"Heated Exchange!"

[Crimson the Cat]

But that's a completely different situation. They had lots of outside shooters, no star shooting guard to play beside, a wealth of talent at center....

It is a different situation. For us to be good, Brandon's usage rating needs to be high. It's been hovering just over 27% the past two seasons. Come Playoff time last year you know what happened to that number? Skyrocketed to 33%. This usage produced a 24PER during the regular season and a 26PER in the Playoffs. Put quality shooters around Brandon, like last year, and we win.

Philadelphia is not nearly the same. Iggy isn't nearly the superstar Brandon is. Philly wasn't going to be better with him balling every single possession, because frankly he's not the playmaker that Brandon is. His usage rating is only 23%, and in the Playoffs last year 25%. At this usage rate, regardless of heading into the Playoffs, his PER was 18.

If we didn't have Brandon, Miller would be a fantastic guard to have. We have Brandon. We need the floor spread out. Miller doesn't help provide that.

 

[BrianFromWA]

Yeah, who could have ever hoped we'd get a PG who would put up 22 points and 16 assists one game and then 16 points (on 7-11 shooting) and pull down 10 boards the very next night - in three quarters before getting benched by a clueless coach.

Miller is every bit as good as advertised - when he's allowed to play. Hard for him to contribute much when his ass is glued to the bench. If Nate had his way, Blake would still be starting and playing 30+ MPG with Bayless gettign the rest of the PG minutes.

Injuries have forced Nate to play Miller and Miller responded in spectacular fashion with impressive back-to-back doubles - only top be rewarded by getting benched in the 4th quarter by McClueless. It's like Miller made Nate look bad (for choosing Blake over him) by playing so well that Nate benched him to save face. So much for players earning their minutes. When was the last time Steve Blake put up back-to-back double-doubles. How many career double-doubles does Jerryd Bayless have? Yet, it's Miller than gets benched.

BNM

Whoa....you and I are on the same page. I've basically posted every word you've said here on one thread or another today. What I was saying was that (IMO) we got Andre this summer to upgrade the PG position and make us a more dangerous playoff team. Due to whatever reason (coaching, injuries, rotations, etc) we've not had much of an upgrade in PG play and I don't think we're a more dangerous playoff team. That's all.

 

[andalusian]

I'll take a passive-aggressive jerk who is producing over a nice guy with a single digit PER.

I'll also take a passive-aggressive jerk who is producing over a coach that lies to his players and whose ego is costing the team wins.

Andre Miller is not a win producer. The team wins 50% of the time he is on the court this year. Philly won 51% last year when he was on the court. Philly won 50% the year before that when he was on the court.

He is an good individual stats player, but he is not a win producer. It is time to look at his history and realize that Andre Miller is a lot like Zach Randolph. A good individual stats player, maybe one of the best in the league for his position, individually, but these stats just never really seem to help a team win...

 

[Crimson the Cat]

Unless Miller is playing off the ball, in which case whenever the ball gets to him, ball movement stops and restarts. I haven't seen him make more than a couple swing passes in at least two games now...

Ding ding ding. It's as if one half of the Blazer fandom is watching an entirely different game than the other half.

Andre Miller produces when he's playmaking. The problem with that is then Brandon's not. I'll take Brandon over Miller everytime.

The point is this. This team needs players that will compliment him, not hinder him. We need a guard that can defend the quicker point guards, hit from deep, and playmake when Brandon's out or being paid too much attention. Andre Miller for all his strengths doesn't fit.

 

[BlazerWookee]

I'll take a passive-aggressive jerk who is producing over a nice guy with a single digit PER.

So will I, as long as that passive-aggressive jerk doesn't hand grenade team chemistry, which I don't think has happened yet.

I'll also take a passive-aggressive jerk who is producing over a coach that lies to his players and whose ego is costing the team wins.

Can you be specific about how Nate lied to his players?

As for your assertion that Nate's "ego is costing the team wins," I find that patently absurd.

 

[ABM]

What I was saying was that (IMO) we got Andre this summer to upgrade the PG position and make us a more dangerous playoff team. Due to whatever reason (coaching, injuries, rotations, etc) we've not had much of an upgrade in PG play and I don't think we're a more dangerous playoff team. That's all.

If there's anyone to blame, here, I'd say blame Roy. But, we can't as he's our franchise player. It is what it is.

 

[hasoos]

You are so upset with Nate, I think you are mixing you're facts up alittle. Nate did bench Blake for Miller (before Blake got hurt).

I think many agree that Nate may have messed up last game, but Miller has been anything but spectacular, IMO. You keep saying double double . . . but that's as frustrating as others using +/- to prove a point. Getting a double double is great and all, but you got to look at beyond the numbers and Miller was not getting back on defense (instead trying to get that offensive rebound)

Personally I would have put Miller in for Bayless with about 6 mins left, but the only way Miller was spectacular is if it is relative to his play this season.

I think a ton of people are still upset over the last game, and they are letting it cloud their thinking on this issue. That is just one of many things that has happened this season. Losing causes frustration. Players who don't get to play when the team loses, when they think they should be playing, tend to get the most frustrated. Bayless voiced his frustration earlier this year. Miller is voicing his frustration now.

The best thing that could happen to this team would be a consolidation trade, to get rid of some of the run of the mill talent and get a player where there could be no argument about who is playing when. This would also take a load off of Roy before he gets hurt any more trying to carry this team on his own. This would achieve the following:

1. If the player obtained is of sufficiently high talent, there can be no argument as to who should be playing in crunch time. Just like when Damon was here, he would bitch that Pippen would be running the show late in the game. But it was Scottie Fucking Pippen. So nobody cared.

2. The player of said talent can take a load off of Roy and prevent his career from being shortened by injury.

 

[Crimson the Cat]

Yeah, he got 16 assists against the Clippers by holding the ball. What games have you been watching? Seriously, the only time we get ANY ball movement is when Miller is in. The rest of the time it's nothing but walk the ball up and run ISOs for Roy or Bayless.

BNM

How many of those assists occurred in the fourth quarter? Seems to me not that many. He does help the team, just not in the fourth quarter when Brandon's playing.

 

[Boob-No-More]

You are so upset with Nate, I think you are mixing you're facts up alittle. Nate did bench Blake for Miller (before Blake got hurt).

Only after Blake SUCKED for WEEKS while starting and playing more minutes than Blake. So much for Nate's claim that players EARN their minutes.

You keep saying double double . . . but that's as frustrating as others using +/- to prove a point. Getting a double double is great and all, but you got to look at beyond the numbers and Miller was not getting back on defense (instead trying to get that offensive rebound)

No, it's not the same. +/- is a team stat - more accurately, it's dependent on the performance of ALL 10 players on the court. It's NOT an individual player single game stat. People who use it as such either don't understand what it is, oir deliberately misues use it when it suits their argument.

Points, assists and rebounds are all individual stats. Obviously, there is more to a player's game than those three stats, but when I player is excelling at them, it makes little sense to bench him in favor of one who is not.

but the only way Miller was spectacular is if it is relative to his play this season.

Wrong. He's also been "spectacular" all season in comparison to Steve "Single Digit PER" Blake.

BNM

 

[Boob-No-More]

How many of those assists occurred in the fourth quarter? Seems to me not that many. He does help the team, just not in the fourth quarter when Brandon's playing.

Hard to get assists in the 4th quarter when:

1) Your ass is glued to the bench

2) Every fucking play you run is an isolation

You blame Miller for this? He's not the one making these stupid decisions.

BNM

 

[BrianFromWA]

How many of those assists occurred in the fourth quarter? Seems to me not that many. He does help the team, just not in the fourth quarter when Brandon's playing.

Of the 9:16 of the 4th quarter that wasn't garbage time (Mills and Shavlik in the game), the Blazers scored 13 points. Andre Miller was in the game for 5:02 of that and was 2-3 (missed a 3) for 4 points, assisted Webster on his 3. that's 7 of the 13 points. And for most of his stint, Bayless was in there with he and Roy and the other two controlled the ball.

 

[Crimson the Cat]

Hard to get assists in the 4th quarter when:

1) Your ass is glued to the bench

2) Every fucking play you run is an isolation

You blame Miller for this? He's not the one making these stupid decisions.

BNM

Not directly, but indirectly yes. His skills don't translate to winning basketball come the fourth quarter, at least not with this club.

 

[BlazerCaravan]

Of the 9:16 of the 4th quarter that wasn't garbage time (Mills and Shavlik in the game), the Blazers scored 13 points. Andre Miller was in the game for 5:02 of that and was 2-3 (missed a 3) for 4 points, assisted Webster on his 3. that's 7 of the 13 points. And for most of his stint, Bayless was in there with he and Roy and the other two controlled the ball.

So... one assist?

 

[Boob-No-More]

Can you be specific about how Nate lied to his players?

His repeated statemens that players "earn" their playing time and then handing the starting PG spot to Steve Blake and leaving him there for week, after week, after week, after week when Miller was playing better and out producing him.

As for your assertion that Nate's "ego is costing the team wins," I find that patently absurd.

Good for you. What I find absurd is a head coach benching a productive, experienced player who is having a great game in the 4th quarter and then shouting at him "You don't play the way we want to play" in front of the whole team at practice. Well the "way" the team played in the last 3:45 of the Clippers game cost them a win, but way to stick to your guns Nate. Maybe rather than stubbornly sticking to a style of play that's failing miserably, the coach should set aside his ego and try sometrhing different.

BNM

 

[Boob-No-More]

Not directly, but indirectly yes. His skills don't translate to winning basketball come the fourth quarter, at least not with this club.

How do you know? He played the last 8 seconds of the 4th quarter in the loss to the Clipps. So, suddenly it's HIS style that cost us the win and not Nate's style?

BNM

 

[ABM]

Maybe rather than stubbornly sticking to a style of play that's failing miserably....

How is it "failing miserably" when our coach has effectively led this M*A*S*H unit to within 1 game of the NW Division lead? (This, BTW, with the team going 1-3 without him on the sideline.)

 

[BlazerWookee]

Of the 9:16 of the 4th quarter that wasn't garbage time (Mills and Shavlik in the game), the Blazers scored 13 points. Andre Miller was in the game for 5:02 of that and was 2-3 (missed a 3) for 4 points, assisted Webster on his 3. that's 7 of the 13 points. And for most of his stint, Bayless was in there with he and Roy and the other two controlled the ball.

For the last few minutes he was in the game, he was jogging back on D, standing still watching guys battle for boards when we put up a shot and not taking a step in either direction until someone actually got the rebound, arching his back and grimacing in pain, and ignoring any offensive flow we had by stopping the ball every time it touched his hands regardless of the situation. Granted, he did work hard with the ball and when his man had the ball, but he was definitely coasting the rest of the time. The guy was tired and hurt. Good on him for thinking he could play through it, but it was clear to me that he couldn't.

 

[RR7]

Who was he watching battle for boards? he had 2 offensive rebounds in the last minute and a half. Was he struggling on those? Who was he watching? Bette ryet, who were you watching?

 

[BrianFromWA]

Let's go with that and assume you're right about everything. Somehow he then found the fountain of youth (3 quarters only) variety the next game and was able to get rebounds and go 7-11.

"he was jogging back on D, standing still watching guys battle for boards when we put up a shot, not taking a step in either direction until someone got the rebound"...

Are we talking about Miller, LMA or Roy?

 

[BenDavis503]

I am trying to not post and just read... but I had to say something.

You people who think Bayless had a choice on what shot to make and miss, are ignorant. I thought posters in this community were more intelligent. But to suggest a player can just freaking decide if he wants to make or miss a FT??? Why is everyone in the league not shooting 100% if they can just choose if they want to make it or miss it?!??!

If any of you actually looked. Bayless tried to miss the 2nd FT, he tried to follow what Brandon said and he blew it. He made it. OOPS. Shit happens. Get over it and move on. BAYLESS DOES NOT CONTROL IF HE CAN MAKE OR MISS A SHOT. To think he made it on purpose, because Miller said so, is absolutely senseless.

B Wookie you are unreal!!! The things I want to say would get edited. You have some idiotic beef with Miller and that has your eyes glossed. You need to wake up.

Nate is an idiot, stubborn fuck who lets his emotions get in the way of his work. That is not good. This crap with Miller proves it. Miller need to play and Roy needs to learn to play with him. Roy is a fantastic player and I love the guy, but he is not good enough to demand some Jordan type team dominance. Miller is a great player and Roy needs to deal with it and let him play.

Can you imagine how good we would be if Roy AND Miller got 22\6\6 ???

 

[BlazerWookee]

His repeated statemens that players "earn" their playing time and then handing the starting PG spot to Steve Blake and leaving him there for week, after week, after week, after week when Miller was playing better and out producing him.



Good for you. What I find absurd is a head coach benching a productive, experienced player who is having a great game in the 4th quarter and then shouting at him "You don't play the way we want to play" in front of the whole team at practice. Well the "way" the team played in the last 3:45 of the Clippers game cost them a win, but way to stick to your guns Nate. Maybe rather than stubbornly sticking to a style of play that's failing miserably, the coach should set aside his ego and try sometrhing different.

BNM

Miller was benched because he was completely out of gas, and it was showing.

Your definition of "earn" is obviously vastly different from Nate's. That's not Nate telling lies, that's you disagreeing with his opinion.

I strongly disagree that Nate's stubbornness is because of any sort of inflated ego. The man has played and coached the game the way he has his entire career because he believes it to be the right way to play/coach, not because it brings him accolades.

 

[alex42083]

From Bust A Bucket...

 

[Rastapopoulos]

Here's a request:

A list of the coaches Miller has played for, and the winning record under each coach.

I'd like to see if he's played well under any "strong willed" (i.e., Nate-esque) coaches or if his best results have been under "players' coaches (i.e., Mo Cheeks-esque).

 

[WillG]

. It's like Miller made Nate look bad (for choosing Blake over him) by playing so well that Nate benched him to save face. So much for players earning their minutes.
BNM

BIG +1.

Exactly what I thought was happening.

 

[andalusian]

How do you know? He played the last 8 seconds of the 4th quarter in the loss to the Clipps. So, suddenly it's HIS style that cost us the win and not Nate's style?

Excuse me? Looking at the box score, the Blazers were down 8 at the end of the 3rd, where Miller played 31 minutes. It seems that the entire "no Miller" group was +4 the entire time he was off the floor in the 4th. Maybe they would have won if they did not play him as much as they did in the first 3 quarters as well...

A basketball game is played for 48 minutes - and it seems that this team played better the period they did not have Miller's great contributions...

Given his average of -2.666 points per quarter when playing - and extrapolating it to the 4th quarter - one would assume the Blazers would have lost by 10 instead of 4 if he played more in the 4th...

Repeat after me - Andre Miller is not the answer. Never was, and if we are lucky - we will not spend an awful lot more time seeing him prove it, as he did before in Philly, Denver, LAC or Cleveland.

The numbers do not lie. Miller is the same player he was last year and the year before in Philly. When he is on the floor - his team wins 50% of the time. That's just what he is, the data is there to back it up. Time to accept the fact that he is a role player, and not a good fit on this team.

 

[WillG]

From Bust A Bucket...

Replace the pic of Miller with Nate and it's more accurate. . .

 

[Crimson the Cat]

How do you know? He played the last 8 seconds of the 4th quarter in the loss to the Ckipps. So, suddenly it's HIS style that cost us the win and not Nate's style?

BNM

Nate's not perfect, he's a coach developing, much the way our young players are. But, each year, he shows improvements. It's not just me that thinks highly of him. His players do (minus Miller). Colangelo and Coach K did. Bryant and James did as well. Want results, look at his win-loss record. IMO, he and the coaching staff have put their players in roles that allow them to succeed and, in turn, for the team to achieve wins. Nate's style wins games, right. It's Nate's design that led all these seasons, correct? Every time the team goes up against an adverse situation and we're all waiting for the walls to come crumbling down, what happens. We win. Obviously Roy has a ton to do with this, but it's the system also that allows Roy to garner these results.

I'm taking my opinion from what I've seen over the multitude of fourth quarters this season. I'm not sure what the reason was that he sat the entire fourth quarter of the Clippers game, but logic tells me that it was a good decision considering what I've seen from the Roy/Miller tandem at the end of games.

 

[BlazerCaravan]

Cleveland:
Randy Whitman - 2 years (32-50, 30-52)
John Lucas - 1 year (29-53)

LA Clippers:
Alvin Gentry - 0.5 years (19-39)
Dennis Johnson - 0.5 years (8-16)

Denver:
Jeff Bzdelik - 1.5 years (43-39, 13-15)
Michael Cooper - 0.25 years (4-10)
George Karl - 1.25 years (32-8, 44-38, 14-9)

Philly:
Mo Cheeks - 1.75 years (28-28, 9-14)
Tony DiLeo - 0.75 years (32-27)

Portland:
Nate McMillan - 0.5 years (22-15)

Trend: Plays for a coach for a while, that coach is fired, and the next coach decides to trade him after a season.

 

[Rastapopoulos]

I am trying to not post and just read... but I had to say something.

Don't you know that your exchange with PapaG was caught on security cameras and Stern has got the feds on your ass?

You people who think Bayless had a choice on what shot to make and miss, are ignorant. I thought posters in this community were more intelligent. But to suggest a player can just freaking decide if he wants to make or miss a FT??? Why is everyone in the league not shooting 100% if they can just choose if they want to make it or miss it?!??!

Um - it's pretty easy to MISS a shot. You certainly have a choice about that. FWIW Ernie Johnson seemed to think that Bayless had tried (and his expression after the FT might back that up, except that's his permanent expression).

B Wookie you are unreal!!! The things I want to say would get edited. You have some idiotic beef with Miller and that has your eyes glossed. You need to wake up.

Why don't you just show him three guns and ask him to pick one.

Actually I think Wookie is being very reasonable and citing good evidence (y'know, from actually observing the games) to support his claims. People could learn from him.

Nate is an idiot, stubborn fuck who lets his emotions get in the way of his work.

Ah. Good thing you can show Wookie the cool objective insight of someone who doesn't have some idiotic beef.

Can you imagine how good we would be if Roy AND Miller got 22\6\6 ???

Easily -- in past seasons when we played the Sixers. Unfortunately it's pretty obvious it would never happen with them both on the same team.

 

[Boob-No-More]

How is it "failing miserably" when our coach has effectively led this M*A*S*H unit to within 1 game of the NW Division lead? (This, BTW, with the team going 1-3 without him on the sideline.)

I was referring specifically to the Clipper game where our coach's offensive scheme of ISOs and nothing but ISOs generated a grand total of 1 point over the final 3:45 and cost us the game by turning an 8-point lead into a 4-point loss.

BNM