I agree I don't think this is very significant, but he was told that Nate envision him coming off the bench before he sign his contract. He admitted as much when he said that was then this is now. He might have thought he would start anyway and sign the contract under that assumption, but that's his own fault for not taking Nate at his word.
Every coach tells every player that he may start or he may sub. The normal meaning is that the best player will start, so if you beat out Blake for the job, it's yours. Miller has clearly outplayed Blake. He was told he might sub, he took it at its usual meaning and performed, and now Nate's holding his feet to the fire with a strictly literal meaning--that no matter what he does, the inferior player will start. "Relative" meaning = Nate told him he may sub (if he's not the best PG) "Absolute" meaning = Nate told him he may sub (at Nate's irrational whim) Miller heard the former and Nate claims he intended it to mean the latter. I think Nate was ambiguous on purpose. They were trying to sign him at the time, right? Or had they already signed him.
locker room cancer? All the stuff I've been reading since the signing was how much his teammates loved him. I must have missed something.
Exactly, I read a tweet from Andre Iguodala at the time he signed that basically said "No more Dre? What the fuck?!"
First, he never accused his coach of lying. Nate never told him he'd come off the bench no matter what, just that he'd have to compete and earn it, it wasn't going to be given to him. So to me, the entire question and answer from the Marc Spears article is mute since it doesn't apply to reality. Miller knew he'd have an opportunity and he also knew it wasn't a forgone conclusion that he'd be a starter. Miller has never said otherwise, it appears he was just answering a rhetorical question, or the quote in question was part of a larger quote. I also haven't seen any quote by Andre in which he's bitching about playing time. And why would he? We're three fucking games into the preseason. On the contrary, here's some of what he said: http://blog.oregonlive.com/behindblazersbeat/2009/10/trail_blazers_andre_miller_and.html I also haven't seen him pick phantom fights with the local media. He talked to Marc Spears because he felt he was being portrayed wrongly in a few articles and wanted his side of the story to be heard, that's hardly picking a fight. I'd do the same thing. In his own words: He has every right to respond to what's written about him in a professional manner, and that's what he did because of stuff like: From scimming this thread I can tell you're all worked up, so if you choose to respond I won't engage you (edit - Because you have a history of ignoring reason and arguing for the sake of arguing). I merely want to ask you to quit being so reactionary, melodramatic, and absurd. I've read other articles about Miller and how he was raised and I personally have zero reason to think he's going to be a cancer or complain about playing time. Get a grip.
Oh dear Lord. How will I ever get over this snub? "I'll lecture you at length about why I don't agree with your opinion, and I won't accept any return engagement to poke holes in my silly justifications."
It must be painful to bend over backwards as far as you have to excuse Andre's boorish, me-first attitude. Your fictional revisionist accounting of how everything went down in your parallel universe is amusing, but fiction nonetheless. I suppose you view Hitler as simply a misunderstood benefactor.
Me not changing my opinion based on your own perception of Miller's words is not me 'ignoring reason'. I'm sorry if it frustrates you that I don't view Miller in the best light right now, but let me remind you, you answered me at length. I didn't ask for your own opinion, though I do appreciate you posting it. I could have done without your personal attack, but I guess I'm not as petty as you are.
If Miller produces, then alll will be forgotten . . . and that appears to be Millers's MO (let's his play on the court do his talking for him). But could this apparent unease by Miller (if you believe the article) be the reason he wasn't high up on the Blazer's wish list?
One reason maybe, but I suspect the fact his style of play is not a good fit with this team was a bigger reason, and then there's the 4 teams that no longer required his services. I still say it was an unwise PR move by an embattled KP to quiet the media critics. You gotta know when to hold 'em, know when to fold 'em. [video=youtube;D8o6Os0xQf8]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D8o6Os0xQf8[/video]
I really think that song is great, from a story-telling point of view, but that rendition was amazingly limp. It reminds me of a cafeteria worker plopping mashed potatoes onto an endless line of trays. Is it 5 o'clock yet? barfo
