I was thinking in the shower just now and the previous post felt too bromidal, you know, "it's only one game," yada. A team is what its record says it is: that's true. That applies to all teams, therefore to both teams tonight. Tonight's game matched two teams with near identical records, Miami 31-13, LAC 31-14. Both teams were as good as their records. The game was played in Miami where the "Heat" were 21-1.You would therefore predict that the game would go nip-and-tuck the whole way as it did for two and three-quarters quarters. But it did not. LAC blew it open and that brings up Ira Winderman's hypothetical "argument" that "The "Heat" are not as good as their record." That argument is non-sensical, it is anti-tautological. Understood however as a predictor of future success (or lack), it can be true and it was true tonight. Before tonight, Miami was winning at a 70.4% pace. You can neither take that reality after 44 games, apply it to 82 games and say Miami is going to win 57 games or take Miami's record in tonight's game, 0-1, apply the .000 winning percentage to the remaining games and say Miami is going to finish 31-51. We are left with this: There is no way that a 31-14 team blows out a 31-13 team on the loser's floor. Those two teams were not "really" separated by a mere half-game. LAC is much the better team.
When the game started getting tight I was powerfully reminded of Miami's first-ever playoff series. They got in as a sub-.500 team. Their reward was to face the Chicago "Bulls" of Michael Jordan, Scottie Pippen, Bill Cartwright, I think Horace Grant, if not, Dennis Rodman. Chicago won the first two games in Chi sleep-walking. Came the third game in Miami. I was there. Miami had like a 20-point lead in the first half. The fucking old Miami Arena was coming apart from the noise. I can still see in my mind's eye Chicago with the body language of being unphased. They went on to win that game.
Tonight when I started following the game I saw that Miami had jumped out to an eight-point lead after the first quarter. When I first checked it was seven points or whatever my post said it was. It then got tighter, Miami would recover, LAC would make it tighter, it was like LAC would score three points to Miami's two on every possession and the half ended as only a two-point "Heat" lead. I didn't watch the game tonight but it read to me like LAC wanted to size this bright new thing up. Lemme let 'em take their shot, I want to see how hard they hit. Boy they hit pretty hard! We're down a touchdown and PAT after one. And then, what doesn't kill you makes you stronger, LAC tentatively at first, then more assertively--now knowing what Miami had--began crawling and then galloping back into it. Three-quarters way through the third they floored it and left the "Heat" in their dust.
If the immediately above is true then LAC are far superior to Miami, records be damned. And as I read the box score and a bit of the play-by-play there is nothing obvious that says this was aberrational. The "Heat" were without Justise of course, were still with UD of course, and didn't have Goran and Special K tonight and Jimmy did turn his ankle twice and get poked in the eye once (he left in the 4th Q), which is a lot and sounds like a lot but they haven't had Justise all year, have had UD all year, have not had the Dragon for every game and the "Heat" did make it competitive at the end, not just subs against subs either, "really": Dion hit a three :34 left to make it a 3-point game and they lost 122-117 but the "Clippers" were without Paul George and Patrick Beverley and none of that on the "Heat" side taken explains
15-0,
LAC's run in the third quarter that blew it open. No: That was not caused by injuries or by Dion playing or me observing, the Los Angeles "Clippers" are a much better team than the Miami "Heat" and will be for the rest of the season. Full stop.
It is unlikely that Miami lost its last game tonight; it is unlikely that Miami won its last game Wednesday night against D.C. but between those two extremes the "Heat" are closer to the latter than the former, and closer to D.C. (32.6 win %) than to LAC (68.9%). They will finish between the two, duh, but Miami management will take tonight's game very seriously. Do they "really" have the personnel to win 57 games? I think not. I think "Heat" management thinks not. That was Ira Winderman's hypothetical argument. If management "really" thinks that then they will make a trade. I don't think they will make a trade and that might be a mistake, as it was in 2016/17. Or not. Good night.
When the game started getting tight I was powerfully reminded of Miami's first-ever playoff series. They got in as a sub-.500 team. Their reward was to face the Chicago "Bulls" of Michael Jordan, Scottie Pippen, Bill Cartwright, I think Horace Grant, if not, Dennis Rodman. Chicago won the first two games in Chi sleep-walking. Came the third game in Miami. I was there. Miami had like a 20-point lead in the first half. The fucking old Miami Arena was coming apart from the noise. I can still see in my mind's eye Chicago with the body language of being unphased. They went on to win that game.
Tonight when I started following the game I saw that Miami had jumped out to an eight-point lead after the first quarter. When I first checked it was seven points or whatever my post said it was. It then got tighter, Miami would recover, LAC would make it tighter, it was like LAC would score three points to Miami's two on every possession and the half ended as only a two-point "Heat" lead. I didn't watch the game tonight but it read to me like LAC wanted to size this bright new thing up. Lemme let 'em take their shot, I want to see how hard they hit. Boy they hit pretty hard! We're down a touchdown and PAT after one. And then, what doesn't kill you makes you stronger, LAC tentatively at first, then more assertively--now knowing what Miami had--began crawling and then galloping back into it. Three-quarters way through the third they floored it and left the "Heat" in their dust.
If the immediately above is true then LAC are far superior to Miami, records be damned. And as I read the box score and a bit of the play-by-play there is nothing obvious that says this was aberrational. The "Heat" were without Justise of course, were still with UD of course, and didn't have Goran and Special K tonight and Jimmy did turn his ankle twice and get poked in the eye once (he left in the 4th Q), which is a lot and sounds like a lot but they haven't had Justise all year, have had UD all year, have not had the Dragon for every game and the "Heat" did make it competitive at the end, not just subs against subs either, "really": Dion hit a three :34 left to make it a 3-point game and they lost 122-117 but the "Clippers" were without Paul George and Patrick Beverley and none of that on the "Heat" side taken explains
15-0,
LAC's run in the third quarter that blew it open. No: That was not caused by injuries or by Dion playing or me observing, the Los Angeles "Clippers" are a much better team than the Miami "Heat" and will be for the rest of the season. Full stop.
It is unlikely that Miami lost its last game tonight; it is unlikely that Miami won its last game Wednesday night against D.C. but between those two extremes the "Heat" are closer to the latter than the former, and closer to D.C. (32.6 win %) than to LAC (68.9%). They will finish between the two, duh, but Miami management will take tonight's game very seriously. Do they "really" have the personnel to win 57 games? I think not. I think "Heat" management thinks not. That was Ira Winderman's hypothetical argument. If management "really" thinks that then they will make a trade. I don't think they will make a trade and that might be a mistake, as it was in 2016/17. Or not. Good night.
