2024-25 · Regular Season · Final
Utah Jazz at Miami Heat
Saturday, January 4, 2025 · tip-off time not recorded
UTA 2–2@MIA 1–0 records going into the game NBA.com recap ↗
Forecast and result
| Team | Projected | Final | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| UTA Utah Jazz | 110 | 136 | +26 |
| MIA Miami Heat (home) | 116 | 100 | −16 |
Forecast: Miami Heat to win, 67% win probability, projected margin 6.
Inside the Forecast
How the inputs are builtWhat the model received
| Input | UTA | MIA |
|---|---|---|
| Elo ratingMargin-of-victory Elo; 1500 is average. | 1363 | 1534 |
| Elo gap, home minus road, incl. home court | +241 | |
| Season scoring marginPoints per game, blended with last season early in the year. | −9.0 | +1.6 |
| Games played this season | 32 | 31 |
| Offensive rating, last 10Points scored per 100 possessions. | 112.3 | 110.7 |
| Defensive rating, last 10Points allowed per 100 possessions; lower is better. | 123.9 | 110.7 |
| Combined pace, last 10Possessions per game, both teams. | 99.2 | |
| Rotation points missingPoints per game of rotation players listed Out or Doubtful. | 6.0 | 21.6 |
| Rest days | 3 | 2 |
| Second night of a back-to-back | No | No |
This forecast can't be broken down exactly: the model version that made this forecast is not available. Explanations are shown only when the model that made a forecast can be rebuilt and reproduces it. How explanations are checked
Built from the box scores
How the breakdowns workWhere each input came from. Open a row to see the games and box-score stats behind it. A breakdown is shown only when rebuilding it from the stored stats gives exactly the number the model received.
Elo ratingUTA1363MIA1534
Updated after every game from the final score only: wins, losses and margin. Each season starts by keeping 75% of last season's distance from the 1500 average.
UTA1363
- Ended last season at 1363 → started this one at 1397
- First 22 games: −14.3
- Last 10 games: −20.0
- L@SAC97–141−11.4
- LPHX126–134−6.5
- L@LAC107–144−9.6
- W@DET126–119+12.3
- W@BKN105–94+16.2
- L@CLE113–124−2.4
- L@POR120–122−4.5
- LPHI111–114−5.3
- LDEN121–132−6.2
- L@NYK103–119−2.6
MIA1534
- Ended last season at 1543 → started this one at 1532
- First 21 games: +19.9
- Last 10 games: −17.6
- WTOR114–104+3.3
- L@DET124–125−5.4
- LOKC97–104−5.9
- L@ORL114–121−6.1
- WBKN110–95+5.4
- W@ORL89–88+5.5
- L@ATL110–120−9.8
- W@HOU104–100+9.7
- WNOP119–108+2.9
- LIND115–128−17.2
Season scoring marginUTA−9.0MIA+1.6
Points scored minus points allowed per game this season, mixed with last season's margin until 20 games are played.
UTA−9.0
Scores 110.7, allows 119.8 over 32 games: −9.0 a game.
MIA+1.6
Scores 111.2, allows 109.6 over 31 games: +1.6 a game.
Offensive rating, last 10UTA112.3MIA110.7
Points scored per 100 possessions. Split into the four factors: right of center helps the team, left hurts, in points per 100 possessions compared with the league average (2024-25 to date: 112.6).
UTA112.3scored, −0.3 vs league
| Factor | UTA | League | hurtshelps | Pts |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Shooting (eFG%) | 55.9% | 54.2% | +2.6 | |
| Turnovers (TOV%) | 16.1% | 12.5% | −5.1 | |
| Offensive rebounding (OREB%) | 27.8% | 24.6% | +1.4 | |
| Free throws (FTM per FGA) | 0.210 | 0.195 | +0.4 | |
| Everything else | +0.4 |
MIA110.7scored, −1.9 vs league
| Factor | MIA | League | hurtshelps | Pts |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Shooting (eFG%) | 55.1% | 54.2% | +1.5 | |
| Turnovers (TOV%) | 13.3% | 12.5% | −1.1 | |
| Offensive rebounding (OREB%) | 19.6% | 24.6% | −2.2 | |
| Free throws (FTM per FGA) | 0.239 | 0.195 | +1.3 | |
| Everything else | −1.4 |
Defensive rating, last 10UTA123.9MIA110.7
Points allowed per 100 possessions, built from what opponents did in those games. Bars point right when the defense held opponents below average. Split into the four factors: right of center helps the team, left hurts, in points per 100 possessions compared with the league average (2024-25 to date: 112.6).
UTA123.9allowed, +11.3 vs league
| Factor | Opponents | League | hurtshelps | Pts |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Shooting (eFG%) | 58.4% | 54.2% | −6.3 | |
| Turnovers (TOV%) | 9.3% | 12.5% | −4.6 | |
| Offensive rebounding (OREB%) | 23.2% | 24.6% | +0.7 | |
| Free throws (FTM per FGA) | 0.190 | 0.195 | +0.2 | |
| Everything else | −1.2 |
MIA110.7allowed, −1.9 vs league
| Factor | Opponents | League | hurtshelps | Pts |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Shooting (eFG%) | 53.8% | 54.2% | +0.7 | |
| Turnovers (TOV%) | 12.1% | 12.5% | −0.5 | |
| Offensive rebounding (OREB%) | 22.7% | 24.6% | +0.8 | |
| Free throws (FTM per FGA) | 0.175 | 0.195 | +0.6 | |
| Everything else | +0.4 |
Pace, last 10average 99.2
Possessions per 48 minutes. The model uses the average of the two teams. Faster games mean more points for both sides, so pace mostly moves the projected total, not the margin.
UTA 100.6 and MIA 97.9 → average 99.2 (league 2024-25 to date: 99.9)
Rotation points missingUTA6.0MIA21.6
Points per game of rotation players (two or more of the last 10 games this season, 15+ minutes) listed Out or Doubtful on the official injury report.
UTA6.0pts/g missing
| Player | Pts | Min | Games |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cody Williams | 6.0 | 21.8 | 3 |
Source: official injury report, 2025-01-04 17:30 ET. 11 rotation players.
MIA21.6pts/g missing
| Player | Pts | Min | Games |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jimmy Butler III | 12.8 | 26.5 | 5 |
| Dru Smith | 8.8 | 25.6 | 5 |
Source: official injury report, 2025-01-04 17:30 ET. 10 rotation players.
RestUTA3 daysMIA2 days
Days since the team's previous game, capped at 5. One day means the second night of a back-to-back.
UTA3days
Last played Jan 1 against NYK.
MIA2days
Last played Jan 2 against IND.
The last 10 games behind these numbers, box-score totals
UTA
| Date | Opp | Score | FG | 3P | FT | TOV | OREB | Off | Def | Pace |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 1 | @NYK | 103–119 | 39-96 | 13-43 | 12-15 | 16 | 14 | 102.0 | 117.8 | 101.0 |
| Dec 30 | DEN | 121–132 | 44-86 | 13-38 | 20-22 | 16 | 7 | 121.0 | 130.7 | 100.5 |
| Dec 28 | PHI | 111–114 | 43-89 | 12-36 | 13-15 | 21 | 14 | 113.3 | 116.3 | 98.0 |
| Dec 26 | @POR | 120–122 | 41-86 | 21-42 | 17-25 | 13 | 11 | 121.2 | 123.2 | 99.0 |
| Dec 23 | @CLE | 113–124 | 38-92 | 19-44 | 18-26 | 16 | 16 | 115.3 | 125.3 | 98.5 |
| Dec 21 | @BKN | 105–94 | 41-86 | 14-41 | 9-17 | 18 | 9 | 104.0 | 93.1 | 101.0 |
| Dec 19 | @DET | 126–119 | 39-83 | 20-40 | 28-31 | 27 | 14 | 113.5 | 109.2 | 110.0 |
| Dec 16 | @LAC | 107–144 | 36-80 | 13-39 | 22-30 | 22 | 10 | 101.9 | 139.8 | 104.0 |
| Dec 13 | PHX | 126–134 | 43-77 | 22-39 | 18-22 | 15 | 6 | 132.6 | 141.1 | 95.0 |
| Dec 8 | @SAC | 97–141 | 31-80 | 15-42 | 20-21 | 20 | 9 | 98.0 | 142.4 | 99.0 |
MIA
| Date | Opp | Score | FG | 3P | FT | TOV | OREB | Off | Def | Pace |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 2 | IND | 115–128 | 43-75 | 11-26 | 18-21 | 14 | 5 | 118.6 | 133.3 | 96.5 |
| Jan 1 | NOP | 119–108 | 44-83 | 14-34 | 17-21 | 10 | 5 | 126.6 | 113.7 | 94.5 |
| Dec 29 | @HOU | 104–100 | 37-84 | 10-33 | 20-28 | 14 | 15 | 108.3 | 104.2 | 96.0 |
| Dec 28 | @ATL | 110–120 | 40-90 | 13-41 | 17-18 | 8 | 8 | 110.0 | 122.4 | 99.0 |
| Dec 26 | @ORL | 89–88 | 31-76 | 15-30 | 12-14 | 20 | 6 | 92.7 | 90.7 | 96.5 |
| Dec 23 | BKN | 110–95 | 36-73 | 17-41 | 21-24 | 15 | 4 | 115.8 | 101.1 | 94.5 |
| Dec 21 | @ORL | 114–121 | 36-75 | 9-32 | 33-42 | 14 | 7 | 112.9 | 122.2 | 100.0 |
| Dec 20 | OKC | 97–104 | 36-83 | 12-40 | 13-20 | 18 | 7 | 100.0 | 107.2 | 97.0 |
| Dec 16 | @DET | 124–125 | 45-99 | 12-43 | 22-24 | 13 | 9 | 108.8 | 108.7 | 103.7 |
| Dec 12 | TOR | 114–104 | 40-83 | 13-32 | 21-32 | 15 | 11 | 112.9 | 103.0 | 101.0 |
Off and Def are points scored and allowed per 100 possessions in each game; their averages are the 10-game ratings above. OREB is missing (–) where the source data didn't record it.
The result against the forecast
2024-25 surprise gamesSurprise is measured against this model's forecast, not against what other observers expected. Outcome surprise is −ln(winner's pregame probability): 0.69 for a coin flip, 2.3 for a 10% winner.
Team box score
What happened in the game. These numbers are not used by the forecast, and they are not offered as the reason it missed.
| Team stat | UTA | MIA |
|---|---|---|
| Final score | 136 | 100 |
| Field goals | 52–100 · 52.0% | 35–80 · 43.8% |
| Three-pointers | 19–46 · 41.3% | 9–35 · 25.7% |
| Free throws | 13–16 · 81.3% | 21–30 · 70.0% |
| Rebounds | 57 | 32 |
| Assists | 31 | 25 |
| Turnovers | 14 | 15 |
| Steals | 11 | 9 |
| Blocks | 4 | 7 |
How the model does with these teams over time: Utah Jazz · Miami Heat
Where the forecast differed from the result
| Measure | Forecast | Actual | Actual − forecast |
|---|---|---|---|
| Home margin (MIA) | +6 | −36 | −42 |
| Total points | 226 | 236 | +10 |
| UTA points | 110 | 136 | +26 |
| MIA points | 116 | 100 | −16 |
Score by quarter
| Team | Q1 | Q2 | Q3 | Q4 | OT | Final |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| UTA | 22 | 40 | 36 | 38 | – | 136 |
| MIA | 22 | 19 | 25 | 34 | – | 100 |
Recent form before this game
Previous meetings
| Date | Matchup | Score |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2 2023-24 | UTA at MIA | UTA 120 – 126 MIA |
| Dec 30 2023-24 | MIA at UTA | MIA 109 – 117 UTA |
| Mar 13 2022-23 | UTA at MIA | UTA 115 – 119 MIA |
| Dec 31 2022-23 | MIA at UTA | MIA 126 – 123 UTA |
| Nov 13 2021-22 | MIA at UTA | MIA 111 – 105 UTA |