The Cleveland Cavaliers lost because Darius Garland got hurt.
When something shocking occurs, we scramble to understand it. How could our expectations not have been met? How could the improbable suddenly become reality?
It was a difficult thing for Cavaliers fans to watch as their team was summarily dumped from the playoffs. They let go of the rope in Game 2 and lost in embarrassing fashion as the Indiana Pacers came back from down seven points in the final minute. They were blown out in Game 4. They couldn't stay alive in Game 5.
As with any playoff series loss, there is a plethora of reasons for the Cavaliers' failure to extend and win the series. Yes, their defense was not at its best. Yes, their shooting went cold. Yes, perhaps they could have better matched Indiana's physicality.
Yet the media, both national and local, is spending countless hours of podcasts and gallons of (digital) ink trying to find the real reason why the Cavaliers lost. That they didn't have the mental toughness. That they are not a physical team and were punked out of the postseason.
ESPN's Hoop Collective podcast trumpeted that narrative as Cleveland's own Brian Windhorst tried to keep the injury issue in sight. The Wine and Gold Talk podcast spent an hour decrying the team's lack of physicality and mental toughness. The worst offender, The Athletic's Jason Lloyd, wrote not one but two different articles about the Cavaliers' lack of toughness after spending over a week calling Darius Garland a wimp for not playing through his toe injury.
The Cavaliers lost because Garland was hurt
The Cleveland Cavaliers played the first two games of its series against the Indiana Pacers without an All-NBA player in Darius Garland. They played that second game without a second All-NBA player, the Defensive Player of the Year, and their best bench player. When the situation became dire enough, Garland forced his way onto the basketball court -- with a special shoe to try and force his toe into the one position that owuldn't cause him excruciating pain.
He couldn't move right, he didn't have the same burst and acceleration, he could make sudden changes in movement. The idea that he simply wasn't "tough" is the language of grumpy former players and entitled keyboard warriors. This was not an injury that Garland could play through, and it was proven by how his mobility was hampered when he suited up for Gmaes 3-5. Imagine how much worse it would have been if he played in Game 2?
The NBA playoffs, especially the Second Round, are a war between tough, successful teams. The Indiana Pacers have the league's second-best record since January 1st. They are a good team, and the Cavaliers needed to play well to defeat them.
The primary reason that they did not play well was that they were without a healthy All-NBA player. That's the bottom line. Take Tyrese Haliburton away from the Pacers; were they going to be at their best? Would they have taken down the Cavaliers? Certainly not.
Take Jaylen Brown away from the Boston Celtics and they are going to struggle. Take Jalen Williams or Chet Holmgren away from the Oklahoma City Thunder and they are going to struggle. In the playoffs, you need your best, and the Cavaliers had their best ripped away from them.
Donovan Mitchell is at his best next to a point guard, but his running mate was hurt. That put a lot of pressure on him, and he wore down by the end of games (Game 2 being the obvious case study), struggled to bring the ball up the court under pressure, and his defensive impact was muted by the massive workload he carried on offense. Minor injuries he was playing through were worsened by the load he was carrying.
Evan Mobley and Jarrett Allen lost the spacing that allowed them to thrive all season without Garland in the lineup. Ty Jerome had a terrible series, yes, but he was being asked to take on a role he didn't fill all year against an opponent uniquely suited to take him out of his game.
Could the Cavaliers have played better? Absolutely. Yet outside of Game 4, they didn't play poorly despite missing a key player. They had the better shot quality in all four other games in the series. A 4-1 loss is lopsided, but a healthy Darius Garland could have easily swung two of those games.
The Pacers had a completely clean bill of health for their rotation the entire series. The Cavaliers lost an All-NBA player. Pontificate about toughness all you want, but that's the bottom line for why the Cavs were upset. We should stop trying to find something else to blame.