At the price we landed Miller, I have no fucking idea why Blazers fans would not support his arrival. To feel even a twinge of negativity over this signing is beyond stupid, IMO.
I hate that too, yet it crossed my mind. Then I stomped on my mind and called it stupid. Truly different situations. But I'm totally picking up what you're laying down......and my fingers are crossed.
10 years versus 3 years, plus Roy led a team to 54 wins last year while Miller has never won more than 50. Are we now smearing Brandon Roy in order to prop up Andre Miller's resume? I'm not saying Miller can't win, but calling him a winner when he hasn't won seems rather silly.
I support his arrival. I want him to start. That doesn't mean he goes without scrutiny, does it? Is your post addressed to me? I guess only Blake and Outlaw deserve to be questioned in thread after thread. I only point out that Miller wasn't Plan A, or even Plan B, and that he hasn't won a playoff series in his career. I expect that to change this season. If not...
Maybe it's just my generally optimistic attitude, but I think Miller may be exactly the right guy to push the Blazers to a higher level of play next season. I see him doing for the Blazers what Billups did for the Nuggets last year. I think his ability to get into the lane and distribute is what was missing last year. He may not have been KP's first pick, but I think he'll turn out to be good for the Blazers. That's it for me. The pessmists may now resume whining about how KP peed in your cornflakes.
Because some people have a crush on Steve Blake and can't come to terms at how much more of a superior player Andre Miller is when compared to Steve Blake. It's odd.
Was Okafor available when we could have actually traded said expiring contract? Probably not. So that's revisionist history saying that we should have done that deal.
Pritchard admitted to speaking with Lee the night before they had dinner with Miller. Not really a rumor in that case. I haven't the slightest clue about Ariza or Odom, but I am guessing no one spoke to them much. Miller was choice number 4. Not sure how that can be considered a glorious success. Instead I would call it a happy accident, since Miller makes more sense for the team then any of the first 3 guys they talked to (Turk, Milsap and Lee).
+1 Portland has been without a decent PG for so long, people have forgotten what a good PG can do for a team. We won 54 games with a PG that was a liability in every area but 3-point shooting.....and people don't see how upgrading the position is a positive??
I mentioned both rumours and reports. "Talking" doesn't really tell us anything about who was higher on his list. Perhaps he was exploring a salary-neutral deal, like Outlaw and Blake, allowing New York to shed the salary next off-season and Portland to retain their cap space for Miller. Teams "talk" all the time. I don't consider anything except actions to be particularly indicative. Or choice 3. In either case, "success" is measured by making the team better, not what number choice you can ascribe to the player you add. Portland added a very good point at a reasonable monetary cost and at zero talent cost. That sounds like a success to me.
No, but he was clearly available this offseason. IMO, Przybilla/Outlaw would have been worth more to Charlotte than Chandler, and Okafor would have been worth more to us than Przybilla/Outlaw are. Just my opinion...
What support do you have Turk being better than Hedo? Both are not "defenders", but play well within a team defense concept. Both are as much creators/facilitators as they are scorers. This is good when you already have good scorers on your team. But, this also means you don't want to overpay for this "role player", as you will certainly need to pay your scorers. Both are experienced, don't have "issues", coaches like them, other intangibles are not a big differentiator. Miller plays a position of scarcity. It is much harder to get an above average PG or center than any other position. Turk, of course, does not play a position of scarcity. Turk, was the 4th best player (Howard, Lewis, Nelson - all All-Stars) and the 3rd most important for the playoff run after Nelson went down, on a 59 win team. Miller was the 2nd best player (after AI, not an all-star), and the "most important" player, according to one of his coaches, to a 41 win team. Miller was 32 last season. Turk was 29 last season. A 5 yr guaranteed contract for Turk is similar in one respect to a 2 yr guaranteed contract for Miller in that last year age is 34. Last season PER: Turk: 14.8 Dre: 18.6 Career PER: Turk: 15.1 Dre: 18.0 Sure doesn't look like last season's numbers are much of a fluke, since both players track to their career averages. Last season Win Shares: Turk: 7.4 Dre: 8.6 Despite his team winning many more games, this stat claims it wasn't because of Hedo. It is hard to compare different positions, and hard to compare the 2nd best player on a .500 ball club to a role player on a championship contender that features an MVP caliber player, but I don't see how you can be so sure that Turk is better than Miller. Stats don't back it up.
