Bye, bye, Andre Miller

[Boob-No-More]

Your defense of Andre's shooting is laughable. He's shooting 8.3% on 3 pointers this season. Do you realize how AWFUL that is? Hell, even Rondo makes threes at a 30% clip. You simply must be able to stretch the defense from the point guard position if you want to have an elite team in my opinion.

Yeah, it sucks. However, I disagree with your premise you MUST be able to stretch the defense from the PG position. As long as you have one, or better, two legitimate 3-point threats from your guards and small forward position, it will open up the middle for your bigs. The Celtics have Ray Allen (0.473 3 FG%) and Paul Pierce (0.412 3 FG%). So, they don't NEED a PG who can shoot the three. Rondo may shoot a better (but still not good) 3FG%, but he's actually attempted one fewer 3-point shot than Andre Miller this season. So, he's not stretching anyone's defense with his outside shooting ability, Allen and Pierce do that.

Ditto for the Spurs. Tony Parker has only attempted 28 3-pointers all season with a 3FG% of 0.286. But, the Spurs have a shit load of other 3-point threats (Matt Bonner, 0.504 3FG% on 119 attempts, Richard Jefferson, 0.422 3FG% on 166 attempts, Gary Neal, 0.390 3FG% on 159 attempts and Manu Ginobili, 0.372 3FG% on 253 attempts). We don't. Our best 3-point shooter would be San Antonio's 4th best (barely). We've got Wes Matthews, 0.374 3FG% on 198 attempts, Rudy Fernandez, 0.329 3FG% on 173 attempts, Nicolas Batum, 0.313 3FG% on 163 attempts, and now Patty Mills, 0.323 3FG% on 65 attempts. If one, or two, of these guys could step up and consistently knock down an open 3-pointer, we wouldn't NEED our PG to stretch the defense. But, they can't. So, Miller, in spite of all the other things he does well, is the scape goat.

BNM

 

[Boob-No-More]

I'm sorry my post is a little strong. I didn't read all of your post and missed where you stated that criticism of Miller's 3 point shooting is valid.

No worries - I posted a follow-up anyway. It is a legitimate criticism.

BNM

 

[tlongII]

Yeah, it sucks. However, I disagree with your premise you MUST be able to stretch the defense from the PG position. As long as you have one, or better, two legitimate 3-point threats from your guards and small forward position, it will open up the middle for your bigs. The Celtics have Ray Allen (0.473 3 FG%) and Paul Pierce (0.412 3 FG%). So, they don't NEED a PG who can shoot the three. Rondo may shoot a better (but still not good) 3FG%, but he's actually attempted one fewer 3-point shot than Andre Miller this season. So, he's not stretching anyone's defense with his outside shooting ability, Allen and Pierce do that.

Ditto for the Spurs. Tony Parker has only attempted 28 3-pointers all season with a 3FG% of 0.286. But, the Spurs have a shit load of other 3-point threats (Matt Bonner, 0.504 3FG% on 119 attempts, Richard Jefferson, 0.422 3FG% on 166 attempts, Gary Neal, 0.390 3FG% on 159 attempts and Manu Ginobili, 0.372 3FG% on 253 attempts). We don't. Our best 3-point shooter would be San Antonio's 4th best (barely). We've got Wes Matthews, 0.374 3FG% on 198 attempts, Rudy Fernandez, 0.329 3FG% on 173 attempts, Nicolas Batum, 0.313 3FG% on 163 attempts, and now Patty Mills, 0.323 3FG% on 65 attempts. If one, or two, of these guys could step up and consistently knock down an open 3-pointer, we wouldn't NEED our PG to stretch the defense. But, they can't. So, Miller, in spite of all the other things he does well, is the scape goat.

BNM

Parker and Rondo are very different than Miller. They are much quicker and much younger. Miller can't shoot the three and he can't break down opponents off the dribble either. About all he can do is post up and pass. I think we need more from the position.

 

[PapaG]

Parker and Rondo are very different than Miller. They are much quicker and much younger. Miller can't shoot the three and he can't break down opponents off the dribble either. About all he can do is post up and pass. I think we need more from the position.

LOL at BNM comparing Andre Miller to Tony Parker and Rajon Rondo.

Talk about funny!

 

[mgb]

I think it's funny how people think you have to shoot a 3 to open stuff up. A good mid range jumper can do the same job. The art of a mid range jumper has been loss since the league started the 3 point line.

 

[Natebishop3]

Honestly, I think it's laughable how some of the fans treat Miller on this board. When he scores, he shoots too much. When he drops 10 dimes in a game, he is a bad shooter. The guy can't win.

 

[Boob-No-More]

LOL at BNM comparing Andre Miller to Tony Parker and Rajon Rondo.

Talk about funny!

What's even funnier is you still haven't learned to read.

I did not compare Andre Miller to Tony Parker or Rajon Rondo. I cited the Celtics and Spurs as examples of two teams that don't rely on their PG shooting 3-pointers to open up the offense, as both teams have other excellent 3-point shooters. Of the 24 players averaging more than more than 5.0 APG, Parker, Miller and Rondo rank 22, 23 and 24 in 3FGA at 28, 24 and 23. That's a fact. Look it up. Shouldn't be too hard. I even provided the link.

If you COULD read, you would have also noticed that Parker and Miller were two of the PGs that I said I'd definitely take over Andre Miller - IF THEY WERE AVAILABLE.

*Deleted*

BNM

 

[Boob-No-More]

Honestly, I think it's laughable how some of the fans treat Miller on this board. When he scores, he shoots too much. When he drops 10 dimes in a game, he is a bad shooter. The guy can't win.

The problem is they aren't "fans". They are assholes that cheer against one of their own players in a desperate attempt to to be "right" in an internet discussion group. They'd rather see Miller fail than admit they might have been wrong about the guy.

BNM

 

[Minstrel]

The problem is they aren't "fans". They are assholes that cheer against one of their own players in a desperate attempt to to be "right" in an internet discussion group. They'd rather see Miller fail than admit they might have been wrong about the guy.

I think some posters created a false Roy vs. Miller dichotomy, that to be a "Roy loyalist" meant criticizing Miller at every turn.

 

[Natebishop3]

The problem is they aren't "fans". They are assholes that cheer against one of their own players in a desperate attempt to to be "right" in an internet discussion group. They'd rather see Miller fail than admit they might have been wrong about the guy.

BNM

Well, I'm sure some of it has to do with Roy not accepting Miller, and complaining about how their styles clash. There's two sides to the argument, and while some people fault Miller for the lack of chemistry and cohesion with Roy, I personally fault Brandon. This is Roy's team, he's the leader, and it's his job to rectify that kind of thing.

 

[truebluefan]

Did I miss something?

I was going to ask the same thing. I saw the title, and wondered if he had been traded, waived, or hurt.

 

[Natebishop3]

I was going to ask the same thing. I saw the title, and wondered if he had been traded, waived, or hurt.

Just wishful thinking on the part of some fans.

 

[Boob-No-More]

I was going to ask the same thing. I saw the title, and wondered if he had been traded, waived, or hurt.

Nope, just more clueless, unjustified, unsubstantiated, pointless bashing o our second best player by a so-called fan.

BNM

 

[Boob-No-More]

Well, I'm sure some of it has to do with Roy not accepting Miller, and complaining about how their styles clash. There's two sides to the argument, and while some people fault Miller for the lack of chemistry and cohesion with Roy, I personally fault Brandon. This is Roy's team, he's the leader, and it's his job to rectify that kind of thing.

It also didn't help that both Roy and Nate publicly supported Steve Blake over Miller when Miller was clearly the better player. Way to make the guy fell welcome and part of the team.

BTW, how is Blakey doing this year playing in an ideal situation beside Kobe and in the triangle where he's sure to get plenty of wide open shots? Huh, that's funny. He still SUCKS. He has a PER of 7.5, a 13.6 AST%, a 19.7 TOV% and a 0.051 WS/48. He's averaging 4.6 PPG on 0.371 FG%, averaging 2.0 APG, averaging 0.4 STL and still can't get to the FT line. He's playing in a superior system, under a better coach, alongside a superstar in the back court, and those are the numbers he's putting up? Yet, Nate and Roy both thought he was a better player than the guy who has a PER of 19.1, 37.6 AST%, 17.2 TOV% and 0.137 WS/48 playing in an inferior system on a roster decimated by injuries. Could they have possibly been wrong? No way, because NOBODY is ever wrong about Andre Miller - or at least nobody will ever admit it.

BNM

 

[PapaG]

Nope, just more clueless, unjustified, unsubstantiated, pointless bashing o our second best player by a so-called fan.

BNM

LOL

You're so above it all. If Miller is the 2nd best player, then this team is going nowhere fast.

 

[Minstrel]

LOL

You're so above it all. If Miller is the 2nd best player, then this team is going nowhere fast.

A 19-20 PER player is often a team's second- or third-best player.

Why so hostile to Miller? He didn't injure Roy's knees, you know. Does this go back to BLANKY?

 

[PapaG]

It also didn't help that both Roy and Nate publicly supported Steve Blake over Miller when Miller was clearly the better player. Way to make the guy fell welcome and part of the team.

BTW, how is Blakey doing this year playing in an ideal situation beside Kobe and in the triangle where he's sure to get plenty of wide open shots? Huh, that's funny. He still SUCKS. He has a PER of 7.5, a 13.6 AST%, a 19.7 TOV% and a 0.051 WS/48. He's averaging 4.6 PPG on 0.371 FG%, averaging 2.0 APG, averaging 0.4 STL and still can't get to the FT line. He's playing in a superior system, under a better coach, alongside a superstar in the back court, and those are the numbers he's putting up? Yet, Nate and Roy both thought he was a better player than the guy who has a PER of 19.1, 37.6 AST%, 17.2 TOV% and 0.137 WS/48 playing in an inferior system on a roster decimated by injuries. Could they have possibly been wrong? No way, because NOBODY is ever wrong about Andre Miller - or at least nobody will ever admit it.

BNM

BLANKY is hitting 40% of his threes, which of course you don't mention. I posted a long list of PER and how it relates to PGs in Phil Jackson's offense a month ago, and you ignored it. PER is worthless when assessing a triangle PG; look at the history of that position under Phil Jackson before you go and post a bunch of irrelevant statistics next time. The PG has one primary offensive goal in PJ's offense; hit open three point shots. BLANKY does that better than Andre Miller ever could.

Andre Miller is a ballhog who can't shoot and can't defend. I certainly don't advocate waiving him, but if he isn't traded at the deadline, it will be a huge gaffe by this organization.

 

[Natebishop3]

LOL

You're so above it all. If Miller is the 2nd best player, then this team is going nowhere fast.

Once again you haven't figured out that correlation doesn't always mean causation.

 

[RoyToy]

Well, I'm sure some of it has to do with Roy not accepting Miller, and complaining about how their styles clash. There's two sides to the argument, and while some people fault Miller for the lack of chemistry and cohesion with Roy, I personally fault Brandon. This is Roy's team, he's the leader, and it's his job to rectify that kind of thing.

Miller's the one that pouted from day 1. He wouldn't accept his role that McMillan gave him and team chemistry suffered for it. Roy was the one that wanted every guy on the team to accept and play their role. Miller wouldn't do it, period.

Miller being a vet should have respected this was Roy's team. Instead he came in here and wanted to run the show. It was terrible for team chemistry.

 

[PapaG]

A 19-20 PER player is often a team's second- or third-best player.

Why so hostile to Miller? He didn't injure Roy's knees, you know. Does this go back to BLANKY?

BLANKY come back!

Anyhow, I just don't think Miller is a winner. I was shocked to hear he was 16th all-time in assists. When I heard he passed Muggsy Bogues to be 16th, the shock went away. An overrated statistic for an overrated PG who has won nothing in his long career. I've long said he has trade value, though, so Cho should use it as part of his mysterious "long-term" plan.

 

[Natebishop3]

BLANKY is hitting 40% of his threes, which of course you don't mention. I posted a long list of PER and how it relates to PGs in Phil Jackson's offense a month ago, and you ignored it. PER is worthless when assessing a triangle PG; look at the history of that position under Phil Jackson before you go and post a bunch of irrelevant statistics next time. The PG has one primary offensive goal in PJ's offense; hit open three point shots. BLANKY does that better than Andre Miller ever could.

Andre Miller is a ballhog who can't shoot and can't defend. I certainly don't advocate waiving him, but if he isn't traded at the deadline, it will be a huge gaffe by this organization.

If he's averaging 4.6 ppg, that means he's hitting 1.5 threes per game? You think the Lakers are getting their moneys worth? If his only job is to hit threes, he's not doing a very good job.

 

[PapaG]

Once again you haven't figured out that correlation doesn't always mean causation.

That's impossible to quantify, though. Either could be correct, and history, at least in terms of Miller's playoff success, leans more toward causation, IMO.

 

[Natebishop3]

Miller's the one that pouted from day 1. He wouldn't accept his role that McMillan gave him and team chemistry suffered for it. Roy was the one that wanted every guy on the team to accept and play their role. Miller wouldn't do it, period.

Miller being a vet should have respected this was Roy's team. Instead he came in here and wanted to run the show. It was terrible for team chemistry.

You're right... he wouldn't accept his role as a backup point guard behind a terrible player. I don't blame him. It had nothing to do with "running the show" or who's team it was, he just wanted to play. You fault him for that? Also, Roy has pouted since day one about having Miller on his team, and that pouting continues to this day. Roy is the captain of this team, you think that's appropriate behavior from the captain?

 

[Minstrel]

I posted a long list of PER and how it relates to PGs in Phil Jackson's offense a month ago, and you ignored it. PER is worthless when assessing a triangle PG; look at the history of that position under Phil Jackson before you go and post a bunch of irrelevant statistics next time.

I thought your point about "triangle point guards" was either confused or else intellectually dishonest. There's no evidence, logical or otherwise, that the triangle suppresses point guards. Going back over the point guards that Jackson has had, he's never had a particularly talented point guard. That goes a much longer distance to explaining why the point guard position hasn't produced much under Jackson. Arguably the most talented player Jackson has played at point guard was a broken down (offensively) Ron Harper...his main talent by the time he reached the Bulls was defense.

Blake follows in that tradition of not having talented point guards. It's not like Jackson had a bunch of excellent point guards who's numbers tanked with Jackson.

As for Miller being a ballhog, his excellent Assist Rates show otherwise.

 

[PapaG]

If he's averaging 4.6 ppg, that means he's hitting 1.5 threes per game? You think the Lakers are getting their moneys worth? If his only job is to hit threes, he's not doing a very good job.

The guy gets a consistent 20mpg on a team much better than the Blazers. He must be doing something Phil Jackson likes. Either that, or Phil Jackson likes to give 20 mpg to players who "SUCK", as BNM so eloquently put it. I invite you as well to search for my post on PER and PJ's PGs. I guess if winning titles with a PG with a PER of 9.1 means the players SUCKS, then I'll take that sort of SUCK.

 

[Natebishop3]

That's impossible to quantify, though. Either could be correct, and history, at least in terms of Miller's playoff success, leans more toward causation, IMO.

History doesn't show that one player, be it Andre Miller or Michael Jordan, can single handedly win basketball games. It's a team sport, which means you have to have at the very least five guys on the court for your team. Andre Miller is just a cog in a machine, and while he is an influence on whether a team wins or loses, he is not the only factor that determines the outcome.

 

[PapaG]

I thought your point about "triangle point guards" was either confused or else intellectually dishonest. There's no evidence, logical or otherwise, that the triangle suppresses point guards. Going back over the point guards that Jackson has had, he's never had a particularly talented point guard. That goes a much longer distance to explaining why the point guard position hasn't produced much under Jackson. Arguably the most talented player Jackson has played at point guard was a broken down (offensively) Ron Harper...his main talent by the time he reached the Bulls was defense.

Blake follows in that tradition of not having talented point guards. It's not like Jackson had a bunch of excellent point guards who's numbers tanked with Jackson.

I never said the triangle suppresses PGs. I said that a high PER is not an accurate measurement for the PG in the PJ system. If that is 'intellectually dishonest' to you, well, I don't think pointing out hard statistics is ever dishonest. Questioning the integrity of that post seems like an admission that you really can't combat the raw data, though.

 

[Natebishop3]

The guy gets a consistent 20mpg on a team much better than the Blazers. He must be doing something Phil Jackson likes. Either that, or Phil Jackson likes to give 20 mpg to players who "SUCK", as BNM so eloquently put it. I invite you as well to search for my post on PER and PJ's PGs. I guess if winning titles with a PG with a PER of 9.1 means the players SUCKS, then I'll take that sort of SUCK.

Talk to Laker fans about Derek Fisher or Sasha Vujacic last season. Neither guy was stellar. Their point guard corp right now isn't the best in the world, which is probably why they signed Blake in the first place. They were looking for help at that position, but it's obvious they didn't find it in Blake.

 

[PapaG]

History doesn't show that one player, be it Andre Miller or Michael Jordan, can single handedly win basketball games. It's a team sport, which means you have to have at the very least five guys on the court for your team. Andre Miller is just a cog in a machine, and while he is an influence on whether a team wins or loses, he is not the only factor that determines the outcome.

So Michael Jordan isn't to be credited for winning 6 NBA titles, as he was just a "cog in a machine". LOL

 

[Minstrel]

TI guess if winning titles with a PG with a PER of 9.1 means the players SUCKS, then I'll take that sort of SUCK.

While Blake does suck, I'd also accept that sort of suckage if I could also have Kobe Bryant, Pau Gasol, Lamar Odom (and to a lesser extent Andrew Bynum and Ron Artest).