Mavericks at Celtics NBA Finals Game 2 odds, expert picks: Can Dallas answer Game 1 rout?

Any doubts about the Boston Celtics’ dominance — and the health of one Kristaps Porziņģis — were quickly quashed on Thursday night in Game 1 of the NBA Finals. Buoyed perhaps by the thrill of making his finals debut against a team that “essentially gave up on him,” Porziņģis hit Game 1 with a ferocity many were hesitant to expect after missing 10 games of this postseason.

After receiving a 107-89 drubbing from a full-strength Celtics squad, the Mavericks are looking up a steep hill to respond in this series. But therein lies the potential plot twist — the Mavericks have been here before. They went down in Game 1 against the LA Clippers 109-97 and in Game 1 against the Oklahoma City Thunder 117-95. They came back to win both Game 2s and both series 4-2.

Of course, neither of those opponents was anything like this Celtics core, with Finals experience and hunger for their stars’ first rings. So, who do our experts have for Game 2? We’ve got the NBA Finals odds and expert predictions ahead of Sunday night’s game.

All odds from BetMGM. Find the best deals on StubHub for tickets.

Dallas Mavericks at Boston Celtics

How to watch: 8 p.m. ET on ABC

Celtics lead series 1-0

Series odds: Celtics -450, Mavericks +340

The odds for Game 2 aren’t far off from the odds for Game 1, with a 7.5-point spread for Sunday compared to a 6.5-point spread before Thursday’s game, which Boston covered handily.

It’s the series odds that have seen a greater shift. Before Game 1, Boston had -225 odds to win the series, and the Mavs had +180. Now we’re at -450 for the Celts and +340 for the Mavs. No surprise after that Game 1 smackdown.

The story of this matchup started as the story of star duos: Jayson Tatum and Jaylen Brown vs. Luka Dončić and Kyrie Irving. That didn’t quite deliver in Game 1, with Boston finding a way to clamp down on Dallas’ star power to a large degree and both teams exhibiting that their role players will be key to the championship.

Irving, in particular, was held to 12 points on 6-of-19 shooting. Dončić had a solid shooting night with 30 points on 12-for-26 field goals and grabbed 10 rebounds. P.J. Washington showed why he’s critical to this Dallas lineup with 14 points and eight rebounds.

But the Celtics’ strategy forced the Mavs’ stars to score more than to create for their teammates. And it worked: Irving had just two assists (he’s been averaging five per game this postseason) and Dončić has just one assist, which is only the fifth time in his career he’s produced so little for other scorers. He’s been averaging 8.4 assists per game this postseason. The entire Mavericks lineup had just nine assists total, compared to Boston’s 23.

Meanwhile, on Boston’s end, this was a game of not just a star duo but a dominant team. Six Celtics scored in the double figures Thursday night, with the returning Porziņģis getting 20 off the bench. Tatum had 16 points, 11 rebounds and five assists, and Brown had 22 points, six rebounds and two assists. Jrue Holiday’s plus-minus was a game-high plus-20. Seven Celtics players made at least two 3-pointers, which is a single-game NBA Finals record. They outscored the Mavericks by 27 from three. And that’s not even digging into their defense, which really won the game.

In our series preview, our experts were divided on which Boston player would win Finals MVP if the Celtics take the series. That in itself is a testament to the balance of this team.

But don’t forget the path that Dallas has carved to get here — a path of adversity and struggle, where they’ve played their best basketball with their backs against the wall. They reduced the Celtics’ lead from 29 points to eight in the third quarter. Dončić looked like he could outscore the whole Celtics team for a minute there.

However, it seems clear this series is Boston’s to lose; and if these same two teams show up in the same way again, the Celtics could easily sweep. But it’s hard to imagine Dallas can’t dig deep and find an answer. The question is when.