The Miami Heat played with fire against the Boston Celtics but still managed to win Game 1 of the Eastern Conference Finals. Was their success sustainable?
Once it was announced that Al Horford and Marcus Smart would miss Game 1 of the Eastern Conference Finals, it felt as if all the pressure quickly fell on the shoulders of the Miami Heat. Even more so considering Game 1 would be played on their floor.
However, after a lackluster first-half performance, where the team was down eight points, many (including myself) were quick to point out just how overwhelming the Boston Celtics were playing against Miami.
Even when the Heat was clicking, the Celtics always had an answer. That was, of course, until the third quarter when it all fell apart for Boston – or it all came together for the Heat.
During the third quarter, the Heat outscored the Celtics 39-14 and carried a 17-point lead into the fourth quarter. Boston made a run during the fourth but never got closer than seven points as the Heat cruised to a 118-107 Game 1 victory to take a 1-0 series lead.
Despite the Heat’s dominance in the third quarter, the Celtics looked like the (much) better team in the three other quarters. Boston outscored Miami in three of the four quarters. Of course, that doesn’t matter. In the end, it was the Heat that won the game.
After the fact, though, I can’t help but feel as if the Heat played with fire but still managed to steal Game 1 on their home floor.
The Heat only shot 33 percent from 3. PJ Tucker got hurt in the first half (though he did return). Max Strus was putrid in the first half. Robert Williams outscored Bam Adebayo. Still, thanks in large part to the brilliance of Jimmy Butler (who finished with 41 points), the Heat still won.
The big question, of course, is whether or not this win is sustainable for the Heat? Miami clearly won this game in the third quarter because of their tenacity and physical play on the defensive end.
Miami started paying attention to the details and locked in defensively. The Celtics didn’t have a response, probably where the absences of Al Horford and Marcus Smart were felt most.
Those are the situations in which you lean on your veterans. And the Celtics simply didn’t have them in uniform.
That could all change in Game 2. It’s probably likely that we’ll see Smart back, but there is real concern that Horford will miss another game, at least.
Nevertheless, the Celtics should feel fine about how Game 1 ended. A few breaks here and there and Boston would be sitting with a 1-0 series lead. Instead, it’s the Heat that won Game 1. After Game 1, though, you’d have to wonder how much longer the Heat will be able to survive while playing with fire.