On whether he would have done it again knowing it would warrant suspension: "I took two shots. The referees didn't call it on that end. I took two shots, then I gave a shot. I told the ref 'we can call that even now.' He didn't make the call, and he was looking right at it." On whether the suspension was justified: "It wasn't justified at all. If I was a dirty player that was looking to go out and hurt someone then I can understand 'OK, this guy has a reputation.' Back in the day, like John Stockton, tough minded player, some people thought he was dirty, he never got suspended for anything. The league has changed, they favor the young guys now and that's just how it is." http://www.columbian.com/weblogs/blazerbanter/2010/dec/08/andre-miller-unplugged/
I thought veterans were supposed to get the benefit of the calls, not rookies. When did the rules change?
When your name is Blake Griffin and you take a shot like that, the league is going to protect their asset.
Andre Miller speaks the truth. And no doubt he will be fined, heavily. Do you think he would have been suspended if he had done that to Charles Smith? He got in trouble because he made the mistake of getting physical with one of the NBA's new marketing props.
I totally agree with 'Dre. Plus, Griffin was playing chippy himself, and that apparently doesn't matter.
That quote really makes me like 'Dre. As for Griffin, he should be embarrassed. He got punked by a point guard.
There's a difference between hitting someone going for a rebound (which Griffin did twice) and hitting someone because they hit you... and doing so when there's no basketball justification. Miller didn't deserve the suspension, IMO, but I don't think a grave injustice was done, and I don't think it mattered that it was Griffin nor that he was young. Ed O.
