All other home favorites are 69-50-1 ATS (58%) in that span.
  • Big road favorites win and cover – Since the start of the 2013 playoffs, NBA second round road favorites of 5 points or more are 10-0 SU and 7-2-1 ATS (77.8%). Boston was 2-0 SU and 1-1 ATS in this role versus Cleveland a year ago.
  • Second round smaller road favorites of -4.5 or fewer (or pick ’em) have struggled over the last decade-plus, having gone 15-25 SU and 13-27 ATS (32.5%) since 2013. There were NONE of these in 2024.
  • The number 220 has been key on totals over the last six years in the second round of the playoffs. On totals of 220.5 or higher since 2018, Under has gone 36-17-1 (67.9%!), including 13-0 when 227.5 or higher!

Last Game Trends

  • Teams have struggled in the second round when coming off of same series losses and playing on the road, having gone just 12-27 SU and 15-24 ATS (38.5%) in the follow-up contests in their last 39 playoff tries. However, these teams were 8-4 ATS in last year’s upset-riddled second round.
  • Teams coming off a loss in a second round series game and playing at home have bounced back well, 23-13 ATS (63.9%) since 2021.
  • Close losses have been galvanizing for teams lately in the second round, as those losing by 6 points or fewer in one game follow that up with a 17-6 SU and ATS (74%) record over the lst four postseasons. Furthermore, outright winners are 23-0 ATS in these games, meaning they have been decisive.
  • There is a very interesting totals trend that has developed lately in competitive contests, as when games have been decided by 10 points or fewer, the follow-up second round same series game is 34-18-1 Under (65.1%) the total in the last 53.
  • Second round teams coming off a same series game in which they scored 127+ points are just 6-10 SU and 4-12 ATS (25%) in the follow-up contest. The last 10 of those games have also gone Under the total (100%).
  • Poor 3-point shooting teams don’t necessarily bounce back from those off nights, going 21-27-1 ATS (43.8%) after games in which they shot 25% or less.

Trends by Game Number

  • Home teams have held the edge in Game Ones of the second round series since 2016, going 21-11 SU and 18-13-1 ATS (58.1%). There have only been two road favorites during that span.
  • Nineteen of the last 32 (59.4%) non-neutral Game Ones of the second round NBA playoffs have gone Over the total.
  • The best Game One favorites have been the biggest favorites, as those laying 6-points or more are on an 18-6 SU and 15-9 ATS (60%) surge.
  • Upsets occur in Game Ones with lines of -5.5 or less – favorites of 5.5 points or less are on an 8-19 SU and 5-21-1 ATS (19.2%) skid.
  • Home teams were just 1-3 SU and ATS in the 2024 second round to drop their 4-year record to 13-3 SU and 12-4 ATS (75%).
  • Smaller home favorites get it done in Game Twos – Home favorites of 7 points or less have gone 19-4 SU and 17-6 ATS (73.9%) in their last 23 chances.
  • Home teams are 9-3 SU and 7-5 ATS (58.3%) in the last 12 Game Threes, turning around a trend of 6-14 ATS over the prior five non-neutral playoff seasons.
  • Change of venue has changed scoring trend recently – with more Game Twos going Over than not, the scoring pace slows for Game Threes, as they are 19-9 Under (67.9%) in the last 28.
  • In the last 17 Game Threes featuring one of the teams up 2-0 already in the series, 13 have gone Under the total (76.5%).
  • Oddsmakers pave the road for game 4 profits – An interesting trend that has developed over the last eight playoff seasons finds that second round game 4 favorites are on a surge of 28-11 SU and 23-15-1 ATS (60.5%).
  • Game Three winners have most often become Game Four winners as well, as they are 15-5 SU and 14-6 ATS (70%) in their last 20 tries.
  • Teams up in the series are just 15-22 SU and 11-25-1 ATS (30.6%) in their last 37 Game Four tries, including 0-4 ATS a year ago.
  • Expect Game Fives to be tight – Favorites are 31-12 SU but just 20-23 ATS (46.5%) since 2013. This is a significant win/no cover percentage of games. In these contests with lines of 5.5 points or more, they are just 11-17 ATS (39.3%).
  • Teams that lost big in Game Four, by 7 points or more, come back very competitively in Game Five, going 15-9 SU and 18-6 ATS (75%) in their last 24 tries.
  • Game Sixes have swung towards underdogs, 15-13 SU and 18-10 ATS (64.3%) since 2014.
  • Ten of the last 14 (71.4%) Game Sixes that have been played the last four playoff seasons have gone Under the total
  • Favorites have been far from automatic lately in Game Sevens, going just 5-7 SU and 4-8 ATS (33.3%) in their last 12 tries. Both Denver and New York lost outright as home favorites in this spot in 2024.
  • Winning Game Six has provided a good boost for Game Seven, as these teams riding the positive momentum have gone 9-3 SU and 10-2 ATS (83.3%) in their last 12 chances.
  • Not surprisingly, Unders are the wager of choice in Game Sevens lately, 9-5 in the last 12 (64.3%).

Trends by Seed Number

  • After a long run of dominance prior, #1 seeds are just 50-38 SU and 43-44-1 ATS (49.4%) in their last 88 second round playoff games.
  • #1 seeds are on a 12-4 SU and 11-5 ATS (68.8%) at home in the last three seasons in the second round, turning around a trend that saw them go just 9-8 SU and 5-11-1 ATS (31.3%) prior.
  • #1 seeds have failed to build on second round momentum in the last four postseasons, going 7-10 SU and 5-12 ATS (29.4%) in the last 17 tries when coming off a same series win.
  • #1 seeds are on a 6-16 SU and 9-13 ATS (40.9%) skid as underdogs in the second round.
  • #2 seeds have been very competitive in the underdog role in the second round, going 23-20 SU and 29-14 ATS (67.4%) in that role since 2015.
  • #2 seeds have not closed out opponents well in the second round, going just 6-14 SU and 4-16 ATS (20%) when given that chance since 2018.
  • #3 seeds have meant Unders in second round games of late, 37-21-1 (63.8%) in the last 59.
  • Teams seeded at #3 in the NBA playoffs have been awful on the road in the second round of late, winning just 13 of their last 41 games while going 15-26 ATS (36.6%).
  • #3 seeds are on a phenomenal second round run of 11-4 SU and 12-3 ATS (80%) when trying to stave off elimination in a series.
  • Teams seeded #4 tend to be overmatched in the underdog role, owning a record of 11-35 SU and 16-28-1 ATS (35.6%) as such since 2015.
  • The last 14 #4 seeds trying to fend off elimination in a second round series are just 5-10 SU and 6-9 ATS (40%).
  • Losses compound for #4 seeds in the second round, as they are just 11-24 SU and 13-22 ATS (37.1%) coming back after a same series defeat since 2014.
  • Upset winners of the first round don’t win much in second round, with teams seeded #5 or worse going 20-33 SU and 26-27 ATS (49.1%) in their second round games over the last 10 seasons when not matched up against another upset winner.
  • First round upset winners are also brutal as large underdogs, as teams seeded fifth or lower have gone 3-31 SU and 13-21 ATS (38.2%) when playing as dogs of 6 points or more. Included in that is a 0-7 SU and ATS record at home.
  • Winning doesn’t provide a whole lot of momentum for the second round teams “not supposed to be there,” as they are just 11-22 SU and 12-21 ATS (36.4%) when coming off a same series victory since 2013. 

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR