Miami ? We need a winner, and we need a loser. Every game. Every season. Every trade. Sports observers do not tolerate shades of gray, and therefore we scoff at any suggestion that two sides could have fared well in the same transaction.

Even when they did.

The Heat and Lakers reprised their faux rivalry for a third straight, and hopefully last, Christmas on Monday afternoon, a lingering consequence of the deal they consummated on July 14, 2004. That trade sent Shaquille O’Neal to South Florida for Lamar Odom, Caron Butler, Brian Grant and the draft pick that became Jordan Farmar – who, incidentally, was the only one of the aforementioned players to actually participate in the Heat’s 101-85 victory.

That means the Heat has won four of five matchups between the teams since the trade, including all three on the holiday, in a series that quickly has become as stale as a pop song in heavy radio rotation.

The Heat has played in 38 playoff games since the deal. The Lakers? Seven.

The Heat has won one NBA title. The Lakers? They have won some early vacation.

Those results have led many to view the deal as lopsided. It’s not so simple. In retrospect, this increasingly looks like a move that each side had to make, and one that neither will regret.

Start with the Heat.

Start with this premise: Even if O’Neal never again wears anything but a sharp suit inside AmericanAirlines Arena, he has proven his worth. NBA titles are precious. If you win one in 30 years, the numbers say that you have matched the odds. In reality, you have beaten them. Eleven franchises have split the last 30 championships, and the Bulls, Spurs, Lakers, Celtics and Pistons have won 23 of those. As Hall of Fame player and coach Lenny Wilkens said, “When you have a chance, you go for it. You never know when you’ll have another.”

The Kings, Trail Blazers, Pacers and Jazz all fell just short of raising the ultimate banner to their rafters.

The Heat did, and O’Neal’s presence, however diminished, played a role in that.

So yes, it would be nice if O’Neal could be available in an occasional fall or winter contest. Still, you make the trade. Every time.

So, how about the Lakers?

You make the trade again.

Every time.

Say they had re-signed O’Neal, on his terms, as a reward for his service.

What would they have to show now?

Maybe one more title, if Phil Jackson or some other coach (Pat Riley?) had been able to convince O’Neal and Kobe Bryant to work together. But how long would peace have lasted? More likely, Bryant would have left in free agency if the Lakers had extended O’Neal. What if Bryant had left for the talented Clippers, starring in the same building, haunting and embarrassing his former franchise?

The Lakers would have been left with an aging center in steady numerical decline, with a work ethic Jackson recently questioned. They would not have Odom who, when healthy, is clearly their second-best player. They would not have Kwame Brown, the enigmatic yet physically promising big man they acquired for Butler.

They would not have much hope.

They have that now.