5/18, 4 Assists from the "PG" Miller in 38 Minutes

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Terry had twice the range as Andre, providing more legitimate shooting opportunities and the opportunity to spread the defense with 3's.

Andre can't hit consistently from beyond 12' so he's allowing the defense to pack it in and he's shooting when he has little chance of scoring, and we have little chance of rebounding his misses.

You didn't answer the question (no surprise there). The question had absolutely nothing to do with shooting range. That's a different issue. The question was related to FGA/AST ratio - a stat you brought up and claimed Miller's career FGA/AST ratio of 1.58 made him a selfish ballhog who is "all about making himself look better than his teammates".

So, by your definition, point guard A has a career FGA/AST ratio of 1.58 = selfish ballhog who is "all about making himself look better than his teammates"

by the same definition, point guard B with a career FGA/AST ratio of 1.63 is an even bigger, more selfish ballhog who is even more "all about making himself look better than his teammates".

That is your own definition and your own exact words.

So, if you believe that definition to be true, and that Andre Miller is a selfish ballhog who is "all about making himself look better than his teammates", then by your definition, so is Terry Porter.

The only other possible conclusion is that you are wrong and Andre Miller with a career FGA/AST ratio is NOT a selfish ballhog who "all about making himself look better than his teammates".

So which is it? Either both Andre and Terry are selfish ballhog, shoot first PGs, or neither of them are. Which is it?

BNM
 
Last edited:
Miller takes more shots than anybody else and the team is playing .500 basketball against 4 bad teams and 2 good teams.

I don't see where I posted anything that wasn't based in fact. Why does the truthful title of this thread and my commentary on it make me a "troll"? A "troll" isn't somebody who you don't agree with. I think BengalDuck is being foolish with his posts about Roy, but that certainly doesn't make him a "troll" in my view. :dunno:

We've had thread after thread bashing Travis Outlaw; are those posters "trolls"?

Miller isn't performing in the role that I assumed he would take on this team. For all of the talk about Roy/LMA adapting their game to Miller, it would be nice if Miller started to adapt his game to Roy/LMA/and especially Oden ASAP.
 
Miller isn't performing in the role that I assumed he would take on this team. For all of the talk about Roy/LMA adapting their game to Miller, it would be nice if Miller started to adapt his game to Roy/LMA/and especially Oden ASAP.

That'd be great. What i really like about Miller, though, is to not only adapt to players, but adapt to each GAME differently. See, last night, he wan't really able to adapt to Roy, LMA, or Oden, since neither was in the game all that much. And that has been the case a lot of the preseason when Miller has been on the floor. Same with Rudy. So he has adapted by taking on more of a role to help the team win. We don't know what will happen in mid-November, January, etc. Based on seeing the way he controls his pace and his shot selctions and passes, I would say that he will adapt to them when he is able to play with them more often.

In the 4th quarter last night, once Brandon entered the game, with 8.5 minutes left in the game, he shot 1-3. 2 of the attempts, and the make, were layups, and the 20 footer was with the shot clock expiring. He didn't force up jump shots, he didn't look to be a ball hog. He played off of Brandon, and off of Greg. He adapted to them being in the game quite well, and played off of them quite well. Well to the tune of a 22-5 run.

You can go further and break down his entire game, as opposed to just taking a simple pass at the box score, and assuming the worst. His first shot came at the beginning of the second quarter. he missed a long jumper to try to beat the shot clock. On the floor with him was Bayless, Joel, Outlaw, and Webster. he had assists on their next two made baskets. After that, greg quickly entered and left, and Juwan howard came in for Martell. Andre/Bayless/Travis/Juwan/Joel. He missed a jumper, and then a layup on a fast break.
Blake then came in for Bayless, and Batum for Outlaw. Miller/Blake/Batum/Juwan/Joel. He made a layup. Then missed a layup. Then missed a shot right before the half he put up with the shot clock expiring. So in the first half, he went 1-6. he played aminute and a half with brandon. Hardly stealing shots from him. Played 45 seconds with Greg. Didn't steal shots from him either. In the third quarter, he didn't play at all with brandon, and played a minute and a half with Greg. Played in the third quarter, again, primarily with Joel, Travis, Blake or Bayless, Juwan, batum. There were two more instances in the third quarter where he had to force up a shot with the clock expiring. And one more in the 4th before Brandon entered. So I have counted I believe at least 5 attempts of his that were trying to beat the clock. And a good majority of his attempts with neither Greg or Brandon on the floor. In other words, he adapted well to the game, and what was needed of him. And that's something I have never seen Steve Blake do. Yes, Steve will have his big scoring nights. They're nights where he is hitting his iopen jumpers, and the team feeds him. It's not him making an effort to score because it is needed from him. He doesn't generally adapt to changing situations. Really, he doesn't have the ability to. he is what he is. That's why miller is better for this team, and will prove to be better for this team. Too often, when guys went cold, we were forced to watch them continue to be cold, because we had that and spot up shooters. Miller gives us one mroe player with the ability to score when it might be needed from the team. The ability to try to make something happen when nobody else is able or willing to.

rr7
 
Last edited:
The other thing Miller gives us is another player that can penetrate and draw fouls and get to the FT line. This is a huge asset as it gets the other teams bigs in foul trouble and also lets us score with the clock stopped - very important when coming from behind in the 4th quarter.

Last night, Miller drew one foul each on Nene, Andersen and Martin - Denver's three best bigs.

BNM
 
Also, on top of drawing fouls, it's usually easier to get tips on a missed layup, when the defenders will converge on Miller, than it is on a long missed jumper, which often lead to longer rebounds, and sometimes, fast breaks. Miller missed 3 layups last night. All 3 were rebounded by the TrailBlazers.

rr7
 
Last edited:
Miller isn't performing in the role that I assumed he would take on this team. For all of the talk about Roy/LMA adapting their game to Miller, it would be nice if Miller started to adapt his game to Roy/LMA/and especially Oden ASAP.

QFT, there is no arguing that. Oden looks better I think, but there is something going on with LA and Roy, wether it is them, their minutes, jitters, or... something else... I want to see things get worked out sooner than later. Most pundits said Roy's numbers would go down with Miller, but that LA and Oden would look better... so far only Oden appears to be getting more looks.
 
Last edited:
Given that about 1/3 of his FGA were threes (257 of 764), every single one of those would have to have been buzzer-beaters for your claim to be even remotely accurate.

You make this too easy...

Anyone who watches regularly knows who Nate designated for out-of-timeout desperation shots. They also know most of Sergio's 3's were in that situation. Quibbling over tiny fractions makes you appear to be a newbie who doesn't know what he's talking about.
 
weren't most of our buzzer beater attempts outlaw airballs or blake clankers? I would estimate Sergio's buzzer beater attempts to be more like 10 than 250, but hey, I only watched every game, what do I know.
 
I take it you only saw the box score? Haven't we all learned that box scores do not tell the story of the game? Miller played great and I am really glad we have him. Now that I have seen him twice this year with the team.

Miller playing great is not the issue.

Miller played great, or good if you want to lose the hyperbole, on his 4 previous teams.

His teams however, all played like crap under his "direction". Then they got rid of him.

I'd be more excited if he played like crap, but our team played great.
 
Miller playing great is not the issue.

Miller played great, or good if you want to lose the hyperbole, on his 4 previous teams.

His teams however, all played like crap under his "direction". Then they got rid of him.

I'd be more excited if he played like crap, but our team played great.

That would be a truly awesome paradox! I like your thinking on this one.
 
Okay, thanks for pointing out the truth that Sergio is way closer to being a true PG like John Stockton than Andre will ever be, regardless if you like it or not.

There's a huge difference between Sergio and "a true PG like Stockton". A true PG actually has the ability to contribute in ways other than flashy passes, something Sergio has yet to demonstrate. But you knew that.
 
Total bullshit. Travis didn't force one shot with the shot clock winding down due to Andre Miller. Travis did force a lot of shots, but it was his own doing, not Millers. Blake had plenty of time to catch and shoot as well. His shot simply was not falling last night. Try watching the game next time rather than making up totally inaccurate scenarios.
BNM

No tv so far, as you well know.

But the radio play by play had the ball in Miller's hands 'til very late in the clock most of the time. It sounded like Miller against the other team, with other Blazers mentioned primarily in the final 3-5 secs of the few posessions that didn't end with a Miller attempt.

I'll factor in your well-known hatred of Travis and Steve and your penchant for lying by omission and assume I'm spot on with my impression of the game.
 
You didn't answer the question (no surprise there). The question had absolutely nothing to do with shooting range. That's a different issue. The question was related to FGA/AST ratio - a stat you brought up and claimed Miller's career FGA/AST ratio of 1.58 made him a selfish ballhog who is "all about making himself look better than his teammates".

So, by your definition, point guard A has a career FGA/AST ratio of 1.58 = selfish ballhog who is "all about making himself look better than his teammates"

by the same definition, point guard B with a career FGA/AST ratio of 1.63 is an even bigger, more selfish ballhog who is even more "all about making himself look better than his teammates".

That is your own definition and your own exact words.

So, if you believe that definition to be true, and that Andre Miller is a selfish ballhog who is "all about making himself look better than his teammates", then by your definition, so is Terry Porter.

The only other possible conclusion is that you are wrong and Andre Miller with a career FGA/AST ratio is NOT a selfish ballhog who "all about making himself look better than his teammates".

So which is it? Either both Andre and Terry are selfish ballhog, shoot first PGs, or neither of them are. Which is it?

BNM

That is such a heavily-edited distortion of anything I have ever posted that I'll just ignore most of it.

In shooting range, Andre is closer to Joel than he is to Brandon.

Brandon can hit over anyone from anywhere.

Andre can barely leave the paint without leaving his shot behind. Most PF's have better range.

Obviously Brandon should get many attempts.

Andre and Joel, many less.

Gosh, I hope you can grasp this complicated concept. :dunno:
 
Given that easily 1/3 of his attempts were buzzer-beater long shots taken on Nate's direction his true stat would be closer to Stockton's otherwise.

Ah yes, the old-dribble-around-pointlessly-wasting-time-and-then-jacking-up-a-low-percentage-shot-as-the-shot-clock-expires play. You can hardly give Nate credit for inventing that play. It has been in the Blazers play book since at least the Dunleavy days. In fact, it was Damon's inability to properly execute this play (i.e. make the shot) that often led to him being benched in favor of Greg Anthony during the fourth quarter of close games.

It became a staple of the Blazers offense during the Mo Cheeks era. He seemed to call in just about every other play.

Given Steve Blake's ability to actually make an open shot, I can see why Nate left it in the Blazers playbook. However, given his back-ups complete inability to make an open shot if his life depended on it, I do blame note for not eradicating it from the playbook when Sergio was here.

With the exception that Damon occasionally made the shot, seeing Sergio (aka Dribble Boy) out there running that play time, after time, after time reminded me of the good old days when Damon and Nick Van Exel shared PG duty of the Blazers.

The good news is Miller seems to know his own limitations and rarely calls that play for himself the way Sergio did. He seems to prefer to attack the defense, draw fouls and get to the FT line.

BNM
 
That is such a heavily-edited distortion of anything I have ever posted that I'll just ignore most of it.

In shooting range, Andre is closer to Joel than he is to Brandon.

Brandon can hit over anyone from anywhere.

Andre can barely leave the paint without leaving his shot behind. Most PF's have better range.

Obviously Brandon should get many attempts.

Andre and Joel, many less.

Gosh, I hope you can grasp this complicated concept. :dunno:

Stop avoiding the question. Shooting range has nothing to do with FGA/AST. There is no mention of distance in that formula.

So, if point guard A has a career FGA/AST ratio of 1.58 and is, by your definition, a selfish, ballhog, shoot first PG who "is all about making himself look better than his teammates", what does that make point guard B who has a career FGA/AST ratio of 1.63?

It's a simple, direct question that requires a simple, direct answer. Don't try to avoid answering it (again) by bringing in unrelated variables and other players. Just focus on the question, as asked, and answer it.

BNM
 
Stop avoiding the question. Shooting range has nothing to do with FGA/AST. There is no mention of distance in that formula.

So, if point guard A has a career FGA/AST ratio of 1.58 and is, by your definition, a selfish, ballhog, shoot first PG who "is all about making himself look better than his teammates", what does that make point guard B who has a career FGA/AST ratio of 1.63?

It's a simple, direct question that requires a simple, direct answer. Don't try to avoid answering it (again) by bringing in unrelated variables and other players. Just focus on the question, as asked, and answer it.

BNM

Stop avoiding reality. The nonsensical question was only asked to avoid answering my point, and is unanswerable in the form you offer it.

"If poster A dislikes Miller and poster B dislikes Travis and Steve, does that make Joel a PG?" :dunno:

Shot attempts are, or should be, directly related to the likelyhood of them being the best shot the team can get. That's Miller's job assignment.

He took 18 shots and made only 5, while assisting only 4 times in 38 minutes.

You would have burned Sergio at the stake for such a dismal performance, had he ever done that poorly. :ohno:

It will be a rare time indeed when Andre Miller is the best shooter we have on the court.
 
I'll factor in your well-known hatred of Travis and Steve and your penchant for lying by omission and assume I'm spot on with my impression of the game.

My well known hatred of Steve????? Please provide ONE example. I have ALWAYS been VERY pro Steve Blake.

Here's just one example of my "well-known hatred" of Steve Blake"

Boob-No-More said:
OK, James Jones has been absolutely great this month and leads the NBA in three point shooting at 0.534.

However, here's something I bet nobody else here realized (until now): James Jones has actually been the Blazer second best 3-point shooter this month. For the month of December:

Code:
             3FG   3FGA   3FG%
James Jones   29    54    0.537
Steve Blake   27    49    0.551

How amazing is that? To have two guys both shooting well above 50% from 3-point range for an entire month?

As I was watching the game today, it was obvious just what a smart player Blake is. He knows when to shoot and when not to. He doesn't force anything. He also takes care of the ball and doesn't turn it over. He'll never be a star, but is a great role player and glue guy. If he had re-signed with Denver instead of Portland, I seriously doubt it we'd be in first place right now - Denver would be better and we'd be worse.

BNM

You're a liar and a troll. Plain and simple.

BNM
 
I would have been thrilled if sergio could have shot 18 and made 5 buckets, with a career average of 3.6 he never was productive enough to make such a comparison.
 
Stop avoiding reality.

Stop avoiding the question.

Player A: FGA/AST = 1.58
Player B: FGA/AST = 1.63

Which one is the selfish ballhog, shoot first PG?

Answer the question.

BNM
 
Ah yes, the old-dribble-around-pointlessly-wasting-time-and-then-jacking-up-a-low-percentage-shot-as-the-shot-clock-expires play. You can hardly give Nate credit for inventing that play.BNM

Again, you distort and re-write my posts to mean the opposite.

Pretty sure you and everyone else knows I'm talking about being put in cold off the bench with 1.3 secs on the clock for the halfcourt shot so Roy and Blake's stats don't take a hit on a prayer shot. It was often Sergio's first touch of the game at the end of the 1st or 3rd quarter.

It was a regular occurrence the last 3 seasons and you claim to attend games.
 
You would have burned Sergio at the stake for such a dismal performance, had he ever done that poorly.

I think you mean "if Sergio would have ever done that well".

Name one time in Sergio's entire 3 year NBA career when he played 38 minutes and committed ZERO turn overs. Name one time in his entire 3 year when Sergio got to the FT line 9 times in one game. Name one time in Sergio's entire 3 year career when he drew three fouls on the opponents three best big men. Name one time when Sergio held one of the best PGs in the game to 11 points on 2-6 shooting. Name one time where he did ANY of those things, let alone all of them in the same game.

You are again trying to avoid the question. This thread has nothing to do with Sergio Rodriguez. He no longer plays for the Blazers. They gladly paid the worst team in the league to take him off their hands - where he is now 3rd on their depth chart at PG. That makes him the worst PG on the worst team in the NBA. Weren't you saying that Sergio was going to flourish in Westphal's system. Unless your definition of flourish includes improving his towel waving and hand clapping skills, you're WRONG once again.

BNM
 

Totally true, and not the least bit surprising to anyone who has ever seen the poor shooting, no defense, human turn over machine play a minute of basketball.

He'll be out of the league after this season - if Sacramento doesn't cut him sooner to free up a roster spot for some promising D-leaguer. Perhaps he can still carve out a nice career for himself as a 3rd string PG in some obscure European league - Lichtenstein perhaps.

BNM
 
I would have been thrilled if sergio could have shot 18 and made 5 buckets, with a career average of 3.6 he never was productive enough to make such a comparison.

Good PG's rarely take 18 attempts, especially if they only make 5.

But here is Sergio taking 14 shots, the most he ever took in an NBA game.

He made 11 of them (78.6%) for 23 pts, threw 10 assists, had 4 def boards, 3 steals, 4 to, 3 pf, in 30 minutes.

[video=youtube;YcqJ1sBLfU8]
 
Good PG's rarely take 18 attempts, especially if they only make 5.

But here is Sergio taking 14 shots, the most he ever took in an NBA game.

He made 11 of them (78.6%) for 23 pts, threw 10 assists, had 4 def boards, 3 steals, 4 to, 3 pf, in 30 minutes.



As they say (whomever "they" are) even the sun shines on a dog's ass once in awhile ...
 
As they say (whomever "they" are) even the sun shines on a dog's ass once in awhile ...

That was Sergio as he came to this team 3 years ago.

Wow, player-developer Nate worked wonders with all that talent, didn't he? :sigh:
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top