2008 Blake V. 2009 Miller - Advanced Statistical Comparison

[PapaG]

But im not attacking u, im worried about you....like maybe you need to get evaluated

Is this the proper place for your "concern"?

Nate, you guys are losing control of this place.

 

[Nikolokolus]

PapaG, your mock outrage is what really gets me.

I called your statistical comparison laughable because it compares incomparable data points, two seperate seasons, different mixes of players, completely different styles of play ... there are ways to compare Miller and Blake, but what you did seemed awfully intent on showing the parts you thought would validate Blake and undermine Miller.

We get it, you hate the Roy/Miller pairing in the backcourt and you think his presence is detrimental to our offense and you've had a beef with him ever since you learned that he wasn't showing up to training camp early and that he didn't pass Nate's conditioning test, etc.

If you're satisfied with your stats and the way they line up and you think you were merely providing us with data for our edification and information and weren't trying to make a point then so be it. Have a nice day.

 

[PapaG]

PapaG, your mock outrage is what really gets me.

I called your statistical comparison laughable because it compares incomparable data points, two seperate seasons, different mixes of players, completely different styles of play ... there are ways to compare Miller and Blake, but what you did seemed awfully intent on showing the parts you thought would validate Blake and undermine Miller.

We get it, you hate the Roy/Miller pairing in the backcourt and you think his presence is detrimental to our offense and you've had a beef with him ever since you learned that he wasn't showing up to training camp early and that he didn't pass Nate's conditioning test, etc.

If you're satisfied with your stats and the way they line up and you think you were merely providing us with data for our edification and information and weren't trying to make a point then so be it. Have a nice day.

I only offered the data. Also, I advocated Miller starting, but you must have missed that.

I'll take this post as an admission that there is no data that exists that says that the offense is better this season (so far) than it was last season. So, I extrapolate that info and arrive at the conclusion that Miller has been a bust thus far.

It's against S2's CW, but it seems to be supported statistically.

 

[PapaG]

I have to wonder why me posting some stats has so many people in what seems to be an outrage.

 

[PapaG]

but what you did seemed awfully intent on showing the parts you thought would validate Blake and undermine Miller.

I've invited you, and others, to add information that validates Miller and undermines Blake.

No one can do it. Oddly, that appears to be my fault.

 

[Nikolokolus]

I only offered the data. Also, I advocated Miller starting, but you must have missed that.

I'll take this post as an admission that there is no data that exists that says that the offense is better this season (so far) than it was last season. So, I extrapolate that info and arrive at the conclusion that Miller has been a bust thus far.

It's against S2's CW, but it seems to be supported statistically.

That's called confusing causation with correlation and it's a logical fallacy. But if it makes you feel better to think that's some admission or concession, then OK.

 

[Nikolokolus]

I've invited you, and others, to add information that validates Miller and undermines Blake.

No one can do it. Oddly, that appears to be my fault.

You're right, Blake is awesome and makes everything better, Miller makes it stink. Feel better now?

 

[PapaG]

That's called confusing causation with correlation and it's a logical fallacy. But if it makes you feel better to think that's some admission or concession, then OK.

All we have is correlation. Causation, in this instance, is opinion-based. I'll gladly accept the data as being a determinent of the conclusion, or at least include it in forming an opinion.

 

[PapaG]

You're right, Blake is awesome and makes everything better, Miller makes it stink. Feel better now?

I never said that.

 

[Nikolokolus]

Night night.

 

[Boob-No-More]

Except Miller is the variable that wasn't there last year, and Miller is Blake's replacement at PG.

It is this kind of "logic" that makes it hard for anyone to take your conclusions seriously.

Miller starting at PG is only ONE of several variables that are different this season than last.

Last year's starting line-up:

Center - Joel (for 43 games and Greg for the other 39)
PF - LaMarcus
SF - Batum
SG - Roy
PB - Blake

This year's starting line-up:
Center - Greg
PF - LaMarcus
SF - Roy
SG - Blake
PB - Miller

Notice that our starters this year are different than last year at 4 of the 5 positions (at the very least 3.5 out of 5 as Greg started almost half the games last season at center). Saying the Andre Miller is the only difference is a false assumption, and basing your conclusions on false assumptions renders those conclusions invalid.

I want to say it one more time, I'm not anti Blake - I'm anti starting both Blake and Miller together as it forces at least two of our starting five to play out of position. Roy is much better at SG, where he has excellent size and strength for the position, than he is at SF where he is severely undersized compared to other starting SFs. Roy's scoring and over all productivity (PER) are both down significantly this season. You want to blame that on playing with Andre Miller. You concluded that before they even took they court together that Roy and Miller could not co-exist in the starting backcourt. That conclusion was based on zero data. Now, because Roy's production is down, you chose to ignore the obvious cause (he's playing out of position) and use it to "prove" your original baseless conclusion (Roy and Miller can't co-exist). Roy can no longer overpower his opponent. Instead, he is the one that's getting overpowered by the bigger, stronger players that are guarding him and that he is forced to guard on the other end. So, he has trouble scoring against bigger stronger defenders and is worn out from trying to guard them on the other end. In my opinion, playing out of position at SF is the major reason for Roy's decreased productivity.

Miller and Blake also end up playing out of position. Blake plays shooting guard on offense, where he is now guarded by bigger, stronger opponents. As a result, his shooting percentages and over all productivity are both WAY down from last season. He no longer gets to spot up and shoot over the outstretched hand of 6'1" PGs, he now has to get his shot off with a 6'6" shooting guard charging at him. Big difference - and it explains why Blake's shooting percentages have dropped so dramatically (0.364 vs. 0.428 FG% and 0.365 vs. 0.427 3FG%)

Miller also ends up guarding bigger, stronger shooting guards on the other end, which puts him at a physical disadvantage and wears him out physically.

So, if you look at just he starting wing positions from last year compared to this year:

Last year:
SF - Batum, PER = 12.9
SG - Roy, PER = 24.0
Combined PER= 36.9

This year:
SF - Roy, PER = 20.0
SG - Blake, PER = 9.5
Combined PER= 29.5

Difference = -7.4 or -20%

By forcing Roy and Blake to play out of position, the combined production from our small forward and shooting guard positions are down 20% compared to last season - THAT is the biggest reason why our offense is so much less efficient this season than last - NOT Andre Miller vs. Steve Blake at the starting PG position.

Concerning Miller this season vs. Blake last season the data you presented seems to indicate it's a wash (Blake 2008-09 PER = 14.4, Miller 2009-10 PER = 14.3). I disagree. In addition to the very small sample size, Miller's PER as our starting PG is much higher than his total PER of 14.3. Prior to the first five games of this season, Miller has not had to come off the bench since his rookie year. It's not a role that suits him. Prior to moving into the starting line-up, Miller's PER was down in the single digits. Now that he has been starting for 8 games, he has been able to pull his total PER up to 14.3. I don't know of a site that gives PER splits for starter vs. reserve roles, but basketball-reference does give most basic stats for these different roles. If you look at Miller's stats as a starter vs. his stats as a reserve, you will see both the raw stats and the per-minute stats are MUCH better over all as a starter than as a reserve. If you do the math, you will see his PTS/36 and REB/36 are both up considerably as a starter, as is his FG% (0.432 vs. 0.316). His APG is up, slightly, but his AST/36 is down slightly. Over all, based on his increased scoring, rebounding and much higher shooting percentage, it is reasonable to conclude that his PER as a starter is significantly higher than his total seasonal PER of 14.3. Therefore, Miller as a starter in 2009-10 IS an upgrade over Blake as a starter (PER = 14.4) in 2008-09.

So, rather than bash Steve Blake. I would like to see him, Brandon Roy and Andre Miller all put in roles where they can thrive. In my opinion, that means moving Roy back to his best, most natural position of shooting guard where he will once again have an advantage over his opponents, moving Steve Blake to back-up PG where he will enjoy much better match ups than he does at starting shooting guard, and let Andre Miller continue to start at PG where he is (as a starter) outproducing Blake both this season and last. That means moving Martell back into the starting line-up. This will have the added benefit of improving our team defense and rebounding.

BNM

 

[VanillaGorilla]

It is this kind of "logic" that makes it hard for anyone to take your conclusions seriously.

Miller starting at PG is only ONE of several variables that are different this season than last.

Last year's starting line-up:

Center - Joel (for 43 games and Greg for the other 39)
PF - LaMarcus
SF - Batum
SG - Roy
PB - Blake

This year's starting line-up:
Center - Greg
PF - LaMarcus
SF - Roy
SG - Blake
PB - Miller

Notice that our starters this year are different than last year at 4 of the 5 positions (at the very least 3.5 out of 5 as Greg started almost half the games last season at center). Saying the Andre Miller is the only difference is a false assumption, and basing your conclusions on false assumptions renders those conclusions invalid.

I want to say it one more time, I'm not anti Blake - I'm anti starting both Blake and Miller together as it forces at least two of our starting five to play out of position. Roy is much better at SG, where he has excellent size and strength for the position, than he is at SF where he is severely undersized compared to other starting SFs. Roy's scoring and over all productivity (PER) are both down significantly this season. You want to blame that on playing with Andre Miller. You concluded that before they even took they court together that Roy and Miller could not co-exist in the starting backcourt. That conclusion was based on zero data. Now, because Roy's production is down, you chose to ignore the obvious cause (he's playing out of position) and use it to "prove" your original baseless conclusion (Roy and Miller can't co-exist). Roy can no longer overpower his opponent. Instead, he is the one that's getting overpowered by the bigger, stronger players that are guarding him and that he is forced to guard on the other end. So, he has trouble scoring against bigger stronger defenders and is worn out from trying to guard them on the other end. In my opinion, playing out of position at SF is the major reason for Roy's decreased productivity.

Miller and Blake also end up playing out of position. Blake plays shooting guard on offense, where he is now guarded by bigger, stronger opponents. As a result, his shooting percentages and over all productivity are both WAY down from last season. He no longer gets to spot up and shoot over the outstretched hand of 6'1" PGs, he now has to get his shot off with a 6'6" shooting guard charging at him. Big difference - and it explains why Blake's shooting percentages have dropped so dramatically (0.364 vs. 0.428 FG% and 0.365 vs. 0.427 3FG%)

Miller also ends up guarding bigger, stronger shooting guards on the other end, which puts him at a physical disadvantage and wears him out physically.

So, if you look at just he starting wing positions from last year compared to this year:

Last year:
SF - Batum, PER = 12.9
SG - Roy, PER = 24.0
Combined PER= 36.9

This year:
SF - Roy, PER = 20.0
SG - Blake, PER = 9.5
Combined PER= 29.5

Difference = -7.4 or -20%

By forcing Roy and Blake to play out of position, the combined production from our small forward and shooting guard positions are down 20% compared to last season - THAT is the biggest reason why our offense is so much less efficient this season than last - NOT Andre Miller vs. Steve Blake at the starting PG position.

Concerning Miller this season vs. Blake last season the data you presented seems to indicate it's a wash (Blake 2008-09 PER = 14.4, Miller 2009-10 PER = 14.3). I disagree. In addition to the very small sample size, Miller's PER as our starting PG is much higher than his total PER of 14.3. Prior to the first five games of this season, Miller has not had to come off the bench since his rookie year. It's not a role that suits him. Prior to moving into the starting line-up, Miller's PER was down in the single digits. Now that he has been starting for 8 games, he has been able to pull his total PER up to 14.3. I don't know of a site that gives PER splits for starter vs. reserve roles, but basketball-reference does give most basic stats for these different roles. If you look at Miller's stats as a starter vs. his stats as a reserve, you will see both the raw stats and the per-minute stats are MUCH better over all as a starter than as a reserve. If you do the math, you will see his PTS/36 and REB/36 are both up considerably as a starter, as is his FG% (0.432 vs. 0.316). His APG is up, slightly, but his AST/36 is down slightly. Over all, based on his increased scoring, rebounding and much higher shooting percentage, it is reasonable to conclude that his PER as a starter is significantly higher than his total seasonal PER of 14.3. Therefore, Miller as a starter in 2009-10 IS an upgrade over Blake as a starter (PER = 14.4) in 2008-09.

So, rather than bash Steve Blake. I would like to see him, Brandon Roy and Andre Miller all put in roles where they can thrive. In my opinion, that means moving Roy back to his best, most natural position of shooting guard where he will once again have an advantage over his opponents, moving Steve Blake to back-up PG where he will enjoy much better match ups than he does at starting shooting guard, and let Andre Miller continue to start at PG where he is (as a starter) outproducing Blake both this season and last. That means moving Martell back into the starting line-up. This will have the added benefit of improving our team defense and rebounding.

BNM

Repped.

 

[OSUBlazerfan]

It is this kind of "logic" that makes it hard for anyone to take your conclusions seriously.

Miller starting at PG is only ONE of several variables that are different this season than last.

Last year's starting line-up:

Center - Joel (for 43 games and Greg for the other 39)
PF - LaMarcus
SF - Batum
SG - Roy
PB - Blake

This year's starting line-up:
Center - Greg
PF - LaMarcus
SF - Roy
SG - Blake
PB - Miller

Notice that our starters this year are different than last year at 4 of the 5 positions (at the very least 3.5 out of 5 as Greg started almost half the games last season at center). Saying the Andre Miller is the only difference is a false assumption, and basing your conclusions on false assumptions renders those conclusions invalid.

I want to say it one more time, I'm not anti Blake - I'm anti starting both Blake and Miller together as it forces at least two of our starting five to play out of position. Roy is much better at SG, where he has excellent size and strength for the position, than he is at SF where he is severely undersized compared to other starting SFs. Roy's scoring and over all productivity (PER) are both down significantly this season. You want to blame that on playing with Andre Miller. You concluded that before they even took they court together that Roy and Miller could not co-exist in the starting backcourt. That conclusion was based on zero data. Now, because Roy's production is down, you chose to ignore the obvious cause (he's playing out of position) and use it to "prove" your original baseless conclusion (Roy and Miller can't co-exist). Roy can no longer overpower his opponent. Instead, he is the one that's getting overpowered by the bigger, stronger players that are guarding him and that he is forced to guard on the other end. So, he has trouble scoring against bigger stronger defenders and is worn out from trying to guard them on the other end. In my opinion, playing out of position at SF is the major reason for Roy's decreased productivity.

Miller and Blake also end up playing out of position. Blake plays shooting guard on offense, where he is now guarded by bigger, stronger opponents. As a result, his shooting percentages and over all productivity are both WAY down from last season. He no longer gets to spot up and shoot over the outstretched hand of 6'1" PGs, he now has to get his shot off with a 6'6" shooting guard charging at him. Big difference - and it explains why Blake's shooting percentages have dropped so dramatically (0.364 vs. 0.428 FG% and 0.365 vs. 0.427 3FG%)

Miller also ends up guarding bigger, stronger shooting guards on the other end, which puts him at a physical disadvantage and wears him out physically.

So, if you look at just he starting wing positions from last year compared to this year:

Last year:
SF - Batum, PER = 12.9
SG - Roy, PER = 24.0
Combined PER= 36.9

This year:
SF - Roy, PER = 20.0
SG - Blake, PER = 9.5
Combined PER= 29.5

Difference = -7.4 or -20%

By forcing Roy and Blake to play out of position, the combined production from our small forward and shooting guard positions are down 20% compared to last season - THAT is the biggest reason why our offense is so much less efficient this season than last - NOT Andre Miller vs. Steve Blake at the starting PG position.

Concerning Miller this season vs. Blake last season the data you presented seems to indicate it's a wash (Blake 2008-09 PER = 14.4, Miller 2009-10 PER = 14.3). I disagree. In addition to the very small sample size, Miller's PER as our starting PG is much higher than his total PER of 14.3. Prior to the first five games of this season, Miller has not had to come off the bench since his rookie year. It's not a role that suits him. Prior to moving into the starting line-up, Miller's PER was down in the single digits. Now that he has been starting for 8 games, he has been able to pull his total PER up to 14.3. I don't know of a site that gives PER splits for starter vs. reserve roles, but basketball-reference does give most basic stats for these different roles. If you look at Miller's stats as a starter vs. his stats as a reserve, you will see both the raw stats and the per-minute stats are MUCH better over all as a starter than as a reserve. If you do the math, you will see his PTS/36 and REB/36 are both up considerably as a starter, as is his FG% (0.432 vs. 0.316). His APG is up, slightly, but his AST/36 is down slightly. Over all, based on his increased scoring, rebounding and much higher shooting percentage, it is reasonable to conclude that his PER as a starter is significantly higher than his total seasonal PER of 14.3. Therefore, Miller as a starter in 2009-10 IS an upgrade over Blake as a starter (PER = 14.4) in 2008-09.

So, rather than bash Steve Blake. I would like to see him, Brandon Roy and Andre Miller all put in roles where they can thrive. In my opinion, that means moving Roy back to his best, most natural position of shooting guard where he will once again have an advantage over his opponents, moving Steve Blake to back-up PG where he will enjoy much better match ups than he does at starting shooting guard, and let Andre Miller continue to start at PG where he is (as a starter) outproducing Blake both this season and last. That means moving Martell back into the starting line-up. This will have the added benefit of improving our team defense and rebounding.

BNM

Its like talking to a Rock....very difficult

 

[blazerboy30]

As I suspected, not a single poster can tell me how Miller is an upgrade over what Blake provided last season.

Snarky comments can't hide how the offense is much worse so far this year than it was last year

No, I don't. I just think Miller has been even crappier than Blake was last year, at least so far this year.

The offense sucks under Miller, but the defense is much better.

Roy was the primary ball-handler last year in the 4th. The team had a much better efficiency last year than they do this year, with Miller running the show.

Find me a data set that says this year's offense under Miller is thus far better than last year's offense under Blake.

Followed by...

I didn't make an argument. What's your point, Boob?

You make this too easy.

 

[OSUBlazerfan]

Originally Posted by PapaG

If Miller has been an upgrade thus far, I'd hate to see what a downgrade would look like. At this point, the Miller signing seems to be a complete dud, at least in terms of upgrading what BLANKY did last year as the starting PG.

This to me really makes me believe that you ARE making an argument.

Yea, he tried to make the same point about not making an argument. Yet the thread is littered with arguments, not good solid ones btw.

 

[Luther]

Wait until we're 40+ games into the season to start calling Miller a "dud"...He is a much better PG than Steve Blake and has shown that throughout his entire career.

 

[PapaG]

Wait until we're 40+ games into the season to start calling Miller a "dud"...He is a much better PG than Steve Blake and has shown that throughout his entire career.

Why. BLANKY'S already been deemed a "dud" after 13 games.

 

[PapaG]

It is this kind of "logic" that makes it hard for anyone to take your conclusions seriously.

Miller starting at PG is only ONE of several variables that are different this season than last.

Last year's starting line-up:

Center - Joel (for 43 games and Greg for the other 39)
PF - LaMarcus
SF - Batum
SG - Roy
PB - Blake

This year's starting line-up:
Center - Greg
PF - LaMarcus
SF - Roy
SG - Blake
PB - Miller

Notice that our starters this year are different than last year at 4 of the 5 positions (at the very least 3.5 out of 5 as Greg started almost half the games last season at center). Saying the Andre Miller is the only difference is a false assumption, and basing your conclusions on false assumptions renders those conclusions invalid.

I want to say it one more time, I'm not anti Blake - I'm anti starting both Blake and Miller together as it forces at least two of our starting five to play out of position. Roy is much better at SG, where he has excellent size and strength for the position, than he is at SF where he is severely undersized compared to other starting SFs. Roy's scoring and over all productivity (PER) are both down significantly this season. You want to blame that on playing with Andre Miller. You concluded that before they even took they court together that Roy and Miller could not co-exist in the starting backcourt. That conclusion was based on zero data. Now, because Roy's production is down, you chose to ignore the obvious cause (he's playing out of position) and use it to "prove" your original baseless conclusion (Roy and Miller can't co-exist). Roy can no longer overpower his opponent. Instead, he is the one that's getting overpowered by the bigger, stronger players that are guarding him and that he is forced to guard on the other end. So, he has trouble scoring against bigger stronger defenders and is worn out from trying to guard them on the other end. In my opinion, playing out of position at SF is the major reason for Roy's decreased productivity.

Miller and Blake also end up playing out of position. Blake plays shooting guard on offense, where he is now guarded by bigger, stronger opponents. As a result, his shooting percentages and over all productivity are both WAY down from last season. He no longer gets to spot up and shoot over the outstretched hand of 6'1" PGs, he now has to get his shot off with a 6'6" shooting guard charging at him. Big difference - and it explains why Blake's shooting percentages have dropped so dramatically (0.364 vs. 0.428 FG% and 0.365 vs. 0.427 3FG%)

Miller also ends up guarding bigger, stronger shooting guards on the other end, which puts him at a physical disadvantage and wears him out physically.

So, if you look at just he starting wing positions from last year compared to this year:

Last year:
SF - Batum, PER = 12.9
SG - Roy, PER = 24.0
Combined PER= 36.9

This year:
SF - Roy, PER = 20.0
SG - Blake, PER = 9.5
Combined PER= 29.5

Difference = -7.4 or -20%

By forcing Roy and Blake to play out of position, the combined production from our small forward and shooting guard positions are down 20% compared to last season - THAT is the biggest reason why our offense is so much less efficient this season than last - NOT Andre Miller vs. Steve Blake at the starting PG position.

Concerning Miller this season vs. Blake last season the data you presented seems to indicate it's a wash (Blake 2008-09 PER = 14.4, Miller 2009-10 PER = 14.3). I disagree. In addition to the very small sample size, Miller's PER as our starting PG is much higher than his total PER of 14.3. Prior to the first five games of this season, Miller has not had to come off the bench since his rookie year. It's not a role that suits him. Prior to moving into the starting line-up, Miller's PER was down in the single digits. Now that he has been starting for 8 games, he has been able to pull his total PER up to 14.3. I don't know of a site that gives PER splits for starter vs. reserve roles, but basketball-reference does give most basic stats for these different roles. If you look at Miller's stats as a starter vs. his stats as a reserve, you will see both the raw stats and the per-minute stats are MUCH better over all as a starter than as a reserve. If you do the math, you will see his PTS/36 and REB/36 are both up considerably as a starter, as is his FG% (0.432 vs. 0.316). His APG is up, slightly, but his AST/36 is down slightly. Over all, based on his increased scoring, rebounding and much higher shooting percentage, it is reasonable to conclude that his PER as a starter is significantly higher than his total seasonal PER of 14.3. Therefore, Miller as a starter in 2009-10 IS an upgrade over Blake as a starter (PER = 14.4) in 2008-09.

So, rather than bash Steve Blake. I would like to see him, Brandon Roy and Andre Miller all put in roles where they can thrive. In my opinion, that means moving Roy back to his best, most natural position of shooting guard where he will once again have an advantage over his opponents, moving Steve Blake to back-up PG where he will enjoy much better match ups than he does at starting shooting guard, and let Andre Miller continue to start at PG where he is (as a starter) outproducing Blake both this season and last. That means moving Martell back into the starting line-up. This will have the added benefit of improving our team defense and rebounding.

BNM

Great. I agree. BLANKY has been getting killed, while Miller gets a pass. The comparative stats tell me the Blazers have downgraded at PG. What is obvious is that the SG (BLANKY) is a downgrade as well.

It's a small sample size. I wanted to check the stats to see if Miller was an improvement on BLANKY'S 2008. The results surprised me, so I posted them.

 

[PapaG]

Followed by...






You make this too easy.

Those aren't arguments. They are comments based on stats presented in this thread.

That said, since you literally never answer a post of mine except to criticize me or try some lame "gotcha", I'm going to ignore you. I think we'll both be better of for it, because you really don't add anything substantive.

 

[Boob-No-More]

Great. I agree. BLANKY has been getting killed, while Miller gets a pass.

No Miller does not "get a pass". You've made sure of that ever since he was signed, let alone set foot on the court in a Blazers uniform. You ragged on him during training camp, you ragged on him during the preseason and you've continued to rag on him during the regular season, and you continue to rag on him in this thread. Please explain to me how your constant anti-Miller posts polluting this forum == getting a pass.

The comparative stats tell me the Blazers have downgraded at PG.

No, they don't. They tell you that Miller's TOTAL stats for 2009-10 are comparable to Blake's for 2008-09 (PER = 14.3 vs. PER = 14.4). But they also tell you that Miller's stats are MUCH better as a starter than they were coming off the bench. Give Miller enough games as the starter, and it will become crystal clear that he is a significant upgrade at PG over Steve Blake. Plus, unless you have a time machine, you can't have 2008-09 Steve Blake, you're stuck with 2009-10 Steve Blake who can't seem to throw a ball in the ocean these days (0.364 FG%) and has a PER of 9.5.

What is obvious is that the SG (BLANKY) is a downgrade as well.

A HUGE, HUGE, HUGE downgrade (from Roy's PER = 24.0 to Blake's PER = 9.5). It is not Blake's natural postion and it shows. He's a very capable back-up PG, or a marginal starting PG. He's NOT a starting SG. I can't understand why that isn't obvious to Nate.

Plus, playing Blake at SG forces our best player to play out of position, which negatively impacts his performance as well - which is obvious by looking at Roy's stats and by watching him struggle against bigger players in the games.

It's a small sample size. I wanted to check the stats to see if Miller was an improvement on BLANKY'S 2008. The results surprised me, so I posted them.

You reached your conclusion LONG before you looked at the data. So, it's only natural you would massage that data (Blake's 2008-09 stats vs. Miller's 2009-10 stats) to prop up your premature conclusion. As I pointed out in my previous post, Miller's perfomance as a starting PG this season is better than Blake's was last season - AND our reduced offensivive efficiency is a result of out best player being forced out of position so that Blake, with a PER of 9.5 can also continue to start and play out of position at SG.

We have yet to see a starting backcourt of Roy and Miller. Claiming they cannot co-exist is baseless until we do. It's pretty obvious that forcing Roy and Blake to play out of position hurts our offensive efficiency. Again, I think the best solution is to let all three players play a role where they can thrive. Those roles are: Roy starting SG, Miller starting SG and Blake back-up PG.

BNM

 

[hasoos]

The thing I don't understand is why this thread is concentrating on Miller vs Blanky. To me, it is about Blanky vs Rudy vs Bayless. At least with the current lineup configuration.

 

[blazerboy30]

Those aren't arguments. They are comments based on stats presented in this thread.

That said, since you literally never answer a post of mine except to criticize me or try some lame "gotcha", I'm going to ignore you. I think we'll both be better of for it, because you really don't add anything substantive.

Probably a good idea for you. If you can't have an intelligent conversation and back up your own nonsensical arguments, you should just ignore the people that call you out on them.

If you want me (or anybody else for that matter) to answer a post of your's, post it in a logical, non-leading (without your obvious preconceived bias) and non-trolling manner.

 

[paintslinger57]

Ive only seen three games live this season but in the three games miller seemed like a better point guard. Not as good of a shooter as Blake but he is the first person I have seen get Greg the ball where he wants it. Greg is a feast of famine player and miller to me has been the best guy at getting him good touches early on. I think that Webster has to play with Miller because Miller can't shoot. So either way off the bench or starting you have to have either Webster or Rudy play with mill to help stretch the floor. I hate starting Miller and Blake we are already having trouble figuring out who to run the offense through now we are trying to put 3 guys who want to run the floor starting together, who does that leave to run the floor with the bench team? I think eventually we will start Miller, Roy, Webster, LA, Oden I blame this all Nate right now he came into the preseason basically set on rotations now we have a couple of injuries and the chemistry doesn't seem to be there.

 

[RoyToy]

Why. BLANKY'S already been deemed a "dud" after 13 games.

More like his whole career.

 

[PapaG]

18 minutes, 2 assists, 7 TOs.

I'd run an update, but...

 

[MARIS61]

Can we trade 2009 Blake for 2008 Blake?

Easily.

This team minus Miller plus Sergio = last years team.

Miller is like SAR. Great on paper, teamkiller in reality.

 

[MARIS61]

The thing I don't understand is why this thread is concentrating on Miller vs Blanky. To me, it is about Blanky vs Rudy vs Bayless. At least with the current lineup configuration.

That's because you refuse to admit the obvious.

Miller is the problem.

 

[Ed O]

18 minutes, 2 assists, 7 TOs.

I'd run an update, but...

But no one cares?

Ed O.

 

[PapaG]

But no one cares?

Ed O.

Obviously people care.

 

[PapaG]

Hmmmm...