Andre Miller Underperformed in the Playoffs

[BGrantFan]

I didn't say anything about him being any kind of second option. Given that everyone knew that Roy was going to miss the playoffs, LMA had time to prepare himself to be THE GUY, but didn't step in and fill the void with Roy out.

Sorry, I confused your post with a part of Minstrel's. LA played to his norm, which is a top 20 player in terms of the minutes he played. Miller elevated his game in Game One, then choked when his deficiencies were exposed.

 

[Minstrel]

Be like Mike.

Career 28.3 PPG, 27.9 PER
Playoffs 33.4 PPG, 28.6 PER

Be like LeBron
Career 24.8 PPG, 26.9 PER
Playoffs 28.6 PPG, 27.1 PER

Amare
Career 22.5 PPG, 22.6 PER
Playoffs 24.1 PPG, 24.1 PER

The PER difference is not particularly significant (especially Jordan's, a player most used as an example as "stepping it up") and, like the PPG difference, it's largely tied to the fact that all those players took more shots in the playoffs. One flaw in PER is that you can raise it by taking more shots, as long as you aren't too inefficient. That is, you don't necessarily have to play better...shooting more can raise it. This is mostly an issue with high volume scorers.

Again...if the player has a higher level, they should be playing at it all the time or most of the time. If they truly are playing better in the playoffs (which I generally think is not the case), it means that they were underperforming to that point.

 

[Denny Crane]

The PER difference is not particularly significant (especially Jordan's, a player most used as an example as "stepping it up") and, like the PPG difference, it's largely tied to the fact that all those players took more shots in the playoffs. One flaw in PER is that you can raise it by taking more shots, as long as you aren't too inefficient. That is, you don't necessarily have to play better...shooting more can raise it. This is mostly an issue with high volume scorers.

Again...if the player has a higher level, they should be playing at it all the time or most of the time. If they truly are playing better in the playoffs (which I generally think is not the case), it means that they were underperforming to that point.

It sure looks like that for a lot of teams and players, the real season starts with the playoffs. So they play hard enough to win enough games in the regular season.

 

[BGrantFan]

The PER difference is not particularly significant (especially Jordan's, a player most used as an example as "stepping it up") and, like the PPG difference, it's largely tied to the fact that all those players took more shots in the playoffs. One flaw in PER is that you can raise it by taking more shots, as long as you aren't too inefficient. That is, you don't necessarily have to play better...shooting more can raise it. This is mostly an issue with high volume scorers.

Again...if the player has a higher level, they should be playing at it all the time or most of the time. If they truly are playing better in the playoffs (which I generally think is not the case), it means that they were underperforming to that point.

Roy is one of the few players to elevate his game by over 2 in the playoffs versus the regular season. He did it last year. He didn't do himself any favors with his critics by playing hurt this postseason, but I am positive his teammates appreciated it.

He's our star. His teammates now this. He has one of the most complete offensive games in the NBA.

 

[Minstrel]

Roy is one of the few players to elevate his game by over 2 in the playoffs versus the regular season.

Then he should have played at that level during the regular season. Purposely playing worse during the regular season maybe cost them seeding last year.

Or perhaps he didn't "elevate" his game, because he was already playing at his best during the regular season, and 7 games is a small sample size.

I think it's the second. If you're hostile to Roy, you'd think it was the first.

 

[jlprk]

Many times in NBA history, an older (or chronically injured) player has been "saved" for the playoffs. The coach decided to have him play beneath his capacity in the regular season, to maximize his energy (or minimize the effect of his injuries that just won't go away) in the playoff season.

 

[oldmangrouch]

There is a difference between somebody being a "2nd banana" because that's their role, and being a 2nd banana because that's the best they can be.

If Jordan had gone down with an injury, I'm sure Pip would have increased his scoring average. The same with Bird/McHale or Magic/Worthy.

That wouldn't be because they were dogging it before the injury - it would be because their role changed. It appears that LMA can't adjust to a changing role. In that sense, he failed to "step up" and do what the team needed him to do.

 

[ehizzy3]

Yet your post directed at me isn't an example of you seeking attention? Hilariously ironic.

no actually it's not. lol

 

[BGrantFan]

Then he should have played at that level during the regular season. Purposely playing worse during the regular season maybe cost them seeding last year.

One of your weaker efforts.

Later

 

[BGrantFan]

There is a difference between somebody being a "2nd banana" because that's their role, and being a 2nd banana because that's the best they can be.

If Jordan had gone down with an injury, I'm sure Pip would have increased his scoring average. The same with Bird/McHale or Magic/Worthy.

That wouldn't be because they were dogging it before the injury - it would be because their role changed. It appears that LMA can't adjust to a changing role. In that sense, he failed to "step up" and do what the team needed him to do.

Aldridge increased his scoring average in the playoffs over what he averaged in the regular season, and he did it by being the focus of Phoenix's defense. The biggest problem Aldridge has is he can't create his own offense. That wasn't going to chage with Roy out. We needed the primary ballhandler to elevate his game, and in that aspect, Miller failed miserably.

 

[Minstrel]

One of your weaker efforts.

Later

I'm afraid not. You still haven't explained why Roy would have a higher level of play, yet not use it in the regular season.

But I know your style, PapaG...once you run out of points to defend your point of view, you say something dismissive and finish with "Later" or "I'm done." Fair enough.

 

[BGrantFan]

I'm afraid not. You still haven't explained why Roy would have a higher level of play, yet not use it in the regular season.

But I know your style, PapaG...once you run out of points to defend your point of view, you say something dismissive and finish with "Later" or "I'm done." Fair enough.

Again with the PapaG stuff. Anyhow, if you really believe that Roy was holding back in the regular season, and therefore hurt the seeding last year, instead of playing at an elevated level over a 6 game sample, then my opinion of your basketball expertise has been wrong since I joined. Your premise is so silly to me that I honestly don't know how to answer it. You're now using Roy playing well in the playoffs last year to criticize his play during the regular season.

As for me running out of points, what does that even mean? Perhaps I should have titled the thread "Miller Overperformed in the Regular Season, and Also the Rest of His Career, Compared to the Phoenix Series"? Then, I could have posted how the real Andre Miller is the slug that we saw after Game 1 with a sub-13 PER, and how the rest of his career has been an example of him overperforming.

 

[Nikolokolus]

Again with the PapaG stuff. Anyhow, if you really believe that Roy was holding back in the regular season, and therefore hurt the seeding last year, instead of playing at an elevated level over a 6 game sample, then my opinion of your basketball expertise has been wrong since I joined. Your premise is so silly to me that I honestly don't know how to answer it. You're now using Roy playing well in the playoffs last year to criticize his play during the regular season.

As for me running out of points, what does that even mean? Perhaps I should have titled the thread "Miller Overperformed in the Regular Season, and Also the Rest of His Career, Compared to the Phoenix Series"? Then, I could have posted how the real Andre Miller is the slug that we saw after Game 1 with a sub-13 PER, and how the rest of his career has been an example of him overperforming.

If you aren't PapaG, you're his long lost twin. Seriously uncanny resemblance.

 

[Minstrel]

Again with the PapaG stuff. Anyhow, if you really believe that Roy was holding back in the regular season, and therefore hurt the seeding last year

Oh, PapaG, you make this too easy. This was my post:

Then he should have played at that level during the regular season. Purposely playing worse during the regular season maybe cost them seeding last year.

Or perhaps he didn't "elevate" his game, because he was already playing at his best during the regular season, and 7 games is a small sample size.

I think it's the second. If you're hostile to Roy, you'd think it was the first.

I hate playing the "learn2read" card, but you really should be more careful.

 

[BGrantFan]

you make this too easy. This was my post:

Or perhaps he didn't "elevate" his game, because he was already playing at his best during the regular season, and 7 games is a small sample size.

I think it's the second. If you're hostile to Roy, you'd think it was the first.

I still don't understand what your point was, unless it was "Andre Miller Underperformed in the Playoffs", because if you believe what you typed about Roy, the inverse is true about Miller this year. Excuses aside, he underperformed. If it makes you feel better, excuses aside, Roy was in the same camp, but only worse against Phoenix. Regarding last year, it seems that you're agreeing that Roy "overperformed" in last year's playoff series compared to his seasonal statistics.

I hate playing the "learn2read" card, but you really should be more careful.

You're heavy on the snark in this exchange, but very light on the substance, other than ultimately agreeing with the premise of this thread (by proxy).

 

[Minstrel]

I still don't understand what your point was

Part of this discussion has been about "stepping up" in the playoffs, due to Denny bringing it up about LMA failing to do so. I don't believe in the ability to magically become a better player in the playoffs. That tangent discussion isn't relevant to Miller, as far as I'm concerned.

You're heavy on the snark in this exchange

Thank you!

but very light on the substance, other than ultimately agreeing with the premise of this thread (by proxy).

Oh, I agree that Miller underperformed his seasonal stats. Small sample sizes can lead to outside-of-norm results. I don't think that means that Portland was just as well off with Blake at point guard. Miller offered more throughout the season, and in the playoffs he commanded Phoenix's best perimeter defender. It's bad luck for Portland that Roy was too banged up to take advantage of that benefit Miller provided.

 

[blazerboy30]

With what he did in the regular season.

No. Miller was good enough in Game 1 that the Suns had to completely change their defensive strategy and put their best defensive player on Miller. They also increased their focus on him.

In the regular season the opposing team didn't have the opportunity to put their best defensive player on Miller because Roy was there.

You're comparing apples to oranges and saying oranges underperform.

 

[blazerboy30]

Part of this discussion has been about "stepping up" in the playoffs, due to Denny bringing it up about LMA failing to do so. I don't believe in the ability to magically become a better player in the playoffs. That tangent discussion isn't relevant to Miller, as far as I'm concerned.

There can be a difference between "becoming a better player in the playoffs" and performing at a higher level in the playoffs. You can't ride a single player all game every game for the 82 game regular season. You can do so more in the playoffs with more rest and fewer games. Therefore, if you can ride your best player more in the playoffs, they may produce at a higher level, not "magically" become a better player.

 

[BGrantFan]

No. Miller was good enough in Game 1 that the Suns had to completely change their defensive strategy and put their best defensive player on Miller. They also increased their focus on him.

In the regular season the opposing team didn't have the opportunity to put their best defensive player on Miller because Roy was there.

You're comparing apples to oranges and saying oranges underperform.

Yet it's fair game to criticize Aldridge. I love this place. So many obvious inconsistent arguments, and the anger when the hypocrisy is exposed is top notch.

 

[MrSelfDestruct]

Yet it's fair game to criticize Aldridge. I love this place. So many obvious inconsistent arguments, and the anger when the hypocrisy is exposed is top notch.

And that's when the AirSoft guns get drawn. Careful, BGrantFan, a former poster was nearly killed by a poster's avatar.

 

[BGrantFan]

And that's when the AirSoft guns get drawn. Careful, BGrantFan, a former poster was nearly killed by a poster's avatar.

Um, OK. Thanks for the tip?

 

[Minstrel]

There can be a difference between "becoming a better player in the playoffs" and performing at a higher level in the playoffs. You can't ride a single player all game every game for the 82 game regular season. You can do so more in the playoffs with more rest and fewer games. Therefore, if you can ride your best player more in the playoffs, they may produce at a higher level, not "magically" become a better player.

I think players generally tend to gravitate toward their correct usage rates (through their own ability and coaches' decisions); that is, the usage rates that pretty much maximize their ability. They may deviate from it, up and down, at times, but I don't think they deviate enough to result in a player attaining a significantly different and better level of performance in the playoffs or "important games."

I agree that a team's best player(s) are likely to play more per game in the playoffs...so if you're talking about raw per game stats increasing, I don't disagree with that. I just don't think a player can choose/force himself to play better...the Blazers may have wanted/needed Aldridge to be better without a healthy Roy, but I don't think there's any way he could suddenly be better. Just because you promote a second/third option to first option doesn't mean he's got the talent for it.

 

[BGrantFan]

I think players generally tend to gravitate toward their correct usage rates (through their own ability and coaches' decisions); that is, the usage rates that pretty much maximize their ability. They may deviate from it, up and down, at times, but I don't think they deviate enough to result in a player attaining a significantly different and better level of performance in the playoffs or "important games."

I agree that a team's best player(s) are likely to play more per game in the playoffs...so if you're talking about raw per game stats increasing, I don't disagree with that. I just don't think a player can choose/force himself to play better...the Blazers may have wanted/needed Aldridge to be better without a healthy Roy, but I don't think there's any way he could suddenly be better. Just because you promote a second/third option to first option doesn't mean he's got the talent for it.

The clear beneficiary of Roy being out/ hobbled was Miller, who got to dominate the ball on offense in the playoffs. He underperformed when his number was called. I can't change reality; I can only comment on it.

 

[Minstrel]

I can't change reality

That destroys my entire belief system.

 

[BGrantFan]

That destroys my entire belief system.

Obviously. You couldn't even be snarky in this post, and went down a level to sarcasm.

 

[Minstrel]

Obviously. You couldn't even be snarky in this post, and went down a level to sarcasm.

Ah, PapaG...I wish I didn't continually disappoint you.

 

[BGrantFan]

I wish I didn't continually disappoint you.

Why would you think that you disappoint me as a poster? I get that you single out posters, and craft your arguments based on who is posting, regardless of the substance, but I can tell that your heart isn't in the battle this time. Instead, you're merely toeing the line of the Gang of 10, for reasons unknown. You know Miller was an underperformer in the playoffs, deep inside that lump of coal that you call a heart.

 

[BGrantFan]

Oh, and since people want me to be whoever Papag is, send me his account info, let me reset it, and I'll post under that name.

People seem to miss the guy, for whatever reason. If it adds to the board, I'm here for you in the doldrums of late spring/early summer.

 

[Minstrel]

Oh, and since people want me to be whoever Papag is, send me account, let me reset it, and I'll post under that name.

People seem to miss the guy, for whatever reason.

This is my favourite post of the year.

And yes, I certainly missed him. I'm glad he's back.

 

[Minstrel]

Why would you think that you disappoint me as a poster? I get that you single out posters, and craft your arguments based on who is posting, regardless of the substance, but I can tell that your heart isn't in the battle this time. Instead, you're merely toeing the line of the Gang of 10, for reasons unknown. You know Miller was an underperformer in the playoffs, deep inside that lump of coal that you call a heart.

Who's the Gang of 10?

And I already agreed with you in a previous post that Miller underperformed his regular season numbers, so I'm not sure how deep in my coal-like heart it is. I simply think he was still more valuable, in the playoffs, than Blake was...and significantly more valuable when the regular season is counted in.

And as far as "singling out" posters...I single out posters who post something I disagree with. And I target them with some mixture of basketball analysis and good-natured joking. I think that's a perfectly good way to participate here, though it's not everyone's style.