Thanks! Now what about the winning %... Hmm. The only remotely big name on that list is George Karl. Interesting that they didn't butt heads, but then again, Karl likes to run. I wonder what a combination of Miller and, say, Poppovich or Brown would've been like.
I wouldn't guarantee that they didn't butt heads; he was traded 1/4 of the way into his second season with Karl. I'll edit my post and add win%
Miller's best winning year in the NBA got him 49 wins under Bzdelik. I think his 2nd best was 45 wins under him as well (but it could have been Karl's first year with Denver, not sure about it).. I think most of his other years were very close to .500 or less. George Karl of course was the one that traded him for AI. It is funny that the solution they had to fill his shoes (because AI is, let's face it, a SG) - was Steve Blake. That was their (Denver) best year until they got Chauncey.
That's where we disagree. He's stopped developing. He found a comfort zone and wants to stay there. I'm more alarmed by his misuse of Oden (prior to injury, of course) than his misuse of Miller. He has no clue how to incorporate a dominant center into his stagnant offense (ISOs and 3-pointers as the shot clock expires). He even told Greg before the season started he didn't want him to worry about scoring, just concentrate on defense and rebounding. Once the season started, it was obvious that Greg could abuse other centers down low - and because Nate's system wasn't designed to take advantage of this option, it caused problems with the players and confusion over their roles. I think Nate is a GREAT motivator and teacher of sound fundamentals. However, I think he falls far short of designing an offense that can take advantage of multiple dominant scorers. His current offense relies too much on one dominant scorer and a whole lot of perimeter shooting. It's no wonder that we were last in the league in points in the paint - even before Oden whent down. That's by design and it's OK when your starting center is Joel Przybilla. It's NOT OK when your starting center is Greg Oden. I think it's time for Nate to go. He did a good job, but is now in over his head and has not continued to develop as a head coach. He has found a comfort zone and seems unwilling, or unable, to move beyond that. Every other team in the league knows the Blazers are going to run ISOs for Roy in the 4th quarter - and they are figuring out how to stop it. Unless we get a more creative coach, we are doomed to be a talented (when heathy) team that doesn't reach our full potential. BNM
So, you too, think that going with the unit without Miller that went +4 for the quarter was not the right solution, and it would have been better to go with the unit that went -8 with Miller for the first 3 quarters? Geez, people. Miller is not the solution, and if we can actually look at the +4 vs. the -8 - he might have been the problem!
Because with the Spurs, he was on a six figure contract, and when he became a FA, somebody offered him a LOT more money.
I was wondering at the time Bayless was shooting if he was going to try and miss it. I told my friend at the game that I think he is going to try and make it because the Blazers only had two guys on the blocks ready for the rebound. The other two players weren't even in a rebound postion or charged the basket after the free throw shot. Come to think about it, it the bench and Roy thought Bayless should miss it,shouldn't they be screaming at the players to get in rebound position? I don't think Bayless was given good direction on that last free throw shot. And if you want to miss a free throw, it really isn't hard to hit the rim. At the very least put some really high arch on it to try and get a funny bounce rebound. Bayless was trying to make it.
So let him rest, catch his breath and then put him back in with say 3:45 to go. Why wait until there is 8 seconds left, Juwan Howard fouls out andthe game is lost?. Did Miller, the NBA's Iron Man, really need THAT much time to get his wind back? My definition of "earn" is based on production and winning - and Miller was clearly out producing Blake, who was having an AWFUL season until he was moved to the bench. Prior to being benched, Blakes PER had dropped to 8.3. Miller's, at the time was 15.0. And, both players played even better and the team went on a winning streak when Nate FINALLY benched Blake in favor of Miller. So, my definition of "earn" includes better production and winning. If yours is different, I'd love to hear it. BNM
I guess we sould have also benched Brandon Roy for the first 11:52 of the 4th quarter. After all, wasn't he also part of that unit that was -8 through 3 quarters? BNM
The Blazers and Knicks were the only teams interested in Miller this past summer. That said, NY only wanted to offer him a one-year deal.
Not after the way Nate has misused him. His trade value is probably at an all-time low right now. We'll be lucky if we can get a "no talent big man with a pulse" for him - and we'll probably have to throw in a young player (maybe the rights to one of our Euros) and/or a future draft pick to unload him. Somebody's going to get a bargain. BNM
I see teams are fighting for Alston . . . maybe we can ride the contending teams wanting a PG wave. For some reason, I think Miller has a bad rap with his locker room presence and that hurts his trade value. Why else was he really not pursued this summer by NBA teams including his old team.
He and his agent made it known that they weren't signing for the MLE. That put a lot of teams out of the running, since they couldn't offer more and they weren't giving PHI anything for the right to sign and trade for him.
Are you telling me you see all these great things in Miller but NBA scouts out there won't? If he is as good as you advertise, then Nate's misuse of him isn't going to drop his value much. I think the reality is that Miller has never had good trade value and I'm trying to figure out why. Because I think he has something left in the tank and can help the right team.
It wasn't just wind, it was his legs, his arms, and his sore back. The dude played his ass off for two games straight, and his age caught up with him. I don't think Nate is a PER nerd, but I do think he's fully aware of the numbers. I think he is the one setting the standards of play, practice, and behavior of this team, and he's the sole judge of who reaches which standards. I also happen to believe that he's more qualified to be in that position than you, me, or anyone who semi-regularly reads this board, and that's including Mike Rice, Antonio Harvey, and even Kevin Pritchard.
