ASK IRA: Was Heat’s lack of reprisal as egregious as LaMelo Ball’s takedown of Bam Adebayo?
(First, a ton of questions were in the mailbag regarding the LaMelo Ball incident, so thanks for all who submitted. The following three are a sampling, using some of the thoughts from other submitted questions in the answers, including Dexter Pittman and Tyler Hansbrough references that were sent this way. I do read them all, with the exception of Jerry in Miami who daily suggests I should be fired for not routinely cursing out Erik Spoelstra.
My thoughts are that answering 1,095 questions a year in this space for over 20 years sounds about right. ) Q: Ira, all the credit in the world to Erik Spoelstra. I cannot imagine anything close if Pat Riley was coach and was told by the league that a player who scored a winning basket should have been ejected.
Riley would have invented invectives. – Wayne. A: But Erik Spoelstra also knew there was nothing that he could do to change the reality that it only was after the fact that the NBA said LaMelo Ball should have been ejected for what should have been ruled a Flagrant 2 foul for his reckless and dangerous takedown that effectively ended Bam Adebayo’s season.
It’s not as if the Heat could travel back in time and back to Charlotte to take the two free throws that would have been awarded. And, yet, if the ruling would have evoked Erik Spoelstra’s ire , that would have been within his rights, as well. Typically, a missed call can cost up to three points, can add a foul to a player’s total.
But this was a missed call that effectively changed every play the balance of the game from the first minutes of the second period going forward, for every minute that LaMelo Ball played and Bam Adebayo did not play. Egregious would be an understatement. But at least the NBA gave the Heat their pick back from the Terry Rozier (wait, what?