The Heat without Wade: Predictions?
I think it's going to be tough for the Heat to beat anyone without Wade. I'm thinking they'll become the new Memphis Grizzlies immediately (26% win percentage). What do you think?
I like this analysis from John Hollinger:
As things stand today, the Heat are 26-27 and in possession of the eighth seed in the East, but without Wade it's hard to imagine that situation remaining the same for long. The Heat are 1-6 when Wade hasn't played this season, with all six losses in double figures.
And in the other 46 games, it's only been the brilliance of the league's top-rated player that has kept the team's head above water. As I've been pointing out since the third week of the season, Wade's supporting cast has been horrid.
Yes, Shaquille O'Neal is back, but this isn't the Shaq of old. Minus their lone superstar (sorry, Shaq), it's tough to imagine the Heat winning more than a third of their games -- and that may be generous, considering they were barely over .500 even when Wade played.
Estimates of Wade's absence seem to be running between four and six weeks; based on Miami's upcoming schedule, that would knock him out for between 13 and 20 games. If it's the shorter of those estimates, the Heat might be able to survive the blow. Say Miami guts out a couple tough wins and manages to go 4-9 without Wade, dropping it to 30-36. The Heat could still make up ground in the final 16 games, and with a fairly light closing schedule the Heat might still get back to the 40 or so wins they'd probably need to get a playoff spot.
But if he's out six weeks, forget it. Then we're talking about 20 games, and if the Heat go 6-14 in that stretch (which might be optimistic) they'll be 32-41 by the time Wade gets back, with only nine games left to repair their record. Meanwhile, with New Jersey at 25-30 this morning and expecting Richard Jefferson back in early March, it stands to reason the Nets will end up around the 40-win mark themselves. So unless the Heat ran the table when Wade came back, they'd be looking at lotteryville.
I like this analysis from John Hollinger:
As things stand today, the Heat are 26-27 and in possession of the eighth seed in the East, but without Wade it's hard to imagine that situation remaining the same for long. The Heat are 1-6 when Wade hasn't played this season, with all six losses in double figures.
And in the other 46 games, it's only been the brilliance of the league's top-rated player that has kept the team's head above water. As I've been pointing out since the third week of the season, Wade's supporting cast has been horrid.
Yes, Shaquille O'Neal is back, but this isn't the Shaq of old. Minus their lone superstar (sorry, Shaq), it's tough to imagine the Heat winning more than a third of their games -- and that may be generous, considering they were barely over .500 even when Wade played.
Estimates of Wade's absence seem to be running between four and six weeks; based on Miami's upcoming schedule, that would knock him out for between 13 and 20 games. If it's the shorter of those estimates, the Heat might be able to survive the blow. Say Miami guts out a couple tough wins and manages to go 4-9 without Wade, dropping it to 30-36. The Heat could still make up ground in the final 16 games, and with a fairly light closing schedule the Heat might still get back to the 40 or so wins they'd probably need to get a playoff spot.
But if he's out six weeks, forget it. Then we're talking about 20 games, and if the Heat go 6-14 in that stretch (which might be optimistic) they'll be 32-41 by the time Wade gets back, with only nine games left to repair their record. Meanwhile, with New Jersey at 25-30 this morning and expecting Richard Jefferson back in early March, it stands to reason the Nets will end up around the 40-win mark themselves. So unless the Heat ran the table when Wade came back, they'd be looking at lotteryville.
