Celtics vs Magic 
5-Unit bet on the Celtics priced as a 4.5-point favorite. 
For a pizza money bet I like the OVER team total for the Celtics. 

The following NBA betting algorithm has gone 65-18 SU (78%) and 57-26 ATS for 69% winning bets since 2018. The requirements are:  

Bet on favorites between 3.5 and 7.5 points.  

The favorite has seen their last three games play Under by 30 or more points.  

The game takes place in the second half of the season and playoffs. 

The total is priced between 225 and 234.5 points. 

If in the playoffs and it is game 3, our favorites have gone 9-1 SU and 7-2-1 ATS for 78% winning bets. 

Date: April 25, 2025 
Location: Kia Center, Orlando, FL 
Series Context: Celtics lead 2-0 
Key Note: Jayson Tatum is ruled out for Game 3 due to a right wrist bone bruise sustained in Game 1. 

As the Boston Celtics head into Game 3 against the Orlando Magic at the Kia Center, they aim to take a commanding 3-0 series lead in their Eastern Conference first-round matchup. Despite the absence of All-Star forward Jayson Tatum, Boston’s depth, defensive versatility, and league-leading three-point shooting position them for a double-digit victory. Coming off a 109-100 Game 2 win, where Jaylen Brown’s 36 points and a suffocating defense held Orlando to 100 points, the Celtics are favored to exploit the Magic’s offensive limitations and capitalize on key matchups. This preview highlights three critical team matchups, supported by advanced analytics, that can propel Boston to a 10+ point win tonight. 

Game Context 

The Celtics, who finished the regular season with a 61-21 record and the NBA’s best offense (122.2 points per 100 possessions), have dominated the series so far. Their Game 1 blowout (121-94) showcased their three-point prowess (22-of-40), while Game 2 demonstrated their ability to grind out a win without Tatum, thanks to Brown’s heroics and a 15-turnover forced defensive effort. Orlando, with a 47-35 record and the league’s fourth-best defense (108.4 defensive rating), relies heavily on Paolo Banchero and Franz Wagner but struggles offensively (23rd in offensive rating at 110.5). The Magic’s 0-4 road playoff record in the Banchero-Wagner era and their inability to match Boston’s firepower make a double-digit Celtics win plausible, especially if Boston leverages the following matchups. 

Key Team Matchups and Advanced Analytics for a Celtics Win 

Celtics’ Perimeter Offense vs. Magic’s Perimeter Defense 

Why It Matters: Boston led the NBA with 1,457 three-pointers made (42.5% of their field goal attempts) and a 38.8% three-point percentage during the regular season. Without Tatum’s 37.6% three-point shooting, players like Jaylen Brown (35.4% 3P), Derrick White (39.6% 3P), and Sam Hauser (42.4% 3P) must exploit Orlando’s perimeter defense, which ranked 10th in opponent three-point percentage allowed (35.8%). 

Advanced Analytics: 

Celtics’ Three-Point Efficiency: Boston’s 1.21 points per possession (PPP) on catch-and-shoot threes (Synergy) is the league’s best, compared to Orlando’s 1.08 PPP allowed on defended catch-and-shoot attempts (top 10). In Game 1, Boston’s 22-of-40 three-point shooting generated 66 points, a 1.65 PPP clip that overwhelmed Orlando. 

Magic’s Defensive Rotations: Orlando’s defense has a 12.4% forced turnover rate on perimeter plays (top 5), but their closeout speed ranks 18th (per Second Spectrum), leaving shooters open on 28% of contested threes. Boston’s 4.2 open threes per game (15+ feet of space) in the series can exploit this. 

Path to Victory: If Brown and White combine for 5+ threes (as they did in Game 2: 6-of-11), and Hauser/Payton Pritchard add 3-4 bench threes, Boston can generate 36-45 points from deep, forcing Orlando to stretch their defense. Targeting Kentavious Caldwell-Pope (2.8 deflections per game) with off-ball screens will create open looks, boosting Boston’s effective field goal percentage (eFG%) to 58%+ (top 3 in playoffs). 

Prediction: Boston hits 14-16 threes at 40%+, outscoring Orlando by 15-20 points from beyond the arc, a key driver of a double-digit margin. 

Celtics’ Defensive Switching vs. Magic’s Isolation Offense 

Why It Matters: Orlando’s offense relies heavily on Banchero (24.2% usage rate) and Wagner (22.1% usage rate), who combine for 44.3 points per game in the series. Boston’s switch-heavy defense, anchored by Jrue Holiday and Derrick White, has disrupted Orlando’s flow, forcing 14.5 turnovers per game (19.2% turnover rate, 3rd-worst in playoffs). 

Advanced Analytics: 

Celtics’ Defensive Versatility: Boston’s 1.02 PPP allowed on isolation plays (top 5, Synergy) neutralizes Banchero’s 0.98 PPP in isos (46th percentile). In Game 2, Boston held Banchero to 26 points on 9-of-20 shooting (0.87 PPP) by switching Al Horford onto him, limiting his post-ups. 

Magic’s Offensive Stagnation: Orlando’s 0.89 PPP in half-court sets (28th in playoffs) drops to 0.82 PPP against switches (per Second Spectrum). Their 14.7% assist rate on made field goals in the series (lowest in playoffs) reflects poor ball movement against Boston’s 1.8 steals per game on switches. 

Path to Victory: Boston’s ability to switch 1-4 with Holiday, White, and Brown will force Banchero and Wagner into inefficient isos (sub-0.90 PPP). Doubling Banchero in the post with Horford and Kristaps Porzingis will create 3-4 extra turnovers, leading to 8-12 transition points (Boston’s 1.28 PPP in transition, top 2). Limiting Orlando to 40% field goal shooting (as in Game 1: 39.3%) keeps their scoring under 100 points, setting up a 10+ point cushion. 

Prediction: Boston forces 15+ turnovers, converting them into 20+ points, while holding Orlando to 95-100 points, ensuring a double-digit lead. 

Celtics’ Frontcourt Dominance vs. Magic’s Interior Defense 

Why It Matters: Kristaps Porzingis (20.1 points, 7.2 rebounds per game) gives Boston a mismatch against Orlando’s frontcourt of Wendell Carter Jr. and Jonathan Isaac, who struggle to defend stretch bigs. Porzingis’ ability to score in the post and from mid-range (46.3% mid-range FG%) can pull Carter away from the rim, opening driving lanes. 

Advanced Analytics: 

Porzingis’ Post-Up Efficiency: Porzingis’ 1.12 PPP on post-ups (82nd percentile, Synergy) exploits Carter’s 0.98 PPP allowed in the post (38th percentile). In Game 2, Porzingis scored 10 of his 18 points in the paint, generating 1.25 PPP on post touches. 

Magic’s Paint Vulnerability: Orlando’s 46.8 points allowed in the paint per game (8th in regular season) has ballooned to 52.0 in the series, as Boston’s 1.18 PPP on drives (top 5) overwhelms Isaac’s 1.4 blocks per game. Boston’s 14.0 second-chance points per game (playoff-high) capitalize on Carter’s 8.2 rebounding percentage (average). 

Path to Victory: Porzingis’ post-ups and pick-and-pop threes (38.1% 3P) will force Carter into foul trouble (3.5 fouls per game in series), weakening Orlando’s rim protection. Boston’s 1.15 PPP on offensive rebounds (top 3) will generate 12-15 second-chance points, while Porzingis and Horford combine for 8-10 defensive rebounds to limit Orlando’s 10.8 second-chance points per game. This rebounding edge (Boston: 44.5 RPG vs. Orlando: 40.2 RPG) ensures extra possessions for a 10+ point win. 

Prediction: Porzingis scores 20+ points with 10+ rebounds, Boston outscores Orlando 50-40 in the paint, and their 12-15 second-chance points pad the margin. 

Strategic Keys for a Double-Digit Win 

Maximize Three-Point Volume: Boston must attempt 35+ threes (as in Game 1: 40 attempts), targeting a 40%+ clip to generate 42+ points from deep. Pritchard and Hauser’s bench shooting (combined 41.8% 3P in regular season) will be critical against Orlando’s second unit. 

Force Turnovers in Transition: By generating 15+ turnovers (as in Game 2), Boston can score 20-25 transition points at 1.28 PPP, exploiting Orlando’s 1.12 PPP allowed in transition (22nd in playoffs). 

Control the Glass: A +5 rebounding margin (Boston: 44.5 RPG vs. Orlando: 40.2 RPG) will yield 12-15 second-chance points, while limiting Orlando to under 10, creating a 10-point swing. 

Neutralize Banchero’s Efficiency: Holding Banchero to sub-45% shooting (as in Game 2: 9-of-20) via switches and doubles will cap Orlando’s offense at 95-100 points, below their 104.2 playoff average. 

Orlando’s Challenges 

The Magic’s 23rd-ranked offense (110.5 offensive rating) struggles against Boston’s second-ranked defense (108.2 defensive rating). Their 34.2% three-point shooting in the series (vs. 34.7% regular season) limits their ability to keep pace, especially if Gary Harris (33.3% 3P) and Cory Joseph (31.0% 3P) remain cold. Orlando’s reliance on Banchero and Wagner (49.2% of playoff points) makes them predictable, and their 14.7% assist rate (lowest in playoffs) reflects poor ball movement against Boston’s switches. Without a breakout from role players or a 50-point combined effort from their stars, Orlando faces an uphill battle. 

Prediction 

The Celtics’ depth and analytics-driven approach will overpower the Magic, even without Tatum. Expect Jaylen Brown to lead with 30+ points, Kristaps Porzingis to dominate the paint, and Derrick White to anchor the defense. Boston’s 14-16 threes, 15+ forced turnovers, and +5 rebounding edge will fuel a balanced attack, while Orlando’s offense stalls below 100 points. The advanced metrics—Boston’s 1.21 PPP on threes, 1.02 PPP allowed on isos, and 1.15 PPP on second-chance opportunities—point to a decisive edge. 

Final Score Prediction: Celtics 110, Magic 95 (+15) and is not a recommendation to bet the OVER. For a pizza money bet I like the OVER team total for the Celtics.