We've heard this after each of the Heat's last 6 victories, -the opponent is now totally demoralized -the Heat have figured them out -the Heat are now focused and on a roll After the last 6 wins the Heat have been winless in the next game, so I'd wait on the Spurs eulogy for awhile. The Heat don't have a killer instinct or any real intestinal fortitude.
It's hard to read your posts.......when you type.....like this.....poor manu.......he sounds broken......too many dots......what should I do.......perhaps ignore.......list............?..............................................
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p>LeBron says he will start GM 7 with headband due to superstition but if it falls off he'll talk with headband to determine if it stays off.</p>— Marc J. Spears (@SpearsNBAYahoo) <a href="https://twitter.com/SpearsNBAYahoo/statuses/347422363924705281">June 19, 2013</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
"but you obviously did" followed by "...not read posts you're unable to read..." How can I "obviously" read something and not read it at the same time? Perhaps you shouldn't type like a dumb "a$$."..... ................ Spoiler .....dot dot dot....
It's happened 23 times, 20 times since 1969, but only twice since 1969 in the finals: in 1974 and 1978. The last 5 finals game 7's have been won by the home team. Overall the home team is 3-12 in finals game 7's. Overall the home team is 23-88 in game 7's, any round. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_NBA_game_sevens
This series is by no means over and I expect a dogfight on Thursday. It will be disappointing if it is a blowout either way.
It's not about the Heat but the Spurs. The Heat haven't looked like a championship team all playoffs long (after the first round against a team that shouldn't be in the PO in the first place). The Spurs were probably the better team for this series, but they blew game 6 and there is no way they win game 7 on the road after that. They look and sound defeated.
Historically there's a 20% chance. 3-in 15, 23-in-111 Not a gimme. About like Shane Battier's 3-point FG% in the playoffs this year (25%)
It's probably better than that considering how even these two teams are. However, it is hard to anticipate the "shook" factor. In 2006, the Lakers & Phoenix played a game 6 and it played out almost the same way, where the Lakers had a lead at the end and failed to secure a rebound, and then Tim Thomas hit a 3 to send it into OT where Phoenix won. In Game 7, the Lakers looked deflated and were blown off the court. So it depends a lot on the Spurs health & mental state.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p>Bosh let fans have it: "for all those guys who left, make sure they don't come to Game 7." Only wants fans who will stay whole game.</p>— Jon Krawczynski (@APkrawczynski) <a href="https://twitter.com/APkrawczynski/statuses/347431853654949890">June 19, 2013</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p>Bosh: "People gave up on us and they can stay where they are and watch the game at home."</p>— Jon Krawczynski (@APkrawczynski) <a href="https://twitter.com/APkrawczynski/statuses/347431987939778561">June 19, 2013</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> Chris Bosh to the bandwagon Heat fans:
The Spurs' substitution of Duncan during the review of Ray Allen's shot was illegal and should have resulted in a 1 shot technical for the Heat. Spurs had 0 timeouts. The Heat could've won this in regulation if someone was paying attention.
What if the spurs had one and they decided to do a redo and the heat won the second time with the FT. That would have been awesome.
Your link does not say that the penalty for the substitution is to call a technical foul, just that the refs should not have allowed it in the first place.
I'm not sure if this is still the rule, but it used to be the case that you took a tech to call a timeout in order to substitute or advance the ball.
And the Heat got to regroup, align their defense, remind everyone of the Spurs tendencies under that time scenario. Pop did not want the review. The bottom line is that the Spurs gained no benefit from the illegal substitution since they did not score, thus it did not impact the game in any way. The refs are supposed to disallow an illegal substitution. Unless it is specified somewhere else in the NBA rulebook I am not seeing, there is no technical foul assessed if the refs fail to notice it. They are supposed to correct it, like they correct a clock error. If they fail to do so, you play on.
