- Joined
- May 8, 2002
- Posts
- 432,319
- Reaction score
- 44
Q: So who do you like on Friday night? The Hawks are at home, but that never has seemed like much of a homecourt advantage. – Leo.
A: I agree with your thought when it comes to homecourt advantage in Atlanta, although it will be interesting to see if the Hawks can muster something when it comes to a play-in game. Among the biggest takeaways from Wednesday night in Chicago was that this play-in means a lot, a heck of a lot, to the Miami players. They believe that this roster is better than this season‘s record, and it very much seems like they are on a mission. Based on what we saw on Tuesday night in Orlando, I’m not sure you can assume the same takeaway when it comes to the Hawks. In Chicago, we saw what happens when you give Erik Spoelstra four days to game plan for a single game. Now it will be interesting to see what happens when he has just under two. As usual with all things Atlanta, it likely comes down to Trae Young, and whether he can impose his will on a game after sulking off the court in Orlando. So the early money, I would think, would be on Spoelstra, and therefore the Heat.
Q: Every time I think I’m out, they pull me back in. With that said, it would just be on par with this season to blow it in Atlanta Friday night ,right? – T.G., Queens, New York.
Q: I fully, wholeheartedly and completely agree that nothing is a given with this season’s Heat. And I’m not sure can’t-miss Tyler Herro can replicate what accomplished Wednesday night in Chicago. But, man, to come this far, do what they did in Chicago, it would feel like a gut punch for it all to then come crashing down in Atlanta.
Q: Where would you rather be? With the 38-point Jimmy Butler play-in performance and extended contract still here, or where we currently are? – Bob, Davie.
A: Look, no one wants to be in a position of playing with desperation, as the Heat still now must, so obviously with the Warriors through to the actual playoffs, Jimmy Butler clearly is in a better position. But your question also is one without a legitimate Heat answer, from the perspective that no one was prepared after last season to offer an extension to a player who decided only to show up part of the time. As Dwyane Wade mentioned in his interview this week, once that bridge wasn’t crossed, it’s not as if Jimmy was going to give anything more than the minimum for Miami this season. But if you are asking if the Miami Heat are better off with Jimmy Butler, of course they are. But I’m not so sure that if the Heat would have had Jimmy Butler under contract for two seasons beyond this that they could have maximized the next iteration of this team, whatever that might be. But in the moment, yes, there has to be a sense of loss. But let’s also cycle back in a few days or even in a year or two.
Continue reading...
A: I agree with your thought when it comes to homecourt advantage in Atlanta, although it will be interesting to see if the Hawks can muster something when it comes to a play-in game. Among the biggest takeaways from Wednesday night in Chicago was that this play-in means a lot, a heck of a lot, to the Miami players. They believe that this roster is better than this season‘s record, and it very much seems like they are on a mission. Based on what we saw on Tuesday night in Orlando, I’m not sure you can assume the same takeaway when it comes to the Hawks. In Chicago, we saw what happens when you give Erik Spoelstra four days to game plan for a single game. Now it will be interesting to see what happens when he has just under two. As usual with all things Atlanta, it likely comes down to Trae Young, and whether he can impose his will on a game after sulking off the court in Orlando. So the early money, I would think, would be on Spoelstra, and therefore the Heat.
Related Articles
Q: Every time I think I’m out, they pull me back in. With that said, it would just be on par with this season to blow it in Atlanta Friday night ,right? – T.G., Queens, New York.
Q: I fully, wholeheartedly and completely agree that nothing is a given with this season’s Heat. And I’m not sure can’t-miss Tyler Herro can replicate what accomplished Wednesday night in Chicago. But, man, to come this far, do what they did in Chicago, it would feel like a gut punch for it all to then come crashing down in Atlanta.
Q: Where would you rather be? With the 38-point Jimmy Butler play-in performance and extended contract still here, or where we currently are? – Bob, Davie.
A: Look, no one wants to be in a position of playing with desperation, as the Heat still now must, so obviously with the Warriors through to the actual playoffs, Jimmy Butler clearly is in a better position. But your question also is one without a legitimate Heat answer, from the perspective that no one was prepared after last season to offer an extension to a player who decided only to show up part of the time. As Dwyane Wade mentioned in his interview this week, once that bridge wasn’t crossed, it’s not as if Jimmy was going to give anything more than the minimum for Miami this season. But if you are asking if the Miami Heat are better off with Jimmy Butler, of course they are. But I’m not so sure that if the Heat would have had Jimmy Butler under contract for two seasons beyond this that they could have maximized the next iteration of this team, whatever that might be. But in the moment, yes, there has to be a sense of loss. But let’s also cycle back in a few days or even in a year or two.
Continue reading...
