Originally Posted by elT
I thought they did a perfect job in the end. The strategy payed off. They got within one. Now you are saying they got lucky? The plan was to get a stop and a quick three, save that last time-out. How is someone having and executing a plan suddenly lucky?
had a little bit more composure on that last shot, he had more then enough time and space to hit it, would they still be lucky?
Indiana looked like crap to me. They've barley beaten Miami playing at 60% of their potential. Not saying Miami does not need to start playing better but the Pacers do not impress me.
You're being results oriented. Everything had to go right for the Heat to win with how Spoelstra played it.
34 seconds left down 4, and you let Indiana play it out. If Indiana scores, the game is essentially over. If Indiana runs out the clock, you only have 10 seconds to HOPE to hit a 3, and then foul immediately. That's assuming MIA even secures the rebound. So in this scenario, MIA must get a clean rebound against one of the better offensive rebounding teams in the NBA, and rush it up the court and create a quick 3 against the leagues best defence. Sound good to you? Me neither.
Luckily, MIA barely secured the rebound with Lebron tip toeing the line, hit a 3 with only a few seconds left on the clock, and then Hill choked, giving MIA an opportunity to win it, where a larger percentage of the time they'd only be playing to tie the game with a 3 IF THEY'RE LUCKY and IND doesn't score on the original possesion, or get an offensive rebound after running out the clock.
If IND scores on the original possession, or IND secures the offensive rebound, or if their was a battle for the offensive rebound taking more time off of the clock, or if Bosh
missed that 3, everyone would be calling for Spoelstras head wondering why he wouldn't use conventional wisdom and foul to extend the game. But because everything went perfect on those 2 possesions, and Bosh
hit it, you thinks it was well coached, when 90% of the time it doesn't go perfect/perfect like that.
Do you see how flawed your argument is?