I know everyone thinks Cousins played great by the final boxscore, but he made a fierce run in the 3rd when the game was essentially out of reach (from the Pacers perspective). I think I remember seeing he was 4-15 of something similar. Not his fault obviously, but saying he clearly is the best big man, he showed up, etc is slightly misleading. Of course, in the 3rd he played like the best player on the planet for a stretch...
No disrespect, but I feel quite strongly that you aren't qualified to speak on behalf of the 'Pacers perspective'. A 14-point lead to begin the 2nd half is by no means close to being out of reach. A team as successful as the Pacers are obviously aware of that fact, which is why they rarely become lackidasical or lose leads. Furthermore, the Kings got to within 8 with 1:28 remaining in the 3rd. The game didn't get out of reach until Paul George banked in a lucky 3 to end the 3rd then the Pacers went on another run during the first few minutes of the 4th, with Cuz on the bench, to extend the lead over 20.
In regards to Cousins, he was 8 for 12 in the 3rd and didn't play in the 4th. Simple math will tell you that he was 4 for 9 in the 1st half, a far cry from 4 for 15 and certainly not "something similar".
Honestly, how anybody that watched the entire game could possibly be critical of Big Cuz's performance is well beyond me. He was the sole reason the Kings weren't down by 25 or more by during the 3rd quarter. He kept it a game going into the 4th. He scored 31 of the Kings 74 points through 3 and did so at an efficient rate.