McMillan: "Oden AND Miller will come off the bench"

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
PapaG said:
MacMillan is so passionate about his starting line-up that he changed it after three games last season (Batum for Outlaw). Don't cross him on it!
Click to expand...

Tell me, why would he want to hold on to this so titely Papa G? It's to the point, when you ask him about it. He gets super aggressive and defensive about it.

Why?
 
Interesting discussion...

Some observations:
-Historically, Blake is terrible as a bench player.
-Blake is very good at spreading defense with perimeter shooting and very good down-the-court passing
-Blake can play the run-n-gun style - he did it in Denver successfully with AI and Carmello, and got to the playoffs
-Ginobly played well off of the bench for the Spurs - so, Miller can still be effective off of the bench too
-If Webster does not heal, then Blake must start - who else would keep the defense honest with great outside shooting?
-Miller will want to get his shots in - which could take away from Roy (not good), as they both take the same types of shots
-A couple of years ago, Nate declared Jack the starter, only to relinquish that role to Blake after just 3 games - the same could happen for Miller; depends on how well the team plays
-Priz >>> Oden, until Oden shows me something.

Overall, I agree that training camp will determine the starters - despite what Nate has stated.
 
southnc said:
Interesting discussion...

Some observations:
-Historically, Blake is terrible as a bench player.
-Blake is very good at spreading defense with perimeter shooting and very good down-the-court passing
-Blake can play the run-n-gun style - he did it in Denver successfully with AI and Carmello, and got to the playoffs
-Ginobly played well off of the bench for the Spurs - so, Miller can still be effective off of the bench too
-If Webster does not heal, then Blake must start - who else would keep the defense honest with great outside shooting?
-Miller will want to get his shots in - which could take away from Roy (not good), as they both take the same types of shots
-A couple of years ago, Nate declared Jack the starter, only to relinquish that role to Blake after just 3 games - the same could happen for Miller; depends on how well the team plays
-Priz >>> Oden, until Oden shows me something.

Overall, I agree that training camp will determine the starters - despite what Nate has stated.
Click to expand...

Nate is an idiot for not exploiting all of Millers talents to the fullest. He can do that by starting him. Even more, he is being dishonest to his offense by not having out there right from the start. He is a point guard. The best we have had since Rod.

Terrible Nate. Just Terrible.
 
southnc said:
Interesting discussion...

Some observations:
-Historically, Blake is terrible as a bench player.
-Blake is very good at spreading defense with perimeter shooting and very good down-the-court passing
-Blake can play the run-n-gun style - he did it in Denver successfully with AI and Carmello, and got to the playoffs
-Ginobly played well off of the bench for the Spurs - so, Miller can still be effective off of the bench too
-If Webster does not heal, then Blake must start - who else would keep the defense honest with great outside shooting?
-Miller will want to get his shots in - which could take away from Roy (not good), as they both take the same types of shots
-A couple of years ago, Nate declared Jack the starter, only to relinquish that role to Blake after just 3 games - the same could happen for Miller; depends on how well the team plays
-Priz >>> Oden, until Oden shows me something.

Overall, I agree that training camp will determine the starters - despite what Nate has stated.
Click to expand...

Two things

First, Miller is far and away a better passer than Blake. It's not even close. This team needs a passer in the worst way. Just ask Oden.

Second, this team really needs another player who can attack the rim. At times last year it seemed like all our players wanted to do was jack up shots. Miller is a guy who can get into the paint and either score or make a solid pass. Blake isn't that guy. Everyone lauds Blakes shooting, but that's about all he has going for him. I've felt that this team needs a distributor for a while now. Someone who will get the offense moving. We had some really stagnant stretches last year.
 
RedHotRollin said:
Tell me, why would he want to hold on to this so titely Papa G? It's to the point, when you ask him about it. He gets super aggressive and defensive about it.

Why?
Click to expand...

He has a starting line-up going into camp. What's the big deal about him admitting it? That doesn't mean he can't/won't change it depending on how things work out in camp, preseason, and regular season.

Perhaps you think the best idea is the "open competition" approach the many colleges use? I see nothing wrong with having a depth chart, and I have no problem if Nate changes the depth chart after a few practices or games, which he has proven he will do.

People seem to be reading way too much into what sounds like an off-the-cuff response. :dunno:
 
PapaG said:
He has a starting line-up going into camp. What's the big deal about him admitting it? That doesn't mean he can/won't change it depending on how things work out in camp, preseason, and regular season.

Perhaps you think the best idea is the "open competition" approach the many colleges use? I see nothing wrong with having a depth chart, and I have no problem if Nate changes the depth chart after a few practices or games, which he has proven he will do.

People seem to be reading way too much into what sounds like an off-the-cuff response. :dunno:
Click to expand...

Actually, I do. What's wrong with letting your players know, that hey you will have to earn your position. That there won't be any handouts? Why not mentally prepare them to come into camp ready to really play and fight? In the end, I think it will translate into a overall improved finished product.
 
Last edited:
RedHotRollin said:
Actually, I do. What's wrong with letting your players know, that hey you will have to earn your position. That there won't be any handouts?
Click to expand...

Well, you have a philosophical difference with Nate and many other successful coaches. Are the Lakers having an open competition for starting spots? Are the Magic? I don't see how criticizing the guy for taking an approach that many other coaches use makes your view any more valid than their view. Plus, as I said, Nate has shown he will change a starting line-up, and do so rather quickly if things aren't working.
 
PapaG said:
Well, you have a philosophical difference with Nate and many other successful coaches. Are the Lakers having an open competition for starting spots? Are the Magic? I don't see how criticizing the guy for taking an approach that many other coaches use makes your view any more valid than their view. Plus, as I said, Nate has shown he will change a starting line-up, and do so rather quickly if things aren't working.
Click to expand...

Philsophical difference? Nate has embraced this ideology, ever year except this one? He has informed his players before that they better be prepared to go into camp and work.

So it's not really a philosophical difference Papa.
 
RedHotRollin said:
Philsophical difference? Nate has embraced this ideology, ever year except this one? He has informed his players before that they better be prepared to go into camp and work.

So it's not really a philosophical difference Papa.
Click to expand...

It seems to be a philosophical difference, and if Nate trusts the starting team that won 54 games, I won't pretend to know enough about his views to criticize him for it.
 
Boy we just bought an expensive backup. :crazy:

Why say anything now? A few years ago he was always for the open competition... but last year he announced starters and I guess he decided to do it again. Just seems strange to me when he hasn't seen the players on the court together yet. Oh well.
 
Seriously... if we didn't think Miller was a starter we shouldn't have wasted the money on him.
 
Let's say that for the sake of argument Miller really does come off the bench and doesn't start games, does anybody seriously doubt that he's going to play starter's minutes? They guy will easily be 30+ minutes a night, whether he "starts" or not.
 
Okay so this was on Blazersedge twitter, but where did the quote actually come from? I understand that these are supposed to be Roy's words, but who got that quote? When did they get that quote?
 
Sug said:
Okay so this was on Blazersedge twitter, but where did the quote actually come from? I understand that these are supposed to be Roy's words, but who got that quote? When did they get that quote?
Click to expand...

An interview Roy game Blazersedge is where the quote came from.
 
If this actually goes through I'll be speechless.

I'm fine with Przy starting for now until Oden proves he can stay on the court. But Blake over Miller?

LOL
 
RoyToy said:
If this actually goes through I'll be speechless.

I'm fine with Przy starting for now until Oden proves he can stay on the court. But Blake over Miller?

LOL
Click to expand...
Does speechless = no posts?
 
Nikolokolus said:
Let's say that for the sake of argument Miller really does come off the bench and doesn't start games, does anybody seriously doubt that he's going to play starter's minutes? They guy will easily be 30+ minutes a night, whether he "starts" or not.
Click to expand...
Bingo!

I'd be much more worried if he said, "Blake and Joel are going to finish every game."

People are way too hung up on starting.
 
Sug said:
I searched the whole site and could not find this quote. Could you give me a direct link?
Click to expand...

It is a direct link. It is the 14th paragraph

But Oden's motivation is far from the only unresolved situation facing the team, and Roy, as the new season approaches. Let's not overlook a total of three question marks in the starting lineup. "I think it's an open race," Roy stated, before laughing as he recounted his first conversation with Coach McMillan after the Miller signing, "First thing when I called Coach, he said Andre and Greg are coming off the bench. I said, 'Coach, you sure about that?' He said, "Yeah! We won 54 games with this team. That's what we are going to go in with."
Click to expand...
 
Maybe he's looking at the schedule and sees that early on it'd be better to get Miller and Oden time against opponents' 2nd units. They should rip them up.

It really matters who gets the bulk of the PT, and who is in at the end of Q4, IMO.
 
BrianWheeler said:
I'll online rep wager, bet against you on that.
Click to expand...

Ok, Nate WILL NOT be the head coach when this team wins a championship. That is what I was getting at. I just don't see him as that great of an all around coach. He's supposed to be a defensive minded coach yet TEAM defense is an issue. The Blazers don't have an offense...I could go into depth but I'm just gonna leave it at that...
 
I'd bet Nate will be the coach when we reach the WCF. I think us getting that far is all but a guarantee at this point.
 
Dumb thread. I'm confident that Nate hasn't made up his mind regarding starters before training camp has even started.
 
PapaG said:
He has a starting line-up going into camp. What's the big deal about him admitting it? That doesn't mean he can't/won't change it depending on how things work out in camp, preseason, and regular season.

Perhaps you think the best idea is the "open competition" approach the many colleges use? I see nothing wrong with having a depth chart, and I have no problem if Nate changes the depth chart after a few practices or games, which he has proven he will do.

People seem to be reading way too much into what sounds like an off-the-cuff response. :dunno:
Click to expand...


:cheers: some of the rare times we agree on something :)
 
Papa, I think the only major difference between you and I on this is that I interpreted that "quote" as Nate announcing his opening night starting lineup on August 5th or whenever he supposedly told Brandon that, and you are saying Nate should have a depth chart in his head when practice starts (which is fine by me). I'm not saying I interpreted it right -- how would I know?

And Nate erred last year when he announced Oden as the starter before making him earn it, IMO. I don't want to see him make that mistake again. Joel should have been the starter last year, period. It did no good to bench a good starter without making the upstart earn it. It does no good to announce to certain players and their mamma's that they don't have to work to keep their jobs, either.

But then again, I doubt Nate has done that in this instance, despite what he "may" have told Brandon. At least, I hope not.
 
Should Brandon have told Blazersedge about this?
 
Freshtown said:
From Blazersedge twitter feed:

B. Roy: "I called Coach [McMillan] + he said Andre and Greg are coming off the bench. I said, 'Coach, you sure about that?' He said, 'Yeah!'

www.twitter.com/blazersedge

If this is true, shoot me now. Thank God he's only on '1-year deals to prove himself'. It'll be easier to replace him with a real coach when the time comes.
Click to expand...

The time came and went a year or 2 ago.
 
KP: "Nate, I've got great news! We just traded for Chris Paul!!!"

Nate: "That is great news! He'll look great coming off our bench..."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

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