Andre Miller--a changed man

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
OSUBlazerfan said:
Good Stuff right there
Click to expand...

Yep, too bad it took as long as it did, and got as bad as it did, before the coach would put him in a role that would allow him to succeed. Andre Miller was not signed to be our back-up PG. He was signed because he was an upgrade over Steve Blake. He should have been the starter from the first day of training camp.

The whole notion that him and Roy can't coexist was pure fabrication that was used as an excuse to justify McMillan's pig headed instance on starting Blake. That ridiculous fallacy was completely disproved as soon as Roy and Miller were allowed to actually play together in their natural positions and roles. Before the hamstring injury, Roy was playing MUCH better with Miller starting than when Blake was starting. Roy plays better beside Miller, Miller plays better as a starter, Blake is playing better now that he's coming off the bench, Martell is playing a LOT better with Andre starting. Andre Miller as our starting PG from day one should have been a no brainer. It baffles me that it wasn't.

BNM
 
The money line from the story:

Miller said he's not going to force anything or try to be fake. But it appears he is more at ease, which has translated into some remarkable play of late. Miller said he doesn't care about stats, except one: The Blazers are 20-9 when he starts. They are 7-9 when he doesn't.
Click to expand...

Nice article by Quick, it appears he might be trying to mend a rift he helped open up early in the season, but whatever it took to shake Andre out of his funk and shake Nate out of his stubborn insistence in relegating Miller to the bench, I'm glad it's happened.

Dre' is playing (now) pretty much exactly like how I hoped/expected he would when they inked him.
 
Boob-No-More said:
Yep, too bad it took as long as it did, and got as bad as it did, before the coach would put him in a role that would allow him to succeed. Andre Miller was not signed to be our back-up PG. He was signed because he was an upgrade over Steve Blake. He should have been the starter from the first day of training camp.

The whole notion that him and Roy can't coexist was pure fabrication that was used as an excuse to justify McMillan's pig headed instance on starting Blake. That ridiculous fallacy was completely disproved as soon as Roy and Miller were allowed to actually play together in their natural positions and roles. Before the hamstring injury, Roy was playing MUCH better with Miller starting than when Blake was starting. Roy plays better beside Miller, Miller plays better as a starter, Blake is playing better now that he's coming off the bench, Martell is playing a LOT better with Andre starting. Andre Miller as our starting PG from day one should have been a no brainer. It baffles me that it wasn't.

BNM
Click to expand...

To be fair they couldn't coexist running the same style of offense that this team played last year. Miller as an off-the-ball spot up shooter is a terrible, terrible thing -- I'm just glad the team has discovered that it's OK to let Dre' run the show a little bit and make life easier for Brandon.

The best part of all this? Dre's improved play almost completely dovetails with Brandon and LMA's improved play -- the trick will be getting Greg on track without derailing everyone else next season.
 
Unfortunately, I still believe that Miller plays at his best when Roy is not on the court. And I still believe that Mc Millan's idea for Miller to play most of his minutes (but still play starter's minutes overall!) when Roy was not on the court was a sound decision. I think Miller was wrong to perceive that as a lack of respect for his accomplishments over the years.

Certainly Miller is a great asset to the team, but I do not think he will ever be an ideal backcourt mate for Brandon Roy. It's too bad that he hasn't been able to improve his three point shooting over the years (as Jason Kidd did); that would certainly help. However, hopefully he will be able to improve the effectiveness of the rest of the team to such an extent that it won't matter that he and Roy don't complement each other. He can also be there to take up the scoring load when needed.
 
I'm not sold on Miller. Way too many TO's.
 
Nikolokolus said:
To be fair they couldn't coexist running the same style of offense that this team played last year. Miller as an off-the-ball spot up shooter is a terrible, terrible thing -- I'm just glad the team has discovered that it's OK to let Dre' run the show a little bit and make life easier for Brandon.
Click to expand...

Only a fool would attempt to play Miller in that role. Nate had all summer, all of training camp and all of the preseason to adapt his offensive game plan to the talents of his players. He chose not to do so and chose, instead, to stick with the familiar, but clearly inferior talents of Steve Blake. That was what caused all the problems that followed.

One of the big reasons given for the signing of Andre Miller was to take some pressure off Brandon Roy by adding a smart, veteran PG who could help run the offense. Why then did it take so long for this to happen?

BNM
 
He averages 2.2 TO's per game in less than 30 minutes. And in the last 2 games where he's supposedly been so good he's had 10 TO's. That's way too many.
 
tlongII said:
He averages 2.2 TO's per game in less than 30 minutes. And in the last 2 games where he's supposedly been so good he's had 10 TO's. That's way too many.
Click to expand...

Last game.

http://scores.espn.go.com/nba/boxscore?gameId=300123008

13 assists - 2 turnovers, 4 rebounds and 2 steals.

Game before that.

http://scores.espn.go.com/nba/boxscore?gameId=300122002

8 assists - 6 turnovers, 8 rebounds and 2 steals.

So in the last two games, you claim he has had 10 turnovers and that is way to many. Well, you are wrong. You are being lazy, not looking up stats and just crying about Miller for who knows why.

21 assists, 4 steals. Im my opinion, a steal washes out a TO. TO means you lost a possession. A steal means you gain a possession. To me, they wash.

So. Andre has had 21 assists to 8 TOs, while earning back 4 of those TOs in the last two games. WTF more do you want man? A reach around from the guy too?

Edit - and he only averages 2.1 TO\Game. Where do you get your stats?
 
BenDavis503 said:
Last game.

http://scores.espn.go.com/nba/boxscore?gameId=300123008

13 assists - 2 turnovers, 4 rebounds and 2 steals.

Game before that.

http://scores.espn.go.com/nba/boxscore?gameId=300122002

8 assists - 6 turnovers, 8 rebounds and 2 steals.

So in the last two games, you claim he has had 10 turnovers and that is way to many. Well, you are wrong. You are being lazy, not looking up stats and just crying about Miller for who knows why.

21 assists, 4 steals. Im my opinion, a steal washes out a TO. TO means you lost a possession. A steal means you gain a possession. To me, they wash.

So. Andre has had 21 assists to 8 TOs, while earning back 4 of those TOs in the last two games. WTF more do you want man? A reach around from the guy too?

Edit - and he only averages 2.1 TO\Game. Where do you get your stats?
Click to expand...

Sorry, you're right. I looked at his Philly game instead of Detroit. So in his last 3 games he's had 12 TO's. Still way too many.
 
He averages 2.2 TO's per game as shown on nba.com. Get your facts straight Ben. I don't want to keep pwning you, but I will if I have to. :lol:
 
tlongII said:
Sorry, you're right. I looked at his Philly game instead of Detroit. So in his last 3 games he's had 12 TO's. Still way too many.
Click to expand...

So what assists to turnover ratio would be acceptable for you? Since 2.1 is not good, IYO. I am just curious.

Tony Parker - 2.8
Steve Nash - 3.9
Chris Paul - 2.3
Rajon Rondo - 2.9
Jason Kidd - 2.2
Deron Williams - 3.3
LeBron James - 3.6
Derrick Rose - 2.9

Some of the best passers in the league today all have a higher a\to ratio. And not many play more than 4 minutes more per game than Miller.
 
BenDavis503 said:
So what assists to turnover ratio would be acceptable for you? Since 2.1 is not good, IYO. I am just curious.

Tony Parker - 2.8
Steve Nash - 3.9
Chris Paul - 2.3
Rajon Rondo - 2.9
Jason Kidd - 2.2
Deron Williams - 3.3
LeBron James - 3.6
Derrick Rose - 2.9

Some of the best passers in the league today all have a higher a\to ratio. And not many play more than 4 minutes more per game than Miller.
Click to expand...

All of those guys have the ball in their hands a lot more than Miller.
 
Guys could we have a thread that doesn't end in a pissing match? (no pun intended)
 
its all getting a little predictable...
 
Some of the TOs is because some players, especially rookies, don't expect the pass.

I disagree about Miller not being able to play with Roy when Roy takes it to the basket and then passes out for a shot. Those shots don't have to be 3 pts shots they can be mid range jumpers. Miller can hit those no problem. That is a art that has been lost in the NBA because of the 3 point line.
 
Nice to read.

However, at some point it'd have been nice if Quick had asked Nate if he still felt he made the right decision at training camp, and that he still felt that the best players were playing from day one as he had promised.

Too much of this article seems about Miller's growth, when this was really all about Nate. Nate fucked up in preseason by not starting Miller. Miller gets pissed off and demoralized. The Blazers lose too many games. When all other bad options are exhausted and Miller blows up, Nate finally does the right thing. Miller unsurprisingly goes right back to doing what he's done his entire career--playing really good point guard basketball. And somehow this about Miller's change? Whuh?
 
Nikolokolus said:
To be fair they couldn't coexist running the same style of offense that this team played last year. Miller as an off-the-ball spot up shooter is a terrible, terrible thing
Click to expand...

Miller also would make a really lousy center or power forward or color commentator or Blazer Dancer or team mascot. Thank god we don't have to waste another 30 games to establish that too.
 
This article perfectly illustrates why I hate the Oregonian's Blazer coverage. Quick sees the world in terms of toddler psychology. He likes the word "pout." His fetish for body language knows no bounds. He mentions it 3 times in the article. What an infantile performance.
 
where is Rocketeer showing up to say "I told you so" now? ;) jk Rocketeer.
 
Boob-No-More said:
Only a fool would attempt to play Miller in that role. Nate had all summer, all of training camp and all of the preseason to adapt his offensive game plan to the talents of his players. He chose not to do so and chose, instead, to stick with the familiar, but clearly inferior talents of Steve Blake. That was what caused all the problems that followed.

One of the big reasons given for the signing of Andre Miller was to take some pressure off Brandon Roy by adding a smart, veteran PG who could help run the offense. Why then did it take so long for this to happen?
BNM
Click to expand...

Why did it tale so long? A half a season? This is why many smart GM's don't make mid season trades. It does take time. I think it was clear from comments from those who were at practice in the fall, that the combo of Roy and Millers was not a smooth transition. So Nate elected to go to what had worked in the past. Was that really foolish? It might have been wrong, but certainly it was not obvious at the time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

brsinepyce
Andre Miller's Agent Confirms Meet With Blazers.
2 3
Replies
85
Views
5K
oldguy
oldguy
TradeNurkicNow
Andre Miller wants a 3 year deal
Replies
20
Views
1K
RickyRubio
RickyRubio
STOMP
Andre Miller article
Replies
12
Views
2K
Minstrel
Minstrel
MIXUM
Andre Miller lashes out at all star selections
2
Replies
32
Views
2K
jlprk
jlprk
ABM
Andre Miller Should Start (Bust-a-Bucket)
Replies
19
Views
2K
ucatchtrout
ucatchtrout

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top