"Heated Exchange!"

[Rastapopoulos]

Randy Whitman - 2 years
John Lucas - 1 year
Alvin Gentry - 1 year
Jeff Bzdelik - 2 years
George Karl - 1.25 years
Mo Cheeks - 1.75 years
Tony DiLeo - 0.75 years
Nate McMillan - 0.5 years

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

Thanks! Now what about the winning %...

Hmm. The only remotely big name on that list is George Karl. Interesting that they didn't butt heads, but then again, Karl likes to run. I wonder what a combination of Miller and, say, Poppovich or Brown would've been like.

 

[BlazerCaravan]

Thanks! Now what about the winning %...

Hmm. The only remotely big name on that list is George Karl. Interesting that they didn't butt heads, but then again, Karl likes to run. I wonder what a combination of Miller and, say, Poppovich or Brown would've been like.

I wouldn't guarantee that they didn't butt heads; he was traded 1/4 of the way into his second season with Karl.

I'll edit my post and add win%

 

[andalusian]

Thanks! Now what about the winning %...

Miller's best winning year in the NBA got him 49 wins under Bzdelik.

I think his 2nd best was 45 wins under him as well (but it could have been Karl's first year with Denver, not sure about it)..

I think most of his other years were very close to .500 or less.

George Karl of course was the one that traded him for AI. It is funny that the solution they had to fill his shoes (because AI is, let's face it, a SG) - was Steve Blake. That was their (Denver) best year until they got Chauncey.

 

[The Sebastian Express]

I wouldn't guarantee that they didn't butt heads; he was traded 1/4 of the way into his second season with Karl.

I'll edit my post and add win%

There's probably a reason for this:

On December 19, 2006, the Philadelphia 76ers sent Iverson and forward Ivan McFarlin to the Denver Nuggets for Andre Miller, Joe Smith, and two first-round picks in the 2007 NBA Draft. At the time of the trade, Iverson was the NBA's number two leading scorer with teammate Carmelo Anthony being number one.[28]

 

[oldmangrouch]

Bullshit. You got this TOTALLY backwards. Miller is EXACTLY what we need in the 4th quarter of close games - and the play-offs. He's EXACTLY what we needed in the last 3:45 of the 4th quarter two nights ago. Every team in the league now knows that the end of the 4th quarter of a close game EVERY play the Blazers run is an ISO - usually for Roy, and apparantly now occasionally for Bayless. When the other team knows you're playing 1-on-5, it's not exactly difficult to stop.

Miller gives you better ball movement and another PROVEN scoring option. Miller can post up his man and score inside, and more importantly, he can draw fouls, get the other teams bigs in foul trouble and score easy points from the line.

Roy and Bayless also draw fouls, but Miller does it differently - he does it under control. Roy and Miller drive the paint, leave their feet, try to draw contact and hope and pray the ref bales them out with a foul call. It works more for Roy than Bayless, but even in Roy's case, it's not the automatic whistle that Kobe and D-Wade get everytime they enter the lane and leave their feet. Once Roy, and especially Bayless, leave their feet, they are totally at the mercy of the officials. Sometimes they get the call, many times they don't. When they don't, they are stuck forcing up a very difficult shot, which frequently gets blocked (especially in Bayless' case) or a turnover as they lose the ball out of bounds.

Watch how Miller draws fouls. He gets into the paint just as easily as Roy or Bayless, but he DOESN'T LEAVE HIS FEET. He stays on the ground and uses ball fakes and head fakes to draw the opposing bigs off their feet. He then draws the contact and the foul. If the big doesn't leave their feet, Miller still has options and usually just passes off to an open teammate. The point is, when Miller drives into the paint, unlike Roy ands Bayless, he is under control, not wildly flailing about hoping for a friendly whistle to bale him out.

Roy gets a few superstar "gift" calls, but not as many as some other superstars. Bayless basically still gets treated like a rookie by the officials. Unless he's blatantly tackled, the refs aren't going to bale him out. He needs to learn from Miller how to play under control, get the defense to overcommit, and keep other options available in case they don't.

BNM

Nice summation.

 

[Boob-No-More]

Nate's not perfect, he's a coach developing.

That's where we disagree. He's stopped developing. He found a comfort zone and wants to stay there. I'm more alarmed by his misuse of Oden (prior to injury, of course) than his misuse of Miller. He has no clue how to incorporate a dominant center into his stagnant offense (ISOs and 3-pointers as the shot clock expires). He even told Greg before the season started he didn't want him to worry about scoring, just concentrate on defense and rebounding. Once the season started, it was obvious that Greg could abuse other centers down low - and because Nate's system wasn't designed to take advantage of this option, it caused problems with the players and confusion over their roles.

I think Nate is a GREAT motivator and teacher of sound fundamentals. However, I think he falls far short of designing an offense that can take advantage of multiple dominant scorers. His current offense relies too much on one dominant scorer and a whole lot of perimeter shooting. It's no wonder that we were last in the league in points in the paint - even before Oden whent down. That's by design and it's OK when your starting center is Joel Przybilla. It's NOT OK when your starting center is Greg Oden.

I think it's time for Nate to go. He did a good job, but is now in over his head and has not continued to develop as a head coach. He has found a comfort zone and seems unwilling, or unable, to move beyond that. Every other team in the league knows the Blazers are going to run ISOs for Roy in the 4th quarter - and they are figuring out how to stop it. Unless we get a more creative coach, we are doomed to be a talented (when heathy) team that doesn't reach our full potential.

BNM

 

[andalusian]

Nice summation.

So, you too, think that going with the unit without Miller that went +4 for the quarter was not the right solution, and it would have been better to go with the unit that went -8 with Miller for the first 3 quarters?

Geez, people. Miller is not the solution, and if we can actually look at the +4 vs. the -8 - he might have been the problem!

 

[oldmangrouch]

Nonetheless, he was soon gone.

Because with the Spurs, he was on a six figure contract, and when he became a FA, somebody offered him a LOT more money.

 

[The_Lillard_King]

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 ???

I was wondering at the time Bayless was shooting if he was going to try and miss it. I told my friend at the game that I think he is going to try and make it because the Blazers only had two guys on the blocks ready for the rebound. The other two players weren't even in a rebound postion or charged the basket after the free throw shot.

Come to think about it, it the bench and Roy thought Bayless should miss it,shouldn't they be screaming at the players to get in rebound position? I don't think Bayless was given good direction on that last free throw shot.

And if you want to miss a free throw, it really isn't hard to hit the rim. At the very least put some really high arch on it to try and get a funny bounce rebound. Bayless was trying to make it.

 

[Boob-No-More]

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

So let him rest, catch his breath and then put him back in with say 3:45 to go. Why wait until there is 8 seconds left, Juwan Howard fouls out andthe game is lost?. Did Miller, the NBA's Iron Man, really need THAT much time to get his wind back?

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

My definition of "earn" is based on production and winning - and Miller was clearly out producing Blake, who was having an AWFUL season until he was moved to the bench. Prior to being benched, Blakes PER had dropped to 8.3. Miller's, at the time was 15.0. And, both players played even better and the team went on a winning streak when Nate FINALLY benched Blake in favor of Miller.

So, my definition of "earn" includes better production and winning. If yours is different, I'd love to hear it.

BNM

 

[Boob-No-More]

So, you too, think that going with the unit without Miller that went +4 for the quarter was not the right solution, and it would have been better to go with the unit that went -8 with Miller for the first 3 quarters?

Geez, people. Miller is not the solution, and if we can actually look at the +4 vs. the -8 - he might have been the problem!

I guess we sould have also benched Brandon Roy for the first 11:52 of the 4th quarter. After all, wasn't he also part of that unit that was -8 through 3 quarters?

BNM

 

[The_Lillard_King]

So let him rest, catch his breath and then put him back in with say 3:45 to go. Why wait until there is 8 seconds left, Juwan Howard fouls out andthe game is lost?. Did Miller, the NBA's Iron Man, really need THAT much time to get his wind back?



My definition of "earn" is based on production and winning - and Miller was clearly out producing Blake, who was having an AWFUL season until he was moved to the bench. Prior to being benched, Blakes PER had dropped to 8.3. Miller's, at the time was 15.0. And, both players played even better and the team went on a winning streak when Nate FINALLY benched Blake in favor of Miller.

So, my definition of "earn" includes better production and winning. If yours is different, I'd love to hear it.

BNM

If Miller is as good as you say, he should have lots of trade value, don't you think?

 

[ABM]

If Miller is as good as you say, he should have lots of trade value, don't you think?

The Blazers and Knicks were the only teams interested in Miller this past summer. That said, NY only wanted to offer him a one-year deal.

 

[Boob-No-More]

If Miller is as good as you say, he should have lots of trade value, don't you think?

Not after the way Nate has misused him. His trade value is probably at an all-time low right now. We'll be lucky if we can get a "no talent big man with a pulse" for him - and we'll probably have to throw in a young player (maybe the rights to one of our Euros) and/or a future draft pick to unload him. Somebody's going to get a bargain.

BNM

 

[Boob-No-More]

The Blazers and Knicks were the only teams interested in Miller this past summer. That said, NY only wanted to offer him a one-year deal.

To preserve cap space for their LeBron fantasy.

BNM

 

[The_Lillard_King]

The Blazers and Knicks were the only teams interested in Miller this past summer. That said, NY only wanted to offer him a one-year deal.

I see teams are fighting for Alston . . . maybe we can ride the contending teams wanting a PG wave.

For some reason, I think Miller has a bad rap with his locker room presence and that hurts his trade value. Why else was he really not pursued this summer by NBA teams including his old team.

 

[BrianFromWA]

He and his agent made it known that they weren't signing for the MLE. That put a lot of teams out of the running, since they couldn't offer more and they weren't giving PHI anything for the right to sign and trade for him.

 

[The_Lillard_King]

Not after the way Nate has misused him. His trade value is probably at an all-time low right now. We'll be lucky if we can get a "no talent big man with a pulse" for him - and we'll probably have to throw in a young player (maybe the rights to one of our Euros) and/or a future draft pick to unload him. Somebody's going to get a bargain.

BNM

Are you telling me you see all these great things in Miller but NBA scouts out there won't?

If he is as good as you advertise, then Nate's misuse of him isn't going to drop his value much. I think the reality is that Miller has never had good trade value and I'm trying to figure out why. Because I think he has something left in the tank and can help the right team.

 

[The_Lillard_King]

He and his agent made it known that they weren't signing for the MLE. That put a lot of teams out of the running, since they couldn't offer more and they weren't giving PHI anything for the right to sign and trade for him.

Why if he is supposedly a top ten PG?

 

[BlazerWookee]

So let him rest, catch his breath and then put him back in with say 3:45 to go. Why wait until there is 8 seconds left, Juwan Howard fouls out andthe game is lost?. Did Miller, the NBA's Iron Man, really need THAT much time to get his wind back?



My definition of "earn" is based on production and winning - and Miller was clearly out producing Blake, who was having an AWFUL season until he was moved to the bench. Prior to being benched, Blakes PER had dropped to 8.3. Miller's, at the time was 15.0. And, both players played even better and the team went on a winning streak when Nate FINALLY benched Blake in favor of Miller.

So, my definition of "earn" includes better production and winning. If yours is different, I'd love to hear it.

BNM

It wasn't just wind, it was his legs, his arms, and his sore back. The dude played his ass off for two games straight, and his age caught up with him.

I don't think Nate is a PER nerd, but I do think he's fully aware of the numbers. I think he is the one setting the standards of play, practice, and behavior of this team, and he's the sole judge of who reaches which standards. I also happen to believe that he's more qualified to be in that position than you, me, or anyone who semi-regularly reads this board, and that's including Mike Rice, Antonio Harvey, and even Kevin Pritchard.

 

[andalusian]

I guess we sould have also benched Brandon Roy for the first 11:52 of the 4th quarter. After all, wasn't he also part of that unit that was -8 through 3 quarters?

Clearly the coaches saw something that made them think that the problem was Miller, not Roy. It is pretty clear that we did win that 4th quarter with Roy on the floor... so - I suspect that their analysis was better than yours...

It is hard to take this argument seriously when we have data from both this game and the entire year that Miller on the court does not translate to more wins. His win% is lower than the win% of the team as a whole. This is not good.

 

[Boob-No-More]

Are you telling me you see all these great things in Miller but NBA scouts out there won't?

Now you're just making up shit for the sake of argument. I never said Miller was "great", just that he's far more pruductive than Blake, should have been starting all along and should have played more than 8 seconds in the 4th quarter Tuesday.

That doesn't make him "great", just a whole hell of a lot better than Blake. Back when Blake was starting, Blake's PER was 8.3 - one of the lowest in the league for as player averaging over 30 MPG. Since moving to the bench (his proper role), Blake has pulled his PER up to 9.9. Still not great, but an improvement. Good for him. Since becoming the starting PG, Miller has also improved his PER from 15.0 to 15.7. That makes him a whole lot better than Blake and an above average NBA starting PG. Again, not "great" but way, way, better than Blake (this season).

In spite of the the two recent losses, the team is still 15-6 when Miller starts. So much for the bullshit theory that Roy and Miller can't co-exist in the starting line-up.

If he is as good as you advertise, then Nate's misuse of him isn't going to drop his value much.

I disagree. Miller is 33 and due to Nate's misuse of him, his numbers are down considerably from where they were last season. Many teams will now see him as an over-the-hill malcontent on the decline, rather than a productive veteran on a reasonable contract that can help them win.

Nate has misused Miller from day one. If he wasn't considered an upgrade to Blake, they never should have signed him. But since they did, and he IS an upgrade, he should have been starting from day 1.

BNM

 

[Boob-No-More]

I don't think Nate is a PER nerd, but I do think he's fully aware of the numbers. I think he is the one setting the standards of play, practice, and behavior of this team, and he's the sole judge of who reaches which standards. I also happen to believe that he's more qualified to be in that position than you, me, or anyone who semi-regularly reads this board, and that's including Mike Rice, Antonio Harvey, and even Kevin Pritchard.

I think he is also be blinded by his loyalty to certain players who are considered "Nate guys" and plays them more than they deserve. When inferior players get more PT than they deserve, it destroys the morale of players who are better, but get less PT. It also undermines Nate's credibility with the players when he constantly tells them "playing time will be earned, not given". His favoritism of Blake over Miller sent mixed messages that led to this current problem.

I don't claim to know more about the players than Nate, but my judgement is also not clouded by personal attachment to the players. I think I'm more neutral. In the past I've been a big Blake supporter. This year, he has flat out sucked, and with no personal attachment, I was much quicker to recognize that and admit it than someone closer to him persoanally might be.

BNM

 

[Boob-No-More]

It is hard to take this argument seriously when we have data from both this game and the entire year that Miller on the court does not translate to more wins. His win% is lower than the win% of the team as a whole. This is not good.

The team's record with Miller starting is 15-6 and 7-9 when he doesn't start. So much for the theory that Miller and Roy can't co-exist in the starting line-up. How do you explain that?

BNM

 

[andalusian]

My definition of "earn" is based on production and winning - and Miller was clearly out producing Blake, who was having an AWFUL season until he was moved to the bench.

Sorry, but this is only half-true. Blake was and still is out-producing Miller in the win column. He is at 63.6% vs. Miller's 50% - and it was higher before.

I think this was an attempt by Nate to motivate Miller, while having an excuse not to play him at the end of games where his lack of shooting ability does not mesh well with Roy.

 

[oldmangrouch]

Clearly the coaches saw something that made them think that the problem was Miller, not Roy. It is pretty clear that we did win that 4th quarter with Roy on the floor... so - I suspect that their analysis was better than yours...

It is hard to take this argument seriously when we have data from both this game and the entire year that Miller on the court does not translate to more wins. His win% is lower than the win% of the team as a whole. This is not good.

Yet his "win%" is somehow higher than both Blake and Bayless. (at least according to Basketball Prospectus)

 

[andalusian]

The team's record with Miller starting is 15-6 and 7-9 when he doesn't start. So much for the theory that Miller and Roy can't co-exist in the starting line-up. How do you explain that?

By the fact that they are not playing him in the 4th and allowing Roy be Roy. Again, I am really not sure what is the big deal with the who is starting and who is not. The fact of the matter is that with Andre Miller on the court, we are winning at a 50% clip. Does not matter if it is at the start of the game or the end of the game - but that guy is not the reason we are winning.

If games are won in the first quarter - you would have an argument. Since they are won by playing 48 minutes - maybe it is not that big of an argument as you are trying to make of it?

 

[andalusian]

Yet his "win%" is somehow higher than both Blake and Bayless.

It is not. The team wins at a 61% with Bayless on the floor. They win at 63% with Blake on the floor. They win at 50% with Miller on the floor.

Do not know where your numbers are from, but they are wrong.

 

[ABM]

Danger, Will Robinson!

 

[oldmangrouch]

It is not. The team wins at a 61% with Bayless on the floor. They win at 63% with Blake on the floor. They win at 50% with Miller on the floor.

Do not know where your numbers are from, but they are wrong.

Unless I am misreading something, Basketball Prospectus has Miler with both a higher WARP and a higher "win%".