Figures. What opinion have I stated that isn't backed by a fact? I'm not saying my opinion is correct, but I have yet to make anything up about Miller.
Okay, so if we were comparing, say, Will Perdue to Charles Barkley, we could point out that Perdue's teams won more championships than Barkley's teams and, by proxy, Perdue won more than Barkley and therefore (since we like wins and we're not fantasy basketball players) Perdue was a better player than Barkley? Also, the "I'm not a fantasy basketball player so forget about PER" is pretty amusing after all your criticisms of signing Wes Matthews based on his poor PER of last year. But of course PER accurately measures guys like Matthews. Just not guys like BLANKY. Only WINS accurately measure BLANKY. Cuz all he does is WIN BASKETBALL GAMES! Do I have your position right?
You were making up my position and misrepresenting what I posted. Very unlike you, Minstrel. Why do people get so upset with an opinion that deviates from the norm?
You're again missing the entire point of "role players". But whatever. If I change my position and say that Miller is the best thing ever for the Blazers, can this thread end without you throwing out strawmen?
I didn't make up anything. You blamed Miller for Roy's decline, we know his decline was injury-related, therefore you were blaming Miller for Roy's injuries. What did I misrepresent? Why do you get so upset when asked to defend your opinions? I'm not upset, I just think you're not being logical in your desire to cast Miller as a malignant force on the Blazers. In these discussions, I like to challenge what I perceive as a lack of logic. Does that upset you?
BLANKY is the very definition of a role-player, but you're crediting him with "winning" 54 games. Please advise on what role-player issue I'm missing here.
Fine then, name the 10 PGs you would rather have the Blazers start instead of Miller. And feel free to not even take into account the size of there contract or how affordable Dre is when you look at his production.
Weakest reply to a legitimate point in about a week. How many more wins do you think the team would have had, if Oden, Joel, Brandon, Nic, Travis and Rudy had stayed healthy? Go Blazers
Totally false. LOL You win. I just don't have any interest fishing for red herrings. Miller is teh bombay!
I always enjoy when PapaG goes into his "All I did was quote stats. The stats are facts. :shrug: " when the points he hoped to make with those stats are shot down. That said, PapaG stimulates conversation during two pretty dull (IMO) football games. So kudos.
I have no idea. How many more wins would the team have had without Miller last year if the above were healthy? More than 54? Less than 54? Congrats on your own weak point based solely in speculation.
It's a shame when you lose a debate...with yourself. I remember when the traditional "I can't defend my position so I'll try to escape" excuse was "I don't have the time to argue this anymore, I have a real life."
Ha! I am literally sitting in a bar "watching" these games, and I keep coming back to this thread, because at least it interests me. The rest of the family is at Great Wolf for a "Moms and kids" weekend.
Because you're completely disregarding all the injuries last season (and this season) by comparing the 54 win season without Miller, and the two seasons since. It seems like you're ignoring the facts on purpose. Just my two cents.
I think it's a legitimate question. You do not think that Roy should be held to a higher standard than the rest of the team? It's a serious question.
That's not a position, that's an observation. Your clear position through this thread (and many others) is that, based on that observation, BLANKY did more for the Blazers than Miller did. Which means that you are crediting BLANKY with those wins. As you said, you evaluate players by wins. Unless PER supports your position, as with the Wes Matthews debate in the off-season. Then PER is important.
My position is that Patrick Ewing, Charles Barkley, and John Stockton are not as good as Steve Kerr, Luc Longley, and Bill Wennington because the Bulls won 72 games in one season, and three championships with that group. They had more wins, and more championships, therefore they were better than Ewing, Barkley, and Stockton.
