Why couldnt Miller just tell Bayless to make the first free throw???? all of this would have been avoided
Andre was Nate's choice for FA pick over the summer. That's been stated a few times. It's sad that it turns out they don't get along. THat's gotta be disappointing for all involved.
Nate pulls players when they make mistakes; Andre lost the ball a couple of times on the fast break in the third, and was pulled. I think he may think Nate's "shaming him" or making an example of him. To be fair, Nate may indeed be trying to do that. It works if you're young, but obviously Miller is used to a more forgiving environment. Nate does run a thigh-ass ship.
Blaming their personalities is nonsense. The conflict is that McMillan's system is so weird, that no Top-10 PG can fulfill it. McMillan's world is centered around Roy, to make Roy look good. And I don't believe for a moment that Miller was Nate's top pick of all NBA FAs. That was said for the media, of course.
more insult to injury... miller is hurt. questionable for tomorrow if hes hurt... we cant even trade him. has anything gone right???
No it doesn't - not one teeny, tiny bit. What makes me wonder is why people who otherwise appear intelligent insist on continuing to misuse this stat. +/- is a TEAM stat, not an individual player, single game stat. Look at who Miller played his minutes with: Roy - 9 Howard -11 Aldridge -8 Should we have sat all of them for the entire 4th quarter, too? I am convinced the Blazers would have won the Memphis game if Andre Miller would have played more in the 4th quarter. When Miller is in, the Blazers have much better ball movement and get better shots. With Miller on the bench during the last 3:45 of the Memphis game EVERY stinking play was an ISO for Roy or Bayless. Totally predictable and easily defendable if that's the ONLY set you run. The result, the Blazers scored a grand total of ONE point over the final 3:45pm. I blame Nate for the NOT paying Miller and a totally unimaginative, predictable, stagmant ineffective offense that lost the game for the Blazers. I also don't blame Miller for being mad. Nate is a back stabbing liar. He tells his players, and even the media, that playing time is earned and will go to whoever plays best - yet he continued to play Blake over Miller for WEEKS after is was clear to anyone with eyes that Miler was the better player. Nate has done nothing but jerk Miller around since he failed Nate's little preseason conditioning test. Shaq would not have passed that test in his prime. Nate is such a fucking idiot, I honestly believe he would have benched Shaq if he would have failed his stupid little test. The difference being, he would have gotten fired if he would have benched Shaq. Now, Andre Miller looks like the bad guy. So, he'll get traded at below market value for a talentless big with a pulse, and we'll be stuck with Blake as our starting PG and Nate as our coach. Nate was good at getting the young guys to play together and limit their mistakes. He has been HORRIBLE at taking the talent he's been given (when healthy) to the next level. He had trouble integrating both Oden (a dominant big man) and Miller (a proven PG) into his offensive "scheme" - which is basically ISOs for Roy and hurried 3-pointers as the shot clock expires for everyone else. Oden's injury postponed the need to figure out how to use a dominant big man. Nate pretty much admitted he didn't have a clue how to use Oden on offense before the season started when he publically said he wanted Greg to focus on defense and rebounding. And now Miller will be traded because our coach can't figure out how run an offense that utilizes his talents. BNM
Everybody knew what we were getting with Miller. I think everybody knew it wasn't really one of our targets in the free agency off season, but thats how it worked out. The big problem for the Blazers and their playing time problems is we have too many players of a similar talent level who are unable to separate themselves from the pack for playing time. If just one of these guys besides Roy would step up and play well for a long period of time, and make any arguments of playing time moot, this wouldn't be an issue. But we get a player haveing a good game or two, and then not having a good game or two. The solution, is to have players who are visibily better than the 2nd stringers and then the argument is moot.
Personally I think he made it by accident. It would be an oops, shit happens. As has been mentioned there was enough blame to go around to everyone for losing that game. No excuses.
If Miller had an aching back in that game, he should always have an aching back. He's not that hurt. 1) They don't want to suspend him because they might need him, they're so short-handed, so they're keeping their options open by saying he might not play. 2) Also, claiming this back problem justifies Nate's keeping him out of the 4th quarter when he was having an historic game. So the back nonsense kills 2 birds with 1 stone.
I don't think Miller would have done as much rebounding had anyone else stepped up. But no one did. Our front court should be embarassed that a 6'2" guy got twice as many rebounds as the next closest player. Talk about blaming the wrong dude.
I'm pretty sure Nate's world is centered around wins and losses. He happens to be of the mind that without so many weapons, having Roy be the focus of the offense probably gives us the best chance of winning.
