Clearly the coaches saw something that made them think that the problem was Miller, not Roy. It is pretty clear that we did win that 4th quarter with Roy on the floor... so - I suspect that their analysis was better than yours... It is hard to take this argument seriously when we have data from both this game and the entire year that Miller on the court does not translate to more wins. His win% is lower than the win% of the team as a whole. This is not good.
Now you're just making up shit for the sake of argument. I never said Miller was "great", just that he's far more pruductive than Blake, should have been starting all along and should have played more than 8 seconds in the 4th quarter Tuesday. That doesn't make him "great", just a whole hell of a lot better than Blake. Back when Blake was starting, Blake's PER was 8.3 - one of the lowest in the league for as player averaging over 30 MPG. Since moving to the bench (his proper role), Blake has pulled his PER up to 9.9. Still not great, but an improvement. Good for him. Since becoming the starting PG, Miller has also improved his PER from 15.0 to 15.7. That makes him a whole lot better than Blake and an above average NBA starting PG. Again, not "great" but way, way, better than Blake (this season). In spite of the the two recent losses, the team is still 15-6 when Miller starts. So much for the bullshit theory that Roy and Miller can't co-exist in the starting line-up. I disagree. Miller is 33 and due to Nate's misuse of him, his numbers are down considerably from where they were last season. Many teams will now see him as an over-the-hill malcontent on the decline, rather than a productive veteran on a reasonable contract that can help them win. Nate has misused Miller from day one. If he wasn't considered an upgrade to Blake, they never should have signed him. But since they did, and he IS an upgrade, he should have been starting from day 1. BNM
I think he is also be blinded by his loyalty to certain players who are considered "Nate guys" and plays them more than they deserve. When inferior players get more PT than they deserve, it destroys the morale of players who are better, but get less PT. It also undermines Nate's credibility with the players when he constantly tells them "playing time will be earned, not given". His favoritism of Blake over Miller sent mixed messages that led to this current problem. I don't claim to know more about the players than Nate, but my judgement is also not clouded by personal attachment to the players. I think I'm more neutral. In the past I've been a big Blake supporter. This year, he has flat out sucked, and with no personal attachment, I was much quicker to recognize that and admit it than someone closer to him persoanally might be. BNM
The team's record with Miller starting is 15-6 and 7-9 when he doesn't start. So much for the theory that Miller and Roy can't co-exist in the starting line-up. How do you explain that? BNM
Sorry, but this is only half-true. Blake was and still is out-producing Miller in the win column. He is at 63.6% vs. Miller's 50% - and it was higher before. I think this was an attempt by Nate to motivate Miller, while having an excuse not to play him at the end of games where his lack of shooting ability does not mesh well with Roy.
Yet his "win%" is somehow higher than both Blake and Bayless. (at least according to Basketball Prospectus)
By the fact that they are not playing him in the 4th and allowing Roy be Roy. Again, I am really not sure what is the big deal with the who is starting and who is not. The fact of the matter is that with Andre Miller on the court, we are winning at a 50% clip. Does not matter if it is at the start of the game or the end of the game - but that guy is not the reason we are winning. If games are won in the first quarter - you would have an argument. Since they are won by playing 48 minutes - maybe it is not that big of an argument as you are trying to make of it?
It is not. The team wins at a 61% with Bayless on the floor. They win at 63% with Blake on the floor. They win at 50% with Miller on the floor. Do not know where your numbers are from, but they are wrong.
Unless I am misreading something, Basketball Prospectus has Miler with both a higher WARP and a higher "win%".
Who didn't see this coming? McMillan is an idiot. Miller is a better point guard than McMillan ever was.
I have no idea, I am using 82games.com Blake: http://www.82games.com/0910/09POR1.HTM Miller: http://www.82games.com/0910/09POR2.HTM Just to show you that Miller's Win% has been around 50% for quite some time now, here are his results from the year before http://www.82games.com/0809/08PHI1.HTM and the one before: http://www.82games.com/0708/07PHI2A.HTM Finally, here is JB from this year: http://www.82games.com/0910/09POR3.HTM
That's one way to look at it. The other way is this: Nate is allowing Roy to pretend to be Kobe/Lebron/Wade. Since Roy isn't as good as those guys, and doesn't have the refs in his pocket, the use of repeated ISOs will never consistently succeed.
We have been winning pretty consistently, with a depleted group, when Roy is doing that. Again, I find it hard to understand why everyone is upset at Miller sitting the 4th quarter of the last game when the data clearly shows that the team played much better without him than with him in that specific game... I have no problems with someone telling me that we were a lot worse without Miller if the data proved it - but it proves the exact opposite...
Just for the record BNM, I like reading your posts and respect your take on Blazer basketball. It also looks like you are taking on several posters, and having been there, I'm guessing you are getting a little heated up over all this .. . I'm not trying to push your buttons. I want you to know I'm not making shit up just for argument (I'm not the one who said Nate won't start Miller unless Blake is injured, you said that and that was made up). I have skimmed through this thread (who has time to fully ingest all this . . . and who would want to) and when i said you think Miller is great, I was refering to you pointing to his double doubles multiple times, putting teams into the playoffs, calling his play spectacular and other stuff. If I mischaracterized how you feel about Miller, my bad. My skimming through the thread and getting a general gist of your posts led me to that statement . . . I'm not trying to make stuff up . . . man I feekl like you are battling enough as it is (keep up the battle bro) I will say I don't think you give scouts enough credit. This is what they do for a living. If scouts think Miller is washed up, then maybe, just maybe the experts are right and he is. I don't think he is and I think he has value. I think KP hasn't been shopping him in hopes of him fitting in . . .rumor was KP was not engaing in trade talks about Miller and he tried to switch them to Blake. So I am hoping you're analysis of Miller, that he is a productive veteran on a reasonable contract that can help a team win, is correct. Because if he is and if Nate and Miller can't work it out, I trust KP will get something positive done with a chip like Miller. If Nate and Miller work it out, then he can be productive for the Blazers. But I don't think there is any denying that Miller has baggage (I think that is what drop his value) and it has effected this organization.
Its been something that I have been debating internally within myself for a while... I've come to the conclusion that Nate is an overrated coach. He has this stubborn mindset yet has only made it past the 1st round of the playoffs once as a coach. KP brushing off the argument like its a "marriage", is his way of trying to save face for a shitty FA signing on his part. Face it, Roy needs a point guard next to him that is some kind of threat of hitting an outside shot. I'm just worried with Nate is that he's created such a bond with the younger players that he's played a hand in developing and Pritchard is so close with him, that he might get a way longer leash if the team underachieves.
Given the players he had to start with and the rebuilding project that he signed on for, you expect more than that? And Miller fills this bill? Have you seen the guy try to shoot from more than ten feet? UGLY. Given that Nate has only been willing to accept one-year contracts, I think he's putting himself out there as willing to be evaluated on each year's performance. What more do you expect of him this year to date than what the team's achieved so far?
