The Miami Heat have handled the Philadelphia 76ers rather easily
through the first two games of the series.  Despite needing a
late-game surge to avoid an epic collapse in Game 1, Miami
established itself as the more dominant team with its Game 2
rout.  This, of course, is no surprise.  The Heat were the heavy
favorite entering this series; anything less than a five-game
thrashing would be considered a disappointment.   The only
problem with this sentiment—this apparent expected domination—is
that hindsight is 20-20.  What is it about Heat-76ers that is
any different than Memphis-San Antonio, or, more appropriately,
Lakers-Hornets?  The Heat are the more talented team?  The 76ers
do not match-up well with Miami?  Those answers are too simple. 
They can both be applied to Los Angeles, but cannot explain why
New Orleans is up 1-0 on the road against the two-time defending
champs.   This is where intangibles come in to play.  The old
immeasurable measure that explains why some formulas fail to
produce the expect